Skip to main content

Full text of "Dictionary of the Apostolic Church"

See other formats 


Ai^\   " 


hf,'Sr.^-> 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Ontario  Council  of  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/dictionapostchur01hast 


Edited  bv  Dr.  JAMES  HASTINGS 

A    DICTIONARY    OF    CHRIST 
AND    THE   GOSPELS 

In  Two  Vols.    Price  per  Vol.,  In  cloth  binding.  Sis.  net: 
in  half-morocco,  gilt  top,  96s.  net. 

The  purpose  of  this  Dictionary  is  to  give  an  account  of  every- 
thing that  relates  to  Christ — His  Person,  Life,  Work,  and 
Teaching. 

The  articles  are  not  entirely  limited  to  the  Bible,  but  gather 
togeiher  whatever  touches  Christ  in  all  the  history  and  experi- 
ence of  the  Church. 

*  A  triumphant  and  unqualified  success.  Indispensable  to  ministers  and 
Bible  students.'— Sir  W.  Roiiektson  Nicoll,  LL.D. 

'  No  more  useful  present  could  be  made  to  a  youag  clergyman  than  a 
copy  of  this  admirable  work.  The  articles  are  by  competent  and  scholarly 
writers,  and  are  full  of  information  and  suggestiveness.' — Guardian. 


Edinburgh  :  T.  &  T.  CLARK,  38  George  Street 


m! 


Dictionary 


of  th( 


Apostolic    Church 


X. 


Dictionary 

of  the 

Apostolic   Church 


EDITKD  BY 


JAMES    HASTINGS,    D.D. 


WITH   THE  ASSISTANCE  OF 

JOHN    A.    SELBIE,    D.D. 

AVD 

JOHN    C.    LAMBERT,    D.D. 


VOLUA\E    I 

AARON-LYSTRA 


Edinburgh:    T.    &    T.    CLARK,    38    George    Street 

New  York:   CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Fifth  Avenue,  at  48TH  Street 

I915 


63 


Printed  by  Morrison  4  Gibb  Limitk© 


T.   &  T.   CLARK,   EDINBURGH 

LONDON:   8IMPKIN,    MARSHALL,    HAMILTON,    KENT,    AND   CO.    LIMITID 
NEW  YORK:   CHARLES   SCRIIJNEB's   SONS 


[The  Rights  of  Trnnxlntir.n  and  of  Rrprodriction  are  Re.ien'rd.] 


PREFACE 


It  has  often  been  said  that  the  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  tTie  Gospels  is  of  more 
practical  value  than  a  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  From  all  parts  of  the  world  has 
come  the  request  that  what  that  Dictionary  has  done  for  the  Gospels  another 
should  do  for  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  The  Dictionaey  of  the  Apostolic 
Church  is  the  answer.  It  carries  the  history  of  the  Church  as  far  as  the  end  of 
the  first  century.  Together  with  the  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  it  forms  a 
complete  and  independent  Dictionary  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  Editor  desires  to  take  the  opportunity  of  thanking  the  distinguished  New 
Testament  scholars  who  have  co-operated  with  him  in  this  important  work. 


^ 


AUTHORS  OF  ARTICLES  IX  THIS  VOLU^IE 


Allen  (Willoughby  Charles),  M.A, 

Archdeacon    of    Manchester ;     Principal     of 

Egerton  Hall,  Manchester  ;  author  ot   '  The 

Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew'   in  The 

International  Critical  Commentary. 

Anointing,    Children    of   God,    Gospels, 

Kingdom  of  God. 

Allworthy  (Thomas  Batesox),  M.A.  (Camb.), 
B.D.  (Dublin). 
Perpetual  Curate  of    Martin-by-Timberland, 
Lincoln  ;  Founder  and  First  Warden  of  S- 
Anselni's  Hostel,  Manchester. 
Ampliatus,  Andronicus,  Apelles,  Aristo- 
bulus,  Asyncritus,  Epaenetus,  and  other 
proper  names. 

Ba>-ks(John  S.),  D.D. 

Emei-itus  Professor  of  Theology  in  the 
Wesleyan  Methodist  College,  Headingley, 
Leeds ;  author  of  A  ManwoU  of  Christian 

Doctrine. 

Christian,  Contentment, 

Batiffol  (Pierre),  Litt.D. 

Pretre  catholique  et  prelat  de  la  Maison  du  j 
Pape,  Paris ;  auteor  de  Tractatus  Origenis ' 
de  libria  scripturarum  (1900),  Les  Odes  de 
Salomon  (1911),  La  Paix  constant inienne  et 
le  Catholicisme  (1914). 
Ignatius. 

Beckwith  (Clarence  Augustine),  A.B.,  A.M., 
S.T.D. 
Professor  of  Systematic  Theologj-  in  Chicago 
Theological  Seminary ;  author  of  Realities 
of  Christian  Theology ;  departmental  editi>r 
of  the  Neio  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopedia  of 
Religious  Knowledge. 

Beast,     Blindness,     Blood,     Dysentery, 
Fever,  Gangrene,  Lamb,  Lion. 

Bernard  (John  Hexry),   D.D.  (Dublin),  Hon. 
D.D.  (Aberd.),  Hon.  D.C.L.  (Durham). 
Archbishop  of  Dublin  ;  sometime  Archbishop 
King's  Professor  of  Divinity,  Dublin,  and 
Dean  of  St.  Patrick's  Cathedral. 
Descent  into  Hades. 

Boyd  (William  Falcoxee).  M.A..  B.D.  (Aberd.), 
D.Phil.  (Tubingen). 
Minister  of  the  United  Free  Church  of  Scot- 
land at  Met h lick. 
Alexander,    Crown,     Desert,    Gog    and 
Magog,  Israel,  Jew,  Jewess,  and  other 
articles. 


Brooke  (Alan  England),  D.D. 

Fellow,  Dean,  and  Lecturer  in  Divinity  at 
Kings  College,  Cambridge ;  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bisliop  of  S.  AJban's ; 
author  of  A  Critical  and  Exegetical  Com- 
mentary on  the  Johannine  Epistles. 
James  and  John,  the  Sons  of  Zebedee, 
John  (Epistles  of). 

BuLCOCK  (H.\rry),  B.A.,  B.D. 

Minister  of    the    Congregational    Church  at 
Droylsden,  Manchester. 
Anger,     Care,     Cheerfulness,     Comfort, 
Commendation,  Fool,  Grief,  and  other 
articles. 

BuRKiTT  (Francis  Crawford),  M.A.,  F.B.A., 
Hon.  D.D.  (Edin.,  Dublin,  St.  And.),  D. 
Theol.  h.c.  (Breslau). 
Norrisian  Professor  of  Di\inity  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Cambridge  ;  author  of  The  Gospel 
History  and  its  Transmission. 

Baruch  (Apocalypse  of). 

Burn  (Andrew  E.),  D.D. 

Vicar  of  Halifax  and  Prebendary  of  Lichfield ; 
author  of  The  Apostles'  Creed  (1906).  The 
Nicene  Creed  (1909),  The  Afhana-iian  Creed 
(1912). 

Confession,    Hallelujah,    Hymns,    Inter- 
cession. 

Carlyle  (Alexander   James),   M.A.,  D.Litt.. 
F.R.  Hist.  Soc. 
Lecturer  in  Economics  and  Politics  at  Univer- 
sity College,  Oxford. 
Alms,  Community  of  Goods. 

Case  (Shirley  Jacksox),  M.A.,  B.D.,  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation  in 
the  University  of  Chicago ;  author  of  The 
Historicity  of  Jesvs,  The  Evolution  of  Early 
Christianity ;  managing  editor  of  7%« 
American  Journal  of  Theology. 
Allegory,  Interpretation. 

Clark  (P.  A.  Gordon). 

Minister  of  the  L^nited  Free  Church  at  Perth. 

Divination,  Exorcism,  Lots. 

Clayton  (Geoffrey  Hare).  M.A. 
Fellow  of  Peterhouse,  Cambridge. 

Corinthians  (Epistles  to  the),  Eucharist, 
Love-Feast. 


AUTHORS  OF  ARTICLES  IN  THIS  VOLUME 


Clemkns  (John  Samuel),  U.A.,  Hon.  D.D.  (St. 
And.), 
(luvernor  of  the  United  Methodist  College  at 
Haniiioor,  Sht-fheld. 
Bondage,    Constraint,    Liberty,    Lord's 
Day. 

Cobb  (William  Frkdkrick),  D.D. 

Rector  of  the  Church  of  St.  Kthelburga  the 

Vir<,'in,      Ix)n(lon  ;      author      of      Oriqines 

JudnliW,    The    liuuk  of  Pstilmn,   Mystvcism 

and  the  Creed. 

Antipas,  Balaam,  Euphrates,  Hymenaeus, 

Jannes  and  Jambres,  Jezebel,  and  other 

articles. 

('(H'Ki    Akthur  William),  M.A. 

.Mini^ier  of  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Church 
at  Wallasey,  Cheshire  ;  author  of  Palestine 
in  Gcoffrap/tr/  and  in  History. 
Elamites,  Galilee. 

Cowan  (Henry),  M.A.   (Edin.),  D.D.   (Aberd.), 
D.Th.  (Gen.),  D.C.L.  (Dunelni). 
Professor  of  Church  History  in  the  University 
of  Aberdeen  ;  Senior  Preacher  of  the  Uni- 
versity Chapel  ;  author  of  The  Influence  of 
the  Scottish   Church  in   Christendom,   John 
Knox,  Landmarks  of  Church  History. 
Apphia,  Archippus,  Epaphras,  Epaphro- 
ditus. 

Cruickshank  (William),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  at  Kinnetf, 
Bervie  ;  author  of  The  Bible  in  the  Light  of 
Antiquity. 
Arts,   Clothes,   Games,  Jerusalem,  Key, 
Lamp,  ami  other  articles. 

Davies  (Arthur  Llywelyn),  M.A. 

Sinicox    Kesearch   Student,    Queen's   College, 
Oxford. 
Ascension    of     Isaiah,    Assumption    of 
Moses,   Enoch  (Book  of)* 

Dewick  (Edward  Chisholm),  M.A.  (Camb.). 

Tutor    and    Dean     of    St.     Aidan's    College, 
Birkenhead  ;      Teacher     of      Ecclesiastical 
History   in   the    University    of    Liverpool  ; 
author  of  Primitive  Christian  Eschatology. 
Eschatology. 

DiMONT  (Charles  TuNNACLiFF),  B.D.  (Oxon.). 
Prin(riiml   of  Salisburj'   Theological    College ; 
Prebendary  of   Salisbury  ;  Cha[>lain  to  the 
Bisliop  ol  Salisbury. 
Business,  Labour. 

VON  DobschCtz  (Ernst),  D.Theol. 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis  in  the 
University  of  Breslau. 
Communion,      Fellowship,       Hellenism, 
Josephus. 

Donald  (James),  M.A.,  D.D.  (Aberd.). 

Minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  at  Keith- 
hall  ami  Kinkeli,  Abenlecnsliire. 
Dispersion,  Gentiles,  Heathen,  Libertines. 

Duncan  (James  Walker),  M.A. 

Minister  of  the  United  Free  Church  at  Lass- 
o<lic,  Dunfermline. 
Canaan,  Haran. 

Dundas  (William  Harix)e),  B.D. 

Rector  of  Ma^'heragall,  near  LisbuiTi. 
Authority,  Dominion. 


Faulkner  (John  Alfred),  B.A.,  B.D.,  M.A., 
D.  I). 
Professor    of    Historical    Tiieology    in    Drew 
Theological  Seminary,  Madison,  N.J. 
Benediction,  Doxology. 

Feltoe  (Charles  Lett),  D.D. 

Rector    of    Ripple,    near    Dover;    sometime 

Fellow  of  Clare  College,  Cambridge  ;  author 

of  Sacramentarium  Leonianurn,  Tlie.  Letter* 

and  other  Remains  of  Dionyaius  of  Alex- 

andrid. 

Akeldama,        Candace,        Chamberlain, 

Ethiopians,    Ethiopian  Eunuch,   Judas 

Iscariot. 

Fletcher  (M.  Scott),  M.A.,  B.D.,  B.Litt. 

Master    of     King's    College,    University    of 
Queensland,  Brisbane,  Australia ;  author  of 
The  Psychology  of  the  New  Testament. 
Edification,  Enlightenment,  Exhortation. 

Frew  (David),  D.D. 

Minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  at  Urr. 
Barnabas,  Esdras  (The  Second  Book  of), 
Herod. 
Garvie  (Alfred  Ernest),  M.A.  (Oxford),  D.D. 
(Glas.). 
Principal  of  New  College,  London  ;  author  of 
The    RUschlian    Theologi/,    Studies    in    ths 
Inner  Life  of  Jesus,  Stiuiies  of  Paul  and  fUt 
Gospel. 
Evil,  Fall,  Good. 
Gordon  (Alexander  Reid),  D.Litt.,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Hebrew  in  M'Gill  University,  and 
of  Old  Testament  Literature  and   Exegesis 
in    tlie     Presbyterian     College,    Montreal  ; 
author  of  The  Poets  of  the  Old  Testanunt. 
Judgment-Hall,  Judgment-Seat,  Justice, 
Lawyer. 
Gould  (Georgi:  Pearce),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Principal  of  Regent's  Park  College,  London  ; 
Ex-President  of  the  Baptist  Union  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland. 

Berenice,  Drusilla,  Felix,  Festus,  Lysias. 

Grant  (William  Milne),  M.A. 

Minister    of     the    United    Free    Church    at 
Druinoak,   Aberdeenshire;    author  of    The 
Religion  and  Life  of  the  Patriarchal  Age, 
The  Founders  of  Israel. 
Assembly,  Building,  Day-Star,  Founda- 
tion,  Genealogies,    Gospel,   and  other 
articles. 

Grensted  (Laurence  William),  M.A.,  B.D. 
Vice-Principal  of  Egerton  Hall,  Manchester  : 
joint-author  of  Introduction  to  the  Books  of 
the  New  Testament. 
Colossians  (Epistle  to    the),    Ephesians 
(Epistle  to  the). 

Grieve  (Alexander  James),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Professor    of    New    Testament    Studies    and 
Christian  Sociology  in  tiie  Yorksiiire  United 
Independent  College,  Bradford. 
Form,  Friendship,  Fruit,  Image. 

Griffith-Jones  (Ebenezer),  B.A.  (Lond.),  D.D. 
(Edin.). 
Principal,  and  Professor  of  Dogmatics,  Honii- 
Ifctica.    and    Practical   Theology,    Yorkshire 
Unitetl     Independent    College,     Bradford ; 
author  of  The  Ascent  through  Christ,  Types 
of  Christian  Life,  The  Economics  of  Jcsu.s; 
The  Master   and  His  Methxl.    Fmth    and 
Verification. 
Abiding,  Abounding,  Acceptance,  Access, 
Account,  Answer. 


AUTHORS  OF  ARTICLES  IN  THIS  VOLUME 


XI 


Hamilton*  (Harold  Francis),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Ottawa,  Canada ;  formerly  Professor  in  the 
University  of  Bishop's  College,  Lennoxville, 
Quebec. 

Barnabas  (Epistle  of). 

Handcock(P.S.P.),  M.A. 

Member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  Barrister-at>- 
Law  ;  Lecturer  of  the  Palestine  Exploration 
Fund  ;  formerly  of  the  Department  of 
Egyptian  and  Assyrian  Antiquities  in  the 
British  Museum  ;  author  of  jfe*opotamian 
ArchcBologij.  Latest  Light  on  Bible  Lands. 
Dog,  Eagle,  Goat,  Hospitality,  Locust, 
and  other  articles. 

HooKE  (Samuel  Henry),    M.A.  (Oxon.),  B.D. 
(Lond.). 
Professor  of  Oriental  languages  and  Litera- 
ture in  Victoria  College,  Toronto. 
Heaven,  Immortality,  Lake  of  Fire. 

James  (John  Geokge),  M.A.,  D.Lit. 

Author  of  Problems  of  Personality,  Problems 
of  Prayer,  The   Coining  Age  of  Faith,  The 
Prayer-Life. 
Cross,  Crucifixion,  Custom,  Dream. 

Jordan  (Hermann),  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  Church  History  and  Patristics  in 
the  University  of  Erlangen. 
Catholic  Epistles,  Epistle,  Letter. 

Lake  (Kxrsopp),  M.A.  (Oxford),  D.D.  (St.  And-). 

Professor  of    Early   Christian    Literature  in 

Harvard  Univeraty  ;  author  of  The  Earlier 

Epistles  of  St.  Paul. 

Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Acts  of  the  Apostles 

(Apocryphal),  Luke. 

Lambert  (John  C),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Fenwick,  Ealmamock  ;  author  of  The  Sacra- 
ments in  the  New  Testament. 
Antichrist,  Body,  Conscience,  Flesh,  Life 
and  Death,  Light  and  Darkness,  and 
other  articles. 

L.\w  (Robert),  D.D.  (Edin.). 

Professor    of  New  Testament  Literature   in 

Knox  College,  Toronto  ;  author  of  The  Test* 

of  Life:  A  Study  of  the  First  Epistle  of  St. 

John. 

Covetousness,       Formalism,       Fulness, 

Generation,  Glory,  Hour. 

LiGHTLEY  (John  William),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Professor  of    Old  Testament   Language  and 
Literature  and  Philosophy  in  the  Wesleyan 
College,  Headingley,  Leeas. 
Epicureans. 

LoFTHOusE  (William  F.),  M.A. 

Professor  of  Philosophy  and  Old  Testament 
Language  and  Literature  in  the  Wesleyan 
College,  Handsworth,  Birmingham  ;  autnor 
of  Ethics  and  Atonement,  Ethics  and  the 
Family. 

Conversion,  Creation,  Forgiveness,  Free- 
dom of  the  Will. 

Mackenzie  (Donald),  M.A. 

Minister  of  the  United  Free  Church  at  Oban  ; 
Assistant    Professor    of    Logic    and    Meta- 
physics   in    the    University  of    Aberdeen, 
1906-1909. 
Abstinence,        Feasting,       Fornication, 
Harlot,  Lust,  and  other  article*. 


Maclean  (Arthur  John),  D.D.  (Camb.),  Hon. 
D.D.  (Glas.). 
Bishop  of  Moray,  Boss,  and  Caithness  ;  author 
of  Dictionary  of  Vernacular  Syriac  ;  editor 
of  East  Syrian  Litiirgii.s. 
Adoption,  Angels,   Ascension,   Baptism, 
Demon,  Family,  and  other  articles. 

Main  (Archibald),  M.A.  (Glas.),  B.A.  (Oxon.), 
D.Litt.  (Glas.). 
Minister  of  the  Chorch  of  Scotland  at  Old 
Kilpatrick ;  examiner  in  Modem  and  Ecclesi- 
astical History  and  in  Political  Economy  in 
St.  Andrews  University ;  member  of  the 
Examining  Board  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land. 
C]^bal,  First- Fruit,  Harp. 

Massh  (Fred.  Shipley),  M.A. 

Sub- Warden  of    King's  College    Theological 
Hostel  and  Lecturer  in  Theology,  King's 
College,   London  ;  formerly  Tyrwhitt   and 
Crosse  Scholar  in   the  L'niversity  of  Cam- 
bridge. 
Clement  of  Rome  (Epistle  of),  Galadans 
(Epistle  to  the),  Hebrews  (Epistle  to 
the). 

Martin-  (A.  Stuart),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Formerly  Pitt  Scholar  and  Examiner  in 
Divinity  in  Edinburgh  L'niversity  and 
Minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  at 
Aberdeen  ;  author  of  The  Books  of  the  New 
Testament. 
Grace,  Justification. 

Martin  (G.  Currie),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Lecturer    in    connexion    with    the    National 
Council  of  Adult  School  L'nions ;  formerly 
Professor  of  New  Testament  at  the  York- 
shire United  College  and  Lancashire  College. 
Hell. 

Mathews  (Shailer),  A.M.,  D.D.  (Colby, 
Oberlin,  Brown). 
Dean  of  the  Divinity  School,  and  Professor  of 
Historical  Theology,  in  the  University  of 
Chicago  ;  President  of  the  Federal  Council 
of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America ; 
author  of  The  Messianic  Hope  in  the  New 
Testament. 
Assassins,  Judas  the  Galilean. 

Maude  (Joseph  Hooper),  M.A. 

Rector      of      Hilgay,      Downham     Market ; 
formerly    FeUow    and    Dean    of    Hertford 
College,  Oxford;  author  of  The  History  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
Ethics. 

Mitchell  (Anthony),  D.D. 

Bishop  of  Aberdeen  and  Orkney ;    formerly 
Principal     and      Pantonian     Professor     of 
Theology  in  the  Theological  College  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  in  Scotland. 
Hennas  (Shepherd  of). 

MoE  (Olaf  Edvard),  Dr.  Theol. 

Professor  of  Theology  in  the   University  of 
Christiania. 
Commandment,  Law. 

MOFFATT  (Jamesi,  D.Litt.,  Hon.  D.D.  (St. 
And.),  Hon.  M.A.  (Oxford). 
Professor  of  Church  History  in  the  L'nited 
Free  Church,  Glasgow ;  author  of  The 
Historical  New  Testament,  The  New  Testa- 
ment :  A  Netr  Tran^ation. 
Gospels  (Uncanonical). 


AUTllMl's  nV  AKTICLKS   1  .\   THIS   \()LUMK 


MoNTCiOMERY  (Wiu.iAM),  M.A.  (Cantab.)>  B,D. 

(Loiulon). 
Lecturer    in    |ii\iiiiiy    in    flu-     I'liiversity   of 
Cainbriil^'f  :  ant  Imr  oi' ,sy.  A  iK/iisfine. 
Book  of  Life,  Book  with  the  Seven  Seals, 
James     the     Lord's    Brother,     James 
(Epistle  of)- 

Montgomery  (W.  S.),  HT). 

Minister     of     tlu'     \'r Kytcriai!     Clnirrli    in 

Ireland  at  liiiUaculla.  <,Miccir>  ('(Minty. 
Beating,  Buffet,  Chain,  Fire,  Jailor. 

Morgan  (Wii.r.iAM).  M.A.,  D.D.  (Aherd.)- 

Professor  of  Sy>iiiiiatic  Theology  and  Aiiolo- 
getics  in  Qm  >  n  >  I'lieological  Collejie,  King- 
ston, Oiilai  id  ;  Kerr  Lecturer  for  1914. 
Judgment. 

Moss  (KlCHAKI)    W AUDY),  D.D. 

rriii(ii)al,  and  I'utor  in  Systematic  Theology, 
J)id^liury    Cnllc;,'!',    MiiiiclH-^lcr ;   author  of 
I'/w  Ji'i/ii/i   nf  Christ  inn  K.iji'  rimce. 
Aaron,  Aaron's  Rod,  Anathema,  Condem- 
nation, Curse,  Levite. 

Moui.rnN  (W  ii.iKii)  .(.),  >LA.  (Cantab.). 

I'l.h  ~(n  oi  Systematic  Theology  in  the 
Wt-lcyaii     (Ollr-c,      Ho.idinj^'ley,     Leeds; 

ailtlinVdl    'I'lir    W'ltivss  nf  Isnicl. 

Covenant. 

MuiRUEAi)  (Lewis  A.),  D.D. 

Minister    of     fho    United     I'lec     Cliurch    at 
Bronj^lity  -  Ii'ii  V  ;     autlmr    <it     The    Terms 
I/iJ'>'  <n\tl  Death  in  the   Old  (ittd  ^'cw  Testa- 
iihiit.-s.  The  Esrhatology  of  Jesus. 
Apocalypse. 

NiCOL  ('I'lloMA^-),    D.D. 

Pr(ii'i'-~<)i    iif  Hihlical  Criticism  in  tlie  Univer- 
sity of  Alirrdfoi  :   Miidfratur  oi  tlic  (Jeneral 
Asscinlily  <i|'  till'  Church  t>\  Scothiiid,  1914. 
Assurance,    Education,    Election,    Fore- 
knowledge, and  otiier  jirticles. 

NiVEN  (WlI.I.lAM  DiCKIK),  M.A. 

Miiiistci  (ii  the  United  Free  Cliurch  at  Blair- 
gowrie ;  co-exaininer  in  Mental  Philosophy 
m  the  Univensity  of  Aberdeen. 
Cerinthus,   Doctor,  Ebionism,    Emperor- 
Worship,  Essenes,  Gnosticism. 

Peake  (Arthur  Samuel),  :\r.A.,  D.n. 

Kylands  Professor  of  Hihliial  I.xruc-is  in  the 
University  of  Manchester  and  I'utor  in  the 
Hartley  Primitive  Methodist  College  ;  some- 
time Fellow  of  Merton  College  and  Lecturer 
in  Mansfield  College,  Oxford  ;  author  of 
T/te  Problem  of  Stiffering  in  the  Old  T'-sta- 
VWnt,    A     Critir,,/    hifrnducfitin    fn    ffir    \ew 

Testament,  (/hri.stinnitii :  its  Anfure  mid  its 
Truth. 
Cainites,  Jude  the  Lord's  Brother,  Jude 
(Epistle  of). 
I'LATT  i  l'i;i,iii:i;i('),  M.A..  li.D. 

Professor  f)i  Svstemai  ic  and  F*astoral  Theologj' 
in  the  Wesfeyan  Colhg*;,  Handsworth,  Bir- 
mingham ;  autlior  of  Miracles:  An  Outline 
of  the  Christ  inn  View. 
Atonement. 

Plummki:  (Alfred),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Late  Master  of  University  College,  Durham  ; 
formerly  F'ellow  and  Senior  Tutor  of  Trinity 
CollcL;e.  Oxford;  author  of  'The  Go.spel 
■'  !u  S.  I.uke'in  The  International 

I  .mil'  I'tfiry,  and  other  works. 

Apostle,  Bishop,  Church,  Deacon,  Evan- 
gelist, and  other  article-. 


Pope  (R.    Martin),   M.A.    (Cantab,    and    Man- 
chester). 
Minister  of  the  Wesleyan   Mcthodi-i   <  Imnh 
at  Keswick;  author  of  ErpDSitirrij  Sut'S  on 
at.   I'linis   Kjii  ■:il-  ;  tn    Timothy  and  Titus, 
and  other  wdik-. 
Abba,     Christian     Life,     Conversation, 
Gifts,  Judging. 

liEin  (John),  M.A. 

Mini.ster  of  the  United  1  hi    (  hurch  at  Inver- 
ness; autiior  of  .fi-sii^  ■iiiii  .\i'  ,,t/.-,,i"x.  The 
First  Thinrjsff  J'  <Hs.  /Vc  I  '/Jift , n^i  nf  I,,f'  ; 
editor  of /;;//w^(/(/  llo/v/.v. 
JEon,  Age,  Aged,  Honour. 

Roberts  (John  Edwaku),  M.A.  (London),  B.D. 
(St.  Andrews). 
Minister  of  the  Baptist  Cliunli  at  Manchester; 
author     of     Christian     l',<i  i^'i,;,!,  ^      J'rimt,- 
Prayers  and  Devotions. 
Apollos,  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  Bar-Jesus, 
Gallio,  anil  other  articles. 

Roberts  (Kouert),  B.A.  (Wales).  rii.D.  (Leipzig). 
Kliuallt,  St.  Asaph. 
Expediency. 
Robertson  (Archibald  Thomas),  .M..\.,  I).  D., 
LL.D. 
Professor  of  Interpretation  oi  tlie  New  Te-ta 
nieiit   in  the  Southern    Baptist  'ilieological 
Seminary,    Louisville,    Ky.  :     .iiithor    of    A 
Grainnutr  of  tlie  Greek  Acw  Testament  in  the 
Light    of   Historical    Research,    and   other 
works. 

Bond,  Debt,  Deliverer,  Destruction. 

Robinson  (George  L.),  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Profe.ssor  of   Biblical  Literature  and  Fnglish 
Bible  in  M'Cormick  Theological  Seminary, 
Chicago. 
Caesarea. 

Robinson  (Henry  Wheeler),  M.A.  (O.xon.  and 
Ed  in.). 
Professor    of    Church    History    and    of     the 
Philosophy    of    Religion     in     the     lliiti-i 
College,   llawdon  ;  sometime  Senior   Kcniu- 
cott   Scholar  in  the  University  of  Oxford  : 
author  of  'Hebrew   P.sychology  in  TNI.-uiim 
to    Pauline     AntliropoioL:y      in 
College  Essays,  The   Christ  cm    T 
Man,  The  Religious  Ideas  of  the  (v      ;     /  ' 
ment. 
Adorning,  Ear,  Eye,  Feet,  Hair,  Hand, 
Head. 

Sanday  (William),  D.n.,  LI..I)..  I.itt.n.,  F.B..\. 
Lady    Margaret    l'idfe--or  of    iUvmiiy,   and 
Can<m  of  Ciirist  Cimrch,  Oxford;  Chaplain 
in  Ordinary  to  11. M.  the  King. 
Inspiration  and  Revelation. 

von  Schlatter  (Adolf). 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Introduction  and 
I'.xegesis  in  the  University  of  Tubingen. 
Holy  Spirit. 

Scott  (<  h  \i;i.i:s  Am)1.i;s(in),  M.A.,  D.D. 

i'rofe.-soi-    of    ihr    Language,    Literature,   and 

Tlieology   of  the    New  Testament    in    \\'e-.r- 

minster  Cidlege.  ( 'aml>ridge  :  .'11111101  of   ///•■ 

Mdkinij  cf  II  t'hristuni,  and  other  \\oik-. 

Christ,  Christology. 

siDNKi.i.    (lliMiv    Cariss   Jones),    B..\..    L.l>. 

(Londoiii. 
Minister  of  the  A\'e-le\;ni  Methodi-t   (hurc!; 
at  Ilkley. 

Admonition,     Chastisement,     Discipline, 
Excommunication. 


AUTHORS  OF  ARTICLES  IX  THIS  VOLUME 


Smith  (Sherwin),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Minister  of  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Church 
at  Burnley. 
Abomination,  Clean  and  Unclean. 

SouTEK  (Alexander),  M.A-,  D.Litt. 

Regius  Professor  of  Humanity  and  Lecturer 
in  Mediaeval  Palaeography  in  the  University 
of  Aberdeen  ;  formerly  Professor  of  New 
Testament  Greek  and  Exegesis  in  Mansfield 
College,  Oxford ;  author  of  A  Sttidy  of 
Ambrosiaster,  The  Text  and  Canon  of  the 
New  Testament. 
Augustus,  Caesar,  Calignia,  Citizenship, 
Diana,  Domitian,  and  other  articles. 

Spooxek  (William  Archibald),  D.D. 

Warden  of  New  College,  Oxford  ;  Hon.  Canon 
of     Christ     Church,     Oxford ;     Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough. 
Lucius. 

STEVLXSOX  (MORLEY),  M.A. 

Principaj  of    Warrington   Training  College ; 
Hon.  Canon  of  Liverpool ;  author  of  Hand- 
book to  the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Luke,  and 
other  works. 
Author     and     Finisher,      Circumcision, 
Divisions,  Forerunner,  Heresy,  Judaiz- 
ing. 

Stewart  (George  Wauchope),  M.A.,  B.D. 

Minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  at  Hadding- 
ton (First  Charge) ;  author  of  Music  in  the 
Church. 
King,  King  of  Kings  and  Lord  of  Lords, 
Lord. 

Stewart  (Robert  William),  M.A.,  B.Sc,  B.D. 
Minister  of  the  United  Free  Church  at  Duthil 
(Carr  Bridge). 
Apostolic  Constitutions. 

Strachak  (Robert   Harvey),    M.A.   (Aberd.), 
B.A.  (Cantab.). 
Minister     of     the    Presbyterian    Church    of 
England  at  Cambridge. 
Consecration,  Fast  (The),  Holiness,  Holy 
Day. 

Strahax  (James),  M.A.,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Hebrew  and  Biblical  Criticism  in 
the  M'Crea  Magee  Presbyterian  College, 
Londonderry ;  Cunningham  Lecturer ;  author 
of  Hebrew  Ideals,  The  Book  of  Job,  The 
Capt'urity  and  Pastoral  Epistles. 
Abraham,  Colours,  Elements,  Galatia, 
Hypocrisy,   and  other  articles. 


Thcmb  (Albert). 

Professor    of  Comparative    Philology  in   the 
University  of  Strassburg ;  author  of  Hand- 
hook  of  tite  Jdodern  Greek  Vemacuiar. 
Hellenistic  and  Biblical  Greek. 
Tod  (David  Macrak),  M.A.,  B.D.  (Edin.). 

Minister    of     the     Presbyterian     Church    of 
En^'land  at  Huddersfiefd;  formerly  Hebrew 
Tutor  and  Cunningham  Fellow,  New  College, 
Edinburgh. 
Faith,    Faithfulness,  Ignorance,   Know- 
ledge. 

Vos  (Geerhardcs),  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

Charles  Haley  Professor  of  Biblical  Theology 
in  the  Theological  Seminary  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  at  Princeton,  N.J. 

Brotherly    Love,   Goodness,  Joy,   Kind- 
ness, Longsuffering,  Love. 

Watkixs  (Charles  H.  k  D.Th. 

Minister  of  the  Baptist  Church  at  Liverpool ; 

Lecturer  in   the   Midland    Baptist   College 

and  University  College,  Nottingham ;  author 

of  St.  PaiiFs  Fight  for  Galatia. 

Ambassador,      Blessedness,      Brethren, 

Conspiracy. 

Watt  (High),  B.D. 

Minister  of  the  United  Free  Church  of  Scotland 
at    Bearsden ;    Examiner    for    the    Church 
History  Scholarships  of    the  United  Free 
Church  of  Scotland. 
Didache. 

Wells  (Leonard  St.  Albax),  M.A.  (Oxon.). 
Vicar  of  St.   Aidan's,   South    Shields ;    sub- 
editor of  the  Oxford  Apocrjfpha  and  Pseud- 
epigrapha. 

Alpha  and  Omega,  Amen. 

Willis  (Johx  Rothwell),  B.D. 

Canon  of  St.  Aidans,  Ferns,  and  Rector  of 
Preban  and  Moyne. 

Angels  of  the  Seven  Churches,  Collec- 
tion, Contribution. 

WoRSLEY  (Frederick  William),  M.A.,  B.D. 
Subwarden  of  St.  Michael's  CoU^e,  LlandaflT; 
author  of  The  Apocalypse  of  Jesus. 
Areopagite,  Baal,  Babbler,  Cali^  Damaris, 

Dioscuri,  Idolatry,  Jupiter. 

Zexos  (Axurew  C),  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor    of     Historical     Theology     in     the 
MCormick  Theological  Seminsiry,  Chicago. 
Dates. 

Zwaax  (J.  DE),  D.D.  (Leiden). 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis  in  the 
University  of  Groningen. 

'  Acts  of  Thomas'  in  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
(Apocryphal). 


LIST   OF   ABBREA'IATIOXS 


I.  General 


App.  =  Appendix. 

Arab.  =  Arabic. 

art.,  artt.=  article,  articles. 

A.S.  =  Anglo-Saxon. 

Assyr.  =  Assyrian. 

AT  =  Altes  Testament. 

AV= Authorized  Version. 

AVm  =  Authorized  Version  margin. 

Bab.  =  Babylonian. 

c.  =  circa,  about. 

cf.=  compare. 

ct.  =  contrast. 

ed.  =  edited,  edition. 

Eng.=  English. 

Eth.  =  Ethiopic. 

EV,  EW  =  English  Version,  Versions. 

f.  =  and  following  verse  or  page. 

G.  =  and  following  verses  or  pages. 

fol.  =  folio. 

fr.  =  fragment,  from. 

Fr.  =  French. 

Germ.  =  German. 

Gr.=  Greek. 

Heb.  =  Hebrew. 

Lat.  =  Latin. 


lit.  =literall5-,  literature. 

LXX = Septuagin  t. 

m.,  marg.  =  margin. 

MS,  MSS  =  manuscript,  manuscripts. 

n.  =  note. 

NT  =  New  Testament,  Neues  Testament. 

N.S.  =new  series. 

0T  =  01d  Testament. 

pi.  =  plural. 

q.v.,  qq.v.  =  quod  vide,  quce  vide,  which  see. 

Rhem.  =Rhemi3h  New  Testament. 

rt.  =root. 

RV  =  Revised  Version. 

RVm  =  Revised  Version  margin. 

Sera.  =  Semitic. 

sing.  =  singular. 

Skr.  =  Sanskrit. 

Syr.  =  Svriac. 

Targ.  =*rargura. 

tr.  ==  translated,  translation. 

TR=Textus  Receptus,  Received  Text 

V.  =  verse. 

v.l.  =varia  lectio,  variant  reading. 

VS,  VSS= Version,  Versions. 

Vulg.,  Vg.=  Vulgate. 


n.  Books  of  the  Bible 


Old  Testament. 


Gn= Genesis. 

Ex  =  Exodus. 

Lv= Leviticus. 

Nu  =  Numbers. 

Dt  =  Deuteronomy. 

Jos  =  Joshua. 

Jg  =  Judges. 

Ru  =  Ruth. 

1  S,  2  S  =  land  2  Samuel. 

1  K,  2K=1  and  2  Kings. 

1    Ch,    2    Ch=:l    and    2 

Chronicles. 
Ezr  =  Ezra. 
Neh  =  Nehemiah. 
Est  =  Esther. 
Job. 

Ps  =  Psalms. 
Pr  —  Proverbs. 
Ec  =  Ecclesiastes. 

Apocrypha. 

1  Es,  2  Es  =  1  and  2  To  =  Tobit. 

Esdras.  Jth  =  Jui!itii. 


Ca= Canticles. 
Is  =  Isaiah. 
Jer  =  Jeremiah. 
La  =  Lamentations. 
Ezk  =  Ezekiel. 
Dn  =  Daniel. 
Hos  =  Hosea. 
Jl  =  Joel. 
Am  =  Amos. 
Ob  =  Obadiah. 
Jon = Jonah. 
Mic  =  Micah. 
Nah  =  XaIiuni. 
Hab  =  Habakkuk. 
Zeph  =  Zephaniah. 
Hag  =  Haggai. 
Zee— Zechariah. 
Mal  =  Malachi. 


Ad.    Est  =  Additions    to    Sus  =  Susanna. 


Esther. 
Wis = Wisdom. 
Sir  =  Sirach   or    Ecclesi- 

asticus. 
Bar=Baruch. 
Three  =  Song  of  the  Three 

Children. 


Bel  =  Bel     and      the 

Dragon. 
Pr.    Man  =  Prayer    of 

Manasses. 
1  Mac,  2  Mac=l  and  's 

Maccabees. 


Aew  Testament. 


Mt= Matthew. 

Mk  =  Mark. 

Lk  =  Luke. 

Jn  =  John. 

Ac  :=  Acts. 

Ro  =  Romans. 

1    Co,    2  Co  =  1  and 

Corinthians. 
Gal  =  Galatians. 
Eph  =r  Ephesians. 
Ph  =  Philippians. 
Col  =  Colossians. 


1    Th,   2    Th  =  l    and    2 

Thessalonians. 
1    Ti,    2    Ti  =  l     and    2 

Timothy. 
Tit  =  Titus. 
Philem  =  Philemon. 
2  He  =  Hebrews. 
Ja  =  James. 

1  P,  2P=1  and  2  Peter. 
1  Jn,  2  Jn,   3   Jn  =  l,  2, 

and  3  John. 
Jude. 
Rev  =  Revelation. 


XVI 


LIST  OF  ABJiREVIATlONS 


III,  BlBLIOORAPHV 


iiG(7=Abhandluugen  der  Gottinger  Gesellschaft 

der  Wishcnschaften. 
AJPh  —  Americasi  .lournal  of  Philology. 
,/4J^7'A  =  American  .(uurnal  of  Theology. 
AJiW=ATchiv  fiii  Ueligionswissenschaft. 
^5= Acta  Sanctoruiii  (HoUiindus). 
£«/=Helhiiii  .Iiidaicuiii  (Juttephus). 
jBX.  =  lijiiiii>ton  lecture. 
^»r=  Biblical  VVorltl. 
C'£= Catholic  Encyclopedia. 
<.'/v4  =  CorpUB  Inscrip.  Atticanim. 
C'/C  =  Corpus  Inwrip.  Gni'carum. 
<'/Z.=Corpus  In8cri|i.  Latinarum. 
C7.S'= Corpus  Inscrip.  Seiniticaruin. 
C^^=Churcli  Quarterly  Keview. 
6'i?=:ConteniiK>rary  Review. 
<7iSi?/y  =  Corpus  Script.  Eccles.  Latinomm. 
DB= Did.  of  the  Bible. 
DCA=Dict.  of  Christian  Antiquities. 
Z>CB  =  Dict.  of  Cliristian  Bi<);,'raphy. 
Z>CG  =  Dict.  of  Christ  and  the  Ciisi>el8. 
DGRA  =Dict.  of  (ireek  and  Konian  Antiquities. 
DGRB=V>ict.  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography. 
DGRG ^D'lct.  of  Greek  and  Roman  Geography. 
i?5i  =  Encyclop«'dia  Biblica. 
Elir  =  Encyclopjcdia  Britannica. 
EGT=Y,\\tosiioT»  (ireek  Testament. 
JS7?^=Encyclop»edia  of  Religion  and  Ethics. 
Exp  =  Expositor. 
ExpT=  Expository  Times. 
<r.^P= Geographic  des  alten  Paliistina  (Buhl). 
G!B  =  Golden  Bough  (J.  (i.  Frazer). 
GGA  =G6ttiDgiscne  Gelehrte  Anzeigen. 
G(r.iV  =  Nachrichten  der  konigl.  Gesellschaft  der 

Wissenscliaften  zu  (Joftinpen. 
<?JF'=Ge8chicht«  des  jiidischen  Volkes  (Schiirer). 
<Jrimra-Thayer  =  Grimm's  Gr.-Eng.  Lexicon  of  the 

NT,  tr.  Thayer. 
/r/)B=Ha.stinjr8'^Dict.  of  the  Bible  (5  vols.). 
y/£=Historia  Ecclesiastica  (Eusebius,  etc.). 
^(?^/^  =  Historical  Geography  of  the  Holy  Land 

(G.  A.  Smitli). 
i/^/  =  History  of  Israel  (Ewald). 
//./  =  Hibbert  Journal. 
irJP=  History  of  tlie  Jewish  People  (Eng.  tr.  of 

GJV).  * 

//L  =  Hibbert  Lecture. 
^.V=Hi8toria  Naturalis  (Pliny). 
/C6'=  International  Critical  Commentary. 
75.9= International  Science  Series. 
JA  =  Journal  Asiatique. 
«/£Z.  =  Journal  of  Biblical  Literature. 
./J?  =  Jewish  Encvclopedia. 
.//f.S'  =  Journal  of  Hellenic  Studiea 
J/*A  =  Journal  of  Pliilology. 

JP7'A  =  Jahrbiicher  fiir  prot«stantische  Theologie. 
./07i- Jewisli  Quarterly  Review. 
^^5= Journal  of  Roman  Studies. 
./TAiYs  Journal  of  Theological  Studies. 
A'i47'»=KeilinHchriften  und  das  Alte  Testament* 

(Schrader.  1K8.S). 
A'.447''^Ziiiiiiicrn-Winckler's  ed.  of  the  preceding 

(a  totally  distinct  work),  19U2-03. 


A'/^  =  Keilin8chriftliche  Bibliothek. 

ZC'Zf/= Literarisches  Centralblatt. 

Z,A'jr=Introd.  to  Literature  of  the  New  Testament 
(MoHatt). 

LT  ==  Life    and    Times    of    Jesus    the    Messiah 
(Edersheim). 

J7drj'=Monats8chrift  fiir  Geschichte und  Wissen- 
schaft  des  Judentums. 

iyr(?G  =  Nachrichten  der  konigl.  Gesellschaft  der 
Wissenschaften  zu  Gottingen. 

iViirZ=Neue  kirchliche  Zeitschrift. 

iV7'iZ'(r  =  Neute8tanientliche  Zeitgeschichte  (Holtz- 
niann  and  otliers). 

(?J?Z>  =  Oxford  English  Dictionary. 

OTJC=Oh\  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church  (W. 
R.  Sniitli). 

Pauly-Wissowa  =  Pauly-Wissowa's    Realencyklo- 
padie. 

PJ5  =  Polychrome  Bible. 

PC=  Primitive  Culture  (E.  B.  Tylor). 

P^/'=  Palestine  Exploration  P^und. 

PEFSt  =  Palestine   Exploration   Fund  Quarterly 
Statement. 

P^^  =  Realencyklopadie  fiir  protestantische  Theo- 
logie und  Kirche. 

PiSfi J  =  Proceedings    of    the    Society  of  Biblical 
Archaeolof^y. 

RA  =  Revue  Arcli^ologique. 

.BJ5  =  Revue  Biblique. 

REG  =  Revue  des  fitudes  Grecques. 

i2(r(?  =  Religion  in  Geschichte  und  Gegenwart. 

72^/2= Revue  de  I'Histoire  des  Religions. 

Roscher=Roscher's    Ausfiihrliches    Lexikon    der 
griech.  und  rom.  Mythologie. 

RS  =  Religion    of    the    Semites    (W.    Robertson 
Smith). 

55.4  JF=Sitzungsberichte  der  Berliner  Akademie 
der  Wissenschaften. 

SEE  =  S&cred  Books  of  the  East. 

Schatr-Herzog  =  The  New  Schafi-Herzog  Encyclo- 
pedia (Eng.  tr.  of  PRE). 

<SZ)£  =  Hastings'    Single-vol.    Dictionary    of    the 
Bible. 

<S£P= Memoirs  of  Survey  of  Eastern  Palestine. 

5A'=Studien  und  Kritiken. 

5  JFP= Memoirs  of  Survey  of  Western  Palestine. 

rAZ,Z= Theologische  Litteraturzeitung. 

rAr=Theol.  Tijdschrift. 

7'.^= Texts  and  Studies. 

TU=Texte  und  Untersuchungen. 

Wetzer-Welte  =  Wetzer- Welte's  Kirchenlexikon. 

WH  =  Westcott-Hort's  Greek  Testament. 

ZATW  =  Zeitschrift    fiir    die     alttest.     Wissen- 
schaft. 

ZDMG  —  Zeitschrift  der  deutschen  morgenland- 
ischen  Gesellschaft. 

i^^ATG  =  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschichte. 

Z/firX  =  Zeitschrift  fiir  kirchl.  Wissenschaft  und 
kirchl.  Leben. 

ZNTW  =  Zeitschrift    fur    die    neutest.    Wissen- 
schaft. 

Z7'A'=Zeitsclirift  fiir  Theologie  und  Kirche. 

ZlfT= Zeitschrift  fiir  wissenschaftliche  Theologie. 


DICTIONARY 
OF   THE    APOSTOLIC    CHURCH 


A 


AARON. — By  name  Aaron  is  mentioned  in  the 
NT  only  by  St.  Luke  (Lk  1',  Ac  7*^)  and  by  the 
^v^ite^  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (5^  7"  &*), 
and  in  his  personal  history  very  little  interest  is 
taken.  Officially,  he  Mas  represented  to  be  the 
lirst  of  a  long  line  of  high  priests,  specilically 
appointed  such  (Ex  28'^-)  in  conhmiation  of  the 
status  already  allowed  him  in  Arabic  usage 
(Ex  4") ;  and,  though  his  successors  were  prob- 
ably not  all  in  the  direct  line  of  descent,  they 
found  it  convenient  to  claim  relationship  with 
him  (Ezr  2®"-),  and  gradually  the  conceptions  in- 
volved in  high-priesthood  were  identified  with  the 
name  of  Aaron.  That  continued  to  be  the  case 
in  the  apostolic  period  ;  and  it  became  a  familiar 
thought  that  the  high  priest  was  a  type  of  Christ, 
who  was  viewed  as  the  antitype  of  all  true  sacer- 
dotal persons  and  ministries. 

In  this  typical  relation  between  Aaron  as  the 
embodiment  of  priestly  ideas  and  Christ  as  their 
final  expression,  an  attempt  was  made  to  trace 
ditierences  as  well  as  correspondences.  Christ  was 
thought  of,  not  as  identical  with  His  prototype, 
but  as  invested  with  higher  qualities,  of  which 
only  the  germ  and  promise  are  to  be  found  in 
Aaron. 

1.  In  regard  to  vocation,  both  were  appointed 
by  God  (He  5^) ;  yet  to  the  priesthood  of  Christ  no 
Aaronic  (7"),  or  Levitical  (7"),  or  legal  (9^)  measure 
may  be  put.  He  was  a  man  like  Aaron  (2^®'-), 
capable  of  sympathy  both  by  nature  and  from 
experience  (4'')  ;  yet  His  priesthood  is  distinctly 
of  a  higher  and  eternal  order  (5^),  limited  neither 
to  an  earthly  sanctuary  (9^^),  nor  to  the  necessity 
of  repeating  the  one  great  sacrifice  (9^'),  nor  in 
efficiency  to  the  treatment  of  otfences  that  were 
chiefly  ceremonial  or  ritual  (9^-  ^^). 

2.  In  the  consecration  of  the  high  priest  the 
supreme  act  was  anointing  with  oU  (Lv  8^-),  from 
which,  indeed,  the  designation  Messiah  ('anointed 
one')  arose.  Yet  such  Avas  the  lofty  position  of 
Jesus,  and  such  was  His  consciousness,  that  He 
could  say,  'I  consecrate  myself  (Jn  17**"),  on  the 
very  eve  of  His  priestly  sacrifice. 

3.  In  function  Aaron  stood  between  God  and 
the  congregation,  representing  each  to  the  other. 
On  the  one  hand,  not  only  were  the  priests 
gathered  together  into  an  embodied  unity  in  him, 
but  in  his  annual  approach  to  God  he  brought  a 
sacrifice  even  for  the   'ignorances'   of  the  people 

VOL.  I. — I 


(He  9'),  and  pnrified  the  sanctuary  itself  from  any 
ix)ssible  defilements  contracted  through  the  sins 
of  its  frequenters  (9'*^  ;  cf.  Lv  16*"").  As  the  repre- 
sentative of  God,  he  wore  the  sacred  Urim  and 
Thummim  in  the  pouch  of  judgment  upon  Ms 
heart  (Ex  28*^),  indicating  his  qualification  to  com- 
municate God's  decision  on  matters  that  tran- 
scended human  wit ;  and  through  him  and  his  order 
the  blessing  of  God  was  invoked.  In  the  Chris- 
tian thought  of  the  apostolic  age  all  these  functions 
pass  over  to  Jesus  Christ,  with  modifications  em- 
phasizing their  ethical  eflect  and  the  intrinsically 
spiritual  benefit  that  follows.  One  of  the  most 
general  statements  is  He  2",  where  the  phrase 
'  things  pertaining  to  God '  covers  both  sides  of  the 
relations  between  God  and  man,  though  promin- 
ence is  given,  as  in  tbe  passages  that  speak  of 
Christ  as  our  Advocate  with  God,  to  the  work 
done  by  Him  as  representing  men.  Much  the 
same  is  the  case  with  the  great  passage  on  medi- 
atorship  (1  Ti  2*).  As  He  is  the  Saviour,  so  He  is 
the  High  Priest,  of  all  men,  'specially  of  them 
that  believe '  (1  Ti  4*°).  In  virtue  of  His  imma- 
nence as  God,  as  well  as  of  His  priestly  rank  and 
sympathy.  He  fitly  represents  all  men  before  God, 
while  for  those  who  have  put  themselves  into  a 
right  attitude  towards  Him  He  acts  as  Paraclete 
(1  Jn  2*),  promoting  their  interests  and  completing 
their  deliverance  from  sin.  On  the  other  hand, 
as  representative  of  God,  He  bestows  gifts  upon 
men  (Eph  4^*),  communicating  to  them  the  will  of 
God  and  enriching  them  with  every  spiritual  bless- 
ing. He  is  not  only  the  Kevealer  of  the  Father ; 
but,  just  as  He  oflers  His  sacrifice  to  God  in  the 
stead  of  man,  so  He  represents  to  man  what  God 
is  in  relation  to  human  sin,  and  what  God  has 
devised  and  does  with  a  view  to  human  redemption. 
Between  God  and  man  He  stands  continuously, 
the  medium  of  access  on  either  side,  the  channel 
of  Divine  grace  and  of  human  prayer  and  praise. 
See,  further,  art.  Melchizedek. 

LrTKRATCirK. — See  art.  '  Aaron  '  in  HDB,  DCG  and  JE,  and 
Comm.  on  Hebrews,  esp.  th06e  of  A.  B.  Davidson  and  B.  F. 
Westcott,  A.  S.  Peake  (Centuiy  Bible),  E.  C.  Wickham 
(Westminster  Coin.) ;  also  Phillips  Brooks,  Sermons  in  Englith 
Churches,  1S83,  p.  43 ;  J.  Wesley,  Works,  viL  (London,  ls72] 
273.  R.  W.  Moss. 

AARON'S  ROD. — Aaron's  rod  is  mentioned  only 
in  He  9*,  which  locates  the  rod  in  the  ark.  An 
earlier  tradition  (Nn  17*" ;  cf.  1  K  8*)  preserves  it 


2 


ABADDON 


ABBA 


'before'  the  nrk,  on  the  sjiot  on  which  it  had 
budded  (Be«!  llDIi  i.  3'').  In  oitlier  cjlho  the  object 
was  to  secure  a  stjmdinj.'  witness  to  tli«  validity'  of 
the  claimn  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  (so  Clement, 
1  Cor.  §  43).  The  rod  hiw  BometimcH  been  identi- 
fied as  a  branch  of  tlie  almond  tree  ;  and  lK>th 
Jewish  and  Christian  fancy  lias  l>een  busy  with  it. 
For  early  legends  associatinc  it  8ynil>olically  with 
the  cross,  or  literally  with  tiie  transverse  beam  of 
the  cross,  see  W.  W.  Seymour,  The  Cross  in  Tradi- 
tion, History,  Art,  1898,  p.  83.         R.  W.  Moss. 

ABADDON.— The  word  is  found  in  the  NT  only 
in  Rev  D".  In  the  OT  text  'itbhadddn  occurs  six 
times  (only  in  the  Wisdom  literature),  AV  in  eacii 
case  rendering  'destruction,'  wliile  KV  gives  '  De- 
struction'  in  Job  28«  31",  Ps  88>,  but  'Aba.idon' 
in  Job  26',  Pr  15"  27*j  on  the  ground,  as  state«l  by 
the  Revisers  in  their  Preface,  tliat '  a  proper  name 
appears  to  be  required  for  giving  vividness  and 
point.'  Ktymologically  the  word  is  an  abstract 
term  meaning  'destruction,'  and  it  is  employed  in 
this  sense  in  Job  31".  Its  use,  however,  in  paral- 
lelism with  Sheol  in  Job  26«,  Pr  15"  27-""  and  with 
'  the  grave'  in  Ps  88"  shows  that  even  in  the  OT 
it  htM  passed  beyond  this  general  meaning  and 
had  become  a  specialized  term  for  the  abo<le  of  the 
dead.  In  Job  28^,  again,  it  is  personilied  side  by 
side  with  Death,  just  as  Hades  is  personified  in 
Rev  6*.  So  far  as  the  OT  is  concerned,  and  not- 
withstanding tiie  evident  suggestions  of  its  deriva- 
tion (from  Heb.  'dbhadh,  '  to  perish'),  the  connota- 
tion of  the  word  does  not  appear  to  advance  be- 
yond that  of  the  parallel  w^ord  ESheol  in  its  older 
meaning  of  the  general  dwelling-place  of  all  the 
dead.  In  later  Heb.  literature,  nowever,  when 
Sheol  had  come  to  be  recognized  as  a  sphere  of 
moral  distinctions  and  consequent  retribution, 
Abaddon  is  represented  as  one  of  the  lower  divi- 
sions of  Sheol  and  a.s  l)eing  the  abode  of  the  wicked 
and  a  place  of  punishment.  At  first  it  was  distin- 
gnished  from  Gehenna,  as  a  place  of  loss  and  de- 
privation rather  than  of  the  jwsitive  suHering 
assigned  to  the  latter.  But  in  the  Rabbinic  teach- 
ing of  a  later  time  it  becomes  the  very  house  of 
perdition  (Targ.  on  Job  26*),  the  lowest  part  of 
Gehenna,  tiie  deei)est  deep  of  hell  (Eniek  Ilatn- 
melech,  15.3). 

In  Rev  9"  Abaddon  is  not  merely  personified  in 
the  free  |)oetic  manner  of  Job  28-,  bnt  is  used 
as  the  personal  ilesi;,'nation  in  Hebrew  of  a  fallen 
angel  described  as  tlie  king  of  tlie  locusts  and  *  the 
angel  of  the  abyss,'  wiiose  name  in  the  (ireek 
tongue  is  said  to  be  ApoUyon.  In  tlie  LXX 
'abhadddn  is  regularly  rendered  by  avdiKtux  ;  and 
the  personification  of  the  Heb.  word  by  the  writer 
of  Ilev.  ap|>arently  led  him  to  form  from  the 
corresponding  Gr.  verb  (diroXXiyw,  later  form  of 
6,v6\\v(u)  a  Gr.  name  with  tiie  personal  ending  wk. 
Outside  of  the  Apocalyjise  the  name  Abaddon  has 
hardly  any  place  in  English  literature,  while 
ApoUyon,  on  the  contrary,  has  become  familiar 
through  the  use  made  of  it  in  the  Pilgrim's  Pro- 

? tress  by  Bunyan,  whose  concejition  of  ApoUyon, 
lowever,  is  entirely  his  own.  Abaddon  or  AimjII- 
yon  was  often  identitied  with  Asmodieus,  '  the  evil 
spirit'  of  To  3";  but  this  identitication  is  now 
known  to  be  a  mistake. 

LrrKRATiTRK.— Theartt  *.rr.  in  HDB  and  Klii;  art.  'Abyss' 
in  EHE ;  KxpT  xx.  (lOOS-OOJ  234  f.  J.  C.  LaMIIEUT. 

ABBA. — Abba  is  the  emphatic  form  of  the  Aram, 
word  for  'father'  (see  Dalman,  Arnm.  (ham.  p. 
98,  for  3K  and  its  various  forms  ;  also  Ma<dean,  in 
DCG,  S.V.).  It  is  found  only  in  tliree  i)assages  in 
the  NT,  viz.  Mk  14*  Ro  8",  Gal  4«;  in  each  case 
6  irar^p  is  .subjoined  to  'A^jia.,  the  whole  expres- 
sion being  a  title  of  address.    [The  use  of  6  war^p, 


nominative  with  the  article,  as  a  vocative,  is  not  a 
Hebraism,  as  Lightfoot  thought,  but  an  emphatic 
vocative  not  unknown  t-o  classical  Greek  ana  com- 
mon in  the  NT  :  '  nearly  sixty  examples  of  it  are 
found  in  NT' ;  see  Monlton,  tfrawt.  of  AT  Greek, 
Edinburgh,  1906,  p.  70.] 

Lightfoot  on  (Jal  4"  argues  that  the  bilingual 
expression  is  a  liturgical  formula  originating  with 
Hellenistic  Jews,  who,  while  clinging  to  the  original 
word  which  was  consecrated  by  long  usage,  aBded 
to  it  the  Greek  equivalent;  but  he  supports  an 
alternative  theory  that  it  took  its  rise  among  Jews 
of  Palestine  after  they  had  become  acquainted  with 
the  Greek  language,  and  is  simply  an  expression 
of  importunate  entreaty,  and  an  example  of  that 
verbal  usage  whereby  the  same  idea  is  conveyed 
in  dillerent  forms  for  the  sake  of  emphasis.  As 
illustrations  of  this  repetition,  he  quotes  Rev  9" 
('Ato\\Cu»,  'A^aSSwv)  12»  20*  (Zara^aj,  Atd/SoXoy). 
Thayer,  in  III)B  {s.v.),  points  out  that,  though  de- 
votional intensity  belongs  to  repetition  of  the  .same 
term  (e.g.  Kijpie,  Kvpte),  it  is  also  expressed  by  such 
phrases  as  val  dfiriv,  'Hallelujah,  Praise  the  Lord,* 
where  the  terms  are  different.  The  context  of  each 
passage  where  'Abba,  Father'  is  found  appears  to 
prove  that  the  Greek  addition  is  not  merely  the 
explanation  of  the  Aramaic  word,  such  as,  e.g., 
St.  Peter  might  have  added  in  his  preaching — a 
custom  to  be  perpetuated  by  the  Evangelists,  as 
suggested  by  the  passage  in  Mk.  ;  but  is  rather  an 
original  formula,  the  genesis  of  which  is  to  be 
sought  further  back,  perhaps  in  the  actual  words 
used  by  our  Lord  Himself.  Thus  Sanday-Headlam 
on  Ro  8"  (ICC,  1902)  remark  : 

'  It  seems  better  to  suppose  that  our  Lord  Himself,  usinp 
familiarly  both  languajfes,  and  concentratiiij^  into  this  word  of 
all  words  such  a  depth  of  meaniii({,  found  Himself  imi^elled 
spontaneously  to  re)iuat  the  word,  and  that  some  among  His 
disciples  caught  and  transmitted  the  same  habit.  It  is  signifi- 
cant however  of  the  limited  extent  of  strictly  Jewish  Christi- 
anity that  we  find  no  other  original  examples'  of  the  use  than 
these  three.' 

Thus,  the  double  form  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
early  Christians  were  a  bilingual  people  ;  and  the 
duplication,  while  conveying  intensity  to  the  ex- 
pression, '  would  only  be  natural  where  the  speaker 
was  using  in  l)otli  cases  his  familiar  tongue.'  F.  H, 
Chase  {2'S  I.  iii.  23)  suggests  that  the  phrase  is  due 
to  the  shorter  or  Lucan  form  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
and  that  the  early  Christians  repeated  the  Hrst 
word  in  the  intensity  of  their  devotion,  coupling  a 
Hellenistic  rendering  with  the  ATomaxc  Abba.  He 
argues  that  the  al).sence  of  such  a  phrase  as  S  iffnv, 
or  6  iari  /j.edfpfitivev&fievoi',  in  Mk  M'**  is  due  to  the 
familiarity  of  the  formula ;  and  that,  while  the 
Pauline  jiassages  do  not  recall  Gethseinane,  they 
suggest  the  liord's  Prayer  as  current  in  the  shorter 
form.  Monlton  (op.  cit.  p.  10),  combating  Zahn's 
theory  that  Aramaic  was  the  language  of  St.  Paul's 
prayers — a  theory  based  on  the  Apostle's  'Abba, 
Father' — remarks  that  '  the  peculiar  sacredness  of 
association  belonging  to  the  first  word  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer  in  its  original  tongue  supplies  a  far  more 
probable  account  of  its  liturgical  use  among  Gen- 
tile Christians.'  He  mentions  the  analogy  (soe 
footnote,  loc.  cit.)  of  the  Roman  Catholic  'saying 
Paternoster,'  but  adds  that  '  Paul  will  not  allow 
even  one  wor<l  of  prayer  in  a  foreign  tongue  with- 
out adding  an  instant  translation ' ;  and  further 
refers  to  tlie  Welsh  use  of  Pader  as  a  name  for  the 
Lord's  Prayer. 

It  seems  probable  (1)  that  the  phrase,  'Abba, 
Father,'  is  a  liturgical  formula  ;  (2)  that  the  duality 
of  the  form  is  not  due  to  a  Hebraistic  repetition 
for  the  sake  of  em|)hasis,  but  to  the  fact  that  the 
early  Christians,  even  of  non- Jewish  descent,  were 
familiar  with  l)oth  Aramaic  and  Greek  ;  (3)  that 
Abba,  being  the  lirst  word  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
was  held  in  si)ecial  veneration,  and  was  quoted 


ABEL 


ABO^HNATION 


with  the  Greek  equivalent  attached  to  it,  as  a 
familiar  devotional  phrase  (like  Maran  atha  [I  Ck) 
16^,  whicli  would  be  quite  intellijiible  to  Chris- 
tians of  Gentile  origin,  though  its  lireek  transla- 
tion, 6  Kipios  6-y-yi/s  [Ph  4*],  was  also  used  ;  cf.  Did. 
10*,  wliere  '  Maran  atha'  and  '  Amen '  close  a  public 
prayer) ;  and  (4)  that  our  Lord  Himself,  though 
this  cannot  be  said  to  be  established  beyond  doubt, 
used  the  double  form  in  pronouncing  the  sacred 
Name,  which  was  invoked  m  His  prayer. 

In  conclusion,  it  should  be  noted  that,  while  the 
phrase  is  associated  wth  the  specially  solemn  occa- 
sion of  the  Gethsemane  agony,  where  our  Lord  is 
reported  by  St.  Mark  to  have  used  it,  both  ex- 
amples of  its  use  in  the  Pauline  writings  convey  a 
adnular  impression  of  solemnity  as  connected  with 
the  Christian  believer's  assurance  of  sonship — and 
sonship  (let  it  be  noted)  not  in  the  general  sense 
in  which  all  humanity  may  be  described  as  children 
of  God,  but  in  the  intimate  and  spiritual  connota- 
tion belonging  to  viodeala,  or  '  adoption,'  into  the 
family  of  God. 

LrraRATURK.— See  art. '  Abba  '  in  HDB,  DCG,  and  JE,  an  art. 
in  ExpT  XX.  [1909]  356,  and  the  authorities  cited  above. 

R.  Martix  Pope. 

ABEL. — Abel  f^iSeX)  has  the  first  place  in  the 
roll  of  '  the  elders'  (ol  -rpea^vrepoi.  He  11-),  or  men 
of  past  generations,  who  by  their  faith  pleased 
God  and  had  witness  borne  to  them.  It  is  recorded 
of  him  that  he  offered  unto  God  a  more  excellent 
sacrifice  [vXeLova  Ovaiav)  than  his  elder  brother 
(He  ll"*).  In  the  original  story  (Gn  4^^^)  his  offer- 
ing was  probably  regarded  as  more  pleasing  on 
account  of  the  material  of  his  sacrifice.  It  was  in 
accordance  with  primitive  Semitic  ideas  that  the 
occupation  of  a  keeper  of  sheep  was  more  pleasing 
to  God  than  that  of  a  tiller  of  the  ground,  and 
accordingly  that  a  firstling  of  the  flock  was  a 
more  acceptable  offering  than  the  fruit  of  the 
ground.  The  ancient  writer  of  the  story  (J) 
evidently  wished  to  teach  that  animal  sacrifice 
alone  was  pleasing  to  God  (Gunkel,  Genesis,  38 ; 
Skinner,  105).  The  author  of  Hebrews  gives  the 
story  a  different  turn.  The  greater  excellence  of 
Abel's  sacrifice  consisted  in  the  disposition  with 
which  it  was  offered.  The  spirit  of  the  worshipper 
rather  than  the  substance  of  the  offering  is  now 
considered  the  essential  element.  Abel's  sacrifice 
was  the  offering  of  a  man  whose  heart  was  right. 
Through  his  faith  he  won  God's  approval  of  his 
gifts,  and  through  his  faith  his  blood  continued  to 
speak  for  him  after  his  death.  In  a  later  passage 
of  Heb.  (12**)  that  blood  is  contrasted  wth  'the 
blood  of  sprinkling,'  by  which  the  new  covenant 
is  confirmed.  The  blood  of  Abel  cried  out  from 
the  ground  for  vengeance  (cf.  Job  16^*,  Is  26-', 
2  K  9^ ;  also  Rev  6*-  ^'*)  ;  it  was  such  a  cry  as  is 
sounded  in  Milton's  sonnet,  '  Avenge,  O  Lord,  thy 
slaughtered  saints ' ;  but  tlie  blood  of  the  eternal 
covenant  intercedes  for  mercy. 

St.  John  (1  Jn  3'-)  uses  tlie  murder  of  Abel  by 
his  brother  to  illustrate  the  absence  of  that  spirit 
of  love  which  is  the  essence  of  goodness.  The 
writer  indicates  that  the  new  commandment,  or 
message  {ayytXia),  which  has  been  heard  from  the 
beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  was  also  the  funda- 
mental law  of  the  moral  life  from  the  beginning  of 
human  history.  Cain  was  of  the  evil  one  (ck  rov 
rov7}pov),  and  slaughtered  {lff(pa^ev)  his  brother. 

LiTERATrRK. — Besidcs  the  artt.  in  the  Bible  Dictionaries,  see 
W.  G.  Ebnslie,  Expository  Lectures  and  Sermons,  1392,  p.  164  ; 
J.  Hasting^s,  (rreater  Men  and  Women  of  the  Bible,  vol.  i. 
[1913]  p.  53 ;  G.  Matheson,  The  Representative  Men  of  the 
Bible,  L  [190-2]  45 :  A.  P.  Peabody,  King's  Chapel  Sermons, 
1^1,  p.  317 ;  A.  Whyte,  Bible  Characters,  L  [1896]  44. 

J.\MES  StRAHAN. 

ABIDING.— As  in  the  Gospels,  so  in  Acts  and 
Ephesians  we  find  both  the  local  and  the  ethical 
connotations  of  this  word,  which  in  almost  every 


case  is  used  to  render  fidvu  or  one  of  its  numerous 
compounds  (e'xt-,  Kara-,  vapa-,  rpoi-,  inro-).  With 
the  purely  local  usages  we  have  here  no  concern  ; 
but  there  is  a  small  class  of  transitional  meanings 
which  lead  the  way  to  those  ethical  connotations 
which  are  the  distinctive  pro{>erty  of  the  word. 
Among  these  may  be  mentioned  the  several  places 
in  1  Co  7,  where  St.  Paul,  dealing  with  marriage 
and  allied  questions  (?  in  view  of  the  Parousia), 
speaks  of  abiding  in  this  state  or  calling.  In  the 
same  Epistle  note  also  3"  '(If  any  man's  workaijVfe,' 
and  13^^  '  And  now  abide  faith,  hope,  love.'  *  Simi- 
larly we  are  told  of  the  persistence  (a)  of  Mel- 
chizedek's  priesthood  (He  7*),  (6)  of  the  Divine 
fidelity  even  in  face  of  human  faithlessness  (2  Ti 
2^),  and  (c)  of  the  word  of  God  (1  P  1»). 

It  is,  however,  in  the  1st  Ep.  of  John,  as  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  that  we  get  the  ethi«d  use  of 
abiding  most  fully  developed  and  most  amply  pre- 
sented. But,  while  in  the  Gospel  the  emphasis  is 
laid  on  the  Son's  abiding  in  the  Father  and  Christ's 
abiding  in  the  Church,  in  1  Jn  2"-^-  -'  the  stress  is 
rather  on  the  mutual  abiding  of  the  believer  and 
God  (Father  and  Son).  Note  the  following  ex- 
perimental aspects  of  the  relation  in  question. 

1.  The  belieYer  as  the  place  of  the  abiding. — 
A  somewhat  peculiar  expression  is  foimd  in  1  Jn 
2*^,  where  we  read :  '  The  anointing  .  .  .  abideth 
in  you-'  By  xp^ixfui  is  meant  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  (cf.  2  Co  1-^),  whose  presence  in  the  heart 
gives  the  believer  an  independent  power  of  testing 
whatever  teaching  he  receives  (cf.  '  He  shall  take 
of  mine  and  shall  show  it  unto  you,'  Jn  16'*).t  In 
1  Jn  2'*  it  is  said  that  the  word"  of  God  abideth  in 
'  young  men ' ;  but  it  is  also  the  meaning  in  v.** ; 
while  in  S-"*  Christ  is  mentioned  as  abiding  in  them 
'  by  the  Spirit.'  In  each  passage  we  have  a  subtle 
instance  of  the  perfectly  natural  way  in  which  the 
operation  of  the  risen  Christ  on  the  heart  is  identi- 
fied with  that  of  the  Spirit.  The  believer's  soul 
is  thus  mystically  thought  of  as  the  matrix  in 
which  the  Divine  energ\-  of  salvation,  conceived 
of  in  its  various  aspects,  is  operative  as  a  cleansing, 
saving,  and  conserving  power,  safeguarding  it  from 
error,  sin,  and  unfaithfulness. 

2.  The  abiding  place  of  the  believer. — In  1  Jn 
2**  we  have  the  promise  that  '  it  the  [word]  heard 
from  the  beginning'  remains  in  the  believer's 
heart,  he  shall  '  continue  in  the  Son '  and  in  the 
Father  (cf.  3*).  This  reciprocal  relation  between 
the  implanted  word  and  the  human  environment 
in  which  it  energizes  is  [)eculiarly  Johannine. 
Secondary  forms  of  the  same  idea  are  found  in  2"* 
('he  that  loveth  his  brother  abideth  in  the  light'), 
and  in  3"  ('he  that  hateth  his  brother  abideth  in 
death ').  In  2^  we  have  the  fact  that  the  believer 
abides  in  Christ  made  the  ground  for  a  practical 
appeal  for  consistency  of  life,  and  in  v.^  the  reward 
of  such  living  is  that  the  believer  '  abideth  for  ever,' 
i.e.  has  eternal  life.  As  a  general  principle,  in  the 
use  of  this  word  we  find  a  striking  union  of  the  mys- 
tical and  the  ethical  aspects  of  the  Christian  faith. 

LrTEEATTEB.— G.  G.  Findlay,  The  Thing*  Abore,  1901,  p.  237 ; 
G.  H.  Knight,  Divine  Cpliftings,  1906,  p.  83  ;  F.  von  Htigel, 
Eternal  Life,  1912,  p.  365L;  and  also  the  art.  'Abiding'  in 
DCG,  and  the  literature  there  cited. 

E.  Gbiffith-Jones. 
ABOMINATION  (j35Airy/ta).  —  Like  the  word 
'  taste ' — originally  a  physical,  then  a  mental  term, 
— '  abomination '  denotes  that  for  which  God  and 
His  people  have  a  violent  distaste.  It  refers  in 
the  OT  to  the  feeling  of  repulsion  against  pro- 
hibited foods  (Lv  111",  Dt  14'),  then  to  everything 

•  Popular  opinion,  based  on  a  well-known  hymn  (Par.  4913'X 
very  erroneously  makes  faith  and  hope  pass  away,  only  love 
abiding. 

t  As  indicated  in  BDB  i.  101»>,  the  words  of  1  Jn  2=7  gave  rise 
to  the  practice  of  anointing  with  oil  at  baptism. 


ABOUNDING 


ABRAHAM 


connected  with  idolatry  (Dt  7^*,  Ko  2-'-  [dr.]).* 
Thence  it  acquires  a  moral  meaning,  and  together 
with  fornication  stigmatizes  all  the  immoralities 
of  heathendom  (Rev  17**  *).  Its  intensest  use  is 
reserved  for  hypocrisy,  the  last  oU'ence  against 
religion  (Lk  W,  Tit  i'«,  Kev  ai-"^). 

Shkrwin  Smith. 

ABOUNDING The  English  word  'aljound'  in 

the  Epistles  of  the  NT  is  the  translation  of  tlie  dr. 
words  irXeocdfw  and  jrepiff<revu.  There  is  nothing  of 
special  interest  in  these  terms ;  perhai)s  the  former 
has  the  less  lofty  sense,  its  primary  connotation  being 
that  of  superfluity.  As  used  by  St.  Paul,  however, 
there  seems  little  to  choose  between  them,  although 
it  is  worth  noting  that,  where  he  sneaks  (Ro  5-'") 
of  the  '  ollence '  and  '  sin '  abounding,  he  uses 
TrXfoi'dfen'.  Yet  he  employs  the  same  term  in  Ro 
6'  of  tiie  '  abounding  of  grace,'  and  in  Ph  4"  of  the 
fruit  of  Christian  giving.  Ills  favourite  term, 
however,  is  irepiaaevu  (in  one  case  vTrepTrepi<r(reiju, 
•overflow,'  Ro  5**),  whether  he  is  speaking  of  the 
grace  of  God  (Ro  5'"),  the  sufferings  of  Christ  (2  Co 
1"),  or  tlie  Christian  spirit  that  finds  expression  in 
liberality  (2  Co  8'  9«),  contentment  (Ph  4i^-  ^s),  hope 
(Ro  5"),  service  (1  Co  15°®).  This  list  of  references 
is  not  cxiiaiistive,  but  it  is  representative.  These 
words  and  tiie  way  in  which  tiiey  are  used  give  us 
a  suggestive  glimpse  into — 

1.  The  religious  temperament  of  the  Apostle. — 
His  was  a  rich  and  overnowing  nature,  close-packed 
with  vivid,  ever-active  qualities  of  mind  and  heart. 
His  conception  of  the  gospel  would  be  naturally  in 
accordance  with  the  wealth  of  his  psychic  and 
moral  natnre  ;  he  would  inevitably  fasten  on  such 
a-spects  of  it  as  most  thoroughly  satisfied  his  own 
.soul ;  and  he  would  put  its  resources  to  the  full 
test  of  his  spiritual  needs  and  capacities.  It  is 
fortunate  that  Christianity  found  at  its  inception 
such  a  man  ready  to  hand  as  its  chief  exponent  to 
the  primitive  churches,  and  that  his  letters  remain 
as  a  record  of  the  marvellous  way  in  which  he 
opened  his  heart  to  its  appeal,  and  of  the  manifold 
response  he  was  able  to  make  to  that  appeal.  In 
all  ages  our  faith  has  been  conditioned  by  the 
human  medium  in  which  it  has  had  to  work.  The 
ages  of  barrenness  in  Christian  experience  have 
been  those  which  have  lacked  richly-endowed  per- 
sonalities for  its  embodiment  and  exposition  ;  and 
vice  versa,  when  such  personalities  have  arisen 
and  have  given  themselves  wholeheartedly  to  the 
Divine  Spirit,  there  has  been  a  wide-spread  efflor- 
escence of  religious  experience  in  the  Church  at 
large.  Ordinary  men  and  women  are  pensioners 
religiously,  to  a  peculiar  degree,  of  the  great  souls 
in  the  community.  St.  Paul,  Origen,  Augustine, 
Bernard,  Luther,  Wesley,  etc.,  have  been  the  focal 
points  through  which  the  forces  of  the  gospel  have 
radiated  into  the  world  at  large,  and  lifted  its  life 
to  higher  levels. 

2.  The  superabundant  wealth  of  the  gospel  as 
a  medium  of  the  Divine  energies  of  redemption. 
— The  Christian  faith  is  full  of  spiritual  resources 
on  which  the  soul  may  draw  to  the  utmost  of  its 
needs.  In  the  teaching  of  our  Lord,  the  prodigality 
of  His  illustrations,  their  varied  character,  and  the 
frequency  with  which  He  likens  the  Kingdom  to  a 
'  feast,'  with  all  its  suggestions  of  a  large  welcome 
and  an  overflowing  abundance  of  good  things,  are 
very  characteristic  of  His  own  attitude  towards 
the  gospel  He  preached ;  and  St.  Paul  is  pre- 
eminent among  NT  writers  for  the  way  in  which 
he  has  grasped  the  same  idea,  and  caught  the 
spirit  of  the  Master  in  his  exposition  of  spiritual 
realities.  (Cf.  'How  many  hired  servants  of  my 
father's  have  bread  enough  and  to  spare '  [Lk  15"] 

•  Cf.  the  well-known  expression,  'abomination  of  desolation,' 
applied  to  a  heathen  altar  (Dri  12"  ;  cf.  1  Mac  !«,  Mt  2-lis, 
Mk  13i-»).    See  art.  '  Abomination  of  Desolation '  in  UDB. 


with  •  the  grace  of  God,  which  is  by  one  man,  Jesus 
Christ,  liath  abounded  unto  many'  [Ro  5'*;  also 
vv.  "•  '"•  -"•  ^'].  "-"tl  many  other  passages.) 

3.  The  call  for  an  adequate  response  on  the 
part  of  believers  to  the  varied  and  abundant 
resources  of  the  gospel.— Here,  again,  St.  Paul 
exhausts  the  power  of  language  in  urging  his  con- 
verts to  allow  the  Divine  energies  of  salvation  to 
have  their  way  with  them.  The  normal  type  of 
Christian  is  not  reached  till  his  nature  is  flooded 
Avith  the  grace  of  God,  and  he  in  turn  is  lifted  into 
a  condition  which  is  characterized  by  an  abounding 
increase  of  hope,  grace,  love,  good  works,  and  fruit- 
fulness  of  character.  '  Therefore,  as  ye  abound  in 
(everything),  see  that  ye  abound  in  this  grace  also ' 
(2  Co  8'')  expresses  one  of  his  favourite  forms  of 
appeal.  He  Avas  not  satisfied  to  see  men  raised  to 
a  slightly  higher  plane  by  their  faith  in  Christ ; 
they  were  to  be  '  transformed  in  the  spirit  of  their 
minds'  (Ro  12^) ;  they  Avere  ahvays  to  'abound  in 
the  Avork  of  the  Lord'^  (1  Co  15*»  ;  cf.  2  Co  9") ;  and, 
as  '  they  had  received '  of  him  hoAV  they  might  Avalk 
and  '  to  please  God,'  thejjr  Avere  exhorted  to  '  alx)und 
more  and  more'  (1  Th  4'),  and  that  especially 
because  they  kncAV  Avhat  commandments  '  had  been 
given  them  by  the  Lord  Jesus'  (1  Th  4'-).  It  Avas 
a  .subject  for  joyfulness  to  him  Avhen  he  found  his 
converts  thus  responding  to  the  poAver  of  God  (see 
2  Co  8"-)-  As  regards  his  realization  of  this  Divine 
abundance  in  his  OAvn  experience,  Ave  find  him 
breaking  out  into  an  ecstasy  of  thanksgiving  at 
the  thought  of  Avhat  God  has  done  for  him,  and 
of  the  sense  of  iuAvard  spiritual  abundance  Avhich 
he  consequently  enjoys,  so  that  he  feels  quite  in- 
dependent of  all  outAViird  conditions,  hoAvever  hard 
they  may  be  (cf.  Ph  4"''^).  This  is  the  language 
of  a  man  Avho  enjoys  all  the  resources  of  the  God- 
head in  his  inner  life,  and  Avho  can,  therefore,  be 
careless  of  poverty,  misfortune,  sickness,  and  even 
the  prospect  of  an  untimely  end. 

LiTERATURB. — Seo  Sanday-Hcadlam,  and  Ligfhtfoot  (especi- 
ally Notes  on  Epistles  of  at.  Paul),  on  the  i>a.ssa;jf.s  referred  to, 
also  Phillips  Brooks,  The  Light  of  the  World,  1891,  p.  140,  and 
AUpy  viii.  [1897]  514".  E.  GRIFFITH-JONES. 

ABRAHAM  ('k^paiii).  —  Addres.sing  a  JcAvish 
croAvd  in  the  precincts  of  the  Temple,  St.  Peter 
emphasizes  the  connexion  betAveen  the  HebreAv  and 
the  Christian  religion  by  proclaiming  that '  the  God 
of  Abraham  .  .  .  hath  glorified  his  serA'ant  (iraiSa  ; 
cf.  RVm)  Jesus '  (Ac  S^^).  Tliis  Divine  title,  Avhich 
is  similarly  used  in  St.  Stephen's  speech  (7*''),  Avas 
full  of  significance.  All  through  tlie  OT  and  the 
NT  the  foundation  of  the  true  religion  is  ascribed 
neither  to  the  Prophets  nor  to  Moses,  but  to 
Abraham.  Isaac  (Gn  26-^)  and  Jacob  (31*-)  Avor- 
shipped  the  God  of  Abraham,  but  Abraham  did 
not  Avorship  the  Elohim  Avhom  his  fathers  served 
beyond  the  River  (Jos  24^^  '*•  ^').  He  Avas  the  head 
of  the  great  family  that  accepted  JahAveh  as  their 
God.  JcAvs,  Muslims,  and  Christians  are  all  in 
some  sense  his  seed,  as  having  either  his  blood  in 
their  veins  or  his  faith  in  their  souls.  To  the  JeAvs 
he  is  '  our  father  Abraham '  (Ac  7^,  Ro  4^^,  J  a  2*'), 
'  our  forefather  {t6u  irpoTrdropa)  according  to  the 
flesh'  (Ro  4^).  To  the  Muhamniadans  he  is  the 
'model  of  religion'  (imam,  or  priest)  and  the  fir.st 
person  'resigned  (mnslim)  unto  God'  {Qur'dn,  ii. 
115,  125).  To  the  Christians  he  is  'the  father  of 
all  them  that  believe'  (Ro  4"),  'the  father  of  us 
air  (4'").  Taking  the  Avord  Abraham  to  mean 
(according  to  the  popular  A\'ord-play,  Ro4"  ||  Gn  17*) 
'  a  father  of  many  nations,'  St.  Paul  regards  it  as 
indicating  that  Abraham  is  the  spiritual  ancestor 
of  the  Avhole  Christian  Church. 

1.  In  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.— As  Abraham 
Avas  tiie  renoAvned  founder  of  the  JcAvish  nation 
and  faith,   it  Avas  crucially  important  to  decide 


ABRAHAM 


ABRAHAM 


whether  the  Jews  or  the  Christians  could  claim 
his  support  in  their  great  controversy  on  justilica- 
tion.  The  ordinary  Jews  regarded  Abraham  as  a 
model  legalist,  whose  faith  in  God  (Gn  15"-)  con- 
sisted in  the  fulhlment  of  the  Law,  which  he  knew 
by  a  kind  of  intuition.  According  to  the  Jewish 
tradition  [Bereskith  Rabb.  44,  Wiinsche),  Abraham 
s;iw  the  whole  history  of  his  descendants  in  the 
mysterious  vision  recorded  in  Gn  15^-.  Thus  he 
is  said  to  have  '  rejoiced  with  the  joy  of  the  Law ' 
(Westcott,  St.  John  [in  Speakers  Com.],  140).  In 
the  philosophical  school  of  Alexandria  there  was 
a  much  higher  conception  of  faith,  which  was  re- 
garded as  *  the  most  perfect  of  virtues,'  '  the  queen 
of  virtues,'  '  the  only  sure  and  infallible  good,  the 
solace  of  life,  the  fulfilment  of  worthy  hopes,  .  .  . 
the  inheritance  of  happiness,  the  entire  ameliora- 
tion of  the  soul,  which  leans  for  support  on  Him 
who  is  the  cause  of  all  things,  who  is  able  to  do 
all  things,  and  Molleth  to  do  those  which  are  most 
excellent'  (Philo,  Quis  rer.  div.  her.  i.  485,  de 
Abr  iL  39).  In  these  passages  faith,  in  so  far  as 
it  expresses  a  spiritual  attitude  towards  God,  does 
not  ditier  much  from  Christian  faith.  Nor  could 
anything  be  finer  than  the  Rabbinic  Mechilta  on 
Ex  14*1 :  » Great  is  faith,  whereby  Israel  believed 
on  Him  that  spake  and  the  world  was.  ...  In 
like  manner  thou  findest  that  Abraham  our  father 
inherited  this  world  and  the  world  to  come  solely 
by  the  merit  of  faith  whereby  he  believed  in  the 
Lord  ;  for  it  is  said,  and  he  believed  in  the  Lord, 
and  lie  counted  it  to  him  for  righteotisncss'  (Light- 
foot,  Galatians,  162).  But  the  ordinary  tendency 
of  Judaism  was  to  give  Abraham's  life  a  pre- 
dominantly legal  colour,  as  in  1  Mac  2*^  «  Was  not 
Abraham  found  faithful  in  temptation,  and  it  was 
reckoned  unto  him  for  rigliteousness  ? ' 

To  St.  Paul  faith  is  the  motive  power  of  the 
whole  life,  and  in  two  expositions  of  his  doctrine 
— Ro  4,  Gal  3 — he  affirms  the  essential  identity  of 
Abraham's  faith  with  that  of  every  Christian.  He 
does  not,  indeed,  think  (like  Jesus  Himself  in 
Jn  8")  of  Abraham  as  directly  foreseeing  the  day 
of  Christ,  but  he  maintains  that  Abraham's  faith 
in  God  as  then  partially  revealed  was  essentially 
the  same  as  the  Christian's  faith  in  God  as  now 
fully  made  known  in  Christ.  Abraham  had  faith 
when  he  was  still  in  uncircumcision  (Ro  4"),  faith 
in  God's  power  to  do  things  apparently  impossible 
(4i7-i9j^  faith  by  which  he  both  strengthened  his 
own  manhood  and  gave  glory  to  Grod  (4^). 
Abraham  believed  '  the  gospel '  which  was  preached 
to  him  beforehand,  the  gospel  which  designated 
him  as  the  medium  of  blessing  to  all  the  nations 
(Gal  3*).  And  as  his  faith,  apart  from  his  works, 
was  counted  to  him  for  righteousness,  he  became 
the  representative  believer,  in  whom  all  other 
believers,  without  distinction,  may  recognize  their 
spiritual  father.  It  is  not  Abraham's  blood  but 
his  spirit  that  is  to  be  coveted  (3-) ;  those  who  are 
of  faith  (o2  fK  jriirreus)  are  '  sons  of  Abraham,'  are 
'blessed  with  the  faithful  Abraham'  (3^-*');  uiwn 
the  Gentiles  has  come  '  the  blessing  of  Abraham  ' 
(3") ;  all  who  are  Christ's,  without  any  kind  of 
distinction,  are  'Abraham's  sons,'  fulfilling,  like 
him,  the  conditions  of  Divine  acceptance,  and  in- 
heriting with  him  the  Divine  promises. 

St.  Paul  uses  the  narratives  of  Genesis  as  he  finds  them. 
Before  the  dawn  of  criticism  the  theolc^an  did  not  raise  the 
question  whether  the  patriarchal  portraits  were  real  or  ideaL 
To  St.  P;iul  Abraham  is  a  historical  person  who  Uved  430  years 
before  Moses  (Gal  31^,  and  who  was  not  inferior  to  the  great 
prophets  of  Israel  in  purity  of  religious  insight  and  strengUi  of 
inward  piety.  It  is  now  almost  universally  believed  that  the 
faith  ascribed  to  the  patriarchs  was  itself  the  result  of  a  lonsr 
historical  evolution.  But,  while  the  maturer  conceptions  of  a 
later  ajje  are  carried  bock  to  Abraham,  the  patriarch  is  not  dis- 
solved into  a  creation  of  the  reli^ous  fancy.  '  The  ethical  and 
spiritual  idea  of  God  which  is  at  the  foundation  of  the  religion 
of  Israel  could  only  enter  the  world  through  a  personal  organ 


of  divine  revelation ;  and  nothing  forbids  os  to  see  in  Abialuun 
the  first  of  that  long  series  of  prophets  through  whom  God  has 
communicated  to  mankind  a  saving  knowlwlge  of  Himself ' 
(Skinner,  Genesit  [ICC,  1910],  p.  xxviiX 

2.  In  the  Epistle  of  St.  James St.  James  (2"»-»} 

uses  the  example  of  Abraham  to  establish  the 
thesis,  not  that  '  a  man  is  justified  by  faith  apart 
from  the  works  of  the  law '  (Ro  3»),  but  that '  by 
works  a  man  is  justified,  and  not  only  by  faith' 
( Ja  2^).  While  the  two  apostles  agree  that 
Christianity  is  infinitely  more  than  a  creed,  being 
nothing  if  not  a  life,  they  differ  in  their  conception 
of  faith.  The  meaning  which  St.  James  attaches 
to  the  word  is  indicated  by  his  suggestion  of 
believing  demons  and  dead  faith  (2''- »).  St.  Paul 
would  have  regarded  both  of  these  phrases  as  con- 
tradictions in  terms,  since  all  believers  are  con- 
verted and  all  faith  is  living.  Asked  if  faith  must 
not  prove  or  justify  itself  by  works,  he  would 
have  regarded  the  question  as  superfluous,  for  a 
faith  that  means  self-abandonment  in  passionate 
adoring  love  to  the  risen  Christ  inevitably  makes 
the  believer  Christlike.  St.  James  says  in  effect : 
'  Abraham  believed  God,  pro\-ing  his  faith  by 
works,  and  it  was  counted  to  him  for  righteous- 
ness.' With  St.  Paul  righteousness  comes  between 
faith  and  works ;  with  St.  James  works  come 
between  faith  and  righteousness.  Had  St.  James 
been  attacking  either  Galatians  or  Romans,  and 
in  particular  correcting  St.  Paul's  misuse  of  the 
example  of  Abraham,  his  polemic  would  have  been 
singularly  lame.  Such  a  theory  does  injustice  to 
his  intelligence.  But,  if  he  was  sounding  a  note 
of  warning  against  popular  perversions  of  evangeli- 
cal doctrine,  St.  Paul,  who  was  often  •  slanderously 
reported '  (Ro  3*),  must  have  been  profoundly  grate- 
ful to  him.    See,  further,  art.  James,  Epistle  of. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Clement  of  Rome  co.ordinatefl 
the  doctrines  of  the  two  apostles.  Taking  the  typical  example 
of  Abraham,  he  asks,  '  Wherefore  was  our  father  Abraham 
Messed  ?'  and  answers,  '  Was  it  not  because  he  wrought  right- 
eousness aad  truth  through  faith?  '  (£p.  ad  Cor.  §  31).  If  the 
two  types  of  doctrine  could  be  r^arded  as  complementary  sets 
of  troths,  justice  was  done  to  both  apofiUes.  But  the  difference 
assumed  a  dangerous  form  in  the  hard  dermatic  distinction  of 
the  Schoolmen  between  fide*  informis  and  fideg  fomuUa  turn 
earitaU,  the  latter  of  which  (along  with  the  '  epistle  of  straw  * 
on  which  it  seemed  to  be  based)  Luther  so  vehemently  re- 
pudiated. 

3.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.— The  writer 
of  Hebrews  bases  on  the  incident  of  Abraham's 
meeting  with  Melchizedek  (He  7 ;  cf.  Gn  14)  an 
argument  for  a  priesthood  higher  than  the  Aaronic 
order  (v.*""^).  To  the  king -priest  of  Salem 
Abraham  gave  tithes,  and  from  him  received  a 
blessing,  thereby  owning  his  inferiority  to  that 
majestic  figure.  As  Abraham  was  the  ancestor 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  the  Aaronic  priesthood  itself 
may  be  said  to  have  been  overshadowed  in  that 
hour  and  ever  afterwards  by  the  mysterious  order 
of  Melchizedek.  This  is  the  conception  of  the 
writer  of  Ps  1 10,  who  identifies  God's  vicegerent, 
seated  on  the  throne  of  Zion,  not  with  the  Aaronic 
order,  but  with  the  roj-al  priesthood  of  Melchizedek. 
When  the  Maccabees  displaced  the  house  of  Aaron, 
and  concentrated  in  their  own  persons  the  kingly 
and  priestly  functions,  they  found  their  justifica- 
tion in  the  priestly  dignity  of  Melchizedek.  and 
called  themselves,  in  his  style,  '  priests  of  the 
Most  High '  (Charles,  Book  of  Jubilees,  1902,  pp. 
lix  and  191).  Finally,  when  Christ  had  given  a 
Messianic  interpretation  of  Ps  110,  it  was  natural 
that  the  writer  of  Hebrews  should  see  the  Aaronic 
priesthood  superseded  by  an  eternal  King-Priest 
after  the  ancient  consecrated  order  of  Melchizedek. 

For  divergent  critical  views  of  the  Abraham-Helchizedek 
perioope  of  Gn  14  see  Wellhausen,  Comp.s,  1889,  p.  211  t. ; 
Gunkel,  Geimis,  253;  Skinner,  Genesis,  269  f.  Against 
Wellhausen's  theory  that  the  story  is  a  post-exilic  attempt  to 
glorify  the  priesthood  in  Jerusalem,  Gui^el  and  Skinner  argue 
for  an  antique  traditional  T 


6 


ABSTINENCE 


ABSTINENCE 


The  writer  of  Hebrews  illustrates  his  definition 
of  faith  (11')  by  three  events  in  the  life  of  Abraham. 
— (1)  The  i>atriarch  left  liis  home  and  kindred, 
and  '  went  out  not  knowing  whither  he  went ' 
(He  11').  His  faith  was  a  sense  of  the  unseen  and 
remote,  as  akin  to  the  si)iritual  and  eternal.  In 
obedience  to  a  Divine  impulse  he  ventured  forth 
on  the  unknown,  confident  that  his  speculative 
poradventure  would  be  changed  into  a  realized 
ideal.  The  doubting  heart  says,  '  Forward,  though 
I  cannot  see,  I  guess  and  fear ' ;  the  believing 
spirit,  '  Lookup,  trust,  benotafraid.' — (2)  Abraham 
remained  all  his  life  a  sojourner  {irdpoiKo^  Kal 
■irap€-iriS7)iJ.os  =  2^'^n]ii,  Gn  23^)  in  the  Land  of  Promise 
(He  11*).  He  left  his  home  in  Chalda^a,  and  never 
found  another.  Wherever  he  went  he  built  an 
altar  to  God,  but  never  a  home  for  himself.  He 
was  encamped  in  many  places,  but  naturalized  in 
none.  His  pilgrim  spirit  is  related  to  his  hope  of 
an  eternal  city — a  beautiful  conception  transferred 
to  Genesis  from  the  literature  of  the  Maccab.-pan 
period  {En.  90»- =*,  Apoc.  Bar.  32»-*  etc.).— (3)  IJy 
faith  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac,  'accounting  that 
God  is  able  to  raise  up,  even  from  the  dead' 
(He  11'*).  Here  again  the  belief  of  a  later  age 
becomes  the  motive  of  the  patriarch's  act  of 
renunciation.  The  narrative  in  Gn  22  contains 
no  indication  that  the  thought  of  a  resurrection 
flashed  through  his  agonized  mind. 

LiTRRATURE.— F.  W.  Weber,  Sj/st.  der  altsyn.  paldstin. 
Theol.ausTarpum,  Mitlrasch,  u.  Talmud,  1880,  ch.  xix. ;  J.  B. 
Lig:htfoot,  Galatians,  1805,  p.  158  if.  ;  Sanday-Headlain, 
Romam'i,  1902,  p.  102  ff.  ;  W.  Beyschlagr,  NT  Theology, 
1894-96,  i.  364  ff.  ;  A.  B.  Bruce,  St.  Paul'sConceptiono/ Christi- 
anity, 1896,  p.  ncf. ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  NT, 
1901,  p.  289 ;  B.  Weiss,  Biblical  Theology  of  the  NT,  1882-83,  i. 

*37ff.  James  StRxMian. 

ABSTINENCE.  — /nfrorfMc^ion.  — The  whole  of 
morality  on  its  negative  side  may  be  included 
under  Abstinence.  Christian  moral  progress 
(sanctification)  includes  a  holding  fast  (Ka.Tixe<rOai) 
of  the  good,  and  an  abstaining  from  (iirix^irdai.) 
eveiy  form  of  evil  (1  Th  5^"-).  While  Christianity 
has  general  laws  to  distinguish  the  good  from  the 
bad,  yet  for  each  individual  Christian  these  laws 
are  focused  in  the  conscience,  and  the  function  of 
the  latter  is  to  discriminate  between  the  good  and 
the  bad  —  it  cannot  devolve  this  duty  on  out- 
ward rules.  With  it  the  ultimate  decision  rests, 
and  on  it  also  lies  the  responsibility  (Ro  14*,  He  5'*). 
The  lists  of  vices  and  virtues,*  of  'works  of  the 
flesh'  and  'fruits  of  the  spirit,'  given  in  the  NT 
are  not  meant  to  be  exhaustive,  but  typical  ;  nor 
are  they  given  to  make  needless  the  exercise  of 
Christian  discernment.  The  NT  is  not  afraid  to 
place  in  the  Christian  conscience  the  decision  of 
M'hat  is  to  be  abstained  from  and  what  is  not, 
because  it  believes  in  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  because  it  exalts  personal  responsibility. 
It  is  necessary  to  make  this  clear,  because,  as  we 
shall  see,  tiie  ultimate  tribunal  of  appeal  in  mat- 
ters of  abstinence  in  the  ordinary  sense  (i.e.  in 
the  sphere  of  things  indiflferent)  is  the  Christian 
conscience.  The  ideal  of  Christian  conduct  is 
sometimes  said  to  be  self-realization,  not  self- 
suppression  ;  consecration,  not  renunciation.  These 
antitheses  are  apt  to  be  misleading.  In  the  self 
with  which  Christianity  deals  there  are  sinful  ele- 
ments that  have  to  be  extirpated.  Christian  sanc- 
tification takes  place  not  in  innocent  men,  but  in 
sinners  who  have  to  be  cleansed  from  ail  lilthiness 
of  the  flesh  and  spirit  (2  Co  7').  To  purify  oneself 
(1  Jn  3')  is  not  simply  to  realize  oneself;  it  is  to 
do  no  sin. 

In  all  moral  conduct  there  is  suppression  ;  in 
Christian  conduct  there  is  extirpation.    This  nega- 

•  See  Dobschiitz,  Christian  lAjt  in  the  Primitivt  Church, 
Eng.  ir.,  1004,  p.  406 ft.,  tor  list*. 


tivc  side  of  Christian  conduct  is  abstinence.  It  is 
the  crucifying  of  the  flesh — death  unto  sin — and 
it  is  the  correlative  of  'living  to  righteousness,' 
'  being  risen  with  Cijrist,'  etc.  Abstinence  in  this 
sense  is  an  essential  and  ever-jjresent  moment  in 
the  Christian  life. 

More  narrowly  interpreted,  abstinence  is  a  re- 
fraining from  certfiin  outward  actions — as  eating, 
drinking,  worldly  business,  marriage,  etc.  ^  It  i» 
thus  applied  to  outward  conduct,  while  continence 
(^yKpdreia)  is  used  of  inward  self-restraint.  Cicero 
makes  this  distinction,  though,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  he  cannot  always  consistently  apply  it 
(see  Lewis  and  Short,  Lat.  Dict.,s.v.  '  Abstinentia'). 

We  may  look  first  at  the  outward  side  of  absti- 
nence, ana  then  try  to  find  out  what  the  Christian 
principles  are  (as  these  are  unfolded  in  the  apos- 
tolic writings)  that  determine  its  nature  and  its 
limits. 

I.  Ascetic  practices. — 1.  Pasting.— (a)  Fast- 
ing, or  abstinence  from  food  and  drink,  may  be  un- 
avoidable or  involuntary  (e.g.  Ac  27"'  *^,  1  Co  4", 
2  Co  60  •  IP^*  Ph4'2).  Such  fa.stings  have  a  re- 
ligious value  only  indirectly.  They  may  overtake 
the  apostate  as  well  as  the  apostle.  If  they  are 
caused  by  devotion  to  Christian  service,  they  are,  like 
all  other  privations  so  caused,  badges  of  fidelity ; 
and  they  may  be  referred  to  with  reasonable  pride 
by  Christ's  ministers  (2  Co  6«-  ll**).  They  ought 
to  silence  criticism  (cf.  Gal  6",  Avhere  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  his  bruises  as  (rriyfiaTa  roO  'lr)ffov),  and 
they  enforce  Christian  exhortation  (Col  4"*,  Eph  4'). 
On  the  principle  that  he  who  chooses  the  end 
chooses  the  means,  such  fastings  are  real  proofs  of 
fidelity  to  Christ.  They  are  like  the  scars  of  the 
true  soldier. 

(b)  An  absorbing  pre-occupation  with  any  pursuit 
may  be  the  cause  of  fasting.  The  arti.st  or  the 
scientist  may  forget  to  take  food,  in  the  intensity 
of  his  application  to  his  work  ;  or  any  great  emo- 
tion like  sorrow  may  make  one  'forget  to  take 
bread.'  Such  a  fast  we  have  in  Ac  9",  where  St. 
Paul,  we  are  told,  was  witliout  food  for  three  days 
after  his  conversion.  As  Jesus  fasted  in  the  wil- 
derness (Mt  4'""),  or  at  the  well  forgot  His  hunger 
(Jn  4'"),  so  the  ferment  of  the  new  life  acted  on 
St.  Paul  thus  also.  Fasting  is  not  the  cause  of 
such  pre-occupation,  but  the  efiect ;  and  so  its  value 
depends  on  the  nature  of  the  emotion  causing  it.t 
Such  involuntary  privations,  however,  are  not  fast- 
ing in  the  proper  sense.  In  themselves  they  are 
morally  indifteient,  as  they  may  overtake  any  one 
irrespective  of  moral  conditions ;  but,  when  borne 
bravely  and  contentedly  in  the  line  of  Christian 
duty,  they  are  not  only  indications  of  true  faith, 
but  in  turn  they  strengthen  that  faith  (Ko  5*""\ 
Ph  4"). 

(c)  Ileal  fasting  is  purposive  and  voluntary.  It 
is  a  total  or  partial  abstinence  from  food  for  an 
unusual  period,  or  from  certain  foods  always  or  at 
certain  times,  for  a  moral  or  religious  end.  Such 
a  fast  is  mentioned  in  Ac  13'--  ^  14-'^  in  connexion 
with  ordination.  It  is  associated  with  prayer. 
Some  hold  that  it  was  the  form  to  '  be  i)ernianently 
observed' in  such  cases  (Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  1895, 
p.  122).  There  is  no  mention,  however,  of  fasting 
at  the  appointment  of  Matthias  (Ac  1-*),  or  of  the 
seven  (6*).  We  cannot,  therefore,  take  it  as  inher- 
ently binding  on  Christian  Churches  at  such  solem- 
nities. It  is  rather  the  survival  of  ancient  religious 
practices  (like  the  fasting  on  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment), which  on  the  occasions  referred  to  were 
adopted  through  the  force  of  custom,  and  served 

•  These  are  sometimes  explained  as  voluntary  tasts— to  uae 
Hooker's  expression  (Ecc.  Pol.  v.  72.  8) — but  the  contexts  seem 
decisive  against  that  view. 

t  This  was  probably  what  Jesus  had  in  view  in  the  saying  in 
Mt  010. 


ABSTINENCE 


ABSTINENCE 


to  solemnize  the  proceedings.  The  Atonement  fast 
(Ac  27')  is  mentionetl  only  as  a  time  limit  after 
which  navigation  was  dangerous.  It  is  not  said 
that  St.  Paul  fasted  on  that  day,  though  probably 
he  did. 

These  Jewish  survivals  were  conserved  without 
investigation  by  the  Palestinian  Church,  though, 
after  what  Jesus  had  said  on  fasting,  we  may  be- 
lieve that  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  believer, 
rather  than  the  performance  of  the  outward  rite, 
would  be  the  essential  element.  Pharisaism,  how- 
ever, follows  so  closely  on  the  heels  of  ritual  that 
in  some  quarters  it  very  early  influenced  Christi- 
anity (cf.  Did.  i.  3  :  '  Fast  for  those  who  persecute 
you' ;  and  Epiph.  Hcer.  Ixx.  11 :  '  When  they  [i.e. 
the  Jews]  feast,  ye  shall  fast  and  mourn  for  them ' ; 
cf.  also  Polycarp,  vii.  2;  Hermas,  Vis.  iii.  10.  6; 
and,  in  the  same  connexion,  the  interpolations  in 
the  NT  [Mt  17",  Mk  9^,  Ac  10»,  1  Co  7']).  Even 
the  Pharisaic  custom  of  fasting  twice  a  week 
(Monday  and  Thursday)  was  adopted  in  some 
quarters,  though  these  days  were  changed  to  Wed- 
nesday and  Friday  {Did.  viiL  1).  These  are  the 
later  dies  staticmum  or  orda-eu  (cf.  Clem.  Alex. 
Stnrm.  vii  12,  p.  877).     See  ERE  v.  844^ 

To  evaluate  the  practice  of  fasting,  we  must  look 
to  the  end  aimed  at  and  the  eflScacy  of  this  means 
to  attain  that  end.  (1)  In  many  cases  it  would  be 
mainly  a  viatter  of  tradition.  On  any  eventful 
occasion  men  might  practise  fasting,  to  ratify  a 
decLsion  or  induce  solemnity,  as  those  Jews  did 
who  vowed  to  kill  St.  Paul  (Ac  231^).  Under  such  a 
category  would  fall  the  Paschal  and  pre-baptismal 
fasts.  Though  not  mentioned  in  the  XT,  they 
were  early  practised  in  the  Christian  Church  (Ens. 
HE  V.  24 ;  Did.  viL  ;  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  i.  61). 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  ordination  and  bap- 
tismal and  Paschal  fasts  may  serve  to  solemnize 
these  events,  yet  there  is  no  warrant  for  making 
them  an  ecclesiastical  rule.  In  such  traditional 
fasting  there  is  often,  consciously  or  unconsciously, 
implicated  the  feeling  that  God  is  thereby  pleased 
and  merit  acquired,  and  the  result  in  sucn  cases 
is  Pharisaic  complacency  and  externalism.  Jesus, 
following  the  great  prophets  (Is  58^',  Zee  8^*),  had 
relegated  outward  rites  to  a  secondary  place.  He 
demanded  secrecy,  sincerity,  and  simplicity  in  all 
these  matters,  and  the  Apostolic  Church  never 
wholly  lost  sight  of  His  guidance.  St.  James, 
while  emphasizing  the  value  of  prayer  (S^'"*"), 
says  nothing  of  fasting,  and  he  makes  real  ritual 
consist  in  works  of  mercy  and  blameless  conduct 
(l''^).  Even  when  fasting  was  enjoined,  the  danger 
of  extemalism  was  recognized  (Hermas,  Sim.  v.  1  ; 
Barn.  ii.  10 ;  Justin  Martyr,  Dial.  15).  St.  Paul 
had  to  prove  that  such  fastings  could  not  be  re- 
demptively  of  any  value,  that  they  were  not  bind- 
ing, that  they  did  not  place  the  observer  of  them 
on  a  higher  spiritual  plane  than  the  non-obsener, 
that  even  as  means  of  discipline  they  were  of 
doubtful  value,  and  that  they  were  perpetually 
liable  to  abuse  (Col  2**). 

(2)  Fastings  were  used  in  certain  cases  to  induce 
ecstatic  conditions.  This  is  a  well-known  feature 
in  ap>ocalyptic  writings.  Perhaps  the  Colossian 
heretics  ffid  this  (cf.  &  idpaKtv  ift^arevwy.  Col  2'*). 
St.  John  and  the  other  Apostles  ^vith  him  are  said 
to  have  fasted  three  days  before  writing  the  Fourth 
Gospel  (Muratorian  fragment).  The  Apocalypse, 
however,  though  a  Spatm  (vision),  is  lacking  in 
the  usual  accompaniments  of  a  vision,  viz.  prayer 
and  fasting  (contrast  Hermas,  Sim.  v.  1).  St. 
Peter's  vision  (Ac  10*"^*)  was  preceded  by  hunger, 
but  it  was  not  a  voluntary  fast ;  nor  is  there  any 
reference  to  fasting  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul's  visions 
(Ac  16»  18«-,  2  Co  12"-),  and  the  reference  in  the 
case  of  Cornelius  (Ac  10**)  is  a  later  interpolation. 
It  was  more  when  direct  prophetic  inspiration  be- 


came a  memory  rather  than  when  it  was  a  reality 
that  men  resorted  to  fasting  in  order  to  superin- 
duce it. 

(3)  Fasting  was  resorted  to  also  that  alms  might 
be  given  out  of  the  savings. 

'  If  there  is  among  them  a  man  that  is  poor  and  needy,  and 
they  have  not  an  abundance  of  neoesBaries,  they  fast  for  two  or 
three  days,  that  they  may  supply  the  needy  with  necessary 
food '  (Aristides,  Apob>sn,  ^ct.).  Ct  also  Hennas,  Sim.  r.3.7: 
'  Reckon  up  on  this  day  what  thy  meal  would  oth^wise  have 
cost  thee,  and  give  the  amount  to  some  poor  widow  or  orphan, 
or  to  the  poor.' 

Origen  (horn.  >»  Levit.  x.)  quotes  an  apostolic 
saying  which  supports  this  practice : 

'We  have  found  in  a  certain  booklet  an  apostolic  saying, 
"Blessed  is  also  he  who  fasts  that  he  may  feed  the  poor"' 
('  Invenimus  in  quodam  libeDo  ab  apostolis  dictom — Beatus  est 
qui  etiam  jejunal  pro  eo  ut  alat  pauperem  '), 

This  saying  might  legitimately  be  deduced  from 
such  passages  as  Eph  4^  and  Ja  2'^,  but  the  prac- 
tice easily  associated  itself  with  the  idea  of  fasting 
as  a  work  of  merit. 

'  More  powerful  than  prayer  is  &ksting,  and  more  than  both 
alms.'  'Alms  abolish  sins'  (2  Clem.  xvi.  4 ;  cf.  Hermas,  Sim. 
v.  3). 

Fasting  done  out  of  Christian  love  to  the  brethren 
is  noble ;  but,  when  done  to  gain  salvation,  it  be- 
comes not  only  profitless  but  dangerous.  '  Though 
I  give  all  my  goods  to  feed  the  poor  and  have  not 
love,  it  proliteth  me  nothing'  (1  Co  13*). 

(4)  Again,  fasting  may  have  been  viewed  as 
giving  potcer  over  demons  (cf.  Clem.  Horn.  ix.  9; 
Tertullian,  de  Je^'unOs,  8 :  '  Docuit  etiam  adversus 
diriora  demonia  jejuniis  praeliandum ' ;  cf.  Mt  17**, 
Mk  9^).  Some  find  this  view  in  the  narrative  of 
the  Temptation  (see  EBi,  art.  '  Temptation ').  This 
view  of  fasting,  grotesque  as  it  appears  to  us,  is 
akin  to  the  truth  that  surfeiting  of  the  body  dulls 
the  spiritual  >nsion,  and  that  the  spiritual  life  is  a 
rigorous  discipline  (cf.  1  Co  9^'^). 

What  strikes  one  in  the  apostolic  writings  gener- 
ally, as  contrasted  with  later  ecclesiastical  litera- 
ture, is  the  scarcity  of  references  to  fasting  as 
an  outward  obser\ance.  Nowhere  is  the  tradi- 
tional Church  ascetic  held  up  to  imitation  in  the 
NT,  as  Eusebius  [HE  ii.  23)  holds  up  St.  James,  or 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (P«rf.  iL  1)  St.  Matthew,  or 
the  Clem.  Hom.  (xii.  6,  xv.  7)  St.  Peter,  or  Epiph- 
anius  {Hcer.  Ixxviii.  13)  the  sons  of  Zebedee. 

In  the  NT  the  references  to  fasting  are  almost 
all  incidental,  and  apologetic  or  hostile.  It  is 
regarded  as  due  to  weakness  of  faith,  or  positive 
perversion.  Neither  St.  John,  St.  James,  St. 
Jude,  nor  St.  Peter  once  mentions  it  as  a  means 
of  grace.  This  sUenee,  it  is  true,  ought  not  to  be 
unduly  pressed  ;  yet  it  is  surely  a  proof  that  they 
considered  fasting  as  of  no  essential  importance. 
Its  revival  in  the  Christian  Church  was  due  to 
traditionalism  and  legalism  on  the  one  hand,  and 
to  ascetic  dualism  (Orphic,  Platonic,  Essenic)  on 
the  other.  In  the  NT  the  latter  influence  is 
strenuously  opposed  (Colossians  and  Pastorals), 
and  the  former  is  as  vigorously  rejected  when  it 
makes  itself  necessary  to  salvation,  although  it  is 
tenderly  treated  when  it  is  only  a  weak  leaning 
towards  old  associations.  The  whole  spirit  of 
apostolic  Christianity  regards  fasting  as  of  little 
or  no  importance,  and  the  experience  of  the 
Christian  Church  seems  to  be  that  any  value  it 
may  have  is  infinitesimal  compared  with  the  evils 
and  perversions  that  seem  so  inseparably  associ- 
ated ^vith  it.  According  to  Eusebius  (HE  v.  18), 
Montanus  was  the  first  to  give  laws  to  the  Church 
on  fasting.  The  NT  is  altogether  opposed  to  such 
ecclesiastical  laws.  The  matter  is  one  for  the  indi- 
vidual Christian  intelligence  to  determine  (Ro  14*). 

St.  Paul's  language  in  1  Co  9^**-  has  been  ad- 
duced in  support  of  self-torture  of  all  kinds  ;  but, 
while  we  must  not  minimize  the  reality  of  Christian 


8 


ABSTINENCE 


ABSTINENCE 


discipline,  nothing  can  be  legitimately  deduced 
from  this  passage  or  any  other  m  favour  of  fasting 
or  flagellation  as  a  general  means  of  sanctilication, 
nor  is  the  Apostle's  view  based  on  a  dualism  which 
looks  on  matter  and  tlie  human  body  as  inherently 
evil.  It  may  be  said  that  interjiolations  like 
1  Co  7*  (cf.  Ac  1(P.  Mt  17",  Mk  \f^)  reveal  tlie 
beginniiif^s  of  that  ascetic  resurgence  Avhich 
reached  its  climax  in  monastic  austerities,  and 
that  there  is  at  least  a  tinge  of  ascetic  dualism  in 
certain  I'auline  passages  (e.g.  llo  8'*,  1  Co  6"  7^'" 
9",  2  Co  4>''- '»,  Col  3*) :  but  even  those  who  hold 
this  view  of  these  Pauline  passages  admit  'that  there 
is  very  little  asceticism,  in  the  ordinary  sense,  in 
St.  Paul's  Epistles,  while  there  is  much  that  makes 
in  the  opposite  direction  '  (McGilFert,  Apostol.  Age, 
1897,  p.  136).  We  shall  see,  however,  when  we 
come  to  deal  with  the  principles  of  abstimnuc  us 
unfolded  by  St.  Paul,  that  even  this  iniiiiiuum 
residuum  has  to  be  dropped. 

We  may  conclude,  then,  that,  according  to  the 
NT,  fasting  is  not  enjoined  or  even  recommended 
as  a  spiritual  lielp.  The  ideal  is  life  with  the  Risen 
Christ,  which  involves  not  only  total  renunciation 
of  all  sinful  actions  but  self-restraint  in  all  conduct. 
When  the  individual  Christian  finds  fasting  to  be  a 
part  of  this  self-restraint,  then  it  is  useful ;  but  one 
fails  to  find  any  proof  in  the  NT  that  fasting  is 
necessarily  an  element  of  self-restraint.  When  it 
is  an  effect  of  an  absorbing  spiritual  emotion,  or 
when  practised  to  aid  the  poor,  or  involuntarily 
undergone  in  the  straits  of  Christian  duty,  then  it 
is  highly  commendable. 

2.  The  use  of  wine. — While  drunkenness  as 
well  as  gluttony  is  sternly  condemned,  nowhere  is 
total  abstinence,  in  our  sense,  enforced.  In  one 
passage  it  has  even  been  contended  that  St.  Paul 
indirectly  opposes  it  {1  Ti  5''^),  but  his  words  in  our 
time  would  be  simply  equivalent  to  medical  advice 
ti)  llic  cH'oct  that  total  abstinence  as  a  jirinciple 
must  lie  subordinated  to  bodily  health.  Thus,  while 
total  abstinence  is  in  itself  not  an  obligatory  duty, 
it  may  become  so  on  the  principle  that  we  ought 
not  to  do  anything  by  which  our  brother  stumbles, 
or  is  offended,  or  is  made  weak  (I  Co  8'*).  This 
principle,  which  is  equally  applicable  to  fasting, 
must  l>e  considered  in  deciding  the  Christian  at- 
titude towards  all  outward  observances.  While 
Christianity  recognizes  the  indifferent  nature  of 
these  customs,  wliile  its  liberty  frees  Christians 
from  their  observance,  yet  cases  may  arise  when 
this  liberty  lias  to  be  suf>ordinated  to  love  and  the 
interests  of  Christian  unity.  In  1  Co  8  the  Apostle 
is  dealing  with  the  conditions  of  his  own  time  ;  our 
conditions  did  not  engage  his  attention.  Christian 
abstainers  can  find  an  adequate  defence  for  their 
position  in  the  degrading  associations  of  strong 
drink  in  our  modern  life.  On  the  other  hand,  total 
abstinence  from  strong  drink  is  no  more  a  univer- 
.sally  binding  duty  than  fasting  is,  nor  are  ecclesi- 
astical rules  called  for  in  the  one  case  more  than  in 
the  other.*  Both  the.se  customs  fall  within  the 
sphere  of  things  indifferent,  and  are  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  individual  in  the  light  of  the  nature 
of  the  Christian  life,  which  is  'neither  meat  nor 
drink,  Imt  righteousness,  peace,  and  joy  in  the 
Holy  Ghost '(Ko  14''). 

3.  Marriage  and  celibacy. — We  are  not  here 
concerned  with  the  NT  doctrine  of  marriage  (q.v.) 
in  its  totAlity,  but  with  the  question  as  to  whether 
celibacy  is  commanded  as  a  superior  grade  of  living, 
and  as  to  whether  this  is  basnl  on  a  dualistic  view 
which  regards  the  sexual  functions  as  in  their  very 
nature  evil.  To  begin  with,  marriage  is  viewed  by 
St.  Paul  as  being  in  general  a  human  necessity,  as 

•  The  '  water-folk '  found  in  the  Eastern  Church  in  the  Srd 
cent,  (who  objected  to  wine  at  the  Lord's  Supper),  cannot 
appeal  to  NT  principles  for  a  Justification  of  their  actions. 


indeed  a  preventive  against  incontinency.  It  is  a 
'  part  of  his  greatness  that,  in  spite  of  his  own 
somewhat  ascetic  temperament,  he  was  not  blind 
to  social  and  phy.siological  facts'  (Drummond, 
quoted  in  EGT  on  1  Th  4'').  He  recommends  those 
who  can  to  remain  single  as  he  is  himself.  In  view 
of  the  approaching  world-end  in  which  he  believed, 
marriage  meant  tlie  multii)lication  of  troubles  that 
would  make  fidelitjyr  to  Christ  more  difficult ;  and 
perhaps  in  this  light  also  the  jjropagation  of  the 
race  was  undesirable.  It  is  possible  also  that  he 
may  have  been  here  influenced  unconsciously  by 
liis  Ilabbinical  training,  and  that  he  interpreted 
liis  own  case  as  too  generally  applicable.  He  was 
a  celibate  for  the  Kingdom  of  lleaven's  sal-cp  (Mt 
ig'"''*),  and  he  m<ay  have  made  the  mi-  •''<'• 

siring  to  universalize  his  own  exception 

Yet  there  is  no  ground  for  the  view  tii.u  (•(•iiiiacy 
in  itself  is  a  superior  form  of  life.*  St.  Paul  does 
not  say  that  it  can  produce  that  life  or  is  neces.sarj 
to  it,  but  when  it  is  a  consequence  of  it,  then  it  is 
of  value.  It  is  the  supremacy  of  single-liearted 
devotion  to  Christ  that  he  holds  out  as  an  ideal, 
and  liis  view  is  that  in  some  cases  marriage  en- 
dangers this.  Again,  marriage  is  not  to  him 
simply  a  preventive  against  uncleanness  (see  art. 
Soberness).  It  is  also  the  object  of  sanctilication, 
and  its  relations  have  their  own  honour  (1  Th  4''; 
see  Marriage,  Virginity).  He  uses  it  as  an 
illustration  of  the  highest  relationship  ;  lieoppo.ses 
those  who  prohibit  it  (1  Ti  4'-)  owing  to  a  false 
asceticism.  It  is  true  he  does  not  there  give 
reasons,  as  he  does  in  the  case  of  abstinence  from 
food,  because  the  same  principle  applies  to  both 
cases.  While,  then,  we  may  admit  that  on  this  ques- 
tion his  view  Avas  narrow,  we  may  say  with  Sjibatier 
(The  Apostle  Paul,  Eng.  tr.,  1891,  p.  164)  that  '  this 
narrowness,  for  which  he  has  been  so  greatly 
blamed,  does  not  arise  from  a  dualistic  asceticism. 
There  is  no  dualism  to  be  found  in  Paul's  doctrine.' 

4.  World-flight  is  not  encouraged  in  the  NT. 
Slaves  even  are  warned  to  abide  in  their  situations, 
knowing  that  they  are  God's  freemen  (see  art. 
Abuse).  The  necessity  of  labour  is  unfolded  in 
the  Thessalonian  Epistles,  against  the  practice  of 
those  who  had  given  up  work  under  escfiatological 
influences.  World-flight  is  not  conquering  the 
world,  but  rather  giving  up  the  idea  of  conquering 
it,  abandoning  the  battlefield,  and,  as  such,  is 
contrary  to  the  apostolic  view.  St.  Paul  did  not, 
it  is  true,  expatiate  after  the  manner  of  modern 
moralists  on  the  dignity  of  labour.t  but  he  did 
insist  on  '  the  divineness  of  those  obligations  and 
ties  which  constitute  man's  social  life.  .  .  .'  The 
instituti(ms  of  society — '  marriage,  the  stat«,  the 
rights  of  possession — are  of  Divine  aj)iiointment, 
and  must  be  ui)held  and  honoured,  however  short 
the  time  before  the  order  to  which  they  belong 
shall  pass  away  forever'  (Stevens,  Theol.  of  NT, 
1899,  p.  454). 

II.  ^SCJS27C  7';iV.\(7y7./;,s.— Abstineiui-  is  wider 
than  fasting  or  outward  observances ;  it  imitlies 
principles  by  which  these  external  actions  arc 
determined,  and  it  keeps  in  view  also  the  inner 
reality  of  which  they  are  the  expression.  It  in- 
cludes character  as  well  as  conduct.  Indeed,  it  is 
this  inward  reality  which  is  mainly  of  value  in  the 
Christian  ideal  of  abstinence. 

1.  The  verb  Ao-kciv  occurs  only  once  in  the  NT 
(Ac  24'"),  in  this  sense  of  a  life  whose  activities  are 
explained,  in  the  way  Itoth  of  omission  and  com- 
mission, by  an  inner  i>rinciple.  St.  Paul  was 
accused  of  deliberatelj'  oflending  Jewisli  legal  sus- 

•  Ilarnack  (on  Did.  \\.  S)  thinks  Eph  53*  recommends 
celihftcy  as  a  higher  life  for  the  Christian.  See,  however, 
Schaff,  The  Oldexl  Church  Mniwul,  )8S5,  p.  202. 

1  See  llarnack's  Whitt  is  Chriatiniiiti/i  (Eiip.  tr.,  1004,  p. 
12:jfr.)for  remarks  qualifying  the  idea  underlying  the  phrase, 
'  the  di;;nity  of  labour.' 


ABSTINENCE 


ABSTINENCE 


ceptibilities.  He  denies  the  charge.  While  he 
adheres  to  the  heresy  of  'the  Way,'  he  does  so 
without  intentionally  coming  into  collision  with 
the  cu.stoms  or  prejudices  of  others.  Not  only  so, 
but  his  plan  is  a  studied  attempt  to  conform  to 
all  customs  of  Jew  and  Gentile,  of  'weak'  and 
'strong,'  consistently  with  his  faithfulness  to  God 
and  his  being  under  law  to  Christ.  This  is  his 
&aKi)aii  for  the  gospel's  sake  (1  Co  9**"**).  His 
whole  life  is  an  illustration  of  tliis.  He  yielded  to 
Jewish  susceptibilities  (Ac  16^  18'*  21**),  and  bore 
^vith  Gentile  immaturity  (1  Th  2^"^*).  This  con- 
duct was  not  due  to  fickleness  or  guile  (1  Co  2", 
I  Th  23),  but  to  love  (2  Co  5^^-),  and  it  was  done 
in  simplicity  and  godly  sincerity  of  conscience 
(2  Co  P-,  Ac  24'*).  It  was  different  from  the  love- 
less superior  liberty  of  Corinthian  liberalism,  and 
from  tlie  servile  man-pleasing  of  weak  Judaism 
(Gal  1.  2).  It  was,  in  short,  a  reproduction  of  that 
*r^p&w«  of  self  (so  different  from  selfish  human  ac- 
quisitiveness) which  was  tie  great  feature  of  the 
life  of  Christ  (Ph  28). 

To  St.  Paul  this  involved  very  real  asceticism. 
In  striking  language  he  figures  himself  as  in  the 
course  of  his  Christian  race  undergoing  privations, 
abstinences,  and  self-discipline  as  great  as  any 
runner  for  the  Isthmian  prize  or  as  any  pugilist. 
It  is  not  simply  that  this  asceticism  involved 
abstinence  from  sin — Christianity  demands  that 
from  all  ;  it  involved  also  the  giving  up  of  privi- 
leges and  rights,  and  the  denial  to  self  of  anything 
that  would  hinder  his  being  sure  of  the  prize  or 
that  would  weaken  others  or  cause  them  to  stumble. 
It  is  a  warning  to  Christian  liberalism  in  Corinth 
not  to  degenerate  into  licence  and  so  to  fall. 
Christian  asceticism  is  the  remedy  against  this. 
We  are  not  to  infer  that  St.  Paul  practised  bodily 
torture,  that  he  went,  as  it  were,  out  of  his  way  to 
invent  austerities,  self-imposed  fastings,  or  flagella- 
tions. What  he  refers  to  here  is  the  effect  on  his 
whole  life  of  his  absorbing  passion  for  men's  salva- 
tion. That  was  the  expulsive  power  which  made 
him  an  ascetic  in  this  sense,  which  made  him 
abnegate  his  rights  of  maintenance  at  Thessalonica 
and  Corinth,  which  made  him  work  at  night  though 
preaching  through  the  day,  which  overcame  liis 
bodily  weaknesses,  which  brought  him  into  dangers 
by  land  and  sea  without  being  deterred  by  the  fear 
of  pain  or  privation. 

Nor  was  this  d<r»c7j<j-tj  of  his  a  superior  form  of  life 
which  was  binding  only  on  a  few  choice  souls.  St. 
Paul  has  no  double  morality.  No  one  can  empty 
himself  too  much  for  Christ  or  endure  too  much 
for  Him.  In  this  way  must  we  explain  the  mani- 
fold passages  where  the  Cliristian  life  is  compared 
to  a  race,  to  an  athletic  contest,  to  military  life  and 
warfare.  Just  as  the.se  involve  abstinence,  so  also 
does  Christianity.  This  asceticism  is,  however,  not 
arbitrarily  imposed  or  cunningly  invented ;  it  is 
the  consequence  of  fidelity  to  Christ's  cause.  It 
arises  out  of  the  very  nature  of  the  Christian  life. 
Its  outward  manifestation  is  accidental.  What  is 
essential  is  the  presence  of  the  self-denying  spirit, 
which  sjiends  and  is  spent  willingly  out  of  love  to 
Christ.  It  is  a  complete  perversion  to  suppose  that 
outward  austerities  can  create  this  spint.  Out- 
ward hardships  of  any  sort  must  be  effects,  not 
causes.  This  Christian  asceticism  is  not  due  to 
any  dLsparagenient  of  the  body  or  undervaluation 
of  earthly  relationships  or  a  false  view  of  matter. 
The  asceticism  bom  of  these  is  at  best  only  a 
aa/MTiKi)  yvfivaa^ia*  (1  Ti  4"'-),  while  Christian  as- 
ceticism is  one  whose  end  is  piety.  The  one  is  of 
little  profit,  the  other  of  eternal  worth.  This 
gymnastic  for  holiness  arises  out  of  the   provi- 

*  This  (Tu^artKT;  yvfivaaia  is  not  athletics  in  our  sense  ;  it  is  a 
bodily  discipline  dictated  by  a  philosophico-relig^ous  view  of 
the  body— a  dualistic  view  of  things  (cf.  1  Ti  i^). 


dential  disciplines  furnished  copiously  by  a  strict 
adherence  to  the  line  of  Christian  duty.  It  is  the 
KOTiav  cat  dveioi^fffOau,  the  exhaustive  labouring,  and 
the  abuse  (or  earnest  conflict  Idyayvii^fffOcu])  of  the 
man  who  sets  his  hope  on  the  living  God  (1  Ti  4'*'). 

2.  What,  then,  are  the  principles  that  determine 
thQ  nature  and  limits  of  Christian  abstinence? 
We  may  learn  these  by  considering  the  general 
word  for  '  abstinence '  (irexfffOct)  in  the  NT 
(Ac  I5=»-  ^,  1  Th  43  5^,  1  Ti  4»,  1  P  2'i).  These 
principles  did  not  disengage  themselves  all  at  once 
in  the  Church's  consciousness.  The  first  real 
attempt  at  such  a  disengagement  is  found  in  the 
so-called  Apostolic  Decree  (Ac  15).  This  was 
nothing  more  than  a  working  compromise  to  ease 
the  existing  situation.  Attempts  have  been  made 
often  and  early  to  moralize  it  and  so  find  in  it  a 
valid  basis  for  Christian  abstinence.  Thus  '  blood ' 
was  explained  as  '  homicide,'  and  '  things  strangled ' 
were  omitted,  as  in  Codex  D ;  but  such  attempts 
are  beside  the  point  as  surely  as  the  attempts  to 
judaize  the  document  completely  by  making '  forni- 
cation' mean  'marriage  ■within  the  prohibited 
degrees.'  For  our  purpose  the  Decree  is  valuable 
historically  rather  than  morally.  It  is  a  land-mark 
in  the  liberating  of  Christianity  from  ceremonial 
Judaism,  similar  to  the  evangelizing  of  Samaria 
by  Philip  and  his  baptizing  of  the  eunuch,  or  the 
dealing  of  St.  Peter  with  Cornelius.  It  does  not, 
however,  supply  a  logical  or  lasting  basis  for 
abstinence.  Such  a  basis  is  furnished  by  St.  Paul 
(1  Th  4'-8,  1  Co  6'--»  Gal  5'*  etc.  ;  cf.  1  P  2"). 
The  ground  of  Christian  abstinence  is  found  in  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  life,  which  is  a  holy  calling 
— a  fellowship  with  the  Holy  One — whose  animat- 
ing principle  is  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Christian 
man — body,  soul,  and  spirit — is  in  union  with 
Christ.  Hence  the  verjr  nature  of  the  Christian 
life  gives  a  positive  principle  of  abstinence.  Every- 
thing carnal  is  excluded.  'The  carnal  mind  is 
enmity  against  God,  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of 
God,  neither  indeed  can  be'  (Ro  8^).  This  deter- 
mines positively  what  is  of  necessity  to  be  avoided, 
and  lists  of  these  sins  are  given  m  the  NT  (see 
above,  Introduction).  These  are  '  the  works  of  the 
flesh.'  At  the  very  lowest  foundation  of  the 
Christian  life  there  must  be  personal  purity. 
ayiafffi6s  is  wholly  opposed  to  axadapffla  (1  Th  4'^). 

Some  have  maintained  that  St.  Paul  tends  to 
regard  sanctification  as  mainly  absence  from 
sensual  sin  (Wemle,  Beginnings  of  Christianity, 
Eng.  tr.,  1904,  ii.  334),  and  others  that  he,  possibly 
from  his  own  bitter  experience  of  this  sin,  empha- 
sized this  aspect  of  sanctification  (A.  B.  Bmce, 
St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christ ianiiy,  1894,  p.  264). 
But  St.  Paul's  view  of  sanctification  includes  the 
whole  personality.  He  was  keenly  alive  to  the 
*  inconceivable  e\\\  of  sensuality,  although  he 
himself  had  the  charism  of  continence  (1  Co  f). 
The  reason  for  his  emphasis  on  personal  purity  is 
found  in  the  immoral  state  of  Grecian  cities — '  the 
bottomless  sexual  depra\-ity  of  the  heathen  world ' 
(Scliaft",  op.  cit.  p.  202)— and  in  the  sensual  bias  of 
human  nature.  Christians  had  to  learn  this  grace 
of  purity  (1  Th  4^). 

The  Christian  life,  then,  is  a  positive  life— a  life 
that  is  being  sanctified  ;  and  this  includes  all  along 
a  negative  element,  for  Christianity  does  not  deal 
with  innocent  men,  but  with  sinners.  Hence  the 
crucifying  of  the  flash,  with  its  affections  and  lusts, 
and  the  mortifying  of  the  bodily  members  are  just 
the  negative  side  of  advance  in  Iioliness. 

It  is  sometimes  held  that  at  first  St.  Paul's 
teaching  on  this  ix)int  was  tinged  with  dualism, 
and  that  he  tended  to  regard  the  body  itself  as 
essentially  evil,  and  that  it  was  only  later  on,  when 
the  full  consequences  of  his  early  views  were  carried 
into  eflect,   as  in  Colossians  and   the  Pastorals, 


10 


ABSTINENCE 


ABSTINENCE 


that  he  came  to  repudiate  this  dualistic  asceticism 
(IJaring  (iould,  A  Study  of  St.  Paul,  1897  [see 
Index,  under  '  Asceticism ']),  or  it  is  maintained 
that  his  attitude  towards  the  flesh  changes — that 
at  times  he  views  it  as  something  to  be  extirpated, 
while  at  other  times  and  oftener  *  liis  exliortations 
to  his  Christian  readers  have  reference  commonly 
not  to  the  Cliristian's  attitude  towards  his  fleshly 
nature,  but  to  his  relation  to  Christ  or  the  Divine 
Spirit  within  him'  (McGitt'ert,  Apostol.  Age,  p. 
137  f.)-  The  truth  is  tliat  the  change  was  not  m 
St.  Paul's  principle,  but  in  the  circumstances  and 
conditions  with  which  he  happened  to  be  at  any 
time  dealing,  and  that  this  opposition  between  a 
negative  and  a  positive  attitude  is  not  a  contra- 
diction, but  only  exhibits  the  opposite  sides  of  the 
one  Christian  principle  of  sanctihcation.  Abstain- 
ing and  retaining,  pruning  and  growth,  are  not 
contradictories  but  complements.  Even  McGiflert, 
as  we  have  seen,  admits  that  'there is  very  little 
asceticism,  in  the  ordinary  sense,  in  Paul's  epistles, 
while  there  is  much  that  makes  in  the  opposite 
direction '  (op.  r.it.  \t.  136).  These  distinctions, 
however,  are  largely  irrelevant.  To  St.  Paul  the 
Christian  life  was  a  life  of  sanctification,  and  this 
included  both  aspects. 

This  positive  principle,  then,  of  Christian  abstin- 
ence is  found  in  the  very  nature  of  the  Christian 
life,  which  includes  the  aflirmation  of  all  the  per- 
sonality and  its  relationships  as  instruments  of 
the  spirit,  and  also  the  negation  of  the  flesh  and  the 
world,  or  of  personality  and  its  relationships  as 
alienated  from  the  Spirit  of  God, 

This  principle,  just  because  it  contained  these 
two  moments,  was  apt  to  be  misunderstood.  Its 
twofold  unity  was  apt  to  be  disrupted,  and  we  may 
well  believe  that  the  later  Gnostic  dualism  and 
licentious  libertinism  may  both  have  appealed  to 
the  authority  of  St.  Paul.  The  Apostle,  however, 
had  a  .'<econa  principle  of  abstinence  which  helps  us 
to  correct  this  antagonism.  He  clearly  distin- 
guished between  those  things  that  in  their  very 
nature  were  hostile  to  the  Christian  life  and  those 
things  that  were  indilferent.  The  neglect  or  abuse 
of  this  principle  is  apt  to  confuse  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  abstinence.  The  difficulty  is  intensified  by 
the  fact  that  in  this  region  of  the  indillerent  we  are 
dealing  with  the  application  of  a  universal  principle 
to  changing  conditions,  so  that,  to  use  logical 
language,  while  the  major  premiss  is  the  same, 
the  minor  premiss  varies,  antf  thus  the  right  con- 
clusion has  to  be  discovered  from  the  nature  of  the 
conditions  with  which  we  are  for  tiie  moment  deal- 
ing. Thus  we  lind  that  the  conditions  at  Kome 
and  Corinth  were  not  the  conditions  present  in 
Colossians  or  the  Pastorals,  and  accordingly  St. 
Paul  deals  with  each  according  to  its  merits.  His 
general  principle  in  regard  to  indifferent  things  is, 
'All  things  are  lawful.'  This  is  universally  ap- 
plicable only  inside  this  universe  of  discourse.  It 
18  not  applicable  to  our  relation  to  those  things 
that  by  their  very  nature  are  inimical  to  the 
Christian  life.  To  apply  the  principle  to  the 
latter  sphere  is  to  degenerate  into  libertinism  such 
as  St.  John,  St.  Jude,  and  St.  Peter  had  to  face. 

While  St.  Jude  and  St.  Peter  are  content  with 
combating  this  libertinism  mainly  by  denunciation 
and  exhortations  to  Christians,  St.  John  applies 
St.  Paul's  positive  principle  of  al)stinence  to  refute 
it.  He  pomta  out  the  inadmissibility  of  sin  (1  Jn 
2^'*).  By  this  neither  he  nor  St.  Paul  means  per- 
fectionism, nor  yet  are  they  speaking  ideally  of  the 
Christian  life.  It  is  not  true,  as  the  Gnostics  say, 
that  the  gold  of  Christianity  is  not  injured  by  the 
mud  of  impurity  (Irenajus,  c.  Hcer.  i.  6.  2).  Some 
so  explained  the  saying  ascrilwd  to  Nicholas  (cf. 
Rev  2®-  "),  Sfiv  TrapaxpriaOai  txj  aapKl  ('  the  flesh  must 
be  abused').     According  to  Clem.  Alex.  {St ruin. 


ii.  20),  '  abandoning  themselves  like  goats  to 
pleasure,  as  if  insultmg  the  body,  they  lead  a  life 
of  self-indulgence.'  It  is  this  that  St.  Jolin  is  con- 
futing in  these  jjerfectionist  passages,  just  as  St. 
Paul  confutes  ascetic  severity  towards  the  body  in 
Colossians,  by  pointing  to  the  nature  of  the  new 
life  the  Christian  has  in  Christ. 

This  Christian  principle  of  abstinence,  then, 
'  All  things  are  lawful,'  does  not  apply  to  sin.  It 
has  further  limitations.  These  are  unfolded  in 
1  Cor.  and  Romans.  The  abstainers  in  both  tliese 
cases  were  in  the  minority.  They  did  not  base 
their  views  on  a  material  dualism.  They  were 
under  the  influence  of  an  atmosphere  rather  than 
a  system,  and  they  were  apt  to  be  treated  in  a 
liigh-handed  fashion.  They  were  not  endangering 
the  very  basis  of  Christianity  as  a  free  service  of 
God,  as  the  Galatians  were.  Hence  they  had  to 
be  defended  rather  than  condemned.  St.  Paul 
says  all  he  can  in  their  favour,  although  he  ranges 
himself  in  principle  on  the  other  side.  He  tells 
the  advocates  of  liberty  that  love  is  superior  to  the 
Christian's  freedom  towards  tilings  indiflerent,  that 
it  makes  liberty  look  as  much  on  the  weakness  of 
others  as  on  its  own  strength.  The  interests  of 
brotherly  love  and  Christian  unity  make  liberty 
impose  restraints  on  itself.  This  restraint  is  a 
noble  asceticism.  'The  liberty  of  faith  is  found 
in  the  bondage  of  love '  (Sabatier,  Paul,  p.  163). 
He  warns  the  advocates  of  liberty  also  that  they 
may  .ipply  this  jirinciple  to  matters  that  are 
essential  and  not  indiflerent.  This  warning  was 
necessary,  because  idolatry  was  so  identified  with 
all  social  functions  that  it  was  difficult  to  escape  it. 
Why  not — to  advert  to  the  coming  conditions — 
adore  the  image  of  the  Emperor  ?  Why  not  throw 
incense  into  the  fire  ?  Just  because  by  so  doing 
the  first  and  major  principle  of  Christian  abstin- 
ence was  destroyed,  viz.  that  it  was  a  holy  life  in 
fellowship  Avith  the  risen  Christ ;  and  its  second 
principle  of  freedom  in  things  indiflerent  did  not 
consequently  apply. 

Yet  this  second  principle  was  distinctly  valuable. 
It  was  a  great  step  in  advance  to  have  it  clearly 
enunciated.  For  the  weak  brother,  as  in  Galatia, 
might  become  intolerant ;  he  might  become  the 
victim  of  false  views,  which  would  look  on  the  ob- 
servance of  indiflerent  rites  as  a  necessary  quali- 
fication of  full  salvation  and  Cliristian  privilege. 
Then  Christian  liberty  in  its  fullness  must  be 
maintained  (Gal  5').  This  liberty — rightly  under- 
stood— contains  in  itself  the  real  principle  of  ab- 
stinence from  what  is  sinful.  Nowliere  have  we 
fuller  lists  of  the  works  of  the  flesh  given  than  in 
the  Galatian  Epistle. 

Or,  again,  as  in  Colossians  and  the  Pastorals, 
a  false  asceticism  might  be  present  which  re- 
garded matter  and  body  as  evil,  in  which  case 
both  principles  would  be  used  to  destroy  such  a 
view. 

(a)  In  regard  to  indifferent  matters  like  food 
and  drink  God  has  given  freedom.  The  argument 
is  the  same  as  that  used  by  Jesus  when  He  purified 
all  meats  (Mk  7'").  These  minutijie  of  fasting  are 
human  inventions,  not  Divine  commands  ;  and  to 
respect  them  casuistically  is  to  blur  the  distinction 
between  the  essential  and  the  indiflerent.  We  get 
what  God  meant  us  to  get  from  perishable  meats 
when  we  joyfully  use  them  with  a  thankful  spirit 
towards  God.  They,  like  the  bodily  appetites 
which  they  satisfy,  do  not  belong  to  the  eternal 
world,  but  to  the  natural.  Yet  the  natural  world 
and  its  relations  to  us,  our  bodies  and  their  re- 
quirements, are  of  God  and  can  all  be  used  to  His 
f^lory.  Our  bodies,  souls,  and  spirits  are  His.  It 
is  not  by  using  severity  towards  the  body  or  by 
abstaining  from  marriage  or  leaving  our  earthly 
callings  that  we  can  gain  further  sanctification.     In 


ABUSE,  ABUSERS 


ABYSS 


11 


fact,  St.  Paul  says  that  this  d^iSi'a  ffw/xaroi — 
severity  towards  the  body — is  of  little  practical 
value  (Col  2^).  Its  aim  is  to  destroy  the  wxiy,  not 
to  tit  it  for  God's  service.  Logically  carried  to  its 
issue,  this  false  asceticism  would  not  only  enfeeble 
the  soul  by  debasing  the  body,  but  would  destroy 
the  body  and  matter  altogether.  But  God's  ideal 
for  the  Wly  is  different  (cf.  Ph  3"),  so  that  what 
is  to  be  aimed  at  by  the  Christian  is  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  flesh  (<rdpi),  not  of  the  body  as  such 
{ffwua). 

But  (b)  the  Apostle  uses  the  primary  principle  of 
Christian  abstinence  to  refute  this  dual  is  tic  asceti- 
-  cism.  He  shows  that  Christianity  is  not  a  matter 
of  prohibitions,  but  of  a  renewed  lue — a  walking  in 
the  Spirit.  Asceticism  at  its  best  leaves  the  house 
empty.  It  is  doubtful  from  history  and  physiology 
if  it  can  even  do  that,  but  the  new  life  in  Chnst 
has  an  expulsive  power  against  sin  and  a  construc- 
tive power  of  holijiess. 

These,  then,  are  the  principles  that  govern  Chris- 
tian abstinence  :  (1)  The  Christian  life  as  a  '  holy 
calling '  demands  abstinence  from  all  sin.  This  pro- 
hibits not  only  sinful  actions  but  sinful  thoughts. 
This  is  what  may  be  called  essential  abstinence. 
(2)  Besides  this,  there  may  be  abstinence  in  in- 
different matters,  but  it  rests  with  the  individual 
conscience  to  determine  when  this  is  necessary 
for  the  furtherance  of  the  new  life  in  Christ. 
This  sphere  by  its  verj-  nature  is  not  subject  to 
obligatory  ecclesiastical  rules,  nor  must  such  ab- 
stinence be  made  the  basis  of  salvation  or  of  a 
higher  moral  platform,  nor  must  it  be  based  on  a 
false  view  of  matter  or  of  the  htiman  body  or  of 
human  relationships. 

See  also  artt.  SELF-DENIAli  and  Temperakce. 

LrrBRATTRX. — Consult  the  books  referred  to  in  the  article  and 
the  Tarious  Commentaries.  See  also  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Coloi- 
«ian«3,  1S79,  p.  3»7  ff. ;  C  E.  Latfaardt,  Christian  Ethic* 
be/ort  the  Rtformatioiv,  tr.  Hastie,  Edinbargb,  1SS9;  O. 
Zbclder,  Kritigehe  Geteh.  der  Atkae,  Frankfurt  am  M.,  1897 ; 
A.  Hamack,  HistoTy  of  Dogma,  Eog.  tr.,  1894-99;  H.  J. 
Holtzmann,  ST  TAMrfoyie,  Tubingen,  1911,  bk.  iv.  ch.  vii.; 
A.  B.  D.  Alexander,  The  JSthies  of  St.  Paul,  Glasgow,  1910  ; 
A.  Ritschl,  Entitehung  der  attkathoL  Kirehe,  Bomi,  1867,  p. 
173ff. ;  E.  Hatch,  The  Jnfumee  of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages 
upon  the  Christian  C/turat  (Hibbert  Itecture,  1888X  London, 
1890,  Lecture  vi.  DONALD  MACKENZIE. 

ABUSE,  ABUSERS.— The  Latin  abator  means 
either  (1)  '  use  badly,'  '  misuse,'  or  (2)  '  use  to  the 
full.'  In  this  second  sense  Cicero  uses  the  word 
of  spending  one's  whole  leisure  time  with  a  friend 
(see  Lewis  and  Short,  Latin  Diet.,  s.v.  '  Abutor '). 

The  Greek  verb  Karaxpdofiai  had  both  these  mean- 
ings. Thus  in  Plato  {3Jeticx.  247  A)  it  means 
'  use  wrongly ' ;  and  Clem.  Alex.  Pwd.  i.  (p.  142, 
Potter)  speaks  of  '  using  fully  every  device  of  wis- 
dom.' In  older  English  the  verb  had  both  mean- 
ings. Cranmer's  Bible  has  '  abuse '=' use  to  the 
full '  in  Col  2*=.  In  both  1  Co  7*'  and  9^*  Karaxpdofiai 
means  '  use  to  the  full.'  The  RV  translates  it  so  in 
9'*  and  marginally  so  in  7*'. 

(«)  1  Co  7^. — The  connexions  {e.g.  marriage), 
circumstances  (e.g.  sorrow  and  joy),  and  concerns 
{e.g.  business  and  wealth)  of  life  have  in  Christianity 
an  emotional  interest.  Stoicism  would  expel  these 
emotions  and  leave  the  soul  empty.  Christianity 
determines  them  eschatologically  (cf.  1  Co  7^^  '^^). 
To  avoid  abuse  of  the  world  is  to  use  it  sub  specie 
finis.  Abuse  here  borders  nu  our  meaning  of 
misuse  (cf.  French  abuser — on  abuse  ceiui  qui  se 
laisse  captiver ;  and  Mark  Pattison's  note  on  Pope's 
Essay  on  Man,  iL  14) ;  and  that  perhaps  is  why 
RV  retains  'abuse.'  Texts  like  this  apply  in 
their  original  freshness  and  strength  to  times  of 
crisis  (cf.  Luthers  hymn,  '  Gut,  Ehre,  Kind,  und 
TTeib  .  .  .  lass  fahren  dahin'),  when  the  dissolu- 
tion of  society  seems  imminent,  but  in  essence  they 
aie  applicable  to  all  time,  as  human  life  is  always 


uncertain.  They  do  not,  however,  encourage  aloof- 
ness from  or  slackness  in  social  duties  (cf.  St.  Paul's 
attitude  towards  the  non-workers  in  Thessalonica, 
2  Th  3'**-). 

(i)  1  Co  9".— One  phase  of  St.  Paul's  accommodat- 
ing conduct  {ffvyKard^cufts)  for  the  gospel's  sake 
was  the  voluntary  abridgment  of  his  rights  of 
maintenance  by  the  Corinthians  ( 1  Co  9''"",  2  Co  1 1*). 
This  accommo<iation  must  be  distinguished  from 
men-pleasing  (cf.  Gal  1'*).  As  the  height  of  right 
may  be  the  height  of  injury  {summum  ivs  summa 
iniuria),  so  conversely  the  abnegation  of  Christian 
rights  for  the  gospel's  sake  enhances  the  power  of 
both  Evangelist  and  Evangel  (ct  Mk  KP**). 

Summary. — A  lawful  use  of  the  world  (1  Co  7") 
or  even  of  Christian  rights  (9^*)  becomes  harmful 
when  dissociated  from  eternal  issues,  or  pursued 
without  regard  to  others.  The  lower  planes  of  life 
gain  simiiicance  in  subordination  to  the  highest. 
Rights  legally  due  may,  if  pressed  without  r^ard 
to  love,  become  injurious. 

(c)  In  1  Co  6'  and  1  Ti  1^"  dfurepoKoiTtu  is  translated 
'  abusers  of  themselves  with  mankind '  (cf.  Ro  1^ 
written  from  Corinth).  This  unnatural  vice  is  that 
known  in  Greek  literature  as  xat5epo<rrta.  In  St. 
Paul's  view  sins  of  tmcleanness  were  the  inevitable 
Divine  penalty  of  forgetfulness  of  God — a  view 
strengthened  by  the  association  between  unclean- 
ness  and  the  worship  of  Aphrodite  in  places  like 
Corinth. 

Lttkrature.  —  Grimm-Thayer,  s.v.  KaTaxpao/iai;  HDB, 
ToL  L  art  'Abuae';  the  Comm.  on  above  paasages,  e.g. 
Edwards  in  EGT  and  Band-Com. ;  cf.  also  C.  J.  Vanghan. 
Lessons  of  Life  and  Godliness,  London,  1870,  Sermon  six. ; 
F.  W.  Robertson,  Sermons,  vol.  in.  sermon  xir. ;  W.  G. 
Blaikie,  Present  Day  Tracts,  no.  4,  'Christiaaity  and  the 
Life  that  now  is.'  On  ■nulfpatrna.  oonmtt  W.  A.  Becker, 
CharUdes,  3  vols.,  Beiiin,  1877-78,  roL  iL  p.  252  ff. 

Donald  Mackenzie. 
ABYSS.— This  is  the  RV  rendering  of  the  word 
A^wraot  which  occurs  in  Lk  8^',  Ro  10",  Rev  g*-  *•  " 
ll'17«2(H-».  In  Lk.  and  Rom.,  AV  translates 'deep'; 
in  Rev.,  *  bottomless  pit ' — no  distinction,  however, 
being  made  between  rb  4>piap  riji  d^vcaov  in  9^-' 
(RV  '  the  pit  of  the  abyss')  and  ^  ei^waos  simply 
in  the  remaining  passages  (RV  'the  abyss'). 
i^vaffos  (from  a  intens.  and  /3wr<r6j,  Ion.  for  ^v06s, 
'the  depth')  occurs  in  classical  Greek  as  an  adj. 
meaning  '  bottomless,'  but  in  biblical  and  ecclesi- 
astical Greek  almost  invariably  as  a  substantive 
denoting  '  the  bottomless  place,'  '  the  abyss.'  The 
word  is  found  frequently  in  the  LXX,  usually 
as  a  rendering  of  the  Heb.  t'hOm,  and  primarUy 
denotes  the  water-deeps  which  at  tirst  covered  the 
earth  (Gn  1*,  Ps  103  (104)®)  and  were  conceived  of 
as  shut  up  afterwards  in  subterranean  storehouses 
(32  (33)').  In  Job  38«'-  the  abyss  in  the  sense  of 
the  depths  of  the  sea  is  used  as  a  parallel  to 
Hades  ;  and  in  41^  (LXX)  the  sea-monster  regards 
the  Tartarus  of  the  abyss  as  his  captive.  In  Ps 
70  (71)^  '  the  abyss '  is  applied  to  the  depths  of  the 
earth,  and  is  here  evidently  a  figurative  equiva- 
lent for  Sheol,  though  it  is  nowhere  used  in  the 
LXX  to  render  the  Heb.  word.  In  the  later  Jewish 
eschatology,  where  Sheol  has  passed  from  its  OT 
meaning  of  a  shadowy  under  world  in  which  there 
are  no  recognized  distinctions  between  the  good 
and  the  bad,  the  wicked  and  the  weary  (cf.  Job  3", 
Ec  9*),  and  has  become  a  sphere  of  <Iefinite  moral 
retribution,  the  conception  of  the  abjss  has  also 
undergone  a  moral  transformation.  The  Ethiopian 
Book  of  Enoch  is  especially  suggestive  for  the 
development  of  the  eschatological  conceptions  that 
appear  in  pre-Christian  Judaism  ;  and  in  the  earliest 
part  of  that  book  the  fallen  angels  and  demons  are 
represented  as  cast  after  the  final  judgment  into 
a  gulf  (xaos)  of  fire  (10"- "),  whUe  in  2F  the  chasm 
(SmucoxtJ)  filled  with  fire  (cf.  rb  it>p^ap  in  Rev  9>-  *)  is 
described  as  bordered  by  the  abyss.    Apparently 


12 


ACCEPTANCE 


ACCEPTANCE 


the  abyss  was  conceived  of  as  the  proper  home  of 
tlie  devil  and  his  anj^els,  in  the  centre  of  which 
was  a  lake  of  lire  reserved  as  the  place  of  their 
final  punishment. 

The  previous  history  of  the  word  explains  its  use 
in  the  NT.  In  Ko  10',  where  lie  is  referring  to  Dt 
30'^,  St.  Paul  uses  it  simply  as  the  abode  of  the  dead, 
Sheol  or  Hades — a  sense  equivalent  to  that  of  Ps  70 
(7 1  )■'*'.  In  Lk  8''  the  penal  uspect  of  the  abyss  comes 
clearly  into  view  ;  it  is  a  place  of  confinement  for 
demons.  In  Rev.  we  are  in  the  midst  of  the  visions 
and  imaijes  of  apocalyptic  eschatology.  In  9''  * 
'  the  pit  of  the  abyss'  sends  forth  a  snioKe  like  the 
smoke  of  a  great  furnace.  The  abyss  has  an  angel 
of  its  own  whose  name  is  Abaddon  (q.v.)  or  Apoll- 
yon  (v.").  From  it  'the  beast'  issues  (IV  17*), 
and  into  it  '  the  old  serpent  which  is  the  Devil  and 
Satan  '  is  cast  for  a  thousand  years  (20^'^). 

LiTBRATURK.— The  Conimentaries  and  Bible  Dictionaries ;  art- 
•Abyss'  \nERE.  J.  C.  LAMBERT. 

ACCEPTANCE.— The  noun  itself  is  not  found  in 
the  AV  of  the  NT,  though  we  come  very  near  it  in 
'  acceptation '  (dTroSoxi?),  1  Ti  P'  4*.  Instances  of 
the  verb  and  adjective  are  frequent,  and  are  mostly 
equivalents  of  54xo/iai  and  its  derivatives,  as  the 
following  list  shows:  5^xoM»'i  2  Co  6^  8'^  IP; 
OfKrdi,  I'll  4'* ;  d.ir65eKTOi,  1  Ti  2^  5^  ;  TrpoaSixof^"''-) 
He  Ipo ;  €virp6<rd€KTos,  Ilo  15i«-  ^S  2  Co  6^  8^\  1  P  2«. 
We  also  find  Xafi^dvw,  Gal  2*;  evdpicrTos*  Ko  12'-  ^ 
14>«,  2  Co  5»,  Eph  5'»,  Ph  4^8,  Col  3^»,  Tit  2^,  He  IS^^, 
and  £vap4(rrus,*  He  12^  ;  x<^P"»  1  P  2'^  ;  and  xapt7-6w, 
Eph  P.  It  should  be  noticed  that  in  the  RV  the 
adjective  '  well-pleasing '  often  takes  the  place  of 
tlie  AV  '  acceptable ' ;  and  that  in  Eph  P  the 
familiar  expression  '  (his  grace)  wherein  he  hath 
made  us  accepted  in  the  Beloved'  gives  place  to 
the  more  correct  '  which  he  freely  bestowed  upon 
us,'  etc.  See  the  commentaries  of  Westcott  and 
Armitage  Robinson,  in  loc. 

2  Co  8^^  (Titus  '  accepted  the  exhortation ')  and 
He  U"*  ('not  accepting  deliverance')  do  not  call 
for  comment.  With  2  Co  IP  on  the  non-accept- 
ance of  another  gospel  than  that  of  Paul,  compare 
1  Ti  P  and  4\  2  Ti  P'  4'" ;  see  also  for  the  *  accepted 
time'  (the  day  of  opportunity  for  accepting  the 
Divine  message)  2  Co  B^'^  (cf.  Lk  4i»).  In  Ko  W^ 
St.  Paul  hopes  that  the  collection  for  the  Jerusalem 
poor  may  be  acceptable  to  the  saints  ;  and,  refer- 
ring to  the  same  proiect  in  2  Co  8'^,  lays  down  the 
principle  that  contributions  are  acceptable  in  pro- 
portion to  the  willingnesswith  which  tliey  are  given. 

We  are  now  left  with  the  passages  which  speak 
of  God's  acceptance  of  man.  Christians  are  '  child- 
ren of  light,'  are  to  'prove  what  is  acceptable  (or 
well-pleasing)  to  the  Lord '  (Enh  5"» ;  cf.  Col  S-"),  to 
test  and  discern  the  Lord's  will  (Ro  12^).  They  are 
'  to  make  it  their  aim,'  M'hether  living  or  dying, 
'  to  be  M'ell-pleasing  to  him  '  (2  Co  5*). 

What  then  are  the  principles  and  practices  that 
ensure  this  hajipy  consummation  ?  We  may  first 
notice  the  familiar  negative  proposition  set  forth 
in  Gal  2®  and  Ac  10**  '  (iod  accepteth  no  man's 
person '  [i.e.  the  mere  outward  state  and  presence) ; 
and  over  against  it  the  comprehensive  declaration 
of  Ac  10^  '  In  every  nation  he  that  feareth  God 
and  workcth  righteousness  is  acceptable  to  him.' 
This  furnislies  a  starting-point  for  a  detailed  enum- 
eration of  the  courses  wluch  are  '  well-plcaaing'  to 
God,  and  which  may  be  set  forth  as  follows :  the 
offering  of  our  bodies  as  a  living  sacrifice  (Ro  12-) ; 
the  serving  of  Christ  by  not  putting  stumbling- 
blocks  before  weaker  brethren  (14"*);  missionary 
M-ork— the  '  oflcring  n\t '  of  the  Gentiles  (15'*) ;  the 
gift  of  the  Philii)pian  Church  to  St.  Paul  in  prison 

*  On  the  use  of  these  words  in  inscriptions  sec  A.  Deissmonn, 
Bibk  Studies,  214 f.  The  use  of  Apttnoi,  'pleasing,'  and  the 
verb  apeiTKu  in  the  NT  should  also  be  noted. 


(I'll  41"  ;  cf.  Mt  25"-«) ;  filial  aflection  to  a  widowed 
mother  (1  Ti  5*) ;  supplication  and  intercession  for 
all  men  (1  Ti  2^);  undeserved  suflering  patiently 
endured  (1  P  2^).  All  these  may  be  looked  uj>on 
as  examples  of  the  'spiritual  sacrifices'  (1  P  2'), 
the  offering  of  '  service  with  reverence  and  awe  ' 
(He  12*8  .  cf.  1316),  which  are  'acceptable'  to  God. 
He  it  is  who  '  works  in  us  that  which  is  well-pleas- 
ing in  his  sight  through  Jesus  Christ '  (He  13-'). 

It  is  interesting  and  instructive  to  compare  the 
grounds  of  '  acceptance  '  in  the  circle  of  OT  thought 
with  those  in  the  NT.  In  the  former  these  grounds 
are  partly  ceremonial  (Lv  22^),  and  partly  ethical 
(Is  P^'^',  Jer  6'-"  etc.),  though  here  and  there  a 
higher  note  is  struck  (cf.  Pr  2P,  Mic  6«,  Dt  10*) ; 
in  the  latter  the  ceremonial  association  has  entirely 
vanished  except  in  a  metaphorical  sense,  and  l>e- 
come  purely  ethico-spiritual,  as  the  above  references 
prove.  It  was  largely  due  to  the  prophets  that  the 
old  ceremonial  ground  was  gradually  ethicized  ; 
and,  though  it  never  died  out  under  the  earlier 
'dispensation'  (which,  indeed,  reached  its  most 
rigid  and  mechanical  development  in  the  degener- 
ate Pharisaic  cult  of  NT  times),  the  way  was 
effectually  prepared  for  the  full  proclamation  of 
the  spiritual  message  of  the  gospel  by  Jesus,  who 
was  Himself  the  perfect  embodiment  of  all  that  was 
acceptable  and  well-pleasing  to  God  (cf.  Mk  1", 
Mt  17*,  JHS^^etc). 

There  is  a  theological  problem  of  importance 
raised  by  these  passages — What  is  it  that  consti- 
tutes the  ground  of  our  acceptance  with  God  ?  The 
full  treatment  of  this  problem  must  be  sought 
under  the  art.  Justification,  but  the  following 
considerations  may  be  properly  adduced  here. 
Unquestionably  the  Christian  religion  is  a  religion 
of  Grace,  as  contra-distinguished  from  Judaism  and 
other  faiths,  which  are  religions  of  Law.  Salvation, 
according  to  the  NT  throughout  (explicitly  in  the 
writings  of  St.  Paul,  more  or  less  implicitly  else- 
Avhere),  is  of  God,  and  not  of  man  ;  not  our  own 
doings,  but  willingness  to  accept  what  He  lias  done 
for  us,  and  what  He  is  ready  to  .do  in  us,  is  the 
condition  of  initial  inclusion  within  the  Kingdom 
of  Divine  love  and  life.  This  is  the  watershe<l 
which  determines  the  direction  and  flow  of  all 
subsequent  doctrinal  developments  in  Christian 
theology  ;  it  is  what  settles  the  question  whether 
our  thoughts  and  practice  are  distinctively  Christian 
or  not.  There  are,  however,  two  alternative  perils 
to  be  carefully  avoided — antinomianism,  on  the 
one  hand,  which  assumes  our  continued  acceptance 
with  God  irrespective  of  our  moral  conduct  after- 
wards ;  and  the  doctrine  of  salvation  by  works,  on 
the  other,  which  makes  moral  conduct  the  condi- 
tion of  acceptance,  thus  surreptitiously  introduc- 
ing the  legal  view  of  religion  once  more.  This 
'  Either — Or '  is,  however,  a  false  antithesis,  from 
which  we  are  saved  by  the  recognition  of  the 
'  mystical  union '  of  the  believer  with  God  in  Christ. 
By  that  act  of  faith,  in  virtue  of  which  the  sinner 
'accepts'  Christ  and  appropriates  all  that  He  is 
and  has  done,  he  passes  from  a  state  of  condemna- 
tion into  a  state  of  grace  (Ro  8'),  and  is  henceforth 
'  in  Christ ' — organically  united  to  Him  as  the 
member  is  to  the  body  (1  Co  12'-'-),  as  the  branch  is 
to  the  vine  (Jn  IS'"*).  This  'justifying  faith'  is, 
however,  not  an  isolated  act ;  it  is  an  act  that 
brings  us  into  a  permanent  relation  with  the  source 
of  si>iritual  life.  Now,  'good  works'  in  the 
Christian  sense  are  a  necessary  proof  and  outcome 
of  this  relation,  and  as  such  are  well-pleasing  or 
'  acceptable '  to  God,  because  (a)  they  are  a  mani- 
festation of  the  spirit  of  Christ  in  us  (Gal  2-'"  ;  cf. 
V.-') ;  and  (b)  a  demonstration  of  the  continuance 
of  the  believer  '  in  Christ '  (Jn  15*  ;  cf.  Mt  5'«,  Ph 
1"").  The  relation  of  the  believer  to  Christ,  in 
other  words,  while  it  is  religious  in  its  root,  is 


ACCESS 


ACCESS 


13 


ethical  in  its  fruit,  ami  the  quality  and  abundance 
of  the  latter  natural! j'  show  the  quality  and  potency 
of  the  faith-life  of  which  it  is  the  expression  and 
outcome.  Thus  our  '  works '  do  not  constitute  our 
claim  for  acceptance  with  God  after  entering  the 
Kin<,'dom  of  Grace  any  more  than  before ;  but  they 
determine  our  place  tcithin  the  Kingdom.  There 
is  an  aristocracy  of  the  spiritual  as  well  as  of  the 
natural  life  ;  the  saved  are  one  in  the  fact  of  salva- 
tion, but  not  in  the  magnitude  of  their  attainments 
or  the  quality  of  their  influence  ;  and  they  are  more 
or  less  acceptable  to  God  according  to  the  entireness 
of  their  consecration  and  the  value  of  their  service. 
There  is  thus  an  adequate  motive  presented  to  us 
for  perpetual  striving  after  perfection,  and  St. 
Paul's  spiritual  attitude — 'not  as  though  I  had 
already  attaineil,  but  I  follow  after'  (Ph  3'-) — is 
the  normal  attitude  of  every  true  believer  (cf.  Col 
l»*-i-,  1  Th  4i-»,  1  Jn  3-).  It  was  given  only  to  One 
to  be  altogether  well-pleasing  to  God  ;  but  it  is  the 
unfading  ideal,  and  the  constant  endeavour  of  His 
true  disciples  to  follow  in  His  steps,  and  in  all 
things  to  become  more  and  more  like  Him,  as  well 
as  '  well-pleasing'  to  Him. 

See,  further,  artt.  JUSTIFICATION,  etc. ,  and  Litera- 
ture there  specified.  E.  Griffith-Joxes. 

ACCESS.— This  word  in  the  Epistles  of  the  NT 
is  the  translation  of  the  Greek  word  vpoaa-yurffi 
(Ro  5^  Eph  2^8  31^  ;  cf.  1  P  3'»,  where  the  verb  is 
used  actively).  It  has  been  treated  very  thoroughly 
in  DCG  (s.v. ).     Here  we  shall  confine  ourselves  to — 

1.  The  connotation  of  the  word. — In  classical 
Greek,  the  term  rpwrarfar/evs  was  used  primarily 
for  '  one  who  brings  to,'  'introduces  to  another  as 
an  intermediary,'  mainly  in  a  derogatory  sense  (cf. 
irpoffayoryevs  \7jfifidTwr,  one  who  hunts  for  another's 
benefit — a  jackal  [Dem.  750.  21  ;  cf.  Aristid.  ii. 
369,  395] ;  the  spies  of  the  SicUian  kings  were 
called  ■wpoffayur/eTs,  'tale-bearers'  [Pint.  iL  522  D]). 
It  was,  however,  used  later  in  a  technical  sense, 
the  court  rpoaaycjoyevs  being  a  functionary  whose 
business  it  was  to  bring  visitors  or  suppliants  into 
the  king's  presence,  rpoffayurf^  came  thus  to  mean 
access  to  the  royal  presence  and  favour.  It  is 
from  this  association  of  ideas  that  the  word  derives 
its  religious  connotation  in  the  NT.  God  is  con- 
ceived in  the  kingly  relation  (as  frequently  in  the 
OT),  as  one  whose  favour  is  sought  and  found, 
and  Christ  as  the  irpo(ray(oyevs  who  introduces  the 
sinner  into  the  Divine  presence.  It  is  thus  a  form 
of  words  representing  Him  in  the  light  of  a  Mediator 
between  God  and  man  ;  and  it  throws  light  on  the 
relation  of  the  three  parties  in  the  transaction. 

2.  The  light  thrown  on  the  character  and 
attitude  of  God  towards  man.— The  kingly  con- 
cept represents  God  as  supreme,  one  to  whom  all 
allegiance  is  due,  and  who  has  the  power  of  life 
and  death  over  all  His  subjects.  In  the  OT, 
Jahweh,  especially  in  the  Psalms,  is  often  repre- 
sented as  the  King  of  His  people  Israel  (cf.  Ps  10^* 
.24S-IU  444  4-2  6g;4  etc.).  It  is  noticeable,  however, 
that  in  most  of  these  passages  the  Oriental  awe  in 
which  all  potentates  were  habitually  held  is  suflused 
with  a  sense  of  joy  and  pride  in  God  as  Israel's 
King  ;  His  power,  favour,  and  victorious  character 
are  mainly  dwelt  on.  The  idea  which  lies  behind 
the  NT  references,  however,  is  rather  that  of  the 
difficulty  of  approach  to  the  King's  presence,  not 
merely  on  account  of  His  loftiness  and  majesty, 
but  of  His  alienation,  which  demands  a  process  of 
reconciliarion.  It  suggests  that  the  normal  relation 
of  the  King  and  His  subjects  has  been  disturbed 
by  rebellion  or  wrong-doing.  The  Divine  dignity 
has  been  outraged,  and  His  claim  to  obedience  set 
at  defiance.  There  is  thus  no  longer  a  right  of 
admittance  to  the  Divine  presence,  unless  the  wrong 
is  righted  Mid  the  lost  favour  restored ;  and,  tiU 


that  has  l)een  secured,  the  protection  and  kindly 
attitude  of  God  can  no  longer  be  relied  on. 

3.  The  light  thrown  on  the  condition  and 
attitude  of  man  towards  God. — The  suggestion  is 
that  man  is  conscious  of  being  alienated  from  God 
by  sin  ;  that  he  has  no  confidence  in  approaching 
God  in  consequence,  being  uncertain  of  his  recep- 
tion ;  that  he  knows  of  nothing  which  he  can  do 
to  restore  the  lost  relation ;  and  that  he  is  deeply 
sensible  of  the  shame  and  peril  of  his  condition. 
The  conception  of  the  effects  of  evil-doing  as 
separating  God  and  man  is  one  that  runs  through 
the  priestly  ritual  of  Judaism  (cf.  also  the  pro- 
phetic declaration  in  Is  59*  '  your  iniquities  have 
separated  between  you  and  your  God'),  and  corre- 
sponds to  a  fact  in  the  consciousness  of  all  awakened 
sinners.  In  the  earlier  experience  of  bt.  Paul  this 
feeling  was  evidently  poignantly  emphasize<l  ;  and 
the  sense  of  deliverance  that  came  to  him  through 
the  gospel  may  be  taken  as  the  measure  of  the 
pain  and  sorrow  from  which  he  had  been  delivered. 

i.  The  function  fulfilled  by  Christ  as  the  One 
through  whom  the  renewal  of  the  lost  relation 
between  God  and  man  was  accomplished. — 
The  word  TpocaycrfTi  is  insufficient  to  represent  this 
function.  In  itself  it  stands  for  the  work  of  a 
functionary  whose  role  is  to  act  as  a  merely  official 
link  between  the  two  parties,  having  no  active 
part  in  the  process  of  reconciliation,  and  having 
therefore  no  claim  to  the  gratitude  of  the  bene- 
ficiary in  the  process.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
apostolic  use  of  the  word  in  its  reference  to  the 
person  and  work  of  Christ  includes  the  suggestion 
that  the  '  access '  to  God  referred  to  has  been 
accomplished  by  Christ  Himself,  and  an  over- 
whelming sense  of  gratitude  is  awakened  by  this 
fact.  This  appears  in  the  four  passages  in  which 
the  word  is  used,  especially  in  the  last  (1  P  3'*). 
According  to  this,  the  bringing  of  man  tO  God  is 
efflected  through  the  work  of  Christ  in  Bis  Passion ; 
'because  Christ  also  suffered  for  sins  once  (&rai, 
meaning  here  'once  for  all'=a  fact  accomplished), 
the  righteous  for  the  unrighteous,  that  He  might 
bring  us  {rpoffaydyr})  to  God,'  i.e.  restore  us  to 
His  favour,  and  lead  us  to  the  benefits  of  the 
Divine  reconciliation.  In  Ro  5^,  again,  the  '  access ' 
receives  its  meaning  and  privilege  through  its 
consummation  in  and  by  Christ,  'through  whom 
we  have  also  (/cat,  '  copulat  et  auget '  [Toletus], 
'  answering  almost  to  our  "  as  might  be  expected  " ' 
[Alford])  got  (iffx^KHfitv)  our  (ryy)  access  (introduc- 
tion) by  otir  (rj)  faith,  into  this  grace  wherein  we 
stand '  (see  DCG  i.  13»).  Here  the  Person  of  the 
irpoaayorfevi  is  chiefly  thought  of  ('  this  has  come  to 
us  through  Him ') ;  and  the  resulting  benefit  is  urged 
as  a  reason  for  holy  exultation,  since  it  means 
justification  as  a  ground  for  '  rejoicing  in  the  hoi>e 
of  glory.'  In  Eph  2'*  a  slightly  different  emphasis 
is  suggested  :  '  for  tlirough  Him  we  both  {i.e.  Jew 
and  Gentile)  have  our  access  in  one  spirit  unto  the 
Father.'  Here  that  revelation  of  God,  not  as  uni- 
versal King  but  as  the  All-Father,  which  came 
through  Jesus  Christ,  is  included  in  the  benefit 
secured  by  Him  for  mankind  at  large,  and  the 
reconciliation  of  humanity  at  variance  with  itself 
as  weU  as  with  God  is  brought  into  the  circle  of 
mediation  (cf.  v."  'for  he  is  our  peace  [i.e.  He 
is  the  peace-maker,  the  Tpoffayoryevs  between  us, 
Jew  and  Gentile,  who  were  once  far  oft'  from  each 
other]  who  hath  made  both  one'  by  His  blood 
[v.^]).  Through  this  word  we  are  thus  led  into  the 
deep  places  of  the  gospel  as  the  reconciling  agency 
of  God  to  man,  man  to  God,  and  man  to  man. 

LiTKRATTRB.— To  the  literature  in  the  DCG  add  John  Foster, 
Lectures,  1853,  ii.  69 ;  R.  W.  Dale,  The  Jewish  Temple  and 
the  Christian  Church,  1877,  p.  205  ;  A.  J.  Gordon,  The  Two/old 
Life,  1SS6,  p.  175  ;  W.  M.  Macgregror,  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  oj 
God,  1907,  p.  176.  E.   GRIFFITH-JoXES. 


u 


ACCOUNT 


ACHAICUS 


ACCOUNT.— It  will  be  suHicient  merely  to 
mention  the  use  of  the  verb  'account'  (Xoyl^onat) 
in  the  sense  of  '  reckon,'  '  deem,'  *  cctnsider '  (Ho  8*', 
1  Co  4\  He  ll'»,  2  r  3'").  Simple  uses  of  the  noun 
are  found  in  Ac  19*",  when  the  '  town-clerk'  (y. v.) 
of  Ephesus  warns  his  fellow-citizens  of  thedifticulty 
of  givinj?  '  account  (\&yos)  of  this  concourse ' ;  and  in 
Ph  4'^  '  the  fruit  that  increaseth  to  your  account.' 
The  only  signiHcant  paasajjes  where  the  word  is 
found  are  those  dealing  with  the  .Judgment. 

The  declaration  in  Ko  14'-,  '  Each  one  of  us 
shall  give  account  of  himself  to  God,'  must  be 
studied  in  the  light  of  tho  paragraph  (vv.''^)  of 
which  it  is  the  conclusion.  "Those  wno  are  them- 
selves liable  to  judgment  must  not  set  themselves 
up  as  judges  of  one  another,  either  to  make  light 
of  sincere  scruples  or  to  reprove  laxity.  For  one 
man  to  judge  another  is  to  usurp  the  prerogative 
of  God,  to  whom  alone  (as  universal  sovereign  and 
object  of  worship)  man  is  answerable.  The  passage 
should  be  compared  with  2  Co  5*",  where  the  '  judg- 
ment-seat '  is  called  Christ's ;  see  also  1  Co  4'.  St. 
Paul  ajiplies  this  doctrine,  which  is  found  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  and  was  an  integral  part  of 
primitive  Chnstian  teaching,  to  Jew  and  Gentile, 
to  himself  and  his  converts,  to  those  who  liave 
died  before  the  Parousia  and  those  who  are  alive 
at  it.  The  life  in  the  body  provides  the  oppor- 
tunity for  moral  action,  and  by  the  use  they  have 
made  of  it  men  are  sentenced  (cf.  Gal  6").  A. 
Menzies  (Com.  on  S  Co?:)  calls  attention  (a)  to  this 
aspect  of  the  Judgment  in  contrast  with  that  which 
represents  the  saints  as  judging  the  world  and 
angels  (1  Co  G^'- ;  cf.  Mt  19-=8) ;  {b)  to  the  incon- 
sistency between  the  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith  alone,  and  the  doctrine  of  final  judgment  of 
men  according  to  their  actions.  There  is,  however, 
in  the  present  writer's  opinion,  no  inconsistency 
here.  The  NT  generally  represents  the  saved  as 
judged  as  well  as  the  unsaved.  The  judgment  of 
the  latter,  however,  is  retributory  and  involves 
rejection  ;  that  of  tlie  former  is  for  a  place,  higher 
or  lower,  within  the  heavenly  Kingdom  ;  and  this 
place  is  in  accordance  with  the  faithfulness  and 
quality  of  their  service  while  in  the  body.  St. 
Paul,  as  the  above  references  prove,  is  einphatic  as 
to  the  fact  and  nature  of  tliis  judgment  (cf.  1 
Co  3'-"'"),  and  shov/s  that,  however  true  it  is  that 
salvation  is  by  grace,  there  will  be  gradations  in 
standing  and  in  reward  in  the  after-life.  This  is 
in  harmony  with  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  in  the 
Synoptics,  especially  in  the  parables  of  service  and 
reward  (Lk  19'»-«>  etc.  ;  cf.  Mk  \Qf*»).  Cf.  also,  as 
to  the  fact  of  the  saints  h.iving  to  give  an  account 
of  their  earthly  stewardship.  He  13'^,  1  P  4'  :  '  [evil- 
doers and  slanderers  of  Christians]  shall  give 
account  to  him  that  is  ready  to  jud^e  the  quick 
and  the  dead '  (in  1"  to  the  Father,  in  1''  and  S'* 
to  Christ).  Tliese  may  be  regarded  as  special 
instances  of  the  General  Judgment  already  referred 
to.  The  expression  iiroSiddvai  \6yop  generally  im- 
plies that  defence  is  not  easy. 

liiTieiiATiTRB.— See  lit.  on  art.  Judomkst  ;  the  Comtn.  in  locc.  ; 
W.  N.  Clarke,  An  Outline  of  Christian  Theol.,  1808,  p.  459ff. 

E.  Griffith- Jones. 
ACCURSED.— See  Anathema. 

ACCUSATION.— See  Tkial-at-Law. 

ACELDAMA.— See  Akeldaha. 

ACHAIA. — Achaia  ('Axafa)  was,  in  the  classical 
period,  merely  a  atrip  of  fertile  coast-land  stretch- 
ing along  the  south  of  tiie  (Julf  of  Corinth,  from  the 
river  Larisus,  which  separated  it  from  EHs,  to  the 
Sythas,  which  divideu  it  from  Sicyonia,  while 
the  higher  mountains  of  Arcadia  Imunded  it  on  the 
south.     Its  whole  Iciitrth  w.-is  about  fif)  miles,  its 


breadth   from  12  to  20  miles,  and  its  area  about 
650  sq.  miles. 

The  Acha^atiB  were  probably  the  remnant  of  a  Pelaagian  race 
once  (liKtributed  over  the  whole  Peloponnesus.  Though  they 
were  cflebrated  in  the  heroic  a^e,  they  rarely  flgured  in  the 
grout  Hellenic  j)eriod,  keeplnj;  themselves  ixn  far  as  possiihle 
aloof  from  the  conflicts  l>etween  the  Ionian  and  Doric  .States, 
happy  in  their  own  almost  uninterrupted  prosperity.  It  is  not 
till  the  last  struggle  for  Hellenic  independence  that  they 
appear  on  the  stage  of  history. 

The  cities  which  formed  the  famous  Achaean 
League  became  the  most  powerful  political  body  in 
(ireece ;  and,  when  the  Romans  subdued  the  country 
(146  B.C.),  they  at  once  honoured  the  brave  con- 
federation and  spared  the  feelings  of  all  the  Hellenes 
by  calling  the  new  province  not  Greece  but  Achaia. 
As  constituted  by  Augustus  in  27  ».C,,  the  province 
included  Tliessaly,  .^tolia,  Acharnania,  and  part 
of  Epirus  (Strabo,  XVII.  iii.  25),  being  thus  almost 
co-extensive  with  the  modern  kingdom  of  Greece. 
As  a  senatorial  province  Achaia  was  governed  by 
a  proconsul,  who  was  an  ex-pra;tor.  In  a.d.  15 
Tiberius  took  it  from  the  Senate,  adding  it  to 
Macedonia  to  form  an  Imperial  province  under  the 
government  of  a  legatus  ;  but  in  44  Claudius  re- 
stored it  to  the  Senate.  '  Proconsul '  (avOviraro^, 
Ac  18'^)  was  therefore  the  governor's  correct  ofticial 
title  at  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  residence  in  Corinth. 
Nero,  as  '  a  born  Philhellene,'  wished  to  make 
Greece  absolutely  free. 

'  In  gratitude  for  the  recognition  which  his  artistic  contribu- 
tions had  met  with  in  the  native  land  of  the  Muses  .  .  .  [he] 
declared  the  Greeks  collectively  to  be  rid  of  Roman  govern- 
ment, free  from  tribute,  and,  lilce  the  Italians,  subject  to  no 
governor.  At  once  there  arose  throughout  Greece  movements, 
which  would  have  been  civil  wars,  if  these  people  could  have 
achieved  anything  more  than  brawling  ;  and  after  a  few  months 
Vespasian  re-established  the  provincial  constitution,  so  far  as  it 
went,  with  the  dry  remark  that  the  Greeks  liad  unlearned  the 
art  of  being  free  '  (Mommsen,  Provincet,  i.  202). 

To  the  end  of  the  empire  Achaia  remained  a 
senatorial  province.  The  administrative  centre  was 
Corinth  {q.v.),  where  the  governor  had  his  official 
residence.  During  a  prolonged  mission  in  that 
city,  St.  Paul  was  brought  into  contact  with  the 
proconsul  Gallio  (q.v.),  the  brother  of  Seneca. 
The  rapid  progress  of  the  gospel  in  Achaia  is  partly 
explained  by  the  fact  that  Judaism  had  already 
for  centuries  been  working  as  a  leaven  in  many  of 
the  cities  of  Greece.  Sparta  and  Sicyon  are  named 
among  the  numerous  free  States  to  which  the 
Romans  sent  letters  on  behalf  of  the  Jews  al)out 
139  B.C.  (1  Mac  15^),  and  VhWo' a  Lefjntio  ad  Gaium 
(§  36)  testifies  to  the  presence  of  Jews  in  IJceotia, 
Jktolia,  Attica,  Argos,  and  Corinth.  Only  three 
Achaean  cities  are  mentioned  in  the  NT — Athens, 
Corinth,  and  CenchreiB — but  the  address  of  2  Cor. 
to  '  all  the  saints  who  are  in  the  whole  of  Achaia,' 
and  the  liberality  of  'the  regions  of  Achaia'  (2  Co 
9^  11'"),  prove  that  there  must  have  been  many  other 
unnamed  centres  of  Christian  faith  and  life  in  the 
province.  While  1  Co  16"  refers  to  the  house  of 
Stephanas  as  '  the  firstfruits  of  Achaia,'  Ac  17** 
rather  indicates  that  the  Apostle's  brief  visit  to 
Athens  had  already  borne  some  fruit,  '  Dionysius, 
Damaris,  and  others  with  them '  being  Achaean 
believers.  Athens  (q.v.)  was  either  reckoned  by 
itself  or  else  entirely  overlooked. 

LiTBRATCRB. — The  Histories  of  Polybius  and  Livy  ;  A.  Holm, 
History  of  Greece,  Eng.tr.  London,  1891-98,  vol.  iv. ;  T.  Momm- 
sen, The  Provinces  ojf  the  Roman  Empire-,  Eng.  tr.,  I^indon, 
1909,  i.  260fr. ;  J.  Marquardt,  Jiiiin.  Staat.svenmllvng,  newed., 
Leipzig,  1885,  i.  321  f. ;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Aff<-,  Eng. 
tr.  1.2  [London,  1897]  p.  303 ff. ;  A.  C.  McGiflfert,  Apostolie  Age, 
Edinburgh,  1897,  p.  266  fl.  J  AMES  STRAHAN. 

ACHAICUS.  —  One  of  many  worthies  whose 
character  adorned  the  early  Church,  and  whose 
service  edified  it,  but  whom  we  know  only  by  a 
casual  reference  in  the  NT.  In  1  Co  16'^  St.  Paul 
rejoices  '  at  tiie  coming  of  Stephan.-is  and  Fortu- 
natus  and  Achaicus.'      Probably  they  formed  a 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


15 


deputation  from  the  Corintliian  Church ;  they 
luav  have  been  bearers  of  the  letter  of  inquiry 
which  St.  Paul  answers  in  ch.  7  ti'.  His  language 
suggests  that  their  coming  somewhat  reassuretl 
him  after  the  disquieting^ews  brought  by  Chloe's 
household,  and  other  ugly  ruujours  (I  Co  5'). 
Perhaps  they  represented  the  parties  in  Corinth ; 
yet  they  must  have  been  trusted  by  the  Church 
and  must  also  have  shown  themselves  loyal  to  the 
Apostle.  Achaicus  is  such  a  rare  name  that  some 
authorities  call  it  'Greek,'  others  '  Koman.'  The 
suggestion  that  Achaicus  was  a  slave — either  of 
Stephanas  or  of  Chloe — does  not  comport  either 
witli  his  position  as  a  delegate  or  with  St.  Paul's 
^peal  to  the  Church  to  'acknowledge  such,'  i.e. 
to  recognize  the  quality  of  their  service  and  to 
treat  them  with  becoming  deference. 

LiTRRATrKB. — Aitt.  ia  HDB  on  'Achaicus,'  and  'I.  Corinth- 
ians,' i.  4S7»  ;  Comm.  on  1  Cor.  by  Findlay  (EGT),950,  and  by 
Godet,  ii.  467  ;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  i.'-  [London, 
1S97]  pp.  113,  305,  319,  iL  [do.  ls95J  p.  320 ;  Expositor,  Sth  ser. 

i.  [1911]  341  f.  J.  E.  Roberts. 

ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES.— 

L  Text— 

1.  Greek  MSS. 

2.  The  Latin  Versions. 

3.  The  Syriac  Versions. 

4.  The  B^rjptian  Versionai 

5.  Secondary  Versions. 

6.  Early  Quotations. 

7.  Textual  theories  :  Westcott  and  Hort,  Bendel  Harris, 

Chase,  Blass,  von  Soden. 
n.  Tradition  as  to  authorship — 

1.  In  favour  of  Lucan  authorship. 

2.  Against  the  tradition. 

IIL  The  date  of  Acts  and  reception  in  the  Canon — 

1.  The  date  of  the  Lucan  Gospel. 

2.  The  abrupt  termination  of  Acts. 

3.  Knowledge  of  Josephus  in  Acts. 

4.  Reception  in  the  Canon. 
rV.  The  composition  of  Acts — 

1.  The  obvious  facts. 

2.  The  purpose  of  the  whole  narrative. 

5.  The  sources  used  in  Acts. 

(1)  The  we-clauses. 

(2)  The  earlier  chapters. 

(a)  The  Antiochene  tradition. 
(6)  The  Jerusalem  tradition. 

V.  Historical  value  of  the  various  traditions — 

1.  The  Gospel  of  Luke  and  Ac  1. 

2.  The  Jerusalem  and  Galilsan  traditions. 

VI.  Chronology  of  Acts — 

1.  The  death  of  Herod  Agrippa. 

2.  The  famine  in  Judsea. 

3.  Gallio's  proconsulate. 

4.  The  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  Rome. 

5.  The  arrival  of  Festus  in  Judaea. 
Vn.  The  theolo^-  of  Acta — 

1.  Christolo^y. 

2.  Eschatologj'. 

3.  The  OT  and  Jewish  Law, 

4.  The  Spirit. 

5.  Baptism. 

I.  Text. — The  text  of  the  Acts  is  preserved  in 
Greek  MSS,  in  Latin,  Syriac,  Sahidic,  Bohairic, 
Armenian,  and  other  secondary  Versions,  and 
quoted  extensively,  though  not  nearly  so  fully  as 
the  Gospels,  by  the  early  Fathers. 

1.  Greek  MSS.— The  most  complete  study  of  the 
whole  mass  of  Greek  MSS  is  that  of  von  Soden 
in  his  Schriften  des  Neuen  Testaments  (Berlin, 
1902-10).  As  his  grouping  of  the  MSS  is  almost 
entirely  independent  of  his  theories  as  to  the 
early  history  of  the  text,  and  represents  facts 
which  cannot  be  overlooked,  it  is  best  to  give  the 
main  outlines  of  his  classihcation,  dividing  the 
MSS  into  H,  K,  and  /  recensions,  and  following  his 
numeration  ;  in  the  brackets  are  given  the  numbers 
of  these  MSS  in  Gregory's  Prolegomena  to  Tischen- 
dorfs  Editio  Major  octava.  ft  has  not  seemed 
necessary  to  give  also  Gregory's  new  numeration, 
as  this  is  not  any  better  known  than  von  Sodens, 
and  does  not  belonf,'  (and  apparently  will  not 
belong  in  the  immediate  future)  to  a  full  critical 
edition. 


(1)  fl.— This  is  represented  by  SI  (B),  SZ  (*%  «3  (CX  84  (AX  46 
(<P),  M3  (13),  74  (389),  1008  (Pap.  Amh.  8.  ssc  v.-vi-X  103  (25), 
162  (61),  257  (33).  Of  these  MSS  SI  and  «2  represent  a  common 
archetype  il-2,  which  is  much  the  best  authority  for  U.  SI  is 
better  than  S2,  which  is,  however,  somewhat  better  in  Acta,  aptut 
from  soribal  errors,  than  it  is  in  the  Gospels.  74  and  162  »i« 
specially  good  representatives  of  //.  bat  no  sinple  witness  is 
free  from  K  or  I  contamination.  There  is  a  special  nexus  be- 
tween *48  and  257,  bat  *48  is  considerably  the  better  of  the  two. 

(2)  jBT.— It  is  impossible  to  give  here  the  full  list  of  K  MSS; 
roughly  speaking,  90  per  cent  of  the  later  MSS  belong  to  this 
type.  Two  groups  may  be  distinguished  from  ihe  purer  K 
MSS  :—Kr,  a  medisval  revision  of  K  for  lectionary  purposes, 
critically  quite  valueless ;  and  E<=,  a  text  with  enough  sporadic 
/  readings  to  raise  the  question  whether  it  be  not  an  1  text 
which  has  been  almost  wholly  corrected  to  a  f  standard ;  it  is 
called  K<^  because  MSS  of  this  tyjte  seem  to  be  represented  in 
the  Complutensian  edition. 

(3)  I. — The  /  recension  is  found  in  three  forms  :  /»  /*>  I".  /» 
is  best  represented  by  So  (D= Codex  Bezae*),  1001  (E= Codex 
Laudianus  t) ;  by  three  pairs  of  connected  MSS,  7  (Apl.  261>-264 
(233),  200  (S3)-3S2  (231),  70  (506>-101  (40) ;  and  by  a  few  other 
MSS  which  have  suffered  more  or  less  severely  from  K  con- 
tamination. It  is  also  well  represented  in  the  text  of  the  com- 
mentary of  Andreas  (A^P).  !*>  is  found  in  two  branches,  /w 
and  /ba.  The  best  representatives  of  /^i  are  62  (498),  5602  (200X 
365  (214=a'°')and  a  few  other  minuscules  ;  the  best  representa- 
tives of  i»>2  are  the  pair  78  ('  von  der  Goltz'a  MS ')  and  171  (7) 
which  are  almost  doublets,  and  157  (29).  /<:  is  also  found  in  two 
branches  /d  and  I-^-.  The  best  representatives  of  7=1  are  208  (307X 
370  (353),  116(  -),  551  (216) ;  the  best  representatives  of  lei  are 
364  (137)  J  and  a  series  of  other  MSS  contaminated  in  varying 
degrees  by  K. 

2.  The  Latin  Yersions.— The  Old  Latin  or  ante- 
HieronjTiiian  text  is  not  well  repre-sented.  As  in 
the  Gospels,  it  may  be  divided  into  two  main 
branches,  African  and  European. 

(1)  The  African  ia  represented  by  Codex  Floriacensis  (hX  now 
at  Paris,  formerly  at  Fleury,  containing  a  text  which  is  almost 
identical  with  that  of  Cj'prian  ;  it  is  in  a  very  fragmentary 
condition,  but  fortunately  the  quotations  of  Cyprian  and 
Augustine  (who  uses  an  African  text  in  Acts,  though  he 
follows  the  Vulgate  in  the  Gospels)  enable  much  of  the 
text  to  be  reconstructed.  (The  best  edition  of  h  is  by  E.  S. 
Buchanan,  Old  Latin  Biblical  Texts,  v.  [Oxford,  1907].)  Accord- 
ing to  Wordsworth  and  White,  a  later  form  of  the  African  text 
can  be  found  in  the  pseudo-Augustinian  de  Dirinig  Scripturisgive 
Speculum  (CSEL  xii.  2s7-700X  but  the  character  of  this  text 
is  still  somewhat  doubtful. 

(2)  The  European  text  is  best  represented  by  g  (Gigas)  at 
Stockholm,  which  can  be  supplemented  and  corrected  by  the 
quotations  in  Ambrosiaster  and  Lucifer  of  Cagliari  (see  esp. 
A.  Souter,  '  A  Study  of  Ambrosiaster,'  TS  vii.  4  (1905]X  A  branch 
of  the  European  text  of  a  Spanish  or  ProvenQal  type  is  found 
in  p,  a  Paris  MS  from  Perpignan,  and  in  w,  a  Bohemian  MS 
now  in  Wemigerode,  but  in  both  MSS  there  is  much  Tolgate 
contamination.  Other  primarily  European  mixed  MSS  ares, a 
Bobbio  palimpsest  (ssec.  v.-vi.)  at  Vienna,  x  in  Oxford,  and  g»  in 
Milan. 

A  Spanish  lectionary  of  perhaps  the  7th  cent,  known  as  the 
Liber  Comieut,  which  has  many  early  readings,  has  been  edited 
by  G.  Morin  from  a  Paris  MSof  the  11th  cent,  and  is  quoted 
by  Wordsworth  and  White  as  t. 

(3)  Besides  these  purely  Latin  MSS,  we  have  the  Latin  sides 
of  the  Gneco-Latin  MS  65  (D)  or  d  (Codex  Bezae),  and  of  the 
Latino-Greek  MS  1001  (E)  or  e.  The  latter  of  these  agrees  in 
the  main  with  the  European  text  as  established  by  g-Ambro- 
siaster-Lucifer,  but  the  text  of  d  is  in  many  ways  unique,  and 
may  possibly  have  been  made  for  the  private  use  of  the  owner 
of  So,  or  perhaps  of  the  archetype  of  So. 

(4)  The  I'ui/jate. — It  is  impossible  here  to  enumerate  the 
hundreds  of  Vulgate  MSS  of  the  Acts.  Their  study  is  a  special 
branch  of  investigation,  which  has  Uttle  bearing  on  the  Acts, 
and  for  all  purposes,  except  that  of  tracing  the  history  of  the 
Vulgate,  the  edition  of  Wordsworth  and  White  maj-  be  regarded 
as  sufficient. 

3.  The  Syriac  Versions.— It  is  probable  from 
the  quotations  in  Aphraates  and  Ephraim  that 
there  existed  originally  an  Old-Syriac  Version  of 
Acts,  coiTesponding  to  the  Evangelion  da-Mephar- 
re-ihe  represented  by  the  Curetonian  and  Sinaitic 
MSS  ;  but  no  MS  of  this  type  has  sur\ived- 

•  This  MS  is  adequately  described  by  F.  G.  Ken  von  (Handbook 
to  the  Textual  Criticigm  of  the  NT\  88  ff.)  or' in  other  well- 
known  handbooks. 

t  Besides  the  details  noted  in  the  handbooks,  it  should  be 
observed  that  this  MS,  after  being  used  by  Bede  in  North- 
umbria,  passed  to  Gemmny,  whence  it  was  probably  obtained  by 
Laud,  who  gave  it  to  the  Bodleian  Library. 

t  As  an  instance  of  the  advance  in  knowledge  which  von 
Soden's  labours  have  produced,  it  should  be  noted  that  this  MS 
used  to  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  principal  authorities  for  the 
'  Western '  text,  and  was  at  one  time  deemed  worthy  of  » 
separate  edition. 


16 


ACTS  OF  THK  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


(l)The  oldest  Syriac  Version  of  the  Acta  is  tlierefore  the 
Penhi(ta,  probably  made  bv  Habbula,  Bishop  of  Edesaa  (411- 
t35)  (see  V.  C.  Burkitt,  '  8.  Ephraim's  Quotations  from  the 
tio.spel,"  TS  vii.  2  IlOOl)  p.  67  f.)-  (A.  A'.— The  l'e8lu(,ta  is  quoted 
by  Tischendorf  as  Syr"''.) 

(2)  Besides  the  Peslii^ta  we  have  the  Uarklean  made  by 
Thomas  of  Ileraclea.  Tliis  was  Imsed  on  an  earlier  Syriac 
text,  ma<le  in  506  by  Polycarp  for  Philoxcnus,  Bishop  of 
Mabii^  (IlierapoliH,  the  modern  Membij  on  the  Euphrates), 
which  is  no  lon^j'T  extant  for  Acts.  Thomas  of  Heraclea 
rfvised  the  I'hiloxenian  with  the  help  of  Greek  M8S  in  the 
Library  of  the  Knaton  at  Alexandria,  and  enriched  his  edition 
with  a  number  of  critical  notes  t'ivinjr  the  variants  of  these 
Greek  MSS  which  often  have  a  most  remarkable  text  ajfreeinj; 
more  closely  with  Codex  Bezie  than  with  any  other  known 
Greek  MS.    (-V./J.— It  is  quoted  by  Tischendorf  as  SyrP.) 

(\i)  There  is  also  a  lectionary  of  the  so-called  '  i'alestinian ' 
tyi>e,  which  was  probably  in  use  about  the  7th  cent,  in  the 
neiffhbourhood  of  Antioch.  (On  the  nature  of  the  '  Palestinian ' 
Syriac  literature  see  F.  C.  Burkitt,  JThSt  ii.  [1901]  174-185.) 

4.  The  Egyptian  Versions.— The  two  Versions, 
Boliaiiic  and  8ahidic,  whicli  are  extant  for  the 
(rospels,  exist  al.so  for  Acts,  and  there  are  a  few 
fragments  of  Versions  in  otlier  dialects.  The  re- 
lative date  of  these  Versions  has  not  been  finally 
settled,  but  the  opinion  of  Coptic  scliolars  seems 
to  be  increasingly  in  favour  of  regarding  the  Sahidic 
as  the  older  form.  The  Bohairic  agrees  in  the 
main  with  the  H  text,  but  the  Sahidic  has  many 
/  readings  (see  E.  A.  W.  Budge,  Coptic  Biblical 
Texts,  London,  1912,  for  the  best  Sahidic  text). 

5.  Secondary  Versions. — Versions  of  Acts  are 
also  found  in  Arabic,  Armenian,  Ethiopic, 
Georgian,  Persian,  and  other  languages  ;  but  none 
of  them  is  of  primary  importance  for  the  text. 

6.  Quotations  in  early  writers. — The  earliest 
quotations  long  enough  to  have  any  value  for  de- 
termining the  text  are  in  Irenoeus,  fertullian,  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  may  be  regarded  as 
representing  the  text  of  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent,  in 
Gaul,  Africa,  and  Alexandria.  For  the  3rd  cent, 
we  have  Origen  and  Didymus,  representing  the 
Alexandrian  school ;  Cyprian  for  Africa,  and  No- 
vatian  for  Italy.  For  the  4th  cent.  Athanasius 
and  Cyril  represent  the  later  development  of  the 
Alexandria  text ;  Lucifer,  Jerome,  and  Ambrosi- 
aster  represent  the  text  of  Rome  and  Italy ; 
Augustine,  that  of  Africa ;  Eusebius  and  Cyril  of 
.lerusalem  the  Palestinian  text,  which  accorcling  to 
von  Soden  is  /;  the  later  Church  writers  mostly 
use  the  K  text,  though  they  sometimes  show  traces 
of  probably  local  contamination  with  //  and  /. 

7.  Textual  theories. — As  soon  as  textual  criticism 
began  to  be  based  on  any  complete  view  of  the 
evidence,  it  became  obvious  that  the  chief  feature 
to  be  accounted  for  in  the  text  of  Acts  was  the 
existence  of  a  series  of  additions  in  the  text  in  the 
Latin  Versions  and  Fathers,  usually  supported  by 
the  two  great  bilingual  MSS  55  and  1001  (D  and  E), 
fre<|uentTy  by  the  marginal  readings  in  Syr"^"^', 
and  sporadically  by  a  few  minuscules  ;  opposed  to 
this  interpolated  text  stood  the  Alexandrian  text 
of  51,  52  (B  N),  and  their  allies  ;  while  between  the 
two  was  the  text  of  the  mass  of  MSS  agreeing 
sometimes  with  one,  sometimes  with  the  other, 
and  sometimes  combining  both  readings. 

(1)  The  first  really  plausible  theory  to  meet  even 
part  of  the  facts  was  Westcott  and  Hort's  (77tc 
New  Testament  in  Greek,  vol.  ii.  [Cambridge, 
1882]),  who  suggested  that  the  later  text  (K)  was 
a  recension  based  on  the  two  earlier  types.  They 
regarded  55  (Codex  Bezse)  as  representinjj  the 
'  VVestem '  text,  and  51  and  52  as  representing  as 
nearly  as  possible  the  original  text.  The  weak 
point  in  their  theory  was  that  they  could  not 
explain  the  existence  of  the  Western  text. 

(2)  Founded  mainly  on  the  basis  of  their  work,  two 
theories  were  suggested  to  supply  this  deficiency. 

(a)  Kendel  Harris  ('  A  Study  of  Codex  Bezte  in 
TS  ii.  1  [1891],  and  Four  Lcrtures  on  the  Western 
Text,  Cambridge,  1894)  and  F.  H.  Chase  [The  Old 
Syriac  Element  in  the  Text  of  Codex  Bezce,  London, 


1893)  thought  that  retranslation  from  Latin  and 
Syriac  would  solve  the  problem  ;  but  no  amount 
or  retranslation  will  account  for  the  relatively 
long  Bezan  additions. 

(h)  F.  }i[a.»H  {Acta  Apostolorumsecjmdumforjiutm 

fmce  vidctur  Jiomanam,  Leipzig,  1897,  and  also  in 
lis  commentary.  Acta  Apostulorurn,  Gottingen, 
1895)  thought  that  liuke  issued  the  Acts  in  two 
forms  :  one  to  Theophilus  (the  Alexandrian  text), 
and  the  other  for  Rome  (the  Western  text) ;  but 
his  reconstruction  of  the  Roman  text  is  scarcely 
satisfactory,  and  the  style  of  the  additionb  is  not 
sufhciently  Lucan. 

(3)  More  recently  von  Soden  {Die  Schriften  des 
Neuen  Testaments,  1902-1910,  p.  1834  tf.),  using 
the  new  facts  as  to  the  MSS  summarized  above, 
has  revived  Blas.s's  theory  in  so  far  that  he  thinks 
that  the  interpolated  text  witnessed  to  by  55  and 
the  Latin  Versions  and  Fathers  really  goes  back 
to  a  single  original ;  but,  instead  of  assigning  this 
original  to  Luke,  he  attributes  it  to  Tatian,  who, 
he  thinks,  added  a  new  recension  of  Acts  to  his 
Diatcssarun.  The  weak  point  in  this  theory  is 
that  the  only  evidence  that  Tatian  edited  the  Acts 
is  a  passage  in  Eusebius  *  which  states  that  he 
emended  'the  Apostle.'  This  may  refer  to  Acts, 
but  more  probably  refers  to  the  Epistles.  Accord- 
ing to  von  Soden,  the  /  text  did  not  contain  all 
the  interpolations,  K  contained  still  fewer,  and  U 
contained  none.  He  thinks  that  in  the  2nd  cent, 
there  existed  side  by  side  the  Tatianic  text  and  a 
non-interpolated  text  which  he  calls  I-II-K.  From 
these  two  texts  there  arose  the  Latin  Version — 
predominantly  Tatianic — and  most  of  the  early 
Fathers  were  influenced  by  Tatian.  Later  on,  in 
the  4th  cent.,  three  revisions  were  made  :  (a)  U,  by 
Hesychius  in  Alexandria,  wliicli  preserved  in  the 
main  the  text  of  I-II-K  without  the  Tatianic  ad- 
ditions, but  with  a  few  other  corruptions ;  (b)  K, 
by  Lucian,  in  Antioch,  which  had  many  Tatianic 
corruptions,  as  well  as  some  of  its  own  ;  (c)  /,  in 
Palestine,  possibly  in  Jerusalem,  which  preserved 
many  Tatianic  additions,  though  in  a  few  cases 
keeping  the  I-H-K  text  against  //.  55  (D)  is  the 
best  example  of  this  text,  but  has  sufi'ered  from 
the  addition  of  a  much  greater  degree  of  Tatianic 
corruption  tlian  really  belongs  to  the  /  text,  owing 
to  Latin  influence. 

The  general  relations  of  the  various  forms  of  the 
text,  according  to  von  Soden,  can  be  shown  roughly 
in  the  following  diagram  : 

I-H'K 


/» 


/b         ic     ir  ic 


Obviously  this  complicated  theory  cannot  be 
dismissed  without  much  more  attention  than  it 
has  yet  received.  It  may  jirove  that  the  '  text 
^vith  additions '  is  not  Tatianic  but  is  neverthele.ss 
a  single  text  in  origin.  It  is  also  very  desirable 
to  investigate  how  far  it  is  possible  to  prove  that 
there  was  an  /  text,  derived  from  I-H-K,  which 

•  ToO  i'  airooToAou  0a(ri  To\/ui^<rot  Tti»a«  ovrbf  ii€Taif>paa-ai  ^xofai 
OK  (mSioitOovntfov  avriov  ttji'  ttjs  <^pair(wt  avvTa^tv  (Eus.  IlK  iv. 
29.  (().  This  scarcely  soumls  as  though  a  scries  of  interpolations 
was  intended. 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


17 


nevertheless  did  not  possess,  in  its  original  state, 
all  the  '  Bezan '  interpolations.*  If  it  were  possible 
to  say  that  the  interpolations  were  a  connected 
series  (whether  Tatianio  or  not  is  of  minor  im- 
portance), the  text  in  which  they  are  imbedded 
would  become  extremely  valuable,  and  we  should 
have  no  right  to  argue,  as  is  now  often  done,  that, 
l)ecause  the  interpolations  are  clearly  wrong,  there- 
fore the  text  in  which  they  are  found  is  to  be 
condemned.  For  instance,  in  Ac  15*  the  Latin 
text  interpolates  the  Golden  Rule  into  the  Apos- 
tolic decrees.  That  is  no  doubt  wrong.  But  it 
does  not  follow  that  the  text  omitting  tviktoO,  in 
^vhich  this  interpolation  is  placed,  is  not  original. 

LrrraLATms. — The  general  textual  question  can  be  studied 
in  H.  von  Soden,  Die  Sehriften  des  ST,  Berlin,  1903-1910,  esp. 
pp.  1649-1S40  ;  F.  G.  Kenyon,  Handbook  to  the  Textual  Cnti- 
eism  of  the  yj^,  London,  1912  ;  E.  Nestle,  Ein/uhrung  in  da* 
griech.  ST^,  Gottingen,  1909  (the  Eng.  tr.  is  from  an  older 
edition  of  the  period  before  von  Soden) ;  K.  Lake,  The  Text  of 
the  XT^,  London,  1911.  Important  for  the  study  of  the  Lacin 
are  von  Soden,  '  Das  lat.  XT  in  Afrika  zur  Zeit  Cyprians,'  TCf 
xxiiii.  [Leipzig,  1909];  and  Wordsworth-WTiite,  Sob.  Tett. 
Dam.  Twst.  let.  Christi  teeitndum  edit,  S.  Hieronymi,  voL  ii. 
pt.  L  [Oxford,  1905]  which  also  gives  a  clear  statement  of  the 
beet  editions  of  the  separate  MSS  of  the  Old  Latin  and  the 
Vulgate  (pp.  T-xv). 

II.  Tradition  as  to  Authorship.— So  far 
back  as  tradition  goes,  the  Acts  is  ascribed  to  St. 
Luke,  the  author  of  the  Third  (Jospel,  and  com- 
panion of  St.  Paul  (see,  further,  LtTKE).  This 
tradition  can  be  traced  back  to  the  end  of  the  2nd 
cent.  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  12 ;  Tertull.  de  Jejuniis, 
10;  Iren.  adv.  Hccr.  l.  xxiiL  1,  in.  xii.  12 ff., 
IV.  XV.  1 ;  and  the  Canon  of  Muratori).  If  the 
connexion  with  the  Third  Gk>spel  be  accepted,  as 
it  certainly  ought  to  be,  the  fact  that  Marcion 
used  the  (jospel  is  evidence  for  the  existence  of 
Acts,  imless  it  be  thought  that  the  Gospel  was 
written  by  a  contemporary  of  Marcion  who  had 
not  yet  written  Acts.  Farther  back  tradition  does 
not  take  us :  there  are  no  clear  proofs  of  the  use 
of  Acts  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers  (see  The  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  Oxford,  1905)  or  in 
the  early  Apologists.  (For  the  later  traditions 
concerning  Luke  and  his  writings  see  LlTKE. ) 

The  value  of  this  tradition  must  necessarily  de- 
pend on  the  internal  eWdence  of  the  book  itself. 
The  arguments  can  best  be  arranged  under  the 
two  heads  of  favourable  and  unfavourable  to  the 
tradition. 

1.  In  fayoor  of  the  traulition  of  Lake's  author- 
ship is  the  evidence  of  the  '  we-sections,'  or  pass- 
ages in  which  the  wTriter  speaks  in  the  first  person. 
These  are  Ac  W^"  20*  2li8  27^  28»«.  They  form 
together  an  apparent  extract  from  a  diary,  which 
begins  in  Troas  and  breaks  olf  in  Philippi,  on  St. 
Paul's  second  journey ;  begins  again  in  Philippi, 
on  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem  ;  and  continues 
(with  only  the  apparent  break  of  the  episode  of  St. 
Paul  and  the  Ephesian  elders  [20'*-*®]  which  is  told 
in  the  third  person)  until  Jerusalem  is  reached  and 
St.  Paul  goes  to  see  James  ;  then  breaks  otf  again 
during  St.  Paul's  imprisonment  in  Jerusalem  and 
Caesarea ;  begins  again  when  St.  Paul  leaves 
Caesarea  ;  and  continues  untU  the  arrival  in  Home, 
when  it  finally  ceases. 

It  is,  of  course,  theoretically  possible  that  these 
sections  are  merely  a  literary  fiction,  but  this 
possibility  is  excluded  by  the  facts  (a)  that  there 
is  no  conceivable  reason  why  the  writer  should 
adopt  this  form  of  •writing  at  these  points,  and 
these  only,  in  his  narrative ;  (b)  that  by  the 
general  consent  of  critics  these  passages  have  all 
the  signs  of  having  really  been  composed  by  an 
eye-\\itness  of  the  events  described.     It  is,  there- 

*  The  de  Rebaptigmate  has  not  yet  been  sufficiently  studied 
from  this  point  of  riew.  A  nionc^raph  analyzing  its  evidence 
on  the  lines  of  F.  C.  Burkitf  s  Old  Latin  avd  the  Itala  might 
be  valuable. 

VOL,  I. — 2 


fore,  only  necessary  to  consider  the  other  possi- 
bilities:  (1)  that  we  have  here  from  the  writer  of 
the  whole  work  the  description  of  incidents  which 
he  had  himself  seen ;  (2)  that  the  writer  is  here 
using  an  extract  from  the  \*-riting  of  an  eye-wit- 
ness and  has  preserved  the  original  idiom. 

The  only  way  of  deciding  between  these  two 
possibilities  is  to  make  use  of  literary  criteria,  and 
this  has  been  done  in  recent  years  with  especial 
thoroughness  by  Hamack  in  Germany  and  Hawkins 
in  England.  For  any  full  statement  of  the  case 
reference  must  be  made  to  their  books ;  the  prin- 
ciple, however,  and  the  main  results  can  be 
summarized. 

If  the  writer  of  Acts  is  merely  using  the  first 

Eerson  in  order  to  show  that  he  is  claiming  to 
ave  been  an  eye-witness,  the  writer  of  the  'we- 
clauses'  is  identical  ^vith  the  redactor  of  the 
Gospel  and  Acts.  Now,  in  the  Gospel  we  know 
that  he  was  using  Mark  in  many  places,  and,  by 
noting  the  redactorial  changes  in  tlie  Marcan  sec- 
tions of  Luke,  we  can  establish  his  preference  for 
certain  idioms.  If  these  idioms  constantly  recur 
in  the  '  we-clauses,'  it  must  be  either  because  the 
'  we-clauses  '  were  written  by  the  redactor,  or  be- 
cause the  redactor  also  revised  the  'we-clauses,' 
but  without  changing  the  idiom.  As  a  fact  we 
find  that  the  '  we-clauses '  are  more  marked  by  the 
characteristic  phraseology  of  the  redactor  than 
any  other  part  of  the  Gospel  or  Acts.  We  are, 
therefore,  apparently  reduced  to  a  choice  between 
the  theory  that  the  redactor  of  the  Gospel  and  Acts 
wrote  the  '  we-clanses,'  and  the  theory  that  he 
redacted  them  with  more  care  than  any  other  part 
of  his  compilation,  except  that  he  allowed  the  first 
person  to  stand.  The  former  view  certainly  seems 
the  more  probable,  but  not  suflBcient  attention  has 
been  paid  to  the  observation  of  E.  Schiirer  {ThLZ, 
1906,  col.  405)  that  the  facts  would  also  be  ex- 
plained if  the  ^^-riter  of  the  '  we-clauses '  and  the 
redactor  of  Acts  came  from  the  same  Bildungs- 
sphdre.  It  would  be  well  if  some  later  analyst 
would  eliminate  from  both  sides  the  idioms  which 
are  common  to  all  writers  of  good  Greek  at  the 
period,  for  undoubtedly  an  element  of  exaggera- 
tion is  introduced  by  the  fact  that  in  the  Marcan 
source  there  were  many  vulgarisms  which  all  re- 
dactors would  have  altered,  and  mostly  in  the  same 
way.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  there  are  a 
few  '  Lucanisms '  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
'we-clauses.' 

The  details  on  which  this  argument  is  baaed  will  be  found 
best  in  J.  C.  Hawkins,  Hora  S^optiete^,  Oxford,  1909,  pp.  174- 
193 ;  A.  Hamack,  Lutas  der  Arzt,  Leipzig,  1906,  pp.  19-85. 
There  is  also  a  good  resume  in  J,  MofiEatt,  LNT,  p.  294  ff. 

2.  Against  the  tradition  it  is  urged  (1)  that  the 
presentment  of  St,  Paul  is  quite  difierent  from 
that  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  (2)  that  on  definite 
facts  of  history  the  Acts  and  Epistles  contradict 
each  other ;  and  it  is  said  in  each  case  that  these 
facts  exclude  the  possibility  that  the  writer  of 
Acts  was  Luke  the  companion  of  St,  Paul. 

(1)  The  presentment  of  St.  Paul  in  the  Epistles 
and  in  Acts. — It  has  lieen  urged  as  a  proof  that 
the  writer  of  Acts  could  not  have  been  a  companion 
of  St.  Paul,  that  whereas  St.  Paul  in  the  Epistles 
is  completely  emancipated  from  Jewish  thought 
and  practice,  he  is  represented  in  the  Acts  as  stiU 
loyal  to  the  Law  himself,  and  enjoining  its  observ- 
ance on  Jews,  The  points  which  are  really  crucial 
in  this  argument  are  (a)  St.  Paul's  circumcision  of 
Timothy  (Ac  16*),  as  contra-sted  with  his  teaching 
as  to  circumcision  in  the  Epistles  ;  (^)  his  accept- 
ance of  Jewish  practice  while  he  was  in  Jerusalem 
(Ac  21*"^-),  as  contrasted  with  his  Epistles,  espe- 
cially Galatians  and  Romans  ;  {y)  the  absence  of 
'  Pauline '  doctrine  in  the  speeches  in  Acts  ;  (S)  St, 
Paul's  acceptance  of  a  compromise  at  the  Apostolic 


18 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


Council  (Ac  15),  as  contrasted  with  the  complete 
silence  of  the  Epistles  as  to  this  agreement. 

if  these  four  propositions  were  sound,  they  would 
certainly  be  strong  evidence  against  the  Lucan 
authorship  of  Acts.  But  there  is  much  to  be  said 
against  each  of  them  on  the  following  lines. 

(a)  In  Ac  16^  bt.  Paul  circumcises  Timothy,  but 
the  reason  given  is  that  he  was  partly  Jewisli. 
There  is  no  evidence  in  the  Epistles  that  the 
Apostle  would  ever  have  refused  circumcision  to  a 
Jew  :  it  was  part  of  the  Law,  and  the  Law  was 
valid  for  Jews.  The  argument  in  the  Epistles  is 
that  it  is  not  valid  for  Gentiles ;  and,  though 
logic  ought  j)erhaps  to  have  led  St.  Paul  to  argue 
that  Jews  also  ought  to  abandon  it,  there  is  no 
proof  that  he  ever  did  so.  It  is  also  claimed  that 
the  incident  of  Titus  in  Gal  2*  shows  St.  Paul's 
strong  objection  to  circumcision  ;  but  in  tlie  first 
place  it  is  empliatically  stated  that  Titus  was  not 
a  Jew,  and  in  the  second  place  it  is  quite  doubtful 
whetlier  Gal  2*  means  that  Titus,  being  a  Greek, 
was  not  compelled  to  be  circumcised,  or  that, 
being  a  Greek,  he  was  not  compelled  to  be  circum- 
cised, though  as  an  act  of  grace  he  actually  was 
circumcised.  (^)  It  is  quite  true  that  in  Ac  2P"''- 
St.  Paul  accei>ts  Jewish  custom  :  what  is  untrue  is 
that  it  can  be  shown  from  his  own  writings  that 
he  was  likely  to  refuse.  (7)  There  certainly  is  an 
absence  ot  '  Pauline '  doctrine  in  the  speeches  in 
the  Acts,  if  we  accept  tlie  reconstructions  which 
are  based  on  the  view  that  in  the  Epistles  we  have 
a  complete  exposition  of  St.  Paul's  teaching.  But, 
if  we  realize  that  the  Epistles  represent  his  treat- 
ment by  letter  of  points  which  he  had  failed  to 
bring  liome  to  his  converts  while  he  was  with 
them,  or  of  special  controversies  due  to  the  arrival 
of  otlier  teachers,  there  is  really  nothing  to  be 
said  against  the  picture  given  in  the  Acts.  (5)  If 
the  exegesis  and  text  of  Acts  be  adopted  which 
regard  the  Apostolic  decrees  as  a  compromise 
based  on  food-laws,  it  is  certainly  very  strange 
that  St.  Paul  should  have  said  nothing  about  it  in 
Galatians  or  Corinthians,  and  this  undoubtedly 
afl'ords  a  reasonable  argument  for  thinking  that 
the  account  in  Ac  15  is  unhistorical,  and  tliat  it 
cannot  have  been  the  work  of  liuke.  But  it  must 
be  remembered  that  there  is  serious  reason  for 
doubting  (i.)  that  the  text  and  exegesis  of  Ac  15^ 
point  either  to  a  food-law  or  to  a  compromise, 
(ii.)  that  Galatians  was  written  after  the  Council 
(see  G.  Kesch,  '  Das  Aposteldecret,'  TU  xxviii. 
[lUO.j]  3;  J.  Wellhausen,  '  Noten  zur  Apostel- 
geschichte,'  in  GGN,  Gottingen,  1907;  A.  Harnack, 
Apostelgcschichte,  Leipzig,  1908,  p.  188  11". ;  K.  Lake, 
Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  London,  1911,  pp. 
29ff.,48ff.). 

(2)  Rather  more  serious  are  the  objections  raised 
to  the  accuracy  of  certain  definite  statements,  in  tlie 
light  of  contracting  statements  in  the  Epistles,  and 
the  conclusion  suggested  that  the  writer  of  Acts 
cannot  have  been  a  companion  of  St.  Paul.  Many 
objections  of  this  kind  luive  been  made,  but  the 
majority  are  trivial,  and  the  serious  ones  are  really 
only  the  following :  (a)  the  description  of  glos-solalia 
in  Ac  2  as  compared  with  1  Co  12  If.  ;  (b)  the 
account  of  St.  Paul's  visits  to  Jerusalem  in  Acts 
as  compared  with  Gal  2  ;  (c)  the  movements  of  St. 
Paul's  companions  in  ^lacedonia  and  Achaia  in 
Ac  17'*  18'  as  compared  with  1  Th  3"«. 

(a)  The  account  given  of  glossolalia  in  1  Co  14 
shows  that  it  was  in  the  main  unintelligible  to 
ordinary  persons.  '  He  that  sj)caketh  in  a  tongue 
edifieth  himself,  but  he  that  prophesieth  eilifieth 
the  congregation  '  (1  Co  14* ;  cf.  vv.*-  "•  ^);  'If  any 
man  speaketh  in  a  tongue  let  one  interpret' 
(1  Co  14^^).  On  the  other  hand,  the  narrative  in 
Ac  2  de.scril)es  the  glossolalia  of  the  disciples  as  a 
miraculous  gift  of  speech  that  was  simultaneously 


intelligible  to  foreigners  of  various  nations,  each 
of  whom  thought  that  he  was  listening  to  his  own 
language.  It  is  argued  that  this  latter  glossolalia 
is  as  unknown  to  the  historian  of  psycliology  as 
the  glossolalia  described  in  1  Cor.  is  well  known  ; 
and  it  is  suggested  that  Luke  or  his  source  has 
given  a  wrong  account  of  the  matter.  In  support 
of  this  it  must  be  noted  that  the  immediate  judg- 
ment of  the  crowd,  on  first  hearing  the  glossolalia 
of  the  disciples,  was  that  they  were  drunk,  and 
Peter's  speech  was  directed  against  this  imputa- 
tion. It  is  not  probable  that  any  foreigner  ever 
accused  any  one  of  being  drunk  because  he  could 
understand  him,  and  so  far  the  account  in  Acts  may 
be  regarded  as  carrying  its  own  conviction,  and 
showing  tliat  behind  the  actual  text  there  is  an 
earlier  tradition  whicli  described  a  glossolalia  of 
the  same  kind  as  that  in  1  Co  12-14.  But,  if  so, 
is  it  probable  that  a  companion  of  St.  Pa\il  would 
liJive  put  forward  so  'un-Pauline'  a  description  of 
glossolalia?  There  is  certainly  some  weight  in  this 
argument ;  but  it  is  to  a  large  extent  discounted 
by  the  following  considerations.  (a)  It  is  not 
known  that  Luke  was  ever  with  St.  I'aul  at  any 
exhibition  of  glossolalia.  Certainly  there  is  no- 
thing in  Acts  to  suggest  that  he  was  in  Corinth. 
(/3)  In  all  probability  we  have  to  desil  with  a  tra- 
dition which  the  writer  of  Acts  found  in  existence 
in  Jerusalem  more  than  twenty  years  after  the 
events  described.  Let  any  one  try  to  find  out,  by 
asking  surviving  witnesses,  exactly  what  hai)pened 
at  an  excited  revivalist  meeting  twenty  years  ago, 
and  he  will  see  that  there  is  room  for  considerable 
inaccuracy.  (7)  To  us  glossolalia  of  the  Pauline 
type  is  a  known  phenomenon  and  probable  for  that 
reason  ;  it  is  a  purely  j)hysical  and  almost  patho- 
logical result  of  religious  emotion,  while  glossolalia 
of  the  '  foreign  language '  type  as  de-scribed  in  Acts 
is  improbable.  But  to  a  Christian  of  the  1st  cent, 
both  were  wonderful  manifestations  of  the  Spirit, 
and  neither  was  more  probable  than  the  other. 

The  whole  Question  of  elossolalia  can  be  studied  in  H.  Gun- 
kel,  Die  M'irkungen  des  keiligen  Geisteg,  Oottiiigen,  18!)9  ;  H. 
Lietzmann's  Commentary  on  I  Cor.  in  his  Handhnch  ztun  NT, 
iii.  2,  Tubingen,  1909;  J.  Weiss,  '1  Cor."  in  Meyer's  Krit.-Ex*g. 
Kommentar,  Gottingen,  1910  (9th  ed.  o(  '1  Cor.')- 

(b)  The  accounts  given  in  Acts  and  Galatians  of 
St.  Paul's  visits  to  Jerusalem. — The  points  of 
divergence,  which  are  serious,  are  concerned  with 
(a)  St.  Paul's  actions  immediately  after  the  con- 
version ;  (^)  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  ;  (7)  his 
second  visit  to  Jerusalem. 

(a)  St.  PauVs  actions  immediately  after  the  con- 
version.— The  two  accounts  of  this  comjdex  of  in- 
cidents are  Ac  g'""**  and  Gal  P"-^.  The  main 
points  in  the  two  narratives  may  be  arranged  thus 
in  parallel  columns  : — 


Acts. 


OALATIANg. 


1.  Visit  to  Damascus  imniedi-    1.  Visit  to  Arabia  innncdiately 

ately  after  the  conversion.  after  the  conversion. 

2.  Escape  from  Damascus  and     _.  A  '  return  '  to  Damascus. 

journey  to  Jfrusalem. 

3.  Retreat  from  Jerusalem  to    o.  A  visit  to  Jerusalem  '  after 

Tarsus  in  Ciliuia.  throe  years.' 

4.  Departure  to  tlie  'districts 
of  Syria  and  Cilicia.' 

The  ditVerence  l)ctwccn  these  accounts  is  obvious, 
and  it  is  hard  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  Acts  is 
here  inaccurate.  It  should  be  noted,  however, 
that  the  inaccuracy  apparently  consists  in  tele- 
scoping together  two  visits  to  Damascus  and  omit- 
ting the  Arabian  journey  which  came  between  them. 
St.  Paul,  by  speaking  of  his  '  return '  to  Damascus, 
implies  that  tlie  conversion  had  been  in  that  city, 
and  in  2  Co  ll''"'  ('in  Danuuscus  the  ethnarch  of 
Aretas  the  king  guarded  the  citj'  of  the  Damas- 
cenes to  take  me,  and  I  was  let  down  in  a  basket 
through  a  window ')  we  have  a  corroboration  of  the 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


19 


escape  mentioned  in  Acts,  though  it  clearly  must 
come  after  the  visit  (probably  of  a  missionarj- 
charactei)  to  Arabia,  in  order  to  account  for  the 
hostility  of  Aretas.  Thus,  so  far  as  the  enumera- 
tion of  events  is  concerned,  the  inaccuracy  of  Acts 
resolves  itself  into  the  omission  of  the  Arabian 
visit,  and  the  consequent  telescoping  together  of 
two  visits  to  Damascus  along  with  a  proportion- 
ate shortening  of  the  chronology. 

(/3)  St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Jei-usalem. — The  de- 
tails of  this  >-isit  are  a  more  serious  matter,  and 
Acts  and  Galatians  cannot  fully  be  reconciled,  as 
is  plain  when  the  narratives  are  arranged  in 
parallel  columns. 


'  And  when  he  was  come  to 
Jerusalem,  he  assayed  to  join 
himself  to  the  disciples  :  and 
they  were  all  afraid  of  him, 
not  believing  that  he  was  a 
disciple.  But  Barnabas  took 
him,  and  brought  hiiu  to  the 
apostles,  and  declared  unto 
them  how  he  had  seen  the 
Lord  in  the  wa}',  and  that  he 
had  spoken  to  him,  and  how 
at  Damascus  he  had  preached 
boldly  in  the  name  of  Jesus. 
And  he  was  with  them  going 
in  and  coming  out  at  Jeru- 
salem, and  he  spake  and  dis- 
puted against  the  Hellenists ; 
but  they  went  about  to  kill 
him.' 


Gal  !»■» 

'  After  three  years  I  went  up 
to  Jerusalem  to  become  ac- 
quainted with  Cephas,  and 
tarried  with  him  fifteen  days. 
But  other  of  the  apostles  saw 
I  none,  save  James  the  Lord's 
brother.  Now  touching  the 
things  which  I  write  to  you, 
before  God,  I  lie  not.  Then  I 
came  into  the  districts  of  Syria 
and  Cilicia.  And  I  was  still 
unknown  by  face  unto  the 
churches  of  Judaea  which  were 
in  Christ :  but  they  only  heard 
say.  He  that  persecuted  us 
once  now  preacheth  the  faith 
of  which  he  once  made  havoc' 


No  argument  can  alter  the  fact  that  Acts  speaks 
of  a  period  of  preaching  in  Jerusalem  which 
attracted  sufficient  attention  to  endanger  St. 
Paul's  Ufe,  while  Galatians  describes  an  essentially 
private  visit  to  Peter ;  probably  both  documents 
refer  to  the  same  visit,  as  they  place  it  between 
St.  Paul's  departure  from  Damascus  and  his 
arrival  in  Cilicia,  but  they  give  divergent  accounts 
of  it. 

(y)  St.  Paul's  second  visit  to  Jet~usalem. — It  is 
possible  that  the  difficulties  here  are  due  to  a  mis- 
taken exegesis  rather  than  to  any  real  divergence 
between  Acts  and  Galatians.  If  we  start  from  the 
facts,  it  is  clear  that  St.  Paul  describes  in  Gal  2^"'" 
his  second  visit  to  Jerusalem.  In  the  course  of  this 
he  held  a  private  inteni'iew  with  the  apostles  in 
Jerusalem,  in  consequence  of  which  he  was  free 
to  continue  his  preaching  to  the  Gentiles  without 
hindrance.  It  is  also  clear  from  Ac  11^*'  12-'*  that 
St.  Paul's  second  visit  to  Jerusalem  was  during 
the  time  of  the  famine.  If  we  accept  the  identi- 
hcation  of  the  second  visit  according  to  Acts  with 
tlie  second  %-isit  according  to  Galatians,  there  is  no 
ditliculty  beyond  the  fact  that  Acts  does  not  state 
that  St.  Paul  and  the  other  apostles  discussed  their 
respective  missions  when  they  met  in  Jerusalem  ; 
but,  since  this  discussion  altered  nothing  —  the 
Gentile  mission  had  already  begim — there  was  no 
special  reason  why  Luke  should  have  mentioned 
it.  Usually,  however,  critics  have  assumed  that 
the  >isit  to  Jerusalem  mentioned  in  Gal  2''^"  is  not 
the  second  but  the  third  \\s,\t  referred  to  in  Acts, 
so  that  the  interview  with  the  apostles  described  in 
Gal  2  is  identified  with  the  '  Ajxjstolic  Council '  in 
Ac  15.  Great  difficulties  then  arise  :  it  is  obviously 
essential  to  St.  Paul's  argument  that  he  should 
not  omit  any  of  his  visits  to  Jerusalem,  and  it  is 
not  easy  to  understand  why,  if  he  is  writing  after 
the  Apostolic  Council,  he  does  not  mention  the 
decrees.  There  would  seem  to  have  been  a  party 
in  Galatia  which  urged  that  circumcision  was 
necessary  for  all  Christians  ;  this  point  had  been 
settled  at  tlie  Apostolic  Council.  If  the  Council 
had  taken  place,  w  by  did  St.  Paul  not  say  at  once 
that  the  judaizing  attitude  had  been  condemned 
by  the  heads  of  the  Jerusalem  Church  ? 


The.se  difficulties  have  been  met  in  England  since 
the  time  of  Liglitfoot  by  assuming  that  the  Apos- 
tolic decrees  had  only  a  local  and  ephemeral  import- 
ance, in  which  case  it  does  not  seem  obvious  why 
they  are  given  so  prominent  a  place  in  Acts.  In 
Germany  this  difficulty  has  been  more  fully  ap- 

Ereciated,  and  either  the  account  in  Ac  15 — iaenti- 
ed  with  Gal  2 — has  been  abajidoned  as  wholly 
unhistorical,  or  the  suggestion  has  been  made  that 
the  account  in  Gal  2  is  really  a  more  accurate 
statement  of  what  happened  during  St.  Paul's 
interview  with  the  apostles,  which  probably 
took  place  during  the  famine,  while  the  '  decrees ' 
mentioned  in  Acts  really  belong  to  a  later  period 
— perhaps  St.  Paul's  last  visit  to  Jerusalem — and 
have  been  misplaced  by  Luke. 

All  these  suggestions  (and  a  dififerent  combination 
is  given  by  almost  every  editor)  agree  in  giving 
up  the  accuracy  of  Ac  15.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
the  view  be  taken  that  Gal  2  refers  to  an  interview 
between  St.  Paul  and  the  Jerusalem  apostles 
during  the  time  of  the  famine,  and  that  it  settled 
not  the  question  of  circumcision,  but  that  of 
continuing  the  mission  to  the  Gentiles  which  had 
been  begun  in  Antioch,  there  is  no  further  diffi- 
culty in  thinking  tliat  Ac  15  represents  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  question  of  circumcision  which 
inevitably  arose  as  soon  as  the  Gentile  mission 
expanded.  It  is,  therefore,  desirable  to  ask 
whether  the  reasons  for  identifying  Gal  2  and 
Ac  15  are  decisive.  The  classical  statement  in  Eng- 
lish is  that  of  Lightfoot  [Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
p.  1 23  ff. ),  who  formulates  it  by  saying  that  there 
is  an  identity  of  geography,  persons,  subject  of 
dispute,  character  of  the  conference,  and  result. 
Of  these  identities  only  the  first  is  fully  accurate  ; 
and  it  applies  equally  well  to  the  visit  to  Jerusalem 
in  the  time  of  the  famine.  The  persons  are  not 
quite  the  same,  for  Titus  and  Jolm  are  not 
mentioned  in  Acts.  The  subject  is  not  the  same 
at  all,  for  in  Galatians  the  question  of  the  Law 
is  not  discussed  (and  was  apparently  raised  only 
by  St.  Peters  conduct  later  on  in  Antioch),  but 
merely  Avhether  the  mission  to  the  oncircnmcised 
should  be  continued,*  while  in  Acts  the  circum- 
cision of  the  Gentiles  is  the  main  point^.  The 
character  of  the  conference  is  not  the  same  at 
all,  for  in  Galatians  it  is  a  private  discussion, 
in  Acts  a  full  meeting  of  the  Church ;  and  the 
result  is  not  the  same,  for  the  one  led  up  to  the 
Apostolic  decrees,  while  the  other  apparently  did 
not  do  so.  Lightfoot  to  some  extent  weakens 
these  objections  by  suggesting  that  St  Paul  de- 
scribes a  private  conference  before  the  Council, 
but  in  so  doing  he  weakens  his  own  case  still  more, 
for  he  can  give  no  satisfactory  reason  why  St. 
Paul  should  carefully  describe  a  private  conference, 
but  omit  the  public  meeting  and  official  result  to 
which  it  was  preliminarj-. 

Thus,  if  the  identification  of  Gal  2  and  Ac  15 
be  al>andoned,  the  objections  which  are  raised 
against  the  account  in  Acts  fall  to  the  ground, 
and  the  resultant  arguments  against  the  identi- 
fication of  the  writer  of  Acts  with  Luke  are 
proportionately  weakened. 

The  question  may  be  studied  in  detail  in  C.  Clemen,  Paulu*, 
Giessen,  19(M ;  A.  C  McGiffert,  A  History  of  Chrutianity  m 
the  ApottoKe  Age,  Edinburgh,  1807;  A.  Hamack,  ApottH- 
gesek.,  Leipzig,  1908;  J.  B.  I.is:htfoot,  Galatian*,  Cambridge, 
1S65  ;  K.  Lake,  Earlier  Epittlet  of  St.  Paid,  London,  1911 ;  C. 
W.  Emmet,  Galatiams,  London,  1912. 

(c)  The  movements  of  St.  PauFs  companions  in 
Macedonia  and  AchaUi  in  Ac  i7"  IS^  compared 
with  1  Th  5"-*. — The  difference  between  these 
narratives  is  concerned  with  the  movements  of 
Timothy  and  Silas.     According  to  Acts,  when  St. 

*  From  the  context  it  is  clear  that  to  fvay/tXior  rin  ixfoPvariai 
.  .  .  T^  vfftLTonits  means  the  gospel  for  the  Uncircumdaion  (i.«. 
the  Gentiles)  and  the  Circumcision  (i.e.  the  Jews). 


20 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACnS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


Paul  went  to  Athens  he  left  Timothy  and  Silas  in 
Beroea,  and  sent  a  message  to  them  either  from 
Athens  or  from  some  intermediate  noint,  asking 
them  to  rejoin  him  as  soon  as  possiule,  but  they 
did  not  actually  join  him  until  he  readied  Corinth 
(Ac  18*).  Tliis  arrival  of  Timothy  at  Corinth  is 
mentioned  in  1  Th  3*,  but,  according  to  the  im- 
plication of  1  Th  3"-,  Timothy  (and  Silas  ?)  had 
already  reached  Athens  and  been  sent  away  again 
with  a  message  to  Thessalonica.  In  this  case  Acts 
omits  the  whole  episode  of  Timothy's  arrival  at 
and  departure  from  Atliens,  and  telescopes  together 
two  incidents  in  much  the  same  way  as  seems  to 
have  been  done  with  regard  to  St.  Paul's  visits  to 
Damascus  immediately  after  the  conversion.  This 
is  the  simplest  solution  of  the  question,  though  it 
ia  possible  to  find  other  conceivable  theories,  such 
as  von  Dobschiitz's  suggestion  that  1  Th  3'  need 
not  mean  that  Timotliy  came  to  Athens,  as  the 
facts  would  be  equally  covered  if  a  message  from 
St.  Paul  had  intercepted  him  on  his  way  from 
Bercea  to  Atliens  and  sent  him  to  Thessalonica. 

The  best  account  of  various  ways  of  dealing  with  the  question 
is  ^ven  by  E.  von  Dobschutz,  'Die  Thessalonicherbriefe,'  in 
Meyer's  Krit.-Exeget.  Kommentar'',  Gottingen,  1909. 

Summary. — The  general  result  of  a  consideration 
of  tliese  divergences  between  Acts  and  the  Epistles 
suggests  that  the  author  was  sometimes  inaccurate, 
and  not  always  well  informed,  but  it  is  hard  to 
see  that  he  makes  mistakes  which  would  be  im- 
possible to  one  who  had,  indeed,  been  Avith  St. 
I'aul  at  times  but  not  during  the  greater  part  of 
his  career,  and  had  collected  information  from  the 
Apostle  and  others  as  opportunity  had  served.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  argument  from  literary  afhni- 
ties  between  the  '  we-clauses  '  and  the  rest  of  Acts 
remains  at  present  unshaken ;  and,  until  some 
further  analysis  succeeds  in  showing  why  it  should 
be  thought  that  the  '  we-clauses '  have  been  taken 
from  a  source  not  written  by  tlie  redactor  himself, 
the  traditionjil  view  that  Luke,  the  companion  of 
St.  Paul,  was  the  editor  of  the  whole  book  is  the 
most  reasonable  one. 

III.  Date  op  Acts  and  Bkception  in  the 
Canon. — The  evidence  for  the  date  is  very  meagre. 
If  the  Lucan  authorship  be  accepted,  any  date  after 
the  last  events  chronicled,  i.e.  a  short  time  before 
A.D.  60  to  c.  A.D.  100,  is  possible.  The  arguments 
which  have  been  used  for  fixing  on  a  more  definite 
point  are  :  (1)  the  date  of  tiie  Lucan  Gospel,  which 
by  the  evidence  of  Ac  1^  is  earlier  ;  (2)  the  abrupt 
termination  of  Acts ;  (3)  the  possibility  that  the 
Avriter  knew  the  Antiquities  of  Josephus,  which 
cannot  be  earlier  than  A.D.  90. 

1.  The  date  of  the  Lucan  GospeL— It  has  usually 
been  assumed  tliat  this  must  be  posterior  to  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem  in  A.D.  70,  but  it  is  doubtful 
whether  there  are  really  any  satisfactory  proofs 
that  this  was  the  case.  The  only  argument  of 
importance  is  that  in  the  apocalyptic  section  of 
Mark  (ch.  13)  expressions  which  might  be  supposed 
to  refer  to  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  have  been  altered 
to  correspond  with  the  real  facts  of  the  siege. 
Actually,  however,  the  most  striking  change  is 
merely  that  the  vague  Marcan  reference  to  Daniel's 
'  aliomination  of  desolation  '  has  been  rejilaced  by 
a  description  of  Jerusalem  surrounded  by  armies. 
Of  cour.se,  if  we  knew  that  Luke  was  later  than 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  it  would  be  a  rational 
a.ssumption  to  think  that  the  change  was  due  to 
the  inlluence  of  the  facts  on  the  writer ;  Imt  the 
force  of  the  argument  is  not  so  great  if  we  reverse 
the  proposition,  for  to  explain  '  the  abomination  of 
desolation '  as  a  jirophecy  of  a  siege  is  not  specially 
difficult.  The  most,  therefore,  that  can  be  said  is 
that  this  argument  raises  a  slight  presumption  in 
favour  of  a  date  later  tiian  A.D.  70. 

2.  The  abrupt  termination  of  Acts.— Acts  ends 


apjiarently  in  the  middle  of  the  trial  of  St.  Paul : 
he  has  been  sent  to  Koine,  and  has  spent  two 
years  in  some  sort  of  modified  imprisonment,  but 
no  verdict  has  been  passed.  From  this  Uarn.ack 
has  argued  {Neue  Untermichxingen  zur  Apostel- 
(jeschichtc,  p.  6511.)  that  the  Acts  must  have 
been  written  before  the  end  of  the  trial  was 
known. 

This  argument  would  be  important  if  it  were  the 
only  explanation  of  the  facts.  But  two  other 
possibilities  have  to  be  considered.  In  the  first 
place,  it  is  possible,  though  perhaps  not  very 
probable,  that  Luke  wrote,  or  intended  to  write,  a 
third  book  beginning  with  the  account  of  St.  Paul's 
trial  in  Rome.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  possible 
that  the  end  of  Acts  was  not  so  abrupt  to  the  ears 
of  contemporaries  as  it  is  to  us,  for  the  two  years 
may  be  the  recognized  period  during  which  a  trial 
must  be  heard,  and  after  which,  if  the  prosecution 
failed  to  appear,  the  case  collapsed.  The  case  of 
St.  Paul  had  been  originally  a  prosecution  by  the 
Jews,  and  probably  it  still  kept  this  character, 
even  though  the  venue  was  changed  to  Kome. 
But  the  Jews,  as  Luke  says  in  Ac  28",  did  not  put 
in  an  appearance,  and  therefore  the  case  must 
have  collapsed  for  lack  of  a  prosecution,  after  a 
statutory  period  of  waiting.  What  this  period 
Avas  we  do  not  know,  but  a  passage  in  Philo's  i?i 
Flaccum  points  to  the  probability  that  it  was  tAvo 
years.  According  to  this,  a  certain  Lambon  was 
accused  of  treason  in  Alexandria,  and  the  Roman 
judge,  knowing  that  he  was  dangerous,  but  that 
the  evidence  was  insufficient  to  justify  a  condem- 
nation, kept  him  in  prison  for  two  years  (^uriav), 
which  Philo  describes  as  the  '  longest  period  '  [rbv 
ixTjKiffTov  xp^"'"')'  If  this  be  so,  Luke's  termination 
of  Acts  is  not  really  so  abrupt  as  it  seems,  but 
implies  that  St.  Paul  was  released  after  the  end 
of  the  two  years,  because  no  Jews  came  forward 
to  prosecute  ;  it  is  easy  to  understand  that,  as 
this  was  not  a  definite  acquittal,  Luke  had  no 
interest  in  emphasizing  the  fact. 

3.  The  knowledge  of  Josephus  shown  in  Acts.— 
The  evidence  for  this  is  found  in  the  case  of 
Theudas.  The  facts  are  as  follows.  In  Ac  5^ 
Gamaliel  is  made  to  refer  to  two  revolts  which 
failed — first,  that  of  Theudas,  and  after  him  that 
of  Judas  the  Galilean  in  the  days  of  the  Census 
(i.e.  A.D.  6).  Both  these  revolts  are  well  known, 
and  are  described  by  Josephus  ;  but  the  difficulty 
is  that  Judas  really  preceded  Theudas,  whose  re- 
volt took  place  in  the  procuratorship  of  Fadus  (c. 
A.D.  43-47). 

The  revolt  of  Theudas  was  thus  most  probably 
later  than  the  speech  of  Gamaliel,  and  the  refer- 
ence to  it  must  be  a  literary  device  on  the  part  of 
Luke,  who  no  doubt  used  the  speeches  which  he 
puts  into  the  mouths  of  the  persons  in  his  narrative 
with  the  same  freedom  as  was  customary  among 
writers  of  that  period.  But  the  remarkable  point 
is  that  Josephus  in  Ant.  XX.  also  mentions  Judas 
of  Galilee  after  speaking  of  Theudas ;  *  and  the 
suggestion  is  that  Luke  had  seen  this  and  was  led 
into  the  not  unnatural  mistake  of  confusing  the 
dates.  He  apparently  knew  the  correct  date  of 
Judas,  and  remembered  only  that  Josephus  had 
spoken  of  him  after  Theuda.'^,  and  was  thus  led 
into  the  mistake  of  thinking  that  Theudas  must 
have  been  earlier  than  Judas. 

If  the  case  of  Theudas  be  admitted,  it  is  also 
possible  that  in  the  description  of  the  death  of 
Herod  Agrippa  some  details  have  been  Uiken  by 
Luke  from  the  description  of  the  death  of  Herod  tiie 

•  After  describinp  Thendas'  revolt,  Josephus  continues :  irpo? 
TOUToi^  6e  Koi  oi  iralSti  'lovSa  TOW  TaAiAaiou  d»T;x9i)<rai',  Toii  toi' 
Xabi' airb  'Vufiaiuy  airoan^aavrot  Kvpiviov  r^t  'lovSaiaiTiUJire- 
iioiT09,  itt  iv  TOis  itpb  Toi/Tun"  iSrtKuHTaiJLtv,  'Idxu^Of  icoi  StMW  ott 
ivcurravpuaau.  rrptxrirat*"  o  'AAt'foi^pot  {Ant.  XX.  v.  2). 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


21 


Great  as  «riven  by  Josephus.  Bat  the  evidence  is 
liere  imuli  le>s  striking,  and,  if  Theudas  be  not 
conceded,  has  no  real  strength.  Tlie  case  of 
Theudiis  is,  liowev  er,  very  remarkable ;  it  falls 
short  of  ileuionstratiou,  but  not  so  far  short  as  the 
other  arj:iunents  for  dating  the  Acts. 

So  far  it  has  been  assumed  that  Luke  was  the 
writer  of  Acts;  i"'  '"  this  case  the  probable 
length  of  his  lii  •  terminus  ad  quern  for 

dating  his  writi;:_  a.d.  100.     If  hb  author- 

ship be  disputed,  the  terminus  ad  quern  is  the 
earliest  known  use  of  the  book  or  of  its  companion 
Gospel.      T!  be   found  in   the  fact  that 

Marcion  {c.  used  the  Gospel  of  Luke.     It 

i«,  of  cour^t,  j.^-tule  that  some  of  the  isolated 
Evangelical  quotations  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
may  be  from  Luke ;  but  no  proof  of  this  can  be 
given.  As,  however,  Marcion's  text  is  a  redaction 
of  the  canonical  text,  and  Luke's  (iospel  was 
taken  into  the  Four-Grospel  Canon  not  long  after- 
wards, it  must  have  been  in  existence  some  time 
previously,  so  that,  even  if  the  Lucan  authorship 
oe  doubted,  A.D.  130  is  the  latest  date  that  can 
reasonably  be  suggested.  Even  this  appears  to  be 
very  improbable  if  attention  be  paid  to  some  of 
the  characteristics  of  Acts.  For  instance.  Acts 
never  uses  the  triadic  formula :  baptism  is  always 
in  the  name  '  of  the  Lord,'  or  '  of  Jesus ' ;  there  is 
no  trace  of  the  developed  Docetic  controversy  of 
the  Johannine  Epistles  or  of  Ignatius ;  XP^*^^  is 
habitually  used  predicatively,  and  not  as  a  proper 
name,  and  in  this  respect  Acts  is  more  primitive 
than  St.  Paul. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  weakening  of  the  eschato- 
logical  element,  and  the  interest  in  the  Church,  as 
an  institution  in  a  world  which  is  not  immediately 
to  disappear,  point  away  from  the  very  early  date 
advocated  by  Harnack  and  others.  The  decennium 
9O-10O  seems,  on  the  whole,  the  most  probable 
date,  but  demonstrative  proof  is  lacking,  and  it 
may  have  been  written  thirty  years  earlier,  or 
(but  only  if  the  Lucan  authorship  be  abandoned) 
thirty  years  later. 

4.  Reception  in  the  Canon. — There  is  no  trace 
of  any  collection  of  Christian  sacred  books  which 
included  the  Four-Gospel  Canon,  but  omitted  the 
Acts.  That  is  to  say,  tliroughout  the  Catholic 
Church  within  the  Roman  Empire,  Acts  was  uni- 
versally received  as  the  authoritative  and  inspired 
continuation  of  the  Gospel  story. 

It  appears  also  probable  that  in  the  Church  of 
Edessa  Acts  was  used  from  the  earliest  time  as  the 
continuation  of  the  Diatessaron,  for  the  Doctrine  of 
Addai  specifies  as  the  sacred  books  '  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets  and  the  Gospel  .  .  .  and  the  Epistles 
of  Paul  .  .  .  and  the  Acts  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,' 
of  which  the  last  item  probably  means  the  canon- 
ical Acts  (see  F.  C.  Burkitt,  Early  Eastern  Chris- 
tianity, London,  1904,  p.  59). 

Moreover,  the  ilarcionites  and  other  Gnostic 
Christians  do  not  appear  to  have  ever  used  the 
Acts.  Later  on  the  Manichaeans  seem  to  have 
used  a  corpus  of  the  five  Acts  of  Paul,  Peter,  John, 
Andrew,  and  Thomas,  as  a  substitute  for  the 
canonical  Acts ;  and  the  Priscillianists  in  Spain  so 
far  adopted  this  usage  as  to  accept  this  corpus  as 
an  adjunct  to  the  canonical  Acts.  (For  the  more 
detailed  consideration  of  these  Acts,  both  as  a 
corpus  and  as  separate  documents,  see  ACTS  OP 
THE  Apostles  [Apocryphal].) 

IV.  The  Composition  op  Acts.— The  ques- 
tion of  the  composition  of  this  or  any  other  book 
is  one  partly  of  fact,  partly  of  theory.  In  the 
sense  of  determining  the  arrangement  of  the  sec- 
tions, and  the  relations  which  thev  bear  to  one 
another,  it  is  a  question  of  fact  and  observation  ; 
but,  when  the  question  is  raised  why  the  sections 
are  so  arranged,  and  how  far  they  represent  older 


sources  used  by  the  writer,  it  becoiueii  a  question 
of  theory  and  criticism. 

1.  The  obvioos  facts. — ^The  first  point,  there- 
fore, is  the  establishment  of  the  facts,  and  in  the 
main  these  admit  of  little  discussion.  Acts  falls 
immediately  into  two  chief  parts — the  Pauline, 
and  the  non-Pauline  parts — with  a  short  inter- 
mediate section  in  which  St.  Paul  appears  at  in- 
ter\'als.  The  Pauline  section,  a^ain,  falls  into  the 
natural  divisions  aflTorded  by  his  two  (or  tliree) 
great  journeys;  and  a  cross-division  can  also  be 
made  by  noting  that  the  author  sometimes  uses 
the  first  person  plural,  sometimes  writes  exclu- 
sively in  the  third  person.  The  earlier  sections 
in  the  same  way  can  be  divided  —  though  the 
division  is  here  much  less  clear — into  those  in 
which  the  centre  of  activity  is  Jerusalem,  and 
those  in  which  it  is  Antioch,  while  a  further  series 
of  subdivisions  can  be  made  according  as  the  chief 
actor  is  Peter,  Philip,  or  Stephen.  Finally,  still 
smaller  subdivisions  can  be  made  by  dividmg  the 
narrative  into  the  series  of  incidents  which  com- 
pose it. 

The  table  on  p.  22  serves  to  give  a  general 
conspectus  of  the  facts ;  a  somewhat  more  minute 
system  of  subdivision  has  been  adopted  in  the 
earlier  chapters,  which  are  especially  affected  by 
the  question  of  sources,  than  in  the — from  this 
point  of  view — more  straightforward  later  chap- 
ters. This  analysis  is  sufficient  to  show  that  the 
writ«r  must  have  been  drawing  on  various  sources 
or  traditions  for  his  information,  and  we  have  to 
face  three  problems :  What  was  the  purpose  with 
which  the  writer  put  together  this  narrative  ?  How 
far  is  it  possible  to  distingnish  the  sources,  written 
or  oral,  which  he  used  ?  What  is  the  relative  value 
of  the  sources  which  he  used  ? 

2.  The  purpose  with  which  the  whole  narratiYe 
was  composed. — It  is,  of  course,  clear  that  the 
writer  has  not  attempted  to  give  a  colourless  story 
of  as  many  events  as  possible,  but  is  using  history 
to  commend  his  own  interpretation  of  the  facta 
This  is  corroborated  by  his  own  account  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Crospel,  in  which  he  defines  his 
purpose  as  that  of  convincing  Theophilus  of  the 
certainty  of  the  '  narratives  in  which  he  had  been 
instructed '  {bra  irtyw^i  vepl  Caw  KartixvOvi  \&yuv  rriw 
dtnpdXeiar  [Lk  l*]).  In  other  words,  he  wishes  to 
tell  the  story  of  the  early  days  of  Christianity  in 
order  to  prove  the  Christian  teaching. 

If  we  consider  the  narrative  from  this  point  of 
view,  we  can  see  several  motives  underlying  it, 
(a)  The  desire  to  show  that  the  Christian  Church 
was  the  result  of  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  {rwevfia, 
rb  ryevfia,  rb  ayiov  rwevfta  are  the  usual  expressions, 
but  rwev/io.  Kvpiov  in  5*  8*  [the  text  is  doubtfull 
rb  rpev/ta  'I1^rov  in  l&),  which  is  the  fulfilment  of 
the  promise  of  Jesus  to  send  it  to  His  disciples 
(Ac  l**- ;  cf.  Lk  3*«  24*^).  The  Spirit  manifested 
itself  in  glossolalia,  in  the  working  of  miracles  of 
healing,  and  in  the  surprising  growth  of  Christi- 
anity. This  is  perhaps  the  main  object  of  Luke's 
writings,  and  to  it  is  subordinated,  both  in  the 
Gospel  and  in  Acts,  the  eschatological  expectation 
which  is  most  characteristic  of  Mark  and  Matthew  ; 
though  many  traces  of  this  stiU  remain. — (b)  The 
desire  to  show  the  unreasonableness  and  wicked- 
ness of  Jewish  opposition  is  also  clearly  marked, 
and  is  contrasted  with  the  attitude  of  Roman 
officials.  It  is,  therefore,  not  impossible  that  the 
writer  desired  to  dissociate  Christianity  from 
Judaism,  and  to  defend  Christians  from  the  im- 
putation of  belonging  to  a  sect  forbidden  by  the 
State.  If  we  knew  the  time  when  Christianity 
was,  as  such,  first  forbidden  and  persecuted,  this 
might  be  a  valuable  indication  of  date,  but  at 
present  all  that  is  known  with  certainty  is  that 
(cf.  Pliny's  correspondence  with  Trajan)  it  was 


22 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


forbidden  by  the  l)e<,'inning  of  tlie  2n(l  cent.,  iuid 
that  ill  64  it  wns  luobalily  (btit  not  certainly)  not 
forbidden,  as  the  Neronic  persecution  was  not  of 
the  Christians  as  such,  out  of  Ciiristians  as 
suspected  of  certain  definite  crimes.  It  is,  how- 
ever, in  any  case  clear  that  tliis  feature  of  Acts 
supports  the  view  that  one  purpose  cherished  by 
the  writer  was  tlie  desire  to  protest  against  the 
view  that  Ciiristians  had  always  been,  or  could 
ever  be,  regarded  as  a  danger  to  the  Empire. — 
(c)  As  a  means  towards  the  accomplishment  of  his 
other  purposes,  the  writer  is  desirous  of  showing 
how  (Jhristianity  had  spread  from  Jerusalem  to 
the  surrounding  districts,  from  there  to  Antioch, 
and  from  Antioch  through  the  provinces  to  Kome. 
He  also  explains  in  what  way  the  Christians  came 


Ciiurch,  and  the  early  history  of  the  Church  in 
.lerusalem.  In  discussing  them  it  is  simplest  to 
begin  with  the  most  marked  feature — the  '  we- 
clauses '  —  and  then  work  back  to  the  earlier 
chapters. 

(1)  Tlie  '  we-clauses.' — As  was  shown  above,  the 
balance  of  evidence  seems  at  present  to  be  strongly 
in  favour  of  the  view  that  the  writer  of  these 
sections  intended  to  claim  that  he  had  been  a 
companion  of  St.  Paul,  and  that  he  was  himself 
the  editor  of  the  whole  book.  If  this  be  so,  we 
have  for  the  rest  of  the  '  Paul '  narrative  a  source 
ready  to  our  hand  —  the  personal  information 
obtained  by  Luke  from  St.  Paul  himself,  or  from 
other  companions  of  St.  Paul  whom  he  met  in  his 
.society.     This  may  cover  as  much  as  Ac  9^"**  H^r-so 


Rbkrkb.ncb. 

PliACK. 

Gbnkral  Dkscription. 

CiiiEK  Actors. 

IIJI. 

Jenisalem. 

The  Ascension  and  promise  of  the  Spirit. 

Jesus  and  the  Twelve. 

118  26. 

" 

Choice  of  -Matthias.  . 
Speech  of  Peter. 

Peter  and  the  Twelve. 

21-47. 

" 

Gift  of  the  Spirit. 
Glossolalia. 
Speech  of  Peter. 

Peter  and  the  Twelve. 

Sia. 

II 

Healing  miracle  by  Peter  and  John. 
Speech  of  Peter. 

Peter  [and  John). 

41-22 

II 

Imprisonment  of  Peter  and  John. 
Speech  of  Peter. 

Peter  [and  John]. 

423-31. 

" 

Their  release. 
Meeting  of  the  Church. 
Gift  of  the  Spirit. 

Peter  [and  John]. 

432-516. 

11 

Communism  in  the  Church. 

Peter,  BarnaV)aa  (Ana- 
nias, Sapphira) . 

517-42. 

II 

Imprisonment  of  Peter  and  John. 
Speech  of  Gamaliel. 

Peter  [and  John]. 

61-7. 

„ 

Appointment  of  the  Seven. 

The  apostles. 

68.16. 

'• 

Preaching  of  Stephen. 
His  arrest. 

Stephen. 

71-83. 

" 

Speech  of  Stephen. 
His  death. 

Stephen. 

84-2B. 

Samaria. 

Philip's  preaching. 

Philip,  Peter  [and  John]. 

Simon  Magus. 

Simon  Magus. 

826-40. 

The  road  to  Oaza. 

Philip's  conversion  of  the  Ethiopian. 

Philip. 

91-31. 

The  road  to  DaiD.'iscus. 

Conversion  of  Saul,  and  extension  of 
the  Church. 

Paul. 

932-10«. 

Lydda,  Joppa,  Caesarea. 

Peter's  Journey  through  Lydda,  Joppa, 

Csosarea. 
Conversion  of  Cornelius. 
Speech  of  Peter. 

Peter. 

111-18. 

Jerusalem. 

Peter's  speech  on  Cornelius'  conversion. 
Foundation  of  Gentile  Christianity. 

Pet«r. 

1119-98. 

Antioch. 

Hellenistic  .Tews,  Barna- 

bas, Paul. 

1127  80. 

1, 

Collection  for  Jerusalem. 

Barnabas,  Paul. 

121-34. 

Jerusalem. 

Herod's  persecution. 
Peter's  iniprisoiinient. 
Death  of  Herod. 

Peter. 

1225. 

Return    of    Barnabas    and     Saul     to 
Antioch. 

B.arnabas,  Paul. 

131-1428. 

Journey. 

First  missionary  journey. 

Paul. 

151-35. 

Jerusalem. 

Apostolic  Council. 

Peter,  James,  Paul. 

1536-1822. 

Journey. 

Second  missionary  journey. 

Paul. 

1823-2116 

„ 

Third  missionary  "journey. 

Paul. 

2117-2311. 

Jerusalem. 

Paul's  dealings  with  James.    His  arrest. 
Speech  to  Sanhedrin. 

Paul. 

1 

2312-2632. 

Cmsarea. 

Paul's  imprisonment  in  Caesarea.   Feli.\. 

Paul. 

Festus.     Agrippa. 

271-28J6. 

Journey. 

Journey  to  Rome. 

Paul. 

2S''-ai. 

Home. 

Paul  and  Jews  in  Rome. 

Paul. 

to  jiKicli  t()  Gentiles  without  insisting  on  the 
Jewish  i.aw,  and  how  this  had  been  perceived  to  be 
the  work  of  the  Spirit  by  the  Jewish  apostles  wlio 
recognized  the  revelation  to  this  ellect  to  St.  Paul 
and  to  St.  Peter  (Ac  O^a^-  22^1  ll's  \5^«-). 

3.  The  sources  used  in  Acts. — The  most  super- 
ficial examination  of  Acts  shows  that  it  is  divided 
most  obviously  into  a  '  Peter '  part  and  a  '  Paul ' 
part ;  it  is,  therefore,  not  strange  that  the  critics 
of  the  beginning  of  the  19th  cent,  thought  of 
dividing  Acts  into  narratives  derived  from  a 
hypothetical  '  Acts  of  Peter '  and  a  hypothetical 
'Acts  of  Paul.'  But  further  investigation  has 
gone  behind  this  division  :  it  has  been  seen  that 
important  questions  are  involved  in  the  relation 
of  the  '  we-clau.ses'  to  the  rest  of  t\\v  luurative 
relating  to  St.  Paul,  the  story  of  the  .XhIpm  hene 


joai-3i  yj.  yven  more.  There  is  nolliin;,'  in  tlie.se 
sections  wiiicli  cannot  have  come  from  St.  Paul 
or  his  entourage,  and  the  inaccuracies  in  the 
narrative,  as  compared  with  the  Ei)istles,  do  not 
seem  to  point  to  s.nj  greater  fallibility  on  the  part 
of  the  writer  than  that  to  be  found  in  other 
historical  writers  who  are  in  the  possession  of 
good  sources.  At  the  same  time,  this  does  not 
mean  that  the  assignment  of  these  chapters  to  a 
'  Paul '  source  is  final  or  exclusive  of  others.  Some 
sections  within  the.se  limits  (e.g.  Ac  15)  may  come 
from  some  other  Jerusalem  or  Antiochene  source, 
and  some  sections  outside  them  (e.g.  the  story  of 
Stephen's  death)  may  have  come  from  the  '  Paul ' 
source. 

If,  on  the   otlier    hand,    it  .should    ultimately 
appear  that  the   evidence   from  style  has  been 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


23 


exaggeratetl  or  misrepresented,  it  will  be  necessary 
to  regard  the  '  we-sections '  as  representing  a 
separate  source,  and  consider  the  question  whether 
the  rest  of  tlie  chapters  mentioned  above  came 
from  one  or  several  sources.  At  present,  however, 
no  one  has  shown  any  serious  ground  for  thinking 
that  Ave  can  distinguish  any  signs  of  change  of 
style,  or  of  doublets  in  the  narrative,  to  point  in 
this  direction. 

(2)  The  problems  presented  by  the  earlier 
chapters  are  much  more  complicated.  The  chief 
point  which  attracts  attention  is  that  in  the  lirst 
half  of  these  chapters  the  centre  of  interest  is 
Jerusalem,  or  Jerusalem  and  the  neighbourhood, 
while  in  the  second  half  it  is  Antioch.  Here  again 
it  is  easier  to  begin  by  taking  the  later  chapters 
fii-st,  and  to  discuss  the  probable  limits  of  the 
Antiochene  tradition,  together  with  the  passibility 
that  it  may  have  lain  before  the  writer  of  Acts  as 
a  document,  before  considering  the  Jerusalem 
tradition  of  the  opening  chapters. 

(a)  TA«  Antiochene  tradition. — The  exact  limits 
of  this  tradition  are  difficult  to  fix.  It  is  clear 
that  to  it  the  section  describing  the  foundation  of 
the  church  at  Antioch  and  its  early  history 
(Ac  11^*^)  must  be  attributed;  but  difficulties 
arise  as  soon  as  an  attempt  is  made  to  work  either 
backwards  or  forwards  from  this  centre,  as  the 
later  sections,  which  can  fairly  be  attributed  to 
Antiochene  tradition,  can  also  be  attributed  to  the 
Pauline  source,  while  the  earlier  sections  of  the 
same  kind  might  be  attributed  to  the  Jerusalem 
tradition.  It  is  obvious  that  the  oi  fup  otv 
Btoff-rapftrres  of  Ac  II'*  picks  up  the  narrative  of 
8*"*.  In  S^-  *  the  story  of  Stephen's  death  is  brought 
to  a  close  by  the  statement  that  ey^vero  Si  iv  eKeiinf 
rg  T}fJLfp<f  Su^fibi  fd-fa.%  i-rl  ttjp  iKKXrifflaw  rij*  ip 
'Ifpoffo\6/JMT  ravrei  5i  dieffrdpfijcap  Karii  tAj  X"^?^^ 
.  .  .  oi  fiky  oty  Siaatcapivrei  Sirjkdov  evayyeXi^d/iePoi 
rbf  X&'/op.  Then  tlie  writer  gives  two  inst-ances  of 
this  evangelization  by  Philip  and  Peter  in  Samaria, 
and  by  Philip  alone  on  the  road  to  Gaza,  Next 
he  explains  how  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul  put 
an  end  to  the  persecution,  and  how  the  conversion 
of  Cornelius  led  to  the  recognition  of  preaching  to 
Gentiles  by  the  Jerusalem  community.  Finally,  he 
returns  to  where  he  started  from,  and  picks  up  his 
story  as  to  the  Christians  who  were  dispersed  after 
the  death  of  Stephen,  with  the  same  formula — 
ol  fikv  OLV  Siaarap^vrei  in  IP*. 

Thus  there  is  an  organic  unity  between  8*  and 
1P».  But  8*  is  the  end  of  the  story  of  the 
Hellenistic  Jews,  their  seven  representatives,  and 
the  persecution  which  befell  them  ;  and  the  begin- 
ning of  this  story  is  in  6*.  Between  6®  and  8*  there 
is  no  break — unless  it  be  thought  that  the  whole 
speech  of  Stephen  is  the  composition  of  the  editor, 
as  may  very  well  be  the  case.  Is,  then,  6"'-8*  to 
be  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  Antiochene  tradi- 
tion ?  Hamack  thinks  so,  and  it  is  very  probable. 
But  it  is  also  true  that  6*-S*  might  have  come 
either  from  Jerusalem  or  from  St.  Paul  himself, 
and  it  is  hard  to  see  convincing  reasons  why  the 
Antiochene  source  which  Hamack  postulates  should 
not  liave  come  from  the  '  Paul '  source. 

The  same  sort  of  result  is  reached  by  considering 
the  sections  following  IP*--^  Is  ll»-3o  «  Pauline' 
or  'Antiochene'?  The  following  section,  12'*=", 
is  clearly  part  of  the  Jerusalem  tradition,  but 
what  follows,  12"-^-13',  might  again  be  either 
Pauline  or  Antiochene,  and  the  same  is  true  of 
15'"^,  in  which  the  account  of  the  Council  might 
be  Antiochene  or  Pauline,  but  is  less  likely  to 
represent  Jerusalem  tradition.  These  exhaust 
the  number  of  the  passages  which  are  ever  likely  to 
be  attributed  to  the  Antiochene  source.  To  the 
present  AA-riter  it  seems  that,  unless  it  prove 
possible  (so  far  it  has  not  been  done)  to  find  some 


literary  criterion  for  distingmshing  between  the 
'  Pauline '  and  '  Antiochene '  sources,  it  will  remain 
permanently  impossible  to  draw  any  line  of  de- 
marcation between  what  Luke  may  have  heard 
about  the  early  history  of  Antioch  n-om  St.  Paul 
and  what  he  may  have  learnt  from  other  Antiochene 
persons.  It  also  seems  quite  impossible  to  say 
whether  he  was  using  written  sources.  This,  of 
course,  does  not  deny  that  the  so-called  '  Antiochene 
source '  represents  Antiochene  tradition.  All  that 
is  said  is  tuat  this  Antiochene  tradition  may  have 
come  from  St.  Paul  quite  as  well  as  from  any  one 
else.  On  the  merits  of  the  case  we  can  go  no 
further  (for  the  possibility  that  Luke  was  himself 
an  Antiochene  see  Luke). 

(6)  The  Jerusalem  tradition. — It  is  obvious  that 
Ac  1^-5^  represents  in  some  sense  a  Jerusalem 
tradition,  and  it  is  scarcely  less  clear  that  8*~**  ^'- 
liw  12^"-'*  represent  a  tradition  which  is  divided 
in  its  interests  between  Jerusalem  and  Cuesarea. 
It  is,  therefore,  necessary  to  deal  first  with  the 
purely  Jerusalem  sections,  and  afterwards  with  the 
Jerusalem-Cajsarean  narrative,  before  considering 
whether  they  are  really  one  or  more  than  one  in 
origin. 

(a)  The  purely  Jerusalem  sections. — The  most 
important  feature  of  Ac  I'-o**  is  that  2*~"  seems  to 
contain  doublets  of  3'-4^,  and  that  the  suggestion 
of  a  multiplicity  of  sources  is  supported  by  some 
linguistic  peculiarities. 

21-13    ISie  gift  of  the  Spirit,  accompanied  by  the  sbak-    4^1 
ing  of  the  house  ia  which  the  Apotstles  were. 

2i*«    A  ff^ech  of  Peter.  31-* 

237-11    The  result  of  this  speech  is  an  extraordinarily    i* 
large  namber  of  converts  (5000, 3000X 

2**<7    xhe  communism  of  the  Early  Church.  4**-  S 

Of  this  series  of  doublets  the  twice-told  story  of 
the  early  '  communism '  of  the  first  Christians  and 
the  repetition  of  the  shaking  of  the  house  at  the 
outpouring  of  the  Spirit  are  the  most  striking,  but 
the  cumulative  effect  is  certainly  to  justify  the 
view  that  we  have  two  accounts,  slightly  varying, 
of  the  same  series  of  events. 

This  result  finds  remarkable  corroboration  in 
certain  linguistic  peculiarities  of  Ac  3f.  as  com- 
pared with  ch.  2.  In  the  former  the  word  drcumjiraj 
13  used  in  the  sense  '  raised  up  to  preach '  (3-* ;  cf. 
3—),  and  iiyeipe  is  used  of  the  Resurrection,  but  in 
the  latter  oKaffTijo-as  is  used  of  the  Resurrection. 
In  Ac  3 1.  Jesus  is  described  as  a  xatj  dtov  (S^*-* 
^27.  3Dj^  ^^j;  jjj  pi,  2  as  i^dpa  CLTodfdfiyfUror  arb  tow 
dfov.  In  Ac  3  f .  Peter  ia  almost  always  accompanied 
by  John  (3^-  »•  *• "  4**),  but  in  ch.  2  he  appears  aione 
or  '  with  the  other  apostles.' 

That  Ac  2  and  3  f .  are  doublets  is  thus  probable  ; 
moreover,  as  the  linguistic  characteristics  of  3  f.  are 
peculiar  and  not  Lucan,  it  is  more  probable  here 
than  anjTvhere  else  in  Acts  that  we  are  dealing 
with  traces  of  a  written  Greek  document  under- 
lying Acts  in  the  same  way  as  ilark  and  Q  underlie 
the  Lucan  Gospel.  To  this  branch  of  the  Jerusalem 
tradition  Hamack  has  given  the  name  of  *  source 
A,'  and  to  Ac  2  the  name  of '  soturce  B.'  According 
to  him,  the  continuation  of  A  can  be  found  in  o'"'*, 
and  he  also  identities  it  with  the  Jerusalem- 
Caesarean  source  (see  below).  B  is  continued  in 
5i7-43_  ^g  1  more  probably,  he  thinks,  belongs  to 
B  than  to  A,  but  may  have  a  separate  origin. 

If  A  be  followed,  we  get  a  clear  and  probable 
narrative  of  the  history  of  the  Jerusalem  Church, 
but  it  begins  in  the  middle.  According  to  it,  Peter 
and  John  went  up  to  the  Temple  and  healed  a  lame 
man  ;  in  connexion  with  the  sensation  caused  by 
this  wonder  Peter  explained  that  he  wrought  the 
cure  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  whom  he  announced  as 
the  predestined  Messiah.  As  the  result  of  this 
missionary  speech  a  great  number  of  converts  were 
made  (about  5000  [4'*]).  Peter  and  John  were 
arrested,  but  later  on  released  after  a  speech  by 


24 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


Peter,  and  a  practical  deliance  of  t!ie  command  of 
the  autliorities  not  to  preaeli  in  tlie  name  of  Jesus. 
Then  follows  a  descrijition  of  the  joy  of  the  Churdi 
at  the  release  of  Peter  and  John,  and  an  account  of 
their  prayer— 5dy  rots  dovXois  aov  fifra.  jrappTjaias  irdcrrji 
XaXctc  t6c  Xoyov  aov.  In  answer  to  tlieir  prayer,  the 
Spirit  was  outpoured  amid  the  shaking  of  the  room 
in  which  they  were,  after  which  they  were  ahle, 
as  they  had  asked,  to  speak  tlie  word  nerd,  vappriala^. 
Finally,  a  picture  is  drawn  of  tlie  prosperity  of  the 
Church,  and  of  tlie  voluntary  communism  which 
prevailed. 

The  nan-ative  gives  an  intelligible  picture  of  the 
events  which  led  to  the  growth  of  tlie  Jerusalem 
Church  and  of  an  organization  of  charitable  dis- 
tribution that  ultimately  led  to  the  development 
described  in  Ac  6.  Moreover,  it  has  several  marks 
of  individuality,  and  an  early  type  which  suggests 
that  we  have  here  to  do  with  a  source  used  by  Luke, 
probably  in  documentary  form,  rather  than  a  Lucan 
composition.  This  applies  especially  to  Peter's 
speech,  which  is  in  some  ways  one  of  the  most 
archaic  passages  in  the  N'l.  Peter  does  not 
describe  Jesus  as  having  been  the  Messiah,  but 
as  a  iratj  6eov  (more  probably  '  Servant  of  God  '  than 
'Child  of  God,'  and  perhaps  with  a  side  reference 
to  the  '  Servant  of  Jahweh  '  in  Is  53,  etc.) — a  phrase 
peculiar  to  source  A,  1  Clement,  the  Martyrdom 
of  Polycarp,  and  the  Didache.  He  then  goes  on 
to  annoimce  that  (iod  lias  "lorilied  this  Trats  by  the 
Resurrection,  and  that  He  is  the  predestined 
Messiah  (rbv  wpoo'Kexeipio'fi^i'ov  Xpiardv),  who  will 
remain  in  the  Heavens  until  the  '  restoration  of 
all  things.'  Recent  research  in  the  field  of  eschato- 
logy  and  Messianic  doctrine  has  brought  out  clearly 
the  primitive  character  of  this  speech.  The  same 
can  also  be  said  of  the  prayer  of  the  Church  in 
4*"-,  in  which  the  phrase  t6»'  dyiov  iralSd  aov  'Irjaovv, 
6v  ^xp'fas  ('  made  Christ'?)  is  very  remarkable. 

Thus  source  A  commends  itself  as  an  early  and 
good  tradition,  but  it  begins  in  the  middle  and  tells 
us  nothing  about  the  events  previous  to  the  visit  of 
Peter  and  John  to  the  Temple.  Apparently  it  was  to 
till  up  this  gap  that  Luke  turned  to  source  B,  which 
seems  to  relate  some  of  the  same  events,  but  in  a 
different  order  ;  and,  though  Harnack  doubts  this, 
it  seems,  on  the  whole,  probable  that  Ac  1,  or  at 
least  vv.*"'*,  ought  to  be  regarded  as  belonging 
to  it.  According  to  this  narrative,  the  disciples 
received  the  Spirit  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost  amid 
the  shaking  of  the  room,  after  which  Peter  made 
a  speech,  in  many  points  resembling  that  in  Ac  3, 
but  without  the  characteristic  phraseology  of  A, 
and  with  the  addition  of  many  more  '  testimonia ' 
as  to  the  Resurrection.  A  great  number  of  converts 
(about  3000)  were  made ;  and,  in  the  enthusiasm 
which  prevailed,  a  spirit  of  voluntary  communism 
flourished,  and  an  organization  of  charitable  dis- 
tribution came  into  being. 

This  narrative  does  not  seem  so  convincing  as 
that  of  source  A.  But  if  Ac  1  be  regarded  as 
belonging  to  it,  it  has  the  advantage  of  connecting 
the  story  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  directly  with 
the  events  that  followed  the  Crucifixion — a  period 
on  which  A  is  silent.  Now,  it  is  tolerably  clear 
that  A  was  a  written  Greek  source  used  by  Luke, 
just  as  he  used  Mark  in  the  Gospel  ;  for,  although 
it  has  been  '  Lncanized,'  it  still  retains  its  own 
characteristic  expressions.  Presumably,  therefore, 
a  copy  of  this  document  came  into  Luke's  possession, 
and  he  supplemented  it  at  the  beginning  with  B  ; 
but,  whether  B  was  a  written  source  or  oral  tradi- 
tion, it  is  impossible  to  say.  The  question  presents 
in  this  respect  a  remarkable  parallel  to  the  state  of 
things  in  the  last  chapters  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke. 
Here  also  the  writer  made  use  of  a  Greek  document 
— Mark — and  supplemented  it  with  a  Jerusalem 
tradition — whether  written  or  oral  it  is  impossible 


to  say — either  because  the  Marcan  narrative  broke 
off',  as  it  breaks  off  in  the  existent  text  of  Mark,  or 
because  he  desired  to  correct  the  Marcan  tradition. 
It  is,  moreover,  plain  that  this  Jerusalem  tradition 
at  the  end  of  Luke  is  the  same  as  that  in  source  B 
of  the  Acts.  The  question  then  suggests  itself 
whether  source  A — the  written  source  of  Acts — 
may  not  belong  to  the  same  document  as  '  Mark ' 
— the  written  source  of  the  Gospel.  If  we  suppose 
that  the  original  Mark  contained  a  continuation  of 
the  Gospel  story  down  to  the  foundation  of  the 
Church  in  Jerusalem,  and  either  that  Luke  dis- 
liked the  section  referring  to  the  events  after  the 
Crucifixion,  or  perhaps  that  his  copy  had  been 
mutilated,  the  composition  of  this  i)art  of  Acts 
becomes  plain  ;  *  but  it  also  becomes  a  question 
whether  the  John  who  accompanies  Peter  in  source 
A  (and  nowhere  else)  is  not  John  Mark,  rather 
than  John  the  son  of  Zebedee. 

All  this,  however,  is  hypothetical.  The  actual 
existence  of  the  source  A  in  ch.  3f.  and  of  the 
sup])lementary  source  B  in  ch.  2  is  a  point  for 
which  comparative  certainty  may  be  claimed. 

The  problem  then  arises,  how  far  these  sources 
can  be  traced  in  the  following  chapters  of  Acts. 
Harnack  is  inclined  to  see  in  5''""  a  doublet  of 
4^-'^'^,  and  to  assign  the  latter  to  A,  the  former  to 
B.  This  is  not  improbable,  but  it  is  not  so  certain 
as  the  previous  results.  It  is,  for  instance,  by  no 
means  improbable  that  the  apostles  were  twice 
arrested,  and,  as  the  story  is  told,  5"  seems  a  not 
unnatural  continuation  of  ch.  4.  It  is,  however, 
true  that  the  characteristic  '  Peter  and  John '  is 
not  found  in  5'^"^-  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
rather  curious  phrase  dpxvy^"  is  apjdied  to  Jesus 
in  31*  and  5"  (elsewhere  in  NT  only  in  He  2'"  12=*), 
which  militates  somewhat  against  the  view  that 
these  chapters  belong  to  different  sources.  In  the 
same  way  the  story  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira  in 
Ac  5''^^  would  fit  quite  as  well  on  to  B  as  on  to  A, 
with  which  Harnack  connects  it.  Linguistically 
there  is  no  clear  evidence,  but  it  may  be  noted 
that  (pd^os  is  a  characteristic  of  the  Christian  com- 
munity in  B  in  2"'^  and  is  repeated  in  5'- ".  It  is 
not  found  in  A,  though  from  the  circuinstances  of 
the  case  not  much  weight  can  be  attached  to  this. 
It  therefore  must  remain  uncertain  whether  Ac  5 
ought  to  be  regarded  as  wholly  A,  wholly  B,  or  be 
divided  between  the  two  sources. 

(/3)  2'he  Jerusalevi-Cmsarean  section-f. — These  are 
Ac  8'-'**'  !)=*i-lP»  121-'*,  which  describe  Philip's  evan- 
gelization of  Samaria,  followed  by  the  mission  of 
Peter  and  John,  Philip's  conversion  of  the  Ethiopian 
on  the  road  to  Gaza,  and  his  arrival  in  Csesarea, 
Peter's  mission  to  Lydda,  Joppa,  and  C.-esarea, 
and  return  to  Jerusalem,  Peters  arrest,  imprison- 
ment, and  escape  in  Jerusalem,  and  Herod's  death 
in  Ca'sarea.  Harnack  thinks  that  all  these  pivs- 
sages  represent  a  Jerusalem-Caesarean  tradition, 
which  he  identifies  with  source  A.  It  is  certainly 
probable  that  8"'^  belongs  to  A,  owing  to  the 
characteristic  combination  of  Peter  and  John,  and 
it  may  be  regarded  as  reasonable  to  tliink  that 
this  also  covers  the  rest  of  the  section,  so  that 
S"'*"  may  be  attributed  to  A.  It  is  more  doubtful 
when  we  come  to  the  two  other  sections.  If,  how- 
ever, any  weight  be  attached  to  the  suggestion 
that  A  is  connected  with  Mark,  it  is  noteworthy 
that  12^"^  is  also  very  clearly  connected  with  the 
house  of  Mark  and  his  mother. 

The  section  tP'-ll'*  remains.  This  ifl  much  more 
clearly  Ciesarean  than  either  of  the  others,  and 
might  possibly  be  separated  from   them   and  as- 

*See  Burkitt,  Earliett  Sources  of  the  GonpeU,  liOndon,  1911, 
p.  79 f.,  where  the  suggestion  is  made  that  the  early  part_  of 
Acts  ni.a.v  represent  a  Marain  tradition,  thnnirh  the  bearing 
on  this  theory  of  the  double  source  A  ami  H  in  Acts  is  not 
mentioned. 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


25 


cribed  to  a  distinct  Caesarean  source.  If  so,  the 
suggestion  of  Uarnack  and  others  that  the  source 
niiglit  be  identihed  with  the  family  of  Philip, 
which  was  settled  in  Caesarea,  is  not  impossible; 
from  'il*  (a  *  we-clause ')  we  know  that  Luke  came 
into  contact  with  him  there.  It  Is  also  obvious 
that  the  information  given  by  Philip  might  be  the 
source  of  much  more  of  that  which  has  been  ten- 
tatively attributed  to  source  A,  or  on  the  other 
band  might  conceivably  be  identified  with  source 
B  ;  the  truth  is,  of  course,  that  we  here  reach  the 
limit  of  legitimate  hypothesis,  and  pass  into  the 
open  coimtrv  of  uncontrolled  guessing. 

The  result,  therefore,  of  an  inquiry  into  the 
sources  of  the  Jerusalem  tradition  is  to  establish 
the  existence  of  a  written  Greek  source.  A,  in 
Ac  3f.,  with  a  parallel  narrative  B — apparently 
the  continuation  of  the  Lucan  Jerusalem  narrative 
in  the  Gospel ;  and  these  two  sources,  or  one  of 
them,  are  continued  in  ch.  5.  In  S*"**  is  a  further 
naiTative  which  has  points  of  connexion  with  A. 
Ac  9^^-11'*  is  a  Ctesarean  narrative,  probably  con- 
nected with  Philip,  and  this  raises  difficulties  in 
relation  to  A,  for  8*"**  has  also  points  of  connexion 
with  Philip.  Finally  12'"^  is  a  Jerusalem  narrative 
connected  with  Peter  and  Mark ;  but  here  also  the 
possibility  of  a  connexion  with  Caesarea  remains 
open. 

V.  Historical  Value  op  the  Various  Tra- 
DITIOSS. — So  far  as  the  '  we-clauses'  and  the  prob- 
ably Pauline  tradition  are  concerned,  this  question 
has  already  been  discussed.  While  there  are  traces 
of  probable  inaccuracy,  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
the  general  trustworthiness  of  the  narrative.  The 
Antiochene  narrative  and  the  Jerusalem-Caesarean 
narrative  (the  '  Philip '  clauses)  can  be  judged  with 
more  difficulty,  as  we  have  no  means  of  comparing 
the  narratives  with  any  other  contemporary  state- 
ments. Here,  however,  we  have  another  criterion. 
It  is  probable  that  Luke  is  dealing  with  traditions, 
and,  at  least  in  the  case  of  A,  with  a  document. 
We  cannot  say  how  far  he  alters  his  sources,  for 
we  have  no  other  information  as  to  their  original 
form,  but  we  can  use  the  analogy  of  his  observed 
practice  in  the  case  of  the  Gospel.  Here  we  know 
that  he  made  use  of  Mark  ;  and  we  can  control  his 
methods,  because  we  pos.sess  his  source.  In  this  way 
we  can  obtain  some  idea  of  what  he  is  likely  to 
have  done  with  his  sources  in  Acts.  On  the  whole, 
it  cannot  l)e  said  that  the  application  of  this 
criterion  raises  the  value  of  Acts.  In  the  Gospel, 
Luke,  though  in  the  main  constant  to  his  source 
Mark,  was  by  no  means  disinclined  to  change  the 
meaning  of  the  story  as  well  as  the  words,  if  he 
thought  right.  It  is  possible  that  he  was  justified 
in  doing  so,  but  that  is  not  the  question.  The 
point  is  that  he  did  not  hesitate  to  alter  his  source 
in  the  Gospel ;  it  is  therefore  probable  that  he 
did  not  hesitate  to  do  so  in  the  Acts. 

Besides  this,  on  grounds  of  general  probability, 
various  small  points  give  rise  to  doubt,  or  seem  to 
belong  to  the  world  of  legend  rather  than  to  that 
of  history — tor  instance,  the  removal  of  Philip  by 
the  Spirit  (or  angel  ?)  from  the  side  of  the  Ethiopian 
to  Azotus ;  but  the  main  narrative  oti'ers  no  real 
reason  for  rejection.  The  best  statement  of  all 
the  points  open  to  suspicion  is  still  that  of  ZeUer- 
Overbeck  (The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Eng.  tr.,  Lon- 
don, 1875-76),  but  the  conclusions  which  Zeller 
draws  are  often  untenable.  He  did  not  realize 
that  in  any  narrative  there  is  a  combination  of 
really  observed  fact  and  of  hypotheses  to  explain 
the  fact.  The  hypotheses  of  a  writer  or  narrator 
of  the  1st  cent,  were  frequently  of  a  kind  that  we 
should  now  never  think  of  suggesting.  But  that 
is  no  reason  why  the  narrative  as  a  whole  should 
not  be  regarded  as  a  statement  of  fact.  The  exist- 
ence, in  any  given  narrative,  of  improbable  ex- 


planations as  to  how  events  happened  is  not  an  argu- 
ment against  its  early  date  and  general  trust- 
worthiness, unless  it  can  be  shown  that  the  ex- 
1>lanation  involves  improbability  not  only  in  fact 
mt  also  in  thought — it  must  not  only  be  improb- 
able that  the  event  really  happened  in  the  manner 
suggested,  but  it  must  be  improbable  that  a  narra- 
tor of  that  age  would  have  thought  that  it  so  hap- 
pened. Judged  by  this  standard,  the  Antiochene 
and  Jerusalem-Caesarean  traditions  seem  to  deserve 
credence  as  good  and  early  sources. 

The  same  thing  can  be  said  of  source  A  in  the 
purely  Jerusalem  tradition.  But  the  problem 
raised  by  source  B  is  more  difficult.  If  it  be  as- 
sumed that  Ac  1  does  not  belong  to  it,  it  can  only 
be  compared  with  source  A.  To  this  it  seems  in- 
ferior, but  on  the  whole  it  narrates  the  same  events, 
and  it  would  certainly  be  rash  to  regard  B  as 
valueless.  No  doubt  it  is  true  that,  if  the  events 
happened  in  the  order  given  in  A,  they  cannot 
have  happened  in  the  order  given  in  B,  but  it  is 
quite  possible  that  many  details  in  B  may  be  cor- 
rect in  spite  of  the  fact  that  they  are  told  other- 
wise or  not  told  at  all  in  A. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  Ac  1  be  assigned  to  B, 
the  question  is  more  complicated.  According  to 
Ac  1,  the  Ascension  took  place  near  Jerusalem 
forty  days  after  the  Resurrection,  and  the  infer- 
ence is  suggested  that  the  disciples,  including 
Peter,  never  left  Jerusalem  after  the  Crucitixion. 
That  this  was  Luke's  o%%ti  \-iew  is  made  quite  plain 
from  the  Gospel,  except  that  there  does  not  appear 
to  be  any  room  in  the  Gospel  narrative  for  the  forty 
days  between  the  Resurrection  and  the  Ascension. 
The  problems  which  arise  are  therefore  :  (1)  How 
far  can  the  Gospel  of  Luke  and  Acts  1  be  recon- 
ciled? (2)  Is  it  more  probable  that  the  disciples 
stayed  in  Jerusalem  or  went  to  Galilee  ? 

1.  How  far  can  the  Gospel  of  Luke  and  Acts  1 
be  reconciled  ? — Various  attempts  have  been  made 
to  hnd  room  in  the  Gospel  for  the  '  forty  days.' 
They  have  not,  however,  been  successful,  as  the 
connecting  links  in  the  Gospel  narrative  are  quite 
clear  from  the  morning  of  the  Resurrection  to  the 
moment  of  the  Ascension,  which  is  plainly  intended 
to  be  regarded  as  taking  place  on  the  evening  of 
the  same  day.  According  to  Lk  24"-,  the  sequence 
of  the  events  was  the  following.  Early  on  Sunday 
morning  certain  women  went  to  the  tomb,  and  to 
them  two  men  appeared  who  announced  the  Resur- 
rection ;  the  women  believed,  but  failed  to  con- 
vince the  disciples.  Later  on  in  the  same  day  {ir 
avT%  r§  Tiiidpq.)  two  disciples  saw  the  risen  Lord  on 
the  way  to  Emmaus,  and  at  once  returned  to  Jeru- 
salem to  tell  the  news  (drcurTdi^ei  o-vr^  T~j  ^p<f)- 
While  they  were  narrating  their  experience  the 
Lord  appeared,  led  them  out  to  Bethany,  and  was 
taken  up  to  heaven.  The  only  place  where  there 
is  any  possibility  of  a  break  in  the  narrative  is  v.** 
{eiref  Si),  but  this  possibility  (in  any  case  contrary 
to  the  general  impression  given  by  the  passage)  is 
excluded  by  the  facts  that  flxtj'  5e  is  a  peculiarly 
Lucan  phrase  (59  times  in  Luke,  15  times  in  Acts, 
only  once  elsewhere  in  the  NT),  and  that  it  never 
implies  that  a  narrative  is  not  continuous,  and 
usually  the  reverse.  Moreover,  that  Lk  24'^  what>- 
ever  text  be  taken,  refers  to  the  Ascension  is 
rendered  certain  by  the  reference  in  Ac  1-.  Thus, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  the  CJospel  places  the  Ascen- 
sion on  the  evening  or  night  of  the  third  day  after 
the  Crucifixion.  It  is  equally  clear  that  Acts 
places  the  Ascension  forty  days  later,  if  the  text 
of  1^  (8i  ijfiepQv  TcffffapdKorra)  is  correct ;  and,  though 
there  is,  it  is  true,  some  confusion  in  the  text  at 
this  point,  it  is  not  enough  to  justify  the  omission 
of  '  forty  days '  (see  esp.  F.  Blass,  Acta  Apostolorum 
secundum  formam  quce  videtur  Homanatn,  Leipzig, 
1896,    p.   xxiii).      The    only  possible    sn^estion. 


26 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


therefore,  is  tliat  tlio  writer  found  some  reason  to 
modify  his  opinions  in  the  interval  between  writ- 
in<j  tlio  (Josi>el  and  the  Acts.  VViietlier  ho  was 
riglit  to  do  so  depends  on  tlio  jtnif^ment  passed  on 
various  factors,  wliioh  cannot  be  discussed  hero, 
but  majyr  be  summed  up  in  the  question  whether 
the  evidence  of  the  Paulino  Epistles  does  not  suj^- 
{^esb  that  the  earliest  Christian  view  was  that 
Ascension  and  Resurrection  were  but  two  ways  of 
describinfj  the  same  fact,  and  whether  this  is  not 
also  implied  in  the  speeches  of  Peter  in  Ac  2  and 
3  *  (cf.  especially  Ko  8-",  Ph  l''^,  Ac  2=«  3'^-'°).  Tiic 
evidence  is  not  sufficient  to  settle  the  point,  but  it 
shows  tliat  the  problem  is  not  imajxinaiy. 

2.  Is  it  more  probable  that  the  disciples  stayed 
in  Jerusalem  or  went  to  Galilee? — The  evidence 
that  the  disciples  went  to  Galilee  is  found  in 
Mark.t  The  end  of  Mark  is,  of  course,  missing,  but 
there  are  in  the  existing  text  two  indications  that 
the  appearances  of  the  risen  Christ  were  in  Galilee, 
and  therefore  that  the  disciples  must  iiave  returned 
there  after  the  Crucilixion.  (a)  Mk  14'-''-,  '  All  ye 
shall  be  offended  :  for  it  is  written,  I  will  smite  the 
shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered.  But 
after  I  am  risen,  I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee.' 
This  seems  intended  to  prepare  the  way  for  the 
flight  of  the  disciples  aiter  the  arrest  in  Geth- 
semane  ;  the  meaning  of  the  second  part,  '  I  will 
go  before  you  into  Galilee,'  is  obscure,  but  in  any 
case  it  implies  a  return  to  Galilee,  (b)  Mk  16^  (the 
message  of  the  young  man  at  the  tomb),  '  Go,  tell 
his  disciples  anu  Peter  tiiat  he  is  going  before  you 
into  Galilee,  there  shall  you  see  him.'  Here  it 
is  quite  clearly  stated  that  the  first  appearance  of 
the  risen  Christ  to  the  disciples  is  to  be  in  Galilee, 
and  once  more  it  must  be  urged  that  this  implies 
that  the  disciples  went  there. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  evidence  of  Luke  and 
the  Acts  is  that  the  disciples  did  not  leave  Jeru- 
salem, and  that,  so  far  from  the  risen  Lord  announ- 
cing His  future  appearance  to  the  disciples  in  Galilee, 
He  actually  told  them  to  remain  in  Jerusalem. 

That  the  two  traditions  thus  exist  cannot  be 
questioned,  nor  can  they  be  reconciled  without 
violence.  If,  however,  we  have  to  choose  between 
them,  the  Galila;an  tradition  seems  to  deserve  the 
preference.  It  is  in  itself  much  move  probable 
that  the  disciples  fled  to  Galilee  when  tliey  left 
Jesus  to  be  arrested  by  Himself,  than  tliat  they 
went  into  Jerusalem.  If  they  were,  as  the  narra- 
tive says,  panic-stricken,  Jerusalem  was  the  last 
place  to  which  those  who  were  not  inhabitants  of 
that  city  would  go.  Moreover,  it  is  not  difficult 
to  see  that  the  tendency  of  Christian  history  would 
have  naturally  emphasized  Jerusalem  and  omitted 
Galilee,  for  it  is  certainly  a  fact  that  from  the  be- 
ginning the  Christian  Church  found  its  centre  in 
Jerusalem  and  not  in  Galilee.  Why  this  was  so 
is  obscure,  and  there  is  a  link  missing  in  the 
hist-ory  of  the  chain  of  events.  This  must  be 
recognized,  but  what  either  source  B  or  Luke 
himself  (if  Ac  1  be  not  part  of  source  B)  has  done 
is  to  connect  up  the  links  of  the  cliain  as  if  tiie 
Galila^an  link  luul  never  existed.  So  far  as  this  goes, 
it  is  a  reason  for  not  accepting  Ac  1  as  an  accurate 
account  of  history ;  and  this  judgment  perhaps 
reflects  on  source  B  and  certainly  in  some  metisure 
on  Luke.  It  must,  however,  be  noted  that  it  ought 
not  seriously  to  affect  our  judgment  on  Luke's 
account  of  later  events.  The  period  between  the 
Crucifixion  and  the  growth  of  the  Jerusalem 
community  was  naturally  the  most  obscure  noint 
in  the  history  of  Christianity  ;  and,  even  if  Luke 

*  0(  course,  if  this  be  so,  there  is  a  coritr.niiclion  between 
Ac  1  and  2,  and  it  becomes  more  pn)l)al)le  (a)  that  Ac  1  is  from 
a  separate  tradition  from  source  15 ;  (fc)  that  source  B,  like  A, 
was  a  written  document  when  used  by  fjuke. 

t  Secondary  evideni^e  Is  to  bo  foinid  in  Mt  28,  .In  21,  and  the 
*  Qospel  of  Peter,'  but  Uark  is  the  primary  evidence. 


went  wrong  in  his  attempt  to  find  out  the  facts  at 
this  point,  that  is  no  special  rea.son  for  rejecting 
his  evidence  for  later  events  when  he  really  was  in 
a  position  to  obtain  sound  information.  AH  that 
is  really  shown  is  that,  unlike  Mark,  he  was  never 
in  close  contact  with  one  of  the  original  Galikean 
disciples. 

Vl.  CUIiOyOLOGY  OP  Acts. —Thore  are  no 
definite  chronological  statements  in  the  Acts, 
such  as  those  in  Lk  3'.  But  at  five  points  syn- 
chronisms with  known  events  can  be  established 
and  used  as  the  basis  of  a  chronological  system. 
These  are  the  death  of  Uerod  Agrippa  I.  (Ac  12^') ; 
the  famine  in  Jiuhea  (II-'^"-  12^)  ;  Gallio's  pro- 
consulate in  Corinth  (IS^'') ;  the  decree  of  Claudius 
banishing  all  Jews  from  Rome  (18'"') ;  and  the 
axTival  of  Festus  in  Judica  (2")'). 

1.  The  death  of  Herod  Agrippa. — Agrippa  I., 
according  to  the  evidence  of  coins*  (if  these  be 
genuine),  reigned  nine  years.  The  beginning  of 
his  reign  was  immediately  after  the  accession  of 
Caligula,  who  became  Emperor  on  16  March,  A.D. 
37,  and  within  a  few  days  appointed  Agrippa,  who 
was  then  in  Rome,  to  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  with 
the  title  of  king  ;  to  this  in  39-40  the  tetrarchy  of 
Antipas  was  added.  Later  on,  Claudius  added 
Judaea,  Samaria,  and  Galilee.  The  difficulty  is  that 
Josephus  says  that  Agrippa  died  in  the  seventh  year 
of  his  reign.  This  would  be  between  the  spring  of 
43  and  that  of  44,  but  it  does  not  agree  with  the 
evidence  of  the  coinage,  unless  it  be  supposed  that 
Agrippa  dated  his  accession  from  the  death  of  Philip 
rather  than  from  his  appointment  by  Caligula. 

2.  The  famine  in  Judaea.— Our  information  for 
the  date  of  this  event  is  found  in  Josephus  and 
Orosius.  Josephus  {Ant,  XX.  v.)  says  that  the 
famine  took  place  during  the  procuratorship  of 
Alexander.  Alexander's  term  of  office  ended  in 
A.D.  48,  and  this  is  therefore  the  terminus  ad  qucm 
for  the  date  of  the  famine.  His  term  of  office 
began  after  that  of  Fadus.  It  is  not  known  wiien 
Fadus  retired,  but  he  was  sent  to  Judjea  after  the 
death  of  Herod  Agripjia  I.  in  A.D.  44,  so  that 
Alexanders  term  cannot  have  begun  before  45, 
and  more  probably  not  before  46.  Thus  Joseplius 
fixes  the  famine  within  a  margin  of  less  than  two 
years  on  either  side  of  47. 

Orosius  (VII.  vi.),  a  writer  of  the  5th  cent.,  is 
more  definite,  and  fixes  the  famine  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Claudius,  which,  on  his  system  of  reckon- 
ing (see  Ramsay,  Was  Christ  born  at  Bethlehem  i 
London,  1898,  p.  223,  which  sujiplements  and 
corrects  the  statement  in  St.  Paul  the  Traveller 
and  the  Roman  Citizen,  do.  1895,  p.  68  f.),  was  prob- 
ably from  Sept.  44  to  Sept.  45,  or  possibly  from  Jan. 
45  to  Jan.  46.  This  statement  has,  of  course,  only- 
the  value  which  may  be  attributed  to  the  sources 
of  Orosius,  which  are  unknown ;  but  it  supports 
Joseplius  fairly  well,  and  it  is  not  probable  that 
Orosius  was  acquainted  with  the  Antiquities,  so 
that  his  statement  has  independent  value. 

3.  Gallio's  proconsulate. — This  date  has  recently 
been  fixed  with  considerable  definiteness  by  the 
discovery  of  a  fragment  of  an  inscription  at  Delphi  t 
which  contains  a  reference  to  Gallio  as  proconsul 
(which  must  be  proconsul  of  Achaia),  and  bears 
the  date  of  the  26th  '  acclamation '  of  tlie  Emperor 
Claudius.  This  acclamation  was  before  I  Aug. 
A.D.  52  (CIL  vi.  125b),  as  an  inscription  of  that 
date  refers  to  the  27th  acclamation,  and  after  25 
Jan.  51,  as  his  24th  acclamation  came  in  his  11th 
tribunician  year  (i.e.  25  Jan.  51-24  Jan.  52).  More- 
over, it  must  h.avo  been  some  considerable  time  after 
25  Jan.  51,  as  the  22nd,  23rd,  and  24th  acclamations 

•  See  F.  W.  Madden,  Coint  of  the  Jewn,  London,  1881,  p.  130. 

t  First  published  by  A.  Nilcitsky  in  Uussian,  in  Kpifjraphical 
Stmiiig  at  Di'ljiUi,  Odessa,  1808,  and  now  most  accessible  in 
Deissmann's  I'atdua,  Xiibingen,  lUll. 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


27 


all  came  in  the  11th  tribunician  year,  and  the 
•Joth  acclamation  has  not  yet  been  found,  so  tliat 
really  the  end  of  51  is  the  earliest  probable  date 
for  the  'Jtith  acclamation.  Thus  tlie  Delphi  in- 
scription must  be  placed  between  the  end  of  51 
and  1  Aug.  52.  At  this  time  Gallic  was  in  office. 
The  proconsul  usually  entered  on  his  office  in  the 
middle  of  the  summer  (cf.  Monimsen,  Rom.  Staats- 
rec/U'^,  ii.  [Leipzig,  1888]  256),  and  normally  held  it 
for  one  year  only,  though  sometimes  he  continued 
in  it  for  another  term.  According  to  this,  Gallic 
must  have  come  to  Corinth  in  July  51.  Twelve 
months  later  is  not  absolutely  impossible,  though  it 
is  improbable,  for  we  do  not  know  whether  Claudius 
had  been  acclaimed  for  a  long  or  a  short  time  before 
1  Aug.  52,  merely  that  by  then  his  27th  acclamation 
had  taken  place.  According  to  Ac  18'*,  St.  Paul's 
trial  took  place  TaWLuvoi  oi  avdvirdTov  tvros,  and 
this  is  usually  taken  to  mean  'as  soon  as  Gallic 
liecame  proconsul.'  Probably  this  is  correct  exe- 
gesis, though  scarcely  an  accurate  translation ; 
and,  if  so,  St.  Paul's  trial  must  have  been  in  the 
summer  of  51,  or,  with  later  date  for  Gallic,  in  the 
summer  of  52. 

4.  The  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  Rome. — Ac- 
cording to  Ac  18-,  the  Emperor  Claudius  banished 
all  Jews  from  Rome.  Tiie  same  fact  is  mentioned 
by  Suetonius  {Claudius,  25),  who  says  :  '  ludaeos, 
impulsore  Chresto,  assidue  tumultuantes  Roma 
expulit,'  but  no  date  is  given.  Tacitus  does  not 
mention  the  fact ;  nor  does  Josephus.  Orosius 
(VU.  vi.  15)  states  that  it  was  in  the  ninth  year  of 
Claudius,  which  probably  means  Sept.  49-Sept.  50. 
He  states  that  this  date  is  derived  from  Josephus, 
which  is  clearly  a  mistake,  unless  he  is  referring 
to  some  other  writer  of  that  name  (cf.  Deissmann, 
Paulus),  but  the  date  agrees  very  well  with  that  of 
Gallic's  proconsulate  ;  for,  if  the  trial  before 
Gallic  was  in  Aug.  51,  and  St.  Paul  had  been  in 
Corinth  18  months  (Ac  IS'-),  the  Apostle  must 
have  reached  Corinth  in  April  50,  at  which  time 
Aquila  had  just  arrived  in  consequence  of  the 
decree  of  Claudius. 

5.  The  airriyal  of  Festos  in  Judaea. — This  date 
is  unfortunately  surrounded  by  gieat  difficulties. 
The  facts  are  as  follows :  Eusebius,  in  his  Chroni- 
con,  places  the  arrival  of  Festus  in  the  second  year 
of  Nero,  which  probably  means  not  Oct.  55-Oct.  56 
— the  true  second  year  of  his  reign — but,  accord- 
ing to  the  Eusebian  plan  of  reckoning,  Sept.  56- 
Sept.  57.  Josephus  states  that  Felix,  whom  Festus 
replaced,  was  prosecuted  on  his  return  to  Rome, 
but  escaped  owing  to  the  influence  of  Pallas  his 
brother.  But  Pallas  was  dismissed,  according  to 
Tacitus,  before  the  death  of  Britannicus,  and 
Britannicus  was,  also  according  to  Tacitus,  just 
14  years  old.  Britannicus  was  bom  in  Feb.  41, 
so  that  Festus  must  have  entered  on  his  office, 
according  to  this  reckoning,  before  A.D.  55. 
Nevertheless,  Josephus  appears  to  place  the 
greater  part  of  the  events  under  Felix  in  Nero's 
reign,  and  this  can  hardly  be  the  case  if  he  retired 
before  Nero  had  reigned  for  three  months.  It  is 
thought,  therefore,  either  that  Tacitus  made  a 
mistake  as  to  the  age  of  Britannicus,  or  that 
Pallas  retained  considerable  influence  even  after 
his  fall.  Various  other  arguments  have  been  used, 
but  none  is  based  on  exact  statements  or  has  any 
real  value.  Thus,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the 
combination  cf  statements  in  Josephus  and  Taci- 
tus seems  to  give  no  firm  basis  for  argument,  we 
have  only  Eusebius  and  general  probability  to  use. 
General  probability  really  means  in  this  case  con- 
sidering whether  the  Eusebian  date  fits  in  with 
the  date  cf  St.  Paul's  trial  by  Gallic,  and  has, 
therefore,  most  cf  the  faults  of  circular  reason- 
ing. Still,  the  Eusebian  date  comes  out  of  this 
test  fairly  well.     St.  Paul  was  tried  by  Gallic  in 


Aug.    A.D.   51.      We    may    then    reconstruct    as 
follows  : — 

Trial  by  Gallio— Aug.  61. 

Corinth  to  .\ntioch— end  of  51. 

Arrival  at  Ephesus — summer  of  52. 

Departure  from  Ephesus  and  arrival  at  Corinth— autumn  of  54. 

Arrival  at  Jerusalem  and  arrest — summer  of  55. 

Two  years'  imprisonment — 65  to  summer  57. 

Trial  before  Festus — summer  67. 

In  view  of  the  evidence  as  to  Gallio,  this  is  the 
earliest  possible  chronology,  unless  we  suppose 
that  two  years  in  prison  means  June  5o-summer 
56,  which  is,  indeed,  part  of  two  years,  though  it 
is  doubtful  whether  it  could  have  been  described 
as  Sierias  TrXrjpwdeiarji — the  phrase  used  in  Ac  24-'. 

Summary. — These  are  the  only  data  in  Acts  for 
which  any  high  degree  of  probability  can  be 
claimed.  The  date  cf  Gallio  is  by  far  the  most 
certain.  If  we  combine  with  them  the  further 
data  in  Galatians,  we  obtain  a  reasonably  good 
chronology  as  far  back  as  the  conversion  of 
St.  Paul.  The  second  \-isit  to  Jerusalem  in 
Galatians  is  identical  either  with  the  time  of  the 
famine  or  with  that  of  the  Council.  If  the 
former,  it  can  be  placed  in  +46,  if  the  latter,  in 
+  48  ;  and  the  conversion  was  either  14  or  17  years 
before  this,  according  to  the  exegesis  adopted  for 
the  statements  in  Galatians ;  though,  owing  to 
the  ancient  method  of  reckoning,  14  may  mean  a 
few  months  more  than  12,  and  17  a  few  months 
more  than  15.  Thus  the  earliest  date  for  the 
conversion  would  be  A.D.  31,  the  latest  36. 

It  should,  however,  be  remembered  that  the 
perictl  cf  14  years  reckoned  between  the  first  and 
second  visits  of  St.  Paul  to  Jerusalem  depends 
entirely  on  the  reading  AIAIA6TC0N  in  Gal  2\ 
which  might  easily  have  been  a  corruption  for 
AIAAETCON  (  =  ' after  4  years'),  and  that  the  14 
years  in  question  are  always  a  difficulty,  as  events 
seem  to  have  moved  rapidly  before  and  after  that 

?eriod,  but  during  it  to  have  stood  relatively  still, 
'he  possibility  ought  not  to  be  neglected  that  the 
conversion  was  10  years  later  than  the  dates 
suggested,  i.e.  in  41  or  46.  This  is  especially 
important,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  evidence 
of  Josephus  as  to  the  marriage  of  Herod  and 
Herodias  suggests  that  the  death  of  John  the 
Baptist,  and  therefore  the  Crucifixion,  were  later 
than  has  usually  been  thought  (see  K.  Lake,  '  Date 
of  Herod's  Marriage  with  Herodias  and  the  Chron- 
ology of  the  Gospels,'  in  Expositor,  8th  ser.  iv. 
[1912]  462). 

LiTBRATrRK, — For  literature  on  the  subject  see  A.  Hamack, 
Chronoioyie,  Leipzig,  1897-1904,  i.  233-9  ;  the  art.  in  U  DB  on 
'Chronology'  by  C.  H.  Turner  (older  statementi  are  almost 
entirely  based  on  K.  Wieseler's  Chronol.  des  apost.  Zeitalters, 
Hamburg,  1S4S)  ;  C.  Clemen,  Paulus,  Giessen,  1904. 

VII.  The  Theology  of  Acts.— The  theology 
of  Acts  is,  on  the  whole,  simple  and  early,  shewing 
no  traces  of  Jchannine,  and  surprisingly  few  of 
Pauline,  influence.  In  common  with  all  other 
canonical  writings,  it  regards  the  God  of  the 
Christians  as  the  one  true  God,  who  had  revealed 
Himself  in  time  past  to  His  chosen  people  the 
Jews ;  and  it  identifies  Jesus  with  the  promised 
Messiah,  who  will  come  from  heaven  to  judge  the 
world,  and  to  inaugurate  the  Kingdom  of  God 
on  the  earth.  There  is,  however,  just  as  in  the 
Third  Gospel,  a  noticeably  smaller  degree  of 
interest  in  the  Messianic  kingdom  than  in  Mk. 
and  Mt.,  and  a  proportionately  increased  interest 
in  the  Spirit.  This  may  probably  be  explained 
as  due  to  the  fact  that  the  writer  belonged  to  a 
more  Gentile  circle  than  those  in  which  Mk.  and 
Mt.  were  written.  It  is  strange  that  in  some 
respects  Acts  is  less  '  Gentile'  or  '  Greek  '  than  the 
Epistles.  This  is  partially  explained  by  the  fact 
that  much  cf  so-called  Paulinis?nus  has  been  read 
into  the  Epistles ;  but,  even  when  an  allowance 


28 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


has  been  made  for  this  fact,  the  dilHculty  re- 
mains. The  i»oints  on  which  the  theology  of  Acts 
requires  discussion  in  detail  are  its  christolo<,'y, 
eschatology,  attitude  to  the  OT  and  Jewish 
Law,  doctrine  of  the  Spirit,  and  doctrine  of 
baptism. 

1.  Chrlstology. — In  Acts  Jesus  is  recognized  as 
the  Christ,  but  tlie  Christology  belongs  to  an  early 
type.  There  is  no  suggestion  of  the  JjOgos-Christ- 
ology  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  or  even  of  the  Epistles 
of  the  Cai)tivity.  *  The  Christ '  appears  to  have 
tiie  quite  j)rimitive  meaning  of  '  the  king  of 
the  kingdom  of  CJod,  who  is  appointed  by  Uod  to 
judge  tlie  world '  (cf.  fffTriaev  ij/^L^pay  iv  ri  fjL^Wei 
KpLvtiv  TTji'  oLKOvixivriv  iv  dtnaioffuvr)  iv  av5pl  <(5  ibpiaev, 
irlffTiv  irapaax'^v  iraffiv  ovotrrTjcras  avrov  (k  veKpCiv,  IT"")- 
At  wliat  point  Jesus  became  Christ,  according  to 
Acts,  is  not  quite  clear.  Harnack  (Neue  Unter- 
surhungen  zur  Avostelgesch.,  p.  7511.)  thinks  that 
Luke  regarded  the  Kesurrection  as  the  moment, 
in  agreement  with  one  interpretation  of  Ro  1^ 
In  favour  of  this  view  can  be  cited  Ac  13^^'"  (St. 
Paul's  speech  at  Antio(;h  in  IHsidia),  raijrriv  [i.e. 
iirayyeXlav]  6  Oeb^  iKTreirX-fipuKev  roii  riKvon  r]fj.u>v 
avaarTTjffas  'Iricrouv,  wj  /cai  iv  T(f  ^a\fj.<f  yiypanrai  rijJ 
SevripifT  vl6s  fiov  elcru,  iyw  ai^nepov  yeyivvrjKd  ere,  Aviiich, 
strictly  interpreted,  n»ust  mean  that  Jesus  became 
God's  Son  at  the  Kesurrection,  for  in  the  context 
dvatrrijo-as  can  be  given  no  other  translation.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  must  be  remembered  that  many 
critics  think  that  this  same  quotation  from  I's  '2 
is  connected  with  the  Baptism  in  Lk  3''^'^,*  in  wliich 
ca.se  the  further  quotation  in  Lk  4^*,  nvevixa  Kvplov 
iv'  ifii,  ov  eiveKev  ^xp'-'^^"  M^i  kt\.,  acquires  increased 
force,  for  the  connexion  of  ^xP'-'^^^  with  Xpierrds  is 
obvious.  This,  again,  reflects  light  on  Ac  10"**  (ibs 
fXP^'^f  cii)t6i'  6  debs  irvev/xari  071^  /cat  dwdfiei)  and  the 
similar  piirase  in  4-''.  It  must  remain  a  problem 
for  critics  how  far  this  dillerence  between  Ac  13^^'- 
and  10**  and  4-'  is  accidental  (or  merely  apparent), 
and  how  far  it  is  justiliable  to  connect  it  with  tlie 
fact  that  Ac  13  (which  agrees  with  Ko  1*)  belongs 
to  the  Pauline  source,  while  Ac  4  and  10  belong  to 
the  Jerusalem  source  A  and  the  clo.sely  connected 
or  identical  .lerusalem-Caesarean  source  (which 
agree  with  at  all  events  one  interpretation  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Baptism  in  Mk  1). 

The  possible  dillerence  must,  however,  in  any 
case  not  be  exaggerated.  The  whole  of  early 
Christian  literature  outside  Johannine  influence 
is  full  of  apparent  inconsistencies,  because  Xpiffrds 
sometimes  means  '  the  person  who  is  by  nature 
and  predestination  the  appointed  Messiah,'  some- 
times more  naiTowly  '  the  actual  Messiah  reigning 
in  the  Kingdom  of  God.'  In  the  former  sense  it 
was  possible  to  say  flvai  rbv  Xpi<rTbv'lr]a-ovv  f  (Ac  18^), 
or  that  fSfi  iraOeiv  rbv  Xpiardv  (17').  In  the  latter 
sense  it  was  possible  to  si)eak  of  Jesus  as  rbv  irpo- 
Kexfi-pLCTnivov  iifuv  Xpurrbv  (3-"),  where,  in  the  light 
of  the  whole  passage,  the  rbv  TrpoKexeipi<T/ji.ivov  v/ntv 
most  probably  has  reference  to  the  Kesurrection, 
though  other  interpretations  are  possible ;  or  to 
say  Kvpiov  avTbv  Kal  Xpierrbv  iwolrjcrev  6  debs  tovtov  rbv 
'lr](Tovv  (2^),  which  with  less  doubt  may  be  referred 
to  the  Kesurrection.  The  point  seems  to  be  that, 
on  the  one  hand,  Luke  wishes  to  say  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,   and  that,  on  the  other,  he  does  not 

•  The  text  is  doubtful  :  the  editors  usually  give  <rv  <!  6  vios  moi 
o  ayomjTo?,  iv  <toi  i/uJofCTjo-a  with  K  B  L  33  fani  1,  fam  13,  and  the 
mass  of  MSS  (t'.e.  the  //  and  K  texts,  and  at  least  two  im- 
portant branches  of  /  [J  and  U']),  but  Harnack  prefers  to  read 
the  quotation  from  Ps  2  with  D  a  b  c  S  al.  Aujj.  Cleui'ie*-  (thus 
possibly  the  text  of  /»  and  certainly  of  a  text  coeval  with  I-U-K 
[if  such  a  text  existed]) ;  probably  he  is  rii,'ht. 

t  This  must  mean  that  the  Messiab  (of  whom  all  men  know) 
is  Jesus  (of  whom  they  had  previously  not  heard) ;  and  em- 
phasizes the  fact  that,  whereas  Chri8tolo({y  means  to  most 
people  of  this  generation  an  attempt  to  give  an  adequate 
doctrinal  statement  of  Jesus,  it  meant  for  the  earliest  genera- 
tion an  attempt  to  show  that  Jesus  adequately  fulfilled  an 
already  existini;  doctrinal  definition  of  the  Messiah. 


wish  to  say  that  the  life  of  Jesus  was  the  Messianic 
Parousia  or  '  Coming,'  and  does  wish  to  say  that 
by  the  Kesurrection  Jesus  became  the  heavenly, 
glorious  Being  who  would  come  shortly  to  judge 
the  world. 

It  should  be  noted,  as  an  especially  archaic 
characteristic,  that  in  Acts  'IijffoOj  XpiarSi  is  not 
used  as  a  name  except  in  the  i)hrase  rb  dvofia'lrjffoO 
XpiffTov  (2»«3M'«  S^MO^s  15"«  IG'") ;  elsewhere  Xptirr6j 
is  always  predicative.  In  this  respect  Acts  seems 
to  be  more  archaic  than  the  Pauline  Kpistles. 

The  death  of  the  Christ  has  in  Acts  but  little 
theological  importance.  In  one  place  only  (20** 
TTjv  iKKXtjfflav  ToC  Kvplov  [l)ut  deov  a  B  vg,  a  few  other 
authorities,  and  the  TK]  fjv  irepieTroirjffaro  5td  tov 
aifiaros  roO  Idlov)  is  there  anything  which  approaches 
the  Pauline  doctrine,  and  it  is  noticeable  that  this 
passage  is  from  the  speech  of  Paul  to  the  Epiiesian 
elders.  In  the  speeclies  of  Peter  and  Stephen,  the 
death  of  the  Christ  is  regarded  as  a  wicked  act  of 
the  Jews  rather  than  as  a  necessary  part  of  a  plan 
of  salvation.  The  most  important  passage  is  3'^"'' : 
Kal  vvv,  a5e\<poi,  ol5a  6ti  Kark  dyvoiav  iirpd^are,  ibcrirep 
Kal  ol  dpxovres  iifiuv.  6  Si  debs  &  irpoKarrjyyeCKev  5td 
crrbfiaros  iravnov  rQv  wpoepTjTQv  TraOelvrbv  Xpiarbv  airrov 
iirXripwcrev  oOrws.  fieravoriffaTe  o^v,  koI  iTn<rTpi\f/aTe, 
irpbs  rb  i^aXeicji0TJvaL  v/xwv  rds  anaprlas,  6wuis  dv  IXdixxxi 
Kaipol  dvaipv^ews  dirb  irpoadiirov  tov  Kvplov  Kal  diroareiXr) 
rbv  ■jTpoKexeipKT/J.ivov  i'/juv  Xpiarbv  'lyjaoCv,  6v  5ei  ovpavbv 
fjiiv  di^aaOai  dxpi-  XP^'''^''  diroKaracrTdaews  -rrdvTWv,  ktX. 
Here  there  is  a  verbal  connexion  between  the  suHer- 
ing  of  the  Christ  and  the  blotting  out  of  sins,  but 
no  suggestion  of  any  causal  connexion.  The  writer 
says  that  the  Jews  put  the  Messiah  to  death,  as 
had  been  foretold,  but  they  did  it  in  ignorance  ; 
and,  if  they  repent,  this  and  other  sins  will  be 
blotted  out,  and  Jesus  will  corneas  the  predestined 
Messiah.  The  cause  of  the  blotting  out  of  sins  is 
here,  as  in  tlie  OT  prophets,  repentance  and  change 
of  conduct  (i-jnaTpixj/are) ;  nothing  is  said  to  suggest 
that  this  would  not  have  been  effective  without 
the  suffering  of  tlie  Messiah. 

2.  Eschatology. — There  is  comparatively  little 
in  Acts  which  throws  light  on  the  eschatologic.al 
expectation  of  the  writer.  As  compared  with 
Mark  or  St.  Paul,  he  seems  to  be  less  eschato- 
logical,  but  traces  of  the  primitive  expectation  are 
not  wanting.  In  P^  the  Parousia  of  the  Messiah 
is  still  expected  :  'This  Jesus  who  has  lieen  taken 
up  into  Heaven  shall  so  come  as  ye  have  seen  him 
go  into  Heaven  '  ;  and,  though  it  is  not  here  stated 
that  the  witnesses  of  the  Ascension  shall  also  live 
to  see  the  Parousia,  this  seems  to  be  implied.  The 
same  sort  of  comment  can  be  made  on  3^'-  and  17'' ; 
but  otherwise  there  is  little  in  Acts  to  bear  on  the 
eschatological  expectation.  This  was,  indeed,  to 
be  expected  in  a  book  written  l)y  Luke,  who  in 
iiis  Gospel  greatly  lessened  the  eschatological 
elements  fount!  in  Mark  and  Q. 

3.  The  OT  and  Jewish  Law.— For  the  writer  of 
Acts  the  OT  was  the  written  source  of  all  revela- 
tion. The  sufficient  proof  of  any  argument  or 
explanation  of  any  historical  event  was  to  be  found 
in  the  fact  that  it  had  been  prophesied.  Like  all 
Greek-writing  Christians,  he  uses  the  LXX  and 
does  not  stop  to  ask  whether  it  is  textually 
accurate. 

But  a  distinction  must  be  made  between  the 
OT  as  prophecy  and  the  OT  as  Law.  In  the  latter 
sense  the  position  taken  up  in  Acts  is  that  the  Law 
of  the  OT  is  binding  in  every  detail  on  Jewish 
Cliristians,  but  not  binding  at  .ill  on  Gentile 
Christians.  The  most  remarkable  example  of 
tills  is  the  picture  given  in  cli.  25  of  St.  Paul's 
acceptance  of  the  Law  in  Jerusalem,  and  the  cir- 
cumcision of  Timotliy.  Whether  this  can  l)e  re- 
conciled with  the  Apostle's  own  iM)sition  is  a  point 
for  students  of  the  Epistles  to  settle  ;  the  present 


ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


29 


writer  believes  that  in  this  respect  Acts  gives 
&  faithful  representation  of  St.  Paul's  own  view 
(see  the  admirable  discussion  in  Uamack,  Apostcl- 
gesch.,  pp.  8  and  211-217).  The  reason  for  thinking 
that  the  Law  was  still  binding  on  Jews  but  not  on 
Gentiles  must  be  sought  in  a  distinction  between 
the  Law  as  source  of  salvation — it  was  not  this  for 
any  one — and  tlie  Law  as  command  of  God — this 
it  was  for  the  Jew,  but  not  for  the  Gentile. 

As  prophecies,  the  OT  books  are  accepted  without 
question,  and  there  is  no  trace  of  the  Jewish  con- 
troversy which  raised  the  dispute  as  to  the  correct 
exegesis  of  the  OT.  This  controversy  can  be  traced 
in  tlie  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  found  its  extreme 
result  in  the  attitude  of  Marcion,  but  in  Acts  it 
cannot  be  found,  and  apparently  this  is  because 
the  dispute  had  not  yet  arisen.  (For  the  best 
summary  of  this  question  see  Hamack,  Apostel- 
gesch.,  p.  8  n.) 

i.  The  Spirit. — It  is  not  quite  clear  whether 
Acts  regards  all  Christians  as  inspired  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but  it  is  at  least  certain  that  it  regards  this 
as  true  of  all  the  leaders,  and  of  all  who  were  fully 
Christians.  It  would  appear  possible,  however, 
from  such  episodes  as  that  of  the  Christians  in 
Ephesus  who  had  been  baptized  only  in  John's 
baptism,  that  a  kind  of  imperfect  Christianity  was 
recognized ;  these  Ephesians  are  described  as  ftadrp-ds, 
even  before  they  had  been  baptized.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  inadequacy  of  their  baptism  was  dis- 
covered by  St.  Paul  because  they  had  not  received 
the  Spirit,  so  that  even  from  this  passaj^e  it  would 
seem  that  Christians  were  regarded  normally  as 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  Holy  Spirit  is 
usually  referred  to  as  t6  rvevna  rb  iyiov  or  rb  ayiov 
TveO/xa  (21  times),  or  as  rb  xveu/ia  (9  times),  or  as 
■wvevfw.  djLov  (16  times),  once  as  ryev/ia  Kvpiov,  once 
as  rb  -rvevfjM.  Kvpiov,  and  once  as  rb  ryevfw,  'Irjffov. 

A  problem  which  has  as  yet  scarcely  received  the 
attention  which  it  deserves  is,  whether  the  Spirit 
was  regarded  as  one  or  many  (or,  in  other  words, 
what  is  the  difference  between  to  -ryfCfia  and 
■wvevfia).  The  exact  meaning  of  the  very  import- 
ant phrase  to  -rvevna  'IjjctoO  is  also  obscure.  Was 
it  the  Spirit  which  had  been  in  Jesus,  with  which 
God  had  anointed  {ixP'^'^^")  Him?  Or  was  it  the 
Spirit-Jesus,  as  He  had  become  after  the  Resur- 
rection, in  agreement  with  the  Pauline  phrase 
'  The  Lord  is  the  Spirit '  (2  Co  3^")  ?  In  any  case 
it  is  clear  that  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  was  regarded 
as  in  some  sense  the  work  of  the  exalted  Jesus 
(Ac  2^ ;  cf.  Lk  24*®)  but  ultimately  derived  from 
God. 

A  further  development  is  found  in  Acts — that 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit  can  be  ensured  either  by 
baptism  (see  §  5)  or,  more  probably,  by  the  '  laying 
on  of  hands '  of  the  Apostles  {erideffn  x^'-P^" ;  *^^- 
j^i-ff.  917  196)^  though  this  power,  if  one  may  judge 
from  8^'^,  was  not  shared  by  all  other  Christians. 

This  developed  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  is  the 
most  marked  feature  of  Acts,  and  the  Lucan 
Gospel  is  clearly  intended  to  lead  up  to  it.  The 
Christians  were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
the  Resurrection  and  Ascension  of  the  Christ  are 
related  to  this  fact,  rather  than,  as  seems  to  be  the 
case  in  Mark,  to  the  coming  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom.  It  is  true  that  in  Ac  2  the  gift  of  the 
Spirit  and  the  consequent  glossolalia  are  explaine<l 
as  a  sign  that  the  last  days  are  at  hand,  but  the 
whole  tendency  of  the  Acts  is  to  look  on  the 
possession  of  the  Spirit  as  the  characteristic  of  the 
Church,  rather  than  of  an  eschatological  kingdom, 
and  the  work  of  Christ  is  already  regarded  as  the 
foundation  of  this  inspired  Church  in  the  world, 
rather  than  as  the  inauguration  of  the  Kingdom 
of  God  instead  of  the  world.  In  some  respects 
Luke  is  more  archaic  than  St.  Paul,  but  not  in 
this. 


5.  Baptism. — There  is  no  doubt  that  the  writer 
of  Acts  regarded  baptism  as  the  normal  means  of 
entry  into  the  Christian  Church.  There  is  also  no 
doubt  that  he  represents  an  early  stage  of  Christian 
practice  in  which  baptism  was  '  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  Jesus'  (or  '  of  Jesus  Christ '),  not  in  the 
triadic  formula  (Ac  2»  8'«  10«  19*).  This  agrees 
with  the  practice  of  St.  Paul  so  far  as  it  can  be 
discovered  (Ro  6^  Gal  3^;  cf.  1  Co  !»"•),  with 
Didache  8  (but  not  7),  Hennas,  Sim.  ix.  17.  4,  and 
the  Eusebian  text  (if  that  refer,  as  is  probable, 
to  baptism)  of  Mt  28^*  (but  not  with  the  usual  text 
of  this  passage,  or  with  the  later  Christian  practice). 
Difficulty  is,  however,  raised  by  the  question 
whether  the  writer  (or  his  sources)  makes  the 
gift  of  the  Spirit  depend  on  baptism  or  on  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  either  invariably  or  as  a  general 
rule.  It  is,  on  the  whole,  most  probable  that  he 
regards  baptism  as  a  necessary  preliminary  to  the 
gift  of  the  Spirit,  but  not  as  the  direct  means  by 
which  the  Spirit  was  given,  whereas  the  '  laying  on 
of  hands'  was  the  direct  means  of  imparting  this 
gift ;  though,  under  some  exceptional  circum- 
stances, the  gift  was  directly  conferred  by  God 
without  any  ministerial  interposition. 

The  passages  which  seem  at  first  to  identify 
baptism  with  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  are  especially 
Ac  2»  and  19^-^.  In  2!^  St.  Peter  says :  '  Repent 
and  be  baptized  .  .  .  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit.'  This  seems  decisive,  but  in  the  con- 
text we  are  not  told  that  those  baptized  received 
the  Spirit — only  that  they  were  added  to  the 
Church.  Was  this  the  same  thing  for  the  writ«r  ? 
Or  did  he  mean  that  after  reception  into  the 
Church  they  would  receive  it  ?  In  the  same  way 
in  Ac  19^**  St.  Paul  asks  the  Ephesians  whether 
they  have  not  received  the  Spirit ;  and,  hearing 
that  this  is  not  so,  he  inquires  further  into  their 
baptism.  Nevertheless,  in  the  end,  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit  in  their  case  is  directly  connected  -with 
the  'laying  on  of  hands.'  This  conclusion  is,  of 
course,  supported  by  the  other  passages  in  which 
baptism  and  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  are  distinguished  : 
of  these  8^^-  and  10"  are  the  most  important.  (A 
full  discussion  will  be  found  in  EEE  ii.  382  ff.) 

Literature. — See  at  the  end  of  the  varioas  sections  and 
throaghonc  the  article.  KlRSOPP  LAKS. 

ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES  (Apocryphal).— 
I.  ISTRODrCTORY.— The  most  important  of  the 
Apocryphal  Acts  are  the  live  (Peter,  Paul,  John, 
Andrew,  Thomas)  which  sometimes  are  referred  to 
as  '  the  Leucian  Acts,'  because  they  are  supposed 
to  have  been  composed  by  a  certain  Leucius.  Before 
they  can  be  discussed  separately,  it  is  therefore 
necessary  to  deal  with  the  problem  of  the  Leucian 
corpus,  and  inquire  whether  such  a  collection  ex- 
isted in  early  times,  what  was  its  nature,  and  how 
far  the  name  of  '  Leucian '  may  be  applied  to  it. 
The  direct  source  of  the  later  tradition  that  there 
was  a  Leucian  corpus  is  no  doubt  a  statement  of 
Photius  (Bibliothcca,  cod.  114) : 

arfynMi0ri  fiifikiov,  ax  Xeyofirvat  Twr  iwoaro^mr  xcpto&H,  iw 
ali  rfpifixovTO  rpdfdt  Uerpov,  Imanmt,  'Kripiem,  0*>/ut,  IlauXov* 
■ypa.^1  Si  ovrdf,  uf  Si)\ol  to  avni  PtfiKiov,  Aevctof  XaptctK. 

From  this  it  is  plain   that  Photius  had  seen  a 

corpus  of  Acts,  and  interpreted  some  i>assage  in 

the  text  to  mean  that  the  live  Acts  were  all  written 

by  Leucius  Charinus.     It  is  therefore  desirable  to 

examine  earlier  literature  for  ( 1 )  mention  of  Leucius, 

(2)  mention  of  the  live  Acts  of  Peter,  John,  Andrew, 

Thomas,  and  Paul,  either  as  a  corpu-i  or  as  separate 

writings. 

1.  References  to  Leucius.— i.  Ix  the  East. — 

i  Epiphanius  (Panar.  li.  6),  when  speaking  of  the 

Alogi,  mentions  as  famous  heretics  Cerinthus  and 

:  Ebion,    Merinthus    and    Cleobius    or    Cleobulus, 

I  Claudius,  Demas,  and  Hermogenes,  and  says  they 


30 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCllYPHAL) 


were  controverted  by  St.  John  Kal  tCjv  dfx<f>l  aindv, 
AcvKiov  Ka.1  &\\uy  voWwv.  J'resuuiably,  tlierefore, 
EpiplianinH  was  acquainted  witli  some  book  in 
wliicli  Leucius  ajjpearud  as  a  companion  of  St, 
John,  but  it  will  be  noted  that  he  does  not  suggest 
tliat  Leucius  was  in  any  way  heretical,  but  rather 
tliat  lie  controverted  heretics.  Apart  from  this 
solitiiry  mention  there  is  no  trace  of  Leucius  in 
Greek  Ciiristian  writings  until  Photius. 

ii.  In  the  West. — It  is  quite  diflerent  in  the 
West ;  here  tliere  is  a  series  of  witnesses  to  Leucius. 
(1)  Pacian  (f  c.  390),  bishoj)  of  Barcelona.— In  Ep. 
iii.  3  I'aciuu  writes  to  Semn.  Novatianus  concerning 
tiie  Proclan  })arty  of  tlie  Montanists,*  who  claimed 
some  connexion  with  Leucius,  which  Pacian  denied  ; 
and  the  natural  interpretation  of  his  words  seems 
to  be  that  he  regarded  Leucius  as  an  orthodox 
Christian  to  whom  the  Montanists  tried  to  attach 
their  origin  ;  but  the  passage  is  obscure  : 

'  Et  priniuin  hi  pluriiiiis  utuntur  auctoribus ;  nam  puto  et 
Grat'cus  HlasluH  ipsorum  est.  Theodotus  quo(iue  et  Praxeas 
vestros  aliquando  docuere  :  ipsi  illi  PhrvRes  [i.e.  Montanists] 
nobiliorcs,  qui  8e  aniiuatos  mentiuntur  a  Leucio,  se  institutoit  a 
Proculo  gioriantur.' 

(2)  Augustine. — In  the  conh-a  Feliccm,  ii.  6, 
written  earlier  in  the  5th  cent.,  Augustine  says : 

'Habetis  etiain  hoc  in  scripturis  apocryphis,  quas  canon 
quideni  catholicus  non  admittit,  vobis  autem  (t.e.  the  Mani- 
chsoans]  tanto  graviores  sunt,  quaiilo  a  oatholico  canone 
Becludiintur  ...  in  actibus  scriptis  a  Leucio  (codd.  '  Leutio ') 
qu08  taniquani  actus  apostolorum  scribit,  habes  ita  positum  : 
"etenini  speciosa  flpnenta  ct  ostentatio  simulata  et  coactio 
visibiliuni  nee  quideni  ex  propria  natura  procedunt,  sed  ex  eo 
hominc  qui  per  se  ipsum  deterior  factus  est  per  seductionem."' 

As  is  shown  later,  Augustine  was  acquainted 
with  the  Apocryphal  Acts  of  Peter,  Andrew, 
Tliomas,  John,  and  Paul,  of  which  the  first  four 
were  accef  ted  only  by  Manichseans,  the  last  (Paul) 
probably  by  Catliolics  also.  Tliere  is  nothing, 
!ii)\\(\er,  to  show  from  which  he  is  quoting  here, 
aiul  the  passage  is  not  in  any  of  the  extant  frag- 
ments. Thomas  is  excluded,  as  we  probably  have 
the  complete  text,  and  the  passage  is  unlike  what 
we  pos.sess  of  the  Acts  of  Peter  or  Paul.  It  is  there- 
fore probable,  as  Schmidt  argues  {Alte  Petrusakten, 
p.  50),  that  he  is  referring  to  Andrew  or  John — the 
two  Acts  for  which  the  Leucian  authorshii)  is  other- 
wise most  probable.  But  the  point  is  not  certain, 
and  the  possibility  remains  tliat  he  is  referring  to  a 
Maniclia^an  corpus  of  Acts,  collected  by  Leucius. 

(3)  Euodius  of  Uzala.  —  In  the  de  Fide  contra 
Manichceos,  ch.  38  (printed  in  Augustine's  works  [ed. 
Migne,  Patrologia  Latina,  vol.  xlii.]),  written  bj' 
Euodius,  the  contemporary  of  Augustine,  the  Acts 
of  Andrew  is  attributed  to  Leucius.  The  full  quota- 
tion is  given  by  Schmidt  (p.  53),  who  thinks  that  it 
probably,  though  not  certainly,  implies  that  Euodius 
also  regarded  Leucius  as  the  autiior  of  a  corpus  of 
Acts,  but  argues  that  this  opinion  was  probably 
based  only  on  an  interpretation  of  the  passage  of 
Augustine  quoted  alx)ve.  However  this  may  be, 
it  remains  clear  tliat  Euodius  regarded  the  Acts  of 
Andrew  as  Manicluean  and  the  work  of  Leucius. 

(4)  Innocent  I. — In  a  rescript  of  405  to  Exsuperius, 
bishop  of  Toulouse,  Innocent  says : 

'Cct'-Ta  autem  quae  vcl  sub  nomine  Matthiae  vel  sub  nomine 
laoobi  minoris,  vcl  sub  nomine  Petri  et  Joliannis  quae  aquodam 
Leucio  scripta  sunt  (vel  sub  nomine  Andreae  fjuae  a  Nexo- 
charide  et  Leonida  philosophis],  vel  sub  nomine  Thomae  et  si 
qua  sunt  alia  (v.l.  talia),  non  solum  rcpudianda  verum  ctiam 
noveris  dainnanda.' 

The  words  enclosed  in  brackets  are  probably  an 
interpolation  (see  Zahn,  Acta  Joavvis,  209),  and 
Nexocharides  and  Leonidas  tlie  jiliilosopliers  are 
otherwise  unknown  jiersons.  The  text  is  certainly 
not  quite  in  order,  but  Leucius  is  clearly  indicated 
as  tiie  author  of  the  Acts  of  Peter  and  of  John. 

•  From  pseudo-TertuUian,  liefut.  omn.  Hair.  viii.  10,  x.  2C, 
It  appcar.s  tliut  some  Montanists  were  Kara.  IlpoKAoc,  others 
Kara  Aio-xtfijf  (see  Th.  Zahn,  Aela  JoannU,  p.  Ixvi,  n.  4). 


(5)  The  Decretum  Gelasianuni  (Gtli  cent.). — After 
rejecting  as  apocryiihal  the  Acts  of  Andrew, 
Thomas,  Peter,  and  Philip,  the  writer  goes  on  to 
give  a  list  of  Apocryi)lial  Gospels,  and  then  con- 
tinues :  '  Libri  omnes  quOs  fecit  i^eucius  discijjulus 
diaboli,  ajiocryphi.'  As  there  follow  several  Mani- 
chtean  writings,  it  is  tolerably  certain  tliat  here, 
as  elsewhere,  '  disciple  of  the  devil '  means  '  Mani- 
cha*an,'  but  it  is  not  clear  to  which  books  reference 
is  made.  There  is  a  slight  presumption  that  the 
books  made  by  Leucius  are  not  identical  witli  any 
already  mentioned,  and  this  would  suggest  either 
the  Acts  of  John,  which  are  not  otherwise  men- 
tioned, or  possibly  the  Acts  of  Pilate,  which  in  the 
liatin  version  are  connected  witii  the  name  of 
Leucius  Charinus.  Schmidt,  however,  while  think- 
ing that  the  Acts  of  John  are  certainly  intended, 
is  inclined  to  believe  that  the  writer  may  have 
meant  the  whole  Manicluean  collection. 

(6)  Turribius  of  Astorga  (c.  450). — In  a  corre- 
s])ondence  with  his  fellow-bishoj)s,  Idaeius  and 
Creponius,  Turribius  discusses  the  literature  of 
the  Maniclueans  and  Priscillianists.  Among 
these  he  mentions  '  Actus  illos  qui  vocantur  S. 
Andreae,  vel  illos  qui  appellantur  S.  loannis,  quos 
sacrilego  Leucius  ore  conscripsit,  vel  illos  qui 
dicuntur  S.  Thoinae  et  his  similia,  etc.'  Here 
clearly  Leucius  is  regarded  as  the  author  of  the 
Acts  of  John,  and  presumably  not  of  the  others — 
though,  if  a  certain  laxity  of  syntax  be  conceded, 
the  Acts  of  Andrew  might  be  added— certainly  not 
of  the  Acts  of  Thomas. 

(7)  Mellitus.  —  The  writer  of  a  late  Catholic 
version  of  the  Acts,  who  took  to  himself  the  name 
of  Mellitus,  probably  intending  to  identify  himself 
with  Melito  of  Sardis  (c.  160-190),  says  :  '  Volo 
soUicitam  esse  fraternitatem  vcstram  de  Leucio 
quodam  qui  scripsit  apostolorum  actus,  loannis 
evangelistae  et  sancti  Andreae  vel  Thomae  apostoli, 
etc.';  so  that  he  must  have  regarded  Leucius  as 
tlie  author  of  these  three  Acts,  but  there  is  no 
suggestion  of  the  full  coi-pus  of  live.  Schmidt 
thinks  that  he  probably  derived  his  knowledge 
from  the  letter  of  Turribius  and  a  list  of  heretical 
writings,  which  was  once  annexed  to  it,  though 
it  has  now  disappeared  ;  the  letter  was  probably 
taken  up  into  tiie  works  of  Leo,  with  whom  Turri- 
bius corresponded  (see  Schmidt,  j).  61).  It  does 
not  appear  jnobable  from  internal  evidence  that 
Mellitus  had  any  lirst-hand  knowledge  of  the 
Apocryphal  Acts. 

(8)  Further  traces  of  Leucius,  under  the  corrupt 
form  of  Selcucns,  can  perhaps  be  traced  in  pseudo- 
Hieronymus,  Ep.  ad  Chromatium  et  Hdiodorum, 
and  in  literature  de])endent  upon  it  (see  Seiimidt, 
j).  62) ;  but  no  imjiortance  can  be  attached  to  this 
late  and  inferior  composition. 

It  would  appear  from  these  data  that  (a)  the 
earliest  traditions  connected  Leucius  witli  St.  John, 
and  did  not  regard  him  as  In  niiral.  \li)  A  quite 
late  tradition  regarded  hiiu  ;is  \\\v  auihur  of  the 
corpus  of  five  Acts — Paul,  Peter,  John,  Andrew, 
and  Thomas — which  the  Manicluvans  use«l  as  a 
substitute  for  the  canonical  Acts,  and  the  Priscil- 
lianists in  addition  to  the  canonical  Acts,  (c)  Ex- 
ternal evidence  suggests  that  Leucius  was  probably 
the  author  of  the  Acts  of  John,  and,  with  less 
clearness,  of  Andrew,  but  not  of  Peter,  Paul,  or 
Thomas ;  and  tliis  conclusion  is  supported  by  in- 
ternal evidence. 

2.  The  evidence  for  the  Acts  as  a  collection.— 

i.  In  THE  Wkst.— (1)  J>/ilfastriu.s-  of  ]ircsriii  ([iHli- 
391). — In  his  Liber  de  JIansibus,  88,  we  have  the 
earliest  evidence  for  a  corpus  of  A})ocryi)lial  Acts. 
He  begins  by  referring  to  those  who  use  'apocryfa, 
id  est  secreta,'  instead  of  the  canonical  OT  and  NT, 
and  mentions  as  the  chief  of  those  who  do  this  the 
'  Mauichaei,  Cinostici,  Nicolaitae,  Valeutiniani  et 


ACTS  (APOCKYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


31 


alii  quam  plurinii  qui  ajxKiryfa  prophetaruiu  et 
apoi>toloruin,  id  est  Actus  separates  habentes, 
canouiciis  legere  scriptural  conteninuut.'  Later 
on  he  gives  more  details  in  a  passage  where  the 
text  is  unfortunately  clearly  corrupt : 

'Nam  Manichaei  apocryfa  beati  Andreae  apoetoli,  id  est 
Actus  quos  fecit  veniens  de  Ponto  in  Greciam  [quos]  conscrip- 
seruiit  tuuc  discipuli  s«quent«s  bestom  apoetolum,  unde  et 
hab«nt  Maoicbaei  et  alii  tales  Andreae  be^  et  Joannis  actus 
evang«Iistae  beati  et  Petri  similiter  beatissimi  apostoli  et  Pauli 
iwriter  beati  apostoli :  in  quibus  quia  signa  fecerunt  magna 
et  prodijpa,  etc' 

Whatever  may  be  the  true  text  of  this  passage, 
it  clearly  implies  (a)  that  the  Manichaeans  used  a 
carpus  of  Apocryphal  Acts  in  place  of  the  canonical 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  (6)  that  this  corpus  contained 
the  Act.s  of  AudreM-,  John,  Peter,  and  Paul ;  (c)  the 
Acts  of  Thomas  is  not  mentioned  (Schmidt  [p.  44] 
thinks  that  this  is  merely  accidental) ;  (rf)  Leucius 
is  not  mentioned. 

(2)  Augustine. — In  the  controversial  writings  of 
Augustine  against  the  Manichaeans  there  are  many 
allusions  to  the  Apocryphal  Acts.  Reference  may 
especially  be  made  to' (a)  the  de  Sermone  Domini 
in  Monte  (i.  20,  65),  in  which  allusions  can  be  traced 
to  the  Acts  of  Thomas  ;  (6)  the  contra  Adimantum, 
17,  where  allusions  to  the  Acts  of  Thomas  and 
Acts  of  Peter  can  be  identified;  (c)  the  contra 
Faustum  Manicheum  (lib.  xiv.  and  xxx.) ;  (d) 
the  contra  Felicem  ;  and  (c)  the  de  Civitate  Dei. 
Schmidt  (44 if.)  has  sho\»Ti,  from  the  consideration 
of  these  passages,  that  the  Manichaeans  used  the 
five  Acts  of  John,  Andrew,  Peter,  Thomas,  and 
Paul,  while  the  Catholics  rejected  the  first  four, 
but  accepted  the  Acts  of  Paul.  The  crucial  pass- 
age for  this  conclusion  is  c.  Faustum,  xxx.  4,  in 
which  Faustus  the  Manichee  says  : 

'  Mitto  enim  ceteros  eiiisdem  domini  nostri  apostolos,  Petrum 
et  Andream,  Tbomani  et  ilium  inexpertum  veneris  inter  ceteros 
beatimi  Jobannem  .  .  .  sed  bos  quideui,  ut  dixi,  praetereo, 
quia  COS  vos  [i.e.  the  Catholics]  exclusistis  ex  canone,  facileque 
mente  sacrilega  vestra  daemoniorum  his  potestis  importare 
doctrinas.  Kum  igiiur  et  de  Christo  eadem  dicere  poteritis  aat 
de  aivv;tolo  Paulo,  quem  similiter  ubique  constat  et  verbo  semper 
praetultsse  nviptis  innuptas  et  id  opere  quoque  ostendisse  erg* 
Baiictissimam  Theclaiu  ?  quodsi  haec  daemoniorum  doctrinanon 
fait,  quam  et  Theclae  Paulus  et  ceteri  ceteris  adnantiaverunt 
apostoli,  cui  credi  iam  poterit  hoc  ab  ipso  memoratom,  tam- 
quam  sit  daemoniorum  voluntas  et  doctrina  etiam  persoasio 
sanctimonii?' 

As  Schmidt  says,  it  is  clear  that  Faustus  gave  up 
the  use  of  the  Acts  of  Andrew,  John,  Peter,  and 
Thomas,  because  his  opponents  refused  to  recognize 
their  authority,  but  relied  on  a  Pauline  document 
relating  to  Thekla.  Before  the  discovery  of  the 
Acts  of  Paul  it  was  possible  to  think  that  this  might 
be  the  so-called  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thekla.  It  is 
now,  however,  fairly  certain  that  this  latter  docu- 
ment in  its  present  form  is  merely  an  extract  from 
the  older  Acts  of  Paul ;  there  is  no  reason,  there- 
fore, to  doubt  that  Augustine  and  Faustus  both 
recognized  the  Acts  of  Paul,  which  had  not  yet 
been  entirely  deposed  from  the  Canon. 

(3)  Innocent  I.  and  Exsuperius. — A  correspond- 
ence (in  A.D.  405)  between  Innocent  I.  and  Exsup- 
erius, bishop  of  Toulouse  (see  the  quotation  above), 
shows  that  the  Apocryphal  Acts  were  used  in  Spain 
not  onlj-  by  Manichaeans  but  also  by  PriscUlian- 
ists.  It  is  not  quite  clear  to  which  Acts  Innocent 
refers.  Besides  mentioning  the  Acts  of  Peter  and 
John  (of  which  certainly  the  latter  and  probably 
the  former  also  are  ascribed  to  Leucius),  ne  refers 
to  Acts  of  Matthias  and  of  James  the  less,  which 
do  not  elsewhere  appear  in  the  Manichiean  corpus, 
as  well  as  to  those  of  Andrew,  Avhich  in  some  texts 
(see  Zahn,  Gesch.  des  AT  Kanons,  Leipzig,  18S8- 
92,  ii.  244  ft".)  are  ascribed  to  Nexocharide  (u/. 
Xenocharide)  and  Leonidas ;  Fabricius  (Codex 
Apocryphus,  ii.  767)  thinks  that  these  names  are  a 
corruption  of  Charinus  and  Leucius. 

(4)  Leo  the  Great  and  Turribius  (440-461). — Forty 


j-ears  after  the  time  of  Innocent,  the  correspond- 
ence between  Leo  and  Turribius,  bishop  of  Astorga 
in  Spain,  throws  more  light  on  the  use  of  the 
Apocryphal  Acts  by  the  Priscillianists.  Leo  com- 
plains that  the  Priscillianists  '  scripturas  veras 
adulterant '  «md  '  falsas  inducunt.'  Turribius  found 
that  the  Priscillianists  and  Manichaeans  were  mak- 
ing great  progress  in  Spain,  and  for  this  reason  had 
elicited  a  letter  of  condemnation  from  Leo.  He 
also  expressed  himself  further  in  his  letters  to 
Idacius  and  Creponius,  and  apparently  annexed  a 
selection  of  heretical  passages  from  the  Apocryphal 
Acts  to  justify  his  disapproval.  This  selection  is, 
however,  unfortunately  no  longer  extant,  but  it  is 
plain  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  Acts  of 
Thomas,  Andrew,  and  John  (for  text  see  above, 
1.  (6)).     He  also  refers  to  a  Memoria  Apostolorum, 

'  in  quo  ad  magnam  perreratatis  suae  auctoritatem  doctrinam 
domini  mentiuntur,  qui  totam  destruit  legem  veteris  Testa- 
ment! et  omnia  quae  S.  Moysi  de  diveisis  creaturae  factorisque 
ditinitus  revelata  sunt,  praeter  reliquas  eiusdem  libri  blas- 
phemias  qoas  referre  pertaesom  est.' 

This  Memoria  Apostolorum  is  also  mentioned  by 
Orosius  {Consuitatio  ad  Augustinum,  in  Patr.  Lat. 
xlii.  667),  and  Schmidt  (p.  50)  thinks  that  it  is  the 
source  of  a  quotation  from  a  Manicha^an  writing 
which  Augustine  could  not  trace  : 

'  Sed  Apostolis  dominus  noster  interrogantibos  de  Jadaeorum 
propbetis  quid  sentiri  deberet,  qui  de  adventu  eius  aliquid 
ceoiuisse  in  praeteritum  putabantur,  commotus  talia  eos  etiam 
nunc  sentire  respondit  "  Demisistis  vivum  qui  ante  vos  est  et 
de  mortuis  fabulaminL" ' 

ii.  Ix  THE  East. — (1)  Eusehius.—ln  HE  iii.  25.  6 
the  Acts  of  John  and  Andrew  are  mentioned  to- 
gether with  '  those  of  the  other  apostles,'  and  are 
regarded  as  books  used  by  heretics.  In  iii.  3.  2  the 
Acts  of  Peter  are  mentioned,  and  in  iii.  3.  5  and 
iii.  25.  4  the  Acts  of  Paul.  The  Acts  of  Thomas  are 
not  quoted,  nor  is  any  reference  made  to  Leucius. 

(2)  Ephraim  Syrus  (c.  360). — In  his  commentary 
Ephraim  says  that  the  apocryphal  correspondence 
between  Paul  and  the  Corinthians  was  written  by 
the  followers  of  Bardesanes,  '  in  order  that  under 
cover  of  the  signs  and  wonders  of  the  Apostle, 
which  they  described,  they  might  ascribe  to  the 
name  of  the  Apostle  their  own  godlessness,  against 
which  the  Apostle  had  striven.'  This  apocryjuhal 
correspondence  was  contained  in  the  Acts  of  Paul, 
but  it  also  circulated  in  some  Syriac  and  Armenian 
NT  MSS ;  no  doubt  it  was  an  excerpt  from  the 
Acts,  but  it  is  not  clear  whether  Ephraim  knew 
the  Acts  or  the  excerpt.  It  is,  however,  much 
more  probable  that  Ephraim  is  here  referring  to 
the  Acts,  as  the  correspondence  alone  does  not 
seem  ever  to  have  been  regarded  by  the  Syriac 
Church  as  heretical. 

(3)  Epiphanius. — In  the  Panarion  Epiphanins 
mentions  the  Acts  of  Thomas,  Andrew,  and  John 
in  connexion  with  the  Encratites  (Pan.  xlviL  1),  the 
Apostolici  (ib.  Ixi.  1),  and  other  heretics  (cf.  xxx. 
16,  Ixiii.  2).  But  there  is  no  sign  of  any  con- 
sciousness that  there  was  a  Manicluean  corpus,  or 
that  there  was  any  connexion  with  Leucius.  At 
the  same  time  a  note  in  Photius  (Bibl.  cod.  179) 
states  that  Agapius  used  the  Acts  of  Andrew,  so 
that  the  Eastern  Manichaeans  must  have  used  at 
least  some  of  the  Acts. 

(4)  Amphilo'^hius  of  Iconium  (c.  374). — At  tlie 
Second  Council  of  Mcaea  (787)  a  quotation  was 
read  from  Amphilochius'  lost  book  xepi  rlv  fevS- 
ertypd^xar  rOf  -rapa  alperiKoii,  in  which  he  proposed 
Seiiofuf  Si  to  ^i^Xla  ravra,  A  -rpotpipoiMrw  ^/xtr  ol  arSara- 
Ttti  riji  iicK\ti<rias,  ovxi  fCiv  dxo<rT<5Xci>r  xpdfets  dXXa 
SaufiSvwv  ffvyypdfifuxTa.  It  also  appears  from  the 
Acts  of  the  Council  that  the  Acts  of  John  was 
quoted  and  condemned.  It  was  resolved  that  no 
more  copies  were  to  be  made  and  those  already 
existing  were  to  be  burnt. 


32 


ACTS  (APOCRYrHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


(5)  John  of  Thessalonica  (c.  680). — In  the  preface 
to  \\M  recension  of  the  TtXetwirii  Moptaj  (M.  Honnet, 
ZWT,  1880,  ]).  239  fl'.),  John  exphiins  tliat  the 
Acts  of  Peter,  Paul,  Andrew,  and  Jolin  were  liereti- 
cal  productions,  hut  seems  to  argue  that  tiiey  made 
use  of  genuine  material,  just  as  had  been  the  case 
with  the  TeXeiuKTtj, 

From  this  evidence,  which  is  given  with  a  full 
and  clear  discussion  in  his  Alte  Petrusakten  (cf. 
also  his  Acta  Fault,  112  f.),  C.  Schmidt  draws  the 
following  conclusion  :  (a)  The  Manichaeans  had 
formed  a  corptut  of  the  live  Acts,  but  were  not  them- 
selves the  authors  of  any  of  them.  They  used 
this  corpus  instead  of  the  canonical  Acts,  and  the 
I'riscillianists  used  it  in  addition  to  the  Canon. 
(6)  In  the  course  of  the  struggle  between  the  Mani- 
chaeans and  the  Church  the  view  was  adopted  that 
the  corpus  was  tlie  work  of  a  certain  heretical 
Leucius.  (c)  The  name  of  Leucius  originally  be- 
longed to  tiie  Acts  of  .John  alone,  and  was  errone- 
ously attributed  to  the  other  books,  (d)  In  this 
way  the  Acts  of  Paul,  which  was  originally  recog- 
nized as  orthodox  if  not  canonical,  came  to  be 
regarded  as  heretical. 

On  the  evidence  as  we  have  it  no  serious  objec- 
tion can  be  made  to  these  propositions  ;  it  might, 
however,  be  a  matter  for  investigation  wliether  the 
corpus  of  tlie  Manicha3ans  was  also  used  by  the 
Eastern  Manicha-ans,  or  was  the  peculiar  possession 
of  the  Western  branch, 

II.  The  Individual  AcTS.—i.  The  Acts  of 
Paul. — By  far  the  most  important  discovery  con- 
cerning the  Apocryphal  Gospels  in  recent  years 
was  the  Coptic  text  of  the  Acts  of  Paul  found  by 
C.  Schmidt  in  the  Heidelberg  Papyrus  1,  and  pub- 
lished by  him  in  his  Acta  Pauli,  Leipzig,  1903  (and 
in  a  cheaper  form  without  the  facsimile  of  the  text, 
in  1905).  This  is  not  indeed  complete,  and  there 
are  still  minor  problems  connected  with  the  order 
of  the  incidents,  but  the  main  facts  are  now  plain  ; 
and  the  general  contents  of  the  Acts  may  oe  re- 
garded as  roughly  established,  with  the  exception 
of  certain  rather  serious  lacunae,  especially  at  the 
beginning  and  in  the  middle.  The  contents,  as  we 
have  them,  can  be  divided  most  conveniently  as 
follows : 

(1)  In  Antioch. — Paul  is  in  the  house  of  a  Jew 
named  Anchares  and  his  wife  Phila,  whose  son  is 
dead.  Paul  restores  the  boy  to  life,  and  makes 
many  converts  ;  but  he  is  suspected  of  magic,  and 
a  riot  ensues  in  whicli  he  is  ill-treated  and  stoned. 
He  then  goes  to  Iconium.  \ 

(2)  In  Iconium  (the  Thckla-story). —  Here  the 
well-known  story  of  Thekla  is  placed,  and  on  the 
way  to  Iconium  we  are  introduced  to  Demas  and 
Hermogenes,  who  are  represented  as  Gnostics  with 
a  peculiar  doctrine  of  an  dcdcTTaa-ts  not  of  the  flesh. 
In  Iconium  Paul  was  entertained  by  Onesipijorus, 
and  preached  in  his  house  on  dcdoTao-is  and  eyKpd- 
reia,  with  the  result  that  Thekla,  the  daughter  of 
Theokleia,  abandoned  her  betrothal  to  Thamyris 
and  vowed  herself  to  a  life  of  virginity.  Theokleia 
and  Thamyris  therefore  raised  persecution  against 
Paul  and  Thekla.  Paul  was  scourged  and  banished 
from  the  town^;  Thekla  was  condemned  to  be 
burnt.      From   the  flames  she  was   miraculously 

f  reserved,  and  went  to  Antioch,  where  she  found 
'aul.  In  Antioch  her  lieauty  attr.acted  the  atten- 
tion of  Alexander,  a  prominent  Antiochian,  and 
her  refusal  to  consent  to  his  wishes  led  to  her  con- 
demnation to  tlje  wild  beasts.  A  lioness  protected 
her,  but  ultimately,  after  a  series  of  miraculous 
rescues,  .she  was  forced  to  jump  into  a  pond  full  of 
seals  and  committed  herself  to  the  water  with  the 
baptismal  formula.  Ultimately  the  protection  of 
Queen  Tryphacna  and  the  symi)athy  of  the  women 
of  Antioch  .secured  her  pardon.  She  returned  to 
the  house  of  Tryphacna  and  converted  her  and  her 


servants,  and  then  followed  Paul  in  man's  clothing 
to  Myrrlia.  Then  she  returned  to  Iconium,  and 
tinall}'  died  in  Seleucia.  The  text  of  this  whole 
story  is  very  defective  in  Coptic,  but  it  is  preserved 
separately  in  Greek,  and  enough  remains  in  the 
Coptic  to  show  that  the  Greek  has  kept  fairly  well 
to  the  original  story. 

(3)  In  Myrrha. — Thekla  left  Paul  in  Myrrha. 
Here  he  healed  of  the  dropsy  a  man  named  llermo- 
krates,  who  was  baptized.  But  llermippus  the 
elder  son  of  Hermokrates  was  opposed  to  Paul, 
and  the  younger  son,  Dion,  died.  The  text  is  here 
full  of  lacunse,  but  apparently  Paul  raised  up  Dion, 
and  punished  Hermippus  with  blindness,  but  after- 
wards healed  and  converted  him.  He  then  went 
on  to  Sidon. 

(4)  In  Sidon. — On  the  road  to  Sidon  there  is  an 
incident  connected  with  a  heathen  altar,  and  the 
power  of  Christians  over  the  demons  or  heathen 
gods,  but  there  is  unfortunately  a  large  lacuna  in 
tlie  text.  In  Sidon  there  is  an  incident  which 
apparently  is  concerned  with  unnatural  vice,  and 
Paul  and  other  Christians  were  shut  up  in  the 
temple  of  Apollo.  At  the  prayer  of  Paul  the 
temple  was  destroyed,  but  Paul  was  taken  into 
the  amphitheatre.  The  text  is  defective,  and  the 
manner  of  his  rescue  is  not  clesir,  but  apparently 
he  made  a  speech  and  gained  many  converts,  and 
then  went  to  Tyre. 

(5)  In  Tyre. — Only  the  beginning  of  the  story 
is  extant,  but  apparently  the  central  feature  is 
the  exorcism  of  demons  and  the  curing  of  a  dumb 
child.  After  this;there  is  a  gi-eat  lacuna,  in  which 
Schmidt  places  various  fragments  dealing  with  the 
question  of  the  Jewish  law  ;  and  it  appears  possible 
that  the  scene  is  moved  to  Jerusalem  and  that 
Peter  is  also  present. 

(6)  Paul  in  prison  in  the  mines. — In  this  incident 
Paul  Jippears  as  one  of  those  condemned  to  work 
in  the  mines  (?  in  Macedonia),  and  he  restores  to 
life  a  certainPhrontina.  Presumably  he  ultimately 
escaped  from  his  imprisonment,  but  the  text  is 
incomplete. 

(7)  In  Philippi. — The  most  important  incident 
connected  with  Philippi  is  a  correspondence  with 
the  Corinthians,  dealing  with  certain  heretical 
views,  of  which  the  main  tenets  are  (a)  a  denial 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh  ;  (b)  the  human 
body  is  not  the  creation  of  God  ;  (c)  the  world  is 
not  the  creation  of  God ;  (d)  the  government  of 
the  universe  is  not  in  the  hands  of  (iod  ;  (e)  the 
crucifixion  was  not  that  of  Christ,  but  of  a  docetic 
phantasm  ;  (/)  Christ  was  not  born  of  Mary,  nor 
was  he  of  the  seed  of  David, 

(8)  A  farewell  scene. — The  place  in  which  this 
scene  is  laid  cannot  be  discerned  from  the  frag- 
ments which  remain,  but  it  cont-ains  a  prophecy  of 
Paul's  work  in  Home,  placed  in  the  mouth  of  a 
certain  Cleobius. 

(9)  The  martyrdom,  of  Paul. — The  last  episode 
gives  an  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  Paul,  and 
the  text  of  this  is  also  preserved  as  a  separate  docu- 
ment in  Greek.  According  to  it,  Paul  preached 
without  any  hindrance,  and  there  is  no  suggestion 
that  he  was  a  prisoner.  On  one  occasion,  wliile  he 
was  preaching,  Patroclus,  a  servant  of  Nero,  fell 
from  a  window  and  was  killed.  Paul  restored  him, 
and  he  was  converted.  When  Nero  heard  of  this 
miracle,  Patroclus  acknowledged  that  he  was  the 
soldier  of  the  /9a<rtXfi>s  'Irjcrov^  XpiffrSs.  Nero  caused 
him  and  other  Christians  to  be  arrested,  condemned 
Paul  to  be  beheaded,  and  the  other  Christians  to 
be  burnt.  In  prison  Paul  converted  the  prefect 
Longinus  and  the  centurion  Cestus,  and  prb- 
l)hesied  to  them  life  after  death.  Longinus  and 
Cestus  were  told  to  go  to  his  grave  on  the  next 
day,  when  they  would  be  baptized  by  Titus  and 
Luke.     At  his  execution  milk  spurted  from  his 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


33 


neck  instead  of  blood,  and  afterwards  he  appeared 
to  Xero,  who  was  so  impressed  that  he  ended  the 
persecution.  The  narrative  ends  with  the  baptism 
of  Longinus  and  Cestos  at  the  grave  of  Paul. 

The  testimony  of  early  writers  to  the  Acts  of 
Paul. — Since  the  discovery  of  the  Ck)ptic  Acts, 
which  show  that  the  'Acts  of  Paul  aoid  Thekla' 
is  an  extract  from  the  Acts  of  Paul,  there  is  no 
justilication  for  doubting  that  Tertuliian  refers  to 
the  Acts  of  Paul  in  de  Baptismo,  17  : 

'  Quodsi  qai  Paali  perpteram  inscripta  legnnt,  exemplom 
Thetlae  ad  licentiam  mulierom docendi  tinguendique defendant, 
sciaut  in  Asia  presbj-teruui,  qui  earn  scripturam  construxit 
quasi  titulo  Pauli  de  suo  cumulans,  convictmn  atx^ue  coniessum 
scid  amore  Paoli  fecisse  loco  decessisse.* 

This  statement  is  extremely  valuable,  because  it 
gives  us  clear  evidence  as  to  the  provenance  of  the 
Acts,  proves  that  it  is  not  later  than  the  2nd 
cent.,  and  shows  that  it  was  composed  in  the 
great  Church,  not  in  any  heretical  or  Gnostic 
sect. 

Origen  quotes  the  Acts  in  de  Principiis,  i.  2,  3, 
and  in  in  Johannevi,  xx.  12.  In  both  cases  he 
gives  the  Acts  of  Paul  definitely  as  the  source  of 
his  quotation,  but  neither  passage  is  found  in  the 
extant  texts.  He  apparently  regards  the  Acts  as 
only  slightly  inferior  to  the  Canonical  Scriptures. 

Eusebius  in  HE  in.  25  ranks  the  Acts  of  Paul, 
with  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  Ep.  of  Barnabas, 
the  Apoc.  of  Peter,  the  Didache,  and  possibly  the 
Johannine  Apocalypse,  as  among  the  vbda.  But 
he  does  not  appear  to  place  it  with  the  Acts  of 
Andrew  and  John  and  'the  other  apostles'  (per- 
haps the  Acts  of  Peter  and  Thomas)  which  are 
tLrova.  irdvni  Kai  SwratSri.  Hence  he  probably  did 
not  regard  the  Acts  of  Paul  as  heretical. 

In  tlse  Claromontane  list  of  books  of  the  OT 
and  XT  the  Acts  of  Paul  comes  at  the  end  in  the 
company  of  '  Bamabae  epistula,  Johannis  revelatio, 
Actus  Apostolorum,  Pastor,  Actus  Pauli,  Revela- 
tio Petri,'  which  suggests  somewhat  the  same  judg- 
ment as  that  of  Eusebius. 

From  the  Commentary  of  Hippolytus  on  Dn  3^ 
it  seems  clear  that  he  regarded  the  Acts  of  Paul 
as  definitely  historical  and  trustworthy.  Com- 
bating those  who  doubted  the  truth  of  the  story  of 
Daniel  in  the  lions'  den,  he  says : 

et  yip  iri<rre\'-Ofi€v  ori  HowAov  «is  ftp|p*a  KaraiepiBfrTOi  it^^ffi^ 
or'  avThv  6  Xeutv  eis  tow  mSai  ayave<ritv  vtpitXfixfy  aurov,  wm 
mix*-  >"»i  «Ti  Tov  AaftijA  yevo/xei-ii  >7M7Tcv<ro/i«v  ; 

This  incident  is  not  extant  in  the  Coptic  texts, 
but  a  full  account,  statetl  to  be  taken  from  the 
Ufpioooi  TLaiiXov,  is  given  by  Xicephoms  Callistus 
(cf.  Zahn,  Gest;h.  d.  NT  Kanons,  ii.  2.  p.  880  fi".),  and 
there  is  therefore  no  doubt  but  that  Hippolytus  re- 
garded the  Acts  of  Paul  as  little  less  than  canonical 

Finally,  the  passage  quoted  above  from  Augus- 
tine, c.  Faust.  XXX.,  makes  it  clear  that  in  the 
Church  of  Africa,  as  late  as  the  time  of  Augustine, 
the  Acts  of  Paul  was  accepted  as  authoritative 
and  orthodox,  even  if  not  canonical. 

The  date  of  the  Acts  of  Paul. — The  testimony  of 
early  writers  furnishes  a  safe  terminus  ad  quern. 
The  Acts  must  be  earlier  than  Tertullian's  de 
Baptismo.  The  precise  date  of  this  tractate  is 
uncertain,  but  at  the  latest  it  is  only  a  few  years 
later  than  A.D.  200,  so  that  the  Acts  must  at  all 
events  belong  to  the  2nd  century.  The  question 
is  whether  it  is  a  great  deal  or  a  very  little 
earlier.  Schmidt  is  influenced  by  the  frequent  use 
of  the  canonical  Acts  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles  to 
choose  a  date  not  much  earlier  than  180  ;  on  the 
other  hand,  Harnack  thinks  that  the  complete 
silence  as  to  the  Montanist  movement,  or  anythino- 
which  could  be  construed  as  anti-Montanist  po- 
lemics, points  to  a  date  earlier  than  170.  Between 
these  two  positions  a  choice  is  difficult :  probably 
we  cannot  really  say  more  than  that  between  160 

VOL.  I. — 3 


and  200  is  the  most  likely  period  for  the  compo- 
sition of  the  Acts  of  Paul.  (See  especially  C. 
Schmidt,  Acta  Pauli,  176  ff.,  where  the  whole 
question  is  thoroughly  discussed,  and  reference 
made  to  the  literature  bearing  on  the  subject.) 

The  theology  of  the  Acts  of  Paul. — From  the  theo- 
logical point  of  view  the  Acts  of  Paul  has  excep- 
tional value  as  giving  a  presentment  of  the  ordinary 
Christianity  of  Asia  at  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent., 
undisturbed  by  polemical  or  other  special  aims. 

So  far  as  the  doctrine  of  God  is  concerned,  the 
teaching  of  the  Acta  is  quite  simple— it  is  that 
'  there  is  one  God,  and  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ,' 
which  is  sometimes  condensed  into  the  statement 
that  there  is  no  other  God  save  Jesus  Christ  alone. 
It  is  thus  in  no  sense  Arian  or  Ebionite,  but  at 
the  same  time  distinctly  not  Xicene.  It  is  also 
definitely  not  Gnostic,  for  the  Supreme  God  is  also 
the  Creator,  and  the  instigator  if  not  the  agent  of 
redemption.  The  general  view  which  is  implied  is 
that  the  world  was  created  good,  and  man  was 
given  the  especial  favour  of  being  the  son  of  God. 
This  sonship  was  broken  by  the  Fall,  instigated 
by  the  serpent.  From  that  moment  history  be- 
came a  struggle  between  God,  who  was  repairing 
the  evil  of  the  Fall,  through  His  chosen  people 
Israel  and  through  the  prophets,  and  the  prince 
of  this  world,  who  resisted  His  efforts,  had  pro- 
claimed himself  to  be  Grod  (in  this  way  heathen  re- 
ligion was  explained),  and  had  bound  all  humanity 
to  him  by  the  lusts  of  the  flesh.  The  result  of 
this  process  was  the  existence  of  ayvwcLa  and  xXdm} 
followed  by  <pdopd,  6.Ka.dapala,  rjSovrt,  and  ddvaroi,  and 
the  need  of  an  ultimate  judgment  of  God,  which 
would  destroy  all  that  was  contaminated.  But 
in  His  mercy  God  had  sent  His  Holy  Spirit  into 
Mary,  in  order  in  this  way,  by  becoming  flesh,  to 
destroy  the  dominion  of  evil  over  flesh.  This  Holy 
Spirit  was  (as  in  Justin  Martyr)  identical  with  the 
spirit  which  had  spoken  through  the  Jewish 
prophets,  so  that  the  Christian  faith  rested  through- 
out on  the  Spirit,  which  had  given  the  prophets  to 
the  Jews  and  later  on  had  been  incarnate  in  the 
Christ  who  had  given  the  gospel.  It  should  be 
noted  that  there  is  no  attempt  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  Logos  and  the  Spirit.  '  Father,  Son, 
and  Spirit'  is  a  formula  which  seems  to  mean 
Father,  Spirit  or  Logos,  and  the  Son  or  Incarnate 
Spirit.  It  is  clear  that  this  is  the  popular  theology 
out  of  which  the  Sabellian  and  Arian  controversies 
can  best  be  explained.  For  the  reconstruction  of 
lat«  2nd  cent.  Christology  in  popular  circles  the 
Acts  of  Paul  is  of  unique  value.  There  is  also 
a  marked  survival  of  primitive  eschatological 
interest :  the  expectation  of  the  coming  of  Christ, 
and  the  establishment  of  a  glorious  kingdom  in 
which  Christians  will  share,  is  almost  central. 
The  means  whereby  Christians  ensure  this  result 
are  asceticism  and  baptism.  The  latter  is  prob- 
ably the  necessary  moment,  and  is  habitually 
called  the  ff(ppay'i.s ;  but  asceticism  is  equally 
necessary,  and  involves  an  absolute  abstinence 
from  all  sexual  relations,  even  in  marriage. 
There  is  no  trace  of  any  institution  of  repentance 
for  sin  after  baptism ;'  for  this  reason,  baptism 
appears  usually  to  be  postponed,  and  in  these  re- 
spects the  Acts  of  Paul  agrees  more  closely  with 
Tertuliian  than  Avith  Hermas.     The  Eucharist  is 

f)rimarUy  a  meal  of  the  community,  and  the  theo- 
ogy  unclerlytng  it  is  not  clearly  expressed  ;  the 
most  remarkable  feature  is  that  here,  as  in  all  the 
other  Apocryphal  Acts,  water  takes  the  fjlace  of 
wine.  This  feature  used  to  be  regarded  as  Gnostic, 
but  in  view  of  more  extended  knowledge  of  the 
Acts  as  a  whole  this  opinion  is  untenable. 

Far  the  best  statement  of  the  theology  of  the  Acts  ia  in  C. 
Schmidfs  Acta  Pauli,  183  S.  This  also  give*  full  references  to 
earlier  Uteratore. 


34 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


2.  The  Acts  of  Peter.— The  Acts  of  Peter  is 
no  longer  extant  in  a  complete  form.  But,  apart 
from  late  paraphrastic  recensions,  which  re-edit 
older  material  in  a  form  more  agreeable  to  Catholic 
taste,  three  documents  exist,  two  of  them  in  a 
fragmentary  form,  which  probably  represent  por- 
tions of  the  original  Acts.  These  are  (1)  a  Coptic 
text  of  a  Up6ieis  Hirpov,  (2)  the  Codex  Vercellensis, 
or  Actus  Petri  cum  Simone,  and  (3)  a  Greek  text  of 
the  Martyrium  Petri. 

(1)  The  Coptic  Ilpdf eij  UiTpov. — This  fragment 
was  found  by  C.  Schmidt  at  the  end  of  the  Gnostic 
Papyrus  P.  8502  in  the  Egyptian  Museum  at 
Berlin  (Sitzungsber.  d.  K.  Preuss.  Akad.  xxxvi. 
[1896]  839  ff.),  and  published  bjr  him  in  Die  alien 
Petrusakten,  Leipzig,  1903.  This  relates  the  story 
of  Peter's  paralyzed  daughter.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  incident,  Peter,  who  had  been  twitted  with 
the  j)aralysis  of  his  daughter  in  spite  of  his  powers 
of  miraculous  healing,  cured  her  for  a  short  time, 
and  then  restored  her  paralytic  condition.  Having 
thus  shown  his  power,  he  explained  that  she  had 
originally  been  paralyzed  in  answer  to  his  own 
prayer,  in  order  to  preserve  her  virginity,  which 
was  threatened  by  a  certain  Ptolemseus.  By  this 
miracle  Ptolemseus  had  been  converted  to  Christi- 
anity, and  dying  soon  afterwards  left  land  to 
Peter's  daughter,  which  Peter  sold,  giving  the 
proceeds  of  it  to  the  poor. 

(2)  The  Codex  Vercellensis  (Bibliothec,  capitul. 
Vercellensis,  cviii.  1). — This  MS  contains  either  an 
extract  from  or  a  recension  of  the  last  part  of  the 
Acts.  It  begins  by  describing  Paul's  departure  from 
Rome  to  Spain,  and  the  arrival  of  Simon  Magus, 
who  makes  Aricia  his  headquarters.  Meanwhile, 
however,  Peter,  who  had  finished  'the  twelve  years 
which  the  Lord  had  enjoined  on  him'  (on  this 
legend  see  esp.  Hamack's  Expansion  of  Christian- 
ity, i.  [1904]  48  n.),  was  directed  to  go  to  Rome  to 
oppose  Simon.  Simon,  who  was  first  in  Rome, 
perverted  Marcellus,  a  convert  of  Paul ;  and,  as 
soon  as  Peter  arrived,  a  contest  was  waged  for  his 
faith  on  the  question  of  the  respective  powers  of 
Simon  and  Peter  to  raise  the  dead.  In  this  con- 
test, which  is  long  drawn  out,  Peter  was  successful, 
and  Simon  retreated.  Later  on,  the  latter  made 
an  effort  to  restore  his  reputation  by  Hying  in  the 
air,  but  the  prayer  of  Peter  caused  him  to  fall  and 
break  his  thigh.  He  was  carried  to  Aricia  and 
thence  to  Terracina,  where  he  died. 

The  story  then  relates  the  events  which  led  up 
to  the  martyrdom  of  Peter.  The  main  reason  was 
the  decision  of  the  converted  concubines  of  Agrippa 
the  prefect  to  refuse  any  further  intercourse  with 
him,  and  the  similar  conduct  of  Xanthippe  the 
wife  of  Albinus,  a  friend  of  Nero,  and  of  many 
other  wives  who  all  left  their  husbands.  Peter 
was  warned  of  the  anger  of  Agrippa,  and  at  first 
was  persuaded  by  the  Christians  to  leave  Rome. 
At  this  point  the  Codex  Vercellensis  is  defective, 
but  the  missing  incidents  can  be  restored  from  the 
Martyrium  Petri,  Avhich  overlaps  the  Codex  Ver- 
cellensis. From  this  it  appears  that  Peter  on  his 
departure  from  Rome  was  arrested  by  a  vision  of 
Christ  going  to  Rome  and  saying,  '  I  am  going  to 
Rome  to  be  crucified.'  Peter  therefore  applied 
this  vision  to  himself,  and  went  back  to  Rome, 
where  he  was  crucified  by  the  orders  of  the  prefect 
Agrippa.  Here  the  Codex  Vercellensis  is  again 
extant,  and  runs  parallel  with  the  Martyrium  to 
the  end.  Peter  at  his  own  request  was  crucified 
head  downwards,  in  order  to  fulfil  the  saying  of 
the  Lord,  *Si  non  feceritis  dextram  tamquam 
sinistram,  et  sinistram  ut  dextram,  et  quae  sunt 
sursnm  tamquam  deorsum,  et  quae  retro  sunt  tam- 
quam ab  ante,  non  intrabitis  in  regna  coelorum' 
— a  sayinjjj  which  is  also  found  in  the  Gospel  of 
the  Egyptians.    After  Peter's  death  Marcellus  took 


down  his  body  and  buried  it  in  his  own  tomb,  after 
costly  embalming.  But  Peter  appeared  to  him  in 
a  vision  and  rebuked  him  for  not  having  obeyed  the 
precept  'Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead.'  Finally, 
the  narrative  explains  that  Nero  was  angry  with 
Agrippa  because  lie  wished  to  have  inflicted  worse 
tortures  on  Peter,  but,  while  he  was  planning 
further  persecution  of  the  Christians,  he  was  de- 
terred by  a  vision  of  an  angel,  so  that  Peter  was 
the  last  martyr  of  that  persecution.  The  Codex 
ends  with  the  obviously  corrupt  line  '  actus  Petri 
apostoli  explicuerunt  cum  pace  et  Simonis  amen.' 
Lipsius  (Acta  Apocrypha,  p.  103)  suggests  with 
great  probability  that  '  et  Simonis '  is  a  misplaced 
gloss.  In  this  case  the  '  actus  P.  apostoli  explicu- 
erunt. Amen,'  would  be  the  conclusion  of  the 
original  Acts  of  Peter,  of  which  the  Codex  Ver- 
cellensis is  an  extract,  giving  the  Roman  episode 
and  martyrdom. 

(3)  The  Martyrium  Petri. — The  text  of  this  early 
extract  from  the  Acts  of  Peter  is  preserved  in  two 
MSS.  (a)  Cod.  Patmiensis  48  (9th  cent.).  This 
Avas  copied  by  C.  Krumbacher  in  1885  and  published 
by  Lipsius  in  1886  in  the  JahrbiXcher  fiir  Protest. 
Theologie,  pp.  86-106.— (6)  Cod.  Athous  Vatoped. 
79  (lOth-llth  cent.).  This  was  copied  by  Ph. 
Meyer  and  published  by  Lipsius  in  his  Acta 
Apocrypha.  There  are  also  Slavonic  and  Coptic 
(Sahidic)  versions,  the  latter  preserved  directly  in 
three  fragments  and  indirectly  in  Arabic  and 
Ethiopic  translations  (see  further  Lipsius,  Act. 
Apocr.  livf.).  Lipsius  thinks  that  the  Patmos 
MS  is  the  best.  The  contents  of  the  Martyrium 
are  the  same  as  the  second  part  of  the  Codex 
Vercellensis,  beginning  with  Simon's  flight  in  the 
air,  and  from  the  comparison  of  the  Codex  with 
the  Greek  Martyrium  it  is  possible  that  the 
original  form  of  this  part  of  the  ancient  Acta  can 
be  reconstructed  with  some  probability. 

The  place  of  origin  of  the  Acts  of  Peter. — There 
is  no  unanimity  among  critics  as  to  the  community 
in  which  the  Acts  of  Peter  was  first  produced. 
There  is  of  course  a  natural  tendency  to  consider 
in  the  first  place  the  possibility  that  the  document 
is  Roman.  In  favour  of  this  view  the  most  com- 
plete statement  is  that  of  Erbes  ('Petrus  nicht  in 
Rom,  sondern  in  Jerusalem  gestorben,'  ZKG  xxii. 
1,  pp.  1-47  and  2,  pp.  161-231).  He  lays  special 
emphasis  on  the  fact  that  the  writer  is  acquainted 
witn  the  entrance  to  Rome  both  from  tlie  sea  and 
by  road,  and  knows  that  the  paved  way  from 
Puteoli  to  Rome  is  bad  to  walk  upon  and  jars  the 
pilgrims  who  use  it.  He  also  emphasizes  the 
correctness  of  the  narrative  in  placing  the  contest 
between  Peter  and  Simon  Magus  in  the  Forum 
Julium,  on  the  ground  that,  according  to  Appian 
(de  Bella  Civili,  ii.  102),  this  forum  was  especially 
reserved  for  disputes  and  closed  to  commerce.  He 
makes  other  points  of  a  similar  nature,  but  not  of 
so  striking  a  character. 

Against  this  it  is  urged  by  Harnack  (Altchristl. 
Litteraturgesch.  ii.  559)  ana  Zahn  {Gesch.  des  NT 
Kanons,  ii.  841)  that  the  local  references  to  Rome 
are  really  very  small,  and  do  not  give  more  know- 
ledge than  was  easily  accessible  to  any  one  in  the 
2nd  or  3rd  century.  For  instance,  that  Aricia  and 
Terracina  are  towns  not  far  from  Rome  is  a  fact 
which  must  have  been  quite  generally  known. 

Other  arguments  seem  to  point  to  Asia  rather 
than  Rome  for  the  coniposition  of  the  Acts.  Apart 
from  the  OT  and  NT,  the  books  which  clearly 
were  made  use  of  by  the  redactor  of  the  Acts  of 
Peter  are  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  the  Acts  of  John. 
Now  we  know  with  tolerable  certainty  that  the 
Acts  of  Paul  was  written  in  Asia,  and  it  is  usually 
thought  that  the  Acts  of  John  came  from  Ephesus 
or  the  neighbourhood.  It  is,  therefore,  not  im- 
probable that  the  Acts  of  Peter  came  from  the 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


35 


same  district.  Other  possibilities  are  Antioch  or 
Jerusalem,  but  there  is  less  to  be  said  in  favour  of 
these  than  either  Rome  or  Asia. 

The  date  of  the  Acts  of  Peter.— The  terminus  ad 
quern  \s  some  time  earlier  than  Commodian  the 
African  Christian  poet,  who  was  clearly  acquainted 
with  both  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  the  Acts  of  Peter, 
probably  in  a  Latin  version,  and  appears  to  have 
regardeti  them  as  undoubted  history  (cf.  esp. 
Commodian,  Carmen  Apologeticum,  623  ff.).  Com- 
modian is  generally  supposed  to  have  written  c. 
A.D.  250,  so  that  some  years  earlier  than  this  (to 
allow  for  the  spread  of  the  Acts,  their  translation, 
and  the  growth  of  their  prestige)  is  the  earliest 
possible  date.  The  terminus  a  quo  is  more  diffi- 
cult to  find.  It  is  generally  conceded  that  the 
date  +  165  adopted  by  Lipsius  (Apokr.  Apostel- 
gesch.,  ii.  1,  p.  275)  is  too  early,  and  opinion  usually 
fixes  on  the  decenninm  either  side  of  the  year  200 
as  the  most  probable  for  the  writing  of  the  Acts. 
Hamack  tlmiks  that  early  in  the  3rd  cent,  is  the 
most  probable  time  (Altchr.  Lit.,  ii.  553 ff.),  but 
Erbes  and  C.  Schmidt  incline  rather  to  the  end  of 
the  2nd  century.  The  most  important  argument 
is  concerned  with  the  compassionate  attitude  to- 
wards the  lapsi,  which  is  very  marked  in  the 
Acts.  Hamack  thinks  that  this  is  not  intelligible 
until  230,  while  Erbes  and  Schmidt  maintain  that 
in  the  light  of  the  Shepherd  of  Hernias  a  much 
earlier  date  is  possible.  Obriotisly  this  sort  of 
reasoning  is  somewhat  tentative,  and  it  is  ap- 
parently not  possible  at  present  to  say  more  than 
that  lSO-230  seems  to  be  the  half-century  within 
which  the  composition  ought  probably  to  be  placed. 
The  sources  used  by  the  Acts  of  Peter. — Apart 
from  the  OT  and  NT,  both  of  which  the  writer 
uses  freely  and  accepts  as  equally  inspired,  the 
use  can  clearly  be  traced  of  the  following  books, 
(a)  The  Acts  of  Paul.  Apart  from  various  smaller 
points  of  contact,  the  whole  account  of  the  martyr- 
dom of  Peter  is  clearly  based  on  the  martyrdom 
of  Paul.  The  whole  subject  Ls  worked  out  in 
full  detail  by  C.  Schmidt  in  liis  Petrusakten 
(p.  82ff.) ;  but  it  should  be  added  taat  there  is  per- 
haps still  room  for  doubt  whether  that  portion 
of  the  Codex  Vercellensis  which  deals  with  Paul 
really  belongs  to  the  Acts  of  Peter,  and  is  not  an 
addition  made  by  the  redactor  who  formed  the 
excerpt,  rather  than  by  the  author  of  the  Acts 
itself.  The  fullest  statement  of  this  possibility  is 
given  by  Hamack  (TU  xx.  2  [1900],  p.  103 tf.), 
and  a  discussion  tending  to  negative  his  conclu- 
sions is  to  be  found  in  Schmidt's  Petrusakten,  82  f. 
— (b)  The  Acts  of  John.  The  frequent  verbal 
dependence  of  the  Acts  of  Peter  on  the  Acts  of 
John  is  demonstrated  by  the  long  list  of  parallel 
passages  given  by  M.  R.  James  in  Apocrypha 
Anecdota,  u.  p.  xxivff.  James,  however,  thought 
at  that  time  that  this  list  proved  the  identity  of 
authorship  of  the  two  books ;  but  Schmidt  has 
shown  conclusively  that  the  facts  must  be  ex- 
plained as  due  to  dependence  rather  than  to 
identity  of  authorship.  His  most  telling  argument 
is  the  large  use  of  the  OT  and  NT  made  by  the 
Acts  of  Peter  as  contrasted  with  their  very  limited 
use  in  the  Acts  of  John. — (c)  Schmidt  also  argues 
that  the  Acts  used  the  K'^pvyfia  Rerpov.  Probably 
he  is  right,  but  our  knowledge  of  the  K-^pvyfia  is 
too  small  to  enable  the  question  to  be  satisfactorily 
settled. 

The  theology  of  the  Acts  of  Peter. — In  general 
the  account  given  above  of  the  theology  of  the 
Acts  of  Paul  will  serve  also  for  the  Acts  of  Peter. 
But  in  some  passages  which  depend  on  the  Acts  of 
•John  there  is  an  appearance  of  a  pronounced 
Modalism  or  almost  of  Docetism.  Lipsius  and 
others,  who  believed,  with  Zahn  and  James,  that 
the  Acts  of  Peter  was  written  by  the  author  of 


the  Acts  of  John,  used  to  think  that  these  passages 
pointed  to  a  heretical  and  Gnostic  origin.  But 
Harnack  (Altchr.  Lit.  ii.  560 tf.)  and  Schmidt 
(Petrusakten,  p.  lllff.)  have  argued  very  forcibly 
that  this  is  not  the  case,  and  that  the  Acts  of 
Peter  represents  the  popular  Christianity  of  the 
end  of  the  2nd  cent,  rather  than  any  Gnostic 
sect. 

No  ctmiplete  edition  of  the  text  odste:  the  Codex  YeroeDeiMia 
and  the  Greek  text  ot  Xba  Martjfrium  are  criticany  edited  by 
R.  A.  lipsios  in  Aela  Apoergpka,  L  [Leipzig:,  1891] ;  the  Coptic 
npofcts  Herpov  by  C.  Schmidt.  DU  aiteu  Petrtuakten  {TU  xxiv. 
1),  Leipzig,  1903.  Yery  important  is  the  treatment  ot  Hamack 
in  his  ChrtmologU,  tsn,  L  559ff.,  and  the  article  of  Erfaea  in 
ZKG  xxii.  1,  p.  IfL  and  2,  p.  ISlff.  onder  the  title  'FMras 
nicht  in  Bom,  sondem  in  Jerusalem  gestorben.' 

3.  The  Acts  of  John.  —  Recent  research  has 
added  much  to  our  knowledge  of  the  Acts  of  John ; 
and,  though  the  text  is  fragmentary  and  uncertain, 
it  is  now  possible  to  reconstruct  the  greater  part 
of  the  original.  No  single  MS  is  complete,  but, 
from  the  comparison  of  many,  the  following  inci- 
dents can  be  arranged : 

(1)  In  Ephesus.— John  comes  from  Miletus  to 
Ephesus  and  meets  Lykomedes,  with  whom  he 
lodges.  Here  Cleopatra,  the  vnie  of  Lykomedes, 
dies,  and  her  husband  also  falls  dead  from  grief, 
but  John  raises  both  to  life.  Lykomedes  obtains 
a  picture  of  the  Apostle,  and  worships  it  in  his 
room  until  John  discovers  it  and  shows  him  his 
mistake.  The  next  episode  at  Ephesus  is  in  the 
theatre,  where  John  makes  a  long  speech  and 
heals  many  sick.  John  is  then  summoned  to 
Smyrna,  but  determines  first  to  strengthen  the 
Ephesian  community.  On  the  feast  day  of  Artemis 
he  goes  to  the  Temple,  and  after  a  speech  inflicts 
dealh  on  the  priest.  He  then  encounters  a  young 
man  who  has  killed  his  father  because  he  had 
accused  him  of  adultery.  John  raises  the  father, 
and  converts  both  father  and  son ;  he  then  goes  to 
Smyrna. 

(2)  Second  visit  to  Ephesus. — John  returns  to 
Ephesus  to  the  house  of  Andronicus,  who  had 
been  converted  during  his  first  visit.  Drusiana, 
the  wife  of  Andronicus,  dies  from  the  annoyance 
caused  her  by  a  young  man  Kallimachus,  but 
after  her  burial  John  goes  to  the  tomb  and  sees 
Christ  appear  as  a  young  man  ;  he  is  instructed  to 
raise  up  Drusiana  and  also  a  young  man,  Fortun- 
atus,  who  has  been  buried  in  the  same  place. 
Fortunatus  is,  however,  not  converted,  and  soon 
dies  again. 

(3)  The  most  important  fragment  of  the  Acts  is 
that  which  seems  to  follow  upon  the  episode  of 
Drusiana,  as  she  remains  one  of  the  chief  persons. 
This  was  discovered  in  1886  by  M.  R.  James  in 
Cod.  Vind.  63  (written  in  1324)  and  published  in 
1897  in  TS  v.  1.  It  gives  a  long  and  extremely 
Docetic  account  of  the  Passion  of  Christ,  and  of  a 
revelation  which  the  true  Christ  made  to  the 
disciples  while  the  phantasmal  Christ  was  being 
crucified,  and  includes  a  hymn  which  was  used, 
among  others,  by  the  Priscillianists  (Augustine, 
Ep.  237  [253]). 

(4)  The  death  of  John.  —  During  the  Sunday 
worship  John  makes  a  speech,  and  partakes  with 
the  brethren  of  the  Eucharist.  He  then  orders  his 
grave  to  be  dug,  suid  after  prayer,  and  emphasis 
on  his  virgin  life,  lies  down  in  the  grave  and  either 
dies  or  passes  into  a  permanent  trance. 

The  testimony  of  early  writers,  and  the  date  of 
the  Acts  of  John. — The  earliest  writer  to  nse  the 
Acts  of  John  is  Clement  of  Alexandria.  In  the 
Adumbrationes  to  1  Jn  1^  (ed.  Potter,  p.  1009)  he 
says: 

'  Fatar  ergo  in  traditionibas  quoniam  Johannes  ipamn  oorpoa 
quod  erat  extrinsecus  tangens  mannm  soam  in  prufuuda 
misisse  et  ei  doritiam  camis  nuDo  modo  relnctatam  ease  aed 
locom  manui  tribnisse  discipuli.' 


36 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


This  is  a  certain  reference  to  the  Acts  of  John  (ed. 
Bonnet,  195  f.),  and  these  Latin  'adunibrationes' 
are  generally  recognized  as  derived  from  the 
Eypotyposes.  A  similar  reference,  but  loss  cer- 
tain, is  in  Strom,  vi.  9.  71 : 

oAA'  tin,  fjiv  ToO  <r<OT>)pos  to  adixa.  airanelv  los  (Tui/xa  ras  av- 
ayicaCai  wrript(riai  eis  Saiixovrfv  yeAo)?  av  tiri,  t^yev  yap  ov  Sia.  to 
frctffux,  Svvdnti  (Tweyofievov  ayitf,  aAA'  <os  ^t)  roiit  (rvvovTat  aAA(o« 
wept  avToO  <f)poi'e2v  virtiaeKSoi,  ixratp  a(it'A«i  viTTtpov  Boicqaei.  rivi^ 
avTOv  nt<j>at'epoi<T8at.  vireKaPov,  ai/rht  Si  arra^anKiat  a.ira8r]<!  ^v  ci$ 
t>v  oi&iv  irapticBveTai  Klvrma  jraOrynKOV,  ktA. 

Perhaps  later  than  Clement,  but  probably  early 
in  the  3rd  cent.,  is  the  writer  of  the  Monarchian 
Prologues,  in  which  the  statement  as  to  John, 
'qui  virgo  electus  a  Deo  est  quern  de  nuptiis 
volentem  nubere  vocavit  Deus,'  clearly  refers  to 
the  Acts  of  John  (ed.  Bonnet),  p.  212  :  6  OiXovrl  /loi 
iv  vedrriTi.  yrj/jLai  ewKpafeis  Kal  eiprjKdjs  /xoi,  Xprj^o)  aov, 
'ludvvTi.  It  is  noteworthy  that  neither  Clement 
nor  the  author  of  the  Prologues  seems  to  have  any 
consciousness  that  he  has  used  a  source  of  doubtful 
orthodoxy. 

Later  on,  Augustine  and  other  writers  against 
the  Manichaeans  make  tolerably  frequent  mention 
of  the  Acts  ;  a  full  collection  ot  all  the  quotations 
is  given  by  Lipsius,  Apokr.  Apostdgesch.  i.  8311'. 
Here,  of  course,  there  is  no  longer  any  doubt  as  to 
the  heterodoxy  of  the  book,  which  is  condemned 
together  with  the  other  Acts,  with  the  sole  excep- 
tion of  the  Acts  of  Paul. 

The  evidence  of  Clement  is  the  chief,  if  not  the 
only,  testimony  as  to  the  date  of  the  Acts  of  John. 
It  proves  that  it  belongs  to  the  2nd  cent.,  but 
there  is  really  no  evidence  to  say  how  much  earlier 
than  Clement  it  may  be.  Twenty  years  either 
side  of  160  seem  to  represent  the  limits. 

The  provenance  of  the  Acts  of  John. — This 
remains  quite  uncertain.  The  only  evidence  is 
that  the  centre  of  the  Acts  is  Ephesus,  and  this 
points  to  Asia  as  the  place  of  origin.  Nor  is  there 
any  serious  argument  against  this  view,  for  there 
is  certainly  no  connexion  between  the  destruction 
of  the  temple  of  Artemis  by  the  Goths  in  282  and 
the  attack  on  this  temple  attributed  to  John  and 
his  friends  in  the  Acts.  Probably,  therefore, 
Ephesus,  or  more  generally  Asia,  may  be  taken  as 
the  place  of  composition,  but  not  much  should  be 
built  on  this  view. 

The  theology  and  character  of  the  Acts. — The 
theology  of  the  Acts  appears  to  be  markedly 
Docetic  and  Gnostic.  It  represents  Jesus  as 
possessing  a  body  which  varied  from  day  to  day 
in  appearance,  and  was  capable  even  of  appearing 
to  two  observers  at  the  same  time  in  quite  different 
forms.  His  feet  left  no  mark  on  the  ground. 
This  certainly  seems  Docetic,  but  it  is  curious  that 
Clement  of  Alexandria  qixotes  part  of  this  passage 
as  historical  without  any  hesitation  in  accepting 
it,  and  Clement  was  not  a  Docete.  The  fact  that 
at  the  moment  of  the  Crucifixion  Jesus  appears  to 
John  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  is  also  prima  facie 
Docetic,  but  it  is  hard  to  say  where  mysticism 
ends  and  Dooetism  begins. 

The  Gnosticism  of  the  document  is  chiefly 
sr.pported  by  the  reference  in  the  great  hymn  to 
an  Ogdoad  and  a  Dodecad,  but  it  is  not  certain 
that  tliis  is  rtally  a  reference  to  a  Gnostic  system. 
The  Ogdoad  is  sun,  moon,  and  planets,  and  the 
Dodecad  is  the  signs  of  the  zodiac.  The  distinc- 
tion l)etween  Gnosticism  and  Catholicism  was  not 
that  one  believed  in  an  Ogdoad  and  the  other  did 
not,  but  in  tlie  view  Avhich  they  took  of  it.  In 
just  the  same  way  the  Valentinians  and  others 
explained  cliat  the  Demiurge  had  made  seven 
heavens  above  the  earth,  and  wliile  Irena^us  re- 
sisted this  teaching,  he  never  denied  the  existence 
of  the  seven  heavens,  aa  is  shown  by  his  *  Apostolic 
Preaching.' 


The  best  statement  ot  the  caM  against  the  Gnostic  theory  i» 
in  C.  Schmidt,  Petnisakten,  119  ff.  The  case  for  a  Gnostic  origin 
is  best  (,'iven,  though  very  shortly,  by  .M.  R.  James  In  Apocrypha 
Anecilnia,  ii.  (7'.S'  v.  1),  Canibri'lu'ej  1897,  p.  xviii  fl.,  and  (or  a 
definitely  Valeiitinian  origin,  by  Zahn  (A'K/  x.  211  ff.). 

Apart  from  the  suspicion  of  Docetism  and 
Gnosticism,  the  theology  of  the  Acts  is  not  unlike 
that  of  the  Acts  of  Paul.  Especially  noticeable  is 
the  ascetic  objection  to  marriage  ;  in  this  respect 
the  Acts  of  John  is  quite  as  stern  as  the  Acts  of 
Paul  or  of  Thomas.  liut  in  other  respects  the  Acts 
of  John  seems  to  come  from  a  far  higher  mystical 
religion,  and  is  altogether  finer  literature  than 
the  Acts  of  Paul.  Some  of  the  mystical  passages 
reach  a  magnificent  level,  and  may  be  ranked 
with  the  best  products  of  2nd  cent,  religion. 

The  Acts  of  John  may  be  studied  best  in  Lipsius  and  Bonnet, 
Ada  A postolorurn  Apocrypha,  ii.  1,  Leipzig,  1898.  This  is  the 
only  complete  text  of  all  the  known  fragments.  See  also  M.  R. 
James,  Apocrypha  Anecdota,  ii.  (TS  v.  1) ;  Th.  Zahn,  Acta 
Joannis,  Erlangen,  1880,  and  E.  Hennecke,  NeuUst.  Apok- 
ryphen,  Tiibingen,  1904,  and  Handbuch  zu  den  Neutest. 
Apokr.,  do.  1904.  Kspecially  important  is  the  section  on  the 
Acts  of  John  in  C.  Schmidt,  Die  alten  PetrusakUn  {TU 
xxiv.  1),  Leipzig,  1903,  p.  120  ff. 

4.  The  Acts  of  Andrew.— No  MS  is  extant  which 
gives  even  as  good  a  representation  of  the  original 
Acts  as  is  found  in  the  other  early  Acts.  We 
possess  in  quotations  of  Euodius  of  Uzala  (end  of 
the  4th  cent.)  some  valuable  fragments,  of  which 
traces  are  also  found  in  Augustine  ;  from  these, 
and  on  the  grounds  of  general  resemblance  to  the 
Acts  of  John,  it  appears  probable  that  a  fragment 
in  Cod.  Vatican.  Gr.  808  (lOth-llth  cent.),  deal- 
ing with  Andrew  in  prison,  belongs  to  the  early 
Acts ;  and  from  a  variety  of  sources  it  is  also 
possible  to  reconstruct  with  some  accuracy  the 
story  of  the  martyrdom  of  Andrew. 

The  text  of  the  fragment  in  Cod.  Vat.  808  begins 
in  the  middle  of  a  speech  of  Andrew,  who  is  in 
prison  in  Patras.  The  general  situation  is  that 
the  Apostle  is  being  prosecuted  by  a  certain 
^geates — which  is  perhaps  'an  inhabitant  of 
.^gea '  rather  than  a  personal  name — because  he 
perverted  his  wife  Maximilla  by  Encratitic  doctrine 
against  married  life.  A  prominent  part  is  also 
played  by  Patrodes  the  brother  of  .^llgeates  but 
a  friend  of  the  Apostle.  The  fragment  ends,  as  it 
begins,  abruptly  in  the  middle  of  a  speech  by 
Andrew. 

The  death  of  Andrew  was  by  crucifixion,  but 
the  legend  ascribing  an  unusual  shape  to  the  cross 
used  seems  to  be  of  later  origin.  For  three  days 
and  three  nights  he  remained  on  the  cross  exhort- 
ing the  multitude  ;  at  the  end  of  this  time  a  crowd 
of  20,000  men  went  to  the  proconsul  to  demand 
that  Andrew  should  be  released,  .^geates  was 
obliged  to  comply,  but  Andrew  refused,  and  prayed 
that  having  once  been  joined  to  the  cross  he  might 
not  be  separated  from  it.  He  then  died,  and  was 
buried  by  StratoUes  and  Maximilla. 

The  date  and  provenance  of  the  Acts  of  Andrew. 
— These  points  depend  largely  on  the  view  taken 
of  the  authorship  of  the  Acts.  If,  as  is  usually 
thought,  the  Acts  of  Andrew  is  really  Leucian, 
i.e.  written  by  the  same  author  as  tlie  Acts  of 
John,  Asia  is  the  most  probable  place  for  its 
origin,  and  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent,  the  most 
probable  date.  If  this  view  be  given  up,  Greece, 
in  which  the  scene  of  the  Acts  is  laid,  becomes 
the  most  probable  place,  and  the  date  must  be 
decided  by  internal  evidence,  for  the  Acts 
appears  not  to  be  quoted  before  the  time  of  Origen 
(Eus.  HEva.  1).  At  present  the  Leucian  hypothesis 
perhans  holds  the  held  (see  esp.  James,  Apocrypha 
Anecdota,  ii.  pp.  xxixff.),  but  it  is  not  at  all 
certain. 

The  theology  of  the  Acts.—^o  far  as  the  frag- 
ments preserved  enable  us  to  discover,  the  theology 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHA  r.) 


37 


of  the  Acts  of  Andrew  resembles  most  closely  that 
of  the  Acts  of  John,  and  thus  supports  the  Leucian 
theory.  There  is  the  same  emphasis  on  asceticism 
even  in  marriage,  and  the  cross  also  plays  a  Isurge 
part. 

The  text  is  nven  in  Lipdns  and  Bonnet,  Acta  Apocrypha, 
ii.  1,  and  valuable  diacassions  are  given  in  Hamack,  CkronoL  iL 
175,  and  by  M.  B.  James  in  Apo<Tifpha  Aneedota,  iL  p.  xxix  ff. 
Somewhat' out  of  date,  but  still  Taloable  in  some  napecta,  is 
R.  A.  Lipsius,  Die  apobyphen  ApotUlge$ekiehten,  Bmnswick, 
1»3-S7,  L  513  ff. 

5.  The  Acts  of  Thomas,— (1)  Content*. — Judas 
Thomas  is  sold  by  Jesus  to  the  messenger  of  an 
Indian  prince.  At  the  wedding-feast  of  the 
daughter  of  the  king  of  Andrapolis  he  is  dis- 
covered to  be  an  inspired  person  and  forced  by 
the  king  to  pray  over  the  bride  and  bridegroom. 
On  entering  the  inner  room  Jesos  is  found  sitting 
with  the  bride.  He  explains  to  the  bridegroom 
that  He  is  not  Thomas,  and  converts  the  couple 
to  &  complete  abstinence  from  sexual  relations 
(Act  i.).  Thomas  is  ordered  by  his  master,  King 
Gnndaphoms,  to  build  a  palace.  Spending  the 
money  on  alms,  he  erects  a  palace  in  heaven  which 
is  shown  to  the  disembodied  soul  of  the  king's 
deceased  brother,  who  is  afterwards  restored  to 
life  and  receives  the  Eucharist  with  his  brother, 
both  being  '  sealed  '  with  oil  by  the  Apostle.  On 
this  occasion  the  Lord  appears  as  a  youth  bearing 
a  lamp.  Having  preached  to  the  people,  Thomas 
is  ordered  by  the  Lord  to  depart  (ii.).  Thomas 
finds  a  youth  killed  by  a  dragon,  which  forthwith 
appears,  acknowledging  Thomas  as  '  twin  of  the 
Christ,'  and  professes  to  be  the  serpent  from  para- 
dise. The  dragon  is  summoned  to  suck  the  venom 
again  out  of  the  body,  after  doing  which  it 
perishes.  The  youth  is  restored  to  life,  and  says 
that  he  saw  Thomas  as  a  double  person  :  one 
exactly  like  him  standing  by  and  telling  him  to 
resuscitate  the  body  (iii.).  While  this  happens,  the 
colt  of  an  ass  addresses  the  Apostle  as  the  '  twin 
of  the  Christ,'  and  invites  him  to  ride  on  its  back 
to  the  town  (iv.).  A  woman  is  delivered  from  a 
demon  that  had  been  doing  violence  to  her  for  live 
years.  To  protect  her  for  the  future,  she  is 
'  sealed '  and  partakes  of  the  Eucharist  (v. ).  At 
this  moment  a  young  man's  hands  are  withered  in 
the  act  of  taking  the  Eucharistic  bread.  He  con- 
fesses that  he  has  murdered  a  woman  for  repudiat- 
ing him  after  her  conversion  by  Thomas.  Restored 
to  life,  she  recounts  horrible  visions  from  the  lower 
world.  After  a  general  conversion,  Thomas's  final 
words  culminate  in  an  exhortation  to  abstinence 
from  marriage  and  in  emphasis  on  the  permanence 
of  spiritual  possession  (vi.).  All  India  being  evan- 
gelized, a  general  of  king  Misdaens  visits  Thomas 
and  prays  him  to  deliver  his  wife  and  daughter 
from  a  cruel  pair  of  demons  (viL).  On  the  road 
the  Apostle  asks  the  general  to  command  some 
wild  asses  to  draw  his  carriage.  One  of  these  is 
afterwards  ordered  by  the  Apostle  to  summon  the 
demons  from  the  house.  In  the  courtyard  this 
same  ass  preaches  a  sermon  to  the  multitude,  and 
exhorts  the  Apostle  to  give  the  bodies  of  the 
women  back  to  life,  since  they  had  died  as  the 
demons  were  leaving  them  (viii.).  Mygdonia,  a 
relative  of  the  royal  famUy,  comes  to  hear  Thomas 

E reaching.  The  same  night  her  husband  Charisins 
as  a  dream  which  contains  a  foreboding  of  the 
consequences  of  this  preaching  for  the  married 
life.  On  the  next  day  and  night  this  comes  true. 
His  wife  flees  from  hLs  embraces.  In  the  morning 
Thomas  is  arrested,  and  while  in  prison  sings  the 
'  Hymn  of  the  Soul.'  At  home,  however,  Charisius 
finds  his  fervent  supplications  again  scorned.  His 
wife  escapes  to  receive  the  '  seal,'  and  encounters 
Thomas  on  her  way  proceeding  as  a  prince  with 
many  lights  (ix. ).     Thomas  follows  her  and  returns 


to  prison,  having  administered  the  sacraments 
to  her  and  her  foster-mother.  That  morning 
Mygdonia  preaches  a  sermon  to  her  husband  on 
Jesus  as  the  heavenly  bridegroom.  Thomas  is 
now  ordered  by  the  king  and  besought  by  Charisius 
to  make  Mygdonia  alter  her  conduct ;  but  his 
feeble  commands  are  refuted  by  her  from  his  own 
teaching  (x.).  Tertia  the  queen  pays  a  visit  to 
Mygdonia  and  returns  convinced  (xi.).  Thomas  is 
again  imprisoned,  and  converts  Vazanes  the  king's 
son.  An  attempted  torture  being  miraculously 
frustrated,  he  is  conducted  back  and  speaks  a  long 

{)ray er  ( xiL ).  Jesus,  mostly  in  the  form  of  Thomas, 
eads  the  converts  and  with  them  Mnesara,  the 
wife  of  Vazanes,  to  the  prison.  They  enter 
Vazanes'  house,  where  they  are  *  sealed '  and 
baptized  by  Thomas.  After  the  Eucharistic  meal, 
Thomas  returns  to  the  prison  (Martyrium).  The 
Apostle,  followed  by  a  multitude,  is  taken  to 
a  mountain  and  there  pierced  with  swords.  On 
the  mountain  Sifor  tne  general  and  Vazanes 
receive  orders  as  presbyter  and  deacon  (xiii. ). 

(2)  Original  language. — After  Schroter  {ZDMG, 
1871,  p.  327  If.),  Noldeke  (ib.  67">-679  and  in  Lipsius, 
Apokr.  Apostelgcsch.  ii.^  [18S4]  423-425),  and 
^lacke  {Th.  Quartalschr.,  1874,  pp.  3-70),  Burkitt 
has  settled  the  question  {JThSt  i.  [1900]  280-290). 
The  existence  of  a  Syriac  original  is  proved  by  a 
series  of  errors  in  the  Greek  arising  from  Syriac 
idioms  or  writing. 

(3)  Text.— {a)  The  Sjfriae^ed.  Wright,  Apoer.  Aet»,  Lond.  1871, 
i.  172-333,  text ;  iL  146  ff.,  translation)  is  preserved  in  Br.  Mas. 
SvT.  Add  14645  (a.d.  936X  Anotho-  MS  is  at  Berlin :  Sachao 
ta,  a  double  of  this  at  Cambridge  (P.  Bedjan,  AeL  Mart,  and 
Sanet.  iiL  Paris,  1893,  gives  variants  from  the  B^in  MSX 
Fragments  from  the  6th  cent,  in  a  Sinai  palimpsest,  Syr.  Sn.  30^ 
have  been  published  by  Barkitt(Stu<L  Sut.,  C3ambti^^  1900,  toL 
ix.  app.  7).  Search  should  be  made  in  tbie  East  for  HSS  <rf  ttds 
text  suid  its  Oriental  and  Greek  versions.  Our  present  text  is 
not  always  superior  to  the  Greek  version.  On  the  text  of  the 
hvmns  (in  Acts  L  and  ix-X  cf.  A.  .4.  Bevan,  '  T^e  Hvmn  of  the 
Soul,'  TS  v.  3  [1S97] ;  Hoffmann,  ZSTW,  1903,  pp.  273-309 ; 
E.  Preuschen,  Zicei  gnost.  Bymnen,  Giessen,  1904 ;  bat  see 
Burkitt,  ThT,  Leyden,  1905,  pp.  270-282 ;  Doncan  Jones,  JTkSt 
vi.  [1905]  448-451. 

(6)  The  Greek  version  (ed.  Bonnet,  Acta  Apoet,  Apoer.,  iL  2, 
Leipzii;,  1903).  The  13  'Act«'  -i-  the  Martj/rium  exirt  as 
a  whole  in  two  MSS.  The  best  text  is  Cod.  U  (Borne, 
VallicelL  B  35,  llth  cent.).  This  is  the  only  Greek  MS  of  the 
•  Hj-mn  of  the  Soul '  (Act  ix.  chs.  108-113).  On  the  text  of  this 
Hymn  in  Xicetas  of  Salonica,  cf.  Bonnet,  Preface,  p.  xxiti.  The 
other  complete  MS  is  P  (Paris,  gnec  1510, 12th  or  13th  cent.). 
The  (19)  other  3iSS  give  but  sdections.  We  most,  therefore, 
review  separately  the  MSS  for  part  (A)= Acts  L  ii.,  part  (B)= 
Acts  iiL-siL,  part(C)=Act  xiii.  -■-  Martjtrium.  Besides  UP,  15 
copies  preserve  (AX  of  which  CXBHTG  have  no  trace  of  (B)  or 
(OX  while  V  gives  here  only  the  exordium  of  (A) ;  9  copies 
preserve  (B),  of  which  VYED  have  no  selections  beyond  Act 
viii.,  while  SFQZL  give  here  no  more  than  the  '  prayers'  of  Act 
xiL,  which,  against  tite  order  of  these  MSS  and  P,  Bonnet  has 
inserted  here,  following  U  +  Syr. ;  11  copies  preserve  (C),  of 
which  KOM  omit  (A)  and  (B)  altogether,  while  Q  gives  here 
only  the  exordium  of  Act  xiiL  Identical  selections:  FBGX 
(pp.  99-146»  BonnetX  BH  (9»-145>*X  8FZL  (251iO-SSS»,  see 
Pref .  p.  xsJiX  SFZ  (275i<i-2S8).  The  genealogy  is  still  ofaecare. 
In  put  (A)  Bonnet  distinguishes  two  tvpes  of  text :  T  and  A. 
The  r  text=OHZ  and  B  (1st  halfX  The  A  text=A  (Paris. 
gr»c  881,  10th  cent.)  +  fam.  ♦  (=the  rest  of  the  MSS.  U  and  P 
m<dndedX  Both  types  have  several  onimportuit  variations  in 
common,  which  must  derive  from  a  not  very  distant  ancestor. 
But,  as  Utey  more  often  differ  on  serious  points,  the  tiaditioD 
of  the  Greek  text  appears  to  be  not  very  reliable,  la  part  (C) 
again  two  types  occur,  via.  A  +  fam.  O  (=KORUy)and  P  + 
fam.  S  (=FLSZX  All  these  MSS  belonged  to  the  A  text  in  part 
(AX  Z  oolj  excepted  (Peteisb.  imp.  91, 12th  cent.) ;  cf.  'identi- 
cal selections 'above.  In  port  (B)  the  MSSaregrouped  on  their 
textaal  merits  and  in  a  descending  order :  UVYK,  P,  D.  On  the 
MSS  neglected  by  Bonnet  cf.  Pref.  p.  xxiv  ff.  A  Brossds  MS 
OL  204:0  mi|^t  be  of  some  interest.  Sevoal  MSS  are  still 
hidden  in  Smyrna,  Jerusalem,  Athos  (the  catalogues  of  the 
most  important  libraries,  Lavra  and  Vatope<U>  are  still  an- 
publishedX  Bonnef  s  text  might  be  improved.  Only  from  pp. 
197-250  coold  due  influence  be  allowed  to  the  Syriac  and  its 
all^-,  (3od.  U,  Baridtt  having  then  convinced  the  editor  that 
the  Greek  was  but  the  version  of  a  Syriac  original  (Pref.  p.  xxi). 

(c)  The  Armenian  venion  should  be'  better  known-  A  MS  exists 
at  Paris  (BibL  nat.  fonds  arm.  46  niX  which  Tetter  is  expected 
to  publish  in  the  Or.  CftnM.  The '  Hymn  of  the  Sool' is  not  m  it. 
Preuscdien  (Hennecke,  BeutesL  Apokr.  iL  563)  was  impressed 
by  its  variations,  not  by  the  quality  of  its  text.  In  Conybeare's 
opinion  the  Arm.  version  derives  from  the  Syriac  (op.  eit.  L  475X 


38 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


ACTS  (APOCRYPHAL) 


(d)  Of  other  versiont,  the  Ethiopic  ia  wholly,  the  Latin  not 
entirely,  useless  (cf.  Fabricius,  Cod.  apocr.  Jfl%  Hamburg,  1903, 
li.  687 f.  ;  Bonnet,  Acta  Thomce,  1883,  p.  96 ff.). 

(4)  Provenance  and  date. — For  the  history  of 
opinion,  cf.  Harnack,  Allchr.  Lit.,  ii.  1  (1897),  546- 
549  with  ii.  2  (1904),  175-176.  Early  Gnostics  and 
Eastern  Christianity  have  appeared  to  diil'er  less 
in  vocabulary  than  in  other  regards.  Moreover, 
several  coincidences  with  Gnostic  j>lira8eology  have 
been  intensified  in  the  Greek,  or  are  even  due  to 
wrong  translation.  The  intellectual  pursxiits  of 
the  Gnostic  mind  are  absent,  while  the  rigoristic 
ethics  have  close  parallels  in  early  Syriac  Christi- 
anity. All  this  exactly  suits  Baruesanes  (A.D. 
154-222)  and  his  school  (seeBurkitt,  Early  Eastern 
Christianity,  London,  1904,  pp.  170  n.,  199,  205  ff., 
and  Nau,  Z)ic<.  Th<!ol.  Cath.,  Paris,  1907,  ii.  391- 
401,  artt.  'Bard^sane'  and  •  Bard6sanites ' ;  also 
Kriiger,  GGA,  1905,  p.  718,  and  Noldeke,  ib.y.  82). 
The  language  (with  the  proper  names)  points  to 
Syria,  the  figure  of  Thomas  to  Edessa,  the  char- 
acter and  style  ('Acts'  ixf.,  the  'Hymn  of  the 
Soul'  in  this  'Act')  to  the  literary  capacities 
of  Bardesanes'  environment.  R.  lleitzenstein 
(Hellenist.  WundererzdMungen,  Leipzig,  1906,  p. 
104 ff.)  raises  the  question  whether  the  material  of 
the  story  Mas  created  in  Edessa  or  imported.  He 
points  out  that  miracle-stories  {'aretalogies')  were 
a  literary  genre,  spread  by  several  petites  religions 
from  Egypt  on  the  waves  of  universal  syncretism. 
The  pagan  theology  of  Hermetic  monotheism  has 
left  its  traces  among  the  mediaeval  Sabians  of 
Carrhae  (near  Edessa).  It  seems,  however,  that 
he  is  over-stating  the  importance  of  the  existing 
analogies. 

The  date  of  the  Acts  is  fixed  by  Lipsius  (LCBl, 
1888,  no.  44,  p.  1508,  Apokr.  Apostelgesch.,  ii.  2, 
p.  418  note  [on  i.  p.  225  f.])  as  the  time  of  the 
translation  of  the  relics  of  Thomas  to  Edessa  (A.D. 
232).  It  is  impossible  to  clench  this  argument, 
but  it  is  certain  that  one  of  the  component  parts 
of  Act  ix.,  the  '  Hymn  of  the  Soul,'  was  composed 
before  the  rise  of  the  Sasanid  power  in  A.D.  226, 
since  '  Parthian  kings '  are  mentioned  in  1.  38  (ed. 
Bevan,  TS  v.  3).  Therefore  we  must  not  go  much 
beyond  that  time,  and  may  reserve  the  middle 

auarters  of  the  3rd  cent,  as  the  latest  probable 
ate  for  the  whole. 

(5)  Integrity. — Suspicions  are  raised  by  the  fact 
that  most  MSS  of  the  Greek  version  give  but 
selections.  If  this  should  occur  also  in  the  Oriental 
tradition,  our  collection  of  13  Acts  might  seem  the 
result  of  a  process  of  agglomeration.  Noldeke 
{GGA,  1905,  p.  82)  suspects  interpolations  and 
detects  a  nucleus  in  Acts  i.  and  ii.  (except  the 
Andrapolis  episode).    He  supposes  a  rather  intricate 

fjenesis  for  our  collection.  Following  this  line  of 
iterary  criticism,  the  vigorous  style  of  Acts  ix.-xii. 
causes  them  to  stand  out  as  another  unit.  Acts 
iii.-viii.  and  the  remaining  parts  might  come  in  as 
later  accretions.  It  seems,  liowever,  unsafe  to  in- 
dulge much  in  literary  criticism  before  a  more  ade- 
quate knowledge  of  the  original  text  is  available. 
Reitzenst'ein  has  emphasized  (op.  cit.)  the  proba- 
bility of  literary  sources.  One  author  may  have 
composed  the  wnole  by  adapting  pagan  stories  to 
Thomas's  name.  In  this  case  the  diflerent  shades 
of  style  may  be  due  to  close  adherence  to  or  free 
expansion  of  such  sources.  Future  criticism  may 
even  see  its  way  to  combine  this  point  of  view 
with  the  first.  Possible  sources  certainly  de- 
serve serious  consideration  (cf.  Gutschmid,  Kleinc 
Schriften,  ii.  [Leipzig,  1890]  332 ff.,  advocating 
Buddhism  ;  Preuschen  in  Hennecke,  i.  477,  Parsi- 
ism;  Hilgenfeld,  ZWT,  1904,  p.  240,  Persian 
influences). 

(6)  Hrjmns.—lhB  Bridal  '  Ode '  (ch.  7,  1st  Act) 
is  in  our  Syriac  a  mystic  song  of  the  Church.     It 


is  not  safe  to  abandon  this  ancient  exegesis,  since 
its  Gnostic  astrology  and  scenery  do  not  differ  in 
degree  from  the  rest  of  the  Acts.  It  does  not  even 
go  much  beyond  the  Apocalypse  or  the  Patristic 
comments  on  tlie  Song  of  Songs.  Excision  from 
its  context  is  impossible  without  leaving  scars. 
The  '  Hymn  of  the  Soul '  (Greek,  '  Psalm ')  in  chs. 
108-113  (and  also  a  long  doxology  after  ch.  113  ; 
only  Syriac  and  for  the  largest  part  omitted  by 
Sachau  222 ;  cf.  Hennecke,  i.  592-594)  is  omitted 
in  most  MSS.  It  is  a  document  of  the  religious 
life,  not  of  the  metaphysics  of  Gnosticism  (Bevan, 
p.  7).  An  orthodox  bishop  of  Salonica,  Nicetas, 
explained  it  in  the  11th  cent,  without  any  suspicion 
(cf!  above  (3)  a.nA'RMrkxii,  Early  East.  Christianity, 
p.  227).  This  proves  that  its  character  is  not 
obtrusively  Gnostic.  Preuschen  (op.  cit.,  but  cf. 
recensions  in  ThT  and  JThSt,  quoted  under  (3)) 
defines  the  character  of  both  hymns  as  Ophite  or 
Sethian.  Apart  from  this  should  be  considered 
his  exegesis  of  the  'psalm'  of  chs.  108-113  as  a 
'  Hymn  of  the  Christ.  Reitzenstein  supports  his 
views  (for  the  Bridal  Ode  with  less  decision :  ojj. 
cit.  142).  He  explains  its  curious  implications — 
Christ  cheated  by  demons,  defiled  by  communion 
with  them,  serving  the  Lord  of  this  world,  plunged 
in  a  sleepy  forgetfulness  of  His  heavenly  origin 
and  supreme  task — by  assuming  a  '  fast  ratselhaft ' 
strong  influence  of  pagan  literature  (op.  cit.  122). 
On  the  '  sleepy  forgetfulness '  cf .  Conybeare,  JThSt 
vi.  609-610.  Identification  of  the  soul  and  Christ 
is  present  in  the  Odes  of  Solomon.  Hilgenfeld 
(ZWT,  1904,  pp.  229-241)  advocates  a  Greek 
original  ('the  Son  of  the  King  and  the  Pearl') 
sprung  from  a  pagan  Gnostic  movement  in  the 
new  Sasanid  empire. 

All  critics  with  this  last  exception,  but  Preu- 
schen included  (cf.,  however,  his  art.  in  Hennecke, 
i.  479),  agree  in  ascribing  the  '  Hymn  of  the  Soul ' 
to  I3ardesanes  or  to  his  school.  Bevan  (op.  cit.  p. 
6  f. )  has  shown  that  it  contains  just  those  '  heresies ' 
for  which  Bardesanes,  according  to  Ephraim,  was 
excluded  by  the  Edessene  Church.  With  regard 
to  its  inclusion  in  the  Acts,  Burkitt  remarks  (Early 
Eastern  Christianity,  p.  212  note) : 

'  I  cannot  help  expressing  a  private  opinion  that  the  Hymn 
was  inserted  by  the  author  liimself,  just  as  he  used  the  Ix)rd's 
Prayer  in  a  later  prayer  of  Judas  Thomas.  That  the  Hymn 
itself  is  independent  of  the  Acts  is  certain,  but  it  is  not  so 
clear  that  the  Acts  is  independent  of  the  Hymn.  It  may,  in 
fact,  have  become  a  part  of  the  recognised  teaching  of  the  sect 
to  which  the  author  of  the  Acts  belonged  (cf.  Ephraim's  Com- 
mentarp  on  S  Corinthians,  p.  119).' 

(7)  Theology  of  the  Acts. — The  Acts  presupjwses 
the  universal  acceptance  of  a  theology  counting 
only  the  supernatural  world  as  real,  anti  individual 
salvation  as  the  chief  end  of  man.  Asceticism, 
especially  abstinence  from  sexual  relations  even  in 
marriage,  is  urged  as  self-evident.  Even  before 
meeting  the  Aj)ostle,  Vazanes  had  seen  this  (Act 
xiii.).  Mygdonia  shows  a  firmer  grasp  of  tlie 
implications  of  his  doctrine  than  Thomas  himself 
(Act  X. ).  The  supernatural  world  is  not  described  : 
the  Gnostic  cosmogonies  and  esoteric  doctrines  are 
absent.  Against  this  fact  coincidences  in  piirase- 
ology  seem  to  carry  little  weight.  Perhaps  it  is 
only  its  reckless  Puritanism  which  separates  the 
Acts  of  Thomas  from  the  B'nai  Q'y&m&,  Aphra- 
ates,  and  other  leaders  of  early  Syriac  Christianity 
(cf.  Burkitt,  Early  East.  Christianiti/,  pp.  118-154  ; 
Scliwen,  Afrahat,  Berlin,  1907,  pp.  96-99,  130-132). 

The  Church  and  its  dignitaries  are  practically 
absent  (cf.  Acts  v.  vi.  and  the  Martyrium).  The 
sacraments  are  much  in  evidence  as  the  only  means 
of  attaining  to  the  life  among  the  inhabitants  of 
the  worid  of  li^^ht  (chs.  121,  132,  158).  Baptism 
immediately  followed  by  the  Eucharist  is  the  rule. 
It  occurs  in  the  story  of  the  woman  in  Act  v.  (ch. 
49),   Mygdonia,  Act  x.  (ch.  121),   Siphor,   Act  x. 


ACTS  (APOCKYPHAL) 


ADAM 


39 


(ch.  Ties,  Act  xiii.  (chs.    153-158).     In 

the  ^  .udaphorus  and  Gad,  Act  u.  (chs. 

•25-21  j,  tiie  Greek  and  Syriac  differ  ;  both  omit  the 
Eucharist. 

(8)  Ritual. — (a)  Instruction  (132) ;  (b) pratfer  (25, 
156) ;  (c)  consecration  of  the  oil  (157) ;  (el)  imposi- 
tion of  hands  (49);  (e)  outpouring  of  oil  on  the 
head  (27  Gr.  et  reil.) ;  (/)  unction  (27  Gr.  157) ; 
(g)  prayer  over  the  unction  (27  Gr.  121,  157) ;  (A) 
immersion  (27  Syr.  121,  132,  157) ;  (»)  chrism  (27 
Syr.);  (j)  prayer  over  the  chrism  (27  Syr.);  (k) 
prayer  for  the  Eucharist  (49,  121,  132,  158);  (I) 
allocution  before  partaking  (49,  [121],  132,  158); 
(»i)  partaking  of  the  bread  (49,  121,  132,  158) ;  (n) 
of  the  •-•up  1,121,  158).  A  response  from  heaven 
occurs  in  ch.  121,  and  a  Christophany  in  chs.  27, 
153.  The  fullest  *  account  is  that  of  chs.  153-158. 
The  whole  act  of  unction  and  immersion  is  called 
'sealing'  (121),  therefore  in  chs.  49  and  27  (Gr.) 
the  immersion  may  have  been  omitted.  Outpour- 
ing and  unction  constitute  a  double  act  (157). 
Unction  maj-  have  extended  to  more  parts  of  the 
body  for  exorcistic  purposes  (cf.  ch.  5  and  JThSt, 
i.  71  ;  F.  E.  Brigntman,  The  Sacramentary  of 
Serapion  of  Thmuis,  p.  251 ;  Hennecke,  Neutest. 
Apokr.  ii.  565).  WhUe  the  Greek  in  27  has  a 
double  unction  (JThSt  i.  251)  or,  perhaps,  unction 
and  chrism,  the  Syriac  has  baptism  followed  by 
chrism.  Elsewhere  the  Eucharist  seems  always  to 
occupy  the  place  of  the  last  part  of  later  baptismal 
ritual,  viz.  the  confirmation  and  '  sealing '  by  the 
chrism.  Eenunciation  in  a  formal  way  is  al^nt, 
rentmciation  from  sexual  intercourse  is  understood 
promised,  152).  Consecration  of  the  water  is  not 
found,  though  running  water  is  but  once  used 
(121).  Trinitarian  formulae  and  Logos-terminology 
are  used  rather  indiscriminately.  Gnostic  phrase- 
ology occurs  side  by  side  with  it.  The  baptismal 
formula  is  always  Trinitarian.  Ordinary  loBad 
and  water  appear  as  Eucharistic  elemente.  The 
bread  seems  to  be  more  essential  (body  and  blood 
in  ch.  158). 

(9)  The  most  ImpressiTe  element  in  the  Acts  is 
Thomas's  character  as  a  twin  of  the  Christ  (see 
above  (1)).  W.  Bauer  (Das  Leben  Jesu  im  ZeUcUter 
der  neutest.  Apokr. ,  Tiibingen,  1909,  p.  445,  note  3) 
takes  this  as  proof  that  the  Aets  wishes  to  reduce 
the  Virgin  birth  ad  absurdum,  and  quotes  ch.  2 : 
'  I.  -Jesus,  son  of  Joseph  the  carpenter.'  This 
would  he  quite  a  solitary  cloud  of  scepticism  in  an 
atmosphere  saturated  with  syncretistic  thought. 
Reitzenstein  seems  to  open  a  field  where  Bendel 
Harris  (The  Dioscuri  in  the  Christian  Legends, 
London,  1903,  and  Cult  of  the  Heavenly  Twins, 
Cambr.,  1906)  had  already  found  a  way.  That,  in 
fact,  Dioscuric  attainments  are  ascribed  to  Thomas 
is  evident,  and  just  here  a  parallel  between  Bar- 
desanian  literature  and  our  Acts  comes  in  (cf. 
Burkitt,  170  note  and  199).  The  name  Thomas  = 
'twin'  has  been  the  point  de  depart,  the  cult  of 
Aziz  (the  morning  star)  a  presupposition.  Prob- 
ably it  was  this  Dioscuric  god,  whose  month  of 
free-markets  (cf.  Harris,  Cult  of  the  Heavenly 
Twins,  p.  158)  and  whose  place  as  a  paiartm  of 
Edessa  Thomas  was  honoured  with  (cf.  Jn  11^«  20** ; 
Pauly-Wis-sowa,  i.  2644  [Cumont] ;  R.  Duval,  His- 
toire  politime,  relig.  et  litt.  didesse,  Paris,  1892, 
p.  74  ff.).  The  ways  and  by-paths  of  syncretistic 
monotheism  are  still  obscure  to  us,  but  research 
in  this  field  is  certainlv  destined  to  cast  light  on 
the  dark  places  of  the  Acts  of  Thomas. 

Beades  the  works  already  qjooted,  see  F.  Cnmont,  Die  or. 
ReL  im,  mm.  HeideKtum,  "Uei^aag,  1910;  P.  WeDdlaad,  Die 
JteUemgHaeh-^nmiaehe  Kvmr,  Tobnqgm,  1907 ;  B.  Reitaenstan, 
IHe  heUenittiaehen  MvsteriemrOigionen,  Leipzig,  1910,  also 
Poimandres,  5l«d.  z.  griedu-dfftfpt.  u.  /ruAehrittl.  Lit.,  do. 


*  The  sacramental  nsagein  the  Acts  la  not  fixed  :  the  14  pointB 
occur  in  rarioos  combioations. 


1904 ;  P.  J.  Dolger,  S^trogit,  eine  aUdtr.  Tamfbezeiekmtng  in 
ihren  Beziehvngen  zur  pmf.  wul  relig.  KvUur  det  AUerttana, 
Paderbom,    1911;   F.  Ebase,    Zur   Imrdetamaehen   Gnoitt, 

Leipzig,  1910. 

6.  Later  Aets.  —  Besides  the  five  Apocryphal 
Acts  which  have  been  discussed,  there  are  several 
others  of  later  dato,  but  they  are  comparatively 
unimportant.  The  most  valuable  is  the  'Acts 
of  Philip, '  which  is  edited  by  Bonnet  in  Acta 
Apocrypha,  iL  2.  It  describes  the  adventures  of 
Philip  in  Phrygia,  Asia,  Samaria,  ete.,  in  the 
company  of  his  sister  Mariamne.  It  may  be  as 
eurly  as  the  3rd  cent.,  {uad  belongs  either  to  a 
mUdly  Gnc^itic  sect  or  to  the  same  Modalistic 
Christianity  as  the  Acts  of  Peter.  It  is  discussed 
by  Lipsius  in  Die  apok.  Apostelgesehichten,  Supple- 
ment, pp.  65-70,  and  by  Zahn,  Forschungeny 
vi.  18-24.  Besides  this  a  series  of  Acts,  growing 
ever  shorter  and  less  valuable,  can  be  foun3 
attached  to  the  name  of  every  Apostle  or  Teacher 
in  NT  times  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  arranged 
under  the  date  assigned  in  tiie  calratidar  to  the  saint 
in  question. 

7.  Catholic  recensions. — In  the  course  of  the 
Manichaean  controversy  the  view  was  adopted 
that  the  miracles  in  the  '  Leucian '  Acts  were 
genuine,  but  that  the  doctrine  connected  witih 
them  was  heretical.  This  view  finds  ite  clearest 
expression  in  the  Prologue  of  pseudo-Mellitus : 

'  y<^  aankatam  esse  fraternitatan  vestzam  de  Leocio  qoodam 
qui  scripsife  Aposfadonim  actoa,  loanntB  eyangelistae  et  aancti 
Andreae  vel  Thomae  i^Msbdi  qoi  de  virtatibas  qtudem  qaae 
per  eos  dominos  fecit,  plnrfaaaa  vera  dixit,  de  doctaiii*  vero 
malta  mentitiis  est.' 

The  result  was  a  series  of  Catholic  recensions 
which  left  out,  speaking  generally,  the  speeches, 
and  preserved  or  even  added  to  all  the  miracles. 
Of  these  Catholic  recensions,  which  are  very 
numerous,  the  most  famous  are  the  'Prochoms' 
edition  of  the  Acts  of  John  (the  text  is  best  given 
by  Zahn,  Acta  Joannis,  Erlangen,  1880),  and  the 
so-called  'Abdias'  coUeetion.  The  disentan^e- 
ment  of  various  recensions  of  the  separate  Acts  is 
very  difficult,  and  not  very  profitable. 

The  materials  for  a  more  detailed  statement  aS  the  CJatixdic 
recensions  can  be  found  in  Hamack,  GtsAidtte  der  aUekrist- 
2teA«nlAtter«<iir.  LeipzK.  L  [1893]pk  123fE.,  andinK.  A.  Liprins, 
IHe  apokrypken  Apotte^eaekidUen,  18S3-87. 

Kncsopp  Lake  and  J.  de  Zwaak.* 
ADAM  ('Add/t). — ^Adam  was  the  first  man  (0-19= 
man)  and  the  parent  of  the  human  race. — ±.  TVlien 
the  Avriter  of  Jude  (v.")  thinks  it  worth  noting 
that  Enoch  (q.v.)  was  'the  seventh  from  Adam' 
(ipSoiuK  avh  'Addfi),  he  probably  has  in  mind  the 
sacredness  of  the  numbo'  seven.  It  seems  to  him 
an  interesting  point  that  God,  who  rested  from 
His  work  on  the  seventh  day,  found  a  man  to 
walk  in  holy  fellowship  with  Him  in  the  seventh 
generation. 

2.  In  1  Co  11«-  and  1  Ti  2>«-  the  doctrine  of  the 
headship  of  man  and  the  complete  subjection  (xdo-a 
vroray^)  of  woman  is  based  upon  uie  story  <rf 
creation.  Man  was  not  created  for  woman,  but 
woman  for  man ;  Adam  was  created  first  and 
sinned  second.  Eve  was  created  second  and  sinned 
first ;  therefore  let  woman  ever  remember  that  she 
is  morally  as  well  as  physically  weaker  than  man, 
and  let  her  never  attempt  either  to  teach  or  to 
have  dominion  over  him  (auderreiw  awSpds).  With 
the  premisses  of  this  argument  one  may  compare 
the  words  of  Sirach  (25^) :  '  From  a  woman  was 
tiie  beginning  of  sin  (drb  yvwoMxbs  dfix^l  ofiaprlas), 
and  because  of  her  we  all  die.'  St.  Paul  did  not 
take  pleasure  in  this  quaint  philosophy  of  history, 
as  many  of  the  Rabbis  did ;  but,  with  all  Ms 
reverence  for  womanhood,  he  felt  that  the  accepted 

*  The  section  on  the  Acts  of  Xbomas  is  from  ttie  pai  of 
deZwaan;  the  rest  <rf  the  art.  is  by  Kirsopp  Lake. 


40 


ADA^r 


ADAM 


belief  in  woman's  creation  after  and  her  fall  before 
man's  clearly  established  her  inferiority.  It  was 
not  a  personal  and  empirical,  but  a  traditional  and 
dofjmatic,  judgment. 

3.  St.  Paul  had,  and  knew  that  many  others 
had,  a  religious  experience  so  vivid  and  intense 
that  ordinary  terms  seemed  inadequate  to  do  it 
iustice.  It  was  the  result  of  a  Divine  creative  act. 
If  any  man  was  in  Christ,  there  was  '  a  new  crea- 
tion' (/ftttJ'Tj  KTliTis);  old  things  were  passed  away; 
behold,  they  were  become  new  (2  Co  5'^).  Kot 
legalism  or  its  absence,  but  'a  new  creation' 
(Gal  6^')  was  of  avail.  Reflexion  on  this  profound 
spiritual  change  and  all  tiiat  it  involved  convinced 
the  Apostle  that  Christ  was  the  Head  and  Founder 
of  a  new  humanity ;  that  His  life  and  death, 
followed  by  the  gift  of  His  Spirit,  not  merely 
marked  a  new  epoch  in  history,  introducing  a  new 
society,  philosophy,  ethics,  and  literature,  but 
created  a  new  world.  '  Bliss  was  it  in  that  dawn 
to  be  alive.'  As  St.  Paul  brooded  on  the  stupen- 
dous series  of  events  of  which  Christ  was  the  cause, 
on  the  immeasurable  difference  which  His  brief 
presence  made  in  the  life  of  mankind,  there  inevi- 
tably took  shape  in  his  mind  a  grand  antithesis  be- 
tween the  first  and  the  second  creation,  between  the 
first  and  the  last  representative  Man,  between  the 
intrusion  of  sin  and  death  into  the  world  and 
the  Divine  gift  of  righteousness  and  life,  between 
the  ravages  of  one  man's  disobedience  and  the 
redemptive  power  of  one  Man's  perfect  obedience 
(Ro  5i'^--'). 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  Apostle  does  not 
advance  any  new  theory  of  the  first  creation.  He 
knew  only  what  every  student  of  Scripture  could 
learn  on  that  subject.  He  had  no  new  revelation 
which  enabled  him  either  to  confirm  or  to  correct 
the  account  of  the  beginning  of  things  which  had 
come  down  from  a  remote  antiquity.  He  no  doubt 
regarded  as  literal  history  the  account  of  the  origin 
of  man,  sin,  and  death  which  is  found  in  Gn  2-3. 
He  did  not  imagine,  like  Philo,  that  he  was  read- 
ing a  pure  allegory  ;  he  believed,  like  Luther,  that 
Moses  'meldet  geschehene  Dinge.'  It  is  remark- 
able, however,  with  what  unerring  judgment  he 
seizes  upon  and  retains  the  vital,  enduring  sub- 
stance of  the  legend,  while  he  leaves  out  the 
drapery  woven  by  the  old  time-spirit.  He  says 
nothing  of  a  garden  of  Eden,  a  miraculous  tree  of 
life,  a  talking  serpent,  an  anthropomorphic  Deity. 
But  he  finds  m  the  antique  human  document  tliese 
facts :  the  Divine  origin  and  organic  unity  of  the 
human  race ;  man's  attinity  with,  and  capacity  for, 
the  Divine  ;  his  destiny  for  fellowship  with  God 
as  an  ideal  to  be  realized  in  obedience  to  Divine 
law  ;  his  conscious  freedom  and  responsibility  ;  the 
mysterious  physical  basis  of  his  transmitted  moral 
characteristics ;  his  universally  inherited  tendency 
to  sin  ;  his  consciousness  that  sin  is  not  a  mere 
inborn  weakness  of  nature  or  strength  of  appetite, 
but  a  disregard  of  the  known  distinction  between 
right  and  wrong ;  the  entail  of  death,  not  as  the 
law  obeyed  by  all  created  organisms,  but  as  the 
wages  of  his  sin.  The  narrative  which  blends 
these  elements  in  a  form  that  appealed  to  the 
imagination  of  primitive  peoples  has  a  'depth  of 
moral  and  religious  insight  unsurpassed  in  the  OT ' 
(Skinner,  Genesis  [ICC,  1910]  52). 

The  teaching  of  St.  Paul  with  regard  to  sin  and 
death  does  not  materially  differ  from  that  of  his 
Jewish  contemporaries  and  of  the  Talmud,  in 
which  the  same  sense  of  a  fatal  heredity  is  con- 
joined with  a  consciousness  of  individual  responsi- 
bility. 'O  Adam,  what  hast  thou  done?  For  if 
thou  hast  sinned,  thy  fall  has  not  merely  been 
thine  own,  but  ours  who  are  descended  from  thee ' 
(2  Es  7**).  Yet  'Adam  is  not  the  cause  of  sin 
except  in  his  own  soul ;  but  each  of  us  has  become 


the  Adam  of  his  own  soul '  (Bar  54'®).  According 
to  the  Talmud,  '  there  is  such  a  thing  as  trans- 
mission of  guilt,  but  not  such  a  thing  as  transmis- 
sion of  sin '  (Weber,  System  d.  aZtsyn.  paldstin. 
The.ol.,  Leipzig,  1880,  p.  216). 

The  '  immortal  allegory '  of  Genesis  cannot  now 
be  regarded  as  literal  history.  '  The  plain  truth, 
and  we  have  no  rea-son  to  hide  it,  is  that  we  do 
not  know  the  beginnings  of  man's  life,  of  his 
history,  of  his  sin  ;  we  do  not  know  them  histori- 
cally, on  historical  evidence ;  and  we  should  be 
content  to  let  them  remain  in  the  dark  till  science 
throws  what  light  it  can  upon  them'  (Denney, 
Studies  in  TheoL,  London,  1894,  p.  79).  Science 
knows  nothing  of  a  man  who  came  directly  from 
the  hand  of  God,  and  it  cannot  accept  the  pedigree 
of  Adam  as  given  by  Moses  or  by  Matthew,  Its 
working  hypothesis  is  that  man  is  'a  scion  of  a 
Simian  stock,'  and  it  is  convinced  that  man  did 
not  make  society  but  that  society  made  man.  Be- 
yond this  it  has  not  yet  done  much  to  enlighten 
theology.  'We  do  not  know  how  Man  arose,  or 
whence  he  came,  or  when  he  began,  or  where  his 
first  home  was ;  in  short  we  are  in  a  deplorable  state 
of  ignorance  on  the  whole  subject '  (J.  A.  Thomson, 
The  Bible  of  Nature,  Edinburgh,  1908,  p.  191). 

4.  Art  has  made  it  difficult  to  think  of  our  first 
parents  without  adorning  them  with  all  graces  and 
perfections.  '  But  when  we  get  away  from  poetry 
and  i)icture-painting,  we  find  that  men  have  drawn 
largely  from  their  imaginations,  without  the  war- 
rant of  one  syllable  of  Scripture  to  corroborate  the 
truth  of  the  colouring'  (F.  W.  Robertson,  Cor- 
inthians, 242).  To  St.  Paul  (1  Co  15«-»»)  the 
primitive  man  was  of  the  earth,  earthy  (xo'Mi),  a 
natural  as  opposed  to  a  spiritual  man,  crude  and 
rudimentary,  witli  the  innocence  and  inexperience 
of  a  child.  '  The  life  of  the  spirit  is  substantially 
identical  with  holiness ;  it  could  not  therefore 
have  been  given  immediately  to  man  at  the  time 
of  his  creation  ;  for  holiness  is  not  a  thing  imposed, 
it  is  essentially  a  product  of  liberty,  the  freewill 
offering  of  the  individual.  God  therefore  required 
to  begin  with  an  inferior  state,  the  characteristic 
of  which  was  simply  freedom,  the  power  in  man  to 
give  or  withhold  himself  (Godet,  Corinthians,  ii. 
424).  St.  Paul's  conception  is  that,  while  'the 
first  man  Adam,'  as  akin  to  God,  was  capable  of 
immort&lity^jotuit  non  mori — his  sin  made  him 
subject  to  death,  which  has  reigned  over  all  his 
descendants.  Cf.  2  Es  3'' :  'And  imto  him  (Adam) 
thou  gavest  thy  one  commandment :  which  he 
transgressed,  and  immediately  thou  appointedst 
death  for  him  and  in  his  generations.'  Formally 
as  a  deduction  from  the  story  of  Adam,  but  really 
as  his  own  spiritual  intuition,  the  Apostle  thus 
teaches  the  unnaturalness  of  human  death.  This 
is  apparently  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  science, 
that  death  is  for  all  organisms  a  natural  law, 
which  reigned  in  the  world  long  before  the  ascent 
of  man  and  the  be^ning  of  sin— a  debt  which,  as 
it  cannot  be  cancelled,  man  should  pay  as  cheer- 
fully as  possible.  And  yet  his  sense  of  two  things 
— his  own  greatness  and  God's  goodness— convinces 
him  that  it  is  radically  contra  rerum  naturam, 
'  He  thinks  he  was  not  made  to  die, 
And  Thou  hast  made  him,  Thou  art  just ' 

(Tennjson,  In  Memoriam). 

Christianity  confirms  his  instinctive  feeling  that 
death  is  in  his  case  a  dark  shadow  that  should 
never  have  been  cast  upon  his  life.  Acknowledg- 
ing that  it  is  not  the  mere  natural  fate  of  a 
physical  organism,  but  the  wages  of  sin,  the 
Christian  believes  that  it  is  finally  to  be  abolished. 
'  In  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive.'  '  The  last 
Adam,'  having  vanquished  death,  '  became  a  life- 
giving  spirit'  (1  Co  Ib^^).  See  also  artt.  LiFB 
AND  Death,  Sin. 


AD  JUKE 


AIX)PTIOX 


41 


LrraRATTRi!-— B.  Weiss,  Biblical  Tkeolofffo/tMsA'T,  1882-83, 
i.  331  ff..  409  ff.  ;  W.  Beyschlag.  STTh»oU>ffif.  1894-96,  u.  4Sff. ; 
C.  V.  Weirsacker,  Apo*toiu  Age,  1894-95,  L  149  ff.;  G.  B. 
Stevens,  The  Pauline  TheoUxjy,  1906,  p.  122  ff..  Theology  of  the 
AT,  1901,  p.  349S. ;  A.  B.  Brace,  St,  Pa*W$  Coneeption  ef 
Chrittianitu,  1S96,  p.  125  ff. ;  D.  SomerviQe,  St.  PauFt  Coneep- 
tion o/Christ,  1S97,  p.  S6ff. ;  Sanday-HeadLun,  JZomantS,  1902, 
p.  136 ff. ;  A.  Deissmaon,  St.  Paul,  19 12,  pp.50, 107, 155 ff. ;  H. 
Wheeler  Robioson,  The  Christian  Doctrine  of  Man,  1911,  p. 

112  ff.  James  Strahan. 

ADJURE.— See  0.\th. 

ADMINISTRATION.— The  word  occurs  in  the 
AV  in  two  places,  1  Co  12*  and  2  Co  9'^  in  both 
of  which  tlie  RV  has  substituted  'ministration,' 
just  as  in  2  Co  8""-  '  administer '  (AV)  has  given 
place  to  'minister*  (RV  ;  Gr  Suucofiu).  In  1  Co 
12*  and  2  Co  9"  the  word  is  the  tr.  of  Gr.  SiaKovia, 
which  originally  means  '  the  service  (or  duty) 
rendered  by  a  Stditwos,'  i.e.  a  servant,  particularly 
a  waiter  at  table  (Lat.  minister),  who  pours  out 
wine  to  the  guests  individually.  In  1  Co  12*  the 
aspect  alluded  to  is  especially  that  of  practical 
service  rendered  to  a  master  [including  that  of 
'  deacon '  rendered  to  our  '  Lord '],  whereas  in 
2  Co  9^  it  is  particularly  the  concrete  form  of  that 
service  which  is  intended,  in  its  Godward  and  man- 
ward  aspects. 

The  administration  of  the  Roman  Empire  is 
never  directly  referred  to  in  the  NT,  and  is  best 
considered    under    its    various    aspects    (Cesab, 

PiKOCOXSUL,  etc).  A.   SOUTEB. 

ADMONITION Obedience  to    God's  law  and 

submission  to  His  will  are  essential  for  progressive 
spiritual  life.  Human  nature  being  what  it  is, 
there  is  neetl  for  constant  admonition  (2  P  1^**"^). 
In  the  NT  reference  is  made  to  this  subject  in  its 
family,  professional,  and  Divine  aspects. 

1.  vovdcTcw  and  vov6c<rCa  (a  later  form  for  wovOi- 
TTiffis)  are  not  found  in  the  NT  outside  the  Pauline 
Epp.,  except  in  St.  Paul's  speech,  Ac  2CF.  For 
the  former  see  Ro  15",  1  Co  4»,  Col  1^  3i«, 
1  Th  5»-",  2  Th  3» ;  for  the  latter  1  Co  10",  Eph  6*, 
Tit  310 ;  cf.  Is  8«  30^^,  Hab  -Z^-,  Dt  SP^-.  The 
terms  are  used  in  classical  Greek  {e.g.  Aristoph. 
Ranee,  1009),  but  are  more  common  in  later  Greek 
(Philo,  Josephus).  The  root  idea  is  '  to  put  in  mind ' 
(tv  T(fi  vi^  Tidivai),  to  train  by  word,  always  with 
the  added  suggestion  of  sternness,  reproof,  remon- 
strance, blame  (cf.  .^ch.  Prom.  264  ;  Aristoph. 
Vesp.  254  ;  Plato,  Gorg.  479A).  The  implication  is 
•  a  monitory  appeal  to  the  row  rather  than  a  direct 
rebuke  or  censure'  (Ellicott).  To  admonish  is  the 
duty  of  a  father  or  parent  (Eph  6*;  cf.  Wis  11>*, 
Pss.-Sol.  13«),  or  brother  (2  Th  3^*).  The  object 
and  reason  of  such  admonition  must  be  realized  if 
it  is  to  be  a  means  of  moral  discipline.  The  ad- 
nionition  and  teaching  of  Col  1^  correspond  to  the 
'  repent  and  believe '  of  the  gospel  message. 

2.  «apaive« signifies  'recommend,'  'exhort,'  'ad- 
monish '  (Ac  27*-  23 ;  cf .  2  Mac  7^  '^,  3  Mac  5"  7"  A). 
This  word  is  common  in  classical  Greek,  and  is  also 
found  in  the  Apocrypha.  St.  Luke  would  be  familiar 
with  it  as  a  term  use<l  for  the  advice  of  a  physician. 
Its  presence  in  a  '  We "  section  is  suggestive.  St. 
Paul  as  a  person  of  position  and  an  experienced 
traveller  gives  advice  in  an  emergency,  as  a  skilled 
doctor  would  admonish  a  patient  in*  a  serious  ill- 
ness (see  Hawkins,  Horce  Synopticce,  1S99,  p.  153). 

3.  xPIM'*''"^**  in  ^he  active  signifies  'transact 
business '  (xovfia),  '  give  a  Divine  response  to  one 
consulting  an  oracle,'  'give  Divine  admonition' 
(cf.  Jer  25^  31^,  Job  40^).  The  passive  is  used  of 
the  admonition  given  (Lk  2-* ;  cf.  xp^P^Turfids, 
Ro  11*,  2  Mac  2*),  and  of  the  person  thus  admon- 
ished (Mt  212-22.  ^c  10^;  cf.  1126  and  Ro  7*  where 
'called'  is  the  translation;  He  8*  IF;  cf.  12"^). 
This  meaning  of  'Divine  oracle'  is  found  chiefly 


in  the  NT,  with  the  underlying  idea  that  the  mind 
and  heart  must  be  suitably  prepared  for  its  re- 
ception. For  private  and  public  exhortation  by 
preachers,  teachers,  and  communities,  see  Gal  2", 
1  Th  2^,  1  Ti  4",  2  Ti  4-.  See  also  Chastisemext 
and  DisciPLiXK.  H.  Cariss  J.  Sidxell. 

ADOPTION.  — 1.  The   term The   custom   of 

adopting  children  is  explicitly  alluded  to  by  St. 
Paul  alone  of  biblical  writers;  he  uses  the  word 
'adoption'  {vlo6eaia,  Vulg.  adoptio  filicrum,  Syr. 
usually  simath  b^nayd)  five  times:  Ro  8^*  9*, 
Gal  4',  Eph  1*.  This  Greek  word  is  not  found  in 
classic^  writers  (though  Oerbi  vibt  is  used  for  *  an 
adopted  son'  by  Pindar  and  Herodotus),  and  it 
was  at  one  time  supposed  to  have  been  coined  by 
St.  Paul ;  but  it  is  common  in  Greek  inscriptions  of 
the  Hellenistic  period,  and  is  formed  in  the  same 
manner  as  wonoOetria,  '  giving  of  the  law,'  '  l^isla- 
tion'  (Ro  9*;  also  in  Plato,  etc.),  and  hpoOeaia, 
'  bounds,'  lit.  '  fixing  of  bounds '  (Ac  17^^).  It  is 
translated  'adoption'  in  Rom.,  but  'adoption  of 
sons '  in  Gal.,  '  adoption  as  sons  *  (RV  ;  AV  '  adop- 
tion of  children ')  in  Ephesians.  The  classical  Greek 
word  for  '  to  adopt '  is  eia-roieurOai,  whence  eitrroii)<ns, 
'  adoption.' 

2.  The  custom. — St.  Paul  in  these  passages  is 
alluding  to  a  Greek  and  Roman  rather  than  to  a 
Hebrew  custom.  Its  object,  at  any  rate  in  its 
earliest  stages,  was  to  prevent  the  dying  out  of  a 
family,  by  the  adopting  into  it  of  one  who  did  not 
by  nature  belong  to  it,  so  that  he  became  in  all 
respects  its  representative  and  carried  on  the  race. 
But,  thougli  the  preventing  of  the  extinction  of  a 
family  was  thought  important  by  the  Israelites, 
and  though  adoption  was  a  legal  custom  among 
the  Babylonians  (Box,  in  EPE  i.  114),  it  was  not 
in  use  among  the  Hebrews.  With  them  childless- 
ness was  to  some  extent  met  by  the  levirate,  or  in 
the  patriarchal  period  by  polygamy  (cf.  Gn  16''-), 
or  at  a  later  date  by  divorce.  The  few  instances  of 
adoption  in  the  OT(e.gr.  Moses  by  Pharaoh's  daughter, 
Esthei  by  Mordecai)  exhibit  a  different  reason  for 
the  act  from  that  stated  above,  and  are  the  result 
of  foreign  surroundings  and  influence.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  custom  was  very  common  among 
both  Greeks  and  Romans.  It  was  at  first  largely 
connected  with  the  desire  that  the  family  worship 
of  dead  ancestors  should  not  cease — a  cultus  which 
could  be  continued  only  through  males  (Wood- 
house,  in  EEE  i.  107  and  111).  In  Greece  it  dates 
from  the  8th  cent.  B.C.  It  was  afterwards  used  as 
a  form  of  will-making.  If  a  man  had  a  legitimate 
son,  he  could  not  miake  a  will ;  but,  if  he  had  no 
legitimate  son,  he  often  adopted  one  that  he  might 
secure  the  inheritance  to  him  rather  than  to  rela- 
tives, who  would  otherwise  be  heirs.  The  adopted 
son  at  once  left  his  own  family  and  became  a  mem- 
ber of  that  of  his  adopter,  losing  all  rights  as  his 
fathers  son.  If  he  was  adopted  while  his  adopter 
was  still  living,  and  sons  were  afterwards  bom  to  the 
latter,  he  ranked  equally  with  them ;  he  could  not  be 
disinherited  against  his  wilL  Roman  adoption  was 
founded  on  the  same  generalideas ;  it  wascalledarro- 
gatio  if  the  person  adopted  was  s^ui  juris,  hat  adoptio 
if  he  was  under  his  own  father's  poUstas  (Wood- 
house,  loc.  cit. ).  In  the  latter  case  he  came  under  the 
adopter's  potestas  as  if  he  were  his  son  by  nature. 

It  appears,  then,  that  St.  Paul  in  the  five  pass- 
ages named  above  is  taking  up  an  entirely  non- 
Jewish  position ;  so  much  so  that  some  hare 
doubted  whether  a  Jew,  even  after  he  had  become 
a  Christian,  could  have  written  Epistles  which  con- 
tained such  statements  (cf.  Ramsay,  Galatians,  p. 
342).  This,  however,  is  one  of  the  many  instances 
of  the  influence  of  Greek  and  Roman  ideas  on  St. 
Paul.  W.  M.  Ramsay  has  endeaToured  to  show 
that,  in  so  far  as  these  dififered  from  one  another 


42 


ADOPTION 


ADOPTION 


in  the  matter  under  discussion,  it  is  to  Greek 
custom  rather  than  to  '  the  Koman  law  of  adoption 
in  its  original  and  primitive  form '  that  the  Apostle 
refers  in  dealing  with  Gal  S*"^-,  but  that  he  uses  a 
metaphor  dependent  on  Koman  law  when  writing 
to  the  Romans  in  Ro  4"  (ib.  pp.  339,  343 ;  see  also 
art.  Heir).     But  this  has  beon  disputed. 

3.  St.  Paurs  metaphor  of  adoption.— The  Apostle 
applies  tlie  metapiior  to  the  relation  of  both  Jews 
and  Cliristians  to  the  Father,  (a)  Somewhat  em- 
phatically he  applies  it  to  the  Jews  in  Ro  9*.  The 
adoption,  the  glory  [the  visible  presence  of  God], 
the  covenants  [often  repeated],  the  giving  of  the 
Law,  the  service  [of  the  Temple],  the  promises,  the 
fathers,  all  belonged  to  the  Israelites,  '  my  kinsmen 
according  to  the  Hesh,'  of  whom  is  Christ  concern- 
ing the  ilesh — a  passage  showing  the  intense  Jew- 
ish feeling  of  St.  Paul,  combined  with  the  broader 
outlook  due  to  his  Grseco-Roman  surroundings 
(see  above,  §  2).  Here  the  sonship  of  Israel,  for 
which  see  Ex  4'^  {'  Israel,  ray  son,  my  first-born'), 
Dt  141  326.  i9f.^  Pa  68"  103«,  Jer  3I»,  Hos  n\ 
Mai  2",  etc.,  is  described  as  'adoption.'  It  is 
noteworthy  that  the  adoption  is  before  the  Incar- 
nation, although  it  couJd  only  be  '  in  Christ.' 
Lightfoot  (on  Gal  4')  observes  tnat  before  Christ's 
coming  men  were  potentially  sons,  though  actually 
they  were  only  slaves  (v.*).  Athanasius  argues 
that,  since  hetare  the  Incarnation  the  Jews  were 
sons  [by  adoption],  and  since  no  one  could  be  a  son 
except  through  our  Lord  [cf.  Jn  14^,  Gal  3^, 
Eph  P,  and  see  below,  §  5],  therefore  He  was  a  Son 
before  He  became  incarnate  (Orat.  c.  Avian,  i.  39, 
iv,  23,  29), 

(6)  But  more  frequently  St.  Paul  applies  the 
metaphor  of  adoption  to  Christians.  '  Sonship  in 
the  completest  sense  could  not  be  proclaimed  be- 
fore the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Son  in  the 
flesh'  (Robinson,  Eph.,  p.  27 f.).  We  Christians 
'  received  the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry, 
Abba,  Father,'  for  'we  are  children  of  God' 
(Ro  S^"-)-  It  was  not  till  the  fullness  (rb  irX-fipuiw. — 
for  the  word  see  Robinson,  pp.  42,  255)  of  tlie  time 
came  that  God  sent  forth  His  Son  that  we  might 
receive  adoption  (Gal  4*'-).  In  its  highest  sense 
adoption  could  not  be  received  under  the  Law,  but 
only  under  the  Gospel.      The  context  in  these 

Passages  shows  that  the  Spirit  leads  us  to  the 
'ather  by  making  us  realize  our  sonship ;  He 
teaches  us  how  to  pray,  and  puts  into  our  mouth 
the  words  '  Abba,  Father '  (cf.  Kpa^ov  Gal  4'  with 
Kpd^oixev  Ro  8").  We  notice  that  St.  Paul,  though 
aiddressing  those  who  were  not  by  any  means  all 
Jewish  Christians,  but  many  of  whom,  being 
Gentiles,  had  come  directly  into  the  Church,  yet 
seems  at  first  sight  to  speak  as  if  Christ's  coming 
was  only  to  give  adoption  to  those  whom,  being 
under  the  Law,  He  redeemed.  But,  as  Lightfoot 
remarks  (Coin,  in  loc),  the  phrase  used  is  roiis  inrb 
vbfi.ov,  not  vvb  rbv  yo/xov ;  the  reference  is  not  only 
to  those  who  were  under  the  Mosaic  Law,  but  to 
all  subject  to  any  system  of  positive  ordinances 
(so  perhaps  in  1  Co  9*).  The  phrase  'redeem  .  .  .' 
IS  tliought  to  reflect  the  Roman  idea  that  the 
adopter  purchased  a  son  from  the  father  by  nature ; 
adoption  was  eflected  before  a  praetor  and  five 
witnesses,  by  a  simulated  sale. 

(c)  Just  as  the  adoption  of  Jews  was  inferior  to 
that  of  Christians,  so  that  of  Christians  is  not  yet 
fully  realized.  Adoption  is  spoken  of  in  Ro  S^  as 
something  in  the  future.  It  is  the  redemption 
{dw6\&rpua-ts)  of  OUT  body,  and  we  are  still  waiting 
for  it ;  it  can  be  completely  attained  only  at  the 
general  resurrection.  The  thought  closely  re- 
sembles that  of  1  Jn  3- ;  we  are  note  the  children 
of  God,  but  '  if  he  shall  be  manifested,  we  shall  be 
like  him ' ;  the  sonship  will  then  be  perfected. 

4.  Equivalents  in  other  parts  of  NT. — Although 


no  NT  writer  but  St.  Paul  uses  the  word  '  adop- 
tion,' tlie  idea  is  found  elsewhere,  even  if  expressed 
difl'erently.  Thus  in  Jn  V^'-  those  who  '  receive ' 
the  Word  and  believe  on  His  name  are  said  to  be 

given  bj'  Him  the  right  to  become  children  of  God. 
In  this  passage  Athanasius  remarks  (Orat.  c. 
Arian.  ii.  69)  that  the  word  '  become '  shows  an 
adoptive,  not  a  natural,  sonship  ;  we  are  first  said 
to  be  made  (Gn  1^),  and  afterwards,  on  receiving 
the  grace  of  the  Spirit,  to  be  begotten.  As  West- 
cott  observes  (Coin.,  in  loc),  'this  right  is  not  in- 
herent in  man,  but  "given"  by  God  to  him.  A 
shadow  of  it  existed  in  the  relation  of  Israel  to 
God.'  This  passage  is  closely  parallel  to  Gal  3^, 
where  we  are  said  to  be  all  sons  of  God,  through 
faith,  in  Christ  Jesus.  So  in  1  Jn  3',  it  is  a  mark 
of  the  love  bestowed  upon  us  by  the  Father  that 
we  should  be  called  children  of  God  [the  name 
bestowed  by  a  definite  act— KXridCitiev,  aorist] ;  and 
(the  Apostle  adds)  'such  we  are.'  The  promise 
of  Rev  2F  to  'him  that  overcometh'  equally  im- 
plies adoption,  not  natural  sonship  :  '  I  mil  be  his 
God,  and  he  shall  be  my  son ' ;  and  so  (but  less 
explicitly)  do  the  sayings  in  He  2'"  12*  that  Jesus 
'brings  m<any  sons  unto  glory'  (see  below,  §  8), 
and  that  God  deals  with  us  '  as  with  sons. '  The 
figure  of  adoption  appears  as  a  '  re-begetting '  in 
1  P  !'•  "* ;  we  are  begotten  again  unto  a  living 
hope  by  'the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ '  by  means  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  (see 
below,  §  5),  and  therefore  call  on  Him  as  Father 
(v.").  And,  indeed,  our  Lord's  teaching  implies 
adoption,  inasmuch  as,  while  He  revealed  God  as 
Father  of  all  men,  He  yet  uniformly  (see  next 
section)  differentiates  His  own  Sonship  from  that 
of  all  others. 

5.  A  Son  by  nature  implied  by  the  metaphor.— 
The  use  by  St.  Paul  of  the  figure  of  adoption  in 
the  case  of  Jews  and  Christians  leads  us  by  a 
natural  consequence  to  the  doctrine  that  our  Lord 
is  the  Son  of  God  by  nature.  In  the  same  con- 
text the  Apostle  speaks  of  Jesus  as  God's  'own 
Son'  (rbv  iavrov  vl6v),  sent  in  the  likeness  of  sinful 
flesh,  therefore  pre-existent  (Ro  8' ;  cf.  v.^-  roO 
ISlov  vlod).  In  Gal  4*'-  he  says  that  God  sent  forth 
His  Son  (rbv  vlbv  airov)  .  .  .  that  we  might  receive 
adoption ;  Jesus  did  not  receive  it,  because  He 
was  God's  own  Son.  And  so  our  Lord  explicitly 
in  Jn  20"  makes  a  clear  distinction  between  Hrs 
own  sonship  (by  nature)  and  our  sonship  (by  adop- 
tion, by  grace):  'my  Father  and  your  Father,' 
'  my  God  and  your  God.'  He  never  speaks  of  God 
as  'our  Father,'  though  He  taught  His  disciples 
to  do  so.  Athanasius  cites  the  ordinary  usage  of 
our  Lord  in  speaking  of  '  My  Father '  [it  is  so  very 
frequently  in  all  the  Gospels,  and  in  Rev  2"  3"; 
cf.  also  Mk  8**]  as  a  proof  that  He  is  'Son,  or 
rather  that  Son,  by  reason  of  whom  the  rest  are 
made  sons'  (Orat.  c.  Arian.  iv.  21  f.).  The  same 
thing  follows  from  the  language  of  those  NT 
Avriters  who  use  phrases  equivalent  to  those  of  St. 
Paul.  If  Christians  become  children  of  God  ( Jn  1'* ; 
see  §  4  above),  Christ  is  the  Only-begotten  Son  of 
God,  who  was  sent  into  the  world  that  we  might 
be  saved,  or  live,  through  Him  (Jn  3""",  1  Jn  4''). 
If  we  are  the  sons  brought  to  glory  by  Jesus 
(He  2'"),  He  is  emphatically  'a  Son  over  [God's] 
house'  (He  3«  RVm ;  cf.  Nu  12^).  St.  Peter  speaks 
of  God  as  the  Father  of  Jesus  in  the  very  verse  in 
which  he  speaks  of  our  being  begotten  again  by 
Him  (IP  1»,  see  §  4  above).  It  is  this  distinction 
between  an  adoptive  and  a  natural  sonship  which 

fives  point  to  the  title  '  Only-begotton '  (q.v.);  had 
esus  Deen  only  one  out  of  many  sons,  sons  in  the 
same  sense,  this  title  would  be  meaningless  (for 
endeavours  to  evacuate  its  significance  see  Pearson, 
On  the  Creed^,  art.  ii.  notes  52,  53).  The  distinc- 
tion of  Jn  20"  is  maintained  throughout  the  NT. 


ADORXIN'G 


ADKIA 


43 


As  Angnstine  says  {Exp.  Ep.  ad  Gal.  [4*]  §  30, 
ed.  Ben.  iii.  pt.  2,  col.  960),  St.  Paul  'speaks  of 
adoption,  that  we  may  clearly  understand  the 
only-begotten  (unicum)  Son  of  God.  For  we  are 
sons  of  God  by  His  lovingkindness  and  the  favour 
(dignitate)  oi  His  mercy;  He  is  Son  by  nature  who 
is  one  with  the  Father  (qiii  hoc  est  quod  Pater).' 

6.  Adoption  and  baptism. — We  may  in  conclu- 
sion consider  at  Mliat  period  of  our  lives  we  are 
adopted  by  God  as  His  sons.  In  one  sense  it  was 
an  act  of  Grod  in  eternity  ;  we  were  foreordained 
unto  adoption  (Eph  1').  But  in  another  sense  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  it  as  a  definite  act  at  some  definite 
moment  of  our  lives  :  '  Ye  received  (Adhere :  aorist, 
not  perfect)  the  spirit  of  adoption'  (Ro  8").  This 
points  to  the  adoption  being  given  on  the  admis- 
sion of  the  person  to  the  Christian  body,  in  his 
baptism.  And  so  Sanday  -  Headlam  paraphrase 
v."  thus :  'When  you  were  first  baptized,  and  the 
communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit  sealed  your  ad- 
mission into  the  Christian  fold,'  etc.  We  may 
compare  Ac  19-  RV  :  '  Did  ye  receive  {iXd^e)  the 
Holy  Ghost  when  ye  believed  (x«n-ev<ro»T«)  ? ' — a 
passage  in  which  tne  tenses  'describe  neither  a 
gradual  process  nor  a  reception  at  some  interval 
after  believing,  but  a  defiiiite  gift  at  a  definite 
moment'  (Rackham,  Com.,  in  loc.  ;  cf.  Swete,  Holy 
Spirit  in  NT,  1909,  pp.  204,  342).  The  aorists  can 
mean  nothing  else.  In  the  case  of  the  '  potential ' 
adoption  of  the  Jews  (to  borrow  Lightfoot's 
phrase),  it  is  the  expression  of  the  covenant  be- 
tween God  and  His  people,  and  therefore  must  be 
ascribed  to  the  moment  of  entering  into  the  cove- 
nant at  circumcision,  the  analogue  of  baptism. 
Yet  in  neither  case  is  the  adoption  fully  realized 
tiU  the  future  (above,  §  3  (c)).  In  view  of  what 
has  been  said,  we  can  understand  how  '  adoption ' 
came  in  later  times  to  be  an  equivalent  term  for 
'baptism.'  Thus  Payne  Smith  (Thesaur.  Syr., 
Oxford,  1879-1901,  u.  2564)  quotes  a  Syriac  phrase 
to  the  eftect  that  'the  baptism  of  John  was  of 
water  unto  repentance,  but  the  baptism  of  our 
Lord  [i.e.  that  ordained  by  Him]  is  of  water  and 
fire  unto  adoption.'  And  in  the  later  Christian 
writers  viodeala  became  a  synonym  for  'baptism' 
(Suicer,  Tkes.^,  1846,  s.v.). 

LrrsRATCXK. — Athanasias,  Orationet  eonfra  Arianog,  ptutim 
(the  general  subject  of  this  magnificent  work  is  the  Sonship  of 
Christ) ;  J.  Pearson,  On  the  Creed  (ed.  Burton,  Oxford,  1864), 
art.  i.  p.  49,  art.  ii.  note  57,  p.  250;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Hist. 
Com.  on  the  Galatiam,  London,  1899,  §  xxxL  ;  G.  H.  Box,  in 
ERE,  art.  'Adoption  (Semitic)' ;  "W.  J.  Woodhonse,  ib.,  artt. 
'  Adoption  (Greelc) '  and  '  Adoption  (Roman) ' ;  J.  S.  Candlish, 
in  EDB,  art.  'Adoption' ;  H.  G.  Wood,  in  SDB,  art  '  Adop- 
ti<»i.'  See  also  J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  Com.  on  Galatiant  (1st  ed., 
1866,  many  snbseqnent  edd.) ;  Sanday- HeadUm,  Com.  on 
Romans  (1st  ed.,  1S95);  J.  Armitage  RolMiison,  Com.  on 
Ephetians  (Ist  ed.,  1903X  A.  J.  MaCTLEAN. 

ADORNING. — Simplicity  of  personal  attire  has 
been  no  infrequent  accompaniment  of  moral  and 
religious  earnestness,  even  when  not  matter  of  pre- 
scription. Two  passages  of  the  NT  (1  Ti  2?-", 
IP  3^  *)  warn  Christian  women  against  excessive 
display  in  dress,  fashion  of  the  hair  (see  the  art. 
Haie),  and  use  of  ornaments,  and  contrast  it  with  the 
superior  adornment  of  the  Christian  virtues.  At 
the  end  of  the  2nd  cent,  both  Clement  Alex.  {Pad. 
u.  10  f.  [Eng.  tr.  II  f.])  and  Tertullian  {de  Cultu 
Feminarum)  found  it  necessarj-  to  protest  in  much 
detail  against  the  luxurious  attire,  etc.,  prevalent 
even  amongst  Christians  of  their  day.  The  better 
adornment  is  frequently  named  in  the  intervening 
literature.  The  righteous,  like  their  Lord,  are 
adorned  with  good  works  (1  Clem,  xxxiii.  7),  and 
with  a  virtuous  and  honourable  life  (ii.  8).  Ignatitis 
contrasts  the  adornment  of  obedience  to  Christ  with 
that  of  a  festal  procession  to  some  heathen  shrine 
{Eph.  ix.). 

The  reference  to  the  subject  in  1  P  3*-  *  has  some 


psychological  interest.  The  adornment  which  is 
praised  is  that  of  'the  hidden  man  of  the  heart,' 
the  meek  and  quiet  spirit  which  is  precious  in  Giod'e 
sight,  and  incorruptible.  This  u-se  of  '  man '  in  the 
sense  of  personality  suggests  the  well-known  Pauline 
contrast  between  the  inner  and  the  outer  man  (2  Co 
4"  ;  cf.  Ro  7**,  Eph  3'«),  and  may  be  a  further 
example  of  that  dependence  of  1  Peter  on  Pauline 
writings  whichis  now  generally  recognized  (MoflFatt, 
LNT^,  p.  330).  It  has  often  been  maintained  {e.g. 
by  Holtzmann,  Lehrhuch  der  NT  Theol.  ii  14,  15) 
that  this  contrast  is  aproduct  of  Hellenistic  dualism. 
But  it  can  be  adequately  explained  from  that  Heb- 
rew psychology  which  is  the  real  basis  of  the  Pauline 
and  Petrine  ideas  of  personality.  The  heart  (or, 
in  Pauline  terminology,  the  '  mind '  [Ro  7^)  is  the 
inner  personality,  as  the  apparelled  members  are 
the  outer  personality.  Both  are  necessary,  accord- 
ing to  Hebrew  thought,  to  make  the  uni^  of  the 
whole  man.  See  further  on  this  point  the  article 
MAK.  H.  WHEELEB  ROBDfSOK. 

ADSAHTTTIUM  {'ASfiapUrmop ;  in  the  NT  only 
the  adjective ' AJBpafurm)v6s  [Ac  27^  is  found ;  WH 
'A.dpofivmp'di). — This  flourishing  seaport  of  Mysia 
was  situated  at  the  head  of  the  Adramyttian  Gulf, 
opposite  the  island  of  Lesbos,  in  the  shelter  of  the 
southern  side  of  Mt.  Ida,  after  which  the  Gulf  was 
also  called  the  '  Idaean.' 

Its  name  and  ongin  were  probably  Phoenician,  bot  Stnbo 
describes  it  as  '  a  dty  founded  by  a  colony  of  Athenians,  with 
a  harbour  aiid  roadstead '  (xm.  L  51X  ^sin^  to  importance 
under  the  Attalids,  it  becune  the  metropolis  of  the  K.W. 
district  of  the  Soman  province  of  Asia,  and  the  head  of  a 
eonrentxu  juridietu.  Through  it  passed  the  coast-road  whidi 
connected  Ephesos  with  Troy  and  the  HeDespont,  while  an 
inland  highway  linked  it  with  Fergamos. 

It  was  in  '  a  ship  of  Adramyttium ' — larger  than 
a  mere  coasting  vessel — probably  making  for  her  o\s-n 
port,  that  St.  Paul  and  St.  Luke  sailed  from  Caesarea 
by  Sidon  and  under  the  lee  (to  the  east)  of  Cyprus 
to  Myra  in  Lycia,  where  they  joined  a  corn-ship 
of  Alexandria  bound  for  Italy  (Ac  27^-*).  The 
modem  town  of  Edremid,  which  inherits  the  name 
and  much  of  the  prosperity  of  Adramyttium,  is  5 
miles  from  the  coast. 

LrrERATCRX. — Conybeare-Howson,  St.  PomI,  VSTI,  iL  381f. ; 
J.  Smith,  Voyage  and  Skipwrtek  qf  St.  Paul*,  1880,  p.  820. ; 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  SL  Paul  the  TraveOer  and  tie  Roman 
Citizen,  lS9o.  p.  316.  JaMES  STKAHAS. 

ADSIA  (6  'ASplas  [WH  'AdpUul  '  the  Adrias,'  RV 
'  the  [sea  of]  Adria'). — The  name  was  derived  from 
the  important  Tnscan  town  of  Atria,  near  the 
mouths  of  the  Padus,  and  was  originally  (Herod, 
vi.  127,  vii.  20,  ix.  92)  confined  to  the  northern 
part  of  the  gulf  now  called  the  Adriatic,  the  lower 
part  of  which  was  known  as  the  '  Ionian  Sea.'  In 
later  times  the  name  '  Adria '  was  applied  to  the 
whole  basin  between  Italy  and  Illyria,  while  the 
'  Ionian  Sea'  came  to  mean  the  outer  l»sin,  south 
of  the  Strait  of  Otranto.  Strabo,  in  the  beginning 
of  OUT  era,  says  :  '  The  mouth  (strait)  is  common 
to  both  ;  but  this  difference  is  to  be  observed,  that 
the  name  "  Ionian"  is  applied  to  the  first  part  of 
the  gulf  only,  and  "  Adriatic  "  to  the  interior  sea 
up  to  the  farthest  end '  (vn.  v.  9).  Strabo,  how- 
ever, indicates  a  wider  extension  of  the  meaning 
by  adding  that  '  the  name  "  Adrias  "  is  now  applied 
to  the  whole  sea,'  so  that,  as  he  says  elsewhere, 
'  the  Ionian  Gulf  forms  p^  of  what  we  now  call 
"Adrias"'  (n.  v.  20).  Finally,  in  popular  usage, 
which  is  followed  by  St.  Luke  (Ac  27-''),  the  term 
'Adria'  was  stUl  further  extended  to  signify  the 
whole  expanse  between  Crete  and  Sicily. 

This  is  confirmed  by  Ptolemy,  who  wrote  about  the  middle  of 
the  2nd  cent.  A.D.  'With  the  accuracy  of  a  geographer,  he 
distinguishes  the  Gu{f  of  Adria  from  the  Sea  of  Adna ;  thus,  in 
enumerating  the  boundaries  of  Italy,  he  teDs  us   that  it  is 


ADULTERY 


JEOHf 


bounded  on  one  side  by  the  shores  of  the  Otilf  of  Adria,  and 
on  the  south  by  the  shores  of  the  Adria  (iii.  1)  ;  and  that  Sicily 
is  bounded  on"  the  east  by  the  Sea  of  Adria  (4).  He  further 
informs  us  that  Italy  is  bounded  on  the  south  by  the  Adriatic 
Sea  (14),  that  the  Peloponnesus  is  bounded  on  the  west  and 
south  by  the  Adriatic^  Sea  (16),  and  that  Crete  is  bounded  on  the 
west  by  the  Adriatic  Sea  (17)'  (Smith,  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  aj 
St.  Paul*,  163  f.). 

The  usage  current  in  the  first  and  second 
centuries  is  similarly  reflected  by  Pausanias,  who 
speaks  of  Alpheus  flowing  under  Adria  from 
Greece  to  Ortygia  in  Syracuse  (viii.  54.  2),  and  of 
the  Straits  of  Messina  as  communicating  with  the 
Adriatic  and  the  Tyrrhenian  Sea  (v.  25.  3).  Pro- 
c'opius  {Bel.  Vand.  i.  14)  makes  the  islands  of 
Gaulos  and  Melita  (Gozo  and  Malta)  the  boundary 
between  the  Adriatic  and  the  Tyrrhenian  Sea. 
The  meaning  of  the  term  '  Adria '  was  the  debat- 
able point  of  the  once  famous  controversy  as  to 
whether  St.  Paul  sutl'ered  shi])wreck  on  the  lllyrian 
or  the  Sicilian  Melita,  i.e.  on  MeUda  or  Malta 
(see  Melita).  His  ship  Avas  '  driven  through 
Adria'  (di.a<t>€poiJ.ivuv  iifiQi>  iv  tQ  'ASpL(f,  Ac  27^); 
perhaps  not  '  driven  to  and  fio  in  the  sea  of  Adria  ' 
(RV)  (unless  St.  Luke  made  a  landsman's  mistake), 
but  slowlj'  carrieil  forward  in  one  direction,  for 
probably  '  she  had  storm  sails  set,  and  was  on  the 
starboard  tack,  which  was  the  only  course  by 
which  slie  could  avoid  falling  into  tlie  Syrtis ' 
(Smith,  op.  (it.  1 14).  An  interesting  parallel  to  St. 
Paul's  experience  is  found  in  the  life  of  Josephus, 
who  relates  that  his  ship  foundered  in  the  niidst 
of  the  same  sea  (Kara,  fiiaov  t6v  'ASpiav),  and  that 
he  and  some  companions,  saving  themselves  by 
swimming,  were  picked  up  by  a  vessel  sailing 
from  Cyrene  to  Puteoli  ( Vit.  3). 

Literature. —  J.  Smith,  The  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St. 
Paul*,  1880,  p.  162  fi. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller 
and  the  Jioman  Citizen,  1895,  p.  334. 

James  Strahan. 
ADULTERY.— See  Marriage. 

ADVENT.— See  Parousia. 

ADYERSARY.— This  renders  three  Greek  words 
in  the  NT  :  1.  avriSiKos,  properly  an  adversary  in 
a  lawsuit,  and  used  of  an  earthly  adversary  in 
Mt  5'^,  Lk  12''*  18^ — all  these  with  a  legal  reference. 
It  is  used  of  an  enemy  of  God  in  1  S  2^°  (LXX), 
anil  in  1  P  5*  of  '  the  enemy,'  Satan  ;  in  this  last 
l^assage  Sed/SoXos  is  anarthrous,  as  a  proper  name, 
while  dvriSiKos  has  the  article  (see  Devil  and 
Satan). 

2.  avTiKcificvos,  used  in  Lk  13"  of  our  Lord's 
Jewish  opponents,  and  in  21'*  of  all  adversaries  of 
the  disciples,  is  employed  by  St.  Paul  to  denote 
those  who  oppose  the  (Christian  religion,  probably 
in  all  cases  with  the  suggestion  that  the  devil  is 
working  through  them.  Such  are  the  '  adversaries ' 
of  1  Co'l6",  Ph  1^ ;  in  1  Ti  5'*  Chrysostom  takes 
the  '  adversary '  to  be  Satan,  the  '  reviler  '  (cf.  v.'*), 
or  he  may  be  the  human  enemy  as  prompted  by 
Satan.  In  2  Th  2*  '  he  that  opposeth '  (6  avriKdnevos) 
is  Antichrist  (q.v.),  whose  parousia  is  according  to 
the  working  of  Satan  (v.") ;  and  it  is  interesting  to 
note  that  the  letter  of  the  Churches  of  Vienne  and 
Lyons  (Euseb.  HE  v.  i.  6)  uses  this  expression 
absolutely  of  Satan,  or  of  Antichrist,  working 
through  the  persecutors,  and  '  giving  us  a  foretaste 
of  his  unbridled  activity  at  his  future  coming.' 

3.  vn-evavTios  is  used  in  He  10*'^  of  the  adver- 
saries of  God,  apostates  from  Christ,  probably  with 
reference  to  Is  26",  where  the  LXX  has  the  same 
word.  A  similar  phrase  in  Tit  2*  is  '  he  that  is  of 
the  contrary  part,  an  opponent,  6  i^  ivam-las.  In 
Col  2^*  the  word  i/irevavTios  is  used  of  an  inanimate 
object:  '  the  bond  .  .  .  which  was  contrary  to  us.' 

A.  J.  Maclean. 
ADYOCATE.— See  Paraclete. 


£NEAS  (Alvias). — The  name  occurs  only  once  in 
the  NT  (Ac  9^-  ^).  Tiie  person  so  called  was  a 
dweller  in  Lydda  or  Lod,  a  tow  n  on  the  plain  of 
Sharon  about  ten  miles  south  of  Joppa,  to  which 
many  of  the  Christians  had  tied  after  the  persecu- 
tion which  dispersed  the  aix)stles  and  the  church 
of  Jerusalem.  On  a  visit  of  St.  Peter  to  the  place, 
^'Eneas,  who  had  for  eight  years  been  conlined  to 
bed  as  a  paralytic,  was  healed  by  the  Apostle. 
The  cure  seems  to  have  had  a  very  remarkable 
influence  in  the  district,  causing  many  of  the 
dwellers  in  Sharon  and  Lydda  to  accept  Christi- 
anity. Nothing  further  is  known  of  the  man. 
Probably  he  became  a  Christian  at  the  date  of  his 
cure.  W,  F.  IJOYD. 

^ON  (altliv,  alQves,  'age,'  'ages'). — There  is 
some  uncertainty  as  to  the  derivation  of  the  word 
ai'wj'.  Some  relate  it  with  A-q/xi,  '  to  breathe,'  but 
modern  opinion  connects  it  witii  del,  acel  {  =  alFd}v), 
and  finds  as  other  derivatives  the  Latin  CBVum 
and  the  English  'aye.'  In  the  LXX  al(hv  is  used 
to  translate  ah\]i  in  various  forms,  as  cViyp,  Gn  6* ; 
cbrj  ny,  1  K  P'';  D^iy  Vx,  Gn  213^ ;  nb'iyn,  Ec3".  It  is 
of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  NT.  The  instances 
number  125  in  TR,  and  120  in  critical  editions. 
Following  these,  it  is  noteworthy  that  in  the 
Gospels  and  Acts,  where  it  occurs  34  times,  it  is 
only  once  used  in  the  plural  (Lk  P*).  In  the  rest 
of  the  NT  the  use  of  the  plural  predominates  (54 
out  of  86  instances).  In  Rev.  the  word  occurs  with 
great  frequency  (26  times).  In  every  case  it  is 
used  in  the  plural,  and,  except  in  two  places,  in  the 
intensive  formula  eis  toi)s  alCivas  tGiv  alJivwv — a  form 
Avhich  is  never  found  in  the  (jospels  or  Acts,  aithv 
is  variously  translated  as  '  age,' '  for  ever,' '  world,' 
'course,'  'eternal.'  It  expresses  a  time-concept, 
and  under  all  uses  of  tlie  word  that  concept  remains 
in  a  more  or  less  definite  tlegree. 

1.  It  expresses  the  idea  of  long  or  indefinite  past 
time,  air'  aldvoi, '  since  the  world  began '  (EV  ;  Lk  1™, 
Ac  3-'  15"* ;  cf.  c^iyc,  Gn  6^  Is  64*,  ^k  toD  aldvos,  Jn 
9^-).  In  these  instances,  the  phrases  express  what 
we  mean  when,  speaking  generally  and  indefinitely 
of  time  past,  we  say  'from  of  old'  or  'from  the 
moat  ancient  time.' 

2.  The  common  classical  use  of  aluv  for  '  lifetime' 
is  not  found  in  the  NT ;  but  there  are  instances 
wliere  the  phrase  els  rbv  alQva  seems  to  have  that 
significance ;  e.g.  '  The  servant  abideth  not  in  the 
house  for  life,  but  the  son  abideth /or  life,'  Jn  S*" 
(also  Mt  21'«,  Jn  138,  j  Co  8"). 

3.  Tlie  phrase  tli  rbv  alCiva,  or  tovs  alQyas  is 
frequently  found  in  the  NT  as  a  time-concept  for 
a  period  or  '  age '  of  indefinite  futurity,  and  may 
be  translated  'for  ever.'  Strictly  speaking,  in 
accordance  with  the  root  iilea  of  aidbi',  tiie  phrase 
indicates  futurity  or  continuance  as  long  as  the 
'  age '  lasts  to  which  the  matter  referred  to  belongs. 
The  use  of  the  intensive  form  eh  roC'i  aWvoj  rcDj' 
alwvoiv  (Gal  P,  Eph  3-^  He  13-',  and  Rev.  passi7n) 
indicates  the  etibrt  of  Christian  faith  to  give 
expression  to  its  larger  conception  of  the  '  ages'  as 
extending  to  the  limits  of  iiuman  thought,  by 
du])licating  and  reduplicating  the  original  word. 
The  larger  vision  gave  the  larger  meaning ;  but  it 
cannot  be  said  that  the  fundamiental  idea  of  '  age,' 
as  an  epoch  or  dispensation  with  an  end,  is  lost. 
In  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  phrase  is  sometimes 
employed  as  a  synonym  for  '  eternal  life '  ( Jn  6*'-  '*). 

4.  iMie  plural  aluives  expresses  the  time-idea  as 
consisting  of  or  embracing  many  ages— a»ons, 
l)eriod3  of  va.st  extent — '  from  all  ages'  (RV,  Eph 
3"), '  the  ages  to  come '  (Eph  2P,  etc.).  Some  of  the.se 
'  ages '  are  regarded  as  having  come  to  an  end — '  but 
now  once  in  tlie  end  of  the  world  ( '  at  the  end  of  the 
ages'  RV)  hath  he  appeared  to  put  away  sin'  (He 
9'-*).     The  idea  of  one  age  succeeding  another  as 


jEuy 


AGABU.S 


45 


under  ordered  rule  is  provided  for  in  the  suggestive 
title  *  the  king  eternal'  (EV  '  the  king  of  the  ages') 
(1  Ti  1"  ;  cf.  Cyrj  '7x,  Gn  21»).  In  He  1»  '  through 
whom  also  he  made  the  worlds'  (ages),  and  He  11' 
"the  worlds  (ages)  were  made  by  the  word  of  (Jod,' 
we  have  the  striking  conception  of  the  '  ages'  as  '  in- 
chuiing  all  that  is  manifested  in  and  through  them ' 
(Westcott,C<wi.in/oe.).  (InWisl3*thereisacurious 
instance  of  aiuv  as  referring  to  the  actual  world, 
•  For  if  they  were  able  to  know  so  much  that  they 
could  aim  at  the  world  [ffTOX(itra.ffdcu  rbv  cdQwa],  how 
did  they  not  sooner  find  out  the  Lord  thereof?') 

5.  There  is  also  attached  to  the  word  the  signifi- 
cance of  '  age '  as  indicating  a  period  or  dispensa- 
tion of  a  definite  character — the  present  order  of 
'world-life'  viewed  as  a  whole  and  as  possessing 
certain  moral  characteristics.  It  is  unfortunate 
that  there  is  no  word  in  English  which  exactly 
expresses  this  meaning.  The  general  translation 
in  AV  and  RV  is  'world,'  though  'age'  appears 
always  in  RVm  and  in  the  text  at  He  6*.  There  is 
undoubtedly  at  times  a  close  similarity  of  connota- 
tion between  aiJ:v  and  KcxTfios  as  indicating  a  moral 
order.  In  the  Gospel  and  Epp.  of  John  aiuv  is 
never  used  in  this  sense,  but  Koafios  is  employed 
instead  :  e.g.  '  Now  is  the  judgment  of  this  world  ; 
now  shall  the  prince  of  this  world  be  cast  out ' 
(Jn  12^^  also  15^  etc.),  'If  any  man  love  the 
world'  (1  Jn  2^*  etc.).  They  are  almost,  if  not 
altogether,  ^Tionymous  in  '  Where  is  the  disputer 
of  this  world  ('age,'  cudtp)*  Hath  not  God  made 
foolish  the  wisdom  of  this  world  (/cAo-amw)  ? '  (1  Co  1^). 
That  St.  Paul  recognized  a  distinction  between 
them  is  evident  from  the  phrase  Kara  rbv  aiwva  rod 
k6gu.ov  roirrov,  which  is  translated  both  in  AV  and 
in  RV  'according  to  the  course  of  this  world' 
(Eph  2"-).  Plainly  a'u^v  describes  some  quality  of 
the  KOfffKK.  We  have  no  term  to  express  it  exactly, 
but  our  phrase  '  the  spirit  of  the  age '  comes  very 
near  to  what  is  required. 

6.  This  '  world '  or '  age '  as  a  moral  order  includes 
the  current  epoch  of  the  world's  life.  It  is  an 
epoch  in  which  the  visible  and  the  transitory  have 
vast  power  over  the  souls  of  men,  and  may  become 
the  only  objects  of  hope  and  desire.  It  is  described 
simply  as  aiwv,  '  the  world  '  (Mt  13"-,  Mk  4'*),  and 
its  end  is  emphatically  affirmed  (Mt  13»-*^«  24' 
28**).  But  more  frequently  it  is  referred  to  as  in 
contrast  to  a  coming  age.  It  is  described  as  6  clIwp 
oiTos,  '  this  worid '  (Mt  12»,  Lk  16*,  Ro  12»,  1  Co 
1^,  etc.) ;  as  6  fw-  cuwp  (1  Ti  6",  etc.) ;  as  6  aluv  6 
iveffTws,  '  the  present  .  .  .  world '  (Gal  1*).  The 
future  age  is  described  as  6  aiwp  Mf^w,  '  the  world 
to  come'  (Mt  12®'-,  He  6*) ;  6  ipx6fuv<K,  'the  world 
to  come '  (Mk  lO'*,  etc.) ;  and  as  6  aluv  iKeivos, '  that 
world '  (Lk  20»).  The  present  '  age '  has  its  God 
(2  Co  4*),  its  rulers  and  its  wisdom  (1  Co2*- «),  its 
sons  (Lk  16*),  its  fashion  (Ro  12*),  and  its  cares 
(Mt  13^).  ilen  mav  be  rich  in  it  (1  Ti  6"),  and 
love  it  (2  Ti  4'0).  It  is  an  evil  age  (Gal  1^),  yet  it 
is  possible  to  live  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly 
in  it  (Tit  2»-),  and  it  has' an  end  (Mt  13«).  In  the 
future  'age'  there  is  'eternal  life'  (Mk  10^,  Lk 
IS**).  Those  who  are  cormted  worthy  of  it '  neither 
marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  neither  can  tliev 
die  any  more'  (Lk  20'"-).  It  has  'powers'  tha*t 
may  be  '  tasted'  in  the  present  age  (He  6*). 

The  contrast  is  regarded  as  that  which  is  de- 
scribed in  Jewish  writings  as  ran  nViy  and  K|n  c^jf, 
'this  age'  and  'the  age  that  is  to' come.'  These 
are  identified  with  the  age  before  and  after  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah.  There  is  much  xmcertainty 
as  to  the  time  when  this  contrast  first  arose. 
Dalman  says  that  'in  pre-Christian  products  of 
JeNvish  literature  there  is  as  yet  no  trace  of  these 
ideas  to  be  found'  {The  Words  of  Jesus,  p.  148). 
It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  a  nation  which  ex- 
pected so  much  from  the  advent  of  the  Messiah  did 


not  form  some  idea,  at  a  date  before  the  days  of 
Jesus  Christ,  of  the  vast  changes  which  would  be 
produced  when  He  did  come,  and  look  upon  the 
age  which  was  so  marked  as  one  to  be  contrasted 
\»-ith  the  age  in  which  they  were  living.  We  can- 
not follow  Dalman  when  he  says  :  '  It  is  not  un- 
likely that  in  the  time  of  Jesus  the  idea  of  "the 
future  age,"  being  the  product  of  the  schoob  of 
the  scribes,  was  not  yet  familiar  to  those  He 
addressed '  {ib.  p.  135).  Dalman  apparently  donbts 
whether  Jesus  used  the  term  Himself,  but  says : 
'  The  currency  of  the  expressions  "  this  age,"  "  the 
future  age,"  is  at  all  events  established  by  the  end 
of  the  first  Christian  century.'  He  makes  the 
reservation  that  '  for  that  period  the  expressions 
characterised  the  language  of  the  learned  rather 
than  that  of  the  people '  {ib.  p.  151 ). 

7.  Among  the  Gnostics  (see  Gnosticism)  the 
-^Eons  were  emanations  from  the  Di\-ine.  But  this 
meaning  of  the  word  belongs  to  a  time  when  the 
Gnostic  ideas  and  terminology  were  more  fully 
developed  than  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian, 
era.  It  is  enough  to  quote  the  opinion  of  Hort  in 
his  Jttdfiistic  Christianity,  '  There  is  not  the  faint- 
est sign  that  such  words  as  .  .  .  cuwi-  .  .  .  have 
any  reference  [in  the  NT]  to  what  we  call  Gnostic 
terms'  (p.  133,  also  p.  146). 

LiTKRATrsB. — G.  Dalman,  The  Words  of  Jetut,  Eng:.  te. 
Edinbnr^  19(>2,  pp.  147 ff.,  162 ff. ;  HUB,  art  'Worid'; 
Westcott,Coiiu<m(A«£putfeto(A«ff«frmr»,  tntoei*;  F.  Ren- 
dall.  ExpiiaiUn;  3rd  ser..  viL  [1888]  26&-278 ;  AXnike-Grimm. 
Clavia Nam  TesUtmenti,  &«. ;  BRB,  srtt.  '  .£oii8'  utd  '  Ag^es  of 
the  World';  F.  J.  A.  Hart,  Judaittie  ChriManity,  OunlMridge 
•ad  London,  18M,  pp.  133, 146;  H.  B.  Swete,  Goipel  according 
to  St.  Mark,  Lcmdon,  1903,  pp.  66,  217;  J.  T.  Marshall,  EapT, 
X.  a8a(fr-99]  323 ;  IJsrhtfoot,  Com.  on  ColotsianM  and  Philemon^, 
London,  1879,  p.  73  ff.;  C.  Geikie,  Life  and  Word*  </  CAruf, 
do.  1877,  p.  625;  J.  A^  Beet,  Last  Thing*,  do.  1IU3,  pp.  TO  L, 
132  f. ;  Sanday-Heamam.  JiomaiuS  (ICC,  1902X 

JoHX  Reid. 
AFFLICTION.— See  Sufferixg. 

A6ABUS  {'Aya^ot,  a  word  of  nncertain  derivsi- 
tion). — The  bearer  of  this  name  is  menrioned  on 
two  separate  occasions  in  the  Acts  (ll*^-**  21**'^*) 
and  also  by  Eusebius  {HE  u.  3).  He  is  described 
as  a  prophet  who  resided  in  Jerusalem,  and  we 
find  hun  in  A.D.  44  at  Antioch,  where  he  predicted 
that  a  great  famine  (9. f.)  would  take  place  'over 
all  the  world,'  i.e.  over  all  the  Roman  Empire. 
The  immediate  effect  of  this  prediction  was  to  call 
forth  the  liberality  of  the  Christians  of  Antioch 
and  lead  them  to  send  help  to  the  poor  brethren 
of  Judaea  (Ac  11^).  The  writer  of  the  Acts  tells 
us  that  this  famine  took  place  in  the  reign  of 
Claudius.  Roman  historians  speak  of  wide-spread 
and  repeated  famines  in  this  reign  (Sueton. 
Claudius,  xviii.  ;  Dion  Cass.  Ix.  ;  Tac.  Ann.  xii. 
43),  and  Josephns  testifies  to  the  severity  of  the 
famine  in  Palestine  and  refers  to  measures  adopted 
for  its  relief  (Ant.  m.  xv.  3,  XX.  ii.  5,  v.  2). 
Though  Syria  and  the  East  may  have  suffered 
most  on  this  occasion,  the  whole  £mpire  could  not 
fail  to  be  more  or  less  affected,  and  it  is  hyper- 
crirical  to  accuse  the  author  of  the  Acts  of 
'  unhistorical  generalization '  for  speaking  of  a 
famine  '  over  all  the  world,'  as  is  done  by  Schiirer 
{GJV*  I  [1901]  543,  567 ;  cf.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul, 
1895,  p.  48  f. ,  and  Was  Christ  bom  at  Bethlehem .', 
1898,  p.  251  f.). 

Again  in  A.D.  59  we  hear  of  Agabus  at  Caesarea, 
where  he  met  St.  Paul  on  his  return  from  his 
third  missionary-  journey.  Taking  the  Apostle's 
girdle,  he  bound  his  own  hands  and  feet,  and  in 
the  symbolic  manner  of  the  ancient  Hebrew 
prophets  predicted  that  so  the  Jews  would  bind 
the  owner  of  the  girdle  and  hand  him  over  to  the 
Gentiles  (Ac  21^*"").  The  prophecy  failed  to  move 
St.  Paul  from  his  resolve.  There  is  no  means  of 
ascertaining  whether  Agabus  was  a  prophet  in  the 


46 


AGE 


AIK 


higher  NT  sense — a  preacher  or  forth-teller  of  the 
Word ;  or  whether  he  was  merely  a  successful 
soothsayer.  It  is  difJicult  to  see  what  good  end 
could  be  served  by  the  second  of  his  recorded 
predictions.  Tradition  makes  him  one  of  the 
'seventy'  and  a  martyr  at  Antiocli. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
AGE. — The  general  significance  of  '  age '  is  a 
period  of  time,  or  a  measure  of  life.  Specially,  it 
expresses  the  idea  of  advancement  in  life,  or  of 
oldness.  Several  Greek  Avords  are  employed  in 
NT  for  « age.'  (\)  al^bv  (see  Mos).  (2)  yevei,  'a 
generation,  loosely  measured  as  extending  from 
30  to  33  years.  In  Eph  3»-2i  RV  rightly  puts 
•  generations '  for  '  ages.'  (3)  WXetoj,  '  full-grown  ' 
or  '  perfect. '  In  He  5"  for  AV  '  to  them  that  are 
of  full  age  '  the  RV  substitutes  '  fullgrown '  in  the 
text,  and  'perfect'  in  the  margin  (cf.  1  Co  2", 
where  the  R  v  has  '  perfect '  in  the  text,  and  '  full- 
grown  '  in  the  margin).  (4)  rikLKLa.  is  the  most 
exact  Greek  term  for  '  age,'  and  especially  for  full 
age  as  applied  to  human  life.  It  includes  also  the 
ideas  of  maturity  or  fitness,  and  of  stature,  as 
when  a  person  has  attained  to  full  development  of 
growth.  In  Eph  4^'  '  the  measure  of  the  stature 
of  the  fulness  of  Christ '  (EV)  is  somewhat  diffi- 
cult to  interpret.  The  phrase  is  co-ordinate  with 
the  words  'a  perfect  (or  fullgrown,  tA«os)  man,' 
which  precede  it  in  the  text.  Both  phrases 
describe  the  ultimate  height  of  spiritual  develop- 
ment which  the  Church  as  the  body  of  Christ  is  to 
reach.  The  latter  phrase  explains  what  the  former 
implies.  The  general  line  or  interpretation  is  that 
the  whole  Church  as  the  body  of  Christ  is  to  grow 
into  '  a  fullgrown  or  perfect  man,'  and  the  standard 
or  height  of  the  perfect  man  is  the  stature  of  Christ 
in  His  fullness  (see  Comm.  of  Meyer,  Eadie,  Ellicott, 
in  loc.  ;  Field,  Notes  on  the  Tr.  of  the  NT,  1899,  p. 
6 ;  Expositor,  7th  ser.,  ii.  [1906]  441  &.).  In  Gal  V\ 
where  the  compound  ffvvrjXiKidxTas  is  used,  the  word 
has  its  primary  meaning  of  '  age '  ( = '  equals  in 
age'). 

The  question  of  age  was  of  importance  as  regards 
fitness  for  holding  office  in  the  Church  (see  NoviCE). 
In  later  times  tlie  canonical  age  varied,  but  in 
general  it  was  fixed  at  thirty  (see  Cathol.  Encyc. 
art.  'Age').  It  was  also  considered  in  relation  to 
the  dispensing  of  the  charity  of  the  Church,  at 
least  in  the  case  of  widows.  In  1  Ti  5^  it  is  said  : 
'  Let  none  be  enrolled  as  a  widow  under  threescore 
years  old.'  The  question  naturally  arises.  Were 
only  widows  of  advanced  years  eligible  for  assist- 
ance? It  is  possible  that  younger  widows  might 
be  in  greater  need  of  help.  Because  of  this  it  is 
supposed  by  some  (Schleiermacher,  etc.)  that  the 
reference  is  to  an  order  of  deaconesses — a  supposi- 
tion that  becomes  an  argument  for  a  late  and  un- 
Pauline  date  for  the  Epistle.  Others  think  that 
the  reference  is  to  an  order  of  widows  who  had 
duties  which  somewhat  resembled  those  of  the 
presbyters  (Huther,  Ellicott,  Alford).  De  Wette 
believes  that  probably  there  were  women  who 
vowed  themselves  to  perpetual  widowhood,  and 
performed  certain  functions  in  the  Church  ;  but 
evidences  of  such  an  order  belong  to  a  later  date  in 
the  Church's  history.  On  the  whole,  and  especially 
if  the  Epistle  belongs  to  an  early  date,  it  is  best  to 
regard  the  instru<;tion  as  a  direction  about  widows 
who  were  entirely  dcpcruhMit  on  the  charity  of  the 
Church.  YouuLicr  widows  would  receive  help 
according  to  their  ni'f'd,  hul  were  not  enrolled  like 
the  older  widows  as  regul.ir  r<'(i](ient8  of  the 
Church's  charity.  The  .'ii:*^  limit  lor  an  old  age 
pension  is  not  a  mw  iiii;i.  It  \<  impossible  to 
determine  if  the  widows  wh.j  w, w  enrolled  were 
bound  to  give  some  servio-  in  i(;tum  for  the 
assistance  which  they  received.  The  probability 
is  tliat  they  were  not,  assuming,  of  course,  the  early 


date  of  the  Epistle  (see  H.  R.  Reynolds,  in  E.r/tos., 
1st  ser.,  iii.  [1880]  382-390  ;  HDB,  art.  'Widows'). 
The  dispensing  of  charity  to  widows  was  a  great 
and  grnvf!  ))rol)l*im  in  the  early  Church.  The  rule 
;il)(iut  fninliiicHi  only  when  the  threescore  years  had 
boeii  reached  was  t;vidently  intended  to  restrict 
the  number  of  those  who  were  entitled  to  receive 
regular  help.  Nestle  calls  attention  to  '  the 
punning  observation  in  the  Didascalia  (  =  Const. 
Apost.  lii.  6)  about  itinerant  widows  who  were  so 
ready  to  receive  that  they  were  not  so  much  x^pat 
as  irrjpai'  (Deissmann,  Light  from,  tlie,  Ancient 
East,  p.  109,  note).  The  pun  may  be  rendered  in 
Englisn  as  '  not  so  much  "  widows  "  as  "  wallets."' 
In  1  Ti  5^  and  1  P  5'  'elders'  (irpea^vrepoi.)  has 
the  primitive  signification  of  '  men  of  advanced 
age.'     Cf.  also  the  following  article. 

John  Reid. 
AGED. — In  Philem  '  the  writer  speaks  of  himself 
as  IlaOXos  vpea-^&rris  (AV  and  RV  '  Paul  the  aged,' 
RVm  'ambassador').  In  strictness  the  transla- 
tion 'ambassador'  requires  irpea^evr-fp,  a  word 
which  does  not  occur  in  the  NT.  The  two  forms 
may  have  been  confused  in  transcription  or  in 
common  use.  The  translation  '  ambassador '  is 
more  fitting  because  Philemon,  as  father  of  Archip- 
pus,  who  was  old  enough  to  hold  some  '  ministry  * 
in  the  Church  (Col  4'^),  must  have  been  the  equal, 
or  nearly  the  equal,  of  St.  Paul  in  age  ;  and  there 
would  be  little  or  no  ground  for  an  appeal  based 
on  considerations  of  age.  It  is  also  to  be  noticed 
that  the  phrase  '  ambassador  and  .  .  .  prisoner  of 
Jesus  Christ'  is  practically  repeated  in  Eph  6-', 
'an  ambassador  in  bonds.'  Taking  the  word  as 
meaning  'ambassador,'  the  appeal  would  have  in 
it  a  note  of  authority.  It  is  not  a  relevant  objec- 
tion to  say  that  St.  Paul  is  beseeching  Philemon 
'for  love's  sake'  (v.*).  It  is  the  peculiarity  of 
tlie  Christian  ambassador  that  he  beseeches  those 
whom  he  addresses.  Love  and  authority  are  com- 
mingled in  his  mission,  as  in  2  Co  6'*-  ^.  The 
likelihood  of  'ambassador'  being  the  right  trans- 
lation is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  here  as 
elsewhere  (2  Co  5^0,  Eph  G^")  St.  Paul  uses  a  verbal 
and  not  a  noun  form  to  express  his  position  as  an 
ambassador.  See  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Com.  on  Col.  and 
Philemon^,  1879,  in  loc. ;  and  cf.  art.  Ambassador. 

John  Reid. 
AGRIPPA.— See  Herod. 

AIR. — The  apostles,  like  other  Jews  of  their 
time,  regarded  the  air  as  a  region  between  earth 
and  the  higher  heavens,  inhabited  by  spirits, 
especially  evil  spirits.  In  Eph  2^  the  air  is  the 
abode  of  Satan  (see  below) ;  in  Eph  6'*  '  the 
heavenlies'  (to,  iirovpdvia)  —  a  vague  phrase  used 
also  in  Eph  P-  '^  2*  3'"  to  denote  the  heavenly  or 
spiritual  sphere,  the  unseen  universe* — is  where 
the  wrestling  of  the  Christian  against  the  spiritual 
hosts  of  wickedness  takes  place,  and  is  apparently 
in  this  case  equivalent  to  'this  darkness'  (cf. 
Lk  22*^,  Col  1'^  'power  of  darkness,'  i.e.  tyranny 
of  evil).  In  Rev  12^  the  war  between  Michael  and 
the  dragon  is  in  '  heaven. '  This  can  hardly  refer 
to  the  first  rebellion  of  Satan,  nor  yet  can  we  with 
Bede  interpret '  heaven '  as  the  Church ;  but  rather 
the  fiirlitiiiir  is  in  the  heavens,  a  struggle  of  Satan 
to  regain  his  lost  place,  ended  by  his  final  expul- 
sion. '  As  the  Incarnation  called  forth  a  counter- 
manifestation  of  diabolic  power  on  earth,  so  after 
the  Ascension  the  attack  is  supposed  to  be  carried 
into  heaven'  (Swete,  Com.  in  lac).  But  the  con- 
ception is  not  unlike  that  of  St.  Paul  as  noted 
above. 

There  are  several  paralkls  to  tiiese  passages  in 
that  class  of  literature  which  is  thougnt  to  be  a 

•  The  Peshitta  renders  it '  in  heaven,'  except  in  6i2  where  it 
siprniflcantly  has  '  under  heaven.' 


AKELDA^IA 


ALEXA^s'DRIA 


47 


Christian  rehandling  of  Jewish  apocalvptic  writ- 
ings. In  the  Testaments  of  the  XII.  Patriarchs 
tg.t;.)  we  read  of  the  '  aerial  spirit  Beliar '  (Benj.  3). 
In  the  Ascension  of  Isaiah  {q.v.)  there  is  described 
iin  ascent  'into  the  hrmament,'  where  were 
Sammael  and  his  powers,  and  there  was  a  great 
tight  (vii.  9) ;  Christ  descends  from  the  lowest 
heaven  to  the  firmament  where  was  continual  war- 
fare, and  takes  the  form  of  the  angels  of  the  air 
(X.  29).  In  the  Slavonic  Secrets  of  Enoch  the 
apostate  angels  are  suspended  in  the  second  heaven 
awaiting  the  Last  Judgment  (§  7  ;  see  Thackeray, 
Relation  of  St.  Paul  to  Contemp.  Jeicish  Thought, 
London,  1900,  p.  176  f,).  These  works  in  their 
present  form  probably  date  from  the  latter  part 
of  the  1st  or  the  beginning  of  the  2nd  cent.  a.d. 
The  ideas  seem  to  have  had  much  currency  among 
Christians,  for  we  find  Athanasius  (de  Incam.  25) 
speaking  of  the  devil  having  fallen  from  heaven 
and  wandering  about  '  our  lower  atmosphere,' 
'there  bearing  rule  over  his  fellow-spirits  .  .  .,' 
'  while  the  Lord  came  to  cast  down  the  devil,  and 
clear  the  air  and  prepare  the  way  for  us  up  into 
heaven.' 

The  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air  (Eph  2*)  is 
Satan.  That  he  had  authority  over  the  evU  spirits 
whose  abode  is  in  the  air  was  the  general  Jewish 
belief,  except  among  the  Sadducees.  St.  Paul 
does  not,  however,  here  say  'powers  of  the  air,' 
i.e.  evil  spirits,  but  the  '  air-power '  or  '  air-tyranny ' 
(for  this  meaning  of  i^ovcia  see  Ligbtfoot's  note  on 
Col  1^).  Satan  is  the  arch-tyrant  whose  abode  is 
in  the  air. 

LrrKRATTRS.— See  wt.  DnfOH.  A.  J.  MaCLEAX. 

AKELDAMA  (kK€\Bafmx  WH,  'AxeXdaftd  TR).— 
Akeldama  is  said  to  be  equivalent  to  xf^P^o"  cufiaros 
in  Ac  1^*,  and  to  dypos  alfuiTos  in  Mt  27':  in  that 
case  the  word  represents  Aram.  k2'i  Spq  and  the 
final  X  (which  is  retained  also  in  the  best  Vulg. 
text,  acheldemach)  transliterates  k  (which  is  only 
rarely  so  found).  It  has,  therefore,  been  suggested 
as  possible  that  the  second  part  of  the  word  repre- 
sents Aram.  Tfi'^^Koifrrp-fipt.ov,  'cemetery,'  which 
accords  better  with  St.  Matthew's  explanation, 
though  not  with  St.  Luke's.  It  is  difficult  to 
avoid  the  conclusion  that  we  have  here  an  instance 
of  the  occasional  discrepancies  and  inaccuracies 
which  have  from  an  early  period  crept  into  the 
text  of  the  NT.  It  would  certainly  seem  as  if  the 
explanation  of  the  title  'field  of  blood'  given  in 
Mt  27*  is  radically  different  from  that  suggested 
in  Ac  1^*,  and  that  the  former  is  more  in  accord- 
ance with  the  facts,  though  still  an  incorrect  trans- 
lation of  the  Aram,  title,  while  it  is  probable  that 
the  whole  section  w.^^  ^  (with  or  without  v.^)  of 
the  latter  passage  is  not  part  of  St.  Peter's  speech, 
but  a  comment  or  gloss  either  by  the  author  of 
the  book  (St.  Luke)  himself  or  even  by  some  later 
editor  or  transcriber,  who  has  incorporated  a  less 
trustworthy  tradition  in  the  text. 

The  site  of  Akeldama  is  the  modem  Hakk  ed- 
Dumm,  on  the  south  side  of  the  Valley  of  i3innom. 
See,  further,  art.  s.v.  in  HDB  and  DCG. 

C.  L.  Feltoe. 

ALEXANDER  ('AX^fapSpos,  'helper  of  men'). — 
This  name  is  found  in  the  NT  in  five  different 
connexions,  and  possibly  designates  as  many 
different  individuals. 

1.  The  son  of  Simon  of  Cyrene,  who  bore  the 
cross  to  Calvary  (Mk  15*»),  and  the  brother  of 
Rufus.  In  all  probability  Alexander  and  his  brother 
were  well-known  and  honoured  men  in  the  Church 
of  Rome  (cf.  Ro  16^  and  art.  RCFCS),  to  which 
the  Gospel  of  Mark  was  addressed,  as  St.  Mark 
identifies  the  father  by  a  reference  to  the  sons. 
We  may  regard  the  allusion  as  an  interesting  in- 
stance of  the  sons  being  blessed  for  the  father's  sake. 


2.  A  leader  of  the  priestly  party  in  Jerusalem 
at  the  period  subsequent  to  the  death  of  Christ. 
After  the  healing  of  the  impotent  man  we  are  told 
that  Alexander  was  present  at  a  meeting  of  the 
Jewish  authorities  along  with  Annas,  Caiaphas, 
and  John,  and  'as  many  as  were  of  the  kindred  of 
the  high  priest'  (Ac  4*).  It  is  probable,  though 
not  quite  certain,  that  this  indicates  that  Alex- 
ander belonged  to  the  high-priestly  class ;  and  it  is 
impossible  to  identify  him  with  Alexander  the 
'  alabarch '  of  Alexandria  and  brother  of  PhiJo. 

3.  A  leading  member  of  the  Jewish  community 
at  Ephesus  (Ac  19®),  who  was  put  forward  by  the 
Jews  at  the  time  of  the  Ephesian  riot  to  clear 
themselves  of  any  complicity  with  St.  Paul  or  his 
teaching,  but  whom  the  mob  refused  to  hear.  He 
may  have  been  one  of  the  '  craftsmen,'  though  on 
the  whole  it  is  unlikely  that  a  Jew"  would  have 
any  connexion  ^\^th  the  production  of  the  symbols 
of  idolatry.  There  are,  however,  slight  variations 
in  the  MSS  of  Ac  19^,  and  ditierent  views  have 
been  taken  with  regard  to  Alexander  and  the  in- 
tention of  the  Jews.  Meyer  holds  that  Alexander 
was  a  Jewish  Christian  who  was  put  forward 
maliciously  by  the  Jews  in  the  hope  that  he  might 
be  sacrificed  (cf.  Com.  in  loco).  The  omission  of 
Tis,  '  a  certain,'  before  his  name  has  been  regarded 
as  an  indication  that  Alexander  was  a  well-known 
man  in  Ephesus  at  the  time. 

i.  A  Christian  convert  and  teacher,  who  along 
with  Hymensns  {q.v.)  and  others  apostatized  from 
the  faith,  and  was  excommtmicated  by  the  Apostle 
Paul  (1  Ti  li»-»). 

5.  Alexander  the  coppersmith,  who  did  St.  Paul 
much  evil  and  whom  the  Apostle  desires  to  be 
rewarded  according  to  his  works  (2  Ti  4^*"^*).  This 
Alexander  has  been  identified  with  both  3  and  i. 
We  are  able  to  gather  certain  facts  regarding  him 
which  would  seem  to  connect  him  with  3. — (1)  His 
trade  was  that  of  a  smith  (see  Coppersmith),  a 
worker  in  metal,  originally  brass,  but  subsequently 
any  other  metal,  which  might  associate  him  with 
the  craftsmen  of  Ephesus.  (2)  The  statement  re- 
garding him  was  addressed  to  Timothy,  who  was 
settled  in  Ephesus.  On  the  other  hand,  we  are 
told  that  Alexander  greatly  withstood  St.  Paul's 
words — a  reference  which  seems  to  indicate  a  bitter 
personal  hostility  between  the  two  men,  as  well  as 
controversial  disputes  on  matters  of  doctrine  which 
might  rather  connect  him  with  i,  the  associate  of 
Hymenffius.  It  is  possible  that  3,  i,  and  5  may 
be  the  same  person,  but  Alexander  was  a  very 
common  name,  and  the  data  are  insufficient  to 
allow  of  any  certain  identification.  Those  who 
hold  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  to  be  non-Pauline 
regard  the  statement  in  Ac  1^  as  the  basis  of  the 
references  in  the  Epistles,  but  the  only  thing  in 
common  is  the  name,  while  there  is  no  indication  in 
Acts  that  Alexander  had  any  personal  connexion 
with  St.  Paul. 

IJTBRATCRF.— R.  J.  Knowlingr,  EOT,  '  Acts,"  1900  ;  Comm.  ot 
Meyer,  Zeller,  Holtzmann  ;  ^V.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  1885, 
p.  279  ;  artt.  in  HDB  and  EBi.  "\V.  F.  BOYD. 

ALEXANDRIA  CAXe|dv5pta).— The  city  of  Alex- 
andria almost  realized  Alexander  the  Great's  dream 
of  '  a  city  surpassing  anything  previously  exist- 
ing' (Plutarch,  Alex.  xxvi.).  Planned  by  Dino- 
crates  under  the  king's  supervision,  and  built  on  a 
neck  of  land  two  miles  wide  interposed  between 
the  Mediterranean  Sea  and  Lake  Mareotis  (4/ar»ui), 
about  14  miles  from  the  Canopic  mouth  of  the 
Nile,  it  became  successively  the  capital  of  Hellenic, 
Roman,  and  Christian  Egypt,  '  the  greatest  mart 
in  the  world '  (fUyurrov  efiiroptov  Trjs  oiKovft^yns,  Strabo, 
xvn.  i.  13),  and  next  to  Rome  the  most  splendid 
city  in  the  Empire.  About  4  miles  long  from  E. 
to  W.,  nearly  a  mile  wide,  and  about  15  nules  in 


48 


ALEXANDRIA 


ALEXANDRIA 


circumference,  it  was  quartered — like  so  many  of 
the  Hellenic  cities  of  the  period — by  two  colon- 
naded thoroughfares  crossing  each  otlier  at  a  great 
central  square,  terminating  in  the  four  principal 
gates,  and  determining  the  line  of  the  other  streets, 
so  that  the  whole  city  was  laid  out  in  parallelo- 
grams. Tlie  three  regions  into  which  it  was  divided 
— the  liegio  Judceorutn,  Bnicheium,  and  IlhacCtis 
— corresponded  generally  with  the  three  classes  of 
the  population — Jews,  Greeks,  and  Egyptians — 
while  representatives  of  nearly  all  other  nations 
commingled  in  its  streets  (Dio  Chrys.  Orat.  32). 
Diodorus  Siculus,  who  visited  it  about  58  B.C., 
estimates  (xvii.  52)  its  free  citizens  at  300,000,  and 
it  probably  had  at  least  an  equal  number  of  slaves. 

'Its  fine  air,"  says  Strabo,  'is'worthy  of  remark:  this  results 
from  the  city  beiiiR  on  two  sides  surrounded  by  water,  and 
from  the  favourable  effects  of  the  rise  of  the  Nile,'  one  canal 
joining  the  great  river  to  the  lake,  and  another  the  lake  to  the 
sea.  'The  Nile,  being  full,  fills  the  lake  also,  and  leaves  no 
marshy  matter  which  is  likely  to  cause  exhalations  '  (xvii.  i.  7). 

The  name  of  the  city  does  not  occur  in  the  NT, 
but  '  Alexandrian,' as  noun  and  adj.  ('We^avbpevs, 
'A\e^av5piv6s),  is  found  4  times  in  Acts.  There 
was  a  synagogue  of  Alexandrians  in  Jerusalem 
(6®),  fanatical  defenders  of  the  Mosaic  faith,  roused 
to  indignation  by  the  heresies  of  Stephen.  Apollos 
was  '  an  Alexandrian  by  race,  a  learned  man  (dvTjp 
"Kbyios ;  AV  and  RVm,  '  eloquent '),  mighty  in  the 
scripttires'  (18^).  In  one  Alexandrian  ship  St. 
Paul  was  wrecked  at  Melita  (27*),  and  in  another 
he  continued  his  voyage  to  Puteoli  (28").  Here 
are  references  to  the  three  most  striking  aspects  of 
the  life  of  Alexandria — her  religion,  culture,  and 
commerce.     We  invert  the  order. 

1.  Commerce. — Alexandria  was  built  on  a  site 
uniquely  adapted  for  maritime  trade.  Served  on 
her  northern  side  by  the  Great  Harbour  and  the 
Haven  of  Happy  Return  *  (evvo(XTos),  which  were 
formed  by  a  mole  seven  stadia  in  length — the  Hepta- 
stadium — flung  across  to  the  island  of  Pharos,t  and 
on  lier  southern  side  by  the  wharves  of  Mareotis, 
Alexandria  entered  into  the  heritage  of  both  Tyre 
and  Carthage,  and  drew  to  herself  the  commerce 
of  three  continents.  Under  the  Ptolemys  Egypt 
largely  took  the  place  of  the  lands  around  the 
Euxine  as  a  grain-producing  country,  and  '  corn  in 
Egypt '  became  as  proverbial  as  it  had  been  in  the 
days  of  the  Pharaohs. 

'The  corn  which  was  sent  from  thence  to  Italy  was  con- 
veyed in  ships  of  very  ^eat  size.  From  the  dimensions  g'iven 
of  one  of  them  by  Lucian,  they  appear  to  have  been  quite  as 
large  as  the  largest  class  of  merchant  ships  of  modern  times ' 
(Smith,  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul*,  1880,  p.  71  f.). 

The  cruisers  and  coasters  of  Alexandria  traded 
with  every  part  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  it  was 
an  ordinary  occurrence  to  find  vessels  bound  for 
Italy  in  the  harbours  of  Myra  and  Malta  (Ac  27® 
28").  Seneca  gives  a  vivid  picture  of  the  arrival 
of  the  Alexandrian  fleet  of  merchantmen  at  Puteoli 
{Ep.  77).  The  trade  which  came  to  Lake  Mareotis 
from  the  Nile  and  the  Red  Sea  was  equally  im- 
portant. 

'  Large  fleets,'  says  Strabo  (xvii.  i.  13),  '  are  dispatched  as 
far  as  India  and  the  extremities  of  Ethiopia,  from  which  places 
the  most  valuable  freights  are  brought  to  Egypt,  and  are  thence 
exported  to  other  places,  so  that  a  double  amount  of  custom  is 
collected,  arising  from  imports  on  the  one  hand,  and  from  ex- 
ports on  the  other.' 

2.  Caltore. — It  was  the  ^eat  ambition  of  the 
Ptolemys  to  make  their  capital  not  only  the  com- 
mercial but  the  intellectual  centre  of  the  world. 
Alexandria  really  succeeded  in  winning  for  herself 
the  crown  of  science,  and  was  for  centuries  the 
foster-mother  of  an  international  Hellenic  culture. 

*  Its  inner  basin,  Kibotos,  greatly  enlarged,  forms  the  modern 
harbour. 

t  On  the  eastern  point  of  the  island  was  the  famous  Light- 
house, one  of  the  '  Seven  Wonders '  of  the  world. 


The  proofs  of  her  devotion  to  letters  were  seen  in 
the  Bnicheium,  or  central  quarter  of  the  city,  which 
contained  not  only  the  mau.soleum*  of  Alexander, 
the  palaces  of  the  Egyptian  kings,  the  Temple  of 
Poseidon,  and,  at  a  later  date,  the  Csesarium  t  in 
which  divine  honours  were  paid  to  the  Roman 
emperors,  but  the  Museum,  which  in  many  ways 
resembled  a  modern  university,  with  lecture  halls 
and  State-paid  professors,  and  the  Library,  in 
which  were  accumulated  the  books  of  Greece,  Rome, 
Egypt,  and  India,  to  the  number  (according  to 
Josephus,  Ant.  XIL  ii.  1)  of  more  than  half  a 
million.  In  this  home  of  endowed  research  the 
exact  sciences  flourished  ;  Alexandria  had  on  her 
roll  of  fame  the  names  of  Euclid  in  geometry, 
Hipparchus  in  astronomy,  Eratosthenes  in  geo- 
graphy ;  and  her  physicians  were  the  most  cele- 
brated in  the  world.  For  literature  her  savants 
did  a  noble  work  in  collecting,  revising,  and  classify- 
ing the  records  of  the  past.  On  the  whole,  how- 
ever, her  literary  school  was  imitative  rather  than 
creative  ;  her  poets  trusted  more  to  learning  than 
to  imagination,  and  the  muses  rarely  visited  the 
Museum.  The  artificial  atmosphere  of  literary 
criticism,  which  was  the  breath  of  life  to  gram- 
marians, philologists,  and  dialecticians,  chilled 
rather  than  fostered  original  genius.  Alexandria's 
most  brilliant  scholars,  detached  from  the  realities 
of  life,  immured  in  academic  cloisters,  were  con- 
noisseurs, not  writers,  of  classics. 

In  the  Roman  period  '  numerous  and  respectable  labours  of 
erudition,  particularly  philological  and  physical,  proceeded  from 
the  circle  of  the  savants  "of  the  Museum,"  as  they  entitled 
themselves,  like  the  Parisians  "of  the  Institute"  ;  but  ...  it 
was  here  very  clearly  apparent  that  the  main  matter  was  not 
pensions  and  rewards,  but  the  contact  ...  of  g^reat  political 
and  great  scientific  work '  (Mommsen,  Provinces^,  ii.  271  f.). 

3.  Religion.  —  While  the  eclecticism  of  Alex- 
andrian religion  was  represented  in  its  pagan 
aspect  by  the  cultus  of  the  Serapeum,  the  most 
famous  of  the  city's  temples,  in  which  the  attempt 
was  made  to  blend  the  creeds  of  Greece  and  Egypt, 
the  grafting  of  Judaism  on  Hellenism  flowered  into 
a  system  which  had  far  more  influence  upon  the 
permanent  thought  of  the  world.  The  migration 
of  the  Jews  to  Egypt,  which  began  at  the  time  of 
the  downfall  of  Jerusalem  (Jer  42"),  increased 
rapidly  under  the  Ptolemys,  who  welcomed  them 
as  colonists,  giving  them  equal  civic  rights  with 
the  Macedonians  and  Greeks — rights  which  both 
Julius  Csesar  and  Augustus  contirmed  to  them. 
Occupying  their  own  quarter  of  the  city  —  the 
north-eastern — and  forming,  under  their  ethnarch 
or  '  alabarch,'  a  community  within  a  community, 
they  were  yet  profoundly  influenced  by  their  en- 
vironment, and  developed  not  only  a  genius  for  trade 
but  a  passion  for  learning.  In  the  beginning  of 
our  era  they  amounted  to  an  eighth  part  of  the 
population,  and  nowhere  else  was  the  scattered 
race  so  wealthy,  so  cultured,  or  so  influential. 
Alexandria  became  the  greatest  of  Jewish  cities, 
the  centre  of  Semitism  as  well  as  of  Hellenism  (q.v. ). 
Naturalized  in  a  foreign  city  and  inevitably  breath- 
ing its  spirit,  the  Jews  showed  themselves  at  once 
pliant  and  stubborn.  Glorying  in  the  retention  of 
their  monotheistic  faith,  they  yet  dropped  their 
sacred  Hebrew  language.  Their  Scriptures,  trans- 
lated into  Greeks  for  their  own  use,  came  into  the 
hands  of  their  Hellenic  neighbours,  who  gave  them 

•  Near  the  centre  of  the  city,  perhaps  represented  by  the 
present  mosque  Nelii  Daniel. 

t  Near  it  were  '  Cleopatra's  Needles,'  one  of  which  is  now  in 
London,  and  the  other  m  New  York. 

J  The  legend  of  the  composition  of  the  Septuagint,  contained 
in  the  Letter  of  Aristeat,  is  probably  based  on  facts.  The  ini- 
tiative seems  to  have  been  taken  by  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  who 
doubtless  wished  to  promote  the  use  of  Greek  aiiioni;  the  Jewish 
population  of  the  citv.  The  Law  was  translated  in  the  3rd 
cent.  B.C.,  the  Prophets  (probably)  in  the  2nd,  and  most  of  the 
'  Writings '  in  the  1st,  while  Ecclesiastes  and  Daniel  were  not 
translated  till  the  2nd  cent.  a.d. 


ALEXANDRIANS 


ALIEN 


49 


in  exchange  the  classics  of  Athens.  Alexandria 
thus  became  the  meeting-place  of  Eastern  and 
Western  ideals.  Both  races  were  sensitive  to  im- 
pressions :  whUe  the  Jews  felt  the  subtle  influence 
of  a  rich  civilization  and  a  lofty  philosophy,  the 
Greeks  were  attracted  by  a  strange  note  of  assur- 
ance regarding  God.  In  an  eclectic  age  and  city, 
the  endeavour  was  consequently  made  to  harmonize 
the  religion  of  Moses  with  that  of  Plato.  Moramsen 
remarks  that  they  were  the  clearest  heads  and  the 
most  gifted  thinkers  who  sought  admission  either 
as  Hellenes  into  the  Jewish,  or  as  Jews  into  the 
Hellenic,  system  (Provinces^,  ii.  167).  With  perfect 
sincerity,  u  by  faulty  exegesis,  the  Jewish  men  of 
culture  made  their  Scriptures  yield  up  the  doctrines 
of  the  Academy  and  the  Stoa.  The  literary  ex- 
ponent of  this  spiritual  rapprochement  is  Philo(y.p. ), 
who  probably  did  little  more  than  give  expression 
to  the  current  opinions  of  his  countrymen  in  the 
time  of  our  Lord.  While  not  a  little  of  his  Neo- 
Judaism  must,  on  account  of  his  persistent  allegor- 
izing, be  regarded  as  pseudo-Judaism,  he  had  the 
supreme  merit  of  combining  the  highest  Eastern 
with  the  highest  Western  view  of  the  universe  ;  of 
identifying  the  Hebrew  '  wisdom '  with  the  Greek 
'  reason ' ;  of  developing  Plato's  conception  of  the 
world  as  the  Oeiov  ■yewrtroi',  the  eUwr  toD  -ronfrov,  the 
fiovoyanfis  (the  Divine  Child,  the  Image  of  its  Maker, 
the  Only- begotten)  into  that  of  the  Kocfios  yoTtrds  or 
X070S,  which  is  the  Invisible  God's  rpiirroyovos  or 
■rfXinoroKos,  His  aratryaafia  or  xttp*'"^p ;  and  of  thus 
facilitating  that  fusion  of  Hellenism  and  Hebraism 
out  of  which  so  much  Christian  theology  has 
sprung.  Alexandrian  thought  provided  the  cate- 
gories— in  themselves  cold  and  speculative — into 
which  Christianity,  as  represented  by  the  writers 
of  Colossians,  Hebrews,  and  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
poured  the  warm  life-blood  of  a  historic  and 
humane  faith.  And  if  the  Alexandrian  exegetical 
method  was  often  unscientific — as  when  it  made 
Moses  identify  Abraham  with  understanding, 
Sarah  with  virtue,  Noah  with  righteousness,  the 
four  streams  of  Paradise  with  the  four  cardinal 
Wrtues — yet  the  writer  of  Hebrews  could  scarcely 
have  built  a  bridge  between  Judaism  and  Christi- 
anity unless  he  had  been  trained  in  a  school  which 
taught  its  disciples  to  pass  from  symbols  to  ultimate 
realities.  Apollos  {q.v.),  the  learned  and  eloquent 
(X&yios,  dwaros  ev  rah  ypm/xui),  was  a  true  Alex- 
andrian, not  impossibly  '  of  the  Museum ' ;  and 
Luther  was  happily  inspired  in  suggesting  that  he 
may  have  been  the  writer  who  used  the  Hebrew- 
Hellenic  theology  of  Egypt  to  interpret  the  manger 
of  Bethlehem,     ^ee  also  the  following  article. 

LiTBRATTRE.— Art.  'AJexandria'  in  HDB,  SDB,  EBi,  and  in 
Panly-Wissowa ;  H.  Kiepert,  Zur  Topog.  des  aUen  Alex- 
andria, Berlin,  1ST2 ;  J.  P.  Maha%,  Alexander's  Empire, 
London,  18SS,  and  The  Silrer  Age  0/ Vie  Greek  World,  do. 
190*3 ;  T.  Mommsen,  Prov.  0/  Rom.  Emp.^,  2  vols.,  do.  1909 ;  J. 
Drummond,  PhUo-Judcem,  2  vols.,  do.  1S88;  ct  also 
W.  M.  Ramsay's  art.  'Boads  and  Travel  (in  NT)'  in  HDB, 
^•'^^S.  J.\MES  STR.<VHAX. 

ALEXANDRIANS. — Among  the  active  opponents 
of  St.  Stephen  were  'certain  of  them  that  were 
of  the  synagogue  called  the  synagogue  ...  of  the 
Alexandrians '  (A\€^at>Spi(,}v,  Ac  6*). 

Grammatically  the  sentence  is  not  in  good  form,  and  admits 
of  a  varietT  of  interpretations.  Some  exegetes  (Calvin,  Bengel, 
O.  Holtzmann,  Kendall)  assume  that  the  Libertines,  Cyrenians. 
Alexandrians,  Cilicians,  and  Asiatics  residing  in  Jerusalem  all 
worshipped  in  one  s>-nag<c^ae.  Others  (Wendt.  Zockler,  Sanday, 
Knowling,  Winer-Moulton)  think  that  the  first  three  classes  of 
Jews  had  one  synag<^ne  and  the  last  two  another— an  idea 
favoured  by  the  -ntv  .  .  .  twv  after  ti«s.  T.  E.  Page  groups 
the  Libertines  in  one  place  of  worship,  the  men  of  ^exandria 
and  Cyrene  in  a  second,  and  those  of  Cilicia  and  Asia  in  a  third. 
Rnally,  some  scholars  (Schiirer,  Meyer,  Weiss,  Hackett)  be- 
lieve tiiat  each  of  the  five  classes  had  its  own  distinctive  syna- 
gogue in  the  holy  city.  A  synagogue  of  the  Alexandrians  in 
Jerusalem  is  mentioneid  in  Jerus.  MegiUa,  V3d,  where  it  is  also 
said  that  there  were  in  all  no  fewer  than  4So  synagogues  in  the 
VOL.  I. — 4 


city— a  statement  which  Schurer  (HJP  n.  ii.  73)  Hinmitff^  ««  an 
insipid  Tklmudic  legend,  but  which  Renan  (Tfc«  Apostles,  Eng. 
tr.,  113)  is  dis]>06ed  to  accept  a«  '  by  no  means  improbable.' 

The  Jews  of  Alexandria  {q.v.)  were  in  a  very 
different  position  from  the  people  of  any  modem 
Ghetto.  They  were  amongst  the  most  opulent  and 
influential  citizens.  They  formed  a  distinct  muni- 
cipal community,  and  |x)ssessed  extensive  political 
privileges.  At  the  foundation  of  the  city  Alexander 
gave  them  equal  rights  with  the  Greeks  {fStMce  ri 
iieroiK€ir  /card  rjji'  x6Xv  i$  Urorifiias  rpds'EWrin.i),  and 
the  Diadochoi  permitted  them  to  style  themselves 
Macedonians  (Jos.  BJ  n.  xviii.  7).  Of  the  five 
quarters  {pujiipai)  of  the  city,  named  after  the  first 
five  letters  of  the  alphabet,  two  were  called 
'Jewish'  (lovdcuKol  \iyorrai  [Philo,  in  Flac.  §8]). 
While  one  quarter,  knoTs-n  as  Delta,  was  entirely 
peopled  by  Jews  (BJ  n.  xviii.  8),  many  more  of  the 
race  were  scattered  over  all  the  other  parts  (e>  rats 
SXKaii  oi'K  6\iyoi  ffTopdSei  [Philo,  loc.  cil.}),  and  none 
of  them  were  without  their  house  of  prayer  (Philo, 
Leg.  ad  Gaium,  §  20).  The  special  Begio  Judceorum 
lay  in  the  N.K  of  the  city,  beyond  the  promontory 
of  Lochias,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  royal  palace. 
Till  the  time  of  Augustus  the  Jews  were  presided 
over  by  an  ethnarch,  who,  according  to  Strabo 
(quoted  by  Josephus,  Ant.  XIV.  vii.  2),  '  governs  the 
people  and  adminbters  justice  among  them,  and 
sees  that  they  fulfil  their  obligations  and  obey 
orders,  just  Kke  the  archon  of  an  independent  city'' 
Augustus  instituted  a  council  or  senate  (ytpowrla), 
which  was  entrusted  with  the  management  of 
Jewish  affairs,  and  over  which  a  certain  number 
of  &prxovTes  presided.  The  reign  of  Caligula  was 
marked  by  the  first  rude  interruption  of  the  policy 
of  toleration.  The  governor  Flaccus  issued  an 
edict  in  which  he  termed  the  Jews  of  Alexandria 
'strangers,'  thus  depriving  them  of  the  rights  of 
citizenship  which  they  had  enjoyed  for  centuries. 
He  ordered  38  archons  to  be  scourged  in  the 
theatre,  and  turned  the  Jewish  quarters  into 
scenes  of  daily  carnage  (Philo,  in  Flac.  §^  6-10). 
But  one  of  the  first  acts  of  Claudius  was  to  re-affirm 
the  earlier  edicts,  and  Josephus  states  that  in  his 
own  day  (c.  a.d.  90)  one  could  still  see  standing  in 
Alexandria  'the  pillar  containing  the  privileges 
which  the  great  Caesar  (Julius)  bestowed  upon  the 
Jews'  (tt/i'  oriiKriP  .  .  .  rh,  diKoiufuiTa  repUxovaap  A 
K(U0-a/>  6  /x^TOi  rdis  'lovdaloii  iSuKcv  [c.  Apion.  ii,  4 ; 
cf.  Ant.  XIV.  X.  1]).  Some  AlexaniMan  Jews  held 
responsible  positions  as  ministers  of  the  Ptolemys, 
and  others  were  in  the  service  of  the  Roman 
Emperors  (c.  Apion.  ii.  5).  Philo's  brother  Alex- 
ander and  others  filled  the  office  of  '  alabarch '  (see 
Schiirer,  HJP  n.  ii.  280). 

For  a  time  the  'Alexandrians'  were  doubtless 
bilingual,  but  ultimately  they  forgot  their  Hebrew 
or  Aramaic,  and  adopteii  Greek  as  the  language  of 
the  home  and  the  synagogue  as  well  as  of  the 
market.  Living  in  a  great  university  town,  many 
of  them  became  highly  educated ;  the  school  of 
Philo  in  particular  assimilated  many  elements  of 
Greek  philosophy  ;  and  the  Judaism  of  Egypt  was 
gradually  differentiated  from  that  of  Palestine. 
Even  before  becoming  a  Christian,  the  Alexandrian 
Apollos  had  doubtless  a  breadth  of  sympathy,  as 
well  as  a  richness  of  culttire,  which  could  not  have 
been  attained  among  the  Rabbis  of  Jerusalem. 
Yet  in  the  great  mass  of  the  'Alexandrians,'  as 
throughout  the  Dispersion  generally,  the  Jewish 
element  predominated,  and  it  need  occasion  no 
surprise  that  those  of  them  who  chose  to  reside  in 
the  Holy  City  were  as  zealous  for  the  Mosaic 
traditions,  and  as  strenuously  opposed  to  innova- 
tions, as  any  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews. 

T  JtTR  ATTBg. —See  list  appended  to  preceding  article. 

Jam£s  Stkahak. 
ALIEN.— See  STEANaEB. 


60 


ALLEGORY 


ALPHA  AND  OMEGA 


ALLEGORY.  — The  word  is  derived  from  the 
Greek  dWrjyopla,  used  of  a  mode  of  speech  which 
implies  more  than  is  expressed  by  the  ordinary 
meaning  of  the  language.  This  metliod  of  inter- 
preting literature  was  practised  at  an  early  date 
and  among  diflerent  peoples.  When  ideas  of  a 
primitive  age  were  no  longer  tenable,  respect  for 
the  ancient  literature  which  embodied  these  ideas 
was  maintained  by  disregarding  the  ordinary  im- 
port of  the  language  in  favour  or  a  hidden  meaning 
more  in  harmony  with  contemporary  notions.  The 
word  '  allegory '  has  come  to  be  used  more  particu- 
larly of  a  certain  type  of  Scripture  interpretation 
iq.v.)  current  in  both  Jewish  and  Christian  circles. 
Its  fundamental  characteristic  is  the  distinction 
between  the  apparent  meaning  of  Scripture  and  a 
hidden  meaning  to  be  discovered  by  the  skill  of  the 
interpreter.  In  allegory  proper,  when  distinguished 
from  metaphor,  parable,  type,  etc.,  the  veiled 
meaning  is  the  more  important,  if  not  indeed  the 
only  true  one,  and  is  supposed  to  have  been 
primary  in  the  intention  of  the  writer,  or  of  God  who 
inspired  the  writer.  Jewish  interpreters,  particu- 
larly in  the  Diaspora,  employed  this  means  of 
making  the  OT  acceptable  to  Gentiles.  They 
aimed  especially  at  showing  that  the  Jews'  sacred 
books,  when  properly  interpreted,  contained  all 
the  wisdom  of  Greek  philosophy.  This  interest 
flourished  chiefly  in  Alexandria,  and  found  its 
foremost  representative  in  Philo  iq.v.),  who  wrote 
early  in  the  1st  cent.  A.D.  His  Allegories  of  tJie 
Sacred  Laws  is  one  of  his  chief  works,  though  all 
his  writings  are  dominated  by  this  method  of 
interpretation.  Similarly  Josephus  (ly. v.),  a  half- 
century  or  so  later,  says  that  Moses  taught  many 
things  '  under  a  decent  allegory '  (Ant.  Prooem.  4). 
Allegory  was  used  freely  also  by  Palestinian  inter- 

fyreters,  though  less  for  apologetic  than  for  homi- 
etic  purposes.  They  were  less  ready  than  Philo  to 
abandon  the  primary  meaning  of  Scripture,  but 
they  freely  employed  allegorical  devices,  particu- 
larly in  the  Haggadic  midrdshim. 

AVhen  Christians  in  the  Apostolic  Age  began  to 
interpret  Scripture,  it  was  inevitable  that  they 
should  follow  the  allegorical  tendencies  so  prevalent 
at  the  time.  Yet  the  use  of  this  method  is  far  less 
common  in  the  NT  than  in  some  later  Christian 
literature,  e.g.  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  iq.v.).  St. 
Paul  claims  to  be  allegorizing  when  he  finds  the  two 
covenants  not  only  prefigured,  but  the  validity  of  his 
idea  of  two  covenants  proved,  in  the  story  of  Hagar 
{q.v.)  and  Sarah  (Gal  42'*-^).  Allegorical  colouring 
is  also  discernible  in  his  reference  to  the  muzzling 
of  the  ox  (1  Co  9»'-),  the  following  rock  (10*),  and 
the  veil  of  Moses  (2  Co  S'^ff-)-  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  is  especially  rich  in  these  features,  which 
are  much  more  Alexandrian  in  type  than  the 
writings  of  St.  Paul  (e.g.  S"-"  9^  10^  ll^-s  12-"-). 
Certain  Gospel  passages  also  show  allegorical  traits, 
where  in  some  instances  the  allegorical  element 
may  have  come  from  the  framers  of  tradition  in 
the  Apostolic  Age  (e.g.  Mk  4i»-2»=Mt  13'8-s»  =  Lk 

811-15.  T^Ik  12»-»=Mt2l'=»-«=Lk  209-19;  MtlS^'-^O- 36-43 

Jn  10>-'»  15'-8). 
LiTERATURK.— See  list  appended  to  art.  luTKRrRETATiON. 

S.  J.  Case. 
ALMIGHTY.— See  God. 

ALMS. — The  duty  of  kindliness  to  and  provision 
for  the  poor  is  constantly  taught  in  the  OT ; 
in  the  later  Jewish  literature,  and  especially  in 
Sirach  and  Tobit,  it  is  even  more  emphatically 
asserted.  It  is  clear  that  our  Lord  and  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  taught  this  as  a  religious  obligation 
with  equal  force.  In  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
almsgiving  is  assumed  to  be  one  of  the  duties  of 
the  religious  life  (e.g.  Mt  Gi^'*),  and  in  several  places 
the  principle  is  expressed  directly.     Our  Lord  says 


to  the  rich  young  ruler,  '  Sell  whatsoever  thou  hast, 
and  give  to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure 
in  heaven'  (Mk  lO^^^) ;  in  the  parable  of  the  Judg- 
ment, the  place  of  men  is  decided  on  the  ground 
that  they  have  or  have  not  helped  and  relieved  the 
Lord's  brethren  (Mt  25*»-«),  and  in  St.  Luke  our 
Lord  is  reported  as  saying :  '  Sell  that  ye  have, 
and  give  aims ;  make  for  yourselves  purses  which 
wax  not  old,  a  treasure  in  the  heavens  that  faileth 
not' (Lk  1233). 

We  find  the  same  principles  spumed  in  the 
literature  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  In  the  Acts 
we  read  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem :  '  All  that 
believed  were  together,  and  had  all  things  common  ; 
and  they  sold  their  possessions  and  goods,  and 
parted  them  to  all,  according  as  any  man  had 
need '  (Ac  2*»- « ;  cf.  4.^  ^*-  ^).  What  relation  this 
may  have  to  the  community  of  goods  is  considered 
elsewhere  (see  art.  Community  of  Goods)  ;  but  it 
is  at  least  clear  tliat  the  Church  in  Jerusalem 
recognized  the  paramount  obligation  of  the  main- 
tenance of  the  poor  brethren,  and  it  is  worthy  of 
notice  that  the  first  officers  of  the  Christian  com- 
munity of  Avhose  appointment  we  have  direct 
mention  are  the  Seven  who  were  appointed  to 
carry  out  the  ministrations  of  the  Church  to  the 
poor  widows  of  the  community  (Ac  6'-*). 

In  the  letters  of  St.  Paul  we  have  frequent  refer- 
ences to  the  obligation  of  helping  the  poor  (e.g. 
Ro  1213,  £pt^  428^  I  xi  618),  and  in  certain  letters  we 
find  him  specially  occupied  with  the  collections 
which  were  being  made  for  the  poor  Christians  in 
Jerusalem  (Gal  2i»,  Ro  lo^*-  ^,  1  Co  le'-  2,  2  Co  8 
and  9).  The  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
speaks  of  such  deeds  of  charity  as  being  sacrifices 
well-pleasing  to  God  (He  IS^^).  It  is  in  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  John,  however,  that  the  principle  of 
the  responsibility  of  Christian  men  for  the  main- 
tenance of  their  brethren  is  most  emphatically 
expressed  :  '  Whoso  hath  this  world's  goods,  ana 
beholdeth  his  brother  in  need,  and  shutteth  up  his 
compassion  from  him,  how  doth  the  love  of  God 
abide  in  him  ? '  (1  Jn  3'^).  For  St.  John  the  notion 
that  any  man  can  love  God  without  loving  his 
brother  is  a  falsehood  ( 1  Jn  4^). 

The  Christian  literature  of  the  end  of  the  1st 
cent,  carries  on  the  same  principles.  The  Teach- 
ing of  the  Twelve  Apostles  (iv.  8)  says :  '  Thou 
shalt  not  turn  away  from  him  that  is  in  need,  but 
shalt  share  all  things  with  thy  brother,  and  shalt 
not  say  that  they  are  thine  own  :  for  if  ye  are 
sharers  in  that  which  is  immortal,  how  much  more 
in  those  things  which  are  mortal.'  The  Epistle 
of  Barnabas  contains  almost  exactly  the  same 
phrases.  We  have  thus  in  the  NT  and  the  sub- 
apostolic  literature  the  clearest  enunciation  of  the 
principle  whose  effect  and  practical  applications 
we  have  to  study  in  the  history  of  the  Early 
Church  and  of  Christian  civilization.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  our  Lord  and  the  writers  of  the 
NT  looked  upon  the  maintenance  of  the  poor  as  a 
primary  obligation  of  the  Christian  life. 

Literature.— Art.  ' Almsgriving '  in  HDB;  'Alms'  In  BBi 
and  Smith'8  DZJ2  ;  'Charity,  Almsgriving  (Christian)'  in  ERE; 
G.  Uhlhorn,  Christian  Charity  in  the  Ancient  Church,  Eng.  tr., 
Edinburgh,  1883;  A.  Harnack,  Expantion  of  Christianity^, 
London,  1008,  i.  147;  A.  F.  W.  Ingrram,  Banners  of  the 
Christian  Faith,  London,  1899;  W.  C.  E.  Newbolt.  Counsels 
of  Faith  and  Practice,  do.  1894 ;  B.  F.  Westcott,  The  Incar- 
nation and  Common  Life,  do.  1893;  J.  L.  Davies,  Social 
Questions,  do.  1888.  A.  J.   CARLYLE. 

ALPHA  AND  OMEGA These  are  the  first  and 

last  letters  of  the  Gr.  alphabet ;  cf.  Heb.  'Aleph  to 
Tati'',  Eng.  'A  to  Z.'  The  title  is  applied  to  God 
the  Father  in  Rev  P  21«,  and  to  Christ  in  Rev  22" 
(cf.  2^),  The  ancient  Heb.  name  for  God,  m.T,  has 
been  very  variously  derived,  but  its  most  probable 
meaning  is  the  '  Eternal'  One—'  I  am  that  I  am' 


ALTAE 


ALTAE 


51 


(Ex  3").  This  idea  of  the  Deitj,  farther  emphasized 
in  Is  41*  43'"  44*,  is  expressed  in  the  language  of  the 
Apocalypse  by  the  Greek  phrase  '  A  and  Q,'  which 
corresponds  to  a  common  Heb.  expression  'Ahph 
to  Tail,'  of  which  the  Talmnd  and  other  Rabbinic 
writings  furnish  many  examples.  R.  H.  Charles 
adduces  similar  phrases  in  Latin  (Martial,  v.  26) 
and  Greek  (ThecKloret,  HE  iv.  8)  to  express  com- 
pleteness. To  those  who  believe  in  a  Jewish 
original  for  the  NT  Apocalypse,  its  presence  there 
wiS  cause  no  surprise,  and  its  application  to  Christ 
will  constitut*  an  instance  of  the  Christian  re- 
modelling which  that  book  has  undergone.  More- 
over, Jewish  writers  {e.g.  Kohler)  have  given 
another  explanation  of  its  use  as  a  title  for  (Jod, 
calling  it  the  hellenized  form  of  a  well-known 
saying,  '  The  Seal  of  God  is  Emeth  (rcK  = '  truth '), 
a  word  containing  first,  middle,  and  last  letters  of 
tlie  Heb.  alphabet  (cf.  Gen.  Bab.  Ixxxi.  ;  Jems. 
Sanh.  L  18a ;  Sank.  64a ;  Yama  696).  Josephus 
(c.  Apion.)  probably  refers  to  this  saying  (cf.  also 
Dn  1(P  rcx  i7.r?,  '  the  writing  of  truth").  Similar 
is  the  use  of  Justin  {Address  to  Greeks,  xxv.). 
Whatever  may  be  the  origin  of  the  phrase,  its 
chief  significance  for  Christians  lies  in  its  constant 
application  to  Christ,  of  which  this  passage  in  the 
Apocalypse  supplies  the  first  of  countless  instances. 
Charles  and  ^Iuller  agree  that  Patristic  comment- 
ators invariably  referred  all  these  passages  to  the 
Son,  and  in  so  doing  they  plainly  claimed  the 
Divine  pri^-ilege  of  eternity  for  the  Person  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  established  the  claim  set 
forth  in  the  later  creeds  that  '  the  Word  of  God 
was  equal  with  God.' 

Not  only  was  this  the  universal  opinion  of  the 
earliest  commentators,  as  of  the  Christian  author 
or  editor  of  the  Apocalypse ;  it  was  an  opinion 
deeply  rooted  in  the  convictions  of  the  Christian 
congregations.  We  hear  of  no  attempt  to  dispute 
it ;  and,  relying  on  this  as  an  established  fact,  the 
Gnostic  teacliers  sought  to  deduce  by  various  means 
and  numerical  quibbles  the  essential  identity 
of  all  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity  (cf.  Iren.  adv. 
E(er.  I.  xiv.  6,  xv.  1).  Among  others,  Tertullian 
{Monog.  v.),  Cyprian  {Testimon.  ii.  1,  6),  Clem- 
Alex.  (Strom,  iv.  25,  vi.  16),  Ambrose (£xp.  in  septem 
Vis.  i.  8),  emphasized  this  view  of  the  matter ;  and, 
before  the  last  persecution  of  Diocletian  was  over, 
many  inscriptions  had  been  put  up  on  tombstones, 
walls  of  catacombs,  etc.,  in  which  these  two  letters 
stood  for  the  name  of  Christ.  At  a  subsequent 
period  the  practice  became  universal  all  over  the 
Christian  world,  and  countless  examples  are  still 
extant  to  prove  the  general  popularity  of  this 
custom. 

In  most  cases  the  letters  are  accompanied  by 
other  symbols  and  titles  of  the  Master,  e.g. 
p^ ;  in  a  few  examples  they  stand  alone  as  a 
reverent  way  of  representing  the  presence  of  the 
Redeemer.  Most  numerous  in  the  period  from 
A.D.  300-500,  they  decline  in  number  and  import- 
ance during  the  early  Middle  Ages,  and  are  rare,  at 
least  in  the  West,  after  the  7th  and  8th  centuries. 
It  is  significant  to  not«  that  in  none  of  those 
hundreds  of  examples  do  the  letters  (often  rudely 
scrawled  by  poor  peasants)  refer  to  any  one  but 
Jesus  Christ.  It  is  hard  to  conceive  of  any  fact 
more  suited  to  emphasize  the  deep-rooted  belief  of 
the  early  Christians  in  the  true  Divinity  of  their 
Lord  and  Master,  who  had  created  the  world, 
existed  from  the  beginning,  and  was  still  alive  and 
ready  to  succour  His  faithful  followers. 

LiTKRATTRK.— R.  H.  Chaxles,  art.  in  BDB ;  B.  W.  Bacon, 
an.  in  DCG ;  K.  Kohler,  art.  in  JE ;  'W.  MUUer  in  PREi 
(foU  account  of  extant  inscriptions);  C.  Schoettgen.  Hor.Beb., 
Leipzig,  1733.  L.  St.  ALBAX  WeLLS. 

ALTAR.— In  the  NT,  as  in  the  LXX,  the  usual 


term  for  '  altar  *  is  Ovauurr^piov — a  word  otherwise 
confined  to  Philo,  Josephus,  and  ecclesiastical 
writers — while  ^uitm,  as  contrasted  with  a  Jewish 
place  of  sacrifice,  is  a  heathen  altar.  The  most 
striking  example  of  the  antithesis  is  found  in  1  Mac 
l**"*".  Antiochus  Epiphanes  erected  a  small  altar 
to  Jupiter — '  the  alximination  of  desolation '  (v.**) 
— upon  the  ffwruurr^piow  of  the  temple,  and  '  on  the 
twenty-fifth  day  of  the  month  they  sacrificed  npon 
the  idol-altar  (pufiSs)  which  was  upon  the  altar 
of  God  [dvffuierr^pior).'  The  NT  contains  only  a 
single  distinct  reference  to  a  pagan  altar — the 
^wfjuK  which  St.  Paul  observed  in  Athens  bearing 
the  inscription  ' Ayvuarip  Qci^  (Ac  17^). 

1.  The  altar  on  which  sacrifices  were  presented 
to  (jod  was  indispensable  to  OT  religion.  Alike  in 
the  simple  cultus  of  patriarchal  times  and  the  ela- 
borate ritual  of  fully  developed  Judaism,  its  posi- 
tion was  central.  The  altar  was  the  place  of 
meeting  between  (jod  and  man,  and  the  ritual  of 
blood — the  supposed  seat  of  life — was  the  essence 
of  the  offering.  Whatever  details  might  be  added, 
the  rite  of  sprinkling  or  dashiug  the  blood  against 
the  altar,  or  allowing  it  to  flow  on  the  ground  at 
its  base,  could  never  be  omitted.  The  Levitical 
cultus  was  continued  in  Jerusalem  till  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple  by  the  Romans  in  A.D.  70,  and 
the  attitude  and  practice  of  the  early  Jewish- 
Christian  Church  in  reference  to  it  form  an  interest- 
ing and  difficidt  problem.  It  has  been  generally 
assumed  that,  when  our  Lord  instituted  the  New 
Covenant  in  His  own  blood  (Mk  14",  Lk  22*),  He 
implicitly  abrogated  the  Levitical  law,  and  that, 
when  His  sacrifice  was  completed,  the  disciples 
must  at  once  have  perceived  that  it  made  every  altar 
obsolete.  But  there  is  not  wanting  evidence  that 
enlightenment  came  slowly ;  that  the  practice  of 
the  Jewish-Christian  Church  was  not  altered  sud- 
denly, but  gradually  and  with  not  a  little  misgiving. 
Hort  observes  that  '  respecting  the  continued  ad- 
herence to  Jewish  observances,  nothing  is  said 
which  implies  either  its  presence  or  its  absence' 
{Judaistic  Christianity,  42).  But  there  are  many 
clear  indications  that  the  first  Christians  remained 
Jews — McGiffert  (Apostol.  Age,  65)  even  suggests 
that  they  were  '  more  devout  and  earnest  Jews 
than  they  had  ever  been ' — continuing  to  worship 
God  at  the  altar  in  the  Temple  like  all  their 
countrymen.  '  They  had  no  desire  to  be  renegades, 
nor  was  it  possible  to  regard  them  as  such.  Even 
if  they  did  not  maintain  and  observe  the  whole 
cultus,  yet  this  did  not  endanger  their  allegiance. 
.  .  .  The  Christians  did  not  lay  themselves  open  to 
thechargeof  violating  the  law'  ( Weizsacker,.4/>Gs<of . 
Age,  L  &).  They  went  up  to  the  Temple  at  the 
hour  of  prayer  (Ac  3'),  which  was  the  hour  of  sacri- 
fice ;  they  took  upon  themselves  vows,  and  offered 
sacrifices  for  release  (21*'-  **) ;  and  even  St.  Paul, 
the  champion  of  spiritual  freedom,  brought  sacri- 
fices (irpoff<f>opii)  to  lay  on  the  altar  in  the  Holy  City 
(24'~).  The  inference  that  the  New  Covenant  left  no 
place  for  any  altar  or  Mosaic  sacrifice  is  first  expli- 
citly drawn  by  the  writer  of  Hebrews  (see  Temple). 

2.  Apart  from  a  passing  allusion  to  the  altars 
which  were  thrown  down  in  Elijah's  time  (Ro  11'), 
St.  Paul  makes  two  uses  of  the  Oxxftaarripior  in  the 
Temple.  (1)  In  vindicating  the  right  of  ministers  of 
the  gospel  to  live  at  the  charge  of  the  Christian 
community,  he  instances  the  well-known  Levirical 
practice  :  '  those  who  wait  upon  the  altar  have  their 
portion  with  {avfiiupLiorrai)  the  altar '  (1  Co  9"),  part 
of  the  offering  being  burnt  in  the  altar  fire,  said  part 
reserved  for  the  priests,  to  whom  the  law  gives  the 
privilege  'altaris  esse  socios  in  dividenda  victima' 
(Beza).  Schmiedel  {in  loc.)  thinks  that  the  refer- 
ence may  be  to  priests  who  serve  '  am  Tempel  der 
Heiden  wie  der  Juden,'  but  probably  for  St,  Paul 
the  only  divtaffr^piov  was  the  altar  on  which  sacrifice 


52 


AMBASSADOR 


AMEN 


was  offered  to  the  God  of  Israel.  (2)  In  arguing 
against  the  possibility  of  partaking  of  the  Eucharist 
and  joining  in  idolatrous  festivals,  St.  Paul  appeals 
to  the  ethical  significance  of  sacrifice,  regarded  not 
as  an  atonement  but  as  a  sacred  meal  between  God 
and  man.  The  altar  being  His  table  and  the  sacri- 
fice His  feast,  the  hospitality  of  table-communion 
is  the  pledge  of  friendship  between  Him  and  His 
worshippers.  All  who  join  in  the  sacrifice  are  par- 
takers with  the  altar  {koivwvoI  toO  dvaiaarjipiov),  one 
might  almost  say  commensals  with  God.  '  Accord- 
ing to  antique  ideas,  those  who  eat  and  drink  together 
are  by  the  very  act  tied  to  one  another  by  a  bond 
of  friendship  and  mutual  oblij^ation  '  ( W.  R.  Smith, 
Bel.  Sem.^,  247).  How  revolting  it  is,  then,  to  pass 
from  the  altar  of  God  or,  by  parity  of  reasoning, 
from  the  Tpkne^a  tov  KvpLov,  to  the  orgies  of  pagan 
gods,  the  rpaire^a  dainovlwv, 

3.  The  ^vriter  of  Hebrews  refers  to  the  old  Jewish 
altar  and  to  a  new  Christian  one.  (1)  Reasoning 
somewhat  in  the  manner  of  Philo,  he  notes  the 
emergence  of  a  mysterious  priest  from  a  tribe  which 
has  given  none  of  its  sons  to  minister  at  the  altar, 
and  on  this  circumstance  bases  an  ingenious  argu- 
ment for  the  imperfection  of  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood, and  so  of  the  whole  Mosaic  system  (He  7'^). 
(2)  Against  those  Christians  who  occupy  themselves 
with  (sacrificial)  meats  the  writer  says  :  '  We  have 
an  altar,  whereof  they  have  no  right  to  eat  who 
serve  the  tabernacle'  (13^**).  Few  sentences  have 
given  rise  to  so  much  misunderstanding.  ''Exofiev 
can  only  denote  Christians,  and  what  is  said  of  them 
must  be  allegorically  intended,  for  they  have  no  ry 
ffKTjvy  \aTpetJ0VT€s,  and  no  0v(natTT-f)piov  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word '  (von  Soden).  The  point  which 
the  writer  seeks  to  make  is  that  in  connexion  with 
the  great  Christian  sacrifice  there  is  nothing  corre- 
sponding to  the  feasts  of  ordinary  Jewish  (or  of 
heathen)  sacrifices.  Its  r&iros  is  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  no  part  of  wliich  was  eaten  by 
priest  or  worshipper,  the  mind  alone  receiving  the 
benefit  of  the  oliering.  So  we  Christians  serve  an 
altar  from  which  we  obtain  a  purely  spiritual  ad- 
vantage, AVhether  the  writer  actually  visualized 
the  Cross  of  Christ  as  the  altar  at  which  all  His 
followers  minister,  like  Xeirovpyol  in  the  Tabernacle, 
— as  many  have  supposed — is  doubtful.  Figurative 
language  must  not  be  unduly  pressed. 

The  writer  of  Rev.,  whose  heaven  is  a  replica  of 
the  earthly  Temple  and  its  solemn  ritual,  sees 
underneath  the  altar  the  souls  of  martyrs — the 
blood  poured  out  as  an  oblation  (cf.  Ph  2^^,  2  Ti  4*) 
representing  the  life  or  r^ux'J— and  hears  them  cry- 
ing, like  the  blood  of  Abel,  for  vengeance  (Rev 
6«-  '»  ;  cf.  En.  22«).  In  8^  and  9""  the  dvaiaffTiipiov  is 
not  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  but  that  of  incense 
(see  Incf.nse).  In  14^*  the  prophet  sees  an  angel 
come  out  from  the  altar,  the  spirit  or  genius  of  fire, 
an  Iranian  conception ;  and  in  16'  he  personifies 
the  altar  itself  and  makes  it  proclaim  the  truth  and 
justice  of  God. 

LiTBRATURE.— I.  Beoziiieer,  Heh.  Arch.,  Freiburg,  1894,  p. 


London,  1894;  J.  Wellhausen,  Reste  ardb.  Heidenthuins, 
Berlin,  1887,  p.  101  f.  ;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  Apostol.  Age,  VAinh. 
1897,  i>.  36 f.;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostol.  Age,  2  vols.,  London, 
1894-95,  i.  43 fit.  JaMES  STRAHAN. 

AMBASSADOR.  — Although  this  word  occurs 
twice  (2  Co  G-"  and  Eph  6»«)  in  the  EV  of  the  NT, 
the  corresponding  Greek  noun  {irpea^evr-qs)  occurs 
nowhere.  Instead,  we  find  the  verb  vpta^eiu,  '  to 
be  an  ambassador,'  while  the  connate  collective 
noun  (RV  '  ambassage ')  is  used  in  Lk  14*'  19'*.* 

*  npta-ptvu  and  irpecr/Sfvnjs  were  the  recognized  terms  in  the 
Greek  East  for  the  Legate  of  the  Roman  Empire  (Deissmanu, 
Light  from  the  Ancient  East-,  1911,  p.  379). 


In  the  OT  the  idea  behind  the  words  translated 
'  ambassador '  (generally  maVdkh)  is  that  of  going 
or  being  sent,  and  of  this  the  etymological 
equivalent  in  the  NT  is  not  '  ambassador '  but 
'  apostle '  (dirArToXoj,  '  one  sent  forth ') ;  but  both 
the  OT  terms  and  the  NT  dir<5<rToXoj  have  to  be 
understood  in  the  light  of  use  and  context  rather 
than  of  derivation.  In  this  way  they  acquire  a 
richer  content,  of  which  the  chief  component  ideas 
are  the  bearing  of  a  message,  the  dealing,  in  a  re- 
presentative character,  with  those  to  whom  one  is 
sent,  and  the  solemn  investiture,  before  starting 
out,  with  a  delegated  authority  sufficient  for  the 
task  (cf.  Gal  1"""). 

The  representative  character  of  ambassadorship 
is  emphasized  bv  tlie  repeated  vvip,  *  on  behalf  of,' 
in  2  Co  5^,  with  the  added  '  as  though  God  were 
intreating  by  us.'  The  same  preposition  (i/vip) 
occurs  in  Eph  6^ ;  thus  irpea/Sei^w  is  never  found 
in  the  NT  without  it.  So  also  in  Lk  14^2 19"  the 
context  shows  that  the  wpea^ela  is  representative. 

There  is  no  very  marked  difference  between 
'ambassador'  and  'apostle.'  vpea^evu,  having 
vpia^i)%  ('  aged ')  as  its  stem,  does  suggest  a  certain 
special  dignity  and  gravity,  based  on  the  ancient 
idea  of  the  vastly  superior  wisdom  brought  by 
ripeness  of  years.  Probably,  however,  St.  Paul 
was  not  thinking  of  age  at  all,  for  irpea^fuu  had 
lived  a  life  of  its  oyvn.  long  enough  to  be  independ- 
ent of  its  antecedents.  His  tone  of  dignity  and  of 
pride  springs  not  so  much  from  his  metaphor  as 
direct  from  his  vividly  realized  relation  to  God: 
inrip  is  more  emphatic  than  irpea^evu).  It  is  in 
exactly  the  same  tone  that  he  claims  the  title 
'  apostle  '  (see,  e.g.,  Gal  1\  1  Co  9^  IS'-i") ;  cf.  Gal 
l^'^*,  where  his  '  separation  to  preach '  expresses  the 
same  thought  in  yet  another  form.  Nevertheless, 
his  is  a  humble  pride,  for  only  grace  has  put  him 
in  his  lofty  position  (cf.  1  Co  IS**).  Moreover,  his 
commission  is  not  to  lord  it  over  others,  but  to 
'  beseech '  them  ;  nay,  God  Himself  only  '  intreats ' 
(2  Co  5^^").  It  is  He  who  seeks  '  arrangements  for 
peace'  with  men  (cf.  Lk  14*^).  On  the  trpea^vriji 
of  Philem«  (AV  and  RV  'the  aged,'  RVm  'an  am- 
bassador ')  see  art.  Aged.  C.  H.  Watkins. 

AMEN.— The  lack  of  a  common  language  has 
always  been  a  barrier  to  the  mutual  knowledge  and 
intercourse  of  the  great  nations  of  mankind,  all  the 
more  tliat  the  days  when  the  educated  men  of 
all  European  nations  were  wont  to  converse  in 
Latin  liave  long  since  passed  away.  To  a  certain 
extent  the  gulf  has  been  bridged  for  men  of  science 
by  a  newly-invented  vocabulary  of  their  own,  and 
a  general  use  of  Latin  and  Greek  names  for  all  the 
objects  of  their  study.  In  the  world  of  religion 
it  still  remains  a  great  obstacle  to  all  attempts  to 
realize  a  truly  catholic  and  universal  Church.  The 
Latin  of  the  Roman  Catholic  missal,  which  seems 
so  unintelligible  to  the  mass  of  the  worshippers  that 
a  sign  language  (of  ritual)  is  largely  the  medium 
by  which  they  follow  the  services  when  not  ab- 
sorbed in  the  reading  of  devotional  manuals  in 
their  own  mother  tongue,  is  but  a  caricature  of 
such  a  general  medium  of  interpretative  forms  of 
worship.  It  is,  therefore,  a  matter  of  great  interest 
to  study  the  use  of  those  few  words  of  ancient 
origin  which  have  taken  root  in  the  relin;ious  lan- 
guage of  so  many  great  Christian  nations,  and 
have  come  to  convey,  in  all  the  services  where  they 
are  used,  the  same  or  a  similar  meaning.  Of  these, 
perhaps  the  most  familiar  are  the  words  'Amen' 
and  '  Hallelujah.'  These  old  Heb.  phrases  were 
taken,  of  course,  from  the  Bible,  where,  save  in 
the  case  of  Luther's  edition  and  the  LXX  version. 
of  the  earlier  books  of  the  OT,  no  attempt  has  been 
made  to  replace  them  by  foreign  equivalents. 
They  have  a  deep  interest    for    Christian.^,   not 


A  MEN 


AMKN 


53 


merely  as  a  reminder  of  their  essential  unitjr  and 
their  ancient  historj',  and  as  a  recollection  of  the 
debt  which  we  owe  to  a  race  so  often  despised,  but 
as  a  reminiscence  of  the  very  words  which  came 
from  our  Lord's  own  mouth,  in  the  days  when  He 
was  sowing  the  seed  of  which  we  are  reaping  the 
fruits. 

A  brief  examination  of  the  history  of  the  word 
'Amen'  will  be  sufficient  to  prove  the  meaning 
which  it  had,  the  way  in  which  it  acquired  this 
meaning,  and  the  certainty  that  it  was  one  of  the 
very  words  which  fell  from  the  Master  and  had 
for  Him  a  message  of  rare  and  unusual  signifi- 
cance. The  original  use  of  the  word  (derived  from 
a  Heb.  root  pit,  meaning  '  steadfast,'  and  a  verb, 
'to  prop,' akin  to  Heb.  rcg,  'truth,' Assyr.  temenu, 
'foundation,'  and  Eth.  aihena,  'trust'  [Arab,  ami- 
nun  =  ^  secure '])  was  intended  to  express  certainty. 
In  the  mouth  of  Benaiah(l  K  l'^)  and  Jeremiah 
(Jer  28*)  it  appears  as  first  word  in  the  sentence, 
as  a  strong  form  of  assent  to  a  previous  statement. 
It  was  not  till  after  the  Exile  that  it  assumed  its 
far  commoner  place  as  the  answer,  or  almost  the  re- 
frain in  chorus,  to  the  words  of  a  previous  speaker, 
and  as  such  took  its  natural  position  at  the  close 
of  the  five  divisions  of  the  Psalms.  It  is  uncertain 
how  far  this  formed  part  of  the  people's  response 
in  the  ritual  of  the  Temple,  but  it  is  certain  that 
it  acquired  a  fixed  place  in  the  services  of  the  syna- 
gogues, where  it  stiU  forms  a  common  response  of 
the  congregation.  This  was  sometimes  altered 
later,  in  opposition  to  the  Christian  practice,  and 
'God  Faithful  King'  was  used  instead.  The  ob- 
ject of  this  use  of  '  Amen '  was,  in  Massie's  words, 
'to  adopt  as  one's  own  what  has  just  been  said' 
(HDB  i.  80),  and  it  thus  finds  a  fitting  place  in  the 
mouth  of  the  people  to  whom  Nehemiah  promul- 
gated his  laws  (^neh  5^^).  To  express  emphasis, 
in  accordance  with  Hebrew  practice  the  word  was 
often  doubled,  as  in  the  solemn  oath  of  Nu  5^  (cf, 
Neh  8°).  This  was  further  modified  by  the  inser- 
tion of  '  and '  in  the  first  three  divisions  of  the 
Psalter.  *  Amen '  later  became  the  last  word  of 
the  first  speaker,  either  as  simple  subscription — as 
such  it  stands  appended  to  three  of  the  Psalms 
(41,  72,  89),  and  in  many  NT  Epistles,  after  both 
doxologies  (15  times)  and  benedictions  (6  times  in 
RV) — or  as  the  last  word  of  a  prayer  (RV  only 
in  Prayer  of  Manasses ;  but  2  others  in  Vulgate, 
viz.  Neh  13",  To  13^8).  In  two  old  MSS  of  Tobit 
(end),  as  in  some  later  MSS  of  the  NT,  it  appears  by 
itself  without  a  doxology.  The  later  Jews  were 
accustomed  to  use  'Amen'  frequently  in  their 
homes  (e.g.  after  grace  before  meals,  etc.),  and  laid 
down  precise  rules  for  the  ways  of  enunciating  and 
pronouncing  it.  These  are  found  in  the  Talmudic 
tract  B'rdkhoth  ('  Blessings'),  and  are  intended  to 
guard  against  irreverence,  haste,  etc.  So  great 
was  the  superstition  which  attached  to  it  that 
many  of  the  later  Rabbis  treated  it  almost  as  a 
fetish,  able  to  win  blessings  not  only  in  this  life 
but  in  the  next ;  and  one  commentator,  Eliezer  ben 
Hyrcanns,  went  so  far  as  to  declare  that  by  its 
hearty  pronunciation  in  chorus  the  godless  in 
Israel  who  lay  in  the  penal  tires  of  Gehenna  might 
one  day  hope  for  the  opening  of  their  prison  gates 
and  a  free  entrance  into  the  abode  of  the  blessed, 
though  Hogg  suggests  that  this  sentiment  was 
extracted  from  a  pun  on  Is  26^  (Elijahu  Zutta,  xx. ; 
Shab.  1196;  Sicldur  B.  Amram,  136;  cf.  YcUk.  iL 
296  on  Is  26-). 

'  Amen '  would  naturally  have  passed  from  the 
synagogues  to  the  churches  which  took  their  rise 
among  the  synagogue-worshippers,  but  the  ilast«r 
Himself  gave  a  new  emphasis  to  its  value  for  Chris- 
tians by  the  example  of  His  own  practice.  In  this, 
as  in  all  else.  He  was  no  slavish  imitator  of  con- 
temporary Rabbis.    He  spoke  '  as  having  authority 


and  not  as  the  scribes'  (Mk  I**),  and  in  this  capa 
city  it  is  not  surprising  that  He  found  a  new  use 
for  the  word  of  emphasis,  which  neither  His  pre- 
decessors nor  His  followers  have  ventured  to  imi- 
tate, though  the  title  applied  to  Him  in  Rev  3"  is 
founded  upon  His  own  chosen  practice.  In  His 
mouth,  by  the  common  evidence  of  all  the  Gospels 
(77  times),  the  word  is  used  to  introduce  His  own 
words  and  clothe  them  with  solemn  affirmation. 
He  plainly  expressed  His  dislike  for  oaths  (Mt  5**), 
and  in  Dalman's  view  { Words  of  Jesus,  229) — and 
no  one  is  better  qualified  to  speak  on  the  subject 
— He  found  here  the  word  He  needed  to  give  the 
assurance  which  usually  came  from  an  oath.  But 
in  doing  this  '  He  was  really  making  good  the  word, 
not  the  word  Him,'  and  it  is  therefore  nattiral  that 
no  other  man  has  ever  ventured  to  f oUowHis  custom. 
That  it  was  His  habitual  way  of  speaking  is  doubly 
plain  from  a  comparison  of  aU  four  Gospels,  even 
though  St.  Luke,  who  wrote  for  men  unacquainted 
with  Hebrew,  has  sought  where  possible  to  replace 
the  word  by  a  Greek  equivalent  {a\TidQs,  etc.).  St. 
John  has  always  doubled  the  word,  probably  for 
emphasis,  since  Delitzsch's  explanation  from  a 
word  K^'wK=  '  I  say '  is  shown  by  Dalman  (p.  227  f.) 
to  be  wrong  and  based  on  a  purely  Babylonian 
practice. 

The  rest  of  the  NT  presents  examples  of  all  the 
older  uses  of  the  phrase,  though  the  earliest  is 
found  only  in  the  Jewish  Apocalypse  (Rev  7^  19*) 
which  has  probably  been  worked  up  into  the  Chris- 
tian Book  of  '  Revelation,'  and  in  one  passage 
(22*")  christianized  from  it.  Here  it  is  perhaps  a 
conscious  archaic  form,  brought  in  to  add  to  the 
mysterious  language  of  the  vision,  which  may 
originally,  like  the  Book  of  Enoch  or  Noah,  have 
been  ascribed  to  some  earlier  seer.  The  language 
of  St.  Paul  in  1  Co  14^'  shows  that  the  synagogue 
practice  of  saying  '  Amen '  as  a  response  early  be- 
came habitual  among  the  worshippers  of  •  the 
Nazarene,'  even  if  we  had  not  been  led  to  infer 
this  by  the  growing  reluctance  of  the  Jews  to  em- 
phasize this  feature  of  their  service.  The  use 
(?  Jewish)  in  Rev  5"  corresponds  with  this  custom 
(cf.  Ps  106*^).  It  b  plain  that  the  complete  absence 
of  the  word  in  Acts — itself  a  link  with  the  Third 
Gospel — must  be  ascribed  to  the  peculiar  style  and 
attitude  of  the  author,  and  not  at  all  to  the  actual 
practice  in  the  churches. 

Twice  in  the  NT  (2  Co  1*  Rev  3")  the  word 
'  Amen '  is  used  as  a  noun  implying  the  '  Faithful 
God,'  but  it  is  hard  to  tell  whether  this  is  to  be 
understood  as  a  play  on  words  based  on  Is  65^* 
(rcK,  'truth,'  being  read  as  jck,  'Amen'),  or 
whether  it  is  connected  i\ith  the  manner  in  which 
the  Master  employed  the  phrase  as  guaranteed  by 
HLs  own  authority  and  absolute  '  faithfulness.' 

The  Church  of  the  Fathers  made  much  of  the 
word  '  Amen '  in  all  its  OT  uses,  and  introduced,  it 
into  their  services,  not  only  after  blessings,  hymns, 
etc.  (cf .  Euseb.  iv.  15,  viL  9),  but  after  the  reception 
of  the  Sacrament — a  custom  to  which  Justin  refers 
in  his  [the  earliest]  account  of  the  manner  in 
which  this  service  was  conducted  (Apol.  i.  64,  66). 
This  is  confirmed  bv  Ambrose.  The  practice  is 
stUl  in  vogue  in  the  feastem  Church,  was  adopted 
in  the  Scottish  Liturgy  of  1637,  and  dropped  only 
in  the  6th  cent,  by  the  Western  Church.  Some- 
times the  'Amen'  was  even  repeated  after  the 
lesson  had  been  read.  From  the  Jews  and  the 
Christians  it  passed  over  to  the  Muhammadan 
ritual,  where  it  is  still  repeated  after  the  first  two 
suras  of  the  Qur'an,  even  though  its  meaning  is 
wholly  misunderstood  by  the  Muslim  imams  who 
guess  at  various  impossible  explanations.  In  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  it  appears  in  various 
forms — as  the  end  of  the  priest's  prayer,  as  the 
response  of  the  people,  or  as  the  unanimous  assent 


54 


AMETHYST 


AKANIAS 


of  both  priest  and  people.  Curiously  enough, 
among  Presbyterians  it  is  said  by  the  minister 
only.  One  relic  of  the  Gospel  language  is  retained 
in  the  Bishojjs'  Oath  of  Supremacy,  which  com- 
mences almost  in  the  style  of  one  of  Christ's 
famous  declarations.  In  legal  terminology  the 
term  has  been  introduced  to  strengthen  attirmation, 
and  formed  an  item  in  the  '  style '  of  proclamations 
until  the  16th  century.  Hogg  notes  that  in  Eng- 
lish, as  in  Syriac,  it  has  come  to  mean  '  consent,' 
and  has  been  enabled  thus  to  acquire  the  sense  of 
'the  very  last,'  even  though  it  commenced  its 
career  as  first  word  in  the  sentence. 

The  foregoing  remarks  may  enable  the  reader 
to  judge  of  the  strange  changes  to  which  the  mean- 
ing of  this  word  has  been  subjected,  the  important 
part  it  has  played,  and  the  historical  interest  which 
attaches  to  its  every  echo. 

LiTERATrRE.— The  artt.  in  HDB,  DCG,  EBi,  and  JE;  G. 
Dalman,  The  Words  of  Jesus,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinb.  1902,  p.  226  ff. ; 
H.  W.  Hoggr,  in  JQR  ix.  [1896]  1-23;  Ox/.  Hcb.  Lex.,  s.v. 
JDK;  Grimm-Thayer,  s.v.  iixiji';  artt.  in  ExpT  viii.  [1897]  190, 
by  Nestle,  and  xiii.  [1902]  563,  by  Jannaris. 

L.  St.  Alban  Wells. 
AMETHYST  (d/x^^wroj,  Rev  212<>).— A  variety 
of  quartz  of  rock-crystal,  of  purple  or  bluish  violet 
colour.  Derived  from  d,  '  not,'  and  nedvcKeiv,  '  to 
intoxicate,'  it  was  regarded  as  a  charm  against  the 
efiects  of  wine.  Quaffed  from  a  cup  of  amethyst, 
or  by  a  reveller  wearing  an  amulet  of  that  sub- 
stance, the  vine-juice  could  not  intoxicate.  This 
was  doubtless  a  case  of  sympathetic  magic,  wine 
being  amethystine  in  colour.  In  the  LXX  (Ex  28'^, 
etc.) '  amethyst '  stands  for  ahldmdh,  a  stone  which 
was  regarded  as  a  charm  against  bad  dreams.  The 
amethyst  was  used  as  a  gem-stone  by  the  ancient 
Egyptians,  and  largely  employed  in  classical  an- 
tiquity for  intaglios.  Naturally  it  was  often  en- 
graved with  Bacchanalian  subjects.  Being  com- 
paratively abundant,  it  is  inferior  in  price  to  true 
gems,  and  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  oriental 
amethyst,  a  variety  of  corundum,  or  sapphire  of 
amethystine  tint,  which  is  a  very  valuable  gem  of 
great  brilliancy  and  beauty.      James  Strahan. 

AMOMUM  (d/iufiov,  perliaps  from  Arab,  hamma, 
'  heat '). — An  aromatic  balsam  used  as  an  unguent 
for  the  hair,  made  from   the  seeds  of  an  eastern 

Slant  which  has  not  been  identified  with  certainty, 
osephus  {Ant.  XX.  ii.  2)  speaks  of  Harran  as  '  a 
soil  which  bare  ainomum  in  plenty,'  and  Vergil 
(Ed.  iv.  25)  predicts  that  in  the  Golden  Age 
'Assyrium  vulgo  nascetur  amomum.'  The  word 
came  to  be  used  generally  for  any  pure  and  sweet 
odour.  In  Rev  18^*  AV  (with  B  i^'')  omits  the  word  ; 
RV  (with  K  *AC)  accepts  it  and  translates  'spice' 
(RVm  'Gr.  amomum').  The  term  is  now  applied 
to  a  genus  of  aromatic  plants,  some  species  of  which 
yield  cardamoms  and  grains  of  paradise. 

James  Strahan. 
AMPHIPOLIS  ('A/i(/>/7roXts).  — This  Macedonian 
city  played  an  important  part  in  early  Greek 
history.  Occupying  an  eminence  on  the  left  bank 
of  the  Strymon,  just  below  the  egress  of  the  river 
from  Lake  Cercinitis,  3  miles  from  the  Strymonic 
Gulf,  it  commanded  the  entrance  to  a  pass  leading 
through  the  mountains  into  the  great  Macedonian 
plains.  It  was  almost  encircled  by  the  river, 
whence  its  name  '  Amphi-polis.' 

Thucydides  (i.  100)  says  that  the  Athenians 
'  sent  10,000  settlers  of  their  own  citizens  and  the 
allies  to  the  Strymon,  to  colonize  what  was  then 
called  the  "Nine  Ways"  ('Evi/^a  6doL),  but  now 
Amphipolis.'  It  was  the  jewel  of  their  empire, 
but  they  lost  it  in  422  B.C.,  and  never  recovered 
it.  It  was  under  the  ^Macedonian  kings  from  360 
till  the  Roman  conquest  of  the  country  in  167  B.C. 
The  Romans  made  it  a  free  city  and  the  capital  of 


the  first  of  four  districts  into  which  they  divided 
Macedonia.  It  lay  on  the  Via  Egnatia,  which 
connected  Dyrracliium  with  the  Ileliespont.  From 
Philippi  it  was  32  miles  to  the  south-west,  and 
'  this  was  one  of  the  most  beautiful  day's  journeys 
Paul  ever  experienced '  (Renan,  Saint  Paul,  Eng. 
tr.,  p.  91).  The  Apostle  and  his  fellow-travellers 
evidently  remained  in  Amphipolis  over  night,  and 
next  day  went  on  to  ApoUonia  (Ac  17')'  It  is  now 
represented  by  Neochori. 

LiTERATiTRE.— W.  M.  Leake,  Northern  Greece,  London,  18.35, 
iii.  181  f.  ;  G.  Grote,  Uist.  of  Greece,  new  ed. ,  do.  1870,  liL  284  fl. ; 
Conybeare-Howson,  8t.  Paul,  do.  1872,  i.  374  ff. 

James  Strahan. 

AMPLIATUS  ('A/[X7rXiaros  [Ro  168  j<  ABFG],  a  com- 
mon Lat.  name  of  which  AV  Amplias  f  A/iTXiaj, 
DELP]  is  a  contraction). — Saluted  by  St.  Paul  and 
described  as  '  my  beloved  in  the  Lord '  (rbv  dyairriToy 
fioij  iv  Kvpl(f)).  The  only  other  persons  described  in 
Ro  16  as  'my  beloved'  are  Epa;netus  (v.*)  and 
Stachys  (v.^).  A  woman  is  saluted — perhaps  with 
intentional  delicacy — as  '  Persis  the  belovecl '  (v.^). 
The  precise  phrase  '  my  beloved  in  the  Lord '  does 
not  occur  again  in  the  NT.  The  special  term  of 
Christian  endearment  might  suggest  that  Ampli- 
atus  was  a  personal  convert  of  St.  Paul's  or  closely 
associated  with  him  in  Christian  work.  Such 
friends,  however,  are  referred  to  as  '  beloved  child ' 
(Timothy,  1  Co  4"),  '  beloved  brother '  (Tychicus, 
Eph6^^),  'beloved fellow-servant'  (Epaphras,  Col  V), 
etc.  (cf.  art.  Beloved).  Nothing  whatever  is  known 
of  Ampliatus  beyond  this  reference. 

Assuming  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  and  the 
Roman  destination  of  these  salutations,  he  was 
perhaps  a  Roman,  whom  St.  Paul  had  met  on  one 
of  his  missionary  journeys,  and  who  was  known  by 
the  Apostle  at  the  time  of  writing  to  be  residing 
in  or  visiting  Rome.  It  is  interesting  to  find  the 
name  Ampliatus  several  times  in  inscriptions  be- 
longing to  the  Imperial  familia  or  household  (see 
Lightfoot,  Philippians*,  1878,  p.  174,  and  Sanday- 
Headlam,  Romans'^,  1902,  p.  424).  Sanday-Headlam 
also  refer  to  a  Christian  inscription  in  the  catacomb 
of  Domitilla  belonging  to  the  end  of  the  1st  or 
beginning  of  the  2nd  cent,  in  which  the  name 
occurs,  possibly  as  that  of  a  slave  or  frecdman 
prominent  in  the  Church.  If  the  view  be  held 
that  the  salutations  in  Ro  16  were  part  of  a  letter 
to  the  Church  of  Ephesus,  Ampliatus  must  have 
been  a  Roman,  resident  in  Ephesus,  with  whom 
St.  Paul  became  acquainted  during  his  long  stay 
in  that  city.  It  is  possible  that  he  was  a  Jew 
who  had  taken  a  Latin  name  (cf.  the  names  Paulus, 
and  Lucius  a  'kinsman,'  i.e.  a  Jew,  Ro  16-'). 

T.  B.  Allwokthy. 

ANANIAS  (Gr.  'Ami'tas ;  Heb.  Ijn,  '  Jahweh  is 
gracious'). — A  very  common  name  in  later  Jewish 
times,  corresponding  to  Hananiah  or  Hanani  of  the 
OT.  We  find  it  occurring  frequently  in  the  post- 
exilic  writings  and  particularly  in  the  Apocrj'pha. 
In  the  history  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  we  meet 
with  three  persons  bearing  this  name. 

1.  An  early  convert  to  Cliristianity,  best  known 
as  the  husband  of  Sapphira  (Ac  5'"*).  Along  with 
his  wife,  Ananias  was  carried  into  the  early  Church 
on  the  wave  of  enthusiasm  which  began  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  but  they  were  utterly  devoid  of 
any  understanding  or  appreciation  of  the  new 
religion  they  professed.  In  this  period  of  early 
zeal  many  of  the  Cliristians  sold  their  lands  and 
handed  the  proceeds  to  the  comnmnity  of  be- 
lievers (cf.  Barnabas,  Community  of  Goods). 
Ananias  and  his  wife,  wishing  to  share  in  the 
approbation  accorded  to  such  acts  of  generosity, 
sold  their  land  and  handed  part  of  the  i>rice  to  the 
community,  pretending  that  thej^  hail  sacrificed 
all.  When  8t.  Peter  rebuked  the  male  oliender 
for  his  (hijilicity,  Ananias  fell  down  dead,  and  was 


AXAXIAS 


ANATHEMA 


55 


carried  out  for  burial ;  his  wife  also  came  in  and 
Mas  overtaken  by  the  same  fate.  The  narrative 
does  not  indicate  that  the  two  were  punished 
because  they  had  in  any  way  violated  a  rule  of 
communism  which  they  had  professed  to  accept. 
The  words  of  St.  Peter,  '  Whiles  it  remained,  did 
it  not  remain  thine  own,  and  after  it  was  sold,  was 
it  not  in  thine  own  power  ? '  (Ac  5*)  at  once  dispose 
of  any  view  of  the  incident  which  would  regard 
communism  as  compulsory  in  the  early  Church. 
The  sin  for  which   Ananias  and  Sapphira  were 

funished  is  described  as  'lying  unto  God'  (v.*). 
t  was,  says  Knowling,  '  much  more  than  mere 
hypocrisy,  much  more  than  fraud,  pride  or  greed — 
hateful  as  these  sins  are — the  power  and  presence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  had  been  manifested  in  the 
Church,  and  Ananias  had  sinned  not  only  against 
human  brotherhood,  but  against  the  Divine  light 
and  leading  which  had  made  that  brotherhood 
possible.  .  .  .  The  action  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira 
was  hypocrisy  of  the  worst  kind,'  an  attempt  to 
deceive  not  only  men  but  God  Himself.  Most 
critics  admit  the  historicity  of  the  incident  {e.g. 
Baur,  Weizsacker,  Holtzmann,  Spitta),  while  it  is 
undoubted  that  in  the  narrative  the  cause  of  death 
is  traced  to  the  ^vill  and  intention  of  St.  Peter, 
and  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  chance  occurrence  or 
the  etiect  of  a  sudden  shock  brought  about  by  the 
discovery  of  their  guilt.  Much  has  been  written 
on  the  need  in  the  infant  Church  of  such  a  solemn 
warning  against  a  type  of  hypocrisy  which,  had 
it  become  prevalent,  would  have  rendered  the 
existence  of  the  Christian  community  impossible. 

LiTERATCRK— F.  C.  Baar,  Paulus,  Leipzig,  1866,  i.  28  ff.; 
A.  Neander,  Planting  of  CkrUUanity,  ed.  Bohn,  i.  flSSO]  27  ff. ; 
C.  V.  Weizsacker,  ApottoL  Age,  L  [1894]  24 ;  R.  J.  Knowling:, 
£«JT.  Acts,'  1900,  in  loco;  Oaaun.  of  Meyer,  Zeller,  Holtz- 
mann, Spitta. 

2.  A  Christian  disciple  who  dwelt  in  Damascus, 
and  to  whom  Christ  appeared  in  a  vision  telling 
him  to  go  to  Saul  of  Tarsus,  who  was  praying  and 
had  seen  in  a  vision  a  man  named  Ananias  coming 
in  and  laying  his  hands  on  him  that  he  might 
receive  his  sight  (Ac  9^*"").  On  hearing  this  com- 
mand, Ananias,  knowing  the  reputation  of  Saul 
as  a  persecutor,  expressed  reluctance,  but  was 
assured  that  the  persecutor  was  a  chosen  messenger 
of  Christ  to  bear  His  name  to  the  Gentiles  and 
kings  and  the  children  of  Israel.  Thus  encouraged, 
Ananias  went  and  laid  his  hands  on  Saul,  who 
received  his  sight  and  was  baptized.  In  his  speech 
before  the  multitude  at  Jerusalem  (Ac  22^"'*)  St. 
Paul  describes  Ananias  as  '  devout  according  to 
the  law,"  and  as  one  '  to  whom  witness  was  borne 
by  all  that  dwelt '  at  Damascus. 

Later  traditiou  has  much  to  say  regarding  Anani>M».  He  is 
represented  as  one  of  the  '  Seventy,'  and  it  is  possible  he  may 
have  been  a  personal  disciple  of  Jesus.  He  is  also  described  as 
bishop  of  Damascus,  and  reported  to  have  met  a  violent  death, 
slain  by  the  sword  of  Pol,  the  general  of  Aretas,  accordii^  to 
one  authority  (B>x>t  of  the  Bee,  by  Solomon  of  Basra  [1&2], 
ch.  xxix.,  ed.  Wallis  Budge),  or,  according  to  another  (see  Aeta 
Sanctorum,  Jan.  25  [new  ed.  p.  227]),  stoned  to  death  after 
undergoing  torture  at  the  hand  of  Lucian,  prefect  of  Damascus. 
His  name  stands  in  the  Roman  and  Armenian  Martyrolog^es, 
and  he  is  commemorated  in  the  Ab>'ssinian  Calendar. 

3.  The  high  priest  who  accused  St.  Paul  before 
Claudius  Lysias  in  Jerusalem  (Ac  23^^-),  and  who 
afterwards  appeared  among  the  Apostle's  enemies 
before  Felix  at  Caesarea  (Ac  24^').  He  is  not 
to  be  identified  or  confused  with  Annas  {q.v.) 
of  Ac  4«,  Lk  3^  or  Jn  18'^  He  was  the  son  of 
Nedebjeus,  and  is  regarded  by  Schiirer  (GJV*  ii. 
272)  a.s  the  twenty-first  high  priest  in  the  Roman- 
Herodian  period.  He  retained  his  office,  to  which 
he  had  been  appointed  by  Herod  of  Chalcis,  for 
about  twelve  years  (A.D.  47-59).  During  the  time 
of  his  administration,  bitter  quarrels  broke  out 
between  the  Jews  and  the  Samaritans,  which  led 
to  a  massacre  of  some  Galilseans  by  Samaritans 


and  to  the  {plundering  of  Samaritan  villages  by 
Jews.  Ananias  was  summoned  to  Kome  and  tried 
for  complicity  in  these  disturbances,  but,  at  the 
instigation  or  Agrippa  the  younger,  was  restored 
to  office.  He  ruled  in  Jerusalem  with  all  the 
arbitrariness  of  an  Oriental  despot,  and  his  violence 
and  rapacity  are  noted  by  Josephus  (Ani.  XX.  ix. 
2),  while  his  personal  wealth  made  him  a  man  of 
consideration  even  after  he  was  deprived  of  his 
office.  He  did  not  scruple  to  make  frequent  use 
of  assassins  to  carry  out  his  policy  in  Jerusalem, 
and  his  Roman  sympathies  made  him  an  object  of 
intense  hatred  to  the  national  party.  When  the 
war  broke  out  in  A.D.  66,  he  was  dragged  from  his 

Elace  of  concealment  in  an  aqueduct  and  murdered 
y  the  assassins  whom  he  had  used  as  tools  in  the 
days  of  Ms  power  (Josephus,  BJ  n.  xviL  9). 

LiTERAicTtE. — ^Josephus,  Ant.  xx.  ix.  2,  BJ  n.  xrlL  9 ;  E. 
Schnrer,  GJV*  ii.  [1907]  256,  272,  274. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 

AHATHEMA.— The  transliteration  of  a  Gr.  w  ord 
which  is  used  in  the  LXX  to  represent  the  Heb. 
herein,  'a  person  or  thing  devoted  or  set  apart, 
under  religious  sanctions,  for  destruction'  (Lv 
27*  *•,  Jos  6").  It  is  capable  of  use  in  the  good 
sense  of  an  offering  to  God,  but  was  gradually 
confined  to  the  sense  of  'accursed,'  which  is  the 
rendering  adopted  in  AV  in  all  XT  passages  except 
1  Co  16-.  Around  the  Heb.  term  there  gathered 
in  course  of  time  an  elaborate  system  of  excom- 
mtinication,  with  penalties  varying  both  in  amount 
and  in  duration,  the  purpose  being  sometimes 
remedial  of  the  offender  and  sometimes  protective 
of  the  community ;  but  these  developments  are 
mainly  later  than  our  period.  They  may  have 
suggested  lines  on  which  a  system  of  official 
discipline  in  the  Christian  Churdi  was  afterwards 
constructed,  but  it  would  be  an  anachronism  to 
read  them  into  the  simpler  thoughts  of  the  aposto- 
lic literature.  In  patristic  times  the  word  de- 
noted some  ecclesiastical  censure  or  form  of 
punishment,  for  which  a  precedent  may  have  been 
sought  in  the  teacliing  or  practice  of  St.  Paul. 
To  the  Apostle,  the  OT  allusion  would  be  predomin- 
ant, and  his  chief,  if  not  his  only,  thought  would 
be  that  of  a  hopeless  spiritual  condition,  from 
which  emergence  could  be  effected,  if  at  all,  only 
with  extreme  difficulty  and  by  special  forbearance 
on  the  part  of  God. 

In  the  Pauline  Epistles  the  word  'anathema' 
occurs  four  times,  once  in  reference  to  the  Apostle 
himself,  and  on  the  other  occasions  in  reference 
to  the  maltreatment  of  his  Lord. 

t.  The  personal  passage  is  Ro  9*,  where  there 
is  no  serious  difficulty  to  those  who  do  not  look 
for  strict  reasoning  in  the  language  of  the  heart. 
St.  Paul  has  just  expressed  (8")  his  belief  that 
nothing  conceivable  could  separate  him  from  the 
love  of  God  ;  and  now,  in  his  yearning  over  his 
fellow-countrymen,  he  announces  that  for  their 
sakes  he  would  be  willing,  if  it  were  possible, 
to  be  even  hopelessly  separated  from  Christ. 
Clearly  '  anathema '  need  not,  and  does  not  here, 
carry  any  sense  of  formal  excommunication ;  it 
denotes  a  spiritual  condition  of  which  the  two 
features  are  exclusion  from  the  redemption  in 
Christ  and  permanent  hopelessness. 

2.  Greater  difficulty  attaches  to  Gal  1*,  where 
the  Apostle,  again  under  strong  emotion,  impre- 
cates anathema  upon  others.  The  case  he  imagines 
is  one  that  would  warrant  extreme  indignation, 
though  the  language  is  that  of  justifiable  passion 
and  pot  to  be  interpreted  literally.  St.  Paul 
would  he  the  last  of  Christian  teachers  to  with- 
draw all  hope  from  a  man,  and  it  is  possible  that 
in  this  ca.se  he  thought  of  anathema  as  being 
remedial  and  temporary.  He  was  the  bond- 
servant of  Christ,  and  as  such  he  resented  entirely 


66 


ANATHEMA 


ANCHOR 


any  conduct  or  teaching  that  dishonoured  liis 
Lord.  That  such  teaching  reflected  also  on  him- 
self would  be  a  matter  of  little  consequence  ;  but 
Christ  was  sacred  to  him,  and  the  preacher  of 
another  gospel,  whether  one  of  his  own  colleagues 
or  even  'an  angel  from  heaven,'  was  not  to  be 
tolerated.  His  teaching  made  and  proved  him  a 
person  set  apart  for  destruction ;  but  whether 
that  destruction  was  final  or  only  corrective  would 
depend  upon  the  man's  impenitence  or  reform. 
Free  association  with  him  would  be  no  longer 
possible,  and  to  that  extent  the  beginnings  of  a 
system  of  discipline  may  be  traced  in  the  phrase, 
as  in  1  Ti  1^  and  1  Co  5*,  where  the  ultimate 
restoration  of  the  man  is  distinctly  in  view.  But 
the  reference  to  '  an  angel  from  heaven '  is  suffi- 
cient to  prove  that  ecclesiastical  censure,  carry- 
ing finality  with  it,  was  not  the  main  thought. 

3.  and  4.  Twice  in  1  Cor.  the  word  '  anathema ' 
occurs  in  the  course  of  the  sharp  conflict  excited 
by  the  extreme  party  among  converted  proselytes 
to  Judaism  ;  ana  the  great  idea  is  that  everything 
in  the  religion  of  a  professed  Christian  is  deter- 
mined by  his  real  relationship  to  Christ.  Over 
against  the  party  of  which  the  watchword  was 
'  Jesus  is  Lord,'  was  a  party  whose  irreligion  was 
manifested  by  their  cry  'Jesus- is  anathema' 
(1  Co  12*).  They  were  in  a  sense  within  the 
Christian  community,  and  conscious  therefore  of 
certain  obligations  to  Christ ;  but  they  were  so 
provoked  by  the  attempt  to  set  Jesus  on  the  same 
level  with  the  supreme  God,  and  by  the  apparently 
absolute  incompatibility  of  that  belief  with  their 
fundamental  conviction  of  the  unity  of  God,  that 
they  were  jirepared  to  renounce  Jesus  and  even  to 
denounce  Him  rather  than  to  confess  His  Godhead 
and  submit  to  His  claims.  Or,  introduced  into 
the  Church  from  some  form  of  paganism,  they  had 
been  so  familiar  with  the  evil  inspiration  that 
swept  them  along  to  the  worship  of  '  dumb  idols ' 
(12'')  as  to  be  disposed  to  plead  inspiration  for  any 
tongues  or  doctrines  of  their  own,  to  whatever 
extent  Jesus  was  degraded  therein.  In  response 
St.  Paul  sets  up  the  great  antithesis  between  real 
inspiration  and  counterfeit.  The  Spirit  of  God  is 
the  author  of  any  confession  that  Jesus  is  Lord ; 
ecstasy  or  even  demoniac  possession  may  be  pleaded 
for  the  assertion  that  Jesus  for  His  teaching  is 
destined  to  Divine  destruction,  but  never  the 
breath  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Between  those  two 
extremes  there  are  many  halting-places,  and  the 
insecurity  of  each  of  them  is  in  proportion  to  its 
remoteness  from  the  confession  of  Jesus  Christ  as 
Lord.  So  much  is  the  Apostle  aflected  by  this 
dishonour  done  to  his  Lord,  that  it  recurs  to  his 
memory  as  the  Epistle  is  being  closed,  and  suggests 
the  footnote  of  1  Co  16^.  He  adopts  the  word 
used  by  the  men  of  whom  he  was  thinking,  and 
condenses  his  indignation  into  a  curt  dismissal, 
'If  any  one  loveth  not  the  Lord,  let  him  be 
anathema.  Maran  atha.'  In  such  a  place  again 
the  word  cannot  denote  official  ecclesiastical  cen- 
sure. It  is  really  an  antithesis  to  the  prayer  for 
grace  in  Eph  6**,  the  handing  over  of  the  unloving 
man  to  Satan,  the  refusal  to  have  anything  more 
to  do  with  him  until  at  least  some  signs  of  a 
newborn  love  for  Christ  are  given. 

As  to  the  addition  of  Maran  atha,  both  the 
meaning  of  the  words  and  their  relation  to  the 
context  have  been  subjects  of  controversy.  For  a 
discussion  of  the  Aramaic  phrase,  Avitii  related 
questions,  see  HDB  iii.  241  fl".  It  is  either  an 
assertion,  '  Our  Lord  cometh'  (so  RVm),  or,  more 
probably,  an  ejaculatory  prayer,  '  O  Lord,  come,' 
with  parallels  in  Pli  4",  1  P  4^  Rev  22™,  devotional 
rather  than  minatory  in  its  character  and  inten- 
tion. If  it  be  taken  as  an  assertion,  it  may  mean, 
'  Let  those  who  do  not  love  the  Lord  fear  and  be 


quick  to  amend,  for  He  is  at  hand  in  triumph,' 
though  the  expected  Parousia  is  not  a  recurring 
feature  of  the  Epistle.  Or  the  idea  may  be,  '  The 
Lord  is  coming  soon,  and  there  is  no  need  to  trouble 
further  with  these  men,  for  with  greater  wisdom 
thought  may  be  given  to  Him.'  But  the  term  is 
better  detached  entirely  from  the  reference  to 
anathema,  and  considered  simply  as  a  little  prayer, 
in  which  the  normal  yearning  of  the  Apostle 
expresses  itself,  before  he  closes  a  letter  or  group 
of  letters,  in  the  writing  of  which  his  pastoral 
heart  must  have  been  pained  again  and  again. 
The  sudden  way  in  which  the  expression  is  intro- 
duced suggests  that  it  had  already  become  a 
popular  form  of  something  like  greeting  in  common 
use  among  the  disciples,  and  had  supplanted  the 
earlier  *  The  Lord  is  risen,'  unless  both  were 
used,  the  one  on  meeting  and  the  other  on  parting. 
That  would  explain  the  absence  of  any  attempt  to 
translate  it  from  the  vernacular,  and  is  confirmed 
by  the  usage  of  the  next  generation ;  cf.  Didache, 
x.  6,  where  also  the  word  follows  a  warning ;  and 
Apost.  Constitutions,  vii.  26,  where  any  thought 
of  enforcing  a  penalty  is  rendered  impossible  by 
the  jubilant  tone  of  the  section. 

In  course  of  time  'anathema'  came  to  mean 
excommunication,  for  which  sanction  was  found 
in  the  Pauline  use  of  the  word,  which  a^ain  was 
carried  back  to  our  Saviour's  teaching  (Mt  18"). 
Such  men  as  are  referred  to  in  1  Co  16^^  would  of 
necessity  find  themselves  excluded  from  associa- 
tion with  disciples,  and  rules  for  their  treatment 
were  prescribed  (1  Co  5»,  Tit  3^",  2  Jn^"-"),  and 
eventually  expanded  in  great  detail.  But,  while 
this  kind  of  ostracism  was  a  natural  accompani- 
ment of  anathema  from  the  beginning,  the  word 
itself  implied  a  certain  relation  to  God,  a  spiritual 
condition  with  which  God  alone  could  deal,  and 
with  which  He  would  deal  finally  or  remedially. 
Execration  and  not  official  discipline  is  the  dominant 
idea,  with  the  censure  of  the  Church  as  a  corollary. 
See  also  artt.  Discipline,  Excommunication. 

LiTERATURB. — See  artt.  '  Curse,'  '  Excommunication,'  '  Mara- 
natha,'  in  HDB ;  Grimm-Thayer  and  Cremer,  s.v.  acddefia ; 
and  the  NT  Comm.  on  the  passages  cited. 

R.  W.  Moss. 

ANCHOR  (figurative).*— In  He  6^^  the  writer 
describes  the  hope  set  before  the  Christian,  to 
which  he  has  just  referred  in  the  preceding  verse, 
as  '  an  anchor  of  the  soul. '  The  use  of  an  anchor 
as  a  figure  of  hope  was  not  new,  for  it  is  found  in 
pre-Christian  Greek  and  Latin  authors,  and  an 
anchor  appears  on  ancient  pagan  medals  as  an 
emblem  of  hope.  The  figure  would  naturally 
suggest  itself  to  any  one  who  reflected  on  the 
nature  and  power  of  the  faculty  of  hope.  For  it 
is  of  the  essence  of  hope  to  reach  into  the  future 
and  lay  hold  of  an  invisible  object,  as  an  anchor 
drops  into  the  sea  and  catches  hold  of  the  unseen 
bottom.  Hope  has  power  to  keep  the  soul  from 
wavering  in  times  of  storm  and  stress,  just  as  an 
anchor  by  its  firm  grip  keeps  tlie  ship  from  drift- 
ing with  the  winds  ana  tides.  But  Christian  hope 
reaching  out  towards  the  eternal  world  is  some- 
thing much  greater  than  our  familiar  human  hopes 
of  blessings  yet  unrealized  ;  and  the  use  which  this 
writer  made  of  an  anchor  to  represent  the  hope  of 
the  Christian  soul  at  once  transformed  the  figure 
(as  the  Catacombs  bear  witness)  into  one  of  the 
dearest  symbols  of  the  Christian  religion. 

Simple  and  beautiful  as  the  figure  is,  however, 
some  exegetical  difficulties  have  to  be  faced  in 
determining  the  extent  of  its  application  in  the 
passage.  These  difficulties  are  reflected  in  the 
various  renderings  of  AV  and  RV.  In  the  original 
the  word  'hope  of  v.^"  is  not  repeated  in  v.'*. 
Strictly  rendered,  the  verse  runs,  '  which  we  have 
•  For  anchor  In  the  literal  sense  see  art.  Ship. 


A>s^DRoyicrs 


AXGELS 


57 


as  an  anchor  of  the  soul  both  sure  and  stedlast 
and  entering  into  that  within  the  veil' — a  state- 
ment which  has  been  understood  in  two  different 
ways.  AV,  by  supplying  '  hope '  at  the  beginning 
of  the  verse,  makes  '  sure  and  stedfast '  apply  to 
the  anchor,  and  by  introducing  a  comma  at  this 
point  leaves  it  doubtful  whether  the  anchor  is  also 
to  be  thought  of  as  entering  within  the  veil.  RV, 
by  inserting  '  a  hope '  immediately  after  '  soul,' 
limits  the  fagure  to  a  declaration  that  hope  is  an 
anchor  of  the  soul,  and  makes  the  three  epithets 
'  sure,'  '  stedfast,'  and  '  entering '  apply  to  hope 
itself  and  not  to  its  symbol  the  anchor.  The  most 
obvious  construction  of  the  Gr.  vindicates  RV  in 
making  the  three  epithets  hang  together  as  all 
relating  to  one  subject.  On  the  other  hand,  AV 
is  so  far  supported  by  the  fact  that  (wr^X^  and 
^e^aioM  (lit.  'not  failing'  and  'firm')  suggest  that 
the  idea  of  an  anchor  was  immediately  in  the 
writer's  mind.  It  is  probably  right,  therefore,  to 
conclude  that  he  means  to  say  that  the  anchor  is 
sure,  steadfast,  and  entering  into  that  which  is 
within  the  veil,  viz.  the  Holy  of  Holies.  This  is 
really  a  mixture  of  metaphors — the  metaphor  of 
an  anchor  entering  into  the  unseen  world  to  which 
Christian  hope  clings,  and  another  metaphor  by 
which  the  Holy  of  Holies  becomes  a  type  of  that 
world  unseen.  But,  in  view  of  what  the  wTiter 
says  at  a  later  stage  about  the  Most  Holy  Place 
with  its  ark  of  the  covenant  and  cherubim  of  glory 
overshadowing  the  mercy-seat  {^)  as  a  pattern  of 
heaven  itself  where  Christ  appears  before  God  on 
our  behalf  (v.**),  the  figurative  faultiness  of  the 
language  is  more  than  atoned  for  by  its  rich 
suggestiveness  as  to  the  Christian's  grounds  of 
hope  with  regard  to  the  world  to  come.  It  is  the 
appearance  of  our  great  High  Priest  *  before  the 
face  of  God  for  us,'  he  means  to  say,  that  is  the 
ultimate  foimdation  of  the  Christian  hope.  Cf. 
John  Knox  on  his  death-bed  calling  to  his  wife, 
'  Go  read  where  I  cast  my  first  anchor ! '  with 
reference  to  our  Lord's  intercessory  prayer  in  Jn  17. 
Cf.  also  his  answer,  when  they  asKed  him  at  the 
very  end,  '  Have  you  hope  ? '  '  He.lif  ted  his  finger, 
"pointed  upwards  with  his  finger,"  and  so  died' 
(Carlyle,  Heroes,  1872,  p.  140). 

LrnatATtmK. — The  Comm.  on  Hebrews,  esp.  A.  B.  HayiA- 
son's ;  £^pontor,  3rd  ser.  X.  4o  S.  J,   C.   LAMBERT. 

AlfDRONICnS  (XfSpoviKK,  a  Greek  name).— 
Saluted  by  St.  Paul  in  Ro  16^,  his  name  being 
coupled  with  that  of  Junias  or  Junia.*  (1)  The 
parr  are  described  as  '  my  kinsmen '  (roin  ffvyyereU 
fjLov),  by  which  may  be  meant  fellow-Jews  (Ro  9*), 
possibly  members  of  the  same  tribe,  almost  cer- 
tainly not  relatives.  This  last  interpretation  has 
given  rise  to  one  of  the  difficulties  felt  in  deciding 
the  destination  of  these  salutations.  Another 
'  kinsman '  saluted  is  Herodion  (v.^'),  and  saluta- 
tions are  sent  from  three  'kinsmen'  in  v.^.  The 
only  relative  of  St.  Paul  known  to  us  is  a  nephew 
(Ac  23i«). 

(2)  Andronicus  smd  Junia(s)  are  also  described 
as  '  my  fellow-prisoners '  ((n.vaixpMkwrovz  fwv,  lit. 
'prisoners  of  war').  The  meaning  may  be  that 
they  had  actually  shared  imprisonment  with  St. 
Paul  (the  only  imprisonment  up  to  this  time  known 
to  us  was  the  short  confinement  at  PhUippi  [Ac 
16=3,  but  see  2  Co  11==]).  Possibly  they  may  not 
have  suffered  imprisonment  with  the  Apostle  at 
the  same  time  and  place ;  but,  as  enduring  persecu- 
tion for  Christ's  sake,  they  were  in  that  sense 
'fellow-prisoners.'  The  only  other  mention  of 
•  fellow-prisoner '  is  in  a  description  of  Aristarchus 
(Col  4^0)  and  Epaphras  (Philem  ^).  The  meaning  in 
these  cases  is  evidently  literal,  both  sharing  the 

*  It  is  impossible,  as  this  name  occors  in  the  accus.  case,  to 
determine  whether  it  is  masculine  or  feminine.    See  art.  Jxrsua. 


Apostle's  captivity  at  Rome,  whether  compulsorily 
or  ▼olontariiy. 

(3)  The  pair  are  further  described  as  'of  note 
among  the  apostles'  (ixurijtioi  ip  tms  drtxTrSKou). 
Two  interpretations  of  this  phrase  are  possible : 
(a)  well-known  and  honouied  by  the  apostles,  (6) 
notable  or  distinguished  as  apostles.  The  latter, 
although  a  remarkable  expression  (and  all  the  more 
so  if  the  second  name  is  that  of  a  woman),  is  probably 
to  be  preferred.  This  makes  Andronicus  and 
Junia(s)  apostles  in  the  wider  sense  of  delegated 
missionaries  (see  Lightfoot,  Gal.^,  1876,  p.  92  ff.  and 
note  on  p.  96). 

(4)  Lastly,  Andronicus  and  Junia(s)  are  said  to 
have  been  '  in  Christ  before  me '  (ot  Koi  rpd  i/uw 
yiyovav  ev  Xpurr^),  i.e.  they  had  become  Christians 
before  the  conversion  of  Sank  Seniority  of  faith 
was  of  importance  in  the  Apostolic  Church.  It 
brought  honour,  and  it  may  have  also  brought 
responsibility  and  obligation  to  serve  on  behalf  of 
the  community  (cf.  Clement,  £p.  4ci  ;  and  see  1  Co 
16'''- ;  also  art.  Ep,ent:tus).  Note  the  prominence 
given  to  Mnason  (q.v.)  as  an  'early'  or  'original' 
disciple  in  Ac  21^*. 

The  name  Andronicus  occnrs  in  inscriptions  be- 
longing to  the  Imperial  household  (see  Sanday- 
Headlam,  Romans^,  1902,  p.  422). 

T.  B.  Allworthy. 

ANGELS.— 1.  The  scope  of  this  article.— The 
passages  in  the  apostolic  writings  in  which  angels 
are  mentioned  or  referred  to  will  be  examined ; 
some  of  them  are  ambiguous  and  have  been  inter- 
preted in  various  ways.  The  doctrine  of  the  OT  and 
of  the  apocryphal  period  on  the  subject  has  been 
so  fully  dealt  with  in  HDB  that  it  is  unnecessary 
to  do  more  than  refer  incidentally  to  it  here ;  and 
the  angelology  of  the  Gospels  has  been  treated  at 
length  in  DCG  (see  Literature  below).  But  the 
other  NT  writings  have  not  been  so  fully  examined, 
and  it  is  the  object  of  this  article  to  consider  them 
particularly.  Of  these  the  Apocalypse,  as  might 
be  expected  from  the  subject,  calls  for  special 
attention  ;  no  book  of  the  OT  or  the  NT  is  so  full  of 
references  to  the  angels,  and  it  is  the  more  remark- 
able that  the  other  Johannine  writings  have  so  few. 
The  Fourth  Gospel  refers  to  angels  only  thrice 
(la  122»20i2 ;  S'*  is  a  gloss  [see  below,  S  (*)]),  and  the 
three  Epistles  not  at  alL  There  are  frequent  refer- 
ences to  the  subject  in  Hebrews,  and  occasional 
ones  in  the  Pauline  and  Petrine  Epistles  and  in 
Jude. 

2.  The  litepal  meaning  of  ayYcXos — £77e\os= 
'  messenger,'  is  found  only  once  in  the  NT  outside 
the  (Jospels :  in  Ja  2"^,  it  is  used  of  Joshua's  spies 
(in  Jos  6**  [LXX],  which  is  referred  to,  we  read 
roin  KaraaKoreivdyras  oCj  dri<rreiXfw  'Ir/aovs).  In  the 
Grospels  fi77eXos  is  used  of  John  Baptist  in  Mt 
lli»,  Mk  1",  Lk  7^  (from  Mai  S^  but  not  from  LXX, 
which,  however,  also  has  iyyeXm),  of  John's  mes- 
sengers in  Lk  7-^,  and  of  Jesns'  messengers  to  4 
Samaritan  village  in  Lk  9«.  In  Ph  2»,  2  Co  8« 
dxocrroXos  is  translated  'messenger.' 

3.  The  angels  as  heavenly  beings. — From  the 
earliest  times  the  Israelites  had  been  taught  to 
believe  in  angels,  but  after  the  Captivity  the  doc- 
trine greatly  developed.  Yet  some  of  the  Jews 
reject^  all  belief  in  them,  and  this  sharply  divided 
the  Pharisees  from  the  Sadducees,  who  said  '  that 
there  is  no  resurrection,  neither  angel,  nor  spirit' ; 
the  Pharisees  confessed  both  (Ac  23*). 

Angels  are  creatureg,  as  the  Jews  had  always 
taught  (Thackeray,  BeleUion  of  St.  Paul  to  Jewish 
Thought,  p.  150).  They  were  created  in,  through, 
and  unto  Christ  (Col  1"),  who  is  the  beginning  as 
well  as  the  end  of  aU  things  (cf.  1  Co  8«).  They  are 
not  inferior  deities,  but  fellow-servants  {avwSaukoi.) 
with  man  (Rev  ig'*  22^).  Therefore  they  may  not 
be  worshipped  (ib.)',   the  worship  of  angels  was 


68 


ANGELS 


ANGELS 


one  of  the  grave  errors  at  Colossae  (Col  2'*).  So 
idolatry  is  described  as  a  worshipping  of  demons 
(Rev  9*). 

Much  emphasis  is  laid,  lest  it  siiould  be  tliought 
that  angels  were  of  the  same  degree  as  our  Lord, 
on  the  fact  that  Jestis  is  immeasurably  higher  than 
they  ;  as  in  He  l*"^-  (no  angel  is  called  '  the  Son ' ; 
angels  worship  the  Firstborn),  1'*  (no  angel  set  at 
the  right  hand  of  God),  2*  (the  world  to  come  is  not 
made  subject  to  angels,  but  to  man — v.®'*  shows 
that  the  Representative  Man  is  meant,  who  con- 
descended to  bo,  in  His  Incarnation,  made  a  little 
lower  than  the  angels).  In  1  P  3'^*  '  angels  and 
authorities  and  powers'  are  made  subject  to  the 
ascended  Christ ;  and  so  in  Eph  1^'.  In  Col  2" 
(an  obscure  verse),  \\g  may  understand  either  that 
our  Lord,  putting  ofl'  His  body,  made  a  show  of 
the  principalities  and  the  powers,  triumphing  over 
them  in  the  cross  (so  the  Latin  Fathers) ;  or,  with 
the  Greeks,  that  He,  having  stripped  off  and  put 
away  the  principalities,  made  a  show  of  them,  etc. 
— i.e.  that  He  repelled  their  assaults.  Here  the  evil 
angels  are  spoken  of.  But  the  complete  subjection 
of  the  powers  of  evil  to  Jesus  will  not  take  place 
till  the  end  of  the  world  (1  Co  15^^-). 

Angels  are  spirits  (M.ii  V-  ^*);  cf.  Rev  16",  '  spirits 
of  demons:.'  In  Ac  2.3*'-  they  seem  to  be  difl'eren- 
tiated  from  'spirits'  ('no  resurrection,  neither 
angel,  nor  spirit  .  .  .  what  if  a  spirit  hath  spoken 
to  him  or  an  angel  ? ').  But  this  is  not  so.  The 
'angel'  is  the  species,  the  'spirit'  the  genus 
(Alford).  All  angels  are  spirits,  though  all  spirits 
are  not  angels.  In  v.^  the  Pharisees  are  said  to 
confess  '  both,'  i.e.  both  the  resurrection  and  angel- 
spirits  ;  only  two  categories  are  intended.  We 
must  also  remember  that  in  v.*  non-Christian  Jews 
are  speaking. 

But,  though  they  are  spirits,  angels  are  not 
oynnipresent  or  omniscient,  for  these  are  attributes 
of  Deity,  For  their  limited  knowledge  cf.  Eph  3'" 
(whether  good  or  bad  angels  are  tliere  spoken  of)  ; 
it  is  implied  in  1  P  P*  (the  angels  desire  to  look 
into  the  mysteries  of  the  gospel)  and  in  1  Co  2*^-, 
if  'rulers  of  this  Avorld'  are  the  evil  angels  (see 
Demon).  It  is  explicitly  stated  in  Mt  24=«,  Mk  \2?^. 
The  limitation  of  the  angels'  knowledge  is  also 
stated  in  Ethiopic  Enoch,  xvi.  3  (2nd  cent.  B.C.  ?), 
where  the  angels  who  fell  in  Gn  6^  (so  '  sons  of  God ' 
are  interpreted)  are  said  not  to  have  had  the  hidden 
things  yet  revealed  to  them,  though  they  knew 
worthless  mysteries,  which  they  recounted  to  the 
women  (ed.  Charles,  1893,  p.  86  f . ).  In  the  Secrets  of 
Enoch  (Slavonic),  xxiv.  3  (1st  cent.  A.D.  ?),  God  says 
that  He  had  not  told  His  secrets  even  to  His  angels. 
Ignatius  says  that  the  virginity  and  child-bearing 
of  Mary  and  the  death  of  the  Lord  were  hidden 
tromifKadev)  the  ruler  of  this  age  (Eph.  19  ;  for  this 
idea  in  the  Fathers  see  Lightfoot's  note). 

The  good  angels  are  angels  of  light,  as  opposed 
to  the  powers  of  darkness  (2  Co  11''' ;  ct.  Eph  6^-) ; 
so,  when  the  angel  came  to  St.  Peter  in  the  prison, 
a  light  shone  in  the  cell  (Ac  12^).  The  name 
'  seraph '  perhaps  means  '  the  burning  one,'  though 
the  etymology  is  doubtful  ;  cf.  also  Ps  104*. 

They  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage  ; 
and  so  in  the  resurrection  life  there  is  no  marrying, 
for  men  will  be  'as  angels  in  heaven'  (Mt  22^, 
Mk  12=*),  'equal  to  angels'  (lcr6.yye\ot,  Lk  2(P). 
Some  have  thought  that  they  have  a  sort  of  counter- 
part of  bodies,  described  in  1  Co  15*"  as  '  celestial 
bodies'  (Meyer,  Alford),  though  this  is  perhaps  im- 
probable ;  St.  Paul's  words  may  refer  to  the 
'  heavenly  bodies'  in  the  modem  sense  (Robertson- 
Pluuimer),  or  to  the  post-resurrection  human 
bodies  (cf.  v.*) ;  not  to  good  men  as  opposed  to  bad 
(Chrysostom  and  others  of  the  Fathers). 

They  are  numberless  (Rev  5"  [from  Dn  7"], 
He  12*^,  '  myriads' ;  in  the  latter  passage  they  are 


perhaps  described  as  a  'festal  assembly'  [RVm, 
6.yyi\<i)v  iravrjyvpei]). 

The  unfallen  angels  are  holy  (Rev  14'",  Mk  8**, 
Lk  9=*",  and  some  MSS  of  Mt  25*' ;  so  perhaps 
1  Th  3'^  Jude"  [see  below,  5(a)];  cf.  Zee  14"  'all 
the  holy  ones ').  This  is  tlie  meaning  of  '  elect ' 
angels  in  1  Ti  S'^ — not  angels  chosen  to  guard  the 
EpTiesian  Church ;  they  are  mentioned  here  be- 
cause they  will  accompany  our  Lord  to  judgment 
or  (Grimm)  because  they  are  chosen  by  God  to  rule. 

4.  Ranks  of  the  angels.— There  was  a  great 
tendency  in  later  Jewish  writings  to  elaborate  the 
angelic  hierarchy.     In  Is  6^  "  we  had  read  of  sera- 

f>him  ;  in  Ezk  10  of  cherubim.  But  in  Eth.  Enoch, 
xi.  10  (these  chapters  are  of  the  1st  cent.  B.C.  ?), 
the  host  of  the  heavens,  and  all  the  holy  ones 
above,  the  cherubim,  seraphim,  and  ophanim 
( = '  wheels ' ;  cf.  Ezk  1'*),  angels  of  power,  angels  of 
principalities,  are  mentioned  (cf.  Ixxi.  7) ;  in  the 
Secrets  of  Enoch  (20)  we  read  of  archangels,  incor- 
poreal powers,  lordships,  principalities,  powers, 
cherubim,  seraphim,  'ten  troops.'  The  'gene- 
alogies '  of  1  Ti  1*  and  Tit  3*  are  thought  by  some 
to  refer  to  such  speculations.  St.  Paul  shows  some 
impatience  at  the  Colossian  fondness  for  elaborat- 
ing these  divisions ;  yet  in  the  NT  we  find  traces  of 
ranks  of  angels.  In  Jude  *  the  archangel  (Michael) 
is  mentioned  ;  so  in  1  Th  4'*,  where  Michael  is 
doubtless  meant.  In  Romans,  Colossians,  and 
Ephesians  no  organized  hierarchy  is  mentioned  ; 
and  sometimes  the  reference  seems  to  be  to  the 
whole  angelic  band,  sometimes  to  the  evil  angels, 
when  principalities,  powers,  dominions,  thrones  are 
referred  to  (Col  1'"  dpdvoi,  Kvpi&rriTes,  dpxal-,  e^ovcriai  ; 
210. 16  dpxv,  i^ovffia  ;  Eph  1^'  o-pxH,  i^ovala.,  diivafxis, 
KvptdTrjs  ;  3"*  6'^  o,pxo-l,  i^ovcriai ;  Ro  8^  d77eXoi,  dpxo-i, 
5vvd/M€is ;  1  Co  15'-*  dpxVt  i^ovcrla,  dvvafus).  In  the 
passages  in  Col.  and  Eph.  St.  Paul  takes  the  ideas 
current  in  Asia  Minor  as  to  the  ranks  of  the  angels, 
but  does  not  himself  enunciate  any  doctrine ;  in- 
deed, in  Eph  1-'  he  adds,  '  and  every  name  that  is 
named  Idi^o/Md^erai,  i.e.  reverenced]  both  in  this  age 
and  in  that  which  is  to  come.'  Some  have  thought 
that  he  refers  to  earthly  powers ;  but,  though 
these  may  perhaps  in  some  cases  be  included,  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  he  is  speaking  primarily  of 
angelic  powers,  good  and  bad.  '  Whatever  powers 
there  may  be,  Christ  is  Lord  of  all,  far  above  them 
all.'  In  Eph  3'"  only  evil  angelic  powers  are  re- 
ferred to — they  are  in  the  heavenly  sphere  {iv  rois 
iTTovpavLois) ;  and  so  in  6'=,  where  they  are  contrasted 
with  'flesh  and  blood'  (see  also  below).  With 
these  passages  we  may  compare  1  P  3^  '  angels  and 
authorities  and  powers';  and  possibly  2  P  2""-, 
where  the  'lordship'  (RV  'dominion'),  'glories' 
('dignities'),  and  angels  are  thought  by  some  to 
refer  to  ranks  of  angels  ;  if  so,  the  highest  rank  is 
'angels,'  who  are  'greater  in  might  and  power' 
than  the  'glories.'  The  cherubim  of  the  ark 
(Ex  25'^)  are  mentioned  in  He  9*. 

The  Christian  Fathers  and  the  heretical  teachers 
greatly  elaborated  the  angelic  hierarchy  ;  of  these 
perhaps  the  writer  who  had  most  influence  was 
pseudo-Dionysius  the  Areopagite  (de  C'cel.  Hier. 
vi.-ix.,  c.  A.D.  600),  who  divided  the  heavenly  host 
into  tliree  divisions,  with  three  subdivisions  in 
each  :  (1)  thrones,  cherubim,  seraphim  ;  (2)  powers 
{iiowTlcu),  lordships  [KvpibTTrre^),  mights  (Swd/xets) ; 
(3)  angels,  archangels,  principalities  (dpxai).  On 
the  analogy  of  this  list,  the  Syriac-speaking 
Churches  divided  the  Christian  ministry  into  three 
classes,  each  with  three  sub-cla.sses.  For  other 
divisions  of  angels  in  pqst-apostolic  times  see 
Lightfoot's  note  on  Col  1'". 

Very  few  names  of  angels  ocnu  in  the  NT.  Of 
the  holy  angels  only  Gabriel  (Lk  l'"-  -")  and  Michael 
(Jude  »,  Rev  12")  are  named  (from  Dn  8'«  9-'  lO'^-  •" 
12').    We  also  have  the  proper  names  Satan  (thirty- 


AXGELS 


AXGELS 


59 


one  times,  niueteen  outside  the  Gospels),  Beelzebub 
(Gospels  onlj-,  six  times),  and  Belial  or  Beliar  (2  Co 
6").  See  Devil,  Belial.  In  the  Apocryplia  we 
have  Raphael  in  To  12'»,  Uriel  in  2  Es  4^  5»  10«,  and 
Jeremief  in  2  Es  -4^  (the  last  book  perhaps  is  to  be 
dated  c.  A.D.  90).  Many  other  names  are  found  in 
Jewish  writings ;  see  D.  Stone,  Outlines  of  Chr. 
Dogma,  London,  1900,  p.  38 ;  Edersheim,  Lvfe  and 
Times,  App.  xiii. ;  Eth.  Enoch,  20  (Uriel,  Kafael, 
Kaguel,  Michael,  Saraqael,  Gabriel ;  the  Gr.  frag- 
ment [Charies,  p.  356  f.]  has  Sariel  for  Saraqa^, 
and  adds  Kemier[=Jeremiel]). 

S.  Function  of  the  angels. — The  XT  represents 
the  angels  as  having  a  double  activity,  towards 
God  and  towards  man.  Both  these  aspects  are 
found  in  He  1"  (see  below),  as  in  Is  6^"'',  where  the 
seraphim  worship  before  God,  and  one  of  them  is 
sent  to  the  prophet,  and  in  Lk  1'^  where  Gabriel 
is  said  to  stand  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  to  be 
sent  to  Zacharias. 

(a)  Towards  God. — The  angels  are  'liturgic  spirits' 
Q^xiTovpTfLKa  Tvevfiara,  He  1^"* ;  of.  Dn  7*"  Aeirwp- 
70W  airrt^  [Theodotion  ;  the  version  in  our  Gr.  OT] 
for  ajw??^  '  ministered  unto  him ' ;  the  Chigi  LXX 
has  iOepd-revop  airrov) ;  their  ministry  is  an  ordered 
one,  before  the  throne  of  God :  '  the  whole  host  of 
His  angels  .  .  .  minister  {XeirovfTfovaLv)  unto  His 
will,  standing  by  Him '  (Clem.  Rom.  Cor.  34 ;  cf. 
the  4th  cent.  Ignatian  interpolator,  Philad.  9,  '  the 
liturgic  powers  of  Gk)d ').  They  worship  God  in 
heaven  (Rev  S'"-  7"  S^-* ;  cf.  Job  1^  2^),  and  on 
earth  (Lk  2'^) ;  they  worship  the  Firstborn  when 
He  is  brought  into  the  world  (He  1*),  and  are 
witnesses  ot  the  Incarnation  (1  Ti  3'®  'seen  of 
angels' — but  Grimm  interprets  dyyeXots  here  as 
the  apostles,  witnesses  of  the  risen  Christ,  and 
Swete  thinks  the  reference  is  to  the  Agony  in 
Gethsemane  [Ascended  Christ,  1910,  p.  24]).  To  this 
heavenly  worship  there  seems  to  be  a  reference  in 
1  Co  13^  'tongues  of  angels.'  In  Jewish  thought 
there  were  'angels  of  the  presence,'  the  highest 
order  of  the  hierarchy,  who  stood  before  the  face 
of  God,  within  the  veU  (Edersheim,  Life  and  Times, 
L  122 ;  To  12»5  ;  Eth.  Enoch,  40).  There  may  be 
a  reference  to  these  in  Rev  1*  '  the  seven  spirits 
which  are  before  his  throne '  (Swete  interprets  this 
of  the  sevenfold  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit);  8^ 
'the  seven  angels  which  stand  before  God '  (cf.  v.*) ; 
Mt  18^"  '  in  heaven  [the  little  ones']  angels  do  always 
behold  the  face  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven ' ; 
and  in  Lk  1'*  (see  above). 

They  will  attend  on  the  Son  at  the  Last  Judg- 
ment (1  Th  4«,  2  Th  1',  Rev  3') ;  and  tliis  seems  to 
be  the  most  probable  reference  in  1  Th  3'^  '  with 
all  his  saints '  (or  '  holy  ones ' — tQv  dyiav  airrov)  and 
in  Jude  "  '  with  ten  thousands  of  his  holy  ones '  (or 
'with  his  holy  myriads,'  iv  ayiais  fnvpidaiv  airrov), 
where  the  words  are  quoted  from  Enoch,  i.  9,  the 
text  of  the  latter  in  the  Gizeh  Greek  fragment 
being  aiv  toTs  {sic)  fivpidcriy  aiToO  /tai  rots  ayloii  a^oD. 
The  words  in  Jude  are  certainly  to  be  understood 
of  the  angels,  and  this  makes  the  similar  interpre- 
tation of  1  Th  3»3  more  likely.  But  Milligan  (Com. 
tn  loc.)  thinks  that  the  latter  reference  is  to  'just 
men  made  perfect,'  who  are  said  to  judge,  or  to  be 
'  brought  with'  Jesus  at  the  Judgment  (1  Th  4". 
Mt  1928.  Lk  22»;  cf.  Wis  33;  for  1  Co  G^"  see  7 
below).  No  doubt  the  saints  vnh  rule  ^\-ith  Christ 
(liev  2»'-  20^  etc.);  but,  as  all  men  will  them- 
selves be  judged  (Ro  U^o,  2  Co  51"),  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  above  passages  as  implying  that  the 
saints  will  themselves  be  judges  at  the  Last  Day 
is  somewhat  doubtful.  The  attendance  of  the 
angels  on  the  Great  Judge  is  mentioned  in  all  four 
Gospels  (Mt  13*'  Iff^  24'^  2o*i,  Mk  8=«  13^,  Lk  9* 
12^,  and  Jn  1^*  [where  the  reference  is  to  Gn  28^). 
(6)  Towards  man.  —  The  angels  do  service 
(StoKovia)  to  man  as  heirs  of  salvation  (He  1^*). 


They  ministered  to  our  Lord  on  earth,  in  His 
human  nature,  after  the  Temptation  in  the  wilder- 
ness (Mt4",  Mk  1^,  not  in  Lk.),andat  Gethsemane 
(Lk  22«» :  this  may  not  be  part  of  the  Third  Gospel, 
but  is  certainly  part  of  a  1st  cent,  tradition ;  it 
could  not  have  bieen  invented  by  the  scribes  [see 
Westcott-Hort,  NT  in  Greek,  IL  App.,  p.  67]-    The 

{resent  writer  has  argued  for  its  bemg  older  than 
rk.,  and  reflecting  the  same  stage  of  thought  as 
Mk.  [DCG  iL  124'>]).  In  Mt  26»  Jesus  says  that 
angels  would  have  ministered  to  Him,  had  He  so 
willed,  when  Judas  betrayed  Him. 

The  angels  are  spectators  of  our  lives :  1  Co  4'  '  a 
spectacle  (Oiarpov)  to  angek ' ;  1  Ti  5"  'in  the 
sight  of  (Jod  and  Christ  Jesus  and  the  elect  angels ' ; 
1  P  1^,  the  angels  'look  into' — 'glance  at,'  or 
perhaps  'pore  over'  (see  Bigg,  Com.  in  loc.)— the 
Church  and  its  Gospel ;  they  rejoice  over  the 
sinner's  repentance  (Lk  15^"). 

They  are  messengers  to  man.  This  is  the  office  of 
angels  which  is  most  prominent  in  the  N  T ;  see  Ac  7"*- » 
(Moses)  8»  (Philip)  10»-  '•  »■ »  (Peter,  Cornelius)  11" 
(Peter)  12^-"  (Peter  in  prison)  23*  (Paul)  27*»  (Paul 
on  his  voyage),  He  13*  (reference  to  Abraham,  Gn 
18),  and  frequently  in  Rev.  (e.g.  1^  226).  gj;  p^ui 
alludes  to  this  work  of  the  angels  in  Gal  1^,  which 
suggests  that  they  must  be  proved,  as  spirits  must 
be  (1  Co  1210,  1  Jn  4^,  etc.  ;  see  Demox,  §  2),  to  see 
whether  they  are  true  or  false,  and  in  Gal  4", 
where  there  is  a  climax :  '  as  an  angel  of  God, 
nay,  as  one  who  is  higher  than  the  angels,  as 
Christ  Jesus  himself.'  For  this  function  in  the 
Gospels  see  Mt  1»  2"-"  28*-5  Mk  16*-^  Lk 
111.  13. 19.  S8.  so. »  2«-  a  24*-  »  Jn  12»  20"  ;  ^^^^  ^^ 
note  that  the  '  angel  of  the  Lord '  in  the  NT  is  not 
the  same  as  the  '  angel  of  Jahweh '  in  the  OT  :  it 
merely  means  an  angel  sent  by  God.  This  office 
of  the  angels  does  not  exclude  the  Di\'ine  message 
coming  directly  to  man  (Ac  9*  22«  26",  Gal  1'^). 

They  are  helpers  of  our  worship.  They  offer  the 
'  prayers  of  all  the  saints  upon  the  golden  altar ' 
(Kev  8^).  Their  presence  at  Christian  worship  is 
a  reason  for  decorum  and  reverence  (1  Co  11":  a 
woman  should  be  veiled  in  the  assembly  of  the 
faithful  '  because  of  the  angels ' ;  this  seems  to  be 
the  meaning,  not  '  because  of  the  clergy  who  are 
present,'  as  Ambrose,  Ephraim  Syrus,  Primasius, 
nor  '  because  of  the  evil  angels,'  with  a  reference 
to  Gn  6"-,  as  Tertullian  [de  Virg.  Vel.  7 ;  cf.  17], 
nor  yet '  because  the  angels  do  so,'  i.e.  veil  them- 
selves before  their  Superior  [Is  6*] ;  see  Robertson- 
Plummer,  Com.  in  loc).  For  the  presence  of  angels 
at  worship  cf.  Ps  138^  LXX  and  Vulg.,  To  12'*->*, 
Three  =". 

They  fghi  for  man  against  evil,  under  Michael 
(Jude  «,  Rev  12«-  W*-  »  20»-») ;  they  are  '  armies* 
(ffTpaTev/jxjLTa,  Rev  19")  and  a  '  host '  (arpand,  Lk  2^  ; 
not  in  He  12**  RV  where  iwpiAaiv  is  translated 
'  innumerable  hosts ').  They  are  the  '  armies '  sent 
out  by  the  King  in  the  Parable  of  the  Marriage  of 
the  King's  Son  (Mt  22^). 

They  were  the  mediators  of  the  Law  (Ac  7", 
Gal  3'*,  He  2*) ;  i.e.  they  assisted  at  the  giving  of 
the  Law.  St.  Paul  and  the  writer  of  Hebrews 
argue  from  this  the  superiority  of  the  Gospel  as 
being  given  without  the  interposition  of  created 
beings  (Lightfoot  on  Gal  3).  The  presence  of 
angels  is  not  mentioned  in  Ex  19,  but  cf.  Dt  33^ 
Ps  68' ;  it  was  emphasized  by  the  Jews  as  extolling 
the  Law  (see  Thackeray,  op.  eit.  p.  162),  and  this 
is  perhaps  the  meaning  in  Ac  7**. 

At  death  the  angels  carry  the  faithful  departed 
to  Abraham's  bosom  (Lk  16^).  This  was  a  common 
Jewish  belief  (DCG  i.  o7*). 

At  the  Judgment  they  will  be  the  reapers  of  the 
harvest  (Rev  14i'-i»,  Mt  1339-  *»). 

They  are  messengers  of  punishment  (Ac  12"-* 
[Herod],   Rev   14"),   and  of    judgment  (Rev  ^^ 


60 


ANGELS 


ANGELS 


19"-" ;  cf.  the  pouring  out  of  the  bowls,  16'"",  and 
the  seven  angels  having  seven  plagues,  15').  In 
1  Co  10'°  the  '  destroyer '  (6\odptvTi/is)  is  not  Satan, 
hut  the  angel  sent  by  God  to  smite  the  people  (the 
reference  is  to  Nu  16,  where  no  angel  is  mentioned  ; 
but  cf.  Ex  12-^,  2  S  24'*).  Satan  is  sometimes 
called  'the  destroyer'  {diroWvwv,  Rev  9"),  but 
oXoOpevTi^i  is  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  Bible  (see 
Kobertson-Plummer  on  1  Co  10'"). 

They  intervene  on  earth  to  lielp  man  :  an  '  angel 
of  the  Lord'  releases  tiie  apostles  (Ac  5'")  and 
Peter  (12^);  and,  according  to  an  ancient  gloss, 
probably  African,  originating  before  the  time  of 
Tertullian,  who  quotes  it  (de  Bapt.  6),  '  an  angel  of 
the  Lord '  also  '  troubled '  the  water  of  Bethesda 
(Jn  5').  (Tertullian  applies  this  text  to  Christian 
baptism,  over  which  he  says  an  angel  presides.) 
Generally,  the  angels  guard  men  from  evil.  This 
leads  us  to  the  question  of  guardian  angels.  It  is 
an  ancient  idea  that  each  human  being,  or  even 
every  creature  animate  and  inanimate,  has  allotted 
to  it  one  or  more  special  angelic  guards.  This 
idea  is  to  some  extent  confirmed  by  the  words 
of  our  Lord  about  the  'angels  of  the  little  ones' 
in  Mt  18'".  It  was  a  popular  belief  that  these 
i^uardians  took  the  form  of  the  person  guarded, 
and  the  people  assembled  in  the  house  of  Alary  the 
mother  of  Alark  thought  that  Peter,  when  escaped 
from  prison,  was  '  his  angel '  (Ac  12").  This 
Jewish  conception  was  long  retained  by  the  Chris- 
tians. Tertullian  thought  that  the  soul  had  a 
'  figure,'  a  certain  corporeity,  an  'inner  man,  difler- 
ent  from  the  outer,  but  yet  one  in  the  twofold 
condition'  {de  Anima,  9);  this  is  not  quite  the 
sjime  idea,  but  we  find  it  more  clearly  in  the  4th 
cent.  Church  Order,  the  Testament  of  our  Lord  (i. 
40),  where  all  men  have  'figures  of  their  souls, 
wiiich  stand  before  the  Father  of  Light,'  and  which 
in  the  case  of  the  wicked  '  perish  and  are  carried 
to  darkness  to  dwell.'  Similarly  there  are  angels 
of  tire  (Kev  14'^),  of  water  (W^-  ;  cf.  7"-  and  Jn 
o*),  of  winds  (Rev  7';  cf.  Ps  104*),  of  countries 
(Dn  10'3-2o ;  cf.  Sir  17'^) ;  and  the  angel  of  the  abyss, 
Abaddon  (q.v.)  or  Apollyon  (Rev  9";  cf.  20').  For 
Rabbinical  ideas  see  Thackeray,  op.  cit.  p.  168,  and 
Edersheim,  op.  cit.  App.  xiii. 

6.  Angels  of  the  Churches.— In  Rev  l^o  2'-8-  "• '» 
31. 7. 14  ^YiQ  Seven  Churches  are  said  each  to  have 
an  '  angel.'  These  angels  represent  the  Churches  ; 
what  is  said  to  them  is  said  to  the  Churches  (3^ ; 
cf.  1*) ;  things  done  by  the  Churches  are  said  to  be 
done  by  them.  Various  interpretations  have  been 
ottered,  (a)  They  are  said  to  be  angels  as  in  the 
rest  of  the  book.  The  strongest  arguments  for 
this  view  are  the  writer's  usage  elsewhere,  and  the 
mention  of  Jezebel  (2* :  '  thy  wife '  in  some  MSS), 
which  is  clearly  symbolic.  The  difficulty  is  the 
sin  ascribed  to  these  angels,  as  in  any  case  a  good 
angel  must,  if  this  interpretation  be  taken,  be 
meant ;  if  so,  the  meaning  must  be  that  the  angels 
bear  the  sins  of  the  Churches  as  representing  and 
guarding  them.  (6)  They  are  thought  to  be  earthly 
representatives  of  the  Churches,  either  delegates 
to  Patmos  or  the  bishops  or  presbyters  of  the 
Churches.  This  view  accords  better  with  the  later 
than  with  the  earlier  date  assigned  to  Rev.,  with 
the  time  of  Domitian  than  with  that  of  Nero, 
(c)  They  are  thought  to  be  ideal  personifications 
of  the  Churches.  On  the  whole  the  first  view 
seems  to  be  the  most  prolmble.  Compare  and  con- 
trast the  following  article. 

7.  Fallen  angels. — In  the  NT  both  good  and  evil 
angels  are  mentioned  ;  but  Avhen  the  word  '  angel ' 
occurs  alone,  a  good  angel  is  to  be  understood 
imless  the  context  requires  otherwise,  though 
jierhaps  1  Co  6^  is  an  exception  (see  below).  The 
fall  is  mentioned  in  Jude",  2  P  2* ;  and  probably 
in  1  Ti  3',  where  it  is  ascribed  to  pride  (see  Dkvil, 


§  2).  The  Incarnation  was  not  intended  to  help 
the  angels.  Jesus  did  not  '  take  hold '  of,  to  help, 
the  angels  (or,  as  AV,  did  not  take  hold  of  their 
nature) ;  see  Westcott  on  He  2'*.  Yet  in  Col  1» 
God  is  said  to  reconcile  through  (the  death  of) 
Christ  '  all  things '  to  Himself — the  whole  universe 
material  and  spiritual  (Lightfoot) ;  but  it  was  not 
by  delivering  them  from  death  (Alford) :  the  fallen 
angels  are  not  saved  by  Christ's  death.  Accord- 
ing to  some  interpretations,  St.  Paul  says  that 
angels  will  be  judged  by  men  (1  Co  6^).  Robertson- 
Plummer  interpret  this  verse,  tentatively,  as  mean- 
ing that,  as  Christ  judges,  i.e.  rules  over,  angels, 
so  will  saints,  who  share  in  that  rule ;  but,  if  the 
Last  Judgment  is  intended,  then  fallen  angels 
must  be  meant  here,  for  good  angels,  not  having 
fallen,  cannot  be  judged.  For  1  Th  3'*  see  above, 
5  (a).  In  the  end  Satan  is  bound,  and  Babylon 
falls  (Rev  18  and  20) ;  nothing  is  said  of  his  angels, 
but  the  inference  is  that  his  angels  fall  with  him, 
and  this  is  expressly  said  in  Mt  25*'.  See  further. 
Adversary,  Air,  Belial,  Demon,  Devil. 

Metaphorically  the  '  stake  in  the  flesh '  is  called 
an  angel  (messenger)  of  Satan  (2  Co  12^).  See  art. 
Paul. 

8.  Comparison  of  apostolic  and  other  teaching. 
— {a)  Coviparison  with  that  of  our  Lord. — Oesterley 
(SDB,  32)  contrasts  Jesus'  teaching  with  that  of  the 
Evangelists  and  other  NT  writers,  and  says  that 
our  Lord  taught  that  the  abode  and  work  of  the 
angels  are  in  heaven,  not  here  below,  while  His 
disciples  taught  (as  the  Jews  did)  that  they  are 
active  on  earth.  On  the  other  hand,  Marshall 
{DCG  i.  54*)  maintains  the  complete  identity  of 
teaching  between  Jesus  and  the  Evangelists.  To 
the  present  writer  the  latter  view  seems  to  be  the 
right  one.  It  is  true  that  in  our  Lord's  words  the 
work  of  angels  on  earth  is  not  prominent.  But  in 
Jn  F'  (our  Lord  is  speaking)  the  order  '  ascending 
and  descending'  shows  that  the  angels  are  '  already 
on  earth,  though  we  see  them  not'  (Westcott,  Com. 
in  loc).  The  account  of  the  angelic  ministry  at 
the  Temptation,  like  that  of  the  Temptation  itself, 
could  by  its  very  nature  have  come  only  from  our 
Lord's  own  lips.  Moreover,  in  Jesus'  teaching, 
the  angels  come  to  the  earth  to  fetch  Lazarus'  soul 
(Lk  16-^-)  and  to  reap  the  Harvest  (Mt  13=*''-  •»»). 

(b)  Comparison  with  th*  doctrine  of  false  teachers. 
— In  Colossians  we  find  an  elaborate  angelology, 
taught  by  professing  Christians  whom  St.  Paul 
attacks.  Their  heresy  was  partly  Jewish,  partly 
Gnostic,  though  some  think  that  two  different 
sects  are  meant.  The  Gnostic  element  shows  it- 
self in  the  tendency  to  put  angels  as  intermediaries 
between  God  and  man,  and  to  make  angels  emana- 
tions from  God  with  an  elaborate  hierarchy  of 
powers,  dominions,  etc.  Against  such  teaching  St. 
Paul  asserts  that  Christ  is  the  only  mediator  (Col  1'*-" 
2*-'*),  and  forbids  the  worship  of  angels  because  it 
denies  this.  In  the  unique  mediation  of  our  Lord 
lies  the  significance  of  the  repeated  phrases  '  in  the 
Lord,'  ' unto  the  Lord '  (3'*-  ^-  ^).  Jesus  is  the  one 
dpx'7,  or '  beginning'  (1'^ ;  cf.  Rev  3'''),  of  creation,  as 
against  the  idea  of  angelic  intermediaries  when 
the  world  was  made  (see  Lightfoot's  essay  on  tlie 
Colossian  heresy  [Col.,  p.  71  fi'.]).  Perhaps  also  in 
the  assertion  of  the  unique  mediation  of  Christ 
lies  the  significance  of  the  rhetorical  passage  in 
which  St.  Paul  says  that  no  heavenly  powers, 
good  or  bad,  can  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God 
(Ro  8=*).  Passages  in  Eph.  (above,  i)  seem  to  show 
that  the  Colossian  heresy  was  known  also  on  the 
Asian  seaboard. 

A  later  stage  of  angelological  error  is  found  at 
the  end  of  the  Ist  cent,  in  Cerinthus'  teaching, 
which  resembled  that  of  the  Colossian  heretics. 
Cerinthus  (q.v.)  taught  that  the  world  was  not 
made  by  God,  but  by  an  angel,  or  by  a  series  of 


A>sGELS 


A2s'GELS  OF  THE  SEVEX  CHURCHES  61 


Swers  or  angels,  who  were  ignorant  of  God ;  the 
osaic  Law  was  given  by  them  (cf.  above,  5  (6)). 
Cerinthus  is  the  link  between  the  Gnosticism  at 
Colossae  and  the  developed  Gnosticism  of  the  2nd 
century  (for  his  doctrine  see  Irenjjeus,  Hcer.  i.  26  ; 
Hippolytus,  Refut.  vii.  21,  x.  17).  He  claimed  to 
have  had  angelic  visions,  and  was  a  millenarian 
of  the  grossest  sort  (Cains  in  Eusebius,  HE  iiL  28). 
See  also  Lightfoot,  op.  cit.,  p.  106  tf. 

Speculations  such  as  those  attacked  by  St.  Paul 
found  a  congenial  soil  in  '  Asia '  and  Phrygia. 
Even  in  the  4th  cent,  at  the  Council  held  at  the 
Phrj-^an  Laodicea  (c.  A.D.  380),  Christians  are 
forbidden  to  leave  the  Church  of  God  and  invoke 
{drofid^eip)  angels  (can.  35 ;  see  Hefele,  Councils, 
Eng.  tr.,  iiL  317).  It  is  the  proper  jealousy  for  the 
One  Slediator,  on  the  other  hand,  which  has  led 
many  modems  to  reject  the  doctrine  of  the  exist- 
ence of  angels  altogether.  But  both  heavenly  and 
earthly  beings  can  help  man  without  being  medi- 
ators, as  we  see  when  one  man  helps  another  by 
intercessory  prayer.  The  NT  teaching  about 
angelic  helpers,  so  potent  an  antidote  to  material- 
ism, in  no  way  asserts  that  we  are  to  pray  to  God 
through  the  angels,  or  contradicts  the  doctrine 
that  Christ  is  the  only  Mediator  between  God  and 
man. 

(c)  Comparison  tcith  current  Jewish  teaching  and 
that  of  the  later  Babbis. — The  apostolic  teaching 
is  quite  free  from  the  wild  speculations  of  Je^vish 
angelology.  (For  dilierences  between  it  and  cur- 
rent Je\^-ish  ideas  see  Edersheim,  op.  cit.  i.  142 
and  App.  xiii. )  Of  Jewish  speculations  the  most 
elaborate  were  those  of  the  Essenes  (q.v.),  which 
had  a  decided  Gnostic  tinge.  This  Jewish  sect  had 
an  esoteric  doctrine  of  angels,  and  its  members 
were  not  allowed  to  divulge  their  names  to  out- 
siders (Jos.  BJ  n.  viiL  7 ;  Lightfoot,  Col.,  p.  87  ; 
Edersheim,  L  330  f.).  A  few  Jewish  speculations 
may  be  mentioned.  It  was  thought  that  new 
angels  were  always  being  created — an  idea  derived 
from  a  wresting  of  La  3^  (Thackeray,  op.  cit.  p. 
150).  The  angels  taught  Noah  medicine  {Book  of 
Jubilees,  10).  The  righteous  will  become  angels 
{Eth.  Enoch,  li.  4).  An  angel  troubled  the  waters  of 
Bethesda  for  healing  (gloss  in  Jn  5*).  An  elaborate 
hierarchical  system  and  numerous  names  were  in- 
vented for  them  (above,  i).  Contrasted  ^nth  these 
ideas,  we  have  in  the  NT  a  wise  reserve,  which 
refuses  to  go  beyond  the  things  which  are  written. 

One  Jewish  speculation  must  be  noticed  more 
fully.  The  Rabbis  taught  that  none  of  the  angels 
was  absolutely  good,  that  they  opposed  the  crea- 
tion of  man  and  were  jealous  of  him  (Edersheim, 
ii.  754).  Thackeray  (p.  151  f.)  considers  that  St. 
Paul  also  makes  them  all  antagonistic  to  God.  If 
so,  he  contradicts  the  teaching  both  of  our  Lord 
and  of  the  other  NT  writers  (above,  3).  But  this 
view,  based  on  St.  Paxil's  language  about  princi- 
palities, powers,  etc. ,  and  on  the  idea  that  aU  the 
angels  are  the  enemies  who  must  be  put  under 
Christ's  feet  (1  Co  15^),  appears  to  be  untenable. 
St.  Paul,  while  Affirming  that  some  *  powers '  are 
evil,  does  not  say  that  they  all  are  so.  See 
above,  i. 

9.  Nature  of  HT  angelophanies. — It  is  unprofit- 
able to  ask  whether  angels  took  material  bodies 
when  they  appeared  to  men  or  whether  they 
merely  seemed  to  do  so.  At  any  rate,  they  took 
the  form  of  men  to  the  mind,  though  in  some  cases 
there  was  something  about  them  that  produced 
wonder  or  fear  (Lk  1",  Mt  28*,  etc.).  The  accounts 
of  the  angels  who  were  seen  after  the  Resurrection 
vary.  In  Mt  28-  the  angel  who  roUed  away  the 
stone  was  like  lightning,  his  raiment  white  as  snow. 
In  Mk  16^  we  read  only  of  a  young  man  in  a  white 
robe.  In  Lk  24*  there  are  two  men  in  dazzling 
apparel  (cf.   v.**  'vision  of  angels').     In  Jn  20^ 


there  are  two  angels  in  white,  sitting.  In  Ac  !'"• 
there  are  'two  men  ...  in  white  apparel.'  To 
Cornelius  the  angel  was  'a  man  ...  in  bright 
apparel '  (Ac  10**).  Stephen's  face  was  filled  with 
superhuman  glory,  '  as  it  had  been  the  face  of  an 
angel '  (Ac  6** ;  so  we  reflect,  as  in  a  mirror,  the 
glory  of  the  Lord,  2  Co  3"*).  For  an  argument  that 
the  appearance  of  the  angels  was  'objective'  see 
Plummer  on  Lk  1"  ;  but  this  is  largely  a  matter  of 
definition.  At  the  death  of  Herod  (Ac  12**)  no 
appearance  of  an  angel  is  necessarily  intended. 

10.  The  immediate  successors  of  the  apostles. — 
Angelology  was  a  favourite  topic  of  the  time ; 
but,  the  literature  of  the  sub-apostolic  period 
being  very  scanty,  the  references  are  few.  For 
Clement  of  Rome  see  above,  5  (a).  Ignatius  says 
that  the  knowledge  of  angelic  mysteries  was  given 
to  martyrs  (Trail.  5) :  '  heavenly  things  and  the 
dispositions  {rorodeaias)  of  angels,  and  musterings  of 
rulers  {awrrdtreis  dpxorriKdi),  seen  and  unseen'  (cf. 
Col  1^®).  The  '  dispositions '  would  be  in  the  seven 
heavens.  The  iffxorres,  'rulers,'  would  be  St. 
Paul's  apx<u,  i.e.  angels  (Lightfoot,  Ign.  iL  165). 
In  Smym.  6  it  is  said  that  the  angels,  if  they 
believe  not  in  the  blood  of  Chi-ist,  are  judged; 
this  seems  to  imply  that  their  probation  is  not  yet 
ended.  See  also  above,  3.  Papias  (quoted  by 
Andreas  of  Caesarea,  in  Apoc.,  ch.  34,  serm.  12; 
Lightfoot-Harmer,  Apostol.  Fathers,  p.  521)  says 
that  to  some  of  the  angels  Grfxl  '  gave  dominion  over 
the  arrangement  (Siajcoff/i^crewj)  of  the  universe  .  .  . 
but  their  array  (Td^w)  came  to  naught,  for  the 
great  dragon,  the  old  serpent,  who  is  called  the 
Devil  and  Satan,  who  deceiveth  the  whole  earth, 
was  cast  down,  yea,  was  cast  down  to  the  earth, 
and  his  angels '  (quotation  from  Rev  12*).  Papias 
seems  to  date  the  fall  of  the  angels  after  the 
creation  of  the  world.  Hennas  (for  his  possibly 
early  date  see  Salmon,  Introd.  to  NT,  xxvi.)  describes 
the  building  of  the  tower  [the  Church]  upon  the 
waters  by  six  young  men  (cf.  Mk  16'),  while 
countless  other  men  bring  the  stones  ;  and  the 
former  are  said  to  be  the  holy  angels  of  (Jod,  who 
were  created  first  of  all ;  the  latter  are  also  holy 
angels,  but  the  six  are  superior  to  them  {Vis.  iiL 
1,  2, 4).  In  the  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp,  2,  martyrs 
are  said  to  become  angels  after  death  (see  above, 
8).  In  the  Epistle  to  Diognetiu,  7,  God  is  said  to 
have  sent  to  men  a  minister  {{mipinip)  or  angel  or 
ruler  (S.pxo>rra).  Justin  interprets  Ps  24^- '  [LXX] 
as  addressed  to  the  rulers  appointed  by  God  in  the 
heavens  {Dial.  36).  To  angels  was  committed  the 
care  of  man  and  of  all  things  under  heaven,  but 
they  transgressed  through  the  love  of  women  {Apol. 
iL  5,  referring  to  Gn  6"'-).  Angels,  like  men, 
have  free  will  {Dial.  141). 

Ijrbatubx.— A.  Edersheim,  Life  and  Times  tff  Jetus  the 
Memalfi,  London,  1897,  i.  142,  iL  748  (Appendix.  xiiLX  etc ; 
H.  St.  J.  Thackeray,  The  Belation  of  St.  Paul  to  Contemporam 
Jewish  Thought,  do.  1900;  A.  B.  Davidson  in  HDB,  ait. 
'  Angel'  (almost  entirely  for  OI) ;  W.  Fairweather  in  HDB, 
ToL  v.,  art.  'Development  of  Doctrine  in  the  ApocrypbaX 
Period,'  I  iiL  ;  J.  T.  Marshall  in  DCG,  art.  '  Angds' ;  and  the 
Commentaries,  esp.  H.  B.  Swete,  Apoeaiypte  (/  iSL  John, 
London,  1906^  B.  F.  Westcott,  Hebretcti,  do.  1906;  G. 
MHHga".  ThetmloniaHS,  do.  1908 ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  ColomoM 
and  Philemon,  do.  1900  (ISb  ed.  1875) ;  A.  Robertsoo  and  A. 
Plnmmer,  1  Corinthians,  Edinburgh,  1911. 

A.  J.  Macleak. 
ANGELS  OF  THE  SE¥EM  CHURCHES.— The 

general  practice  of  NT  writers  points  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  word  'angels,'  used  in  this  con- 
nexion, is  employed  to  denote  superhuman  and 
celestial  personalities.  We  are  not,  however, 
without  examples  of  its  being  used  to  indicate 
ordinary  '  messengers '  (cf.  Lk  7"-*  9",  Ja  2*,  etc.). 
In  this  case  it  would  be  equivalent  to  the  irdaroXoi 
iKKXijffiQv  (2  Co  8^ ;  cf.  Ph  2P),  who  were  in  some 
sense  the  oflBcial,  if  temporary,  delegates  of  one 
Church  to  another.   The  fact  that  in  the  Apocalypse 


62    ANGELS  OF  THE  SEVEN  CHURCHES 


ANGER 


these  '  angels '  are  to  such  a  degree  the  recipients 
of  praise  and  blauie  would  seem  to  put  both  these 
simple  interpretations  out  of  court. 

Many  ingenious  attempts  have  been  made  to 
emi)loy  the  expression  as  a  collateral  or  subsidiary 
proof  that  episcopacy  had  already  been  established 
within  the  lifetime  of  the  Johannine  author.  The 
passages  adduced  from  the  OT  in  support  of  this 
view  are  certainly  irrelevant ;  for,  while  it  is  con- 
ceivable that  the  chief  minister  of  a  Church  should 
be  styled  AyyeXoi  Kvplov  (cf.  Hag  1"  and  Mai  2'' ; 
see  also  Is  44'*  and  Mai  3'),  it  is  difficult  to  under- 
stand the  application  to  him  of  the  designation 
dyye\oi  iKK\r]<xiai  (Rev  2\  etc.).  Nor,  again,  can  the 
(Hmtention  be  sustained  that  the  expres.sion  had 
its  origin  in  the  office  of  the  sh'liah  zibbur,  the 
messenger  or  plenipotentiary  of  the  synagogue — 
for,  as  Schiirer  has  pointed  out,  these  '  messengers ' 
were  not  permanent  officials  (see  HJP  II.  ii.  67), 
but  persons  chosen  for  the  time  by  the  ruler  to 
pronounce  the  prayer  at  public  worship  (cf.  Light- 
foot,  Dissertations  on  Apostol.  Age,  1892,  p.  158). 

In  supporting  the  contention  that  by  the  '  angels' 
of  the  Churches  are  meant  the  bishops,  the  strange 
conclusion  has  been  maintained  that  in  the  words 
TTjj'  yvvauca  [<rou] ' lefd/SeX  (Rev  2^)  the  author  is  re- 
ferring to  the  Thyatiran  bishop's  wife  (see  Grotius, 
Annotationes  in  Apoc,  ad  loc).  It  ought  to  be 
pointed  out  that  this  theory  is  as  old  as  Jerome, 
who  in  his  commentary  on  1  Ti  3^  adopts  a  similar 
interpretation  ;  and  Socrates  (HE  iv.  23)  describes 
Serapion  as  '  the  angel  of  the  church  of  the 
Thmuitae'  (cf.  Jerome,  de  Vir.  illustr.  99,  where 
he  mentions  Serapion  as  *  Thmueos  Egypti  urbis 
Episcopus ').  The  same  conception  is  attached  to 
the  expression  by  the  6th  cent,  commentators, 
Primasms  the  African  {Com.  in  Apoc.)  and  Cassi- 
odorus  the  Italian  {Complexiones  in  Apoc.)  in  their 
reflexions  on  Rev  V. 

An  examination  of  the  use  of  the  word  dyye\o$ 
in  the  NT  Apocalypse,  apart  from  its  connexion 
with  the  Churches,  shows  that  the  author  invari- 
ably employs  it  to  describe  a  spiritual  being 
attached  to  the  service  of  Gad  or  of  Satan.  We 
are,  therefore,  confronted  with  the  difficulty  of 
accounting  for  its  presence  here  in  a  sense  so 
completely  different  as  the  episcopal  theory  in- 
volves. I'here  is,  indeed,  no  valid  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  author,  even  in  a  work  as  highly 
symbolical  as  this  is,  attaches  an  essentially  differ- 
ent idea  to  the  word  when  he  speaks  of  '  the 
Angels  of  the  Seven  Churches.' 

If  we  can  accept  the  textual  purity  of  the  Ascen- 
sion of  Isainh,  iii.  15,  there  is  a  remarkable  parallel: 
'  the  descent  of  the  angel  of  the  Christian  Church, 
which  is  in  the  heavens,  whom  He  will  summon  in 
the  last  days.'  Even  on  the  supposition  that  the 
Ethiopic  version,  supported  by  some  Greek  MSS, 
is  a  correct  translation  of  the  original,  and  the 
simple  word  '  Cliurch'  is  substituted  for  'angel  of 
the  Ciiristian  Cliuroh,'  we  are  confronted  by  the 
primitive  identification  of  the  Church  and  its  angel 
(see  Charles,  Asc.  of  Isainh,  ad  loc). 

Perhaps  the  most  curious  feature  of  the  letters 
to  the  Asian  Churches  is  the  way  in  which  the 
writer  expresses  himself  in  terms  of  stern  reproof 
or  of  encouragement  to  their  •  angels.'  The  objec- 
tion to  this  difficulty  is  considered  by  Origen, 
wlio  finds  cause  for  marvel  at  the  care  shown  by 
God  for  men  :  'forasmucli  as  He  suffers  His  angels 
to  be  blamed  and  rebuked  on  our  behalf  [horn,  in 
Num.  XX.  3  ;  cf.  in  Luc.  xiii.). 

As  we  have  already  seen,  however,  it  is  difficult 
to  sujipose  that  the  writer  intended  the  words  to 
be  understood  as  referring  literally  to  angels  who 
presided  over  the  Churches.  There  is,  no  doubt, 
a  natural  inclination  to  see  in  his  u.se  of  the  phrase 
a  reminiscence  of  the  '  princes '  of  the  Apocalypse 


of  Daniel  (6  &pxuy  ^aaiXtlas  Jltpffuy,  Dn  10^ ;  cf. 
MtxarjX  6  dyyeXos,  v.'^').  A  similar  belief  with  re- 
spect to  the  guardianship  of  individuals  is  referred 
to  incidentally  as  held  by  Jesus  (Mt  18'"),  and  we 
need  not  be  surprised  to  lind  it  applied  to  Churches 
in  their  corporate  capacity  by  a  writer  whose 
teaching  on  the  activity  and  functions  of  angeb  is 
so  advanced. 

Taking  into  account  the  symbolism  of  the  whole 
book  and  the  obviously  symbolic  mention  of  Jeze- 
bel (Rev  2*« ;  cf.  Milligan  on  Rev  lO'-^  in  SchatFs 
Pop.  Com.  on  the  NT),  there  seems  to  be  no  inter- 
pretation more  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the 
writing  than  that  which  sees  in  this  expression  the 
personification  of  the  characteristic  spiritual  tone 
and  genius  of  each  Church. 

If  we  accept  this  conclusion  as  being  most  con- 
sonant with  tlie  general  trend  of  thought  through- 
out the  writing,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  refer  to  the 
remarkable  parallel  in  the  fravashis,  or  '  doubles,' 
of  Parsiism.  Whatever  the  connexion  between 
Persian  and  Jewsh  angelology  —  and  it  is  not 
necessary  to  insist  on  a  direct  borrowing — it  seems 
to  be  certain  that,  in  the  period  immediately  sub- 
sequent to  the  Captivity,  Parsi  influence  shaped, 
at  least  indirectly  and  remotely,  the  development 
of  Hebrew  thought.  '  The  fravashi  of  a  nation  or 
community  is  a  conception  found  in  three  Avestan 
passages.  .  .  ,  The  fravashi  is  no  longer  a  being 
necessarily  good,  but  becomes  a  complete  spiritual 
counterpart  of  the  nation  or  the  church,  and  cap- 
able therefore  of  declension  and  punishment'  (HDB 
iv.  99P ;  cf.  JThSt  iii.  520  tf.).  The  nexus  may  be, 
and  probably  is,  not  so  mechanical  and  direct  as 
J.  H.  Moulton  seeks  to  establish.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  seems  as  if  a  relationship  of  some  kind 
between  the  allied  forces  of  Magianism  and  Zoro- 
astrianism,  as  they  were  refracted  by  the  medium 
of  Hellenistic  culture  and  Hebrew  thought,  must 
be  regarded  as  inevitable.  It  is  enough  to  say 
that  the  '  angel '  is  the  personified  embodiment  of 
the  spiritual  character  and  ethos  of  the  Church.  If 
this  use  of  the  word  by  the  author  has  led  to  con- 
fusion and  obscurity,  the  reason  lies  probably  in 
the  limitations  of  that  symbolism  which  was  the 
characteristic  vehicle  of  Jewish  apocalyptic  litera- 
ture (see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Letters  to  the  Seven 
Churches,  1904,  pp.  57-73).  Compare  and  contrast 
§  6  of  the  preceding  article. 

Literature. — See  the  works  referred  to  throughout  the  art., 
and  the  Commentaries  on  the  Apocalypse. 

J.  R.  Willis. 
ANGER. — 1.    Human   anger.— Except  by    the 

stoical  mind  which  linds  no  place  for  strong 
emotion  in  a  moral  scheme,  anger  has  been  recog- 
nized as  a  quality  which,  under  certain  conditions 
and  within  certain  limits,  may  not  only  be  per- 
missible but  commendable.  Its  ready  abuse  has, 
however,  led  to  its  being  commonly  placed  among 
the  evils  of  human  nature.  The  teaching  of  the 
early  Christian  Church  recognizes  both  aspects. 
Condemnation  of  the  abuse  of  anger  is  not  wanting 
in  the  apostolic  writings.  Among  the  manifest 
works  of  the  flesh  are  enmities,  strife,  iealousies, 
wraths  {dviiol),  factions  (Gal  5-'*').  St.  Paul  fears  lest 
he  shall  find  these  evils  in  the  Church  when  he  comes 
to  Corinth  (2  Co  12*).  One  of  the  marks  of  the 
greatest  of  Christian  virtues  is  that  it  '  does  not 
blaze  forth  in  passionate  anger '  (ov  irapo^vverai  [1  Co 
13"]).  In  Christian  circles,  all  bitterness  and  wrath 
and  anger  must  be  put  away  (Eph  4*' ;  cf.  Col  3^). 
The  holy  hands  lifted  up  in  prayer  must  be  un- 
stained with  anger  and  strife  (1  Ti  2^).  The 
'bishop'  must  be  blameless,  as  Goti's  steward, 
not  self-willed,  not  soon  angry  (Tit  V).  St.  James 
bids  his  readers  be  swift  to  hear,  slow  to  speak, 
slow  to  wrath,  for  the  wrath  of  man  worketh  not 
the  righteousness  of  God  (!'••  ^).    '  Be  not  prone  to 


ANGER 


AXGER 


63 


anger,'  says  the  Didache  (uL  2),  •  for  anger  leadeth 
to  murder :  nor  a  zealot,  nor  contentious,  nor 
quick-tempered,  for  mnrder  also  is  the  outcome  of 
these.' 

On  the  other  hand,  Christian  morality  recognizes 
a  righteous  anger.  The  section  of  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  which  teaches  that  whosoever  is  angry 
with  his  brother  is  in  danger  of  the  judgment  (Mt 
6^»"-)  is  primarily  aimed  at  something  other  than 
passion — it  is  an  emphatic  condemnation  of  the 
spirit  which  despises  and  seeks  to  injure  a  brother. 
The  violation  of  the  law  of  brotherly  love,  manifest 
in  the  anger  of  Mt  5-,  might,  indeed,  provoke  a 
legitimate  wrath,  e.g.  in  the  series  of  woes,  terrible 
in  intensity  of  language,  pronounced  by  Jesus 
against  the' scribes  and  Pharisees  (Mt  23^**-).  We 
should  hesitate  to  acknowledge  a  man  as  morally 
and  spiritually  great  who  could  remain  unmoved 
in  the  presence  of  the  world's  wrongs.  The  early 
preachers  would  have  been  poor  souls  had  they 
been  able  to  hide  their  indignation  at  the  mur- 
derers of  Jesus  (Ac  3^"  o^^  7*^ ).  Could  Peter  well 
have  been  calm  with  Anania.s  and  Sapphira  (Ac  5^), 
and  later,  with  the  commercially -minded,  religious 
adventurer,  Simon  Magus  (S'*"-)?  A  certain  prin- 
ciple of  discrimination  seems,  however,  to  have  been 
observed.  Anger  at  personal  insult  or  persecution 
was  discouraged.  Anger  provoked  by  personal  in- 
jury may  have  a  protective  value  in  a  lower  stage 
of  the  world's  life,  but  the  attitude  of  Christian 
ethics  to  this  tvpe  is  governed  by  the  law  of  non- 
resistance  laid  down  by  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
Man  must  return  good  for  evil,  show  kindness  to 
his  enemy,  leave  retribution  to  Grod  (Ro  12'*-*'). 
St.  Paul  claims  that,  '  when  reviled,  we  bless  ;  when 
persecuted,  we  bear  it  patiently ;  when  slandered,we 
try  to  conciliate'  (1  Co  4*-),  thtis  following  the 
example  of  Jesus  (1  P  2^).  One  is  tempted  to 
regard  the  apology  which  followed  the  momentary 
outburst  of  St.  Pauls  passion  against  the  high 
priest  (Ac  23')  as  an  expression  of  the  Apostle's 
principles  of  non-resistance  rather  than  as  an  ac- 
ijnowledgment  of  priestly  rights.  But  there  is  an 
altogether  diM'erent  attitude  when  that  which  is  to 
be  defended  is  a  righteous  principle,  a  weaker 
brother,  or  the  faith  or  ethical  standard  of  the 
Church.  Elymas,  the  sorcerer,  seeking  to  hinder  a 
work  of  grace,  provokes  a  vigorous  anger  (Ac  13^''- "). 
On  behalf  of  the  purity  of  faith  St.  Paul  resists  St. 
Peter  to  the  face  (Gal  2").  The  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  is  a  piece  of  passionate  writing,  and  a 
note  of  indignation  runs  through  the  later  chapters 
of  2  Cor.  (cf.  1  Co  1»  5*,  etc.).  The  man  who  does 
not  love  the  Lord  Jesus,  or  the  one  who  preaches 
a  false  gospel,  let  him  be  acctirsed — avadetw.  ( 1  Co 
16-).  The  indignation  (d^oFdimjcrts)  of  the  Cor- 
inthian Church  against  the  guilty  person  in  the 
case  of  umnorality,  to  which  St.  Paul  has  dra\sTi 
attention,  is  commended  by  him  (2  Co  7").  Simi- 
larly, the  Church  at  Ephesus  is  congratulated  on  its 
hatred  of  the  Nicolaitans  (Rev  2*).  St.  Paul 
'  bums '  if  another  is  '  made  to  stumble '  (2  Co  ll^*). 
In  these  instances,  anger  seems  to  have  been  re- 
garded as  compatible  with,  and  indeed  expressive 
of,  Christian  character.  "The  obvious  danger  of 
mistaken  zeal  for  a  cause  or  creed  must,  however, 
be  kept  in  mind.  The  case  of  St.  Paul's  early  life 
provides  an  illustration  (Gal  l^^,  Ph  3«).  there 
may  be  a  zeal  for  God,  not  according  to  knowledge 
(Ro  10=). 

But  even  legitimate  anger  may  readily  pass 
into  a  sin.  Passions  beyond  the  control  of  the 
rational  self  can  hardly  be  justified,  whatever  the 
cause.  Self-control  is  a  cardinal  Christian  virtue. 
Hence  the  apostolic  caution  of  Eph  4=*,  'Be  ye 
angry  and  sin  not,'  i.e.  if  angry,  as  one  may  rightiy 
be,  do  not  allow  the  passion  to  become  an  evil  by 
its  excess.     The  wrath  against  which  the  waminK 


is  given  seems  indicated  by  the  foUo\ving  clause — 
•  let  not  the  sun  go  down  on  your  rapopyurfuit '  ('  a 
noun  which  differs  from  dpfyri  in  denoting,  not  the 
disposition  of  anger,  or  an^er  in  a  lasting  mood,  but 
exasperation,  sudden  violent  anger'  [Salmond]). 
Tiiere  is  no  reference  to  deliberate  indignation  on 
a  matter  of  principle,  such  as  the  resentment  which, 
the  author  of  Ecce  Homo  claims,  was  felt  by  Jesus 
towards  the  Pharisees  to  the  end  of  His  life. 

2.  DiYine  anger. — Most  minds  must  have  felt 
the  objection  expressed  by  Origen,  Augustine,  and 
the  Neo-Platonist  theologians  generally,  that  we 
cannot  treat  the  Supreme  as  a  magnih^  man  and 
attribute  to  Him  such  perturbation  of  mind  as  is 
suggested  to  us  by  the  term  '  anger.'  But  we  may 
allow — and  must  do  so  unless  we  are  prepared  to 
deny  personality  in  God — that  the  quality,  which 
we  find  expressed  under  human  conditions  as  the 
righteous  anger  of  a  good  man,  must  exist  in  God, 
although  in  a  form  which  we  cannot  adequately 
conceive,  owing  to  our  inability  to  realize  absolute 
conditions.  We  may  be  helped  to  some  extent  by 
recognizing  that  behind  the  human  agitations  of 
personality  in  love,  pity,  indignation,  etc.,  there  are 
certain  principles  and  attitudes  which  no  more 
depend  for  their  quality  on  the  element  of  agita- 
tion than  the  existence  of  steam  depends  upon  the 
appearance  of  white  vapour  which  we  ordinarily 
associate  with  it.  This  underlying  quality  we 
may  attribute  to  the  Deity,  in  whom  life  and  per- 
sonality, here  expressed  only  in  finite  and  con- 
ditioned forms,  have  their  perfect  and  unconditioned 
being  (Lotze). 

The  objection  that  anger,  unlike  love,  is  nn- 
worthy  of  the  highest  moral  personality  (Marcion) 
may  be  met  by  the  answer  that  Divine  love  and 
anger  are  not  two  opposing  principles,  but  ex- 
pressions of  the  one  attitude  towards  contrary 
sets  of  human  circumstances.  The  IKvine  anger 
is  actually  involved  in  the  Divine  love  (Tertullian, 
Martensen,  etc.).  The  one  Lord  whose  name  is 
Truth  and  Love  is,  because  of  this,  a  consuming 
flame  to  wrong  (He  lO'i  12'^). 

The  idea  of  the  '  Divine  anger ' — this  attitude  of 
Deity  towards  certain  courses  of  human  life — is  a 
justifiable  inference  from  the  intuitions  of  con- 
science, but  another  and  an  unsound  argument 
played  a  part  in  the  historical  formation  of  the  doc- 
trine. In  the  early  stages  of  religious  thought  the 
conception  of  the  wrath  of  Gkni  would  naturally 
come  to  men's  minds  from  contemplation  of  the  ills 
of  human  life.  The  chieftain  punished  those  with 
whom  he  was  angry,  either  by  direct  action  or  by 
withholding  his  protection.  Did  not,  then,  physical 
calamities,  pestilences,  reverses  of  fortune,  defeat 
in  battle,  indicate  the  displeasure  of  Deity  (Jos  7, 
2  S  21^  24,  etc.)?  Such  misfortune,  when  no 
ethical  cause  could  be  recognized,  would  en- 
courage the  doctrine  of  imwitting  and  non-ethical 
offences  {e.g.  the  violation  of  tabu)  and  of  non- 
ethical  propitiation.  The  ills  of  life — especially 
death — suggested  later  a  world  lying  under  a  curse, 
due  to  Adam's  sin.  Against  the  popular  doctrine 
that  misfortune  indicated  Divine  displeasure,  the 
Book  of  Job  is  a  protest.  Human  suffering  has 
educative  values,  and  does  not  necessarily  indicate 
the  disapproval  of  God  (He  1^-). 

Yet  even  in  early  times  the  idea  of  the  Divine 
anger  did  not  restVhoUy  on  the  facts  of  human 
suflering.  Men  realized  that  the  world,  as  they 
found  it,  was  not  in  harmony  viith  their  conceptions 
of  the  Highest,  and  thus  in  times  of  prosperity, 
which,  according  to  tliis  theory,  would  indicate 
God's  contentment  with  His  people,  prophets  such 
as  Amos  argued  for  coming  doom.  From  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  holiness  of  God  it  was  inferred 
that  there  must  be  Divine  displeasure. 

The  turning  atoay  of  the  Divine  anger. — Two 


64 


ANGER 


ANGER 


attitudes  in  regard  to  this  problem  appear  among 
the  Hebrews,  even  as  early  as  the  8th  cent.  B.C. 
The  prophets  of  that  period  '  do  not  recognize  the 
need  of  any  means  of  reconciliation  with  God 
after  estrangement  by  sin  other  than  repentance ' 
(Hos  14^  Am  d'^-"*.  Is  V'- ",  Mic  6«-8).  On  the 
other  hand,  while  repentance  was  always  insisted 
upon  by  Israel's  religious  teachers,  there  was  a 
tendency  to  assert  the  need  of  supplementary 
means  in  order  to  bring  about  the  reconciliation  of 
God  and  man.  The  conception  may  have  origin- 
ated in  the  practice  of  oflering  a  propitiatory  gift 
or  legal  compensation  to  an  outraged  person 
(Gn  2016  32'8;  cf.  1  S  26^\  2  S  2i^*>'),  or  in  the 
primitive  view  of  sin  as  having  a  material  exist- 
ence of  its  own  which  called  for  an  appropriate 
ritual  treatment  beyond  the  mental  change  of 
repentance,  or  in  the  customs  of  Levitical  '  sin- 
ofierings,'  which,  although  originally  made  in  view 
of  ceremonial  faults,  for  which  ethical  repentance 
was  strictly  impossible,  must  have  come  to  suggest 
that,  in  addition  to  repentance,  a  sacrificial  opera- 
tion was  needful  even  in  cases  of  moral  trans- 
gression. 

From  the  period  of  the  Exile,  prayer,  fasting, 
almsgiving,  and  especially  the  sufferings  of  tlie 
righteous,  were  regarded  as  substitutes  for  material 
sacrilices  (see  art.  '  Atonement '  in  JE).  Is  53  is 
the  'earliest  expression  of  a  conception  [viz.  the 
atoning  value  of  the  suflerings  of  pious  men]  which 
attained  wide  development  in  later  times  and  con- 
stantly meets  us  in  the  teaching  of  the  Jewish 
synagogues'  (O.  Whitehouse).  One  of  the  seven 
brothers,  during  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  prays  that  '  in  me  and  my  brothers, 
the  wrath  of  the  Almighty  may  be  appeased* 
(2  Mac  7*^).  4  Mac  6^  gives  a  prayer,  '  Let  my 
blood  serve  for  purification,  and  as  an  equivalent 
for  their  life  {6,vtI\I/vxov)  take  my  own'  (cf.  4  Mac 
111  924  1720-22  i84)_  These  passages  supply  an  inter- 
esting link  between  the  old  Leviticism  and  the 
NT  doctrine  of  the  sacrificial  death  of  Jesus. 

The  doctrine  of  propitiation  receives  no  support 
from  the  teaching  of  Jesus  as  given  in  the  Synoptics. 
Repentance  and  new  life  are  the  conditions  of  the 
restoration  of  the  Divine  favour.  Jesus  does  not 
appear  to  have  ever  taught  that  reconciliation 
depended  upon  His  own  death  as  a  propitiation 
(see  DCG,  art.  '  Sacrifice '),  although  He  did  teach 
that  the  spiritual  ministration  involved  suffering 
and  sacrifice,  so  that  the  death  of  Jesus  might 
be  figuratively  regarded  as  a  '  ransom  for  many ' 
(Mk  1(F-**).  Moreover,  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is 
not  favourable  to  the  view  that  legal  right  claims 
a  compensation  beyond  repentance,  before  the 
Father  will  forgive.  The  moral  of  the  parables  of 
the  Prodigal  and  the  Labourers  (cf.  Lk  23*^)  is  that 
forensic  conceptions  are  altogether  inappropriate 
in  the  religious  sphere.  Harmony  with  God  is  a 
matter  of  attitude,  not  of  purchase  or  compensation. 
The  teaching  of  the  Acts  of  the  Ajiostles  agrees 
with  that  of  the  Synoptics.  There  is  no  hint  in 
the  early  preaching  of  the  Church,  as  recorded  in 
this  work,  of  a  propitiatory  value  in  the  death  of 
Jesus.  Jesus  is,  indeed,  described  as  a  'Saviour,' 
but  in  the  sense  that  He  gives  'repentance  to 
Israel  and  remission  of  sins  (Ac  5"),  i.e.  He  is 
able  to  bring  about  a  change  in  the  hearts  of  men, 
and,  in  accordance  with  prophetic  teaching,  pardon 
follows  repentance  (cf.  the  description  of  tlie 
preaching  of  the  Baptist,  as  that  of  '  repentance 
unto  remission  of  sins,'  Mk  1*). 

But,  with  the  exception  of  the  authors  of  the 
Synoptics,  the  Acts,  and  the  Epistle  of  James, 
the  writers  of  the  NT  are  strongly  influenced  by 
the  propitiatory  theory  of  the  death  of  Jesus.  Tlie 
passage  of  the  '  Suffering  Servant '  (Is  53*^  '"•)  sug- 
gested a  doctrine  which  seemed  to  throw  light 


upon  the  ignominious  death  of  Jesus  upon  the 
Cross.  The  '  stumbling-block '  to  the  Jewish  mind 
became  the  Christian's  boast.  How  the  sacrifice 
was  regarded  as  operating  is  not  clear — the  analogy 
of  Levitical  blood  sacrifices  was  evidently  some- 
times in  the  mind  of  the  writers  (Ro  3",  1  P  1", 
Jn  1=**,  etc.).  St.  Paul  also  holds  the  idea  that  the 
death  of  Jesus  is  a  sign  of  His  human  submission 
to  the  elemental  world-powers  of  darkness,  who, 
since  Adam,  have  held  the  world  under  their 
grievous  rule  ( HDB,  art.  '  Elements ' ;  also  Wrede, 
Pavl,  Eng.  tr.,  1907,  p.  95).  But,  being  more 
than  man,  He  rises  from  the  dead.  The  Resur- 
rection is  a  sign  that  Death — one  of  the  elemental 
principalities  and  powers,  and  representative  of 
the  rest  —  has  no  longer  dominion  over  Him 
(Ro  6*),  or  over  those  in  '  faith '  union  with  Him. 
But  these  '  world-powers  of  darkness,'  whose  dues 
the  death  of  Jesus  was  conceived  as  satisfying,  are 
but  a  thinly  disguised  form  of  God's  retribution 
for  Adam's  sin.  Ultimately  the  propitiation  is 
still  made  to  God,  although  the  emphasis  is  drawn 
from  the  wrath  of  God  to  the  love  which  inspired 
the  propitiatory  action  (cf.  Jn  3^',  Ro  3**  5^  etc.). 
From  this  point,  St.  Paul  follows  the  anti-legal 
teaching  of  Jesus  in  asserting  that '  justification  — 
right  relations  with  God — depends  on  the  new 
attitude  of  '  faith,'  not  on  '  works ' ;  but  legalism 
with  St.  Paul  must  be  satisfied  by  the  prior  trans- 
action of  Jesus  on  the  Cross. 

The  diflBculty  in  the  doctrine  of  propitiation  does 
not  lie  in  the  fact  that  no  ultimate  distinction  can 
be  made  between  the  Power  to  whom  propitiation 
is  offered  and  the  God  of  love  who  offers  it.  Inde- 
pendently of  the  interests  of  this  particular  doctrine, 
we  must  accept  the  paradox  that  the  same  God 
who  works  under  the  limitation  of  law  ordains  the 
law  which  limits  Him.  But  we  cannot  accept  the 
interpretation  of  the  death  of  Jesus  as  an  exalted 
Levitical  blood  sacrifice,  or  as  a  transaction  with  the 
'  world-powers  of  darkness,'  nor  can  we  be  satisfied 
with  a  presentation  of  an  angry  God,  who  needs 
compensation  or  some  mollifying  gift  before  He  will 
turn  away  the  fierceness  of  His  wrath.  The  sacri- 
fices of  God  are  a  broken  spirit ;  a  broken  and  con- 
trite heart  He  will  not  despise  (Ps  51'^).  It  would 
seem  more  satisfactory  to  follow  the  su<fgestions 
of  the  Synoptics  and  tne  Acts,  and  find  the  recon- 
ciling work  of  Jesus,  as  directed  not  towards  God. 
but  towards  men,  bringing  about  in  them  a  repent- 
ance which  makes  possible  their  harmonious  rela- 
tions with  the  Father. 

The  death  of  Jesus  may  be  regarded  partly  as  a 
vicarious  sacrifice  of  the  order  recognized  in  the 
Synoptics — sufi'eringand  self-denial  for  the  sake  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God,  for  conscience,  and  men's 
uplifting.  The  justification  of  this  law  of  sacrifice 
('Ever  by  losses  the  right  must  gain,  Every  good 
have  its  birth  of  pain '  [Whittier,  The  Preacher]) 
is  that  it  makes  possible  the  exi>ro!?.sion  of  moral 
qualities.  In  order  that  love  may  liave  significance, 
it  must  pay  a  price— must  be  written  upon  a  hard 
resisting  world,  as  labour  and  self-denial.  This 
demand  of  law  is  obviously  not  indicative  of  Divine 
displeasure  or  ojjposition. 

The  death  of  Jesus  may  also  be  regarded  as  part 
of  the  penalty  of  human  sin.  If  men  had  not  been 
selfish,  hypocritical,  apathetic  to  goodness  and 
justice,  there  would  not  have  been  the  tragedy  on 
Calvary.  In  virtue  of  race  solidarity,  tlie  sins  of 
an  evil  and  adulterous  generation  fell  upon  Him. 
This  dark  law — that  the  innocent  must  suffer  the 
results  of  transgression  along  with  the  guilty — has 
an  educative  value  in  demonstrating  the  evil  and 
disastrous  nature  of  sin,  which  is  doubly  terrible 
since  the  suffering  which  it  creates  falls  ujwn  the 
just  as  well  as  upon  the  unjust,  sometimes  even 
more  upon  the  former  than  upon  the  latter.     The 


AXGER 


AKOINTLN'G 


65 


penalty  of  sin  indicates  the  Divine  displeasure 
towards  sin,  but  not  necessarily  towards  those  who 
pay  the  penalty,  for  obviously  God  cannot  be  con- 
ceived as  being  angry  with  innocent  sufferers, 
involved  in  the  results  of  others'  sins.  Neither 
must  we  regard  (Jod  as  angry  with  a  repentant 
sinner  because  he  continues  to  reap  what  he  has 
sown.  The  forgiveness  of  sin  is  distinct  from 
the  cancelling  of  its  results,  which,  in  accord- 
ance with  educative  moral  law,  must  run  their 
course. 

One's  trust  in  the  forgiveness  of  Grod  rests  upon 
the  sense  of  the  divinity  of  human  forgiveness — 
'  By  all  that  He  requires  of  me,  I  know  what  God 
Himself  must  be'  (Whittier,  Revelation).  If  we 
must  judge  the  anger  of  God  from  the  righteous 
indignation  of  a  good  man,  we  cannot  think  of 
His  cherishing  any  vindictiveness,  or  needing  any 
propitiation  to  induce  Him  to  forgive,  when  the 
sinner  seeks  His  face.  Nor  can  a  vie%y  of  recon- 
ciliation held  by  the  most  sternly  ethical  of  the 
OT  prophets,  and  by  the  purest  soul  of  the  NT, 
be  considered  as  weakening  the  sense  of  sin,  and 
minimizing  the  grace  of  pardon. 

The  Day  of  Wrath. — From  the  time  of  Amos, 
OT   prophetism   had  conceived   a  darker  side  to 
Israel's  still  more  ancient  conception  of  the  Day 
of  the  Lord.     It  would  be  a  time  when  human 
wrongdoing,  much  of  which  was  apparently  over- 
looked in  this  age,  would  receive  its  sure  reward, 
although  genuine    repentance  would    apparently 
avert  the  coming  anger  (Jl  2,  Am  5*^,  Jer  18*). 
That  'great  and  notable  Day'  (Ac  2^),  with  its 
darker  aspects,  entered  largely  into  NT  thought 
(Mt  3^  7^,  Lk  10'2,  2  Th  1^,  etc.).     It  is  to  this 
coming  Dies  Irce  that  the  actual  term  '  wrath  of 
God '  (opyjj  Tov  deov)  is  almost  uniformly  applied  by 
NT  writers.     Some  of  the  Divine  indignation  may 
be  manifested  in  the  present  operation  of  moral 
law — the  penalties  experienced    by  the  ungodly 
heathen  seem  to   be  part  of    the  Divine  wrath 
which   '  is  being    revealed '    {dTOKaX&rreTai)    from 
heaven    (Ro    V^) ;    and,    according    to    13^,    the 
temporal  ruler  punishing  evil-doers  is  '  a  minister 
of  God,  an  avenger   for  (Divine)  wrath,'  i.e.   a 
himian  instrument  carrying  out  in  this  age  the 
Divine  retribution.      But  the   emphasis  is  upon 
'the  ^vrath  to  come.'    In  the  present  age,  moral 
law  only    imperfectly    operates.      The  sinner   is 
treasuring  up  for  himself  '  wrath  in  the  day  of 
wrath '  (Ro  2*),  when  upon  every  soul  that  worketh 
e^-il  shall  be  wrath  and  indignation,  tribulation 
and   anguish  (v.^;   cf.    Rev  IP*  6^®- ^^  where  the 
Divine  anger  is  spoken  of  as  '  the  wrath  of  the 
Lamb').     Repentance  before  the  Day  of  Wrath 
will  save  one  from  the  coming  doom  (Ac  2^^  **•  *, 
Eph  2*),  and  the  provision  of  these  days  of  grace 
modifies  the  conception  of  the  Divine  sternness 
(Ro  9^).      The   'Law,'  in  making    transgression 
possible,  '  worketh  wrath '  (Ro  4^'),  but  Chiist,  by 
His  reconciliation  of  man  and  God,  delivers  the 
believer  from  the  'wrath  to  come'  (1  Th  1^°  5^). 
The  NT  significance  of  opyrj  6eod  is  illustrated  in 
Ro  5®,  where  St.   Paul  argues   from   the  fact  of 
present  reconciliation  with  God   that  the  saints 
vrill  be  delivered  from  the  'wrath  of  God.'    Even 
where   the  Divine  anger  is  described  as  having 
already  had  its  manifestation,  the  reference  may 
really  be  eschatological  (Ritschl).     The  aorist  of 
1  Th  2^*  {itpdacrep  5i  e-r  avroi/s  ij  dfrpj  etj  t^os)  seems 
to  indicate  that,  in  the  Apostle's  judgment,  some 
historical  manifestation  of  Grod's  wrath  upon  the 
Jews  has  already  taken  place,  but  St.  Paul  may 
regard  such  an  indication  of  the  Divine  anger  as 
the  preliminary  movements  of  the  Day  of  Wrath. 
The  clouds  were  already  gathering  for  that  con- 
summation which  the  Apostle  was  expecting  in 
his  own  lifetime  (1  Th  4^). 
VOL.  I. — 5 


,— A.  Ritschl,  <U  Ira  Dei,  Bonn,  1859,  Jiutifiea- 
tMMmmm^  AUmemuU,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinborgfa,  1900;  R.  W.  Dale, 
The  Atonemenf,  London,  1S78 ;  D.  W.  Simon,  Bedemplum  qf 
Marfi,  do.  1906 ;  O.  Lodge,  Manand  tkt  Unumtt  da  1908, etw. 
7  *nd  8 :  P.  Gardner,  Saaloratio  Bvangdiea,  da  18B9,  cbM,  29, 
31.  For  human  anger :  J.  Butler's  Sermoiu,  8  and  9 ;  J.  R. 
Seeley,  EeeeHomo,  1866,  pp.  il-23 ;  ToUtoi,&aayt  and  LeUen, 
ch-  12.  H.  BULCOCK- 

ANNAS  (Gr.  'Arrat,  Heb.  jjn,  'merciful'  pn 
Josephus,  Ananos"]). — Annas  the  son  of  Sethi,  ap- 
pointed high  priest  by  Quirinius  in  A.D.  6  or  7, 
retained  office  till  he  was  deposed  by  Valerius 
Gratus  in  A.D.  15  (Jos.  Ant.  XVIU.  ii.  1,  2). 
Josephus  tells  us  that  he  was  regarded  as  the  most 
fortunate  of  men,  for  he  had  five  sons  who  all  held 
the  office  of  high  priest  (Ant.  XX.  is..  1).  From 
the  Fourth  Grospel  we  leam  that  Joseph  Caiaphas, 
the  high  priest  at  the  date  of  the  Crucifixion,  was 
a  son-in-law  of  Annas  ( Jn  18^^).  His  removal  from 
office  in  A.D.  15  did  not  by  any  means  diminish  hia 
influence.  Being  extremely  wealthy,  he  was  able 
to  exert  the  powers  of  high  priest  long  after  he 
was  deposed.  His  wealth  and  that  of  his  sons 
was  acquired  by  the  institution  of  the  *  booths  or 
bazaars  of  the  sons  of  Annas,'  which  enjoyed  the 
monopoly  for  the  sale  of  all  kinds  of  sacrificial 
requirements.  These  booths  were  situated  either 
in  the  temple  court  (Keim,  Jesus  of  Nazara,  v. 
116;  Edersheim,  LT  iii.  5)  or  on  the  Mount  of 
Olives  (J.  Derenbourg,  Essai sur  Fhistoire  .  .  .  dela 
Palestine,  1867,  p.  465).  The  words  of  Jesus  re- 
garding the  unholy  traffic  (Mt  21^,  Lk  19«)  aroused 
the  hostility  of  the  priestly  party  and  1^  to  His 
arrest  and  examination  by  Annas  ( Jn  18^*"-^).  The 
Talmud  accuses  the  sons  of  Annas  of  '  serpentlike 
hissings'  (or  whisperings  [Pes.  57a]).  Probably 
the  meaning  is  that  they  exerted  private  influ- 
ence on  the  judges  and  perverted  justice  for  their 
own  ends.  Their  attitude  towards  Jesus  and  the 
apostles  as  revealed  in  the  NT  seems  to  bear  out 
this  interpretation.  Although,  as  we  have  seen, 
Annas  was  deposed  from  the  high-priestly  office  in 
A.D.  15,  he  retains  the  title  all  through  the  NT. 
Both  Josephus  and  the  writers  of  the  NT  uniformly 
give  the  title  '  high  priest '  not  only  to  the  actual 
occupant  of  the  office  at  the  time,  but  to  all  his 
predecessors  who  were  stUl  alive,  as  well  as  to  all 
the  more  influential  members  of  the  families  from 
which  the  high  priests  were  selected.  The  phrase 
in  Lk  3'  'in  the  high-priesthood  of  Annas  and 
Caiaphas'  is  unique,  and  may  be  accounted  for 
by  the  fact  that  the  combination  had  become  so 
familiar  in  connexion  with  the  history  of  the 
Crucifixion  that  St.  Luke  couples  the  two  to- 
gether here  (Ewald,  HI,  vol.  vL  [1883]  p.  430, 
n.  3). 

The  important  and  influential  position  held  by 
Annas  even  after  his  deposition  is  proved  by  the 
fact  that  it  was  to  him  that  Jesus  was  first  sent 
before  He  appeared  at  the  more  formal  tribunal  of 
the  Sanhedrin  ( Jn  18").  The  interview  with  Annas 
(Jn  18'*-^)  determined  the  fate  of  the  prisoner,  and 
probablv  Annas  was  the  chief  instigator  in  com- 
passing'the  death.  In  Ac  4^  Annas  again  appears 
as  the  head  of  the  party  who  tried  the  apostles 
and  enjoined  them  to  keep  sUent  about  the 
Resurrection. 

LrrBEATTRK.— Josephus,  AnIiquitiM,  fattim;  A.  Ed«- 
heim,  LT  \.  [1886]  263 ;  T.  Keim.  Jenu  of  Sazam,  1887-1882, 
tL  36ff.  ;  E.  Schfirer,  <?yF*  iL  [1907]  256,  270,  274,276. 

W.  F.  BOYD. 

AKNIHILATION.— See  Eschatology. 

ANOINTING.— Anointing  was  used  in  antiquity 
in  three  chief  connexions:  (1)  as  a  part  of  the 
toilet,  to  beautifv,  strengthen,  and  refresh  the 
body ;  (2)  medicinally ;  (3)  as  a  part  of  religious 
ceremonial.  From  the  last-named  sprang  (4)  the 
use  of  terms  of  anointing  in  a  metaphorical  sense 


66 


AKOmTtNG 


ANSWER 


to  signify,  e.g.,  the  imparting  of  the  Divine  Spirit, 
whether  to  the  Messiah  or  to  the  Christian  dis- 
ciple. 

1.  So  far  as  the  first  use  is  concerned,  examples 
within  our  period  may  be  found  in  the  anointing 
of  the  Lord's  feet  (Lk  T'®-  *«,  Jn  12=*)  and  in  Mt  6'^ 
'  anoint  thy  head,  and  wash  thy  face.' 

2.  Instances  of  the  second  occur  in  Jn  9*-  ", 
Rev  3'*  'eyesalve  to  anoint  thine  eyes,'  and  are 
generally  found  in  Mk  6^'  '  they  anointed  with  oil 
many  that  were  sick,  and  healed  them,'  and  Ja  5'* 
'  Is  any  among  you  sick  ?  let  him  call  for  the  elders 
of  the  church  ;  and  let  them  pray  over  him,  anoint- 
ing him  with  oil  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.'  The 
commentators  on  these  texts  generally  quote  pass- 
ages to  prove  that  the  use  of  oil  was  well  known 
in  medicine,  and  leave  it  to  be  understood  that  the 
apostles  in  the  Gospel  and  the  elders  in  the  Epistle 
are  thought  of  as  making  use  of  the  simplest  neal- 
ing  remedy  known  to  them.  This  method  of  in- 
terpretation does  not  seem  satisfactory,  because 
the  parallels  quoted  do  not  bear  out  the  point.  In 
Is  1*  and  Lk  10^*  oil  is  used  as  a  remedy  for 
wounds,  not  for  internal  sickness.  Herod  in  his 
last  illness  was  placed  in  a  bath  of  warm  oil  (Jos. 
BJ  I.  xxxiii.  5),  but  this  was  only  one  amongst 
several  methods  of  treatment  used  in  his  case,  and 
was  no  doubt  employed  because  of  the  open  and 
running  sores  on  his  body.  Galen  {Med.  Temp., 
bk.  ii. )  speaks  of  oil  as  the  *  best  of  medicines  for 
withered  and  dry  bodies,'  but  that  does  not  mean 
that  he  would  have  advocated  the  indiscriminate 
use  of  oil  in  cases  of  sickness  due  to  various  causes. 
Philo's  praise  of  oil  for  imparting  vigour  to  the 
flesh  (Somn.  ii.  8)  must  not  be  pressed  into  an  advo- 
cacy of  it  as  a  panacea  against  all  forms  of  dis- 
ease. It  must  remain  doubtful  whether  the  two 
NT  passages  can  be  reasonably  understood  to  mean 
that  oil  was  used  as  a  simple  medical  remedy  with- 
out deeper  signification. 

3.  The  use  of  anointing  in  religious  ceremony 
was  very  varied.  It  was  applied  both  to  persons — 
as,  e.g.,  to  the  kings  and  high  priests— and  to  in- 
animate things.  This  is  not  the  place  to  investi- 
gate the  original  signification  of  the  act  of  anoint- 
ing in  religious  ceremonies  (see  Robertson  Smith, 
Rel.  Sem.\  1894,  pp.  233,  383 ;  ERE,  HDB,  SDB, 
EBi,  art.  \  Anointing '),  but  it  seems  clear  that  it 
came  to  signifj'-  the  consecration  of  persons  and 
things  to  the  service  of  God,  and  also  the  com- 
munication to,  e.g.,  the  kings,  of  the  Divine  Spirit 
(see  E.  Kautzsch,  in  HDB  v.  659).  That  is  to  say, 
anointing  had  in  part  the  nature  of  a  sacrament. 
And  it  seems  probable  that  something  of  this  sort 
underlies  the  passages  Mk  6^*,  Ja  5'*.  The  anoint- 
ing oil  was  not  merely  medicinal,  but  consecrated 
the  patient  to  God,  and,  together  with  prayer,  was 
the  means  of  conveying  to  him  the  Divine  healing 
life.  We  may  compare  a  passage  in  the  Secrets  of 
Enoch  (22^),  where  Enoch,  when  carried  into  the 
presence  of  God,  is  anointed  with  holy  oil,  with 
the  result  (56^)  that  he  needs  no  food,  and  is  purged 
from  earthly  passions. 

4.  Instances  of  the  metaphorical  use  of  anoint- 
ing to  signify  the  communication  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  are  to  be  found  in  1  Jn  2^''-  ^  '  ye  have  an 
anointing  from  the  Holy  One,'  'his  anointing 
teacheth  you  all  things.'  '  Anointing '  here  means 
the  material,  not  the  act,  of  anointing,  and  so  the 
grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  same  metaphorical 
use  is  found  in  2  Co  P',  'He  that  hath  anointed 
us  is  God ' ;  and  in  the  passages  in  which  Christ  is 
spoken  of  as  having  been  anointed,  Ac  4"  10^, 
He  1"  (OT  quot.).  A  passage  in  the  recently  dis- 
covered Odes  of  Solomon  (36'),  '  He  hath  anointed 
me  from  his  own  perfection,'  may  be  referred  to 
here.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  speaker  is  Christ 
or  the  Christian.     Allusions  to  a  custom  of  anoint- 


ing dead  bodies  are   found   in  Mk   14*  and  the 
parallels,  and  in  Mk  16'. 

Lastly,  reference  should  be  made  to  the  absten- 
tion from  anointing  by  the  Essenes  (Jos.  BJ  II. 
viii.  3).  This  is  explained  by  Schiirer  (HJP  II. 
ii.  212)  as  a  part  of  an  attempt  to  return  to  the 
simplicity  of  nature ;  by  Bousset  {Rel.  des  Jud.^, 
Berlin,  1906,  p.  442)  as  a  protest  against  the  priest- 
hood, whose  authority  rested  upon  anointing. 

LiTEEATURB. — See  the  artt.  'Anointing'  in  ERE,  HDB,  and 
EBi ;  and,  for  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of  Extreme 
Unction  in  the  Church,  J.  B.  Mayor  on  Ja  5i*  (Ep.  of  St, 
Jamea^,  1910);  see  also  ExpT  xvii.  [190C]  418 fl.,  and  the 
literature  there  cited.  WILLOUGHBY  C.  ALLEN. 

ANSWER. — Passing  over  the  very  large  number 
of  occurrences  of  this  word  in  the  common  sense  of 
'  reply '  {dwoKpbofiai,  dirdKpio-n),  there  are  one  or  two 
interesting  usages  to  note  before  we  come  to  the 
most  theologically  significant  use  of  the  term. 
Thus  in  Tit  2*  slaves  are  enjoined  not  to  '  answer 
again'  (AV;  RV  'gainsay,'  avnX^yu);  in  Gal  4** 
'  this  Hagar  is  Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia  and  answer- 
eth  to  {i.e.  '  corresponds  with,'  o-wrotx^w)  the  Jeru- 
salem that  now  is ' ;  in  Ro  11*  St.  Paul,  discussing 
the  despair  of  Elijah,  asks  '  What  saith  the  answer 
{XpvfJ-0'Ti<T/j.6s,  '  Divine  oracle')  of  God  unto  him ?' 

The  passages  Avith  which  we  are  most  concerned, 
however,  are  those  which  speak  of  tlie  Christian 
answer  or  'defence'  (so  usually  in  RV)  against 
critics  from  within  or  Avithout  the  Church  (oto- 
Xoy^ofiai,  diroXoyia).  In  the  life  of  St.  Paul  we  have, 
e.g. ,  his '  answer'  or  apologia  before  Felix  (Ac  24'""^), 
before  Festus  (25^°'-),  and  before  Agrippa  (26'*''). 
The  charges  brought  against  him  were  tliat  he  had 
incited  the  people  to  sedition  (24'  25^),  that  he  had 
profaned  the  Temple  (24*),  and  that  he  was  a  ring- 
leader of  the  Sect  of  the  Nazarenes  (24').  His 
defence  was  skilfully  directed  in  each  case  to  the 
rebutting  of  the  charges,  to  the  conciliation  of  his 
judges,  and  to  the  demand  that  as  a  Roman  citizen 
he  should  be  tried  before  Ca?sar.  Before  Agrippa 
and  Festus  he  defended  himself  so  successfully  that 
they  agreed  that,  if  he  had  not  appealed  to  Coesar, 
he  might  have  been  set  at  liberty,  out  having  made 
the  appeal  he  could  no  longer  withdraw.  In  2  Ti 
4'®  St.  Paul  is  represented  as  complaining  that  at 
his  '  first  answer '  (before  Ca?sar)  no  man  took  his 
part,  but  that  '  all  men  forsook  him '  (cf .  1").  "With 
these  instances  may  be  compared  the  remarkable 
'  answer '  of  St.  Stephen  before  the  Sanhedrin  (Ac  7). 

Of  probably  even  greater  interest  than  these 
defences  before  civil  tribunals  are  St.  Paul's 
answers  to  those  who  denied  his  Apostleship, 
the  Judaizers  who  followed  him  from  place  to 
place  and  attempted  to  undermine  his  teacliing 
and  influence  among  his  converts  in  his  absence — 
a  fact  to  which  we  largely  owe  the  letters  to  the 
Galatians  and  the  Corinthians,  or  at  least  the 
most  characteristic  and  polemical  portions  of  them. 
The  same  or  other  enemies  charged  him  with 
inconsistency  (1  Co  ICF*"  etc.),  and  brought  other 
charges  against  him  (11^- "-^  1  Co  9^),  such  as 
the  charge  of  being  mean  in  appearance  (10""^**), 
of  being  rude  of  speech  (11*),  of  being  a  visionary 
(12^),  and  of  other  things  not  mentioned,  which 
evidently  inspired  certain  obscure  references 
tliroughout  these  chapters.  St.  Paul's  apologia 
meets  these  charges  with  a  vehement  assertion  of 
his  innocence,  of  his  full  Apostleship,  of  his  com- 
petency to  utter  forth  the  gospel  from  fullness  of 
Knowledge  (11*),  and  of  his  abundant  sufferings  and 
self-denial  for  the  sake  of  his  converts.  The  large 
space  given  to  these  apologies  and  personal  re- 
joinders is  remote  from  our  modern  habit  of 
mind,  but  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  every 
educated  man  in  these  days  was  expected  by  the 
Greeks  to  be  ready  to  take  free  part  in  polemics 


AXTICHRIST 


AimCHRIST 


67 


of  this  kind,  and  to  defend  himself  vigorously 
against  attack.  In  1  P  3"  we  have  the  well-known 
injunction  to  be  'readv  always  to  give  answer  to 
every  man  that  asketh  you  a  reason  concerning 
the  hope  that  is  in  you,'  whether  before  a  judge  or 
in  informal  conversation — which  should  probably 
be  interpreted  in  this  sense.  In  v.*^  of  the  same 
chapter  '  the  answer  (AV)  of  a  good  conscience 
towards  God'  is  a  difficult  phrase,  and  the  com- 
mentaries should  be  consulted,  i-refulrrrma  can 
hardly  mean  'answer,'  and  the  RV  translates 
'  interrogation '  (see  a  long  note  in  Huther  in 
Meyer  s  Com.  pp.  192-197).  C.  Bigg  (ICC,  in  loc.) 
interprets  it  of  the  baptismal  question  or  demand. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  has  been  called  '  the 
first  Christian  apology,'  in  the  sense  of  a  definite 
and  reasoned  defence  of  the  Christian  faith  and 
position.  It  had  its  forerunners  in  the  speeches  of 
St.  Paul  already  referred  to,  and  its  successors  in 
the  long  line  of  Ante-Nicene  'apologies,'  of  which 
those  of  Justin  Martyr  and  Tertullian  are  two 
outstanding  examples. 

LiTBKATURS. — ConuD.  OD  the  passages  cited;  E.  F.  Scott, 
The  Apoiogetie  of  the  Sew  TestaaiaU,  1907  ;  H.  M.  Gwatkin, 
Earlff  Church  Bistory,  1909,  ch.  xL,  uid  siiiular  works ;  W.  M. 
Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  1893,  St.  Paul 
the  TracelUr  and  Roman  Citizen,  1895 ;  T.  R.  Glover,  The 
■Conjliet  of  Religions  in  the  Early  Roman  Empire,  1909. 

K  Griffith  Jones. 
ANTICHRIST  (awxpurros).— The  word  is  found 
in  the  NT  only  in  1  Jn  2i«-  ^  i\  2  Jn'',  but  the 
idea  further  appears  in  the  Gospels,  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  and  above  aU  in  the  Apocalypse.  It 
is  not,  however,  an  idea  original  to  Christianity, 
but  an  adaptation  of  Jewi^  conceptions  which, 
as  Bousset  has  shown  (The  Antichrist  Legend), 
had  developed  before  the  time  of  Christ  into  a 
full-grown  Antichrist  legend  of  a  hostile  counter- 

Sart  of  the  Messiah  who  would  make  war  against 
[im  but  whom  He  would  finally  overthrow.  The 
!NT  references  to  the  subject  cannot  be  rightly 
appreciated  without  some  previous  consideration 
of  the  corresponding  ideas  that  were  present  in 
Judaism  before  they  were  taken  over  by  Chris- 
tianity. 

1.  The  Antichrist  of  Judaism. — Although  the 
word  '  Antichrist '  does  not  occur  tUl  we  come  to 
the  Johannine  Epistles,  we  have  many  evidences 
in  pre-Christian  Jewish  literature,  canonical  and 
extra-canonical,  that  there  was  a  widely  spread 
idea  of  a  supreme  adversary  who  should  rise  up 
against  God,  His  Kingdom  and  people,  or  His 
Messiah.  The  strands  that  went  to  the  composi- 
tion of  the  idea  were  various  and  strangely  inter- 
woven,  and  much  obscurity  still  hangs  over  the 
subject.  But  it  seems  possible  to  distinguish 
three  chief  influences  that  went  to  the  shaping  of 
the  Jewish  conception  as  it  existed  at  the  time  of 
Christ. 

(1)  Earliest  of  aU  was  the  ancient  dragon-myth 
of  the  Babylonian  Creation-epic,  with  its  represent- 
ation of  the  struggle  of  Tiamat,  the  princess  of  chaos 
and  darkness,  against  Marduk,  the  god  of  order 
and  light.  The  myth  appears  to  have  belonged 
to  the  common  stock  of  Semitic  ideas,  and  must 
have  become  familiar  to  the  Hebrews  from  their 
earliest  settlement  in  Canaan,  if  indeed  it  was  not 

Eart  of  the  ancestral  tradition  carried  with  them 
rom  their  original  Aramaean  home.  In  any  case, 
it  would  be  re\-ived  in  their  minds  through  their 
close  contact  with  the  Babylonian  mythology 
during  exilic  and  post-exilic  times.  Traces  of 
this  dragon-myth  appear  here  and  there  in  the 
OT,  e.g.  in  the  story  of  the  Temptation  in  Gn  3, 
where,  as  in  Rev  12*  '2flr,  the  serpent = the  dragon; 
and  in  the  later  apocalyptic  literature  a  dragon 
represents  the  hostile  powers  that  rise  up  in 
opposition  to  God  and  His  Kingdom  (Pss.  Sol.  ii. 
29).    But  it  was  characteristic  of  the  forward  look 


of  Prophetism  and  Messianism  that  the  idea  of  a 
conflict  between  God  and  the  dragon  was  trans- 
ferred from  cosmogony  to  eschatology  and  repre- 
sented as  a  culminating  episode  of  tne  last  days 
(Is  27S  Dn  7). 

(2)  Side  by  side  with  the  dragon-myth  must  be 
set  the  Beliar  (Belial)  conception,  a  contribution 
to  Jewish  thought  from  the  side  of  Persian  dualism, 
with  its  idea  of  an  adversary  in  whom  is  embodied 
not  merely,  as  in  the  Babylonian  Creation-story, 
the  natural  forces  of  chaos  and  darkness,  but  all 
the  hostile  powers  of  moral  eviL  In  1  Ch  21^ 
Satan  is  evidently  represented  as  God's  adversary, 
just  as  we  find  him  in  later  Jewish  and  primitive 
Christian  thought.  And  in  the  interval  between 
OT  and  XT  Beliar  is  frequently  used  as  a  synonym 
for  Satan,  the  DevU  or  arch-demon  (e.g.  Jubilees, 
15 ;  cf.  2  Co  6*').  The  Beliar  idea  was  a  much 
later  influence  than  the  dragon-myth,  for  Baby- 
lonian religion  oflers  no  real  parallel  to  a  belief  in 
the  Devil,  and  Cheyne's  suggested  derivation  of 
the  name  from  Beltli,  the  goddess  of  the  under 
world  (EBi,  art.  '  Belial '),  has  little  to  recommend 
it.  But  a  subsequent  fusion  of  Beliar  with  the 
dragon  was  very  natural,  and  we  have  a  striking 
illustration  of  it  when  in  Wis  2^  and  elsewhere 
the  serpent  of  the  Temptation  is  identified  with 
the  Devil.  Cf.  Rev  12*  20^,  where  *the  dragon, 
the  old  serpent,'  is  explained  to  be  '  the  Devil  and 
Sat-an.' 

(3)  But  the  development  of  the  Messianic  hope  in 
Jndaism  was  s  more  determinative  influence  than 
either  of  those  already  mentioned.  The  Jewish 
Antichrist  was  very  far  from  being  a  mere  pre- 
cipitate of  Babylonian  mythology  and  Iranian 
eschatology.  It  was,  above  aU,  a  counterpart  of 
the  Messianic  idea,  as  that  was  derived  from  the 
prophets  and  evolved  under  the  experiences  of 
Jewish  national  history.  Ezekiel's  prophecy  of 
the  overthrow  of  Gog  and  Magog  (Ezk  38) ; 
Zechariah's  vision  of  the  destruction  of  the  de- 
stroyers of  Jerusalem  (Zee  14) ;  above  all,  the  repre- 
sentation in  Daniel,  with  reference  to  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  of  a  world-power  that  waxed  great 
even  to  the  host  of  heaven  (Dn  8^"),  and  trod  the 
sanctuary  under  foot  (v."),  and  stood  up  against 
the  Prince  of  princes  untU  it  was  finally  '  broken 
Avithout  hand  (v.**) — all  contributed  to  the  idea 
of  a  great  coming  conflict  with  the  powers  of  a 
godless  world  before  the  Divine  Kingdom  could 
be  set  up.  And  when,  by  a  process  of  synthesis, 
the  scattered  elements  of  Messianic  prophecy 
began  to  gather  round  the  figure  of  a  personal 
Messiah,  a  King  who  should  represent  Jahweh 
upon  earth,  it  was  natural  that  the  various  utter- 
ances of  OT  prophecy  regarding  an  evil  power 
which  was  hostUe  to  Grod  and  His  Kingdom  and 
people  should  also  be  combined  in  the  conception 
of  a  personal  adversary.  Fzekiel's  frequent  re- 
ferences to  GJog  (chs.  38,  39)  would  lend  them- 
selves to  this,  and  so  would  the  picture  in  Daniel 
of  the  little  horn  magnifying  itself  even  against 
the  prince  of  the  host  (8^^).  And  the  preoccupa- 
tion of  the  later  Judaism  with  utterances  like 
these,  sharpened  as  it  was  by  hatred  of  the 
heathen  conquerors  not  merely  as  political  enemies 
but  as  enemies  of  Jahweh  and  His  Kingdom, 
would  render  all  the  easier  that  process  of  per- 
sonalizing an  Antichrist  over  against  the  Christ 
which  appears  to  have  completed  itself  within  the 
sphere  of  Judaism  (cf.  Apoc.  Bar.  40,  Asc.  Is.  4^"). 

2.  Antichrist  in  the  NT.— Deriving  from  Judaism, 
Christianity  would  naturally  carry  the  Antichrist 
tradition  with  it  as  part  of  its  infieritance.  That 
it  actually  did  so  Bousset  has  shown  by  a  com- 
prehensive treatment  of  the  later  Christian  exe- 
getical  and  apologetic  literature,  which  eWdently 
rests  on  a  tradition  that  is  only  partially  dependent 


68 


ANTICHRIST 


ANTICHRIST 


on  the  NT  (op.  cit.  ;  cf.  EBi  i.  180  ff.)-  But,  so 
far  as  the  NT  is  concerned,  the  earlier  Antichrist 
tradition  is  taken  over  with  important  changes,  due 
to}the  difierences  between  Judaism  and  Christianity, 
and  especially  to  the  differences  in  tlieir  conception 
of  the  Messiah  Himself.  At  the  same  time  it  must 
be  noticed  that  nothing  like  a  single  consistent  pre- 
sentation of  the  Antichrist  idea  is  given  by  the 
NT  as  a  whole.  Elements  of  the  conception  appear 
in  the  Gospels,  the  Pauline  Epistles,  the  Apocalypse, 
and  the  Joliannine  Epistles  ;  but  in  each  group  of 
writings  it  is  treated  diti'erently  and  with  more  or 
less  divergence  from  the  earlier  Jewish  forms. 

(\)  In  the  Gospels. — In  the  Synoptic  Gospels  it 
is  everywhere  apparent  that  Jesus  recognized  the 
existence  of  a  kingdom  of  evil  under  tne  control 
of  a  supreme  personality,  variously  called  the 
Devil  (Mt  41  13^,  etc.),  Satan  (Mt  410  1226,  Lk  jqis^ 
etc.),  or  Beelzebub  (Mt  122^il),  who  sought  to 
interfere  with  His  own  Messianic  mission  (4^""  IG^^H), 
and  whose  works  He  had  come  to  destroy  (Mk  1^^  ^ 
311. 12. 18^  etc.  ;  cf . He  2'*).  But  from  all  the  crude  and 
materialistic  elements  of  the  earlier  tradition  His 
teaching  is  entirely  free.  In  the  reference  to  the 
'  abomination  of  desolation '  standing  in  the  holy 
place  (Mt  24"> ;  cf.  Mk  13",  Lk  21^),  which  occurs 
m  the  great  eschatological  discourse,  some  critics 
have  seen  a  parallel  to  2  Th  l^'^'  and  an  evident 
allusion  to  the  Jewish  Antichrist  tradition ;  but 
they  do  so  on  the  presumption  that  the  words 
were  not  spoken  by  Jesus  Himself  and  are  to  be 
attributed  to  a  redactor  of  the  original  source.  If 
they  were  uttered  by  our  Lord,  it  seems  most  pro- 
balile  that  they  portended  not  any  apocalypse  of  a 
personal  Antichrist,  but  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
bv  the  Roman  armies — a  calamity  which  He  had 
already  foreshadowed  as  coming  upon  the  city 
because  of  its  rejection  of  Himself  (23^^'*).  For  the 
adversaries  of  the  Son  of  Man,  the  real  representa- 
tives of  the  Antichrist  spirit  in  His  eyes,  were  the 
false  Christs  and  false  prophets  by  whom  many 
should  be  deceived  (24'>-  ^) — in  other  words,  the 
champions  of  that  Avorldly  idea  of  the  coming 
Kingdom  which  He  had  always  rejected  (Mt  4"^ 
1623,  Jn  6^^),  but  to  which  the  Jewish  nation 
obstinately  clung. 

(2)  In  the  PaiUine  Epistles. — A  familiarity  on 
the  part  of  St.  Paul  with  the  Antichrist  tradition 
is  suggested  when  he  asks  in  2  Co  6'*,  *  What  con- 
cord hath  Christ  with  Belial  ? '  and  when  he  speaks 
in  Col  2'"  of  Christ  triumphing  over  'the  princi- 
palities and  powers.'  This  familiarity  becomes 
evident  in  'the  little  apocalypse'  of  2  Th  2^-^-, 
where  he  introduces  the  figure  of  the  '  man  of  sin,' 
or  more  correctly  'man  of  lawlessness.'  Nestle 
has  shown  (ExpT  xvi.  [1904-5]  472)  that  the 
Beliar-Satan  conception  underlies  this  whole 
passage,  with  its  thought  of  an  opponent  of  Christ, 
or  Antichrist,  whom  the  Lord  at  last  shall  '  slay 
with  the  breath  of  his  mouth  and  bring  to  nought 
by  the  manifestation  of  his  coming '  (v.^).  But  the 
distinctive  character  of  this  Pauline  view  of  the 
Antichrist  is  that,  while  features  in  the  picture 
are  evidently  taken  from  the  description  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  Daniel  (cf.  v.*  with 
Dn  1^  11"),  the  Antichrist  is  conceived  of,  not 
after  the  ftishion  of  the  later  Judaism  as  a  heathen 
potentate  and  oppressor,  but  as  a  false  Messiah 
from  within  the  circle  of  Judaism  itself,  who  is  to 
work  by  means  of  false  signs  and  lying  wonders, 
and  so  to  turn  men's  hearts  away  irom  that  love 
of  the  truth  which  brings  salvation  (v.*).  See, 
further,  MAN  OF  SiN. 

(3)  In  the  Apocalypse. — As  follows  naturally  both 
from  its  subject  and  from  its  literary  form,  the 
Apocalypse  is  more  permeated  than  any  other  book 
in  the  NT  with  the  idea  of  the  Antichrist.  For 
its  subject  is  the  speedy  return  of  Christ  to  subdue 


His  enemies  and  set  up  His  Kingdom  (Rev  1'  2^'  3", 
etc.),  and  its  form  is  an  adaptation  to  Christianity 
of  the  ideas  and  imagery  or  those  Jewish  Apoca- 
lypses, from  Daniel  onwards,  which  were  chiefly 
responsible  for  the  growtli  of  the  Christian  Anti- 
christ conception.  It  would  be  out  of  place  to 
enter  here  into  any  discussion  of  the  conflicting 
interpretations  of  the  symbolism  of  the  dragon  and 
the  beasts  that  appear  and  reappear  from  ch.  11 
to  the  end  of  the  book  (see  artt.  Apocalypse, 
Dragon).  But  in  ch.  11  'the  beast  that  cometh 
up  out  of  the  abyss '  was  evidently  suggested  by 
the  dragon-myth  as  embodied  in  the  Jewish  Anti- 
christ tradition,  while  the  '  great  red  dragon '  of 
12*,  Avho  is  also  described  as  '  the  old  serpent,  he 
that  is  called  the  Devil  and  Satan '  (v."),  and  who 
is  clearly  represented  as  the  Antichrist  (vv.*-  ^' "), 
reproduces  both  the  mythical  dragon  and  the  later 
Beliar-Satan  conception,  now  fused  into  one  ap- 
palling figure.  Again,  the  scarlet-coloured  beast 
of  13^'''°  and  the  realm  of  the  beast  in  ch.  17  are 
described  in  language  which  recalls  the  apocalyptic 
imagery  of  Daniel  (see  esp.  ch.  7),  and  clearly 
applies  to  a  hostile  and  persecuting  world-power 
represented  by  its  ruler.  In  Daniel  that  power 
was  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleucidse  under  Antioclius 
Epiphanes ;  here  it  is  very  plainly  indicated  as 
the  Roman  Empire  (173-9-18)  with  the  Emperor 
at  its  head  (13*"*).  But  to  these  pre-Christian 
forms  of  the  Antichrist  tradition  —  the  dragon, 
Satan,  and  a  hostile  world-power — the  Apocalypse 
contributes  two  others  which  are  peculiar  to 
Christianity  and  which  play  a  large  part  in  the 
Christian  tradition  of  later  times. 

The  first  of  these  is  found  in  the  application  to 
Christian  ideas  of  the  Antichrist  of  the  con- 
temporary Nero-saga,  with  its  dream  of  a  Nero 
Redivivus  who  should  come  back  to  the  world  from 
the  realms  of  the  dead  (cf.  Sib.  Or.  iv.  11911".; 
Suetonius,  Nero,  47  ;  Augustine,  de  Civ.  Dei, 
XX.  19).  That  Nero  is  referred  to  in  13^'  is  most 
probable,  the  number  666  being  the  equivalent 
of  Nero  Cffisar  (NEPflN  KAISAP)  when  written  in 
Heb.  characters  (nop  p"u).  And  the  legend  of  his 
return  from  the  under  world  of  the  dead  explains 
in  the  most  natural  way  the  healing  of  the  beast's 
death-stroke  (13'*^)  and  the  statement  that  it 
'shall  ascend  out  of  the  bottomless  pit  .  .  .  and 
they  that  dwell  on  the  earth  shall  wonder  when 
they  behold  the  beast,  how  that  he  was,  and  is  not, 
and  shall  come'  (17*).    See  also  art.  Apocalypse. 

The  second  contribution  was  the  idea  of  the  false 
prophet  (161*  1920  2010),  who  is  to  be  identified  with 
'  another  beast '  of  13"  "•.  It  is  most  probable  that 
the  false  prophet  represents  the  Imperial  priesthood 
as  propagandists  of  the  Caesar- cult,  but  it  seems 
not  unlikely  that  elements  in  the  representation 
are  taken  from  the  legend  that  had  grown  up 
around  the  name  of  Simon  Magus  (cf.  Justin 
Martyr,  Apol.  i.  26,  56 ;  Irenaeus,  c.  Eoer.  i.  23). 
To  the  early  Church,  Simon  with  his  magic  arts 
and  false  miracles  was  the  arch-heretic  and  the 
father  of  all  heresy,  and  suggestions  of  his  legend- 
ary figure  loom  out  from  the  description  01  the 
second  beast  (13""''),  even  while  the  author  attri- 
butes to  it  functions  and  powers  that  belong  more 
properly  to  the  ministers  of  the  Emperor- worship 

(4)  In  the  Johannine  Epistles. — In  these  writings, 
where  the  word  '  Antichrist '  appears  for  the  first 
time,  the  idea  is  spiritualized  as  nowhere  else  in 
the  NT  except  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  The 
Antichrist  is  not,  as  in  the  Apocalypse,  a  material 
world-power  threatening  the  Church  from  without, 
but  a  spirit  of  false  doctrine  rising  up  from  within 
(1  Jn  2^*).  It  is  true  that  Antichrist  is  spoken  of 
as  still  to  come  (2^*  4*),  so  that  some  culminating 
man^estation  is  evidently  expected— probably  in 


AXTLXOMIAXISM 


A^rriocH 


69 


a  definite  personal  form.  But  even  now,  it  is  said, 
there  are  many  antichrists  (2^®  ;  cf.  2  Jn  '),  and  the 
spirit  of  Antichrist  is  already  in  the  world  (1  Jn  4'). 
And  the  very  essence  of  that  spirit  is  the  denial  of 
'the  Father  and  the  Son'  (2^),  i.e.  the  refusal  to 
acknowledge  the  Son  as  well  as  the  Father  ;  more 
explicitly  it  is  the  refusal  to  confess  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  (4- »,  2  Jn ').  The 
spirit  of  Antichrist,  in  other  words,  is  a  spirit  of 
heresy — such  heresy  as  flourished  in  Asia  Minor 
towards  the  close  of  the  1st  century  through  the 
doctrines  of  Cerinthus  (q.v.). 

When  the  NT  utterances  regarding  the  Anti- 
christ are  looked  at  in  their  variety  and  as  a  whole, 
it  is  diflicult  to  derive  from  them  any  justification 
for  the  \-iew  that  the  Church  should  expect  the 
advent  of  a  personal  Antichrist  as  an  individual 
embodiment  of  evil.  The  NT  authors  were  evi- 
dently influenced  in  their  treatment  of  the  subject 
by  contemporary  situations  as  well  as  by  an  inherit- 
ance of  ancient  traditions.  To  St.  Paul,  writing 
out  of  his  own  experience  of  Jewish  persecution 
and  Roman  justice  and  protection,  Judaism  was 
the  '  man  of  lawlessness,'  and  Rome  the  beneficent 
restraining  power.  To  the  Apocalyptist,  writing 
to  a  Church  which  had  known  Nero's  cruelty  and 
now  under  Domitian  was  passing  through  the 
flames  once  more,  Antichrist  was  the  Roman 
Empire  represented  by  a  ruler  who  was  hostile  to 
Christianity  because  it  refused  to  worship  him  as 
a  god.  In  the  Johannine  Epistles,  Antichrist  is 
not  a  persecuting  power  but  a  heretical  spirit, 
present  in  the  world  already  but  destined  to  come 
in  fuller  power.  The  ultimate  authority  for  our 
thoughts  on  the  subject  must  be  found  in  the  words 
of  Jesus  when  He  teaches  us  to  pray  for  deliver- 
ance from  '  the  evil  one '  (Mt  6^^),  and  warns  us 
against  false  Christs  and  false  prophets  who  pro- 
claim a  kingdom  that  is  not  His  own  (24"). 

Literature. — H.  Gnnkel,  Sehop/ung  und  Chaos,  Gottmgen, 
1S95  ;  W.  Bonsset,  The  Antichrist  Lenend,  Eng-.  tr.,  London, 
1696 ;  W.  O.  E.  Oesterley,  The  Etoluticni  of  the  Messianic 
Idea,  do.  190S ;  C.  Clemen,  Primitite  Christianitt/  and  its 
Son-Jewiih  Sources.  Eng.  tr..  Edinburgh,  1912;  artt.  'Anti- 
christ '  in  PBE  3,  ERE,  and  EBi,  and  '  Man  of  Sin '  in  HBB  ; 
H.  Cremer,  Bib.-Theol.  Lex.,  s.x.  ;  J.  Moffatt,  ' Revelation '  in 
EGT ;  EipT  xvi.  [19'>l-5]  472,  xxiii.  [1911-12]  97. 

J.  C.  Lajibekt. 
ANTINOMIANISM.— See  Law. 

IMTIOCH  ('Ajrrtoxeia).— 1.  In  Syria.— About  20 
miles  from  the  Mediterranean,  the  Orontes,  turning 
abruptly  westward,  enters  a  fertile  plain,  10  miles 
long  and  5  \*"ide,  which  separates  the  CTeat  Lebanon 
range  from  the  last  spurs  of  the  Taurus.  Here 
Seleucus  Nicator,  after  his  defeat  of  Antigonus  at 
Issiis  in  301  B.C.,  discovered  an  ideal  site  for  the 
capital  of  his  Syrian  kingdom,  the  Asiatic  portion 
of  the  vast  empire  of  Alexander  the  Great,  and  here 
he  built  the  most  famous  of  the  16  Antiochs  which 
he  foTinded  in  honour  of  his  father  Antiochus. 
Planned  by  Xenarius,  the  original  city  occupied 
the  level  ground  between  the  river  and  Mt.  Silpius, 
and,  like  all  the  Hellenistic  foundations  in  Syria, 
it  had  two  broad  colonnaded  streets  intersecting  at 
the  centre,  or  Omphalus.  The  Seleucid  kings  vied 
with  one  another  in  extending  and  adorning  their 
metropolis.  A  second  quarter  was  added  on  the 
eastern  side,  perhaps  by  Antiochus  l.  ;  a  third,  the 
\  New  City,'  was  built  by  Seleucus  Callinicus  on  an 
island — similar  to  the  island  in  the  Seine  at  Paris 
— which  has  since  disappeared,  probably  owing  to 
one  of  those  seismic  disturbances  to  which  the 
region  has  always  been  peculiarly  subject ;  and  a 
fourth,  on  the  lowest  slopes  of  SUpius,  was  the 
work  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Henceforth  the 
city  was  known  as  a  Tetrapolis,  or  union  of  four 
cities  (Strabo,  XVI.  iL  4).  Such  was  the  magnificent 
Greek  substitute  for  the  ancient  and  beautiful  but 


too  essentially  Semitic  capital  of  Sjrria — Damascus. 
A  navigable  river  and  a  fine  seaport — Seleucia  of 
Pieria — made  it  practically  a  maritime  city,  while 
caravan  roads  converging  from  Arabia  and  Meso- 
potamia brought  to  it  the  commerce  of  the  East. 
It  attained  its  highest  political  importance  in  the 
time  of  Antiochus  the  Great,  whose  power  was 
shattered  by  the  Romans  at  Magnesia.  In  83  B.C. 
it  fell  into  the  hands  of  Tigranes  of  Armenia,  from 
whom  it  was  wrested  by  the  Roman  Republic  in 
65  B.C.  Thereafter  it  was  the  capital  of  the  pro- 
vince of  Syria,  and  the  residence  of  the  Imperial 
legate.  Pompey  made  it  a  civitas  libera,  and  such 
it  remained  till  the  time  of  Antoninus  Pius,  who 
made  it  a  colon  ia.  The  early  emperors  often  visited 
it,  and  embellished  it  with  new  streets  and  public 
buildings. 

During  the  Jewish  wars  (69  B.a) '  Vespasian  took  with  him 
his  army  from  Antioch,  which  is  the  metropolis  of  Syria,  and 
without  dispute  deserves  the  place  of  the  third  city  in  the 
habitable  world  that  is  under  the  Roman  Empire,  both  in 
magnitude  and  in  other  marks  of  prosperitj- '  (Jos.  BJ  m.  iL  4). 
In  the  4th  cent.  Chrjsostom  estimated  the  population  at  200,000, 
of  whom  10i),000  were  then  Christians,  and  probably  he  did 
not  reckon  slaves  and  children. 

Antioch  was  called  'the  Beautiful'  (^  koXtJ 
[Athen.  i.  p.  20]),  but  its  moral  repute  was  never 
high.  '  In  no  city  of  antiquity  was  the  enjoyment 
of  life  so  much  the  main  thing,  and  its  duties  so 
incidental,  as  in  "Antioch  upon  Daphne,"  as  the  city 
was  significantly  called'  (Mommsen,  Prov.^,  1909, 
ii.  128).  The  pleasure-garden  of  Daphne,  o  miles 
from  the  city,  10  raUes  in  circumference,  with  its 
sanctuary  of  Apollo,  its  groves  of  laurel  and  cypress, 
its  sparkling  fountains,  its  colonnades  ani  halls 
and  baths,  has  come  down  through  history  with 
an  evil  name.  Daphnici  mores  were  proverbial, 
and  Juvenal  flung  one  of  his  wittiest  jibes  at  his 
own  decadent  Imperial  city  when  he  said  that  the 
Orontes  had  flowed  into  the  Tiber  (Sat.  iii.  62), 
flooding  Rome  with  the  superstition  and  immorality 
of  the  East.  The  brilliant  civilization  and  perfect 
art  of  the  Greek  failed  to  redeem  the  turbulent, 
fickle,  and  dissolute  character  of  the  Syrian.  In- 
stead of  either  race  being  improved  by  the  contact, 
each  rather  infected  the  other  with  itscharacteristic 
vices.  Cicero  flattered  Antioch  as  a  city  of  '  most 
learned  men  and  most  liberal  studies '  {pro  Arch. 
iii.),  but  the  sober  verdict  of  history  is  ditierent. 

'  Amidst  all  this  luxury  the  Muses  did  not  find  themselves  at 
home  ;  science  in  earnest  and  not  less  earnest  art  were  never 
truly  cultivated  in  Syria  and  more  especially  in  Antioch.  .  .  . 
This  people  valued  only  the  day.  Ko  Greek  region  has  so  few 
memorial-stones  to  show  as  Syria ;  the  great  Antioch,  the  third 
city  of  the  empire,  has— to  say  nothing  of  the  land  of  hiero- 
gU'pbics  and  obelisks — left  behind  fewer  inscriptions  than  many 
a  small  African  or  Arabian  village '  (Mommsen,  op.  eit.  130,  XZXt.'). 

No  city,  however,  after  Jerusalem,  is  so  closely 
associated  with  the  Apostolic  Church.  From  its 
very  foundation  it  had  in  its  population  a  strong 
Jewish  element,  attracted  by  the  offer  of  '  privileges 
equal  to  those  of  the  Macedonians  and  Greeks '  (Jos. 
Ant.  XII.  iii.  1).  The  Jewish  nation  '  had  the  great- 
est multitudes  in  Antioch  by  reason  of  the  size  of 
the  city.  .  .  .  They  made  proselytes  of  a  great 
many  of  the  Greeks  perpetually,  and  thereby,  after 
a  sort,  brought  them  to  be  a  portion  of  their  own 
body'(.BJ'vu.  iii.  3).  Whilethe  Judaism  of  Antioch 
did  not  assimilate  Hellenic  culture  so  readily  as  that 
of  Alexandria,  and  certainly  made  no  such  con- 
tribution to  the  permanent  thounht  of  the  world,  it 
yet  did  much  to  prepare  the  city  for  the  gospel. 
'  Nicolas  a  proselyte  of  Antioch,'  who  Mas  early 
won  to  Chri-stianity,  and  is  named  among  the  Seven 
of  the  Jerusalem  Church  (Ac  6'),  was  evidently  one 
of  that  great  number  of  Antiochene  Greeks  who  had 
previously  felt  the  spell  of  the  Jewish  faith.  And  it 
was  the  mixture  of  national  elements  in  the  Church 
of  Antioch — pure  Greeks  with  Greek-speaking  Jews 
— that  peculiarly  fitted  her  to  play  a  remarkable 


70 


AXTIOCH 


ANTIOCH 


part  in  the  Apostolic  Ai^e.  Her  distinction  was 
that,  while  unquestionably  the  daugliter  of  the 
Jewish  Christian  community  at  Jerusalem,  full  of 
filial  gratitude  and  devotion,  she  became  the  first 
Gentile  Cliurch,  and  the  mother  of  all  the  others. 
The  diaspora  that  followed  the  death  of  Stephen 
brought  many  fugitive  Jewish  Christian  preachers 
to  Antioch,  and  some  Cypriotes  and  Cyrenians 
among  them  inaugurated  a  new  era  by  going  beyond 
the  Hellenist  Jews  for  an  audience  and  preaching  to 
'the  Greeks  also'  (Ac  11^).  kolI  irpb^  Toi)i"E\\r]vM 
is  probably  the  correct  reading,  in  spite  of  '  many 
ancient  authorities'  who  have 'EWijno-Tcis ;  other- 
wise the  historian's  words  would  be  singularly  point- 
less. The  new  evangelism  resulted  in  many  con- 
versions (IP'),  and  the  vigilant  Church  in  Jerusalem 
sent  Barnabas  down,  if  not  to  assist  in  the  work,  at 
least  to  supervise  it.  It  was  the  merit  of  Barnabas 
that  he  could  not  be  a  mere  onlooker.  Grasping 
the  situation,  and  flinging  himself  impetuously 
into  the  novel  movement,  he  went,  apparently 
Avithout  consulting  anybody,  to  Tarsus  to  summon 
Paul  to  his  lifework.  In  Antioch  the  two  men 
exercised  a  united  and  fruitful  ministry  for  a  year 
(1122-26)  !(;  ^vas  at  this  time  and  in  this  place  that 
•the  disciples  were  first  called  Christians'  (11-^), 
the  designation  probably  coming  from  the  lively 
populace,  who  quickly  noted  the  new  phenomenon 
m  their  midst,  and  justified  their  reputation  for 
the  invention  of  nicknames.  Their  wit  never  spared 
anybody  who  seemed  worthy  of  their  attention. 

'  The  only  talent  which  Indisputably  belonged  to  them — their 
mastery  of  ridicule — they  exercised  not  merely  against  the 
actors  of  their  stage,  but  no  less  against  the  rulers  sojourning 
in  the  capital  of  the  East,  and  the  ridicule  was  quite  the  same 
against  the  actor  as  against  the  emperor.'  While  Julian  'met 
their  sarcastic  sayings  with  satirical  writings,  the  Antiochenes 
at  other  times  had  to  pay  more  severely  for  their  evil  speaking 
and  their  other  sins  '  (Mommsen,  Provinces,  ii.  134,  135). 

But  the  '  Christians '  gratefully  accepted  the 
mockin»  sobriquet  bestowed  upon  them,  changing 
it  into  tne  most  honourable  of  all  titles  (cf .  1  P  4"^). 
And  the  first  Gentile  Church  was  now  to  become 
the  first  missionary  Church.  While  Antioch  was 
never  wanting  in  respect  for  Jerusalem,  contribut- 
ing li1icr;i!ly  to  its  poor  in  a  time  of  famine,  and 
consuliin.L;  its  leaders  in  all  matters  of  doctrine 
and  practice,  her  distinguishing  characteristic  was 
her  evangelistic  originality.  Her  heart  was  not 
in  Juda;a  but  in  the  Roman  Empire.  The  fresh 
ideas  of  Christian  liberty  and  Christian  duty, 
which  the  mother-Church  at  Jerusalem  was  slow 
to  entertain,  found  ready  acceptance  in  the  freer 
atmosphere  of  the  Syrian  capital.  That  the 
victory  over  Judaism  was  not  easily  won  even 
there  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  not  only  Peter 
but  Barnabas  vacillated  under  the  alternate  in- 
fluence of  cosmopolitan  liberalism  and  Jud.i'.an 
narrowness,  till  Paul's  arguments  and  rebukes 
convinced  them  of  their  error  ((!;il  2^"'^).  But 
contact  with  the  great  world  and  syiiipathy  with 
its  needs  probably  did  more  than  the  force  of 
reason  to  lighten  the  Antiochene  Church  of  the 
dead-weight  of  Judaism.  Christians  of  Hellenic 
culture  and  Konuin  citizcn-^liii)  taught  her  a  nolile 
universalism,  .and  it  wiis  .•in  iiiditiLrly  at  the  in- 
stance of  the  Churcii  of  Antiudi  tli;it  the  Council 
of  Jerusalem  sent  to  the  (Jeutile  ((inverts  a  circular 
letter  which  became  the  charter  of  spiritual  freedom 
(Ac  15'-^"^).  Above  all,  it  was  from  Antioch  that 
Paul  started  on  each  of  his  missionary  journeys 
(Ac  lI>-»  15^  1823),  and  to  Antioch  tli.it  he  returned 
again  and  again  with  ]iisr('i«iit  of  Iresh  ctmquests 
(14^  IS''^).  It  was  the  nl,■l^^'l minds  of  Chnstian 
Antioch  who  at  length  cIi.uil;!'.!  the  pathetic  dream 
of  '  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gcn(  il(>s '  into  a  reality. 

Antioch  gave  rise  to  a  -cliool  of  Christian 
thought  which  was  distinguished  by  literal  inter- 
pretation of  the  Scriptures  and  insistence  uiion  the 


human  limitations  of  Jesus.  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia  was  one  of  its  best  representatives.  Be- 
tween the  years  252  and  380,  ten  Councils  were 
held  at  Antioch.  Antakiyeh  is  now  but  a  meagre 
town  of  600  inhabitants,  tliough  its  environs  '  are 
even  at  the  present  day,  in  spite  of  all  neglect,  a 
blooming  garden  and  one  of  the  most  charming 
spots  on  earth'  (Mommsen,  ii.  129). 

LiTEEATimM. — C.  O.  Miiller,  Antiquitates  Antioehenee, 
Odttingen,  1839  ;  Conybeare-Howson,  St.  Paul,  London,  1872, 
i.  149  flf. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  Roman 
Citizen,  do.  1895,  also  Church  in  Rom.  Emp.,  do.  1893,  chs. 
ii.-vii.,  xvi. ;  A.  C.  McGifFert,  Apostolic  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897; 
C.  V.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1897. 

2.  InPi8idia(Ac  13"  RV,'A.  ttjv  Uiaidlav, ' Pisidian 
Antioch,'  which  is  the  correct  reading,  instead  of 
'A.  TTJs  lliffioiai). — This  city  was  probably  founded 
by  Seleucus  Nicator  (301-280  B.C.)  alxjut  the  same 
time  as  Syrian  Antioch,  being  another  of  the  many 
cities  which  he  called  after  his  father  Antioohns. 
It  was  intended  as  a  garri^on  towii  aini  ;i  ccmie 
of  Hellenic  influence  in  the  liciut  of  Asia  .Min(»r, 
commanding  the  great  trade  route  between  Ephesus 
and  the  Cilician  Gates.  Guided  by  Strabo's  de- 
scription of  the  place  (xil.  viii,  14),  as  standing 
'  on  a  height '  to  the  south  of  a  '  backbone  of 
mountains,  stretching  from  east  to  west,'  Arundell 
identified  it  in  1833  with  the  extensive  ruins  of 
Yalowatch,  on  the  skirts  of  the  long  Sultan  Dagh, 
about  3600  ft.  above  sea-level,  overlooking  the  gieat 
plain  which  is  drained  by  the  river  Anthios. 

After  the  battle  of  Magnesia  (190  B.C.),  which 
cost  Antioclius  the  Great  the  whole  of  his  dominions 
north  of  the  Taurus,  the  Romans  made  Antioch  a 
free  city.  In  39  B.C.  Mark  Antony  gave  it  to  king 
Amyntas,  after  whose  death  in  25  B.C.  it  became 
a  city  of  the  vast  Roman  province  of  Galatla.  At 
some  time  before  6  B.C.,  Augustus  raised  it  to  the 
rank  of  a  colony — Pisidarum  colonia  Ccesarca 
(Pliny,  HN  v.  24) — and  made  it  the  governing  and 
military  centre  of  the  southern  half  of  the  province. 
Its  importance  increased  when  the  first  emperors 
found  it  necessary  to  pacify  the  '  barbarian  '  high- 
landers  of  Pisidia.  '  In  the  mountain-land  proper 
no  trace  of  Hellenistic  settlement  is  found,  and 
still  less  did  the  Roman  senate  apply  itself  to  this 
difficult  task.  Augustus  did  so  ;  and  only  here 
in  the  whole  Greek  coast  we  meet  a  series  of 
colonies  of  Roman  veterans  evidently  intended 
to  acquire  this  district  for  peaceful  settlement ' 
(Mommsen,  Provinces,  i.  336f.).  Roman  lojuis 
connected  Antioch  with  all  the  other  colonies 
founded  in  the  district — Olbasa,  Comama,  Creiuna, 
Parlnis,  and  Lystra.  The  work  of  pacification  was 
in  especially  active  progress  during  the  reign  of 
Claudius  (A.D.  41-54),  in  which  St.  Paul  visited 
Antioch.  The  city  was  not  yet  '  Antioch  in 
Pisidia'  (AV),  being  correctly  styled  by  Stralx> 
*  Antioch  towards  Pisidia '  ('A.  i)  irpbs  UifftdLq.  Ka\ov- 
nivrj  [XII.  viii.  14]),  in  distinction  from  Antioch 
on  the  Mreander  ;  but  St.  Luke  already  calls  it 
'Pisidian  Antioch,' to  difterentiute  it  from  Antioch 
in  Syria.  The  boundaries  of  i'i>iilia  j:ia(lually 
moved  northward  till  it  included  most  (jf  Southern 
Plirygia,  and  then  '  Antioch  of  Pisidia '  became 
the  usual  designation  of  the  city.  At  a  still  later 
period  Pisidia  was  constituted  a  Roman  province, 
with  Antioch  as  its  capital. 

On  the  South-Galatian  theory,  in  tlie  form  nd- 
vocated  by  Ramsay  [Church  in  Rom.  l-linp.,  74  ti. ), 
Antiochisregardedby  St.  Luketusbelon-i'  '  '  > 
Plirygio-Galatic  region  (t^v  4>pvylav  Km 
Xuipac,  Ac  16*),  Phrj'gian  being  a  geograjil 
and  Galatic  a  political,  the  one  used  liy  i  he  ( .!((  ks 
and  the  other  by  the  Roman  goveiiuuent.  hi 
Ac  IS'**  the  reuion  is  simply  called  'Phrygian,'  and 
if,  as  many  tliink,  'Ipt^iav  is  here  to  be  taken  as  a 
noun,  the  sense  is  still  much  the  same  (sen  Cai.atia 
and  Phrygia).     St.  Paul's  first  mission  to  Antioch 


AXTIPAS 


APOCALYPSE 


71 


was  so  successful  that  the  whole  jwlitical  regio  of 
which  this  colony  was  the  centre  soon  heard  of  the 
new  faith  (Ac  13^).  In  no  other  Asian  city,  except 
Ephesu3,  was  the  influence  of  his  preaching  so  far- 
reaching.  His  success  was  no  doubt  in  great 
measure  due  to  the  strong  Jewish  element  in  the 
population,  even  though  it  was  Jewish  persecution 
that  compelled  him  to  leave  the  city  for  a  time 
(Ac  13**-*').  The  early  Seleucid  kings  settled 
Jews  in  many  of  their  cities,  and  gave  them  the 
same  cine  rights  as  the  Greeks,  finding  them  to 
be  trusty  supporters  and  often  real  Hellenizers. 
Antiochus  the  Great  settled  2000  Jewish  families 
in  Lvdia  and  Phrygia  (Jos.  Ant.  xn.  iii.  4),  many 
of  .wLom  must  have  found  a  home  in  Antioch. 
Trade  doubtless  attracted  others  to  so  important 
a  centre,  and  thus  the  Jewish  leaven  had  been 
working  for  a  long  time  before  Christianity  was 
introduced.  Ramsay  thinks  that  '  the  Jews  are 
likely  to  have  exercised  greater  political  power 
among  the  Anatolian  people,  with  their  yielding 
and  easily  moulded  minds,  than  in  any  other  part 
of  the  Roman  world '  (Hist.  Com.  on  Gal.,  193) ;  and 
their  spiritual  influence  was  at  least  as  great. 
St.  Paul  found  many  '  devout  proselytes '  in 
Antioch  (Ac  13^),  and  his  presence  attracted  '  the 
whole  city'  to  the  synagogue  (IS^**).  While  the 
native  Phrygian  type  of  religious  feeling  was 
more  eastern  than  western,  and  thus  had  a  certain 
natural  affinity  with  the  Semitic  type,  the  Phrygian 
Jews,  whose  laxity  gave  deep  ofience  to  the  rigidly 
orthodox,  no  doubt  increased  their  power  among 
their  neighbours  by  their  freedom  from  bigotry. 
The  attraction  of  the  Jewish  faith  for  Gentile 
women  (rds  at^ofUvai  yvpouKas,  Ac  13**)  was  a 
familiar  theme  in  ancient  writings  (Juvenal,  vL 
543;  Jos.  BJ  n.  xx.  2) ;  and  the  influence  of 
'  women  of  honourable  estate '  (tAs  ci<7x^A«>»'as),  not 
only  in  Antioch  but  in  Asia  ilinor  generally,  is 
one  of  the  most  striking  features  in  the  social  life 
of  the  country  (Conybeare-Howson,  St.  Paul,  L 
219;  Ramsay,  Church  in  Bom.  Emp.,  67).  Strabo 
(loc.  cit.)  mentions  another  fact  which  may  help 
to  explain  the  rapid  progress  of  Christianity  in 
Antioch :  '  In  this  place  was  established  a  priest- 
hood of  Men  Arcieus,  ha\-ing  attached  to  it  a 
multitude  of  temple  slaves  and  tracts  of  sacred 
territory.  It  was  abolished  after  the  death  of 
Amyntas  by  those  who  were  sent  to  settle  the 
succession  to  his  kingdom.'  This  drastic  action 
of  the  Romans  had  removed  one  of  the  greatest 
obstacles  to  the  new  faith — the  vested  int^ests  of 
an  old  and  powerful  hierarchy. 

LrreRATTRE.— F.  V.  J.  AnmdeD,  Diseoveriet  m  Asia  Minor, 
London,  ls34,  i.  2sl  f. :  Conybeare-Howson.  St.  P<nU,  do. 
1572,  i.  204f.  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  HUt.  Com.  on  Gol.,  da.  1809, 
pp.  196-213,  Church  in  Bom.  Emp.,  do.  1893,  peutim  ;  J.  R.  S. 
Steirett,    Woffe  ExpedUion   to  Asia  Minor,  Boflt<Hi,  188S, 

P"l*'-  Jaaees  Strahan. 

ANTIPAS.— See  Hebod. 

ANTIPAS  (shorter  form  of  Antipater  [Jos.  Ant. 
XIV.  i.  3 :  '  this  Antipatros  was  at  first  calle^i 
Antipas']  as  Hennas  is  of  Hermodorus,  Lucas  of 
Lucanus,  and  Silvas  of  Silvanus). — Antipas,  other- 
wise unkno%^-n,  is  mentioned  in  Rev  2^.  Later 
Greek  tradition  made  him  bishop  of  Pergamum, 
martyreil  under  Domitian  by  being  thrown  into  a 
brazen  bull  which  stood  at  the  t«mple  of  Diana, 
and  so  roasted  alive.*  The  name  has  been  allegor- 
ized as  anti-pas  ( =  *  against  all ')  or  anti-papa.  The 
character  of  the  Apocalypse,  again,  admits  the 
hypothesis  that  the  name  refers  to  the  God  Pan. 
Pan  was  worshipped   at    Ephesus  and  in    many 

*  Xemnann  (Der  Rom.  Stoat  u.  die  aUgem^ine  Kirehe,  1890,  L 
15)  suggests  that  Antip«8  wms  ttie  only  martyr  who  soffeied  in 
Peigamom,  but  Ramsay  (Letters  to  the  Seren  Churches,  288) 
maintains  that  he  was  the  first  of  a  long  series. 


cities  in  Asia  Minor — no  record  of  his  worship  at 
Pergamum  is  extant — under  the  strong  influences 
of  Arcadian  and  Peloponnesian  cults.  It  is  not 
impossible,  therefore,  that  the  Christian  Church 
at  Pergamum  is  praised  for  its  opposition  to  the 
heathen  Pan.    Cf.  Balaam,  Nicolaitaxs. 

Ltteratuks.— .45,  April,  iL  [1866J  3ff.,  961;  Roscher,  iiL 
1369;  H.  B.  Swete,  Apocalypse,  ad  loe. ;  H.  Alford,  Gr.  Test., 
ad  loc. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay.  Church  in  the  Roman  Empin^,  1897, 
Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches,  1904  ;  C.  ▼.  ^Veizsacker,  Apostolic 
Age,  Eag.  tr.  1804 ;  A.  C  McGiffiert,  Hist,  of  Christianity  in 
tKe  ApotL  Age,  1897.  W.  F.  COBB. 

ANTIPATRIS  CArrfxaTptj).— Antipatris,  a  Hel- 
lenistic town  of  Palestine,  stood  at  the  eastern 
edge  of  the  Plain  of  Sharon,  where  the  military 
road  from  Jerusalem  to  Caesarea  left  the  hills. 
Under  the  protection  of  a  body  of  Roman  cavalry 
and  infantry,  St.  Paul  was  brought  thither  by 
night,  and  thence,  with  a  diminished  escort,  to 
Cfesarea  (Ac  23*^-  ^).  Antipatris  was  a  border  tovm 
between  Judsea  and  Samaria  (Neubauer,  Giogr.  du 
Talm.y  1868,  p.  80  f.),  and  after  it  was  reached  there 
would  be  less  danger  of  a  Jewish  attack.  Josephus 
(Ant.  XTL  v.  2)  gives  an  account  of  its  foundation  : 

*  Herod  erected  another  city  in  the  plain  called  Kiqi^iaraafaa, 
where  he  chose  out  a  fit  place,  both  for  plenty  of  water  and 
goodness  of  soil,  and  pr(^>er  for  the  production  of  what  was 
there  planted,  where  a  river  encompassed  the  dty  itaelf ,  and 
a  grove  of  the  best  trees  tat  magnitude  was  ronnd  aboot  it : 
tius  he  named  Antipatris,  from  his  tether  Antipater.' 
The  historian  elsewhere  identifies  it  with  Kaphar- 
saba  (Ant.  xin.  xv.  1),  and  Robinson  (BMical 
Researches,  iv.  139  f.),  followed  by  Schiirer  (n.  L 
130  f.),  naturally  concludes  that  the  site  must  be 
the  modem  Kefr  Saba ;  but,  as  the  latter  place 
cannot  be  described  as  well-watered,  Conder, 
Warren,  G.  A.  Smith,  and  Buhl  all  favour  Bas- 
el-A  in,  a  little  farther  south,  at  the  source  of  the 
Aujah.  James  Steahan. 

ANTITYPE.— See  Type. 

ANTONIA.-See  Castle. 

ANXIETY.— See  Cabe,  Careful. 

APELLES  ('AxcXX^,  a  Greek  name  possibly  con- 
tracted from  ApoUodorus,  and  apparently  common 
among  Jews  of  tiie  Dispersion  [cf.  Hon'  Sat.  i.  5. 
100 :  credat  ludcetts  Apella,  and  Gow's  suggestion, 
ad  loc.,  that,  as  modem  Jews  take  a  Gentile  name 
which  closely  resembles  their  Hebrew  name,  so  in 
ancient  times  a  Jew  called  Abel  might  choose  the 
name  Apelles]). — ApeUes,  saluted  by  St.  Paul  in  Ro 
le***,  is  called  '  the  approved  in  Christ '  (rdr  dSKi/ior 
iw  'KpuTTifi).  The  phrase  may  indicate  that  he  had 
been  specially  tested  and  tried  by  aflliction  or  per- 
secution, or  that  he  was  a  Christian  who  had  gained 
the  approbation  of  the  Church,  sufliciently  perhaps 
to  be  called  to  the  ministry  (cf.  1  Ti  3^'*).  Nothing 
is  known  of  Apelles  beyona  this  reference. 

Assuming  the  Roman  destination  of  these  saluta- 
tions, he  was  probably  a  Jewish  convert  residing  in 
Rome  as  a  member  of  the  Imperial  household. 
As  the  salutation  which  follows  is  that  to  '  the 
household  of  Aristobulus,'  it  has  been  suggested 
that  ApeUes'  Christian  activity  may  have  lain  in 
that  direction.  If  Aristobultis  (q.  v. )  was  the  grand- 
son of  Herod,  Apelles  would  no  doubt  find  in  his 
'  household '  many  members  of  his  own  race.  The 
name  Apelles  is  known  to  have  belonged  to  the 
Imperial  household.  It  was  borne  by  a  famous 
tragic  actor  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Cains  (see 
Lightfoot,  Philippians*,  1878,  p.  174). 

T.  B.  All  WORTHY. 

APOCALYPSE.  —  I.  ISTRODUCTIOS.  —±.  The 
word  'apocalypse'  in  the  NT. — oTOJcdXi/^ti  ('re- 
velation '")  occurs  some  eighteen  times  in  the  NT. 
The  general  sense  is '  instruction  concerning  Divine 


72 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


things  before  unknown — especially  those  relating 
to  the  Christian  salvation — given  to  the  soul  by 
God  or  the  ascended  ;Christ,  especially  through 
the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (1  Co  2'°) '  (Grimm- 
Thayer).  The  word  was  important  to  St.  Paul 
when  he  wished  to  express  his  independence  of  the 
first  apostles  in  reference  to  his  knowledge  of  the 
gospel  and  even  to  the  steps  taken  to  come  to  an 
understanding  with  them  (Eph  3»,  Gal  2*).  The 
object  of  diroKi\v\j/is  is,  therefore,  a  mystery 
(Ro  16'"').  The  gospel  without  it  would  remain 
unknown,  with  it  it  is  an  'open  secret.'*  The 
source,  as  also  the  end  or  object,  of  diroKiXvpis  is 
God  or  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  mode  may  be  vision 
or  ecstasy  (2  Co  12').  It  may  also  be,  however, 
events  which  strike  the  general  eye,  e.g.  '  the 
righteous  judgment  of  God'  (Ro  2');  ' iiroKd\v\j/is 
of  the  sons  of  God'  (8^*),  i.e.  'the  glory  that  is 
manifestly  given  to  some,  showing  them  to  be  sons 
of  God ' ;  '  dwoKd.\vxl/is  of  the  glory  of  Christ  '(IP  4'3), 
i.e.  'the  glory  with  which  He  will  return  from 
heaven '  (Grimm-Thayer).  The  return  is  called  the 
' diroKd\v\f/ii  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ'  (2  Th  1^ 
1  Co  1',  1  P  1^  ").  As  a  prophet  is  one  to  whom 
truth  comes  not  from  man  but  from  God,  what  he 
utters  may  be  called  an  dTroKd\v\//is,  and  he  himself 
may  be  said  to  '  have  an  diroKdXv^n,'  or  to  speak 
^v  diroKa\}j\{/ei  (1  Co  14^;  cf.  v.').  It  is  a  fact  of 
much  suggestiveness  for  the  subject  of  this  article 
(see  below)  that,  so  far  as  the  NT  is  concerned, 
the  prophet  and  the  apocalyptist  may  be  considered 
one  and  the  same. 

2.  The  NT  Apocalypse  of  John  as  the  type  of 
apocalyptic  writings. — Though  in  the  sense  of  the 
Cnristian  creed  the  whole  Bible  is  by  pre-eminence 
the  literature  of  apocalypse  or  revelation,  there  is 
only  one  book  in  each  Testament  to  which  the 
name  has  been  given.  In  the  NT  we  have  the 
Apocalypse  of  John  and  in  the  OT  we  have  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  which  is  unmistakably  both  in 
style  and  substance  of  the  same  literary  genus. 
The  latter  is — apart  from  what  may  be  called 
apocalyptic  fragments  in  the  older  prophetical  writ- 
ings, e.g.  Is  24 — the  oldest  known  Apocalypse,  and 
has  served  as  a  model  for  subsequent  writings  of 
the  class.  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse  of  John 
mark  respectively  the  beginning  and  the  end  of 
what  may  be  called  the  apocalyptic  period,  which 
thus  covers  upwards  of  260  years  (say  168  B.C.  to 
A.D.  96). t  It  thus  appears  that,  while  there  is  an 
apocalyptic  element  in  practically  all  the  books  of 
tne  NT  (see  below),  there  is  only  one  writing  be- 
longing to  the  Apostolic  Age  which  is  as  a  whole 
of  the  apocalyptic  class,  and  which,  despite  much 
controversy  in  the  early  centuries,^  has  held  its 
place  among  the  books  of  authority  recognized  by 
the  Christian  Church.  This  circumstance  alone 
might  warrant  the  almost  exclusive  devotion  of 
this  article  to  an  account  of  this  book,  but  such 
concentration  oilers,  besides,  the  advantage  of 
showing  the  leading  features  of  the  apocalyptic 
style  as  they  appear,  so  to  speak,  synthetically, 
interwoven  with  an  actual  situation — a  crisis — on 
which  the  mind  of  the  apocalyptist  reacts.  In 
regard  to  the  imcanonical  apocalypses,  if  one  may 
not  say,  after  studying  the  Apocalypse,  '  Ex  uno 
disce  omnes,'  one  may  remember  tne  attention 
paid  to  the  lesser  apocalypses  during  the  last  half- 
century,  and  say  that  the  creepers  have  not 
suffered  from  the  overshadowing  of  the  cypress.  § 

•  Denney,  et  al. 

t  Daniel  belongs  to  the  time  of  the  persecution  of  the  Jews 
under  the  Greek-Syrian  kinfr  AntiochuB  Epiphanes  (168-165  B.C.) ; 
the  Apoc.  of  John  probably  to  the  persecution  of  the  Christians 
under  the  Roman  emperor  Domitian  (a.d.  81-86). 

J  The  canonicity  of  the  Apocalypse  was  controverted,  esp.  in 
the  Eastern  Church,  and  it  was  not  till  a.d.  215  that  the 
Western  Church,  under  the  leadership  of  Hippolytus,  accepted 
It.    The  East  finally  yielded  to  the  West. 

S  Verg.  Eel.  i.  26  f.,  quoted  by  Moffatt  (EOT  v.  296). 


3.  Non-canonical  apocalypses  of  the  Apostolic 
Age. — As,  however,  both  the  Apocalypse  and  the 
otner  books  of  the  NT  contain  implicit  references, 
and,  in  at  least  one  case,*  an  explicit  reference  to 
other  apocalypses,  a  list  may  here  be  given  of  the 
non-c«nonica(  apocalypses,  either  wholly  or  partly 
extant,  and  of  others  whose  existence  may  be  in- 
ferred from  quotations  of  them  found  in  the  early 
Fathers.  They  may  be  classified  under  three 
heads :  (A)  Jewish,  (B)  Jewish  -  Christian,  (C) 
Hellenic  or  Gentile. 

(A)  Under  this  head  fall :  (a)  The  cycle  known  as  Enoch,  which 
includes  :  (a)  The  Ethiopie  Enoch,  so  called  because  it  survive* 
chiefly  in  an  Ethiopie  Version.  It  includes  :  (1)  chs.  1-36,  72-108 
(c.  100  B.C.);  (2)  chs.  37-71  ('Book  of  Similitudes'),  which  be- 
longs probably  to  the  early  days  of  the  Herodian  dynasty,  and  is 
therefore  close  to  the  Christian  era.  In  this  book't  occur  those 
references  to  the  pre-existent  Messiah  under  the  title  '  Son  of 
man,'  which  Ililgenfeld  and  others  have  ascribed  to  Christian 
interpolation,  but  whose  direct  debt  is  probably  only  to  Daniel 
(see  esp.  Dn  7'3).  (/3)  The  Slavonic  Secrets  of  Enoch,  before  a.d. 
70. — (b)  Assumption  of  Moses  (<?.».)  not  later  than  a.d.  10.— (c) 
Apocalypse  of  Ezra,  usually  cited  as  Fourth  Ezra  (^2  Esdraa 
[q.v.]  of  English  'Apocrypha,'  chs.  3-14),  after  a.d.  90. — (d) 
Apocalypse  of  Baruch  (q.v.),  about  the  same  time  as  U  Ezra. — 
(e)  The  Testament  of  Abraham,,  perhaps  the  1st  cent.  a.d. — (/) 
The  Testaments  of  the  XII.  Patriarchs  (q.v.),  probably  the  1st 
cent.  a.d. — (a),  (6),  (d),  and  (/)  are  best  accessible  to  the  English 
reader  in  the  careful  editions  of  B.  H.  Charles,  Oxford,  1893, 
1897,  1896,  1908.  In  regard  to  (c),  we  have,  in  addition  to  the 
scholarly  editions  of  James  and  Bensly,  O.  H.  Box's  The 
Ezra-Apocalypse  (London,  1912).  For  (e),  we  have  the  edition 
of  M.  R.  James  (Cambridge,  1892).  N.B.—See  now  also  R.  H. 
Charles,  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha  of  the  OT,  Oxford, 
1913. 

Closely  related  to  the  apocalyptical  books  are :  (g)  The 
Psalm^s  of  Solomon,  64-40  B.C.,  edited  by  Ryle  and  James 
(Cambridge,  1891)  under  the  alternative  title  Psalms  of  the 
Pharisees.— -(h)  The  Book  of  Jubilees,  probably  before  Christ- 
See  Charles'  translation  in  JQR  vi.  [1894J  710,  vii.  [1895]  297.— 
(i)  The  Ascension  of  Isaiah  (q.v.) — Jewish  part=the  Martyrdom 
of  Isaiah  (2i-3i2  and  5--"),  Charles'  edition  (London,  1900).  In 
addition  to  these  extant  books  are  4,  which  are  known  to  us 
only  through  citations  in  Origen  and  other  Fathers :  (J)  The 
Prayer  of  Joseph  ;  (h)  The  Booh  of  Eldad  and  Medad  ;  (I)  The 
Apocalypse  of  Elijah ;  (m)  The  Apocalypse  of  Zephaniah. 

(B)  Under  this  head  would  fall  not  so  much  apocalypses 
written  independently  by  Jews  who  were  Christians — for,  if  we 
except  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  such  books  are  hardly  known 
to  have  existed— as  (a)  Selections  from  Jewish  apocalj-pses 
of  matter  embodying  beliefs  common  to  Jews  ond  Christians ; 
and  (b)  Christian  interpolations  of  Jewish  apocalj^yses.  Of 
these  (a)  are  by  far  the  more  frequent.  The  OT  was  the  Bible 
of  the  early  Christians,  and  such  an  example  as  that  of  Jude  ^*f- 
(cf.  En.  19),  taken  along  with  the  implicit  references  to  apoca- 
lyptic writings  which  are  found  in  the  Apocalj^ise  and  other 
books  of  the  NT  (see  below),  reveals  a  tendency  among  the 
Christians  to  extend  the  range  of  the  Canon  ;  it  points  at  the 
same  time  to  the  large  amount  of  matter,  both  within  and  be- 
yond the  Canon,  that  was  common  to  Jews  and  Christians.  It 
is,  indeed,  a  fact  worthy  of  special  notice  that  at  an  early  period, 
which  we  may  date  roughly  from  the  fall  of  the  Jewish  State 
in  A.D.  70,  apocalyptic  literature  begins  to  lose  interest  for  the 
Synagogue  in  proportion  as  it  gains  it  for  the  Christian  Church. 
This  fact  invests  the  apocalyptic  literature  with  a  peculiar 
interest  for  the  student  of  the  Apostolic  Age.  There  is  the 
general  question  as  to  how  that  age  of  early  Christians  came  to 
value  and  even  to  produce  apocalyptic  books,  which  we  convert 
here  into  the  more  concrete  question.  How  could  it  produce  the 
Apocalypse  of  John  ?  There  is  the  dogmatic  question.  What  are 
the  elements  in  this  book  which  entitle  it  to  the  position  of 
authority  it  holds  to  this  day?  For  (b),  examples  of  Christian 
interpolation  may  be  found  in  The  Ascension  of  Isaiah,  which 
is  Christian  in  all  but  2i-3i2  and  62-14  ;  and  in  chs.  1  and  2,  and 
15  and  16  of  A  Ezra  which  are  sometimes  quoted  as  6  and  6 
Ezra  respectively. 

(C)  Hellenic  apocalypses.  —  The  Sibylline  OraeUt  (q.v.), 
'  Jewish  works  under  a  heathen  mask  '  (Schiirer),  are  the  best 
instance  under  this  head.  They  are  the  work  of  Hellenigtic 
Jews,  and  are  written  in  Greek  hexameters  for  Gentiles,  under 
names  which  have  authority  for  such  readers.  The  fact  that 
they  have  been  subjected  to  considerable  Christian  interpolation 
testifies  to  the  extent  of  their  circulation.  Much  the  best  edition 
of  them,  based  on  14  MSS,  is  that  of  Rzach  (Oraeula  Sibyllina, 
Vienna,  1891).  English  readers  may  consult  Schiirer's  HJP  ii.  iii. 
288-92;  Edinb.  Review  (July  1877);  Deane's  Pseudepigrapha 
(1891),  276ff.i;  Charles'  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha,  ii. 

As  an  example  of  distinctively  Christian  work,  produced 
under  more  decidedly  Hellenic  influence  than  is  to  be  found  in 
works  of  Jewish  origin,  may  be  mentioned  the  Apocalypse  of 
Peter,  a  large  part  of  which  was  edited  for  the  English  reader 
in  1892.  Strong  claims  to  canonicity  were  made  for  it  in  early 
times,  and  its  teaching  largely  influenced  later  Christian  ideas 


•  Jude  I4f- ;  cf.  Eth.  En.  !». 

t  48-'!'  623  etc.    See  L.  A.  Muirhead,  TA«  TiiMt  nf  Chritt, 
Edinburgh,  lf06,  pp.  141  f.,  147. 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


73 


of  heaven  and  hell.  '  It  is  as  strongly  Greek  as  Revelation  [the 
Apoc.  of  John]  is  Jewish,  having  a  close  relation  to  the  Greek 
Orphic  Literature.  It  concerns  the  lot  of  souls  after  death, 
whereas  Revelation,  like  the  Jewish  apocal}-pee8,  is  more  con- 
cerned with  the  course  of  world-history '  (Porter,  from  wboee 
Mettagei  of  the  Apoe.  WriUn,  7  ff.,  these  lists  are  mainly  taken). 
i.  Period  and  general  characteristics  of  apoca- 
lyptic literature. — Before  passing  to  an  account  of 
the  Apocalypse  of  John  we  must  try  to  form  a 
definite  idea  of  the  characteristic  features  of  apoca- 
lyptic literature  —  its  design,  form,  and  leading 
ideas.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the  student  of 
the  NT,  apocalypse  must  be  considered  as  of  purely 
Jewish  growth.*  As  we  have  seen,  the  period 
within  which  apocalyptic  literature  was  produced 
occupied  over  a  century  and  a  half  before  the 
birth  of  Christ  and  about  a  century  after.  It  is 
thus  the  accompaniment  and  interpretation  of  the 
last  great  struggle  of  the  Jewish  people  for  that 
political  independence — with  an  implicit  idea  of 
supremacy — which  seemed  to  be  due  to  the  Chosen 
People.  'Within  this  period  fall  the  comparative 
victory  (ilaccabsean  triumph),  varying  fortnnes 
(political  importance,  accompanied  ^vith  decline  of 
religious  fervour ;  dissensions  between  the  lax 
hellenizing  and  the  puritanical  patriotic  party), 
and  the  mtimate  seeming  extinction  (capture  of 
Jerusalem  by  Titus  a.d.  70)  of  this  ideal.  The 
apocalyptists  are  the  instructors  and  encotiragers 
oi  the  people  in  the  name  of  Grod  in  reference  to 
that  Kingdom  which,  in  spite  of  the  greatness  of 
the  world-powers  that  are  their  rivals  and  the 
enemies  of  Jahweh,  is  yet  to  come  to  them  from 
God  and  to  be  realized  in  the  world.  In  Daniel, 
which  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Maccabsean 
struggle,  we  may  see  the  high-water  mark  of 
spiritual  faith  reached  by  this  ideal ;  in  the  fact 
that  after  the  fall  of  the  Je^vish  State,  the  kernel  t 
of  the  nation,  the  Jews  of  the  stricter  synagogue, 
ceased  to  cherish  the  apocalypses  and  perhaps 
even  suppressed  ^  them,  we  have  an  index  of  the 
limitations  of  the  ideal.  The  Kingdom,  however 
loftily  conceived  by  the  seers  of  the  nation,  was 
still  in  the  actual  thought  of  the  orthodox  Jew  too 
much  of  this  world  and  of  his  own  nation.  Be- 
tween this  flow  and  ebb  lies  the  history  of  apoca- 
lypse, as  it  is  to  be  read  within  the  limits  of 
Judaism.  It  is  a  record  of  great  hopes  and  fideli- 
ties, but  also  of  great  disappointments  and  of 
failures  both  in  conception  and  fulfilment.  The 
mreat  apocalypses  were  written  in  periods  of  stress. 
Judging  from  Daniel,  we  may  say,  perhaps,  the 
greater  the  stress  the  truer  the  inspiration  of  the 
apocalyptist.  The  leading  ideas  are  simple  but 
great ;  the  tribulation  is  real.  It  will  last  for  a 
measured  while,  and  even  increase.  The  troubling 
powers  are  fierce  and  violent.  They  rage  like  wild 
beasts  and  seem  to  be  of  great  power ;  but  their 
power  passes,  and  the  Kingdom  comes  to  the  faith- 
rul  and  the  patient.  Death  does  not  end  every- 
thing either  for  the  faithful  or  for  the  lawless,  and 
there  is  special  bliss  for  those  who  lose  life  for 
righteousness'  sake.§ 

As  to  the  literary  form  of  the  apocalypses,  the 
most  salient  distinguishing  feature  is  a  certain 
*  That  is  to  say,  questions  as  to  the  affinities  of  its  phrase- 
ology and  conceptions  with  those  of  heathen  mj-thology  belong 
rather  to  the  study  of  the  OT.  Long  before  '  John  '  writes,  the 
mythological  conceptions  have  pas^  through  the  mill  of  the 
spirit  that  is  distinctive  of  the  Jewish  faith.  What  hirther  re- 
finement they  need  is  supplied  by  the  mill  of  the  Christian 
fulfilment. 

t  Yet  what  is  here  said  is  not  altc^ether  true  of  the  Jews  of 
the  Dispersion. 

t  The  'apocalypses  survive  for  the  most  part  not  in  their 
native  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  bat  in  Greek,  and  in  the  dialects  of 
the  districts  where  they  were  received,  and  where  they  were 
read  more  by  Christians  than  by  Jews. 

§  Dn  122  is  fairly  cited  as  probably  the  only  passage  in  the  OT 
that  clearly  teaches  a  bodily  resurrection  for  individual  Israel- 
ites. The  resurrectioa  would  seem  to  be  universal  as  regards 
Israel  (though  this  is  doubtful),  but  nothing  is  said  of  the 
heathen. 


obscurity  of  imagery,  which  sometimes  takes  the 
form  of  a  grotesqueness,  and  of  an  incongmity  in 
details,  which  are  excusable  only  upon  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  awkward  imagery  was  capable  of  the 
twofold  task  of  conveying  the  meaning  to  those 
for  whom  it  was  intended,  and  of  veiling  it  from 
others. 

This  obscurity  of  style  is  connected  with  the 
fact  that  apocaly^pses  were,  so  far  as  we  know,  in 
nearly  every  case  pseudonymous.  Daniel  was  not 
written,  like  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  or  Jeremiah, 
to  be  spoken.  It  was  written  to  be  read.  Prob- 
ably in  the  case  of  the  author  of  Daniel,  the 
pseudonymity  was  due,  not  so  much  to  the  feeling  * 
that  he  would  not  be  accepted  by  his  fellow- 
countrymen  as  a  prophet,  as  to  the  necessity  of 
eluding  the  hostility  and  even  the  suspicion  of  the 
Syrian  authorities.  A  prophet  might  be  arrested 
in  the  street,  a  living  author  might  be  traced  to  his 
desk.  But  what  could  the  Syrian  do  with  the 
influence  of  writings  that  were  three  centuries 
old?  The  example  of  the  author  of  Daniel 
made  pseudonymity  a  fashion.  Writers  who  had 
no  cause  to  fear  arrest,  but  some  perhaps  to  fear 
neglect,  wrote  in  the  names  of  prophets  or  saints 
of  bygone  days.  It  is  difficult  tor  us  to  conceive 
how  any  one  able  to  handle  a  pen  could  have  been 
deceived  by  such  fictions.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  is  a  certain  impressiveness  in  the  fact  that 
questions  regarding  the  real  state  of  matters  (in 
the  literary  sense)  do  not  seem  to  have  emerged. 
Readers  and  interpreters  of  the  apocalypses  were 
concerned  with  their  message  for  their  own  time. 
If  an  interpreter  had  thoughts  of  his  own  regarding 
the  literary  structure  of  an  apocalypse,  he  sup- 

{)ressed  them.  His  instinct  told  him,  as  its  equiva- 
ent  teUs  the  modem  preacher,  that  a  text  does 
not  become  the  word  of  God  until  it  is  released 
from  bondage  to  its  historical  meaning.  At  the 
same  time  their  artificial  literary  style  takes  from 
the  spiritual  value  of  the  apocalyptic  writings.  If 
real  history,  in  so  far  as  it  deals  with  the  past,  is 
a  veil — though  a  transparent  one — between  (jod 
and  the  spirit  of  the  reader,  the  fiction  of  history, 
behind  which  the  apocalyptic  writer  found  it 
necessary  (even  were  it  in  the  interest  of  his 
message)  to  conceal  himself,  becomes,  at  least  for 
later  residers,  a  veil  that  is  opaque.  Parables  that 
are  puzzles  can  hardly  be  edifying.  Some  of  the 
parables  of  Daniel  are  puzzles  to  this  day.  It  is  a 
question  of  some  moment  how  far  such  criticism 
applies  to  the  canonical  Apocalypse  of  the  XT. 

Besides  community  in  general  ideas  and  in 
pseudonymity,  apocalypses  have  a  certain  com- 
munity in  imagery.  There  is,  as  it  were,  a  sample 
stock  of  images  always  accessible  to  the  apoca- 
lyptist. 

On  the  side  of  good,  we  have  (to  take  great 
examples)  Gk)d  and  His  throne,  angels  such  as 
Michael  and  Gabriel,  or  angelic  beings  resembling 
men  (of  whom  the  chief,  when  he  appears  at  all,  is 
the  Messiah),  books  written  with  the  names  of  the 
saints,  the  paradise  of  God  with  its  trees  of  healing 
and  nourishment,  the  new  creation  with  its  wonders 
specialized  in  the  new  city  and  temple.  On  the 
side  of  evU,  we  have  Satan,  the  opposer,  deceiver, 
accuser,  the  monster  of  the  deep  (dragon  or  croco- 
dile), wild  beasts  of  the  land,  which,  however,  rise 
out  of  the  deep, t  a  'man  of  lawlessness'  who 

*  The  feeling  was,  however,  undoubtedly  present.  The 
author's  appeal  to  '  books'  is  a  confession  of  it  (Dn  9* ;  cf.  Jet 
25Ut).    SeeL.  A.Mnirtae*d,7Ae  j:KAatofo9yo/J««u«,Lond<xi. 

1904,  p.  Tiff.  ^    .  _.  *u 

t  Cf.  Rev  13^«-,  Dn  7«,  U  Ezr.  131*.  in  the  last  paasage  Uie 
figure  of  •  one  like  a  man '  (the  Messiah)  rises  frwn  the  m*.  and 
then  flies  among  the  clouds,  and  the  exi^anation  is  given :  '  As 
none  can  find  out  what  is  in  the  depths  of  the  sea,  so  none  <A 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  can  see  my  S<m  and  his  compamona 
save  at  the  hour  of  his  day'  (v.**^).  The  depth  of  the  sea 
rather  than  the  height  of  heaven  seemed  to  'Eaa'  the  surest 


74 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


embodies  all  blasphemy,  a  '  great  whore '  who 
incarnates  all  tlie  abominations  of  the  heathen 
world.  In  view  of  this  sameness  of  the  underlying 
imagery,  the  originality  of  an  apocalyptist  is  to  be 
seen  more  in  the  use  of  his  material  than  in  the 
material  itself.  The  forces  of  good  and  evil  remain 
the  same,  the  general  aspect  of  conflict  between 
them — the  inherent  strength  of  God's  rule  and  the 
imminent  collapse  of  the  devil's — remains  to  the 
prophetic  eye  the  same,  but  persons  and  events 
change.  Tlie  apocalyptist  of  truly  prophetic  spirit 
has  his  eye  fixed  on  God  and  his  own  time  ;  and, 
while  he  uses  what,  abstractly  considered,  seems  a 
cumbrous  and  partly  alien  literary  form,  he  does 
so  not  to  exercise  a  literary  gift  but  to  convey  a 
message,  the  urgency  of  which  lies  on  his  spirit  as 
a  '  burden '  of  the  Lord.  An  obvious  criterion  of 
the  rightfulness  of  his  claim  to  be  a  prophet  will  be 
the  ease  and  freedom  with  which  he  is  able  to 
adapt  the  material,  imposed  by  his  choice  of  the 
apocalyptic  form,  to  the  purpose  of  his  message. 

Judged  in  this  way,  the  Apocalypse  of  John 
shines  in  a  light  which  no  student  of  early  Chris- 
tian literature  can  call  other  than  brilliant. 
Whatever  difficulties  were  felt  by  the  early  Fathers 
in  giving  it  a  place  in  the  Canon,  there  is  no  book 
of  tlie  NT  whose  claim,  once  admitted,  has  been 
less  a  matter  of  subsequent  doubt.  Until  less 
than  a  century  ago,  the  Apocalypse  was  supposed 
to  contain  a  forecast*  or  the  entire  career  of 
the  Church  in  time,  but  the  modification  of  this 
view  through  the  clear  perception  that  both  pro- 
phets and  apocalyptists  wrote  for  their  own  time, 
attaching  to  its  needs  and  prospects  a  certain 
finality,  has  not  altered  the  belief  of  Christians 
in  the  permanent  spiritual  value  of  this  unique 
book. 

II.  The  Apocalypse  op  John.— i.  Scheme  of 
the  book. — It  is  not  possible  to  supply  in  this 
article  anything  like  a  Commentary  or  even  an 
adequate  Introduction  to  the  Apocalypse.  Yet  it 
may  be  useful  to  precede  a  discussion  of  some  of 
its  salient  features  with  the  following  scheme  of 
its  contents,  which  is  an  abbreviated  version  of 
that  given  by  F.  C.  Porter  in  his  invaluable 
manual  (op.  cif.  179  f.). 

Superscription,  li-S. 

A.  The  messaRes  of  Christ  to  His  Churches  represented  by 
the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  14-322. 

(o)  Introduction,  including  salutation,  theme,  attestation, 
14-8. 

(b)  The  Seer's  Call,  19-20. 

(c)  The  Seven  Messages,  cha.  2  and  3. 

B.  Visions  of  Judgment,  composing  the  body  of  the  book 
(chs.  4-20)  intersected  at  chs.  7,  11, 14,  and  19,  with  visions  of  the 
victory  and  bliss  of  the  faithful. 

(a)  Visions  of  God  and  Christ  respectively  performing  and 
revealing,  chs.  4  and  5. 

J)  First  stages  of  the  Judgment,  including  the  opening  of 
six  seals.t  the  salvation  of  the  faithful,  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  one-third  of  mankind  at  the  sounding  of  six 
trumpets,  chs.  6-9. 

(c)  Last  stages  of  the  Judgment,  issuing  in  the  final  overthrow 
of  Satan  and  Rome,  especially  the  imperial  cultus  (the 
'Beast'),  and  in  the  General  Resurrection  and  Judgment. 
The  .Sof  r  receives  a  new  commission.  He  describes  the 
coiitliot  between  the  worshippers  of  the  Beast  and  the 
followers  of  the  Lamb,  and  his  vision  of  the  wrath  of  God 
in  seven  bowls,  chs.  10-20.  Note  that  a  large  portion  of 
this  section  consists  of  assurances  to  the  faithful  and  of 
songs  of  triumpl),  and  much  the  greater  part  of  the 
Judgment  portion  (chs.  12,  17,  18,  and  19)  describes  the 
fall  of  Rome. 

C.  The  Blessed  Consummation,  including  the  coming  of  God 


stronghold  of  secrets  that  should  be  inaccessible  to  men.  On 
the  representation  of  this  idea  in  the  Genesis  narratives  of 
creation  and  the  relation  of  the  l.-vtter  to  the  Babylonian  myth 
of  Marduk  and  Tiamat,  see  Gimkcl,  Schopfung  u.  Chaos,  1896. 

*  In  an  obvious  sense,  of  course,  the  book  did  contain  such  a 
forecast.  As  with  every  prophet,  the  end  is  within  the  vision 
of  the  writer.  In  his  case  it  is  to  come  'shortly' — i.e.  most 
likely  wthin  his  own  generation. 

t  There  are  pauses  after  the  6th  seal  and  the  6th  trumpet. 
The  7th  seal  contains,  as  it  were,  the  7  trumpets,  and  the  7th 
trumpet  contains  the  7  bowls. 


to  dwell  with  men  and  the  descent  of  the  Heavenly  Jerusalem, 
chs.  21  and  22.  Note  that  both  the  Epilogue  and  the  Prologue  of 
the  book  solemnly  emphasize  the  claim  to  be  considered  '  pro- 
phecy ■  (22i8f- ;  cf.  13). 

2.  Examples  of  the  problems. — A  few  specimens 
may  be  given  of  the  many  fa-scinating  problems 
which  emerge  for  the  student  regarding:  (1)  the 
literary  striictnre  of  the  Apocalypse ;  (2)  the  sig- 
nificance of  some  of  its  move  promiTient  details. 

(1)  In  spite  of  its  being,  more  than  almost  any 
other  book  of  the  NT  (see  below),  saturated  with 
reminiscences  of  books  of  the  OT  (esp.  Dan.,  Ezek., 
Is.,  Jer.,  Joel,  and  generally  all  tlie  portions  of 
the  OT  which  describe  visions  of  God  or  offer 
pictures  of  bliss  or  woe),  the  book  leaves  the 
reader  with  a  strong  impression  of  its  spiritual 
unity.  The  writer  is  a  Christian  and  a  prophet. 
His  central  positive  theme  is  Christ  Cfrucified, 
Risen,  and  Ascended  (1"'-  S"- ^*^-).  The  warrant, 
substance,  and  spirit  of  his  prophecy  are  'the 
testimony  of  Jesus,'  a  phrase  in  which  the  of  seems 
to  incluae  both  a  subjective  and  an  objective 
meaning*  (19'";  cf.  l'^-).  The  world  to  come  is 
imminent,  and  its  inlieritors  are  the  worshippers 
of  God  and  the  Lamb  (!"•  1^-  etc.). 

It  is  evident,  however,  as  a  few  examples  will 
be  sufficient  to  show,  that  this  general  unity  goes 
along  with  great  looseness  in  the  assimilation  of 
borrowed  material. 

Examples :  (a)  Ch.  11  is  made  up  of  portions  of  two  apoca- 
lypses, one  of  which  (represented  by  vv.i-2)  belongs  to  the 
time  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  (c.  a.d.  70),  and  the  other 
embodies  a  portion  of  the  Antichrist  legend,  which  related  how 
Antichrist  would  slay  Enoch  and  Elijah,  returned  from  heaven, 
who  would,  however,  be  raised  up  by  God  or  His  angels 
Gabriel  and  Michael  (see  Bousset's  Antichrist ;  and  Tert.  de 
Anima).  In  the  Apocalypse,  Enoch  becomes  Moses,  and  what 
was  previously  described  (v. 2)  as  the  '  holy  city '  becomes '  spiritu- 
ally Sodom  and  Egypt,  where  the  Lord  was  crucified '  (v.8).  The 
general  purpose — to  teach  that  the  worshippers  of  the  true  God 
are  safe  (vv.i-  2),  and  that  the  powers  of  wicked  men  will  not 
prevail  against  the  testimony  of  law  and  prophecy  to  the  true 
God  (vv.3-12) — is  evident.  But  it  is  equally  evident  that  the 
author  is  hampered  in  the  expression  of  this  message  by  a 
superabundance  of  borrowed  and  not  quite  congruous  niatenal. 
Though  the  time  of  the  testimony  of  the  two  witnesses  in  v.* 
corresponds  with  that  during  which  the  holy  city  is  to  be 
trodden  under  foot  by  the  Gentiles  (cf.  vv.2.a)^  the  situation 
of  the  city  at  v.i3  does  not  correspond  with  that  indicated  at 
v.2  any  more  than  the  holy  city  of  the  latter  verse  corresponds 
with  '  Sodom  and  Egypt '  of  v.** 

(&)  An  example  of  composite  structure,  better  known  to 
modern  students  of  the  Apocalypse  (through  Gunkel's  5c^c7j/. 
M.  Chaos),  but  more  difficult  to  exhibit  with  precision,  is  the 
vision  in  ch.  12  of  the  Messiah-mother  and  the  Dragon  seeking 
to  devour  her  child.  The  teaching  of  '  John '  is,  again,  evident 
enough.  Satan  has  been  overthrown  by  the  birth  and  ascension 
of  the  Messiah.  He  has  been  cast  down  from  heaven,  but  he  is 
still  permitted  to  persecute  the  Messianic  conimui)it.v  on  earth. 
If  his  wrath  is  fierce,  it  is  because  his  time  is  short.  Let  the 
persecuted  lend  their  ear  to  the  loud  voice  saying  in  heaven : 
'Now  is  come  salvation — and  the  Kingdom  of  our  God' 
(vv.17. 12. 10).  It  is  clear,  however,  that,  apart  from  a  desire  to 
use  materials  which  lay  to  his  hand  in  fr.igments  of  Jewish  ajiocA- 
lypses,  which  borrowed  and  combined  Babylonian,  Egyptian, 
and  Greek  myths,  he  would  not  have  expressed  his  meaning  in 
the  way  we  find  in  this  chapter.  The  scene  begins  in  heaven, 
and  the  woman  is  described  (v.  i)  in  language  approiiriate  to  a 
goddess.  Then  she  appears  (v.o),  without  explanation,  on  the 
earth,  where  she  finds  refuge  and  nourishment  in  the  wilder- 
ness. The  Dragon  is  then  cast  out  of  heaven  to  the  earth  (v.O). 
although  this  ejection  seems  already  to  be  assumed  at  v.*,  and 
on  the  earth  he  pursues  the  woman  to  her  retreat  in  the  wilder- 
ness. A  Christian  meaning  can  doubtless  be  put  into  it  all,  but 
no  one  narrator  could  ever  spontaneously  have  told  the  stor.v 
in  this  way.  For  a  brief  and  lucid  attempt  to  conceive  the 
possible  process  through  which  the  immediate  and  remote 
materials  passed  in  the  hands  of  '  John,'  see  Porter,  op.  cit. 
236  ff. 

(2)  Of  problems  turning  on  more  special  points 
we  have  good  instances  in  ch.  13.  We  may  feel 
satisfied  that  the  first  Beast  is,  in  general  the 
Roman  Empire  embodied  in  the  person  of  the 
Emperor,  while  the  second  (the  lamb  that  '  spake 
as  a  dragon,'  v.")  is  the  priesthood  of  the  Imperial 

*  The  words  '  the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy ' 
are  a  gloss  (see  the  Commentaries),  but  they  are  entirely  true 
to  the  writer's  thought  (li),  and  form  with  1  Co  123  an  interest- 
ing witness  to  the  test  applied  to  prophets  in  the  early  Church. 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


<o 


cultas  exercising  a  lamb-like  office  ^vnth  all  the 
ferocity  of  dragon-like  tyrants.  We  may  be  satis- 
fied also  that  under  the  imagery  of  the  first  Beast 
the  author  must  have  thought  both  of  Nero  and 
Doraitian.  Still  the  questions  remain :  (a)  What 
is  the  ' deadly  wound '  that  was  healed  (v.")?  (6) 
Who  is  the  '  man '  whose  number  is  the  number 
of  the  Beast  (v.")?  (c)  Is  the  'number'  666,  or, 
as  in  some  MSS,  616  ?  These  three  questions  are 
closely  interdependent.  It  has  been  argued  that, 
as  the  Beast  is  rather  the  Empire  than  an  individual 
iimperor,  the  wound  should  refer  to  some  event 
of  public  rather  than  of  personal  import.  To 
the  objection  that  v.^*  speaks  expressly  of  the 
•number  of  a  man,'  it  is  replied  that,  on  the 
analogy  of  21",  this  may  simply  mean  that  the 
nnnaber  is  to  be  reckoned  in  a  human  and  not  in 
a  heavenly  or  angelic  way.  It  is  found  that  the 
Greek  letters  *  of  the  phrase  meaning  '  the  Latin 
Kingdom '  give  the  number  666,  whUe  the  value 
of  the  letters  in  'the  Italian  Kingdom'  is  616. 
Against  the  identification  of  the  Beast  with  Nero 
it  is  further  argued  that  the  Hebrew  equivalent  of 
'Nero  Caesar,'  rightly  spelt  (i.e.  with  the  yod  ['] 
in  '  Caesar '),  t  gives  not  666  but  676.  Accepting  this 
point  of  view,  we  should  still  have  to  ask,  What  were 
the  events  that  were  respectively  the  inflicting  and 
the  healing  of  a  deadly  wouna,  and  we  are  pre- 
sented witli  the  alternative  theories :  assassina- 
tion of  Julius  Ceesar  (wound),  accession  of 
Augustus  (healing) ;  end  of  the  Julian  dynasty  in 
Nero  (wound),  rise  of  the  Flavian  dynasty  (heal- 
ing). On  the  other  hand,  it  is  contended  that, 
apart  even  from  v.^^  the  whole  passage  is  too 
intense  and  too  definite  in  its  reference  to  exclude 
particular  Emperors  from  the  view  of  the  author 
or  his  readers.  He  must  have  thought  of  Nero. 
Almost  as  certainly  he  must  have  thought  of 
Domitian,  whom  he  conceived  as  Nero  Hedivivus 
(17"),  and,  not  improbably,  he  also  thought  of 
Caligula,  to  whose  attempt  to  set  up  his  o\\ti  statue 
in  Jerusalem  the  Apocalypse  of  the  blasphemous 
beast  (considered  as  material  borrowed  by  '  John ') 
might  be  supposed  to  have  originally  referred.^ 
This  might  explain  the  variant  616,  which  is  the 
number  of  Caligula's  name.  The  omission  of  the 
yod  in  writing  the  Hebrew  form  of  Caesar  is  not  a 
serious  difficulty  (see  Moflatt,  op.  cit.).  Finally, 
Gunkel,  finding  the  Bab.  original  of  the  Beast  in 
the  chaos-monster  Tiamat  overcome  (in  the  crea- 
tion mjrth)  by  Marduk,  has  shown  that  the  Heb. 
words  njpc^p  cSn^(T'hdm  kadhmdni yah =' the  primi- 
tive monster')  give  the  number  666.  It  might  be 
supposed,  therefore,  that  what  struck  'John  '  was 
that  the  number  of  this  primaeval  beast,  tradition- 
ally familiar  to  him,  was  also  the  number  of  a 
man,  viz.  Nero.  There  are  serious  linguistic 
objections  to  this  view  (see  Moffatt),  but  it  may 
suggest  to  us  that  the  number  containing  three 
sixes  had  a  traditional  meaning.  It  may  have 
meant  the  constant  eflbrt  and  failure  of  what  is 
human  to  attain  the  Divine  perfection,  of  which 
the  number  7  was  the  symbol :  so  near  yet  so  far 
otF,  '  O  the  little  more,  and  how  much  it  is.' 

All  these  varying  views  of  '  John's '  meaning 
cannot  be  true  in  every  particular.     Yet  we  are, 
perhaps,  nearer  the  truth  in  saying  that  portions 
of  all  of  them  must  have  passed  tlu-ough  his  mind  ' 
than  in  deciding  dogmatically  in  favour  of  one  of 

*  The  letters  of  both  the  Greek  and  the  Hebrew  alphabets 
have  each  a  numerical  ralne. 

t  "i;'2  not  n;^ ;  cf-  art.  Astichrist. 

t  Cf.  V.5  with  the  description  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in 
Dn  1136"^  It  seems  to  the  present  writer  that  *  John '  may 
have  thoogbt  of  Dooiitian  as  combining  C^gnla  and  Xero  in 
himself  in  much  the  same  way  as  the  Beast,  which  is  Rome 
(133),  combines  in  itself  all  the  ferocities  of  Daniel's  first  three 
beasts  (lion,  bear,  leopard,  Dn  "*»•).  like  i  Ezr.  121<M>  he 
would  consider  Daniel's /tnirtA  beast  to  be  Borne. 


them.  It  seems  to  the  present  writer  that  the 
loose  way  in  which  the  prophet  and  pastor  who 
^vTote  the  Apocalypse  deEilt  with  the  traditional 
material  that  lay  to  his  band  was  probably  as 
intentional  as  the  frequent  grammatical  anomalies 
and  harsh  Hebraisms  of  his  text,  which  no  Greek 
scholar  supposes  to  be  due  to  inadvertence.  The 
man  who  had  the  literary  genius  and  the  prophetic 
inspiration  to  write  the  songs  of  triumph  and  the 
hortatory  portions  of  the  Apocalypse  may  be  be- 
lieved to  have  had  a  method  in  his  carelessness. 
He  was  certainly  capable  of  adopting  a  fixed  style 
of  writing  and  carrying  it  through  in  the  way 
that  style  on  the  whole  required.  If  he  left  some 
strings  flying  for  his  readers  to  cut  or  fasten  up  as 
the  spirit  might  lead  them,  may  it  not  be  a  sign 
that  he  considered  himself  and  his  companions  in 
the  '  kingdom  and  patience  of  Jesus  Christ '  to 
occupy  a  sphere  which,  just  because  it  was 
supreme  and  Divine,  was  not  hermetically  sealed 
to  the  rest  of  the  world,  but  was  open,  like  the 
New  Jerusalem,  to  receive  testimony  and  tribute 
from  every  quarter  ? 

3.  The  Apocalypse  of  John  as  a  product  of  the 
.ftpostolic  Age,  and  a  testimony  to  Jesus  as  the 
Christ. — Enough  has  perhaps  been  said  to  show 
that  questions  regarding  the  importance  and 
function  of  apocalyptic  literature  in  the  faith  and 
life  of  the  Apostolic  Age  are  best  answered  in 
connexion  with  a  study  of  the  Apocalypse  of  John. 
No  known  apocalyptic  writing  of  the  same  or 
greater  bulk  is  comparable  with  it  in  vitality  of 
connexion  with  primitive  Christianity  ;  and  there 
is  no  likelihood  that  any  such  writing  existed. 
Attention  may  be  fasten^  on  three  matters :  (a) 
the  historical  situation,  (b)  the  relation  of  apoca- 
lypse to  prophecy,  (c)  the  hortatory  and  dogmatic 
teaching  of  tne  Apocalypse. 

(a)  The  historical  situation. — We  have  seen  that 
the  period  of  apocalyptic  literature  is  roughly  the 
250  years  of  the  last  struggles  of  the  Jewish  people 
for  political  and  religious  independence.  The  first 
apocalypse  of  the  OT  is  contemporaneous  with  the 
great  sacrifices  made  by  the  elite  of  the  Jewish 
people  to  maintain  the  national  testimony  to  Jah- 
weh.  The  sacrificial  spirit  passed  into  the  com- 
munity that  confessed  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  crucified, 
risen,  and  ascended,  as  Lord  and  Messiah.  Very 
early  the  sacrificial  spirit  was  called  forth.  But 
the  first  persecutors  were  not  heathen  in  name. 
They  were  the  representatives  of  the  city  which 
'  spiritually  is  called  Sodom  and  Egypt,  where  also 
the  Lord  was  crucified'  (Rev  ll^;  cf.  1  Th  2^^, 
2  Th  2^-^).  To  St.  Paul  the  power  of  Antichrist 
lay  in  the  jealousy  of  the  Jewish  synagogue,  and 
it  would  seem  from  the  passage  in  2  Th  2  that  the 
power  '  that  restrains '  (6  KaT^&w,  rb  narexw)  is  the 
Roman  Empire.  Certainly  the  representation 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  favours  this  view 
(16"  21«  22««-  2^^).  Between  the  ministry  of 
St.  Paul  and  the  time  of  the  Apocalypse  a  change 
had  taken  place.  In  the  Apocalypse  the  Roman 
Empire  is  clearly  the  instrument  of  Antichrist. 
The  Dragon  gives  power  to  the  Beast  (IS"*),  and  it 
is  obvious  that  in  '  John's '  time,  and  especially  in 
the  province  of  Asia,  Christians  were  persecuted 
under  Imperial  authority  simply  because  of  their 
Christian  profession.  Christianity  was  a  crime  pun- 
ishable with  death,  in  so  far  as  it  was  inconsistent 
with  the  worship  of  the  Emperor  (1*  13'*^).  Doubt- 
less there  were  diflerences  in  the  administration  of 
the  law,  but  the  tone  of  the  Letters  to  the  Seven 
Churches  (chs.  2  and  3)  and  of  the  whole  Apoca- 
lypse indicates  a  time  when  the  worst  might  be 
apprehended.  The  beginning  of  this  Imperial 
attitude  to  the  Christians  may  perhaps  be  found 
in  the  summer  of  A.D.  64,  when,  as  Tacitus  in- 
forms us  (Ann.  xv,  44),  Nero  sought  to  fasten  on 


76 


APOCALYPSE 


^ypOCALYPSE 


the  Christians  the  odious  charge  of  incendiarism, 
and  it  lias  been  held  that  the  Apocalypse  belongs 
to  the  time  of  the  Neronic  persecution.  This  view 
may  now  be  regarded  as  superseded.  Nero  is  cer- 
tainly a  figure  in  the  Apocalypse  (see  above),  but 
he  is  a  figure  of  the  past.  The  Beast  is  alive  in 
his  bestial  successor  Domitian,  whom  'John'  con- 
siders Nero  Ecdivivus  *  (cf.  13*  with  17'^- 

It  was  under  Domitian  that  persecution  of  the 
Christians   first  became  a  part  of  the    Imperial 

ftolicy.  It  is  this  legalized  persecution  and  the 
act  that  the  centre  of  the  storm  lies  among  the 
Churches  of  Asia  that  rouse  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
in  the  author  of  chs.  2  and  3,  and,  as  we  venture 
to  think,  of  the  whole  Apocalypse.  And,  assuredly, 
it  was  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  and  not  of  delusion, 
that  gave  him  the  certainty  that  the  Lord  Jesus 
would  '  come  quickly '  to  deliver  His  people  from  a 
situation  in  wiich  the  choice  lay  between  death 
and  unfaithfulness  to  Him.  Every  prophet  is  an 
eschatologist.  He  sees  the  end  of  what  is  opposed 
to  the  will  of  holiness  and  love.  It  is  only  for  a 
moment — though  the  moments  of  God  and  history 
may  be  long — that  cruelty  and  violence  can  reign 
or  the  meek  and  righteous  be  oppressed. 

13'^  seems  to  indicate  an  edict  actually  in  force 
or  about  to  be  issued,  under  which  ordinary  con- 
tracts of  exchange  should  not  be  legal  apart  from 
vows  of  allegiance  to  the  Emperor  as  a  Divine 
person.  This  meant  that  Christians  were  excluded 
from  the  business  of  the  world,  and  so  from  the 
world  itself,  and  to  'John'  it  seemed  justly  a 
challenge  of  God's  supremacy,  which  God  and  His 
Christ  could  not  delay  to  take  up.  Quite  apart 
from  the  peculiar  genius  of  its  author,  the  Apoca- 
lypse must  have  been  to  its  first  readers  a  message 
of  comfort  and  power.  Its  appeal  lay  in  its  in- 
evitableness.  In  the  situation  as  described,  no 
message  short  of  that  contained  in  the  Apocalypse 
could  have  seemed  worthy  of  God  or  a  '  testimony 
of  Jesus  Christ.'  Prophecy  is  never  in  vactio. 
God's  word  is  in  the  mouth  of  His  prophet  because 
it  is  first  in  the  events  which  His  providence  or- 
dains or  permits.  It  would  be  difficult  to  rate  too 
highly  the  literary  and  spiritual  genius  of  '  John,' 
yet  the  autlioritativeness  of  his  message  for  his 
own  time  and  ours  lies  not  in  this  but  in  its  corre- 
spondence with  a  situation  of  crisis  for  the  King- 
d!om  of  God.  So  long  as  it  is  possible  for  a  situa- 
tion to  emerge  in  which  we  cannot  obey  man's 
law  without  dishonouring  God's,  the  Apocalypse 
will  be  an  authority  ready  for  use  in  the  hands  of 
the  godly. 

{b)  Apocalyptic  and  prophecy. — If  this  view  is 
just,  it  contains  the  answer  to  two  closely  related 
questions :  ( 1 )  Is  the  writer,  as  he  represents 
himself,  a  '  companion  in  tribulation '  of  those  to 
whom  he  writes  (1"),  or  does  he,  like  other  apoca- 
lyptists,  including  Daniel,  write  under  the  name 
of  some  great  personage  of  the  past?  (2)  Is  he 
really  a  prophet  as  well  as  an  apocalyptist  ? 

(1)  The  former  question  should  be  kept  apart 
from  the  question  whether  the  writer  can  reason- 
ably be  identiJied  with  the  Apostle  John.  There 
is  nowhere  in  the  book  the  slightest  hint  of  a 
claim  to  apostleship ;  21'''  and  18^  suggest  rather 
that  the  autlior  distinguished  himself  from  the 
•holy  apostles  and  prophets'  and  from  the  '12 
apostles.'  We  do  not  know  enough  regarding  the 
Cnurches  of  Asia  in  the  1st  cent,  to  say  with 
confidence  that  only  one  who  was  as  highly 
esteemed  as  John  the  Apostle  (Ramsay)  or  John 
the  Presbyter  (Bousset)  could  be  confident  that 
his  message  would  come  with  authority  to  those 

•  The  '  Beven  kings '  of  n^OfT.  are  the  seven  emperors — exclusive 
of  the  usurpers  Oalba,  Otho,  and  Vitellius — from  Augustus  to 
Nero.  The  '  eighth  that  is  of  the  seven  (v.H)  is  Domitian,  con- 
sidered as  Nero  Redivimis. 


to  whom  it  was  addressed.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  more  than  possible,  in  view  both  of  the  liter- 
ary apocalyptic  convention  of  pseudepigraphy  and 
of  the  probability  that  concealment  of  the  author's 
name  wjis  an  act  of  warrantable  prudence,  that 
'  John '  was  not  the  author's  real  name,  and  that 
(almost  by  consequence)  the  banishment  in  Patmos 
was,  so  far  as  he  was  concerned,  fictitious.  But 
the  matter  of  real  importance  is  not  the  question 
whether  the  names  of  person  and  place  are 
fictitious ;  it  is  the  fact  that — supposing  them  to 
have  been  fictitious — here  the  fiction  ends.  The 
writer  is  a  Christian.  He  is  in  the  same  situation 
with  those  he  addresses.  He  neither  desires  nor 
attempts  to  place  himself  in  the  distant  past.  The 
Christian  Church  has  its  own  prophets.  Our 
author  solemnly  claims  to  be  one  of  tliem,  and  the 
Church  since  the  beginning  of  the  3rd  cent,  has 
taken  him  at  his  own  estimate.* 

(2)  But  is  not  an  apocalyptist,  ipso  facto,  only 
a  pale  shadow  of  a  prophet  ?  Must  not  '  John '  lie 
conceived,  as  regards  inspiration,  to  stand  to  a 
speaking  prophet,  say  of  Ephesus,  as  '  Daniel ' 
stands  to  tne  real  Daniel  or  to  some  prophet  of  the 
time  of  Nebuchadrezzar  ?  It  seems  to  the  present 
writer  that  the  entire  absence  from  the  Apocalypse 
of  such  a  fiction  as  that  in  Daniel,  in  which  the 
past  is  in  one  part  (the  alleged  writer's  time) 
adorned  with  legendary  features,  and  in  a  much 
greater  part  (the  centuries  between  the  Exile  and 
the  Syrian  Persecution)  is  treated  fictitiously  as 
future,  separates  it  longo  intervallo  from  apocalyptic 
writings  of  the  purely  Jewish  type,  or  even  from 
Christian  apocalypses  like  the  Apoc.  of  Peter,  which 
resemble  the  Jewish  type  in  the  feature  of  imper- 
sonation. It  may  be  probable,  though  it  is  far 
from  certain,  that  '  John '  conceals  his  real  name, 
but  the  suggestion  that  he  tried  to  personate  any 
one,  or  sought  any  authority  for  his  message  other 
than  what  belonged  to  it  as  the  testimony  of  Jesus 
given  to  himself,  seems  to  be  as  destitute  of  proba- 
bility as  of  proof. 

What,  we  may  ask,  is  a  Christian  prophet  but 
one  who  has  an  diroKa\v^l/is  (revelation)  from  God 
through  Jesus  Christ  concerning  matters  Ipertain- 
ing  to  His  Kingdom  (1  Co  14'''*^-,  esp.  v.^*;  cf. 
Rev  19^")  ?  If  a  Christian  could  spealc  so  as  to 
bring  home  to  his  brethren  the  reality  of  the 
promised  Kingdom,  or  so  as  to  flash  the  light  of  the 
Divine  judgment  on  the  darkened  conscience  of  an 
unbeliever,  he  had  the  xa/J'^Ma  or  gift  of  prophecy 
(1  Co  1422-=«-).  St.  Paul  himself  must  have  pos- 
sessed the  gift  in  an  eminent  degree.  We  judge 
so  not  simply  from  what  is  told  in  the  Acts  or 
from  what  he  himself  tells  regarding  the  source 
from  which  he  derived  the  contents  and  manner  of 
his  preaching  or  the  directions  necessary  for  liis 
missionary  journeys.  We  judge  so  rather  from 
the  correspondence  existing  between  his  claim  to 
direct  access  to  this  source  and  the  still  operating 
influence  of  his  personality  upon  the  conscience 
and  conduct  of  mankind.  If  it  be  said  that  St. 
Paul  was  a  preacher,  and  '  John '  was,  so  far  as  we 
know,  only  a  writer,  it  may  be  asked  in  reply : 
What  do  we  know  of  Paul  the  preacher  that  we  do 
not  learn  best  from  his  own  writings?  No  com- 
panion of  'John  '  has  told  us  (as  Luke  did  of  Paul) 
how  he  preached,  but  surely  we  may  say  that  no 
one  could  write  as  '  John  does  without  being, 
under  favourable  conditions,  a  preacher,  and  that 

f»robably  as  much  in  proportion  of  '  John's '  Apoca- 
ypse  as  of  St.  Paul  s  Epistles  might  have  been 

*  Porter  (op.  cit.  183)  asks  whether  the  Apocalj-pse  is  '  a 
direct  or  a  secondary  product  of  that  new  inspiration  '  [Chria- 
tian  pro|)hec.v],  and  he  replies,  rather  disconcertingly  :  '  Our 
impression  is  that  it  is  secondary.'  No  one  has  a  better  right 
to  speak  with  authority  than  Porter.  But  if  the  inspiration  of 
the  -Apocalypse  is  secondary,  what  measure  have  we  by  which 
to  judge  of  that  which  is  primary? 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


77 


preached  as  it  stands  to  his  own  contemporaries. 
When  it  is  remembered  how  apocalypses  incom- 
parably inferior  in  spiritual  quality  to  the  Apoca- 
lypse were  cherished  by  the  early  Church  and  even 
quoted  as  Scripture,  it  will  not  seem  hazardous  to 
assert  that  in  the  Apostolic  Age  the  distinction 
between  apocalypse  and  prophecy,  which  is  marked 
in  the  pre-Christian  period  by  the  separation  of 
Daniel  in  the  Hebrew  Canon  from  '  the  Prophets,' 
has  ceased  to  exist.  Two  things,  unnaturally 
separated  (through  the  spirit  of  artihce),  have  come 
together  again.  The  prophet  is  the  man  who  has 
a  'revelation,'  and  the  man  who  has  a  'revelation,' 
whether  he  speak  it  or  write  it,  is  a  prophet.  If 
our  argument  is  sound,  we  may  venture  to  say 
that  once  at  least  this  ideal  unity  of  apocalypse 
and  prophecy  has  been  realized.  It  is  realized  in 
the  Apocalypse  of  John. 

(c)  The  hortatory  and  dogmatic  teaching  of  the 
Apocalypse. — The  best  proof  of  the  soundness  of 
the  above  argument  lies  in  the  abundance  of 
hortatory  and  dogmatic  material  of ;  permanent 
value  to  be  found  in  the  Apocalypse.  '  John '  is, 
in  a  sense,  the  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel  of 
the  NT.  This  is  eminently  true  of  the  messages 
to  the  Seven  Churches  (chs.  2  and  3).  Ramsay's 
Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia  (Lond.  1904) 
probably  exaggerates  the  extent  to  which  the 
writer  may  have  had  in  his  mind  facts  of  geography 
and  history  relating  to  the  places  mentioned  ; 
but  such  a  book — from  the  pen  of  an  unrivalled 
authority  on  the  antiquities  of  Asia  Minor — could 
not  have  been  written  of  the  messages  in  chs.  2 
and  3  of  the  Apocalypse  did  they  not  proceed  from 
one  who  was  thoroughly  conversant  with  every- 
thing in  the  environment  of  the  Churches  of  Asia 
which  had  a  bearing  on  their  spiritual  condition. 
A  writer  who  closes  each  message  with  the  formula, 
'he  that  hath  ears,  etc'  (27-  "•  ".  29  36.  13.  22. 
cf.  Mt  13®***,  etc.),  claims  to  stand  to  those  whom 
he  addresses  in  the  relation  of  a  speaking  prophet 
to  his  hearers.  Those  who  remember  the  function 
these  chapters  still  serve  in  that  best  type  of 
Christian  oratory  in  which  preaching  is  prophesy- 
ing, may  justly  feel  that  the  on-us  prohandi  rests 
with  those  who  deny  the  claim.  But  the  immedi- 
ately edifying  elements  of  the  Apocalypse  are  not 
confined  to  these  chapters.  The  book  is  written, 
as  it  claims  to  be,  in  an  atmosphere  of  worship.  * 
The  inspiration  came  to  '  John '  on  the  day  in 
which  Christians  remembered  the  Resurrection  of 
the  Lord.  The  book  is  a  message  from  the  Lord 
in  heaven.  Those  who  read  and  obey  are  blessed 
because  the  time  of  their  deliverance  is  at  hand. 
The  sense  of  holy  omnipotent  power,  not  domin- 
ated by  but  manifested  through  suffering — for 
the  power  is  redemptive — pervades  the  book.  Its 
refrain  is  Glory  to  God  and  to  the  Lamb  (1*^),  and 
the  note  of  the  triumphant  thanksgiving  of  the 
faithful  sounds,  throughout,  loudly  behind  the 
curtain  of  judgment  that  shrouds  the  wicked 
world  (5*-i*  69ff-  7^^  S^'-  ll"^'  1210-12  13»*-  14i-7-  ^ 
151-4  191-8. 11-16  2a«-fi  21.  22).  The  worship-element 
in  the  book  is  exquisitely  beautiful  as  literature, 
but  it  was  too  vital  to  the  spiritual  situation  to 
be  intended  as  ornamental.  The  crucial  element 
in  the  situation  is  the  liberty  of  worship.  His- 
tory has  proved  that  the  day  of  martyrs  is  emi- 

•  110.  The  opinion  of  scholars  is  against  the  rendering  :  '  I 
was,  through  the  Spirit,  in  the  Day  of  the  Lord  (or  the  Day  of 
Jad^ent),'  though  this  rendering  cannot  be  said  to  be  gram- 
maticall}'  impossible ;  and  though  it  has  the  advantage  of 
attaching  a  good  traditional  meaning  to  'Day  of  the  Lord," 
which  would  thus  retain  its  OT  sense  (Is  212,  Am  520,  etc),  yet  it 
is  hardly  likely  that  €v  would  be  used  both  in  the  instrumental 
and  the  local  sense  in  one  short  sentence  ;  and  the  analogy  of 
173f.  2110  suggests  that,  had  the  author  intended  this  meaning, 
he  would  have  used  a  verb  of  transference  ('  I  was  carried  by 
the  Spirit  to,  etc.').  The  '  Day  of  the  Lord'  is,  therefore,  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  the  day  of  worship. 


nently  the  day  when  this  liberty  is  denied  or 
ignored. 

The  ethical  teaching  of  the  book  is  perhaps  best 
seen  in  such  passages  as  B®-"  13*-i"  14"-"  20"-.  The 
essential  virtues  of  the  saints  are  patience  and 
courage.  The  weapon  of  force  is  not  permitted 
to  them  (131" .  ^f^  ^^^  26=2),  but  patience  and  faith 
prevaU.  On  the  other  hand,  patience  is  not  mere 
passivity.  The  command  to  worship  the  Beast 
must  be  courageously  disobeyed.  Compliance  is 
fatal.  First  among  those  who  have  their  part  in 
the  '  second  death '  are  '  the  fearful '  (21^).  The 
vital  connexion  of  this  teaching  with  the  situation 
is  obvious.  Not  less  but  even  more  obvious  is  its 
connexion  with  the  dogmatic  teaching  of  the  book. 
As  we  have  seen,  the  Apocalypse  must  be  con- 
sidered, so  far  as  the  Apostolic  Age  is  concerned, 
a  thing  of  Jewish  origin  and  growth.*  There  are, 
indeed,  few  direct  quotations  from  the  OT  in  the 
Apocalypse  ;  but  there  are  more  OT  reminiscences 
in  it  than  in  almost  any  other  book  of  the  NT.t 
This,  no  doubt,  is  due  largely  to  the  comparatively 
stereotyped  character  of  the  apocalyptic  imagery. 
But,  in  view  of  the  emphasis — in  some  cases 
excessive — which  many  scholars  have  laid  on  the 
Jewish  character  of  the  Apocalypse,  a  word  seems 
necessary  on  the  question  of  how  far  the  distinc- 
tive Christian  belief  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  has 
modified  the  type  of  teaching  peculiar  to  a  Jewish 
apocalyptic  book. 

At  first  sight  the  change  seems  more  formal 
than  real.  The  Apocalypse  comes  from  Jesus 
Christ  (1^),  but,  beyond  the  features  of  His  death 
and  resurrection,  there  is  nothing  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  sublime  Personage  who  overwhelms 
'  John'  with  His  manifestations  (1")  suggestive  of 
any  feature  distinctive  of  the  human  Jesus  of  the 
Gospels.  The  description  of  the  Figure  in  1^- 1"^- 
and  in  IQ^"^-  owes  more  to  Daniel,!  Zechariah,§ 
and  Isaiah  ||  than  to  anything  that  is  original  in 
the  Gospels.  Such  a  fact  gives  a  certain  colour 
to  the  view,  propounded  by  Vischer  in  1886,  that 
the  book  is  a  Jewish  Apocalypse  set  in  a  Christian 
framework  (chs.  1-3,  and  22^--'),  and  slightly  inter- 
polated. This  extreme  view  has,  however,  yielded 
to  the  strong  impression  of  its  unity  and  Christian 
character,  which,  in  spite  of  its  eclectic  form,  the 
book  produces  on  the  mind  of  the  critical  no  less 
than  of  the  ordinary  reader.  As  to  the  alleged 
absence  of  the  features  of  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels, 
two  considerations  seem  specially  relevant.  The 
one  is  that  the  absence  of  the  human  features  of 
Jesus  is  scarcely  more  marked  in  the  Apocalypse 
than  it  is  in  every  other  book  of  the  NT  outside 
the  Gospels.  Are  references  to  the  human  Jesus 
frequent  or  marked  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
though  that  book  was  written  by  a  man  who  also 
wrote  a  Gospel?  Are  they  marked — or  even,  in 
the  latter  case,  at  all  present — in  the  Epistles  which 
bear  the  names  of  Peter  and  John  ?  Notoriously 
they  are  so  little  marked  in  the  known  writings 
of  the  greatest  figure  of  the  Apostolic  Age  that 
their  absence  has  supplied  its  one  position  of 
apparent  strength  to  the  'modem  Gnosticism' 
associated  with  the  names  of  Jensen  and  Drews, 
and  has  made  the  effort  to  exhibit  real  points  of 
contact  between  St.  Paul  and  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
a  main  task  of  modem  Apologetics.  Yet  one  of 
St.  Paul's  companions  was  Mark,  and  another  was 
Luke.     "We  do  not  know  all  that  St.  Paul  either 

*  That  is  to  say,  its  affinities  with  pagan  mythology  may  be 
ignored,  as  belonging  to  the  sphere  of  OT  research. 

t  According  to  Hiihn,  Matthew  has  37  direct  quotations  from 
the  OT  against  3  in  the  Apocalyj>se.  But  the  latter  has  463 
reminiscences  against  437  in  Matthew.  Thus  Matthew  comes  near 
the  Apocalj'pse  in  this  respect ;  Luke,  with  474  reminiscences, 
goes  beyond  it.  All  the  other  books  are  much  behind  it 
{Alttegt.  Citate  w.  ReminUcenzen  im  NT,  1900,  p.  269 flf.). 

:  Dn  7S  105ff..  §  Zee  1210.  y  ig  n*  63^-. 


78 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


spoke  or  wrote,  but  we  do  know  that,  contempo- 
raneously Avith  the  actoniiilishnient  of  his  mission 
to  the  Gentiles,  or,  at  least,  well  within  the  Ajjos- 
tolic  Age,  a  demand  for  written  rcininiscenees  of 
Jesus  arose  both  in  the  Jewish  and  in  the  Gentile 
portion  of  the  Church.  Men  possess  reminiscences 
of  personalities  who  have  exercised  a  determining 
influence  upon  them  lonj,'  before  they  think  of 
committing  them  to  writing,  and  often,  if  not 
usually  —  as  witness  the  cases  of  Matthew  and 
Mark — the  task  of  writing  is  undertaken  only  by 
request  (Euseb.  HE  iii.  39).  If,  then,  the  silences 
of  St.  Paul,  the  contemporary  of  Jesus  (who  yet 
possibly  never  saw  Him  in  the  llesh),  do  not,  on 
fair  consideration,  surprise  \is,  wliy  should  those 
of  a  man  some  thirty  years  younger,  a  Chris- 
tian prophet  of  the  time  of  Domitian,  offend 
us? 

The  other  consideration  is  more  positive  in  char- 
acter. It  is  that  of  what  may  be  called  the 
eschatological  outlook  of  the  Apostolic  Age.  It 
was  believed  by  all  the  NT  writers  of  the  first 
generation  that  the  return  of  Christ  to  His  own 
in  glory  and  power  would  be  witnessed  by  some  in 
their  own  time  while  they  were  yet  in  the  flesh. 
The  expectation  appears  in  the  Gospels  (Mk  9^  13l|), 
and  it  is  a  matter  much  discussed  how  far  it  is  due 
to  convictions  definitely  entertained  and  expressed 
by  our  Lord  Himself.  It  was  certainly  entertained 
by  St.  Paul  (I  Co  15",  1  Th  5''"^-) ;  and,  though  on  the 
whole  it  hardly  affected,  and  never  unwholesomely,* 
his  ethical  teaching,  it  surely  explains  why  letters 
to  fellow-Christians,  who  had  been  for  the  most 
part  his  own  converts  and  catechumens,  in  so  far  as 
they  were  not  occupied  with  matters  of  immediate 
perplexity  and  duty,  should  be  concerned  rather 
with  prospects  of  the  Lord's  coming  and  glory  than 
with  reminiscences  of  the  days  of  His  flesh.  If 
St.  Paul  had  been  asked  to  state  his  essential  creed 
as  briefly  as  possible,  he  might  fairly  be  conceived 
to  reply  :  For  the  past,  Christ  died  in  the  flesh  for 
our  sins  ;  for  the  present,  Christ  rose  and  lives  for 
our  justification  ;  for  the  future,  Christ  will  come 
to  confirm  and  receive  His  own  to  Himself  in  the 
glory  of  God.  Would  the  modem  religious  man, 
whose  creed  has  any  title  to  be  associated  Avitli  the 
NT,  say  anything,  even  in  regard  to  the  future, 
that  is  really  different  from  this  ? 

Whatever  worth  may  belong  to  these  considera- 
tions in  reference  to  St.  Paul  belongs  to  them  a 
fortiori  in  reference  to  a  writer  whose  express  aim 
is  to  show  to  the  servants  of  God  the  '  things  that 
must  shortly  come  to  pass'  (P).  Even  if  we  put 
out  of  account  the  limitations  of  apocalyptic 
literary  method,  the  last  thing  we  shall  expect 
such  a  writer  expressly  to  deal  with  will  be 
reminiscences  of  the  historic  Jesus.  If  we  assume 
that  the  Apostolic  Age,  whatever  may  be  its 
defects,  supiilies  the  norm  of  the  religion  which 
is  final,  we  shall  require  of  the  Christian  prophet 
'John'  only  that  he  accomplish  his  declared 
purpose  in  a  manner  conformable  both  to  the 
situation  he  has  in  view  and  to  the  spirit  and 
teaching  of  the  apostolic  faith.  No  critic  con- 
tends tliat  chs.  2  and  3  do  not  indicate  a  writer 
Avho  is  in  the  matters  of  main  account  in  close 
touch  with  the  communities  he  addresses,  and 
who  writes  to  them  in  prophetic  vein,  on  the 
whole  just  as  he  might  be  conceived  to  speak.  In 
the  rest  of  his  book,  he  drops  special  reference 
to  the  Asiatic  Churches,  devotes  himself  to  the 
recounting  of  visions,  mainly  of  final  judgment, 
which  are  of  account  for  the  whole  Church  and 
world  of  his  time,  and  makes,  as  the  nature  of  his 
theme  requires,  larger  use  of  material  that  is  more 
or  less  common  to  all  imaginative  religious  speech 

*  1  Oo  729ff.  seems  to  the  present  writer  an  illustration  rather 
than  an  exception. 


or  literature.*  He  has  the  definite  belief  that 
the  last  instrument  of  Antichrist  is  the  Koman 
Imperial  system,  and  that  with  the  removal  of 
the  'Great  Whore'  (19^)— the  'Babylon'  which  is 
Rome — especially  the  cult  of  the  Emperor,  the 
last  obstacle  to  the  glorious  advent  of  the  Kingdom 
will  be  taken  away.  It  is  true  there  is  nothing 
in  his  general  estimate  of  the  situation  of  the 
worshippers  of  the  true  God,  suffering  from  the 
Koman  persecution,  that  might  not  have  been 
conceived  by  '  Daniel '  or  any  other  OT  prophet. 
There  is  scarcely  a  detail  in  the  wonderful  lament 
of  triumph  over  the  fall  of  the  Roman  Babylon 
(ch.  18)  that  has  not  its  close  parallel  in  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah  (for  the  details  see  Porter,  op.  cit. 
267). 

But  what  significance  has  such  a  fact  other 
than  that  of  illustrating,  in  general,  the  claim  of 
Christianity  to  fulfil  OT  prophecy,  and,  in  par- 
ticular, the  claim  of  this  Christian  seer  to  be  in 
the  succession  of  the  prophets  (1^  lO""^-  19^"  22i*'*'-)? 
Once  it  is  seen  that  it  is  the  work  of  a  Christian, 
and  that  every  detail  in  it  has  to  the  author's 
own  mind  a  significance,  determined  by  his  own 
attitude  and  that  of  his  readers  to  the  Messiah 
who  was  crucified  (1"-  11*  12"),  the  book  must  be 
allowed  to  possess  a  unique  value  for  edification 
both  in  itself  and  in  reference  to  the  place  assigned 
it  by  Christian  authority — that  or  closing  the 
canonical  record  of  revelation  contained  in  the 
Bible. 

*  A  good  instance  o(  the  author's  eclecticism,  acting  under 
control  of  spiritual  insight,  is  his  combination  of  an  earthly 
and  a  heavenly  view  of  the  Consummation.  The  binding  of 
Satan  and  the  thousand  jears'  reign  of  the  martyred  saints 
precedes  the  final  destruction  of  the  Antichristian'power  and 
the  descent  of  the  Heavenly  City  (ch.  20 ;  cf.  with  chs.  21  and 
22).  Why  does  the  prophet  not  close  his  book  at  19io?  It  ig 
the  poorest  conceivable  answer  to  say  that  he  continues  his 
text  for  literary  reasons,  having  a  desire  to  utilize  traditional 
material  that  was  too  good  to  be  neglected.  But  the  reason 
may  well  be  that,  while  the  destruction  of  the  colossal  im- 
posture of  the  Roman  Imperial  cult  is  the  last  preliminary  to 
the  Consummation  that  comes  within  his  definite  conviction, 
a  complex  instinct,  which  we  may  consider  part  of  his  prophetic 
equipment,  warns  him  against  the  danger  of  confounding 
definiteness  of  result  with  deflniteness  of  time  and  manner. 
Tlie  large  doings  of  God  permit  of  fluctuation  in  detail,  and 
the  prophet  is  practical  as  well  as  inspired.  One  matter  that 
genuinely  concerned  him  as  a  prophet,  and  had  concerned 
brother-prophets  before  him  (cf.  Dn  12iff-,  En.  Oliaff-,  Bar  408, 
and,  for  a  Christian  example,  1  Co  15-oa),  was  the  question  what 
special  reward  would  be  granted  to  those  who  had  maintained 
tlieir  faithfulness  to  God  at  the  aost  of  their  lives.  And  here 
the  traditional  idea  of  a  reign  of  the  saints  preliminary  to  the 
Final  Consummation  came  to  his  aid.  In  En.  91i2f-  (cf.  Bar  40") 
we  find  a  scheme  according  to  which  all  human  history,  in- 
cluding the  reign  of  the  Messiah,  is  divided  into  heavenly 
weeks.  In  4  Ezr.  728  the  period  of  the  reign  of  the  Messiah  ia 
400  years — a,  number  which,  as  the  Talmud  (Sank.  99)  explains, 
is  obtained  by  combining  Gn  153  with  I's  9016.  The  1000  years 
of  our  prophet  would  be  obtained  in  a  somewhat  similar  fashion 
by  combining  Gn  lif-  (the  'day'  of  the  Creation-narrative) 
with  Ps  90^.  The  'day '  (  =  1000  years)  is  the  rest-day  of  God's 
saints,  who  are  in  particular  the  martyrs.  In  tlic  Jewish  tradi- 
tion (cf.  Jub.  430  and  Secrets  of  Enoch  33if-)  the  seventh  'day' 
was  the  reign  of  the  Messiah.  With  '  John '  it  is  the  reign  of 
the  Messiah  with  His  faithful  martyrs,  ond  of  course  neither 
they  nor  He  die  at  the  end  of  it,  as  in  4  Ezr.  7^.  Satan,  however, 
is  unbound  and  leads  the  powers  of  evil  in  a  final  assault  upon 
the  saints  of  the  earth.  He  is  overthrown  and  cast  into  the 
'lake  of  fire'  with  the  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet.  Then 
follows  the  General  Judgment,  in  which  those  whose  names  are 
not  found  in  the  '  book  of  life'  are  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  and 
the  rest  who  are  faithful  join  the  saints  of  the  Millennium  in 
the  final  bliss.  It  is  obvious  that  these  details  are  not  strictlv 
reconcilable  with  those  of  the  Apocalypse  that  ends  at  lO^O, 
and  again  at  1921.  But  surely  we  may  credit  the  prophet  with 
being  aware  of  the  inconsistency.  He  handles  his  manifold 
material  freely.  What  is  important  to  him  is  not  to  reconcile 
discrepant  details,  but  to  express  through  them  ideas  of  destin^v 
that  are  worthy  of  God  and  His  Messiah.  And  it  was  mani- 
festly important  to  him,  as  it  was  also,  in  part,  to  St.  Paul,  to 
express  the  ideas  :  (1)  that  believers  who  died  before  the  Advent 
Buffered  no  disodvsuitage  above  others  (1  Th  41'"''- ;  cf .  Uev  (JW.) ; 
(2)  that  the  earth  needed  to  be  prepared  for  the  final  glory  by 
the  prevailing  presence  in  it  of  the  saints  (1  Co  Ib'^f-  ir^f- ;  of. 
Rev  20^-i«) ;  (3)  that  there  were  special  rewords  for  those  who 
made  special  sacrifices,  In  particular  the  sacrifice  of  life,  for  the 
sake  of  the  Kingdom  (2  Ti  2"f- ;  cf.  Mk  ItfKTI,  and  passages  in 
Rev.  above  cited). 


APOCALYTSE 


APOCALYPSE 


79 


The  following  examples  may  be  given  of  the 
teaching  of  the  Apocalypse  on  detinite  articles 
of  the  Christian  creed.  (1)  The  Messiah  is  the 
historical  Person  of  the  seed  of  David,  who  was 
crucified  at  Jerusalem  (5*  11*).— (2)  Grace  and 
peace  come  from  Him  equally  with  Him  who  *  is 
and  was  and  is  to  come'  and  with  the  'seven 
spirits  which  are  before  the  throne'  (manifest 
apocalyptic  equivalents  for  the  Father  and  the 
Spirit).  He  is  the  'faithful  witness,'  the  'First- 
begotten  of  the  dead,  the  Prince  of  the  kings  of 
the  earth'  (1*^  T^").— <3)  The  '  revelation '  contained 
in  the  book  is  not  only  mediated  by  Jesus  Christ, 
it  is  the  revelation  of  Him  (1^).  The  prophets 
are  those  who  have  the  '  testimony  of  Jesus,  and 
the  latter  is  the  'spirit  of  prophecy'  (19'<*).  The 
prophet  is  a  fellow-ser^-ant  and  companion  of  all 
faitnful  believers  in  Jesus.  For  they  also  have 
the  testimony.  They  are  made  prophets  as  well 
as  priests  and  kings  (1^*). — (4)  The  fundamental 
work  of  the  Messiah  is  the  redemptive  self-sacrifice. 
No  doubt  the  '  Lamb '  is  a  leader  and  a  warrior, 
whom  His  servants  follow.  His  'wTath'  is  the 
destruction  of  His  enemies.  Yet  even  in  the  glory 
of  His  power  'in  the  midst  of  the  throne  He 
remains  for  the  Christian  seer  a  '  Lamb  as  it  had 
been  slain,'  and  the  innumerable  multitude  of  the 
glorified  faithful  in  heaven  are  those  whose  robes 
have  been  '  made  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb.' 
The  motive  of  service  even  in  heaven  is  the 
gratitude  of  those  who  have  been  forgiven  and 
cleansed  (14i-»  19^^  1^-).  Agreeably  with  this, 
the  fundamental  virtues  of  the  saints  are  '  patience 
and  faith ' ;  though,  as  there  is  a  '  wrath  of  the 
Lamb,'  so  there  is  a  certain  fierceness  in  the 
conflicts  and  triumphs  of  the  saints.  Those  who 
find  fault  with  the  vindictiveness  of  the  Apocalypse 
should  make  allowance  for  the  dramatic  style  of 
the  book  and  should  not  forget  that  at  bottom 
the  battle  between  the  saints  and  their  oppressors 
is  a  battle  between  patience  and  violence  (18** 
13«-  U^). 

(5)  The  conception  of  Christian  duty  and  bliss, 
similarly,  is  profoundly  ethical  and  spiritual. 
The  saints  must  show  no  half-hearted  timidity 
in  resisting  the  order  that  is  supreme  in  the  world. 
The  resistance  is  to  be  maintained  in  the  sense  in 
which  maintenance  is  victory.  The  promise  is  to 
'  him  that  overeometh,'  and  no  sacrifice  is  too 
great  (•2i»  21''-).  The  reward  of  this  holj^  sacrificial 
attitude  of  the  will  is  complete  union  with  Christ, 
and  participation  in  all  the  privileges  of  sonship. 
The  sun  that  lightens  the  city  of  pearls  and  makes 
its  splendours  real  is  none  other  than  Gk)d  Himself 
and  the  Lamb.  Its  bliss  is  the  life  of  its  citizens 
(7i5ff.  i97fl.  22Jff-).  The  guests  at  the  marriage- 
supper  of  the  Lamb  do  not  wear  jewellery.  They 
wear  the  'crown  of  life,'  and  the  'fine  linen  of 
the  righteousness  of  the  saints'  (2^*  19^).  In 
reference  to  the  fidelity  of  the  servants  of  God, 
the  emphasis  laid  on  worship  is  noticeable.  It  is 
not  accidental.  It  is  due  to  the  twofold  fact  that 
the  book  reflects  a  situation  in  which  liberty  of 
worship  was  denied,  and  that  worship  in  spirit 
and  in  truth  is  the  loftiest  expression  of  the  soul's 
loyalty.  The  emphasis  is  negative  as  weU  as 
positive.  Twice  over,  the  seer  is  warned  not  to 
worship  him  that  showed  him  these  things.  The 
worship  of  angels  was  a  heresy  not  unknown  in 
the  Asiatic  Churches.  Perhaps  'John'  felt  that 
the  elaboration  of  the  conception  of  angelic  agency 
and  mediation,  however  inevitable  in  apocalyptic 
literature  or  even  in  the  thoughts  proper  to 
true  religion,  had  its  dangers  (19^"  22*;  cf.   Col 

OlSff. ), 

(6)  Finally,  the  spirit  of  gracious  evangelism 
that  finds  expression  in  '23P  deserves  acknowledg- 
ment.    Evangelism  is  scarcely  to  be  expected  in 


a  book  announcing  finalities,  and  concerned  so 
largely  with  the  Judgment.  'John'  does  not 
believe  that  there  is  much  more  chance  of  repent- 
ance for  the  rank  and  file  of  those  who  mtve 
yielded  to  the  apostasy  of  his  time  than  for  the 
Beast  and  the  False  "Prophet  who  have  led  it. 
There  is  not  much  chance,  for  there  is  not  much 
time  (1'  2210'-).  Yet  the  last  word  of  the  book- 
as  from  the  Spirit  (in,  say,  the  prophet  himself), 
as  from  the  Church,  already  the  '  Bride,'  as  from 
the  chance  hearer,  and  as  from  the  Nameless  who 
is  above  every  name — is  '  Come ' :  '  whosoever  will, 
let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely.'  On  all 
these  points — and  others  might  be  named — the 
close  touch  of  the  Apocalypse  with  the  teaching 
of  the  other  books  of  the  ^^T  is  obvious. 
III.    Thu  apocalyptic  elemeat  ly  other 

BOOKS  OP  THE  XT  AXD  IS  CHRISTIASITT.— 
Though  it  is  impossible  to  treat  the  subject  here 
in  detail,  a  word  may  be  said  in  conclusion  regard- 
ing what  is  commonly  called  the  '  apocalyptic  ele- 
ment': (1)  in.  the  other  books  of  the  N't;  (2)  in 
Christianity  itself.  We  use  the  phrase  'apoca- 
lyptic element '  with  reserve,  because  it  may  weU 
appear  from  our  study  of  the  Apocalypse  that  the 
whole  of  Christianity  is  an  apocalypse  or  revela- 
tion whose  containins  sphere  is  the  Person  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Col  23-  9).  the  view  of  the  NT  and  of 
the  early  Fathers  (see  Didache,  11)  regarding  the 
Christian  prophets  is  that  expressed  by  St.  Paul 
(1  Co  12^,  Eph  4"),  viz.  that  they  are  next  in 
rank  to  the  apostles.  Yet  what  distinguished  the 
apostles  from  the  prophets  was  accidental.  The 
apostles  were  received  as  witnesses  of  Jesus  at 
first  hand,  men  who  had  '  seen  the  Lord '  (1  Co  9*). 
They  moved  from  place  to  place,  and  founded 
churches.  In  the  sub-apostolic  Church  these 
functions  probably  passed  over  largely  to  the 
prophets,  who  in  any  case  were  one  with  the 
apostles  in  the  essential  qualification  of  having 
received  their  commission  not  from  man  but  from 
God  and  who  spoke  and  acted  by  aroK6.\vif/is  (Ac  4" 
20**^  21i«-,  Gal  11 T-).  The  expression '  apocalyptic 
element'  indicates  phrases,  sentences,  or  longer 
passages  in  the  apocalyptic  style  occurring  in  writ- 
ings that  do  not  on  the  whole  bear  the  lit«rary 
character  of  apocalypses.  It  is  obvious  even  at  a 
superficial  glance  that,  so  understood,  the  apoca- 
lyptic element  in  the  NT  is  considerable;  and 
when  we  remember  that  it  includes  phrases  directly 
relating  to  the  order  that  already  exists  in  heaven 
or  to  the  processes  through  which  it  will  come  to 
earth,  we  shall,  perhaps,  leel  that  apocalypse  is  a 
leaven  rather  than  an  ingredient  in  the  ]J^T.  The 
life  reflected  in  the  NT  is  saturated  with  the  super- 
natural. 

1.  The  Gospels. — Besides  words  and  phrases,  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  contain  long  passages  of  alleged 
discourses  of  Jesus — notably,  e.g.,  Mk  13.i — which 
are  entirely  in  the  apocalyptic  style.  In  view  of 
the  fact  that  Jesus,  when  before  Caiaphas,  de- 
clared Himself  the  Messiah  in  words  that  were 
virtually  a  quotation  of  Dn  7^  (Mk  14**;!),  it  can- 
not be  said  to  be  impossible  that  He  spoke  the 
contents  of  Mk  13  substantially  as  they  are  re- 
ported. On  the  whole,  however,  it  is  probable 
that  the  Evangelists  incorporated  in  their  texts  a 
Jewish-Christian  apocalypse  which  gave  the  sub- 
stance of  our  Lord's  utterance  in  a  form  adapted 
to  the  case  of  the  Christians  in  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  of  the  Jewish-Roman  war  (a.d.  66-70).  It 
may  surely  be  said  ^vith  truth  and  reverence  that 
our  Lord  Himself  was  the  best  example  of  a  speak- 
ing apocalyptist,  or  of  the  union  between  apo<^ 
lypse  and  prophecy.  The  saying  recorded  in 
Lk  10^  would  alone  be  suflBcient  to  prove  the 
point. 

In  the  Grospel  of  John  matters  lie  in  a  difierent 


80 


APOCALYPSE 


APOCALYPSE 


perspective.  The  heavenly  has  come  rather  tlian 
IS  coming.  That  does  not  mean,  however,  that 
there  is  no  room  for  apocalypse.  It  means  that 
all  is  apocalypse.  The  Gospel  is  an  account  of  the 
manifestation  in  the  flesh  of  the  Word  that  was 
God  {V- "). 

2.  The  Acts  of  the  ipoBtles.— Just  as  to  John 
(the  Evangelist)  the  appearance  and  action  of 
Jesus  in  the  world  are  themselves  an  apocalypse, 
so  to  Luke  in  the  Acta  the  events  that  mark  the 

{)rogre8s  of  the  gospel  are  largely  sensible  apoca- 
ypses  of  the  Divine  favour  or  power.  Ch.  2 
(wind,  and  tongues  of  fire),  3  (healing),  4  (earth- 
quake), 5  (strokes  of  judgment,  death  by  a  word), 
7  (transfiguration,  6^* ;  cf .  7*"),  10  (coincident  visions), 
12  (deliverance  through  an  angel)  are  conspicuous 
instances. 

3.  The  Epistles. — (a)  In  general,  the  expecta- 
tion of  the  Lord's  coming,  and  coming  soon,  is 
dominant  in  all  these  writings,  except  (For  wholly 
accidental  reasons)  Philemon  and  2  and  3  John. 
Even  in  the  later  writings,  where  the  colour  of  the 
expectation  may  be  supposed  to  be  more  sober, 
the  sense  of  the  imminence  of  the  coming  glory 
is  not  lost.  Even  John  is  confident  that  it  is  the 
'last  time'  (1  Jn  2'^).  The  difference  between 
earlier  and  later  appears  chiefly  in  the  choice  in 
the  later  writings  of  phrases  indicating  the  mani- 
festation of  a  Divine  reality  already  existing  rather 
than  the  coming  from  heaven  of  something  new 
(Col  S^«- ;  cf.  Eph  58-  ",  1  Jn  3^«-).  The  apocalyptic 
element,  even  in  the  literary  sense,  in  2  Peter — 
perhaps  the  latest  writing  in  the  NT — is  sufficiently 
obvious  (2  P  3^-^3). 

(6)  Of  special  interest  are  the  earlier  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  1  and  2  Cor.,  Gal.,  and  1  and  2  Thessalonians. 
The  passages  1  Co  7*''-  IS^'^-  have  already  been 
referred  to.  Those  in  1  Co  12iff-  and  U^«-  on  the 
tests  of  prophecy  (cf.  Did.  11)  and  on  its  value  for 
edification  and  conversion  are  of  peculiar  interest 
to  the  student  of  Christian  prophecy  as  manifested 
in  the  Apostolic  Age  (U^^- i«.8iff.).  in  the  enu- 
meration in  14^,  the  prophet  is  clearly  the  person 
who  'has  an  diroKdXv^pis.'  Prophecy  and  'tongues' 
might  be  alike  in  respect  of  irapermanence  (13*), 
but  prophecy,  while  it  lasted,  was  by  far  the  more 
valuable  gift  (14^).  St.  Paul  probably  believed 
that  prophecy,  exercised  under  proper  self-control, 
would  last  until  the  Advent,  whereas  the  rational- 
istic spirit,  however  little  it  deserved  to  be  en- 
couraged, would  quench  the  inspiration  of  the 
tongues  (cf.  U^''-  with  13»'-  and  1  Th  5^^'-).  In 
our  study  of  the  Apocalypse  we  have  seen  some- 
thing of  the  difficultv  or  even  impossibility  of  find- 
ing an  eschatological  scheme  of  perfect  consistency 
in  detail  even  in  so  purely  apocalyptical  a  writer 
as  'John.'  The  eschatology  of  St.  Paul  is  beyond 
the  range  of  this  article.  Yet  it  is  pertinent  to 
make  two  remarks.  The  one  is  that  St.  Paul  is  as 
certain  of  the  need  and  value  of  prophesying  and 
of  the  reality  of  the  supernatural  nappenings  with 
which  prophecy  is  concerned  as  any  apocalyptical 
writer  could  be.  We  prophesy,  indeed,  in  part ; 
still  we  must  prophesy  so  long  as  we  believe.  The 
other  is  that,  where  St.  Paul  enters,  so  to  speak, 
upon  the  sphere  of  the  apocalyptist,  as  he  does 
so  markedly  in  the  Corinthian  and  Thessalonian 
Epistles,*  his  practical  motives  are  clear  and 
cogent.  They  are  the  same  as  the  motives  of 
'John,'  viz.  to  encourage  believers  to  continue  in 
patience  and  hope.  The  proposition  will  bear 
examination  that  in  practically  every  case  where 
believers  are  addressed  in  the  NT  regarding  the 
final  glory  that  is  to  come  soon — presumably  with- 
in their  own  life-time — a  leading  motive  of  the 
utterance  is  to  insist  that  other  important  things 
•  Loee.  citt.  in  1  Cor.,  also  2  Co  61K  12l«'-,  1  Th  i^ss.   2  Th 


must  happen  first.*  This  is  a  paradox,  but  it  is 
true — as  true  as  the  more  comprehensive  paratiox 
that  the  Bible  is  the  most  eschatological  book  in 
the  world  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  most  etliical. 

i.  In  Chpistianity. — May  we  extend  the  paradox 
to  Christianity  itself  as  the  spirit  and  power  of 
the  religion  of  the  20th  century?  Or  are  those 
'  modernists '  right  who  say  that  the  Christianity 
of  the  future  must  be  stripped  of  '  eschatological 
delusions'?  The  question,  perhaps,  cannot  be 
answered  with  perfect  satisfaction  to  the  mind 
without  the  aid  of  psychology  and  metaphysics; 
and  possibly  the  new  '  intuitionalism '  of  our  day, 
associated  with  the  name  of  Bergson,  may  help 
some  religious  men,  whom  mental  training  has 
fitted  to  desire  and  receive  such  aid.  We  could 
hardly  be  satisfied  with  the  impossibility  of  search- 
ing out  God  to  perfection  unless  it  were  permis- 
sible, or,  for  some,  even  necessary,  to  attempt  the 
task.  Yet,  on  the  whole,  the  moral  and  spiritual 
life  of  mankind  goes  its  own  way  independently 
of  philosophy.  But  it  does  not  proceed  independ- 
ently of  God.  He  '  is  and  was  and  is  to  come,'  and 
He  '  reveals '  Himself  to  those  who  trust  and  obey 
Him.  Our  situation  in  reference  to  Him  is  para- 
doxical. We  rest  in  Him,  yet  cannot  rest,  for  His 
promise  leads  us  forward  to  horizons  that  vanish 
and  enlarge  as  we  approach.  We  suffer,  yet  we 
hope.  We  are  disappointed,  yet  we  are  comforted ; 
for  the  fulfilment  is  greater  than  the  hope.  Life 
is  an  experiment,  not  a  theory,  and  the  object  of 
the  experiment  is  God.  Those  who  thus  think 
will  look  rather  to  history  and  to  personal  and 
social  religious  experience  than  to  philosophy  for 
a  solution  of  the  eschatological  question. 

Could  Jesus  be  the  Reveal  er  of  God  and  of  Son- 
ship  with  God  and  yet  be  under  illusion  as  to  the 
end  of  the  world?  Yes,  because  human  life  in- 
volves this  ignorance,  and  the  Son  of  God  was 
made  flesh.  And  yes,  again,  because  the  illusion 
was  to  Him  the  transparent  veil  of  the  certainty 
that  the  Righteous  Father  lived  and  reigned. 

But  what  of  the  religion  of  the  future?  Must 
we  not  leave  eschatology  and  put  evolution  in  its 
place?  No,  because  these  are  not  alternatives. 
Evolution  no  more  excludes  eschatology  than 
science  excludes  religion.  No,  again,  because  one 
cannot  have  religion  without  eschatology.  To  the 
religious  man  human  history  is  not  a  mere  spectacle. 
It  is  a  work  in  which  he  is  involved  as  a  partner 
with  God.  It  is  the  working  out  of  God's  purpose. 
And  it  must  have  an  end,  because  God  must  fulfil 
Himself.  Only,  let  our  eschatology  be  a  thing  of 
dignity  and  freedom.  Let  it  be  reserved  even 
when  it  speaks  Avith  eflusion.  Let  it  never  be 
separated  from  the  spirit  of  moral  discipline  and 
religious  worship.  Let  it  be  '  in  the  spirit  on  the 
Lord's  Day,'  and  go  with  Him  to  a  height  where 
we  see  more  than  '  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world 
and  the  glory  of  them '  because  we  see  Him.  Let 
it  be  '  a  companion  in  tribulation '  with  the  hum- 
blest of  men  and  women,  who  are  the  servants  of 
God  and  the  redeemed  of  Jesus  Christ.  Fulfilling 
these  conditions,  it  will  recover  (should  it  have 
lost  it)  the  note  of  authority  that  is  struck  in  the 
NT  and  attains  such  lofty  expression  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  John.  If  we  do  not  call  this  note  science, 
it  IS  because  we  must  use  a  greater  word  and  call 
it  prophecy.  The  heart  of  Christian  prophecy  is 
the  •  testimony  of  Jesus.'  It  is  the  confidence 
gained  not  from  man  but  from  God,  that  history  has 
no  other  end  than  the  reconciliation  of  sinful  man 
to  God  through  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  reign  of  holi- 
ness and  love  in  their  hearts.     The  '  Lamb '  is  also 

•  This  point  is  clearly  and  admirably  brought  out  in  reference 
to  our  Lord  in  C.  W.  Emmet's  article  {Expositor,  8th  ser.  xxiii. 
[1912]  423)  entitled,  '  Is  the  Teaching  of  Jesus  an  Interinu- 
ethik^' 


APOLLOXIA 


APOLLOS 


81 


'  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah '  who  has  prevailed 
to  open  the  book  of  human  destiny.  '  John '  used 
largely  the  language  of  primitive  religious  im- 
agination to  convey  his  prophecy,  and  who  will 
say  that  in  his  hands  the  language  has  not  shown 
itself  lit  ?  If  the  modem  Christian  prophet  thinks 
he  can  do  better  with  the  language  of  evolution, 
let  him  put  his  belief  to  the  test  of  experiment. 

In  its  passage  seawards,  the  river  of  life  is 
joined  by  innumerable  tributaries.  But  there  is 
only  one  force  of  gravity,  and  only  one  main 
stream.  The  tributaries  reach  the  ocean  only  by 
first  reaching  the  main  stream.  There  is  some- 
thing in  God  that  is  akin  to  everything  that  is 
human,  yet  it  may  well  be  that  nothing  human 
reaches  the  end  or  fulfilment  of  Grod — nothing,  as 
'  John '  might  say,  receives  the  '  crown  of  life '  or 
finds  its  *  name  written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life ' 
— save  through  the  channel  of  the  sacrificial  will 
and  the  heart  of  faith.  These  do  not  come  by 
evolution  or  any  involuntary  process.  They  come 
through  the  travail  of  self-discipline  and  prayer 
and  sympathy  with  our  fellows.  And,  when  they 
come,  it  is  by  vision  and  revelation.  It  may 
surely  be  claimed  that  the  abiding  and  the  loftiest 
witness  to  this  in  literature  is  the  Apocalypse  of 
John. 

LrrKRATTRE. — The  handbooks,  C.  A.  Scott's  '  R«velation,'  in 
the  Century  BibU,  London,  1905,  and  F.  C.  Porter's  The 
Mesgaget  of  the  Apoealjfptieai  Writers,  do.  1905,  will  be  found 
(esp.  the  latter)  extremely  helpful.  Of  the  larger  commentaries 
may  be  mentioned :  J.  MofEatt  {EGT ;  see  esp.  '  Literature '  in 
the  Introduction) ;  Lucke-deWette,  Bonn,  lfe52  (epoch-making 
for  the  modem  method  of  interpretation);  W.  Bonsset, 
Gottingen,  1906  ('Excursuses'  and  history  of  the  interpretation 
of  the  Apocalypse  specially  valuable) ;  J.  Weiss,  in  Sehriften 
d.  HT  neu  ubinetzt  u.  JUr  d.  Gegenwart  erkidrt,  do.  1908. 
For  Biblical  Eschatolo£7  mav  be  noted  :  A.  Titins,  Die  neutett. 
Lehre  von  der  SeligkeU,  Tubingen,  1895-1900 ;  E.  Hanpt,  J>ie 
eichat.  Ausiagen  Jesu  in  den  syn,  Etang.,  Berlin,  1895 ;  and 
I_  A.  Muirhead,  EtehatoL  of  Jetus,  London,  1901  (the  two 
last  for  the  GtspelsX  For  the  Epistlea  of  St.  Paul :  H.  A.  A. 
Kennedy,  St.  Paut*  Conceptions  of  the  Last  Things,  do.  1904 ; 
R.  Kabisch,  Eseh.  d.  Paulas,  Gottingen,  1393.  On  Jewish  Eschat- 
ology  in  general,  see  the  great  relative  works  of  W.  Bousset 
and  P.  Volz,  and  the  still  valuable  work  of  A.  Hilgenfeld,  Die 
jiid.  Apokalpptik,  Jena,  1857.  On  the  mythical  groundwork  of 
eschatology  :  H.  Gunkel,  Sehopfung  «.  Chaos,  Gottingen,  1895 ; 
H.  Gressmann,  Der  Ursprung  der  tsraei.-jiid.  EsehaMogie,  do. 
1905. 

Headers  of  (zerman  will  find  readiest  and  fullest  access  to  the 
texts  of  most  of  the  extra-canonical  apocalypses  in  the  invalu- 
able work,  representing  many  scholars.  Die  Apokryphen  «. 
Psextdepigraphen  des  Alien  Testaments,  2  vols.,  ed.  E.  Eautzsch, 
Tubingen,  1900.  The  texts  are  given  in  German  translations. 
There  are  critical  introductions  and  notes. 

Lewis  A.  Muirhead. 

APOLLONIA  ('AxoXXw^Ia).— A  town  of  Myg- 
donia  in  Macedonia,  S.  of  Lake  Bolbe  (Athen. 
viii.  334),  and  X.  of  the  Chalcidian  mountains. 
It  lay  on  the  Via  Egnatia,  and  St.  Paul  '  passe<l 
through'  Amphipolis  and  Apollonia  on  his  way 
from  Philippi  to  Thessalonica  (Ac  17^).  The 
intermediate  towns  were  probably  remembered  by 
him  as  resting-places.  According  to  the  Antonine 
Itinerary,  Apollonia  was  37  Roman  mUes  from 
Amphipolis,  and  37  from  Thessalonica.  Leake 
identities  it  with  the  modem  village  of  PoUina. 

J.  Strahan. 

APOLLOS.— In  Ac  18'*-»Apollos  is  described  as 
•  a  Jew,  an  Alexandrian  by  race,  a  learned  man, 
mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  instructed  in  the  way  of 
the  Lord,  fervent  in  spirit,'  who  came  to  Ephesus 
when  Aquila  and  PrisciUa  had  been  left  there 
by  St.  Paul  to  do  pioneering  work  pending  the 
Apostle's  return.  Apollos  '  spake  and  taught  care- 
fully the  things  concerning  Jesus ' ;  but  his  know- 
ledge of  Jesus  was  limited,  for  he  knew  '  only  the 
baptism  of  John.' 

It  is  not  easy  to  elucidate  the  meaning  of  the 
rather  obscure  phrases  in  18^*.  Schmi^el  cuts 
the  knot  by  making  IS'*^-  '^^  later  accretions. 
Wendt  throws  out  the  whole  of  v.^,  regarding 
Apollos  as  a  Jew  having  no  connexion  with  John 

VOL.  I. — 6 


or  with  Jesus.  McGilfert  is  of  opinion  that  the 
description  of  Apollos  as  *  instructed  in  the  way 
of  the  Lord '  and  as  teaching  '  the  things  con- 
cerning Jesus'  is  erroneous  ;  v.*»  must  have  been 
added  by  St.  Luke.  '  ^ye  are  to  think  of  Apollos  as 
a  disciple  of  John  who  was  carrying  on  the  work 
of  his  master  and  preaching  to  his  countrymen 
repentance  in  view  of  the  approaching  kingdom  of 
God'  (Apostolic  Age,  291  f.).  Hamack  says: 
*  Apollos  would  appear  to  have  been  originally  a 
regular  missionary  of  John  the  Baptist's  move- 
ment ;  but  the  whole  narrative  of  Acts  at  this 
point  is  singularly  coloured  and  obscure '  {Expan- 
sion of  Christianity,  L  331  n.). 

Without  falling  back  on  any  of  these  somewhat 
contradictory  explanations,  we  gather  that  Apollos 
had  an  imperfect  hearsay  acquaintance  with  the 
story  of  Jesus,  though  enough  to  convince  him  of 
His'Messiahship.  If  the  twelve  men  found  in 
Ephesus  by  St.  Paul  (Ac  19^  *)  may  be  treated  as 
disciples  of  Apollos,  he  had  not  heard  'whether 
the  Holy  Ghost  was  given.'  His  bold  eloquence  in 
the  synagogue  attracted  Aquila  and  Prisciila  [g.v.), 
who  '  took  him  unto  them  and  expounded  the  way 
of  Grod  more  carefully.'  This  indefinite  expression 
does  not  carry  us  very  far.  It  seems  unlikely  that 
Apollos  was  baptized  at  Ephesus,  for  the  twelve 
disciples  are  stUl  ignorant  of  baptism,  nor  was 
there  a  Christian  Church  in  Ephesus  untU  after  St. 
Paul's  return  later.  In  this  connexion,  the  West- 
em  reading  is  interesting :  that '  the  brethren  '  who 
encouraged  Apollos  to  go  to  Achaia  were  Corin- 
thian Christians.  Perhaps  they  recognized  the 
need  of  fuller  instruction  than  could  be  given  in 
Eph^us  for  such  a  promising  disciple,  who  was 
likely  to  become  a  powerful  Christian  teacher. 

The  work  of  Apollos  in  Corinth  is  described  as 
'  helping  them  much  which  had  believed  through 
grace '  (Ac  18^).  St.  Paul's  mission  must  have  left 
a  number  of  uninstructed  Christians  in  Corinth. 
These  converts  had  been  persuaded  to  'believe 
through  grace.'  But  the  Christian  life  of  some 
was  undeveloped  ;  and  the  powerful  preaching  of 
Apollos  did  much  to  help  them. 

This  conception  of  the  work  of  Apollos  in  Corinth 
is  in  accord  with  St.  Paul's  words  in  1  Co  3*,  '  I 
planted  ;  ApoUos' watered.'  It  is  justifiable  also  to 
recognize  Apollos  in  St.  Paul's  reference  to  men 
who  'build  on  the  foundation' he  had  laid  (S"-*^), 
and  to  '  tutors  in  Christ '  (4^*)  in  contrast  to  him- 
self as  their  'father.'  Evidently  Apollos'  work 
was  not  so  much  preaching  the  gospel  to  the  un- 
converted as  buttressing  the  faith  of  Christians, 
partly  by  an  eloquent  exposition  of  the  OT,  and 
partly  by  a  powerful  apologetic  which  silenced 
opponents  and  strengthened  believers. 

But  this  confirming  work  done  by  Apollos  in 
Corinth  had ;  other  effects  which  were  less  useful. 
It  appears  to  have  been  infiuential  in  determining 
the  subsequent  character  of  the  Church.  Preach- 
ing to  recent  converts  whose  intellectual  equipment 
was  slender  and  whose  Christian  knowledge  must 
have  been  elementary,  Apollos,  whose  own  instruc- 
tion had  been  impertect,  would  inevitably  put  the 
impress  of  his  own  mode  of  thinking  upon  them. 
Thus  there  arose  a  party  in  the  Corinthian  Church 
with  the  watch-word  '  I  am  of  ApoUos.'  Although 
some  of  these  had  been  converted  by  St.  Pam's 
preaching,  they  had  been  '  much  helped '  by  Apollos. 
Under  the  influence  of  their  '  tutor  in  Christ,'  their 
interpretation  of  Christian  truth  and  duty  took  on 
the  hue  of  Apollos  rather  than  of  St.  Paul. 

The  distinctive  elements  in  the  preaching  of 
Apollos  may  be  gauged  from  two  considerations. 
(1)  He  was  '  a  Jewish  Christian  versed  in  the  Alex- 
andrian philosophy,'  whose  'method  of  teaching 
differed  from  that  of  Paul,  in  the  first  place  in 
being  presented  in  a  strikingly  rhetorical  form. 


82 


APOLLOS 


APOSTLE 


and  also  by  the  use  of  Alexandrian  speculation  and 
allegorical  interpretation  of  Scripture.  .  .  .  Apollos 
sought  to  reinforce  the  Gospel  which  was  common 
to  both  [Paul  and  himself],  by  means  of  the 
Alexandrian  philosophy  and  methods  of  exegesis ' 
(Pfieiderer,  i.  145  f.).  It  is  questionable,  however, 
whether  the  gospel  he  preached  was  in  all  respects 
'  common  to  both  Paul  and  himself.'  It  cannot  be 
without  significance  that  St.  Paul  has  to  emphasize 
the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  so  definitely  as  he  does 
in  1  Cor.  (of.  2»»-i«  S^"  12i-*).  Apollos  when  h6  arrived 
in  Ephesus  did  not  know  of  tne  giving  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Even  in  Corinth  his  efiorts  were  to  show 
by  the  Scriptures  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ  (Ac 
IS^).  It  seems  likely  that  his  preaching  had  this 
Jewish  tone  all  through,  and  lacked  the  spiritual 
note  so  dominant  in  St.  Paul's  preaching.  It  was 
not  Judaistic  ;  it  was  '  a  middle  term  between 
Paulinism  and  Judaism '  (Pfieiderer,  i.  148). 

The  last  NT  reference  to  Apollos  (Tit  S^^)  con- 
nects him  with  '  Zenas  the  lawyer,'  probably  a 
convert  from  the  Jewish  scribes.  This  confirms 
the  idea  that  Apollos  maintained  a  Hebraistic  type 
of  preac'hinjj,  though  his  Alexandrian  training 
differentiated  him  from  the  '  Judaizers '  who  pur- 
sued St.  Paul  so  relentlessly.  Apollos  did  not 
recognize  that  he  was  anti-Pauline.  But  the  in- 
evitable result  of  his  preaching  was  to  produce  a 
ditierent  type  of  Christian  from  the  type  St.  Paul 
desired. 

(2)  Despite  Weizsacker's  disclaimer,  some  of  the 
results  of  the  teaching  of  Apollos  can  be  recognized 
in  those  irregularities  in  the  Corinthian  Church  to 
which  St.  Paul  refers  in  1  Corinthians.  Would  not 
his  eloquence,  his  philosophical  bent,  and  his  re- 
iteratea  emphasis  on  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  lead  to 
imperfect  conversions  ?  And  may  not  the  prefer- 
ence for  the  gift  of  tongues,  or  the  difficulties  about 
marriage,  be  traced  naturally  to  this  eloquent 
ascetic?  In  Corinth,  St.  Paul  resolved  'not  to 
know  anything  save  Christ,  and  him  crucified'  (1 
Co  2^).  Apollos  was  less  conscious  of  the  dangers 
of  another  mode  of  preaching ;  and  his  convincing 
eloquence  might  win  converts  who  had  not '  believed 
through  grace.'  This  judgment  is  in  harmony  with 
St.  Paul's  references  to  Apollos.  They  scarcely 
justify  the  remark  of  Pfieiderer  that  St.  Paul  and 
Apollos  were  '  on  the  best  of  terms '  (i.  146).  The 
relations  were  correct,  but  hardly  cordial.  The 
two  men  were  friendly ;  but  they  occupied  different 
standpoints,  and  could  not  always  agree.  St.  Paul 
was  very  anxious  to  avoid  friction  in  Corinth. 
Therefore  he  wrote  about  '  the  parties '  in  a  con- 
ciliatory spirit,  acknowledging  generously  the  work 
of  Apollos.  In  the  same  spirit,  Apollos  did  not 
accept  the  invitation  of  the  Corinthians  (1  Co  16^^). 
But  there  are  hints  that  St.  Paul  did  not  reckon 
Apollos  among  the  great  Christian  teachers.  He 
is  not  mentioned  among  the  founders  of  the  Church 
in  2  Co  1'®.  In  1  Co  16^^  he  is  referred  to  only  as 
'  the  brother,'  where  other  people's  work  is  de- 
scribed with  enthusiasm.  St.  Paul's  references  to 
his  own  preaching  '  not  in  wisdom  of  words '  ;  to 
'wood,  nay,  stubble'  as  possibly  built  on  the 
foundation  he  has  laid  ;  to  '  ten  thousand  tutors  in 
Christ '  who  may  conceivably  mislead  :  these  are 
compatible  at  least  with  St.  Paul's  fear  lest  the 
work  of  Apollos  might  be  somewhat  subversive  of 
his  own.  Then  in  Tit  S^^  St.  Paul  links  Apollos 
with  Zenas  in  a  kindly  spirit,  but  not  as  if  he  were 
an  outstanding  leader.  Probably,  whilst  sincerely 
respecting  each  other,  they  recognized  frankly  the 
ditlerences  between  them  ;  and  in  a  very  creditable 
manner  each  man  went  on  his  own  Avay.  Like  St. 
Paul,  Apollos  tried  to  avoid  fomenting  the  party 
spirit  in  Corinth  ;  and  the  NT  leaves  him  in  Crete, 
as  a  travelling  preacher. 

Several  scholars  favour  the  theory,  suggested  by 


Luther,  that  Apollos  was  the  author  of  '  Hebrews.' 
Probably  we  must  accept  Bruce's  summing  nj): 
'  Apollos  is  the  kind  of  man  wanted.  With  this 
we  must  be  content '  (HDB  ii.  338"). 

LiTERATURB. — Artt.  in  HDD  and  EBi  on  '  Apolloa,'  'Corinth,' 
'Corinthians';  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paid  the  Traeeller  and 
the  Kotrum  Citizen,  London,  1895,  pp.  252,  267  ff. ;  O.  Pfieiderer, 
Prim.  Christianity,  do.  1»06,  i.  146-160 ;  C.  v.  Weizsacker, 
Apostolic  Age,  i.2  [do.  1897]  319-322, 11.  [1895]  97  ;  A.  Harnack, 
ExparutUm  of  Christianity-,  do.  1908,  i.  79 ;  A.  C.  McGiffert, 
Apostolic  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897,  p.  290  ff. ;  A.  Wright,  Some 
NT  Problems,  London,  1898,  p.  309 ;  A.  Deane,  Friends  and 
Fellow- Labourers  of  St.  Paul,  do.  1907,  p.  20;  F.  J.  A.  Hort, 
JThSt,  Oct.  1905;  and  Schaff-Herzogr,  art.  'Apollos.'  For 
authorship  of  '  Hebrews,'  see  Comm.  on  Heb.  by  M.  Dods 
{EGT),  229,  and  art.  in  HDD  on  '  Hebrews,  Epistle  to.* 

J.  E.  IlOBERTS. 

APOLLYON.— See  Abaddon. 

APOSTASY.— The  Gr.  word  diroaraffla  {apostasia) 
is  found  twice  in  the  NT,  but  in  neither  case  does 
EV  render  'apostasy.'  In  Ac  2P'  a  charge  is 
brought  against  St.  Paul  of  teaching  all  the  Jews 
who  are  among  the  Gentiles  'to  forsake  Moses' 
(lit.  '  apostasy  from  Moses ').  In  2  Th  2^  St.  Paul 
assures  the  Thessalonian  disciples  that  the  day 
of  the  Lord  shall  not  come  'except  the  falling 
away  (lit.  '  the  apostasy')  come  first,  and  the  man 
of  sin  (marg.,  with  better  textual  justification, 
'lawlessness')  be  revealed.'  It  is  sometimes  as- 
sumed that  the  word  'first'  indicates  that  the 
revelation  of  the  '  man  of  sin '  must  be  preceded 
in  time  by  the  apostasy  (cf.  art.  Man  of  Sin, 
and  HDB  iii.  226) ;  but  the  relation  of  v.2  to  v.» 
makes  it  more  natural  to  understand  '  first '  as 
signifying  that  the  apostasy  and  the  revelation  of 
the  '  man  of  sin,'  regarded  as  contemporaneous, 
must  come  before  the  day  of  the  Lord.  This  is 
confirmed  if  we  accept  Nestle's  contention  (ExpT 
xvi.  [1904-1905]  472)  that  i]  diroaracria  in  this  pa.ssage 
should  be  taken  as  a  translation  of  the  Heb.  ^]IV?^ 
(Belial  [q.v.]) — a  rendering  that  occurs  frequently 
in  Aquila's  version  and  also  in  3  K  21"  in  the 
Cod.  Alexandrinus.  In  any  case  the  Apostle's 
reference  is  to  the  wide-spread  expectation  in  the 
primitive  Church  (Mt  24^^,  1  Jn  2'8;  cf.  Dn  12") 
that  the  return  of  Christ  would  be  preceded  by 
such  a  revelation  of  the  power  of  the  Antichrist 
(q.v.)  as  would  lead  to  apostasy  from  the  faith  on 
the  part  of  many  professing  Christians. 

J.  C.  Lambert. 

APOSTLE.— The  term  '  Apostle  '  (Gr.  dv6<TTo\os) 
is  more  definite  than  '  messenger '  (Gr.  dyyeXos)  in 
that  the  apostle  has  a  special  mission,  and  is  the 
commissioner  of  the  person  who  sends  him.  This 
distinction  holds  good  both  in  classical  and  in 
biblical  Greek.  There  is  no  good  rea.son  for  doubt- 
ing that  the  title '  apostle '  was  given  to  the  Twelve 
by  Christ  Himself  (Lk  6i8=Mk  3'*,  where  'whom 
he  also  named  apostles '  is  strongly  attested).  That 
the  title  was  used  in  the  first  instance  simply  in 
reference  to  the  temporary  mission  of  the  Twelve 
to  prepare  for  Christ's  own  preaching  is  a  conjecture 
which  receives  some  support  from  the  fact  that,  in 
the  Apostolic  Church,  Barnabas  and  Paul  are  first 
called  'apostles'  (Ac  14*-  ^*)  when  they  are  acting 
as  envoys  of  the  Church  in  Antioch  in  St.  Paul's 
first  missionary  journey.  On  this  hypothesis,  the 
temporary  apostleship,  though  not  identical  with 
the  permanent  office,  was  typical  of  it  and  i)re- 
paratory  to  it  (Hort,  The  Christian  Ecclesia,  1897, 
p.  28  f.). 

There  is  fundamental  agreement  between  the 
work  of  the  apostles  during  Christ's  ministry  and 
their  work  after  the  Ascension  :  their  functions 
undergo  no  radical  change.  But  the  changes  are 
considerable.  Christ  chose  them  in  the  first  in- 
stance (Mk  3")  'that  they  might  be  with  him,' 
to  be  educated  and  trained,  '  and  that  he  might 
send  them  forth  to  preach  '  and  do  works  of  mercy. 


APOSTLE 


APOSTLE 


83 


Instruction  is  the  main  thing,  and  '  disciples'  is  the 
usual  designation  ;  mission  work  is  secondary  and 
temporary.  After  the  Ascension  their  mission 
work  becomes  primary  and  permanent.  Apostle- 
ship  is  now  the  main  thing  ;  in  Acts  '  apostles'  is 
the  dominant  appellation,  and  in  the  Epistles 
'disciples'  are  not  mentioned.  Instead  of  being 
led  and  guided,  the  Twelve  now  become  leaders 
and  guides  ;  or  rather,  instead  of  having  a  visible 
Guide,  they  now  have  an  invisible  one — instead  of 
Jesus,  '  the  Spirit  of  Jesus '  (Ac  16"),  who  helps 
them  to  lead  others.  The  guidance  of  the  Spirit 
is  the  dominant  idea  in  the  Apostolic  Church- 
Nevertheless,  the  other  way  of  stating  the  change 
is  true  ;  they  have  become  teachers  rather  than 
disciples.  But  the  purpose  is  the  same ;  their 
mission  is  unchanged.  With  enlarged  experi- 
ence, with  powers  greatly  augmented  at  Pente- 
cost, and  with  an  enormously  extended  sphere  of 
work,  they  have  to  make  known  the  Kingdom  of 
Gol.     Cf.  art.  DiSClPLE. 

This  extension  of  sphere  is  one  of  the  special 
marks  of  the  transfigured  apostleship.  It  is  no 
longer  restricted  to  '  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel,'  but  is  to  embrace '  all  the  nations '  through- 
out 'all  the  world.'  The  tentative  mission  to  the 
inhabitants  of  Palestine  at  a  peculiar  crisis  has  be- 
come one  which  has  no  limitations  of  either  space 
or  time  (Mt  28»»,  Lk  24",  Ac  1»).  But  this  uni- 
versality of  sphere  was  not  the  only  or  the  most 
important  characteristic  of  the  new  mission.  The 
chief  mark  was  the  duty  of  bearing  witness.  The 
Twelve  seem  to  have  been  select^  originally  be- 
cause of  their  fitness  for  bearing  witness.  They 
were  not  specially  qualified  for  grasping  or  ex- 
pounding theological  doctrines ;  nor  were  such 
qualifications  greatly  needed,  for  the  doctrines 
wliich  the  Master  taught  them  were  few  and  simple. 
Yet  they  had  difficulty  in  apprehending  some  of 
these,  and  sometimes  surprised  their  Master  by 
their  inability  to  understand  (Mk  7"  8"  9»).  But 
because  of  their  simplicity  they  were  very  credible 
witnesses  of  what  they  had  heard  and  seen.  They 
had  been  men  of  homely  circumstances,  and  their 
unique  experiences  as  the  disciples  of  Christ  made 
a  deep  impression  upon  them,  especially  with  re- 
gard to  the  hopeless  sense  of  loss  when  He  was  put 
to  death,  and  to  the  amazing  recovery  of  joy  when 
their  own  senses  convinced  them  that  He  had  risen 
again.  They  were  thus  well  qualified  to  convince 
others.  They  evidently  had  not  the  wit  to  invent 
an  elaborate  story,  or  to  retain  it  when  it  had  been 
elaborated,  and  therefore  what  they  stated  with 
such  confidence  was  likely  to  be  true.  They  were 
chosen  to  keep  alive  and  extend  the  knowl&dge  of 
events  that  were  of  the  utmost  importance  to  man- 
kind— the  knowledge  that  Jesus  Christ  had  died 
on  the  Cross,  and  had  risen  from  the  grave.  That 
He  had  died  and  been  buried  was  undisputed  and 
indisputable;  and  all  of  them  could  testify  that 
they  had  repeatedly  seen  Him  alive  after  His 
burial.  This  was  the  primary  function  of  an 
apostle — to  bear  witness  of  Christ's  Resurrection 
(Ac  1^  4*-»),  and  the  influence  of  the  testimony 
was  enormous.  The  apostles  did  not  argue  ;  they 
simply  stated  what  they  knew.  Every  one  who  heax^ 
them  felt  that  thej-  were  men  who  had  an  intense 
belief  in  the  truth  of  what  they  stated.  There  is 
no  trace  in  either  Acts  or  the  Epistles  of  hesitation 
or  doubt  as  to  the  certainty  of  their  knowledge ; 
they  knew  that  their  witness  was  true  (Jn  21==^, 
1  Jn  V-^).  And  the  confidence  with  which  they 
delivered  their  testimony  was  communicated  to 
those  who  heard  it  all  the  more  effectually  because, 
without  any  sign  of  collusion  or  conspiracy,  they 
all  told  the  same  story.  They  differed  in  age, 
temperament,  and  ability,  but  they  did  not  difiter 
when  they  spoke  of  what  they  had  seen  and  heard. 


Nay,  this  still  held  good  when  one  whom  they  had 
at  first  regarded  with  fear  and  suspicion  (Ac  9") 
was  added  to  their  company.  Greatly  as  Saul  of 
Tarsus  differed  from  the  Twelve  in  some  things, 
he  was  entirely  at  one  with  them  respecting  funda- 
mental facts.  He,  like  them,  had  seen  and  heard 
the  risen  Christ  (1  Co  9^  15*-";  Latham,  Pastor 
Pastorum,  1890,  pp.  228-230). 

It  was  probably  owing  to  St.  Paul's  persistent 
claim  to  oe  an  a{X)stle,  equal  in  rank  with  the 
Twelve  (Gal  1*,  1  Co  9*),  that  it  became  customary 
from  very  early  times  to  restrict  the  appellation 
of  'apostle '  to  the  Twelve  and  the  Apostle  of  the 
(Jentiles  ;  but  there  is  no  such  restriction  in  the 
NT.  It  is  certainly  given  to  Barnabas,  but  perhaps 
primarily  as  being  an  envoy  from  the  Church  of 
Antioch  (Ac  13'-  *  14*- "),  rather  than  as  having 
a  direct  mission  from  Christ.  St.  Paul  seems  to 
speak  of  him  as  a  colleague,  recognized  by  Peter 
and  John  as  equal  to  himself  in  the  mission  to  the 
Grentiles  (Gal  2*),  and  as  one  who,  like  himself, 
used  the  apostolic  privilege  of  working  for  nothing, 
although  he  had  a  right  to  maintenance  (1  Co  9*). 
"We  need  not  doubt  that  Barnabas  continued  to 
be  called  an  apostle  in  a  general  sense  after  the 
mission  from  Antioch  was  over. 

Perhaps  the  simplest  and  most  natural  way  of 
understanding  Gal  1"  is  that  James,  the  Lord's 
brother,  had  the  title  of  'apostle'  in  the  wider 
sense.  It  may  be  regarded  as  certain  that  this 
James  was  not  one  of  the  Twelve.  But  1  Co  15' 
ought  not  to  be  quoted  as  implying  either  that 
there  was  a  company  of  apostles  larger  than  the 
Twelve  or  that  James  was  a  member  of  this  larger 
company.  •  Next  he  appeared  to  James  ;  then  to 
the  whole  body  of  the  apostles.'  There  is  no 
emphasis  on  'all,'  implying  an  antithesis  between 
'  to  one,  then  to  all.'  Such  an  antithesis,  as  well 
as  the  idea  that  James  was  in  some  sense  an 
apostle,  is  foreign  to  the  context.  The  '  all '  prob- 
ably looks  back  to '  the  twelve '  in  v.",  which  is  an 
official  and  not  a  numerical  designation,  for  only 
ten  were  there,  Thomas  and  Judas  being  absent. 
'  Then  to  all  the  apostles '  probably  means  that  on 
that  occasion  the  apostolic  company  was  complete 
(for  Thomas  was  present)  rather  than  that  some  were 
there  who  were  called  apostles  although  they  were 
not  of  the  original  Twelve.  It  is  highly  probable 
that  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  was  such  a  person, 
but  1  Co  15^  ought  not  to  be  quoted  as  evidence  of 
this.  It  is  after  the  murder  of  James  the  son  of 
Zebedee  that  James  the  Lord's  brother  comes  on 
the  scene.  He  may  have  taken  the  place  of  his 
namesake  in  the  number  of  the  Twelve. 

That  Silvanus  and  Timothy  were  regarded  as 
apostles  in  the  wider  sense  is  not  improbable.  In 
both  1  and  2  Thess.  they  are  associated  with  St. 
Paul  in  the  address,  and  in  both  letters  the  first 
person  plural  is  used  with  a  regularity  which  is  not 
found  in  any  other  group  of  the  Pauline  Epistles : 
'  our  gospel,'  i.e.  '  the  gospel  which  we  apostles 
preach,'  is  specially  remarkable  (1  Th  1*,  2  Th  2"). 
StUl  more  remarkable  is  the  casual  addition, 
'  when  we  might  have  been  burdensome  as  apostles 
of  Christ '(1  Th2«). 

Ro  16^  probably  means  that  Andronicus  and 
Junias  were  distinguished  as  apostles ;  but  there 
are  two  elements  of  doubt :  iritntfiot  ir  toTj  dxwrrdXotj 
might  mean  '  well  known  to  the  apostles,'  but  it 
more  probably  means  that  among  the  apostles  they 
were  illustrious  persons  ;  and  'lovricw  may  be  masc. 
or  fern.,  Junias  or  Junta.  If  Junta  is  right,  the 
probability  that  Andronicus  and  Junia  (?inan  and 
wife)  were  distinguished  members  of  the  apostolic 
body  is  lessened.  But  Chrysostom  does  not  shrink 
from  the  thought  that  a  woman  may  be  an  apostle. 
He  says  that  to  be  an  apostle  at  all  is  a  great  thing, 
and  therefore  to  be  Ulustrious  amongst  such  persons 


84 


APOSTLE 


APOSTOLIC  CONSTITUTIONS 


is  very  high  praise  ;  and  '  liow  CTeat  is  the  devotion 
of  this  woman,  that  she  should  be  even  counted 
worthy  of  the  appellation  of  apostle ! '  (Sanday- 
Headlam,  ad  loc. ). 

The  fact  that  there  were  people  who  claimed, 
without  any  right,  the  title  of  'apostle'  (2  Co  ll'^ 
Rev  2^)  amounts  to  proof  that  in  the  Apostolic 
Church  there  were  'apostles'  outside  the  Twelve 
with  the  addition  of  St.  Paul.  It  is  incredible  tliat 
there  were  people  Avho  claimed  to  belong  to  a  body 
so  well  known  as  the  Twelve,  or  any  who  tried  to 
personate  St.  Paul ;  and  '  it  would  be  unprofitable 
to  waste  words  on  the  strange  theory  that  St.  Paul 
is  meant  by  these  false  apostles'  (Hort,  Judaistic 
Christianity,  1894,  p.  163).  Very  soon,  though  not 
in  the  NT,  tlie  title  of  '  apostle '  was  given  to  the 
Seventy.  It  is  not  likely  that  Joseph  Barsabbas 
and  Matthias  were  the  only  persons  among  the  120 
gathered  together  after  the  Ascension  (Ac  1"*)  who 
had  the  apostolic  qualification  of  having  seen  the 
Lord  ;  probably  most  of  them  had  been  His  personal 
disciples.  All  of  those  who  took  to  missionary  work 
would  be  likely  to  be  styled  '  apostles ' ;  and  it  is 
not  impossible  that  the  '  false  apostles '  who  op- 
posed St.  Paul  had  this  qualification,  and  therefore 
claimed  to  have  a  better  right  to  the  title  than  he 
had. 

The  cumulative  effect  of  the  facts  and  probabili- 
ties stated  above  is  very  strong — so  strong  that  we 
are  justified  in  affirming  that  in  the  NT  there  are 
persons  other  than  the  Twelve  and  St.  Paul  who 
were  called  apostles,  and  in  conjecturing  that  they 
were  rather  numerous.  All  who  seemed  to  be 
called  by  Christ  or  the  Spirit  to  do  missionary  work 
would  be  thought  worthy  of  the  title,  especially 
such  as  had  been  in  personal  contact  with  the 
Master.  When  it  is  said  that  this  reasonable 
affirmation,  based  entirely  upon  Scripture,  is  con- 
firmed by  the  account  in  the  Didache  of  an  order 
of  wandering  preachers  who  were  called  '  apostles,' 
we  must  be  careful  not  to  exaggerate  the  amount 
of  confirmation.  There  is  no  proof,  and  there  is 
not  a  very  high  degree  of  probability,  that  the 
'apostles'  of  the  Didache  are  the  same  kind  of 
ministers  as  those  who  are  called  '  apostles '  in  the 
NT,  although  not  of  the  number  of  the  Twelve. 
We  must  not  infer  that  they  are  the  lineal  de- 
scendants, officially,  of  workers  such  as  Silvanus, 
Andronicus,  and  Junias.  But  the  fact  that  in  the 
sub-Apostolic  Age  there  were  itinerant  ministers 
called  '  apostles  does  give  confirmation  to  the 
assertion  that  in  the  NT  there  were,  outside  the 
apostolic  body,  ministers  who  were  known  as 
'  apostles.'  Chief  among  these  were  Paul,  Barnabas, 
and  James,  of  whom  Paul  certainly,  and  the  other 
two  probably,  were  regarded  by  most  Christians 
as  eoual  to  the  Twelve.  Like  the  Twelve,  Paul 
and  Barnabas  had  no  local  ties :  they  retained  a 
general  authority  over  the  churches  which  they 
founded,  but  they  did  not  take  up  their  abode  in 
tliem  as  permanent  rulers.  They  trained  the 
churches  to  govern  themselves.  The  Twelve  are 
to  be  twelve  Patriarchs  of  the  larger  Israel,  twelve 
repetitions  of  Christ  (Hamack,  Expansion  of  Chris- 
tianity, Eng.  tr.,  1904-5,  i.  72),  and  at  first  they 
were  the  whole  ministry  of  the  infant  Churcli. 
The  first  act  of  the  infant  Church  was  to  restore 
the  typical  number  twelve  by  the  election  of 
Matthias  ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  note,  as  indicating 
both  the  undeveloped  condition  of  the  ministry 
and  also  the  germs  of  future  developments,  that  in 
Acts  all  three  terms, '  diaconate '  ( 1"-  '^), '  bishopric ' 
(1**),  and  '  apostleship '  (1^),  are  used  in  connexion 
■with  the  election  of  Matthias.  There  is  no  good 
ground  for  the  conjecture  that  the  choice  of 
Matthias  did  not  receive  subsequent  sanction,  that 
he  was  set  aside,  and  that  St.  Paul  was  Divinely 
appointed  to  take  his  place.     It  is  true  that  he 


subsequently  falls  into  the  background  and  is  lost 
from  sight ;  but  so  do  most  of  the  Twelve. 

The  absence  from  Christ's  teaching  of  any  state- 
ment respecting  the  priesthood  of  the  Twelve,  or 
respecting  the  transmission  of  the  powers  of  the 
Twelve  to  others,  is  remarkable.  As  the  primary 
function  of  the  Twelve  was  to  be  witnesses  of  what 
Christ  had  taught  and  done,  especially  in  rising  from 
the  dead,  no  transmission  of  so  exceptional  an  office 
was  possible.  Even  with  regard  to  the  high  author- 
ity which  all  apostles  possessed,  it  is  not  clear  that 
it  was  a  jurisdiction  which  was  to  be  passed  on  from 
generation  1  to  generation.  Belief  in  the  speedy 
return  of  Christ  would  prevent  any  such  intention. 
The  apostles  were  commissioned  to  found  a  living 
Church,  with  power  to  supply  itself  with  ministers 
and  to  organize  them. 

Literature. — In  addition  to  the  works  already  cited,  gee 
J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Galatiam,  ed.  1892,  pp.  92-101 ;  E.  Haupt, 
Zum  Verstdndnis  des  Apostolats  im  2iT,  Halle,  1896 ;  H. 
Monnier,  La  Notion  de  I'apostolat,  Paris,  1903 ;  P.  Batiffol, 
L'Bglise  naissante'^,  do.  1909,  pp.  46-68 ;  also  art.  '  Apostle,' 
in  SDB,  DCG,  EBi,  and  EB^f.      ALFRED  PlUMMEK. 

APOSTOLIC  CONSTITUTIONS  AND  CANONS.— 

This  work  (of  the  4th  or  5tli  cent.  A.D.,  but  based 
on  more  ancient  materials)  is  divided  into  eight 
books,  dealing,  in  rambling  and  hortatory  fashion, 
with  the  problems  of  church  life  and  discipline. 
The  chief  interest  of  its  contents  lies  in  the  mis- 
cellaneous information  afforded  regarding  the 
customs  of  an  early  period ;  the  theological  lean- 
ings, if  definitely  juesent  at  all,  are  difficult  to 
determine  ;  the  copious  Scripture  quotations  often 
support  'Western  readings.  At  the  end  of  the 
eighth  book  come  85  'Apostolic  Canons,'  which 
have  attracted  special  attention. 

The  claim  made  by  its  title  (AiaTa7ai  ruv  ayluv 
d,iro(rT6\o}V  5id  KXrifiefTOS  rod '  Fu/xalui'  iiricrKdirov  re  Kai 
iroXLrov.  KadoKiKT)  diSaffKoKta)  is  re-stated  in  the 
conclusion  and  amplified  in  vi.  14,  18  :  '  We  now 
as.sembled,  Peter  and  Andrew,  James  and  Jolin, 
Philip  and  Bartholomew,  Thomas  and  Matthew, 
James  the  son  of  Alphseus,  and  Lebbaeus  who  is 
surnamed  Thaddaeus,  and  Simon  the  Canaanite, 
and  Matthias  who  instead  of  Judas  was  numbered 
with  us,  and  James  the  brother  of  our  Lord  and 
bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  Paul  .  . .  and  have  written 
to  you  this  catholic  doctrine  [which]  we  have  sent 
by  our  fellow-minister  Clement.'  The  direct 
authority  of  Christ  is  also  adduced  in  ii.  1  :  '  Con- 
cerning bishops  we  have  heard  from  our  Lord ' ;. 
and  in  v.  7  :  *  We  teach  you  all  these  things  which 
He  appointed  by  His  constitutions.'  The  collective 
apostolic  authorship  is  recalled  to  the  reader's 
mind  from  time  to  time  by  casual  plirases  such  as 
'  we  twelve,'  '  Philip  our  fellow-apostle  ' ;  while  by 
a  curious  device,  from  time  to  tune,  without  any 
break  in  the  discourse,  one  or  other  of  the  apostles 
takes  the  word  out  of  the  common  moutii  and 
speaks  in  his  own  name,  especially  at  points  where 
the  reference  is  to  his  personal  experience ;  as  ii. 
57  :  '  Head  the  gospels  which  I,  Matthew  and  John, 
have  delivered  unto  you,'  and  v.  14 :  'I  arose  up  from 
lying  in  His  bosom.'  Near  the  end  the  apostles 
in  turn  each  deliver  one  or  more  'constitutions.' 

For  any  modern  reader  a  cursory  glance  will 
dispose  of  these  claims.  The  detailed  injunctions 
about  ordinations  and  festivals,  the  triumphant 
proof  of  the  possibility  of  the  Resurrection  by  a 
reference  to  the  phoenix,  do  not  strike  the  apostolic 
note ;  and  it  is  easy  to  remark  definite  points  such 
as  the  reference  to  the  heresy  of  Basilides  (vi.  8), 
and  the  conversion  of  the  Romans  (vi.  24),  which, 
show  the  suggestion  of  the  title  to  be  unwarranted. 
The  author,  however,  found  the  apostolic,  claim 
made  in  the  sources  he  used  ;  his  own  contribution 
to  the  fiction  is  the  assertion  that  Clement  was  the 
channel  of  communication. 


APOSTOLIC  COXSTITUTIOXS 


APOSTOLIC  CONSTITUTIONS      85 


In  692  the  TruUan  Council  of  Constantinople 
repudiated  the  'Constitutions'  as  having  been 
tampered  with  by  heretics,  but  accepted  the  85 
Canons  ;  while,  although  in  the  Gelasian  Decree 
they  are  called  apocryphal,  Dionysius  Exiguus  (c. 
A.D.  500)  had  translated  50  of  the  Canons  into 
Latin,  and  thus  these  50  obtained  acceptance  in 
the  West.  The  85  Canons  were  translated  into 
Svriac,  Coptic,  Ethiopic,  Arabic ;  and,  though  the 
'  Constitutions'  was  not  translated  as  a  whole,  and, 
in  the  West,  remained  unknown,  we  find  Nicetas 
(A.D.  1154)  quoting  books  v.  vi.  vii.  in  his  book 
contra  Latinos.  After  the  first  publication  of  the 
Greek  text  at  Venice,  in  1563,  by  the  Jesuit 
Turrianus  from  a  good  Cretan  MS,  the  spuriousness 
of  their  authority  soon  came  to  be  recognized.  The 
convenient  edition  of  W.  Ultzen  (Schwerin  and 
Rostock,  1853)  is  based  on  this  text. 

Modem  criticism,  it  may  be  said  summarily, 
has  shown  that  the  '  Apostolic  Constitutions '  is  a 
compilation  made  by  a  single  writer,  often  referred 
to  as  pseudo-Clement,  who  seems  identifiable  with 
the  author  of  the  spurious  Ignatian  epistles  ;  that 
it  is  of  Syrian  origin,  and  that  it  must  be  dated  in 
the  4th  or  early  in  the  5th  century.  One  leading 
consideration  is  the  absence  of  a  polemical  theo- 
logical note,  which  demands  a  period  sufficiently 
subsequent  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea  (A.D.  325). 
Interest  is  thus  transferred  to  the  task  of  dis- 
tinguishing the  older  mat«rials  present,  and  tracing 
Lq  them,  and  in  the  modifications  made  by  the 
compiler,  and  by  stiU  later  hands  (especially  in 
book  viii. ,  which,  being  most  in  practical  use,  was 
subject  to  current  alteration),  the  flux  of  ecclesi- 
astical usages — a  task  in  which  the  Church  historian 
still  waits  to  some  extent  for  the  textual  critic. 

Books  i.-vi.  are  based  on  the  Didascalia,  a  book 
originally  written  in  Greek,  but  known  only 
through  a  single  MS  of  the  Syriac  version,  now  in 
Paris,  published  as  Didascalia  apostolorum  syricux 
by  P.  Lagarde  (Leipzig,  1854),  by  M.  D.  Gibson 
with  Eng.  tr.  in  Horce  Semiticce,  i.,  ii.  (Cambridge, 
1903),  by  H.  Achelis  in  TU  xxv.  2  [1904].  This 
document  is  to  be  placed  in  Syria  about  the 
middle  of  the  3rd  century.  It  contemplates  a  large 
city-church  attended  by  all  sorts  and  conditions, 
conscious  of  the  gulf  between  Christians  and 
pagans,  yet  apparently  neither  persecuted  nor 
unpopular.  After  some  general  exhortations  to 
men  and  women,  the  subject  of  the  bishop  and 
his  duties  is  treated  in  detail.  Remarkable 
emphasis  is  laid  on  a  ready  and  kindly  reception 
of  the  penitent.  We  hear  of  Church  courts  for 
civil  cases  between  Christian  disputants,  which  are 
to  meet  on  Monday,  so  that  feeling  may  be  cooled 
before  the  days  of  worship.  The  church  building 
lies  eastwards — in  the  direction  of  the  earthly 
Paradise — and  is  arranged  with  special  seats  for 
the  Presbytery  and  the  different  sexes  and  ages  in 
the  congregation.  Deacons,  sub-deacons,  deacon- 
esses, widows,  orphans,  martyrs,  readers,  are 
mentioned  as  special  classes.  By  a  strange  chron- 
ology of  the  Passion,  a  foundation  is  oliered  for 
Easter  regulations  evidently  requiring  defence, 
whether  as  new  or  as  in  conflict  with  neighbouring 
custom.  There  are  some  Jewish-Chrisrian  mem- 
bers, and  at  the  close  these  are  specially  addressed. 
The  style  throughout  is  homiletic,  with  copious 
citations  from  Scripture.  A  short  account  of  this 
book  is  given  in  Hamack,  The  Mission  and  Ex- 
pansion of  Christianity^  (tr.  Moffiatt,  London,  1908) 
ii.  157,  158. 

The  work  of  the  compiler  of  the  '  Constitutions ' 
is  seen  in  the  additional  Scripture  references,  moral 
reflexions  and  exhortations.  He  makes,  for  ex- 
ample, an  unhappily  conceived  attempt  at  an 
elaborate  analogy  between  a  well-arranged  church 
■and  a  ship,  the  deacons  being  the  sailors,  the  congre- 


gation passengers,  and  so  forth.  He  revises  the 
account  of  the  Passion  referred  to,  in  the  interests 
of  the  shorter  fast  of  his  dav  (v.  14).  He  boldly 
reverses  the  direction  to  follow  the  Jewish  com- 
putation for  Easter  (ib.  17).  He  refers  to  the 
Roman  adoption  of  Christianity  (vi,  24),  where 
instead  the  Didcucalia  mentions  persecution. 

Book  vii.  consists  of  an  amplification  of  the 
Didache  (5'.r.)with  modifications.  An  injunction 
to  fear  the  king  (ch.  16)  and  pay  taxes  willingly  is 
inserted.  The  permission  of  warm  water  at  baptism 
is  omitted  (ch.  20).  The  rule  about  weekly  fast- 
days  is  taken  to  apply  to  the  Easter  fast.  The 
connexion  of  Eucharist  with  Agape,  apparent  in 
the  Didache,  is  avoided.  A  number  of  liturgical 
forms  are  appended,  among  which  the  baptismal 
symbol  in  ch.  41  has  been  doubtfully  attributed  to 
Lucian  of  Antioch — a  suggestion  which  might,  as 
Achelis  points  out,  connect  the  'Constitutions* 
with  his  congregation.  For  a  comparison  of  book 
viL  with  the  Dulache  see  Hamack,  '  Didache,'  in 
TU  ii.  2  [1884],  and  art.  Dedache  below. 

Behind  book  viii.  are  various  sources.  The  first 
two  paragraphs  are  thought  by  Achelis  to  be 
founded  on  Hippolytus'  lost  work  xept  xap«r/«iTftw. 
After  there  treating  of  the  diversity  of  spiritnal 
gifts,  the  writer  goes  on  to  24  chapters,  in  which 
the  apostles,  gatliered  in  council,  deliver  singly, 
in  turn,  '  constitutions '  concerning  the  choice  and 
ordination  of  bishops  and  other  oflicers  ;  concerning 
presbyters,  deacons,  sub-deacons,  readers,  widows, 
exorcists,  and  their  functions ;  concerning  tithes 
and  oflFerings,  the  reception  of  catechumens,  holy 
days,  church  services  and  prayers.  The  main 
source  is  thought  to  be  the  '  Egyptian  Church 
Order,'  originally  in  Greek,  but  known  through 
its  Coptic  and  Ethiopic  versions,  this  in  turn  being 
based  upon  the  *  Canons  of  Hippoljrtus '  (c.  a.d. 
220).  Both  of  these  may  be  compared  with  the 
'  Constitutions '  in  TU  vi.  4  [1891],  pp.  39-136.  The 
dependence  of  the  '  Constitutions'  on  these  Canons, 
though  not  noted  in  the  complete  MSS  (unless, 
indeed,  the  old  conjecture  were  revived  that  in  the 
title,  after  KX^^jtoi  ,  .  .  i-ruTK&rov  should  be  read 
Kal'l-rwoXiJTov,  instead  of  re  /to2  vaiXirov),  is  pointed 
out  by  the  title  Aiard^ets  tQsp  ayUof  d-roarokuv  repl 
XftporoviQp  Sia  '  I-w~rai\vrov,  in  excerpts  from  book 
viii.  Whether,  however,  the  '  Egyptian  Church 
Order '  needs  to  be  inserted  as  a  link  between  book 
viii,  and  the  'Canons  of  Hippolytus'  has  been 
disputed. 

The  most  noteworthy  sections  of  book  viiL  are 
those  containing  a  complete  liturgy  for  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  catechumens, 
hearers,  unbelievers,  and  heterodox  are  to  depart. 
Mothers  are  to  '  receive  '  their  children — that  is,  to 
keep  them  quiet,  else  they  would  continue  straying 
to  and  fro  between  the  women's  seats  and  their 
fathers,  as  may  still  be  seen  in  Eastern  Christian 
worship.  Two  deacons  are  to  fan  away  flies  from 
the  cups.  The  high  priest  consecrates,  the  service 
proceeds  with  responses  and  pravers.  First  the 
bishop,  then  the  presbyters  and  deacons  partake, 
and  then  the  people,  who  after  further  praj'er  are 
dismissed  with  the  benediction  'Depart  in  peace.' 
To  the  older  sotirce  the  compiler  of  the  '  Constitu- 
tions '  adds  that  the  high  priest  puts  on  '  his 
shining  garment'  and  crosses  himself;  and,  after 
the  deacons,  adds  a  long  list  of  classes  of  partakers, 
ending  with  the  children  ;  and  orders  Ps  33  to  be 
said  while  the  distribution  takes  place. 

In  comparison  with  its  sources,  book  viii,  shows 
a  hardening  of  ecclesiastic  rule,  e.g.  in  the  decision 
that  a  confessor  must  not  on  any  account  be  dis- 
pensed from  the  need  of  being  ordained  if  he 
proceeds  to  oflSce.  A  stUl  later  change  is  seen  in 
the  suppression  of  all  mention  of  porters  in  this 
book.     This  cannot    be    due   to  pseudo-Clement, 


86      APOSTOLIC  CONSTITUTIONS 


APPIUS,  MARKET  OF 


for  he  names  them  in  the  preceding  books  ;  when 
they  had  disappeared  in  practice,  tlie  references 
must  have  been  deleted  from  the  fuiniliar  book 
viii.,  but  left  unnoticed  elsewhere. 

The  85  '  Canons '  at  the  end  of  book  viii. 
gained,  as  we  have  seen,  a  partly  independent 
currency :  20  are  derived  from  the  Synod  of 
Antioch  (A.D.  341) ;  at  least  24  repeat  regulations 
from  the  '  Constitutions ' ;  the  others  are  likelier  to 
be  taken  from  various  sources  than  to  be  original 
inventions.  They  are  to  be  put  a  little  later  than 
the  '  Constitutions."  The  most  remarkable  is  that 
which  enumerates  the  canonical  books  of  Scripture, 
omitting  the  Apocalypse  from  the  NT  canon,  but 
inserting  the  two  epistles  of  Clement  and  the 
'Apostolic  Constitutions,'  and,  after  this  audacity, 
with  an  artistic  touch  modestly  placing  '  the  Acts 
of  us  Apostles '  at  the  bottom  of  the  list. 

Other  matters  contained  in  the  '  Apostolic 
Constitutions'  may  be  briefly  noticed.  In  the 
•bidding  prayers'  in  book  viii.  a  touching  light  is 
thrown  on  the  composition  of  the  Church  by  the 
reference  to  those  in  bitter  servitude  (viii.  10  ;  cf. 
the  instruction  to  admit  a  slave  concubine  to 
membership  if  faithful  to  her  master  [ib.  32]).  A 
diflerent  aspect  of  allairs  is  revealed  by  the  list  in 
iv.  6  of  those  whose  gifts  should  not  be  received — 
adulterers,  cruel  employers,  idol-makers,  thieves, 
unjust  publicans,  drunkards,  usurers.  A  strange 
piece  or  advice  follows — that,  if  such  contribu- 
tions have  to  be  taken,  they  shall  be  expended 
in  fuel  for  the  needy  rather  than  in  food,  as  the 
putrid  sacrificial  meat  is  ordered  in  Lv  19^  to  be 
burnt. 

The  transition  from  '  Sabbath '  (Saturday)  to 
*  the  Lord's  day '  (Sunday)  as  the  day  of  worship  is 
seen  in  process.  Book  ii.  36  enjoins  observance  of 
Sabbath  ;  in  ch.  47  the  language  suggests  both  days, 
althougli  the  thought  has  in  view  perhapsjonly  one  ; 
ch.  59  shows  the  hesitancy  of  a  time  of  change, 
saying  first  '  principally  on  the  Sabbath,'  then  '  on 
the  Lord's  day  meet  more  diligently.'  Bk.  v.  20 
enjoins  both  days ;  vii.  23  enjoins  first  both,  then 
says  '  there  is  one  only  Sabbath  to  be  observed  in 
the  whole  year,'  that  before  Easter,  as  a  fast,  for 
then  Christ  was  in  the  tomb.  Book  viii.  33  enjoins 
rest  for  slaves  on  both  days.  As  regards  other 
holy  days,  Christmas,  Epiphany,  Holy  Week,  are 
mentioned  (v.  14,  15) ;  further,  Pentecost  and  St. 
Stephen's  Day  (viii.  33). 

Baptism  ritual  is  elaborate.  Before  and  after 
immersion  there  is  anointing.  Presbyters  can 
baptize,  though  not  ordain  (iii.  10,  11).  Deacon- 
esses are  useful,  especially  in  the  baptism  of 
women  (ib.  15).     Canon  50  orders  trine  immersion. 

The  bishop  is  to  be  ordained  by  two  or  three 
bishops  after  he  is  chosen  by  the  people,  who  are 
to  be  repeatedly  asked  for  their  consent  to  pro- 
cedure (viii.  4).  A  chief  duty  of  his,  requiring 
acuteness  and  tact  and  honour,  is  the  charge  of 
the  almsgiving  (ii.  4).  Exorcists  are  recognized 
as  doing  good  work,  though  they  are  not  to  be 
ordained. 

In  public  worship  (ii.  67)  the  bishops  and  presby- 
ters sit,  the  deacons  stand  near,  the  congregation 
are  seated  according  to  age  and  sex,  children 
may  stand  beside  their  parents.  Deacons  walk 
about  to  check  whispering,  laughing,  or  sleeping. 
Lessons  from  the  historical  and  poetical  books  of 
the  OT  respectively  are  followed  by  a  Psalm  sung 
solo,  the  congregation  joining  '  at  the  conclusions 
of  the  verses ' ;  then  comes  a  lesson  from  the  Acts 
or  Epistles,  and  after  this  all  stand  at  the  reading 
of  the  Gospel.  If  visiting  bishops,  presbyters,  or 
deacons  are  present,  they  uie  to  l>e  recognized  as 
such,  and,  especially  visiting  l.ishoiis,  are  to  be 
asked  to  speak.  Then*  i~  ilnily  inorniiiLr  and 
evening  service  (ii.  5S>,   \  iii.  ;>J,  iioj,  uiui  tcmpuuiou 


both  to  neglect  it  and  to  attend  heathen  and 
Jewish  services. 

Curiosities  of  thought  and  diction  are :  < 
ings  to  males  against  dressiness — they  ma\ 
snare  the  frail  fair  (i.  3)  ;  warnings  to  women  ikh 
to  paint  the  face,  'which  is  God's  workmansliip ' 
(ib.  8) ;  the  reason  in  favour  of  secrecy  in  alms- 
giving, that  thus  comparisons  and  grumbling  are 
prevented  among  the  recipients  (iii.  14) ;  an  elabo- 
rate comparison  of  spiritual  and  physical  healing 
(ii.  41),  wnich  gives  a  vivid  picture  of  contemjKjrary 
medicine  and  surgery,  at  least  as  it  appeared  to 
the  author's  imagination  : 

'  If  it  be  a  hollow  wound  or  g^reat  gash,  nourish  it  with  a  suit- 
able plaster ;  ...  if  foul,  cleanse  with  corrosive  powder,  tliat 
is,  words  of  reproof ;  if  it  have  proud  flesh,  eat  it  down  with 
a  sharp  plaster — threats  of  jud^ent ;  if  it  spreads,  cut  off  the 
putrid  flesh  ;  .  .  .  but  if  there  is  no  room  for  a  fomentation,  or 
oil,  or  bandage,  then,  with  a  great  deal  of  consideration,  and 
the  advice  of  other  skilful  physicians,  cut  off  the  putrefied 
member,  that  the  whole  church  be  not  corrupted.  ...  Be  not 
hasty  with  the  saw,  but  first  try  lancing.' 

A  quaint  story  is  told  by  Peter  (vi.  8  f.)  about 
Simon  Magus,  who,  to  recommend  his  heresies,  flew 
in  the  air  in  a  Roman  theatre  supported  by  demons, 
till  Peter  exorcized  them  and  Simon  fell  and  Itroke 
his  legs,  whereupon  the  people  cried  out  :  '  There 
is  only  one  God,  and  Peter  rightly  preaches  the 
truth."' 

LiTERATURB. — In  addition  to  the  references  already  given, 
full  notes  will  be  found  in  H.  Achelis'  valuable  art.  '  .4postol. 
Konstitutionenu.Kanones'  in  PHE3  i.  [1896].  The  '  Ante-Xicene 
Library '  (vol.  xvii.)  contains  an  Eng.  translation.  See  also  the 
notices  in  A.  Harnack,  Gesch.  der  altchrist lichen  Litteratur, 
pt.  i.  [Leipzig,  1893] ;  A.  J.  Maclean,  Recent  Ducoveries  iUnst rat- 
ing Early  Christian  Life  and  Worship,  Ix)ndon,  1904  ;  W.  E. 
Collins,  art.  •  Apostol.  Constitutions'  in  ElirU  ii.  [1910]. 

R.  W.  Stewart. 
APPEAL.— See  Trial- at-Law. 

APPEARING.— See  Parousia. 

APPHIA  (in  some  MSS  and  VSS  Aphphia  or 
Appia). — A  Christian  lady  of  Colosste,  designated 
by  St.  Paul  (Philem^)  as  '  sister '  (d.8e\<pjj,  so  K  ADE), 
in  the  Christian  sense.  AV,  following  inferior  MS 
testimony,  substitutes  '  beloved '  (dyair-riTrj) ;  some 
MSS  have  both  Avords.  Grotius  regards  the  name 
as  a  softened  and  hellenized  form  of  the  Latin 
Appia;  but  Lightfoot  (Col.  and  Philein.'^,  1ST9. 
p.  306)  and  Zahn  (Introd.  to  NT,  1909,  i.  458)  ^lu.u 
that  the  name  is  Phrygian  and  is  found  in  nunurou^ 
ancient  Phrygian  inscriptions. 

Most  commentators  (following  Chry.so>toni  and 
Theodoret)  regard  Apphia  as  Philemon's  wife,  since 
otherwise  her  name  either  would  not  have  been  in- 
troduced at  all  in  a  private  letter,  or  at  least  would 
have  been  put  after  the  name  of  Archippus  (q.v.), 
who  was  an  otJice-bearer.  As  the  wife  of  Philemon, 
Apphia  would  have  some  claim  to  be  consulted  in 
such  a  matter  as  the  forgiveness  and  emancipation 
of  a  slave.  The  possibility,  however,  of  her  being 
the  sister  (literally)  of  Philemon  is  not  grammatic- 
ally excluded  if  the  reading  '  sister '  be  accepted. 

The  ancient  Greek  Martyrology  represents 
Apphia  (along  with  Philemon)  as  suffering  martyr- 
dom under  Nero  on  Nov.  22  (see  Mencea  for 
November). 

Literature.— See  under  Philemon.       HeNRY  CowAN. 

APPII  FORUM.— See  Appius,  Market  of. 

APPIUS,  MARKET  OF  ('Awwlov  <t>hpov,  Ac  lN-"  : 
AV  Appii  Forum). — A  town  on  tlic  ]">■'  .\y:n.,. 
the  usual  resting-place  for  travclk  r.-  mnii  \\i<w<'  -.a 
the  end  of  the  hrst  day's  journey,  tlion^h  iluia<e 
says  of  himself  and  his  companion  :  'IIo(  iter  i-nivi 
divisimus'  (Sat.  I.  v.  5).     The  site  of  thf  \>>\\\\  is 

marked  by  consideial.lc   ruin>.   ni':ir   ilv   i ;,'iii 

railway  st-ation  of  Fvrn  Jptno,  where  Up-  ii'.nl 
ancient  milestone  is  still  lu-eserved.  It  v:i-  ilie 
iimtheru  terminus  of  a   lanal  ifo.s^sa),  wliirh   o.\- 


APROX 


AQUILA  AND  PRISCILLA         87 


tended,  parallel  with  the  line  of  road,  thiough  the 
Pomptine  marshes  as  far  as  the  neijrhbourhood  of 
Tarracina.  Strabo  says  that  travellers  from  the 
South  usually  sailed  up  the  canal  by  night,  'em- 
barking in  the  evening,  and  landing  in  the  morning 
to  travel  the  rest  of  their  journey  by  road '  (v.  iii. 
6).  Pliny  mentions  Appii  Forum  among  the  muni- 
cipal towns  of  Latium  (III.  v.  9).  Horace  (loc.  cit. 
4-15)  sets  do^m  his  W^d  recollections  of  a  place 
•  crammed  full  of  boatmen  and  extortionate  tavern- 
keepers,'  where  '  the  water  was  utterly  bad,'  where 
at  night  '  the  slaves  bantered  the  boatmen  and  the 
boatmen  the  slaves,"  where  '  troublesome  mosqui- 
toes and  marsh  frogs '  kept  sleep  from  his  eyes. 
SL  Paul  and  St.  Luke  remembered  it  gratefully  as 
the  first  of  two  places — Tres  Tabema  (see  Three 
T.A.VEEXS),  10  miles  further  north,  being  the  other — 
whither  brethren  came  from  Rome  to  greet  them 
and  escort  them  on  their  way.  J.  Strahax. 

APRON.— The  word  cri/uKlpeta  (pL),  a  modified 
form  of  the  Latin  semicinctia,  occurs  only  in  Ac 
19^,  where  it  is  translated  'aprons,'  and  placed  in 
an  alternative  relation  to  <rovddpta  (see  Haxdker- 
CHIEF).  The  two  articles  are  not  to  be  identified. 
The  ffifiixtpdiop  is,  as  the  derivation  suggests,  a  half- 
girdle,  or  forecloth  ;  not  an  essential  of  dress,  like 
the  girdle  itself,  but  an  accessory,  worn  by  artisans 
and  slaves  for  protection  of  their  clothes  during 
work.  Presumably  the  material  was  linen  or  cotton. 
Still  there  is  some  doubt  as  to  its  precise  nature 
(see  L.  S.  Pot^vin.  Here  and  There  in  the  Greek  Xeic 
Testament,  New  York,  1898,  p.  169,  where  a  parallel 
from  Martial,  xiv.  151  if.  is  quoted). 

It  is  not  said  that  the  aprons  were  the  property 
of  St.  Paul ;  but,  judging  from  the  word  used  for 
body  (dx6  toD  xp<^os),  this  is  not  impossible.  The 
deduction  has  been  made  that  he  used  them  in  pur- 
suing his  craft  as  a  tentmaker.  AU  that  was  needed, 
however,  was  that  the  articles  should  have  touched 
his  person,  and  thereafter  those  suffering  from  dis- 
ease (cf.  Lk  8").  For  the  usage,  and  belief  under- 
lying, cf.  Ac  5'^,  and  for  modem  instances,  HDB 
(«.r.),  and  S.  I.  Curtiss,  Primitive  Semitic  Beligion 
To-Day,  London,  19«>2.  p.  91  f. 

W.  CRUICKSH.A.XK. 

AQUILA  AND  PRISCILLA  (or  Peisca).*— The 
references  to  this  husband  and  wife  are  Ac  18, 
Ro  \&,  1  Co  16i»,  and  2  Ti  ^^.  These  pj^ssages 
suggest  that  Aquila  and  Priscilla  were,  in  St. 
Paul's  eyes,  people  of  importance  in  the  early 
Church,  though  ecclesiastical  tradition  has  little 
to  say  about  them.  The  careful  description  of 
Aquila  as  '  a  Jew,  a  man  of  Pontus  by  race '  (Ac  18*), 
rather  implies  that  PrisciUa  his  wife  was  not  a 
Jewess ;  because  her  name  is  usually  put  first,  it 
is  thought  that  she  was  of  higher  social  standing 
than  her  husband.  Evidence  has  been  offered  by 
de  Rossi  that  Priscilla  was  a  well-connected  Roman 
lady.  Discussing  this  eWdence,  Sanday  and  Head- 
lam  suggest  that  both  Aquila  and  Priscilla  '  were 
freedmen  of  a  member  of  the  AcUian  gens '  (Boman^, 
420).  But  they  admit  the  possibility  of  Priscilla 
being  '  a  member  of  some  distinguished  Roman 
family.'  Ramsay  strongly  urges  this  theory,  and 
it  explains  much  in  the  sU)rT — their  social  position, 
their  command  of  money,  their  influence  in  Rome, 
their  freedom  from  Jewish  prejudices,  etc.  Another 
explanation  of  why  PrisciUa's  name  comes  first  may 
be  that  she  was  the  more  vigorous  and  intelligent 
Christian  worker.  Thus  Hamack  describes  them 
as  '  Prises  the  missionary,  with  her  husband 
Aquila'  (Expansion  of  Christianity^,  i.  79). 

Aquila  and  Priscilla  came  from  Italy  to  Corinth, 
'  because  Claudius  had  commanded  all  the  Jews  to 
depart  from  Rome  '  (Ac  18-).     Suetonius  says  the 

*  St.  Luke  uses  the  form  PriteOia  Qn  ActsX  St.  Piml  the 
fonn  Prisea  (in  his  EpistlesX 


expulsion  was  caused  W  a  series  of  disturbances 
'due  to  the  action  of  Chrestus'  (Claud.  25);  i.e. 
Christian  ferment  was  one  cause  of  the  edict.  It 
is  probable,  therefore,  that  Aquila  and  Priscilla 
had  been  influenced  in  Rome  by  Christian  teaching, 
though  it  cannot  be  decided  wnether  they  were  al- 
ready converts  to  Christianity.  For  this  reason 
they  were  compelled  to  leave  the  country,  though 
the  edict  was  not  rigidly  enforced  on  all  Jews. 
Priscilla  accompanied  her  Jewish  husband  to 
Corinth,  where  they  followed  their  trade  as  tent- 
makers.  They  seem  always  to  have  been  able  to 
maintain  a  fair  position,  for  their  house  was  a 
meeting-place  for  the  Church  both  in  Ephesus  and 
in  Rome.  Probably,  then,  they  were  people  of 
considerable  means,  though  their  expulsion  from 
Rome  limited  their  resources  for  a  time.  Com- 
radeship in  trade  is  given  as  the  reason  why  St. 
Paul  lodged  vrith  Aquila  and  Priscilla  in  Corinth  ; 
but  their  favourable  attitude  to  Christianity  must 
have  been  a  strong  inducement  on  both  sides. 
Under  St.  Paul's  influence  they  became  not  only 
earnest  Christians,  but  also  enthusiastic  helpers  of 
the  Apostle.  Writing  to  the  Corinthian  Church 
in  after  years,  the  Apostle  says :  '  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  greet  you  much  in  the  Lord'  (1  Co  16"). 
This  is  a  warm  personal  greeting,  in  the  way  not 
merely  of  friendship  but  of  love  and  service  to 
Christ — a  suitable  greeting  from  those  who  had 
helped  St.  Paul  to  found  the  Church. 

When  St.  Paul  went  to  Ephesus,  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  went  with  him  and  remained  there  to  do 
pioneer  work  whilst  he  visited  Jerusalem.  They 
shrank  from  the  responsibility,  and  wanted  the 
Apostle  to  remain  (Ac  18**).  But  he  urged  them 
to  stay,  promising  to  return.  So  the  initial  work 
in  Ephesus  was  done  by  Aquila  and  Priscilla. 
They  tried  to  prepare  the  ground  before  St.  Paul 
returned,  and  to  sow  the  seed  of  Christian  teach- 
ing as  far  as  they  were  able.  During  this  time 
Apollos  iq.v. )  came  to  Ephesus,  with  his  imperfect 
apprehension  of  Christianity.  Aquila  and  Priscilla 
admired  his  learning  and  lus  earnestness  ;  and,  re- 
cognizing that  such  a  man  must  either  be  a  strong 
supporter  of  the  cause  or  an  influential  opponent, 
they  did  their  best  to  instruct  him  more  carefully 
(Ac  18*).  Subsequent  events  throw  doubt  on  the 
ability  of  this  couple,  who  were  themselves  recent 
converts,  to  educate  the  eloquent  Alexandrian  in 
the  Pauline  interpretation  of  the  gospel.  Would 
not  his  presence  overshadow  Aquila  and  Priscilla, 
tending  to  make  their  work  more  diflicult?  The 
elementary  and  even  chaotic  state  of  things  in 
Ephesus  at  this  period  is  shown  by  the  incident  of 
the  twelve  men  'knowing  only  the  baptism  of 
John '  whom  St.  Paul  found  when  he  returned  to 
the  city  (Ac  19^'- )•  As  nothing  is  said  about  the 
baptism  of  Apollos,  and  as  the  twelve  men  'had 
not  heard  whether  the  Holy  Spirit  was  given,'  it 
seems  unlikely  that  there  had  been  any  Christian 
baptism  in  Ephesus  before  St.  Paul  came  to  super- 
intend the  work.  Nevertheless,  Aquila  and  Pris- 
cUla  seem  to  have  fulfilled  their  mission  with  skill 
and  courage ;  and,  when  a  Church  was  gathered, 
the  members  met  in  their  house  (1  Co  16**).  This 
may  explain  their  presence  in  Rome  when  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written.  As  St.  Paul 
left  them  in  Ephesus  to  do  pioneering  work,  so  he 
seems  to  have  sent  them  to  Rome  to  prepare  the 
way  for  his  coming  there.  The  decree  of  expul- 
sion was  not  enforced  permanently ;  their  con- 
nexion with  a  leading  Roman  family  made  it 
more  possible  for  them  to  return  to  Rome  than 
for  Jews  with  no  influence ;  whilst  their  know- 
ledge of  the  city,  their  social  standing,  as  well  a.< 
their  experience  in  Corinth  and  in  Ephesus,  with 
their  devotion  to  himself,  fitted  them  pre-eminently 
for  such  work  as  St.  Paul  contemplated- 


88 


ARABIA 


ARABIA 


The  recognition  of  the  social  position  of  this 
devoted  couple,  and  of  their  valuable  pioneering 
work,  invests  them  with  special  interest  as  having 
assisted  St.  Paul  in  his  missionary  labours  in  a 
unique  way.  Their  devotion  to  the  Apostle  was 
signalized  in  some  remarkable  fashion,  apparently 
when  he  was  in  diinger.  His  description  of  them 
as  '  my  fellow-workers  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  for  my 
life  laid  down  their  own  necks ;  unto  whom  not 
only  I  give  thanks  but  also  all  the  churches  of  the 
Crentiles'  (Ro  W-*),  sets  them  side  by  side  with 
the  Apostle.  They  have  laboured  along  with  him 
in  a  pre-eminent  manner,  and  have  attested  their 
worth  as  independent  workers  (cf.  Weizsacker,  i. 
394).  '  They  furnish  the  most  beautiful  example 
known  to  us  in  the  Apostolic  Age  of  the  power 
for  good  that  could  be  exerted  by  a  husband  and 
wife  working  in  unison  for  the  advancement  of 
the  Gospel'  (McGiflert,  428). 

The  references  to  Aquila  and  Priscilla  have  been 
used  as  arguments  against  the  historicity  of  parts 
of  Acts  and  in  favour  of  treating  Ro  16  as  not  part 
of  that  Epistle.  But  the  two  reasons  relied  on  are 
not  strong  enough  to  carry  the  conclusions.  It  is 
supposed  that  both  were  Jews  (so  Weizsacker, 
McGiffert ;  cf.  Lightfoot  on  Phil.*,  1878,  p.  16)— 
though  Priscilla  was  probably  a  Roman  ;  and  their 
migratory  life  is  fully  explained  if  they  were  people 
of  means,  who  became  enthusiastic  helpers  in  St. 
Paul's  missionary  labours,  and  whom  he  selected  to 
do  pioneering  work  in  Ephesus  and  in  Rome.  In 
particular  their  return  to  Ephesus  at  a  later  period 
(2  Ti  4^')  is  quite  comprehensible.  Not  only  would 
they  have  trade  connexions  with  the  city,  but  also 
their  presence  would  be  specially  welcome  because 
they  had  been  actually  the  founders  of  the  Church. 

Aquila  and  Priscilla  have  been  selected  by  some 
scholars  as  likely  authors  of  *  Hebrews.'  Harnack 
has  argued  strongly  for  this  suggestion,  and  Rendel 
Harris  favours  it.  M,  Dods  says :'  All  that  we  know 
of  Aquila  seems  to  lit  the  conditions  as  Avell  as  any 
name  that  has  been  suggested '  (Com.  on  '  Hebrews ' 
[EGT],  234).  It  has  to  be  said,  however,  that  the 
suggestion  implies  a  closer  intimacy  with  Judaism 
than  seems  likely  in  their  case.  The  influence  of 
the  Roman  wife  probably  preponderated  over  the 
Jewish  influence  of  the  husband.  They  were  not 
Christians  of  the  Judaistic  type,  but  cordial 
workers  on  Pauline  lines  among  Gentiles.  At  the 
same  time,  the  discussion  of  a  Jew's  difficulties  by 
such  a  vigorous  mind  as  Priscilla  possessed  may 
have  qualified  Aquila  to  write  '  Hebrews '  with 
his  wife's  help.  It  is  a  question,  however,  whether 
their  authorship  would  harmonize  with  the  inde- 
pendent use  of  Pauline  thoughts  characteristic  of 
the  Epistle  (cf.  Expositor,  8th  ser.,  v.  371  ff.). 

LiTBRATURE.— Artt.  in  HDB  on  '  Aquila,' '  Priscilla,' '  Corinth,' 
•Corinthians' ;  in  EBi  (hy  Schmiedel)on  'Acts'  and  'Aquila' ; 
and  in  SchaffHerzog  on  'Aquila';  Sanday  -  Headlam, 
Romans^,  Edinburgh,  1902,  Introd.  §  3,  and  p.  xl,  also  pp.  418- 
420 ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman 
Citizen,  London,  1896,  pp.  253ff.,  267fif.  ;  A.  Harnack,  Ex- 
pansion of  Christianity'^,  do.  1908,  i.  75  and  79;  C.  v. 
Weizsacker,  The  Apostolic  Age,  i.2  [do.  1897]  307  fif. ;  O. 
Pfleiderer,  Primitive  Christianity,  i.  (do.  1906]  246;  A.  C. 
McGififert,  Apostolic  A  ne,  Edinburgh,  1897,  pp.  273,  427  f.; 
EOT,  'Hebrews,'  Introd.  p.  228,  'Acts  of  Apostles,'  p.  383, 
•Romans,'  pp.  560,  718 f.  J.  E.  ROBERTS. 

ARABIA. — Arabia  (Apa^la,  from  a-yr),  which  now 
denotes  the  great  peninsula  lying  between  the  Red 
Sea  and  the  Persian  Gulf,  was  in  ancient  times 
a  singularly  elusive  term.  Originally  it  meant 
simply  'desert'  or  'desolation,'  and  when  it  became 
an  ethnographic  proper  name  it  was  long  in  ac- 
quiring a  fixed  and  generally  understood  meaning. 
'  Arabia '  shifted  like  the  nomads,  drifted  like  the 
desert  sand.  It  did  not  denote  a  country  whose 
boundaries  could  be  defined  by  treaty,  shown  by 
landmarks,  and  set  down  in  a  map.      Too  vast  and 


vague  for  delimitation,  it  impressed  the  imagina- 
tion like  the  steppe,  the  prairie,  or  tlie  veldt,  while 
it  had  a  character  and  history  of  its  own.  To  the 
settled  races  of  Mesopotamia,  Syria,  and  Palestine, 
it  meant  any  part  of  that  hinterland,  skirting  the 
confines  of  civilization,  which  was  the  camping- 
ground  of  wandering  tribes  for  ever  hovering  around 
peaceful  towns  and  spreading  terror  among  their 
inhabitants.  It  was  the  dim  Border  region,  not  so 
wholly  unproductive  as  to  be  incapable  of  support- 
ing life,  interposed  between  cultivation  and  the 
sheer  wilderness.  So  uncertain  was  the  applica- 
tion of  the  term,  that  there  was  no  part  of  the  semi- 
desert  fringe  extending  from  the  lower  Tigris  to 
the  lower  Nile  which  was  not  at  one  time  or  another 
called  Arabia.  To  the  propliets  of  Israel  the  word 
had  one  meaning,  on  Persian  inscriptions  another, 
and  to  Greek  writers  (Herod,  ii.  and  iii. ;  Xenophon, 
I.  V.  1,  VII.  viii.  25)  still  another.  Every  one  used 
it  to  denote  that  particular  hinterland  whose  tribes 
and  peoples  were  more  or  less  known  to  him ;  that 
was  his  Arabia. 

But  by  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.  the  Arab  tribe  of  the 
Nabataeans  had  become  a  powerful  nation,  with 
Petra  as  their  capital,  and  from  that  time  onward 
Arabia  began  to  be  identified,  especially  in  the 
Western  mind,  with  the  Nabatsean  kingdom. 
While  1  Mac.  still  distinguishes  the  Nabataeans 
from  other  Arabs  (5^  9**),  2  Mac.  speaks  of  Aretas, 
the  hereditary  king  of  the  Nabataeans,  as  '  king  of 
the  Arabs'  (5*).  In  the  time  of  Josephus  this 
people  'inhabited  all  the  country  from  the  Eu- 
phrates to  the  Red  Sea'  {Ant.  I.  xii.  4).  Soon 
after  taking  possession  of  Judaea,  the  Romans  sent 
an  expedition,  under  Marcus  Scaurus,  against  the 
Nabataeans  (59  B.C.) ;  and,  though  their  subjugation 
was  not  accomplished  at  that  time,  it  must  have 
taken  place  not  much  later.  From  the  days  of 
Augustus  the  kings  of  the  Arabians  were  as  much 
subject  to  the  Empire  as  Herod,  king  of  the  Jews, 
and  they  had  the  whole  region  between  Herod's 
dominions  and  the  desert  assigned  to  them.  To 
the  north  'their  territory  reached  as  far  as 
Damascus,  which  was  under  their  protection,  and 
even  beyond  Damascus,  and  enclosed  as  with  a 

firdle  the  whole  of  Palestinian  Syria' (Mommsen, 
'rovinces^,  Lond.  1909,  ii.  148  f . ).  "The  Arabians  who 
were  present  at  the  first  Christian  Pentecost  (Ac  2") 
were  most  likely  Nabataeans,  possibly  from  Petra. 

The  Nabataean  kings  made  use  or  Greek  official 
designations,  and  St.  Paul  relates  how  'the  gov- 
ernor '  (6  idvdpxv^)  of  Damascus  '  under  Aretas  the 
king '  was  foiled  in  the  attempt,  probably  made  at 
the  instigation  of  the  Jews,  to  put  him  under  arrest 
soon  after  his  conversion  (2  Co  IP'"-).  This 
episode,  which  has  an  important  bearing  on  the 
chronology  of  St.  Paul's  life,  raises  a  difficult  his- 
torical problem.  Damascene  coins  of  Tiberius 
indicate  that  the  city  was  under  direct  Roman 
government  till  A.D.  34  ;  and,  as  the  legate  of  Syria 
was  engaged  in  hostilities  with  Aretas  till  the  close 
of  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  it  is  very  unlikely  that  this 
emperor  yielded  up  Damascus  to  the  Nabataean 
king.  But  the  accession  of  Caligula  brought  a 
great  change,  and  the  suggestion  is  naturally  made 
that  he  bought  over  Aretas  by  ceding  Damascus  to 
him.  The  fact  that  no  Damascene  coins  bearing 
the  Emperor's  image  occur  in  the  reigns  of  Cal- 
igula and  Claudius  is  in  harmony  with  this  theory 
(Schurer,  EJP  I.  ii.  357  f. ).  The  view  of  Mommsen 
(Provinces'^,  ii.  149),  following  Marquardt  {Rom. 
Staatsvenvaltung,  Leipzig,  1885,  i.  405),  is  ditt'er- 
ent.  Talking  of  the  voluntary  submission  of  the 
city  of  Damascus  to  the  king  of  the  Nabataeans, 
he  says  that 

'  probably  this  dependence  of  the  city  on  the  Nabattsan  kings 
subsisted  so  long  as  there  were  such  king^  [i.e.  from  the  begrin- 
ning  of  the  Roman  period  till  a.d.  106].    From  the  fact  that  the 


ABAMATC 


AKEOPAGITE,  AKEOPAGUS        89 


city  struck  coins  with  the  heads  of  the  Roman  emperors,  tber« 
follows  doubtless  its  dependence  on  Rome  and  therewith  its  self- 
administration,  but  not  its  non-dependence  on  the  Roman  raasal- 
prince ;  such  protectorates  assumed  shapes  so  various  that  these 
arrangements  might  well  be  compatible  with  each  other.' 
See,  further,  Aretas. 

In  the  Galatian  Epistle  (1")  St.  Paul  states  that 
after  his  escape  from  Damascns  he  '  went  away  into 
Arabia,'  evidently  for  solitary  communion  vdth 
God ;  but  he  does  not  further  define  the  place  of 
his  retreat,  and  Acts  makes  no  allusion  to  this 
episode.  When  he  quitted  the  city  under  cover  of 
darkness,  he  had  not  a  long  way  to  flee  to  a  place 
of  safety,  for  the  desert  lies  in  close  proximity  to 
the  Damascene  oasis.  Possibly  he  went  no  further 
than  the  fastnesses  of  ^auran.  Lightfoot  {Gal. 
87  f.),  Stanley  {Sinai  and  Palestine,  Loud.  1877, 
p.  50),  and  others  conjecture  that  he  sought  the 
solitude  of  Mt.  Sinai,  with  which  he  seems  to  show 
some  acquaintance  in  the  same  Epistle  (Gal  4®). 
But  he  could  scarcely  have  avoided,  specific  refer- 
ence to  so  memorable  a  journey,  which  would  have 
brought  him  into  a  kind  of  spiritual  contact  with 
Moses  and  Elijah.  Besides,  the  peninsxda  of  Sinai 
was  about  400  miles  from  Damascus ;  and,  as 
military  operations  were  being  actively  carried  on 
by  the  legate  of  Syria  against  Aretas  in  A.D.  37 
—the  probable  year  of  St.  Paul's  conversion — it 
would  scarcely  have  been  possible  for  a  stranger  to 
pass  through  the  centre  of  the  perturbed  country 
without  an  escort  of  soldiers. 

In  A.D.  106  the  governor  of  Syria,  Aulus  Cornelius 
Palma,  broke  up  the  dominion  of  the  Nabataean 
kings,  and  constituted  the  Roman  province  of 
Arabia,  while  Damascus  was  added  to  Syria.  For 
the  whole  region  the  change  was  epoch-making. 

'  The  tendency  to  acquire  these  domains  for  civilisation  and 
specially  for  Hellenism  was  only  heightened  by  the  fact  that  the 
Roman  government  took  upon  itseU  the  work.  The  Hellenism 
of  the  East  .  .  .  was  a  church  militant,  a  thoroughly  conquering 
power  pushing  its  way  in  a  political,  religious,  economic,  and 
literary  point  of  view '  (Mommsen,  op.  eit.  ii.  152). 

Under  the  strong  new  regime  the  desert  tribes  were 
for  the  first  and  only  time  brought  under  control, 
with  the  result  that  no  small  part  of  '  the  desert ' 
was  changed  into  *  the  sown. '  '  Rome  won  the 
nomads  to  her  service  and  fastened  them  down  in 
defence  of  the  border  they  had  otherwise  fretted 
and  broken.  .  .  .  Behind  this  Roman  bulwark  there 
grew  up  a  curious,  a  unique  civilisation  talking 
Greek,  imitating  Rome,  but  at  heart  Semitic 
{G.  A.  Smith,  HGHL,  London,  1894,  p.  627). 

LiTBRATCRK.— E.  Schtirer,  HJP  i.  ii.  345  ff. ;  J.  Enting-, 
SabalaUeht  Inschriften au*  Arabien,  Berlin,  lS«o  ;  H.  Vincent, 
Le»  Arabet  en  Syrie,  Paris,  1907  ;  G.  A.  Cooke,  Sorth-Semitic 
Inttripticru,  London,  1903 ;  and  the  art.  '  Arabs  (Ancient),'  by 
Th  Noldeke,  in  EIi£  L  659.  JaMES  STRAHAK. 

ARAMAIC— See  L.^nguage. 
ARATUS.— See  Quotations. 
ARCHANGEL.— See  AXGEL. 

ARCHIPPUS  CA/JxtTxoj).— An  office-bearer  of 
the  Apostolic  Church  referred  to  in  Col  4^"  as  exer- 
cising a  ministry  'in  the  Lord,'  i.e.  in  fellowship 
with,  and  in  the  service  of,  Christ.  He  is  addressed 
by  St.  Paul  as  '  feUow-soldier ' — a  designation  pos- 
sibly occasioned  by  some  special  service  in  which  the 
two  had  been  engaged  together  during  St.  Paul's 
three  years'  abode  at  Ephesus,  where  the  Apostle 
had  severe  conflicts  with  as^dlants  (1  Co  15**). 
More  probably,  however,  the  expression  refers  to 
the  general  fellowship  of  the  two  men  in  evangel- 
istic work  (cf.  Ph  2^).  The  military  figure  may 
have  been  suggested  by  the  Apostle's  environment 
at  Rome. 

Archippus  may  have  been  a  presbyter  bishop,  a 
leading  deacon,  an  evangelist,  or  a  prominent 
teacher  at  the  time  when  St.  Paul  wrote.     From 


Philem^  he  appears  to  have  been  a  member  of 
Philemon's  household,  and  he  is  regarded  by  meet 
commentators  (after  Theodore  of  Mopsnestia)  as 
his  son.  Accordingly,  it  is  generally  snppoeed 
(after  Chrysostom)  tnat  Archippus  was  an  office- 
bearer of  the  Colossian  Church.  Against  this 
inference  Lightfoot  adduces  (1)  the  mention  of 
Archippus  in  Col.  immediately  after  a  reference  to 
Laodicea ;  (2)  the  alleged  unlikelihood  of  Archippus 
being  addressed  in  Col  4^'  indirectly  instead  of 
directly,  if  he  were  himself  an  oflicial  of  the  Church 
to  which  St.  Paul  was  writing ;  (3)  the  tradition 
(embodied  in  the  Apost.  Constitutions,  viL  46)  that 
Archipptis  became  '  bishop,'  or  presiding  presbyter, 
of  Laodicea.  Lightfoot  infers  that  Archippus  ful- 
filled his  ministry  at  Laodicea,  which  was  not  many 
miles  from  Colossae :  and  the  mention  of  him  in 
PhUem.  is  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  St. 
Paul  (through  Tychicus,  the  bearer  of  his  letter  to 
Philemon)  might  have  suggested  that  Onesimus 
should  be  employed  not  in  the  city  where  he  had 
lived  as  a  slave,  but  in  the  Laodicean  Chxirch  under 
Archippus.  The  usual  supposition,  however,  that 
Archippus  lived  with  Philemon  at  Colossse  and  also 
laboured  there,  appears,  on  the  whole,  more  natural 
and  probable. 

The  me-ssage  conveyed  to  Archippus  ('Take  heed 
[look]  to  the  ministry,' etc.)  is  held  by  Lightfoot 
(Coio«s.^  42f.)  to  imply  a  rebuke,  as  it  Archippus 
had  been  remiss  or  unfaithful  in  the  discharge  of 
official  duty ;  and  Lightfoot,  believing  that  Archip- 
pus held  office  at  Laodicea,  compares  the  admonition 
to  him  with  the  censure  on  account  of  lukewarm- 
ness  administered  in  Kev  3  to  the  angel  and  church 
of  the  Laodiceans.  The  message,  however,  to 
Archippus  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  necessarily 
suggesting  more  than  that  his  work  was  specially 
important  and  arduous,  demanding  from  himsell 
earnest  watchfulness,  and  from  an  older  'feUow- 
campaigner,'  like  St.  Paul,  the  incentive  of  sympa- 
thetic exhortation  and  warning.  Theophylact,  in 
his  commentary,  supposes  that  the  apostolic 
message  is  purposely  made  public,  instead  of  being 
conveye< ;  in  a  private  letter,  not  so  much  to  suggest 
Archippus'  special  need  of  admonition,  as  to  enable 
him,  without  offence,  to  deal  in  like  manner  with 
brethren  under  himself. 

In  the  Greek  Martyrology,  Archippus  appears 
(in  the  Mencea  under  Nov.  22)  as  haN-ing  been 
stoned  to  death,  along  with  Philemon,  at  Chonae, 
near  Laodicea.  His  alleged  eventual  '  episcopate ' 
or  presiding  presbyterate  at  Laodicea  is  at  least 
possible,  and  even  probable ;  but  the  inclusion  of 
his  name  in  the  pseudo-Dorothean  list  (6th  cent.) 
of  the  Seventy  of  Lk  10  is  quite  incredible. 

LrrKRATrKE. — J.  A,  Dietelmaier,  de  Archippo,  Altdorf,  1761; 
J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Colotsianifi,  1879,  pp.  42  f.,  3i8ff. ;  see  also 
Literature  under  PmLXMOX.  HeJTEY  CoWAX. 

AREOPAGITE,  AREOPAGUS.— In  Ac   17^  the 

title  '  the  Areopagite  '  is  given  to  one  Dionysius,  a 
convert  to  the  Christian  faith  at  Athens,  imply- 
ing that  he  was  a  member  of  the  council  of  the 
Areopagus. 

Areopagus  (Ac  17"  AV  and  RY;  v.«  AV 
'Mars'  Hul,'  RV  'Areopagus';  the  RV  is  correct 
in  rendering  '  Areopagus  '  in  both  places,  as  it  pre- 
serves the  ambiguity  of  the  original). — (a)  The 
name  denominated  a  rocky  eminence  N.W.  of  the 
Acropolis  at  Athens,  which  was  famous  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  city.  Between  the  hill  and  the  Acro- 
polis was  a  narrow  declivity,  now  largely  filled  in. 
On  the  N.E.  the  rock  is  precipitous,  and  at  the  foot 
of  the  precipice  the  worship  of  the  propitiated 
Furies  as  the  Eumenides  was  carried  on,  so  that  the 
locality  was  invested  with  awesome  associations. 
It  is  approached  from  the  agora,  or  market-place, 
by  an   old,  worn   stairway  of  sixteen  steps,  and 


90        AREOPAGITE,  AREOPAGUS 


AEETAS 


upon  the  top  can  still  be  seen  the  rough,  rock-hewn 
benches,  forming  three  sides  of  a  square,  upon 
which  the  court  sat  in  the  open  air,  in  order  that 
the  judges  shouhi  not  be  under  the  same  roof  as 
the  accused. — (b)  The  expression  was  also  used  of 
the  court  itself  (Cicero,  ad  Att.  1.  14.  5;  de  Nat. 
Deor.  ii.  74 ;  Bep.  i.  27).  From  time  immemorial 
this  court  held  its  meetings  on  the  hill  in  question, 
and  was  at  once  the  most  ancient  and  most  revered 
tribunal  in  the  city.  In  ancient  times  it  had  su- 
preme authority  in  both  criminal  and  religious 
matters,  and  its  influence,  ever  tending  to  become 
wider,  aftected  laws  and  offices,  education  and  mor- 
ality. It  thus  fulfilled  the  functions  of  both  court 
and  council.  Pericles  and  his  friend  Ephialtes  (c. 
460  B.C.)  set  themselves  to  limit  the  power  of  the 
court  (Aristotle,  Const.  Ath.  25),  and  it  became 
largely  a  criminal  court,  while  religious  matters 
seem  to  have  been  controlled,  at  least  in  part,  by 
the  King  Archon.  But  the  reforms  of  Ephialtes 
mainly  concerned  interference  in  public  affairs ; 
and  the  statements  of  ^Eschylus  in  the  tragedy 
Eunienides,  which  appeared  at  the  time  in  defence 
of  the  court,  appear  to  be  exaggerated.  In  any 
case,  in  the  Roman  period  it  regained  its  former 
powers  (Cicero,  ad  Fam.  xiii.  1.  5  ;  de  Nat.  Dcor. 
li.  74).  As  to  the  origin  of  the  court,  according  to 
popular  legend  Ares  was  called  before  a  court  of 
the  twelve  gods  to  answer  for  the  murder  of 
Halirrhotius  (Paus.  I.  xxviii.  5),  but  ^schjdus 
(Eum.  685  ff. )  attributes  its  foundation  to  Athene. 

The  questions  which  arise  out  of  the  narrative 
of  Acts  are  these  :  Was  St.  Paul  taken  before  the 
council  or  to  the  hill?  Or  did  he  appear  before 
the  council  sitting  in  the  traditional  place  ?  Was 
he  in  any  sense  on  trial  ? 

The  King  Archon  held  his  meetings  in  the  Stoa 
Basileios,  and  it  was  there  that  Socrates  had  been 
arraigned  on  a  matter  similar  to  that  which  exer- 
cised the  minds  of  the  philosophers  in  the  case 
before  us.  It  seems  probable  that  this  Stoa  became 
identified  with  the  discussion  of  religious  questions, 
and  that,  when  the  council  of  the  Areopagus  re- 
gained its  full  powers,  it  held  its  meetings  here, 
reserving  its  old  judgment-seat  for  cases  of  murder 
(so  Curtius,  Gesammelte  Abhandlungen,  Berlin, 
1894,  ii.  528  f.,  Stadtgesch.  von  Athen,  do.  1891,  p. 
262  f.  ;  but  Harnack,  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Lono. 
and  N.Y.,   1909,   p.   108,   remarks:   'Curtius'   ex- 

Elanation  seems  to  me  untenable ' ;  see  also  Cony- 
eare,  in  HDB  i.  144).  The  whole  picture,  indeed, 
is  in  favour  of  this  view.  There  is  no  reason  why 
the  Stoics  and  Epicureans  should  have  carried 
away  the  Apostle  to  an  isolated  spot.  Further, 
Kamsay  truly  remarks :  '  The  Athenians  were,  in 
many  respects,  flippant ;  but  their  flippancy  was 
combined  with  an  intense  pride  in  the  national 
dignity  and  the  historic  glory  of  the  city,  which 
would  have  revolted  at  such  an  insult  as  that  this 
stranger  should  hjirangue  them  about  his  foreign 
deities  on  the  spot  where  the  Athenian  elders  had 
judged  the  god  Ares  and  the  hero  Orestes'  (St. 
Paid  the  Traveller,  Lond.  1895,  p.  244).  Moreover, 
the  Apostle's  speech  was  not  a  philosophical  dis- 
quisition but  rather  a  popular  oration,  suited  to 
the  general  populace  of  idle  Athenians  and  dilet- 
tante Roman  youths  whose  education  was  not 
considered  complete  until  they  had  spent  some 
time  in  the  purlieus  of  the  ancient  university.  If 
the  council  happened  to  be  sitting,  as  was  evidently 
the  case,  it  was  a  most  natural  impulse  to  hurry 
the  newcomer,  who  '  babbled '  apparently  of  two 
new  deities,  Jesus  and  '  Resurrection '  (for  so  they 
would  understand  him),  to  its  meeting-place,  that 
the  question  might  be  settled  as  to  whether  or  not 
he  was  to  be  allowed  to  continue.  Yet  it  can 
hardly  be  said  that  the  proceedings  were  even  re- 
motely connected  with  a  judicial  inquiry.     It  was 


no  nnakrisis,  or  preliminary  investigation,  though 
the  philosophers  may  have  hoped  that  something 
of  the  sort  would  be  the  outcome.  It  is  of  little 
importance  whether  the  phrase  '  they  took  him 
and  brought  him' implies  friendly  compulsion  or 
inimical  intent.  The  feelings  of  the  listeners 
would  be  very  mixed,  and  they  would  quite 
naturallj'  be  excited  by  the  curious  message  of  the 
new  preacher.  The  professin<j  teachers  were  all 
interested  in  new  ideas  and  yet  resented  un- 
warranted intrusion.  The  council  was  in  the  habit 
of  making  pronouncements  on  the  subject  of  new 
religious  cycles  of  thought,  and  it  was  no  doubt 
felt  that,  if  their  attention  was  drawn  to  the  sub- 
ject, official  proceedings  would  follow.  It  is  evident 
that  there  was  much  in  the  address  of  St.  Paul  that 
awoke  sympathy  in  his  audience.  One  member  of 
the  council,  at  least,  was  converted,  to  wit,  Diony- 
sius.  There  may  have  been  others.  But  the 
general  effect  produced  by  the  mention  of  the 
Resurrection  was  contempt.  A  few  were  ready  to 
hear  more  on  the  subject,  possibly  a  minority  sug- 
gested a  more  formal  examination  ;  but  the  result 
of  the  hearing',  as  of  the  visit,  outwardly  and 
visibly,  was  failure.  The  council  of  the  Areopagus 
made  judicial  procedure  impossible,  by  refusing  to 
treat  the  matter  seriously,  and  the  Apostle  left 
them,  a  disappointed,  and  no  doubt  a  somewhat 
irritated  man. 

Literature. — Besides  the  authors  quoted,  see  W.  M. 
Ramsay,  in  Expositor,  5th  ser.  ii.  [1895]  209,  261,  also  x.  [1899] ; 
E.  Renan,  St.  Paul,  Eng.  tr.  1890,  p.  193  f. ;  A.  C.  McGiffert, 
Iliatoiij  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897,  p.  257  ff. ;  i'ZirS, 
art.  'Areopagus';  R.  J.  Knowling-,  in  EGT  ii.  [London,  1900] 
368  f.  F.  W.  WORSLEY. 

ARETAS  ('Ap^ras,  Arab.  Haritha).—T!he  Gr. 
form  of  a  name  borne  by  several  rulers  of  the  Na- 
bata^an  Arabs,  Avhose  capital  was  Petra  in  Arabia. 

1.  The  first  known  to  history,  '  Aretas,  prince  of 
the  Arabians,'  is  said  to  have  had  the  fugitive  high- 
priest  Jason  shut  up  at  his  court  (2  Mac  5* ;  the 
Gr.  text  is  doubtful).  His  designation  as  '  prince ' 
(Tipavvos)  indicates  that  the  hereditary  chieftain  of 
the  tribe  had  not  yet  assumed  the  dignity  of  king- 
ship. The  royal  dynasty  was  founded  by  Erotimus 
about  110-100  B.C.,  Avhen  the  Greek  kings  of  SjTia 
and  Egypt  had  lost  so  much  of  their  power,  '  ut 
adsiduis  proeliis  consumpti  in  contemptum  liniti- 
morum  venerint  praedaeque  Arabum  genti,  im- 
belli  an  tea,  fuerint'  (Trog.  Pomp.  ap.  Justin., 
xxxix.  5.  5-6). 

2.  The  second  Aretas,  called  6  'Apd^uv  ^a<n\e\ji,  is 
mentioned  by  Josephus  {Ant.  Xlll.  xiii.  3)  in  con- 
nexion witli  the  siege  of  Gaza  by  Alexander  Jan- 
naeus  in  96  B.C. 

3.  Aretas  ill.,  who  reigned  from  about  85  to  60 
B.C., is  known  as  '  Aretas  the  Philliellene,'this  being 
the  superscription  of  the  earliest  Nabattean  coins 
that  are  known.  Under  him  the  mountain  fortress 
of  Petra  began  to  assume  the  aspect  of  a  Hellenistic 
city,  and  the  Nabataean  sway  was  extended  as  far 
as  Damascus.  He  incurred  the  displeasure  of  the 
Romans  by  interfering  in  the  quarrel  of  Hyrcanus 
and  Aristobulus,  but  the  war  which  Scaurus  waged 
against  him  left  his  power  unbroken  [Ant.  XIV.  v. 
i.  ;  BJ  I.  viii.  1 ).  He  couldinot,  however,  i)revent 
LoUius  and  Metellus  from  taking  possession  of 
Damascus  (Ant.  XIV.  ii.  3  ;  BJl.  vi.  1), which  there- 
after was  permanently  under  the  suzerainty  of 
Rome. 

i.  Aretaslv.,Philopatris,the lastand best-known, 
had  a  long  and  successful  reign  (c.  9  B.C.-A.U.  40). 
He  was  originally  called  iEneas,  but  on  coming  to 
the  throne  he  assumed  the  favourite  name  of  the 
Nabatsean  kings.  He  soon  found  it  necessary  to 
ingratiate  himself  with  Rome. 

Augustus  *  was  angry  that  Aretas  had  not  sent  to  him  first 
before  he  took  the  kingdom ;  yet  did  ^Eneas  send  an  epistle 


.VRISTAKCHUS 


ARK 


91 


and  presents  to  Csesar,  and  a  crown  of  gold  of  the  weisfat  of 
many  talents.'  .  .  .  The  Emperor  'admitted  Aretaa% ambaasa- 
dors,  and  after  he  had  jost  reprored  him  for  his  rashness  in 
not  waiting  till  he  had  received  the  kin^om  from  him,  he 
accepted  hi^  presents,  mad  confirmed  him  m  the  government ' 
(Jos.  Ant.  XVI.  ix.  4,  x.  9). 

This  Aretas'  daughter  became  the  wife  of  Herod 
Antipas,  who  divorced  her  in  order  to  marry 
Herodias  (Mk  6^').  Border  disputes  gave  the  in- 
jured father  an  opporttinity  of  revenge.  Again 
acting,  at  this  new  juncture,  >vithout  consulting 
Rome,  he  attacked  and  defeated  Antipas  (a.D.  28) ; 
and  again  fortune  smiled  on  his  daring  disregard 
of  consequences.  The  belated  expedition  which 
Vitellius,  governor  of  Syria,  at  Tiberius'  command, 
led  against  Petra,  had  only  got  as  far  as  Jerusalem, 
when  the  tidings  of  the  Emperors  death  (A.D.  37) 
caused  it  to  be  abandoned. 

There  is  circumstantial  evidence,  though  perhaps 
too  slender  to  be  quite  convincing,  that  Tiberius' 
successor  Caligula  favoured  the  cause  of  Aretas. 
St.  Paul  was  converted  probably  about  A.D.  36  (so 
Turner),  and,  some  time  after,  the  Jews  of  Da- 
mascus conspired  to  kill  him  (Ac  9^^).  In  recall- 
ing this  fact  he  mentions  a  detail  (2  Co  ll**)  which 
the  writer  of  Acts  omits,  namely,  that  it  was  the 
governor  {idydpxvi)  tmder  Aretas  the  king  who — 
doubtless  at  the  instigation  of  the  Jews — guarded 
the  city  to  take  him.  The  question  is  thus  raised 
when  and  how  Aretas  Ijecame  overlord  of  Damascus. 
It  is  inconceivable  either  that  he  captured  the  city 
in  face  of  the  Roman  legions  in  Syria,  or  that 
Tiberius,  who  in  the  end  of  his  reign  was  strongly 
hostile,  ceded  it  to  him.  But  it  is  probable  that 
Caligula  favotxred  the  enemy  of  Herod  Antipas. 
One  of  his  first  imperial  acts  was  to  give  the 
tetrarchy  of  Philip  and  Lysanias  to  Agrippa  {Ant. 
XTUI.  vi.  10),  and  he  may  at  the  same  time  have 
given  Damascus  to  Aretas  as  a  peace-oftering.  It 
was  better  policy  to  befriend  than  to  crush  the 
brave  Nabatajans.  Antipas  was  ultimately  de- 
posed and  banished  in  39. 

It  was  only  for  a  short  time,  however,  that  Rome 
relaxed  her  direct  hold  upon  the  old  Syrian  capital. 
There  are  Damascene  coins  with  the  figure  of 
Tiberius  down  to  A.D.  34,  and  the  fact  that  none 
has  been  found  with  the  image  of  Cains  or  Claud- 
ius is  significant  of  a  change  of  regime  ;  but  the 
image  of  Nero  appears  from  62  onwards.  To  the 
view  of  Marquardt  {Rom.  Staatsverwaltung,  1885, 
i.  405)  and  Mommsen  (Province^,  1909,  iL  149), 
based  on  2  Co  1 1^,  that  Damascus  was  continuously 
in  subjection  to  the  Nabatfean  kings  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Roman  period  down  to  A.D.  106, 
there  are  the  strongest  objections(see  Schiirer,  HJP 
I.  ii.  354).     Cf.  art.  Arabia. 

More  coins  and  inscriptions  date  from  the  time 
of  Aretas  iv.  than  from  any  Nabataean  reign. 
^YhUe  the  standing  title  of  Aretas  m.  was  4>tXA- 
\i)voi,  that  which  the  last  chose  for  himself  was  cm 
•T25?,  'Lover  of  his  people."  He  set  country  above 
culture ;  he  was  a  Nabatsean  patriot  first  and  a 
Hellenist  after^ivards.  It  was  probably  this  success- 
ful reign  that  Josephus  had  in  view  when  he 
^vrote  of  the  extension  of  the  Nabataean  king- 
dom from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Red  Sea  {Ant.  L 
xii.  4). 

LiTERATrsus.— In  addition  to  the  anthorities  cited  in  the  body 
of  the  art.,  see  Literature  appended  to  art.  Akabu,  and  P. 
Ewald,  art.  'Aretas,'  in  PR&.  J  AMES  StRAHaX. 

ARISTARCHDS  ('Apf<rropxos).  —  A  Macedonian 
Christian  and  a  native  of  Thessalonica  who  became 
one  of  the  companions  of  St.  Paul  on  his  third 
missionary  journey.  He  is  first  mentioned  on  the 
occasion  of  the  riot  in  Ephesus,  where  along  with 
another  companion  of  the  Apostle  named  Gains 
{q.v.),  probably  of  Derbe,  he  was  rushed  by  the 
excited  multitude  into  the  theatre  (Ac  19^).     He 


seems  to  have  been  an  influential  member  of  the 
Church  of  Thessalonica,  and  was  deputed  along 
with  Sectmdus  (q.v.)  to  convey  the  contributions  of 
the  Church  to  Jertisalem  (Ac  20*).  He  was  thus 
present  in  the  city  at  the  time  of  St.  Patil's  arrest, 
and  seems  to  have  remained  in  Syria  during  the  two 
years  of  the  Apostle's  imprisonment  in  Csesarea, 
for  we  find  him  embarking  with  the  prisoner  on 
the  ship  bound  for  the  West  (Ac  27*).  It  is  not 
certain  that  he  accompanied  St.  Paul  to  Rome. 
He  may,  as  Lightfoot  supposes  {Phil.*  34),  have  dis- 
embarked at  Myra  (Ac  27').  On  the  other  hand, 
Ramsay  {St.  PauP,  316)  believes  that  both  Aris- 
tarchus  and  St.  Luke  accompanied  the  Apostle  on 
the  voyage  as  his  personal  slaves.  In  any  case  Aris- 
tarchus  was  present  in  Rome  soon  after  St.  Paul's 
arrival,  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  he  came  later 
with  contributions  from  the  Philippian  Church  to 
the  Apostle.  When  the  EpLstles  to  the  Colossians 
and  to  Philemon  were  written,  Aristarchus  was 
with  the  Apostle  in  Rome.  In  the  former  (Col  4^*) 
he  is  called  the  'fellow-prisoner'  (ffwotxAwiXwros) 
of  the  writer,  and  we  find  the  same  term,  which 
usually  indicates  physical  restraint,  applied  to 
Epaphras  {q.v.)  in  Philem**.  While  the  idea  in 
the  Apostle's  mind  may  be  that  Aristarchus,  like 
himself,  was  taken  captive  by  Jestis  Christ,  it  is 
more  probable  that  Aristarchus  shared  St.  Paul's 
prison  in  Rome,  either  as  a  suspected  friend  of  the 
prisoner  or  voluntarily  as  the  Apostle's  slave — a 
position  which  he  and  Epaphras  may  have  taken 
alternately.  In  PhUem**  he  is  called  'fellow- 
labourer  '  of  the  writer.  Nothing  is  known  of  his 
subsequent  history.  According  to  tradition  he 
stilfered  martyrdom  tmder  Nero. 

LiTBRATTRE.— W.  M.  Ramsaj,  St.  Paiul  the  Ttvxdler\ 
London,  1897,  pp.  £79,  316 ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  CoUmiana  and 
PhilemoH?,  do.  1879,  p.  236,  Philippian*^,  do.  1878,  p.  34 ;  artt. 
in  HDB  and  in  EBi ;  R.  J.  Kno^iriu^,  in  EGT  n.  [1900]  414. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 

ARISTOBULDS  ('Ap«<rT<5j3oi'Xor,  a  Greek  name 
frequently  adopted  by  Romans  and  Jews,  and 
borne  by  several  members  of  the  Maccalwean  and 
Herodian  families). — In  Ro  16^*  St.  Patil  salutes 
*  them  which  are  of  the  household  of  Aristobulus ' 
(to«>s  iK  tQw  'Apurro^o6kov),  i.e.  the  Christians  in  his 
familia  or  establishment  of  freedmen  and  slaves 
(perhaps  known  as  Aristobxdiani,  for  which  the 
Greek  phrase  would  be  eqtiivalent).  Lightfoot 
thinks  that  Aristobulus  was  a  grandson  of  Herod 
the  Great,  smd  brother  of  Agrippa  and  Herod. 
This  Aristobulus  lived  and  died  in  Rome  in  a 
private  station  (see  Jos.  BJ  n.  xL  6,  Ant.  XX.  i. 
2).  After  his  death  it  is  sup}X)sed  that  his  '  house- 
hold '  passed  over  to  the  Emperor,  but  retained  the 
name  of  their  former  master.  The  '  household  of 
Aristobnlns '  wotild  naturally  include  many  Ori- 
entals and  Jews,  and  therefore  probably  some 
Christians.  The  name  Herodion  (q.v.),  which 
immediately  follows,  suggests  a  connexion  with 
the  Herodian  dynasty.  If  Lightfoot  is  right,  the 
reference  to  the  '  household  of  Aristobulus '  is 
strong  evidence  for  the  Roman  destination  of 
these  salutations.  The  Christians  in  the  '  house- 
hold' would  naturally  form  one  of  the  distinct 
commtmities  of  which  the  Church  at  Rome  was 
apparently  made  up  (cf.  v."  and  the  phrases  in 
vv.*-").  We  have  no  knowledge  as  to  whether  the 
master  himself  was  a  convert.  See  Lightfoot, 
Philippians*,  1878,  p.  174 f. 

T.  B.  Allwoktht. 

ARK.— The  LXX  and  the  NT  use  «^an-6i=a 
wooden  chest  or  box,  as  a  terminus  teehnicus  both 
for  Noah's  ark  (n?n),  and  for  the  ark  (jii*?)  of  the 
covenant. 

1.  An  interesting  aa^unt  of  the  successive  phases 
of  modem  opinion  regarding  the  former  ark  will  be 
found  in  £J5r"  (s.v.).     The  writer  of  Hebrews  (W), 


92 


AEMAGEDDOK^ 


ARMOUR 


taking  the  story  as  he  finds  it,  refers  to  Noah's 
forethought  as  a  supreme  instance  of  that  faitli 
which  is  the  conviction  of  things  not  seen — a  faith 
by  which  he  not  only  virtually  condemned  the 
world,  bringing  its  careless  infidelity  into  strong 
relief,  but  became  heir  of  that  righteousness  which 
is  faith's  crown  and  reward  (t^s  Kard.  irlimv  BiKaio- 
ffijvijs).  St.  Peter  (1  P  3^^^-),  supplementing  a  tradi- 
tion which  is  found  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  (6-16 ; 
cf.  Jubilees,  5),  imagines  Christ,  as  a  bodiless  spirit, 
preaching,  in  the  days  between  His  Passion  and 
His  ResuiTection,  to  the  spirits  in  prison.  These 
are  the  disobedient  and,  to  bt.  Peter  (himself  like  a 
spirit  in  prison  during  those  three  days),  unhappy 
children  of  the  unlawful  union  between  angels  and 
the  daughters  of  men,  condemned  rebels  who  in 
vain  sought  the  intervention  of  Enoch  on  their 
behalf  in  that  time  of  Divine  long-suffering  when 
Noah  was  preparing  the  ark  in  which  he  saved 
himself  and  his  family  (see  R.  H.  Charles,  Bk.  of 
Jub.,  Lond.  1902,  p.  43  fF.). 

2.  The  writer  of  Hebrews  mentions  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  {rrju  Ki^wrbv  rijs  diaO-j^Kij^)  as  the  inner- 
most and  most  sacred  piece  of  furniture  contained 
in  the  Tabernacle.  His  description  of  it  as  '  com- 
pletely overlaid  with  gold '  {irepiKeKaXv/xn^vrjv  irdvTodev 
Xpvcrlq))  corresponds  with  the  directions  given  in  Ex 
25"  (iffwOev  Kai  f^wOev  -xfivauiffei^  airn/iv).  The  desig- 
nation '  the  ark  of  the  covenant,'  which  was  pro- 
bably coined  by  the  writer  of  Deut. ,  was  historically 
later  than  'thearkof  Jahweh,'and  *  the  ark  of  God' 
( JE),  and  earlier  than  '  the  ark  of  the  testimony ' 
<P).  It  was  a  contraction  for  *  the  ark  containing 
the  tables  of  the  covenant,'  the  Decalogue  being  a 
summary  of  the  terms  which  Israel  accepted  on 
entering  into  covenant  with  God.  In  Kautzsch's 
Heilige  Schrift  it  is  rendered  die  Lade  mit  dem 
Gesetz,  '  the  ark  with  the  law.'  When  the  Deca- 
logue came  to  be  known  as  '  the  testimony,'  the 
new  name  i]  Ki^urbs  toD  fiaprvpLov  was  introduced, 
but  it  did  not  displace  the  older  phrases.  The 
golden  pot  of  manna  (the  adj.  is  an  embellishment 
upon  Ex  16'^)  and  Aaron's  rod  that  budded,  which 
in  the  original  narratives  were  laid  up  before  the 
Lord  {ivavTiov  rod  deov,  Ex  16^ ;  ivuiriov  rQv 
fiapTvpiuv,  Nu  17^°)  are  supposed  by  the  writer  of 
Hebrews  to  have  been  within  the  ark. 

The  ultimate  fate  of  the  ki^wtSs  is  involved  in 
obscurity.  The  popular  imagination  could  not 
entertain  the  idea  that  the  inviolable  ark  was  irre- 
coverably lost,  and  there  arose  a  tradition  that 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  586  B.C.,  the 
Tabernacle  with  all  its  sacred  furniture  was  hidden 
by  Jeremiah  (or,  according  to  the  Talmud,  by 
Josiah)  in  a  cave  of  Mt.  Nebo  (2  Es  10^^ ;  cf.  2  Mac 
2'),  whence  it  was  to  be  miraculously  restored  to  its 
place  at  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  In  the  second 
and  third  Temple  the  Holy  of  Holies  contained  no 
ark.  '  In  this  was  nothing  at  all,'  is  Josephus' 
emphatic  testimony  {BJ  V.  v.  5).  Pompey,  on 
entering,  found  '  vacuam  sedem  et  inania  arcana ' 
<Tac.  Hist.  V.  9).  The  thought  of  that  emptiness 
oppressed  the  minds  both  of  devout  Jews  and  of 
Jewish  Christians,  and  in  Rev  ll^^,  when  the 
seventli  angel  has  sounded,  and  the  temple  of  God 
in  heaven  is  opened,  the  ark  of  the  covenant  is 
there.  '  All  we  have  willed  or  hoped  or  dreamed 
of  good  shall  exist ;  not  the  semblance  but  itself.' 

LiTERATURK. — Besides  the  artt.  in  //  DB  (J.  Macpherson  and 
A.  R.  S.  Kennedy),  SDB(A.  R.  S.  Kennedy),  and  especially 
ERE  (R.  H.  Kennett),  see  R.  Kraetzschmar,  Die  Bimde.ivor- 
stellung,  Marbur;;,  1896 ;  H.  Couard,  '  Die  reliiciose  nationale 
Bedeutungder  Lade,'  mZATWxW.  [1892];  Volck,  art.  'Bun- 
deslade,' in  PiJ£3.  JaMES  STBAHAN. 

ARMAGEDDON.— See  Har-Magedon. 

ARMOUR. — As  Jews,  the  disciples  of  our  Lord — 
not  to  speak  of  Himself — were  exempt  from  mili- 


tary service.  They  had  the  privilege  of  iffTpartia, 
which  Lentulus  conceded  to  tne  Jews  of  Asia  (Jos. 
Ant.  XIV.  X.  13  f.),  and  Julius  Caesar  to  those  of 
Palestine  {ib.  x.  6).  The  Roman  auxiliaries  who 
garrisoned  Judsea  were  recruited  wholly  from  the 
Greek  cities  of  Palestine,  such  as  Sebaste  and 
Coesarea.  Probably,  therefore,  none  of  the  dis- 
ciples ever  wore  armour,  or,  with  the  possible 
exception  of  Simon  the  Zealot,  became  skilled  in 
the  use  of  weapons.  St.  Peter  once  carried  a  sword, 
but  made  a  very  blundering  use  of  it  (Mk  14*', 
Jn  18^").  The  only  sword  of  which  Christianity 
approves  is  that  which  is  the  symbol  of  the  puni- 
tive ministry  of  the  magistrate  (Ro  13*).  Never- 
theless, it  was  impossible  for  Christians  not  to  be 
profoundly  interested  in  the  brave  men  who  were 
taught  that  it  was  dulce  et  decorum  pro  patria  mori, 
and  Christ  Himself  sanctioned  the  use  of  illustra- 
tions drawn  from  the  warfare  of  kings  (Lk  14*^),  It 
is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to  find  that  St.  Paul 
regards  the  valour  and  endurance  of  the  world's 
conquerors  and  the  Empire's  defenders  as  worthy 
of  emulation,  and  that  he  transfigures  the  armour 
of  the  Roman  legionary  into  the  panoply  of  the 
Christian  soldier  (Eph  6""^). 

Descriptions  of  tne  equipment  of  soldiers  are 
frequent  in  Greek  authors.  (1)  Homer  lets  us  see 
his  TTpSfjuixoi  arming  before  they  go  forth  to  battle. 
Paris  (II.  iii.  32811.)  cases  his  limbs  in  greaves 
(Kvrjfudes) ;  a  splendid  cuirass  (ddipa^)  covers  his 
breast;  a  baldrick  sustains  the  sword  (^i^oj)  that 
glitters  at  his  side  ;  his  great  round  shield  (o-d/cos) 
is  then  displayed ;  over  his  brows  he  places  his 
helmet  (Kwitj)  with  nodding  plume ;  and  last  of  all 
he  grasps  his  spear  (?7xos)  in  his  hand  (cf.  //.  iv. 
132 ff".,  xi.  15ff'.,  xvi.  130 ff.,  xix.  .364 ff".).  'The 
six  pieces  of  armour  are  always  mentioned  in  the 
same  order,  in  which  they  would  naturally  be  put 
on,  except  that  we  should  expect  the  helmet  to  be 
donned  before  the  shield  was  taken  on  the  arm* 
(Leaf's  Homer,  i.  106).— (2)  Polybius  (vi.  23)  de- 
scribes the  armour  of  Roman  soldiers  in  the  time 
of  the  Punic  wars.  The  heavy-armed  carried  an 
oblong^shield  (dvpeb^,  scutum), 'iieet  by  2|,  incurved 
into  the  shape  of  a  half-cylinder  ;  the  helmet  {-irepi- 
K£<f)a\ala)  of  bronze  had  a  crest  of  three  feathers;  and 
a  greave  protected  the  rirfit  leg.  The  wealthier 
soldiers  wore  a  cuirass  of  chain-armour  (lorica),  the 
poorer  a  bronze  plate  9  inches  square.  For  de- 
fence they  all  carried  a  Spanish  sword  (/idxat/)o), 
straight,  double-edged,  and  pointed,  which  was 
used  for  both  thrust  and  cut;  and  two  long 
javelins  (vacroL,  pila),  which  were  either  hurled  at 
a  distance  or  used  at  close  quarters  like  modem 
bayonets. — (3)  Josephus  (BJ  ill.  v.  5)  describes  the 
equipment  of  Roman  soldiers  under  the  Empire. 
The  neavy-armed  had  a  helmet  (/cpdfoj),  a  cuirass, 
a  long  sword  worn  on  the  left  side  and  a  dagger  on 
the  right,  a  pilum  (^varbv),  and  a  scutum  (dvpein). 
The  detachment  which  attended  the  commander 
had  a  round  shield  (aairh,  clipeus)  and  a  long  spear 
(Xityxfi)-  The  cavalry  wore  armour  like  that  of  the 
infantry,  with  a  broadsword  (^idxatpa),  a  buckler 
slung  from  the  horse's  side,  a  lance,  and  several 
javelins  (S-Kovre^),  almost  as  large  as  spears,  in  a 
sheath  or  quiver. 

In  his  enumeration  of  the  weapons  of  spiritual 
warfare  St.  Paul  omits  the  spear,  and  by  implica- 
tion adds  girdle  and  shoes  (^oxrriip  and  caligce). 
The  complete  equipment  consists  of  six  pieces, 
defensive  and  offensive — the  girdle  of  tnitn,  the 
breastplate  of  righteousness,  the  sandals  of  readi- 
ness to  carry  good  tidings,  the  shield  of  faith,  the 
helmet  of  salvation,  and  the  sword  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Christian  soldier  is  clad  cap-ii-pie  in  super- 
natural armour— the  panoply  which  is  the  gift  of 
God.  There  is  no  defence  for  the  back,  which 
should  never  need  any. 


AEMY 


ARTEMAS 


93 


'  The  next  day  they  took  him  [Christian)  into  the  armoury, 
where  they  showed  him  all  manner  of  furniture,  which  the  Lord 
had  provided  for  pilgrims,  as  sword,  shield,  helmet,  breastplate, 
all-prayer,  and  shoes  that  would  not  wear  out.  And  there  was 
enough  of  this  to  harness  out  as  many  men  for  the  service  of 
their  Lord  as  there  be  stars  in  the  heaven  for  multitude' 
(Bunyan,  Pilgrim't  Progress). 

In  1  Th  5*  the  breastplate  (dvp€6i)  is  faith  and 
love.  In  the  realm  of  the  imagination  a  happy 
idea  will  present  itself  in  various  aspects  to  differ- 
ent minds,  and  even  to  the  same  mind  at  different 
moments.  Isaiah  (59^^)  had  already  suggested  the 
thought  of  a  panoply  in  which  God  Himself  is 
clothed,  and  the  \\Titer  of  Wisdom  had  worked 
it  out  thus  (5"'*) :  '  He  shall  take  His  jealousy  as 
complete  armour  ;  .  .  .  He  shall  put  on  righteous- 
ness as  a  breastplate,  and  shall  array  Himself  with 
judgment  unfeigned  as  with  a  helmet ;  He  shall 
take  holiness  as  an  invincible  shield,  and  He  shall 
sharpen  stem  wrath  for  a  sword.' 

LiTKBATirRE. — In  addition  to  the  sources  cited  in  the  article, 
see  arc.  'Anna,'  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Ant.^, 
London,  1891,  and  art.  '  Armoiir,  Arms '  (A.  R.  S.  Kennedy),  in 

SD£.  James  Strahak. 

ARMY.— This  term  occurs  in  Ac  23^7,  Rev  9" 
1914.  19  (in  ^}jg  last  three  instances  referring  to 
armies  [a-TparevfuiTa]  of  apocalyptic  vision).  On 
the  outbreak  of  a  tumult  in  the  Temple  at  Jeru- 
salem, the  chief  captain  of  the  band  came  on  the 
scene,  as  he  afterwards  reported,  cim  T<p  aTparev/jiaTi 
(AV  'with  an  army,'  RV  'with  the  soldiers'). 
The  little  force  thus  described  (Ac  23^")  was  a  frac- 
tion of  the  vast  army  which  maintained  law  and 
order  throughout  the  Roman  Empire.  In  the  first 
month  of  29  B.C.,  a  year  after  the  battle  of  Actitim, 
the  gates  of  the  temple  of  Janus  at  Rome  were 
closed  for  the  first  time  in  200  years.  That  signifi- 
cant act  was  the  beginning  of  the  Pax  Romana. 
The  Civil  War  was  ended,  and  the  State  had  no 
more  foreign  foes  to  fear.  Augustus  found  himself 
master  of  three  standing  armies,  his  own  and  those 
of  Lepidus  and  Antony,  amounting  to  45  legions. 
He  at  once  undertook  that  task  of  military  re- 
organization which  was  perhaps  his  greatest  and 
most  original  achievement.  By  ruthlessly  elim- 
inating inferior  elements  he  obtained  a  thoroughly 
efiBcient  force  of  25  legions.  The  time  for  great 
field  forces,  such  as  Scipio  and  Caesar  had  wielded, 
was  now  past.  An  army  that  could  be  swiftly 
mobilized  was  no  longer  a  necessity,  and  might 
easily  become  a  menace,  to  the  Empire.  Augustus 
initiated  the  policy,  which  was  respected  by  his 
successors  down  to  the  time  of  the  Antonines,  of 
'  maintaining  the  dignity  of  the  Empire,  without 
attempting  to  enlarge  its  limits'  (Gibbon,  Hist., 
ch.  1).  His  conservative  policy  determined  his 
use  of  the  army.  Distributing  the  legions  in  the 
frontier  provinces  of  the  Empire — which  had  the 
Atlantic  as  its  boundary  on  the  west,  the  Rhine 
and  the  Danube  on  the  north,  the  Euphrates  on 
the  east,  and  the  deserts  of  Arabia  and  Africa  on 
the  south — he  charged  them  to  guard  the  borders 
which  were  exposed  to  the  attacks  of  restless  bar- 
barians. Italy  itself  was  garrisoned  by  the  Prae- 
torian cohorts  (see  Pr^torium). 

The  legions  were  recruited  from  the  Roman  citi- 
zens of  Italy  and  the  provinces.  Each  consisted 
of  6000  heavy  infantry  divided  into  ten  cohorts, 
with  a  troop  of  120  horsemen  to  act  as  dispatch 
riders.  The  legion  was  no  longer  under  six  tribunes 
commanding  by  turns.  The  supreme  authority 
was  now  entrusted  to  a  legatus  legionis,  who  was 
the  deputy  of  the  Emperor  as  commander-in-chief 
of  the  whole  army.  The  efiiciency  of  the  soldiers 
depended  largely  upon  the  60  centurions,  who 
formed  the  backbone  of  the  legion.  The  term  of 
service  was  20  years,  and  on  discharge  the  legion- 
ary received  a  bounty  or    land.     Many  colonics 


were  formed  for  the  purpose  of  providing  homes 
for  veterans.  Each  legion  bore  a  title  and  a 
number,  e.g. , '  VI.  Victrix '  stationed  at  York,  '  III. 
Gallica '  at  Antioch, 

But  the  legions  were  not  the  only  guardians  of 
the  peace  ot  the  Empire.  Augustus  developed 
a  new  order  of  auxUia.  Regiments  of  infantry 
(cohortes)  or  cavalry  [cUas],  ^K)  to  1000  strong, 
were  recruited  from  the  subiects,  not  the  citizens, 
of  the  provinces,  and  formed  a  second  force  equal 
in  numbers  if  not  in  importance  to  the  first.  It  is 
estimated  that  the  two  forces  together  made  up  a 
regular,  long-service  army  of  400,000  men.  The 
auxiliaries  were  more  lightly  armed  than  the 
legionaries  (see  Armour);  they  were  not  so 
well  paid ;  and  on  their  discharge  they  received  a 
bounty  or  the  Roman  franchise. 

As  Judaea  was  a  province  of  the  second  rank, 
governed  by  a  procurator,  it  was  not  (like  Syria) 
garrisoned  oy  legionaries,  but  by  auxiliaries,  who 
had  their  headquarters  in  Caesarea.  The  cohortes 
and  alas  were  recruited  from  the  Greek  cities  of 
Palestine,  from  which  they  derived  their  names, 
such  as  '  Cohors  Sebastenorum,'  or  '  Tyriorum.' 
The  Jews  were  expressly  exempted  from  military- 
service  under  the  Roman  banners  and  eagles,  which 
they  regarded  as  idolatrous.  Julius  Caesar's  edict 
granting  this  privilege  is  preserved  by  Josephus 
{Ant.  XIV.  X.  6). 

At  the  time  of  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa 
(A.D.  44),  an  ala  of  cavalry  and  five  cohorts  were 
stationed  at  Caesarea  (Jos.  Ant.  xix.  ix.  1-2). 
Probably  they  had  once  belonged  to  the  army  of 
Herod  the  Great,  and  had  been  taken  over  by  the 
Romans  after  the  deposition  of  his  son  Archelaus 
in  A.D.  6  (Schiirer,  EJP  I.  ii.  51).  They  are  often 
mentioned  in  the  period  A.D.  44-66  [Ant.  XX.  vi.  1, 
viii.  7),  and  they  were  finally  drafted  into  Vespa- 
sian's army  in  A.  D.  67.  The  relation  of  the  Italian 
and  Augustan  cohorts  (see  Augustax  Band 
and  Italian  Bakd)  to  fthese  auxiliaries  is  a 
difficult  question.  The  cohort  {aveipa),  military 
tribune  (xtXtapx"^)*  ^^^  centurions  (eAcarofrapxcu) 
mentioned  in  the  story  of  St.  Paul's  arrest  at 
Jerusalem  and  transference  to  Caesarea  (Ac  21- 
23)  certainly  belonged  to  the  Judaean  auxilia.  A 
single  cohort  formed  the  normal  garrison  of  the 
Holy  City  (Jos.  BJ  v.  v.  8,  where  rajfia  is  used 
instead  of  the  more  correct  a-reTpa).  The  barracks 
(rapefjL^oXri,  used  six  times  in  the  same  narrative) 
adjoined  the  fortress  of  Antonia,  close  to  the 
N.E.  comer  of  the  Temple  area  (see  Castle).  At 
the  Jewish  festivals  a  stronger  body  of  troops  was 
drafted  from  Caesarea  for  the  purpose  of  keeping 
order  among  the  pilgrims  in  the  crowded  Temple 
precincts,  as  the  Turkish  soldiers  now  do  at  Easter 
among  the  Christian  sects  in  the  Church  of  the 
Holy  Sepulchre.  St.  PanI  was  escorted  from 
Jerusalem  to  Antipatris  by  200  foot-soldiers,  70 
horsemen  (in-xets),  and  200  spearmen  (5eftoXd/3ot), 
and  thence  to  Caesarea  by  the  horsemen  alone. 
The  precise  function  of  the  Se^ioXd^oi  (an  exceed- 
ingly rare  word,  meaning  apparently  '  those  who 
grasped  their  weapons  with  the  right  hand')  is 
very  doubtful ;  see  Schiirer,  I.  ii.  56,  and  Meyer,  in 
loco. 

LiTERATURB.  — Art. '  Exercitus '  i n  Smith's  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom. 
Ant.S,  London,  1S91  (by  W.  Ramsay),  and  in  Pauly-Wissowa, 
(by  Liebenam) ;  E.  Schiirer,  HJP  1.  ii.  49  ff. ;  E.  G.  Hardy, 
Studies  in  Roman  History,  London,  1906-09 ;  and  art.  'Army' 
(A.  R.  S.  Kennedy)  in  SDB.  JAMES  StRAHAN. 

ARTE  MAS.  —  Artemas  is  mentioned  only  in  Tit  3^*. 
St.  Paul  urges  Titus  to  '  give  diligence  to  come  to ' 
him,  'when  I  shall  send  Artemas  unto  thee,  or 
Ty chicus. '  This  implies  that  Artemas  was  capable 
of  relieving  Titus  in  the  oversight  and  organization 
of  the  Church  in  Crete.     Therefore  he  must  have 


D4 


AETEMIS 


ARTS 


been  a  Christian  of  considerable  experience  and  of 
hiyh  cliaracter,  and  free  to  devote  iiimself  to  Cliris- 
tiaii  work  ;  oneof  St.  Paul's  coiii|i;Liiiiins  fruiu  w  Imiii 
the  '  iijiostolic  legates'  were  helectud.  The.  iiaiuu 
is  Greek ;  but  that  tells  nothing  about  his 
nationality. 

LiTBKATURB.  —  Artt.  in  II I)l>  on  'Artemas,'  'Titus,'  and 
•  Titus,  Epistle  to ' ;  £G'r  on  Tit  i;'-;.  J.  E.  ROBERTS. 

ARTEMIS.— See  Diana. 

ARTS. — This  article  surveys  the  indtistrial  arts  of 
the  Apostolic  Age,  from  data  furnished  by  the  NT, 
the  Gospels  excepted.  '  Art '  may  be  co-ordinated 
with  '  craft,'  which,  liowever,  has  been  replaced  by 
•trade,'  '  Imsiness,'  in  RV  (see  Ac  18^  \^-^); 
'  craft -^man/  'craftsmen'  being  retained  (Ac  19-*"^, 
Rev  Ls--,  where  'craft'  also  survives). 

In  the  Avritings  of  St.  Paul  are  numerous  indica- 
tions of  the  close  contact  of  the  Apostle  with  the 
artisan  class,  which  is  to  be  expected  in  view  of  what 
is  known  concerning  his  own  manner  of  life.  This 
point  is  emphasized  by  Deissmann  (Light  from  the 
Ancient  East^,  London,  1911,  p.  316  ff.  ;  but  cf.  Re- 
view of  Theology  and  Philosophy,  viii.  [1912-13] 
p.  317).  'Work,'  'works'  (and  derivatives)  figure 
prominently  in  the  Pauline  vocabulary  (Eph  2^"  4^^, 
Col  323,  1  xh  4",  2  Ti  2i^  Tit  3^,  etc. ).  Many  social 
relationships  proceed  upon  a  work-basis,  e.g. 
masters,  servants  (slaves),  bond,  bondmen  (Eph  6'* ", 
Col  322,  etc.  ;  cf.  1  P  216-  ^\  Rev  6^5  IS^"). 

1.  About  one-half  of  the  references  to  labour 
within  the  apostolic  writings  refer  to  agricaltupe, 
which,  in  the  widest  sense  of  the  term,  also  belongs 
to  the  industrial  arts.  In  so  far  as  these  references 
are  quite  general,  or  purely  metaphorical,  and  such 
as  are  common  to  literature  in  all  ages,  we  shall 
omit  them.  Toilers  on  the  land  are  here  regarded 
more  in  their  relation  to  craftsmen  of  whatsoever 
craft  (Rev  18^^).  The  time  had  passed  when  agricul- 
ture was  a  self-contained  industry  ;  there  were  now 
many  departments,  and  much  subdivision  of  labour. 
Behind  the  actual  tillers  of  the  soil  stood  those  who 
were  owners  of  land,  such  as  are  mentioned  in  Ac 
437  5iff.  (cf.  Josephus,  Life,  76).  The  care  of  the 
crop  and  of  animals  occupied  so  much  time  that 
commerce  in  grain  (Ac  27^ ,  Rev  IS^'')  and  in  stock 
had  to  be  made  over  to  other's.  The  workers  with 
agricultural  implements  could  not  at  the  same  time 
fashion  them,  at  least  to  advantage.  Thus  it  came 
about  that  the  carpenter,  the  smith,  the  worker  in 
leather,  found  their  customers  largely  among  the 
agricultural  community.  The  plough,  the  yoke  (so 
frequent  in  St.  Paul's  metaphors  :  2  Co  6",  Gal  5^ 
Ph  43,  1  Ti  61 ;  cf.  Ac  IS"),  the  goad  (Ac  26^*),  in- 
struments for  reaping  (e.g.  the  sickle,  Rev  141*) 
and  for  threshing,  the  muzzle  (1  Co  9»,  1  Ti  5^8, 
only  in  quotation),  the  bridle  (Ja  3^),  and  harness  in 
general,  millstones  (Rev  IS^^-  ^^),  weights  and 
measures  (Rev  6^) — all  these  more  or  less  called  for 
the  skill  of  the  artisan  proper.  In  rural  parts  mill- 
ing and  baking  may  indeed  have  continued  to  be 
woman's  work  in  the  house  (or  tent),  but  in  towns 
there  had  arisen  millers  and  bakers,  the  latter  in 
particular  exercising  their  craft  in  shops,  many  of 
which  were  found  in  the  same  district  or  quarter, 
as  is  still  the  practice  in  the  East  to-day. 

We  read  once  of  the  shambles  (fi6.KeKKov  = 
macellum,  1  Co  10-'),  which  in  reality  was  a  meat 
and  provision  market,  with  many  booths  or  shops, 
such  as  every  great  city  of  the  time  could  boast. 
The  market-place  (iyopd,  forum,  Ac  17"),  althougli 
put  to  many  other  uses,  was  not  without  signifi- 
cance as  a  trade  centre. 

Specialized  forms  of  agriculture,  relating  to  the 
vine,  the  olive,  and  the  fig,  are  less  frequently 
Alluded  to  (Ja  3>»  ;  cf.  Ro  IV''-^*,  1  Co  9',  Rev  6'"  11* 
li'**-),  but  the  products  of  -wine  and  oil  are  named 


as   matt  IT-  oi 

The  illl|Mil  l;iiir 
slni\\]i    hy    I)iM>^iu 


coininon     kii(i\\l(Ml;.'c  (Ucv  6«  18'=*). 

Ml'   the  (ili\i'  in  ijarLiciil,-i.r  lias  lifc^ri 

nwiSf.   Paul,  London,    Ilil-J.  p. 

I'll u/ (lie  and  other  Stml'     ,  do. 


in>/s 
o  ail 


1906,  p.  21911'.).  It  maybe  noted  that  the  palm  ii: 
only  m  Rev  7*,  although  at  this  time  it  was  al 
important  culture  (Jos.  Ant.  Xiv.  iv.  1).  ''ri.tin 
articles  of  commerce  enumeratcil  in  K' \  is  - 
cinnamon,  spice,  etc — presuppose  at  .suiue  puiuL  (jr 
other  an  activity  in  intensive  arboriculture.  For 
basket-making,  see  art.  Basket. 

The  rearing  of  cattle,  sheep,  horses,  etc.  is  but 
slightly  referred  to  (1  Co  9»,  Ja  3^,  1  P  2-»,  Rev  18"), 
but  products  come  to  light  in  the  industries  of  tan- 
ning and  weaving.  From  the  prevalence  of  sacrilice, 
pagan  (Ac  14i3- 1*  15^'  ^  etc.)  no  less  than  Jewish, 
we  may  also  infer  that  this  gave  support  to  several 
important  branches  of  industry. 

2.  Next  to  the  arts  concerned  with  food  supplies 
come  those  connected  with  clothing  and  shelter. 
Spinning  and  weaving  were  fundamental  industries, 
then,  as  aforetime,  embracing  the  coarser  fabrics 
involved  in  the  tent-cloth  (see  Tent,  Ten'T-makixg) 
made  of  goat's  hair,  for  which  Cilicia  a\  .is  famed, 
and  at  the  making  of  which  St.  Paul  and  his 
companions,  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  wrought  (Ac  18* 
20*»,  1  Co  4l^  2  Co  IP,  1  Th  29,  2  Th  3«),  and  the 
finer  sorts  for  human  wear,  culminating  in  articles 
embroidered,  inwrought  with  gold  and  silver, 
adorned  with  precious  stones  and  pearls,  such  as  the 
royal  apparel  of  Ac  12^1  (cf.  1  Ti  2",  1  P  3*.  Rev., 
passim).  The  treatment  of  the  material,  probably 
while  in  the  raw  state,  with  dye  (producing  purple, 
scarlet,  etc. ),  and  with  minerals  for  bleaching  (i.e. 
the  process  of  fulling),  Avas  an  allied  industry  (see 
especially  Ac  16"  and  cf.  art.  Clothes,  etc.).  The 
art  of  the  tailor  was  less  in  evidence,  perhaps,  his 
place  being  taken  by  the  weaver  and  by  the  women 
in  the  home  (cf .  Ac  9^"),  although  in  Talmudic  times 
he  figures  among  other  artisans. 

3.  The  care  of  the  person  was  then  carried  to  a 
great  degree.  The  elaborate  system  of  baths  which 
prevailed  must  have  provided  work  for  many, 
including  the  apothecary,  who  supplied  unguents 
and  salves  (Rev  3^8  IS^^).  The  barber  (Ac  W^  21« 
1  Co  11"-)  had  also  a  well-established  position. 

4.  The  tanner  has  been  brought  into  prominence 
by  one  instance  (Simon  [<?.'??.],  Ac  9^  10'- 3^).  While 
an  important  craft,  this  was  a  despised  one,  and 
the  fact  of  Simon's  house  having  been  by  the  seaside 
was  due  as  much  to  enforced  separation  from  the 
town  as  to  the  necessities  of  business.  The  prepara- 
tion of  leather  for  foot-wear  (see  SHOE,  SANDAL) 
was  but  a  small  part  of  the  tanner's  occupation. 
He  was  a  necessary  coadjutor  of  the  maker  of 
articles  for  house-furnishing,  and  also  of  the 
harness-maker. 

5.  Building  arts. — The  first  part  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  Avitnessed  great  activity  in  building  within 
Palestine,  notably  the  completion  of  Heron's  ambi- 
tious projects.  The  Temple  was  finished,  only  to 
be  demolished  again  by  the  Romans.  The  con- 
querors took  up  the  like  work  for  themselves,  but 
along  lines  of  their  OAvn.  References  to  building 
in  the  Apostolic  Avritings  are,  however,  fcAV.  The 
Avork  of  the  mason  underlies  such  passages  as  Ro 
1520,  1  Co  3»»-,  2  Co  5"'-,  1  P  2*^-,  He  3f'-.  Specific 
parts  of  buildings  are  named  in  the  '  middle  Avail  of 

Partition '  (Eph  2",  perliaps  reminiscent  of  the 
eniple),  the  '  foundation '  and  '  chief  corner-stone  ' 
(Eph  2**).  The  builder's  measuring-rod  (reed)  is 
mentioned  in  Rev  W.  Carpentry  appears  only 
metaphorically  in  1  Co  '^'^'^,  and  in  the  figure  of 
speecli  employed  in  Col  '2'^. 

6.  Workers  in  metal.  I'lu'  numerous  references 
to  arms  Avithin  tlie  apostolic  Avritings  shoAv  that 
the  art  of  the  smith  must  have  been  familiar  in 
those  days.     No  doubt  it  AA'as  largely  extraneous 


ARTS 


XSIOX 


95 


to  Palestine,  being  maintained,  however,  for  behoof 
of  the  conquering  Romans.  There  and  elseMliere 
it  was  an  industry  that  ati'ected  the  early  Christians 
adversely,  being  associated  for  the  most  part  with 
prisons  and  detention,  e.g.  spearmen,  etc  (Ac 
23^),  chains  (Ac  12*  21»28»  Eph  &»,  2  Ti  1«),  iron 
gate  (Ac  12'*).  The  ApocaJypse  is  especially  rich 
in  V  arlike  imagery :  breast-plates  of  iron  (9*), 
chariots  (9^  18"),  sword  (1"  2'*  etc. ).  See  also  Eph 
6'^-,  1  Th  5^.     Cf.  art.  Armoltj. 

In  connexion  with  ships  and  boats  the  smith's 
(and  carpenter's)  art  must  also  have  been  largely  in 
evidence  :  anchor  (He  6"),  rudder  (Ja  3*) ;  cf.  the 
narrative  of  St.  Paul's  voyage.  It  most  be  remem- 
bered that  navigation  was  itself  an  juct,  requiring 
a  shipmaster  and  mariners  (Rev  18'^),  a  steersman 
(Ja  ^),  etc.  But,  as  in  the  case  of  arms,  this 
activity  stood  largely  apart  from  the  Ufe  of  the 
early  Church. 

Thus  far  the  crafts  have  been  regarded  on  a 
large  scale.  But  iron- work  (see  Ibox)  took  finer 
forms  (Rev  18'^) :  e.g.  certain  parts  of  the  warrior^s 
equipment ;  also  the  balance,  if  made  of  this 
metal  (Rev  6*).  This  is  equally  true  of  working  in 
wood  :  idols  (Rev  9^) ;  thyine  wood,  most  precious 
^vood,  in  juxtaposition  to  ivory  (Rev  18^') ;  foot- 
stool (Ja  2^) ;  vessels  (2  Ti  2»).  The  coppersmith 
iq.v.)  is  expressly  named  in  2  Ti  4".  With  the 
free  use  of  iron  at  this  time  it  is  probable  the  copper- 
smith worked  mostly  on  ornamental  lines,  being 
r-killed  in  allovs.  refining,  engraving,  burnishing 
Rev  1-5  2'S).  'Mirrors  (1  Co  13*^,  2  Co  3",  Ja  1*») 
nong  the  articles  produced  (see  Mirror). 
-  should  in  all  probability  be  replaced  by 
•  bronze '  or  '  copper '  tmroughout  the  NT. 

Still  finer  was  the  work  done  in  gold,  silver,  and 
precious  stones.  The  sDversmiths  of  Ephesus  (Ac 
19^^)  were  a  powerful  gild,  working  at  a  particular 
craft,  \"iz.,  the  making  of  silver  shrines  or  models 
of  the  Temple  of  Diana  (see  Ramsay,  The  Church 
in  the  Roman  Empire,  London,  18^,  p.  112  flF. ; 
and  art.  DiANA).  This  was  part  of  a  wider 
practice  of  fashioning  idols  in  the  precious  metals 
(Ac  17^,  Rev  9*).  These  elements  entered  into 
dress  and  personal  ornament  (1  Ti2®,  1  P  3^  Ja2^), 
as  also  into  house  furniture  (2  Ti  2*").  The  refer- 
ences in  Rev.  are  too  numerous  to  mention,  includ- 
ing garments  (girdle,  etc.),  articles  for  food  and 
drink  (bowl,  cup.  etc.),  and  even  altar  and  throne. 
Although  these  here  appear  as  seen  in  vision,  they 
were  all  of  them  possible  to  antiquity. 

The  use  of  gold,  silver,  etc.,  in  coinage  should 
not  be  overlooked.     See  artt.  Gold,  Silver. 

7.  There  were  also  workers  in  stone  and  clay 
(including  terra-cotta)  along  artistic  lines.  When 
graven  by  art  and  device  of  man  (Ac  IT"),  stone, 
especially  marble,  took  high  value  (Rev  #»  18"). 
Tablets  of  stone  were  also  fashioned  for  commem- 
orative purposes  (Ac  17**,  2  Co  3*-^  Rev  2»'), 
attached  to  statues,  tombs,  etc.,  and  the  inscrip- 
tions in  certain  cases  remain,  yielding  welcome 
archpeological  evidence. 

The  potter's  art  (see  PoTTER)  was  as  necessary 
as  ever  for  household  use  (2  Co  4^,  2  Ti  2",  Rev  2"). 
It  proWdes  St.  Paul  with  a  well-known  metaphor 
(Ro  9^).  Interesting  details  regarding  Jewish  pot- 
tery of  this  period  are  to  be  found  in  Conferences 
de  Saint-Etienne,  1909-10,  p.  99  ff.  Glass  appears 
only  figuratively  (Rev  2ps-  ^  ;  cf.  4«  15*).  But  it 
was  quite  a  common  article  of  mantLfactnre  at  this 
time  (see,  further,  art.  Lamp,  etc. ). 

A  whole  system  of  trade  (Ac  '  ?"'  2"-  '.  Ja  4^, 
Rev  IS"*-)  was  built  upon  the  pi;  leh  arts 

as  have  here  been  passed  in  revic .. .  ^^.  ..^^  a  liveli- 
hood to  merchants,  money-lenders,  and  also  tax- 
collectors.  The  correspondence  necessitated  by 
trade  and  by  the  ditfusion  of  knowledge  must  also 
have  given  occupation  to  many  who  prepared  the 


materials  for  writing  (parchment,  papyrus,  pen, 
ink,  etc). 

8.  Serious  as  most  arts  were,  we  yet  learn  that 
many  spent  their  lives  in  following  after  pseudo- 
arts,  e.g.  the  '  curious  arts '  (t4  repiefrya)  of  Ac  19"  ; 
cf.  Simon  Magus  (Ac  8*^),  Elymas  (Bar-Jesns; 
Ac  13"^),  and  the  masters  of  the  Philippian  maid 
(Ac  16**).  As  seriously  taken  as  any  were  the 
gymnastic  arts :  running,  boxing  (1  Co  9*"^),  and 
wrestling  (Eph  6").    See  art.  Games. 

LrrBKATCKB.— "Die  ait. '  Arta  and  Ciatts'  in  SDB  may  be  c<«- 
salted.  An  exbaustiTe  list  of  aotiioritatave  works  wiQ  be  found 
in  HDB  v.  57*-,  appended  to  the  art.  '  New  Testament  TBioea.' 
Another  verr  complete  Ust  of  a  spedalized  order  appears  in  S. 
Kranss,  Taimud.  Arehdologie,  Leipcig^,  1910-11,  ii.  249.  ThM 
work  is  very  important.  M.  B.  Schwalm,  La  VU  prioee  du 
peupU  jvif  a  Vepogfue  de  Jettu-Ckrist,  Paris,  1910,  written 
from  the  sociological  standpoint,  is  ns^oL  The  works  of  W. 
M.  Ramsay  and  A.  Deissmann  are  also  helpfoL 

W.  Cruickshaxk. 

ASCENSION.— 1.  NT  statements.— The  his- 
torical account  of  the  Ascension  is  given  in  Ac 
1*"^,  for  the  Gospel  story  does  not  carry  us  so  far. 
The  Ascension,  the  last  of  the  series  of  the  post- 
Resurrection  appearances,  is  a  new  subject,  and 
the  description  of  it  be^ns  a  new  book.  This  is 
the  case  \i-hatever  view  we  take  of  the  text  of  Lk 
24*1,  as  i^ijat  in  any  case  is  no  detailed  description 
of  the  event,  but  only  a  brief  summary  of  the  in- 
cidents. The  First  and  Fourth  Grospels  end  before 
the  final  departure,  and  so  probably  did  the  Second, 
the  conclusion  of  which  (after  16*)  we  have  lost. 

The  place  of  the  Ascension  was  Olivet  (Ac  1", 
'EXoM^r — so,  according  to  some  editors,  we  ought  to 
read  the  word  in  Lk  19®  21"),  usually  called  the 
Mount  of  Olives.  It  was  '  over  against  Bethany ' 
(Lk  24**),  and  therefore  on  the  far  or  S.E.  side  of 
the  hill,  looking  down  on  Bethany,  which  lies  in 
a  hollow ;  the  reputed  site  overlooks  Jerusalem, 
and  is  unlikely  to  have  been  the  real  one  (Swete, 
Appearances,  p.  103 ;  but  see  C.  Warren,  in  HDB 
iii.  619).  As  they  were  talking,  Jesus  lifted  np 
His  hands  and  blessed  the  disciples  (Lk  24^),  ana 
in  the  act  of  blessing  He  was  taken  up,  and  a 
cloud  received  Him  out  of  their  sight  (Ac  1'). 
Two  angels  (•  men  in  white  apparel ')  appeared  and 
assured  them  of  His  future  return  to  earth,  and 
they  went  back  to  Jerusalem  (v.^""^)  with  great 
joy  (Lk  24*^).  There  had  been  no  record  of  angelic 
appearances  when  the  risen  Jesus  was  seen  by  the 
disciples,  as  we  might  have  expected  from  Jn  1*' ; 
the  angels  appeared  only  to  announce  the  Resurrec- 
tion and  to  explain  the  Ascension.  The  account 
in  Lk  24**"**  can  hardly  apply  to  Miy  other  parting 
than  the  Ascension,  even  if  with  *  Western '  author- 
ities (DA,  some  Old-Lat.  MSS,  Augustine*)  we 
omit  the  last  half  of  v." :  '  was  carried  np  into 
heaven.'  On  no  other  supposition  can  the  'joy' 
of  the  disciples  be  understood.  At  anj  rat«,  the 
person  who  inserted  the  words,  whether  the 
Evangelist  or  a  scribe,  so  took  them. 

The  XT  is  full  of  references  to  the  Ascension. 
It  is  called  an  'assumption'  (dj^dXi^^ts),  in  the 
hymn  quoted  in  1  Ti  3^*  ('  received  up  [d^eX^^^j 
in  glory'),  in  the  Appendix  to  Mk.  (16**,  drcX^^) 
and  Lk  9*^  ( '  the  days  of  his  assumption,'  dwdK-ifij/eui), 
as  in  Ac  1*-  "•  **  (cf.  inri\a^,  v.*).  The  same  verb 
is  used  of  Elijah  (2  K  2"  LXX,  Sir  48*)  and  of 
Enoch  (Sir  49^*),  and  also  of  the  vessel  received  up 
into  heaven  in  St.  Peter's  vision  (Ac  10").  On  the 
other  hand,  we  read  of  an  '  ascension '  (ipA^ani)  in 

*  ATig:astine  inserts  the  words  mace,  and  <Mnit8  them  once. 
SjT-fiin  is  also  quoted  for  the  omission ;  it  reads :  '  when  he 
Messed  them,  he  was  lifted  np  (cttrtm)  fn»n  them,'  which 
seems  to  be  an  abbreriaticMi  of  the  fuller  text,  and,  if  so,  to  be 
a  witaiess  against  the  omia^on  (the  ix.  'taken  awar'  is  pos- 
siUe  but  1^  probable;  D-Iat  has  'discessit').  Svr-sin  also 
omits  'and  they  worshipped  him,' with  'Western'  texts. 
The  Feshitta  Syriac  has  the  full  text  (with  ethpreA^  'was 
separated,''for  the  first  rerfoX  as  has  the  lAtin  Vulgate.  The 
omission  may  be  due  to  hcMnoioteleutQn. 


96 


ASCENSION 


ASCENSION 


Jn  6«^  20",  and  in  Eph  48'-,  where  Ps  68'8  is  quoted, 
the  first  clause  nearly  following  the  LXX,  the 
latter  differing  from  it.  St.  Paul  was  probably 
guided  by  an  old  Jewish  interpretation  (Robinson, 
Com.  in  loc.) ;  so  in  Ac  2^  St.  Peter  says  that 
David  did  not  ascend  (dv^/Sij)  into  the  heavens. 
The  word  '  ascension '  has  less  of  a  mystical  mean- 
ing than  'assumption,'  and  emphasizes  the  his- 
torical side  of  the  matter ;  '  assumption '  may  be 
misinterpreted  in  a  Docetic  sense,  as  it  is  in  the 
Gospel  of  Peter,  5,  where  our  Lord's  death  is  so 
called  {iveXi/jcpdri)  by  the  Docetic  author.  For  this 
reason  Irenseus  speaks  of  the  Ascension  as  an 
'  assumption  in  the  flesh '  {iv<rapKov  d.v6.\-n\l/i.v  [Hcer. 
I.  X.  1];  see  also  Swete,  Ap.  Creed,  70).  Other 
words  are  used  elsewhere  in  the  NT.  Jesus  is  the 
High  Priest  who  has  '  passed  through '  {dieXrjXvd&ra) 
the  heavens  (He  4") — the  reference  is  to  the  idea 
of  seven  heavens  (cf.  7^  '  made  higher  than  the 
heavens ') ;  He  '  entered  '  {ela^XOe)  within  the  veil 
as  a  forerunner  on  our  behalf  (6^),  not  into  a  holy 
place  (^710)  made  with  hands,  but  into  heaven  itself 
(gi2. 2ij  Tjjg  Ascension  was  a  *  departure '  ( Jn  16'', 
diriXeto),  a  '  parting '  (Lk  24",  diicrTT)),  according  to 
many  MSS  a  *  carrying  up '  into  heaven  {ib. ,  dvetpi- 
pero  [see  above],  a  verb  used  of  the  taking  up  of 
the  disciples  to  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration,  Mt 
n\  Mk  92),  a  'lifting  up' (Ac  P,  iTr'^pOr),  a  verb 
used  of  lifting  up  the  eyes  to  heaven,  Lk  18^*,  Jn 
17^),  and  a  'journey'  (1  P  3^^^  iropevOels,  used  of 
the  nobleman  who  went  into  a  far  country,  a  par- 
able looking  forward  to  the  Ascension,  Lk  19^^). 

The  Ascension  of  our  Lord  was  not  a  death. 
David  did  not  ascend,  though  he  died  and  was 
buried  (Ac  229- ").  So  in  Jn  3^8  those  who  had  died 
had  not  'ascended.'  This  verse  would  hardly 
have  been  recorded  if  the  Evangelist  had  not  as- 
sumed the  Ascension  of  Jesus  as  a  historical  fact, 
and  it  is  in  effect  a  prophecy  of  that  event;  it 
asserts  the  pre-existence  (Kara^ds),  and  points  for- 
ward to  the  Ascension,  though  it  does  not  assert 
that  our  Lord  had  at  that  time  actually  ascended 
{dva^i^TjKev). 

The  Ascension  is  implied  by  the  expected  return 
or  'descent'  of  our  Lord,  1  Th  4^^  (/corajSiJo-erai),  a 
return  called  a  *  revelation '  (diroKdXvfi^)  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  in  2  Th  1^  1  Co  1'.  The  disciples  did 
not  look  for  any  other  appearance  such  as  had 
taken  place  in  the  Forty  Days,  until  He  should 
come  at  the  end  of  the  world. 

2.  Session  and  exaltation  of  our  Lord. — In  the 
passages  given  above,  the  Ascension  is  described 
as  the  parting  of  Jesus  from  the  disciples  at  the 
last  of  the  Resurrection  appearances ;  for  there- 
after there  were  no  such  manifestations  as  those 
in  which  Jesus  had  been  touched  bv  the  disciples 
and  had  eaten  in  their  presence  (Mt  28^  Lk  24*^ 
and  probably  vv.*"-  ^,  Jn  20^7— though  St.  Thomas 
perhaps  did  not  actually  touch  the  Lord  when  in- 
vited to  do  so — and  possibly  20^'') ;  the  appearances 
to  St.  Paul  at  his  conversion  and  to  St.  John  in 
Patmos  were  of  quite  another  nature.  In  the  de- 
scription of  the  parting  a  symbolical  tinge  is  seen. 
The  glorified  body  is  received  by  a  cloud  as  it 
gradually  vanishes  from  the  disciples'  eyes.  But 
'  up '  and  '  down '  are  symbolical  words  ;  heaven  is 
not  a  place  vertically  above  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
nor  is  it  a  place  at  all,  but  a  state  ;  the  Ascension 
is  a  transition  rather  from  one  condition  to 
another  than  from  one  place  to  another  (MUligan, 
The  Ascension,  p.  26).  The  fact  that  men  were 
accustomed  to  speak  symbolically  of  heaven  being 
'  above '  was  doubtless  the  reason  of  the  last  dis- 
appearance taking  the  form  that  it  did  ;  it  would 
seem  that  when  Jesus  disappeared  on  former  occa- 
sions during  the  Forty  Days  (for  the  Gospels  de- 
scribe His  Resurrection  body  as  being  not  bound 
by  the  ordinary  laws  of  Nature)  He  did  not  vanish 


by  an  apparently  upward  movement.  In  the 
statements  about  the  ascended  life  of  our  Lord 
symbolism  has  to  be  still  more  freely  employed, 
as  no  human  language  can  adequately  describe 
the  new  conditions.  Just  as  symbol  was  neces- 
sary to  describe  the  Temptation  of  our  Lord,  or 
the  overthrow  of  Satan  by  the  efforts  of  the 
Seventy  disciples  (Lk  lO^^**),  or  the  eventual  triumph 
over  evil  foretold  in  the  Apocalypse,  so  was  it 
necessary  in  describing  the  heavenly  life  of  Jesus. 
The  use  of  symbolism,  of  which  the  Bible  from 
beginning  to  end  is  full,  does  not  mean  that  the 
incident  or  condition  described  is  mythical,  but 
that  it  cannot  be  expressed  in  ordinary  human 
words.  Sanday,  in  his  striking  lecture  on  'The 
Symbolism  of  the  Bible '  (Life  of  Christ  in  Recent 
Research,  Oxford,  1907),  defines  it  as  'indirect 
description.' 

The  symbolism  used  to  describe  our  Lord's 
ascended  life  is  that  of  Ps  110^  which  is  quoted 
directly  in  Mk  \2^,  Mt  22**,  Ac  2="'-,  1  Co  \o^.  He 
jis  ioi2«-^  and  indirectly  in  numerous  passages  which 
speak  of  Jesus  being,  sitting,  or  standing,  on  God's 
right  hand  till  all  His  enemies  are  subdued.  In 
some  passages  it  is  said  that  He  'sat  down'  (^/cd^tcrei'. 
He  13  81  IQi^  '  Mk '  W^)  or '  hath  sat  down'  {KeKdOiKev, 
He  12^,  inferior  MSS  iKdOiaev) ;  so  in  Eph  !*•  it  is 
said  that  God  'made  him  to  sit'  {Ka6laa.%),  and  in 
Rev  321  Jesus  says  '  I  sat  down  {iKddiaa)  with  my 
Father  in  his  throne '  (cf.  12'),  In  other  passages 
Jesus  is  said  to  '  be  sitting,'  as  in  Col  3^  (iaTiv  .  .  . 
KaO-^/xevos) ;  so  in  Mk  14®^  and  ||  (see  below).  While 
the  former  method  of  expression  emphasizes  the 
historic  fact  of  the  Ascension  on  a  certain  day,  the 
latter  denotes  that  the  Session  was  not  an  isolated, 
but  is  a  continuous,  action.  The  latter  point  of 
view  is  seen  also  in  Ro  8**,  1  P  3^  ('who  is  at  the 
right  hand'),  and  in  Ac  7"'"  where  Stephen  sees 
the  Lord  '  standing '  at  the  right  hand  of  God — 
ready  (such  seems  to  be  the  meaning)  to  help  His 
martyr  (cf.  also  Rev  5*  14').  And  we  note  that  in 
Ps  110' [LXX]  the  imperative  'sit'  {Kddov)  marks 
the  continuance  of  the  Session  (Westcott  on  He  1"). 
This  variation  in  biblical  usage  is  reflected  in  the 
use  of  both  '  sitteth '  and  '  sat  down '  (sedet,  sedit) 
in  different  Creeds.  The  former  is  the  usual  form, 
e.g.  in  the  'Constantinopolitan'  form  of  the  Nicene 
Creed  (KaOe^dnevov ;  cf.  Tertullian,  de  Virg.  Vel.  1, 
'sedentem  nunc').  But  the  latter  is  sometimes 
found,  especially  in  the  4th  cent.,  as  in  the  Creed 
of  Jerusalem  (Cyr.  Jer.  Cat.  xiv.  27,  KadiaavTa  4k 
de^iwu  Tov  Uarpds) ;  in  the  Testament  of  our  Lord  (ii. 
8) ;  the  Verona  Latin  fragments  of  the  Didascalia 
(ed.  Hauler,  p.  110) ;  the  Egyptian  and  Ethiopic 
Church  Orders;  and  in  the  Creeds  of  the  Abtx)t 
Pirminius  (8th  cent.),  of  the  Bangor  Antiphonary 
(7th  cent.),  of  the  Gallican  Sacramcntary  (7tn 
cent.  ;  Codex  Bobiensis),  and  of  the  Missale  Galli- 
canum  (Mabillon) ;  cf.  also  Tert.  de  Prater.  13, 
'  sedisse. ' 

The  Session  is  'at  the  right  hand  of  God' — either 
4k  Se^iQv  or  4v  Be^i^ ;  the  former  in  Ps  110'  [LXX] 
('at  my  right  hand')  and  in  the  quotations  of  it 
in  Mt  22**,  Mk  123«,  Ac  2«,  He  l^^,  also  in  the 
allusions  to  it  in  Mk  14«^  and  ||  Mt  26«*  (both  '  of 
power')  and  ||  Lk  22**  ('of  the  power  of  God')  and 
'  Mk '  16'»,  Ac  7»'-  twice  ('of  God ').  But  St.  Paul, 
St.  Peter,  and  the  writer  of  Hebrews  prefer  ii>  df^i^ : 
Ro  S'**,  He  10'*  (though  v.'*  is  a  quotation  from 
Ps  110'),  Col  3',  1  P  3-^  (all  these  have  'of  God') ; 
so  He  1*  ('of  the  Majesty  on  high')  8'  ('of  the 
throne  of  the  Majesty  in  tne  heavens')  12*  ('of  the 
throne  of  God '),  Eph  I'-*  ('  his  right  hand ').  With 
these  phrases  cf.  Ac  2**  ('being  therefore  by  the 
right  hand  of  God  exalted,'  ii^uOeh)  6"  ('him  did 
God  exalt  with  his  right  hand'),  in  both  of  which 
places  RVm  reads  'at'  for  'by*  or  'with.' 

The  symbolism  of  Session,  according  to  Pearson 


ASCENSION 


ASCENSION 


97 


(On  the  Creed,  art.  vi.)  and  Westcott  {Historic 
Faith*,  1890,  p.  52),  is  that  of  perfect  rest  from  all 
pain,  sorrow,  disturbance,  and  opposition.  Yet, 
as  Swete  points  out  {Ascended  Christ,  p.  14),  this 
is,  at  best,  incomplete.  The  seated  monarch  on 
earth  is  not  idle,  and  so  the  seated  Christ  '  rests 
not  day  nor  ni^ht  from  the  unintermitting  energies 
of  heaven.'  The  symbolism  of  the  right  hand  is 
unmistakable.  It  expresses  the  exaltation  and 
glory  of  the  Ascended  Christ  as  Man.  Jesus  did 
not  merely  return  to  His  former  glorv  (cf.  Jn  17' : 
'  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was'),  but, 
in  addition,  was  glorified  in  His  human  nature. 
For  the  exaltation  see  Lk  24^  ('to  enter  into  his 
gl5ry ' — the  glory  which  was  His  due),  Jn  7^  12'^, 
Ac  2^  ( '  God  hath  made  him — caused  him  to  be  re- 
cognized as — both  Lord  and  Christ' ;  with  reference 
to  the  Session),  2  Co  3^"^^  Ph  2*  (aurdi'  inrep&if/uffe, 
'highly  exalted  him,'  in  consequence  of  the  self- 
emptym^  and  self-humUiation),  1  Ti  3^*  ('received 
up  in  glory').  He  2*  ('crowned  with  glory  and 
honour '),  and  the  passages  given  above.  The  ex- 
altation or  '  lifting  up '  (C^owtj)  is  spoken  of  by  our 
Lord  in  immediate  reference  to  the  Crucifaxion 
(Jn  3"  828  1232-  ^),  but  doubtless  with  the  further 
thought  that  death  leads  to  glory  (cf.  Jn  13^^ ;  see 
also  Slilligan,  op.  cit.  p.  78  f.). — It  is  not  improbable 
that  the  period  of  Forty  Days  was  one  of  increasing 
glory,  of  which  the  Ascension  was  the  consumma- 
tion. In  Jn  20^^  our  Lord  says  to  Mary  Magdalene, 
'I  ascend'  {dva^aivw),  that  is,  not  'I  shall  ascend,' 
as  our  looser  English  use  of  the  present  tense  may 
suggest,  but '  I  am  ascending.'  '  The  Resurrection 
had  begun  the  great  change  ;  from  Easter  morning 
He  was  already  ascending  '  (Swete,  Holy  Spirit  in 
NT,  p.  374).  But  the  last  parting  was  the  definite 
act  of  Ascension. 

3.  The  work  of  the  ascended  Christ. — (a)  Jesus 
has  ascended  to  make  intercession  for  us  as  our 
Priest,  Ro  8^,  He  7^  (a  perpetual  intercession). 
The  High-Priesthood  of  Christ  is  one  of  the  great 
themes  of  Hebrews,  and  Ps  110^*  is  quoted  in  He 
56. 10  717. 21  Jesus  is  High  Priest  for  ever  after  the 
order  of  Melchizedek,  not  of  the  Aaronic  order  (see 
below).  He  is  our  'great  priest'  (lO-^).  One  of 
the  meanings  of  '  Paraclete '  is  '  Advocate '  or 
'  Intercessor,'  and  Jesus  is  our  Paraclete  (1  Jn  2^), 
as  He  Himself  implies  in  calling  the  Holy  Ghost 
'another  Paraclete'  {iXkov  HapaKX-qrov,  Jn  14^^). 
His  very  presence  in  heaven  is  the  intercession 
which  fie  offers.  He  'appears  before  the  face  of 
God  for  us'  (He  Q^"*).  This  is  the  meaning  of  the 
references  in  Hebrews  to  the  high  priest  entering 
into  the  Holy  of  Holies  on  the  Day  of  Atonement 
(414-16  620  -27  g3  97.12.24  etc.).  But  we  must  notice 
two  differences  between  the  type  and  the  antitype. 
The  earthly  high  priest  stands  to  offer  (10"),  while 
Jesus  is  usually  (though  not  always)  depicted  as 
sitting  (above,  §  2).  And  the  earthly  high  priest 
enters  into  the  Holy  of  Holies  alone,  leaving  the 
people  outside,  while  Jesus  carries  the  people  with 
Him  within  the  veU  and  gives  them  access  to  the 
Father  {v\.'^-^).  Jesus  is  the  Mediator  (8«  12--^), 
and  on  His  mediation  all  human  intercession  is 
based  (1  Ti2^-').  Mediation  and  intercession  axe 
not,  indeed,  quite  the  same  thing.  A  mediator 
brings  the  contending  parties  together.  But  our 
ascended  Mediator  goes  further,  and  offers  inter- 
cession for  all  men  (see  Swete,  Asc.  Christ,  p.  93). 
In  this  connexion  we  must  notice  that  there  is  no 
contradiction  between  the  intercession  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  that  of  our  ascended  Lord.  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  both  intercessions  in  the  same  context 
(Ro  8'^'-  *♦).  The  two  are  not  to  be  separated  ;  they 
are  really  one  act,  though  the  insufficiency  of 
human  language  makes  them  seem  two.  The 
intercession  of  our  Lord  in  heaven  and  that  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  believers  are  one.  Christ  in 
VOL.  I. — 7 


heaven  sends  the  Holy  Ghost  to  intercede  within 
us.  This  double  conception  is  parallel  with  that 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  coming  down  to  us  here  on  earth 
at  the  same  time  that  we  are  taken  up  to  '  the 
heavenlies'  with  Jesus  (Eph  2*). 

It  has  long  been  disputed  when  the  High-Priest- 
hood of  Christ  began.  He  was  the  Priest-Victim 
on  the  Cross,  and  some  passages  in  Hebrews  point 
to  a  Priesthood  on  earth,  whUe  others  point  to  one 
in  heaven  only.  Westcott  {Hebrew^,  p.  229,  Add. 
Note  on  8')  says  that  Christ  fulfilled^  two  types, 
and  that  there  are  two  aspects  of  His  Priesthood, 
one  as  fulfilling  the  Levitical  High- Priest  hood  on 
earth  before  the  Session,  and  the  other  as  fulfilling 
that  of  Melchizedek  thereafter.  The  priesthood 
was  thus,  as  it  were,  completed  by  the  Ascension. 
But  Milligan  {op.  cit.  p.  72  ff". )  denies  the  two  types 
of  priesthood,  and  says  that  our  Lord's  Priesthood 
began  with  His  glorification,  and  that  the  Death 
was  part  of  this  glorification,  falling  in  the  sphere 
of  the  heavenly  Priesthood.  There  seems  to  be 
much  truth  in  both  views.  The  Priesthood  of 
Christ  is  one,  but  as  the  earthly  high  priest  only 
fulfilled  his  priesthood  when  he  brought  the  blood 
of  the  victim  within  the  Holy  Place,  so  Christ  did 
not  fulfil  His  Priesthood  till  the  Ascension  (see 
J.  H.  Bernard,  in  EEE  ii.  157). 

(6)  Jesus  has  ascended  to  rule  over  and  to  fill  all 
things  ;  He  is  our  King.  This  is  specially  empha- 
sized in  Rev  (1«  51"-  IP"  lO^^- 1«  20*).  Jesus  is  the 
ruler  of  the  kings  of  the  earth,  and  is  worthy  to 
receive  the  power  and  the  might ;  the  kingdom  of 
the  world  is  become  the  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  [the 
Father]  and  of  His  Christ ;  Jesus  has  many  diadems 
on  His  head,  and  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of 
lords ;  He  reigns  with  His  saints  for  a  thousand 
years.  St.  Paul  also  emphasizes  the  Kingship  of 
the  Ascended  Christ.  He  must  (Set) — it  is  fitting 
that  He  should — reign  till  His  enemies  are  con- 
quered (1  Co  15^).  He  is  seated  far  above  all  rule, 
authority,  and  power,  both  in  this  and  in  the  coming 
age  (Eph  1-^) ;  He  ascended  that  He  might  fill  all 
things  (Eph  4^'  ;  cf.  3^").  His  rule  is  with  a  view  to 
the  restoration  of  the  universe  to  order,  and  is  not 
only  over  Christians,  but  over  all.  He  was  exalted 
that  in  His  name  every  knee  should  bow  throughout 
the  whole  universe  (Ph  2*'-).  »•«•  in  the  name  which 
the  Father  gave  Him  (v.*),  namely,  the  Divine 
Majesty  :  to  the  Divine  Jesus  aU  shall  do  homage 
(see  Lightfoot's  note).  He  is  the  Head  of  the 
Church,  and  in  all  things  has  the  pre-eminence 
{-IT purr fvwv),  for  in  Him  all  the  fulness  dwells  (Col 
jisf.  .  fQj.  xXi}pw/ia,  see  Robinson,  Ephesians,  p.  255) ; 
cf.  Eph  4^"-  5^.  So  St.  Peter  speaks  of  angels  and 
authorities  and  powers  being  made  subject  to  the 
Ascended  Christ  ( 1  P  3^).  All  authority  in  heaven 
and  earth  has  been  given  to  Him  (Mt  28^^).  He  is 
the  Priest- King,  the  '  priest  upon  his  throne '  of 
Zee  6^^ ;  and  His  Kingship  assures  us  that  good 
wUl  triumph  over  evil. 

(c)  The  office  of  the  Ascended  Jesus  as  Prophet 
is  not  so  explicitly  mentioned  in  the  NT  as  His 
Priesthood  and  Kingship.  Yet  it  is  clearly  im- 
plied. His  prophetic  or  teaching  office  did  not 
cease  at  the  Ascension  ;  on  the  contrary.  He  there- 
after teaches  more  plainly ;  not,  as  formerly,  in  pro- 
verbs (Jn  16^) ;  the  teaching  is  through  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit,  who  was  to  teach  us  all  things  (14**), 
and  guide  us  into  all  the  truth,  not  speaking  from 
Himself,  'for  he  shall  take  of  mine  and  shall 
declare  it  unto  you '  (IGi^*-).  This  is  illustrated  by 
the  outpouring  of  the  gift  of  prophecy  upon  the 
infant  Church  ;  '  the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the 
spirit  of  prophecy '  (Rev  19'").  Now  the  Ascension 
is  intimately  connected  with  the  gift  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Ascension  was  not  a  mere  spectacle  to  reassure 
the  disciples,  but  the  mode  by  which  we  are  given 
a  new  life.     Until  Jesus  was  glorified  it  was  not 


98 


ASCENSION- 


ASCENSION 


possible  for  the  new  mode  of  His  presence  to  take 
etl'ect  ( Jn  7^"  16^ ;  cf.  Lk  24**).  Hence  the  necessity 
of  our  Lord's  death  :  otherwise  the  grain  of  wheat 
could  not  bear  fruit  ( Jn  12'^).  The  Ascended  Christ 
became  a  life-giving  Spirit  (1  Co  15*").  The  con- 
nexion between  the  Ascension  and  the  gift  of  tlie 
Spirit  is  also  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  last  words 
oi  Jesus  (Ac  1*)  were  that  the  disciples  should  re- 
ceive power  when  the  Holy  Ghost  should  be  come 
upon  them,  and  so  they  would  be  Jesus'  witnesses 
in  all  the  world.  This  explains  to  us  the  purport 
of  the  words  '  after  he  had  spoken  to  them,  in  the 
Appendix  to  Mk.  {16^"). 

(a)  Another  work  is  referred  to  in  He  6^*.  The 
Ascended  Christ  has  entered  within  the  veil  on 
our  behalf  as  a  Forerunner  {wpddpofios  [see  FORE- 
RUNNER]), to  prepare  a  place  for  us  (Jn  li'^;  for 
the  *  many  resting-places,'  see  Swete,  Asc.  Christ, 
105  ff.),  that  we  may  sit  with  Him  on  His  throne 
{Rev  3^1). 

4.  Interval  between  the  Resarpection  and  the 
Ascension. — In  Ac  P  Jesus  is  said  to  have  appeared 
to  the  disciples '  by  the  space  of  forty  days'  {Si'  imepQiv 
Te(Tffap6.KovTa).  This  interval  has  been  usually  taken 
as  exact,  and  when  the  Festival  of  the  Ascension 
was  instituted,  in  the  4th  cent. ,  the  sixth  Thursday 
after  Easter  was  selected  for  the  purpose  (Ap.  Const. 
V.  20 ;  cf.  viii.  33,  ed.  Funk),  and  has  been  so  ob- 
served ever  since.  But  St.  Luke's  words  do  not 
necessarily  imply  an  exact  period  of  forty  days, 
and  there  have  been  other  calculations.  In  the 
Third  Gospel  he  describes  all  the  events  which  took 
place  after  the  Resurrection  till  the  'parting'  of 
24"^  (see  above,  §  1),  without  any  note  of  time,  and 
the  deduction  has  been  drawn  that  when  he  wrote 
the  Gospel  he  supposed  that  all  the  post-Resurrec- 
tion appearances  which  he  describes  took  place  on 
Easter  Day  itself,  but  that  he  learnt  a  more  ac- 
curate chronology  before  he  wrote  Acts  (cf.  art. 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  V.  1).  This  is  scarcely 
credible,  and  assumes  that  the  Gospels  are  what 
they  never  claim  to  be — chronological  biographies, 
like  modern  'Lives.'  This  view  makes  St.  Luke 
get  in  all  the  events  which  happened  after  the 
evening  meal  at  Emmaus  (v.^*),  including  the  return 
journey  of  the  two  disciples  7  or  8  miles  to  Jeru- 
salem, before  nightfall,  for  none  of  the  authorities 
suggests  that  the  Ascension  took  place  at  night. 
In  Ilk  24  we  have  a  series  of  events  foreshortened 
(probably  because  the  author  had  already  planned 
Acts),  and  no  note  of  time  is  suggested. 

There  are,  however,  some  indications  that  the 
words  '  forty  days '  were  not  always  taken  exactly. 
*  Barnabas '  makes  the  Ascension  take  place  on  a 
Sunday  (§  15) ;  but  he  does  not  say  that  it  was  the 
same  Sunday  as  the  Resurrection  ('the  eighth 
day  ...  in  which  also  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead, 
and,  having  been  manifested,  ascended  up  to 
heaven').  He  mentions  the  'eighth'  rather  than 
the  '  first '  day  because  it  follows  the  seventh  day 
or  Sabbath,  or  which  he  is  treating ;  he  hints  at  the 
replacement  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath  by  the  Christian 
Lord's  day,  but  only  obscurely.  With  this  we  may 
compare  the  fact  that  in  the  Edessene  Canons 
(4th  cent.)  the  Ascension  was  commemorated  on 
Whitsunday,  and  so  in  the  Pilgrimage  of  'Silvia' 
(Etheria),  though  in  that  work  the  fortieth  day  after 
Easter  was  observed  for  another  purpose ;  see  the 
present  writer's  art.  '  Calendar,  The  Christian,'  in 
VCG  i.  261*.  This  is  some  confirmation  of  the 
suggestion  that  the  Ascension  took  place  on  a 
Sunday.  There  are  also  some  speculations  of  an 
extravagant  nature,  such  as  the  Valentinian  idea 
that  the  interval  between  the  Resurrection  and  the 
Ascension  was  18  months,  or  that  of  certain  Opliites 
that  it  was  11  or  12  years,  or  that  of  Eusebius  in 
one  place  (Dem.  Evang.  viii.  2)  that  it  was  as  long 
as  the  Ministry  before  the  Crucifixion ;  see  Swete, 


Ap.  Creed,  p.  69  f.  All  that  we  can  deduce  from 
these  facts  is  that,  while  the  Ascension  nmy  have 
taken  place  on  tlie  Thursday,  it  may  also  have 
happened  on  the  following  Sunday,  or  on  any  day 
between  or  close  to  these  dates. 

5.  Hodern  objections  to  the  Ascension.— The 
present  article  is  mainly  concerned  with  the  facts, 
and  the  reader  may  be  referred  for  an  answer  to 
objections  from  a  philosophical  point  of  view  to  A. 
S.  Martin's  article  in  DCG  i.,  which  is  very  full  on 
this  head.  Here  it  is  enough  to  say  (a)  that  the 
objection  that  it  is  impossible  for  a  body  to  disobey 
the  laws  of  gravity  and  to  ascend  instead  of  fall, 
presupposes  that  the  Resurrection  body  of  our 
Lord  was  under  the  same  material  conditions  as 
His  body  before  Easter  Day,  which  all  the  Evan- 
gelists' accounts  show  not  to  have  been  the  case. 
Objections  on  this  head  are  therefore  really  objec- 
tions to  the  Resurrection,  not  to  the  Ascension. 
(b)  It  is  impossible  to  regard  the  account  in  Ac  1  as 
a  myth  unless  we  adopt  the  now  exploded  theory 
that  the  whole  gospel  story  is  such.  The  narrative 
bears  the  same  stamp  of  truth  as  the  evangelical 
records.  For  example,  Sanday  well  points  out  the 
authentic  touch  about  the  disciples  desiring  the 
restoration  of  the  earthly  kingdom  of  Israel  (v.®'- ; 
see  HDB  ii.  643*).  However  we  may  interpret  the 
narrative,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  repre- 
sents what  the  eye-witnesses  believed  to  have  tajcen 
place. 

But  an  allegation  of  Hamack  must  be  briefly 
noticed  here,  as  it  deals  with  the  facts.  He  says  that 
the  special  prominence  given  to  the  Ascension  in 
the  Creeds  is  a  deviation  from  the  oldest  teaching, 
and  that  in  the  primitive  tradition  the  Ascension 
had  no  separate  place  (Das  apost.  Glaubensbekennt- 
niss,  Berlin,  1892).  He  aUeges  the  silence  of  the 
Synoptists,  of  St.  Paul  in  1  Co  15^*^-,  and  of  the 
chief  sub-apostolic  writers;  the  placing,  in  some 
old  accounts,  of  the  Session  after  the  Resurrection 
as  if  they  were  one  act ;  and  the  discrepancy  noted 
above  as  to  the  interval  between  the  Resurrection 
and  the  Ascension.  These  allegations  have  been 
ably  answered  by  Swete  (Ap.  Creed,  ch.  vi.).  Tlie 
argument  from  silence  (always  precarious)  is  invalid 
in  the  case  of  Mt.  and  Mk.,  which  do  not  carry  the 
narrative  so  far  as  the  Ascension  (the  end  of  Mk. 
is  lost) ;  at  best  it  hardly  applies  to  Lk.  (see  above, 
§  1),  and  the  mention  of  the  Ascension  in  1  Co 
253flF.  -would  have  been  irrelevant  to  St.  Paul's  argu- 
ment. Moreover,  the  Ascension  belongs  to  the 
history  of  the  Church  rather  than  to  the  gospel 
narrative,  and  therefore  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  it  should  be  found  there  except  in  allusion. 
It  is  hard  to  see  any  force  in  the  argument  from 
St.  Paul's  silence  in  one  place  when  elsewhere  he 
so  emphatically  states  his  belief  in  the  Ascension. 
As  to  the  sub-apostolic  ^vriters,  the  Ascension  is 
explicitly  mentioned  by  'Barnabas'  (§  15),  by  Justin 
(Dial.  38),  and  is  probably  referred  to  by  Ignatius 
(Magn.  7).  The  allegation  that  the  Session  and  the 
Resurrection  were  regarded  as  one  act  may  be 
tested  by  Ro  8**,  where  St.  Paul  names  successively 
the  Death,  Resurrection,  Session,  and  Intercession 
of  Christ.  If  the  second  and  third  of  these  are 
one  act,  why  not  also  the  iirst  and  fourth  ?  The 
argument  from  the  interval  has  already  been  dealt 
with  (above,  §  4).  For  fuller  details,  see  Swete,  Ap. 
Creed.  It  is  quite  intelligible  that  those  who  believe 
that  our  Lord  is  mere  Man  should  find  difficulties 
in  the  doctrine  that  He  ascended  ;  but  it  is  not 
really  possible  to  maintain  that  the  disciples  did 
not  believe  it. 

6.  Importance  of  the  Ascension  for  the  practical 
life. — This  iias  been  indirectly  pointed  out  above 
(§  3).  The  Ascension  shows  that  the  work  of  Christ 
for  man  has  never  ceased,  but  is  permanent, 
although  He  has  never  needed  to  repeat  His  sacri- 


ASGKN'SIOIT  OF  ISAIAH 


ASCENSION  OF  ISAIAH 


99 


lice.  It  has  brought  Jesus  into  closer  touch  \*-ith 
us  ;  He  has  never  ceased  to  be  Man,  and  in  the 
heavenlv  sphere  is  not  removed  far  away  from  us, 
but  is  wath  us  until  the  end  of  the  world  (Mt  28*). 
He  raises  our  ideals  from  earthly  things  to  heavenly; 
and,  giving  us  through  the  Spirit  the  new  life 
which  enables  us  to  follow  Him,  by  His  Ascension 
teaches  us  the  great  Sursum  Corda  :  '  Lift  up  your 
hearts ;  we  lift  them  up  unto  the  Lord.' 

LmsATURB. — W.  Milligran,  The  Aseentum  and  Heavenly 
PrUithood  of  OUT  Lord  (&kird  LectureX  London,  1892  ;  H.  B. 
Swete,  The  ApotOe^  Creed,  Cambridge,  1894,  The  Holy  Spirit 
m  tMe  A«w  Tettament,  London,  1909,  Appendix  E,  The  Appear- 
aneet  <^  our  Lord  ttfter  the  Pattion,  do.  1907,  2%«  Ascended 
Christ,  do.  1910 ;  J.  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  art.  vi. ;  J. 
Denney,  art.  '  Ascension,'  in  HDB  L ;  W.  Sanday,  art.  '  Jesos 
Christ,'  ^.  iL  ;  A.  S.  Martin,  art.  '  Ascension,'  in  DC6  i. ;  J.  G. 
SiafMon,  art.  'Ascension,'  in  SDB;  J.  H.  Bernard,  art. 
*  Aasomptioo  and  AacensioD,'  in  ERE  ii. ;  B.  F.  Westcott, 
Conk  on  HebretM,  London.  1906 ;  R.  L.  Ottley,  The  Rule  of 
Faith  and  Hope,  da  1912,  p.  S2flf. ;  A.  J  .Tait,  The  Heavenly 
Setation  of  our  Lord,  do.  1912 ;  S.  C  Gayford,  elaborate 
reriew  of  foregoing,  in  JThSt  xiv.  [1913]  458. 

A.  J.  Maclean. 
ASCENSION  OF  ISAIAH.— This  is  an  apocryphon 

now  extant  in  a  complete  form  in  the  Etmopic 
Version  alone.  It  is  composite  in  structure,  and 
contains  three  separate  parts  of  different  author- 
ship, one  being  of  Jewish  and  two  of  Christian 
origin,  but  all  alike  apparently  composed  during 
the  1st  cent.  a.d.  It  is  thus  of  considerable  im- 
portance in  the  light  which  it  throws  upon  the 
views  held  in  certain  circles  of  the  Christian  Church 
of  the  apostolic  period  with  regard  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  Trinity,  the  Incarnation,  the  Resurrection, 
the  Seven  Heavens,  the  Antichrist,  angels  and 
demons.  It  adds,  moreover,  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  internal  and  external  conditions  of  the  Church, 
and  of  the  stage  which  had  been  reached  in  the 
development  of  its  organization.  In  phraseology 
and  ideas  it  presents  interesting  parallels  with  the 
New  Testament. 

1.  Composite  character. — The  title  '  Ascension  of 
Isaiah '  is  strictly  appropriate  only  to  the  latter  part 
of  the  work,  chs.  6-11,  in  which  Isaiah  is  success- 
ively led  through  the  firmament  and  six  lower 
heavens  to  the  seventh  heaven,  and  receives  dis- 
closures regarding  the  descent,  birth,  Morks,  cruci- 
fixion, and  ascension  of  the  Beloved.  The  first  five 
chapters  deal  in  the  main  ^ith  Manasseh's  wicked- 
ness and  Isaiah's  martyrdom,  with  a  curious  inser- 
tion (3^^-4>*)  which  claims  to  be  a  vision  foretelling 
the  life  of  Christ  and  the  fortunes  of  His  Church, 
awkwardly  introduced  as  explaining  the  wrath  of 
Beliar  which  occasioned  the  martyrdom  of  Isaiah. 
A  careful  examination  of  the  diction  and  subject- 
matter  of  each  section  leads  to  the  clear  discrimina- 
tion of  three  distinct  sources. 

(a)  The  Martyrdom  of  Isaiah  (V-  =»•  «»""•  2^-3^ 
5ib-i4)  This  narrates  how  in  the  twenty-sixth  year 
of  his  reign  Hezekiah  caUed  Manasseh  to  receive 
accounts  of  ^-isions  which  he  had  seen  ( 1^  -).  Isaiah, 
who  is  present,  warns  the  king  of  Manasseh's  future 
wickedness,  and  foretells  his  own  martyrdom  (1^"*^). 
After  Hezekiah's  death,  Manasseh,  as  foretold,  for- 
sakes the  service  of  God  and  serves  Satan,  whereupon 
Isaiah  withdraws  first  to  Bethlehem  and  then  to 
the  desert  with  his  companions  (2^"").  Meanwhile 
Belchira,  a  brother  of  the  false  prophet  Zedekiah, 
son  of  Chenaanah,  accuses  Isaiah  and  his  fellow- 
prophets  to  the  king,  of  prophesying  evil  against 
Jerusalem,  and  claiming  to  have  seen  (iod,  and 
calling  Jerusalem  Sodom,  and  the  princes  the  people 
of  Gomorrah  (2^-3'*').  Manasseh  seizes  Isaiah  and 
has  him  sawn  asunder  with  a  wood-saw.  Isaiah 
dies  ^^•ith  wonderful  firmness  and  constancy,  com- 
muning with  the  Holy  Spirit  till  the  end.  This 
narrative  is  mainly  historical  in  form,  and  contains 
nothing  specifically  Christian.  In  its  outlook  it 
might  well  be  Jewish,  and  this  supposition  is  con- 
firmed by  the  Patristic  references  (e.g.  in  Origen 


and  Jerome)  which  attribute  the  account  of  the 
sawing  asunder  of  Isaiah  to  Jewish  traditions,  and 
also  by  the  fact  that  the  Talmud  contains  a  similar 
account  of  Isaiah's  death.  Further,  the  original 
was  probably  written  in  Hebrew.  In  2'  a  play  upon 
words  appeare  when  the  passage  is  re-translated  in- 
to Hebrew  (.T?rj  •'^y;?).  The  name  'Malchira'  in  P  is  a 
transliteration  of  in  '?^,  as  S.  A.  Cook  has  observed. 
Above  all,  the  curious  term  '  a  wooden  saw '  can 
hardly  be  explained  except  as  a  misrendering  of 
pg  Tw?,  '  a  wood-saw.' 

(6)  The  Vision  of  Isaiah  (6-1 1 ).  In  the  twentieth 
year  of  Hezekiah,  Isaiah,  in  the  presence  of  the 
King,  when  speaking  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  taken  up 
in  mind  (cf.  2  Co  12^~*)  through  the  firmament  and 
each  of  the  six  lower  heavens  in  turn,  and  finally 
arrives  at  the  seventh  heaven,  to  which  he  is  ad- 
mitted by  special  command  of  the  Lord  Christ. 
There  he  se^  all  the  righteous  from  the  time  of 
Adam,  including  Abel,  Seth,  and  Enoch,  stript  of 
the  garments  of  the  flesh,  not  sitting  on  their 
thrones  nor  as  yet  wearing  their  crowns  of  glory, 
until  the  Beloved  has  descended  to  earth  (9^  ")  and 
ascended  again  (9'*).  He  sees  the  Great  Gloi-y,  and 
on  His  right  the  Lord  (the  Beloved)  and  on  tfis  left 
the  Holy  Spirit.  He  worships  the  three,  and  his 
Lord  and  the  Holy  Spirit  worship  the  Great  Glory. 
The  Father  commissions  the  Son  to  descend  to  earth, 
and  tells  of  His  ascension  and  final  judgment.  The 
Son  descends  through  each  heaven  in  turn,  assum- 
ing in  each  the  form  of  the  angels  who  dwell  in 
them,  and  finally  passes  through  the  firmament  and 
then  the  air  to  the  earth.  There  Isaiah  beholds  His 
wonderful  birth,  miracles,  and  crucifixion,  resurrec- 
tion, mission  of  the  Twelve,  ascension,  and  session 
on  the  right  hand  of  the  Great  Glory.  Isaiah  returns 
to  his  body  and  binds  Hezekiah  to  secrecy  concern- 
ing the  vision. 

The  date  of  this  narrative  is  probably  in  the  1st 
cent.  A.D.  The  vision  is  quoted  not  only  by  Jerome, 
Com.  in  Isaiam,  Ixiv.  4  (Vallarsi,  iv.  761),  but  also 
by  the  Actus  Petri  Vereelletues,  ch.  xxiv.  (p.  72,  ed. 
Lipsius),  and  by  Hieracas  ihe  heretic,  according  to 
Epiphanins,  S(er.  IxviL  3.  There  is  also  a  remark- 
aole  parallel  between  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad.  Ephes.  xix. 
and  Asc.  Is.  11".  There  appears  to  be  a  reference 
to  the  sawing  asunder  in  He  11".  The  author  wrote 
in  Greek,  and  was  a  Christian  with  a  Docetic  tend- 
ency and  a  crude  conception  of  the  Trinity. 

Tne  title  '  Ascension  of  Isaiah '  properly  belongs 
to  this  section  of  the  work.  Jerome  so  quotes  it, 
Epiphanins  refers  to  it  as  rh  'XvaSariKov  "Htreubi'. 
The  Ethiopic,  Slavonic,  and  Latin  texts  of  6^  imply 
the  title '  Vision  of  Isaiah,'  and  so  does  Montfaucon  s 
Canon. 

(c)  The  Testament  of  HezeJdah,  a  Christian  Apo- 
calypse (3'*-4'*).  This  title  is  given  in  Cedrenus 
L  r20-121  (ed.  Bonn),  and  is  appropriate  only  to  the 
above  section.  As  Charles  observes  :  '  that  such  a 
work  was  incorporated  in  the  Ascension  might  also 
be  inferred  from  l^**"**,  which  describe  the  contents 
of  Hezekiah's  vision.'  It  describes,  briefly  string- 
ing together  various  details  in  the  manner  of  an 
epitome,  the  coming  and  death  of  the  Beloved  ;  the 
descent  of  the  angel  of  the  Christian  Church  ;  the 
ascension  ;  the  falling  awaj  of  the  Church,  and  the 
prevalence  of  error,  impurity,  strife,  and  covetous- 
ness  ;  the  coming  of  Beliar  in  the  likeness  of  a  law- 
less king,  a  matricide,  who  claims  to  be  GSod,  and 
demands  Divine  worship,  and  persecutes  the  saints 
for  three  years,  seven  months,  and  twenty-seven 
days.  This  persecution  is  ended  by  the  second 
coming  of  the  Lord,  who  drags  Beliar  into  Gehenna, 
and  gives  rest  to  the  godly,  sets  up  a  kingdom  of  the 
saints,  who  afterwards  are  transformed,  and  ascend, 
apparently,  to  heaven.  The  final  judgment  follows, 
and  the  godless  are  annihilated. 

The  date  cannot  be  later  than  A.D,  100,  for  4" 


100 


ASCENSION  OF  ISAIAH 


ASCENSION  OF  ISAIAH 


Eresupposes  that  there  were  a  few  still  alive  Avho 
ad  seen  the  Lord  in  the  flesh.  The  fusion  of  the 
three  originally  distinct  conceptions  of  the  Anti- 
christ, of  lieliar,  and  of  Nero  Itedivivus  cannot  Avell 
be  put  earlier  than  a.d,  88  (see  Charles,  Asc.  Is.  pp. 
li-lxxiii).  So  the  date  of  this  section  falls  between 
A.D.  88  and  100. 

2.  Importance  for  New  Testament  study. — (a) 
The  Trinity. — i.  The  First  Person  is  called  '  the 
Great  Glory'  (9="  10'«  IP^),  '  the  Most  High  '  (6»  1^ 
108-  7),  and  '  Father '  (S^s  ;  cf.  7^  10«- '  in  Charles' 
restored  text). 

ii.  The  Second  Person  is  generally  referred  to  as 
« the  Beloved '  (!*■  »•  ''• "  3^  "• "  4?-  «•  »•  ^^  ^i  515  717.  a 
818.  25  912)  or  i  my  Loj.(j  >  (gis  937  iqv.  16.  i7)^  and  also  once 
as  *  Lord  of  all  those  heavens  and  these  thrones '  (8*). 
His  name  is  as  yet  unknown.  He  is  '  the  Only- 
Begotten,  •  .  .  whose  name  is  not  known  to  any 
flesh '  (7^^), '  the  Elect  One  whose  name  has  not  been 
made  known,  and  none  of  the  heavens  can  learn  His 
name '  (8^).  The  title  *  Christ,'  and  the  phrase  '  who 
will  be  called  Jesus '  (see  9'  note  in  Charles'  ed. )  are 
probably  original  to  the  work.  The  title  '  Son  of 
Man'  in  the  Latin  and  Slavonic  versions  of  11^  is 
probably  original,  and  was  excluded  by  the  editor  of 
the  present  Greek  version  for  doctrinal  reasons  (see 
Charles,  Asc.  Is.  p.  xxvi). 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  title  '  the  Beloved '  is 
bestowed  on  Christ  by  the  Bath  Qol  in  Mk  1"  9^ 
and  it  is  used  by  St.  Paul  in  Eph  1^.  As  Armitage 
Robinson  (HDB  ii.  501 )  points  out,  it  was  probably 
a  pre-Christian  Messianic  title.  It  is  used  in  the 
OT  of  Israel,  and  so  would  naturally  be  trans- 
ferred from  the  people  to  the  Messiah,  like  the 
titles  '  Servant'  and  '  Elect.'  It  was,  moreover,  a 
term  interchangeable  with  the  Messianic  title  *  the 
Elect,'  as  Luke  (9^^)  substitutes  6  iKXeXey/jL^vos  (K  B, 
etc.)  for  6  dyaTrr)T6s  (Mt  17',  Mk  9').  In  early 
Christian  writings  also  the  title  is  applied  to 
Christ,  e.g.  Ep.  Barn.  iii.  6,  iv.  3.  8 ;  Clem.  Rom. 
lix.  2  f .  ;  ign.  Smyrn.  inscr.  ;  Herm.  Sim.  ix.  12.  5. 
No  doubt  the  writer  thought  the  term  most  appro- 
priate in  a  work  claiming  to  be  an  ancient  Jewish 
prophecy  of  Christ,  but  its  vagueness  also  betrays 
the  undeveloped  Trinitarian  conceptions  of  the 
period.  The  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  receive 
worship  (9^"^"),  but  they  in  turn  v.'orship  the  Great 
Glory  (9^").  They  stand,  one  on  His  right  hand 
and  the  other  on  His  left  (9^).  (We  may  compare 
the  Hieracite  doctrine  in  Epiph.  Hcer.  Ixvii.  3.) 
The  command  to  descend  to  earth  is  given  by  the 
Father  (10^).  The  conception  of  the  gradual 
descent  from  heaven  to  heaven,  with  corresponding 
transformation  in  form,  suggests  a  Gnostic  colour- 
ing, and  possibly  a  Docetic  tendency,  as  do  also 
the  statement  that  the  Beloved  escaped  recognition 
at  eacii  stage,  and  the  miraculous  appearance  of 
the  born  babe  two  months  after  the  Virgin's  con- 
ception. The  Protev.  Jacobi  and  the  Actus  Petri 
have  interesting  parallels  to  the  narrative  here 
(U'-"),  while  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  it  is  the 
source  of  Ignatius'  words  in  ad.  Ephes.  xix.,  /cat 
fKaOev  rbr  Apxavra  rod  alCjuo^  tovtov  i]  irapdevia  MapLas 
Kai  6  TOKerbs  airnjs,  d/xolus  Kai  6  Odvaros  tov  KvpLov, 
'The  concealment  of  the  real  nature  of  Christ  is 
the  entire  theme  of  lO^-ll'*.'  He  is,  however, 
really  crucified,  and  descends  to  the  angel  of  Sheol 
(Ijiu.  20.  cf.  10*).  In  His  ascension  He  has  resumed 
His  proper  form,  and  all  the  angels  of  the  firma- 
ment and  the  Satans  see  Him  and  worship  Him 
(11^ ;  cf.  10").  On  arriving  in  the  seventh  heaven. 
He  sits  down  (not  stands,  as  in  9**)  on  the  right 
hand,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  left  (IP".  33) 
His  session  with  God,  however,  will  not  be  realized 
by  the  angels  of  the  world  until  the  final  judgment 
(10"). 

The  significance  of  the  crucifixion  is  nowhere 
noticed,  but  in  9**  the  '  plundering  of  the  angel  of 


death '  (cf .  Ign.  ad.  Magn.  ix.  ;  Mt  27'^-  ^ ;  Evang. 
Nicodcmi,  i.  i,  xi.  1  [ed.  Tiscli.])  is  ref^arded  as  the 
result  of  the  desceiisio  in  infci-na  (cr.  1  P  3^  4*). 
In  the  Test.  liez.  (i.e.  3'^''-4'*)  His  work  includes 
the  founding  of  the  Church  ( '  the  descent  of  the 
angel  of  the  Christian  Church,'  3*"),  and,  after 
coming  forth  from  the  tomb  on  the  shoulders  of 
Gabriel  and  Michael,  the  sending  out  of  the  Twelve. 
Those  who  believe  in  His  cross  will  be  saved,  and 
many  who  believe  in  Him  will  speak  through  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  Ascension,  not  the  Resurrection, 
is  the  distinctive  object  of  faith  to  the  believer  in 
2'  3'*.  At  His  second  coming  the  Lord  will  Him- 
self drag  Beliar  into  Gehenna  (4"),  and  give  rest  to 
the  godly  still  alive  in  the  body  (cf.  2  Th  !*• '',  1 
Th  4").  The  saints  (i.e.  the  departed)  will  come 
with  the  Lord  (1  Th  318  4")  and  descend  and  be 
present  in  this  world  (4^^),  and  the  Lord  will  minister 
to  those  who  have  kept  watch  in  this  world  (cf.  Lk 
12^).  Apparent^  an  earthly  Messianic  Kingdom 
is  impliea  (cf.  Rev  20^"*).  It  is  followed  by  a 
spiritual  translation  to  heaven,  the  body  being  left 
in  the  world  (4").  Then  follows  '  [a  resurrection 
and]  a  judgment,'  and  the  godless  are  entirely  de- 
stroyed by  fire  from  before  the  Beloved  (4^"). 

iii.  The  Third  Person  is  spoken  of  as  an  angel, 
the  angel  of  the  Spirit  (4^1  9^- «  10*  11*)  or  the 
angel  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (3i«  7^  9»«  ll^^).  In  com- 
munion  with  Him,  Isaiah  endures  his  martyrdom, 
and  also  is  carried  in  spirit  to  the  third  heaven. 
The  Holy  Spirit  stands  (9^),  and  after  the  Ascen- 
sion sits  (11^)  on  the  left  hand  of  the  Great 
Glory.  The  angel  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  3^®  must 
be  regarded  as  Gabriel,  and  in  11*  He  performs 
the  part  of  Gabriel  in  the  Annunciation. 

(b)  The  Resurrection  is  apparently  a  spiritual 
one.  The  'garments,'  i.e.  spiritual  bodies,  are 
reserved  for  the  righteous,  with  the  robes  and 
crowns  in  the  seventh  heaven  (4^'  7^  8'*-  ^).  These 
garments  are  received  at  once  after  death  (8^*  9"). 
the  thrones  and  crowns  not  till  after  the  Ascension 
of  Christ  (9^-  ^^).  The  living  whom  the  Lord  finds 
on  His  return  will  be  'strengthened  in  the  gar- 
ments of  the  saints.'  There  is  a  temporary 
Messianic  Kingdom,  and  (?)  a  feast  (4^*),  followed 
by  a  spiritual  consummation  in  heaven  (cf.  Ph  S'-'-', 
1  Co  15'^-  '^).  The  righteous  from  Adam  downwards 
are  already  in  the  seventh  heaven,  stript  of  the 
garments  of  the  flesh,  though  not  yet  seated  on 
their  thrones  and  crowned  (9").  The  Final  Judg- 
ment is  referred  to  in  4^^  and  10". 

(c)  Beliar. — The  idea  of  demonic  possession  is 
very  prominent  in  the  Martyrdom  of  Isaiah. 
Beliar  is  regarded  as  served  by  Mana.sseh  and 
ruling  in  his  heart  (I*-  «•  "  2i-  *•  ">  3"  b^- "),  and  as 
aiding  Belchira  (5^).  The  name  '  Beliar '  is  absent 
from  the  Vision,  and  in  the  Test.  Hez.  it  has  quite 
another  meaning,  the  Beliar  Antichrist  appearing 
in  the  form  of  a  man — Nero  (4^*  "■  "•  '*).  In  the 
Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  Beliar  appears 
in  both  meanings,  at  times  as  the  source  of  immoral 
deeds,  and  at  times  as  the  Antichrist  (see  Charles, 
Asc.  Is.  1%.).  In  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  ii.  167  he  is 
to  come  as  the  Antichrist,  working  signs ;  in  iii. 
63-73  to  proceed  from  the  Roman  Emperors,  deceive 
the  elect,  and  finally  be  burnt  up.  He  is  also 
called  Matanbuchus  (2*)  and  Mechembechus  (5=*). 
His  relation  to  Sanmiael  is  puzzling.  In  part  the 
two  seem  identical ;  both  awell  and  rule  in  the 
firmament  (7*  4^),  take  possession  of  Manasseh 
(2'  1*  3'^  5^),  are  wroth  with  Isaiah  for  his  visions 
(5"  3"  5'),  and  cause  Isaiah  to  be  sawn  asunder 
(11*^  5").  But  in  part  Sanimael  seems  to  be  sub- 
ordinate. He  exerts  himself  to  win  Manasseh  as 
the  subject  of  Beliar  (1*).  Beliar  has  kings  under 
him  (4"),  and  is  the  prince  of  this  world  (1*  4* ; 
cf.  4^*).  He  will  finally  be  cast  into  Gehenna  with 
his  armies  (4^*).     In  2  Co  6"  St.  Paul  asks  '  What 


ASCENSION  OF  IS  AT  AH 


ASCENSION  OF  ISAIAH 


101 


concord  hath  Christ  with  Beliar?'  Here  either 
meaning  of  Beliar  is  |)ossible.  In  2  Th  2^-^  the 
two  ideas  appear  to  be  fused  with  yet  a  third — that 
of  a  human  sovereign  with  miraculous  powers. 
The  •  man  of  lawlessness '  is  possibly  a  translation 
of  'Beliar'  (cf.  LXX:  irSpes  rapoMofioi  in  Dt  13^ 
etc.).  In  Asc.  Is.  2*  Beliar  is  the  angel  of  lawless- 
ness, and  makes  Manasseh  strong  in  apostatizing 
and  lawlessness  (cf.  2^).  The  sins  specified  are 
witchcraft,  magic,  divination  and  au^uration, 
fornication,  and  the  persecution  of  the  righteous. 
The  'falling  away'  of  2  Th  2^  is  referred  to  in 
Asc.  Is.  S-^:  'on  the  eve  of  His  approach.  His 
disciples  will  forsake  .  .  .  their  faith  and  their 
love  and  their  purity.'  Cf.  '  few  in  those  days  will 
be  left  as  His  servants'  (4^ ;  cf.  Lk  18«). 

(d)  The  Antichrist  and  Ifero  Bedivivus. — ^In  4* 

we  are  told : 

'  Beliar  the  great  mler,  the  king  of  this  world  [ct  Jn  12S1 14*' 
1611]  will  descend,  who  hath  ruled  it  since  it  came  into  being ; 
vea  he  will  descend  from  his  firmament  [cf.  Eph  22  &^  in  the 
likeness  of  a  man,  a  lawless  king,  the  slayer  of  his  mother  [i.e. 
Xero ;  cf.  Sib.  Or.  iv.  141,  v.  145. 363,  viii.  71]  .  .  .  will  persecute 
the  plant  which  the  Twelve  Apostles  .  .  .  have  planted  [<.«.  the 
Church].  Of  the  Twelve,  one  {i.e.  Peter]  will  be  delivered  into 
his  hands.  .  .  .  There  will  come  with  him  all  the  powers  of  this 
world  [cf.  Rev  Ifti*  20"-9].  ...  At  his  word  the  sun  will  rise  at 
night  [cf.  Rev  131^  1320,  2  Th  29].  ...  He  will  say  "I  am  Ck)d  " 
(cf.  2  Th  2«]  .  .  .  and  all  the  people  in  the  world  will  believe  in 
him,  and  they  will  sacrifice  to  him  [cf.  Rev  13*-  a  i*).  .  .  .  And 
the  ^rreater  number  of  those  who  shall  have  been  associated 
together  to  receive  the  Beloved,  he  wUl  torn  adde  alter  him  [cL 
Mt  24^,  Mk  1322 ;  contrast  2  Th  21*>-13].  .  .  .  And  he  will  set  np 
his  image  ...  in  every  city  [cf .  Rev  1$14].' 

The  time  of  his  sway  will  be  3  years,  7  months, 
and  27  days  (4^).  This  period  points  back  to  Dn 
7^  12^  (cf.  Kev  12") ;  but  in  4"  the  time  is  given  as 
(one  thousand)  three  hundred  and  thirty-two  days. 
During  this  period  the  few  believers  left  flee  from 
desert  to  desert  (^^ ;  cf.  Rev  12*- ").  Beliar  is  finally 
destroyed,  not  by  Slichael  but  by  the  Lord  Him- 
self (4"). 

(e)  Angels. — ^While  there  is  no  reference  to  the 
functions  of  good  angels  as  mediators  or  inter- 
cessors, spiritual  powers  are  conceived  of  as  the 
true  cause  of  all  action.  Manasseh  and  Belchira 
are  only  agents  of  Beliar  and  Sammael  and  Satan. 
Xero  Kedivivus  is  only  an  embodiment  of  Beliar 
(4°).  Angels,  authorities,  and  powers  rule  in  this 
world  under  Beliar  their  prince  (1*;  cf.  Eph  1^  3^' 
6",  Col  li«  2i»-  ",  1  P  3^).  The  angel  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  (cf.  Rev  2**  *•  "  etc. )  descends  from 
heaven  after  our  Lord's  passion.  The  Holy  Spirit 
and  the  angel  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (see  under 
'  Trinity ')  are  identical,  except  perhaps  in  3'*  and 
11*.  There  is  an  angel  of  death  (9^^  10"),  and  an 
angel  of  Sheol  (IP*).  Each  heaven  has  its  angels, 
with  the  superior  ones  to  the  right  of  the  throne. 
The  sun  and  the  moon  also  have  each  an  angel  (cf. 
Rev  ly").  The  judgment  of  the  angels  is  referred 
to  in  15  418  1012. 

(/)  T?u  Seven  Heavens. — The  conception  of  the 
seven  heavens  which  we  find  e.g.  in  the  Testaments 
of  the  Ttoelve  Patriarchs  and  in  Slavonic  Enoch  is 
not  to  be  found  in  the  Asc.  Is.  Evil  is  found  only 
in  the  firmament  and  the  air ;  it  is  entirely  absent 
from  all  the  heavens.  Nor  is  there  any  reference 
to  natural  phenomena  or  heavenly  bodies  in  them. 
Each  heaven  is  merely  a  duplicate  of  the  one  above, 
with  no  distinction,  except  of  glory,  until  the 
sixth  and  seventh  are  reached  (8^  •).  The  sixth  is 
not  under  any  subordinate  angel  or  'throne,'  but 
is  ruled  by  the  Great  Glory  in  the  seventh.  There 
is  an  angel  over  the  praise-giving  of  the  sixth 
heaven,  however,  who  challenges  Isaiah  when  pro- 
ceeding to  the  seventh  (9'-  *).  In  the  seventh  are 
the  Patriarchs,  the  righteous,  the  crowns  and 
thrones  and  garments  of  the  righteous,  the  Great 
Glory,  the  Beloved,  and  the  angel  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

(g)  TTie  Christian  Church  and  its  eircumstanees. — 


The  angel  of  the  Christian  Church  which  is  in  the 
heavens  will  be  summoned  by  God  in  the  last  days 
(3").  The  Church  is  the  plant  planted  by  the 
Twelve  Apostles  (4'),  It  consists  of  those  who  are 
'  associated  together  to  receive  the  Beloved '  at  His 
Second  Coming  (4*).  A  great  persecution  is  re- 
garded as  imminent,  in  which  the  few  faithful 
remaining  will  '  flee  from  desert  to  desert,  awaiting 
the  coming  of  the  Beloved.'  For  the  expectation 
of  the  Coming,  cf.  I  Th  1",  1  Co  1^  Ph  3*  He  9». 
The  Neronic  Antichrist  is  r^arded  as  destroying 
one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  (4'),  and  deceiving 
many  of  the  faithful  (4*).  In  3"""  we  have  a  con- 
temporary picture  of  the  Christian  Church  regarded 
as  guilty  of  serious  declension  from  its  high  (^ing. 
Church  organization  is  not  yet  developed.  We 
have  mention  of  pastors  and  elders  (3**-  '*).  There 
is  a  general  disbelief  in  the  Second  Coining  and  in 
prophecy  generally  (3*-  "•  ^),  but  prophecy  is  still 
existent,  though  there  are  'not  many  prophets 
save  one  here  and  there  in  divers  places.'  The 
'  faith '  (3^)  is  spoken  of  objectively,  as  in  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  {e.g.  1  Ti  V\  Faith,  love,  and 
purity  are  the  distinctive  Christian  virtues  (as  in 

1  Ti  4^2).  There  are  lawless  elders  (3**),  and  much 
hatred  exists  among  the  Church  leaders  (3®). 
Covetonsness  and  slander  are  common  vices  (of. 

2  Ti  3^  »).  The  'spirit  of  error'  (3"^)  is  at  work 
among  Christians  (cf.  1  Jn  4*,  1  Ti  4^).  Caesar- 
worsMp  is  already  a  difficulty  (4''""). 

(A)  Apocrjffihal  work. — The  only  reference  to 
another  apocryphon  occurs  in  4^,  where  the  book 
'  Words  of  Joseph  the  Just '  is  probably  to  be 
identified  with  the  Upoffeux^J  tow  'Iukt^  (Fabricius, 
Cod.  Pseud.  V.T.  i.  761-769  ;  see  HDB  iL  778). 

3.  The  text.  —  (a)  In  its  complete  form  the 
Asc.  Is.  is  found  only  in  the  Ethiopie  Version,  and 
even  this  needs  to  be  corrected  and  at  times  supple- 
mented by  other  authorities.  Of  this  Version 
there  are  three  MSS,  one  at  the  Bodleian,  and  two 
inferior  ones  in  the  British  Museum. 

(6)  There  are  two  Latin  Versions. — (L )  The  fuller 
of  the  two  was  printed  at  Venice  in  1522  from  a 
MS  now  unknown,  and  reprinted  by  Gieseler  in 
1832. — (iL)  The  other  version  occurs  in  two  frag- 
ments discovered  by  Mai  in  1828  in  the  Codex 
Bescriptus  of  the  Acts  of  Chalcedon,  Vat.  5750,  of 
the  5th  or  6th  century. 

(c)  The  Greek  Versions  are  likewise  twofold  :  (i. ) 
a  lost  Greek  text  on  which  the  Greek  Legend  was 
based ;  (ii. )  the  Greek  text  from  which  the  Slav- 
onic and  the  fuller  Latin  Versions  were  derived. 
Of  this  text  2^-^*  have  been  recovered  in  the 
Amherst  Papyri  by  GrenfeU  and  Hunt. 

The  Greek  Legend  was  found  by  O.  von  Giebhardt 
in  a  Greek  MS  of  the  12th  cent.  (no.  1534,  Biblio- 
thfeque  Nationale,  Paris).  This  work  is  reaUy  a 
lection  for  Church  use,  and  so  takes  liberties  in 
the  way  of  rearranging  and  abbreviating  the  text. 
The  yiartyrdom  is  brought  to  the  end,  and  other 
details  are  added.  It  is,  however,  very  valuable 
for  correcting  and  restoring  the  text. 

(d)  The  Slavonic  Version  \&  extant  in  a  !MS  in 
the  Library  of  the  XJspenschen  Cathedral  in 
Moscow.     It  belongs  to  c.  A.D.  1200. 

In  all  these  authorities  two  recensions  may  be 
traced.  The  Greek  Papyri,  the  Ethiopie,  the 
Slavonic,  and  the  fuller  Latin  Version  follow  the 
second  recension  of  the  Greek ;  the  Greek  Legend 
and  the  Latin  fragments  support  the  first  Greek 
recension.  Charles  in  his  edition  of  the  Asc.  Is. 
(1900)  has  produced  a  crirical  text  founded  on  all 
these  authorities.  To  this  work  the  present  writer 
would  express  his  deep  indebtedness. 

LrTKRATTR*.— L  Critical  Inquiries.— B..  Laurence,  Ateen- 
siolsaitz  V<Ux»,  Oxford,  1819,  pp.  141-180 ;  K.  I.  Nitzsch,  SK, 
1830,  TO>.  209-246 ;  G.  C.  F.  Lacke,  BitUat.  m  die  Qffiatbarunp 
dMJokannesfi,  Bonn,lSo2,  pp.  274-30S;  A.  Dillmann,  Aaeetuw 


102 


ASCETICISM 


ASIARCH 


Jtaice,  Leipzig,  1877,  pp.  v-xviii ;  G.  T.  Stokes,  art.  '  Isaiah, 
Ascension  of,^  in  DCB  iii.  [ISSZ]  298-301  ;  W.  J.  Deane, 
Pseudepigravha,  Edinburgii,  lSt)l,  pp.  23()-275 ;  A.  Harnaclc, 
Geseh.  der  altchnsll.  Litteratur,  Leipzig,  189a£f.,  i.  854-8r)(i,  li. 
573-679,  714  ;  C.  Clemen,  '  Die  Hiramelfahrt  des  Jesaja,'  ZWT, 
1896,  pp.  388-416,  also  1897,  pp.  455-40r. ;  J.  A.  Robinson,  art. 
*l8aiah,A8censionot,'in£ri>i3,ii.  499-501 ;  G.  Beer, in  Kautzsch's 
Apok.  und  Pseudepig.,  Tubingen,  1900,  ii.  110-123;  R.  H. 
Cnarles,  Aseention  of  Isaiah  trantlated  from  the  Ethiopie 
Version,  tehieh,  together  with  the  New  Greek  Fraument,  the  Latin 
Vergians,  and  the  Latin  Translation  of  the  Slavonic,  i»  here  pub- 
lished in  full,  London,  1900,  also  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepi- 
grapha,  Oxford,  1913,  ii.  166-158 ;  E.  Littmann,  JE  vi.  [1904] 
642  f. 

n.  Editions.— {a)  Ethiopia  Version.— R.  Laurence,  A. 
Dillmann,  and  R.  H.  Charles,  opp.  cit.  supra.  (6)  Latin 
Versions. — (i.)  J.  K.  L.  Gieseler,  in  a  Gottingen  programme, 
1832 ;  (ii.)  A.  Mai,  Scriptorum  veterurn  nova  coUectio,  Rome, 
1826-38,  iii.  238  f.  ;  both  are  given  in  the  editions  of  Dillmann 
and  Charles  as  above,  (c)  Greek  Vendoiis. — ^i.)  The  Greek 
Legend — a  free  recension  :  O.  v.  Gebhardt,  in  Hilgenfeld's 
ZWT,  1878,  p.  330 ff.  ;  R.  H.  Charles,  Asc.  of  Isaiah,  pp. 
xviii-xxxiii,  141-148 ;  (ii.^  Papyrus  fr^^^ment :  Grenfell  and 
Hunt,  Ancension  of  Isaiah,  London,  1901;  R.  H.  Charles, 
j4sc.  o/ /samA,  pp.  xxviii-xxxi,  84-95.  (d)  Slavonic  Version.— 
R.  H.  Charles,  Asc.  of  Isaiah,  pp.  xxiv-xxvii,  98-139. 

A.  Ll.  Davies. 
ASCETICISM See  Abstinence. 

ASHER.— See  Tbibes. 

ASHES.— See  Heifer  and  Moukning. 

ASIA  ('A(r/a). — Asia  had  a  great  variety  ot  mean- 
ings in  ancient  writers.  It  niiglit  denote  (1)  the 
western  coast-land  of  Asia  Minor  ;  (2)  the  kingdom 
of  Troy  (poetical) ;  (3)  the  kingdom  of  the  early 
Seleucids,  i.e.  Asia  Minor  and  Syria  (frequent  in  1 
and  2  Mac. ) ;  (4)  the  kingdom  of  rergamuni  (Livy) ; 
(5)  the  Roman  province  Asia  ;  (6)  the  Asiatic  conti- 
nent (Pliny).  In  Strabo's  time — the  beginning  of 
the  1st  cent.  A.D. — the  province  was  ij  Idius  KoKovfiivr) 
'Affia.  (Geog.  p.  118),  and  in  the  NT  (where  the 
name  is  found  22  times — 15  times  in  Acts,  4  times 
in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  once  in  1  Peter,  twice  in 
Ilev.)  Asia  almost  invariably  denotes  proconsular 
Asia.  St.  Paul  the  Roman  citizen  naturally  as- 
sumed the  Imperial  standpoint,  and  made  use  of 
Roman  political  designations,  while  the  Hellenic 
Luke,  though  he  frequently  employed  geograph- 
ical terms  in  their  popular  non-Roman  sense,  was 
probably  to  some  extent  influenced  by  St.  Paul's 
practice  of  using  the  technical  phraseology  of  the 
Empire. 

The  province  of  Asia  was  founded  after  the  death 
of  Attains  ill.  of  Pergamura  (133  B.C.),  who  be- 
queathed his  kingdom  by  will  to  the  Roman  Re- 
public. The  province  was  much  smaller  than  the 
kingdom  had  been,  until,  on  the  death  of  Mithri- 
dates  (120  B.C.),  Phrygia  Major  was  added  to  it. 
Cicero  indicates  its  extent  in  the  words  :  *  Namque, 
ut  opinor,  Asia  vestra  constat  ex  Phrygia,  Caria, 
Mysia,  Lydia'  {Flac.  27);  but  the  Troad  and  the 
islands  or  Lesbos,  Chios,  Samos,  Patmos,  and  Cos 
should  be  added.  Pergamum,  so  long  a  royal  city, 
naturally  became  the  capital  of  the  province,  and 
officially  retained  this  position  till  tne  beginning 
of  the  2nd  cent.  A.D.  ;  but  long  before  that  time 
Ephesus  iq.v.)  was  recognized  as  the  real  adminis- 
trative centre.  When  the  provinces  were  arranged 
by  Augustus  in  27  B.C.,  Asia  was  given  to  the 
Senate ;  it  was  therefore  governed  by  proconsuls 
{dvO&iraroi,  Ac  19^).  Its  beauty,  wealth,  and  culture 
made  it  the  most  desirable  of  all  provinces. 

The  only  passage  in  which  St.  Luke  certainly 
uses  'Asia'  in  the  popular  Greek  sense  is  Ac  2% 
where  he  names  Asia  and  Phrygia  together  as 
distinct  countries,  whereas  in  Roman  provincial 
language  the  greater  part  of  Phrygia  belonged  to 
Asia.  In  such  an  expression  as  '  the  places  on  the 
coast  of  Asia '  (Ac  27")  the  sense  is  doubtful ;  but 
it  is  probable  that,  where  the  historian  refers  to 
Jews  of  Asia  (Ac  6*  212^  24>«),  to  'all  the  dwellers 
in  Asia'(19''';  cf.  IQ^*-),  and  to  St.  Paul's  sojourn 


in  Asia  (19^^20'*-'*),  he  has  the  province  in  view. 
St.  Paul  almost  certainly  uses  the  word  in  its 
Roman  sense  when  he  speaks  of  *  the  lirstfniits  of 
Asia '  (Ro  16»  IIV),  the  clmrches  of  Asia  (1  Co  16"*), 
aitlictions  in  Asia  (2  Co  1^),  apostates  in  Asia  (2  Ti 
li«). 

Though  the  Roman  meaning  of  Asia  is  generally 
assumed  by  adherents  of  the  S.  Galatian  theory,  it  is 
not  incomi)atible  with  the  other  view.  Thus  Light- 
foot,  an  advocate  of  the  N.  Galatian  theory,  holds 
that,  while  St.  Luke  usually  gives  geographical 
terms  their  popular  significance,  '  the  case  ot  Asia 
is  an  exception.  The  foundation  of  this  province 
dating  very  far  back,  its  official  name  had  to  a 
great  extent  superseded  the  local  designations  of 
the  districts  which  it  comprised.  Hence  Asia  in 
the  NT  is  always  Proconsular  Asia'  {Gal.^,  1876, 
p.  19,  n.  6).  Only  those  who  find  '  the  Phrygian 
and  Galatic  region '  (Ac  16*)  in  the  north  of  Pisidian 
Antioch  are  obliged  ([like  Conybeare-Howson,  i.  324) 
to  assume  that  Asia  '  is  simply  viewed  as  the  west- 
ern portion  of  Asia  Minor,  for  the  Paroreios  be- 
longed to  proconsular  Asia,  in  which  preaching 
was  expressly  forbidden  (Ac  16').  See  Phrygia 
and  Galatia. 

1  P  1^  is  a  clear  instance  of  the  use  of  geograph- 
ical terms  in  the  Roman  administrative  sense. 
The  four  provinces  named — Bithynia  and  Pontus, 
though  here  separated,  being  really  one — sum  up 
the  Avhole  of  Asia  Minor  north  of  Taurus.  The 
Seven  Churches  of  Revelation  were  all  in  pro- 
consular Asia  (Rev  1*- "),  and  it  is  possible  that 
the  so-called  '  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians '  was  an 
encycla  to  a  group  of  churches  in  that  province. 

Por  the '  Asiarchs '  (RVm)  of  Ac  19^^  see  follo>ving 
article. 

LiTERATURB.— F.  J.  A.  Hort,  The  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter, 
London,  1898,  p.  167  f.  ;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age,  Edin- 
burgh, 1897,  p.  273  f.;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Church  in  Roman 
Empire,  London,  1893,  and  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the 
Roman  Citizen,  do.  1895,  passim.  JAMES  StrAHAN. 

ASIARCH.— In  Ac  19^1  RVm  reads  'Asiarchs' 
for  RV  '  chief  officers  of  Asia '  and  AV  '  chief  of 
Asia.'  The  word  is  a  transliteration  of  the  Gr. 
'AffLapxns,  derived  from  'Acia,  '  province  of  Asia,' 
and  &pxfi-v,  '  to  rule,'  and  belongs  to  a  class  of 
names,  of  which  'BiOwidpxv^,  TaXaTdpxv^t  KairiradoK- 
dpxv^,  AvKidpxv^,  Ilovrdpxv^,  ^vpLdpxv^  are  other 
examples.  The  titles  are  peculiar  to  Eastern, 
Greek-speaking,  Roman  provinces.  As  the  real 
rulers  of  these  provinces  were  the  Roman  Emperor 
and  the  Roman  Senate,  with  their  elected  repre- 
sentatives, it  is  clear  that  such  titles  must  have 
been  honorary  and  complimentary.  With  regard 
to  the  duties  and  privileges  attached  to  the  dig- 
nities thus  indicated  there  has  been  much  discus- 
sion. The  titles  occur  rarely  in  literature,  mucli 
more  often  in  inscriptions ;  and  the  lessons  we 
learn  from  inscriptions  are  in  direct  proportion  to 
their  number.  Several  scholars  of  repute  have 
held  the  view  that  the  term  'Aaidpxv^  is  equivalent 
to  d/)X'e/>ei>s  'AaLas  ('high  priest  of  Asia'),  the  pre- 
sident of  the  Diet  of  Asia  (Koivbv  t-^s  'Ao-Ioj,  co7n- 
mune  Asicc).  This  Diet  of  Asia  was  a  body 
composed  of  a  number  of  representatives,  one  or 
more  of  whom  were  elected  by  each  of  a  number 
of  cities  in  the  province.  The  principal  duty  of  the 
president  of  this  body  was  to  supervise  the  worship 
of  Rome  and  the  Emperor  throughout  the  province 
(see  under  art.  Emperou  -  Worship).  Certain 
considerations,  however,  militate  against  the  view 
that  the  terms  '  Asiarch '  and  '  high  priest  of  Asia ' 
are  interchangeable.  The  word  Aaidpxv^  is  never 
feminine,  whereas  the  title  '  high  priestess  of  Asia ' 
is  often  applied  to  tlie  wife  of  the  high  priest. 
There  was  only  one  dpx'epei^s ' A«rfas  (without  further 
designation)  at  a    time,   whereas    there    were    a 


ASP 


ASSASSINS 


103 


uuniber  of  Asiarchs.  Another  (civil)  office  could 
be  held  concurrently  with  the  Asiarchate,  but  not 
with  the  chief  priesthood  of  Asia.  Further,  the 
title  '  Asiarch '  was  held  only  during  a  man's 
period  of  office  (probably  one  year  *),  but  he  was 
eligible  for  re-election.  The  origin  of  the  view 
that  '  Asiarch '  and  '  high  priest  of  Asia '  are  two 
convertible  terms  is  to  be  found  in  the  Martyrdom 
of  Polycarp  (A.D.  155),  where  two  separate  persons 
named  Philippos  have  been  confused :  (1)  Philip  of 
Sravma,  Asiarch,  who  superintended  the  games; 
(2)  Philip  of  Tralles,  who  was  high  priest  of  Asia 
(the  latt«r  had  been  an  Asiarch  a  year  or  two  be- 
fore). It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  honorary 
position  of  Asiarch  was  inferior  to  the  office  of 
high  priest  of  Asia.  Yet  there  was  a  connexion 
between  the  two.  The  high  priest  presided  over 
the  games,  etc.,  but  the  Asiarens  did  the  work  and 
prolSibly  paid  the  cost.  Their  election  by  their 
fellow-citizens  to  this  honorary  position  was  re- 
warded by  games  and  gladiatorial  shows.  Both 
the  Asiarchs  and  the  high  priest  disappear  aft«r 
the  early  part  of  the  4th  cent.,  for  the  obvious 
reason  that,  as  the  Empire  was  henceforth  offici- 
ally Christian,  the  machinery  for  Emperor-worship 
had  become  obsolete. 

When  we  come  to  study  the  connexion  of  the 
Asiarchs  with  the  Acts  narrative,  we  are  puzzled. 
It  seems  at  first  sight  so  strange  that  men  elected 
to  foster  the  worship  of  Rome  and  the  Emperor 
should  be  found  favouring  the  ambassador  of  the 
Messiah,  the  Emperor's  rival  for  the  lordship  of 
the  Empire.  This  is  only  one,  however,  of  a 
number  of  indications  that  the  Empire  was  at  first 
disposed  to  look  with  a  kindly  eye  on  the  new 
religion.  Christianity,  with  its  outward  respect 
for  civil  authority,  seemed  at  first  the  strongest 
supporter  of  law  and  order.  Artemis-worship, 
moreover,  bulked  so  largely  in  Ephesus  as  perhaps 
to  dwarf  the  Imperial  worship.  Thus  St.  Paul, 
whose  preaching  so  threatened  the  authority  of 
Artemis,  may  have  appeared  in  a  favourable  light 
to  the  representatives  of  Caesar-worship,  as  likely 
to  create  more  enthtisiasm  in  that  direction. 

See  also  artt.  Diaxa  and  Ephesus. 

LnTRATTRE. —  C.  G.  Brandis, ,  «.cr.  'Asiarches,'  'Bithyni- 
arches,'  '  GaUtarches,'  in  I^aulr-Wiaiowa,  Stattgut,  ISMCF. ; 
J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  Appendix,  'The  Asardutte'  in  hat  Apottolie 
Fathers,  pt.  iL  voL  iii.,  London,  18^,  p.  40(ff. ;  W.  M.  Ram- 
say in  CUuneal  Review,  iii.  [1SS9]  174,  »nd  St.  Paul  the 
TrazeUer  and  the  Roman  Citizen,  Loodoo,  1895,  p.  280  f. 

A.  SOUTEB. 
ASP  [iff-rU). — The  Greek  word  occurs  in  the 
classical  writings  of  Herodotus  (iv.  191)  and 
Aristotle  (de  Anim.  Hist.  iv.  7.  14),  and  generally 
represents  the  Heb.  jn^  (pet?ien)  in  the  LXX  (pethen 
IS  translated  ' asp '  in  Dt  32^3,  Job20i*-  ^\  and  Is  ll^, 
but  '  adder'  in  Ps  58*  Ql^^).  In  the  NT  the  '  asp' 
is  mentioned  only  once  (Ro  3^':  'The  poison  of 
asps  [id*  d<rTi5wi']  is  under  their  lips').  Here  it  is 
introduced  in  a  quotation  from  Ps  140»  (139*),  where 
the  Heb.  word  used  is  3»?s  (a  ira^  Xey.  and  prob- 
ably corrupt,  perhaps  read  et'^is,  'spider'),  but 
the  LXX  word  is  dirrit,  as  in  Romans.  The 
general  meaning  of  the  passage  is  obvious  (cf. 
Ja  3^ :  '  The  tongue  can  no  man  tame — a  restless 
evil — full  of  deadly  poison'),  and  the  position  of 
the  poison-bag  of  the  serpent  is  correctly  described. 
The  serpent  referred  to  is  without  doubt  the 
Na^ja  haje,  or  small  hooded  Egyptian  cobra, 
which,  though  not  fotmd  in  the  ciiltivated  parts 
of  Palestine,  is  well  known  in  the  downs  and 
plains  S.  of  Beersheba  (cf.  Tristram,  Natural 
History  of  the  Bible,  p.  270),  and  frequents  old 
walls  and  holes  in  the  rocks  (cf.  Is  11*  :  'And  the 
sucking-child  shall  play  on  the  hole  of  the  asp'). 
It  does  not  belong  to  the  viper  tribe  (Fiperute) 
but  to  the  Colvbndee,  which  includes  the  ordinary 

*  But  see  Lightfoot,  Apoitoiie  Fatherg,  pt,  iL  voL  iiL  p.  412  ff. 


British  grass-snake.  The  chief  peculiarities  of 
cobras  are :  (a)  a  clearly  defined  neck,  which  they 
can  dilate  at  will,  and  (b)  the  equality  in  size  of 
the  scales  on  the  back  with  those  on  the  other 
parts  of  the  body.  There  are  about  ten  different 
species,  of  which  the  Xaja  haje,  or  Egyptian  asp, 
and  the  Naja  tripudians,  or  Indian  cobra,  are  the 
best  known.  The  latter  is  the  species  upon  which 
Indian  snake-charmers  usually  practise  their  skill, 
while  the  Naja  haje  is  used  tor  this  purpose  in 
Egypt 
See  also  Sekpekt,  Viper. 

LrmuTUBX. — H.  B.  Tristram,  JToteroZ  Hitttny  </  tht 
BibUio,  London.  1911,  p.  270t.:  SWP  viL  146:  R.  Lydekker 
inTheCondae  tnawuagelfatwrnlHittonf,  1^7,  p.  424  ;  Bae- 
deer's  Paiatint  tmd  Sfritfi,  1912,  p.  M ;  W.  Aldis  Wright. 
The  Bible  Word-Boo»,  1884,  p.  60,  fw  the  nae  of  the  word ; 
cf.  also  Sanday-Headlam,  Romarufi,  1902,  p.  79;  Driver, 
Deutenmomifl,  1396,  p.  372 ;  HDB,  toL  iv.  p.  469 ;  EBi,  toL  ir. 
ooL  4394 ;  Mnrray's  DB,  p.  67;  SDB,  p.  837. 

P.  S,  P.  Hajtdcock. 
ASSASSINS  (or,  more  properly,  Sicarii  [cf.  Ac 
21"],  'dagger-men'). — The  name  given,  according 
to  Josephus,  to  a  body  of  radicals  in  the  Jewish 
Messianic  agitation  which  culminated  in  the  out- 
break of  A.D.  66.  The  name  was  derived  from  the 
short  daggers  worn  by  the  members  of  the  body 
{siea,  a  short,  curved,  possibly  Persian  sword), 
which  they  kept  concealed  in  their  clothing  imd 
used  to  stab  people  among  the  crowds.  The  Siearii 
seem  to  have  appeared  first  during  the  procurator- 
ship  of  Felix,  although  Josephus  in  BJ  vn.  viii.  1 
might  be  interpreted  as  ascribing  their  origin  to 
a  somewhat  earlier  period.  He  has  a  number  of 
references  to  these  men,  whom  he  describes  as 
follows  {BJ  n.  xiiL  3) : 

"Diere  sprang  np  another  sort  of  robbers  in  Jemsalem  \rbo 
were  called  Siouii,  who  slew  men  in  the  daytime  in  the  midat 
of  the  city,  eqieciaUy  at  the  festivals,  when  they  mixed  with 
the  multitnde,  and  ctmoeaied  little  daggers  under  their  gar- 
ments, with, which  they  stabbed  tboae  that  were  their  enemies ; 
and  when  any  fell  down  dead,  the  nmrderen  joined  the  bv- 
standeis  in  expressing  their  indigmtinn,  ao  that  from  their 
I^aaaibility  they  ooold  by  no  means  be  diaoorered.  The  first 
nun  who  was  shin  hy^  than  was  Jonathan  the  high  jHiest,  after 
whom  many  woe  sbun  every  day,  and  the  fear  men  were  in  of 
being  so  treated  was  mofc  harasdng  than  the  cahunity  itself, 
everybody  expecting  death  every  Ixmr,  as  men  do  in  war.  So 
menk^aloMK-oatfor  their  enemies  at  agreat  distance,  and 
even  if  their  Mends  were  cconing,  they  dorst  not  trust  than 
any  longer,  bat  were  slain  in  the  midst  of  tbeir  sospkaiMis  and 
precaotioDB.  Sacfa  was  the  oderity  of  the  plotteia,  and  so 
conning  was  their  oontcivance  against  detec&m.'  See  also  BJ 
vn.  X.  1. 

It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  these  Siearii  at 
first  constituted  an  organized  body,  although  such 
a  view  would  seem  to  be  implied  by  Josephus  {BJ 
vn.  viii.  1).  They  joined  the  Zealots  {ib.  n.  x\iL 
7),  and  inaugurated  the  reign  of  terror  which  filled 
Jemsalem  after  the  outbreak  of  the  Revolution. 
Subsequently  they  seized  the  great  fortress  of 
Masada  {ib.  TV.  vii.  2),  and  there  maintained  them- 
selves by  plundering  the  neighbouring  country, 
until  they  were  besieged  by  the  Romans  under 
Flavins  Silca.  Their  commander  was  one  F.leftatr 
{ib.  vn.  viii.  1),  whom  Josephus  describes  as  an 
able  man  and  a  descendant  of  that  Judas  who  had 
led  the  revolt  against  the  census  under  Quirinius. 
After  a  considerable  siege  the  Romans  were  on 
the  point  of  taking  the  fortress  when  the  Sicarii 
massacred  themselves,  one  old  woman  alone 
escaping. 

In  Ac  21*  they  hare  *the  Egyptian*  as  a  leader. 
Josephus  mentions  this  Egyptian  as  having  ap- 
peared dtiring  the  procuratorship  of  Felix,  but 
does  not  connect  the  Sicarii  with  him  {Ant.  XX. 
viii.  6 ;  BJ  u.  xiii.  5).  The  Siearii  seem  to  have 
dispersed  after  the  Roman  war  and  to  have  dis- 
appeared from  history,  the  references  to  Siearii 
in  the  Mishna  {BikJcur.  L  2,  ii.  3;  Gitiin  v. 
6 ;  Machsh.  i.  6)  probably  being  to  robbers  in 
general. 


104 


ASSEMBLY 


ASSOS 


LiTERATORB. — See  E.  Schiirer,  OJV^  i.  [Leipzig;,  1901]  p.  674, 
n.  31  (IJJP  I.  ii.  178),  where  further  references  will  be  found. 

Shailer  Mathews. 

ASSEMBLY.— In  the  Acts  and  Epistles  (AV 
and  KV)  the  English  Avord  'assembly'  occurs  as 
follows,  but  in  each  instance  a  difl'erent  Greek 
noun  is  translated  by  it. 

1.  In  Ac  1932.39. *i  'assembly'  {^KKXrjala)  stands 
for  the  tumultuary  mob  gathered  by  Demetrius 
and  his  fellow-gildsmen  in  Ephesus  to  protest 
against  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul,  which  was 
destroying  the  business  of  the  shrine-makers. 
Though  iKK\r}<xia  strictly  denotes  an  assembly  of 
the  citizens  summoned  by  the  crier  {icTjpv^),  this 
was  a  mere  mob,  with  all  a  mob's  unreasonable- 
ness :  •  Some  cried  one  thing,  and  some  another, 
for  the  assembly  was  confused,  and  the  more  part 
knew  not  wherefore  they  were  come  together.' 
So  runs  St.  Luke's  *  logical,  complete,  and  photo- 
graphic' narrative,  (tor  a  similar  description  of 
a  Roman  gathering,  cf.  Virgil,  ^n.  i.  149  :  '  Saevit- 
que  animis  ignobile  vulgus.  )  In  Ephesus  the  man 
revered  for  his  piety  and  worth  was  the  Secretary 
of  the  City  (ypofificereiii  [see  TOWN  Clerk]),  who 
calls  the  gathering  a  riot  (o-rcicrts),  and  a  concourse 
{ffv<TTpo(f>-^).  If  Demetrius  and  his  gildsmen  had 
just  ground  of  complaint,  they  should  have  carried 
their  case  before  tlie  proper  court,  over  which  the 
proconsul  presided,  for  the  present  gathering  was 
outside  the  law,  and  had  '  no  power  to  transact 
business.'  He,  therefore,  referred  them  to  the 
lawful  (AV)  or  regular  (RV)  assembly  {ij  ivvofws 
iKK\i)(ria),  which  is  '  the  people  duly  assembled  in 
the  exercise  of  its  powers '  (Ramsay).  The  Re- 
visers' change  of  '  lawful '  into  '  regular '  is  perhaps 
hypercritical ;  for  in  practice,  under  the  Roman 
rule,  the  distinction  is  not  appreciable. 

2.  Ac  ^23'':  'The  assembly  [RV  ;  A  V  the  multi- 
tude] was  divided '  [icrx^crdi)  rb  irXrjdos).  The  refer- 
ence is  to  the  council  {irav  rd  <rvvidpiov,  22*") 
summoned  by  Lysias  the  tribune  of  the  Roman 
garrison  in  the  tower  of  Antonia,  consequent  upon 
the  tumult  in  the  Temple,  and  St.  Paul's  arrest. 
We  are  not  to  understand  a  regular  sitting  of  the 
Sanhedrin,  but  an  informal  meeting  for  what  is 
known  in  Scots  Law  as  a  precognition  ( '  a  meeting 
of  the  councillors,  aiding  the  Tribune  to  ascertain 
the  facts '  [Ramsay]).  As  Lysias  called  the  meet- 
ing, he  probably  presided  and  conducted  the  busi- 
ness. This  would  account  for  St.  Paul's  ignorance 
of  the  fact  that  Ananias  was  the  high  priest,  and 
explains  his  apology.  As  to  the  charge  made 
against  him,  the  Apostle  conducted  his  defence 
in  a  way  that  won  for  himself  the  sympathy  of 
the  Pharisees.  It  is  a  needless  refinement  to  find 
here  difficulties  of  an  ethical  kind.  'Luke  saw 
nothing  wrong  or  unworthy  in  this,  and  he  was 
best  able  to  judge.  Paul  was  winning  over  the 
Pharisees  not  merely  to  himself  but  to  the 
Christian  cause.  Paul  states  the  same  view  more 
fully  in  26''8  where  there  is  no  question  of  a  clever 
tricK,  for  there  were  no  Pharisees  among  his 
judges'  (Ramsay,  Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
1910,  p.  283).  The  result  of  this  defence  was  that 
t6  ffwiSpiov  became  rb  TrX^dos. 

8.  Ja  2- :  '  If  there  come  into  your  assembly ' 
(AV  and  RVm ;  RV  and  AVm  'synagogue':  eZs 
r^v  a-vvayuryi/iv). — James,  writing  'to  the  twelve 
tribes  scattered  abroad,'  uses  the  old  familiar 
word  '  synagogue, '  which  had  become  hallowed  in 
the  ears  of  the  Dispersion  by  associations  of 
worship  and  fellowship.  This  usage  is  a  delicate 
indication  (unintentional  on  the  writer's  part,  of 
course)  that  the  Christian  meeting  had  its  ties  not 
with  the  Temple,  but  with  the  synagogues  which 
for  ages  had  nourished  the  faith  of  Israel. 

i.  He  12^  :  'Ye  are  come  ...  to  innumerable 
hosts  of  angels,  to  the  general  assembly  and  church 


of  the  firstborn  who  are  enrolled  in  heaven  '  (RV  ; 
fMvpidtriv  iyy^Xuv,  vavrjyvpei  Kal  iKKXijcrlqi.  vptororbKuv 
dTToyeypafifidvuv  iv  oiipavoh).  In  classical  usage 
ravT^vpis  is  the  festal  assembly  of  the  whole  nation, 
gathered  for  some  solemnity,  such  as  the  Olympic 
Games.  But  the  word  occurs  only  here  in  the 
NT,  though  it  is  found  in  LXX  Ezk  46",  Hos 
2"  9*,  Am  5*^  The  passage  has  given  rise  to 
considerable  variety  of  interpretation,  indication 
of  which  may  be  seen  in  RV  text  and  margin. 
The  difficulty  is  to  determine  how  many  classes  are 
referred  to. 

(a)  A.  B.  Davidson  ('Hebrews,'  Bible  Class 
Handbooks,  in  loco)  holds  that  the  only  subject 
is  angels,  and  translates :  '  to  myriads  of  angels, — 
even  a  festal  assembly  and  convocation  of  first- 
borns enrolled  in  heaven.'  In  this  interpretation 
he  is  followed  by  A.  S.  Peake  (Century  Bible, 
'Hebrews'). 

(b)  On  the  other  hand,  Westcott  (Hebrews)  con- 
tends for  two  classes — angels  and  men;  and 
renders  the  passage :  '  to  countless  hosts  of  angels 
in  festal  assembly,  and  to  the  Church  of  the  first- 
born enrolled  in  heaven.'  So  also  Farrar  (Cambridge 
Bible  for  Schools)  and  Edwards  (Expositor's  Bible). 

Against  this  latter  interpretation,  it  may  be 
pointed  out  that  men  are  mentioned  separately — 
'and  to  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect' — 
and  it  is  improbable  that  the  groups  occur  twice. 
'  Tens  of  thousands '  is  an  almost  technical  term 
for  angels ;  and,  though  '  firstborn '  is  not  elsewhere 
applied  to  them,  it  is  a  quite  natural  name  for  the 
sons  of  God.  Besides,  if  living  Christians  are 
referred  to,  as  this  interpretation  seems  to  imply, 
it  is  awkward  'to  speak  of  their  coming  to  a 
company  which  includes  themselves '  (A.  S.  Peake). 
On  the  whole  it  appears  better  to  abide  by  the  first 
interpretation.  It  is  the  picture  of  noble  souls 
returning  home  to  God,  and  welcomed  with  the 
'joy  that  is  in  the  presence  of  the  angels  of  God.' 
Students  of  Dante  will  compare  the  corresponding 
passage  in  the  Convivio :  '  And,  as  his  fellow- 
citizens  come  forth  to  meet  him  who  returns  from 
a  long  journey,  even  before  he  enters  the  gate  of 
his  city ;  so  to  the  noble  soul  come  forth  the 
citizens  of  the  eternal  life.'  Bernard's  great  hjmn 
(Neale's  translation)  'Jerusalem  the  Golden' may 
also  be  cited  as  instinct  with  the  spirit  of  He  12"*. 

W.  M.  Grant. 

ASSOS  ("Atro-oj). — An  ancient  Greek  city  on  the 
Adramyttian  Gulf,  in  the  south  of  the  Troad. 
Originally  an  ^Eolic  colony,  it  was  re-founded, 
imder  the  name  of  ApoUonia,  by  the  Pergamenian 
kings,  whose  dominions  were  converted  into  the 
Roman  province  of  Asia  in  133  B.C.  Its  situation 
was  one  of  the  most  commanding  in  all  the  Greek 
lands.  'It  is  a  strong  place,'  says  Strabo,  'and 
well  fortified  with  walls.  There  is  a  long  and 
steep  ascent  from  the  sea  and  the  harbour.  .  .  . 
Cleanthes,  the  Stoic  philosopher,  was  a  native  of 
this  place.  .  .  .  Here  also  Aristotle  resided  for 
some  time '  (xill.  i.  58).     The  walls  are  still  well- 

f)reserved,  and  the  harbour  mole  can  be  traced  by 
arge  blocks  under  the  clear  water.  The  summit 
of  the  hill  was  crowned  by  the  Doric  temple  of 
Athene  (built  c.  470  B.C.),  the  panels  of  which — 
now  mostly  in  the  Louvre — are  among  the  most 
important  remains  of  ancient  Greek  art.  The 
modern  town,  Behram  Kalossi,  is  still  the  chief 
shipping-place  of  the  southern  Troad. 

On  a  Sunday  afternoon,  probably  in  the  spring 
of  A.D.  56,  St.  Paul,  having  torn  himself  away 
from  the  Christians  of  Troas,  walked  or  rode  the 
20  miles  of  Roman  highway  which  connected  that 
city  with  Assos,  first  passing  along  the  western 
side  of  Mt.  Ida,  then  tlirough  the  rich  Valley  of 
the  Tuzla,  and  finally  reaching  the  Via  Sacra,  or 
Street  of  Tombs,  which  still  extends  a  great  dis- 


ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES 


ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES 


105 


tance  to  the  N.W.  of  Assos.  In  the  haven  he 
joined  his  ship,  which  had  meanwhile  taken  his 
companions  round  the  long  promontory  of  Lectum 
(Ac  20^). 

Utkraitrb.— J.  T.  Clarke,  Aaaot,  2  vols.,  Boston,  1882  and 
1898;  C  Fellows,  Tnuelt  and  Buearthes  in  Aiia  Minor, 
London,  1S52  ;  Murray's  Handbook  of  Asia  Minor. 

James  Strahan. 

ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES.— A  curious  state  of 
afiairs  exists  with  regard  to  the  so-called  '  Assump- 
tion of  Moses.'  The  title  is  incorrectly  applied  to 
what  is  really  the  '  Testament  of  Moses,  a  work 
which  is  extant  in  a  more  or  less  complete  form  in 
a  Latin  fragment  discovered  by  Ceriani  in  a  6th 
cent.  MS  in  the  Ambrosian  Library  at  Milan,  and 
published  by  him  in  1861.  The  true  '  Assumption ' 
survives  only  in  quotations  and  references  in  the 
NT  and  early  Christian  writers  ;  but  from  certain 
facts  it  appears  that  it  was  at  a  very  early  date 
appended  to  the  '  Testament.'  For  example,  in 
Ceriani's  Latin  MS  in  10^^  we  have  the  reading 
'  From  my  death  [assumption]  xmtil  His  advent.' 
Here  the  duplicate  reading  '  assumption '  would 
appear  to  be  an  attempt  to  prepare  for  the  account 
of  the  Assimiption  appended  to  the  Testament. 
Moreover,  as  early  as  St.  Jude's  Epistle,  we  find 
quotations  from  both  works  in  close  juxtaposition. 
Under  these  circumstances,  the  present  article  in- 
cludes an  account  of  both  works. 

Both  works  alike  must  have  been  written  in  the 
1st  cent.  A.D.,  and  the  former,  if  not  the  latter,  in 
Hebrew,  between  the  years  7  and  29.  A  Greek  ver- 
sion of  both,  of  the  same  century,  is  presupposed  by 
the  quotations  and  parallels  in  Ac  7^,  Jude  ••  **• ", 
2  Baruch,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen. 
The  author  was  a  Pharisaic  Quietist.  His  silence 
with  regard  to  the  Maceabaean  rising  and  its  leaders 
is  most  significant.  There  cotild  be  no  severer 
censure  on  the  political  and  bellicose  Pharisees  of 
his  time.  For  him  Eleazar  and  his  seven  sons  had 
been  the  true  heroes,and  not  Judas  and  his  brethren. 
He  expects  the  ultimate  triumph  of  Israel,  but  this 
is  to  be  brought  about  by  Divine  intervenrion  and 
not  by  the  sword,  and  the  human  conditions  pre- 
requisite are  a  stricter  observance  of  the  Law  and 
a  national  repentance. 

The  work  is  of  great  value  in  the  stress  it  lays  on 
spiritual  reli^on  and  quietism.  In  this  and  in  its 
singular  freedom  from  the  Jewish  doctrine  of  merit 
it  aifords  a  parallel  to  NT  teaching.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  thoroughly  Judaic  in  its  exaltation  of 
the  person  of  Moses,  which  seems  to  be  set  up  as  a 
Jewish  cotmterpart  to  that  of  our  Lord,  while  the 
pre-existence  of  Moses  and  Jerusalem  is  expressly 
asserted  in  1^^  ^". 

1.  Contents  (historical  and  other  allusions  are 
explained  in  brackets). — i.  In  the  2500th  year  from 
the  Creation,  after  the  Exodus,  Moses  calls  Joshua 
and  appoints  him  his  successor  as  minister  of  the 
people  and  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  testimony,  at 
the  same  time  committing  to  his  charge  certain 
books  which  were  to  be  preser\  ed  in  the  place  which 
God  had  made  from  the  beginning  of  the  world 
(Jerusalem). — ii.  After  Joshua  has  secured  to  Israel 
their  inheritance,  the  people  are  to  be  ruled  for 
eighteen  years  (i.e.  the  fifteen  judges,  and  the  three 
kings,  Saul,  David,  and  Solomon)  by  chiefs  and 
kings,  and  for  nineteen  years  (the  nineteen  kings 
of  Israel)  the  ten  tribes  shall  break  away.  The  two 
tribes  maintain  the  Temple  worship  for  twenty  years 
(reigns),  of  which,  however,  four  are  evil  and  idola- 
trous.— iii.  Then  a  king  from  the  East  (Nebuchad- 
rezzar) shall  come  and  bum  their  *  colony '  (Jera- 
salem)  and  the  Temple  and  remove  the  sacred  vessels. 
The  two  tribes  are  carried  into  captivity,  and  con- 
fess their  punishment  to  be  just,  as  also  do  the  ten 
tribes. — iv.  At  the  end  of  the  77  years'  captivity, 
one  who  is  over  them  (Daniel)  will  pray  for  them. 


A  king  (Gyms)  has  compassion  on  them,  and  parts 
of  the  two  tribes  return,  while  the  ten  increase 
among  the  Gentiles  in  their  captivity. — v.  Even 
the  faithful  two  tribes  sin,  and  are  punished  through 
the  kings  who  share  in  their  guilt  (the  Seleucids). 
They  are  di\-ided  as  to  the  truth,  and  pollute  the 
altar  with  their  non-Aaronic  priests,  'not  priests 
but  slaves,  sons  of  slaves '  (Jason  and  Menelaus). — 
viiL  A  •  second  visitation '  follows.  The  king  of 
the  kings  of  the  earth  (Antiochus  Epiphanes) 
crucifies  those  who  confess  to  circumcision,  and 
compels  them  to  blaspheme  the  law  and  bear  idols, 
and  persecutes  them  with  tortures. — ix.  Thereupon 
a  man  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  named  Taxo  ( =  Eleazar), 
exhorts  his  seven  sons  to  fast  for  three  days  and  on 
the  fourth  to  go  into  a  cave  and  die  rather  than 
transgress  the  commands  of  the  Lord  of  lords. — vi. 
Next  there  are  raised  up  kings  bearing  rule  who 
call  themselves  priests  of  the  Most  Hi^  God  (the 
Maccabees).  They  work  iniquity  in  the  Holy  of 
Holies.  They  are  succeeded  by  an  insolent  ting 
not  of  the  race  of  the  priests  (Herod),  who  ^ill  carry 
out  secret  massacres  and  rule  for  34  years.  His 
children  are  to  reign  for  shorter  periods.  A  power- 
ful king  of  the  West  (Varus,  governor  of  Syria)  in- 
vades the  land,  bums  part  of  the  Temple,  and  cruci- 
fies some  of  the  people. — vii.  The  times  shall  then 
be  ended.  Destructive  and  impious  men  (Sadducees) 
shall  rule— treacherous,  hypocritical,  gluttons,  op- 
pressing the  poor,  and  lawless.  Though  unclean  in 
band  and  mind,  they  say,  '  Do  not  touch  me,  lest 
thou  shouldest  pollute  me.' — x.  Then  (Jod's  king- 
dom shall  appear,  and  Satan  shall  be  no  more,  and 
the  angel  who  has  been  appointed  chief  (ilichael) 
shall  avenge  them  of  their  enemies.  The  earth  is 
shaken,  the  sun  and  moon  fail,  and  the  sea  and 
the  waters  dry  up.  The  Gentiles  are  punished,  and 
Israel  is  happy,  and  triumphs  over  the  Eagle 
(Rome),is  raised  to  the  stars,and  beholds  his  enemies 
in  Gehenna  and  rejoices  over  them.  Until  thisadvent 
of  God  there  shall  be  250  times  from  Moses'  death. 
— xi.  Joshua  mourns  that  he  is  not  able  to  take 
Moses'  place  as  guide  and  teacher,  prophet  and 
advocate.  The  Amorites  will  assail  Israel  when 
Moses  is  not  among  them. — xii.  Moses  replies  by 
placing  Joshua  in  his  own  seat,  and  assures  him 
that  all  is  foreseen  and  controlled  by  God. 

At  the  end  of  ch.  vii.  and  agaiin  at  the  end  of  ch. 
xii.  the  MS  breaks  ofiF  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence. 
Chapters  viii.  and  tx.  are  read  between  v.  and  vi.,  as 
Charles  suggests  in  his  edition  (pp.  28-30).  They 
obviously  refer  to  the  Antiochian  persecution,  and 
are  quite  out  of  place  after  ch.  vii.,  which  describes 
the  Sadducees  who  were  contemporaries  of  the 
author.  Burkitt  argues  (HDB  iii.  449)  that  'the 
Theophany  in  x.  comes  in  well  after  the  story  of 
the  ideal  saint  Taxo  in  ix. ,  but  very  badly  after  the 
description  of  the  wicked  priests  and  rulers  in  viL' 
But  ch.  vii.  is  mutilated  at  the  end,  and  we  cannot 
argue  from  the  last  reference  which  happens  to  be 
preserved  in  it.  He  suggests  that  the  author  '  filled 
up  his  picture  of  the  final  woes  from  the  stories  of 
the  Antiochian  martyrs.'  But  surely  he  would  not 
need  to  borrow  his  picture  of  the  ideal  saint  of  the 
last  times  (and  his  name)  from  the  same  period. 

2.  Date. — The  date  of  composition  is  clearly  fixed 
by  the  words  in  6^  '  and  he  (Herod)  shall  beget 
children  who  succeeding  him  shall  rule  for  shorter 
periods.'  As  this  is  a  prediction  which  was  falsified 
by  the  event,  for  Antipas  reigned  forty-three  years 
and  Philip  thirty-seven  (while  Herod  reigned  thirty- 
four),  we  must  postulate  a  date  earlier  than  thirty- 
four  years  from  Herod's  death,  ».«.  a.d.  30.  A  date 
nearer  to  the  deposition  of  Archelaus  in  A.D.  6, 
which  would  suggest  the  impending  deposition  of 
his  brothers,  woi3d  be  still  more  suitable. 

3.  Author. — The  author  is  generally  supposed  to 
have  been  a  Zealot  (so  Ewald,  Wieseler,  DUlmann, 


106 


ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES 


ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES 


Schiirer,  Deane,  and  Briggs).  But,  while  well  aware 
of  the  Maccabsean  movement,  he  shows  his  aversion 
to  Maccabaean  methods  by  his  silence  in  regard  to 
the  exploits  of  Judas  and  his  brethren.  His  hero, 
Taxo,  instead  of  taking  up  arms,  withdraws  into  a 
cave  to  die,  with  the  words  '  Let  us  die  rather  than 
transgress.'  It  is  not  militancy  but  God's  direct 
and  personal  intervention  that  will  bring  in  the 
kingdom. 

The  same  arguments  prove  that  he  was  no  Sad- 
ducee.  His  was  no  earthly  ideal,  but  that  of  a 
heavenly  theocratic  kingdom  ( 10"-  )•  A  Resurrection 
is  not  taught,  it  is  true,  but  it  is  implied  in  the  con- 
summation of  Israel's  happiness  m  these  verses. 
The  Sadducees  are  attacked,  and  in  7'- "  there  is  a 
play  on  their  name  and  their  claim  to  be  just  (D'pns 
ana  D'pns). 

He  was  not  an  Essene.  He  is  a  strong  patriot 
and  keenly  interested  in  the  fortunes  of  the  nation. 
The  Law  is  of  perpetual  obligation  and  is  itself 
sufficient.  The  Temple  is  bmlt  by  God  Himself 
(2^)  in  tlie  place  He  prepared  from  the  creation  (1*^). 
Its  profanations  are  often  mentioned  {2^-  ^  3^  5'-  * 
6'- ').  The  sacrificial  system  is  regarded  as  valid 
(2^),  and  its  cessation  is  a  cause  of  lamentation  (4*). 
The  altar  is  polluted  only  W  injustice  (5*).  The 
Essenes  did  not  value  the  Temple  sacrifices,  and 
objected  to  animal  sacrifice  altogether.  The  future 
heavenly  abode  of  the  righteous,  and  the  future 
punishment  of  Israel's  enemies  in  Gehenna,  are  dis- 
tinctively Pharisaic  ideas.  The  pre-existence  of 
Moses  in  1^*  is  regarded  as  a  unique  distinction. 
The  Essenes  believed  in  the  pre-existence  of  all 
souls  alike. 

We  must  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  author  was 
a  '  Pharisee  of  a  fast-disappearing  type,  recalling 
in  all  respects  the  Chasid  of  the  early  Maccabean 
times,  and  upholding  the  old  traditions  of  quietude 
and  resignation'  (Charles,  1897,  p.  liv). 

4.  The  Latin  text. — The  Latin  text  presents  a 
difficult  task  to  the  critical  reconstructor  of  the 
original  Hebrew  text.  To  begin  with,  Ceriani's 
MS  is  a  palimpsest,  in  which  whole  verses  are  at 
times  indecipherable.  In  the  next  place,  it  is  not 
the  original  Latin  translation  but  a  copy,  in  Avhich 
the  Latin  itself  has  been  corrected  and  corrupted. 
Thus  in  5^  we  have  six  lines  of  duplicate  rendering, 
and  there  are  dittographies  also  in  6'  S**  IP*.  In 
11*  the  copyist  has  misread  'eum'as  'cum,'  and 
corrects  '  Mouses '  into  '  Monse '  accordingly.  The 
version,  however,  is  very  literal,  and,  in  spite 
of  corruptions  and  carelessness,  its  Greek  source  is 
occasionally  evident ;  and  the  original  Hebrew 
idiom  is  frequently  preserved.  Greek  words  like 
clibsis  {  =  d\i\{/is,  S'')  and  herermis  (  =  €p^/xoi,  3"),  and 
even  a  reading  \ikejinem  in  2',  which  presupposes 
8pov  in  Greek  [corrupt  for  SpKov],  suffice  to  prove 
translation  from  the  Greek  ;  while  corrupt  passages 
like  4*  5'  10*  11'^  (see  Charles'  text)  require  re-trans- 
lation into  the  original  Hebrew  in  order  to  explain 
the  corruption.  In  7'  we  have  a  play  on  the  name 
Sadducees  (D'pns) 

'  dicentes  se  esse  justos  (D'p'is) ' 
which  is  possible  only  in  Hebrew.     An  Aramaic 
original  postulated  by  Schmidt,  Merx,  and  others 
is    not  necessitated  by  the  order  in   l^"  3*  (see 
Charles,  1897,  pp.  xxviii-xlv). 

5.  The  original  'Asaumption  of  Moses.'— The 
subject-matter  of  the  extant  work  (preserved 
largely  in  Ceriani's  Latin  MS)  proves  it  to  be  a 
Testament  of  Moses,  as  it  deals  with  the  dying  pre- 
dictions and  charges  of  Moses  as  related  to  Joshua, 
quite  in  the  manner  of  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve 
Patriarchs  (q.v.).  It  nowhere  describes  his  'As- 
sumption,' and  only  in  an  interpolation  (10'*)  re- 
fers to  it.  The  opening  words  have  been  thus  re- 
stored by  Charles  to  fill  the  gap  in  the  MS—'  Testa- 
mentum   Moysi  |  Quae  praecepit  ano  vi|tae  eius 


Cmo  et  xxnio.'  Throughout  the  work  Moses  is  to 
die  an  ordinary  death  (e.g.  1''  3'^  10"-").  In  a 
Catena  quoted  in  Fabricius  {Cod.  Psettd.  Vet.  Test. 
ii.  121,  122),  and  again  in  Section  xiii.  of  Vassiliev's 
Anecdota  Grmco-Iiyzantina  (pp.  257-258),  we  find 
references  to  a  natural  death  of  Moses,  which  may 
be  derived  from  the  original  ending  of  the  '  Testa- 
ment.' In  Vassiliev's  work  the  words  that  follow 
seem  to  be  derived  from  the  true  'Assumption,' 
while  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  viii,  48)  seems  to  be  aware 
of  the  new  claims  put  forth  for  Moses'  Assumption, 
while  explaining  the  Scripture  statement  of  his 
death  as  a  precaution  against  deification  of  the 
national  hero :  vi<l}Ovs  al<pvi5iow  vir^p  a&roD  ardvTo^, 
itpavLl^erai  Kard  rtvos  <j}6,payyo%.  Tiypa(pe  d'  avrbv  iv 
Tttij  lepaii  /3I/3Xots  redveOra,  delffas  u-V  Si  virtp^oXTjv  ttjs 
irepl  ainrbv  dperTJs  irpbi  rb  ffeiov  ainbv  duaxojprjcai 
ToX/XT^aucriP  elweii'. 

The  fragments  of  the  true '  Assumption  of  Moses ' 
preserved  in  various  sources  are  as  follows. — We 
read  in  Jude  ^ :  '  But  Michael  the  archangel,  when, 
contending  with  the  devil,  he  disputed  about  the 
body  of  Moses,  durst  not  bring  against  him  a  rail- 
ing judgment,  but  said,  "  The  Lord  rebuke  thee." ' 
Clem.  Alex,  quotes  this  verse  in  Adumbrat.  in 
Ep.  Jud(B  (Zahn's  Supplement.  Clementin.,  1884, 
p.  84),  and  adds  :  '  Hie  confirmat  Assumptionem 
Moysi.'  Didymus  Alex,  in  Epist.  Judce  Enarratio, 
and  tlie  Acta  Synodi  Niccen.  ii.  20  also  refer  to 
St.  Jude's  words  as  a  quotation  from  '  Moyseos 
Assumptioi'  or '  A.vd\7]\pis  Muvaius.  The  Devil's  claim 
which  Michael  thus  rebutted  was  (1)  that  he  was 
lord  of  matter  (Uti.  ifibv  rb  (tw/jui  ws  rrjs  vXrjs  Se<nr6^ovTt. 
[Cramer's  Catena  in  Ep.  Cath.,  1840,  p.  160:  also 
Matthsei's  edition  oiSept.  Epp.  CathoL,  Riga,  1782, 
pp.  238,  239]) ;  (2)  that  Moses  was  a  murderer. 

The  answer  to  the  second  claim  is  not  given,  but 
the  answer  to  the  first  is  in  fuller  form  than  in 
St.  Jude,  in  Acta  Synodi  Niccen.  ii.  20 :  dirb  yap 
TveijfMTOS  dylov  a&rov  Trdvrei  iKTLaOrjfiev,  thus  claiming 
all  creation  as  the  handiwork  of  God's  Holy  Spirit. 
Origen  (de  Princip.  iii.  2. 1)  adds  a  reproach  uttered 
by  Michael  to  the  serpent :  '  a  diabolo  inspiratum 
serpentem  caosam  exstitisse  praevaricationis  Adae 
et  Evae.' 

The  Assumption  finally  'takes  place  in  the 
presence  of  Joshua  and  Caleb,  and  in  a  very  peculiar 
way.  A  twofold  presentation  of  Moses  appears : 
one  is  Moses  "living  in  the  spirit,"  which  is  carried 
up  to  heaven  ;  the  other  is  the  dead  body  of  Moses, 
which  is  buried  in  the  recesses  of  the  mountains ' 
(Charles,  p.  106).  So  Clem,  Alex.,  Strom,  vi.  15; 
Origen,  hom.  in  Jos.  ii.  1 ;  Euodius,  Epist.  ad. 
Augustin.  258,  vol.  ii.  p.  839  (Ben.  ed.  1836).  This 
'  twofold  presentation  would  appear  to  be  due  to 
an  attempt  to  reconcile  Dt  34"-  with  the  Jewish 
legend.     Cf.  Josephus,  quoted  above. 

6.  Value  for  New  Testament  study. — i.  Paral- 
lels in  phraseology. — These  are  conlined  to  five 
passages  :  (a)  Stephen's  speech  in  Ac  7*'',  where  the 
words  'in  Egypt  and  in  the  Red  Sea  and  in  the 
wilderness  forty  years'  are  the  same  as  in  Ass. 
Mos.  3".  Cf.  also  Ac  1^-  ^  with  Ass.  Mos.  3".— 
(b)  Jude  " :  cf.  Ass.  Mos.  V  '  complainers ' ;  7'  '  and 
their  mouth  will  speak  great  things ' ;  5"  respect- 
ing the  persons  of  the  wealthy,'  Jude"  'in  the 
last  time '=^55,  Mos.  V  'the  times  shall  be 
ended.'— (c)  With  2  P  2''  cf.  Ass.  Mos.  7*  'lovers  of 
banquets  at  every  hour  of  the  day,'  and  with  2* 
cf,  T  '  devourers'  of  the  goods  .  .  .  saying  that 
they  do  so  on  the  ground  of  justice  (or  mercy).' 

The  signs  of  the  end  in  sun,  moon,  and  stars  in 
Ass.  Mos.  10°  resemble  those  in  Mk  13**-  ^,  while 
the  phrase  in  8'  'there  will  come  upon  them  a 
second  visitation  and  wrath,  such  as  has  not  be- 
fallen them  from  the  beginning  until  that  time,' 
is  nearer  Mt  24^'  than  Dn  12'  and  Rev  le^*. 

There  is  also  the  well-known  reference  to  the 


ASSUMPTION  OF  MOSES 


ASSUEANCE 


107 


lost  'Assumption '  in  Jude  *  (generalized  in  2  P  2""") 
— '  Yet  Michael  the  archangel,'  etc. 

ii.  Parallels  in  doctrine  and  ideas. — (a)  The 
parallels  >%-ith  the  NT  doctrine  of  Christ  are  re- 
markable. Moses  appears  to  fill  the  place  which 
would  be  taken  by  Clirist  in  Christian  belief,  as  a 
Divinely  appointed  mediator,  bound  by  no  limita- 
tions of  time  or  space,  interceding  on  behalf  of 
God's  people.  His  pre-existenoe  and  mediatorship 
are  as^serted  in  1".  He  was  '  prepared  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  (cf.  Alt  25**)  to  be  the 
mediator  of  His  (God's)  covenant'  (cf.  Gal  3"*). 
Christ,  too,  was  '  before  all  things '  (Col  1",  Jn  1^  8» 
I7*)j  and  was  the  Mediator  of  a  new  and  better 
covenant  (He  8®  9"  12^).  Baldensperger  sees  in 
IP  a  definite  attack  on  Christian  views.  The 
body  of  Moses  would  know  no  local  sepulchre,  nor 
would  any  dare  to  move  his  '  body  from  thence  as 
a  man  from  place  to  place.'  This  seems  to  imply 
the  Jewish  view  that  not  only  was  Christ  buried, 
and  His  body  moved  from  the  cross  to  the  grave, 
but  that  His  disciples  had  removed  it  from  the 
sepulchre  (Mt  2S^).  In  11'  Joshua  says:  'Thou 
art  departing,  and  who  will  feed  this  people  [cf. 
tiie  commission  to  Peter  in  Jn  21""^^,  or  who  is 
there  who  will  have  compassion  on  them,  and  .  .  . 
be  their  guide  by  the  way  (cf.  Mt  9^),  or  who 
will  prav  for  them,  not  omitting  a  single  day?' 
cf.  11^'  CRo  8**,  He  7^).  But  not  only  is  :Moses  ! 
regarded  as  shepherd,  compassionate  guide,  and 
intercessor;  in  11'®  he  is  described  as  'the  sacred 
spirit  who  was  worthy  of  the  Lord  (cf.  Wis  3*  7**), 
manifold  and  incomprehensible,  the  lord  of  the 
word,  who  was  faithful  in  all  things  (He  3'),  God's 
chief  prophet  throughout  the  earth,  the  most  per- 
fect teacher  in  the  world.'  Cf.,  in  regard  to  Christ, 
Jn  3-  '  Thou  art  a  teacher  come  from  God,'  6® 
'Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.'  For  the 
'manifold  Spirit,'  cf.  1  Co  12"-^,  and  for  Christ 
as  Spirit,  2  Co  3^'  'the  Lord  is  that  Spirit.'  In 
12*  Moses  is  '  appointed  to  pray  for  their  (Israel's) 
sins  and  make  intercession  for  them '  (cf.  He  7^). 
Moses  also  was  the  appointed  revealer  of  God's 
hidden  purpose  (P^ ").  God  had  'created  the 
world  on  behalf  of  his  people '  (a  common  Jewish 
view ;  contrast  He  1^,  Col  l^*,  Ro  ll**,  Jn  1^— where 
Christ  is  the  final  cause  of  creation).  'But  he 
was  not  pleased  to  manifest  this  purpose  of  crea- 
tion from  the  foundation  of  the  world  in  order 
that  the  Gentiles  might  thereby  be  convicted '  (by 
their  own  false  theories).  Cf.  Ro  16=*-  *  ' .  .  .  the 
preachingof  Jesus  Christ  .  .  .  the  revelation  of  the 
mystery  which  hath  been  kept  in  silence  through 
times  eternal,  but  now  is  manifested  .  .  .  unto  all 
the  nations  unto  obedience  of  faith.'  In  Eph  I'-  ^^ 
the  mystery  of  Grod's  will,  'according  to  ms  good 
pleasure,  which  he  purposed  in  him,'  is  not  Israel 
but  Christ  as  the  goal  of  all  creation.  In  Eph 
3*-"  it  includes  the  bringing  in  of  the  Gentiles  into 
the  scheme  of  final  restoration.  In  1  Co  2^,  Eph 
3®,  Ro  16^  the  purpose  precedes  the  creation  of 
the  world. 

(b)  Justification  and  good  works. — The  Rabbinic 
doctrine  of  man's  merit  is  entirely  absent.  Cf.  12" 
'  Not  for  any  \-irtue  or  strength  of  mine,  but  in  His 
compassion  and  long-snffering,  was  He  pleased  to 
call  me'    Cf.  Tit  3*,  2  Ti  R 

(c)  Day  of  repentance. — Jerusalem  is  to  be  the 
place  of  worship  till  '  the  day  of  repentance  in  the 
visitation  wherewith  the  Lord  shsdl  visit  them  in 
the  consummation  of  the  end  of  the  days'  (1^*). 
This  repentance  in  Mai  4*  and  Lk  l^*- "  is  to  be 
brought  about  by  Elijah.  It  is  the  theme  of  John 
the  Baptist  (Mk  \*)  and  of  Christ  (1").  It  is  to 
usher  in  the  '  ^-isitation,'  or  the  establishment  of 
the  theocratic  Kingdom  by  Grod  Himself  in  person. 

(d)  Michael  is  regarded  as  the  chief  antagonist 
of  Satan  and  of  Israel's  foes.     In  IQr  he  is  ap- 


pointed chief,  and  '  will  forthwith  avenge  them  of 
their  enemies.'    Cf.  Rev  12". 

(e)  Gehenna  is  still  the  place,  not  where  the 
wicked  and  immoral  suffer,  but  into  which  Israel's 
foes,  the  Gentiles,  are  cast.  The  dividing  line  be- 
tween the  future  blessed  and  accursed  is  a  national 
and  not  a  moral  one. 

(/)  Messianic  Kingdom. — There  is  no  Messiah. 
In  lO'  we  are  told  'the  Eternal  God  alone  .  .  . 
will  .  .  .  punish  the  Gentiles.'  The  Kingdom  will 
come  upon  a  general  repentance  (1")  175C»  years 
(lO'*)  after  Moses'  death,  i.e.  between  a.d.  75  and 
107.  The  ten  tribes  share  in  the  promises  (3*)  and 
in  the  final  restoration  (10*)  Israel  is  finally  ex- 
alted to  heaven  (10^)  and  beholds  iti>  foes  in  Gie- 
henna  (10'"). 

Lttbratubb. — (a)  Cmiv  kdibokb  op  thb  IiAtix  tnr. — 
A.  Ceriani,  Mtmumetttamteraet  prof  ana,  l  i  [1861]  5»-M;  A. 
Hilgeofeld,  ST  extra  Caiumem  reemtumfl,  1878,  pp.  107-135 ; 
G.  Volkmar,  Mo$e  Pnplutie  u»d  Htmmtifakrty  IjeSpag,  1867 ; 
Scbmidt-Merx, '  INe  AwwHiipUo  Moob  .  .  .'  {Arehivf.  vinen. 
Erfortek.  dea  AT,  ed.  Menc.  1868,  i.  fi.  111-152);  O.  F. 
Fritzsche,  LOH  Apoertpki  V.T.,  1871.  pn.  700-730;  R.  H. 
Charlen,  The  Atnmption  of  Motu  .  .  .  tie  wumettded  Text 
.  .  .  togiHuT  with  the  Text  in  its  .  .  .  eritieaUgemtendedFormy 
LoDd«»,  1807 ;  C  Clenw^,  The  Asmmftkm  of  Mooe$,  Cub- 
bridge,  ISNM.  (b)  Cmxr  cxmcAii  nKgaaaa. — Rfinsch,  ZWT, 
xL  [1868]  76-108,  466-468,  xiL  tlSBO]  213-228,  xir.  [1871]  89-93, 
xviL  [1874]  542-5^  xxviiL  [1885]  108-104 ;  F.  Rosenthal,  rier 
apoe.  Bueher,  1885,  pp.  13-S8;  E.  Schnxer.  HJP  n.  iiL  73-83; 
W.  Baldenq>etKer,  Daa  StOitlbtwmaltuin  Jesa,  1888,  Mt. 
^0-31 :  AV.  J.  Oeane,  PaeMdirigrafka,\tafy,  pp.  85-130;  E.  de 
Faye,  Le*  Apoealjfpees  Junes,  1893,  pp.  67-75 ;  R.  H.  Cbaxles, 
op.  eit.  xiii-lzr;  C.  Clemen,  in  Kantmcfa's  Apok.  «md  Ptettd., 
a.  [1900]  SU-331;  F.  C.  Borkitt,  in  HDB  m.  448^50;  R.  H. 
Charles.  Afoanifka  and  PaeudepigntfiM,  Oxford,  1913,  iL 
*07-43*.  A.  LI.  DaTIES. 

ASSURANCE.— 1.    The    word    and    its    Greek 

equivalents. — 'Assurance'  (with  the  kindred  forms 
'  assure,' '  assured  of,' '  assuredly')  is  employed  in  the 
EV  to  render  several  Gr.  words  expressing  certi- 
tude, or  setting  forth  grounds  of  certainty. — (1)  In 
Ac  17^  it  is  used  to  render  xiVtij,  'faith,'  which 
has  the  meaning  here  of  'pledge'  or  'guarantee,' 
the  Resurrection  of  Christ  heing  taken  by  St.  Paul, 
in  addressing  the  Stoics  and  Epicureans  of  Athens 
on  Mars'  Hill,  as  warranting  the  faith,  or  impart- 
ing certainty  to  the  conviction,  of  judgment  to 
come. — (2)  It  is  used  in  He  11^  (RV)  to  translate 
uTOffTOffii,  'substance,'  'confidence,'  where  rUmr 
itself  is  defined  as  '  the  assurance  of  things  hoped 
for,  the  pro\'ing  {iXeyxoi)  of  things  not  seen.' — (3) 
In  1  Jn  3^  we  find  the  verb  employed  to  translate 
reUrofjLfv  from  reideip  :  *  Hereby  shall  we  know  that 
we  are  of  the  truth  and  shall  assure  our  heart 
before  him,'  where  rtiffofiey,  translated  'shall 
asstire,'  signifies  the  stilling  and  tranquillizing  of 
the  heart  that  has  been  agitated  by  doubts,  mis- 
givings, or  fears.  (TcUro/iep  ia  only  once  again 
employed  in  the  XT  in  this  sense :  in  Mt  28^*,  where 
it  is  rendered  'persuade,'  and  where  Tmdale's 
quaint  translation  is  'pease'  [appease],  the  object 
of  the  persuasion  being  the  Roman  governor  at 
Jerusalem.) — (4)  In  2  Ti  3^*  the  passive  form  of 
the  verb  is  found  as  the  rendering  of  erurru&ijs, 
'  thou  hast  been  assured  of,'  referring  to  Timothy's 
training  in  the  knowledge  of  the  '  sacred  writings 
which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto  salvation.' — 
(5)  In  Ac  2^''  we  find  the  adverb  '  assuredly '  em- 
ployed to  translate  da<f>a\ws,  'surely,'  'certainly,' 
recalling  d«r^dXc«ar  in  Lk  1*.— (6)  In  Ac  16^*  the 
word  ai^ifiipd^vw,  '  combining,'  '  putting  this  and 
that  together,'  ia  translate  in  AV  'assuredly 
gathering,'  which  in  RV  has  given  place  to  the 
word  of  logical  inference,  '  concluding.' 

(7)  The  word,  however,  of  which  '  assurance '  is 
the  definite  and  specific  rendering  is  ■r\ripo<popta  (1 
Th  1',  Col  2^,  He  6"  10*^),  with  which  may  be  taken 
the  kindred  verb  r\r)po<popfTp,  passive  r\ripo4>opeur6au 
In  determining  the  precise  meaning  of  the  Gr. 
original  we  receive  no  help  from  Gr.  literature  in 


108 


ASSUEANCE 


ASSURANCE 


general,  where  the  word  is  not  found  at  all  till  a 
late  period.  The  word  TrXripofjyopdv,  however,  has 
been  found  in  papyri  signifying  '  to  settle  fully  an 
account,'  '  to  give  satisfaction  as  to  a  doubtful 
matter,'  '  to  be  completely  satisfied  with  regard  to 
something  that  was  owing'  (A.  Deissmann,  Light 
from  the  Ancient  East,  London,  1910,  p.  82),  It 
occurs  once  in  LXX  (Ec  8").  Otherwise  its  use  is 
exclusively  NT  and  Patristic. — (a)  ■ir\r}po<popia  is 
used  absolutely  in  1  Tli  1"*,  and,  though  RVm 
gives  '  much  fulness '  as  the  translation  of  iroWrj 
ir\7jpo(()opia,  this  is  weak  and  inadequate,  and  '  full 
assurance'  of  AV  and  RV  brings  out  the  proper 
force  of  the  word  and  really  expresses  the  Apostle's 
thought.  The  second  term  of  the  composite  word 
(^-<(>opLa,  -<j)opdv,  -eiffdai)  seems  to  carry  with  it  a  sub- 
jective force  both  in  the  noun  and  in  the  verb,  as 
may  be  gathered  from  examples  in  the  NT  and  in 
the  Fathers.  To  this  2  Ti  4«  and  Lk  1^  may  be  ex- 
ceptions. "We  are  justified,  therefore,  in  rendering 
in  Col  2-  '  full  assurance  of  the  understanding ' ;  in 
He  6"  'full  assurance  of  hope' ;  and  in  10'-''  'full 
assurance  of  faith.'  In  1  Clem.  xlii.  3  fj.eTk 
TrX-rjpotpoptas  irveijfiaros  ayiov  is  '  with  full  assui'ance 
produced  by  the  Holy  Spirit,'  although  it  might  be 
'with  full  reliance  upon  the  Holy  Spirit.'  This 
Clementine  passage  has  the  verb  also  (ir\7]po(popT]- 
divres)  and  is  peculiarlv  instructive  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  '  assurance '  wnich  possessed  the  apostles 
as  they  went  forth  to  be  ambassadors  of  Christ : 
'  Accordingly  having  received  instructions  and 
having  attained  to  full  assurance  (■tr\7]po<f>opy]divTe$) 
through  the  Resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  having  been  put  in  trust  with  the  word  of  God, 
they  went  forth  in  full  reliance  upon  the  Holy 
Spirit,  preaching  the  glad  tidings  that  the  kingdom 
or  God  was  about  to  come.' — [b)  Tr\r]po<pope'i(r6ai  has 
the  subjective  force  we  have  attributed  to  it  in 
most  of  the  Pauline  and  Patristic  examples  of  its 
use.  Of  Abraham  it  is  said  that  he  Avas  '  fully 
assured'  {irXtjpocpoprideis)  that  what  God  had  promised 
he  was  able  also  to  perform  (Ro  4^^).  In  regard 
to  doubtful  questions  in  the  Apostolic  Church,  St. 
Paul  bids  each  man  be  'fully  assured'  in  his  own 
mind  (Ro  W  RV).  The  prayer  of  St.  Paul  and 
his  friends  for  the  Colossian  Christians  is  that  they 
may  stand  perfect  and  'fully  assured'  (ireirXrjpo- 
ipoprj/jLivoi)  in  every  thing  willed  by  God  (Col  4'^). 
in  the  Epp.  of  Ignatius,  who  contends  so  strenu- 
ousljr  agamst  Docetic  views  of  the  Person  of  Christ, 
we  hnd  the  saint  and  martyr  employing  the  verb 
in  the  same  sense  as  St.  Paul.  He  bids  his  readers 
be  on  their  guard  against  the  seductions  of  error 
and  be  fully  assured  {Treir\Tipo<popTjffdai.)  of  the  Birth, 
Passion,  and  Resurrection  as  historical  facts,  for 
these  things  were  truly  and  certainly  done  by  Jesus 
Christ  '  our  Hope,  from  which  hope  may  it  never 
befall  any  of  you  to  be  turned  aside'  {Magn.  11). 
Elsewhere,  speaking  of  the  OT  prophets,  Ignatius 
declares  that  they  were  inspired  by  the  grace  of 
Christ  Jesus  '  to  the  end  that  unbelievers  might  be 
fully  assured  [eh  rb  w\T]po((>op7)di]vai)  that  there  is  one 
God  who  manifested  Himself  through  Jesus  Clirist, 
His  Son'  {Magn.  8). 

2.  The  doctrine  in  the  teaching  of  the  apostles. 
— From  an  examination  of  the  words  employed  by 
the  NT  writers  to  express  Christian  certamty,  with 
the  illustrations,  which  might  easily  be  added  to, 
from  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  we  can  gain  a  clear 
outline  of  the  character  of  'assurance.'  It  em- 
braces a  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  Christian 
history,  of  the  historical  reality  of  the  Birth, 
Passion,  and  Resurrection  of  Christ ;  trustful  re- 
liance upon  the  promises  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ 
His  Son ;  the  exercise  of  the  intelligence  and  the 
reasoning  powers  to  know  without  doubt  what  God 
requires  or  His  i)eople  ;  and  the  consciousness  of  a 
personal  interest  in  Christ  and  His  great  redemp- 


tion, wrought  by  the  Spirit  in  the  individual  soul. 
Tiiis  outline  we  are  able  to  till  in  from  the  apostles' 
teaching  in  passages  where  the  word  itself  is  not 
employed.  Assurance,  as  an  experience  of  the 
apostolic  writers  and  their  readers,  meets  us  in 
nearly  every  one  of  the  Epistles.  St.  James,  in 
his  Epistle,  negatively  urges  it  when  he  dwells 
upon  the  evils  of  the  divided  mind,  and  he  has 
words  of  commendation  for  the  perfected  faith  of 
Abraham  (Ja  1*-  ^  22"-).  St.  Jude  knows  the  secret 
when  he  commends  the  readers  of  liis  brief  Einstle 
to  Him  that  is  able  to  keep  them  from  falling  and 
to  present  them  faultless  before  the  presence  of  His 
glory  with  exceeding  joy  (Jude  *•).  The  writer  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  when  he  bids  his 
readers  show  diligence  to  the  full  assurance  of  hope 
unto  the  end  (He  6"),  means  '  that  your  salvation 
may  be  a  matter  of  certainty,  and  not  merely  of 
charitable  hope'  (A.  B.  Bruce).  And  pointing  to 
the  blood  of  sprinkling,  and  the  rent  veil,  and  the 
new  and  living  way,  and  the  heavenly  High  Priest, 
he  bids  them  keep  approaching  '  with  a  true  heart 
in  full  assurance  of  faith'  (lO*^^).  But  St.  Peter, 
St.  John,  and  St.  Paul  have  teaching  on  the  sub- 
ject which  may  be  a  little  more  fully  drawn  out. 

(1)  St.  Peter's  teaching  Ls  given  in  Acts  and  in  the 
Epistles  that  bear  his  name.  St.  Peter's  speeches, 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost  and  afterwards,  set  forth 
the  grounds  of  the  assurance  of  the  Resurrection  and 
Ascension  of  Jesus  which  possessed  the  apostles  and 
their  believing  hearers.  These  grounds  are  (a)  the 
prophetic  words  of  Scripture  finding  their  fulfil- 
ment not  in  David  or  any  other,  but  in  Jesus  ;  {b) 
the  personal  testimony  of  the  apostles  to  the  things 
which  they  had  seen  and  heard  ;  (c)  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  risen  Lord's  presence  and  power  in  the 
miracles  wrought  in  His  name  ;  {d)  the  inner  wit- 
ness of  the  Spirit — '  we  are  witnesses  of  these  things 
and  so  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  God  hath  given  to 
them  that  obey  him '  (Ac  5*^) — '  the  historical  wit- 
ness borne  to  the  facts  and  the  internal  witness  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  bringing  home  to  men's  hearts  the 
meaning  of  the  facts'  (Knowling,  ad  loc.  ;  of.  2^*'** 
42oir.)  n  jg  ^hjg  assurance  which  the  Apostle  holds 
forth  to  the  sojourners  of  the  Dispersion  in  his  First 
Epistle  (1  P  13-9),  -whom  the  God  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  had  begotten  again  to  a  living 
hope  through  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from 
the  dead  ;  '  who  by  the  power  of  God  are  guarded 
through  faith  unto  a  salvation  ready  to  be  revealed 
in  the  last  time.'  Whether  2  Peter  be  the  produc- 
tion of  St.  Peter  or  of  some  disciple  writing  in  his 
spirit  at  a  later  time,  it  is  the  voice  of  full  assurance 
we  hear  when  the  author  says :  'We  did  not  follow 
cunningly  devised  fables,  when  we  made  known 
unto  you  the  power  and  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  but  we  were  eye-witnesses  of  his  majesty ' 
(2  P  P*).  Thus  convincingly  does  the  external  and 
the  internal  witness  blend  in  St.  Peter's  doctrine  of 
assurance. 

(2)  St.  John^s  teaching  in  his  Epistles  lays  the  chief 
stress  upon  the  ethical  tests,  and  has  less  to  say  of 
the  inner  witness.  Not  that  the  latter  is  overlooKed. 
'The  anointing  which  ye  received  of  him,'  he  says, 
referring  to  the  Holy  Spirit  or  a  function  of  the 
Spirit,  '  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  have  no  need  that 
any  one  teach  you  (I  Jn  2-").  But  St.  John's 
doctrine  of  assurance  embraces  great  Christian 
certainties.  '  We  know  and  have  believed  the  love 
which  God  hath  in  us  '  (1  Jn  4>*).  '  We  know  that 
we  have  passed  out  of  death  into  life,  because  we  love 
the  brethren '  (3").  '  Hereby  shall  we  knoio  that 
we  are  of  the  truth,  and  shall  assure  our  iiearts  liefore 
him'  (3'*).  'We  /fcnot^;  [being  the  children  of  God 
and  recipients  of  redeeming  love]  that,  if  he  shall  be 
manifested,  we  shall  be  like  him  ;  for  we  sliall  see 
him  even  as  he  is '  (3-).  '  We  know  that  we  have 
come  to  a  knowledge  of    him,   if    we    keep  his 


ASYNCRITUS 


ATHENS 


109 


commandments '  (2»).  '  Hereby  we  know  that  we 
are  in  him  ;  he  that  saith  he  abideth  in  him  ought 
himself  also  to  walk  even  as  he  walked '  (2*'-)- 

Law  apUy  characterises  St.  John's  doctrine  of  per8(»ial  mbot- 
ance  when  he  says  :  '  With  St.  John  the  grounds  of  assorance 
are  ethical,  not  emotionaJ  ;  objective,  not  subjective  ;  plain  and 
tanidWe,  not  microscopic  and  elusive.  They  are  three,  or,  rather, 
th-v  are  a  trinity  :  Belief,  Bighleousneas,  Love.  By  his  belief 
-ist,  his  keeping  God's  conun&ndmentB.aLi)d  his  love  to  the 
.  r  '•  n.  a  Christian  man  is  recognised,  ana  recognises  himself 
as  LciTOtten  of  God'  (Tert*  of  Life,  Edinburgh,  1909,  p.  297). 

St.  John  applies  his  doctrine  of  assurance  to 
prayer.  '  Beloved,  if  our  heart  condemn  us  not,  we 
have  boldness  toward  God ;  and  whatsoever  we  ask, 
we  receive  of  him,  because  we  keep  his  command- 
ments '  (3^"-)-  '  And  this  is  the  boldness  which  we 
have  towards  him,  that,  if  we  ask  anything  accord- 
ing to  his  will,  he  heareth  us '  (5").  And  while  this 
assurance  gives  boldness  and  confidence  in  prayer, 
it  also  gives  boldness  in  the  Day  of  Judgment : 
'  Herein  is  love  made  perfect  with  us,  that  we  may 
have  boldness  in  the  day  of  judgment;  because  as 
he  is,  even  so  are  we  in  this  world.  There  is  no 
fear  in  love :  but  perfect  love  casteth  out  fear'  (4"*-). 

(3)  St.  Paul's  teaching  lays  the  stress  upon  the 
inner  witness  which  we  desiderated  in  St.  John. 
And  yet  in  his  enumeration  of  graces  under  the 
designation  of  'fruit  of  the  Spirit"  we  have  sure 
evidences  of  the  Spirit's  indwelling  whereby  to 
'assure  our  hearts'  before  Him.  St.  Paul's  assur- 
ance rests  also  upon  a  broad  basis  of  fact  in  the 
Person  and  work  of  Christ :  '  I  know  him  whom  I 
have  believed,  and  I  am  persuaded  that  he  is  able 
to  guard  that  which  I  have  committed  unto  him 
against  that  day '  (2  Ti  V-).  When,  however,  he 
uses  the  expression  '  we  know,'  uttering  his  assur- 
ance of  personal  immortality,  he  attributes  it  to 
God  who  gave  him  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  (2  Co 
5^*- ).  In  two  great  passages,  Rom  8^*"-  and  Gal  4"-, 
St.  Paul  sets  forth  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  to  the 
sonship  of  the  believer,  which  is  the  ground  of  his 
full  assurance,  by  the  chUdlike  confidence  which  it 
works  and  the  perfect  liberty  which  it  brings.  And 
so  he  can  exclaim  :  '  We  know  that  to  them  that 
love  God  all  things  work  together  for  good,  even  to 
them  that  are  called  according  to  his  purpose.  .  •  . 
For  I  am  persuaded  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor 
angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  things  present,  nor 
things  to  come,  nor  powers,  nor  height,  nor  depth, 
nor  any  other  creature,  shall  be  able  to  separate  us 
from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our 
Lord '  (Ro  8^  *'•)• 

But,  although  St.  Paul  cherishes  this  assurance 
and  has  no  doubt  or  misgiving  as  to  his  personal 
salvation,  this  assurance  does  not  cause  him  to 
slacken  in  the  fulfilment  of  service  and  the  pursuit 
of  the  eternal  prize.  Even  he  is  moved  by  the 
wholesome  fear  lest  he  who  had  preached  to  others 
should  yet  himself    become  a  castaway  {dSoKt/xoi, 

1  Co  9^),  and  be  cast  out  of  the  lists  as  one  who 
had  not  contended  according  to  the  rules. 

'  We  must  remember,'  says  a  Christian  writer  before  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  cent.,  'that  he  who  strives  in  the  corruptible  contest, 
if  he  be  found  acting  unfairly,  fouling  a  competitor  in  the  race, 
or  trying  with  guile  to  overreach  his  antagonist,  is  taken  away 
and  scourged  and  cast  forth  from  the  lists.  What  then  think  ye? 
If  one  does  an  j-thing  unseemly  in  the  incorruptible  contest,  what 
shall  he  have  to  bear  ? '  (2  Clem.  vii.).  It  is  in  the  same  spirit  that 
the  author  of  the  Didache,  writing  before  the  close  of  the  1st 
cent.,  says  :  '  For  the  whole  period  of  your  faith  will  profit  you 
nothine  tmless  ve  be  found  fijly  perfected  at  the  last '  (2>td.  xvL 

2  ;  cf.  ip.  of  Bam.  iv.  9% 

ISTK&iTCBJi. — F.  H.  R.  von  Frank,  System  of  Christian  Cer- 
tainti/,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  lsS6;  W.  J.  Townsend,  H.  B. 
Workman,  and  G.  Eayrs.  Sew  Hist,  of  Methodism,  London, 
1909;  R.  Seeberg.  in  PRE3  vi.  160;  the  art.  'Assurance,'  in 
HDB,  SDB,  and  DCG  ;  art.  'Certitude,'  in  CE,  and  art.  '  Cer- 
tainty (Eeligious),'  in  ERE,  with  the  literature  there  cited. 

T.  XlCOL. 
ASYNCRITUS  ('Jux^KpiToi,  or  'A<rjrKpiTOi,  a  Greek 
name). — The  first  of  a  group  of  five  names  (all 
Greek)  of  persons  'and  the  brethren  with  them' 


saluted  by  St.  Paul  in  Ro  16".  Nothing  is  known 
of  Asyncritus  or  of  any  member  of  this  group.  It 
is  suggested  that  together  they  formed  a  separate 
iKK\ij<riay  or  church,  within  the  Church  of  Rome. 
That  such  little  communities  existed  in  Rome, 
each  with  its  own  place  of  meeting,  would  appear 
from  other  similar  phrases  in  Ro  16  :  '  the  chtirch 
that  is  in  their  house '  (v.*),  '  all  the  saints  that  are 
with  them'  (v."),  and  from  the  references  to  the 
Christian  members  of  the  '  households '  of  Aristo- 
bulus  and  Narcissus  (w."-  ").  This,  of  course, 
assumes  the  Roman  destination  of  these  saluta- 
tions. If  the  Ephesian  destination  be  preferred, 
there  is  evidence  of  similar  house-churches  at 
Ephesos  in  1  Co  16^,  and  perhaps  in  Ac  20*  (see 
art.  Patbobas).  The  name  Asyncritus  has  been 
found  in  an  inscription  of  a  freemnan  of  Augustas 
(see  Sanday-Headlam,  Bomans^,  1902,  p.  427). 

T.  B.  Allwobthy, 

ATHENS  CAe^vai).— Athens,  which  St.  Paul 
visited  in  the  autumn  of  A.D.  48  (Hamack),  or  50 
(Turner),  or  51  (Ramsay),  was  now  in  some  respects 
very  diflerent  from  the  city  of  Pericles  and  Plato. 
Her  political  and  commercial  supremacy  was  gone. 
Greece  had  for  two  centuries  been  the  Roman 
province  of  Achaia,  of  which  Athens  was  not  the 
capital.  The  governor  had  his  residence  at  Corintli . 
and  the  merchant-princes  had  forsaken  the  Pir£eu> 
for  Lecheum  and  Cenchreae.  But  Athens  was  still 
the  most  beautiful  and  brilliant  of  cities,  the  home 
of  philosophy,  the  shrine  of  art,  the  fountain-head 
of  ideals.  Aa  the  metropolis  of  Hellenism  she  had, 
indeed,  a  wider  and  more  pervasive  influence 
than  ever,  which  the  Roman  conquerors,  like 
the  Macedonians  before  them,  did  their  best  to 
extend.  '  From  tlie  Philhellenic  standpoint,  doubt- 
less, Athens  was  the  masterpiece  of  the  world' 
(T.  Monunsen,  Provinces  of  the  Soman  Empir^, 
London,  1909,  L  258).  To  be  among  her  citizens 
was  to  breathe  the  atmosphere  of  culture.  Her 
Lyceum  by  the  Ilissus,  her  Academy  by  the  groves 
of  Cephissus,  her  Porch  in  the  Agora,  and  her 
Garden  near  at  hand,  were  stiU  frequented  by 
Platonists,  Peripatetics,  Stoics,  amd  Epicureans. 
Her  University  drew  to  itself  a  host  of  foreign 
students,  especially  from  Rome,  and  became  the 
model  of  the  younger  foundations  of  Alexandria, 
Antioch,  and  Tarsus. 

Neither  the  Republic  nor  the  Empire  ever  fully 
applied  the  subject-relation  to  Greece,  and  the 
Athenians  were  always  treated  >vith  special  kind- 
ness. '  The  Romans,  after  their  conquest,  finding 
them  governed  by  a  democracy,  maintained  their 
independence  and  liberty '  (Strabo,  EC  L  20).  Even 
in  the  Mithridatic  war,  when  an  ordinary  town 
behaving  as  Athens  did  would  have  been  razed  to 
the  ground,  'the  citizens  were  pardoned,  and,  to 
this  time,  the  city  enjoys  liberty,  and  is  respected 
by  the  Romans'  {ib.). 

The  outward  aspect  of  Athens  was  little  altered 
in  St.  Paul's  time.  Plutarch,  who  wrote  half  a  cent- 
ury later,  says  in  regard  to  Pericles'  public  edifices  : 
'  In  beauty  each  of  them  at  once  appeared  venerable 
as  soon  as  it  was  built ;  but  even  at  the  present 
day  the  work  looks  as  fresh  as  ever,  for  they  bloom 
with  an  eternal  freshness  which  defies  time,  and 
seems  to  make  the  work  instinct  with  an  unfading 
spirit  of  youth '  (Pericles,  xiii. ).  Cicero  conveys  the 
impression  which  the  city  made  upon  every  cul- 
tivated mind  in  his  time :  '  Yalde  me  Athenae 
delectarunt,  urbe  dumtaxat  et  urbis  omamento, 
.  .  .  sed  multum  ea  philosophia'  {E^.  ad  Att.  v. 
10).  The  Philhellenism  of  the  Empire  surpassed 
that  of  the  Republic,  and  of  all  the  Roman  bene- 
factors of  Athens  the  greatest  was  Hadrian,  who 
not  only  completed  the  temple  of  Zeus  Olympius, 
which  had  remained  unfinished  for  700  years,  but 
embellished  the  city  with  many  other  public  build- 


110 


ATHENS 


ATONEMENT 


ings,  and  gave  the  name  of  Hadrianopolis  to  a  new 
quarter. 

But,  though  Athens  was  outwardly  as  splendid 
as  ever,  she  was  inwardly  decadent,  being,  in  philo- 
sophy, letters,  and  art,  a  city  living  upon  tradi- 
tions. Her  first-rate  statesmen  and  orators,  poets 
and  thinkers,  did  not  outlive  the  nation's  freedom. 

'  The  self-esteem  of  the  Hellenes,  well-warranted  in  itself  and 
fostered  by  the  attitude  of  the  Roman  government  .  .  .  called 
into  life  ainontr  them  a  cu^ttw  of  the  past,  which  was  compounded 
of  a  faithful  clinging  to  the  memories  of  greater  and  happier 
times  and  a  quaint  reverting  of  matured  civilisation  to  its  in  part 
very  primitive  beginnings.  .  .  .  The  bane  of  Hellenic  existence 
lay  in  the  limitation  of  its  sphere  ;  high  ambition  lacked  a  cor- 
responding aim,  and  therefore  the  low  and  degrading  ambition 
flourished  luxuriantly '  (Mommsen,  op.  cit.  i.  280,  283). 

The  decay  of  Athens  was  due  less  to  the  exhaus- 
tion of  her  creative  energy,  with  the  substitution 
of  imitative  for  original  work,  than  to  the  simple 
fact  that  the  thought  and  art  of  her  citizens  were 
no  longer  wedded  to  noble  action  and  brave  endur- 
ance. Full  of  aesthetes  and  dilettantes,  loving  the 
reputation  more  than  the  reality  of  culture,  letting 
a  restless  inquisitiveness  and  shallow  scepticism  take 
the  place  of  high  aspiration  and  moral  enthusiasm, 
she  became  blind  to  the  visions,  and  deaf  to  the 
voices,  which  redeem  individual  and  collective  life 
from  vanity. 

The  devouring  appetite  of  the  Athenians  for 
news  had  long  been  one  of  their  best-known  traits. 

Demosthenes  (Phil.  i.  p.  43)  pictures  them  bustling  about  the 
Agora  inqiiiring  if  any  newer  thing  is  being  told  (irvveavdiievoi. 
Kara  rijf  ayopdu  el  Tt  Xeyerat  veoJTepov),  the  tragedy  being  that, 
while  they  were  talking,  Philip  was  acting.  Thucydides  (iii.  38) 
makes  Cleon  say  to  them  :  '  So  you  are  the  best  men  to  be  im- 
posed on  with  novelty  of  argument,  and  to  be  unwilling  to  follow 
up  what  has  been  approved  by  you,  being  slaves  of  every  new 
paradox,  and  despisers  of  what  is  ordinary.  Each  of  you  wishes 
above  all  to  be  able  to  speak  himself.  ...  In  a  word,  you  are 
overpowered  by  the  pleasures  of  the  ear,  and  are  like  men  sitting 
to  be  amused  by  rhetoricians  rather  than  deliberating  upon 
State  affairs.' 

Among  the  philosophers  of  St.  Paul's  time  the 
penchant  for  news  took  the  form  of  an  eagerness 
to  hear  the  latest  novelty  in  speculation  or  religion 
which  any  <nr€pno\6yos  (picker-up  of  scraps  of  infor- 
mation) might  have  to  publish  (Ac  17'^'),  in  order 
that  they  might  exercise  their  nimble  wits  upon  it, 
and  most  probably  hold  it  up  to  ridicule. 

Though  St.  Paul  spoke  the  language  of  Hellas, 
and  acknowledged  himself  a  debtor  to  the  Hellenes 
(Ro  1^^),  yet  Athens  does  not  seem  to  have 
exercised  any  fascination  over  him.  She  did  not 
beckon  him  like  Rome  ;  he  did  not  see  her  in  his 
dreams,  or  pray  that  he  might  be  prospered  to 
come  to  her ;  he  never  exclaimed,  with  a  sense  of 
destiny,  '  I  must  see  Athens.'  That  he  ever  visited 
her  at  all  was  apparently  the  result  of  an  accident. 
He  was  hurried  away  from  Bercea  before  he  had 
time  to  mature  his  plans  of  future  action,  and  he 
merely  waited  at  Athens  for  the  arrival  of  his 
friends,  Silas  and  Timothy  (Ac  17^"- )•  To  picture 
him  wandering  among  temples  and  porticos,  lost  in 
admiration  of  works  of  genius,  and  'perhaps  wit- 
nessing the  performance  of  a  play  of  Euripides,'  is 
to  misunderstand  him.  He  did  not  spend  his 
leisure  in  Athens,  any  more  than  Luther  m  Rome, 
in  appraising  the  masterpieces  of  plastic  and  dra- 
matic art.  They  were  both  'provoked ' *  by  what 
they  saw  as  they  passed  by.  They  were  consumed 
with  the  prophetic  zeal  which  seeks  to  replace  a 
false  or  imperfect  religion  with  a  true  and  perfect 
one.  St.  Paul,  indeed,  knew  the  Hellenic  world 
too  well  to  imagine  that,  while  the  city  was  'full 
of  idols '  (KarelSuXov),  its  men  of  culture  were  given 
to  idolatry.  In  their  case  the  worship  of  the  gods 
survived  only  in  that  cultus  of  physical  beauty  to 
which  innumerable  sculptured  forms   bore  silent 

*  napo^vyoixou.  IB  often  used  in  the  L\X  to  express  a  burning 
Divine  (and  prophetic)  indignation  against  idolatry  (Hos  8*, 
Zee  103). 


witness,  while  such  spiritual  faith  as  they  still  re- 
tained found  expression  rather  in  altars  'AyvwaTif) 
Qev ;  to  the  existence  of  which  Pausanias  (I.  i.  4) 
and  Philostratus  ( Vit.  Apollon.  vi.  2)  testify  (see 
Unknown  God). 

St.  Paul's  address  before  the  court  or  council  of 
Areopagus  (q.v.)  is  a  noble  attempt  to  find  common 
ground  with  the  Athenian  philosophers,  an  ap- 
preciation of  what  was  highest  in  their  religion, 
an  expression  of  sympathy  with  their  sincere 
agnosticism,  an  appeal  to  that  groping,  innate 
sense  of  spiritual  realities,  that  universal  instinct 
of  monotheism,  which  lead  to  the  true  God  who  is 
near  to  all  men,  and  who,  though  unseen,  is  no 
longer  unknown.  Renan  suggests  that  St.  Paul 
was  '  embarrassed '  by  all  the  wonders  that  met 
his  eyes  in  Athens,  as  if  Athene  herself  had  per- 
haps cast  her  spell  upon  him  and  made  him  some- 
what doubtful  of  the  Galilsean  ;  but  there  is  no 
sort  of  foundation  for  such  a  fancy.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that  the  Apostle  had  a  new  experience 
of  a  different  kind  in  Athens.  Faced  by  an 
audience  half-courteous  and  half-derisive,  he  was 
first  ridiculed  and  then  ignored,  when  he  would 
have  preferred  to  be  contradicted  and  persecuted. 
Not  driven  from  the  city  by  hostile  feeling,  but 
quitting  it  of  his  own  accord,  too  unimportan4 
to  be  noticed,  too  harmless  to  be  molested,  he 
departed  with  a  crushing  sense  of  failure,  and, 
apparently  as  a  consequence,  began  his  mission  in 
Corinth  'in  weakness  and  fear  and  much  trem- 
bling' (1  Co  2^).  It  is  possible  that  he  felt  he  had 
made  a  mistake.  All  that  he  said  to  the  philo- 
sophers of  Athens  was  true,  but  ineffective.  It 
did  little  or  nothing  to  storm  the  enemy's  citadel. 
In  a  modern  phrase,  it  was  magnificent,  but  it 
was  not  war.  Another  power  was  needed  to 
humiliate  the  wise,  as  well  as  to  end  the  long  reign 
of  the  gods  of  Greece.  It  is  significant  that  in 
Corinth  the  Apostle  determined — not,  indeed,  for 
the  first  time,  but  certainly  with  a  new  emphasis 
— not  to  know  anything  save  Jesus  Christ  and 
Him  crucified  (1  Co  2^*),  who  was  for  both  Jews 
and  Hellenes  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of 
God  (P*). 

The  Athenian  synagogue  (Ac  17"),  in  which  St. 
Paul  met  some  'devout  persons' — a-e^Sfj-evoi,  Gen- 
tiles more  or  less  influenced  by  Judaism — was  pro- 
bably small,  for  the  university  city  did  not  attract 
his  compatriots  like  Corinth,  the  seat  of  commerce. 
His  reasoning  '  in  the  Agora  every  day  with  those 
who  met  him '  naturally  recalls  those  Socratic  dis- 
putations in  the  same  place,  of  which  Grot«  gives 
a  lively  account  in  his  History  of  Greece  (London, 
1869,  viii.  211  f.).  That  the  address  before  the 
Council  of  the  Areopagus  was  not  entirely  fruitless 
is  proved  by  the  conversion  of  a  man  holding  so 
important  an  official  position  as  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite  (q.v.). 

Literature. — W.  J.  Conybeare  and  J.  S.  Howson,  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  new  ed.,  Ixmdon,  1877,  i.  405  f. ;  W. 
M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen, 
London,  1895,  p.  237 f. ;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Aqe,  Edin- 
burgh, 1897,  p.  257  f. ;  E.  Curtius,  Gesammelte  Abhandlnngen, 
Berlin,  1894,  ii.  528  f.;  A.  Mommsen,  Athena  Christiano; 
Leipzig,  1868 ;  J.  P.  MahaSy,  (;ri?eifc  Life  and  Thought,  London, 
1887,  and  The  Silver  Age  of  the  Greek  World,  do.  1906 ;  A. 
Holm,  History  of  Greece,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  18;>4-9S. 

James  Strahan. 
ATONEMENT.— Although  found  only  once  in 
the  NT  (Ko  5")  and  there  in  the  AV  alone,  this 
word  has  become  the  elect  symbol  in  theological 
thought  to  indicate  the  doctrine  in  the  Apostolic 
Church  which  placed  the  death  of  Christ  in  some 
form  of  causative  connexion  with  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  and  with  the  restoration  of  men  to  favour 
and  fellowship  with  God.  The  development  of  a 
doctrine  of  atonement  in  the  NT  is  almost  entirely 
the  product  of  the  experience  and  thought  of  the 


ATOXEilEXT 


ATONEMENT 


111 


Apostolic   Church.      It   moved  along   two   lines ; 
these  were  neither  divergent  nor  exactly  parallel, 
nor  is  it  probable  that  one  was  precisely  supple- 
mentary to  the  other ;  they  are  best  considered  as 
converging  towards  an  ultimate  point  of  unity  in 
which  Godward  and  manward  aspects  are  merged. 
The  J  have  been  contrasted  as  objective  and  sub- 
jective, juridical  and  ethical,  sul»titutionary  and 
mystical.     They  correspond  also  to  two  definitions 
of'the  word  itself.     Originally  and  etymologically  i 
the  word  means  '  at-one-ment ' ;  it  is  a  synonym  ■ 
for  '  reconciliation '  as  an  accomplished  fact.    His-  ; 
torically    its    usa^  signifies    '  a    satisfaction    or  I 
reparation  made  by  giving  an  equivalent  for  aii  j 
injury,  or  by  doing  or  suffering  that  which  is  , 
received  in  satisfaction  for  an  offence  or  injury' 
(Imperial   Diet.,     s.v.).      Here     its    synonym    is 
'expiation'  as  a  means  to  reconciliation.     Theo- 
logically it  has  been  chiefly  used  in  this  latter 
sense,   to  indicate   '  the  expiation  made  by  the 
obedience  and  suffering  death  of  Christ  to  mark 
the  relation  of  God  to  sin  in  the  processes  of  human 
redemption.'    A  decided  modem  tendency  is  to 
return  to  the  more  original  use  of  the  word.     It 
will  probably  be  seen  that  both  uses  are  required 
to  state  the  rullness  of  the  apostolic  doctrine. 

The  literature  preserved  in  the  NT  witnesses  to 
the  undoubted  fact  that  the  Apostolic  Church  had 
very  early  established  a  close  connexion  between 
the' death  of  Jesus  the  Messiah  and  the  redemp- 
tion of  men  from  their  sins.  Within  seven  years 
of  His  death — or  probably  considerably  less — a 
'  doctrine  of  the  cross '  was  freely  and  authorita- 
tively preached  in  the  Christian  community ;  it 
appears  to  have  been  distinctly  Pauline  in  general 
character ;  it  held  a  primary  place  in  the  apostolic 
preaching  ;  it  was  declared  to  be  the  fulfilment  of 
the  OT  Scripture  ;  it  was  set  forth  as  the  essence 
of  tlie  gospel,  and  was  definitely  referred  to  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  for  its  ultimate  authority.  This 
much  seems  to  be  implied  in  what  is  probably  the 
earliest  testimony,  if  regard  be  had  to  the  date  of 
the  writings  in  which  it  occurs,  concerning  the 
apostolic  doctrine  of  the  atonement.  It  is  St.  Paul's 
confident  assertion,  '  I  delivered  unto  yon  first  of 
all  that  which  also  I  received,  how  that  Christ  died 
for  our  sins  according  to  the  scriptures  '  (1  Co  15^). 
This  is  undoubtedly  typical  of  the  teaching  accepted 
by  the  primitive  Church ;  whatever  St.  Paul's 
differences  with  other  apostolic  teachers  on  other 
matters  may  have  been,  agreement  seems  to  be 
found  here.  The  confidence  of  this  common  wit- 
ness so  early  in  the  Apostolic  Church  raises  many 
interesting  questions,  some  of  which  must  be  con- 
sidered. To  what  extent  can  we  find  the  more 
elaborate  Pauline  doctrine,  which  we  shall  find 
elsewhere  in  his  writings,  presented  in  such  frag- 
ments of  the  teaching  of  the  first  Christians  as  we 
possess?  How  far  is  the  apostolic  interpretation 
of  Christ's  death  sustained  by  appeal  to  the  experi- 
ence and  teaching  of  Jesus  Himself?  By  what 
means  had  the  swift  transition  been  made  by  the 
apostolic  teachers  themselves  from  the  state  of 
mind  concerning  the  death  of  Jesus  which  is  pre- 
sented in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  to  the  beliefs 
exhibited  in  their  preaching  in  the  Acts?  How 
was  the  unconcealed  dismay  of  a  bewildering  dis- 
appointment changed  into  a  glorjlng?  It  is  clear 
from  the  contents  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  that, 
whatever  the  confusion  and  distress  in  the  minds 
of  His  disciples  which  immediately  followed  the 
death  of  Christ,  they  were  already  in  possession  of 
memories  of  His  teaching  which  lay  comparatively 
dormant  until  they  were  awakened  into  vigorous 
activity  by  subsequent  events  and  experiences ; 
these,  together  with  the  facts  of  their  Lord's  life 
and  the  incidents  of  His  death,  may  be  spoken 
of  as  the  sources  of  the  apostolic  doctrine  of  the 


atonement,  as  to  its  substance.  For  the  forms 
into  which  it  was  cast  we  mast  look  to  the  religious 
conceptions — legal,  sacrificial,  ethical,  and  eschato- 
logical — which  constituted  their  world  of  theologi- 
cal ideas,  and  the  background  against  which  was 
set  the  teaching  of  Jesus. 

I.  Sources.— ±.  In  the  Synoptic  Gospels.— Briefly 
summarized  these  are:  (1)  The  intense  and  con- 
sistent ethical  interpretation  that  Jesus  gave  to 
the  Elingdom  He  came  to  establish,  and  to  the 
conception  of  the  salvation  He  taught  and  pro- 
mised as  the  sign  of  its  establishment  in  the  indi- 
vidual soul  and  in  the  social  order.  It  was  no 
mere  change  of  status ;  it  was  a  becoming  in 
ethical  and  spiritual  character  sons  of  God  in  like- 
ness and  obedience  ;  it  was  actual  release  from  the 
selfishness  of  the  unfilial  and  unbrotherly  life,  and 
access  into  living  communion  in  holy  love  with  His 
Gfod  and  Father. 

(2)  The  Baptism  and  the  Temptation  of  Jesus, 
which  initiated  Him  into  the  course  of  His  public 
ministry,  were  events  associated  in  the  minds  of 
those  who  preserved  the  Synoptic  tradition  with 
the  voice  from  heaven,  '  Thou  art  my  beloved  Son  ; 
in  thee  I  am  well  pleased '  (Lk  3**).  Apparently 
the  consciousness  of  Jesus  as  He  realized  His 
vocation,  judging  from  what  He  afterwards  taught 
His  disciples  of  its  inner  meaning,  was  aware  of 
this  combination  of  Ps  2"  with  Is  42"^ — the  Son  of 
Grod  as  King,  and  the  suffering  Servant  of  the  Lord. 
The  inference  Denney  draws,  though  obviously 
open  to  keen  criticism  from  the  eschatological 
school,  has  a  suggestive  value :  the  Messianic  con- 
sciousness of  Jesus  from  the  beginning  was  one 
with  the  consciousness  of  the  suffering  Servant; 
He  combined  kingship  and  service  in  suffering  from 
the  first.  *  This  finds  support  in  the  accounts  of 
the  Temptation,  which  was  supremely  a  tempta- 
tion to  avoid  suffering  by  choosmg  the  easy  way. 

(3)  All  the  Sj-noptics  assure  us  that,  when  Jesus 
received  the  first  full  recognition  of  Messiahship 
from  His  disciples.  He  instantly  met  it  by  the  open 
confession  that  His  suffering  and  death  were  a 
necessity.  '  The  Son  of  Man  must  {bet)  suffer — 
mu3t  go  up  to  Jerusalem  and  be  killed '  (Mk  8", 
Mt  1621,  Lk  9^).  Henceforth  His  constant  subject 
of  instruction  was  concerning  His  death,  which, 
when  '  the  Son  of  Man  was  risen  from  the  dead,' 
His  disciples  were  to  interpret.  The  necessity 
associated  with  His  death  was  not  merely  the 
inevitable  sequence  of  His  loyalty  to  His  ideal  of 
righteousness  in  face  of  the  opposition  of  His 
enemies.  It  was  that,  but  it  was  more.  In  the 
career  of  one  such  as  Jesus  the  violent  and  unjust 
death  to  which  He  was  mo\ing  could  not  be  separ- 
ated in  thought  from  the  Father's  will  to  which 
He  was  so  exquisitely  sensitive,  and  which  He 
came  perfectly  to  fulfil.  What  was  in  His  Father's 
will  was  appointed  and  could  not  be  the  mere 
drift  of  circumstances  into  which  He  was  cast  and 
from  which  the  Divine  purpose  was  absent.  The 
necessity  was  inward,  and  identical  with  the  will 
of  God  as  expressed  in  Scripture ;  to  His  disciples 
it  was  incomprehensible. 

(4)  Jesus  described  His  death  as  for  others  and 
as  voluntarily  endured.  Definite  terms  are  selected 
in  which  the  meaning  more  than  the  fact  of  the 
death  is  set  forth.  '  The  Son  of  Man  came  ...  to 
minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  (Xw-por)  for 
many '  (Mk  10**).  Whether  we  approach  the  mean- 
ing of  this  term  (see  Raxsom)  from  Christ's  con- 
ception of  His  life-work  as  a  whole,  or  by  closer 
exegetical  or  historical  study  of  the  word  itself,  it 
is  clear  that  the  giving  of  His  life  was  to  Jesus 
much  more  than  the  normal  experience  of  dying  ; 
it  was  a  dying  which  was  to  issue  in  largeness  and 
freedom  oi  life  for  mankind — it  was  probably  even 

»  Death  irfCkritt,lAL 


112 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


more  than  'on  behalf  of,'  'in  the  service  of;  it 
was  '  instead  of '  {dvrl)  men.  From  what  He  is  to 
release  them,  however,  is  not  definitely  stated. 
The  objection  often  made  that  the  term  is  an 
indication  of  Pauline  influence  on  Mark  is  part  of 
the  general  problem  of  Paulinism  in  the  Gospels, 
too  large  for  discussion  here.  The  saying  is  in 
perfect  harmony  with  its  setting. 

(5)  The  other  selected  term  is  connected  with 
the  critically  difficult  passages  recording  the  in- 
stitution of  the  Supper.  '  This  is  my  blood  of  the 
covenant  [possibly  the  'new'  covenant]  which  is 
shed  for  many  unto  remission  of  sins'  (Mt  26^). 
Here  the  purpose  or  ground  of  the  death  of  Jesus 
is  set  forth.  It  is  only  just  to  say  that  Matthew 
alone  makes  the  reference  to  '  remission  of  sins.' 
The  earliest  account  of  the  Supper — St.  Paul's 
(1  Co  1123-26) — omits  this  reference  ;  he  is  followed 
by  Mark  and  Luke.  Questions  also  turn  on  the 
sacrificial  significance  of  'blood  of  the  covenant.' 
The  reference  is  obviously  to  the  solemn  ratifica- 
tion by  blood-sprinkling  of  the  covenant  of  Sinai 
(Ex  24*).  Whether  this  was  strictly  sacrificial 
blood  with  expiatory  value  is  debated.  Robertson 
Smith  *  and  Driver  f  niay  both  be  quoted  in  favour 
of  the  view  that  '  sacrificial  blood  was  universally 
associated  with  propitiatory  power.' J  Whilst  too 
much  should  not  be  built  upon  a  single  authority 
for  the  precise  Avord  of  Jesus,  the  criticism  does 
not  touch  the  value  of  the  citation  as  an  index  to 
the  mind  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 

(6)  The  awful  isolation  of  the  cry  of  Jesus  on 
the  cross,  '  My  God,  my  God,  why  nast  thou  for- 
saken me?'  (Mk  15**)  cannot  easily  be  separated 
in  the  experience  of  the  sinless  Son  of  God  from 
some  mysterious  connexion  with  the  sin  He  clearly 
came  to  deal  with  by  His  death.  It  is  at  least 
capable  of  the  suggestion  that  for  a  time  His  con- 
sciousness had  lost  the  sense  of  God's  presence, 
whose  unbroken  continuity  had  hitherto  oeen  the 
ethical  and  spiritual  certainty  of  His  spirit. 

To  complete  the  material  provided  for  the  apos- 
tolic doctrine  in  the  Synoptics  there  should  be 
added  to  the  points  already  mentioned  the  minute- 
ness and  wealth  of  detail — quite  without  parallel 
in  the  presentation  of  other  important  features  of 
His  life — with  which  the  death  of  Jesus  is  recorded, 
and  also  the  extent  to  which  the  writers  insist 
upon  the  event  as  a  fulfilment  of  the  OT  Scriptures. 
We  have,  therefore,  in  the  Synoptics,  whatever 
view  may  be  taken  of  the  position  largely  held, 
that  they  were  the  issue  of  '  the  productive  activity ' 
of  the  early  Church  under  the  stimulating  influence 
of  redemptive  experiences  attributed  to  the  death 
of  Christ,  at  least  the  starting-point  of  the  ethical 
and  juridical  views  of  the  atonement  subsequently 
developed  in  the  primitive  community  ;  they  lack 
doctrinal  definiteness,  and  distinctly  favour  the 
ethical  more  than  the  legal  view  of  tlie  process 
of  redemption  ;  they  are  also  accompanied  oy  evi- 
dences that  the  disciples  listened  unintelligently 
or  with  reluctant  acquiescence  to  the  words  of 
Jesus  concerning  His  death.  This  last  feature 
indicates  the  dependence  of  the  apostolic  doctrine 
upon  another  source. 

2.  The  apostolic  experience. — The  doctrine  of 
atonement  arose  out  of  the  Christian  experience  ; 
it  was  the  issue  of  a  new  religious  feeling  rather 
than  a  condition  of  faith.  The  springs  of  this  new 
spiritual  emotion  must  be  sought,  if  the  doctrine 
which  is  its  result  in  the  Apostolic  Church  is  to 
be  rightly  appreciated.  In  tnis  way  also  we  shall 
provide  a  statement  of  the  transition  from  the 
desolation  wrought  by  the  death  of  Jesus  in  the 
hopes  of  His  followers  to  the  triumphant  temper 

•  Rel.  S«m.2,  London,  1894,  p.  319  f. 
t  HDB,  art.  '  Propitiation,'  iv.  182. 
X  Denney,  Death  of  Christ,  53. 


and  abounding    joy  of    the  primitive  faith  and 
preaching.     The  elements  of  this  experience  are  : 

(1)  The  Resurrection. — This  is  the  starting-point 
of  the  new  experience :  the  ultimate  root  of  the 
apostolic  doctrme  of  atonement  was  the  presence 
or  the  Kisen  Christ  in  the  consciousness  of  the 
primitive  Christian  community ;  for  it  was  the 
secret  of  the  restoration  and  enrichment  of  per- 
sonal faith,  the  re-creation  of  the  corporate  con- 
fidence of  the  community,  which  '  was  begotten 
again  unto  a  living  hope  by  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead'  (1  P  1*).  It  was 
also  the  revealing  light  that  brought  meaning  into 
the  mystery  of  His  death.  Now  and  for  always 
these  two — death  and  resurrection — stood  together. 
When  the  apostles  stated  the  one,  they  implied 
the  other  ;  the  Resurrection  was  the  great  theme 
of  the  apostolic  preaching  because  it  interpreted 
the  significance  of  the  Death.  Both  were  closely 
and  instinctively  connected  with  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  :  '  The  God  of  our  fathers  raised  up  Jesus, 
whom  ye  slew,  hanging  him  upon  a  tree.  Him 
did  Goa  exalt  with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince 
and  a  Saviour,  for  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and 
remission  of  sins '  (Ac  5*"-)-  The  redeeming  virtue 
issues  from  the  Death  .and  Resurrection  as  from  a 
common  source,  though  the  cross  ultimately  be- 
came its  chosen  symbol.  Beginning  to  search  the 
Scriptures  to  discover  whether  death  had  a  place 
in  the  proplietic  presentation  of  the  Messiah,  the 
disciples  were  surprised  into  the  apprehension  of 
the  meaning  of  the  words  of  Jesus  spoken  whilst 
He  was  yet  with  them ;  they  thus  came  to  see 
that  the  Death  was  only  the  shadow  side  of  an 
experience  by  which  He  passed  to  the  exaltation 
and  authority  of  His  redeeming  work  ;  the  catas- 
trophe was  seen  to  have  a  place  in  the  moral 
order  of  God,  and  the  scandal  of  the  cross  was 
transfigured  into  the  glory  of  the  Divine  purpose 
of  redemption.    This  experience  was  followed  by — 

(2)  The  Great  Commission. — The  terms  of  this 
are  influential  for  discerning  the  apostolic  doctrine. 
As  they  appear  in  Mt.  (28'9'-)  and  in  Mk.  (16'"-) 
associated  with  baptism,  which  in  the  primitive 
Church  was  always  connected  with  remission  of 
sins,  they  are  suggestive,  but  not  free  from  criti- 
cal difficulties.  As  they  appear  in  Lk.  (24'"''^'), 
from  an  excellent  source,  thej-  have  their  chief 
significance ;  they  are  there  bound  up  with  '  my 
words  which  1  spake  unto  you  while  I  was  yet 
with  you';  with  the  fulfilling  of  the  Scriptures 
concerning  the  necessity  that  '  tlie  Christ  should 
sufler  and  rise  again  from  the  dead  the  third  day  ; 
and  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should 
be  preached  in  his  name'  ;  and  especially  with 
the  opening  of  the  minds  of  those  who  were  to  be 
'  witnesses  of  these  things '  that  they  might  under- 
stand them.  The  historicity  of  this  as  conveying 
the  experience  and  convictions  of  tlie  Apostolic 
Church  is  strong,  and  it  atlords  exactly  the  link 
needed  to  unite  what  we  iind  in  the  Synoptics 
with  what  appears  as  preaching  and  teaching  in 
the  primitive  society.  The  illumination  of  the 
apostolic  mind  for  its  construction  of  a  doctrine  of 
atonement  resulting  from  the  Resurrection  and  the 
Great  Commission  was  perfected  by  the  experi- 
ences of — 

(3)  Pentecost. — The  coming  to  abide  with  them 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  'the  promise  of  the  Fatlier' 
(Ac  1*),  '  the  Spirit  of  Christ,'  was  for  the  Apostolic 
Church  the  ultimate  certainty  of  guidance  into 
all  the  truth,  and  the  supreme  authority  for  its 
adequate  utterance.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  as 
Jesus  had  defined  it  was  :  '  He  shall  take  of  mine 
and  shall  declare  it  unto  you'  (Jn  16'*).  To  the 
fullness  of  His  ministry  the  Apostolic  Church 
owed  the  interpretation  of  the  cross,  the  inspira- 
tion of  its  preaching,  the  construction  of  its  doc- 


ATOXEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


113 


trine,  and  especially  the  moral  and  spiritual  results 
in  the  life  of  the  individual  and  of  the  community 
which  were  the  living  verification  of  its  power, 
and  also  the  justification  of  the  moral  grounds  on 
which  the  declaration  and  experience  of  remission 
of  sins  were  based.  The  meaning  of  the  words  of 
Jesus  is  understood  through  the  worksof  His  Spirit ; 
the  significance  of  His  death  can  be  apprehended 
onlv  in  the  light  of  the  experience  it  creates. 
Only  so  can  an  adequate  soteriology  be  reached. 
From  first  to  last  the  apostolic  doctrine  of  the 
atonement  is  the  effort  to  interpret  this  experience 
in  the  relations  in  which  it  was  conceived  to  stand 
to  the  Christian  conceptions  of  God  and  man. 

II.  The  doctrise  preached. — l.  In  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles. — The  early  chapters  of  the  Acts 
contain  the  one  partuiclar  account  of  the  earliest 
form  the  doctrine  of  atonement  took  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Church ;  for  it  is  generally  admitted  that 
some  source  of  considerable  value  underlies  the 
speeches  of  Peter.  Both  their  christology  and 
soteriology  are  primitive  in  type — it  is  surely  not  the 
doctrine  of  the  2nd  century.  In  this  account  the 
suli'erings  and  death  of  Jesus  the  Messiah  have  a 
fundamental  place.  The  cross  is  now  more  than 
a  scandal ;  the  '  word  of  the  cross '  is  more  than 
an  apologetic  device  for  getting  over  the  difficul- 
ties of  accepting  a  cruciJtied  Messiah.  Although 
the  great  feature  of  the  apostolic  preaching  is 
not  the  explanation  of  the  death  of  Christ  in  re- 
lation to  the  remission  of  sins,  but  its  power  in 
spiritual  renewal,  it  contains  much  which  enables 
ns  to  perceive  how  the  primitive  community  was 
taught  to  regard  it.  Stmimarized,  this  is — (I) 
The  death  of  Christ  was  a  Divine  necessity,  ap- 
pointed by  God's  counsel  and  foreknowledge.  It 
was  a  crime  whose  issue  God  thwarted  for  His 
redeeming  purpose  (Ac  2^  3^). — <2)  Jesus  as  the 
Messiah  is  identified  with  the  suffering  Servant  of 
the  Lord  (4-''  8^"^).  This  conception,  abhorrent 
to  the  Jewish  mind  and  a  sufficient  ground  for 
rejecting  the  Messianic  claims  of  Jesus,  is  the 
assertion  of  the  vicarious  principle  of  the  righteous 
one  suffering  for  the  unrighteous  many  and  also 
the  sign  of  a  Divine  fellowship. — (3)  The  great 
gift  of  the  gospel — remission  of  sins — is  set  in 
direct  relation  to  the  crucified  Jesus  (2*  3^"  5" 
10°).  The  prominence  given  to  this  in  every 
sermon  suggests  that  this  connexion  cannot  be 
considered  accidental. — (4)  Reference  to  the  fre- 
quent observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper  (2**). 
When  it  is  remembered  that  nothing  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  is  more  primitive  than  the  sacra- 
ments, and  that  both  of  them  bear  implications 
of  Christ's  relation  to  the  remission  of  sins,  this 
reference  is  significant. — (5)  Christ's  death  is  not 
distinctly  represented  as  the  ground  of  forgiveness, 
by  setting  forth  the  Messiah's  death  as  a  satisfac- 
tion for  sin  or  as  a  substitute  for  sin's  penalty.  It 
is  set  forth  as  a  motive  to  repentance  and  a  means 
of  turning  men  away  from  sin,  but  its  saving 
value  L-5  not  more  closely  defined.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that  the  early  Apostolic  Church  attached 
a  saving  significance  to  the  death  of  Christ. 

2.  In  1  Peter.— It  is  usual  to  associate  with  the 
indications  of  the  doctrine  in  the  early  chapters  of 
Acts  the  constructive  tendencies  found  in  1  Peter. 
The  Epistle  of  James  is  too  uncertain  in  its  date 
and  authority,  and  its  aim  is  too  purely  practical 
to  warrant  appeal  to  it  on  the  apostolic  doctrine 
of  atonement.  Indeed,  1  Peter  is  far  from  being 
free  from  difficulty  when  used  for  this  purpose. 
The  signs  of  Pauline  influence  are  too  strong  for 
its  use  as  a  source  of  primitive  Christian  ideas  with- 
out some  hesitarion.  StiU,  the  fact  that  St.  Paul 
and  St.  Peter  are  represented  as  in  harmony  on  the 
significance  of  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ,  when 
they  are  manifestly  at  variance  in  other  important 
VOL.  I. — 8 


factors  of  the  primitive  faith,  is  not  without  its 
value  ;  it  is  possible  also  that  their  similarities  may 
be  accounted  for  by  their  common  loyalty  to  the 
accepted  Christian  tradition.  Taken  as  it  stands, 
St.  Peter's  contribution  may  be  epitomized  thus :  (1) 
Whilst  the  suffering  death  of  Christ  holds,  as  else- 
where in  apostolic  writings,  the  central  place,  its 
strongest  appeal  is  made  in  regard  to  the  moral 
quality  of  the  sufferings.  The  patience  and  inno- 
cence of  the  Sufferer  for  righteousness'  sake  control 
its  theological  presentation.  The  exhortation  to 
suffer  Avith  Christ  by  expressing  His  spirit  in  the 
life  of  discipleship  obviously  emphasizes  the  ethical 
appeal  of  His  example,  but  this  is  based  upon  a 
due  appreciation  of  His  sufferings  on  our  behalf. 
Quite  a  procession  of  theological  ideas  thus  emerges. 
--<2)  The  covenant  idea  with  its  sacrificial  implica- 
tion in  '  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ '  is 
present  (1*),  possibly  reminiscent  of  the  words  at 
the  Supper.— {3)  Ransomed  '  with  precious  blood, 
as  of  a  lamb  without  blemish  and  without  spot, 
even  the  blood  of  Christ'  (1"),  combines  the  idea  of 
the  sacrificial  lamb  with  possibly  an  echo  of  the 
'  ransom '  of  Mk  10*. — (4)  The  close  connexion  of 
Christ  who  'suffered  for  vou,  leaving  you  an 
example,  that  ye  should  follow  his  steps,'  and  its 
ethical  appeal,  with  the  clear  interpretation  of  the 
Passion  as  a  sin-bearing,  'who  his  own  self  bare 
our  sins  in  hb  body  upon  the  tree'  {2'*),  and  its 
profound  moral  issues,  '  that  we  having  died,  unto 
sins,  might  live  unto  righteousness ;  by  whose 
stripes  ye  were  healed ' — shows  how  intimately 
what  are  termed  the  objective  and  subjective  con- 
ceptions of  the  atonement  are  associated  in  the 
writer's  thought ;  the  end  is  moral  and  dominates 
the  means,  but  the  means  are  clearly  substitution- 
ary, to  the  extent  that  the  obligations  to  righteous- 
ness involved  in  'our  sins'  are  assumed  by  the 
sinless  Lamb  of  God. — ^5)  The  writer  once  again 
glides  with  simple  ease  and  familiarity  from  the 
torce  of  the  example  of  Christ  to  the  aoiding  fact 
of  His  sin-bearing  (3^*) :  '  Because  Christ  also 
suffered  for  sins  once  (axo^,  'once  for  aU'),  the 
righteous  for  (i-x^p)  the  unrighteous,  that  He  might 
bring  us  to  God.'  Access  to  God  is  regarded  as  a 
high  privilege  obtained  by  a  great  self-surrender 
and  not  as  a  native  right  to  be  taken  for  granted. 
Of  course  these  ideas,  which  the  writer  of  1  Peter 
discusses  in  this  apparently  incidental  way,  are 
closely  akin  to  those  of  the  righteousness  by  faith 
and  ethical  obedience  'in  Christ'  which  St.  Paul 
discusses  so  fully  and  of  set  purpose  in  Ro  3  and  6 
respectively,  and  this  may  suggest  his  influence. 
If  so,  then  the  evidence  of  1  Peter  will  fall  into  the 
later  Pauline  period  of  apostolic  doctrine,  which 
we  shall  now  consider  at  length ;  but  that  would 
not  depreciate  its  value  as  a  witness  to  the  faith  of 
j  the  Apostolic  Church  in  its  wider  range. 

III.  The  doctrise  developed.—!.  The 
Pauline  type. — It  will  be  obvious  to  any  reader  of 
the  literature  of  the  Apostolic  Church  that  its 
doctrine  of  atonement  was  the  subject  of  consider- 
able development  in  form.  In  tracing  this  the 
Pauline  writings  must  be  our  main  source.  Of  all 
NT  writers,  St.  Paul  goes  into  the  greatest  detail 
and  has  most  deliberately  and  continually  reflected 
upon  this  subject.  Indeed,  the  abundance  of  the 
material  he  provides  is  embarrassing  to  any  one 
seeking  a  unijfied  doctrine.  In  St.  Paul  we  find  for 
the  first  time  a  philosophy  of  the  death  of  Christ 
in  relation  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  is  ulti- 
mately based  upon  an  anaij'sis  of  the  Divine 
attributes  and  their  place  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  cross.  At  the  same  time  the 
emphasis  he  lays  upon  this  is  regarded  by  him  as 
in  accordance  with  the  belief  and  teaching  of  the 
primitive  community ;  it  is  the  centre  of  his  gospel 
and  theirs.     It  may  be  assnmed,  therefore,  that 


114 


ATOITEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


we  are  as  likely  to  leam  from  him  as  from  any 
other  source  Avnat  was  the  inner  meaning  of  the 

Erimitive  Christian  belief.  He  declared  that  what 
e  preached  concerning  the  dying  of  Christ  for  our 
sins  according  to  the  Scriptures  he  *  received  *  (1  Co 
15').  Whilst  it  is  possible  that  this  statement  finds 
a  fuller  definition  m  his  further  assertion,  '  Neither 
did  I  receive  it  from  man,  nor  was  I  taught  it,  but 
it  came  to  me  through  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ ' 
(Gal  V),  it  seems  clear  that  St.  Paul's  doctrine 
rested  upon  the  common  apostolic  data  given  in  (1) 
the  words  of  Jesus  respecting  the  necessity  of  His 
death  on  man's  behalf ;  (2)  the  very  early  Christian 
idea  that  it  was  included  in  the  Divine  purpose ;  (3) 
the  conception  of  the  vicarious  sufferings  of  the 
righteous  and  their  merit  founded  on  Is  53  which 
had  been  elaborated  in  later  Jewish  thought.* 
Although  it  seems  clear  that  this  late  Jewish  doc- 
trine was  a  source  of  St.  Paul's  theory,  it  under- 
went partial  transformation  at  his  hands ;  it  was 
ethicized  ;  moreover,  it  was  probably  the  vicarious 
idea,  as  it  was  associated  witii  the  prophetic  rather 
than  with  the  priestly  or  legal  conceptions,  that  he 
appropriated  ;  it  was  not  the  literal  legal  substitu- 
tion and  transfer,  but  the  vicariousness  of  a  real 
experience  in  which  the  righteous  bear  upon  their 
hearts  the  woes  and  sins  of  the  sinful,  t 

(1)  St.  Paul's  early  preaching. — The  earliest 
indication  of  St.  Paul's  view  of  atonement  would 
naturally  be  sought  in  his  preaching  during  the 
fifteen  or  more  years  before  he  wrote  the  letters  in 
which  he  sets  forth  more  deliberately  and  with  ob- 
vious carefulness  his  matured  doctrinal  judgments. 
The  author  of  the  Acts  gives  little  light  on  St. 
Paul's  method  of  setting  out  his  interpretation  of 
the  death  of  Christ  in  his  discourses  ;  now  he  was 
accustomed  to  place  it  in  relation  to  forgiveness  of 
.sin  in  his  earliest  preaching  does  not  definitely 
appear.  The  discourse  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia  may 
illustrate  the  character  of  his  reference  to  it : 
'  through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you  forgive- 
ness of  sins'  (Ac  13^) ;  out  nothing  is  defined  more 
closely.  To  the  Ephesian  elders  at  Miletus  he 
speaks  about  '  the  Church  of  God,  which  he  pur- 
chased with  his  ovna  blood '  (20^).     St.  Paul  himself 

fives  us  the  only  valuable  account  of  his  preaching. 
ts  dominant  topic  was  the  crucifixion  —  'the 
preaching  of  the  cross'  (1  Co  1^');  *I  determined 
not  to  know  anything  among  you  save  Jesus  Christ 
and  him  crucified '  (2^).  No  explanation  is  given. 
But  the  fact  that  he  made  the  cross  supreme  when 
it  was  regarded  as  a  direct  antagonism  and  provocat- 
ive by  those  he  sought  to  win — a  scandal  to  Jews 
and  foolishness  to  the  Gentiles — implies  that  it  was 
associated  Avith  an  interpretation  that  made  it 
something  different  from  a  martyrdom.  Such  a 
martyrdom  neither  Jew  nor  Greek  would  have 
regarded  with  the  scorn  they  exhibited  for  the 
interpretation  St.  Paul  gave  them  in  order  to  meet 
their  challenge  for  explanation. 

(2)  The  Pauline  Epistles. — On  the  whole,  St.  Paul's 
preaching  carries  us  no  further  towards  a  know- 
ledge of  any  reasoned  doctrine  of  atonement  than 
the  position  reached  in  the  preaching  of  his  fellow- 
apostles — that  '  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according 
to  the  Scriptures.'  Of  course  this  is  in  itself  a  vast 
doctrinal  implication.  Still,  for  the  structure  of 
the  Pauline  doctrine  we  are  shut  up  to  his  teach- 
ing in  his  Epistles.  In  his  earliest  writings  — 
the  Thessalonian  Epistles — we  practically  get  no 
further  towards  his  doctrine  than  in  his  preaching, 
except  perhaps  that  the  idea  emerges  that  in  some 
way  Christ  identifies  Himself  with  our  evil  that 
He  may  identify  us  with  Himself  in  His  own  good 
(1  Th  5"'-).     We  meet  the  organized  body  or  his 

*  Cf.  Stevens,  Christian  Doctrine  of  Salvation,  59,  122. 
t  Cf.  O.  A.  Smith,  Mod.  Crit.  and  Preaching  of  OT,  London, 
1901,  p.  120  fl. 


doctrine  in  the  well-authenticated  group  of  hia 
writings  to  the  Galatians,  Romans,  and  Corinth- 
ians, with  a  supplementary  view  in  the  Imprison- 
ment Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians. 
We  may  differentiate  this  teaching,  but  it  has 
throughout  most  important  underlying  principles 
in  common.  It  falls  conveniently  into  five  divisions 
— Atonement  and  Law  ;  Atonement  and  Righteous- 
ness ;  Atonement  and  Personality ;  Atonement 
and  Newness  of  Life;  Atonement  and  the  Universe. 
In  briefly  reviewing  these,  it  should  be  remembered 
that  according  to  St.  Paul  the  love  of  God  is  the 
first  and  last  motive  of  redemption,  and  that  none 
of  the  atoning  processes  is  separable  from  the  full 
activities  of  the  Divine  Personality. 

(a)  Atonement  and  Law. — This  is  the  form  iii 
which  St.  Paul  construes  his  doctrine  in  the  Galatian 
Epistle,  which  deals  more  exclusively  than  any 
other  NT  document  with  the  significance  of  the 
death  of  Christ.  '  Christ  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  having  become  a  curse  for  {vv^p) 
us ;  for  it  is  written.  Cursed  is  every  one  that 
hangeth  upon  a  tree'  (Gal  3^').  The  conception 
here  is  distinctly  juridical ;  whether  it  is  also  penal 
will  depend  upon  the  definition  of  '  penal.'  If 
punishment  implies  guilt,  the  sufferings  of  Christ 
were  not  strictly  penal,  for  He  is  always  set  forth 
as  guiltless ;  moreover,  guilt  cannot  be  transferred 
as  guilt.  His  sufferings  did,  in  St.  Paul's  judgment, 
serve  the  end  of  punishment ;  thev  were  representa- 
tively penal ;  Christ  took  the  place  of  the  guilty 
as  far  as  it  involved  penal  consequences  ;  for  special 
emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  instrument  of  death — the 
cross — and  upon  its  curse,  though  there  seems 
nothing  to  justify  the  attributing  to  Christ  of  the 
position  suggested  by  the  allusion  to  Dt  21''^  of  one 
'  accursed  of  God '  which  has  at  times  been  pressed 
by  expositors.  That  He  endured  the  consequences 
of  sucn  a  position  and  in  this  sense  was  '  made  a 
curse  on  our  behalf '  is  the  Apostle's  application  of 
it.  This  endurance  is  regarded  as  the  recognition 
of  the  just  requirement  of  the  law  of  God — not  the 
ceremonial  law  alone,  but  also  the  moral  demands 
arising  out  of  God's  holy  and  righteous  nature, 
and  especially  those  which  empirically  St.  Paul 
had  put  to  the  test  in  vain  in  his  seeking  after 
personal  righteousness.  St.  Paul  does  not  deny 
the  authority  of  this  law ;  he  asserts  it,  but  the 
fact  that  it  was  added  to  the  promise  for  '  the  sake 
of  transgression '  resulted  in  its  making  men  sinful ; 
it  brought  a  curse  :  '  Cursed  is  every  one  which  con- 
tinueth  not  in  all  things  that  are  written  in  the 
book  of  the  law,  to  do  them '  (3'").  With  this  curse 
in  its  consequences  Christ  identifies  Himself,  as  in 
the  Apostle's  thought  He  had  identified  Himself 
with  mankind  in  being  'bom  of  a  woman,  born 
under  the  law'  (4*).  By  thus  making  Himself 
absolutely  one  with  those  under  ban,  absorbing 
into  Himself  all  that  it  meant,  He  removed  the 
obstacle  to  forgiveness  in  the  righteous  attitude  of 
God  towards  sin  which  could  not  be  overcome  until 
sin  had  been  virtually  punished.  It  was  thus  that 
the  way  was  opened  for  man  to  identify  himself  by 
personal  faith  and  living  experience  with  Christ  s 
death,  so  that  St.  Paul  was  justified  in  saying : 
'  For  I  through  the  law  died  unto  the  law,  that  I 
might  live  unto  God.  I  have  been  crucified  with 
Christ ;  yet  I  live  ;  and  yet  no  longer  I,  but  Christ 
livethinme'(2'»'-). 

This  conception  of  St.  Paul's  adds  the  ethical 
idea  of  atonement  to  the  juridical,  which  other 
passages  reiterate  (5^"  6").  It  is,  however,  essenti- 
ally Pauline  to  regard  the  ethical  as  depending 
for  its  possibility  and  efficacy  in  experience  upon 
the  juridical  ;  othervrise  'Christ  died  for  nought.' 
God  must  vindicate  His  law  so  that  He  may 
justly  forgive ;  the  operation  of  grace  is  connected 
I  with  the  assertion  of^  justice.     But  ultimately  St. 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


115 


Paul's  conception  really  transcends  these  contrasts  ; 
for  it  is  God  Himself  who  in  His  love  provides 
the  way  to  be  both  just  and  gracious  ;  He,  not 
another,  provides  the  satisfaction.  In  the  last 
analysis  God  is  presented  as  removing  His  own 
obstacles  to  forgiveness  ;  the  death  in  which  His 
righteous  law  is  exhibited  is  the  provision  of  His 
antecedent  love  ;  the  commending  of  His  love  is 
the  prior  purpose  resulting  in  Christ  being  '  made  a 
curse  on  our  behalf.'*  Consequently  the  whole 
Christian  life  is  resolved  into  a  response  to  God's 
love  exhibited  in  the  death  of  His  Son ;  it  does 
away  with  the  hindrance  to  forgiveness  in  God's 
law,' and  at  the  same  time  inspires  the  faith  which 
conducts  into  ethical  conformity  to  Christ  in  man's 
experience. 

(b)  Atonement  and  Rightemtsness. — This  is  dealt 
with  exhaustively  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans ; 
the  great  question  the  Epistle  discusses  is — How 
sliall  a  sinful  man  be  righteous  with  God  ?  and  the 
answer  is — By  receiving  '  a  righteousness  of  God  ' 
which  is  'revealed  from  faith  to  faith.'  In  the 
interpretation  of  this  answer  we  reach  the  heart 
of  the  apostolic  doctrine,  and  upon  it  the  great 
bulk  of  later  historical  discussions  has  turned. 
For  more  than  the  briefest  hints  here  given  of  the 
points  of  exegesis  involved,  reference  should  be 
made  to  commentaries  on  the  Epistle.  St.  Paul 
distinctly  states  the  two  sides  of  the  meaning 
of  atonement  referred  to  in  the  beginning  of  this 
article.  But  his  interest  is  primarily  absorbed 
by  the  efl&cient  cause  of  at-one-ment  as  the  ideal 
end,  viz.  the  atonement,  the  Divine  provision  of 
the  satisfaction  which  the  Divine  righteousness 
requires  to  be  exhibited  in  order  that  forgiveness 
of  sins  may  be  bestowed  and  a  restoration  of 
fellowship  between  God  and  man  achieved.  To 
this  he  devotes  his  utmost  strength ;  he  regards 
it  as  primary  in  the  order  of  thought  as  well  as  in 
the  redemptive  process.  Still  he  is  nobly  loyal  to 
both  conceptions,  if,  indeed,  they  were  for  him 
really  two ;  for  he  thinks  of  the  unity  of  the  pro- 
cess ^vith  the  end  as  exhibiting  the  perfectness  of 
the  Divine  purpose  of  grace.  This  point  will  be 
discussed  later.  Meanwhile  it  must  be  pointed  out 
that  the  strong  divergencies  revealed  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  apostolic  doctrine  have  frequently 
resulted  from  regarding  one  or  other  of  these 
phases  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  as  in  itself  adequate 
to  explain  the  whole.  Ethical  theories  have  sought 
to  ignore  the  juridical  means  ;  juridical  theories 
have  often  stopped  short  of  the  ethical  end.  The 
Pauline  doctrine  does  neither.  Both  are  met  in 
the  conception,  essential  to  his  doctrine,  of  the 
ideal  and  actual  identification  of  Christ  \vith  man 
in  his  sin,  and  of  man  with  Christ  in  newness  of 
life ;  and  also  in  the  identification  of  both  mth 
God  in  His  unchanging  righteousness  and  in  His 
eternal  love ;  for  St.  Paul  with  ceaseless  loyalty 
carries  all  the  processes  of  redemption  in  time  up 
to  the  initiative  and  executive  of  the  Divine  pur- 
pose. 

Righteousness  is  the  starting-point  of  his  discus- 
sion ;  it  is  seen  in  '  the  wrath  of  God  revealed  from 
heaven  against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteous- 
ness of  men'  (Ro  1^).  God  can  never  be  at 
peace  vnth  sin.  Law  brings  no  righteousness ;  '  by 
the  law  is  the  knowledge  of  sin'  (^).  All  have 
sinned ;  not  one  is  righteous ;  the  necessity  for  a 
righteousness  apart  from  the  law  is  obvious. 
The  provision  of  this,  '  even  the  righteousness  of 
God  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  unto  all  them 
that  believe '  (3^),  is  the  Divine  atonement.  This 
implies,  of  course,  in  its  completion  a  great  moral 
and  spiritual  change  in  the  nature  and  character 
of  those  who  '  have  received  the  atonement ' ;  that 

*  Cl.  P.  Wemle,  Anfange  umertr  Reliffion,  Tabingen,  1901, 
p.  146 ;  Stevens,  Ckrittian  Doctrine  of  Salration,  67. 


end  does  not  yet  receive  St.  Paul's  attention  ;  his 
mind  is  preoccupied  with  the  means.  He  is  not  even 
at  present  intent  on  demonstrating  the  necessity 
of  this  ethical  transformation  ;  he  is  in  subjection 
to  the  arresting  fact  that  all  ungodliness  and  un- 
righteousness of  men  was  exposed  to  the  Divine 
wrath,  and  is  constrained  to  snow  how  the  wrath 
was  withheld.  This  was  not  primarily  to  be  son^t 
in  the  measure  in  which  men  might  be  arrested  oy 
the  fact  and  cease  to  sin ;  they  must  and  would  do 
that  in  proportion  as  they  received  the  atonement. 
But  for  the  time  being  St.  Paul  is  confining  his 
thought  entirely  to  the  '  objective '  work  of  Christ 
in  the  atonement,  whereby  was  provided  and  set 
forth  the  means  by  which  the  '  subjective '  work  of 
Christ  in  personal  union  with  the  believing  soul 
might  be  possible  ;  indeed,  in  some  respects  it  had 
been  actual  also  in  the  past,  for  sins  had  already 
been  remitted  by  God.  '  Being  justified  freely  by 
his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus :  whom  God  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation, 
through  faith,  by  his  blood,  to  show  his  righteous- 
ness, because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins  done 
aforetime,  in  the  forbearance  of  God ;  for  the 
showing,  I  say,  of  his  righteousness  at  this  present 
season :  that  he  might  himself  be  just,  and  the 
justifier  of  him  that  hath  faith  in  Jesus '  {3***-). 

Thus  St.  Paul  conceived  the  method  of  deliver- 
ance from  the  wrath  of  God  which  was  inevitable  in 
the  presence  of  unrighteousness ;  it  is  an  objective 
work  and  is  in  response  to  faith,  however  fuU  of 
personal  renewal  in  righteousness  its  ethical  impli- 
cations may  eventually  become ;  for  the  destrucrion 
of  sin  and  the  gift  of  life  are  regarded  as  depending 
upon  a  free  bestowal  on  sinners  of  a  righteousness 
of  God.  The  interpretation  of  this  crucial  passage 
and  its  context  depends  upon  the  meaning  assigned 
to  the  terms  '  righteousness  of  God '  and  '  propitia- 
tion.' The  idea  expressed  in  the  former  term 
occupies  the  central  place  in  St.  Paul's  conception 
of  atonement.  Righteousness  was  hLs  passion ;  its 
quest  the  summum  boniim  of  his  life;  'he  had 
sought  it  long  in  vain,  and  when  at  length  he  found 
it  he  gave  to  it  a  name  expressive  of  its  infinite 
worth  to  his  heart:  the  righteousness  of  God.'* 
To  this  title — *  a  righteousness  of  God ' — he  firmly 
adheres ;  it  is  distinctive ;  to  him  it  is  something 
belonging  to  the  Christian  man,  yet  it  is  not  his 
personal  righteousness  of  character ;  he  receives  it. 
It  also  belongs  to  God,  but  it  is  not  His  personal 
righteousness  which  is  imparted  to  the  believer. 
St.  Paul's  conceprion  of  it  does  not  occur  in  the 
Gospels,  where  the  term  stands  for  tJie  righteous- 
ness of  which  God  is  the  centre,  which  is  His 
essential  attribute.  The  nearest  approach  to  the 
Pauline  sense  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is  the  grace 
of  God  in  the  free  pardon  of  sin.  In  St.  Paul, 
righteousness  is  a  '  gift '  from  God  to  him  who 
believes  in  Christ.  He  is  dealt  with  as  righteous. 
To  regard  the  righteousness  of  GJod  as  essentially 
self-imparting,  taking  hold  of  human  lives  and 
filling  them  with  its  Divine  energies,  without  any 
reference  to  the  problem  sin  has  created,  is  not 
Pauline.  To  St.  Paul,  as  well  as  to  all  XT  teaching, 
God's  righteousness  was  the  affluent,  overflowing 
source  of  all  the  goodness  in  the  world,  but  he  felt 
that  sin  made  a  ditference  to  God  ;  it  was  sin  against 
His  righteousness  ;  and  His  righteousness  had  to 
be  vindicated  against  it  ;  it  comd  not  ignore  it. 

Any  view  which  failed  to  appreciate  this  problem 
would  miss  the  characteristic  solution  that  bt.  Paul 
unceasingly  presents  in  the  '  propitiation '  in  the 
blood  of  Christ,  'whom  God  had  set  forth  to  show 
his  righteousness  in  passing  over  sins  done  afore- 
time.' Ritschl's  view,  that  always  in  St.  Paul  the 
righteousness  of  God  means  the  mode  of  procedure 
which  is  consistent  with  God's  having  the  salva- 
*  Bmce,  St.  PauTi  Conception  of  CArutimity,  144. 


116 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


tion  of  believers  as  His  end,*  overlooks  the  emphatic 
contention  of  the  A])ostle,  that  it  is  the  ungodly  to 
M'hom  God  is  gracious  rather  than  the  faitliful 
within  the  covenant  privilege ;  this  latter  is  the 
class  referred  to  in  the  Psalms  and  Second  Isaiah, 
to  whom  God  exhibited  His  righteousness  in  pres- 
ence of  the  wrongs  done  them  by  their  enemies. 
Ritschl's  conception  is  an  attractive  presentation  of 
the  meaning  of  the  term  in  other  relations,  but  it 
is  irrelevant  to  St.  Paul's  distinctive  meaning.  The 
suggestive  view  of  the  term  expounded  by  Seeberg 
in  Der  Tod  Christi,  that  the  righteousness  of  God 
means  simply  His  moral  activity  in  harmony  with 
His  true  character,  the  norm  of  which  is  that  He 
should  institute  and  maintain  fellowship  with  men  ; 
that  if  He  did  not  do  so  He  would  not  be  righteous 
and  would  fail  to  act  in  His  proper  character,  leaves 
unanswered  in  any  distinctive  Pauline  fashion  the 
question  what  means  God  takes  to  secure  fellowship 
with  sinful  men  so  that  He  may  act  towards  the 
ungodly  in  a  way  which  does  justice  to  Himself. 
St.  Paul  does  not  leave  the  presentation  of  Christ 
as  a  means  by  which  this  fellowship  may  be 
instituted,  without  a  much  closer  definition  ;  he 
clearly  relates  it  to  the  vicarious  principle  lying  for 
him  in  his  elect  word  '  propitiation,'  whether  it  be 
taken  as  a  strictly  sacrificial  term  or  not  (see,  in 
addition,  art.  Propitiation). 

Denney,  who  discusses  these  views  at  Iength,t 
maintains  that  the  righteousness  of  God  has  not 
the  same  meaning  throughout  this  passage  (S^'*-) ; 
it  has  '  in  one  place — say  in  v.^ — the  half-technical 
sense  which  belongs  to  it  as  a  summary  of  St. 
Paul's  gospel ;  and  in  another — say  in  \.^ — the 
larger  and  more  general  sense  which  might  belong 
to  it  elsewhere  in  Scripture  as  a  synonym  for  God's 
character,  or  at  least  for  one  of  His  essential  at- 
tributes.' But  these  two  views  are  not  unrelated  ; 
they  cannot  be  discussed  apart ;  we  see  them  har- 
monized as  complements  in  the  true  meaning  of 
'propitiation.'  Christ  is  set  forth  by  God  as  a 
propitiation  to  exhibit  their  unity  and  consistency 
with  each  other.  When  the  Pauline  view  of  '  pro- 
pitiation,' as  'relative  to  some  problem  created  by 
sin  for  a  God  who  would  justify  sinners,'  is  accepted 
in  a  substitutionary  sense  and  the  argument  of  the 
passage  reaches  its  climax,  the  two  senses  of  the 
righteousness  of  God  in  it  '  have  sifted  themselves 
out,  so  to  speak,  and  stand  distinctly  side  by  side.'  J 
God  is  the  Just  in  His  own  character  ;  and  at  the 
same  time,  in  providing  a  righteousness  of  God 
through  faith,  which  stands  to  the  good  of  the 
believing  sinner.  He  is  the  Justifier.  That  both 
these  meanings  are  present  in  atonement  and  are 
there  liarmonized  with  one  another,  is  what  St. 
Paul  seeks  to  bring  out. 

St.  Paul  would  show  God  righteous  in  His 
forbearance  in  'the  passing  over  of  sins  done 
aforetime.'  But,  as  he  defines  the  effects  of  the 
pronitiation,  he  leaves  the  wrath  of  God  in  the 
background  ;  the  forbearance  of  God  becomes  the 
centre  of  his  thought ;  that  is  a  gracious  fact  and 
must  be  accounted  for.  Why  has  God  never  dealt 
with  sinful  men  according  to  their  sins  ?  He  has 
always  been  slow  to  anger  and  of  great  kindness,  a 
gracious  God  and  merciful ;  sins  done  aforetime  were 
passed  over.  Does  the  doing  of  this  impugn  His 
righteousness  ?  St.  Paul  finds  his  apology  for,  and 
explanation  of,  the  universal  graciousness  of  God  in 
the  propitiation  which  He  has  set  forth  in  Clirist 
by  His  blood.  God  cannot  be  charged  with  moral 
indifference  because  He  has  always  been  God,  the 
Saviour.  Sin  has  never  been  a  trivial  matter ;  any 
omission  to  mark  it  by  inflicting  its  full  penal  con- 
sequences has  been  due  to  forbearance,  which  now 
in  the  propitiation  justifies  itself  to  His  righteous- 

•  Reehtfertigung  und  Versohnung,  ii.  117. 

t  Death  of  Christ,  164  S.  J  lb.  165. 


ness.  If,  apart  from  this,  God  had  invested  with 
privilege  those  whose  sin  deserved  the  manifesta- 
tion of  His  wrath,  He  would,  St.  Paul  thinks,  have 
suppressed  His  righteousness.  To  show  the  Justi- 
fier, whether  '  in  respect  of  sins  done  aforetime '  or 
'  at  this  present  season,'  to  be  Himself  just,  St.  Paul 
holds  the  setting  forth  of  His  righteousness  by  the 
propitiation  in  the  blood  of  Christ  to  be  necessary. 
Christ's  death,  therefore,  was  something  more  than 
a  great  ethical  appeal  of  the  love  of  God  in  sufier- 
ing  for  sin  to  the  heart  and  conscience  of  men ;  it 
had  been  rendered  necessary  by  the  remission  of 
sins  in  ages  befoie  the  Advent,  as  well  as  to  justify 
the  readiness  and  desire  of  God  to  remit  the  sins  of 
any  man  who  '  at  this  present  season '  •  hath  faith 
in  Jesus.' 

This  exaltation  of  the  forbearance  of  God  as  the 
ultimate  explanation  of  the  propitiation  is  intended 
to  make  known  the  ultimate  fact  that  the  wrath  of 
God  against  sin  lies  within  the  supreme  constraint 
of  the  love  of  God — '  His  own  love'  which  He  com- 
mendeth  toward  us  in  that  while  we  were  yet  sinners 
Christ  died  for  us  (S**^-)-  Christ  was  set  forth  by  God 
Himself ;  His  love  provided  the  propitiation  ;  there 
was  no  constraint  upon  Christ.  He  gave  Himself  up 
for  us ;  there  was  no  conflict  between  the  Divine 
wrath  and  the  Divine  love  ;  they  were  reconciled  in 
God,  and  their  reconciliation  set  forth  in  the  pro- 
pitiation in  the  blood  of  Christ.  The  wrath  is  tlie 
expression  and  minister  of  the  love ;  mere  self-con- 
sideration is  unknown  in  the  Divine  activity.  More- 
over, where  the  love  has  prevailed,  the  wrath  fails, 
'While  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us ;  much 
more  then  being  now  justified  in  his  blood  shall  we 
be  saved  through  him  from  the  wrath.  For  if  while 
we  were  enemies  we  were  reconciled  to  God  through 
the  death  of  his  Son,  much  more  being  reconciled, 
shall  we  be  saved  by  his  life'  (5^^').  The  achieve- 
ment of  redemption  in  its  ethical  value  proceeds 
from  the  death  of  Christ  as  the  supreme  demonstra- 
tion of  the  Divine  love,  by  evoking  in  sinful  souls 
the  response  of  a  personal  surrender  to  the  newness 
of  life  to  which  it  constrains.  This  may  introduce 
the  classical  passage  in  St.  Paul's  writings  on  the 
doctrine  of  atonement.  'AH  things  are  of  God, 
who  reconciled  us  to  himself  through  Jesus  Christ, 
and  gave  unto  us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  ;  to 
wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
unto  himself,  not  reckoning  unto  them  their  tres- 
passes, and  having  committed  unto  us  the  word  of 
reconciliation.  We  are  ambassadors  therefore  on 
behalf  of  Christ,  as  though  God  were  entreating  by 
us ;  we  beseech  you  on  behalf  of  Christ,  be  ye 
reconciled  to  God.  Him  who  knew  no  sin  he  made 
to  be  sin  on  our  behalf,  that  we  might  become  the 
righteousness  of  God  in  him'  (2  Co  5'**^).  The 
Pauline  doctrine  receives  its  most  satisfying  and 
probably  its  most  permanent  interpretation  in  the 
restoration  of  acceptable  personal  relations  between 
God  and  man,  and  the  perfecting  of  these  in  a 
fellowship  of  holy  love. 

{c)  Atonement  and  Personality. — Love,  the  perfect 
expression  of  the  Divine  Personality,  constrained 
God  to  identify  Himself  in  Christ  with  us,  and  con- 
strains us  to  identify  ourselves  in  Christ  with  God. 
Personality^  finds  its  perfection  in  fellowship  ;  self- 
identification  Avith  others  is  the  ultimate  of  fellow- 
ship. Identification  is  the  principle  on  which  an 
interpretation  of  reconciliation  most  easily  proceeds 
(see  Keconciliation).  Love  is  essentially  self-im- 
partation.  Keconciliation  is  an  exchange,  the  giving 
and  receiving  of  love;  'at-one-ment'  is  its  issue. 
This  is  based  in  the  Pauline  thought  upon  the  Divine 
initiative.  God  '  made  him  who  knew  no  sin  to  be 
sin  on  our  behalf,'  that  there  might  be  identification 
of  righteousness  as  well  as  of  love  in  the  reconcilia- 
tion, '  that  we  might  become  the  righteousness  of 
God  in  him,'  '  not  reckoning  unto  men  their  tres- 


AToxr^n:xT 


ATONEMENT 


117 


passes.'  These  woiu::  ...__  :  the  idea  of  such  an 
identitication  of  men  *in  Christ"  that  there  is  on 
Gixl's  part  a  general  justification  of  mankind  in  the 
form  of  a  non-imputation  of  sins,  on  the  purely 
objective  ground  of  God's  satisfaction  by  self-giving 
in  Hira  who  knowing  no  sin  was  made  sin  on  our 
behalf.  Individual  identification  of  man  will  follow, 
as,  in  response  to  God's  entreating,  each  man  is 
reconciled  to  God.  '  For  the  love  of  Christ  con- 
straineth  xis  ;  because  we  thus  judge,  that  one  died 
for  all,  therefore  all  died  ;  and  he  died  for  all,  that 
they  which  live  should  no  longer  live  unto  them- 
selves, but  to  him  who  for  their  sakes  died  and  rose 
a-ain '  (2  Co  5'"-).  As  the  race  died  in  Christ,  His 
death  is  a  true  crisis  in  every  man's  history ;  there 
is  a  new  creation,  which  includes  both  a  new  statos 
and  a  new  creature.  That  all  died  in  Christ  is 
neither  wholly  subjective  nor  wholly  objective. 
St.  Paul's  full  doctrine  requires  both  ;  their  death  is 
died  by  Him,  and  His  death  is  died  by  them.  But  in 
the  order  of  thought  He  must  first  die  their  death, 
that  they  may  die  His.  We  never  read  that  G^ 
has  been  reconciled  ;  He  reconciled  Himself  to  the 
world  in  Christ,  but  men  are  reconciled  or  '  receive 
the  reconciliation.'  St.  Paul's  judgment  is  that  the 
atonement  is  a  finished  work,  but  that  the  '  at-one- 
ment '  is  progressive  ;  reconciliation  is  first  a  work 
wrought  on  men's  behalf  before  it  is  ^Tought  within 
their  hearts  ;  it  is  a  work  outside  of  men,  that  it 
may  be  a  work  within  them  ;  there  is  objective 
basis  for  the  subjective  experience. 

Some  interpreters,  e.g.  Denney,*  would  limit  the 
reconciliation  to  what  God  in  Christ  has  done  oat- 
side  of  us  ;  others,  e.g.  Kaftan,t  hold  that  nothing 
is  to  be  called  reconciliation  unless  men  are  actually 
reconciled.  St.  Paul's  doctrine  isconsistent  with  the 
view  that  reconciliation  is  both  something  which  is 
done  and  something  which  is  being  done.  The  ex- 
pression of  that  which  is  done  and  the  source  of  that 
which  is  being  done  are  seen  in  the  solemn  assertion 
that  God  made  Him  who  knew  no  sin  to  be  sin  on 
our  behalf.  No  exegesis  is  more  than  a  halting  in- 
terpretation of  the  profound  significance  of  this  say- 
ing. At  least  the  words  mean  that  He  died  for  our 
sin  in  regard  to  its  consequences.  They  seem,  how- 
ever, to  mean  more  ;  but  in  what  sense  God's  love 
in  the  gift  of  Christ  can  be  said  to  be  identified 
with  '  sin  on  our  behalf,'  it  is  impossible  to  say. 
Certain  it  i>  that  St.  Patil  had  other  and  more  osnal 
ways  of  saying  that  the  sinless  One  was  a  sin-bearer 
in  the  sense  of  an  otiering  for  sin.  The  strength  of 
the  saying  is  that  He  died  to  all  that  sin  could  mean, 
and  that,  in  this  dying  unto  sin  once  for  all,  the 
race  with  which  He  "identified  Himself  in  His  suffer- 
ings and  death  died  with  Him  ;  it  is  a  death  which 
contains  the  death  of  all,  rather  than  solely  a  death 
which  would  otherwise  have  been  died  by  all ;  in  it 
their  trespasses  are  not  imputed  unto  them,  and  by 
the  constraint  of  its  demonstration  of  love  they  live 
not  unto  themselves  but  unto  Him  who  died  for  them 
and  rose  again.  The  statement  that  all  this  was 
the  work  of  '  God  in  Christ '  suffices  to  refute  any 
reading  of  the  process  of  reconciliation  which  sug- 
gests a  contrast  that  approaches  competition  be- 
tween the  righteousness  of  God  and  the  love  of 
Christ.  It  is  identification  which  is  supreme  here. 
For,  while  it  is  no  doubt  true  that  the  conception  of 
Christ  as  substitute  suits  the  interpretation  of  His 
death  as  sacrificial,  the  idea  of  representation  best 
accords  with  the  whole  group  of  passages  from  which 
by  induction  St.  Paxil's  law  of  redemption  is  to  be 
gatheretl.  In  these,  Christ  appears  as  a  central 
Person,  in  whom  the  race  is  gathered  into  an  ethical 
unity,  having  one  responsibility  and  one  inheritance. 
In  this  identity  even  those  realities  usually  regarded 
as  inseparable  from  personality,  such  as  sm  and 
righteousness,  are  treated  as  separable  entities  pass- 

*  Death  of  Christ,  145.  t  DoffmatH,  §  52  ff. 


ing  freely  from  the  one  participant  in  the  identitica- 
tion to  the  other— sin  to  the  Sinless  One,  righteous- 
ness to  the  unrighteous.  An  objective  identitj'  of 
this  order,  however,  does  not  permanently  satisfj^ 
so  keen  a  thinker  as  St.  Paul ;  ne  cannot  rest  short 
of  subjective  identity  between  Redeemer  and  re- 
deemed. Not  only  in  virtual  oneness  by  Divine  ap- 
pointment, but  in  actual  union  by  living  experience, 
is  identification  to  be  achieved.  This  provides  the 
basis  for  St.  Paul's  teaching  on — 

(d)  Atonement  and  Newness  of  Life. — The  work 
of  redemption  was  not  whoUy  a  matter  of  juridical 
substitution  and  imputation.  Another  line  of 
thought  of  great  importance  is  pursued,  besides 
the  freeing  from  the  curse  and  the  deliverance 
from  wrath.  The  relation  of  men  to  the  salvation 
of  Christ  is  not  purely  passive.*  They  must  enter 
into  intimate  tmion  of  life  with  Him.  They  must 
die  in  effect  with  Christ  to  sin  on  His  cross,  and 
rise  with  Him  in  newness  of  life.  Through  their 
faith  they  constitute  His  mystical  body ;  they 
have  corporate  identity  with  Him  in  'the  life 
which  is  life  indeed ' ;  they  are  saved  from  the 
power  as  well  as  the  guilt  of  sin ;  freedom  from 
the  law  of  sin  and  death  completes  the  release  from 
its  condemnation  ;  the  release  from  past  sin  in  the 
atonement  in  Christ's  death  does  not  exhaust  its 
aim;  it  involves  the  actual  renunciation  of  the 
selfish  life  and  the  realization  of  the  life  of  holy 
love. 

Although  this  conception  is  not  wholly  out  of 
mind  in  chs.  3  and  4  of  Romans  and  elsewhere  (cf. 
Gal  2^,  Col  220  3^  Ph  .3»^).  in  which  the  juridical 
view  of  Christ's  death  is  developed,  it  finds  its  full 
presentation  in  reply  to  an  imaginary  objection  to 
the  juridical  view  in  Ro  6  and  the  following  three 
chapters.  The  question.  Shall  we  continue  in  sin 
that  grace  may  abound  ?  starts  St.  Paul  upon  an 
exposition  of  the  essential  relation  between  the 
righteousness  which  is  by  faith  in  Christ  as  '  pro- 
pitiation,' and  the  righteousness  which  is  personal 
and  real,  through  vital  fellowship  with  His  death 
and  resurrection  ;  'crucified  with  him,  buried  with 
him,  raised  with  him,'  believers  also  walk  with 
Him  '  in  newness  of  life.'  There  is  something  in 
the  experience  of  Christ  which  they  repeat  so  far 
as  its  ethical  implications  can  be  realized  in  their 
own  experience ;  for  the  cl<^est  of  Unks  exists  be- 
tween the  saving  deed  of  Christ  and  the  ethical 
issues  of  the  salvation  it  has  brought  about.  Al- 
though St.  Paul  does  not  make  any  direct  use  of 
the  spotless  holiness  and  perfect  obedience  of 
Christ  save  in  so  far  as  they  issue  in  His  death, 
still  these  ethical  qualities  of  the  Redeemer  be- 
come the  ethical  demand  in  the  redeemed  as  their 
union  of  life  with  Him  is  unfolded.  The  great 
Pauline  conception  '  in  Christ '  is  required  to  com- 
plete on  its  ethical  side  the  salvation  which  is 
'  through  Christ '  on  the  legal  side. 

In  recent  exposition  the  relation  between  these 
two — the  '  subjective-mystical '  view  of  salvation 
and  the  '  objective-juridical ' — has  been  much  dis- 
cussed. Is  the  former  an  addition,  a  supplement, 
a  correlative,  or  a  transformation  of  the  latter? 
'  Probably  a  majority  of  recent  scholars  hold  that 
the  conception  of  freedom  from  sin  through  a  new 
moral  life  is  primary  in  the  thought  of  the 
Apostle ' ;  t  others  reverse  this  relation.  J  Denney 
strongly  maintains  that  Christ's  substitutionary 
death  is  primary,  and  that  the  ethico-mystical 
views  are  direeuy  deduced  from  it;  the  latter 

•  A.  G.  ilcGiffert,  ApoKtoUc  Age,  Edinbnigfa,  1887,  p.  120. 

f  E.g.  Stevens,  Chrutian  Doctrine  qf  Sateation,  70;  W. 
Beysohlag,  ITT  TkeoL,  'Eog.  tr.,  1895,  ii.  198-201;  a  v. 
\\  eiz^cker,  Daa  apottolit^e  ZeitalUr,  Freibaig  L  B.,  1880,  p. 
13y  (Eng.  tr.,  London,  1895.  ii.  lOttX 

:  E.a.  O.  Pfletderer,  J>iu  Ordtriitentitm,  Berlin,  1887,  p.  2S9; 
E.  yienigoz,  Le  PidU  et  la  Btdem^tian  ^apri*  St.  Paul,  1882, 
ii.  251  ff. 


118 


ATOI«"EMENT 


ATONEMENT 


indicate  the  inevitable  result  of  a  true  appropriat- 
ing faith  in  the  substitutionary  death  of  Christ, 
the  sole  object  of  which  was  to  atone  for  sin  ; 
gratitude  to  Christ  for  this  redemptive  act  of  love 
Being  sufficient  to  evoke  the  whole  experience  of 
salvation  on  its  ethical  side.  St.  PauPs  thought 
has  only  one  focus — Christ's  '  finished  work,'  His 
'  atonement  outside  of  us.'  *  A.  B.  Bruce  fears 
that  the  practical  schism  between  these  two  ex- 
periences of  faith  in  the  objective  work  of  Christ 
and  personal  union  in  His  deatli  and  resurrection 
is  too  real  for  such  a  view ;  he  thinks  that  the 
doctrine  of  an  objective  righteousness  wrought 
out  by  Christ  was  first  elaborated,  that  this  '  met 
the  spiritual  need  of  the  conversion  crisis,'  and 
that  '  the  doctrine  of  subjective  righteousness 
came  in  due  season  to  solve  problems  arising  out 
of  Christian  experience ' ;  consequently  they  are 
'  two  doctrines,'  two  revelations  serving  different 
purposes,  but  not  incompatible  with  or  cancelling 
one  another.t  Lipsius  regards  the  two  lines  of 
thought  as  parallel  or  interpenetrating.!  H.  J. 
Holtzmann  makes  the  interesting  suggestion  that 
the  expiatory  doctrine  is  built  up  by  St.  Paul's  use 
of  popular  Jewish  conceptions  and  sacrificial  cate- 
gories applied  to  Christ's  death,  while  the  ethico- 
mystical  view  is  the  more  direct  product  of  his 
experience  interpreted  through  Hellenistic  ideas, 
especially  the  contrast  of  flesh  and  spirit.  §  Whilst 
the  two  doctrines  lie  side  by  side  within  the  same 
Epistle,  it  is  difficult  to  regard  them  as  separate 
doctrines  representing  quite  distinct  epochs  of 
thought  or  experience  in  St.  Paul.  His  teaching 
elsewhere  on  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  should 
not  be  ignored  in  making  adjustments  between 
the  two  sides  of  his  view  of  the  atonement.  It  is 
on  the  interpretation  of  the  place  of  St.  Paul's 
ethical  teaching  on  this  doctrine  that  most  marked 
differences  exist ;  his  doctrine  of  expiation  is  ex- 
pounded with  substantially  the  same  results  by 
scholars  of  the  most  divergent  theological  ten- 
dencies. II 

(e)  Atonement  and  the  Universe. — In  two  of  the 
Epistles  of  the  Imprisonment — those  to  Eph.  and 
Col.  (Phil,  repeats  the  same  circle  of  ideas  as  Rom. 
and  Gal.) — St.  Paul  extends  the  reconciliation 
wrought  by  the  death  of  Christ  from  the  human 
race  to  the  universe  as  it  sustains  moral  relations 
to  God ;  it  is  the  cosmic  view  of  the  atonement, 
and  is  a  result  of  seeking  to  provide  a  basis  for  the 
ruling  idea  of  the  absoluteness  of  his  gospel.  The 
'  world '  for  which  Christ  died  is  no  longer  the  world 
of  sinful  men,  as  in  2  Co  5^®  and  Ro  3^" ;  it  is  vaster 
(cf.  Ro  8*^*);  it  includes  angelic  and  possibly 
super-angelic  beings,  '  things  in  (or  above)  the 
heavens '  (Eph  P") ;  God  has  been  pleased  '  through 
him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself,  having 
made  peace  through  the  blood  of  his  cross,  through 
him,  whether  they  be  things  on  earth,  or  things 
in  heaven '  (Col  P*).  Here  we  pass  from  the  region 
of  the  historical  and  experimental  into  that  of 
vision  and  spiritual  imagination.  How  far  the 
categories  of  juridical  and  ethical,  into  which  St. 
Paul's  doctrine  has  been  cast  elsewhere,  may  be 
applied  to  the  processes  of  the  restoration  of  the 
whole  universe  to  perfect  unity  with  God  in  Christ, 
it  is  difficult  to  say.  R.  W.  DaleU  argues  that 
they  are  fulfilled  in  removing  the  objective  cause 
of  estrangement ;  but  it  is  evident  that,  if  this  is 

•  Death  of  Christ,  179-192. 

t  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity,  214  fl. 

j  Dogmatik^,  Brunswick,  1893,  p.  510. 

%  NT  Theol.  ii.  117  f. 

II  E.g.  Stevens,  Christian  Doctrine  of  Saloation^t.  i.  ch.  iv. ; 
Denney,  Death  of  Christ,  ch.  iii. ;  Pfleiderer,  Pavlinismtii^, 
Leipzig,  1890,  ch.  iii.  (Eng.  tr.,  1877);  Mdnbgoz,  Le  Pichi,  etc., 
iJ.  ch.  iii. ;  H.  J.  Holtzmann,  NT  Theol.  ii.  97-121 ;  H.  Cremer, 
Die  Paulinische  Rechtfertigungslehre^,  Giitersloh,  1900,  pp. 
424-448. 

t  The  Atonements,  253 flf. 


in  itself  inadequate  for  the  realized  salvation  of 
the  human  race,  it  will  not  be  likely  to  suffice  for 
a  higher  race  of  moral  intelligences ;  the  personal 
union  of  sympathy  and  life  implied  in  the  subjec- 
tive and  mystical  view  will  still  be  necessary  for 
at-one-ment. 

The  Pastoral  Epistles,  though  probably  mucii 
later  than  St.  Paul's  earlier  group  in  which  his 
doctrine  is  chiefly  stated,  add  no  fresh  ideas  to  his 
interpretation.  This  may  imply  that  his  doctrine 
had  already  become  fixed  in  form  and  could  be 
taken  for  granted,  or  that  it  is  unwise  to  lay  stress 
upon  the  view  that  it  was  a  slowly  developed  teach- 
ing. The  influence  upon  other  NT  writers  of  St. 
Paul's  doctrine  of  the  relation  of  the  death  of  Christ 
to  the  forgiveness  of  sins  should  be  carefully  con- 
sidered ;  the  subject  goes  beyond  the  scope  of  this 
article. 

2.  The  type  presented  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews.  —  This  is  distinctive.  Some  suspect 
possible  affinities  with  the  thought  of  the  apostolic 
group  in  the  Church  at  Jerusalem.  The  writing 
exhibits  many  resemblances  in  language  to  tlie 
Pauline  type,  but  the  same  terms  are  used  witli  a 
dift'erent  connotation,  and  there  is  an  absence  of 
many  of  St.  Paul's  characteristic  forms  of  thouglit. 
The  Pauline  principle  of  substitution  prevails,  but 
it  is  presented  more  in  the  spirit  and  method  of 
the  Alexandrine  exegesis  and  philosophy  of  religion 
— the  relation  of  shadow  to  reality — or  in  the  sym- 
bolism of  the  Jewish  sacrificial  system.  Althougli 
one  of  the  most  theological  of  all  the  NT  writings, 
it  assumes  rather  than  states  a  philosophy^  of  the 
Christian  redemption.  The  deatn  of  Christ  is  re- 
garded as  exclusively  sacrificial.  As  atonement 
it  is  presented  mostly  on  the  objective  side ;  even 
more  than  St.  Paul,  the  writer  emphasizes  the  work 
Christ  does  outside  us,  'on  our  behalf.'  St.  Paul's 
supplement  to  this  view  in  his  ethico-mystioal 
doctrine  is  only  slightly  considered.  The  term 
'  in  Christ '  does  not  occur ;  the  circle  of  ideas  it 
represents  is  absent;  ethical  implications  of  the 
vicarious  view  are  found,  but  they  are  different 
and  slighter.  The  idea  of  finality  is  the  character- 
istic conception  which  dominates  the  presentation 
of  Christ's  redeeming  work  ;  it  is  '  eternal '  in  this 
sense.  The  ethical  value  of  a  sinless  Offerer  in 
perfect  sympathy  with  His  sinful  brethren,  for 
whom  He  presents  His  sacrifice  perfect  and  with- 
out blemish,  is  a  prominent  characteristic  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  atoning  work.  The  perfect  human- 
ity implied  makes  it  possible  to  start  the  interpret- 
ation of  the  doctrine  of  atonement  in  the  Epistle, 
with  Westcott,  from  the  Incarnation ;  or,  with 
Seeberg,  from  the  Passion  of  the  Offerer  as  identi- 
cal with  the  historic  Jesus.  As  His  perfect  Priest- 
hood, which  is  almost  identical  with  the  latter, 
also  includes  the  former,  both  in  the  historic  fact 
and  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  of  the  Epistle,  it  is 
more  satisfactory  to  adopt  it  as  the  ruling  idea. 

(1)  Priesthood. — Priesthood  is  the  clearest  way 
of  access  to  the  writer's  main  teaching ;  it  unities 
the  distinguishable  orders  of  sacrifice — sin-offering, 
burnt-oflering,  etc.  —  in  the  one  characteristic 
function  of  the  priest,  which  is  to  offer  sacrifice 
and  so  to  establish  and  to  represent  the  fellowship 
of  God  with  man,  which  is  the  root-idea  of  atone- 
ment. Such  fellowship  is  visible  and  incorporate 
in  the  priest's  person  ;  through  him  tlie  people 
draw  near  to  God  themselves,  have  their  fellowship 
with  Him,  and  become  His  people.  The  necessity 
for  a  priest  and  his  mediation  is  that  sin  stands  in 
the  way  of  this  fellowship ;  it  cannot  be  ignored  ; 
its  defilement  is  the  acute  problem  in  thought  and 
experience  which  constrains  the  writer  to  set  forth 
the  Divinely  appointed  way  for  its  removal.  For 
this  end  God  has  appointed  His  own  Son  a  High 
Priest  for  ever,  that  He  may  make  'propitiation' 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


119 


for  the  sins  of  His  people  (He  •2*^).  This  is  possible 
in  only  one  way — sacrifice.  The  OT  conception, 
upon  the  analogy  of  which  this  NT  structure  is 
built,  is  that  propitiation  must  be  made  for  sin,  if 
sinful  men  are  to  have  fellowship  with  God  at  all ; 
the  only  propitiation  known  is  the  shedding  of 
blood  in  sacrificial  ofierings.  A  root-principle, 
therefore,  of  the  writer's  theory  is :  *  Apart  from 
shedding  of  blood  there  is  no  remission '  (9**).  This 
sacrifice  Christ  provides  in  His  blood  ;  He  is  at 
once  Priest  and  Sacrificial  Ofiering  ;  He  is  on  this 
account  capable  of  dealing  efiectively  with  sin  as 
the  obstacle  to  the  fellowship  of  God  and  man  ; 
'once  (fixal — 'once  for  all')  at  the  end  of  the  ages 
hath  he  been  manifested  to  put  away  sin  by  the 
sacrifice  of  himself'  (9*). 

(2)  Sacrifice. — This  offering  of  Himself  is  illus- 
trated from  the  three  elements  of  the  Levitical 
system— (a)  the  sin-offering,  (b)  the  covenant- 
offering,  (c)  the  offering  on  the  great  Day  of  Atone- 
ment. As  sin-offering,  Christ's  death  was  a  final 
sacrifice  for  sins  ( 10^-  '^),  it  made  propitiation  for 
the  sins  of  the  people  (2'"),  it  put  away  sin  (9*). 
As  a  covenant-sacrifice,  it  ratified  the  new  cove- 
nant, of  which  He  was  the  mediator,  by  'blood  of 
sprinkling'  (12**);  for  this  covenant  also,  that  it 
might  become  operative.  His  death  was  necessary. 
As  the  high  priest  entered  every  year  into  the 
Holy  Place,  Christ  has  entered  into  the  heavenly 
sanctuary  to  appear  before  the  face  of  Gktd  for  us 
(9^^).  He  also  suffered  without  the  camp  (13^^). 
The  writer  dwells  much  upon  the  fact  that  all 
these  were  only  symbolic  and  morally  ineffective  as 
types.  Only  in  Christ's  sacrificial  offering  of  Him- 
self and  in  the  functions  of  His  changeless  Priest- 
hood could  be  provided  the  eternal  reality  (see 
Sackifige).  The  writer  also  further  defines  aU 
that  Christ  did  and  suffered  in  its  relation  to  God 
— and  especially  to  His  love.  It  was  by  the  grace 
of  God  that  He  tasted  death  for  every  man  (2^). 
God  is  not  conceived  in  any  sense  as  a  hostile  Being 
who  is  to  be  won  over  ty  sacrificial  gifts  to  he 
gracious  to  man ;  these  are  never  said  to  '  recon- 
cile' God.  The  Priesthood  of  Christ  was  God's 
appointment  and  calling  (5*).  Christ's  supreme 
ministry  was  'to  do  thy  will,  O  God'  (10').  The 
same  will  was  fulfilled  '  through  the  offering  of  the 
body  of  Jesus  Christ  once  for  all'  («*-a|,  lO^O). 
Christ's  life  and  death  are  in  perfect  obedience  to 
God,  and  are  a  revelation  of  the  mind  and  love  of 
God ;  such  is  God's  gracious  way  of  making  it 
possible  for  the  sinful  to  have  fellowship  with  Him, 
of  '  bringing  many  sons  unto  glory '  (2^") ;  it  was 
entirely  congruous,  the  writer  asserts,  with  God's 
perfect  ethical  nature  and  with  man's  sinful  state. 
It  is  in  the  latter  sense  that  the  ^vriter  defines 
further  the  relation  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  to  sin. 
His  work  is  described  as  '  having  made  purification 
of  sins '  (1^).  He  was  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many 
(038  217  ioi2tt).  By  whatever  sacrificial  illustrations 
His  offering  of  Himself  in  His  blood  is  set  forth,  the 
expiatory  significance  is  common  to  them  all ;  they 
represent  the  Divinely  appointed  way  of  deal- 
ing with  sin  as  a  hindrance  to  commimion  with 
God. 

(3)  rA«ory.— Beyond  the  relation  to  (Jod  and  sin 
referred  to,  it  is  not  easy,  without  going  outside 
the  pages  of  the  Epistle,  to  state  a  doctrine  which 
explains  to  the  reason  the  grounds  on  which  the 
sacrificial  ministry  of  Christ  as  Priest  and  Offering 
becomes  available  for  the  establishing  of  the  fellow- 
ship with  God  which  is  plainly  set  forth  as  its 
object.  It  is  said  '  to  sanctify '  men  (2"  10^"-  ^* 
13^) ;  to  enable  them  '  to  draw  near  to  God '  (4^® 
7i9ir.  1022);  «to  make  perfect'  (2io  7"  lO^*)  ;  'to 
purify '  {,^*).  It  is  difficult,  however,  to  give  a 
close  definition  of  these  terms.  Primarily  they 
refer  to  status ;  men's  relation  to  God  is  altered 


rather  than  their  character  changed  into  ethical 
states  befitting  these  terms  as  symbols  of  personal 
qualities ;  the  immediate  effect  upon  men  is  religious 
rather  than  ethical.  But  ultimately  this  effect 
is  inadequate.  As  much  as  this  was  acknowledged 
to  have  been  accomplished  by  the  ancient  priest- 
hood and  sacrifices,  and  it  is  the  persistent  plea  of 
the  writer  that  these  ceased  because  they  were  in- 
adequate :  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  can  never 
take  away  sin  or  serve  for  the  purification  of  the 
conscience.  Christ's  Priesthood  and  Offering  were, 
on  the  other  hand,  'better,'  'perfect,'  'eternal,'  or 
final ;  they  did  what  others  could  not  do.  In  the 
end,  therefore,  those  who  shared  their  benefits 
would  enter  into  possession  and  enjoyment  of  the 
ethical  realities  for  which  they  were  the  surety; 
such  persons  were  to  become  partakers  of  Christ 
(y*-^  6*).  Identification  was  to  follow  the  more 
strictly  vicarious  relation.  Meanwhile,  however, 
the  writer  is  Pauline  to  this  extent  that,  whilst 
not  excluding  the  ethical  from  the  results  of 
Christ's  substitutionary  work,  he  emphasizes  first 
and  strongly  the  objective  benefits.  He  holds  that 
eventuaUy  conscience  and  character  will  share  in 
the  blessings  asured  by  access  to  God,  but  the 
ethical  change  is  considered  as  the  outcome  of  the 
change  in  the  religious  and  juridical  relation. 
Before  the  '  sanctiffed '  become  sinless  or  the 
'  perfect '  faultless  or  the  '  purified '  pure,  they 
have  the  status  towards  God  of  these,  which  is 
expressed  in  the  privilege  of  fellowship.  This  is 
the  effect  of  Christ's  '  finished  work '  in  His  death  : 
it  is  primary ;  and  the  moral  renewal,  though 
assured  as  its  outcome,  is  secondary.  Christ's 
death  has  done  something  in  regard  to  sin  once  for 
ail,  and  by  one  offering  has  brought  men  for  ever 
into  a  perfect  religions  relation  to  God.  That 
such  an  objective  result  is  thus  brought  about 
seems  clear  from  the  Epistle,  but  what  it  is  pre- 
cisely which  in  God  is  related  to  this  work  is  not 
stated  by  the  writer,  nor  what  constitutes  the 
necessity  in  God  for  the  Divinely  appointed  death 
of  Christ.  He  does  not  go  behind  the  Divine 
appointment ;  that  Grod  wills  it  is  sufficient ;  this 
is  for  him  axiomatic  ;  in  what  its  absoluteness  lies 
is  not  stated.  How  far  it  is  legitimate  to  read 
into  the  Epistle  the  Pauline  ideas  is  doubtful ;  it 
has  only  the  value  of  inference.  The  efficiency  of 
the  fact  that  Christ's  death  is  the  putting  away  of 
sin  is  the  writers  contribution  to  the  apostolic 
doctrine  of  atonement  rather  than  its  explanation. 
Denney  finds  the  one  hint  of  an  attempt  at  explana- 
tion in  '  Christ,  who  through  the  eternal  Spirit 
offered  himself  without  spot  to  God'  (9^*).  The 
sinlessness  of  Jesus  gave  to  BUs  offering  an  absolute 
and  ideal  character  beyond  which  nothing  could 
be  conceived  as  a  response  to  God's  mind  and 
requirements  in  relation  to  sin.  The  ideal 
obedience  even  unto  death  may  be  the  cine — the 
spiritual  principle  of  the  atonement  that  gives  the 
work  of  Christ  its  value.  The  Epistle  lays  great 
stress  on  Christ's  identification  of  Himself  with 
man. 

3.  The  Johannine  type. — This  is  a  sufficiently 
definite  term  to  stand  for  a  characteristic  view  of 
the  atonement  in  the  Apostolic  Church  found  in 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  in  the  three  Catholic  Epistles 
bearing  the  name  of  John,  and  in  the  Apocalypse. 
Criticism  still  leaves  the  problem  of  authorship  in 
much  uncertainty,  but  tends  to  greater  agreement 
in  '  ascribing  all  these  writings  to  the  same  locality, 
to  pretty  much  the  same  period,  and  to  the 
same  circle  of  ideas  and  sympathies.'  *  Reflecting 
probably  the  thought  and  experience  of  the  last 
quarter,  or  even  the  last  decade  of  the  first  century, 
they  are  later  than  all  our  other  sources;  and, 
being  dominated  by  theological  interest,  they  are 
*  Denney,  Death  of  Ckritt,  2*L 


120 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


of  particular  importance  for  judging  the  views 
taken  of  the  death  of  Christ  and  its  relation  to 
sin  towards  tlie  close  of  the  Apostolic  Age. 

Wliilst  the  Epistle  which  deals  with  the  death 
of  Christ  presents  a  more  reflective  interpretation 
of  it  than  is  found  in  the  Gospel,  both  unite  in 
dwelling  upon  the  ethical  and  spiritual  results  of 
Christ's  death  in  the  experience  and  possibilities  of 
the  Christian  sanctiiication  rather  than  upon  its 
relation  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Divine  law  of 
righteousness.  But  the  latter  is  by  no  means 
overlooked ;  it  is  present  frequently  by  implica- 
tion, it  is  occasionally  explicitly  referrecf  to.  The 
Johannine  type  is  distinctly  more  favourable  to 
the  conception  of  *  at-one-ment '  than  to  that  of 
atonement ;  it  is  ethical  and  mystical  rather  than 
juridical.  So  much  is  this  so  that  selected  sayings 
could  be  collected  which  would  easily  weave  them- 
selves into  a  theory  that  Jesus  saves  by  revelation, 
by  the  illumination  of  Divine  light  which  becomes 
the  light  of  life  and  the  assurance  of  our  fellowship 
in  the  life  eternal.  Redemption  by  revelation 
would  be  a  fair  interpretation,  say,  of  the  Prologue 
to  the  Gospel  and  of  those  portions  of  it  in  which 
the  ideas  of  the  Prologue  rule.  Salvation  is  in 
Christ's  Person  :  '  this  is  life  eternal,  that  they 
should  know  thee  the  only  true  God  and  him  whom 
thou  didst  send,  even  Jesus  Christ '  ( Jn  17*).  Jesus 
redeems  men  by  revealing  to  them  the  truth  about 
God  in  Himself ;  His  work  is  supremely  that  of 
the  Propliet  of  God,  who  so  redeems  His  people 
into  fellowship  with  God.  Knowledge  of  God  as 
He  is  draws  men  from  sin.  Christ  dies,  but  this  is 
inevitable  because  He  is  the  Word  made  flesh,  and 
must  therefore  share  the  end  of  all  flesh  and  die, 
and  '  so  fulfil  the  destiny  of  a  perfect  man  by  a 
perfect  death  as  by  a  perfect  life. '  *  Broadly  speak- 
ing this  is  true,  but  it  is  certainly  not  the  only 
Johannine  view  of  the  saving  work  of  Christ.  It 
may  be  suggestive  to  discern  the  contrast  between 
the  Pauline  view  that  revelation  is  by  redemption, 
and  the  Johannine  that  redemption  is  by  revela- 
tion, but  it  is  not  exhaustive ;  for  the  Johannine 
writings  are  also  pervaded  by  a  conviction  of  the 
necessity  and  saving  value  of  Christ's  death  ;  He  is 
as  truly  'propitiation'  as  'revelation.'  St.  Paul's 
view  that,  apart  from  His  purpose  of  dying  for 
redemption,  Christ  would  not  have  come  in  the 
flesh  at  all,  is  not  avowed  by  St.  John,  but  it  is  not 
contradicted  by  him  ;  his  main  interests  are  much 
more  with  the  realities  and  issues  of  redemption 
than  with  its  presuppositions  and  processes.  Sin 
is  the  real  problem  for  him  as  for  St.  Paul,  and  the 
death  of  Christ  is  the  only  means  of  removing  it. 
This  is  stated  in  Gospel  and  Epistle  with  a  wealth 
of  variety.  Whether  they  afford  material  for  a 
full  theory  of  expiation,  as  some  expositors  assume, 
may  be  questioned ;  but  that  they  clearly  state  a 
connexion  between  the  death  of  Christ  and  the 
cleansing  away  of  sin,  and  indicate  a  theory  of 
this  relation  which  has  affinities  with  the  Pauline 
view  and  with  that  of  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews, 
cannot  reasonably  be  doubted. 

Whilst  in  the  very  brief  review  of  these  references 
we  must  refrain  from  reading  the  Pauline  meaning 
into  the  Johannine  ideas  and  terms,  we  must  not 
decline  to  recognize  such  similarities  as  we  find  are 
present  in  the  writings. 

(1)  References  in  Gospel. — These  fall  into  char- 
acteristic groups  : — (a)  The.  references  to  the  Lamb 
of  God. — Whether  the  saying  p\it  into  the  mouth 
of  the  Baptist  (Jn  1**)  be  critically  valid  or  not,  it 
is  good  evidence  of  the  Johannine  thought.  We 
accept  the  saying  as  referring  to  Jesus  who  '  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world.'    Its  chief  value  is  the 

*  Cf.  B.  F.  Westcott,  Epistles  of  St.  John,  London,  1883,  p. 
34  ff.,  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  London,  1880,  p.  293  ff.;  H. 
Schultz,  Die  Gottheit  Christi,  Gotha,  1881,  p.  447. 


use  of  the  sacrificial  symbol,  '  the  lamb '  ;  Jesus 
takes  away  sin  by  the  sacrificial  method.  The  re- 
ferences in  the  Apocalypse  to  '  the  Lamb'  as  it  had 
'  been  slain  '  (Rev  5°-  ^'^},  to  '  those  who  have  washed 
their  robes  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb'  (7"),  who 
overcame  '  because  of  the  blood  of  the  Lamb '  (12"), 
indicate  that  the  power  and  purity  of  the  new 
life  in  Christ  were  definitely  associated  with  the 
shedding  and  sprinkling  of  His  blood  in  the  sacri- 
ficial sense.  The  phrase  '  in  the  Lamb's  book  of 
life'  (13"),  though  it  may  not  bear  the  strain  of  the 
idea  of  an  eternal  redemption,  since  'from  the 
foundation  of  the  world  '  belongs  grammatically  to 
'  written  '  (see  art.  Book  OF  Life)  rather  than  to 
'  slain,'  indicates  nevertheless  that  there  is  salvation 
in  no  other. — (i)  The  references  to  '  the  lifting  up ' 
(Jn  3^*  12*-).  These  are  best  expounded  by  tne 
comment  of  the  writer  himself.  '  Tiiis  said  (Jesus), 
indicating  by  what  kind  of  death  he  was  to  die ' 
(12^).  They  refer  to  the  lifting  upon  the  cross, 
though  the  exaltation  that  followed  may  be  implied, 
in  order  that  men  might  see  Him  in  order  to  live 
and  be  drawn  to  Him  by  the  appeal  of  His  cross. 
If  there  be  any  expiatory  idea  here,  it  is  implicit ; 
it  is  not  stated. — (c)  The  references  to  eatitifj  His 
flesh  in  Jn  6.  Alone  these  might  well  be  satisfied 
by  the  ethical  interpretation  of  a  spiritual  appro- 
priation of  Christ ;  this  conception  is  natural  in  the 
context ;  but,  as  it  is  scarcely  possible  at  the  late 
period  of  this  writing  to  deny  a  reference  to  the 
'  Supper '  and  its  connexion  with  remission  of  sins, 
the  expiatory  idea  is  most  probably  involved.  In 
the  exposition  of  any  Johannine  writings  the  place 
held  by  the  sacraments  in  the  Apostolic  Church 
should  never  be  ignored. — {d)  The  references  to  the 
laying  down  of  His  life. — 'The  Good  Shepherd' 
(Jn  10"),  the  prophecy  of  Caiaphas  (ll*"),  the  corn 
of  wheat  (1223^-),  life  laid  down  for  friends  (IS'*)— 
these  with  distinction  of  aspect  show  the  applica- 
tion to  Jesus  of  the  vicarious  principle  ;  in  the  first 
and  last  instances  the  voluntary  character  of  the 
self-sacrifice  is  important,  whilst  in  the  context  of 
the  third  the  soul-troubling  of  Jesus  in  presence  of 
death  suggests  that  the  death  was  neither  ordinary 
nor  accidental.  But  there  is  no  indication  of  a 
theory  of  how  His  death  avails  for  the  benefit  of 
others.  The  one  explanation  that  is  sure  is  that 
He  lays  down  His  life  in  obedience  to  the  constraint 
of  love's  necessity.  This  love  is  regarded  by  the 
writer  both  as  Christ's  own  love  and  as  the 
Father's.  '  God  so  loved  that  he  gave.'  Love  in 
each  case  is  the  gift  of  self. 

(2)  References  in  Epistle. — In  passing  from  the 
Gospel,  where  the  Johannine  writer  has  emphasized 
the  fact  of  the  self-surrender  in  the  death  of  Christ, 
obviously  bringing  it  in  wherever  possible  without 
attempting  a  definition  of  its  relations,  to  the 
Epistle,  we  find  a  closer  definition  of  these  realities 
awaiting  us.  But  here  also  the  stress  is  laid  upon 
the  correlation  of  the  death  of  Christ  with  the 
actual  cleansing  from  sin  rather  than  with  the 
cancelling  of  guilt  or  the  satisfaction  of  the  law. 
Still,  whilst  the  realization  of  purification,  and  not 
merely  a  provision  of  the  means  of  its  cleansing,  is 
the  primary  meaning  of  the  references  to  the  re- 
demptive work  of  Christ  as  the  bearer  of  light  and 
salvation,  the  latter  is  set  forth  in  terms  so  inti- 
mately allied  with  the  sacrificial  terminology  of 
the  writers  of  the  earlier  apostolic  Epistles,  that 
the  contention  that  there  lies  behind  tlie  passages 
the  assumption  of  a  judicial  satisfaction  for  sin 
cannot  be  fairly  evaded.  The  passages  are  :  '  "The 
blood  of  Jesus  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin ' 
(1  Jn  F) ;  'And  if  any  man  sin,  we  have  an 
Advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  right- 
eous ;  and  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins  ;  and 
not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  th&  whole  world ' 
(21'.) ;  'Your  sins  are  forgiven  you  for  his  name's 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


121 


sake '  (2") ;  '  And  ye  know  that  he  was  manifested 

to  take  away  sins ;   and  in  him  is  no  sin '  (3*) ; 

'  Herein  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that 
he  loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  a  propitiation 
for  our  sins  '  (4^*).  With  these  it  is  convenient  to 
associate  the  strongest  saying  in  the  Apocalypse 
on  the  subject :  '  L'  nto  him  that  loveth  us,  and 
loosed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  blood'  (Rev  1'). 
That  the  immediate  interest  in  these  references  is 
to  the  ethical  and  spiritual  results  issuing  from  the 
death  of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  sin  wUl  not  be 
doubted.  The  question  at  issue  is  how  far  the 
inference  from  them,  that  they  assume  an  ante- 
cedent value  belonging  to  the  death  of  Christ  in 
putting  away  the  judicial  obstacle  to  the  cleansing 
in  the  law  and  righteousness  of  Gk)d,  can  be  estab- 
lished. The  cleansing  obviously  depends  upon  the 
'  death '  and  the  '  blood '  of  Christ, 

We  need  not  draw  the  distinction  made  by  West- 
cott,*  between  the  blood  in  the  double  sense  of  a 
life  given  and  of  a  life  liberated  and  made  available 
for  men,  in  order  to  justify  a  backward  as  well  as 
a  fon;\ard  look  in  the  symbol.  The  main  burden 
of  proof  that  the  Johannine  doctrine  includes  an 
objective  as  well  as  a  subjective  work  of  Christ  is 
upon  the  use  of  'propitiation.'  It  is  not  the  same 
word  (i\a<Tti6s,  not  iXa<rr^pto»')  as  is  used  in  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  but  it  is  very  closely  akin.  Is  it 
likely,  in  being  applied  here  to  the  same  object,  to 
have  a  different  meaning?  Used  in  the  same 
Christian  community  within  approximately  the 
same  period,  and  dealing  ^\"ith  the  same  element  in 
a  common  faith,  is  not  the  term  probably  used  in 
the  same  accepted  sense  by  the  Johannine  writer 
as  by  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews  and  St.  Paul  ?  If  we 
are  to  interpret  it,  these  usages  are  the  only  means 
at  our  disposal  unless  the  Johannine  literature 
itself  pro\ides  others.  This  is  not  done.  On  the 
contrary,  other  terms  are  used  that  suggest  that 
the  place  of  IXcurfios  is  in  the  same  system  of  re- 
demptive ideas  that  we  find  in  the  other  apostolic 
^^Titings.  It  is,  for  instance,  co-ordinated  with 
Jesus  Christ  as  '  the  righteous,'  standing  thereby 
in  some  relation  to  the  moral  order  of  the  world, 
and  with  '  an  Advocate,'  which  touches  the  judicial 
system  of  ideas  ;  it  is  connected  also  with  ideas  of 
sacrifice  and  intercession  which  relate  it  to  a 
system  of  mediating  priesthood  ;  the  marked  con- 
trast between  'loveth '  and  '  loosed'  in  the  opera- 
tion of  the  love  of  Christ,  which  is  the  source  and 
eflBcient  cause  of  redemption  in  His  blood  from  our 
sins  in  Rev  1*,  may  also  suggest  a  combination 
between  the  progressive  liberation  from  our  sins 
and  the  achievement  once  for  all  of  onr  redemption 
in  Him.  The  further  statement  that  the  '  propi- 
tiation '  is  not  for  our  sins  only  but  also  for  '  the 
whole  world,'  is  not  satisfied  by  the  merely  personal, 
and  therefore  for  the  present  partial,  experience  of 
a  subjective  salvation.  These  are  only  inferences 
and  nothing  more,  but  they  are  of  value  in  con- 
struing the  Johannine  witness  into  terms  of  the 
general  apostolic  teaching.  The  supreme  value, 
however,  of  this  witness  is  the  matchless  grace 
t\-ith  which  the  ^vrite^  relates  '  propitiation '  to  the 
love  of  God.  St.  Paul  had  taught  this  as  the  ulti- 
mate source  of  redemption,  but  had  associated  with 
its  expression  the  righteousness  of  law  and  the 
wrath  of  God  against  sin.  The  Johannine  ^^T-iter 
transcends  these  in  dwelling  with  holy  joy  upon  the 
issues  of  the  propitiation,  not  only  in'actual  cleans- 
ing from  sin,  but  in  lifting  men' into  the  presence 
of  an  eternal  reality  in  which  propitiation  is  an 
interchangeable  term  with  the  Divine  love  itself. 
In  4^"  lie  defines  propitiation  in  terms  of  love : 
'He  loved  us  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitia- 
tion for  our  sins '  ;  in  3^*  he  reverently  identifies 
love  with  '  propitiation  ' — '  In  this  have  we  known 

*  EpistU*  of  St.  John,  54  ff . ;  EpUtU  to  the  Hebrews,  293  ff. 


love,  in  that  he  (iKurn)  for  us  (irrkp  vf^^)  laid 
down  his  life.'    The  contrast  such  love  implies 
is  the  ultimate  of  the  apostolic  doctrine  of^the 
atonement — it  is  the  perfect  expression  of  what  the 
writer  means  when  he  declares  that  '  God  is  love,'  * 
4.  The  sub-apostolic  period. — In  the  age  im- 
mediately succeeding  the  apostolic,   the  Church 
appears  to  hare  exhibited  no  desire  to  interpret 
the  relation  of  the  death  of  Christ  to  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  either  with  greater  fullness  than,  or  by 
any  divergence  of  view  from,  that  found  in  the 
apostolic  writings ;  the  forms  exhibit«i  there  were 
found  sufficient.     The  early  Fathers  treated  the 
atonement  as  a  fact,  without  any  attempt  to  ex- 
plain its  grounds.     They  had  no  theory:   they 
describe  it  mostly  in  the  actual  words  of  Scripture, 
with  little  or  no  comment ;  the  types  of  interpreta- 
tion given  were  sufficient  to  satisfy  their  intelli- 
gence concerning  the  experience  of  forgiveness  of 
sins  which  so  richly  satisfied  their  heart.     Clement 
of  Rome  in  his  First  Epistle  exhorts  the  Corinthians 
to  '  reverence  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  whose  blood 
was  given  for  us'  (xxL),  who  'on  account  of  the 
love  He  bore  us  gave  His  blood  for  us  by  the 
Avill  of  God ;  His  flesh  for  our  flesh  and  His  soul 
for  our  souls '  (xUx.).     There  is  no  clear  statement 
as  to  the  reasons  that  moved  the  will  of  God, 
The  ethical  appeal  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  pre- 
dominant ;  it  is  the  supreme  motive  to  gratitude, 
humility,  and  self-sacrifice.     The  references  in  the 
writings  of  Ignatius  are  chiefly  that  the  death  of 
Christ  on  the  cross  reveals  His  love,and  that  through 
His  death  we  become  partakers  of  spiritual  nourish- 
ment in  His  body  and  blood  (cf.  Troll,  viii.  and 
Bom.  vi. ).     Poll/carp  reminds  lus  readers  that  '  the 
earnest  of  their  righteousness '  is  Jesus  Christ,  who 
'  bore  our  sins  in  His  own  body  upon  the  tree ;  who 
did  not  sin,  neither  was  guile  found  in  His  mouth, 
but  endured  all  things  for  us,  that  we  might  live 
in  Him'  (Phil.   viiL).      The  Epistle  ascribed  to 
Barnabas  deals  with  the  subject  in  its  relation  to 
the  sacrifices  of  the  Jewish  Temple,   which  are 
abolished  in  order  that  '  the  new  law  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  which  is  without  the  yoke  of  neces- 
sity, might  have  a  human  oblation '  (ii.).     The  Son 
of  God  is  spoken  of  as  One  who  '  suffered  that  His 
stroke  might  give  us  life ' ;  '  let  us  therefore  believe 
that  the  Son  of  God  could  not  have  suffered  except 
for  our  sakes'  (vi.).     Our  Lord's  sufferings  were 
necessary ;  why,  it  is  not  said.    (For  catena  of 
quotations,  consult  R.  W.  Dale,  The  Atonement, 
270  ff.  ;    Moberlv,    Atonement    and    Personality, 
326  ff. ;  Scott  Lidgett,  Spiritual  Principle  of  Atone- 
ment, 420  K). 

IV.  CoycLUSioy.—i.  Is  there  an  apostolic 
doctrine  of  the  atonement  ? — Clearly  the  passages 
we  have  examined,  which  form  the  data  for  a 
doctrine  of  atonement,  are  brief  and  fragmentary 
in  character.  It  is  frequently  pointed  out  that  the 
books  from  which  they  are  taken  are  in  no  strict 
sense  a  unity-,  and  were  not  written  with  the  object 
of  being  related  to  each  other  to  form  a  unified 
volume  ;  that  they  are  only  parts  of  a  larger  and 
richer  whole  which  interpreted  the  faith  of  the 
Apostolic  Age;  that  their  unity  is  factitious.t 
This  view  is  plausible.  It  must  be  admitted  that 
the  doctrine  of  atonement  found  no  uniformity  of 
expression  in  the  Apostolic  Church  ;  but  there  is 
little  room  for  doubt  that  there  existed  a  central 
unity  around  which  varied  statements  consistently 
moved ;  the  latter  were  not  a  mere  fortuitous 
grouping  ;  they  were  orderly,  and  their  movements 
were  organized  in  response  to  a  central  gravity. 
The  fact  that  the  death  of  Christ  had  a  direct  re- 
lation to  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  to  the  restora- 
tion of  fellowship  between  God  and  man  is  funda- 

*  Cf.  Denney,  Death  o/Ckritt,  S7& 
t  lb.  2,  for  t jpical  iilustratioas. 


122 


ATONEMENT 


ATONEMENT 


mental  to  the  most  divergent  interpretations  of  the 
fact.  The  occasion  of  the  reference,  the  purpose 
of  the  writers,  and  especially  their  immediate 
conception  of  tlie  character  of  God  and  His  relation 
to  the  moral  order  of  the  world,  largely  account  for 
the  varying  forms  of  expression  and  illustration. 
For,  taken  apart,  the  aspects  in  which  the  death  of 
Christ  is  viewed  in  the  apostolic  writings  give 
sufficient  warrant  for  the  main  types — legal  and 
ethical — which  mark  the  history  of  the  doctrine  in 
the  subsequent  thouglit  of  the  Church. 

But  the  most  critical  survey  of  these  aspects  does 
not  sanction  the  contention  of  some  recent  writers 
that  an  apostolic  doctrine  of  the  atonement  can- 
not be  constructed.*  A  perfect  doctrine  may  be 
so  deeply  grounded  and  so  many-sided  that  no 
personal  or  corporate  thought  can  completely  ex- 
pound it,  and  there  may  be  many  theories  each 
having  its  value.  The  judgment  expressed  by 
R.  F.  Horton,  '  The  NT  has  no  theory  about  the 
Atonement,' t  is  too  easy  a  release  from  the  in- 
tellectual necessity  of  seeking  an  interpretation  of 
the  profound  fact  which  dominated  the  whole  of 
the  apostolic  experience  and  teaching.  The  mate- 
rials are  certainly  present  in  the  apostolic  litera- 
ture for  the  construction  of  a  theory — and  more, 
a  theory  itself  is  potentially  present  and  virtually 
expressed  in  the  common  experience  and  preaching 
of  apostolic  times  where  it  is  not  formally  defined. 
It  is  quite  contrary  to  the  spirit  and  attitude  of 
the  Apostolic  Church  to  speaK  of  the  atonement, 
as  Coleridge  does,  as  'the  mysterious  act,  the 
operative  cause  transcendent.  Factum  est :  and 
beyond  the  information  contained  in  the  enuncia- 
tion of  the  FACT,  it  can  be  characterized  only  by 
the  consequences.':!:  The  apostolic  writers  regjird 
fact  and  theory  as  permanently  inseparable  ;  '  re- 
conciliation '  involves  its  '  logos,'  and  they  attempt 
an  explanation  of  the  great  fact  which  had  become 
the  ground  and  appeal  of  their  evangel ;  a  fact  of 
such  a  kind  as  the  death  of  Christ,  so  rich  in  ra- 
tional, ethical,  and  emotional  content,  and  appealing 
to  the  whole  ethical  and  spiritual  being  of  man, 
could  not  be  left  without  a  '  meaning.'  The  simple 
connexion  in  any  degree  of  causal  relation  between 
the  fact  of  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  experience 
of  forgiveness  of  sins  is  itself  a  profound  theory  as 
well  as  the  mother  of  theories, 

2.  General  character  of  the  apostolic  doctrine. — 
This,  as  presented  in  the  literature  of  the  Apostolic 
Age,  is  a  unity  in  diversity.  The  diversity  is  ap- 
parent ;  it  emerges  as  the  stress  of  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  death  of  Christ  falls  upon  that  which  is 
accomplished  by  it  objectively  to  man's  inner  ex- 
perience and  moral  desert.in  contrast  with  the  etiects 
subjectively  achieved  in  the  spiritual  history  of  the 
individual  believer  and  of  the  Christian  community. 
The  former  represents  Avhat  God  does  in  and  of  and 
by  Himself  which,  as  exhibited  in  the  life  and  death 
of  His  Son,  justifies  to  Himself  and  in  Himself  the 
manifestation  of  His  grace  in  the  remission  of  sins  ; 
the  latter  is  what  man  experiences  in  actual  cleans- 
ing from  sin  and  in  conscious  reconciliation  with 
God  in  Christ ;  the  former  is  represented  as  accom- 
plished once  for  all  in  the  sacrificial  obedience  of 
Christ  even  unto  death  ;  the  latter  is  realized  in  the 
self -surrender  of  man  under  the  constraint  of  the 
love  of  God  in  Christ,  so  that  he  enters  into  an  in- 
ward spiritual  fellowship  with  the  suffering  death  of 
Clirist,  and  in  the  power  of  his  resurrection  experi- 
ences the  reality  of  ethical  union  with  Christ ;  the 
former  is  regaraed  as  a  finished  work,  the  latter  as 
a  progressive  achievement ;  the  former  is  atone- 
ment, the  latter  is  '  at-one-ment.'  The  presence  of 
this  diversity  of  view  in  the  faith  of  the  Apostolic 

*  Cf .  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  Church,  Ix»ndon,  1895,  p.  274. 
t  Faith  and  Criticism^,  London,  1893,  p.  222. 
t  Aids  to  Reflection,  ed.  London,  1918,  Com.  xix. 


Church  seems  undeniable.  Both  aspects  are  dwelt 
upon  ;  neither  appears  to  be  adequate  alone.  Each 
is  carried  back  to  the  abiding  purpose  of  God  and 
regarded  as  the  interpretation  of  His  eternal  love  ; 
the  juridical  stands  for  a  realitj'  in  His  nature  as 
truly  as  the  ethical ;  much  in  the  apostolic  doctrine 
is  not  covered  by  the  conception  of  atonement  which 
represents  it  as  a  perfect  confession  of  sin  on  behalf 
of  man  by  Christ  as  man's  Representative ;  the 
juridical  conception  is  not  fairly  stated  as  an  argu- 
mentum  ad  Jndceos,  or  as  the  mere  inheritance  of 
Jewish  thought.  For,  although  the  idea  of  literal 
substitution  lay  so  near  to  hand  in  later  Jewish 
theology  and  was  everywhere  enriched  for  them  by 
historic  and  Divinely-appointed  ritual  observance, 
the  apostolic  thinkers  so  deepen  and  transfigure  it 
that  it  no  longer  tolerates  the  superficial  conven- 
tional idea  of  an  easy  or  mechanical  transfer  of  man's 
guilt  and  penalty  to  another  so  that  the  sinner  is 
exempt  from  further  responsibility. 

An  objective  view  of  atonement  exaggerated  into 
a  system  of  imputations  and  equivalents  is  not  found 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  neither  is 
it  ever  set  forth  as  a  device  for  overcoming  God's 
reluctance  to  forgive  sins.  We  are  presented  rather 
with  an  intensely  ethical  conception  of  God's  re- 
quirements and  with  a  mystical  view  of  man's  rela- 
tion to  Christ  as  the  Representative  of  the  race. 
Substitution  is  thus  deepened  into  moral  identifica- 
tion and  solidarity  ;  even  the  outstanding  feature 
of  the  apostolic  view  of  atonement  as  '  propitiation ' 
is  explicitly  correlated  with  the  ethical  nature  of 
God ;  behind  the  figures  of  speech  and  juridical 
phraseology  the  redeeming  work  of  Christ  is  pre- 
sented as  concerned  primarily  with  personal  rela- 
tions and  moral  realities.  In  this  reference  in 
the  processes  of  reconciliation  to  the  Divine  purpose 
and  activity — '  God  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
unto  himself — and,  still  further,  in  the  recogni- 
tion of  the  fact  that  the  sufferings  of  the  righteous 
benefit  the  unrighteous,  the  unity  of  the  apostolic 
doctrine  is  found.  Objective  and  subjective  views 
being  thus  regarded  as  manifestations  of  the  self- 
imparting  love  of  God,  originating  in  Him,  not 
in  Christ  apart  from  Him,  justice  and  mercy  as 
contrasted  attributes  in  the  Divine  nature  are  tran- 
scended. The  apostolic  mind  also  rests  more  upon 
the  declaration  of  the  Divine  righteousness  in  the 
blood  of  Christ  than  upon  its  satisfaction  thereby. 
God  declares  Himself  reconciled  by  something  He 
had  done  whilst  men  were  yet  sinners.  On  Christ's 
part  the  reconciliation  takes  place  through  an  act 
of  self-emptying  prior  to,  but  manifest  in,  the  Incar- 
nation,with  its  obedience  unto  death,  even  the  death 
of  the  cross.  The  unity  of  '  objective  '  and  '  sub- 
jective '  is  verified  also  in  the  true  experience  of 
personal  redemption,  which  is  never  regarded  in 
the  apostolic  teaching  as  adequate  apart  from  an 
ethical  surrender  of  the  self  to  God  in  Christ  by 
the  obedience  of  faith.  Union  with  God  in  Christ 
is  in  the  apostolic  teaching  a  closer  definition  of 
having  '  received  the  reconciliation.' 

3.  Finality  and  authority  of  the  apostolic  doc- 
trine.— The  interesting  question  whetlier  the  apo- 
stolic doctrine  of  the  atonement  is  final  for  the 
thought  of  the  Church  and  binding  upon  her  teach- 
ers, is  a  phase  of  the  living  controversy  respecting 
the  permanent  place  of  apostolic  teaching  in  Chris- 
tian thought,  and  lies  beyond  the  scope  of  this 
article.  It  must  suffice  to  point  out  that  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Apostolic  Church  gives  no  sanction  for 
the  view  that  the  illumination  of  the  minds  of  men 
respecting  the  significance  of  the  death  of  Christ  is 
limited  to   one  type   of   interpretation   or  to  one 

feneration  of  men.  It  is  possible  to  recognize  a 
istinction  between  the  contingent  thought-forms 
of  the  Apostolic  Age  and  the  essential  spiritual  life 
with  its  fundamental  certainties  in  an  experience 


ATONEMENT 


AUGUSTAN  BAND 


123 


of  reconciliation,  made  real  by  God  in  Christ,  which 
these  thought-forms  sought  to  express.  This  ex- 
perience in  the  Apostolic  Age,  as  in  every  other, 
was  something  more  than  a  composite  of  the  terms 
used  in  its  interpretation,  even  when  these  terms 
were  the  coinage  of  the  apostolic  mind.  The  usual 
conditions  for  the  discovery  of  truth  which  satisfies 
the  intellectual  nature  will  prevail  here  as  else- 
where. The  one  way  in  which  truth,  which  is  the 
only  reality  having  authority  for  the  mind,  reveals 
its  authority  is  in  taking  possession  of  the  mind 
for  itself.*  Truth  justifies  itself  in  the  mind  that 
receives  it ;  it  derives  its  authority  in  the  realm  of 
the  moral  and  spiritual  by  the  experience  it  creates. 
The  mind,  once  it  has  come  to  loiow  itself,  cannot 
submit  to  receive  its  con\-ictions  on  blank  authority; 
even  when  that  authority  is  an  utterance  of  the 
apostolic  mind,  it  mtist  commend  itself  to  the 
christian  consciousness  by  its  power  rationally  to 
justifj*  the  facts  to  which  that  Christian  conscious- 
ness knows  it  owes  its  existence.  The  question, 
therefore,  whether  the  forms  of  the  apostolic  ex- 
planation of  the  relation  of  the  death  of  Christ  to 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  are  final  and  binding  upon 
faith,  will  depend  upon  their  adequacy  permanently 
to  int€rpret  the  experience  that  Christian  men  wiU 
always  owe  to  their  knowledge  of  those  facts  in 
which  the  Christian  experience  first  originated.  The 
conviction  that  those  facts  have  been  mediated  to 
the  world  through  the  Apostolic  Church,  will  prob- 
ably always  suggest  that  the  apostolic  explanation 
of  them  will  antecedently  be  regarded  with  atten- 
tion commensurate  with  the  unique  value  of  its 
source.  It  seems  fair,  therefore,  to  expect  that 
where  the  modem  mind  finds  the  unity  of  the  apo- 
stolic doctrine  of  the  atonement,  it  will  also  find 
its  finality  ;  and,  where  finality  is  found,  permanent 
authority  is  readily  acknowledged.  But  finality  is 
in  the  living  truth  of  the  doctrine,  not  in  its  human 
source. 

LiTZRATTRB. — I.  Mor«  dircctlv  on  the  apostolic  doctrine  :  A. 
B.  Bruce,  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianitp,  Edinborg-h, 
IS^ ;  A.  Cave,  The  Seripturai  Doctrine  of  Satrifiee  and 
Atonement-,  do.  1890;  T.  J.  Crawford,  The  Doctrine  of  Holy 
Scripture  respecting  the  Atonement  i,  London,  1S74 ;  R.  W. 
Dale,  The  Atonement,  do.  1875  {1*1S92) ;  J.  Denney,  The  Death 
of  Christ :  its  Place  and  InterpretatUm  in  the  ST,  do.  1902 ; 
R.  J.  Dminmond,  TA*  Relation  of  the  Apostolic  Teaching  to 
the  Teaching  of  Christ,  Edinburgh,  1900 ;  C,  C.  Everett,  The 
Gospel  of  Paul,  Boston,  1893;  J.  Scott  Lidgett,  The  Spiritual 
Principle  of  the  Atonement,  London,  1S97 ;  E.  Menegroz,  Le 
Piehi  et  la  RMemption  d'aprt*  St.  Paul,  Paris,  1SS2,  and  La 
ThMogie  de  VSpitre  aux  Hibreux,  Paris,  1894 ;  G.  Milligran, 
The  Theology  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebreurs,  Edinbunrh,  1899 ; 
G.  F.  Moore,  art  '  Sacrifice '  in  EBi ;  A.  Ritschl,  Jfeehtferti- 
gung  und  Versohnurig*,  Bonn,  1895-1902  (Eng.  tr.  The  Chris- 
tian Doctrine  of  Justification  and  Reconciliation,  by  Hackintosb 
and  Macaulay,  1902);  W.  Sanday,  Priesthood  and  Sacrifice, 
London,  1900 ;  A.  Seeberg,  Der  Tod  Christi,  Leipzig,  1895 ; 
G.  Smeaton,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement  €U  tavght  by  the 
Apostles,  Edinburgh,  1870 ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Christian  Doc- 
trine of  Salvation,  do.  1905 ;  W.  L,  Walker,  The  Gospel  of 
Reconciliation,  do.  1909 ;  relevant  sections  in  (a)  Bible  Diction- 
aries, (b)  NT  Theologies  (esp.  those  of  H.  J.  Holtzmann  [1911], 
B.  Weiss  [3 1880],  G.  B.  Stevens  [1S99]),  (c)  Commentaries  on 
the  .\postolic  Epistles  (esp.  Sanday- Headlam  and  B.  Jowett 
on  Rom.,  and  Westcott  on  Hebrews  and  the  Jobaonine 
wTitingsX 

II.  Dealing  with  the  doctrine  generally:  Anselm,  Omr 
Deus  Homol,  1098 ;  E.  H.  Askwith,  in  Cambr.  TheoLEttays, 
London,  1906,  p.  175  ff. ;  Athanasins,  de  Incamatume  (c.  360) ; 
A.  Barry,  The  Atonement  of  Christ,  London,  1871 ;  A.  B.  Bruce, 
The  Humiliation  of  Christ^,  Edinburgh,  1881,  pp.  317-400; 
H.  Bnshnell,  The  Vicarious  Sacrifice,  London,  ed.  1891 ;  J. 
McLeod  Campbell,  The  Nature  of  the  Atonements,  do.  1S78  ; 
R.  S.  Candlish,  The  Atonement:  its  EAeaey  and  Extent,  do. 
1867  ;  A.  B.  Davidson,  OT  Thectogry,  Edinburgh,  1904,  div.  iiL 
ch.  2;  D.  C.  Davies,  The  AUmenunt  and  Intercession  of  Christ, 
do.  1901 ;  J.  Denney,  T}ie  Atonement  €md  the  Modem  Mind, 
London,  1903 ;  C.  A  Dinsmore,  Atonement  in  Literature  and 
Life,  Boston,  1906 ;  A.  M.  Fairbaim,  The  Place  of  Christ  in 
Modem  Theology,  London,  1393 ;  P.  T.  Forsyth,  The  Crucial- 
ity  of  the  Cross,  do.  1909 ;  C.  C.  Hall,  The  Gospel  of  the  Divine 
Sacrifice,  Xew  York,  1596 ;  T.  Haring,  Zur  rersohnungOehre, 
Gottingen,  1S93 ;  W.  Herrmann,  Der  Verkehr  des  Christen  nut 

*  Cf.  Dennev,  TA«  Atonement  and  the  Modem  Mind,  6  ff.  • 
W.  L.  Walker,  The  Gospel  of  Reconciliation,  60  ff. 


Gott  (Eng.  tr.  The  Communion  of  the  Christian  ^eith  God, 
London,  1906) ;  F.  R.  M.  Hitchcock,  The  AtonemerU  and 
Modem  Thought,  do.  1911;  A.  A.  Hodge,  The  Atonement, 
PhUadelphia,  1867 ;  J.  T.  Hutchinson,  A  View  of  the  Atone- 
ment, Hew  York,  1897  ;  T.  W.  Jenkyn,  The  Extent  of  the  Atone- 
ment in  iU  Relation  to  God  and  the  (Tniterse,  Boston,  1S35  ;  J. 
Kaftan.  Dogmata,  Tiibingen,  1897,  p.  531  ff. ;  G.  Kreibig,  Die 
VeraShnungalehre,  Berlin,  1878;  W.  F.  Lofthonse.  Ethics  and 
Atonement,  Loodon,  1906 ;  A.  Lyttelton,  *  Atonement '  in  Lux 
Mundia,  1891,  p.  201  ff.  ;  F.  D.  Maurice,  The  Doctrine  of 
Satri*ee,new  ed.,  London,  1893;  R.  C.  Moberly,  Atonement 
and  PertonaUty,  do.  1901 ;  W.  H.  Moberly,  'The  Atonement* 
in  Foundations,  A  Statement  of  Christian  Belief  in  Terms  of 
Modem  Thought,  do.  1912;  H.  N.  Oxeoham,  Catholic  Doe- 
trine  of  the  Atonement,  London,  1886;  E.  A.  Park,  The  Atone- 
ment, Boston,  186S ;  L.  Pullan,  The  Atonement,  London,  1906 ; 
J.  Riviire,  Doffme  de  la  ridemption,  Paria,  1905 ;  A.  Sabatier, 
La  Doctrine  de  Peajnmtion  et  ton  Hnlution  historique,  do.  1903 
(Eng.  tr.,  LoDd<»,  19M) ;  D.  W.  Simon,  JSeeoneXation  by  In- 
carnation, Edinborgfa,  1898;  Torretin,  On  the  Atonement  of 
Christ,  Eng.  tr..  New  York,  1859;  T.  V.  Tymms,  The  Chris- 
tianldea ^the  Atonement,  iMBOaa,  1904 ;  W.  L.  Walker,  The 
Oroa  tmd  the  Kingdom,  Edinborg^  1902 ;  R.  Wardlaw,  The 
Extent  «^  the  Atonement,  CUaagow,  1830 ;  B.  F.  Westcott, 
The  Victory  <if  the  Cross,  LondMi,  1888 ;  G.  C.  Workman,  At 
Onement,  New  Toric,  19U ;  Hu  Atonement  in  Modem  Religious 
Thought :  a  Theologieal  Sympoeium,  London,  1900 ;  relevant 
artt.  m  Bible  Dictionaries  and  sections  in  S>yBteni«te  llieologies, 
e.g.  W.  N.  Claiice,  An  Outline  of  Christian  Theology,  Edin- 
boi^fa,  1896,  K>.  321-382  ;  J.  A.  Domer,  A  System  of  Christian 
Doctrine,  ^«.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1880-82,  iv.  1-124 ;  C.  Hodge, 
Systematie  Theology,  London,  1873,  iL  464-691 ;  W.  B.  Pope, 
A  Compendium  of  Christian  TheUom,  IL  [London,  1877]  141- 
316 ;  W.  G.  T.  Shedd,  Dogmatie  Theology,  ii.  [Edinborgfa, 
1889]  378ff. :  A.  H.  Stcong,  Systematic  Theology,  Philadelphia, 
1907,  ii.  713  ff.  FBEDEEIC  PLATT. 

ATTALIA  ('ArraXeio,  Tisch.  and  WH  -la).— This 
maritime  city  of  Pamphilia  was  founded  by,  and 
named  after.  Attains  n.  Philadelphus,  king  of 
Pergamos  (15&-138  B.C.),  who  desired  a  more  con- 
venient haven  than  Perga  (15  miles  N.E.)  for  the 
commerce  of  Egypt  and  Syria.  It  was  pictur- 
esquely situated  on  a  line  of  clifls,  over  which  the 
river  Catarrhactes  rushed  in  torrents — or  cataracts 
— to  the  sea-  Attalia  difiered  from  its  riv^  Perga, 
a  centre  of  native  Anatolian  religiotis  feeling,  in 
being  a  thoroughly  Hellenized  city,  honouring  the 
usual  classical  deities — Zeus,  Athene,  and  Apollo. 
Paul  and  Barnabas  sailed  from  its  harbour  to 
Antioch  at  the  close  of  their  first  missionary  tour 
(Ac  14'^).  Both  politically  and  ecclesiasricaUy  it 
gradually  overshadowed  Perga,  and  to-day  it  is 
the  most  flourishing  seaport,  with  the  exception  of 
Marsina,  on  the  south  coast  of  Asia  Minor.  It 
has  a  poptilation  of  25000,  including  many  Chris- 
tians and  Jews,  who  occupy  separate  quarters. 
The  name  has  been  slightly  modified  into  Adalia. 

LnBRATURK. — ^W.  M.  Ramsay,  HisL  Geog.  tff  Asia  Minor, 
l/ottdoa,  1890,  p.  420 ;  C  Lanckoronski,  Villes  de  la  Pamphylie 
etdela  PisidU,  L  [Paris,  1S90].  JaMES  STEAHAN. 

AUGUSTAN   BAND During  his  voyage  from 

Caesarea  to  Italy,  St.  Paul  was  in  the  charge  of  the 
centtirion  Julius,  of  the  crfipa  'Ze^aa-H],  or  '  Augus- 
tan cohort '  (Ac  27^  RVm).  Two  ^videly  different 
views  prevail  as  to  the  composition  of'this  body 
of  soldiers. 

1.  The  theory  of  Schiirer  (HJP  L  ii.  51  f.)  is 
mainly  based  on  data  supplied  by  Josephus. 
While  legionary  soldiers,  who  were  Roman  citizens, 
were  sent  only  to  provinces  of  the  first  order, 
governed  by  legati,  those  of  the  second  order, 
administered  by  procurators — e.g.  Judaea  —  were 
garrisoned  by  atixiliary  cohorts  of  provincials,  each 
from  500  to  1000  strong,  usually  attended  by  an 
ala  of  cavalry,  and  each  named  after  the  city  from 
which  it  was  recrtiited,  e.g.  'cohors  Sebastenorum.' 
At  the  time  of  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa  (A.D. 
44)  there  was  an  ala  of  Kowopcrs  and  Zf^atmjpoi 
with  five  cohorts  stationed  in  Caesarea  (Jos.  Ant. 
XIX.  ix.  1  f.).  For  their  indecent  demonstrations 
of  joy  at  the  king's  death,  they  were  at  first 
threatened  with  banishment,  but  were  tiltimately 
forgiven  and  taken  over  by  the  Romans.  They 
aire  frequently  referred  to  during  the  period  A-D. 


124 


AUGUSTUS 


AUGUSTUS 


44-66  {Ant.  XX.  vi.  1  ||  BJ  II.  xii.  5  ;  Aiit.  XX.  viii. 
7  II  BJ  II.  xiii.  7).  In  a.d.  67,  Vespasian  finally 
drafted  from  Citjsarea  into  his  army  live  cohorts 
and  one  ala  of  cavalry  {BJ  III.  iv.  2).  Schiirer 
holds  that  the  '  Augustan  cohort '  is  undoubtedly 
one  of  these  live  coliorts.  He  does  not,  however, 
regard  a-ireipa  Se^ao-r?;  as  synonymous  with  aireipa 
Se/Sao'TTjj'tDj'.  Se/SacTTj)  is  ratiier  a  title  of  honour, 
equivalent  to  Augusta,  and  the  full  name  of  the 
cohort  in  question  would  probably  be  cohors 
Augusta  Sebastcnorum  {HJP  I.  ii.  53). 

2.  Mommsen,  followed  by  Kamsay,  attempts  to 
connect  the  <rire7pa  Ze^aari;  with  a  body  of  officers 
detached  from  the  foreign  legions  and  known  as 
frumentarii,  who  were  employed  under  the  Empire 
not  only,  as  their  name  indicates,  in  connexion 
Avith  the  commissariat,  but  as  agents  maintaining 
communications  between  the  central  government 
and  the  distant  provinces.  As  they  were  con- 
stantly passing  backwards  and  forwards,  it  was 
natural  that  prisoners  should  be  entrusted  to  them, 
and  in  time  they  became  hated  as  police-agents 
and  spies.  When  Julius  {g.v.),  who  on  this  theory 
was  one  of  these  couriers,  arrived  in  Home,  he 
handed  over  his  charge  (Ac  28'^,  AV  and  RVm)  to 
the  (XTpaTOTreSdpxn^,  which  is  commonly  translated 
'captain  of  the  Praetorian  Guard.'  Mommsen, 
however,  thinks  that  the  prcefectus  prcetorio  can- 
not have  had  laid  upon  him  the  humble  duty  of 
receiving  prisoners,  and  prefers  another  interpreta- 
tion based  upon  the  term  princeps  peregrinorum, 
which  appears  in  an  Old  Lat.  version  (called  Gigas) 
as  the  equivalent  of  a-TparoTreddpxv^.  Peregrini, 
'  soldiers  from  abroad,'  was  the  name  given  to  the 
frumentarii  while  they  resided  at  Rome,  and  their 
camp  on  the  Caelian  Hill  was  called  Castra  Pere- 
grinorum. It  is  suggested  (1)  that  Luke,  who  as 
a  Greek  Avas  careless  of  Roman  forms  and  names, 
used  the  Greek  term  a-irelpa  1,e^a(XT'f)  not  as  the 
translation  of  an  official  Roman  designation,  but 
as  '  a  popular  colloquial  way  of  describing  the 
corps  of  officer-couriers'  (Ramsay,  St.  Paul^, 
London,  1897,  p.  315) ;  and  (2)  that  his  (rrparoweS- 
dpxvs  is  an  equally  unofficial  title,  for  Avhich  the 
Latin  translator,  being  more  at  home  in  Roman 
usages  than  Luke,  Avas  able  to  supply  the  correct 
technical  term.  It  is  admitted  that  '  this  Avhole 
branch  of  the  service  is  very  obscure.  Marquardt 
considers  that  it  Avas  first  organized  by  Hadrian ; 
but  Mommsen  believes  that  it  must  haA'e  been 
instituted  by  Augustus'  {ib.  349).  The  chief  ob- 
jection to  the  present  theory  is  that  the  foundation 
seems  too  slender  for  the  superstructure.  There 
is  no  clear  evidence  that  the  title  princeps  peregri- 
norum came  into  use  before  the  time  of  Septimius 
Severus  (193-211).  On  the  other  hand,  St.  Paul's 
case  woiild  seem  to  be  on  all  fours  Avith  that  of  an 
appellant  mentioned  in  the  correspondence  of 
Trajan  and  Pliny  {Ep.  57),  regarding  Avhom  the 
Enij)eror  giA'es  this  rescript:  'vinctus  mitti  ad 
pnef ectos  prsetorii  mei  debet. ' 

Literature.— On  the  one  side,  Th.  Mommsen,  Sitztmgs- 
hericht'-  il.  JUtrl.  Akad.,  1895,  p.  495  f.  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  he.  cit. 
.supra;  F.  Randall,  Acts,  London,  1897,  p.  :if'!.  uii  tlie  other 
silk',  Schiirer,  luc.  cit.;  Th.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  ST,  lOng.  tr., 
Edinbur-h.  1909,  i.  CO,  551ff. ;  A.  C.  Headlam,  art.  'Julius'  in 
JIDIS;  P.  W.  Schmiedel  in  EBi  i.  909. 

James  Strahan. 
AUGUSTUS.  — 1.  The  name.— The  Lat.  name 
.l/^7//v//<.v  occurs  only  once  in  the  RV  of  the  NT, 
namely  in  Lk  2^  'fhe  Avord,  cognate  with  augur, 
had  a  sacred  ring  about  it,  having  been  applied 
(n)  to  places  and  objects  Avhich  either  possessed  by 
nature  or  acquired  by  consecration  a  religious  or 
hallowed  character  ;  (6)  to  the  gotls.  It  avjis  a  neAV 
thing  to  apply  it  to  a  human  being,  and  the  Sen- 
ate felt  and  intended  it  to  be  so,  Avhen  it  conferred 
tlie  title  vipon  Octavian  on  16  Jan.,  27  B.C.  By 
this  title  they  Avent  as  near  to  conferring  deifica- 


tion upon  a  huniiin  beiiiu  .-k  rnliii-i  Iialiim  common- 
sense  A\-ould  allow.  '  It  Miu._'i',~u-il  i(jli-ioii^  .sjiiici ily 
and  surrounded  the  son  ot  tlie  dritied  Julius  Avith  a 
halo  of  consecration '  (Bury,  A  History  oftfte  Roman 
Empire,  1893,  p.  13).  The  official  Gr.  equivalent 
of  Augustus  Avas  26^cwt6s.  It  is  noteAVorthy  that 
Luke  in  his  OAvn  Greek  narrative  keeps  the  Latin 
Avord,  whereas  he  puts  the  Greek  ^e^aards  into  the 
mouth  of  Festus(Ac  25"-^;  AV  'Augustus,' RV 
'  the  emj>eror,'  RVm  '  the  Augustus '),  The  differ- 
ence is  important.  A  Greek  Christian  like  Luke 
could  only  use  the  word  Se^acrris  (which  meant  '  to 
be  Avorshipped,'  '  Avorthy  of  Avorship ')  of  God 
Himself  :  being  a  Greek,  Avriting  his  oAvn  language, 
he  had  not  the  same  objection  to  the  foreign  word 
Augustus,  and  he  had  to  be  intelligible.  The 
absence  of  Beds  ('  god,'  diuus),  Avitli  tlie  name  of  the 
deceased  and  deified  Emperor  in  Lk  2^,  is  also 
perfectly  consistent  Avith  the  Christian  attitude 
(on  Ac  27S  see  Augustan  Band). 

2.  Life. — The  Emperor  of  whom  Ave  commonly 
speak  as  Augustus  Avas  originally  named  Gains 
Octavius  [Thurinus],  like  his  father,  and  was  born 
on  22  Sept.,  63  B.C.,  the  year  of  Cicero's  consul- 
ship. The  ancestral  home  of  his  race  Avas  Velitrse 
(modern  Veletri)  in  the  Volscian  country,  at  no 
great  distance  from  Rome.  The  family  was 
equestrian  and  rich,  the  father  of  the  future 
Emperor  being  the  first  of  his  race  to  enter  the 
Senate.  He  had  an  honourable  and  successful 
official  career,  attaining  to  the  pnetorship  and 
the  governorship  of  the  province  of  Macedonia. 
He  died  suddenly,  and  left  three  children,  one  of 
them  the  future  Emperor  (aged  4),  Avhose  mother 
Avas  Atia.  This  Atia  Avas  the  daughter  of  M. 
Atius  Balbus  and  Julia,  the  sister  of  the  great 
dictator  Julius  Coesar.  Augustus  Avas  thus  the 
grand-nephoAv  of  the  dictator.  He  receiA'ed  the 
dress  of  manhood  at  15,  and  Avas  alloAved  to 
accompany  his  grand-uncle  to  Spain  (47  B.C.), 
Avhere  he  already  shoAved  the  quality  of  courage. 
Soon  after  he  Avas  sent  to  Apollonia  on  the  other 
side  of  the  Adriatic,  to  pursue  his  studies.  He 
was  still  there  when  the  dictator  Avas  assassinated, 
on  15  March,  44  B.C.  It  Avas  then  that  he  re- 
vealed Avhat  was  in  him.  Though  only  eighteen 
and  a  half  years  of  age,  he,  having  been  adopted 
into  the  Julian  family  by  the  aaIU  of  his  grand- 
uncle,  Avhose  heir  he  AA\as  at  the  same  time  con- 
stituted, took  the  name  Gains  Julius  Csesiar 
Octavianus,  and  immediately  left  for  Italy,  to 
claim  not  only  the  private  out  also  tlie  public 
inheritance  of  his  grand-uncle.  His  great  career 
is  best  folloAved  in  the  next  section.  His  private 
and  family  history  may  be  summed  up  here.  As 
a  young  man  he  Avas  betrothed  to  a  daughter 
of  P.  Servilius  Isauricus,  but  he  broke  off  this 
engagement,  and  for  political  reasons  married 
Claudia,  step-daughter  of  Mark  Antony,  in  her 
extreme  youth.  Her  he  immediately  divorced, 
and  afterAvards  Scribonia,  his  second  Avife.  Im- 
mediately after  the  second  divorce  he  robbed 
Tiberius  Claudius  Nero  of  his  Avife,  Livia  Drusilla 
(38  B.C.),  and  with  her  he  lived  all  the  rest  of  his 
life.  His  immediate  household  consistt^d  of  her, 
her  tAA'o  sons  by  her  previous  liusliaiul,  the  future 
Emperor  Tiberius  {q.v.),  and  Drusus,  as  well  as  liis 
own  daughter  Julia,  Scribonia's  child.  Julia  bore 
five  childron  to  the  second  of  her  three  husbands, 
M.  Vipsaiiius  Agrippa,  namely  Gaiii>.  Lu(in>, 
Agrippa,  .lulia,  and  Agrippina.  (lain-aiul  l.mius 
Avere  adopted  by  their  grandfather,  but  dieil  early. 
All  his  direct  descendants  in  fact  died  early  or 
disgraced  him,  and  he  Avas  forced  to  fall  back  on 
his  step-son  Tiberius  fur  tlie  -neif  ^.m.  !)ni-us 
haA'ing  perished  in  9  B.C.,  Tiberius  \\a~  (uiMixll.il 
in  his  turn  to  adopt  his  nepheAV  Gcrmanicu.s. 
Augustus  died  19  August,  a.d.  14. 


AUGUSTUS 


AUTHORITIES 


125 


3.  OflScial  career.  —  The  stages  in  Augiistus' 
official  career  may  be  summed  up  as  follows. 
He  was  recognized  by  the  Senate  in  44  B.C.  ;  re- 
ceived pnetorian  imperiutn  against  Antony,  on  19 
August  made  consul  (though  hardly  twenty  years 
of  age),  elected  triumuir  rei  publicce  const ituendce 
(with  Antony  and  Lepidus)  for  five  years,  43 ; 
appointed  augur,  37  (or  later) ;  first  conferment  of 
tribunicia  potestas,  36 ;  between  37  and  34  elected 
XVuir  sacris  /aciundis;  30,  fourth  consulship 
(hence  annually,  with  certain  exceptions,  until 
the  13th  was  reached  in  2  B.C.) ;  27,  title  Augustus 
and  imperial  pow^ers ;  23,  the  tribunicia  potestas 
conferred  on  him  for  life ;  22,  a  special  ciira 
annonce  ;  18,  imperial  powers  renewed  for  5  years  ; 
16  (before  this  date),  elected  septemuir  epulonum  ; 
15,  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  for  the  Empire 
reserved  to  Emperor ;  12,  elected ^on^i/ea;  maxirnus ; 
8,  imperial  powers  renewed  for  ten  years;  2, 
received  title  of  pater  patrice ;  A.D.  3,  imperial 
powers  renewed  for  ten  years,  and  again  in  a.d. 
13.     The  '  deification '  took  place  on  17  Sept.,  14. 

i.  Achievements. — This  bare  enumeration  marks 
the  steps  by  ■which  the  power  of  Augustus  was 
gradually  consolidated,  and  with  it  the  Empire 
itself.  The  achievements  of  Augustus  which  led 
to  this  result  can  only  be  briefly  enumerated. 
Amongst  the  most  important,  because  without 
them  nothing  further  could  have  been  attained, 
are  his  military  achievements.  His  military  career, 
with  few  exceptions,  was  continuously  successful. 
It  began  by  the  driving  of  Antonius  into  Gallia 
Transalpina  (43  B.C.),  and  was  followed  up  by  the 
defeat  of  Brutus  and  Cassius  at  PhUippi  (42),  the 
defeat  of  Sextus  Pompeius  (36),  and  the  defeat  of 
Cleopatra  and  Antonius  at  Actium  (31).  At  this 
poinc  ci\il  war  ends,  aU  his  Roman  enemies  and 
rivals  are  removed,  and  he  can  give  attention  to 
frontier  problems.  A  succession  of  frontier  wars 
ends  in  N^ctory  for  the  Romans  :  in  19  the  Cantabri 
were  exterminated,  in  15  the  Raeti  and  Vindelici 
were  conquered.  The  German  wars  gave  great 
trouble  throughout  the  later  part  of  his  reign,  in 
which  most  valuable  help  was  rendered  by  his 
step-sons  Tiberius  and  brusus.  In  the  earlier 
period  Augustus  was  most  fortunate  in  possess- 
ing such  an  able  lieutenant  as  M.  Vipsanius 
Agrippa. 

In  other  respects  also  Augustus  was  extremely 
active — in  the  spheres  of  law,  religion,  architecture, 
and  building.  He  did  all  he  could  to  restore  the 
sapped  virtue  of  the  Italians  by  his  encouragement 
of  family  life  and  his  attempts  to  recover  the 
simplicity  of  the  ancient  Italian  religion.  He 
was  a  patron  of  literature,  and  was  greatly  helped 
in  his  aims  by  the  writings  of  Virgil  and  Horace. 
In  all  his  schemes  for  the  betterment  of  Rome, 
Maecenas,  an  Etruscan  knight,  himself  a  patron 
of  literature,  was  his  right-hand  man.  Among 
the  important  statutes  passed  were  the  Lex  Lulia 
de  adidteriis  (18  B.C.),  the  Lex  de  maritandis 
ordinibus,  and  the  Lex  Papia  Poppcea — all  in  the 
interests  of  a  worthy  family  life,  which  Augustus 
recognized  to  be  the  indispensable  foundation  of  a 
truly  great  State.  The  Lex  ^lia  Sentia  (4  B.C.) 
regulated  the  status  of  manumitted  slaves,  a  large 
class  of  growing  influence  in  the  State  (see 
Clattdius).  Augustus'  interest  in  religion  was 
shown  by  his  acceptance  of  several  sacred  offices, 
as  well  as  by  the  restoration  of  many  decayed 
temples  and  rituals.  His  boast  that  he  had  found 
Rome  made  of  brick  and  left  it  made  of  marble 
probably  means  no  more  than  that  he  faced  the 
(regular)  brick  core  of  buildings  with  marble  slabs, 
but  he  certainly  spent  vast  sums  on  building. 
Among  the  most  important  monuments  of  his 
reign  are  the  Portus  lulius  (37  B.C.),  the  Templum 
Diui  luli  (29),  the  temple  of  Apollo  on  the  Palatine 


Hill,  equipped  with  public  libraries  of  Greek  and 
Latin  literature  (28),  and  the  theatre  of  Marcellus 
(11).  The  personal  ability  of  Augustus  is  some. 
times  unjustly  depreciated.  It  may  be  questioned 
if  he  owed  more  than  inspiration  to  nis  grand- 
uncle. 

5.  Administpation. — The  Emperor's  administra- 
tion covered  not  only  the  whole  of  Italy,  but  the 
imperial  (or  frontier)  provinces,  where  an  army 
was  required.  He  had  financial  agents  also  in  the 
senatorial  provinces.  The  great  achievement  of 
Augustus  was  that  he  ruled  the  Roman  Empire  as 
a  citizen  (though  the  chief  citizen,  princeps),  under 
constitutional  forms.  In  theory  the  Empire  ceased 
with  the  death  of  the  Emperor,  but  under  these 
constitutional  forms  he  laid  the  foundations  of  a 
lasting  despotism.  Luke  refers  in  2^  to  a  census 
of  the  whole  Empire  ordered  by  him.  This  was 
one  of  his  administrative  reforms,  and  the  census 
recurred  every  14  years.  A  census  of  Roman 
citizens,  as  distinguished  from  subjects  of  the 
Empire,  was  taken  tAnce  in  his  reign,  in  28  and 
8  B.C.     Cf.  art.  C^SAK. 

LiTBRATURK. — ^Therc  are  many  vexed  questions  connected 
with  the  career  of  Augustus,  which  will  make  one  always  regret 
that  T.  Mommsen  did  not  write  the  fourth  volume  of  his 
Romisehe  GetehiehU,  which  was  to  cover  Augustus'  reign  ;  of., 
however,  the  second  edition  of  the  Rei  Gegtte  Divi  Avgutti 
(Berlin,  1883X  edited  by  him ;  V.  Gardthausen's  Avffusttig  tmd 
seim  Zeit,  Leipag,  1891  ff.  (2  parts,  each  in  three  volumes, 
first  jiart  text,  second  part  notesX  has  not  filled  the  gap. 
Chronology  of  chief  events  is  best  g^ven  by  J.  S.  Reid  in  A 
Companion  to  Latin  Studies  (ed.  J.  E.  Sandys,  Cambr.  1910X 
129  S.  The  theor}'  of  the  Empire  is  best  expounded  in  the  same 
writer's  chapter  in  the  Cambridge  Medianal  History,  i.,  Cambr. 
1911 ;  a  splendid  account  is  .found  also  in  H.  F.  Pelham,  Out- 
line* of  Roman  History,  London,  1893 ;  A.  v.  OomaszewsJd's 
Gesek.  derriim.  Kaiser,  2  vols.,  Leipzig,  1909,  voL  L  pp.  11-250, 
by  a  master  of  Roman  history  and  antiquities  ;  etc.  The  chief 
ancient  authori  ties  are  the  J/anu7n«ntum.<ine}nvnum,Suetonius' 
Life  of  Augustus,  Velleius  Paterculus,  Appian,  DioC^sdus,  and 
the  early  chapters  of  TacitOB.  A.  SOUTKK. 

AUTHOR  AND  FINISHER.— In  He  12^  Jesus  is 
called  the  '  author  (AV  and  RV ;  AVm  '  beginner,' 
RVm  '  captain ')  and  finisher  ( AV ;  RV  '  perfecter ') 
of  (our)  faith.'  The  Gr.  word  rendered  'author' 
{ipXTt^)  occurs  in  three  other  passages,  viz.  Ac  3'* 
5^1  and  He  2'<'.  It  is  translated  '  captain '  in  He  2^'^ 
(AV;  but  RV  'author');  in  Ac  2,^  'prince'  (AV 
and  RV ;  AVm  and  RVm  '  author ') ;  in  Ac  5*^ 
'  prince. '  In  classical  Greek  it  is  used  for  a '  leader,' 
one  who  precedes  others  by  his  example,  and  so  for 
an  '  originator.' 

The  reference  in  He  12*  is  to  the  previous  chapter. 
The  writer,  in  summing  up  the  list  of  heroes  of  faith, 
bids  us  look  unto  Jesus,  who  is  pre-eminently  the 
Leader  in  that  great  company,  and  the  Perfect 
Example  of  that  virtue  of  which  to  a  certain  extent 
they  have  been  witnesses.  The  insertion  of  the 
word  '  our '  in  the  EV  obscures  the  meaning.  '  The 
faith '  refers  to  that  which  has  been  the  main  theme 
of  ch.  11. 

Alford,  Bleek,  Ebrard,  Wordsworth,  and  A.  B. 
Davidson  translate  apxvy^^  in  He  12-  by  '  leader' ; 
Wyclif  has  '  the  maker ' ;  but  Tindale,  Cranmer, 
the  Geneva  and  the  Rheims  all  have  '  author.' 

As  Jesus  is  the  Leader  in  the  great  army  of  the 
Faith,  so  is  He  also  the  Finisher  or  Perfecter 
(reXctwr^s).  Therefore  we  run  the  race  looking 
unto  Him  as  our  Leader  and  the  only  one  who  can 
sustain  us  to  the  end  and  perfect  that  which  He 
has  begun  (cf.  Davidson,  in  loc). 

MOKLEY  STEVEXSON. 

AUTHORITIES.— The  word  occurs  thrice  in  the 
English  NT:  Lk  12ii  RV  (AV  'powers';  Gr. 
^^ovaiai).  Tit  3'  RV  (AV  '  powers ' ;  Gr.  e^ovcriai),  and 
1  P  3=^  (Gr.  i^omiai).  This  is  by  no  means  a  com- 
plete list  of  the  occurrences  of  i^ovcia  (sing,  and 
plur.)  in  a  quasi-concrete  sense  in  the  NT.  It  is 
characteristic  that  in  the  first  and  second  of  these 
places  the  word  should  be  united  with  apxai,  and 


126 


AUTHORITY 


BABBLER 


in  the  third  with  dwd/xet^.  This  collocation  of 
words  denoting  power  in  some  manifestation  or 
other  is  due  to  the  later  Jewish  theology,  whicli 
postulated  the  existence  of  a  number  of  spiritual 
powers  (cf.  artt.  Dominion,  Power,  Principality, 
Throne,  etc.)  inhabiting  the  air.  These  powers 
were  defined  in  Greek  under  the  various  aspects  of 
dOfafjLis  (physical  force),  dpxT^  (magisterial  power), 
and  ^^ovala  (moral  authority).  At  first  each  of  the 
words  was,  no  doubt,  intended  to  carrv  a  precise 
signification,  and  the  complete  list  would  comprise 
every  sort  of  spiritual  power  man  could  conceive  ; 
but  later  the  enumeration  became  so  familiar  as  to 
be  repeated  without  any  clear  distinction  between 
the  individual  terms  (so  1  P  3^).  The  frequency 
of  the  use  to  indicate  spiritual  powers  has  a  reflex 
efiect.  The  word  i^ovalai  is  used  in  the  first  and 
second  passages  with  reference  to  earthly  powers. 
It  does  not  seem  possible  to  say  precisely  what 
powers  are  intended,  but  in  the  Gospel  passage 
(where  the  wording  is  peculiar  to  Luke)  it  is  prob- 
able that  the  Sanhedrin  and  the  Roman  procurator 
of  Jddfea  would  be  included,  while  in  the  Titus 
Epistle  the  reference  is  to  all  those  set  in  authority 
over  the  people — the  Emperor,  the  governor  and  his 
suite,  as  well  as  the  local  magistrates.  See  also 
the  following  article.  A.  Souter. 

AUTHORITY. — This  word,  which  occurs  much 
more  frequently  in  RV  than  in  AV,  in  most  cases 
represents  the  Gr.  i^ovcrla.  It  is  used  of  delegated 
authority  in  Ac  9"  26^''*  ^"^ ;  of  the  authority  of  an 
apostle  in  2  Co  10^  and  13">  (RV) ;  of  earthly  rulers 
('authorities')  in  Tit  3^  (RV),  cf.  Lk  12^^;  and  in 
RV  of  Apocalypse  is  substituted  frequently  for  AV 
'  power ' ;  cf.  Rev  6*  12i»  13*-'2 17^2  (in  1713  it  replaces 
AV  '  strength ').  Yet  in  many  places  RV  still  re- 
tains '  power '  as  the  translation  of  i^ova-la ;  cf.  Ac 
819,  Col  li»,  Ro  13i-»,  Rev  9i»  11«  etc.  In  1  Co  lli" 
i^ova-La  is  used  in  a  peculiar  sense  ( '  for  this  cause 
ought  the  woman  to  have  i^ovaiav  on  her  head, 
because  of  the  angels'),  where  a  veil  appears  to  be 
meant.  Here  AV  gives  '  power,'  RV  '  a  sign  of 
authority,'  with  'have  authority  over'  in  the 
margin. 

In  several  passages  i^ovffla  is  used  to  designate  a 
created  being  superior  to  man,  a  spiritual  potentate, 
viz.  1  Co  15^^  Eph  1",  Col  2",  and,  in  the  plural, 
Eph  31"  61=*,  Col  116  215,  1  p  322^     In  1  Co  15-*  and  1  P 


3^,  AV  and  RV  render  '  authority '  and  RV  also  in 
Eph  l''!,  the  reason  probably  being  that  SOva/iLs  also 
occurs  in  these  verses  for  which  the  word  '  power ' 
was  needed.  In  the  other  references  the  transla- 
tion is  'power'  or  'powers.'  Seeing  that  i^ovfflai 
appear  to  be  a  class  of  angelic  beings  distinct  from 
dvi/d/xeii,  it  would  have  been  conducive  to  clearness 
if  the  word  '  authority '  had  been  used  in  all  these 
passages.  In  Eph  6i^  evil  principles  are  obviously 
referred  to  (cf.  2'') ;  in  1  Co  15'^  both  good  and  evil 
angels  may  be  included  (Lightfoot,  Uol.^  1879,  p. 
154).  See,  further,  under  Principality,  and  cf. 
the  preceding  article. 

In  a  few  places  'authority'  in  AV  represents 
other  Gr.  words,  viz.  Ac  8^  AV,  RV,  '  a  eunuch  of 
great  authority'  (Swdo-riji) ;  1  Ti  2^  AV  '  for  kings 
and  for  all  that  are  in  authority '  {iv  inrepoxv),  RV 
'  in  high  place ' ;  1  Ti  2i*  AV  '  I  suffer  not  a  woman 
...  to  usurp  authority  over  the  man '  (avdivrelv 
6.v5p6i),  RV  '  to  have  dominion  over ' ;  Tit  2"  '  re- 
buke (AV  reprove)  with  all  authority '  (eVtra-yTjs). 

W.  &.  DUNDAS. 

AVENGING.— See  Vengeance. 

AZOTUS  ('AfwTos).— Azotus,  the  Gr.  form  of 
'  Ashdod,'  occurs  often  in  1  Mac.  (4"5''10"-  ^'-  etc.), 
and  once  in  the  NT.  St.  Philip  met  the  Ethiopian 
on  '  the  way  that  goes  down  from  Jerusalem  to 
Gaza,'  and,  after  baptizing  him,  '  was  found  at 
Azotus '  (Ac  8-*-  **).  Ashdod  was  the  most  import- 
ant of  the  Philistine  cities  which  formed  the  Penta- 
polis.  Situated  midway  between  Joppa  and  Gaza 
— about  25  miles  from  each — it  passed  through 
many  vicissitudes.  It  appears  often  in  the  histori- 
cal and  prophetic  books  or  the  OT,  in  the  Assjnrian 
records,  in  the  Maccabsean  annals,  and  in  Josephus. 
Herodotus  (ii.  157)  says  that  the  siege  which  Azotus 
endured  before  it  was  subdued  by  Psarameticus, 
king  of  Egypt,  was  the  longest  on  record,  lasting  29 
years.  Ashdod  survives  in  the  modem  Esdud,  a 
village  on  the  slope  of  a  wooded  artificial  mound  {tell) 
— once,  no  doubt,  a  strong  fortress — about  3  miles 
from  the  sea-coast,  where  the  traces  of  a  harbour 
have  been  found.  The  ancient  city  lies  beneath  the 
sand-drift  that  now  threatens  to  bury  the  mud 
hovels  of  the  village,  among  which  some  remains 
of  old  stone  bnililings  are  to  be  seen.  The  wide 
plain  to  the  east  is  exceedingly  fertile. 

James  Strahan. 


B 


BAAL. — Baal  (Ro  11*,  in  a  quotation  from  1  K 
191*)  was  a  generic  name  for  a  god  among  Semitic 
peoples,  the  literal  meaning  being  '  owner '  or '  lord . ' 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  show  that  this  was  the 
original  name  of  the  Sun-god,  or  that  it  represents 
the  Supreme  Being  worshipped  by  the  Canaan- 
ites.  Neither  of  these  contentions  can  be  proved  ; 
indeed  it  is  evident  that  the  Baal  of  one  place 
differed  from  that  of  another.  Thus  the  reference 
in  the  text  is  to  Melkart,  the  Baal  of  Tyre.  The 
feminine  article  (t^  BadX)  in  the  Greek  of  Ro  11* 
is  due  to  the  frequent  substitution  of  bdsheth 
(in  Greek  al<rx>iyv),  *  shame,'  for  Baal  by  the 
Hebrews.* 

LrrBRATURB.— A.  S.  Peake,  art.  'Baal'  in  HDB\  G.  F. 
Moore  in  EBi ;  L.  B.  Paton  In  ERK ;  W.  R.  Smith,  RS\ 
London,  1894,  p.  93  ff.  F.    W.    WORSLEY. 

*  Hence  frequently  in  LXX  if  BaoA  (=:^  aXrxyyt),  though  in 
1  K  19^'*  the  reading  is  rep  BooA. 


BABBLER  (Ac  17").— Augustine  and  Wyclif 
wrongly  derive  the  word  cvepfioXSyos  from  airelpu 
\6yovi  and  translate  it  '  sower  of  words.'  It  is 
properly  derived  from  a-n-ipfM,  '  seed,'  and  X^«i', 
'  to  gather.'  Originally  an  adjective,  the  derived 
substantive  was  used  of  small  birds  gathering 
crumbs  (Aristophanes,  Av.  233,  580).  It  was  after- 
wards applied  to  loafers  in  the  market-place  who 
gained  a  precarious  livelihood  by  what  tney  could 
pick  up,  and  it  thus  connotes  '  a  vulgar  fellow,'  •  a 
parasite.'  Greek  writers  used  it  as  a  term  of  con- 
tempt for  plagiarists  and  nseudo-philosophers  (cf. 
Eustathius  on  Homer,  Oayss.  v.  490),  and  Zeno 
thus  names  one  of  his  followers.  W.  M.  Ramsay 
{St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Boman  Citizen,  1895, 
p.  242)  speaks  of  the  word  as  'characteristically 
Athenian  slang,  clearly  caught  from  the  very  lips 
of  the  Athenians.'  The  word  thus  contemptuously 
implies  one  who  is  an  outsider  and  yet  wishes  to 
pose  as  one  of  the  inner  circle,  and  probably  does 


BABBLINGS 


BA2sD 


127 


not  refer  to  anything  that  the  Apostle  had  said.  I 
It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  expression  was  j 
used  by  the  philosophers  who  have  just  been 
mentioned  rather  than  by  the  populace  in  general. 
They  resented  the  intrusiooi  of  one  who  had  no 
credentials,  and  from  the  first  viewed  him  with 
hostility  (see,  further,  Ramsay, '  St.  Paul  in  Athens,' 
in  Expositor,  5th  ser.,  iL  [1895]  262  S. 

r.  W.  WORSLEY. 

BABBLINGS  ( 1  Ti  6»,  2  Ti  2i«  ^f^^Xovi  Kevcx^vlas). 
— The  '  profane  babblings,  and  the  oppositions  of 
the  knowledge  which  is  falsely  so  called'  are  all 
profitless  speculation  and  empty  religious  talk 
which  only  minister  questions,  but  have  no  value 
in  the  equipment  of  a  man  of  God,  or  in  the  build- 
ing "up  of  the  Church.  The  implied  contrast  is 
between  intellectualism  in  religion  and  genuine 
pietv  in  heart  and  life  (cf.  F.  Godet,  Expositor, 
Srdser.,  vii.  [I888]45flF.). 

Some  have  seen  in  'the  oppositions  {opTideffeu) 
of  the  knowledge  which  is  falsely  so  called,'  a 
reference,  covert  or  open,  to  Marcion's  Antitheses ; 
but  this  has  scarcely  bsen  made  out,  and  it  is  better 
to  take  the  words  as  pointing  to  an  incipient 
Gnosticism,  hardly  yet  conscious  of  itself,  against 
which  the  writer — be  he  St.  Paul  or  a  Paulinist — 
warns  his  readers  {cf.  M.  Dods,  Introd.  to  NT, 
London,  1888,  p.  174).  The  Greek  mind  was  always 
desirous  of  being  saved  by  dialectic,  and  ready  to 
hear  or  to  tell  some  newer  thing  (cf.  Ac  17'^^).  In 
the  fermenting  vat  of  the  Greek  cities  in  the  Apos- 
tolic as  well  as  in  the  sub- Apostolic  Age  there  were 
frothy,  windy  men  who  knew  everything  about 
religion  except  'the  practick  part''(cf.  Didache, 
ii.  40-45  :  ovK  Irrai  6  \6yos  aov  ^euSrjs,  oil  Kev&s,  6Wd 
IJtefieorwfUvm  rpd^ei — '  Thy  speech  shall  not  be  false, 
nor  empty,  but  filled  with  doing ').  Practical  piety 
is  the  writers  theme,  and  he  calls  Christians  to 
cultivate  simplicity  as  it  is  in  Jesus ;  not  to  lose 
themselves  in  a  cloud  of  words,  but  to  be  direct 
and  devout.  Cf.  A.  Rowland  (1  Tim.,  London, 
1887) :  '  It  is  easier  to  quibble  over  Christ's  words 
than  to  imitate  His  life.'  To  the  same  etfect, 
Butler  {Charge  to  the  Clergy)  advises  them  'not  to 
trouble  about  objections  raised  by  men  of  gaiety 
and  speculation,'  but  to  endeavour  to  beget  a  prac- 
tical sense  of  religion  'upon  the  hearts  of  the 
people '  (cf.  EBi  iv.  5094). 

The  standing  type  of  the  religious  babbler  is 
Bunyan's  '  Talkative,'  who  will  '  talk  of  things 
Heavenly  or  things  Earthly  .  .  .  things  sacred  or 
things  profane,  things  past  or  things  to  come, 
things  more  essential  or  things  circumstantial.' 
To  this  masterly  characterization  '  of  the  evil  ex- 
cesses of  some  of  the  prophets,  lunatic  preachers, 
and  loquacious  hypocrites '  in  Puritan  tmies  may 
be  added  R.  H.  Button's  description  (C&n^e/nporary 
Thought  and  Thinkers,  London,  1894,  i.  257)  of  a 
certain  rampant  sceptic  of  yesterday  as  a  man 
'  hurling  about  wildly  loose  thoughts  over  which 
he  has  no  intellectual  control.'  These  are  the 
profane  babblers  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  They 
were  not  only  unsettling  to  the  Church — '  If  I  had 
said  "  I  will  speak  thus,"  I  should  have  been  faith- 
less to  the  generation  of  thy  children,'  Ps  73" — 
but  the  unreal  words  corrupted  the  babbler  himself, 
as  the  writer  not  obscurely  hints.  His  nature 
is  suMued  to  what  he  works  among  (cf.  Emerson  : 
•  I  cannot  listen  to  what  you  are  saying  for  thinking 
of  what  you  are '). 

To  use  unreal  words,  to  be  constantly  dealing 
with  the  greatest  things,  and  yet  to  be  too  shallow 
or  flippant  to  realize  their  majesty,  was,  in  the 
Apostolic  Age,  and  ever  since  has  been,  the  peculiar 
snare  and  peril  of  religious  speakers,  and  gives 
point  to  the  taunt  of  Carlvle  :  '  When  a  man  takes 
to  tongue-work,  it  is  all  over  with  him.'  The 
Carthusian  student  who  went  to  a  teacher  and  got 


the  text '  I  will  take  heed  to  my  wavs  that  I  sin  not 
■«-ith  my  tongue,'  found  that  enougli  for  a  lifetime. 
On  the  whole  subject  Newmans  lines  ('Flowers 
without  Fruit,'  in  Verses  on  Various  Occasions)  are 
an  apt  and  instmctiTe  commentary  : 

'  Prune  tboa  tbjr  words,  tibe  thoosfato  control 
That  o'er  thee  audi  and  thitxv/ 

Utkrattbx.— In  addition  to  the  worto  cited  abore,  we 
A.  Whyte,  Bunyan  Ckaratten,  L  [Edinburgh,  1895]  180 ;  J. 
Kelman,  The  Road,  L  [do.  1911]  180  ;  Joseph  Butler,  Sermont, 
ed.  Gladstone,  Oxford,  188«,  na  4.  V\'.  !M.  GraXT. 

BABYLON.— See  Apocalypse  and  Pktkk,  Fibst 
Epistle  of. 

BACKBITING.— See  Evil-speakixg. 

BALAAM. —  The  somewhat  prominent  place 
that  Balaam  holds  in  the  Apostolic  Age  may  be 
appraised  by  the  three  references  to  him  in  the 
NT  (2  P  2^,  Jude  ",  and  Rev  2") ;  by  the  legends 
which  grew  round  his  name  in  Hellenistic  and 
Haggadic  literature,  and  later  in  Muhammadanism ; 
and  perhaps  by  the  apparent  popularity  of  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  '  Blessings  of  Balaam '  by  Hippolytus. 
Balaam  has  become  the  representative  of  false 
teachers  and  sorcerers,  and  we  may  suspect  a  play 
on  his  name  in  Rev  2^*  (perhaps  =  'lord  of  the 
people'),  in  order  to  brand  certain  Gnostic  teachers 
as  making  gain  for  themselves  out  of  the  simple 
folk  by  the  use  of  magic  and  by  the  teaching  of  a 
gnosis  which  tended  to  laxity  of  practice.  (It  is 
not  improbable  that  in  the  Nicodemus  of  Jn  3  is 
enshrined  a  counter-play  of  words — the  Jewish 
party  also,  it  is  hinted,  had  a  false  and  carnal 
doctrine  of  their  own. )  Balaam  becomes  in  legend 
a  counsellor  of  Pharaoh ;  he  and  his  two  sons 
Jannes  and  Jambres  (q.v.)  were  compelled  to  flee 
from  Egypt  to  Ethiopia,  where  Balaam  reigned  as 
king  till  conquered  by  Moses.  On  this  he  and  his 
sons  returned  to  Egypt  and  became  the  master- 
magicians  who  opposed  Moses.  Finally,  Phinehas 
attacked  Balaam,  who  by  his  magic  flew  into  the 
air,  but  was  killed  by  Phinehas  in  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Name.     See  Nicolaitaxs  ;  also  JE  ii.  468  f . 

W.  F.  Cobb. 

BALAK. — Balak  is  named  in  Rev  2"  along  with 
Balaam.  Like  Balaam  {q.v.),  Balak  is  to  be  re- 
garded here  as  a  typical  figure.  The  former 
teaches  doctrine  which  is  false  in  itself,  corrupt  in 
its  motive,  and  immoral  in  its  fruits  ;  while  Balak 
is,  as  in  the  OT,  the  heathen  power  which  thrusts 
Balaam's  sorceries  on  the  faithful.  It  is  difficult 
to  resist  the  conclusion  that,  if  Balaam  is  the 
teacher  of  Gnosticism,  Balak  is  the  Roman  power 
which  has  adopted  syncretism  and  seeks  to  compel 
the  Christians  to  adopt  its  ways  also,  and  so  makes 
them  fall  into  the  corruptions  attendant  on  pagan 
worship.  W.  F.  Cobb. 

BAND  {<rreipa,  always  'cohort'  in  RYm). — As  a 
province  of  the  second  rank,  governed  by  pro- 
curators, Judaea  was  not  garrisoned  by  legionaries, 
who  were  Roman  citizens,  but  by  auxiliaries,  who 
were  levied  from  subject  races.  £ach  cohort,  vary- 
ing from  500  to  1000  infantry,  usually  strengthened 
by  an  ala  of  cavalry,  was  named  after  the  Greek 
city  from  which  it  was  recruited — '  cohors  Sebas- 
tenorum,  Ascalonitarum,'  etc.  The  Jews  them- 
selves were  exempted  from  military  service- 
Various  data  supplied  by  Josephus  (see  the  refer- 
ences in  Schiirer,  HJP  I.  ii.  51  f.)  indicate  that 
the  Judaean  forces  were  originally  the  troops  of 
Herod  the  Great,  which  were  taken  over  by  the 
Romans  after  the  deposition  of  Archelaus  in  A.D.  6. 
At  ordinary  times  Jerusalem  was  garrisoned  by 
one  cohort — called  by  Josephus  a  riyfia  {BJ  V.  v,  8) 
1  — which  was  stationed  at  the  tower  of  Antonia,  on 


128 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


the  north  side  of  the  Tenii)le,  under  the  com- 
mand of  a  diiliarch  (Ac  21*^).  Part  of  this  cohort 
— 200  infaiitrj',  70  horsemen,  and  200  5«|to\<i/3ot,  an 
obscure  term  translated  '  spearmen '  (see  Schiirer, 
op.  cit.  56) — formed  St.  Paul's  protecting  convoy 
wlien  he  was  transmitted  by  Claudius  Lysias  to 
the  governor  Felix  in  Csesarea. 

James  Strahan. 

BAPTISM — 1.  Christian  baptism  in  the  NT.— 
It  will  be  convenient  at  the  beginning  of  this  article 
to  collect  the  narratives  of  and  allusions  to  Chris- 
tian baptism  in  the  NT.  The  command  of  our 
Lord  to  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations  by  bap- 
tism (Mt  28^";  see  oelow,  4  and  8)  was  faithfully 
carried  out  by  the  first  disciples.  Actual  bap- 
tisms are  recorded  in  Ac  2***  *^  (the  3000  converts), 
8i2t.  16  (Samaritans,  men  and  women,  and  Simon), 
gss.  3s  (the  Ethiopian  eunuch),  9^8  22ie  (Saul),  10"'- 
(Cornelius  and  his  friends),  IB^"^  (Lydia  and  her 
household),  16^  (the  Philippian  jailer  'and  all 
his '),  18*  (Crispus  and  his  nouse,  and  many  Cor- 
inthians), 19'  (about  twelve  Ephesians),  1  Co  1^*-  " 
(Crispus,  Gains,  and  the  household  of  Stephanas). 

In  addition  to  these  narratives  there  are  many 
allusions  to  Christian  baptism  in  the  NT — Ro 
6^'-,  Col  2^2,  baptized  into  Christ  Jesus,  into  His 
death,  buried  with  Him  in  baptism :  a  common 
thought  in  early  times — e.g.  Apost.  Const,  ii.  7 
and  often  in  that  work  (see  A.  J.  Maclean,  Ancient 
Church  Orders,  123).— 1  Co  6^^  sanctification  and 
justification  connected  with  the  washing  of  bap- 
tism ;  three  aorists,  referring  to  a  definite  event : 
'  ye  washed  away  {aireKoiffacrOe,  middle)  [your  sins] 
...  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  in 
the  Spirit  of  our  God ' ;  cf.  Ac  22^®  (above) :  '  arise 
and  be  baptized '  {^awTLffai,  '  seek  baptism ')  and 
wash  away  (diroXova-ai)  thy  sins.' — 1  Co  12'^,  [Jews 
and  Gentiles]  all  baptized  in  one  Spirit  into  one 
body. — Gal  3",  baptized  into  Christ,  put  on  Christ. 
— Eph  4',  'one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism.' — 
Eph  5^,  Christ  sanctified  the  Church,  having 
cleansed  it  by  the  washing  (Kovrpc^)  of  water  mth 
the  word.  The  'word'  is  said  by  Robinson  {Com. 
in  loc.)  to  be  the  '  solemn  invocation  of  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesus ' ;  Westcott  (in  loc. )  adds : 
'accompanied  by  the  confession  of  the  Christian 
faith,  cf.  Ro  10*';  Chase  (J ThSt  viii.  165)  inter- 
prets it  of  the  word  or  fiat  of  Christ,  and  compares 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (Cat.  iii.  5).— Tit  3«,  '  by  the 
washing  of  regeneration  (5tA  Xovrpov  TraXiyyevecrias) 
and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost ' ;  see  below, 
8. — He  6^"  *,  the  first  principles  are  repentance, 
faith,  teaching  of  baptisms  (^airTia-fiQv)  and  of 
laying  on  of  hands,  resurrection,  and  judgment ; 
Christians  were  once  enlightened  ((jximadivras)  and 
tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  par- 
takers of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  hence  the  name  '  illumi- 
nation '  (<^wTt(rAi6s)  and  '  illuminated '  for  '  baptism ' 
and  'the  baptized'  in  Justin  (Apol.  i.  61,  65)  and 
elsewhere.  Westcott  interprets  the  'teacliing 
[StSax^J,  but  B  reads  •■l)v,  which  is  adopted  in 
RVm  and  by  WH]  of  baptisms '  as  instruction 
about  the  ditlerence  between  Christian  baptism 
and  other  lustral  rites.  Chase  (Confirmation  in 
Apostol.  Age,  p.  44  f . )  denies  this,  and  interprets 
the  phrase  of  the  baptism  of  different  neophytes, 
'  the  Christian  rite  in  its  concrete  application  to 
individual  believers ' :  the  '  heavenly  gift '  is  one 
part  of  the  illumination  or  baptism,  i.e.  the  gift 
of  the  Son,  of  Eternal  life,  or  sonship  (Chase) ; 
the  partaking  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  other  part. 
In  any  case  the  iwiOecm  x^^P^"  niust  refer  to  the 
laying  on  of  hands  which  followed  immersion  (see 
below,  6),  thou";h  Westcott  would  extend  it  to 
benedictions,  ordinations,  etc.,  as  well. — He  10*"-, 
'  our  body  washed  with  pure  water '  (our  sacra- 
mental bathing  contrasted  with  the  symbolic 
bathings  of  the  Jews  [Westcott]),  '  let  us  hold  fast 


the  confession  (hfioXoylav)  of  our  hope.' — In  1  P  3" 
baptism  is  the  '  antitype '  of  the  bringing  of  Noah 
safe  througli  the  water ;  the  antitype  is  here  the 
'nobler  member  of  the  pair  of  relatives'  (Bigg, 
ICC,  in  loc),  the  fulfilment  of  the  type ;  but  in  He 
9^  it  is  used  conversely,  as  it  often  is  in  Christian 
antiquity  when  the  Eucharistic  bread  and  wine 
are  called  the  antitype  of  our  Lord's  body  and 
blood,  e.g.  Verona  Didascalia  (ed.  Hauler,  p.  112) 
*  panem  quidem  in  exemplar  quod  dicit  Graecus 
antitypum  corporis  Christi';  so  Cyr.  Jer.,  Cat. 
xxiii.  20;  Tertullian  similarly  uses  'figura'(arfw. 
Marc.  iv.  10),  and  Serapion  hfiolw/Jia  (Liturgy,  §  1). 
For  other  instances,  see  Cooper-Maclean,  Test,  of 
our  Lord,  Edinburgh,  1902,  p.  172  f.,  and  Apost, 
Const.  V.  14,  vi.  30,  vii.  25.  In  Ps.-Clem.  £  Cor. 
14  the  flesh  is  the  '  antitype '  of  the  Spirit. 

In  the  Gospels,  Christian  baptism  is  three  times 
referred  to  :  Mt  28i9,  '  Mk '  16^8,  Jn  S^-  ».  In  the 
last  passage  the  words  ^f  iidaros,  read  in  all  MSS 
and  VSS,  have  been  judged  by  K.  Lake  (Inaug. 
Lecture  at  Leyden,  17th  Jan.  1904,  p.  14)  to  be 
an  interpolation,  as  they  are  not  quoted  by  Justin. 
This  deauction  is  very  precarious  (for  an  examina- 
tion of  it,  see  Chase,  JThSt  vi.  [1905]  604,  note, 
who  deems  the  theory  un.scientific) ;  but  in  any 
case  the  '  birth  of  the  Spirit '  could  not  but  con- 
vey to  the  Christian  readers  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
a  reference  to  baptism.  Westcott  truly  remarks 
(Com.  in  loc.)  that  to  Nicodemus  the  words  would 
suggest  a  reference  to  John's  baptism.  An 
attempt  to  explain  '  water '  here  Avithout  reference 
to  baptism  is  examined  by  Hooker  (Eccl.  Pol.  v. 
59),  who  lays  down  the  oft-quoted  canon  that 
'while  a  literal  construction  will  stand,  the 
farthest  from  the  letter  is  commonly  the  worst* 
(see  below,  8). 

In  these  passages  water  is  not  always  mentioned  ; 
but  the  word  ^airrtfw,  whicli  to  us  is  a  mere 
technical  expression,  and  its  Aramaic  equivalent 
(rt.  h^a)  would  to  the  first  disciples  at  once  convey 
the  idea  of  water.  The  element  is  mentioned  or 
alluded  to  in  Ac  8^,  I  Co  6"  12'8  ('drink  of  one 
Spirit '),  Eph  5^0,  Tit  3»,  He  lO^^,  1  P  32»,  and  is 
necessitated  by  the  metaphor  of  burial  in  baptism 
in  Ro  6'',  Col  2^^.  Justin  (Dial.  14)  emphasizes 
the  element  used,  by  calling  baptism  the  '  water 
of  life' :  so  in  Hermas  (Vis.  lii.  3)  the  Church  (the 
tower)  is  built  on  the  waters,  '  because  your  life  is 
saved  and  shall  be  saved  by  Avater.' 

More  indirect  allusions  to  Christian  baptism  are 
found  in  the  NT.  The  Israelites,  by  a  metaphor 
from  it,  are  said  to  have  been  baptized  into  (els) 
Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea  (1  Co  10*). 
Whatever  view  is  taken  of  baptism  for  the  dead 
(1  Co  15^),  it  alludes  to  the  Christian  rite.  It  has 
been  interpreted  (a)  of  vicarious  baptism  on  be- 
half of  those  who  had  died  unbaptized  (cf.  2  Mac 
2243(r-,  ollering  made  for  the  dead)  ;  this  AA'as  the 
practice  of  some  heretics  (so  Tert.,  de  Res.  Cam. 
48,  adv.  Marc.  v.  10,  and  Goud^e,  Alford).  But 
there  is  no  evidence  that  it  existed  in  the  1st  cent., 
and  the  practice  may  have  originated  from  this 
verse  ;  could  St.  Paul  have  even  tacitly  approved 
of  such  a  thing? — (b)  The  AA'ords  inrip  tQv  yfKpQp 
are  rendered  by  many  Greek  Fathers  '  in  expecta- 
tion of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead ' ;  but  this 
forces  the  grammar,  and  gives  no  good  sense  to 
{nrip  a&rQv,  Avhich  is  the  best  attested  reading  at 
the  end  of  the  verse  ;  also  '  they  Avhich  are  bap- 
tized '  means  not  all  Christians,  out  some  of  them. 
—(c)  Others  interpret  the  verse  of  people  being 
draAvn  to  the  faith  and  to  baptism  out  of  affection 
for  some  dead  friend  ;  Robertson-Plummer  (ICC, 
in  loc.)  incline  to  this.— (rf)  Estius  and  Calvin 
render  'as  now  about  to  die,'  jamjam  morituri; 
but  see  (b).—(e)  Luther  renders  '  over  the  graves 
of  the  dead ' ;  here  again  see  (b).     Many  other 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


129 


suggestions  have  been  made.  It  is  probable  that 
the  problem  is  insoluble  with  our  present  know- 
ledge, and  that  the  reference  is  to  some  ceremony 
in  tne  then  baptismal  rite  at  Corinth  of  which  we 
hear  no  more,  but  not  to  vicarious  baptism  (see 
Plummer  in  HDB  i.  245). 

Other  allusions  to  baptism  (the  complete  rite, 
see  below,  6)  may  probably  be  found  in  the  meta- 
phors of  anointing  and  sealing.  For  anointing, 
see  2  Co  1-'*  (xp«ffas,  aorist),  1  Jn  2"-*-  ^  (the  anoint- 
ing abides  in  us  and  is  not  only  a  historical  act). 
Though  anointing  may  have  accompanied  the  rite 
in  the  NT,  and  Chase  (Confirmation,  53flF.)  decides 
that  it  wa-s  so  used,  yet  it  is  also  not  improbable 
that  its  institution  at  a  very  early  age  of  the 
ChuYch  may  have  been  due  to  these  very  passages 
— that  the  practice  came  from  the  metaphor.  We 
notice  that  in  the  Didache,  §  7,  anointing  is  not 
mentioned,  but  that  in  Apost.  Const,  vii.  22  (4th 
cent. ),  wliich  incorporates  and  enlarges  the  Didache, 
it  is  introduced.  It  was  certainly  used  very 
early.  Irenaens  says  that  some  of  the  Gnostic  sects 
anointed  after  baptism  (c.  Haer.  I.  xxi.  3f.) ;  and 
as  the  Gnostic  rites  were  a  parody  of  those  of  the 
Church,  this  carries  the  eWdence  back  to  c.  A.D. 
150.  It  is  mentioned  by  Tert. ,  de  Bapt.  7,  de  Bes. 
Cam.  8  ;  by  Cyr.  Jer.,  Cat.  xxii.  1.  From  the 
anointing  came  the  custom  of  calling  the  baptized 
'christs,'  xP'<'^TO'  (Cyr.  Jer.,  loc.  cit.  ;  Methodius, 
Banquet  of  the  Ten  Virgins,  viii.  8,  where  Ps  105" 
LXX  is  quoted*.  In  the  NT,  xP't'"  is  used  meta- 
phorically of  our  Lord;   cf.  Lk  4»8,  Ac  4"  10^, 

For  sealing,  see  2  Co  1**  (same  context  as  the 
anointing),  Eph  1"  ('having  believed  ye  were 
sealed  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise'),  4* 
('sealed  in  the  Holy  Spirit').  The  aorists  in  all 
three  passages,  which  connect  the  Holy  Ghost 
with  the  sealing,  point  to  the  definite  time  when 
they  became  believers  (Chase,  Confirmation,  p. 
52).  (The  metaphor  is  used  in  Ro  4^^  of  circum- 
cision ;  and  otherwise  in  Jn  3*^  6^,  Ro  15^,  1  Co 
9=^,  2  Ti  2^*.)  Hence  in  Christian  antiquity  the 
baptismal  rite,  either  as  a  whole  or  in  one  or  other 
of  its  parts,  is  frequently  called  '  the  seal,'  atppayls ; 
e.g.  Hermas,  Sim.  is.  16,  '  the  seal  is  the  water ' ; 
cf.  viiL  6;  Ps.-Clem.,  2  Cor.  7;  Clem.  Alex., 
Quis  dives,  42;  Tert.,  de  Spect.  24  {signacidum) ; 
CjT.  Jer.,  Cat.  iv.  16,  etc. 

To  these  passages  must  be  added  those  which 
speak  of  Christian  adoption :  Ro  8"-  ^,  Gal  4*, 
Eph  1' ;  for  these  see  art.  ADOPTION. 

2.  Predecessors  of  Christian  baptism. — (a)  The 
words  jSaxTij'cj,  /Sottktjuoj,  /Sdxrto-jua  are  used  in  the 
NT  of  various  ceremonial  icashings  of  the  Jews. 
The  verb  is  derived  from  ^amj,  'to  dip'  (found 
in  the  NT  onlv  in  Lk  16-*,  Jn  IS^*,  and  some  MSS 
of  Rev  19",  always  literally),  and  has  in  classical 
Greek  the  same  meaning.  In  the  NT  jSaxrifw  is 
used  either  metaphorically,  of  the  Passion  of  our 
Lord  (Mk  lO^*'-,  Lk  12»>,  and  some  MSS  of  Mt  20^^ 
— so  also  ^rTicTfia)  and  of  the  descent  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  at  Pentecost  (Ac  1'  IP^,  see  below,  6),  or 
else  of  baptism  and  of  Jewish  ablutions.  For 
these  last,  see  Mk  7*  (the  Jews  'baptize,'  v.l. 
sprinkle,  themselves  before  meat  and  have  '  bap- 
tizings,'  ^a-TTifffwvs,  of  vessels),  Lk  11^  (of  washing 
before  breakfast,  i^-rriaOr)  rpb  roO  apiarov),  He  9^'' 
(divers  'baptisms,'  i.e.  washings).*  Ceremonial 
ablution  was  a  common  practice  of  the  Jews  (Ex 
29*  etc.,  Mk  7'  -rvyfiy  vixpwyrai,  Jn  2®  3'^) ;  and  the 
allusions  to  washing  in  connexion  with  baptism 
(above,  1)  would  be  familiar  to  the  early  Christians, 

*  /Stt»Tt<Tfi6«  is  used  of  Christian  baptism  in  Col  213  (p./. 
PawTUTfia),  and  in  the  plural  in  He  62  (see  above,  1) ;  Josephus 
(Ant.  xvni.  v.  2)  uses  it  of  John's  baptism.  fiairruTfui  is  used 
in  the  NT  12  times  of  John's  baptism  and  3  (or  4)  times  of 
Christian  baptism ;  for  its  metaphorical  use  see  above. 
VOL.  I. — 9 


who  also  had  the  metaphor  of  cleansing  ;  see  2  Co 
V,  1  Jn  r.  Rev  1»  (some  MSS)  7'*  ;  cf.  2  P  2». 

(b)  Baptism  of  proselytes. — The  Jews  admitted 
'proselytes  of  rignteousness,'  i.e.  full  proselytes, 
with  baptism,  circumcision,  and  sacrifice.  This 
custom  was  very  common  in  Rabbinical  times, 
though  Josephus  and  Philo  do  not  mention  it,  and 
some  have  therefore  concluded  that  it  did  not  exist 
in  the  1st  cent.  ;  but  Edersheim  has  clearly  proved 
from  ancient  evidence  that  it  was  then  in  use  [LT 
ii.  746,  App.  xii.).  It  may  be  added  that  the  Jews 
in  later  times  would  not  have  borrowed  baptism 
from  the  Christians,  though  it  is  intelligible  that  first 
John  and  then  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  should 
have  adopted  a  custom  already  existing  and  have 
given  it  a  new  meaning.  Such  a  baptized  person 
was  said  by  the  Rabbis  to  be  as  a  little  child  just 
bom  (cf.  Tit  3*  ;  see  Edersheim,  loc.  cit.). 

(c)  The  baptism  of  John  is  described  in  all  the 
Gospels.  It  was  a  preparatory  baptism  (Mt  3*^), 
the  baptism  of  repentance  (Mk  1*,  Lk  3»,  Ac  13** 
19*),  intended,  by  an  outward  symbol,  to  induce 
repentance  which  is  the  essential  requisite  for  the 
reception  of  spiritual  truth.  So  marked  a  feature 
of  his  teaching  was  baptism,  that  John  is  called 
pre-eminently  'the  Baptist'  (6  /SaTrwr^s,  Mt  3* 
IP"-,  Mk  8«,  Lk  7»-»9i»;  Josephus,  Ant.  xvm. 
V.  2 ;  in  Mk  6"-  ***•  6  /Saxrt'fwp),  But  he  himself 
shows  the  difference  between  his  baptism  and  that 
of  Jesus,  in  that  the  latter  was  to  be  Avith  the  Holy 
Ghost  (Mt  3'i,  Mk  P,  Lk  3'«,  Jn  1^)  and  with  fire 
(Mt.,  Lk.).  For  the  meaning  of  baptism  'with 
the  Holy  Ghost,'  see  below  6  and  8  (e).  Baptism 
'  with  fire  '  is  explained  in  Mt  3'^  ;  it  is  a  baptism 
of  judgment  separating  the  wheat  from  the  chaff, 
and  burning  the  chaff  with  fire  unquenchable 
(Allen,  Com.  in  loc.  ;  so ;;  Lk  3'^).  This  interpre- 
tation, however,  is  denied  by  Plummer  (ICC  on 
Lk  3**),  who  prefers  a  reference  to  the  purifying 
power  of  the  grace  given,  or  to  the  fiery  trials  that 
await  Christians.  Others  see  a  reference  to  the 
'  tongues  like  as  of  fire '  at  Pentecost  (Ac  2*). 
However  this  may  be,  the  fundamental  difference 
between  the  two  baptisms  is  that  John's  was  a 
ceremonial  rite  symbolizing  the  need  of  repent- 
ance and  of  washing  away  sin,  while  that  of  our 
Lord  was,  in  addition,  the  infusing  of  a  new  life  ; 
see  below,  8.  The  baptism  of  John  is  mentioned 
in  the  NT  outside  the  Gospels  in  Ac  1«-  ^  10"  ll'« 
13**  18**  193^  ;  the  last  two  passages  show  that  it 
survived  after  Pentecost  among  those  who  had  not 
yet  received  the  gospel. 

To  this  preparatory  stage  is  also  to  be  assigned 
the  baptism  of  Jesus  by  John ;  it  was  not  the 
institution  of  Christian  baptism,  though  it  paved 
the  way  for  it,  and  in  some  sense  our  Lord  may  be 
said  to  have  thereby  sanctified  '  water  to  the 
mystical  washing  away  of  sin. '  Such  also  was  the 
baptizing  by  Jesus'  disciples  during  His  earthly 
ministry  ( Jn  3**  4')  ;  we  note  that  our  Lord  carried 
on  the  Baptist's  teaching  about  the  approach  of  the 
kingdom  and  about  repentance  (Mk  1"  ;  cf.  Mt  3*'), 
though  in  His  teaching  the  Good  Tidings  pre- 
dominated, while  in  that  of  John  repentance  was 
the  chief  note  (Swete,  Com.  in  loc.). 

3.  Preparation  for  baptism. — Instruction  in 
Christian  doctrine  before  baptism  is  to  some  extent 
necessary,  because  otherwbe  there  cannot  be  faith 
and  repentance.  Our  Lord  commanded  the  dis- 
ciples to  teach  (Mt  28**,  diSoffKoyres)  as  well  as  to 
baptize.  St.  Peter  instructed  the  people  and  Cor- 
nelius before  he  commanded  them  to  be  baptized 
(Ac  21*-^  10^*»-  *8).  Philip  instructed  the  Samari- 
tans and  the  Eunuch  before  baptism  (S"-^**). 
The  instruction  of  TheophUns  (Lk  1*)  was  probably, 
at  least  in  part,  before  baptism.  Lydia's  baptism 
followed  a  preaching  <Ac  16'*),  as  did  that  of  the 
Corinthians  (18*).     But  in  most  of  these  cases  the 


130 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


teaching  was  very  short,  in  some  of  them  not  last- 
ing more  than  one  day.  And  no  instruction  that 
can  be  properly  so  called  is  mentioned  in  the  case 
of  Saul  (Ac  9'8  2218),  or  the  Philippian  jailer  (18«; 
note  *  immediately '),  or  the  twelve  Ephesians  (19*). 
Apollos  had  been  instructed  {^v  Kar-qx-ntidvos)  in  the 
way  of  the  Lord,  but  only  imperfectly,  and  Pris- 
cilla  and  Aquila  taught  him  more  carefully  (d/cpt- 
^^ffrepov,  Ac  18^*).  The  allusions  to  the  instruction 
of  Christians  in  1  Co  W^,  Gal  6«  (/carijx^w),  Ro  12^ 
Col  1**  etc.  (5t5d<r/cw),  have  no  special  reference  to 
baptism.  In  Ro  2'*  KaTrix^u  is  used  of  Jewish 
instruction. 

At  a  later  period,  persons  under  instruction  for 
baptism  were  called  catechumens  {Karrjxov/j.ej'oi, 
'  those  in  a  state  of  being  taught ' ;  cf.  Gal  6*),  and 
their  preparation  was  called  catechesis  (/carvJx'7''''^  5 
cf.  our  word  '  catechism '  from  KarTjxKr/Mdi,  through 
Latin).  The  catechumens  were  taught  the  Creed, 
or  Christian  doctrine,  during  their  catechumenate, 
and  their  instruction  was  called  the  *  traditio 
symbol! ' ;  they  professed  their  faith  at  baptism, 
and  this  profession  was  called  the '  redditio  symboli ' 
(see  below,  S).  The  baptism  in  later  times  norm- 
ally took  place  in  the  early  morning  of  Easter  Day, 
and  the  selection  of  candidates  for  baptism  took 
place  on  the  40th  day  before  ( Cyr.  Jer. ,  Cat. ,  In  trod. 
§  4  ;  it  was  called  the  '  inscribing  of  names,'  dvofw.- 
Toypa(f>ia) ;  thenceforward  the  selected  candidates 
Avere  called  'competentes,'  ffwairoOvTes.  In  the 
4th  cent,  the  catechumenate  lasted  two  years 
(Elvira,  can.  42)  or  three  years  {Ap.  Const,  viii. 
32,  and  several  Church  Orders) ;  but  this  was  never 
a  hard  and  fast  rule.  Catechumens  were  not 
allowed  to  be  present  at  the  main  part  of  the 
Eucharist  or  at  the  Agape  (Didache,  9,  and  often  in 
the  Church  Orders).  See,  further,  A.  J.  Maclean, 
op.  cit.  pp.  16-19,  97  ;  DCA,  art.  '  Catechumens.' 

i.  Formula  of  baptism. — It  is  not  quite  clear 
what  words  were  used  for  baptism  in  NT  times. 
In  Mt  28^*  our  Lord  bids  His  followers  make 
disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing  (/SaTrr/foj/res, 
present  part.)  them  into  the  name  (et's  rb  bvofw., 
AN  '  in  the  name,'  see  8)  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  These  words  are  in 
all  MSS  and  VSS,  but  F.  C.  Conybeare  {ZNTW, 
1901,  p.  275  ft'.  ;  HJ  i.  [Oct.  1902]  102  ft".)  and  K. 
Lake  (Inaug.  Lect.  at  Leyden,  17th  Jan.  1904)  dis- 
pute their  authenticity,  because  Eusebius  often 
quotes  the  text  without  them  or  with  '  make  dis- 
ciples of  all  the  nations  in  my  name. '  The  careful 
refutation  of  this  view  by  Chase  {JThSt  vi.  483  ft'. ) 
and  Riggenbach  (•  Der  trinitar,  Taufbefehl  Matth. 
28'*,'  in  Beitrdge  zur  Forderung  christl.  Theol., 
Giitersloh,  1903)  has  made  this  position  untenable, 
and  we  can  with  confidence  assert  that  the  full 
text  is  part  of  the  First  Gospel.  It  has,  however, 
been  denied  that  the  words  were  spoken  by  our 
Lord.  But  the  view  that  He  made  some  such 
utterance,  of  which  the  words  in  Mt  28'"  are 
doubtless  a  much  abbreviated  record,  is  the  only 
way  in  which  we  can  comprehend  how  such  a 
Trinitarian  passage  as  2  Co  13'*  could  have  been 
written,  or  understand  the  numerous  passages  in 
the  NT  which  affirm  the  Godhead  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  (Chase,  JThSt  vi.  509  f .  ;  see  also 
art.  '  God  '^  in  SDB). 

In  Acts  we  read  of  people  being  baptized  (almost 
always  in  the  passive)  *  in  {ev)  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus'  (2*^  [v.l.  iirl']),  or  '  into  (eU)  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus '  (8"  19*),  or  '  in  (iv)  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ'  (lO'^).  In  the  Pauline  Epistles  we  read  of 
baptism  into  Christ  Jesus,  into  His  death  (Ro  6*), 
into  Christ  (Gal  3'") ;  with  these  passages  cf.  1  Co 
118.18  ('into  the  name  of  Paul,'  '  into  my  name '), 
10=  ('into  Moses'),  12"  (' into  one  body '),  Ac  19^ 
('into  what?' — 'into  John's  baptism');  all  these 
passages  also  have  the  passive  '  to  be  baptized,' 


except  1  Co  10'  whicli  (according  to  the  best  read- 
ing) has  the  middle  i^airTLaavro  (cf.  1  Co  6",  Ac 
22'"  ;  above,  1) ;  1  Co  6"  has  '  in  (^i*)  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  in  the  Spirit  of  our  God.' 
Of  these  passages  only  Ac  8"  10*^  19*  are  narra- 
tives of  baptisms. 

The  Pauline  references  clearly  do  not  refer  to 
the  formula  used,  though  1  Co  1'*-  "  makes  it  prob- 
able that  in  some  form  the  '  Name '  was  mentioned 
in  the  words  of  baptism.  Do  the  other  passages 
refer  to  a  formula  ?  On  this  point  there  is  much 
diversity  of  opinion,  (a)  It  is  maintained  that  the 
formula  at  first  ran  '  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus '  or  the  like  ;  and  that  the  First  Evangelist 
introduced  into  his  Gospel  the  Trinitarian  formula 
which  was  in  use  towards  the  end  of  the  Ist  century 
(Robinson,  EBi,  art.  '  Baptism '),  It  is  not  easy  to 
see  how,  if  the  other  formula  was  the  original 
apostolic  usage,  this  one  could  have  been  invented 
in  the  third  or  even  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  Ist 
cent.,  unless  indeed  our  liOrd  had  reallj'  spoken 
such  words  as  are  found  in  Mt  28'* ;  and  in  that 
case  it  is  hard  to  see  why  the  apostles  should  have 
used  a  quite  different  formula. — (6)  It  is  thought 
that  the  passages  in  Mt.  and  Acts  alike  refer  to  the 
formula  used,  l)ut  that  baptism  into  Christ's  name 
is  necessarily  the  same  as  baptism  into  that  of  the 
Holy  Trinity.  The  latter  statement  is  quite  true, 
but  it  does  not  meet  the  whole  difficulty. — (c)  It 
is  said  that  none  of  the  passages  in  Acts  refers  to 
a  formula  at  all,  but  only  to  the  theological  import 
of  baptism  (see  below,  8).  This  is  quite  probable  ; 
at  least  the  difterences  of  wording  show  that  if 
a  formula  is  referred  to  at  all  in  Acts,  it  was  not 
stereotyped  in  the  first  age. — (d)  Assuming  that  our 
Lord  spoke,  at  any  rate  in  substance,  the  words  re- 
corded in  Mt  28'",  many  think  that  He  did  not  here 
prescribe  a  formula,  but  unfolded  the  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  rite  (so  Chase,  JThSt  vi.  506  ft'., 
viii.  177  ;  Swete,  Holy  Spirit  in  NT,  p.  124  ;  W.  C. 
Allen,  ICC,  in  lac).  This  view  is  extremely  prob- 
able, whatever  inter})retation  we  put  ujjon  the 
Eassage,  for  which  see  below,  8.  It  was  our  Lord's 
abit  not  to  make  regulations  but  to  establish 
Erinciples  ;  so  Socrates  (HE  v.  22),  speaking  of  the 
eeping  of  Easter,  contrasts  the  practice  of  Jesus 
with  that  of  the  Mosaic  Law  in  the  matter  of  the 
making  of  rules. 

It  is  quite  possible  that  no  formula  of  baptism  is 
given  in  the  NT  at  all,  and  even  that  at  first  there 
were  no  fixed  words.  It  is  probable  that  all  the 
NT  passages  refer  primarily  to  the  theological 
import  of  the  rite,  though  they  may  have  a  remote 
allusion  to  the  mode  of  baptizing.  But  though  we 
cannot  assert  that  there  was  in  the  Apostolic  Age 
a  fixed  form  of  words,  it  was  a  sound  instinct 
which  induced  the  Church,  at  least  from  the  1st 
cent,  onwards,  to  adopt  the  Trinitarian  formula, 
and  it  would  be  rash  indeed  to  depart  from  it.  If 
our  Lord's  words  did  not  prescribe  a  form  of  wonls, 
at  least  they  suggested  it.  We  find  it  in  the 
Didache  (§  7  :  '  baptize  into  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost '),  though  in 
describing  Christians  in  §  9  the  writer  speaks  of 
them  as  'baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord.' 
So  Justin  paraphrases :  '  They  then  receive  the 
washing  with  water  in  the  name  (ix  6v6ixaro%)  of 
God,  the  Father  and  Lord  of  the  universe,  and  of 
our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,' 
and  says  that  '  he  who  is  illuminated  (see  above,  1) 
is  washed  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  .  .  .  and 
in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost'  {Apol.  i.  61). 
Tertullian  says  that  the  formula  has  been  pre- 
scribed [by  Christ],  and  quotes  Mt  28'*  exactly  {de 
Bapt.  13 ;  note  especially  that  he  translates  eh  rb 
dvofia  by  •'  in  nomen  '  though  Mi^ne,  aj)parently  by 
error,  gives  'nomine').  In  de  Praescr.  20  he 
paraphrases  the  text :  '  He  ba^le  them  ...  go  and 


BAPTISM 


EAPTISM 


131 


teach  the  nations  who  were  to  be  baptized  (intin- 
guendas)  into  the  Father  (in  Patrem),  and  into  the 
Son,  and  into  the  Iloly  Ghost ' ;  and  in  adv.  Prax. 
26  thus  :  '  He  commands  them  to  baptize  into  the 
Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  (jhost,  non  in 
tinum ' — i.e.  not  into  one  Person.  The  Trinitarian 
formula  is  the  only  one  found  in  the  Church  in 
ancient  times.  It  is  prescribed  or  referred  to  in 
Origen,  Horn,  in  Lev.  viL  §  4,  in  the  Church  Orders 
(Can.  of  Hipp.  xix.  [ed.  Achelis,  §  133] ;  Ap.  Const. 
iii.  16,  vii.  22 ;  Ethiopic  Didascalia,  16,  ed.  Piatt ; 
Test,  of  our  Lord,  n.  7),  in  the  Acts  of  Xanthippe 
twice  (XI.  K.  James,  Apocr.  Anecd.  i.  [  =  2'5ii.  3, 
Cambridge,  1893]  p.  79),  and  in  the  Apostolic 
Canons  [c.  A.D.  400],  can.  49  f.  The  fact  that  this 
last  "work  forbids  any  other  form  probably  shows 
that  in  some  heretical  circles  other  words  were  used. 

Most  of  the  Eastern  Churches,  Orthodox  or 
Separated,  use  the  passive  voice  '  N.  is  baptized,' 
or  the  like.  The  Westerns,  on  the  contrary, 
alwajrs  use  the  active  :  '  N.,  I  baptize  thee.'  The 
latter  is  perhaps  the  older  form  ;  it  is  found  in  the 
Canons  of  Hippolytus  and  (in  the  plural,  '  We 
baptize  thee  ')'\m\\QActsof  Xanthippe  (as  above) ; 
and  it  is  favoured  by  Mt  28"  itseu  ('baptizing 
them ')  and  Didache,  7  ('  baptize,'  imperative).  It 
is  also  found  among  the  Copts  and  Abyssinians 
(DCA  L  162'';  H.  Denzinger,  Eitus  Orientalium, 
Wurzburg,  1863,  i.  208,  230,  235). 

We  may  ask  what  is  meant  by  the  invocation  of 
the  Divine  name  over  the  persons  who  were  being 
baptized,  of  which  we  read  in  Justin,  Apol.  i.  61 
('tnenameof  God  is  pronounced  over  Mm')  and 
Ap.  Const,  iii.  16  ('having  named,  ivovofuLras, 
the  invocation,  eTiKXrjcriv,  of  Father  and  Son  and 
Holy  Ghost,  thou  shalt  baptize  them  in  the  water, 
iv  Ti}  fSart').  In  connexion  with  this,  Ac  22'* 
('  calling  on  his  name ')  is  quoted ;  but  there  it  is 
the  baptized,  not  the  baptizer,  who  '  invokes ' ; 
baptism  is  given  in  response  to  the  prayer  of  the 
candidate.  More  to  the  point  are  Ac  15^^  ('the 
Gentiles  upon  whom  my  name  is  called,'  from  Am 
9^-),  and  Ja  2^  ('the  honourable  name  which  was 
called  upon  you,'  KVm,  rd  irixkridiv  e4>'  ifids) ;  cf. 
Nu  6^'^,  where  God's  name  is  put  upon  the  Israelites 
by  the  threefold  blessing,  and  Ac  19^,  where  the 
Jewish  exorcists  named  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  over  the  demoniacs,  saying,  '  I  adjure  you 
by  Jesus  .  .  .'  It  is  quite  possible  that  in  the 
liT  passages  there  may  be  some  reference  to  the 
words  used  in  baptizing,  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
probably  (at  least  in  the  ordinary  way)  included  a 
mention  of  the  Name.  But  there  is  no  evidence 
that  any  invocation  Avas  part  of  the  rite  in  apos- 
tolic times,  and  Chase  denies  that  it  was  so  (JThSt 
viiL  164).  Is  it  necessary-  to  suppose  that  Justin 
and  the  writer  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  refer 
to  anything  else  than  the  Trinitarian  formula  of 
baptism ': 

5.  Baptismal  customs. — Some  traces  of  customs 
which  were  part  of  the  rite  in  the  early  Church 
are  found  in  the  NT,  (a)  A  profession  of  faith 
and  renunciation  of  evil  is  common  in  ancient 
times  {e.g.  Justin,  Apol.  i.  61,  where  the  candidate 
undertakes  to  be  able  to  live  according  to  the 
faith ;  Tert.  de  Bapt.  6,  de  Idol.  6,  de  Cor.  3,  de 
Spect.  4 — Tertullian  mentions  the  renunciations, 
for  which  see  EEE  i.,  art.  '  Abrenuntio ').  To  such 
a  profession  the  gloss  of  Ac  8*^,  which  is  older 
than  Irenaeus  who  mentions  it  (c.  Ha^r.  m.  xii.  8), 
is  the  oldest  certain  reference.  But  it  is  possible 
that  there  is  an  allusion  to  it  in  1  Co  15^* — or  at 
least  to  an  instruction  before  baptism — though  no 
form  of  Creed  can  be  intended  (note  v.^:  '  I 
delivered  unto  you  first  of  all  that  which  also  I 
received' — the  'delivery'  of  the  faith  to  the 
catechumens,  see  above,  3) ;  also  in  Ro  6"  10^, 
1  Ti  61-,  2  Ti  1"*-,  He  lO^^*-,  1  P  3='  (for  this  verse 


see  ERE  i.  38),  Jude^".  While,  however,  it  is  ex- 
tremely probable  that  some  sort  of  a  profession 
of  faith  was  always  made  at  baptism,  the  NT 
passages  fall  short  of  j)roof  of  the  fact. 

(b)  Trine  immersion  is  a  very  early  custom,  being 
mentioned  in  the  Didache  (§  7)  and  by  Tertullian 
(de  Cor.  3,  adv.  Prax.  26).  The  practice  of  im- 
mersion would  probably  be  suggested  by  the  word 
jSaxr/fw  (see  above,  1).  But  J.  A.  Robinson  (JThSt 
viL  187  ff.)  denies  this,  and  says  that  as  the  word 
is  used  of  ceremonial  washings  in  Mk  1*,  Lk  11", 
it  need  not  imply  immersion,  though  pdxTu  (see 
above,  2)  does;  but  need  only  denote  ceremonial 
cleansing  with  water.  Chase  (JThSt  viii.  179  f.) 
replies  that  the  vessels  in  Mk  7*  must  have  been 
dipped  in  order  to  be  cleansed,  and  also  that  Lk 
11**  means  bathing  ;  to  this  may  be  added  that 
ceremonial  '  baptizing '  of  '  themselves '  in  Mk  7*  is 
shown  by  v.'  to  mean  the  dipping  of  their  hands 
into  water.  However  this  may  be  with  regard  to 
those  passages,  it  seems  more  than  probable  that 
the  word  /Saxri^w  to  the  first  disciples,  when  used 
of  baptism,  conveyed  the  idea  of  immersion,  both 
because  it  would  be  difficult  otherwise  to  explain 
the  metaphor  of  baptismal  burial  and  resurrection 
(Ro  6*,  Col  2^*),  and  because  the  Jewish  practice  in 
proselyte-baptism  (see  above,  2)  was  to  undress 
the  candidate  completely,  and  to  immerse  hiin  so 
that  every  part  ot  his  body  was  touched  by  the 
water  (Eiersheim,  LT  iL  745  f.;  the  canmdate 
also  maide  a  profession  of  faith  before  the  '  fathers 
of  the  baptism '  or  sponsors).  But  it  is  also  prob- 
able that  total  immersion  could  not  always  be 
practised,  as  in  the  case  of  the  PhUippian  jailer  ; 
and  that  when  this  was  the  case  the  candidate 
stood  in  the  water,  which  was  then  poured  over 
him. 

There  is  no  trace  in  the  NT  of  trine  immersion, 
which  doubtless  was  founded  on  the  Trinitarian 
formula,  though  this  is  no  evidence  against  its  ex- 
istence in  the  apostolic  period.  Flowing  ('  living ') 
water,  if  it  can  be  had,  is  prescribed  in  the  Didache 
(§  7)  and  in  several  Church  Orders  (Maclean,  p. 
104).  In  case  of  necessity  the  Didache  {loc.  cit.) 
expressly  allows  atfusion.  Immersion  is  implied 
in  Ep.  of  Barnabas,  §  11,  where  we  read  of  going 
down  into  the  water  laden  with  sin,  and  rising  up 
from  it  bearing  fruit  in  the  heart. 

(c)  Clothing  the  neophytes. — In  the  early  Church 
the  putting  off  of  the  clothes  of  the  candidates 
before  baptism,  and  the  clothing  of  them  afterwards, 
usually  in  whit«  robes,  were  emphasized  as  cere- 
monial actions ;  but  of  this  we  have  no  certain 
evidence  before  the  4th  century.  Constantine  was 
buried  in  his  baptismal  robes  (ri  (pufkbria,  DCA  i. 
162).  The  Church  Orders  make  a  great  point  of  the 
clothing,  and  the  Test,  of  our  Lord  mentions  white 
robes  (ii.  12,  see  Maclean,  p.  105),  as  does  Ambrose, 
de  JIt/st.  34  (vii.).  Even  from  the  first,  whether 
immersion  was  total  or  partial,  there  must  have 
been  an  unclothing  and  a  re-clothing  ;  and  this,  as 
it  would  seem,  gives  point  to  the  metaphor  about 
'putting  off'  (areKSwd/ieroi)  the  old  man,  and 
'  putting  on '  (irdvadfievoi)  the  new,  in  Col  ^,  and 
alx>ut '  putting  on  '  Christ  in  baptism  in  Gal  3*^ ; 
cf.  Ro  13''*,  Eph  4^.  The  metaphor  goes  back  in 
some  degree  to  OT  times  ;  in  Zee  3^*-  Joshua  the 
high  priest  is  stripped  of  his  fUthy  garments  as  a 
symbol,  and  Justin  (Dial.  116)  perhaps  applies 
this  to  Christian  baptism  :  '  even  so  we  .  .  .  have 
been  stripped  of  the  filthy  garments,  that  is,  of  our 
sins.'  Josephus  tells  us  (BJ  U.  viii.  5)  that  the 
Essenes  clothed  themselves  in  white  veils  and 
bathed  as  a  puiification,  and  then  partook  of  a 
common  meal  with  benediction  before  and  after  it ; 
then,  laying  aside  their  garments,  they  went  to 
work  tiU  the  evening.  But  there  was  apparently 
no  symbolism  about  this  clothing. 


132 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


(d)  The  kiss  of  peace  after  baptism  is  common  in 
Christian  antiquity.  Justin  (Apol.  i.  65)  describes 
it  as  taking  place  after  the  newly-baptized  are 
received  among  the  faithful  and  after  the  people's 
prayers,  i.e.  at  the  Eucharist  which  followed  the 
rite  of  baptism.  Cyprian  (Ep.  Iviii.  4,  ad  Fidum) 
alludes  to  it  at  the  baptism  of  infants.  In  the 
Church  Orders  it  is  used  at  Confirmation,  as  well 
as  at  the  Eucharist,  and  (apparently)  at  all  times 
of  prayer  (Maclean,  pp.  18 f.,  108).  Tertullian 
{de  Orat,  18)  says  that  some  did  not  observe  it 
in  times  of  fasting.  There  could  be  no  better 
symbol  of  Christian  love  than  this,  and  it  is 
highly  probable  that  it  was  used  in  worship  in  NT 
times  ;  such  would  seem  to  be  the  suggestion  of 
the  'holy  kiss'  in  Ro  16^  1  Co  IG-^*,  2  Co  IS^^ 
1  Th  52«,  and  of  the  '  kiss  of  love '  in  1  P  5^*.  But 
there  is  no  evidence  in  the  NT  as  to  its  use  in 
baptism. 

(e)  For  a  possible  use  of  anointing  in  the  NT, 
see  1 ;  for  the  laying  on  of  hands,  see  6.  The  sign 
of  the  cross  was  used  in  early  times,  and  was  often 
called  the  '  seal'  (Maclean,  p.  108  ;  Cyr.  Jer.,  Cat. 
xiii.  36).  Some  think  that  this  is  referred  to  in 
the  passages  cited  above  in  1  about  '  sealing ' ;  but 
this  is  more  than  doubtful. 

(/)  Of  three  other  early  baptismal  customs 
there  is  no  trace  in  the  NT.  (a)  Sponsors  are  men- 
tioned by  Tertullian  in  de  Bapt.  18  ('sponsores') ; 
of.  de  Cor.  3  ('inde  suscepti').  They  Avere  called 
'  susceptores '  (iv&doxoi.)  because  they  '  received '  the 
newly- baptized  when  they  came  up  from  the  font ; 
cf.  d.va\r)<pd€U,  Socrates,  ilE  vii.  4.  They  are  found 
in  the  Church  Orders  (Maclean,  p.  98f. );  and, 
especially  in  the  case  of  infants,  when  they  make 
the  responses  for  them,  they  might  be  the  parents 
or  others  of  their  '  houses '  (Test,  of  our  Lord,  ii.  8). 
In  Justin  (Apol.  i.  61)  '  he  who  leads  the  person 
that  is  to  be  washed  to  the  laver '  seems  to  be  the 
baptizer.  (j3)  Fasting  before  baptism  is  ordered  in 
the  Didache  (§  7),  and  is  mentioned  by  Justin  (Apol. 
i.  61)  and  Tertullian  (de  Bapt.  20 ;  cf.  de  Jejun.  8), 
and  frequently  in  the  Church  Orders  (Maclean,  pp. 
133  f.,  137  f.).  This  is  analogous  to  the  fasting  in 
Ac  IS^*  before  the  sending  forth  of  Barnabas  and 
Saul.  (7)  The  tasting  of  milk  and  honey  by  the 
newly-baptized  after  baptism  (and  conmiunion) 
seems  originally  to  have  been  an  Egyptian  and 
'  African '  custom  only.  It  is  mentioned  by 
Tertullian  (de  Cor.  3,  adv.  Marc.  i.  14),  by  Clement 
of  Alexandria  (Paed.  i.  6),  and  in  the  Egyptian  and 
Ethiopic  Church  Orders,  the  Canons  of  Uippolyttis, 
and  the  Verona  Didascalia  (all  these  four  are 
probably  Egyptian),  but  not  in  the  Test,  of  our 
Lord  or  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (see  Maclean, 
p.  46).  It  was,  however,  probably  introduced  into 
Kome  by  the  4th  cent. ,  for  Jerome  mentions  it  (Dial, 
c.  Luciferianos,  8),  and  he  was  baptized  in  Rome  c. 
A.D.  365.  Thereafter  it  is  several  times  mentioned 
in  the  West.  It  is  suggested  by  Ex  3^,  which 
describes  the  promised  land  as  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey  ;  though  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus  (xix. 
[ed.  Achelis,  §§  144,  148])  say  that  it  is  because  the 
neophytes  are  as  little  children  whose  natural  food 
is  milk  and  honey,  or  because  of  the  sweetness  of 
the  blessings  of  the  future  life. 

6.  The  complement  of  immersion:  the  laying  on 
of  hands. — In  Acts  we  have  two  detailed  accounts 
of  baptism  in  the  Apostolic  Age  (8^-'"  19*'*),  and 
in  both  cases  we  read  first  of  an  immersion  and 
then  of  a  laying  on  of  hands,  the  latter  being 
expressly  connected  with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
In  Ac  8  Philip,  one  of  the  Seven,  had  preached  to 
the  Samaritans,  and  they  were  baptized.  But  as 
yet  the  Holy  Gliost  had  fallen  upon  none  of  them, 
onlj-  tiiey  had  been  baptized  into  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus.  Then  the  apostles  Peter  and  John, 
who  were  sent  down  from    Jerusalem    by  their 


fellow  apostles,  prayed  for  the  newly-bjiptized  that 
they  miglit  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  ana  laid  their 
hands  upon  them  ;  and  tliey  received  the  Holy 
Ghost.  In  ch.  19,  St.  Paul  finds  about  twelve  men 
at  Ephesus  who  had  received  John's  baptism  ; 
these  are  '  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,'  and  St.  Paul  himself  lays  his  hands  upon 
them  and  the  Holy  Ghost  comes  upon  them.  We 
may  note  in  passing  that  '  there  is  nothing  in  the 
narrative  to  lead  us  to  suppose  that  he  followed  at 
Ephesus  a  course  which  he  did  not  follow  else- 
where' (Chase,  Confirmation,  p.  32).  With  these 
passages  we  may  take  He  6"''-  (see  above,  1),  where 
the  'teaching  ...  of  the  laying  on  of  hands'  is 
added  to  that  of  '  baptisms '  as  part  of  the  '  founda- 
tion.' Even  if  it  does  not  refer  exclusively  to  the 
baptismal  imposition  of  hands  after  immersion,  it 
at  least  incluaes  it. 

The  meaning  of  this  laying  on  of  hands  will  be 
considered  in  §  8  below.  Here  we  must  notice 
the  other  passages  of  the  NT  which  speak  of  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  two  preliminary 
remarks  must  be  made,  (a)  It  would  save  much 
confusion  of  thought  if  it  were  remembered  that  in 
Christian  antiquity  'baptism'  is  constantly  used 
to  comprehend  the  whole  rite,  immersion,  and  also 
laying  on  of  hands,  and  other  similar  actions.  It 
would  therefore  be  well  if  we  more  often  used  the 
word  'immersion'  (including  in  it  all  possible 
varieties  of  usage,  total  or  partial  immersion  or 
affusion)  when  we  are  speaking  of  the  action  at 
the  font,  rather  than  the  technical  name  '  baptism.' 
We  are  apt  to  put  ancient  references  to  baptism 
into  a  Avrong  perspective  because  we  are  accustomed 
to  the  long-continued  separation  of  the  two  parts 
of  the  rite  in  the  West. — (b)  In  studying  Acts  we 
shall  do  well  to  remember  that  St.  Luke  does  not 
attempt  in  his  narrative  to  give  all  the  details  of 
the  historical  actions  which  he  records.  As  W.  M. 
Ramsay  truly  observes,  an  author  like  St.  Luke 
'  seizes  the  critical  events,  concentrates  the  reader's 
attention  on  them  by  giving  them  fuller  treat- 
ment, touches  more  lightly  and  briefly  on  the  less 
important  events,  omits  entirely  a  mass  of  unim- 
portant details'  (St.  Paul,  London,  1895,  p.  3). 

In  numerous  passages  of  the  NT  the  gift  of  the 
Spirit  is  explicitly  connected  with  baptism  (in  its 
fullest  sensed,  as  in  Ac  2=«  8>'-"  9"'-  10**-  *''•  (before 
baptism)  19»,  1  Co  6"  12is,  Tit  3*,  He  Q^-*  \(^  (which 
appears  to  refer  to  the  repudiation  of  the  baptismal 
confession  and  covenant ;  see  Westcott,  Com.  in 
loc.  ;  cf.  v.'''^'-),  and  in  the  passages  which  refer  to 
'  sealing,'  2  Co  P"-,  Eph  P^'-  A^  (see  above,  1) ;  also 
in  the  Gospels,  Mt  S^S  Mk  18,  Lk  3i«,  Jn  1="  3»,  see 
above,  2  (c).  "The  close  connexion  between  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit  and  baptism  is  seen  also  in  the  fact 
that  our  Lord  calls  the  Descent  at  Pentecost  a 
baptism  (Ac  1';  cf.  IP®),  although  in  the  case  of 
those  on  whom  the  Holy  Ghost  then  came  there 
was  no  immersion. 

To  these  passages  we  may  add  several  where  a 
definite  historical  bestowal  of  the  spirit  is  men- 
tioned :  Ro  5*  (SodivTOi),  81*  (Ad/Sere),  1  Co  2'= 
(eXd^oiMev),  2  Co  5"  (5oi's),  11*  (ot5(c  Ad/3rre,  speaking 
of  a  '  ditlerent  Spirit '  in  contrast  to  the  Holy 
Ghost),  Gal  32  (iXd^ere  ;  cf.  v.»  '  having  begun  in 
the  Spirit,'  and  v.*  where  the  present  participle 
marks  the  continuance  of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit),  4* 
(^^aw^cxTeiXev),  1  Th  4"-  (iKdXtffe,  the  definite  call, 
connected  with  t6v  diddvra,  '  who  ever  giveth '  the 
Spirit :  some  MSS  have  the  aorist  56vTa ;  G. 
Milligan,  Com.  in  loc,  takes  the  present  part,  as 
meaning  '  the  Giver  of  the  Spirit '),  2  Th  2^^  (dXero), 
1  Jn  3''''*  (iduKey ;  cf.  4",  where  the  perfect  B^duKev 
denotes  the  permanent  eflects  of  the  gift ;  Brooke, 
ICC  on  3=").     These  aorists*  point  to  a  definite 

•  The  RV  has  often  been  criticized  as  having  too  slavishly 
followed  the  Ureek  aorist  in  »  way  that  does  not  suit  the 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


133 


event,  and,  taken  with  the  passages  in  the  preceding 
paragraph,  would  seem  to  refer  to  the  Christian 
initiation. 

In  the  other  records  of  baptisms  the  imposition 
of  hands  is  not  mentioned,  and  in  some  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  alluded  to.  It  would  be 
unsafe  (see  above),  especially  in  view  of  He  6'^,  to 
infer  that  the  laying  on  of  hands  was  not  practised 
except  in  the  cases  where  it  is  explicitly  referred 
to.  But  the  case  of  Cornelius  must  be  specially 
considered.  Here  the  Holy  Ghost  was  given  before 
baptism  and  without  any  outward  sign  such  as  the 
laying  on  of  the  Apostle's  hands.  Yet  St.  Peter 
does  not  judge  that,  even  after  such  a  signal  mark 
of  God's  favour,  it  is  unnecessary  for  Cornelius  and 
his  household  to  be  baptized  in  the  usual  manner. 
From  this  we  may  with  Chase  (Confirmation,  p. 
28)  see  on  the  one  hand  that  it  is  wrong  to  under- 
value the  sacraments,  and  on  the  other  that  God 
is  not  tied  down  to  them,  but  may  give  His  grace 
without  the  interposition  of  outward  ordinances. 
He  is  not  bound,  if  we  are.  The  same  thing  was 
seen  at  Pentecost,  when  the  Spirit  was  given  with- 
out the  outward  act  of  immersion  having  preceded. 

Again,  other  reference  to  the  laying  on  of  hands 
after  immersion  is  seen  by  some  in  2  Ti  P  (which 
is  usually  taken  to  refer  to  Timothy's  ordination, 
though  Chase  refers  it — not  1  Ti  1" — to  his  baptism, 
i.e.  confirmation).  In  Ac  9^^  (of.  v.^)  also,  Ananias 
lays  his  hands  on  Saul  before  baptism  ;  but  the 
allusion  in  both  cases  is  doubtful.  For  the  anoint- 
ing, see  above,  1. 

The  name  confirmation,  i.e.  '  strengthening,' 
for  the  complement  of  immersion  is  not  found 
before  the  oth  cent.  ;  it  may  be  founded  on  the 
use  of  ^e^aioa  in  2  Co  1*"-  with  the  allusion  there 
to  baptism. 

For  many  centuries  the  baptismal  rite — im- 
mersion, anointing  (when  practised),  and  laying  on 
of  hands — was  normally  one,  and  took  place  at 
■one  time.  Tertullian  (de  Bapt.  8)  speaks  of  the 
immersion,  unction,  and  imposition  of  hands  with 
invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  being  administered 
on  the  same  occasion  ;  and  the  Church  Orders  are 
equally  definite  (Maclean,  pp.  18f.,  105  ff.).  Laying 
on  of  hands  is  also  referred  to  in  Tert.  de  Res. 
Cam.  8  (with  immersion,  unction,  sealing  with  the 
sign  of  the  cross,  and  communion),  and  by  Cyprian 
{Ep.  Ixxi.),  who  speaks  of  those  who  have  been 
baptized  by  heretics  being  received  into  the  Church 
with  imposition  of  hands  that  they  might  receive 
the  Holy  Ghost  (cf.  Ep.  Ixxii.  9,  referring  to  Ac  8). 
Origen  (de  Princ.  I.  iii.  2)  says  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  given  by  the  laying  on  of  the  apostles' 
hands  in  baptism  ;  so  Athanasius,  ad  Scrap.  Orat. 
i.  6.  It  is  curious  that  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (Cat. 
xx.-xxii.),  who  mentions  immersion,  anointing,  and 
the  communion  of  the  neophytes,  omits  the  laying 
on  of  hands,  seeing  that  the  contemporary  Church 
Orders  strongly  emphasize  it.  It  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  this  custom  ceased  with  Tertullian. 
The  baptismal  Eucharist  with  the  first  communion 
of  the  neophytes  follows  immediately  in  the  Church 
Orders ;  cf.  also  Tertullian  and  Cyril  as  above, 
and  Justin  (Apol.  i.  65). 

In  case  of  necessity  there  might  be  an  interval 
between  the  immersion  and  the  imposition  of 
hands,  as  there  had  been  in  Ac  8.  The  Council  of 
Elvira  (c.  A.D.  3<J5,  can.  38,  77)  says  that  in  such  a 
case  if  the  baptized  dies  before  [his  confirmation], 
he  may  be  justified  by  the  faith  which  he  has 
professed ;  cf .  also  Jerome,  Dial.  c.  Lucif.  9,  who 
mentions  the  laying  on  of  hands. 

English  idiom.  Whatever  justification  there  may  be  for  this 
criticism  in  a  version  intended  for  public  reading  (though  even 
(here  it  is  surely  important  that  the  hearers  should  know  what 
the  sacred  writers  exactly  meant),  yet  it  cannot  be  too  strongly 
asKFted  that  it  is  essential  for  the  student  to  pay  the  greatest 
attention  to  the  accuracies  of  the  Greek  tenses. 


For  the  theological  significance  of  the  laying  on 
of  hands,  see  below,  §  8. 

7.  Minister  of  baptism. — We  gather  from  the 
NT  that  the  apostles  themselves  did  not  usually 
baptize  ;  their  task  was  '  to  preach  the  Gospel,' 
and  St.  Paul  only  rarely  administered  the  sacra- 
ment himself,  lest  any  should  sav  that  his  converts 
were  baptized  into  his  name  (1  Co  1^*"^").  It  is  not 
recorded  who  baptized  the  3000  at  Pentecost  (Ac 
2*^),  or  the  Samaritans  (8'**-,  probably  Philip),  or 
Lydia  and  her  household  (16**),  or  the  jailer  at 
PhUippi  and  'all  his'  (IB**),  or  the  Corinthians 
(18*),  or  the  Ephesians  ( 19*) ;  St,  Peters  companions 
clearly  baptized  Cornelius  and  his  company  (IC'-) : 
he  '  commanded '  them  to  be  baptized.  Philip 
baptized  the  Eunuch  (8"),  and  evidently  AnanLis 
baptized  St.  Paul  (9'*  22").  It  has  been  suggested 
that  baptism  was  one  of  the  functions  of  John 
Mark  as  'minister'  (irxi7p^$)  to  Barnabas  and 
Saul  (13*;  Rackham,  Com.  in  loc.).  On  the  other 
hand,  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  laid  their  hands  on 
those  who  had  been  baptized  in  Samaria  (8*'),  and 
St.  Paul  laid  his  hands  on  the  Ephesian  neophytes 
(19«;  ct.  v.«). 

A  similar  rule  is  found  in  the  baptismal  customs 
of  the  succeeding  ages.  In  the  Church  Orders  the 
bishop  is  normally  present  at  baptisms,  but  the 
presbyters  actually  immerse,  and  the  deacons 
assist ;  then  the  newly-baptized  are  immediately 
brought  to  the  bishop  for  anointing  and  laying  on 
of  hands ;  though  the  custom  as  to  the  person  who 
anoints  and  the  number  and  place  of  the  unctions 
in  the  rite  varies,  the  bishop  always  lays  on  hands 
(for  details,  see  Maclean,  p.  104fif.).  AV'hen,  there- 
fore, it  is  said  that  the  bishop  was  the  normal  minis- 
ter of  baptism,  it  is  not  meant  that  he  actually 
immersed,  though  doubtless  he  sometimes  did  so. 
St.  Ambrose  (de  Myst.  8  [ui.])  speaks  only  of  the 
bishop  (stimmum  sacerdotem)  interrogating,  and 
hallowing  (the  water,  or  the  oil  [?]).  As  time  went 
on,  either  the  immersion  and  the  confirmation  had 
to  be  separated,  or  else  the  latter  was  adminbtered 
by  the  presbyter  with  oil  consecrated  by  the  bishop. 

Deacons  were  allowed  at  Elvira  (can.  77)  to  bap- 
tize in  case  of  necessity  ;  and  so  Tertull.  de  Bapt. 
17  (who,  like  Elvira,  allows  laymen  to  baptize  in 
such  a  case),  Te^.  of  our  Lord,  ii.  11,  Didascalia, 
iii.  12  (ed.  Funk) ;  but  this  is  forbidden  in  Ap. 
Const,  viii.  28,  46  (ed.  Funk).  The  Ap.  Const. 
(iii.  9)  and  the  'Fourth  Council  of  Carthage,' 
.\.D.  398  (can.  100,  Hefele,  Councils,  Eng.  tr.,  ii. 
[1896]  417),  forbid  women  to  baptize.  There  is 
perhaps  a  permission  to  deacons  to  baptize  in 
country  places,  in  Cyr.  Jer.,  Cat.  xvii,  35;  but 
this  is  uncertain.  There  may  be  a  trace  of  pres- 
byters confirming  in  the  Sacramentary  of  Serapion 
and  in  the  Ap.  Const,  (see  Maclean,  pp.  107,  110, 
155). 

8.  Theological  aspects. — (a)  A  study  of  the  NT 
leads  us  to  the  conclusion  that  baptism  is  no  mere 
ceremony  whereby  outsiders  are  fitly  received  into 
the  Christian  Church.  It  is  a  means  of  grace — it 
conveys  by  an  outward  sign  the  grace  of  God,  but 
always  under  certain  conditions,  for  which  see 
below  (f).  St,  Peter  says  that  water  after  a  true 
likeness  (itn-irvrov)  saves  us,  even  baptism :  a 
cleansing  of  the  body,  but  also  a  cleansing  of  the 
soul ;  the  outward  part,  water,  is  the  symbol  or 
sign  of  the  inward  washing  (1  P  3*^).  God  saved 
us  (iawffsv,  aorist)  through  the  washing  of  regenera- 
tion and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (Tit  3*).  The 
writer  of  the  Appendix  to  Mk.  says  that '  he  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved*  (16'*). 
And  this  is  in  accordance  with  God's  usual  way  of 
working.  He  normally  uses  outward  instruments 
and  means,  though  He  is  not  bound  by  them  and 
can  work  otherwise  if  He  wills.  On  the  one  hand. 
He  uses  human  beings  as  His  instruments  (cf.,  e.g.. 


134 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


Ac  9"  13",  Gal  V"-,  Eph  3^  for  men  as  preachers 
of  the  gospel),  and,  on  the  other  hand.  He  uses 
inanimate  things  or  outward  actions.  Thus  the 
'gift  of  God'  is  conveyed  by  imposition  of  hands 
(2  Ti  1*).  Jesus  ordinarily  (but  not  always)  used 
outward  means  in  healing  and  in  doing  other 
mighty  works  {DCG  i.,  art.  *  Gestures,'  1).  So  He 
instituted  outward  means  (water,  bread,  and  wine) 
for  the  two  sacraments  of  the  gospel.  Among  OT 
analogies  may  be  noted  the  cloud  and  pillar  of  fire, 
which  symbolized  God's  presence.  By  using  out- 
ward means,  God  shows  that  matter  is  not,  as 
Gnostic  dualism  asserted,  naturally  evil,  but  that 
it  is  consecrated  by  Him  for  His  sacred  purposes. 

The  same  truth  may  be  expressed  by  saying  that 
baptism  is  a,  pledge  or  ivitness  of  grace,  by  which 
God  assures  us  that  He  will  perform  His  part  of 
the  covenant  between  Him  and  man ;  cf.  the  pas- 
sages where  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  the  earnest 
(dppa^ihv)  of  our  inheritance,  is  associated  with 
faith,  and  by  implication  with  baptism  (Eph  l^^'- ; 
see  above,  1). 

(b)  Baptism  is  a  union  with  God.  The  baptized 
is  incorporated  into  the  Divine  Being,  united  with 
Christ,  apart  from  whom  we  can  do  nothing  ( Jn  15'). 
This  baptismal  union  is  clearly  asserted  in  Ro  6*, 
Gal  3=",  and  by  contrast  is  implied  in  1  Co  P^-  is  10^; 
it  is  made  possible  only  by  the  Incarnation,  and 
by  the  glorifying  of  Jesus'  humanity  ;  see  Jn  7^. 
It  involves  sonship  by  adoption  (Ro  S*'**'-  [note  the 
aorist  iXd^ere,  pointing  to  a  definite  time].  Gal 
326f.  44f. .  gee  art.  ADOPTION).  This  aspect  of  bap- 
tism as  an  incorporation  into  God  holds  good  what- 
ever view  we  take  of  the  meaning  of  the  Lord's 
command  to  baptize,  which  must  now  be  considered 
carefully,  as  it  is  essential  to  the  understanding  of 
baptism. 

(c)  Meaning  of  baptism  'in'  or  'into  the  Name.' 
— The  words  eh  rb  6i'0fia  (or  els  alone)  in  the  bap- 
tismal passages  are  usually  interpreted  as  denoting 
incorporation  into  a  person  or  society,  and  the  pur- 
pose for  which  the  baptism  is  administered  ;  but 
another  view  interprets  tlie  words  in  Mt  28'®  as 
meaning  'by  the  authority  of.'  (For  a  full  dis- 
cussion, see  F.  H.  Chase  in  JThSt  vi.  500  ft'.,  viii. 
161  if.  ;  J.  A.  Robinson  in  JThSt  vii,  186  ff.,  and 
EBi,  art.  'Baptism.') 

It  is  agreed  that  by  a  Hebrew  idiom  common  in 
Hellenistic  Greek  '  tlie  name '  of  a  person  is  used 
for  the  person  himself.  To  believe  in  the  name  of 
some  one  is  to  believe  in  him  (Jn  V^  2^  3'^,  1  Jn  5'^ 
iriffTedu)  els ;  1  Jn  S^'*  iricrr.  with  dative — for  the  dif- 
ference, see  Westcott  on  Jn  6"  S^"'- ;  cf.  Ac  3'*)  ; 
to  come,  or  to  act,  or  to  receive  a  person,  in  the 
name  of  some  one,  is  to  come  or  act  or  to  receive 
one  as  his  representative  (Mt  18"  21»  23^,  Mk  9" 
119  136^  Lk  13«,  Jn  5«  1025  jo'S  14^«,  all  with  iy  [ry] 
dvdfjMTi ;  Mt  24'  with  iir  dvd/xari) ;  to  hojie  in  God's 
name  is  to  hope  in  Him  (INIt  12-',  with  simple  dative, 
=  Is  42*  LXX  with  iirl) ;  to  have  life  in  Christ's 
name  is  to  receive  life  from  Him  (Jn  20^') ;  to  ask 
or  give  thanks  in  (iv)  Christ's  name  is  to  do  so  in 
Him,  i.e.  for  His  merits  (Jn  14'3'-  15'«  162"-  =«,  Eph 
5'*) ;  to  adjure  in  (iv)  the  name  of  a  person  is  to 
adjure  by  him  (Ac  16'* ;  cf.  1  Co  1"*  did) ;  to  receive 
remission  of  sins  through  {did)  Jesus'  name  is  to 
receive  it  througli  Him  (Ac  10^).  In  Jn  17'"- 
Jesus  prays  the  Father  to  keep  the  disciples  '  in  {iv) 
thy  name  which  thou  hast  given  me '  (so  best  text ; 
cf.  Ph  2"),  and  says  that  He  has  kept  them  while 
on  earth  in  the  Father's  name  —  a  verj'  difficult 
passage.  The  latter  phrase  must  mean  'as  the 
Father's  representative  (as  above) ;  for  the  former, 
cf.  17*-  *,  where  the  '  name '  stands  for  God  and  His 
attributes,  and  we  may  perhaps  paraphrase :  '  in 
thyself,  with  whom  I  am  one '  (cf.  10«>).  In  Col  3'" 
to  do  all  in  (^i')  tlie  name  of  Christ  is  to  do  all  '  in 
Christ,'  however  we  are  to  understand  that  charac- 


teristic Pauline  phrase  (see  J.  A.  Robinson,  Ep/ies., 
London,  1903,  ]>.  2211".).  So  again  in  Lk  6-'*  'cast 
out  your  name '  is  equivalent  to  'cast  you  out ' ;  in 
Ac  IS'*  Barnabas  and  Paul  are  said  to  have  hazarded 
their  lives  for  tlie  name  of  Jesus,  i.e.  for  Him. 

In  the  above  passages  the  translation  '  by  the 
authority  of '  is  not  possible.  But '  in  the  name ' 
can  well  be  so  translated  in  some  passages,  as  when 
tlie  discii)les  spoke  or  preached  in  Jesus'  name,  Ac 
4'"-  (inl)  d^(^v) ;  cf.  Lk  24«  (^tt/)  ;  though  here  also 
it  can  be  rendered  'as  the  representatives  of.'  So 
'by  the  authority  of  suits  best  in  passages  where 
devils  are  cast  out  or  mighty  works  done  'in  the 
name,'  as  Mt  7"  (dative  witnout  prep.),  Mk  9"'' 
(if,  iirl),  'Mk'  16'7  (^i'),  Lk  O-'M^",  v.l.  iwL),  Ac3« 
(eV ;  cf.  4''- '") ;  and  in  Lk  10",  where  demons  are 
subject  in  (iv)  Christ's  name. 

Three  passages  remain  to  be  considered.  Mk  9*' 
has  '  in  {iv)  name  that  ye  are  Christ's,'  which  is 
usually  treated  as  an  idiom :  '  because  ye  are 
Christ's'  (RV,  Swete ;  the  text  followed  by  A'V 
is  faulty  here),  though  Chase  {JThSt  viii.  170) 
renders  'in  the  Name,  because  ye  are  Christ's.' 
In  Mt  10*^'-  18*"  eh  is  used.  In  the  former  passage, 
'  into  the  name  of  a  prophet '  or  '  disciple '  can  only 
mean  'as  a  prophet'  or  'disciple,'  i.e.  with  a  view- 
to  the  prophetic  office  or  to  discipleship.  In  the 
latter,  'gathered  together  into  my  name'  is  best 
rendered  as  '  drawn  nigh  to  me ' ;  cf.  Dt  12*,  1  K  9* 
(so  Chase,  loc.  cit.). 

Another  line  of  interpretation  of  the  passages 
with  '  in  the  name '  is  that  of  F.  C.  Conybeare,  who 
makes  'in  the  name  of  Jesus'  a  theurgic  formula, 
an  application  of  ancient  magic  {JQB  ix.  66,  581). 
For  an  answer  to  this  theory,  which  is  quite  in- 
applicable to  several  of  the  passages  cited  above, 
and  which  takes  no  account  of  the  OT  use  of  '  the 
Name,'  see  G.  B.  Gray  in  IIDB  iii.  480. 

We  may  now  consider  the  baptismal  passages. 
In  Mt  28'»,  Ac  S'"  19',  1  Co  l''*-  "  we  read  of  baptism 
'  into  {els)  the  name' ;  and  so  1  Co  10'^  '  into  Moses,' 
12'^  'into  one  body,'  Ac  19^  'into  John's  baptism,' 
Ro  6^  Gal  3"  'into  Christ,'  or  'into  his  death'; 
while  in  Ac  2^  10^*,  1  Co  6''  we  read  of  baptism  '  in 
{iv)  the  name.'  The  usual  interpretation,  at  least 
of  the  former  set  of  passages,  is  that  the  neophytes 
are  in  baptism  incorporated  with  the  Holy  Trinity, 
or  with  Christ,  with  a  view  to  {els)  remission  of 
sins  (Ac  2^*)  or  to  dying  with  Christ ;  the  disciples 
of  John  are  baptized  with  his  baptism.  Further, 
'  into  the  name '  implies  proprietorship :  we  are 
baptized  so  as  to  belong  to  God ;  and  the  same 
idea  attaches  to  in  dvdfiaros,  by  which  Justin  ex- 
plains baptism  to  the  heathen  (above,  4 ;  see  Swete, 
Holy  Spirit  in  NT,  p.  125 ;  Chase.  JThSt  vi.  501). 
If  /SttTTT/fw  conveyed  to  the  first  Christians  the  idea 
of  immersion  (above,  5),  this  interpretation  follows 
necessarily.  In  that  case,  what  is  the  difference, 
if  any,  between  baptism  'in'  and  'into'?  Chase, 
who  upholds  the  above  interpretation,  thinks  that 
both  involve  the  idea  of  incorporation  or  union, 
though  the  latter  emphasizes  the  entrance  into  the 
name,  while  the  former  conveys  the  idea  of  the 
name  encompassing  the  baptized  {JThSt  viii.  177, 
184). 

This  line  of  interjiretation  is  denied  by  Robinson 
{EBi,  art.  '  Baptism,' and  JT/; 67  vii.  191),  who  holds 
that  els  and  iv  are  synonymous  in  the  NT,  as  they 
undoubtetlly  are  in  the  "Slodeni  Greek  vernacular, 
which  has  entirely  lost  ^i*  except  in  a  few  phrases, 
Wj  having  taken  its  place.  On  this  view,  '  in  the 
name '  is  the  translation  preferred,  and  it  is  taken 
to  mean  'by  the  authority'  of  the  person  men- 
tioned. The  statement  that  the  two  prejwsitions 
have  the  same  meaning  in  tlie  NT  is  hardly  borne 
out  by  the  facts.  It  is  true  that  the  tendency  to 
confuse  them  had  begun  in  the  Apostolic  Age  ;  but 
it  had  not  got  very  far,  hardly  beyond  a  fondness 


BAPTISM 


BAPTISM 


135 


for  'constnictio  praegnaus,"  as  in  Mk  P,  where 
e^airricrdrj  ejs  t6v  'Iop5ciy77v  = '  went  into  the  Jordan 
and  was  baptized  there'  liu  v.'  we  li.ive  efia-n-Tl^ovTo 
(V  Tif  'lopddvTj),  or  else—"  \\;i.--  iiiiiut'i:>uil  in  Jordan' 
(Swete,  Co/n.  in  loc.) ;  cf.  also  Ac  8'**'  evpedi]  ets 
'A^orrov,  '  went  to  Azotus  and  was  found  there,'  and 
Lk  4**.  The  nearest  approach  to  a  real  confusion 
of  the  i)repositions  is  in  Mt  5*"-  :  '  Swear  not  .  .  . 
bylfV)  the  heaven  .  .  .  nor  by  (ev)  the  earth  .  .  . 
n.M  I'v  (.'-■.  KVui  '  toward')  Jerusalem,' where  Chase 
(■I  [ii>t  \iii.  Kiti)  ^uti'^ests  that  ev  ' lepcxroXt/joots  is 
avoided  so  as  to  exclude  a  local  meaning,  and  that 
eh  represents  the  directicm  of  the  oath,  just  as  in 
Ac  2"^,  Eph  5*^,  He  7^^  ets  can  only  mean  '  with 
reference  to.' 

In  the  opinion  of  the  present  writer  no  argument 
can  be  deduced  from  the  fact  that  our  Lord  spoke 
Aramaic,  and  that  both  eh  rb  dvofw.  and  ev  t<^  dvbfian 
represent  the  simple  phrase  era.  For  (though  we 
know  little  of  the  Palestinian  Aramaic  of  the  1st 
cent.)  the  preposition  in  Syriac  not  infrequently 
denotes  motion  ;  see  Payne  Smith,  Thesaur.  St/r., 
O.xford,  1879-1901,  i.  430.  And,  as  Chase  remarks 
(JThSt  vi.  507),  the  argument  from  the  Aramaic 
preposition  is  robbed  of  all  its  force  by  the  con- 
sideration that  the  Peshitta  uses  it  in  Ro  6^,  Gal 
3""  for  '  into  Christ  [Jesus],'  which  can  only  denote 
incorporation.  Therefore  the  Aramaic  phrase  D2>2 
can  mean  '(incorporation)  into  the  name.' 

The  crrave  objection  to  Robinson's  interpretation 
is  that  it  does  not  suit  the  Pauline  passages,  which 
cannot  be  put  aside  as  irrelevant.  That  '  Paul  was 
not  crucified  for  the  Corinthians  and  they  were  not 
baptized  into  his  name'  (1  Co  1^^'*),  is  a  proposition 
in  direct  contrast  to  the  statement  that  '  all  we 
who  were  baptized  into  Christ  Jesus  were  baptized 
into  his  death'  (Ro  6^).  The  latter  passage 
denotes  incorporation,  and  so  therefore  must  the 
former.  Indeed,  the  passage  in  1  Cor.  would  lose 
aU  force  if  it  were  translated  '  by  his  authority.' 

For  a  long  list  of  Greek  Fathers  who  interpret 
Mt  28^^  of  incorporation,  see  Chase,  JThSt  viii. 
173  if.  On  the  other  hand,  Robinson  says  that  the 
Western  formula  'in  nomine'  can  only  mean  'by  the 
authority.'  This  is  not  clear,  and  in  any  case  it  is 
signiticant  that  Tertullian,  the  father  of  ecclesi- 
astical Latinity,  understood  Mt  28^^  otherwise,  for 
he  translates  by  'in  nomen,'  and  paraphrases  by  'in 
Patrem,'  etc.  ;  see  above,  i.  He  clearly  understood 
the  baptismal  command  to  denote  incorporation. 

The  issue  does  not  rest  on  tlie  question  whether 
eh  and  iv  are  interchangeable.  It  is  the  whole 
sentence  in  ^Mt  28^**  which  must  be  considered,  and 
it  is  difficult  to  follow  Robinson  in  thinking  that 
it  conveyed  no  idea  of  immersion  to  the  first 
Christians.  No  doubt  our  Lord  gave  a  new  and 
more  spiritual  significance  to  a  Jewish  method  of 
speech,  but  this  is  just  what  He  did  frequently  in 
His  teaching.  If,  as  is  probable,  the  account  in 
Mt.  is  greatly  condensed  (above,  i),  there  is  no 
difficulty  about  this.  No  doubt  He  explained  His 
meaning  to  the  disciples ;  we  are  led  to  interpret 
it  by  the  writings  of  the  disciples  themselves.  For 
these  reasons  the  present  writer  cannot  but  think 
that  Chase's  interpretation  is  right,  and  that  the 
RV  has  properly  given  the  words  as  'into  the 
name.' 

(d)  Meaning  of  'being  horn  anew'  or  'from 
above.' — In  Jn  3'-°  our  Lord  speaks  to  Nicodemus 
of  another  birth,  which  He  connects  with  water 
(see  above,  1)  and  the  Spirit,  and  which  is  requisite 
for  seeing  or  entering  the  Kingdom  of  God  ;  this 
birth  is  dvwdev,  which  may  be  translated  '  anew ' 
(RV,  and  Westcott,  Com.  in  loc.)  or  'from  above' 
(RVm,  and  Swete,  Holy  Spirit  in  ST,  p.  131).  In 
favour  of  the  latter  is  Jn  3^^  ('  he  thatcometh  from 
above,'  SLvudev)  and  19",  and  the  fact  that  the 
writer  often  speaks  of  our  being  begotten  of  God 


(Jn  P^  1  Jn  38  4^  51. 4. is.  !„  Jn  3»-»  the  word  is 
yevvrte^).  In  this  case  it  is  a  heavenly  birth  that 
Jesus  speaks  of.  In  favour  of  the  former  is  Gal  4» 
(ttAXw  &vujdev  =  '  over  again '),  but  especially  the  fact 
that  Nicodemus  takes  this  meaning  (v.*),  and  also 
that  the  term  '  regeneration '  (waKiyyeveaia),  which 
was  used  in  the  Apostolic  Church  (Tit  3^)  can  best 
be  explained  as  a  reminiscence  of  our  Lord's  words 
on  such  an  occasion,  handed  down  orally.  But 
may  not  both  meanings  of  S-vudev  in  Jn  3  be  valid  ? 
The  birth  is  both  'from  above'  and  'new.'  A 
single  word  with  more  than  one  meaning  is  often 
used  to  express  more  than  one  truth. 

This  new  or  heavenly  birth  is  the  new  start,  the 
implanting  of  the  new  life,  which  is  given  to  us  by 
the  Ascended  and  Glorified  Christ  through  the 
Holy  Ghost.  And  this  new  life  is  expressly  con- 
nected with  Christian  baptism,  whatever  view  we 
take  of  €$  i'Saros  in  Jn  3^  ;  St.  Paul  speaks  (Col  2'^-) 
of  the  Christian  having  been  buried  with  (o-uj/ra- 
<f>4vTes)  Christ  in  baptism,  '  wherein  (not '  in  whom,' 
i.e.  Christ)  ye  were  raised  -svith  him  {crvvTiyipOr^Te), 
.  .  .  and  you  being  dead  .  .  .  did  he  quicken 
together  with  him  ((rwe^uoirolTiaev) ' — note  the 
aorists,  denoting  an  action  at  a  given  time  ;  cf. 
also  Eph  2^'-  (the  '  sitting  in  heavenly  places '  in 
v.^  is  not  future,  but  present).  This  new  implanting 
of  life  is  called  'regeneration'  in  Tit  3^  (as  above), 
and  is  effected  by  washing  or  a  laver  (XovrpoO),  that 
is,  by  baptism.  (7roXi77ei'eo-ta  is  used  in  Mt  19-®  of  the 
new  age  hereafter  [cf.  Ac  3-^  '  the  restitution  of  all 
things  '] ;  the  application  of  it  to  the  present  age, 
as  has  been  lately  suggested,  is  most  unlikely  :  for 
its  use  by  non-Christian  writers,  see  Swete,  Holi/ 
Spirit  in  NT,  p.  390,  App.  M.) 

But  the  new  life  is  like  a  seed.  It  may  blossom 
and  flourish,  or  it  may  die.  It  is  the  opportunity, 
the  talent ;  but  if  it  is  not  seized  and  put  to  good 
use,  it  is  of  no  avail  to  the  recipient,  and  even  con- 
demns him  ;  see,  further,  below  (/). 

The  figure  of  a  new  birth  is  very  common  in  the 
Fathers  in  connexion  with  baptism  ;  e.g.  Justin, 
Apol.  i.  61,  66,  and  Irenaeus,  c.  Haer.  I.  xxi.  1,  in. 
xvii.  1  (avayevvTjffi^)  ;  Tert.  adv.  Marc.  i.  28,  de  Res. 
Cam.  4ri  (regeneratio). 

(e)  Baptism  and  tJie  gift  of  the  Spirit.  — We  have 
seen  (above,  6)  how  closely  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is 
connected  with  baptism  in  the  NT.  We  may  now 
consider  the  meaning  of  that  gift.  Though  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  the  Agent  of  all  the  Divine  working, 
and  therefore  must  be  the  Giver  of  life  (cf.  Ro  8"  " 
etc. )  at  the  immersion,  yet  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
is  said  in  Ac  8^^  not  to  be  bestow'ed  then,  but  at  a 
later  stage  of  the  same  rite — at  the  laying  on  of 
hands  (see  above,  6).  Tertullian  remarks  (r/e  Bapt. 
6)  that  '  in  the  waters  we  do  not  receive  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but,  having  been  cleansed  in  the  water  under 
the  influence  of  an  angel  {sub  angelo),  we  are  pre- 
pared for  the  Holy  Spirit.'  AVhat,  then,  did  St. 
Peter  and  St.  John  pray  for  when  they  prayed 
that  the  Samaritans  might  receive  the  Holy  Ghost 
(Ac  8'5)  ?  What  w^as  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
received  in  v.  ^'^  ?  One  answer  which  has  been  given 
to  this  question  must  be  dismissed  as  quite  insuffi- 
cient—that the  miraculous  signs  vouchsafed  in  the 
infancy  of  the  Church  were  the  gift.  It  may  be 
said  that  in  v.'*  Simon  saw  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  given,  and  that  therefore  there  must  have 
been  some  outward  manifestation.  In  Ac  19*  the 
neophytes  spoke  with  tongues  and  prophesied  (cf. 
2^  10^).  To  state  the  matter  in  this  way,  however, 
is  to  confuse  the  outward  evidences  of  the  activity 
I  of  the  Spirit  with  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  Himself. 
No  one  could  suppose  that  all  that  the  Church 
received  on  the  Day  of  Pent«cost  was  a  mere  speak- 
ing with  '  other  tongues.'  To  understand  what  the 
gift  is,  we  cannot  do  better  than  consider  our  Lord's 
promise  of  the  gift,  in  Jn  14-16.     As  He  describes 


136 


BAPTISM 


BARAK 


it,  it  is  a  gift  of  guidance  and  teaching  (14^ 
IQ-M  iQS.  isir.)^  anil,  above  all,  a  continued  presence 
of  the  Spirit  with  us  for  ever  (14'*"-).  It  was  not 
to  be  a  gift  for  one  generation  only,  but  for  us  in 
modern  times  as  well  as  for  the  hrst  Christians. 
There  is  nothing  in  these  chapters  about  the  gift 
of  tongues  or  other  wonderful  signs.  Indeed,  as 
Chase  remarks  (Confirmation,  p.  114),  'in  the 
teaching  of  the  Apostles  the  thought  of  extra- 
ordinary charismata  has  a  quite  subordinate  place.* 
When  Saul  received  the  Holy  Ghost  (Ac  9")  there 
appear  to  have  been  no  outward  phenomena.  And, 
whether  the  laying  on  of  hands  in  2  Ti  1®  was  at 
baptism  or  at  ordination  (see  above,  6),  it  is  signi- 
ficant that  the  '  gift  of  God '  which  was  in  Timothy 
by  the  laying  on  of  St.  Paul's  liands  was  the  '  spirit 
of  power  and  love  and  discipline'  (<r<ij<ppopifffiov). 
Indeed,  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  the  apostles 
could  have  laid  so  much  stress  on  the  gift  if  it  was 
merely  a  speaking  with  tongues  (which  St.  Paul 
somewhat  disparages  in  1  Co  14-),  or  prophesying. 
Throughout  the  Epistles,  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  a 
very  different  thing  ;  it  is  that  inward  strengthen- 
ing which  enables  the  Church  to  fight  the  battle 
with  the  hosts  of  evil  and  to  win  the  victory.  And 
this  is  what  our  Lord  promised  in  the  Jonannine 
chapters  quoted  above. 

(/)  Baptism  not  a  magical  charm. — To  say  that 
God  uses  outward  means  or  instruments  as  the 
normal  manner  in  which  He  gives  His  grace  is  not 
to  assert,  on  the  one  hand,  that  all  who  receive  the 
outward  means  receive  the  grace,  or,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  God  cannot  give  the  grace  otherwise. 
Hence  the  emphasis  on  the  need  of  repentance  and 
faith  in  those  who  are  baptized  ;  e.g.  cf.  Ac  2^  for 
repentance,  18*  for  faith  :  '  believed  and  were 
baptized ' ;  in  IQ'*'-  '  when  ye  believed  '  is  equiva- 
lent to  '  when  ye  were  baptized '  (viffTeva-ai/res — 
ipairTl<Td7)Te).  One  or  two  references  to  the  early 
Fathers  (out  of  a  large  number)  will  show  how 
strongly  they  felt  this.  Repentance  and  faith  are 
both  insisted  on  by  Justin  (Apol.  i.  61).  Origen 
says  that  the  Spirit  may  leave  the  unworthj' 
Christian  after  baptism  (in  Joann.  vi.  33).  Cyril 
of  Jerusalem  says  that  the  outward  rite  will  not 
convey  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  if  the  candidate  does 
not  come  in  faith  (Cat.  xvii.  35  fi'.).  It  is  equally 
recognized  in  Christian  antiquity  that  it  is  possible 
for  man  to  receive  the  grace  without  the  outward 
sign  in  cases  of  necessity.  For  example,  the 
'  baptism  in  blood '  of  unbaptized  martyrs  is  recog- 
nized as  sufficient  by  Tertullian,  de  Bapt.  16,  and 
in  the  Church  Orders  (Test,  of  our  Lord,  ii.  5 ;  Can. 
of  Hippolytus,  xix.  [ed.  Achelis,  101] ;  Egyptian 
Church  Orders,  44)  and  elsewhere.  The  work  of 
God  is  mighty,  though  the  instrument  is  insig- 
nificant. Thus  Tertullian  (de  Bapt.  2,  4)  remarks 
on  the  simplicity  of  baptism,  which  makes  people 
disparage  the  greatness  of  its  effect,  not  realizing 
that  the  Spirit  sanctities  the  water. 

9.  Infant  baptism.  —  There  is  no  historical 
account  in  the  NT  of  an  infant  being  baptized ; 
but  the  indirect  evidence  of  the  practice  is  strong. 
In  view  of  tlie  analogy  of  circumcision,  it  would 
be  strange,  supposing  that  infants  had  been  ex- 
cluded from  baptism,  that  such  exclusion  should 
not  have  been  mentioned.  If  infants  needed  to  be 
brought  into  the  inferior  covenant  by  the  outward 
sign  of  circumcision,  still  more  would  they  need  to 
be  brought  into  the  higher  covenant  by  the  out- 
ward sign  of  baptism.  The  Talmud  says  that 
infant  children  of  proselytes  are  to  be  baptized 
with  their  i)arents  (John  Lightfoot,  ffor.  Hear,  on 
Mt  3«  in  Works,  xi.  [London,  1823]  53  ff.),  and  this 
was  probably  the  custom  in  the  1st  cent,  (see 
above,  2).  Our  Lord  by  blessing  little  children 
with  an  imposition  of  hands  (Mk  10'"^-  -iraihla. ;  Lk 
18'*  (ip^i>v,  '  babes')  shows  that  they  are  capable  of 


receiving  grace.  In  Mt  10*^,  Jesus  speaks  of  giving 
'  one  of  these  little  ones '  a  cup  of  cold  water  '  in 
the  name  of  a  disciple,'  i.e.  as  a  disciple  (above,  8), 
showing  that  infants  can  be  disciples.  No  limit  is 
placed  on  the  baptismal  command  of  Mt  28'*  ('  all 
the  nations,'  not  'all  the  adults').  The  house- 
holds of  Lydia,  the  Philippian  jailer,  Crispus,  and 
Stephanas,  not  improbably  included  some  infants, 
but  all  were  baptized  (cf.  Ac  16^,  'all  his').  It  is 
disputed  whether  1  Co  7'*  refers  to  infant  baptism 
(Robertson-Pluramer,  Com.  in  loc,  think  that  it 
does  not),  but  at  least  it  seems  to  point  to  the 
right  of  children  to  baptism,  for  otherwise  could 
they  be  called  *  holy'  or  '  consecrated  '  (S,yia)  ?  Cf. 
Goudge  and  Alford,  Comm.  in  loc. 

When  we  turn  from  the  NT  to  the  successors  of 
the  apostles,  we  find  that  the  practice  of  infant 
baptism  was  probably  in  force  at  least  c.  A.D.  69. 
For  Polycarp  at  his  martyrdom  (c.  A.  D.  165 :  for 
the  date  see  Lightfoot,  Apostol.  Fathers,  pt.  ii. 
vol.  i.  [1889]  437  tf.)  says  that  he  had  served  Christ 
for  86  years.  It  is  extremely  unlikely  that  he  waa 
older,  or  at  any  rate  more  than  3  or  4  years  older, 
than  this  at  his  death,  and  he  must  therefore  have 
been  baptized  when  he  was  an  infant,  or  at  least 
as  a  very  young  child  ;  he  seems  to  have  been  born 
of  Christian  parents  (ib. ).  Justin  speaks  of  men  and 
women  of  60  or  70  who  had  been  made  disciples 
(4fxadr]Te6dria-av)  from  childhood  (Apol.  i.  15),  and 
compares  baptism  to  circumcision  (Dial.  43).  Iren- 
aeus  (c.  Haer.  li.  xxii.  4)  says  that  Jesus  came  to 
save  all  who  through  Him  are  born  again  to  God 
— ^infants,  children,  boys,  youths,  and  old  men. 
He  passed  through  every  age,  becoming  an  infant 
for  infants,  thus  sanctifying  infants,  etc.  Ter- 
tullian (de  Bapt.  18),  who  advocates  delaying 
baptism  lest  it  should  be  rashly  administered, 
especially  in  the  case  of  infants,  bears  witness  to 
the  common  practice  of  his  day.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  he  does  not  blame  infant  baptism  as  a  novelty, 
as  he  assuredly  would  have  done  had  it  been  such. 
And  thereafter  the  evidence  of  its  existence  is  very 
abundant;  see,  e.g.,  Cyprian,  Ep.  Iviii.;  Can.  of 
Hipp.  xix.  (113,  ed.  Achelis),  and  all  the  Church 
Orders. 

It  is  objected  to  these  ar^ments  that  faith  is 
required  in  the  NT  for  baptism,  and  that  infants 
cannot  have  faith.  But  this  is  not  a  true  objec- 
tion. If  an  adult  coming  to  baptism  has  not  faith, 
he  puts  the  barrier  of  non-faith  between  God  and 
himself  ;  he  cannot  be  in  a  neutral  condition,  but, 
if  he  does  not  believe  in  God,  must  disbelieve  in 
Him.  With  an  infant  it  is  not  so.  In  the  age  of 
innocence  he  cannot  put  a  barrier  between  God 
and  himself,  and  therefore  the  fact  that  he  has 
not  yet  learnt  to  have  an  active  faith  does  not 
preclude  the  working  of  the  grace  of  God  within 
him. 

LiTBRATORE.— R.  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.,  bk.  v.  (ed.  Bayne, 
London,  1902),  esp.  chs.  Ivii.-lxvi.;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Uoty 
Spirit  in  the  Ne%o  Testament  -,  do.  1910,  esp.  App.  I  and  J  ;  D. 
Stone,  Uoly  Baptism,  do.  1899  ;  A.  J.  Mason,  3Vic  Jiilation 
of  Confirmation  to  Baptism^,  do.  1893;  D.  Macleane,  The 
Heavenly  Citizenship  of  Infants,  do.  1891;  F.  H.  Chase, 
Confirmation  in  the  Apostoli-c  Age,  do.  1909 ;  A.  C.  A.  Hall, 
Cmitirmatioii,  do.  1900 ;  F.  E.  Warren,  Litnrny  and  Ritual 
of  the  Ante-Nieene  Church'^,  do.  1912;  A.  J.  Maclean,  The 
Ancient  Church  Orders,  Cambridge,  1910  ;  artt.  on  '  The  Lord's 
Command  to  Baptize '  in  JThSt  vi.  (11)04-05],  vii.  [1905-06),  viii. 
[1906-07],  by  F.  H.  Chase  and  J.  A.  Robinson;  artt.  on 
'  Baptism '  in  11 DB  i.  (A.  Plummer),  DCG  i.  (M.  Dods),  SDB 
(C.  A.  Scott),  EBi  i.  (J.  A.  Robinson),  ERE  ii.  (J.  V. 
Bartlet,  K.  Lake,  H.  G.  Wood);  art.  'Laying  on  of  Hands' 
in  BOB  iii.  (H.  B.  Swete);  artt.  'Confirmation'  in  ERE 
iv.  (H.  J.  Lawlor  and  H.  Thurston). 

A.  J.  Maclkax. 
BAPTISM  FOR  THE  DEAD.— See  Baptism. 

BARAK.— Barak  (Bapdic)  was  the  ally  of  Deborah 
in  the  life-and-death  struggle  of  Israel  with  the 
Canaanites.  He  won  the  great  battle  of  Kishon 
( Jg  4.  5).     He  is  named  in  the  roll  of  the  ( )T  heroes 


BARBAKIAN 


BAE-JESUS 


13< 


of  faith  (He  11*^).  He  was  one  of  those  who  Sia 
irUrreus  '  waxed  mighty  in  war,  turned  to  flight 
armies  of  aliens '  (IP*).  JAMES  SXRAHAN. 

BARBARIAN.— The  Greeks  of  the  age  of  in- 
dependence divided  mankind  into  two  classes — 
Hellenes  or  Greeks,  and  Barbarians,  the  latter 
term  having  a  special  reference  to  those  who  did 
not  speak  tne  Greek  language  and  were  thus  un- 
intelligible to  the  inhabitants  of  Hellas.  The 
word  itself  is  almost  certainly  onomatopoetic, 
being  an  imitation  of  the  way  in  which  the  peoples 
seemed  to  speak.  It  occurs  for  the  first  time  in 
Homer  (/?.  ii.  867),  and  is  used  of  the  Carians 
(Kapes  ^ap^apb<pu)voi).  Plato  divides  the  human 
race  into  Hellenes  and  Barbarians  (Polit.  262  D). 
Even  the  Komans  called  themselves  Barbarians 
till  Greek  literature  came  to  be  naturalized  in 
Rome ;  and  both  Philo  and  Josephus  regard  the 
Jews  and  their  tongue  as  barbarous.  By  and  by 
the  word  came  to  be  used  as  descriptive  of  all  the 
defects  which  the  Greeks  thought  foreign  to  them- 
selves and  natural  to  all  other  peoples,  but  the 
first  and  the  main  idea  conveyed  by  the  term  is 
that  of  difference  of  language. 

In  the  NT  history  of  the  early  Church  we  find 
the  term  used  in  four  different  places. — (1)  In 
Ac  28-'*  it  is  applied  by  St.  Luke  to  the  Phoenician 
inhabitants  of  Malta,  perhaps  with  a  slight  hint 
of  contempt  on  the  part  of  the  author.  (2)  The 
Apostle  Paul  in  1  Co  14^^  refers  to  the  ecstatic 
speaking  with  tongues,  and  declares  that  if  any 
speak  in  an  unknown  tongue,  'I  shall  be  to  him 
that  speaketh  a  barbarian,  and  he  that  speaketh 
wUl  be  a  barbarian  unto  me.'  Here  the  word  is 
used  in  the  original  sense  of  one  who  speaks  in  an 
unknown  tongue.  (3)  In  the  statement  (Ko  1^*), 
'  I  am  a  debtor  both  to  Greeks  and  to  Barbarians,' 
St  Paul  uses  the  common  conventional  division  of 
mankind;  and,  like  Philo  and  Josephus,  classes 
the  Jews  among  the  Barbarians.  (4)  In  Col  3"  we 
have  a  looser  use  of  the  term  '  Greek  and  Jew 
.  .  .  barbarian  and  Scythian.'  The  Apostle  has 
been  speaking  of  the  abolition  of  all  distinction  in 
the  offer  of  the  gospel,  and  the  classes  selected  are 
not  mutually  exclusive  but  mentioned  with  refer- 
ence to  heresies  in  the  Colossian  Church  (cf.  J.  B. 
Lightfoot,  Colossians^,  1879,  p.  216).  The  Apostle 
offers  the  gospel  not  merely  to  learned  Greeks 
but  to  barbarians,  and  even  to  Scythians,  who  are 
popularly  regarded  as  the  lowest  type  of  this  class. 

Ltterattjre. — Grimm-Thayer,  g.v. ;  see  also  artt.  in  HDB 
and  EBL  W.  F.  BOYD. 

BAR-JESUS.— In  Ac  13^  Bar-Jesus  is  described 
as  '  a  certain  sorcerer,  a  false  prophet,  a  Jew ' 
whom  Barnabas  and  Paul  found  at  Paphos  in  the 
retinue  of  the  proconsul  in  Cyprus.  The  comparison 
of  him  with  '  the  modem  gipsy  teller  of  fortunes '  is 
'misleading  and  gives  a  false  idea  of  the  influence 
exerted  on  the  Roman  world  by  Oriental  person- 
ages like  this  Magian'  (Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the 
Traveller,  78) ;  nor  can  he  be  called  an  impostor. 
He  was  a  representative  of  a  class  of  men,  very 
numerous  in  that  day,  '  skilled  in  the  lore  and 
uncanny  arts  and  strange  powers  of  the  Median 
priests '  (cf.  HDB,  art.  '  Barjesus  '),  who  possessed 
a  familiarity  with  the  forces  of  Nature  not  shared 
by  their  fellows,  and  which  was  commonly  re- 
garded as  supernatural  in  its  origin.  They  were 
both  magicians  and  men  of  science  ;  moreover, 
their  system  presented  a  religious  aspect  to  the 
world.  The  presence  of  an  influential  exponent  of 
such  a  current  religious  and  philosophical  system 
in  the  train  of  the  comites  of  a  Roman  governor 
was  quite  natural ;  nor  is  there  any  need  to  suppose 
that  Sergius  Paulus  (who  was  'a  man  of  under- 
standing') was  dominated  by  the  Magian  in  any 


other  sense  than  that  Bar-Jesus  had  considerable 
influence  and  credit  with  his  patron — an  influence 
he  was  able  to  turn  to  his  own  private  advantage. 
Hearing  of  Barnabas  and  Paul  as  travelling  teachers 
in  the  island,  the  governor,  a  highly  educated  man, 
interested  in  science  and  philosophy,  invited  them 
to  his  court.  He  listened  with  such  pleasure  to 
their  exposition  that  it  became  clear  to  all  his  reti- 
nue that  they  were  making  a  marked  ett'ect  on  him. 
This  was  a  challenge  to  Bar-Jesus,  who  had  been 
the  dominant  religious  influence  in  the  court.  He 
took  steps  to  minimize  the  effect  and  to  retain  the 
governor's  interest  in  himself  and  his  system.  The 
challenge  was  accepted  by  Paul,  who  superseded 
Barnabas  as  the  chief  Christian  protagonist  at  this 
point.  Special  interest  attached  to  the  incident  as 
an  early  but  typical  case  of  the  meeting  of  two 
religious  systems ;  it  was  the  first  collision  of 
Christianity  with  the  great  religious  force  of 
Magianism.  The  result  was  a  striking  manifesta- 
tion of  the  superior  power  residing  in  the  Christian 
missionary,  by  which  Bar-Jesus  was  struck  blind 
for  a  season,  and  which  deeply  impressed  the  pro- 
consul in  favour  of  Christianity. 

A  phrase  occurs  in  v.^  which  has  caused  perplex- 
ity :  '  Elymas  the  sorcerer  (for  so  is  his  name  by 
interpretation).'  All  attempts  to  explain  Elymas 
as  the  interpretation  of  Bar-Jesus  have  failed. 
This  has  been  used  to  discredit  the  historicity  of 
the  narrative.  Thus  Schmiedel  says  it  suggests 
the  'amalgamation  of  two  sources,'  and  illustrates 
the  tendency  of  Acts  to  establish  a  '  parallelism 
between  Peter  and  Paul '  {EBi  i.  480  f. ) — a  theory 
urged  by  Weizsacker,  who  considers  this  portion  of 
Acts  '  is  far  from  being  historical '  (i.  275,  239-240), 
and  finds  a  proof  of  double  authorship  in  the  use 
of  the  two  names  'Saul  who  is  also  called  Paul.' 
But  Ramsay  has  explained  the  latter  usage  most 
convincingly.  It  was  the  fashion  in  bilingual 
countries  to  have  two  names,  the  native  and  the 
Greek.  Amongst  Jewish  surroundings  Paul's  Jew- 
ish name  '  Saul '  was  used  naturally  ;  but  '  by  a 
marvellous  stroke  of  historic  brevity '  (Ramsay,  83) 
the  author  sets  forth  by  a  formula  how  in  the 
court  of  the  Roman  governor,  when  the  Apostle 
challenged  the  system  represented  by  Bar-Jesus,  he 
stood  forth  as  Paul  the  Roman  citizen,  a  freeborn 
member  of  that  Greek-Roman  world  to  which  he 
carried  his  universal  gospel.  Does  not  the  same  ex- 
planation hold  good  for  his  opponent  ?  Bar- Jesus  is  a 
Jewish  name — the  name  of  '  a  Jew,  a  false  prophet.' 
Elymas  is  the  man's  Greek  name.  It  is  the  Greek 
form  of  an  Arab  word  allm  meaning  '  wise,'  and 
6  /jAyot  ('the  sorcerer,'  AV  and  RV)  is  its  transla- 
tion. From  the  Jewish  point  of  view  the  encounter 
was  between  Saul  the  Jewish  teacher  and  Bar- Jesus 
the  Jewish  prophet.  From  the  wider  point  of  view 
it  w^as  between  Paul  the  Roman  citizen  who 
championed  Christianity,  and  Elymas  the  Greek 
philosopher  and  magician.  It  was  not  only  Bar- 
Jesus  the  Jewish  false  prophet  whom  Paul  blinded, 
but  Elymas  the  Magian,  the  representative  of  that 
Oriental  theosophy  which  Christianity  was  destined 
to  meet  so  often.  Luke  the  historian  has  special 
interest  in  describing  the  first  encounter  between 
the  systems,  and  the  signal  victory  won  by  the 
Christian  Apostle  over  one  who  practised  the  occult 
arts.  Paul  probably  shared  the  opinion  of  educated 
Judaism,  that  magic  was  associated  with  idolatry 
and  the  realm  of  darkness,  and  was  therefore  to  be 
shunned  as  demoniacal.  This  explains  the  vigour 
of  his  denunciation. 

LiTERATUKK.— Artt.  in  HDB  on  'Barjesus'  (Massie)  and 
'  Magic '  (Whitehouse),  and  in  EBi  (Schmiedel)  on  '  Barjesus  ' ; 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  London,  1895,  pp.  73- 
88  (cf .  Was  Christ  bom  in  Bethlehem  ?,  do.  1898,  p.  54) ;  C.  v. 
Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  i.2  do.  1897,  pp.  80,  111,  240,  274  ; 
A.  C.  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age,  Edinburffh,  1897,  pp.  174-176 ; 
EOT  on  '  Acts,"  1900,  p.  287.  J.  E.  RoBERTS. 


i; 


BARNABAS 


BARNABAS 


BARNABAS  (otherwise  Joses  [AV]  or  Joseph 
[IIV]). — A  member  of  the  primitive  Church  of 
Jerusalem  and  a  close  associate  of  Paul  in  the 
early  years  of  his  Christian  career.  He  is  not  to 
he  identilied  with  Joseph  called  Barsabbas  (Ac 
1^),  tlion<jli  he  is  sometimes  substituted  for  him  by 
ecclesiastical  writers  (see  JosKPH  [Barsabbas]). 
Information  regarding  iiim  is  mostly  derived  from 
Acts.  According  to  4*',  the  surname  Barnabas 
was  given  him  by  tiie  apostles,  presumably  as  an 
honourable  distinction,  and  signilies  '  son  of  con- 
solation or  exhortation  '  (vlbs  irapaKX-^crecjs  =  Aram. 
bar,  '  son,'  and  Heb.  root  which  appears  in  ndbhi', 
'prophet').  This  etymology  draws  upon  two 
ditterent  languages,  and  leaves  the  terminal  form 
unexplained.  Besides,  the  name  may  have  been 
self -assumed,  in  accordance  with  a  common  j»ractice 
of  the  Jews  in  their  intercourse  with  the  Gentile 
world.  Other  derivations  therefore  have  been 
proposed,  which  give  '  the  son  of  Nebo,'  '  the  son 
of  peace'  (=Aram.  bar  n'^vahdh),  etc.,  as  the 
meaning.  In  any  case,  the  statement  of  Acts 
implies  that  Barnabas  was  noted  for  his  prophetic 
or  preaching  gifts  ;  and  comparison  with  14'^  prob- 
ably warrants  the  further  inference  that  he  was 
more  fluent  in  Aramaic  than  in  Greek. 

In  Ac  4*"-  Barnabas  is  introduced  as  a  Levite  of 
Cyprus,  who  sold  land  that  he  possessed,  and 
devoted  the  proceeds  to  tiie  use  of  the  Church. 
No  other  Levite  is  mentioned  by  name  in  the  NT. 
His  ownership  of  land,  in  contravention  of  the  law 
(Dt  10")  which  excluded  Levi  from  part  or  inherit- 
ance with  his  brethren,  is  not  surprising,  as  in 
later  times  this  Deuteronomic  prohibition  cannot 
have  been  enforced  ( Jer  32^"*''* ;  Jos.  Vita,  76). 
From  Cyprus  the  youthful  Barnabas  may  have 
passed  over  to  the  neighbouring  Tarsus,  famous  in 
liis  time  for  its  culture  as  Avell  as  its  commerce, 
and  there  made  the  acquaintance  of  Paul.  At  any 
rate,  he  appeared  as  his  friend,  and  stood  sponsor 
for  him  on  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem,  when  other 
members  of  the  Church  regarded  him  with  distrust 
(9-'<").  Thereafter  Paul  retired  to  Tarsus,  but 
Barnabas  remained  in  Jerusalem  till  tidings 
reached  the  mother  Church  of  the  success  of  the 
gospel  in  Antiocii,  when  he  was  commissioned  to 
visit  that  city  and  confirm  the  disciples.  Having 
sought  out  Paul  at  Tarsus,  he  induced  him  to  join 
him  in  his  work  in  Antioch.  After  a  year  of 
service  there,  the  two  fellow-labourers  were  dis- 
l»atched  to  Jerusalem  with  alms  for  the  needy 
Christians  of  Judiea  (\V^-^).  Soon  after  their 
return  to  Antioch  they  were  solemnly  set  apart 
liy  the  Church  for  special  evangelization  work, 
and  started  on  what  is  usually  called  the  first 
missionary  journey,  in  the  course  of  which  they 
visited  Cyprus  and  the  southern  parts  of  Asia 
Minor,  accompanied  as  far  as  Perga  in  Pamphyiia 
by  Joim  Mark  (q.v.)—a.  relative  of  Barnabas  (Col 
410J — whom  they  had  brought  with  them  from 
Jerusalem.  In  the  account  of  tiie  journey,  the 
independent  character  of  Paul  appears  in  the 
])recedence  gradually  accorded  him  over  Barnabas, 
whose  name  has  previously  had  lirst  place  in  the 
narrative,  probably  because  he  had  oeen  better 
known  in  Antioch  and  Cyprus.  Following  upon 
this  mission  came  a  prolonged  stay  at  Antioch, 
broken  at  length  by  another  visit  to  Jerusalem,  in 
consequence  of  dissensions  that  hud  arisen  over 
the  necessity  of  circumcision.  A  judgment  on  this 
question  having  been  obtained  from  tlie  leaders  of 
the  mother  Church  met  in  Council,  Paul  and 
Barnabas  repaired  again  to  Antioch,  and  began  to 
<'onsult  about  anotlier  missionary  journey.  As 
Barnabas,  iiowever,  insisted  on  taking  Mark  with 
them,  in  spile  of  his  defection  on  the  previtius 
journey,  a  sharp  contention  took  place  between 
them,  witli  tlie  result  that  Paul  chose  Silas  as  his 


coniiianion,  and  proceeded  to  Syria  and  Cilicia, 
while  Barnabas  set  sail  witli  Mark  for  Cyprus 
( 12^-15*'),  There  is  no  further  notice  of  Barnabas 
in  Acts. 

Galatians  (chs.  1-2)  partly  covers  the  same 
CTound  as  Acts,  but  between  the  two  narratives  a 
(liscrepancy  appears  which  has  provoked  mucii 
discussion.  Reviewing  his  association  with  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem,  Paul  asserts  that  it  did  not 
extend  beyond  two  visits.  One  of  these  (P*)  seems 
to  have  been  the  occasion  of  his  introduction  by 
Barnabas,  and  the  other  (2')  has  usually  been 
identified  with  the  visit  to  tlie  Council  ;  but,  in 
that  case,  what  becomes  of  the  intervening  visit 
in  Acts — that  on  wliicli  Paul  and  Barnabas  con- 
veyed the  offerings  of  the  Antiochene  Christians  ? 
Its  comparative  recentness  and  the  asseveration  of 
1^  preclude  the  supposition  that  it  could  have 
been  forgotten  or  passed  over  by  the  Apostle. 
One  solution  of  the  difficulty  is  obtained  by  re- 
jecting entirely  the  story  of  this  visit  in  Acts,  and 
taking  the  rendering  of  the  facts  only  from  Gal. 
(EBi  i.  486).  Others  endeavour  to  harmonize  the 
two  accounts  with  a  smaller  sacrifice  of  the  credi- 
bility of  Acts.  Such  is  the  suggestion  of  Neander, 
Lightfoot,  and  others  that,  while  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas were  both  commissioned  to  carry  the  contribu- 
tions from  Antioch  to  Jerusalem,  only  the  latter 
actually  accomplished  the  journey  ;  and  that  the 
author  of  Acts,  finding  the  record  of  the  appoint- 
ment in  his  sources,  naturally  a.ssumed  that  Paul 
had  fulfilled  his  part  of  the  mission.  Such  also  is 
the  view  very  generally  held  that  the  second  and 
third  visits  of  Acts  were  really  one  and  the  same 
— the  visit  to  the  Council  recorded  in  Galatians  ; 
but  that,  as  it  was  undertaken  with  the  twofold 
object  of  bearing  alms  to  the  poor  and  discussing 
circumcision  with  the  leaders  of  the  Church,  two 
accounts  of  it  came  into  existence  which  the 
author  of  Acts  erroneously  supposed  to  refer  to 
separate  events.  A  third  form  of  solution  has 
been  advanced  by  Rtimsay  and  others,  which 
would  identify  the  second  visit  of  Gal.  with  the 
second  visit  of  Acts.  Recently  this  view  has  been 
ably  maintained  by  C.  W.  Emmet  (The  Eschato- 
logical  Question  in  the  Gospels,  Edinburgh,  1911, 
p.  191  ir.),  who  also  contends  that  Gal.  was  written 
before  the  third  visit  of  Acts  had  taken  place,  that 
is,  before  the  Council  of  Jerusalem.  On  this 
theory,  the  accuracy  of  Acts  is  fully  vindicated, 
but  an  early  date  is  required  for  Galatians,  which 
may  not  be  generally  conceded.  Cf.,  further, 
Galatians,  Epistle  to. 

On  one  point — the  parting  of  Paul  and  Barnabas 
— Gal.  has  been  regarded  as  supplementing  Acts. 
In  Paul's  account  of  the  trouble  with  Peter  at 
Antioch  over  the  eating  with  Gentiles  (2^^"'*),  his 
co-worker  is  represented  as  taking  part  with  his 
opponents.  Probably,  for  the  moment,  the  mediat- 
ing character  of  Barnabas  betrayed  him  into  a 
policy  of  vacillation  which  wsis  the  real  origin  of  his 
disagreement  with  the  Apostle.  Their  quarrel 
may  have  culminated  in  a  separation  over  John 
Mark,    but    its  actual    cause  was    a    matter    of 

Erinciple.  From  a  subsequent  reference  of  Paul  to 
larnabas  (1  Co  9*)  it  may  l)e  inferred  that  they 
were  reconciled  in  later  years,  though  not  neces- 
sarily that  they  were  again  associated  in  their 
work. 

Tradition  has  been  busy  with  the  name  of  Bar- 
nabas, but  has  prcserveit  little  that  is  deserving 
of  trust.  According  to  one  legend,  he  was  a 
personal  disciple  of  Clirist,  even  one  of  the  Seventy 
mentioned  in  Lk  10',  and  preached  the  gospel  in 
Rome  iluring  the  lifetime  of  our  Lord.  Another 
asserts  tiiat  he  was  the  founder  ami  first  bishop  of 
the  Church  of  Milan,  though  Ambrose  makes  no 
mention  of  him  as  one  of  his  pretiecessors  in  that 


BARNABAS,  EPISTLE  OF 


BAENABAS,  EPISTLE  OF        139 


see.  A  tliird  makes  him  the  missionary  or  apostle 
to  Cyprus,  and  states  that  he  died  by  martyrdom 
at  Salamis  in  A.D.  61.  From  an  early  date  also 
the  writing  of  an  Epistle  has  been  ascribed  to  him  : 
(1)  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  authorship  of 
which  was  claimed  for  him  by  Tertullian  ;  and  (2) 
the  Epistle  to  which  his  name  has  been  attached 
since  the  time  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (see 
followin«r  article).  In  both  cases  the  internal 
evidence  is  strongly  against  the  authorship  of 
Barnabas,  such  references,  for  instance,  being 
made  to  the  Jewish  Law  as  were  not  likely  to 
come  from  a  member  of  the  Jerusalem  Church  and 
a  sympathizer  with  Peter  at  Antioch.  McGiffert 
{Apostol.  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897,  p.  598  f.)  argues 
very  ingeniously  in  favour  of  Barnabas  as  the 
author  of  1  Peter  ;  but  the  reasons  adduced  by 
him,  though  plausible,  are  scarcely  suflBcient  to 
establish  bis  theory.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
Epistle  to  necessitate  a  Levite  authorship,  and 
Barnabas  need  not  have  remained  anonymous 
(Moffat.  LNT,  343  n.,  437). 

LiTKKATrK£. — In  addition  to  references  already  given,  see 
works  generally  on  Paul,  Acts,  Galatians,  and  the  Apostolic 

A«e-  D.  Frew. 

BAENABAS,  EPISTLE  OF 1.  Object.  — The 

chief  object  of  the  author  of  this  Epistle  was  to 
impart  to  his  readers  a  knowledge  of  what  pertains 
to  salvation  that  they  might  be  saved  in  the  Day 
of  Jesus  Christ  (ii.  10,  iv.  1,  9).  The  two  lessons 
he  impresses  upon  them  are:  (1)  that  the  literal 
observance  of  the  Mosaic  Law  is  useless  for  salva- 
tion ;  (2)  the  necessity  and  duty  of  a  moral  life. 
This  is  the  letter  of  a  true  Christian  pastor  of  much 
moral  and  spiritual  earnestness  ;  he  is  deeply  con- 
cerned for  the  salvation  of  his  flock  and  desirous 
of  imparting  to  them  the  best  that  he  has. 

2.  Moral  interest. — It  is  only  right  to  emphasize 
our  author's  moral  and  spiritual  arms  because  a 
large  part  of  what  he  says,  consisting  of  allegorical 
interpretations  of  the  Mosaic  Law,  apj>ears  to 
modem  minds  strangely  unreal  and  fantastic.  But 
if  his  letter  abounds  in  allegory,  it  is  only  because 
he  is  deeply  impressed  with  the  idea  that  the  Law, 
if  literally  observed,  will  make  shipwreck  of  men's 
salvation  (iiL  6).  His  earnest  advice  is :  '  Let  us 
flee  from  all  vanity,  let  us  entirely  hate  the  works 
of  the  evil  way'  (iv.  10 ;  cf.  9).  In  his  closing 
chapters  (xix.-xxi.)  he  forsakes  the  allegorical 
method  entirely,  and  devotes  himself  to  a  setting 
forth  of  '  the  two  ways,'  the  way  of  light  and  the 
way  of  darkness.  The  duties  of  loving,  fearing, 
praising,  and  obeying  Glod  are  named  first.  Then 
follows  a  series  ot  injunctions,  some  negative  and 
some  positive  in  form,  concerned  chiefly  with  one's 
relations  to  others.  A  man's  neighbour  must  be 
loved  more  than  his  own  soul.  The  waj'  of  the 
'  Black  One '  is  set  forth  in  the  form  of  a  catalogue 
of  vices  and  evil  actions.  Only  two  Command- 
ments are  quoted  from  the  Decalogue — the  third 
and  the  seventh.  There  is  no  direct  appeal  to 
either  the  teaching  or  the  example  of  our  Lord. 

3.  Attitude  towards  Judaism. — The  main  in- 
terest which  the  Epistle  has  for  us  to-day  lies  in 
the  light  which  it  throws  ujwn  the  relations  be- 
tween Judaism  and  the  Church.  In  order  to 
appreciate  the  position  of  this  Epistle  in  early 
Christian  literature,  it  is  necessary  to  make  a  brief 
review  of  the  transition  from  Judaism  to  Christi- 
anity. Christianity  did  not  come  into  the  world 
at  a  point  where  there  was  a  religious  vacuum.  It 
was  founded  by  One  who  claimed  to  be  the  An- 
ointed One  of  a  definite  national  religion,  which 
had  existed  for  many  centuries.  He  and  His 
apostles  believed  in  the  Jewish  religion,  as  the 
only  true  religion,  used  the  Jewish  Scripttires  as 
the  very  word  of  God,  and  observed  the  national 


forms  of  worship  as  the  Divinelv-appointed  mode 
of  serving  God.  How  then  did  His  followers  ever 
come  to  abandon  the  Law  ?  Did  they  at  any  point 
make  a  complete  break  with  all  that  was  Jewish 
and  begin  afresh  on  an  entirely  new  basis?  By 
no  means ;  there  was  no  break,  but  merely  a  re- 
organization. The  followers  of  Jesus  believed  that 
He,  as  Messiah,  had  authority  from  God  to  insti- 
tute a  new  Covenant  between  God  and  His  people 
Israel,  and  that  He  actually  did  so  when  He  oflered 
Himself  on  the  cross  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin.  The 
logical  consequences  of  this  belief  were  not  per- 
ceived all  at  once,  but  were  bound  to  come  to  light 
as  time  went  on. 

(1)  If  the  death  of  Jesus  is  sufficient  to  obtain 
salvation,  the  observance  of  the  Law  cannot  be 
essential  any  longer.  Hence,  though  believing 
Jews  may  continue  to  observe  the  Law  if  they 
will,  there  is  not  sufficient  ground  for  compelling 
Gentiles  who  turn  to  God  and  believe  on  Jesus  to 
do  so  also.  This  recognition  of  the  Gentiles  is  the 
first  step  in  the  process,  and  is  the  position  reached 
at  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  (Ac  15).  The  next 
step  was  to  admit  that  it  was  not  necessary  for  be- 
lieving Jews  to  observe  the  Law,  when  such  observ- 
ance caused  them  to  separate  from  their  Gentile 
brethren.  Tliis  step  was  being  taken  during  the 
lifetime  of  St.  Paul  (Gal  2i**-,  1  Co  92>).  The  last 
step  was  to  condemn  all  observance  of  the  Law, 
whether  by  Jewish  or  by  Gentile  believers. 

This  last  step  is  reflected  in  the  pages  of  our 
Epistle.  There  is,  however,  this  peculiarity  about 
its  position  :  the  main  stream  of  Christian  thought 
believed  that  the  Mosaic  Law  had  been  given  by 
God  to  the  Jews  to  be  literally  fiUfilled.  Our 
author,  however,  does  not  believe  that  the  Law 
ever  was  intended  to  be  taken  literally  ;  he  says  it 
was  uttered  in  a  spiritual  sense  which  the  Jews 
did  not  imderstand  (x.  9).  This  error  of  the  Jews 
was  the  work  of  an  evil  angel  (ix.  4 ;  cf.  viii.  7) ; 
the  true  spiritual  interpretation  is  known  to 
Christians  because  God  circumcised  their  ears 
(ix.  4).  This  spiritual  interpretation  of  the  Law  is 
nothing  more  or  less  than  a  series  of  allegories. 
The  scapegoat  of  the  Day  of  Atonement  is  the 
type  of  Jesus  who  was  to  sufler  (ch.  vii.).  The 
prescription  that  certain  animals  must  not  be  eaten 
is  explained  as  meaning  that  one  must  have  no 
dealings  with  certain  kinds  of  evil  persons  (ch.  x.). 
If  Abraham  is  said  to  have  circumcised  318  men, 
the  real  meaning  is  Jesus  and  the  Cross,  because 
'  in  the  number  18,  I  stands  for  ten,  H  for  eight. 
Here  thou  hast  Jesus  (THZOTZ).  And  because  the 
cross  in  the  T  was  to  have  grace,  he  saith  also 
three  hundred.  So  he  revealeth  Jesus  in  the  two 
letters  and  in  the  remaining  one  the  Cross '  (ix.  8  ; 
cf.  his  treatment  of  the  Red  Heifer  of  Nu  19  in  ch. 
viii.). 

This  position  is  supported  by  citing  the  prophetic 
condemnation  of  the  idea  that  sacrifice  and  ritual 
can  be  made  a  substitute  for  a  moral  life  (chs.  ii. 
and  iii.).  In  dealing  with  circumcision,  our  author 
seizes  on  those  passages  which  speak  of  a  circum- 
cision of  the  heart  (Jer  4*,  Dt  10'«,  Jer  9*),  and 
argues  that  the  Jewish  circumcision  '  is  abolished, 
for  he  hath  said  that  a  circumcision  not  of  the  flesh 
should  be  practised'  (ix.  4).  The  six  days  of 
creation  are  in  reality  6000  years  ;  hence  the  true 
Sabbath  cannot  be  obser\ed  until  the  coming  of 
the  Son  of  God  (ch.  xv.).  Similarly  the  building 
of  a  material  Temple  was  a  mistake ;  the  true 
Temple  is  a  spiritual  Temple — the  hearts  of  those 
with  whom  God  dwells  (ch.  xvi.) ;  thus  all  that  is 
outwardly  distinctive  of  the  Jewish  religion  is 
interpreted  in  a  spiritual  sense :  distinctions  of 
clean  and  unclean,  circumcision,  the  Sabbath  and 
the  Temple. 

(2)  Another  logical  consequence  of  belief  in  Jesus 


140        BARNABAS,  EPISTLE  OF 


BARNABAS,  EPISTLE  OF 


as  Messiah  will  further  illustrate  the  mind  of  our 
writer.  If  the  Messiah  has  indeed  come  in  tho  jier- 
son  of  Jesus,  then  the  national  religion  of  the  Jews 
is  not  destroyed  but  proved  to  be  the  true  service  of 
the  Living  God,  and  its  claim  that  it  had  received  a 
direct  Divine  revelation  is  not  exploded  but  vindi- 
cated by  God  Himself.  Every  one  who  believed 
in  Jesus,  believed  that  He  came  in  fulGlment  of 

Eromises  made  by  God  to  the  Jewish  fathers ; 
ence  a  Christian  believer  could  not  but  regard  the 
ancient  Jewish  Scriptures  as  the  record  of  a  unique 
revelation  and  treat  them  as  the  very  word  of  God. 
This,  too,  is  the  position  of  our  author  ;  for,  though 
he  regards  the  literal  observance  of  the  Law  as 
having  been  from  tlie  very  first  a  fatal  mistake, 
yet  all  his  proofs  of  this  are  drawn  from  the 
OT  itself  anfl  from  what  he  believes  to  be  its  true 
exegesis.  '  The  Lord  has  made  known  to  us  by 
His  prophets,  things  past  and  present.'  The  words 
of  Scripture  he  constantly  quotes  as  words  spoken 
from  the  mouth  of  God  (ii.  4,  5,  7,  iii.  1,  iv.  8,  v. 
5,  12,  etc.  ;  cf.  iv.  7,  11,  v.  4,  etc.).  Moreover,  he 
uses  the  Scriptures  to  explain  the  mystery  of  the 
suflering  of  the  Son  of  God.  *  How  did  He  endure 
to  sufler  at  the  hand  of  men  ?  Understand  ye. 
The  Prophets  receiving  grace  from  Him,  prophesied 
concerning  Him'  (v.  5,  6,  13,  14;  cf.  vi.  6,  7,  x., 
xi. ).  The  OT  was  his  only  source  of  authority  in 
religion  ;  he  does  not  appeal  to  any  Christian  writ- 
ing, or  even  to  the  words  of  Jesus  ;  he  feels  he  has 
fully  proved  his  point  if  he  can  show  that  his  doc- 
trine IS  grounded  in  the  Jewish  Scriptures. 

(3)  If  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  He  was  clothed 
with  full  authority  to  mould  the  national  religious 
life  according  to  the  will  of  God.  Those  who  re- 
fused to  believe  and  obey  Him  refused  to  obey 
and  believe  God,  and  by  this  act  of  disobedience 
cut  themselves  off  from  the  Covenant  and  the 
mercies  of  God.  On  the  other  hand,  those  who  did 
believe  God  and  were  obedient  to  His  Messiah, 
became  the  true  people  of  God,  the  New  Israel,  the 

{•resent  possessors  of  all  the  privileges  that  once  be- 
onged  to  the  Jewish  nation,  and  the  recipients  of 
all  the  Messianic  blessings.  If  the  purpose  of  God 
in  creating  the  Avorld  and  in  calling  Abraham  had 
been  fulfilled  in  Jesus,  tlien  it  was  not  for  the  sake 
of  unbelieving  Jews  but  for  tlie  sake  of  the  believers 
in  the  Messiah  that  the  world  had  been  created  and 
Abraham  called.  They  are  the  new  People  and  yet 
the  old,  for  they  have  been  latent  in  God's  intention 
since  the  Creation.  Thus  the  Christians  denied  to 
the  Jews  any  share  whatever  in  the  glorious  herit- 
age of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  claimed  it  entirely 
for  themselves. 

This  position  throws  light  upon  the  mind  of  our 
writer.  He  is  sure  that  the  patriarchs  from  Abra- 
ham to  Moses  stood  in  a  special  relation  to  God 
and  received  special  promises  from  Him  (v.  7,  xiii. 
7,  xiv.  1).  But,  whereas  St.  Paul  would  say  that 
the  physical  descendants  of  Abraham  were  not  cut 
oft'  from  this  special  relationship  until  they  cut 
themselves  off"  when  they  refused  to  believe  in 
Jesus  (Ro  11),  our  author  thinks  that  they  were 
cut  off"  long  before  this,  as  long  ago  as  the  day  of 
Aaron's  golden  calf.  A  Covenant,  he  says,  was 
given  to  Moses  to  deliver  to  the  Jews,  but  it  was 
never  really  received.  'He  hath  given  it  (the 
Covenant),  but  they  themselves  were  not  found 
worthy  to  receive  it  by  reason  of  their  sins '  (xiv. 
1);  for,  when  Moses  perceived  their  idolatry,  he 
cast  out  of  his  hands  the  two  tables  which  he  had 
received  in  the  Mount,  and  they  Avere  broken  in 
pieces  (xiv.  1-4,  iv.  6-8).  St.  Paul  and  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  know  of  two  Covenants — an  old 
and  a  new  ;  and  the  old  was  in  force  until  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah  (Ro  7-'^-,  Gal  32«-  4",  He  8"). 
The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  says  that  only  one  Cove- 
nant was  ever  in  force— the  Covenant  of  Jesus. 


Our  author  does  not  cut  Cliristianity  away  from 
all  historic  connexion  witli  the  Jewish  past ;  on 
tlie  contrary,  he  denies  a  place  of  privilege  to  the 
Jews  after  Mount  Sinai,  in  order  to  show  that 
that  place  really  Itelonged  to  the  Christians. 
There  are  two  peoples — the  Jews  and  the  Chris- 
tians. Of  these,  the  Jews,  the  elder,  are  in  the 
position  of  Esau  and  of  Manasseh,  who,  though 
the  first-born  of  their  respective  fathers,  did  not 
inherit  the  blessing ;  the  Christians,  like  Jacob  and 
Ephraim,  though  in  each  ca.se  the  younger,  have 
been  made  the  recipients  of  the  promises  (ch.  xiii.). 
Accordingly,  to  our  author,  the  Christians  have 
now  come  into  what  was  always  their  own  and  had 
never  belonged  to  the  nation  of  Israel.  •  Do  not 
then  say,  "Our  covenant  remains  to  them  also." 
Ours  it  is,  but  they  have  lost  it  in  this  waj^  for  ever, 
when  Moses  had  just  received  it '  (iv.  6 ;  cf.  8). 
The  Christians  are  'the  new  people'  of  God  (v.  7, 
vii.  5 ;  cf.  xiii.  6),  a  holy  people  (xiv.  6),  who  have 
been  cleansed,  forgiven  (vi.  11),  whose  hearts  have 
been  redeemed  out  of  darkness  (xiv.  5),  'created 
afresh  from  the  beginning  '  (xvi.  8),  '  a  new  type  ' 
(vi.  11) ;  '  He  Himself  prophesying  in  us.  He  Him- 
self dwelling  in  us,  opening  for  us  who  had  been  in 
bondage  unto  death.  .  .  .  This  is  the  spiritual 
temple  built  up  to  the  Lord '  (xvi,  9,  10 ;  cf.  vi.  15). 

It  is  not  correct,  then,  to  say  with  Kriiger  (Hist, 
of  Early  Christian  Lit.,  New  York,  1897,  p.  21) 
that  to  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  'Judaism  was 
an  error  with  which  Christianity  could  have  noth- 
ing to  do,  but  which  it  must  reject.'  Our  autlior 
accepts  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  the  patriarchs,  the 
promises,  Moses,  and  the  Law  in  its  (to  his  mind) 
correct  spiritual  interpretation.  His  animus  is 
against  the  Jews,  not  against  the  Jewish  religion  ; 
from  Sinai  onwards  they  have  in  reality  stood  out- 
side that  religion  ;  its  privileges  were  always  the 
peculiar  property  of  the  Christians,  held  in  reserve 
for  them  until  the  coming  of  the  Messiah. 

4.  Christology. — In  the  facts  of  the  earthly  life 
of  our  Lord  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  has  but  little 
interest.  From  incidental  notices  one  gathers  that 
Jesus  had  performed  wonders  and  miracles  (v.  8) ; 
that  He  had  chosen  twelve  apostles  to  preach  His 
gospel  (v.  9,  viii.  3)  ;  that  He  was  crucified,  set  at 
naught  and  spit  upon  (vii.  9)  ;  that  He  was  given 
vinegar  and  gall  to  drink  (vii.  3).  It  is  evident  that 
the  writer  did  not  think  that  his  readers  stood  in 
need  of  instruction  in  the  details  of  the  life  of 
Christ. 

Nor  does  he  aim  at  expounding  a  doctrine  of 
Christ's  Person  and  work ;  but  when  one  gathers 
together  from  diff"erent  parts  of  his  work  the  pas- 
sages which  refer  to  our  Lord,  one  can  see  that  his 
teaching  is  in  line  with  that  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  Christ  is  '  the  Beloved '  of  God  (iii.  6,  iv. 
3,  8).  He  '  manifested  Himself  as  the  Son  of  God ' 
(v.  9,  11,  vii.  9),  who  was  pre-existent,  being  pre- 
sent at  and  taking  an  active  part  in  the  Creation 
(v.  5,  10,  vi.  12) ;  One  who  came  among  men  in  the 
flesh  (v.  6,  10,  11,  vi.  7,  9,  14,  xii.  10) ;  who  should 
not  be  called  Son  of  David  but  Son  of  God,  for 
David  himself  called  him  not  son,  but  Lord  (xii. 
10,  11) ;  wlio  is  about  to  come  again,  and  that 
quickly,  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead  (v. 
7,  vii.  2,  XX i.  3). 

His  teaching  on  the  Atonement  belongs  to  the 
same  early  period  of  Christian  teacliing.  He 
knows  that  Christ  suff"ered  for  us  (v.  5,  vii.  2)  and 
as  a  sacrifice  for  our  sins  (vii.  3,  6,  v.  2),  that  we 
might  be  forgiven,  sanctified  (v.  1),  and  saved  (v. 
10)  ;  and  that  we  may  reign  with  Him  hereafter 
when  we  have  been  made  perfect  (vi.  18,  19) ;  that 
He  might  annul  death,  show  the  resurrection  (v.  6) 
and  give  us  life  (vii.  2,  xii.  5) ;  that  He  might  sum 
up  the  tale  of  the  sins  of  those  who  persecuted  His 
prophets  (v.  11 ;  cf.  xiv.  6).     He  has  no  theory  of 


BARNABAS,  EPISTLE  OF 


BAEXABAS,  EPISTLE  OF        141 


the  Atonement  and  no  detinition  of  sacrifice  ;  he  is 
content  to  show  that  according  to  the  Scriptures 
Christ  died  for  our  sins  and  that  we  are  thereby 
saved. 

5.  Aathonhip. — The  Epistle  is  anonymous. 
Tradition,  however,  has  ascribed  it  to  Barnabas  the 
fellow-worker  of  St.  Paul.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
quotes  it  as  the  work  of  '  the  Apostolic  Barnabas, 
who  was  one  of  the  seventy  and  a  fellow-  worker  of 
Paul '  (Strom,  u.  20 ;  cf.  iL  6,  7,  15,  18,  v.  8,  10). 
Origen  speaks  of  '  the  Catholic  Epistle  of  Barnabas ' 
(c.  Ceis.  i.  63).  Eusebius  calls  it  '  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,'  i.e.  the  Apostle  (HE  vi.  14,  iii.  25). 
It  seems  to  have  been  held  in  high  esteem  in  Alex- 
andria towards  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent.  ;  and,  since 
it  is  found  in  Codex  Sinaiticus  beginning  on  the 
leaf  where  Revelation  ends,  one  may  conclude  that 
it  was  once  read  in  churches.  In  the  West  it  was 
never  regarded  as  canonical.  Eusebius  objected  to 
it,  and  finally  its  connexion  with  the  NT  was 
severed  entirely. 

The  external  evidence  is  thus  wholly  in  favour 
of  the  apostolic  authorship.  But,  coming  as  it 
does  from  a  period  as  late  as  the  closing  years  of 
the  2nd  cent.,  this  testimony  cannot  overbalance 
the  weighty  considerations  drawn  from  internal 
evidence  which  make  it  impossible  to  ascribe  it  to 
the  companion  of  St.  Paul.  What  we  know  of  the 
apostolic  Barnabas  indicates  that  he  took  a  view 
of  the  Mosaic  Law  wholW'  diflerent  from  that  re- 
flected in  this  Epistle.  The  '  Son  of  Consolation ' 
belonged  to  the  earliest  stage  of  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tian controversy;  he  was  ready  to  give  the  Gfen- 
tiles  liberty,  but  by  no  means  ready  to  say  that 
the  Jews  might  abandon  the  Law  altogether  (Gal 
2").  It  is,  of  course,  quite  possible  that,  after  the 
incident  of  Gal  2,  Barnabas  might  have  come  to 
acknowledge  the  entire  freedom  of  the  Jews,  but 
even  this  would  not  bring  him  into  the  atmosphere 
of  our  Epistle  ;  for  here  there  is  no  question  as  to 
whether  a  believing  Jew  may  or  mav  not  abandon 
the  Law  ;  the  main  idea  is  that  no  ^ew,  believing 
or  unbelieving,  ought  ever  to  have  observed  the 
Law  at  any  time,  even  before  Christ  came.  Such 
an  attitude  as  this  lay  altogether  outside  the  pur- 
view of  the  thoughts  of  St.  Paul's  companion,  if 
we  may  judge  from  what  St.  Paul  tells  us  of  him. 
And  it  is  difficult  to  think  that  any  Jew,  bom 
under  the  Law,  and  nurtured  in  the  stirring  tra- 
ditions of  its  maintenance  in  the  face  of  cruel  per- 
secution, could  come  to  feel  so  little  enthusiasm 
for  and  interest  in  the  national  struggles  and 
heroisms  that  he  could  sweep  them  all  away  as 
things  which  never  ought  to  have  been.  A  soul 
so  dead  to  patriotism  was  no  true  Jew.  None  but 
an  alien  could  be  so  unsympathetic  to  the  national 
history  of  the  Jews. 

Not  very  much  more  can  be  added  to  this.  The 
author  was  probably  one  of  the  class  distinguished 
by  a  charisTna  or  '  gift '  of  teaching.  Though  he 
disclaims  any  intention  of  writing  professionally, 
yet  he  was  conscious  of  possessing  •  some  claim  to  a 
deferential  hearing'  (Bartlet,  EBr^  iii.  409).  Two 
theories  are  advanced  to  account  for  the  ascription 
of  the  Epistle  to  Barnabas.  It  was  the  work  of 
a  namesake  of  St.  Paul's  companion  ;  or,  it  was 
known  as  coming  from  Alexandria,  and  hence 
was  ascribed  to  Barnabas  as  to  one  prominent 
in  the  early  history  of  that  Church. 

6.  Place. — There  is  a  general  agreement  among 
scholars  that  Alexandria  is  the  probable  scene  of 
its  composition.  The  general  style  and  the  use  of 
the  allegorical  method  are  thoroughly  Alexandrian. 
At  Alexandria,  again,  the  Jews  were  particularly 
strong,  and  in  constant  conflict  with  the  Christians. 
Hence  the  bitter  opi)osition  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation, 
and  the  anxiety  to  cut  ott'  all  sympathy  with  Jew- 
ish practices.     It  has  been  observed  that  there  are 


serious  blunders  in  the  descriptions  of  Jewish  rites ; 
our  author  agrees  neither  with  the  OT  nor  with 
the  Talmud.  But  possibly  his  knowledge  is  de- 
rived from  -Alexandria  rather  than  from  Palestine. 
Kohler,  in  JE  ii.  537,  remarks  that  the  letter  shows 
an  astonishing  familiarity  with  Jewish  rites. 

7.  Date. — There  is  much  less  agreement  on  the 
question  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle.  It  is  plainly 
later  than  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus 
in  A.D.  70,  for  it  alludes  to  that  event  (xvi.  4). 
Again,  it  is  earlier  than  the  second  destruction 
under  Hadrian  in  A.D.  132 ;  otherwise,  as  Light- 
foot  remarks,  some  reference  to  this  event  would 
have  been  found. 

A  closer  determination  of  the  date  depends 
mainly  on  the  interpretation  of  a  passage  from  ch. 
iv.  This  chapter  contains  a  warning  that  '  the 
last  offence '  is  at  hand  ;  for  the  Lord  has  shortened 
the  times  and  the  days  that  His  beloved  may  come 
quickly.  As  a  proof  that  the  last  offence,  i.e.  the 
Antichrist,  is  at  hand,  the  writer  quotes  a  prophecy 
from  the  Book  of  Daniel  (Dn  7^-  *•)  to  the  efl'ect 
that  ten  kings  shall  reign,  and  after  them  shall 
arise  a  little  king  who  shall  subdue  three  of  the 
kings  in  one  {v<^  ep).  It  is  evident  that  the  writer 
j  thinks  that  this  prophecy  has  been,  in  part  at 
i  least,  fulfilled ;  he  hsLS  seen  something  in  recent 
!  history  which  corresponds  with  this  vision.  Thus 
much  then  seems  clear ;  when  he  wrote  this,  there 
had  been  ten  Cjesars  on  the  Imperial  throne. 
Unless  we  are  to  omit  some  of  the  Emperors  from 
the  list — a  proceeding  for  which  there  seems  no 
justification — the  tenth  Emperor  brings  us  to  the 
reign  of  Vespasian.  If  the  '  little  horn '  had  al- 
ready appeared  when  the  Epistle  was  written, 
then  we  must  look  for  three  Emperors  subdued  by 
the  successor  of  Vespasian.  And  this,  of  course, 
Titus  did  not  do.  Hence  it  seems  better  to  inter- 
pret the  little  horn  as  Antichrist,  who  has  not  yet 
been  revealed,  for  this  gets  rid  of  the  difficulty  of 
finding  one  Emperorwho  had  already  subdued  three. 
The  i^Titer  found  this  reference  to  three  kings  in 
his  text  of  the  prophecy,  and  meant  to  leave  it  to 
the  future  to  show  who  the  three  were  and  how 
they  would  be  overthrown.  But  no  matter  how 
this  point  is  settled,  the  tenth  horn  can  scarcely 
be  other  than  Vespasian,  and  this  fixes  the  date  of 
the  Epistle  at  between  a.d.  70  and  79.  Another 
chapter  (xvL)  is  sometimes  referred  to  as  having 
a  bearing  on  this  question.  This  chapter  speaks 
of  a  building  of  the  Temple  of  God.  Many  com- 
mentators, including  Hamack,  take  this  as  refer- 
ring to  the  material  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  which 
they  say  the  Jews  expected  Hadrian  to  rebuild. 
Hence  they  place  this  Epistle  c.  .\.D.  120.  But 
this  rests  on  a  misinterpretation  of  ch.  xvL  It 
seems  certain  that  the  writer  has  in  view  the 
spiritual  Temple  built  up  in  the  hearts  of  believers, 
and  hence  the  passage  has  no  bearing  on  the  ques- 
tion of  date  (cf.  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  241). 
Certain  other  considerations,  such  as  the  absence 
of  a  reference  to  Gnosticism  and  the  apparent 
possibility  of  a  relapse  into  Judaism,  have  also 
been  brought  forward.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  none 
of  these  is  incompatible  with  the  date  given 
above. 

8.  Text. — Until  the  discovery  of  the  famous 
Codex  Sinaiticus  (K)  in  1862,  this  Epistle  was 
known  only  in  a  Latin  translation  and  in  eight 
Greek  MSS.  The  Latin  Version  is  found  in  a 
MS  of  the  8th  cent.,  but  the  translation  was  made 
from  a  text  supposed  by  Miiller  to  be  earlier  than 
K.  It  does  not  contain  the  last  four  chapters. 
The  Greek  MSS  all  lacked  exactly  the  same 
portion  of  the  Epistle — the  first  five  and  a  half 
chapters — and  joined  the  remainder  of  Barnabas 
on  to  the  end  of  the  Epistle  of  Polvcarp  as  though 
it   were   all   one  letter.     Being  thus  plainly  de- 


142 


BARS ABBAS 


BARUCH,  APOCALYPSE  OF 


fecended  from  a  common  source,  they  are  not  in- 
dependent witnesses  for  the  text.  With  the 
publication  of  i<  by  Tiachendorf  in  1862  a  complete 
Greek  text  appealed  for  tlie  first  time.  In  this 
Codex  our  Lpistle  follows  Revelation,  and  is 
followed  by  the  Shepherd  of  Hennas.  Another 
complete  Greek  MS  was  discovered  in  Constan- 
tinople by  Bryennios  in  1875.  A  good  account  of 
the  MSS  will  be  found  in  Hamack's  Altchristl. 
Litteratur,  i.  58-61,  and  in  Gebhardt-Harnack's 
Pat.  Apost.  Op.  i.  2,  pp.  vii-xx. 

9.  Integrity. — Attempts  have  been  made  by 
Schenkel,  Heydecke,  J.  Weiss,  and  others  to 
show  that  tlie  Epistle  contains  many  interpola- 
tions. Hefele,  Hilgenfeld,  and  Gebhardt-Harnack 
have  maintained  the  opposite.  Of  special  interest 
is  the  relation  of  our  Epistle  to  the  Didanhe  (q.v.) ; 
for  both  set  forth  much  the  same  moral  teaching 
under  the  title  of  'The  Two  Ways.'  Rendel 
Harris  {Teaching  of  the  Apostles,  Cambridge,  1888, 
pp.  17-20)  maintains  that  the  writer  of  Barnabas 
Knew  the  Didache  and  quoted  it  from  memory. 
Harnack,  however,  seems  more  successful  in  show- 
ing that  the  writer  of  the  Didache  used  and  ini- 
pro\ed  upon  our  Epistle  (cf.  Die  Lehre  der  zwolf 
Apostel,  Leipzig,  1884,  pp.  81-87). 

Literature. — Euglish  translations  will  be  found  in  J.  B. 
Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  1  vol.,  London,  1891 ;  The  Writ- 
ings of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  tr.  Roberts,  Donaldson,  and 
Crombie  (=Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library,  i.),  97  ff.  ;  K.  Lake, 
Apostolic  Fathers,  London,  1912.  Reference  should  also  be  made 
to  Gebhaxdt-Harnack,  Patrum  Apost.  Op.  i.  2  [Leipzig,  1878], 
who  give  a  complete  list  of  titles  down  to  1878  on  pp.  xlii-xliv  ; 
A.  Harnack,  Gesch.  der  altchristl.  Litteratur,  Leipzig,  1893 ; 
A.  Bardenhewer,  Gesch.  der  altkirchl.  Litteratur,  Freiburg  i, 
B.,  1902-03;  J.  Donaldson,  Apostolical  Fathers,  London,  1874 
(  =  new  ed.  of  vol.  i.  of  Crit.  Uist.  of  Christ.  Lit.  and  Doct.) ;  W. 
Cunningham,  A  Dissertation  on  the  Epistle  of  St.  Barnabas, 
do.  1877  ;  C.  J.  Hefele,  Pat.  Apost.  Op.  iv.  S  [Tubingen,  1855] ; 
S.  Sharpe,  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  London,  18S0 ;  G.  Salmon, 
Introd.  to  the  JVT«,  London,  1892,  pp.  513-519 ;  K.  Kohler  in 
JE  ii.  [1902]  537 f.;  W.  Milligan  in  BOB  1.  [1877]  260 ff.; 
J.  Vernon  Bartlet  in  BBrn  iii.  [1910]  408  f.  ;  J.  G.  Muller, 
Eikldrung  des  Bamabasbriefes,  Leipzig,  1869. 

Harold  Hamilton. 
BARSABBAS.— See  Joseph,  Judas. 

BARUCH,  APOCALYPSE  OF.— The  subject  of 
this  article  is  a  Jewish  work  composed  not  long 
after  the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  a.d.  70,  and 
now  preserved  only  in  Syriac.  This  Syriac  is  a 
translation  from  the  Greek,  of  which  only  a  tiny 
fragment  is  extant ;  the  Greek  itself  seems  to  have 
been  a  translation  from  an  Aramaic  or  Hebrew 
original. 

The  Apocalypse  o/Baruch  was  first  published  as  a  whole  by 
Ceriani  from  the  Ambrosian  MS  of  the  Peshitta  OT  (6th  cent.). 
The  Latin  translation  appeared  in  1866,  and  tlie  Syriac  text  in 
1871.  An  English  translation  with  full  critical  and  explanatory 
commentary  by  R.  H.  Charles  appeared  in  1896.  In  Patro- 
logia  Syriaca,  vol.  ii.  [1907]  1055-131)6,  M.  Kmosko  gives  the 
Syriac,  together  with  an  amended  text  of  Ceriani's  translation. 
The  Greek  fragment  appeared  in  1903  in  Oxyrhynchus  Papyri, 
vol.  iii.  pp.  3-7.  By  some  oversight  Kmosko  does  not  notice 
this  important  discovery. 

1.  Contents. — The  work  professes  to  be  written 
by  Baruch,  the  scribe  of  Jeremiah,  immediately 
alter  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadrezzar. 
It  does  not  readily  fall  into  sections,  but  may  be 
analyzed  as  follows  : 

i.-xx.  The  capture  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  vindi- 
cation of  God's  power  and  justice  in  respect  to  it. 

Baruch  is  miraculously  shown  the  destruction  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  bj-  angels  and  the  hiding  of  the  holy  vessels*  (vi.  vii.), 
after  which  the  Cbaldseans  enter.  Baruch  laments  over  Zion 
(x.  6-xii.  4) ;  after  seven  days  Qod  reveals  to  him  that  justice 
will  be  done  on  the  heathen  (xiii.  6-12) ;  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  is 
a  step  towards  the  final  judgment  (xx.  2). 

xxi.-xxxiv.  Prayer  of  Baruch,  and  first  Messianic 
revelation  to  him. 

*  Note  that  the  seven-branched  candlestick  is  not  included  : 
thaX  was  actually  carried  in  triumph  by  Titus. 


The  world  will  last  until  all  the  pre<leslined  sons  of  .\dam 
have  been  born  (xxiii.  4,  6).  At  the  end  will  come  the  Messiah, 
the  Manna  will  descend  again,  and  Behemoth  and  Leviathan 
will  be  there  for  the  saitits  to  eat  (xxix.).  After  that  cornea 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  (xxx.). 

Baruch  assembles  the  people  and  warns  them  that  Zion  will 
be  rebuilt  and  then  again  destroyed ;  the  tribulation  at  the  end 
of  time  is  the  worse  (xxxii.  2,  6). 

xxxv.-xlvi.  Vision  of  the  cedar  and  the  vine. 

The  cedar  is  the  Roman  Empire,  the  vine  is  Messiah  (xxxix. 
5,  7) ;  in  the  end  the  last  great  heathen  ruler  will  be  destroyed 
by  Messiah  (xl.). 

Baruch  again  warns  the  people  to  keep  the  Law  (xliv.  3, 
xlvL  6). 

xlvii.-lxxYii.  Second  prayer  of  Baruch,  followed 
by  a  revelation  to  him  about  the  resurrection  of 
the  good  and  the  bad,  and  the  vision  of  the  black 
and  the  bright  waters. 

The  dead  will  rise  unaltered,  but  the  righteous  will  then 
become  glorious  while  the  wicked  waste  away  (1.  Ii.).  All 
history  is  divided  into  12  parts:  the  black  waters  are  the  six 
bad  periods,  beginning  with  the  Fall  ('  O  Adam,  what  hast  thou 
done  to  all  those  who  are  born  from  thee 't '  xlviiL  42) ;  the 
bright  waters  are  the  short  alternating  gleams  of  rightieous- 
ness,  beginning  with  Abraham  (Ivi.-lxxii.).  At  the  end  the 
saints  will  have  a  glorious  time  (Ixxiii  f.). 

Baruch  again  warns  the  people  to  keep  the  Law  :  if  they  do 
so,  those  left  in  the  Holy  I>and  will  never  be  removed  (Ixxvii. 
5, 6).  To  the  captive  Jews  in  Babylon  he  sends  a  letter  by  hand 
(Ixxvii.  17),  while  to  the  lost  Nine-and-a-ball  Tribes  he  sends  a 
letter  by  an  eagle  (Ixxvii.  19  ff.). 

Ixxviii.-lxxxYii.  Baruch's  letter  to  the  Lost 
Tribes. 

Baruch  tells  them  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  announces 
the  approaching  end  of  all  things,  and  exhorts  them  to  keep  tha 
Law.  '  If  we  set  our  hearts  straiglit  we  shall  receive  everything 
that  we  have  lost  and  more '  (Ixxxv.  4). 

2.  Problems  raised  by  the  book. — The  chief 
problems  connected  with  th&  Apocalypse  of  Baruch 
are  (1)  its  place  in  Jewish  thought,  especially  in 
connexion  with  4  Ezra  (i.e.  '2  Esdras '  in  the 
English  Apocrypha,  which  it  much  resembles) ;  and 
(2)  its  literary  history  in  Syriac  and  the  relation 
of  the  Syriac  text  to  the  underlying  Greek.  It 
will  be  convenient  to  take  this  second  group  first. 

(1)  Literary  history,  etc. — The  Ambrosian  MS  is 
the  only  one  that  contains  the  whole  work,  but 
the  Epistle  of  Baruch  (chs.  Ixxviii.-lxxxvii.,  see 
above)  is  extant  in  several  Syriac  MSS  and  found 
a  place  in  the  Paris  and  London  Polyglots.  Tliis 
extract  must  be  of  exclusively  Jacobite  origin  : 
it  appears  as  a  sort  of  Appendix  to  Jeremiah  and 
is  included  in  the  Jacobite  Massora.  Its  readings 
are  inferior  to  that  of  the  full  text  preserved  in  the 
Ambrosian  Codex,*  where  it  is  dissociated  from 
Jeremiah  and  immediately  precedes  4  Ezra. 

The  Sj'riac  style  indicates  a  very  early  date  for 
the  translation.  It  is  idiomatic  and  flowing,  like 
the  Syriac  translation  of  Eusebius'  Ecclesiastical 
History.  So  full,  indeed,  is  it  of  genuine  Semitic 
idiom  that  various  perfectly  good  Syriac  phrases 
have  actually  been  regarded  by  R.  H.  Charles  as 
the  survival  of  original  Hebrew  idioms,  persisting 
through  the  lost  Greek  intermediary.  Especially 
is  this  tlie  case  with  regard  to  the  use  of  the  infini- 
tive absolute  for  emphasis,  which  is  quite  good 
Syriac  and  occurs  in  the  Ev.  da-Mepharreshe, 
though  the  construction  is  usually  avoided  in  later 
forms  of  the  Syriac  NT.f  And  this  general  im- 
pression has  been  signally  contirmed  by  the  dis- 
covery of  the  Oxyrhynchus  Fragment.  Short  as 
the  fragment  is,  it  gives  us  enough  of  tlie  Greek 
text  of  chs.  xii.  xiii.  and  xiv,  to  tell  us  in  what 

*  Here  and  there  the  extract  is  better,  e.g.  Ixxxii.  4,  where  all 
the  editors  rightly  prefer '  drop'(  =  oTa'yu»»',  Is  40")  to  'pollution.' 

t  A  good  instance  is  Eus.  UE  iv.  15.  29,  where  raina.  ovv  fitra 
TCKTovTou  raxovi  iyivtro  Oarrov  ij  i\eyero  is  rendered  in  S\Tiac, 
'  And  these  things  quicker  than  they  were  said  were  indeed 
done  (mest'Sru  est'ar).'  It  is  obvious  that  sudi  a  rendering, 
while  perfectly  adei^uate,  does  not  enable  us  to  reconstruct  the 
wordmg  of  the  original. 


BAKUCH,  APOCALYPSE  OF 


BAEUCH,  APOCALYPSE  OF   U3 


manner  the  Syriac  translator  has  gone  to  work. 
Especially  important  is  xiii.  12,  where  the  Greek 
has  [vfifts  yip  (iitpyferovuffOi  ael  Trx.olP^'^f^'^f  (a**)].* 
but  the  Syriac  is  '  For  always  I  have  been  benefit- 
ing you,  and  ye  have  been  denying  benefit  always.' 
This  sentence  sufficiently  shows  how  difficult  it 
would  be  to  reconstruct  the  Greek  from  the  Sj-riac 
of  Baruch,  and  how  impossible  to  argue  back  to 
the  wording  of  a  hypothetical  Hebrew  or  Aramaic 
original.  At  the  same  time  'denying  benefit' 
{kdphar  betaibutha)  is  actually  used  for  axaptaros  in 
2  Ti  3-  and  in  Lk  6**  syr.-sin.  (not  Pesh.):  in  a 
word,  the  Syriac  of  Baruch  is  akin  in  style  to  the 
earliest  Syriac  translations  of  the  NT. 

The  Apocalypse  of  Baruch  contains  no  formal 
quotations  from  canonical  Scripture,  but  several 
sentences  are  obviously  moulded  upon  the  OT.  As 
Charles  has  founded  an  argument  on  these  for  a 
Hebrew  original,  it  is  necessary  to  point  out  that 
the  evidence  is  really  indecisive.  '  The  quotations 
from  the  OT  agree  in  all  cases  but  one  with  the 
Massoretic  Hebrew  against  the  Septuagint,'  says 
Charles.  In  support  of  this  he  adduces  eight 
passages.  In  four  of  these,  however  (iv.  2,  vi.  8, 
n.  4,  IviiL  1),  Baruch  agrees  with  the  Peshitta,  as 
we  might  expect  in  a  work  which  pays  so  much 
attention  to  byriac  idiom  and  is  so  little  of  a  word- 
for-word  rendering  of  the  Greek.  In  two  others 
('  Thy  wisdom  is  correctness,'  xxsviii.  2 ;  and  '  fled 
under  Thy  wings,'  xli.  4)  the  Syriac  does  not  agree 
with  any  "biblical  text.t  The  allusion  in  xxxv.  2 
is  admitted  by  Charles  to  be  merely  a  paraphrase. 
The  remaining  passage  is  Ixxxii.  i,  5,  where  the 
heathen  are  said  to  be  '  like  a  drop '  and  '  counted 
as  spittle':  this  agrees  with  the  LXX  of  Is  40'* 
((1)1  (TTa-ftJiv  ...  (is  ffteXos),  but  not  with  the  He- 
brew or  the  Syriac.  :J:  Thus  the  biblical  allusions  in 
Baruch  do  not  prove  that  the  author  was  acquaintod 
with  the  Massoretic  text :  they  merely  show  that 
the  Syriac  translator  was  familiar  with  the  Pesh- 
itta. It  is  possible,  of  course,  if  the  Greek  be  a 
translation  from  Hebrew  or  Aramaic,  that  the 
Greek  translator  changed  the  wording  of  Ixxxii.  5 
to  agree  vrith.  the  Greek  Bible  ;  but  there  is  no 
actual  evidence  which  points  in  that  direction. 
The  '  sirens,'  the  '  Lilith,'  the  '  devils,'  and  the 
'  jackals '  of  x.  8  are  all  found  in  the  Peshitta  of 
Is  13"i-  23  and  M^^-  ".  It  should  be  added'  that 
there  is  nothing  to  suggest  that  the  Syriac  trans- 
lator of  the  Apocalypse  was  a  Christian  rather 
than  a  Jew. 

(2)  Relation  to  4  Ezra. — It  is  obvious  that  the 
Apocalypse  of  Baruch  and  that  of  Salathiel,  com- 
monly known  as  4  Ezra,  have  a  great  deal  in 
common,  both  in  ideas  and  in  language.  §  They 
must  have  issued  from  the  same  circle,  if  they  are 
not  actually  the  work  of  the  same  author.  And, 
further,  it  is  almost  certain  that  they  must  have 
been  originally  composed  in  the  same  language, 
either  both  in  Greek,  or  both  in  Hebrew  or 
Aramaic.  As  has  been  indicated  in  the  preceding 
paragraphs,  most  of  the  arguments  for  a  Semiric 
origin  of  Baruch  founded  upon  the  Syriac  text  are 
inconclusive ;  but  if  the  Latin  text  of  4  Ezra 
(which  is  undoubtedly  a  literal  translation  of  the 
lost  Greek)  creates  the  impression  that  this  Greek 
was  itself  a  translation,  then  after  aU  we  must 
regard  the  Greek  of  Baruch  also  as  a  translation. 

*  The  reconstmction  is  practically  certain,  except  the  last 

t  In  xli.  4,  Charles  translates  'fled  for  refuge  ...  *  But 
'fmq  means  '  fled ' :  the  '  taking  refuge '  which  is  inherent  in  the 
Heb.  .^0^  (Buth  2i'-  etc.)  is  not  erpressed  in  the  Syriac 

X  The  same  comparisons  are  used  in  U  Ezra  6^,  which  must 
similarlv  also  be  considered  to  show  the  influence  of  the  Greek 
Bible. 

$  A  good  account  of  these  resemblances  is  to  be  found  in 
H.  St.  J.  Thackerai-'s  art.  '  Esdras,  Second  Book  of,'  in  HDB  L 
763  f.  See  also  G.  H.  Box  in  Charles'  Apoe.  and  Pteudepigr. 
a.  563  tf. 


From  the  linguistic  side  the  chief  arguments 
concern  the  names  used  for  God  and  the  occurrence 
of  the  infinitive  absolute.  Beside  words  which 
imply  KOpios  (as  in  the  LXX),  we  find  Altissimus 
and  Fortis  (e.g.  4  Ezra  9**)  in  both  works  ;  these 
must  correspond  to  'Tif/urrot  and  'Itrxypbt  in  the 
Greek.*  'T^urros  in  a  Jewish  writing  corresponds 
to  \\''^v  (Aram.  ^kSf)  ;  but  as  it  was  auso  a  name  of 
God  in  Greek  its  occurrence  proves  nothing  as  to 
the  original  language  of  our  book.  'Irxypin,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  only  found  as  a  name  of  God  in 
translations,  and  implies  "jk  (El) ;  it  is  characteristic 
of  the  later  Jewish  translators  Aquila  and  Theodo- 
tion,  to  a  less  degree  of  Symmachns,  and  not  at  all 
of  the  genuine  LXX,  which  only  uses  itrxypot  as  an 
adjective  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  '  strong '  (Ps  7^ 
41*).  Thus  a  reader  of  the  Greek  Bible  would  not 
be  likely  to  use  it  by  itself  as  a  proper  name  for 
'  the  Almighty.'  Its  presence  in  Apoc.  Baruch  and 
4  Ezra  must  therefore  be  held  to  suggest  that  the 
Greek  texts  of  these  works  are  translations. 

The  use  of  the  infinitive  absolute  points  in  the 
same  direction.  If  it  were  merely  attested  in 
Syriac,  it  might  be  explained  away  as  an  idiom 
introduced  by  the  translator.  But  its  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  Latin  text  of  4  Ezra  (  e.g.  exce- 
dens  excessit,  4-)  cannot  thus  be  disposed  of,  and 
at  present  no  real  example  of  this  idiom  is  known 
in  works  composed  originally  in  Greek,  though  it 
is  common  in  translations  such  as  the  LXX.  The 
linguistic  evidence,  therefore,  though  not  quite 
conclusively,  points  to  a  Semitic,  and  consequently 
to  a  Palestinian,  origin  for  both  4  Ezra  and  the 
Apocalypse  of  Baruch.  But,  as  explained  above, 
we  are  very  far  from  being  able  to  reconstruct 
the  text  of  this  hypothetical  Hebrew  or  Aramaic 
original  (Ixiv.  7,  8). 

Not  only  the  language,  but  also  the  contents, 
of  Baruch  favour  a  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original. 
The  circle  of  thought  and  tradition  is  throughout 
Palestinian,  and  uninfluenced  by  Greek  speculation 
and  culture.  The  legends  incidentally  referred  to 
are  specifically  Jewish,  and  can  be  illustrated  from 
the  Talmud,  such  as  that  of  Behemoth  and  Levia- 
than created  to  be  the  food  of  the  saints  (xxix.  4) ; 
or  the  story  of  Manasseh,  who  was  cast  into  the 
brazen  'horse'  {i.e.  mule),  and  who,  though  he 
prayed  from  it  to  God  and  was  delivered,  yet  was 
finally  tormented.t 

3.  integrity. — In  what  has  been  said  above,  the 
Apocalypse  of  Barueh  has  been  treated  as  an 
organic  whole.  This  has  been  controverted  by 
Charles,  who  splits  the  lxx)k  up  into  no  fewer 
than  six  (or  seven)  separate  fragments,  on  the 
assumption  that  an  apocalyptist's  anticipations  of 
the  future  will  be  clear-cut  and  self -consistent. 
But  this  is  hardly  to  be  expected  in  a  work  which 
reflects  the  mind  of  an  orthodox  Jew  just  after  the 
Destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  Temple  with  its 
priests  and  sacrifices,  nay,  the  very  national  exist- 
ence, had  been  brought  utterly  to  an  end  bj-  the 
heathen.  The  individual  Jews  that  remained  were 
left  with  nothing  but  the  Law  and  a  ttuuult  of  im- 
possible hopes.  The  author  is  swayed  by  his  sub- 
ject. He  may  believe  that  the  captured  city  was 
not  the  true,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  (iv.  2-6),  and 
that  it  had  been  destroyed  by  the  angels  of  God  be- 
fore the  enemy  were  allowed  to  capture  it  (vL-viii. ). 
Yet  the  catastrophe  is  too  recent  to  allow  him 
calmly  to  contemplate  the  Fall  of  Zion,  and  his 

*  The  Greek  fragment  of  Apoc  Barueh  actually  contains  the 
word  t<rxv{pov)- 

t  Another  instance,  important  from  the  incidental  manner  of 
its  occurrence,  is  in  txxvii.  25,  where  we  read :  *  S<d(Maion  also 
.  .  .  whithersoever  he  wished  to  send  or  seek  for  anything, 
commanded  a  bird  and  it  obeyed  him  '  This  is  a  manifest  allu- 
sion to  the  story  of  the  wildiowl  by  which  Solom<m  sent  a  letter 
to  the  Queen  of  Sheba  at  Kittor  (2nd  Targtun  to  Esther,  L  2).  a 
legend  familiar  in  Arabic,  but  not  current  in  Greek 


144      BARUCH,  APOCALYPSE  OF 


BASKET 


lament  over  the  ruins  (x.  6-xii.  4)  is  uninterrupted 
by  any  gleam  of  hope.  Surely  this  is  what  might 
be  expected  in  a  work  of  literature,  apart  from  the 
fact  that  it  is  not  till  later  in  the  book  that  revela- 
tions about  the  future  are  given  to  Baruch. 

While,  however,  absolute  consistency  is  not  to 
be  expected,  it  is  necessary  to  show  that  the  Fall 
of  Jerusalem  is  assumed  all  through  the  book.  A 
Jewish  apocalyptist  may  vary  in  his  anticipations 
of  tlie  future,  but  after  A.D.  70  he  could  never 
write  as  if  the  Temple  were  still  standing.  No 
great  weight,  indeed,  can  be  laid  on  passages  like 
ch.  xxvii.,  where  neither  the  building  nor  the  de- 
struction of  the  Herodian  Temple  is  mentioned  ; 
for  the  historical  situation  implied  throughout  is 
that  of  Baruch  lamenting  over  the  ruins  of  the 
recently  destroyed  Solomonic  Temple,  it  being 
obvious  that  the  author  often  practically  identi- 
fies himself  with  Baruch,  and  his  own  recently 
destroyed  Temple  with  the  Solomonic.  But  be- 
sides these  passages  it  has  been  asserted  that  the 
present  existence  of  a  Temple  at  Jerusalem  is 
assumed  in  xxxii.  2fiF.,  lix.  4,  and  Ixviii.  5.  On 
closer  examination,  however,  this  is  seen  not  to  be 
the  case.  Ch.  xxxii.  is  an  address  by  Baruch  to 
the  Jews  left  in  the  land  after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem. 
He  tells  them  that  Zion  will  be  built  again  (v.^) ; 
but  that  building  will  not  last :  it  will  be  thrown 
down  and  remain  desolate,  and  only  afterwards 
will  it  be  renewed  in  glory  (vv.^*).  The  whole 
context  shows  that  it  is  a  prophecy  of  the  re-building 
of  the  Temple  of  Zerubbabel  and  its  subsequent 
destruction,  and  we  must  interpret,  or  if  necessary 
amend,  the  wording  of  v.^  in  accordance  with  that 
context.  It  is  literally,  '  Because  after  a  little 
time  the  building  of  Zion  will  be  shaken  that  it 
may  be  built  again.'  Either,  therefore,  this  is  an 
adaptation  of  Hag  2*,  Ezk  SV,  or  the  word  for 
'  shaken '  is  a  mistranslation  for  some  Avord  like 
'  set  in  motion.'  In  lix.  4  it  is  said  that  God  showed 
Moses  '  the  likeness  of  Zion  and  its  measurements, 
made  in  the  likeness  of  the  present  Sanctuary.' 
But  this  phrase,  corresponding  to  rd  vvy  &yia.,  does 
not  necessarily  mean  '  the  Sanctuary  which  is  now 
in  "ood  repair ' ;  it  need  mean  no  more  than  '  the 
modern  Temple,'  as  contrasted  with  the  heavenly 
Pattern  (Ex  25^").  In  Ixviii.  5,  Baruch  is  told  that 
Zion  will  be  built  again,  but  in  the  later  predictions 
of  the  final  troubles  before  the  advent  of  Messiah 
no  mention  is  made  of  its  subsequent  destruction. 
But  this  is  not  conclusive,  as  no  detailed  historical 
predictions  are  made  in  Ixix.-lxxiv.  '  The  Most 
High  .  .  .  alone  knows  what  will  befall '  (Ixix.  2). 

In  all  this  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  Apoc. 
Bancch  is  known  to  us  only  from  a  single  MS  of  a 
not  very  literal  translation  into  Syriac  of  a  Greek 
translation  of  a  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original.  It 
is,  therefore,  only  likely  that  some  minor  incoher- 
encies  may  be  due  to  accidents  of  transmission. 
But  they  are,  after  all,  very  few. 

4.  General  point  of  view. — The  Apocalypse  of 
Baruch,  then,  is  here  regarded  as  a  unity,  and  as 
the  work  of  a  Palestinian  Jew  writing  soon  after 
A.D.  70.  4  Ezr.  3-14  may  be  described  in  similar 
terms.  We  have  noticed  some  of  the  linguistic 
connexions  between  these  works.*  They  coincide 
also  in  much  of  their  teaching,  in  the  aivision  of 
history  into  12  parts,  in  the  importance  attached 
to  Adam's  sin,  in  the  legend  of  Behemoth  and 
Leviathan,  in  the  interest  taken  in  the  Lost  Tribes,t 
in  the  stress  laid  on  the  permanence  of  the  Law. 

The  chief  difi'erence  between  them  lies  in  the 

•  Amonf?  single  phrases,  the  political  situation  is  reflected  in 
habilatio  Hierusalem  (4  Ezr.  icf*^)  and  '  the  habitation  of  Zion ' 
(Bar.  Ixxx.  7),  i.«.  'the  {act  that  Jerusalem,  or  Zion,  was 
inhabited.' 

t  It  is  possible  that  to  this  interest  the  books  owed  their  pre- 
servation in  Syriac.  Edessa  itself  is  situated  on  '  the  other 
side'  of  the  Euphrates,  and  thoae  Eklessenes  who  read  the  ' 


psychology  of  the  writers.  The  fate  they  antici- 
pate for  Israel  is  similar,  but  it  afi'ects  them  dif- 
ferently. The  author  of  4  Ezra  is  not  really  a 
pessimist  in  the  sense  of  believing  that  evil  is  ulti- 
mately victorious  in  tliis  world.  The  eagle,  i.e. 
Rome,  is  destroyed  in  the  end  ;  the  last  act  in  the 
world -drama  is  the  glorious  400  years'  reign  of 
Messiah.  Then  comes  the  other  world  or  full 
retribution.  The  scheme  satisfies  the  Most  High, 
who  says,  '  Let  the  multitude  perish,  which  was 
born  in  vain'  (9^).  The  really  interesting  thing 
is  that  it  does  not  satisfy  Ezra.  '  This  is  my 
first  and  last  saying,'  says  he,  *  that  it  had  been 
better  that  the  earth  had  not  given  Adam,  or  else 
when  it  had  given  him  to  have  restrained  him  from 
sinning' (7**  [116]).  'We  are  tormented,  because 
we  perish  and  know  it.  Let  the  race  of  men 
lament  and  the  beasts  of  the  field  be  glad,  for  it 
is  better  with  them  than  with  us ;  for  they  look 
not  for  judgment,  neither  do  they  know  of  tor- 
ments or  of  salvation  promised  unto  them  after 

death '(7«*«f-)- 

There  is  nothing  of  this  arraignment  of  Provi- 
dence in  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch.  When  the 
author  thinks  for  a  moment  about  the  fate  of 
apostate  Israelites,  he  falls  into  intentional  ob- 
scurity (xlii.  4,  5).  In  general,  he  is  quite  content 
to  nerve  himself  to  believe  that  the  Mighty  One 
will  ultimately  make  the  Israelites  triumph  in  this 
world,  and  that,  after  that,  in  the  world  to  come, 
the  righteous  will  be  abundantly  rewarded  and 
the  sinners  tormented.  His  main  interests  are 
immediate  and  practical.  He  has  a  definite  mes- 
sage for  his  countrymen.  Let  those  who  are  left 
in  the  Holy  Land  stay  there  (Ixxvii.  6),  and  let  one 
and  all,  especially  the  exiles,  hold  fast  by  the  Law, 
though  the  Temple  be  destroyed.  '  Zion  hath  been 
taken  from  us,  and  we  have  nothing  now  save  the 
Mighty  One  and  His  Law'  (Ixxxv.  3) ;  but  '  if  ye 
have  respect  to  the  Law  and  are  intent  upon  wis- 
dom, the  lamp  will  not  fail,  and  the  shepherd  will 
not  depart,  and  the  fountain  will  not  rmi  dry' 
(Ixxvii.  16).  This  is  the  message  of  the  last  of  the 
great  series  of  Jewish  Apocalypses.  As  Daniel 
shows  us  what  was  the  spirit  that  nerved  the 
Hastdtm  to  resist  Antiochus,  so  Baruch  lets  us 
see  in  what  frame  of  mind  it  was  possible  for  the 
Rabbis  under  Johanan  ben  Zakkai  and  his  succes- 
sors to  sit  down  and  adapt  the  religion  and  the 
hopes  of  Israel  to  the  times  of  the  long  dominion 
of  the  Gentiles. 

Cf.  also  art.  Esdras  (SECOND). 

Literature. — This  is  sufficiently  indicated  in  the  first  para- 
grraph  of  this  article.  In  addition,  since  this  article  was  written, 
the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch  has  been  rc-edited  by  R.  H.  Charles 
in  The  Apocrypha  and  Psemiepigrapha  of  the  OT,  Oxford, 
1913,  ii.  470-526  ;  but  the  positions  adopted  in  that  edition  only 
differ  in  unimportant  det^iils  from  the  separate  edition  of  1896, 
to  which  Charles  frequently  refers  back  for  the  discussion  of 
deUils.  F.  C.  BURKITT, 

BASKET.— Two  different  words  for  '  basket '  are 

used  in  connexion  with  St.  Paul's  escape  from 
Damascus,  one,  a<t>vpl%  or  ffvvph  (Ac  9-*),  being  the 
same  as  is  found  in  the  miracle  of  feeding  the  4000 
(Mt  15*^,  Mk  8®),  the  other,  ffapydvri,  being  peculiar 
to  the  Apostle's  own  version  of  the  incident  (2  Co 
11^).  The  former  kind  of  basket  plays  an  import- 
ant part  in  relation  to  the  miracles  of  feeding,  and 
the  argument  for  its  larger  size  as  compared  with 
k6<Pivos  is  supported  by  a  reference  to  its  use  in 
facilitating  St.  Paul's  escape  (but  see  DCG,  art. 
' Basket').  The  latter  calls  for  detailed  treatment 
here.  It  has  been  thought  of:  (1)  as  flexible, 
coming  near  the  idea  of  reticule  or  net ;  (2)  as 
rigid :  either  braid- work  (used  especially  of  fish- 
Epistle  may  have  half  fancied  that  the  Epintle  of  Barueh  wu 
addreased  to  their  own  ancestors. 


BEAST 


BED,  COUCH 


145 


luu^kets  [EBi]),  or  wicker-work.  This  last  seems  to 
be  nearest  the  truth.  In  Jewish  usage  the  root 
iio  (T»)  attaches  to  weaving  in  the  rigid  form  {e.g. 
basket-making)  as  opposed  to  the  dexible  (e.g. 
."spinning).  ■  One  species  of  work-stool  is  called  pro. 
The  basket-making  industry  was  located  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  with  head- 
quarters at  Scythopolis,  and  a  ready  outlet  for  the 
manufactured  article  was  found  in  Damascus  (see 
S.  Krau^,  Talmud.  Archdologie,  ii.  [Leipzig,  1911] 
269  f.,  where  many  kinds  are  spetilied). 

In  the  absence  of  knowledge  as  to  the  nature 
and  size  of  the  window  (fit-pis),  and  other  details  of 
St.  Paul's  escape,  we  cannot  hope  to  attain  to  a  pre- 
cise result  re^utling  the  structure  of  the  <rap>dnj. 
It  need  not  he  said  that  present-day  traditions  in 
Damascus  are  of  little  value.  Only  the  lower  half 
of  the  wall  dates  possibly  from  NT  times  {see£Bi, 
art.  '  Damascus  ')•  For  the  device  of  letting  a 
person  down  through  a  window,  see  Jos  2"  and  1  S 
19" ;  cf .  also  Josephus,  BJ  l.  xvi.  4. 

"W.  Cbctckshank. 

BEAST. — The  word  appears  with  three  references. 
— 1.  It  signifies  simply  un  irrational  animal  (2  P 
2") ;  a  beast  of  burden  (Ac  23-*) ;  an  animal  used  for 
food  (Rev  18^),  or  for  sacrifice  (He  13'^) ;  or  it  is 
used  as  symbolizing  Nature  in  its  highest  forms  of 
nobility,  strength,  ^visdom,  and  s^viftness  (Rev  4?^^  ; 
cf.  Ezk  1  and  Is  6). — 2.  St.  Paul  writes  that  he 
fought  with  'beasts'  at  Ephesus  (1  Co  15^).  If 
these  were  actual  beasts,  then  the  Apostle,  who 
had  come  oflF  conqueror  in  the  tight,  instead  of 
being  handed  over  to  the  executioner,  was  set  free 
by  the  provincial  magistrate  (cf.  C.  v.  Weizsacker, 
Das  apostol.  Zeitalter,  1886,  p.  328  [Eng.  tr.,  The 
Apostfjlic  Age,  i.  (1894)  385] ;  A.  C.  McGitiert,  The 
Apostolic  Age,  1S9~,  n.  280  ff.).  The  uncertainties 
and  difficulties  of  this  position  are,  however,  so 
serious  that  it  is  commonly  abandoned  in  favour 
of  a  metaphorical  interpretation,  and  for  these 
reasons :  (a)  St.  Paul  was  a  Roman  citizen ;  (6) 
neither  in  Acts  nor  in  2  Cor.  is  there  any  allusion 
to  an  actual  condict  with  beasts ;  (o)  had  he  so 
fought,  he  would  not  have  survived.  Ignatius, 
referring  to  his  journey  to  Rome  where  he  was 
to  suffer  martyrdom,  Avrote,  '  I  am  bound  to 
ten  leopards,  that  is,  a  troop  of  soldiers  .  .  . '  {ad 
Bom.  5).  Some  explain  St.  Pauls  allusion  by  Ac 
19  ;  but  this  tumult  was  probably  later,  and  such 
explanation  disagrees  with  1  Co  16*-  *.  Ramsay 
alleges  a  mixture  of  Greek  and  Roman  ideas — in 
the  Greek  lecture-room  St.  Paul  would  become 
familiar  with  the  Platonic  comparison  of  the  mob 
with  a  dangerous  beast,  and  as  a  Roman  citizen  he 
would  often  have  seen  men  fight  with  beasts  in  the 
circus  {St.  Paul,  1895,  p.  230 f.).  Max  Krenkel 
{Beit rage  zxir  Aufhellung  der  Gesch.  und  der  Brief e 
des  Apost.  Paulus,  Brunswick,  1890,  pp.  126-152) 
suggests  that  Christians  used  '  beast '  (cf.  Rev.  13^ 
with  a  cryptic  reference  to  Rome's  power  (cf.  the 
four  beasts  in  Dn  8^-)-  ^Ve  are  certain  only  that 
St.  Paul  referred  to  some  extreme  danger  from 
men  through  which  he  had  passed  in  Ephesus,  of 
which  the  Corinthians  had  heard  (P.  W.  Schmiedel, 
Hand-Kommentar  zum  Xeuen  Testament,  Freiburg 
L  B.,  1893,  p.  198).— 3.  In  Rev.  {IV  W)  two 
beasts  are  described,  one  (13''*'*;  cf.  Dn  7^'"^)  sym- 
bolizing the  hostile  political  world-power  of  Rome 
and  the  kings  of  Rome  as  vassals  of  Satan,  the 
other  (13"*'*)  the  hostile  religious  power  of  false 
prophecy  (cf.  16^'  19^  20^')  and  magic,  enlisted 
as  allv  of  the  political  power — a  false  Christ  or 
Anticlirist,  by  which  the  worship  of  the  Caesar 
was  imposed  on  the  provinces.  See,  further,  art. 
Apocalypse.  C.  A.  Beck  with. 

BEATING.— The  AV  uses  the  word  'beat'  to 
express  some  form  of  corporal  punishment,  without 

VOL.   I.  —  ID 


defining  the  particular  mode  of  infliction.  1.  In 
Ac  5**  22'*  when  dtpta  ('to  scourge,  so  as  to  flay  off 
the  skin')  is  thus  translated,  the  allusion  is  to  the 
Jewish  mode  of  castigation,  inflicted  with  a  leathern 
scourge,  in  the  former  instance  by  the  authority  of 
the  supreme  Sanhedrin  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  latter 
by  that  of  the  rulers  of  the  synagogues,  or  local 
Sanhedrins,  at  the  instigation  of  Saul.  St.  Paul 
himself,  during  the  period  of  his  apostolic  career 
previous  to  the  writing  of  2  Cor.,  was  subjected  to 
this  species  of  chastisement  on  no  less  than  five 
occasions  (2  Co  11**),  none  of  which  is  referred  to 
in  the  Acts. 

2.  In  Ac  16^,  when  ^a^liv  is  rendered  by  the 
verb  '  beat,'  the  allusion  is  to  the  Roman  punish- 
ment ^^•ith  rods.  In  defiance  of  the  Roman  Law, 
which  exempted  every  citizen  from  the  disgrace  of 
being  scourged  with  rods  or  whips,  the  duumvirs 
at  Philippi  subjected  St.  Paul  and  Silas  to  this 
cruel  form  of  maltreatment.  St.  Paul  suffered 
from  two  other  inflictions  of  the  same  sort,  regard- 
ing which  the  Acts  is  silent. 

3.  In  Acl8'^  21*^  the  verb  ruma  is  used  to  denote 
another  mode  of  beating,  namely,  that  inflicted  by 
mob  violence.  In  the  case  of  Sosthenes,  the  assault, 
apparently  by  members  of  the  Greek  lower  order, 
entailed  no  danger  to  the  life  or  limb  of  the  victim. 
In  St.  Paul's  case,  on  the  other  hand,  the  onslaught 
by  the  fanatical  Asiatic  Jews  was  of  such  a  violent 
character  that  nothing  but  the  timely  intervention 
of  the  Roman  tribune  prevented  a  fatal  result. 

See,  further,  art.  SCOUKGIXG. 

W.  S.  MOXTGOMERT. 

BEAUTIFUL  GATE.— See  Temple  and  Door. 

BED,  COUCH.— In  the  relevant  section  of  the 
NT  four  different  Greek  words  are  translated  '  bed.' 
In  He  13*,  where  the  imperatives  of  the  RV  should 
be  noted,  the  marriage-bed  (xotrij)  is  referred  to, 
and  is  synonymous  with  the  state  of  marriage  itself. 
In  Rev  2^  the  clause  ^dXXw  a.vTi\v  etj  K>Mnfr  is  to  be 
taken  metaphorically,  representing  the  enforced 
recumbent  position  of  the  sick  (cf.  Mt  9^,  Mk  7*, 
also  Mt  S*- "),  paralleled  in  the  same  verse  by  e/i 
ffXi^tf  fuyiXiip,  the  portion  of  tovs  fioix^vo>^o,s  fier 
avriji. 

The  remaining  instances  are  concret«,  involving 
K\iyapio>p  {'beds')  and  KpaBdrrur  ('couches')  in  Ac 
5",  and  Kpa^rrov  (this  time  translated  '  bed,'  both 
in  AV  and  RV)  in  Ac  9**.  Regarding  the  former 
of  these  we  find  that  KXtrapiuy,  the  reading  of  the 
principal  MSS,  has  replaced  an  earlier  kXimup. 
Kpa^drruv  (Vul^.  grabatis)  has  equal  MS  authority 
with  KSj.vapiwi'fim.t  Kpa^ixroi^uw)  and  Kpa^^Tov{wp) 
are  alternative  spellings,  particularly  in  Ac  9". 
It  is  difficult  to  distinguish  between  the  two  kinds 
of  beds.  jcXx^dpiof  is  a  '  small  bed,'  with  or  without 
reference  to  structure.  In  Jewish  usage  Kpd^rroi 
appears  to  be  descriptive,  and  to  have  some  con- 
nexion with  the  bands  of  leather  that  were  used  to 
fill  up  the  framework,  by  means  of  which  a  couch 
or  seat  by  day  could  be  converted  into  a  bed  by 
night.  It  is  equated  to  ffKifirovs,  (TKifixodiop,  which 
is  defined  as  a  mean  bed  for  accommodating  one 
person  (Grimm-Thayer),  but  may  with  equal  pro- 
priety be  taken  as  akin  to  couch  or  sofa  (see  S. 
Krauss,  Talmud.  Archdologie,  L  [Leipzig,  1910]  p. 
66).  Eiach  kind  was  portable,  and  to  this  end  a 
framework  of  some  sort  would  have  been  of  service, 
but  was  not  essential.  Meyer  justly  refuses  to 
accept  a  distinction  which  makes  the  one  word 
mean  a  soft,  costly  bed,  and  the  other  a  poor,  humble 
one.  The  story  of  .Eneas  (Ac  9^  ")  suggests  the 
presence  of  soft  materials,  which  could  be  smoothed 
out  {ffTfHbaoy ;  cf.  Mk  14^).  The  references  to  bed 
and  couch  are  indicative  of  simplicity,  not  to  say 
poverty  (cf.  the  fcenum,  bed.  of  haj-,  characteristic 
of   the  Jews  [Juvenal,  Sat.  iii.  14  and  vi.  541]). 


146 


BEGINNING  AND  END 


BENEDICTION 


The  refined  and  luxurious  modes  that  without 
doubt  prevailed  in  the  Graeco-Roinan  world  are 
only  matter  of  inference  from  Kev  18'*. 

Although  there  is  no  mention  of  bed  in  Ac  12*, 
the  passage  may  be  cited  as  aftbrding  a  vivid  picture 
of  one  rising  up  from  sleep,  ungirt,  with  sandals 

Eut  off,  and  the  upper  garment  laid  aside  or  per- 
aps  having  been  used  as  a  covering  by  night. 
The  passage  He  11'-'^  may  reasonably  be  brouglit 
within  the  scope  of  this  article,  since  it  is  likely 
that  'stafi"'  should  be  rendered  'bed'  (cf.  Gn  47"'). 
See  article  Staff.  W.  Cruickshank. 

BEGINNING  AND  END,  -See  Alpha  and 
Omega. 

BELIAL,  BELIAR. — This  word  occurs  only  once 
in  the  NT  (2  Co  6'*).  To  understand  its  meaning 
there  we  must  trace  its  use  in  the  OT.  The  word 
is  Hebrew  (Vy:^^),  but  its  etymology  is  uncertain. 
The  ordinary  derivation  (from '^|,  'without,' and 
rt.  hsi',  which  in  Hiph.  '?'yin  = '  to  profit ')  seems  to  be 
the  best,  and  this  makes  the  word  mean  '  worth- 
lessness.'  But  T.  K.  Cheyne  (Expos.,  5th  ser.,  i. 
[1895]  43511".  ;  cf.  also  art.  'Belial'  in  EBi)  makes 
it  mean  '  one  may  not  ascend '  (so  suiting  Sheol  in 
Ps  18*'- ;  see  below),  or '  hopeless  ruin,'  The  Talmud 
makes  it  mean  'without  the  yoke'  (h'\i!  '^^).  The 
Syriac  lexicographers  (see  R.  Payne  Smith,  Thesaur. 
Syr.,  Oxford,  1879-1901,  i.  534)  understand  it  to 
mean  •  prince  of  the  air ' ;  they  seem  to  have  de- 
rived it  from  ^ys,  ba'al,  'lord,'  and  the  Syriac  ikx 
=  dL-fip,  'air.'  But  the  last  two  derivations  ai'e 
certainly  wrong. 

Taking  the  meaning  'worthlessness,'  we  note 
that  the  ordinary  use  of  '  Belial '  in  the  OT  suits  it 
very  well ;  '  sons  of  Belial '  or  '  men  of  Belial '  means 
'  worthless  or  wicked  men,'  according  to  the  com- 
mon Hebrew  idiom  which  substitutes  a  genitive 
for  an  adjective.  The  word  is,  however,  twice 
used  in  the  OT  as  a  quasi-proper  name.  In  Ps  18*'' 
we  read  of  '  the  cords  of  death,'  '  the  floods  of 
Belial,'  '  the  cords  of  Sheol,'  '  the  snares  of  death ' ; 
here  Belial  =  the  under  world.  Again,  in  Nah  P" 
we  read  that  Belial  shall  no  more  pass  through 
Judah  ;  he  is  utterly  cut  off.  In  this  passage 
Belial  almost  exactly  corresponds  to  the  '  man  of 
lawlessness,  the  son  of  perdition '  of  St.  Paul  (2  Th 
2*,  on  which  see  Milligan,  Thessalonians,  London, 
1908). 

In  2  Co  6",  where  the  best  MSS  (B  C  L  P  N)  and 
most  of  the  VSS  (but  not  the  Vulgate)  read '  Beliar ' 
rather  than  '  Belial '  (Peshitta  '  Satan,'  but  the 
^arl^lensian  Syriac  '  Beliar '),  the  word  is  iised  as 
a  proper  name  =  Satan,  or  else  Antichrist,  Satan's 
representative.  This  use  of  the  word  is  found  fre- 
quently in  the  literature  of  the  period.  In  the 
Test,  of  the  XII  Patriarchs  (Benj.  3),  Belial  is  the 
'aerial  spirit'  (see  Air),  and  frequently  in  this 
book  (c.  A.D.  100  ?)  is  identified  with  Satan.  In  the 
Sibylline  Oracles  (iii.  63,  74,  where  the  reference  to 
the  '  Augustans '  or  ^f^aarrjvol  shows  the  passage  to 
be  a  later  interpolation,  probably  of  1st  cent.  A.D.  ; 
see  also  iL  167),  Belial  is  Antichrist.  In  the  As- 
cension of  Isaiah  (iv.  2),  Beliar  is  'the  great  angel, 
the  king  of  this  world.'  This  work  in  its  present 
form  is  probably  not  later  than  A.D.  100. 

There  are  many  forms  of  this  name,  chiefly  due 
to  the  phonetic  interchange  of  liquids  :  Belial, 
Beliar,  Beliam,  Belian,  Beliab,  Bellas,  Serial. 

LiTBRATURB.— W.  Baudisstn  in  PRE3  ii.  [1897]  548,  and  in 
ExpTviii.  [1896-97]  360, 423,  472,  ix.  [1897-98]  40 ;  T.  K.  Cheyne 
in  Expositor,  5th  scr.,  i.  (189i'i]  435,  in  ExpT  ix.  91,  332,  also  in 
EBi,  S.V.;  P.  Jensen  in  ExpT  ix.  S&l ;  F.  Hommel  in  ExpT  ix. 
.'■)67;  W.  Bousset,  Der  Antichrist,  Gottinpen,  1895,  pp.  86,  99; 
R.  H.  Charles,  Ascension  of  Isaiah,  Loudon,  1900,  pp.  li,  6; 
Levi-Kohler  in  JE  ii.  aW.  A.  J.  MACLEAN. 

BELIEF.— See  Faith. 


BELOVED  (ayavriTd^,  sometimes  -nyairri/j^vos ; 
dvaTTTjTij  is  also  .sometimes  translated  in  EV  '  dearly 
beloved '  [Ro  12'"]  or  '  well  beloved '  [16»,  3  Jn  ']).— 
In  the  NT  outside  the  Gospels  '  beloved  '  is  found 
as  (a)  a  description  of  Christ,  (6)  a  description  of 
Christians. 

(a)  For  the  first  usage,  cf.  Eph  1'  {rtyavrifi^vos) ; 
also  2  P  1"  *  This  is  my  beloved  (d7air7;T6s)  Son,  in 
whom  I  am  well  pleased.'  The  latter  is  a  quota- 
tion from  the  gospel  story  (cf.  Mt  17'). 

(b)  As  applied  to  Christians  the  term  is  much 
more  frequent.  Sometimes  it  refers  to  their  rela- 
tion to  God.  '  dyavTiTol  $€ov  is  applied  to  Christians 
as  being  reconciled  to  God  and  judged  by  Him  to 
be  worthy  of  eternal  life'  (Grimm-Thayer,  s.v. 
dyairrrr6s).  Cf.  Ro  V,  1  Th  1*,  Col  3'*  (the  Gr.  in 
the  last  two  cases  is  riyaTrrifiivos).  The  commonest 
usage,  however,  is  in  reference  to  the  mutual  re- 
lations of  Christians  one  to  another  ;  cf.  Philem  ", 
1  Ti  6^^.  '  Hence  they  are  often  dignified  with  this 
epithet  in  tender  adaress,  both  indirect  (Ro  16*"', 
Cfol  4")  and  direct  (Ro  12i»,  1  Co  4'*,  He  6»,  Ja  1", 
1  P  2",  2P  3»)' (Grimm-Thayer).  Particularly 
noteworthy  is  the  phrase  dyair-nrbi  iv  Kvpiip  (Ro  16*). 
In  the  sub-apostolic  literature  we  find  similar 
usages.  ■fiyavTjfjL^voi  is  used  of  Christ  in  Barn.  3*  4*-  * 
(some  place  this  work  in  the  1st  cent.  A.D.,  though 
a  2nd  cent,  date  is  more  usual).  In  1  Clem.,  which  is 
generally  admitted  to  be  of  the  1st  cent.,  we  have 
dyairtirds  of  the  relation  of  Christians  to  God  (8*) ; 
while  in  the  same  epistle  it  is  also  found  of  the 
mutual  relation  of  Christians  to  one  another,  and 
was  a  mode  of  address  :  '  beloved  '  (1^-  ■*  etc.).  Cf. 
also  Barn.  4^"®. 

Origin  and  significance  of  the  above  usage. — In 
reference  to  Christ  the  origin  of  the  term  dyavjirhi 
(■fiyavri/iivoi)  is  in  Is  42'.     As  a  name  of  our  Lord  it  is 

Sarallel  with  iK\eKT6s  :  both  belong  to  the  original 
lessianic  stratum  of  early  Christian  theology, 
which,  when  set  in  opposition  to  the  later  developed 
'  pneumatic '  Christology,  receives  the  name  of 
'adoptianist.'  Such  opposition  is,  however,  not 
necessary,  as  is  shown  by  the  occurrence  of  the  term 
in  Ephesians  along  with  a  highly  developed  Christ- 
ology. 

The  use  of  dyairTjTbi  to  describe  Christ  is,  however, 
undoubtedly  closely  associated  with  the  descrip- 
tion of  Christians  as  ■^aTrrj/Mivoi  deov.  Cf.  Harucack, 
Hist,  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1894-99,  i.  185, 
note  4,  where  it  is  pointed  out  that '  Barnabas,  who 
calls  Christ  the  "Beloved,"  uses  the  same  expres- 
sion for  the  Church.' 

As  regards  the  usage  in  reference  to  the  mutual 
relation  of  Christians  one  to  another,  the  only 
points  which  need  comment  are  its  frequency,  and 
the  evidence  this  affords  of  the  spirit  of  brotherhood 
which  characterized  the  Primitive  Church. 

Robert  S.  Franks. 
BENEDICTION  (eiiXoyla,  benedictio). — This  term 
has  in  the  NT  all  the  senses  of  bfrOkdh  in  the  OT. 
It  signifies :  (a)  praises  given  to  God  or  Christ 
(Rev  5'2-"  7^=*,  Ja  3'")  ;  (6)  in  a  sense  exclusively 
biblical,  favour  or  blessing  from  God  (He  6^) ;  (c)  a 
blessing  asked  for  (He  12'^) ;  {d)  the  blessingof  the 
Christian  gospel  or  calling  (Ro  15^,  Gal  3'*,  Eph  P, 
1  P  3') ;  (c)  the  gifts  or  temporal  goods  bestowed 
on  others  (2  Co  9*) ;  (/)  by  a  figure,  the  cup  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  on  account  of  the  thanksgiving  and 
praise  oflered  in  connexion  with  it  (1  Co  10'*) ;  {g) 
the  fine  and  flattering  speeches  (Ro  16'*)  used  by 
false  teachers  to  lead  away  Christians— the  only 
place  in  the  NT  where  the  word  has  its  classical 
sense.  It  is  the  thought  of  the  Apostle  that 
Christianity  is  specially  a  religion  which  leads  its 
followers  to  help  and  bless  others  (Ro  12",  1  Co  4" 
14"^,  1  P  3*)— an  altruistic  faith  which  reminds  one 
by  contrast  of  the  luxuriant  use  of  anathema  and 
excommunication  in  the  Middle  Ages.     From  the 


BENEDICTION 


BENEDICTION 


147 


verb  ei^v/fiy  has  come  the  purely  biblical  and 
ecclesiastical  word  evXorrrrSt,  V'ulg.  benedictus, 
'  blessed,'  which  is  the  LXX  translation  of  bdr&k, 
participle  of  bdrdk.     Gkxi  is  called  thus  because 

E raises  are  made  to  Him  and  He  is  the  source  of 
lessings  (Ro  1^  9»,  2  Co  1»  \V\  Eph  P,  1  P  l^). 
The  word  '  benedictions'  is  more  commonly  used 
of  those  well-wishings  or  spiritual  blessings  in 
Christ  which  form  such  a  characteristic  part  of  the 
closing  sentences  of  the  Epistles  of  the  NT,  especi- 
ally those  of  St.  Paul.  One  of  these  benedictions, 
under  the  title  of  the  Apostolic  Benediction,  has 
}>assed  into  use  in  the  public  worship  of  many 
Churches  of  Christendom.  Let  us  take  these 
sentences  in  chronological  order.  (1)  'The  peace 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you'  (1  Th  5^). 
The  verb  in  these  greetings  is  omitted,  but  it  is 
better,  with  nearly  aU  scholars,  to  interpret  them 
as  prayei^,  and  so  supply  elt),  than  as  declarations 
and  supply  iarL*  The  usual  closing  good  wish  in 
the  letters  of  this  period  was  tppaao  or  ippw<7de= 
vale,  'farewell,'  lit.  'be  strong.'  With  St.  Paul 
everything  was  looked  upon  from  the  standpoint 
of  Christ,  and  even  courtesies  were  to  receive  a 
new  significance.  (2)  'The  peace  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  be  with  you  all'  (2  Th  S^S).  This  is 
preceded  by  a  statement  that  the  greeting  is  added 
by  St.  Paid  in  his  own  handwriting,  and  that  this 
will  be  a  constant  custom  as  a  certificate  of 
genuineness.  Compare  the  (reffTj/ieiw/jMi  ('I  have 
noted  [or  written,  or  sealed]"),  generally  contracted 
into  (xeffTj,  with  which  many  of  the  Egyptian  papyrus 
letters  and  ostraca  close.t  or  the  postscript  in  one's 
own  handwriting  {^vfi^oXow)  which  guaranteed  an 
ancient  letter.  J  (3)  '  The  peace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  be  with  your  spirit,  brethren.  Amen '  (Gal 
6^*).  The  word  '  spirit '  is  added  as  in  keeping  with 
the  emphasis  on  spirit  in  the  letter,  and  the  word 
*  brethren '  is  given  as  a  token  of  St.  Paul's  affec- 
tion in  closing  an  Epistle  in  which  he  had  to  use 
stem  rebuke.  (4)  '  The  peace  of  oxir  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  be  with  yon.  My  love  be  with  you  all  in 
Christ  Jesus.  Amen'  (1  Co  16^=^).  The  second 
clause  is  peculiar  here.  It  is  explained  by  the  fact 
that  St.  Paul  had  been  compelled  to  use  censures, 
and  he  wished  the  Corinthians  to  know  that  his 
love  was  still  abounding  towards  them.  It  never 
failed  (13^).  It  was,  as  Ghrysostom  says,  'some- 
thing spiritual  and  exceedingly  genuine.'  But 
that  love  is  only  in  the  sphere  of  Christ,  so  that 
everj-where  the  verb  of  desire  (elrj)  is  to  be  under- 
stood, as  in  the  strict  sense  St.  Paul  could  not  love 
those  who  did  not  love  the  Lord  (v.—)  or  who  de- 
stroyed God's  temples  (3^").  §  P.  Bachmann  speaks 
of  St.  Paul's  final  benediction  here  in  these  fitting 
words  :  '  So  ends  a  sound  of  faith,  of  hope  and 
of  love  out  of  the  deepest  soul  of  the  writer,  and 
after  such  changing  and  manifold  discussions  he 
turns  in  his  conclusion  to  the  sentiment  of  his 
friendly  and  warm  beginning.'  !  (5)  '  The  grace  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  love  of  God,  and  the 
communion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  with  you  all' 
(2  Co  13'*).  The  genitives  here  are  subjective.  It 
is  the  love  which  God  has  to  us.  This  is  always 
the  use  of  St.  Paul  after  dydrri,  'love'  (Ro  5'  8*^, 
2  Co  5"  13'*  etc.).  It  is  not  communion  with  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  an  object,  but  a  communion  belong- 
ing to  the  Spirit,  of  which  the  Son  is  the  founder 
and  centre,  and  of  which  the  Spirit  is  the  means 

*  For  an  able  defence  of  the  contrary  view  (cort),  aee  J.  J. 
Owen  in  BibliotAeea  Sacra.  1S62,  p.  707  ff. 

t  G.  Miliigan,  SL  Paul's  Ev.  to  the  Thettalonians,  1908.  o. 
130.  .    "-^t- 

J  Deissmann,  Lieht  vom  Often,  106  (Enjf.  tr..  Light  from  the 
Ancient  EaM-,  1911,  _p.  153). 

§  G.  G.  Findlay,  EGT,  '1  Cor.'  1900,  p.  953.  See  also  the 
excellent  remarks  of  Robertson-Plumnier,  1  Cor.  (ICC.  19111 
p.  402.  " 

I  Der  ente  Brief  det  PatUtu  an  die  Korintker,  Leipzig.  1906 

p.  4&0. 


and  vital  force.  The  verse  prays  for  a  holy 
fellowship  in  the  Divine  life  mediated  hjr  the 
Spirit,  and  it  is  a  fitting  conclusion  to  an  Epistle 
agitated  by  strife.  Tlus  triple  benediction  is  well 
called  by  Bengel  a  '  striking  testimony '  to  the 
Holy  Trinity.  '  It  offers,'  says  J.  H.  Bernard,  '  a 
devotional  parallel  to  the  Baptismal  Formula  of  Mt 
28";  and  the  order  of  its  clauses  receives  its  ex- 

flanation  in  the  later  words  of  St.  Paul  in  Eph  2^. 
t  is  the  Grace  of  Christ  which  leads  us  towards 
the  Love  of  God,  and  the  Jxyve  of  Grod  when 
realised  through  the  Spirit's  power,  promotes  the 
love  of  man  (1  Jn  4"),  the  holy  fellowship  fostered 
by  the  indwelling  Spirit.'  *  The  passage  is  one  of 
the  many  evidences  of  how  thoroughly  part  of  the 
consciousness  of  the  first  Church  were  those  ideas 
out  of  which  grew  the  completely  developed  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity.  That  doctrine  was  thus  not 
a  deposit  of  Greek  speculation  on  Jewish  ground, 
but  was  the  expre.$sion  of  the  innermost  life  and 
thought  of  Christians  from  the  beginning.  At 
least  it  was  of  St.  Paul,  and  in  this  respect  he 
never  had  to  defend  his  views.  His  view  of  the 
Son  and  Spirit  as  having  their  roots  in  the  eternal 
life  of  the  Godhead  was  taken  as  a  matter  of  course 
by  both  Jewish  and  GentUe  Christians.  He  never 
had  to  support  the  words  of  2  Co  13'*  against  the 
charge  of  blasphemy.  Their  relegation  of  Christ 
and  the  Spirit  to  a  substantial  equality  with  God 
apparently  offended  no  Christian  sentiment. 

J.  Weiss  rect^poizes  this  fact,  and  acknowledges  that  Ag^wtb 
in  the  estimate  of  CSirist  by  the  early  Christians  is  hardly  to  be 
traced.  It  started  at  the  faU.  He  says :  '  There  is  hiurdly  a 
toace  of  gndoal  develoiMnent ;  ahnost  at  once  the  scheme  of 
the  Christology  was  completed  ;  already  in  the  New  Testament 
the  principal  conceptions  of  the  later  dogma  are  eaaentianr 
present,  though  to  some  extent  only  in  germ ;  and  there  one 
detects  already  all  the  difficulties,  which  the  later  church  had  to 
face.  .  .  .  This  regarding  of  God  and  Christ  side  by  side,  which 
exactly  cmresponds  to  the  enthronement  of  the  two  together, 
is  characteristic  of  primitive  Christian  piety.  .  .  .  The  historian 
is  bound  to  say  that  Christianity  from  its  earliest  b^innings, 
side  by  side  with  faith  in  God  as  Father,  has  also  proved  Ute 
veneration  of  Christ  to  be  to  it  a  perfectly  natnnl  form  of 
religion-  .  .  .  The  early  Christians  .  .  .  beUered  that  they  were 
acting  in  complete  accordance  with  Christ's  mind,  when  they 
adored  him  and  sang  hymns  to  him  quasi  Deo.'  t 

(6)  'The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with 
you '  (Ro  16=*).  (7)  '  Grace  be  with  you '  (Col  4"). 
Notice  the  brevity.  Von  Soden  speaks  of  the 
'  Lapidarstn '  of  the  Epistle.  (8)  '  The  grace  of 
our  [some  authorities,  '  the ']  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be 
with  your  spirit.  Amen'  [best  authorities  omit 
'  Amen ']  (Philem  **).  (9) '  Peace  be  to  the  brethren, 
and  love  with  faith,  from  God  the  Father  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Grace  be  with  all  them  that 
love  our  Lord  .Jesus  Christ  in  uncorruptness '  (Eph 
6^  ^).  St.  Paul's  benedictions  are  usually  ad- 
dressed directly  to  the  reader,  but  here  the  third 
person  is  used,  as  is  appropriate  in  a  circular 
letter.  Wieseler  thinks  that  '  brethren '  refers  to 
the  Jewish  Christians  and  'all'  to  the  Gentiles, 
but  this  idea  is  fanciful.  •  Peace '  here  is  not 
simply  a  salutation  of  well-wishing,  but  has  the 
Christian  connotation  of  that  peace  which  comes 
from  reconciliation  with  God.  Both  peace  and 
love  go  with  faith,  which  is  always  presupposed  in 
making  the  Christian.  The  '  love  is  not  Divine 
love  but  brotherly  love,  which  shows  itself  where 
faith  is,  and  through  which  faith  works  (Gal  5*). 
The  primal  cause  and  fountain  is  God  the  Father, 
the  mediate  and  secondary  is  Jesus.  This  is  always 
the  order  with  St.  Paul,  and  must  be  in  Christi- 
anity if  it  is  a  monotheistic  religion.  '  Grace ' :  it 
is  the  grace,  besides  which  there  is  no  other — the 
loving  favour  of  our  God.:!:     The  '  incorruptness ' 

*  EGT,  '2  Cor.,"  1903,  p.  119. 

t  Christ :  The  Beginnings  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  1911,  pp.  12, 
47,  48. 

X  See  ezcnrsus  on  x^^  *ixi  x^P""^  in  J.  A.  Bobinaon, 
Epkesiams,  1903,  pp.  221-228. 


148 


BENKDICTIOX 


BERCEA 


{^(pdafHTla)  does  not  at  all  mean  '  sincerity '  as  in 
AV,  but  imperishableness  (cf.  Ko  2^,  1  Co  15<-- »« 
etc,  2  Ti  1'"),  and  refers  to  the  quality  of  their 
love.  They  have  taken  hold  already  of  that  end- 
less and  unbroken  life  in  which  love  has  triumphed 
over  death  and  dissolution.*  The  true  Christian's 
love  is  like  God's,  eternal,  and  it  is  directed  to- 
wards, not  simply  God  tiie  Father  (that  is  a  matter 
of  course),  but  towards  Jesus,  who  with  the  Father 
is  the  object  of  his  faith,  hope  and  love,  that  is,  of 
his  worship.  (10)  'The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  be  with  your  sj)irit '  (some  MSS,  but  not 
the  best,  'with  you  all')  (Ph  4**).  The  chrono- 
lo<;ical  order  of  the  rest  of  the  Epistles  is  not  so 
certain.  We  follow  that  of  Zalin.  (11)  '  Peace  be 
unto  you  all  that  are  in  Clirist '  (1  P  5^*).  '  Peace'  : 
the  simple  Hebrew  salutation  proper  in  St.  Peter's 
autograph.  (12)  'Grace  be  with  you'  (1  Ti  6-*). 
The  same  as  in  Col.  ;  some  MSS  read  'with  thee.' 
Tiie  plural  in  itself  is  not  sufficient  to  show  that 
the  Kpistle  was  intended  for  the  Church  as  a  whole. 
'  The  study  of  papyrus  letters,'  says  J.  H.  Moulton,  f 
*  will  show  that  singular  and  plural  alternated  in 
the  same  document  with  api)aiently  no  distinction 
of  meaning.'  (13)  'The  Lord  be  with  thy  spirit. 
Grace  be  with  you '  (2  Ti  4'^^).  '  Lord '  here  means 
Christ,  as  generally  in  the  Epistles.  See  Grimm- 
Thayer  with  references.  Close  personal  associa- 
tion between  Jesus  and  Timothy  is  prayed  for. 
(14)  '  Grace  be  with  you  all '  (Tit  3"),  (15)  '  Grace 
be  with  you  all.  Amen'  (He  IS^*).  (16)  'Peace 
unto  thee'  (3  Jn  ").  This  is  a  Jewish  greeting; 
cf.  Jn  6^  19-".  (17)  '  The  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  be  with  the  saints'  (Rev  22-'').  On  the  true 
leading  see  textual  note  in  EGT smd  the  references 
there  given.  Moti'att  thinks  this  sentence  was 
used  at  the  close  of  the  reading  in  worship,  and 
from  that  custom  slid  into  the  text  here.  '  Apoca- 
lypses were  sometimes  cast  in  epistolary'  form, 
used  in  worship,  and  circulated  by  means  of  public 
reading.'^  It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  that  in 
apostolic  times  there  was  no  stereotyped  form 
of  benediction,  just  as  there  was  not  either 
then  or  later  any  stereotyped  form  of  public  wor- 
ship. 

We  extend  the  list  to  a  few  benedictions  in 
extra-canonical  Epistles  in  or  near  apostolic  times. 
(18)  'The  peace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with 
you  and  with  all  men  in  all  places  Avho  have  been 
called  by  God  and  through  Him,  through  whom  be 
glory,'  etc.  (Clement  of  Rome,  Ep.  to  Corinthians, 
65  [A.D.  97]).  (19)  'The  Lord  of  glory  and  of 
every  grace  be  with  your  spirit '  (Ep.  of  Barnabas, 
21  [A.D.  75-130,  date  uncertain]).  Ignatius  gives 
nothing  like  the  apostolical  benedictions,  but  the 
simple :  '  Fare  ye  well  in  God  the  Father  and  in 
Jesus  Christ  our  common  hope'  {ad  Eph.  21), 
'Fare  ye  well  in  godly  concord'  (Mag.  15),  'Fare 

Je  well  unto  the  end  in  the  patient  waiting  for 
esus  Christ'  (Rom.  10),  'Fare  ye  well  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  common  hope'  (Phil.  11),  'Fare  ye  well 
in  the  grace  of  God '  (Smyr.  13),  and  '  Fare  ye  well 
in  the  Lord  '  [ad  Pol.  8). 

The  Aaronitic  benediction  (Nu  6^^"*),  though 
always  used  in  the  synagogue,  does  not  appear  in 
our  ancient  sources  or  in  any  Church  liturgy  (ex- 
cept in  the  Spanish)  until  Luther  introduced  it  in 
his  Mass  (1526).  It  was  also  used  in  the  German 
Protestant  Masses.  For  the  use  of  benedictions  in 
later  Church  history,  see  the  articles  in  PBE^  ii. 
588  If.  :  DCA  i.  193  tf. 

Liter ATURK.  —  See  the  brief  but  excellent  article  in  F. 
Vigouroux,  Diet,  de  la  Bible,  Paris,  1891-99,  i.  1581-83 ;  W.  J. 


*  J.  A.  Uobinson,  op.  cit.  137-i;}8,  gives  a  lonif  discussion. 
See  sdso  almost  any  scientittc  commentary,  like  Meyer,  Lange, 
EUicott,  AUord,  etc. 

t  ExpositDT,  6th  ser.,  vii.  [190.'}]  107. 

t  See  Moffatt,  EGT,  '  Kevelatlon,'  1910,  p.  493 1. 


Yeomans  in  Princeton  lien,  xxxiii.  [1861]  286-321 ;  J.  H. 
Bernard  in  Kxpotitor,  6th  ser.,  v-iii.  [1903]  372  ff.; and  the  works 
mentioned  above.  J.  ALFRED  FAULKNER. 


BENJAMIN.— See  Tribes. 

BEOR. — IJeor,  the  father  of  Balaam,  is  named  in 
2  P2"  (AV,  with  some  ancient  authorities,  Bosor, 
which  may  be  a  corruption  of  Pethor  [Grotius],  or 
may  be  due  to  the  Greek  sibilant  taking  the  place 
of  the  Heb.  guttural  [Vitringa]).  Balaam  by  his 
great  wisdom  became  vain,  so  a  fool  (ben  b''6r), 
said  Jerus.  Targ.  to  Nu  '22»  ;  cf.  JE  ii.  468 ;  C. 
Vitringa,  Obsei-v.  Sacrce,  i.  936  f.       W.  F.  COBB. 

BERENICE,  BERNICE  (Ac  25i='«'  26«>).— Bere- 
nice, eldest  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippal.,  was  born 
in  A.D.  28,  and  early  betrothed  to  Marcus,  son  of 
Alexander  who  was  alabarch  at  Alexandria.  On 
the  death  of  Marcus,  Berenice  was  given  by  her 
father  to  his  brother  and  her  uncle,  Herod,  king  of 
Chalcis,  in  the  Lebanon.  Two  sons  were  the  issue 
of  this  marriage.  Herod  of  Chalcis  died  in  A.D.  48. 
Berenice  then  joined  her  brother,  who  was  to  be 
known  later  as  Herod  Agrippa  II.,  at  Rome,  The 
pair  obtained  an  infamous  notoriety,  and  are 
pilloried  by  Juvenal  (Sat.  vi.  156  tf.).  After  a  con- 
siderable interval,  Berenice  '  persuaded  Polemon, 
who  Avas  king  of  Cilicia,  to  be  circumcised,  and  to 
marry  her  '  (Jos.  Ant.  XX.  vii.  3).  This  union  Avas 
soon  terminated  by  the  return  of  Berenice  to 
Agrippa.  The  tAvo  are  next  heard  of  on  the  occa- 
sion of  their  visit  to  Cajsarea  to  greet  the  ncAvly 
arrived  Procurator  Festus.  Of  Berenice's  part  in 
the  intervieAv  Avith  the  Apostle  Paul  Ave  are  told 
only  that  she  api)eared  '  with  much  display.'  Just 
before  the  outbreak  of  the  insurrectionary  mo\'i- 
ment  in  A.D.  66  she  Avas  at  Jerusalem  'to  perform 
a  A'OAv  Avhich  she  had  made  to  God '  (Jos.  BJ  II. 
XV.  1),  and  availed  herself  of  the  opportunitj'  to  be- 
seech the  Procurator  Florus  to  abate  the  cruelties 
Avhich  Avere  goading  the  JeAvs  to  Avar.  When  hos- 
tilities commenced,  Agrippa  and  his  sister  took 
throughout  the  side  of  the  Romans.  This  brought 
them  into  contact  Avith  Vespasian  and  Titus.  Titu.s 
became  enamoured  of  Berenice.  On  his  return  to 
Rome,  he  had  her  to  live  Avith  him  in  his  palace — 
to  the  scandal  of  the  Roman  populace  (Dio  Cass. 
Ixvi.  15).  The  intrigue  Avas  not  continued  after 
the  accession  of  Titus  to  the  Imperial  throne  in 
A.D.  79.  '  Berenicen  statim  ab  urbe  dimisit  invitus 
invitam '  (Suet.  Titus,  vii.).  From  that  time 
Berenice  is  lost  to  view.  A  fragment  of  an  inscrip- 
tion in  her  honour  at  Athens  gives  no  indication 
of  time  or  occasion.  G.  P.  GoULD. 

BERCEA.— Beroea  (Bipcua,  some  MSS  Bippoia)  was 
a  city  of  Southern  Macedonia,  in  the  district  of 
Emathia  (Ptol.  iii.  12).  It  stood  on  the  loAver 
slope  of  Mt.  Bermios  (Strabo,  vii.  Frag.  28),  and 
commanded  an  extensive  vieAV  to  north,  east,  and 
south  over  the  plain  of  the  Axiosaudthe  Haliacmon. 
Its  streets  and  gardens  Avere  abundantly  Avatered 
by  rills  from  an  alHuent  of  the  latter  river.  Five 
miles  to  the  S.E.  of  the  town  the  Haliacmon  broke 
through  the  Olympian  range  to  enter  the  plain. 
Beroea  AA'as  about  50  miles  S.W.  of  Thcssalonica, 
30  miles  S.  of  Pella,  and  20  miles  W.  of  the  Ther- 
maic  Gulf.  Its  name  surA'ives  in  the  modern 
Vcrria  or  Kara-Verrin,  Avhich  is  one  of  the  most 
l»leasant  toAvns  in  Rumili  (Leake,  'Travels  in 
Northern  Greece,  iii.  '29011'.). 

To  this  city  St.  Paul  and  Silas  AvithdrcAv  Avhen 
their  converts,  solicitous  for  their  safety,  sent  them 
aAvay  from  Thessalonica  (Ac  17'").  It  Avas  an  out- 
of-the-Avay  tOAvn — oppidttm  deviuni  (Cic.  in  Pis. 
xxxvi.  [89])— and  tiierefore  a  suitable  place  of  re- 
treat for  the  apostles,  who  continued  to  hope  that 


BEKYL 


BISHOP,  ELDER,  PRESBYTER     149 


the  obstacles  at  Tliessalonica  would  soon  be  re- 
moved and  that  tliey  would  be  enabled  to  return — 
a  hope  which  wa-s  not  realized  (1  Th  2'-).  Their 
city  of  refuge,  however,  proved  a  sphere  of  success- 
ful'missionary  activity.  It  was  large  and  prosper- 
ous enough  to  have  attracted  a  colony  of  Jews, 
whom  the  historian  commends  as  more  noble  in 
spirit  {(i-yeveffTepoi)  than  those  of  Thessalonica, 
comparatively  free  from  jealousy,  less  fettered  by 
prejudice,  more  receptive  of  new  truth.  They 
daily  examined  the  Scriptures  (tAs  ypa<f>d$} — especi- 
ally, no  doubt,  the  passages  brought  under  their 
notice  by  the  preachers,  but  not  these  alone — to 
find  if  the  strange  things  taught  found  confirmation 
there,  with  the  result  that  many  of  them  believed 
(Ac  17'-).  Nor  were  the  labours  of  the  apostles 
confined  to  the  synagogue.  It  is  stated  that '  of  the 
Greeks  and  of  those  of  honourable  estate,  men  and 
women  in  considerable  numbers  believed'  (v.^*). 
This  is  the  true  rendering  of  the  Greek  words  {koI 
Twv'EWrjpiSwv  ywaiKdiv  rQy  evcxv/^^"'^  *•*'  dydpQp  ovk 
6\iyoi)  rather  than  that  in  the  RV,  'also  of  the 
Greek  women  of  honourable  estate,  and  of  men, 
not  a  few.* 

St.  Paul's  residence  in  Bercea  probably  lasted 
some  months  (W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  1895,  p. 
234).  For  the  searching  of  the  Scriptures  daily  (t6 
Ka6'  Tjfiipav),  for  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  in  the 
city  as  well  as  in  the  synagogue,  and  the  consequent 
conversion  not  only  of  'many'  Jews  but  also  of 
•not  a  few'  Gentiles,  a  considerable  time  was  re- 
quired. St.  Paul  would  doubtless  be  slow  to  move 
farther  south,  and  thereby  put  a  longer  distance 
between  himself  and  Thessalonica,  where  his  heart 
was.  At  length,  however,  malicious  .Jews  came  all 
the  way  from  that  city  to  Bercea,  and  so  stirred  up 
the  baser  passions  of  the  crowds  (ffaXevcvrei  rovs 
6x^ovs),  that  the  Christians  thought  it  advisable 
to  send  St.  Paul  forth  '  to  go  a-s  far  as  to  the 
sea'  (not  wj  but  ?wj  ^ttI  ttjv  ^dXco-o-ai'  being  the 
true  reading  in  v.").  That  he  was  the  real  object 
of  hatred  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  Silas  and 
Timothy  could  safely  remain  Ijehind  (v.^*).  Con- 
trary to  his  usual  practice,  the  historian  does 
not  name  the  seajxtrt  of  Bercea,  but  it  was  prob- 
ably from  the  town  of  Dium,  the  great  bul- 
wark of  the  maritime  frontier  of  South  Macedonia, 
that  St.  Paul  and  his  escort  set  sail  for  Athens 
(v.").  Sopater,  who  is  mentioned  in  Ac  20*  as 
one  of  St.  Paul's  later  associates,  was  a  Beroean. 
There  is  a  tradition  [Ap.  Coiist.  vii.  46)  that 
Onesimus  was  the  first  bishop  of  the  Church  of 
Bercea. 

LiTEBATURE.— W.  Smith,  DGRG  i.  [1856]  393 ;  E.  M.  Cousi- 
nery,  Voyage  dans  la  Macedoine,  1831,  i.  57 ff.  ;  Conybeare- 
Howson,  Life  ajtd  EpUtles  of  St.  Paul,  new  ed.,  1S77,  i.  399  ff. ; 
T.  Lewin,  St.  PauP,  1875,  i.  235  ff. ;  W.  M.  Leake.  Trarelt  in 
Sortheni  Greece,  1835,  iiL  2905.  J  AMES  StRAHAX. 

BERYL.— Beryl  {^-npvWos  [Rev  2I2»],  a  word  of 
unknown  etymology)  is  a  mineral  which  differs 
little  from  the  emerald  except  in  colour.  It  never 
exhibits  the  deep  rich  green  of  that  gem,  being  in 
general  pale  green,  and  sometimes  yellowish,  bluish, 
brownish,  or  colourless.  Its  finer  varieties,  which 
are  transparent,  are  called  aquamarine.  It  usually 
takes  the  form  of  long  six-sided  prisms,  verticallj- 
striated.  It  was  much  prized  as  a  gem-stone  by 
the  ancients,  and  very  fine  specimens  of  Greek  and 
Roman  engraring  in  beryl  are  extant.  Its  great 
abundance  in  modem  times  has  depreciated  its 
value.  In  RVm  of  the  OT,  '  beiyl '  stands  for 
shoham,  which  Flinders  Petrie  (HDB  iv.  620'') 
identifies  with  green  felspar. 

James  Strahah. 

BIGAMY.— See  Marriage. 

BIRTHRIGHT.— See  FiKST-BORX. 


BISHOP,  ELDER,  PRESBYTER.  —  The  origin 
of  the  episcopate  is,  and  is  likely  to  remain,  un- 
known. All  the  available  evidence  has  been  care- 
fully collected,  sifted,  and  estimated,  and  it  is 
insufficient.  Equally  honest  and  equally  capable 
critics  infer  different  theories  of  the  episcopate 
from  it,  and  no  solution  of  the  problem  can  claim 
demonstration.  AVe  may  hold,  and  perhaps  be 
able  to  convince  others,  that  one  solution  is  more 
probable  than  another,  but  we  cannot  prove  that 
It  is  the  true  one.     All  conclusions  are  tentative. 

The  problem  is  an  old  one,  and  as  early  as  the 
4th  cent,  there  were  two  leading  theories  respect- 
ing the  origin  of  the  episcopate — that  of  Theodore 
of  Mopsuestia  and  that  of  Jerome — but  they  are 
theories  and  no  more.  These  two  writers  drew 
inferences  from  facts,  or  what  they  believed  to  be 
facts ;  they  did  not  know  more  about  the  origin 
than  we  do.  And  they  both  start  from  the  same 
fact,  viz.  that  La  the  ]NT  'bishop'  and  'presbyter' 
(or  'elder')  are  synonyms;  they  are  two  names 
for  the  same  official,  ^his  is  so  generally  recog- 
nized that  there  is  no  need  to  repeat  the  evidence. 
The  two  names  are  still  synonymous  in  Clement 
of  Rome  {Cor.  42,  44),  and  by  implication  in  Poly- 
carp  {PhU.  1)  and  the  Didarhe  (15),  wliich  we  may 
date  about  a.d.  130-150.  Ignatius  is  the  earliest 
writer  known  to  us  who  clearly  separates  '  bishop ' 
from  '  elder '  ;  with  him  '  bishop '  means  the  mon- 
archical ruler  of  a  local  church,  distinct  from,  and 
superior  to,  the  '  presbyters  '  or  '  elders.' 

Starting  from  the  original  identity  of  'bishop* 
and  '  presbyter,'  Themlore  (on  1  Ti  3'"®)  infers  that 
episcopacy  existed  from  the  first.  The  first  bishops, 
among  whom  were  Timothy  and  Titus,  were  con- 
secrated by  apostles,  governed  whole  provinces, 
and  were  sometimes  called  'apostles.'  Theodore 
erroneously  supposed  that  '  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  the  presbytery'  (1  Ti  4'*)  meant  consecration  of 
Timothy  by  some  of  the  Twelve.  He  was  conse- 
crated by  St.  Paul  with  certain  elders  (2  Ti  1^). 
'The  presby terj-, '  which  in  Lk  22*®  and  Ac  22* 
means  the  body  of  elders  in  the  Sanhedrin,  here 
means  a  body  of  Christian  elders.  The  details  of 
Theodore's  theory  need  not  detain  us  ;  the  central 
point  in  it  is  the  proposition  that  the  apostles 
instituted  a  distinct  class  of  officials  to  be  their 
successors.  But  did  they?  The  question  admits 
of  no  secure  answer.  It  must  be  remembered  that 
we  have  no  evidence  that  either  Christ  or  the 
apostles  ever  prescribed  any  particular  form  of 
government  for  the  society  which  they  founded  ; 
and  there  is  the  improbability  that  men  who  be- 
lieved that  Christ  would  very  soon  return  would 
think  it  worth  while  to  devise  and  prescribe  a 
particular  form  of  government  for  the  increasing 
number  of  Christian  communities.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  probable  that,  as  the  apostles  passed 
away,  and  the  Lord  still  did  not  appear,  the  com- 
munities would  be  driven  to  devise  some  form  of 
government  for  themselves. 

Jerome  {Ep.  146,  ad  Ecanffelum)  answers  the 
question  in  the  negative.  The  apostles  did  not 
institute  distinct  officials  to  be  their  successors. 
Churches  were  governed  by  a  council  of  presbyters. 
But  when  presbyters  began  to  form  parties,  and 
each  presbyter  thought  that  those  whom  he  bap- 
tized belonged  to  him,  it  was  decreed  throughout 
the  world  that  one  of  them  should  be  elected  and 
set  over  the  others,  and  that  on  him  should  rest 
the  general  supervision  of  the  Church.  On  Tit  1^ 
he  says  that  it  is  '  by  custom  rather  than  by  the 
Lord's  arrangement'  that  bishops  are  a  higher 
order. 

There  is  no  need  to  assume  that  party  spirit  was 
in  all  cases,  or  even  in  most,  the  chief  reason  for 
setting  one  presbj'ter  above  the  rest.  The  more 
usual    reasons    would  be  the   obvious   advantage 


150  BISHOP,  ELDER,  PRESBYTER 


BISHOP,  ELDER,  PRESBYTER 


of  having  one  person  to  whom  cloul)tful  matters 
might  be  referred,  and  the  fact  that  in  most 
colleges  of  presbyters  there  was  one  who  was 
manifestly  more  capable  than  the  others.  When 
once  a  particular  presbyter  had  been  either  form- 
ally elected,  or  allowed  moie  and  more  to  take  the 
lead,  his  special  functions  would  be  likely  to  grow. 
The  dignity  of  bishops  appears  to  have  developed 
rapidly.  They  led  their  congregations  in  public 
Avorship,  regulating  liturgical  forms  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  alms.  They  also  regulated  the 
congregation's  power  of  punishing  and  forgiving 
offenders.  They  represented  their  congregations 
in  all  relations,  Godward  and  manward.  Tliey 
gradually  absorbed  the  functions  of  the  expiring 
charismatic  ministry,  and  were  at  once  prophets 
and  teacliers,  and  they  conducted  the  correspond- 
ence with  other  local  churclies.  The  frequent 
appearance  of  questionable  doctrines  greatly  aug- 
mented the  importance  of  bishops,  who  came  to 
be  regarded  as  teaching  with  unique  authority. 
Montanism  was  a  revolt  against  this  official 
episcopacy — an  attempt  to  restore  the  charismatic 
ministry  of  the  prophets,  and  when  it  failed,  the 
triumph  of  episcopacy  was  complete.  And  it 
deserved  to  fail,  not  merely  because  of  its  ex- 
travagances, but  because  of  its  rebellion  against 
external  forms.  In  one  sense,  forms  are  un- 
essential ;  the  realities  which  the  forms  express 
are  the  things  which  matter.  But  it  is  only  by 
continuity  in  the  forms  that  the  realities  can  be 
preserved  ;  '  formlessness  inspired  by  enthusiasm 
melts  away.  .  .  .  The  elaboration  of  a  close  hier- 
archical organization  and  the  setting  up  of  a  fixed 
dogmatic  teaching  were  proved  to  be  the  necessary 
means  of  self-preservation,  if  the  Gospel  itself  was 
not  to  be  lost  in  the  vortex  of  Gnosticism '  (Dob- 
schiitz,  Apostol.  Age,  Eng.tr.,  London,  1909,  pp.  122, 
141).  The  bishops  were  witnesses  to  the  deposit 
of  faith,  and  as  such  decided  as  to  the  soundness 
of  doctrines. 

Probably  the  first  function  that  was  assigned  to 
the  bishop  was  that  of  being  leader  and  guide  in 
public  worship.  But  we  know  very  little  about 
the  beginnings  of  this  worship.  The  influence  of 
tlie  synagogue  in  determining  the  form  was  con- 
siderable, and  it  is  possible  that  certain  heathen 
mysteries  exercised  some  influence,  but  the  latter 
point  has  been  exaggerated.  Clement's  Epistle 
shows  that  the  trouble  at  Corinth  was  about 
persons — whether  certain  presbyters  had  been 
rightly  deposed ;  not  about  principles — whether 
government  by  presbyters  could  be  rightly  main- 
tained. Clement  himself  was  not  a  bishop  in  the 
later  sense  :  lie  was  president  of  the  college  of 
presbyters  in  Home.  But  such  a  president  would 
be  likely  to  develop  into  a  monarchical  bishop. 
Clement  is  the  first  Cliristian  writer  to  take  the 
fateful  first  step  of  interpreting  the  nature  of  office 
in  the  Church  by  reference  to  Jewish  institutions, 
for  which,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  way  is  prepared 
in  1  Co  9*  and  1  Ti  5"*  (Harnack,  Constitution  and 
Law  of  the  Church,  London,  1910,  p.  72).  He  draMs 
a  parallel  between  the  Jewish  priest  and  Levite 
and  the  Christian  priest  and  deacon,  and  bases  an 
argument  from  analogy  on  the  resemblance  (Cor., 
ch.  40).  It  is  doubtful  whether  tlie  mention  of  the 
high  priest  has  any  reference  to  a  monarchical 
episcopate. 

In  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  we  seem  to 
have  the  first  instance  of  a  monarchical  ruler  in  a 
Christian  community.  But  it  is  im])robable  that 
in  connexion  witli  him  the  idea  of  one  ruler  for 
the  whole  Cliurch  arose,  and  still  more  imjirobable 
tliat  Mt  16'^  was  written  as  a  protest  against  any 
such  claim  being  made  for  one  who  was  not  one 
of  the  Twelve.  It  was  not  in  Jerusalem,  but  in 
Asia  Minor,  that  the  monarchical  episcopate  as  a 


permanent  Christian  institution  had  its  rise,  owing 
to  causes  which  are  unknown  to  us. 

There  are  three  possibilities  with  regard  to  the 
origin  of  both  bishops  and  elders,  and  what  is  true 
of  one  need  not  be  true  of  the  other.  Each  may 
lie  (1)  copied  from  Jewish  synagogue  officials,  or 
(2)  copied  from  Gentile  municipal  oflicials,  or  (3) 
due  to  spontaneous  production.  On  the  whole,  it 
is  probable  that  elders  or  presbyters  were  adopted 
from  the  synago^e,  and  tliat  bishops  arose  spon- 
taneously. But  here  we  must  carefully  distinguish 
between  origin  and  subsequent  development.  It 
is  possible  in  both  cases,  and  probable  in  the  case 
of  bishops,  that  the  development  of  the  office  Avas 
influenced  by  secular  municipal  institutions. 

In  neither  case  does  the  Avord  give  us  any  definite 
information.  By  'elders'  (irpeo-p&repot)  may  be 
meant  either  (1)  seniors  in  a^e,  or  (2)  people  to  be 
honoured  for  personal  excellence,  or  (3)  members 
of  a  council.  The  term  '  bishop '  {(irLa-Koiroi)  denotes 
a  supervisor  or  inspector,  but  tells  us  nothing  of 
Avhat  he  supervises  or  inspects.  It  may  be  build- 
ings, or  business,  or  men.  In  the  NT  it  means  an 
overseer  of  men  in  reference  to  their  spiritual  life, 
and  is  closely  connected  Avith  the  iaea  of  shep- 
herding ;  '  the  shepherd  [iroifi-^u)  and  overseer 
(eiriffKotros)  of  your  souls'  (1  P  2^);  'the  flock 
inol/MPiov)  in  the  Avliich  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made 
you  overseers  {eTrlffKoiroi}  to  tend  (Troifxaiveiv)  the 
Church  (iKKXrjaia)  of  God  '  (Ac  20^).  Only  once  in 
the  NT  is  '  shepherd '  or  '  pastor '  used  of  Christian 
ministers  (Eph  4") ;  but  it  is  used  of  Christ  in  He 
13=»,  1  P  225  5^;  cf.  Jn  10"-". 

The  term  '  overseer '  or  '  bishop '  (iiriffKovroi) 
having  been  used  of  Christ  as  '  the  Overseer  of 
souls,'  it  AA'ould  be  natural  to  use  it  of  those  of  His 
ministers  Avho  in  a  special  Avay  continued  this  Avork; 
and  it  is  more  probable  that  the  Christian  use  of  the 
title  arose  in  this  Avay  than  that  it  Avas  adopted  in 
imitation  of  the  secular  iirlffKoiros  in  a  city.  As 
the  specially  gifted  persons  knoAvn  as  'apostles, 
prophets,  and  teachers '  became  less  common,  their 
functions  Avould  be  transferred  to  the  permanent 
local  officials,  especially  to  the  highest  of  tlieni, 
viz.  the  bishops  (Didachc,  15'-  '^).  Neither  bishops, 
elders,  nor  deacons  appear  in  the  lists  of  ministers 
and  ministerial  gifts  in  1  Co  12'^-*',  Ro  I2«-*,  Eph 
4".  But  this  does  not  prove  that  St.  Paul  did 
not  knoAv  or  care  about  such  officials.  Where 
these  officials  existed,  they  Avere  as  yet  only  loccU 
ministers,  and  there  Avas  no  need  to  mention 
them  in  speaking  of  gifts  to  the  Church  as  a 
Avhole. 

Timothy  and  Titus  AA-ere  not  monarchical  bishops. 
They  Avere  temporary  delegates  or  rejuesentatives 
of  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus  or  in  Crete ;  they  Avere 
forerunners  of  the  monarchical  bishops,  not  the 
first  exami)les  of  them.  Nor  can  the  'angels'  of 
the  Seven  Churches  (IJev  1-3)  be  regarded  as  the 
bisho]ts  of  tiiose  Churches.  '  The  inA-ariable  prac- 
tice '  of  the  Avriter  of  that  lK)ok  '  forbids  such  an 
interpretation'  (SAA-ete  on  Rev  1^).  Excepting 
James,  and  perhaps  'the  Elder'  in  3  Jn.,  there  is 
no  instance  of  the  monarchical  episcopate  in  the 
NT  ;  but  it  Avas  established  in  Asia  Minor  before 
A.D.  100,  and  had  become  Avide-spread  in  Christen- 
dom by  150. 

LiTERATURB— J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  PhiKpfnans,  Loiulon,  1891 
ed.,  pp.  95-99,  181-269,  Dissertatiom,  do.  1892,  i>p.  1.C--246 
(which  contains  additional  notes  to  the  essay  in  Philippiant); 


Oxford,  1900;  A.  Deissmann,  Bible  Studies,  tr.  Griivr.  Kdin 
burgh,  1901,  pp.  154-157,  '230;  A.  Harnack,  ,Wis*/«'/i  mid 
Rxjmngion  of  ChriMianily,  Eng.  tr.2,  Ixindon,  lsxi»,  i.  tt.'-lsU  ; 
P.  Batiffol,  L'^gline  naistante^,  Paris,  1909,  pp.  ll.'i-ir.^  (Engr. 
tr.,  Primitive  Catholieunn,  London,  1911.  pp.  97-16;i).  See  alao 
works  mentioned  under  Ciu'Rcn  Oovers.mk>t. 

Al.FHED  PlU.MMER. 


BITHYXIA 


BLASPHEMY 


151 


BITHYNIA.— Bitbj-nia  {Bidivia)  was  a  fertile  and 
highly  civilized  country  in  the  N.  W.  of  Asia  Minor, 
bounded  on  the  W.  by  the  Propontis  and  the 
Bosporus,  on  the  N.  by  the  Euxine,  on  the  S.  by 
the  range  of  Mysian  Olympns,  and  on  the  E.  by  a 
doubtful  line,  some  distance  to  the  right  of  the 
river  Sangarios  (Strabo,  XII.  iv.  1 ;  Pliny,  v.  43). 
One  of  the  kings  of  Bithynia  changed  the  history 
of  Asia  Minor  by  inviting  the  marauding  Galatians 
to  cross  the  Bosporus  (278  B.C.).  Nicomedes  III., 
the  last  king,  made  the  Romans  his  heirs  (73  B.C.), 
and  after  the  expulsion  of  Mithridates  of  Pontus 
(64  B.C.),  Pompey  formed  the  dual  province  of 
Bithynia  et  Pontus,  which  was  governed  by  a  pro- 
consul, residing  at  Xicomedeia.  On  the  division 
of  the  provinces  by  Augustus  in  27  B.C.  it  remained 
senatorial. 

The  presence  of  Jews  in  Bithynia  is  indicated  by 
Philo  {Lefj.  ad  Gaium,  36).  In  his  second  missionary 
journey,  St.  Paul,  always  drawn  to  the  great  centres 
of  Gneco-Roman  civilization,  attempted  with  Silas 
to  enter  Bithynia  {ixeipa^of  ei's  ttjj'  'Bidvpi<w  ropev- 
ffrjpou),  intending  probabljr  to  evangelize  Xicaea  and 
Nicomedeia,  but  the  Spirit  of  Jesus,  who  was  lead- 
ing them  on  westward,  did  not  permit  them  (Ac 
16^).  The  province  which  so  nearly  became  an 
apostolic  mission-field  had  not,  however,  to  wait 
lon^  for  the  gospel.  1  P  1'  aflbrds  e\-idence  of  the 
early  introduction  and  rapid  progress  of  Christian- 
ity in  the  province  of  Bithynia.  Details,  however, 
are  wanting. 

'  For  Bithrnia,  like  Cappadocia,  we  hare  no  primitive  Christian 
record :  but  it  could  iiardly  remain  long  unaffected  by  the 
neighbourhood  of  Christian  communities  to  the  South- West, 
the  South,  and  probably  the  East ;  even  if  no  friend  or  disciple 
took  up  before  long  the  purpose  which  St.  Paul  bad  been  con- 
strained to  abandon,  when  a  Divine  intimation  drew  him  onward 
into  Europe'  (F.  J.  A.  Hort,  First  Ep.  of  St.  Peter:  I.  l-II.  17, 
189S,  p.  17). 

In  A.D.  112  the  younger  Pliny  was  sent  to  govern 
the  province  of  Bithynia,  which  had  become  dis- 
organized under  senatorial  administrarion.  His 
correspondence  -with  Trajan  bears  striking  testi- 
mony to  the  expansion  of  the  Christian  religion, 
which  seemed  to  him  a  superstitio  prava  immodica 
(Epp.  X.  96,  97).  Not  only  in  the  cities  but  in  the 
rural  villages  the  temples  were  almost  deserted  and 
the  sacrificial  ritual  interrupted.  WhUe  the  letters 
describe  a  state  of  things  which  was  true  of  the 
province  as  a  whole,  there  are  some  indications 
that  Amisos  in  the  Far  East  was  the  first  city  on 
the  Black  Sea  to  which  Christianity  spread  (Ramsay, 
The  Church  in  the  Soman  Empire,  1893,  p.  224  f.). 

LrrBRjiTCM.— W.  Smith,  DGRG  i.  [1S56]  404;  Cari  Ritter, 
jrte»na«>n,  i.  [185S]  650  ff. ;  E.  G.  Hardy,  Plinii  EpMulcB  ad 
Trajanum,  IsiH  :  ^V.  M.  Ramsay,  Eigt.  Geog.  of  Atia  Minor, 
1890;  Conybeare-Howson,  Life  and  Epistle*  of  SL  Paul,  new 
«*-•  1S77.  J  AMES  'STRAHA>»". 

BITTERNESS  (x«/cp«a). —  ' Bitter '  means  lit. 
'  biting  ■  (A.  S.  bttan,  '  to  bite'),  and  TiKp6i,  '  sharp ' 
(from  the  same  root  aspuTigo,  'pike,'  'peak').  t6 
TTixpov,  as  that  which  has  an  acrid,  pungent  taste, 
is  opposed  to  to  7\i'icv  (Ja  3").  In  LXX  riKpia  is 
oftt:-n  used  to  translate  viih,  a  bitter  and  poisonous 
plant,  which  is  always  used  figuratively.  Moses 
says  that  the  man  or  woman,  family  or  tribe,  that 
turns  from  Jahweh  will  be  'a  root  that  beareth 
gall  and  wormwood '  (  ptjVi  &vw  tpvoxxra.  ev  x°^V  *«»' 
■rucpia,  Dt  29^*).  There  is  an  echo  of  this  saying  in 
He  12",  where  any  member  of  the  Church  who 
introduces  wrong  doctrines  or  practices,  and  so 
leads  others  astray,  becomes  a  '  root  of  bitterness 
springing  up '  (ptfa  xticpias  &pu  ipuovoa) ;  and  there 
may  be  another  echo  of  it  in  Ac  8**  (RVm),  where 
Peter  predicts  that  Simon  Magus  will  'become 
gall  (or  a  gall  root)  of  bitterness  '  (e/j  x"^^'  xjxptaj 
opCi  ae  oirra)  by  his  evil  intiuence  over  others,  if  he 
remains  as  he  now  is.     But  xo^'J"  rucpias  may  be  a 


genitive  of  apposition  and  the  Apostle  may  mean 
that  Simon  is  even  now  'in  Bitterkeit,  Bosheit, 
Feindseligkeit,  wie  in  Galle'  (H.  J.  Holtzmann, 
Apostelgeschichte^,  1901,  ad  loc.).  In  Ro  3"  bitter- 
ness of  speech  is  joined  with  cursing,  and  in  Eph 
4'^  TiKpia  is  an  inward  disposition  (cf.  irjXor  riKpAf, 
Ja  3")  which  all  Christians  are  to  put  away  in 
order  that  they  may  be  'kind  one  to  another, 


tender-hearted. 
BLACK.— See  Colours. 


James  STBAHAJf. 


BLASPHEHTOSXtur^/tlo,  vb.  pkaff^/jieu>,  adj.  and 
noun  p\d<r<i>7]fi(K ;  perhaps  derived  from  pXdvTetw, 
•to  injure,'  and  it^nv,  'speech'). — La  ordinary 
usage  and  in  Eng.  law  this  word  denotes  profane, 
irreverent  speaking  against  (Jod  or  sacred  things ; 
but  the  Greek  word  has  a  wider  sense,  including 
all  modes  of  reviling  or  calumniating  either  God 
or  man.  In  2  Ti  3^  the  RV  has  '  rauers '  instead 
of  '  blasphemers ' ;  in  Ac  13**"  and  18*"  it  gives 
'rail'  as  an  alternative,  and  in  Rev  2""  'revile.' 
'  As  we  be  slanderously  reported '  {fiXatnprifiov/xeda, 
Ro  3*) ;  '  why  am  I  evil  spoken  of  ? '  {ri  ^\a<r- 
4>Tl/iovfMi;  1  Co  10*);  'to  speak  evil  of  no  man' 
(fiijSiva  ^Xaa^ni/jieip,  Tit  3*) ;  '  these  .  .  .  raU  at 
dignities'  (5(S$aj  ^offtpvfiwffiy,  Jude^;  cf.  2  P  2") 
are  other  examples  of  the  use  of  the  word  with  a 
human  reference.  The  two  meanings  of  ^Xcur^/ua 
are  combined  in  Ac  6",  where  Stephen  is  acciised 
of  speaking  blasphemous  words  (^/tara  pkdurifnjfia) 
against  Moses  and  God  (els  MowiiF  jcal  Tia>  ff(6p). 

According  to  the  Levitical  law  the  punishTnent 
for  blaspheming  the  name  of  Jahweh  was  death  by 
stoning  (Lv  24'*"^*)  ;  but  as  Roman  subjects  the 
Jews  had  not  power  to  put  any  man  to  death. 
Though  they  attempted  to  observe  the  r^ular 
forms  in  their  trial  of  Stephen  for  blasphemy, 
his  death  was  not  a  judicial  execution,  but  tne 
illegal  act  of  a  solemn  Sanhedrin  changed  by 
fanatical  hatred  into  a  murderous  mob. 

After  Jesus  had  come  to  be  acknowledged  as  the 
Messiah,  the  denial  of  His  status  and  the  insulting 
of  His  name  were  regarded  by  His  followers  as 
conscious  or  unconscious  blasphemy.  St.  Panl 
recalls  ^vith  shame  and  sorrow  the  time  when,  in 
this  sense  of  the  term,  he  not  only  wa-s  guilty  of 
habitual  blasphemy  (rd  rporepor  ivra.  ^\dff(p7jfior, 
1  Ti  1"),  but  strove  to  make  others  blaspheme 
{■nfdyicai^oy  ^Xoff^nnfUlr,  Ac  26").  The  fortitude  of 
those  who  resisted  his  efforts  made  a  profound 
impression  on  his  mind,  and  probably  did  more 
than  anything  else  to  pave  the  way  for  conversion. 
Like  Pliny  afterwards  in  Bithynia  (Epp.  x.  97), 
he  doubtless  found  it  was  all  but  impossible  to 
make  men  and  women  ^»eak  evU  of  their  so-called 
Messiah — *  maledicere  Christum ' — or  submit  to 
any  other  test  that  would  have  indicated  disloyalty 
to  Him :  '  quorum  nihil  cogi  posse  dicuntur,  qui 
sunt  re  vera  Christiani'  (ib.).  When,  on  the  other 
hand,  St.  Panl  began  to  preach  Jesus  as  His  own 
Messiah,  the  blasphemies  of  his  countrymen 
against  that  Name  became  his  daily  fare.  The 
Jews  of  Pisidian  Antioch  '  contradicted  the  things 
which  were  spoken  by  Paul  and  blasphemed '  (Ac 
13^) ;  those  of  Corinth  '  opposed  themselves  and 
blasphemed'  (18*);  and  the  historian  might  have 
multiplied  instances  without  end. 

Blasphemy  was  not  exclusively  a  Jewish  and 
Christian  conception.  To  the  Greeks  also  it  was  a 
high  ofience  j3\aatpriufb'  els  Beovi  (Plato,  .Bg>.  281  E). 
The  majesty  of  the  gods  and  the  sacfedness  of 
the  temples  were  jealously  guarded.  St.  Paul, 
who  reasoned  against  idolatry,  never  used  oppro- 
brious language  about  the  religion  of  Greece  or 
Rome.  It  was  better  to  tight  for  the  good  than  to 
rail  at  the  bad.  The  town-clerk  of  Ephesus  re- 
minds his  fellow-citizens,  roused  to  fury  at  the  bare 


152 


BLASTUS 


BLINDNESS 


suspicion  of  dislionour  to  Artemis,  that  St.   Paul 
ana  his  companions  were  no  blasphemers  of  their 

foddess  (oCrf  ^\a(r<pr]novi>Tei  ri)v  dtav  vfxuiv,  Ac  19*^). 
'owards  the  cult  of  Ctesar,  whicli  was  still  kept 
within  some  bounds,  the  Apostle  always  main- 
tained the  same  correct  attitude.  But  in  the 
Apocalypse,  written  in  the  reign  of  Domitian, 
there  is  a  startling  change.  That  emperor,  '  prob- 
ably the  wickedest  man  who  ever  lived'  (Renan), 
was  the  first  to  demand  that  Divine  lumours  should 
be  paid  to  himself  in  his  lifetime.  Not  content, 
like  his  predecessors,  with  the  title  Divus,  he 
caused  himself  to  be  styled  in  public  documents 
'  Our  Lord  and  God.'  In  Asia  Minor  the  deification 
of  Caesar,  the  erection  of  temples  in  his  honour, 
and  the  establishment  of  communes  for  the  pro- 
motion of  his  worship  became  imperative,  while  the 
offering  of  incense  to  his  statue  was  made  the 
ordinary  test  of  loyalty  to  the  Empire.  To  the 
prophet  of  Ephesus  all  this  seemed  rank  blasphemy, 
and  he  delivered  his  soul  by  denouncing  it.  lie 
personified  the  Empire  as  the  Beast  whose  seven 
heads  had  names  of  blasphemy  (Rev  13^),  to  whom 
was  given  a  mouth  speaking  great  things  and 
blasphemies  (13'),  who  opened  his  mouth  for 
blasphemies  against  God,  to  blaspheme  His  name 
and  His  tabernacle  (13*);  as  the  scarlet-coloured 
Beast  who  was  covered  all  over  with  names  of  blas- 
phemies (17^).  That  a  creature  called  an  emperor 
should  assume  the  attributes  of  the  Creator,  and 
compel  the  homage  of  an  infatuated  world,  was 
nothing  less  than  a  Satanic  triumph  ;  and  whether 
men  knew  it  or  not,  they  'were  worshipping  the 
dragon'  {13*).    Cf.  art.  Empkror- worship. 

Literature.— In  addition  to  artt.  on  'Blasphemy'  in  HDB, 
EBi,  SDti,  and  ERE,  with  the  literature  there  cited,  see  the 
relevant  Commentaries,  esp.  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  (TCC, 
1902) ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John-,  1907 ;  J. 
Armitagre  Robinson,  Ephesiann,  1903.  See  also  CE,  s.v.,  and 
Roman  Catholic  literature  cited  there. 

James  Strahan. 
BLASTUS. — Blastus,  a  chamberlain  of  Herod 
Agrippa  I.,  is  mentioned  in  Ac  12'*  in  connexion 
with  an  embassy  which  the  inhabitants  of  Tyre 
and  Sidon  sent  to  Herod  at  Cajsarea  in  order  to 
obtain  terms  of  peace.  The  ambassadors  obtained 
an  audience  of  the  prince  through  the  inrtuence  of 
Blastus,  who  no  doubt  had  been  liberally  bribed 
for  his  services.  The  incident  of  the  embassy  is 
not  mentioned  by  Josephus  nor  is  the  name  of 
Blastus,  and  this  omission  has  been  regarded  by 
some  {e.g.  Krenkel)  as  throwing  doubt  on  St. 
Luke's  nfirrative,  while  others  regard  the  incident 
as  a  proof  of  St.  Luke's  independence,  or  as  an 
intentional  su])plement  to  the  account  of  the 
Jewish  historian.  W.  F.  Boyd. 

BLESSEDNESS.— This  word  occurs  three  times 
in  the  AV  (Ro  4"-  ",  Gal  4"),  but  rightly  disappears 
in  the  RV,*  for  the  (ir.  word  fiaKapifffios  means  not 
blessedness  itself,  but  a  pronouncement  that  some 
one  is  blessed.  '  Blessedness '  is  simply  a  convenient 
generalization,  expressing  the  meaning  which 
NT  writers  convey  by  the  adjectives  translated 
'blesseii'  or  'happy'  { /jMKdpios,  evXoyrjTos)  and  the 
participle  €v\oyri/j.^vos,  '  blessed  '  (practically  an  ad- 
jective) ;  cf.  the  verb  euevXoyiofiai  (Ac  S^,  Gal  3*) 
and  fiaKapl^b)  (Lk  I'"',  Ja  5").  The  various  forms  of 
ei'>\oy^oiJLai  refer,  literally,  to  being  '  well  spoken 
of,'  and  apparently  always  contain  at  least  the 
latent  thought  of  praise  being  conferred  or  happi- 
ness ascribed  ;  fiaKdpios,  however,  expresses  simply 
the  i)ossession  of  a  quality,  and  for  the  ascription 
of  this  by  others  the  verb  /wiKaptfw  is  needed. 

Blessedness  being  a  personal  posse.ssion,  any  kind 
of  action  or  utterance  by  others  is  of  secondary 
importance   in   regard   to   it.     Hence   the   crucial 

*  In  the  two  passages  in  Rom.  the  RV  substitutes  '  blessint;,' 
in  Gal.  *  {^ratulation.* 


word  is  fiaKoipioi,  not  fvXoy^ofiai,  etc.  The  RV  has 
in  Jn  13",  1  P  3'*  4"  alt«;red  the  AV  tr.  of  fiaKapiOi 
from  '  happy '  to  '  blessed ' ;  it  might  well  have 
matle  the  same  alteration  in  Ro  14^,  1  Co  1*". 
Massie  would  banish  '  happy '  from  the  NT  except 
in  Ac  2&'  {HDB,  art.  '  Happiness').  In  the  OT  'ifK, 
'  O  the  happiness  (or  blessedness)  of,'  has  been  even 
more  frequently  translateil  '  happy'  when  it  might 
have  been  rendered  '  blessed  '  (cr.  Ps  89"  with  144", 
where  the  Hebrew  is  '"ic'n  in  both  cases).  Still, 
'  liappy '  is  more  suitable  in  the  OT  than  in  the 
NT,  for  the  rewards  promised  to  the  OT  saints 
are  of  a  far  more  material  and  temporal  order  (see 
I's  P'* ;  the  epilogue  even  of  Job  42'*'"" ;  and 
HDB,  art.  'Blessedness').  For  the  NT  it  is  signi- 
ficant not  only  that  naxapios,  which  occurs  very 
frequently,  represented  to  the  Greeks  the  higher 
and  even  the  Divine  bliss,  but  also  that  the  lower 
and  more  ordinary  word  evSalfiwp,  \\\\\\  its  sugges- 
tion of  good  luck,  is  entirely  absent.  I  mi  the  use 
of  fiaKcipio!  in  the  Gospels,  see  art.  '  IJealitude'  in 
HDB  and  in  DCG.  This  was  the  regular  term  in 
NT  times  for  '  departed'  (to  the  world  of  blessed- 
ness) ;  cf.  Germ,  selig,  and  see  Deissraann,  Light 
from  the  Ancient  Ewit^,  1911,  p.  166.  On  the  whole, 
it  bears  an  exceedingly  lofty  meaning,  though  it  is 
less  spiritual  in  Luke  than  in  Matthew.  In  24*" 
Matthew  need  not  be  understood  as  offering  a 
coarsely  material  '  blessedness' ;  the  servant  is  ad- 
vanced in  the  confidence  of  his  master.  There  is 
no  need  to  question  the  inwardness  of  any  blessed- 
ness ofi'ered  elsewhere  in  Matthew.  In  Lk  12"-  ^ 
the  spread  table,  and  the  flattering  attentions  re- 
ceived thereat,  are  somewhat  prominent ;  but  Jesus 
is  speaking  metaphorically,  and  elsewhere  literal, 
materialistic  views  are  rebuked  (11*^-  ^  and  perhaps 
24i5ir. )  'Pqq  much  stress  must  not  therefore  be  laid 
on  6-"-  -',  although  there  the  blessedness  of  being 
'  filled '  seems  to  refer  to  food  rather  than,  as  in 
Matthew,  to  righteousness. 

In  the  rest  of  the  NT  fiaKapios  is  less  used  than 
in  the  Gospels.  St.  Paul  has  it  twice  only  (Ro  4'- "), 
and  then  in  an  OT  quotation.  In  1  Ti  1'^  and  6" 
(never  in  the  Gospels)  it  is  applied  to  God,  but  in 
this  sense  eiiXoynrds  is  usual.  In  regard  to  men,  it 
is  applied  to  those  who  give  (Ac  20^),  who  are  for- 
given (Ro  4^-'*),  who  endure  temptation  (Ja  l'-*), 
who  act  according  to  the  perfect  law  of  liberty 
( Ja  l''^),  who  die  in  the  Lord  (Rev  14"* ;  see  al.so 
Rev  l»  16"  19"  2(fi  22^-  ").  It  stands  for  a  good 
which  is  above  happiness,  and  dwells  not  least  witii 
those  who  are  counted  worthy  to  sacrifice  happi- 
ness for  conscience'  sake.  It  is  based,  partly,  on  a 
character  Avhich  is  its  own  '  better  and  abiding  })os- 
session '  (He  10*"").  While  it  remains  itself,  it  is 
above  all  adequate  earthly  reward  and  beyond  all 
earthly  overthrow.  Above  all,  it  is  based  in  the 
sniritual  world  ;  to  the  '  pure  in  heart '  the  highest 
blessedness  is  to  '  see  God  *  (Mt  5"  ;  cf.  1  Jn  3--  *). 

For  various  aspects  of  the  idea  of  blessedness,  as 
expressed  in  the  NT  by  quite  other  words,  see  art. 
'  Blessedness  '  in  HDB. 

LiTKii  .\rtRK.— Art. '  Blessedness '  in  HDB,SDB,  and  DCG  ;  also 
F.  C.  Kempson,  The  Future  Ufe,  1907,  p.  308  ;  J.  M.  Hodgson, 
Reli'ium—Tlie  Quetit  qf  the  Ideal,  1911,  n.  106;  T.  G.  Selby, 
The  Imperfect  Angel,  1888,  p.  2.5  ;  T.  Binney,  KingTs  »f'ei(7/i- 
hntac.  Chapel  Sermons,  1869,  p.  71 ;  J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  Sennons 
in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  1891,  p.  178. 

C.  H.  Watkins. 
BLESSING.— See  Bknediction. 

BLINDNESS.— Only  once  does  this  term  refer  to 

the  ahsence  of  physical  sight  (Ac  13"),  yet  even 
there  moral  blindness  is  symbolized  (cf.  also  the 
case  of  St.  Paul,  Ac  9«*'^-  20'',  a  temporary  condition 
due  to  suggestion,  or  to  sudden  .severe  nervous 
tension  which  soon  gave  place  to  normal  sight). 
All  the  other  references  to  blindness  (Ro  2'^  2  Co 
4*,  2  I'  P,  1  Jn  2",  Rev  3")  are  metaphysical  and 


BLOOD 


BLOOD 


153 


indicate  a  moral  condition.  Apart  from  the  general 
titness  of  such  a  tigxire  to  signify  a  mor.al  condition, 
a  special  reason  for  its  use  hy  St.  Paul  is  found  in 
his  experience  before  and  after  his  conversion. — 1. 
Blindness  is  alleged  as  a  simple  fact  without  ex- 
planation (2  P  1»,  Rev  3").— 2.  It  is  referred  to  the 
character  and  influence  of  the  world,  from  which 
some  of  those  who  have  joined  themselves  to  the 
Christian  community  have  not  yet  emerged — they 
still  remain  in  the  'darkness  in  which  they  were 
before  (1  Jn  2^').— 3.  The  god  of  this  world,  or 
Satan,  who  is  supposed  to  have  power  over  the 
course  of  affairs  in  the  present  age,  is  assigned  as 
the  cause  of  this  condition  (cf.  Eph  6^ ;  Ascension 
of  Isaiah,  ed.  Charles,  1900,  pp.  11,  24,  where 
Beliar  =  the  ruler  of  this  world). — i.  To  GJod  is 
attributed  in  part  the  activity  which  results  in 
moral  blindness  (Ac  28-*,  Ro  11*-  ^%  This  concep- 
tion belongs  to  the  circle  of  Jewish  religious  ideas 
— the  prophetic  doctrine  of  the  absoluteness  of  God, 
the  Pharisaic  teaching  of  Divine  predestination. 
Both  of  these  lay  in  the  background  of  St.  Paul's 
thought  (cf.  Is  «»•!»,  Ps  69^,  Ro  Q*^-),  jet  other 
elements  also  entered  into  and  modified  it.  From 
the  point  of  view  of  the  Di\-ine  absoluteness,  the 
Apostle  did  not  doubt  that  God  had  the  unques- 
tioned right  to  be  the  sole  cause  of  blindness  in  one 
or  of  sight  in  another — a  prerogative  which,  how- 
ever, He  refrained  from  exercising.  Hence  a 
somewhat  different  explanation  was  to  be  sought 
for  the  blindness  of  Israel.  That  God  had  rejected 
the  Jews  as  a  whole  was  for  the  Apostle  abundantly  i 
evident.  Yet  this  did  not  contradict  God's  election  i 
and  promise.  Israel's  guilt  had,  indeed,  for  the 
time  being,  annulled  these ;  stUl,  this  was  only  one 
side  of  the  reality.  Grod's  rejection  of  Israel  was 
neither  without  purpose  nor  was  it  irrevocable. 
God's  purpose  was  universal,  embracing  GentUes 
as  well  as  Jews,  and  if  it  appeared  to  pass  from  the 
Jews  to  the  Gentiles,  this  was  not  the  whole  truth, 
nor  was  it  final.  For,  firstly,  some  Jews  had  always 
remained  faithful  to  the  election,  and  secondly, 
the  blindness  of  the  remainder  was  only  temporarj' 
— untU  the  'fullness  of  the  Gentiles,'  when  all 
Israel,  beholding  the  salvation  of  the  Gentiles, 
should  once  more  turn  to  God.  The  blindness  is 
marked  by  two  features.  It  is  conceived  of  as  per- 
taining not  to  indi>iduals,  but  to  the  community ; 
and  it  is  one  stage  in  the  unfolding  of  a  vast 
theodicy.  The  latter  fact  does  not,  however,  re- 
lieve the  community  of  either  responsibility  or 
^ilt.  Whether  all  the  community  living  in  the 
mterim,  that  is,  previous  to  the  removal  of  the 
social  blindness,  will  share  in  the  recognition  and 
acceptance  of  the  election,  is  not  considered  by  the 
Apostle.  In  the  other  passages  of  the  AV  the 
Greek  words  which  are  translated  '  blinded '  (Ro 
11",  2  Co  3'*)  and  '  blindness '  (Ko  ir-»,  Eph  4^)  are 
replaced  in  the  RV  by  their  proper  equivalents 
'  hardened '  and  '  hardness,'  which  express  also  in- 
sensibility to  the  truth  of  the  gospel. 

LtTERATTRE.— Art.  'Blindncss'  in  DCG  ;  Sanday-Headlam, 
Romaics  (ICC.  19'>2) ;  J.  Armitage  Robinson,  Ephe»ian.^,  1903, 
p.  264  ff.  ;  B.  F.  Westcott,  Epkesiatig.  llUHJ,  p.  t5«  ;  JThSt  iii. 
11901-0-2]  81.  C.  A.  BeCKWITH. 

BLOOD.— 1.  Meaning  of  the  term.— Among  its 
simplest  designations,  •  blood '  represents  the  blood 
which  flows  from  wounds  in  the  body  (Ac  22*) ; 
the  extremity  of  human  endurance  of  evil  (He  12*). 
The  plirase  '  flesh  and  blood '  signifies  the  lower 
sensuous  nature  (1  Co  15*;  cf.  Mt  16'") ;  any  one 
whatever  (Gal  1'*) ;  the  substantial  basis  of  human 
life  (He  2") ;  and  human  power  antagonistic  to  the 
gospel  (Eph  6^^).  Thus  '  blood '  may  symbolize  any 
aspect  of  human  life  inferior  to  that  of  the  '  spirit.' 

2.  Origin. — The  meaning  of  the  term  is  derived 
from  OT  usage,  as  in  St.  Peter's  reference  to  the 


portents  of  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  quoting  Joel's 
words,  '  blood  .  .  .  the  moon  [shall  be  turned  into] 
blood '  (Ac  2>»- » ;  cf.  Jl  2»- ").  The  same  usage 
together  with  dependence  on  the  story  of  the 
plagues  in  Egypt  appears  in  Rev.  (6"  8'-  '11*  IG*-  •*). 
Blood  thus  represents  the  greatness,  awfcdness, 
and  finality  of  the  Divine  judgment,  by  which 
either  a  wicked  condition  is  simply  brought  to  an 
end  (cf.  also  Rev  19'*),  or  a  temporary  dispensation 
gives  place  to  the  last  age  of  human  earthly  exist- 
ence in  the  fulfilment  of  God's  purpose. 

3.  Usage. — (1)  The  word  is  related  to  Jewish 
ordinances.  Among  the  prohibitions  put  forth  by 
the  council  at  Jerusalem  was  one  enjoining  absti- 
nence from  blood  (Ac  15*-»  21»  ;  cf.  Lv  3'").  The 
reason  for  the  edict  was  doubtless  that  assigned 
for  the  earlier  restriction,  that '  the  life  of  all  flesh 
is  in  the  blood '  (Lv  17''').  (2)  Blood  further  sym- 
bolizes the  life  violently  taken  (Ac  1^  22*,  Ro  3'\ 
Rev  16*),  for  which  the  murderer  is  responsible 
(Ac  5**  Rev  17*  18^),  and  liable  to  the  just  judg- 
ment of  God  (Rev  6'"  19*);  perhaps,  in  poetic 
justice,  a  punishment  like  the  crime  (cf.  14^).  It 
may  also  signify  the  unpitying  violence  with 
which  men  treat  their  fellows  ( Ro  3**).  ( 3)  In  his 
denunciation  that  blood  shall  be  upon  one's  own 
head,  St.  Paul  meant  that  the  Corinthians  who 
had  refused  belief  in  the  gospel  were  both  respon- 
sible for  their  rejection  and  exposed  to  God's  judg- 
ment against  them  (Ac  18*  ;  cf.  5**,  2  S 1^*,  Mt  27^). 
In  like  manner  one  might  be  '  guilty  of  the  .  .  . 
blood  of  Christ'  (1  Co  11^).  (4)  Blood  represents 
the  life  of  men  capable  of  redemption,  for  which 
any  herald  of  the  gospel  is  responsible  and  of  which 
he  may  be  found  guilty  if  he  fails  in  his  duty  as  a 
preacher  of  Christ  (Ac  20").  (5)  It  signifies  the 
life  given  up  for  an  atonement,  both  as  presented 
to  God  and  as  having  reconciling  \"irtue  for  men 
(He  9'  10*- '«-«  13"^  *«•). 

4.  The  term  used  in  connexion  with  the  work 
of  Christ.— Tlie  most  important  uses  of  the  word 
centre  in  the  work  of  Christ.  In  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  the  reference  to  blood  involves  its  relation 
on  the  one  hand  to  the  sacrificial-oflering,  on  the 
other  hand  to  the  sin-oftering,  wherein  it  appears 
that  the  sacrificial  is  the  sin-oflering.  In  other 
letters  of  St.  Paul  the  references  to  blood  are  in- 
cidental and  determined  by  the  particular  feature 
of  redemption  in  the  mind  of  the  Apostle  at  the 
moment.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  is  derived  from  the  analogy  of  the 
OT  Scriptures,  which  in  a  very  inadequate  manner 
prefigured  the  offering  which  Christ  made  of  Him- 
self. Revelation  is  dominated  by  the  OT  usage 
of  the  word  and  is  in  a  large  degree  influenced  by 
prophetic  language,  although  the  common  note  of 
redemption  through  the  blood  of  Christ  is  heard 
here  also.  As  related  to  the  work  of  Christ,  then, 
the  apostolic  teaching  concerning  blood  involves 
the  following  sjiecitic  features  :  (a)  It  is  connected 
with  sacrifices,  as  that  of  the  Day  of  Atonement 
(Ro  3**,  He  9™-),  by  means  of  which  the  relation  of 
men  to  Gk)d,  and  indeed  of  God  to  men  (cf.  Ro  5'*), 
broken  by  sin,  is  restored  by  the  death  of  Christ. 
According  to  the  Epi»tle  to  the  Hebrews,  while 
the  animal  sacrifices  as  sucli  were  irrational,  des- 
titute of  personal  consent,  intermittent,  incapable 
of  purifying,  spiritual  efficacy  (He  10*),  this  lack 
wa.-^  more  than  set  off  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  (6) 
As  in  the  Old  Dispensation  all  persons  ministering 
at  the  altar,  utensils  of  service  and  worship,  and 
means  of  a})proach  to  God  were  cleansed  with  blood 
as  a  medium  of  purification  (cf.,  however,  Lv  5'""-), 
so  the  blood  of  Christ  signifies  that  all  that  which 

I  pertains  to  salvation  in  the  heavenly  sanctuary 
j  into  which  both  He  and  His  followers  enter  has 
!  been  for  ever  pnrifiwi  in  His  blood  (He  9***-).  It  is 
I  as  if  the  author  of  the  Hebrews  conceived  of  sin  as 


154 


BLOODY  FLUX 


BODY 


having  penetrated  and  deliled  even  tlie  unseen 
heavenly  world,  which  therefore  needed  to  be  set 
free  from  contamination  and  made  holy  in  the  same 
way  as  things  belonging  to  the  earthly  tabernacle. 
(c)  It  is  the  sign  and  pledge  of  Christ's  free  sur- 
render of  Himself  to  His  atoning  death  (He  9^-'", 
Rev  1'),  and  symbolizes  the  experience  through 
wiiich  Jesus  must  pass  on  His  way  to  perfected 
communion  with  God  and  the  linal  stage  of  His 
mediatorial  agency  (He  10'»  13'S  1  JaS*-** ;  cf.  1  Co 
lo'-^,  Kev  19'*).  (d)  The  blood  is  also  the  means 
for  the  ratification  of  the  New  Covenant  (1  Co  H'-**, 
He  9i«-=»  102*  13^  ;  cf.  Mt  26-«,  Ex  24''-%  It  could 
not  but  be  that  a  ceremony,  the  meaning  of  which 
was  so  deeply  embedded  in  the  religious  experience 
of  the  race,  and  wiiich  was  so  well  fitted  to  symbol- 
ize the  solemn  consecration  to  mutual  obligations, 
should  find  its  significance  completely  expressed  in 
the  blood  of  Christ  through  which  God  would 
reunite  Himself  in  even  more  spiritual  bonds  to  the 
lives  of  Christ's  followers,  (e)  The  blood  is  repre- 
sented as  the  purchase  price  of  deliverance  from 
sin  (Ac  2028,  Ep^  j?^  Col  ii*,  l  P  V\  Rev  5" ;  cf.  He 
9'^^).  The  vivid  imagery  of  this  word  receives  no- 
where a  closer  definition  ;  its  force  lies  in  its  sug- 
gestion of  one  aspect  of  the  experience  of  the  man 
who  passes  from  the  consciousness  of  the  bondage 
of  sin  to  the  joyful  freedom  of  forgiveness.  (/) 
Hence  the  word  is  associated  with  forgiveness  of 
sins.  As  a  sacrificial  oft'ering  Christ  was  at  the 
same  time  a  sin-ofiering  (Ro  3^'  5",  He  9'^),  and  as 
such  His  offering  has  expiatory  efficacy,  (g)  By 
His  blood  as  our  High  Priest  He  enters  into  the 

Eresence  of  God  on  our  behalf  (He  g^^'"  10'*),  there 
oth  perfectly  realizing  fellowship  with  God  for 
Himself  and  carrying  forward  His  mediatorial 
work,  {h)  The  blood  has  eflScacy  in  the  actual 
life  of  believers,  disclosing  its  energy  in  their  pro- 
gressive personal  sanctification  (He  9"  10'^  12^*, 
1  P  1^  1  Jn  V,  Rev  P  7"),  and  in  the  power  wiiich 
it  confers  on  them  to  overcome  that  which  resists 
the  Christian  aim  from  without  (Rev  12").  (i) 
Blood  is  also  a  symbol  of  the  inner  fellowship  of 
believers  with  one  another  and  with  God — the 
reference  is  social  (1  Co  10'®,  He  13'-). 

Looking  back  over  this  subject  as  a  whole,  it  is 
evident  that  the  apostolic  writers  do  not  let  their 
attention  rest  on  blood  as  such,  but  only  on  blood 
as  it  is  a  vehicle  and  symbol  of  life.  For  the  blood 
represents  the  life,  even  if  this  is  taken  by  violence. 
Christ's  blood  freely  given,  with  the  sole  aim  of 
recovering  men  in  sin  to  fellowship  with  God  and 
to  their  Divine  destination  as  children  of  God. 
The  efficacy  of  the  life  of  Christ  thus  given  is  con- 
tinuous from  the  unseen  world  and  in  the  purpose 
of  (jod.  Thus  the  blood  which  flowed  once  for  all 
is  not  of  transitory  worth,  but  is  endowed  with 
the  energy  perpetually  to  create  new  redemptive 
personal  and  social  values — it  is  eternal. 

Literature.— B.  F.  Westcott,  The  Epistles  of  St.  John, 
1883,  '  Additional  note  on  i.  71,'  p.  34  ff.,  also  The  KpiMe  to  the 
Hebrews,  1889,  note  'On  the  Use  of  the  term  "Blood"  in  the 
Epistle,'  p.  293  f. ;  W.  Sanday  and  A.  C.  Headlam,  The  Epistle 
to  the  RomayisO  (ICC,  1902),  p.  91  ff. 

C.   A.    BlX'KWITH. 

BLOODY  FLUX.— See  Dysentery. 

BOASTING.— This  term  is  employed  by  AV 
with  considerable  frequency  to  render  the  group 
of  words  Kai'xac^at,  (cai/x'jc's,  Kavxv/Jia.  They  are 
found  about  40  times  in  LXX,  and  about  60  times 
in  the  NT  (exclusively  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  except 
He  .3«,  Ja  P  4'«).  The  forms  iyKavxdffOai  (2  Th  \*) 
and  KaraKavxacrOai  (lio  11"*,  Ja  3'*)  are  also  found. 
The  group  belongs  to  what  Lightfoot  (Com.  on 
Ph  3')  calls  '  the  tumultuous  eagerness  of  the 
Apostle's  earlier  style ' ;  the  words  appear  most 
frequently  in  2  Cor.,    where  i)ersonal  feeling  is 


deeply  stirred.  Whereas  in  AV  they  are  rendered 
by  '  boasting '  and  '  glorying '  in  about  equal  pro- 
portions, in  RV  '  Ixiasting'  has  almost  completely 
disappeared,  and  'glorying'  is  found  instead.  Tiie 
only  pla(!e  where  '  lx)abt'  is  now  found  is  in  Ja  3' 
— '  the  tongue  also  is  a  little  member  and  boasteth 
great  things';  but  here  the  verb  is  not  /cafxarat 
but  aiixei,  and  the  idea  '  is  jiroperly  to  stretch  the 
neck  and  liohl  up  the  head  in  pride,  and  hence  to 
speak  with  proud  confidence'  (Hort,  ad  loc). 
'  Boastful'  still  appears  twice  in  RV  (Ro  l*",  2  Ti 
3^),  taking  the  place  of  AV  '  boasters,'  and  is  the 
equivalent  of  dXa^uv,  the  abstract  noun  aXa^oveia 
being  rendered  in  Ja  4'*  '  vaunting'  and  in  1  Jn  2" 
'vainglory,'  the  only  two  places  where  it  occurs. 
The  dXafwi'  ('  boastful ')  has  evil  associations  in  both 
passages — in  Ro  1^  with  those  who  have  been 
given  over  to  a  reprobate  mind,  and  in  2  Ti  3^  with 
the  '  proud,'  blasphemers,  and  such  like.  Similarly 
dXa^oveia  is  found  in  Patristic  literature  in  lists  of 
vices  and  corrupt  practices — in  Didache  (v.l)  along 
with  'self-will,'  'covetousness,'  and  others;  in 
1  Clem.  XXXV.  5  bracketed  with  vTrep7i<f>avLa,  'pride,' 
in  such  a  list ;  and  in  Ep.  to  Diognetus  (iv.  6)  in 
conjunction  with  iroXv-n-payfj-oavvi),  '  meddlesome- 
ness.' Aristotle  saw  in  the  dXafwi',  'not  merely 
one  making  unseemly  display  of  things  which  he 
actually  possesses,  but  vaunting  himself  in  those 
which  he  does  not  possess'  (quoted  in  Trench, 
Synonyms  of  NT^,  Lond.  1876,  p.  96).  In  no 
such  category  could  St.  Paul  be  placed  when  he 
speaks  of  himself,  using  /cavxaf^ai  or  its  cognates, 
as  '  boasting'  (2  Co  7"  8^*  9*).  The  RV,  however, 
has  replaced  the  word  by  'glorying,'  except  in 
some  cases  where  it  uses  'rejoicing'  (Ro  5'-  ",  but 
in  Ja  4'*  'rejoice'  of  AV  has  also  given  place  to 
'  glory ').  '  Glorying '  (or  '  boasting ')  '  in  the  law,' 
or  '  in  works '  as  a  ground  of  acceptance  with  God, 
or  '  in  men '  as  watchwords  of  sects  or  parties,  is 
condemned  by  St.  Paul  (Ro  3^^,  Eph  2»,  1  Co  3^'). 
But  the  word  expresses  well  the  high  level  at 
which  he  lived,  exulting  in  Christ  Jesus.  He 
gloried  in  the  Cross  (Gal  6"),  in  free  giace  (Ro  5"), 
in  an  approving  conscience  (2  Co  1'-),  in  his  inde- 
pendence as  an  apostle  (2  Co  11'*),  in  his  converts 
(2  Th  1^),  and  above  all  in  Christ  Jesus  (Ro  15'^) 
and  in  God  (1  Co  P'),  in  the  spirit  of  the  Psalmist 
(44*),  and  of  the  Prophet  (Jer  9^)  who  .said  in  the 
name  of  God,  '  Let  not  the  wise  man  glory  in  his 
wisdom  .  .  .  but  let  him  that  glorieth  glory  in 
this,  that  he  understandeth,  and  knoweth  me, 
that  I  am  the  Lord.'  T.  NiCOL. 

BOAT.— See  Ship. 

BODY.— 1.  The  term.— In  EV  *  body '  represents 
3  different  terms  in  the  original.  Once  (Ac  19'-) 
it  renders  xP^s,  which  properly  denotes  the  skin  or 
the  surface  of  the  body.  Thrice  (Rev  IP  9)  '  dead 
body '  is  the  equivalent  of  irrw/xa,  which  corre- 
sponds to  Lat.  cadaver,  Eng.  '  carca,se.'  In  all 
other  cases  '  body'  stands  for  awna.  in  the  Gr.  text. 
Occasionally  ffGifia  is  used  of  a  dead  body,  whether 
of  man  (Ac  9*",  Jude")  or  beast  (He  13"),  but 
ordinarily  it  denotes  the  living  body  of  animals 
(Ja  3*)  or  of  men  (1  Co  6"  etc.).  When  distin- 
guished from  ffipi  (EV  'flesh'),  which  applies  to 
the  material  or  substance  of  the  living  body  (2  Co 
12^),  ffw/ia  designates  the  body  as  an  organic  whole, 
a  union  of  related  parts  (1  Co  I'i'-') ;  but  cuim  and 
ffap^  are  sometimes  used  in  connexions  Avhich  make 
them  practically  synonymous  (cf.  1  Co  5*  with  Col 
2\  2  Co  4'»  with  v.").  In  Rev  18'^  ffuixa-ra  is 
rendered  by  'slaves'  (marg.  'bodies'),  the  body 
only  of  the  slave  being  taken  into  account  by 
ancient  law.  From  the  literal  meaning  of  o-w^o 
as  an  organism  made  up  of  interrelated  parts 
comes  its  figurative  employment  to  describe  the 


BODY 


BODY 


155 


Christian  Church  as  a  social  whole,  the  '  one  body ' 
with  many  members  (Ro  12*,  I  Co  l2»=*-27  etc.). 
Symbolically  the  bread  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is 
designated  as  the  bodv  of  Christ  (1  Co  10"  11^  "• »). 

2.  The  doctrine. — Outside  of  the  Pauline  Epistles 
tlie  references  to  the  body  are  few  in  number,  and 
do  not  furnish  materials  for  separate  doctrinal 
treatment.  It  is  almost  wholly  with  St-  Paul  that 
we  have  to  do  in  considering  the  doctrinal  appli- 
cations of  the  word.  HLs  use  of  it  is  threefold — 
a  literal  use  in  connexion  with  his  doctrine  of  man, 
a  tigurative  or  mystical  use  in  his  doctrine  of  the 
(.liurch,  a  symbolic  use  in  his  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

(1)  The  literal  body.  — The  assumption  is 
frequently  made  that  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  man 
was  formed  under  Hellenistic  influences,  and  that 
he  sets  up  a  rigid  dualism  between  body  and  soul, 
matter  and  spirit  (cf.  Holtzmann,  NT  Theol.  ii. 
14 f.).  It  is  true  that  he  makes  use  of  the  contrasted 
terms  '  flesh '  and  '  spirit,'  '  body '  and  'soul,'  which 
had  become  general  among  the  Jews  tlirough  famili- 
arity with  the  LXX,  and  were  thus  indirectly  due 
to  contact  with  the  Greek  world.  But,  notwith- 
standing his  use  of  these  terms,  St.  Paul's  doctrine 
of  man  was  timily  rooted  in  the  soil  of  OT  teach- 
ing, and  anything  like  the  Greek  dualLstic  anti- 
thesis between  body  and  soul  was  far  from  his 
thoughts.  For  him,  as  for  the  OT  writers,  the 
psycho-physical  unity  of  the  human  personality 
was  the  rundaniental  feature  in  the  conception 
of  man.  The  body,  no  less  than  the  soul,  was 
essential  to  human  nature  in  its  completeness, 
though  the  bodj-,  as  the  part  that  links  man  to 
Nature,  held  a  lower  place  than  the  soul  or  spirit 
by  which  he  came  into  relation  with  God.  These 
two  strands  of  thought — the  essentiality  of  the 
body  to  a  complete  human  nature,  and  its  subordi- 
nation to  the  soul — run  through  all  the  Apostle's 
anthropological  teaching,  and  come  into  clear  view 
in  his  teaching  on  the  subjects  of  sin,  death, 
sanctification,  and  the  future  life. 

(a)  The  body  and  sin. — It  is  here  that  the  argu- 
ment for  a  positive  dualism  in  the  Pauline  teaching 
regarding  the  body  finds  its  strongest  support.  It 
must  be  admitted  that  St.  Paul  often  speaks  of  the 
body  and  its  members  not  only  as  instruments  of 
sin,  but  as  the  seat  of  its  power  (e.g.  Ro  6'*-^' 
T'-'^).  But  it  has  been  further  alleged  that  he 
saw  in  the  body  the  very  source  and  principle  of 
sin  (Pfleiderer,  Paulinismus,  Leipzig,  189"3,  p.  53 ff.). 
The  argument  depends  on  the  interpretation  given 
to  the  word  '  flesh '  (<rd/>^)  in  those  passages  where 
it  is  emploj-ed  in  an  ethical  sense  in  contrast  with 
'spirit'  (TTP^x'^jLa).  It  is  assumed  by  Pfleiderer  and 
others  that  (rdp^  in  such  cases  simply  denotes  the 
physical  or  sensuous  part  of  man,  in  which  the 
Apostle  finds  a  substance  essentially  antagonistic 
to  the  life  of  the  spirit,  making  sin  inevitable. 
But  the  objections  to  this  %'iew  seem  insuperable. 
In  St.  Paul's  category  of  the  '  works  of  the  flesh ' 
(Gal  .5"^)  most  of  the  sins  he  enumerates  are 
spiritual,  not  physical,  in  their  character.  When 
he  charges  the  Corinthians  with  being  'carnal' 
(1  Co  3^),  he  is  condemning,  not  sensuality,  but 
jealousy  and  strife.  His  doctrines  of  the  sanctifi- 
cation of  the  body  (1  Co  &^  '^)  and  of  the  absolute 
sinlessness  (2  Co  5*=^)  of  one  bom  of  a  woman  (Gal  4*) 
would  have  been  impossible  if  he  had  regarded  the 
principle  of  r-in  as  lying  in  man's  corporeal  nature. 
The  antithesis  of  flesh  and  spirit,  then,  cannot  be 
interpreted  as  amounting  to  a  dualistic  opposition 
between  man's  body  and  his  soul.  It  is  a  contrast 
rather  between  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly,  the 
natural  and  the  supernatural,  what  is  evolved  from 
below  and  what  is  bestowed  from  above.  The 
'  carnal '  man,  with  his  '  mind  of  the  flesh '  at 
enmity  with   God    (Ro   8'),   is   the  same  as  the 


'natural'  man  who  receiveth  not  the  things  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  (1  Co  2"),  and  so  is  to  be  distin- 
guished from  the  *  spiritual '  man  in  whom  a  super- 
natural and  Divine  principle  is  already  at  work 
(v.i»-;  cf.  3»-»). 

But  while  the  Apostle  does  not  find  in  the  body 
the  very  principle  of  sin,  he  does  regard  it  as  a 
lurking  -  piace  of  evil  and  a  constant  source  of 
liability  to  fall  (Ro  6'  7®-  **).  Hence  his  determina- 
tion to  bring  the  body  into  subjection  (1  Co  9"), 
and  his  sununons  to  others  to  mortify  its  deeds 
(Ro8»;  cf.  Col3»). 

{b)  The  body  and  death. — In  his  teaching  about 
death,  St.  Paul  lends  no  support  to  the  doctrine  of 
those  Greek  philosophers  who  saw  in  it  a  liberation 
of  the  soul  from  bondage  to  the  body  as  such  (cf. 
Plato,  Phcedo,  64  tf.).  The  emphasis  he  lays  on 
the  inner  and  spiritual  side  of  personality  enables 
him,  it  is  true,  to  conceive  of  existence,  and  even 
a  blessed  existence,  in  the  disembodied  state  (2  Co 
5*).  His  sense,  too,  of  the  weakness  of  the  flesh 
and  its  subjection  to  the  forces  of  evil  leads  him 
to  describe  the  present  body  as  a  tabernacle  in 
which  we  groan,  oeing  burdened.  But  in  the  same 
passage  he  expresses  his  confidence  that  the  house 
not  made  with  hands  will  take  the  place  of  the 
present  tabernacle,  and  that  those  who  have  here- 
tofore been  burdened  will  be  so  clothed  upon,  that 
what  is  mortal  shall  be  swallowed  up  of  life  (2  Co 
5^"*).  He  longs  not  for  deliverance  from  the  body, 
but  for  its  complete  redemption  and  transforma- 
tion, so  that  it  may  be  perfectly  adapted  to  the 
life  of  the  spirit.  In  his  view,  death  was  not  a 
liberation  of  the  soul  from  bondage,  but  an  inter- 
ruption, due  to  sin  (Ro  ff-^),  of  the  natural  solidarity 
of  the  two  component  parts  of  human  nature.  But 
as  Christ  by  His  Spirit  dwelling  in  us  can  subdue 
the  power  of  sin,  so  also  can  He  gain  the  victory 
over  death — the  culminating  proof  of  sin's  power 
(1  Co  15^).  In  Christ  the  promise  is  given  of  a 
body  not  only  raised  from  the  grave,  but  redeemed 
from  the  power  of  evil,  and  thus  capable  of  being 
transformed  from  a  natural  body  into  a  spiritual 
body  (v.« ;  cf.  Ph  3^). 

(c)  The  body  and  sanctification. — St.  Paul's  view 
of  the  body  as  an  essential  part  of  the  human 
personality  appears  further  in  his  doctrine  of  the 
bodily  holiness  of  a  Christian  man.  In  Corinth 
the  perverted  notion  had  grown  up  that  since  the 
body  was  not  a  part  of  the  true  personality,  bodily 
acts  were  morally  indiflerent  things  (1  Co  6**^). 
To  this  the  Apostle  opposes  the  doctrine  that  the 
body  of  a  Christian  belongs  to  the  Lord,  that  it  is 
a  member  of  Christ  Himself  and  a  sanctuary  of  the 
Holy  Ghost — thus  making  the  personal  life  which 
unites  us  to  Christ  inseparable  from  those  other 
manifestations  of  the  same  personal  life  which  find 
expression  in  the  bodily  members.  Yet  this  view 
of  the  communion  of  the  body  in  man's  spiritual 
life  and  its  participation  in  the  sanctifying  powers 
of  the  Divine  Spirit  did  not  blind  him  to  the  fact 
that  the  body,  as  we  know  it,  is  weak  and  tainted, 
ever  ready  to  become  the  instrument  of  temptation 
and  an  occasion  of  stumbling  (Ro  6**,  1  Co  9^). 
And  so,  side  by  side  with  the  truth  that  the  body 
is  a  Divine  sanctuary,  he  sets  the  demand  that 
sin  should  not  be  allowed  to  reign  in  our  mortal 
bodies,  that  we  should  obey  it  in  the  lusts  thereof 
(Ro  6^). 

(d)  The  body  and  the  f-uturt  life. — Here,  again, 
the  same  two  familiar  lines  of  thought  emerge. 
On  the  one  hand,  we  have  an  overwhelming  sense 
of  the  worth  of  the  body  for  the  human  person- 
ality ;  on  the  other,  a  clear  recognirion  of  its 
present  limitations  and  unfitness  in  its  earthly 
form  to  be  a  perfect  spiritual  instrument.  The 
proof  of  the  first  is  seen  in  St.  Paul's  attitude  to 
the   idea  of  a  bodily  resurrection.      To  him  the 


156 


BODY 


BOLDNESS 


resurrection  of  Christ  was  a  fact  of  tlie  most  ab- 
solute certainty  ( Ro  1*,  1  Co  \5'*"-);  and  tliat  fact 
carried  with  it  the  assurance  that  the  dead  are 
raised  (v."*"^-).  Had  he  thought  of  the  body  as 
something  essentially  evil,  liad  he  not  been  per- 
suaded of  its  absolute  worth,  his  hopes  for  the 
future  life  must  liave  centred  in  a  bare  doctrine 
of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and  not,  as  they 
actually  did,  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  But 
while  he  clung  passionately  to  the  hope  of  the 
resurrection,  he  did  not  believe  in  the  resurrection 
■of  the  present  body  of  flesh  and  blood  (1  Co  15***). 
He  looked  for  a  body  in  which  corruption  haid 
given  place  to  incorruption  (vv.*-  *^)  and  humilia- 
tion had  been  changed  into  glory  (Ph  3-').  His 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  includes  tlie  assurance 
that  when  the  dead  in  Christ  are  raised  (he  has 
little  to  say  of  the  physical  resurrection  of  others), 
it  will  not  be  in  the  old  bodies  of  their  earthly 
experience,  but  in  new  ones  adapted  to  heavenly 
conditions  (1  Co  15'"''^-)j  bodies  that  are  no  longer 
psychical  merely,  i.e.  moving  on  the  plane  of  man's 
natural  experience  in  the  world,  but  pneumatical 
(v.**"'-),  because  redeemed  from  every  taint  of  evil 
and  fitted  to  be  the  worthy  and  adequate  organs 
of  a  spiritual  and  heavenly  life. 

(2)  The  figurative  or  mystical  body.— In 
1  Co  12'2fl'-  (cf.  Ro  125),  st^  Paul  describes  the  re- 
lations in  which  Christians  stand  to  Christ  and  to 
one  another  under  the  ligure  of  a  body  and  its 
members ;  and  towards  the  end  of  the  chapter 
(v.'-'')  he  says  of  the  Corinthian  Church  quite 
expressly,  '  Now  ye  are  a  body  of  Christ  (a-Qfia 
XpiffToO),  and  members  in  particular.'  In  ancient 
classical  literature  the  figure  was  frequently  ap- 
plied to  the  body  politic ;  and  the  Apostle  here 
transfers  it  to  the  Church  with  the  view  of  im- 
pressing upon  his  readers  the  need  for  unity  and 
mutual  helpfulness.  As  yet,  however,  the  figure 
is  plastic,  and  the  anarthrous  ffQ/xa.  suggests  that 
it  is  the  Church  of  Corinth  only  which  St.  Paul  has 
inmiediately  in  view.  This  may  be  regai'ded,  ac- 
cordingly, as  the  preliminary  sketch  of  tiiat 
elaborated  conception  of  the  Church  as  Christ's 
mystical  body  which  is  found  in  two  later  Epistles. 
In  Ephesians  (l-^'-  4'''*)  and  Colossians  (V^-'-i*)  'the 
l)<)dy  of  Christ'  {t6  <rQfxa  toD  Xpicxrov)  has  become  a 
lixed  designation  of  the  universal  and  ideal  Church. 
Moreover,  this  further  distinction  is  to  be  observed, 
tliat  whereas  in  Rom.  and  1  Cor.  Christ  is  con- 
ceived of  as  the  whole  body  of  which  individual 
Christians  are  members  in  particular,  in  Eph.  and 
Col.  the  Church  has  become  the  body  of  which 
Christ  as  the  head  is  ruler,  saviour,  and  nourisher 
{Eph  5-=^'-,  Col  2i»).  In  its  later  form  the  figure 
suggests  not  only  the  unity  of  the  Church  as  the 
mystical  body  of  Christ,  but  its  absolute  depend- 
ence upon  Him  who  is  the  Head  for  its  strength 
and  growth  and  very  existence. 

(3)  The  symbolic  BODY.~The  words,  '  This  is 
my  body,'  applied  by  Jesus  to  the  broken  bread 
of  the  Supper  (Mt  26^',  Mk  W^,  Lk  22J'»), 'are  re- 
peated by  St.  Paul  in  his  narrative  of  the  institu- 
tion (1  Co  U'").  And  the  Apostle  not  only  repeats 
the  Lord's  words  in  their  historical  connexion,  but 
himself  describes  the  sacramental  bread  as  being 
Christ's  l)ody.  '  The  bread  which  we  break,'  he 
writes,  *  is  it  not  a  communion  of  the  body  of 
Christ?'  (1  Co  10'").  In  like  manner  he  says  that 
whosoever  shall  e.at  the  bread  of  the  Lord  un- 
worthily shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  of  the  Lord 
( 1 1*''),  and  that  a  participant  of  the  Supper  eats  and 
drinks  judgment  unto  himself  '  if  he  discern  not 
the  body'  (v.-"").  There  are  wide  ditlerences  of 
opinion  among  Christians  as  to  the  full  significance 
oi  this  identilication  of  the  bread  of  the  Lord's 
8upper  with  the  body  of  the  Lord  Himself.  But 
whatever  further  meanings  may  be  seen  in  it,  and 


even  under  tl»cories  of  a  Real  Presence,  which  is 
Kcmiething  other  and  more  than  a  purely  spiritual 
presence,  the  bread  which  Jesus  broke  at  the  Last 
Supper  was,  in  the  first  place,  a  symbol  of  His  own 
body  of  flesh  and  blood  which  was  yielded  to  death 
in  a  sacrifice  of  love. 

LiTKRATCRE.  —  H.  Cremer,  Bibl.-Thcol.  Lex.^,  Edinburgh, 
1880,  s.v.  ;  relevant  sections  in  J.  Laidlaw,  Bible  Doct.  uf  Man, 
do.  1879;  F.  Delitzsch,  Bibl.  Pgycholony,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1867; 
and  the  A'T*  Theolu<jie»  of  Holtzmann  [Tuhin^feTi,  1911],  Weiss 
[Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1882-83],  and  Beyschlag:  [Eiig.  tr.,  do. 
1895].  See,  further,  W.  P.  Dickson,  St.  Paul's  I'sc  of  the 
Terms  Flesh  and  Spirit,  Glasgow,  1883  ;  H.  H.  Wendt,  Teach- 
ing of  Jesru,  Enif.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1892,  i.  1.56  ;  H.  W.  Robin- 
son, '  Heb.  Psychology  in  relation  to  Pauline  Anthropology,' 
in  Mansfield  College  Essays,  London,  1909  ;  F.  Paget,  spirit  of 
Discipline,  do.  1891,  p.  80fl.  J.  C.  LaMBKHT. 

BOLDNESS.—'  Boldness'  (with  the  allied  expres- 
sions 'bold,'  'boldly,'  'to  be  bold')  has  several 
Greek  equivalents  in  the  aj)ostolic  writings. — (a) 
In  the  sense  of  daring,  we  find  it  used  to  render 
roXfjLdu,' to  dare,'  'to  be  bold'  (2  Co  10^  11",  Ph 
1").  The  cognate  adverb  To\fnjpC!)%  in  the  compar. 
roXfirjporepov  is  used  by  St.  Paul  (Ro  15'').  TJie 
verb,  in  composition  with  the  strengthening  prep. 
dir6,  is  used  in  Ro  10*",  where  d.iroTo\fw.y  has  the 
force  of  'to  be  very  bold.' — (6)  In  the  sense  of 
being  of  good  courage  it  is  emploj'ed  to  render 
dappe^v  in  2  Co  5«-  •*  V'^  (RV  ;  the  AV  having  '  con- 
fident,' '  confidence '  in  these  places).  In  2  Co  lO'-  \ 
where  the  same  verb  is  rendered  '  to  be  bold '  in 
AV,  tlie  RV  prefers  '  to  be  of  good  courage '  ;  and 
similarly  '  we  may  boldly  say '  of  AV  in  He  13"  is 
renderetl  in  RV  '  with  good  courage  we  say.'  In 
Ac  28^^*  ddpffo^  occurs  in  the  exjjression  used  regard- 
ing St.  Paul — '  he  thanked  God  and  took  courage.' 
dpdffos  and  dpaa&r-ns  are  used  in  the  sense  of  '  over- 
confidence,'  'insolence'  in  Patristic  literature  in 
company  with  sucli  words  as  irXeove^ia,  '  covetous- 
nes.s,'  and  ciKa^ovela,  '  boastfulness  '  (Didache  iii.  9, 
V.  1). — (c)  In  the  sense  of  liberty  and  frankness  of 
speech  it  is  employed  to  translate  irappTjaia  and  the 
derived  verb  irapprjcnd^effdai.  In  classical  usage 
irapprjffLa  {wdi'  and  pTJffis)  is  the  frank  and  outspoken 
expression  of  opinion  which  was  the  cherished 
privilege  of  Athenian  citizenship.  In  NT  usage  it 
denotes  tlie  glad  and  fearless  confidence  in  drawing 
near  to  God,  and  having  communion  with  Him, 
which  is  the  dearest  privilege  of  the  Chri.^tian 
heart  (Eph  3>2,  He  4",  1  Jn  2^).  It  is  contrasted 
with  shrinking  back  from  fear  or  shame  (Ph  1*, 
1  Jn  2-**).  In  reference  to  speech,  it  is  plainness 
and  candour  witiiout  reserve  or  ambiguity,  without 
parable  or  metaphor,  without  hesitation  or  mis- 
giving, in  the  utterance  of  it  (Jn  7'Ml'''  IG**-  ^,  Ac 
4J9  234t;  where  Trappr]aid^ea-Oai  is  used).  '  When  it  is 
transfenred  from  words  to  actions,  it  apjiears 
always  to  retain  the  idea  of  "  confidence,  boldness  " ' 
(Lightfoot  on  Col  2i»). 

Tiie  chief  usages  of  the  word  in  the  apostolic 
writers  may  be  given  as  follows  : 

(1)  Fearlessness  and  frankness  in  the  public 
proclamation  of  the  gospel. — Examples  are  St. 
Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Ac  2^*),  St.  Peter 
and  St.  John  before  the  Council  (4'*),  and  in  setting 
forth  Christ  to  the  people  (4"^-  ''),  St.  Paul  at  Rome 
preaching  to  all  and  sundry  (28*^).  In  this  sense 
wappTjffid^fffdai  is  used  of  Saul  at  Daniiuscus  and 
Jerusalem  (l*"'-),  of  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  at 
Antioch  of  Pisidia  (13'**),  of  Apollos  at  Enhesus 
els'*),  of  St.  Paul  himself  at  Thessalonica  ( 1  Th  2»  ; 
cf.  Eph  6»»'-). 

(2)  Confide^icc  in  prayer  and  cotnmioiion  with 
God  through  Christ. — This  is  the  privilege  which 
St.  Paul  (Eph  3'*)  commends  to  Ins  readers  when 
he  speaks  of  '  boldnes.-*  and  access  in  confidence ' 
which  are  theirs  through  their  faith  in  Chri.st. 
The  same  fearless  confidence  is  dwelt  xi\>on  by  the 
writer  of   the   Epistle   to  the  Hebrews   (4'«  "lO"*). 


BOND 


BONDAGE 


157 


This  joyous  confidence  in  prajer  is  specialh- 
notable  in  St.  John's  First  Epistle  (3-i  5").  It 
conies  of  abiding  in  Christ  (2'^),  of  the  presence  in 
the  heart  of  the  love  which  casts  out  fear  (4'"'-),  of 
a  clear  conscience  and  an  obedient  life  (3'**"^). 

(3)  Candid  speech  towards  Christian  brethren 
(2  Co  :*,  Philem  »,  and  possibly  2  Co  3'-,  if  Cluysos- 
tom's  interpretation  be  correct). 

(4)  Fearless  bearing  in  the  Church  and  before 
the  world  acquired  through  the  faithful  discharge 
o/rftt^y(l  Ti3i»,  Phl«>). 

(5)  Fearless  confidence  at  the  appearance  of  Christ 
and  before  His  judgment  seat  (1  Jn  2^  4*""^"). — 
The  Scriptural  opposite  is  the  shame  of  the  man 
without  the  wedding-garment  who  was  speecliless 
(Mt  22--).  Clements  words  are  a  good  illustration  : 
'  The  good  workman  takes  with  boldness  the  bread 
which  is  the  reward  of  labour,  but  the  slothful  and 
the  indolent  dare  not  meet  the  eye  of  their  em- 
ployer' (1  Clem,  xxxiv.  1).  Ct.  also  Wis  5^: 
•Then  [in  the  judgment]  shall  the  righteous  man 
stand  in  great  boldness  before  the  face  of  them 
that  atliicted  him.' 

LiTBR/.TURE. — D.  Russell  Scott,  art.  'Boldness  (Christian)' 
in  ERE  ii.  7s5,  with  lit.  there  cited ;  also  J.  H.  Jowett,  The 
Transfigured  Church,  1910,  p.  181.  T.   NiCOL. 

BOND  (Col  2").— The  point  here  lies  in  the  word 
xei.p6~/pa(pov.  For  '  bond '  in  the  sense  of  Soi/Xoj,  see 
1  Co  12''^  etc.,  and  in  that  of  ffvvSeafios  (ligament  in 
surgeiy  [very  often]),  see  Col  2",  etc.  Col  2"  is 
the  only  instance  in  the  XT  of  the  word  x^'po- 
■ypa4>ov,  though  there  are  other  compounds  with  x"P- 
(X^'paiary^w,  Ac  9* ;  x^'P*7'^'"^J>  Ac  13^^  ;  x^'P*"""'- 
rp-oi,  Eph  2^^,  and  axu-poiroLrfroi,  Col  2^^  ;  xftp<"'0''fw, 
Ac  14^).  This  synthetic  compound  means  origin- 
ally 'handwriting'  or  '  autograph,'  and  occurs  in 
this  sense  in  Polybius  (xxx.  8.  4),  Dion.  Hal.  (v. 
8),  etc.  Its  technical  use  is  for  '  a  note  of  hand, 
a  bond  or  obligation,  as  having  the  "  sign  manual  " 
of  the  debtor  or  contractor'  (Lightfoot,  Col.^,  1879, 
in  loc.) ;  so  To  5"*  iSuKev  aiTij  to  x^'-P^P^'t*^''-  See 
also  Plut.  {Mar.  p.  829  A)  and  Artem.  (Oneir. 
iii.  40).  Its  position  as  a  Kotvi)  word  is  greatly 
strengthened  by  the  papyri,  where  it  is  very  common 
(Deissmann,  Bible  studies,  Eng.  tr.,  1901,  p.  247). 
Some  of  these  bonds  in  papyri  texts  are  crossed 
out  with  the  Greek  cross-letter  X,  thus  cancelling 
the  note  (cf.  Deissmann,  Light  from  the  Ancient 
East-,  191 1,  p.  336  f. ).  A  number  of  these  '  crossed- 
out '  bonds  are  in  the  papyri  lists  at  Berlin,  Heidel- 
berg, and  elsewhere.  This  was  the  method  of 
oflScial  as  well  as  private  cancellation  (see  the 
Florentine  Papyrus  [a.D.  85],  where  the  Governor 
of  Egypt  ordered  the  bond  to  be  'crossed  out' 
[x^offdrfvai]).  There  is  no  evidence  for  the  notion 
that  these  bonds  were  cancelled  by  hanging  on 
nails  (perforation).  There  are  examples  of  in- 
scribed leaden  roUs  being  perforated  and  hung  on 
nails,  but  not  for  cancellation  by  the  nails  (Deiss- 
mann, £iWe  5^  jtrfjc;?,  p.  273  f.).  St.  Paul  piles  up 
his  metaphors,  as  he  often  does,  by  the  use  of 
(^d\ei\pas  ('blotting  out';  cf.  x^^fw.  'cross  out'), 
^pxfv  iK  ToO  fUffov  ('take  out  of  the  midst';  note 
change  to  indicative  and  perfect  for  notion  of  per- 
manent removal).  Dibelius  (Handbuch  zum  XT, 
'Kolosser,'  1912,  p.  81)  cites  Epictetus'  use  of  atpe 
l|«,  oipe  (K  Tov  iiiaov  as  synonymous.  As  to  vpoffrj- 
Xtawas  TV  (TTCLvpw  ('  nailing  to  the  cross  '),  E.  Haupt 
(Meyer-Haupt,  Kom.  Kol.,  1902,  in  loc.)  points  out 
that  ^\•ith  St.  Paul  it  is  not  the  cancelling  by  nail- 
ing, but  the  nailing  to  the  cross  that  is  dominant. 
These  three  metaphors  all  accentuate  the  main 
idea  of  the  cancellation  of  the  debt. 

"WTiat  the  bond  is  in  Col  2"  scholars  are  not 
agreed.  Probably  the  general  notion  of  law  is 
correct,  since  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews  seem  to 
be  included,  rather  than  the  Mosaic  Law  or  the 


narrower  notion  of  the  purelj'  ceremonial  law. 
The  addition  of  roh  Sdynaffiv,  difficult  as  to  sjTitax, 
points  to  formulated  commandment  (Peake,  EGT, 
' Colossians,'  1903,  in  loc.)  of  some  kind  (cf.  Eph 
2^'),  though  'the  moral  assent  of  the  conscience' 
(Lightfoot,  in  loc.)  is  surely  involved  also.  No 
stress  is  to  be  laid  on  the  fact  of  the  law  being 
written  or  not  wTitten  (the  autograph  idea  in 
Xftf)6ypa(f>ov)  by  the  sinner,  though,  if  tlie  primary 
reference  be  to  the  Jews,  they  might  be  said  to 
have  signed  the  contract  in  _giving  assent  to  the 
law  as  represented  in  Dt  27^*"  .  The  central  idea 
is  that  the  bond  of  moral  obligation  which  wa.s 
against  us  (Kad'  i]fiQv  and  6  ijv  virevairriov  rj/uf)  has 
been  removed  by  the  death  of  Chiist  on  the  Cross. 
It  has  been  cancelled  (crossed  out)  and  hung  up 
for  all  to  see  (nailed  to  the  cross)  as  an  obligation 
from  which  we  are  now  free.  It  is  a  bold  picture 
of  grace  versus  works  as  the  method  of  salvation. 
Christ  has  paid  the  debt  and  destroyed  the  note 
against  us.  Cf.  St.  Paul's  otfer  to  pay  Philemon 
for  the  debt  of  Onesimus  (Philem  '*'•). 

A.  T.  ROBEKTSOX. 

BONDAGE.—'  Bondage '  in  the  EV  uniformly  re- 
presents oovXeia,  which  can  equally  Avell  be  rendered 
'slaverj'.'  Note  the  Vulg.  servUus  and  Wyclifs 
corresponding  term,  'servage.' 

1.  So  far  as  literal  slavery  is  meant  in  the  use  of 
this  and  kindred  expressions,  see  art.  Slavery. 

2.  'Bondage'  has  an  important  figurative  use  in 
the  Epistles  in  relation  to  spiritual  experience.  It 
denotes  the  state  of  sin.  The  place  filled  by  slaverj- 
in  the  social  structure  of  that  age  made  such  a  figuie 
natural  and  forceful.  St.  Paul  conspicuously  em- 
ploys this  description  of  the  sinful  state  in  his  dis- 
cussion of  human  sin  in  Ro  5-7.  It  is  evident  that 
he  was  far  more  deeply  interested  in  man's  spiritual 
bondage  and  his  deliverance  than  in  slavery  as  an 
institution  open  to  challenge  in  the  cause  of 
humanity.  No  slaverj-  in  his  view  was  comparable 
with  that  of  a  man  *  sold  under  sin,'  whether  lord  or 
slave.  This  became  a  commonplace  in  the  thought 
of  the  early  Church.  The  writings  of  St.  Augustine 
and  St.  Chrysostom  notablj'  furnish  many  instances 
of  its  vigorous  enforcement.  Similar  sentiments, 
it  should  be  added,  were  held  by  Plotinus  (3rd  cent.) 
and  the  Neo-Platonic  School  of  Alexandria.  (In 
the  NT  note  the  description  of  man  a^  enslaved  to 
sin,  Ko  6'^ ;  or  to  passions  and  pleasuies.  Tit  3* ; 
cf.  2^.) 

The  bondage  of  the  will  ( '  the  will,  deprived  of 
liberty,  is  led  or  dragged  by  necessity  to  evil' 
[Cal\Tn,  Inst.  iii.  2]),  a  theologoumenon  figuring  so 
largely  in  the  Augustinian  and  the  Reformed  the- 
olog}-,  strains  Pauline  teaching  and  finds  little  or 
no  illustration  in  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers. 

3.  The  righteous  life,  on  the  other  hand,  is  also 
described  as  a  bondage  (Ro  6'*).  This  servitude, 
which  is  that  of  the  8od\oi  of  God,  or  of  Christ 
(1  Co  7^^  etc.),  is  freedom  in  relation  to  that  of  sin 
(as  per  se,  cf.  '  Whose  service  is  perfect  freedom,' 
Book  of  Common  Prayer),  and  vice  versa.  But  St. 
Paul  surely  uses  a  gentle  ironj-  in  representing 
sinners  as  '  free '  from  the  bondage  of  righteousness 
(Ro  6-^). 

i.  The  term  is  used  of  other  forms  of  religious 
life  in  contrast  to  the  liberty  of  the  Christian  life. 
Thus  in  the  allegory,  wrought  out  in  Rabbinical 
fashion,  in  Gal  4-'*-,  Judaism  spells  bondage ;  the 
gospel,  freedom.  In  v.^  and  vv.**^"  slavery  inro  to. 
(TToixf^oL  rov  KOfffiov  includes  apparently  reference 
both  to  Jewish  legalism  and  to  GentUe  devotion  to 
false  gods.  In  this  connexion  must  be  noted  Ro  8'^ 
(cf.  Gal  4*-")  with  its  striking  contrast  between  the 
servile  temper  of  fear  characterizing  life  under  law, 
so  vividly  depicted  in  Ro  7,  and  the  filial  spirit  of 
happy  confidence  pertaining  to  Christian  experi- 
ence.    For  another  instance  of  the  association  of 


158 


BONDS 


BOOK  OF  LIFE 


bondage  witli  fear  and  the  antithesis  between  the 
lilial  and  the  servile  condition,  see  He  2^*'-. 

5.  In  Ro  8'-'  all  creation  is  represented  as  being 
in  bondage — *  servitude  to  decay ' — but  hoping  for 
deliverance  and  for  that  freedom  which  character- 
izes 'tlie  glory  of  the  children  of  God.'  With  this 
contrast  the  reference  in  2  P  2'*  to  '  the  bondage  of 
corruption'  as  =  moral  degradation. 

J.  S.  Clemens. 

BONDS.— See  Prison,  Chain. 

BOOK.— See  Writing. 

BOOK  OF  LIFE.— The  actual  phrase  occurs  in 
six  passages  only  of  the  NT  :  Ph  4^  Rev  3"*  IS"  17^ 
2012.15  21="  (in  22'9  the  evidence  for  the  reading 
'  book  of  life'  [AV]  instead  of  'tree  of  life'  [RV] 
is  negligible).  Of  these  passages  the  most  import- 
ant for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  meaning  is 
Rev  20^^  ^^  because  there  the  book  of  life  is  dis- 
tinguished from  certain  other  books :  '  and  the 
books  were  opened,  and  another  book  was  opened 
which  is  the  book  of  life  ;  and  the  dead  were 
judged  out  of  those  things  that  were  written  in  the 
books,  according  to  their  works  .  .  .  and  whoso- 
ever was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life,  was 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.'  The  natural  implication 
here  is  that  the  other  books  Avere  records  of  works, 
but  that  the  book  of  life  was  simply  a  register  of 
the  names  of  those  destined  for  life — an  interpre- 
tation which  fits  all  the  above-noted  passages. 

An  interesting  exegetical  point  comes  up  in 
connexion  with  Rev  13^.  The  words  '  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world '  may  grammatically  refer 
either  to  '  written '  or  to  '  tlie  Lamb  which  hath 
been  slain.'  But  in  17^  where  the  same  phrase 
occurs,  the  only  natural  way  to  take  it  is  as 
referring  to  'written';  and  this  is  practically 
decisive  for  13*  also  (so  Swete,  Apoc.  of  St.  John  ^ 
London,  1907,  and  RV).  The  phrase  thus  carries 
a  suggestion  of  predestination ;  but  this  is  not 
thought  of  as  absolute,  since  the  idea  of  blotting 
out  a  name  from  the  book  of  life  occurs  quite  freely. 

With  the  above-noted  passages  there  fall  into 
line  a  number  of  others  where  the  same  conception 
is  clearly  implied :  Lk  10-»,  Dn  12i,  Ps  692*,  Ex 
^2^2. 33  The  conception  of  a  register  found  in  all 
these  passages  seems  to  be  based  on  the  analogy 
of  citizen-lists,  registers  of  the  theocratic  com- 
munity, such  as  are  referred  to  in  Is  4' :  '  He  that 
is  left  in  Zion  shall  be  called  holy,  every  one  that 
is  written  among  the  living  in  Jerusalem '  (cf.  Neh 
12-='-  23,  Ezk  n^).  To  be  written  in  the  heavenly 
counterpart  of  such  a  list  meant  to  be  assured  of 
being  a  sharer  in  the  blessings  destined  for  the 
true  Israel.  Other  passages  which  associate  them- 
selves more  or  less  closely  with  this  conception  are 
1  S  252»,  Ps  87«  139i»,  Is  48i9,  Jer  22^,  He  1223. 

The  conception  of  a  heavenly  record  of  man's 
actions,  which  we  found  clearly  distinguished  from 
the  above  in  Rev  20'=** ",  appears  equally  distinct 
in  Dn  7^"  as  compared  with  12i.  See  also  Ps  56*, 
Is  658,  Mai  3'8. 

Different  again  is  the  conception  of  the  Book 
with  the  Seven  Seals  in  Rev  5,  for  that  is  thought 
of  as  the  book  of  destiny — the  prophetic  history  of 
the  world. 

All  three  conceptions  appear  in  the  Book  of  Enoch. 
When  the  Head  of  Days  'seated  Himself  on  the 
throne  of  His  glory,  and  the  books  of  the  living 
were  opened  before  Him  '  {En.  xlvii.  3),  the  context 
makes  it  clear  that  the  purpose  of  the  opening  of 
the  books  is  not  a  great  assize,  it  is  a  vindication 
of  the, righteous  that  is  at  hand,  and  'the  living' 
means,  not  all  living,  but  the  righteous.  Charles 
remarks  that  'books  of  the  holy  ones*  in  En. 
cviii.  3  has  practically  the  same  meaning.  The 
complementary  conception  '  the  book  of  those  that 


sliall  be  destroyed '  appears  in  Jub.  xxx.  22.*  The 
second  conception,  that  of  a  record,  appears  in  En. 
Ixxxix.  70  tf.,  where  the  evil  deeds  of  the  shepherds 
are  recorded  and  read  before  the  Lord ;  cf.  xc.  17, 
20,  xcviii.  7,  8,  civ.  7  (a  daily  record).  The  idea 
of  a  book  of  [fate  or  prophetic  historj',  is  repre- 
sented by  the  'heavenly  tablets,'  Ixxxi.  1,  '2,  xciii. 
1  ir. ;  but  this  should  be  kept  separate.  See,  further, 
following  article. 

As  regards  the  origin  of  the  conception,  if  we 
take  the  heavenly  book  in  the  wider  sense  of  a 
record  of  men's  actions  or  a  prophetic  world 
history,  it  is  obviously  one  of  those  conceptions 
for  which  it  is  not  easy  to  establish  a  relation  of 
dependence  between  one  religion  and  another, 
since  it  is  likely  to  arise  independently  in  various 
places.  A.  Jeremias  {Bahylonischcs  im  NT,  Leipzig, 
1905,  p.  69  tf.,  and  art.  '  Book  of  Life,'  in  EBE)  has 
pointed  to  the  Bab.  New  Year's  Festival,  at  ■which 
it  was  conceived  that  an  assembly  of  the  gods 
determined  the  events  of  the  year,  and  especially 
the  duration  of  men's  lives,  which  was  written 
down  in  a  '  tablet  of  life.'  For  the  narrower  con- 
ception of  the  book  of  life  as  set  forth  above,  the 
most  interesting  literary  parallel  is  that  cited  by 
Jeremias  from  the  Akhmim  fragments  of  the  Coptic 
Apoc.  of  SopJionicis  (Zephaniah),  tr,  L.  Stern,  in 
Zeitschr.  fur  dgypt.  Sprache,  xxiv.  [1886].  There 
the  seer  inquires  about  two  angels  whom  he  sees, 
and  is  told  by  his  angel  guide :  '  These  are  tlu; 
angels  of  the  Lord  Almighty  who  inscribe  all 
the  good  works  of  the  righteous  in  His  scrolls, 
sitting  at  the  gate  of  heaven.  They  give  these 
scrolls  to  me,  to  take  them  to  the  Lord  Almighty, 
in  order  that  He  may  write  their  name  {sc.  names 
of  the  righteous)  in  the  Book  of  the  Living.'  This 
passage  is  not  of  any  value  as  evidence  for  the 
source  of  the  conception,  for  the  work  shows  in 
many  places  dependence  upon  Rev.,  but  it  prob- 
ably indicates  correctly  how  the  relation  or  the 
book  of  life  to  the  other  books  in  Rev  20^-  is  to  be 
conceived.  As  Aiford  there  explains  it,  on  internal 
grounds,  the  other  books  are,  so  to  speak,  the 
'  vouchers '  for  the  book  of  life. 

In  the  Ajjostolic  Fathers  the  conception  occurs 
in  1  Clem.  xlv.  8  :  '  Those  who  remained  faithful, 
inherited  glory  and  honour,  were  exalted  and  were 
inscribed  by  God  in  His  memorial  for  ever ' ; 
Hernias,  Vis.  i.  3.  2  :  '  Cease  not  to  admonish  thy 
children,  for  I  know  that  if  they  shall  repent  with 
their  whole  hearts  they  shall  be  inscribed  in  the 
books  of  life  with  the  saints,'  and  Sim.  ii.  9  :  '  He 
that  does  these  things  shall  not  be  abandoned  by 
God,  but  shall  be  inscribed  upon  the  books  of  the 
living  ' ;  cf.  Hand.  viii.  6  :  '  Refrain  thyself  from 
all  these  things,  that  thou  niayest  live  to  God,  and 
be  enrolled  with  those  who  exercise  self-restraint 
therein.' 

Among  homiletic  expositions  of  the  passage 
Rev  20^2  one  of  the  most  impressive  is  that  of  St. 
Augustine  in  de  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  14.  Taking  the 
book  of  life  as  a  record  of  men's  deeds,  he  observes 
that  it  cannot  be  understood  literally,  since  the 
reading  of  such  a  record  would  be  interminable. 
'We  must  therefore  understand  it  of  a  certain 
Divine  power  by  which  it  shall  be  brought  about 
that  every  one  shall  recall  to  memory  all  his  own 
works,  whether  good  or  evil,  and  shall  mentally 
survey  them  with  a  marvellous  rapidity,  so  that 
this  knowledge  will  either  accuse  or  excuse  con- 
science, and  thus  all  and  each  shall  be  bimultane- 
ously  judged.' 

LiTBRATDRE.— R.  H.  Charles,  The  Knok  of  llniH-h-,  Oxford, 
1912,  note  on  xlvii.  3  ;  H.  Zinimem,  KA  n.  Berlin,  19U3,  p.  401ff. ; 
A.  Jeremias,  art.  '  Book  of  Life '  in  EUE  ;  W.  Bonsset,  Com. 

*  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Old  Latin  (Donatist)  text 
in  Jer  I'l^*  has  '  recedentes  a  te  scribantur  in  libro  mortia '  (see 
Burkitt,  Old  Latin  and  Itaia  [TS  iv.  3  (189C)).  p.  87). 


BOOK  WITH  THE  SEVEN  SEALS 


BRETHREN 


159 


(Gottingen,  lb96)  on  Kev  3^  ;  B.  Duhm,  Com.  (Gottingen,  1902) 
on  Is  4* ;  A.  Bertbolet,  SUUung  der  Itraeliten  u.  der  Juden 
tu  den  Frtmden,  Freiburg  wid  Leipzis,  ISDC 

W.    MOXTGOMEKY. 

BOOK  WITH  THE  SEVEN  SEALS.— There  is 
no  more  impressive  piece  of  symbolism  in  the 
Apocalypse  than  that  connected  with  the  seven- 
sealed  book  (Rev  5).  Much  of  the  imagery  of 
Rev.  strikes  the  modem  Western  mind  as  exotic 
and  unattractive  ;  it  is  only  by  a  determined  use 
of  the  historical  imagination  that  we  can  bring 
ourselves  to  a  sympathetic  understanding  of  it. 
But  here  the  qualities  which  we  look  for  in  great 
painting  or  in  epic  poetry  are  plainly  to  be  seen. 
And- this  applies  both  to  the  imagery  and  to  the 
dominant  thought.  The  unnamed  Presence  in  the 
glory  of  light  on  the  central  throne,  the  represen- 
tatives of  humanity  and  nature  groupned  around 
and  before  Him,  the  concentration  of  interest  in 
the  seven-sealed  book  held  out  upon  [itrl,  ace.)  His 
hand,  the  dramatic  challenge,  the  dread  pause 
when  there  seems  no  answer,  emphasized  by  the 
grief  of  the  Seer,  the  triumphant  approach  of  the 
Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Jndah — each  point  in  the  pro- 
gress of  the  drama  seizes  the  reader's  imaginarion 
and  increases  the  tension  of  his  sympathies,  till  at 
last  they  are  afforded  relief  by  the  magnificent 
burst  of  acclamation  which  follows. 

And  the  thought,  as  has  been  said,  is  worthy 
of  its  setting,  for  this  sealed  book  is  the  book  of 
destiny,  the  prophetic  history  of  the  world  as  fore- 
known in  the  purpose  of  God  ;  and  the  fact  that 
the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  alone  prevails  to 
open  the  book  is  the  symbolic  expression  of  what 
would  be  described  in  modem  language  as  the 
central  significance  of  Christ  in  history.  That 
the  Lion  is  also  the  Slain  Lamb  attaches  this  sig- 
nificance especially  to  His  sacrifice  of  Himself : 
*  For  thou  wast  slain  and  hast  redeemed  us  to 
God  by  thy  blood  .  .  .  and  hast  made  us  unto  our 
God,  Icings  and  priests.'  In  a  word,  the  purpose  of 
history  is  the  founding  of  a  redeemed  humanity. 

To  touch  on  some  of  the  details — the  conception 
of  a  book  containing  the  future  history  ot  the 
world  is  found  in  Enoch,  Ixxxi.  1,2:'  And  he  said 
unto  me :  O  Enoch,  observe  the  writing  of  the 
heavenly  tablets  and  read  what  is  written  thereon 
.  .  .  and  I  read  the  book  of  all  the  deeds  of  men, 
and  of  aU  the  children  of  flesh  that  will  be  upon 
the  earth  to  the  remotest  generations ' ;  and  more 
especially  xciiL  2,  3  :  '  Concerning  the  children  of 
righteousness  ...  I  will  speak  to  you  .  .  .  ac- 
cording to  that  which  I  have  learned  from  the 
heavenly  tables.'  (Then  follows  a  prophetic  scheme 
of  the  history  of  Israel  divided  into  seven  weeks. ) 

The  seals  obviously  imply  the  secret  nature  of 
the  record  (not  here,  directly,  ratification),  as  in 
Dn  12*.  If  the  vision  of  ch.  5  stood  alone,  the 
sevenfold  sealing  might  simply  emphasize  this 
idea,  but  the  successive  opening  of  the  seals  im- 
plies that  the  leaves  of  the  book  or  parchment-roll 
are  sealed  down  in  successive  portions,  and  the 
idea  of  completeness  in  the  seven  is  thus  referred 
to  the  history  (cf.  the  seven  weeks  of  Israel's 
history  in  Enoch). 

The  visions  connected  with  the  opening  of  the 
several  seals  are  of  less  central  interest,  belonging 
rather  to  the  general  furniture  of  apocalyptic. 
The  second  to  the  sixth  signify  clearly  war,  famine, 
pestilence,  persecution,  convulsions  of  nature.  As 
to  the  meaning  of  the  first  horseman,  expositors 
are  not  agreed,  Swete  takes  the  first  two  together 
as  representatives  of  war  in  its  two  aspects  of 
victory  and  carnage.  At  the  seventh  vision  the 
scheme,  instead  of  moving  directly  to  its  com- 
pletion, branches  out  into  new  ramifications. 

LlTKRATCWE. — Scc  Literature  at  end  of  preceding  article. 
W.    MOXTGOMERY. 


BOSOR.— See  Beor. 
BOTTOMLESS  PIT.— See  Abyss. 

BOWL.— The  word  is  used  in  the  RV"  instead  of 
'  vial '  to  translate  <tn&\Tj,  which  occurs  12  times 
in  Revelation.  The  change  was  desirable,  as  the 
former  word,  a  modification  of  '  phial,'  has  come  to 
mean  a  small  glass  vessel  or  bottle,  as  in  Milton's 
'  precious  vialled  liquors.'  ^tdXij  meant  in  classical 
Greek  (after  Homer,  to  whom  it  was  a  cinerarj- 
urn)  a  broad  shallow  bowl  used  in  drinking  or  in 
offering  libations.  Its  saucer  shape  allowed  its 
contents  to  be  poured  out  at  once  or  suddenly.  It 
was  often  of  finely- wrought  gold  or  silver  (Herod, 
ii.  151 ;  Pind.  Nem.  ix.  122),  and  it  is  a  familiar 
object  in  classical  art.  In  the  LXX  <j>uxKrj  denotes 
a  bronze  bowl  or  basin  (Pi|2)  used  in  the  sacri- 
ficial ritual  of  Tabernacle  or  Temple  (Ex  27*) — the 
vessel  in  which  the  priest  caught  the  warm  blood 
of  the  victim,  to  dash  it  upon  the  altar.  These 
uses  of  the  word,  with  striking  modifications,  are 
reflected  in  Revelation.  (1)  In  a  single  passf^ 
(5*)  it  is  employed  with  its  classical  connotation, 
except  that  the  offering  which  the  vessel  holds  is 
not  the  pagan  libation  of  wine,  but  the  Levitical 
gift  of  incense.  '  The  ^Qm  and  the  -rpfa^urepoi  [re- 
presenting perhaps  all  Nature  and  all  saints]  fell 
do>vn  before  the  Lamb,  having  .  .  .  golden  bowls 
[(pidXaf  xP''<'^*0  fiiU  of  incense.'  The  Vulg.  has 
'  phialas  aureas,'  but  the  proper  Lat.  equivalent  of 
4Kd\ij  was  '  patera,'  as  in  Virg.  Geor.  iL  192,  '  pateris 
libamus  et  auro.'  The  subjoined  interpretation  of 
the  bowls  and  their  contents  as  '  the  prayers  of  the 
saints '  is  probably  an  editorial  gloss  suggested  by 
Rev  8*  (see  LxcEXSE).  (2)  In  every  other  passage 
where  the  word  occurs  the  (pidXij  does  not  exhale  a 
cloud  of  fragrant  incense,  sent  up  with  the  adora- 
tion of  saints,  but  is  filled  with  the  hot,  bitter, 
poisonous  wine  of  the  wrath  of  God,  which  earth  is 
made  to  drink — a  figure  resembling  the  prophetic 
'  cup  of  reeling '  (Is  51"-  ^),  but  even  more  appalling. 
The  seven  angels  who  have  the  seven  bowis  are 
'laden  with  the  seven  last  plagues'  (Rev  21'). 
Every  emptied  <pidXr)  means  au  added  judgment 
falling  on  land  or  sea  or  air  (16"-).  Hence  in 
common  speech  the  words  'vials'  and  'wrath' 
have  become  almost  inseparably  linked  together. 

James  Str.\han. 

BREAKING  OF  BREAD.  — See  Love-Feast, 
Eucharist. 

BREASTPLATE.— See  Armour. 

BRETHREN.— In  the  OT  this  term  refers  to  :  (1) 
birth  from  the  same  parent  or  parents  (very  fre- 
quently, e.g.,  in  Gn  37-50) ;  (2)  meml)ership  of  the 
same  nation  (e.g.  Ex  2"),  with  special  emphasis  on 
the  bond  thus  established  between  the  various 
single  tribes  (e.g.  Nu  18^  Dt  3*),  even  when  one  of 
them  is  separated  oft"  (Dt  10*  18»-') ;  (3)  membership 
of  other  groups  lying  between  the  family  and  the 
nation,  i.e.  clans  and  single  tribes  (see  Dt  18', 
where  the  Levite's  '  brethren '  are  his  fellow- 
Levites) ;  (4)  metaphorical  applications  which  are 
too  general  and  too  various  for  exact  delimitation. 

The  OT  and  NT  alike  use  only  one  word  for 
'  brethren '  (cnx  and  dSe\(poi  respectively),  and  trust 
to  its  flexibility  to  express  every  needed  shade  of 
meaning.  aS€\(p6s  is  of  great  frequency  (about  40 
times  in  Mt.  and  still  oftener  in  Acts).  In  the 
Gospels  the  literal  use  predominates ;  in  the  Acts 
and  Epistles  various  metaphorical  uses.  The  literal 
use  is  especially  clear  in  Mt  10^^  12«  13^  22®,  but 
Mt.  tends  more  than  anv  other  Gospel  to  a 
metaphorical  sense ;  cf.  5-  ^  **• "  12«-**  18"  23®  25*> 
28^*,  to  which  only  Lk  8"  17*  provide  even  a  partial 
parallel.     The    'brother'    intended   is    especially 


160   BKETHREN  OF  THE  LORD 


BROTHERLY  LOVE 


one's  fellow-Ciiristian,  and  Mt.  in  this  way  leads 
over  from  the  Gospels  to  the  rest  of  the  Nl ,  much 
of  which  is,  however,  chronologically  earlier. 

d5f\</)6j  in  the  purely  family  sense  (see  (1)  above) 
occurs  in  Ac  12*,  Gal  1^*,  1  Co  9*,  and  perhaps  2  Co 
818  i2»8  (A.  Souter  in  ExpT  xviii.  [1906-07]  285). 
In  its  second  sense  it  occurs  in  Ro  9^  (cf.  Ac  22'-' 
23'-  *• ",  where  St.  Paul  is  addressing  Jews).  Usually, 
however,  '  the  brethren '  (cf.  ddeXtporrii, '  the  brother- 
hood '  [1  P  2'^  5*])  means  the  Christian  community 
(e.g.  Ac  1'"),  and  this  is  much  more  definitely 
marked  off  from  non-Christians  than  in  Mt.  (ct. 
1  Co  5"  6' 7";  the  whole  spirit  of  Gal.,  especially 
the  privileged  '  liousehold  of  the  faith,'  6^" ;  and 
the  alienation  from  '  the  world'  in  Jn.  and  1  Jn.). 

d5eX0o9  was  common  at  this  time  in  the  Greek 
East  as  meaning  '  member  of  a  community '  (see 
Deissmann,  Bible  Studies,  Eng.  tr.,  1901,  p.  82f., 
Light  from  the  Ancient  East'^,  do.,  1911,  p.  107), 
but  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  minimize  on  that 
account  its  fervent  tone  in  the  NT,  or  its  import- 
ance as  suggesting  a  fulfilment  of  such  words  of 
Jesus  as  Jn  13^'  concerning  mutual  love.  This 
love  is  a  command  (Jn  13^^),  a  fundamental  thing 
taught  directly  by  God  (1  Th  4'),  a  test  of  living  or 
not  living  in  God  (1  Jn  3"  4i2).  Denney  in  HDB 
(art.  '  Brotherly  Love ')  points  out  that  it  found 
expression  in  two  special  ways — hospitality  and 
care  for  persecuted  Christians.  The  word  '  bre- 
thren '  is  continually  used  in  exhortation  and 
appeal,  sometimes  strengthened  by  ayairrp-oL  ('  be- 
loved'), as  in  1  Co  15*"*;  or  Kai  iwnrbdtjroi.  ('and 
longed  for ')  may  further  be  added  (Ph  4^).  Again, 
brethren  are  called  7rt(rTo's  ('  faithful '  or  '  believing '), 
as  Col  12  4»,  or  iiyios  ('holy'),  as  Col  1^,  He  3^. 
Freqiiently  'brother'  has  a  patlietic  tone  (1  Co 
8",  Philem  '•  ^^-  -",  2  Th  3^',  Ja  2^^).  It  is  often  a 
humble  or  a  humbling  word  (Gal  3^5  gi,  Ph  S^^,  1  Th 
5-^,  2  Th  31).  In  Ac  9^^  22}',  1  Co  16^2  (see  Com- 
mentaries) it  breathes  a  line  magnanimity.  Gal 
6'*  is  noteworthy  in  that  this  most  fiery  of  St. 
Paul's  letters  is  the  only  one  which  has  '  brothers  ' 
as  its  closing  note.  C.  H.  Watkins. 

BRETHREN  OF  THE  LORD.— See  James,  Ep.  of. 

BRIDE,  BRIDEGROOM.— See  artt.  Family  and 
Marriage. 

BRIMSTONE.— Brimstone  {ddov),*  or  sulphur, 
is  scientifically  one  of  the  most  important  of  the 
non-metallic  elements,  widely  distributed  in  the 
mineral  world,  sometimes  pure,  and  sometimes 
chemically  combined  with  otner  elements,  forming 
sulphates  and  sulphides.  It  is  found  in  greatest 
abundance  in  volcanic  regions,  and  is  extensively 
employed  in  arts  and  manufactures.  Most  of  what 
is  used  in  modern  Europe  is  obtained  from  Sicily, 
which  finds  therein  one  of  the  sources  of  its  wealth. 
The  ancients  used  brimstone  for  ordinary  fumi- 
gations and  especially  for  religious  purifications. 

'Bring  hither  Are,  and  hither  sulphur  bring 
To  purge  the  palace  ' 

(Homer,  Od.  xxii.  481 1.). 

In  the  Grseco-Roman  period  the  hot  sulphur  springs 
of  Palestine,  on  both  sides  of  the  Dead  Sea,  at 
Tiberias,  and  in  the  valley  of  the  Yarmuk,  were 
used  medicinally.  At  the  direction  of  his  physicians, 
Herod  the  Great  '  went  beyond  the  river  Jordan, 
and  bathed  himself  in  the  warm  baths  that  were 
at  Callirrhoij,  which,  besides  their  other  general 
virtues,  were  also  fit  to  drink '  (Jos.  Ant.  XVII.  vi.  5). 
But  the  biblical  meaning,  which  is  invariably 

*  6tlov  is  a  word  of  uncertain  etj'mology.  It  may  be  the  neut. 
of  Btioi  and  mean  Divine  incense,  from  the  supposed  purifying 
and  conta^fion-preventing  virtue  of  burning  sulphur ;  but 
Curtius  allies  it  with  0voi  and  fumtis.  Brimstone  is  the  O.K. 
*  brenston '  and  Scot.  '  bruntstane.' 


determined  by  Gn  19^^  reflects  the  ideas  of  a  pre- 
scientific  age,  in  which  the  commercial  value  and 
domestic  utility  of  brimstone  were  unsuspected, 
while  electric  currents  and  their  sulphurous  fumes 
were  regarded  as  indications  of  the  wrath  of 
heaven.  '  Fire  and  brimstone  and  a  burning  wind ' 
(Ps  11'),  'an  overflowing  shower,  and  great  hail- 
stones, fire,  and  brimstone'  (Ezk  38-**),  were  not 
the  mere  symbols,  but  the  actual  media  of  Divine 
judgment.  The  association  of  lightning  and 
brimstone  was  Avide-spread  and  persistent,  the 
ozonic  odour  which  accompanies  electric  discharges 
being  ascribed  to  the  presence  of  sulphur.  '  Ful- 
mina,  fulguraq^uoque,'  says  Pliny,  '  sulf uris  odorem 
habent,  ac  lux  ipsa  eorum  sulf  urea  est'  (HN  xxxv. 
1.  [15]).  'Sulfur  aethereum'  (Lucan,  vii,  160)  and 
'sulfur  sacrum'  (Pers.  ii.  25)  are  synonyms  for 
liglitning,  and  Shakespeare's  'stones  of  sulphur' 
are  thunderbolts. 

The  prophetic  writer  of  Revelation  naturally 
retains  the  old  picturesque  language  with  its  dread 
suggestion.  His  armies  of  angelic  horsemen  have 
breastplates  of  fire  and  of  hyacinth  and  of  brim- 
stone— red  and  blue  and  yellow — and  their  breath 
is  lire  and  smoke  and  brimstone  (9").  The  worship- 
pers of  the  Beast  and  his  image  are  to  be  tormented 
with  fire  and  brimstone  in  the  presence  of  the 
angels  and  the  Lamb  (14").  And  the  destruction 
of  the  wicked  in  the  end  of  the  age  will  be  a 
magnified  repetition  of  the  overthrow  of  the  cities 
of  the  Ghor — the  godless  multitude  are  to  be  cast 
into  the  lake  that  burns  with  fire  and  brimstone, 
which  is  the  second  death  (2'8  ;  cf.  19-'"  20'°). 

James  Strahan. 

BROTHER.— See  Family. 

BROTHERHOOD.— See  Brethren,  Fellow- 
ship. 

BROTHERLY  LOYE.— 1.  Meaning  of  the  words 

and  usage. — The  word  <pi\ade\(pia  occurs  in  the  NT 
in  Ro  12">,  1  Th  4^,  He  13',  1  P  P-,  2  P  V.  The 
AV  renders  it  in  the  first  three  passages  '  brotherly 
love,'  in  the  fourth  'love  of  the  brethren,'  in  the 
last '  brotherly  kindness '  (in  order  to  mark  a  quali- 
tative as  well  as  a  quantitative  distinction  between 
<pi\aSe\<f)la  and  the  following  Aydin]).  The  RV  has 
in  all  passages  '  love  of  the  brethren,'  which  i;^  more 
correct,  since  in  the  Greek  word  the  second  part 
takes  the  place  of  an  objective,  not  a  subjective, 
genitive.  The  adjective  ^iXdJeX^oj  is  found  in 
1  P  3*.  The  original  meaning  of  the  word  is  the 
literal  one  of  love  for  brothers  (and  sisters)  by 
blood -relationship  (cf.  Xen.  Mem.  II.  iii.  17,  '  loving 
one  like  a  brother* ;  Jos.  Ant.  IV.  ii.  4,  where  the 
word  is  used  of  Moses  and  Aaron  ;  Lucian,  Dial. 
Dcor.  xxvi.  2,  where  it  is  used  of  Castor  and  Pollux). 
In  the  NT  it  has  only  the  metaphorical  sense  of 
love  towards  the  fellow-members  of  the  Church — a 
usage  which  already  occurs  in  earlier  Jewish  wTit- 
ings  (cf.  2  Mac  IS'*,  the  love  of  Israelite  towards 
Israelite).  It  should  be  noted  that  '  the  brotiier- 
liood  '(IP  2")  to  which  this  love  applies  is  nowhere 
in  the  NT  humanity  as  such.  'Brethren'  is  not 
the  correlate  of  tiie  universal  Fatherhood  of  God, 
but  of  that  specific  paternal  relation  which  God 
sustains  to  believers  (cf.  Mt  23^*).  The  NT  concep- 
tion has  its  root  in  the  redemptive  experience  of 
Israel  (Zee  11'*,  Mai  2'")  and  of  the  Apostolic 
Church.  It  obtains  its  significance  for  universal- 
ism  througli  the  missionary  extension  of  this,  not 
through  philosophical  abstraction  from  all  positive 
differences  as  is  the  case  with  the  Hellenic  idea  of 
cosmopolitanism.  Even  where  the  duty  of  love  for 
all  men  is  based  on  kinship  by  nature,  this  is  traced 
bac^k  to  creation  in  the  image  of  God  (Ja  3*).  In 
1  Th  3"*  love  towards  the  fellow-members  of  the 
Church  and  towards  all  is  explicitly  distinguished, 


BROTHERLY  LOVE 


BROTHERLY  LOVE 


161 


but  it  is  uncertain  whether  'all'  here  means  all 
Christians  or  all  men.  In  2  P  T  ' love'  appears  as 
something  supplementary  to  '  brotherly  love' ;  the 
context  here  requires  the  reference  ot  this  '  love ' 
to  man;  the  distinction  between  ^nXadeXipia  and 
d7<ixT7  most  therefore  lie  in  the  range  of  extent ; 
at  the  same  time  the  difierence  in  the  word  used 
suggests  the  deeper  and  more  intimate  character  of 
brotherly  love  (cf.  tpiXely  in  Jn  5-^  16-").  In  Gal  6'* 
a  distinction  is  made  between  the  working  of  good 
toward  '  all  men '  and  toward  '  them  that  are  of  the 
liousehold  of  the  faith.' 

2.  The  primacy  of  love  in  Christianity. — The  dis- 
tinctiveness of  Christianity  lies  not  so  much  in  the 
theoretical  discovery  or  proclamation  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  love,  either  as  constitutive  in  the  Divine 
character  or  as  reguhitive  for  human  conduct,  but 
rather  in  the  proiluction  of  forces  and  motives 
which  give  to  the  principle  a  new  concrete  reality 
in  the  life  of  men  (cf.  ilk  12»,  Lk  1(F,  iJn  2^  3*). 
Still,  even  as  a  subject  of  teaching,  love  occupies  a 
prominent  place  in  the  apostolic  writings.  It  ap- 
j)ears  not  merely  as  one  important  factor  among 
others  in  the  Christian  life,  but  as  its  chief  ?nd 
most  characteristic  ingredient,  greater  even  tLan 
faith  and  hope  (1  Co  V6^).  The  Pastoral  Epistles 
utter  a  warning  against  the  absorption  of  the  re- 
ligious interest  by  the  false  gnosis  and  its  asceti- 
cism or  impure  love  to  the  detriment  of  true  Chris- 
tian love  ( 1  Ti  1'  5«,  2  Ti  -I---^  3^-^  ").  The  primacy 
of  love  also  finds  expression  in  such  passages  as 
Ro  I3*-i»,  Eph  1*,  Ja  2«,  Rev  2». 

3.  Love  for  God. — The  love  thus  made  prominent 
is,  before  all  else,  love  towards  (lod.  Ritschl's  view, 
that  the  NT  writers,  especially  St.  Paul,  conceive 
of  love  towards  God  as  something  difScnlt  of  attain- 
ment, and  therefore  hesitate  to  speak  of  it,  except 
in  the  quotation  which  underlies  Ro  8^,  1  Co  2*  8*, 
.Ja  V-  2^,  is  not  borne  out  by  the  facts.  Against  it 
speaks  2  Th  2*.  Conceptions  like  '  living  unto  God ' 
(Ro  6»o-  ",  Gal  2'9),  'pleasing  God'  (Ro  8«,  Gal  l''«, 
1  Th  4'),  'offering  sacrifice  to  God '  (Ro  12'  IS'^,  Ph 
4'^  He  13'5.  1  P  2*).  '  serving  God '  (Ro  !»  7*  16»s, 
1  Th  P,  2  Ti  13,  He  9^*),  aU  imply  that  the  Chris- 
tian's religious  life  is  inspired  by  an  aflection 
directly  terminating  upon  God  (cf.  also  1  Co  14-, 
Rev  2^"-  ^).  It  is  unwarranted,  where  the  concep- 
tion of  love  occurs  without  further  specification  of 
the  object,  to  think  exclusively  of  the  fraternal 
attection  among  Christians  mutually.  In  many 
cases  the  writers  may  have  had  in  mind  primarily 
the  love  for  God.  The  very  fact  that  Christian 
love  must  be  exercised  in  imitation  of  Christ  favours 
this  primary  God-ward  reference  (Eph  S""*).  Nor  is 
it  correct  to  say  that  the  only  mode  of  expressing 
love  to  God  lies  in  the  service  of  men.  1  Jn  4^^  is 
often  quoted  in  proof  of  this,  but  the  passage  in 
the  context  means  no  more  than  that  the  invisibility 
of  God  exposes  man  in  his  feeling  of  love  for  Him  to 
the  danger  of  self-deception,  which  can  be  guarded 
against  by  testing  oneself  in  regard  to  the  actual 
experience  of  love  for  the  brethren.  Hence  in  5"' 
the  opposite  principle  is  also  affirmed,  viz.  that  the 
assurance  of  the  genuineness  of  one's  love  for  the 
brethren  is  obtainable  from  the  exercise  of  love 
and  obedience  towards  God.  Only  in  so  far  as  the 
love  of  God  assumes  the  form  of  concrete  deeds 
of  helpfulness,  it  cannot  serve  God  except  in  the 
brethren. 

4.  Interdependence  of  the  love  for  God  and  love 
for  the  brethren.— The  love  for  God  and  the  love 
for  the  brethren  are  not,  according  to  the  apostolic 
teaching,  two  independent  facts.  In  examining 
their  relation,  it  should  be  remembered  that  the 
love  for  God  and  the  love  for  Christ  are  to  the  NT 
practically  interchangeable  conceptions,  Christ  no 
less  than  God  being  the  source  and  recipient  of 
religiotis  devotion  (Eph   3^').     This  may  be  most 

VOL.   I.  —  II 


strikingly  illustrated  by  a  comparison  of  the  Gospel 
and  the  h  irst  Epistle  of  John  :  in  the  latter,  love  is 
derived  from  and  attached  to  God  precisely  after 
the  same  manner  as  in  the  Gospel  it  is  derived  from 
and  attached  to  Christ.  The  close  union  of  love 
for  God  (and  Christ)  and  love  for  the  brethren  can 
be  traced  both  objectively  and  subjectively.  06- 
jeetively  it  may  be  followed  along  these  lines  :  the 
Divine  purpose  and  the  redemptive  process  do  not 
contemplate  the  production  of  love  for  Grod  in  iso- 
lated individuals,  but  in  the  Church  as  the  organic 
community  of  believers.  It  is  through  the  conjoined 
love  for  God  and  the  brethren  that  the  Church  is 
and  works  as  an  organism  (1  Co  12,  Eph  3"), 
'  rooted  and  grounded  in  love '  (Eph  3",  cf .  Col  3'* 
'  the  bond  of  perfectness ') ;  hence  the  same  term, 
Koij'w»'ta,'commvmion,'i3usedfor  the  fellowship  with 
God  Mid  Christ  and  the  fellowship  with  the  breth- 
ren (1  Co  1«,  2  Co  6'*  8*,  Ph  1'  3»»,  1  Jn  1>-  ••') ;  the 
act  which  produces  love  for  Gkxi  simultaneously 
produces  love  for  the  brethren,  and  the  same  Spirit 
which  underlies  and  inspires  the  former  likewise 
underlies  and  inspires  the  latter  (Ro  IS**,  2  Co  6*, 
Gal  5«  Eph  1*  6^,  Col  1«,  1  Th  3'-4»,  1  Jn  3'*) ;  the 
inseparableness  of  the  two  also  finds  expression  in 
the  figure  of  the  family  or  household  of  God  (Gal  6", 
Eph  2"*,  1  Jn  1^  2^  5^  [where,  however,  '  him  that  is 
begotten '  may  refer  to  Christ  and  not  to  the  fellow- 
believer]).  Subjectively  the  interdependence  of  love 
for  God  and  love  for  the  brethren  presents  itself  as 
follows :  through  the  recognition  of  the  inclusive- 
ness  of  the  love  of  God  the  experience  of  the  same 
acts  as  a  motive-power  for  the  Christian  to  include 
those  whom  God  loves  in  his  own  love  Ekewise; 
the  Christian  also  recognizes  that  he  is  not  merely 
the  object  of  the  Divine  love,  but  also  the  instru- 
ment of  its  manifestation  to  others  ;  he  serves  man 
in  the  service  of  God  (Ro  6",  1  Co  7^,  2  Co  8*,  Ph 
2'^,  2  Ti  4*) ;  the  love  of  God  and  Christ  shown  him 
becomes  to  the  believer  an  example  of  love  to  the 
brethren  (Ro  U^,  1  Co  8",  2  Co  S^  >,  Eph  4»  5-,  Ph 
2**-,  1  Jn  4") ;  the  idea  of  a  close  union  between 
the  two  also  underlies  the  formula  '  faith  energiz- 
ing through  love '  (Gal  5*).  Here  faith  as  the  right 
attitude  towards  God  as  Redeemer  begets  love  for 
Him,  which  in  turn  becomes  the  active  principle  of 
service  to  others  (cf.  v.^').  Because  the  love  for 
others  is  thus  founded  on,  and  regulated  by,  the 
love  for  God,  it  not  only  does  not  require  but  for- 
bids fellowship  with  such  as  are  in  open  opposition 
to  God  and  Christ  (1  Jn  2»  5'«,  2  Jn  '*,  Rev  2^  «). 

5.  The  origin  of  brotherly  Ioyc. — Religious  love 
in  general  is  a  supernatural  product.  It  originates 
not  spontaneously  from  a  sinful  soU,  but  in  response 
to  the  sovereign  love  of  God.  and  that  under  the 
influence  of  the  Spirit  (Ro  S*-®  8®,  1  Co  8»  [where 
'  is  known  of  him '  = '  has  become  the  object  of  his 
love'].  Gal  4'  [where  'to  be  known  by  Gk)d'  has 
the  same  pregnant  sense],  1  Jn  4''*' ").  Love  for 
the  brethren  specifically  is  also  a  product  of  re- 
generation (1  P  1--^;  cf.  1"-').  Especially  in  St. 
Paul,  the  origin  of  brotherly  love  is  connected  with 
the  supernatural  experience  of  dying  with  Christ, 
in  which  the  sinful  love  of  self  is  destroyed,  and 
love  for  God,  Christ,  and  the  brethren  produced  in 
its  place  (Ro  6><«-  7*  8i-»,  2  Co  5»^i«,  Gal  2^- »). 
Accordingly,  love  for  the  brethren  appears  among 
other  \-irtues  and  graces  as  a  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  a 
charisma  (Ro  If^,  1  Co  13,  Gal  5**  6»-").  Although 
this  is  not  explicitly  stated  in  Acts,  there  is  no 
doubt  that  St.  Luke  (if  not  the  early  disciples 
themselves)  derived  the  manifestation  of  love  in 
the  Mother-church  from  the  influence  of  the  Spirit. 

6.  The  essence  of  brotherly  loYe.— A  psycho- 
logical definition  of  brotherly  love  is  nowhere  given 
in  the  apostolic  ^vritings,  but  certain  notes  and 
characteristics  are  prominently  brought  out. 

These  are :  {\)  On  the  positive  side. — (a)  Personal 


162 


BROTHERLY  LOVE 


BUILDING 


attachment  and  devotion.  The  fornml;e  for  this 
are  '  to  give  oneself,'  '  to  owe  oneself,'  '  to  seek  the 
person'  (2  Co  8*  12'*,  Philem  i").  There  is  among 
the  brethren  an  inner  harmony  of  willing  (Ac  4^-). 
As  such  an  inward  thing  true  love  goes  beyond  all 
concrete  acts  of  helpfulness :  it  means  more  even 
than  feeding  the  poor  or  giving  one's  body  to  be 
burnt  (1  Co  13') ;  it  involves  an  absolute  identifica- 
tion in  life-experience,  which  goes  to  the  extent  of 
bearing  the  burden  of  sorrow  for  the  sins  and 
the  weaknesses  of  others  (Ko  15S  1  Co  2*,  2  Co  7^ 
Gal  6^*). — (b)  An  energetic  assertion  of  the  will  to 
love.  Love  does  not  consist  in  mere  sentiment ;  it 
is  subject  to  the  imperative  of  duty.  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  it  as  a  matter  of  pursuit  and  zealous 
endeavour  (1  Co  14^) ;  it  involves  strenuous  labour 
<1  Th  P  [where  '  the  labour  of  love'  is  not  the 
labour  performed  by  love,  but  the  labour  ii^volved 
in  loving]).  Hence  also  its  voluntariness  is  emphas- 
ized (2  Co  9'),  and  the  continuance  of  its  obligation 
insisted  upon  (Ro  13*). — (c)  Concrete  helpfulness  to 
others.  '1  he  NT  throughout  preaches  the  necessity 
for  love  to  issue  into  practical  furtherance  of  the 
interests  of  others.  This  is  emphatically  true  even 
of  St.  Paul,  notwithstanding  his  insistence  on  faitli 
as  the  sole  ground  of  salvation.  The  Apostle, 
because  governed  by  the  principle  of  the  glory  of 
God  as  subserved  by  the  love  of  God,  requires  the 
work  as  essential  to  the  completeness  of  love. 
'  Good  works '  is  a  standing  formula  in  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  (1  Ti  21"  S^"-  ^&»,  2  Ti  2"  3",  Tit  P«  2'-  " 
31-  8) ;  but  it  also  appears  in  Ac  93«,  Ro  13'  14«,  1  Co 
620  10",  2  Co  9»,  Eph  2'",  Col  P",  He  \QP\  1  P  2'2, 
Rev  22-  '»•  28-  2«  32-  8. 15  14^3  20'^  22^2,  Hence  the 
reference  to  the  '  members'  as  organs  of  the  service 
of  God  (R<?  6"  121).  Tiie  test  of  love  lies  in  its 
helpfulness  (Ro  14,  1  Co  8).  Love  'edifies,'  i.e. 
builds  up,  the  fellow-Christian  (1  Co  8').  It  contri- 
butes, however,  not  exclusively,  nor  even  primarily, 
to  the  material  or  intellectual,  but  to  the  spiritual 
benelit  of  others  (1  Co  8^).  The  NT  avoids  the 
errors  both  of  the  Jewish  and  of  the  Hellenic  prac- 
tice of  ethics.  In  Judaism  the  external  acts  had 
become  too  much  detached  from  the  personal  spirit 
of  devotion.  In  Hellenism  the  interest  was  too 
much  turned  inward  and  absorbed  by  a  self-centred 
cultivation  of  virtue  as  such.  Because  all  conduct 
is  thus  determined  by  the  supreme  principle  of  love 
as  helpfulness,  all  casuistry  is  excluded  and  ethical 
jjroblems  are  all  reduced  to  the  one  question  :  what 
will  benefit  my  brother  ?  This  absence  of  all  casu- 
istic treatment  of  ethical  questions  is  characteristic 
of  St.  James  as  well  as  of  St.  Paul. 

(2)  On  the  negative  side. — The  negation  of  self. 
Love  for  the  brethren  originates  only  through  the 
death  of  the  sinful  love  of  self.  Those  who  die  this 
death  no  longer  live  to  themselves  (2  Co  5^',  Gal  2'* 
6",  Ph  2*- 21) ;  love  is  the  opposite  of  all  self-pleas- 
ing and  self-seeking  (Ro  \b^«-,  2  Co  2^-^  Gal  l'», 
1  Th  2»,  Eph  6»,  Ph  P«ff-,  Col  322).  It  excludes 
every  selfish  cult  of  individuality  (Ro  12^7  ]4i«  152), 
all  vain-glorying  and  excessive  self-consciousness 
(Ro  327 123,  1  Co  129  321 47,  Ph  23,  1  Th  2«),  all  envious 
comparison  of  self  with  others  (Ro  12^,  Gal  4"),  all 
personal  anger  or  resentment  (2  Co  2'  122",  Gal  5-'", 
Eph  42«- "  6^  Ph  1",  Col  3«,  1  Ti  2^) ;  it  is  not, 
however,  inconsistent  with  wrath  for  the  sake  of 
Christ  and  God  (2  Co  2^  Gal  1^,  1  Th  4"-i«,  Rev  2- 
16. 19  gio.  16  1410)^  ^yjth  a  strong  sense  of  the  indepen- 
<lence  of  men  in  the  service  of  God  (1  Co  9'- 1*,  Gal  2* 
51),  with  the  right  to  glory  in  the  distinction  which 
God's  grace  has  conferred  (1  Co  1*'  4*,  2  Co  1"  7" 
10M1"12»,  Gal6'*,  Ph2i8). 

7.  Forms  of  manifestation  of  brotherly  love.— 
As  such  the  following  are  conspicuously  monticmed. 
(1)  The  external  expression  of  the  inward  unity  of 
love  in  the  form  of  common  meals,  the  ayd-n-ai  ( Ac 
2<«,  1  Co  ll"-3<,  2  P  2",  Jude  ^2).     (O)  The  Koivo,Aa 


of  benevolence  through  the  altruistic  use  of  private 
means  (Ac  4*^  Ro  12-"  152«,  2  Co  82-5  9"  12'*-  '»,  Gal 
2'"  6'o,  He  e'o  13'«).  This  Koivuvla  was  not,  however, 
in  the  early  Church  a  '  community  of  goods '  in  the 
modern  sense  (cf.  Ac  4**-  ^'  with  5*).  In  the  case  of 
enemies,  benevolence  becomes  the  only  form  in  which 
love  can  express  itself  (Ro  122",  Gal  6'").  (3)  The 
missionary  extension  of  the  blessings  of  salvation  to 
others.  The  duty  of  missions  is  distinctly  put  on 
the  basis  of  love.  Primarily  this  means  love  for 
God  and  Christ  (Ro  P,  1  Co  9",  2  Co  412  5*) ;  but 
secondarily  it  signifies  also  love  towards  men  (Ro  1*  ; 
cf.  13"  and  Eph  5*,  1  Jn  P'*).  It  is  characteristic 
of  apostolic  missions  that  they  are  not  related  to 
the  individual  but  to  the  organism  of  the  Church, 
and  conceived  not  as  an  unconscious  influence,  nor 
as  a  secret  propaganda  (like  the  Jewish  mission), 
but  as  an  open  proclamation  and  a  deliberate 
pursuit.  In  the  last  analysis  this  is  due  to  the 
consciousness  that  the  Church  as  an  organism  is 
the  instrument  through  which  God  and  Christ 
bring  their  love  to  bear  upon  the  world. 

LiTERATiTRE.— A.  Hamack,  The  Mission  and  Expansion  of 
Chrigtianitp  in  the  First  Three  Centuries,  Eng.  tr.-,  19i)8,  i. 
147-198  ;  W.  Liitgert,  Die  Liebeim  Xeuen  Testament,  Leipzig, 
1905 ;  E.  Sartorius,  The  Doctrine  of  Divine  Love,  Enjj.  tr., 
1884 ;    B.   Wilberforce,  Sanctijication   hy    the    Truth,  1906, 

p-180-  Geerhardus  Vo.s. 

BUFFET.— The  word  'bufTet'  is  used  in  AV  as 
the  translation  of  KoXatplli'w  (lit.  '  to  give  one  blows 
with  the  lists,  or  slaps  on  the  ear'),  which  means 
'to  treat  with  violence  and  contempt.'  The  verb 
is  found  only  in  the  NT  and  later  ecclesiastical 
writers,  and  is  probably  colloquial.  In  the  ex- 
hortation to  slaves  in  1  P  22^  it  is  used  to  describe 
the  rough  usage  to  which  such  persons  were  sub- 
jected by  heathen  masters  as  a  punishment  for 
their  offences.  The  fact  that  it  is  so  used,  is  prob- 
ably the  reason  wiiy  it  is  preferred  to  other  terms 
of  similar  import  in  1  Co  4"  ('we  are  butleted'), 
where  it  is  vividly  descriptive  of  the  ill  usage 
which  St.  Paul  constantly  experienced  in  pursuit 
of  his  apostolic  mission,  especially  when  contrasted 
with  the  happier  fortune  of  his  Corinthian  converts 
('  ye  reigned  as  kings ').  1  Co  92^  RV  gives  '  bufiet ' 
as  the  rendering  also  of  iTrwTrtdfw  (from  vt6  and 
wi/',  '  to  hit  under  the  eye,'  and  then  '  to  beat  black 
and  blue'),  a  word  admirably  fitted  to  express  the 
hardships  and  sufferings  endured  by  St.  Paul  in 
the  course  of  his  ministry,  and  patiently  sub- 
mitted to  as  a  salutary  means  of  spiritual  disci- 
pline. The  fact  that  the  Apostle  speaks  of  him- 
self as  the  a^ent  in  producing  the  discipline  ('I 
buffet  my  body')  need  not  be  taken  as  evidence 
that  ascetic  practices,  or  bodily  mortifications,  are 
intended.  He  regarded  his  body  as  an  antagonist 
to  be  subdued  by  the  Milling  acceptance  of  adverse 
circumstances  fitted  to  promote  his  personal  sancti- 
lication.  W.  S.  MONTGOMERY. 

BUILDING.— The  usual  NT  word  is  oIko5oh^= 
olKoddfiTja-Ls,  a  building  in  course  of  construction,  as 
distinguished  from  oiKoS6ny)iJ.a,  a  finished  structure. 

1.  1  Co  3*. — 'Ye  are  God's  husbandry  (RVm 
'  tilled  land '),  God's  building.'  Without  pressing 
the  change  of  metaphor,  it  is,  however,  to  be  noted, 
as  indicating  the  intensity  of  the  Apostle's  thought, 
how  his  mind  grasps  first  one  method  of  increase 
and  then  another.  The  Kingdom  grows  like  the 
organic  development  in  the  vegetable  world,  where 
outside  substances  are  incorporated  and  assimilated 
into  the  organism  itself.  Or  it  grows  as  a  build- 
ing from  the  foundation  ;  stone  is  laid  upon  stone, 
according  to  a  preconceived  plan,  till  the  whole 
is  complete.  Under  his  metaphor  St.  Paul  de- 
scribes the  Church  as  God's,  and  the  leaders  of  the 
Church  as  His  instruments  ('the  saints  build  up 
the  fabric').     In  this  light  the  factions  of  Corinth 


BUILDING 


EUSmESS 


163 


are  manifested.  They  have  not  jn'asped  the 
Divine  idea  of  the  Church,  and  therefore  they 
are  rebuked :  '  I  could  not  sj)eak  unto  you  as  unto 
spiritual  but  as  unto  carnal '  (3').  With  a  tender 
smile  of  blame  he  calls  them  'babes  in  Christ,' 
who  have  not  grown  into  the  height  and  freedom 
of  their  calling  as  God's  fellow-workers  (<nvepyol). 
Kindled  with  his  metaphor,  the  Apostle  rises  to 
the  thought  of  the  gradusil  upbuilding  of  the 
Church  (by  transformation  and  accretion)  through 
the  ages,  by  many  builders,  and  with  varied 
material,  but  all  on  the  once-laid  foundation,  to 
the  glory  not  of  the  builders,  but  of  the  hand  that 
guided  and  the  heart  that  planned  (cf.  Longfellow's 
poem  The  Builders,  andO.  W.  Holmes,  The  Living 
Temple  and  The  Chambered  AatttUus). 

2.  2  Co  y. — '  We  know  ...  we  have  a  building 
(oixodofi-qv)  from  (iod,  a  house  not  made  with  hands, 
€temal,  in  the  heavens.'  The  punctuation  in  AV 
is  wrong,  and  the  sense  of  RV  would  be  more  ex- 
plicit if  it  read  '  We  have  in  the  heavens  a  build- 
ing from  God,  an  house  not  made  with  hands, 
■eternal '  (so  Alford,  de  Wette,  Meyer,  and  most 
Modems).  The  house  to  which  St.  Paul  looks 
forward  is  not  heaven  itself,  though  it  is  in  the 
heavens,  and  comes  from  God  as  His  gift.  The 
Ajwstle  is  here  moving  among  the  conceptions  of 
what  he  calls  'the  spiritual  body'(l  Co  IS''*^), 
adumbrating  in  his  paradox  thoughts  which  are 
really  unspeakable.  Cf.  also  Ph  3'^  '  the  body  of 
our  humiliation  .  .  .  the  body  of  his  glory.' 

3.  Eph  2^. — 'Each several  building (irda^a  olKoSofi-f]) 
fitly  framed  together,  groweth  into  a  holy  temple' 
(RVm  'sanctuary').  AV  has  'all  the  building,' 
and  the  difference  ought  to  be  carefully  noted  in 
point  both  of  grammar  and  of  thought.  The 
weight  of  the  best  MSS  favours  the  omission  of 
the  article,  and  Meyer  translates  accordingly 
'  every  building.'  Moule  [Ephesians  [in  Cambridge 
Bibleyor  Schools,  1886])  and  EUicott  (Com.  in  loc.) 
contend  that  the  article  is  implicit ;  the  latter 
calls  its  omission  '  a  grammatical  laxity,'  and  the 
former  is  of  opinion  that  the  law  of  the  article  is 
in  some  respects  less  precise  in  the  NT  than  in  the 
classics.  This  does  not  appear  to  be  made  out, 
and  it  is  safer  to  abide  by  the  established  usage 
than  to  allow  an  ad  sensum  interpretation  (which 
really  assumes  the  point  in  dispute).  Westcott 
{Ephesians,  1906)  prefers  to  abide  by  the  classical 
use  (cf.  ExpT  xviii.  [1906-07]  2  for  a  note  on  the 
similar  expression  in  Eph  3").  xas  without  the 
article  = '  a  various  whole,' and  this  is  the  Apostle's 
thought.  '  The  image  is  that  of  an  extensive  pile 
of  buildings,  such  as  the  ancient  temples  commonlj- 
were,  in  process  of  construction  at  diflerent  points 
over  a  wide  area'  (FindJay,  Ephesians  {Expositor's 
Bible,  1892],  146).  Uniformity  is  not  necessary 
to  unity.  The  true  catholicity  is  found  in  Jesus 
Christ  Himself,  the  chief  comer-stone,  and  not  in 
external  uniformity.  The  reading  adopted  in  RV 
may  be  claimed  as  an  incidental  testimony  to  the 
early  date  of  the  Epistle.  In  point  of  fact,  in  the 
2nd  cent,  the  desire  for  forni^  unity  would  have 
rendered  impossible  the  text  '  each  several  build- 
ing.' 'The  Church  swallowed  up  the  churches' 
(Findlay).  But  here  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  with 
the  variety  of  circumstance,  attainment,  and  social 
aspect  in  the  churches,  the  essential  idea  of  unity 
is  nevertheless  preserved,  for  '  each  several  build- 
ing '  is  destined  to  be  'fitly  framed  together.' 
Each  serves  to  make  up  the  ideal  temple  of  GJod, 
which  is  being  built  for  ever.  Each  is  a  true  part 
of  that  mystical  body  of  Christ,  the  habitation  of 
God  through  the  Spirit. 

4.  He  y^^. — '  But  Christ  being  come  an  high 
priest  of  good  things  to  come,  by  a  greater  and 
more  perfect  tabernacle,  not  made  with  hands, 
that  is  to  say,  not  of  this  building '  ( AV) ;  better 


RV  '  but  Christ  having  come  a  high  priest  of  the 
good  things  that  are  come  (RVm),  through  the 
greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  not  made 
with  hands,  that  is  to  say,  not  of  this  creation  (ou 
TouTiji  TTji  KTifffoK).'  Thc  tabemacle  is  immaterial 
and  spiritual  as  contrasted  with  the  heaven  and 
the  earth.  F,  Field  (Notes  on  the  Translation  of 
the  XT  [  =  Otium  Xorvieense,  iii.],  Cambridge,  1899, 
p.  142 ;  ;!  Farrar,  Hebrews  [in  Cambridge  Bible  for 
Schools,  1883],  p.  139 f.)  would  translate  'not  of 
ordinary  construction.'  '  Human  skill  had  nothing 
to  do  with  its  structure,  for  man's  work  finds  its 
expression  in  the  visible  order  of  earth,  to  which 
this  does  not  belong'  (Westcott,  Hebrews,  1889, 
p,  258).  For  the  diflerent  meanings  assigned  to 
'  tabemacle '  and  their  bearing  on  the  true 
humanity  of  otir  Lord,  see  Taberxacle. 

5.  RcY  21". — 'The  building  (eVSo/tTjffu)  of  the 
wall  thereof  was  jasper.'  The  word  is  passive  and 
denotes  the  structure,  what  was  built  in.  Cf.  '  I 
will  make  thy  battlements  jasper '  (Is  54^  [LXX]). 
Some  clear  stone  is  intended,  and  not  our  modem 
jasper,  which  is  generally  red  or  brown. 

W.  M.  Grant. 

BUSINESS-— The  word  occurs  in  the  AV  in 
Ac  6*  (xpeia),  Ro  12"  (rrovSi^,  '  diligence,'  RV)  16» 
(rpay^M,  '  matter,'  RV),  and  1  Th  4"  (rd  tdia).  The 
last  named  passage,  '  Study  to  be  quiet,  and  to  do 
your  own  business,'  implies  that  every  Christian  is 
expected  to  have  an  occupation.  Christianity  in- 
troduced a  new  ideal  in  this  respect.  Greek  ethics 
regarded  only  certain  occupations  as  being  fit  for 
those  leading  the  highest  life,  and  from  these  com- 
mercial acti^^ty  was  excluded  (Plat.  Hep.  495  C). 
Jewish  teaching  improved  on  this  bv  requiring 
that  every  boy  should  learn  a  trade  (Sdiiirer,  HJP 
II.  i.  318),  But  even  under  this  rule  some  trades 
were  condemned,  e.g.  those  of  tanner,  butcher, 
miner,  goldsmith,  and  even  the  physician's  calling 
(F.  Delitzsch,  Jevcish  Artisan  Life  in  the  Time  of 
Christ,  1902,  p.  56).  Fishermen,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  esteemed  as  being  generally  pious — an 
interesting  fact  in  the  light  of  our  Lord's  choice  of 
some  of  them  to  be  His  apostles.  The  notion 
that  some  trades  were  necessarily  degraded  was 
abolished  by  Christianity,  and  St.  Peter  did  not 
hesitate *to  lodge  in  the  house  of  a  tanner  (Ac  9**). 

In  the  conduct  of  their  business  Christians  are 
required  to  set  an  example  to  the  world.  They 
are  to  be  honest  (1  Th  4^),  to  owe  no  man  anything 
(Ro  13*),  to  avoid  covetousness  which  leads  to  dis- 
lionesty  (He  13*),  and  to  refuse  to  go  into  partner- 
ship with  extortioners  (1  Co  5").  Business  disputes 
between  Christians  are  not  to  be  carried  before 
heathen  tribunals  (1  Co  6*^).  The  actual  giving 
up  of  rights  may  sometimes  be  demanded  by  faith- 
fulness to  the  gospel.  It  is  evident  that,  at  any 
rate  in  Corinth,  converts  found  it  ditficult  at  first 
in  ordinary  business  dealings  to  rise  to  the  new 
standard.  Somewhat  later  arose  another  danger, 
which  is  stUl  familiar,  that  men  should  use  religion 
in  order  to  improve  their  business  prospects  ( 1  Ti 
6').  This  ine%'itably  led  to  a  low  commercial 
morality,  such  as  that  to  which  Hennas  confesses 
(Mand.'w..).  Even  as  a  Christian  he  had  been  for 
some  years  accustomed  to  regard  lying  in  business 
transactions  as  quite  permissible. 

While  the  first  Christians  looked  upon  all  honest 
occupations  as  honourable,  they  refused  to  see  any- 
thing sacred  in  the  vested  interests  of  trades 
which  only  exist  by  wronging  others.  At  Philippi 
St.  Paul  put  an  end  to  the  exploitarion  of  the  girl 
with  second  sight  (Ac  16**^),  and  at  Ephesus  showed 
no  tenderness  for  the  profits  of  idolatrous  silver- 
smiths (19^-*').  It  is  evident  that  persecution  was 
often  instigated  by  pagans  whose  btisiness  had 
been  thus  affected'  by  the  new  faith.  St.  Paul 
experienced  this  in  the  two  instances  menuoned. 


164     CiESAE,  CiESAR'S  HOUSEHOLD 


CiESAR,  CiESAR'S  HOUSEHOLD 


and  Pliny's  letter  to  Trajan  testifies  that  there 
was  niucli  feeling  against  Christians  amongst  those 
-vvho  sold  fodder  for  the  victims  iised  in  heathen 
sacrifices. 


LiTKRATURK. — UeHidcs  CoHiinentarieB  on  the  texts  uieiitioned, 
see  E.  von  Dobscbiitz,  Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church, 
Kiiff.  tr.,  London  and  N.Y.,  1904,  passim;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  London,  1893,  p.  l!)9f. 

C.  T.  UlMO.NT. 


c 


CiESAR,  CiESAR'S  HOUSEHOLD.— In  origin 
the  name  '  Ctusar,'  which  has  had  such  a  wonder- 
ful history,  culminating  in  the  German  A'atscr  and 
the  Russian  Tsar,  was  simply  a  cognomen  (or  sur- 
name), indicating  one  branch  of  the  gens  Julia,  one 
of  the  old  patrician  families  of  Rome,  which  was 
said  to  have  been  descended  from  ^Eneas  of  Troy 
and  Venus,  through  their  son  lulus  (Ascanius). 
The  earliest  known  member  of  the  family  is  Sex. 
lulius  Ciesar,  praetor  in  208  B.C.  ;  the  greatest  is 
of  course  C.  lulius  Csesar,  the  dictator  (lived  from 
about  100  to  44  B.C.).  The  name  was  kept  by  all 
the  early  Emperors  except  Vitellius  (and  even  he 
used  it  sometimes),  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  after 
Nero  no  Emperor  had  a  drop  of  Caesarian  blood  in 
his  veins.  The  complete  official  names  of  the 
Emperors  who  reigned  during  the  hundred  years 
following  the  birth  of  Christ  are  Imperator  Caesar 
Augustus  (see  Augustus),  Tiberius  Caesar  Augus- 
tus (see  Tiberius),  Gains  Caesar  Germanicus 
(nicknamed  Caligula  [q.v.])  (A.D.  37-41),  Tiberius 
Claudius  Caesar  Augustus  Germanicus  (see  Claud- 
ius), Imperator  Nero  Claudius  Caesar  Augustus 
Germanicus  (see  Nero),  Imperator  Servius  Sul- 
picius  Galba  Caesar  Augustus  (9  June  68-15  Jan. 
69)  (see  Galea),  Imperator  Marcus  Otho  Ciesar 
Augustus  (15  Jan.-25  Apr.  69)  (see  Otho),  Impera- 
tor Aulus  Vitellius  Caesar  or  Aulus  Vitellius 
Imperator  Germanicus  (2  Jan.  69-20[?]  Dec.  70) 
(see  Vitellius),  Imperator  Vespasianus  Caesar 
Augustus  (69-79)  (see  Vespasian),  Imperator  Titus 
Vespasianus  Caesar  Augustus  (71-81)  (see  TiTUS), 
Imperator  Domitianus  Caesar  Augustus  (81-96) 
(see  DoMiTlAN),  Imperator  Nerva  Augustus  Caesar 
(96-98)  (see  Nerva),  Imperator  Cajsar  Nerva 
Traianus  Augustus  (97-117)  (see  Trajan).  This 
enumeration  shows  how  fixed  the  name  Caesar  had 
become  as  part  of  ^the  Emperor's  name,  quite  irre- 
spective of  relationship.  It  will  also  explain  how 
in  all  the  places  of  tlie  NT  but  two  the  name 
'  Caesar '  alone  (with  or  without  the  article)  is 
familiarly  used,  as  equivalent  simply  to  '  the 
Emperor.'  In  the  Gospels  the  reference  is  to  Tib- 
erius (cf.  Mk  12'*""  and  parallels),  in  Acts  and 
Philippians  (4^)  to  Nero.  Where  the  historian 
seeks  to  date  an  event,  he  is  naturally  more  precise 
(Caesar  Augustus,  Lk  2',  Tiberius  Caesar,  Lk  3'). 

There  are  two  aspects  in  which  the  Caesar 
appears  in  the  Gospels.  In  the  section  Mk  12'^"" 
it  IS  the  question  of  giving  tribute  to  Caesar  that 
comes  up.  The  inhabitants  of  Juda?a,  a  Roman 
Imperial  province,  governed  by  one  of  the  Emperor's 
agents,  called  a  procurator,  were  by  law  bound  to 
pay  tax  to  the  Emperor.  The  term  used,  /c^vcros,  is 
the  Latin  word  census,  which  means  '  census '  in  our 
sense,  but  much  more.  The  census  paper  was  in 
tlie  Roman  Empire  also  an  income-  and  property- 
tax  return,  on  the  basis  of  which  the  assessment 
of  tax  was  made  by  the  Imperial  officials.  Hence 
the  word  in  the  Gospels  might  almost  be  translated 
'income-tax.'  Luke  alters  his  original  to  the 
good  Greek  word  <f>6pos  (Lat.  tributum,  war-tax  ;  cf. 
Lk  23").  The  second  aspect  in  which  the  Cajsar 
appears  in  the  Gospels  is  that  of  the  Messiah's 
rival  to  lordship  over  the  chosen  people.  Jesus  is 
cliarged  with  '  saying  that  he  is  au  anointed  king  ' 


(Lk  23'  ;  cf.  Jn  19""",  Ac  17'),  for  so  we  ought  to 
translate  it.  When  Pilate  asks  Him  if  He  is  the 
King  of  the  Jews,  He  casts  the  word  back  to  him, 
'  You  say  it,  the  word  is  yours'  (Burkitt,  Evan- 
gelion  da-Mepharreshe,  1904,  ii.  58).  Throughout 
the  Apostolic  Age  and  later,  the  Christians  con- 
tinue to  use  of  their  King  in  the  spiritual  .sense 
the  very  same  epithets  as  the  pagans  use  of  the 
Emperor.  This  fact  must  have  accentuated  the 
hostility  of  the  Empire  to  the  Church. 

In  Ac  25  and  following,  the  Caesar  is  appealed  to 
by  St.  Paul,  after  his  unjust  arrest  at  Jerusalem. 
The  right  of  appeal  (provocatio)  was  one  of  the 
]>ulwarks  of  the  original  republican  constitution. 
By  it  a  citizen  could  appeal  to  his  fellow-citizens 
in  assembly  against  any  injustice  on  the  part  of  a 
magistrate.  The  plebeians  were  later  also  protected 
by  their  special  officials,  the  ti-ibuni  plebis.  By  the 
Imperial  constitution  the  Emperor  possessed  tri- 
bunicia  potestas  (see  AUGUSTUS).  Any  aggrieved 
citizen  could  thus  api)eal  to  him,  and  the  Emperor 
could  quash  the  verdict  of  a  lower  court,  and  sub- 
stitute his  own  verdict.  The  Emperor  had  also 
the  ius  gladii,  the  right  of  life  and  death,  and  this 
he  could  delegate  to  subordinates.  St.  Paul's  ex- 
periences before  purely  Roman  tribunals  had  been 
on  the  whole  so  satisfactory  that  he  decided  to 
risk  appeal  to  the  highest  tribunal  of  all,  knowing 
how  valuable  for  the  success  of  his  mission  a  fav- 
ourable verdict  would  be.  His  appeal  was  received 
by  Festus,  and  he  proceeded  to  Rome.  Hartmann 
(see  below  under  Literature)  does  not  consider  that 
St.  Paul's  appeal  was  an  appeal  in  the  proper  sense 
of  the  term,  but  it  seems  better  to  follow  Ramsay, 
especially  as  Luke's  language  is  quite  plain.  In 
the  silence  of  historj^  scholars  are  divided  as  to 
the  result  of  the  Apostles  appeal.  Some  consider 
that  the  conclusion  of  Acts  (q.v. )  means  that  it  was 
unsuccessful,  and  that  he  was  condemned  and 
beheaded.  'Those  who  accept  the  genuineness  of 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  believe  that  he  was  acquitted 
and  released. 

Caesar's  household.— St.  Paul,  writing  from 
Rome  to  the  Philippian  Church  in  A.D.  60  or  61, 
sends  greetings  from  all  the  Christians  in  Rome, 
but  '  especially  '  from  '  them  that  are  of  Caesar's 
household'  (Ph  4-^).  The  date  shows  that  the 
'  Caesar '  is  Nero,  and  the  word  oMa,  translated 
'  household,'  is  doubtless  a  translation  of  the  Latin 
familia.  The  worAfamilia  is  the  later  form  of  the 
older  famulia,  derived  horn  famulus,  a  household- 
slave,  and  in  Latin  carries  with  it  the  idea  especi- 
ally of  the  collection  of  slaves  and  freedmen  in  a 
house.  The  relations  between  slaves  and  masters  in 
the  Roman  world  were  generallygood, the  slave  being 
regarded  more  as  an  integral  part  of  the  family  than 
hired  servants  are  in  modem  times.  In  the  Imper- 
ial palace  at  Rome  they  can  hardly  have  numbered 
fewer  than  2000,  and  an  idea  of  the  variety  of  their 
occupations  can  be  got  from  a  study  of  the  list  of 
nouns  joined  to  a,  ab  in  J.  C.  Rolfe's  art.  in  the 
Archivfur  lateinische  Lcxikographie,  vol.  x.  [1898] 
p.  481  ir.  or  the  Thesaurus  Lmguce  Latince,  vol.  i. 
[1905]  cols.  22  and  23.  It  is  remarkable  that  the 
list  of  names  in  Ro  16  coincides  almost  exactlj' 
with  names  of  members  of  the  Imperial  household 


C^SAEEA 


CADHTES 


165 


recovered  in  Konian  inscriptions,  as  Lightfoot  first 
showed  at  length.  The  nnmber  of  examples  has 
since  increased.  No  epigraphist  could  doabt  that 
oh.  16  is  an  integral  part  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  and  that  most  of  the  persons  there  named 
were  'of  Ca?sar's  household.'  Our  knowledge  of 
the  life  of  such  persons  is  mainly  derived  from 
Statins  (e.g.  i>iiiuB  v.  1)  and  Martial. 

For  Caesar-worship,  see  Empekoe-Wobship  and 
RoMAX  Empire. 

LrreRiTURB.— Official  names  of  Roman  Emperors  in  R- 
Cagnat,  Court  d'ipigraphie  latin^,  Paris,  1888,  p.  177  S. ;  on 
the  tributtcm  see  A.  H.  J.  Greenidge,  Roman  Pvblie  Life, 
London,  1901,  p.  429  ff.  ;  on  Casar  and  the  Meariah  as  rivals  cf. 
the  am.  ot  P.  Wendland  in  ZSTW  r.  [190*]  Z3&-S63  and  H. 
A.  A-  Kennedy  in  Exporitor,  7th  ser.  viL  [1909]  289-307 ;  on 
the  appeal  (proroeatio,  appeUatio)  see  T.  Mommsen,  Bmn. 
Str.i  'rr.-ht,  1699, 8er  Abschnitt,  p.  463  ff-  GttommeUe  Sehriften, 
iii.  [Uc:]  431-446,  reprinted  from  ZSTW  iL  [1901]  81ff. ;  art. 
'Appellatio'  bv  Hartnuum  in  Paulv-WisBOwa:  J.  S.  R^d  in 
Joumai  of  Roinan  Studie*,  L  [1911-12]  68ff. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
St.  Paul  the  TratxUer,  1895,  p.  311  ff.  On  Caaar's  Household 
see  the  excnrsos  in  Lightfooit,  SpittU  to  the  PMUppiang*,  1S7S, 
p.  171.  and  E.  Riggfenbacb,  in  Jfeue  Jahrimeher  fur  tUut»ehe 
Thedogie,  L  ri88SJ  498 ff.;  best  collection  of  inacriptious  in 
H.  Dessau.  Im4:r.  Lot.  Seieetcg,  L  [Beriin,  1892]  ch.  vL 

A.  SOUTER. 

C^SAREA  {Kaurdpeia  or  Kaurdpcux.  2«;3o<rr^, 
named  in  honour  of  Augustus ;  known  also  as 
CcBsarea  Pal(estineB,  and  in  modem  Arabic  as  el- 
j^aimrit/eh :  to  be  distinguished  clearly  from 
CcEsarra  Pkilippi).  —  Cjesarea  was  situated  on 
the  Mediterranean  coast,  32  miles  N.  of  Joppa, 
25  S.  of  Carmel,  and  75  N.W.  of  Jerusalem.  It 
was  once  the  chief  port  of  Palestine.  It  was  re- 
built by  Herod  the  Great  on  the  site  of  'Straton's 
Tower'  (Jos.  Ant.  XV.  ix.  6).  The  citjr  is  closely 
associated  -svith  the  history  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
being  especially  notable  as  the  place  where  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  poured  out  upon  the  Gentiles  (Ac 
10**).  The  name  occurs  in  Acts  onlj-.  Philip  the 
deacon  seems  to  have  resided  at  Caesarea  (8**  21*-  **). 
St.  Paul  was  sent  hence  to  Tarsus  (9**).  Cornelius, 
a  Roman  centurion,  influenced  by  a  vision  to 
send  to  Joppa  for  St.  Peter,  here  became  the  first 
convert  of  the  Gentiles  (W-  -*  11").  Here  Herod 
Agrippa  I.  died  (12'*).  Here  St.  Paul  landed  on 
his  way  from  Ephesus  (18-),  being  later  escorted 
hither  on  his  return  from  Jerusalem  (23^  **),  and 
here  he  was  imprisoned  for  two  years,  and  tried 
before  Festus  (25'-  *-^^). 

In  apostolic  times  Coesarea  was  politically  the 
capital  of  the  province  of  Judaea,  and  the  residence 
of  the  Roman  procurators.  Tacitus  describes  it 
as  'the  head  of  Judaea'  {Hist.  iL  78).  Among  its 
inhabitants  there  were  both  Jews  and  Greeks. 
The  city  was  elaborately  beautified  with  temples, 
theatres,  palaces,  arches,  and  altars.  It  was  es- 
pecially famous  for  its  harbour  (Jos.  Ant.  XV. 
ix.  6).  Aqueducts  supplied  the  inhabitants  with 
water  from  Carmel  and  the  Crocodile  River.  In 
the  3rd  cent,  a.d.,  it  became  the  seat  of  a  famous 
school  of  theology,  in  which  Origen  taught ;  also 
of  the  bishopric  of  Syria,  Eusebius  being  the  most 
celebrated  of  those  occupying  the  office.  Under 
the  Arabs  it  unfortunately  lost  its  former  prestige 
and  rapidly  degenerated.  At  the  time  of  the 
Crusades  it  was  rebuilt  by  Baldwin  II.  Saladin 
took  it  in  1187.  In  1251  it  was  re-fortified  by  St. 
Louis.  Finally,  in  1265,  it  was  completely  de- 
stroyed by  the  Sultan  Bibars,  since  whose  tune  it 
has  remained  in  ruins. 

Little  is  now  left  to  mark  the  ancient  city. 
Porter,  writing  in  1865,  says  :  '  I  saw  no  man. 
The  Arab  and  the  shepherd  avoid  the  spot' 
{Giant  Cities,  235).  Thomson  also  (Land  and 
Book,  i.  72)  speaks  of  it  as  '  absolutely  forsaken.' 
Since  1889,  however,  a  few  Bosnians  have  settled 
among  the  ruins  and  carried  on  a  small  trade  in 
brick.  Most  of  the  stones  of  the  ancient  city  were 
used  by  Ibrahim  Pasha  in  constructing  the  new- 


fortifications  at  Acre.  To  the  missionary,  Caesarea 
is  one  of  the  most  interesting  spots  on  earth,  hav- 
ing been  the  cradle  of  the  Gentile  Church. 

LrrKRATURE.— Josephns,  Ant.  xtv.  iv.  4,  xvn.  xi.  4,  BJ  i.  xxL 
5,  n.  ix.  1 ;  G.  A.  Smith,  UGHL  13Sff.,  art.  'Casarea'  in 
EBi,  L  617 ;  C.  R-  Conder.  art.  '  Csesarea '  in  MDB,  L  337,  Tent 
Work  m  Palestine,  new  ed.,  18S7,  pp.  107-110 ;  Schiirer,  HJF, 
index,  «.r. ;  SWP  iL  [1882],  sheet  x. ;  Baedeker.  Palettvte 
and  Syriai,  1912,  p.  237ff. ;  A.  Nenbaner.  6&)g.  du  Talmtid, 
1868 ;  G.  Le  Strange,  PaUttine  under  the  Moriemt,  1890,  p. 
474 :  H.  B.  Tristram.  Bible  PUuet,  1897.  p.  75 ;  J.  L.  Porter. 
The  Giant  Citiet  of  Baehan,  1873.  p.  2330. ;  W.  M.  Thomson. 
The  Land  and  the  Book,  1881,  L  60ff. ;  W.  Smith,  DB?,  art. 
'Casarea.-  GeORGE  L.  ROBENSOJf. 

CAIAPHAS  (Kcud^s).  —  Caiaphas,  or  Joseph 
Caiaphas,  was  appointed  high  priest  in  A.D.  18  by 
Valerius  Gratos,  and  held  office  till  A.D.  36,  when 
he  was  removed  by  Vit«llius  (Jos.  Ant.  xvni.  ii. 
2,  iv.  3).  He  was  son-in-law  of  Annas  (cf.  art. 
Axx.AS).  Like  most  of  the  priests  at  this  period, 
Caiaphas  was  a  Sadducee  in  religion.  By  his 
masterly  policy  of  conciliating  his  Roman  masters 
he  was  able  to  retain  his  office  for  an  unusually 
long  period.  His  craft  and  subtle  diplomacy  as 
well  as  his  supreme  disregard  for  justice  and  re- 
ligion are  revealed  in  the  advice  he  gave  to  the 
assembled  Sanhedrin  after  Jesns  had  won  the 
people  by  the  raising  of  Lazams — '  It  is  expedient 
that  one  die  for  the  people'  (Jn  ll*").  Caiaphas 
saw  clearly  that  if  a  popular  movement  in  favour 
of  Jesus  were  aroused,  his  power  and  position 
under  Rome  would  be  at  an  end,  and  he  sought  at 
once  to  give  ettect  to  his  own  advice.  The  trial  of 
Jesus  in  his  presence  was  a  travesty  of  all  legal 
procedure,  railing  to  obtain  evidence  from  wit- 
nesses, he  adjured  the  prisoner  to  declare  whether 
or  not  He  was  the  Messiah  ;  and  on  Jesus  declar- 
ing He  was,  the  pious  hyjjocrite  rent  his  clothes, 
shocked  at  the  blasphemy  of  the  answer.  Caiaphas 
is  a  type  of  the  wily  ecclesiastical  opportunist, 
who  places  the  success  of  himself  and  the  institu- 
tion he  represents  before  aU  claims  of  truth  or 
justice.  Such  a  character  is  always  ready  to 
persecute,  and  in  the  Apostolic  Church  Caiaphas 
appears  as  a  bitter  persecutor  of  the  apostles  (Ac  4*). 
He  is  probably  the  high  priest  referred  to  in  Ac 
517-21. 27  'J  1  91  ^}jQ  imprisoned  Peter  and  John, 
presided  at  the  trial  of  Stephen,  caused  the  perse- 
cution recorded  in  Ac  8,  and  gave  Saul  of  Tarsns 
letters  to  Damascus  to  apprehend  the  Christians 
there. 

LrrBRATURB.— Josephns,  poMtm;  Schfirer,  GJV*  iL  [1907]  258, 
271 ;  an.  'Caiaphas'  in  HDB  (BfOymont) and  DCG  (C  A. 
Scott);  E.  Nestle,  'The  Name  "Caiaphas,*"  in  ExpT  x. 
[189S-99]  185  ;  W^.  M.  Clow,  in  the  Day  of  the  Crete,  1896.  p. 
9ff. ;  J.  B.  Liglitfoot,  Sermons  in  St.  PauP*  CaihetbtU,  1801. 
p.  75 ;  A.  MacUren,  Christ uithsHsart,  1886,  p.  255. 

W.  F.  BOTD. 

CAM.— See  Abel. 

CAINITES. — According  to  the  scanty  informa- 
tion we  possess  about  the  Cainites,  they  seem  to 
have  formed  one  of  the  Gnostic  sects  which  are 
classed  together  under  the  somewhat  inadequate 
and  perhaps  misleading  name  '  Ophites,'  though 
the  serpent,  from  which  the  name  '  Ophite'  is  de- 
rived, seems  to  have  played  no  part  in  their  system. 
Our  oldest  source  is  to  be  found  in  Irenaeus,  adv. 
Hmr.  i.  31.  He  tells  us  that  the  Cainites  regarded 
Cain  as  derived  from  the  higher  principle.  They 
claimed  fellowship  with  Esau,  Korah,  the  men  of 
Sodom,  and  all  such  jjeople,  and  regarded  them- 
selves as  on  that  account  persecuted  by  the  Creator. 
But  they  escaped  injury  from  Him,  for  Sophia  used 
to  carry  away  from  them  to  herself  that  which 
belonged  to  her.  They  regarded  Judas  the  traitor 
as  having  full  cognizance  of  the  truth.  He 
therefore,  rather  than  the  other  disciples,  was  able 
to  accomplish  the  mysterj-  of  the  betrayal,  and  so 
bring  about    the  dissoluuon  of  all    things  both 


166 


CAINITES 


CALIGULA 


celestial  and  terrestrial.  The  Cainites  possessed  a 
fictitious  work  entitled  '  Tiie  Gospel  of  Judas,'  and 
Irenieus  says  that  he  had  himself  collected  writ- 
ings of  theirs,  wiiere  they  atlvocated  that  the  work 
of  Hystera  siiould  be  dissolved.  By  Hystera  tliey 
meant  the  Maker  of  Heaven  and  Earth.  They 
taught,  as  did  Carpocratea,  that  salvation  could 
be  attained  only  by  passing  through  all  experience. 
Whenever  any  sin  or  vile  action  was  performed  by 
them,  they  asserted  that  an  angel  was  present 
whom  they  invoked,  claiming  that  they  were  ful- 
fillin{^  his  operation.  Perfect  knowledge  consisted 
in  going  without  a  tremor  into  such  actions  as  it  is 
not  lawful  even  to  name.  Epinlianius  (Hcer.  38) 
characteristically  gives  a  much  longer  account,  in 
substantial  harmony  with  what  IrcniKUS  says.  He 
appears  to  have  had  some  source  of  information 
independent  of  Irenseus.  He  speaks  of  Abel  as  de 
rived  from  the  weaker  principle — a  statement  whicli 
bears  the  marks  of  authenticity.  He  also  says  that 
Judas  forced  the  Arciions,  or  rulers,  against  their 
will  to  slay  Christ,  and  thus  assisted  us  to  the 
salvation  of  the  Cross.  Pliiiaster,  on  the  other 
hand,  assigns  the  action  of  Judas  to  his  knowledge 
that  Christ  intended  to  destroy  the  truth — a  pur- 
pose which  he  frustrated  by  the  betrayal. 

The  account  given  by  Irenseus  is  unduly  curt  and 
the  text  not  quite  secure,  but  it  is  not  difficult  to 
form  a  general  estimate  of  the  sect  from  it,  especi- 
ally witli  the  assistance  of  our  other  sources.  Like 
other  Gnostics,  tlie  Cainites  drew  a  distinction 
between  the  Creator  and  the  Supreme  God.  Pre- 
sumably they  identified  the  Creator  with  the  God 
of  the  Jews.  They  viewed  Him  and  those  whom 
He  favoured  with  undisguised  hostility ;  redemp- 
tion had  for  its  end  the  dissolution  or  His  work. 
They  claimed  kinship  with  those  to  whom  He 
showed  antagonism  in  His  book,  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  shared  themselves  in  the  same  hostility. 
Nevertheless  He  was  the  weaker  power,  who  could 
do  them  no  permanent  harm,  for  Sophia,  the 
Heavenly  Wisdom,  drew  back  to  herself  those 
elements  in  their  nature  which  they  had  derived 
from  her.  Presumably,  then,  they  thought  of  a 
division  of  mankind  into  two  classes — the  spiritual 
and  tlie  material,  the  latter  belonging  to  the  realm 
of  the  Creator  and  deriving  their  being  from  Him, 
but  doomed  to  dissolution,  while  the  former  class 
contained  the  spiritual  men,  imprisoned,  it  is  true, 
in  bodies  of  fiesh,  but  yet  deriving  their  essential 
being  from  the  highest  Power,  opposed  by  the 
Creator  and  His  minions,  but  winning  the  victory 
over  them  as  Cain  did  over  Abel.  Unfortunately 
we  cannot  be  sure  what  view  they  took  of  redemp- 
tion. There  is  no  doubt  that  they  applauded  the 
action  of  Judas  in  the  betrayal,  but  our  authorities 
differ  as  to  the  motive  which  prompted  him.  The 
view  that  Judas  through  his  more  perfect  yvHiri.^ 
penetrated  the  wish  of  Jesus  more  successfully 
than  the  others,  and  iiccom})lished  it  by  bringing 
Him  to  the  Cross  througli  which  He  effected 
redemption,  is  intrinsically  the  more  probable. 

So  far  as  the  moral  character  and  conduct  of  the 
Cainites  is  concerned,  there  is  no  doubt  that 
Irenieus  intended  to  represent  them  as  shrinking 
from  no  vileness,  but  rather  as  deliberately  practis- 
ing it.  Carpocrates,  we  are  told,  defended  this 
practice  by  a  theory  of  transmigration.  It  was 
necessary  to  pass  through  all  experiences,  and  iience 
the  soul  had  to  pass  from  l»ody  to  body  till  the 
whole  range  of  experience  had  been  traversed.  If, 
however,  this  could  all  be  crowded  into  a  single 
lifetime,  then  the  transmigration  became  unneces- 
sary. We  have  no  ground  to  suppose  that  the 
Cainites  held  such  a  view,  but  they  seem  to  have 
professed  the  belief  that  this  fullness  of  experience 
was  essential  to  salvation.  We  have  no  substantial 
justification   for.  doubting  the   truth  of  Irena-us' 


account,  though  accusations  of  immorality  urged 
against  heretics  should  alwaj's  be  received  with 
caution.  G.  li.  S.  Mead  (Fragments  of  a  Faith 
Forfjutten,  1900,  p.  22'J)  thinks  that  originally  they 
were  ascetics,  while  N.  Lardner  {History  ofHeretinn, 
bk.  il.  cli.  xiv.  [z=  Works,  18'29,  viii.  660])  questions 
whether  a  sect  guilty  of  such  enormities  ever  ex- 
isted. But  there  is  no  valid  reason  to  deny  the 
generally  accepted  view  that  the  Gnostic  attitude 
to  matter  did  lead  to  quite  opposite  results.  To 
some  it  would  seem  a  duty  to  crush  the  flesh  V>e- 
neath  the  spirit  by  the  severest  austerity,  but  the 
premiss  might  lead  to  a  liljertine  as  well  as  to  an 
ascetic  conclusion  :  if  the  spirit  alone  was  import- 
ant, the  flesh  but  contemptible  and  perishable, 
what  happened  to  the  latter  might  seem  a  matter 
of  complete  indiflerence,  inasmuch  as  its  degrada- 
tion could  not  stain  the  white  purity  of  the  spirit. 
The  principle  tliat  the  jeM'el  is  undimmed  though 
its  casket  lie  in  the  mire,  or  that  the  Gnostic  may 
do  what  he  will  for  he  is  saved  by  grace,  probably 
found  quite  faithful  expression  in  the  attitude  of 
such  Gnostics  as  Carpocrates  and  the  Cainites. 

It  is  held  by  several  scholars  that  some  of  the 
Ophite  sects  date  back  into  the  pre-Christian  era, 
and,  if  this  view  is  correct,  Pfieiderer  (Das  Unhris- 
tentinn?,  Berlin,  1902,  vol.  ii,  pp.  52-54,  82,  97  f.  = 
Primitive  Christianity,  London,  1910,  vol.  iii.  pp. 
72-74,  114,  136 f.)  may  be  right  in  thinking  that 
the  Cainites  whom  we  know  from  Irenaius  were 
the  successors  of  the  people  who  were  attacked  by 
Philo  in  his  de  Posteritute  Caini.  Whether  the 
reference  in  Jude"  is  to  the  Cainites  must  be 
regarded  as  very  doubtful  (see  JUDE). 

Liter ATURK. — In  addition  to  the  Literature  named  in  the 
article,  the  iollowing  may  be  consulted  :  H.  L.  Mansel,  Gnostic 
Heresies,  London,  1875  ;  A.  Hilgenfeld,  Die  KetzenjeschichU 
des  l/rchrigtenthums,  Leipzig,  1S84;  A.  Harnack,  Gesekichte 
der  altchrixtlichen  Litteratur,  i.  [Leipzig-,  1893]  p.  163  ff.,  iL 
[1897]  p.  538  fif.  The  subject  receives  some  discussion  in 
Church  Histories  and  Histories  of  Doctrine.  Of  articles  in 
Dictionaries  special  mention  may  be  made  of  that  in  JJCJi  by 
G.  Salmon.  ARTHUR  S.   PeAKE. 

CALF.—'  Calf '  (Ac  7«,  He  9^2.  is,  Rev  4^)  should 
be  rendered  'ox'  or  'steer.'  1.  The  expiatory 
virtue  of  sacrifices  of  blood  formed  part  of  the 
Semitic  belief  from  earliest  times.  In  Lv  17"  the 
reason  given  is  that  the  life  or  soul  of  the  animal 
is  in  the  blood  (cf.  Gn  9-',  Dt  12'-^),  which  gives 
piacular  efficacy  to  the  sacrifice  (see  art.  '  Sacrifice ' 
in  the  Bible  Dictionaries).  2.  The  second  of  tiie 
four  living  creatures  in  the  Apocalypse  had  tiie 
likeness  of  an  ox,  presumably  as  the  symbol  of 
strength.  It  was  certainly  for  this  reason  that 
the  bull  was  chosen  as  the  symbol  of  Jahweh  by 
Aaron  (Ac  7''^  and  Jeroboam  (B.  Duhm,  Thcoi. 
der  Propheten,  Bonn,  1875,  p.  47  ;  A.  Dillmann, 
Exodus,  Berlin,  1880,  p.  337  ;  J.  Robertson,  Early 
Religion  of  Israel,  Edinburj^h,  1892,  pp.  215-220 ; 
similarly  Kuenen  and  Vatke).  The  four  living 
creatures  remind  us  of  certain  of  the  signs  of  the 
zodiac  (bull,  angel,  lion,  eagle),  and  possibly  they 
have  some  connexion  with  that  source  (so  Moffatt 
and  Gunkel).  Irenieus  (IH.  xi.  8)  associates  the 
living  creatures  with  the  four  evangelists,  and 
holds  that  the  'calf,'  signifying  the  priestly  and 
sacrificial  character  of  Jesus,  is  the  symbol  of  St. 
Luke.  These  traditions  continued  after  his  time, 
but  there  was  considerable  variety  in  the  applica- 
tion of  the  symbols  (see  Zahn,  Forschtingen ,  Lrlan- 
gen,  1881-1903,  ii.  257  11".  ;  Swete,  Gospel  according 
to  at.  Mark'^,  London,  190*2,  p.  xxxvill.). 

F.  W.  WORSLEY. 

CALIGULA.— Caligula  ('little  boots')  was  a  pet 
name  given  by  the  soldiers  in  his  father's  army  to 
the  boy  who  was  afterwards  known  officially  as 
(iaius  Ca>sar  Gerraanicus.  In  a  similar  way  the 
name  '  Caracalla '  or  '  Caracallus '  was  applied  popu- 
larlj'  to  Imperator  Cajsar  Marcus  Aurelius  Antoni- 


CALIGULA 


CALL,  CALLED,  CALLING       167 


nas  (A.D.  198-217),  and  '  Elagabalus '  to  Iniperator 
Cjvsar  Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus  Augustus  (A.D. 
218-222).  These  sobriq^uets  had  no  official  currency, 
but  were  useful  as  brief  ways  of  referring  to  the 
names  of  Emperors,  whose  ancestors  by  nature  or 
adoption  had  names  so  like  their  own,  that  con- 
fusion was  certain  to  occur  in  conversation  or  writ- 
ing  about  them.  Caligula,  who  was  named  at 
birth  Gains  lulius  Ciesar,  was  the  third  son  of  the 
distinguished  general  Germanicus,  and  ACTippina 
(the  elder).  As  Germanicus  was  a  son  of  I)nisus, 
the  adopted  son  of  Augustus,  and  as  Agrippinawas 
a  daughter  of  (Agrippa  and)  lulia,  the  daughter  of 
Augustus,  Caligula  was  thus  both  by  nature  and 
by  adoption  a  great-grandson  of  the  Emperor 
Augustus.  He  is  commonly  said  to  have  been  bom 
in  the  camp  of  his  father  (Tac.  Ann.  i.  41);  but 
Suetonius  {Gains,  8)  points  out  that  the  boy  was 
born  before  his  father  left  for  his  province.  The 
date  of  his  birth  was  31  Aug. ,  A.  D.  12.  From  a  very 
early  time  he  displayed  signs  of  the  insanity  which 
was' to  break  out  in  the  most  signal  manner  when 
he  attained  to  manhood.  His  mania  took  three 
forms — inordinate  lust,  inordinate  vanity,  and  a 
homicidal  tendency.  No  doubt,  as  in  the  case  of 
other  Emperors,  we  must  allow  for  the  influence  of 
evil-minded  gossip  on  our  historical  records,  but 
there  remains  ample  evidence  to  justify  this  state- 
ment. He  was  proclaimed  Emperor  on  the  death 
of  his  grand-uncle  Tiberius  on  18  March,  A.D.  37. 
He  was  ottered  the  honorary  title  of  pater  patrice 
in  the  early  days  of  38,  and  died  on  24  Jan.  41  at 
the  hands  of  an  assassin,  C.  Cassius  Chaerea,  in  one 
of  the  vaults  of  the  palace  on  the  Palatine  Hill. 
He  was  thrice  married,  first  to  lunia  Claudilla, 
daughter  of  a  patrician,  M.  Silanus.*  She  died  in 
childbirth,  and  he  afterwards  married  Lollia  Paul- 
ina, daughter  of  M.  LoUius,  whom  he  had  robbed 
from  her  husband  Memmius.  He  soon  afterwards 
divorced  her.  His  third  wife  was  Milonia  Caesonia. 
Caligula  left  no  descendants. 

Caligula's  reign  was  as  uneventful  as  it  was  short. 
The  machine  of  government  had  been  left  in  such 
perfect  condition  by  Augustus  and  Tiberius  that 
the  recklessness  of  a  Caligula  could  not  in  such  a 
short  time  do  serious  harm.  But  one  thing  he 
could  and  did  do  :  he  wasted  the  savings  of  his  prede- 
cessors. He  succeeded  to  the  Empire  because  he 
was  the  personal  heir  of  Tiberius,  not  because  he 
had  been  in  any  sense  his  partner  in  the  Empire. 
It  was  the  theoi-y  of  the  principate  that  it  came  to 
an  end  on  the  death  of  each  Emperor,  and  that 
power  returned  to  the  Senate  and  people  as  in  the 
days  of  the  Republic  ;  but  in  practice  it  was  diffi- 
cult, if  not  impossible,  to  pass  over  the  Emperor's 
heir,  and  Gains  was  thus  proclaimed  Emperor.  His 
reign  began  with  a  relaxation  of  many  of  the  restric- 
tions of  Tiberius"  rule,  but  his  only  aim  throughout 
was  the  pursuit  of  excitement  and  pleasure.  There 
is  no  need  to  detail  the  countless  variety  of  his  in- 
sane actions.  Towards  the  end  of  his  principate 
he  revived  the  reign  of  terror,  which  was  such  a 
feature  of  Tiberius'  time. 

Certain  changes  were  made  in  the  Eastern  pro- 
vinces in  the  reign  of  Gains.  The  territorj-  of 
Autiochus  of  Commagene,  which  had  been  made  a 
province  by  Tiberius,  was  restored  to  his  son :  it 
ran  along  the  northern  side  of  the  province  of 
Cllicia.  Herod  Agrippa  received  the  tetrarchy  of 
his  uncle  PhUip,  along  with  Abilene.  Later  he 
obtained  also  Samaria,  after  Herod  Antipas  and 
his  wife  Herodias  had  been  expelled  by  the  Emperor 
at  his  instance.  Thrace  was  also  restored  to  a 
member  of  the  old  dynasty  which  had  ruled  it.  To 
his  kinsmen  Polemo  and  Cotys,  Gains  gave  Pontus 

*  So  Suet.  Gains,  12  ;  but  Bury,  on  what  authority  the  present 
writer  does  not  know,  names  Orestilla,  wife  of  Cn.  Piso,  as  his 
first  wife(^  History  of  the  Roman  Empire,  p.  221). 


Polenioniacus  and  Lesser  Armenia  respectively. 
The  Arabian  Sohcemus  was  made  ruler  over  the 
Ituneans.  Ptolemaeus,  King  of  Mauritania,  was 
executed,  and  steps  were  taken  to  convert  his  king- 
dom into  two  provinces.  The  most  useful  thing 
Gains  did  in  the  way  of  provincial  government  was 
to  put  the  legion  which  was  in  the  province  of  Africa 
under  the  command  of  an  Im^Tia.t legatus.  Hither- 
to Africa  had  been  the  only  senatorial  province 
with  Roman  troops  in  it.  This  legatus  had  also 
ci^nl  functions  in  the  Xumidian  part  of  Africa. 

One  aspect  of  Caligula's  activity  had  a  serious 
effect  on  the  Jews,  and  thus  drew  forth  two  of  the 
most  interesting  historical  tractates  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  Philo's  Legatio  ad  Gaium  and  contra 
Flaccum,  The  Emperor  claimed  to  be  worshipped 
as  a  god.  This  claim  was  naturally  rejected  by 
the  Jews  of  Judaea  and  of  Alexandria.  The  gover- 
nor of  Egypt,  with  ill-timed  zeal,  required  them  to 
set  up  statues  of  Gains  in  their  synagogues.  The 
riots  which  resulted  caused  many  deaths.  In  the 
year  A.D.  40  the  Jews  of  Alexandria  sent  an  em- 
bassy to  the  Emperor  to  get  the  governor's  decree 
rescinded.  This  embassy  was  vinsnccessful,  and 
but  for  the  speedy  death  of  the  Emperor  the  con- 
sequences of  the  proposed  sacrilege  would  have 
been  most  serious. 

LiTEKATTRE. — The  ancient  authorities  are  Snetonins,  Gains  ; 
Philo,  contra  Flaccum  and  Legatio  ad  Gaium  ;  Dio  Cassius  ; 
etc.  The  relevant  parts  of  Tacitus  (Annais,  bk.  vii.  ff.)  are 
lost.  Modem  books  are  J.  B.  Bury,  A  History  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  London,  1893,  pp.  168,  21-1  fi.,  etc. ;  V.  Dumy,  A  His- 
tory of  Rome,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1SS4-86,  iv.  370  £f.  (splendidly  illus- 
trated) ;  H.  ScbiDler,  Geseh.  der  rdm.  Kaiserzeit,  Gotha,  1883, 
i.  301-314;  A.  von  Domaszewski,  GeseA.  der  rom.  Kaiser, 
Leipzig,  1909,  iL  1-20.  A-  SOUTEB. 

CALL,  CALLED,  CALLING.— These  terms  in 
the  NT  are  for  the  most  part  the  rendering  of 
KoXe'iv  in  its  various  parts  and  derivatives  (KeKXrifievot, 
KXijToi,  KXrjffii),  or  in  one  or  other  of  its  various  com- 
pounds. Among  its  meanings  are  invitation 
(KaXeif,  .eiadai  [Mt  Q'^  22*,  1  Co  1(F,  Rev  19^], 
TTpoffKaXeiffdat  [Ac  2^]) ;  designation  (icoXetJ',  -eiadai 
[Mt  1-1  5«,  Ac  14^^  He  2^  W],  eriKoXe'iy,  -eurOai 
[Mt  1(P,  Lk  223,  Ac  1»  He  IP*]);  invocation 
(iriKaXe'ureai  [Ac  2^^  1^,  1  Co  l^,  2  Co  1«,  1  P  1»^) ; 
summons  (^trra/coXetv,  -eiadai  [Ac  7^*  ICF^). 

In  the  OT  a  call  of  God  to  His  servants  and 
His  people  is  part  of  His  gracious  dealing  with 
mankind.  It  was  in  response  to  a  Divine  call 
that  Abraham  (Gn  12i-2),  Moses  (Ex  3^°),  Bezaleel 
(Ex  31-),  David  (Ps  78™),  Isaiah  (Is  6«- »),  Jere- 
miah (Jer  I'*-'),  Ezekiel  (Ezk  2*)  and  other  eminent 
servants  of  God  entered  into  covenant  with  Him 
and  fulfilled  the  tasks  committed  to  them.  Not 
only  was  Israel  thus  called  as  the  people  of  God, 
but  complaint  is  again  and  again  made  by  the 
Prophets  that  they  refused  to  hearken  and  stopped 
their  ears  that  they  should  not  hear  (Is  6*,  Zee 
■jii-isj  "jije  Prophets,  moreover,  had  visions  of  the 
day  when  the  Gentiles  should  be  called  into  the 
covenant  and  service  of  Jahweh  (Is  55*- ').  Of  this 
OT  meaning  examples  in  the  NT  are  our  Lord's 
call  of  His  apostles  (Mt  4-^),  the  Spirit's  call  of 
Barnabas  and  Saul  (Ac  13-),  the  call  of  the  High 
Priest  of  the  old  dispensation  (He  5*),  where  a 
Divine  call  to  special  service  is  given  and  accepted. 

In  the  Epistles,  and  particularly  in  St.  Paul, 
there  is  found  the  more  definite  meaning  of  the 
word  as  the  call  of  God  to  the  blessings  of  salva- 
tion. It  is  here  intimately  associated  with  the 
eternal  purpose  of  God  in  human  redemption. 
This  is  an  advance  upon  what  we  find  in  the 
Gospels.  In  the  Gospels  '  the  called '  (w  KXnroi)  are 
distinguished  from  'the  chosen'  {ol  iKXeicrol),  the 
former  being  those  to  whom  the  invitation  to  the 
gospel  feast  is  addressed,  and  the  latter  the  more 
select  company  who  had  heard  and  accepted  it 
(Mt  22").     In  the  Epistles  'the  called'  are  'the 


168   CALL,  CALLED,  CALLING 


CAPPADOCIA 


chosen'  (Ro  9''*,  2  Th  2^^^*,  1  P  2»,  where  y^vos 
^KXeKxSv  ai'e  those  whom  God  '  called  out  of  dark- 
ness into  his  marvellous  light').  The  KXyp-ol  are 
the  manifestation  of  the  iKXtKroi ;  '  of  a  KXijcm  wliich 
does  not  include  the  iKXayrj  tlie  Scripture  knows 
nothing'  (K.  Seeberg,  in  FRE^,  art.  ' Berufung'). 
With  St.  Paul  and  also  with  St.  Peter,  it  is  more 
tlian  an  invitation,  it  is  an  invitation  responded 
to  and  accepted,  and  it  is  so  because  '  the  called ' 
are  already  '  the  chosen'  (2  Th  2'»-  ",  Ro  8-«). 

•The  called'  (ol  kKijtoI)  to  whom  St.  Paul  ad- 
dresses the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  are  '  called  to 
be  Jesus  Christ's '  (Ro  1®)  and  they  are  '  called  to  be 
saints'  (Ro  1''),  the  meaning  of  the  word  bein^ 
identical  with  our  'converted.'  They  are  'called 
according  to  his  purpose'  (Ro  8^) — God's  electing 
purpose  from  all  eternity  :  '  for  whom  he  foreknew, 
he  also  foreordained  to  be  conformed  to  the  image 
of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be  the  first-born  among 
many  brethren  :  and  whom  he  foreordained,  them 
he  also  called  :  and  whom  he  called,  them  he  also 
justitied  :  and  whom  he  justified,  them  he  also 
glorified.'  'The  called'  in  the  thought  of  St. 
J^aul  are  'the  elect'  from  all  eternity,  and  their 
'  calling '  through  the  gospel  and  the  means  of 
grace  is  the  realization  in  time  of  God's  purpose 
with  them  from  eternity :  '  that  he  might  make 
known  the  riches  of  his  glory  upon  vessels  of 
mercy  which  he  afore  prepared  unto  glory,  even 
us  whom  he  also  called  not  from  the  Jews  only 
but  also  from  the  Gentiles '  (Ro  9^^^).  This  thought 
of  St.  Paul's  is  also  St.  John's.  We  find  it  in  the 
Revelation,  where  St.  John  pronounces  the  victori- 
ous followers  of  the  Lamb  '  called  and  chosen  and 
faithful'  (Rev  17^*,  kXtjtoI  Kal  iKXeKrol  Kai  TiffToL) — a 
description  entirely  in  keeping  with  St.  John's 
recordTof  the  Avords  of  Christ :  '  all  that  which  the 
Father  giveth  me  shall  come  unto  me '  ( Jn  6^- ''®), 
and  His  promise  concerning  the  sheep  to  whom  He 
gives  eternal  life  and  whom  no  man  shall  pluck 
out  of  His  Father's  hand  (Jn  lO^^).  'The  calling' 
{ij  kXtjctis)  is  '  not  of  works '  but  of  the  sovereign 
grace  of  God  (Ro  9"),  '  who  saved  us  and  called  us 
with  a  high  calling  (ayla  KXri<Tei),  not  according  to 
our  works,  but  according  to  His  own  purpose  and 
grace,  which  was  given  in  Christ  Jesus  before 
times  eternal'  (2  Ti  1").  The  call  which  thus 
comes  from  God  is  'in  Christ'  (1  P  5^")  and 
'  through  the  gospel '  (2  Th  2"),  to  '  the  fellowship 
of  his  Son  '  (1  Co  l^),  to  '  freedom '  (Gal  5^^),  not '  for 
uncleanness  but  in  sanctification '  (1  Th  4''),  to 
'eternal  life'  (1  Ti  6^''),  to  holiness  'like  as  he 
which  hath  called  you  is  holy'  (1  P  l^'').  It  is, 
therefore,  well  designated  '  the  high  calling  of  God 
{i]  &VU)  KXijffii  ToO  eeoG)  in  Christ  Jesus'  (Ph  3"),  'a 
heavenly  calling'  (/cX^trts  iirovpavio^,  He  3');  and 
those  who  are  partakers  of  it  are  exhorted  to  make 
their  '  calling  and  election  sure '  (2  P  l^").  For  the 
goal,  though  predestined  and  prepared  aforetime 
(Ro  8^'-  9^^),  is  not  attained  without  labour  and 
conflict ;  as  St.  Paul  exhorts  Timothy  :  '  Fight  the 
good  fight  of  faith,  lay  hold  on  the  life  eternal, 
whereunto  thou  wast  called,  and  didst  witness  the 
good  confession  in  the  sight  of  many  witnesses ' 
(1  Ti  6^^).  That  'the  calling'  is  to  more  than  a 
Christian  profession  is  clear  from  the  experiences 
which  St.  Paul  associates  with  it ;  for,  if  he  is  '  a 
called  apostle'  (Ro  P),  the  particulars  of  his  call, 
which  was  his  conversion,  are  given  when  he  tells 
how  it  pleased  God  to  separate  liim  from  his 
mother's  womb  and  to  call  him  by  His  grace  and 
to  reveal  His  Son  in  him  (Gal  P'- '").  '  Tlie  calling ' 
carries  with  it  a  great  hope — 'ye  were  called  in 
one  liope  of  your  calling'  (Eph  4'*) — for  they  that 
experience  it  do  not  only  in  this  life  partake  of 
justification,  adoption,  and  sanctification,  but  know 
that  when  Christ  who  is  their  life  shall  appear 
they  also  shall  appear  with  Him  in  glory  (1  Th  2'*). 


For  this  '  the  called '  are  kept  (rrnqpijixivoit  KXip-olt, 
JudeM;  and,  many  though  the  adversaries  and 
difficulties  be,  '  faithful  is  he  that  called  you,  who 
will  also  do  it'  (1  Th  5^). 

The  call  which  St.  Paul  and  the  apostolic  writers 
generally  have  in  view  exercises  upon  tliose  wlio 
are  the  subjects  of  it  a  grace  and  a  power  which 
are  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  in  the  words  of  the 
Westminster  Divines,  '  convincing  us  of  our  sin 
and  misery,  enlightening  our  minds  in  the  know- 
ledge of  Christ,  and  renewing  our  wills,  doth  per- 
suade and  enable  us  to  embrace  Jesus  Christ, 
freely  ottered  to  us  in  the  Gospel'  {Hhorter 
Catechism,  31). 

LiTERATURK.— Sanday-Headlam,  ii<mMn«  (ICC,  1902),  12 f., 
215 1. ;  R.  Seeberg,  PiijKSii.  [1897]  art. '  Berufung  * ;  C.  Hodge, 
Systematic  Theoloiiy,  ii.  [1872]  639-732;  art.  'Oall'  in  HDB; 
'Call,  Caliiiiij' in  Z^CC.  T.  NiCOL. 

CALLIMACHUS.— See  Quotations. 

CANAAN  (AV  Chanaan,  Ac  7"  and  13").— In 
the  NT  Palestine  is  referred  to  as  'the  Land'  or 
'  the  Land  of  Israel '  (Mt  'I^).  The  old  designation 
'  Canaan '  is  used  by  St.  Stephen,  in  making  refer- 
ence to  the  famine  which  sent  Jacob's  sons  into 
Egypt ;  and  by  St.  Paul  at  Antioch  when  referring 
to  the  destroying  of  the  Canaanites  and  the  giving 
of  the  Land  of  Promise  to  Israel. 

J.  W.  Duncan. 

CANDACE. — Candace  (KavddK-n)  is  mentioned  in 
Ac  8"  as  'queen  of  the  Etliiopians,'  i.e.  of  Meroe 
(see  ETHiopiAand  Ethiopian  Eunuch).  It  appears 
from  various  ancient  authorities  that  this  was  a 
name  always  borne  by  the  queen-mother  of  the 
Ethiopians,  and  that  in  many  cases  she  reigned 
still  as  dowager :  e.g.  we  read  KavSdKrjv  AiOiowfs 
ird(Ta,v  TT}v  rod  ^affiX^us  firp-ipa.  KaXovaiv  (J.  A.  Cramer, 
Catena  in  Acta  Apostolorum,  1844,  p.  143),  an  ex- 
tract from  an  anonymous  author  who  proceeds  to 
quote  Bion  (of  Soli)  thus :  AldLoirfs  roiis  ^affiXiwv 
iraripas  oiiK  iK<pa.ivov<nv,  dXX'  lis  bvras  vloiis  ijXiov 
irapadiddaaiv  eKCLcrrov  Si  Trjv  fjajripa  KaXoOffi  KavSdKTjv  ; 
cf.  Athen.  xiii.  566  and  Pliny,  HN  vi.  29.  The 
name  in  its  Egyptian  form  is  said  to  occur  on  the 
monuments,  and  a  queen  so  named  tried  conclusions 
with  the  Romans  during  the  reign  of  Augustus 
24-21  B.C.  and  obtained  some  measui'e  of  success. 
The  expression  in  Ac  S'"  that  the  evvovxos  dwdirnii, 
whom  Philip  baptized,  'was  over  all  her  treasure' 
suggests  that  this  monarch  was  powerful  and 
wealthy.  C.  L.  Feltoe. 

CANDLE,  CANDLESTICK.— See  Lamp,  Lamp- 
stand. 

CANKER.— See  Gangrene. 

CAPPADOCIA  {KavvaooKia).  —  Cappadocia  was 
an  elevated  table-land,  with  ill-defined  and  varying 
boundaries,  in  the  east  centre  of  Asia  Minor.  It 
was  drained  chiefly  by  the  Halys  and  its  tributaries, 
and  intersected  by  gieat  mountains,  the  hitfliest  of 
which,  Argjuus,  is  13,000  feet  above  the  sea. 
'Persons  who  ascend  it  (but  they  are  not  many) 
say  that  both  the  Euxine  and  the  Sea  of  Issua  may 
be  seen  from  it  in  clear  Aveatlier '  (Strabo,  XII.  ii. 
7).  Cappadocia  was  traversed  by  the  great  road 
of  commerce  from  Ephesus  to  the  Euphrates,  by  the 
pilgrims'  route  from  Constantinople  to  Jerusalem, 
and  by  roads  from  the  Cilician  Gates  to  the  cities 
of  the  Euxine.  It  was  an  excellent  country  for 
corn  and  pasturage,  and  it  had  some  iini)ortant 
centres  of  commerce.  Jews  had  found  their  wav 
into  tiie  country  before  the  Maccaba'an  period, 
and  in  139  B.C.  tlie  Roman  Sinate  sent  a  letter  to 
Ariarathes,  King  of  Cappadocia,  directing  him  'not 
to  seek  their  hurt'  (1  Mac  IS'"-  ^).     Philo  (Leg.  ad 


CAPTAIN  OF  THE  TEMPLE 


CARNAL 


169 


Gaium,  36)  also  refers  to  Jews  in  Cappadocia.  On 
the  death  of  King  Archelaus  in  A.D.  17,  the  country 
was  formed  into  a  Roman  province  (Tacitus,  Anji. 
ii.  42).  It  Avas  administered  by  a  procurator  until 
the  time  of  Vespasian,  who  joined  it  to  Armenia 
and  placed  it  under  a  legatus. 

Jews  of  Cappadocia  were  sojourning  in  Jerusalem 
at  the  time  of  the  lirst  Christian  Pentecost  (Ac  2"). 
The  elect  of  the  Dispersion  in  the  province  of 
Cappadocia  are  addressed  in  1  P  1^.  Pagan  Cappa- 
docia was  devoted  chiefly  to  the  cult  of  Ma,  and 
the  strength  of  its  anti-Christian  forces  is  indicated 
in  Strabo's  description  of  two  leading  cities,  Comana 
and  Morimene. 

Ttf6  priest  of  ComanA  'presides  orer  the  temple,  and  has 

authority  over  the  hierodoali  belonging'  to  it,  who,  at  the  time 
I  was  there,  exceeded  in  number  6000  persons,  including  men 
and  women.  A  large  tract  of  land  adjoins  the  temple,  the 
revenue  of  which  the  priest  enjoys.  He  is  second  in  rank  in 
Cappadocia  after  the  king,  and  in  general  the  priests  are  de- 
scended from  the  same  family  as  the  kings '  (xn.  ii.  3).  '  In 
Morimene,  among  the  Venasii,  ia  a  temple  of  Jupiter,  with 
buildings  capable  of  receiving  nearly  3000  hierodouli.  It  has  a 
tract  of  sacred  land  attached  to  it.  .  .  .  The  priest  is  appointed 
for  life  like  the  priest  of  Ck)m*na,  and  is  nest  to  him  in  rank ' 
(in.  ii.  7). 

Yet  Christianity  made  rapid  progress  in  Cappa- 
docia, and  its  triumph  in  Csesarea,  the  capital,  so 
offended  Julian  the  Apostate  that  he  deprived  the 
city  of  its  freedom.  Some  of  the  other  cities  of 
Cappadocia — Nyssa,  Nazianzus,  Tyana,  Samosata 
— are  celebrated  in  Church  history. 

LrrBRATTRE. — W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Ckureh  in  the  Soman 
Empire,  London,  1893,  p.  445  ff. ;  Th.  Mommsen,  Provineeg  of 
the  Horn.  Empire 2,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1909,  L323  f.,  33-2  f.,  ii.  19, 41, 63 ; 
E.  Chantre,  Mission  en  Cappadode,  Paris,  1S9S  ;  G.  Long:,  in 
DGRG,  L  506ff. ;  art.  '  Cappadocia '  in  HDB  and  EBi. 

James  Strahan*. 

CAPTAIN  OF  THE  TEMPLE  (Ac  i'  5*^^,  6 
ffrparrr/bs  rov  lepoO). — This  is  St.  Luke's  name  for 
the  commander  of  the  Levitical  guard  who  kept 
order  in  the  Temple  precincts  and  guarded  the 
house.  He  was  not  a  civil  officer,  but  a  priest ; 
and  his  duty,  besides  keeping  the  peace,  was  to 
make  his  rounds  by  night,  visit  all  the  gates,  and 
see  that  the  sentries  were  awake.  The  office  ap- 
pears in  Xeh  IP',  Jer  20',  etc.  In  2  Mac  3^  he  is 
called  -rpocTarrjs  rov  iepov,  and  is  said  to  be  of  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin.  If  the  reading  is  correct,  this 
would  be  an  irregularity.  In  the  time  of  Claudius 
Ca?sar,  one  Ananus,  the  commander  of  the  Temple, 
was  sent  in  bonds  to  Rome  to  answer  for  his  actions 
In  a  Jewish-Samaritan  tumult  (Jos.  Ant.  XX.  vL  2). 
For  the  name  cf.  also  BJ  VI.  v.  3. 

In  the  NT  period,  some  of  the  high  priests  were 
blamed  for  nepotism,  because,  among  other  things, 
they  made  their  sons  '  captains  of  the  Temple.' 

In  Ac  4'  the  captain  intervened  on  the  ground 
that  the  peace  of  the  Temple  was  likely  to  be 
broken  by  the  preaching  of  tlie  apostles,  who  were 
regarded  as  unauthorized  speakers,  and  as  such 
were  under  the  ban  of  Jer  29^  :  *  that  there  might 
be  an  overseer  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  for  every 
man  who  is  insane  and  prophesies,  and  that  thou 
mightest  put  him  in  the  stocks  and  in  the  block.* 

In  Ac  5**-  "■*  the  captain  of  the  Temple  re-arrested 
Peter  and  John,  who  had  escaped  from  prison  the 
previous  night.  But  clearly  he  was  uncertain  of 
his  position,  and  recognized  that  popular  opinion 
was  on  the  side  of  the  apostles.  It  was  the  policy 
of  the  Sadducees  to  avoid  disturbance,  and  to  give 
no  excuse  for  the  intersention  of  the  Roman  power. 
Therefore  the  arrest  was  efl"ected  courteously, 
'  without  v-iolence,  for  they  feared  the  people  lest 
they  should  be  stoned.'  W.  M.  Gr.\kt. 

CAPTIYITY.— See  Boxdage. 

CARE,  CAREFUL.— The  English  word  'care'  is 
used  in  two  senses  :  (a)  attention  to  something  or 


someone,  not  necessarily  painful  (Lat.  cura) ;  and 
(6)  anxiety,  painful  attention.  This  sense  was  due 
to  the  A.S.  caruy  'sorrow,'  becoming  confounded 
with  the  Latin  cura,  'attention'  (see  HDB,  art. 
'  Care').  Tliis  confusion  was  not  unnatural,  since 
excessive  attention,  or  conflicting  attention  (cf. 
fxifH-Uva  'drawing  in  different  directions,'  or  Eng. 
'  distraction '),  readily  becomes  painful.  The  sense 
of  distress  is  not  conveyed  by  the  adjectival  and 
adverbial  forms — careful  and  carefully,  careless 
and  carelessly. 

(rt)  Instances  of  commendable  human  care  are 
to  be  found  in  concern  for  personal  righteousness 
(He  12'*,  Tit  3*) ;  zeal  (a-KovS-n)  for  correcting  a 
wrong  (2  Co  7") ;  interest  in  the  welfare  of  one's 
fellows,  especially  those  who  are  of  the  household 
of  faith  (1  Co  12»,  2  Co  7"  8'«,  Ph  2r^  4") ;  anxiety 
for  the  churches  (2  Co  1 1®).  (b)  Care  is  condemned 
when  it  has  an  unworthy  object,  e.g.  forethought 
(■rp6voia)  for  the  flesh  to  fulfil  its  lusts  (Ro  13") ; 
the  worship  of  mammon  (1  Ti  S^-  ",  He  13');  or 
when  it  is  purely  selfish  (Ph  2^).  (c)  Care  which 
distracts  from  the  love  and  service  of  God  becomes 
an  evil.  Marriage  was  regarded  as  legitimate  and 
honourable  in  the  early  Church,  but  St.  Paul  saw  in 
the  cares  of  married  life  a  menace  to  spiritual  zeal 
and  labour  (1  Co  7*-').  A  lawful  temporal  care  was 
recognized.  He  who  made  no  provision  (xporoct) 
for  those  dependent  upon  him,  and  especially  for 
his  own  family,  had  denied  the  faith  and  was  worse 
than  an  unbeUever  (1  Ti  5^  ;  cf.  2  Th  3«-^^  Ro  12'-'). 
But  how  readily  the  cares  of  the  world  crushed 
out  the  love  of  God !  (2  Ti  4'»,  He  13*,  etc.).  (d) 
Hiunan  care  has  its  remedy  in  the  spirit  which 
puts  first  of  all  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  His 
righteousness.  The  secret  of  St.  Paul's  indiflerence 
to  human  loss  (Ph  3"'-),  and  his  contentment  in 
whatsoever  condition  of  life  he  happened  to  be  (4"), 
lay  in  the  fact  that  the  ordinary  human  interests 
of  life  had  become  utterly  subordinate  to  the 
interests  of  God  (cf.  1  Co  7",  '  Were  you  a  slave 
when  (Jod  called  vou?  Let  not  that  weigh  on 
your  mind'),  (e)  Again,  'the  strain  of  toU,  the 
fret  of  care '  is  relieved  in  the  thought  of  God's 
providence  (Ph  4®,  '  in  nothing  be  anxious' ;  1  P  5', 
'casting  aU  your  anxiety  upon  God,  because  he 
careth  for  you '  ;  cf.  He  13*).  Providence  does  not 
guarantee  freedom  from  human  pain,  sorrow  and 
persecution  (2  Co  4**-  11^^,  etc.),  but  embraces 
these  and  all  things,  in  a  wide  scheme  of  goodness 
(Ro  828-»-s7;  cf.  Mt  1038- »  God  cares  for  the 
spaurrows  that  fall  to  the  ground).  Care  is  relieved 
for  the  Christian,  not  so  much  by  the  hope  of  a 
change  of  human  circumstances,  as  by  his  changed 
estimate  of  human  values.  Temporal  things  '  shall 
vanish  aU — the  city  of  God  remaineth'  (2  Co  4**^). 
See  also  art.  Comfort. 

LrrraLATCE*.— Art. '  Care '  in  HDB  and  DCG ;  R.  W.  Dale, 
Laws  of  Christ  Jor  Common  lAJe,  London,  1899 ;  T.  C.  Upham, 
Life  and  Religious  Opinions  of  Madame  Guyon,  New  York, 
1877 ;  W.  C.  E.  Newbolt,  Counsels  of  Faith  and  Practice, 
1S94,  p.  161 ;  H.  Black,  Christ's  Service  of  Love,  1907,  p.  42. 

H.    BULCOCK. 

CARNAL.— In  two  cases  (Ro  8^  He  9»<»)  the 
adj.  '  carnal,'  and  in  one  (Eo  8®)  the  adv.  '  car- 
nally,' are  used  in  AV  to  render  the  gen.  of  adf^ 
'  flesh' ;  in  Ro  8«- '  RV  substitutes  '  of  the  flesh.' 
The  '  carnal  mind  '  or  '  mind  of  the  flesh '  (Ro 
8*- ")  denotes,  according  to  St.  Paul's  frequent 
usage,  human  nature  as  fallen,  sinfully  condi- 
tioned, and  hostile  to  the  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  ;  'carnal  ordinances'  (He  9^')  are  material 
ordinances  as  contrasted  with  those  that  are 
spiritual. 

On  the  other  occasions  when  '  carnal '  is  found 
in  the  Epistles  it  represents  the  adjectives  adpKwoi 
and  ffapKiKos,  which,  according  to  their  strict  mean- 
ings, correspond  respectively  to  the  Lat.  cameus 


170 


CARPUS 


CASTLE 


and  camalis,  and  the  Eng.  'fleshy'  and  'fleshly.' 
Belonging  to  the  general  class  of  proparoxytone 
adjectives  in  -tvoj  which  are  used  to  denote  the 
material  of  which  a  thing  is  made  (cf.  ^vXivos, 
wooden,   Xidivos,    made    of    stone,    etc.),    cipKivos 

Sroperly  describes  that  which  is  composed  of 
esn.  It  is  tlie  more  literal  and  grosser  term, 
while  crapKiKdi  has  an  abstract  and  ethical  applica- 
tion as  denoting  the  '  fleshly '  or  what  pertains  to 
the  flesh. 

With  regard  to  the  use  of  the  two  words  in  the 
Pauline  Epp.,  a  ditticulty  arises  owing  to  the  way 
in  which  they  are  interchanged  in  diflerent  MSS. 
In  the  view  of  some  scholars,  a-dpKivoi,  which  was 
much  the  more  familiar  word  of  the  two,  has  been 
substituted  in  some  cases  for  a-apKiKds,  an  adjective 
almost  wholly  unknown  outside  of  biblical  Greek 
(Winer,  Gram,  of  NT  Gi\,  tr.  Moulton,  ed.  1882, 
p.  122).  Otliers,  conversely,  are  of  opinion  that 
o-apKiKd!  as  the  more  abstract  term  may  have  taken 
the  place  of  the  grosser  o-dpKivos,  which  might  seem 
to  a  copyist  less  appropriate  to  the  Apostle's 
moaning  (Cremer,  Lexicon,  s.v.).  There  are  cases, 
however  {e.g.  Ro  7^^),  where  according  to  the  best 
readings  ffdpKivos  stands  when  (rapKiKds  might  have 
been  expected.  According  to  some  commentators 
(Tholuclc,  Alford),  St.  Paul  used  the  two  adjectives 
indiscriminately.  Meyer,  on  the  other  hand,  who 
lays  stress  on  the  ditt'erence  of  meaning  between 
the  two  words,  thinks  that  the  Apostle  sometimes 
of  set  purpose  employed  (xdpKivos  as  the  stronger 
expression  in  order  to  indicate  more  emphatically 
the  presence  of  the  unspiritual  element.  He  calls 
the  Corinthians  a-dpKivoL  (1  Co  3')  because  the  flesh 
appeared  to  constitute  their  very  nature  ;  he  says 
of  himself  in  Ro  7'^  '  I  am  carnal '  (trdp/ctj'os),  to 
show  by  this  vivid  expression  the  preponderance 
in  his  own  case  of  that  unspiritual  nature  which 
serves  as  the  instrument  of  sin. 

The  use  of  ffdpKivo^  in  such  cases,  however,  is  not 
to  be  taken  as  lending  any  support  to  the  view 
that  St.  Paul  recognized  in  the  body  the  source 
and  principle  of  sin.  The  language  he  uses  in 
Gal  5^^-,  1  Co  3*  suggests  rather  that  his  contrast 
of  'carnal'  and  'spiritual'  (Ro  8^"'-)  is  equivalent 
to  the  contrast  he  elsewhere  makes  of  '  natural ' 
and  '  spiritual '  (I  Co  2'*^-).  The  '  carnal  mind  '  or 
'  mind  of  the  flesh  '  is  the  mind  which  is  not  sub- 
ject to  the  law  of  God  (Ro  8^)  because  it  has  not 
received  the  Spirit  of  God  (1  Co  2'2- ").  See, 
further,  Flesh,  Body. 

LiTERATURK.— H.  Cretner,  Lex.  of  NT  Greek^,  Edinburgh, 
J880,  and  R.  C.  Trench,  St/nonyms  of  the  iV'2'a,  London,  1876, 
s.vv.  crapictKos,  <rd.pKi.voi ;  Comm.  of  Alford  and  Meyer  on 
pasHages  referred  to  ;  J.  Laidlaw,  liiMe  Doct.  of  Man,  new  ed., 
Edinburgh,  1895,  oh.  vi.  ;  Sanday-Headlam,  iComajis'  {ICC, 
1902),  pp.  181,  412 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Uoly  Spirit  in  the  NT, 

1909,  pp.  190, 214.  J,  c.  Lambert. 

CARPUS  (KapTFos). — Carpus  was  an  inhabitant 
of  Troas  in  whose  house  St.  Paul  probably  lodged 
on  his  last  journey  to  Rome.  St.  Paul  writes 
from  his  prison  to  Timothy,  and  asks  him  to  bring 
the  cloak,  books,  and  parchments  which  he  had 
left  at  Troas  with  Carpus  (2  Ti  4'»).  Possibly  the 
Apostle  was  arrested  in  Troas  and  compelled  to 
leave  these  articles  behind.  Nothing  further  is 
known  with  any  certainty  regarding  Carpus. 
The  name  is  Greek,  but  his  nationality  is  un- 
known. He  is  supposed  by  later  tradition  to  have 
been  one  of  '  the  Seventy,'  and  the  Greek  Church 
honours  his  memory  on  May  26,  the  Roman  and 
Syrian  Churches  on  October  13.  Both  Hippolytus 
and  Dorotheus  include  his  name  in  their  lists  of 
the  Seventy,  and  report  that  he  became  bishop  of 
Berythus  or  Bercea  in  Thrace  (Acta  Sanctorum, 
May  26,  Oct.  13  ;  Mcnologion,  May  26  ;  N.  Nilles, 
Kalendarium  Manuale,  Innsbruck,  1896,  i.  165, 
4G1).  W.  F.  Boyd. 


CASTAWAY.— This  word  has  disappeared  from 
the  RV  (1  Co  9-''),  and  its  place  has  been  taken  by 
'  rejected '  (d56Kt/ioi).  The  word  is  the  negation 
of  SdKifiof,  'acceptable,'  'accepted  after  trial,'  and 
means  '  unacceptable,'  '  rejected  after  trial,'  as  in 
the  LXX  Is  122  there  is  found  '  your  silver  is  re- 
jected' {t6  dpyvpiov  v/iQv  d86Kifj.ov).  St.  Paul,  how- 
ever, somewhat  extends  the  metaphor,  for  the 
context  shows  that  the  ancient  games,  or,  as  he 
is  writing  to  Corinthians,  the  Isthmian  games, 
are  in  his  mind.  He  contemplates  the  possibility 
of  rejection,  after  having  been  successful  in  the 
contest,  for  not  having  contended  in  accordance 
with  the  rules.  It  M-ould  be  distressing  in  the 
extreme  after  all  his  exacting  training  and  his 
arduous  struggle  to  be  found  by  the  umpire  dis- 
qualified for  neglect  of  the  conditions.  To  have 
preached  to  others,  and  yet,  through  lack  of  Chris- 
tian watchfulness,  to  have  allowed  the  flesh  to 
re-assert  the  mastery  and  so  to  become  a  castaway, 
to  be  rejected  in  the  final  scrutiny,  is  a  possibility 
which  urges  the  Apostle  himself  to  more  arduous 
exertions  and  lends  earnestness  to  his  appeal  to 
the  Corinthians.  For  an  apposite  parallel  see  2 
Clement,  vii.    See  also  art.  Assurance. 

T.  NicoL. 

CASTLE.  — The  word  irapep-^oX-fi,  translated 
'castle'  six  times  in  Acts,  meant  in  the  Mace- 
donian dialect  an  encampment,  and  in  the  LXX  it 
is  used  for  the  camp  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert 
(Ex  29^'*,  etc.).  In  the  vivid  narrative  of  St.  Paul's 
arrest  in  Jerusalem  (Ac  21.  22)  it  probably  denotes 
the  barracks  of  the  Roman  soldiers  who  were 
stationed  at  the  castle  of  Antonia,  though  the  RV 
as  well  as  the  AV  identifies  it  with  the  castle  itself. 

The  history  of  this  fort  goes  back  to  the  time 
of  Neheraiah,  who  speaks  of  procuring  '  timber  to 
make  beams  for  the  castle  (tiie  Blrah)  which  ap- 
pertains to  the  house'  (2*;  cf.  7^).  Probably  on 
the  same  site  John  Hyrcanus,  high  priest  from  135 
to  105  B.C.,  built  the  Hasmona'an  castle,  which 
Josephus  calls  'Baris'(^n<.  XV.  xi.  4  ;  BJl.  xxi.  1). 
'  When  Herod  became  king,  he  rebuilt  that  castle, 
which  was  very  conveniently  situated,  in  a  magnifi- 
cent manner,  and  because  he  was  a  friend  of  An- 
tonius,  he  called  it  by  the  name  of  Antonia'  [Ant. 
XVIII.  iv.  3).  Situated  at  the  comer  of  the  north 
and  west  cloisters  of  the  Temple,  it  commanded, 
especially  from  its  lofty  S.E.  tower,  a  view  of  the 
whole  sacred  precincts,  while  two  staircases  (dxa- 
^adfiol,  Ac  21^'>,  KaTa^dtretj,  Jos.  BJ  V.  v.  8)  led  down 
from  it  to  the  cloisters  ;  and  in  the  Roman  period 
the  soldiers  of  the  cohort  {aveXpa.),  which  was  always 
stationed  in  the  city,  '  went  several  ways  among 
the  cloisters,  with  tlieir  arms,  on  the  Jewish  festi- 
vals, in  order  to  keep  watch  over  the  people '  (Jos. 
loc.  cit.). 

The  narrator  of  St.  Paul's  arrest  was  evidently 
well  acquainted  with  this  locality,  and  he  graphi- 
cally reproduces  the  details  of  the  scene.  News  of 
a  Temple  riot — no  uncommon  occurrence — came  up 
{dvi^-q  (pda-ii)  to  the  commander  of  the  cohort 
IxiXlapxoi,  '  military  tribune '  RVm),  who  at  once 
took  soldiers  and  ran  down  (Kar^Spafnv)  to  the  fana- 
tical crowd,  probably  just  in  time  to  prevent  blood- 
shed (Ac  2F'-  ="2).  As  St.  Paul  was  about  to  be 
conducted  up  one  of  the  staircases  leading  to  the 
barracks,  he  was  swept  ofl"  liis  feet  by  the  rising 
human  tide,  and  had  literally  to  be  carried  out  of 
danger  by  the  soldiers ;  but,  recovering  himself  on 
the  upper  steps,  he  asked  and  obtained  permi.'^sion 
to  address  the  baffled  and  still  racing  crowd,  who 
turned  a  sea  of  angry  faces  upon  him  from  below. 
His  beckoning  hand  and  his  Aramaic  speech 
secured  a  temporary  silence,  which  enabled  him 
to  tell  his  vast  audience  the  story  of  his  conversion, 
but  he  could  not  get  beyond  the  fatal  word  '  Gen- 
tiles'  (222>),  and,  leaving  behind  him  a  yelling  mob, 


CASTOR 


CENCHRE^ 


171 


he  was  marched  into  tlie  barracks.  Fort  Antonia 
was  for  some  days  his  place  ot  continement.  Hither 
came  his  nephew  with  a  message  wliich  saved  him 
from  fallinj,'  into  the  hands  of  fanatical  conspirators 
(23'"),  and  here  Christ  Himself  seemed  to  stand  by 
him  with  words  of  good  cheer  (v.").  From  the 
castle  he  was  taken  oy  night  to  Antipatris,  and 
thence  to  Csesarea  (23^^"^). 

LiTERATrRE.— T.  Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paxil?,  1S75, 
li.  135  ff.  ;  Conybeare-Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
1850,  ii.  311  ff. ;  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  Sources  of  NT  Greek,  1895, 
p.  15  ;  artt. '  Castle '  and  '  Jerusaleoi '  in  EBi, '  Castle '  in  UDB. 

James  Strahan. 
CASTOR.— See  Dioscuri. 

CATECHUMEN.— See  Baptism. 

CATHOLIC  EPISTLES.— The  title  'Catholic 
Epistles,'  as  applied  to  a  group  of  seven  Epistles  in 
tlie  NT,  viz.  those  of  James,  Peter  (two),  John 
(three),  and  Jude,  is  first  met  with  in  Eusebius  (HE 
II.  xxiii.  2o[6M]and  VI.  xiv.  1),  and,  somewhat  later, 
in  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  {Catecheseis,  iv.  36)  and  the 
original  'Euthalius'  (ed.  Zaccagni,  1698,  i.  405, 
409).  We  can  thus  trace  the  title  in  the  above 
sense  as  far  back  as  c.  A.D.  310,  and  even  then  it 
comes  before  us  as  a  long-established  and  familiar 
designation,  the  origin  of  which  we  may  therefore 
assign  to  the  3rd  century.  As  regards  its  usage  by 
Eu.sebius,  the  context  of  the  fir.st  passage  cited 
(II.  xxiii,  25)  shows  us  that  it  cannot  bear  the 
meaning  of  'canonical'  or  'apostolic,'  since  he 
there  employs  it  simply  in  the  sense  of  Epistles  not 
addressed  to  a  definite  and  relatively  narrow  circle 
of  readers.  With  this  usage  we  may  compare  his 
application  of  the  term  '  catholic '  to  the  Epistles  of 
Dionysius  of  Corinth  in  HE  IV.  xxiii.  1,  where  he 
presumably  makes  use  of  an  already  current  desig- 
nation of  that  group  of  seven  ( !)  Epistles,  which, 
though  directed  to  particular  communities,  might 
nevertheless,  so  far  as  their  character  and  contents 
are  concerned,  have  been  addressed  to  any  com- 
munity in  Christendom.  The  title  'Catholic Epistle,' 
again,  as  applied  to  a  particular  letter,  is  used,  c. 
260,  by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (ap.  Eus.  HE  VII. 
XXV.  7,  10)  of  1  John — in  contradistinction  to  the 
other  two  Epistles  of  John,  which  are  not  addressed 
to  the  Church  at  large;  the  term  is  used  more 
frequently  by  Origen  of  1  John,  Jude,  and  1  Peter, 
as  also,  in  a  single  instance,  of  the  Epistle  of  Bar- 
nabas (c.  Cels.  i.  63).  The  letter  of  the  Apostolic 
Council  in  Jerusalem  (Ac  15^"^)  is  referred  to  as 
'catholic'  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Strom.  IV. 
XV.  97)  c.  205,  and  he  applies  the  same  attribute  to 
Jude  in  his  Hypotyposeis  (T.  Zahn,  Forschungen 
zur  Gesck.  des  NT  Kanons,  pt.  iii.  [1884]  83,  Gesch. 
des  NT  Kanons,  i.  [1888]  319 f.).  The  anti-Mon- 
tanist  Apollonius  speaks  ( 197)  of  a '  Catholic  Epistle ' 
which  the  Montanist  Themiso  had  composed  in 
imitation  of  the  Apostle  {ap.  Eus.  HE  V.  xviii.  5) 
— probably  St.  John  in  his  First  Epistle. 

We  may  therefore  assume  that,  by  the  end  of  the 
2nd  century,  the  title  'catholic'  was  applied  to 
certain  Epistles  which,  as  contrasted  above  all  with 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  were  not  explicitly  addressed 
to  particular  churches,  and  that  it  was  likewise 
used  on  similar  grounds  of  1  John  as  contrasted 
with  2  and  3  John.  From  this  point,  again,  a 
further  step  was  taken,  probably  in  the  first  half 
of  the  3rd  century,  in  applying  the  attribute 
•  catholic '  to  all  the  non-Pauline  Epistles  in  the 
sacred  collection,  even  although  the  term  as  hither- 
to used  was  not  appropriate  to  2  and  3  John.  These, 
however,  were  by  that  time  closely  linked  with 
1  John.  The  usage  of  the  term  as  equivalent  to 
'  general '  or  '  encyclical '  was  still  recognized  by 
Leontius  of  Byzantium  (de  Sectis,  ii.  4)  and  (Ecume- 
nius  {Com.  in  Ep.  Cath.  Jacobi).     The  change  by 


which  the  attribute  'catholic'  came  to  signify  the 
opposite  of  '  non-apostolic '  or  '  uncanonical '  took 
place  in  the  West,  and  it  was  there  also  that  this 
group  of  seven  Epistles  in  the  NT  came  to  be  kno\vn 
generally  as  the  Canonical  Epistles  (cf.  Council  of 
Damasus  of  382  ;  see  C.  H.  Turner,  JThSi  i.  [1899- 
1900] 554,  and  E.  v.  Dobschiitz,  Z)ccre<.  Gelasianum, 
1912,  p.  28  ;  Pseudo-Didymus,  in  Ep.  Can.  [in  the 
Latin  version],  and  Cassiodoms,  de  Inatit.  Div. 
Lit.,  8).  It  would  thus  appear  that  these  terms 
were  resorted  to  as  a  mere  makeshift,  and  that 
they  are  of  very  little  service  to  us  either  as  regards 
the  history  of  the  canon  or  from  the  literary  point 
of  view. 

LiTERATtrRE. — Historfes  of  the  NT  Canon,  and  Introductions 
to  the  NT,  esp.  H.  A.  Schott,  Isa(jogf.  hist.-erit.  in  libros  Som 
Foederis,  Jena,  1830,  pp  .371-5,  and  E.  Reuss,  Geseh.  derheiligen 
Sehriften  A'euen  Testaments^,  Brunswick,  18C0,  §  301  (Eng.  tr., 
Edinburgh,  1884);  E.  T.  Mayerhoff,  '  Uber  die  Bedeutungdes 
Namens  enurroKaX  KadoAiicai"  in  Uist.-krit.  Einleitung  in  die 
petrinischen  Sehriften,  Hamburg,  1835,  pp.  31-42 ;  A.  Deiss- 
mann,  Bibelstudien,'ii&rhuTg,  1895,  p.  243 f. (Eng.  tr., Edinburgh, 
1901,  p.  50 ff.);  the  relevant  excursuses  of  Jan  van  Gilse  and 
W.  C.  L.  Ziegler  ('  Animadversiones  in  sensum  nominis  epist 
eathol.')  in  J.  Dahl,  Commentatio  exegetico-critica  de  avQevrin 
ejmt.  p«(r.,  Rostock,  1807.  H.  JORDAN. 

CAUDA.— Cauda  (Claada  in  AV ;  KaOSa  in  B, 
supported  by  Gaud  us  in  Pliny,  HN  IV.  xii.  61,  and 
Pomp.  Mela,  ii.  14  ;  KXaCSa  in  K  and  most  authori- 
ties, supported  by  KXaOSoj  in  Ptolemy,  III.  xvii.  11) 
was  a  small  island  23  miles  S.  of  Crete.  From  the 
modem  forms  of  the  name — Gavdho  in  Greek,  Gozzo 
in  Italian — Ramsay  argues  that  preference  should 
be  given  to  the  ancient  form  which  omits  the  letter 
'1.'  Favoured  by  a  soft  south  wind,  the  ship  in 
Avhich  St.  Paul  was  sailing  for  Italy  had  rounded 
Cape  Lithinos  (now  Cape  Matala),  four  or  five  miles 
west  from  Fair  Havens,  and  was  making  in  a 
W.N.W.  direction  across  the  Bay  of  Messara  for 
Port  Phenice  {q.v.),  which  there  Avas  the  prospect 
of  reaching  in  a  few  hours,  when  she  was  suddenly 
struck  by  a  '  typhoon '  {ipefios  Tv<f>wviK6s),  or  E.N.E. 
squall  (see  EURAQUILO).  sweeping  down  from 
Mount  Ida,  and,  not  being  able  to  face  the  gale 
{a.vTo<p0a\/jidi'),  she  had  to  run  l^efore  it  (^7rt56i^ey 
eipepd/xeda)  till  she  was  fortunate  enough  to  get 
under  the  lee  of  Cauda,  where  the  comparatively 
smooth  water  en.abled  the  crew  to  bring  her  to 
and  prepare  her  to  weather  the  storm  (Ac  27'^'"). 
'The  ship  must  have  been  laid  to  on  the  starboard 
tack  under  the  lee  of  Cauda,  for  it  was  only  on 
this  tack  that  it  was  possible  to  avoid  being  driven 
on  the  African  coast'  (Smith,  Voyage  and  Ship- 
icreck  of  St.  Paul*,  London,  1880,  p.  97  fl'.). 

LiTERATiTRB. — W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  London,  1895,  p. 
326 ff.;  A.  Breusing,  Vie  yautik  der  Alten,  Bremen,  1886,  p. 
169  ff. ;  artt.  '  Cauda '  in  HDB  and  '  Clauda  '  in  EBi. 

James  Strahan. 
CELIBACY,— See  Marriage. 

CENCHREiG. — Cenchreae  (not  '  Cenchrea,'  as  in 
AV  ;  KcTx/jeat  [Tischendorf],  KevxpeaL  [WH] ;  now 
the  village  of  Kichries)  was  the  eastern  port  of 
Corinth,  7  miles  from  the  city,  on  the  Saronic  Gulf, 
opposite  to  Lechaeum  on  the  Corinthian  Gulf. 
'  Cenchreae,'  .says  Strabo,  '  serves  for  the  trade  with 
Asia,  and  Lechseum  for  that  with  Italy'  (Vlil.  vi. 
22).  From  the  town  of  Schcenus — 4  miles  north  of 
CenchreiE — where  the  isthmus  is  less  than  5  miles 
wide,  a  tramway  (5io\/cos)  was  laid  to  the  other 
side,  upon  wliich  vessels  of  smaller  tonnage  were 
conveyed  bodily  from  sea  to  sea,  avoiding  a  cir- 
cuitous passage  by  the  stormy  headland  of  Malea. 
In  A.D.  67,  Nero,  impressed  by  an  idea  which  had 
previously  commended  itself  to  greater  minds — 
notably  to  that  of  Julius  Caisar — made  an  abortive 
attempt  to  cut  a  canal  across  the  Isthmus,  a  piece 
of  engineering  which  was  not  accomplished  till 
the  end  of  the  19th  century  (1S81-1893).     Between 


172 


CENSER 


CERINTHUS 


Cenchreoe  and  Schccnus  was  a  famous  sanctuary, 
in  which  stood  '  the  temple  of  Isthmian  Xoptune, 
shaded  above  witli  a  <jrove  of  pine-trees,  where  the 
Corinthians  celebrated  the  Isthmian  games' (Strabo, 
loc.  cit. ).  From  the  pines  were  cut  those  garlands 
for  the  brows  of  the  victors  in  the  stadium,  which 
St.  Paul  contrasts  with  inunortal  crowns  (1  Co 
g24-27)  ^^  Cenchrea;,  St.  Paul,  on  the  eve  of  his 
sailing  for  Syria  to  attend  the  Passover,  had  his 
head  shorn  on  account  of  a  vow  (Ac  18^").  During 
his  prolonged  residence  in  Corinth,  Cenchrere  had 
become  the  seat  of  a  church,  of  which  Phoebe  was 
a  Si6.Kovoi — if  not  a  deaconess  in  the  full  technical 
meaning  of  later  times,  at  any  rate  in  a  more  de- 
finite sense  than  is  implied  by  'servant'  (lio  16'). 
She  was  a  irpoarAai^ — succourer,  patroness,  guardian 
— of  many  way  faring  Christians  who  passed  through 
that  bustling  seaport  (16-).  It  has  generally  been 
assumed  that  this  Cenchrean  lady,  whom  St.  Paul 
so  warmly  commends,  was  the  bearer  of  the  lloman 
Epistle  to  its  destination  (lienan,  St.  Paul,  1869, 
p.  219),  but  there  is  strong  reason  to  believe  that 
Ko  16  is  a  letter  meant  for  Ephesus  (see  Romans). 

LITERAT0RB. — Convbeare-Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St. 
Paid,  1856,  ii.  224  ;  T.  Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul^, 
1875,  i.  299  £f. ;  J.  G.  Frazer,  Paxisanias,  1898,  iii.  6ff. ;  E.  B. 
Redlich,  St.  Paul  and  his  Companions,  1913,  index,  s.v. 

James  Strahan. 
CENSER. — 1.  The  writer  of  Hebrews  mentions 
the  '  golden  Ovfiiar-qpiov '  lirst  among  the  pieces  of 
furniture  which  belonged  to  the  Holy  of  Holies 
(9^).  He  had  in  view  Ex  30'"i",  which  is  generally 
regarded  as  one  of  the  latest  strata  of  P.  His 
words  raise  a  question  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
word  Ov/xiar-fipiop,  and  another  as  to  the  position  of 
the  article  so  named,  both  of  which  questions  have 
been  the  subject  of  much  controversy.  (1)  AV 
and  RV,  following  the  Vulgate — 'aureum  habens 
thuribulum' — render  Ov/jnarifipiov  by  'censer';  but 
RVm  and  American  RV,  like  Clement  Alex., 
Calvin,  and  most  modern  scholars,  translate  it  as 
'altar  of  incense.'  Etymologically  the  Avord — a 
neut.  adj. — may  mean  anything  employed  in  the 
burning  of  incense,  whether  a  censer  in  which,  or 
an  altar  upon  which,  the  act  is  performed.  When 
ev/uar-fipiov  occurs  in  the  LXX— '2  Ch  26'8,  Ezk  8", 
4  Mac  7^^ — it  no  doubt  means  'censer,'  being  a 
translation  of  nnapp,  while  tiie  altar  of  incense  is  t6 
dvaioLffrfipiov  0vnidiJ.aTos  (or  -ruv)  in  Ex  30'*  ",  Lv  4', 
1  Ch  7^*,  etc.  But  it  is  also  certain  that  Bvjj.iar-^pioi' 
became  the  usual  Hellenistic  name  for  the  altar  of 
incense,  and  Philo  (Quis  rer.  div.  hcer.  46,  Vit. 
Mo.i.  iii.  7),  Josephus  (Ant.  ill.  vi.  8,  viii.  2,  3,  BJ 
V.  V.  5),  and  the  versions  of  Symmachus  and  Theo- 
dotion  use  the  word  with  this  meaning  in  Ex  30'. 
Unless  the  writer  of  Hebrews  follows  the  same 
usage,  he  entirely  ignores  the  altar  of  incense  in 
his  description  of  the  furniture  of  the  tabernacle, 
which  is  scarcely  credible.  (2)  Prima  facie,  the 
author  of  Hebrews  has  fallen  into  error  in  naming 
this  altar  among  the  furnishings  of  the  most  holy 
place.  He  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  misled 
(a)  by  the  ambiguous  instructions  regarding  it 
given  in  Ex  30*  :  '  thou  shall  put  it  before  the  veil 
that  is  by  the  ark  of  the  testimony,  before  the 
mercy-seat  that  is  over  the  testimony' ;  (6)  by  its 
designation  as  dyiov  tQv  ayluv  in  Ex  30'" ;  and  (c) 
especially  by  the  fact  that  in  Ex  '25^"**  26^^,  only  tlie 
candlestick  and  the  table  are  mentioned  as  standing 
in  the  holy  place.  Such  a  mistake  on  the  part  of  the 
writer,  whose  acquaintance  with  the  ritual  practice 
of  Judaism  was  second-hand,  would  not  prove  him 
the  Monstrum  von  Unwissenheit  that  Delitzsch 
suggests.  Still,  it  is  not  certain  that  he  was  really 
WTong.  He  does  not  say  tiiat  the  Holy  of  Holies 
contained  the  Ovfuarripiov  (contrast  ^i*  5  in  He  9^), 
but  that  it  had  {(xowa)  such  an  altar.  Evidently 
he  was  thinking,  not  of  the  local  position  of  the 


altar,  but  of  its  intimate  relatif)n  to  the  ministry 
of  the  inner  sanctuary  on  the  Day  of  Atonement. 

2.  In  Rev  8*-",  Xi/Saxwrds,  which  is  strictly  '  frank- 
incense,' the  gum  exuding  from  the  Xi/Savos,  is  used 
instead  of  XifiavuTls  (or  -rph)  for  '  censer,'  corre- 
sponding to  the  irvpetou  (TripLov)  or  OvLffKr}  ('  lire  pan  ') 
of  the  LXX.  In  the  prophetic  symbolism  this 
censer  holds  (1)  tiie  lire  which  burns  the  incense 
that  is  added  to  the  prayers  of  the  saints,  and  (2) 
the  lire,  or  hot  ashes,  of  God's  vengeance,  which  are 
cast  upon  a  hostile  and  impenitent  world.  See 
Incense. 

Literature. — Grimm-Thayer,  s.v.  BvniatT^piov ;  Schiirer, 
HJP  II.  i.  295  ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  NT,  En^f.  tr.,  1909,  ii.  303; 
H.  B.  Swete,  Apocalypse  of  iSt.  Juhifi,  1907,  p.  108 ;  ExpT  i. 
[1889-90]  74,  ii.  [1890-91]  18  ;  see  also  art.  'Censer'  in  HDD 
and  Literature  there  cited.  JaMES  STKAUAN. 

CENTURION.— See  Army. 
CEPHAS.— See  Peter. 

CERINTHUS.— Probably  Cerinthus  was  educated 
in  Egypt  (Hippol.,  vii.  7,  33  ;  x.  21  [ed.  Duncker]) ; 
certainly  he  taught  in  proconsular  Asia  contempor- 
aneously with  John,  the  writer  of  the  Gospel  and 
Epistles,  i.e.  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  1st  cent.  A.D. 
(Polycarp,  quoted  in  Iren.,  adv.  liter .  III.  iii.  4). 
Cerinthus  is  one  of  the  earliest  of  the  Gnostics. 
The  world,  he  taught,  was  made  not  by  the 
Supreme  God,  but  by  a  Power  inferior  to,  and 
ignorant  of,  Him.  He  denied  the  virgin  birth  of 
Jesus,  who  was,  however,  pre-eminent  for  right- 
eousness, prudence,  and  wisdom.  He  separated 
Jesus  and  Christ.  Christ  descended  on  Jesus  after 
baptism  and  left  Him  before  the  crucifixion. 
Jesus  suffered  and  rose  again,  but  Christ,  a  pure 
spirit,  was  impassiVjle  (Iren.,  adv.  Hcer.  I.  xxvi.  1  ; 
cf.  III.  xi.  1  ;  Hippol.,  vii.  33,  x.  21  ;  Pseudo- 
TertuUian,  adv.  omn.  Hcer.  x.). 

It  is  not  incredible  that  Cerinthus  judaized  to 
the  extent  of  teaching  the  obligation  of  circum- 
cision and  the  Sabbath  (Epiph.,  Hcer.  chs.  i.  and  ii., 
and  Philaster).  Though  Judaizing  and  Gnosticism 
afterwards  became  inconsistent  with  each  other, 
at  Cerinthus'  stage  such  a  limited  alliance  is  not 
unthinkable.  It  is,  however,  his  christology  that 
is  most  important,  and  it  is  an  interesting  query — ■ 
Is  it  this  that  is  attacked  in  1  John?  Beyond 
doubt  St.  John  has  an  actual  heresy  in  view  ;  he 
gives  no  mere  general  warning  against  errors  that 
may  arise.  The  crucial  passage  is  1  Jn  4-*  *•, 
which,  literally  translated  from  the  critical  texts, 
reads  :  '  Hereby  know  ye  the  spirit  of  God  ;  every 
spirit  which  confesses  Jesus  Christ  come  in  the 
flesh  is  of  God,  and  every  spirit  which  confesses 
not  Jesus  is  not  of  God.'  The  use  of  '  Jesus '  alone 
in  V.**  makes  it  almost  certain  that  v.*  should  be 
taken  to  mean  '  confesses  Jesus  as  Christ  come  in 
the  flesh.'  Thus  it  is  not  Docetism  that  is  opposed, 
but  a  separation  sucii  as  Cerinthus  made  between 
Jesus  and  Christ.  Further,  according  to  Socrates 
(HE  vii.  32),  '  confesses  not '  in  v.*  was  substituted 
for  an  original  '  dissolves '  or  '  disrupts '  (Xi/et,  so 
Vulg.  solvit).  If  we  accept  this,  the  ca.se  may  be 
said  to  be  proved.  It  is  exactly  the  christology  of 
Cerinthus  that  is  attacked,  bo  in  1  Jn  2^,  the 
denial  that  Jesus  is  Christ  can  scarcely  l)e  the  old 
Jewish  denial,  but  a  refusal  like  that  of  Cerinthus 
to  identify  Jesus  with  Christ.  Again,  in  1  Jn  5* 
'  blood '  probably  refers  either  to  the  birth  or  to 
the  deatn  of  Christ,  both  of  which  Cerinthus 
denied.  Quite  possibly  other  errors  are  in  St. 
John's  mind  as  well  as  Cerinthianism.  Docetism,  no 
doubt,  was  a  real  danger,  and  passages  like  1  Jn  !"• 
seem  to  have  it  in  view.  But  it  is  probable  in  the 
highest  degree  that  it  is  mainly  Cerinthus  who  is 
to  St.  John  the  enemy  of  the  truth. 


CERTAINTY 


CHASTISOIENT 


173 


I 


The  errors  dealt  with  in  1  John  had  antinomian 
consequences.  According  to  Gains  of  Rome 
(quoted  by  Euseb.,  HE  iii.  28),  Cerinthus  taught 
the  coming  of  a  millennium  of  sensual  delights. 
Too  much  credence,  however,  is  not  to  be  attached 
to  such  statements.  In  early  days,  as  always, 
heretics  were  readily  and  rashly  painted  as  moral 
delinquents,  and,  as  noted  above,  John  may  have 
others  besides  Cerinthus  in  view. 

Other  views  have  been  attributed  to  Cerinthus, 
but  the  evidence  is  so  scanty,  confused,  and  con- 
tradictory, that  it  is  not  worth  while  to  state  them. 

LmtEATrRE. — J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Colossians  and  PhiUmoii^, 
London,  1S79  ;  H.  L.  Mansel,  The  Gnostic  Hereties,  do.  1S75 ; 
A.  Hagenfeld,  EftzergesehiehU,  Leipzig  1884,  p.  411  ff.; 
D.  R.  A.  Lipsias,  Zxtr  QuelUnkritik  d.  £piphanios,  Vienna, 
1S65,  p.  32i  f.  ;  R.  Law,  The  TeMs  of  Life,  Edinburgh,  1909, 
chs.  ii.  and  xiii. ;  art.  'Cerinthus,'  by  A.  S.  Peake,  in  ERE 
iii.  31S.  W.  D.  NiVEX. 

CERTAINTY.— See  Assxjkance. 

CHAIN,  BONDS.— The  word  aXwts  is  used  of  the 
coupling-chain  or  manacle  by  which  the  prisoner 
was  attached  to  his  guard,  as  distinguished  from 
xebt),  the  foot-fetters.  It  differs  apparently  from 
5ea;uoi  in  conveying  the  idea  of  attachment  rather 
than  continement.  Among  the  Romans,  it  was 
customary  to  attach  the  prisoner  by  a  light  chain 
to  the  soldier  responsible  for  his  safe  custody. 
One  end  of  the  chain  was  fastened  to  the  right 
wrist  of  the  captive,  and  the  other  to  the  left 
wrist  of  his  custodian,  whose  right  hand  was  thus 
free.  It  is  to  this  method  of  continement  that 
St.  Paul  alludes,  when  speaking  of  his  '  chain '  (Ac 
28=»,  Eph  6^^,  2  Ti  V%  Sometimes,  for  greater 
security,  the  prisoner  was  bound  to  two  soldiers, 
one  on  each  side  of  him,  in  which  case,  of  course, 
the  use  of  two  chains  would  be  necessary.  This 
more  rigorous  method  of  confinement  is  the  sort 
to  which  St.  Peter  was  subjected  during  his  im- 
prisonment (Ac  12^),  and  also  St.  Paul  during  the 
early  days  of  his  captivity  at  Jerusalem  (Ac  21®). 
Later  on,  at  Caesarea  and  Rome,  the  latter 
Apostle,  although  still  kept  in  strict  military 
custody,  was  permitted  to  enjoy  a  considerable 
measure  of  freedom  (Ac  24^  f&*"-).  More  fre- 
quently, the  less  precise  and  graphic  terms  Sedfioi 
and  dea/jA,  'bonds'  or  'imprisonment'  are  used  to 
describe  the  condition  of  persons  in  captivity.  St. 
Paul,  speaking  of  himself  as  a  prisoner,  makes 
repeated  allusions  to  his  'bonds'  (Ph  i^- is- 1*- is^ 
Col  4»,  2  Ti  29,  Philem  i"- 1^).  The  neuter  and  mascu- 
line forms  are  used  with  distinct  shades  of  mean- 
ing, Sea-fii  referring  to  the  fetters  by  which  the 
person  was  bound  (Ac  16^  ['bands']  20^,  26-®), 
deffuoi  to  the  state  of  captivity  into  which  the 
person  had  been  thrown.      W.  S.  MoXTGOMEEY. 

CHALCEDONY  (xoX/cijati^).— Chalcedony  is  the 
precious  stone  with  which  the  third  foundation  of 
the  wall  of  the  New  Jerusalem  is  garnbhed  (Rev 
2P*).  The  ancient  meaning  of  the  word  is  un- 
certain. In  modem  mineralogy  the  chalcedony  is 
'  a  micro-crystalline  form  of  quartz  ...  a  trans- 
lucent substance  of  rather  waxy  lustre,  presenting 
great  variety  of  colours,  though  usually  white, 
grey,  yellow  or  brown'  (EBr^^  v.  803).  But  the 
chalcedony  of  Pliny  (HN  xxxvii.  72-73)  was  a 
green  stone — an  inferior  kind  of  emerald — from 
the  copper-mines  of  Chalcedon  in  Bithynia,  whence 
its  name.  Flinders  Petrie  (HDB  iv.  621*)  suggests 
that  it  was  '  diopta.se'  or  silicate  of  copper. 

James  Steahan. 

CHAMBERLAIN. — The  only  person  clearly  desig- 
nated as  such  in  the  NT  is  Blastus,  6  eirl  tov  koitwvo^ 
Tov  paffiKeuM  {sc.  Herod  Agrippa  I.),  whom  the 
TjTJans  and  Sidonians  persuaded  to  befriend  them 
against  the  king's  displeasure  at  Caesarea,  and  to 


obtain  peace  for  them  'because  their  country 
was  nourished  by  the  kind's  country'  (Ac  12=*). 
The  office  he  held  would  ooviously  mvolve  great 
intimacy  and  intiuence  with  the  Jdng.  Erastus, 
who  is  called  '  the  chamberlain  of  the  city '  in  Ro 
16^  (AV ;  RV  'treasurer'),  held  a  different  office 
(see  Stew.\rd).  The  eunuch  of  Ac  S*"'-  also  held 
a  diflerent  office ;  he  '  was  over  all '  the  queen's 
'  treasure '  (see  Ethiopian  Eunuch). 

C.  L.  Feltoe. 
CHAN AAN.— See  Caxaax. 

CHARISMATA.— See  Gifts. 

CHARITY.— See  Alms,  Love. 

CHARITY,  FEAST  OF.— See  Love-Feast. 

CHASTISEMENT.— The  subject  of  chastisement 
and  chastening  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  OT 
and  the  NT.  The  NT  terms  are  raideika  and  xaidela, 
which  correspond  to  ".;;  and  nps  of  the  OT.  In 
classical  usage  these  words  refer  to  the  whole  of 
the  education  of  the  rah,  including  the  training 
of  the  body.  Sometimes  they  are  used  of  the  re- 
sults of  the  whole  process.  They  do  not  contain, 
however,  the  idea  of  chastisement.  In  the  OT, 
Apocrypha,  and  NT  this  idea  of  correction,  dis- 
cipline, chastening,  is  added  to  that  of  the  general 
cultivation  of  mind  and  morals :  the  education  is 
'per  molestias'  (Augustine,  Enarr.  in  Pss.,  119*)  ; 
see  Lk  23i«,  He  12'-  '•  «,  Rev  S'^ ;  cf.  Lv  26'«,  Ps  6', 
Is  53«,  Sir  4"^  226,  2  Mac  6'-  (see  Westcott  on  He  127 ; 
Trench,  NT  Syn.\  1876,  p.  23 ;  MUIigan,  Greek 
Papyri,  1910,  p.  94).  In  Ac  7^  there  is  found  the 
only  NT  instance  of  the  verb  in  its  general  Greek 
sense.  In  2  Ti  3'®  the  noun  is  used  for  disciplinary 
instruction,  the  correction  of  mistakes  and  curbing 
of  passions,  that  virtue  may  be  increased.  Pilate 
uses  the  verb  in  speaking  of  the  terrible  scourging 
of  Jesus  (Lk  23i«-  ^ ;  cf.  Dt  22''*),  but  it  is  a  very 
mild  term  for  the  ieaxhH  flagellatio. 

Chastisement,  as  part  of  the  moral  discipline  of 
character,  is  the  positive  duty  of  a  father  (Eph  6"*). 
In  this  passage,  '  chastening '  is  substituted  by  RV 
for  AV  '  nurture,'  which  is  too  weak  a  word,  but 
'  discipline '  might  be  better  still.  The  same  ides 
of  parental  correction  of  the  faults  of  children  is 
found  in  He  12^,  where  the  fathers  are  described 
as  raiSevrai  (cf.  Plato,  Dialogues,  tr.  Jowett,  1892, 
index,  *.r.  'education').  In  this  fatherly  fashion 
God  Himself  chastens  His  children  for  their  ulti- 
mate good  (He  12*-";  cf.  Pr  S^"-,  Rev  S'*).  The 
evils  with  which  God  visits  men  are  rods  of  chas- 
tisement (1  Co  11^2,  2  Co  6»;  cf.  Pr  19i«  29",  Wis 
34ff.  iiiuff.^  2  Mac  616 10*).  Such  treatment  is  not  a 
sign  of  antipathy  or  rejection,  but  an  evidence  of 
true  love.  God  does  not  leave  His  wayward 
children  to  their  fate,  but  strives  to  bring  them  to 
becoming  reverence  and  reformation.  Sometimes 
the  chastisement  is  of  such  a  terrible  character 
that  the  one  who  suffers  is  said  to  be  'delivered 
unto  Satan '  (1  Co  5^  1  Ti  1*  ;  cf.  Job  2«,  Ps  109*", 
Ac  26**).  But  even  in  these  cases  the  ultimate 
object  is  the  recovery  of  the  sinner,  'that  the 
spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus ' 
and  '  that  they  might  be  taught  not  to  blaspheme.' 
The  'thorn  in  the  flesh'  afflicted  St.  Paul  so 
grievously  that  he  called  it  '  a  messenger  of  Satan ' 
(2  Co  12"ff-  ;  cf.  Lk  13i«,  Jub.  x.  2),  but  it  saved  him 
from  being  '  exalted  overmuch '  and  became  a 
means  of  such  abundant  grace  that  he  was  led 
positively  to  glory  in  his  weakness.  This  same 
grace  of  God,  which  brings  salvation  to  all  who 
receive  it,  does  not  always  appear  in  gentle  in- 
struction, but  sometimes  takes  the  form  of  stern 
chastisement ;  in  a  word,  whatever  means  is  neces- 
sary for  the  perfect  redemption  of  the  soul,  that 


174 


CHEEKFULNESS 


CHILDREN  OF  GOD 


means  will  giace  employ  (see  Tit  2'"^- )•  To  those 
who  submit  to  this  process  of  chastening,  the  re- 
wards are  immense  and  enduring.  Compared  with 
them  the  'atliiction'  is  'light,'  and  the  pain  of  the 
present  moment  is  transformed  into  '  an  eternal 
weight  of  glory '  (2  Co  4'«-i»). 

As  to  the  relation  between  iraidtla  and  vovOeffla, 
'chastening  and  admonition'  of  Eph  (i*,  T.  K. 
Abbott  (£joA.  and  Col.  [ICC,  1897]  178)  maintains 
that  iraiSeia  is,  as  in  classical  writers,  the  more 
general,  vovdeaia  the  more  specific  term,  for  instruc- 
tion and  admonition.  On  the  other  hand,  Grotius, 
followed  by  Ellicott,  Alford,  and  many  others, 
declares :  '  TratSeia  hie  sigiiilicare  videtur  institu- 
tioriem  per  poenas  ;  vovBeaia  autem  est  ea  institutio 
quae  fit  verbis. '  The  Vulg.  translates  '  in  disciplina 
et  correptione.'  The  probability  is  that  the  former 
word  refers  to  training  by  '  act  and  discipline,'  the 
latter  to  training  by  '  word.'  See  also  Admonition 
and  Discipline. 

LiTERATUiiE.— H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  Sources  of  NT  Greek,  1895, 
p.  101  ;  R.  C.  Trench,  NT  SynonymsS,  1876,  p.  107  i. ;  H.  B. 
Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  Johrfi,  1907,  p.  63 ;  the  Coin- 
mentaries  on  Ephesians,  esp.  J.  Armitagre  Robinson,  1903 ; 
ExpT  xiv.  [1902-03]  272 ;  see  also  artt.  '  Chastening '  and 
*  Nurture  •  in  Z/Z>i>'.  H.   CaRISS  J.   SiDNELL. 

CHEERFULNESS  (O.E.  chere,  'face,'  'look'; 
L.  Lat.  cava,  'the  face'). — The  abundance  of  ex- 
pressions of  buoyant  gladness  in  a  weak  and  perse- 
cuted community,  as  was  the  Christian  Church  of 
the  lirst  century,  is  striking.  Whereas  we  might 
expect  depression  and  sighing,  we  find  everywhere 
singing  at  midnight  in  the  prison  houses  (Ac  5*' 
16'*,  Ito  8=«-37,  1  P  16.8^  etc.).  Although  St.  Paul 
is  described  as  once  saying  that  his  service  has 
been  with  tears  (Ac  20'*-  ^'),  and  in  his  letter  to 
Corinth  confesses  that  he  writes  with  many  tears 
and  with  deep  sutiering  and  depression  of  spirit 
(2  Co  2^),  such  utterances  stand  isolated  among  a 
multitude  of  phrases  suggestive  of  rejoicing  and 
exultation.  The  Apostle's  references  to  depressing 
eircumstances  of  life  are  usually  to  indicate  his 
triumph  over  them  (Ph  3^- «,  2  Co  4^'-  6-*  ll^"*  12"). 
Is  there  affliction  ?  That  may  be  joyfully  regarded 
as  filling  up  what  was  lacking  in  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  (Col  1^*),  as  building  up  character  (Ro  5^  ; 
cf.  He  12",  Ja  P),  as  winning  an  eternal  weight  of 
glory  (2  Co  4").  Even  martyrdom  for  faith  is  a 
thought  inspiring  joyfulness  (Ph  2'^-  ^*).  Are  there 
those  who  preach  Christ  out  of  envy  and  con- 
tentiousness ?  No  matter,  Christ  is  being  preached 
(Ph  1'=*"'").  St.  Paul's  very  imjjrisonment  is  having 
happy  results — the  Imperial  guards  have  thereby 
heard  of  Christ,  and  other  brethren  have  been  in- 
spired by  St.  Paul's  sacrifice  to  bolder  service 
(Ph  1'^"").  There  is  much  in  human  life  to  give 
gladness — meetings  with  friends  (Ph  2-^-  '^,  2  Ti  I'', 
2  Jn  '-),  even  the  very  remembrance  of  them  (Ph  1^), 
the  sharing  of  the  joys  of  others  (Ko  12'*,  1  Co  \2-^), 
the  success  of  one's  work  (Ph  21"),  the  faithfulness 
of  converts  (1  Th  2'*-^),  their  repentance  after 
error  (2  Co  7»),  their  thoughtful  liberality  (Ph  4i"). 
One  may  rejoice  in  a  good  conscience  (2  Co  P-'),  in 
the  joy  set  before  tliose  running  the  good  race 
(He  12^),  in  the  inspirations  and  consolations  of 
Christian  faith  (Ro  S^  "  15'»,  2  Co  P-*  5«f-,  Ph  l^*, 
1  P  P),  Not  only  is  there  cause  for  joy  in  the 
argued  inferences  from  Christian  beliefs — in  the 
direct  experience  of  the  Holy  Spirit  there  is  joy 
and  peace  which  the  world  cannot  give  (Ro  14'^, 
Gal  5-'^,  1  Th  1* ;  cf.  the  characteristic  features  of 
mysticism  in  W.  James,  The  Varieties  of  Ecligiotis 
Experience,  London,  1902,  lects.  16  and  17). 
Christian  cheerfulness  is  not  based  on  a  denial  of 
the  reality  of  the  dark  things  of  life,  but  on  the 
proportioninj?  of  them  by  the  larger  elements  of 
joyful  Christian  faith  and  experience.  A  shallow, 
worldly  cheerfulness  must  not  be  confused  with 


the  joy  of  the  Christian  in  God.  Human  good 
cheer  is  only  for  a  season  (1  Co  7**) ;  there  is  a 
laughter  which  should  be  turned  to  grief,  and 
gladness  to  shame  (Ja  4").  Exhortations  to  re- 
loice  arc  found  in  1  Th  5^",  Ro  5=*  (cf.  Col  1")  12>2, 
Ph  3'  4*  Cxafpere  expresses  the  predominant  mood 
of  the  Epistle,  a  mood  wonderfully  characteristic 
of  Paul's  closing  years '  [H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  £GT, 
'  Philippians,'  1903,  p.  466]).  H.  BuLCOCK. 

CHERUBIM  (xfpou)3f/t).— Among  the  symbolic 
ornaments  of  the  Tabernacle  the  writer  of  Hebrews 
mentions  '  the  cherubim  of  glory  overshading  the 
mercy-seat '  (9").  In  Solomon's  Temple  there  were 
two  colossal  cherubim  whose  out-spread  wings  lilled 
the  most  holy  place  (1  K  6'-^'''"*),  but  in  the  ideal 
description  of  the  Tabernacle  two  much  smaller 
figures  are  represented  as  standing  on  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  itself  (which  was  only  about  four 
feet  long),  facing  each  other  and  overshadowing 
the  place  of  God's  presence.  The  cherubim  were 
'  das  beliebteste  Ornamentstiick  der  Hebriier '  (Ben- 
zinger,  Heb.  Arch.,  Freiburg,  1894,  p.  268).  It  is 
signilicant  that  while  precise  directions  are  given 
regarding  their  material,  position,  and  attitude, 
nothing  is  said  of  their  shape  except  that  they 
were  winged.  Their  enigmatic  form  made  them 
fitting  symbols  of  the  mj'sterious  nature  of  the 
Godiiead.  Originally,  no  doubt,  they  were  far 
from  being  merely  allegorical.  They  had  lived 
long  in  the  popular  imagination  before  they  came 
to  be  used  as  religious  emblems.  They  were 
mythical  ligures  probably  suggested  by  the  phen- 
omenon of  the  storm-cloud,  in  which  God  seemed 
to  descend  from  heaven  to  earth,  the  thunder 
being  the  rushing  of  their  wings  and  the  light- 
ning their  flashing  swords  (cf.  Ps  18'"-  ^^).  While 
Lenormant  (Les  Origines,  1880-84,  i.  112  f.)  and 
Friedrich  Delitzsch  ( Wo  lag  das  Paradies  ?,  1881 ,  p. 
150  f.)  connect  them  with  the  winged  bulls  which 
guarded  the  entrance  to  Assyrian  palaces,  others 
associate  them  with  the  Syrian  giitiins  (probably 
of  Hittite  origin)  which  were  supposed  to  draw 
the  chariot  of  the  sun-<;od  (Cheyne,  EBi  i.  745). 
Behind  the  cherubim  of  Ezekiel  (10"-)  which  are 
the  original  of  the  '  living  creatures '  of  Rev  4*"*, 
there  may  be  the  signs  of  the  zodiac  (Gunkel). 

When  the  later  Hebrews  wished  to  represent 
the  presence  of  Jahweh  among  them  in  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem,  they  adopted  the  cherubim  a.s  the 
awful  symbols  alike  of  His  nearness  and  of  His 
una])proachableness.  It  is  imjaobable  that  these 
works  of  art  had  a  purely  human  appearance. 
Schultz  {Or  ThRoL,  Eng.  tr.,  1892,  ii.  236)  inclines 
to  the  view  that  they  were  '  composite  ligures, 
with  the  feet  of  oxen,  the  wings  of  eagles,  the 
manes  of  lions,  and  the  body  and  face  of  men.' 
A.  Jereniias  {The  OT  in  the  Light  of  the  Anc.  East, 
1911,  ii.  126),  following  Klostermann,  thinks  it  iK)s- 
sible  that  '  the  conception  is  that  of  four  cheruoim 
(two  cherubim,  each  with  a  double  face).'  As  the 
symbols  were  blazoned  on  the  doors,  walls,  and 
curtains  of  the  Temple,  their  general  appearance 
must  originally  have  l)een  quite  well  known,  but 
time  once  more  threw  a  veil  of  mystery  over  them, 
and  Josephus  declares  that '  no  one  can  tell  or  guess 
what  the  cherubim  were  like'  {Ant.  vill.  iii.  3). 

LiTERATiiiE.— I.  Benzinger,  Beb.  Arch.^,  1907,  index,  t.v. 
'  Kerube ' ;  A.  Furtwangler,  in  Koscher,  Lex.  i.  2,  col.  174211., 
art.  '  Uryps ' ;  art.  '  Cherub '  in  BBi  and  '  Cherubim  '  in  HDB. 

James  Strahan. 
CHIEF  PRIEST.— See  Priest. 

CHILD,  CHILDREN.— See  Family. 

CHILDREN  OF  GOD,  SONS  OF  GOD — Amongst 
the  many  ways  current  in  antiquity  of  expressing 
the  relationship  existing  between  God  and  man 


CHILDREN  OF  GOD 


CHILDREX  OF  GOD 


175 


(Creator,  King,  Lord,  Husband,  Father),  two  were 
derived  from  Imman  relationships  of  the  family  life 
—God is  the  Husband  or  Bridegroom  of  His  people, 
or  He  is  their  Father.  With  the  former  we  are  not 
now  concerned.  The  latter  plavs  a  large  part  in 
the  teaching  of  the  NT.  It  will  be  convenient  to 
examine  thts  teaching  under  four  heads  :  (1)  the 
doctrine  of  St.  Paul,  (2)  that  of  the  Johannine 
writings,  (3)  that  of  1  Peter,  (4)  that  of  the  remain- 
ing books. 

1.  St.  Paul. — It  is  natural  that  we  should  find  in 
this  writer,  who  was  the  champion  and  protagonist 
of  the  movement  for  the  extension  of  Christianity 
to  the  Gentiles,  the  most  unrestricted  expression  in 
the  NT  of  the  sonship  of  mankind  as  related  to  God. 
In  Ac  17**  he  bases  an  argument  upon  the  phrase 
of  the  poet  Clean thes  'for  we  are  his  offspring.' 
If  Eph  3"  '  the  Father  from  whom  every  family 
in  heaven  and  earth  is  named  '  should  more  rightly 
be  translated  '  of  whom  all  fatherhood  in  heaven 
and  earth  is  named,'  *  we  have  here  the  thought 
that  Fatherhood  is  an  element  in  the  very  being  of 
God,  and  that  all  other  forms  of  paternity  are 
derived  from  Him.  The  words  of  Eph  4®  'one 
God  and  Father  of  all '  will  then  be  naturally 
interpreted  of  this  universal  Fatherhood  of  Gkxi. 
It  is,  however,  natural  enough  that  in  a  Christian 
writer  this  conception  of  the  universal  Fatherhood 
of  God  should  tind  little  emphasis,  and  that  it 
should  be  of  infrequent  occurrence,  for  the  concep- 
tion of  sonship  was  wanted  to  express  a  closer  and 
more  vital  relationship  than  that  between  God  and 
unredeemed  humanity.  St.  Paul,  therefore,  gener- 
ally uses  it  to  denote  the  relationship  between  Gk)d 
and  the  disciples  of  Christ,  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles. 
Writing  in  the  stress  of  the  Jewish  controversy,  he 
finds  it  necessary  to  vindicate  the  claims  of  the 
Gentile  Christians  to  the  name  '  children  or  sons 
of  God.'  Gentile  Christians  are  '  children  of  pro- 
mise '  (Gal  4®).  It  is  they  who  as  '  children  of 
promise'  are  Abraham's  seed  (Ro  9*).  And  this 
sonship  had  been  foretold  by  Hosea  (Ro  9^).  To 
express  the  proccvs  by  which  the  Christian  be- 
comes a  son  of  God,  St.  Paul  takes  from  current 
Greek  and  Roman  terminology  the  metaphor  of 
'  adoption ' :  t  so  in  Ro  8^'  '  ye  received  the  spirit  of 
adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba,  Father ' ;  so  again 
in  Gal  4*^  '  God  sent  forth  his  Son  .  .  .  that  we 
might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons  .  .  .  and  be- 
cause ye  are  sons,  God  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his 
Son  into  our  hearts,  crying,  Abba,  Father.'  The 
metaphor  occurs  twice  besides  in  connexion  with 
the  genesis  of  the  idea  of  adoption  in  the  mind  of 
(}od,  and  with  its  complete  realization  in  the 
future.  In  Eph  1'  St.  Paul  speaks  of  God  as 
'ha\nng  foreordained  us  unto  adoption  as  sons 
through  Jesus  Christ  unto  himself.'  In  Ro  8^  he 
speaks  of  Christians  who  have  the  first-fruits  of 
the  Spirit,  who  therefore  have  already  received  in 
some  measure  the  spirit  of  adoption,  as  '  wait- 
ing for  our  adoption,  to  wit,  the  redemption  of  our 
body.'  He  seems  to  mean  that  only  at  the  resur- 
rection, when  the  body  rises  incorruptible,  will  the 
process  of  adoption  be  really  completed,  and  made 
manifest.  Adoption  to  sonship,  then,  according 
to  St.  Paul,  presupposes  the  revelation  of  the  Son 
of  God :  '  Grod  sent  forth  his  Son  that  we  might 
receive  the  adoption  of  sons'  (Gal  4®).  It  was 
effected  by  the  imparting  to  the  dLsciple  of  the 
Spirit  of  the  incarnate  Son,  or,  in  other  words,  of 
the  Spirit  of  God.  '  God  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of 
his  Son  into  our  hearts'  (v.*)  ;  'As  many  as  are 
led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  sons' of  God' 
(Ro  8*^).  This  involves  real  likeness  to  the  Son  of 
God  :  '  He  foreordained  them  to  be  conformed  to  the 

*  See  J.  Armitage  Robinson,  Ephetians,  1903,  p.  83  f- 

f  See  W.  M.  Rainsar,  Biitorieai  Commentary  on  the  Gaiatians, 


image  of  his  Son,  that  be  might  be  the  first-born 
amongst  manj'  brethren'  (v.*).  Cf.  such  pass- 
ages as  2  Co  3^*  'we  aU  .  .  .  are  being  changed 
into  the  same  image,'  At  the  unveiling  or  apoi-a- 
lypse  of  Christ  there  will  also  be  an  unveiling,  or 
manifestation,  of  the  sons  of  God  (Ro  8"),  in  which 
in  some  sense  the  whole  created  universe  will  share 
(v.").  Lastly,  adoption  involves  fellowship  with 
the  Son  of  God  (I  Co  1")  and  joint  participation 
with  Him  in  present  suffering,  and  in  future  glory 
(RoS**^). 

2.  Johannine  writings. — In  this  literatnre  the 
terms  •  the  Father,'  '  the  Son '  are  most  character- 
istically used  to  express  the  relationship  between 
God  and  the  Word  of  God  incarnate  in  Jesus 
Christ.  Whether  God  is  spoken  of  as  the  Father 
of  all  men  is  doubtful.  The  same  question  arises 
here  as  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  There  Christ 
speaks  repeatedly  to  His  disciples  of  God  as  '  your 
Father'  :  in  Mt.,  commonly,  e.g.  S"**-*;  in  Mk., 
twice,  1I»- »  ;  in  Lk.,  thrice,  6»«  12»- «.  They  are 
to  address  Him  in  prayer  as  'our  Father'  (Mt  6') 
or  '  Father'  (Lk  11-).  They  are  so  to  imitate  Him 
that  they  may  be  His  sons  (Mt  5*^,  Lk  6").  In  the 
Fourth  Gospel  we  find  for  'your  Father'  the 
simple  '  the  Father.'  Of  course  we  may  read 
into  these  phrases  the  idea  of  the  universal  Father- 
hood of  God ;  and  the  general  tenour  of  Christ's 
teaching,  interpreted  in  the  light  of  history,  makes 
it  certain  that  He  meant  to  imply  this.  But  we 
must  remember  that  He  was  speaking  to  Jews, 
who  had  long  been  accustomed  to  think  of  God's 
Fatherhood  as  a  term  specially  applicable  to  the 
pious  Jew,  or  to  the  Jewish  nation.  His  hearers 
would  not,  therefore,  nec-essarily  have  read  a 
universalistic  sense  into  His  words,  and  He  no- 
where explicitly  speaks  of  God  as  Father  of  all 
men  outside  His  own  disciples  (members  of  the 
Jewish  nation).  The  nearest  approximation  to 
this  would  be  His  use  of  '  the  Father'  in  speaking 
to  the  Samaritan  woman  (4^-^).  For  the  term 
'  Father'  as  applied  to  God  in  the  OT  and  in  the 
later  Jewish  pre-Christian  literature,  where  it  Ls 
generally  used  to  denote  the  relationship  between 
God  and  the  individual  pious  Jew,  see  W.  Bousset, 
Bel.  des  Jud.,  Berlin.  19<j3,  p.  355  ff.  ;  G.  Dalman, 
The  Words  of  Jesus,  Eng.  tr. ,  Edinburgh,  1902,  p. 
184  ffl  The  phrase,  *  the  children  of  God  who  were 
scattered  abroad '  ( Jn  1 1*-),  probably  refers  to  the 
members  of  the  Gentile  churches  of  the  writers 
own  period.  These  became  '  children  of  (jod '  when 
they  became  Christians.  In  connexion  with  son- 
ship  as  used  of  the  relarion  between  God  and  the 
disciple  of  Christ  the  most  characteristic  feature 
of  the  Johannine  writings  is  the  use  of  the 
metaphor  of  re-birth.  In  Jn  1^-  it  is  said  that 
those  who  receive  the  incarnate  Word,  or  who  be- 
lieve on  HLs  name,  are  given  authority  to  become 
children  of  God.  (It  is  just  possible  that  we  have 
here  an  allusion  to  the  Pauline  conception  of  son- 
si -ip  by  adoption.)  Then  follows  a  description  of 
the  process  by  which  this  position  of  *  children  '  was 
reached.  They  were  begotten,  not  along  the  lines 
of  physical  birth,  but  'of  God.'  There  is  a  very 
interesting  variant  reading  (Western)  which  makes 
these  words  descriprive  not  of  the  spiritual  birth 
of  the  Christian  disciple,  but  of  the  birth  in  a 
supernatural  manner  ('not  of  a  husband')  of  the 
Word,  who  thus  became  flesh.  And  even  if  that 
be  not  the  original  reading,  it  would  seem  that  the 
writer  in  choosing  terms  in  which  to  describe  the 
spiritual  birth  of  the  disciple  has  selected  terms 
which  presuppose  acquaintance  with  the  tradition 
of  the  birth  from  a  \"irgin.  The  disciple,  like  the 
Lord  Himself,  was  bom,  not  by  physical  genera- 
tion, nor  of  fleshly  passion,  nor  at  the  impulse  of  a 
human  husband,  but  of  God.  In  3'  the  necessity 
of  thus  bein^  bom  from  above,  or  anew,  is  once 


176 


CHILDREN  OF  GOD 


CHIOS 


more  empliasized.  In  3'  the  birth  is  described  as 
a  begetting  of  the  S])irit  which  takes  place  at  bap- 
tism {'of  water,'  unless  these  words  are  an  early 
gloss).  In  the  First  Epistle  the  idea  recurs.  The 
communication  of  the  Divine  life  from  God  in 
this  spiritual  birth  is  connected,  as  in  St.  I'aul, 
with  'faitli.'  '  Every  one  who  believes  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ  is  begotten  of  God,'  1  Jn  5'  (of.  Gal 
3*  '  sons  through  faith  ').  But  '  love,'  and  '  doing 
righteousness'  are  also  the  external  signs  of 
spiritual  birth  (of.  4''  '  Every  one  that  loveth  is 
born  of  God,'  and  2^  '  Every  one  that  doeth 
righteousness  is  begotten  of  Him ').  And  just  as 
in  St.  Paul  adoption  to  sonshii)  involved  an  increas- 
ing conformity  to  the  likeness  of  the  Son  of  God, 
so  in  St.  John  the  birth  from  God  involves  the 
idea  of  freedom  from  sin.  '  Every  one  that  is 
begotten  of  God  does  not  commit  sin'  (3"  ;  cf.  5'*). 
It  carries  with  it  also  the  certainty  of  victory  over 
'the  world.'  'Whatsoever  is  begotten  of  God 
overcometh  the  world  '  (S'*).  Just  as  it  is  character- 
istic of  St.  Paul,  with  his  metaphor  of  adoption, 
to  speak  of  Christians  as  '  sons,'  so  it  naturally 
follows  from  St.  John's  preference  for  the  idea  of 
re-birth  to  speak  of  them  as  '  children. '  And  lastly, 
just  as  St.  Paul  seems  to  look  forward  to  the  resur- 
rection as  the  moment  when  adoption  to  sonship 
shall  be  consummated,  so  St.  John  looks  forward 
to  the  manifestation  of  Christ  as  the  moment  when 
likeness  to  Him,  which  is  involved  in  sonship, 
will  be  perfected  (cf.  1  Jn  3^  '  Beloved,  now  are  we 
the  children  of  God,  and  it  is  not  yet  made  mani- 
fest what  we  shall  be.  But  we  know  that  if  he  [or 
it]  shall  be  manifested  we  shall  be  like  him,  for  we 
shall  see  him  as  he  is'). 

3.  1  Peter. — Here,  too,  we  find  the  conception 
that  Christians  have  passed  through  a  process  of 
re-birth.  The  word  used  is  not  the  simple  'to 
beget,'  as  in  Jn  3^-  ^  but  a  compound  '  to  beget 
again,'  which  is  found  also  in  '  Western '  author- 
ities of  Jn  3*.  Thus  when  St.  Peter  speaks  of 
God  who  '  begat  us  again,'  he  describes  the  life  of 
Christians  as  a  new  life  into  which  they  had 
entered,  and  at  the  same  time  emphasizes  this  life 
as  having  originated  by  a  Divine  act  of  God.  In 
l'^  he  speaks  of  Christians  as  '  being  begotten 
again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible, 
through  the  word  of  God.'  The  seed  here  seems 
to  describe  the  Divine  nature  (cf.  1  Jn  3^),  and 
the  '  word '  apparently  means  the  message  of  the 
Gospel  of  the  incarnate  '  Word.'  It  is  in  harmony 
with  this  conception  of  the  re-birth  of  Christians 
tliat  St.  Peter  speaks  of  them  as  invoking  '  a 
Father' (1"). 

i.  The  idea  of  sonship  finds  little  expression  in 
the  remaining  books  of  the  NT.  In  He  12*-  ''• » 
affliction  is  regarded  as  a  proof  that  God  deals 
with  the  sufferers  as  with  sons.  This  is  merely 
metaphorical.  More  to  our  point  is  He  2^"'-  '  It 
became  him,  through  whom  are  all  things,  and  all 
things  through  him,  in  bringing  many  sons  to 
glory,  to  make  the  leader  of  their  salvation  perfect 
through  sufferings.  For  he  that  sanctitieth  and 
they  that  are  sanctified  are  all  of  one.'  Some 
would  see  in  the  'sons'  a  reference  to  the  uni- 
versal Fatherhood  of  God,  but  more  probably  it 
is  Christians  who  are  meant,  who  have  become 
'sons'  by  uniting  themselves  M'ith  the  one  Son. 
Consequently  He  and  they  are  all  sons  of  one 
common  Father.  The  use  of  '  sons '  is  in  this  case 
parallel  to  that  of  '  children '  in  Jn  IP-.  The  con- 
ception of  sonship  does  not  occur  in  James,  2  or  3 
John,  2  Peter,  or  in  Jude,  for  the  phrase  '  God 
the  Father '  in  2  P  I",  2  Jn",  and  Jude^  seems  to 
have  reference  ratlier  to  the  relationship  between 
God  and  Christ  than  to  that  between  God  and 
men.  In  the  Apocalypse  it  occurs  only  in  2V, 
where  it  is  to  be  the  privilege  of  those  who  in- 


herit the  new  Jerusalem  that  they  will  be  sons  of 
God. 

If  we  now  try  to  summarize  tlie  teaching  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  as  expressed  in  the  writings  of  the 
NT  on  the  conception  of  sonship  of  God,  the  follow- 
ing appear  to  be  tlie  main  lines  of  tliought :  (1) 
There  is  a  recognition  of  the  universal  Fatherhood 
of  God,  to  be  seen  in  the  teaching  of  Christ  wlien 
once  it  was  detached  from  a  literal  Jewish  inter- 
pretation (cf.  especially  the  Parable  of  tlie  Prodigal 
Son,  and  the  use  of  tne  term  '  the  Father'  in  the 
conversation  with  the  woman  of  Samaria).  It 
appears,  too,  in  St.  Paul's  words  to  the  non-Chris- 
tian Atlienians.  Whether  the  inference  that  God 
is  the  Father  of  all  men,  from  P^ph  3^*,  is  a  neces- 
sary one  may  be  more  doubtful.  The  correlative 
to  this  thought  of  tlie  Fatherhood  of  God  should 
logically  be  that  of  the  universal  sonship  of  men. 
But  this  receives  very  scanty  expression  in  the  NT 
(cf.  again  the  Parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  Ac  17*", 
and  perhaps  He  2'").  (2)  In  a  unique  sense  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  Son  of  God.  (3)  The  Christian  disciple 
by  virtue  of  his  union  with  Christ  becomes  a  son, 
or  child,  of  God.  In  the  language  of  St.  Paul  he 
is  adopted  to  be  a  son.  In  the  language  of  St. 
John  and  St.  Peter  he  is  born  or  begotten  again. 
The  condition  of  such  sonship  is  faith.  It  is  char- 
acterized by  guidance  by  the  Spirit,  and  it  mani- 
fests itself  in  love  and  in  righteousness.  Consist- 
ing in  the  gift  of  new  life  from  God  (incorruptible 
seed,  or  the  Spirit),  it  implies  growth,  i.e.  a  pro- 
gressive assimilation  to  Christ  Himself.  The  con- 
summation of  this  process  will  be  a  final  adoption 
at  the  resurrection  (St.  Paul),  or  likeness  to  Christ 
at  His  manifestation  (St.  Jolm). 

LiTBRATORE. — For  Sonship  of  God  by  new  birth,  in  antiquity, 
see  A.  Dietericli,  Bine  MUhrasliturgie,  Leipzig,  1903jp.  157  ff.  ; 
for  Adoption,  see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Uist.  Conn,  on  GalatianH, 
London,  1899,  p.  337  ff.  and  art.  '  Adoption '  in  ERB.  For  Son- 
ship  of  God  in  the  NT,  see  the  Theologies  of  the  NT,  e.g.  G.  B. 
Stevens,  Edinbur^'h,  1899,  pp.  69  ff.,  591  f.  For  Sonship  in  St. 
John,  see  B.  F.  Westcott,  Epistles  of  St.  John,  London,  1883, 
p.  120  f.  ;  O.  Pfleiderer,  Primitive  Christianiti/,  Eng.  tr.,  i. 
[1906J  365  ff.,  iv.  [1911]  227  ff.  W.  C.  ALLEN. 

CHILIARCH.— See  Army. 

CHILIASM.— See  Parousia,  Eschatology. 

CHIOS  (i]  Xlos ;  now  'Scio'). — The  name  was 
given  to  a  beautiful  island  in  the  ^Egean  Sea, 
separated  from  the  mainland  of  Asia  Minor  by  a 
picturesque  cliannel,  6  miles  wide,  which  is  studded 
with  islets.  Its  capital  was  also  called  Chios.  In 
the  5th  cent.  B.C.  its  inhabitants  were  said  to  be 
the  wealthiest  in  Greece.  It  produced  'the  best 
of  the  Grecian  wines  '  (Strabo,  XIV.  i.  35).  Under 
the  Roman  Empire  it  was  a  free  city  of  the 
province  of  Asia,  till  the  time  of  Vespasian,  who 
included  it  in  the  Insularum  Provincia. 

St.  Paul  passed  Chios  in  his  last  recorded  JEsaan. 
voyage  (Ac  20^").  Sailing  in  the  morning  from 
Mitylene  in  Lesbos,  his  sliip,  after  a  run  of  50 
miles,  cast  anchor  at  night  near  the  Asian  coast, 
opposite  Chios  (&vTtKpvs  Xiov)  and  under  the  head- 
land of  Mimas.  Next  day  she  struck  across  the 
open  sea  (irape^dXo/j.ei')  for  Samos.  Chios  was  one 
or  the  seven  claimants  to  the  honour  of  being 
the  birth-place  of  Homer,  and  its  pretensions 
received  stronger  support  from  tradition  than 
those  of  any  of  its  rivals.  'The  blind  old  bard 
of  Chios'  rocky  isle'  was  familiar  with  the  course 
pursued  by  St.  Paul,  for  he  represents  Nestor  as 
standing  m  his  ship  at  the  Lesbian  Bay  and 
doubting — 

'  It  to  the  right  to  urge  the  pilot's  toil  .  .  . 
Or  the  straight  course  to  rocky  Chios  plough. 
And  anchor  under  Mimas'  shaggy  brow  ' 

(Od.  iii.  16S-172). 


CHLOE 


CHKIST,  CHRISTOLOGY         177 


Josephus  describes  a  voyage  of  Herod  the  Great 
in  the  opposite  direction.  '  When  he  had  sailed 
by  Rhodes  and  Cos,  he  touched  at  Lesbos,  as  think- 
ing he  should  have  overtaken  Agrippa  tliere  ;  but 
he  was  taken  short  here  by  a  north  wind,  which 
hindered  his  ship  from  going  to  the  shore,  so  he 
remained  many  days  at  Chios.  .  .  .  And  when 
the  high  winds  were  laid  he  sailed  to  Mitylene, 
and  thence  to  Byzantium'  (Ant.  XVI.  ii.  2). 

iJTBRATtRB-  —  Conybeaxe-Howson,  SL  Patti,  new  ed., 
London,  IS77,  ii.  2«>2<.  :  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  do.  1895,  p. 
2S>2  (. ;  T.  Bent,  in  Eng.  HuL  Revieui,  it.  [1889]  pp.  467-480 ; 
Mnrrays  Guide  to  Atia  Minor.  JAMES  StRAHAX. 

CHLOE.— St.  Paul  was  told  of  the  factions  in 
Corinth  irro  tQv  XXotjj,  '  by  them  of  Chloe '  (1  Co  1"). 
It  is  not  said  that  she  was  a  Christian,  nor  is  it  clear 
whether  she  lived  in  Corinth  or  in  Ephesus.  Pro- 
bably she  was  an  Ephesian  Christian  lady,  whose 
'  people '  {i.e.  her  Christian  slaves,  or  companions, 
or  even  children)  had  brought  back  disquieting 
news  after  visiting  Corinth.  Her  name  is  an 
epithet  of  a  goddess  and  was  often  given  to  slaves ; 
hence  it  has  been  conjectured  that  she  was  a 
freedwoman  of  property. 

LrrERATrEii.— Artt.  in  HDB  on  'Chloe'  and  on  'I.  Cor- 
inthians," p.  4s7»;  Comin.  on  1  Cor.  by  Findlay  {EGT,  19(>4X  pp. 
735,  763,  and  by  Godet  (1SS9),  L  21,  64.  C  v.  Weizs4cker 
discusses  the  siVaation  in  Corinth,  and  takes  a  different  view 
about  Chloe  :  see  his  Apogtolie  Age,  L*,  London,  lii»7,  pp.  305, 
318,  325,  335.  J.  E.  KOBEKTS. 

CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY.— In  studying  'Chris- 
tology'  the  object  is  to  ascertain  what  were  the 
opinions,  conWctions,  or  dogmas  regarding  the 
Person  of  Christ  which  were  held  by  particular 
authorities  or  by  the  Christian  Church  as  a  whole 
at  any  particular  time.  In  the  period  now  under 
review  '  dogmas '  do  not  enter  into  considera- 
tion, seeing  that  the  Apostolic  Age  does  not 
furnish  any  instance  of  common  opinion  enforced 
by  authority,  which  is  what  '  dogma  '  consists  in. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  limits  of  our  period  are 
set  not  by  the  '  Age  of  the  Apostles '  strictly 
understood,  but  by  the  documents  which  form  our 
NT,  even  though  some  of  them  may  be  held  to 
proceed  from  a  generation  subsequent  to  that  of 
the  apostles. 

It  has  been  usual  to  divide  the  subject  into 
pre-Pauline  and  Pauline  (with  post-Pauline)  Chris- 
tology  ;  and  the  division  only  does  justice  to  the 
great  place  occupied  by  St.  Paul  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Christian  experience  and  the  correlation  of 
Christian  thought.  But  the  classification  is  open 
to  a  two-fold  objection.  In  the  first  place,  it  tends 
unduly  to  depreciate  the  importance,  indeed  the 
normative  value,  of  Christian  experience  and  re- 
flexion anterior  to  St.  Paul  ;  and,  in  the  second 
place,  by  grouping  the  other  forms  of  Chiistology 
as '  post-Pauline '  or  '  sub- Pauline,'  it  assumes  or 
alleges  a  relation  of  dependence  between  them  and 
the  Christology  of  the  Apostle  ;  whereas  the  fact 
of  this  relation  and  the  measure  of  it  are  parts  of 
the  whole  problem,  and  call  for  careful  investiga- 
tion. It  is  preferable,  therefore,  to  consider  first 
primitive  Christology,  and  then  sub- primitive  Chris- 
tology, without  assuming  tmy  continuous  line  of 
development. 

I.  The  Christology  of  the  primitive  com- 
MUX  ITT. — 1,  Sources.— The  material  for  the  study 
of  this  period  is  far  from  copious,  and  its  value 
has  been  much  disputed.  Yet  its  importance  is  so 
great  that  it  demands  careful  examination.  The 
possible  sources  may  be  classified  under  three  heads  : 
(1)  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  especially  the  earlier 
half  ;  (2)  certain  statements  and  allusions  in  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  as  to  views  held  in  common  by  him- 
self and  the  primitive  Christian  community  ;  and 
(3)  certain  elements  in  the  Synoptic  Gk)spels,  in 

VOL.  I. — 12 


which,  it  has  been  suggested,  we  find  reflected  the 
Christological  idea  of  a  later  generation.  We  shall 
take  these  in  the  reverse  order. 

(1)  The  Synoptic  Gospels. — Here  it  is  not  proposed 
to  make  any  use  of  what  some  claim  to  recognize 
as  '  secondary '  material  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Firstly,  even  if  the  presence  of  such  material  be 
admitted  as  a  po^bility,  there  is  the  greatest  un- 
certainty as  to  its  amount  and  its  distribution. 
While  there  has  undoubtedly  been  a  tendency  in 
some  critical  writers  to  exaggerate  the  influence  of 
later  theology  on  the  Synoptic  record,  it  is  also 
quite  possible  that  the  criteria  to  which  they  appeal 
may  need  to  be  revised.  Neither  the  absolute  nor 
the  relative  dates  of  the  NT  documents  have  been 
ascertained  with  sufficient  certainty,  nor  yet  has 
the  inner  history  of  the  period  been  realized  mth 
sufficient  precision,  to  make  the  disciimination  of 
such  material  anything  but  very  precarious.  But, 
secondly,  even  if  there  were  much  more  certainty 
than  there  is  as  to  the  Synoptic  material  which  is 
reaUy  secondary  in  character,  it  would  be  of  little 
use  for  our  purpose,  seeing  that  the  criterion  by 
which  it  is  distinguished  is  precisely  its  harmony 
with  the  views  of  a  later  period  ;  and  on  that  ac- 
count it  cannot  be  expected  to  yield  any  new  and 
posirive  information  as  to  the  opinion  held  in  the 
period  to  which  ex  hypothesi  it  belongs. 

(2)  The  EpisUes  of  St.  Pa«i.— These  provide  at 
least  valuable  confiiiuation  of  what  may  be  other- 
wise ascertained  as  to  the  opinion  held  by  the 
primitive  community,  partly  through  direct  state- 
ment by  the  Apostle  as  to  what  was  the  gospel  he 
had  '  received,'  and  partly  through  inference  which 
may  be  made  from  his  own  views,  as  to  that  out 
of  which  they  had  developed.  But  beyond  this  we 
cannot  go.  The  Epistle  of  James,  even  if  its  date 
be  early,  would  add  nothing  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  primitive  Christology.  The  First  Epistle  of 
Peter,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse all  represent  a  stage  in  some  degree  in 
advance  of  the  common  basis  from  which  they 
started  ;  and  the  Jobannine  Gospel  and  Epistles 
embody  the  results  of  still  longer  experience  and 
deeper  analysis. 

(3)  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. — There  remains,  as 
the  chief  source  of  material  for  constructing  the 
pre-Pauline  Christology,  the  Book  of  Acts,  more 
especially  the  first  eleven  chapters.  Not  many 
years  ago  it  would  have  been  difficult  to  justify  at 
the  bar  of  scholarly  opinion  the  use  of  this  docu- 
ment as  a  trustworthy  source.  No  book  was  so 
seriously  discredited  as  a  historical  source  by  the 
representatives  of  the  'Tiibingen  theory.'  Now, 
however,  that  the  governing  historical  principle  of 
that  theory  has  been  shown  to  be  untenable,  and 
the  conclusions  based  u^n  it  have  been  either  aban- 
doned or  seriously  modified,  the  way  has  been  opened 
for  a  reconsideration  of  the  Acts  as  to  both  its  date 
and  its  historical  value.  In  the  opinion  of  most 
competent  scholars,  the  authorship  may  now  be 
restored  to  St.  Luke  and  the  date  placed  w-ithin 
the  first  century,  some  assigning  it  to  the  nineties, 
some  to  the  eighties.  Quite  recently  a  strong  case 
has  been  made  out  by  Hamack  for  the  stiU  older 
view  that  it  was  written  in  the  sixties  before  the 
death  of  St.  Paul. 

But  what  is  more  important  for  our  purpose  than 
the  possible  revision  of  the  date  is  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  charge  of  history-making  for  party  (or 
eirenical)  purposes,  and  the  recognition  that  St. 
Luke  was  not  simply  an  echo  of  St.  Paul  (see 
Jiilicher,  Introd.  to  AT,  Eng.  tr.,  1904,  p.  437  ;  J. 
Motfatt,  LNT,  1911,  p.  301).  In  particular  there  is 
an  increasing  disposirion  to  acknowledge  that  in 
the  speeches  of  the  earlier  chapters  we  have  the 
thought  of  the  primitive  community  preserved  and 
repr(^uced  with  singular  fidelity.     The  admission 


178         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


of  Schmiedel  in  his  ait.  on  the  Acts  {EBi  i.  48)  is 
significant  : 

'  A  representation  of  Jesus  bo  simple,  and  in  such  exact  agrree- 
inent  with  the  impression  left  by  the  most  genuine  passages  of 
the  first  three  gospels,  is  nowhere  else  to  be  found  in  the  whole 
NT.  It  is  hardly  possible  not  to  believe  that  this  Christology  of 
the  speeches  of  Peter  must  have  come  from  a  primitive  source." 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  most  of  tlie  material 
is  contained  in  tlic  five  speeches  of  Peter  and  tlie 
speech  of  Stephen,  tliose  of  Peter  being  («)  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  (•_'""•)  ;  (b)  in  Solomon's  portico 
(Si'^'ff-) ;  (c)  the  first  before  the  Sanhedrin  (48*-) ;  (d) 
the  second  before  the  Sanhedrin  (5^"^) ;  and  (e)  the 
short  speech  at  Joppa  (lO^*^-).  When  we  proceed 
to  collect  and  classify  the  relevant  statements  in 
this  part  of  the  Acts,  we  find  that  they  point  to 
the  following  conclu.sions.  (i.)  The  Christians  of 
the  early  days  identified  Jesus  with  the  Messiah, 
(ii.)  They  appealed  for  confirmation  of  this  convic- 
tion to  the  fact  that  God  had  '  raised  him  from  the 
dead';  and  also  that  He  had  been  'exalted'  by, 
and  to,  the  right  hand  of  God,  the  Resurrection 
and  Exaltation  marking  a  decisive  moment  in  the 
Messiahship.  (iii. )  At  the  same  time  they  referred 
back  behind  the  Resurrection  to  facts  and  charac- 
teristics of  His  earthly  ministry,  (iv.)  In  spite  of 
the  dignity  and  authority  to  which  they  believed 
Him  raised,  they  consistently  referred  to  Him  in 
terms  of  humanity,  as  to  one  who  had  been,  while 
upon  earth,  a  man  among  men.  (v. )  They  promptly 
began  to  attach  to  Him  certain  OT  titles  and  types, 
some  of  which  had  already  been  recognized  as 
Messianic,  others  po.ssibly  not ;  e.g.  '  Son  of  Man,' 
'  Servant  of  God,'  '  Leader  of  Salvation,'  •  Saviour,' 
'  Judge,'  and  '  Lord.'  (vi. )  They  connected  the  death 
of  Jesus,  on  the  one  hand,  very  definitely  with  the 
determined  purpose  of  God  ;  and,  on  the  other, 
with  the  blotting  out  of  sin.  And  for  these  reasons 
this  Jesus  was  the  subject  of  the  '  good  news'  (5*^), 
the  object  of  faith  (9*^  11"),  and  the  cause  of  faith 
in  men  (3^®). 

(i. )  The  first  point  hardly  requires  to  be  illustrated. 
Not  only  the  speeches  but  the  narrative  as  a  whole 
bear  witness  to  the  fact  that  the  '  disciples,'  to  use 
St.  Luke's  word,  identified  Jesus  who  had  died  but 
risen  again  with  the  Messiah  of  Jewish  expectation. 
This  was  indeed  the  one  point  which  at  the  outset 
distinguished  them  from  the  other  Jews  in  Jeru- 
salem. Other  grounds  of  distinction,  ultimately 
leading  to  separation,  were  doubtless  latent  in  their 
minds — recollections  of  the  Master's  teaching,  of 
His  attitude  to  the  Law  and  the  ritual  of  the 
Temple.  But  in  the  meantime  '  the  disciples '  are 
found  haunting  the  Temple  and  observing  the  for- 
mal hours  of  prayer  ;  St.  Peter  proudly  claims  that 
no  unclean  or  forbidden  food  has  passed  his  lips 
(10"),  and,  thirty  years  later,  St.  James  can  assure 
St.  Paul  that  all  the  thousands  of  Jewish  Christians 
in  Jerusalem  are  '  zealous  of  the  law '  (2120),  But 
with  an  enthusiasm  which  no  scorn  could  quench, 
a  determination  -which  neither  threats  nor  imprison- 
ment could  weaken,  they  proclaimed  to  high  and 
low  their  conviction  that  the  Jesus  they  had  known 
was  the  Messiah.  It  is  one  of  the  water-marks  of 
the  primitive  character  of  St.  Luke's  narrative  that 
lie  everywhere  shows  his  consciousness  that  this  is 
the  meaning  of  x/'"''''<5s.  He  never  emi^loys  it  as  a 
proper  name.  His  name  for  our  Saviour  is  either 
'  Jesus '  or  '  the  Lord  '  ;  and  xp'o^''6s  when  it  stands 
alone  always  means  'Messiah.'  This  is  specially 
significant  in  passages  where  '  Christ '  and  '  Jesus  ' 
occur  together,  in  apposition  ;  e.g.  3-", '  that  he  may 
send  the  Messiah  who  has  been  before  appointed — 
Jesus' ;  5^-  17*  18'  18-*,  'shewing  by  the  scriptures 
that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.'  The  completeness 
with  which  this  fact  is  attested  must  not  ulind  us, 
however,  to  two  uncertainties,  which  immediately 
arise.     The  first  may  be  stated  thus :  What  did 


the  disciples  understand  by  the  Messiali  v  Wli.it 
character,  rOle,  or  function  did  tliey  a>si-ii  to  Him  '.' 
And  the  second  thus:  At  wlmt  ijoiin  did  ilujy 
understand  Him  to  have  eiiirn  .1  on  lii^s  .Me.->iuli- 
ship?  They  identified  Je.sus  with  the  Messiah  of 
Jewish  expectation;  but  did  tiiiit  mean  that  He 
had  been  (and  was  still,  and  \\as  to  return  as) 
Messiah,  or  that  the  Messiahsiiip  was  a  dignity 
conferred  on  11  im  after  death  and  at  the  Resurrec- 
tion? The  answer  to  these  questions  follows  on 
the  examination  of  the  other  elements  in  the  primi- 
tive conviction. 

(ii.)  That  conviction  rested  upon,  and  appealed 
to,  the  Resurrection  us  the  concuisive  proof  of  the 
Messiahship  of  J esus.  llm  the  Resurrection  was 
uniformly  connected  with  tiie  Exaltation  to  tlx! 
right  hand  of  God,  or  with  its  equivalent — the  ]i,ir 
ticipation  of  Jesus  in  the  Divine  'glory.'  In  eacJi 
of  St.  Peter's  recorded  speeches  tlie-i'  two  factors 
are  significantly  combined  (2^--  ."i  7  '  lO*'-*^). 
The  Resurrection  is  thus  reganled  as  the  exter- 
nally visible  side  of  a  great  transaction  which  has 
its  true  significance  in  the  Exaltation  of  Jesus  to 
Messianic  rank  and  honour  in  heaven ;  it  was  a 
public  declaration  of  His  station  ;  the  man  whom 
they  had  seen  crucified  now  occupied  the  place  of 
dignity  and  authority  which  prophecy  and  apoca- 
lyptic had  assigned  to  the  Messiah.  God  had  now 
'  made  him  both  Lord  and  Christ '  (2^).  The  word 
'Lord'  {KvpLos),  like  'Christ,'  is  probably  used  as 
an  official  title ;  but  in  any  case  the  phrase  wit- 
nesses to  the  belief  that  the  Resurrection  and 
Exaltation  had  marked  a  decisive  moment  in  the 
Messiahship  of  Jesus. 

(iii.)  At  the  same  time,  St.  Peter  is  careful  to 
emphasize  on  more  than  one  occasion  the  ministry 
Avhich  had  preceded  the  Crucifixion  and  Resurrec- 
tion. He  marks  the  limits  of  that  ministry  (l-^-  -^) 
in  accordance  with  those  set  by  the  Gospels.  In 
his  first  speech  (2-'-''^)  he  describes  its  character — 
'  Jesus  the  Nazarajan  (cf.  3«  4^"  6'*  22^  24»  and  26"), 
a  man  approved  of  God  unto  you  by  mighty  works 
and  signs  and  wonders,  which  God  did  by  him  in 
the  midst  of  you,  even  as  ye  yourselves  know.* 
And  specially  in  the  address  preceding  the  baptism 
of  Cornelius  (lO^"'-),  St.  Peter,  having  begun  with 
words  which  make  echoes  of  Messianic  passages  in 
Isaiah  (52' ;  cf.  Nah  P*),  proceeds  to  remind  his 
hearers  of  something  already  familiar  to  them — the 
ministry  of  'Jesus  the  one  from  Nazareth,'  which 
began  from  Galilee  after  the  baptism  proclaimed 
by  John.  Him  God  had  anointed  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  He  had  gone  about  doing  deeds  of  kind- 
ness and  healing  all  who  were  tyrannized  by  the 
devil.  Of  all  that  He  had  done  also  in  Juda;a  and 
Jerusalem  (as  Avell  as  of  the  Resurrection)  St. 
Peter  and  his  comrades  were  appointed  to  bear 
witness.  The  only  epithets  applied  to  Jesus 
which  might  throw  light  on  the  impression  He  had 
made  are  '  holy '  and  '  righteous  '  (S'*  4^  [cf.  4*"]  7'^ 
[cf.  22"]).  The  ascription  of  tlie  characteristic 
'  righteous  '  is  probably  due  to  a  reminiscence  of  a 
description  already  traditional  for  the  Messiaii  (cf. 
En.  38^  46*  53"),  and  the  collocation  of  '  holy  '  and 
'  servant '  may  have  a  similar  origin  ;  but  in  3", 
where  both  epithets  are  applied  to  the  historical 
Jesus,  the  contrast  drawn  in  the  following  para- 
graph with  the  'murderer'  for  wlioni  the  Jews 
had  asked  suggests  that  the  words  at  the  same 
time  connote  the  consciousness  that  they  fitly 
describe  the  character  of  Jesus. 

(iv.)  This  Jesus,  whether  He  be  referred  to  in 
the  days  of  His  flesh  or  in  His  present  Exaltation 
at  the  right  hand  of  God,  is  consistently  repre- 
sented in  terms  of  humanity.  It  cannot  be  said 
that  any  special  stress  is  laid  on  His  human 
nature.  "  The  time  had  not  yet  come  when  it  was 
necessary  to  emphasize  His  true  manhood  over 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY         179 


against  Docetic  or  Gnostic  tendencies.  If  some 
slight  emphasis  is  to  be  detected,  it  is  dne  rather 
to  wonder  that  One  to  whom  so  much  honour  is 
assigned,  through  whom  so  much  is  expected,  was 
One  with  whom  the  disciples  had  been  on  familiar 
terms.  This  is  suggested  bv  the  frequency  with 
which  the  simple  name  '  Jesus '  is  used  (three 
times  as  often  as  the  title  'Christ'),  by  the  re- 
iterated designation  '  Jesus  the  Nazaraean,'  and 
by  the  emphatic  demonstration  which  occurs  more 
than  once — '  This  Jesus  did  God  raise  up '  (2*^ ;  cf. 
2*).  It  is  'Jesus'  whom  Stephen  sees  standing 
at  the  right  hand  of  God  (7**),  and  'Jesus'  who 
speaks  to  Saul  from  heaven.  It  was  in  the  fact 
that  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  had  been  companions 
of  'Jesus'  that  the  members  of  the  Sanhedrin 
found  some  explanation  of  their  boldness  and 
powers  of  speech  (4^).  It  was  in  the  name  of 
'  Jesus '  that  they  taught  (4^),  and  in  the  same 
name  that  they  wrought  miracles.  The  miracles 
of  Jesus  Himself  were  not  ascribed  to  His  in- 
dei>endent  initiative  ;  they  were  wonders  which 
'God  did  by  him'  (2"");  and  the  explanation  of 
His  power  which  is  given  elsewhere  (KF*)  is  that 
God  had  anointed  Him  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
that  God  'was  with  him'  (lO**).  For  God  had 
'  raised  him  up  '  in  the  sense  in  which  He  '  raised 
up'  prophets  of  old,  and  'sent  him  to  bless'  His 
people  m  turning  away  every  one  of  them  from 
their  iniquities  (3-*).  hi  all  this  we  see  the  tokens 
of  a  very  early  form  of  Christology  ;  one,  moreover, 
which  would  be  very  difficult  to  account  for  either 
as  the  invention  or  as  the  recollection  of  a  later 
generation. 

(v.)  But  this  is  not  a  complete  account  of 
the  Christological  phenomena  of  these  chapters. 
There  are  numerous  indications  that  from  the 
very  outset  the  minds  of  some  at  least  of  the 
disciples  were  at  work  on  the  material  pro\aded 
for  them  by  (a)  their  recollection  of  what  Jesus 
had  been,  said,  and  done ;  (6)  the  facts  of  His 
Crucifixion  and  Resurrection ;  and  (c)  the  promises 
and  predictions  of  the  OT,  together  possibly  with 
some  of  the  language  of  the  apocalypses.  'The  re- 
sult of  this  reflexion  is  seen  in  the  ascription  to 
Jesus  as  Messiah  of  certain  important  titles  and 
functions  which  indicate  more  precisely  the  relation 
in  which  He  stands  towards  God  or  the  function 
He  discharges  towards  men.  In  his  speech  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  St.  Peter  was  ready  with  a  quota- 
tion from  Ps  16,  and  an  exegetical  interpretation 
of  it  which  was  sufficiently  in  accord  with  con- 
temporary methods  of  exegesis  to  commend  it  to 
his  hearers.  Not  long  after,  we  find  him  making 
the  definite  general  statement  that  God  had  ful- 
filled the  things  which  He  foreshowed  '  by  the 
mouth  of  all  his  prophets  that  his  Christ  should 
sufler '  (3'8 ;  cf.  also  3-^  10«).  We  are  justified, 
therefore,  in  looking  to  the  writings  of  the  prophets 
for  the  sources  of  phrases  and  ideas  now  connected 
with  Jesus  as  the  risen  Messiah. 

(a)  The  Servant  of  God. — That  is  undoubtedly 
the  source  of  the  strildng  description,  rdir  ralda  avroD 
(sc.  Oeov),  which  occurs  twice  in  St.  Peter's  second 
speech  (3'^  ^)  and  twice  (rbv  dyiov  -raidi  aov)  in  the 

firayer  of  thanksgiving  (4^-  *').  The  rendering 
aniUiar  to  English  ears  through  the  AV  trans- 
lates iral8a  by  '  Son '  in  the  first  two  passages,  by 
*  child '  in  the  last  two.  But  according  to  the 
view  now  generally  held  it  is  the  alternative 
meaning  of  vah  which  is  here  intended,  viz.  '  ser- 
vant '  ;  and  we  have  in  the  phrase  a  deliberate 
echo  of  the  language  of  Deutero-Isaiah  concern- 
ing the  '  Servant  of  the  Lord.'  Such  a  usage,  in 
the  first  place,  is  a  further  indication  of  the  primi- 
tive character  of  St.  Luke's  material.  It  is  found 
elsewhere  only  in  Clement,  the  Didache,  and  the 
Martyrdom  of  Polycarp.     It  is  an  early  Messianic 


title  for  our  Lord  which  is  not  repeated  in  the 
later  books  of  the  NT  (see  further  A.  Harnack, 
Date  of  Acts  and  Synoptic  Gospels,  £ng.  tr.,  1911, 
p.  106  ;  History  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  L  [1894]  185, 
note  4). 

Further,  the  application  of  this  title  to  Jesus  is 
very  significant,  whether  it  is  traced  to  inde- 
pendent retlexion  on  the  part  of  the  apostles,  or 
whether  it  be  due  to  appreciation  on  their  part 
of  the  same  factor  in  the  consciousness  and  in  the 
utterances  of  Jesus.  Its  efl'ect  was  to  link  on  to 
the  traditional  conception  of  the  Messiah  a  series 
of  ideas  of  quite  a  different  character,  including 
linmility,  submission,  vicarious  suffering  and  death. 
The  importance  of  this  identification  is  illustrated 
by  the  exposition  of  Is  53'  given  by  Philip  to  the 
Ethiopian  eunuch  (8"  *  beginning  from  this  scrip- 
ture he  preached  unto  him  Jesiis ') ;  and  the  same 
interpretation  probably  underlies  St.  Paul's  state- 
ment, '  Christ  .  .  .  died  for  our  sins  according  to 
the  scriptures.' 

(/3)  Prinze  and  Saviour. — The  same  OT  context 
is  probably  the  source  of  another  striking  desig- 
nation, apxvyov  KoX  (rorrTjfM.  'Him  did  Grod  exalt 
unto  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour ' 
(5^*  ;  cf.  3^*  '  ye  slew  the  Prince  of  life ' ;  and  He 
2'*  'the  author  (prince,  or  captain)  of  their  sal- 
vation '  ;  also  12"-  '  author  and  finisher '  [Westcott, 
'  leader  and  consummator ']).  The  variety  in  the 
renderings  reflects  an  ambiguity  in  the  word  dffxv 
yoi.  It  describes  one  who  both  inaugurates  and 
controls  ;  and  the  ipxTY^  ^*  f<*^s  *t  once  inaugu- 
rates and  controls  the  Messianic  experience  of  sal- 
vation here  described  as  fw^.  There  is  thus  a 
close  parallelism  between  the  two  phrases  '  Prince 
of  life '  and  '  Prince  and  Saviour '  ;  and  when  they 
are  taken  together,  and  weighed  with  the  context 
in  which  the  first  is  found,  their  connexion  with 
the  language  of  Isaiah  becomes  plain,  e.g.  Is  60" 
eyw  K(//xos  6  truj^ur  ae,  and  ob*  ISoii  fiapripioy  iw  fdrttrip 
ISuKa  awrdi',  ipxovra  Kal  vpoarAaaovra  rcii  iOveaiv.  The 
'  sufferings  of  the  Christ '  had  been  foretold  '  by  the 
mouth  of  all  the  prophets ' ;  and  the  same  pro- 
phecies, to  the  study  of  which  the  apostles  had 
been  led  by  His  death,  supplied  forms  for  the  ex- 
pression of  their  faith  in  Him. 

(7)  Son  of  Man. — This  title  for  Jesus  occurs  once 
only — in  the  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen 
(7**).  Stephen  '  looked  up  stedfastly  to  heaven  and 
saw  the  glory  of  God,  and  Jesus  standing  at  the 
right  hand  of  God  ;  and  he  said,  Behold,  I  see  the 
heavens  opened,  and  the  Son  of  man  standing  at 
the  right  hand  of  God.'  Two  things  are  clear: 
the  name  '  Jesus '  and  the  title  '  Son  of  Man '  are 
already  felt  to  be  interchangeable,  and  the  title 
belongs  to  Jesus  as  the  Messiah.  There  is  no 
other  instance  of  the  phrase  in  the  NT  outside  the 
Gospels,  Rev  1"  being  no  exception.  It  provides, 
as  Bartlett  says  {ad  loc. ),  '  a  water-mark  of  the 
originality  of  this  utterance,'  and  even  the  most 
cautious  critics  admit  that  this  speech  of  Stephen 
reached  St.  Luke  from  a  very  early  source.  These 
two  facts — the  early  date  to  which  the  phrase 
must  be  assigned  and  its  uniqueness  outside  the 
Gospels — point  to  its  being  a  reminiscence  of  what 
is  attested  by  the  Gospels — our  Lord's  custom  of 
describing  Himself  by  this  title,  and  describing 
Himself  with  a  veiled  allusion  to  His  Messiahship. 
But  even  if  the  primitive  community  was  itself  re- 
sponsible for  this  identification,  and  did  not  take 
it  over  from  our  Lord  Himself,  that  would  not 
diminish  the  significance  of  the  phrase  for  the 
primitive  Christology.  '  This  identification  of  the 
historical  Jesus  with  the  "  Son  of  Man  "  of  Daniel 
and  Enoch  is  very  significant,  because  directly  it 
is  accomplished,  the  further  thought  can  no  longer 
be  resisted,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  not  simply  a 
man,  who  in  the  future  is  to  be  exalted  to  heavenly 


180         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


glory,  but  an  original  heavenly  being,  who  came 
down  to  accomplish  this  work  of  his  on  earth'  (J. 
Weiss,  Christ,  Eng.  tr.,  1911,  p.  59  f.).  The  com- 
munity, for  which  this  was  a  just  and  intelligible 
•lescription  of  Jesus,  was  preparing  and  prepared 
for  any  interpretation  of  His  being  which  is  con- 
tained in  tlie  NT. 

(5)  Tiie  plirase  Son  of  God  is  also  used,  but  only 
once— in  9=**.  St.  Paul  '  preached  Jesus,  that  he  is 
the  Son  of  God.'  But  the  title  is  used  in  its 
Messianic  and  official  sense,  founded  on  Ps  2''  (cf. 
Mt  16'^  Jn  1*®) ;  and  the  sentence  implies  no  more 
than  the  closing  words  of  v.*-  'proving  that  this  is 
the  Clirist.'  A  later  generation  failed  to  recognize 
this,  and  the  consequence  is  seen  in  the  TR  of  9-", 
where  'Christ'  has  been  substituted  for  'Jesus' — 
a  useful  illustration  of  the  way  in  which  the  copy- 
ists felt  the  lack  of  the  word  '  Christ '  as  a  name, 
and  therefore  introduced  or  substituted  it  (some 
nine  times  in  all  in  Acts). 

(e)  The  Lord. — "KpicrTb^,  vais  Oeov,  dpxvj^^  ''"^J 
(rwrrjplas,  dpxvy^^  k"-^  awrijp,  vl6i  rod  avdpilnrov — these 
are  elements  out  of  which  a  rich  Christology  might 
rapidly  develop.  And  there  is  still  one  to  add, 
which  is  probably  the  most  pregnant  of  all — the 
title  6  Kiptos.  The  Synoptic  Gospels  witness  to  the 
habit  of  addressing  the  Master,  or  speaking  of 
Him,  as  6  Kipios ;  and  there  it  is  simply  an  expres- 
sion of  profound  respect.  As  such  the  word  was 
also  in  common  use  among  the  Hellenists  of  the 
Empire,  applied  alike  to  gods  and  to  Emperors. 
St.  Paul  shows  himself  conscious  of  this  when  he 
says  (1  Co  8')  that  there  are  in  fact  many  'gods 
and  lords  so-called.'  But  when  he  asserts  the 
claim  of  Jesus  to  the  title  in  a  unique  sense,  he  is 
only  doing  what  the  infant  Church  had  done  before 
him.  '  Indubitably  therefore  let  the  whole  house 
of  Israel  know  that  God  has  made  him  Lord  and 
Christ,  this  Jesus  whom  ye  crucilied '  (Ac  2*").  '  He 
is  Lord  of  all'  (10^).  This  became  in  fact  the 
chosen  and  prevailing  appellation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
especially  among  the  Gentile  Christians,  where  the 
historical  significance  of  '  Christ '  was  unfamiliar. 
But  how  far  the  usage  was  from  originating  in 
Gentile  circles  we  learn  from  its  familiarity  there 
in  the  Aramaic  form  of  '  Maran  atha,'  i.e.  '  Our 
Lord  comes'  or  'Our  Lord,  come.'  That  St.  Paul 
could  count  on  this  being  understood  by  the 
Christians  at  Corinth  betokens  antecedent  and 
wide-spread  usage  of  the  formula  in  Palestinian 
circles. 

The  special  and  unique  significance  of  the  title 
as  now  applied  to  Christ  arises  out  of  its  use  in 
the  LXX  as  the  usual  eupiiemistic  equivalent  of 
'  Jahweh.'  For  those  familiar  with  the  OT  in  the 
Greek  version,  6  Kiipios  was  a  synonym  for  God  ; 
the  outstanding  fact  in  connexion  with  the 
Christolojnr  of  the  Acts  and  Epistles  is  that  the 
same  word  has  become  the  common,  the  preponder- 
ating designation  of  Jesus  Christ.  And  the  con- 
notation which  is  involved  in  its  application  to 
Him  is  the  same.  This  follows  from  the  trans- 
ference to  Christ  not  merely  of  the  title  but  also 
of  phrases  from  the  OT,  the  original  reference  of 
which  was  to  Jahweh.  When  the  believers  on 
Christ  are  described  as  ol  iviKoKoiiievoi.  rb  6voixa. 
rovTo, '  those  who  call  upon  this  name,'sc.  the  name 
of  Jesus  our  Lord  {9-^ ;  cf.  9^*  2^^  22'«  and  Ro  10'*, 
1  Co  P),  language  is  approjiriated  to  Christ  which 
in  the  OT  had  been  used  to  describe  the  worshipper 
of  the  true  God  (cf.  Gn  4''«  12«,  2  K  5").  Stephen 
dies  '  calling  upon  (the  Lord)  and  saying,  Lord 
Jesus,  receive  my  spirit ' ;  and  Peter  postulates 
universal  dominion  of  the  same  Person — '  He  is 
Lordof  air(103«). 

'There  cannot  be  the  least  doubt,'  says  J.  Weiss  {Christ,  p. 
46  f.), 'that  the  name  has  now  a  rpii'.(7iou«  significance.  To  make 
clear  the  religious  import  of  the  use  o(  the  name  *'  Lord  "  by  the  I 


early  Christians,  one  would  have  to  cite  the  whole  of  the  NT. 
For  in  the  expression  "  Our  Ix)rd  Jesus  Christ "  the  whole 
primitive  Christian  religion  is  contained  in  jrerm.  Dutiful 
obeisance,  reverence,  and  sacred  fear  lest  he  should  be  oflTended, 
the  feeling  of  complete  dependence  in  all  things,  thankfulness 
and  love  and  trust— In  short,  everything  that  a  man  can  feel 
towards  God,  conies  in  this  name  to  utterance.  .  .  .  That  which 
is  expected  from  God,  the  Lord  can  also  impart.' 

Corresponding  with  these  significant  titles  there 
are  certain  functions  ascribed  to  the  risen  Christ, 
Avliich  throw  valuable  light  on  the  conception  of 
Him  which  prevailed  in  the  primitive  community. 
He  is  represented  (a)  as  One  whom  it  is  natural  to 
approach  in  prayer,  (b)  as  One  who  can  forgive  and 
save,  and  (c)  as  One  who  is  destined  to  be  the  Judge 
of  quick  and  dead. 

(a)  The  practice  of  addressing  prayer  to  Christ 
is  established  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul  (see  below), 
and  his  references  to  the  practice  give  no  ground 
for  the  supposition  that  it  was  a  novelty  which 
originated  with  him.  Rather  do  they  suggest  a 
practice  which  was  already  familiar,  and  requiring 
no  defence,  and  so  serve  to  confirm  the  evidence  of 
the  Acts  to  the  eflect  that  from  the  beginning  the 
disciples  addressed  the  Risep  Lord  in  prayer.  It  is 
in  this  sense  that  the  Christians  in  Damascus  are 
described  by  Ananias  as  '  those  who  call  upon  thy 
name'  (9''*),  with  this  signiljcance  that  the  dying 
Stephen  cries,  '  Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  spirit,'  and 
'  Lord,  lay  not  this  sin  to  their  charge,  and  it  is 
at  least  possible  that  the  same  idea  underlies  St. 
Peter's  quotation  from  Joel  (Ac  2^*),  for  the  speech 
to  which  it  is  prefixed  leads  up  to  the  conclusion 
that  Jesus  has  been  made  Lord  and  Christ  (see 
Zahn,  Die  Anbetung  Jesv!^,  1910). 

(6)  The  words  of  Stephen  are  addressed  to  One 
who  has  the  power  to  forgive ;  and  the  title  of 
'Saviour'  is  no  empty  form.  That  'salvation,' 
which,  whatever  be  the  precise  contents  of  the 
term,  always  stands  for  the  highest  good,  can  be 
obtained  through  Him,  and  through  no  other.  In 
4^*^  ('there  is  no  other  name,'  etc.)  St.  Peter  is  pro- 
bably contemplating  Jews  only,  and  salvation  as 
conceived  by  them,  i.e.  as  the  Messianic  deliver- 
ance of  the  future.  This  Jesus,  who  is  the  Christ, 
is  to  return,  after  '  seasons  of  refreshing  from  the 
presence  of  the  Lord '  at '  the  time  of  the  restoration 
of  all  things'  (3-^).  That  return  will  prove  the  cul- 
minating and  final  fulfilment  of  predictions  made 
by  Moses  and  the  prophets  who  followed  him,  con- 
cerning both  the  glories  and  the  judgment  of  the 
Messianic  times. 

For,  (c)  when  He  comes,  Christ  will  fulfil  the 
function  for  which  He  has  bean  destined  by  God  ; 
He  will  act  as  Judge  of  ciuick  and  dead  (10**). 

These  last  are  the  only  references  in  the  early 
chapters  of  Acts  to  the  Parousia  of  Christ  and  its 
attendant  circumstances.  We  have  to  observe 
therefore  the  sobriety  and  the  reticence  of  the  ex- 
pectation, especially  when  compared  Avith  the  exu- 
berance of  earlier  and  contemporary  writing  on 
the  subject.  There  is  no  reference  to  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Kingdom  to  Israel,  or  to  the  humiliation 
and  destruction  of  Israel's  foes — features  of  the 
future  which  were  part  of  the  common  form  of 
Messianic  expectation.  In  fact,  the  tone  of  these 
speeches  is  strangelj'  different  from  what  we  should 
have  expected  from  a  Jew  speaking  under  the  con- 
viction that  the  Messiah  had  been  manifested  in 
Jesus,  and  would  shortly  return  to  fulfil  the  Divine 
programme.  We  miss  even  the  e-schatological 
scenery  connected  with  the  Return,  with  Mhich 
the  apocalyptic  sections  of  tlie  Synoptic  Gospels 
have  made  us  familiar,  and  also  that  emphasis  on 
the  imminence  of  the  Return  wliich  api)ears  in  the 
early  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  And  yet,  in  the  an- 
nouncement that  Christ  comes  to  judge  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  St.  Peter  a-scribes  to  Him  a  function 
which  sets  Him  on  the  plane  of  God  (see  Scheel  in 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY  181 


RGG  i.  1743,  foot).  The  exalted  Jesus,  despite 
the  clearness  with  which  He  is  defined  as  a  man, 
is  yet  One  to  whom  men  pray,  One  who  exercises 
the  Divine  functions  of  forgiving,  saving,  and 
judging.  And  '  what  is  honoured  in  worship  stands 
wholly  and  without  qualification  on  the  side  of 
God '  (Buusset,  Kyrios  Christos,  p.  185). 

(vi.)  Further  light  is  shed  upon  the  conception 
of  Christ  held  by  the  primitive  community  by  the 
significance  assigned  to  His  death.  It  is  true  that 
the  references  to  this  subject  are  unexpectedly  few, 
brief,  and  general.  The  early  chapters  of  Acts 
present  a  very  exact  reproduction  of  the  natural 
situation  in  which  the  death  of  Jesus  was  a  fact 
known  to  all,  one  which  called  for  explanation, 
and,  in  the  absence  of  explanation,  was  without  re- 
ligious value  ;  but  one  for  which  an  explanation 
was  emerging  under  the  guidance  partly  of  the  OT, 
partly  of  reminiscences  of  the  Master's  teaching, 
and  partly  of  the  spiritual  experience  of  the 
disciples.     The  following  points  are  to  be  noted. 

(a)  The  death  of  Jesus  was  very  definitely  referred 
to  '  the  determined  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of 
God'  (2"^).  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate  with  the 
Gentiles  and  the  Jews  as  a  people  had  only  carried 
out  what  had  been  ordained  to  happen  by  the  hand 
and  will  of  God  (4^*).  In  this  there  is  nothing  that 
goes  beyond  the  Jewish  doctrine  of  the  Divine  fore- 
knowledge ;  but  the  statement  of  it  involved  a  prob- 
lem which  was  calling  for  solution.  To  what  end 
had  God  ordained  the  death  of  the  Messiah  ? 

(^)  This  death,  though  the  fact  had  hitherto 
been  ignored,  had  actually  been  predicted  by  the 
prophets  of  the  OT.  '  Those  things  which  God 
before  showed  by  the  mouth  of  all  the  prophets 
that  his  Christ  should  suffer,  did  he  thus  fulfil ' 
(3i«;  cf.  10*,  1  P  li»,  Lk  24?^«-  *^-).  The  repeated 
emphasis  on  '  all  the  prophets '  (cf.  3^)  is  not  to  be 
explained  as  due  merely  to  hyperbole.  It  arises 
from,  and  illustrates,  the  conviction  that  Christ 
was  the  goal  and  the  fulfilment  of  the  whole  pro- 
phetic anticipation  of  redemption  ;  though  St. 
Peter  might  have  found  difficulty  in  quoting  many 
prophetic  words  directly  bearing  on  the  death  of 
Christ,  the  conviction  he  expresses  is  that  that 
death  must  now  be  recognized  as  an  essential 
element  in  the  working  out  of  the  redemptive 
purpose. 

(7)  The  disciples  commemorated  the  death  of 
Jesus  by  a  frequently  repeated  eucharistic  meal  in 
which  they  '  showed  forth  the  Lord's  death.'  That 
this  practice  began  so  promptly  after  the  birth  of 
the  community  (2^)  is  a  fact  which  must  be  due 
to  recollection  of  the  Last  Supper,  and  so  involves 
conscious  remembrance  of  the  significance  which 
the  Master  had  attached  to  the  breaking  of  the 
bread,  at  least  according  to  the  shortest  form  in 
which  the  words  are  reported :  '  This  is  ray  body 
which  is  on  your  behalf  (1  Co  ll-^*).  Behind  that 
would  lie  recollections  of  other  things  He  had  said 
bearing  upon  His  death  which  had  been  vague  and 
cryptic  at  the  time. 

In  these  factors — the  correlation  of  the  death  of 
Jesus  with  the  whole  redeeming  purpose  of  God, 
the  foreshadowing  by  prophecy  of  the  vicarious 
value  attaching  to  tiie  death  of  the  innocent 
servant  of  God,  and  the  remembered  attitude  of 
Jesus  towards  His  own  death — we  have  the  condi- 
tions for  a  rapid  evolution  of  a  doctrine  of  recon- 
ciliation through  the  Cross.  The  doctrine  itself  is 
not  here  ;  but  distinct  approximation  to  it  can  be 
traced  in  the  collocation  of  Jesus  as  sutiering 
Messiah  with  an  appeal  for  'repentance  unto  re- 
mission of  sins'  {3^*- '^).  In  2^  when  the  people 
have  heard  the  declaration  that  God  has  made 
Jesus  Lord  and  Christ,  and  ask.  What  are  we  to 
do  ?  the  answer  is  '  Repent,  and  be  baptized,  every 
one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  re- 


mission of  your  sins.'  There  is  a  superficial 
similarity  to  the  summons  issued  by  John  the 
Baptist,  but  a  fundamental  distinction  in  that  the 
ground  of  the  apostolic  appeal  is  the  fact  of  Christ, 
a  fact  as  yet  unanalyzed  ;  and  the  baptism  is  to  be 
'  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,'  i.e.  it  involves  and 
symbolizes  the  confession  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ, 
and  heart-felt  submission  to  His  Personality.  In 
5'*  {'Him  did  God  exalt  to  be  a  Prince  and  a 
Saviour,  for  to  give  repentance  and  remission  of 
sins '),  if,  as  is  probable,  '  God  'is  to  be  understood 
as  the  subject  of  the  infinitive  clause  (cf.  11*  and 
Ro  2*),  the  Exaltation  and  indirectly  the  death 
have  remission  of  sins  in  part  for  their  object  and 
result. 

More  cannot  be  said.  The  nature  of  the  con- 
nexion between  the  death  of  Jesus  and  the  Divine 
plan  remains  obscure.  To  explain  it  was  the  work 
of  a  longer  Christian  experience,  a  deeper  compre- 
hension of  sin,  and  a  nigher  conception  of  the 
ethical  demands  of  God.  But  when  the  explana- 
tion came,  it  was  an  unfolding  of  the  primitive 
conviction  that  there  was  a  profound  connexion 
between  the  death  of  Jesus  and  the  removal  of  sin. 
On  this  point,  as  on  others,  investigation  of  the 
primitive  consciousness  entirely  confirms,  as  it  is 
confirmed  by,  St.  Paul's  statement  of  the  gospel  as 
it  had  been  communicated  to  him,  that  '  Christ 
.  .  .  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  scriptures ' 
(1  Co  15^). 

(5)  The  summary  of  the  '  gospel '  here  given  by 
St.  Paul,  while  it  is  notably  lacking  in  certain 
elements  which  are  commonly  supposed  to  be 
essential  to  Paulinism,  corresponds  very  closely 
with  the  impression  concerning  the  missionary 
preaching  which  is  made  by  the  later  chapters  of 
Acts.  It  is  of  course  maintained  by  many  scholars, 
and  by  some  regarded  as  axiomatic,  that  the  simi- 
larity between  the  speeches  of  St.  Peter  and  those 
of  St.  Paul  is  due  to  the  fact  that  they  were  all 
the  work  of  one  man,  neither  St.  Peter  nor  St. 
Paul,  but  either  an  unknown  writer  in  the  second 
cent,  or  St.  Luke  working  up  old  material  at  the  end 
of  the  first.  The  alleged  similarity  calls  for  care- 
ful examination.  The  result  will  probably  be  the 
recognition  that  it  arises  from  an  inward  harmony 
between  the  two  apostles  as  to  the  essentials  of 
their  message,  and  especially  as  to  their  concep- 
tion of  Christ,  combined  with  a  diversity  of  tone 
and  emphasis  which  is  specially  marked  when  the 
speeches  of  St.  Paul  are  compared  with  one  another, 
and  extends  to  his  speeches  as  a  whole  when  com- 
pared with  St.  Peter  s.  And  whatever  explanation 
be  given  of  the  composition  of  the  speeches  of  St. 
Paul,  the  primitive  character  of  the  Christology 
they  present  remains  a  fact,  and  one  which  is  more 
easily  accounted  for  if  they  reproduce  the  essentials 
of  the  Apostle's  mission  preaching,  than  if  we  have 
to  suppose  St.  Luke,  with  the  knowledge  of  St. 
Paul's  later  preaching  which  he  must  have  pos- 
sessed, deliberately  excluding  what  was  character- 
istically Pauline.  The  discrepancy  between  the 
Christology  reflected  in  St.  Paul's  speeches  in  Acts 
and  that  of  his  Epistles  may  actually  be  reflective 
of  the  true  facts  of  the  case. 

In  regard  to  their  Christology  the  speeches  of  St. 
Paul  witness  to  practically  the  same  elements  as 
those  of  St.  Peter,  and  to  no  other,  or  at  most  to 
one.  Just  as  in  the  speech  of  Stephen,  and  (less 
conspicuously  but  not  less  really)  in  the  speeches 
of  St.  Peter,  so  in  the  speech  of  St.  Paul  at  Pisi- 
dian  Antioch,  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  set  forth  as  the 
goal  of  Israel's  history  and  the  crowning  fulfilment 
of  Jewish  prophecy.  The  good  news  of  the  gospel 
which  its  messengers  proclaim  is  the  promise  to 
the  fathers  now  fulfilled  (Ac  IS** ;  cf.  26«,  Ro  \b% 
From  Thessalonica  we  have  a  specimen  of  St. 
Paul's  missionary  preaching,  according  to  which 


182         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


for  three  Snl)bath  days  or  'weeks'  (RVm)  he 
reasoned  with  the  Jews  '  from  the  scriptures,'  to 
tlie  eHect  that  the  Clirist  '  was  bound  to  sutler,' 
and  the  same  api)eal  to  Scripture  is  repeated  in 
Ac  26**  28*3  ;  cf.  13".  The  object  of  the  appeal  is 
to  show  both  that  this  is  the  Messiah,  and  that  His 
death  is  part  of  the  redemptive  process.  He  refers 
to  Clirist  in  the  same  striking  way  as  6  SiKaios  (22"  ; 
cf.  7*'*),  and  describes  Him  as  the  One  appointed  by 
God  to  judge  the  world  (IV^).  St.  Paul  further 
presents  Christ  as  an  object  of  faith  (22'* ;  cf.  9** 
11",  and  possibly  3'^),  and  claims  that  the  consist- 
ent burden  of  his  preaching  has  been  '  repentance 
toward  God  and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ '  (20-'  ;  cf.  262").  In  13»»  he  declares '  through 
this  man  is  proclaimed  unto  you  remission  of  sins.' 
If  in  the  following  verse  ('  and  from  all  the  things 
from  which  ye  could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of 
Moses,  by  him  is  justified  every  one  that  believeth  ') 
St.  Paul  seems  to  cross  the  line  into  '  Paulinism,' 
he  does  not  go  very  far.  *  Justified  '  has  tlie  same 
significance  here  as  it  has  in  the  Parable  of 
tiie  IMiarisee  and  Publican  (Lk  18'*)  ;  and  iv  To&rt^ 
BiKaioOrai  involves  the  same  conception  as  the  words 
of  St.  Peter  in  15"  Sia  rrjs  x'^P"""'  '^^^  Kvpiov  'lri(rov 
■wiffTevo/Mev  crwdrjvai,  or  in  4'-  oiiK  ^ctlv  iv  SiKKip  ovdevl 
il  awTTjpla.  There  is  one  phrase,  however,  in  which 
St.  Paul,  as  reported  in  the  Acts,  states  in  dogmatic 
form  a  conviction  to  which  we  find  no  verbal  paral- 
lel in  tlie  speeches  of  St.  Peter.  In  20^  he  refers 
to  TTji*  iKKkTjffLav  rov  deov  ijv  irepieiron)ffaTO  8ia  tov 
a'ifiaros  toO  iSLov,  (The  probability  is  strong  that 
vlov  has  been  accidentally  omitted  from  the  text 
at  a  very  early  stage  ;  otherwise  l8Lov  must  be  con- 
strued as  a  substantive  =  d7a7r7;Toi;.)  Here  we  have 
undoubtedly  a  seed-thought  of  much  that  we  recog- 
nize as  specifically  Pauline.  But  it  is  still  in  the 
form  of  a  seed.  Ps  74*  in  the  LXX  runs  fiv/icrdriTi 
TTJs  crwayuyiji  <tov  ^s  iKT-f)<r(i3  air  a.pxv^  I  i'f^vrpdiaw 
pd^Sov  T^s  K\r]povo/j.iai  crou.  St.  Paul,  echoing  the 
thought  rather  than  quoting  the  words,  takes  the 
two  words  iKri)(T<j}  and  iXvrpibffu,  combines  them, 
then  breaks  up  the  compound  into  two  new 
elements — purchase  and  price  ;  and,  guided  further 
by  such  phrases  as  '  I  have  given  Egypt  for  thy 
X&rpov '  (Is  43*),  '  He  smote  all  the  first-born  of 
Egypt '  (Ps  78"),  he  sets  the  fact  that  '  Christ  died 
for  our  sins  '  in  this  pregnant  form  :  that  the  new 
holy  community  like  the  old  one  has  been  redeemed 
at  the  cost  of  blood,  the  blood  of  God's  own  beloved 
Son. 

2.  Primitive  conception  of  Christ. — (1)  Jesus  as 
the  Messiah. — We  have  now  examined  the  material 
available  for  answering  the  question  with  which 
we  started — What  significance  did  the  primitive 
community  attach  to  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus, 
and  what  led  them  to  recognize  Him  as  Messiah 
and  as  a  Messiah  with  this  significance  ?  It  would 
not  further  our  inquiry  to  enter  on  an  examination 
of  antecedent  or  contemporary  Jewish  conceptions 
of  the  Messiah  and  the  functions  He  was  to  dis- 
charge. These  conceptions  were  at  once  so  various 
and  so  fluid,  and  the  extent  to  which  any  one  of 
them  prevailed  at  any  particular  time  is  so  difficult 
to  estimate,  that  even  when  we  know  all  there  is 
to  know  on  the  subject,  we  iiave  only  a  bewildering 
variety  of  possibilities.  We  must  and  can  find 
what  we  want  within  the  NT.  We  begin  by 
marking  the  two  extremes  between  which  the  con- 
ception of  the  Messiah  moved.  The  one  is  pre- 
sented quite  clearly  at  the  openinfj  of  Acts,  before 
the  experience  of  Pentecost.  The  disciples  put 
the  question  to  the  Risen  Christ :  '  Lord,  dost  thou 
at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel  ?'  (1®) — 
a  question  reflecting  the  same  conception  as  the 
words  of  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Enimaus 
(Lk  24*'),  viz.  that  of  a  Messiah  whose  function  was 
primarily  and  mainly  the  political  enfrancliisement 


of  the  nation.  The  other  extreme  is  found  in  such 
a  saying  as  '  Christ  also  sutl'ered  for  sins  once  .  .  . 
that  he  might  bring  us  unto  God '  (1  P  3'*),  or  in 
2  Co  5'"  '  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
unto  himself.' 

The  way  to  test  any  conception  of  the  Messiah 
is  to  observe  from  what  He  is  expected  to  deliver 
— from  the  tyranny  of  the  earthly  oppressor  or 
from  the  tyranny  of  moral  and  spiritual  evil. 
Now,  when  we  apply  this  test  to  the  conception 
which  lies  Ijehinu  the  language  of  the  primitive 
community,  we  find  that,  while  it  has  very  definitely 
moved  away  from  the  political,  it  has  not  yet 
reached  a  developed  consciousness  of  the  ethical 
deliverance.  We  find  the  reiterated  and  triumph- 
ant assertion  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  but  no 
trace  subsequent  to  Pentecost  of  any  idea  that  He 
is  to  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  record  of  the  early  days  furnishes  no 
clear  exposition  of  the  cliaracter  of  the  deliverance 
He  brings.  We  learn  that  in  no  otiier  than  Christ 
is  crwrripia  ;  but  the  nature  of  the  ffurrjpia  remains 
undefined.  Tiiis  is  true  in  spite  of  allusions  to 
'  remission  of  sins '  in  connexion  with  this  mani- 
festation of  His  death .  According  to  contein  porary 
Jewish  thought,  '  remission  '  or  '  blotting  out '  of 
sin  was  a  condition  antecedent  to,  not  part  of,  the 
Messianic  salvation.  There  is,  therefore,  some- 
thing really  new  in  the  presentation  of  the  Chris- 
tian Messiah  as  instrumental  in  the  remission  of 
sins.  It  was  to  antedate  His  traditional  activity. 
'  Unto  you  first,'  says  St.  Peter  (3-'*'),  '  God,  having 
raised  up  his  Servant,  sent  him  to  bless  you,  in 
turning  away  every  one  of  you  from  your  iniqui- 
ties.' Tliat  had  been  a  function  of  Jesus  in  the 
days  of  His  flesh  ;  and  the  saying  indirectly  testi- 
fies to  one  of  the  felt  consequences  of  His  fellow- 
ship. But  now,  says  St.  Peter,  'repent  ye,  and 
be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  unto  the  remission  of  your  .sins  ;  and  ye  shall 
receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost'  (2^).  So  in 
1Q43  ('Through  his  name  every  one  that  believeth 
on  him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins ')  the  declara- 
tion is  followed,  and  so  confirmed,  by  the  be-stowal 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  recognized  as  the  first-fruits  of  the  Messiiinic 
salvation  and  a  pledge  of  its  ultimate  completion. 
The  condition  of  receiving  it  is  the  remission  of 
sins  ;  and  that  follows  on  '  believing  on  him,'  or, 
what  is  synonymous,  '  repenting  and  being  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,'  which  again 
signifies  the  solemn  confession  of  belief  in  Jesus  as 
the  Christ.  Christ  is  not  described  as  the  One  who 
bestows  forgiveness  (though  the  prayer  of  Stephen 
shows  the  near  emergence  of  the  idea)  or  as  One 
for  whose  sake  forgiveness  is  bestowed ;  but  He 
is  set  in  such  relation  to  forgiveness  that  all  is 
ready  for  the  next  step.  When  His  disciples  begin 
to  have  a  deeper  conception  of  sin,  and  to  emphasize 
the  idea  of  salvation  as  deliverance  from  it,  a  pro- 
founder  explanation  of  the  Messiah's  relation  to 
sin  and  its  removal  will  be  demanded.  Meanwhile, 
the  conception  of  His  function  is  plainly  transi- 
tional, cut  loose  from  the  Judaic  but  only  approxi- 
mating to  the  Pauline. 

The  burden  of  the  testimony  borne  by  the  primi- 
tive community  was  to  the  effect  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ ;  He  is  also  to  return  as  the  Christ ;  had  He 
been  the  Christ  while  yet  on  earth  ?  No  conclusion 
to  the  contrary  can  be  drawn  from  Ac  2",  seeing 
that  there  is  no  indication  of  the  point  of  time  at 
which  the  '  making  '  took  place  ;  and  even  though 
it  appears  most  natural  to  connect  it  with  the 
Resurrection  (cf.  Ro  1*),  the  'making'  probably 
implies  tlie  further  recognition  and  promulgation 
of  a  status  rather  than  the  bestowal  of  it.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  are  not  wanting  indications 
which  seem  to  carry  back  the  Messianic  status 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY  183 


into  the  eartlily  ininistn,-.  He  had  been  'raised 
np'  bv  God  (3=*;  cf.  7'*  13**)  as  it  had  been  pre- 
dicted by  Moses  that  God  wonld  raise  up  '  a 
prophet '  (3*^).  He  had  been  sent  by  God  as  one 
olessin^  His  people,  and  by  God  '  anointed  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power'  (10*).  Tliis  last 
expression  probably  means  '  appointed  as  Messiah,' 
the  occasion  referred  to  being  the  Baptism  of 
Jesus.  '  Since  Is  1 1-  the  conception  of  the  Messiah 
in  Jewish  theologj-  had  been  indissolubly  linked 
with  that  of  the  Spirit.  The  Messiah  is  the  bearer 
of  the  Spirit  *  (Briickner,  in  BGG  iL  1208),  so  that 
the  anointing  with  the  Spirit  is  equivalent  to  in- 
stallation as  Messiah. 

(2).  The  Besurrection  and  the  Measiahahip. — To 
what  was  the  conviction  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah 
due  ?  It  is  sometimes  easUy  assumed  that  it  was 
produced  by  the  Resurrection.  But  taken  by  it- 
self the  Resurrection  was  not  sufficient  to  create 
belief  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  It  is  not  as 
if  there  had  been  any  antecedent  expectation  that 
the  Messiah  would  rise  from  the  dead  ;  such  an 
expectation  was  indeed  excluded  by  the  absence  of 
any  idea  that  death  was  an  element  in  the  Messiah's 
ex{ierience.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
when  St.  Peter  appealed  to  the  verses  in  Ps  16,  he 
was  guided  in  the  interpretation  he  gave  of  v.^** 
by  any  tradition  concerning  the  Messiah.  Nor  was 
there  in  the  fact  of  resurrection  itself  any  demon- 
stration that  such  a  rank  belonged  to  the  subject 
of  it.  It  had  been  reported  concerning  John  the 
Baptist  that  he  was  risen  from  the  dead  (Mk  6^^), 
but  the  only  inference  drawn  was  that  *  therefore 
do  these  powers  work  in  him.' 

The  Resurrection  did  not  create  faith  in  Jesus  as 
Messiah  ;  it  revived  it.  He  had  died  as  One  who 
claimed  to  be,  and  by  some  was  believed  to  be,  the 
Christ.  '  We  trusted  that  it  had  been  he  which 
shotild  have  redeemed  Israel '  (Lk  24-^) ;  and  the 
effect  of  the  Resurrection  was  to  vindicate  this 
claim  made  by  Jesus  and  for  Him  on  behalf  of  His 
followers. 

The  form  and  contents  of  that  belief  began  to 
undergo  a  rapid  change,  as  we  have  seen  ;  but 
beyond  this,  the  disciples  are  found  taking  up  a 
religious  attitude  to  the  Risen  Master  which  is  not 
accounted  for  by  their  belief  that  He  was  the 
Messiah.  They  behold  Him  as  set  by  the  right 
hand  of  God  ;  and  the  vision  is  the  ideal  expression 
of  the  devotion,  allegiance,  and  hope  which  move 
in  their  hearts  towards  Christ.  To  what  again  is 
this  profoundly  significant  attitude  due — for  which 
there  is  no  sufficient  explanation  in  traditional 
ideas  of  the  Messiah  ?  The  explanation  may  be 
sought  in  two  directions. 

(3)  The  historic  Jesus. — The  attitude  is  due, 
firstly,  to  the  impression  made  on  the  disciples  by 
the  historic  Jesus.  He  had  never  attempted  to 
demonstrate  the  claim  which  He  made.  But  they 
had  tacitly  admitted  its  validity.  He  had  claimed 
to  stand  in  a  universal  and  at  the  same  time  unique 
relation  to  men  ;  He  had  postulated  that  their  atti- 
tude to  Himself  was  the  determining  factor  in 
life  both  present  and  future.  He  had  demanded 
for  Himself  and  for  His  cause  an  allegiance  which 
outweighed  the  claims  of  any  other  relationship. 
And  He  made  known  to  them  in  Himself  such  a 
character,  such  a  personality,  that  these  claims, 
stupendous  as  they  were,  seemed  reasonable,  and 
were,  indeed,  admitted  and  acted  upon — 'Lord,  we 
have  left  all  and  followed  thee.'  And  the  very 
failure  on  the  part  of  these  same  men  to  grasp  the 
inmost  signihcance  of  HLs  message  and  His  life 
enhances  their  witness  to  the  moral  pressure  they 
experienced,  leading  them  to  submit  even  where 
they  imperfectly  understood.  When  St.  Peter 
made  what  is  called  the  great  confession,  'Thou 
art  the  Christ,'  he  was  doubtless  seeking  to  crys- 


tallize the  total  impression  into  a  categorical  form. 
But  the  form  itself  was  not  adequate.  To  acknow- 
ledge Jesus  as  the  Messiah  was  to  assign  to  Him 
the  highest  rank  and  dignity  within  the  intellect- 
ual range  of  the  apostles.  But  the  motives  which 
led  to  the  confession,  the  attitude  and  personal 
relation  which  lay  behind  it,  found  only  incomplete 
expression  in  the  recognition  of  Him  as  the  Messiah. 
Jesus  had  done  what  no  one  had  ever  conceived 
of  the  Messiah  doing.  He  had  touched  the  inner 
springs  of  their  life.  He  had  deepened  indefiinitely 
their  apprehension  of  essential  things,  the  joy  of 
life  as  lived  by  those  who  have  a  Father  in  God, 
the  sorrow  that  springs  from  the  fact  of  human 
alienation  from  that  Father.  According  to  the 
measure  of  their  capacity  He  revealed  to  them  the 
Father,  and  it  was  oy  leading  them  to  know  Him- 
self. And  so,  for  those  who  attached  themselves 
to  Him,  Jesus  became  Messiah  and  more.  And  as 
the  con\-iction  that  He  was  Messiah  was  revived  by 
the  Resurrection  from  the  death-blow  which  it  re- 
ceived through  the  Crucifixion,  so  the  experience 
of  '  the  more '  was  also  latent  in  the  c-onsciousness 
of  the  disciples,  waiting  to  be  quickened  by  a 
corresponding  event,  and  developed  by  a  future 
experience. 

(4)  Pentecost. — That  event  which  corresponded 
to  the  Resurrection,  and  displays  itself  as  the 
second  moving  cause  of  the  attitude  to  Christ 
which  we  find  taken  up  by  the  infant  Church,  was 
the  experience  of  Pentecost,  described  as  the  out- 

g)uring  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Fundamental  as  the 
esurrection  was,  it  did  not  stand  alone  as  a  basal 
fact  on  which  the  faith  and  life  of  the  young  Church 
were  built ;  nor  is  it  possible  to  explain  what  fol- 
lowed in  the  development  of  life  or  thought  from 
the  Resurrection  by  itself.  That  was  succeeded 
after  a  short  interval  by  Pentecost  and  the  indue- 
ment  with  spiritual  power  of  those  who  believed  in 
•lesus  as  the  glorified  Messiah.  To  the  fact  of  the 
Resurrection  was  added  the  experience  of  a  Spirit- 
filled  life  ;  and  quite  apart  from  any  questions  as 
to  the  form  in  which  this  experience  manifested 
itself,  it  is  to  this  highly  intensified  and  concen- 
trated perception  of  God's  activity  in  the  lives  and 
wills  of  those  who  submit  themselves  to  Him  in 
Jesus  Christ,  working  on  the  complex  of  facts  il- 
luminated by  the  Resurrection,  that  the  unfolding 
of  systematic  Christian  thinking  is  due.  As  to  the 
narrative  of  Pentecost  itself,  it  was  only  natural, 
in  view  of  the  character  of  the  phenomena,  that 
tradition  should  seize  on  the  externally  marvellous 
and  enhance  it,  to  the  obscuring  of  the  really  sig- 
nificant. And  in  particular  the  tradition  as  it 
reached  St.  Luke  was  so  shaped  either  before  him 
or  by  him  that  the  central  feature  in  the  account 
(2*""),  the  declaration  by  men  of  many  different 
nationalities,  'we  do  hear  them  speaking  in  our 
tongues  the  mighty  works  of  God,'  differs  from 
every  other  item  of  evidence  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  glossolalia  or  '  speaking  with  tongues.'  That 
this  phenomenon,  the  speaking  with  '  new '  or 
strange  tongues,  was  a  familiar  one  in  the  first  gen- 
eration of  Christians,  we  know  from  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  ;  that  the  first  manifestation  of  it  is  what 
St.  Luke  is  describing  we  may  be  sure ;  but  inas- 
much as  a  marked  characteristic  of  glossolalia  in 
all  other  contexts  is  incomprehensibility  snA  the 
necessity  for  interpretation,  we  may  take  it  that 
on  the  first  occasion  also  the  phenomenon  was  that 
of  ecstatic  speech,  not  comprehended  by  the  hearers 
except  in  the  sense  that,  being  infected  by  the  like 
enthusiasm,  they  felt  themselves  in  mental  com- 
munication with  the  speakers,  though  they  did  not 
rmderstand  their  words.  The  essential  thing  is  that 
something  occurred  of  a  public  and  striking  descrip- 
tion which  not  only  called  for  explanation,  but 
justified    St.   Peter  in   seeing  in    the   experience 


184         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


shared  by  him  and  so  many  others  the  fulfilment 
of  Christ  s  words  about '  the  promise  of  the  Father ' 
(1*;  cf.  Lk  24'«»,  Gal  3"). 

The  fulfilment  of  this  promise  became  the  second 
moment  in  the  development  of  a  deeper  and  richer 
Christology.  On  the  one  hand,  it  involved,  and  so 
revealed,  a  relation  between  God  and  '  His  Christ ' 
of  a  difierent  quality  from  what  had  hitherto  been 
recognized.  That  relation  had  been  conceived  as 
something  due  to  positive  choice,  as  external, 
official ;  and  the  Spirit  was  bestowed  on  Jesus  as 
part  of  His  Messianic  equipment.  The  Christian 
experience  of  Christ  sets  up  a  process  at  the  end  of 
which  we  find  St.  Paul  boldly  identifying  Christ 
and  the  Spirit,  and  the  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
interpreting  the  parting  words  of  Jesus  in  terms  of 
that  identification.  And  the  efi'ect  of  this  identi- 
fication on  the  Christology  is  to  provide  an  explana- 
tion of  the  attitude  of  believers  to  the  Risen  Lord 
in  their  recognizing  Him  as  united  to  God  in  a  re- 
lation which  was  not  official  but  inherent,  not 
mediated  in  time  but  eternal  and  unchangeable. 
And  once  more  the  stage  in  this  process  which  we 
find  reflected  in  the  Acts  is  the  intermediate  one. 
The  glorified  Messiah  is  no  longer  the  subject  of 
the  Spirit's  influence  (as  in  the  SjTioptic  Gospels), 
nor  is  He  as  yet  identified  with  it ;  but  he  is  the 
instrument  and  channel  of  the  Spirit's  bestowal. 
That  bestowal  is  conditioned  by  faith  in  Him  (2^), 
by  obedience  to  Him  (5^^).  On  the  other  hand,  the 
bestowal  of  the  Spirit,  which  was  afterwards  recog- 
nized and  described  as  'the  Spirit  of  unity  and 
brotherly  love,'  involved  and  revealed  a  new  re- 
lationship between  all  those  who  received  the  gift 
from  Christ.  That  is  the  real  meaning  of  Pentecost 
so  far  as  it  has  been  identified  with  the  birth  of  the 
Church.  We  are  told  of  the  3000  souls  that  were 
added  to  the  infant  community  that  they  were 
steadfastly  adhering  to  the  teaching  of  the  apostles, 
and  to  the  fellowship  (Koivuvla),  the  breaking  of 
bread,  and  the  prayer  {2*^).  We  have  here  a  new 
word  for  a  new  thing,  the  new  consciousness  of 
sacred  union  connecting  the  believers,  knitting 
them  together  in  what  St.  Paul  afterwards  called 
the  Body  of  Christ.  Hort  (Christian  Ecclesia,  1897, 
p.  44)  understands  by  Koivuvla  here  *  conduct  ex- 
pressive of  and  resulting  from  the  strong  sense  of 
fellowship  with  the  other  members  of  the  brother- 
hood.' Pentecost  had  for  its  most  striking  result 
the  creation  of  the  sense  of  brotherhood  within  a 
body  of  men  and  women  whose  common  bond  was 
not  only  a  common  allegiance  to  Christ,  but  com- 
mon participation  in  His  Spirit.  No  doubt  the 
extreme  form  which  the  principle  at  first  assumed 
— community  of  goods — proved  unworkable,  and 
was  of  temporary  duration  ;  but  underlying  it  we 
see  a  whole  series  of  new  ethical  ideals  in  opera- 
tion— mutual  service,  mutual  self-sacrifice,  the 
merging  of  the  individual  in  the  corporate  whole, 
'  love  of  the  brethren'  as  a  governing  motive  of  the 
new  life. 

And  with  the  consciousness  of  a  new  binding 
fellowship  created  by  Christ,  there  came  a  new 
conscience.  The  new  relations  involved  new  re- 
sponsibilities, the  possibility  of  new  oftences,  new 
sins.  The  earliest  case  of  sin  which  is  recorded 
within  the  new  community  was  in  fact  sin  against 
the  community  itself  and  the  principle  of  brother- 
hood ;  and  it  was  recognized  and  dealt  with  as  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost. 

These  ethical  consequences  of  the  bestowal  of 
the  Spirit  which  was  traced  to  the  action  of  the 
Risen  Christ  had  far-reaching  results  not  only  in 
the  life  but  in  the  thought  of  the  Church,  l^ar- 
ticipation  in  the  Spirit  was  the  privilege,  as  it 
was  the  mark,  of  every  true  Christian.  The  act 
of  believing  on  Jesus,  the  surrender  to  Him  which 
found  symbolic  expression  in  baptism,  was  followed 


by  a  great  religious  experience,  the  eflfect  of  which 
was  manifold.  Incorporated  in  a  community  which 
had  died  to  earthly  ambition,  whether  personal  or 
national,  and  which  was  permeated  with  a  holy 
enthusiasm  towards  Him  who  was  felt  to  be  the 
source  of  its  life,  and  with  genuine  love  to  '  all  the 
brethren,'  the  individual  became  conscious  of  a  new 
'life,'  ethical  and  religious;  and  he  saw  in  Jesus 
the  Christ,  the  Founder  and  Pioneer  of  that  life. 
Conscious  that  it  was  as  moved  by  the  proclama- 
tion of  that  Messiah  crucified  but  risen  tliat  he, 
repenting  and  turning  to  God,  had  found  peace  of 
conscience,  deliverance  from  fear  of  the  wrath,  he 
hailed  in  Christ  a  aur-np,  and  connected  Him  with 
the  great  experience  of  &<p€<ns  rdv  afjMpTiQv.  The 
connexions  and  inijilications  of  these  experiences 
and  convictions  were  still  undeveloped.  But  the 
motive  power  and  the  material  for  the  development 
were  there.  The  influence  of  the  Spirit  realized 
from  day  to  day  alike  in  the  individual  and  in  the 
corporate  life,  and  in  the  inter-action  of  the  two, 
meant  that  not  only  were  the  disciples  secure  of 
salvation  in  the  future  ;  they  had  it  now.  The 
Kingdom  was  theirs  in  both  senses.  It  belonged 
to  them  as  an  inheritance  ;  it  was  already  in  their 
possession.  They  were  on  the  way  to  St.  Paul's 
great  discovery,  '  The  kingdom  of  heaven  consists 
in  .  .  .  righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in  the 
Holy  Ghost'  (Ro  141^).  And  to  Him,  to  whom 
they  traced  the  bestowal  of  the  best  they  had  ever 
been  led  to  hope  for  from  God,  and  also  the  revela- 
tion and  bestowal  of  gifts  such  as  '  had  not  entered 
into  the  heart  of  man  to  conceive,'  they  lifted  their 
hearts  as  hitherto  they  had  done  only  to  God 
Himself. 

II.  The  Christology  of  the  sub-primitive 
COitSf  UNITY. — The  records,  scanty  though  they 
are,  thus  provide  sufficient  evidence  to  show  that 
most,  if  not  all,  of  the  chief  elements  in  later 
Christology  were  already  present,  at  least  in  germ, 
within  the  consciousness  of  the  primitive  com- 
munity. From  the  year  A.D.  50  or  thereabouts 
we  are  able  to  trace  the  development  of  these 
elements  in  Epistles  from  various  hands.  But  the 
lines  of  development  are  not  continuous.  Although 
there  are  doubtless  lines  of  cross-connexion,  e.g. 
between  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter,  between  St.  Paul 
and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  it  is  more  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  historical  situation  to  regard 
them  as  radiating  from  the  common  centre  of 
primitive  thought.  Arranging  these  lines  in  the 
order  of  James,  the  Apocalypse,  Peter,  Paul, 
Hebrews,  John,  we  find  an  increasing  measure, 
not  of  divergence  from  the  primitive  type,  but  of 
originality  and  penetration  m  the  analysis  of  the 
convictions  which  were  common  to  them  all.  Some 
at  least  of  these  lines  appear  to  be  focused  again 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  along  with  some  which  turn 
back  independently  to  the  original  base. 

A  broad  comparison  between  these  various  types 
of  Christian  thought  which  may  be  described  as 
sub-primitive  shows  that  the  characteristic  which 
distinguishes  the  Pauline  from  all  the  other  types 
is  not  primarily  a  distinction  in  respect  of  doctrine 
in  general  or  of  Christology  in  particular.  It  is  a 
distinction  in  the  aspects  of  religious  experience 
which  are  respectively  emphasized.  In  neither 
case  is  the  emphasis  an  exclusive  one ;  that  is  to 
say,  it  must  not  be  taken  as  excluding  the  aspect 
which  is  not  emphasized.  But,  while  for  St. 
Paul  the  dominating  interest  in  Christological 
reflexion  lies  in  the  explanation  of,  and  preparation 
for,  the  ethical  union  between  believers  and  their 
Lord,  for  St.  Peter  and  the  others  Christological 
reflexion  runs  on  more  concrete  lines,  developing 
the  thought  of  Christ  as  external  to  men,  as 
Preacher  of  Righteousness,  as  Example,  as  Priest, 
as  Authority.     Ultimately  the  distinction  depends 


CHKIST,  CHEISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY         185 


upon  the  place  assigned  by  St.  Paul  to  the  Tvev/M 
and  to  the  category  of  ryevfiariKSs.  This  subtle 
but  indubitable  difference  of  atmosphere  has  to  be 
steadily  borne  in  mind.  To  it  may  be  due  not  a 
few  apparent  divergences  of  expression,  while  on 
the  other  hand  apparent  correspondences  of  lan- 
guage may  represent  real  distinction  of  thought. 

1.  The  Epistle  of  James. — It  is  hardly  possible 
to  speak  of  the  Christology  of  an  Epistle  in  which 
the  word  Xp«<rros  occurs  only  twice  (1^  2^).  But  it 
is  to  be  noted  that  in  both  places  the  writer  gives 
the  full  title  tov  Kvpiov  iinwv  'Irtaov  'KpurroD,  that  in 
1^  he  presents  himself  as  in  the  same  sense  8oD\os 
of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  that  in  2^  he  adds  to  the 
titlQ  the  striking  appellation  t^s  Sdfi/s  (so  Mayor, 
adloc.,  following  Bengel).  To  this  there  may  be 
a  parallel  in  2  P  H"  (cf:  also  Col  1=",  Ro  9^,  Jn  1")  ; 
and  in  view  of  the  prevailingly  Judaic  tone  of  the 
Epistle  there  may  be  an  allusion  to  Christ  as  the 
Shekinah  (cf.  1  S  4=^,  Ps  78^).  In  2^  {^\a<T<fn}novffii> 
t6  KoXdv  6vofia  t6  ^xtJcXTj^^r  i<f  vfidi)  there  is  probably 
a  reference  to  the  name  of  Christ  as  used  in  bap- 
tism (cf.  Ac  2^),  and  in  5",  whether  tov  Kvpiov 
should  stand  in  the  text  or  not,  a  reference  to  the 
same  name  as  the  secret  of  prevailing  prayer.  If 
we  add  5^,  '  The  Parousia  of  the  Lord  is  at  hand,' 
and  couple  with  it  the  phrase  in  the  following 
verse,  '  Behold,  the  Judge  is  at  the  door,'  we  have 
probably  exhausted  the  references  to  Christ.  But 
the  fact  that  the  writer  in  the  same  context  and 
frequently  elsewhere  puts  Kvpios=Q€6s  must  be 
allowed  due  weight,  and  similarly  it  is  to  be  noted 
how  in  5*  the  '  Second  Coming  is  equated  ^vith 
the  old  object  of  expectation,  the  Kingdom  of 
God. 

The  Christology  which  is  suggested  rather  than 
defined  in  the  Epistle  is  lacking  in  several  of  the 
details  which  appear  even  in  that  of  the  primitive 
community,  most  notably  perhaps  in  all  reference 
to  the  Holy  Spirit ;  but  it  is  wholly  consistent 
with  it,  and  the  inadequacy  of  its  expression  is 
probably  due  rather  to  the  character  of  the  docu- 
ment than  to  any  defect  in  the  writer's  views  as 
compared  with  those,  e.g.,  of  St.  Peter. 

2.  The  Apocalypse  of  John. — It  is  best  to  con- 
sider the  Apocalypse  of  John  at  this  point,  be- 
cause its  Christology  also  represents  the  Chris- 
tology of  the  primitive  community,  not  developed 
by  intellectual  analysis,  or  even  through  the 
interpretation  of  Christian  experience,  but  ex- 
panded through  the  emotional  magnification  of  the 
heavenly  Christ.  In  no  book  in  the  NT  do  devo- 
tion to,  and  adoration  of,  Christ,  and  recognition 
of  His  participation  in  the  glory  and  authority  of 
the  Father,  find  such  copious,  such  exalted,  ex- 
pression. Yet  the  forms  m  which  this  expression 
IS  cast  are  for  the  most  part  not  original.  On  a 
much  larger  scale  than  by  the  primitive  community, 
so  far  as  our  records  show,  tlie  OT  has  been  laid 
under  contribution  ;  so  also  has  the  literature  of 
the  Interval.  Attributes  and  functions,  descrip- 
tions and  imagery  which  had  played  their  part  in 
setting  forth  the  majesty  and  the  Almighty  power 
of  God,  are  gathered  from  all  available  sources  and 
attached  to  the  Person  of  the  heavenly  Christ. 

Characteristic  of  the  whole  book  is  the  repre- 
sentation of  Christ  in  the  opening  vision  (1^*), 
where  He  appears  as  the  *  one  like  unto  a  son  of 
man '  of  the  Danielle  vision,  but  the  details  of  His 
appearance  are  some  of  those  which  in  that  earlier 
scene  are  attributed  to  the  '  Ancient  of  Days.' 
Divine  titles  are  ascribed  to  Him.  as  '  Lord  of 
lords,  and  King  of  kings'  (17"  19^°),  and  Divine 
functions,  in  the  searching  of  heart  and  reins  (2®  ; 
cf.  Ps  7*),  and  a  share  both  in  the  throne  of  God 
(22'  'the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb')  and  in 
the  worship  paid  to  God,  even  the  worship  paid  by 
angels  (5").     He  holds  the  keys  of  Hades  and  of 


death  (1'*),  which  according  to  Jewish  tradition 
was  one  of  the  prerogatives  of  the  Almighty.  It 
is  before  His  wrath  that  men  are  to  tremble  in  the 
Day  of  Judgment  (6'®- '"),  and  He  is  to  come  again 
in  power  and  glory  to  judge  the  world  and  to  save 
His  people  (1^  14^*^-  22*').  The  throne  on  which 
He  has  taken  His  place  is  His  Father's  throne  (3*^), 
and  to  Him  He  stands  in  a  relation  of  unique  son- 
ship  (1®),  while  at  the  same  time  it  is  from  His 
Father  that  He  receives  His  power  (2^),  and  He 
is  made  to  speak  of  Him  as  '  my  God '  (3-  *^). 

This  antithetical  emphasis  upon  the  Divine  honour 
and  dignity  assigned  lo  Christ  and  the  ideas  of 
humility,  submission,  and  suffering  which  are  also 
connected  with  Him  are  vividly  brought  out  by 
the  fact  that  it  is  under  the  title  of  'the  Lamb' 
that  many  of  the  highest  prerogatives  are  assigned 
to  Him.  This  is  indeed  the  most  characteristic 
appellation  in  the  book,  and  occurs  some  28  times. 
He  is  '  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world'  (13^),  and  even  now  appears  as  one  'that 
has  been  slain '  (5*-  ^^) ;  but  it  is  also  as  Lamb  that 
He  receives  the  worship  of  Heaven  (5"-  "),  that  He 
takes  His  place  by  the  side  of  God,  and  opens  the 
seals  of  the  Book  of  Destiny.  It  is  '  in  the  blood 
of  the  Lamb '  that  the  saints  have  '  washed  their 
robes  and  made  them  clean'  (7^*  22"),  or,  by 
another  figure,  it  is  with  His  blood  that  He  has 
purchased  unto  Grod  {dyopd^eip  ;  cf.  Gal  3'^)  '  men  of 
every  tribe'  and  nation  (5^;  cf.  14'-*).  On  the 
other  hand,  the  name  '  which  no  one  knoweth  but 
he  himself,'  'Word  of  Grod'  {6  \6yos  toC  deov,  19^), 
is  not  further  applied  or  expanded,  and,  though  it 
may  mark  a  line  of  connexion  between  the  Apoca- 
lypse and  the  Fourth  Gospel,  it  cannot  be  said  to 
throw  any  clear  light  on  the  Christology  of  this 
book. 

There  is  a  class  of  passages  which  appears  to 
claim  for  Christ  a  life  co-eternal  with  that  of  God. 
'  I  am  the  first  and  the  last  and  the  living  One ' — 6 
fujj'  (!"•  1^) ;  'I  am  the  Alpha  and  Omega,  the  first 
and  the  last,  the  beginning  and  the  end '  (22^ ;  cf. 
21*) ;  Avith  which  must  be  compared  Is  44®,  where 
Jahweh  says,  '  I  am  the  first  and  the  last,  and 
beside  me  there  is  no  God,'  and  Rev  1*,  where 
the  same  majestic  self -description  is  ascribed  to  the 
Almighty.  Such  language  may  well  seem  to  impl}' 
the  pre-existence  of  Christ ;  yet  the  predicate  in 
that  form  is  probably  to  be  regarded  rather  as  a 
necessary  inference  from  the  language  of  the 
writer,  who  carries  the  equating  of  Christ  with 
God  to  the  furthest  point  short  of  making  Them 
eternally  equal.  Christ  is  still  '  the  beginning  of 
the  creation  of  God '  [i]  dpxv  '"^  (crurewj  toD  deov,  3"), 
by  which  is  probably  to  be  understood  (cf.  Col  P" 
apxh,  irputTOTOKOi  tQv  veKpCiv  •  also  Col  1**)  that  He 
Himself  was  part  of  the  m'fftj. 

The  Apocalypse  of  John  as  a  whole  leaves  the 
impression  of  a  conception  of  Christ  so  exalted,  so 
majestical  in  the  history  of  mankind,  that  it  could 
not  be  carried  further  without  either  impinging 
on  the  writer's  monotheism  or  demanding  the  em- 
ployment of  metaphysical  categories  which  were 
beyond  his  range  of  thought.  It  has  been  main- 
tained by  some  {e.g.  Bousset)  that  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  Christ  as  Alpha  and  Omega  the  writer 
goes  beyond  St.  Paul,  and  actually  represents  the 
furthest  point  in  the  development  of  Christology 
within  the  NT.  B.  Weiss  says  that  '  the  fact  that 
the  Messiah  is  an  originally  divine  Being  {gottliches 
JF&seK) is  taken  for  granted'  {Bib.  Theol.  of^  T,  Eng. 
tr.,  1882-83,  vol.  ii.  p.  172).  But  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  this  outgoing  of  St.  Paul  by  the  Apocalypse 
is  not  more  apparent  than  real.  'The  impression  is 
due  partly  to  the  continuous  occupation  of  the 
authors  mind  with  the  same  theme.  Christ  is  the 
Hero  of  every  scene  in  the  drama  of  the  end.  There 
is  none  of  that  wide  sweep  of  interest  in  things 


186         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


both  human  and  Divine  which  marks  the  letters  of 
St.  Paul.  It  is  due  also  in  part  to  the  natural  ten- 
dency of  the  modern  reader  to  accept  as  evidence 
of  a  theory  or  conception  of  Christ's  Person  what 
for  the  author  was  only  concrete  imaj^ery  gathered 
from  many  sources  to  set  forth  ana  enhance  the 
<:;\oTy  of  his  Lord.  It  may  indeed  be  doubted  whether 
he  held  any  proposition  regarding  Christ  which  was 
not  inclucled  in  the  convictions  of  the  primitive 
community.  All  that  he  has  to  say  was  involved 
in  the  tacit  assertion  that  Christ  is  an  object  of 
worship  and  a  hearer  of  prayer.  And  with  all  the 
Divine  honours  and  attributes  which  he  lavishes  on 
tlie  Glorified  Messiah  he  never  loses  sight  of  His 
identity  with  the  man  Jesus.  After  the  title  '  the 
Lamb '  he  uses  with  most  frequency  tlie  simple 
name  '  Jesus '  (nine  times).  The  phenomenon  was 
so  noticeable  that  in  several  passages  inferior  MSS 
have  inserted  the  word  '  Clirist,'  which  copyists 
felt  to  be  missing.  It  was  '  for  the  testimony  of 
Jesus '  that  John  was  in  Patmos  (I*  ;  cf.  121^  191") ; 
it  was  with  the  blood  of  '  the  martyrs  {or  witnesses) 
of  Jesus '  that  Rome  was  intoxicated  ;  and  in  22'" 
the  heavenly  Christ  speaks  of  Himself  by  this 
human  name — '  I  Jesus  have  sent  my  messenger,' 
Avhile  the  response  to  the  message  with  which  the 
book  closes  addresses  the  Risen  Christ  in  the  same 
form,  reminiscent  of  '  the  days  of  his  flesh ' — '  Even 
so,  come,  Lord  Jesus.'  The  Apocalypse,  therefore, 
is  no  exception  to  the  rule  that,  so  far  from  being 
accompanied  by  a  loosening  of  the  tie  between 
Christ  and  the  historical  Jesus,  the  increasing  em- 
phasis on  His  Divine  significance  for  the  world  goes 
along  with  the  same  or  even  clearer  assertion  of 
the  oneness  of  Jesus  and  the  Christ.  The  Christ 
they  worshipped  was  the  Jesus  whom  they  had 
known. 

3.  The  Christology  of  St.  Paul.— The  material  for 
Christology  which  was  already  present  in  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  primitive  community,  or  within 
its  grasp,  received  its  fullest  and  richest  develop- 
ment at  the  hands  of  St.  Paul.  The  task  of  the 
student  is  to  do  equal  justice  to  what  he  received 
from,  and  shared  with,  those  who  were  before  him 
in  Christ,  and  to  those  elements  which  were  original 
with  him.  This  will  supply  the  right  answer  to  a 
question  whicii  has  become  a  living  issue  for  modern 
Christology — Is  the  Pauline  Christology  a  legiti- 
mate and  necessary  development  of  the  relevant 
material  provided  oy  the  contents  of  the  Gospels 
and  the  experience  of  the  Church,  or  does  it  repre- 
sent a  new  departure,  a  conception  of  Christ  so 
distinct  from,  and  disparate  to,  what  had  gone  be- 
fore, that  it  must  be  lield  to  rest  not  on  the  revela- 
tion of  Jesus,  but  on  the  speculation  of  the  Apostle  ? 
There  has  been  for  some  time  a  tendency  in  one 
school  of  NT  criticism  to  exaggerate  beyond  all 
reason  the  distinction  between  Christianity  accord- 
ing to  the  Gospels  and  Christianity  according  to 
St.  Paul,  and  to  do  so  by  minimizing  or  eliminat- 
ing what  is  '  Pauline '  in  the  Gospels  and  by  over- 
emphasizing the  '  Pauline '  elements  in  St.  Paul. 
Whatever  is  distinctive  in  St.  Paul — his  'Calvin- 
ism,' his  '  sacramentarianism,'  his  'mysticism,'  his 
'  eschatology ' — is  apt  to  be  isolated  and  exaggerated, 
with  the  result,  if  not  the  intention,  of  dillerentiat- 
ing  him  more  emphatically  from  his  Master.  It 
needs  to  be  borne  in  mina  tliat  we  are  working 
here  in  a  highly  charged  electric  field,  where  men 
of  all  schools  of  thought  are  in  danger  of  being 
swayed  even  unconsciously  l)y  a  general  jnirinj/i- 
cium. 

In  examining  the  evidence  as  to  St.  Paul's  con- 
ception of  Ciirist,  certain  general  considerations 
have  to  be  kept  in  view.  It  is  now  commonly 
agreed  that  it  is  a  mistake  to  regard  St.  Paul  as 
one  who  was  constructing  or  had  constructed  a 
system  of  dogmatic  theology.     We  are  probably 


nearer  the  truth  if  we  think  of  him  as  a  man 
supremely  interested  in  the  ^iractical  conduct  of 
life,  whose  mind  was  speculative  in  the  sense  that 
he  was  not  content  to  register  phenomena,  but 
must  seek  for  their  relations  and  their  causes,  and 
that  he  constantly  referred  details  to  their  correla- 
tive principles.  That  he  was  moved  to  this  by 
the  impulse  of  a  practical  demand  rather  than 
of  an  intellectual  necessity  is  plainly  suggested  by 
what  we  can  gather  concerning  his  '  missionary 
preaching.'  Tlie  Epi-stles  to  the  Thessalonians 
rurnish  evidence  as  to  its  comparatively  elementary 
character  up  till  A.D.  52.  And  it  is  within  the 
last  ten  years  of  his  life  that  we  are  to  place  those 
Epistles  in  which  his  distinctive  theological  ideas 
are  developed  and  exposed,  Avithin  six  of  these  last 
ten  years  that  we  place  the  great  group  of  Epistles 
in  which  they  find  their  classical  and  all  but  final 
expression.  Everything  points  to  the  fact  that  the 
specifically  Pauline  combinations  or  inferences  were 
due  to  the  stimulus  of  specific  situations  or  to  the 
demands  created  by  definite  opposition.  St.  Paul's 
mind  '  is  logical  enough  when  his  spiritual  experience 
demands  it,  but  a  large  part  of  his  afiirmations 
regarding  the  religious  life  and  destiny  of  men  is 
thrown  off',  as  occasion  prompts,  in  vague  hints,  in 
outbursts  of  intense  spiritual  emotion,  in  pictures 
set  within  the  framework  of  his  inherited  training, 
in  arguments  devised  to  meet  the  needs  of  a  par- 
ticular church  or  a  particular  group  of  converts' 
(H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  St.  PauVs  Conceptions  of  the 
Last  Things,  1904,  p.  22).  It  is  impossible  to  separ- 
ate the  practical  and  ethical  from  the  doctrinal,  in 
the  interests  of  the  Apostle  ;  and  only  imperfect 
success  can  attend  any  attempt  to  study  Pauline  con- 
ceptions by  isolating  their  intellectual  expression. 

(1)  Sources  for  Paulinism.— For  our  informa- 
tion regarding  the  thought  and  teaching  of  tiie 
Apostle  we  are  almost  wholly  dependent  on  his  own 
letters.  From  the  Acts  we  learn  the  details  of  his 
conversion,  the  course  and  method  of  his  missionary 
activity,  but  concerning  his  teaching  only  what 
may  be  gathered  Avith  caution  from  his  speeches 
reported  there.  The  Letters  are  conveniently 
divided  into  four  groups. 

(a)  The  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  written 
from  Corinth  some  twenty  years  after  his  conver- 
sion, in  which  we  have  an  echo  and  some  record  of 
that  mission-preaching  wiiicli  had  been  the  task  of 
St.  Paul's  life  since  that  event.  (6)  The  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians  may  possibly  be  earlier  still,  though 
by  most  authorities  it  is  grouped  with  those  to  the 
Romans  and  the  Corinthians,  written  some  five 
years  later,  in  which  we  find  the  Apostle  at  the 
height  of  his  intellectual  energy,  stimulated  to  the 
discovery  and  enunciation  alike  of  the  relations 
and  of  the  foundations  of  those  truths  which  had 
formed  the  centre  of  his  gospel,  (c)  A  third  group, 
commonly  known  as  the  Epistles  of  the  Imprison- 
ment— those  to  the  '  Ephesians,'  the  Colossians, 
and  the  Philippians — belongs  probably  to  A.D.  62- 
63,  and  shows  the  Apostle  responding  to  hostile 
stimulus  of  a  diflerent  kind,  and  carrying  yet 
further  certain  of  the  lines  of  thought  laid  down  in 
earlier  Epistles,  (d)  There  is  a  fourth  group  of 
Epistles,  that  known  as  the  '  Pastorals,'  addressed 
to  Timothy  and  Titus,  written,  if  they  were  written 
by  St.  Paul,  after  he  had  been  released  from  his 
imprisonment.  The  much-disputed  question  of 
their  authenticity  is  hardly  material  to  our  present 
purpose,  seeing  that  the  l*astoraIs  have  little  addi- 
tional to  contribute  to  Pauline  Christology.  When 
Christ  is  referred  to  as  the  '  one  mediator  between 
God  and  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus '  (1  Ti  2*),  He 
is  presented  under  an  aspect  which  does  not  appear 
in  St.  Paul,  though  it  does  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews;  but  in  general  the  Christology  of  the 
Pastorals  is   important  rather   as  a  criterion   of 


CHRIST,  CHEISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHEISTOLOGY  187 


tijeir  aurhorship  than  as  adding  material  for  the 
Pauline  Christology. 

The  convictions  of  St.  Paul  regarding  Christ 
began  at  the  same  point  as  tliose  ot  the  primitive 
community.  Through  a  like  experience  of  Je^ns 
as  Living,  Risen,  and  Glorified,  he  was  seized  by 
the  conviction  that  He  was  the  Messiah.  In  his 
ca.se,  however,  tlie  personal  recollection  of  what 
Jesus  had  been  and  tauglit,  of  the  Messianic  claim 
made  bj-  Him  and  for  Him,  was  replaced  by  the 
testimony  of  those  disciples  who  h&d  already  be- 
lieved on  Him,  and  had  sealed  their  belief  by  stead- 
fastness under  persecution.  That  doubtless  gave  the 
content  of  St.  Paul's  belief;  what  created  it  was 
the  vision  of  Christ  as  risen :  '  la-st  of  all  he  was 
seen  "of  me  also '  ( 1  Co  15*).  To  St.  Paul  also,  as 
to  the  earlier  disciples,  came  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
(Ac  9^").  And  '  straightway  in  the  synagomies  he 
proclaimed  Jesns,  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God '  (9**), 
».e.  tliat  He  is  the  Messiah,  the  phrase  having  still 
its  Messianic  significance  (cf.  Jn  1^*),  and  finding  its 
equivalent  in  v.^  '  proving  that  this  is  the  Christ.' 
It  was  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  OT  that  he  too 
sought  for  the  proof  (Ac  18^),  as  also  for  proof  of 
the  further  affirmation  that  it  behoved  the  Christ 
to  surter  (17*).  Like  Peter  and  like  Stephen,  but 
by  a  ditierent  series  of  steps,  he  traces  the  history 
of  Israel  doAvn  to  the  manifestation  of  Jesus  ( 13'"*-). 
He  preached  to  Jews  and  Greeks  alike  '  that  they 
should  repent  and  turn  to  God,  doing  works  worthy 
of  repentance '  (26®) ;  moreover,  he  also  connected 
the  promise  of  forgiveness  with  the  revelation  of 
Christ  (13^),  and  recognized  in  Jesus  One  whom 
God  had  '  appointed  to  judge  the  world  in  righteous- 
ness' (17").  And  to  this  Exalted  Christ  St.  Paul 
also  in  the  Acts  gives  the  pregnant  title  Kvpios. 
This  is  specially  significant  in  his  speech  to  the 
Elders  at  Miletus,  in  which  there  is  a  note  of 
personal  attachment  and  devotion  to  the  One  he 
there  describes  (20^*-  *i-  **-  S"-  ssj  which  is  not  struck 
elsewhere  in  the  Acts,  common  as  the  title  itself 
is  throughout.  This  prepares  us  for  the  evidence 
of  the  Thessalonian  Epistles,  and  for  the  subse- 
quent development  of  the  implication  of  the  name. 
There  is  thus  scattered  up  and  down  the  later 
chapters  of  Acts  evidence  as  to  the  character  of  St. 
Paul's  preacliing,  which  suggests  that  it  included 
the  same  elements  as  are  found  in  that  of  the  Jeru- 
salem Church  ;  and  there  is  so  far  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  it  contained  any  elements  peculiar  to 
himself,  with  the  one  important  exception  that  he 
claimed  for  the  Gentile  as  Gentile,  and  not  as  Gen- 
tile become  Jew,  the  full  privileges  of  Christian 
salvation.  And  again  this  corresponds  with  what 
may  be  gathered  from  the  Thessalonian  Epistles. 

(2)  CHEISTOLOGY  OF  EPISTLES  TO  THE  THESSAL- 
ONIAN'S. — These  Epistles  are  too  commonly  studied 
almost  exclusively  for  the  light  they  throw  on 
Pauline  eschatology  ;  but  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  directly  eschatological  passage  occupies  only  one- 
seventh  of  the  First  Letter,  while  before  it  is  reached 
the  letter  has  passed  what  looks  like  an  intended 
close  (1  Th  3""^),  and  in  the  earlier  portion  the  re- 
ferences to  the  JParousia  are  brief  and  wanting  in 
elaboration.  Nor  are  the  proportion  and  emphasis 
ven^  diflerent  in  the  Second  Epistle. 

The  really  striking  feature  of  these  Epistles  is 
the  equal  emphasis  on  Christ  the  Lord  and  God 
the  Father  as  severally  and  jointly  the  source  of 
all  Christian  experience,  and  the  ground  of  all 
Christian  hope.  In  the  opening  verse  of  each 
Epistle,  Christ  and  the  Father  are  combined  as  the 
sphere  in  which  the  Church  at  Thessalonica  has 
it«  being.  In  1  Th  3^^  the  words  '  our  God  and 
Father  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ '  appear  as  the 
subject  of  a  verb  in  the  singular  number,  express- 
ing a  prayer  that  the  Apostle  may  be  guided  on 
his  way  (cf.  2  Th  2'^).     It  is  from  Christ  no  less 


than  from  God  that  the  Apostle  claims  to  have 
received  his  commission  (1  Th  2*),  and  it  is  '  through 
the  Lord  Jesus '  that  he  utters  his  precepts  (1  Th 
41  [cf.  5>^],  2  Th  3«-  ").  And  though  Chnst  is  not 
in  these  Epistles  directly  referred  to  as  Judge,  it 
is  implied  that  in  the  work  of  Judgment  the  Son 
will  also  have  a  part  (1  Th  3''  4«  5*,  2  Th  1'  28). 

It  will  be  already  plain  that  6  Kvpun  is  the  con- 
stantly recurring  description  of  Christ ;  but,  more 
than  that,  it  is  used  only  of  Him.  For  the  phrase 
consecrated  by  OT  usa^e,  '  the  Lord  God,'  St.  Paul 
has  in  fact  sutetituted  'God  the  Father  and  the 
Lord.'  The  usage  of  various  names  for  Christ  in 
these  Epistles  has  been  examined  bv  G.  Milligan 
{St.  PauFs  Epp.  to  Thess.,  1908,  p.  *135)  with  the 
following  results.  The  human  name  'Jesus'  by 
itself  is  fotind  only  twice  (1  Th  1>«  4'*).  The  name 
'  Christ '  standing  alone  is  also  comparatively  rare, 
occurring  four  times  ('apostles  of  Christ,'  'gospel 
of  Christ,'  'dead  in  Christ,'  'patience  in  Christ'). 
The  combination  '  Christ  Jesus '  denoting  the 
Saviour  alike  in  His  official  and  in  His  personal 
cliaracter,  the  use  of  which  in  the  NT  is  confined  to 
St.  Paul,  occurs  twice.  On  the  other  hand,  K6pioi 
occurs  twenty-two  times  in  all,  eight  times  with, 
and  fotirteen  times  without,  the  article.  The  fact 
that  nearly  two-thirds  of  these  instances  are  anar- 
throus shows  how  completely  the  word  was  al- 
ready accepted  as  a  proper  name,  and  appropriated 
to  Christ. 

It  is  consistent  with  the  significance  we  have 
assigned  to  this  use  of  Ki-ptot  that  the  phrase  ^ 
rifiepa  toS  Kvpiov,  which  in  the  OT  means  '  the  Day 
of  Jahweh,'  is  employed  here  without  hesitation 
and  without  explanation  to  describe  the  day  of 
Christ's  return  in  judgment  (1  Th  5* ;  cf.  2  Th  2*). 
Of  like  significance  are  the  parallel  use  and  the 
interchange  of  'God'  and  'Lord,'  e.g.  1  Th  5** 
'  the  God  of  peace  himself,'  and  2  Th  3^^  '  the 
Lord  of  peace  himself ' ;  1  Th  1*  '  brethren  beloved 
of  God,'  and  2  Th  2i»  '  brethren  beloved  of  the 
Lord.'  These  phenomena  are  the  more  remark- 
able inasmuch  as  they  occur  in  Epistles  which 
otherwise  are  distinguished  for  an  unusually  per- 
sistent expression  of  what  may  be  called  'God- 
consciousness.'  It  is  not  so  much  a  doctrine  con- 
cerning God  that  forces  itself  on  the  attention,  as 
a  habit  of  referring  evervthing  to  '  God.'  It  is 
God  who  has  called  the  Ttessalonians  (I  Th  2"), 
the  gospel  of  God  that  they  have  received  (2'),  to 
(Jod  that  they  have  turned  from  idols  (1'),  faith 
toward  God  that  they  show  (V).  It  is  God  whose 
love  they  experience  (1*),  whose  rule  is  their 
supreme  authority  (4*  3^),  who  gives  them  the 
Holy  Spirit  (4*),  who  is  to  sanctify  them  wholly 
(5^),  who  is  to  bring  again  the  dead  (4^*).  All 
these  references  (and  they  are  not  exhaustive)  are 
in  the  First  Epistle ;  and  further  illustration  of 
the  same  characteristic  is  furnished  by  the  Second. 

It  is,  therefore,  in  letters  which  at  the  same 
time  testify  so  continuously  and  so  emphatically 
to  the  unchallenged  monotheism  of  the  Apostle 
that  we  find  equally  striking  evidence  that  even 
at  this  stage  he  assigned  to  Christ  rank,  dignity, 
authority,  and  sovereign  importance  for  religion, 
such  as  are  surpassed  in  none  of  his  later  writings. 
And  yet  it  cannot  be  said  that  in  any  essential 
partictdar  these  Epistles  carry  tis  beyond  the 
Christology  of  the  pre- Pauline  Church.  The  fact 
is  that  all,  or  nearly  all,  that  St.  Paul  ever  taught 
concerning  the  Person  of  Christ  is  involved  in  His 
'Lordship.' 

•The  confession  of  Christ's  Lordship  is  the  confearion  of  His 
Divinity.  There  is  no  doubt  that  to  Flaal  and  the  mass  of 
believers  the  Man  Christ  Jesus,  Risen  and  Exalted,  .  .  .  was 
the  object  of  worship.  In  Him  they  saw  God  manifested  in  a 
human  form.  In  His  influence  upon  them  they  perceived  the 
influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  Of  His  Divine  power  they  had 
the  most  convincing  evidence  in  the  consciooaiess  of  the  new 


188         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


life,  with  the  moral  strength  it  imparted,  which  He  had 
quiclcened  within  them.  .  .  .  The  ease  and  naturalness  with 
which  Paul  passes  from  the  thought  of  God  to  that  of  Christ 
shows  that  he  knew  of  no  other  God  save  the  God  who  was  one 
with  Christ  and  Christ  with  Him,  that  in  turning  in  faith  and 
prayer  to  Christ  he  was  conscious  he  was  drawing  near  to  God 
in  the  truest  way,  and  that  in  calling  on  God  be  was  calling  on 
Christ,  in  whom  alone  God  was  accessible  to  men '  (D.  Somer- 
ville,  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christ,  1897,  p.  146  and  144  n.). 

This  is  possibly  to  anticipate  the  results  of  the 
examination  of  the  other  Epistles,  but  only  in 
details.  The  central  fact  of  Pauline  Christology 
is  already  evident  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  viz.  that  while  betraying  no  sign  that  his 
monotheism  is  in  danger,  or  that  his  way  of  inter- 

Ereting  it  is  either  singular  or  calling,'  for  defence, 
e  gives  to  the  Exalted  Man,  Christ  Jesus,  the 
value  and  many  of  the  attributes  of  God. 

A  Messiah  who  is  Messiah  and  more,  One  whose 
function  it  is  to  save  from  the  wrath  that  is  im- 
pending, but  One  to  be  in  relation  with  whom  is 
to  have  found  already  the  basis  of  new  life  in  an 
ethical  sense,  the  condition  of  a  new  relation  to 
God,  and  One  who  therefore  draws  to  Himself 
faith,  obedience,  worship — that  is  in  briefest  form 
St.  Paul's  conception  of  Christ  as  set  forth  in 
these  Epistles.  In  subsequent  letters  St.  Paul 
analyzes  the  relation  of  Christ  to  God  and  of 
Christ  to  mankind,  which  this  conception  involves  ; 
but  nothing  can  justify  the  suggestion  that  this 
central  conception  was  built  up,  as  it  were,  out  of 
the  elements  into  which  it  could  subsequently  be 
resolved.  It  was  one  which  reached  St.  Paul 
whole  and  complete  at  the  crisis  of  his  conversion. 
That  there  was  some  preparation,  psychological 
and  even  intellectual,  for  that  transforming  ex- 
perience is  quite  possible,  though  St.  Paul  himself 
would  probably  have  denied  it.  But  that  it  can 
be  accounted  for  merely  as  the  result  of  any  sub- 
jective process  is  a  suggestion  quite  irreconcilable 
with  the  evidence.  We  have  the  concurrent  testi- 
mony of  St.  Paul  himself  (Gal  V^^- ;  cf.  2  Co  4«) 
tliat  at  the  moment  of  his  conversion  he  was 
atlame  with  persecuting  zeal  against  those  who 
believed  in  Jesus  as  Messiah,  and  of  Acts  (8"  9^^-), 
that  the  martyrdom  of  Steplien  was  followed  by 
an  outburst  of  calculated  fury  against  the  Chris- 
tian heretics.  And  the  revelation  of  the  Risen 
Christ  resulted  in  something  more  than  the  mere 
reversal  of  Saul's  opinion  regarding  Jesus,  and  the 
confession  that  He  was  indeed  the  Messiah  ;  it  re- 
sulted in  a  conversion  of  the  whole  man  so  com- 
plete that  the  change  of  opinion  which  was  its  in- 
tellectual expression  was  of  secondary  importance. 
There  was  an  ethical  change  which  demands  for 
its  explanation  a  religious  as  well  as  an  intellectual 
revolution  ;  and  the  explanation  is  that  from  the 
time  of  his  conversion  St.  Paul  found  in  Jesus  not 
only  Xpiards  but  KOpioi. 

Tlie  proof  of  this  ethical  change  lies  in  his  sub- 
sequent life  and  in  all  his  Epistles.  It  is  seen 
alilce  in  the  ideals  which  he  inculcates  and  in 
the  degree  in  which  he  himself  approximates  to 
these  ideals.  And  he  asserts  the  closest  causal 
connexion  between  the  qualities  of  this  new  life, 
life  of  this  quality,  and  Christ,  so  that  the  ethical 
experience  of  liimself  and  his  fellow-believers  has 
contributed  largely  to  his  Christology.  Already 
in  1  Thess.  (P)  we  find  the  triad  of  Christian 
virtues — faith,  love,  and  hope — recognized  as  being 
the  natural  fruit  of  being  '  in  Christ ' ;  and  Christ 
as  the  active  source  of  '  increase '  in  that  love 
wherewith  they  have  been  'taught of  God'  to  love 
one  another  (1  Th  3^^  4»),  In  1  Tlx  5  we  have  the 
picture  of  a  Christian  community  wherein  this 
'  love '  was  to  be  operative  in  curbing  the  unruly, 
in  comforting  those  of  little  spirit,  in  supporting 
the  weak,  in  showing  longsuflering  towards  all ; 
where  men   were  to   abstain  from  every  form  of 


evil,  and  to  hold  fast  rb  Ka\6v.  These  and  other 
etliical  ideals  for  the  common  life  receive  their 
sanction  in  tlie  conviction  that,  im  Christians, 
men  belong  '  not  to  the  night '  but  '  to  the  day  ' 
(5'- "),  i.e.  in  a  certain  sense  they  are  already  living 
in  the  light  of  the  world  to  come.  And  within 
tliis  series  of  precepts  lies  one  which  more  than 
anything  else  reveals  the  power  over  human  nature 
which  St.  Paul  a-ssigns  to  faith  in  Christ.  'At  all 
times  be  joyful  ;  pray  without  ceasing  ;  in  every 
circumstance  give  thanks.  For  this  is  what  God 
makes  known  to  you  in  Jesus  Christ  as  his  will.' 
A  trust  in  God  which  would  enable  men  to  accept 
everything  which  came  to  them  as  part  of  a 
Father's  will,  and  so  enable  them  in  every  circum- 
stance to  be  thankful,  to  be  free  fi'om  care — how- 
ever this  reached  St.  Paul  as  part  of  the  new  ideal, 
it  testifies  to  an  ethical  harmony  tetween  liim  and 
Jesus.  St.  Paul's  explanation  of  it  would  be,  '  It 
pleased  God  to  reveal  His  Son  in  me '  ;  and  again 
the  ethical  experience  must  be  taken  into  account 
in  the  development  of  his  Christology. 

(3)  The  developed  Christology  of  St.  Paul. 
— This  may  conveniently  be  studied  under  three 
aspects,  according  as  it  bears  upon  the  conception 
of  Christ :  (a)  as  He  now  is,  in  glory  ;  (6)  as  He 
was  upon  earth  ;  (c)  as  He  had  been  before  coming 
to  earth. 

A.  The  glorified  Christ. — St.  Paul's  faith  was  in 
a  living  Christ,  a  Being  who  was  continuously 
active  in  and  on  behalf  of  those  who  had  been  re- 
deemed to  God  through  Him,  whether  they  were 
regarded  as  individuals  or  as  a  corporate  whole. 
Accordingly,  it  is  only  natural  that  his  thought 
dwells  preponderatingly  on  various  aspects  and 
activities  of  Cluist  as  He  is  now,  in  '  glory '  and 
in  the  Church  ;  but  along  with  this  there  goes  al- 
ways the  recollection,  whether  tacit  or  expressed, 
of  what  had  preceded  the  glory,  viz.  the  death, 
and  the  manifestation  in  earthly  life. 

The  four  Ei)istles  of  the  second  group  (Gal. 
Rom.,  1  and  2  Cor.)  in  the  first  place  give  greater 
definiteness  to  the  '  Lordship '  of  Christ  as  the 
central  fact  to  be  grasped  and  acknowledged  by 
men.  The  necessary  but  sufficient  condition  for 
being  reckoned  a  Christian  was  the  sincere  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  religious  relation  to  Christ 
involved  in  confessing  Him  as 'Lord.'  'Believe 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved  * 
had  been  St.  Paul's  word  to  the  jailer  of  Plnlippi ; 
and  in  Ro  lO**^-  the  same  principle  is  laid  down 
and  expanded.  The  'word,'  which  in  the  mouth 
of  Moses  (Dt  3(fi*)  stood  for  the  Mosaic  Law,  is 
now  represented  by  the  gospel,  the  word  of  faith 
proclaimed  by  the  apostles.  And  as  accepted  and 
openly  acknowledged  by  those  who  believe  that 
God  raised  Jesus  from  the  dead,  it  takes  this  form, 
'  Jesus  is  Lord ' ;  and  this  acknowledgment  is  the 
external  condition  of  salvation.  In  the  same  con- 
text St.  Paul  shows  why  this  is  so  all-important. 
He  appeals  to  two  passages  of  the  OT,  in  each  of 
which  the  original  reference  is  to  Jahweh  ('who- 
soever believeth  on  him  shall  not  be  ashamed,' 
from  Is  28'*,  and  '  whosoever  shall  call  UT)on  the 
name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved,'  from  Jl  2^"-) ;  but 
he  predicates  them  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Nothing 
could  show  more  simply  or  more  completely  the 
place  which  the  Risen  Jesus  had  taken  in  the 
religious  consciousness  of  the  Church.  The  hon>- 
age,  the  prayer,  the  dependence  which  were  due 
to  God  were  due  to  Him  ;  and  the  protection,  the 
security,  the  salvation  which  were  to  be  looked 
for  from  God  might  be  claimed  at  His  hand.  In 
like  manner,  according  to  1  Co  12*  ('  no  one  is  able 
to  say  that  Jesus  is  Lord  but  by  the  Holy  Spirit '), 
this  acknowledgment  is  traced  to  the  Spirit's  in- 
spiration and  is  ottered  as  a  test  whereby  the  in- 
spiration of  a  speaker  may  be  ascertained.     And 


CHEIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


189 


in  Ph  2^  "  in  all  probability  it  is  this  name  of 
'  Lord '  which  the  Apostle  describes  as  the  '  name 
above  every  name,  the  bestowal  of  which  upon 
Jesus  at  His  Exaltation  involved  His  right  to  the 
homage  of  all  created  beings.     St.  Paul  here  ex- 

f)resses  his  consciousness  of  the  wonder  of  what 
le  believes  to  be  the  fact — that  God  has  bestowed 
on  Jesus  His  own  glorious  name,  that  whereby 
He  had  so  long  been  known  and  addressed  by  the 
Jews,  who  shrank  from  pronouncing  '  Jahweh '  (cf. 
Ac  2*  ;  and  W.  Lueken  ad  loc.  in  Schriften  des 
NT,  ii.  [1908]  379). 

(a)  Son  of  God. — If  St.  Paul  thus  connects  onr 
Lord's  entry  on  the  title  and  dignity  of  Kvpioi  with 
His  Resurrection  and  Exaltation,  does  he  do  the 
same'  in  reference  to  His  status  as  Son  of  God  ? 
The  governing  passage  is  in  Ro  1*  toO  bpiadivToi  viov 
Otov  iv  dvvdfifi  Kara  rvtvfw.  ayiuavvrj^  i^  avauTTOLffeus 
rexpQv — 'declared  {or  installed)  Son  of  God  with 
power  according  to  the  spirit  of  holiness  in  virtue 
of  resurrection  from  the  dead.'  The  emphasis  is 
probably  on  the  words  '  with  power.'  As  yev6,uf»os 
{K  <rripfiaTo%  Aa^iS,  Jesus  had  been  XptoTos  Kara  aipica 
and  vlb%  Oeov  in  the  Messianic  sense,  and  was 
crucified  tf  aadeveia^  (2  Co  13*).  But  after  and  in 
consequence  of  the  Resurrection,  He  has  entered 
on  the  status  of  Son  of  God  in  an  exalted  form,  set 
free  from  'the  likeness  of  (weak  and)  sinful  tiesh,' 
He  has  been  promulgated  as  '  in  power.'  This  open 
acknowledgment  of  His  true  character  was  '  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  spirit  of  holiness.' 

"The  Resurrection  was  to  Paul  the  disclosure  of  the  nature  of 
Christ.  It  was  not  only  the  crowning  sta-^e  in  the  development 
of  the  Life  that  had  been  Uved  on  earth,  its  natural  consiumua- 
lion,  but  as  such  it  was  also  the  revelation  of  the  inner  nature 
of  Christ  and  of  the  forces  of  His  personal  life  that  were  con- 
cealed, as  well  as  hindered  in  their  proper  exercise  on  others, 
as  long  as  Be  was  in  the  flesh '  (Somerrille,  op.  cit.  p.  17  ;  see, 
further,  below). 

In  three  other  passages  St.  Paul  refers  to  Christ 
as  '  the  Son  of  God '  (Gal  2-*,  2  Co  1«,  Eph  4").  In 
others  again  he  speaks  of  Christ  as  '  the  Son '  (1  Co 
15^)  or  'his  Son '  (Ro  1»- »  o^",  1  Co  l^.  Gal  4*). 
Some  of  these  passages  may  stUl  refer  to  the 
Messianic  Sonship ;  but  others  more  probably 
belong  to  another  class,  of  which  Ro  8'-  ^'-  (rbv 
iavTov  vibv  -refitf/as — tov  iSiou  viov  ovk  itptUraTo)  and 
Col  P^  (tox)  viov  Trji  dydrijs  avrov)  furnish  the  clearest 
examples.  In  these  passages  the  conception  of 
Christ's  Sonship  has  passed  over  into  a  conception 
other  and  deeper  than  the  official  Messianic  one ; 
and  it  seems  to  involve  a  'community  of  nature 
between  the  Father  and  the  Son'  (Sanday-Headlam, 
ad  loc.),  and  a  relationship  independent  of  any 
historical  experience.  At  this  point,  therefore,  St. 
Paul  does  advance  beyond  any  position  which  is 
attested  for  the  primitive  community.  It  is  useless 
as  well  as  needless  to  raise  any  question  as  to 
whether  he  conceived  the  relation  metaphysically 
or  otherwise.  St.  Paul  is  content  to  recognize  it 
as  intimate,  personal,  unique.  '  It  is  clear  that  in 
the  scale  of  being  the  son  is  the  one  who  in  origin 
and  nature  is  nearest  to  Grod'  (J.  Weiss,  Christ, 
p.  66). 

This  deeper  conception  of  the  Sonship  is  borne 
out  by  the  frequent  and  spontaneous  use  of  the 
name' 'Father'  for  God.  The  full  name  for  God 
in  the  Church  of  the  NT  is  '  the  God  and  Father 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ'  (e.g.  Ro  15«.  2  Co  11'', 
Eph  P  3l^  Col  P,  1  P  1»).  And  as  such  He  is 
described  absolutely  as  6  -rarrip,  and  known  experi- 
mentally by  those  who  have  in  their  hearts  the 
Spirit  'whereby  we  cry  Abba,  Father'  (Ro  8^'). 
All  this  circle  of  ideas  testifies  to  the  recognition 
of  a  Sonship  not  only  in  the  sense  in  which  it  was 
equivalent  to  Messiahship,  but  in  the  sense  of  a 
relationship  which  is  intrinsic  and  unique. 

It  is  quite  unnecessary  to  go  far  afield  to  find 
the  source  from  which  St.  Paul  derived  this  con- 


ception of  Christ's  Sonship.  It  is  attested  by  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  as  an  element  in  the  seu-con- 
sciousness  of  Jesus.  There  is  nothing  to  suggest 
that  it  was  a  discovery  or  a  conclusion  due  to  St. 
Paul.     As  J.  Weiss  says  : 

'  Paul  shows  no  trace  of  uneasineas  nor  gives  any  hint  of  a 
tradition  as  to  how  the  relation  of  sonship  arose  or  what  its 
actual  significance  was.  When  in  Col  l'^  he  speaks  of  Christ  as 
the  firet-bom  of  all  creatures,  we  must  not  by  any  means  con- 
clude that  Paul  bad  in  mind  a  begetting  or  birth,  or  any  special 
creative  act.  But  neitJier  is  there  in  a  single  syllable  any  sug- 
gestion of  an  emanation  in  the  sense  of  the  later  Gnosticism,  or 
an  election.  It  is  significant  that  Paul  does  not  feel  the  least 
need  to  account  for  the  existence  of  this  Son  of  God  by  any 
story  of  creation  or  birth,  i.e.  by  what  the  Science  of  Eeligfion 
calls  "  Myth  "  ■  {Chritt,  p.  6» t). 

This  means  that  neither  intellectual  construction 
nor  speculation  gave  rise  to  the  conception.  It 
came  from  Jesus.  And  as  the  Resurrection  put 
the  seal  of  Divine  authentication  on  His  Messianic 
consciousness,  so  did  it  put  the  seal  of  Divine  ac- 
knowledgment upon  that  filial  consciousness  which 
had  been  the  deepest  thing  in  His  personality. 

Conversely,  of  course,  this  prompt  and  spon- 
taneous recognition  of  the  filial  relationship 
between  Jesus  and  God  provides  confirmation  of 
the  gospel  record  so  far  as  it  reflects  this  element 
in  His  consciousness.  On  the  broad  foundation  of 
the  Lordship  of  Christ  and  the  Sonship  of  Christ — 
the  one  a  fact  of  religious  experience,  the  other  a 
factor  in  the  consciousness  of  Jesus — St.  Paul  builds 
his  specific  Christology.  And  he  postulates  for 
Christ  three  ditlerent  relationships :  he  sets  Him 
in  a  relationship  amounting  to  identity  with  the 
Spirit  of  (iod  ;  he  presents  Him  as  Head  of  a  new- 
race  of  men,  the  second  Adam  ;  and  he  claims  for 
Him  a  creative  relation  to  the  world  of  intelligent 
being. 

(;3)  The  Lord  the  Spirit. — The  evidence  for  this 
identification  is  partly  direct  and  partly  indirect. 
In  2  Co  3'"  the  Apostle  makes  the  categorical  state- 
ment, '  The  Lord  is  the  Spirit,'  and  the  same  idea 
is  probably  echoed  in  the  following  verse,  '  even  as 
from  the  Lord  the  Spirit'  (the  genitive  wTei'puiTos  be- 
ing probably  in  apposition  to  Kvpiov — so  Schmiedel, 
Lietzmann).  But  the  same  idea  also  underlies  the 
Apostle's  habit  of  using  -rvevfw.  [GeoCj,  rvevna  Xpurrov 
and  Xpurrdi  as  practically  interchangeable.  Christ 
is  ' a  life-giving  Spirit'  (1  Co  15'*'),  but  the  Spirit 
also  gives  life  (2  Co  3« ;  cf.  Gal  5=»).  And  in  Ro 
8».  !•.  u  g(;  Paul  passes  indifferently  from  the 
one  to  the  other,  referring  to  the  Divine  Spirit  in 
one  verse  the  effect  which  in  the  next  he  refers  to 
Christ.  For  him  '  Christ '  and  '  the  Spirit  of  him 
that  raised  up  Jesus '  are  practically  synonymous. 

The  basis  for  the  identification  which  St.  Paul 
asserts  is  not  any  idea  of  metaphysical  unity,  but 
an  observed  harmony  of  ethical  and  spiritual  in- 
fluence. St.  Paul  had  no  doctrine  of  tne  Trinity. 
The  Spirit  of  God,  or  Holy  Spirit,  was  for  him 
(apart  from  the  identification  with  the  Risen  Christ) 
the  energy  of  the  Divine  nature,  universal  in  its 
operation,  influencing  the  will  and  the  intelligence 
of  men,  the  source  of  the  sevenfold  gifts  described 
in  Is  11-,  and  specially  the  creator  of  ' life'  in  the 
new  sense  in  which  it  was  a  prerogative  of  the 
Messianic  age,  and  practically  sj-nonynious  with 
'  salvation.'  The  identification  or  this  Spirit  with 
the  Risen  Christ  followed  on  the  combination  of 
the  experience  of  Easter  with  that  of  Pentecost. 
Together  they  formed  the  source  and  the  basis  of 
new  life  for  the  believers.  This  was  for  them  the 
meaning  of  salvation,  and  the  proof  that  they  were 
being  saved.  The  subjective  certainty  was  given 
in  new  moral  power  to  follow  new  ideals.  Both 
the  power  and  the  ideals  were  traced  to  the  Spirit 
(Gal  5-) ;  but  they  came  to  each  individual  after 
and  in  consequence  of  his  faith  in  Christ  as  Risen 
Lord.  So  this  life-giving  energj-  of  God  which  by 
the  primitive  community  had  been  explained  as 


190         CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


'  shed  abroad '  by  the  Exalted  Christ,  is  by  St.  Paul 
identified  with  Him.  What  would  further  con- 
tribute to  this  conclusion  would  be  the  necessity 
of  attributing  to  Clirist  existence  in  a  super- 
physical  or  'spiritual'  form,  and  the  further 
necessity  of  accounting  for  the  universality  of  His 
presence,  Avith  each  and  with  all  of  the  believers 
everywhere. 

There  is  a  further  indication  here  of  the  way  in 
which  the  conception  of  salvation  as  the  highest 
good  belonging  to  the  life  to  come  was  giving  place 
to  the  conception  of  it  as  a  present  experience. 
With  all  its  antecedent  conditions — e.g.  justification 
(  =  acquittal),  cleansing,  redemption  from  the  do- 
minion of  evil — and  with  all  its  expected  contents 
— peace  with  God,  tranquil  confidence,  hope  and 
joy — salvation  was  within  men's  grasp.  Men  who 
liad  received  the  Spirit  had  received  it  as  airapxn 
or  appa^wv,  at  once  the  first-fruits  and  the  guarantee 
of  eternal  life  ;  they  knew  that  they  had  received 
the  Spirit  because  tlie  fruits  of  the  Spirit  were  jiro- 
duced  in  them  and  among  them  (cf.  1  Jn  3'*) ;  and 
that  these  were  fruits  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  or 
the  Spirit  that  was  Christ,  they  knew,  because 
they  corresponded  with  what  they  knew  of  His 
character  and  teaching. 

The  recognition  of  this  element  in  St.  Paul's 
Christologv  has  certain  conseauences.  —  (i. )  It 
throws  li^ht  on  the  use  so  freely  made  by  the 
Apostle  of  the  phrase  iv  Xpiarip.  (li.)  It  leads  to  a 
change  in  the  way  of  conceiving  the  Spirit  which 
has  recently  been  described  as  '  die  Christificierung 
des  Geistes.'  The  Spirit  being  recognized  as  enter- 
ing into  personal  relations  with  man,  of  the  same 
character  as  those  of  Christ  with  man,  there  is 
formed  a  conception  of  the  Spirit  which  can  only 
be  described  in  terms  of  personality,  (iii. )  If  as 
Ki^ptos  Christ  exercises  the  authority  of  God,  and 
as  TTvev/xa  at  once  enspheres  men  (cf.  Ac  17^)  and 
dwells  in  them,  producing  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit, 
the  true  grounds  are  provided  for  regarding  Him 
as  Divine. 

'  It  is  .  .  .  because  He  works  in  us  with  an  energy  of  love  and 
holiness  that  is  identified  with  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  commands 
our  obedience  with  an  absoluteness  that  is  identical  with  the 
authority  of  God,  that  we  are  to  recognise  Christ  as  truly  Divine 
and  to  acknowledge  the  presence  in  Him  of  pmvers  of  Godhead 
that  constitute  Him  the  object  of  our  faith  and  worship' 
(Somerville,  op.  clt.  p.  112). 

(7)  The  Second  Adam. — Another  line  of  advance 
was  opened  for  the  Apostle  partly  through  the 
universal  ism  of  his  gospel,  leading  him  to  find  in 
Adam,  the  head  and  founder  of  nurnanity  which 
fell,  a  type  of  Christ  as  founder  and  head  of  the 
humanity  which  He  had  redeemed.  Redeemed 
humanity  was  indeed  a  Kaivri  Kriffi^  (2  Co  5^'',  Gal 
6'^ ;  cf.  Col  3",  where  the  parallel  with  the  ci-eation- 
narrative  in  Genesis  is  distinctly  suggested).  The 
new  creature  is  a  citizen  of  a  new  world  (Ph  3-"), 
belongs  no  longer  to  the  kingdom  of  darkness  but 
to  the  kingdom  of  God's  Son  (Col  1^^),  and  lives 
under  a  new  covenant,  or  basis  of  relationship, 
between  God  and  man  (2  Co  3").  In  all  these 
jiarticulars  he  is  seen  to  be  a  member  of  a  new 
race ;  and  Adam,  tlie  founder  of  the  original  race, 
was  Tviroi  Tov  fifKXovToi  (Ro  5'*):  i.e.  Christ  as 
6  /M^Wu;/  bore  the  same  relation  to  the  new  race  as 
Adam  to  the  old. 

In  two  passages  St.  Paul  makes  use  of  this 
analogy,  in  both  cases  assuming  its  validity,  not 
proving  it.  According  to  the  first,  Adam  is  typical 
of  Christ  in  the  way  in  which  his  fall  involves  con- 
sequences affecting  the  relation  to  God  of  his  whole 
posterity.  That  is  to  say,  in  Christ,  as  Second 
Adam  and  Representative  Man,  humanity  makes  a 
new  beginning  ;  it  recovers  its  pristine  relation  to 
God,  the  Divine  likeness  in  wliich  it  was  first 
created.  And  as  Adam  by  his  disobedience  had 
entailed  on  all  who  followed  the  heritage  of  sin 


and  death,  so  Christ  by  His  perfect  fulfilment  of 
the  Divine  will  liad  secured  for  '  all '  participation 
in  righteousness  and  life  (Ro  5'-'^'). 

In  the  second  passage  (1  Co  15«-^^)  St.  Paul 
applies  the  same  relation  and  contrast  between 
Adam  and  Christ  to  support  his  statement  that 
tliere  is  not  only  'a  natural  (  =  psychical)  bo<ly* 
but  also  a  '  spiritual '  ( =  pneumatic)  one.  It  is 
quite  in  accordance  with  his  method  of  using 
Scripture  that  the  verse  of  Genesis  which  he  quotes 
has  no  reference  to  aCj/ia;  and  yet  we  can  .see  its 
relevancy.  'E7^j'eTo  6  [irpurros]  &vdpii)iro%  [A5d/x]  e/s 
\}/vxhv  ^Cxrav,  where  the  bracketed  words  are  added 
to  the  text  of  the  LXX  and  emphasize  the  diiection 
of  the  Apostle's  thought ;  Adam,  the  first  man,  was 
made  a  psychic  person,  or  a  '  natural  man.'  Then 
he  proceeds  (witliout  indicating  what  is  the  ca^e, 
viz.  that  he  is  no  longer  quoting) :  '  the  last  Adam 
(was  made)  a  spirit,  a  life-giving  soul.'  He  states, 
in  fact,  the  same  view  of  Christ  as  that  just  con- 
sidered— 'the  Lord  is  the  Spirit' — but  leaves  un- 
expressed the  inference  he  would  have  men  draw, 
viz.  that  as  Adam  and  all  who  derive  from  him 
had  a  '  psychic  body,'  so  Christ  and  all  who  owe 
'life'  to  iiim  have  a  'pneumatic  body.' 

It  is  only  then  (if  at  all)  that  St.  Paul  recalls  the 
famous  interpretation  put  by  Philo  upon  the  double 
narrative  of  the  creation  of  man  (Gn  1^  and  2')— 
SiTTo.  dvOpdnruf  y^vrj-  6  fiiv  yap  iariv  ovpdvtoi  ipOpuiros, 
6  di  yrjivos.  6  p-^v  ovv  ovpdvios  are  /car  (Udva  QeoO  7£7o- 
vtDj  (pdapTTJs  Kal  ffvvdXws  yedj8ovs  ovcrLas  dniroxo!,  6  8i 
yrfCvos  iK  ffiropdSos  DXiji  ^v  xovv  KiKKrjKfv  ivdyi) 
(Lcgum,  allegor.  [ed.  Mangey,  vol.  i.  p.  49] ;  cf. 
de  Opif.  Mundi  [vol.  i.  p.  32]).  Not  a  few  modem 
writers  are  disposed  to  find  the  root  of  St.  Paul's 
'  higher  Christology '  in  this  doctrine  of  Philo  con- 
cerning '  the  heavenly  man. '  But  this  is  probably  a 
mistaken  view.  Along  with  obviously  close  corre- 
spondence in  phrasing  the  passage  shows  funda- 
mental divergence  from  the  Philonic  conception. 
Pfieiderer  and  B.  Weiss  agree  that  the  pa.ssage 
contains  no  reference  to  Philo's  doctrine  of  the  ideal 
man.  J.  Weiss  (Christ,  p.  74),  after  positing  that 
there  is  'no  evidence  of  literary  dependence,  i.e. 
borrowing  from  any  work  of  Philo's,'  makes  a 
careful  comparison  of  the  two  concejjtions,  and 
concludes  that  Philo's  doctrine  shows  no  trace  of 
what  is  most  characteristic  in  St.  Paul. 

'  The  Alexandrine  does  not  attribute  the  least  eschatological 
significance  to  the  heavenly  man.  He  shows  no  trace  of  the 
belief  that  he  who  came  into  being  in  the  image  of  God,  at  the 
end  of  all  things  shall  appear  as  Messiah.  But  with  Paul  it  is 
just  this  which  is  the  essential  thing.  His  doctrine  of  the 
heavenly  and  earthly  man,  or  of  the  first  and  last  Adam,  or  of 
Adam  and  Christ,  is  most  pointedly  apocalvptic  in  character ' 
(*.  p.  77  f.). 

If  there  is  any  allusion  to  Philo's  view,  it  is 
referred  to  only  to  be  contradicted  :  '  the  pneu- 
matic was  not  first,  but  the  psychic  ;  then  came 
the  pneumatic'  At  this  point  (v.^)  the  Apostle's 
mind  reverts  to  his  original  subject — the  constitution 
respectively  of  the  psychic  and  of  the  pneumatic 
man.  The  first  man  was  sprung  from  earth, 
earthy  in  his  constitution  ;  the  second  man  was, 
is,  or  shall  be  from  heaven,  and  is  the  heavenly 
man.  And  the  same  law  wliereby  members  of 
Adam's  race  reproduce  his  earthy,  psychic  constitu- 
tion secures  that  those  who  derive  their  life  from 
the  heavenly  man  shall  receive  a  pneumatic  frame 
or  constitution.  But  the  frame  or  ffw/to  is  now 
described  as  eUuv,  the  image  or  concrete  expression 
of  personality  which  produces  an  impression  on 
the  beholder.  The  '  image  of  the  heavenly  '  in  v.*» 
is  the  same  as  the  'image  of  his  glory,'  or  'his 
glorious  likeness  '  of  Ph  3",  into  which  the  Lord  is 
to  change  the  '  body  of  our  humiliation.'  And  the 
'  image  of  his  glory,'  the  '  image  of  the  heavenly 
man  '  alike  describe  the  pneumatic  <rw/ua,  frame  or 
form,  which  the  Risen  Christ  had  taken  to  Himself. 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


191 


When  we  examine  these  verses,  freed  from  the 
obligation  of  reading  into  them  PhUo's  theory  of 
creation,  the  OT  tignre  which  is  suggested  by  6 
ivovpavioi  is  not  the  supposed  Urmensch  of  Gn  1, 
nor  yet  a  Pauline  complement  of  the  earthly  Adam 
of  Gn  2,  but  the  figure  in  Dn  7",  ISov  fiera  tQv 
veipfKuv  ToC  ovpdrov  ilii  vlbi  dydpurov  ipx6(ievoi.  It  is 
true  that  there  is  not  elsewhere  in  St.  Paul's 
writings  any  certain  allusion  to  the  'Son  of  Man' ; 
but  this  may  well  be  due  to  the  incomprehensibility 
of  the  phrase  in  Gentile  ears.  And  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul  was  either  ignorant 
of,  or  indifferent  to,  the  Messianic  significance  of 
the  Danielle  figure.     The  view  which  these  verses 

Eostulate  is  therefore  this  :  that  the  Messiah,  the 
eavenly  man  of  Daniel,  is  at  the  same  time  the 
head  of  the  new  race,  the  second  Adam,  and  is 
known  to  be  such  because  He  has  been  made  a 
'  life-giving  Spirit '  ;  those  who  believe  on  Him  are 
by  Him  made  alive. 

At  what  point  did  this  take  place,  in  the  opinion 
of  St.  Paul  ?  Was  it  at  the  '  creation,'  or  at  His 
coming  to  earth,  or  at  His  Exaltation  ?  Probably 
the  fiKt  of  these  possibilities  is  the  one  which 
corresponds  with  the  first  impression  the  words 
make ;  the  description  is  in  both  cases  that  of  the 
original  condition  of  the  first  and  the  second  Adam 
respectively.  And  that  is  the  interpretation  in- 
sisted upon  by  those  who  find  the  source  of  St. 
Paul's  Christology  in  the  conception  of  a  pre- 
existent  ideal  man.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  at 
least  not  necessary  to  look  for  the  source  of  both 
parts  of  the  statement  in  the  Genesis-narrative. 
It  is  quite  in  accordance  with  St.  Paul's  manner  of 
liandling  Scripture  that  he  should  add  to  a  direct 
quotation  a  proposition  which  rests  on  quite  other 
ground  (cf.  Ko  3^,  Gal  2^%  Nor,  in  the  second 
place,  is  it  necessary  that  the  verb  eyevero  (granting 
that  it  is  to  be  supplied  in  the  second  clause  of  v.**) 
should  refer  in  both  cases  to  the  same  point  of 
time,  or  to  synonymous  moments  in  the  experience 
of  the  first  and  second  Adam.  All  that  is  necessary 
is  that  in  both  cases  the  experience  must  be  one 
capable  of  being  described  by  the  word  iyevero,  and 
the  illuminating  parallel  is  that  in  Ac  2*> :  '  Grod 
made  him  Lord  and  Christ.' 

Once  more,  the  whole  passage  must  be  viewed 
and  interpreted  in  its  bearing  on  the  solution  of 
the  question,  With  what  body  do  they  come  ? 
What  is  really  contrasted  with  the  aQfui  ^vxikov 
which  clothed  the  •'px/xv^  ^Ctxray  of  the  first  Adam 
is  the  aw^ia  rvevfuiTiKoy  through  which  the  rvev/xa 
^bxrroiovv  of  the  Second  Adam  is  manifested.  And 
as  the  <Tu:fm  rvevfuiTiKov  is  the  glorified  body  of  the 
Risen  Lord,  so  it  was  at  His  Eesurrection  that  He 
'  was  made  a  life-giving  Spirit.'  It  would  not 
follow  that  St.  Paul  did  not  regard  Him  as  having 
been  wevfui  or  even  irvei'fj.a  ^wotolovv  in  some  sense 
anterior  to  the  Eesurrection,  any  more  than  it  is 
necessary  to  put  a  similar  interpretation  on  Ac  2^. 
As  '  the  first- bom  from  the  dead,'  He  was  also  '  the 
first-born  among  many  brethren,'  inasmuch  as  they 
were  destined  in  advance  to  be  conformed  to  His 
'  image,'  i.e.  to  the  form  of  His  existence  in  glory 
(Ro  8^;  see  Denney,  ad  loc.).  He  was  the 
Second  Adam  because  He  was  at  once  the  Source, 
the  Type,  and  the  Head  of  the  new  race ;  and  as 
surely  as  filiation  from  the  first  Adam  had  shown 
itself  in  the  physico-psycMc  constitution,  so  surely 
woxild  vital  relation  to  Christ  show  itself  in  the 
bearing  of  a  spiritual-heavenly  body,  the  habita- 
tion not  made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the  heavens. 
It  appears,  therefore,  that  in  1  Co  15**  St.  Paul 
has  nothing  to  tell  about  the  pre-existent  Christ ; 
and  the  same  is  probably  the  case  in  regard  to  the 
other  factors  in  St.  Paul's  description  of  Christ — 
the  recognition  of  Him  as  elKCiv  rod  deoC  and  the 
declaration  that  in  Him  dwells  '  the  whole  fulness 


of  the  Godhead.*  In  both  passages  (2  Co  4*  and 
Col  1")  where  he  refers  to  Christ  as  '  the  image  of 
God,'  the  context  suggests  that  the  idea  is  more 
than  that  of  simple  likeness,  reflexion,  or  even 
representation.  Christ  as  eUiliy  rod  deov  is  and  has 
all  that  Adam  had  in  consequence  of  being  made  ev 
eUbvL  deov  without  suffering  any  of  the  subsequent 
diminution  or  cancelling  of  powers  or  privileges 
which  in  Adam's  case  followed  upon  transgression. 
This  phrase,  therefore,  like  '  the  Second  Adam,' 
sets  Him  forth  as  the  archetypal  man.  But  the 
phrase  has  had  a  history  since  its  origin  in  Hebrew 
literature,  and  St.  Paul  may  have  had  that  also 
in  mind.  It  appears  in  a  modified  form  in  W'is. 
(7^*)  in  a  description  of  the  Divine  Wisdom  personi- 
fied :  araOyatrfia  yap  i<m  tpurrbi  aXSiov  .  .  .  Kcd  etVwr 
7-^5  iya06rrjTos  airov.  From  an  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tion of  196  B.C.  Wendland  quotes  the  description 
of  an  apotheosized  prince  as  eixopot  ^d;<7r]i  toD  deov 
(Hellen.-rom.  Kultur,  19<37,  p.  75).  But  there  is 
no  need  to  go  beyond  the  passage  in  Wis.,  which 
indeed  seems  also  to  have  influenced  the  language 
of  2  Co  4^  and  He  1',  and  possibly  Col  V\  The 
eUdiv  evidently  connotes  light,  glory,  radiant  efi'ul- 
gence  ;  and  when  St.  Paul  applies  the  description 
to  Christ,  he  means  that  the  otherwise  invisible 
God  is  manifested  and  revealed  through  Him 
(cf.  Jn  14-1  ifupavLaa  efiai-rop).  Its  true  significance 
is  in  fact  explained  by  2  Co  4®  :  *  Seeing  it  is  God 
.  .  .  who  shined  in  our  hearts,  to  give  the  light  of 
the  knowledge  of  tlie  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of 
Jesus  Christ.'  St.  Paul  neither  denies  nor  asserts 
that  Christ  had  been  '  the  image  of  God '  from  the 
beginning  ;  but  what  he  does  say  on  the  subject 
is  properly  referred  to  Christ  as  Exalted. 

(5)  The  fullness  of  the  Godhead. — It  pleased  God 
that  'in  him  the  whole  fulness  of  the  Godhead 
should  make  its  abode '  (Col  V^ ;  cf.  f?  iv  airrtp 
Karoixel  rav  to  rX'^pufui  riji  diJTrjros  ffc^fiariKQi,  Kai  fori 
if  airifi  rerXrjfXjjfifyoi).  It  has  now"  been  made  clear 
that  as  the  foregoing  description  has  its  roots  in  the 
Hebrew  record  of  creation,  so  this  one  is  not  unre- 
lated to  contemporary  theosophic  speculation.  St. 
Paul  makes  this  assertion  regarding  Christ  in  re- 
sponse to  a  challenge,  which  had  been  delivered, 
tacitly  at  least,  by  the  false  teachers  at  Colossje 
against  thesole  and  sufficient  supremacy  of  the  Lord. 
On  the  lips  of  those  whom  he  was  controverting, 
as  well  as  on  his  own,  the  phrase  stood  for  the 
totality  of  the  Divine  powers  or  agencies.  But  for 
the  false  teachers  the  totality  was  distributed 
among  a  plurality,  a  countless  host,  of  mediators — 
'  thrones,  dominions,  principalities,  powers,'  rd  (ttoi- 
Xeia  Tov  Koafioa  St.  Paul  had  found  in  Christ 
another  view  of  the  universe,  according  to  which 
all  this  imagined  hierarchy  of  intermediaries  be- 
came irrelevant.  Thus  it  is  probable  that  in  both 
sentences  in  which  the  phrase  occurs  a  strong 
emphasis  should  be  placed  on  the  words  iv  airrcf. 
Not  in  that  cloud  of  unknown  spiritual  forces  but  in 
Christ  resides  that  whole  fullness  of  which  they 
speak  ;  and  it  resides  ffufiaTucHis,  i.e.  not  'in  bodily 
form,'  but  '  in  completeness  and  abiding  reality ' 
(so  Klopper,  Dibelius). 

'  The  term,  in  its  origin,  or  as  used  by  the  theoeoi^usts  of 
Coloesae,  may  be  metaphysical  or  not ;  in  the  moath  of  the 
apostle  it  expresses  a  reli^oas  truth,  a  truth  of  i^ection  baaed 
on  religious  exi)erience,  the  truth  learnt  in  communion  with 
the  Kisen  Lord,  that  in  Him  there  is  a  full  endowment  of  life  by 
the  Spirit  of  God  that  answers  to  all  the  religious  needs  ot 
human  nature '  (Somerville,  op.  dt.  p.  158). 

It  is  to  be  noted  in  connexion  with  each  of  these 
later  aspects  of  Christ  recognized  by  St.  Paul,  that 
it  is  held  or  revealed  by  Him  in  order  to  be  im- 
parted or  conveyed  to  men.  If  He  is  the  Son  and 
the  Image  of  the  Invisible  (Jod,  it  is  in  order  that 
men  who  believe  on  Him  may  become  sons  of  the 
same  Father  and  conformed  to  the  same  Image. 
If  the  fullness  of  God  has  taken  up  its  abode  in 


192  CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


Him,  that  has  had  for  a  result  '  ye  have  been  ful- 
filled in  him,'  and  tlien  we  find  the  Apostle  in 
Eph  3"  praying  that  the  brethren  may  by  the  in- 
dwelling of  Christ  be  '  fulfilled '  till  tliey  attain  to 
the  pleroma  of  God.  At  the  same  time,  this 
participation  of  believers  in  the  highest  attributes 
of  Christ  is  (i.)  mediated  through  llim,  is  theirs 
only  through  their  organic  union  with  Him  ;  and 
(ii. )  only  partial  and  fragmentary  at  any  time  in 
the  individual  believer.  No  inclividual  believer, 
however  closely  he  may  resemble  his  Master,  can 
ever  reproduce  all  tliat  Christ  is.  It  is  the  body 
of  believers,  believers  as  a  body,  who  are  destined 
to  attain  '  to  the  perfect  man,  to  the  measure  of 
the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ '  (Eph  4'»).  All 
the  attributes  of  the  heavenly  Christ  have  refer- 
ence to,  and  are  applied  to,  the  salvation  of  man  ; 
but  they  are  conveyed  by  Him  ;  apart  from  Him 
they  are  not  within  the  reach  of  men. 

B.  The  historical  Jesus.  —  St.  Paul  traced  the 
origin  of  his  faith,  and  ascribed  the  life  he  now 
lived,  to  the  Risen  and  Exalted  Christ,  Lord  and 
Spirit.  But  it  is  not  true  to  say  that  he  was 
either  ignorant  of,  or  indifferent  to,  the  manifes- 
tation of  Jesus  'in  the  days  of  his  flesh.'  The 
references  which  he  makes  to  the  '  historical 
Jesus'  may  be  few  in  number,  but  they  are  em- 
phatic ana  essential  to  his  total  conception  of 
Christ's  Person  and  Work.  In  the  first  place,  he 
admits  and  relies  on  the  authority  of  Jesus  as  the 
rule  of  life.  In  Ac  2(P  he  is  heard  definitely  re- 
calling '  the  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,'  as  in  1 
Co  ipsff.  he  quotes  as  authoritative  the  terms  in 
which  Jesus  instituted  the  Last  Supper.  The  dis- 
cussion on  marriage  and  divorce  in  1  Co  7  illus- 
trates his  attitude.  On  the  one  hand,  in  regard  to 
the  marriage  of  '  virgins,'  he  says  frankly  that  he 
*  has  no  commandment  of  the  Lord,'  just  as  in 
reference  to  married  life  he  has  disclaimed  any 
Divine  authority  (1  Co  7®) ;  but  in  regard  to  divorce 
he  takes  a  very  different  tone,  because  for  that 
question  he  has  the  authority  of  the  historical 
Jesus,  whose  deliverance  on  the  subject  he  quotes. 
In  like  manner  he  claims  to  '  follow  Christ,'  mean- 
ing the  historical  Jesus,  as  the  supreme  example 
(1  Co  IP),  and  urges  his  converts  to  do  the  like 
(Ph  2*ff-,  1  Th  2'4,  Eph  5^). 

It  is  on  the  human  manifestation  of  Christ  that 
St.  Paul's  whole  gospel  is  based — '  Christ  died  for 
our  sins ' ;  and  it  was  as  Jesus  of  Nazareth  that 
He  died  ;  it  was  '  in  the  flesh '  that  He  '  condemned 
sin,'  '  in  the  body  of  the  flesh '  that  God  '  reconciled 
men  to  himself  (Col  1^).  And  the  fact  of  His 
humanity  is  absolute^  essential  to  the  Apostle's 
theory  of  salvation.  It  provides  the  identification 
of  the  Redeemer  with  the  race  He  would  redeem, 
in  all  human  experience  save  the  consciousness  of 
having  sinned.  It  is  wholly  a  mistake  to  represent 
the  emphasis  which  St.  Paul  puts  upon  the  Risen 
Christ  as  excluding  interest  in,  or  knowledge  of, 
the  historical  Jesus ;  '  the  heavenly  man '  had  no 
meaning  for  him  except  for  His  being  the  same  as 
'  the  man  Christ  Jesus.' 

And  he  leaves  no  room  for  doubt  that  the  Christ 
of  faith  was  one  with  the  Jesus  of  the  Gospels. 
He  was  '  born  of  a  woman '  (Gal  4* ;  cf.  Job  14'). 
The  phrase  neither  includes  nor  yet  does  it  ex- 
clude a  supernatural  factor  in  the  birth  of  Jesus  ; 
it  asserts  His  true  participation  in  our  common 
humanity.  He  was  '  born  under  law '  (Gal  4*). 
Whether  significance  is  to  be  attached  to  the  ab- 
sence of  the  article  (Lightfoot)  or  not  (Lietzmann), 
the  context  shows  that  it  is  His  identification  witli 
the  Jewish  race  that  St.  Paul  is  empiiasizing.  He 
is  represented  as  a  lineal  descendant  of  David 
(Ro  1^),  and  an  argument  is  founded  upon  His 
descent  from  Abraham  (Gal  3**).  This  descent  had 
special  significance,  inasmuch  as  by   becoming  '  a 


minister  of  circumcision '  (or  '  of  the  circumcision ' ; 
cf.  2  Co  3')  He  confirmed  the  promises  made  to 
the  forefathers  of  Israel  (Ro  IS"  ;  cf,  2  Co  1»). 
So  that  it  is  one  of  the  distinguishing  privileges  of 
Israel  that  the  Messiah  belongs  to  them  '  as  far  as* 
the  flesh  is  concerned '  (Ro  9*).  In  2  Co  5",  where 
St.  Paul  repudiates,  for  the  period  subsequent  to 
his  conversion,  any  knowledge  of  '  Christ  after  the 
flesh,'  he  postulates  at  least  the  hypothetical  possi- 
bility of  nis  having  known  Him  so,  and  probably 
refers  to  a  claim  which  others  founded  upon  then- 
personal  acquaintance  witii  the  historical  Jesus. 

There  remain  two  passages  of  special  importance 
for  the  light  they  shed  on  the  Apostle's  view  of 
the  constitution  of  our  Lord's  human  personality. 
The  first  is  in  Ro  8' — 6  dtbs  t6v  iavroO  1l6v  iritixf/a^ 
iv  6/Ji,oubfj.aTi  aapKbs  a/juipriai  kt\.  The  allusion  to  a 
pre-existent  state  from  which  God  '  .sent  His  own 
Son '  (see  below)  is  followed  by  the  carefully  chosen 
phrase  '  in  the  likeness  of  sin's  flesh '  (cf.  Ph  2^ 
'  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  men ').  It  is  jpos- 
sible,  but  it  would  be  mistaken,  to  read  these 
words  as  though  tiieir  purpose  was  to  assert  that 
Christ  was  '  like '  but  only  '  like '  to  men.  What 
the  phrase  does  convey  is  tiiat  the  likeness  is  true 
and  complete  as  far  as  it  can  be,  sin  being  excepted. 
By  the  introduction  of  ofioiwfia  St.  Paul  '  wishes  to 
indicate  not  that  Christ  was  not  really  man,  or 
that  His  flesh  was  not  really  Avhat  in  us  is  o-Apf 
a/j.aprlas,  but  that  what  for  ordinary  men  is  their 
natural  condition  is  for  this  Person  only  an  assumed 
condition '  (Denney,  ad  loc. ).  The  rendering  of  AV 
(also  RV)  '  of  sinful  flesh '  gives  a  -wrong  impression 
and  creates  unnecessary  ditticulty.  '  Of  sin's  flesh  ' 
refers  to  the  physical  constitution  of  man  not  as 
originally  or  inherently  sinful — which  was  never 
St.  Paul  s  view — but  as  it  had  come  to  be,  histori- 
cally and  experimentally,  an  appanage  of  sin. 
Christ  entered  into  humanity  as  it  was  conditioned 
by  sin,  tyrannized  and  enslaved  by  it— sin  being 
regarded  as  an  almost  personal  conqueror  and 
tyrant. 

But  He  who,  according  to  Ro  8*,  was  thus  made 
'in  the  likeness  of  sin's  flesh,'  according  to  the 
second  passage  (Ro  l^*)  manifested,  in  contradis- 
tinction to  all  others  who  appeared  in  human  form, 
'  a  spirit  of  holiness' ;  and  it  was  in  harmony  with 
that  ethical  uniqueness  that  a  unique  glory  was 
assigned  to  Him,  inasmuch  as  His  death  was 
followed  by  a  Resurrection  whereby  He  was  de- 
clared (or  installed)  by  God  as  '  Son  of  God  with 
power.'  Thenceforward  His  Messiahship  was  in- 
dubitable ;  it  was  demonstrated  by  the  '  power ' 
which  was  wielded  by  the  Risen  Lord.  This  pas- 
sage, like  the  former  one,  starts  with  a  possible 
allusion  to  the  pre-existent  Sonship  (rov  Tlov  aCrroO), 
and  at  least  suggests  a  state  of  liumiliation  as 
antecedent  to  the  state  of  glory  and  power.  There 
is  at  the  same  time  no  suggestion  of  a  time  at 
which  Jesus  became  possessed  of  the  'spirit  of 
holiness,'  such  as  meets  us  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Rather  is  tlie  spirit  referred  to  &s  '  the  principle  of 
personality  in  Jesus.'  It  is  the  '  spirit  of  holiness ' 
which  binds  the  earthly  existence  alike  to  what 
went  before  and  to  what  came  after  (cf.  Peine, 
Theol.  des  NT,  1910,  p.  260).  And  the  same 
thought  may  underlie  tne  phrase  in  Ro  8' :  '  the 
law  (  =  principle)  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ 
Jesus  hath  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and 
death.'  6  vb/ioi  here  means  '  authority '  (so  Sanday- 
Headlam),  or  in  modern  speech,  the  '  governing 
principle.'  Sin  and  death  are  contrasted  as  govern- 
ing principles  with  the  living  (and  life-giving) 
spirit  that  was  in  Christ  Jesus — the  same  '  spirit  of 
holiness.' 

The  passage  in  Philippians  (28-")  which  is  chiefly 
valued  for  the  light  it  throws  on  St.  Paul's  view 
of  the  pre-existent  Christ  has  importance  also  for 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHEISTOLOGY  193 


his  view  of  the  historical  Jesus.  He  '  was  found,' 
ffx^Mi^'  <i's  dv^/Kinroi,  i.e.  in  outward  appearance,  in 
all  that  presented  itself  to  the  senses,  '  as  a  man ' ; 
and  that  because  He  was  '  made  in  the  likeness  of 
men  '  {if  ofioiufian  ardpJrrur).  But  the  description 
of  the  human  manifestation  opens  with  the  phrase 
fiop«pr}p  Sov\ov  Xa^tay,  by  which  the  Apostle  indicates 
something  which,  while  going  deeper  than  the 
<rxvfia  or  the  6fioi(i>fw,,  yet  does  not  touch  the  essen- 
tial personality.  Christ,  that  is  to  say,  entered 
upon  a  real,  but  not  a  permanent,  servitude.  In 
what  sense?  It  will  not  suffice  to  say,  with 
Lightfoot  (a«?  loc.),  'For  ipepcirroi  the  stronger 
word  dovXos  is  substituted.  He  who  is  Master 
of  all  becomes  the  slave  of  all.'  For  this  gives 
insufficient  distinctness  to  the  two  clauses,  and  in- 
adequate force  to  the  former  one.  It  is  more  prob- 
able that  the  two  clauses,  /iofxfnji'  dovXov  \a3wv  and 
ir  6fioiuinaTi  dfdpdrrup  yevdfievos  are  parallel  in  re- 
verse order  to  the  two  clauses  in  Gal  4^,  yeyonevow 
iK  yvvaiKOi  and  yevo/xeyor  inrb  yo/jLoy ;  and  the  fK)wer 
to  which  St.  Paul  declares  that  Jesus  submitted 
Himself  as  SovXo^  is  the  Law  and  the  whole  dis- 
pensation of  which  it  was  the  symbol.  He  volun- 
tarily placed  Himself  under  its  yoke,  made  Him- 
self 'a  debtor  to  keep  the  whole  law.'  It  was  in 
virtue  of  this  submission  that  He  could  tindergo 
its  curse,  be  'made  a  curse  for  us,'  and  redeem  us 
(Jews)  from  'the  curse  of  the  law.'  This  subjec- 
tion to  the  Law  was  thus  a  special  case  of  Christ's 
submission  to  the  disabilities  of  '  the  flesh,'  through 
which  He  could  be  '  made  sin '  for  us  {2  Co  5^). 
The  ffip^  which  He  assumed  was  truly  human 
flesh  ;  it  was,  for  such  it  had  come  to  be  histori- 
cally, '  sin's  flesh ' — flesh  that  was  in  the  grasp  of 
sin.  He  'knew  no  sin'  (2  Co  o^),  and  yet  in 
His  case  the  adp^  was  the  medium  of  sin's  assault 
upon  Him.  It  brought  Him  into  relation,  a  re- 
lation always  hostile,  Avith  the  whole  series  of 
forces  which  were  opposed  to  God,  the  forces  which 
were  in  control  of  '  this  present  world,'  the  '  princi- 
paliries  and  powers'  (Col  2^),  the  'world'  rulers 
of  this  darkness  (Eph  6^).  And  it  was  in,  by 
means  of,  this  adp^  that  He  '  condemned  sin,'  that 
He  '  triumphed '  over  the  hostile  powers,  stripping 
them  off'  from  Himself  along  with  the  vip^,  when 
on  the  Cross  He  died  from  under  the  control  of 
'  the  spiritual  forces  of  the  world '  (Col  £'*•■*), 

Thus  the  historical  man,  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
was  a  fact  of  cardinal  importance  for  St.  Paul,  not 
only  as  an  authority  supreme  in  the  realm  of  con- 
duct, but  as  embodying  the  conditions  by  which 
alone  redemption  could  be  accomplished. 

C.  The  pre-existent  Christ. — The  material  for 
ascertaining  St.  Paul's  conception  of  Christ  is  now 
nearly  complete.  By  far  the  larger  part  of  it 
refers  to  the  'post-existent'  Christ,  the  Lord  in 
glorj-.  Another  element,  smaller  in  extent,  but 
not  for  that  reason  unimportant,  has  to  do  with 
the  historic  Jesus.  There  remains  a  third  element 
consisting  of  allusions  to  Christ  as  having  been 
exist«nt  and  active  before  He  appeared  on  earth. 
That  element  is  certainly  present  both  in  the  mind 
and  in  the  language  of  S't.  Paul.  The  difficult  and 
delicate  task  is  to  weigh  its  importance,  and  to 
account  for  its  presence  in  his  thinking. 

The  evidence  is  unevenly  distributed.  In  the 
four  '  chief '  Epistles  we  liave  a  number  of  allu- 
sions ;  in  each  of  two  of  the  'captivity'  Epistles, 
PhUippians  and  Colossians,  we  find  an  explicit 
statement.  The  allusions  in  the  earlier  Epistles 
are,  if  anything,  more  important  than  the  state- 
ments in  the  later  ones  ;  for  they  suggest  that  St. 
Paul  was  dealing  with  a  conception  regarding 
Christ  which  was  already  familiar,  which,  so  far 
from  requiring  to  be  proved,  was  \sidely  accepted 
as  a  necessary  inference  from  other  facts.  Further, 
the  references  are  '  so  incidental  as  to  suggest  the 
VOL.  I. — i^ 


inference  that,  while  intimately  related  to  his  own 
deepest  convictions  about  Christ,  this  doctrine 
formed  no  part  of  his  formal  teaching,  untU,  at 
least,  the  necessity  for  it  arose  in  the  special  cir- 
cumstances of  the  Church  at  Colosse'  (Somerville, 
(^.  cit.  p.  185 ;  cf.  Beyschlag,  NT  Theol.,  Eng.  tr., 
1895,  ii  78).  The  language  of  Gal  4*  ('God  sent 
forth  his  Son')  and  Ro  8'  ('God,  sending  his  Son 
in  the  likeness  of  sin's  flesh')  implies  this  previous 
existence  for  the  Son,  an  existence  under  different 
conditions,  with  which  subjection  to  the  Law  and 
participation  of  flesh  are  contrasted.  Consistently 
\vith  this  suggestion  the  Apostle  in  2  Co  8*  alludes 
to  the  fact  that  '  he  who  was  rich,  for  our  sakes 
became  poor,'  a  phrase  which  links  up  with  the 
statement  in  Philippians,  inasmuch  as  it  traces 
the  impoverishment  to  the  action  of  Christ  Him- 
self. In  1  Co  8*  there  is  a  suggestion  of  the  idea 
which  is  developed  in  Colossians,  where  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  'one  Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are 
all  things  and  we  bv  him ' ;  and  in  1  Co  15*'"  **, 
though  it  is  in  His  txaltation  that  He  is  recog- 
nized as  the  'Second  Adam,'  yet  as  contrasted 
^vith  the  first  Adam,  who  belongs  to  earth,  He  is 
represented  as  belonging  to  heaven,  and  being 
'the  heavenly  one.'  Indirectly,  the  language  of 
1  Co  10*  involves  the  same  idea  ('  They  drank  of 
that  spiritual  rock  that  followed  them"  and  that 
rock  was  Christ ') ;  but  the  immediate  significance 
of  the  saying  is  that  the  Apostle  puts  'Christ' 
where  Jewish  legend  had  put  '  Jahweh.' 

We  come  now  to  the  two  passages  in  which  St. 
Paul  appears  to  make  details  allusion  to  the  pre- 
existent  Christ.  The  first  is  in  Ph  2*"".  The 
first  point  to  notice  is  the  context.  Not  only  is 
the  example  of  Christ  appealed  to  as  a  ground  and 
norm  for  Christian  humiUty,  and  the  duty  of  each 
one  'looking  not  on  his  own  things  but  on  the 
things  of  others,'  but  the  conclusion  also  of  the 
whole  passage  is  relevant,  inasmuch  as  it  displays 
the  Exaltation  of  Christ  as  a  supreme  illustration 
of  God's  recognition  of  this  spirit  of  self-effacement : 
8i6  Kal  6  debs  airrby  vrepi^uHrey.  To  illustrate  the 
true  character  of  Christian  humility  St.  Paul  re- 
fers to  the  action  of  Christ,  which  took  place  be- 
fore His  appearance  upon  earth.  And  again  the 
description  is  calculated  to  remind  rather  than  to 
inform  ;  it  is  penned  for  them  who  already  know 
(Dibelitis,  cui  loc.).  Christ  had  been  originally 
(inrdpx<^)  iy  ffopffti  0€ov.  What  sense  are  we  to 
attach  to  this  phrase?  Lightfoot  {Philippian^, 
1878,  p.  127  fl". ),  after  an  exhaustive  examination  of 
the  use  of  the  words  fiop<pTi  and  (rxjifut  in  philo- 
sophic literature,  comes  to  the  conclusion  that 
nop<prif  '  must  apply  to  the  attributes  of  the  God- 
head,' that  it  implies  not  the  external  accidents 
but  the  essential  attributes,  so  that  the  possession 
of  fiopip^  involves  participation  in  the  oiaia  also. 

'  Thus  in  the  passage  aoder  consideration  the  /aopM  is  am- 
trasted  with  the  <nr>>f^  ^  that  which  is  intrinsic  and  essential 
with  that  which  is  accidental  and  outward.  And  the  three 
clauses  imply  resi)ectively  the  true  di>-ine  nature  of  our  Lord 
Oiop<^  0covX  the  true  human  nature  (uop4rh  iovXov\  and  the 
externals  of  tiuman  nature  (trxnfia-n  w$  ayOpmnt).' 

With  the  interpretation  of  fiopifrfi  goes  the  expla- 
nation of  (Xyai  tffa  0e<^,  '  equality  with  Gtod,'  as  some- 
thing which  was  already  Christ's  possession  but 
which  He  refused  to  regard  as  a  prize  to  be  ten- 
aciously held  (oi'x  dprayftby  rfyilaaTo) ;  but  so  far 
from  this.  He  divested  Himself  (iiciywaey  iavr&y) 
not  of  His  Divine  nature,  for  this  was  impossible, 
but  of  the  glories,  the  prerogatives  of  Deity. 
This  He  did  by  taking  upon  Him  the  form  of  a 
servant. 

This  interpretation  is  open  to  several  objections. 
— (i.)  In  effect  it  reads  into  St.  Paul's  language 
the  conclusions  of  a  later  Christology,  inasmuch 
as  the  meaning  which  it  gives  to  fioptftri  (as  involv- 
ing essential  participation  in  the  o&rla  or  substance) 


194  CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


must  be  carried  through  in  both  clauses,  and  we 
net  consequently  a  personality  which  has  taken 
the  substance  of  humanity  without  laying  asiile 
that  of  Deity,  (ii.)  It  gives  a  forced  meaning  to 
oovXov,  and  at  the  same  time  an  inadequate  one  ; 
for  if  the  word  means  no  more  tlian  '  man,'  we 
have  an  inexplicable  tautology — three,  or  at  least 
two,  clauses  in  succession  which  make  no  advance 
in  the  thouglit.  (iii.)  It  gives  an  unsatisfactory 
rendering  to  apiraytids,  which  is  rather  '  a  thing  to 
be  clutched  at'  than  'a  thing  to  be  held.' 

For  these  and  other  reasons  the  other  interpre- 
tation is  to  be  preferred,  according  to  which  St. 
Paul  is  using  the  terms  iiop<prij,  axvf^t  etc.,  in  a 
popular  sense  rather  than  as  philosophic  terms, 
and  iJ.op<pifi  means  '  form,'  which  is  separable  from 
essence,  though  more  truly  characteristic  than 
<rxvfJLa. ;  in  the  case  of  Christ  the  /J-op<pr]  deov  stands 
for  'the  glory  which  he  had  with  the  Father.' 
Having  this  glorious  form  as  a  Spirit-Being,  the 
Image  of  God,  He  might  have  grasped  at  the  yet 
higher  prize  to  be  '  equal  unto  God.'  But  (here 
comes  in  the  parallel  with  what  is  expected  of 
Christians)  He  refused  to  look  on  His  own  things, 
and  for  the  sake  of  others  (men)  emptied  Himself 
of  the  heavenly  spiritual  form,  tooK  the  form  of 
one  who  was  subject  to  inferior  powers,  including 

f)ossibly  the  Law,  and  humbled  Himself  to  the 
ast  stage  of  humiliation,  the  death  on  the  Cross. 
And  therefore  (here  comes  in  the  parallel  with 
what  the  self-effacing  Christian  may  expect)  God 
has  highly  exalted  Him,  has  conferred  upon  Him 
the  very  equali^  which  He  refused  to  grasp,  be- 
stowing upon  Him  the  name  that  is  above  every 
name,  that  '  every  tongue  should  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord.' 

The  Christological  passage  in  Philippians 
assumes  the  pre-existence  of  Christ ;  the  second 
passage,  in  Colossians  (P'"^^),  states  it  {airrSs  iarw 
irpb  w6.vTuv),  and  founds  on  it  a  doctrine  of  the  re- 
lation between  Christ  and  all  created  beings.  He 
is  '  the  firstborn  of  every  creature '  ( AV,  not  RV), 
antecedent  to  them  all.  It  is  not  necessary  to  ex- 
tend the  scope  of  St.  Paul's  language  here  so  as 
to  include  what  we  call  '  Nature,'  inanimate  crea- 
tion. The  meaning  of  '  all  things '  is  not  wider 
than  'every  creature,'  and,  so  far  as  'the  unseen' 
among  the  'all  things'  are  concerned,  they  are 
here  described  as  living  intelligences — '  thrones, 
principalities,  powers,  dominions,'  i.e.  angelic 
powers  in  'the  heavenlies.'  It  is  only  such  living 
intelligences  that  are  capable  of  being  'recon- 
ciled to  him'  (v.**).  And  it  is  of  them  that  St. 
Paul  says  that  they  all,  whether  on  earth  or  in 
heaven,  whether  seen  or  unseen,  were  created 
'  in '  Christ,  '  through '  Christ,  and  '  unto '  Christ, 
that  '  in  Him '  they  have  still  the  basis  of  their 
existence  (rA  vAvTa  iv  aim^  avu^aTTjKev).  They 
were  created  '  in  Christ '  (not  '  by ')  as  the  sphere 
within  which  the  Divine  will  operates  for  salva- 
tion ;  '  through  Him '  as  the  agent  for  the  effecting 
of  the  same  purpose  ;  and  '  unto  Him '  as  the  end 
or  goal  of  their  history,  which  provides  the  norm 
of  their  experience. 

What  we  have  here  is  in  fact  the  half-defined 
working  of  the  idea  which  found  definite  expres- 
sion in  the  Logos-Christology  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  Here,  if  anywhere,  St.  Paul  betrays  the 
influence  of  speculations  which  are  best  known  to 
us  through  the  works  of  Philo.  The  words  eUibv, 
irpttiTOTOKos,  ffvv4(rrr]Ktv,  are  all  employed  by  Philo 
for  the  exposition  of  the  relation  of  the  Logos  to 
the  origin  and  maintenance  of  created  things. 
How  tiiis  conception  and  the  nomenclature 
reached  St.  Paul,  it  is  impossible  to  say.  There 
was  enough  in  the  OT  doctrine  of  Wisdom  as  co- 
operative with  God  in  the  work  of  creation  to 
furnish  a  foundation  for  the  conception.     Details 


and  the  terms  he  emi)loy.s  may  have  reached  him 
through  the  cosmological  speculations  (if  tlie  false 
teachers.  They  interposed  between  God  and  His 
world,  as  agents  of  creation  and  intermediaries  of 
Divine  working,  the  hierarchy  of  unseen  spirit- 
forces.  St.  Paul  may  have  been  dealing  a  olow 
to  right  and  to  left  when  he  said  in  effect,  to  one 
school  of  thought,  '  your  Logos  is  our  Christ,'  to 
another,  'your  spirit- forces  were  called  into  l)eing 
by  Him  and  have  their  very  existence  conditioned 
by  Him.' 

It  remains  to  call  attention  to  two  general  facts 
of  a  character  apparently  opposite  to  those  we 
have  been  considering,  (a)  St.  Paul  never  gives  to 
Christ  the  name  or  description  of  'God.'  Two 
passages  have  been  ap])ealed  to  as  proving  that 
lie  does  :  (i. )  2  Th  V^  Kara  tt^v  x^-P'-"  '''<'''  ^^°"  ijixQiv  Kal 
Kvplov  'IriffoO  XpiffTov,  '  according  to  the  grace  of 
our  God  and  (the)  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  It  seems 
natural  at  first  sight  to  take  this  phrase  as 
describing  one  Person,  Jesus  Christ,  as  both  God 
and  Lord.  But  according  to  the  practically 
unanimous  opinion  of  modern  commentators  (B. 
Weiss,  Dibelius,  ad  loc.  in  Handbuch  zum  NT, 
1911),  the  phrase  must  be  treated  as  a  double  one 
referring  to  God  and  Christ  (so  AV  and  RV). 
(ii.)  Ro  9'  i^  ix)v  6  XpiffTos  rb  Kara  adpKa,  6  wv  iirl 
irdvTuv  6e6s  evXoyijTos  eis  roi/s  alwvas.  Both  AV  and 
RV  render  '  Christ  .  .  .  who  is  over  all,  (iod 
blessed  for  ever.'  WH  in  the  margin  of  their  Gr. 
text  put  a  colon  after  adpKa,  Hort  remarking  that 
this  alone  '  seems  adequate  to  account  for  the 
whole  of  the  language  employed,  more  especially 
when  it  is  considered  in  relation  to  the  context.* 
Westcott  adds  that  '  the  juxtaposition  of  6  X/jkttos 
Kard,  ffdpKo,  and  6  Cjv  ktX.  seems  to  make  a  change 
of  subject  improbable,'  indicating  his  opinion  that 
it  is  Christ  Avho  is  described  as  '  God  over  all ' ; 
Sanday-Headlam  also,  after  a  full  discussion  of 
the  passage,  take  the  doxology  as  ascribed  to 
Christ ;  so  also  B.  Weiss,  but  in  the  sense  that 
not  Godhead  but  Divine  Exaltation  is  postulated 
for  Him. 

Not  so  the  later  commentators,  who  for  the  most 
part  find  here  a  doxology  addressed  to  God,  '  God 
who  is  over  all  be  blessed  for  evermore.'  Evidence 
of  a  grammatical  or  linguistic  character  is  evenly 
balanced  in  favour  of  the  two  renderings ;  but  in 
favour  of  the  latter  there  is  the  strong  general  reason 
that  on  the  other  interpretation  we  should  liave  a 
phrase  which  would  inevitably  infringe  St.  Paul's 
monotheism  and  challenge  the  monotheism  of  his 
leaders.  And,  reviewing  the  whole  of  his  utter- 
ances regarding  Christ,  the  total  impression  is  that 
of  a  monotheistic  conviction  consistently  resisting 
the  impulse  to  do  this  very  thing — to  call  Jesus 
God.  On  the  other  hand,  nothing,  not  even  the 
Cross,  could  have  offered  a  greater  stumbling-block 
to  the  people  whom  St.  Paul  was  seeking  to  in- 
fluence than  the  proclamation  of  a  second  God. 
And  the  entire  absence  from  the  NT  of  any  indica- 
tion of  opposition  to  such  teaching,  or  of  necessity 
to  explain  teaching  which  would  be  so  distasteful, 
points  conclusively  in  the  same  direction. 

(j8)  This  conclusion  is  borne  out  by  the  second 
general  consideration,  viz.  the  frequent  and  em- 
phatic references  in  St.  Paul  to  the  subordination  of 
the  Son.  In  1  Co  3*"*  we  have  the  striking  climax, 
'  AH  things  are  yours,  for  ye  are  Christ's,  and  Christ 
is  God's' ;  cf.  1  Co  11'  '  the  head  of  every  man  is 
Christ ;  the  head  of  tlie  woman  is  the  man  ;  and  the 
head  of  Christ  is  God.'  The  very  name  of  'Son' 
implies  a  measure  of  subordination,  and  even  the 
supreme  Exaltation  of  the  Son  when  every  tongue 
shall  '  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord  '  (Ph  2'')  is 
'  to  the  glory  of  Grod  the  Fatiier.'  The  same  idea 
underlies  the  representation  of  Christ  as  the  organ 
of  God's  revelation,  of  creation,  of  reconciliation. 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGi' 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGV 


195 


And  it  is  brought  out  with  almost  startling  force 
in  1  Co  15^  '  When  all  things  shall  have  been  sub- 
jected unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  be 
subjected  to  hira  that  did  subject  all  things  unto 
him,  that  God  may  be  all  in  all.' 

Whether  St.  Paul  was  ever  conscious  of  the  prob- 
lem which  his  Christology  thus  presents,  it  is  im- 
possible to  say.  He  held  with  equal  conviction  and 
emphasis  two  propositions  which  seem  contradic- 
tory :  '  There  is  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who 
is  above  all  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all,'  and 

•  Christ  is  GJod  for  me ' ;  and  perhaps  they  find 
their  synthesis  in  that  saying  which  is  at  once  the 
simplest  and  the  profonndest  account  of  the  whole 
matter  :  '  Grod  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
untoliimseht '  (2  Co  5^*). 

4.  The  First  Epistle  of  Peter.— This  Epistle  opens 
with  a  phrase  ( '  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,'  P ;  cf .  2  Co  1',  Eph  1^)  which  puts  its 
Christology  on  the  same  plane  with  what  was 
central  in  the  Christology  of  St.  Paul,  but  at  the 
same  time  common  to  the  primitive  community 
(see  Hort's  notes  ad  loc.).  But  its  predominantly 
practical  character  does  not  offer  the  opportunity 
tor  developing  the  Christological  conception  in  de- 
tail. There  is  no  reference  to  Christ  as  Son  of  God 
(except  indirectly  in  the  phrase  quoted  above),  as 
Son  of  Man,  or  as  Spirit.  The  word  '  Christ '  is 
frequently  used  as  a  proper  name,  sometimes  in 
combination  with  •  Jesus,"  sometimes  by  itself.  The 
starting-point  of  Christian  '  hope'  and  of  Christian 
experience  is  the  Kesurrection  of  Christ  (1*) ;  but 
that  experience  is  described  in  terms  of  re-birth, 
recalling  the  language  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  (cf. 
1  P  1»-^  with  Jn  35  1^^  ^).  The  goal  of  Christian 
hope  is  '  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  *  (1  P  1'- " 
4'* ;  cf.  1*  5^).  In  the  interval  the  supreme  religi- 
ous duty  of  Christians  is  to  •  sanctify  in  their  hearts 
Christ  as  Lord '  (3"  RV).  St.  Peter  is  here  quoting 
(and  adapting)  the  language  of  Is  8^  ^'  in  the  LXX 
version,  which  concludes  with  Kiptor  airrbf  ayiiffare. 
Whatever  be  the  precise  way  in  which  his  words 
should  be  rendered,  the  signihcant  thing  is  that  he 
substitutes  the  word  X/xarbr  for  the  airrov  by  which 
the  prophet  meant  Jahweh.  He  demands  for  Christ 
the  same  reverence,  submission,  and  dependence  as 
the  prophet  claimed  for  Gtod,  and  he  makes  the 
rendering  of  these  the  central  thing  in  religion-  In 
2*  we  find  a  similar  application  to  Christ  of  the 
language  of  Ps  34*. 

Christ  '  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  having  gone 
into  heaven  (cf.  Ac  3^),  angels  and  authorities  and 
powers  being  made  subject  unto  him '  (3^).     For 

*  God  has  raised  him  from  the  dead,  and  given  him 
glory '  ( I^  ;  cf .  Ac  3"  idit^aaer  row  vaiSa  avroO  and 
Is  52"^  LXX  o  Tcuj  fwv  So^atrd-fjfferat  <rif>6Spa).  This 
glorified  Christ  is  the  'chief  shepherd'  (5*),  the 
'  shepherd  and  overseer  of  your  souls '  (2^),  by  a 
figure  which,  thouirh  familiar  in  the  OT  (e.g.  Ps  23, 
Zee  IS',  Is  40'^)  and  also  in  the  Gospels  {e.g.  Mt  9», 
Jn  10)  and  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (13*),  is 
never  applied  to  Christ  by  St.  Paul.  It  is  possible 
that  St.  Peter  also  represents  Him  as  '  ready  to 
judge  the  quick  and  the  dead '  (4*),  though  in  1"  it 
13  God  who  is  the  Judge. 

The  Epistle  is  distinguished  from  all  other  docu- 
ments of  the  XT  in  that  it  appears  to  assign  to 
Christ  a  redeeming  activity  in  the  interval  between 
the  Crucifixion  and  the  Kesurrection.  '  Being  put 
to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  in  the  Spirit,  in 
which  also  he  went  and  preached  to  the  spirits  in 
prison  '  (3^*-  ^) ;  cf .  4*  '  the  gospel  was  preached  to 
the  dead  also.'  The  idea  of  our  Lord's  descent 
into  Sheol  and  temporary  abode  there  underlies  the 
interpretation  put  by  St.  Peter  upon  Ps  16"  in  Ac 
2»  and  is  possibly  reflected  in  Eph  4*  (cf.  Lk  23*^). 
But  the  exposition  which  is  given  to  it  in  the  Epistle 
is  probably  due  to  the  influence  of  speculation,  traces 


of  which  are  found  in  apocalyptic  writings,  concern- 
ing the  ultimate  fate  of  fallen  spirits  in  the  under 
world.  The  Book  0/ Enoch  in  particular,  acquaint- 
ance with  which  is  traceable  elsewhere  in  thisEpistle 
(cf .  I''  with  Ell.  1\  deals  with  this  subject  in  several 
passages  (60*-  ^  64  69^,  ed.  Charles)  and  hints  at  an 
opportunity  of  repentance  allowed  to  sinners  of  the 
antediluvian  period  between  the  first  judgment  of 
the  Deluge  and  the  final  one.  En.  69*,  referring 
apparently,  after  a  long  interpolation,  to  the  fallen 
angels  of  ch.  64,  says,  '  There  was  great  joy  among 
them,  and  they  blessed  and  glorified  because  the 
name  of  the  Son  of  Man  was  revealed  unto  them.' 
The  reference  to  Noah  in  both  contexts  makes  it 
highly  probable  that  the  Enoch  literature  is  the 
source  of  the  special  idea  behind  the  passages  in 
1  Peter.  Christ  was  understood  to  have  preached 
'  to  the  Spirits  in  prison '  in  fulfilment  of  the  ex- 
pectation that  the  name  of  the  Son  of  Man  would 
be  revealed  to  them. 

Concerning  the  historic  Christ  the  Epistle  de- 
clares, quoting  Is  53^,  that  '  he  did  no  sin,  neither 
was  gnue  found  in  his  mouth '  (2^) ;  it  refers  to 
Him  as  'a  lamb  without  spot  and  blameless'  (1^), 
as  '  rejected  of  men '  but  '  chosen  of  Gk)d '  (2*),  as 
the '  righteous '  who  died  *  for  the  unrighteous'  (3^*). 
Special  emphasis  is  laid  upon  EUs  patient  endurance 
of  suffering  as  an  example  to  be  followed  by  all 
Christians  (2^  4^  ^) ;  and  of  these  sufferings  the 
writer  claims  to  be  a  '  witness,'  possibly  meaning 
an  eye-witness  (5^  ndprvs  rur  toC  'Kpurrmi  ra^/uirur). 
In  fact,  the  Epistle  testifies  to  the  thorough  work- 
ing out  of  that  analogy  between  the  suffering 
servant  in  Isaiah  and  the  crucified  Messiah,  the 
pr^nant  use  of  which  has  been  noted  in  St.  Peter's 
speeches  in  Acts. 

'The  Cbiist<dogical  l^are  whidi  bdoi«s  to  the  Petrine 
speccdMB  ot  Acts  and  the  Rrat  ^Hatle  d  Peter  ditHnetiweljf, 
beine  tnccable  daewhere  only  in  »  few  primitiTe  litorginl 
mwwgea.  ...  is  the  Isaian  figure  cl  the  suffering  Servant  of 
Tahweh' CB.  W.  Bacon.  JeautSkeScnt^Gcd,  1911.  p.  100)i 

Those  who  find  in  this  Epistle  the  doctrine  of  the 
pre-existent  Christ relv  on  two  passages — 1"  and  1**. 
In  the  first  of  these  tlie  prophets  are  said  to  have 
searched  •  what  time,  or  what  manner  of  time, 
the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them  {rb  er  airois 
rrev/ia  XpuTTod)  did  signify '  ;  and  it  is  inferred  that 
the  writer  ascribes  their  inspiration  to  the  Spirit 
of  the  (pre-existent)  Christ.  But  both  in  this  clause 
and  in  the  following  one  '  Christ '  probably  stands 
for  '  Messiah ' ;  and  the  meaning  is,  '  what  time  .  .  . 
the  Messiah-spirit  in  them  did  signify  when  it  tes- 
tified beforehand  the  sufferings  leading  up  to  {or 
destined  for)  Messiah.*  This  is  the  view  of  Hort 
{First  Ep.  of  Peter,  1898,  p.  53),  who  adduces  as  par- 
allels Is  61\  Ps  105'*,  2  S  231  LXX,  and  remarks : 

*  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  sharp  distinctkm  wfakb  we 
are  aocastomed  to 'make  betweoi  the  pnphetoatbe  one  rids 
and  the  Mfiwiah  at  whom  be  speakaon  the  othw  does  noi  emt 
in  the  OT  itseU.  The  pn^het,  the  peoide  to  whom  he  bdongs 
and  to  whom  he  nptelnt.  and  the  dinilf  seen  Head  and  Kin|;  o< 
the  people,  aO  pass  inaetHibly  one  Into  the  othertiB  the  laaginge 
of  prophecy:  thqr  all  are  partakers  a<  the  Divine  anotntinir,  and 
the  Mwgtiahahip  which  is  confemd  by  it.' 

In  the  second  passage  (1**)  Christ  is  described  as 
'foreknown  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
but  manifested  at  the  end  of  the  times '  {vpoeyptta- 
fidpoir  fuv  rpo  cara^oX^  cdtr/tov),  from  which  it  is 
argued  that  both  the  implication  of  the  word 
'  manifested '  and  its  correlation  with  '  foreknown ' 
strongly  favour  the  idea  of  personal  pre-existence. 
But  this  argument  probably  lays  an  unjustifiable 
stress  on  the  etymology  of  rpoeyrtKr/Uvop,  and  over- 
looks the  significance  suggested  by  its  usage.  The 
meaning  '  to  have  prescience  of*  does  not  well  suit 
either  this  passage  or  Ro  8**  (oflj  rpciyru  koI  rpoiopurew) 
or  Ro  1 1-  (oi'ic  ardicaTO  o  debt  ri»  'habw  avroO  6p  rpoeywa). 
So  Hort  points  out  {ad  loc.),  and  adds  :  "a  com- 
parison of  these  passages  suggests  that  in  them 


196 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


irpoyiyviiffKu  means  virtually  pre-recognition,  desig- 
nation to  a  function  or  position  '  (cf.  Jer  P,  Is  49'). 
The  idea  of  the  designation  of  the  Messiah  in  the 
counsel  of  God  before  all  worlds  is  expressed  more 
or  less  distinctly  in  other  language  in  Eph  !•• '", 
Col  1**,  and  does  not  necessarily  imply  pre-existence 
for  the  Messiah.  The  same  idea  is  illustrated  in 
this  Epistle  in  P,  according  to  which  the  recipients 
of  the  letter  are  '  saints  according  to  the  foreknow- 
ledge of  God  '  (/card  vpoyvuxriv  deov).  It  is  probable 
therefore  that  the  Epistle  does  not  contain  any  re- 
ference to  the  pre-existent  Christ. 

As  a  whole  it  displays  this  perplexing  combina- 
tion— the  presence  of  linguistic  echoes  of  Pauline 
phraseology,  and  the  absence  of  everything  that  is 
specifically  Pauline  in  thought.  We  look  in  vain 
for  any  reference  to  justification  or  reconciliation, 
to  the  mystical  participation  in  Christ's  death  and 
resurrection  or  the  union  between  Christ  and  the 
believer,  to  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God  or  as  '  sent 
into  the  world  from  a  pre-existent  state.'  There 
are  lines  of  connexion  with  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  e.g.  the  superiority  of  Christ  to  angels 
(3^;  cf.  Bacon,  op.  cit.  p.  91),  the  conception  of 
faith  approximating  to  hope,  the  reference  to 
'sprinkling*  (1*),  and  the  description  of  Christ  as 
•  Shepherd '  (2^).  But  the  Epistle,  especially  in  its 
Christology,  stands  distinctly  nearer  to  the  common 
primitive  basis  than  to  Paulinism  in  its  present  form. 

'The  writer  is  !by  no  means  a  Paulinist.  His  attitude  is 
rather  that  of  the  common  practical  consciousness  pervading 
the  churches — a  consciousness  which  was  prior  to  Paul,  and  in 
which  Paulinism,  for  the  most  part,  operated  merely  as  a 
ferment.  The  proper  appreciation  of  this  central  popular 
Christianity  in  the  apostolic  age  is  vital  to  the  proper  focus  for 
viewing  the  earlj'  Christian  literature  '  (Moffatt,  LNT,  1911,  p. 
330  f.). 

5.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.— This  Epistle 
contributes  a  very  original  development  of  the 
primitive  conception  of  Christ  in  closest  connexion 
with  a  special  view  of  the  character  of  His  redeem- 
ing work.  The  address  of  the  Epistle  '  to  Hebrews ' 
is  probably  as  misleading  as  its  traditional  ascrip- 
tion to  St.  Paul  as  its  author  was  mistaken.  And 
it  is  a  great  gain  to  NT  theology  that  it  is  now 
examined  apart  from  any  of  the  former  pre-sup- 
positions  as  to  either  authorship  or  address.  The 
phenomena  of  the  Epistle  '  converge  on  the  conclu- 
sion that  Paul  had  nothing  to  do  with  it ;  the 
style  and  religious  characteristics  put  his  direct 
authorship  out  of  the  question,  and  even  the  medi- 
ating hypotheses  which  associate  Apollos  or  Philip 
or  Luke  with  him  are  shattered  upon  the  non- 
Pauline  cast  of  speculation  which  determines  the 
theology '  (Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  428).  Compared  with 
the  letters  of  St.  Paul  it  runs  far  more  on  the  lines 
of  a  rhetorical  address,  and  may  have  been  intended 
in  the  first  place  for  a  (juite  small  and  homo- 
geneous community  of  Christians,  not  specially  dis- 
tinguished by  either  Jewish  or  Gentile  origin  and 
proclivities.  In  its  fundamental  purpose  it  is  'a 
word  of  exhortation'  (13-^),  and  its  key-note  is 
struck  in  2'"*,  especially  2^,  '  how  shall  we  escape 
if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation  ? '  The  Christian 
salvation  is  seen  to  be  '  so  great,'  because  after  an 
exhaustive  comparison  between  it  and  the  salvation 
offered  under  the  OT  covenant,  it  is  seen  to  be 
superior  at  every  point,  and  this  most  conspicu- 
ously in  the  Person  of  Him  through  whom  it  has 
been  mediated  (9"  ;  cf.  1"^  12"). 

"What  is  most  characteristic  in  the  Christology 
of  Hebrews  is  that  each  of  the  two  normative 
elements  in  the  primitive  conception  of  Clirist — the 
reality  of  His  hviman  nature  and  experiences,  and 
the  glorious  efficacy  of  His  Divine  Sonship — is 
reiterated  and  developed  with  a  new  emphasis  and 
with  new  detail.  This  is  specially  true  of  the 
Divine  Sonship,  which,  even  more  than  the  High- 
Priesthood,  expresses  for  the  writer  tlie  highest 


claim  for  Christ.  This  is  the  subject  into  which 
lie  bursts  without  any  preface,  in  the  opening 
sentences  of  his  letter.  God,  the  same  who  spoke 
to  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  has  spoken  to  us  by 
'  the  Son,'  whom  He  has  '  made  the  lieir  of  all 
things,'  '  by  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds.'  The 
description  which  follows,  of  the  Son  as  '  the  efful- 
gence of  his  glory,  the  expression  of  his  essence,' 
makes  clear  at  once  that  the  Sonship  is  conceived  in 
the  absolute  sense,  and  this  is  the  case  throughout 
(1*  2'  5*-  *  7^),  probably  even  where  the  full  phrase  (6 
vLb%  Tov  deov)  is  employed  (4'*  6*  7"  10^).  As  Son  He 
is  already  KpeiTruv  yevdfifvo^  tQv  6.yyO<uv  (\*),  and 
as  Son,  who  through  the  Kesurrection  has  become 
irpuTdroKos,  i.e.  Kepresentative  and  Head  of  the 
whole  family  of  God,  He  is  to  be  again  brought 
into  the  world  (1*),  when  His  eternal  glory  and 
sovereignty  will  be  yet  more  conspicuously  dis- 
played, ft  would  not  be  safe  to  infer,  however, 
that  the  author  intended  all  the  language  of  the 
OT  passages  whicli  he  proceeds  to  quote  to  apply 
literally  and  specifically  to  Christ ;  and  in  particu- 
lar the  quotation  from  Ps  45  ('  Thy  throne,  O  God, 
is  for  ever  and  ever,'  1*  RV  ;  see  marg.)  is  of  such 
uncertain  interpretation,  lx)thin  the  LXX  and  here, 
that  it  cannot  be  claimed  as  proof  that  the  writer 
addressed  Clirist  as  0€6s  (see  Westcott,  ad  loc). 
Nevertheless,  the  successive  clauses  of  the  opening 
paragraph  point  to  One  who  belongs  to  the  eternal 
order,  and  holds  at  once  a  unique  and  a  universal 
relation  to  all  created  things.  The  timeless  char- 
acter of  the  Son's  existence  is  indirectly  brought 
out  by  the  analogy  of  Melchizedek,  who  '  having 
neither  beginning  nor  end  of  days,'  is  therein  '  made 
like  unto  the  Son  of  God '  (7»). 

In  all  this  there  is  both  likeness  and  unlikeness 
to  the  Christology  of  St.  Paul — likeness  in  the  con- 
ception of  Sonship  as  involving  radiant  revelation 
(ex.  elKuv  roD  deov)  of  Christ  as  connected  with  the 
creation  and  sustaining  of  all  created  being  (1  Co  8*, 
Col  1'*) ;  unlikeness,  if  not  in  substance,  yet  in  the 
greater  sweep  and  definiteness  of  the  conception 
and  in  tlie  probable  extension  of  meaning  here 
given  to  ra  iravra.  While  in  both  cases  the  passage 
in  Wis.  (7'^^)  has  unmistakably  left  its  mark  on 
the  language,  in  the  case  of  Heb.  we  must  probably 
allow  also  for  the  influence  of  Philo's  elaboration 
of  the  same  nexus  of  ideas. 

But  there  is  a  deeper  distinction  in  the  use  of 
the  Sonship-conception  as  between  St.  Paul  and 
Hebrews.  There  is  nothing  in  the  latter  corre- 
sponding to  the  note  of  tenderness  and  intimate 
aflection  which  St.  Paul  seems  to  have  recognized 
in  the  relationship  (e.g.  Ro  88- *i.  Col  l'^).  The 
'  Sonship '  in  Hebrews  shows  not  so  much  a  change 
of  quality  from  the  official  Messianic  conception 
as  an  extension  of  it  into  a  timeless  past.  And 
this  is  confirmed  by  the  absence  from  the  Epistle 
of  any  reference  to  God  as  the  Father  whether  of 
Christ  or  of  men  in  Christ.  St.  Paul's  pregnant 
phrase,  '  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,'  makes  no  appearance  ;  nor  do  we  find  '  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ '  at  all,  but  in  its  stead  the  very 
rare  6  /ci/ptoj  i)tiQ)v  (7'*  13'''° ;  otherwise  only  in  1  Ti  1", 
2  Ti  18,  2  P  3i»). 

This  '  Son  '  has  now  entered  into  '  heaven  itself ' 
(92* ;  cf.  4"  122»,  1  P  3",  Ac  3^1, 1  Th  1"),  and  taken 
His  seat  '  at  the  right  hand  of  the  majesty  on 
high '  (P  ;  cf.  81  lO''*  12^).  But  He  has  entered  not 
only  as  the  glorified  Mes.siah,  the  Lord,  who  exer- 
cises kingly  rule,  but  also  as  the  great  High  Priest, 
in  whom  the  high  priests  (and  priests)  of  the  old 
dispensation,  with  the  whole  system  of  sacrifices 
and  purifications  which  they  represent,  find  their 
antitype  and  consummation. 

( 1 )  Tfie  High-Priesthood.  — .Tust  as  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  the  Messiahship,  so  here  the  High-Priest- 
hood, is  a  function  of  the  Sonsiiip.     It  is  presented 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


197 


in  two  aspects :  lirst,  as  typified  in  the  Levitical 
High-Priesthood ;  and  second,  as  typified  in  the 
Priest-King  Melchizedek.  The  title  Itpevs  (d/>x'«- 
ptvs),  which  in  this  Epistle  alone  of  the  books  of  the 
NT  is  applied  to  Christ,  appears  quite  abruptly  at 
2"  and  again  at  3^  but  its  contents  are  developed 
from  4"  onwards.  Christ  corresponds  with  the 
type,  the  Levntical  High-Priesthood,  in  that  He  too 
isable  'to  bear  gently  with  the  ignorant  and  errant' 
(5' ;  cf .  4'*),  in  that  tie  too  holds  the  office  by  Divine 
appointment  {5*-*),  and  in  that  He  provides  an 
effective  offering  and  purification  for  sins  (7^^ ;  cf. 
1^  2").  But  to  this  Priesthood  He  is  superior  in 
that  He  requires  not  to  make  any  offering  for  His 
own  sins  (7-') ;  and  by  a  single  offering,  the  offering 
of  His  body  once  for  all  (lO'"),  He  '  has  perfected 
for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified'  (10^*).  But, 
argues  the  writer,  it  would  be  a  mistake  to 
stop  short  at  the  analogy  of  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood, when  there  is  another  equally  applicable, 
and  itself  belonging  to  a  higher  category.  '  Leav- 
ing the  story  of  the  beginning  of  the  Christ  (the 
first  stage),  let  us  be  borne  on  to  His  culmination 
(6^)  ;  though  it  be  a  long  story  we  have  to  tell, 
and  one  difficult  of  interpretation '  (5").  The  cul- 
mination of  the  Priesthood  of  Christ  followed  on 
His  Exaltation,  when  He  became  a  '  priest  for  ever 
after  the  order  of  Melchizedek '  {6^  ;  cf.  o*^^  7^). 
That  is  to  say,  the  writer  agrees  with  St.  Paul  in 
ascribing  a  great  accession  of  power  and  dignity 
to  Christ  consequent  upon  the  [Resurrection  and] 
Exaltation,  but  he  applies  to  Christ  as  Priest  the 
enhancement  of  significance  which  St.  Paul  applies 
to  Him  as  *  Son  of  God '  (Ro  1*). 

This  Priesthood  after  a  new  '  order,'  correspond- 
ing to  the  '  better  covenant '  of  which  Christ  was 
the  Mediator  and  the  Pledge  (7"  9^^  12-^),  tran- 
scended every  other  form  of  priesthood  in  that 
(o)  it  was  '  after  the  power  of  an  endless  life '  (V^) ; 
{b)  it  was  confirmed  by  an  oath  of  God  (7"^  ^)  ; 
(c)  the  type  to  which  it  conformed  included  kingly 
as  well  as  priestly  functions  and  prerogatives,  and 
moreover  could  he  shown  by  a  historical  illustra- 
tion to  be  superior  to  the  Levitical  priesthood 
(7^'  ^'') ;  and  (rf)  it  was  unchallengeable,  unique, 
absolute  (7^  dirapd^aTos ;  see  Westcott  ad  loc). 
Such  a  High  Priest,  'holy,  harmless,  undefiled' 
in  personal  character,  '  separated  from  sinners ' 
and  '  higher  than  the  heavens '  in  regard  to  the 
conditions  of  His  existence,  is  One  who  answers  to 
human  need  (7^).  There  'he  ever  liveth  to  make 
intercession'  (7^;  cf.  7"  9^^);  through  Him  men 
offer  '  the  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God '  (13^^)  ;  and  for 
them  He  secures  access  to  '  the  holy  place '  (4^^  ;  cf. 
1019-22)  These  priestly  functions  He  continues  to 
exercise  ;  but 

'the  modem  conception  of  Christ  pleading  in  heaven  His 
Passion,  "  offering,'  His  bloo<i,"  on  behalf  of  men  has  no  founda- 
tion in  the  Epistle.  His  srlorified  humanity  is  the  eternal 
pledge  of  the  absolute  efficacy  of  His  accomplished  work.  He 
pleads,  as  older  writers  truly  expressed  the  thought,  by  His 
Presence  on  the  Father's  Throne '  (Westcott,  Hebrewg,  1889,  p. 
230). 

(2)  The  historical  Jesus. — This  conception  of  the 
eternal  representation  of  humanity  in  the  presence 
of  God  as  an  essential  part  of  Christ's  redeeming 
function  is  related  to  the  emphasis  on  the  reality 
of  His  human  nature,  which  runs  through  the 
Epistle,  concurrent  with  the  emphasis  on  His 
Divine  glory  and  dignity.  The  human  name 
'Jesus'  appears  with  marked  frequency  and  em- 
phasis, nine  times  in  all,  and  in  nearly  every  case 
is  placed  emj)hatically  at  the  end  of  a  clause. 
Though  there  is  no  reference  to  the  birth  of  Jesus, 
and  only  one  to  His  Resurrection  (13-*),  stress  is 
laid  upon  His  death  as  a  death  of  suffering  (2^-io), 
and  the  scene  in  Gethsemane  as  well  as  the  locality 
of  the  Cnicifixion  are  indicated  with  unexampled 
detail  (o'*-  12^).     In  character  He  is  described  as 


'  holy,  harmless,  undefiled '  (7*),  and  '  faithful  to 
him  that  appointed  him '  (3*).  He  Himself  was 
'  made  for  a  season  lower  than  the  angels '  (2*),  and 
is  specifically  described  as  a  sharer  in  'the  blood 
and  flesh  or  men '  (2'^),  seeing  that  '  it  behoved 
him  to  be  made  like  unto  his  brethren'  (2").  In 
particular,  the  likeness  in  experience  extended  to 
temptation,  and  the  temptation  was  such  as  arose 
from  His  likeness  to  men,  though  there  was  no  sin 
either  as  its  cause  or  as  its  result  (2>*  4").  Tlie 
writer  does  not  shrink  from  ascribing  to  His  human 
nature  progress  and  also  weakness  and  shrinking 
from  death  :  'in  the  days  of  his  flesh  .  .  .  though 
he  was  Son  yet  learned  he  obedience  through  the 
things  which  he  suffered  ' ;  '  he  offered  prayers  and 
supplications  to  him  that  was  able  to  save  him  from 
death  with  strong  crj-ing  and  tears '  (5"'"'}. 

The   author  does   not,   however,   even    in    this 

[)assage  (*cai  reXeioj^eij)  teach  that  Christ  was  de- 
ivered  from  moral  infirmity,  and  so  made  morally 
perfect.  A  study  of  the  word  TeXeiowu  and  its  cog- 
nates, as  used  in  the  Epistle,  shows  that  it  connotes 
'complete  development,'  arriving  at  the  destined 
end,  consummation.  'To  "make  perfect"  does 
not  mean  to  endow  with  all  excellent  qualities, 
but  to  bring  to  the  end,  that  is,  the  appropriate  or 
appointed  end,  the  end  corresponding  to  the  idea ' 
(A.  B.  Davidson,  ad  loc).  Here  the  idea  is  ade- 
quacy to  be  the  Author  of  Salvation  (2^*  5'),  or 
Sanctifier  (2"),  or  High  Priest  (7^ ;  cf.  6^).  It  is 
in  this  sense  that  Christ  was  '  made  perfect,'  and 
that  'through  suffering';  and  in  this  sense  that 
He  is  the  Author  [or  Pioneer]  and  Perfecter  of 
faith  (12*). 

6.  The  Johannine  literature. — It  is  now  commonly 
understood  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  contains  tMo 
elements,  combined  in  proportions  Mhich  are  still 
uncertain — history  and  its  religious  interpretation. 
And  these  so  interpenetrate  one  another  that  not 
only  is  it  difficult  to  separate  them,  but  the  form 
given  to  the  history  is  in  a  lesser  or  greater  degree 
afl'ected  by  the  interpretation.  What  we  are  con- 
cerned with  here  is  the  conception  of  Christ  Avhich 
gave  rise  to  the  interpretation,  and  left  its  mark 
on  the  historical  material.  At  least  the  first  of 
the  Johannine  Epistles,  proceeding  from  the  same 
source,  adds  its  witness  to  the  same  conception. 

The  Christology  of  the  Johannine  literature  is 
remarkable,  in  the  first  place,  for  the  combination 
and  reprotluction  of  practically  all  the  elements 
which  had  emerged  in  the  earlier  documents  of  the 
NT.  Christ  is  presented  as  Messiah  (Son  of  God, 
Son  of  Man),  Son,  Priest,  Judge,  and  Creator,  and 
also  as  adequately  replaced  by  the  Spirit.  The 
combination  is  the  more  remarkable  when  justice 
is  done  to  the  large  measure  of  independence  among 
the  documents  in  which  these  aspects  of  Christ  are 
severally  emphasized.  The  various  lines  which 
radiate  from  the  common  centre  of  primitive  con- 
ceptions are  brought  together  again  in  the  Johan- 
nine Christology.  Only  the  title  Kuptos  practically 
disappears  (except  in  20^)  from  the  Gospel  and  the 
Epistles  alike,  a  fact  in  which  Bousset  (op.  cit.  p. 
187)  sees  the  efiect  of  the  same  deep  mysticism 
which  claims  for  the  disciples  the  position  of  friends. 

But  though  these  elements  are  present  in  the 
same  form,  their  connotation  is  modified  in  com- 
parison with  the  earlier  writings.  Each  of  them 
has  undergone  a  subtle  change,  partly  in  conse- 
quence of  their  being  subsumed  under  one  general 
conception,  and  partly  because  of  the  character  of 
that  over-ruling  principle,  which  is  commonly  but 
inadequately  described  as  the  'Logos-idea.'  One 
general  rule  applies  to,  and  partly  explains,  these 
subtle  changes.  The  Johannine  conception  of 
Christ  differs  from  those  that  had  gone  before  in 
that  it  is  static,  not  dynamic.  All  that  Christ  has 
since  become  to  the  Church  or  been  discovered  to 


198  CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


CHRIST,  CHRISTOLOGY 


be,  He  must  liave  been  from  the  beginning.  That 
eternal  and  intrinsic  relation  to  God  towards  the 
expression  of  which  other  writers  had  been  moving, 
has  now  become  the  central  and  governing  idea,  in 
the  light  of  which  all  His  other  relations,  all  His 
functions,  are  beheld  and  set.  And  there  is  no  need, 
because  tliere  is  no  room,  for  the  recognition  of 
crises  in  His  experience,  such  as  the  Bajitisni  and 
the  Transfiguration,  or  '  being  declared  the  Son  of 
God  M'ith  power,'  or  being  '  made  a  priest  for  ever ' 
at  the  Exaltation.  The  only  change  allowed  for  is 
a  change  of  form,  at  the  beginning  from  the  Logos 
to  the  Logos  made  flesh,  and  again  at  the  end  from 
the  human  manifestation  to  the  spiritual  condition 
of  being. 

The  writer  distinctly  states  the  purpose  he  had 
in  view  when  composing  his  Gospel  (20^') :  '  these 
[signs]  are  written  that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus 
is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  that  believing 
ye  may  have  life  in  liis  name.'  But  the  two  titles 
nave  interchanged  their  relative  importance.  In 
the  Synoptic  Gospels  Jesus  is  '  Son  of  God '  because 
He  is  Messiah,  in  accordance  with  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Ps  2''.  Here  He  is  Messiah  because  He  is 
Son  of  God.  And  the  Sonship  is  uniformly  con- 
ceived as  a  relation,  intrinsic,  unique,  and  eternal, 
involving  and  resting  upon  essential  unity  with  the 
Father  (P  KP  U^"  etc.). 

'  The  idea  of  Sonship,  which  in  Paul  is  carefully  subordinated 
to  a  strict  monotheism,  is  accepted  in  its  full  extent.  In  the 
generation  succeeding:  Paul  the  name  "  Son  of  God  "  had  gradu- 
ally assumed  the  more  definite  meaning  which  the  Greek 
language  and  forms  of  thought  attached  to  it.  The  Fourth 
Evangelist  employs  it  deliberately  in  the  sense  which  it  would 
convey  to  the  ordinary  Greek  mind.  Jesus  as  the  Son  was 
Himself  of  the  same  nature  as  the  Father.  All  the  divine 
powers  and  attributes  de>olved  on  Him  in  virtue  of  His  inherent 
birthright  as  Son  of  God '  (E.  F.  Scott,  The  Fourth  Gospel,  1906, 
p.  194). 

As  Son,  Christ  is  now  in  heaven,  whither  He  has 
ascended  (3'*) ;  He  is  '  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father ' 
(P*).  But  He  is  also  witli  and  in  the  Church  on 
earth.  He  has  returned,  in  a  very  real  sense, 
though  not  'with  the  clouds  of  heaven.'  And  the 
story  of  His  life  on  earth  is  written  from  the  point 
of  view  of  those  who  know  Him  to  be,  and  to  have 
been  all  along,  the  Son  of  God  from  heaven  (3"-  ^^ 
etc.).  He  has  been  recognized  as  Divine,  and 
Divine  in  such  a  sense  that  even  in  His  human 
manifestation  He  retained  attributes  of  Godhead. 
Omniscience  is  not  obscurely  claimed  for  Him  (l**^ 
228  417. 89) .  a^jj(j  jjig  miracles  are  not  so  much  works 
of  mercy  as  signs  {a-rjfiela)  of  supernatural  power. 

The  miracles  are  specially  represented  as  attest- 
ing His  claim  to  be  Messiah  (ICF).  And  that  claim 
is  made  for  Him  (!*'•  **)  from  the  very  outset  of  His 
Ministry,  and  by  Himself  (4^  10^^),  in  the  plainest 
terms ;  while  belief  that  He  is  the  Messiah  is  re- 
presented as  the  condition  of  salvation  {8^ ;  cf. 
10").  From  the  beginning  al.so  He  exercises  His 
Messianic  authority  {e.g.  in  the  cleansing  of  the 
Temple,  2'^"^'),  and  '  reveals  his  [divine]  glory'  (2^^). 
The  Baptist  points  to  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  '  as 
a  dove  from  heaven'  (p-s*)  as  the  proof  of  His 
Mes.siahship,  not  as  the  occasion  of  its  inauguration. 

The  title  '  Son  of  Man '  also  reappears  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  (12  times),  and  still  as  the  self- 
designation  of  Jesus.  It  retains  what  is  probably 
the  most  significant  feature  of  its  use  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  viz.  the  suggestion  of  contrast ; 
but  wliereas  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  the  contrast 
may  be  either  between  the  real  glory  of  the  Messiah 
ana  the  lowliness  of  His  appearance  or  between  the 
real  lowliness  of  Jesus  and  the  glorj-  of  liis  future, 
here  it  is  uniformly  the  latter  (1"  'Hereafter  ye 
shall  see  heaven  opened  and  the  angels  of  God  ascend- 
ing and  descending  on  the  Son  of  man ' ;  12^  IS**' 
'  Now  is  the  Son  of  man  glorified ').  This  is  still 
the  case  in  tlie  three  instances  which  refer  to  the 
lifting  ui)  of  Christ  (3"  S**  12"-),  where  the  'lifting 


up'  involves  not  the  Crucifixion  alone  but  the 
Crucifixion  as  the  preliminary  to  power  and  glory. 
Viewed  as  one  factor  in  the  Johannine  conception  of 
Christ,  the  title  lays  stress  on  tlie  weakness,  humil- 
ity, and  obscurity  of  His  earthly  manifestation. 

But  the  Messiahship  itself  is  looked  at  through 
the  experience  of  intervening  years.  The  trans- 
mutation of  eschatology  has  already  been  accom- 
plished. The  Kingdom  of  God  is  such  that  it  can 
be  seen,  and  entered,  only  by  those  who  have  been 
'  bom  again,'  tho.se  who  are  '  spirit '  (3'-  ').  It 
follows  that  the  function  of  tiie  Messiah  in  relation 
to  that  Kingdom  is  differently  conceived.  It  is  to 
declare  the  Father  (1'*),  to  give  that  knowledge  of 
God  which  itself '  is  life  eternal '  (17*). 

To  Christ  is  assigned  here  also  the  function  of 
Judge ;  but  it  is  no  longer  that  of  index  futtirus. 
His  presence  in  the  world  acts  alreafly  as  a  Kpi<rts 
(317-16  5ij2  93a) ,  even  when  He  waives  the  function, 
it  is  because  the  words  He  has  spoken  have  judg- 
ment-force (12^'')-  It  is  to  save  tlie  world  that  He 
has  come,  the  Life,  the  Light,  the  Truth,  or,  in  one 
chosen  name,  the  Word  of  God. 

This  '  Logos-conception '  is  neither  the  dominat- 
ing conception  which  has  given  shape  to  the  con- 
tents of  the  Gospel,  nor  is  it  an  after-thought. 
The  Evangelist  comes  to  that  conception  with  his 
belief  in  Christ  as  the  Divine  Son  of  God  alreadj- 
complete,  with  the  various  aspects  of  His  nature 
and  function  already  correlated  and  harmonized 
under  that  idea  ;  and  adopts  as  a  means  of  relating 
his  central  conception  to  contemporary  Hellenistic 
thought  the  description  of  Logos  for  the  Son  of 
God. 

'  The  Johannine  Logos  shows  nothing  of  the  fluctuating  am- 
biguity which  forms  the  characteristic  quality  of  the  Philonic. 
He  is  Personality  through  and  through,  and  (what  for  Philo  is 
an  impossible  thought)  has  entered  on  the  closest  union  with 
the  <rap^,  the  anti-Divine  principle '  (Bauer,  '  ad  Jn  1','  in  Hand- 
buch  zum  NT,  1912,  p.  7 ;  cf.  also  Bousset,  Kyrioa  Chrittot, 
1913,  p.  187  note). 

It  would  be  the  direct  converse  of  that  method, 
to  begin  with  the  conception  of  the  Logos  as 
current  in  Hellenistic  speculation,  and,  having 
analyzed  its  contents,  proceed  to  fit  into  harmony 
with  its  several  elements  the  records  of  the  life 
of  Jesus  which  were  relevant  to  his  purpose.  He 
introduces  the  Logos  as  a  term  already  familiar  to 
his  readers ;  he  reminds  them  of  the  nature,  the 
prerogatives,  the  activity  of  the  Logos,  His  sharing 
in  the  nature  of  God,  His  timeless  being.  His  part 
in  the  ANork  of  creation  ;  and  then  says  in  etlect, 
'  This  Logos  is  our  Christ ;  He  became  flesh  ;  and 
we  beheld  His  glory,  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten 
of  the  Father.'  And  throughout  the  subsequent 
relation  of  His  acts  and  words,  that  glory  is  allowed 
to  shine. 

But  not  to  the  obliteration  of  His  humanity,  or 
to  the  obscuring  of  His  dependence  upon  (lod. 
The  glory  was  visible  to  those  who  believed  on 
Him ;  but  they  were  fully  persuaded  of  the  reality 
of  His  human  nature  too  (1  Jn  P"^).  To  others  He 
appeared  as  a  man  (4^  5^-  7"  9"  10^),  with  a  human 
father  and  mother  (6**).  They  relied  on  the  evi- 
dence of  their  senses  when  they  accused  Mini  of 
blasphemy,  '  because  thou  being  a  man  iiiakest 
thyself  God'  (10^).  The  Evangelist,  does  not 
shrink  from  reporting  the  words  of  Philip  when  he 
described  Him  as  'Jesus  the  son  of  Joseph' (1**), 
or  those  of  the  Baptist  referring  to  Him  as  dvdpuiro^ 
(3")  ;  he  even  reports  Jesus  as  referring  to  Himself 
in  the  same  terms — vvv  8i  ^-rrre'iri  fie  diroKrelvai  ivdpv- 
TTov  8s  rijv  iX-qdeiav  ii/juy  \e\d\rjKa  (8*). 

His  humanity  is  emphasized  with  a  detail  un- 
known in  the  Synoptic  Gospels— He  could  l)e 
wearied  (4«),  thirsty  (19=«),  troubled  in  spirit  (13"'). 
He  Himself  .says,  '  Now  is  my  soul  troubled  '  (12=^), 
and  prays  that  He  may  be  saved  '  from  this  hour' 
(cf.  He  5^).     He  formed  ties  of  intimat<'  personal 


CHRISTIAX 


CHRISTIAX 


199 


friendship  and  atiection  (11*),  and  at  the  tomb  of 
Lazanis  He  •  wept '  (11^).  Tiie  attempt  to  explain 
such  iostances  of  emphasis  on  the  human  nature 
of  Jesus  as  due  to  the  '  schematism '  of  the  writer 
is  an  attempt  to  get  rid  of  the  problem  left  by 
the  Johannine  Christology  by  evading  one  of  the 
factors,  and  it  is  wrecked  on  the  simplicity  and 
naturalness  of  each  of  the  instances.  A  schema- 
tism which  so  successfully  concealed  the  iimer 
meaning  of  the  language  would  defeat  its  own 
object. 

Nor  is  it  possible  to  explain  away  the  repeated 
witness  to  the  sense  of.  dependence  upon  God  ac- 
knowledged by  Jesus,  and  the  derivation  of  His 
power  from  Him.  The  Father  who  is  '  greater 
than  all  things'  (1(P)  is  'greater  than'  the  Son 
(14*).  From  the  Father  the  Son  derives  the  things 
which  He  speaks  to  the  world  (8» ;  cf.  S»  12»  15"), 
and  also  the  power  to  do  His  'works.'  He  'can 
do  nothing  of  himself '  (5" ;  cf.  5*  8**).  He  submits 
Himself  continuously  to  the  Father's  commands 
(15^*;  ct.  8*t.  and  finds  His  spiritual  nourishment 
in  obedience  (4**).  It  is  in  this  document  where 
the  human  nature  of  the  Son  and  His  dependence 
on  the  Father  are  asserted  with  the  strongest 
emphasis  that  His  Divinity  Is  for  the  first  time 
expressly  acknowledged  (1^  20*).  If  John  thus 
leaves  an  unsolved  problem  for  posterity  to  attack 
it  is  better  to  recognize  that  it  is  so. 

'  How  it  was  possible  that  this  essential  divine  poaaeaaion. 
the  exclosiye  oidowinent  of  a  heavenly,  sinritnal  being,  could 
be  manifested  in  a  being  of  flesh,  is  not  a  subject  on  which  he 
seenis  to  have  pondeml — it  is  to  him  simply  a  marvel  for 
reverent  contemplation  !  One  thing  only  is  <^ear,  that  with 
equal  energy-  be  defends  both  positions:  tmly  become  flesh, 
and  yet  in  complete  possession  of  those  qualities  which  con- 
stitate  the  nature  of  the  Deity '  (J.  Weiss,  op.  eit.  p.  151). 

LiTERATXrBX. — In  addition  to  the  aathorities  dted  above,  see 
W.  Lock, '  Christfdoey  of  the  Earlier  Chapters  of  the  Acts,'  in 
Expositor,  4th  ser.,  iv.  [1891]  17S ;  W.  Sanday,  ChrUMogiet 
Anciont  and  Modern^  Oxlotd,  1910 ;  G.  H.  Box,  'The  Christian 
Messiah  in  the  Light  0t  Judaism,'  in  JThSt  xiiL  [1912]  321 ; 
B.  W.  Bacon,  Jegu»  ths  Son  of  God,  London,  19U  ;  J.  Gran- 
bery.  Outline  of  AT  Ckristoloffr,  Chicago,  1909  ;  A.  E.  Garvie, 
Stuaie*  of  Paul  and  ?iis  Ooipel,  UoaAon,  1911 ;  A.  Oeiss- 
nuum,  5t.  Paul,  Ene  tr.,  London,  1912;  M.  Briickner,  Die 
BnttUhung  der  ■paxdiniteken  Ckristoloffie,  Strassbuig,  1903; 
W.  Olschewski,  Die  Wurzeln  der  paulinitehen  Ckrittologie, 
Konigsberg,  1909  :  S.  Monteil,  La  CkritUtloffie  de  Saint-Paul, 
Paris,  1906  ;  A.  Jdlicher,  Paulu*  und  Jesu*,  TnlMngen,  1907 : 
J.  Weiss,  Jfsiti  I'm  Glauben  de*  UrehritUntumt,  do.  1910,  and 
•Christologie  cles  Lrchristen turns,'  in  RGG  L  [1909]  1712 ff. ; 
A.  S.  Pe^e,  'The  Person  of  Christ  in  the  Revelation  of  St. 
John,'  in  Mansfield  College  Ettayt,  London,  1909,  p.  88 ;  F. 
Loofs,  What  is  tie  Truth  about  Jesus  Chrialt,  Eng.  tr.,  Edin- 
bmxh,  1913  ;  H.  R.  Mackintosh,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Peraon 
of  Jesus  Chrift,  Edinburgh,  1912 ;  W.  Bonsset,  Kyrios  Ckristot, 

G««M>g«>.  1913.  C.  Andersox  Scott. 

CHRISTIAN  (Xpurri<w<}j).  —  We  might  expect 
that,  in  the  case  of  so  renoT\-ned  a  name  as  '  Chris- 
tian,' the  occasion  and  circumstances  of  its  origin 
would  have  been  recorded  with  all  possible  detail, 
but  such  is  not  the  case.  Its  first  appearance  is 
noticed  in  the  most  simple,  matter-of-fact  way 
without  further  explanation.  '  The  disciples  were 
called  Christians  first  in  Antioch  '  (Ac  U^J.  Then, 
as  far  as  the  NT  is  concerned,  the  name  almost 
disap[)ears ;  it  is  mentioned  only  twice  again  (Ac 
26^,  1  P  4^*).  In  the  former  passage  Agrippa 
says :  '  Thou  wouldest  fain  make  me  a  Christian '  ; 
in  the  latter.  Peters  words,  '  If  a  man  sutler  as  a 
Christian,'  are  spoken  from  a  persecutor's  stand- 
ix>int.  Even  in  Agrippa's  day  the  designation 
was  understood  (<r.  A.D.  44),  and,  when  1  Peter 
was  written  (.\.D.  64-67),  it  must  have  been  in 
common  use.  In  the  other  Epistles  the  name  does 
not  occur.  There  the  terms  used  are  such  as 
'disciples,'  'believers,'  'the  faithfiil,'  'brethren,' 
•saints.'  The  only  two  points  definitely  indicated 
in  Ac  1 1*  are  the  time  and  place,  and  both  these 
are  in  every  way  appropriate. 

The  missionary  work  of  the  Church  was  about 
to    begin     from    Antioch    as    its    starting-point. 


There  a  considerable  church  had  been  formed  by 
the  united  labours  of  Bamabaa  and  Saul.  Driven 
from  Jerusalem  by  persecution,  disciples  had  gone 
to  Cyprus  and  preached  to  the  Jews  there. 
Thence  some  came  over  to  Antioch  and  preached 
to  '  Greeks  also '  ("EXXi/raj ;  another  reading  has 
'E\Xi}vurrds,  'Grecian  Jews'),  with  the  result  that 
'  a  great  number  believed.'  Barnabas  came  from 
Jerusalem  on  an  errand  of  inquiry,  and  under  hv* 
ministry  'much  people  was  added  to  the  Lord.' 
Barnabas  then  fetched  Saul  from  Tarsus ;  both 
laboured  in  Antioch  'a  whole  year'  and  taught 
'much  people'  {6x^0"  ucari^).  fiere  was  the  first 
considerable  chtirch  on  Gentile  soil ;  a  common 
name  was  necessary  and  was  forthcoming — provi- 
dentially, we  cannot  doubt,  but  how  is  not  so  clear. 

The  citry  of  Antioch  {q.v.),  the  capital  of  Syria, 
a  splendid  centre  of  Greek  life  and  culture,  became 
after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  (A.D.  70)  a  second  home 
of  the  Church  and  the  mother-church  of  Gentile 
Christianity.  Although  it  does  not  figure  promi- 
nently in  the  NT,  in  subsequent  history  it  plays 
a  great  part  as  a  rival  of  Alexandria,  Rome,  and 
Constantinople.  Chrysostom,  the  prince  of  early 
Christian  preachers,  won  his  first  fame  there. 
This  Antioch  school  of  theology  represented  a 
type  of  interpretation  more  akin  to  modem  thought 
than  any  other  in  those  days.  Ignatius,  martyr 
and  writer  of  the  famous  letters,  was  bishop  of 
Antioch.  Chrysostom  writes  :  '  As  Peter  was  tiie 
first  among  the  apostles  to  preach  the  Christ,  so 
was  this  city  the  first  to  be  crowned  with  the 
name  of  Christian  as  a  diadem  of  wondrous  beauty.' 

As  to  the  mode  in  which  the  name  '  Christian  ' 
originated,  there  is  great  difference  of  opinion. 
"We  seem  compelled  to  accept  one  of  three  explana- 
tions. (1)  All  agree  that  the  name  did  not  origin- 
ate with  the  Jews.  On  their  lips  it  would  have 
been  a  tacit  acknowledgment  of  the  Messiahship 
of  Jesus.  'While  the  first  disciples  were  Jews,  the 
Jewish  element  soon  became  a  diminishing  quantity 
in  the  Church.  Their  name  for  believers  in  Christ 
was  Nazarenes.  Their  attitude,  as  we  see  in  the 
Acts,  was  increasingly  one  of  estrangement  and 
hostility. 

(2)  The  suggestion  has  been  made  that  the 
designation  originated  with  Christians  themselves. 
Eusebius  (4th  cent.),  usually  well-informed  and 
trustworthy,  supports  this  view.  An  argument  in 
its  faTour  is  its  eminent  appropriateness.  Nothing 
could  better  signalize  the  central  position  of  Jesus 
in  Christianity.  St.  Paul's  attitude  on  this  ques- 
tion represents  the  Church  of  all  ages.  Systems 
like  Muhammadanism  and  Buddhism,  once  estab- 
lished, are  independent  of  their  founders.  Not  so 
Christianity  :  '  Christianity  is  Christ.'  His  person, 
life,  and  work  are  the  key-stone  of  the  arch,  the 
alpha  and  omega  of  the  gospel.  Yet,  if  this 
opinion  were  correct,  we  should  expect  some  in- 
timation to  this  effect  in  Ac  11*.  Still  more,  the 
name  is  not  found  in  the  NT  outside  the  three 
passages  mentioned,  and,  as  far  as  records  go,  for 
I  some  time  afterwards.  In  writers  of  the  2nd  cent, 
it  is  of  common  occurrence — in  pagan  writers,  the 
Apologists,  the  author  of  the  Dictaehe,  and  so  on. 
Speaking  of  the  Neronian  persecution,  Tacitus 
(A.D.  116)  says:  '  They  whom  the  populace  (tm/yi«) 
called  Christians  {Christianas).'  Suetonius  (A,D. 
120)  and  Pliny  (A.D.  112)  use  the  same  designation. 
P.  "W.  Schmiedel  {EBi  s.v.)  says  that  Christian 
writers  did  not  use  it  because  they  did  not  need 
it.  '  Saints,'  '  brethren,'  etc.,  served  their  purpose. 
I  '  It  follows  that,  notwithstanding  its  absence  from 
their  writings,  the  name  of  Christian  may  very 
well  have  originated  at  a  comparatively  early 
time.'  As  we  have  seen,  Ac  26^  and  1  P  4»*  imply 
that  the  term  was  in  use.  As  to  scanty  references, 
many  early  Christian  writings  have  perished. 


200 


CHRISTIAN 


CHRISTIAN  LIFE 


(3)  The  opinion  most  in  favour  is  that  the 
term  originated  in  Gentile  circles  outside  the 
Church.  The  people  of  Antioch  with  their  quick 
wit  had  a  reputation  for  the  invention  of  party 
names.  A  title  so  apt,  almost  obvious,  once  sug- 
gested, would  persist  with  a  vitality  of  its  own. 
Coming  from  outside,  it  was  not  at  once  accepted 
by  believers,  but  slowly  grew  in  favour.  This  ex- 
planation on  the  whole  presents  the  fewest  diffi- 
culties and  fits  the  circumstances  of  the  case.  We 
need  not  accept  the  view  that  the  title  was  used 
at  first  derisively.  There  is  nothing  of  this  char- 
acter in  the  title  itself,  although  Conybeare- 
Howson  and  others  think  that  it  was  so  meant. 
A.  Carr  in  an  essay  in  his  Horce  Biblicce  takes 
this  view.  He  thinks  that  St.  Paul's  preaching  of 
the  Kingdom,  carrying  with  it  the  idea  of  Chris- 
tians as  an  army,  would  suggest  comparison  with 
the  followers  of  great  military  leaders  (Pompeians, 
Herodians),  greatly  to  the  discredit  of  Christ  and 
Christians.  This  meaning  is  not  expressed  in  the 
term  itself,  but,  if  it  were  a  fact,  would  arise  out 
of  the  memory  of  the  Crucifixion.  Antiochene  in- 
genuity could  certainly  have  discovered  a  better 
expression  for  such  an  idea.  At  a  much  later 
date  the  Emperor  Julian  saw  nothing  discreditable 
in  the  name,  for  he  forbade  its  use  and  replaced  it 
with  Galilfean.  (The  incidental  character  of  the 
origin  of  a  great  name  is  not  without  analogy.  In 
v.*^  of  the  same  chapter  we  have  the  first  mention 
incidentally  of  '  presbyters ' — the  office  out  of 
which  the  countless  forms  of  church  polity  have 
grown.     So  again  with  regard  to  deacons  in  Ac  6*. ) 

It  has  been  argued  that  the  term  'X.pi(XTiav6%  im- 
plies a  Western  and  Latin  origin.  But  the  term- 
ination -a.v6%  was  in  wide  use  among  Greeks  every- 
where (HDB  i.  384). 

The  use  of  this  name  was  the  first  step  in  the 
differentiation  of  Christians  from  Jews  in  the 
public  eye.  Previously  the  two  classes  had  been 
confounaed  ;  and  the  confusion  Avas  advantageous 
to  Christians  in  many  respects,  as  the  Jews  were  a 
privileged  nation  before  the  Roman  law.  As  the 
Church  grew  in  numbers  the  confusion  ceased,  and 
the  new  name  emphasized  the  distinction. 

As  the  name  Xpiard^  was  often  confused  with 
Xpr/cT^s  ('good,'  'useful'),  so  Xpicriauds  was  often 
misspelt  Xprjcmavdi.  This  was  intelligible  enough 
in  pagan  writers.  Suetonius  says  that  Claudius 
expelled  the  Jews  from  Rome  because  they  were 
always  raising  tumult  under  the  instigation  of 
Chrestus.  Christian  writers  are  not  disinclined  to 
turn  the  mistake  to  account.  Tertullian  (Apol.  3) 
does  this  intentionally,  saying  to  pagans  :  'When 
you  wrongly  say  Clirestians  [Chrestianos]  (for  your 
Knowledge  of  the  name  is  limping),  it  is  composed 
of  suavity  and  benignity '  [de  suavitate  et  benigni- 
tate].  Clem.  iVlex.  {Strom,  ii.  4)  also  writes : 
'  They  who  believe  in  Christ  both  are  and  are 
called  good  {xpv'^'rol) ' ;  Justin  {Apol.  i.  4)  :  '  You 
ought  lather  to  punish  those  who  accuse  (us)  be- 
cause of  our  name.  For  we  are  accused  of  being 
Christians  ;  but  it  is  unjust  for  that  which  is  good 
(t6  ■xj>r](jTbv)  to  be  hated  '  ;  Lactantius  {Div.  Inst. 
iv.  7) :  '  Ignorant  of  our  aflairs,  they  call  Christ 
Chrest  (Christum  Chrestum)  and  Christians  Chres- 
tlnns  (Christianos  Chrestianos).' 

We  can  imagine  nothing  more  fitting  than  that 
Christians  should  bear  their  Master's  name  (Christ) 
in  their  own  (Christian).  There  was  more  than 
accident  in  such  an  origin.  The  name  betokens 
the  vital  union  between  Christ  and  Ijelievers,  of 
which  the  Epistles  make  so  much  ('they  that  are 
Christ's').  An  early  Liturgy  says:  '  \Ve  thank 
thee  that  the  name  of  thy  Christ  is  named  upon 
us,  and  so  we  are  made  one  with  thee.'  What  a 
( "hristian  is  called  he  is.  He  has  the  mind  of  Christ. 
He  thinks  and  feels,  loves  and  acts,  as  Christ  does. 


His  name  is  an  index  to  his  heart.  '  We  are  called 
children  of  God,  and  such  we  are.'  '  A  Christian  is 
one  who  has  Christ  in  his  heart,  mouth  and  work ' 
(k  Lapide).  Passages  like  Mt  19^  24"  found  a 
literal  fulfilment  in  the  Church  :  see  Mk  9*',  '  Be- 
cause ye  are  Christ's,'  and  margin,  the  name  stand- 
ing for  the  person  ;  Ac  4>'-',  '  Neither  is  there  any 
other  name  under  heaven,  that  is  given  among 
men,  wherein  we  must  be  saved.'  To  believe  on 
the  name  is  to  believe  on  Christ  (Jn  1"). 

Literature. —Comra.  of  Meyer,  Rackham,  Alford,  Words- 
worth on  Ac  112«;  artt.  in  HDD,  Elii,  DCG,  and  Kitto's  Cyclo- 
pcedia,  s.v.  ;  Conybeare-Howson,  Life  and  EpistUs  or  St. 
PauP,  1877,  i.  146  f.;  A.  Carr,  Uorce  Bibliete,  1904;  P.  H. 
Chase,  The  Credihility  of  the  Book  of  Acts,  1902. 

J.  S.  Banks. 

CHRISTIAN  LIFE.— The  type  of  moral  and  re- 
ligious life  which  was  lived  by  the  Christians  of 
the  Apostolic  Age  had  already  been  so  far  fixed  as 
to  be  described  in  the  phrase  Karh.  xpt^Tiavifffibp  ^rju 
by  Ignatius  {Magn.  x.  1)  towards  the  close  of  that 
period  ;  and  the  Didache  (xii.  4),  possibly  at  an 
earlier  date,  used  the  title  Xpio-rtacdj,  showing  that 
the  name  which  Antioch  invented  (Ac  11"*  ;  cf.  26* 
and  1  P  4'*)  was  now  accepted  as  specifying  a 
person  whose  life  was  distinctive  alike  in  ideal  and 
practice.  If  we  take  the  year  A.D.  1(X)  as  mark- 
ing the  extreme  limit  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  our 
authorities  for  determining  the  characteristics  of 
Christian  practice  and  of  the  Christian  life  in  its 
inner  and  outer  aspects  are  but  meagre,  consisting 
of  the  NT  writings,  the  Didache,  1  Clement,  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas,  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  some 
fragments  of  Papias  and  Hegesippus  preserved  by 
Eusebius,  and  a  few  contemporary  references  in 
pagan  writers  like  Tacitus  and  Suetonius.  There 
is  a  difficulty  in  usin^  and  classifying  the  informa- 
tion of  these  authorities,  inasmuch  as  the  chron- 
ology of  the  NT  writings  is  a  subject  of  inquiry 
and  even  of  controversy ;  while  the  traditional 
origin  and  authorship  of  writings  like  the  Epistle 
to  the  Ephesians  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  of 
the  Johannine  writings  and  several  others,  are  dis- 
puted by  competent  critics  (see  art.  Dates).  Some 
scholars  {e.g.  Gwatkin)  regard  the  Didache  as  one 
of  the  earliest  works  of  Christian  literature  ;  while 
others,  like  von  Dobschiitz,  place  it  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  Apostolic  Age.  Nevertheless,  in  spite 
of  the  various  opinions  on  questions  of  chronology 
and  authorship,  it  is  possible  to  arrive  at  some 
definite  conclusions  on  universally  accepted  pre- 
misses, and  to  form  a  clear,  if  in  details  an  incom- 
ftlete,  conception  of  the  practice  of  the  Christian 
ife  exhibited  by  Christian  communities  from  the 
death  of  Christ  to  the  close  of  the  1st  century. 

One  general  principle  may  be  laid  down  by  way 
of  preface.  The  earliest  witnesses  of  Christianity 
are  more  concerned  with  Christ  than  with  a  system 
of  Christian  morals.  It  is  not  primarily  a  new 
code  of  ethics  which  they  unfold  ;  it  is  a  new 
Personality.  Not  the  teaching,  but  the  Teacher 
is  their  theme.  The  suinmum  honum  had  been 
realized  in  the  life  of  Jesus.  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  indeed,  entered  into  the  apostolic  con- 
sciousness, as  we  see  from  the  precepts  of  Ro  12  ; 
but  the  Law-giver,  as  on  the  occasion  of  its  utter- 
ance, is  more  than  His  precepts  (Mt  7"*^).  The 
devotion  to  a  living  historical  Person,  the  Son  of 
God  and  Redeemer  of  the  world,  who  was  capable 
of  communicating  His  Spirit  to  all  mankind — this 
is  the  note  of  the  earliest  preaching  of  the  gospel.* 
The  apostles  preacii  'Christ  and  him  crucified.' 
'  They  seem  to  think  that  if  they  can  only  fill  men 

•  Incidentally  we  may  rejrard  this  feature  as  one  of  the 
reasons  why  Christianity  in  the  Uoinan  world  vanquished  all 
competitors— Isis  or  .Vttis  or  Mithra  or  the  redeemer-ffod  of 
Oriental  niystcry-reliKions.  The  Kedeenier-Ood  of  Christianity 
was  a  historical  personality. 


christia:^  life 


CHRISTIAN  LIFE 


201 


I 


with  true  thankfulness  for  the  gift  of  life  in  Christ, 
morality  will  take  care  of  itself  (Gwatkin,  Early 
Church'Hist.  i.  55).  What  results  did  sucli  a  pre- 
sentation of  truth  produce  on  the  age  to  which  it 
was  given?  This  question  can  be  answered  only 
by  a  study  of  moral  conditions  within  the  Christian 
Cliurch.  We  must  go  for  our  enlightenment,  not 
to  any  general  studies  of  Christian  ethics,  but  to 
the  extant  authorities  of  the  age,  which  treat  of 
the  Christian  life  in :  (1)  the  Jewish-Christian 
period  ;  (2)  the  Pauline  period  ;  and  (3)  the  post- 
Pauline  period.  In  the  evolution  of  the  Christian 
communities,  there  is  a  direct  connexion  between 
ethical  conditions  and  the  oflBcial  or  institutional 
organization  of  the  churches,  which  grew  naturally 
out  "of  these  conditions  ;  but  it  will  be  necessary  to 
narrow  our  survey  to  religious  and  moral  aspects, 
and  to  disregard  in  detail  problems  of  a  historical 
and  institutional  character,  e.g.  Baptism,  Lord's 
Supper,  ritual  and  worship  in  general,  bishops  and 
elders,  the  relation  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Jerusalem 
Council,  and  the  like  (see  artt.  Church,  Baptism, 
Eucharist,  Bishop,  etc.). 

1.  Jewish  Christianity. — The  followers  of  Christ 
at  the  time  of  His  death  w^ere  distinguished  from 
the  majority  of  their  fellow- Jews  by  their  convic- 
tion that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  They  were  thus 
to  their  contemporaries  a  Messianic  sect  within 
the  pale  of  Judaism,  conforming  to  the  rites  and 
moral  cotle  of  their  religion.  Their  Master,  while 
condemning  the  defects  of  representative  leaders 
of  religion,  like  the  Pharisees,  had  never  rejected 
the  observances  of  the  Jew;ish  religion — true  to  the 
spirit  of  His  mission,  which  was  rather  to  fulfil 
than  to  destroy.  Weizsacker  seems  to  go  too  far 
when  he  suggests  (Apostol.  Age,  ii.  341)  that  there 
is  disharmony  between  the  evidence  of  the  Synop- 
tics and  the  Acts,  on  the  ground  that  the  latter 
shows  the  primitive  Church  more  bound  up  with 
Judaism  than  Jesus  Himself  was,  and  the  Pharisees 
actual  patrons  of  the  apostolic  community.  The 
fact  is  that  both  Jesus  and  the  early  Church  ac- 
cepted the  outward  symbols  of  Judaism,  e.g.  the 
Temple  and  national  festivals,  while  in  spirit  they 
had  already  advanced  beyond  the  national  faith 
(cf.  Ac  2*). 

The  primitive  Christians  of  Jerusalem,  while 
folloAving  the  rules  of  the  Jewish  religion  for 
everyday  life  (Ac  15),  and  for  worship  and  devo- 
tional observances  (3^),  come  before  us  in  the  earlj- 
chapters  of  the  Acts  as  a  distinctive  community, 
given  to  prayer  (1").  Prayer  was  at  once  the 
source  and  seal  of  that  unity  or  spirit  of  brother- 
hood which  was  to  find  further  expression  in  a 
common  social  life  characterized  by  d7a\Xta<ns  Kai 
a.(j>€\&Ti)^  KapSLas,  and  in  a  community  of  goods 
(2**-*).  The  latter  feature  represented  merely  the 
socialism  of  self-sacrifice,  its  real  motive  being  not 
a  desire  for  social  innovation,  but  the  support  of 
the  poor  ;  and  it  may  have  been  suggested  by 
Essene  models  (see  COMMUNITY  OF  Goods).  The 
Christians  lived  a  happy  family  life  ;  the  members 
were  '  brethren ' ;  new  converts  were  received  into 
the  fellowship  by  baptism  (2^^)  ;  the  practice  of 
charity  produced  noble  examples  of  generosity  like 
that  of  Barnabas  (4^),  and  incidentally  provoked 
unworthy  ambition,  of  which  the  deceit  of  Ananias 
and  Sapphira  (ch.  5)  was  a  dark  and  memorable 
result.  Women  such  as  Mary,  the  mother  of  John 
Mark,  and  Sapphira  held  an  independent  position 
in  the  community,  and  slowly  the  influence  and 
aims  of  the  brotherhood  broadened  out.  They 
were  known  as  'disciples,'  men  'of  the  Way'  (Ac 
9-  24"),  and  'saints.'  The  appointment  of  the 
seven  Hellenists  (Ac  7)  which  quelled  the  internal 
diflerences  between  the  Hebrews  or  pure  Jews  and 
the  Hellenists,  their  Greek-speaking  brethren  of 
the  Dispersion,  indicates  not  only  the  large-hearted 


charity  of  the  Christian  apostles,  but  their  gradual 
alienation  from  the  narrowness  of  Judaic  legalism. 
This  spirit  of  alienation  came  to  a  head  in  the 
extreme  views  of  St.  Stephen,  the  leader  of  the 
Hellenists,  who  paid  the  penalty  of  his  undisguised 
anti-Judaism  in  martyrdom.  It  is  easy  to  see  that 
the  ideas  of  St.  Stephen  anticipated  the  essential 
principles  of  Pauline  Christianity,  and  further, 
that  tney  were  in  advance  of  minds  like  that  of 
St.  Peter,  who  still  maintained  a  loyal  observance 
of  Jewish  law  and  felt  scruples  about  entering 
a  Gentile  house  (Ac  10)  and  joining  St.  Paul, 
Barnabas,  and  other  Gentile  Christians  (Gal  2"). 
Thus,  while  the  Hellenists  were  scattered  abroad, 
being  found  in  Samaria  and  as  far  north  as  Antioch, 
the  Petrine  section  remained  at  Jerusalem  to  find 
a  new  head  in  St.  James,  who  in  a.d.  51  is  associ- 
ated with  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  and  in  58  is  sole 
leader  of  the  Church.  The  Apostolic  Decree  (Ac 
15),  which  was  intended  to  solve  the  diflferences  of 
Jewish  and  Gentile  Christianity,  was  a  compromise 
which  show^s  at  once  the  strength  and  the  weakness 
of  the  Jewish-Christian  position  :  its  strength  lay 
in  its  jealousy  for  pure  morality — Gentile  Chris- 
tians  are  to  abstain  from  meat  oftered  to  idols, 
blood,  things  strangled,  and  fornication  ;  its  weak- 
ness lay  in  its  ceremonialism  and  in  its  distrust  of 
the  GentUe  per  se.  The  later  factors  of  Jewish 
Christianity  represented  by  the  Johannine  litera- 
ture and  such  writings  as  the  Epistle  of  James 
are  treated  below. 

Palestinian  Christianity,  in  spite  of  its  reverence 
for  Jewish  law,  did  not  escape  persecution.  The 
Christian  Jews  fled  to  Pel  la  before  A.D.  TO,  and  re- 
fused to  join  the  Bar  Cochba  rebellion,  and  finally 
became  a  sect  beyond  the  Jordan,  known  as 
Ebionites  or  Nazarenes.  The  saint  of  Palestinian 
Christianity  is  undoubtedly  James,  the  Lord's 
brother,  already  referred  to  (see  the  glowing  ac- 
count of  him  by  Hegesippus,  preserved  in  Euseb. 
HE  ii.  23) ;  he  was  '  the  Just,'  a  Nazirite  in  prac- 
tice, but  consecrated  to  God,  a  typical  priest  of 
righteousness  to  the  Jewish-Christian  mind.  The 
martyrdom  of  St.  Stephen  and  that  of  St.  James 
in  their  several  ways  indicate  the  undying  influence 
of  Christ's  example  and  teaching.  It  is  probable 
that  in  this  community  the  oral  teaching  of  our 
Lord  had  a  wider  vogue  than  in  Pauline  circles. 
His  sayings  were  circulated  and  known  in  the 
sphere  of  His  earthly  ministry,  and  produced  a  new 
type  of  personality  and  conduct  (see  Dobschiitz, 
Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  156  f.). 
We  may  sum  up  the  features  of  Christian  life  in 
its  earliest  environment  as  a  moral  ideal,  coloured 
and  modified  by  loyalty  to  the  tenets  of  Judaism  ; 
but  issuing,  under  belief  in  the  Me.ssianic  Jesus 
and  by  the  power  of  His  Spirit,  in  brotherliness, 
sympathy,  love  of  enemies,  heroic  confession  of 
faith,  and  purity  of  life. 

2.  Pauline  Christianity. — The  conversion  of  St. 
Paul  was  a  new  departure  in  the  Christian  witness, 
and  opened  a  new  epoch  for  Christianity.  His  own 
Christianity  was  not  in  essence  so  much  a  negation 
of  or  a  revolt  from  Judaism  as  a  fresh  inspiration, 
the  result  of  a  moral  crisis  in  his  inner  life.  One  of 
the  results  of  the  crisis,  it  is  true,  was  to  reveal  to 
him  what  he  calls  to  aSiivarov  tov  vofiov  (Ro  8^),  and  to 
bring  about  his  rejection  of  the  Jewish  ideal  of  sal- 
vation ;  but  his  conception  of  Christianity  was  based 
on  the  positive  conviction  rooted  in  experience  that 
newness  of  life  consisted  in  a  personal  union  with 
Christ.  Faith  in  Christ  transfigured  a  man's  person- 
ality, and  thereby  gave  him  a  new  ethic,  together 
with  the  power  to  carry  it  into  practice.  The 
Pauline  morality  is  the  oftspring  of  the  Apostles 
doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith.  '  He  who  was  united 
to  Christ  could  not  help  practising  the  Christian 
virtues'  (Gardner,  Belig  ions  Experience  of  St.  Paul, 


202 


CHRISTIAX  LIFE 


CHRISTIAN    LIFK 


159).  His  insistence  on  ethics  reveals  his  abhor- 
rence of  antinomianism,  even  when  that  abhorrence 
is  not  as  expressly  stated  as  it  is  in  Ro  6"  and  Gal 
5'*'-.  The  difference  between  Pauline  morality  and 
the  morality  of  the  J  udaizers  who  were  found  all 
over  the  Greek-speaking  world,  lay  in  the  fact  that 
Gentile  Christianity  fornaed  an  independent  ethic, 
while  the  ethic  of  the  Jewish  Christian  '  merely 
looked  like  an  addition  to  the  commandments,  an 
ennobling  and  purifying  of  the  rule  of  the  pious, 
law-abiding  Jew'  (see  Weizsacker,  ii.  346).  This 
distinction  arose  naturally  from  the  exalted  view 
which  St.  Paul  held  as  to  the  Person  of  Christ ; 
wherever  the  Deity  of  our  Lord  is  proclaimed,  as 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  1  John,  1  Peter,  and  the 
Ignatian  Epistles,  we  find,  as  McGitfert  notes  (see 
art.  '  Apostolic  Age '  in  ERE),  that  the  Pauline 
idea  of  moral  transformation  by  the  indwelling  of 
the  Divine  becomes  prominent.  On  the  other  hand, 
elsewhere  in  the  NT  and  in  Clement's  First  En.  to 
Corinthians,  where  the  Jewish  type  of  theology 
prevails,  salvation  is  placed  in  the  future  as  the 
reward  of  the  faithful.  For  the  message  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles  and  the  ethical  life  and  problems 
of  the  Christian  communities  as  portrayed  therein 
the  reader  is  referred  to  artt.  on  the  individual 
Epistles,  but  a  general  summary  of  the  evidence  of 
his  writings  may  be  added  here. 

We  may  often  infer  from  St.  Paul's  warnings  the 
general  perils  to  whicii  the  Christians  Avere  liable. 
We  see  that  the  Christian  standard  is  not  attained 
at  once  (Ph  3^-) ;  there  are  express  references  to 
flagrant  examples  of  moral  failure  necessitating  a 
ban  of  excommunication ;  and  the  '  saints '  are  good 
men  and  women  still  in  the  making  ;  hence  the 
hortative  form  so  largely  adopted  by  this  Apostle. 
Tnie  to  his  essential  convictions,  the  Apostle  as- 
signs to  the  direct  action  of  the  Spirit  the  trans- 
forming of  human  character.  He  appeals  not  to 
Scripture  or  law,  but  to  the  Christian  consciousness. 
Christ  is  the  fulfilment  and  end  of  the  Law  (Ko  10^) 
and  the  founder  of  a  new  law  of  love  (Gal  6^,  1  Co 
9-'),  in  that  His  Spirit  is  a  new  vital  power.  With 
the  truth  of  the  Incarnation  several  of  his  greatest 
precepts  are  allied  (2  Co  8»,  Ph  2»,  Gal  2-'^,  Col  3'^ 
Ro  15'),  and  there  is  often  a  direct  connexion  be- 
tween his  ethics  and  his  theological  and  christo- 
logical  doctrine.  His  distinction  between  '  flesh  ' 
and  '  spirit '  colours  all  his  thought  regarding  per- 
sonal morality.  His  insistence  on  sexual  chastity 
(in  1  Cor.  he  reveals  his  preference  for  celibacy,  and 
his  sympathy  with  the  ascetic  ideal,  while  he  de- 
nounces its  excesses),  and  his  warnings  against  sins 
of  the  flesh  are  everywhere  prominent.  The  body 
is  a  temi)le  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (1  Co  G'").  His 
memorable  indictment  of  pagan  vice  in  Ro  1-^^-  is 
pointed  by  the  actual  life  of  Corinth,  the  city  from 
which  he  wrote  the  Epistle,  and  there  is  hardly  an 
Epistle  in  whicli  reference  is  not  made  to  sexual 
vice  (cf.  Col  S'^^-).  The  famous  •  hymn  of  love  ' 
(I  Co  13)  places  love  at  the  head  of  his  ethical 
system,  and  is  indirectly  an  indictment  against  all 
forms  of  self-seeking  elsewhere  specified  :  e.f/.  covet- 
ousness  (Col  3"),  the  spirit  of  faction  and  the  love  of 
pre-eminence  (Ph  1''-  "),  and  dishonesty  (1  Th  4^). 
In  Ro  12"-  we  have  the  moral  life  set  forth  as  a 
XoyiKi)  Xarptla,  and  its  motive  the  fulfilment  of  God's 
will.  The  duty  of  prayer  fulness*  is  frequently  pro- 
claimed (Ro  121^  1  Co  7»,  Ph  48,  Col  4^).  The  spirit 
of  revenge  is  condemned,  the  love  of  one's  enemy 
( Ph  1 '")  and  returning  of  good  for  evil  are  expressly  in- 
culcated. Ordinary  (;onversation  is  to  be  wholesome 
and  yet  pleasing  (Col  4'').  The  gentler  virtues  which 
found  no  place  in  pagan  ethics,  such  as  sincerity, 
humility,  reasonableness  (Ph  4'),  patience,  meek- 
ness, brotherly  love,  kindness  ((jial  5~),  are  united 

*  See,  for  models  of  prayer  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  Didache,  10, 
and  1  Clem,  ."sg-fll. 


with  love  and  temperance  or  self-control ;  while 
joy,  neace,  and  thankfulness  (cf.  Ph  4",  tix^p^oria) 
are  the  resultant  graces  of  Christian  conduct. 

The  domestic  and  social  virtues  are  frequently 
urged  on  the  Christian  convert — love  of  husband  for 
wire,  of  wife  for  husband,  of  children  for  parents, 
of  slave  for  master,  of  master  for  slave  (cf.  Ro  3*\ 
Col  S"*'**).  In  aU  social  relations  St.  Paul  is  con- 
scious of  the  need  of  Christian  tactfulness  and  dis- 
cretion (Col  S-''  and  Ph  P).  '  To  walk  worthily  of 
the  gospel  of  Christ '  (Ph  I'")  is  his  comprehensive 
formula  for  Christian  conduct.  The  Christian's  re- 
lation to  the  heathen  outsiders  and  to  his  less  strict 
or  '  weak '  brother,  and  to  heathen  practices  and  use 
of  heathen  tribunals,  is  set  forth  in  1  Cor. ,  which  is 
a  manual  of  social  Christianity.  He  did  not  attack 
the  slave-system  or  proclaim  a  .social  revolution  :  he 
sought  to  Christianize  the  relationship  of  master  and 
slave  by  Christianizing  both  master  and  slave  (see 
art.  Philemon).  In  1  Thess.  he  warns  men  against 
the  moral  perils  of  '  an  overstrained  Parousia- 
expectation  ;  in  2  Thess.  he  proclaims  the  dignity 
and  duty  of  labour. 

Finally,  there  is  the  duty  of  the  '  strong '  to  heli> 
the  weak  (Gal  6'),  the  care  for  and  liberality  toward.-* 
the  poor  (see  1  Co  16),  and,  above  all,  obedience  to 
civicand  Imperial  authorities  (Ro  13'"'").  In  dealing 
with  social  and  civil  responsibilities,  the  ethics  of 
Pauline  Christianity  are  opposed  to  revolt  or  agita- 
tion. The  sunctification  of  the  individual  and  the 
community  is  their  aim  and  object.  For  his  views 
with  regard  to  the  subordination  of  women  (1  Co  7), 
St.  Paul  has  frequently  been  criticized,  but  on  the 
whole  they  made  for  domestic  purity  and  the 
strengthening  of  the  marriage  tie,  m  an  age  when 
the  matrimonial  relationship  was  losing  its  binding 
and  sacred  sanctions.  His  cfoctrine  of  the  solidarity 
of  society — a  sin  against  <a  brother  is  a  sin  against 
Christ  (1  Co  S"*) — and  of  the  equality  of  all  men  in 
Christ  (Gal  Z^,  Col  3")  prepared  the  way  for  the  up- 
lifting of  the  masses,  and  identified  Christianity 
with  the  spirit  of  brotherhood,  even  though  the  re- 
ferences to  love  of  tiie  brethren  are  more  frequent 
than  to  love  of  mankind  as  a  whole  (see  art. 
Fellowship).  In  fact,  Christianity,  as  we  find  it 
set  forth  by  St.  Paul  and  exemplified  however 
imperfectly  by  the  Pauline  churches,  already 
exhibits  the  new  ethical  passion  and  power 
which  were  eventually  to  win  the  Empire  and 
the  world. 

3.  Post-Pauline  Christianity. — For  tiiis  period 
our  chief  authorities  are  the  later  writings  of  the 
NT.  These  include,  in  addition  to  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  (now 
widely  regarded  as  sub-Pauline),  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  1  Peter,  the  Johannine  writings,  Revi'la- 
tion,  James,  and  Jude.  We  have  also  the  Ignatian 
Epistles,  1  Clement,  and  the  recently  discovered  Ocks 
of  Solomon  {q.v.),  to  which  Harnack  assigns  the  date 
of  r.  A.D.  100.  The  interest  of  the  Odes  is  doctrinal 
and  ceremonial  rather  than  ethical,  although  it 
appears  that  they  were  a.ssociateii  with  the  teach- 
iiiff  of  the  catechumens.  1  Peter,  Revelation,  and 
Hebrews  Inilong  to  the  time  of  the  persecution 
under  Domitian,  in  which  Christians  and  Jews 
alike  suffered.  The  Pastorals  apparently  have  re- 
ference to  the  eiulier  or  Neronian  persecution  (A.D. 
64),  in  which  a  large  number  or  the  Christians 
perished  because  they  were  convenient  scapegoats 
(Tac.  A?iv.  XV.  44)  for  Nero's  unreasoning  anger. 
Both  Ephesians  and  the  Pastorals  give  us  the 
Pauline  type  of  morality,  Ephesians  Iwing  influ- 
enced by  and  modelled  on  Colossians.  In  fact, 
the  influence  of  St.  Paul  is  maJiifest  not  only  in 
those  Epistles  traditionally  assigned  to  him,  but 
generally  in  the  later  literature,  which  is  really  the 
offspring  of  a  Jewish-Christian  type  of  thoiight, 
e.g.  1  Peter,  Hebrews,  and  the  Johannine  writings. 


CHRISTLO"  LIFE 


CHURCH 


203 


For  the  special  characteristics  of  this  post-Pauline 
literature,  see  aitt.  on  the  several  books. 

In  1  Peter.  Hebrews,  and  the  Epistle  of  the 
Roman  Church  to  the  Church  of  Corinth  (1  Clem.) 
we  find  ourselves  in  touch  with  the  Church  at 
Rome.  In  Hebrews  the  Christians  addressed  had 
already  pas-setl  through  the  Neronian  persecution 
and  become  a  '  gazing-stock '  (ICF)  to  the  world. 
The  didactic  purpose  was  to  show  the  preparatory 
character  of  trie  Jewish  religion  ;  but  throughout 
we  find  the  hortatory  element  prominent :  it  was 
a  \&yos  iropa/c\iJ<rews  (13^').  The  peril  was  shrinking 
from  confession  of  Christ,  a  failure  of  va^fni<ria 
( 10^'),  their  lack  of  Christian  knowledge  (6^) ;  on 
the  .other  hand,  good  works  are  praised  (6^") — 
brotherly  love,  hospitality,  care  for  the  sick  and 
imprisoned  ;  the  great  need  is  xums,  not  intellec- 
tual belief,  but  the  moral  assurance  of  a  future 
reward — 'a  better  country.'  1  Peter  similarly 
lays  stress  on  the  consolatory  power  of  eXxiy — the 
'living  hope'  of  a  future  life — in  the  midst  of 
sufferings.  1  Clem,  shows  that  the  Church  at 
Rome  had  not  lost  its  stability,  nor  forgotten  the 
duty  of  intercession  especially  for  captive  fellow- 
members.  On  the  other  hand,  at  Corinth  since 
the  40  years  when  St.  Paul  wrote,  there  is  little 
change ;  there  are  the  defects  of  licentiousness 
and  rebellion  against  authority.  Throughout  the 
Epistle  we  are  conscious  of  St.  Paul's  influence ; 
ch.  49,  e.g.,  is  an  imitation  of  the  '  hjmn  of  love.' 
1  Peter,  while  sent  from  Rome,  is  addressed  to  the 
Churches  of  Asia  Minor. 

Possibly  Ephesians  belongs  to  the  same  period. 
While  emphasizing  knowledge  (1®""  3"),  it  gives 
the  premier  position  to  love,  which  surpasses 
knowledge  and  is  its  object  (3^^).  In  1  Peter  the 
favourite  word  is  ayaOoiroita.  In  Ephesians  the  old 
sins  of  paganism  recur — uncleanness,  lascivious- 
ness,  lusts  ;  in  1  Peter  malice,  guile,  hypocrisies, 
envies,  and  evil-speaking.  The  life  of  paganism 
is  dyvoia,  darkness,  death  :  Christianity  brings 
knowledge  (Eph  4^',  1  P  1"),  light  (Eph  5«,  1  P  2»), 
and  life  (Eph  2^-)  or  effective  power  (l*'  3-*").  In- 
cidentally we  note  the  emergence  of  new  faults — 
drunkenness  (Eph  5'*),  the  habit  of  the  dXXorptextff- 
KOTos,  or  meddling  in  other  people's  concerns  (1  P 
4'*),  and  extravagance  of  ornamentation  in  women 
(3*).  Botli  1  Peter  and  Ephesians  show  an  advance 
on  St.  Paul  in  their  appeal  to  the  OT,  which  Jew- 
ish Christianity  made  the  Bible  of  the  GJentile 
world.  The  Pastoral  Epistles  exhibit  the  begin- 
nings of  Gnosticism  (q.v.)  and  the  influence  of  the 
false  teaching  prevalent  in  Asia  Minor  (cf.  Jude, 
which  warns  especially  against  a  far-reaching 
licentiousness),  the  discrediting  of  prophecy  and 
the  conception  of  ewej3eia.  The  Epistle  of  James, 
with  which  may  perhaps  be  associated  the  Didache 
(although  the  date  of  the  latter  is  uncertain),  gives 
us  the  stronj^'  ethical  ideal  of  Palestinian  Chris- 
tianity ;  its  insistence  on  works  does  not  imply 
retention  of  the  Jewish  code  ;  the  '  law  of  liberty ' 
is  a  new  law  given  by  Christ,  or  '  the  yoke  of  the 
Lord '  (Did.).  Revelation  is  also  Jewish-Christian 
in  its  standpoint,  and  presents  some  valuable 
cameos  of  church  life  in  Asia  Minor  in  the  letter 
to  the  Seven  Churches  (see  art.  Apocalypse).  It 
treats  the  Christian  life  on  the  broad  basis  of 
history,  and  recognizes  the  heroism  of  both  Jewish 
and  Gentile  Cliristians  in  the  world-confiict ;  the 
proofs  of  Christianity  are  to  be  seen  in  '  the  heroic 
virtues  of  martyrdom  and  virginity.'  The  Igna- 
tian  Epistles,  which  also  glority  martyrdom,  are 
remarkably  silent  regarding  the  gross  sins  of 
paganism.  They  deal  with  the  contrast  between 
Christian  and  non-Christian,  the  peril  of  nominal 
Christianity,  and  the  duties  of  confession  and 
Churcli  unity ;  they  reflect  the  growing  Church- 
consciousness  which  anticipates  the  later  Catholi- 


cism. The  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Johannine 
Epistles  clearly  express  the  equal  recognition 
of  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians.  The  author, 
though  a  Jew,  is  '  denationalized '  in  his  stand - 

Joint,  which  yet  is  to  be  distinguished  from  St. 
'aul's  in  its  generally  mystical  and  idealistic 
nature.  The  spirit  of  his  ethic  is  '  contemplative 
and  exclusive'  (Weizsacker,  ii.  397).  Faith  in 
Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  is  the  condition  of  '  eternal 
life '  and  the  sonship  of  God ;  while  the  Person 
of  Christ  involved  a  universal  redemption.  The 
truth  of  the  new  birth  is  Pauline  ;  while  the  view 
of  sin  as  ivoftia  shows  the  Jewish  veneration  for 
the  old  Law  ;  even  '  the  new  commandment '  is  an 
old  commandment  (1  Jn  2^)  rightly  viewed.  The 
Christian  life  is  characterized  in  a  series  of  splendid 
generalizations — love,  truth,  light,  with  the  anti- 
theses of  death  and  hatred,  sin,  the  world,  and 
darkness.  The  ideal  is  the  overcoming  of  the 
world,  the  spirit  of  which  is  independence  of  God. 
The  distinction  between  deadly  and  venial  sins, 
the  recognition  of  false  forms  of  faith,  the  presence 
of  official  ambition  which  resents  all  ecclesiastical 
development  (in  Diotrephes  [3  Jn]),  are  features 
which  point  to  a  later  and  more  regulated  stage  of 
Christian  life  than  we  find  in  the  Pauline  letters, 
with  their  advocacy  of  the  unfettered  action  of 
the  Spirit. 

To  sum  up,  the  Christian  life,  as  exhibited  in 
the  literature  of  the  Apostolic  Age  and  viewed  in 
the  many  phases  and  fluctuations  which  were  due 
to  its  environment,  the  immaturity  of  its  professors, 
the  development  of  speculative  thought,  the  errors 
of  undue  asceticism  and  moral  laxity,  presents  on 
the  whole  a  fixed  and  established  type  biised  on 
ethical  and  religious  principles,  which  were  des- 
tined to  live  and  to  transform  the  world  because 
they  owed  their  origin  to  faith  in  the  historical 
Son  of  God,  who  had  opened  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven  to  sill  believers. 

LiTERATURK.— A.  C.  McGiffcrt,  Apottolic  Age,  Edinburgh, 
1897,  and  art.  '  Apostolic  Age '  in  ERE ;  E.  von  Dobscfaiitz, 
Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1904  ; 
C.  von  Weizsacker,  The  Apogtoiie  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  ii.  [do.  1896] ; 
A.  Hamack,  Minion  and  Expansion  of  Chrigtianitp'^  Eag. 
tr.,  do.  1906  ;  H.  M.  Gwatkin,  Early  Church  History,  do. 
1909 ;  J.  Moffatt,  LST,  Edinburgh,  1911 ;  P.  Gardner,  The 
Religious  Experience  of  St.  Paul,  I^ndon,  1911. 

R.  Martix  Pope. 
CHRONOLOGY.— See  Dates. 

CHRTSOLITE  {xpvffoXtdo^,  Rev  21^).— In  modem 
usage  the  name  '  chrysolite '  is  applied  to  a  trans- 
parent variety  of  olivine,  used  as  a  gem-stone  and 
often  called  'peridot.'  The  ancients  ai>plied  the 
word  to  various  yellowish  gems.  The  LXX  gives  it 
as  the  equivalent  of  b'TI?,  which  Flinders  Petrie 
(HDB  iv.  620'')  is  inclined  to  identify  with  yellow 
jasper.  The  later  Greeks  gave  the  name  chryso- 
lite to  the  topaz,  which  was  unknown  in  earlier 
times.  James  Stbahax. 

CHRYSOPRASE  (xpvfforpaffm,  from  xpwSs, '  gold,' 
and  rpitrov,  '  a  leek '). — This  stone  is  the  tenth 
foundation  of  the  wall  of  the  New  Jerusalem  (Rev 
2r-*).  The  name  is  now  applied  to  an  apple-green 
variety  of  chalcedony  or  hornstone,  prized  in  jewel- 
lery and  sometimes  used  for  mural  decorations. 
But  this  chalcedony  was  probably  unknown  to  the 
ancients,  and  the  xP'^'^^oicpaffos  of  the  Greeks  was 
'not  improbably  our  chrysoberyl '  (EBr^^  vi.  321). 
The  word  is  not  found  in  either  of  the  LXX  lists  of 
precious  stones  (Ex  28"'^,  Ezk  28^^)  with  which  the 
writer  of  Rev.  was  familiar.     James  Strahak. 

CHURCH.— The  history  of  the  Church  in  the 
Apostolic  Age  may  be  treated  under  the  follow- 
ing heads  :  (1)  Sources,  (2)  Importance,  (3)  Name, 
(4)  Origin,  (5)  Growth,  (6)  Conflict  between  Jewish 


204 


CHURCH 


CHURCH 


and  Gentile  elements,  (7)  Character,  (8)  Relation 
to  the  State  and  other  systems. 

1.  Sources. — Our  sources  of  information  are  not 
nearly  so  full  as  we  might  wish,  but  some  of  them 
are  excellent ;  and,  although  we  are  obliged  to 
leave  several  important  questions  open,  yet  criti- 
cism enables  us  to  secure  solid  and  sure  results. 
Our  earliest  sources  are  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
and  the  large  majority  of  those  which  bear  his 
name  are  now  firmly  established  as  his.  Doubts 
still  exist  with  regard  to  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  but 
it  is  generally  admitted  that  they  contain  portions 
which  are  by  the  Apostle,  and  at  any  rate  they  are 
evidence  as  to  a  period  closely  connected  witn  his 
age.  Hebrews,  whoever  wrote  it,  is  evidence  re- 
specting a  similar  period.  With  the  possible  ex- 
ception of  2  Peter,  all  the  other  Epistles  and  the 
Apocalypse  are  sources.  More  full  of  information 
than  the  Pauline  Epistles,  though  later  in  date,  is 
the  Book  of  Acts,  now  firmly  established  as  the 
work  of  St.  Luke,  the  companion  of  St.  Paul. 
Those  who  fully  admit  this  difier  considerably  in 
their  estimate  of  the  value  of  Acts  as  a  historical 
document,  but  the  trend  of  criticism  is  in  the  direc- 
tion of  a  high  estimate  rather  than  of  a  low  one. 
Microscopic  investigation  and  a  number  of  recent 
discoveries  show  how  accurate  a  writer  St.  Luke 
generally  is.  We  have  to  lament  tantalizing 
omissions  much  more  often  than  to  suspect  serious 
inaccuracies.  The  Gospels  give  some  helj);  for 
what  they  record  explains  many  features  in  the 
Epistles  and  Acts. 

Outside  the  NT,  but  within  the  1st  cent.,  we 
have  the  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the  Corin- 
thians and  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  one  represent- 
ing Gentile  and  the  other  Jewish  Christianity. 
Within  the  first  three  decades  of  the  2nd  cent.,  we 
have  the  writings  of  three  men  whose  lives  over- 
lapped those  of  some  of  the  Apostles — Ignatius, 
Polycarp,  and  Papias ;  and  to  the  same  period 
probably  belongs  tne  Didache  or  Teaching  of  the 
Twelve.  Something  of  considerable  value  may 
also  be  obtained  from  two  writers  near  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  cent. — Hermas  and  Justin  Martyr ;  and 
even  so  late  as  the  last  quarter  of  the  cent.  Ave 
can  find  apostolic  traditions  of  great  value  in  the 
writings  of  Irenseus.  From  outside  the  Christian 
Church  we  have  good  material,  especially  respect- 
ing the  great  crisis  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
by  Titus,  from  the  Jewish  writer,  Josephus ;  and 
also  some  important  statements  from  the  heathen 
writers,  Tacitus,  Suetonius,  and  Pliny,  who  were 
contemporary  Avith  Clement,  Ignatius,  and  Poly- 
carp. 

2.  Importance. — The  importance  of  the  history 
of  the  Apostolic  Church  is  very  great,  but  it  is 
sometimes  misunderstood.  The  sources  mentioned 
above  tell  us  something  about  the  beliefs,  organiza- 
tion, and  ritual  of  the  first  Christians ;  and  they 
are  all  very  simple.  It  is  sometimes  supposed  that 
if  Ave  take  these  simple  elements  and  close  our 
eyes  to  later  developments,  we  get  the  essence  of 
Christianity,  free  from  unessential  forms,  and 
that  this  constitutes  the  importance  of  the  primi- 
tive Church.  It  is  the  model  to  Avhich  all  Cnurch 
reformers  ought  to  look,  Avith  a  vicAv  to  restoring 
its  simplicity.  Tavo  considerations  show  that  this 
estimate  is  erroneous.  Essence  Avithout  form  is 
unattainable.  Tlie  Apostolic  Church  had  forms 
Avhich  Avere  the  outcome  of  the  conditions  in  Avhich 
the  Church  existed.  Some  of  those  conditions 
changed  very  quickly,  and  the  forms  changed  also. 
The  restoration  of  the  simplicity  of  the  primitive 
forms  Avill  have  little  value  or  vitality  unless  Ave 
also  restore  the  primitive  conditions,  and  that  is  im- 
possible. Secondly,  the  sources  do  not  tell  us  the 
Avhole  truth.  On  some  important  points  Ave  can 
obtain  nothing  better  than  degrees  of  probability 


l>ecause  the  evidence  is  so  inadequate  ;  on  other 
points  there  is  no  evidence,  and  Ave  have  to  fall 
back  on  pure  conjecture.  If  it  had  been  intended 
tliat  all  subsequent  ages  should  take  the  Apostolic 
Church  as  a  model,  then  Ave  might  reasonably 
expect  that  a  complete  description  of  it  would 
have  been  preserved.  A  sketch  Avhich  has  to  be 
gathered  piecemeal  from  different  sources,  and 
Avhich,  Avhen  put  together,  is  incomplete  both  in 
outline  and  in  contents,  cannot  be  made  an  authori- 
tative example.  '  Cliristianity  is  not  an  archaeo- 
logical puzzle '  (J.  H.  Ropes,  Apostolic  Age,  London, 
1906,  p.  20). 

Nevertheless,  the  importance  of  this  age  is  real 
and  great,  (a)  The  spiritual  essence  of  Christianity 
may  be  said  to  consist  in  the  inner  relation  of  each 
soul  to  God,  to  His  Christ,  and  to  His  Spirit,  and 
in  the  inner  and  outer  relations  of  all  believers  to 
one  another.  In  the  first  age  of  the  Church  this 
essence  existed  in  such  simple  vigour  that  it  gave 
reality  and  life  to  forms  Avhich  had  not  yet  had 
time  to  become  mistaken  for  essentials.  About 
the  simplicity  of  these  beginnings  there  is  no 
doubt ;  it  is  an  established  fact ;  but  that  does  not 
prove  that  this  primitive  simplicity  is  a  binding 
authority  for  all  ages,  (b)  This  age  produced  the 
NT — the  group  of  writings  Avhich  has  had  greater 
intiuence  for  good  than  any  Avhich  the  Avorld  has 
ever  knoAvn  :  a  group  of  Avritings  Avhich  reflects 
the  ideas  and  habits  of  that  age  and  must  be  inter- 
preted by  a  knoAvledge  of  those  ideas  and  habits, 
(c)  This  age  exhibits  the  first  effects  Avhich  the 
gospel  produced  upon  Jew  and  Gentile — tAvo  very 
different  soils,  which  might  bear  very  different 
fruits,  (d)  It  is  the  first  stage  in  the  complex 
development  of  the  Church  and  the  churches ;  and 
in  order  to  understand  that  development,  Ave  must 
study  its  beginnings. 

3.  Name. — The  name  '  Church'  is  in  itself  strong 
evidence  of  the  connexion  betAveen  the  Old  Cove- 
nant and  the  NeAV.  In  the  OT,  two  different  A\ords 
are  used  to  denote  gatherings  of  the  chosen  people 
or  their  representatives — 'edhah  (RV  'congrega- 
tion') and  qdhal  (RV  'assembly').  In  the  LXX, 
avvayoyy-i]  is  the  usual  translation  of  'edMh,  Avhile 
qdhdl  is  commonly  rendered  4KK\riala.  Both  qdhal 
and  iKK\7]ala  by  their  derivation  indicate  calling  or 
summoning  to  a  place  of  meeting ;  but  '  there  is 
no  foundation  for  the  Avidely  spread  notion  that 
iKKXrjffla  means  a  people  or  a  number  of  individual 
men  called  out  of  the  Avorld  or  mankind '  (F.  J.  A. 
Hort,  The  Christian  Ecclesia,  London,  1897,  p.  5). 
QdMl  or  iKKKriaia.  is  the  more  sacred  term ;  it 
denotes  the  people  in  relation  to  JahAveh,  especi- 
ally in  public  Avorship.  Perhaps  for  this  very 
reason  the  less  sacred  term  avvayurff)  Avas  more 
commonly  used  by  the  Jcavs  in  our  Lord's  time,  and 
probably  influenced  the  first  believers  in  adopting 
iKKkriala.  for  Christian  use.  (rvvayuiyfj  quickly  Avent 
out  of  use  for  a  Christian  assembly  (Ja  2*),  except 
in  sects  which  Avere  more  JeAvish  than  Christian. 
Owing  to  the  groAving  hostility  of  the  Jews,  it 
came  to  indicate  opposition  to  the  Church  (RevS* 3'). 
iKKK-qala,  therefore,  at  once  suggests  the  neAv  people 
of  God,  the  new  Israel. 

We  do  not  knoAv  avIio  so  happily  adopted  the 
word  for  Christian  use.  It  is  not  impossible  that 
Christ  Himself  may  have  used  it,  for  He  sometimes 
spoke  Greek.  He  used  it  or  its  equivalent  in  a 
Christian  sense  (Mt  16'8) ;  but  Mt  18",  though 
capable  of  bein|;  transferred  to  Christians,  must  at 
the  time  Avhen  it  Avas  spoken  have  meant  a  JeAvish 
assembly.  St.  Paul  probably  found  the  Avord  al- 
ready in  use,  and  outside  the  Gospels  it  is  very 
frequent  in  the  NT.  We  find  three  uses  of  the 
term  :  the  general  body  of  believers  (Ac  5"  9="  12' ) ; 
the  believers  in  a  certain  place  (1  Th  1',  2  Th  1') ; 
an  assembly  for  public  worship  (1  Co  11"  14"-"). 


CHURCH 


CHUBCH 


205 


It  had  already  become  a  technical  term  with 
strongly  religions  associations,  which  were  partly 
borrowed  from  a  Jewisli  ideal,  but  had  been  so 
enriched  and  transfigured  as  to  indicate  a  body 
that  was  entirely  new.  The  Jewish  idea  of  a 
chosen  people  in  relation  to  God  received  a  fuller 
meaning,  and  to  this  was  added  the  idea  of  a  chosen 
people  in  relation  to  the  Incamat*  and  Risen  Son  of 
God  and  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  ^ritXTjo-ia  is  nowhere 
used  of  heathen  religious  assemblies. 

4.  Origin. — Whether  or  no  the  Christian  com- 
munity owes  its  name  of  '  Church '  (^K/cXT^r/a)  to 
Christ',  beyond  reasonable  doubt  it  owes  its  origin 
to  Him.  It  is  a  strange  misreading  of  plain  facts 
to  elevate  St.  Paul  into  the  founder  of  the  Christian 
Church.  The  theory  that  in  Christianity,  as  in 
some  other  religions,  there  was  a  gradual  deifica- 
tion of  the  founder,  continues  to  be  advocated,  but 
it  will  not  bear  serious  investigation.  If  St.  Paul 
originated  Christianity,  who  originated  St.  Paul? 
Wfiit  was  it  that  turned  Saul  the  persecutor  of  the 
Church  into  Paul  the  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ?  It 
was  the  indelible  conviction  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah,  and  that  He  had  risen  from  the  dead  and 
conversed  with  him  on  the  road  to  Damascus,  that 
converted  and  ever  afterwards  controlled  St.  Paul. 
The  conviction  that  the  Messiah  had  been  crucified, 
and  had  risen,  and  was  now  the  Lord  in  heaven, 
was  reached  very  quickly  and  surely  by  large  num- 
bers, who  had  good  opportunities  of  ascertaining 
the  truth  and  staked  everything  on  the  result. 
This  conviction  was  based  upon  the  experiences  of 
those  who  were  qtiite  certain  that  the  Risen  Christ 
had  appeared  to  them  and  conversed  with  them. 
Those  appearances  were  realities,  however  we  may 
explain  them  ;  they  are  among  those  things  which 
prove  themselves  by  their  otherwise  inexplicable 
results  ;  and  the  convictions  which  they  produced 
remain  undestroyed  and  indestructible.  It  was 
upon  them  that  the  Apostolic  Church  was  built. 
From  the  Risen  Christ  it  had  received  the  amazing 
commission  to  go  forth  and  conquer  the  world  ; 
about  that  there  was  no  doubt  among  those  who 
joyously  undertook  this  stupendous  work.  The 
apostles  must  have  knowna  whether  Christ  intended 
them  to  form  a  Church  ;  and  their  view  of  His 
intention  is  shown  by  the  fact  that,  immediately 
after  His  withdrawal  from  their  sight,  they  set  to 
work  to  construct  one.  If  the  new  religion  was 
to  conquer  the  world,  it  must  be  both  individualistic 
and  so<ial ;  it  must  provide  for  communion  between 
each  soul  and  God,  and  also  for  communion  between 
its  adherents.  In  other  words,  there  must  be  a 
Chturch.  Christ  showed  how  this  was  to  be  done. 
He  was  not  content  with  being  an  itinerant  teacher, 
preaching  to  casual  audiences.  He  selected  a  few 
disciples  and  trained  them  to  be  His  helpers  and 
His  successors.  It  is  manifest  that  He  intended 
them  to  found  a  society ;  for  although  He  gave 
few  rules  for  its  organization,  yet  He  Instituted 
two  rites,  one  for  admission  to  It  and  one  for  its 
preservation  (W.  Hobhouse,  The  Church  and  the 
World  [Bampton  Lectures,  London,  1910],  p.  17  ff.). 
*  An  isolated  Christian '  Is  a  contradiction,  for  every 
Christian  is  a  member  of  Christ's  Body.  In  refer- 
ence to  the  world  Christians  are  '  samts '  (iyioi) ; 
in  reference  to  one  another  they  are  '  brethren ' ;  In 
reference  to  Christ  they  are  'members.'  In  the 
original  constitution  of  the  human  body  God  placed 
diflerently  endowed  members,  and  He  has  done  the 
same  In  the  original  constitution  of  the  Church 
(1  Co  l-Z^).  Both  are  in  origin  Divine,  the  product 
of  the  creative  action  of  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit. 

5.  Growth.— The  gro^-th  of  the  Apostolic  Church 
■was  very  rapid.  The  first  missionary  eflbrts  of  the 
original  believers  were  confined  to  Jerusalem  and 
its  immediate  neighbourhood,  and  the  converts 
were   Palestinian   or  Hellenistic  Jews  who  were 


livin^or  sojourning  in  or  near  the  capital.  At  first 
the  Hellenists  were  in  a  minority,  but  this  soon 
ceased  to  be  the  case.  Persecution  caused  flight 
from  Jerusalem,  and  then  missionary  effort  was 
extended  to  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  and  to  Crentiies. 
At  Antioch  in  Syria  the  momentous  change  was 
made  to  a  mixed  congregation  containing  both  Jews 
and  Christians.  Then  what  had  seemed  even  to 
the  Jews  themselves  to  be  a  mere  Jewish  sect 
became  a  universal  Church  (Ac  11^").  As  soon  as 
it  was  seen  that  Judaism,  in  spite  of  all  its  OT 
glories,  would  never  become  a  universal  religion, 
missions  to  the  heathen  became  a  necessity.  The 
first  missionaries  to  the  Gentiles,  the  men  who  took 
this  momentous  step  of  bringing  the  gospel  to 
pagans,  are  for  the  most  part  unknown  to  us. 
Who  won  the  first  Gentile  converts  at  Antioch? 
Who  first  took  Christianity  to  Rome?  Whoever 
they  were,  there  had  been  a  long  and  complex 
preparation  for  their  work,  which  goes  a  consider- 
able way  towards  explaining  its  success.  This 
indeed  was  to  be  hoped  for  in  accordance  w-ith 
Christ's  command  (Mt  28'«,  Lk  24")  and  St.  Peters 
Pentecostal  promise  *to  all  that  are  afar  off'  (Ac 
2^) ;  but  we  can  see  some  of  the  details  which 
helped  fulfilment. 

The  only  thing  which  adequately  explains  the 
great  expjuision  of  Christianity  in  the  1st  cent,  is 
the  fact  of  its  Divine  origin  ;  but  there  were  a  num- 
ber of  causes  which  favoured  its  spread  and  more 
than  counteracted  the  active  opposition  and  other 
difficulties  with  which  It  had  to  contend. 

(a)  The  dispersion  of  the  Jews  in  civilized  coun- 
tries secured  a  knowledge  of  monotheism  and  a 
sound  moral  code. 

(ft)  Roman  law  had  become  almost  co-extensive 
with  the  civilized  world.  Tribal  and  national  ideas, 
often  irrational  and  debasing,  had  given  place  to 
principles  of  natural  right  and  justice.  Roman 
law,  liie  the  Mosaic  Law,  was  a  rcuSayuyAt  to  lead 
men  to  Christ. 

(c)  The  splendid  organization  of  the  Roman 
Empire  gave  great  facilities  for  travel  and  corre- 
spondence. 

(rf)  The  dissolution  of  nationalities  by  Roman 
conquests  prepared  men's  minds  for  a  religion 
which  was  not  national  but  universal ;  and  It  Is 
not  impossible,  in  spite  of  the  horror  which  the 
writer  of  the  Apocalypse  exhibits  towards  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Emperor,  that  that  worship,  which  was 
nominally  universal,  sometimes  prepared  people  for 
a  worship  of  the  Power  to  which  they  owed  exist- 
ence, and  not  merely  fitful  security  and  peace. 

(e)  The  Macedonian  conquest  had  made  men 
familiar  with  a  type  of  civilization  which  seemed 
to  be  adaptable  to  the  whole  world,  and  had  sup- 
plied a  language  which  was  stUl  more  adaptable. 
Greek  was  everywhere  spoken  In  large  towns,  and 
in  them  converts  were  most  likely  to  be  found. 
Through  the  LXX,  Greek  was  a  Je^vish  as  well  as 
a  pagan  Instrument  of  thought,  and  had  become 
very  flexible  and  simple,  capable  of  expressing  new 
ideas,  and  yet  easily  intelligible  to  plain  men. 
Greek  was  the  language  of  culture  and  of  commerce 
even  In  Rome.  It  was  also  the  sacred  language  of 
the  world-wide  worship  of  Isis.  Hardly  at  any 
other  period  has  the  ci\"ilized  world  had  a  nearer 
approach  to  a  universal  language.  The  retention 
of  a  Greek  liturgy  in  the  Church  of  Rome  for  two 
centuries  was  due  partly  to  the  fact  that  the  first 
I  missionaries  taught  in  Greek  and  that  the  Greek 
i  Bible  was  used  ;  partly  to  the  desire  to  preserve 
the  unity  of  the  Church  throughout  the  Empire. 
Its  abanionment  by  the  Roman  Church  prepared 
the  way  for  the  estrangement  between  East  and 
West. 

{/)  There  was  a  wide-spread  sense  of  moral  cor- 
ruption  and   spiritual  need.     'A  great   religious 


206 


CHURCH 


CHURCH 


longing  swept  over  tlie  length  and  breadth  of  the 
empire.  The  scepticiism  of  the  age  of  enlighten- 
ment had  become  bankrupt'  (E.  v.  Dobschiitz, 
Apustol.  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1909,  p.  39).     The 

{(revalent  religions  and  philosophies  had  stimulated 
ongings  which  they  could  not  satisfy.  Specula- 
tions about  conscience,  sin,  and  judgment  to  come, 
about  the  efficacy  of  sacrifices,  and  the  possibility 
of  forgiveness  and  of  life  after  death,  had  prepared 
men  for  what  Christianity  had  to  offer.  Even 
if  the  gospel  had  not  been  given,  some  religi- 
ous change  would  have  come.  The  gospel  often 
awakened  spiritual  aspirations ;  more  often  it 
found  them  awake  and  satisiied  them.  It  satisfied 
them  because  it  possessed  the  characteristics  of  a 
universal  religion — incomparable  sublimity  of  doc- 
trine, inexhaustible  adaptability,  and  an  origin 
that  was  recognizable  as  Divine.  The  Jew  might 
be  won  by  the  conviction  that  the  law  was  trans- 
figured in  the  gospel  and  that  prophecy  was  fulfilled 
in  Christ  and  His  Church.  St.  Peter  began  his 
Pentecostal  address  to  the  assembled  Jews  by  point- 
ing out  that  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  was  a 
fullilment  of  Jewish  prophecy  (Jl  2^"^^)  and  an 
inauguration  of  '  the  last  days,'  Avhich  were  to  pre- 
cede the  coming  of  the  Messiah  in  glory.  But  to 
the  Gentile  these  considerations  were  not  impres- 
sive. The  great  pagan  world  had  to  be  won  by  the 
actual  contents  of  Christianity,  which  were  seen  to 
be  better  than  those  of  any  religion  that  the  world 
had  thus  far  known.  They  were  not  only  new, 
but  '  with  authority ' ;  and  they  stood  the  test  of 
experience  by  bearing  the  wear  and  tear  of  life. 
Christianity  was  at  once  a  mirror  and  a  '  mystery ' : 
it  I'eflected  life  so  clearly  and  it  suggested  some- 
thing much  higher.  It  was  a  marvel  of  simplicity 
and  richness.  It  was  so  plain  that  it  could  be  told 
in  a  few  words  which  might  change  the  whole  life. 
It  was  so  varied  and  subtle  that  it  could  tax  all  the 
intellectual  powers  and  excite  the  strongest  feel- 
ings. 

When  the  proconsul  Saturninus  said  to  the  Scillitan  Martyrs, 
'  We  also  are  religious  people,  and  our  religion  is  simple,'  one  of 
the  Christians  replied,  '  If  you  will  grant  uie  a  quiet  hearing,  1 
wll  tell  you  the  mystery  of  simplicity '  (Acts  of  the  Scillitan 
Martyrs  [TS  i.  2,  1891,  p.  112] ;  cf.  1  Co  27). 

The  number  of  Christians  at  the  close  of  the  1st 
cent,  is  very  uncertain.  We  read  of  a  good  many 
centres  throughout  the  Empire  ;  but  we  know  little 
about  the  size  of  each  of  these  local  churches.  In 
some  the  numbers  were  probably  small.  In  Pales- 
tine they  were  numerous  (Ac  21-'*'). 

(g)  The  zeal  and  ability  of  the  first  missionaries 
were  very  great.  We  know  the  names  of  compara- 
tively few  of  them,  but  we  know  some  of  the  results 
of  their  work.  The  extension  of  the  Church  in  the 
2nd  cent,  is  proof  of  the  good  work  done  in  the  1st. 
In  accordance  with  Christ's  directions  (Mk  6'' ;  cf. 
Lk  10^),  these  missionaries  commonly  worked  in 
pairs  (H.  Latham,  Pastor  Pastorum,  Cambridge, 
1890,  p.  296  f.).  St.  Paul  as  a  general  rule  had  one 
companion,  and  probably  seldom  more  ;  and  his 
ability  in  planning  missions  is  conspicuous.  He 
selected  Roman  colonies,  where,  as  a  Roman  citizen, 
he  would  have  rights,  and  where  he  would  be  likely 
to  find  Jews,  and  men  of  other  religions,  trading 
under  the  protection  of  Rome.  A  synagogue  was 
at  first  the  usual  starting-point  for  a  Christian 
mission.  But  very  soon  the  Jews  became  too  hos- 
tile ;  so  far  from  listening  to  the  preachers,  they 
stirred  up  the  heathen  against  them  (T.  R.  Glover, 
The  Conflict  of  Religions  in  the  Early  Roman 
Empire,  London,  1909,  ch.  vi.). 

It  is  impossible  to  say  which  of  the  forces  which 
characterized  Christianity  contributed  most  to  its 
success :  its  preaching  of  the  life,  death,  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ,  its  lofty  monotheism,  its  hope  of 
immortality,  its  doctrine  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 


its  practical  benevolence,  its  inward  cohesion  and 
unity.  Each  of  these  told,  and  we  may  be  sure 
that  their  combined  ellect  was  great. 

6.  Conflict  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  ele- 
ments.— It  is  remarkable  how  soon  this  conflict  iii 
the  Apostolic  Church  began.  Not  long  after  Chris- 
tianity was  born,  it  was  severed  from  the  nation 
which  gave  it  birth,  and,  since  the  final  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  it  has  only  in  rare  cases  found  a  secure 
hold  on  Jewish  soil.  But  it  is  not  a  just  statement 
of  the  case  to  say  that  the  Gentile  Church  fir.st 
stripped  Judaism  of  everything,  the  Scriptures  in- 
cluded, and  then  left  it  by  the  wayside  half  dead  ; 
or  that  the  daughter  first  robbed  her  mother,  and 
then  repudiated  her.  That  is  an  inversion  of  the 
truth  ;  it  was  the  mother  who  drove  out  the  daugh- 
ter and  then  persistently  blackened  her  character. 
As  to  the  Scriptures,  there  has  been  no  robbery, 
for  both  have  possessed  them.  But  the  daughter 
has  put  them  to  far  better  account  and  has  in- 
creased their  value  tenfold.  Christianity  did  not 
come  forward  at  first  as  a  new  religion  aiming  at  oust- 
ing the  Jews.  Its  Founder  was  the  Jewish  Messiah, 
the  fulfilment  of  OT  prophecies.  It  Mas  the  Jews 
who  forced  the  opposition.  The  relation  of  Juda- 
ism to  Christianity  was,  almost  from  the  first,  a 
hostile  one.  And,  as  it  was  the  energetic  Jew  of 
Tarsus  who  led  the  first  persecution  of  the  Chris- 
tians, so  it  was  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  who 
caused  the  final  separation  of  the  Church  from  the 
Synagogue.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel,  *  the  Jews '  are 
the  opponents  of  the  Christ.  In  the  Apocalypse, 
they  are  '  the  synagogue  of  Satan '  (2''  3"  ;  cf .  Did- 
ache,  8).  Barnabas  goes  stiU  further  :  the  Jews 
have  never  been  in  covenant  with  God  (iv.  6-9,  xiv. 
1);  the  Jews  are  the  sinners  (xii.  10).  Judaism  is 
obsolete  :  the  Christian  Church  has  taken  its  place 
and  succeeded  to  all  its  privileges.  Hence  the 
lofty  enthusiasm  of  the  first  Christians,  whose 
language  often  assumes  a  rhythmic  strain  when  the 
Church  is  spoken  of  (Eph  4S  Col  P**,  1  Ti  S^',  He 
\2^-\  1  P  29,  Mt  16'»).  It  was  through  the  Christian 
Church  that  God  filled  the  world  with  His  Spirit ; 
to  it  belonged  the  glorious  future  and  the  final 
triumph  ;  for  by  it  the  religion  of  an  exclusive 
nation  had  been  transformed  into  a  religion  for  the 
whole  world. 

It  was  inevitable  that  the  Jews  should  resent 
such  claims  on  the  part  of  Christians,  and  espe- 
cially of  Gentile  Christians ;  and  the  resentment 
became  furious  hostility  when  they  saw  the  rapid- 
ity with  which  Christians  made  converts  as  com- 
Eared  with  their  own  slowness  in  making  proselytes 
ere  and  there.  Until  the  Maccabaean  princes 
used  force,  not  many  had  been  made.  Since  then, 
religious  aspirations  had  combined  wth  interested 
motives  to  bring  adherents  to  Judaism,  and  it 
was  from  these  more  serious  proselytes  that  the 
Christian  missionaries  obtained  much  help.  Under 
their  roof  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  could  meet  to 
hear  the  word  of  God  (Ac  18^).  Christianity  could 
offer  to  a  dissatisfied  and  earnest  pagan  all  that 
Judaism  could  otter  and  a  great  deal  more.  Such 
inquirers  after  truth  now  ceased  to  seek  admission 
to  the  Synagogue  and  joined  the  Church,  and  the 
downfall  of  Jerusalem  accelerated  this  change. 
The  Jewish  war  of  a.d.  66-70  was  regarded  oy 
the  Christians  as  a  judgment  for  the  murder  of 
the  Messiah,  and  also  for  the  more  recent  murder 
in  62  of  the  Messiah's  brother,  James  the  Just. 
That  catastrophe  destroyed  both  the  centre  of  Jew- 
ish worship  and  also  the  Jews  themselves  as  a 
nation.  The  loss  of  the  Temple  was  to  some  extent 
mitigated  by  the  system  of  synagogues,  which  had 
long  been  established.  But  that  destruction,  both 
in  its  immediate  eflect  and  in  its  far-reaching  con- 
sequences, marks  a  crisis  which  has  few  parallels  in 
history.     Christianity  felt  both.     The  destruction 


CHURCH 


CHURCH 


20; 


of  Jerusalem  left  the  Gentile  Churches,  and  espe- 
cially the  Church  of  Rome,  %%ithout  a  rival,  for  the 
Jewish  Church  of  Jerusalem  sank  into  obscurity,  I 
and  never  recovered  ;  nor  did  any  other  community  , 
of  Jewish  Christians  take  its  place.  When  a 
Christian  community  arose  once  more  in  the  re- 
storeil  J  erusalem,  it  was  a  Gentile  Church.  Jewish 
Christianity  was  far  on  the  road  towards  extinction. 
The  Judaizing  Christians  persisted  in  regarding 
Judaism  as  the  Divinely  appointed  universal  re- 
ligion, of  which  Christianity  was  only  a  special  off- 
shoot endow^ed  with  new 'powers.  The  Pauline 
view  involved  the  hateful  admission  that  the  OT 
disi)ensation  was  relative  and  transitory.  The 
JudaLzerseould  not  see  that  Christianity,  although 
founded  on  the  OT  and  realizing  an  OT  ideal  which 
had  been  seen  but  not  reached  by  the  prophets, 
was  now  independent  of  Judaism.  Judaizing  was 
a  passing  malatiy  in  the  life  of  the  Church,  and 
had  little  influence  on  ecclesiastical  development. 
The  Judaizing  Christians  either  gave  up  their  Juda- 
ism or  ceased  to  be  Christian. 

The  Tiibingen  theory  that  the  leading  fact  in  the 
Apostolic  Church  was  a  struggle  between  St.  Paul 
and  the  Twelve  has  been  illuminating,  but  closer 
study  of  the  evidence  has  shown  that  it  is  unten- 
able. There  were  some  differences,  but  there  was 
no  hostility,  between  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve. 
The  hostility  was  between  St.  Paul  and  the  Juda- 
izers,  who  claimed  to  represent  the  Twelve.  It  is 
possible  that  some  of  these  Judaizing  teachers  had 
seen  Christ  during  His  ministry,  and  therefore  said 
that  they  had  a  better  right  to  the  title  of  '  apostle  ' 
than  he  had.  In  the  mis-called  '  Apostolic  Council ' 
at  Jerusalem,  which  was  really  a  conference  of 
apostles,  elder  brethren,  and  the  whole  Church  of 
Jerusalem  (Ac  15*-  ^  *^  ^),  there  was  no  conflict  be- 
tween the  Twelve  and  St.  Paul.  St.  Paul's  rebuke 
to  St.  Peter  at  Antioch  (Gal  2""")  is  no  evidence  of 
a  ditterence  of  principle  between  them.  St.  Peter 
is  blamed,  not  for  having  erroneous  convictions, 
but  for  being  unfaithful  to  true  ones.  He  and  St. 
Paul  were  entirelj-  agreed  that  there  was  no  need 
to  make  Gentile  converts  conform  to  the  Mosaic 
Law  ;  but  St.  Peter  had  been  willing  to  make  un- 
worthy concessions  to  the  prejudices  of  Jewish  con- 
verts who  were  fresh  from  headquarters,  by  ceasing 
to  eat  with  GrentUe  converts.  He  had  perhaps 
argued  that,  as  it  was  impossible  to  please  both 
parties,  it  was  better,  for  tne  moment,  to  keep  on 
good  terms  with  people  from  Jerusalem.  He  tem- 
porized in  order  to  please  the  Judaizers. 

'  But  what  it  amounted  to  was  that  multitudes  of  baptized 
Gentile  Christians,  hitherto  treated  on  terms  of  }5erfect  equality, 
were  now  to  be  practically  exhibited  as  unfit  company  for  the 
circumcised  Apostles  of  the  Lord  who  died  for  them.  ." .  .  Such 
conduct,  though  in  form  it  was  not  an  expulsion  of  the  G«ntile 
converts,  but  only  a  self-withdrawal  from  their  company,  was 
in  effect  a  summons  to  them  to  become  Jews  if  they  wished  to 
remain  in  the  fullest  sense  Christians.  St.  Paul  does  not  tell  us 
how  the  dispute  ended  :  but  he  continued  on  excellent  terms 
with  the  Jerusalem  Apostles'  (F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Jvdaittie  Chris- 
tianity,  Cambridge,  1894,  pp.  78.  79). 

The  leading  facts  in  the  history  of  the  Apostolic 
Church  are — the  freedom  won  for  Gentile  converts, 
the  consequent  expansion  of  Christianity  and  Chris- 
tendom, and  the  transfer  of  the  Christian  centre 
from  Palestine  to  Europe.  When  the  Apostolic  Age 
began,  the  Church  was  overwhelmingly  Jewish  ; 
before  it  ended,  the  Church  was  overwhelmingly 
Gentile.  Owing  mainly  to  the  influence  of  St. 
Paul — 'a  Hebrew  of  Hebrews ' — whose  Jewish  birth 
and  training  moulded  his  thoughts  and  language, 
but  never  induced  him  to  sacrifice  the  freedom  of 
the  gospel  to  the  bondage  of  the  law,  the  break 
mth  Judaism  became  absolute,  and,  as  GtentUe 
converts  increased,  the  restrictions  of  Judaism  were 
almost  forgotten.  The  Judaizing  Christians,  especi- 
ally after  the  second  destruction  of  Jerusalem  tmder 


Hadrian,  drew  further  and  further  away  from  the 
Church,  and  ceased  to  influence  its  development. 

7.  Character. — The  character  of  the  Apostolic 
Church  is  not  one  that  can  be  sketched  in  a  few 
strokes.  Simple  as  it  was  in  form,  it  had  varied 
and  delicate  cnaracteristics.  By  its  foundation  in 
Jerusalem,  which  even  the  heathen  regarded  as  no 
mean  city,  Christianity  became,  what  it  continued 
to  be  in  tne  main  for  some  centuries,  a  city-religion, 
a  religion  nearly  all  the  adherents  of  which  lived 
in  large  centres  of  population.  It  was  in  such 
centres  that  the  first  missionaries  worked.  For 
eighteen  years  or  more  (Gal  1^^  2^)  Jerusalem  con- 
tinued to  be  the  headquarters  of  at  least  some  of 
the  Twelve ;  but  even  before  the  conversion  of  St. 
Paul  there  were  Christians  at  Samaria  (Ac  8'*), 
Damascus  (9"),  and  Antioch  (11^),  which  soon 
eclipsed  Jerusalem  as  the  Christian  metropolis. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  already  that  the  Church 
is  necessarily  social  in  character  ;  and  it  resembles 
other  societies,  especially  those  which  have  a  poli- 
tical or  moral  aim,  in  requiring  self-denying  loyalty 
from  its  members.  But  it  difl'ers  from  other  societies 
in  claiming  to  be  universal.  The  morality  which 
it  inculcates  is  not  for  any  one  nation  or  class,  but 
for  the  whole  of  mankind.  In  the  very  small  amount 
of  legislation  which  Christ  promulgated,  He  made 
it  quite  clear  that  in  the  Kingdom  social  interests 
are  to  prevail  rather  than  private  interests ;  and  also 
that  all  men  have  a  right  to  enter  the  society  and 
ought  to  be  invited  to  join  it.  The  Church,  there- 
fore, is  a  commonwealth  open  to  all  the  world.  Every 
human  being  may  find  a  place  in  it ;  and  all  those 
who  belong  to  it  will  find  that  they  have  entered  a 
vast  family,  in  which  all  the  members  are  brethren 
and  have  the  obligations  of  brethren  to  promote 
one  another's  well-being  both  of  body  and  soul. 
This  form  of  a  free  brotherhood  was  essential  to  a 
universal  religion  ;  and  the  proof  of  its  superiority 
to  other  brotherhoods  lay  in  its  being  suitable  to 
all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men.  It  prescribed  con- 
duct which  can  be  recognized  as  binding  on  all ; 
and,  far  more  fully  than  any  other  system,  it  sup- 
plied to  all  what  the  soul  of  each  individual  craved. 
The  name  '  disciples '  did  not  last  long  as  a  name 
for  all  Christians  ;  the  name  '  brethren '  took  its 
place.  St.  Paul  does  not  speak  of  Christians  as 
'  disciples '  ;  that  word  came  to  be  restricted  to 
those  who  had  been  the  personal  disciples  of  Christ. 
He  speaks  of  them  as  '  brethren,'  a  term  in  harmony 
with  the  Christians'  '  enthusiasm  of  humanity,'  an 
enthusiasm  which  set  no  Ijounds  to  its  affection, 
but  gave  to  every  individual,  however  degraded, 
full  recognition.  The  mere  fact  of  being  a  l^ptized 
believer  gave  an  absolute  claim  to  lo>'ing  considera- 
tion from  all  the  rest.  This  brotherhood  of  Chris- 
tians was  easily  recognized  by  the  heathen. 

Lucian  (Death  of  Pereftinut  ProteuM)  says :  '  It  was  imposed 
upon  them  by  their  original  lawgiver  that  they  are  aU  brothers 
from  the  moment  that  they  are  conrerted.  ...  An  adroit,  un- 
scrupulous fellow,  who  has  seen  the  world,  has  only  to  get 
among  these  simple  souls,  and  his  fortune  is  soon  made.'  By 
pretending  to  be  a  '  brother '  he  can  get  anything  out  of  them. 

There  is  a  stronger  bond  than  that  of  belonging 
to  one  and  the  same  society,  commonwealth,  and 
brotherhood.  Seeing  that  the  brotherhood  implies 
that  the  Father  of  the  family  is  God,  there  would 
seem  to  be  nothing  stronger  than  that.  And  yet 
there  is  :  Christians  are  members  of  one  Body,  the 
Body  of  Christ,  which  is  inspired  by  one  Spirit. 
Just  as  no  one  did  so  much  as  St.  Paul  to  free  the 
new  society  from  its  cramping  and  stifling  connexion 
with  Judaism,  so  no  one  did  so  much  as  he  to  develop 
the  idea  of  a  free  Christian  Church,  and  of  the  re- 
lation of  the  Spirit  to  it.  The  local  eKKXrjffia  of  be- 
lievers is  a  temple  in  which  God  dwells  by  His 
Spirit ;  it  is  Christ's  Body,  of  which  all  become 
members  by  being  baptized  in  one  Spirit.     No  difler- 


208 


CHUKCH 


CHURCH 


ences  of  rank  or  of  spiritual  endowments  can  de- 
stroy this  fundamental  unity,  any  more  than  the 
unity  of  a  building  or  of  the  human  body  is  destroyed 
by  the  complexity  of  its  structure.  In  Ephesians, 
the  Apostle  looks  forward  to  an  iKKXtjcria,  not  local, 
but  including  all  Christians  that  anywhere  exist. 
The  same  Spirit  dwells  in  each  soul  and  makes  the 
multitude  of  the  faithful,  irrespective  of  locality 
or  condition,  to  be  one  (see  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit 
in  the  NT,  London.  1909,  p.  308).  From  the  ideal 
point  of  view,  there  is  only  one  Church,  which  is 
imperfectly,  but  effectively,  represented  and  real- 
ized in  the  numerous  organizations  in  Christen- 
dom. Not  that  Christendom  is  the  whole  of  which 
they  are  the  constituent  parts — that  is  a  way  of 
looking  at  it  which  is  not  found  in  the  Apostolic 
Church,  and  it  may  easily  be  misleading.  The 
more  accurate  view  is  to  regard  each  member  of  a 
Christian  organization  as  a  member  of  the  universal 
Church.  The  Church  consists  of  duly  qualified  in- 
dividuals ;  the  intermediate  groups  may  be  con- 
venient or  inevitable,  but  they  are  not  essential. 

Separate  organizations,  or  local  churches,  came 
into  existence  because  bodies  of  Christians  arose  at 
different  places  and  increased.  These  bodies  were 
independent,  no  one  local  church  being  in  subjec- 
tion to  another.  The  congregations  at  Ephesus, 
Thessalonica,  Philippi,  Corinth,  etc.,  were  independ- 
ent of  one  another  and  of  the  earlier  churches  of 
Antioch  and  Jerusalem.  Their  chief  bond  of  union 
was  that  of  the  gospel  and  of  membership  in  Christ. 
Besides  this,  the  churches  just  named  had  the  tie 
of  being  the  product  of  one  and  the  same  founder  ; 
and,  as  children  of  the  same  spiritual  father,  they 
were  in  a  special  sense  '  brethren.'  St.  Paul  appeals 
to  this  fact  and  to  their  relationship  to  other 
churches.  But,  although  he  teaches  that  a  church 
in  need  has  claims  upon  the  liberality  of  other 
churches,  he  nowhere  gives  one  church  authority 
over  others.  Nevertheless,  even  in  apostolic  times, 
congregations  in  the  same  district  appear  to  have 
been  regarded  as  connected  groups,  and  it  is  pos- 
sible that  the  congregation  in  the  provincial  capital 
had  some  sort  of  initiative  in  virtue  of  the  import- 
ance of  the  city  where  they  dwelt.  Thus,  we  nave 
'the  churches  of  Galatia^(l  Co  16',  Gal  1'),  'the 
churches  of  Asia'  (1  Co  16'®),  'the  churches  of 
Judtea '  (Gal  1^2),  '  the  seven  churches  of  Asia '  (Rev 
1^).  In  this  way  there  arose  between  the  local  city 
church  and  the  universal  Church  an  organization 
which  may  be  called  the  provincial  Church  (A. 
Harnack,  Constitution  ana  Law  of  the  Church, 
Eng.  tr.,  London,  1910,  p.  160). 

Besides  these  close  ties  of  relationship  and  mem- 
bership, the  first  Christians  were  held  together  by 
unity  of  creed.  It  is  true  that  primitive  Christian- 
ity was  an  enthusiasm  rather  than  a  creed ;  but 
there  was  a  creed.  It  may  be  summed  up  in  two 
strong  convictions,  one  negative  and  the  other 
positive.  The  negative  one  united  the  Christians 
with  the  Jews ;  the  positive  one  was  the  chief  cause 
of  separation  between  the  two.  Both  Jew  and 
Christian  declared  with  equal  emphasis  that  the 
gods  of  the  heathen  were  no-gods (Dt  32'^,  1  Co  10-") : 
they  were  Shedim,  nullities.  But  the  Divine 
nature  of  the  Incarnate,  Crucified,  and  Risen  Son  of 
God  was  what  the  Christian  affirmed  as  confidently 
and  constantly  as  the  Jew  denied  it.  Here  no  com- 
promise was  possible.  Tlie  Divinity  of  the  Cruci- 
fied, which  is  such  a  difficulty  to  modem  thought, 
appears  to  have  caused  little  difficulty  to  the  first 
Christians.  It  has  been  suggested  that  familiarity 
with  polytheistic  ideas  helped  them  to  believe  in 
the  Divinity  of  the  Son.  Possibly  ;  but,  on  the 
otiier  hand,  their  rejection  of  polytheism  M'as  ab- 
solute, and  they  died  rather  than  make  concessions. 
Heatiien  philosopliers,  who  saw  that  polytheism 
was  irrational,  had  a  colourless  theism  which  could 


make  compromises  with  poi)ular  misbeliefs.  Think- 
ers like  Plato,  Aristotle,  Cicero,  Seneca,  and 
Plutarch  could  talk  indiflerently  of  God  and  gods, 
of  the  Divine  Being  and  the  deities ;  but  for  the 
early  Christians  that  was  impossible.  They  were 
not  theologians,  and  they  had  only  the  rudiments 
of  a  creed  ;  but  they  were  quite  clear  about  the 
necessity  of  worshipping  God  and  His  Christ,  and 
about  the  folly  and  wickedness  of  worsliipping  men 
or  idols.  Hence,  with  all  their  simplicity  or  doc- 
trine they  had  deep  convictions  which  formed  a 
strong  bond  of  union.  The  heathen  mysteries  had 
something  of  the  same  kind. 

P.  Gardner  has  pointed  out  three  common  characteristics,  all 
of  which  bring  them  into  line  with  Christianity  :  rites  o(  purifica- 
tion, rites  of  communion  with  some  deity,  and  means  of  secur- 
ing happiness  in  the  other  world.  He  holds  that  the  Christian 
mystery  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks  is  '  the  existence  of  a  spiritual 
bond  holding  together  a  society  in  union  with  a  spiritual  lord 
with  whom  the  society  had  communion,  and  from  whom  they 
received  in  the  present  life  safety  from  sin  and  defilement,  and 
in  the  world  to  come  life  everlasting '  {The  IleligUnu  Experience 
of  St.  Paul,  London,  1911,  p.  79). 

8.  Relation  to  the  State  and  other  systems. — 

The  question  of  the  relation  of  the  Churtli  to  the 
State  was  only  beginning  to  arise  towards  the  end 
of  the  apostolic  period.  The  Church  was  develop- 
ing its  organization  for  its  own  purposes,  witiiout 
thinking  of  producing  a  power  which  might  rival 
and  oppose  the  State.  The  State  had  not  yet  be- 
come aware  of  any  Christian  organization,  and  it 
dealt  with  Christians  as  eccentrics,  who  sometimes 
became  a  public  nuisance.  The  Jews  were  toler- 
ated, less  because  they  were  not  offensive  to  the 
Roman  Government  than  because  itwas inexpedient 
to  persecute  them  ;  and  so  long  as  Christians  were 
regarded  as  a  Jewish  sect,  they  shared  the  immun- 
ity of  the  Jews  and  were  generally  unmolested. 
When  the  difference  between  Jews  and  Christians 
became  manifest — and  the  Jews  often  pointed  it 
out — Christians  were  persecuted  whenever  the 
temper  of  the  magistrates  or  of  the  mob  made  it 
expedient  to  persecute.  The  State  was  intolerant 
on  principle  ;  it  allowed  no  other  corporation  either 
inside  or  outside  itself.  While  it  freely  permitted 
a  variety  of  cults,  it  insisted  on  every  citizen  tak- 
ing part  in  the  State  religion,  especially  in  the 
worship  of  the  Emperor.  It  was  here  that  the 
Church  came  into  complete  and  deadly  collision 
with  the  Roman  Empire,  as  the  Apocalypse  again 
and  again  shows.  Nero  was  not  fond  of  being 
styled  a  god  ;  it  seemed  to  imply  that  he  was  about 
to  be  translated  from  earth  by  death,  and  he  pre- 
ferred popularity  during  this  life  to  worship  after 
it  was  over.  Domitian  had  no  such  feeling.  He 
was  not  popular,  and  could  not  make  himself  so ; 
but  he  could  make  his  subjects  worship  him  ;  and 
in  the  provinces,  especially  in  the  province  of  Asia, 
where  Emperors  were  not  often  seen,  but  where 
the  benefits  of  good  government  were  felt,  subjects 
were  very  willing  to  render  Divine  honours  to  the 

f>ower  that  blessed  them.  Domitian  began  the 
ormal  letters  which  his  procurators  had  to  issue 
for  him  with  the  words  :  '  Our  Lord  and  God  orders 
this  to  be  done'  (Suet.  Do7n.  13).  Festivals  for  the 
worship  of  the  Emperor  were  often  held  by  the 
magistrates  at  places  in  which  there  were  Chris- 
tians, e.g.  at  Ephesus,  Sardis,  Smyrna,  and  Phila- 
delphia ;  and  to  refuse  to  take  part  in  them  was 
rebellion  against  the  Government  and  blasphemy 
against  the  Augustus.  Some  magistrates  were 
friendly,  like  the  Asiarchs  towards  St.  Paul  (Ac 
19^^),  but  the  possibilities  of  persecution  for  refus- 
ing to  worship  the  Emperor  or  the  local  deities  were 
so  great  that  we  may  suspect  that  many  attacks  on 
Christians  took  place  about  which  history  records 
nothing  (Swete,  Apocalypse,  London,  1907,  Introd. 
ch.  vii.  ;  J.  B.  Ligntfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  pt.  i. 
vol.  i.  [1890]  p.  104). 


CHURCH 


CHURCH  GOVER^':ME^'T 


209 


Even  if  this  danger  had  not  existed,  the  mere 
fact  that  the  Church  was  a  self-governing  body, 
within  the  State — imperium  in  imptrio — bat  not  of 
it,  was  enongh  to  bring  it  into  collision  with  the 
(.J«>vemment.  The  attitude  of  the  Church  was  as 
loyal  as  was  possible.  The  apostles  respected  the 
civil  power,  even  when  represented  by  a  Nero,  as  a 
Divinely  appointed  instrument  for  the  preservation 
of  order ;  but  they  could  not  allow  it  to  interfere  with 
their  duty  to  Him  who  had  ordained  both  the  civil 
power  and  the  Church.  The  Church  was  no  leveller 
or  democrat  in  the  modem  sense  of  those  terms. 
Rulers  are  to  be  respected  by  subjects,  masters  by 
slaves,  husbands  by  wives,  and  parents  by  children. 
St.  Paul  does  not  teach  the  fallacy  that  all  men 
are  eqiial  ;  he  teaches  that  in  spiritual  things  all 
souls  have  equal  value.  As  regards  the  things  of 
this  Life,  all  men  are  brethren,  and  in  this  he  went 
far  beyond  Stoicism  ;  even  now,  perhaps,  we  have 
not  yet  grasped  the  ftill  significance  of  his  teach- 
ing. To  both  the  Government  and  the  go^omed 
the  Christians  were  an  enigma.  They  aeeoMtd  to 
regard  suHering  as  a  dreadful  thing,  for  they  were 
always  striving  to  relieve  it ;  and  yet  to  disr^ard 
it  entirely,  for  they  were  always  willing  to  endure 
it.  In  an  age  in  which  there  were  no  charitable  in- 
stitutions, tne  whole  congregation  was  a  free  insti- 
tution for  dispensing  practical  help  ;  and  yet,  when 
their  cult  was  in  question,  they  scorned  pain  and 
misery.  Thev  fought  against  involuntary  poverty 
as  an  evil,  anS  yet  declajred  that  volimtary  poverty 
was  a  blessing.  And  there  was  another  paradox — 
Christianity  was  at  once  the  most  comprehensive 
and  the  most  exclusive  of  all  religions.  All  were 
incited  to  enter,  because  the  yoke  was  so  easy ; 
and  all  were  warned  to  count  the  cost,  because  the 
responsibilities  were  so  great.  Converts  were  told 
that  they  must  begin  by  taking  up  the  cross  and 
that  they  must  abjure  the  world.  In  practice,  the 
severance  between  the  Church  and  the  world  was 
not  insisted  upon  { 1  Co  6**) :  it  was  a  difierence  of 
thought  and  life  rather  than  of  social  intercourse. 
Many  Christians  mixed  freely  with  heathens,  and 
many  heathens  came  sometimes  to  Christian  ser- 
vices, without  any  thought  of  seeking  baptism. 
Some  heathens  thought  that  the  Way  was  good, 
but  that  there  were  other  ways  which  were  equaUy 
good.  The  mixture  of  Church  and  world  b^an 
very  early. 

Among  rival  religious  systems,  none  was  more 
dangerous  to  the  success  of  Christianity  than 
Blithra-worship.  Except  in  the  form  of  '  Mysteries,' 
the  old  Greek  religion  had  not  much  power ;  its 
gods  and  goddesses  were  openly  ridiculed.  But 
Mithraism  was  full  of  life  ;  it  could  excite  not  only 
powerful  emotions  but  moral  aspirations  as  well. 
It  inculcated  courage  and  purity,  and  it  taught  the 
doctrine  of  rewards  and  penalties  here  and  here- 
after. Mithra  would  come  one  day  from  heaven, 
and  there  would  be  a  general  resurrection,  after 
which  the  wicked  world  would  be  destroyed  bv  fire 
and  the  good  would  receive  immortality,  ^me 
Church  teachers  regarded  it  as  a  gross  caricature 
of  Christianity.  As  a  missionary  religion,  it  had 
the  advantage  of  being  able  to  make  terms  with 
paganism  ;  its  adherents  had  no  objection  to  idol- 
atrous rites,  and  therefore  never  came  into  collision 
with  the  Government.  It  probably  gained  thou- 
sands who  mi^ht  otherwise  have  accepted  the 
gospel.  The  elastic  simplicity  and  freedom  of 
primitive  Christianity  exposed  the  Apostolic 
Church  to  perils  of  another  kind.  The  troubles 
of  Gnosticism,  Manichaeism,  and  Montanism  grew 
out  of  the  contact  of  Christianity  with  Greek  and 
Oriental  systems  of  religion  and  philosophy,  whose 
ideas  found  entrance  into  Christianity  and  were 

I  sometimes  an  enrichment  and  sometimes  a  cor- 
ruption of  it.     The  balance  was  on  the  side  of  gain. 
VOL.  I. — 14 


The  go^>el  continued  to  supply  the  plain  man  with 
a  simple  rule  of  life,  and  it  began  to  snpply 
the  philoscmher  with  inexhaustible  material  for 
thought.     This  is  a  permanent  cause  of  success. 


il9«.  Oxford. 


LmaATTKB.— In  additioB  to  tlM  ^ 
•ee  W.  W.  SUri^.  Tk»  CkmrO^  te 
I8B7:  P.  Sch»S,  AmmufU  Ouitlim 
Bl;  A.  Hamack,  Somnm  tf  Vk»  j^tHtht. 
Loadoii, liaK;  C ▼.  Wciaidkar.  'fktAmm 
do.  laW;  A.  C  McGJgBrt,  TW^ji  ■*■«<■  Agt,  BdnrtiMi 
W.  M.  Raosay. Tk« Cterafc «» tkt  ltmmKmmir^7\_  _ 
UOO^  SL  Pmnlike  IVnMilw*.  do.  IMB;  UtUn  UtkeSntk 
Cftwcte^  doL  IMM,  Pfietaras  ^  tte  ^pMtoiie  Ctardk,  doL  mO; 
C  Bwr.  n«  Origmt  if  OkritHmmitg,  dot  ]M»:  H.  If. 
Gwa^m,  Bmrtf  Ctarc*  JBiM..  do.  1MB:  L.  DwdieaM,  BmHf 
HitL  ^tkeCkrittimm  Cftweft, b(. tr.. do.  IflOV-UU. 

AlaFKKD  PlUMXKR. 

CHURCH  QOTEBHMBVT.— Christ  left  a  small 
body  of  disciples  under  the  direction  of  the  apostles, 
with  a  charge  to  convert  the  world ;  but  He  gave 
nothing  which  can  be  called  either  a  constitnti<m 
or  a  code,  and  He  explained  the  commandments 
as  giving  principles,  not  rules.  About  the  develop- 
ment of  a  constitution  we  know  little ;  but  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  and  3  John,  which  must  be 
{daeed  early,  whoever  wrote  them,  show  that  the 
I»oeess  b^an  soon  and  continued  rapidly,  when 
it  became  clear  that  Christ's  return  might  be  long 
delayed.  The  process  and  its  rapidity  probaUy 
differed  somewhat  in  different  centres.  At  first 
the  camps  scattered  about  the  eastern  half  of  the 
Mediterranean  had  each  its  own  tentative  r^ula- 
tions.  When  the  camps  became  a  ndtvo»  of 
fortifications,  spreading  westward  and  inward  and 
communicating  with  one  another,  the  r^ulations 
became  more  settled  and  uniform.  Thus  the 
Christian  organization  developed  until  it  became 
an  object  of  suspicion  and  dread  to  the  Roman 
Goyemment,  which  at  last  it  vanquished.  Then 
the  Christian  cnganixatifm  did  for  the  Empire 
what  the  Roman  organization  with  all  its  states- 
manship and  military  discipline  had  failed  to  do  : 
it  ga'^e  it  cohesion  and  unity. 

The  first  line  of  distinction  is  between  the 
apostles  and  the  other  believers ;  and  this  line  is 
continued  as  a  distinction  between  rulers  of  any 
kind  and  those  who  are  ruled — the  Seven,  elders, 
deacons,  etc.,  on  the  one  side,  and  the  laity  on  the 
other.  The  great  commi^ion  was  given  by  the 
risen  Christ  to  the  whole  Church  and  not  to  any 
select  body  in  it.  Yet  this  primary  fact  does  not 
qnite  justify  the  phrase,  'the  priesthood  of  the 
laity.'  What  the  NT  gives  us  is  the  priesthood 
of  the  whole  Church  ^vithout  distincticm  between 
clergy  and  laity  (1  P  2*- »,  Rev  1«  y^  30»),  and  no 
individual  can  exercise  it  without  the  authority 
of  the  Church.  All  Christians  are  priests  alike; 
but,  inasmuch  as  it  is  by  the  Spirit  that  the 
whole  Church  is  consecrated  to  the  priesthood,  so 
the  special  ministers  need  a  special  consecration 
by  the  Spirit.  The  NT  speaks  clearly  of  special 
functions  which  are  confined  to  a  select  minority 
and  are  not  shared  by  the  rest.  It  was  by  the 
Spirit  that  the  'charismatic'  ministries  worked. 
This  is  manifestly  true  of  the  apostles  and  the 
Christian  prophets.  It  might  or  might  not  be 
true  of  those  whom  St.  Paul  or  his  deputy  (Ac,  14", 
Tit  1*)  dHMe  for  their  capacity  for  governing. 
These  derived  their  authority  from  the  Spirit  (Ac 
20*),  but  they  did  not  necessarily  possess  the 
gift  of  prophecy  or  even  of  teaching.  But  officials 
chosen  to  do  spiritual  work  in  a  spiritual  com- 
munity needed  spiritual  gifts  of  some  kind  ;  and 
what  these  men  received  in  ordination  was  a 
spirit  of  power  and  love  and  discipline  (2  "R  V) 
(see  Westcott,  Ephesians,  1906,  p.  169;  Swete, 
TheHotif  Spirit  in  the  NT,  1909,  pp.  103,  317,  320). 

We  are  accustomed  to  think  of  the  first  Chris- 
tians as  having  no  government,  other  than  that  of 
'  Peter  with  the  Eleven '  (Ac  2").     Hamack  (Coiui. 


210    CHURCH  GOVERNMENT 


CHURCH  GOVERNMENT 


and  Law  of  the.  Church,  p.  20  f.)  has  pointed  out 
that  they  had  a  number  of  authorities,  to  be  loyal 
to  all  of  which  was  sometimes  perplexing.  They 
had  inherited  from  Judaism  the  ordinances  of  the 
Jewish  Church.  To  administer  these  there  was 
the  Sanhedrin.  There  were  the  known  commands 
of  Christ,  which  included  the  authority  of  the 
whole  community  to  forgive  and  to  punish 
offenders.  There  were  the  occasional  promptings 
of  tlie  Spirit  (Ac  G"-  ^^  8=»  lO^"  ll'^"-  =»  16^).  There 
were  also  the  brethren  of  the  Lord,  who  had  some 
kind  of  authority.  Perplexity  might  arise  as  to 
reconciling  Jewish  ordinances  with  the  commands 
of  Christ,  and  there  might  be  difi'erences  between 
the  Twelve  and  the  Lord's  brethren.  We  know 
that  there  was  collision  between  the  Divine  com- 
mands and  the  decrees  of  the  Sanhedrin,  and  that 
of  course  it  was  the  latter  that  were  disobeyed 
(4^'  52».  32)  Nevertheless,  none  of  these  provided 
a  constitution,  and  the  common  view  that  the 
germs  of  one  are  to  be  looked  for  in  the  Twelve  is 
not  far  from  the  truth. 

The  Twelve  left  the  selection  of  the  Seven, 
which  was  a  first  step  towards  development,  to 
the  whole  body  of  Christians,  most  of  whom  were 
PaJestinian  Jews.  These  showed  their  liberality 
by  electing  men,  all  of  whom  bear  Greek  names 
and  Avere  presumably,  but  not  certainly,  Greek- 
speaking  Jews,  who  would  be  more  acceptable  to 
the  murmuring  Hellenists.  One  of  the  Seven  was 
only  a  proselyte,  and  we  have  here  a  very  early 
illustration  oi  the  expansive  power  of  the  Church. 
St.  Luke's  silence  about  elders  in  this  connexion  is 
the  more  remarkable,  because  distribution  of  the 
means  of  life  was  one  of  their  functions  (Ac  IP"). 
The  common  identification  of  the  Seven  with  the 
deacons  is  q^uestionable.  Probably  they  were 
temporary  officials,  scattered  by  the  persecution 
which  was  fatal  to  Stephen,  and  never  re-estab- 
lished.   See  Deacon. 

The  apostles'  plan  of  leaving  the  choice  of  the 
Seven  to  the  community  was  perhaps  followed  by 
St.  Paul  in  his  earlier  work.  In  Romans  he  men- 
tions no  body  of  commissioned  clergy.  We  cannot 
be  sure  from  this  that  the  Churcli  in  Rome  was 
not  yet  organized  :  possibly  there  was  no  need  to 
mention  officials.  In  1  and  2  Cor.  there  is  no 
trace  of  a  sacerdotal  class ;  and  it  is  possible  that 
there  and  elsewhere  the  Apostle  was  trying  the 
experiment  of  a  Christian  democracy  without  any 
hierarchy.  Corinth  had  its  charismatic  ministry, 
and  this  seems  to  have  sufficed  for  a  time.  The 
charismatic  ministry  came  to  an  end  very  quickly 
there  and  elsewhere.  There  is  little  trace  of  it 
later  than  the  Didache  (a.d.  100-150).  While  it 
lasted,  it  supplied  teachers,  not  rulers.  The  in- 
fant Gentile  churches  seem  to  have  governed 
themselves  under  the  direction  of  the  Apostle  who 
founded  tliem.  The  Apostle  does  not  address  his 
letters  to  any  official  at  Thessalonica,  Corinth,  or 
Rome.  He  leaves  it  to  the  congregation  to  punish 
and  pardon  offenders,  to  manage  the  collection  of 
money,  and  to  decide  who  shall  take  charge  of  the 
fund.  These  Gentile  churches  have  gifted  persons 
who  take  the  lead  in  public  worship,  'apostles, 
prophets,  and  teachers'  (1  Co  12^,  Eph  4^^ ;  cf.  Ro 
12^"*),  but  they  form  no  part  of  tne  permanent 
■organization  of  the  local  church.  They  do  not 
govern,  nor  are  they  tied  to  one  community  ;  they 
jnay  go  from  one  local  church  to  another.  They 
are  not  classes  of  officials  each  with  special  duties ; 
they  are  inilividual  believers  with  special  gifts, 
witn  whicli  they  edify  congregations.  They  are 
ministers  of  the  word,  proclaiming  and  explaining 
the  gospel,  and  their  business  is  to  convert  and  in- 
struct rather  than  to  rule.  They  are  '  spiritual ' 
men  (wevfuniKoi),  endowed  by  the  Spirit  (wevfj^a.) 
with  powers  (xap/V/xaTa)  which  are  not  common  to 


all  Christians ;  and  their  authority  depends  not 
upon  election  or  appointment  by  otliers,  but  upon 
these  personal  endowments,  exercised  with  the  con- 
sent oi  the  congregation. 

Yet  it  is  scarcely  credible  that  the  infant  Gen- 
tile churches  remained  very  long  without  rulers 
of  any  kind.  Congregations  which  consisted 
chiefly  of  Jewish  Christians  had  '  elders  '  analogous 
to 'elders'  among  the  Jews;  and  in  the  Gentile 
communities  something  similar  would  grow  up, 
with  or  without  the  suggestion  of  the  Apostle  who 
founded  the  church.  The  converts  who  were 
senior,  whether  by  standing  or  age,  and  jiersons 
of  social  position  or  secular  experience,  would 
naturally  ue  looked  upon  as  leaders ;  e.g.  '  the 
elder  brethren,'  which  is  the  true  reading  in  Ac 
15^.  There  are  similar  leaders  at  Ephesus.  St. 
Luke  calls  them  '  the  elders  of  the  Church,'  but 
he  does  not  report  that  St.  Paul  in  his  address  to 
them  does  so  (Ac  20"'**).  Except  in  the  Pastorals, 
St.  Paul  does  not  mention  '  elders.'  In  tl»e  earliest 
of  his  letters  (1  Th  5")  he  exhorts  his  Gentile 
converts  '  to  esteem  exceeding  highly  them  that 
labour  among  you  and  guide  (irpditrTOinivoin)  you 
in  the  Lord  and  admonish  you.'  F.  J.  A.  Hort 
(Christian  Ecclesia,  1897,  p.  126)  points  out  that 
although  irpMffTajjJvovs  cannot  be  the  technical 
title  of  an  office,  standing  as  it  does  between 
labouring  and  admonishing,  yet  the  persons  meant 
seem  to  be  office-bearers  in  the  Church.  The 
words  which  follow,  'Admonish  the  disorderly, 
etc.,'  appear  to  be  addressed  to  these  guardians. 
But  here  again  these  guides,  like  the  '  apostles, 
prophets,  and  teachers,'  seem  to  owe  their  appoint- 
ment to  personal  qualities.  The  dili'erence  is  that 
they  guide  and  admonish  rather  than  teach.  But 
no  strict  line  would  be  dra^vn  between  leading  and 
teaching.  The  same  man  would  often  have  a 
gift  for  Doth,  and  would  be  specially  influential  in 
consequence.  When  official  appointments  began 
to  be  made,  persons  with  this  double  qualification 
would  be  chosen,  and  they  became  '  presbyters ' 
or  '  elders '  in  the  technical  sense. 

There  seems  to  be  a  transition  stage  between 
the  purely  charismatic  and  the  official  ministry 
in  Ac  13^**,  about  A.D.  47.  There  is  a  fast  and  a 
solemn  service  conducted  by  prophets  and  teachers 
at  Antioch.  During  the  service,  the  Spirit  (through 
one  of  the  prophets)  says :  '  Since  you  desire  to 
know  (StJ),  separate  for  me  Barnabas  and  Saul,' 
who  were  present.  There  is  another  fast  and  ser- 
vice, and  then  the  two  are  separated  by  the  laying 
on  of  the  hands  of  the  other  prophets  and  teachers. 
This  ordination  was  for  mission  work,  but  ordina- 
tion for  the  work  of  ruling  congregations  was  pro- 
bably similar.  In  I  Ti  4"  Timothy  is  reminded 
of  the  gift  {x<ipi.ff/ia)  which  was  given  him  by  pro- 
phecy, with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
presbytery.  '  By  prophecy '  probably  refers  to 
utterances  of  prophets  which  marked  him  out  for 
ordination  (V^)  as  a  helper  of  St.  Paul ;  and  the 
presbyters  of  the  local  church  joined  with  St.  Paul 
in  ordaining  him.  Here  for  the  first  time  'presby- 
tery '  is  used  of  a  body  of  Christian  elders.  In  Lk 
22««  and  Ac  22*  it  is  used  of  the  Sanhedrin.  '  In 
none  of  these  instances  of  the  laying  on  of  hands 
is  there  any  trace  of  a  belief  in  the  magical  virtue 
of  the  act.  It  is  simply  the  familiar  and  expres- 
sive sign  of  benediction  inherited  by  tlie  Apostles 
from  the  Synagogue  and  adapted  to  the  service  of 
the  Church '  (Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the-  NT, 
p.  384).  The  laying  on  of  hands  was  used  in  bless- 
ing ;  and  the  person  who  blesses  does  not  transmit 
any  good  gift  which  he  possesses  himself :  he  in- 
vokes what  he  htis  no  power  to  bestow,  but  what 
he  hopes  that  God  will  bestow.  When  this  sym- 
bolical action  was  used  by  a  minister  in  connexion 
with  an  appointment  to  the  ministry,  the  idea  of 


CILICIA 


CIECUMCISIOX 


211 


transmission  naturally  arose.  But  the  action  is  a 
symbol,  not  an  iustninient  of  consecration.  The 
^ft  which  Timothy  received  at  his  ordination  was 
just  such  as  was  required  for  ruling  infant  churches : 
it  was  '  a  spirit  of  power,  and  love,  and  discipline ' 
(2  Ti  !*• ').     Cf.  art.  Ordixatiox. 

Permanent  local  officials  were  required  in  the 
first  instance  for  the  regulation  of  public  worship. 
St.  Paul  gives  the  earliest  directions  respecting 
this,  and  what  he  lays  down  for  the  Corinthians  is 
based  on  principles  which  can  be  applied  every- 
where. He  gives  no  directions  as  to  special  minis- 
ters, but  he  recognizes  them  where  they  exist  (Ph 
V).  He  and  Baxnabas  appointed  elders  in  every 
chxirch  (Ac  14^).  It  is  here  that  the  influence  of 
the  synagogue  is  so  marked.  '  Elders '  are  bor- 
rowed from  it.  The  ritual  which  Jewish  and 
Christian  elders  regulate  is  similar — praise,  read- 
ing of  Scripture,  exposition,  and  prayer.  The  dis- 
cipline exercised  by  both  is  similar;  they  deal 
with  much  the  same  kind  of  ofiences,  and  the  chief 
penalty  in  both  cases  is  excommunication.  ^Vben 
Christians  were  told  not  to  take  their  disputes  in- 
to Roman  civil  courts  ( 1  Co  6),  that  involved  the 
growth  of  Christian  civil  law,  which  the  permanent 
officials  had  to  administer ;  and  here  the  Influence 
of  Roman  legislation  came  in  to  develop  what  was 
derived  from  Christ's  teaching  and  that  of  the  OT. 

The  development  of  Church  organization  and 
the  complete  separation  of  the  clergy  from  the 
laity  were  the  work  of  the  post-apostolic  age.  The 
remark  that  'no  soldier  on  service  entangleth 
lumself  in  the  afl'airs  of  this  life '  (2  Ti  2*)  contri- 
buted to  this  separation,  for  it  was  interpreted  to 
mean  that  the  clergy  must  abjure  seculax  occupa- 
tions. Already  in  apostolic  times  the  clergy  had 
three  distinct  rights  :  honour  and  obedience  (1  Th 
o^) ;  maintenance  (1  Co  9*-^^) ;  and  freedom  from 
frivolous  accusations  (1  Ti  5^).  Before  the  end 
of  the  2nd  cent,  most  of  the  elements  of  the  later 
development  were  already  fotmd  in  the  Church. 

Certainty  is  not  attainable,  and  there  is  nothing 
approaching  to  it  in  favour  of  the  theory  that 
Christ  gave  a  scheme  of  Church  government  to 
the  apostles,  and  that  they  delivered  it  to  the 
Church.  There  is  little  evidence  to  support  either 
of  these  propositions.  The  far  more  probable 
theory  is  that  Church  government  was  a  gradual 
growth  initiated  and  guided  by  the  Spirit,  to  meet 
the  growing  needs  of  a  rapidly  increasing  com- 
munity. This  theory  is  supported  by  a  good  deal 
of  evidence,  and  it  is  in  harmony  with  what  we 
know  of  God's  methods  in  other  departments  of 
human  life. 

LiTE&ATURK. — See  works  mentioned  onder  Aposilb  and 
BisBop ;  C.  Gore,  Th»  Church  and  the  Mmittrjf,  London,  1888 ; 
R.  C.  Moberly.  MinitUrial  Priathood,  do.  18S7 ;  J.  Words- 
worth, Serapion'tPraj/er-Book,  do.  1899,  n»  Mwtiknftf  Grace, 
do.  1901 ;  T.  M.  Lindsay,  The  Church  and  the  Miniitry  in  the 
Early  Centurie*,  do.  1902 ;  A.  W.  F.  BhaA.  Studies  in  ApoatoL 
Christianity,  do.  1909 ;  A.  Hamack,  Conttitviian  and  Law  of 
the  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1910 ;  Robertson-Plummer.  1  Cor- 
inthians, Edinburgh,  1911,  pp.  xl-xlvi,  27S-2S4  ;  C.  H.  Tomer, 
Studies  in  Early  Church  History,  Oxford,  1912,  Essays  i.  and  ii. 

Alfeed  Plummee. 
CILICIA  (KtXt«io). — CUicia  was  a  country  in  the 
S.E.  of  Asia  Minor,  bounded  on  the  west  by  Pam- 
phylia,  on  the  north  by  Lycaonia  and  Cappadocia, 
and  on  the  east  by  the  Amanus  range.  It  was 
drained  by  four  rivers,  the  Calycadnus,  the  Cydnus, 
the  Serus,  and  the  Pyramus,  which  descend  from 
Taurus  to  the  Cyprian  Sea.  It  fell  into  two  well- 
marked  di\-isions.  Cilicia  Tracheia  ( Aspera),  a  rug- 
ged mountainous  region  with  a  narrow  seaboard, 
was  the  immemorial  haimt  of  brigands  and  pirates, 
whose  subjugation  was  a  difficult  task  for  the 
Roman  Republic  and  Empire  ;  Cilicia  Pedeia  (Cam- 
pestris),  the  wide  and  fertile  plain  lying  between 
the  Taurus  and  Amanus  chains  and  the  sea,  was 
civilized  and  Hellenized.     Its  rulers  in  the  Hellen- 


istic period  were  partly  the  Egyptians,  whose  royal 
house  gave  its  name  to  different  townships,  and 
partly  the  Seleucids,  after  whom  the  most  consider- 
able town  of  West  Cilicia  was  named  Seleucia  on 
the  Calycadnus. 

In  the  NT  'Cilicia'  invariably  means  Cilicia 
Pedeia.  Though  this  country  formed  a  part  of  the 
peninsula  of  Asia  Minor,  its  political,  social,  and 
religious  affinities  were  rather  with  Syria  than 
mth  the  lands  to  the  north  and  west,  khe  reason 
was  geographicaL  It  was  comparatively  easy  to 
cross  the  Amanus  range,  either  by  the  Syrian  Gates 
(Beiian  Pass)  to  Antioch  and  Syria,  or  by  the 
Amanan  Gates  (Baghche  Pass)  to  North  Syna  and 
the  Euphrates.  Hence  it  was  natural  that,  at  the 
redistribution  of  the  provinces  by  Augustus  in  27 
B.C.,  Cilicia  Pedeia,  wnich  had  been  Roman  terri- 
tory since  103  B.  c. ,  should  be  merged  in  the  great 
Imperial  province  of  Syria- Cilicia -Phcenice.  It 
was  equally  natural  that  St.  Paul,  who  boasted  of 
being  '  a  Jew  of  Tarsus,  a  city  in  Cilicia'  (Ac  21* 
22?),  shotUd  regard  '  the  regions  of  Syria  and  Cilicia ' 
as  forming  a  imity  {Gal  1*^).  The  writer  of  Acts 
does  the  same  (15^*'),  and  the  anthor  of  1  Peter, 
who  enumerates  in  his  superscription  the  Roman 
provinces  of  Asia  Minor,  omits  Cilicia,  which  lay 
beyond  the  barrier  of  Taurus  and  belonged  to  a 
different  order  of  things. 

The  presence  of  Jews  in  Cilicia  probably  dated 
from  the  time  of  the  early  Seleucids,  who  settled 
many  Jewish  families  in  their  Hellenistic  cities, 
giving  them  equal  rights  with  Macedonians  and 
Greeks.  St.  Paul  enjoyed  the  citizenship  of  Tarsus 
not  as  an  individual,  but  as  a  unit  in  a  Jewish 
colony  which  had  been  incorporated  in  the  State. 
Jews  of  Cilicia  are  mentioned  by  Philo  in  his  Leg. 
ad  Gaium  (§  36).  Among  the  Jews  of  Jerusalem 
who  rose  against  Stephen  there  was  a  synagogue  of 
Cilicians  (Ac  6^).  After  hb  conversion  St.  Paul 
spent  seven  years  in  his  CUician  homeland,  engaged 
in  a  preparatory  missionary  work  of  wMch  there 
are  no  recorded  detaUs.  Probably  he  was  founding 
the  churches  to  which  allusion  is  made  in  Ac  15***  **. 
He  began  his  second  missionary  journey  by  pass- 
ing through  Cilicia  to  confirm  these  churches,  after 
which  he  must  have  crossed  the  CUician  Gates  to 
Lycaonia  ( 16^) ;  and  probably  he  took  the  same  road 
on  his  third  journey  (18^).  Syria  and  Cilicia  were 
the  first  centres  of  Gentile  Christianity,  from  which 
the  light  radiated  over  Asia  !Minor  into  Europe. 

LrrERATURK.— C.  Hitter,  KUinatien,  1859,  iL  56ff. ;  J.  R.  S. 
Sterrett,  The  Wolfe  ExpedUion  to  Asia  Minor,  1883 ;  W.  Bf. 
Ranisay,  HisL  Geog.  of  Asia  Minor,  1890,  p.  361  ff. ;  Smith's 
Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Geog.,L  11856}  CIT',  see  also  art. '  CSlicia ' 
in  HDB  and  Litetatore  ttore  cited. 

Jakes  Stbahax. 
CINNAMON  (Kuvdfutwoif  from  je^sh — Cinnamon  is 
mentioned  in  Rev  18"  among  the  merchandise  of 
'  Babylon,'  i.e.  of  Imperial  Rome.  The  name  prob- 
ably came  with  the  thing  from  the  remote  east ; 
Rodiger  (Gesenius,  The*.  Add.,  1829,  p.  Ill)  com- 
pares it  with  the  Malay  kainamanis.  It  was  known 
to  the  Hebrews  (Ex  3(F,  Pr  7",  Ca  4") ;  and  Hero- 
dotus (iii.  Ill)  speaks  of  '  those  roUs  of  bark  (roOra 
TO.  Kop^a)  which  we,  learning  from  the  Phoenicians, 
call  cinnamon.'  The  finest  cinnamon  of  commerce 
is  now  obtained  from  Ceylon  ;  it  is  the  fragrant 
and  aromatic  inner  rind  of  the  stem  and  boughs  of  a 
tree  which  grows  to  a  height  of  30  ft.  Oil  of  cinna- 
mon, which  is  used  in  the  composition  of  incense, 
is  got  from  the  boiled  fruit  of  the  tree.  But  the 
cinnamon  of  the  ancients  was  probably  the  cassia 
lignea  of  S.  China,  James  SxEAHASr. 

CIRCUMCISION.  —  The  origin  of  circumcision 
and  its  practice  by  the  Jews  and  other  peoples 
may  be  studied  in  HDB  and  EEE.  This  article 
is  concerned  with   the   difficulties  caused  in   the 


212 


CIRCUMCISION 


CITIZENSHIP 


Apostolic  Churcli  by  the  desire  of  the  Judaizing 
party  toenforce  the  rite  upon  the  Gentile  ChrlHtians. 
The  crisis  thus  brought  about  la  described  in  Ac  15 
and  Gal  2i-'«>. 

As  tlie  work  of  the  Church  extended,  tlje  problem 
of  the  reception  of  Gentile  converts  i)resented  itself 
for  sohition.  Should  such  converts  be  compelled 
to  be  circumcised  and  keep  the  Mosaic  Law  or  not  ? 
The  answer  to  tliis  question  led  to  great  diflerence 
of  opinion  and  threatened  to  cause  serious  division 
in  the  Church.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the 
first  Christians  were  Jews,  born  and  brought  up  in 
the  Law  and  taught  to  observe  it.  To  them  such 
rites  as  circumcision  were  almost  second  nature. 
To  abrogate  the  Law  of  Moses  was  to  thenj  incon- 
ceivable. The  idea  of  the  passing  away  of  the  Law 
had  not  yet  penetrated  their  understanding.  The 
headquarters  of  those  who  held  these  opinions  were 
at  Jerusalem,  where  the  Temple  services  and  the 
whole  atmosphere  served  to  strengthen  them  in 
this  belief.  The  very  name  of  the  |)arty — 'They 
that  were  of  the  circumcision'  (Ac  11-) — snows  how 
closely  they  were  attached  to  the  observance  of 
this  rite.  On  the  other  hand,  we  can  trace  the 
gradual  growth  in  the  Church  of  the  opposite  view  : 
the  baptism  of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  (q.v.)  by 
Philij) ;  the  admission  of  Cornelius  and  his  friends 
by  St.  Peter  ;  tlie  mission  of  certain  evangelists  to 
the  Gentiles  at  Antioch  ;  and  finally  the  work  of  St. 
Paul  and  St.  Barnabas,  who  turned  to  the  Gentiles 
and  freely  admitted  them  into  the  fellowship  of  the 
Church. 

It  was  obvious  that  the  question  must  be  settled. 
The  Judaizing  party  were  quite  definite  in  their 
teaching.  '  Certain  men  which  came  down  from 
Judfea  taught  the  brethren  and  said.  Except  ye 
be  circumciseil  after  the  manner  of  Moses,  ye  can- 
not be  saved '  (Ac  15').  This  was  a  position  which 
it  was  impossible  for  St.  Paul  and  St.  Barnabas  to 
admit.  It  was  destructive  of  their  work  and  of 
the  catholicity  of  the  Church.  No  wonder  that 
'  there  was  no  small  dissension  and  disputation.' 
An  appeal  was  made  to  the  niotlier  church  at  Jeru- 
salem ;  and,  among  others,  St.  Paul  and  St.  Barna- 
bas went  up.  St.  Paxil's  own  statement  is, '  I  went 
up  by  revelation '  (Gal  2*).  He  also  tells  us  that 
Titus,  an  uncircumcised  Gentile,  accompanied  him. 
They  were  well  received  by  the  church  at  Jerusalem, 
but  certain  of  the  Pharisees,  who  were  believers, 
laid  it  down  '  that  it  was  necessary  to  circumcise 
them '  (Ac  15'),  and  thus  the  issue  was  joined. 

The  question  was  so  important  that  it  could  not 
be  settled  at  once.  There  must  be  an  interval  for 
consideration.  How  this  interval  was  spent  we 
are  told  in  Gal  2.  The  Judaizing  party  found  that 
an  uncircumcised  Gentile — Titus — nad  been  brought 
into  their  midst,  and  they  immediately  demanded 
his  circumcision.  With  this  demand  St.  Paul  was 
not  inclined  to  comply.  The  principle  for  which 
he  was  contending  was  at  stake.  On  the  other 
hand,  circumcision  to  him  was  nothing,  and  there 
was  the  question  whether  he  should  yield  as  a 
matter  of  charity.  The  course  which  he  took  has 
always  been  a  matter  of  undecided  controversy,  but 
the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  .authorities  is  that 
Titus  was  not  circumcised.* 

After  this  episode  St.  Paul  had  an  opportunity  of 
discussing  his  gospel  privately  with  those  of  repute, 
viz.  James,  Cephas,  and  John.  They  were  evi- 
dently moved  by  the  account  of  his  work  among 
the  Gentiles,  and  recognized  the  hand  of  God  in  it, 
and  they  were  influenced  by  the  fervour  and  spirit 
of  the  Apostle.  They  gave  to  him  and  St.  Barnabas 
'the  rignt  hand  of  fellowship.'  They  recognized 
that  their  sphere  was  among  the  Gentiles,  as  that 

*  For  the  contrary  view  see  R.  B.  Rackhain  on  Ac  15  {Oxford 
Coin.,  1901);  and  on  the  vexed  chronoUjgical  and  other  ques- 
tions c(.  artt.  Acts  of  tub  Apostlks  and  Galatiass,  Epibtlk  to. 


of  the  other  apostles  was  among  the  Jews.  The 
result  of  the  conference  was  a  compromise :  Gentiles 
were  not  to  be  circumcised,  but  they  were  to  abstain 
from  certain  practices  which  were  offensive  to  their 
Jewish  brethren. 

The  teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  circumcision  may  be 
further  illustrated  from  his  Epistles.  In  Uo  2'">-* 
he  shows  that  circumcision  was  an  outward  sign  of 
being  one  of  the  chosen  people,  but  that  it  was  of 
no  value  unless  accompanied  by  obedience,  of  which 
it  was  the  symbol.  The  uncircumcised  keeper  of 
the  Law  was  better  than  the  circumcised  breaker 
of  it.  The  true  Jew  is  he  who  is  circumcised  in 
heart,  i.t.  he  who  keeps  God's  Law  and  walks  in 
His  ways.  In  ch.  4  he  discusses  the  case  of  Abraham, 
and  asks  whether  the  Divine  blessing  was  conferred 
upon  him  because  he  was  the  head  of  the  chosen 
race  and  the  first  person  of  that  race  who  was  cir- 
cumcised. He  shows  that  the  promise  came  before 
circumcision,  and  therefore  not  in  consequence  of 
it.  Circumcision  followed  as  the  token  or  sign  of 
the  promise,  so  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all 
believers  whether  they  were  circumcised  or  uncir- 
cumcised. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  St.  Paul  utters 
grave  warnings  against  those  who  insist  on  circum- 
cision. He  speaks  of  the  rite,  when  thus  insisted 
on,  not  as  circumcision  but  as '  concision '  (Karoro/cti;, 
Ph  3-).*  The  circumcision  which  the  Judaizers 
wished  to  enforce  was  to  Christians  a  mere  mutila- 
tion such  as  was  practised  by  the  idolatrous  heathen. 
The  verb  KaraT^fiveiv  is  used  in  the  LXX  of  incisions 
forbidden  by  the  Mosaic  Law :  e.g.  KarerefjivovTo 
Kara  rbv  edur/ibv  airrQiv  (1  K  18^;  cf.  Lv  2P).  In 
contrast  to  this.  Christians  have  the  true  circum- 
cision (Ph  3*),  not  of  the  flesh  but  of  the  heart, 
purified  in  Christ  from  all  sin  and  wickedness. 
This  contrast  between  circumcision  of  the  flesh  and 
of  the  spirit  occurs  in  other  passages  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  e.g.  Col  2>S  Eph  2''.  No  doubt  the 
Apostle  had  certain  OT  passages  in  mind  which 
use  circumcision  as  a  metaphor  for  purity,  e.g.  Lv 
26",  Dt  W\  Ezk  44^. 

Literature. — Artt.  on  '  Circumcision '  in  HDB,  ERE,  DCG, 
and  JE,  with  Literature  there  cited ;  tlie  relevant  Commentaries, 
esp.  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  (ICC,  1902);  also  E.  v. 
Dobschiitz,  Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  Eng.  tr., 
1904  :  K.  Lake,  The  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1911  ;  E.  B. 
Redlich,  St.  Paul  and  hig  CoinvanioTui,  1913 ;  H.  Weinel,  St. 
Paul,  Eng:.  tr.,  1906  ;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  i.i 
[1897],  ii.  [1895].  MOKLEY  STEVENSON. 

CITIZENSHIP  (xroXire/a,  ciuitm). — The  conceji- 
tion  of  citizenship  among  the  ancient  Greeks  and 
llomans  was  deeper  than  among  ourselves.  We 
can  think  of  human  existence  and  life  apart  from 
citizenship,  but  to  the  ancient  member  of  a  x6Xis 
or  citiitas  citizenship  was  life  and  life  was  citizen- 
ship. This  explains  why  St.  Paul  could  use  xoXt- 
TeieaBai  practically  in  the  sense  of  '  to  live'  (Ac  23', 
Ph  127;  cf_  320  fl-oXirei/Ma).  The  life  of  a  city  is  a 
development  out  of  the  more  primitive  life  of  the 
village-community  {kiL/j.7},  uicius).  A  irdXtj  in  fact 
consists  of  a  number  of  KQifiai,  each  of  which  con- 
sists of  a  number  of  families  (oIkos,  domtis).  The 
unity  was  generally  based  on  blood-relationship. 
The  regular  ir6\ts  in  the  Greek  world  was  on  the 
model  of  the  constitution  of  Athens.  This  consti- 
tution had  a  council  {^ovX-/;,  senatus)  or  advisory 
body,  and  a  popular  assembly  {SrjfjLoi,  inKXijffLa,  Ac 
1932.  39.  41)^  fQj.  membership  of  both  of  which  free 
citizens  were  eligible.  For  citizenship  the  require- 
ment was  free  birth  within  the  community,  the 
father  being  a  citizen.  It  could  l)e  conferred  on 
foreigners  by  a  decree  of  the  people.     Each  com- 

•  The  paronomasia  of  KaraTOfnj  and  n-eptro/uuj  used  by  St.  Paul 
here  is  one  of  several  instances  in  which  he  employs  that  figure 
of  speech  :  e.g.  liTfiiv  epyo^ofit't^wt  oAXo  irtpitpyaionimvt  (2 
Th  3"). 


CITIZENSHIP 


CLAUDIA 


213 


niunity  contained  also  those  who  were  not  full 
citizens,  but  had  certain  privileges,  viz.  resident 
aliens  (ndroiKM ;  of.  the  scriptural  rdpoiKoi,  iraperi- 
dijfioi,  Eph  2'»,  1  P  2",  etc.).  There  was  also  a 
third  class,  {^<x,  strangers  with  no  privileges  at 
all,  and  a  fourth  class,  the  slaves,  who  were  mere 
chattels.  In  such  a  constitution  each  citizen  had 
to  be  enrolled  in  a  particular  tribe  (<pv\ri,  tribus). 
St.  Paul  refers  witii  pride  to  his  citizenship  of 
Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  his  native  city  (Ac  21'*).  As  a 
citizen  of  Tarsus  he  must  have  belonged  to  a  par- 
ticular tribe,  and  it  has  been  plausibly  conjectured 
by  W.  >I.  Ramsay  that  the  '  kinsmen  '  of  St.  Paul 
referred  to  in  Ro  16  were  his  fellow-tribesmen  of 
Tarsus. 

One  kind  of  citizenship  in  the  Apostolic  Age 
swamped  every  other,  and  that  was  citizenship  of 
Rome.  This  fact  is  well  illustrated  by  a  much 
earlier  document — Cicero's  speech,  pro  Balbo  (56 
B.C.).  In  it  the  principle  is  affirmed  that  '  no  one 
could  be  a  citizen  of  Rome  and  of  other  cities  at 
the  same  time,  while  foreigners  who  were  not 
Roman  citizens  could  be  on  the  burgess-rolls  of 
any  number  of  cities '  (ed.  J.  S.  Reid,  1878,  p.  18). 
The  spread  of  the  Roman  citizenship  kept  pace 
with  the  growth  of  the  Empire.  At  first  only  in-  [ 
habitants  of  Rome  could  be  Roman  citizens,  but 
the  citizenship  was  gradually  extended  as  a  result  : 
of  Rome's  conquests.  It  could  lie  conferred  both  ; 
on  communities  and  on  individuals.  Moreover,  it 
was  of  two  kinds  or  grades.  In  addition  to  the 
full  citizenship,  a  limited  citizenship  existed  till 
about  200  B.C. — ciuUas  sine  suffragio,  impl3ring 
that  the  persons  who  possessed  it  had  all  the  privi- 
leges of  a  Roman  citizen  except  the  power  to  vote 
in  the  assemblies  and  to  hold  office.  The  constant 
conferment  of  this  limited  cinitas  added  greatly 
to  the  Roman  army  and  territory,  and  was  not  in- 
tended for  the  subjects'  good.  By  the  end  of  the 
iind  cent.  B.C.  there  were  many  country  towns  of 
Italy  (municipia)  which  possessed  citizen  rights, 
and,  as  the  result  of  the  Social  War  and  the  Lex 
lulia  (90  B.C.),  the  Lex  Plautia  Papiria  (89  B.C.), 
a  senatorial  edict  of  86  B.C.,  and  a  law  of  Julius 
Caesar  (49  B.C.),  all  peoples  in  Italy  south  of  the 
Alps  obtained  the  Roman  citizenship.  Such  com- 
munities were  created  also  outside  Italj'  by  Julius 
Caesar,  Claudius,  Vespasian,  and  others,  until  in  .\.D. 
212,  under  Caracalla,  every  free  inhabitant  of  the 
Roman  Empire  obtained  the  full  Roman  franchise. 

The  inhabitants  of  colonUe  required  no  grant  of 
citizensliip  because  they  were  of  necessity  Roman 
citizens  from  the  first ;  a  colonia  wa.s  in  origin 
simply  a  bit  of  Rome  set  down  in  a  foreign  cormtry, 
to  keep  a  subject  people  in  check.  It  had  complete 
self-government  (see  art.  COLONY).  The  smaller 
/ora  and  conciliftbula  had  in  Republican  times 
incomplete  self-government.  The  municipia,  re- 
ferred to  al)ove  as  incorporated  bodily  in  the 
Roman  State,  had  complete  self-government,  differ- 
ing thus  from  the  prafecturce,  which  were  also 
communities  of  Roman  citizens  but  without  com- 
plete self-government. 

The  partial  citizenship  known  as  Laiinitas  or 
iiw  Lata  deserves  mention.  It  conferred  com- 
mercium  (the  right  to  trade  with  Rome,  and  to 
acquire  profjerty  by  Roman  methods,  etc.),  but 
not  conubium  (the  right  of  intenuarriage  with 
Romans).  It  was  thus  a  kind  of  intermediate 
condition  between  citizenship  and  peregrinity,  and 
such  rights  were  not  infrequently  conferred  on 
communities  as  a  kind  of  step  towards  the  full 
citizenship.  The  name  is  explained  by  the  origin 
of  the  practice.  It  began  in  Rome's  early  days  as 
the  result  of  her  relations  with  other  towns  in  the 
Latin  League,  and  in  172  B.C.  was  first  extended 
beyond  Latiura.  Magistrates  in  such  towns  be- 
came ipso  facto  full  Roman  citizens. 


The  conferment  of  citizenship  on  individuals  has 
a  special  interest  for  students  of  the  Apostolic 
Age.  During  the  whole  of  the  Republican  period 
the  extension  of  the  body  of  burgesses  was  the 
right  of  t\\Q  comitia  tributa.  This  assembly  con- 
ferred the  citizenship  from  time  to  time  on  indi- 
vidual stran^rs  (peregrini)  as  well  as  on  communi- 
ties. Commissioners  for  carrying  out  colonization 
or  divisions  of  ager  ptMieru  could  confer  it  on  a 
very  limited  number  of  persons,  and  C.  Marius  re- 
ceived such  a  power.  About  the  time  of  the  civil 
wars,  Roman  commanders  conferred  the  citizenship 
on  individual  foreigners  who  had  aided  tlie  Roman 
military  operations.  This  must  often  have  been 
done  without  the  authority  of  any  statute,  but  no 
one  was  ever  disfranchised  in  consequence.  Pom- 
pey,  however,  obtained  the  right,  by  the  Lex 
Gdlia  Cornelia  of  72  B.C.,  to  confer  the  citizenship 
on  individuals  after  consulting  with  his  body  of 
advisers.  It  was  probably  either  from  him  or 
from  Julius  Caesar  that  the  father  or  grandfather 
of  St.  Paul  obtained  the  Roman  citizenship.  Tar- 
sus as  a  community  had  not  received  the  Roman 
franchise,  nor  was  it  a  colonia.  The  possession  of 
this  honour  (Ac  16"  22"-®'-)  shows  that  his  family 
was  one  of  distinction  and  wealth.  Members  of 
such  provincial  communities  who  possessed  the 
Roman  citizenship  constituted  the  aristocracy  of 
these  communities.  During  the  Empire  the  bur- 
gesses could  be  added  to  by  the  Emperor  only,  and 
every  citizen  had  the  right  to  a  trial  at  Rome.  Of 
this  right  St.  Paul  took  advantage  (Ac  25'"). 

LrrKRATTRE. — Os  Grkek  cmzKXsmp :  P.  Gardner  and  F. 
B.  Jevons,  A  Manual  of  Greek  Antiquities,  London,  1895,  bk. 
vi. ;  G.  Gilbert,  Handlmeh  der  grxeehUehtn  Staatsaltertkumier, 
L2  [Leipzig,  1893],  iL  {ISSSJCEog.  tr.  of  v<ri.  \.*=Tkt  Constitu- 
tionad  Antiquitiet  of  Sparta  and  Athens,  London,  1^5);  K. 
F.  Hermann,  Ltkrbueh  der  grieehigehen  Antiquitaten,  L* 
[Freibur-o'  i.  B.,  1889-1892],  IL  [1895].— Os  Ron  ax  crriZKSsmp: 
J.  Muirhead,  Historical  Introduction  to  the  Private  Law  of 
Rome,  Edinbtu^,  1886  (new  ed.  by  H.  Goudy,  ls99) ;  J.  S. 
Reid,  '  On  Some  Qaestions  of  Roman  Public  Law,'  in  Journal 
of  Hainan  Stvdiet,  L  [1911]  6t^99 ;  J.  E.  Sandys,  A  Companion 
to  Latin  Studies^,  Cambridjte,  1913,  \i.  1  (J.  S.  ReidX  vi.  7,  8 
(B.  W.  Henderson)  and  Literature  cited  tbere  ;  Th.  Monunsen, 
Humixchet  Staatsreehf^  ,  Leipzig;,  lsA7.— Os  St.  Paul's  Ronas 
cmzexiiuip :  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Trareller  and  ths 
Koman  Citizen,  London,  1S95,  pp.  30 f.,  225. 

A.    SOUTEB. 

CLIUDA.— See  Caud.a. 

CLAUDIA  (KXai'Sui).— Claudia  wajs  a  Christian 
lady  of  Rome  who  was  on  friendly  terms  with  the 
Apostle  Paul  at  the  date  of  his  second  imprison- 
ment, and  who,  along  with  Eubidus,  Pudens,  and 
Linus  {qq.v.),  sends  a  greeting  to  Timothy  (2  Ti 
4*').  This  is  all  we  know  with  any  certainty  re- 
garding her.  The  name  suggests  that  she  belonged 
to  the  Imperial  household,  and  various  conjectures 
have  been  made  as  to  her  identity,  though  there 
is  very  little  in  the  nature  of  certain  data.  Prob- 
ably she  was  a  slave,  but  it  is  not  impossible  that 
she  was  a  member  of  the  gens  Claudia.  In  the 
Apostolic  Constitutions  (vii.  46)  she  is  regarded 
as  the  mother  of  Linus  (Atj-os  6  KXoi>5tas).  An  in- 
scription found  on  the  road  between  Rome  and 
Ostia  (CIL  vi.  15066)  to  the  memory  of  the  infant 
child  of  Claudius  Pudens  and  Claudia  Quinctilla 
has  given  rise  to  the  c-onjectnre  that  this  was  the 
Claudia  of  St.  Paul  and  that  she  was  the  wife  of 
the  Pudens  of  2  Ti  4"^.  Another  ingenious  but 
most  improbable  theory  identifies  Claudia  with 
Claudia  Rufina,  the  wife  of  Aldus  Pudens,  the 
friend  of  Martial  (Epigr.  iv.  13,  xi.  34),  and  thus 
makes  her  a  woman  of  British  race.  This  Claudia 
of  Martial  has  again  been  identified  with  an 
imaginary  Claudia  suggested  by  a  fragmentaiy 
inscription  found  at  Chichester  in  1722  which  seems 
to  record  the  erection  of  a  temple  b^-  a  certain 
I'udens  with  the  approval  of  Claudius  Cogidubnus, 
who  is  supposed  to  be  a  British  king  mentioned  in 


214 


CLAUDIUS 


CLAUDIUS 


Tacitus  (Agricola,  xiv.)  and  the  father  of  the 
Claudia  who  had  adopted  the  name  [cognomen) 
Kufina  from  Poinponia  the  wife  of  Aulus  Plautius, 
the  Roman  governor  of  Britain  (A.D.  43-52). 
E.  H.  Plumptre  in  Ellicott's  NT  Covimentary  (ii. 
186)  confidently  asserts  the  identity  of  the  Claudia 
of  St.  Paul  with  the  friend  of  Martial  and  the 
daughter  of  Cogidubnus.  All  such  identification 
is,  however,  extremely  precarious.  The  theory 
that  Claudia  is  the  daughter  of  the  British  prince 
Caractacus  who  had  been  brought  to  Rome  with 
his  wife  and  children  is  a  product  of  the  inventive 
imagination.  Lightfoot  (Apostolic  Fathers,  I.  i. 
76-79)  discusses  the  whole  question  of  identifica- 
tion, and  decides  that,  apart  from  the  want  of 
evidence,  the  position  of  the  names  of  Pudens  and 
Claudia  in  the  text  2  Ti  4'''i  disposes  of  the  possi- 
bility of  their  being  husband  and  wife — a  diffi- 
culty which  Plumptre  evades  by  the  supposition 
that  they  were  married  after  the  Epistle  was 
Avritten.  The  low  moral  character  of  Martial's 
friend  Pudens  can  hardly  be  explained  away  sutH- 
ciently  to  make  him  a  likely  companion  of  St.  Paul 
(cf.  Merivale,  St.  Paul  at  Jiome,  149). 

LrrERATiRB.— E.  H.  Plumptre,  in  Ellicott's  NT  Com.,  1884, 
vol.  ii.  p.  Ife5  :  '  Excursus  on  the  later  years  of  St.  Paul's  life ' ; 
J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  1890, 1,  i.  76-79 ;  C.  Meri- 
vale, St.  Paul  at  Rome,  1877,  p.  149;  T.  Lewin,  Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  PauP,  1875,  ii.  397 ;  artt.  in  HDB  and  EDi ; 
Conybeare-Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  new  ed., 
1877,  u.  582,  594.  W.    F.    BOYD. 

CLAUDIUS.— Claudius,  or,  to  give  him  his  full 
Imperial  style,  Tiberius  Claudius  Caesar  Augustus 
Germanicus  (to  which  the  lionorary  titles  Britan- 
mcM5  and  Sarmaticus  [see  Papyr.  Brit.  Mus,  1178 
=  G.  Milligan,  Selections  from  the  Greek  Papyri, 
1910,  no.  40Jare  sometimes  added),  the  son  of  Nero 
Claudius  Drusus  (38-9  B.C.),  stepson  of  Augustus, 
and  Antonia  Minor  (the  younger  daughter  of  the 
triumvir  Mark  Antony  and  Octavia,  sister  of 
Augustus),  was  born  on  1  Aug.  10  B.C.  at  Lugu- 
dunum  (Lyons).  His  father  died  the  year  after. 
The  boy  inherited  both  physical  and  mental  weak- 
ness, and  was  in  consequence  neglected.  There 
was  no  room  in  Roman  life  for  weaklings ;  exposure 
of  newly  bom  children  was  frequent,  and  until 
Christianity  came  there  was  little  care  for  the 
physically  or  mentally  defective.  Claudius  was 
left  to  the  society  of  his  social  inferiors,  and  coarse 
tastes  were  developed  in  him.  The  one  bright 
side  in  his  life  was  nis  devotion  to  scientific,  espe- 
cially historical,  studies.  Augustus  saw  some  good 
in  him,  but  kept  him  from  the  public  gaze.  At 
the  succession  of  Tiberius  in  A.D.  14  he  began  to 
take  some  slight  part  in  public  life,  but  most  of 
liis  time  was  spent  on  country  estates.  Gains, 
grandnephew  of  Tiberius  and  nephew  of  Claudius, 
succeeded  to  the  purple  in  A.D,  37,  and  raised  his 
uncle  to  the  consulship  at  once.  Soon  after,  how- 
ever, the  feeling's  or  the  maddest  of  all  the 
Emperors  changed,  and  Claudius  was  once  more  in 
a  position  of  disgTace.  Claudius  had  married 
Plautia  Urgulanilla  (before  A.D.  20),  who  bore  him 
a  son  and  a  daughter,  but  was  afterwards  divorced 
for  adultery.  His  marriiige  with  M\ia.  Psetina, 
by  whom  he  had  a  daughter,  had  the  same  end. 
The  notorious  Valeria  Messalina  was  his  third 
wife,  and  bv  her  a  daughter  was  bom  about  the 
year  40,  ana  a  son  called  Britannicus  in  41,  It  is 
said  that  Claudius,  after  the  murder  of  his  nephew, 
was  dragged  from  a  remote  part  of  the  palace, 
where  he  was  cowering  in  terror,  and  made  Emperor 
almost  unawares  (25  Jan.  41)  by  the  army.  He 
now  changed  his  name  from  liberius  Claudius 
Nero  Drusus  Germanicus  to  that  given  above. 
His  reign  of  thirteen  years  was  very  much  more 
successful  than  might  have  been  anticipated. 

Some  of  the  more  important  events  of  his  reign 


may  be  enumerated  in  the  order  of  their  occur- 
rence. 

In  A.D.  41  certain  reforms  were  made  in  the  repfulation  of  the 
com  supply,  etc.,  which  had  suffered  in  Gaius'  reign.  Many  of 
these  reforms  were  doubtless  due  to  the  Emperor's  freednien, 
Narcissus,  the  ab  epistulia,  M.  Antonius  Pallas,  the  a  rationibus, 
etc.,  who  exercised  a  tremendous  influence  during  his  reign 
and  acquired  colossal  fortunes  in  his  service.  In  this  year  suc- 
cesses were  gained  in  Mauretania  and  also  against  the  Catti 
and  Ohauci  in  Germany  ;  the  eagle  of  Varus,  captured  in  a.d.  9, 
was  now  recovered.  Privileges  were  granted  to  the  Jews  of 
Alexandria  ;  Agrippa  (q.v.)  had  his  kingdom  extended  by  the 
addition  of  Judcea  and  Samaria,  and  was  thus  ruler  of  aU  the 
territory  that  had  once  been  Herod's  (a.d.  42).  To  facilitate 
the  supply  of  com  to  Rome,  the  building  of  a  harbour  at  Ostia, 
the  mouth  of  the  Tiber,  was  decided  on.  War  in  Mauretania 
continued,  and  the  district  was  made  into  two  provinces, 
Mauretania  Tiiiiritana  and  Mauretania  Csesariensis,  which  were 
each  put  under  the  command  of  an  Imperial  procurator.  Pre- 
tenders to  the  Imperial  throne  were  crushed  (a,  d.  42).  Lycia, 
owing  to  disturbances,  was  made  an  Imperial  province,  under 
a  legatus  pro  proetore.  Britain  was  invaded  for  the  first  time 
since  Julius  Ctesar  (55  B.C.).  A.  Plautius  landed  with  a  strong 
army  and  fought  agfainst  the  Trin^uantes  in  the  south  of  the 
island.  Claudius  followed  in  person,  defeated  the  enemy  on  the 
Thames,  captured  their  chief  city  Camulodunum  (Colchester), 
and  returned  to  the  continent  after  a  sixteen  days'  stay.  The 
southern  half  of  Ent;land  was  made  into  a  province,  and  A. 
Plautius  was  appointed  the  first  govemor  (43).  King  Agrippa 
of  Judaja  died,  and  his  kingdom  was  again  made  a  Uoman  pro- 
vince and  put  under  a  procurator.  In  this  and  next  j'ear  (44-45) 
the  pacification  of  Britain  was  continued.  In  a.d.  4(J  King 
Bhoemetalces  ii.  of  Thrace  having  been  murdered,  his  territory 
was  made  into  a  Roman  province  and  put  under  a  procurator. 
This  was  also  the  year  of  the  great  famine  in  Palestine  (Ac  11** ; 
Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  pp.  49,  08,  Expositor,  6th  ser.  xii.  [1905] 
299).  In  47  the  censorship  was  revived  after  a  long  period  of 
disuse,  the  Emperor  taking  the  office,  and  endeavouring  to  im- 
prove public  morality.  The  eight-hundredth  anniversary  of 
Rome  was  celebrated  with  great  6clat.  New  aqueducts  and 
roads  were  built,  and  three  letters  were  added  to  the  alphabet 
These  last  were  to  represent  sounds  as  yet  imperfectly  repre- 
sented, but  they  did  not  survive  Claudius'  reign.  A  number  of 
edicts  were  issued  by  the  Emperor.  A.  Plautius  was  recalled 
from  Britain,  given  an  ovation,  and  succeeded  by  P.  Ostorius 
Scapula,  who  had  to  repel  an  attack  immediately  on  arrival. 
Cn.  Domitius  Corbulo  gained  victories  in  Germania  Inferior. 
A  census  taken  in  the  year  48  revealed  a  total  of  5,984,072 
Roman  citizens  (other  reports  vary,  the  largest  number  given 
being  6,941,000).  Messalina  was  married  according  to  legal 
form  to  C.  Silius  in  October  ;  immediately  afterwards  they  and 
all  their  accomplices  were  put  to  death.  Claudius  married  as 
his  fourth  wife  his  own  niece,  Agrippina,  daughter  of  Germani- 
cus. Her  son,  L.  Domitius  Ahenobarbus,  the  future  Emperor 
Nero,  had  the  way  thus  paved  for  his  accession.  On  the  death 
of  Herod,  king  ofChalcis,  or  soon  after,  his  kingdom  was  given 
to  Agrippa  II.,  son  of  Claudius'  old  friend.  In  the  year  49,  we 
see  Agrippina  at  once  occupying  a  position  of  authority  in  the 
State  equal  to  if  not  greater  tlian  that  of  her  husband.  She 
betrothed  her  son  to  Octavia,  Claudius'  daughter,  and  put  him 
under  the  tuition  of  the  great  philosopher  L.  Annasus  Seneca. 
The  ItursDan  country  and  perhaps  also  Abilene  were  added  to 
the  Province  Syria.  Scapula  was  successful  in  Britain.  In 
A.D.  50  the  young  Domitius  was  adopted  by  Claudius,  as  future 
colleag^ue  to  his  own  son  Britannicus.  Other  events  are  the  war 
in  Germany  ;  the  great  success  of  Scapula — the  wife,  daughter, 
and  brothers  of  Caratacus  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  con- 
queror ;  Claudius'  edict  expelling  the  Jews  from  Rome  (Ac  IS-), 
on  account  of  their  dissensions.  The  result  of  this  edict  was 
that  for  the  four  years  50-54  the  Church  of  Rome  was  bereft  of 
its  Jewish  members.  The  year  51  saw  the  danger  of  famine 
and  the  Emperor's  relief  measures.  In  52  astrologers  were 
banished  from  Italy.  Laws  were  passed  as  to  children  born  of 
unions  between  free  and  slaves.  Quarrels  arose  between  Jews 
and  Samaritans.  Felix  received  the  government  of  the  whole  of 
Judaea,  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Persea.  Scapula  warred  against 
the  Silures  and  died ;  he  was  succeeded  by  A.  Didius  Gallus, 
who  drove  the  Silures  out  of  Roman  territory.  In  63  Nero  ad- 
vanced, and  Britannicus  kept  in  the  background.  Agrippa  n. 
received,  in  place  of  his  district  Chalcis,  the  former  tetrarchy 
of  Trachonitis,  Batansea,  Gaulanitis,  and  Abilene  as  his  kingdom. 
In  64  Claudius  was  poisoned  at  the  instance  of  Agrippina  on 
18  October. 

Claudius  was  deified  after  his  death.  A  skit  preserved  among 
the  works  of  Seneca,  and  called  'Tlie  PumpkinifioAtion  of 
Claudius,'  is  among  the  most  amusing  relics  of  Latin  literature. 

This  bald  enumeration  will  show  that  much  was 
done  during  the  reign  of  Claudius.  It  is  true  that 
at  all  times  he  was  too  much  under  the  dominion 
of  evil  women,  and  that  he  never  thoroughly  cast 
oil' the  brutish  habits  contracted  in  his  youth,  but 
yet  his  reign  was  the  most  important  for  the 
Roman  Empire  in  the  period  between  tlie  reigns 
of  Augustus  and  of  Trajan.  The  Empire  was  ex- 
tended in  various  directions ;  much  social  legisla- 
tion was  carried  out ;  and  great  public  works,  sucli 


CLAUDIUS  LYSIAS 


CLEilEXT 


215 


as  roads,  aquedacts,  harbours,  were  accomplished. 
The  Emperor,  like  most  of  lus  class,  was  a  hard 
worker,  or  countenanced  the  hard  work  of  his 
f  reedmen.  The  position  of  importance  occupied  by 
these  men  is  in  fact  a  leading  characteristic  of 
the  reign,  and  was  most  obnoxious  to  the  old 
aristocracy,  which  may  be  said  to  have  thus  re- 
ceived its  death-blow.  The  power  of  the  Senate 
was  greatly  circumscribed.  Claudius  was,  inter 
alia,  something  of  an  autiior.  It  was  in  fact  the 
rule  rather  than  the  exception  that  Romans  of  high 
birth  sliould,  among  their  other  accomplishments, 
be  wielders  of  the  pen.  He  began  to  write  a 
history,  but  abandoned  it  unfinished.  A  second 
historical  work  was  published,  and  some  fragments 
of  it  have  survived.  He  also  «Tote  eight  books  of 
autobiography,  and  worked  at  Etrurian  and  Cartha- 
ginian history.  The  greater  part  of  a  speech  he 
delivered  in  the  Senate  has  been  preserved  on  a 
bronze  tablet  at  Lyons.  His  style  is  not  without 
merits. 

LiTEEATTRE. — Much  Valuable  materixU  has  been  found  in  the 
article  by  Groag:  and  Gaheis  in  Pauly-Wissowa,  iii.  cols.  277S- 
2s39  :  of.  also  A.  ▼.  Domaszewski,  Gttch.  der  rom.  KaUer, 
ii.  [Leipzig,  1909]  pp.  21-46.  On  the  chronologj'  of  events  in  the 
Claudian  period  referred  to  in  the  XT  see  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
5t.  Paul  the  Traveller  «nd  the  Soman  Citizen,  London,  1S95, 
pp.  18 ff.,  6Sf.,  Wat  CkriMbomat  BeOOehem  f,  do.  1S9S,  p.i223f., 
Expoiitiyr,  6th  aeries,  lii.  [1906]  299 ;  the  latest  general  treat- 
ment of  Panline  chronology  by  the  erudite  French  scholar, 
M.  Goguel,  in  '  Essai  sur  la  chronologie  paulinienne '  {RHR 
Ixv.  [1912]  -285-339).  A.   SOUTER. 

CLAUDIUS  LYSIAS.— See  Lysias. 
CLAY.— See  Potter  and  Predestination. 

CLEAK,  UNCLEAN,  COMMON.- '  Common '  {koi- 
pos,  communis)  is  an  honourable  word  in  classical 
Greek  =  ' shared  by  the  people.'  In  Hellenistic 
Greek,  it  has  sometimes  this  same  meaning  (Ac  "2" 
4^,  Tit  1*,  Jude  '),  but  sometimes  a  less  honourable 
one  ( =  Lat.  vulgaris).  This  depreciation  arose  out 
of  the  transcendence  of  religion  to  the  Eastern  mind. 
What  was  '  shared  by  the  people '  had  become  pro- 
faned for  the  god  (cf.  the  English  word  '  worldly,' 
meaning  first  secular,  then  unspiritual).  We  see  the 
process  with  icMvbt  in  He  KP® — '  counted  the  blood 
of  the  covenant  a  common  [i.e.  secular]  thing.'  In 
Rev21^wegoastep  further,  and '  anything  common ' 
means  the  worldly,  the  unspiritual  (cf.  Jos.  Ant. 
XH.  ii.  14,  xni.  i'  1).  Elsewhere  'common'  cor- 
responds to  positive,  active  uncleanness  (Ac  lO^*- " 
11«,  Ro  14",  1  Mac  l*^-«2,  Jos.  Ant.  XI.  viiL  7; 
the  verb  is  found  in  Ac  21«,  He  ^). 

The  distinction,  '  clean' (catfapdj)  and  'unclean' 
(oKadafyrm),  refers  in  the  OT  and  primitive  religions 
to  definite  departments  of  life,  such  as  food,  sanita- 
tion, contact  with  the  dead,  andmarriage  (Lv  11-15). 
In  the  OT  it  is  mainly  a  common-sense  distinction, 
made,  however,  from  religious  motives,  and  be- 
coming part  of  the  ritual  of  the  Hebrews.  It  was 
thus  a  practical  diflerentiation  between  them  and 
surrounding  peoples.  It  arose  out  of  a  good  idea, 
but  when  separated  from  this  idea  grew  into  a 
proud  national  badge.  Such  national  and  religious 
customs,  so  long  held,  seem  stronger  than  they  are. 
One  push  of  a  new  movement  will  often  destroy, 
almost  in  a  moment,  the  habits  of  centuries.  W  e 
find  this  process  to-day  in  the  East.  In  the  NT 
it  may  be  seen  in  the  case  of  Simon  Peter ;  he 
combined  Christian  beliefs  and  Jewish  distinctions 
without  at  first  being  willing  to  perceive  their 
variance.  His  vision  (Ac  10)  woke  him,  and, 
though  he  relapsed  for  an  instant  (Gal  2*),  the 
work  was  done  ;  and  when  that  generation  passed 
away,  the  religious  nature  of  these  distinctions 
had  gone  from  Christianity  ;  cleanliness,  instead 
of  being  godliness,  was  next  to  godliness.  These 
details  of  conduct  were  left  to  the  reason  and  the 


conscience.  The  transition  stage,  where  some 
cling  to  the  old  laws  and  others  obey  the  new 
spirit,  with  its  problems  of  faith  and  charity,  is 
treated  in  Ro  14. 

There  is  another  ground  for  this  ceremonial  dis- 
tinction of  '  clean '  and  '  unclean,'  i.e.  contact  with 
idolatry,  which  in  the  OT  makes  unclean  (Dt  7*). 
St.  Paul  allows  (I  Co  8)  that  an  idol  is  nothing 
and  cannot  aflect  meats  ofl'ered  to  it.  But  idolatry 
is  something — its  atmosphere,  its  offerings,  its 
gatherings  into  temples.  It  becomes  the  embodi- 
ment of  demons  (1  Co  10**);  there  is  a  'table'  of 
demons,  an  agreement  with  hell,  and  no  man  can 
with  impunity  associate  with  even  the  outward 
forms  which  this  a^greement  takes,  or  frequent 
the  places  where  it  is  most  generally  made.  The 
Apostle  treats  marriage  (q.v.)  in  a  similar  way. 
He  would  place  restrictions  on  the  marriage  of 
believers  with  unbelievers.  It  is  as  if  a  Christian 
were  participating  in  idolatry  (1  Co  lO^*-*  2  Co  6 
^*""),  or  trying  to  mingle  the  communion  of  God 
with  the  communion  of  devils.  If,  however,  they 
are  already  married,  the  principle  of  faith  triumphs 
over  all  forms.  The  believing  partner  sanctifies 
the  unbelieving  one,  and  their  children  are  holy 
(1  Co  7'^).  St.  Paul  recognizes  the  value  of  forms 
for  the  human  spirit,  but  he  subordinates  them  to 
the  conscience.  Many  of  the  old  tabus  on  food, 
marriage,  travel,  the  &ibbath,  were  rooted  in  fact. 
They  were  based  on  laws  of  health,  decency,  human 
nature :  but  they  were  not  deeper  than  that. 
They  were  not  regions  principles  to  be  obeyed 
without  thought  and  absolutely  guaranteeing 
purity. 

Men  are  always  tending  to  revert  to  forms,  and 
there  was  yet  another  movement  in  later  NT 
times,  which  felt  after  this  old  distinction.  It 
adopted  that  of  matter  and  spirit,  in  which  spirit 
is  clean,  matter  unclean.  It  had  ordinances  Hke 
•  Touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not'  (Col  2"-^),  it  tried 
to  refine  in  all  manner  of  ways,  it  forbade  men  to 
eat  meat  and  to  marry  (1  Ti  4*).  St.  Paul  answers 
in  Tit  1^  :  All  the  external  refinements  in  the  world 
will  not  avaU  to  give  purity  ;  purity  of  heart,  the 
will  to  be  pure,  alone  secures  it  in  body  and  spirit. 

lXBajauttx.—HDB,  art.  'Unclean';  W.  R.  Smith,  AS>, 
1894,  AdcBtional  Note  B  ;  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  JudaitUc  Chrittiaitttf, 
1884,  cfas.  6,  T :  J.  B.  Ligbtfoot,  Colo$siant  and  PhOemoifi, 
1879,  pp.  83  ff.,  40a-414 ;  R.  C  Trench,  ST  Syntm^nufi,  VSn, 

p-308.  Sherwin  Smith. 

CLEANTHES.— See  QUOTATIONS. 

CLEMENT.— Mention  is  made  of  Clement  in 
Ph  4*  as  one  of  St.  Paul's  fellow- workers.  If  >i£t4 
Ktti  ^\-qnevTos  is  connected  with  cvWati^drov,  Cle- 
ment was  urged  to  help  in  the  work  of  reconciling 
Euodia  and  Syntyche.  But  it  is  better  to  connect 
the  phrase  \s-ith  (rinHfikqaap,  so  including  Clement 
among  those  with  whom  these  women  and  St. 
Paul  '  laboured  in  the  gospel ' ;  i.e.  he  had  been 
conspicuous  in  Christian  work  in  Philippi.  But 
the  reference  does  not  suggest  that  he  was  in 
Philippi  when  St.  Paul  wrote  ;  it  is  too  oblique  for 
that.  Would  he  not  have  been  asked  to  use  his 
good  offices  to  ettect  a  reconcUiation  ?  Two  things 
are  possible :  (a)  he  may  be  dead,  though  his 
memory  is  fragrant  (the  reference  to  other  '  fellow- 
workers  whose  names  are  in  the  book  of  life'  is 
not  inconsistent  with  this  suggestion) ;  (b)  he  may 
be  with  St.  Paul,  one  of  the  band  who  gathered 
about  him  in  his  imprisonment  and  through  whom 
the  Apostle  carried  on  his  work.  In  that  case 
Clement  was  in  Rome,  and  one  of  the  arguments 
against  identifying  him  with  Clement,  bishop  of 
Rome,  who  wrote  the  Letter  to  the  Church  of 
Corinth,  would  disappear.  The  difficulty  of  date 
is,  however,  serious,  though  not  insuperable.     If 


216    CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF         CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF 


Clement  were  a  promising  convert  from  Philippi, 
who  after  serving  there  with  marked  success  be- 
came a  pupil  and  companion  of  St.  Paul,  he  could 
not  very  well  have  been  less  than  35  or  40  years  of 
age  when  Phil,  was  written  from  liome  about  A.D. 
60.  If  this  Clement  is  to  be  identified  with  Clemens 
Romanus,  he  must  have  lived  to  extreme  old  age. 
The  identification,  first  made  by  Origen,  cannot  be 
proved  ;  it  is  even  precarious  ;  but  Kennedy  goes 
too  far  when  he  calls  it  *  absurd '  (EGT,  '  Philip- 
pians,'  ad  loc). 
The  name  is  a  common  one. 

LiTBRATiiRK. — J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Philippians*,  1878  (esp.  note 
on  p.  168 ff.);  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  FAiT,  'Philippians,'  1903; 
art.  on  'Clement'  in  UDB;  E.  B.  Redlicb,  St.  Paul  and  his 
Companions,  1913,  p.  223.  J.  E.  IlOBERTS. 

CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF.— 1.  Occa- 
sion.— The  Epistle  of  Clement  itself  supplies  com- 
plete information  as  to  the  circumstances  under 
which  it  was  written.  Dis-sension  had  arisen  with- 
in the  Christian  community  at  Corinth,  and  the 
Church  was  torn  asunder.  The  original  ground  of 
contention  is  not  mentioned,  but  the  course  of  the 
strife  is  clearly  indicated.  A  small  but  powerful 
party  of  malcontents  (i.  1,  xlvii.  6)  had  usea  their  in- 
fluence to  secure  the  deposition  of  certain  presbyters, 
men  duly  appointed  according  to  apostolic  regula- 
tions, who  were,  moreover,  of  blameless  reputation 
and  unfailing  zeal  in  the  performance  of  their  duties 
(xliv.  3).  A  fierce  controversy  was  raging,  and  the 
Corinthian  Church,  hitherto  renowned  for  its  vir- 
tues, especially  such  as  are  the  outcome  of  brotherly 
love  (i.  2-ii.),  had  become  a  stumbling-block  in- 
stead of  an  example  to  the  world  (xlvii.  7).  Once 
before,  the  Church  of  Corinth  had  shown  the  same 
spirit  of  faction  (I  Co  !'"•").  History  was  now 
repeating  itself,  but  the  latter  case  was  much  worse 
than  the  former.  Then,  the  contending  ])arties  had 
at  least  claimed  to  be  following  the  lead  of  apostolic 
men,  but  now  the  main  body  of  the  Church  was 
following  '  one  or  two '  contumacious  persons  in  re- 
bellion against  their  lawful  rulers  (xlvii.). 

The  news  of  this  state  of  things  was  brought  to 
Rome.  How  it  came  it  is  impossible  to  say.  Ill 
news  travels  apace,  and  Rome  is  within  easy  reach 
of  Corinth.  It  seems  clear  that  no  direct  appeal 
was  made  to  Rome  by  either  contesting  party.  Yet 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  things  the  Roman  Church 
would  soon  hear  of  the  Corinthian  trouble,  for  com- 
munication seems  to  have  been  fairly  frequent  be- 
tween the  principal  Christian  communities  in  the 
early  days  (note  the  stress  laid  on  the  duty  of  hos- 
pitality, i.  X.  xi.  xii.  XXXV. ).  At  any  rate  the  Chris- 
tians at  Rome  heard  of  the  Corinthian  dissension 
while  it  was  still  at  its  height  (xlvi.  9).  ^yhen  the 
tidings  first  came,  tliey  themselves  were  suftering 
under  the  stress  of  external  persecution  (i.  1,  vii.  1), 
but  as  soon  as  the  storm  had  abated,  a  letter  was 
written  in  the  name  of  the  Church  at  Rome  to  the 
Church  at  Corinth,  expressing  the  sorrow  which 
the  Corinthian  feud  had  caused  to  the  Christians 
at  Rome,  and  admonishing  the  Corinthians  to  re- 
member the  primary  duty  of  <pi\ade\(pla  and  bring 
their  strife  to  an  end.  'I^hat  Epistle  has  survived 
to  the  present  day.  It  is  known  as  *the  First 
Epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians.' 

2.  Date  and  authorship.— (I )Z)a^c. — The  terminus 
a  quo  for  tlie  dating  of  the  Epistle  is  fixed  by  its 
reference  to  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul  (v.  4,  6),  and  its  use  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  (xxxvi.  xliii.).  Even  if  we  accept  the 
earliest  possible  dates  for  the  death  of  the  apostles 
and  for  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Epistle  of 
Clement  cannot  have  been  written  before  a. D.  70. 
The  terminus  ad  q^ucm  is  also  fixed  by  the  fact 
that  Clement's  Epistle  was  indubitably  used  by 
Polycarp  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philipi)ians  (Light- 


foot,  Clem.  Rom.  [Ajiostol.  Fathers,  pt.  i.,  1890]  vol. 
i.  p.  149  fr.).  If  Lightfoot  be  correct— as  seems 
most  probable — in  <lating  Polycarp's  letter  c.  A.D. 
110  (.S'^  Ign.  and  St.  Puli/c.^  [Apostol.  Fathers,  pt. 
ii.,  1889],  vol.  i.  p.  42811;),  the  date  of  Clement's 
Epistle  must  fall  between  the  years  A.D.  70  and 
A.D.  110. 

Fortunately  it  is  possible  to  reduce  these  limits 
very  considerably.  The  Epistle  contains  distinct 
allusions  to  two  serious  persecutions  alreatly  suflered 
by  the  Church  at  Rome.  During  the  former  of 
these,  we  are  told,  '  women  suffered  cruel  and  un- 
holy insults  as  Danaids  and  Uircae,'  and  'a  vast 
multitude  of  the  elect '  endured  '  many  indignities 
and  tortures '  before  '  they  reached  the  goal  in  the 
race  of  faith  and  received  a  noble  reward '  (vi.  1,  2). 
When  the  Epistle  was  written  this  persecution  was 
a  matter  of  past  history,  but  its  victims  are  still 
spoken  of  as  '  those  champions  who  lived  very  near 
to  our  own  time '  and  '  the  noble  examples  which 
belong  to  our  generation'  (toi>j  iyyicrra  ytvofituovs 
d^Xijrds.  .  .  Trjiy€i'edsr]iJi.CL)VTi,y€i'va7avTrodeiyfiO-Ta,v.l). 
The  second  persecution  was  still  in  progress  when 
the  news  of  the  Corinthian  schism  was  brought  to 
Rome.  The  Epistle  opens  with  an  apologj'  for  the 
delay  in  writing  which  has  been  caused  by  '  the 
sudden  and  repeated  calamities  and  reverses  which 
have  befallen  us '  (rds  al<pvi5Lovs  kolI  iiraWifKom  yevo- 
nivas  i)fjuv  <TVfj.<f)opa9  Kal  irepiimJoffeit,  i.  1).  The 
writer's  words  suggest  that  the  method  of  attack 
adopted  in  the  later  persecution  was  diflerent  from 
that  of  the  earlier  one.  That  the  two  are  not  to 
be  identified  is  made  plain  in  vii.  1,  Avhere  a  clear 
distinction  is  drawn  between  the  martyrs  of  an 
earlier  date  and  '  us '  who  '  are  in  the  same  lists,' 
whom  '  the  same  contest  awaits.' 

Now  it  is  a  well-established  fact  that  during  the 
Ist  cent.  A.D.  the  Roman  Church  suflered  two,  and 
only  two,  serious  persecutions.  The  first  was  that 
of  Nero  (c.  A.D.  64),  in  the  course  of  which,  accord- 
ing to  an  ancient  tradition,  St.  Paul  lost  his  life. 
The  second  was  that  of  Domitian.  Nero's  persecu- 
tion was  a  savage  onslaught  on  all  Christians  indis- 
criminately ;  that  of  Domitian  took  the  form  of 
sharp  intermittent  attacks  aimed  at  individuals. 
In  fact,  the  difference  between  the  two  was  precisely 
the  difference  between  the  two  persecutions  men- 
tioned in  the  Epistle  of  Clement.  It  seems,  there- 
fore, a  safe  conclusion  that  the  references  of  the 
Epistle  are  to  the  persecutions  of  Nero  and  Domi- 
tian, and  that  the  Epistle  was  written  either  just 
before  or  just  after  the  termination  of  the  latter  of 
the  two.  I.e.  c.  A.D.  95-96.  This  date  suits  admir- 
ably the  other  indications  of  time  contained  in  the 
Epistle,  all  of  which  point  towards  the  close  of  the 
1st  cent.  A.D.  An  earlier  date  is  precluded  by 
the  following  facts  :  (a)  the  Church  of  Corinth  is 
already  called  apxa-la-  (xlvii.  6) ;  (b)  presbyters  are 
mentioned  who  liave  succeeded  successors  of  the 
apostles  (xliv.  3) ;  (c)  the  language  used  of  the 
Roman  envoys  '  who  have  walked  among  us  from 
youth  unto  old  age  unblameably '  (Ixiii.  3)  seems 
to  imply  that  a  generation  has  almost  passed  since 
the  Church  of  Rome  was  founded.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Epistle  cannot  have  been  written  later 
than  the  end  of  the  century,  because  (a)  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  are  included  amongst  the  '  examples 
of  our  own  generation '  (v.  1) ;  (6)  ivlffKovoi  and  vpeff- 
§uT(po%  are  still  regarded  as  interchangeable  terms 
(xliv.  4,  5),  whereas  very  early  in  the  2nd  cent, 
tliey  were  used  to  denote  distinct  offices  (Ign.  Epp., 
l)assim).  Finally,  external  evidence  of  an  early  and 
reliable  kind  (a)  connects  the  Epistle  with  the  epis- 
copate of  Clement,  third  bishop  of  Rome,  and  (b) 
places  his  episcopate  in  the  last  decade  of  the  1st 
rent.  A.D.  (Hegesippus,  ap.  Eus.  HE  iv.  22  :  Dion. 
Cor.  ap.  Ens.  HE  iv.  23 ;  Iren.  adv.  H<er.  III.  iii. 
3).     In  view  of  this  accumulation  of  evidence,  it  is 


CLEMEXT  OF  EOME,  EPISTLE  OF        CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF    217 


impossible  to  doubt  that  the  Epistle  of  Clement 
was  written  about  A.D.  95-96. 

{2)  Authorship. — The  Epistle  itself  claims  to  be 
the  letter  not  or  an  individual  but  of  a  community. 
The  author's  name  is  nowhere  mentioned.  Nor  in- 
deed do  we  find  in  the  statements  of  Hegesippus, 
Dionysius  of  Corinth,  and  Irenaeus,  the  three  ear- 
liest writers  who  connect  the  Epistle  with  the  name 
of  Clement,  any  definite  assertion  that  Clement  was 
the  author.  Eusebius,  to  whom  we  owe  our  know- 
ledge of  Hegesippus,  does  indeed  declare  that  that 
writer  '  makes  some  remarks  concerning  the  Epistle 
of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians'  {HE  iv.  22),  but 
the  title  here  given  to  the  letter  is  due  to  the  his- 
torian and  not  to  Hegesippus,  whose  own  words 
have  unfortunately  not  been  preserved.  Dionj-sius 
of  Corinth,  c.  A.D.  170  {ap.  Eus.  HE  iv.  23),  speaks 
of  TTjv  vporepar  ijfuy  Sia  KXi^fievroi  ■ypa<tttiaav  (sc.  i-rur- 
ToX^v),  but  his  statement  is  ambiguous.  5ta  KX^ 
fuvTOi  might  mean  that  Clement  was  the  author, 
the  amanuensis,  or  even  the  bearer  of  the  Epistle. 
Similarly  the  language  of  Irenaeus  (c.  A.D.  180)  is 
indefinite  as  to  the  actual  authorship  of  the  letter : 
(tI  TovTov  ovv  Tov  KXi^fierroi  .  .  .  iriffreiXey  i}  er'Pw/iT) 
fKKXriffia  iKOPUTdnjp  ypaifnjv  Tails  Kopipdioii  {adv.  H(Br. 
in.  iii.  3).  Yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  language  of  any  of  these  three 
writers  to  exclude  the  possibility  of  believing  that 
they  regarded  Clement  as  the  author  of  the  Epistle. 
The  absence  of  more  explicit  statement  on  the  sub- 
ject is  probably  due  to  the  fact  that  they  looked 
upon  the  letter  as  the  utterance  of  the  whole  Roman 
Church  rather  than  of  one  man.  The  Epistle  is 
first  definitely  ascribed  to  Clement  of  Rome  in  the 
writings  of  his  namesake  of  Alexandria  (c.  A.D. 
200),  who,  though  his  usage  is  not  quite  uniform, 
on  at  least  four  occasions  speaks  of  Clement  as 
the  author  (Strom,  i.  7,  iv.  17-19,  v.  12,  vi.  8). 
All  later  writers  are  unanimous  in  accepting  this 
opinion  (Lightfoot,  Clem.  Bom.,  vol.  L  p.  160  ff.). 

It  is  unreasonable  to  doubt  that  they  are  justified 
in  doing  so.  That  Clement  was  head  of  the  Roman 
community  at  the  time  of  the  Corinthian  schism  is 
as  well  attested  as  any  fact  of  early  Church  history, 
and  as  such  he  would  be  the  natural  mouthpiece 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  in  its  communications  with 
a  sister  community.  At  any  rate,  this  function  is 
attributed  to  him  by  the  writer  of  'Hermas' 
{vifiypei.  ovv  KXi^/xi/j  ets  tos  i^tij  ToXetj,  (Keivt^  yap  i-ririr- 
parrai,  Vis.  II.  iv.  3),  and  '  Hennas'  may  have  been 
written  as  early  as  A.  D.  110-125  (V.  H.  Stanton, 
The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  pt.  i.  pp.  34- 
41).  Again,  however  worthless  as  historical  docu- 
ments the  Clementine  Recognitions  and  Homilies 
may  be,  they  at  least  bear  witness  to  the  fact  that, 
by  the  middle  of  the  2nd  cent.  A.  D.,  Clement  was 
regarded  as  an  author.  It  is  difficult  to  understand 
what  could  have  given  rise  to  that  opinion  except 
the  belief  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians.  Certainly  at  that  date  no 
other  writing  of  importance  were  attributed  to 
him.  But  the  real  value  of  the  Epistle  depends 
not  so  much  on  its  authorship  as  on  its  date, 
which  is  sufficiently  indicated  by  purely  internal 
evidence. 

3-  Contents. — Introdtuiory. — (o)  Opening  salutation  from 
•  the  Church  of  God  which  sojounieth  in  Rome  to  the  Church 
of  God  which  sojoumeth  in  Corinth.'  (6)  AfKilojry  for  apparent 
lack  of  interest  in  the  Corinthian  trouble.  The  Romans'  previ- 
ous silence  due  to  the  '  sudden  and  repeated  calamities '  which 
have  befallen  them. 

(1)  The  Corinthian  trouble — it*  cause  and  the  remedy. — Xow 
at  last  we  have  an  opportunity  of  speaking  our  mind  about  '  the 
detestable  and  unholy  sedition  which  a  few  headstrong  and  self- 
willed  persons  have  kindled '  till  the  once  honoured  name  of 
the  Church  of  Corinth  is  now  greatly  reviled  (i.  1).  For  indeed 
the  Church  of  Corinth  has  hitherto  been  a  model  of  Christian 
virtues,  especially  of  sobriety  in  all  things,  of  self-sacrifice  and 
moderation  (i.  2-ii.).  But,  like  Israel  ol  old,  you  have  been 
spoiled  by  your  good  progress.  Excellence  has  given  way  to 
jealousy  and  envy  (iii.).    Envy  and  ill-will  al%rays  result  in 


sofiering.  So  mach  we  may  learn  from  the  stories  of  Cain,  of 
Jacob,  of  Moees,  Aaron  and  Miriam,  of  Dathan  and  Abiram, 
and  of  Da\id  (i*^-)-  Or  think  of  tboae  who  suffered  martvrdom 
'  nearest  our  own  time  '—of  Peter  and  Paul  and  the  multitude 
of  others  (v.  vi.).  These  examples  ou{;ht  to  warn  as  who  have 
to  face  the  same  expression  of  the  worid's  envy  to  be  free  from 
envy  ourselves.  If  we  have  not  kept  ouiaelres  free  from  it,  then 
let  us  use  the  'grace  of  repentance'  which  Christ's  death  won 
for  man  (ni.),  even  as  the  men  of  old  repented  at  the  preaching 
of  Noah  and  of  Jonah  (vii.  5  ff.). 

The  Holy  Spirit  Himself,  through  the  prophets,  calls  men  to 
repentance  (viiL).  Let  us  be  obedient  to  His  call,  foUowinj:  the 
example  of  Enoch  and  Noah  (ix.).  Obedience  to  God  brooyht 
hlecsings  upon  Abraham  (x.) ;  faith  and  care  for  others  saved 
Lot  from  the  fate  of  Sodom  (xL),  and  Rahab  from  the  fate  of 
Jericho  (xli.).  'Arrogance  and  conceit  and  foUv  and  anger' 
must  be  laid  aside.  The  promises  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  are  for  the  humble-minded  (xiu.  xiv.X  who  are 
genuinely  so  (xt.).  What  an  example  of  humility  was  set  by 
Christ  Himself  (xvL)  and  by  the  saints  of  old — Elijah,  Elisha, 
Ezekiel,  Abraham,  Job,  Moses  (xvii.X  and  David  (xriiL) !  Self- 
seeking  and  discord  are  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  Creator  (xix.) ; 
the  harmony  of  the  natural  world  proves  His  own  long-suffering 
and  love  of  settled  order  (xx. ).  Let  us  therefore  act  as  befits  the 
servants  of  such  a  Master,  for  He  reads  the  nccrets  of  all  hearts. 
Lee  us  reverence  rulers,  honour  elders,  and  train  onr  families  tc 
do  the  same  (xxi.) ;  for  Christ,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the 
Father  both  commend  the  single-hearted  and  «>naemn  such  as 
are  double-minded  (xxiL  xxiii.).  The  Lord  will  come  quickly 
(xxiiL). 

(2)  The  retttrreetion  of  the  body.  Fa  ith  and  worka  the  mean* 
by  whiek  the  eUet  obtain  thi*  and  the  other  bletting*  of  God. — 
Let  us  hare  no  doubt  abont  the  resurrectioa  <rf  the  dnd.  Life 
out  of  death  is  the  ver>-  law  of  Xatore.  Day  grows  out  of 
night,  the  plant  from  the  death  of  the  seed  (xxiv.),  the  phcenix 
from  its  parent's  ashes  (xxv.).  In  the  Scriptures  God  has  pro- 
mised a  resurrection.  His  promise  and  His  jiower  are  aJike 
sufficient,  for  He  is  almighty  and  cannot  lie.  Therefore  let  our 
souls  be  bound  to  Him  with  this  hope  (xxri.-xxviiL). 

We  must  approach  Him  in  holiness  of  soul,  for  we  are  His 
' elect,'  His  '  special  portion '  (xxix.) ;  as  such  we  must  put  away 
all  lust,  strife,  contention,  and  pride.  '  Boldness  and  arrogance 
and  daring  are  for  them  that  are  accursed  of  God  ;  but  forbear- 
ance and  humility  and  gentleness  are  with  them  that  are 
blessed  of  God  '  (xxx.).  "This,  then,  is  how  the  blessing  of  God 
is  obtained.  We  see  it  in  the  case  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 
(xxxi.).  They  were  blessed  'not  through  themselves,  in  their 
own  works  or  righteous  doing,'  but  because  they  accepted  the  will 
of  God,  i.e.  through  faith.    So  we  are  justified  by  faith  (xxxii.). 

Yet  we  must  never  be  slack  in  works.  Does  not  the  Creator 
rejoice  to  work  unceasingly?  We  must  follow  His  example,  for 
we  are  made  in  His  image  (xxxiii-X  Vfe  must  imitate  the 
diligence  of  the  angels,  if  we  would  win  the  promises  of  God 
(sxxiv.).  How  blesied  and  marvellous  are  the  gifts  which  God 
prepares  for  them  that  patiently  await  Him  !  If  we  would  enjoy 
them,  we  must  first  hate  done  with  all  bitterness  and  suife, 
vainglory  and  inboepitality,  which  are  hateful  to  Him  (xxxr.X 
Jesus  Christ, '  the  Guardian  and  Helper  of  oor  weakness,'  will 
aid  us  in  oor  efforts,  and  He  is  mightier  than  any  angel  (xxxvL). 

(3)  Diaofline  i*  indiepentable  in  a  corporate  tociety :  provi- 
sion mtade  for  tkit  in  the  Motaie  Lair  and  in  the  Divinely  ap- 
pointed ounttfry  of  the  Church.— V>'e  are  Christ's  soldiers 
(g Tpart mriitifOcu,  xxxrii.  1):  soldiers  must  be  under  discipline, 
each  in  his  own  rank.  Look  at  the  soldiers  in  the  Roman  army ; 
think  of  the  limbs  in  a  human  body  ;  '  all  the  members  conspire 
and  unite  in  subjection,  that  the  whole  body  may  be  saved' 
(xxxTiLJL  So  the  members  of  the  Christian  body  murt  perform 
each  his  own  function  for  the  common  weal  (xxxviii.).  Only 
'  senseless  and  stupid  and  foolish  and  ignorant  men '  seek  power 
and  exaltation,  forgetting  the  utter  nothingness  of  man,  and 
the  condemnation  of  the  Scriptures  for  such  as  themselves 
(xxxix.). 

Regard  for  order  and  decen<gr  is  Divinely  taught  in  the 
Mosaic  Law,  which  expressly  prescribes  how,  when,  and  by 
whom  each  of  its  rites  shall  be  performed,  every  man  having 
his  own  appointed  place,  whether  high  priest,  priest,  Levite,  or 
layman  (xl.).  So  we,  who  are  under  the  Christian  Law,  must 
be  content  to  perform  the  function  which  is  appointed  for  us 
(xli.). 

The  Christian  ministry  is  a  Divinely  appointed  order.  Je«us 
CJhrist  was  sent  forth  from  God,  and  Himself  sent  forth  the 
apostles.  They,  in  turn,  when  they  had  preached  in  town  and 
country,  appointed  such  of  their  converts  as  were  approved  by 
the  Spirit,  to  be  '  bishops  and  deacons  tmto  them  that  should 
believe'  (xliL).  In  this  they  followed  the  example  of  Moses, 
who  appointed  a  succession  of  priests,  and  to  prevent  all  future 
dispute,  confirmed  the  appointment  of  Aaron's  line  by  tlie 
miracle  of  the  budding  rod  (xliii.).  The  apostles,  too,  were 
Divinely  warned  that  strife  would  arise  over  the  bishop's  office. 
They  therefore  provided  for  a  regular  succession  of  the  ministry 
froiii  generation  to  generation  (div.  1,  2). 

(4)  The  Corinthians  hare  disobeyed  not  only  a  ipeeifie  ordin- 
ance of  God,  but  ai*o  the  fundamental  Christian  law  of  torn. 
3lay  they  gpeedUy  repent.— You  have  sinned  grievously  in 
thrusting  from  their  office  men  who  were  duly  appointed 
according  to  the  apostles'  directions,  and  have  faithfully  dis- 
charged the  duties  of  a  bishop  (xliv.  3-6X  It  is  monstrous  that 
God's  officers  should  be  persecuted  by  those  who  profess  to  be 
God's  servants.  Read  your  Bible,  and  you  will  learn  that  when 
righteous  men  have  suffered  persecution— *.jr.  Daniel  and  the 
three  Holy  Children— they  have  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the 


218    CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF         CLEMENT  OF  ROME,  EPISTLE  OF 


ungodly  (xlv.).  Surely  you  ouprhC  to  be  found  on  the  side  of  the 
riKliteous  rather  than  of  the  pcrtiecutors.  We  worship  one  Owl. 
We  are  one  body  in  Chriiit,  we  have  one  spirit  of  (Trace.  How 
can  you  bear  such  strife  if  you  remember  that  wu  are  niembeni 
one  of  another?  Remember  what  Jesus  our  Ix>rd  said  concern- 
itit;  those  who  cause  offence  as  you  have  done  (xlvi.).  St.  Paul 
rebuked  you  for  the  same  fault,  but  thing^s  are  worse  now. 
Then  at  least  }'ou  professed  to  follow  apostles  or  apostolic  men, 
but  now  *  the  steadfast  and  ancient  Church  of  the  Corinthians, 
for  the  sake  of  one  or  two  persons,  maketh  sedition  against  its 
presbyters'  (xlvii.).  Let  us  have  done  with  such  tem\n,  and  in 
penitence  pray  Qod  to  restore  our  former  harmony  (xlviii.). 

Love  is  all-powerful :  love,  His  own  attribute,  is  acceptable  to 
God :  seek  love,  and  you  shall  be  saved  (xlix.  1).  Love  is  the 
only  fH'ound  on  which  we  can  hope  for  Ood's  foi^veness.  Let 
us  therefore — and  especially  those  who  have  caused  strife— con- 
fess our  offences  and  not  harden  our  hearts  as  Pharaoh  did,  lest 
like  Pharaoh  we  perish  (li.). 

God  asks  nothmt;  of  man  but  contrition,  prayer,  and  praise 
Gii.}.  Remember  how  Moses  fasted  and  prayed  forty  days  on 
the  mountain,  offerin);  his  life  for  the  life  of  his  people  (liu-)- 
Let  those  of  you  who  are  the  occasion  of  strife,  copy  his  self- 
effacement  Qiv.),  and  follow  the  examples  of  those  noble 
heathens — rulers  and  citizens,  even  women — who  over  and  over 
again  in  the  course  of  history  have  been  willing  to  give  up  all 
for  the  good  of  their  nation  (Iv.). 

Let  us  intercede  for  one  another.  Let  us  be  ready  to  give 
and  to  receive  admonition.  In  Ood's  hands,  chastisement  is  an 
instrument  of  mercy  (Ivi.).  You  especially,  who  first  stirred 
up  the  strife,  be  first  to  repent — '  submit  yourselves  unto  the 
presbyters,  and  receive  chastisement  unto  repentance.'  The 
Scriptures  contain  many  threats  against  the  stubborn  and  im- 
penitent (Ivii.).  Let  us  by  obedience  escape  them,  for  they 
who  obey  God's  will  shall  be  saved  (Iviii.).  'But  if  certain 
persons  should  be  disobedient  unto  the  words  spoken  by  Him 
through  us  .  .  .  they  will  entangle  themselves  in  no  slijiflit 
transgression  and  danger  ;  bat  we  shall  be  guiltless  of  this  sin  ' 
(lix.). 

(5)  Prayer  for  all  mankind :  final  admonition  and  benedic- 
tion.— We  pray  that  God  will  keep  His  elect  intact.  We  pray 
for  inward  light,  for  all  who  need,  for  the  Gentiles'  conversion, 
for  pardon  and  cleansing,  for  peace  and  concord,  for  deliver- 
ance from  those  who  hate  us  wrongfully,  for  the  grace  of 
obedience  to  temporal  authority,  for  earthly  rulers,  that  they 
may  govern  in  accordance  with  Ood's  will  in  peace  and  gentle- 
ness. We  offer  our  praises  to  the  Almighty  Father  '  through 
the  lliv'li  Priest  and  Guardian  of  our  souls,  Jesus  Christ'  (lix.- 
Ixi.). 

We  iiave  said  enough  about  the  Christian  life ;  about  faith, 
repentance,  love,  temperance,  sobriety,  patience,  righteousness, 
truth,  longsuflfering.  We  have  spoken  gladly,  knowing  that  we 
spoke  to  men  who  have  studied  the  oracles  of  God  (Ixii.). 
Follow  the  example  of  the  Fathers ;  submit  yourselves  to  author- 
ity. You  will  give  us  great  joy  if  you  cease  from  strife.  With 
the  letter  we  have  sent  faithful  and  prudent  men  who  shall  be 
witnesses  between  us  (Ixiii.). 

May  God  endue  with  all  virtues  those  who  call  on  His  name 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Hi;:h  Priest  and  Guardian  (Ixiv.). 
We  commend  Claudius  Ephcbus,  and  Valerius  Bito,  who,  with 
Fortunatus  also,  are  the  bearers  of  this  letter.  Send  them 
back  speedily  with  good  news. 

The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you  and  all  men. 

i.  Teaching.— The  object  of  the  Epistle  was 
strictly  practical.  It  is  therefore  unreasonable  to 
expect  to  find  in  it  precise  delinitions  of  Christian 
doctrine.  Yet,  in  enforcing  his  practical  lesson, 
the  writer  alludes  to  the  main  articles  of  the  faith 
as  he  had  learned  it,  and  these  incidental  allusions 
are  historically  the  more  valuable,  because  they 
represent  not  the  belief  of  one  man  but  the  tra- 
dition of  a  community. 

The  tradition,  which  lies  behind  the  Epistle,  is 
above  all  things  catholic,  in  its  recognition  of  the 
many-sidedness  of  Christian  truth.  It  embraces 
almost  every  type  of  apostolic  teaching  which  is 
•expressed  in  the  Epistles  of  the  NT — the  type  of 
St.  .James  no  less  than  of  St.  Paul,  of  St.  Peter 
as  well  as  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  one 
cilement  which  is  lacking  is  the  mysticism  of  St. 
•lohn,  probably  because  the  Johannine  writings 
were  not  yet  in  existence  (Lightfoot,  Clem.  Bom. 
vol.  i.  p.  95  tf.). 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  admitted  that  the 
Epistle  betrays  a  certain  failure  to  grasp  the  full 
meaning  of  the  more  profound  doctrines  of  the 
NT.  This  is  especially  evident  in  its  treatment  of 
the  Pauline  idea  of  justification  by  faith.  To  St. 
Paul  faith  is  the  mainspring  of  the  Christian  life, 
the  source  of  all  Christian  virtues.  To  the  writer 
of  the  Epistle,  faith  is  nothing  more  than  one 
amongst  many  virtues.     He  is  conscious  of  no  in- 


congruity in  placing  '  faith  '  and  '  ho.spitality '  side 
by  side  as  erpial  conditions  of  salvation  (.xii.  1  ;  cf. 
Lightfoot,  Clrvi.  Horn.  vol.  i.  p.  397). 

(1)  Doctrine  of  God. — The  terms  in  which  the 
Epistle  speaks  of  God  are  unmistakably  borrowed 
from  the  langua^^e  of  the  OT  and  the  Jewish 
synagogue.  God  is  '  the  Almighty,'  '  the  all-seeing 
Master  (Iv.  6),  'the  Creator  and  Master  of  the 
universe'  (xxxiii.  2),  'the  Father  of  the  ages,  tlie 
All-holy  One'  (xxxv.  3)  ;  'the  Father  and  Maker 
of  the  whole  M-orld'  (xix.  2;  cf.  Ix.  and  Ixii.); 
•the  King  of  the  ages'  (Ixi.  2);  'He  that  em- 
braceth  the  whole  universe '  (xxviii.  4).  His  un- 
ceasing activity  in  the  natural  world  displays 
both  His  beneficence  and  His  love  of  harmony  (xx. 
xxxii.).  Amongst  men  He  is  made  known  as  '  the 
Creator  and  Overseer  .  .  .  the  Benefactor  of  all 
spirits  and  the  God  of  all  flesh '  (lix.  3).  To  the 
elect  He  is  revealed  as  a  '  gentle  and  compassion- 
ate Father'  (xxix.  1),  'the  champion  and  protector 
of  them  that  in  a  pure  conscience  serve  His  excel- 
lent Name'  (xlv.  7). 

So  much  might  have  been  said  by  a  conscientious 
Jew ;  but  in  two  passages  at  least,  the  language 
of  the  Epistle  passes  beyond  the  mere  monotlieism 
of  Judaism  :  '  Have  we  not  one  God  and  one 
Christ  and  one  Spirit  of  grace  that  was  shed  upon 
us?'  (xlvi.  6) ;  'as  God  liveth  and  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  liveth,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  are  the 
faith  and  the  hope  of  the  elect  .  .  .'  (Iviii.  2). 
The  simple  and  natural  way  in  which  the  Son  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  are  here  linked  M-ith  the  Father  as 
equal  objects  of  Christian  faith  and  hope  is  quite 
inexplicable  unless  the  writer  was  convinced  of 
their  essential  Divinity  and  essential  equality 
with  the  Father. 

(2)  Christology. — A  clear  allusion  to  the  pre- 
existence  of  Christ  is  contained  in  the  statement 
that  He  speaks  through  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  OT 
Scriptures  (xxii,  1).  A  similar  reference  is  prob- 
ably to  be  found  in  the  words  '  Jesus  Christ  was 
sent  forth  from  God '  (xlii.  1).  He  is  never  actually 
called  God,*  but  His  Divinity  is  implied  when  He 
is  described  as  '  the  sceptre  of  the  majesty  of  God ' 
(xvi.  2),  Avho  showed  us  '  as  in  a  mirror '  the  very 
'  face '  of  God  (xxxvi.  2). 

But  most  frequently  the  Epistle  speaks  of  Christ 
in  His  relation  to  mankind.  He  came  to  earth  '  to 
instruct,  to  sanctify,  to  honour  us'  (lix.  3),  to  be 
our  pattern  of  lowliness  (xvi.).  Yet  He  was  no 
mere  example  to  men.  He  shed  His  blood  for  our 
salvation  (vii.  4,  xii.  7,  xxi.  6),  and  '  gave  His 
flesh  for  our  flesh  and  His  life  for  our  lives '  (xlix.  6). 
By  His  death  He  'won  for  the  whole  world  the 
grace  of  repentance'  (vii.  3).  God  raised  Him 
from  the  dead,  and  we  shall  one  day  share  His 
resurrection  (xxiv.  1).  Meanwhile  He  is  'the 
Hi"h  Priest  of  our  ofterings,  the  Guardian  and 
Helper  of  our  weakness '  (xxxvi.  1  ;  cf.  Ixi.  3,  Ixiv.). 
'  Through  Him  we  taste  the  immortal  knowledge ' 
(xxxvi.  2),  'the  full  knowledge  of  the  glory  of 
God's  Name '  (lix.  2).  Througli  Him  we  have  our 
access  to  the  Father  (xx.  11,  Ixi.  3,  Ixiv.). 

(3)  The  Holy  Spirit.— In  times  past  the  Holy 
Spirit  inspired  the  message  of  the  prophets  (viii.  1, 
xlv.  1).  In  the  present  He  is  a  living  power  poured 
out  upon  the  Church  (xlvi.  6).  His  indwelling 
Mas  tlie  source  of  the  manifold  virtues  whicli  had 
formerly  distinguished  the  Clmroh  of  Corinth  (ii. 
3).  The  writer  of  the  Epistle  claims  that  his  own 
words  were  written  '  through  the  Holj' Spirit '  (rot j 
v<t>  ijuQv  yeypafifi^voi^  Sid.  rov  aylovtrvevfMaros,  Ixill.  2). 

(4)  Justification  by  faith  and  toorks. — Salvation 

•  The  one  possible  exception  is  the  passage  ii.  1  which  ends 
Koi  tA  wa&riiux.Ta  ovTOv  i)V  irpb  o^aAM*»'  Vfiiiv.  The  question 
turns  on  a  doubtful  reading.  As  the  antecedent  of  outoC  Cod.  A 
reads  toO  fleoO.  If  this  be  correct,  the  statement  made  above 
is  not  quit*  true.  But  the  weight  of  MS  authority  (C  and  all 
three  versions)  is  In  favour  of  the  reading  roii  XpccrroO. 


CLOIEST  OF  BOME^  EPISTLE  OF        CLEMESSTt  OF  BOME;  EPISTLE  OF   219 


ly^tte 


«f  Cln*Cvn.  ^ 


amL  7,  c««.|u    Ota  aMnr^  pnt.  tihe 

( (niHii]}^  Jht  *ivb  ais 

Mfc   W  INriB'  CSSS.  31. 

I*  fzszLSI. 
«^  kvriK  1MB  caBol  Hmtm^  ffis  j;k.  tte 
Fatkn^  inD  m  CkaSA 

m  rmtj  m 
-     tte  fthi^llj  Cwl 

bKBfMBtfce  ~ 

-11.    Ye* 

_    _  fB  i  B IHL 

lib  «■«■  as  tte  Cheaiar 

Hb  Ik  111  fa  I  at  aitiivjilf.    Ym  Hut  wm^  tts 
•faeEi|iriiec»«BiintaBlfte  ~ 

jM^wtLfc.    T(dtkecaMailrfidbtt»ii» 

~    ;rf  JMth— it  ■■■  ■■iliiiilaiiilyaLPkJL 
1^  He  juwiiimfMB  ^li«*n<.— Hk  tmtfc  of 


IS 


€aiv|sfiL4^^; 
fsfir. 


«— »  —i  mfimMtwfm  to  —a tf  tiai 
].^a.   luttMheMlMntkeaMeB 

'Vt    "^'"'" '~H"Li     irii 

far  a  MhMB  af  tibe  vie«r  ttjhat  I 
aaBalkcLJ.BL]laHn 

«f  ttaCW 


iiwHliailiiil  faa»  tte  data  iiiiiri  lly  ttfce  gT 
taNnB&  tts  cmI  «f  ite  9taA  cnIL  fa  ainhr  aaa- 


220    CLEMENT  OF  KOME,  EPISTLE  OF        CLEMENT  OF  BOME,  EPISTLE  OF 


by  U  and  A,  while  often  supporting;  A,  it  is  leaa  constantly 
opposed  to  B  tban  is  the  NT  ;  and  (c)  it  displays  an  occasional 
tendency  to  agree  with  Theodotion  and  even  with  Aquila  against 
the  LXX  •  (Swete,  Introd.  to  the  OT  in  Greelfi,  1902,  p.  410). 

To  the  student  of  the  growth  of  the  NT  Canon, 
Clement's  Epistle  has  both  a  positive  and  a  negative 
value.  Negatively,  it  shows  that  as  yet  the  NT 
writings  were  not  definitely  counted  amongst  the 
Scriptures.  Sayings  of  our  Lord  are  indeed  quoted 
as  of  equal  weight  with  the  writings  of  the  OT, 
and  in  a  form  which  resembles  passages  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  (xiii.  2,  xlvi.  8),  but  their  authority 
is  that  of  the  speaker,  not  of  the  written  word. 
(On  the  form  of  Clement's  quotations  see  Sanday, 
Inspiration^,  1896,  p.  299  fi.  ;  Stanton,  op.  cit.  pt.  i. 
p.  5<r.) 

Positively,  the  Epistle  provides  clear  evidence 
that  by  the  end  of  the  Ist  cent,  many  of  the  apos- 
tolic writings  were  known  and  studied  in  the  Church 
of  Rome.  For  it  contains  an  express  reference  to 
St.  Paul's  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  (xlvii. 
1  If.),  indubitable  traces  of  the  influence  of  Romans 
(xxxiii.-xxxvi.  xlvii.  1.)  and  Hebrews  (xxxvi.  xliii.; 
cf.  xvii.  1 ),  and  possible  reminiscences  of  the  phrase- 
ology of  Acts  (ii.  1),  the  Pastoral  Epistles  (ii.  7,  Ixi. 
2),  1  Peter  and  James  (xxx.  2,  xlix.  5). 

An  apocryphal  Avork  is  quoted  in  xxiii.  3  with 
the  formula  ^  ypa-<Pv  aiht].  The  same  quotation 
occurs  in  an  amplified  form  in  the  so-called  Second 
Epistle  of  Clement  (xi.).  Possibly,  as  Lightfoot 
suggests  {Clem.  Rom.  vol.  ii.  p.  80),  it  may  have 
been  taken  from  the  lost  pseudepigraphic  book  of 
Eldad  and  Medad,  which  was  certainly  known  to 
the  primitive  Roman  Church;(8ee  Hermas,  Vis.  ii.  3). 
Whatever  the  source  may  have  been,  it  is  the  only 
book  quoted  by  Clement  which  is  outside  the  Canon 
of  the  Greek  Bible. 

Fourthly,  the  Epistle  of  Clement  contains  his- 
torical alhisions  which  are  of  great  interest.  Not 
only  does  it  provide  contemporary  evidence  for  the 
persecutions  of  Nero  and  Domitian,  both  of  which 
occurred  during  the  writer's  lifetime,  but  it  also 
adds  fresh  detail  to  our  knowledge  of  the  life-story 
of  St.  Paul.  For  the  statement  that  the  Apostle 
'  taught  righteousness  to  the  whole  world  and 
'  reached  the  furthest  bounds  of  the  west '  (iwl  rb 
Tipfjio.  TTjs  Si/trews  i\duv,  v.  7),  occurring  in  an  Epistle 
written  from  Rome,  seems  most  naturally  to  mean 
that  before  his  death  St.  Paul  fulfilled  his  intention, 
expressed  in  Ro  15^,  of  making  a  missionary 
journey  to  Spain.  An  allusion  is  made  to  the 
same  journey  by  an  anonymous  writer  two  genera- 
tions later  (Muratorian  Fragm.  ap.  Westcott,  Hist, 
of  NT  Canon\  1881,  p.  521  tf.). 

Finally,  the  long  prayer  with  which  the  Epistle 
concludes  (lix.-lxiv.)  is  full  of  interest  to  the  litur- 
giologist.  Lightfoot  has  pointed  out  the  strong 
Jewish  colouring  which  it  has  in  common  with  the 
rest  of  the  Epistle,  and  especially  its  marked 
affinity  with  the  'eighteen  benedictions'  of  the 
synagogue  service  (Clem.  Bom.  vol.  i.  p.  393  fl".). 
furthermore,  as  the  same  writer  observes,  'it  is 
impossible  not  to  be  struck  with  the  resemblances 
in  this  passage  to  portions  of  the  earliest  known 
liturgies.  Not  only  is  there  a  general  coincidence 
in  the  objects  of  tne  several  petitions,  but  it  has 
also  individual  phrases,  and  in  one  instance  [lix.  4] 
a  whole  cluster  of  petitions,  in  common  with  one 
or  other  of  these '  (oo.  cit.  p.  384f.).  Yet  it  would 
be  straining  the  evidence  too  far  to  conclude  that 
Clement  is  quoting  an  actual  form  of  prayer  already 
in  use  in  the  Roman  Church.  The  utmost  that 
can  be  said  is  that  the  pas.sage  in  question  is  '  an 
excellent  example  of  the  style  of  solemn  prayer  in 
which  the  ecclesiastical  leaders  of  that  time  were 
accustomed  to  express  themselves  at  meetings  for 
worship '  (Duchesne,  Chriitian  Worship,  Eng.  tr. 
from  3rd  Fr.  ed.,  1903,  p.  50). 


6.  MS8  and  versions. — Two  early  Greek  MSS  and 
three  ancient  versions  of  the  Epistle  are  known. 

(1)  MSS.— (a)  Cod.  yl.— The  oldest  Greek  MS 
which  contains  the  Epistle  is  the  famous  5th  cent, 
uncial,  generally  known  as  Codex  Alexandrinus. 
Cod.  A  originally  included  the  whole  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments.  The  Epistle  of  Clement 
stands  at  the  end  of  the  NT,  immediately  after 
the  close  of  the  Ai)ocalypse  and  before  the  spurious 
'Second  Epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians.' 
One  whole  leaf  of  Clement's  Epistle  is  missing 
(i.e.  from  Ivii.  7  to  the  end  of  Ixiii.),  and  the 
edges  of  the  remaining  leaves  are  considerably 
mutilated.  Many  editions  of  the  Epistles  of 
Clement  based  on  the  text  of  Cod.  A  have 
appeared  since  the  '  editio  princeps '  of  Patrick 
Young,  published  in  1633.  It  is  still  the  chief 
authority  for  the  text. 

{b)  Cod.  C. — Thesecond  Greek  MS, which, amongst 
other  patristic  writings,  contains  the  Epistles  of 
Clement,  was  made  known  to  the  world  in  1875, 
when  Bryennios,  then  Metropolitan  of  Serrse, 
published  the  first  complete  text  of  1  and  2  Clement. 
This  MS,  which  bears  the  date  A.D.  1056,  was  found 
at  Constantinople,  in  the  library  of  the  Patriarch 
of  Jerusalem.  Its  chief  value  is  that  it  enables  ua 
to  fill  in  the  gaps  in  Cod.  A,  but  on  the  whole  its 
text  is  distinctly  inferior  to  that  of  the  earlier  MS. 

(2)Versions. — (a)Syriac. — Almostsimultaneously 
with  the  discovery  of  Bryennios,  the  first  ancient 
version  of  Clement's  Epistle  came  to  light.  A 
MS  of  the  Harklean  (Syriac)  Version  of  the  NT, 
then  acquired  by  Cambridge  University,  was  found 
to  include  Clement's  Epistles,  placed  after  the 
Catholic  and  before  the  Pauline  Epistles.  The 
date  of  the  MS  is  a.d.  1170.  As  an  authority  for 
the  text  of  Clement  it  is  superior  to  Cod.  C,  but 
inferior  to  Cod.  A.  An  edition  of  this  Syriac  text 
of  1  and  2  Clem,  was  published  in  1899. 

{b)  Latin. — Much  more  remarkable,  in  view  of 
the  lack  of  any  real  acquaintance  with  Clement's 
Epistle  on  the  part  of  the  early  Latin  Church,  was 
the  discovery  by  G.  Morin  in  1894  of  an  ancient 
Latin  version.  The  MS  which  contains  it  was 
written  in  the  11th  cent.,  but  the  available  evidence 
clearly  shows  that  the  translation  is  at  least  as  old 
as  the  4th  cent.,  and  perhaps  as  old  as  the  2nd. 
The  Greek  text  which  it  represents  is  independent 
of  that  of  all  the  other  authorities,  and  probably 
ranks  second  only  to  that  of  Cod.  A.  Tne  Latin 
text  was  published  by  Morin  in  1894.  (For  an 
estimate  of  its  value  see  R.  Knopf,  TU  xx.  1 
[1901] ;  also  CQR  xxxix.  [1894]  190-195,  and  JThSt 
ii.  [1900]  154). 

(c)  Coptic. — More  recently  still  a  Coptic  version 
of  Clement  has  been  discovered  in  a  papyrus  book 
ascribed  to  the  end  of  the  4th  century.  The  text 
was  published  by  Carl  Schmidt  in  1908  [TU  xxxii. 
1).  The  most  interesting  feature  of  this  version  is 
its  omission  of  the  name  of  Clement  from  the  title, 
which  runs  '  Epistle  of  the  Romans  to  the  Cor- 
inthians.' Owing  to  the  loss  of  five  leaves  from 
the  middle  of  the  book,  the  text  is  defective  from 
xxxiv.  6  to  xlii.  2.  The  underlying  Greek  text, 
though  good,  is  inferior  to  that  of  Cod.  A  or  of 
the  Latin  version  (C.  H.  Turner,  Studies  in  Early 
Church  Hist.  p.  257). 

LiTBRATURB. — Editions  of  the  Epistle  of  Clement :  O.  v.  Geb- 
hardt  and  A.  Hamack  (1876) ;  F.  X.  Funk  (1878-81) ;  J.  B. 
Lightfoot  (Apostol.  Fathers,  pt.  i.,  18SK)) ;  R.  Knopf  (1901). 
Artt.  on  Clement  of  Rome  :  '  Clemens  Roniaiius  '  by  G.  Salmon, 
in  DCS  i.  [1877];  'Clement  I.,'  bv  John  Chapman,  in  CR 
iv.  [1908];  'Clemens  von  Kom,'  by  G.  Uhlhom,  in  PRR^  iv. 
[1898]  and  'Clement  of  Rome'  in  SchafT-Herzog,  iii.  [J909J. 
General  works :  A.  Hau^ack,  liesehichte  der  altehrUtl.  LUt.  i. 
[1893],  ChronoU)gie,\i.  [1891);  C.  H.  Turner,  SfudiV*  in  Earl^i 
Church  History,  1912 ;  V.  H.  Stanton,  The  GosptU  a.«  Uis- 
torioal  Documents,  pt  i.  [1903].  Versions  :  Svriac,  ed.  Bensley 
(1899) ;  Latin,  ed.  Morin  (1894) ;  Coptic,  ed.  Schmidt  (190s). 

F.  S.  Mak.sh. 


CLOKE 


CLOTHES 


221 


CLOKE  *  {<pai\6nts,  etc). — The  most  important 
passage  in  which  this  word  figures  is  2  Ti  4", 
where  the  cloke,  left  behind  at  Troas  with  Carpus, 
is  mentioneti  together  with  the  books,  especially 
the  parchments.  This  grouping  has  led  to  the 
cloke  being  identified  with  a  bag  or  case  for  books 
(since  the  time  of  Chrysostom).  In  HDB  it  is 
stated  that  the  cloke  'may  have  been  a  light 
mantle  like  a  cashmere  dust-cloak,  in  which  the 
books  and  parchments  were  wrapped.'  In  DCG  it 
is  taken  as  '  a  heavy  woollen  garment,  generally 
red  or  dark  yellow  in  colour,  worn  as  a  protection 
against  cold  and  rain,  at  first  especiaUy  bv 
travellers  and  by  artisans  and  slaves.  .  .  .'  It 
appears  to  have  been  of  one  piece,  circular  or  ellip- 
soid in  shape,  with  a  hole  in  the  middle  for  the  in- 
sertion of  the  head,  and  with  no  sleeves.  Accord- 
ing to  Seyftert'sZ>»cili<^nary  of  Classical  Antiquities, 
s.p.  '  Pseuula,'  it  was  buttoned  or  stitched  up  in 
front,  in  the  direction  of  its  length — a  description 
which  would  lead  to  some  modification  of  the  idea 
of  there  being  a  simple  opening  for  the  head.  An 
interesting  addition  to  the  last-named  account  is 
the  mention  of  the  cucullus  or  hood,  to  sen'e  as  a 
head-covering.  Most  accotmts  agree  in  describing 
it  as  a  travelling-cloke,  for  rich  and  poor,  and  for 
both  sexes.  It  belongs  to  the  category  of  vesti- 
menta  clansa.  It  was  worn  in  Rome  (see  Suet. 
Nero,  48),  and  was  also  in  common  use  throughout 
the  East,  being  well  known  to  Greeks,  Jews,  and 
Syrians.  The  Jewish  and  Syriac  forms  of  the 
word  have  caused  it  to  be  confused  Avith  the 
pallium  (iftATiov)  or  mantle. 

The  Latin  pcenula  (=  <^iyb\rji,  <f>€v6\rii)  is  in- 
teresting in  view  of  the  transposition  of  v  and  X,  as 
found  in  </)atX6ci;s,  ^\6»^s  of  the  NT,  which  are  said 
to  be  erroneous  forms.  There  seems  to  be  great 
diversity  of  opinion  among  lexicographers  on  the 
point.  For  the  relation  of  the  cloke  to  the  chasuble 
and  other  matters  connected  mth  ecclesiastical  vest- 
ments, see  Z>C6^,  a.  i'.  'Cloke.'  In  this  connexion  R. 
Sinker,  Essays  and  Studies,  Cambridge,  1900,  pp.  87- 
97,  and  W.  Lowrie,  Christian  Art  and  ArcJueology, 
New  York,  1901,  p.  396  ff.,  should  also  be  consulted. 

The  phrase  '  before  winter'  (2  Ti  4*')  is  a  for- 
tuitous sequence,  and  is  not  to  be  brought  into 
relation  to  v.^^.  As  to  this  and  further  specula- 
tions regarding  the  history  of  St.  Paul's  cloke,  see 
F.  W.  Farrar,  Life  and  Wark  of  St.  Faul,  hondou, 
1897,  p.  682,  where  a  noteworthy  parallel  is  cited. 
Cf.  also  A.  Plummer,  The  Pastoral  Epistles  {Ex- 
positor's Bible),  1888,  p.  411  ff. 

The  word  '  cloke '  appears  in  an  extended  mean- 
ing :  (1)  ^i'  rfxxpdffei  -rXeore^lai,  '  a  cloke  of  covetotis- 
ness'  (1  Th  2*);  and  (2)  iriKoKvfxna  rip  KaKiai,  '& 
cloke  of  wickedness  (or  malice)'  (1  P  2'*).  These 
passages  call  for  no  remark. 

W.   CRmCKSHAXK. 

CLOTHES,  t — Many  words  of  general  meaning 
relating  to  clothing  are  used  in  the  Acts,  Epistles, 
and  especially  in  the  Apocalypse.  In  a  number 
of  instances  these  are  metaphorical,  particularly 
in  the  case  of  verbs,  e.g.  '  putting  on,'  '  putting 
off,'  '  encircled,'  etc.  (2  Co  5»-  *,  Eph  4^^  6",  Col 
3*-  ^'*).  The  clothing  of  the  angels  and  visionary 
figures  is  indeterminate,  except  as  to  aspect  and 
colour,  e.g.  white,  sliining,  pure,  purple,  scarlet, 
sprinkled  (or  dipped).  Even  with  regard  to  luxury 
in  dress,  kingly  or  otherwise,  there  is  little  or  no 
mention  of  particular  garments  (cf.  Ac  12^^,  1  Ti 
2*,  1  P  3^).  In  a  passage  quoted  from  the  OT  (He 
1"-  ^-)  another  indefinite  term  {rtpi^oXcuov ;  cf.  1 
Co  11")  is  employed.  Little  is  said  to  indicate 
the  condition  of  poverty  (except  Ja  2^) ;  '  naked,' 

*  This  spelliiuF,  instead  of  the  modem  'cloak,'  ia  retained  bv 
theRV. 

t  This  art.  includes  such  tenna  as  'dress,'  'garment,'  *  robe,' 
'  vesture'  (the  last  not  in  RV). 


'  nakedness,'  occur  mostly  in  connexion  with  per- 
secutions, which  were  also  marked  by  the  wearing 
of  sheepskins  and  goatsldns  (He  11*0— this,  how- 
ever, m  pre-Christian  times.  The  restricted 
meaning  ot  '  naked '  is  probably  found  in  Ac  19** 
(cf.  7**).  The  minimum  in  respect  of  clothes  is 
hinted  at  in  the  ffKfritrnara  of  1  Ti  6*  (where  some 
have  found  '  shelter '  implied  as  well),  and  enjoined 
in  the  (^i*)  /carturroXs  KOfffdifi  of  1  Ti  2*,  where  a  con- 
trast is  made  between  modest  apparel  and  the 
other  extreme,  which  is  also  vividly  pictured  in 
one  of  the  parties  entering  the  synagogue,  and 
having  favour  shown  by  the  rulers  (Ja  2*-  *).  The 
moth-eaten  garments  (5*)  of  the  rich  also  tell  an 
evident  story. 

1.  Under-garments. — The  x*'''^>  or  under-gar- 
ment,  is  expressly  mentioned  in  few  places.  We 
find  that  Dorcas  made  coats  (xtrwai)  and  gar- 
ments (ihAtia),  the  two  chief  categories  of  dress  (Ac 
9**).  In  Jude  ^  the  garment  (xirww)  spotted  by  the 
flesh  may  be  tmderstood  literally,  the  x""^^  being 
brought  into  immediate  contact  with  the  body. 
But  it  would  not  warrant  the  conclusion  that 
there  was  no  other  nnder-garment  known  or  worn 
at  this  time.  The  x""*^'  ™*y  also  be  inferred  from 
Ac  12*,  where  the  girdle  is  evidently  implied  (see 
Girdle).  Sackcloth  is  mentioned  only  in  the 
imagery  of  Rev.  (6*- 11').     See  Coat. 

2.  Outer  co¥epuig  (of  coverings)  .—(/uiruM'  (t/idria, 
pi.),  while  no  doubt  genericalJy  employed,  is  also 
the  specific  word  for  the  outer  garment,  equivalent 
to  Heb.  ^^^7  and  Latin  pallium  (see  Mt  5*, 
•cloke').  (TToXiJ,  'robe,'  appears  only  in  Rev. 
(sing,  and  pi.),  and  the  compound  KaraffroX^  iji  1 
Ti  2*.  ro&^prj  (accus.  of  -rod^prfi),  in  Rev  1",  a 
garment  reaching  to  the  feet,  appears  to  combine 
the  notions  of  dignity  and  priestly  sanctity.  The 
outer  garment  (mostly  in  pC)  figures  in  the  Acts  in 
connexion  with  certain  activities,  viz.  the  stoning 
of  Stephen  (7*) ;  preparation  for  going  forth  (12*) ; 
rending,  as  a  token  of  grief  (14") ;  rending,  as  an 
act  of  violence  (16-) ;  shaking  out,  to  indicate 
being  done  with  (18*);  throwing  off,  as  a  sign  of 
rage  (22**).  For  outer  coverings  see  further  Cloke, 
Maxtle. 

3.  Head-dress. — No  distinctive  head-covering  for 
men  is  mentioned,  but  in  view  of  the  treatment  of 
the  head  by  shearing  and  shaving  some  protec- 
tion must  have  been  worn  (Ac  18'^  21-^),  and  may 
be  deduced  from  1  Co  11^  The  difficult  paragraph 
(w.*"**)  need  be  regarded  here  only  in  so  far  as  it 
evidences  a  practice  of  veiling  of  women  (not  in- 
deed of  the  face),  indoors  and  out-of-doors,  as  a 
sign  of  authority  (RV),  which  authority  is  either 
another's,  and  this  is  the  usual  interpretation,  or 
hCT  own  (see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Luke  the  Physician, 
London,  1908,  p.  175).  St.  Paul  makes  use  of  the 
faoe-veil  (cf.  Ex  34***)  for  spiritual  purposes  in  2 
Co  3^"".  The  crown  (ffr^^^os),  frequently  men- 
tioned in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  and  in  Kev.,  is  either 
part  of  gala-attire  (cf.  <rrift.fia.Ta,  Ac  14''),  or  dis- 
tinctive of  saints  and  aUegori(^  figures  seen  in 
vision.  Such  word-pictures  may,  however,  have 
had  a  basis  of  fact  in  the  fi^llets,  chaplets,  and 
other  head-gear  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans.  For 
the  influence  of  Asia  Minor  on  the  dress  of  Rev. 
(e.g.  7**-)  see  A.  Deissmann,  Bibelstudien,  Marburg, 
1895,  p.  285  ff.  (Eng.  tr.,  Bible  Studies,  Edinburgh, 
1901,  pp.  368-370). 

4.  Footwear.— See  art.  Shoe,  Sandal. 

5.  Handkerchief,  Apron. — See  separate  articles 
under  these  titles. 

6.  Articles  of  military  vear  are  treated  under 
Armouk. 

7.  Clothes  relating  to  marriage  and  buriaL — 
Rev  21'  contains  the  only  mention  of  the  '  bride 
adorned,'  and  detaUs  are  equally  lacking  as  to 
burial  customs.     Ac  5*,  referring  to  Ananias  {(rw4- 


222 


CLOUD 


CNIDUS 


areikav  airr6v,  '  they  wrapped  him  round '),  does  not 
convey  much. 

8.  Ornaments. — The  single  reference  to  'bag- 
gage' (Ac  2P'*)  is  significant  of  the  absence  of 
superfluous  articles  of  wear  in  the  equipment  of 
St.  Paul  and  his  companions  in  travel.  But  many 
of  those  who  remained  at  home  were  not  so  in- 
diHerent  to  luxury.  To  the  indications  already 
given  may  be  added  the  mention  of  a  mirror  (1  Co 
13'-,  2  Co  3'*,  Ja  1-^),  in  actual  practice  doubtless 
as  much  for  ornament  as  for  use.  Plaiting  the 
hair  (1  Ti  2^  1  P  3')  is  open  to  censure,  and 
anointing  likewise  seems  to  have  been  carried  to 
excess  in  these  times  (ointment.  Rev  18'^).  The 
XpvffoSaKTiiXios  of  Ja  2^^  paves  the  way  for  the  wider 
domain  of  female  ornamentation,  as  given  in  the 
^old,  pearls,  costly  raiment  of  1  Ti  2^  and  the 
jewels  of  gold  and  putting  on  of  apparel  of  1  P  3^ 
This  culminates  in  the  royal  apparel  of  Ac  12^' 
(cf.  Jos.  Ant.  XIX.  viii.  2),  and  the  great  pomp  of 
Agrippa  and  Bernice  (Ac  25^).  The  city-life  of 
the  age  certainly  aliorded  scope  for  the  practice  of 
the  luxurious  and  extravagant  in  dress,  as  can  be 
gathered  from  the  indictment  of  Rev  18  (cf.  17^*  *), 
in  which  is  to  be  found  a  storehouse  of  materials 
falling  under  this  head.  The  purple  (cf.  Ac  16^*) 
and  scarlet,  the  line  linen  and  silk  (or  rather,  mix- 
ture containing  silk),  are  the  last  word  in  luxury 
of  materials,  and  to  them  must  be  added  em- 
broidery (Rev  19'"  [?])  and  inworking  of  gold  and 
silver,  precious  stones  and  pearls.  The  \lvov  or 
\ldov  of  Rev  15",  and  the  line  linen,  bright  and 
pure  (19^),  white  and  pure  (19'^),  etc.,  have  tran- 
scendent value. 

9.  Washing  of  clothes.— (oi)/c)  ^/idXvvav  (Rev  3*), 
ftrXwoj'  (T^* ;  cf.  22"),  i\eiKavav  (7''*),  although  used 
allegorically,  are  indicative  of  processes  connected 
with  the  fulling  and  washing  of  clothes.  The 
kindred  process  of  dyeing  xmderlies  the  imagery 
of  19'^  (if  ^€^a/j,fj.^voi>  be  read).  See  also  '  purple 
and  scarlet '  above,  §  8. 

Literature.— Art.  'Dress 'in  II DB  (G.  M.  Mackie),  SDB 
(A.  R.  S.  Kennedy),  EBi  (I.  Abrahams  and  S.  A.  Cook), 
DCGCE.  W.  G.  Masterman);art.  'Costunie,'J£(W.  Nowack); 
8ee  further  I.  Benzinger,  Ueb.  Archnologie  2,  Tubingen,  1907, 
pp.  73-87,  and  especially  S.  Krauss,  Talmud.  Archdologie,  vol. 
1.  [Leipzig,  1910]  pp.  127-207  (preceded  by  a  very  important 
list  of  dictionary  articles  and  books);  G.  M.  Mackie,  Bible 
ilannem  and  Customs,  1898.  \V.   CeUICKSHANK. 

CLO  U  D  ( ve<t>i\ri,  vi^os).  — Ruskin  says  that  we  never 
make  the  clouds  a  subject  of  thought,  otherwise 
we  should  witness  '  scene  after  scene,  picture  after 
picture,  glory  after  glory '  {Frondes  Agrestes,  1875, 
p.  36  f.).  The  Apostolic  Church  was  not  blind  to 
the  beauty  of  the  '  brave,  o'erhanging  firmament,' 
which  was  far  from  seeming  to  her  a  mere  *  con- 
gregation of  vapours.'  But  in  her  the  aesthetic 
sense  was  subordinated  to  the  religious.  Her 
thoughts  were  to  a  large  extent  shaped  by  those  of 
the  ^reat  Hebrew  writers,  who  conceived  of  God  as 
making  the  cloud  His  chariot  (Ps  104*),  spreading 
it  for  a  covering  (105^  19^),  descending  in  it  (Ex  34'), 
speaking  out  of  it  (Nu  ll^^,  Dt  5--),  leading  His 
people  in  it  (Ex  13'^>,  Ps  78").  She  brooded  over 
Daniel's  vision  of  the  Son  of  Man  coming  with  the 
clouds  of  heaven.  She  heard  that  when  the  three 
disciples  were  on  the  Holy  Mount  a  bright  cloud 
overshadowed  them,  that  they  feared  as  they 
entered  into  the  cloud,  and  that  a  voice  spake  out 
of  the  cloud  (Mt  17*,  Mk  9^  Lk  9«- »).  Thus  for 
the  early  Church  the  cloud  sometimes  served  a 
higher  purpose  than  that  of  watering  the  thirsty 
earth — it  was  regarded  as  the  vesture  of  Deity,  of 
angels,  or  of  saints. 

1.  When  Christ  had  spoken  His  last  words  to 
His  disciples,  *  he  was  taken  up,  and  a  cloud  re- 
ceived him  out  of  their  sight '  (Ac  1").  His  body 
■lid  not  suddenly  vanish,  as  in  other  post-Resurrec- 


tion manifestations ;  nor  was  His  Ascension  ac- 
complished in  a  blaze  of  glory.  He  was  in  human 
form  when  He  parted  from  His  Church  and  entered 
within  the  veil.  The  Church  still  thinks  of  Him, 
and  prays  to  Him,  as  He  was  when  the  cloud  en- 
veloped Him. 

2.  St.  Paul  regards  the  cloud  which  indicated 
God's  presence  among  the  Israelites  as  having  a 
sacramental  virtue  to  them  (1  Co  lO^**).  When 
they  were  under  it,  and  when  they  passed  through 
the  sea,  they  were  initiated  into  the  service  of 
Moses,  as  the  Christian  is  initiated  by  baptism 
into  the  service  of  Christ.  '  They  were  neither 
wet  with  the  cloud  nor  with  the  sea,  much  less 
were  they  immersed  in  either  .  .  .  nor  b  the  term 
baptism  found  in  the  writings  of  Moses.  But  Paul 
uses  this  term  with  great  propriety,  because  (1)  the 
cloud  and  the  sea  are  in  their  own  nature  water, 
(2)  the  cloud  and  the  sea  took  the  fathers  out  of 
sight  and  restored  them  again  to  view,  as  the  water 
does  to  those  who  are  baptized.  .  .  .The  sacra- 
ments of  the  OT  were  more  than  two,  if  we  take 
into  account  these  extraordinary  ones'  (Bengel's 
Gnomon,  in  loco). 

3.  At  one  time  St.  Paul  expected  that  he  and 
other  believers,  still  alive  at  the  Parousia,  would 
be  caught  up  in  clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air 
(1  Th  4-').  The  absence  of  the  art.  indicates  that 
these  are  no  common  clouds,  but  '  eigne  Vehikel ' 
(Schmiedel,  Hand-Kom.  in  loc).  Whether  St.  Paul 
thinks  of  Christ  descending  to  meet  the  saints  on 
their  way  to  heaven,  or  simply  of  their  ascending 
to  join  Him  in  the  air — i.e.  in  heaven — is  not  made 
quite  clear ;  but  probably  the  former  idea  is  what 
is  meant.  The  essential  fact  is  contained  in  the 
words  which  follow :  '  So  shall  we  ever  be  with  the 
Lord.'  At  a  later  time  St.  Paul  welcomed  the 
thought  of  joining  Christ  in  another  waj- — '  janua 
mortis,  janua  vita3 '  (1  Co  15",  2  Co  b\  Ph  l^i-^). 

4.  In  the  Apocalypse  a  gigantic  angel  comes 
down  out  of  heaven,  arrayed  with  a  cloud  (Rev  10'). 
Christ  Himself  comes  with  clouds  (1^),  as  in  the 
Danielle  vision.  He  is  enthroned  upon  a  white 
cloud  (14"- 1»- 18). 

In  He  12^  the  innumerable  witnesses  for  Christ 
in  past  ages  are  compared  to  a  cloud  (vi<p^%)  en- 
circling believers  who  are  now  running  their  race. 
The  example  (perhaps  not  without  the  superadded 
thought  of  the  real  presence)  of  the  multitude  who 
have  finished  the  course  and  won  the  prize  is  an 
inspiration  to  the  present-day  runner. 

In  Jude  1^  hypocrites,  uttering  swelling  words  of 
vanity,  are  likened  to  mists  and  clouds  which 
promise  abundant  showers  for  the  thirsty  earth 
but  never  give  them.  James  Strahan. 

CNIDUS  (Kj'tSoj). — Cnidus  was  a  city  of  Caria, 
at  the  S.W.  angle  of  Asia  Minor,  between  the 
islands  of  Cos  and  Rhodes.  It  lay  at  the  end  of 
a  long  peninsula — Triopium — which  juts  into  the 
^gean  Sea  and  forms  the  southern  shore  of  the 
Sinus  Ceramicus.  Strabo  (XIV.  ii.  15)  accurately 
describes  it :  '  Cnidus  has  two  harbours,  one  of 
which  is  a  close  harbour,  tit  for  receiving  triremes, 
and  a  naval  station  for  twenty  ships.  In  front  of  the 
city  is  an  island,  seven  stadia  in  circuit ;  it  rises 
high,  in  the  form  of  a  theatre,  and  is  joined  by  a 
mole  to  the  mainland,  making  Cnidus  in  a  manner 
two  cities,  for  a  great  part  of  the  inhabitants  live 
on  the  island,  which  shelters  both  the  harbours.' 
In  the  lapse  of  time  the  mole  has  become  a  sandy 
isthmus.  The  situation  of  the  city  in  the  highway 
of  the  seas  gave  it  much  commercial  importance. 
It  was  a  free  city  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Jews  were 
settled  there  in  the  Maccabajan  period  (1  Mac  15**). 

St.  Paul's  ship  of  Alexandria  sailed  from  Myra 
'  slowly '  and  '  with  difficulty,'  probably  on  account 
of  adverse  winds  rather  than  of  calms,    taking 


COALS 


COLLECTION 


223 


'many  days'  to  come.' over  against  Cnidus.'  The 
distance  between  the  two  ports  was  130  miles, 
which  with  a  fair  wind  could  have  been  run  in  one 
day.  After  passing  the  point  which  divides  the 
southern  from  the  western  coast,  the  ship  was  in  a 
worse  position  than  before,  having  no  longer  the 
advantage  of  a  weather  shore,  and  being  exposed 
to  the  full  force  of  the  X.  W.  winds — called  Etesian 
— which  prevail  in  the  /Egean  towards  the  end  of 
summer.  Instead  of  taking  a  straight  course  to 
the  north  of  Crete — the  wind  not  permitting  this 
(jxT)  irpoaewyros  iifiai  tov  iy^/xov) — she  had  to  nm 
under  the  lee  of  the  island.  Some  interpret  St. 
Luke's  words  as  meaning  that  the  crew  made  a 
vain  attempt  to  reach  Cnidus,  '  the  wind  not 
allowing '  them ;  but  there  was  apparently  no 
reason  why  they  sliould  not  have  entered  the 
southern  harbour,  which  was  well  sheltered  from 
N.W.  winds. 

LiTKRATCRB.— C.  T.  Newton  and  R.  P.  Pullan,  But.  o/Dis- 
eooeriet  at  Haiieamasstts,  Cnidus  and  Branchidce,  1863;  T. 
Lewin,  St.  Paul,  1875.  ii.  190 ;  Conybeare-Howson,  St.  Paul, 
1856,  iL   390ff. ;  W.  Smith,   Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Horn.  Geog.  i. 

[iS56]63Sff.  "James  Strahax. 

COALS  {ivOpaKcs,  prumce). — The  coal  of  the  Bible 
is  charcoal.  The  knowledge  of  the  process  of  pre- 
paring charcoal  from  timter  dates  from  a  remote 
period.  True  coal  is  not  found  in  Syria  except  in 
one  part  of  Lebanon,  where  it  was  mined  for  a 
short  time  about  1SS4  (C.  R.  Conder,  Tent  Work 
in  Pal.,  London,  1878,  ii.  326).  Pieces  of  charcoal 
in  process  of  combustion  were  called  '  coals  of  fire ' 
(dvdpaKes  Trvp6i=ai<  "hui),  and  glowing  coals  heaped 
upon  the  head  became  a  figure  for  the  burning 
sense  of  shame  which  an  enemy  feels  when  he 
receives  a  return  of  good  for  the  evU  he  has 
done  (Ro  12*  i!  Pr  25-^-  -).  Another  view  (held 
by  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Grotius,  etc. ),  that  the 
'coals  of  fire'  are  Divine  judgments  which  will 
fall  on  the  sinner's  head  if  he  hardens  his  heart 
against  persevering  love,  is  impossible.  Benevo- 
lence tainted  by  such  a  thought  is  scarcely  better 
than  malevolence.  Jerome  says  rightly  :  '  "  Car- 
bones  ignis  congregabis  super  caput  eius,"  non  in 
maledictum  et  condemnationem,  ut  plerique  ex- 
istimant,  sed  in  correctionem  et  poenitudinem ' 
{contra  Pelagianos,  i.  30;  cf.  Meyer,  Romans,  u. 
[1874]  272).  James  Stbahan. 

COAT  (x'Tiiv,  Lat.  tunica,  both  words  probably 

related  to  the  Eastern  n^  ;  Assyr.  Kitinne,  '  linen '), 
or  'tunic'  (Jn  19^  RVm).— The  word  was  used  to 
designate  the  under-garment  of  all  classes  and  both 
sexes,  over  which  the  cloak  (n^pir,  ludrtov,  pallium) 
was  worn.  On  entering  the  upper-room  in  Joppa 
where  the  bod  j-  of  Dorcas  lay,  Peter  was  sutTounded 
by  widows  sho\\-ing  the  xtT'WJ'or  Arai  ludna  which  her 
hands  had  made  (Ac  9^).  Tunics  naturally  varied 
in  material  and  shape  according  to  the  position, 
means,  and  taste  of  the  wearer.  Wool  and  flax 
were  the  native  products  of  Sjrria;  fine  linen 
(bi/ssu-s)  was  largely  imported  from  Egypt;  the 
silk  of  the  East  was  unkuoA\-n  till  the  beginning  of 
our  era,  and  its  use  was  deemed  an  evidence  of 
extreme  luxurj-  (Rev  18";  'silk'  in  Ezk  IG^o  is 
probably  a  mistake).  The  JeA\-ish  prisoners  in 
Sennacherib's  marble  reliefs,  who  are  evidently 
carved  from  life,  have  tunics  fitting  fairly  close  to 
the  body  and  reaching  nearly  to  the  ankles.  This 
was  the  garment  worn  by  free  townsmen  ;  that  of 

f>easants  and  slaves  was  no  doubt  shorter  and 
ooser.  The  coat  of  white  linen  with  long  skirts 
and  sleeves  (Gn  37^)  was  a  mark  of  honour,  wealth, 
and  leisure.  In  later  times  even  the  poorer  classes 
adopted  a  somewhat  more  elaborate  toilet.  Jose- 
phus  mentions  a  slave  in  the  time  of  Herod  the 
Great  who  was  found   to  have  an  incriminating 


I  letter  of  his  masters  concealed  in  his  inner  tunic, 
or  true  shirt  (Ant.  xvii.  v.   7).      The  x'^'w"  was 

!  made  of  two  pieces  of  cloth  sewn  together  at  the 
sides,  or  of  one  piece  which  required  a  single  seam  ; 
or  it  was  entirely  seamless  {i^f>a<(>os,  unsewed),  being 
'woven  froni  the  top  throughout'  (Jn  19^),  a  pro- 
cess for  which  a  special  loom  was  needed. 

The  x'Twi'  of  the  Greeks  was  of  two  sorts.  The 
Ionian  was  a  linen  tunic  with  sleeves,  reaching  to 
the  feet  (reptubiiz  [Od.  xix.  242]) ;  the  Dorian  was 
a  square  woollen  tunic  with  short  sleeves  or  mere 
armholes.  Among  the  Romans  a  tunic  with  long 
sleeves  was  thought  very  effeminate  ;  *  et  tunicae 
manicas  habent '  are  words  uttered  in  scorn  ( Virg. 
.^n.  ix,  616).  The  proverb  '  Tunica  proprior 
pallio  est '  was  like  the  English  '  Near  is  my  shirt, 
but  nearer  is  my  skin.'    Cf.  also  art.  Clothes. 

James  Strahan. 
COHORT.— See  Army. 

COLLECTION.— -At  a  very  early  stage  in  the 
history  of  the  Christian  Church  the  consciousness 
of  its  members  expressed  itself  in  volrmtary  efforts 
to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the  poor  and  desti- 
tute (Ac  4^  6^).  That  this  somewhat  naive  attempt 
proved  a  failure  was,  perhaps,  inevitable.  Its  ap- 
parently early  abandonment  leads  to  the  conclusion 
that  its  promoters  soon  realized  that  a  permanent 
settlement  of  social  evils  could  never  be  arrived  at 
by  practical  communism.  Indeed,  it  is  conceivable 
that,  instead  of  curing  the  ills  of  poverty,  wide- 
spread and  deep-seated  as  it  was  in  Jerusalem,  it 
aggravated  and  perpetuated  them.  As  we  shall 
see,  other  and  more  powerful  causes  were  at  work  ; 
but,  even  if  we  minimize  the  historical  value  of  the 
early  chapters  of  Acts,  enough  remains  to  prove 
that  this  earliest  and  most  self-sacrificing  attempt 
of  Christian  men  to  realize  their  obligation  to  their 
poor  brethren  contributed  to,  rather  than  allayed, 
the  evil  it  sought  to  destroy.  See  art.  Commhstitv 
OF  Goods. 

The  next  instance  of  a  systematic  collection  of 
money  for  the  purpose  of  relieving  distress  in 
Judaea  and  Jerusalem  is  found  in  the  liistory  of 
the  Church  of  Antioch  (Ac  ll^^ff-).  A  threatened 
famine  roused  the  sympathy  of  the  Antiochene 
Christians,  whose  activity  in  the  matter  reveals 
their  knowledge  that  the  conditions  of  life  amongst 
many  of  tlieir  Jewish  brethren  were  those  of  chronic 
poverty  and  distress.  The  agents  (diA  x"P<5s)  em- 
ployed on  this  occasion  for  bringing  relief  (eis  Bia- 
KOflav)  were  Barnabas  and  Saul.  It  was  probably 
the  example  thus  set  that  gave  St.  Paul  the  idea  of 
his  great  and  prolonged  ettbrt.  Other  causes  were 
doubtless  at  work  in  the  mind  of  the  Apostle.  As 
time  went  on,  and  misunderstandings  grew  up  be- 
tween Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians,  some  attempt 
to  bring  them  together  was  necessary  if  permanent 
disruption  was  to  be  avoided.  In  his  letter  to  the 
Galatian  Church  he  mentions  an  injunction  laid  on 
him  and  Barnabas  by  the  '  pillar '  apostles,  '  that 
we  should  remember  the  poor '  (Gal  2'").  It  is  also 
of  interest  to  note  that  public  subventions  from  the 
Imperial  exchequer  to  cities  or  provinces  in  distress 
formed  part  of  a  settled  policy  of  the  Emperors, 
while  private  benefactions  by  wealthy  citizens  in 
cases  of  real  or  fancied  need  were  almost  universal 
(see  S.  Dill,  Roman  Society  from  Nero  to  Marcus 
Aurelius,  1904,  bk.  ii.  ch.  ii.).  The  Jews  of  the 
Dispersion,  moreover,  recognized  their  obligation 
to  their  poor  brethren  of  Jerusalem  by  organized 
help  from  time  to  time  (cf.  Robertson-Plummer, 
1  Corinthians  [ICC,  1911]  382);  and  doubtless  as 
Christian  teaching  spread  and  was  accepted  by  the 
people,  and  converts  became  gradually  separated 
from  the  rest  of  the  community,  they  would  lose 
their  share  of  these  gifts.  Another  cause  for  a 
poverty  so  acute  and  wide-spread  may  well  have 


224 


COLLECTION 


COLLECTION 


been  the  general  belief  in  the  nearness  of  the  Pa- 
rousia  which  threatened  the  ordinary  daily  business 
of  Christian  men  (2  Tli  3'»  ;  cf.  1  Th  4"). 

In  his  references  to  tlie  carefully  planned  collec- 
tion from  the  ditterent  churches  St.  Paul  uses  seven 
different  words.  All  these  occur  in  his  letters  to 
the  Corinthians  and  Romans,  and  are  as  follows : 
\oyla.  (1  Co  16'),  xap«  {16»,  2  Co  8*),  Koivuvla  (Ko 
IS-"*,  2  Co  8*,  etc.),  a5poTi)s  (8=*),  ev\oyla.  (9»),  Xeiroup- 
yla  (9"),  SlolkovIo.  (S''  9'-  "'• ;  cf.  Ac  ll-'»).  In  the  re- 
port of  his  defence  before  Felix  two  other  words 
occur  in  the  same  connexion  (eXtrmodiivaL  and  trpoa- 
(popal  [Ac  24"]).  The  word  \oyia  occurs  nowhere 
else  in  the  NT,  and  is  of  obscure  origin.  By  some 
it  is  supposed  to  be  used  here  for  the  first  time  in 
Greek  literature,  .and  probably  to  have  been  coined 
by  St.  Paul  for  his  purpose  (T.  C.  Edwards,  Com. 
onl  Cm:"^,  1885,  p.  462).  A  variation  (\07eia),  how- 
ever, is  found  in  the  papyrus  documents  from  the 
3rd  cent,  onwards  and  in  the  compound  words  df  5po- 
\orfla,  TrapaXoyela  (A.  Dei.ssmann,  liible  Stiidies,  Eng. 
tr.,  1901, pp.  142f.,219f.).  It  is  also  found  associated 
with  tlie  Pauline  word  XeirovpyLa  (F.  G.  Kenyon, 
Greek  Papyri  in  the  British  Museum,  1893,  i.  46), 
and  is  frequently  employed  '  in  papyri,  ostraca, 
and  inscriptions  from  Egypt  and  elsewhere,'  when 
the  writer  is  speaking  of  '  religious  collections  for  a 
god,  a  temple,  etc'  (see  Deissmann,  Light  from  the 
Ancient  East,  Eng.  tr.S  1911,  p.  104  ff. ).  The  Codex 
Vaticanus  (B)  has  the  form  Xo7e^a,  but  as  this  MS 
shows  a  tendency  to  orthographical  changes  in  this 
direction  its  evidence  must  be  discounted  (see  West- 
cott,  Introd.  to  NT  in  Greek,  1882,  p.  306).  It  also 
appears  in  a  compound  form  in  Jewish  literature 
(/car  avSpoKoryetov,  2  Mac  12^^)  where  the  question  of 
the  collection  of  money-supplies  is  alluded  to. 

That  St.  Paul  attached  very  great  importance  to 
the  success  of  his  collection  for  the  poor  Christians 
of  Judaea  is  evident  from  the  care  with  which  he 
organized  the  scheme,  and  the  perseverance  he  dis- 
played in  carrying  it  out.  From  the  tone  of  his 
reference  to  this  work  which  he  began  in  Galatia 
(1  Co  16')  we  .are  able  to  infer  not  only  that  he 
exercised  his  apostolic  authority  but  that  he  gave 
detailed  directions  to  the  churches  there  in  accord- 
ance with  arrangements  (Si^ra^a)  personally  thought 
out  by  himself.  The  instructions  sent  by  letter  to 
the  Corinthians  are  no  doubt  a  brief  epitome  of 
those  delivered  to  the  Galatian  Christians  (oiJtws  Kal 
vfxels  iroiT)(Ta.re),  and  include  details  as  to  the  care- 
ful and  systematic  ear-m.arking  by  each  Christian 
believer  of  his  personal  subscription  '  on  every  first 
day  of  the  weelc'  (/card  iJ.iav  o-a^/Sdrou).  They  were 
to  appoint  and  approve  by  letters  of  credit  (cf.,  how- 
ever, Robertson-Plummer's  interpretation  of  the 
pa.ssage,  making  the  Apostle  the  writer  of  the  com- 
mendatory letters  [5t'  eiriaroKuv  tovtovs  iri/x^j/u,  ktX. 
16'])  delegates  who  should  carry  their  gift  to  Jeru- 
salem (rrjv  x'^P^"  i'M^v).  The  laborious  nature  of 
the  undertaking  may  be  realized  from  St.  Paul's 
own  references  to  the  centres  of  activity.  Galatia, 
Asia,  Achaia,  and  Macedonia  constituted  the  fields 
of  his  labours,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  his 
definite  allusion  to  the  collection  in  his  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  was  intended  as  a  hint  to  them  to  join 
with  the  other  churches  in  '  ministering  to  the 
saints'  {SiaKovwv  roils  aytois,  Ro  15^;  see  Bengel, 
Gnomon  of  NIP,  1873,  on  Ro  \5,^ ;  cf.  12'3). 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  Apostle  did 
not  regard  his  work  in  these  four  great  provinces 
as  completed  until  the  fruit  of  his  prolonged  labours 
had  been  reaped  (cf.  <r(ppayiffdnevo?,  Ro  15^).  So 
long  as  this  zealously  undertaken  {iffirovdcuxa,  Gal  2'") 
task  remained  unfinished  he  felt  himself  hindered 
from  extending  his  missionary  operations  {rovro 
oZ'v  iiriTeKiaas).  For  a  long  time  lie  was  eagerly 
determined  to  visit  Rome  (see  Ro  l'^  15^-),  tut  at 
tiie  time  of  writing  to  that  church  he  explains  that 


he  is  prevented  from  doing  so  by  an  obligation  to 
visit  Jerusalem.     On  this  journey  he  was  accom- 

fanied  by  envoys  or  messengers  (dirbcToKoL,  2  Co  8^) 
rom  the  churches  contributing  (Ac  20*),  and  so 
keen  was  his  desire  to  bring  the  undertaking  to  a 
successful  issue  that  no  consideration  of  the  dangers 
involved  could  turn  him  from  his  purpose  (see  Ac 
203.  iKf.)  The  result  of  this  visit  shows  that  the 
risks  foreseen  and  spoken  of  beforehand  (see  Ac 
2inMr.  24"*,  etc.)  were  neither  imaginary  nor  ex- 
aggerated. 

In  order  to  appreciate  rightly  the  necessity  for 
this  work  of  good-will  (evUKt^aav,  Ro  15*"-),  it  will 
be  useful  to  recall  the  wretched  condition  of  the 
poor  in  Jerusalem  at  this  time  (all  the  Jewish 
Christians  were  not  amongst  the  poor  [see  tU  toOs 
TTTwxovs  tQv  ayluv,  Ro  15'-*]).  The  plundering  and 
bloodshed  accompanying  the  successive  administra- 
tions of  the  procurators  Ventidius  Cumanus  and 
Felix  brought  about  a  state  of  anarchy,  chronic  re- 
bellion, and  famine  (Jos.  Ant.  XX.  viii.  5,  etc.,i?J^II. 
xii.  1,  II.  xiii.  2,  etc.,  Tacitus.^nn.  xii.  54 ;  cf.  Ja2*-' ; 
W.  Fairweather,  'The  Background  of  the  Gospels, 
1908,  p.  199  f.  ;  Schurer,  HJP  I.  ii.  [1890]  p.  172  f.). 
The  Zealots,  wliose  fanatical  policy  kept  the  country 
seething  with  the  wildest  revolution,  were  rei)laced 
by  the  Sicarii  or  Assassins  (cf.  Ac  21**).  Murder- 
ous bands  infested  the  provinces,  and  the  streets  of 
Jerusalem  witnessed  innumerable  deeds  of  cruelty 
and  bloodshed.  Those  suspected  of  the  least  friend- 
liness witli  the  Romans  were  unhesitatingly  robbed 
and  assassinated  ;  and  although  Felix  endeavoured 
to  stem  the  wild  religious  and  political  torrent  by 
wholesale  crucifixion,  the  disorders  increased.  The 
procurators  Festus,  Albinus,  and  Florus,  who  suc- 
ceeded Felix,  were  not  less  unfortunate  in  tlieir  ex- 
perience (Jos.  Ant.  XX.  viii.  ix.  xi.),  and  the  inter- 
necine struggles  of  the  Jewish  factions  ended  in  the 
advent  of  Titus  and  the  final  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem. Famine,  bitter  and  chronic,  was  the  in- 
evitable outcome  of  these  conditions,  and  none 
suffered  so  severely  as  the  humble  disciples  of  the 
despised  Nazarene. 

The  relief-fund,  the  earliest  attempt  to  organize 
and  perpetuate  Christian  fellowship,  was  not  only 
a  failure  in  itself,  but  must  soon  have  disappeared 
in  these  social  upheavals.  An  appeal  to  outside 
sources  became  necessary,  and  one  result  of  the 
compromise  effected  at  his  meeting  with  the 
'  pillar'  apostles  in  Jerusalem  was  the  initiation  by 
St.  Paul  of  his  scheme  of  systematic  collection  (see 
Gal  2'").  There  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt  that  the 
halting  decision  of  the  apostles  of  the  circumcision, 
while  it  left  the  cardinal  point  of  difference  much 
where  it  had  been,  quickened  St.  Paul's  anxiety 
to  adopt  a  plan  which  should  emphasize  the  spirit 
of  toleration  and  good-will  then  established  (Gal 
2**).  Having  returned  to  Antioch,  he  was  com- 
pelled to  renew  in  a  more  pronounced  form  the 
controversy  which  had  been  partially  settled  at 
the  .Jerusalem  Conference.  After  some  little  time 
ilxeTd  di  Tivas  vfi^pai,  Ac  15*)  he  proceeded  in  com- 
l)any  with  Silas  to  revisit  by  the  shortest  route — 
'  the  Cilician  Gate' — the  older  churches  of  Galatia. 
The  purpose  of  this  visit  was  not  only  to  strengthen 
and  establish  (iiriaT-ripi^uv,  Ac  15*')  spiritually  these 
communities,  but  also  to  set  on  foot  the  collection 
for  the  poor  among  the  Christians  of  Jerusalem 
(cf.  Gal  6'").  In  spite  of  the  discouraging  defec- 
tion of  the  Galatian  Christians,  the  Apostle  feels 
himself  justified  in  keeping  this  purpose  before 
them,  recalling  its  origin,  and  reminding  them  of 
its  spiritual  value  (cf.  Gal  6«"'-).  It  was  probably 
early  in  A.D.  57  that  he  visited  the  Galatian 
churches  for  this  purpose,  and  from  this  time  until 
he  presents  the  fruit  of  his  toil  during  the  feast 
of  Pentecost  in  A.D.  58  he  never  loses  sight  of  the 
importance  and  justice  of  the  collection,  not  alone 


COLLECTIOX 


COLONY 


as  it  affected  those  who  were  to  receive  it,  but 
also  as  it  attected  the  givers  (see  Ro  15^  2  Co  9* 
S**- ").  It  is  instructive,  too,  to  note  how  he 
stimulates  each  community  by  mentioning  the 
others  in  terms  of  generous  praise  (cf.  2  Co  8^"*  9'"*, 
Ro  IS**-).  It  is  a  good  example  of  the  Apostle's 
method,  and  recalls  the  accusation  of  wiliness 
(TttfoO/yyoi  56\ifi,  2  Co  12'*)  brought  against  him  by 
the  Corinthian  Christians. 

The  character  of  the  dispute  which  raged  so 
long  and  so  fiercely  between  St.  Paul  and  the 
church  in  Corinth  was  to  a  large  extent  developed 
and  moulded  by  the  niggardliness  {^iw  5i  d^iop  ^ 
Tov  Kd/ii  rofxvtffdcu  [1  Co  16*;  cf.  9'"-,  2  Co  1I«- 
12"])  and  suspicious  meanness  of  its  members. 
Their  response  to  the  appeal  of  Titus,  who  was 
the  original  deputed  organizer  of  the  Corinthian 
collection,  was  prompt  and  \*'illing  (rd  diXew) ;  and 
yet,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  they  had  so  early  (rpo- 
fvrip^aucrdf  dxi  Tipvai,  2  Co  8'*)  given  their  assent  to 
his  wishes,  they  seem  to  have  repented  soon  of 
their  promised  support  and  to  have  accused  St. 
Paul  of  having  hurried  them  deceitfully  into  an 
unwelcome  undertaking  (e7w  ov  nare^prjca,  2  Co 
12").  The  disingenuous  nature  of  their  charges 
appears  again  and  again  in  his  vigorous  self-de- 
fence (see  his  words,  ^St/oJcra/xcF,  i<f>6flpafiep,  cxXeo- 
vfKTriffaufv,  2  Co  r*).  Of  one  fact  he  constantly 
reminds  them — he  never  accepted  the  smallest  help 
towards  his  own  support  during  his  two  visits  to 
Corinth  (cf.  Ac  18»,  1  Co  9^^  «•  ^,  2  Co  1V«-) ;  and 
if,  as  seems  very  probable,  his  Second  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians  is  represented  by  the  last  four 
chapters  of  our  Canonical  Second  Epistle  (see  J. 
H.  Kennedy,  The  Second  and  Third  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians,  1900),  we  find  that  the  Apostle's 
indignation  was  so  keen  that  he  expressly  deter- 
mined, before  he  wrote  the  more  conciliatory 
Third  Epistle  (2  Co  1-9),  never  to  accept  monetary 
aid  at  their  hands  (2  Co  IP-  '-  12i-»).  It  is  satis- 
factory to  note  that  this  intense  and  proud  in- 
dependence was  met  by  a  complete  reconciliation  ; 
and  the  success  of  his  mission  was  such  that  he 
was  moved  to  exclamations  of  thankfulness  and 
praise  (2  Co  9^*).  Perhaps  an  even  more  signifi- 
cant proof  of  his  feeling  in  this  respect  is  to  be 
discovereti  in  the  tone  of  friendliness  with  which 
he  mentions  his  Corinthian  friends  in  the  docu- 
ment written  immediately  afterwards  (Ro  16'*-  ^). 
At  the  time  of  writing  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
he  was  the  guest  of  Gaius  in  Corinth,  and  the  un- 
pleasant character  of  his  relations  with  the  Cor- 
inthian Church  had  undergone  a  complete  change. 

What  measure  of  success  attended  the  Apostle's 
prolonged  and  anxious  efforts  it  is  difficult  to  esti- 
mate. If  we  are  to  judge  by  his  silence  and  the 
solemn  warning  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Galatians 
(6^),  the  scheme  would  appear  to  have  been  only 
a  partial  success  or  even  to  have  fallen  through. 
Again,  if  we  are  allowed  to  draw  an  inference 
from  the  list  of  delegates  who  accompanied  him 
(Ac  20^),  it  would  seem  that  the  amount  of  the 
Corinthian  collection  was  so  small  that  there  was 
little  or  no  need  for  a  representative.  As  early  as 
the  latter  part  of  A.D.  57  the  Macedonian  churches 
had  appointed  their  delegates  (2  Co  8^'  ;  see  HDB 
iii.  712*).  On  the  other  hand,  as  the  Apostle  in- 
tended to  spend  the  winter  months  in  Corinth,  the 
selection  would  naturally  await  his  arrival ;  and 
more  especially  would  this  delay  occur  as  the 
bitter  quarrel  had  only  just  been  amicably  settled. 
From  the  scanty  evidence  available  it  would  not 
be  safe  to  dogmatize.  It  may  be  that  his  reference 
to  the  example  of  the  Galatian  collection  (see  the 
emphatic  im««.  1  Co  16')  points  to  a  work  already 
successful.  Again,  as  the  time  of  his  journey  to 
Jerusalem  drew  near,  confidence  in  a  not  unworthy 
response  by  the  Corinthian  Church  seems  to  have 
VOL.  I. — 15 


been  restored  (see  his  Tapfyr/via,  Ka&xvcu,  2  Co  7'' ; 
repurffeOere,  8^;  wpodv/iia,  8";  rifp  oth>  lrde(|(v  t^ 
Aydxris  vfiwr,  8** ;  cf.  9**  ''•  ^ ").  It  is  not  im- 
probable that  the  triumphant  joyoosness  (^  Kapila. 
r)fiwp  re-rMrvrrcn,  2  Co  6")  of  his  late  appeal  to 
them  was  due  to  their  having  chosen  himself  as 
their  ambas-sador  or  representative  to  convey  their 
'gracious'  gift  {irepeyKtir  tt}i>  x^P**  vf^  tls  'lepov- 
aoMifi,  1  Co  16^)  to  its  destination.  His  satisfac- 
tion that  all  discontent  and  suspicion  were  at  an 
end  is  expressed  by  his  sending  before  him  to  Cor- 
inth along  with  Titus  two  well-known  and  tried 
brethren  (o5  6  firavos  ip  n^  eiar/^ekup,  8r  eSotu/id- 
ffufiev  ir  xoXXoIs,  2  Co  8'*-  **),  to  complete  the  collec- 
tion and  to  have  everything  in  readiness  against 
his  arrival  in  company  probably  with  some  Mace- 
donian representatives  (2  Co  9* ;  cf.  Ac  20*).  It  is 
pleasant  to  learn  that  the  unsavoury  bickerings 
in  Corinth  were  forgotten  when,  during  that 
winter's  sojourn  there,  St.  Paul  penned  his 
stately  and  calm  Epistle  to  Rome.  In  that  docu- 
ment he  refers  only  to  the  good-will  and  the 
pleasure  with  which  the  Corinthians  adopted  and 
carried  out  the  purpose  of  his  pacificatory  labours 
{t^p  Kopvov  TovTov,  Ro  15").  Thc  depth  of  the 
Apostle's  sympathy  for  the  sufferings  of  his  feUow- 
countrymen  may  be  gauged  by  the  reasons  on 
which  he  bases  his  claims  on  their  behalf.  The 
spiritual  debt  which  the  (Jentiles  owed  to  the  Jews 
{6<p€i\trau  elffip  airruip,  Ro  15^ ;  cf.  Gal  6^  1  Co  9*') 
demanded  an  answering  ser\-ice  (\eiTovpyijaai)  in 
ministering  to  their  temporal  needs  (see  the  con- 
trast involved  in  the  words  rpevfiarucoU  .  .  . 
ffapKiKois,  Ro  15").  Another  reason  which  he 
adduces  arises  out  of  the  duty  which  wealth  uni- 
versally owes  to  poverty  (mark  again  the  contrast, 
replffev/ia  .  .  .  vareprifia,  2  Co  8'*),  in  order  that,  as 
equal  opportunities  in  things  spiritual  is  the  norm 
of  Christian  life,  there  may  also  be  equality  (8x&« 
yepjp-ai  iadnii,  2  Co  8")  in  the  satisfaction  of  worldly 
necessities.  The  repeated  use  of  the  word  Koipuvia 
in  this  connexion  by  St.  Paul  justifies  us  in  assum- 
ing that  he  deliberately  set  himself  the  task  of 
conciliating  the  jealousy  of  the  Jewish  Christians 
by  establishing  a  bond  of  fellowship  and  com- 
munion between  them  and  the  Gentile  converts 
(2  Co  8*  9" ;  cf.  Ro  12"). 

All  this  is  the  more  remarkable  as  at  this  period 
the  sinister  machinations  of  the  Jews  in  both  Cor- 
inth and  Jerusalem  were  active  and  unremitting 
(Ac  20* ;  cf.  Ro  15*').  Instead  of  sailing  direct, 
he  made  the  return  journey  through  Macedonia, 
where  he  celebrated  the  Passover  (Ac  20®),  and 
only  arrived  in  Jerusalem  in  time  for  the  feast  of 
Pent«cost,  when  he  finally  discharged  the  task  he 
had  set  himself  to  carry  out  (cf.  Ac  24"). 

LrrE&ATTRK. — Id  addition  to  the  works  mentioned  throoglKmt 
the  art. ,  see  Conybeare-Howson.  The  Life  and  Ejristie*  qf  SL 
Paul,  new  ed.,  1886;  G.  G.  Findlay,  art.  'Paul  the  Apostle' 
in  HDB  iiL  686ff. ;  A.  Hamack,  ilUtion  and  Stpatuum  of 
ChristianUp,  Zag.  tt.',  1906 ;  A.  Hansrath,  A  HitL  of  ST 
Time»:  The  Time  oj  iht  ApokU*,  Enz.  tr.,  1885,  vols.  iiL  and 
iv. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  5t.  Paul  Uu  TraveOer  and  the  Roman 
Citizen,  1895,  also  art.  'Ckwinth'  in  HDB  i.  479  ff. ;  F.  Ken- 
dall, '13ie  Paoline  Ck>Uection  for  the  Saints'  iu  Expositor,  4tb 
8er.  viiL  [1893]  321  ff. ;  J.  Armitag^e  Robinson,  art.  '  Com- 
munion ■  in  HDB  L  460ff.  ;  Sanday-Headlam,  Ranuaufi  {ICC, 
1902) ;  C.  V.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  &ig.  tr.,  L»  [189T1,  iL 

[1895].  J.  R,  Wnxis. 

COLONY.— The  careful  reader  of  Ac  16",  the 
only  place  in  the  NT  where  the  term  '  colony ' 
(KoXb»'(a,  a  mere  transliteration  of  the  Latin 
original)  occurs,  sees  at  once  that  a  Roman  colony 
must  have  been  very  different  from  what  we  under- 
stand by  the  word  '  colony.'  Colonia  (from  eolonus, 
'  settler,'  '  htisbandman,'  from  colere,  '  to  culti- 
vate') was  a  word  applied  by  the  Romans  to  a  body 
(usually  300)  of  their  citizen-soldiers  (in  earlier 
days  the  two  terms  were  convertible),  transferred 


226 


COLOSSI 


COLOSSI 


from  the  city  of  Home  itself  to  some  outlying  part 
of  Italy  or  (later)  to  some  other  land.  Tnese  men 
remained  Roman  citizens  after  transference,  and 
were  collectively,  in  fact,  a  portion  of  Rome  itself 
planted  amidst  a  community  not  itself  possessed 
of  Roman  citizenship.  The  object  of  the  earliest 
colonies  was  the  holding  in  subjection  to  Rome  of 
the  particular  country  in  which  they  were  planted. 
It  was  not  usually  a  fresh  city  that  was  thus 
founded.  The  rule  was  that  a  community  was 
already  resident  there,  and  the  body  of  Roman 
soldiers  Avas  stationed  there,  thus  making  the 
place  into  a  garrison  city.  The  colonice  were  con- 
nected by  military  roads,  beginning  at  Rome,  and 
troops  could  be  marchetl  along  those  roads  to  relieve 
the  colonice  in  the  shortest  possible  time,  supposing 
a  rising  {tumultus)  should  occur,  too  powerful  to  be 
quelled  by  the  local  garrison.  (A  good  example  is 
tlie  case  of  the  Lombardy  Plain  and  the  cam- 
paigns of  Marius.)  A  Roman  colony,  then,  means 
a  garrison  city,  and  implies  the  presence  of  Roman 
soldier-citizens. 

This  was  the  Roman  colonia  in  origin  and  pur- 
[>ose.  We  find,  however,  that,  after  danger  from 
the  enemy  had  ceased,  colonice  continued  to  be 
planted  during  the  Empire  in  peaceful  districts. 
This  new  style  of  colonia  continued  to  mean  a  body 
of  Roman  citizens,  but  the  military  aspect  was 
lost  sight  of.  It  was  an  honour  for  a  provincial 
city  to  be  made  into  a  colonia,  because  this  was  a 
proof  that  it  was  of  special  importance,  specially 
dear  to  the  Emperor,  and  worthy  to  be  the  residence 
of  Roman  citizens,  who  were  the  aristocracy  of 
the  provincial  towns  in  which  they  lived.*  (It  was 
not  till  A.D.  212,  the  time  of  Caracalla,  that  all 
the  subjects  of  the  Roman  Empire  received  the 
Roman  citizenship.) 

A  number  of  towns  mentioned  in  the  NT  were 
colonice  at  the  time  the  events  narrated  there  took 
place:  Corinth  (since  44-43  B.C.),  Puteoli  (since 
194  B.C.),  Philippi  (42  B.C.),  Pisidian  Antioch 
(before  27  B.C.),  Syracuse  (21  B.C.),  Troas  (between 
27  and  12  B.C.),  Lystra  (after  12  B.c.),t  Ptolemais 
(before  A.D.  47).  All  these  places  are  mentioned 
by  the  writer  of  Acts,  and  yet  to  one  only  does  he 
attach  the  epithet  '  colony,'  namely  Philippi.  The 
whole  manner  in  which  he  refers  to  tnis  place 
shows  personal  pride  in  it,  and  it  is  hard  to  refrain 
from  believing  that  he  had  a  si)ecial  connexion 
with  it. 

The  comparatively  large  proportion  of  places 
holding  the  dignity  of  colony,  which  were  visited 
by  St.  Paul,  illustrates  very  forcibly  the  plan  of 
his  evangelization.  He  aimed  at  planting  the 
gospel  in  the  leading  centres,  knowing  that  it 
would  spread  best  from  these. 

Literature. — Kornemann,  art.  '  Colonise '  in  Pauly-Wissowa. 
(Korneraann's  statement  that  there  is  no  up-to-date  comprehen- 
sive work  on  colonice  outside  Italy  appears  to  be  still  true.) 
On  Philippi  as  colonia  see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the 
Traveller,  London,  1895,  p.  206  ff. ;  Iconium  not  a  colonia  till 
Hadrian,  see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Historical  Commentary  on  St. 
Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Galatiana,  do.  1S09,  pp.  123,  218  f.,  and 
later  works.  A.   SOUTER. 

COLOSSI  {KoKoatral  in  the  opening  of  the  Epistle, 
P  ;  in  the  title,  whicii  is  not  original,  there  is  about 
equal  authority  for  KoXoo-ffaeis  and  KoXcuro-aets ;  in  the 
subscription  the  authority  for  KoXao-o-aets  predomin- 
ates).— The  name  was  given  to  an  ancient  Phrygian 
<;ity  on  the  S.  bank  of  the  Lycus  (Churuk  Su),  an 
atHuent  of  the  Mzeander.  It  was  situated  at  the 
lower  end  of  a  narrow  glen  about  10  miles  long. 
Herodotus  says  that  at  Colossse  '  the  river  Lycus, 
falling  into  a  chasm  of  the  earth,  disappears  ;  then, 
reappearing  at  a  distance  of  about  Eve  stadia,  it 

•  The  British  colonice  were  Colchester,  Oloucester,  York,  and 
Lincoln, 
t  Not  Iconium  till  the  time  of  Hadrian. 


discharges  itself  into  the  Maeander'  (vii,  30).  No 
such  chasm,  however,  exists  at  Colossae,  and  the 
historian  has  apparently  misrepcrted  what  he  heard 
of  the  underground  pa.s.sage  of  the  river  at  its  source, 
as  accurately  described  by  Strabo  (XIL  viii.  16). 

Colossa3  was  one  of  three  sister  cities  which  re- 
ceived the  gospel  about  the  same  time  (Col  4"), 
Laodicea  lying  about  10  miles  farther  down  the 
Lycus  valley,  and  facing  Hierapolis,  which  was 
picturesquely  seated  on  a  plateau  6  miles  to  the 
north.  Behind  Colossteand  Laodicea  rose  the  mighty 
snow-capped  range  of  C^admus  (Baba  Dagh,  '  Father 
of  mountains '),  over  8000  ft.  above  sea-level.  Com- 
manding the  approaches  to  a  pass  in  this  range, 
and  traversed  by  the  great  trade-route  between 
Ephesus  and  the  Euphrates,  Colossa;  was  at  one 
time  a  place  of  much  importance.  Hero<lotu8  (op. 
ciY.)  calls  it '  a  great  city  of  Phrygia,'  and  Xenoplion 
describes  it  as  ir6\iv  olKov/x^vrjv  tiiSalfiova  Kal  ficydXrjv 
(Anab.  I.  ii.  6).  But  as  Laodicea  and  Hierapolis 
grew  in  importance,  Colossae  waned,  and  in  the 
beginning  of  the  first  century  Strabo  reckons  it  as 
no  more  than  a  iroXuT/jLa  (xii.  viii.  13).  Pliny,  in- 
deed, names  it  among  the  oppida  celeberriiiia  of 
Phrygia  (HN  v.  41),  but  he  is  merely  alluding  to 
its  illustrious  past.  It  was  visited,  however,  by 
streams  of  travellers  passing  east  and  west,  who 
made  it  conversant  with  the  freshest  thought 
of  the  time.  Its  permanent  population  consisted 
mostly  of  Phrygian  natives  and  Greek  colonists. 
Jews  had  also  been  attracted  to  the  busy  trade- 
centres  of  the  Lycus  valley,  a  fact  which  accounts 
for  the  Jewish  complexion  of  some  of  the  errors  re- 
futed in  the  Colossian  Epistle.  Antiochus  the  Great 
(223-187  B.  c. )  transplanted  2000  Jewish  families  from 
Babylonia  and  Mesopotamia  to  Lydia  and  Phrygia 
(Jos.  Ant.  XII.  iii.  4).  The  freedom  and  prosperity 
which  they  enjoyed  probably  induced  many  others 
to  follow  them,  and  there  is  a  bitter  saying  in  the 
Babylonian  Talmud  that  the  wine  and  baths  of 
Phrygia  separated  the  ten  tribes  from  their  brethren 
(Shab.  147  ,  quoted  by  A.  Neubauer,  Giogr.  du 
Talmud,  Paris,  1868,  p.  315).  Cicero  [pro  Flacc.  28) 
speaks  of  the  rnultitudo  JudcBorum  who  inhabited 
the  district  in  his  time. 

The  Church  of  Colossse  was  not  directly  founded 
by  St.  Paul.     There  is  no  indication  that  he  ever 

f  reached  in  any  of  the  cities  of  the  Lycus  valley, 
n  his  second  journey  he  was  debarred  from  speak- 
ing  in  Asia  (Ac  16®),  the  province  to  which  Colossa; 
politically  belonged,  and  in  his  third  tour  '  he  went 
through  the  Galatic  region  and  Phrygia  [or  Galatic 
and  Phrygian  region]  in  order,  conhrming  the  dis- 
ciples,' and  'having  passed  through  the  upper 
country  {to,  dvonepiKo.  /Ji^pri)  he  came  to  Ephesus' 
(Ac  18^  19^).  It  is  not  impossible  that — as  Renan 
avLggests  {Saint  Paul,  Paris,  1869,  pp.  331  f.,  356  f.) — 
he  followed  the  usual  route  of  commerce  down  the 
Lycus  valley,  going  straight  to  his  destination 
without  pausing  to  do  any  work  by  the  way.  But 
it  is  more  in  harmony  with  St.  Luke's  carefully 
chosen  words,  as  well  as  with  the  language  of  Col., 
to  suppose  that  he  took  the  shorter  hill-road  by 
Seiblia  and  the  Cayster  valley,  a  road  practicable 
for  foot  passen<;ers  but  not  for  wheeled  traffic  (W. 
M.  Ramsay,  T/ie  Church  in  the  Rom.  Emp.  p.  94). 
During  his  three  years'  residence  in  Ephesus,  '  all 
they  that  dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  M'ord  of  the  Lord, 
both  Jews  and  Greeks '  (Ac  19'" ;  cf.  19^),  and  it  was 
probably  at  this  time  that  the  churches  of  the 
Lycus  were  founded.  The  truth  proclaimed  in  the 
virtual  capital  of  the  province — the  primacy  of 
Sardis  was  now  only  nominal — was  soon  carried  to 
the  remotest  towns  and  villages.  Epaphras  and 
Philemon,  citizens  of  Colossal,  were  probably  con- 
verted in  Ephesus,  and  the  former  was  speedily 
sent,  as  St.  Paul's  delegate  or  representative  (\nrip 
VfiQy,  instead  of  vfiuv,  is  the  true  reading  in  Col  V), 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE     227 


to  evanjjelize  his  native  valley.  Five  or  six  years 
afterwards,  St.  Paul,  a  prisoner  in  Rome,  wrote  to 
the  Col(jssian  Christians,  of  whose  faith  and  love 
he  had  heard  (Col  !*•  *)  from  Epaphras  and  perhaps 
from  Onesimus,  but  who  had  never  seen  his  face 
{2*).  He  felt  as  great  a  solicitude  for  them  as 
if  they  had  been  his  o\vn  spiritual  children.  In- 
directly they  were  indebted  to  him  for  their  know- 
ledge of  the  gospel  (cf.  following  article). 

One  of  the  non-Christian  beliefs  and  practices 
which  quickly  threatened  to  submerge  the  Colossian 
Church  was  the  cult  of  angels,  or  elemental  spirits, 
who  were  supposed  to  intervene  between  a  pure, 
absolute,  unapproachable  Gk)d  and  a  world  of  evil. 
This  idea  proved  almost  ineradicable.  One  of  the 
canons  (the  35th)  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (held 
probably  about  A.D.  363)  ran  thus  :  '  It  is  not  right 
for  Christians  to  abandon  the  Church  of  Gkni  and  go 
aAvay  and  invoke  angels  [iyy^Xovs  dvofid^ear).  .  .  . 
If,  therefore,  any  one  is  found  devoting  himself  to 
this  secret  idolatry,  let  him  be  anathema.'  About 
a  century  later,  Theodoret,  commenting  on  Col  2'^, 
says :  '  This  disease  (toOto  rb  rddoi)  remained  long 
in  Phrygia  and  Pisidia  .  .  .  and  even  to  the  present 
time  oratories  {evtrrfifHa)  of  the  holy  Michael  may  be 
seen  among  them  and  their  neighbours.'  The  By- 
zantine historian  Nicetas  Choniates — Chonae,  on  a 
spur  of  Cadmus,  took  the  place  of  decaying  Colossae 
— mentions  tov  apxayyeKiKoi'  vaov  as  standing,  fieyedei 
fi^ioTov  Kal  KdWfi  KaWioTOP,  in  or  near  the  ancient 
city ;  and  the  fantastic  legend  of  '  the  Miracle  of 
Chonae'  (Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Rom.  Emp,  p. 
465  f.)  reflects  a  popular  l>elief  in  the  mediation  of 
Michael  to  save  the  inhabitants  from  an  inundation. 

LiTKRATURB. — W.  M.  Ramsay,  The,  Cities  and  Bishopries  o/ 
Phryiia,  London,  1895-97,  voL  L,  The  Church  in  the  Roman 
Empire,  do.  1S93,  ch.  six.  JaMES  StRAHAX. 

COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.— 1.  Introdac- 
tion. — St.  Paul  himself  had  never  preached  in  the 
Lycus  valley.  On  his  third  missionary  journey  he 
took  another  route  (Ac  19^,  and  that  he  did  not 
visit  that  district  during  has  two  years'  stay  at 
Ephesus  is  sufficiently  proved  by  the  allusions  in 
his  letter  to  the  Church  at  Colossae  (Col  I*-'-*  2^). 
Colossae  was  at  this  time  a  small  town  of  declining 
importance,  overshadowed  by  its  great  neighbours, 
Laodicea  and  Hierapolis,  some  10  miles  down- 
stream. In  all  three  towns  churches  had  been 
founded  by  the  labours  of  Epaphras  (1^  4^  "),  him- 
self a  native  of  Colossae  (4^),  who  had  met  St. 
Paul,  probably  at  Ephesus,  and  had  become  a  dis- 
ciple. The  date  of  the  foundation  of  these  churches 
may  be  assigned  with  some  confidence  to  about  the 
years  A.D.  55  and  56  (adopting  C.  H.  Turner's  dat- 
ing ;  cf.  art.  '  Chronology  in  HDB),  and  Epaphras 
may  well  have  been  acting  as  the  direct  agent  of 
St.  Paul  (cf .  the  better  reading  '  on  our  behalf '  in 
1^).  This  would  account  in  some  degree  for  the 
authoritative  attitude  which  St.  Paul  takes  in  his 
letter. 

Though  Colossae  itself  was  but  a  small  town,  its 
Church  may  well  have  been  the  most  important 
of  those  in  the  Lycus  valley.  It  was  evidently 
closely  connected  with  the  Church  at  Laodicea  (2^ 
4^*),  and  it  is  even  possible  that  the  work  in  the 
latter  place  was  in  charge  of  Archippus,  the  son  of 
Philemon  of  Colossae  (4",  Philem  *).  In  each 
place  the  work  seems  to  have  centred  in  the  house 
of  one  of  its  most  prominent  members ;  cf.  the 
house  of  Aquila  and  PriscUla  at  Rome.  Ro  16'  (if, 
indeed,  Ro  16  was  not  addressed  to  Ephesus),  that 
of  Philemon  (Philem-)  in  Colossae,  that  of  Nym- 
phas,  or  Nympha,  In  Laodicea  (Col  4^').  A  well- 
attested  reading  suggests  that  the  latter,  a  woman's 
name,  may  be  correct  in  spite  of  the  improbability 
of  this  Doric  form  being  used.  If  this  is  so,  Nym- 
pha, Uke  Piiscilla,  takes  her  place  with  the  women 


who  plaj'ed  an  honoured  part  in  the  life  of  the 
early  Church. 

Colossae  lay  in  Phrygian  territory,  and  its  popu- 
lation was  doubtless  largely  Phrygian,  with  a  ven- 
eer of  Greek  civilization.  i*hilemon's  wife,  Apphia 
(Philem-),  bore  a  Phrygian  name.  The  Jewish 
trader  had  doubtless  reached  Colossae,  but  there 
is  no  sign  of  any  permanent  settlement  of  Jews 
there  such  as  was  made  by  the  Seleucid  kings 
at  Laodicea  or  Tarsus.  That  the  Church  there 
was  entirely  or  at  least  predominantly  Gentile  is 
shown  clearly  enough  by  the  Epistle  (!="• "  2"  ;  cf. 
St.  Paul's  anxiety  in  4"  to  show  how  few  among 
his  helpers  are  or  Jewish  race — '  who  alone  of  the 
circumcision  are  my  fellow- workers  .  .  .').  And  the 
Jews  of  Laodicea,  together  with  any  who  may  have 
dwelt  at  Colossae,  were  doubtless,  like  most  of  the 
Jews  of  the  Diaspora,  largely  affected  both  by 
local  tendencies  of  thought  and  by  the  wider  in- 
fluences which  centred  in  Alexandria. 

The  Church  of  Colossa;  had  been  in  existence 
only  a  few  years  when  Epaphras  rejoined  St. 
Paul,  then  in  prison  for  the  faith  (1^  4i»-  ^%  He 
brought  w  ith  him  good  news  of  the  infant  Church 
(1*  2*).  But  yet  there  were  grave  reasons  for 
anxiety.  Both  at  Colossae  and  at  Laodicea  (4^*)  a 
new  and  dangerous  form  of  teaching  was  abroad. 
Who  the  teachers  were  we  do  not  know.  The 
heresy  may  even  have  been  due  to  some  one  influen- 
tial leader  (cf.  Zahn's  comment  on  2**^,  where  the 
participles  are  in  the  singular  \_Introd.  to  ST,  i. 
479]).  But  whether  the  teachers  were  one  or  more, 
it  is  at  least  clear  that  it  was  not  with  a  recurrence 
of  the  Galatian  trouble  that  St.  Paul  had  now  to 
deal.  The  stress  of  this  new  '  philosophy '  lay  not 
so  much  upon  the  Law  as  upon  theosophical  tenets 
and  ascetic  practices,  which  were  supposed  to  con- 
stitute a  higher  Christianity  (2"-  '•  *). 

For  the  present  this  teaching  had  not  made  much 
headway  in  the  Church  at  Colossae.  But  St.  Paul 
saw  the  need  of  striking  while  there  was  yet  time. 
And  he  had  other  reasons  for  sending  one  of  his 
agents  to  Asia  at  this  time.  There  was  Onesimus, 
the  converted  slave  of  Philemon,  reaidy  at  St. 
Paul's  bidding  to  return  to  his  master.  There  was 
also  the  desirability  of  sending  a  pastoral  letter 
to  the  Churches  of  Asia.  Tychicus  was  at  hand, 
ready  to  convey  both  the  circular  letter,  now 
kno^vn  as  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  and  the 
short  note  to  Philemon  about  Onesimus.  By  his 
hand,  therefore,  St.  Paul  writes  to  the  brethren  at 
Colossae. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  whether  a  fourth 
letter,  to  Laodicea,  accompanied  the  other  three, 
based  on  the  command  to  the  Colossians  that  they 
should  read  the  Epistle  '  from  Laodicea.'  The  old 
hypothesis  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  Calvin 
that  this  was  a  letter  written  from  the  Laodicean 
Church  to  St.  Paul  is  rendered  impossible  by  the 
context.  It  remains  therefore  to  decide  whether 
this  is  some  lost  letter  by  the  Apostle  or  whether 
it  can  be  identified  with  any  of  his  existing  letters. 
The  suggestions  of  John  of  Damascus,  who  iden- 
tifies it  ^vith  1  Tim. ,  and  of  Schneckenburger,  who 
identifies  it  with  Heb.,  can  safely  be  passed  over. 
In  1S44  Wieseler  suggested  that  Philemon  really 
lived  at  Laodicea,  and  that  the  lost  letter  is  our 
Epistle  to  Philemon.  This  would  certainly  make 
it  easier  to  account  for  the  apparent  connexion  of 
Aichippus  with  Laodicea,  but  otherwise  the  theorj' 
has  little  point  and  has  not  met  with  any  accept- 
ance. A  more  probable  hypothesis  is  to  oe  found 
in  the  identification  of  this  letter  with  Ephesians. 
If  this  was  a  circular  letter,  intended  for  aU  the 
Asiatic  churches,  it  would  naturally  come  to 
Colossae  as  a  letter  brought  by  Tychicus  from 
Laodicea  (see  art.  Ephesians).  If  this  identifica- 
tion IB  rejected  the  letter  to  the  Laodiceans  is  lost 


228     COLOSSI ANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


beyond  recall.  It  is  interesting  that  more  than  one 
attempt  was  made  to  supply  this  gap  in  the  Paul- 
ine Canon  during  tlie  early  days  ot  the  Church. 
In  several  MSS  the  words  '  written  from  Laodicea' 
•were  added  at  the  end  of  1  Timothy.  More 
curious  still,  an  Epistle  was  made  up  out  of  a  col- 
lection of  Pauline  phrases,  possibly  as  early  as  the 
2nd  cent,  (so  Zahn)  but  probably  later,  and  was 

fiven  the  title  ad  Laodlcenses.  Jerome  (Vir. 
llustr.  V.)  mentions  this  work,  '  legunt  quidam  et 
ad  Laodicenses,  sed  ab  omnibus  exploditur,'  and,  de- 
spite his  condemnation,  it  was  widely  read  through- 
out the  Middle  Ages.  Traces  of  this  Epistle  have 
been  found  only  in  the  West,  and  it  has  commonly 
been  regarded  as  a  Western  forgery.  Lightfoot, 
however,  argues  that  it  shows  traces  of  being  from 
a  Greek  original,  desi)ite  the  fact  that  all  known 
MSS  are  in  Latin.  The  early  date  of  the  docu- 
ment also  points  in  the  same  direction.  (This  Ep. 
ad  Laod.  is  discussed  at  length  by  Lightfoot  in  an 
appendix  to  his  Colosdans,  p.  274  tf.  ;  cf.  also  West- 
cott.  Canon  of  NT^,  1881,  Appendix  E;  A.  Souter, 
Text  and  Canon  of  NT,  1913,  p.  193.) 

a.  Contents.— St.  Paul,  associating  Timothy  with  himself  in 
his  opening  greeting:  (l'-2),  passes  on  in  his  customary  manner 
to  a  Ihaiiksgivine:  for  the  good  news  which  he  has  heard  from 
Epaphrus.  In  this  thanksgiving  he  alludes  especially  to  the 
true  gospel  which  had  heen  preached  to  his  readers  by  Epaph- 
ras,  and  reminds  them  that  it  is  this  gospel  and  no  other  that 
has  borne  fruit  in  all  the  world  (l»-8).  This  is  followed  by  a 
prayer  which  widens  out,  as  in  Eph.,  into  a  statement  of  doc- 
trine with  regard  to  the  Person  of  Christ  (19-23).  This  doctrinal 
Bection  is  expanded  with  a  special  view  to  the  heresies  which  it 
is  St.  Paul's  purpose  to  combat.  In  oi)position  to  the  '  philo- 
sophy '  which  was  being  preached,  he  prays  that  the  Colossians 
may  be  filled  with  '  all  spiritual  wisdom  and  understanding '  (19). 
In  opposition  to  the  theosophy  which  recognized  and  trembled 
before  '  the  principalities  and  the  powers,"  he  thanks  God  that 
they  have  been  delivered  from  'the  power  of  darkness'  and 
made  members  of '  the  kingdom  of  the  Son  of  His  love '  (l^^). 
In  opposition  to  the  position  accorded  to  angelic  beings,  he 
breaks  into  a  psean  in  honour  of  the  Son  (a)  as  sole  Redeemer 
(11^)  ;  (6)  as  the  visible  Representative  of  the  invisible  God  (li*) ; 
(c)  as  prior  to  and  supreme  over  all  creation,  including  these 
very  angelic  powers  ;  as  the  present  stay,  and  ultimate  consum- 
mation, of  creation  (115-17) ;  (d)  as  the  supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  in  virtue  of  His  Resurrection  (1"*)  ;  (e)  as  One  in  whom 
abide  completely  all  the  perfections  of  the  Godhead  (li9) ;  (/)  as 
One  whose  death  has  made  atonement  not  only  for  human 
sin  but  also  for  all  the  disorder  that  exists  in  heavenly  places, 
so  that  not  only  are  the  angels  unable  to  '  make  peace,'  but 
they  themselves  need  the  mediation  of  the  Son  (120-23).  gt. 
Paul  then  passes  on  to  emphasize  his  own  position  as  a  minister 
of  this,  the  one  true  gospel,  a  gospel  which  does  not  merely 
save  a  few  elect,  but  which  is  valid  for  every  man  who  wiU 
receive  it  (l2^-2a). 

Ch.  2  is  devoted  to  warnings  against  the  false  teaching  which 
had  been  reported  by  Epaphras.  It  opens  with  a  renewal  of 
the  prayer  of  !».  St.  Paul  again  reiterates  that  in  Christ  alone, 
and  not  in  any  human  plausibility,  can  the  hidden  treasures  of 
knowledge  and  wisdom  be  found  (2i-5).  He  warns  his  readers 
agaitist  esoteric  cults  which  have  dealings  with  the  angel 
world,  instead  of  with  Christ,  the  supreme  Head  of  all  (2^i"). 
He  reminds  them  that  as  Christians  they  need  no  special  and 
mysterious  ceremonies,  but  only  faith  in  Christ,  who  has  can- 
celled all  ceremonial  obligations  through  the  power  of  the 
Cross,  thereby  depriving  hostile  spiritual  powers  of  their 
weapon  against  mankind  (211-1*).  The  Colossians  are  therefore 
not  to  be  misled  into  thinking  that  there  is  some  higher  way  of 
leading  the  Christian  life,  consisting  in  special  ordinances  or  a 
higher  asceticism,  even  if  commended  by  a  show  of  esoteric 
knowledge  (216-23). 

In  ch.  3,  St.  Paul  passes,  by  way  of  contrast,  to  the  practical 
implications  of  life  in  Christ.  For  Christians  there  is  indeed  a 
true  asceticism,  but  it  consists  in  a  putting  to  death  of  the 
'  old  man,'  and  a  putting  on  of  the  '  new  man,'  not  merely  in  a 
mortifying  of  the  flesh,  for  that,  for  the  Christian,  is  already 
accomplished  in  the  renewal  of  the  spirit  'after  the  image  of 
him  that  created  him  '  (3i-ii).  The  rule  for  the  Christian  must 
therefore  be  not  the  rule  of  ascetic  ordinances  but  the  warm 
and  living  rule  of  love,  of  Christ  dwelling  in  the  heart  (312-17). 

A  short  passage  follows  in  which  brief  words  of  counsel  are 
addressed  to  wives,  husbands,  children,  fathers,  servants, 
masters  (3'**-4l),  and  one  or  two  general  e.vhorcations  lead  up  to 
the  salutations  with  which  the  letter  closes  (-JS-IS). 

3.  Date  and  place  of  composition. — It  has  been 

customary  to  regard  the  four  '  Epistles  of  the  Cap- 
tivity '  as  all  written  from  Rome  during  the  two 
years  (a.d.  59-61)  alluded  to  in  Ac  28**.  There  is 
no  good  reason  for  giving  up  this  view  in  the  case 
of  Colossians.     Phil,  at  least  must  be  from  Rome. 


If,  with  Bleek  and  Lightfoot  {Philippians*,  1878, 
p.  30),  we  place  Col.  later  than  Phil.,  on  the  ground 
of  the  closer  affinity  of  the  latter  witli  Rom.  both 
in  style  and  doctrine,  the  Roman  origin  of  Col. 
woulu  be  unquestionable.  It  is  not  possible,  how- 
ever, in  a  writer  like  St.  Paul,  to  postulate  so  orderly 
an  advance  in  these  respects.  His  doctrine  at  least 
must  have  been  thought  out  long  before  he  wrote 
Romans.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  the  allusions  in 
Ph  V-  '^-  '*•  -"■-'  2'^^  point  to  a  date  near  the  very  close 
of  the  Roman  imprisonment.  We  must  thus  date 
Col,  earlier  (Ph  l'^'""  seems  to  reflect  Col  43-  *).  But 
this  leaves  open  the  possibility  that  it  was  written 
not  from  Rome  but  during  the  two  years  spent  at 
Cajsarea.  This  view  has  been  held  by  quite  a 
number  of  scholars,  e.g.  Meyer,  Sabatier,  Weiss, 
and  Haupt.  So  also  recently  E.  L.  Hicks,  Inter- 
preter, 1910.  But  the  arguments  on  the  other  side, 
as  set  out  e.g.  by  Peake  ('Col.'  in  EG'T,  p.  491), 
seem  conclusive.  Haupt's  argument  that  a  con- 
siderable interval  of  time  must  lie  between  the 
statements  of  doctrine  found  in  Phil,  and  Col.  has 
no  weight.  Weiss  points  out  that  St.  Paul  gives 
a  ditlerent  account  of  his  plans  in  Phil.,  w  here  he  is 
hoping  to  visit  Macedonia,  from  that  in  Philem., 
where  Colossai  is  his  goal.  But  the  two  statements 
are  not  incompatible  in  letters  both  written  from 
Rome.  The  one  plan  might  easily  involve  the 
other.  And,  further,  there  are  serious  objection.'j 
to  the  Ca;sarea  hypothesis.  It  is  impossible  to 
think  that  St.  Paul  at  Cffisarea  was  aheady  plan- 
ning a  visit  to  Colossse.  It  was  upon  Rome  that 
his  eyes  were  lixed,  and  at  least  towards  the  end  of 
his  days  at  Csesarea  he  knew  that  he  would  be  sent 
thither.     But  most  decisive  of  all  is  the  little  com- 

S anion  note  to  Philemon.  It  must  have  been  at 
iome,  the  natural  refuge  of  the  runaway  slave, 
that  St.  Paul  came  across  Onesimus,  and  from 
Rome  that  he  sent  him  back  to  his  master  with 
Tychicus.  Finally,  it  would  be  most  remarkable, 
in  a  letter  written  from  Csesarea,  that  there  should 
be  no  salutation  from  Philip. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  Col.  and  Philem.  were 
probably  sent  together,  it  has  caused  comment  that 
there  is  some  variation  in  the  salutations.  Not  only 
is  the  order  of  the  names  different — a  point  of  little 
significance — but  in  Col.  Aristarchus,  in  Philem. 
Epaphras,  is  given  the  place  of  honour  as  'my 
fellow-prisoner.'  The  reason  for  this  is  obscure. 
Fritzsche's  suggestion  that  St.  Paul's  friends  took 
turns  in  sharing  his  captivity  is  only  a  suggestion. 
As  Peake  points  out,  the  divergence  is  a  proof  of 
the  authenticity  of  both  Epistles,  since  no  imitator 
would  have  made  so  unnecessary  and  self-condem- 
natory an  alteration. 

4.  External  evidence  for  authenticity.— This  is 
quite  as  strong  as  could  reasonably  be  expected. 
At  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent.  Col.  was  known  to 
Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria. 
It  is  mentioned  by  name  in  the  Muratorian  Canon. 
Its  acceptance  by  Marcion  carries  the  knowledge 
of  it  at  Rome  to  before  150.  This  renders  the 
description  by  Justin  of  Christ  as  '  first-bom  of  all 
creation '  [Dial.  84,  85,  100)  an  almost  certain  echo 
of  V^,  especially  as  the  parallel  phrase  in  Philo  is 
not  vpwT&roKos  but  irpc^dyovos.  Earlier  references 
are  all  rather  uncertain,  especially  in  Barnabas  and 
Clement  of  Rome.  It  is,  however,  probable  that 
Ignatius  quotes  Col  2"  in  Smyrn.  i.  2,  and  P"  in 
Trail.  V.  '2.  Lightfoot  also  points  out  Ignatius' 
use  of  at'ivSovkoi  as  a  term  for  deacons  ;  ex.  1"  4''. 
This  evidence  is  insufficient  in  itself  to  prova 
authenticity,  and  throws  us  back  upon  a  discussion 
of  the  many  problems  which  the  Epistle  itself 
present.-. 

5.  The  Colossian  heresy. — The  teaching  attacked 
by  St.  Paul  is  described  in  2*-  "-'",  verses  which  in 
addition  to  their  brevity  present  many  problems 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


COLOSSIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    229 


both  of  translation  and  of  text.  Theories  as  to  its 
character  have  been  varied  and  numerous.  The 
principal  facts  that  can  be  gleaned  are  as  follows : 

(1)  The  teaching  was  Christian;  cf.  2^*,  which, 
however,  suggests  that  it  did  not  give  Christ  His 
due  position. 

(2)  It  was,  at  least  in  part,  Judaistic.  This 
would  not  necessarily  be  proved  by  the  reference 
to  'the  bond  written  in  ordinances'  in  2",  though 
it  is  on  the  whole  probable  that  the  Mosaic  Law 
is  intended.  But  the  specific  allusions  in  2^*,  'in 
meat  or  in  drink  or  in  respect  of  a  feast  day,  or  a 
new  moon,  or  a  sabbath  day,'  are  ob^aously  Jewish. 
It  is  true  that  the  Law  says  nothing  about  'drink,' 
but  the  Iat«r  Rabbinism  certainly  included  such 
regulations,  as  is  shown  by  He  9^*.  And  this  very 
Babbinism  is  clearly  alluded  to  in  2*,  '  the  tradition 
of  men.'  The  references  to  circumcision  (2"  3^*) 
show  that  the  false  teachers  assigned  some  value 
to  it.  Yet  this  Judaism  cannot  have  been  very 
like  that  attacked  in  Gal.,  as  the  whole  tone  of  the 
letter  shows.  It  was  less  definite,  and  mingled 
with  other  elements  of  a  peculiar  type. 

(3)  It  claimed  to  be  a  '  philosophy  (2^),  which  St. 
Paul  calls  a  *  vain  deceit.'  It  seems  to  have  been 
regarded  as  the  revelation  of  a  secret  '  wisdom  and 
knowledge '  (2*- ').  Here,  just  as  much  as  in  1  Co 
1,  we  are  certainly  mo\Tng  in  Greek,  or  at  least 
HeUenistic,  regions  of  thought.  Philo  could  speak 
of  a  'Jewish  philosophy.'  And  the  Judaism  of 
Colossje,  like  that  of  Alexandria,  was  at  least  given 
a  Hellenic  colour.  As  Hort  has  shown  (Juda- 
istic Christianity,  p.  119 ff,),  the  term  'philosophy' 
might  easily  have  been  used  of  esoteric  lore  about 
angels,  or  even,  though  this  usage  is  a  later  one, 
of  an  ascetic  ethical  cult,  features  Avhich  both 
appear  at  Colossae. 

(4)  Some  sort  of  worship  of  angels  seems  to  have 
been  practised,  and  possibly,  if  the  reading  is 
correct,  emphasis  was  laid  upon  visions  communi- 
cated bv  them  (2^*).  St.  Paul  charges  the  teachers 
with  reliance  upon  the  spirits  that  control  the  ele- 
ments of  the  universe  rather  than  upon  Christ  (2*). 
That  this  is  the  true  meaning  of  ot-wx*"'  in  this 
passage,  as  well  as  in  Gal  4**',  is  shown  by  the 
exegesis,  which  implies  in  each  case  personal  agents. 
And  the  emphasis  laid  by  St.  Paul  upon  the 
superiority  of  Christ  to  '  thrones  or  dominions  or 
pnncipalities  or  powers'  (P*;  cf.  1"-"  2'*)  confirms 
this  view.  That  there  was  angelolatrj*  of  some 
sort  is  certain,  though  the  language  in  which  it  is 
described  cannot  be  pressed  too  closely,  since  St. 
Paul  may  be  using  the  language  of  his  own  angel- 
ology  to  "describe  the  view  of  his  opponents.  In  the 
4th  cent,  the  Council  of  Laodicea  tound  it  necessary 
to  condemn  angel- worship.  In  the  5th  cent.  Theodo- 
ret  says  that  the  archangel  Michael  was  worshipped 
in  the  district,  and  this  worship  continued  for 
several  centuries  (see  Zahn,  op.  cit.  p.  476 f. ;  cf. 
Lightfoot,  Col.  p.  68). 

(5)  Whatever  2^  precisely  means,  it  shows  that 
stress  was  laid  upon  asceticism,  for  which  special 
rules  were  given  (2^*-  ^  ^).  This  was  the  natural 
outcome  of  a  '  philosophy '  in  which  the  spirits  that 
ruled  material  things  were  the  objects  of  fear  and 
reverence.  The  angels  who  were  the  objects  of  the 
Colossian  cult  were  powers  who  if  not  propitiated 
might  be  hostile  to  man,  who  must  therefore  guard 
himself  by  mortifying  his  material  body.  This  is 
the  point  of  St.  Paul's  counter-statement  of  the 
true  Christian  asceticism  {3'*-). 

It  has  been  made  clear  by  the  work  of  recent 
scholars  that  there  is  notliing  in  all  this  which 
need  point  to  a  date  later  than  A.D.  60.  The 
Tubingen  school,  from  Baur  to  Hilgenfeld,  thought 
that  Col.  reflected  the  great  Gnostic  systems  of  the 
2nd  century.  The  powers,  etc.,  were  the  Valen- 
tinian  aeons,  forming  the  Pleroma,  to  which  they 


saw  an  allusion  in  1'*.  Asceticism,  again,  was  a 
typical  Gnostic  feature,  as  was  the  emphasis  on  a 
secret  wisdom  or  Gnosis  (cf.  2*)  confined  to  an  inner 
circle  of  initiates  or  xAeiot  (cf.  1",  where  St.  Paul 
declares  that  every  man  is  to  be  made  rAetos  by  the 
gospel).  The  Judaistic  references  were  explained 
on  this  theory  to  be  due  to  some  sort  of  Gnostic 
Ebionism,  on  the  lines  of  the  pseudo-Clementines. 
That  there  were  Gnostic  tendencies  at  Colossae  need 
not  be  denied.  The  emphasis  on  knowledge  is 
enough  to  prove  that.  But  there  is  no  hall-mark 
of  any  particular  2nd-cent.  system.  The  word 
rXi^pw/ia  in  1^  loses  most  of  its  point  if  it  is  used  in 
the  later  technical  sense  (on  the  word  see  Lightfoot, 
Col.  p.  323;  J.  A.  Eobinson,  Eph.,  1903,  p.  255; 
Peake  on  Col  1^),  It  is  far  more  probable  that 
the  later  Gnostics  derived  their  usage  from  that 
of  St.  Paul. 

More  recently  the  theory  has  been  held  in  a 
modified  form,  recognizing  a  genuine  Pauline 
Epistle,  directed  against  a  Jewish-Christian  theo- 
sophy,  but  regarding  it  as  having  been  expanded 
by  a2iid-cent.  writer  (so  Pfleiderer,  Primitive  Chris- 
tianity, Eng.  tr.,  1906-11,  who  saw  allusions  to 
Gnostic  Ebionism  though  he  did  not  attempt  to 
reconstruct  the  original  Epistle ;  Holtzmann  and 
Soltau,  who  depend,  however,  rather  on  literary 
criticism  ;  see  below).  The  argtiments  for  this  also 
fail  if  the  known  tendencies  of  the  1st  cent,  are 
sufficient  to  cover  the  facts.  And  there  is  no  hint 
in  the  Epistle  of  any  such  division  in  the  object 
of  St.  Paul's  attack. 

More  plausible  is  the  attempt  to  find  in  Col.  an 
attack  on  the  1st  cent.  Gnosticism  of  Cerinthus  (so, 
e.g.,  R.  Scott).  Here  we  find  both  the  emphasis  on 
Judaism,  though  the  Jewish  angels  have  taken  the 
position  later  occupied  by  the  Gnostic  aeons,  and 
the  reduced  Christology  in  which  the  Christ  is 
supposed  to  have  descended  upon  the  man  Jesus  at 
His  baptism.  This  has  clear  affinities  with  the 
Colossian  heresy  ;  but,  as  Lightfoot  has  shown  {Col. 
p.  108  ft ),  it  is  difficult  to  think  that  the  teaching 
at  Colossae  had  as  yet  taken  so  definite  a  form. 
St.  Paul  would  surely  have  made  a  more  definite 
and  incisive  reply.  And,  further,  the  angelic 
powers  could  still  lie  regarded  as  objects  of  worsiiip. 
They  are  not  yet  either  ignorant  of  or  hostile  to 
the  Supreme  God.  And  the  emphasis  on  the 
identity  of  Jesus  with  the  Christ  (2*),  while  it 
would  have  point  against  Cerinthus,  is  hardly  an 
attack  upon  him.  It  is  thus  more  natural  to  see 
in  this  heresy  that  tendency  of  thought  which  led 
up  to  Cerinthus  than  the  direct  outcome  of  his 
teaching. 

It  has  been  suggested,  especially  by  Lightfoot 
and  Klopper,  that  there  was  some  connexion  with 
the  Jewish  ascetic  sect  known  as  Essenes.     But 
(a)  before  A.D.  70  there  is  no  trace  of  Essenism 
except  on  the  shores  of  the  Dead  Sea.     The  some- 
what   similar    Tlierapeut*,  in    Egypt,  are    only 
known   from   Philo,   de    Vit.  contempt.,   a  much- 
disputed  treatise.     Lightfoot  tries  to  find  parallels 
in  Acts  for  the  use  of  magic  (cf.  Ac  19"  with  Jos. 
BJ II.  8.  6  ad  fin.)  and  in  the  fourth  book  of  the 
Sibylline  Oracles,  probably  written  in  Asia  c.  A.D. 
80.     Neither  parallel  amounts  to  much.     (6)  The 
Essenes  jealously  guarded  the  names  of  the  angels 
(Jos.  BJ  n.  viii.  7).     This  is  a  poor  parallel  for  the 
Colossian  cult,  which  more  probably  arose  through 
a  syncretistic  admixture  with  Phrj-gian  ideas,     (c) 
The  evidence  that  the  Essenes  forbade  flesh  and 
wine  is  disputable  (see  Zahn,  op.  cit.  p.  376),  though 
I  thev   certainly   had    extremely   rigid   ceremonial 
I  rules  as  to  food.     Of  the  specific  Essene  prohibition 
,  of  marriage  there  is  no  trace  at  Colossae.     (rf)  There 
is  no  sign  in  Col.  of  the  alleged  Essene  sun-worship, 
[  of  their  communal  life,  their  ablutions,  their  very 
1  severe  probation  and  initiation,     (c)  The  allusions 


230    COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


COLOSSIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


to  'sabbaths'  and  circumcision  in  Col.  are  merely 
Judaistic.  There  is  no  hint  of  the  very  strict  Sab- 
batarian rules  of  the  Essenes.  It  is  true  that 
Lightfoot  and  Klopper,  especially  the  latter,  argue 
merely  for  Essenistic  tenaencies  at  Colossa;.  liut 
even  iliis  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  proved.  The 
real  value  of  the  suggestion  is  that  it  shows  that 
within  Judaism  itself  it  was  possible  for  strange 
esoteric  cults  to  appear.  (For  the  Essenes  see  esp, 
Jos.  BJn.  viii.  ;  Lightfoot,  Col.  pp.  82ft:,  115ft. ; 
Zahn,  op.  cit.  p.  376  f.) 

We  are  thus  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Colossian  heresy  found  its  stimulus  in  contemporary 
Judaism,  doubtless  with  syncretistic  Phrygian 
features.  Hort  {Judaistic  Christianity,  116  ft'.)  has 
shown  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  language  which 
need  imply  any  other  source.  The  one  surprising 
point  is  the  worship  of  angels.  But  even  if  this  is 
not  derived  from  some  local  Phrj'gian  cult,  it  was 
(juite  a  natural  application  of  contemporary  Juda- 
ism. In  the  later  Jewish  view  all  God's  activity 
in  Nature  was  mediated  by  angels,  and,  though 
angel-worship  among  the  Jews  is  not  known  at  this 
date,  it  certainly  sprang  up  within  a  short  time, 
being  alluded  to  in  tne  Hvangelinm  Petri,  by  Celsus, 
and  several  times  in  the  Talmud.  No  objection  to 
the  authenticity  of  the  Epistle  need  therefore  be 
maintained  upon  tliis  ground . 

6.  The  theology  of  the  Epistle. — It  has  been  ob- 
jected to  Col.  that  it  is  un-Pauline  in  its  Christo- 
logy.  It  is  true  that  there  is  a  speculative  advance 
with  regard  to  the  Person  of  Christ.  St.  Paul  is 
now  oppo.sing  a  speculative  'philosophy,'  and,  as 
has  been  shown  in  dealing  with  the  contents  of  the 
letter,  he  is  forced  to  draw  out  the  speculative 
implications  of  his  own  position.  And  in  the 
advance  made  there  is  nothing  to  cause  surprise. 
That  Christ  is  prior  to,  and  the  principle  of,  all 
creation  (P»-")  is  the  thought  implicit  in  1  Co  8« 
and  in  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  Man  from  Heaven 
(15")  regarded  as  pre-existent.  That  Christ  is  re- 
garded also  as  the  goal  of  creation  (Col  1'^)  is  only 
in  form  an  advance  upon  1  Co  15^*,  for  it  is  only 
when  the  consummation  in  Christ  is  reached  that 
He  is  to  surrender  all  things  to  the  Father ;  and 
even  so,  in  virtue  of  His  unity  with  the  Father, 
they  remain  His  own  (cf.  Ph  2^-  '«).  In  Col. 
St.  Paul  is  especially  emphasizing  the  indwelling 
in  Christ  of  the  whole  Godhead  (1^  2%  And, 
indeed,  in  1^  the  most  natural  rendering  implies 
exactly  the  doctrine  of  1  Co  lo'-^,  Ro  ll^*.  In  any 
case,  even  if  there  is  a  real  advance  here,  it  is  one 
that  St.  Paul  might  easily  have  made,  and  which 
was  the  natural  answer  to  teachers  who  were 
assigning  cosmic  significance  to  angelic  beings. 

This  raises  the  question  of  St.  Paul's  angel- 
ologj'.  Here  again  objection  has  been  taken  to 
Colossians.  There  is  certainly  little  direct  refer- 
ence to  angels  in  the  other  Pauline  Epistles.  But 
yet  such  references  do  occur,  and,  so  far  as  they  go, 
they  tend  to  confirm  the  view  that  St.  Paul  might 
naturally  have  taken  up  the  position  adopted  here. 
Further,  the  Rabbinism  of  the  period  was  full  of 
speculations  about  the  angels,  and  there  is  no 
reason  why  St.  Paul  should  have  abandoned  such 
speculations  upon  his  conversion.  They  must  have 
been  taken  up  into  his  Christianity,  even  though, 
in  preaching  to  Gentiles,  it  was  seldom  necessary 
to  dwell  upon  them.  The  principal  features  found 
in  Col.  are  these  : 

(1)  The  universe  is  animated  by  elemental  spirits 
(2*).  This  conception  appears  also  in  Gal  4*-  *, 
and  is  in  line  with  that  of  Ps  104*,  a  passage  which 
has  been  taken  over  in  He  V,  though  with  a 
change  of  thought  characteristic  of  later  Judaism. 
Both  the  Book  of  Jubilees  and  Enoch  speak  of  the 
spirits  of  such  things  as  fire,  mist,  hail,  the  sea 
(cf.  Rev  14'8 16"). 


(2)  There  are  diflerent  ranks  of  anjjels  (1"  2'»-  " ; 
cf.  Ro  8**,  1  Co  15'-^,  where  substantially  the  same 
language  is  used).  This  conception  perhaps  starts 
from  Dt  4",  where  the  nations  are  allotted  to  '  the 
host  of  heaven.'  In  Daniel  each  nation,  including 
Israel,  has  its  angelic  'prince.'  It  was  a  natural 
development  that  led  to  the  conception  of  orders 
of  angelic  powers  in  heaven  itself  (cf.  Jin.  Ixi.  10). 
In  the  later  Rabbinism  ten  orders  were  enumerated 
(cf .  also  the  angels  of  the  churches  in  Rev. ). 

(3)  In  2^*-  "  there  is  perhaps  an  allusion  to  the 
ministry  of  angels  in  the  giving  of  the  Law.  This 
characteristic  idea  of  tlie  RaJ)bis  was  derived  from 
Dt  33=*  (LXX).  It  is  alluded  to  in  Ac  7",  He  2*, 
Jos.  Ant.  XV.  v.  3. 

(4)  The  angels,  even  the  angel  or  angels  of  the 
Law,  may  be  morally  imperfect,  and  need  recon- 
ciliation through  the  Cross  (I*'  2>*).  This  is  typi- 
cally Pauline  (cf.  Ro  8^,  1  Co  2«-8  6^  11»»  15^*,  Gal  1»). 
It  does  not  seem  to  be  a  very  early  Jewish  concep- 
tion, unless  it  appears  in  Gn  6''*.  Such  ministers 
of  evil  as  the  destroying  angel  of  Ex  12  are  non- 
moral.  But  in  the  later  writings  angels  are 
frequently  charged  with  weakness  of  difterent 
kinds  ;  cL  Ps  82'-  \  Job  4^^  IS'*.  It  was  only  at  a 
late  date  that  the  distinction  between  absolutely 
good  and  absolutely  bad  angels  arose.  It  was  not 
the  characteristic  view  of  St.  Paul's  day,  and  there 
is  no  reason  why  we  should  expect  to  find  it  in  his 
writings.  There  thus  seems  to  be  nothing  particu- 
larly un-Pauline  in  the  angelology  of  Colossians. 
(On  this  subject  see  esp.  O.  Everling,  Die  paulin- 
ische  Angelologie  und  Ddmonologie,  1888  ;  A.  S. 
Peake,  Introd.  to  '  Col.'  in  EOT;  M.  Dibelius,  Die 
Geisterwelt  im  Glauben  des  Paulus,  1909.) 

7.  Relation  to  Ephesians. — It  is  at  once  obvious 
that  there  is  a  close  literary  connexion  between 
Colossians  and  Ephesians.  The  structure  of  the 
two  Epistles  is  largely  the  same,  though  naturally 
the  special  warnings  of  Col.  find  no  parallel  in  Eph., 
and  a  second  thanksgiving  and  prayer  in  Eph  2-3^ 
3'*"^^  has  no  parallel  in  Colossians.  The  exhorta- 
tions at  the  end  show  close  agreement  in  detail. 
And,  most  significant  of  all,  there  is  a  remarkable 
series  of  verbal  parallels,  running  through  verse 
after  verse  of  the  two  Epistles.  Only  two  alterna- 
tives are  possible.  Either  both  letters  are  by  one 
writer,  or  one  has  been  deliberately  modelled  on 
the  other. 

It  has  commonly  been  asserted  that  Eph.  is  based 
on  Col.,  and  in  that  case  no  presumption  against 
Col.  arises.  Holtzmann,  however,  showed  that 
the  literary  criticism  did  not  work  out  so  simply. 
Sometimes  one  Epistle,  sometimes  the  other,  seems 
to  be  prior.  Accordingly,  he  regarded  Eph.  as 
based  upon  a  shorter  Col. ,  which  was  subsequently 
expanded  from  Eph.  in  view  of  Gnosticism.  But 
the  tests  by  which  he  proposed  to  recover  the 
original  Col.  do  not  work  out  well.  The  division 
of  the  heresy  into  two  parts  is  not  at  all  easy. 
And  the  literary  criteria  are  altogether  too  minute. 
A  similar  and  even  more  elaborate  theorj"^  has  teen 
worked  out  by  Soltau.  Von  Soden,  however,  in 
examining  Holtzmann's  view,  only  admitted  1^*"^ 
210.  iii.  J8b  jj^g  later  insertions,  and  has  subsequently 
reduced  even  this  amount,  rejecting  onlj'  the 
Christological  passage  in  ch.  1.  The  majority  of 
scholars  now  accept  the  whole  Epistle  as  Pauline. 

As  to  the  relations  with  Eph.,  it  seems  to  the 
present  writer  that  suflicient  stress  has  not  been 
laid  upon  the  curious  interweaving  of  the  phrase- 
ology of  the  two  Epistles.  Even  Holtzmann's 
hypothesis  does  not  do  justice  to  the  way  in  which 

Shrase  after  phrase  is  used  in  connexion  with 
iflerent  trains  of  thought.  The  author  of  Epii. 
did  not  com-  Col.  at  all  as  the  two  later  Synoptists 
copied  St.  Mark.  He  simply  used  its  language,  and 
to  a  most  extraordinary  extent.     He  is  writing  for 


COLOURS 


COLOURS 


231 


a  different  purpose,  and  applies  to  that  purpose 
phraseology  used  with  quite  different  implications 
in  Colossians.  ThusEph2"-"is  full  of  the  language 
of  Col  2'^-**,  and  yet  the  points  of  the  passages  are 
quite  dill'erent.  Is  it  possible  that  such  a  pheno- 
menon could  have  arisen  at  all  except  in  the  work 
of  a  single  writer  writing  a  second  letter  while  the 
language  of  tlie  lirst  was  still  fresh  in  his  mind  ? 

8.  Style  and  language. — It  has  been  objected 
that  these  are  un-Pauline,  but  this  holds  only  if 
tlie  four  great  Epistles  are  taken  as  the  final  norm 
as  to  what  St.  Paul  might  have  written.  Of  the 
46  words  not  used  elsewhere  by  St.  Paul  the 
majority  are  connected  either  with  the  heresy  or 
with  its  refutation.  Further,  11  Pauline  words 
occur  which  are  used  by  no  other  NT  writer.  It 
should  be  noted  that  St.  Paul  was  now  at  Rome, 
in  the  midst  of  new  associations,  which  would 
naturally  affect  his  vocabulary.  The  suggestion 
has  been  matle  that  Timothy,  who  is  associated 
with  St.  Paul  in  the  salutation,  may  have  had  a 
large  share  in  the  actual  composition  of  the  letter. 

This  suggestion  might  also  help  to  account  for 
the  change  in  style  from  the  earlier  Epistles.  The 
movement  of  thought  is  less  abrupt,  and  the 
sentences  are  often  longer  and  more  involved. 
Particles,  even  those  of  which  St.  Paul  is  most 
fond,  such  as  &pa,  5l6,  5i6ti,  are  replaced  to  a  great 
extent  by  participial  constructions.  This,  however, 
may  well  be  due  to  the  lack  of  urgency.  The 
danger  was  not  so  great  as  it  had  been  in  Galatia 
or  in  Corinth. 

In  the  second  chapter  the  difficulty  of  translating 
is  very  great,  and  it  is  possible  that  in  some  cases 
the  text  has  suffered  from  corruption  lying  further 
back  than  all  our  existing  MSS  ;  2^*  and  2^  are  the 
most  notable  examples  (in  2'*  C.  Taylor's  d^pa  Kevefi- 
^revuv  has  been  favoured  by  Westcott  and  Hort 
and  Zahn,  and  is  commonly  accepted).  The  trans- 
lation of  2^'  presents  almost  as  many  difficulties. 

LiTERATrRE. — EDITIONS. — Col.  has  been  edited  bv  H.  J.  Holtz- 
mann  (1S72),  A.  Klopper  (1SS2),  H.  von  Soden  (1891),  and 
Haupt  (in  Meyer's  Com. ^,  1899).  J.  B.  Lightfoot's  Co?os«ia/i« 
(1st  ed.,  1875)  is  the  standard  Eng.  work.  Of  recent  Eng.  Com- 
mentaries the  most  valuable  are  those  bv  A.  S.  Peake  (EGT, 
1903),  T.  K.  Abbott  (ICC,  1697),  and  G.  G.  Findlay  (Pulpit 
Commentary,  1886).  General.— F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Judaistie 
Chriitianit!/,  1894  ;  W.  Sanday,  art.  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  the 
Bxble-2,  1893;  T.  Zahn,  Einleitung  in  das  ST,  1897  (Eng.  tr., 
Introd.  to  ST,  1909) ;  H.  von  Soden,  artt.  in  JPTh,  1885-87  ; 
J.  MofiFatt,  LXT\  1912.  L.    W.   GkENSTED. 

COLOURS.— Among  the  writers  of  the  NT  the 
sense  of  colour  is  strongest  in  the  author  of  the 
Revelation,  who  partly  reproduces  the  colour- 
symbolism  of  earlier  authors,  priestly,  prophetic, 
and  apocalyptic,  and  partly  is  original.  Colour 
distinctions  were  perhaps  not  so  tine  in  ancient  as 
in  modem  times  ;  at  any  rate  the  colour  vocabu- 
lary was  more  limited.  The  associations  of  colour 
vaiy  greatly  in  different  ages  and  peoples. 

1.  White  (Xeu/cds,  connected  with  lux ;  Xa/iirpo's, 
•bright'  in  RV,  fr.  \d/tirw  'to  shine'),  the  colour 
of  light,  is  the  symbol  of  purity,  innocence,  holi- 
ness ;  it  is  the  primary  liturgical  colour.  The 
head  and  hair  of  the  Son  of  Man  are  white  as  wool 
or  snow  (Rev  1'*).  Angels  are  arrayed  in  white 
(15«  ;  cf.  Ac  V%  The  elders  (Rev  4*);^  the  martyrs 
(6'M,  the  great  multitude  (7*)  are  clothed  in  white 
raiment :  but  their  robes  were  not  always  white ; 
they  have  washed  them  and  made  them  white 
[iXfVKavav)  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  (7'^).  Such 
raiment  one  of  the  Seven  Churches  is  counselled  to 
buy  (3^*).  A  hypocrite  has  not  the  white  robe ; 
he  is  only  like  a  whitewashed  wall  (roTxe  kskovm- 
fieve,  Ac  23^ ;  cf.  Mt  23"-^).  White  is  the  colour  of 
victory  ;  the  first  rider  on  a  white  horse  (Rev  6^) 
represents  a  conquering  secular  power,  probably 
Parthia ;  the  second  is  the  Faithful  and  True 
(19'^),  whose  triumphant  followers  are  clad  in  white 


uniform  (19^*).  The  Son  of  Man  is  seen  enthroned 
on  a  white  cloud  (14**);  and  the  great  throne  of 
Got! — unlike  the  sapphire  throne  in  Ezk  1* — is 
white. 

2.  Red,  the  first  of  the  three  primary  colours  of 
science,  is  in  Greek  irvppoi,  from  irOp,  '  fire.'  '  Light 
and  tire,  when  regarded  ethically  in  Holy  Scripture, 
are  contrasts  :  light,  the  image  of  beneticent  love  ; 
and  fire,  of  destroying  anger '  (Delitzsch,  Iris,  Eng. 
tr.,  1889,  p.  73).  The  swordsman  upon  the  red 
horse  (Rev  6*)  represents  war  and  bloodshed ;  the 
great  red  dragon  (12*)  the  same,  probably  with  the 
added  idea  of  fire. 

3.  Black  (mAos)  indicates  the  absence  of  light : 
a  white  object  is  one  which  retiects  nearly  all  the 
light  of  all  colours  ;  a  black  object  absorbs  nearly 
all.  Ethically  considered,  the  withdrawal  of  light 
is  weird  and  appalling.  The  revelation  at  Sinai 
was  made  in  '  blackness  {yv6<pos,  gloom)  and  mist 
and  tempest'  (He  12'*).  Black  is  the  colour  of 
famine  ;  the  third  of  the  four  riders  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse, who  brings  dearth,  goes  forth  on  a  black 
horse  (Rev  6').  A  great  earthquake  makes  the 
sun  black  as  sackcloth  of  hair  (6^* ;  cf.  Jl  2^  *' ;  Ass. 
Mos.  X.  4f.  ;  Virg.  Georg.  i.  463  f.).  For  men 
whose  lives  belie  their  profession  there  is  reserved 
the  blackness  of  darkness  (6  f<5^y  tov  aicorous,  2  P 
2"  II  Jude^*  ;  cf.  Homer,  II.  xxi.  56). 

4.  Purple  {■rop(f>vpa,  purpura)  now  denotes  a 
shade  varying  between  crimson  and  violet,  but  to 
the  ancients  it  was  a  red-purple  dye,  which  might 
even  be  mistaken  for  scarlet  (cf.  Jn  19^  with  Mt 
27^).  It  was  obtained  from  a  shellfish  {purpura, 
murex)  found  near  Tyre  and  on  the  shores  of  Tar- 
en  tum  and  Laconia.  The  throat  of  each  mollusc 
yielded  one  drop  of  the  precious  fluid.  The  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  the  dye  was  the  monopoly  of 
the  Phoenicians.  Pliny  says  of  Tyre  that,  while 
she  once  '  thirsted  so  eagerly  for  the  conquest  of 
the  whole  earth  .  .  .  all  her  fame  is  now  con- 
fined to  the  production  of  the  murex  and  the 
purple'  {HX  v.  17).  Cloth  of  purple  was  the 
emblem  of  royalty  and  nobility — purpura  regum 
(Virg.  Georg.  ii.  495).  The  soldiers  arrayed  Christ 
with  it  in  derision  (Mt  15*"-  ^).  It  was  among  the 
costly  merchandise  of  Imperial  Rome  (Rev  18^). 
The  Maccabees  noted  that  the  sober-minded 
Romans  of  the  Republic  did  not  wear  it  (1  Mac 
8'*),  but  Pliny  remarks  on  '  the  frantic  passion  for 
purple '  in  his  time  (HN  ix.  60).  The  prophet  of 
the  Revelation  knows  that  the  great  citj"  is  arrayed 
in  it  (Rev  18''').  The  apocalj-ptic  harlot  clothes 
herself  with  it  (17*).  Tlie  finest  kind  of  purple 
was  '  the  Tynan  dibapha  (double-dyed),  which 
could  not  be  bought  for  even  1000  denarii  per 
pound '  (Pliny,  ix.  63).  Lydia  (Ac  16"-  ^*-  **)  was  a 
seller  of  purple  (irop^i/pon-wXts),  but  it  is  now  generally 
believed  that  the  Thyatiran  dye,  which  she  was 
engaged  in  selling,  was  the  modern  turkey  red, 
which  is  extracted  from  the  madder  root  {rubia). 

5.  Scarlet  (kokklvo^)  was  obtained  from  the 
female  of  the  Jcermes  insect  (Arab,  kirmiz,  whence 
the  synonymous  '  crimson '),  which,  when  impreg- 
nated, attaches  itself  to  the  holm-oak,  and  was 
long  supposed  to  be  a  red  berry  or  seed — a  mistake 
found  in  Pliny  {RN  xvi.  8).  The  insect  {Coccus 
ilicis)  is  of  the  same  famUy  as  the  cochineal  of 
Mexico,  which  yields  a  finer  dye  that  has  super- 
seded the  ancient  scarlet.  Wool  dyed  scarlet  was 
used  in  the  Jewish  ritual  of  sacrifice  (He  9'"). 
Scarlet  fabrics  were  among  the  merchandise  of 
Rome  (Rev  18'-) — 'rubro  cocco  tincta  vestis '  (Hor. 
Sat.  II.  vi.  102  f.).  The  glaring  colour  was  the 
symbol  of  luxury  and  splendour.  The  great  city 
was  attired  in  it  (Rev  18"*).  The  woman  arrayed 
in  purple  and  scarlet,  and  sitting  on  a  scarlet- 
coloured  beast,  is  an  image  of  flaunting  licentious- 
ness (17*-^). 


232 


COMFORT 


COMFORT 


6.  Pale  is  one  of  the  translations  of  x^w/wj,  an 
indefinite  hue,  applied  as  an  epithet  to  objects 
so  diflerent  as  fresh  green  grass  (Mk  6**)  and 
yellow  sand  (Soph.  Aj,  1064).  Botli  meanings 
were  common  from  Homer  downwards.  The  pale 
horse  in  Kev  6**  has  the  livid  hue  of  death. 

7.  Hyacinthine  {vaKlvdivoi)  is  one  of  the  three 
colours  of  the  breastplates  of  the  fiendish  horse- 
men in  Rev  9^'.  vdKivdoi  is  the  LXX  tr.  of  n^rn,  a 
dye  obtained  from  another  shelHish  on  the  Tyrian 
coast.  It  was  blue-purple  as  distinguished  from 
red-purple;  the  Oxj.  Jleb.  Lex.  gives  'violet.' 
The  cuirasses  were  also  red  like  fire  (wplvovs)  and 
yellow  as  brimstone  {6eid)8eis). 

The  brilliant  hues  of  the  foundations,  walls, 
gates,  and  streets  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  and  those 
of  the  robes  of  the  inhabitants,  suggest  that  '  the 
beauty  of  colour  .  .  .  will  contribute  its  part  to 
the  blessedness  of  vision  in  the  future  world ' 
(Delitzsch,  Iris,  61).  James  Strahan. 

COMFORT. — The  word  irap6.K\T)(ns  is  generally 
translated  in  RV  '  comfort' ;  '  exhortation  '  is  used 
in  Ac  Vi^\  Ro  12*,  2  Co  8'^  1  Th  2^,  1  Ti  4.^^,  He  12^ 
13'*'';  'encouragement,'  He  6^*;  'consolation'  or 
'  exhortation,'  Ac  4^**'  15^^  These  translations 
indicate  that  the  NT  use  of  Trap6.K\i)(n.s  is  more 
nearly  equivalent  to  the  root  meaning  of  *  comfort ' 
(L.  Lat.  confortare,  'to  strengthen')  than  to  the 
narrowed  present  sense  of  '  consolation.'  (The  use 
of  irapdK\r]<Tii  as  '  request '  occurs  in  2  Co  8''' ; 
irapa/xvdia  is  rendered  '  consolation '  in  1  Co  14^ ; 
irapafi.'udiov,  translated  'consolation,'  rather  indi- 
cates persuasive  address  in  Ph  2^ ;  the  verb  is  used 
in  1  Tn  2'' ;  irap-nyopla  =' comfort'  in  Col  4^'.) 

It  is  one  of  the  great  functions  of  religion  to 
transform  the  human  pain,  sorrow,  and  discourage- 
ment of  life.  The  man  of  faith  cannot  escape  the 
inevitable  sorrows  of  the  common  human  lot,  but 
he  can  modify  their  values  by  his  religious  faith 
and  hope.  When  faith  does  not  remove  mountains, 
it  can  give  strength  to  climb  them.  The  '  thorn  in 
the  flesh '  may  remain,  but  the  Divine  grace  proves 
'  sufficient '  (2  Co  12*'  ®).  God  is  recognized  as  the 
real  source  of  all  comfort  (2  Co  1* ;  cf.  Ro  15',  2  Co 
7',  2  Th  2>«).  He  operates  through  the  'comfort 
of  the  Scriptures'  (Ro  15*,  He  1^;  cf.  the  name 
'consolation'  [nehemfta]  given  by  the  Jews  to 
the  Prophetic  literature),  through  the  faithfulness, 
love,  and  prosperity  of  the  churches  (2  Co  7®* ''  etc.), 
and  the  sustaming  comradeship  of  friends  (Col  4", 
Philem ').  Ac  9^*^  supplies  the  phrase  '  the  comfort 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,'  although  the  translation  is  un- 
certain (see  R.  J.  Knowling,  EGT,  '  Acts,'  1900,  p. 
244) ;  but  the  idea  is  present  in  Jn  14-17,  the  section 
which  commences  with  the  note  of  comfort  given 
in  view  not  only  of  the  coming  bereavement,  but 
of  the  difficulties  of  Christian  life  and  work. 

The  tenn  'comforter'  in  these  chapters  appears  to  be  an 
inaccurate  and  inadequate  translation  of  napa.K\r]ro';.  irapoKaXiio 
has  a  double  sense:  (1)  'call  in  as  a  helper,"  (2)  'comfort.' 
The  passive  form  requires  the  former  meaning— the  Paraclete  is 
the  one  called  in  to  help,  advise,  defend.  'Comforter'  would 
be  TrapaKArJTiop  as  in  Job  162  (see  HDB,  art.  'Paraclete').  But 
the  fact  of  having  a  Pararlete  is  itself  a  comfort  and  encourage- 
ment. The  recognition  and  experience  of  the  Divine  in  human 
souls  inspires  and  sustains.  The  description  of  the  Paraclete 
in  these  chapters  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  as  possessing  mainlj- 
an  intellectual  function,  makes  the  narrow  identification  with 
the  ecstatic  Pentecostal  spirit  of  Acts  improbable.  The  term 
rather  indicates  the  growmg  inward  Logos,  developed  by  the 
demands  put  upon  the  disciples  after  the  death  of  Jesus  ('If  I 
go  not  away  the  Paraclete  will  not  come  unto  you,'  Jn  167 ;  cf. 
the  thought  in  Emerson's  essay  on  'Compensation' — 'The 
angels  go  out  that  the  archangels  inay  come  in '). 

(a)  One  of  the  most  obvious  needs  of  the  Church 
in  NT  times  was  that  of  comfort  under  circum- 
stances of  persecution  for  Christ's  sake  (1  Th  3* 
etc. ).  The  grounds  of  such  comfort  might  be  found 
in  the  thought  that  Jesus,  the  Captain  and  Per- 
fecter  of  their  faith,  had  similarly  suflered  (He  12*, 


1  Th  2'*),  and  that  they  who  shared  His  sullerings 
would  share  His  glory  (2  Co  410,  Ph  3"*) ;  in  the 
recognition  that  in  their  case  it  was  nobility  of 
spirit  which  provoked  the  world's  persecution  (1  P 
4""-,  2  Ti  3'2,  Ac  5«  ;  cf.  Jn  15""-) ;  that  affiictions 
were  the  signs  of  God's  sonship  (He  12*"*) ;  and  tliat 
the  worthy  bearing  of  them  resulted  in  ripened 
character  (v."),  demonstrated  the  strength  of  God 
in  human  weakness  (2  Co  12'"),  qualiiied  one  to 
minister  to  others  (2  Co  1*),  and  worked  an  eternal 
weight  of  glory  in  comparison  with  which  the  pass- 
ing affliction  was  light  (2  Co  4"  ;  cf.  Rev  7'=*-"  etc.). 
The  'promise'  which  sustained  the  ancient  heroes 
of  faith  amid  much  affliction  was  still  an  inspiration 
(He  11).  (b)  The  Christian  worker  might  be  dis- 
couraged by  his  own  limitations  and  the  disappoint- 
ing results  of  his  labour  ;  his  comfort  must  be  that, 
despite  diversity  of  ministration,  '  all  service  ranks 
the  same  with  God'  (1  Co  12),  and  that  his  service 
in  the  Lord  would  not  be  in  vain  (Gal  6^,  1  Co  15** ; 
cf.  Rev  14'*).  (c)  The  common  burden  of  life  was 
lightened  for  the  Cliristian  believer  in  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  Divine  love.  Apart  from  what 
Jesus  had  actually  done  to  comfort  and  encourage 
mankind.  His  very  Coming  was  a  symbol  of  the 
eternal  goodness,  love,  and  care  of  God.  Would 
not  the  Father,  who  had  not  spared  His  own  Son, 
with  Him  freely  give  His  children  all  things?  (Ro 
%^'^).  Again,  the  present  '  age '  with  its  pain  and 
sorrow  was  not  destined  to  continue  for  ever.  The 
whole  creation  was  moving  towards  a  Divine  event ; 
to  those  in  sympathy  with  goodness,  all  things 
were  working  together  for  good  (Ro  8).  The  world 
was  God's  ('there  is  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom 
are  all  things '  [1  Co  8*]),  who  finally  would  again 
be  all  in  all  (1  Co  15''*"'^).  {d)  Bereavement  and 
the  fear  of  death  were  relieved  by  the  strong 
Christian  faith  in  the  Resurrection  (1  Co  15,  etc.). 
The  First  Thessalonian  Epistle  sought  to  give 
comfort  to  those  whose  friends  had  '  fallen  asleep ' 
by  the  fact  and  manner  of  the  Parousia  (1  Th  4'2"^»). 
A  deeper  element  of  faith  was  realized  in  the 
consciousness  that  behind  the  world,  visible  and 
temporal,  was  a  world,  unseen  and  eternal,  and  if 
the  earthly  house  of  our  tabernacle  be  dissolved, 
we  have  a  building  of  God  eternal  in  the  heavens 
(2  Co  4^"  5^).  Whether  the  Christians  lived  or  dietl, 
they  belonged  to  the  Lord  (Ro  14^).  Uncertain  a.s 
to  what  the  future  state  would  be  (1  Jn  3-),  they 
could  nevertheless  be  sure  of  the  Divine  Fatherhood 
and  care.  '  Neither  life  nor  death,  things  present 
nor  things  to  come,'  could  separate  the  children  of 
God  from  His  love  (Ro  8*^;  cf.  the  closing  verses 
of  Whittier's  The  Eternal  Goodness).  The  fourth 
voice  from  heaven  (Rev  14^^)  proclaims  the  blessed- 
ness of  those  who  die  in  the  Lord. 

The  duty  of  mutual  comfort  is  enjoined  in  1  Th 
418  ('"Wherefore  comfort  one  another  with  these 
words ' ;  cf.  5").  Among  a  list  of  Christian  duties 
in  5'*  is  that  of  'comforting  the  faint-hearted' 
(irapa/jivdeiffde  Toiis  6\iyo\l/vxovs).  irapdKXTjcris  is  de- 
scribed as  part  of  a  Christian  minister's  equip- 
ment (1  Ti  4i»,  Tit  P,  1  Th  3"),  and  that  the  term  is 
not  confined  to  mere  exhortation  is  suggested  by 

2  Co  1*.  The  detailed  results  of  '  prophesying '  are 
given  in  1  Co  14"  as  '  edification  and  comfort  and 
consolation'  (RV).  The  penitent  offender  in  the 
Corinthian  Church  must  not  only  be  forgiven,  but 
comforted,  lest  by  any  means  such  a  one  should  be 
swallowed  up  by  his  overmuch  sorrow  (2  Co  2" ;  cf. 
1  Jn2'-2). 

LiTERATURK.— Artt. '  Comfort '  in  HDB  ;  '  Comfort, "Consola- 
tion,'and  'Care'  in  DCG;  the  relevant  Commentaries,  esp.  J. 
B.  Lightfoot,  Pliflippians-i,  1S7S,  p.  107,  and  G.  Milluran, 
Thcssaloniatis, l90S,v.  17;  A.  Nairne,  The KpisUe of  Prie$thoud, 
1913,  p.  432 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  JST,  1909, 
pp.  i)6f..  22«f.,  372 f. ;  H.  Black,  Christ's  Service  of  Love,  1907, 
p.  62  :  S.  A.  Tipple,  Days  of  OUi,  1911,  p.  107  ;  W.  P.  DuBose, 
The  Reason  of  Life,  1911,  p.  183.  H.  BULCOCK, 


COMING 


COMMANDMENT 


233 


COMING.— See  Parousia. 

COMMANDMENT. — In  so  far  as  primitive  Chris- 
tianity, in  contrast  to  the  OT,  appeals  to  the  con- 
science as  the  supreme  tribunal  of  moral  judgment 
(1  Co  8^-,  Ro  14»-  1*-^  ;  cf.  2"),  and  calls  upon 
Christians  themselves  to  determine  what  is  the 
will  of  God  (Ro  122,  Eph  5'»-",  1  Jn  2»;  cf.  Jer 
31**),  it  may  be  said  to  proclaim  the  ethical 
autonomy  of  the  individual  Christian.  This,  of 
course,  involves  the  assumption  that  the  Christian 
apprehends  the  character  of  God  as  revealed  in 
Jesus  Christ ;  and  accordingly  the  ethical  maxim 
of  primitive  Christianity  is  that  the  believer  should 
have  the  mind  of  Christ  (Ph  2**^-)  and  should  follow 
Him  (1  Co  IP,  1  P  -I-^-,  1  Jn  2«  etc). 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  apostles,  including 
St.  Paul,  make  reference  to  a  tradition  of  authori- 
tative Divine  commandments,  and  indeed  they 
themselves  lay  down  a  number  of  precepts  designed 
to  serve  as  guides  for  the  moral  judgment  of 
Christians  (ivToXcU,  d&ynara,  xopayyeXtat,  xo/wSarets, 
etc.).     We  note  the  following  categories. 

1.  Commandments  of  the  Mosaic  Law. — We 
have  in  the  first  place  those  commandments  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  or  of  the  OT,  which  are  regarded  as 
of  Divine  authority  not  only  by  the  Jewish-Chris- 
tian apostles,  but  also  bv  St.  Paul ;  cf.  Ja  2®"", 
Ro  7*-!^  13*,  Gal  5",  Eph  6^.  Of  the  laws  of  Moses, 
the  Decalogue,  as  we  might  expect,  is  assigned  a 
position  of  peculiar  importance ;  it  forms  the 
tundamental  law  of  the  Old  Dispensation  (2  Co  3'  : 
'  tables  of  stone '),  and  is  therefore  always  cited 
when  the  leading  commandments  are  under  con- 
sideration (Ro  13®,  Ja  2").  It  is  worthy  of  remark, 
however,  that  here  both  St.  Paul  and  St.  James 
take  into  account  only  the  commandments  of  the 
second  table,  asserting  that  the  whole  Law  is 
summed  up  in  the  command  to  love  one  s  neighbour 
(Gal  5",  Ro  13«f-),  'the  royal  law'  (Ja28),  though 
it  is  true  that  in  Eph  6^  St.  Paul  quotes  a  command- 
ment from  the  first  table  ('Honour  thy  father,' 
etc.).*  The  sequence  of  the  laws  quoted  in  Ro  13® 
and  Ja  2'^  agrees  with  that  of  the  LXX  version  of 
Ex  20^*  in  putting  adultery  before  murder.  So  far 
as  the  Decalogue  shares  the  statutory  character  of 
the  Law  as  a  whole,  it  also,  according  to  St.  Paul, 
is  involved  in  the  abrogation  of  '  the  law  of  com- 
mandments'  (Eph  2"),  as  is  evident  from  what  is 
said  regarding  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  the  obli^i- 
torycharacter  of  which,  according  to  Ro  14',  Gal  4^-, 
Col  2'*",  is  in  principle  surrendered.  Hence  Luther^s 
interpretation  of  this  commandment  is  the  right 
one  ;  though,  in  view  of  1  Co  7",  St.  Paul  probably 
maintained  that  it  should  remain  binding  upon 
Jewish  Christians  (see  art.  Law). 

Further,  St.  Paul  (as  also  the  other  apostles) 
cites  not  only  the  Decalogue,  but  the  rest  of  the 
Torah  as  well,  in  support  of  hLs  own  ethical  pre- 
cepts (1  Co  9®  14**,  1  Ti  5^  ;  cf.  Ja  2"  ;  in  all  these 
passages,  however,  the  reference  is  to  command- 
ments which  justijfy  themselves  to  the  Christian 
consciousness).  He  avails  himself  of  the  principle 
laid  down  in  1  Co  10",  Ro  15S  Col  2",  i.e.  he 
applies  the  OT  commandments  to  the  Messianic 
era  in  an  allegorical  or  typological  sense ;  thus 
1  Co  9®  (maintenance  of  Christian  teachers)  =  Dt  25*, 
1  Co  9^  =  Xu  18^  1  Co  5''-  =  Ex  IQ?«-  (the  putting 
away  of  leaven).  He  likewise  reinforces  his  own 
admonitions  by  sayings  from  the  Psalms  and  the 
Prophets,  as,  e.g.,  2  Co  99=Ps  1129,  j  Cq  ia=Jer 
92=",  Ro  1218= Dt  32«  ;  cf.  Ja  4«  =  Pr  3«  He  3^-"  = 
Ps  95'"^^.     Finally,  St.  Paul  and  the  rest  frequently 

*  Just  as,  e,g.,  in  Mt  19^  and  Is  this  commandment  is  ap- 
pended to  those  of  the  second  table  (nos.  6,  7,  and  8).  It  is 
impossible  to  decide  whether  the  Jewish,  the  Eastern  and  Re- 
formed, or  the  Roman  Catholic  and  Lutheran  arrangement  of 
the  commandments  is  followed  here. 


give  their  pi-ecepts  in  the  form  of  OT  exhortations  ; 
cf.,  e.g.,  Ro  12»=Pr  25=^'-,  1  P2'^  =  Pr24-i,  1  P3i««- 
=  P8  M^'-,  He  12«^  =  Pr  3"'-. 

2.  Commandments  of  God  and  Jesos. — (1)  The 
commandments  of  God  frequently  referred  to  in 
the  Epistles  of  John  and  in  Rev.  (1  Jn  S*'  4»  5*^, 
2  Jn«,  Rev  12"  14^  ;  cf .  the  Pauline  usage,  1  Co  T'*) 
should  doubtless  be  regarded  as  the  OT  command- 
ments in  the  NT  acceptation  (i.e.  as  applied  by 
Jesos) ;  cf.  1  Jn  2"-,  where  the  commandment  to 
love  one's  brother  is  spoken  of  as  at  once  old  and 
new,  and  1  Jn  4^,  where  brotherly  love  in  Christ's 
sense  is  combined  with  love  to  God  (cf.  Mt  22F'" 
and  parallels). 

(2)  Apart  from  this  the  apostolic  Epistles  refer 
but  seldom  to  the  commandments  of  Jesus.  In 
James,  1  Peter,  Hebrews,  and  Revelation  we  meet 
^vith  no  utterance  of  the  earthly  Jesus,  while  1  and 
2  John  allude  to  His  commandments  oiily  in  general 
terms  (1  Jn  2«-  S"^  [brotherly  love]  ;  cf.  2  Jn  »).  Nor 
will  it  surprise  us  to  find  that  the  Pauline  Epistles 
likewise  contain  but  few  references  to  the  com- 
mandments of  the  Lord.  Apart  from  Ac  2CP 
(which,  it  is  true,  implies  a  more  extensive  use  of 
the  Lord's  words  in  the  oral  teaching  of  St.  Paul ; 
cf.  the  pi.  X<57wi'),  we  find  such  references  only  in 

1  Co  7"  9^*  (11=^**),  Gal  6»,  1  Ti  6^  The  first  of 
these  passages  refers  to  the  prohibition  of  divorce  ; 
the  second  to  the  apostles'  right  to  live  by  preach- 
ing the  gospel  (cf.  1  Ti  5**) ;  Gal  6*  to  '  the  law  of 
Christ,'  i.e.  mutual  service;  and  1  Ti  6*  to  the 
words  of  Jesus  in  general  (cf.  4*).  But  the  explicit 
distinction  which  St.  Paul  diuws  between  what 
the  Lord  did  and  did  not  command  shows  that  he 
had  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  Lord's  words — 
just  as  he  also  distingaishes  between  his  own  pre- 
cepts and  the  Lord's  commandments.  To  trace 
this  distinction  to  the  difference  between  a  greater 
and  a  less  degree  of  certainty  in  the  inward  revela- 
tion (Baur)  is  the  sheerest  caprice ;  cf.  the  historic 
tense  in  1  Co  9^*.  That  St.  Paul  in  general  based 
his  moral  teachings  on  the  authority  of  Jesus  Him- 
self appears  from  1  Th  4',  where  he  reminds  his 
readers  of  the  charges  he  delivered  to  -  them 
'through  the  Lord  Jesus';  cf.  1  Co  4^',  where,  as 
the  context  shows,  his  'ways  which  are  in  Christ' 
are  the  ethical  precepts  for  which  Christ  was  his 
authority.  In  using  here  the  somewhat  vague  ex- 
pression '  in  Christ,'  he  simply  indicates  that  his 
precepts  are  not  mere  repetitions  of  the  words  of 
Jesus,  but  that  they  are  '  Christian '  in  the  wider 
sense — like,  let  us  say,  the  '  Teachings  of  the  Lord 
through  the  Twelve  Apostles'  in  the  DidacAe. 
The  commandments  of  Jesus  are  fr^uently  cited 
also  by  the  Apostolic  Fathers ;  cf.  1  Clem.  xiiL  3 ; 

2  Clem.  iiL  4,  iv.  5ff.,  xvii.  3.  6;  Ign.  Eph.  ix.  2; 
cf.  Magn.  xiii.  1  (Sbyfiara  toO  Kvpiov  Koi  tQt  aroard- 
\uv) ;  Did.  xi.  3  {Sdr'/fta  rod  einyyeXiov). 

3.  Commandments  of  the  apostles. — From  the 
commandments  of  Jesus  appealed  to  by  the  apostles 
it  is  an  easy  transition  to  those  of  the  apostles 
themselves  (cf.  2  P  3*) ;  it  should  be  noted,  how- 
ever, that  the  term  ivroXal  is  restricted  to  the 
commandments  of  God  and  Jesus,  while  the  apos- 

I  tolic  '  commandments '  are  denoted  by  other  terms : 
Soytiara  (Ac  16*),  xopayyeXwu  (1  Th  4- ;  cf.  2  Th  3^% 
rafxiSoffus  (1  Co  11-,  2  Th  2^  3«),  and  the  like.     But 

!  although  St.  Paul,  in  1  Co  7,  distinguishes  between 
his  own  '  judgment '  (v.^  yrupn])  and  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord,  he  nevertheless  demands  obe- 
dience to  the  former,  inasmuch  as  he  is  possessed 
of  the  Spirit  of  God  (1   Co  7*>;  cf.  Ac  15«),  and, 

I  accordingly,  he  can  even  assert  that  what  he  writes 

i  is  '  the  commandment  of  the  Lord'  (1  Co  14*^).  It 
is  true  that  he  sometimes  appeals,  as  in  1  Co  1(P, 

i  to  the  personal  judgment  of  his  readers,  but  it  is 
clear,  from  11^^  and  14*^*-,  that  he  attached  no  de- 

I  cisive  importance  to  such  judgment.     In  any  case. 


234 


COMMENDATION 


COMMUNION 


all  opposition  must  give  way  before  the  consensus 
of  apostolic  usage  (11'*  14^),  and  St.  Paul  always 
assumes  that  such  a  consensus  really  exists ;  cf. 
Ro  6^'  Tvvoz  SiSaxhi  ('fixed  form  of  moral  teach- 
inw'),  16" (where  'the  teaching '= moral  teaching). 

This  common  ethical  tradition  would  include, 
above  all,  the  so-called  Apostolic  Decree  (Ac  lo'""- 
16'*).  It  must  certainly  nave  comprised  the  in- 
junctions regarding  things  sacrificed  to  idols,  and 
fornication,  an  echo  of  which  is  still  heard  in  Rev 
220.  24  ((.f  y  24  j;hg  phrase  '  cast  upon  you  none  other 
burden '  with  Ac  15'-^),  and  which  tiie  Apostle,  not 
only  according  to  Ac  16^,  but  also  in  1  Co  6'^"*"  and 
lQu-33^  expressly  urges  upon  Gentile  Christians. 
Cf.  further  artt.  Law  and  Moses. 

We  must  also  take  account  of  the  lists  of  vices  and 
virtues  given  in  various  forms  by  the  apostles : 
Gal  5i9-='i,  1  Co  5»o  6«'-,  2  Co  122<>'-,  Ro  l^s-^i  13»3, 
Col  3'-8,  Eph  4=»  5«-,  1  Ti  l"'-,  2  Ti  3'^-»,  Rev  218  22"> 
(vices);  Gal  6^,  Col  SJ^-i',  Eph  ^'^■^■'-5\  2  P  p-^ 
(virtues).  Similar  lists  are  found  in  Did.  ii.  1-v.  2, 
Barn.  18-20,  Polycarp,  ii.  2-iv.  3.  Though  such 
tables  were  in  their  origin  dependent  upon  Jewish 
and  Greek  models  (e.g.  Wis  l'^"-  U^^"-;  cf.  Mt  15'9 ; 
Diog.  Laert.  vii.  110-114) — as  St.  Paul  indeed  in- 
directly recognizes  in  Ro  P-,  Ph  4^  (cf.  the  Stoic 
phrase  tA  /it;  KaO-fiKovra,  Ro  1'-^) — they  nevertheless 
reveal,  especially  as  regards  the  virtues,  their  dis- 
tinctively Christian  character. 

Along  ■with  the  lists  of  vices  and  virtues  should 
be  mentioned  also  the  so-called  'house-tables,'  i.e. 
the  groups  of  precepts  for  the  various  domestic  re- 
lationships— husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  chil- 
dren, masters  and  slaves  (e.g.  Eph  5^-'-6®,  Col  3'*-4\ 
1  P  2"'-3^).  These,  as  will  be  seen,  make  their 
first  appearance  in  the  later  Epistles,  but  they  may 
well  have  attained  an  oral  form  at  an  earlier  date. 
Finally,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  in  addition  to  the 
family  precepts,  give  several  series  of  directions 
for  the  various  orders  of  Christians — bishops, 
deacons,  Avidows,  etc.,  thus  furnishing  in  fact  a 
kind  of  Church  organization,  the  social  duties  of 
the  various  relationships  being  made  more  or  less 
subordinate  to  the  ecclesiastical  point  of  view  (cf. 
1  Ti  2>-62,  Tit  l«-32). 

The  reduction  of  Christian  morality  to  concrete 
details  was  a  matter  of  historic  necessity.  Just  as 
the  spirit  of  Christianity  was  not,  even  at  the  out- 
set, possessed  by  all  believers  in  the  same  degree, 
but  was  found  pre-eminently  in  the  apostles  and 
prophets,  so  it  was  not  present  so  fully  in  the  later 
period  as  in  the  earlier.  Hence,  when  the  apostles 
were  nearing  their  end,  they  felt  it  necessaiy,  for 
the  sake  of  the  succeeding  generation,  to  commit 
to  writing  the  more  detailed  ethical  teaching  which 
no  doubt  they  had  to  some  extent  already  brought 
into  an  oral  form.     Cf.  further  art.  Law. 

LiTRRATURE.— The  NT  Theologies  of  B.  Weiss,  P.  Peine,  and 
H. Weinel ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Pauline  Theology,  1892  ;  C.  v. 
Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  i.'-  [1897]  154  ;  A.  Seeberg, 
Der  Katechismus  der  Urehristenheit,  1903,  p.  Iff.;  O.  Moe, 
Paulas  und  die  evangelische  Gesekichte,  1912,  p.  56  ff.  ;  A.  B. 
Bruce,  St.  PauFs  Conception  of  Christianity,  1894,  p.  293  ff. ; 
E.  V.  Dobschiitz,  Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  Eng. 
tr.,  1904,  p.  399ff.  OLAF  MOE. 

COMMENDATION  (from  Lat.  com-  and  mando, 
'commit  to'). — 'Commend'  is  used  in  AV  and 
RV  as  a  translation  of  (a)  irapaTiOrin.i,  in  the  sense 
of  entriisting  (cf.  '  Father,  into  thy  hands  I  com- 
mend my  spirit,'  Lk  23«)  in  Ac  14^3  and  20»2,  in 
reference  to  the  solemn  committing  of  the  heads 
of  the  churches  to  God.  The  same  verb  is  trans- 
lated '  commit '  (to  God)  in  1  P  4'®  ('  Let  them  that 
suffer  .  .  .  commit  their  souls  ...  to  a  faithful 
creator ') ;  cf.  Lk  12^8^  1  Ti  1'8  e^o,  2  Ti  V^  ]*  2\ 

(b)  irapioTTTjixi  is  translated  '  commend '  in  1  Co 
88  ('Meat  conmiendeth  us  not  to  God')  in  the 
sense  of  presenting  to   God ;  '  non  exhibebit  nos 


Deo'  (Mever);  'will  not  bring  us  into  God's  pre- 
sence' (Weymouth). 

(c)  'Commend'  is  used  to  translate  <rwi«rTTj}i.i  (1) 
in  Ro  3',  in  the  sense  of  demonstration,  setting  in 
clearer  light  ('  but  if  our  unrighteousness  com- 
mendeth  the  righteousness  of  God,  what  shall  we 
say?')  ;  (2)  in  Ro  5*,  in  the  sense  of  making  proof 
of  {'God  commendeth  his  own  love  towards  us,  in 
that,  while  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us ') ; 
(3)  in  the  sense  of  introduction  in  Ro  16'  ('  I  com- 
mend unto  you  Phoebe  our  sister ').  '  ffwiffrrj/u  is 
the  technical  word  for  this  kind  of  recommenda- 
tion, which  was  equivalent  to  a  certificate  of 
church  membership '  (Denney,  EGT,  '  Romans,' 
1900,  p.  717).  Greek  teachers  used  to  give  ttrtcr- 
ToXal  avarariKal  (Diog.  Laert.  viii.  87).  The 
Ephesian  Christians  wrote  such  a  letter  for  ApoUos 
to  the  Church  at  Corinth  (Ac  18'-").  St.  Paul  in 
2  Co  8'8''"  gives  an  introduction  for  Titus  and  his 
companions  to  the  Corinthian  Church.  In  2  Co  3' 
St.  Paul  finely  points  out  that  no  such  introduc- 
tion is  necessary  in  his  own  case,  either  for  or 
from  his  readers.  They  themselves  are  a  letter  of 
commendation  in  a  double  sense — they  are  ever 
written  in  his  heart ;  no  need  for  others  to  com- 
mend them  to  his  interest  and  care  ;  again,  as  his 
converts,  they  are  his  letter  of  credential  to  them- 
selves and  to  all  the  world.  (4)  The  verb,  retlex- 
ively  used  to  convey  the  idea  of  self-praise,  occurs 
in  2  Co  3'  5'^  10'^-  '8  (where  the  pronoun  coming 
before  the  verb  occupies  the  prominent  position) ; 
(5)  but  in  4^^  6*  7"  (where  the  pronoun  follows  the 
verb)  the  reference  is  to  legitimate  demonstration 
of  one's  faith  and  work ;  e.g.  zeal  for  purity  is 
such  a  commendation  (7").  An  apostle's  true 
credentials  are  unwearied  labour,  self-sacrifice, 
character,  and  loftiness  of  spirit  (6^). 

H.  BULCOCK. 

COMMERCE.— See  TRADE. 

COMMON.— See  Clean. 

COMMUNION.— The  Greek  word  Koivwvla.  has  a 
wider  scope  (see  Fellowship)  than  the  English 
word  '  communion,'  which  the  EV  uses  particularly 
in  regard  to  the  Lord's  Supper  (1  Co  10'").  St. 
Paul's  expression  is  somewhat  ambiguous.  In 
what  way  may  the  cup  and  the  bread  be  said  to  be 
a  communion  ?  They  may  either  be  a  symbol  for 
communion  or  may  constitute  a  communion  by 
sacramental  influence.  What  does  the  blood  of 
Christ  mean  ?  Is  it  the  blood  which  was  shed  at 
His  death,  or  does  it  signify  the  death  itself  or  its 
efi'ects  ?  Or  does  St.  Paul  perhaps  think  of  the 
blood  as  some  transfigured  heavenly  substance? 
And  what  does  the  body  of  Christ  mean  ?  Is  it  the 
material  body,  which  Jesus  wore  on  earth,  and 
which  hung  on  the  cross,  or  the  immaterial  body 
of  the  heavenly  Lord  ?  Or,  again,  is  it  the  spiritual 
body,  whose  head  is  Christ,  i.e.  the  Church  ?  And 
lastly,  what  does  communion  of  the  blood  and  of 
the  body  mean?  Is  it  communion  with,  i.e.  par- 
taking of,  the  blood  and  the  body,  or  is  it  a  com- 
munion whose  symbol  and  medium  are  the  blood  and 
the  body?  In  former  times  all  attempts  at  inter- 
pretation distinguished  sharply  between  tiiose 
various  meanings;  nowadays  there  is  a  tendencj 
towards  accepting  the  ditlcrent  views  as  being 
present  at  the  same  time  in  the  author's  mind  and 
in  the  mind  of  his  first  readers,  not  as  entirely 
separate  ideas,  but  all  together  in  fluctuating  transi- 
tion. Grammar  and  vocabulary  are  not  decisive 
in  such  a  case.  We  have  to  start  from  the  general 
view  of  communion  which  early  Christianity  held. 
In  this  the  particular  meaning  of  communion  in 
regard  to  the  Lord's  Supper  will  be  included. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  early  Christianity 
had  a  double  conception  of  fellowship :  all  mem- 


COMMUNION 


CO^IMUNITY  or  GOODS 


235 


bers  of  the  Cbxirch  were  in  close  fellowship  one 
with  the  other,  and  at  the  same  time  each  and  all 
of  them  were  in  fellowship  with  the  heavenly 
Lord.  Tlie  former  conception  was  the  more  pro- 
minent ;  but  the  latter  no  doubt  was  the  basis  of 
faith.  Now  in  the  Lord's  Supper  we  find  both 
these  ideas  present.  St.  Patil  complains  of  the 
divisions  at  Corinth  (1  Co  11'*):  the  members  of 
the  Church  do  not  share  their  meal  in  a  brotherly 
way,  nor  do  they  wait  for  one  another  (».e.  prob- 
ably for  the  slaves  who  could  not  be  present 
early).  Here  we  have  the  purely  social  and  moral 
idea.  But  St.  Paul,  in  speaking  of  'the  Lord's 
Supper'  (11^),  indicates  another  point  of  view, 
which  maj*  be  called  the  religious  and  sacramental 
conception  :  the  Lord's  Supper  is  not  only  a  supper 
held  at  the  Lord's  command,  or  a  supper  held  in 
honour  of  the  Lord  (cf.  11^  ^),  but  it  is  also  a 
supper  in  communion  Avith  the  Lord,  where  the 
Lord  is  present,  participating  as  the  Host.  In  this 
way  the  Lord's  Supper  is  not  only  the  expression 
of  an  existing  communion  with  Him,  but  it  realizes 
this  communion  every  time  it  is  held.  Now  the 
question  is :  Is  it  the  common  supper  which  con- 
stitutes the  communion,  or  are  we  to  think  of  the 
particular  elements,  bread  and  wine,  as  producing 
the  communion  ?  We  shall  tiy  to  find  an  answer 
by  noting  some  analogies  from  the  comparative 
history  of  religions. 

W.  "Robertson  Smith  started  the  theory  that  the 
origin  of  all  sacrifice  lies  in  the  idea  of  a  sacra- 
mental communion  between  the  members  of  a  tribe 
and  the  tribal  deity,  which  is  realized  by  the 
common  eating  of  the  flesh  of  the  sacrifice  and  the 
drinking  of  its  blood.  The  theory  as  a  complete 
explanation  is  inadequate,  but  we  may  admit  sacra- 
mental communion  in  this  sense  as  one  of  the 
diti'erent  views  underlying  the  practice  of  sacrifice. 
In  ancient  Israel  the  so-called  peace-oflering  may  be 
taken  as  illustrating  this  ^iew.  In  later  Judaism, 
however,  this  rite  held  but  asmall  place,  and  Rabbi- 
nical transcendentalism  would  not  allow  any  thought 
of  sacramental  communion  with  (Jod  the  Most 
High.  To  adduce  analogies  taken  from  primitive 
culture  is  of  no  value.  According  to  Dieterich, 
primitive  man  had  the  idea  that,  by  partaking  of 
the  flesh  of  any  sacrificial  animal  offered  to  a  god, 
he  was  partaking  of  the  god  himself,  and  thus 
entering  into  sacramental  communion  with  him. 
This  theory  has  not  been  proved,  and  in  any  case 
it  is  beside  the  point  here.  We  find  better  analo- 
gies in  the  Hellenism  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  where 
we  may  distinguish  two  sets  of  parallels.  (« )  In  the 
Mysteries  certain  sacred  foods  and  drinks  were 
used  to  bring  man  into  communion  with  the  god  ; 
(b)  on  the  other  hand,  many  clubs  held  an  annual 
or  monthly  supper,  which  generally  took  place  in 
a  temple,  and  was  at  any  rate  accompanied  by 
religious  ceremonies  which  were  to  constitute  a 
communion  between  the  members  and  the  god  or 
hero  ( very  often  the  founder  of  the  club)  in  whose 
honour  the  supper  was  given.  So  we  have  two 
conceptions  of  communion  :  one  mystical,  individ- 
ual, magical ;  the  other  moral,  social,  spiritual. 
In  the  former,  particular  food  is  supposed  to  bring 
the  partaker  into  communion  with  the  god  physic- 
ally (or  rather  hyper-physically),  to  transfer  the 
essence  and  virtues  of  the  god  into  the  man  and  so 
to  make  him  god  (deify  him) ;  in  the  latter,  it  is 
the  community  of  the  meal  which  unites  all  par- 
takers to  one  another  and  to  the  hero  in  the  same 
sense  as  marriage  or  friendship  unites  distinct  per- 
sonalities. 

The  e\-idence  of  these  parallels  brings  the  early 
Christian  conception  of  the  Lord's  Supper  into 
close  affinity  with  the  communion  of  the  club 
suppers,  which  had  their  analogy  in  suppers  held 
in  the  Jewish  synagogues  of  the  Hellenistic  Dis- 


persion. The  Mysteries  did  not  influence  Christian 
thought  before  the  2nd  century.  St.  Paul,  it  is 
true,  starts  the  idea  of  an  unto  mystica  between 
the  individual  Christian  and  Christ  (Gal  2*") ;  this 
idea  is  prevalent  in  his  doctrine  of  baptism  (Ro  6'', 
Col  2") ;  but  his  predominant  line  of  thought  is 
the  other  view,  which  regards  the  two  personalities 
as  apart  from  each  other,  and  may  be  described  as 
the  idea  of  '  fellowship.'  The  same  may  be  said 
about  St.  John's  Wew,  in  spite  of  all  mystical 
appearances. 

Now,  when  we  turn  to  1  Co  10^®  again,  we  see 
clearly  that  it  is  not  the  bread  and  the  wine  that 
constitute  sacramental  communion  by  themselves ; 
nor  is  communion  the  partaking  of  Christ's  material 
body  and  blood.  Bread  and  wine  in  relation  to  body 
and  blood  were  given  by  tradition,  but,  as  far  as 
performing  a  sacramental  communion  is  concerned, 
they  represent  only  the  common  meal,  which  brings 
men  into  communion  with  the  Lord,  who  through 
His  death  entered  upon  a  heavenly  existence. 
From  this  conception  of  the  transfigured  body  it  is 
easy  to  pass  to  the  other  one  of  a  spiritual  body 
whose  members  are  the  partakers  (yS'). 

This  interpretation  is  further  supported  by  the 
comparison,  made  by  St.  Paul  him-self,  of  Jewish 
and  Grentile  sacrifices.  When  he  saj's  that  the 
Jews  by  eating  the  sacrifices  have  communion  with 
the  altar,  he  means  spiritual  communion  with  God 
whose  representative  is  the  altar  (note  that  the 
phrase  '  communion  with  God  '  is  avoided — a  true 
mark  of  Rabbinism) ;  and  when  he  says  that  to 
partake  of  a  supper  connected  with  a  heathen  sacri- 
fice brings  men  into  communion  with  demons,  he 
does  not  accept  the  popular  idea  that  the  food  itself 
was  quasi-infected  by  demonic  influence  (he  declares 
formally  that  to  eat  such  flesh  xmconsciously  does 
not  harm  a  Christian) ;  but  he  says :  '  ye  cannot 
drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord  and  the  cup  of  devils : 
ye  cannot  partake  of  the  table  of  the  Lord  and  of 
the  table  of  devils,'  because  partaking  of  the  table 
constitutes  a  spiritual  and  moral  conmiunion  which 
is  exclusive  in  its  effect.    See  Eucharist. 

Lms&ATTRE. — W.  Robertson  Smith,  Kinship  and  Marriage 
in  Early  Arabia,  new  ed.,  1903,  RS*,  1894  ;  A.  Dieterich,  Bine 
Mithrastiturffie,  1903 ;  E.  Reaterskiold,  Die  Ent^Uthung  der 
Speitesaeramente  {Reiigiontwi*»en»du^/Uiehe  Bibliothek,  1912) ; 
ll.  R.  Famell,  '  Beii^ons  and  Social  Aspects  of  the  Colt  of 
Ancestonand  Heroes,'  in  HJ  vii.  [1909]415-t35.  Formemorial 
Boppen,  see  inscriptions  collected  bv  H.  Lietzmann,  Handlmeh 
zum  ST,  iii.  [1907 J  lOOfif. ;  E.  Lucias,  Die  An/dnge  des  Heili- 
genkult*,  1904.  For  Jewish  suppers  in  srnagogues,  see  E. 
Schfirer,  GJV*i^  [1909]  143 ;  O.  Schmitz,'Z>i<  Opferamehau- 
ung  destpdterenJudentvms,  1910 ;  W.  HeitmuUer,  TaMfe  und 
Abendmahl  bei  Paulus,  1903;  E.  v.  Dobschiitz,  'Sacrament 
und  Symbol  im  Urchristentum,"  in  SK,  19C6,  pp.  1-40;  F. 
Dibelius,  Das  Abendmahl,  1911.  Ct  the  Commentaries  on 
1  Cor.  by  L.  1.  Rtickert  {loS6),  C.  F.  G.  Heinrici  (ISSO),  T.  C. 
Edwards  (218&5X  P.  W.  Scbmiedel  (1S91),  H.  Lietzmann 
(1907X  P.  Bachmann  (1905,  31910),  J.  Weiss  (in  Meyer®,  1910). 
E.   VOX   DOBSCHiJTZ. 

COMMUNITY  OF  GOODS.— There  are  two  pass- 
ages in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  which  seem  to 
suggest  that  there  was  established  in  the  Church 
in  Jerusalem  a  system  of  community  of  goods. 
'And  all  that  believed  were  together  and  had  all 
things  common ;  and  they  sold  their  possessions 
and  goods,  and  parted  them  to  all,  according  as 
any  man  had  need '  (Ac  2*^).  '  And  the  multitude 
of  them  that  believed  were  of  one  heart  and  soul : 
and  not  one  of  them  said  that  aught  of  the  things 
which  he  possessed  was  his  own,  but  they  had  all 
things  common.  .  .  .  For  neither  was  there  among 
them  any  that  lacked  :  for  as  many  as  were  possess- 

,  ors  of  lands  or  houses  sold  them,  and  brought  the 

S  prices  of  the  things  that  were  sold,  and  laid  them 
at  the  apostles'  feet :   and  distribution  was  made 

'  unto  each,  according  as  any  one  had  need '  (4**- **•"). 

I  The  Didacke  (iv.  8)  contains  a  phrase  which  must  be 

E'     ut  beside  this  :  '  Thou  shalt  not  turn  away  from 
im  that  is  in  need,  but  shalt  share  all  things  with 


236         COMMUNITY  OF  GOODS 


CONDEMNATION 


thy  brother,  and  shalt  not  say  that  they  are  thine 
own  ;  for  if  ye  are  sharers  in  that  which  is  immortal, 
how  much  more  in  those  things  which  are  mortal.' 
The  so-called  Epistle  of  Barnabas  contains  almost 
exactly  the  same  phrase  (xix.  8),  and  it  is  most 
jjrobable  that  in  these  works  it  came  from  some 
common  source.  We  confine  ourselves  in  this  art. 
to  the  1st  cent.,  but  a  statement  of  Justin  Martyr 
must  be  cited.  He  says  in  the  First  Apoloqxj  that 
the  Christians  brought  what  they  possessed  into  a 
common  stock,  and  shared  with  every  one  in  need 
(xiv.). 

At  first  sight  it  would  seem  as  if  the  passages 
in  Acts  indicated  the  existence  in  the  Christian 
community  of  a  definite  system  of  communism, 
and  there  are  some  things  in  the  Gospels  which 
might  seem  to  point  in  the  same  direction.  The 
blessedness  of  poverty,  the  subtle  dangers  of 
riches,  are  taught  in  many  passages.  The  rich 
young  man  is  told  to  sell  all  that  he  has  and  give 
to  the  poor,  and  our  Lord  observes  upon  tlie  in- 
cident tliat  it  is  hard  for  them  tliat  have  riches  to 
enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  God  (Mk  10'^-^  |!).  In 
Lk  6^-  '•'*  our  Lord  is  reported  as  saying,  '  Blessed 
are  ye  poor,  for  yours  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  .  .  . 
But  woe  unto  you  that  are  rich,  for  ye  have  re- 
ceived your  consolation.'  It  is  possible  that  we  must 
allow  for  the  influence  of  difl'erent  tendencies  in  the 
Gospel  narratives  ;  for  instance,  in  St.  Matthew's 
Gospel,  this  benediction  upon  the  poor  is  given  a 
strictly  spiritual  turn  (Mt  5^).  Again  the  E^pistle 
of  St.  James  seems  to  indicate  that  the  Christian 
communities  are  composed  of  poor  people,  while 
the  rich  are  their  enemies.  '  Hearken,  my  beloved 
brethren ;  didnot  God  choose  them  that  are  poor  as  to 
the  world  to  be  rich  in  faith,  and  heirs  of  the  king- 
dom which  he  promised  to  them  that  love  him  ?  .  .  . 
Do  not  the  rich  oppress  you,  and  themselves  drag 
you  before  the  juagment-seats  ? '  (Ja  2"-). 

When,  however,  we  examine  the  passages  in  the 
Acts  more  carefully,  it  seems  to  be  clear  that  the 
evidence  does  not  warrant  us  in  concluding  that 
there  was  any  definite  system  of  community  of 
goods,  even  in  the  Church  in  Jerusalem.  It  is  i>lain 
from  the  story  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira  that  there 
was  no  compulsion  about  the  sale  of  goods  and 
lands  for  the  common  fund.  St.  Peter  is  reported 
as  saying  to  Ananias :  '  Whiles  it  remained,  did 
it  not  remain  thine  own  ?  and  after  it  was  sold,  was 
it  not  in  thy  power  ? '  (Ac  S'*).  When  we  turn  from 
the  Acts  to  the  Pauline  Epistles  we  find  no  trace 
of  any  system  of  community  of  goods.  St.  Paul 
constantly  exhorts  his  converts  to  liberality  to  the 
poor,  especially  to  those  in  Jerusalem  (1  Co  16^'-, 
2  Co  8.  9,  Ro  15^,  1  Ti  6'8),  and  the  nature  of  his 
exhortation  seems  to  imply  that  the  individual 
Christian  retained  his  own  possessions.  The  same 
thing  is  implied  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (13'®), 
and  seems  t(»  be  the  most  natural  interpretation  of 
the  phrase  in  1  John  (3"). 

It  cannot  be  said  that  the  references  in  the  NT 
justify  us  in  asserting  that  a  system  of  community 
of  goods  was  part  of  the  normal  constitution  of  the 
primitive  Christian  communities  ;  but  it  is  not  im- 
possible that  the  conception  that  this  was  the  most 
perfect  form  of  the  religious  life  may  have  come 
into  Christianity  from  such  contemporary  forms  of 
Judaism  as  that  of  the  Essenes,  among  whom  the 
community  of  goods  was  apparently  practised.  But 
on  the  whole  it  would  seem  that  the  NT  passages 
are  sufficiently  explained  by  the  very  high  sense  of 
the  claim  of  brotherhood  among  Christian  people. 
The  discussion  of  the  full  significance  of  this  Mould 
take  us  into  the  later  history  of  the  Church,  and 
would  therefore  l)e  out  of  place  here.  But  so  much 
may  l)e  said,  that  the  NT  principles  are  wholly  in- 
coTisistent  with  the  view  that  tne  Christian  man 
has  any  absolute  right  of  property  as  against  his 


fellow-man.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  great 
Father  like  St.  Gregory  the  Great  rightly  interprets 
the  spirit  of  the  NT  when  he  says  that  when  we 
give  what  they  need  to  those  who  are  in  want,  we 
give  them  that  which  is  their  own  ;  we  are  not 
giving  away  what  is  ours,  we  are  rather  discharg- 
ing an  obligation  of  justice  than  performing  a  work 
of  mercy  {Lib.  Meg.  Pastor,  pt.  iii.  ch.  xxi.), 

LiTERATTTRB. — E.  Trocltsch,  Die  Sozialiehren  der  ehristliehen 
Kirehen  und  Gntppen,  1912  :  R.  W.  and  A.  J.  Carlyle,  A  His- 
tor]/  of  Mediaeval  Political  Theory  in  the  West,  vol.  i.  ('The  '2nd 
cent,  to  the  9th,'  by  A.  J.  Carlyle),  1903 ;  E.  B.  Redlich,  St. 
Paul  and  his  Companions,  1913,  p.  7  ;  O.  Cone,  Rich  and  Pour 
in  the  ^T,  1902,  p.  143  ff. ;  E.  Schurer,  GJ  ra  ii.  [1898]  r.04  ff. 

A.  J.  Caulylk. 
COMPASSION.— See  Pity. 

CONCISION.— See  Circumcision. 

CONCUPISCENCE.— See  Lust. 

CONDEMNATION.— Not  only  from  the  Gospels, 
but  from  the  rest  of  the  RV  as  well,  the  word 
'  damnation '  disappears,  '  condemnation '  taking 
its  place  in  Ro  3*  and  1  Ti  6'^  'destruction'  in 
2  P  2»,  and  'judgment'  in  Ro  13^  and  1  Co  11=». 
The  reason  is  that  the  process  of  defeneration, 
which  had  begun  before  the  translation  of  the 
AV,  linked  up  the  term  with  conceptions  of  finality 
and  eternity,  originally  alien  to  it,  and  thus  made 
it  no  longer  representative  of  apostolical  thought. 
With  the  exception  of  2  P  2*,  the  same  Greek  root 
occurs  in  all  instances,  and  the  context  in  the 
various  passages  is  mainly  responsible  for  the  ditt'er- 
ent  shades  of  meaning.  In  the  case  of  the  verb,  an 
exception  must  also  be  made  of  Gal  2",  where 
the  idea  is  that  the  act  of  Peter  needed  no  verdict 
from  outside,  but  carried  its  own  condemnation, 
as  in  Ro  2'  14=»  and  Tit  3". 

Little  difficulty  attaches  to  the  use  of  the  term 
in  the  sense  of  '  destruction '  in  the  ca.se  of  Sodom 
(2  P  2®),  to  the  reference  to  the  ark  as  a  visible 
sign  of  the  destruction  about  to  come  upon  the 
unbelieving  (He  11'),  or  to  the  denunciation  by 
James  (5")  of  men  who  unjustly  ascribe  blame  to 
others  and  exact  penalty  for  the  imagined  fault. 
The  wanton  are  rightly  condemned  for  the  rejec- 
tion of  the  faith  whose  value  they  had  learnt  by 
experience  (1  Ti  5'^).  Sound  speech,  on  the  other 
hand,  cannot  be  condemned  (Tit  2®).  The  man 
who  fails  to  judge  and  discipline  himself  is  re- 
minded of  his  duty  by  Divine  chastening  ;  and  if 
that  fail,  he  shares  in  the  final  judgment  with  the 
lost  (1  Co  11"'- ;  cf.  Mk  9*''«-).  In  Ro  5'«- '«  con- 
demnation is  the  consequence  of  an  original  act  of 
evil,  and  suggests  the  antithesis  of  a  single  act  of 
righteousness,  the  etiects  of  which  overflow  to  the 
potential  justification  of  all  men ;  and  the  freedom 
from  condemnation  continues  beyond  the  initial 
stage  of  forgiveness  and  ripens  into  all  the  assured 
experiences  of  union  with  Christ  (Ro  8'). 

In  several  passages  the  term  is  involved  in  a 
context  which  to  some  extent  obscures  the  mean- 
ing. The  justification  of  evil  as  a  means  to  good 
is  indignantly  dealt  with  in  Ro  3^ ;  with  the 
authors  of  the  slander  that  he  shared  that  view 
the  apostle  refuses  to  argue,  but  he  leaves  them 
with  the  just  condemnation  of  God  impending. 
That  God  '  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh '  (Ro  8*)  has 
been  taken  to  mean  that  the  sinlessness  of  Christ 
was  by  contrast  a  condemnation  of  the  sin  of  man, 
or  that  the  incarnation  is  a  token  that  human 
nature  is  essentially  sinless  ;  but  the  previous 
phrases  connect  the  thought  with  the  death  rather 
than  with  the  birth  of  Christ.  For  Him  as  man 
death  meant  the  crown  of  sinlessness,  the  closure 
of  tlie  last  avenue  tlirough  which  temptation  could 
approach  Him  ;  and  in  virtue  of  union  with  Christ, 
the  believer  who  is  dead  with  Him  is  free   from 


COXFESSIOX 


CONTESSIOX 


237 


sin,  though  not  immune  from  temptation.  In  2 
Co  3*  '  condemnation '  is  antitlietical  to  '  righteous- 
ness,'and  synonymous  with  'death'  in  v.^.  The 
argument  appears  to  be  that  sin  is  so  horrible  that 
the  law  wliich  reveals  it  is  glorious ;  a  fortiori 
the  covenant  that  sweeps  it  out  exceeds  in  glory. 
'This  condemnation'  of  Jude*  ought  granmiatic- 
ally  to  be  retrospective,  but  NT  usage  allows  a 
prospective  use  with  an  explanatory  phrase  in 
apposition.  The  meaning  is  that  ungodliness  of 
the  kind  described  is  self-condemned,  as  has  been 
set  forth  in  various  ways  in  Scripture  (cf.  Jn  3'*, 
2  P  21-3)  as  well  as  in  Enoch,  i.  9  (cf.  Jude^*"!*). 
'  The  condemnation  of  the  devil '  (1  Ti  3*)  is  a  com- 
jiarison  of  his  fall  with  that  of  any  vainglorious 
member  of  the  hierarchy.  Both  being  God's  minis- 
ters to  the  people,  the  similarity  is  one  of  circum- 
stance, not  necessarily  of  degree. 

R.  W.  Moss. 

CONFESSION.— 1.  Confession  of  Christ.— The 
duty  of  confessing  Christ  before  men  was  very 
plainly  taught  by  the  Lord.  He  promised  (Mt  10^) 
that  He  would  Himself  acknowledge  a  faithful 
disciple  before  His  Father  and  the  holy  angels. 
He  had  challenged  by  a  leading  question  the  con- 
fession of  St.  Peter  :  '  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  God '  (Mt  16^'),  which  He  commended. 
In  the  Acts  we  find  the  same  root  ideas  carried 
into  practice.  St.  Peter  and  the  other  apostles 
openly  confessed  Jesus  as  the  Christ  (Ac  2^"-). 
The  references  to  baptism  into  the  name  of  the 
Lord  most  probably  refer  to  the  confession  of  faith 
in  Him  which  was  made  by  aJl  candidates  for  bap- 
tism. Probably  the  little  creed  put  into  the  mouth 
of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  (Ac  8*^  'I  believe  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God')  is  an  interpolation, 
and  represents  the  creed  of  some  Church  in  Asia 
Minor,  since  it  wsis  known  to  Irenseus. 

The  Epistles  bear  the  same  witness:  'No  one 
can  say  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord,  save  in  the  Holy 
Ghost  ^(1  Co  123).  .  If  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy 
mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in  thy 
heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead, 
thou  shalt  be  saved'  (Ro  10®).  St.  Paul  here  im- 
plies that  the  Lord  Jesus  is  one  with  the  Lord 
Jahweh  on  whom  the  prophet  Joel  bade  men  call 
when  he  predicted  '  this  word  of  faith.'  Our  diffi- 
culties begin  when  we  try  to  piece  together  any 
sort  of  longer  confession  which  might  be  regarded 
as  the  archetype  of  the  later  creeds.  It  is  so  diffi- 
cult to  keep  an  open  mind  and  refrain  from  read- 
ing too  much  into  the  evidence. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  confirms  the  testi- 
mony of  the  earlier  Pauline  Epistles.  He  3^  reads, 
'  consider  the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our  con- 
fession, even  Jesus.'  In  Westcotts  words  {Ep.  to 
Hebrews,  1889,  ad  loc.)  :  'In  Christ  our  "confes- 
sion," the  faith  M-hich  we  hold  and  openly  acknow- 
ledge, finds  its  authoritative  promulgation  and  its 
priestly  application.'  In  4^^  the  idea  is  expressed 
of  clinging  to  faith  in  one  who  is  truly  human  and 
truly  Divine.  In  10^  this  confidence  is  described  as 
the  confession  of  our  hope,  by  which  it  is  shaped. 
There  is  an  interesting  parallel  in  Clement,  ad  Cor., 
eh.  36,  who  calls  Christ  '  the  High  Priest  of  our 
offerings.' 

The  Johannine  Epistles  correspond  to  the  Pauline. 
In  1  Jn  2**  confession  is  contrasted  with  denial  as 
entailing  the  privilege  of  having  the  Father.  The 
true  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  is  shown  in  confession 
of  'Jesus  Christ  come  in  the  flesh'  (4^-)  uniting 
the  Divine  and  the  human  in  one  person.  '  The 
recognition  of  the  revelation  of  God  b  the  sign  of 
the  presence  of  God  '  (^Yestcott,  Epp.  of  St.  John, 
1883,  p.  146) :  '  Whosoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus 
IS  the  Son  of  God,  God  abideth  in  him  and  he  in 
God '  (4»). 

There  is  an  interesting  parallel  with  Johannine 


teaching  in  Polycarp's  Epistle,  ch.  7,  where  he 
urges  confession  of  Jesus  Christ  come  in  the  flesh, 
echoing  1  Jn  4^  Polycarp's  teacher,  Ignatius  of 
Antioch,  has  much  more  to  say  on  the  lines  of  the 
developed  teaching  about  the  person  of  Christ  in 
opposition  to  Docetic  heresy.  Thus  he  writes  to 
the  Ephesians  (ch.  7) :  '  There  is  one  only  physician, 
of  flesh  and  of  spirit,  generate  and  ingenerate, 
God  in  man,  true  Life  in  death.  Son  of  Mary  and 
Son  of  God,  first  passible  and  then  impassible, 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.'  This  is  a  good  illustration 
of  the  way  in  which  the  simple  primitive  creed 
was  analyzed  to  meet  new  phases  ot  thought  which 
were  felt  to  impoverish  its  fuU  meaning.  But 
there  is  great  risk  in  the  attempts  which  have 
been  made  to  extract  a  full  parallel  with  a  later 
baptismal  creed,  such  as  the  Old  Roman,  from 
passages  like  the  following.  Ignatius  writes  to 
the  Trallians  (ch.  9):  'Be  ye  deaf  therefore,  when 
any  man  speaketh  to  you  apart  from  Jesus  Christ, 
who  was  of  the  race  of  David,  who  was  the  Son  of 
Mary,  who  was  truly  bom  and  ate  and  drank,  was 
truly  persecuted  under  Pontius  P*ilate,  was  truly 
crucified  and  died  in  the  sight  of  those  in  heaven, 
and  those  on  earth,  and  those  tinder  the  earth ; 
who  moreover  was  tndy  raised  from  the  dead.  His 
Father  ha>-ing  raised  Him,  who  in  the  like  fashion 
will  so  raise  us  also  who  believe  on  Him — His 
Father,  I  say,  wUl  raise  us — in  Christ  Jesus,  apart 
from  whom  we  have  not  true  life.'  It  is  reasonable 
to  argue  from  this  and  similar  passages  {ad  Eph. 
18,  ad  Smym.  1 )  that  for  purposes  of  catechetical 
instruction  Christian  teachers  would  soon  prepare 
a  precise  statement  of  the  great  facts  of  the  Lord's 
life  and  death  and  resurrection.  But  there  is  no 
evidence  that  it  had  as  yet  been  fitted  into  the 
setting  of  the  Trinitarian  baptismal  formula. 
Ignatius  expresses  his  faith  in  the  Trinity — '  in 
the  Son,  and  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Spirit'  (cui 
Magn.  13 ;  cf.  2  Co  13'*)— clearly  enough.  But  he 
does  not  bring  it  into  connexion  with  his  confession 
of  Christ. 

From  a  study  of  Ignatius  we  may  work  back- 
wards to  the  problem  of  the  confession  of  faith  in 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  We  are  not 
concerned  here  to  defend  their  authenticity,  but 
only  to  ask  whether  it  is  possible  to  extract  from 
them,  as  Zahn  attempts  to  do,  an  Apostolic  Creed 
of  Antioch.  St.  Paul  reminds  Timothy  of  the 
confession  which  he  made  before  many  witnesses, 
we  may  suppose  at  his  baptism  (1  "fi  6'^).  He 
calls  it  the  beautiful  confession  to  which  Christ 
Jesus  has  borne  witness  before  Pontius  Pilate,  and 
charges  Timothy  '  before  God,  who  quickeneth  all 
things,  to  keep  the  commandment  undefiled,  irre- 
proachable, until  the  appearing  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.'  The  reference  is  to  the  Lord's  avowal 
that  He  was  a  King  (Jn  18^).  The  word  'confes- 
sion '  seems  to  draw  attention  to  the  fact  that  He 
confessed  rather  than  to  any  form  of  words.  In 
the  Martyrdom  of  Ignatius,  ch.  1,  it  is  referred  to 
the  martyrdom  of  one  who  witnesses  by  blood- 
shedding — that  is  to  say,  in  deed,  not  in  word. 

'  A  form  of  sound  words '  was  indeed  needed  by 
Timothy  as  a  teacher,  and  he  is  exhorted  to  teach 
as  he  had  been  taught  (2  Ti  1*^),  '  in  faith  and  love 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.'  'Remember  Jesus 
Christ,  risen  from  the  dead,  of  the  seed  of  David, 
according  to  my  gospel '  (2^).  We  can  safely  say 
that  that  gospel  included  teaching  about  God 
who  quickeneth  all  things,  reference  to  Pontius 
Pilate,  tothe  resurrection,  and  to  the  return  to  judg- 
ment ;  but  the  inference  is  most  precarious  by 
which  Zahn  puts  them  all  into  the  creed  with  con- 
fession of  the  Holv  Spirit,  who  is  named  in  2  Ti  1", 
but  not  with  emphatic  correlation  of  His  Person  to 
the  Persons  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  (cf.  1  Ti  6"). 
The  thought  is  rather  tbat  of   1  Co  12»,  quoted 


238 


CONFESSION 


CONFESSION 


above,  where  St.  Paul  teaches  that  it  is  under  the 
influence  of  the  Spirit  that  any  man  confesses  Jesus 
as  the  Lord. 

It  is  very  unsafe  in  the  face  of  these  reflexions 
to  restore  an  Apostolic  Creed  of  the  NT  as  several 
writers  have  attempted  to  do.  A.  Seeber<^  of 
Dorpat  (Der  Katechistnus  der  Urchristetifieit,  1903) 
suggests  the  following  as  a  reconstruction  of  St. 
Paul's  creed :  '  The  living  God  wlio  created  all 
things  sent  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  born  of  the  seed 
of  David,  who  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the 
Scriptures,  and  was  buried,  who  was  raised  the 
third  day  according  to  the  Scri[»tures  and  appeared 
to  Cephas  and  the  Twelve,  who  sat  at  the  right 
hand  of  God  in  the  heavens,  all  rules  and  authori- 
ties and  powers  being  made  subject  unto  him,  and 
is  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and 
great  glory.'  This  is  much  less  like  the  earliest 
Forms  of  developed  creed  both  in  East  and  West 
than  Harnack's  more  famous  reconstruction  of 
*  our  oldest  creed,'  which  he  was  careful  to  explain 
'  is  not  a  creed  that  was  ever  used  or  ever  likely  to 
be  used ' :  'I  believe  in  (one)  God  Almighty,  in 
Christ  Jesus,  His  Son,  our  Lord,  who  was  born  of 
a  Virgin,  under  Pontius  Pilate  suflered  (crucified), 
and  rose  again  (from  the  dead),  sat  on  the  rij^ht 
hand  of  God,  whence  He  is  coming  (in  glory)  to  judge 
living  and  dead,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost.'  * 

It  is  important,  however,  to  remember  that  the 
fact  of  confession  is  of  greater  importance  than 
any  form  in  which  it  is  made.  Of  that  there  is 
no  doubt.  It  comes  out  incidentally  in  a  passage 
about  idol  meats,  where  St.  Paul  implies  that  it  is 
not  the  eating  of  flesh  in  itself,  but  with  the  open 
confession,  '  I  am  a  Christian,'  that  makes  the 
difierence  (Ro  14").  Again,  it  is  not  generally 
understood  that  one  form  of  the  interfering  with 
other  men's  matters  spoken  of  by  St.  Peter  ( 1  P  4'"- ) 
might  be  the  pressing  forward  with  open  confession 
of  Christianity  during  another  man's  trial.  Such 
unwholesome  fanaticism  under  the  cloak  of  zeal 
began  early.  On  the  other  hand,  the  definite 
teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  takes  a  sad 
tone  when  the  writer  thinks  of  recent  acts  of 
apostasy.  If,  as  von  Dobschiitz  thinks,  the  Epistles 
to  Timothy  represent  the  transition  to  Catholicism, 
the  exhortations  to  fearless  confession  may  be  ex- 
plained by  opposition  to  a  Gnosticism  that  fought 
shy  of  confession  (2  Ti  1*  2^).  In  this  case,  the 
apostle  who  was  not  ashamed  of  his  bonds  might 
certainly  appear  to  his  successors  a  pattern  putting 
them  to  shame  {V  '2P^-  4^^-)-  But  we  need  not 
wait  for  2nd  cent.  Gnosticism  to  suggest  motives 
for  cowardice.  The  temptation  is  rife  in  every 
generation.  In  Revelation  the  condition  of  the 
churches  varies  widely,  but  it  is  only  the  Church  of 
Philadelphia  which  sets  the  pattern  of  joyous  con- 
fession coupled  with  active  missionary  zeal  (3^^- ). 
Such  joy  is  also  expressed  in  Clem,  ad  Cor.  5,  6, 
some  words  of  which  may  fitly  conclude  this  part 
of  our  subject : 

'  Let  us  set  before  our  eyes  the  good  Apostles.  There  was 
Peter,  who  by  reason  of  unrijrhteous  jealousy  endured  not  one 
nor  two  but  many  labours,  and  thus  having  borne  his  testimony 
went  to  his  appointed  place  of  glory.  By  reason  of  jealousy 
and  strife  Paul  oy  his  example  pointed  out  the  prize  of  patient 
endurance.  .  ,  .  Unto  these  men  of  holy  lives  was  gathered  a 
vast  multitude  of  the  elect,  who  through  many  indignities  and 
tortures,  being  the  victims  of  jealousy,  get  a  brave  example 
among  ourselves.' 

Literature.— A.  Hamack,  Hist,  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  1894-99  ; 
F.  Kattenbusch,  Das  apostul.  St/mhol,  Leipzig,  1804-1900 ;  H. 
B.  Swete,  The  ApostUs'  Creed,  1894 ;  C.  H.  Turner,  Ilixt.  and 
Use  of  Creeds,  1906 ;  A.  E.  Burn,  An  IiUrod.  to  the  Creeds, 

1809. 

2.  Confession  of  sin.— In  the  Apostolic  Age  this 
had  its  root  in  ancient  Jewish  practice.  The  cere- 
monial of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  the  confessions 
in  the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  the  Penitential 

*  A.  Hahn,  Bibliothek  der  Syvibole^,  Breslau,  1897,  p.  390. 


Psalms  must  be  remembered  when  we  reflect  on 
the  confessions  made  publicly  by  disciples  of  John 
the  Baptist.  The  language  of  penitence  lay  in  the 
OT  readjr  for  use  when  John's  fervent  appeal  stirred 
the  consciences  of  men  into  self-accusation.  Among 
these  men  were  reckoned  some  of  the  chief  apostles 
of  Christ. 

(1)  Confession  to  God. — The  repentance  demanded 
from  all  candidates  for  Christian  baptism  (Ac  2^) 
must  have  included  confession  of  sins  as  a  necessary 
element,  in  private  if  not  in  public.  The  teaching 
of  1  Jn  1'  expressly  makes  it  a  condition  of  forgive- 
ness. St.  Paul's  teaching  on  repentance  leaves  no 
doubt  that  he  also  regarded  it  as  a  primary  duty. 
For  him  conscience  was  supreme  arbiter,  ISo 
troubled  conscience  can  find  relief  save  in  full 
acknowledgment  of  fault. 

(2)  Confession  before  men. — This  brings  ua  to  a 
more  difficult  problem.  In  1  Jn  P  confession  of 
sins  is  connected  with  the  Divine  blessing,  and  the 
word  implies  open  acknowledgment  in  the  face  of 
men.  But  nothing  is  said  as  to  the  mode,  though 
it  is  implied  that  it  will  be  definite  and  specific, 
not  in  mere  general  terms.  St.  Paul  is  represented 
as  receiving  many  confessions  publicly  at  Ephesus 
(Ac  19'"),  when  many  '  came,  confessing,  and  de- 
claring their  deeds,'  and  there  was  a  bonfire  of 
books  of  magic.  The  case  of  discipline  at  Corinth, 
when  St.  Paul  was  constrained  to  condemn  a 
brother  so  sternly  for  incest,  led  to  public  con- 
fession not  only  by  him  but  also  by  those  who  had 
been  implicated  in  shielding  him  (2  Co  7^*).  St. 
James  records,  it  would  seem,  the  practice  of  the 
Church  in  Jerusalem  in  relation  to  visits  of  the 
elders  of  the  Church  to  sick  persons  whom  they 
anointed  with  prayer :  '  Confess  therefore  your  sins 
one  to  another,  and  pray  one  for  another,  that  ye 
may  be  healed '  (Ja  5'*).  The  word  a/juiprias  refers 
to  sins  against  God,  though  it  may  include  sins 
against  neighbours.  Much  has  been  made  of 
Cardinal  Cajetan's  opinion  tliat  this  does  not  relate 
to  sacramental  confession  {Epp.  S.  Pauli,  Paris, 
1532,  f.  ccxii).  But  however  limited  be  the  mean- 
ing put  on  the  words,  e.g.  by  Mayor  (Epistle  of 
James^,  1910,  p.  175),  who  supposes  reference 
'  merely  to  such  mutual  confidences  as  would  give 
a  right  direction  to  the  prayers  ottered,'  the  practice 
in  the  sickroom  corresponds  to  the  common  practice 
of  the  Church  in  the  next  generation. 

Both  Clement  and  Hernias  witness  to  the  custom 
of  public  confession.  Clement  writes  to  the  Corin- 
thians (57) :  *  Ye  therefore  that  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  the  sedition,  submit  yourselves  unto  the 
presbyters  and  receive  chastisement  unto  repent- 
ance, bending  the  knees  of  your  heart.'  We  must 
interpret  these  words  in  the  light  of  others,  e.g.  ch. 
51 :  '  For  it  is  good  for  a  man  to  make  confession 
of  his  trespasses  rather  than  to  harden  his  lieart ' 
(cf.  ch.  54).  Hermas,  the  prophet,  tells  us  bluntly 
in  the  Shepherd  of  the  confessions  of  untruthfulness 
and  dishonesty  whicli  he  was  constrained  to  make 
publicly  (Mand.  iii.  3).  He  was  constrained  also 
to  confess  neglect  of  his  home,  double-mindedness, 
and  doubts.  It  is  no  ideal  picture  which  he  draws 
of  his  own  conduct  or  of  the  life  of  his  fellow- 
Christians.  But,  as  von  Dobschiitz  says,  these 
confessions  reveal  '  the  magnificent  moral  earnest- 
ness of  the  man,  and  not  of  him  only,  but  of  the 
Christianity  of  his  time'  {Christian  Life  in  the 
Primitive  Church,  p.  315).  The  Epistle  of  Bamabcis 
is  evidence  for  the  preciseness  with  which  the 
Church  in  Alexandria  at  the  end  of  the  1st  cent, 
interpreted  the  Moral  Law.  Tlie  writer  teaches 
definitely:  'Thou  shalt  confess  thy  sins'  (ch.  19), 
and  also  speaks  of  the  spiritual  counsel  which  one 
is  to  give  to  another :  '  Be  good  lawy;ivers  one  to 
another;  continue  faitliful  counsellors  to  your- 
selves ;  take  away  from  you  all  hypocrisy '  (ch.  21). 


CONFLDENXE 


COIS^SCIENCE 


239 


Ignatius  of  Antioch,  writing  to  the  PhiladelphianB 
(en.  8),  regards  the  bishop  with  his  council  as  in 
charge  of  the  discipline  of  the  Church  :  '  Now  the 
Lord  forgiveth  all  men  when  they  repent,  if  repent- 
ing they  return  to  the  unity  of  God  and  to  the 
council  of  the  bishop.' 

These  hints  about  the  public  penitential  system 
of  the  primitive  Church  do  not  carry  us  very  far, 
but  they  certainly  prepare  us  for  the  famous  de- 
scription given  by  Terttillian,  which  applies  no 
doubt  to  the  practice  at  the  beginning,  as  at  the 
end,  of  the  2nd  century. 

'  This  confession  is  a  disciplinary  act  of  great  hamiliation  and 
prostration  of  the  man ;  it  regulates  the  dress,  the  food ;  it 
enjoins  sackcloth  and  ashes ;  it  deSles  the  body  with  dust,  and 
subdues  the  spirit  with  anguish ;  it  bids  a  man  alter  his  life, 
and  sorrow  for  ■past  sin ;  it  restricts  meat  and  drink  to  the 
greatest  simplicity  possible ;  it  nourishes  prayer  by  fasting ;  it 
mculcates  groans  and  tears  and  invocations  of  the  Lord  God 
day>nd  night,  and  teaches  the  penitent  to  cast  himself  at  the 
feet  of  the  presbyters,  and  to  fall  on  his  knees  before  the  beloved 
of  God,  and  to  b^  of  all  the  brethren  to  intercede  on  bis  behalf ' 
(d«  Paen.  ch.  9). 

Lotrattrb.  —  E.  von  Dobschutz,  Christian  Life  in  the 
Primitive  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  1904  ;  N.  Marshall,  The  Penitential 
Diseipiine  of  the  Ftimitive  Church,  new  ed.,  1S44. 

A.  E.  Burn. 

CONFIDENCE.— The  term  'confidence'  ('confi- 
dent,' 'confidently')  is  in  the  RV  of  the  NT  al- 
most wholly  confined  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  the 
only  exception  being  He  3'*.  In  AV  it  renders 
rapprjffia  of  1  Jn  2"*  and  5",  but  is  replaced  in  RV 
by  'boldness'  (q.v.).  The  verb  dappeiv  of  2  Co  5®"- 
in  AV  is  rendered  by  '  to  be  confident ' ;  in  RV 
'  to  be  of  good  courage '  is  substituted.  In  RV  of 
1  Ti  1^  and  Tit  3*  5ui3eSaiovffBan  is  now  rendered 
'  confidently  affirm.'  In  both  AV  and  RV  '  con- 
fidence '  is  three  times  employed  to  render  the  diffi- 
cult and  many-sided  word  irrorraau  (2  Co  9*  11" 
He  3"). 

The  words,  however,  that  most  concern  us  here 
are  -re-roidivai,  'to  be  confident,'  and  rerolOifris, 
'confidence,'  the  latter  being  in  the  NT  an  ex- 
clusively Pauline  word  and  found  only  once  in  the 
LXX  (2  K  18^^).  They  both  belong  to  the  language 
of  deep  personal  feeling,  and  it  is  not  surprising 
that  they  appear  more  frequently  in  2  Cor.  and 
Phil,  than  in  all  the  other  Epistles  put  together. 
The  confidence  cherished  by  St.  Paul  is  a  state  of 
mind  springing  out  of  faith  and  rising  to  the  firm 
persuasion  that  God's  purposes  with  himself,  with 
his  converts,  and  with  all  that  pertains  to  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  are  right  and  cannot  fail  of 
accomplishment.  In  this  'confidence'  he  enjoys 
his  boldness  in  Christ  and  access  through  Christ 
to  G<xi  (Eph  3^*).  He  is  '  confident  of  this  very 
thing,  that  he  which  began  a  good  work  in  you 
will  perfect  it  until  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ'  (Ph 
V).  His  'confidence'  as  regards  himself  (Ph  2**, 
AV  and  RV  '  trust '),  and  as  regards  his  converts 
and  their  compliance  with  his  counsels,  is  in  God 
(Gal  5»»,  2  Th  3*,  Philem*i).  It  comes  from  union 
with  Christ,  and  has  God  for  its  ultimate  goal  (2 
Co  3^).  Clement  in  1  Corinthians  (xxvi.  1)  speaks 
of  those  who  have  served  God  religiously  'in  the 
confidence  of  an  honest  faith.'  He  mentions,  too, 
many  wonderful  gifts  of  God — 'life  in  immortaJ- 
ity,  splendour  in  righteousness,  truth  in  boldness, 
faith  in  confidence,  and  temperance  in  sanctifica- 
tion '  (xxxv.  2). 

Whilst  there  is  such  a  confidence,  there  is  also 
a  confidence  which  is  misplaced — confidence  in 
ourselves  (Ro  2'*,  2  Co  1»),  in  the  flesh  (Ph  S^'-), 
the  confidence  of  which  Hermas  says  (Sim.  ix.  22. 
3)  that  '  vain  confidence  is  a  great  demon.' 

T.  NicoL. 

CONFIRMATION.  —  (a)  The  word  'confirm'  in 
the  NT  sometimes  represents  o-n/ptfw  or  exum/pifw, 
used  of  the  strengthening  of  Christians,  of  love, 
faith,  etc.,  in  Ac  14^'  15^-  «  ;  cf.  18»  (RV  '  stablish,' 


AV  '  strengthen ').  <m;pjf«  is  usually  (about  12 
times)  translated  '  stablish '  or  '  establish '  (in  Lk 
16-*  it  is  used  of  the  '  fixing'  of  a  gulf). — (6)  '  Con 
firm '  and  '  confirmation '  are  used  to  translate 
^e^aiocj  and  /Se^aiwcris  in  Ro  lo»,  1  Co  1*-  *,  He  2»6", 
Ph  1',  'Mk'  16^,  with  the  same  meaning.  The 
same  Gr.  verb  is  rendered  '  stablish '  or  '  establish  ' 
in  2  Co  1",  Col  27,  He  13».— (c)  '  Confirm  '  is  also 
the  word  used  for  Kvpow  or  -rpoKvpbu  in  connexion 
with  a  covenant  or  will  (Gal  3^  ",  which  may  re- 
fer to  what  we  should  call  '  registration  * ;  see  W. 
M.  Ramsay,  Hist.  Com.  on  Galatians,  1899,  p. 
354) ;  in  2  Co  28  it  is  used  of  love.— (rf)  In  Tit  3" 
Siafie^ai6<a  is  translated  'affirm.'  In  He  6"  fu<n- 
revw  is  rendered  in  AV  '  confirm,'  in  RV  and  AVm 
'  interpose,'  in  RVm  '  mediate.' 

For  the  rite  of  confirmation,  see  Baptism,  §§  6, 8. 

A.  J.  Maclean. 

CONGREGATION.— In  Tindales  Version  (1534) 
and  in  Cranmer's  ( 1539) '  congregation '  was  usied  in- 
stead of '  church '  to  translate  both  iKKXifaia  and  avra- 
•y&ryij.  But  Wyclif  had  used  '  church,'  and  the 
Greneva  Version,  followed  by  AV,  reverted  to  it. 
RV,  with  one  exception,  has  'church'  exclusively 
in  the  text,  though  in  several  places  '  congregation ' 
appears  in  the  margin.  The  exception  is  He  2^, 
where  in  the  quotation  from  Ps  22^  '  congregation  ' 
is  in  the  text  and  '  church  '  in  the  margin.  F.  J.  A. 
Hort  {The  Christian  Ecclesia,  London,  1897)  chose 
'  Ecclesia '  as  a  word  free  from  the  disturbing  as- 
sociations of  '  church  '  and  '  congregation,'  though 
the  latter  has  not  only  historical  standing  (as  above) 
but  also  the  advantage  of  suggesting  some  of  these 
elements  of  meaning  which  are  least  forcibly 
brought  out  by  the  word  '  church  '  according  to  our 
present  use  (cf.  £xpT  viii.  [1896-97]  386).  So  far, 
however,  as  there  is  any  substantive  difference 
between  the  two  words  as  found  in  the  English 
Bible,  the  '  congregation '  of  RVm  points  to  an 
actual  church  assembled  in  one  place. 

In  the  NT  iKKX-qaUt  naturally  designates  the 
Christian  Church.  The  associations  of  o-waTory^ 
were  against  its  Chrbtian  use,  though  it  is  retained 
in  Ja  2-  to  describe  an  assembly  of  Jewish-Chris- 
tians ;  but  this  is  explained  by  the  destination  of 
the  letter — '  to  the  twelve  trilies  which  are  of  the 
Dispersion.' 

In  St.  Paul's  address  to  the  elders  of  Miletus 
(Ac  20")  we  see  the  old  Jewish  ffi-yayuyri  in  the 
process  of  passing  into  the  more  distinctively  Chris- 
tian eKic\jf(ria.  He  quotes  Ps  74*  '  Remember  thy 
congregation  which  thou  didst  purchase  of  eld ' ; 
but  for  the  LXX  tri/j-aYory^  he  puts  ecKXijffto.  Thus 
in  the  Apostle's  hands  this  passage  becomes  '  one 
of  the  channels  through  which  the  word  "  ecclesia" 
came  to  denote  Grod's  people  of  the  future '  (ExpT 
viii.  387).  Cf.  also  art.  Assembly  ;  and,  for  the 
Heb.  and  Gr.  terms  in  the  OT,  art.  •  Congregation ' 
in  HDB.  W.  M.  Gkakt. 

CONSCIENCE  (avpei^ts).—!.  The  word  and  its 

history. — Both  the  Lat.  conseientia,  from  which 
'conscience'  is  derived,  and  the  Gr.  ffweiBijcns,  of 
which  it  is  the  invariable  rendering  in  the  NT,  have 
originally  the  more  general  meaning  of  '  conscious- 
ness ' — the  knowledge  of  any  mental  state.  Down 
to  the  17th  cent.,  as  the  AV  itself  bears  witness, 
'  conscience '  too  was  sometimes  used,  in  this  wider 
sense.  In  1  Co  8^  '  conscience  of  the  idol,'  and  in 
He  lO*  'conscience  of  sins,'  would  now  be  better 
rendered  'consciousness.'  Some  exegetes  would 
prefer  '  consciousness '  to  '  conscience '  in  1  P  2^ 
'  conscience  toward  (or  of)  God. '  With  these  excep- 
tions, '  conscience '  in  the  NT  denotes  not  conscious- 
ness generally,  but  the  moral  faculty  in  particular 
— that  power  by  which  we  apprehend  moral  truth 
and  recognize  it  as  having  the  authority  of  moral 
law.     The  history  of  the  words  '  conscience,'  con- 


240 


CONSCIENCE 


conscif:nce 


scientia,  avpelS-nffis,  shows  that  it  is  entirely  fanciful 
to  suppose  on  etymological  grounds  that  the  prefixes 
con  and  aw  point  to  the  subject's  joint  knowledge 
along  with  God  Himself.  Tlie  joint  knowledge  de- 
noted is  knowledge  with  oneself,  a  self-knowledge 
or  self-consciousness  in  which  the  inner  '  I '  comes 
forward  as  a  witness.  This  does  not,  of  course, 
exclude  the  further  view  that,  as  man  is  made  in 
the  inaage  of  God,  and  as  his  individual  personality 
is  rooted  in  that  of  the  absolute  moral  Ruler,  the 
testimony  of  conscience  actually  is  the  voice  of 
God  bearing  witness  in  the  soul  to  the  reality  and 
authority  of  moral  truth. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  the  word  •  conscience ' 
is  nowhere  found  in  the  OT  text,  though  in  Ec  10'-" 
both  AV  and  RV  give  it  in  the  margin  as  an  alter- 
native for  '  thought,'  to  represent  the  Heb.  v'j/'?, 
which  LXX  here  renders  by  <Tvvel5ri<7i%.  In  ancient 
Israel  it  was  an  external  law,  not  an  inward  law- 
giver, that  held  the  seat  of  authority  ;  and  though 
the  prophets  addressed  their  appeals  to  the  moral 
sense  or  their  hearers  (cf.  Mic  (j*),  they  furnished 
no  doctrine  of  conscience.  Nor  does  the  word  occur 
either  in  the  Synoptics  or  the  Fourth  Gospel ;  for 
the  clause  of  Jn  8*  where  it  is  found  does  not  belong 
to  the  correct  text  (see  RV).  Jesus  in  His  teaching 
constantly  addresses  Himself  to  the  conscience,  and 
clearly  refers  to  it  when  He  speaks  of  '  the  light 
that  is  in  thee'  (Mt  6-^  Lk  11**),  but  His  mission 
was  to  illumine  and  quicken  the  moral  faculty  by 
the  revelation  He  brought,  not  to  analyze  it,  or 
define  it,  or  lay  down  a  doctrine  on  the  subject. 
In  the  Acts  and  Epistles,  however,  the  effects  of 
the  revelation  in  Christ  become  apparent.  We 
have  the  word  '  conscience '  31  times  in  AV  and  30 
times  in  RV — the  latter  reading  awrjOeig.  for  <rvv€i- 
Srjffei  in  1  Co  8'.  Heb.  has  it  5  times  and  1  Pet. 
thrice  ;  with  these  exceptions  it  is  a  Pauline  word. 
There  are  anticipations  of  the  NT  use  of  it  in  the 
Apocrypha  (Wis  17",  Sir  14^,  2  Mac  6"),  and  sug- 
gestions for  St.  Paul's  treatment  of  it  in  contem- 
porary Greek  teaching,  and  especially  in  the  moral 
philosophy  of  the  Stoics.  But  it  was  Christian 
faith  that  raised  it  out  of  the  region  of  ethical  ab- 
straction and  set  it  on  a  throne  of  living  power. 

2.  The  NT  doctrine.  —  (1)  The  nature  of  con- 
science.— According  to  its  etymology,  conscience  is 
a  strictly  cognitive  power — the  power  of  appre- 
hending moral  truth ;  and  writers  of  the  intui- 
tional school  frequently  restrict  the  use  of  the 
term  to  this  one  meaning  (cf.  Calderwood,  Hand- 
book of  Moral  Philosophy,  p.  78).  Popularly, 
however,  conscience  has  a  much  wider  connotation, 
including  moral  judgments  and  moral  feelings  as 
well  as  immediate  intuitions  of  right  and  wrong  ; 
and  it  is  evident  that  in  the  NT  the  word  is 
employed  in  this  larger  sense  so  as  to  include  the 
whole  of  the  moral  nature.  When  conscience  is  said 
to  '  bear  witness '  (Ro  2^*  9^  or  to  give  '  testimonjjr ' 
(2  Co  1'-),  it  is  the  clear  and  direct  shining  of  the 
inner  light  that  is  referred  to.  When  it  is  described 
as  '  weak '  or  over-scrupulous  (1  Co  8^-  ^°'  ^^),  and  is 
contrasted  by  implication  with  a  conscience  that 
is  strong  and  walks  at  liberty,  the  reference  is 
to  those  diversities  of  opinion  on  moral  subjects 
which  are  due  to  variations  of  judgment  in  the 
application  of  mutually  acknowledged  first  prin- 
ciples. When  it  is  spoken  of  on  the  one  hand  as 
'good'  (1  Ti  l«-'9,  He  13^  1  P  S^s-^ijor  'void  of 
offence  toward  God  and  men  '  ( Ac  24^*),  and  on  the 
other  as  '  defiled'  (1  Co  8"),  '  wounded  '  (v.^^*),  '  evil ' 
(He  10-'-),  'seared  (or  branded)  with  a  hot  iron' 
(1  Ti  4^^),  the  writers  are  thinking  of  those  pleasant 
or  painful  moral  feelings  which  follow  upon  obedi- 
ence or  disobedience  to  moral  law,  or  of  that  dead- 
ness  to  all  feeling  which  falls  upon  those  who  have 
persistently  shut  their  ears  te  the  inward  voice  and 
turned  the  light  that  is  in  them  into  darkness. 


Tlie  fundamental  passage  for  the  Pauline  doc- 
trine is  Ro  2'*-  ".  Tlie  Apostle  here  seems  to  lay 
down  as  unquestionable,  (a)  that  there  is  a  Divine 
law  written  by  Nature  on  the  heart  of  every  man, 
whether  Jew  or  Gentile  ;  (6)  that  conscience  is  the 
moral  faculty  which  bears  witness  to  that  law  ; 
(c)  that  in  the  light  of  that  witness  there  is  an 
exercise  of  the  thoughts  or  reasonings  (XoyiafjLo^),  in 
other  words,  of  the  moral  judgment ;  (d)  tliat,  a.s 
the  result  of  this  judgment  before  the  inward  bar, 
men  are  subject  to  the  feelings  of  moral  self- 
approval  or  self-reproach.  Covering  in  this  pas- 
sage the  whole  ground  of  the  moral  nature  of  man, 
St.  Paul  appears  to  distinguish  conscience  as  the 
witness-bearing  faculty  from  the  moral  judgments 
and  moral  feelings  that  accompany  its  testimony. 
But  elsewhere,  as  has  been  already  shown,  he  fre- 
quently speaks  of  conscience  in  tnat  larger  sense 
wiiicli  makes  it  correspond  not  only  with  the 
immediate  apprehension  of  moral  truth,  but  with 
the  judgments  based  upon  the  truth  thus  revealed, 
and  the  sentiments  of  satisfaction  or  dissatisfaction 
to  which  these  judgments  give  rise. 

(2)  The  authority  of  conscience. — However  men 
differ  in  their  theories  as  to  the  nature  and  origin 
of  the  moral  faculty,  there  is  general  agreement 
as  to  the  authority  of  the  moral  law  which  it  en- 
joins. Few  will  be  found  to  challenge  Butler's 
famous  assertion  of  the  supremacy  of  conscience : 
'  Had  it  strength  as  it  has  right,  had  it  power  as 
it  has  manifest  authority,  it  would  absolutely 
govern  the  world'  (Serin,  ii.).  And  while  ad- 
herents of  the  sensational  school  of  ethics  may 
dispute  Kant's  right  to  describe  the  Imperative  of 
morality  as  'categorical'  in  its  nature  (Metaphysic 
of  Ethics,  p.  31),  even  they  will  not  seek  to  qualify 
his  apostrophe  to  duty  (p.  120)  or  the  exalted  lan- 
guage in  which  he  describes  the  solemn  majesty 
of  the  Moral  Law  (p.  108).  For  the  NT  authors 
conscience  is  supreme,  and  it  is  supreme  because 
in  its  very  nature  it  is  an  organ  through  which 
God  speaks  to  reveal  His  will.  In  the  case  of  the 
natural  man  it  testifies  to  a  Divine  law  which  is 
written  on  the  heart  (Ro  2^*) ;  in  the  case  of  the 
Christian  man  this  law  of  Nature  is  reinforced  by 
a  vital  union  with  Jesus  Christ  (Gal  2^)  and  by 
tlie  assenting  witness  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (Ro  9*). 
The  claim  of  right  which  Butler  makes  on  behalf 
of  conscience  is  transformed  for  St.  Paul  into  a 
law  of  power.  The  pure  and  loyal  Christian  con- 
science has  might  as  it  has  right ;  it  not  only  legis- 
lates but  governs.  What  the  law  could  not  do  in 
that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  is  actuallj' 
fulfilled  in  those  who  take  Christ  to  be  the  com- 
panion of  their  conscience  and  who  walk  not  after 
the  flesh  but  after  the  spirit. 

In  Acts  we  have  many  examples  of  the  way  in 
which  conscience,  in  Butler's  words,  '  magisterially 
exerts  itself '  in  the  case  alike  of  bad  men  and  of 
good.  The  suicide  of  Judas  (1'* ;  cf.  Mt  27^'^-)j  the 
heart-pricks  of  the  men  of  Jerusalem  under  St. 
Peter's  preaching  (2*^),  the  claim  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  John  that  tliey  must  obey  God  rather  than 
men  (4^*  5^),  Saul's  experience  that  it  was  hard  to 
kick  against  the  pricks  (9^),  Felix  trembling  as  St. 
Paul  reasoned  of  righteousness,  temperance,  and 
judgment  to  come  (24^) — all  these  are  examples 
of  the  authority  of  conscience.  And  what  in  Acts 
we  see  practically  exemplified  is  laid  down  in  the 
Epistles  as  a  matter  of  rule  and  doctrine.  St. 
Paul  enjoins  submission  to  the  civil  authority  (Ro 
W-),  but  vindicates  its  right  to  govern  on  the 
ground  of  the  higher  authority  of  conscience  (v.*). 
The  writer  of  Heb.  rei)resents  the  sin-convicting 
conscience  as  a  sovereign  power  which  impelled 
men  to  lay  their  gifts  and  sacrifices  on  the  altar, 
but  was  never  satisfied  until  Jesus  Christ '  through 
the  eternal  Spirit  offered  himself  without  blemish 


COIS^SCIENCE 


CONSCIEXCE 


241 


unto  God'  (He  9»- "  10^-).  St.  Peter  teaches 
that,  in  a  matter  of  conscience  before  God,  men 
must  be  willing  to  '  endure  griefs,  sutiering  wrong- 
fully'  (1  P  2'*).  Nor  is  it  only  the  personal  con- 
science whose  dignity  and  supremacy  must  be  ac- 
knowledged ;  a  like  reverence  is  to  be  shown  for 
the  conscience  of  others.  St.  Paul  sought  to  com- 
mend himself  to  every  man's  conscience  in  the 
sight  of  God  (2  Co  4» ;  cf.  5")-  He  taught  that 
the  exercise  of  Christian  liberty  must  be  limited  \ 
bj-  regard  for  another's  conscience  (1  Co  10®),  and 
that  even  when  that  conscience  is  weak,  it  must 
not  be  wounded  or  bewildered  or  defiled  {S^-  ^'^  ^) 
lest  the  other's  sense  of  moral  responsibility  should 
thereby  be  impaired. 

The  source  of  this  magisterial  authority  of  con- 
science is  represented  by  the  XT  writers  as  lying 
altogether  in  the  Divine  will,  of  which  conscience 
is  the  instrument.  For  St.  Paul  conscience  is  not 
an  individualized  reflexion  of  social  opinion,  nor 
a  subtle  compound  of  feelings  evolved  in  the 
course  of  the  long  struggle  for  existence,  nor  yet  a 
mysterious  faculty  that  claims  to  regulate  the  life 
of  man  by  virtue  of  some  right  inherent  in  its  own 
nature.  Its  authority  is  that  of  a  judge,  who  sits 
on  the  bench  as  the  representative  of  a  law  that 
is  higher  than  himself.  Its  function  is  to  bear 
witness  to  the  law  of  God  (Ro  2"*  9^,  2  Co  l^*) ;  its 
commendation  is  a  conunendation  in  His  sight  (2 
Co  4"-) ;  its  accusation  is  an  anticipation  of  the  day 
when  He  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  (Eo  2*^  "I. 
Similarly  for  St.  Peter  a  matter  of  conscience  is 
a  question  of  '  conscience  toward  God  '(IP  2"). 
Some  commentators  would  render  ffweidrjffis  deov 
in  this  verse  by  '  consciousness  of  God ' ;  and  the 
very  ambiguity  of  the  expression  may  suggest 
that  in  the  Ajwstle's  view  conscience  is  rejilly  a 
God-consciousness  in  the  sphere  of  morality,  as 
faith  is  a  God-consciousness  in  the  sphere  of  religion. 

(3)  Varieties  of  conscience. — What  has  just  been 
said  as  to  the  absolute  and  universal  authority  of 
conscience  may  seem  difficult  to  reconcile  with 
the  distinctions  made  by  the  NT  writers  between 
consciences  of  very  varied  types.  There  are  con- 
sciences that  are  weak  and  timid,  and  others  that 
are  strong  and  free  (1  Co  8'^-)-  A  conscience  may 
be  '  void  of  offence '  (Ac  24^*),  or  it  may  be  defiled 
and  wounded  (I  Co  8"-  ^,  Tit  1^^).  It  may  be  good 
(1  Ti  1*- 1»,  He  13^^  1  P  316-21),  or  it  may  be  evil 
(He  1(F).  It  may  be  pure  (1  Ti  3^,  2  Ti  'P),  or  in 
need  of  cleansing  (He  9^*).  It  may  possess  that 
clear  moral  sense  which  discerns  intuitively  both 
good  and  evil  (He  5"),  or  it  may  be  'seared  with 
a  hot  iron '  (1  Ti  4*)  and  condemned  to  that  judicial 
blindness  to  which  nothing  is  pure  (Tit  1").  The 
explanation  of  the  difficulties  raised  by  such  lan- 
guage lies  in  the  fact  already  noted  that  'con- 
science '  in  the  XT  is  used  to  denote  not  the  power 
of  moral  vision  onlj-,  but  the  moral  judgment  and 
the  moral  feelings.  As  the  organ  which  discerns 
the  Moral  Law,  conscience  has  the  authority  of 
that  law  itself ;  its  voice  is  the  voice  of  God.  It 
leaves  us  in  no  doubt  as  to  the  reality  of  moral 
distinctions ;  it  assures  us  that  right  is  right  and 
wTong  is  wrong,  and  that  '  to  him  that  knoweth 
to  do  good  and  doeth  it  not,  to  him  it  is  sin'  (Ja 
4'").  But  for  the  application  to  particular  cases  of 
the  general  law  of  auty  thus  revealed,  men  must 
depend  upon  their  moral  judgments  ;  and  moral 
judgments  are  liable  to  error  just  as  other  judg- 
ments are.  It  was  a  want  of  'knowledge'  that 
led  some  in  the  Corinthian  Church  to  shrink  from 
eating  meat  that  had  been  offered  to  an  idol  (1  Co 
8^),  and  a  consequent  mistake  of  judgment  when 
they  came  to  the  conclusion  that  such  eating 
was  wrong.  Their  consciences  were  weak  because 
their  moral  judgments  were  weak.  And  as  the 
result  of  their  weakness  in  the  decision  of  moral 

VOL.  I.  — 16 


questions,  their  moral  feelings  were  misdirected, 
and  so  tlieir  consciences  were  stained  and  wounded 
by  acts  in  which  a  man  of  more  enlightened  con- 
science saw  no  harm.  Similarly,  when  a  conscience 
is  said  to  be  '  good '  or  '  pure '  or  '  void  of  offence,' 
the  reference  is  to  the  sense  of  peace  and  moral 
harmony  with  Grod  and  man  which  comes  to  one 
who  has  loyally  obeyed  the  dictates  of  the  Moral 
Law  ;  while  an  uncleansed  or  evil  conscience  is  one 
on  which  there  rests  the  burden  and  pain  of  sin 
tliat  is  unatoned  for  and  unforgiven.  A  '  seared ' 
or  '  branded '  conscience,  again,  may  point  to  the 
case  of  those  in  whom  abuse  of  the  moral  nature 
has  led  to  a  per\-ersion  of  the  moral  judgment  and 
a  deadening  of  the  moral  sentiments.  Compare 
what  St.  Paul  says  of  those  whose  understanding 
is  darkened,  whose  hearts  are  hardened,  and  who 
are  now  'past  feeling'  (Eph  4**). 

(4)  The  education  of  conscience. — Someinttutional- 
ists  have  held  that  conscience,  being  an  infallible 
oracle,  is  incapable  of  education  ;  and  Kant's  famous 
utterance,  '  An  erring  conscience  is  a  chimera '  (op. 
cit.  p.  206),  has  of  ten  oeen  quoted  in  this  connexion. 
But  it  is  only  in  a  theoretical  and  ideal  sense  that 
the  truth  of  the  saying  can  be  admitted — only  when 
the  word  of  conscience  is  taken  to  be  nothuig  less 
and  nothing  more  than  the  voice  of  God,  and 
its  light  to  be  in  very  reality  His  '  revealing  and 
appe^ng  look '  ( J.  Martineau,  Seat  of  Authority 
in  Eeligion^,  London,  1891,  p.  71).  In  the  NT, 
however,  as  in  general  usage,  '  conscience '  is  not 
restricted  to  the  intuitive  discernment  of  the 
difference  between  right  and  wrong,  but  is  applied 
to  the  whole  moral  nature  of  man ;  and  when 
understood  in  this  way  there  can  be  no  question 
that  it  shares  in  the  general  weakness  of  human 
nature,  and  that  it  is  both  capable  of  education 
and  constantly  in  need  of  an  educative  discipline. 
The  distinction  made  by  the  NT  ^vriters  between 
a  good  and  an  evil  conscience  implies  the  need  of 
education ;  their  moral  precepts  imply  its  possi- 
bility. St.  Patd  says  that  he  '  exercised  himself ' 
to  have  a  conscience  void  of  offence  toward  God 
and  men  (Ac  24^*) ;  the  author  of  Heb.  speaks  of 
those  who  'by  reason  of  use  have  their  senses 
exercised  to  discern  both  good  and  evil '  (5**). 

In  various  aspects  the  necessity  for  this  exercise 
or  training  of  the  moral  faculty  comes  before  us. 
Even  as  a  power  of  intuition  or  vision  by  which 
the  Moral  Law  is  discerned,  conscience  is  capable 
of  improvement.  Ignorance  darkens  it  (Eph  4'*), 
sin  defiles  it  (Tit  1") ;  and  only  an  eye  that  is 
purged  and  enlightened  can  see  clearly.  '  My 
conscience  is  nott  so,'  said  Queen  Mary  to  Knox. 
'Conscience,  Madam,'  he  replied,  'requyres  know- 
ledge ;  and  I  fear  that  rycht  knowledge  ye  have 
none'  (Knox,  Works,  ed.  Laing,  Edinburgh,  1864, 
ii.  283).  But  conscience  is  also  a  faculty  of  moral 
judgment,  and  in  moral  matters,  as  in  other 
matters,  human  judgments  go  astray.  The  *  weak ' 
conscience  is  the  natural  accompaniment  of  the 
weak  and  narrow  mind  (1  Co  8") ;  a  selfish  and  im- 
pure heart  usually  compounds  with  its  conscience 
for  the  sins  to  which  it  is  inclined,  and  a  conscience 
that  accepts  hush-money  is  apt  to  grow  dumb 
until  contact  with  another  conscience  stronger  and 
purer  than  itself  makes  it  vocal  once  more  (Ac  24^). 
Moral  sentiments,  again,  gather  around  a  false 
judgment  as  readily  as  around  a  true.  Christ's 
apostles  were  kiUed  by  men  who  thought  that 
they  were  thereby  doing  God  service  (Jn  16^),  and 
St.  Paul  himself  once  believed  it  to  be  his  duty 
'  to  do  many  things  contrary  to  the  name  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth '  (Ac  26®).  In  such  cases  persecution 
to  the  death  carried  no  self-reproach  with  it,  but  a 
sense  of  moral  complacency. 

Granting,  then,  that  conscience  needs  to  be  edu- 
cated, how,  according  to  the  NT,  is  the  work  to 


242     CONSECRATE,  CONSECRATION 


CONSECRATE,  CONSECRATION 


be  done  ?  Three  ways  are  especially  suggested — 
the  ways  of  knowledge,  obedience,  and  love ;  in 
other  words,  the  way  of  the  mind,  the  way  of  the 
will,  and  the  way  of  the  heart,  (a)  Knox  said  to 
Queen  Mary  that  conscience  requires  knotoledge ; 
and  that  is  what  St.  Paul  also  taught  (1  Co  8'). 
Before  the  man  of  God  can  be  '  furnished  completely 
unto  every  good  work '  he  has  need  of  '  instruction 
in  righteousness '  (2  Ti  3>*- ").  Education  of  this 
kind  can  be  obtained  from  many  masters,  but  the 
best  teachers  of  all  are  Scriptures  inspired  of  God 
{ib. ).  St.  Paul's  own  Epistles  are  full  of  instruction 
as  rega'ils  both  the  broad  principles  of  Christian 
ethics  and  their  application  under  varying  circum- 
stances to  all  the  details  of  personal,  family,  and 
social  life.  And  in  the  teaching  of  Christ  Himself, 
above  all  in  that  Sermon  on  the  Mount  whose 
echoes  are  heard  so  frequently  in  the  Epistle  of 
James,  enlightenment  comes  to  the  human  con- 
science through  the  revelation  of  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  Divine  Kingdom. 

(ft)  Conscience  is  educated,  in  the  next  place,  by 
obedience  to  the  Divine  law  when  that  law  is  recog- 
nized. It  is  the  use  of  knowledge  already  possessed 
that  exercises  the  senses  to  keener  moral  discern- 
ment (He  5") ;  it  is  the  man  who  is  willing  to  do 
God's  will  who  comes  to  know  the  Divine  voice  when- 
ever he  hears  it  ( Jn  7").  The  ethics  of  the  NT  are 
not  the  ingenious  elaboration  of  a  beautiful  but  ab- 
stract moral  scheme ;  they  are  practical  through 
and  through.  Christians  are  called  upon  to  acknow- 
ledge not  the  right  of  conscience  only,  but  its  might ; 
they  are  commanded  everywhere  to  bring  their  dis- 
positions, desires,  passions,  and  habits  into  captivity 
to  its  obedience.  To  follow  Clirist  is  to  have  the 
light  of  life  ( Jn  8'^) ;  while  to  hate  one's  brother  is 
to  walk  in  darkness  with  blinded  eyes,  and  so  to 
lose  the  knowledge  of  the  way  (1  Jn  2^^  ;  cf.  Jn  12^'). 
Obedience,  in  short,  is  the  organ  of  spiritual  know- 
ledge (cf.  F.  W.  Robertson,  Sermons,  2nd  ser.,  new 
ed.,  London,  1875,  no.  viii.).  A  good  conscience 
goes  with  a  pure  heart  (1  Ti  1").  But  sin  so  perverts 
and  blinds  the  inward  eye  that  the  very  light  that 
is  in  us  is  darkness  (Mt  6^). 

(c)  But  something  more  is  required  before  the 
education  of  conscience  is  complete.  Knowledge 
is  much,  and  the  will  to  obedience  is  more,  but 
what  if  the  power  of  love  be  wanting  ?  In  that 
case  the  conscience  will  not  be  void  of  oft'ence  to- 
ward God  and  men.  According  to  the  NT  writers 
the  conscience  must  be  set  free  by  being  delivered 
from  the  sense  of  guilt  through  the  atoning  power 
of  Christ's  sacrifice  (He  9"  10'") ;  it  must  learn 
its  close  dependence  upon  the  mystery  of  faith 
(1  Ti  39 ;  cf.  119) ;  it  must  be  taught  that  love  out 
of  a  pure  heart  and  a  good  conscience  and  faith  un- 
feigned are  '  the  end  of  the  charge '  and  the  fulfill- 
ing of  the  law  (P).  To  be  perfectly  educated,  in 
short,  a  conscience  must  experience  the  constrain- 
ing and  transforming  power  of  the  love  of  Christ, 
in  whom  men  are  new  creatures,  so  that  old  things 
are  passed  away  and  all  things  are  become  new  (2  Co 
gi4.  r?)  Thus,  m  tiie  view  of  the  NT  writers,  ethics 
passes  into  religion,  and  the  Christian  conscience 
IS  the  conscience  of  one  who  lives  the  life  of  faith 
and  love,  and  who  can  say  with  St.  Paul,  '  I  live,  and 
yet  no  longer  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me '  (Gal  2^*). 

LmsRATtniE.— J.  Butler,  Analogy  and  Sermons,  London,  1862, 
Sermons  ii.  iii.;  I.  Kant,  Metaphysic  of  Ethicg,  Eng.  tr.,  1869, 
p.  245  fl.  ;  T.  H.  Green,  Prolegomena  to  Ethics,  Oxford,  1883, 
p.  342  ff. ;  H.  Calderwood,  llandbook  of  Moral  Philosophy, 
London,  1872,  pt.  i. ;  H.  Martensen,  Christian  Ethics,  Edin- 
burgh, 1881-82,  i.  856ff. ;  Newman  Smyth,  Christian  Ethics, 
do.  1892,  index  s.v.  ;  HDB,  art.  'Conscience';  PRE^,  art. 
'Qewissen' ;  B.Weias,i^r2'A«o/.,Eng.tr.,Edinbuiierh,  1882-83, 
i  476,  ii.  40,  211.  J.  C.  LAMBERT. 

CONSECRATE,  CONSECRATION.  — The  word 
'  consecrate '  occurs  twice  in  the  AV  of  Hebrews 


(7-*  10-'").  In  the  first  passage  it  is  the  translation 
of  TtTeKeiwuivov  ;  in  the  second  of  iveKalviatv.  In 
neither  case  is  the  translation  quite  suitable. 

1.  He  7*;  vlbv  eh  Tbv  aluiva  TereKeiwfiivov.  Full 
consideration  of  reXetiw  would  encroach  on  the  art. 
Perfect  (q.v.) ;  but  there  are  certain  special  points 
connected  with  this  passage  that  may  usefully  l)e 
noted,  rekeiovv  tAs  x^^P°-^  ^^  frequently  used  in  tlie 
LXX,  but  only  in  the  Pentateuch  (Ex  <2!SP-^-^^ 
[Lv  4"]  8*3  leK  Nu  3»),  to  translate  the  obscure 
Hebrew  phrase  mille'  ydd='till  the  hand,'  i.e. 
'consecrate'  (a  priest).  Elsewhere  in  the  Penta- 
teuch and  Historical  Books  (once  in  Ezekiel  [43"]) 
parts  of  irXrjpdw,  ^fjiirlirXrjfii,  wlirK-qfii  are  employed. 
reXeiowrty  is  used  alone  (Ex  29'^  ■*•  -'^-  ="•  ^,  Lv  7"  8=«- 
28. 28. 31.  ss  933)  for  the  Heb.  mUliVhn  ( = '  consecra- 
tion' [RV]).  In  Lv  21"  TereKeiufiivos  is  used  with- 
out the  rest  of  the  phrase  =  *  consecrated,'  although 
many  MSS  supply  tSs  x"P"s  airrov.  These  last 
uses  would  at  least  point  to  the  conclusion  that 
7-e\«6w  and  reXeiwo-is  tended  to  become  semi-techni- 
cal terms  for  the  consecration  of  the  priest,  having 
originally  been  used  to  translate  the  verb  in  the 
Heb.  phrase,  which  is  quite  obscure.  Most  prob- 
ably its  original  sense  is  suggested  in  the  corre- 
sponding Assyr.  Jcdtii,  7nW/t2  = '  hand  over  to  one 
(or  make  one  responsible  for)  a  person  or  thing  or 
office '  (cf.  F.  Delitzsch,  Assyr.  Handworterbuch, 
1896,  p.  409^ :  '  Rammanirari,  whom  Asur  has  en- 
dowed with  a  dominion  incomparable ' ;  and  HDB 
iv.  71»). 

It  follows,  then,  that  He  7^  and  the  other 
passages  where  TeXeibu  occurs  (see  art.  PERFECT) 
indicate  that  the  writer  is  making  use  of  a  technical 
expression  and,  in  harmony  with  his  system  of 
thought,  hellenizing  it  (cf.  Moffatt,  LNT,  1911,  p. 
427).  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  in  Hebrews 
Te\«(5w  is  used  in  the  Aristotelian  sense  of  bringing 
to  the  WXoy  or  final  end.  Jesus,  as  High  Priest, 
is  '  perfected '  for  evermore,  as  distinct  from  the 
reXefwo-ij  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood.  There  can  be 
no  idea  of  a  moral  development  in  character. 
Jesus  is  '  perfected  [and  there  is  also  the  further 
idea  of  exaltation  to  office]  for  evermore'  in  the 
sense  that  He  is  endowed  with  an  experience  of 
human  suffering  in  life  and  in  death  (He  4'*);  so 
A.  B.  Davidson,  Hcbreivs  {Handbooks  for  Bible 
Classes),  pp.  145  f.,  207  f.  ;  von  Soden,  Hcbrderbrie.p 
(Handkommentar  zum NT,  Tiibingen,  1 899),  p.  28  n. ; 
but  cf.  A.  B.  Bruce,  Hebrews,  1899,  \\  283  If.  ;  M. 
Dods,  EGT,  'Hebrews,'  1910,  pp.  265,  319,  who 
argue  for  the  sense  of  moral  perfecting. 

2.  He  10*:  tt)v  etaoSov  .  .  .  fiv  iveKaiviaev  rifuv 
oddv  Trp6cr<f>arov  Kal  ^Cxrav  dtd,  toO  KaTairtTaa ijja.TO%. 
iyKaivltoi  is  used  also  in  He  9".  In  AV  of  lO-"  the 
word  is  'consecrated,'  and  in  9^*  'dedicated.'  In 
RV  in  both  cases  '  dedicated '  is  used.  In  the  LXX 
iyKaivL(;u}  is  used  to  translate  two  Heb.  words, 
hanakh  ('initiate,'  'consecrate,'  Dt  20«,  1  K  8«) 
and  hiddesh  ('renew,'  'make  anew,'  1  S  IV*,  2  Ch 
158,  Ps  SOI'').  iyKaivl^u  in  He  lO^"  might  seem  to 
combine  both  meanings,  implying  that  .some  kind 
of  way  existed  before  (cf.  Sir  33  [36]«).  In  He  9»«, 
also,  the  word  means  simply  'inaugurate,'  unless 
the  pre-existence  of  a  covenant  is  supposed  (cf .  9**  ^) 
before  the  ceremony  of  vv.^^-si^  That  the  sense  of 
'  renewal,'  however,  is  strongly  emphasized  is  seen 
also  in  the  use  of  nrpoa^arov  ('fresh,'  'hitherto  un- 
trodden'), ^daav  implies  'a  way  that  really  lea<ls 
and  carries  all  who  enter  it  into  the  heavenly  rest,' 
as  opposed  to  'a  lifeless  pavement  trodden  by  the 
high  priest,  and  by  him  alone'  (Delitzsch,  Hebrews, 
Eng.  tr.,  ii.  [1870]  171).  It  also  implies  a  way  that 
would  never  become  old,  worn,  or  obsolt^te.  fip 
must  be  taken  as  referring  to  etffoSos.  Jesus  has, 
by  bursting  the  veil  of  His  flesli  in  death,  'inaugu- 
rated' a  new  entrance  into  tlie  Presence  of  God  (cf. 
Mk  15**).    The  flesh  of  Jesus  is  regarded  as  symbolic 


CONSOLATION 


CONSPIRACY,  PLOT 


243 


of  the  '  veil '  or  '  curtain  "  which  was  removed  as  the 
sacrificial  blood  was  carried  into  the  Holy  of  Holies. 
^Kiuwl^u)  '  includes  the  motive  of  leading  into  life  ' 
(von  Soden,  Hebraerbrief^,  p.  64).  Probably  the 
literal  idea  of  elffodot  ( = '  entrance  to  a  house ')  is 
also  symbolically  present  (cf.  Neh  31  [LXX]).  The 
'  house  '  in  this  case  is  the  Church,  the  new  Temple 
(cf.  ■rapfntaiai')  in  10^*,  and  its  use  in  3*  and  4"  is 
opposed  to  the  attitude  of  the  Bfpd-wujw  (3*).  The 
feast  of  tjKaiviOi  ( Jn  10^')  was  instituted  by  Judas 
Maccabaeus  (164  B.C.)  in  memory  of  the  cleansing 
of  the  Temple  from  the  pollution  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  (1  Mac  4*). 

LiTBRATURX. — In  addition  to  the  references  in  the  course  of 
the  article,  see  R.  W.  Dale,  The  JeicUh  Temple  aTid  the 
Christian  Church,  1902,  pp.  144  ft.,  231fiC  ;  F.  Paget,  The 
Spirit  0/  IHseipline,  1903,  p.  191  ff. ;  J.  B.  Mozley,  I  nivrrtiti/ 
Sermont,  1900,  p.  244fl. ;  artt.  ».r.  in  DCO  (Tasker),  HDB 
(HastingrsX  and  £ £Jf  (Feltoe).  R.  H.  StKACHA>«. 

CONSOLATION.— See  COMFOET. 

CONSPIBACT,  PLOT.— The  Gr.  word  translated 
'conspiracy'  {ffwuficxria)  occurs  only  once  in  the 
XT  (Ac  23'^),  but  the  thing  for  which  it  stands  is 
much  more  frequent.  In  the  OT  the  correspond- 
ing word  (■2'g)  is  fairly  common,  as  also  is  the 
cognate  verb  t?3  '  to  make  a  conspiracy,'  lit.  '  to 
bind-'  ffvpup-ocia  means,  literally,  the  mutual  tak- 
ing of  an  oath,  and  its  etymological  equivalent  in 
Latin  is  coniuratio.  Of  this  we  have  no  strict 
equivalent  in  English,  for  'conjure'  means  some- 
thing quite  difierent ;  '  conspiracy '  is  the  working 
equivalent. 

(1)  The  cruvw^Mxria  of  Ac  23^  was  entered  into  by 
'  more  than  forty'  Jews  -with  the  object  of  kUling 
St.  Paul.  To  this  end  they  tried  to  induce  the 
'  chief  captain '  to  bring  him  once  more  before  the 
Sanhedrin — which  had  already  entered  upon  his 
trial — that  they  might  'judge  of  his  case  more 
exactly.'  Along  the  route  the  conspirators  were 
to  be  lying  in  wait,  and  St.  Paul  would  not  reach 
the  council-chamber  alive.  The  scheme  was  frus- 
trated by  the  vigilance  and  the  intervention  of 
'Paul's  sister's  son'  (v.^*'-).  The  'chief  captain' 
at  once  decided  to  send  his  prisoner  to  Caesarea 
under  guard,  and  by  night.  This  narrative  is  of 
special  importance  here  for  two  reasons :  (a)  v.^ 
states  that  the  conspiracy  was  the  sole  reason  why 
St.  Paul  was  sent  to  the  governor  Felix  at  Csesarea  ; 
and  the  consequences  of  that  step  extend  to  the 
end  of  the  Acts.  With  this  turning-point  in  the 
life  of  St.  Paul,  however,  two  other  crises  should 
be  compared  :  (a)  the  earlier  one  described  in  Ac 
22^-22  (cf.  Eph  3» ;  from  Ac  22^'  onwards  there 
might  be  said  to  be  one  chain  of  events  leading  to 
the  prison  house  at  Rome) ;  (;3)  the  later  one  de- 
scribed in  Ac  2oi*-i*  26**  (the  appeal  to  Caesar).  (6) 
In  23**  the  '  conspiracy '  is  spoken  of  as  a  '  plot '  {i.e. 
ffwufjuxria  is  practically  identified  with  €Tt/3oi/Xi)), 
and  thus  the  NT  passages  which  speak  of  an  ext- 
povkv  (all  referring  to  St.  Paul)  are  brought  within 
the  scope  of  this  article. 

(2)  The  most  important  of  these  passa^'es  is 
Ac  20^^  where  the  Apostle  speaks  of  the  trials  and 
temptations  {-reipaa/xoi)  which  befell  him  by  the 
plots  {iiriSovXal)  of  the  Jews  at  Ephesus.  They 
seem  to  have  been  many  and  grievous  (cf.  the 
'tears,'  v.">);  notorious  ('Ye  yourselves  know,' 
v.^);  and  probably  additional  to  the  opposition 
mentioned  in  Ac  19^  ('speaking  evil  of  the  Way 
before  the  multitude '),  and  the  troublesome  com- 
petition of  the  '  strolling  Jews,  exorcists,'  in  19'^  ; 
certainly  additional  to  the  stirring  up  of  disturbance 
by  the '  combine '  of  Gentile  idol -makers  (19^- ).  If 
so,  the  fact  that  these  many  and  grievous  plots  are 
not  mentioned  in  ch.  19  shows  how  many  there 
may  have  been  elsewhere,  which  are  likewise  un- 
mentioned.      Others  do   find   mention  in   9^-*  20*, 


where  the  Gr.  is  again  ert^oi/Xi}.  Another  instance 
occurs  in  25*,  where  '  lay  wait '  (KV)=^i'<3pa»  xoteu', 
with  which  compare  M8pa  (ambush)  in  23'*  and 
ipfSptvetv  in  23*^. 

(3)  It  is  still  necessary  to  mention  at  least  three 
other  conspiracies  :  (a)  the  trial  of  Stephen  (Ac  6-7) 
turns  on  a  plot  which  reveals  numerous  and  close 
resemblances  to  the  case  of  Jesus.  In  fair  debate 
his  opponents  are  silenced  (6'") ;  then  false  wit- 
nesses are  '  suborned '  (w."-J^) ;  the  people  also 
are  '  stirred  up'  (v.") ;  and  one  of  the  accusations 
relates  to  threats  directed  against  the  '  holy  place ' 
(VV.13-";  cf.  Mk  14»).  This  plot  is  the  more 
important  because  Saul  is  declared  to  hare  been 
present  at  Stephen's  martyrdom,  to  have  agreed 
with  it,  and  to  have  kept  the  clothes  of  those  who 
threw  the  stones  (Ac  7**  8'  22*) ;  and  he  was  very 
likely  one  of  the  worshippers  at  the  CUician  syna- 
gogue in  Jerusalem,  mentioned  in  6*.  This  martyr- 
dom was  probably  one  of  the  chief  factors  in 
impressing  Saul,  against  his  will,  with  some  vague, 
and  for  a  time  unrecognized,  feeling  for  the  possible 
Divinity  of  the  Church  and  faith  of  Jesus  (note 

glO.  15  >JS9-S6.S»-eO\ 

(b)  In  Gal  2*  St.  Paul  speaks  of  an  important 
conspiracy,  but  the  grammatical  constructions  in 
the  immediate  context  are  very  uncertain,  and 
these  difficulties  are  increased  by  the  variant  read- 
ing in  2*,  where  some  excellent  scholars,  including 
Zahn,  J.  Weiss,  and  K.  Lake,  omit  the  words  of 
negation  {oU  oi-di),  thus  arriving  at  the  statement 
'  we  yielded  for  an  hour  on  account  of  the  pseudo- 
brethren.'  Those  who  accept  this  are  divided  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  concession  referred  to.  Weiss 
{>vith  Spitta)  believes  that  St.  Paul  'yielded'  by 
circumcising  Titus;  Zahn,  that  he  yielded  by 
going  up  to  Jerusalem  for  consultation  at  all,  but 
did  not  circtmicise  Titxis.  If  the  invasion  of  the 
pseudo-brethren  be  connected  vrith  'we  did  not 
yield,'  it  will  simply  have  defeated  itself  by  stiffen- 
ing St.  Paul's  resolution  in  the  contrary  direction  ; 
but  with  whatever  it  be  connected,  while  the  nega- 
tive in  v.*  is  retained,  it  cannot  be  supposed  to  have 
accomplished  much. 

The  scene  of  this  uninvited  visit  was  probably 
Antioch  (see  Ac  15'),  possibly  Galatia  (see  Gal  2* 
'  continue  with  you ') ;  almost  certainly  not  the 
Council  at  Jerusalem,  to  which  the  '  spjing  out '  is 
not  appropriate.  It  is  quite  possible  that  St.  Paul 
speaks  somewhat  too  severely,  for  he  writes  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  at  a  time  of  acute  '  dis- 
sension '  (cf .  Ac  15^).  But,  if  the  plot  was  as  repre- 
hensible as  he  says,  it  would  accotmt  for  much  of 
the  bitterness  of  the  Epistle,  for  in  this  he  is  fighting 
much  the  same  battle  over  again,  and  has  to  deal 
with  a  similar,  and  almost  equally  perilous,  inva- 
sion of  his  churches. 

(c)  In  Gal  2'"*^  St.  Paul  refers  to  a  conspiracy 
against  the  'truth  of  the  gospel'  at  Antioch,  in 
which  Peter,  the  'rest  of  the  Jews'  there,  and 
'  even  Barnabas,'  are  all  implicated.  Its  object, 
according  to  St.  Paul,  was  to  rebut  the  claim  of 
the  GentUes  to  equality  by  refusing  to  eat  with 
them.  The  vigour  of  his  language  is  noteworthy  : 
'  to  the  face,'  '  condemned '  (v.") ;  so  also  '  fearing ' 
(v.  12) ;  '  dissembled,' '  dissimulation  '  (v.^*) ;  '  not  up- 
rightly,' '  (not)  according  to  truth,'  '  before  them 
all '  (v. ").  The  Apostle  appears  to  draw  a  conscious 
and  pointed  contrast  between  his  own  conduct  and 
that  of  his  opponents  at  Antioch,  especially  St. 
Peter  ;  and  certainly  his  portrayal  ot  the  scene 
forms  in  eflect  a  telling  reply  to — almost  a  turning 
of  the  tables  on  —  any  insinuations  current  in 
Galatia  as  to  his  own  weakness  and  dissimulation 
(see,  e.g.,  l^'^  and,  more  generally,  Ro  3*,  2  Co  4' 
llia-15  1216^  I  fij  2»). 

LiT£&ATC~EE. — The  relevant  Commentaries,  esp.  Zaiai,  Ram- 
say,  Lightfoot,  etc.,  on  Galatians ;  F.  Spitta,  Die  Apottel- 


244 


CONSTRAINT 


CONTENTMENT 


gesehichte,  Halle,  1891  ;  J.  Weiss,  SK,  1893,  p.  480fl.,  and  1895, 
p.  262  ff.  ;  C.  V.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Aye,  i.'-i  [1897]  175-21«, 
262-275 ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  jVr,  1909,  i.  152-202  ;  Douglass 
Round,  The  Date,  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle,  to  the  Galatians.  I'JOO  ; 
W.   M.   Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and   the   Jtoman 

Citueti.  1895.  C.  H.  Watkins. 

CONSTRAINT.— Neglecting  irapa^ii^onai,  used  in 
Ac  28"'  (of.  Lk  24^)  simply  of  the  pressure  of  hospit- 
able invitation,  we  have  two  terms  in  the  NT  ex- 
pressing the  notion  of  '  constraint ' — dvaY/cdfeiv  and 

1.  Ava-yKi^eiv  is  to  constrain  to  some  course  of  con- 
duct as  a  matter  of  necessity  (avdYK?;).  In  Gal  6'^  the 
Judaizers  appear  as  an  example  of  the  sinister  exer- 
cise of  constraint,  rushing  the  bewildered  Galatian 
converts  into  circumcision  exemplo  suo  et  importuni- 
tate  (Bengel,  ad  loc).  Again,  St.  Paul  himself 
speaks  of  his  experience  of  constraint  arising  from 
a  solemn  sense  of  duty  ( 1  Co  9^*).  In  neither  case  is 
the  di'dyKrj  an  arbitrary,  irresistible  fate  that  drives 
men  to  act  thus  and  thus.  Otherwise  the  Galatians 
could  not  have  been  blamed  by  St.  Paul  for  listen- 
ing to  l)is  opponents,  nor  could  he  have  said  of  him- 
self, 'Woe  is  me  if  I  preach  not  the  gospel.' 

In  1  P  5-  pastors  are  exhorted  to  do  their  duty 
'  not  of  constraint '  {fxr]  dvayKaa-T&s) ;  but  this  is  not 
in  conflict  with  St.  Paul's  position  in  I  Co  9'*. 
Service  can  only  be  satisfactory  when  along  with 
the  fundamental  sense  of  duty  there  is  a  willing 
response  to  its  demand. 

In  Jude'  the  kindred  phrase  0^1x7^771'  ^<rxov  =  onr 
simple  '  I  could  not  help  '  {sc.  writing). 

2.  ffvv^xfiv  appears  in  2  Co  5'^,  and  being  predi- 
cated of  '  the  love:  of  Christ,'  cannot  have  here  any 
suggestion  of  irksome  pressure  as  in  some  other  in- 
stances of  its  use.  'The  love  of  Christ  (/rips  us,' 
says  the  Apostle,  adding  explicitly  that  his  over- 
mastering sense  of  that  love  arose  from  his  view  of 
the  Lord's  death.  J.  S.  CLEMENS. 

CONTENTMENT.— The  idea  of  '  contentment '  is 
more  prominent  in  Scripture  than  appears  on  the 
surface.  The  Avord,  indeed,  is  seldom  used,  St.  Paul 
being  the  only  NT  writer  who  treats  the  subject 
explicitly.  But  whether  the  word  is  there  or  not, 
the  thing  is  there.  Seeing  that  the  virtue  is  one  of 
the  constituent  elements  of  earthly  life  and  happi- 
ness, it  would  be  strange  if  it  were  absent  from  the 
ethics  of  Scripture.  No  amount  of  worldly  fortune 
or  success,  without  a  contented  mind,  brings  happi- 
ness, while  contentment  makes  straitened  means 
enough.  We  are  not  surprised  that  the  subject 
enters  into  all  ethical  .schemes  and  has  been  a 
favourite  text  of  essayists  in  all  lands  and  ages. 

1.  The  Stoic  idea. — Contentment,  reaching  even 
to  the  point  of  self-denial,  was  a  distinctive  feature 
in  the  Stoic  system  of  ethics,  which  prevailed  so 
widely  among  the  educated  classes  of  the  Roman 
Empire  in  the  first  Christian  centuries.  There  were 
many  points  both  of  resemblance  and  of  difference 
between  its  teaching  and  the  teaching  of  Christi- 
anityon  this  subject.  Seneca,oneof  Nero's  ministers, 
a  Stoic  of  Stoics,  was  a  contemporary  of  St.  Paul ; 
and  they  have  so  much  in  common  that  some 
Avxiters  think  that  one  borrowed  from  the  other, 
or  that  both  were  indebted  to  a  common  source. 
Lightfoot  discusses  the  point  in  his  essay  '  St.  Paul 
and  Seneca'  {Philippians*,  1878,  p.  270 fF.),  and 
comes  to  a  negative  conclusion.  Still  more  famous 
Stoics  are  Epictetus,  a  Greek  slave  of  Rome,  and 
the  Emperor  Marcus  Aurelius,  the  saint  of  ancient 
paganism.*  '  The  sentences  of  Seneca  are  stimulat- 
ing to  the  intellect ;  the  sentences  of  Epictetus  are 
fortifying  to  the  character ;  the  sentences  of  M. 

•  We  have  ample  means  of  knowincr  these  writers  in  various 
essays  and  translations :  the  essays  of  Matthew  Arnold,  F.  W.  H. 
Myers,  F.  W.  Farrar  ;  translations  by  Gcorpe  Long,  G.  H.  Ken- 
dall, A.  Stewart,  Elizabeth  Carter,  and  G.  Stanhop>e. 


Aurelius  find  their  way  to  the  soul'  (Arnold). 
Myers  remarks  tliat  in  these  three  writers  the 
system  grows  more  practical.  '  We  hear  less  of 
its  logic,  its  cosmogony,  its  portrait  of  the  ideal 
Sage.  It  insists  on  wliat  may  be  termed  tiie 
catholic  verities  of  all  philosophers,  on  the  sole  im- 
portance of  virtue,  the  spiritual  oneness  of  the  uni- 
verse, the  brotherhood  of  men.'  The  weakness  of 
Stoicism  and  of  Stoic  ethics  was  that  its  religion 
was  a  minus  quantity,  just  as  the  strength  of  Chris- 
tianity  is  in  the  religious  spirit  of  its  etliics.  With- 
out arguing  that  ethics  is  impossible  without  re- 
ligion, we  may  say  that  it  is  immeasurably  richer 
and  nobler  with  religion.  The  Stoic  writers  indeed 
often  speak  of  God  ;  but  whether  they  mean  more 
by  the  name  than  the  order  of  Nature  or  universal 
law  and  reason  is  open  to  debate.  They  have  no 
explicit  doctrine  of  God.  To  imitate  or  obey  God 
and  to  follow  Nature  seem  to  be  the  same  thing. 
Lightfoot  speaks  of  the  system  both  as  '  material 
pantheism'  and  'pantheistic  materialism.'  W.  L. 
Davidson  in  his  6toic  Creed  (1907)  holds  that  the 
creed  makes  Fate  superior  to  God  ;  in  other  words. 
Fate  is  the  supreme  law  of  the  universe.  With 
these  abatements  the  great  Stoics  plead  for  virtue 
most  impressively.  Their  picture  of  the  good  man 
battling  with  the  forces  of  evil  is  very  noble. 
Scarcely  anything  has  been  said  by  later  moralists 
respecting  virtue  and  righteousness  generally,  and 
contentment  in  particular,  which  is  not  in  substance 
anticipated  by  the  Stoics.  Joseph  Butler's  power- 
ful arguments  for  virtue  from  its  natural  effects  and 
tendencies,  from  man's  self-interest  in  the  highest 
sense,  from  the  instincts  of  human  nature  rightly 
understood,  are  quite  in  the  Stoic,  and  indeed  in 
the  Christian,  vein.  The  Stoic  idea  of  contentment 
with  life  as  it  comes  or  is  fixed  for  us  by  unchange- 
able law  is  often  pushed  to  the  extreme  of  apathy, 
insensibility,  impassiveness  {d-rrddeia).  This  is  not 
to  endure  pain,  but  to  deaden  the  sense  of  pain. 
Here  Stoicism  betrays  its  Eastern  origin,  and  joins 
hands  with  Hindu  and  Buddhist  asceticism. 

Christian  moralists  have  rightly  appealed  to  Stoic 
teaching  as  a  preparation  for  Christian  ethics.  Two 
notable  English  writers  on  contentment  are  Sander- 
son in  two  sermons,  and  Barrow  in  five  sermons, 
on  Ph  4",  the  former  sententious  and  pointed,  the 
latter  manly  and  copious  in  thought  and  expression. 
Both  are  greatly  strengthened  by  abundant  quota- 
tion from  the  three  great  Stoics,  as  well  as  from 
Horace,  Cicero,  Chrysostom,  and  others.  Still,  their 
main  source  of  material  and  proof  is  Scripture.  In 
this  mode  of  treatment  they  are  examples  of  the 
Anglican  and  Puritan  literature  of  their  age.  While 
Scripture  is  the  supreme  court  of  appeal,  the  abun- 
dant references  to  ancient  writers  show  the  har- 
mony of  Christian  thought  with  general  belief,  and 
seem  to  imply  some  kind  of  Divine  revelation  or 
guidance  in  the  pre-Christian  world. 

2.  St.  Paul's  teaching.  —  In  two  passages  St. 
Paul  expressly  teaches  the  lesson  of  contentment, 
both  by  word  and  by  his  own  examnle :  '  I  have 
learned,  in  whatsoever  state  I  am,  tnerein  to  be 
content.  I  know  how  to  be  abased,  and  I  know 
how  to  abound  ;  in  everything  and  in  all  things  I 
have  learned  the  secret  both  to  be  filled  and  to  be 
hungry,  both  to  abound  and  to  be  in  Mant'  (Ph 
4^^'-) ;  '  Godliness  with  contentment  is  great  gain ' 
(1  Ti  6*  and  context).  In  the  second  passage  St. 
Paul,  in  opposition  to  those  who  tuni  godliness 
into  material  gain,  emphasizes  the  true  gain  of 
godly  contentment  in  guarding  against  the  moral 
dangers  of  avarice  (vv.»-  ^'').  His  Stoic  contempo- 
raries would  have  joined  is  his  counsels  :  '  For  we 
brought  nothing  into  the  world,  for  neither  can 
we  carry  anything  out ;  but  having  food  and  cover- 
ing we  shall  be  therewith  content ' — food  and  cover- 
ing, a  modest  sutticiencj-.     '  The  love  of  money  is 


CONTEXTME^'T 


COISTRIBUTIOX 


245 


a  root  of  all  kinds  of  evil ' — of  lying,  dishonesty, 
overreaching,  oppression.  In  the  first  passage  he 
is  guarding  himself  against  the  suspicion  of  a  mer- 
cenary spirit.  He  has  never  sought  for  himself 
the  contributions  which  he  has  received  from  the 
churches,  thus  making  gain  of  godliness.  '  I  have 
learned '  {Ifiador) :  contentment,  like  all  other 
virtues,  is  not  a  growth  of  nature,  but  a  plant  of 
"race's  planting  and  nurture.  Seneca  said  '  Nature 
does  not  give  virtue ;  to  become  good  is  an  art.' 
Contentment  is  a  lesson  learnt  in  the  school  of  ex- 
perience at  the  feet  of  a  Divine  teacher.  St.  Paul 
has  learned  to  reduce  his  desires  to  his  means,  '  in 
whatever  state  I  am  {ev  oTj  elfu),  be  it  high  or  low, 
rich  or  poor,  base  or  honourable,  easy  or  painful, 
prosperous  or  troublous ;  all  that  God  sends  is  wel- 
come.' 'To  be  content' — airripKTis,  'sufficient  in 
oneself,'  'independent';  avrdpKfia,  'sufficiency  in 
oneself,'  1  Ti  6^ ;  see  Lk  3^*,  2  Co  12^,  He  13'.  '  I 
have  learned  the  secret' — a  striking  phrase  repre- 
senting a  single  word  in  the  text,  fUftAitfitu  (jivito), 
'  I  have  been  initiated,'  a  reference  to  the  ancient 
religious  mysteries.  '  I  have  learned  the  secret  of 
contentment  in  all  circumstances' — is  there  not 
here  a  playful  turn  in  comparing  the  art  of  sub- 
mission to  all  that  happens  to  us  with  instruction 
in  esoteric  mysteries?*  Of  course  the  self-suffi- 
ciency or  independence  spoken  of  is  not  original 
or  absolute,  but  derived  and  conditioned.  '  I  can 
do  all  things  in  him  that  strengtheneth  me'  (Ph 
4'*) — 'True  contentedness  of  mind  is  a  point  of 
high  and  holy  learning,  whereunto  no  man  can  at- 
tain unless  it  be  taught  him  from  above'  (Sander- 
son). 'I  have  learned' — learning  is  gradual,  ad- 
vancing from  the  alphabet  to  perfect  knowledge. 
Moral  progress  is  not  by  leaps  and  bounds,  but  step 
by  step,  invisible  to  subject  and  spectator  as  the 
growth  of  tree  and  flower.  It  is  '  forgetting  the 
things  which  are  behind  and  stretching  forward 
to  the  things  which  are  before,'  from  the  great  to 
the  greater,  from  the  high  to  the  higher. 

3.  Difference  between  OX  and  NT  doctrine. — 
The  reason  of  the  whole  difference  between  the 
Christian  bearing  in  the  problems  of  life  and  that 
of  the  Stoic  and  natural  moralist  lies  in  the  Chris- 
tian conception  of  God,  more  especially  in  God's 
providential  reign  over  and  care  for  the  world  and 
the  individual.  Faith  in  that  truth  determines 
the  Christian  attitude,  especially  in  times  of  adver- 
sity and  suffering.  As  to  the  doctrine,  the  differ- 
ence between  OT  and  NT  is  one  only  of  degree — 
a  great  diflerence  we  admit — but  even  the  early 
revelation  of  this  truth  is  glorious.  After  making 
every  allowance  for  development  in  the  OT  records, 
we  must  admit  that  their  presentation  of  God's  re- 
lation to  the  world  and  to  man — personal,  living, 
intimate,  loving,  like  that  of  human  father  and 
son — was  quite  unique  at  the  time.  The  lives  of 
patriarchs,  leaders,  prophets,  as  well  as  the  nation- 
al historj-,  show  us  Providence  at  work.  We  have 
there,  as  in  the  NT,  righteousness  as  the  rule  of 
Divine  dealing  and  final  destiny.  We  see  righteous- 
ness also  as  the  supreme  endeavour  of  human  life. 
What  infinite  pathos  of  Divine  love,  compassion, 
tenderness,  patience,  faithfulness,  slowness  to 
anger,  readiness  to  forgive,  speaks  in  Psalm  and 
Prophecy  (Ps  23.  32.  36.  63.  73.  103,  Is  40.  43.  53. 
54.  55.  60.  61,  Jer  31,  Ezk  34.  36.  37.  etc.).  The 
Book  of  Job  casts  a  flood  of  light  on  the  Divine 
mission  of  affliction.  The  meaning  of  the  provi- 
dential discipline  of  life  emphasi;^  in  He  1^- 
is  taken  from  the  OT.  The  contrast  between  the 
OT  portrayal  of  God  as  a  moral  Ruler  and  of  His 
government  as  administering  Moral  Law  and  the 
glorification  of  might  in  contemporary  kingdoms 
and  even  in  later  Rome,  is  striking  in  the  highest 

*  llbere  are  similar  turns  in  Ro  l^n  '  in  dUigeiice  not  sloth- 
ful';  1  Th  411 '  be  ambitious  to  be  quiet.' 


degree.  The  confirmation  of  all  this  in  the  facta 
of  experience  in  Butler's  treatise  (pt.  i.  ch.  3)  is 
unanswerable.  The  case  of  the  good  sutferine 
misfortune  and  the  evil  prospering  is,  in  the  final 
issue  of  the  whole,  exceptional  (see  Job,  Ps  73). 

The  NT  fulfilment  is  the  crown  of  a  great  pre- 
paration. It  is  all  summeil  up  in  the  idea  of  God 
as  Father  of  the  individual,  which  pervades  the 
entire  NT  teaching  from  first  to  last.  '  Your 
Father,  my  Father,  are  words  ever  on  the  lips  of 
the  supreme  Teacher  and  Revealer.  '  When  ye 
pray,  say.  Our  Father.'  'How  much  more  shall 
your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  give  good  things 
to  them  that  ask  him  ? '  '  Your  heavenly  Father 
knoweth  that  ye  have  need '  of  food  and  clothes. 
The  Divine  Fatherhood  is  the  strongest  foundation 
of  prayer.  We  know  how  much  St.  Paul  and  St. 
John  make  of  the  correlative  relation  of  believers 
as  children  of  God,  St.  Paul  speaking  of  them  as 
both  '  sons '  and  '  children,'  St.  John  using  only  the 
title  'children'  (Ro  8"-  ^\  1  Jn  3').  For  the  chil- 
dren nothing  is  too  good  for  God  to  promise  and 
give.  '  It  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give 
you  the  kingdom '  (Lk  12°).  The  whole  section 
Mt  e^*"**  is  a  perfect  antidote  to  anxiety  and  fear. 
'  To  them  that  love  Gk)d  all  things  work  together 
for  good '  (Ro  8^)  corresponds  to  OT  sayings  like 
Ps  ^410  103^.  Human  faith,  called  forth  and  jus- 
tified by  such  promises,  never  rose  so  high  in  the 
sphere  of  natural  reason  as  in  Ro  S'*'**.  It  is  in 
passages  like  Jn  13-17  that  the  tenderness  of  Grod's 
love  for  His  earthly  children  finds  the  highest  ex- 
pression. These  selections  from  a  wide  field  may 
suffice  to  set  forth  the  grounds  of  Christian  sub- 
mission to  all  that  Gk)d  sends  or  permits,  gives  or 
withholds,  of  earthly  good. 

Contentment  seems  a  weak  word  to  describe  the 
Christian  attitude  to  the  Divine  appeal.  It  has 
all  the  Divine  character  and  revelation  in  word 
and  act  behind  it.  Even  the  adverse  and  painful 
is  seen  to  have  Divine  purpose  in  it.  We  '  rejoice 
in  tribulation '  and  '  manifold  trials '  (Ro  5^,  Ja  1-}, 
not  for  their  own  sake  but  for  the  fruit  they  bear. 
Trials  and  difficulties  nurse  strength  and  courage. 
The  greatest  sufferers  have  been  the  greatest 
heroes.  Patient  endurance  is  the  highest  evidence 
of  strength.  The  strongest  souls  are  often  found 
in  sick  chambers.  '  God's  peace  stands  sentry, 
keeps  guard  over  them '  (Ph  4") — an  echo  again  of 
an  OT  benediction, '  Thou  wilt  keep  him  in  perfect 
peace,  whose  mind  is  stayed  on  thee,  because  he 
trusteth  in  thee'  (Is  26').  This  age-long,  world- 
wide extent  of  personal  experience  guarantees  the 
truth  and  reality  of  what  lies  behind  Chrisrian 
resignation  and  trust.  We  may  repeat  the  vow 
of  Epictetus  to  Gkxl,  with  deeper  meaning : 

'  For  the  rest  use  me  to  what  thou  pleasest.  I  do  consent 
unto  thee  and  am  indifferent.  I  refuse  nothing  which  seemeth 
good  to  thee.  Lead  me  whither  tboa  wQt ;  put  on  me  what 
garment  thou  pleasest.  Wilt  thou  hare  me  to  be  a  governor 
or  a  private  man,  to  stay  at  home  or  to  be  banished  away,  to 
be  poor  or  to  be  rich ':  I  will,  in  respect  to  all  these  things, 
apolc^ise  for  thee  with  men '  (quoted  in  Barrow,  Works,  iiL  X). 

LinEATtiu. — Somons  on  Ph  4U  will  be  fooDd  in  I.  Barrow, 

Worka,  m.  0831]  1-106 ;  R.  Sanderson,  Works,  i.  [ISW]  112- 

172;  R.  Sibbes,  Work^,  v.   [1863]  177-193;  Commentaiies  on 

Philippians,  esp.  C.  J.  EllicottmSfiSX  M.  R.  Vincent  (/CC, 

I  1897),  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy  (EGT,  19C3) ;  see  also  J.  Gntbiie. 

I  Divine  Discontent.  1913 ;  H.  W.  Smith,  Tks  Life  Worth  Liv- 

I  inn,  1912,  p.  7 ;  Lord  Avebnzy,  Peat»  and  Hajfpiness,  1909, 

p.  99  ff.;  J.  I.  Vance,  Royal  Manhood^  UM,  p.  165  ff. ;  D. 

Watson,  In  Life's  School,  IflOS,  p.  145ff.      J.  S.  BANKS. 

CONTINENCE.— See  Absxisexce. 

CONTRIBUTION.— The  significance  of  the  word 
KOivuria,  twice  translated  '  contriburion  '  in  the  RV, 
is  understood  best  from  its  employment  and  the 
employment  of  its  cognates  in  various  connexions 
in  the*NT.  The  root- idea  is  that  of  personal  rela- 
tionship.    The  fellowship  or  communion  which  it 


246 


CONTERSATIOX 


CONVERSION 


denotes,  while  it  is  essentially  inward  and  spiritual, 
is  at  the  same  time  a  living  and  active  union  based 
on  mutual  co-ojjeration  between  persons  or  porsoni- 
iied  subjects  (cf.  1  Jn  P-  "•,  Ac  2«,  2  Co  6"  13'*, 
1  Co  P,  etc.  ;  for  crvyKoiuuyeii'  and  ffvyKOtvuvdi  see 
Ph  4",  Eph  5",  Rev  18*).  From  this  it  came  to 
express  the  acts  by  which  this  vital  fellowship  is 
manifested  through  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  by  acts  of  brotherly  kindness  between  members 
of  the  scattered  Christian  communities  (cf.  Ph  2\ 
He  13'« ;  see  B.  Weiss,  Biblical  Theology  of  the  NT^, 
1893,  i.  188).  In  the  Didache  we  find  the  same 
conception  of  brotherly  love  emphasized  as  the 
visible  expression  of  a  personal  spiritual  communion 
((TvyKOLvwvqaeii  Sk  irdvTa  t<^  d8e\<pt^  vov  .  .  .  el  yd,p  iv 
Ttp  aOavdrcf)  koivuvoI  i<rTe,  irba(^  fiaWov  iv  toU  Ovryrois, 
iv.  8).  Here  the  meaning  has  not  yet  reached  the 
degenerate  stage  at  which  it  arrived  in  patristic 
(Jreek  theology,  where  it  is  almost  equivalent  to 
e\er]fjLoaiji>7j  (see  Cremer,  Bibl.-Thcol.  Lexicon  of  NT 
Greek,  Eng.  tr.*,  1895,  p.  363).  We  are  thus  able 
to  apprehend  the  supreme  importance  which  St. 
Paul  attached  to  the  contributions  of  the  Gentile 
Churches  to  the  poor  among  the  Christians  of  Judaea 
(Ro  15*',  2  Co  9'^,  etc. ;  see  also  art.  Collection), 
His  conception  of  the  undertaking  is  not  merely 
that  Gentile  and  Jew  should  be  participators  in 
the  common  blessings  of  plenty,  to  a  siiare  in  which 
each  Christian  lias  a  claim.  If  that  were  all,  we 
should  look  for  the  word  fxerix^Lv  (cf.  1  Co  10", 
He  2",  etc. ),  which  has  both  a  narrower  and  a  more 
external  connotation  than  Koivuvdv  (see  Westcott, 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrew^,  1903,  pp.  74,  336 ;  Robert- 
son-Plummer,  1  Corinthians  [ICC,  1911],  pp.  212, 
215,217  ;  cf.,  however,  EUicott's  Commentary,  1887, 
on  1  Co  W% 

The  giver  and  the  receiver  are  both  involved  in 
Koivuvla,  and  in  the  acts  of  giving  and  receiving 
they  throw  into  objective  reality  their  complete 
personal  union  in  the  Body  of  Christ.  To  achieve 
this  end  no  sacrifice  was  too  great  (Xetrou/ry^o-oi, 
Ro  15^),  for  a  debt  inestimable  was  resting  on 
those  who,  from  outside,  had  been  received  into 
the  spiritual  fellowship  of  Jesus  Christ  ((J^efXerat). 
By  discharging  their  obligation  in  this  respect,  the 
Gentiles  not  only  witnessed  to  the  profound  spirit- 
ual principle  of  communion  in  the  Christian  society, 
but  also  used  an  instrument  whereby  the  union, 
thus  expressed,  would  be  realized  on  the  other 
.side.  Arising  out  of  the  movement  initiated  by 
St.  Paul  we  find  that  contributing  to  the  needs  of 
the  saints  (Koivuvovvres,  Ro  12'*)  is  enjoined  as  a 
general  duty  of  Christians  (cf.  koivuviko^s,  1  Ti  6^*, 
where  the  thought  involves  the  formation  of  the 
habit  and  character  of  generosity  with  a  view  to 
'  the  life  whicli  really  is  life '  [see  the  translation 
in  Moffat's  Historical  New  Testament"^,  1901,  p. 
576]).  J.  R.  Willis. 

CONYERSATION.— This  is  the  AV  rendering  of 
the  Gr.  dfacrpoipri  in  Gal  l'»,  Eph  4*2,  1  Ti  4",  Ja  3'^ 
I  p  115-18  212  31.  i.  18^  2  P  2^  3"  ;  of  woXlrevfia  in  Ph  3-» 
(TToKireveffde,  Ph  1*^),  and  of  rpbiro^  in  He  13'.  The 
English  word  is  founded  on  the  Vulg.  conversaiio 
(converso7-)  and  signifies  'manner  of  life'  (=  RV 
rendering ;  for  examples  of  this  use  of  '  conversa- 
tion,' see  Murray's  OED  s.v.).  iroXirevfia  and 
iro\ireve<rOai  definitely  associate  the  conception  of 
life  with  relationship  to  a  7r6\ts.  They  are  character- 
istically Greek  expressions ;  for  '  conduct  to  a 
Greek  was  mainly  a  question  of  relation  to  the 
State '  (J.  A.  Robinson  on  Eph  2-).  On  the  other 
hand,  dvourrp^tpea-Oai  (with  its  noun  dva(TTpo<p-^)  is  in 
the  NT  practically  synonymous  with  words  express- 
ing a  manner  or  '  walk  of  life,  such  as  irepiTrareiv 
(a  favoui'ite  Pauline  and  Johannine  word)  and 
TropeCieffOai  (which  is  found  in  Luke  and  Acts  and 
elsewhere  in  the  NT,  but  not  in  Pauline  and  Johan- 


nine writings) ;  cf.  also  (rroix"",  Gal  5^  6'°,  Ph  3" 
(see  HDB,  art.  '  Conversation,'  for  disou.ssion  of  the 
distinction  between  vepiiraTtlv  and  dvaarp^cfxa-dai.  as 
drawn  by  E.  Hatch  in  his  Essays  in  Biblical  Greek, 
1889,  p.  9).  'Conversation,'  tlierefore,  is  an  ex- 
cellent rendering  of  dpajTpo<pT/i  if  it  be  understood 
in  the  general  sense  of  '  conduct '  or  regulation  of 
life,  the  signification  which  it  bore  in  Englisli 
before  being  limited  by  common  usage  to  inter- 
course in  speech. 

We  find  dvaaTp4<peffdai  used  in  this  ethical  sense 
not  only  in  the  NT  writings,  but  in  the  Apostolic 
Father.s  (Ign,  Magn.  ix.  1  ;  Hermas,  Mand.  xi.  12  ; 

1  Clem.  xxi.  8  ;  Ep.  of  Barn,  xix,  6,  and  also  in 
the  Didache  iii.  9  repeating  Ep.  of  Barn.  xix.  6, 
/xerA  diKalwv  .  .  .  dvacrTpa^Vi?)-  Deissmann,  Bible 
Studies,  Eng.  tr.,  1901,  p.  88  (cf.  Light  from  t/ie 
Ancient  East,  Eng.  tr.'-*,  1911,  pp.  107,  315),  points 
out  that  '  the  moral  signification  se  gerere  which 
dva<TTpi<p€<Teai  bears  in  2  Co  l'^  Eph  2»,  1  P  1",  2  P 
2'8,  He  10"  13'8,  1  Ti  3",  is  illustrated  by  Grimm, 
needlessly,  on  the  analogy  of  the  Hebrew  •^hn,'  and 
shows  that  it  is  not  to  be  explained  as  a  Hebraism 
(cf.  ib.  p.  194),  by  quoting  the  '  Inscription  of  Per- 
gamus  No.  224  A  (middle  of  2nd  cent.  B.C.),  where 
it  is  said  of  some  high  official  of  the  king  iv  TrSxrtv 
Ka[ipoii  dfiifiiTTUS  Kai  dSlews  dvaLffTpe(p6/ji€vos  (cf.  also 
Moulton,  Grammar  of  NT  Greek,  1908,  p.  11,  and 
T.  Nageli,  Wortschatz  des  Apostels  Paulus,  1905, 
pp.  34,  38). 

The  ethical  use  of  dvaffrpofifi  and  dva<rrpi<f>ta6ai  18 
thus  quite  frequent  in  Hellenistic  Greek  ;  and 
neither  noun  nor  verb  is  Hebraic,  nor  peculiar  to 
the  language  of  the  NT,  but  common,  as  Deissmann 
states,  to  the  ancient  world  as  a  whole.  The  ety- 
mology conveys  the  idea  of  movement  -vvithm 
certain  limits  or  a  given  sphere.  Such  activity, 
however,  is  more  expressly  defined  by  the  words 
denoting  '  walking '  or  '  going '  mentioned  above. 
All  such  expressions  may  be  illustrated  by  the  term 
'  the  Way '  used  in  the  Acts  (see  9-  W-  ^  22*-  ^)  of 
the  path  of  the  Christians  (see  art.  Cheistian 
LlFE),  which  is  marked  out  by  Divine  revelation, 
as  opposed  to  a'ipeais  (Ac  24'''),  the  way  a  man 
chooses  for  himself.  R.  Martin  Pope. 

CONVERSION.— 1.  Terminology.— The  concep- 
tion of  conversion,  as  of  so  much  else  in  the  NT, 
rests  on  what  had  become  familiar  in  the  OT.  But 
we  find  nothing  like  a  definite  doctrine  of  conversion 
in  either  ;  much  less  a  theology  or  a  psychology. 
The  most  common  word  in  the  OT  is  '  turn '  (2\v), 
which  is  quite  general  in  meaning ;  it  may  be  ac- 
complished by  the  sinner  himself  (Ezk  18")  or, 
more  rarely,  by  God  (Jer  31").  In  the  NT,  as  far 
as  the  Acts  and  Epistles  are  concerned,  the  noun 
occurs  only  once  (Ac  15^),  but  the  verb  is  com- 
paratively frequent :  e.g.  Ac  3'^  ^  26'8,  1  Th  P, 

2  Co  3*',  i  P  2^*.  It  is  significant  that  it  occurs  12 
times  intransitively,  4  times  transitively  ;  and  the 
tense  (aorist)  used  most  commonly  implies  that  the 
action  is  regarded  as  momentary  more  often  than 
continuous  (there  is  implied  continuity  in  Ac  14'* 
15i»,  Gal  4»,  as  against  Ac  3'9  26'8,  2  Co  3'«,  Ja  5"»). 
It  may  be  added  that  in  all  cases,  except  4  (Ac  3" 
28=",  Ja  S'"-  2"),  RV  translates  by  '  turn.'  The  verb 
is  only  twice  used  literally  (Rev  V-,  2  P  2"),  and  it 
is  used  once  in  Galatians  (4")  and  twice  in  a  single 
passage,  2  P  2='-  =»,  quoting  from  the  OT  (Pr  26"), 
of  perversion. 

2.  Suggestions  from  the  context.— \Vhat  are  the 
causes  and  accompaniments  of  conversion  ?  It  ap- 
pears as  the  result  of  preaching  (Ac  14'"),  or  of 
'signs'  (9"  IP').  It  is  connected  with  repentance 
(3'"  26^)  and  followed  by  bond-service  and  endurance 
(1  Th  P);  and  in  the  story  of  Cornelius  and  his 
friends,  as  St.  Peter  is  preaching,  at  the  moment 
when  he  describes  remission   of  sins  as  i^iven  to 


CONVERSION 


CONVERSION 


247 


those  who  believe  on  Christ,  the  Holy  Spirit  falls 
on  them,  and  they  speak  with  tongues  and 
'  magnify  God '  (Ac  10"-  *).  They  are  then  bap- 
tized. The  same  thing  happens  to  the  12  disciples 
of  ApoUos  at  Ephesus  (Ac  19'^)  after  they  have 
been  baptized  and  St.  Paul  has  laid  his  hands  upon 
them.  (In  1  Co  12**>  and  W passim  nothing  is  said 
to  connect  the  gift  of  'tongues'  with  conversion.) 
This  glossolalia  is  the  only  outward  sign  of  con- 
version mentioned  in  the  NT  ;  it  is  true  that  the 
men  in  Stephen's  unrepentant  audience  were  '  cut 
to  the  heart '  (Ac  7*^) ;  but  abnormalities  such  as 
those  which  accompanied  the  early  stages  of  the 
Methodist  movement,  the  American  camp-meet- 
ings, or  the  Welsh  revival,  are  altogether  absent 
from  the  history  of  apostolic  preaching  and  its 
results. 

3.  Parallel  expressions. — Although  the  actual 
descriptions  of  conversion  are  few  (see  below,  §  7), 
references  to  the  great  transition  are  numerous. 
The  converts  are  reminded  that  they  were  recon- 
ciled (2  Co  5^),  that  they  died  with  Christ  (Col  2*'), 
that  they  were  made  alive  together  with  Christ 
(Eph  2*),  that  they  were  baptized  into  Christ 
(Gal  3"),  that  they  obtained  mercy  (Ro  1I»).  The 
word  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel  is  increasing  in  the 
Colossians,  since  the  day  that  they  heard  and  knew 
the  grace  of  God  in  truth  (Col  l^ ;  cf.  He  1(F«-  ^-). 
They  have  renounced  the  hidden  things  of  dark- 
ness ;  they  have  believed,  they  are  washed,  they 
are  sanctified  (1  Co  6'^).  The  general  term  '  salva- 
tion '  is  used  in  1  Co  l-i,  Ro  W\  Tit  3«;  St.  Peter 
writes  to  those  who  are  elect,  begotten  again 
(1  P  11-  3  ;  cf.  2  P  l^").  In  all  these  phrases,  stress 
is  laid  sometimes  on  the  action  of  God,  sometimes 
on  the  response  of  man  ;  nor  is  it  always  easy  to 
see  whether  the  writers  are  referring  to  the  actual 
moment  of  conversion  or  not ;  they  would  seem  to 
think  more  frequently  of  the  new'life,  introduced 
by  a  definite  exiierience  (cf.  St.  Paul's  use  of  the 
perfect  tense,  •^XxtKores,  1  Co  15^*,  ireTiffTevKa,  2  Ti 
1^),  than  of  the  exact  moment  of  transition. 
The  language  of  St.  John,  as  might  have  been 
expected,  makes  but  little  reference  to  the  change 
as  an  event  happening  in  time ;  his  thought  is 
rather  of  belief  or  knowledge  as  an  abiding  at- 
titude of  mind  (1  Jn  2^  4^^)  ;  but  we  may  compare 
the  striking  phrase  in  1  Jn  3'^  *  have  passed  from 
death  unto  life,'  with  that  of  St.  Paul  (2  Co  5^'), '  if 
any  man  is  in  Christ,  it  is  a  new  creating.' 

References  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers  to  the  con- 
version of  unbelievers  are  surprisingly  few.  These 
\vriters  are  rather  concerned  to  hold  a  high  ethical 
standard  before  their  readers.  Clement  of  Rome 
speaks  of  those  who  have  been  called  through  His 
wUl  in  Christ  Jesus  as  being  justified  through  faith 
(xxxii. ),  and  constantly  emphasizes  the  need  of 
repentance.  The  Didache  makes  no  reference  to 
the  conversion  of  outsiders  as  such,  though  one 
would  think  that  the  members  of  the  Church  must 
have  regarded  the  exhortations  of  the  '  Two  Ways ' 
as  more  applicable  to  outsiders  than  to  themselves. 
Barnabas,  who,  like  the  Didache,  quotes  the  '  Two 
Ways,'  speaks  of  the  apostles  as  'those  who 
preached  unto  us  the  forgiveness  of  sins'  (^aii.); 
refers  to  the  time  before  belief  on  God,  '  when  the 
abode  of  oui*  heart  Mas  corrupt  and  weak,  a  temple 
truly  built  Avith  hands '  (xvi. ) ;  and  adds  the  signifi- 
cant passage  :  '  He  thatdesireth  to  be  saved  looketh 
not  to  the  man,  but  to  Him  that  dwelleth  and 
speaketh  in  him,  being  amazed  at  this  that  he  has 
never  at  any  time  heard  these  words  from  the 
mouth  of  the  speaker,  nor  himself  ever  desiied  to 
hear  them'  (i6.). 

4.  Conyersion  is  from  heathenism. — This  is  the 
great  difference  in  the  use  of  the  tenn  in  the  XT 
from  that  in  the  OT  and  in  much  of  our  modem 
religious  phraseology.     AH   the  NT  converts  had 


definitely  broken  with  their  old  surroundings. 
The  language  of  the  NT  is  the  language  of  tlie 
first  stage  in  the  history  of  a  missionary  church. 
In  the  OT  even  sinners  are  for  the  most  part 
members  of  the  chosen  nation  ;  the  prophets  call 
the  people  back  to  a  holiness  which  they  are  re- 
garded as  having  preWously  lost.  Even  Ezekiel, 
who  alone  seems  to  regard  the  history  of  Israel  as 
one  of  disobedience  from  the  beginning,  feels  that 
the  nation  has  somehow  been  in  touch  with  Jahweh 
all  along.  In  our  own  times,  the  majority  of  con- 
verts have  been  brought  up  in  a  more  or  less 
Christian  atmosphere ;  there  has  been  a  lengthened 
period  of  suggestion  followed  at  last  by  a  decision. 
Even  where  conversion  seems  most  sudden,  much 
teaching  has  often  preceded.  NT  preaching  was 
very  diBerent.  To  the  Jews,  it  occasioned  an  in- 
tellectual shock,  for  the  most  part  at  first  highly 
resented  (Ac  7**^-).  With  Grentiles  this  was  even 
more  definitely  the  case.  The  shock  was  moral 
and  social  as  well.  To  the  Jews,  a  great  deal  of 
the  morality  of  the  apostolic  preaching  would  be 
familiar,  especially  the  emphasis  upon  personal 
purity  in  speech  and  conduct ;  and  the  Jews,  in  the 
Gentile  world,  were  already  a  distinct  community 
(cf.  the  Rabbinic  treatise,  Aboda  Zara)  like  the 
Christians  in  India.  For  the  Gentiles,  that  preach- 
ing demanded  a  complete  renunciation  of  their 
existing  habits,  friendships,  moral  ideas,  and  often 
of  their  business  (cf.  1  Co  IQr^-  ;  and  Tert.  de  Idol. 
— equally  true  a  century  before  he  wrote).  Stan- 
ley's w  ell-known  description  of  baptism,  as  symbol- 
izing the  definite  rupture  with  one  society  and  the 
identification  with  another,  is  far  more  true  of  the 
1st  cent,  than  of  any  other  {Christian  Institutions*, 
London,  1884,  ch.  i.). 

5.  Conversion  and  baptism. — The  new  convert 
was  not,  indeed,  regarded  as  being  perfect  from  his 
conversion  onwards.  His  morals  might  be  very  de- 
ficient (Eph  4^,  6  icX^irrwi'),  and  there  was  much 
need  of  teaching  (cf.  the  emphasis  laid  on  this  point 
in  the  Pastorals).  There  must  have  been  a  large 
number  of  'babes  in  Christ.'  But  the  practice  of 
modem  missionaries  in  delaying  baptism  was  un- 
known in  early  times.  Baptism  followed  the  pro- 
fession of  belief  (Ac  2"),  and,  as  soon  as  belief  and 
repentance  were  professed,  the  convert  was  felt  to 
have  broken  with  the  old  life  (2"  and  S^*-  ^).  Often 
both  belief  and  repentance  are  only  implied  in  the 
actual  narratives  (2^*  16^'). 

6.  Conyersion,  repentance,  belief.  —  Baptism 
(q.v.)  is  then  the  seal  [at^payii)  of  repentance  and 
conversion,  the  sign  of  admission  to  the  new  society 
which  is  the  Body  of  Christ.  Yet  this  never  takes 
place  without  a  change  of  heart ;  so  much  so 
that  in  the  NT  baptism  of  children  is  apparently 
never  refeiTed  to  (the  meaning  of  'household,' 
1  Co  1'®,  is  dubious).  Here  again  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  the  NT  nowhere  deals  with  a  long- 
established  church,  or  with  the  questions  which 
would  naturally  arise  in  one.  But  where  baptism 
has  not  been  preceded  by  a  real  conversion,  the 
writers  speak  in  no  uncertain  tone  (cf.  the  case  of 
Simon  Magus,  Ac  8^).  What  then  is  the  relation 
of  conversion  to  repentance  ?  They  are  twice  men- 
tioned together  (Ac  3'*  and  26"*) ;  repentance  comes 
first  in  both  cases :  repentance  (tieTavoia,  change 
of  mental  attitude),  it  has  been  suggested,  expresses 
the  ethical  aspect  of  the  process,  conversion  the 
spiritual ;  or  they  may  be  called  the  negative  and 

{ositive  aspects.  But  they  cannot  be  separated, 
f  there  is  a  turning  from  (repentance),  there  must 
be  a  turning  to  (conversion).  Sometimes  the  initial 
impulse  will  be  dislike  for  the  old  (cf.  Starbuck  and 
Hadlev,  ut  infra),  or  the  goodness  of  God  will  be 
felt  as' leading  to  repentance  (Ro  2*;  cf.  Ezk  36'^). 
But  the  two  are  parts  of  one  process.  The  same 
thing  must  be  said  of  belief.     For  belief  is  nothing 


248 


CONVERSION 


CORINTH 


but  a  turning  or  giving  oneself  to  a  person  whose 
support  is  expected  with  conhdenoe  and  whose  will 
is  accepted  as  a  command  to  be  obeyed.  And  since 
these  commands  cannot  be  obeyed  witliout  ceasing 
to  do  what  is  inconsistent  with  them,  belief  really 
includes  what  we  have  called  both  the  negative 
and  the  positive. 

7.  Individual  instances.  —  Less  can  be  learnt 
from  these,  as  referred  to  in  the  NT,  than  might  have 
been  expected.  Of  the  conversions  of  Barnabas, 
Silas,  Timothy,  and  the  rest  of  St.  Paul's  great  co- 
adjutors, we  know  nothing.  The  Ethiopian  eunuch 
has  already  been  referred  to.  Cornelius  (Ac  lO"'), 
as  a  proselyte,  has  already  broken  with  his  heathen 
manner  of  life,  and  his  passing  over  to  belief  in 
Christ  is  secured  by  his  vision  ;  St.  Peter's  disciourse 
simply  completes  tlie  process  :  to  adopt  Seelierg's 
suggestive  phrase,  Betehrwig  is  ended  by  Bckeh- 
rung.  Lydia  also,  who  is  apparently  a  proselyte, 
believes  while  St.  Paul  is  preaching  {Ac  Id'*),  and  at 
once  shows  the  change  wrought  in  her  by  ofl'ering 
to  entertain  the  Apostle.  The  Philippian  jailer, 
blurting  out  in  his  terror  a  cry  almost  of  despair 
{Ac  \&^),  receives  an  answer  which  must  have 
seemed  quite  meaningless  to  him  at  first ;  and  then, 
as  the  result  of  a  discourse  which  is  unfortunately 
not  preserved  for  us,  believes  and  is  baptized. 
Whether  any  conversions  took  place  at  Malta 
as  the  result  of  St.  Paul's  stay  there  is  unknown. 
The  above  instances  are  all  of  6en  tiles.  The  appeal 
which  led  to  the  conversion  of  Jews  would  seem  to 
be  that  which  St.  Paul  used  to  Agrippa  :  '  the  re- 
deeming work  of  the  Messiah  is  foretold  or  implied 
by  the  prophets ;  you  believe  the  prophets ;  therefore 
you  must  believe  in  the  Messiah,  Jesus  whom  we 
preach '  (Ac  18«  2622'-  ^ ;  Lk  24^7).  In  the  case  of  St. 
Paul  we  have  two  accounts  purporting  to  come  from 
his  own  lips  (Ac  22.  26),  and  for  the  third  (Ac  9) 
he  must  have  been  the  authority.  Certainly,  he 
did  not  turn  from  any  outward  works  of  darkness{Ro 
13'*) ;  he  may  have  been  prepared  previously,  like 
Cornelius,  though  unconsciously ;  but  when  the 
change  came,  in  a  blinding  flash  of  celestial  light, 
it  meant  an  instant  and  entire  transference  of  his 
loyalty  and  a  complete  destruction  of  his  old  self- 
esteem.  The  culmination  of  his  conversion,  lead- 
ing to  baptism,  was  brought  about,  as  in  the  case 
of  Cornelius,  through  two  mutually  dependent 
visions,  and  actual  instruction  from  a  disciple.  For 
St.  Paul,  it  was  a  turning  from  darkness  to  light, 
a  revealing  of  the  Son  of  God  in  him  (Gal  V^) ;  but 
the  only  works  of  the  flesh  whose  renunciation  was 
involved  were  anger,  pride  and  hatred,  and  these  he, 
like  his  friends,  would  probably  have  considered,  up 
to  the  crisis,  as  positive  virtues.  Was  this  perhaps 
the  reason  why  anger,  hatred,  malice  and  strife  find 
sucli  a  prominent  jdace  in  his  later  catalogues  of 
evil  deeds? 

8.  To  turn:  tpansitive  or  intransitlYe 7— We 
have  left  to  the  last  the  difficult  question  whether 
man  turns  to  God  or  God  turns  man  to  Himself. 
The  lan}j:uage  of  the  NT  gives  little  assistance  (see 
§  1).  Where  the  verb  is  not  intransitive,  the  sub- 
ject is  a  man  ( Ja  5^'-  *",  and  perhaps  Ac  26^^),  and 
elsewhere  we  have  simply  the  passive  voice  (1  P 
2^),  with  no  reference  to  the  agent.  But  it  is  im- 
possible to  deny  the  share  of  God  in  the  process 
(Eph  2\  Col  2",  Tit  ,3»,  He  l(fl\  1  P  P,  Ro  Ipo) 
or  the  connexion  between  conversion  and  salvation 
(1  Co  1=",  Ro  10").  But  the  question  of  the  relative 
importance  of  the  action  of  God  and  of  man  in  con- 
version never  occurred  to  the  NT  writers ;  and  a 
closer  examination  of  the  whole  subject  wUl  show 
that  it  is  not  a  case  of  '  either  ...  or.'  According 
to  our  point  of  view,  we  may  see  the  act  as  wholly 
God's  or  wholly  man's.  Exliorting  the  sinner,  tlie 
preacher  will  say,  '  Turn  to  God  ' ;  looking  back  on 
the  act,  the  sinner  will  say,  'God  turned  me  to 


Himself;  or  else  we  may  use  language  which 
admirably  and  daringly  combines  the  two,  employ- 
ing the  imperative  of  tlie  passive  voice,  '  Be  ye 
reconciled  to  God '  (2  Co  5'^}.  Conversion  itself 
rests  on  tlie  Atonement ;  man  must  Ije  made  '  at 
one '  with  God,  and  yet  this  cannot  be  done  unless, 
at  tliat  very  moment,  he  makes  himself  'at  one.' 

The  question  appears  a  dithcnlt  one  just  because 
the  answer  is  invulved  in  the  simplest  processes  of 
action.  All  action  between  persons  is  mteraction. 
It  is  the  union  of  two  elements  to  bring  a  third  to 
the  birth.  We  nmy  for  the  moment  overlook  either 
tlie  one  or  the  other ;  but  both  ai-e  there.  And 
the  two  are  really  one.  William  James's  theory 
of  the  subliminal  is  suggestive  :  conversion  results 
from  the  breaking  up  of  the  fountains  of  the  great 
spiritual  deep;  there  is  a  'subliminal  uprush '  in 
me  ;  and  a  flood  of  perceptions,  feelings,  loves  and 
hates,  of  which  I  had  hitherto  been  quite  uncon- 
scious, gives  me  a  new  conception  of  myself  and 
my  life.  The  correctness  of  this  account  cannot 
here  be  discu8.sed.  It  appears  to  cover  much  in 
the  vast  changes  described  so  simply  in  the  NT. 
It  leaves  room  for,  but  it  does  not  actually  state, 
the  main  factor  in  every  NT  reference  to  conversion, 
and  this  is  neitiier  a  new  moral  ideal  nor  a  fresh 
conception  of  oneself,  but  the  redeeming  love  of  a 
God  of  mercy  and  righteousness,  to  whom  the 
sinner  turns  in  repentance  and  bj'  whose  good- 
ness that  turning  is  encompassed  and  made 
possible. 

LrrBRATtTRB. — See  references  in  art.  'Conversion'  in  ERE. 
The  conversions  in  the  Acts  are  discussed  in  the  various  Lives 
of  St.  Paul  (see  Padl)  ;  see  also  Commentaries  on  the  Epistles 
for  discussions  on  the  passag-es  referred  to  in  the  article.  W. 
James,  Varieties  of  Religious  Experience,  London,  1902  ;  E.  D. 
Starbuclc,  The  Psychology  of  Religion,  do.  1899,  also  art.  in 
ExpT,  XXV.  [1913-14]  p.  ^igff. ;  F.  Granger,  The  Soul  of  a 
Christian,  London,  1900 ;  and  G.  Steven,  Psychology  of  the  Chris- 
tian Soul,  do.  1911,  may  be  mentioned  as  treating  of  the  experi- 
ence of  conversion  generally.  See  also  J.  W.  Chapman,  S.  II. 
HadUy  of  Water  Street ,  London,  190C.  For  a  suggestive  dis- 
cussion of  the  difficulties  in  recaJling  the  exact  experiences  at 
the  time  of  conversion  see  W.  Thimme,  Augtisti7is  geistige 
Entwicklung,  Berlin,  1908.  W.  F.  LOFTHOUSE. 

COPPERSMITH  (xaXiteiJs,  2  Ti  4").— The  Greek 
word  properly  denoted  a  worker  in  x«Xf 6j  {aes) — a 
term  applied  indift'erently  both  to  copper  and  its 
alloys — and  more  generally  a  worker  in  any  metal. 
Copper  was  the  first  ore  men  learned  to  smelt  and 
work  :  '  Prius  aeris  erat  quam  ferri  cognitus  usus ' 
(Lucret.  v.  1292).  The  handicraft  of  the  copper- 
smith was  therefore  very  ancient.  Later,  when 
iron  came  into  use,  x^^f f^J  was  extended  to  include 
workers  in  the  new  ore,  criSripevf  being  a  term  rarely 
employed.  In  the  LXX  Tubal-cain  is  described  as 
a  x'l^ff'^J  x*^*^""^  'f*^  atdripov  (Gn  4*-).  Herodotus 
(i.  68)  tells  how  Lichas,  'coming  to  a  smithy, 
looked  attentively  at  the  iron  being  forged,  and 
was  struck  with  wonder  when  he  saw  what  was 
done.  The  smith  (xaX/fei^s),  perceiWng  his  a.stonish- 
ment,  desisted  from  his  work.' 

As  the  Romans  drew  their  supply  of  aes  chiefly 
from  the  island  of  Cyprus,  it  came  to  be  termed 
aes  cypritim,  which  was  shortened  to  cyprium,  and 
corrupted  into  cyprum,  whence  comes  the  Eng. 
word  '  copper,'  Fr.  cuivre.  Germ.  Kupfer. 

James  Strahan. 

CORINTH  {K6pivdoi). — Corinth  was  the  commer- 
cial ca])ital  of  Greece,  and  one  of  the  first  centres 
of  Christian  light  in  the  continent  of  Europe. 
Occupying  a  commanding  position  at  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  narrow  istlimus  which  joined  the 
Peloponnesus  to  the  mainland  of  Greece,  and  under 
the  steep  northern  side  of  the  stupendous  rock 
of  Acrocorinthus  (1800  ft.  above  sea-level)  which 
formed  one  of  natxire's  strongest  fortresses,  it  en- 
joyed unique  advantages  alike  for  commerce  and 
defence.  '  Corinth  of  the  two  seas '  ('  bimaris  Cor- 
inthus'  [Hor.  Car.  I.  vii.  2;   Ovid,  Mrt.  v.  407]) 


CORINTH 


CORINTH 


249 


could  not  fail  to  become  a  great  maritime  power. 
Its  •western  harbour,  Lechjeuni,  on  the  Corinthian 
Gulf,  received  the  shipping  of  Italy,  Sicily,  and 
Spain;  its  eastern  port,  Cenchreae  i^.v.),  on  the 
Saronio  Gulf,  that  ot  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  Phoenicia, 
and  Egypt.  Instead  of  circumnavigating  stormy 
Cape  Nfalea,  coasting  ships  regularly  made  for  the 
Isthmus,  where  those  of  larger  size  transhipped 
their  cargoes,  whilst  those  of  smaller  tonnage  were 
hauled  from  sea  to  sea  on  a  tramway  5  miles  long 
{SioXxoi).  '  For  goods  exporte<l  from  t*eloponnesus, 
or  imported  by  land,  a  toll  was  paid  to  those  who 
had  the  keys  of  the  country '  (Strabo,  VIII.  vi.  20). 
As  an  emporium  of  the  traide  of  the  East  and  the 
West,  Corinth  grew  into  a  splendid  city,  the  home 
of  merchant  princes,  adorned  with  Temples  and 
filled  with  works  of  tine  art. 

Corinth  was  described  as  •  the  bridge  of  the  sea ' 
(Pihd.  Sem.  vi.  4),  and  '  the  gate  of  the  Pelopon- 
nesus '  (Xen.  Ages.  2).  '  Prosperous  {evSaifjuaf)  Cor- 
inth '  is  Herodotus '  designation  of  old  Corinth. 
'  The  Corinthians,'  says  Thucydides,  '  were  very 
rich,  as  is  shown  by  their  poets,  for  they  gave  the 
title  of  atpreios  to  the  place '  {Hist.  L  13).  '  The  city 
was  rich  and  opulent  at  all  times,'  says  Strabo 
(VII.  vi.  23).  At  the  zenith  of  its  power  it  prob- 
ably had  a  free  population  of  200,000,  with  half  a 
million  slaves  employed  in  its  fleet  and  in  its  numer- 
ous colonies. 

Pillaged  and  razed  to  the  ground  by  the  Romans 
under  Lucius  Mummius  in  146  B.C.,  Corinth  lay 
desolate  for  a  century,  till  Julius  Caesar  refounded 
it  in  46  B.C.  as  the  Volonia  Laus  Julia  Corinthu-s, 
peopling  it  with  Roman  veterans  and  freedmen. 
'  The  copestone  of  the  republican  epoch  was  the 
atonement  for  the  sack  of  Corinth  made  by  the 
greatest  of  all  Romans  and  of  all  PhUhellenes,  the 
dictator  Csesar,  and  the  renewal  of  the  star  of 
Hellas  in  the  form  of  an  independent  community 
of  Roman  citizens,  the  new  "Julian  Honour' 
(Th.  Mommsen,  Provinces,  Eng.  tr.-,  1909,  i.  26<3). 

As  the  capital  of  the  province  of  Achaia,  and  the 
seat  of  proconsular  government,  new  Corinth  be- 
came nearly  as  populous  and  prosperous  as  the  old 
had  been,  again  deriving  a  vast  revenue  from  the 
sea,  again  developing  its  industries  and  cultivat- 
ing its  arts.  Corinthian  potters  and  especially 
workers  in  Corinthian  brass — a  mixture  of  golcl, 
silver,  and  copper — were  famous  all  over  the  world  : 
'nobilis  acre  Corinthus' (Ov.  Met.  vi.  416).  The 
establishment  of  the  Isthmian  games  in  the  sanc- 
tuary of  Poseidon  (Strabo,  VIII.  vi.  22)  made  the 
city  a  great  centre  of  Hellenic  life.  But  as  it  in- 
creased in  wealth  and  refinement,  it  succumbed  to 
the  temptations  of  luxury.  Theoretically,  and  not 
unnaturally,  it  was  devoted  to  the  cult  of  Poseidon, 
but  practically  it  worshipped  only  Corinthian  Aph- 
rodite, who  was  doubtless  no  other  than  the  Syrian 
Astarte  of  the  original  Phcenician  settlers.  Her 
temple  had  more  than  a  thousand  Up6Sov\oi — minis- 
ters of  \-ice  not  found  in  other  shrines  of  Greece, 
though  common  enough  in  those  of  Asia  Minor — 
and  '  the  city  was  frequented  and  enriched  by  the 
multitudes  who  resorted  thither  on  account  of 
them '  (Strabo,  vm.  vi.  22).  Corinth  became  pro- 
verbial for  abysmal  profligacy.  '  To  live  like  a 
Corinthian'  {Kopw6id^e<r6ai)  was  a  synonym  for 
abandonment  to  immorality.  ^yhen  St".  Paul 
^vrote  the  appalling  first  page  of  hLs  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,  he  had  never  seen  Rome,  but  he  had 
lived  nearly  two  years  in  Corinth. 

Into  this  centre  of  commerce,  shrine  of  art,  and 
vortex  of  iniquity  St.  Paul  came  probably  in  the 
autumn  of  A.D.  50.  He  came  alone,  depressed  by 
the  apparent  faQure  of  his  preaching  to  the  intel- 
lectuals of  Athens,  entering  his  new  spliere  of 
labour,  as  he  confesses,  with  a  sense  of  '  weakness 
and  fear  and  much  trembling'  (1   Co  2*j.     But 


when  his  companions,  SUas  and  Timothy,  whom 
he  had  left  in  Philippi,  rejoined  him  after  some 
weeks,^  '  he  was  constrained  by  the  word '  (<rvrct- 
X<To  Tifi  \6iy<f,  Ac  18').  This  probably  means  that 
to  these  companions  it  seemed  as  if  all  his  ener- 

fies  were  being  '  compressed '  into  one  channel,  all 
is  thoughts  controlled  by  a  master  idea.  Carlyle 
has  shrewdly  observed  that  '  the  preaching  man 
of  our  day  has  lost  the  point.'  The  greatest 
preacher  of  apostolic  times  had,  perhaps  after 
some  humiliation,  rediscovered  the  point.  His 
profound  philosophical  disquisition  in  Athens — his 
noble  attempt  to  find  common  ground  with  the 
speculative  minds  of  Hellas — having  apparently 
missed  the  mark,  he  determined  not  to  repeat  his 
error  in  Corinth ;  here  he  would  preach  noth- 
ing '  save  Jesus  Christ  and  him  crucified '  (1  Co  2*). 
He  did  not,  of  course,  contemplate  the  preaching  of 
a  new  gospel,  for  in  the  province  of  Galatia,  and 
doubtless  elsewhere,  Christ  had  already  been  'openly 
set  forth  crucified'  (Gal  3^).  But  in  Corinth  he 
seemed  to  limit  himself  to  one  aspect  of  'the 
word,'  to  preach  the  Cross  with  a  new  passion.  His 
message,  like  his  mind,  was  'compressed.'  The  in- 
tensity of  spirit  with  wliich  Christ  faced  His  own 
last  task  was  indicated  by  the  same  word,  run  awi- 
XOficLi,  '  how  am  I  straitened  ! '  (Lk  12**). 

The  'word  of  the  cross,'  preached  with  such  fer- 
vour, wrought  moral  miracles  in  pleasure-loving 
Corinth.  The  spiritual  attraction  of  Calvary  was 
the  counter  charm  to  the  sensual  temptations  of 
the  corrupt  city.  Writing  not  long  afterwards  to 
his  converts,  St,  Paul  gives  a  black  list  of  the  vari- 
ous types  of  evil-doers  in  Corinth,  and  adds : 
'  such  were  some  of  you ;  but  ye  were  washed,  but 
ye  were  sanctified,  but  ye  were  justified,  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  in  the  Spirit  of 
our  God '  (1  Co  6*"").  And  if  he  found  that  the  in- 
veterate habits  of  a  light-hearted  pagan  society 
speedily  re-asserted  themselves  even  within  the 
Church  (1  Co  5^  6^-'^),  it  was  still  by  the  spiritual 
influence  of  the  same  sacrifice  that  the  members  of 
Christ's  iKxly  were  to  make  and  to  keep  themselves 
pure  (5«-«-  "-^3  6"-»). 

St.  Paul  had  not  intended  to  remain  long  in 
Corinth,  his  heart  being  in  Macedonia,  to  which 
he  had  been  Divinely  called  (Ac  16*-  ^•),  and  where 
his  appointed  task  seemed  scarcely  begun.  He 
would  have  quickly  retraced  his  steps  if  certain 
difficulties,  which  seemed  to  him  Satanic  hin- 
drances, could  have  been  removed  (1  Th  2"-"). 
But  another  night-vision  (Ac  18*-  ^'),  attaching 
itself  no  doubt  to  waking  thoughts  which  had  be- 
gun to  shape  themselves  in  his  mind,  convinced 
him  that  it  was  now  his  duty  to  remain  in  Corinth, 
where  many  converts  were  to  be  won.  As  in  other 
cities,  he  laboured  there  with  his  own  hands,  that 
his  motives  as  a  preacher  might  be  above  suspicion. 
Being  of  the  same  trade  {ofi^Tex'ot)  with  Aquila 
and  PrLscilla  {q.v.),  he  accepted  an  invitation  to 
live  in  their  house  (18').  In  a  commercial  centre 
like  Corinth  the  presence  of  Jews  was  a  matter  of 
course  (cf.  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Gaium,  36),  and  their 
numbers  had  lately  been  augmented  by  the  edict 
of  Claudius  which  banished  all  Jews  from  Rome 
(Ac  IS-).  A  number  of  Greeks  had  gradually 
been  attracted  to  the  worship  of  the  synagogue,  in 
wliich  St.  Paul,  adhering  to  his  plan  of  going  to 
the  Jew  first  (Ro  l''^2*  ^"),  'reasoned  every  Sab- 
bath' (Ac  18^),  till  the  inevitable  rupture  took 
Elace  (V.*).  He  was  then  oflered  the  use  of  the 
ouse  of  the  '  God-fearing '  Titus  Justus,  who  was 
Erobably  one  of  the  Roman  colani,  and  who  may 
ave  adopted  the  cognomen  of  Justus  when  he  be- 
came a  proselyte.  The  preaching  of  the  gospel  in 
such  a  house" was  calculated  to  >vin  the  ordinary 
Gentile  population,  who  might  have  been  slow  to 
enter  the  synagogue. 


250 


CORINTH 


CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


The  Corinthian  converts  were  drawn  froni  tliree 
classes  of  inhabitants — Roman  colonists,  Greek 
iiicolaj,  and  Jewish  settlers.  The  number  of  those 
who  bear  Latin  names — Lucius,  Tertius,  Quartus, 
Fortunatus,  Achaicus(Rol62'-**,  1  Co  16'^)— is  strik- 
ing. A  few  were  men  of  some  social  standing, 
such  as  Crispus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue  (Ac  18°), 
(iaius,  who  was  hospitable  to  St.  Paul  and  to  '  the 
whole  Church '  (if  this  means  that  the  Church  met 
at  his  house,  it  is  possible  that  he  is  to  be  iden- 
tified with  Ticus  Justus),  and  Erastus,  the  citv 
treasurer  (Ro  16^).  Not  many  in  philosophical, 
administrative,  or  aristocratic  circles  were  called 
(1  Co  1**),  and  St.  Paul  glories  in  the  apparent  im- 
potence of  the  means  by  which  the  gospel  gains 
its  victories  :  '  faex  urbis  lux  orbis.'  Yet  Ramsay 
may  be  right,  on  the  whole,  in  niaintaining  that  in 
Corinth,  as  everywhere  else,  '  the  work  of  the 
Christian  Church  was  to  create  or  to  enlarge  the 
educated,  the  thoughtful  middle  class '  (Expositor, 
6th  ser.,  i.  [1900]  98). 

St.  Paul's  Corinthian  experiences  seem  to  have 
directed  his  attention  to  the  central  importance  of 
the  Church  in  Rome  and  to  the  attitude  of  the  Im- 
perial government  to  Christian  missions.  (1)  His 
host  and  hostess,  having  lately  come  from  Italy, 
were  able  to  give  him  vivid  first-hand  intelligence 
regarding  the  world-city,  which  from  this  time 
certainly  loomed  large  on  his  mental  horizon  :  he 
'must  see  Rome'  (Ac  19^1;  cf.  Ro  1"  15^).  (2) 
His  Corinthian  trial,  at  the  instance  of  jealous 
Jews,  before  the  proconsul  Gallio,  the  large-minded 
and  tolei-ant  brother  of  Seneca,  on  the  charge  of 
worshipping  God  '  contrary  to  the  law,'  a  trial 
ending  in  his  speedy  and  triumphant  acquittal, 
not  only  made  it  clear  to  him  that  Christianity 
was  a  religio  licita,  which  might  be  preached  in 
any  part  of  the  Empire,  but  evidently  confirmed 
his  idea  that  the  Imperial  government  might  be 
regarded  as  a  restraining  power  (1  Th  2^),  which 
would  give  protection  to  law-abiding  Christians, 
especially  to  Roman  citizens,  engaged  in  the  peace- 
ful work  of  evangelization. 

In  Corinth  St.  Paul  initiated  a  form  of  mission- 
ary activity  which  proved  immensely  beneficial  to 
all  the  churches — the  writing  of  letters.  From 
Corinth  he  dispatched  1  and  2  Thess.,  Rom.,  and 
possibly  Gal. ;  .and  to  Corinth  he  sent  not  only  the 
two  canonical  Epistles  which  have  come  down  to 
us,  but  apparently  two  others — referred  to  in  1  Co 
5^,  2  Co  2*  7* — one  of  which  may  be  fragmentarily 
preserved  in  2  Co  6^*-7',  while  the  other  is  per- 
haps to  be  found,  in  whole  or  in  part,  in  2  Co  10-13, 

It  was  in  the  Church  of  Corinth,  with  its  numer- 
ous types  of  converts  and  its  astonishing  variety 
of  gifts  (1  Co  1*-''  12<-»"),  that  the  first  ecclesiastical 
divisions  (o-x^o-Atara,  1  Co  P"  IP*  12^*)  took  place, 
with  an  accompanying  hero-worship  which  de- 
tracted from  the  reverence  due  to  Christ  alone 
(1  Co  P"'^*).  For  the  party-strife,  so  characteristic 
of  the  democracy  of  Greek  cities,  in  which  persons 
were  put  before  principles,  the  three  leaders  who, 
without  being  consulted,  were  set  up  as  heads  of 
rival  factions,  were  in  no  way  to  blame.     St.  Peter 

ftrobably  never  visited  Corinth  at  all.  A  polios 
aboured  for  a  time  in  this  city,  and  achieved 
much  success  among  the  Jews  (Ac  18'''*),  but 
nothing  could  have  been  finer  than  the  mutual 
loyalty  of  St.  Paul  and  Apollos  (1  Co  3«  4«  W% 
Ct.  also  following  article. 

The  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the  Cor- 
inthians was  written  about  A.D.  97.  While  com- 
mending their  general  tone  and  spirit,  it  contains 
an  exhortation  to  concord  among  the  members  of 
the  Church,  which  was  still  vexed  by  divisions. 
See  art.  Clement  of  Rome,  Epistle  of. 

LiTERATCRB.— E.  Curtius,  Pelopounesos,  Gotha,  1851-2;  W- 
G.  Clark,  Peloponiiesux.  London.  1858 ;  E.  Wilisch.  G«schichte 


Corinths,  Leipzig,  1887,  1890,  1!X)1  ;  Pausanias,  Description  of 
Greece,  ed.  J.  G.  Frazer,  London,  1898,  ii'.  20-38;  Baedeker, 
Greece,  do.  1889,  >.«.  'Corinth';  art.  'OorinthuB*  in  Smith, 
DGRG  i.  [186fl]  674.  JaMES  STRAHAN. 

CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE.— 1.  Aa- 
thenticity. — It  is  generally  agreed  that  both  these 
Epistles  are  rightly  ascribed  to  St.  Paul.  As  to 
1  Cor,  the  external  evidence  is  remarkably  strong, 
Clement  of  Rome  directly  appeals  to  it  as  the  work 
of  the  '  Apostle  Paul '  (ad  Cor.  xlvii.  :  dvaXd^rre 
TT)v  iiruTTo\r)v  tov  /xaKapLov  Jlat!i\ov  rov  ivoffrdXov.  ri 
wpCrrov  vfiiy  iv  dpxy  tov  eiiayyeXLov  iypa\j/ev  ;  itr 
i.\7)delai  irvevfi.aTiKC)s  iir^ffreiXev  iifuv  vepl  aiirov  re  Kal 
K770a  re  <cai'Airo\\w,  Sia  t6  Kal  t6t€  irpo<TK\l(Teii  vfiai 
irfirotrjadai,).  The  Epistle  was  certainly  known  also 
to  Ignatius  and  Poiycarp  (cf.  W,  R.  Inge,  in  The 
Nl'  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  1905,  p.  67  :  '  Ignatius 
must  have  known  this  Epistle  almost  by  heart. 
Although  there  are  no  quotations  [in  the  strictest 
sense,  with  mention  of  the  source],  echoes  of  its 
language  and  thought  pervade  the  whole  of  his 
writings  in  such  a  manner  as  to  leave  no  doubt 
whatever  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.'  P.  V.  M.  Benecke 
[io.  p.  86]  is  equally  sure  about  Poiycarp  :  '  Poly- 
carp  s  use  of  1  Corinthians  may  be  regarded  as 
certain  ').  The  internal  evidence  is  equally  strong. 
The  Epistle  gives  an  extremely  graphic  picture  of 
a  Christian  Church  of  early  date.  Much  of  it  is 
occasional  in  character.  There  is  nothing  to 
suggest  forgery.  The  attack  made  on  its  auth- 
enticity by  Bruno  Bauer,  and  renewed  later  by 
Loman,  Pierson,  Naber,  van  Manen,  Steck,  and 
others,  has  met  with  very  little  acceptance.  Attacks 
have  also  been  made  on  its  integrity  by  Hagge 
and  Volter,  at  these  also  have  little  to  be  said 
for  them. 

2  Cor.  appears  in  Marcion's  Canon,  and  is  after- 
wards widely  quoted.  But  there  are  few  traces  of 
it  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  Clement  makes  no 
allusion  to  it,  though  it  would  have  suited  his 
purpose  to  do  so.  It  seems  probable  that  it  ^^  a> 
not  published  until  the  churches  began  to  look 
upon  St,  Paul's  letters  as  Scripture.  It  is  in  the 
main  personal,  and  contains  but  little  moral  or 
doctrinal  instruction.  It  is,  therefore,  quite  in- 
telligible that  it  should  not  have  been  published  as 
early  as  1  Cor.,*  which  would  be  at  once  recognized 
as  a  document  of  universal  interest  and  great  im- 
portance ;  but  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  its 
Pauline  authorship,  in  spite  of  the  inferiority  of 
the  external  evidence  for  it.  Irenaeus,  Tertulfian, 
Athenagoras,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  are  all 
familiar  witli  it  and  quote  it  freely.  And  the 
internal  evidence  is  very  strong.  Its  autobio- 
graphical touches  carry  their  own  assurance  of 
genuineness,  and,  while  not  in  the  main  doctrinal, 
'  it  is  saturated  with  the  characteristic  theological 
conceptions  of  St.  Paul.'t 

2.  St.  Paul's  relations  with  Corinth  before 
writing  1  Corinthians. — St.  Paul's  first  visit  to 
Corinth  is  described  in  Ac  18^"'^,  where  we  have  an 
account  of  the  foundation  of  the  Corinthian  Church. 
After  leaving  Corinth,  he  continued  to  be  in  com- 
munication with  the  Church  there,  and  we  can 
reconstruct  some  part  of  his  relations  with  it  from 
the  evidence  of  his  two  extant  Epistles  to  the 
Coiinthians. 

(a)  St,  Paul  wrote  a  '  previous  letter '  (1  Co  S"), 
in  which  he  told  the  Corinthians  not  to  keei> 
company  with  fornicators.  This  must  have  been 
due  to  information  that  immorality  was  creeping 
into  the  Church.  It  is  possible  that  a  portion  of 
this  letter  is  preserved  in  2  Co  6'*-7'  (see  below). 

•Cf.  J.  H.  Kennedy,  The  Second  aiid  Third  EpistU*  to  the 
Corinthiam,  1900,  p.  "l41ff.  ;  K.  Lake,  The  Earlier  EpiitUt  of 
St.  Paul,  1911,  p.  163  f. 

t  UDB  i.  492. 


nOBTVTHTAXS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE        CQRI2sTHTA\S,  EPISTLES  TO  THE    251 


(b)  The  Corinthians  had  themselves  >vritten  a 
letter  to  St.  Panl,  raising  a  number  of  points  and 
requesting  his  decision  upon  them  (1  Co  7'-  =*  8'  11- 
120.  They  raise  the  question  of  marriage — 
whether  marriage  is  legitimate  for  a  Christian, 
the  relation  between  husband  and  wife,  between 
a  non-Christian  husband  and  a  Christian  wife,  and 
vice  versa.  They  interrogate  him  regarding  the 
status  of  virgins,"  and  probiably  also  asK  advice  on 
the  question  of  eiSuXddxrra,  with  all  the  problems 
of  social  life  which  it  involves.  The  difficulties 
that  arose  over  the  Eucharist  may  have  been 
mentioned  in  the  letter  (U""^),  also  the  question 
of  spiritual  gifts  and  of  disorders  in  the  assemblies, 
perhaps  also  the  question  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead.  Attempts  have  been  made  to  reconstruct 
the  Corinthian  letter,*  but  these  must  necessarily 
be  too  conjectural  to  be  of  any  great  value.  It  is 
probable,  however,  that  a  good  many  of  the  expres- 
sions used  in  1  Cor.  are  direct  quotations  from  their 
letter,  e.g.  rdrra  i^ecmv  (cf.  10^),  probably  a  sort  of 
catchword,  which  the  Apostle  accepts  from  them, 
but  qualifies.    In  11-  he  probably  quotes  their  letter. 

(c)  St.  Paul  had  had  other  sources  of  information 
besides  this  letter.  The  existence  of  parties  with- 
in the  Corinthian  Church  had  been  made  known 
to  him  by  Chloe's  people  or  household  (1  Co  1"). 
He  had  also  heard,  possibly  from  the  same  source, 
of  a  case  of  incest  (eh.  5),  and  of  the  habit  which 
had  arisen  of  going  to  law  with  fellow-Christians 
before  heathen  tribunals  (6^-*).  Apollos,  too,  had 
visited  Corinth  (3®),  and  was  now  with  St.  Paul 
at  Ephesus  (16").  Stephanas,  Fortnnatus,  and 
Achaicus  had  also  come  to  him  from  Corinth  (16^"). 

3.  Analysis  of  1  Corinthians-— In  view  of  the  in- 
formation received  from  these  sources,  St.  Paul 
•n-rote  the  First  Epistle.  It  will  be  convenient  here 
to  give  a  full  analysis  of  it. 

L  ISTKODCCTIOSO-^-^ 
\iJi  Salutation. 
VT.*-9  Thank^ving  for  spirittud  gifts  of  Corinthians. 
IL  REBUKE  0-^^i-&^y 

la)  Partv-tpirU,  based  on  false  intellectualism  \a  rdigion 

110-17  ExtMxtation  to  tmity. 
TT.u-ss  The  pandox  of  the  Cross.    Wliat  seems  to  men 
WMk  and  foolish  is  Divine  strength  and  wisdom. 
TT.2M1  Xhis  is  iUostrated  by  the  natural  characteristics  of 
Corinthian  Christians — they  are  naturally  weak 
and  foolish,  but  their  strength  and  nisdom  is 
Christ. 
21-*  Further  illnstTated  by  St.  Pfcal**  own  behaviour 
at  Corinth. 
TT.s^  Yet  there  is  a  qiiritaal  wisdom  for  mature  Oiris- 

tians. 
2U-33  Only  the  spiritoal  man  can  understand  this.    The 
Corinthians,  when  St.  Paul  preached  to  them, 
were  not  yet  spiritual. 
33-*  Xor  are  they  yet  spiritual,  as  is  evidenced  by 
tieir  factions. 
TT.5-9  Foolishness  of  party -spirit,  seeing  that  the  work 
of  all  is  God's  work. 
YY.io-15  St.  Paul  has   laid  the  One  Foundation,  Jesus 
Christ.    Others   may  build  ujmn  it,  and_  are 
responsible  for  the  character  of  their  building. 
rv.16-1"  The  building  is  God's  Temple.    To  destroy  it  is 

to  cause  one's  own  destruction, 
w.  10-23  Folly  of  subjection  to  human  teachers.    All  be- 
long to  Christ. 
41-5  Human  teachers  are  responsible  to  Christ,  and  to 
Him  only. 
TT.6-7  This   rebuke   is   really  only   applicaUe   to  the 

followers,  not  to  theteachers. 
TY.S-lS  For  the  teachers  are  forced  by  their  sufferings  to 
realize  their  limitationsi    Only  the  followers 
are  proud. 
TV.l*-l"  Appeal  to  them  to  follow  St.  Paul's  example. 
Yv.18-21  He  hopes  to  come  himself,  and  test  the  truth  of 

their  claims. 
(6)  Want  of  discipline  in  dealing  vrith  ease  of  incest  (ch.  5). 
5I-8  The  case  of  incest.    Necessity  of  excommunicat- 
ing (lender. 
TT.d-is  ExpUnation    of    instractkMis   given   in    former 
letter  about  Christiuif^  attmide  to  immoral 
persons. 
(e)  Litiffiousness  (61-U). 

di-6  Lawsuits  not  to  be  taken  before  heathen  taribonals. 


•  Ct  G.  G.  Rndlay,  in  Expositor,  6th  ser.  L  [1900)  40HL 


(P-11  Lawsuits  altogether  wrong.  Christians  ought 
rather  to  endure  wrong;  bat  no  Cbrisuut 
ooriit  to  give  oocasioa  for  a  lawsuit. 

(d)  Fomieatiim  (6>*-»)- 

git.1*  The  law  of  liberty  does  not  apply  to  imparity. 
TT.'*-*>  Relation  between  Christ  and  believer  incompat- 
ible with  fornication. 
nL  A.ySWSSS  To  QCESTJOAS  (71-14^ 

(o)  Marriage  problems  (ch.  7)l 

71-7  Celibacy  is  best,  bat  marriage  is  sometimaa  ex- 
pedient. 
w.S^  Unmarried  persons  and  widows  shoald,  if  posnble, 
remain  as  they  are. 

VT.io-u  Married  couples  should  not  sqwrate.  If  they  do. 
the  wife  most  not  re-marry. 

TT.U-18  Mixed  marriages  are  not  real  marriages  in  the 
Christian  sense,  and  therefore  not  indisscrfable. 

TT.17-M  It  is  best  for  pe<^Ie,  both  in  marriage  qnestkms 
and  in  other  matters,*  to  rem^n  externally  in 
the  ootiditioo  in  irtuch  ttai^  were  when  tb^  be- 
came CfaristiaasL 

TT.**-*  Viigins  may  marry  witfaoat  sin,  though  they  do 
better  to  remain  unmarried. 

TT.**  Spiritual  manriage  is  a  good  castom.t 

TT.l^^  SeoMid  marriage  allowed,  but  not  recommended. 

(b)  The  eating  <4  tkutgt  saerijUed  to  idols  (S^-lli). 
8^-3  One  dKMild  be  guided  by  tihe  Iaw  <^  Love. 
w.^«  CbristiaaB  know  that  idols  are  nothing. 

▼T.7-13  Yet  to  eat  of  a  banquet  in  an  idol's  temple  may 
offoid  the  weaker  brethren,  and  so  is  a  sin 
against  the  Law  of  Lore. 
01-3  St.  Paul  claims  spiritual  liberty  even  more  than 
they  can. 

TT.^u  He  bas  the  same  rights  as  the  other  apostles. 

TV.  13-13  Yet  he  does  not  use  the  right  to  maintenance, 
but  surrenders  it  as  a  voluntary  offering  to 
God. 

TV.i*-33  He  has  surrendered  his  liberty  for  the  sake  of  his 
caose. 

TT.*-W  For  the  Christian  life  needs  perpetual  effort  and 
sdf-deniaL 
101-9  This  isQhistrated  by  the  example  of  the  Israelites, 
most  at  whom  perished  in  spice  of  their  privi- 
leges. 
TT.m  Their  history  is  an  example  to  us,  that  we  may 
avoid  tiieir  sins. 

TY.13-I3  Xo  temptation  is  too  stzong  to  be  resisted. 

VT.14-—  Id<datiy  is  a  real  danger.  The  Eucharist  and 
feasts  opoo  things  sacrificed  to  idols  are  incom- 
patiMe. 

yy.a-st  In  any  case  the  Law  of  Love  is  supreme. 

w.B^  Christians  may  accept  the  invitations  of  non- 
Christians,'  and  so  run  the  risk  of  eating  things 
offered  to  idi^  Bat  the  Law  of  Lore  forbids 
that  this  shoold  be  done  knowingly. 

lOO-lli  One  must  do  aU  to  God's  gloiy,  and  avoid  giving 
offence. 

(e)  Women  in  the  assemblies  (11>-I>). 

US-ls  Women  most  bare  the  head  covered  in  the  as- 
semUies  becanse  they  are  inferior  in  spiritoal 
status  to  men. 
TV.U-I>  Yet  men  and  women  are  complementary. 
TV.13-19  AppeaH  to  natural  instinct. 

T.U  Aiqieal  to  Christian  custom. 
(d)  Disorders  at  the  LorSs  Supper  (Ui'-**). 
1117-9  Prevalence  of  greed  and  drunkenness  at  the  Lord's 
Sapper. 
Tv.!3^B  Account  of  institution. 
Tv.as-s  Eesponsibility  of  commnnicanfc 
VY.30^3  Physical  evil  and  death  cansed  by  unworthy  re- 
ception. 
vv.33^  Command  to  avoid  gluttony  and  self-assertion. 
(«)  Spiritual  gifU  (12l-14«X 

121-3  Uie  test  of  a  Spirit  is  his  attatode  to  Jesus. 
Tv.^11  The  gifts  of  the  Spirit  are  diverse,  but  aU  for  use. 
TV.13-13  Christ  is  One ;  yet  we  in  our  variety  are  members 

of  His  Body. 
Tv.i^S  The  members  of  the  natural  body  are  interdepend- 
ent. 
TfJO^  So  is  it  witti  Christ's  Body.    Yet  some  gifts  are 
greater  than  others. 
lSi-3  But  all  g^fta  are  uselesB  without  love. 
TV.*'  Descriptioa  of  love. 

YT.^13  Temporary  character  of  spiritual  gifts  cootnsted 
with  permanence  of  love. 
V.13  Faith,  hope,  and  love  are  permanent)  and  love  ia 

the  greatest.  

141-8  Superiority  of  projAecy  to  tuuguea. 
TT.6-19  Unintelligibility  of  tongues. 
VY.ao-S  The  only  use  of  tongues  is  as  a  miracokos  sign 

to  unbelievers. 
Tv.»-»  An  outsider  is  impressed  more  by  p«ophe<7  than 

by  tongues. 
TT.W*  Need  of  order  in  the  assembhes. 
rrM*  Women  forbidden  to  speak  in  the  assembhes. 


•  V.21  may  contain  an  exception  in  the  case  of  slaves ;  but  the 
Greek  is  ambiguous. 

t  The  yntmm^  tit  tiiis  passage  is  not  qaite  certam.  oat  a.  art. 
•  Agapets '  in  ^RB. 


252    CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE       CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


1437-40  Final  appeal  for  order  and  submission  to  St.  Paul's 
authority. 

IV.  The  RssURJtiXTwy.— An  answer  to  those  who  doubted 

about  the  resurrection  of  ChriHtians  (ch.  15). 
161-11  Summary  of  St.  Paul's  Gospel,  of  which  the  re- 
surrection is  an  essential  part. 

vv.12-11*  The  resurrection  of  Christians  depends  on  the 
fact  of  Christ's  Resurrection. 

vv.20-22  Parallel  between  Christ  and  Adam. 

vv.23-28  The  final  consummation,  the  reig^  of  the  Father, 
when  Christ,  havinjr  suMued  all  His  enemies, 
delivers  up  to  Him  the  Kingdom. 

vv.29-32  Christian  practices.  Christian  endurance  and  self- 
denial  unintelli^'ible  without  the  Hesurrection. 

VV.S3-34  Knowledge  of  Resurrection  should  be  an  incent- 
ive to  energy  in  Christian  life. 

vv. 35-38  Kature  of  resurrection  body.    Analogy  of  seed. 

vv. 39-41  Variety  of  natural  kinds. 

vv.*2-46  The  natural  body  is  the  suitable  framework  of 
man's  present  self ;  his  future  body  will  be  the 
suitable  framework  for  him  when  he  has  become 
spiritual. 

w.-«7-4»  So  man  must  be  changed  from  the  likeness  of  the 
First  to  that  of  the  Second  Adam. 

w.sOiSS  At  the  Last  Trump,  the  dead  shall  arise  incor- 
ruptible, and  those  who  are  still  on  earth  will 
be  suddenly  changed  and  glorified. 

W.B4-57  This  is  the  conquest  of  death. 

V.58  This  gospel  of  the  Resurrection  gives  value  to  all 
moral  eflfort. 

V.  PEHSOJf AT.  MATTERS  (ah.  16). 

161-4  Arrangements  about  collection. 
vv.5-9  St.  Paul's  intention  to  come  and  make  some  stay 
at  Corinth. 
vv.lO-ii  Commendation  of  Timothy. 

V.12  Apollos'  unwillingness  to  come, 
vv.  13-14  Final  exhortation. 

vv.1^16  Commendation  of  the  household  of  Stephanas. 
vv.17-18  Thankfulness  for  the  coming  of  Stephanas  and 

others, 
vv.  19-21  Salutations  and  benediction. 

4.  St.  Paul's  relations  with  Corinth  between  1 
and  2  Corinthians. — It  is  necessary  to  go  into  some 
detail  with  regard  to  the  relations  between  St. 
Paul  and  Corinth  after  the  dispatch  of  1  Cor.,  as 
many  questions  connected  with  2  Cor.  depend  upon 
the  view  taken  of  the  external  history. 

(a)  Visit  of  Timothy . — In  1  Co  4"  St.  Paul  speaks 
of  sending  Timothy  to  Corinth,  apparently  with  a 
mission  to  deal  with  the  party-spirit  that  was  pre- 
valent there.  But  in  16^"  he  speaks  as  thougn  it 
were  uncertain  whether  Timothy  would  arrive. 
In  Ac  19*-  we  read  that  Timothy  went  into  Mace- 
donia. If  that  refers,  as  is  probable,  to  the  same 
journey,  Timothy  must  have  had  a  mission  to  dis- 
charge in  Macedonia  as  well  as  in  Corinth.  We 
hear  nothing  of  his  arrival  at  Corinth,  But  it  is 
quite  certain  that  St.  Paul  did  receive  from  some 
source  very  bad  news  from  Corinth.  It  is  on  the 
whole  probable  that  Timothy  went  to  Corinth,  arid 
found  the  situation  there  very  bad,  that  he  made 
no  impression,  and  that  he  returned  with  alarming 
news  to  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus. 

(6)  St.  Paul's  second  visit  ev  Xivrj. — On  the  receipt 
of  bad  news  from  Corinth,  whether  from  Timothy 
or  from  some  other  source,  St.  Paul  sailed  thither 
in  person,  but  his  visit  was  unsuccessful,  and  he 
soon  went  back  again  to  Asia  Minor.  The  evidence 
for  this  visit  is  to  be  found  in  three  passages  of 
2  Cor.,  viz.  13*-*  12"  2^  The  most  natural  exegesis 
of  13'"*  and  12"  implies  that  he  had  been  to  Corinth 
twice  already,  though  it  is  just  possible  to  avoid 
this  conclusion.  When  these  two  passages  are 
combined  with  2',  the  case  for  a  second  visit  to 
Corinth  becomes  overwhelming,  for  in  2'  it  is  im- 
plied that  St.  Paul  had  paid  a  visit  to  Corinth  iu 
\vin[i.  Now  such  a  description  would  not  apply  to 
his  first  visit,  which  was  a  distinct  success,  in  spite 
of  certain  disappointments  and  sorrows.  The  fact 
that  this  visit  is  not  mentioned  in  Acts  is  unim- 
portant. It  was  very  brief,  and  in  the  main  un- 
successful. The  difficulties  which  occasioned  it 
were  afterwards  settled,  and  it  would  not  naturally 
enter  into  the  plan  followed  by  the  author  of  Acts. 

This  visit  must  have  been  paid  after  1  Cor.  had 
been  written,  for  in  that  Epistle  St.  Paul  speaks 


throughout  as  though  there  had  been  only  one 
visit.  His  knowledge  of  the  Ptate  of  alluirs  at 
Corinth  is  derived  from  information  received,  not 
from  personal  observation  (cf.  1"  5'  11'*),  and  in 
4*'  he  shows  that  he  realized  the  j)o&sibility  that 
he  might  have  to  pay  a  second  visit,  though  he 
was  not  sure  about  it. 

(c)  The  severe  letter. — On  his  return  to  Ephesus, 
St.  Paul  wrote  a  severe  letter  '  out  of  much  atilic- 
tion  and  anguish  of  heart.'  The  letter  so  referred 
to  in  2  Co  2*  must  have  been  written  at  this  time, 
though  efforts  have  been  made  to  identify  it  either 
with  1  Cor.  or  with  the  '  previous  letter '  alluded 
to  in  that  Epistle  (1  Co  5* ;  see  above,  §  2).  1  Cor. 
was  certainly  not  written  '  out  of  much  affliction 
and  anguish  of  heart,  with  many  tears.'  It  is  calm 
and  in  the  main  unemotional.  Moreover,  the 
references  to  the  *  severe  letter '  in  2  Co  ""•  *  3'  I*' 
2'  do  not  suit  1  Cor.  particularly  well.  There  is 
not  a  word  in  1  Cor.  to  suggest  that  he  was  shrink- 
ing from  a  visit  for  fear  of  its  being  unpleasant. 
The  'previous  letter'  is  also  impossible.  For  St. 
Paul  only  heard  that  his  '  severe  letter '  had 
brought  the  Corinthians  to  repentance  when  Titus 
returned  and  met  him  in  Macedonia  (see  below). 
But,  when  writing  1  Cor. ,  St.  Paul  had  already  had 
an  answer  to  the  '  previous  letter'  (1  Co  5"'"). 

The  theory  has  been  put  forward  that  part  of 
the  'severe  letter'  is  to  be  found  in  2  Co  10-13. 
If  this  theory  is  correct,  we  should  expect  to  find 

(1)  a  great  clifFerence  in  tone  and  spirit  between 
the  two  parts  of  the  Epistle,  together  with  a  sudden 
break  of  the  sense  at  tiie  end  of  ch.  9  :  the  last  four 
chapters  should  be  severe  and  threatening,  the  first 
nine  should  be  encouraging,  cheerful,  and  forgiving ; 

(2)  a  certain  number  of  cross-references,  passages 
in  the  first  nine  chapters  which  .seem  to  look  back 
to  the  last  four ;  (3)  a  solution  of  the  rather  in- 
tricate question  of  the  relations  of  Titus  with 
Corinth. 

(1)  The  first  nine  chapters  are  clearly  written  at 
a  time  when  St.  Paul  has  suddenly  been  relieved 
from  very  great  anxiety  by  the  arrival  of  Titus 
and  the  good  news  which  he  lia.s  brought  from 
Corinth  (7^"^  2'2-'3).  The  whole  tone  of  these 
chapters  is  one  of  great  relief,  apparently  caused 
by  the  impression  produced  by  his  'severe  letter.' 
But  in  chs.  10-13  we  find  great  anxiety  and  great 
passion.  The  change  cannot  fail  to  be  noticed  by 
any  reader  of  the  Epistle.  And  there  is  a  marked 
break  in  the  sense  at  the  end  of  ch.  9.  After  speak- 
ing of  the  collection,  and  ending  with  an  ascription 
of  praise  to  God,  suddenly,  without  even  an  dXXd, 
he  begins  to  threaten  his  readers.  This  has  been 
accounted  for  by  those  who  believe  in  the  integrity 
of  the  Epistle  in  two  ways — (i.)  That  the  first  nine 
chapters  were  addressed  to  the  repentant  majority, 
the  last  four  to  the  rebellious  minority.  But  there 
is  no  hint  of  this.  Ch.  10  is  apparently  addressed 
to  the  Church  as  a  whole.  There  seems  no  room 
for  a  repentant  majority.  And  chs.  1-9  give  no 
hint  of  a  rebellious  minority  (cf.  T'*"'").  (ii.)  That 
St.  Paul  received  later  news  from  Corinth  while 
writing  the  Epistle,  and  wrote  the  last  four 
chapters  in  the  light  of  this  later  news.  But  surely 
there  would  have  been  some  indication  of  this.  He 
could  hardly  have  allowed  the  earlier  part  to  stand 
without  alteration. 

(2)  We  find  certain  apparent  cross-references 
between  the  two  parts  of  the  Epistle,  pointed  out 
by  Kennedy  in  his  Second  and  Third  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians  (pp.  79-94),  and  by  Lake  in  The 
Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  (pp.  157-162).  Of 
these  tiie  most  striking  is  tlie  parallel  between  2» 
and  13'".  In  2*  the  Apostle  states  tliat  he  wrote  a 
severe  letter  in  order  that  when  ho  came  he  might 
not  have  to  be  so  .'icvere.  In  13'"  he  says  that  he 
is  at  that  moment  writing  a  severe  letter,  that  he 


CORINTHIAXS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE       CORINTHIAN'S,  EPISTLES  TO  THE    253 


may  not  have  to  be  severe  when  he  comes.     Again 
in  i'^  we  have  a  parallel  with  13-. 

(3)  The  visit  of  Titus  to  Corinth  mentioned  in  7* 
was  with,  or  at  the  same  time  as,  the  '  severe  letter.' 
gn-w  shows  that  St.  Paul  was  sending  Titos  again 
to  make  arrangements  for  the  collection.  This 
surely  he  would  not  have  ventured  to  do  if  he  were 
under  the  necessity  of  writing  in  the  tone  of  chs. 
10-13.  Xo  man  would  send  a  letter  full  of  rebuke, 
and  of  self-justification  in  the  face  of  what  seem 
to  have  been  charges  of  dishonesty,  and  in  the 
same  letter  ask  his  readers  to  subscribe  money. 
In  12^*  he  alludes  to  his  custom  of  taking  no  money 
from  them  for  himself  personally.  He  assumes 
(v.")  that  they  admit  this,  but  then  he  says  that 
they  may  accuse  him  of  winning  their  confidence 
with  a  view  to  futxire  etibrts  to  get  something  out 
of  them.  How  ?  he  asks.  Xot  by  his  representa- 
tives ;  e.g.  Titus  never  'made  gain  out  of  them.' 
Clearly  he  alludes  to  some  early  work  of  Titus  at 
Corinth.  Titus  they  know  and  trust.  So  he  is  a 
suitable  person  to  send  at  this  critical  moment  to 
Corinth.  In  ch.  7  we  hear  of  the  success  of  his 
mission.  The  fact  that  he  was  a  persona  grata  at 
first  and  has  recently  been  successful  there  makes 
him  a  very  suitable  person  to  send  again  (ch.  8)  to 
arrange  about  the  collection. 

Finally,  the  last  four  chapters  of  2  Cor.  answer 
admirably  to  the  descriptions  we  have  of  the 
'  severe  letter. '  They  might  well  have  been  written 
*  out  of  much  affliction  and  anguish  of  heart,  with 
many  tears '  (2*).  It  is  quite  conceivable  that  after 
writing  them  St.  Paul  might  have  regretted  send- 
ing them  and  wondered  whether  they  were  not  too 
severe  (7"'*).  Self -commendation  is  a  very  pro- 
minent feature  in  them  (3').  They  show  that  the 
Apostle  was  contemplating,  but  shrinking  from,  a 
visit  which  he  might  have  to  pay  (12*-**  13^).  This 
corresponds  to  1^  and  2*.  Thus  the  internal  evi- 
dence for  the  theory  is  very  strong.  No  single 
point  is  in  itself  conclusive ;  but  the  conjunction 
of  different  lines  of  evidence,  and  the  fact  that  the 
theory  straightens  out  a  tangled  web  and  solves 
many  problems,  is  very  significant. 

The  theory  is  made  easier  of  acceptance  by  the 
fact  that  2  Cor.  appears  not  to  have  been  published 
at  an  early  date  (see  above,  §  1).  The  Corinthian 
Church  would  hardly  have  wanted  to  publish  the 
'severe  letter,'  and  the  later  letter  is  in  the  main 
personal,  and  does  not  contain  much  instruction. 
It  is  quite  possible  that  the  MSS  were  not  carefully 
preserved,  and  the  two  letters  may  have  been 
conftLsed. 

{d)  Visit  of  Titvs.— The  'severe  letter'  and  the 
mission  of  Titus  already  alluded  to  were  apparently 
successful,  and  Titus  met  St.  Paul  in  Macedonia, 
bringing  him  reassuring  news  (2  Co  7*- "),  after 
which  St.  Paul  wrote,  according  to  the  theory  we 
have  adopted,  2  Co  1-9,  probably  sending  Titus 
with  it,  and  instructing  him  to  make  arrangements 
for  the  collection. 

S.  Analysis  of  2  Co  10-13. 

L  STSOXG  BEBUKEQ.011S), 

101-s  Appeal,  and  thre«t  of  strong  action  against  his 

detractors. 
VT.**  Oaim  to  possession  ol  q>irittial  power,  and  de- 
scription of  that  power. 
y.7  The  Christ-party's  exclasiye  claim  onjustified. 
TT.»u  Threat  of  exertion  of  spiritual  power  on  arrival 

at  Corinth. 
TV.  12-16  St.  Paxil's  boasting,  unlike  that  of  his  opponents, 

shall  be  confined  to  his  own  sphere  of  work. 
vT.17-18  But  all  self-oonunendation  is  to  be  deprecated. 
n.  St.  Paws   self-commexdatios   asd    its   eeasoss 
(Ul-1318). 
(a)  TJUreawiwOl^-**)- 
111-3  His  fears  for  them. 
^.*  Their  tolerance  of  new  preachers. 
TT.3-S  Comparison  of  himself  with  these  preadun. 
TT.7-U  His  refusal  of  maintenance. 

VT.i*-i5  Itsreason— aroidanceofonfavoaiablecompanaon 
■nith  them. 


(ft)  TU  M^-«aMMIMIMi«t»M(Ut«-l£U). 

lli«^»  Apologr  lor  boMtiBir. 
Tv.n-si  Cofnputooa  of  Mtnaelf  with  his  tirals  in  recpect 

of  religioas  prerantivea. 
TT.sus  InrespectotsulfeniigsoBbdMlf  of  ttacgospeL 

lSl-«  In  respect  of  Tiaioos  and  rerelationa. 
TT.*-M  The  thcnrn  in  the  flesh  and  ita  aignificaiKe. 
Tv.U-U  Comparison  resumed  in  respect  <rf  wotk  done  at 

Corinth. 
TT.M-U  JastilleatioB  of  his  refnaal  of  BMintenaiice. 
m.  Forecast  ow  a  tbird  visit  to  Cojuvnr  (isn^ui*). 
12U-S1  HiafMn  about  what  be  may  find  at  Corinth. 
13i->  Threat  at  severe  action. 
TT.s-5  This  is  Hkelj  to   be  mad*  neoeaaary  by  their 

aocnaatkn  of  weakneaa.    IKacaasion  of  this. 
VT.*-U  His  hope  that  after  all  it  may  not  be  neoesaaiy. 

IV.  BXBORTATIOS,  SALVTATIOM.  ASD  BXSSDICTrOS (13^-14). 

It  is  imposrible  to  feel  any  certain^  ahoot  tiw  place  of  ISU-'^ 
Some  think  that  it  is  reaOy  the  oonchukn  of  cfaa.  1  to  9. 
Bnt  Oen  seems  no  good  reaaon  to  think  ttiat  it  ia  inits  wrong- 
place.    St.  Paul  might  quite  well  hare  oondaded  the  'severe 
letter'   with    otdimiiy   ezhortatknis  and   sataitatians.      The 
decision  is  made  difltcnlt  hy  the  fact  tihat  in  any  case  idis. 
10-13  can  be  no  UKMre  than  a  fragment  of  the  'severe  letter,' 
and  we   have  no  means  of  judging  what  pn^wrtioo  of  that 
letter  has  been  lost. 
6.  Analysis  of  2  Co  1-9. 
L  St.  Pauls  sslatioks  wits  CorotbO.  21 
11-3  Salutation. 
w.3-5  "nuuBkagiving  Utt  oonecdatian. 
VY.s-7  Farallehsm  of  their  experioioes  with  bis. 
TV.8-U  His  safferings  anddeUveranoe  in  Asia, 
w.i^i'*  His  clear  oonscieiioe. 

TT.1^3  His  failure  to  cany  oat  his  |H«vioas  intention  of 
visiting  them  was  not  doe  to  ficklenesB. 
lB-33  It  ing  due  to  his  desire  to  spare  them. 
2^^  Beasmi  for  writiiq^  the '  severe  letter.' 
w.s-u  £xhoitati<n  to  fbigive  the  offender. 
TT.13-IS  His  anxietrV  |sevioas  to  his  meeting  with  TStns. 
TV.14-I7  His  thankfulness  to  God  for  His  use  of  him. 
IL  VisoicATios  or  St.  Paws  ufs  and  work  as  ax 
Aposrxs  (S-7y. 
31-S  His  'letter  of  commendation 'is  nothing  but  his 
relations  with  them. 
TT.*4  His  ocmlldence,  based  on  this,  as  a  minister  of 

the  New  Covenant. 
w.T-*  The  old  and  the  new  <liw|>fiwti<wi8  compared  in 
respect  of  otmtent. 
TT.iO-u  In  respect  of  permanence. 
VT.  13-16  In  respect  of  dearaeas  and  openness. 
Tv.n-is  Tbg  new  dispensation  brii^fs  liberty  and  ttans- 
formation  into  ChiistnB  likeness. 
41-S  Consequent  openness  of  Christian  preacher. 
TV.34  Any  obscurity  it  due  to  the  Windnww  of  the 

hearers. 
▼V.B4  For  the  content  of  the  preadiliy  is  Ghiisti,  ttie 
ninminator. 
rj  Weakness  of  human  preacher  makes  manifest 
God's  power. 
w.S-U  His  oontinnal  difficnlties,  which  are  not,  however, 
insnperahle,  show  that  the  life  manifest  in  his 
convots  comes  from  Christ. 
TT.U-U  AH  his  efforts  are  based  00  faith,  and  directed 

to  their  conrenion  to  the  oxl  of  God's  glonr. 
w.M-U  80  he  works  on,  while  the  body  grows  weaker, 
bat  the  siririt  strongs*. 
gts  Qradaal  duaolutkm  of  weak  earthly  boifies  suc- 
ceeded by  bestowal  of  new  spiritoal  bodies. 
▼T.^s  So  deatii  ahaD  mean  presence  with  Christ^ 
w.^-io  ISieiefore,  in  view  of  the  Jodgment,  be  strives 

to  do  Bis  win. 
rv.u-13  H|JB  mast  be  his  defteoe  against  chaiges  alika  of 

fanatirism  and  o<  excessive  self-restraint. 
W.14-U  The  constraining  motive  in  eveiything  is  Chiisf  s 

Love. 
w.iS-19  This  transforms  everything,  so  that  he  has  a  new 
and  spiritual  knowledge  of  Christ  and  Chris- 


w.i^si  As  CfaristTs  ainlisBaadni'  be  preaches  renmcilia- 
tion  to  God,  made  poaaQde  throagfa  Qirist's 
Sacrifice. 
01-*  His  instant  appeal  to  them. 
w.3-3  As  a  Christian  minister  he  endures  harrtAiga. 
vv.8-7  He  displays  supernatural  virtues, 
w.^io  His  life  is  one  of  continnal  contrasts, 
w.u-u  He  exhorts  ttiem  to  respond  to  his  affection. 
&*-7i  Impossibility  of  Christiana  aasoriating  witii  im- 
moral persons. 
7**  His  affiecttonate  and  bonooraUe  rdations  with 
them. 
TV.*-'  The  relief  bron^t  to  him  by  the  coming-  of  IQtus. 
VT.8-H  Satisfactory  result  of  the  '  severe  letter." 
TT.13-16  The  joy  of  Titus. 
in.  Tbb  Collectiox  for  tbe  poor  Cejustiass  at  Jeru- 
salem (&.  9)l 
Si-^  Tbe  generosity  of  the  chorches  of  Macedonia. 
rv.^~  Hie  injanctkme  to  "ntus  to  stir  iq>  the  Corinth- 
ians in  like  manner. 
vv.s-9  Tbe  example  <rf  Christ. 
TT.io-is  Appeal  to  them  to  carry  out  their  good  resolations. 


254    CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE       CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


fciis-is  Need  of  reciprocity  among  churches. 
vv.16-24  Cominenilation  of  the  deputation  which  he  sends. 
9l-fi  Necessity  of  immediate  action  if  his  boasting  is 
not  to  be  falsified, 
vv.*-'?  Cheerful  giving. 
vv.8-11  Generosity  brings  a  blessing. 
VV.12-U  It  also  redounds  to  the  glory  and  praise  ol  Ood. 

7.  Integrity  of  2  Co  1-9.— Attempts  have  been 
made  to  divide  our  2  Cor.  still  further,  or  to  ascribe 
portions  of  it  to  a  later  editor  or  editors.  Drastic 
reconstructions  have  been  proposed,  e.g.,  by  A. 
Halinel,*  D.  Volter,t  and  H.  Lisco.J  But  such 
elaborations  have  but  little  to  recommend  them. 
There  are,  however,  reasons  for  thinking  that  2 
Co  6"-7'  is  a  passage  which  has  got  misplaced.  It 
occurs  in  the  middle  of  an  affectionate  appeal  made 
by  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  and  appears  to 
have  no  connexion  with  what  precedes  and  what 
follows  it.  The  supposed  connexion  is  that  St. 
Paul  urges  them  to  show  their  affection  for  him 
by  ceasing  from  their  immorality.  But  a  closer 
examination  of  the  passage  shows  that  the  point  is 
not  that  they  shoula  cease  to  be  immoral,  but  that 
they  should  abstain  from  intercourse  with  un- 
believers. Now  we  know  from  1  Co  5®"'*  that  in  a 
letter  written  previously  to  the  Corinthians  he  had 
spoken  on  this  subject,  and  that  they  had  asked 
for  an  explanation  of  his  exact  meaning,  and  in 
the  passage  referred  to  he  explains  that  he  did  not 
mean,  as  they  supposed,  that  they  were  not  to 
have  anything  to  do  with  non-Christians,  but  only 
that  immoral  Christians  were  to  be  avoided.  In 
the  absence  of  definite  evidence  it  is  impossible  to 
be  certain,  but  it  is  clear  that  2  Co  6^*-7^  would 
naturally  be  interpreted  to  mean  what  the  Corin- 
thians did  as  a  matter  of  fact  suppose  St.  Paul  to 
mean.  And  for  this  reason,  taken  together  with 
its  irrelevance  in  its  present  position,  it  seems 
extremely  likely  that  it  is  an  extract  from  the 
'  previous  letter, '  whicli  has  by  some  means  been 
misplaced.  If  it  is  omitted  here,  the  sense  runs 
on  admirably  from  2  Co  6^  to  7^ ;  and  we  avoid  the 
necessity  of  having  to  suppose  an  extremely  un- 
natural digression  on  the  part  of  St.  Paul. 

Another  view  which  seems  to  deserve  special 
consideration  is  that  which  finds  the  situation 
implied  in  ch.  8  inconsistent  with  that  in  ch.  9. 
After  the  earnest  exhortation  to  liberality  con- 
tained in  ch.  8,  we  hardly  expect  to  find  in  9  the 
words :  '  About  the  ministration  to  the  saints  it  is 
superfluous  for  me  to  write  to  you.'  Moreover, 
these  last  words  would  certainly  suggest  that  the 
'  ministration  to  the  saints '  was  a  new  subject, 
with  which  he  had  not  so  far  dealt.  J.  S.  Semler,§ 
therefore,  propounded  the  hypothesis  that  ch.  9 
was  a  separate  letter,  addressed  to  the  Christians 
of  Achaia.  Others  have  supposed  that  it  is  ch.  8 
that  ought  to  be  sepai-ated  from  the  rest  of  the 
Epistle  {e.g.  Hagge,  Michelson).  It  is  no  doubt 
true  that,  as  the  chapters  stand,  there  is  a  certain 
amount  of  repetition,  and,  as  has  been  noticed 
above,  the  beginning  of  ch.  9  would  be  more 
natural  if  ch.  8  did  not  precede  it.  Moreover,  the 
subject  of  the  '  collection '  seems  to  be  treated  at 
disproportionate  length.  Yet  these  considerations 
are  not  really  conclusive.  There  is  no  question 
that  St.  Paul  attached  very  great  importance  to 
the  '  collection '  alike  for  religious  and  political 
reasons ;  and  when  he  feels  strongly  about  a  sub- 
ject he  often  deals  with  it  in  an  emotional  and 
rather  disconnected  manner.  This  would  account 
also  for  the  disproportionate  length  of  his  references 
to  it.  And  the  situation  implied  in  ch.  9,  taken  as 
a  whole,  is  not  really  inconsistent  with  that  im- 
plied in  ch.  8.     With  some  hesitation,  therefore, 

*  Derzweite  Korintherbrief  det  Apoitels  PaxUus,  Halle,  1904. 
t  PaxUus  und  seine  Briefe,  Strassburu:.  1905. 
t  Die  Entatehung  des  zweiten  Korintherbriefeg,  Berlin,  1896. 
§  Paraphrasis  in  Pauli  ad  Cor.  Epistolas,  Halle,  1770, 1776. 


we  conclude  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  separate  chs. 
8  and  9,  and  that  it  is  probable  that  tney  are  in 
their  right  places. 

8.  The  troables  at  Corinth.  —  We  must  now 
discuss  the  nature  of  the  troubles  at  Corinth — a 
subject  of  great  complexity.  The  evidence  at  our 
disposal  is  really  not  sufficient  to  enable  us  to 
aiTive  at  a  positive  conclusion.  The  fact  that  we 
only  possess  a  portion  of  the  'severe  letter,'  in 
which  St.  Paul  deals  with  the  troubles  at  their 
height,  and  that  the  portion  which  we  possess  does 
not  include  his  treatment  of  the  specific  difficulties, 
but  is  only  a  discussion  in  general  terms,  ambigu- 
ous to  us  because  of  our  ignorance  of  the  context, 
adds  greatly  to  the  complexity  of  the  problem. 
But  there  are  certain  passages  in  both  Epistles 
which  throw  some  light  on  the  situation. 

(a)  In  2  Co  2»-"  7'*  St.  Paul  speaks  of  a  par- 
ticular offender.  It  appears  that  he  has  been 
sentenced  to  some  punishment  by  a  majority  of  the 
Corintliians  {vwb  riov  irXeidvui').  St.  Paul  says  that 
the  sentence  is  adequate.  The  language  of  the 
passage  suggests  the  existence  of  a  dissentient 
minority,  and  it  would  seem  that  St.  Paul  is  ad- 
dressing this  minority  when  he  gives  his  exhorta- 
tion that  the  offender  should  now  be  forgiven  and 
encouraged,  lest  he  should  be  swallowed  up  by 
excessive  grief.  It  seems  most  probable  that  the 
minority  had  objected  to  the  sentence  as  inade- 
quate ;  and  this  would  imply  that  they  were  what 
we  may  call  an  ultra-Pauline  party.  This  suits 
the  passage  better  than  the  older  view  that  they 
were  hostile  to  St.  Paul,  and  objected  to  the 
sentence  as  excessive.  St.  Paul's  use  of  the  word 
lKav6v  makes  it  clear  that  the  objection  was  rather 
that  the  sentence  was  inadequate.  St.  Paul  says 
in  effect  that  the  sentence  passed  by  the  majority 
satisfies  him,  and  urges  them  to  forgive  the  man, 
implying  that  their  forgiveness  will  make  all  the 
difference  to  the  man's  happiness.  Who  then  was 
the  offender,  and  what  had  he  done  ?  The  view 
that  he  was  the  man  guilty  of  incest,  mentioned  in 
1  Co  5,  cannot  possibly  be  right.  For  in  2  Co  7'* 
St.  Paul  says :  '  I  wrote  not  for  his  sake  who  did 
the  wrong,  nor  for  his  sake  who  suffered  the  wrong, 
but  that  your  zeal  for  us  might  be  made  manifest 
to  you  in  the  sigiit  of  God.'  But  (1)  it  is  clear 
from  I  Co  5*  that  in  that  case  St.  Paul  was  wTiting 
'  for  his  sake  who  did  the  wrong '  ;  (2)  '  He  who 
suffered  the  wrong '  (6  dSiKridtls)  would  have  to  be  the 
man's  father.  This  would  involve  the  supposition 
that  the  father  was  alive,  and  that  a  Corinthian 
Christian  had  .actually  taken  to  wife  his  father's 
wife  during  the  lifetime  of  his  father  without  protest 
from  his  fellow-Christians.  The  language  of  1  Co 
5  does  imply  that  it  was  a  gross  case  of  im- 
morality, but  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  this 
could  really  have  occurred.  And,  if  it  had 
occurred,  St.  Paul  would  surely  not  have  treated 
it  as  lightly  as  he  seems  to  treat  it  in  2  Co  2'""  and 
7^'*.  The  language  of  these  passages  suggests 
rather  that  the  offence  was  a  personal  one,  that 
the  offender  had  grossly  insulted  St.  Paul  when  he 
came  to  Corinth,  and  that  6  dSiKrjdeLs  was  St.  Paul 
himself.  The  suggestion  has  been  made  that  6 
ddiKujOels  was  Timothy,  and  that  he  had  been  in- 
sulted when  he  visited  Corinth  (cf.  1  Co  4"  W). 
This  is  possible,  but  it  is  more  probable  that  the 
reference  is  to  an  insult  inflicted  on  St.  Paul 
himself  :  the  fragment  of  the  '  severe  letter '  which 
we  possess  is  full  of  defence  of  his  authority, 
whic-h  had  clearly  been  in  some  way  attacked.  Iso 
doubt  there  was  a  reference  to  tiie  offender  in  the 
part  of  the  '  severe  letter '  which  is  lost.  St.  Paul's 
authority  had  been  attacked,  but  it  is  not  clear 
from  wliat  quarter  the  attack  had  proceeded. 

(6)  In  1  Co  1'^  we  read  of  the  existence  of 
factions  or  parties  at  Corinth.     It  is  possible  that 


COKIXTHIA^'S,  EPISTLES  TO  THE        CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE    255 


here  we  may  have    the  key  to  tlie    Corinthian 
troubles,  for  one  of  the  parties  at  any  rate   may 

?robably  either  have  been  from  the  first  anti- 
auline  or  have  afterwards  turned  hostile  to  St. 
Paul.  It  will  therefore  be  convenient  at  this  stage 
to  consider  these  parties.  First  of  all,  St.  Paul, 
with  characteristic  tact,  mentions  the  party  which 
took  his  name,  and  condemns  them.  lie  then 
mentions  the  party  of  Apollos.  The  latter  clearly 
did  not  exist  in  opposition  to  St.  Paul  with  the 
consent  of  Apollos  (1  Co  16").  ApoUos  (^.v.)  was 
a  Jew  of  Alexandria,  who,  after  instruction  from 
Priscilla  and  Aquila,  went  into  Achaia,  where  he 
was  very  helpful  to  those  who  had  believed,  bein^ 
particularly  skilful  at  confuting  the  Jews,  and 
using  for  this  purpose  his  great  knowledge  of 
Scripture  (Ac  IS^-*'-*).  UntU  he  met  with  Priscilla 
and  AquUa,  we  are  told  that  '  he  spake  and  taught 
accurately  the  things  concerning  Jesus,  knowing 
only  the  baptism  of  John.' 

The  meaning  of  this  is  uncertain,  but  it  is 
probable  (cf.  art.  by  J.  H.  A.  Hart  on  '  Apollos '  in 
JTkSt  vii.  [1905]  16flf.)  that  it  means  that  he  was 
fully  acquainted  with  Messianic  prophecy,  but 
did  not  know  to  whom  it  referred,  '  the  things 
concerning  Jesus '  being  texts  from  the  OT  which 
from  the  Christian  point  of  view  referred  to  Jesus, 
though  not,  of  course,  from  the  point  of  view  of 
Apollos  himself  at  this  time.  This  interpretation 
gives  a  more  intelligible  sense  to  the  passage  than 
that  which  is  at  first  sight  more  natural,  viz.  that 
TO.  -repl  'iTjaov  means  the  history  of  Jesus'  life.  It 
would  imply  that  he  preached  the  same  message  as 
John  the  Baptist — a  message  of  the  imminence  of 
the  Kingdom,  the  marks  of  the  Messiah,  and  the 
need  for  repentance.  His  instruction  at  the  hands 
of  Priscilla  and  AquUa  taught  him  to  whom  the 
Messianic  passages  with  which  he  was  familiar 
referred.  And  at  Corinth  his  knowledge  of 
Scripture  was  turned  to  good  account  in  showing 
that  the  Messiah  had  come  and  was  none  other 
than  Jesus.  The  view  that  the  intellectualist 
tendencies  condemned  in  the  early  chapters  of  1 
Cor.  were  particularly  characteristic  of  the  party 
of  Apollos  is  not  susceptible  of  proof,  but  it  is  not 
inconsistent  with  what  we  know  of  Apollos.  For 
Alexandria  was  the  home  of  philosophy,  and 
Apollos  was  an  Alexandrian  Jew.  We  ^o  not, 
however,  know  that  he  was  a  disciple  of  Philo,  and 
we  do  know  that  he  was  a  disciple  of  John  the 
Baptist.  These  discipleships  might  be  combined 
in  the  same  person,  but  it  does  not  seem  altogether 
probable.  The  fact  is  that  there  is  no  evidence, 
and  we  must  be  content  to  leave  the  matter 
doubtful. 

The  party  of  Cephas  was  in  all  probability  a 
Judaizing  party.  To  say  this  does  not  involve  the 
view  that  St.  Peter  was  himself  a  Judaizer.  But  it 
is  extremely  likely  that  those  who  used  his  name 
were  so.  Lake  {ITie  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
pp.  112-117)  maintains  that  it  is  probable  that  St. 
Peter  had  himself  been  to  Corinth,  and  that  there 
is  no  likelihood  of  his  party  having  been  Judaizing. 
But  this  is  perhaps  the  least  convincing  part  of  his 
admirable  discussion  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Corin- 
thians. The  policy  of  St.  Peter  was  one  of  friendli- 
ness to  the  work  and  mission  of  St.  Paul,  combined 
with  a  personal  respect  for  and  adhesion  to  the  Law. 
The  Acts  certainly  represents  St.  Peter  as  ac- 
quiescing in  the  freedom  of  the  Grcntiles  from  the 
Law,  but  does  not  forbid  the  supposition  that  he 
acquiesced  with  some  reluctance.  A  modified  and 
liberal  Judaism  would  describe  his  position  with 
suflBcient  accuracy.  This  may  well  represent  the 
policy  of  his  party  at  Corinth.  Probably  also  they 
went  behind  the  authority  of  St.  Paul  to  that  of 
the  Twelve,  of  whom  St.  Peter  was  the  recognized 
leader.     It  is  most  likely  that  the  main  point  in 


dispute  between  them  and  the  Pauline  party  was 
this  question  of  St.  Paul's  independent  authority. 
But  we  have  no  indication  that  they  were  an  im- 
portant body  at  Corinth. 

The  Christ-party  is  the  real  difficulty.  Some 
have  held  that  iyu  8i  Xpiarov  is  not  the  watch- 
word of  a  party,  but  St.  Paul's  own  cry.  But 
the  form  of  the  sentence  makes  this  meet  im- 
probable. Moreover,  there  are  indications  in  2 
Cor.  of  the  existence  of  a  Christ-party  at  Corinth 
(10^).  This  party  apparently  questioned  St.  Paul's 
authority.  Their  leaders  commend  themselves 
(10^^),  i.e.  arrogate  a  lofty  position  to  themselves. 
They  are  probably  referred  to  (11')  as  oi  inrepXlay 
av6aTo\oi.  It  appears  that  they  declined  to  take 
money  from  the  Corinthians.*  But  he  says  that 
they  are  false  apostles,  deceitful  workers.  In 
justifying  his  own  position  against  them  he  says 
that  he  too  is  a  Hebrew,  etc.  (11**).  He  certainly 
excels  them  in  the  amount  of  his  sufierings  for 
Christ.  In  the  matter  of  visions  and  revelations 
he  is  at  least  their  equal.  Therefore  he  is  in  no 
respect  inferior  to  them  (12'^). 

Broadly  speaking,  there  are  two  views  as  to  the 
character  of  this  Christ-party.  The  first  is  that 
they  were  Judaizers,  representatives  of  the  party  / 
who  sent  emissaries  to  Antioch  and  preached  the  ^ 
necessity  of  circumcision  for  all  Christians  (Ac  IS""-), 
but  were  afterwards  repudiated  by  St.  James.  It 
is  clear  from  2  Co  11^  that  they  were  Jews  who 
prided  themselves  on  their  Jewish  birth.  But 
there  is  no  kind  of  evidence  that  anyone  had  told 
the  Corinthians  to  observe  the  whole  Jewish  Law. 
This  is  not  one  of  the  subjects  with  which  St.  Paul 
has  to  deal  in  his"  Epistles.  The  danger  seems  to 
be  the  other  way.  Therefore  it  is  on  the  whole 
unlikely  that  this  party  were,  as  has  been  sup- 
posed, more  extreme  Judaizers  than  the  Cephas 
party,  representing  themselves  as  being  in  an 
authoritative  position  to  say  what  the  mind  of 
Christ  really  was,  and  what  His  own  practice  had 
been,  because  of  their  common  descent  with  Him 
from  an  old  Jewish  stock  and  because  they  were  in 
continual  commimication  with  His  relatives. 

A  more  probable  view  is  that  they  were  spiritual- 
izers  rather  than  Judaizers,  and  that  they  went 
further  than  St.  Paul  in  the  direction  of  freedom 
from  the  Law-.  The  arguments  about  dSukbdvra 
in  1  Co  10  seem  to  be  directed  against  men  who 
made  a  boast  of  their  freedom  from  Jewish  restric- 
tions— Tama  i^eariv  seems  to  have  been  their  cry. 
St.  Paul  shows  the  danger  of  this,  and  the  neces- 
sary subservience  of  any  such  principle  to  the  law 
of  charity,  and  consideration  for  weaker  brethren. 
The  whole  of  2  Cor.  becomes  more  intelligible  if 
we  suppose  the  opposition  to  St.  Paul  to  have  come 
from  a  party  of  people  who  regarded  themselves  as 
vvevfiariKoi,  and  therefore  free  from  restrictions 
and  regulations  concerning  carnal  matters.  2  Co  10- 
implies  that  their  charge  against  St.  Paul  was 
that  he  walked  according  to  the  flesh,  i.e.  that  he 
was  not  TvevfiaTiKbs.  The  grounds  of  their  attack 
on  his  apostolicity  were,  it  seems,  such  as  would 
most  probably  be  employed  by  those  who  regarded 
themselves  as  TvevnaTiKoi.  For  he  defends  himself 
not  only  by  asserting  his  Jewish  birth,  but,  after 
giving  a  list  of  his  sufferings  for  Christ's  sake 
(which  is  the  defence  to  which  he  himself  attaches 
most  importance),  by  making  claims  to  visions  and 
revelations  (121-^"),  and  the  working  of  miracles 
(121-).  Throughout  the  Epistle  St.  Paul  claims  to 
be  TTvevfiariKos  in  the  onlj-  legitimate  sense,  quite 
as  much  as  his  opponents  (cf.  5^^).     The  fact  that 

*  This  would  appear  from  2  Co  lli^,  where  St.  Paul  asserts 
that  his  object  in  refusing  to  accept  maintenance  was  that  in 
the  verv  matter  of  which  they  boasted  they  might  be  found 
even  as  he.  This  seems  to  make  it  clear  that  they  did  not 
accept  maintenance,  and  the  phrase  ei  i-ts  careo^Mi  (H"-*)  must 
be  interpreted  in  accordance  with  this  fact. 


256    CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE      CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


these  opponents  were  Jews  does  not  make  it  im- 
possible that  they  were  also  irvevfjMTiKoi.  We  have 
evidence  that  there  were  Jews  who  did  not  attach 
importance  to  circumcision  and  the  ceremonial 
Law,  but  treated  the  Law  as  symbolic  (cf.  Philo,  de 
Migratione  Abrahami,  quoted  by  Lake,  op.  cit.  pp. 
24,  25).  The  attack  on  the  apostolicity  or  St.  Paul 
is  also  intelligible  from  this  point  of  view.  An 
'apostle'  was  not  much  more  than  a  missionary  (cf. 
DicUiche).  ol  wrepXiav  itrSaroXoi  cannot  in  any  case 
be  the  Twelve,  for  St.  Paul  was  at  this  time  on 
good  terms  with  tliem.  Their  attack  on  his  apos- 
tolicity was  based  on  his  lack  of  spiritual  power 
and  7vw(rts,  and  therefore  cannot  be  regarded  as  in- 
consistent with  this  view  of  their  cliaracter.  The 
fact  that  they  seem  also  to  have  prided  themselves 
on  their  Jewish  birth,  though  logically  inconsistent, 
is  not  at  all  unnatural.  For  sucli  pride  of  birth 
often  remains  in  people  whose  view  of  life  makes  it 
wholly  irrelevant. 

It  would  seem,  then,  that  the  opponents  of  St. 
Paul  at  Corinth  were  men  who  boasted  that  they 
were  above  the  Law  as  being  in  the  Spirit.  They 
attacked  St.  Paul  because  he  was  still  held  in  the 
bonds  of  a  legalism  from  which  they  had  emanci- 
pated themselves,  and  attached  an  altogether  un- 
due importance  to  such  carnal  matters  as  morality. 
St.  Paul's  answer  is  a  claim  that  he  too  is  irvevixaTi- 
k6%  ;  but  there  underlies  this  answer  an  undertone 
of  protest.  He  does  not  really  accept  their  tests 
of  apostolicity.  While  asserting  that  he  can  meet 
them  on  their  own  ground,  he  continually  reminds 
them  that  spiritual  power  and  knowledge  must 
show  themselves  in  zeal  for  morality  and  in  actual 
suffering  for  Christ's  sake.  It  is  on  these  points 
that  he  lays  the  greatest  stress.* 

9.  The  doctFine  of  the  Epistles. — [a)  The  Person 
and  Work  of  Christ. — No  one  can  read  the  first 
chapter  of  1  Cor.  without  perceiving  that  the 
writer  places  Jesus  Christ  in  a  position  which  is 
more  tlian  human.  There  is,  of  course,  no  devel- 
oped doctrine  of  God  to  be  found  either  in  tliis 
chapter  or  elsewhere  in  the  Epistles,  but  where  St. 
Paul  places  God  and  man  over  against  one  another, 
he  consistently  puts  Jesus  Christ  on  the  side  of 
God  over  against  man.  Grace  and  peace  are  to 
come  to  man  from  God  the  Father  and  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  (1  Co  1*,  2  Co  P).  Jesus  is  never  re- 
garded as  a  man  among  men.  He  is  the  source,  or 
at  any  rate  the  medium,  of  God's  gifts  to  men. 
Christians  call  upon  His  Name,  and  the  bond  of 
union  between  Christians  in  every  place  is  that 
they  recognize  the  common  Lordship  of  Christ. 
When  St.  Paul  wants  to  reprove  the  Corinthians 
for  the  existence  of  factions  among  them,  his  crown- 
ing argument  is  that  thev  are  actually  degrading 
Christ  to  the  position  oi  a  party-leader,  and  so 

Eutting  Him  on  a  level  with  ApoUos,  Cephas,  or 
imself.  Always  he  disclaims  any  independence 
of  Christ.  '  We  preach  not  ourselves  but  Christ 
Jesus  as  Lord '  (2  Co  4').  When  he  is  speaking 
of  the  exalted  position  of  'spiritual  men'  (1  Co 
210-16)^  he  points  out  that  the  spiritual  man  is  su- 
perior to  all  others,  for  whereas  the  '  natural  man ' 
can  understand  and  form  estimates  only  of  '  natural 
things,'  the  spiritual  man  can  form  estimates  of  all 
things.  He  nas  all  that  the  '  natural  man '  has, 
and  he  can  move  freely  in  a  sphere  where  the 
'  natural  man  '  is  helpless.  And  he  crowns  liis  argu- 
ment by  a  quotation  from  the  OT  :  '  Who  hath 
known  the  mind  of  the  Lord,  that  he  should  in- 
struct him  ? '  That  is  to  say,  no  one  can  understand 
the  thoughts  of  Jahweh.  '  But  we,'  he  adds, 
'have  the  mind  of  Christ.'  The  'natural  man' 
cannot  understand  the  mind  of  God.  But  we  who 
are  spiritual  actually  have  the  mind  of  Christ. 

*  For  this  whole  section  see  Ijake,  op.  cit.,  where  the  case  is 
lucidly  and  convincingly  stated. 


The  argument  of  this  passage  shows  that  St.  Paul, 
at  any  rate  here,  identified  Christ  with  the  Jahweh 
of  the  OT.  This  is  perhaps  the  most  striking 
example  of  the  position  which  he  gives  to  Christ, 
but  It  is  what  tlie  language  of  the  Epistle 
througliout  would  lead  us  to  expect.  He  clearly 
regards  Christ  as  having  existea  before  He  was 
born  upon  eartli.  'Though  he  was  ricli,  for  our 
sake  he  became  poor '  (2  Co  8").  Yet  it  would  be 
dangerous  to  assert  that  he  had  a  clear  and  consist- 
ent view  of  the  relation  of  Christ  to  the  Father. 
He  regards  Christ  as  sent  by  the  Father,  as  in 
some  sense  belonging  to  the  Father  (1  Co  S'"). 
And  in  IP  he  seems  to  imply  that  the  relation  of 
God  to  Clirist  is  parallel  with  the  relation  ol 
Christ  to  man,  and  again  with  the  relation  of  man 
to  woman.  It  seems  superfluous,  liowever,  to  sup- 
pose that  he  had  a  very  definite  conception  in  his 
mind.  He  need  not  have  meant  more  than  that, 
as  Clirist  does  the  will  of  God,  so  man  is  to  be 
obedient  to  Christ,  and  woman  to  man.  In  15"-^  he 
looks  forward  to  the  time  when  the  mediatorial 
Kingdom  of  Christ  shall  come  to  an  end,  and  God 
shall  be  all  in  all.  There  is  no  reference  here  to 
any  termination  of  the  personal  existence  of  Christ ; 
he  is  only  thinking  of  the  end  of  His  mediatorial 
Kingdom.  But  it  seems  clear  from  this  and  the 
other  passages  mentioned  that  he  regards  Christ  as 
being  definitely  subordinate  to  the  Father,  though, 
as  has  been  said  above,  always  on  the  Godward 
side  of  things,  over  against  man.  He  had  not 
faced  the  question  of  the  bearing  of  this  view  on 
monotheism. 

As  to  the  human  life  of  Christ  he  has  no  doubt. 
'  He  was  crucified  through  weakness '  (2  Co  IS*). 
His  Cross  and  Passion  are  the  centre  of  the  gospel 
message.  There  is  probably  no  Epistle  in  which 
it  is  made  so  clear  that  St.  Paul  regards  the  Cross 
as  the  centre  of  the  Christian  Creed.  '  We  preacli 
Christ  crucified '  (1  Co  \^).  'The  story  of  the 
Cross  is  to  them  that  are  perishing  foolishness,  but 
to  us  that  are  being  saved  it  is  the  power  of  God  ' 
(P^).  There  is  very  little  in  the  way  of  an  expla- 
nation of  the  significance  of  the  Cross.  '  God  was 
in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to  himself.'  '  Him 
who  knew  no  sin  he  made  to  be  sin  for  us,  that  we 
might  become  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him ' 
(2  Co  51""^^).  But  here  again  it  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  St.  Paul  had  in  mind  any  detailed 
theory  of  Atonement.  There  was  a  sense  in  which 
the  death  of  Christ  was  a  sacrifice  (1  Co  5^) ;  but 
there  is  no  theory  of  the  Atonement  either  stated 
or  implied. 

There  is,  however,  a  great  deal  of  explicit  teach- 
ing about  the  relation  between  Christ  and  Chris- 
tians. Christians  are  in  Christ,  and  Christ  is  in 
them.  This  relationship  is  brought  about  by  the 
action  of  God  (1  Co  1**).  And  on  this  mystical 
union  of  the  Christian  Avith  Christ  his  spiritual 
status  entirely  dei)ends.  It  is  Christ  with  whom 
he  is  united  that  is  his  wisdom.  He  is  justified, 
sanctified,  and  redeemed  becau.se  of  this  union. 
The  Christian  calling  can  be  described  as  a  calling 
into  fellowship  with  Jesus  Christ  (P).  And  this 
union  makes  a  complete  change  in  a  man's  whole 
position.  'If  anyone  is  in  Christ,  it  is  a  new 
creation  :  old  things  have  passed  away  ;  behold 
they  have  become  new '  (2  Co  5").  It  is  impossible 
to  exaggerate  the  stress  which  is  laid  by  St.  Paul 
on  this  experience  of  union  with  Christ. 

(h)  The  Church  and  the  Christian  ministrtf. — The 
ruling  thought  of  St.  Paul  about  the  Christian 
Church  is  expressed  by  the  metaphor  of  the  Body 
and  the  members  (1  Co  12).  The  gifts  of  the  Spirit 
are  most  diverse  in  kind  ;  but  it  is  One  Spirit  who 
is  the  giver  of  them  all.  Just  as  in  the  human 
body  the  members  are  diverse,  and  for  all  their 
diversity  of  function  are  closely  inter-related,  and 


CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE        CORINTHL\XS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE   257 


all  of  them  necessary,  so  it  is  with  the  Church, 
which  is  indeed  the  Body  of  Christ.  Every  indi- 
vidual member  of  the  Church  has  a  necessary  part 
to  play.  Being  a  member  of  the  Church,  he  is  neces- 
sarily a  member  of  Christ.  He  does  not  give  a  list 
of  ecclesiastical  officials.  To  suppose  that  he  does 
so  is  to  misunderstand  his  argument.  He  merely 
gives  specimens  of  the  diverse  spiritual  gifts  which 
God  has  bestowed  upon  the  Church,  and  the  lesson 
which  he  desires  to  teach  is  the  lesson  of  unity — 
the  same  lesson  as  he  tries  to  inculcate  when  he 
rebukes  the  Corinthians  for  their  factions  (1  Co  1^*"-) 
— diversity  in  unity,  a  unity  which  is  secured  by 
the  fact  that  the  whole  body  is  the  Body  of  Christ, 
and  that  the  Spirit  from  whom  the  diverse  gifts 
descend  is  One.  The  Church  is  also  compared  to 
the  Temple  of  God  (1  Co  3^*)  built  upon  the  One 
Foundation,  Jesus  Christ  (3^').  Here  the  lesson 
is  the  same.  The  Christian  teachers  are  indeed 
different  from  one  another,  but  all  of  them  build 
upon  that  One  Foundation. 

This  brings  us  to  the  consideration  of  the  position 
which  he  assigns  to  the  Christian  ministry,  about 
which  there  is  a  good  deal  in  the  Epistles.  While 
deprecating  strongly  any  usurpation  by  Christian 
teachers  of  what  should  belong  to  Christ  alone, 
and  asserting  that  they  exist  only  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Church,  he  claims  for  them  an  independence 
of  the  Church  which  they  serve.  They  are  re- 
sponsible to  Christ,  and  to  Him  alone  (1  Co  4'-  *). 
They  are  slaves  of  men,  but  they  are  ambassadors 
of  Clirist.  And  their  authority  can  be  put  to  the 
test.  St.  Paul  always  claims  that  if  he  exerts  his 
authority  he  will  be  able  to  reduce  his  opponents 
to  subjection  {4^^^,  2  Co  10"  13=*).  He  seems  to 
have  been  prepared  to  allow  that  the  authority  of 
the  Christian  minister  should  be  tested  by  his 
spiritual  power,  which  would  on  occasion  manifest 
itself  by  producing  physical  or  natural  results. 
An  instance  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  1  Co  5',  where 
he  speaks  of  delivering  a  man  over  to  Satan  for  the 
destruction  of  the  flesh,  that  the  spirit  might  be 
saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  He  seems  to 
mean  that  the  carrying  out  of  the  sentence  passed 
by  himself,  and  confirmed  by  the  Corinthian 
Church,  would  result  in  the  death  of  the  offender, 
and  that  this  would  ultimately  be  for  the  salvation 
of  his  soul.  The  passage  may  be  paralleled  by  the 
story  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira  (Ac  5^"").  As  a 
rule,  however,  spiritual  power  produced  results 
which  were  themselves  spiritual ;  and  the  main 
proof  of  his  own  authority  as  a  Christian  minister 
was  the  existence  of  the  Corinthian  Church. 

(c)  The  Eucharist. — The  accidental  circumstance 
that  difficulties  had  arisen  in  the  Church  at  Corinth 
owing  to  the  bad  behaviour  of  some  Corinthians  at 
the  common  meal  with  which  the  Eucharist  was 
associated,  is  responsible  for  the  fact  that  we  have 
in  1  Co  ll^s^-.  QQj.  earliest  account  of  the  institution 
of  the  Eucharist.  But  in  the  same  Epistle  it  is 
alluded  to  in  two  other  connexions.  When  St. 
Paul  is  using  the  example  of  the  Israelites  as  a 
warning  to  tiie  Corinthian  Church  against  presum- 
ing upon  their  pri\-ileges,  he  gives  as  instances  of 
the  privileges  of  the  Israelites  the  cloud  which 
went  >vith  them  and  the  sea  which  they  miracu- 
lously crossed,  and  also  the  rock  which,  according 
to  the  Jewish  legend,  followed  them,  and  from 
which  they  drank.  These  he  clearly  regards  as 
types  of  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist.  Thus  he  puts 
into  close  association  as  the  two  great  pri>'ilege3  of 
the  Christian  Church  the  two  Sacraments  of  the 
Gospel  ( 1  Co  Ity'^).  And  immediately  afterwards, 
in  warning  the  Corinthians  against  idolatry,  he 
treats  the  Eucharist  as  parallel  with  the  heathen 
sacrificial  feasts,  thus  clearly  showing  that  he  re- 
gards it  as  a  sacrifice  in  the  same  sense  in  which 
these  heathen  feasts  were  sacrifices.  He  regards 
VOL.  I. — 17 


the  communicant  as  entering  into  real  communion 
«-ith  Christ  through  the  act  of  eating  the  bread 
and  drinking  the  cup ;  and  similarly  he  seems  to 
regard  real  communion  as  brought  about  between 
the  worshipper  at  the  heathen  sacrifice  and  some 
Scu/iovuH'  wnose  power  was  behind  the  idolatrous 
worship  (lCF*-*»).  His  account  of  the  institution 
he  prefaces  by  the  words,  '  I  received  from  the 
Lord '  (11**),  and  this  has  been  taken  to  mean  that 
he  claims  to  have  received  it  from  the  Lord  Him- 
self, presumably  in  a  vision.  But  this  is  not 
certain.  Even  ii  it  is  true,  it  by  no  means  follows 
that  he  claims  to  receive  all  the  details  of  his  ac- 
count in  this  way.  It  may  be  that  he  merely  in- 
tends to  convey  the  impression  that  he  received 
directly  from  the  Lord  a  revelation  of  the  general 
doctrinal  meaning  of  the  Eucharist.  It  is  import- 
ant to  remember  that  he  claims  to  have  had  other 
visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord  (2  Co  12*'*). 
His  account  of  the  institution  is  marked  by  the 
command  to  repeat  the  rite,  which  is  given  twice, 
aft€r  the  institution  of  both  bread  and  cup.  He  con- 
nects it  Avith  the  death  of  Christ,  which  is  thus 
proclaimed.  He  attaches  great  importance  to  due 
preparation  for  reception  ;  and  asserts  that  physical 
evils  have  resulted  from  unworthy  reception  and 
failure  to  discern  the  Body,  which  seems  to  mean 
failure  to  diflerentiate  the  bread  from  ordinary- 
bread.  It  may  be  said  here  briefly  that  St.  Paul  s 
teaching  about  the  Eucharist  is  that  it  is  sacrificial, 
that  it  brings  about  a  real  communion  between  the 
communicant  and  Christ,  that  the  bread  and  the 
wine  are  endowed  with  the  character  of  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ,  and  must  not  therefore  be  re- 
ceived as  ordinary  bread  and  wine.  See  further 
art.  ErcHARiST. 

{d)  Eschatology. —  St.  Paul's  treatment  of  the 
questions  submitted  to  him  is  always  coloured  by 
his  belief  in  the  imminence  of  the  xapovcia.  Chris- 
tians are  '  waiting  for  the  revelation  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ '  (1  Co  1^).  His  language  implies  that 
he  expects  some  at  any  rate  of  those  to  whom  he 
is  writing  to  be  alive  at  the  xapown'o,  and  he  appears 
to  expect  to  be  alive  hiniselJf  (15*^'*^).  The  chief 
characteristic  of  the  xapouo-ta  will  be  judgment 
(2  Co  S'**).  The  work  of  the  Christian  minister 
will  then  be  tested  (1  Co  S^).  The  Parousia  will 
be  the  signal  for  the  beginning  of  the  mediatorial 
reign  of  Christ.  '  He  must  reign,  tUl  he  hath  put 
all  his  enemies  under  his  feet '  (1  Co  15^).  And  then 
finally  comes  the  end  of  His  reign,  when  God's  rule 
shall  be  unmediated  (v.^).  It  is  important  to 
notice  that  St.  Paul  does  not  discuss  in  these 
Epistles  the  future  condition  of  those  who  are  not 
Christians,  It  is  with  the  resurrection  of  Chris- 
tians that  he  is  here  concerned.  For  them  he 
affirms  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  But  it  is  to 
be  noticed  that  he  difterentiates  the  body  from  its 
parts.  '  Meats  for  the  belly,'  he  says,  '  and  the 
oelly  for  meats :  but  God  shall  bring  to  nought 
both  it  and  them.  Now  the  body  is  not  for  fornica- 
tion, but  for  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  for  the  body : 
and  God  both  raised  the  Lord  and  will  raise  us 
also  through  his  power '  (6^'^).  The  new  spiritual 
body  will  differ  from  the  old  as  the  fruit  difiers 
from  the  seed  sown.  This  life  is  the  time  of  sowing, 
and  the  nature  of  the  spiritual  body  will  depend 
upon  the  character  of  the  seed.  But  it  will  not  be 
of  flesh  and  blood,  and  it  will  have  no  element  of 
corruption  (15**).  It  will  be  a  full  and  complete 
means  of  self-expression  for  the  'spiritual'  man, 
just  as  the  'natural'  body  is  a  suitable  means  of 
self-expression  for  the  '  natural '  man,  but  is  already 
found  inadequate  for  Christians,  who  are  even  now 
becoming  '  spiritual.'  Christians  have  received  an 
earnest  of  the  spiritual  body  in  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  (2  Co  5').  The  metaphor  of  which  he 
is  most  fond  is  that  of  a  garment.     He  is  to  be 


258    CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE        CORINTHIANS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


clothed  with  tliis  new  spiritual  body  (1  Co  15", 
2Co5i'^-)- 
10.  St.  Paul's  attitude  to  practical  questions.— 

(a)  elSuXddvra. — One  of  tlie  problems  wliich  facod 
the  Corinthian  Christians  was  the  question  of  their 
attitude  to  the  eating  of  things  sacrificed  to  idols. 
This  aflected  their  social  life  very  nearly.  For 
much  of  the  meat  sold  in  the  market  had  been 
offered  to  idols,  and  their  heathen  friends  would 
give  banquets  in  idol-temples,  using  in  the  banquet 
food  that  had  been  offered  to  the  idols  on  domestic 
and  other  anniversaries.  Moreover,  in  the  ordinary 
entertainments  given  by  heathen  there  was  a  possi- 
bility that  some  of  the  food  had  been  so  ofiered. 
It  might  have  been  supposed  that  the  question 
would  be  regarded  as  settled  for  St.  Paul  by  the 
Apostolic  Decree  (Ac  15).  But,  whatever  be  the 
reason,  no  allusion  at  all  is  made  to  any  decree  of 
the  kind.  St.  Paul  deals  with  the  matter  on  first 
principles.  He  enunciates  the  law  of  liberty,  which 
must,  he  says,  be  tempered  by  the  law  of  love. 
At  first  he  makes  a  strong  assertion  of  monotheism. 
Idols,  he  says,  are  nothing  (1  Co  8*).  But  else- 
where he  seems  to  admit  that  there  is,  or  may 
be,  the  power  of  a  5ai/j.6viov  behind  the  idolatrous 
worship  (10^ ;  see  above,  §  9  (c)).  Whatever  that 
power  may  be,  there  is  no  danger  to  the  Christian 
m  the  mere  act  of  eating.  But  there  is  a  danger 
for  a  man  who  has  only  recently  emancipated 
himself  from  idolatrous  belief  and  practice,  lest  he 
may  be  acting  against  his  own  conscience  if  he 
eats.  There  is  also  a  danger  lest  by  eating  he  may 
offend  the  conscience  of  his  weaker  brethren.  And 
so  St.  Paul's  conclusion  is  that  Christians  may  eat 
what  is  set  before  them  without  asking  questions, 
may  accept  invitations  to  dine  with  their  heathen 
neighbours,  but  may  not  go  and  dine  in  a  heathen 
temple,  which  would  be  a  mere  act  of  bravado. 
This  is  a  good  illustration  of  St.  Paul's  method  of 
dealing  with  practical  problems,  and  settling  them 
upon  fundamental  Christian  principles.  The  whole 
discussion  of  this  question  in  the  Epistle  is  rendered 
much  more  intelligible  if  we  suppose  that  the  op- 
ponents with  whom  he  had  to  deal  regarded  them- 
selves as  irvevfiaTiKoi.  This  supposition  accounts 
for  the  protest  which  he  makes  against  self-styled 
yvQffis,  on  which  men  relied,  and  thus  felt  them- 
selves justified  in  ignoring  the  scruples  of  their 
brethren. 

(6)  Marriage  and  the  position  of  women. — St. 
Paul's  teaching  upon  this  question  is  conditioned 
by  the  attitude  to  women  common  in  the  world  in 
which  he  lived,  and  also  by  his  expectation  of  the 
vapovffLa.  As  the  time  is  so  short,  it  is  best  for 
people  to  remain  in  the  external  circumstances  in 
which  they  were  when  they  were  converted  (1  Co 
■J18-20J  ^g  ^Q  ^jjg  desirability  of  marriage,  he  lays 
stress  upon  the  necessity  of  the  avoidance  of  any- 
thing that  can  distract  the  Christian  from  the 
service  of  God.  In  most  cases  he  thinks  marriage 
will  constitute  a  distraction.  Therefore  for  most 
people  celibacy  is  desirable.  But  if  celibacy  con- 
stitutes a  greater  distraction  than  marriage,  then 
Christians  should  marry.  There  is  no  hint  of  any 
view  of  conjugal  relations  as  being  in  themselves 
evil.  The  only  consideration  present  to  his  mind 
is  as  to  whether  marriage  will  help  or  hinder  a 
Christian  in  the  service  of  God.  His  view  that 
celibacy  from  this  point  of  view  is  the  best  state 
is  put  forward  on  his  own  authority. 

But  for  the  indissolubility  of  Christian  marriage 
he  claims  the  authority  of  Christ  Himself  (1  Co 
710. 11)  ^g  to  this  he  is  quite  explicit.  A  wife 
must  not  separate  from  her  husband  ;  if  she  do  so, 
she  must  not  marry  another  ;  and  a  husband  must 
not  leave  his  wife.  But  where  two  non-Christians 
have  been  married,  and  one  of  them  is  afterwards 
converted,  then,  if  the  unbelieving  partner  is  will- 


ing, St.  Paul  thinks  it  is  test  that  the  marriage 
should  be  regarded  as  binding ;  yet  he  allows 
divorce,  apparently  with  liberty  of  re-marriage 
(7").  His  principle  is  quite  clear.  A  marriage 
entered  upon  by  two  non-ChrLstians  is  not  a 
Christian  marriage  at  all,  and  was  never  intended 
to  be  a  permanent  bond.  It  is  not  fair  to  the  non- 
Christian  partner  that  it  should  be  regarded  as 
necessarily  permanent.  Yet,  if  he  is  willing,  it 
had  better  be  regarded  as  a  Christian  marriage. 
For  that  will  be  better  for  the  children. 

His  attitude  to  women  is,  as  has  been  said, 
affected  by  the  current  view  of  their  position. 
Women  are  not  to  take  part  in  the  assemblies,  and 
are  not  to  be  teachers.  In  one  jiassage  he  speaks 
as  though  women  occupied  an  inferior  spiritual 
position  to  men  (1  Co  IP).  But  his  language  else- 
where is  inconsistent  with  this.  The  fact  is  that 
St.  Paul  had  not  in  this  matter  worked  out  his 
own  principles,  and  he  is  therefore  inconsistent. 
In  his  discussion  of  marriage  he  gives  to  women 
a  position  which  is  distinctly  high.  The  rights  of 
the  wife  are  safeguarded  no  less  than  those  of  the 
husband. 

11.  The  character  of  St.  Paul  as  revealed  in  the 
two  Epistles. — There  is  no  Epistle  in  which  the 
personal  character  of  St.  Paul  is  so  fully  revealed 
as  in  2  Corinthians.  The  '  severe  letter '  brings 
before  us  a  man  acutely  sensitive,  affectionate, 
and  at  the  same  time  determined.  He  is  in  a  high 
degree  impulsive.  He  writes  a  '  severe  letter,'  and 
is  sorry  for  having  written  it  (7*).  An  immense 
load  is  lifted  from  his  heart  by  the  news  of  the 
repentance  of  the  Corinthians|(7*- '').  He  is  intensely 
affectionate,  and  yearns  for  the  affection  of  his 
converts  (6"'^').  He  never  spares  himself.  There 
is  no  limit  to  the  demands  which  are  made  upon 
him  by  his  converts.     It  is  no  affectation  on  his 

Eart  to  cro'svn  the  list  of  the  sufferings  which  he 
as  endured  for  Christ  by  the  words  '  anxiety  for 
all  the  churches'  (11^).  We  see  him  as  a  true 
pastor,  combining  great  practical  wisdom  with 
remarkable  emotional  intensity.  He  is  a  mystic, 
and  he  gives  us  an  account  of  one  of  his  mystical 
experiences  (12'"^  ;  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
in  this  passage  he  is  speaking  of  himself).  But  he 
is  fully  alive  to  the  danger  of  mysticism.  No  one 
could  lay  more  emphatic  stress  upon  the  duty  of 
letting  religion  bear  fruit  in  good  works.  Indeed 
he  is  sometimes  self-assertive  where  self-assertion 
is  needed.  He  does  not  hesitate  to  tell  the  Cor- 
inthians to  imitate  him  (1  Co  11').  But  every 
missionary  must  speak  so  on  occasions.  And  he 
was  in  the  presence  of  teachers  who  asserted  their 
own  authority  against  his.  Above  everything  else 
he  is  possessed  with  an  over-mastering  devotion 
to  Christ;  for  His  sake  he  is  willing  to  endure 
everything,  even  ridicule  (2  Co  5'^  ").  Thus  his 
correspondence  with  the  Corinthians  is  of  immense 
importance  for  the  understanding  of  his  character. 
For  we  see  him  dealing  with  difficult  practical 
problems,  and  we  see  him  when  he  is  most  deeply 
moved  by  personal  slights,  and  again  by  personal 
reconciliation.  It  is  absurd  to  look  to  sucn  a  man 
for  a  systematic  doctrinal  system.  He  speaks  as 
he  is  moved.  He  makes  experiments.  He  is  often 
tentative.  He  provides  the  material  on  which 
doctrinal  systems  may  be  built.  He  is  not  himself 
their  builder. 

12.  Importance  of  the  evidence  of  the  Epistles. 
— The  importance  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians 
consists  largely  in  the  fact  that  they  give  us 
examples  of  St.  Paul's  methods  of  dealing  with 
practical  difficulties  which  actually  arose  in  an 
early  Christian  community.  He  does  not  set  out 
to  give  instruction  to  the  Corinthians,  but  rather 
to  answer  questions  which  they  themselves  have 
raised,  or  to  reform  abuses  which  have  actually 


CORmTHLAJNS,  EPISTLES  TO  THE 


CORNELIUS 


259 


grown  up.  We  thus  get  a  picture,  of  quite  unique 
value,  of  the  life  of  such  a  community  ;  and  the 
doctrines  and  practices  referred  to  in  the  Epistles 
are  evidently  not  being  advocated  by  St.  Paul  now 
for  the  first  time,  but  are  actually  existing  in  the 
Corinthian  Church,  and  apparently  have  so  existed 
for  some  time. 

(a)  Doctrine. — It  would  seem  that  the  doctrine 
held  by  this  Church  was  of  a  comparatively 
advanced  type.  There  is  no  hint  of  any  ditlerence 
of  opinion  at  Corinth  about  fundamental  beliefs. 
Diflerences  do  exist,  but  they  are  concerned  with 
disciplinary  or  ethical  rather  than  >vith  theological 
questions.  It  is  true  that  there  are  some  at  Cor- 
inth who  deny  the  resurrection  from  the  dead. 
But  it  would  appear  from  St.  Paul's  argument  that 
they  all  accepted  the  doctrine  of  the  Kesurrection 
of  tJesus.  For  he  argues  from  the  Resurrection  of 
Jesus  to  the  resurrection  of  Christians  generally  ; 
and  his  argument  seems  to  involve  the  supposition 
that  there  was  no  dilference  of  opinion  about  the 
Resurrection  of  Jesus.  Similarly  there  is  no  hint 
of  any  difference  about  the  position  assigned  to 
Jesus  Himself,  or  about  the  expectation  of  His 
speedy  return  in  judgment.  No  one  in  the  Cor- 
inthian Church  seems  to  have  thought  that  Jesus 
was  merely  human.  The  danger  was  probably 
rather  the  other  way.  There  may  have  been  a 
tendency  to  regard  Him  as  a  Redeemer-God  in  the 
same  sense  as  other  redeemer-gods,*  and  to  have 
paid  inadequate  attention  to  His  human  life,  but 
for  this  there  is  no  direct  evidence.  It  is  clear  that 
to  a  Christian  this  life  was  in  the  main  a  preparation 
for  entrance  into  the  Kingdom  of  God  when  that 
Kingdom  should  come.  This  preparation  consisted 
in  the  reception  of  Christian  Sacraments,  by  which 
he  was  transformed  into  a  '  spiritual  man.'  But 
the  necessity  of  moral  reformation  was  never  for- 
gotten, at  any  rate  by  St.  Paul,  though  there  may 
have  been  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  some  of  the 
Christians  to  forget  it  (1  Co  6*).  All  the  evidence 
of  these  Epistles  goes  to  show  that  there  was  no 
tendency  to  depreciate  the  importance  and  the 
supernatural  character  of  the  change  ^^TOught  for 
Christians  by  the  life  and  death  of  Christ.  The 
danger  probably  lay  in  the  other  direction — lest 
they  should  think  that  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist 
of  themselves,  without  any  effort  on  their  own 
part,  were  sufficient  to  ensure  membership  of  the 
Kingdom. 

{b)  Organization  and  discipline. — The  chief  piece 
of  evidence  about  the  organization  of  the  early 
Christian  Church  is  to  be  found  in  1  Co  5.  It 
would  seem  from  this  chapter  that  for  the  decision 
of  a  case  of  discipline  there  would  be  an  assembly 
of  the  Church,  presided  over  by  St.  Paul  in  virtue 
of  his  apostolic  authority.  St.  Paul  pronounces 
sentence  of  excommunication,  and  it  is  ratified  by 
the  assembly.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  Apostle 
recognized  any  right  on  the  part  of  the  assembly 
to  dispute  his  sentence.  In  the  case  specified  St. 
Paul  IS  himself  absent  from  Corinth,  but  he  acts 
as  though  he  were  present,  being  indeed  present, 
as  he  says,  in  spirit.  These  Epistles  tend  to  con- 
firm the  view  that  the  Apostle  held  an  absolutely 
predominant  position.  Apart  from  the  Apostle 
there  is  not  much  evidence  about  organization, 
though  the  discussion  of  the  Body  and  members 
includes  the  names  of  many  Church  offices.  It  is 
clear  that  on  the  principle  of  the  specialization  of 
function,  different  duties  were  assigned  to  different 
members  of  the  Church,  in  accordance  with  the 
Divine  choice  expressed  by  diverse  spiritual  gifts 
(1  Co  12^^^^) ;  and  there  is  a  recognition  of  the  fact 
that  some  members  are  IdiuiTai,  i.e.  have  no  special 
ministerial    position    in    the  Church   {14i®).     But 

*  See,  however,  A.  Schweitzer,  Pavi  and  hit  Jnterpretert, 
Eng.  tr.,  1912,  p.  193  f. 


there  is  really  no  evidence  as    to  the  different 
functions  discharged  by  the  different  officers. 

13.  Christianity  and  Gnosticism :  the  Christian 
wisdom.— Christians  have  the  mind  of  Christ  (1  Co 
2^').  This  differentiates  them  at  once  from  other 
people,  who  are  merely  ypyxiKoi,  The  ^lottxAi  fLvOfM- 
roi  IS  the  man  whose  spirit  has  not  been  touched 
by  the  Divine  Spirit.  At  Baptism  a  man  is  made 
potentially  rvevfianKdi  ;  he  becomes  vrjTios  iv  Xpurrif. 
His  life  in  the  Christian  Church  is  a  rendering 
actual  of  the  potentiality  of  spirituality  which  is 
now  within  him,  and  which  shows  itseu  in  moral 
effects.  Thus  the  Corinthians,  although  they 
ou^ht  to  be  by  this  time  full-grown  Christians,  are 
still  babes.  This  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  they 
displaj'  party-spirit — a  sure  sign  of  carnality.  As 
long  as  a  man  is  merely  ^i/x'*''os,  the  Christian 
wisdom  is  not  for  him,  for  he  will  not  be  able  to 
understand  it.  He  has  first  to  be  converted  by  the 
mere  preaching  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Cross.  St. 
Paul  seems  to  mean  by  '  Christian  wisdom '  some-, 
thing  more  than  this,  to.  ^ddrj  roO  deoD,  probably 
the  secret  counsels  of  God,  God's  purpose  towards 
mankind.  The  purpose  of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is 
that  we  may  know  the  things  freely  given  to  us  by 
God.  Thus  the  greatness  of  the  heritage  of  the 
Christian  appears  to  be  the  main  content  of  the 
'  Christian  wisdom.'  There  is  no  indication  of  an 
esoteric  doctrine,  belonging  to  a  privileged  class 
in  the  Christian  Church.  The  '  Christian  wisdom ' 
is,  indeed,  esoteric  from  the  point  of  view  of  those 
outside  the  Christian  Church.  And  even  for  those 
who  are  babes  in  Christ  it  is  not  suited,  but  only 
for  the  rfKeioi.  But  all  Christians  may  become 
TiXeioi.    It  is  their  own  fault  if  they  do  not. 

LrrERATrRE. — In  addition  to  the  authorities  cited  throughout 
the  article,  see  A.  P.  Stanley,  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Cor- 
inthiam*,  1876;  J.  A.  Beet,  St.  PatWs  Epistles  to  the  Cor- 
inthiaiu,  ISSo ;  G.  G.  Findlay,  EGT,  '  1  Cor.,'  1900 ;  J.  H. 
Bernard,  EGT,  '2  Cor.,'  1903;  G.  H.  RendAR,  Epistle*  of  SL 
Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  1909 ;  P.  Bachmann,  D^  erste  Biitf 
des  Pavlus  an  die  Korinther.  Leipzig,  1905,  Der  zweita  Brief, 
do.  1909 ;  Commentaries  on  1  Cor. :  T.  C.  Edwards  (21SS5), 
C.  J.  ElUcott  (lSi7),  H.  L.  Goudge  (Westminster  Com.,  1903), 
Robertson- Plummer  {ICC,  1911) ;  on  2  Cor. :  A.  Plommer 
(ComA.  Gr.  Test.,  1903),  A-  Menzies  (1912) ;  artt.  in  HDB  and 

EBi.  G.  H.  Clayton. 

CORNELIUS  (Kopi^^Xioi). — Cornelius  was  a  Roman 
centurion  stationed  at  Caesarea  in  the  early  years 
of  the  history  of  the  Church  (Ac  10').  His  name 
is  of  Roman  origin,  and  he  is  described  as  belong- 
ing to  the  Italian  band  or  cohort.  An  inscription 
recently  discovered  in  Vienna  proves  that  an 
Italian  cohort  was  stationed  in  Syria  about  A.D. 
69,  but  Schiirer  holds  that  this  could  not  have 
been  the  case  under  Agrippa  in  A.D.  40-^4,  which 
is  the  date  of  Cornelius  (cf.  Schurer,  GJV*i.  [1901] 
463,  also  Expositor,  5th  ser.,  iv.  [1896]  469-472; 
W.  M.  Ramsav,  Expositor,  5th  ser.,  iv.  [1896] 
194-201,  V.  [1897]  69).  Leaving  aside  altogether  the 
question  as  to  the  presence  in  Caesarea  at  this  date 
of  an  Italian  cohort  recruited  from  Romans  settled 
in  the  district,  there  is  no  reason  why  Cornelius 
even  apart  from  his  cohort  may  not  have  been 
there  on  duty  in  the  years  referred  to.  Native 
princes  often  received  assistance  from  Roman 
officers  in  training  their  home  troops  (cf .  Knowling, 
EGT,  '  Acts,'  1900,  p.  250).  Cornelius  enters  into 
the  history  of  the  Church  through  a  series  of 
mutual  visions  received  by  him  and  the  Apostle 
Peter,  who  admitted  him  into  the  Church  by 
baptism.  According  to  the  narrative  in  Acts,  St. 
Peter,  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  tanner  of  Joppa, 
saw  in  a  vision  a  cloth  let  down  from  heaven  on 
which  were  four-footed  beasts,  creeping  things, 
and  fowls  of  the  air,  many  of  which  in  the  eyes 
of  the  Jews  were  regarded  as  unclean.  When  St. 
Peter  refers  to  their  ceremonial  uncleanness,  the 
message  is  given,  '  What  God  hath  cleansed  make 


260       CORNER,  CORNER-STONE 


COS 


not  thou  common '  (Ac  10^*).  After  the  vision  had 
passed  messengers  arrived  from  Cjesarea  telling 
St.  Peter  of  Cornelius,  who  in  a  trance  had  received 
a  command  to  send  to  Joppa  for  him.  The  next 
day  the  Apostle,  accompanied  by  some  of  the 
Christians  oi  Jojjpa,  went  to  Ctesarea  and  preached 
Jesus  to  Cornelius  and  his  household,  who  gladly 
accepted  the  message,  received  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  were  baptized.  An  important  question  arises 
as  to  the  exact  significance  of  this  act  of  St.  Peter. 
Luke  evidently,  from  the  space  devoted  to  this  in- 
cident, regards  it  as  of  supreme  importance  and  as 
marking  a  decided  step  in  the  forward  progress  of 
the  Church.  Cornelius  is  described  as  'a  devout 
man  and  one  that  feared  God.'  The  phrase  'a 
devout  man'  might  be  used  to  denote  goodness 
characteristic  of  a  Gentile,  but,  in  connexion  witli 
'one  that  feared  God,'  it  implies  that  Cornelius 
was  a  proselyte,  although  there  is  no  reason  to  be- 
lieve tnat  he  had  been  formally  admitted  to  the 
Jewish  Church  by  the  rites  of  circumcision  and 
baptism.  He  belonged  to  that  large  class  who 
found  greater  truth  and  satisfaction  in  the  teach- 
ing of  Judaism  than  in  their  own  heathen  religions, 
and  who  observed  the  Jewish  laAv  of  the  Sabbath 
and  the  regulations  of  ceremonial  cleanness  (cf. 
Schurer,  GJV*  iii.  [1909]  p.  177,  where  Bertholet's 
view  is  combated  that  tpo^o^/j-evoi  rbv  0e6v,  '  fearers 
of  God,'  is  not  in  Acts  a  terminus  technicus). 
The  distinction  which  was  drawn  by  later  Judaism 
between  '  proselytes  of  righteousness '  and  '  prose- 
lytes of  the  gate'  is  not  found  till  after  NT  times, 
but  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  circumstances 
giving  rise  to  this  distinction  did  really  exist,  and 
that  '  the  fearers  of  God '  of  Acts  are  practically 
identical  with  those  who  at  a  later  date  came  to 
be  known  as  '  proselytes  of  the  gate '  (see  art. 
Proselyte).  The  significance  of  the  incident 
seems  then  to  lie  in  the  recognition  that  full  mem- 
bership in  the  Christian  Church  was  open  not  only 
to  Jews  but  also  to  the  Gentiles  who  '  feared  God.' 
St.  Peter  uses  the  incident  as  a  true  precedent  in 
Ac  IP*^',  and  reasserts  its  determining  importance 
at  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  (Ac  15).  The  ad- 
mission of  Cornelius  was  the  first  step  towards  the 
recognition  of  the  universality  of  the  gospel  of 
Christ.  A  further  step  was  taken  when  member- 
ship in  the  Christian  Church  was  offered  to  the 
heathen  who  had  no  relation  to  the  synagogue. 

Ltteraturk.— R.  J.  Knowling:,  EGT,  'Acts,'  1900,  p.  250; 
C.  V.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  Enf;.  tr.,  i.  [1894]  103  f. ;  A. 
C.  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age,  1897,  p.  101  note. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 

CORNER,  CORNER-STONE.— Among  Semitic 
peoples  a  special  sacredness  was  supposed  to  belong 
to  the  corners  of  structures,  and  tins  probably  lies 
at  the  root  of  the  metaphor.  The  Heb.  n;^,pinndh, 
'  corner-stone,'  is  the  stone  at  the  angle,  which, 
uniting  the  walls,  holds  the  two  sides  together. 
It  was  chosen  for  its  solidity  and  beauty  to  occupy 
an  important  place  either  in  the  foundation  or 
the  battlement.  In  the  OT  pinnGth  denotes  the 
principal  men  in  the  community  and  the  supports 
of  the  State  (e.g.  Jg  20^,  1  S  U^) ;  cf.  *  Meum 
praesidium  et  dulce  decus  meum '  (Hor.  i.  1),  where 
strength  and  beauty  are  united  in  one.  NT 
believers  saw  Christ  everywhere  in  the  OT,  and 
hence  the  Avord  which  originally  referred  to  the 
choice  among  the  chosen  people  came  to  signify 
Christ.  The  figure  of  the  corner-stone  is  thus 
taken  over  from  the  OT,  and  specially  from  Ps  1 18^^ 
and  Is  28^',  the  passages  which  rule  the  apostolic 
use. 

In  the  NT  'corner-stone'  was  applied  by  Jesus 
to  Himself  (Mt  21**),  and  reappears  in  St.  Peter's 
address  to  the  Sanhedrin  :  '  He  is  tlie  stone  which 
was  set  at  nought  of  you  the  builders,  which  was 
made  the  head  of  the  corner'  (Ac  4"  -^evbyievoi  els 


Kf(pa\T)u  yuvlai).  Quoting,  evidently  from  memory, 
the  ApoHtle  uses  i^ovdeviu  '  despise  and  regard 
as  valueless,'  a  word  expressing  great  contempt  ; 
but  later  (1  P  2^)  he  uses  the  milder  word  dwoSo/cc/idi'a; 
of  the  LXX,  which  means  '  test  and  reject  after 
actual  trial.'  liamsay  (Pauline  Studies,  London, 
1906,  p.  253)  notes  that  '  at  the  Phrj'gian  marble 
quarries  there  have  been  found  many  block.s, 
which  had  been  cut,  but  not  sent  on  to  Home  .  .  . 
some  of  them  bear  the  letters  REPR,  i.e.  repro- 
datum,  "rejected."  These  were  considered  as 
imperfect  and  unworthy  pieces,  and  rejected  by 
the  inspector.'  It  might  happen,  however,  that  a 
stone  passed  over  by  one  builder  was  seen  and 
chosen  by  another  and  wiser  architect ;  cf.  Michel- 
Angelo  carving  his  colossal  statue  of  David  out  of 
a  block  of  marble  wliich  had  been  spoiled  and 
rejected  by  an  inferior  sculptor  some  years  before. 
So  St.  Peter's  argument  in  his  Epistle  (1  P2*'''). 
In  ignorance  and  self-will  the  leaders  of  the  people 
had  rejected  the  corner-stone,  but  others,  with 
truer  spiritual  discernment,  making  it  the  ground 
of  faith  and  belief  in  God,  had  found  in  the  rejected 
stone  'preciousness' (RVm  'honour')  and  worth; 
fpTifios  suggests  both  meanings. 

In  Eph  2-'''  '  Christ  Jesus  himself  being  the  chief 
comer-stone  '  (6i>tos  dKpoyuviaiou  airrov  XpuTTOv  'lijffov), 
the  thought  is  of  the  unity  of  Jew  and  Gentile  in 
the  Church — '  the  saints  build  up  the  fabric,  and 
the  corner-stone  is  Christ.'  They  are  drawn  and 
held  together  in  Him,  as  the  walls  of  a  building 
cohere  in  and  are  united  by  the  corner-stone,  which 
determines  the  lines  of  '  each  several  building '  and 
compacts  it  into  one. 

Literature.— C.  Gore,  Ephes.,  London,  1898,  p.  118;  W.  M. 
Ramsay,  Expositor,  5th  ser.  ix.  [1899]  36  f. ;  A.  Maclaren,  Ex- 
positions  :  '  Ephesians,'  London,  1909,  p.  118,  may  be  consulted 
for  doctrinal  and  homiletical  uses.  "W.   M.   GRANT. 

COS  (Kwj,  now  Stanchio  =  is  rav  Kw). — Cos  was  an 
island  of  Caria,  at  the  entrance  to  the  Ceramic 
Gulf,  between  the  two  headlands  on  which  stood 
the  cities  of  Cnidus  and  Halicarnassus.  Its  chief 
city,  lying  at  the  sheltered  eastern  extremity  of 
the  island,  was  '  not  large,  but  beautifully  built, 
and  a  most  pleasing  sight  to  mariners  sailing  by 
the  coast '  (Strabo,  XIV.  ii.  19).  Its  position  on  the 
maritime  highway  betMeen  the  ^gean  and  the 
Levant  gave  it  great  commercial  importance  and 
wealth.  It  had  the  rank  of  a  free  city  till  the 
time  of  Augustus. 

Cos  was  '  the  garden  of  the  Egean '  (T.  Lewin, 
St.  Paul,  1875,  ii.  97).  It  was  renowned  for  its 
vines  and  looms,  its  literature  and  art,  and  above 
all  for  its  temple  of  .Esculapius  and  school  of 
medicine,  which  must  have  made  it  especially 
interesting  to  St.  Luke.  It  had  Theocritus  the 
poet,  Apelles  the  painter,  and  Hippocrates  the 
physician  among  its  citizens.  It  attracted  Jewish 
settlers  at  least  as  early  as  the  Maccabaean  period 
(1  Mac  15^).  Some  words  which  Josephus  (Ant. 
XIV.  vii.  2)  quotes  from  a  lost  work  of  Strabo — 
'  Mithridates  sent  to  Cos  and  took  .  .  .  800  talents 
belonging  to  the  Jews' — prove  that  the  city  had 
become  a  Jewish  banking  centre.  One  of  the 
benefactors  of  the  island  was  Herod  the  Great  (BJ 
I.  xxi.  11).  Another  was  the  Emperor  Claudius, 
who  decreed  that  it  '  should  be  for  ever  discharged 
from  all  tribute,'  chiefly  on  account  of  its  medical 
fame  (Tac.  Ann.  xii.  Gl). 

St.  Paul  and  his  companions,  in  their  voyage 
through  the  .^gean,  '  came  with  a  straight  course ' 
— running  before  the  wind  (fvdvSpofi-fiffavTes) — from 
Miletus  to  Cos,  a  distance  of  40  miles.  Of!"  Cos, 
where  there  was  good  shelter,  they  anchored  for 
the  night,  and  next  day,  with  a  northerly  wind 
still  blowing,  they  enjoyed  an  equally  good  passage 
to  Rhodes  (Ac  21"). 


COUCH 


COVENANT 


261 


LmRATi-RR. — L.  Ross,  Reisen  naeh  Koi,  etc.,  Halle,  1862; 
W.  R.  Paton  and  E.  L.  Hicks,  The  Iiiseriptions  of  Cos,  Oxford, 

1891.  James  Strahan. 


CODCH.— See  BED. 
COUNCIL.— See  Sanhedrix. 
COURAGE.— See  Boldness. 
COURTS.— See  Trial- at-Law. 

COVENANT.— 1.  Context.— In  the  EVV  of  the 

NT  'covenant'  is  the  translation  of  the  Greek 
word  Siad^fiKri,  which  occurs  33  times.  In  the  RV 
the  word  is  uniformly  rendered  '  covenant '  except 
in  He  9'*-  ^'',  where  '  testament '  is  used,  with  '  cove- 
nant '  in  the  margin.  In  the  AV,  '  testament '  oc- 
curs 13  times  (Mt  26^,  Mk  U^^,  Lk222o,  1  Co  ll^*, 
2  Co  3«-  ",  He  7«  Qi* ^  '«•  ^'-  ^,  Rev  ll'»)  and  '  cove- 
nant '  20  times  (Lk  1",  Ac  3»  7«,  Ro  9*  11",  Gal  S''- " 
4«  Eph 2'-',  He  8«-  s. 9 w*.  lo 94  w*  iqis.  29  jw  13»).  (For 
further  particulars  see  DCG  i.  374.)  Analyzing 
the  instances  more  closely,  we  see  that  18  refer 
directly  to  the  OT,  7  occurring  in  quotations  ;  12 
have  reference  to  the  new  or  better  dispensation 
of  Jesus,  or  to  His  blood  ;  3  only  (Gal  3^',  He 
914.  i7j  are  concerned  with  ordinary  human  institu- 
tions. 

2.  Use  of  8ia9i^KT]  in  LXX. — It  is  most  natural, 
in  view  of  this  preponderance  of  references  to  the 
OT,  to  seek  in  the  LXX  use  of  Siad-qKi)  the  clue 
to  its  meaning  in  the  NT.  Siad-qKt)  is  the  all  but 
invariable  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  ir^^ 
{b'rith),  which  in  our  EVV  is  always  rendered 
'  covenant,'  never  '  te.«tament. '  In  some  instances — 
as,  for  example,  1  S18»23'»,  1  K  2<3»«— the  word  indis- 
putably means  '  covenant '  in  the  full  sense,  i.e.  a 
mutual  relationship  between  two  parties.  In 
others,  the  idea  of  the  mutual  relationship  is 
wanting,  as  in  1  S  IP ;  but  the  idea  of  setting  up 
a  relationship,  which  may  be  done  by  the  free  act 
or  choice  of  one  person,  is  always  present.  It  is 
in  this  later  sense  that  we  understand  the  Divine 
b^rith.  This  is  a  Divine  order  or  arrangement 
which  takes  its  rise  without  any  human  co-of)era- 
tion,  springing  from  the  choice  of  God  Himself, 
whose  will  and  determination  account  for  both  its 
origin  and  its  character.  The  one-sidedness  of  such 
an  institution  makes  the  word  '  covenant '  a  rather 
unfortunate  choice  in  our  EW.  Kautzsch  goes  so 
far  as  to  state  that  '  the  usual  rendering  of  b'rith, 
namely  "  covenant,"  ought  to  be  avoided  as  incor- 
rect and  misleading '  [HDB  v.  630b).  It  seems  that 
we  do  not  possess  a  word  in  English  which  exactly 
conveys  the  meaning  of  the  Divine  b'riih.  Neither 
'  arrangement '  nor  '  disposition '  is  at  all  adequate. 
We  are  compelled  in  the  OT  to  continue  the  use  of 
'covenant,'  merely  making  the  mental  qualifica- 
tion required. 

AVe  have  next  to  inquire  why  the  LXX  chose 
and  adhered  to  the  word  diadifiKri  as  the  rendering 
of  b'rith.  It  is  an  undoubted  fact  that  throughout 
the  later  classical  period,  and  certainly  in  the 
early  Christian  period,  this  word  had,  in  common 
usage,  the  meaning  of  'will'  or  'testament.'  It 
is  sometimes  stated  that  there  is  only  one  instance 
of  its  use  in  the  sense  of  '  covenant '  in  the  whole 
of  Greek  literature,  namely  in  Aristophanes,  Birds, 
440.  Building  upon  this  instance,  Wackemagel 
has  recently  suggested  that  this  meaning  was 
current  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  and  may  have  been 
derived  by  the  LXX  from  that  source.  If  this 
were  proved,  many  questions  would  be  answered 
at  a  stroke  ;  but  unless  some  further  evidence  can 
be  adduced  in  its  favour  it  seems  veiy  precarious. 
On  the  other  hand,  further  investigation  rather 
qualifies   the  absoluteness   of  the  assertion  that 


Siadi^KTj  means  '  wUl '  and  nothing  else.  Ramsay 
in  his  Historical  Commentary  on  the  Galatiana, 
and  Norton  in  his  Study  of  AIA9HKH,  both  show 
that,  before  will-making  in  our  modem  sense  had 
become  part  of  Greek  social  life,  the  word  Siad-^xtt 
might  be  used  to  express  '  a  disposition  of  relations 
between  two  parties,  where  one  party  lays  down 
the  conditions  which  the  other  accepts,  not  an 
ordinary  bargain  or  contract,  but  a  more  dignified 
and  solemn  compact  or  covenant  (Norton,  op.  cit. 
p.  31).  In  particular  Ramsay  speaks  of  the  Siaflijicij 
as  a  solemn  and  binding  covenant,  guaranteed  by 
the  authority  of  the  whole  people  and  their  gods, 
and  being  primarily  an  arrangement  for  the  de- 
volution of  religious  duties  and  rights  (op.  cit.  p. 
361  f.).  Accordingly,  it  is  urged  that  in  the  early 
part  of  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.  no  better  word  was 
available  to  express  the  OT  idea  of  a  solemn  and 
irrevocable  disposition,  made  by  God  Himself  of 
His  own  gracious  choice,  and  meant  to  secure  a  re- 
ligious inheritance  to  His  chosen  people.  Accept- 
ing this  as  the  best  explanation  offered  as  yet, 
we  may  observe  that  the  later  Greek  translators, 
Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion,  writing  at  a 
time  when  the  meaning  of  Siad-qKt)  had  been  nar- 
rowed down  to  mean  '  will '  exclusively,  felt  obliged 
to  fall  back  on  the  usual  Greek  word  for  '  covenant,' 
(nvd-fiKfi.  Similarly,  as  Riggenbach  has  pointed 
out  (Theol.  Stud.  294),  Josephus  instinctively  re- 
places SiadrjKT)  by  (TwOriKri  or  the  cognate  verb,  where 
the  reference  is  undoubtedly  to  a  covenant  agree- 
ment between  man  and  man,  his  linguistic  sense 
being  ottended  by  the  use  of  Siaff-nKt]  in  any  sense 
but  that  of  '  will.'  We  come,  therefore,  to  the 
conclusion  that  in  NT  times  the  use  of  8iad-pKrj 
in  the  sense  of  a  solemn  promise  or  undertaking 
had  become  an  archaism.  Readers  of  the  English 
Bible  can  easily  recall  analogies  to  such  a  process 
in  the  nse  of  words  like '  conversation '  or  '  peculiar ' 
or  'walk  disorderly.' 

3.  Use  of  SiaOi^KT)  in  apostolic  and  sub-apostolic 
times. — (1)  Ordinary  usage. — When  we  come  to 
the  NT  period,  there  is  no  possible  doubt  that 
in  ordinary  usage  diaOriKT)  means  '  will '  (so  G. 
Milligan  and  J.  H.  Moulton  in  Expositor,  7th  ser., 
vi.  [1908]  563).  '  The  agreement  of  papyri  and  in- 
scriptions with  regard  to  the  use  of  SiadriKt)  is  very 
remarkable.  .  .  .  Any  number  of  citations  may  be 
made,  and  there  is  never  a  suggestion  of  any  other 
meaning '  (than  '  will ').  Deissmann,  agreeing  with 
this  conclusion,  emphatically  declares  that  the 
usage  was  so  fixed  that  St.  Paul  could  not  have  em- 
ployed the  word  in  the  sense  of  '  covenant.'  '  There 
IS  ample  material  to  back  me  in  the  statement 
that  no  one  in  the  Mediterranean  world  in  the  first 
century  A.D.  would  have  thought  of  finding  in  the 
word  SiadriKTj  the  idea  of  "covenant."  St.  Paul 
would  not,  and  in  fact  did  not.  To  St.  Paul  the 
word  meant  what  it  meant  in  his  Greek  OT,  ' '  a  uni- 
lateral enactment,"  in  particular  "a  will  or  testa- 
ment'" (Light  from  the  Ancient  East'',  p.  341). 
In  his  St.  Paul  (p.  152)  he  goes  further  and  says 
that  St.  Paul  found  in  his  Greek  Bible  the  idea 
that  God  had  executed  a  will  in  our  favour.  It 
does  not,  however,  seem  possible  to  grant  that  St. 
Paul,  who  read  his  Hebrew  Bible  as  well  as  his 
Greek,  always  thought  of  a  \nl\  when  he  read  of 
the  Divine  b'rith.  Yet  the  expression  of  b^rith  by 
a  word  that  meant  '  will '  may  have  enriched  the 
OT  idea  with  new  associations.  We  may  note  in 
further  illustration  of  the  usage  in  Jewish  authors 
that  in  the  Greek  apocryphal  writings  diadrqKTj  and 
(rvvdriKv  are  used,  once  at  any  rate,  as  synonymous 
terms  (cf.  Wis  12^' ;  '  covenants  of  good  promises ' 
(ffweriicn),  and  18^ :  '  covenants  made  with  the 
fathers '  (diaevKrj).  Philo  appears  to  use  SiadriKr]  in 
the  sense  of  '  will,'  saying  that  it  is  written  '  for 
the  benefit  of  those  who  are  worthy  of  a  gift.' 


262 


COVENANT 


COVENANT 


Yet  when  he  adds  that  it  is  'a  symbol  of  grace, 
which  God  lia-s  placed  between  Himself  who  offers 
it,  and  man  who  receives  it,'  he  seems  to  go  back 
to  the  somewliat  wider  use  we  found  in  the  LXX 
(Philo,  dc  Mut.  Nom.  vi.  52  f.  ;  of.  Kiggenbach, 
op.  cit.  p.  311  f.). 

(2)  JVT  iisage. — Passing  now  to  the  NT,  we 
must  ask  whether  its  writers  use  diaOi/iKr)  in  wliat 
is  undoubtedly  the  Hebrew  OT  sense  of  thecovenant 
between  man  and  God,  i.e.  *  unilateral  enactment,' 
or  as  '  will,'  or  in  a  sense  derived  from  both  mean- 
ings, (a)  It  is  best  to  begin  with  He  9'*"'^.  Here, 
in  spite  of  some  attempts  to  retain  the  meaning  of 
'covenant'  throughout  (Westcott,  Hatch,  Dods,  et 
al. ),  the  weight  of  evidence  seems  decisive  that  in 
v.",  at  any  rate,  the  writer  is  speaking  of  a  human 
will.  As  has  been  said,  '  if  the  question  were  put 
to  any  person  of  common  intelligence,  "What 
document  is  that  which  is  of  no  force  at  all  during 
the  lifetime  of  the  person  who  executed  it  ? "  the 
answer  can  only  be,  "A  man's  will  or  testament." ' 
The  most  usual  exposition  grants  this,  but  then 
supposes  that  the  writer  slips  from  one  meaning  in 
v.'s  to  another  in  v. '7,  and  then  back  again  to  the 
first  one.  But  if  Philo,  with  whose  writings  the 
author  was  ffimiliar,  could,  as  we  have  seen,  read 
the  notion  of  will  into  an  OT  passage,  there  is 
little  ground  for  denying  the  same  possibility  here. 
And  when  once  the  translation  '  will '  is  admitted 
throughout  tlie  passage,  the  argument,  which  is  so 
difficult  to  follow  from  any  other  point  of  view, 
becomes  luminous.  Verse  16  affirms  that  the  in- 
heritance contemplated  under  the  first  testament 
of  God  could  not  be  enjoyed  until  a  death  had 
taken  place;  v."  adds  that  this  is  illustrated  by 
the  ordinary  human  practice,  where  a  will  comes 
into  force  after  death  ;  v.'^  states  further  that  this 
was  foreshadowed,  even  at  the  time  when  the  first 
testament  was  given,  by  the  death  of  the  victim, 
which,  as  the  whole  argument  of  the  Epistle  shows, 
looked  onwards  to  the  perfect  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
It  is  indeed  urged  that  the  use  of  the  word  '  medi- 
ator'  in  v.^*  is  fatal  to  the  translation  'will,'  since 
a  will  needs  no  mediator,  whilst  a  covenant  does. 
But,  as  has  been  shown  by  Cremer  {Lexicon,  p.  421), 
citing  illustrations  from  Diodorus  Siculus,  iv.  54, 
and  Jos.  Ant.  IV.  vi.  7,  the  word  /iecrlr-qs  (mediator) 
may  be  used  in  the  sense  of  '  one  who  appears  or 
stands  security  for  anything,'  '  one  who  pledges 
himself  for  promises,'  a  parallel  conception  to  the 
'  surety  '  in  He  7"^.  This  is  admirably  illustrated 
by  the  use  of  the  cognate  verb  in  He  6"  '  God 
interposed  with  an  oath.'  God  gave  His  promise 
to  Abraham  direct,  and  by  the  oath  which  He 
swore  condescended  to  become  the  guarantor  of 
His  own  word. 

If  we  admit  this  translation  of  Siad'^Kri  in  these 
verses,  it  appears  to  follow  also  in  9^  10^  IS^,  as 
also  in  7^  and  12^.  The  references  in  8^^-,  in  view 
of  the  direct  citation  from  Jeremiah,  seem  less 
certain,  though  Riggenbach  argues  for  the  same 
meaning  here.  A  dtadriKT)  written  on  the  heart  is 
less  easy  to  think  of  as  a  'testament.'  Yet  the 
connexion  of  the  diadrjKT}  with  the  promise  in  v.® 
suggests  that  this  thought  was  not  far  away. 
This  is  one  of  those  cases  where  we  cannot  deny 
that  the  archaic  sense  may  have  been  present,  but 
we  may  at  least  claim  that  it  has  been  enriched  by 
the  new  meaning  of  the  word.  Such  a  use  is 
easily  illustrated.  When  Newman  in  his  sermon 
on  '  Unreal  Words '  says :  '  Our  professions,  our 
creed,  our  prayers,  our  dealings,  our  conversation, 
our  arguments,  our  teachiu",  must  henceforth  be 
sincere,'  and  goes  on  immediately  to  quote :  '  In 
godly  sincerity  ...  we  have  had  our  conversation 
in  this  world,'  he  understands  of  course  the  archaic 
biblical  use  of  the  word  he  quotes.  But  can  we 
doubt  that  it  has  been  enriched  to  him  in  such  a 


context  and  on  such  a  subject  by  its  later  u.se  to 
describe  speech  ? 

(6)  Turning  to  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  we  may  begin 
with  the  much-discussed  passage  in  Gal  3'*^". 
Here  St.  Paul  declares  that  he  is  about  to  speak 
'after  the  manner  of  men.'  By  some  he  is  sup- 
posed to  mean  that  he  intends  to  use  the  word 
SiaO-^KT)  in  its  ordinary  human  sense  of  '  will,' 
as  opposed  to  its  biblical  sense  of  '  covenant.* 
But  It  appears  more  likely  that  he  means  that 
having  taken  his  previous  arguments  from  Scrip- 
ture he  will  now  make  his  point  clearer  by  taking 
an  illustration  from  common  daily  life.  Obviously 
if  he  does  this  he  must  give  to  SiatfiJ/ci?  its  current 
meaning,  which  is  without  doubt '  will.'  But  if  so, 
we  ask  whether  he  reverts  to  another  meaning  for 
the  same  word  in  v.".  The  whole  circle  of  ideas 
is  against  this.  It  is  a  5ia.di)K-i)  of  promise,  i.e.  a 
testament.  It  belongs  to  Abraham  and  to  his 
seed,  it  comes  by  way  of  gift,  it  invests  those 
taking  part  in  it  with  the  rights  of  inheritance. 
The  testator  designates  his  heir,  and  arranges  that 
at  a  predetermined  time  he  shall  receive  the 
specified  boon  (4^*).  It  is  indeed  argued  (Lukyn 
Williams,  et  al.)  tliat  we  must  not  translate  '  will,' 
because  this  connotes  death.  But  St.  Paul  seems 
to  have  guarded  himself  against  the  over-pressing 
of  his  argument,  showing  by  his  '  thougli  it  be 
but  a  man's  will '  that  the  analogy  was  not  exact. 
The  word  diad-fjKTf  suggested  to  him  that  there  was 
a  human  document  which  no  one  could  set  aside, 
namely  a  will ;  how  much  more  then  when  God 
makes  a  will  must  that  remain  unalterable. 

In  Eph  2'^  and  Ro  9*  the  idea  of  '  will '  seems 
most  probable.  The  use  of  the  plural  of  diaOrjKT} 
to  express  the  singular  meaning  '  will '  is  very 
frequent  in  Greek,  meaning  either  the  different 
provisions  or  the  will  as  a  whole.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  the  Apostle  is  thinking  of  the  oft- 
renewed  promises  made  to  the  fathers.  In  Gal  4** 
the  word  is  twice  used,  and  applied  once  to  the 
diaOriKri  of  promise  given  to  Abraham  and  fulfilled 
through  Christ,  and  once  to  the  5ia0-/iKr]  made  at 
Sinai.  As  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  the  Abrahamic  dispensation  in  another 
sense  than  in  ch.  3,  and  as  the  thought  of  a  will 
seems  clearly  present  in  4-',  we  find  the  same  con- 
ception here.  The  Law  of  Moses,  which  in  3" 
appeared  only  as  a  supplement  to  the  testament  of 
promise,  delaying  its  operation  but  not  cancelling 
it,  is  here  spoken  of  as  an  inferior  testament. 
There  appears  to  be  a  very  marked  touch  of  irony 
here.  '  If  you  will  have  it  that  it  is  a  testa- 
ment,' says  "the  Apostle,  'and  insist  on  choosing  to 
come  under  its  provisions,  it  is  a  testament  which 
will  bring  you  an  inheritance  of  slavery.'  Our 
view  of  2  Co  3"  will  be  determined  by  our  ex- 
planation of  1  Co  11-^  Here  we  note  the  comment 
of  Zahn  (Galater,  p.  162)  that  the  Greek  word  had 
actually  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  passed  over  into 
the  Aramaic  as  a  loan-word  in  the  sense  of  '  will.' 
Hence  we  may  suppose  that  our  Lord,  speaking 
almost  in  the  very  presence  of  death,  and  promis- 
ing to  His  disciples  a  share  in  His  inheritance  (Lk 
22-*),  enriched  the  OT  idea  of  covenant  with  the 
thoughts  that  cluster  round  the  testament  of  a 
dying  man  planning  out  the  future  of  those  who 
are  dear  to  him.  Tins  is  the  best  illustratiim  the 
NT  aftords  of  the  new  wealth  of  meaning  put  into 
the  old  conception  of  b''rith.  If  so,  we  may  find 
this  in  St.  Paul's  use  also.  In  the  case  of  2  Co  3'*, 
where  diaO^fiK-q  seems  to  stand  for  the  OT,  the 
archaic  use  appears  more  likely. 

(c)  Lastly  (omitting  Ro  11"  and  Rev  11",  which, 
as  cited  directly  from  the  OT,  do  not  contribute 
anything  to  the  understanding  of  the  question), 
we'  may  say  that  Ac  3^,  referring  to  Abraham  and 
to  the  inheritance,  may  liave  been  at  least  coloured 


COVETOUSXESS 


CREATION 


263 


by  the  Greek  conception  of  '  testament.'  In  Ac  7' 
Siadi/iKr)  stands  for  the  seal  which  accompanied  the 
establishment  of  the  new  relationship,  and  sheds 
no  light  upon  its  character. 

(3)  Sub-apostolic  trriters. — Passing  to  the  sub- 
apostolic  Christian  writers,  we  find  few  instances 
that  are  decisive.  In  Clem.  Rom.  ad  Cor.  i.  the 
word  occurs  twice  (xv.  4,  xx.w.  7),  each  time  in 
citations  from  the  OT.  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas 
quotes  also  from  the  OT,  and  refers  specially  to 
tlie  two  tables  of  the  SiadijKr)  which  were  broken  by 
Moses  (iv.  6f.).  Yet  his  most  frequent  use  is 
'heirs  of  the  Siad^Kij'  (vi.  19,  xiii.  1,  6,  xiv.  5). 
'  Moses  as  a  servant  received  it ;  but  the  Lord 
himself,  having  suflfered  in  our  behalf,  hath  given 
it  to  us  that  we  should  be  the  people  of  inherit- 
ance. '  '  He  was  manifested  that  we  .  .  .  being 
constituted  heirs  through  him,  might  receive  the 
StaOi^K-Tj  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  who  was  prepared  for  this 
end;  that  ...  he  might  by  his  word  enter  into 
a  diadriKi}  with  us.'  In  this  last  passage  we  seem 
to  have  a  clear  instance  of  a  passing  over  from  the 
idea  of  *  will '  to  that  of  '  covenant.' 

4.  Conclasion. — As  an  illustration  of  the  new 
fullness  of  meaning  which  we  have  discovered 
above,  reference  may  be  made  to  one  of  the  most 
interesting  of  all  the  Jewish  non-canonical  writings. 
The  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs.  There 
the  fathers  of  the  Hebrew  tribes  plan  out  the 
future  of  their  descendants,  and  with  warning  and 
promise  speak  of  what  lies  before  them.  In  the 
S'T  all  earlier  thoughts  of  God  are  summed  up  in 
tlie  grand  conception  of  Fatherhood,  whilst  man's 
relationship  to  God  is  set  forth  as  perfected  in  the 
realization  of  sonship.  It  was  the  Knowledge  that 
we  have  been  brought  into  the  family  of  God,  and 
made  children  of  His  and  therefore  heirs,  that 
called  forth  St.  Paul's  adoring  gratitude  (Ro  S'**-). 
Looking  back  into  the  past,  he  delighted  to  think 
that  this  gracious  '  wul '  which  adopts  us  and 
makes  us  heirs  of  the  great  inheritance  had  been 
made  long  since  in  favour  of  Abraham,  and  of 
those  who  are  partakers  of  his  spirit  of  faith  and 
trust.  If  he  read  into  the  OT  b'rith  something  that 
was  hidden  from  the  sight  of  those  who  first  wrote 
of  it,  it  is  but  another  illustration  of  Augustine's 
saying :  '  Vetus  Testamentum  in  Novo  patet.' 

LrraRATURE. — E.  Rigrgrenbach,  '  Der  Begriff  der  &ia0r\KTi  im 
Hebraerbrief  (in  The^ogisehe  Studien  Th.  Zahn  dargebraeht, 
Leipzig,  1908),  pp.  ^1-316  ;  J.  Wackemagrel,  '  EHe  griechische 
Sprache'  {KiMur  der  Gegenwart,  i.  i  (do.  190SJ);  F.  O. 
Norton,  A  Lexieographieal  and  Historical  Study  of  AIA8HKH, 
Chicago,  1908;  A.  Deissmann,  Linhtfrom  the  Ancient  Eatt^, 
Ene.  tr.,  1911,  and  5t.  PatiL  Eng.'tr.,  1912;  G.  Milligran  and 
J.  H.  Moulton,  '  Lexical  Notes  from  the  Papyri,'  in  Expotitor, 
7th  ser.,  vi.  [1908]  562;  J.  Behm,  Der  Begriff  a^lABUKUim  ST, 
Leipzig,  1912  ;  E.  Lohmeyer,  Diatheke.Ein Beitraa  zur  Erkldr- 
ung  des  NTBegrifs,  Leipzig,  1913 ;  Dawson  Walker,  T?ie  Gi/t 
of  Tongues,  190C,  pp.  Sl-175.  See  also  the  Commentaries  on 
Galatians  and  Hebrews :  on  GaL,  especially  W.  M.  Ramsay 
(1899),  Zahn  (21907),  Lnkyn  WiUiams  (1911).  Lightfoot 
(■•1874) ;  on  Hebrews,  Westcott  (1SS9),  A.  S.  Peake  (1902). 
Cf.  also  artt.  in  Bible  Dictionaries  and  Lexicons,  especially 
H.  Cramer,  Bibl-Theoi.  Lexicons,  isso. 

Wilfrid  J.  Moultox. 
COYETODSNESS.— In  both  AY  and  RV  '  covet- 
ous '  or  '  covetous  person '  translates  xXcov^kt-i/j 
(1  Co  5^°-  "  6^",  Eph  5'),  and  '  covetousness '  vXeov- 
e^ta  (Ro  1^,  Eph  5\  Col  S^,  1  Th  2«).  Closely  re- 
lated terms  are  4>i.\apyvpia  (1  Ti  6^")  = 'love  of 
money,'  and  ala-xpoKtpSris  (1  Ti  3',  Tit  1^)  =  ' greedy 
of  filthy  lucre. '  (piXapyvpia  and  irXeove^ia  are  some- 
times distinguished  as  '  covetousness '  and  '  avarice,' 
the  desire  to  get  and  the  desire  to  keep  ;  but  this 
distinction,  which  scarcely  exists  in  fact,  is  not 
borne  out  in  NT  usage.  (fuXapyvpia,  which  is  a 
'root  of  all  evils,'  is  manifested  alike  in  greed  of 
gain  and  in  parsimony.  It  emphasizes  the  object 
of  the  desire,  while  the  primary  idea  in  rXeove^la 
is  the  injustice  of  the  means  used  for  its  attain- 
ment.    EtymologicaUy  the  latter    word   signifies 


the  desire  or  claim  to  have  a  larger  share  (irXdoy 
^X"")  than  others ;  in  usage  it  is  covetousness, 
rapacity,  the  disposition  to  seek,  and  the  habit  of 
seeking,  one's  own  enrichment  without  regard  to 
the  rights  and  interests  of  others.  This  sense 
comes  out  clearly  in  the  use  of  the  verb  rXeoKKreiv, 
which  in  the  Pauline  Epistles  (2  Co  2"  7*  12"-  ", 
1  Th  4*)  always  means  to  'take  advantage  of 
another.  Such  unrighteous  advantage  may  be 
taken  in  the  transaction  of  business  (t<^  rpdy/jutrt, 
1  Th  4*),  or  by  the  employment  of  religious  in- 
fluence and  ecclesiastical  position  as  a  means  of 
gain.  In  the  apostolic  writings  the  latter  abuse 
is  strongly  reprobated.  To  be  without  covetous- 
ness is  a  mark  of  the  true  apostle  (1  Th  2"),  of  the 
worthy  bishop  (Tit  1"),  deacon  (1  Ti  3*),  and  elder 
(1  P  5*).  To  be  'greedy  of  filthy  lucre'  is  char- 
acteristic of  the  false  prophet  (2  P  2*) ;  and  against 
this  charge  St.  Paul  guards  himself  with  sensitive 
scrupulosity  (1  Co  Q^'s,  2  Co  7^  12"-  "). 

(1)  The  apostolic  writings  show  that  then,  as 
now,  covetousness,  the  grasping  selfishness  which 
manifests  itself  in  disregard  of  the  interests,  and 
violation  of  the  rights,  of  others,  was  one  of  the 
most  prevalent  and  flagrant  of  the  evils  which  it 
is  the  work  of  Christianity  to  eradicate. 

(2)  They  take  the  gravest  view  of  its  heinous 
sinfulness  (Col  3*),  its  wide-spread  ramifications 
(1  Ti  G'O),  its  ultimate  consequences  (1  Co  6'").  In 
the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  particularly,  a  central 
place  is  always  assigned  to  it  in  the  organism  of 
vice.  It  is  constantly  set  side  by  side  with  un- 
chastity  (1  Co  o^"-  ",  Eph  4i9  o^-  «,  Col  3*,  1  Th  4*^) 
in  a  fashion  which  has  suggested  to  some  exegetes 
that  in  such  passages  rXeove^La  signifies  transgres- 
sion of  the  rights  of  others  in  sexual  rather  than 
in  pecuniary  relations  (many  thus  understand  ry 
rpdyfiari  in  1  Th  4^).  "The  preferable  explanation 
is  that  '  impurity  and  covetousness  may  be  said  to 
divide  between  them  nearly  the  whole  domain  of 
selfishness  and  vice '  (Lightfoot,  Col.^,  1879,  p.  213). 
'  Homo  extra  Deum  quaerit  pabulum  in  creatura 
material!  vel  per  voluptatem  vel  per  avaritiam ' 
(Bengel). 

(3)  Covetousness  is  a  sin  against  one's  own  soul 
— destructive  of  spiritual  self-possession  (He  13*), 
bringing  men  into  bondage  to  things  external  and 
uncertain  (1  Ti  6^") ;  against  one's  neighbour  (1  Th 
4*) ;  but  ultimately  and  essentially  against  God. 
The  most  pregnant  word  on  the  subject  is  that  of 
St.  Paul  (Col  3'), '  covetousness  which  is  idolatry.'* 
The  antidote  is  regard  for  the  righteous  judgment 
of  God  (1  Th  4®),  love  to  one's  neighbour  (1  Co 
1(P*),  trust  in  God's  unfailing  providence  (He  13'-  *, 
1  Ti  6'"),  a  soul-satisfying  experience  of  life  in 
Christ  (Ph  4"-i3). 

LiTERATCRK. — Comm.  on  the  passages  quoted,  especially 
Lightfoot  on  Col  S5 ;  Armitage  Robinson  on  Eph  4i9  53-  * ; 
J.  Weiss  on  1  Co  510- U  ;  Lietzmann  on  Bo  1» ;  R.  C.  Trench. 
Sew  Testament  Synonyms^,  1376,  p.  78;  Sermons  Seic  and 
Old,  1886,  p.  60 ;  John  Foster,  Lecture4^,  iL  [1853]  161 ;  also 
Phillips  Brooks,  The  Light  of  the  World,  1891,  p.  159  ;  E.  M. 
Gotilburn,  Tke  jPursttit  of  BoUnett,  1860,  p.  147. 

Robert  Law. 
CRAFT.— See  Arts. 

CREATION.— The  NT  doctrine  of  creation  in 
general  is  that  of  the  later  OT  writings  and  the 
Apocrypha ;  e.g.  2  Mac  7^,  AVis  11*^.  It  is  found 
over  the  whole  range  of  apostolic  writings,  from 
the  early  speeches  in  the  Acts  (7'"  [quoted  from  Is 
66-]  1415  1724)  to  2  Pet.  (3»).  God  made  the  heaven 
and  the  earth  and  all  that  therein  is ;  He  is  the  one 
supreme  power  in  nature  ;  and  He  is  as  benevolent 
as  He  is  supreme  (cf.  Ac  W).  Human  aflairs  are 
subject  to  His  yviLl  (cf.  Ac  IS^,  Ja  4»*).     Though 

•  Ct  Euripides,  Cyclops,  316-17 : 

o  sivavTXK,  atSitartitrKt,  rots  ot>^o»«  9tif' 
ra  5'  oAAa  cdfiirot  icai  Aoyuv  cvfiop^Mt. 


264 


CREATION 


CREATION 


supreme,  therefore,  He  is  no  capricious  tyrant.  The 
concept  of  laws  of  nature,  of  course,  is  unknown  ; 
but  the  world  is  none  the  less  a  world  of  order  ; 
when  surprising  events  take  place,  they  serve  as 
reminders  or  signs  of  His  jjoverament  or  as  means 
for  the  working  out  of  His  providential  purposes 
(of.  Ac  12^''"-*"-).  The  existing  world  order,  how- 
ever, will  not  last  for  ever ;  it  will  dissolve  in  a 
catastrophe  or  series  of  catastroplies  (cf.  Ac  2'*'' 
quoting  Jl  2''*"^'* ;  also  Jude,  2  P  2,  and  Rev,  passim), 
when  the  power  that  created  will  unmake  to  make 
anew. 

But  throughout  the  OT  writings  is  manifested 
the  feeling  that  some  intermediary  is  needed  in  the 
operations  of  God's  government  (cf.  Jg  S""^-  13^  [an 
angel ;  but  note  6"]  and  Ezk  1 1'  [the  Spirit]).  Later 
Jewish  thought  went  further  and  developed  a  de- 
tailed angelology ;  but  the  NT  reproduces  the 
simpler  thought  of  the  OT  (cf.  Ac  27**  [an  angel  ; 
so  in  12'']  or  16*  [the  Holy  Spirit]).  And  with 
regard  to  the  original  act  or  acts  of  creation,  the 
simple  '  And  Jahweh  formed '  or  '  breathed '  of 
Gn  2,  and  the  even  simpler  '  And  God  said '  of  Gn  1, 
are  extended  even  in  the  OT  by  the  well-known 
references  to  the  brooding  Spirit  (Gn  P  ;  perhaps, 
like  the  rest  of  the  chapter,  containing  a  purified 
echo  of  pagan  cosmologies)  and  to  Wisdom  (Pr  8^ 
etc.);  a  hint  of  a  primal  man  as  an  assessor  at 
creation  has  been  found  by  Ewald  in  Job  15''.  On 
such  foundations  as  these,  later  Jewish  thought 
built  its  theology  of  the  Memra  or  Divine  Word, 
and  of  the  Logos  as  it  appears  in  Alexandrian 
Judaism. 

In  contrast,  perhaps  in  opposition,  to  all  this,  the 
apostolic  writings  prefer  the  language  of  continual 
reference  to  God  Himself.  They  are  troubled  by 
no  Jewish  (or  Gnostic)  fears  as  to  God's  contact 
with  the  world  of  matter  (Ro  P"  4",  He  1"  [quot- 
ing Ps  1022S-27]  3*).  Note  also  He  IP :  '  the  worlds 
— alQ)V€^ — have  been  framed  by  the  word  of  God ' 
(cf.  Ro  1P«,  1  Co  12«,  Eph  128  48).  The  practical  de- 
ductions from  this  view,  that  all  things  made  by 
God  are  good,  and  work  together  for  good,  are 
found  in  Ro  8^8,  1  Ti  4*. 

This  insistence  on  God's  sole  activity  makes  the 
more  remarkable  the  relation  of  the  Father  to  the 
Son  in  the  work  of  creation — a  concept  which,  like 
so  many  others,  owes  its  most  definite  formulation  to 
St.  Paul,  but  is  represented  in  every  other  stratum 
of  apostolic  teaching.  Thus  in  1  Co  8*  we  read : 
'  to  us  there  is  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are 
all  things,  and  we  unto  him  ;  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  throu<jh  (5tA)  whom  are  all  things,  and  we 
through  him.  It  is  perhaps  worth  notice  that  this 
great  sentence  occurs  in  the  discussion  of  things 
offered  to  idols,  as  if  St.  Paul  expected  the  Cor- 
inthians to  recognize  the  truth  as  something  quite 
familiar  (cf.  Ro  IP',  where  the  expression  is^K,  not 
dir6,  deov).  In  Col  P*  we  read  that  all  things  have 
been  created  in  Christ  and  through  Him  and  unto 
Him  (eV,  5td,  eh).  In  v.^'  He  is  called  the  irpuT&roKo^ 
irdffrii  Kriffeujs — a  term  which  recalls  Rev  3'^  but  goes 
far  beyond  it ;  with  this  should  be  compared  the 
fiovoyevrj!  of  Jn  1"  ;  see  also  Ro  8^  (eh  rb  elvai  avrbv 
TrpurdTOKOv  ev  iroKKots  dSfX^otj),  Eph  P,  and  1  P  1^. 
The  same  thought  appears  in  somewhat  different 
language  in  He  P'-  (the  Son  'through  [Std]  whom 
lie  made  the  worlds  .  .  .  upholding  all  things  by 
the  word  of  his  power').  In  the  lociis  classicus 
of  the  Johannine  writings  (Jn  1*)  the  preposition 
is  still  '  through  '  (5td).  In  these  passages  we  have 
what  may  be  termed  the  distinctively  Christian 
contribution  to  the  theistic  doctrine  of  creation. 
Instead  of  a  word,  or  spirit,  or  angels,  the  great  in- 
strument of  creation  is  a  living  Divine  Person — the 
Son.  And  the  difference  is  not  simply  what  the 
Christian  might  express  by  saying  that  the  instru- 
ment is  not  the  word  but  the  Word.     The  Son  is 


not  merely  the  instrument,  He  is  the  end  ;  Si  airrov, 
and  also  eh  airrdv  ;  cf.  Eph  P"  'to  sum  up  all  things 
in  Christ' ;  i.e.  He  is  also  the  final  cause,  wliiie  at 
the  same  time,  from  another  aspect,  with  regard 
to  His  manifestation  (1  P  P""  quoted  above),  the  linal 
cause  of  tlie  appearance  of  Christ  in  the  world  is 
to  be  found  in  the  Church.  Christ  is  also  I^rd  of 
the  created  world,  in  this  present  time  (Eph  1*^, 
Col  1"-^*) ;  all  things  consist,  have  their  ordered 
being,  in  Him ;  He  is  the  hejid  of  all  princi[)ality 
and  power  (Col  2"),  just  as  '  all  the  fulness  of  God ' 
dwells  in  Him  (2®).  And  of  all  this  created  order 
the  Church  is  the  crowning  work  ;  of  the  Church 
Christ  is  the  Head  (Eph  1'^) ;  i.e.  the  Church,  as 
in  some  way  distinct  from  the  rest  of  creation, 
stands  in  a  unique  and  timeless  relation  to  Christ. 

It  is  impos.sible  to  enter  into  these  daring 
thoughts  without  asking.  What  then  of  evil? 
Was  evil  too  created  by  God,  and  through  Christ? 
To  the  childlike  thought  of  the  OT,  evil  was,  or 
rather  is,  created  by  God,  like  good  (Is  45^ ;  cf. 
Am  3').  And  the  NT  writers  were  too  fully 
steeped  in  the  thought  of  the  OT  to  feel  the  prob- 
lem as  we  feel  it  to-day.  But  it  was  felt  none  the 
less.  In  1  P  4^",  indeed,  the  suiferings  of  the  good 
only  suggest  the  thought  of  a  'faithful  Creator.' 
Ps  8®  is  quoted  three  times  in  the  Epistles  :  once  in 
Eph  1'^,  with  simple  approval  ;  in  1  Co  15^  it  is 
recognized  that  the  subjection  of  all  things  to 
Christ  is  not  yet  complete  ;  so  in  He  2*'-,  where  this 
recognition  is  joined  to  the  author's  characteristic 
teaching  with  regard  to  the  sufferings  of  Christ. 
For  the  most  part,  St.  Paul  refers  moral  evil  to  the 
'spiritual  hosts  of  M'ickedness  in  the  heavenly 
places'  (Eph  6^^;  cf.  2^  also  2  Th  2«,  2  Co  4*). 
i3ut  in  one  pregnant  passage,  illuminating  yet  ob- 
scure, Ro  S^'**'-,  he  hears  in  the  long  wail  of  the 
misery  of  creation  the  cries  of  the  birth-pangs 
which  herald  a  new  order,  of  which  the  leaders 
and  inaugurators  are  the  sons  of  God  ;  and  in  the 
apparent  vanity  (fruitlessness)  of  nature  (in  whicli 
'or  fifty  seeds  she  often  brings  but  one  to  bear'), 
he  sees  the  preparation  for  a  new  revelation  of  the 
creative  order  and  purposefulness  of  God  ;  while 
no  created  thing  is  able  even  now  to  separate  us 
from  the  love  of  Christ  (v.**).  It  is  therefore  not 
surprising  that,  in  contrast  to  the  old  order,  St. 
Paul  should  speak  of  the  appearance  of  a  new,  here 
and  now.  If  the  whole  of  creation  is  through 
Christ,  much  more  is  the  new  character  or  self  a 
new  creation  (Gal  6^» ;  cf.  2  Co  5",  Eph  4'^*  with 
Eph  2^'  and  Ps  5P**).  The  'new  man  in  Clirist' 
explains  and  satisfies  the  longing  of  the  created 
and  imperfect  world.* 

Hitherto,  no  reference  has  been  made  to  the 
Epistles  of  St.  John,  and  indeed  in  these  Epistles 
no  mention  is  made  of  the  act  of  creation.  But  it 
may  none  the  less  be  maintained  that  St.  John 
adcis  an  essential  element  to  the  whole  apostolic 
doctrine.  A  consideration  of  this  maj'  be  intro- 
duced by  a  summary  of  the  foregoing.  As  we  have 
seen,  the  majority  of  apostolic  writers  are  not  in- 
terested in  the  question.  How  did  things  originate  ? 
Their  language  can  be  used  with  equal  sincerity  by 
those  who  believe  in  separate  acts  of  creation  and 
in  some  form  of  evolution  (though  doubtless,  if 
questioned,  all  of  them  would  have  upheld  a  literal 
interpretation  of  Gn  1).     Their  interest  is  in  crea- 

•  A  word  should  here  be  added  on  the  four  terms  for  creation 
and  created  objects ;  (CTwrit  denotes  created  thin^  either  singly 
or  collectively,  like  the  much  rarer  irriV/xa  (Bo  8i»,  Col  l^s, 
lie  911,  2  P  8*  ;  cf.  Wis  198).  xoa^o?  is  the  world  as  an  ordered 
svstera  '  relative  to  man  as  well  as  God '  (Westcott),  and  thus 
comes  to  denote  the  order  of  things  apart  from  fio<l.  separate 
from  Him,  and  even  in  antagonism  to  Him  (e.g.  in  Ro  3«,  1  Co  l'-* 
4«,  2Co  619,  He  ll^,  Ja  127,  and  constantly  in  1  Jn. ).  oJwi-  is  chiefly 
a  dispensation  evolvinjr  into  soiiiot.hin>,'  further  :  when  usefl  in 
the  smgular,  it  refers  either  to  the  present  age  or  U)  the  perfect 
age ;  but  it  is  often  used,  quite  naturally,  in  the  plural  (cf. 
He  12  lia,  also  2  Co  **,  Eph  22). 


CRESCEXS 


CRETE,  CRETAlfS 


265 


tion  as  a  stajje  or  epoch  ;  an  epoch  destined,  after 
its  work  is  done,  to  give  place  to  a  better,  whose 
beginnings  can  even  now  be  discerned.  Neither 
of  these  stages  can  be  understood  apart  from  Christ. 
The  first,  lilce  the  second,  is  good,  because  it  is  the 
work  of  God.  It  is  based  on  Christ ;  it  is  held  to- 
gether in  Christ.  But  its  goodness  (to  employ  the 
profound  Aristotelian  distinction)  is  a  matt«r  of 
Si'va/xis  rather  than  of  im-eXixeia.  Moreover,  it 
exists  side  by  side  with  another  order,  Kdcfioi,  which 
is  ruled  over  by  the  powers  of  evil,  and  which  is 
doomed  not  to  be  superseded  but  destroyed.  The 
second  stage  or  epoch,  whose  succession  to  the 
first  is  sometimes  spoken  of  in  terms  of  a  sudden 
catastrophe,  sometimes,  as  it  would  seem,  as  the 
result  of  a  long  process — '  one  far-oflF divine  event ' — 
is  the  complete  manifestation  of  the  wnll  of  God  ; 
it  involves  a  kind  of  transfigured  pantheism,  in 
which  God  is  all  things,  and  in  all  things  (1  Co  15^). 

St.  John  does  not,  however,  pay  attention  to 
these  two  epochs ;  his  antithesis  is  throughout 
between  the  present  evil  order  and  God's  final 
purposes  (the  phrase  6  kScho^  6  fieWuv  is  never  used). 
This  order  is  the  abode  of  evil  ( 1  Jn  2^*)  and  of  the 
great  enemy  of  God  (4^) ;  it  lies,  indeed,  in  the  evil 
one  (5'®)  ;  it  is  passing  away  (2'") ;  it  is  not  to  be 
loved  (2''  ;  contrast  Jn  3^*),  but  to  be  conquered  (5*). 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Son  of  God  has  been  sent 
into  the  world  ;  and  through  believing  in  Him  is 
enjoyed,  here  and  now,  the  gift  of  eternal  life — a 
rift  so  complete  and  final  that  only  in  one  passage 
does  1  Jn.  speak  with  any  detiniteness  of  a  future 
order  at  all  {S^).  As  the  other  apostolic  writers 
imply,  the  order  of  creation  which  centres  in  Christ, 
properly  understood,  is  not  physical,  but  moral 
and  spiritual ;  and  therefore,  to  those  who  believe 
in  Christ,  it  is  present  here  and  now. 

References  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers  are  not 
numerous ;  the  deeper  aspects  of  NT  teaching  were 
hardly  caught ;  attention  may  be  called,  however, 
to  1  Clement :  '  the  Creator  and  Father  of  the  ages ' 
(ch.  XXXV.),  'the  God  of  the  ages'  (Iv.),  and  'the 
King  of  the  ages'  (Ixi.).  In  Hermas  we  have  a 
further  reminiscence  of  the  NT  ( Vis.  I.  i.  6) :  '  God, 
who  dwelleth  in  the  heavens  and  created  out  of 
nothing  the  things  that  are,  and  increased  and 
multiplied  them  for  His  church's  sake.' 

LiTERATrRK. — References  to  the  literature  on  Creation  as  a 
part  of  theiatic  doctrine  cannot  be  given  here,  but  the  reader 
may  be  referred  to  G.  H.  A.  v.  Ewald,  Old  and  yew  Test. 
Theology,  Enp.  tr.,  IsSa  ;  A.  M.  Fairbaim,  The  Philosophy  of  the 
Christian  Reli'jion,  1902  ;  D.  Somerville,  St.  PaiWs  Concepticn 
of  Christ,  1897  ;  and  the  Comm.  of  Westcott,  Ligrhtfoot,  and 
Sanday-Headlam,  ad  Jocc  "W".   F.   LOFTHOUSE. 

CRESCENS  (Kp^cTKTjs). — Crescens,  a  companion  of 
St.  Paul  during  his  last  imprisonment,  had  at  the 
date  of  the  writing  of  2  Timothy  gone  to  Galatia 
(2  Ti  4^"),  which  may  mean  either  Galatia  in  Asia 
Minor  or  the  western  province  of  Gaul.  We  find 
two  of  the  best  MSS  (K  and  C)  reading  TaXkiap 
(Gaul)  for  TaXarlav  (Galatia),  and  Eusebius  (HE 
111.  iv.  9),  Epiphanius  (Hcer.  li.  11),  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  and  Theodoret  understand  Western 
Gaul  to  be  meant  in  the  passage.  If  the  Apostle 
visited  Spain,  as  we  have  every  reason  to  suppose, 
it  is  probable  that  he  passed  tlvrough  Southern 
Graul  and  may  have  founded  churches  there  to 
which  Crescens  may  have  been  sent  as  a  delegate. 
On  the  otlier  hand,  the  fact  that  the  other  delegates 
mentioned  in  the  verse  were  sent  to  the  east  of 
Rome  has  led  some  to  think  that  Asiatic  Galatia 
is  meant.  The  reference  in  the  Apostolic  Constitu- 
tions (viL  46)  is  ambiguous,  as  Western  Gaul  might 
be  referred  to  as  Galatia.  Lightfoot  thinks  it 
likely  that  Western  Gaul  is  indicated,  and  that 
the  Apostle  would  certainly  have  A^Titten  '  Galatia ' 
when  referring  to  the  province  in  the  West.  He 
also  holds  that  TaWiav  (Gaul)  is  an  early  explana- 


tory gloss  which  crept  into  the  text  of  several  MSS 
(GcUatiam^,  1876,  p.  31).  The  churches  of  Vienne 
and  Mayence  both  claimed  Crescens  as  their 
founder.  Of  the  man  himself  nothing  further  is 
kno^vn.  His  name  is  Latin,  and  he  may  have 
been  a  Roman  freedman.  He  is  commemorated  in 
tlie  Roman  MartjTolojnr  on  June  27  and  in  the 
Greek  Menologion  on  >fay  30,  where  he  is  treated 
as  one  of  '  the  Seventy '  and  bishop  of  Chalcedon 
(Acta  Sanctorum,  June  27  ;  Menologion,  May  30). 

W.  F.  Bo\T). 
CRETE,  CRETANS — One  of  the  largest  islands 
in  the  Mediterranean,  Crete  (Kpn^)  lies  60  miles 
S.  of  Greece.  It  is  about  150  miles  in  length  from 
E.  to  W.,  and  varies  from  7  to  30  miles  in  width. 
The  greater  part  of  it  is  occupied  by  ranges  of 
mountains,  but  the  valleys  are  exceedmgly  fertile, 
and  the  climate  is  delightful.  While  the  northern 
coast  has  good  natural  harbours,  tiie  southern  is 
much  less  indented,  the  mountains  in  many  parts 
rising  almost  like  a  wall  from  the  sea.  In  ancient 
times  Crete  had  very  numerous  cities  ;  Horace 
(echoing  Homer,  II.  ii.  649)  describes  it  as  '  centum 
nobilem  Cretam  urbibus '  (Epodcs,  vs..  29 ;  cf. 
Virgil,  jEn.  n\.  106).  The  recent  excavations  of 
early  sites  have  furnished  astonishing  evidence  of 
a  highly  developed  pre-historic  civilization,  with 
'  Minoan  '  palaces  and  shrines,  a  '  Minoan '  art  of 
which  that  of  Mycenae  is  only  an  ottshoot,  and  a 
'  Minoan  '  script  of  which  the  Phoenician  alphabet 
is  but  an  altered  copy  (EBr^^  vii.  421). 

Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  2)  commits  a  curious  error  in 
suggesting  that  the  Jews  came  originally  from 
Crete,  and  that  the  name  JucUei  was  derived  from 
Mt.  Ida.  The  Jews  who  resided  in  Crete  in  the 
early  Maccabsean  period  (1  Mac  10^  15^)  were  of 
course  immigrants.  In  67  B.C.  the  island  was 
annexed  by  Rome,  and  combined  with  Cyrenaica 
to  form  a  single  province,  which  remained  senatorial 
under  the  Empire. 

The  ship  in  which  St.  Paul  sailed  from  Myra  for 
Italy  would  under  ordinary  conditions  have  gone 
north  of  Crete,  but  she  was  driven  by  stress  of 
weather  to  seek  the  shelter  of  the  south  coast. 
Rounding  the  promontory  of  Salmone  in  the  east, 
she  coasted  as  far  as  Fair  Havens,  where  she 
remained  for  some  time  weather-bound.  In  an 
attempt  to  reach  the  better  harbour  of  Phoenix 
(now  probably  Lutro),  she  hugged  the  shore  till 
she  rounded  Cape  Matala,  when  a  violent  E.N.E. 
wind  suddenly  beat  down  upon  her  from  the 
central  mountains  of  the  island,  and  compelled  her 
to  scud  till  she  was  able  to  get  under  the  lee  of 
the  small  island  of  Cauda  (Ac  27*-^*).  See  Fair 
Haveks,  Phcexix,  and  Cauda. 

It  is  not  known  how  Crete  was  first  evangelized. 
Cretan  Jews  and  proselytes  were  present  at  the 
first  Christian  Pentecost,  and  some  of  them  may 
well  have  been  among  the  3000  converts  (Ac  2"-'"). 
It  is  hardly  likely  that  St.  Paul  was  idle  while  he 
was  perforce  spending  '  much  time '  (ikoj-oO  yfibvov) 
near  the  city  of  Lasea  (27*^*).  The  Epistle  to 
Titus,  though  perhaps  not  Pauline,  reflects  a 
credible  tradition  which  links  the  name  of  Titus 
with  Cretan  Christianity.  The  need  of  the  churches 
of  which  he  had  the  oversight  was  organization 
(Tit  1').  '  The  natural  inference  is  that  up  to  this 
time  the  Christians  of  Crete  had  gone  on  without 
any  kind  of  responsible  government,  and  that  this 
anarchic  condition  was  one  considerable  cAuse  of 
the  evidently  low  moral  condition  to  which  they 
had  sunk.  Accordingly,  the  appointment  of  elders 
was  a  necessary  first  step  towards  raising  the 
standard  of  Christian  life  generally'  (F.  J.  A. 
Hort,  Christian  Ecclesia,  1897,  p.  176). 

The  Cretans  were  a  brave  and  turbulent  race, 
hard  to  govern,  with  an  evil  reputation  for  avarice, 
mendacity,  and  drunkenness.     The  writer  of  Tit. 


266 


CRISPUS 


CROSS,  CRUCIFIXION 


<l notes  a  hexameter  of  Epinienides,  a  prophet  of 
llieir  own — called  by  Plato  Ouo^  av-qp  (Laivs,  i,  64'2 
D) — who  brands  them  as  'always  liars,  beasts,  and 
idle  gluttons '  (Tit  l^-).  For  this  indiscriminate 
condemnation,  uttered  with  prophetic  indignation 
and  scorn,  there  was  much  excuse.  The  Greeks 
coined  a  special  word  (Kprrrl^eiv)  for  a  kind  of  talk 
and  conduct  which  was  characteristic  of  Crete,  and 
to  out-Cretan  a  Cretan  (wpb^  KpljTa  \s.p-i)Tl^(iv)  was  to 
outwit  a  knave  (Plut.  /Emil.  23,  Lysand.  20). 

LiTBRATtmu.— T.  A.  B.  Spratt,  TravOi  and  Retearehet  in 
Crete,  2  vols.,  London,  1865  ;  A.  J.  Evans,  Scripta  Minoa,  i. 
Oxford  [1909] ;  C.  H.  and  H.  B.  Hawes,  Crete  the  Forerunner  of 
Greece,  I^ndoii,  1909.  JaMKS  StRAHAN. 

CRISPUS.— Crispus  {Kpl<nro$)  was  the  ruler  of 
the  Jewish  synagogue  at  Corinth  (Ac  18")  who  ac- 
companied St.  Paul  when  he  abandoned  the  syna- 
gogue for  an  adjoining  house,  and  who  became  a 
Christian.  Crispus  was  one  of  the  few  persons  whom 
St.  Paul  himself  baptized  in  Corinth  (1  Co  1"),  the 
Apostle  usually  leaving  the  baptizing  to  others ; 
but  Crispus  was  one  of  the  first  converts,  and  one 
of  uncommon  importance,  whose  conversion  cost 
him  dear,  whilst  it  was  a  notable  encouragement 
to  St.  Paul.  The  example  set  by  a  man  of  such 
eminence  had  considerable  influence.  His  own 
household  became  Christians  with  him  ;  and  their 
conversion  seems  to  have  inaugurated  a  large  in- 
gathering. 

LiTERATURK.— Artt.  in  HDB,  vol.  i.,  on  '  Crispus,' '  Corinth,'  p. 
4S1",  and  '  I.  Corinthians,'  p.  485»  ;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostolic 
.-If/e.i.a  [London,  1897]  305-310;  R.  J.  Knowlingr,  EGT,  'Acts,' 
1900  ;  and  G.  G.  Findlay,  EGT,  '  1  Cor.,'  1900,  ad  locc. 

J.  E.  Roberts. 

CROSS,  CRUCIFIXION.— The  English  word  is 
derived  from  the  Latin  o-w.-r  through  the  French 
croix  (Old  French  and  Middle  Englisn,  crois).  The 
Oreek  aravpbs  is  wider  in  its  meaning  than  the 
English  word,  and  includes  the  upright  stake,  crux 
simplex,  to  which  the  criminal  was  bound  or  upon 
which  he  was  impaled,  as  well  as  the  crux  com- 
posita,  of  various  shapes.  In  the  NT,  however, 
ffravpos  is  confined  to  the  usual  English  significa- 
tion, and  is  equivalent  to  crux.  It  was  the  instru- 
ment upon  which  criminals  suffered  death,  and  the 
references  in  the  NT  are  chiefly  to  the  crucifixion 
of  Jesus  Christ,  the  instrument  becoming  the 
.symbol  of  the  cardinal  doctrine  of  the  Christian 
faith,  the  atonement  and  the  work  of  human  re- 
demption, and  in  general  the  gospel  itself. 

1.  Archaeological. — The  crossing  of  two  lines  at 
right  angles  as  a  symbol  not  only  antedates  Chris- 
tianity, but  is  of  the  remotest  antiquity,  being  pre- 
historic in  origin.  The  primitive  form  of  the  cross 
was  probably  the  gammate  cross  {crux  gammata) 
known  by  the  Sanscrit  name  of  swastika,  as  it  is 
designated  hy  students  of  archaeology.     The  form 

of  this  cross  LC,  used  as  a  token  of  benediction  and 

good  luck,  has  been  found  on  the  ruins  of  ancient 
Troy,  on  the  Hittite  monuments,  in  Cyprus,  and  in 
Greece.  In  pre-historic  times  it  was  used,  according 
to  de  Mortillet,  as  a  .symbol  of  consecration  and 
not  as  a  merely  ornamental  device.  The  gammate 
cross  has  been  found  on  ancient  Buddhist  remains, 
and  it  was  largely  employed  by  the  Buddhists. 
It  has  also  been  seen  upon  jewels  and  weapons 
amongst  the  Gallic,  the  German,  and  the  Scandi- 
navian peoples,  in  China,  and  Ashanti,  and  amongst 
the  South  American  Indians.  Although  it  was 
used  by  the  early  Christians  as  a  prophylactic 
symbol,  it  was  often  placed  along.side  the  other 
forms  of  cross.     In  Egypt  the  cross  is  found  in  the 

paintings  on  the  tombs  in  the  form  -Q-,  as  the  key 

of  life  ;  and  although  its  material  origin  is  doubtful, 
the  symbolism  clearly  indicates  the  vital  germ. 


From  Egypt  its  use  extended  to  tlie  Phajoicians, 
and  afterwards  to  all  the  Semitic  tribes. 

2.  Historical.— The  relation  of  the  non-Christian 
symbolism  of  the  cross  to  that  of  the  Christian 
Church  need  not  be  discussed  here,  although  the 
connexion  is  held  by  some  writers  to  be  very  close. 
We  are  on  sure  ground,  however,  in  tracing  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  cross  to  the  historic  basis 
as  found  in  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus  Christ.  TJiis 
mode  of  execution  was  exceedingly  ancient  in  the 
Orient,  and  it  was  practised  amongst  the  Pha;ni- 
cians  (Valer.  ii.  7),  the  E^ptians  (Thuc.  i.  110), 
and  the  Persians  (Herod,  ix.  120).  Amongst  the 
Romans  it  was  a  punishment  considered  too  de- 
grading for  the  citizens  of  the  Empire  (Josephus, 
Ant.  XX.  vi.  2.  BJ  ll.  xii.  6,  xiv.  9,  V.  xi.  1). 
Cicero  (in  Verr.  ll.  v.  66)  speaks  of  it  as  being  the 
severest  penalty,  reserved  only  for  slaves  ('servi- 
tutis  extremum  summumque  suppliciura').  It 
was  inflicted  upon  those  convicted  for  highway 
robbery,  piracy,  and  similar  crimes  (Petron.  Ixxii.  ; 
Flor.  III.  xix.),  also  for  the  public  accusation  of  a 
master  by  a  slave,  for  sedition,  tumult,  or  false 
witness.  The  arbor  infelix  spoken  of  by  Cicero  is 
suggestive  of  the  penalty  of  crucifixion  {pro  Rabir. 
iii.  tf.).  The  Jews  did  not  crucify  their  criminals 
whilst  they  were  alive,  although  dead  bodies  were 
hanged  by  them  to  the  accursed  tree ;  consequently 
the  execution  of  Jesus  Christ  was  carried  out  by 
the  Romans.  The  Jewish  mode  of  execution  was 
by  stoning  to  death  (Lv  20*  24i6-  =»,  Dt  13'«  W,  etc. ). 

There  were  generally  two  forms  of  cross  used  in 
capital  punishment :  the  crux  simplex,  which  con- 
sisted of  a  single  stake  to  which  the  victim  was 
fastened  or  upon  which  he  was  impaled  ;  also  the 
crux  compacta.  The  latter  was  made  of  cross 
pieces  of  wood  and  took  the  form  of :  (a)  the  crux 
andreana  or  crux  decussata,  in  shape  like  the 
Greek  X ;  or  (6)  the  crux  commissa,  in  the  shape 
of  the  letter  T  or  Greek  Tau ;  or  {c)  the  crux 
immissa,  in  which  the  vertical  trunk  extended 
higher  than  the  transverse  beams.  It  was  upon 
the  last-named  form  of  cross,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  the  Fathers,  that  Jesus  was  crucified. 
Matthew  tells  us  (27*^)  that  the  titulus  was  placed 
over  {iiravo})  the  head  of  Jesus. 

Crucifixion  was  pi'eceded  by  scourging  {virgin 
ccedere),  according  to  the  custom  of  the  Romans, 
after  which  the  prisoner  was  compelled  to  carry 
his  cross,  or  at  least  the  transverse  portion  of  it, 
to  the  place  of  execution.  There  the  cross  would 
be  uplifted,  and  the  victim  bound  to  it  by  cords 
{tollere  in  crucem).  Tlien  he  would  be  fastened  to 
it  by  three  (or  perhaps  four)  nails  (Lipsius,  de 
Cruce,  II.  vii.),  and  piobablj-  also  supported  by 
ropes  (Pliny,  xxviii,  §  46),  and  tiie  placard  or  titulus 
bearing  the  name  of  the  criminal  and  his  sentence 
would  be  fastened  to  the  upper  portion.  The  con- 
demned man  would  in  the  ordinary  way  die  of 
hunger  and  thirst  in  the  course  of  time  ;  but  in  order 
to  shorten  the  duration  of  the  agony,  the  legs 
of  the  sufferer  might  be  broken,  altliough  this 
practice  was  not  common  amongst  the  Romans. 
Nor  would  the  Romans  jiermit  the  removal  of  the 
corp.se  without  special  authorization. 

Ihe  historical  account  of  the  crucifixion  of  our 
Lord  agrees  with  all  the  above  details  of  the  mode 
of  execution.  He  was  condemned  (falsely)  for 
sedition  and  tumult.  He  was  scourged,  and  com- 
pelled, until  He  was  relieved,  to  carrj'  His  cross. 
His  legs  were  not  broken,  it  is  true,  because  it  was 
found  that  He  was  dead  already  ( Jn  19^--  ^).  The 
brigands  who  were  crucified  with  Him  were  sub- 
jected to  cruci/rafjium,  but  one  of  the  soldiers 
pierced  His  side  with  a  spear  to  make  sure  that 
He  was  really  dead,  and  there  flowed  out  'blood 
and  water.' 

To  the  Romans  the  cross  had  no  religious  signi- 


CROSS,  CRUCIFIXIOX 


CROSS,  CRUCIFIXIOX 


267 


ficance  as  it  had  in  the  East ;  they  merely  regarded 
it  as  the  material  instrument  of  a  most  degrading 
punishment.  The  Hebrew  Scriptures,  on  the  other 
hand,  contain  what  may  be  regarded  as  suggestions 
of  the  crucitixion,  as  m  the  case  of  the  uplifted 
brazen  serpent  in  the  wilderness  (Nu  'il^"),  the 
piercing  of  hands  and  feet  in  Ps  22^"',  also  in  the 
suppressed  passage,  referred  to  by  Justin  Martyr, 
formerly  contained  in  Ps  96^*  (LXX  version,  some 
codices). 

As  the  instrument  of  Christ's  execution  came  to 
be  regarded  in  the  early  Church  as  the  means  of 
human  redemption,  it  became  the  symbol  of  the 
Passion,  and  later  still  it  was  used  as  a  sign  of 
protection  and  defence.  Some  of  the  earlier  forms 
of  the  crucifix  represented  the  Lord  as  reigning 
from  the  tree,  the  triumphant  Saviour-King,  with 
no  signs  of  agony.  There  is,  however,  no  monu- 
ment of  the  cross  or  crucifix  remaining  which 
belongs  to  the  1st  century. 

The  ceremony  of  making  the  sign  of  the  cross  is 
of  great  antiquity,  and  is  referred  to  by  Clement 
of  Alexandria  {Strom,  vi.  11  [Pair.  Grceca,  ix.  305]) 
and  by  Tertullian  in  the  3rd  cent,  {de  Cor.  Mil. 
iii. ),  who  felt  it  necessary  to  defend  the  Christians 
against  the  charge  of  the  heathen  that  they  too 
were  guilty  of  idolatry  in  the  worship  of  the  cross. 
The  superstitious  use  of  the  symbol  to  ward  off 
evil  may  be  traced  to  the  middle  of  the  2nd  cent., 
whilst  the  adoration  and  the  exaltation  of  the 
cross  came  in  later. 

3.  The  doctrine  of  the  cross  in  the  early  Church. 
— The  doctrine  of  the  cross,  or  the  death  of  Christ, 
and  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  formed  the 
essential  teaching  in  apostolic  Christianity.  At 
Pentecost,  and  in  the  earliest  contact  of  Chris- 
tianity ^vith  Judaism,  the  fact  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, or  rather  the  Christ  of  the  resurrection,  came 
to  the  front.  But  it  was  always  the  Crucified 
One  who  had  been  raised  from  the  dead.  The 
crucifixion  was  an  event  which  was  familiar  to  all, 
but  the  distinctive  message  was  that  God  had  put 
His  seal  and  approval  on  the  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
On  each  occasion  in  the  Acts  on  which  St.  Peter 
preached  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  hecharged 
the  Jews  with  having  crucified  Jesus  (Ac  2"  4*'  5* 
10®).  In  his  First  Epistle  he  spoke  of  Jesus  as 
having  borne  our  sins  in  His  own  body  on  the  tree 
(1  P  2^). 

St.  Paul  in  his  address  in  the  synagogue  at 
Antioch  of  Pisidia  proclaimed  the  fact  of  the  re- 
surrection and  laid  the  responsibility  of  the  cruci- 
tixion of  our  Lord  upon  the  Jews  (Ac  13"'®). 
It  was  in  his  Epistles,  however,  that  he  laid  down 
specificall}-  the  doctrine  of  the  cross.  In  his  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  he  refers  to  the  cross  as 
the  central  feature  of  his  ministrj',  and  states  that 
he  had  determined  to  know  nothing  among  them 
save  Jteus  Christ  and  Him  crucified  (2*).  It  is  a 
double  reconciliation  which  is  thereby  effected,  be- 
tween God  and  man,  Jew  and  Greek.  The  enmity 
is  slain  through  the  cross,  and  access  is  gained  in 
one  Spirit  unto  the  Father  (Eph  2'«-i8).  It  was 
the  sole  means  whereby  reconciliation  and  peace 
between  God  and  man  were  possible  (Col  1^). 
The  cross  was  a  stumbling-block  to  the  Jews  and 
foolishness  to  the  Greeks,  but  it  was  God's  wisdom, 
not  discernible  by  the  natural  man  and  only  truly 
appreciated  by  those  who  are  spiritual  (l*Co  1). 
In  Gal.  the  curse  of  the  cross  is  brought  forward 
(3*').  This  curse  was  borne  by  Jesus  Christ  on 
behalf  of  all  men,  both  Jews  and  Greeks,  for  it 
rests  upon  those  who  have  not  kept  the  whole 
law,  as  well  as  upon  those  who  have  ignored  it  al- 
together. Neither  Jews  nor  Gentiles  can  be  justi- 
fied by  the  works  of  the  law  ;  both  alike  are  under 
the  curse  and  are  to  be  justified  by  faith  alone. 
The  curse  is  transferred  to  Christ  as  the  sacrificial 


victim,  and  the  'bond  written  in  ordinances'  ia 
nailed  to  His  cross,  and  taken  otit  of  the  way  (Col 
2").  This  idea  is  very  prominent  in  the  symbol- 
ism of  the  scape^at,  the  transfer  of  the  curse 
being  represented  in  the  light  of  the  victim  bear- 
ing the  iniquities  of  the  people  into  the  wilderness 
(Lv  IB*"-).  The  shame,  ignominy,  and  disgrace 
which  were  associated  with  the  cross  formed  the  cul- 
mination in  the  humiliation  of  Him  who  '  was  in 
the  form  of  (Jod  and  counted  it  not  a  prize  to  be 
equal  with  Grod,'  and  it  was  the  ground  of  the 
glorious  exaltation  with  which  God  invested  Him, 
and  for  which  He  received  the  name  which  is  above 
every  name,  and  should  receive  the  homage  of  all 
things  in  heaven  and  earth  and  under  the  earth 
(Ph  2®-").  'He  was  crucified  through  weakness, 
yet  he  liveth  through  the  power  of  God '  (2  Co  13*). 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (especially  9"=*  10) 
develops  the  conception  of  the  High-Priesthood  of 
Christ  and  demonstrates  that  He  is  the  High 
Priest  of  good  things  to  come,  having  through  His 
blood  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us,  and  thus 
He  becomes  the  Mediator  of  the  new  Covenant. 
By  His  redemptive  work  once  for  all  we  are  sancti- 
fied and  perfected  for  ever  through  the  offering  of 
His  body. 

The  hope  of  the  race  for  the  future  is  based 
upon  the  atonement,  and  the  consummation  of  the 
dispensation  is  associated  with  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ  as  the  Lamb  which  hath  been  slain.  The 
Lord  of  the  Churches  is  to  receive  the  adoration  of 
the  Church  throughout  all  ages  because  He  hath 
loved  us  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  His  own 
blood  and  hath  made  us  a  kingdom  and  priests 
unto  God  the  Father  (Rev  !'•  %  '  Because  of  the 
suffering  of  death'  He  is  'crowned  ^vith  glory  and 
honour'  (He  2®).  Throughout  the  eschatological 
references  of  the  Apocalypse,  the  power  and  dig- 
nity of  the  Lamb  upon  the  throne  culminate  in 
the  ascription  of  all  praise  and  glory  to  Him  who 
is  worthy  because  He  has  been  slain. 

From  the  references  in  the  NT  we  gather  that 
the  cross  and  the  crucifixion  of  Christ  became  the 
symbol  of  human  redemption  and  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  atonement.  The  doctrine  of  the  cross  was 
the  central  truth  in  the  early  Church,  confirmed 
and  completed  in  the  fact  of  the  resurrection. 
Though  a  symbol  of  humiliation,  disgrace,  and 
shame,  it  came  to  stand  for  the  most  glorious  truths 
of  the  salvation  wrought  for  us  by  Jesus  Christ 
and  as  sjmonymous  with  the  gospel  itself. 

That  this  was  the  doctrine  of  the  cross  amongst 
the  churches  of  the  1st  cent,  is  evidenced  by  the 
writings  of  the  ApostoUc  Fathers.  Polycarp  refers 
to  the  blood  of  Christ  as  demanding  vengeance 
upon  BUs  persecutors  {Phil,  ii.) ;  he  also  alludes  to 
the  cross,  when  he  affirms  that  he  who  rejects  the 
testimony  is  of  the  devU  (viL ),  and  enjoins  prayer  for 
the  enemies  of  the  gospel  (xiL).  The  doctrine  of 
the  cross  is  with  Ignatius  the  central  teaching  of 
his  faith,  and  he  lays  great  stress  upon  the  '  blwd,' 
the  '  passion,'  and  the  '  cross  '  of  Christ,  so  much 
so  that  he  vividly  recalls  the  words  of  St.  Paul. 
The  cross  means  to  him  salvation  and  is  the  pledge 
of  eternal  life,  but  it  is  a  scandal  to  the  unbeliever 
{Eph.  xviii. ).  The  words  t6  voBk  are  very  frequently 
used  by  Ignatius,  for  in  our  Lord's  passion  all  men 
must  cue ;  through  Christ's  sufferings  the  penitent 
is  to  return  to  Grod  ;  Christ's  passion  the  saint  must 
strive  to  imitate  ;  and  it  is  the  joy  and  peace  of  the 
Church.  The  main  endeavour  of  Ignatius  in  com- 
bating the  Docetic  heresy  was  to  prove  that  the 
sufferings  of  Christ  were  real  experiences,  especi- 
ally in  Trail,  ix.  (see  also  Trail.  Inscr.  xL,  Smyrn. 
L  iii.  viL,  Philadel.  Inscr.  iv.  viiL). 

(1)  The  death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross  is  the 
saerifieefor  human  guilt  and  sin. — The  immediate 
cause  of  Christ's  death  was  the  animosity  of  the 


268 


CROSS,  CRUCIFIXIOlSr 


CROSS,  CRUCIFIXION 


Jews  with  whom  our  Lord  was  brought  into  colli- 
sion through  His  teachings,  His  ministry,  and  His 
claims.  In  the  condemnation  and  death  of  Jesus 
all  liuman  sin  was  epitomized  and  focused.  It 
was  the  rejection  of  the  Messiah  by  God's  chosen 
people  who  represented  the  race  in  its  treatment 
of  the  Son  of  God.  The  death  of  Christ  was, 
however,  voluntarily  borne  by  Him,  who  was  will- 
ing to  sacrifice  Himself  and  become  tlie  victim 
of  the  sins  and  wrongs  of  humanity.  It  is  plainly 
and  repeatedly  taught  by  Christ  and  His  disciples 
that  He  gave  Himself  on  our  behalf  and  for  our 
sakes.  The  Greek  prepositions  ivrl,  vwip,  did,  irepL 
are  used  Avith  respect  to  this  transaction  as  well 
as  such  terms  as  propitiation,  reconciliation, 
mediator,  and  ransom.  The  propitiatory  rites  of 
the  Mosaic  economy  are  freely  employed  by  the 
NT  writers,  not  merely  by  way  of  illustration  but 
also  as  types  of  Christ,  who  has  in  His  death  ful- 
filled and  consummated  them  all. 

The  whole  scheme  of  human  redemption  must 
be  viewed  in  the  light  of  Divine  and  perfectly 
holy  love.  Love  transfers  to  itself  every  aspect  of 
suffering  that  its  object  has  to  bear.  Even  the 
sense  of  isolation  and  '  the  dereliction '  of  our  Lord, 
as  it  is  termed,  must  be  regarded  as  the  transfer 
that  love  alone  is  capable  of  making.  Perfect  love 
is  perfect  sympathy  and  perfect  interest,  and  the 
mystery  of  the  cross  is  the  mystery  of  love  at  its 
highest  power  and  value.  When  love  sacrifices 
itself  for  sin  it  must  entail  suffering.  Although 
love  is  regarded  as  identifying  itself  with  its  object 
in  the  sense  of  shame,  disgrace,  and  degradation, 
there  is  no  confusion  of  moral  issues.  Christ  knew 
no  sin  although  He  was  made  sin  for  us.  He  was 
pure,  harmless,  and  undefiled,  without  spot  or 
blemish.  Nevertheless  He  experienced  sin  as  God 
experiences  it,  whilst  He  experienced  its  effects  as 
man  does  (Forsyth,  Tlie  Cruciality  of  the  Cross,  p. 
212).  As  there  is  in  the  identification  of  love  the 
act  of  putting  oneself  in  the  place  of  another,  an 
element  of  identification,  which  in  some  sense 
amounts  to  substitution,  is  always  involved. 

It  is  important,  however,  to  observe  that  the 
death  of  Christ  regarded  as  a  penalty  or  an  act  of 
suffering  is  not  per  se  stated  to  be  the  propitiation 
or  the  satisfaction  offered  to  Divine  Justice  or  the 
Moral  Law.  It  was  the  perfection  of  the  offering 
and  the  finished  obedience  culminating  in  the 
death  of  the  cross  which  won  the  acceptance  by 
God  of  the  sacrifice.  The  moral  value  or  the  offer- 
ing was  the  sacrifice  of  a  complete  and  absolutely 
perfect  life  which  met  and  satisfied  the  claims 
of  the  law.  It  was  not  the  transfer  of  an  exact 
equivalent  in  suffering  which  constituted  the  worth 
and  efficacy  of  the  atonement,  but  the  offering  of 
a  complete  personality  in  holy  obedience  and  full 
surrender.  Such  was  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  became  obedient  unto  death,  even  the 
death  of  the  cross, 

(2)  The  redemption  of  mankind  is  wrought  by 
means  of  Christ  s  death  tipon  the  cross. — The  race 
is  under  condemnation  and  a  curse  through  sin, 
l)ut  Christ  has  taken  the  curse  upon  Himself,  and 
in  doing  so  has  made  an  offering  for  the  whole  of 
mankind — a  cosmic  sacrifice  by  the  life  of  perfect 
obedience  that  the  Law  required.  This  righteous- 
ness is  imputed  to  all  who  exercise  true  faith  in 
Him,  Whilst  the  holy  love  of  God  in  Christ 
makes  it  possible  that  sin  should  be  transferred  to 
the  Redeemer,  it  is  faith  on  the  part  of  the  be- 
liever which  makes  possible  the  imputation  of 
the  righteousness  of  Christ  to  the  sinner's  account. 
The  man  who  believes  in  Christ  appropriates  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  as  his  own,  by  accepting 
the  sacrifice  and  the  satisfaction  rendered  to  the 
eternal  law  of  right  as  being  offered  on  his  behalf. 
Thus  there  is  on  the  part  of  the  believer  the  identi- 


fication of  himself  witli  Christ  in  His  perfect  sacri- 
fice. He  lays  his  hand  as  it  were  upon  the  head 
of  the  scapegoat,  and  lie  makes  the  offering  of  the 
Paschal  Lamb  his  own  act.  Christ  is  to  him 
the  expression  and  the  fulfilment  of  the  perfect 
righteousness  which  he  feels  is  expected  of  him 
and  that  is  worthy  of  him.  Ideally  all  that  Christ 
did,  accomplished  in  His  life  of  perfect  obedience 
to  the  will  of  God,  culminating  in  the  death  of  the 
cross,  is  appropriated  by  the  believer  as  his  own, 
Christ's  rigliteousness  is  transferred  to  the  believer 
in  so  far  as  he  is  united  to  his  Saviour  by  living 
faith.  He  can  say  with  St.  Paul,  '  I  have  been 
crucified  with  Christ,  yet  I  live  ;  and  yet  no  longer 
I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me'  (Gal  2'-«'),  and  'That  I 
may  gain  Christ,  and  be  found  in  him,  not  having 
a  rigliteousness  of  mine  own,  even  that  which  is 
of  the  law,  but  that  which  is  through  faith  in 
Christ,  the  righteousness  which  is  of  God  by  faith ' 
(Ph  3»).  The  true  self  is  not  the  actual  self,  but 
the  ideal  self,  which  the  believer  finds  in  his  Lord. 
In  the  life  and  character  of  the  believer  this  ideal 
is  being  continuously  and  progressively  realized,  in 
such  a  manner  that  he  dies  to  sin  and  rises  with 
Christ  in  the  power  of  His  resurrection,  and  is  en- 
abled more  and  more  to  live  the  Christ-life  in  the 
world.  By  faith  we  are  united  to  Christ  in  His 
death,  dying  to  sin,  and  are  raised  into  newness  of 
life  in  His  resurrection. 

The  death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross  secures  the 
forgiveness  of  sin  for  those  who  accept  the  Christ 
and  His  sacrificial  work  on  their  behalf.  In  Him 
we  have  our  redemption,  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
(Eph  V,  Col  1"),  The  demands  of  the  Law  are 
satisfied,  God's  requirements  are  met  in  the  perfect 
life  and  personality  of  our  Lord,  the  rightness  of 
the  moral  obligation  is  acknowledged,  and  the  God 
of  Holiness  can  forgive.  The  need  of  forgiveness 
is  seen  in  the  psychological  fact  that  every  man 
requires,  before  he  can  make  a  fresh  start  in  a  life 
of  holiness,  the  consciousness  that  he  is  entering 
upon  a  new,  unstained,  and  unblemished  chapter 
of  his  life,  and  that  the  guilty  past  is  blotted  out. 
The  incubus  of  guilt  must  be  removed,  and  he  must 
take  up  his  life  as  if  the  past  had  not  been.  He 
needs  to  know  that  he  is  in  a  right  relation  with 
God,  and  that  his  ideal  is  yet  attainable.  The  as- 
surance of  forgiveness  is  absolutely  necessary  ;  for 
although  the  Lord  is  full  of  mercy,  and  there  Ls 
always  forgiveness  with  Him,  yet  the  requirements 
of  the  Law  must  be  acknowledged  and  satisfied. 
They  have  been  fully  met  in  the  death  of  Christ, 
and  the  acceptance  of  that  offering  has  been  sealed 
in  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead. 

The  mystic  union  of  the  believer  with  his  Lord, 
which  is  constituted  by  love  and  wrought  through 
faith,  results  in  the  crucifixion  of  self  to  the  world 
and  of  the  world  to  self  (Gal  6'*).  The  spell  of  sin 
is  broken,  and  the  believer  is  dead  to  its  power ; 
the  violated  law  has  no  hold  upon  the  believer. 
He  is  one  with  his  Lord  in  the  love  that  sacrificed 
itself  to  the  death,  and  is  kindled  within  the  heart 
of  the  man  who  accepts  the  sacrifice  as  made  on  his 
behalf.  The  love  which  brought  Christ  to  the 
cross  and  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  establish  a 
spiritual  unity  with  Christ  in  all  His  sufferings  and 
His  judgment  upon  sin,  so  that  man's  lower  nature 
is  crucified  -svith  Christ  and  His  blood  washes  away 
sin  and  cleanses  from  all  guilt.  Thus  the  blood  of 
the  cross  becomes  the  symbol  of  that  redemptive 
grace  which  brings  men  back  to  God,  and  by 
which  the  triumph  of  the  Redeemer  over  sin  and 
death  is  achieved. 

LiTERATURK.— O.  Zbcklef,  Daa  Krexu  Chrigti,  1875 ;  H. 
Fulda,  Das  Krexu  wul  die  Krevuigung,  1878 ;  C.  C.  Everett, 
The  Gospel  of  Paul,  1893  ;  artt.  on  '  Cross  '  and  '  Cni(-iHxion  ' 
in  HDB,  DCG,  ERE,  Smith's  DB,  Elii,  CE ;  H.  P.  Liddon, 
Bamptan  Uctureg  for  18668  1878,  p.  472  ff. ;  R.  W.  Dale,  Tk» 
Atonement,  1878;    T,  J.    Crawford,  The  Doctnin-  of  Holy 


CROWN 


CUBIT 


269 


Scripture  refpeetingtAe  Atonement,  1S71,-^ST4  ;  J.  Denney,  The 
Atonement  and  the  Modem  Mind,  1903;  P.  T.  Forsyth,  The 
Crtieiaiity  of  the  Cnm,  1809,  The  Work  of  Chruit,  1910. 

J.  G.  James. 

CROWN.— The  word  is  used  in  tlie  apostolic 
writings  of  the  NT  (AV)  to  translate  two  Greek 
words — ffTfipafOi  and  SidSrjfui,.  The  RV,  however, 
distinguishes  between  them  and  alM'ays  translates 
didSijua  by  the  word  '  diadem.'  The  latter  term  is 
less  frequently  used,  and  signifies  the  official  head- 
dress of  a  king  or  a  priest.  It  was  originally 
applied  to  the  silken  fillet  of  blue  or  purple  mixed 
with  wliite  used  by  the  Persians  to  confine  the 
hair  (Gr.  5ta5«w,  '  to  bind ').  By  and  by  the  word 
came  to  be  applied  to  the  ornamental  head-dress 
of  the  king,  which  was  distinguished  by  its  colour 
and  the  pendants  of  gold  or  jewels  attached  to  it. 
The  Persian  diadem  was  adopted  by  Alexander  the 
Great,  and  came  to  be  regarded  as  the  special  and 
distinctive  head-dress  of  royalty.  Metaphorically 
the  word  was  used  to  indicate  royal  power, 
dominion,  or  authority.  Thus  in  Kev  12*  13'  19*- 
the  RV  gives  the  correct  translation  '  diadems ' 
(AV  'croAvns').  In  Rev  12^  the  royal  power  of 
the  dragon  is  referred  to,  in  13'  the  power  of  the 
beast,  and  in  19"  the  royal  dignity  of  Christ. 

The  term  ffre^voi  (Lat.  corona,  Eng.  'crown' 
[AV  or  RV]),  on  the  other  hand,  is  never  used  of  a 
kingly  crown  (cf.  Trench,  NT  St/n.^,  London,  1876, 
§  xxiii. ).  It  refers  to  the  chaplet  or  wTeath  given 
by  the  Greeks  as  a  mark  of  victory,  e.g.  to  the 
\*inner  in  the  games,  or  as  a  reward  of  talent,  of 
military  or  naval  prowess,  or  of  civil  distinction, 
wliile  it  was  also  worn  on  festive  occasions  and  at 
funerals.  The  Romans  in  the  same  way  used  the 
term  corona,  and  distinguished  a  great  many 
crowns  .made  of  different  materials  to  signi^ 
various  achievements  in  war  and  peace.  No  fewer 
than  eight  crowns  are  mentioned  as  rewards  for 
military  prowess.  Thus  a  crown  or  wreath  made 
of  grass,  seeds,  or  wild  flowers  was  given  bv  the 
inhabitants  of  a  besieged  city  to  the  general  who 
raised  the  siege  (corona  obsidionalis).  To  the 
soldier  who  saved  the  life  of  a  Roman  citizen  was 
given  a  \vTeath  of  oak  leaves  (corona  civica).  The 
sailor  who  first  boarded  an  enemy's  ship  received 
a  golden  crown  (corona  navalis  or  classica).  In 
the  same  way  the  soldier  who  first  scaled 
the  wall  of  a  l)esie"ed  city  received  the  corona 
muralis,  also  of  gold;  while  a  similar  crown, 
corona  castrensis  or  vallaris,  was  given  to  the 
soldier  who  first  crossed  the  rampart  (vallum)  and 
forced  an  entrance  into  the  enemy's  camp.  The 
Romans  also  distinguished  three  kinds  of  triumphal 
crowns  [corona  triumphal  is),  one  made  of  bay 
leaves  and  worn  round  the  head  of  the  general  who 
secured  a  triumph  ;  another  of  gold  held  over  the 
head  of  the  victorious  general  during  his  triumph  ; 
and  another,  also  made  of  gold,  sent  by  the  pro- 
vinces to  the  victorious  commander.  In  the  same 
way  the  general  who  received  only  an  ovation 
obtained  a  crown  of  myrtle  (corona  ovalia),  while 
another  crown  of  olive  leaf  (corona  oleagina)  was 
worn  by  the  soldiers  of  the  victorious  axmy  as  well 
as  by  their  commander. 

The  custom  of  wearing  crowns  or  chaplets  at 
festive  entertainments  originated  in  Greece  and 
was  transferred  to  Rome.  These  festal  wreaths 
were  made  of  various  shrubs  and  flowers,  such  as 
roses,  violets,  myrtle,  and  ivy,  while  at  marriages 
the  bride  and  bridegroom  were  both  adorned  with 
wreaths,  the  bride  plucking  the  flowers  with  her 
own  hand.  The  practice  of  crowning  the  dead 
with  garlands  of  flowers  and  leaves,  which  was 
also  taken  over  from  Greece  to  Rome,  probably 
arose  from  the  desire  to  honour  the  departed  who 
had  fallen  in  war. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  ideas  underlying  the  word 


ffTi<papoi  are  neither  dominion  nor  royalty  but  (a) 
victory,  honour,  reward ;  and  (b)  ioy.  (1)  The 
conquering  Christ  in  the  Book  of  the  Revelation 
is  described  as  wearing  a  crown  (6*  14"),  as  are 
also  the  devastating  locusts  (9^)  and  the  '  woman 
clothed  with  the  sun  '  (12').  Here  the  idea  is  that 
of  victory.  (2)  In  the  same  way  the  Christian  who 
b  victorious  over  the  temptations  of  life  obtains  as 
his  final  reward  a  crown  of  victory  (1  Co  9^,  Rev 
210  3Uj  This  is  particularly  described  as  a  '  crown 
of  life '  ( Ja  1",  Rev  2")  and  '  a  crown  of  glorj-  that 
fadeth  not  away'(l  P  5*).  Probably  the  'crown 
of  righteousness '  of  2  Ti  4*  is  to  be  understood  as 
signifying  not  '  the  reward  which  is  righteousness,' 
but  rather  '  the  reward  of  righteous  acts.'  The 
Apostle  has  fought  the  good  fight,  finished  the 
course,  kept  the  faith,  and  as  the  reward  of  these 
things  expects  to  receive  the  victors  cro\^"n,  the 
victors  reward  (cf.  EGT  iv.  [1910]  178).  The 
crown  of  life  and  the  crown  of  glory  are  undoubt- 
edly to  be  understood  in  the  sense  of  '  the  reward 
or  crown  which  is  life,'  '  which  is  glory.'  Probably 
a  saying  of  Jesus  suggested  the  use  of  the  word 
j  crown  in  this  connexion  (cf.  EGT  iv.  427).  (3) 
The  ideas  of  victory  and  of  joy  are  both  present  in 
the  use  of  the  term  by  St.  Paul  to  describe  his 
converts.  The  Philippian  Christians  are  his  'joy 
and  crown '  (4'),  i.e.  the  marks  of  his  victory,  the 
cause  of  his  rejoicing,  his  reward  ;  so  the  Thessa- 
lonians  (1  Th  2")  are  his  '  crown  of  rejoicing.' 

The  same  word  is  used  of  the  '  crown  of  thorns,' 
which  probably  was  intended  to  mock  the  defeat 
and  humiliation  of  the  '  King  of  the  Jews.'  It 
marked  the  ironical  contempt  of  the  Roman 
soldiers  for  the  Jews.  In  the  later  history  of  the 
Apostolic  Church  the  question  of  the  relation  of 
Christian  converts  to  these  '  crowns '  of  the  Roman 
army  and  Emperors  became  a  burning  one,  which 
is  discussed  by  TertuUian  in  his  work  de  Corona. 

LrrKRATTRE.— Liddell  and  Scott,  Greek-Eng.  Lexieon,  and 
Grimm -Thayer,  s.rv.  origami  and  Stojiyui;  'Vf.  Sinith, 
Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman  AntiguUiet,  1868,  ».r. 
'Corona' ;  HDB  i.  529 ;  EGT  iv.  v. ;  J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot.  PhiHp- 

pians*,  isrs,  p.  157.  w.  F.  Boyd. 

CRYSTAL  (r/jiWaXXoj,  from  Kpim,  frost).— The 
glassy  sea  before  the  throne  of  God  is  like  unto 
crystal  (Rev  4*),  the  light  of  the  New  Jerusalem 
like  a  crystal-clear  jasper  (21"),  and  the  river  of 
the  water  of  life  bright  (\apLrp6v)  as  crystal  (22'). 
KpCxrraWos  signifies  either  ice  (glacies)  or  rock-crystal 
(crystallum).  For  the  purp«ose  of  the  similes  it  is 
immaterial  which  of  these  is  meant,  as  both  are 
colourless  and  transparent,  and  either  may  be 
used  to  convey  an  idea  of  '  the  white  radiance  of 
eternity.'  The  same  ambiguity  attaches  to  the 
terrible  crystal  (or  ice)  in  Ezk  1^,  where  the  LXX 
renders  rng  by  epjAn-oXAoj.  The  ancients  regarded 
rock-crystal  as  a  kind  of  congealed  water,  whence 
its  name  in  Hebrew  and  Greek.  It  is  really  the 
most  refined  kind  of  quartz.  It  crystallizes  in 
hexagonal  prisms  with  pyramidal  apices.  The 
Romans  carved  it  into  vases  and  goblets,  some- 
times elaborately  engraved.  It  was  supplied  to 
them  from  the  Alps  and  India.  Its  use  is  now 
largely  superseded  by  that  of  glass. 

James  Strahan. 
CUBIT  (Gr.  -rffxvi,  lit.  '  forearm  ).— The  most 
I  important  Hebrew  unit  for  measuring  length  was 
from  the  earliest  times  the  cubit.  This  was 
approximately  the  length  of  the  forearm  from  the 
elbow  to  the  tip  of  the  middle  finger,  and  we  find 
very  frequent  use  of  this  measure  in  the  OT.  Like 
our  own  '  foot '  as  a  measure  of  length,  this  standard 
was  averaged  at  an  early  date,  and  many  varied 
attempts  have  been  made  by  metrologists  to  fix 
the  exact  length  of  the  Hebrew  cubit  in  English 
inches. 


270 


CUP 


CURSE 


Theevidenceof  the  OT  generally,  and  particularly 
of  Ezekiel,  goes  to  show  that  both  before  and  after 
the  Exile  a  longer  and  a  shorter  cubit  were  recog- 
nized. We  find  '  the  cubit  of  a  man '  (Dt  3")  dis- 
tinguished from  a  lon<'er  cubit  used  in  the  measure- 
ment of  Ezekiel's  Temple  (Ezk  40»  43'^).  The 
'cubit  of  a  man'  is  the  measure  in  every-day  use 
at  the  date  of  the  writing  of  Deut.  (probably  in 
the  time  of  Josiah).  Ezekiel  in  describing  the 
Temple  of  his  vision  uses  a  larger  measure — one 
hana-breadth  longer  than  the  ordinary  cubit.  As 
the  prophet's  measurements  correspond  with  the 
details  of  Solomon's  Temple,  he  probably  adopts 
the  ancient  cubit,  generally  used  in  the  days  of 
Solomon,  in  order  that  his  new  Temple  may  be  an 
exact  reproduction  of  the  Solomonic  edifice.  The 
Chronicler  (2  Ch  '3")  speaks  of  the  dimensions 
of  this  first  Temple  as  being  'after  the  former 
measure.'  Common  tradition  fixes  the  length  of 
the  cubit  as  six  liand-breadths,  and  we  have  ground 
for  concluding  that  the  larger  cubit  used  in  build- 
ing in  the  age  of  Solomon  measured  seven  hand- 
breadths. 

It  is  remarkable  that  in  E^pt  (see  F.  L.  Griffith, 
'Notes  on  Egyptian  Weights  and  Measures,'  in 
PSBA  xiv.  [1892]  403)  two  cubits  were  in  use 
from  early  times,  viz.. the  '  short'  cubit  of  six  and 
the  '  royal '  cubit  of  seven  hand-breadths.  The 
'  royal '  cubit  can  be  fixed  with  practical  accuracy 
at  20-63  in.  (Petrie,  JEBr^  xxiv.  483*).  Using  this 
as  a  basis,  we  can  fix  the  *  short '  Egyptian  cubit 
at  17 "68  in.,  being  six  hand-breadths  of  2*95  in,  or 
24  finger- breadths  of  '74  inches.  It  is  uncertain 
whether  the  Hebrew  system  of  measurement  was 
originally  derived  from  Egypt  or  not,  but  the 
similarity  of  the  two  systems  makes  such  a  con- 
clusion extremely  probable. 

Kennedy  in  HDB  iv.  909  brings  forward  evidence 
which  seems  to  show  that  the  cubit  of  later  Judaism 
and  particularly  at  the  date  when  Josephus  wrote 
his  histories,  had  been  approximated  to  tiie  Roman- 
Attic  standard  cubit,  which  was  measured  from 
the  elbow  to  the  knuckle  of  the  middle  finger  and 
was  equal  to  17*5  in.  (cf.  Smith,  Diet,  of  Gr.  and 
Rom.  Ant.",  1875,  p.  1227). 

The  cubit  was  subdivided  into  the  span,  equal 
to  i  cubit ;  the  palm  or  hand-breadth,  equal  to  Jth 
of  a  cubit ;  and  the  finger-breadth  or  digit,  2'tth  of 
a  cubit.  Four  cubits  formed  a  fathom,  and  six 
cubits  a  reed. 

In  the  apostolic  writings  of  the  NT  the  word 
'  cubit '  is  found  only  once,  viz.  Rev  21",  where 
the  seer  describes  the  angel  going  forth  to  measure 
the  walls  of  the  New  Jerusalem  :  '  and  he  measured 
the  wall  thereof,  a  hundred  and  forty  and  four 
cubits,  according  to  the  measure  of  a  man,  that 
is,  of  an  angel.'  The  measure  used  by  the  writer 
here  is  the  ordinary  Grajco- Roman  cubit,  of  which 
400  went  to  the  arddiov  or  arddios  of  the  preceding 
verse.  The  mention  of  '  an  angel '  does  not  imply 
any  reference  to  the  '  royal  cubit,'  but  is,  as  Moftatt 
(EGT,  '  Rev.,'  1910,  p.  484)  remarks,  '  another  naive 
reminder  (cf.  19''-  ^"  22^- ")  that  angels  were  not 
above  men.'  Swete  says:  'The  measurements 
taken  by  angelic  hands  are  such  as  are  in  common 
use  amon^  men.  .  .  .  There  is  perhaps  the  further 
thought  tliat  men  and  angels  are  crOvSovXoi.  (19'"  22') 
and  men  shall  one  day  be  la-dyye\oi '  (Swete,  Com. 
in  loc.).  W.  F.  Boyd. 

CUP  (irorfipiov). — The  Eucharistic  cup  is  called 
by  St.  Paul  '  the  cup  of  blessing '  (t6  vor-fipiov  t^j 
ev\oyla.%,  1  Co  10^').  Various  shades  of  meaning 
have  been  found  in  the  plirase  :  (1)  the  cup  wliich 
Christ  blessed,  making  it  for  ever  a  cup  of  bless- 
ing ;  (2)  the  cup  which  has  been  consecrated  by  a 
prayer  of  thanksgiving  for  use  in  the  Lord's  Supper ; 
(3)  the  cup  which  brings  blessing  to  the  communi- 


cant. The  sacramental  cup  is  usually,  and  very 
naturally,  supposed  to  have  been  connected  in 
Jesus'  mind  with  the  third  and  most  sacred  of  the 
cups  which,  in  the  ceremonial  of  later  Judaism, 
were  handed  round  at  the  Passover.  That  third 
cup  was  known  as  '  the  cup  of  blessing'  (nj-iji  d\3), 
and  St.  Paul,  who  had  often  received  it,  also  appears 
to  be  tacitly  comparing  and  contra.sting  witli  it 
'the  cup  of  blessing  which  we  (Cliristians)  bless.' 
The  identification  of  the  Lord's  Suj)per  with  the 
Passover  is,  it  is  true,  a  much-disputed  point,  but 
even  if  the  institution  of  the  Eucliarist  took  place 
at  an  ordinary  meal,  the  cup  used  by  our  Lord  may 
well  have  been  signalized,  both  at  the  time  and 
ever  afterwards,  as  the  new  cup  of  blessing. 
Another  name  for  it  was  'the  cup  of  the  Lord' 
(I  Co  10*'),  i.e.  the  cup  received  from  His  hand, 
signifying  fellowship  with  Him  and  devotion  to 
Him,  to  drink  from  which  made  it  morally  impos- 
sible for  the  communicant  to  share  in  the  riot  and 
debauch  of  heathen  banquets — to  drink  '  the  cup  of 
demons.' 

13y  a  Semitic  figure  of  speech,  one's  lot  or  experi- 
ence, joyful  or  sorrowful,  regarded  as  a  Divine 
appointment,  is  compared  with  a  cup  which  Gcd 
presents  to  one  to  drmk.  Thus  the  writer  of  Rev., 
saturated  with  prophetic  ideas  and  imagery,  speaks 
of  Divine  retribution  as  '  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of 
God,  which  is  prepared  unmixed  in  the  cup  of  his 
anger'  (M";  cf.  16"*).  J  AMES  Steahan. 

CURSE. — Traces  of  the  early  belief  that  curses 
rightly  pronounced  had  an  inherent  power  can 
hardly  be  found  in  the  NT.  The  principal  force 
of  the  word  is  either  as  an  expletive  provoked  by 
passion  from  an  undisciplined  mind,  or  as  a  serious 
and  stron"  assertion  of  the  connexion  between  evil- 
doing  and  woe.  Sometimes  the  imprecation  of 
Divine  wrath  is  present,  with  sternness  or  mere 
rage  in  the  appeal ;  sometimes  religious  sanctions 
are  implicit,  and  part  of  the  connotation  of  the 
Heb.  herem  or  ban  is  preserved ;  and  in  one  passage 
(Gal  3'""'^)  the  word  recurs  in  various  forms  four 
times  in  as  many  verses,  and  its  suggestions  relate 
to  one  of  the  deepest  inysteries  of  the  Cross. 

In  Ac  23'--  "•  -'  and  Rev  22"  the  Gr.  word  used  is 
a  form  or  compound  of  anatJi^ma  {q.v.) ;  and  in 
each  case  the  form  is  in  the  NT  peculiar  to  the 
passage,  though  not  unknown  in  later  ecclesiastical 
usage.  The  curse  or  oath  was  the  invocation  upon 
themselves  of  the  judgments  of  God  if  the  conspira- 
tors failed  to  do  as  they  had  covenanted  with  one 
another.  It  was  a  religious  bond  such  as  fanatical 
hatred  has  always  been  disposed  to  resort  to,  and 
superstitious  terrors  were  called  in  to  ensure  the 
common  purpose.  In  the  passage  from  Rev.  the 
word  is  strengthened  by  a  prefix,  and  made  equiva- 
lent to  our  'execration.'  The  phraseology  is  at 
least  reminiscent  of  Zee   14",  and  includes,  but 

foes  beyond,  the  reversal  of  the  doom  of  Gn  3". 
n  the  Holy  City,  as  in  the  Jerusalem  of  the  pro- 
phet, will  be  found  no  more  any  person  or  thing, 
execrated  or  execrable,  and  there  will  be  no  need 
for  the  incidence  of  any  Divine  judgment.  It  is 
an  anticipation  of  a  condition  of  moral  purity 
without  any  breach  of  right  relationship  among 
the  residente  or  between  them  and  God  ;  but  the 
prophetic  parallel  suggests  that  the  primary  idea 
IS  that  of  security,  the  people  dwelling  safely  in 
the  absence  of  any  influence  that  would  involve 
moral  peril. 

Anotlier  root  occurs  in  the  rest  of  the  passages, 
its  usage  passing  from  the  general  idea  of  prayer 
through  that  of  the  effect  of  prayer  in  securing  ill 
to  an  enemy  and  ending  with  a  partial  personifica- 
tion in  which  Ara  becomes  a  goddess  of  destruction 
and  revenge.  Almost  without  exception  the  thought 
is  that  of  a  Divine  visitation  upon  an  offender,  in- 


CUSTOM 


CYMBAL 


271 


volving  grievous,  though  not  necessarily  permanent, 
suffering.  The  simplest  form  is  found  in  Ro  3", 
whicli  is  a  free  rendering  from  the  LXX  of  Ps  10'. 
In  Ro  12"  also  the  meaning  does  not  go  much  be- 
yond ordinary  blasphemy  (cf.  Mt  5**).  James  (S**-) 
makes  the  curse  of  an  individual  a  wrong  done  to 
mankind,  and  thus  protests  against  the  Pharisaic 
temper  of  Jn  7*,  and  traces  the  sin  back  to  its 
actual  source,  a  defect  in  love  for  man  being  an 
effect  of  the  absence  of  love  for  God.  '  Children  of 
cursing'  (2  P  2")  is  a  Hebraism  (cf.  Eph  2*,  Lk  10«) ; 
it  may  denote  nothing  more  than  the  extreme 
wickedness  of  the  men  referred  to,  though  one  is 
disposed  to  see  an  allusion  to  the  wrath  of  God,  as 
in  Ps  95".  "Nigh  unto  a  curse'  (He  6')  recalls 
Gn  3'''- ;  such  land  looks  like  that  described  in  the 
original  curse,  and  therefore  rejection  and  '  to  be 
burned '  are  its  natural  fate.  The  burning  is  ap- 
parently final,  or  at  least  like  the  destruction  of  a 
land  by  volcanic  eruption  (Dt  29^),  for  the  thought 
of  purification  by  the  burning  up  of  noxious 
growths  is  foreign  to  the  context. 

There  remains  only  the  critical  reference  in 
Gal  3'*"^.  The  starting-point  of  the  argument 
is  the  impossibility  on  the  part  of  anybodv  of 
compliance  with  the  requirements  of  a  legal  re- 
ligion or  specifically  of  the  Jewish  Law  ;  for  while 
the  Mosaic  Law  is  to  the  forefront,  the  Pauline 
use  of  the  word  for  'law'  without  the  article  is 
significant,  and  the  pronouns  look  beyond  the 
group  of  converts  from  Judaism.  Hence  every 
legal  religion  lays  upon  its  adherents  the  unavoid- 
able curse  of  Dt  27*,  w^hich  again  is  cited  freely 
from  the  LXX.  The  curse  evidently  means  humi- 
liating hopelessness  of  attainment ;  strive  as  he 
may,  the  aspiring  man  is  bound  in  the  shackles  of 
his  very  nature,  and  cannot  meet  the  claims  which 
his  religion  is  recognized  as  justly  making  upon 
him.  '  He  that  doeth  them  shall  live  in  them ' 
(Lv  18*)  is  a  law  of  life,  which  in  experience  becomes 
a  doom.  The  only  refuge  left  is  a  sure  one,  for 
Christ  became  a  curse  for  us  and  thereby  redeemed 
us  from  the  curse  of  the  Law.  What  that  curse 
means  is  shown  in  two  particulars.  The  one  is  His 
death  by  crucifixion,  and  the  other  the  fact  that 
this  death  was  endured  not  for  Himself  but  for 
others.  Shame  and  penalty,  rejection  by  God 
(Mk  15"),  gathered  upon  Him;  and  thus  faith 
became  the  permanent  secret  of  righteousness. 
Crucifixion  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  been  practised 
among  the  Jews  ;  though  there  are  many  instances 
of  their  exposing  dead  bodies  on  stakes  or  other- 
■Nvise,  and  to  that  the  citation  from  Dt  21^  relates. 
To  the  Roman  the  shame  of  the  punishment  was 
intolerable  because  of  its  association  with  slaves 
and  captives  ;  to  the  Jew  it  was  an  outrage  upon 
humanity.  It  meant  the  defilement  of  the  land, 
and  the  concentration  upon  the  sufferer  of  the 
wrath  of  God.  It  has  been  argued  that  Christ's 
death  in  this  way,  though  He  was  personally 
sinless,  was  the  formal  inauguration  of  a  better 
method  of  salvation  than  Mosaism  (but  see  C.  C. 
Everett,  The  Gospel  of  Paul,  1893).  But  neither 
Jew  nor  Gentile  would  be  likely  thus  to  understand 
it ;  nor  do  such  spectacular  expedients  appear  to 
enter  into  Grod's  methods  of  salvation.  The  Paul- 
ine thought  is  rather  that  Christ  was  made  sin  for 
us  (2  Co  5^)  and  a  curse  for  us,  bearing  the  penal- 
ties of  sin  and  thus  etiecting  our  redemption. 

LrrBRATTRK.— In  additioa  to  Comm.  on  the  passages  cited,  and 
»rtt.  on  '  Ban '  in  SDB  and  on  '  Cxireing  and  Blessing '  in  ERE, 
see  F.  Weber,  Die  Lehren  de*  Talmud,  1880,  n.  137  S. ;  E. 
Schiirer,  HJP  n.  iL  [1835]  60  £f.  R.   'VV',  MoSS. 

CUSTOM. — 1.  Custom  in  its  primary  significance 
is  habitual  practice,  on  the  part  of  either  the  indi- 
vidual or  the  community.  The  Greek  word  idoi 
implying  both  usage  and  habit  is  employed  in  the 


■  NT  to  denote  the  routine  of  the  priest's  oflBce  (Lk  1»), 
the  practice  of  attending  the  ceremonial  feast 
(Lk  2**),  and  detailed  observance  of  ancestral  prac- 
tice or  the  Mosaic  ritual  (Ac  6"  16-'  21"  26»  28"). 

The  formation  of  habit  in  individual  conduct 
through  frequent  repetition  is  a  process  well  known 
to  the  psychological  student,  but  the  origin  and 
development  of  custom  in  the  community  are  in- 
volved in  some  obscurity.  The  first  step  towards 
the  establishment  of  a  polity  and  organized  societv 
is  the  formation  of  a  '  cake  of  custom,'  as  Bagehot 
terms  it  (Physics  and  Polities  [ISS,  1872],  p.  27) ; 
but  it  is  a  matter  of  dispute  as  to  the  way  in  which 
the  '  cake '  was  made,  since  it  goes  back  to  the  re- 
motest antiquity.  The  parities  of  circumstance 
were  in  those  far-distant  days  more  prominent  than 
in  the  historical  period,  but  it  is  thought  by  some, 
as  e.gr.  Henry  Maine,  that  the  specific  commands 
and  judgments  of  the  ruler  or  sovereign  preceded 
the  establishment  of  custom  {Ancient  Lauf^,  new 
impression,  1907,  p.  4tl'.).  Most  probably  it  is  a 
collective  product  or  a  common  creation.  It  is 
generally  field  that  custom  was  the  precursor  of 
law  and  one  of  the  chief  elements  in  its  evolution. 
^^*hether  amongst  primitive  peoples  or  in  later 
times,  custom  has  a  tremendous  influence  over  the 
actions  of  the  individual  and  the  community, 
rivalling  even  the  law  itself,  with  its  appropriate 
sanctions.  The  law  recognizes  the  force  of  custom 
and  usage,  but  apart  from  the  legalized  forms ; 
whilst  the  individual  is  largely  under  the  domina- 
tion of  habit,  so  the  community  is  under  the  sway 
of  custom. 

2.  The  word  'custom'  in  English,  through  the 
associations  of  law  and  obligation,  is  extended  to 
cover  what  is  connoted  by  the  Greek  tAos  in  its 
signification  of  toll,  tax,  or  duty.  The  State  with 
its  authority  and  sovereign  power  becomes  the 
Ti\o%,  but  the  term  is  used  in  a  derivative  sense  to 
include  what  is  due  to.  the  State,  as  custom  in  the 
sense  of  toU.  The  tax-gatherer,  6  tcXwi't;s,  collected 
the  enstom  on  behalf  of  the  State  or  the  King 
(Mt  17*).  In  Ro  IS'  the  payment  of  custom  to- 
gether with  tribute,  no  less  than  fear  and  honour, 
formed  part  of  the  obligation  devolving  upon  the 
Christian  with  respect  to  the  higher  powers,  which 
indeed  are  '  ordained  of  Giod.'         J.  G.  Jaues. 

CTVBIL  (ici/M/SoXoF,  from  n'fiSoi,  'a  hollow'),— 
The  word  signifies  one  of  a  pair  of  brass  or  bronze 
plates  which  make  a  ringing  sound  when  brought 
sharply  together.  The  word  appears  only  in 
1  Co  13^,  where  KVfi^aXov  dXaXcl^or  is  used  to  describe 
the  man  whose  lack  of  love  despoils  even  his  un- 
doubted gifts  of  intellect  and  eloquence.  The  ad- 
jective is  better  translated  as  'clanging';  cf.  the 
cymbalum  eoncrepans  of  Jerome  on  Gal  5*.  Pliny 
{ffX  Praef.  §  25)  has  an  expression  which  is 
suggestive  :  '  hie  quem  Tiberius  Caesar  cvmbalum 
mundi  vocabat ' ;  and  in  modem  days,  Goethe  is 
said  to  have  thought  of  1  Co  13^  when  he  read 
Byron's  poems. 

Little  is  known  for  certain  of  Je\<ish  music  in 
the  Apostolic  Age,  and  we  rely  mostly  on  inference. 
As  a  race  the  Hebrews  did  not  deserve  Cicero's 
tribute  to  the  ancient  Egyptians,  but  they  culti- 
vated music  and  were  probably  influenced  by  the 
Egyptians  and  Assynaiis  (but  cf.  J.  L.  SaaLschiitz 
[Geschichte  und  Wiirdigung  der  ilusik  bei  den 
Hebrdern,  1829,  p.  67],  who  believed  that  the  Jews 
preserved  their  own  national  music).  Harmony 
and  counter-point  were  almost  unknown,  though 
C.  Engel  (The  Music  of  the  Most  Ancient  Nations, 
1864,  pp.  320,  356)  holds  that  the  Hebrews  were 
acquainted  with  some  form  of  harmony ;  and, 
consequently,  much  attention  was  devoted  to  form 
and  volume  of  sound,  and  to  combinations  of  in- 
struments.    This  accounts  for  the  prevalence  of 


272 


CYPRUS 


CYRENE,  CYRENIANS 


percussion  instruments,  especially  tliose,  like  the 
cymbal,  which  had  a  shrill,  clanying  sound.  Cym- 
bals were  in  the  hands  of  the  chief  musicians,  and 
were  used  to  mark  time,  as  they  were  used  in 
Egypt,  Greece,  and  Rome,  where  tiiey  played 
their  part  in  the  festivals  of  Cybele  and  Bacchus. 
From  1  Ch  15**  we  learn  that  cymbals  were  made 
of  brass,  but,  if  we  can  trust  Josephus  (whose 
account  of  Jewish  music  is  at  times  perplexing), 
thev  were  also  made  of  bronze.  He  describes  them 
as  large  broad  plates  of  bronze  (Ant.  vii.  xii.  3). 
In  Wellhausen's  'Psalms'  (Haupt's  FB,  1898), 
Appendix,  there  are  two  illustrations  of  Assyrian 
musicians  which  make  it  plain  that  cymbals  were  of 
two  varieties  :  the  one  depicts  bell-shaped  cymbals 
with  handles  which  permit  the  player  to  strike 
them  together,  the  one  on  the  top  of  the  otlier  ; 
the  second  shows  flat  cymbals,  similar  to  modern 
dinner-plates,  with  cord  handles,  and  these  were 
beat  against  each  other  sideways. 

In  the  OT,  to  which  one  must  turn  for  knowledge 
of  cymbals,  the  two  words  used  are  d^p^v?  and 
D'^¥^y.  In  Ps  150*  the  latter  word  appears,  and 
it  has  been  supposed  that  '  loud  cymbals '  are  cas- 
tanets (of.  Engel,  op.  cit.  p.  312),  but  Wellhausen 
tliinks  this  very  doubtful.  Zee  14-"  presents  diffi- 
culties to  the  exegete,  but  it  is  possible  to  compare 
the  noise  of  tinkling  trappings  of  horses  -with  the 
clanging  of  miniature  cymbals.  Cymbals  are  still 
used  in  the  East  at  religious  and  secular  festivals 
(see  W.  M.  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  new 
ed.,  1910,  pt.  iv.  p.  698).  Arcihijald  Main. 

CYPRUS  (KuVpoj). — The  name  is  given  to  a  large 
island  in  the  N.E.  angle  of  the  Mediterranean,  46 
miles  S.  of  Cilicia  and  60  miles  W.  of  Syria.  In 
line  weather  the  Taurus  and  the  Lebanon  ranges 
are  both  distinctly  visible  from  its  higher  ground. 
Its  greatest  length  from  W.  to  E.  is  140  miles 
(including  the  eastern  promontory,  which  is  45 
miles  long),  and  its  greatest  breadth  60  miles.  It 
consists  mainly  of  two  mountain  ranges,  running 
E.  and  W. ,  separated  by  a  wide  and  low-lying 
plain,  which  is  drained  by  the  Pediaeus.  Strabo 
des(;ribes  it  as  a  land  of  wine,  oil,  and  corn  (XIV. 
vi.  4).  The  fragrance  of  its  flowers  won  for  it  the 
epithet  einbdrji.  For  centuries  it  derived  a  great 
revenue  from  exports  of  copper  and  timber,  the 
supply  of  which  has  long  been  exhausted.  The 
word  'copper'  itself  comes  from  'Cyprus.'  The 
island  owed  much  to  Phoenician  and  Greek  colonists, 
but  it  never  developed  the  nobler  aspects  of  Hellenic 
culture  and  art.  Its  Oriental  character  always 
predominated,  and  the  Cyprian  queen,  whom  the 
Greeks  identilied  with  Aphrodite,  was  really  the 
Astarte  of  Syria. 

The  Cypriotes  never  had  energy  enough  to 
establish  themselves  as  an  independent  nation. 
After  having  been  successively  under  Assyrian, 
Egyptian,  Persian,  and  Greek  influence,  they  be- 
came subject  to  Rome  in  57  B.C.  Cyprus  was  at 
tirst  an  Imperial  province,  but  in  22  B.C.  Augustus 
gave  it  to  the  Senate  in  exchange  for  S.  Gaul  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  12),  so  that  St.  Luke  is  strictly  accurate 
in  calling  the  governor  at  the  time  of  St.  Paul's 
visit  '  the  proconsul '  (dvdinraTos,  Ac  13^).  An  in- 
scription or  Soli  on  the  north  coast  of  the  island  is 
dated  'in  the  proconsulrship  of  Paulus,'  who  was 
jirobably  the  Sergius  Paulus  of  Acts  (D.  G. 
Hogarth,  Devia  Cypria,  London,  1889,  p.  114). 
The  names  of  several  other  proconsuls  of  the 
province  are  found  on  coins  and  inscriptions  (op. 
cit.  Appendix).  The  presence  of  Jews  in  Cyprus 
during  the  Maccaba;an  i)eriod  is  indicatea  by 
1  Mac  15-^  and  probably  many  others  were 
attracted  to  the  island  when  Augustus  farmed  the 
copi)er  mines  to  Herod  the  Great  (Jos.  Ant.  XVI. 
iv.  5). 


The  part  which  Cypru.s  played  in  the  progress 
of  apostolic  Christianity  was  singularly  nonour- 
able.  She  helped  to  lil)eralize  the  primitive  Church. 
Her  Jewish  population  had  the  gospel  preached 
among  them  by  Christians  whom  persecution 
drove  from  Jerusalem  after  the  death  of  Stephen 
(Ac  11"),  and  some  Christian  Jews  of  Cyprus,  along 
with  others  from  Cyrene,  initiated  a  new  move- 
ment by  preaching  at  Antioch  '  to  the  Greeks  also' 
( 1 1^).  This  reading,  rather  than  '  to  the  Hellenists,' 
is  required  to  bring  out  the  contrast  to  'Jews 
only '  in  the  previous  verse  ;  and  where  the  MS 
autuority  is  about  equal  the  sense  must  decide. 
Barnabas,  who  discovered  St.  Paul  (11*")  and  be- 
came his  first  comrade  in  missionary  labour,  was 
a  native  of  Cyprus.  It  was  probably  at  the 
instance  of  Barnabas  that  the  island  became  the 
earliest  scene  of  their  united  evangelism  (13*). 

After  preaching  in  the  synagogues  of  Salamis — 
the  plural  number  indicates  that  the  Jewish 
colony  was  large — they  went  through  the  whole 
island  (13"),  and  Ramsay  (Expositor,  5th  ser.  iii. 
[1896]  p.  385ft'.)  contends  that  ditXdbvrei  signifies  'a 
missionary  progress.'  The  verb,  with  the  accusative 
of  the  region  traversed,  occurs  other  eight  times 
in  Acts  (never  in  chs.  1-12),  and  also  in  1  Co  16*, 
each  time  apparently  with  this  meaning,  and  it 
seems  to  have  been  a  terminus  technicus  in  the 
missionary  language  of  the  Apostle  and  the  his- 
torian. To  travel  across  Cyprus  by  either  of  two 
roads — the  one  inland,  the  other  along  the  south 
coast — would  take  only  3  or  4  days,  but  an  evan- 
gelistic tour  would  occupy  a  much  longer  time. 
The  Apostles  had  John  Mark,  Barnabas'  cousin, 
himself  perhaps  a  Cypriote,  with  them  as  their 
attendant  (wtjp^ttjs,  Ac  13*),  but  he  deserted  them 
at  Perga,  and  his  conduct  ultimately  led  to  the 
painful  separation  of  the  two  leaders  (IS*'"*'). 
Barnabas  and  Mark  thereafter  returned  to  Cyprus 
(v.^*),  probably  to  resume  a  joint-ministry,  of  which 
no  record  has  been  preserved.  Another  Cypriote 
was  the  'early  disciple'  Mnason,  who  may  have 
been  one  of  Barnabas '  converts,  and  who  became 
St.  Paul's  host  in  Jerusalem  (Ac  2P''). 

The  other  references  to  Cyprus  are  geographical. 
Tiie  ship  which  brought  St.  Paul  back  to  Syria  at 
the  end  of  his  second  missionary  tour  went  straight 
across  the  high  seas  from  Patara  to  Tyre,  Cyprus 
being  sighted  —  6.vatl>avivTei  is  one  of  St.  Luke's 
many  nautical  terms — on  the  left,  i.e.  to  north- 
ward (Ac  2P).  At  the  beginning  of  his  voyage 
from  Cajsarea  to  Italy,  his  ship  sailed  round  the 
north  side  of  the  island,  in  order  to  get  under  its 
lee,  and  to  have  the  benefit  of  the  current  which 
sets  strongly  westward  along  the  coast  of  Cilicia 
and  Pamphilia. 

The  connexion  of  the  Jews  with  Cypms  ended 
in  disaster.  In  A.D.  117  they  rose  and  massacred 
240,000  of  their  fellow-citizens.  To  avenge  this 
appalling  crime,  Hadrian  banished  all  the  Jews 
from  the  island,  forbidding  them  to  return  on  pain 
of  death.  If  at  any  time  thereafter  a  Jew  was 
wrecked  on  the  shores  of  Cyprus,  he  pleaded  for 
mercy  in  vain  (Eusebius,  HE  iv.  6).  The  later  his- 
tory of  the  Cyprian  Church  lacks  distinction.  The 
legendary  discovery  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  in  the 
tomb  of  Barnabas  at  Salamis  gave  the  patriarch  of 
the  island  the  right  to  sign  his  name  in  red  ink  ;  and 
the  Council  of  Cyprus  was  convened  for  the  purpose 
of  forbidding  the  reading  of  the  books  of  Origen  ! 

Liter  ATURK.—E.  Oberhummer,  Die  Insel  Cypem,  i.  (Munich, 
190;i] ;  Perrot  and  Chipiez,  PMnicie  et  Cypre,  Paris,  ISaS  ; 
M.  Ohnefalsch-Richter,  Ki/iirus,  Dihel  und  Homer,  1  vols., 
Berlin,  1898.  JAMES  STRAHAN. 

CYRENE,  CYRE N I ANS.— Cyrene  (Kvpijvri),  the 
ca])ital  of  Cyrenaica,  was  an  important  city  in  N. 
Africa,   about  equidistant   from  Alexandria  and 


DALMATIA 


DAMASCUS,  DAMASCENES      273 


Carthage.  It  was  founded  by  a  colony  of  Dorians 
in  631  B.C.,  and  its  inhabitants  retained  their 
thoronghly  Hellenic  nature,  though  with  some 
mixture  or  Libyan  blood. 

Standing  on  a  plateau  10  miles  from  the  coast, 
1800  feet  above  the  sea-level,  with  a  background 
of  mountains  on  the  S.,  and  in  full  view  of  the  sea 
to  the  N.,  the  city  was  famous  for  its  beauty,  its 
climate,  and  its  fertility.  It  excelled  in  culture 
as  well  as  in  commerce.  It  was  the  birth-place  of 
Aristippus,  whose  school  of  philosophy  was  called 
the  Cyrenaic,  of  Callimachus  the  poet,  of  Eratos- 
thenes the  father  of  geography,  and  of  Carneades 
the  founder  of  the  Kew  Academy.  The  phrase 
used  in  Ac  2''*  to  describe  Cyrenaica,  ri  nipri  t^s 
Aj/3i>)ji  t^i  koto,  Kvpn^rr/r,  corresponds  with  Ai^vti  tj 
Tepl  Kvfr^priy  of  Dio  Cassios  (liiL  12)  and  ^  rpit 
Kvf>Ti»j}p  AiiivTj  of  Josephus  (Ant.  XVI.  vL  1). 

After  the  time  of  Alexander,  Cyrene  was  subject 
to  the  Greek  kings  of  Egj-pt.  Jewish  settlers 
were  attracted  to  it  at  an  early  period.  Ptolemy 
the  son  of  Lagos  (305-285  B.C.),  'being  desirous  to 
secure  the  government  of  Cyrene  and  of  the  other 
cities  of  Libya  to  himself,  sent  a  party  of  Jews  to 
inhabit  them'  (Jos.  c.  Ap.  ii.  4),  and  in  all  such 
cities  the  Jews  had  equsd  rights  with  the  Mace- 
donians and  Greeks.  Strabo  (quoted  by  Jos.  Ant. 
xrv.  vii.  2)  says  that  the  poptilation  of  Cyrene 
consisted  of  citizens,  husbandmen,  strangers,  and 
Jews.  The  second  book  of  Maccabees  is  stated  to 
have  been  ^vritten  by  Jason  of  Cyrene  (2  Mac  2^). 
The  territory  of  Cyrene  was  left  to  the  Romans  by 
Ptolemy  Apion  in  95  B.C.  Cyrenaica  and  Crete, 
being  separated  by  no  great  expanse  of  sea,  were 
made  into  a  dual  province,  Creta  et  CyrencE,  which 
at  the  division  of  the  provinces  in  27  B.C.  became 


senatorial.  Under  Roman  government  the  Jews 
had  their  ancient  privileges  confirmed  (Jos.  Ant. 
XVI.  vi.  5). 

Cyrenians  played  an  interesting  and  important 
part  in  the  expansion  of  the  primitive  Church. 
Simon  of  Cyrene  (6  Kvpr\vaioi  in  each  of  the  Synop- 
tists,  Mt  27^-,  Mk  15",  Lk  23"«)  was  the  cross-bearer, 
and  his  sons  Rufus  and  Alexander  were  Christians 
well  known  to  St.  Mark's  first  readers  (Mk  15*'). 
Rufus  may  be  the  '  choice  Christian '  {rbr  (KXexTdf 
ip  KirptV)  of  Ro  IG'',  whose  mother  had  at  some  time 
'  mothered '  St.  Paul.  Jews  and  proselytes  from 
Cyrenaica  were  present  at  the  first  Chnstian 
Pentecost  (Ac  2*").  Cyrenian  Jews  resident  in 
Jerusalem,  where  they  had  a  Hellenistic  synagogue, 
were  among  the  narrow-minded  antagonists  of 
Stephen  (6^) ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  Cyrenian 
Jewish  Christians,  progressive  in  thouglit  and 
action,  were  among  the  original  founders  of  Gentile 
Christianity  in  Antioch  (II-*),  and  Lucius  of  CjTene 
was  one  of  a  number  of  prophets  and  teachers  in 
that  city  who  are  credited  with  the  organization  of 
the  first  mission  to  the  nations  (13').  A  tradition 
which  cannot  be  called  well-founded  makes  Lucius 
the  first  bishop  of  Cyrenaica. 

An  insurrection  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  in  which 
the  Jews  of  CjTcne  massacred  many  Greek  and 
Roman  citizens,  led  to  great  disasters.  The  beauti- 
ful city  was  destroyed  by  the  Saracens  in  the  4th 
century.  Extensive  rains  still  attest  its  former 
magnificence. 

LrreRATtnuL— C.  Ritter,  frdfaoidc,  u  [Berlin,  1822];  A.  F. 
Gottscbick,  GeseA.  der  Grundung  und  Bhtte  det  hell.  Staatet 
in  Kyrenaika,  Leipzig,  I&d*;  G.  Haimann,  La  Cirenaica, 
Borne,  laS2;  D.  G.  Hogarth,  in  Monthly  Review,  Jan.  1S94. 

James  Strahax. 


D 


DILMATIIL  (AaX/wtrro).— Till  about  the  middle 
of  the  1st  cent,  this  term  denoted  the  southern 
part  of  the  Roman  province  of  Illyricum  (q.v.). 
Thereafter  it  began  to  be  extended  to  the  whole 
province.  Both  Pliny  and  Suetonius  reflect  this 
change.  For  a  time  the  two  terms  were  con- 
vertible. From  the  Flavian  period  onward  Dal- 
matia  was  the  word  regularly  usetl.  St.  Paul,  who 
consistently  gave  geographical  names  their  Roman 
sense,  first  employed  the  old  provincial  term  (Ro 
15'"),  but  in  his  last  Epistle  (2  Ti  4'*  occurs  in  what 
is  generally  regarded  as  a  genuine  Pauline  frag- 
ment) he  adopted  the  new  designation.  In  his  own 
missionary  progress  he  went  as  far  as  the  frontiers 
of  Illyricum  (m<xp*  Tov'TXkvpiKov),  but  probably  did 
not  enter  it.  His  lieutenant  Titus  took  possession 
of  Dalmatia  for  Christ.  James  Strahan. 

DAMARIS.  —  Damaris  was  converted  by  the 
preaching  of  St.  Paul  at  Athens  (Ac  17**}.  The 
name  is  probably  a  corruption  of  Damalis  ('  heifer '), 
a  popular  name  among  the  Greeks.  St.  Chrysostom 
(rfe  Sacerd.  iv.  7)  makes  Damaris  the  wife  of  Dion- 
ysius  the  Areopa^te,  as  does  the  Latin  of  Codex  E 
('cum  uxore  suo'),  though  the  Greek  has  only  'a 
woman.'  W.  M.  Ramsay  {St.  Paul,  1895,  p.  252) 
suggests  that  she  was  one  of  the  educated  ircUpcu. 
She  seems  to  have  been  a  person  of  some  import- 
ance, since  her  name  is  mentioned,  and  it  is  open 
to  doubt  whether  a  prominent  Athenian  woman 
would  have  been  present.  Codex  Bezae  omits  all 
reference  to  her. 
VOL.  I. — 18 


I>rBtATiniB. —  F.  Blass,  Cotn.  hi  loe. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  The 
CJutrek  in  the  Roman  Empire,  London,  1S93,  p.  161 ;  J.  F^ten, 
ApoiielgetehiehU.  FYeiburg  L  B.,  1S93,  p.  337. 

F.  W.   WORSLEY. 

DAHASCUS,DAMA8CEIIES.— Damascus  (Aa^cur- 
k6s)  cannot  now  be  regarded  as  the  oldest  city  in  the 
world,  but  it  has  a  surer  title  to  fame  in  its  possession 
of  the  secret  of  eternal  youth.  While  Tadmor  and 
Palmyra,  Baalbek  and  Jerash,  have  only  a  '  glory 
hovering  round  decay,'  Damascus  is  still  '  the 
head  of  Syria,'  the  queen  of  Oriental  cities.  The 
creations  of  architectural  genius  have  their  day 
and  cease  to  be,  but  Damascus  is  the  perennial 
gift  of  Nature.  The  green  oasis  between  Mount 
Hermon  and  the  desert  must  always  be  a  theatre 
of  human  activity.  Wheresoever  the  river  comes, 
there  is  life.  Damascus  has  no  means  of  self- 
defence,  has  never  done  anything  memorable  in 
warfare,  has  been  captured  and  plundered  many 
times,  and  more  than  once  almost  annihilated,  but 
it  has  always  quickly  recovered  itself,  and  to-day 
the  white  smokeless  city,  embowered  in  its  gardens 
and  orchards  and  surrounded  by  its  hundred  villages, 
i  is  to  every  Arab  what  it  was  to  young  Muhammad 
I  gazing  down  upon  it  from  the  brow  of  Salahiyeh — 
j  the  symbol  of  Paradise. 

During  the  centuries  of  Greek  and  of  Roman 

■  sway  in  Svria,  Damascus  had  to  yield  precedence 

to  Antiocli.      The   Hellenic    city  in  the  Levant 

became  the  first  metropolis  of  Gentile  Christianity, 

i  and  organized  the  earliest  missions  to  the  \N  estem 

i  nations.     Yet  in  a  sense  the  religion  of  Europe 


274 


DARKNESS 


DATES 


came  by  the  way  of  Damascus,  which  was  tlie  scene 
of  the  conversion  of  the  greatest  of  all  mission- 
aries. It  is  in  connexion  with  this  event  alone 
that  the  city  is  ever  mentioned  in  the  NT.  The 
story  is  told  three  times  in  Acts  (9*-»  22»-"  26'-«'). 

In  the  1st  cent,  of  our  era  the  Jewish  colony  in 
Damascus  was  large  and  influential.  During  a 
tumult  in  the  reign  of  Nero  10,000  Jews  were 
massacred.  Josephus  indicates  the  extent  of 
Jewish  proselytism  in  the  city  when  he  states  that 
the  Damascenes  '  distrusted  their  own  wives,  who 
were  almost  all  atldicted  to  the  Jewisli  religion' 
{BJ  II.  XX.  2).  It  is  not  known  when  or  how 
Christianity  first  came  to  Damascus.  There  were 
doubtless  Syrian  Jews  in  Jerusalem  at  every  feast 
of  Pentecost,  though  none  are  mentioned  in  Ac  2. 
Damascus  was  the  first  of  the  '  foreign  cities '  (Ac 
26")  from  which  the  Jewish  authorities  resolve<l  to 
root  out  the  Nazarene  heresy.  St.  Paul  came  to  it 
as  a  voluntary  inquisitor,  to  call  the  Christian  Jews 
to  account  for  their  apostasy.  He  was  armed  with 
•  the  authority  and  commission  of  the  chief  priests ' 
(Ac  26'-). 

'  In  a  certain  sense  the  Sanhedrin  exercised  Jurisdiction  over 
every  Jewisli  community  in  tiie  world.  ...  Its  orders  were 
regarded  as  binding  throiijfhout  the  entire  domain  of  ortiiodox 
Judaism.  It  liad  power,  for  example,  to  issue  warrants  to  the 
Contrre(rations(syna(;o(j:ues)in  Damascus  for  the  apprehension  of 
the  Christians  in  that  quarter '{Schiirer,  JIJP  ii.  i.  [1885]  186). 

St.  Paul  had  instructions  to  deal  summarily 
'with  any  that  were  of  the  way'  (Ac  9'^),  but  the 
letters  which  he  carried  '  for  the  synagogues '  (9-) 
were  never  delivered,  and  his  'commission'  (26'-) 
was  never  executed.  One  of  the  Christians  whom 
he  intended  to  '  bring  bound  to  Jerusalem'  (9'^) 
baptized  him  (9'**),  and  '  with  the  disciples  who 
were  at  Dainascus '  (9'^)  he  enjoyed  his  first 
Christian  fellowship.  None  of  them  were  among 
the  confessors  who  afterwards  haunted  him  'with 
their  remembered  faces,  dear  men  and  women 
whom'  he  'sought  and  slew.'  In  Damascus  he 
'  preached  Jesus '  (9™),  the  substance  of  his  gospel 
being  '  that  he  is  tiie  Son  of  God,'  '  that  tiiis  is  the 
Christ'  (920- =2).  The  incident  of  St.  Paul's  escape 
from  conspirators  by  his  being  let  down  over  the 
city  wall  in  a  basket  (q.v.)  is  recorded  by  the 
wnter  of  Acts  (Ac  9^"'*),  and  confirmed  in  one  of 
St.  Paul's  own  letters  (2  Co  IF-).  While  St.  Luke 
ascribes  the  i)lot  against  him  to  the  Jews,  St.  Paul 
relates  that  it  was  the  etlinarch  under  Aretas  the 
king  who  guarded  the  city  of  the  Damascenes  to 
take  him.  The  two  versions  of  the  story  can  be 
reconciled  by  supposing  that  the  governor  turned 
out  the  garrison  and  set  a  watch  at  the  instigation 
of  influential  Jews,  who  represented  St.  Paul  as  a 
disturber  of  the  peace  of  the  city.  The  alleged 
ascendancy  of  the  Nabatseau  king  in  Damascus  at 
that  time  raises  a  difficult  historical  problem, 
which  has  an  important  bearing  upon  the  chrono- 
logy of  the  primitive  Church.  This  point  is  dis- 
cus.sed  under  ARABIA,  Aretas,  Ethnarch. 

LiTBRATiRR.— G.  A.  Smith,  IIGIIL,  1897,  p.  641  ff.  ;  Bae- 
deker, Uandbook  to  Syria  and  Palestine,  1912,  p.  29811. ;  W. 
Smith,  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Geog.  i.  [1856]  748;  R.  W. 
Pounder,  St.  Paxil  and  his  Cities,  1913,  p.  58 ;  H.  Macmillan, 
Gleaninnsin  Holy  Fields,  1899,  pp.  101,  114;  E.  B.  Redlich, 
St.  Paul  and  his  Companions,  1913. 

James  Straiian. 
DARKNESS.— See  Light  and  Darknp^ss. 

DART.— See  Armour. 

DATES.— The  dates  of  the  Apostolic  Age  are 
interlinked  with  those  of  the  NT  as  a  whole.  No 
•single  date  is  fixeil  with  the  absolute  precision 
which  modern  historical  science  demands  in  the 
case  of  recent  or  contemporaneous  cljronology. 
Although  some  individual  dates  are  so  nearly  agreed 
upon  that  all  practical  ends  aimed  at  in  chronology 
are  secured,  yet,  in  the  words  of  W.  M.  Ramsay, 


'  No  man  can  as  yet  prove  his  own  opinion  about 
chronology  and  order  in  the  New  Testament  to  the 
satisfaction  of  other  scholars  '  (Expositor,  8th  ser., 
ii.  [1911]  154).  In  re-stating  the  information  ac- 
cessible on  these  dates,  it  will  be  well  to  exhibit 
clearly  the  limits  of  the  apostolic  period,  to  repro- 
duce some  Iloman  Imperial  dates,  to  fix  some 
pivotal  points  which  may  serve  as  landmarks,  and 
to  determine  the  times  of  some  of  the  important 
events  in  the  life  of  tlie  Christian  community  so 
far  as  they  can  be  related  to  the  above.  What 
has  been  said  of  tlie  dilliculty  of  reaciiing  indisput- 
able results  will  be  found  to  be  especially  true  of 
the  last  part  of  this  task. 

I.  General  Li  hit  Dates.— In  its  broadest  ac- 
ceptance (in  ecclesiastical  history)  the  Apostolic 
Age  begins  with  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ  (usually 
reckoned  as  4  B.C.),  and  ends  with  the  passing  of 
the  hast  of  the  apostles  from  the  scene  of  action,  i.e. 
the  death  of  John  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  or,  for 
the  sake  of  convenience,  a.d.  100.  In  a  narrower 
sense,  the  first  33  years  of  this  general  period  are  not 
included  in  the  Apostolic  Age.  They  constitute  an 
epoch  by  themselves.  The  problems  raised  in  them 
are  connected  with  the  life  and  work  of  Jesus,  and 
the  story  is  told  in  tiie  Canonical  Gospels.  In  this 
definition  of  it,  the  Apostolic  Age  begins  M'itii  the 
Day  of  Pentecost,  or  at  the  point  M'here  the  author 
of  Acts  takes  up  the  story  ;  and  it  ends  with  the 
last  of  the  apostles.  In  a  still  narrower  sense,  the 
])criod  beginning  with  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  (A.U. 
70)  is  thrown  off'  on  the  ground  that  '  NT  history 
may  fitly  be  said  to  close  with  the  great  catastrophe 
of  A.D.  70'  (Turner  in  JIDB  i.  415'').  This  limita- 
tion may  be  further  justified  by  the  fact  tiiat  the  de- 
struction of  the  Temjde  established  a  new  order  of 
things  not  simply  with  reference  to  Judaism,  but 
also  to  the  whole  apostolic  activitj',  and  that  the 
only  items  of  importance  in  Christian  history  that 
can  be  included  in  a  chronology  subsequent  to  that 
event  are  the  dates  of  some  apostolic  (or  other  NT) 
writings. 

The  date  of  the  Crucifixion. — Since  the  Apostolic 
Age  begins  with  the  Day  of  Pentecost,  the  question 
of  the  year  in  which  the  Crucifixion  occurred  falls 
to  be  briefly  reviewed  here.  The  line  of  departure 
for  the  chronology  of  the  Crucifixion  is  given  by  the 
Gospel  narratives.  These  name  both  the  Koman 
and  the  Jewisli  rulers  of  the  day.  The  Iloman 
Emperor  was  Tiberius  (A.D.  14-37),  the  procurator 
of  Juda;a  was  Pontius  Pilate  (A.D.  26-36),  the  high 
priest  of  the  Jews  was  Caiajdias  (A.D.  25[?]-34[?]). 
Since  Pilate  must  have  been  i)iocurator  for  two  or 
three  years  before  the  case  of  Jesus  came  for  trial 
(cf.  Jos.  Ant.  XVIII.  iii.  1-3,  BJ  ll.  ix.  2-4),  and 
since,  according  to  St.  Luke,  the  wliole  ministry  of 
Jesus  falls  after  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius  (A.D.  29, 
if  sole  reign  is  meant,  and  27,  if  co-regency  with 
Augustus),  it  follows  tihat  the  earliest  year  for  the 
Crucifixion  is  28.*  The  latest  limit  is  fixed  by  the 
fact  that  after  34  Caiaplias  was  no  longer  high 
priest.  Between  28  and  34,  however,  the  deter- 
mination of  the  exact  year  is  facilitated  by  the 
astronomical  calculations  as  to  tiie  coincidence  of 
Passover  with  the  day  of  the  week  implied  in  the 
Gospel  narrative.  There  is  a  margin  of  uncertainty 
on  this  point ;  but,  whichever  way  the  perplexing 
problem  is  solved,  the  year  29  or  30  still  satisfies 
the  conditions.t  As  between  the  two  years  to 
which  the  discussion  narrows  down  the  choice,  the 
year  30  seems  upon  the  whole,  in  view  of  traditional 
as  well  as  internal  grounds,  to  be  the  more  satisfac- 
tory. 

*  The  question  is  somewhat  complicated  hy  the  uncertainty 
tiA  to  the  lenarth  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  (cf.  h.  Fendt,  Die  Dauer 
der  Offentliehev  Wirksainkeit  Jesu,  1906;  W.  Homanner,  Die 
Daui-r  der  offentUchen  Wirksamkeit  Jesu,  1008). 

f  I«"or  full  discussion  see  Turner  in  UDB  i.  410 ;  cf.  also  art. 
'Dates "in  DCG\.  413. 


DATES 


DATES 


275 


The  net  results  arrivetl  at  for  limiting  dates, 
therefore,  are : 
(l)The  Apostolic  Church =4  B.C.-A.D.  100. 

(2)  The  Apostolic  Age  =  A.D.  30-100. 

(3)  The  Apo6tolic  £ra=A.D.  30-70. 

II.  liOMA  y  iMPERls  L  Da  tes.  — Jesus  Christ  was 
crucitie<l  during  the  reign  of  Tilierius,  juid  more 
precisely  in  the  lotli  year  of  that  Emperor's  sole 
rule,  and  the  17th,  or  18th,  of  his  co-regency  with 
Augustus.  Tiberius  was  followed  by  Caius  Cali- 
gula in  A.D.  37.  Caligula  was  succeeded  by  Claud- 
ius in  41.  Nero  followed  Claudius  in  54,  and  was 
supplanted  in  68  by  Galba.  Otho  succeeded  Galba 
in  69,  and  was  followed  by  Vespasian  in  70.  Ves- 
pasian was  followed  by  his  son  Titus  in  79.  Domi- 
tian  came  next  in  81,  reigning  until  96.  Then  came 
Nerva,  whose  reign  lasted  till  98  ;  and,  so  far  as  the 
Apostolic  Age  was  concerned,  Trajan  closed  the  suc- 
cession, ascending  the  throne  in  98  and  reigning  till 
117. 


A.D. 

AJ>. 

Tiberius 

.    14-37 

_ 

.    70-79 

Calijfula 

.     37^1 

Titus    . 

.    79-81 

Claudius 

.    41-54 

Domitian 

.    81-96 

Nero 

.    54-68 

Nerva  . 

.    96-98 

Galba     . 

.    68-69 

Trajan. 

.    98-117 

Otho       . 

.    69-70 

III.  Pi  roTAL  Dates. — Close  scrutiny  brings  into 
measurably  clear  detail  the  following  hxed  points 
in  the  apostolic  chronologj',  which,  therefore,  may 
serve  as  general  landmarks. 

1.  The  rule  of  Aretas  OYer  Damascus. — In  un- 
ravelling the  complications  of  the  problem  raised 
by  the  mention  of  an  '  ethnarch  of  Aretas '  by  St. 
Paul  (2  Co  11**),  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that 
Rome  governed  the  subject  territories  of  Asia  either 
directly  or  through  subject  princes.  Before  3S-34 
and  after  62-63  Damascus  was  under  direct  Roman 
administration.  This  is  made  clear  from  the  extant 
Syrian  coins  of  these  years,  which  bear  the  heads 
of  the  Roman  Emperors  Tiberius  and  Nero  and 
do  not  allude  to  subject  rulers.  Since  some  allusion 
is  always  made  where  subject  princes  inter^'ene, 
the  case  seems  clearly  made  out  that  only  after  34 
and  before  62  could  a  Nabataean  king  have  secured 
ascendancy  at  Damascus.  How  this  came  about, 
however,  is  not  definitely  known.  It  could  certainly 
not  have  been  due  to  rebellion  or  any  other  form  of 
violence.  And  if  it  was  brought  about  peacefully, 
it  is  probable  that  it  was  done  upon  the  initiative, 
or  by  consent,  of  Caligula,  who  is  kno%vn  to  have 
encouraged  the  devolution  of  as  much  autonomy  on  j 
the  native  dynasts  as  was  consistent  with  Roman 
suzerainty.  The  Nabatiean  ascendancy  in  Damas- 
cus was  thus  near  its  beginning  during  the  last 
years  of  Aretas  (Harithath)  rv.  For  the  accession 
of  this  king  is  placed  by  Josephus  {Ant.  XVI.  ix.  4) 
in  connexion  with  certain  events  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  reign  of  Herod  the  Great.  His  immediiate 
successor  Abia  ruled  under  Claudius  and  was  a  con- 
temporary of  Izates,  of  Adiabene,  against  whom  he 
waged  war  upon  invitation  of  certain  malcontents 
and  traitors  (.4ri<.  XX.  iv.  1).  The  probable  limits  of 
his  reiioi  thus  appear  to  be  9  B.C.  and  A.D.  39  or  40 
(cf.  CIS,  pt.  ii.  197-217  ;  also  Sehiirer,  JJJPl.  ii.  357, 
n.  i.  66,  67).  The  'governor  (ethnarch)  of  Aretas' 
referred  to  by  St.  Paul  must  therefore  have  acted  his 
part  of  guarding  the  gates  of  Damascus  before  the 
year  39.  But  how  long  before  is  not  certain.  And 
since  from  Gal  1"'  it  is  clear  that  Saul  returned  to 
Damascus  as  a  Christian  leader  after  a  period  of 
three  jears  spent  in  Arabia,  and  the  flight  from 
Damascus  (2  Co  II*-)  cannot  be  identified  %vith  any 
later  event  than  this  visit,  his  conversion  must  have 
taken  place  not  later  than  36,  and  perhaps  several 
years  earlier.     See  also  art.  Aretas. 

2.  The  death  of  Herod  Agrippa  I. — According  to 
Josephus  (Ant.  XIX.  viii.  2,  BJ  II.  xi.  6),  Agrippa 
died  at  the  age  of  54,  at  the  end  of  the  seventh 


year  of  his  reign,  four  of  which  had  been  passed 
under  Caligula  and  three  under  Claudius ;  Josephus 
also  makes  it  plain  that  the  three  years  that  fell 
under  the  reign  of  Claudius  were  the  period  of 
Agrippa's  sole  rule  over  the  whole  of  Palestine, 
and  that  he  had  been  made  king  over  the  whole  of 
Palestine  by  Claudius  immediately  after  his  acces- 
sion {Ant.  XIX.  v.  1,  BJ  II.  xi.  5).  Since  Claudius 
succeeded  Caligula  on  24th  Jan.  41,  the  death  of 
Agrippa  must  be  dated  in  44.  This  conclnsion 
harmonizes  with  the  circumstance  that  the  festivi- 
ties at  Caesarea  during  which  he  was  stricken  with 
his  fatal  illness  were  being  held  in  honour  of  the 
safe  return  of  the  Emperor  from  Britain  {awmipia%. 
Ant.  XIX.  viii.  2)  in  the  year  44  (Dio  Cass.  Ix.  23 ; 
Suet.  Claud.  17).  But  if  this  was  the  occasion  for 
the  celebration,  the  time  of  the  year  for  it  was  in 
all  probability  the  late  summer  or  early  autumn, 
since  news  of  the  return  of  the  Emperor  must  have 
taken  some  time  to  reach  the  East.  The  j'ear  44 
is  thus  fixed  as  the  date  of  the  events  in  Ac  12, 
and  at  the  same  time  serves  as  a  tenninus  ad  quern 
for  all  that  precedes. 

3.  The  proconsolship  of  Gallio  in  Achaia. — L. 
Junius  Gallio  (Ac  18'-),  brother  of  the  philosopher 
Seneca  and  mention^  by  him  in  aflectionate 
terms  {Quest.  Nat.,  Preface),  but  adopted  by  the 
rhetorician  Gallio,  served  a  proconsulship  of  one 
year  in  Achaia  some  time  between  44  and  54.  The 
fact  of  his  residence  in  Achaia  is  certified  bjr  Seneca, 
who  alludes  {Ep.  XVIII.  i.  104)  to  his  having  l)een 
obliged  to  leave  that  province  on  account  of  a  fever. 
It  is  further  attested  by  the  mention  of  his  name 
in  an  inscription  found  near  Plataea  in  which  he  is 
designated  as  a  benefactor  of  the  city :  'H  toX/j 
nXaratcwj'  Xwi^iov  'lov]¥iov  TaWluva  'Ariarop  [dfdO}- 
xoTov  Toy  iavrijs  eycpTfe'rjjv].  But,  since  neither  of 
these  references  to  Gallio's  experience  in  Achaia  is 
associated  with  any  date,  the  exact  year  of  his  pro- 
consulship  was  left  to  be  determined  in  the  earlier 
computations  upon  purely  conjectural  grounds ;  and 
these  yielded  no  palpable  gain  in  the  direction  of 
greater  fixity. 

Thus  a  great  variety  of  resalts  was  reached :  Anirer  (de  Tem- 
porum  . . .  Ratione,  1833,  p.  119X  a.d.  52-54 ;  WieaeIer(CAfYmo{. 
des  apottcL  ZeitaUen,  1848.  p.  119),  Lewin  {Fa*U  Saeri,  1866, 
p.  299X  BUaa  {Ada  Apott.,  1895,  p.  23),  Harnack  (Gaeh.  der 
aUekrUtL  LU.,  1897,  u.  237X  48-60 ;  Tomer  {HDB  L  417t>),  after 
44,  {nrobably  after  49  or  50 ;  Hoennicke  (CKnm.  det  Leben*  des 
ApogteU  Pauliu,  1903.  p.  30),  at  the  latest  53-54;  demoi 
(PatUus,  1904),  53-53 ;  O.  Holtzmann  (NTZG*.  1906,  p.  144), 
53 ;  and  Zahn  {Introd.  to  ST,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  iiL  470),  53-54. 

This  uncertainty  has  been  altogether  removed 
by  the  discovery  at  Delphi  of  four  fragments  of  an 
inscription  naming  Gallio  and  linking  bis  proconsul- 
ship with  the  26th  acclamation  of  Claudius  as 
Imperator.  The  fragments  were  fitted  together 
and  the  inscription  was  given  to  the  public  by 
fimUe  Bourguet  {de  Rebus  Delphicis  Imperatorice 
jEtatis  Capita  Duo,  MontpeUier,  1905).  The  dis- 
covery and  its  significance  were  discussed  more  or 
less  fully  by  Deissmann  {Paulus,  1911,  pp.  159- 
176 ;  Eng.  tr.,  1912,  Appendix  I.  p.  235),  OfFord 
{PEFSt  April  1908,  p.  163),  and  Ramsay  {Expositor, 
7th  sen,  vii.  [1909]  468).  The  text  Ls  not  in  a  per- 
fect stat«  of  preservation,  but  is  sufficiently  clear, 
with  the  restorations  which  have  been  proposed 
by  Bourguet,  to  cover  the  chronological  point 
under  dispute.  It  was  a  letter  sent  by  Claudius 
when  he  bore  the  title  of  Imperator  XXVL  (KG 
na-njfyraTplSos).  It  names  Junius  Gallio  as  the 
friend  of    the   writer  and  proconsul  of  Achaia: 

fioi,]Nios   rAAAiaxo[0aoj]    mot    KAI    [ire^- 

IIATOS;.  This  meaning  of  the  inscription  was  first 
pointed  out  by  A.  J.  Reinach  {BEG,  1907,  p.  49), 
and  is  independently  reached  or  otherviise  accepted 
by  Otford  (/oc.  cU'),  Ramsay  {loc.  eit.),  Clemen 
{ThLZ,  1910,  col.  656),  Loisy  (with  his  usual  hyper- 
critical   caution.  Heme    d'hist.  et  de  lit.  relig.. 


276 


DATES 


DATES 


March,  April,  1911,  pp.  139-144),  and  Deissmann 
{loc.  cit.).  The  exact  date  of  the  acclamation  of 
Claudius  as  Iinperator  xxvi.  is  not  jjjiven  any- 
where. But,  since  from  11.  Cagnat's  tables  (Cours 
d'6piffraphie  latine^,  1898,  p.  478)  it  appears  that  at 
the  liieginning  of  52  Claudius  was  Imperator  XXIV. 
and  at  the  end  Imperator  XXVir.,  l>oththe  25th  and 
the  26th  acclamations  must  have  been  issued  some 
time  in  52,  and  in  all  probability  after  victories 
secured  duringthesummerseason.  ButifGallio  was 
proconsul  when  the  document  was  sent  to  Deljjhi, 
since  the  proconsular  year  was  fixed  by  Claudius  as 
beginning  April  1  (Dio  Ca.ssius,  Ivii.  14.  5  ;  Ix.  11.  6, 
17.  3),  Gallio's  term  of  office  falls  in  the  year  begin- 
ning with  the  spring  of  52.  Cf.  art.  Acts  of  thk 
Apostlks,  VI.  3. 

i.  The  recall  of  Felix  and  the  accession  of 
Festus. — Tiie  appointment  of  Felix  was  one  of  tlie 
later  acts  of  the  Emperor  Claudius  ;  and  Nero  on 
his  accession  confirmed  it  {BJ  il.  xii.  8,  xiii.  2-7  ; 
Ant.  XX.  viii.  4,  5).  The  exact  year  of  the  event 
is  given  by  Eusebius  (Chron.  [Armen.  VS  and 
some  MSS  of  Jerome's  tr.])  as  the  11th  year  of 
Claudius.  Tacitus  {Ann.  xii.  64 ;  cf.  Jos.  BJ  II. 
xii.  7f.),  in  his  account  of  the  troubles  leading  to 
the  dej)Osition  of  Cumanus,  placed  the  event  in 
connexion  with  the  year  52.  Although  Harnack 
has  drawn  a  different  conclusion  from  the  Eusebian 
Chronicle,  it  seems  upon  the  whole  that  these  three 
sources  agree  in  pointing  to  the  year  52  for  the 
arrival  of  Felix  in  Palestine,  or,  at  all  events,  for 
his  assumption  of  the  proconsulship.  Much  more 
complicated,  however,  is  the  question  of  the  ter- 
mination of  Felix's  tenure  of  office.  There  is  no 
doubt  that,  like  Cumanus,  Felix  had  by  his  misrule 
made  himself  the  object  of  hatred  ana  the  ground 
of  complaint  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  and  that, 
owing  to  representations  made  by  the  latter,  he 
had  fallen  into  disfavour,  and  had  escaped  con- 
demnation only  by  the  timely  intercession  of  his 
brother  Pallas  (Josephus,  Ant.  xx.  viii.  7-9). 
According  to  the  apparent  meaning  of  Josephus' 
words,  this  occurred  after  Festus  had  assumed 
control  of  Palestine  in  succession  to  Felix.  But 
Tacitus  informs  us  that  Pallas  had  already  fallen 
from  his  place  as  Nero's  favourite  in  55  {Ann.  xiii. 
14),  i.e.  when  Britannicus  was  13  years  of  age. 
With  this  Dio  Cassius  (Ixi.  7.  4)  agrees. 

Assuming  that  Josephus  is  correct,  and  taking 
in  addition  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  (Chron.), 
who  places  the  accession  of  Festus  in  the  second 
year  of  Nero,  Harnack  {Gesch.  der  altchristl.  Lit. 
1.  235)  and  Holtzmann  {NTZG,  p.  128  f.)  place  the 
vindication  of  Felix  in  55  and  the  arrival  of  Festus 
in  Palestine  in  56.  But,  while  this  course  seems 
the  natural  one  upon  the  narrow  range  of  evidence 
taken  into  account,  it  is  precluded  when  the  follow- 
ing considerations  come  into  view. — (1)  The  sedition 
of  'the  Egyptian'  (Ac  21*^)  occurred  during  tiie 
procuratorship  of  Felix,  and  some  time  earlier  than 
the  arrest  of  St.  Paul.  But  Josephus  informs  us 
that  it  took  place  during  the  reign  of  Nero,  or 
after  54  {BJ  II.  xiii.  5 ;  Ant.  XX.  viii.  6).  If  the 
downfall  of  Felix  is  to  be  dated  before  56,  the 
arrest  of  St.  Paul  must  have  been  made  in  63  or  at 
the  latest  in  54,  and  the  uprising  of  '  the  Egyptian  ' 
still  earlier,  or  from  two  to  four  years  before  the 
accession  of  Nero. — (2)  The  marriage  of  Felix  and 
Drusilla  is,  according  to  Josephus,  rendered  impos- 
sible before  55.  For  she  had  been  given  by  her 
brother  Agrippa  to  Azizus  of  Emesa,  being  herself 
15  years  of  age,  in  53  {Ant.  XX.  vii.  1).  Butaccord- 
ing  to  Ac  24^*  she  wa,s  married  to  Felix  at  the  time 
of  St.  Paul's  appearance  before  the  procurator. 
Either,  therefore,  the  arrest  of  the  Apostle  and  the 
end  of  the  proconsulship  of  Felix  must  be  dated 
several  years  later  than  63,  to  allow  time  for  the 
necessary  development  of  the  intrigues  by  which 


Felix  lured  her  to  unfaitiifulness  to  her  husband 
and  ])er8uaded  iicr  to  marry  him,  or  these  events 
must  be  condensed  within  an  incredibly  short 
interval.  Besides,  between  the  appearance  of  St. 
Paul  before  Felix  and  Drusilla  and  the  deposi- 
tion of  Felix  two  years  must  be  allowed  (Ac  24*). — 
(3)  Felix  had  sent  certain  Jewish  leaders  to  Home, 
wiiere  they  were  imjtri.soned  pending  trial.  Jos- 
ephus says  that  in  his  own  27th  year  (63-64)  he 
went  to  Rome  to  negotiate  the  liberation  of  these 
prisoners.  But  if  Felix  ceased  ruling  Judnea  in  56, 
these  men  were  kept  confined  for  the  unparalleled 
period  of  8  or  10  years.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
Felix  remained  in  office  until  60,  their  imprison- 
ment lasted  only  4  years. — (4)  The  length  of  the 
procuratorship  of  telix  may  be  approximately 
computed  from  a  comparison  of  Ac  24"*  and  24''". 
In  the  former  passage  Felix  is  said  to  have  already 
ruled  'many  year.s.'  It  would  be  impossible  to 
construe  this  as  meaning  less  than  three  years.  In 
the  latter  his  rule  is  reported  as  continuing  for 
two  years  longer,  thus  giving  a  minimum  of  five 
years.  This  is,  however,  a  bare  minimum,  and 
may  well  be  doubled  without  violence  to  the 
situation.  If,  therefore,  the  computations  which 
fix  the  date  of  the  appointment  of  Felix  be  correct 
as  given  above,  and  the  year  52  is  approximately 
the  correct  time  of  that  event,  the  year  59  or  60 
would  be  a  rea.sonable  one  to  fix  on  as  the  time  of 
the  end  of  his  rule. 

The  only  consideration  that  offers  any  diflSciilty  in  the  way  of 
this  conclusion  is  the  fact  that  Josephus  associates  the  recall  of 
Felix  with  the  influential  period  of  Pallas  at  court ;  but  (a) 
Josephus  may  have  been  in  error  in  attributing  Felix's  escajH! 
from  punishment  to  the  intercession  of  Pallas.  (6)  He  may 
have  grouped  together  events  belonging  to  two  separate  dates, 
t.e.  certain  charges  made  at  the  early  date,  when  Pallas  by  his 
plea  on  behalf  of  Felix  saved  him  from  punishment,  and  the 
final  complaints  which  ended  in  his  removal.  If  this  be  the 
case,  the  effectiveness  of  the  later  accusations  of  the  Jews  could 
be  all  the  more  easily  understood,  since  at  that  time  Poppsea 
had  acquired  her  influence  over  Nero  and  an  appeal  of  the 
Jewish  leaders  would  enlist  her  strong  endorsement,  (c)  It 
may  be,  however,  that  Pallas,  after  being  charged  with  high 
treason  and  found  innocent,  was  re-instated  into  favour  by 
Nero,  and  so  continued  until  the  year  60.  This  is  not  probable 
in  view  of  the  testimony  of  Tacitus,  who  tells  us  that  Pallas  was 
indeed  acquitted  along  with  Burrhus  {Ann.  xiii.  23) ;  but  that 
he  was  never  again  treated  with  special  favour  (tfc.  xiii.  2).  He 
died  of  poison  in  the  year  62.  The  conflict  between  the  state- 
ments of  Tacitus  and  Josephus  is  best  harmonized  if  we  take 
the  former  to  have  been  well  informed  on  the  order  and  time 
of  events  in  Rome,  but  misled  as  to  similar  matters  in  Judasa  ; 
Josephus,  on  the  other  hand,  may  be  regarded  as  accurate  in  his 
statements  regarding  Palestinian  events  and  less  so  on  matters 
of  an  internal  character  in  Rome.  The  result  yielded  by  this 
view  is  that  Felix  was  found  guilty  of  maladministration  in 
54-55  and  escaped  punishment  at  this  time  through  the  interces- 
sion of  his  brother  Pallas.  Pallas  was  himself  charged  with  high 
treason  the  following  year  and  fell  from  Imperial  favour.  Felix 
continued  until  60,  and  meantime  added  to  the  grievances  of  the 
Jews,  and  yet  entrenched  himself  in  favour  with  sundry  leaders 
because  of  his  bold  measures  against  certain  classes  of  criminals. 
In  60,  however,  he  was  finally  brought  to  trial,  and  in  the  absence 
of  the  powerful  intercession  of  his  brother  was  at  this  time  de- 
posed and  succeeded  by  Festus.    Cf.  also  artt.  Fbux,  Fkstus. 

IV.  Corroborative  Dates.— 'T\\e&&  are  such 
as  do  not  of  themselves  permit  of  clear  determina- 
tion, but  can  be  deduced  from  general  considera- 
tions ;  and  when  so  deduced  confirm  and  elucidate 
the  chronology  as  a  whole. 

1.  The  famine  under  Claudius. — Josephus,  in 
connexion  with  his  account  of  Agrippa  s  death 
(Ant.  XX.  ii.  1,  6,  v.  2),  tells  how  Helena,  queen 
of  Adiabene,  and  her  son  Izates  were  converted  to 
Judaism  and  made  a  visit  to  Jerusalem  during  a 
famine  which  both  she  and  her  son  helped  to  re- 
lieve by  procuring  provisions  at  great  expense. 
According  to  Ac  H'-^s-so  a  famine  occurred  '  through- 
out all  the  world,'  but  presumably  it  was  especially 
severe  in  Juda>a,  for  it  was  to  this  point  that  the 
brethren  'determined  to  send  relief.'  This  relief 
came  'by  the  hand  of  Barnabas  and  Saul.'  The 
death  of  Herod  must  have  taken  place  during  this 
visit  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  (Ac   li?") ;  else  why 


DATES 


DATES 


277 


should  it  appear  after  the  account  of  the  mission 
of  tlie  Apostles  to  Judaea  and  before  their  return 
from  Jerusalem  ?  This  is  a  natural  inference ;  but 
it  meets  with  a  difficulty  in  the  omission  of  all 
mention  of  this  visit   in  Gal  1'",  where  St.  Paul 

Eresumably  mves  an  exhaustive  statement  of  all 
is  visits  to  Jerusalem.  The  difficulty  is  primarily 
one  of  harmony  between  Gal.  and  Acts.  Yet  it 
indirectly  affects  the  chronological  problem.  By 
way  of  explanation  it  may  be  said  that  the  enumer- 
ation of  the  visits  in  Gal  1"  was  meant  to  be  ex- 
haustive, not  absolutely  but  relatively  to  the  possi- 
bility of  St.  Paul's  meeting  the  '  pillar '  apostles 
at  Jerusalem.  If  it  were  known  that  during  the 
famine  tliey  were  absent  from  the  city,  St.  Paul 
might  very  well  fail  to  allude  to  a  visit  at  that 
time. 

But  even  with  the  visit  fixed  during  the  distress 
of  the  famine,  which  is  in  general  associated  with 
the  time  of  Herod's  death,  it  still  remains  doubtful 
whether  this  famine  took  place  in  44.  Since  both 
Josephus  and  the  author  of  Acts  introduce  the 
whole  transaction  (Ant.  XX.  ii.  1 ;  Ac  12')  with 
the  general  formula  '  about  tliat  time,'  the  famine 
may  very  well  ha%'e  occurred  as  late  as  45  or  46. 

2.  The  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  Rome  (Ac  18- ; 
also  Suet.  Claud.  25). — This  cannot  be  the  action 
alluded  to  by  Dio  Cassius  (Ix.  6),  who  expresslj' 
says  that  the  Emperor,  deeming  it  unwise  to  ex- 
clude the  Jews  from  the  city,  commanded  them 
not  to  hold  meetings  together,  although  he  per- 
mitted them  to  retain  their  ancestral  customs 
{Tdrpios  ^ios).  The  decree,  therefore,  must  be  a 
later  one  unmentioned  by  the  secular  historians 
(except  Suetonius,  who  assigns  no  date  to  it).  It  is 
possible,  in  spite  of  the  generally  favourable  attitude 
of  Claudius  towards  Agrippa  II.  in  the  yeais  be- 
tween 51  and  54,  that  he  saw  the  necessity  of 
checking  the  gro\^'ing  power  of  the  Jewish  com- 
munity in  the  capital,  and  decreed  their  exclusion 
from  the  city. 

3.  Sergius  Paulas  (Ac  13^"").— The  data  for  the 
fixing  of  Sergius  Paulus  in  a  scheme  of  NT  chron- 
ology are  as  follows  :  (1)  The  name  occurs  in  in- 
scriptions. Of  these  one  was  first  published  by 
L.  Palma  di  Cesnola  (Salaminia,  1887,  p.  256)  and 
afterwards  carefully  edited  by  D.  G.  Hogarth  in 
Devia  Cypria,  1889,  p.  114.  It  ends  with  the  words 
TLfi.yp-ev<Ta%  tt]v  ffovXriv  [5«]a  e^affTuv  (iri  UavXov  [dvO^v- 
xdrov.  Palseogiapliically  the  inscription  is  judged 
to  belong  to  the  1st  century.  The  second  inscrip- 
tion is  one  found  in  the  city  of  Rome  naming 
L.  Sergius  Paulus  as  one  of  the  curatores  riparum 
et  alvei  Tiber  is  during  the  reign  of  Claudius  (CIL 
vi.  31545). — (2)  The  government  of  Cyprus  was  by 
proconsuls.  The  island  came  under  Roman  control 
before  the  establishment  of  the  Empire,  but  was 
defined  as  a  'senatorial'  province  in  22  B.C.  under 
Augustus  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  12.  7  ;  liv.  4.  1).  Upon 
these  data,  however,  while  it  is  very  clear  tliat 
about  A.D.  50  L.  Sergius  Paulus  (who  had  already 
been  a  high  officer  in  Rome)  was  holding  the  pro- 
consulship  of  Cyprus,  no  nearer  approach  to  the 
precise  date  either  of  the  beginning  or  the  end 
of  his  rule  can  be  made.  See  also  art.  Sergius 
Paulcs. 

4.  Agrippa  ii.  and  Drusilla.— Agrippa  u.,  the 
son  of  Agrippa  I.,  was  bom  in  A.D.  28.  According 
to  Photius  [Bibl.  33)  he  died  in  100.  At  the  time 
of  his  father's  death  he  was  considered  too  young 
for  the  responsibilities  of  the  large  kingdom,  which 
was  therefore  again  put  under  the  care  of  procu- 
rators. But  on  the  death  of  his  uncle  in  the  eighth 
year  of  Claudius  (48)  he  was  given  the  government 
('kingdom')  of  Chalcis  (Ant.  XX.  v.  2,  BJ  n.  xii. 
1).  Within  four  years,  liowever,  Claudius,  'when 
he  had  already  completed  the  twelfth  year  of  his 
reign'  (Ant.  XX.  vii.  1),  transferred  him  from  the 


kingdom  of  Chalcis  to  the  rule  of  a  greater  realm 
consisting  of  the  tetrarchy  of  his  great-uncle 
Philip,  of  the  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias,  and  of  that 
portion  of  Abilene  which  had  been  governed 
by  Varus  (BJ  ii.  xii.  8).  When  Is'ero  succeeded 
Claudius,  he  enlarged  this  kingdom  by  the  addition 
of  considerable  tracts  of  Galilee  and  Persea,  but 
the  dates  of  these  larger  additions  are  not  clearly 
given.  More  important  than  the  growth  of 
Agrippa's  power  is  his  giving  of  his  sister  in  mar- 
riage to  Azizus,  whom  not  long  after  (/xrr'  ov  roXiip 
xpovov)  she  left  in  order  to  marry  the  Roman  procu- 
rator Felix.  These  events  cannot  be  fixed  earlier 
than  54  or  55.  The  incidents  of  Ac  20'«  24»- » 
are  therefore  posterior  to  this  time.  Cf.  art. 
Drusilla. 

5.  Death  of  St.  Peter  and  St  Paul  in  Rome.— 
The  belief  that  the  martyrdom  of  the  two  apostles 
took  place  in  Rome  in  one  of  the  last  years  of 
Nero's  reign  is  basetl  on  tradition.  Epiphanius 
places  it  in  the  12th  year  of  Nero,  Euthalius  in 
the  13th,  Jerome  in  the  14th.  Dionysius  of  Corinth 
associates  the  death  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  in 
the  phrase  kolto.  rbv  airrbv  Kaipov  ( '  about  the  same 
time ').  No  positive  result  for  precise  chronology 
is  gained  by  these  data.  The  general  conclusion, 
however,  that  St.  Paul's  death  took  place  after  64 
is  borne  out  by  the  necessity  for  finding  a  place  in 
his  life  later  than  the  Roman  imprisonment  for  the 
composition  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles ;  and,  although 
this  necessity  is  not  admitted  on  all  sides,  the  pre- 
dominance of  view  among  critics  seems  to  recognize 
it.  The  death  of  the  two  apostles  may  thus  be 
approximately  placed  between  the  years  65  and  68. 
See  artt.  Paul,  Peter. 

6.  The  Passoyer  at  Philippi  (Ac  20*-').— "W.  M. 
Ramsay,  upon  the  basis  of  some  very  precarious 
data  (see  his  St.  Paul,  p.  289  ft';  also  Turner's 
discussion,  HDB  i.  419  f.),  claims  the  fixed  date  57 
for  St.  Paul's  fifth  and  last  recorded  visit  to  Jeru- 
salem, which  was  also  the  occasion  of  his  arrest. 
The  argument  is  briefly  as  follows.  The  Apostle 
celebrated  the  Lord's  Supper  at  Troas  on  Sunday 
night  (v.'').  If  so,  he  must  have  left  Philippi  on 
Friday.  Friday  was  the  day  after  the  Pa.ssover, 
which  was  therefore  observed  on  Thursday  that 
year.  But  the  14th  Nisan  (Passover  Day)  fell  on 
I'hursday  in  the  year  57,  not  in  56  or  58.  The  un- 
certain factors  in  the  computation  are  :  (1)  the  ex- 
act day  of  the  week  for  the  Passover  ;  concerning 
this  there  is  always  room  for  dispute,  owing  to 
the  well-known  but  unscientific  method  of  the 
Jews  in  determining  the  beginning  of  the  month 
Nisan  ;  (2)  the  interval  between  the  Passover  and 
St.  Paul's  departure  from  Philippi,  which,  on 
Ramsay's  assumption,  is  a  single  night  (but  the 
text  does  not  exclude  a  longer  interval) ;  (3)  the 
time  when  the  Lord's  Supper  was  oteerved  at 
Troas,  which  is  stated  to  have  been  '  the  first  of 
the  week'  (rg  luq.  tGiv  (ra^^druy)  (but  this  may  be 
construed  as  Saturday  evening  towards  Sunday). 
Any  one  of  these  uncertainties  vitiates  the  con- 
clusion arrived  at.  Yet  on  the  whole  the  conclu- 
sion corroborates  the  date  59,  and  is  not  necessarily 
inconsistent  with  60  for  the  removal  of  St.  Paul  to 
Rome. 

V.  Palestisias  Secular  Dates.—!.  The  pro- 
curators of  Judaea. — (1)  Pontius  Pilate,  it  seems 
to  be  universally  agreed,  was  appointed  procurator 
of  Judaea  in  26,  and  held  the  office  until  36,  being 
then  deposed  and  sent  to  Rome  by  Vitellius,  after 
'ten  years  in  Judaea' (-(4 «<.  xvill.  iv.  2).  He  ar- 
rived in  Rome  just  after  the  death  of  Tiberius. 

(2)  The  jear  folloAving  the  deposition  of  Pilate, 
the  Imperial  authority  of  Rome  was  represented 
in  Judtea  by  ilarcdlus,  a  friend  and  deputy  of 
Vitellius.  He  is  nowhere  given  the  title  of  *  pro- 
curator,' and  Josephus  is  careful  to  call  him  a 


278 


DATES 


DATES 


'curator'  (ivifitK-q-Hii,  Ant.  XVIII.  iv.  2).  Nor  liad 
he  apparently  come  into  sulficient  proininencH! 
through  any  action  to  warrant  his  being  mentioned 
in  the  succession. 

(.S)  From  37-41  the  procurator  was  a  certain 
MnritUus  {Ant.  xviil.  vi.  10)  who,  like  Marcelhis, 
does  not  seem  to  have  done  anything  official  worthy 
of  note. 

(4)  From  41  to  44  Agrippa  I.,  as  km^  on  approxi- 
mately the  level  of  inde[)endence  enjoyed  by  his 
grandfather  Herod  tlie  Great,  superseded  all  pro- 
curators. At  his  death,  according  to  Josephus, 
Cuspius  Fndus  was  appointed,  tlius  resuming  the 
line  broken  for  three  years  (Ant.  xix.  ix.  2,  XX.  v. 
1,  BJ  II.  xi.  6  ;  Tacit.  Hist,  v,  U).  The  term  of 
office  of  Fadus  was  probably  between  two  and 
three  years. 

(6)  Tiberius  Alexander,  a  renegade  Jew,  who 
was  rewarded  for  liis  apostasy  l)y  appointment  to 
various  offices,  culminating  in  the  procuratorship, 
probably  reached  Palestine  in  46  (Jos.  A7it.  XX.  v. 
2;  BJ  II.  xi.  6,  xv.  1,  xviii.  7f.,  IV.  x.  6,  VI.  iv. 
3  ;  Tacit.  Ann.  xv.  28,  Hist.  i.  11,  ii.  74,  79  ;  Suet. 
Vespas.  6). 

(6)  Ventidius  Cunianus  was  sent  to  succeed 
Alexander  in  48.  According  to  Tacitus  (Ann.  xii. 
54),  he  was  placed  over  Galilee  only,  wliile  Felix 
was  assigned  rule  over  Samaria.  They  were  both 
involved  in  various  cruelties  practised  on  the 
natives,  and  both  were  accused  before  Quadratus, 
who  was  commissioned  to  examine  into  the  atlair. 
But  the  commissioner  quietly  exculpated  Felix, 
and  even  gave  him  a  place  on  the  court  of  investi- 
gation and  judgment.  Cumanus  was  condemned 
and  removed.  Such  a  joint  procuratorship,  how- 
ever, is  excluded  by  Josephus  explicit  statements 
(Ant.  XX.  vi.  2,  vii.  1).  According  to  these, 
Cumanus  alone  was  the  procurator  and  alone 
responsible.  Felix  was  sent  by  Claudius  from 
Rome  to  succeed  him  at  the  express  request  of 
Jonathan,  the  high  priest.  The  contradiction  is 
probably  due  to  some  confusion  on  the  part  of 
Tacitus.  The  date  of  the  removal  of  Cunianus 
may  be  approximately  fixed  as  52. 

(7)  .(4??<o«i?<*jPeZix  immediately  succeeded  Cuma- 
nus. Soon  after  bis  arrival  in  Palestine,  he  saw 
and  was  enamoured  of  Drusilla,  the  sister  of  Ilerod 
Agrippa  II.,  and  enticed  her  to  leave  her  husband, 
Azizus  king  of  Emesa,  and  marry  himself.  This 
he  succeeded  in  accomplishing  through  the  aid  of 
a  magician  from  Cyprus,  bearing  the  name  of 
Simon.  Drusilla  was  born  in  38,  being  six  years 
of  age  at  the  time  of  her  father's  death  (44),  and 
his  youngest  child.  She  was  therefore  at  this 
time  14  or  15  years  old.  The  procur<atorship  of 
Felix  was  characterized  by  arbitrariness  and  greed. 
Though  he  did  much  to  punish  lawlessness,  he 
also  provoked  complaints  on  account  of  which  he 
was  recalled  in  60.   See  above.  III.  4  and  art.  Felix. 

(8)  Porcius  Festus. — The  reasons  which  fix  the 
beginning  of  the  procuratorship  of  Festus  in  60 
have  been  given  above.  The  time  of  the  year 
Avhen  he  arrived  is  determined  as  the  summer 
season  (Ac  25').  There  are  clearer  data  for  fixing 
the  end  of  liis  term.  From  B.T  vi.  v.  3  we  learn 
that  Albinus  his  successor  was  in  Jerusalem  at 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (?),  four  years  before  the 
outbreak  of  the  great  war  and  seven  years  and 
five  months  before  the  capture  of  Jerusalem — or, 
in  other  words,  the  I"'cast  of  Tabernacles  of  the 
year  62.  Allowing  for  sufficient  time  for  the 
next  procurator  to  assume  the  reins  of  government 
at  Ca3sarea,  for  a  similar  interval  for  his  appoitit- 
ment,  for  the  journey  from  Home  and  arrival  in 
Palestine,  the  death  of  Festus,  whi(Oi  took  i)lace 
while  he  was  still  in  olfice  in  I'alestine,  must  be 
dated  very  early  in  the  summer  or  late  in  the 
spring  of  62. 


(9)  Allnnus. — The  date  of  the  death  of  Porcius 
Festus  determines  also  that  of  the  acce.ssion  of 
Albinus  (BJ  VI.  v.  3).  W.  M.  liamHay  (Expositor, 
6th  ser.,  ii.  [1900]  81-105),  in  harmony  with  his 
theory  that  the  death  of  Festus  occurred  in  the 
autumn  of  60,  dates  the  arrival  of  Albinus  in  May 
or  June  61.  But  the  computation  rests  on  a  series 
of  obscure  and  questionable  considerations.  Albinus 
was  recalled  in  64,  after  more  than  two  years  of 
maladministration. 

(10)  Gessius  Florus  was  the  last  of  the  procu- 
rators. According  to  Josephus  (yl»^.  XX.  xi.  1),  it 
was  in  his  second  year  that  the  Jewish  War  broke 
out.  Since  this  is  fixed  at  66  (BJ  II.  xiv.  4),  he 
must  have  entered  upon  his  office  in  64.  The  end 
of  his  administration  was  also  the  end  of  the 
method  of  governing  Judaea  by  procurators.  For 
the  events  which  follow  the  year  66  and  culminate 
in  the  catastrophe  of  70  he  is  held  responsible. 

We  thus  obtain  the  following  list  of  procurators 
of  Juda;a,  with  dates  of  their  administration  : 


A.D. 

A.D. 

Pilate     . 

.     26-3C 

Ventidius  Cumanus 

.    48-62 

(.Marcellus)     . 

.    30-37 

Antonius  Felix 

.    52-00 

Marullus 

.     37-41 

I'orcius  Festus 

.    m-f>'i 

Cuspius  Fadus 

.     44-46 

Albinus  . 

.    62-64 

Tiberius  Alexander 

.     4(5-48 

Ucs^ius  Florus 

.    64-70 

2.  The  Herodian  kings. — When  Jesus  Christ  was 
crucified,  Herod  Antipas  and  Herod  Philip  were 
reigning  siiuultaneously  in  accordance  with  the 
testamentary  provision  of  their  father,  Herod  the 
Great.  Antipas  held  Galilee  and  Pera;a  ;  Philip 
ruled  over  the  region  beyond  Jordan.  Both  bore 
the  title  of  tetrarch.  Philip  died  in  34  without 
a  successor.  In  37  his  place  was  filled  by  the 
appointment  of  his  nephew,  the  son  of  Aristobulus 
and  brother  of  Herodias,  Herod  Agiippa  I.,  and 
this  was  done  by  Caligula,  whom  Agrippa  liad 
befriended.  He  did  not,  however,  take  .active 
possession  of  his  kingdom  until  39.  He  lived  for 
the  most  part  in  Home,  and  engaged  in  intrigues 
with  the  politicians  and  secured  the  deposition  and 
banishment  of  Antipas.  When  the  tetrarchy  of 
Antipas  was  added  to  his  (BJ  II.  ix.  6),  he  took 
his  place  in  Jewish  natioujil  affairs,  and  by  a.ssist- 
ing  Claudius  to  the  Imperial  throne  after  the 
assassination  of  Caligula,  he  so  ingratiated  himself 
into  the  favour  of  the  new  Emperor  that  the 
province  of  Judaea  was  added  to  his  domains  immedi- 
ately on  the  accession  of  Claiidius  (A.D.  41).  Thus 
he  came  to  unite  the  different  sections  of  the 
kingdom  of  his  grandfather,  Herod  the  Great  (BJ 
II.  xi.  5f.).  He  issued  coins  from  which  it  api)ears 
that  he  must  have  reigned  until  44  or  45.  These 
dates,  given  for  the  most  i)art  by  Josephus,  are 
corroborated  by  the  incidental  coincidence  of  the 
order  of  events  in  Acts.  The  death  of  Herod  is 
recited  in  Ac  12.  All  that  precedes  must  be  dated 
l)efore  44  ;  all  that  follows,  after  that  year.  The 
appearance  of  Cornelius  as  the  representative 
Roman  military  authority  in  Ca^sarea  is  jjiobably 
prior  to  the  elevation  of  Agiippa  to  the  standing 
of  Herod  the  Great  (41). 

When  Agrippa  I.  died,  his  son,  Herod  Agiippa  II. 
was  deemed  too  young  to  succeed  him,  but  in  49 
he  was  given  a  portion  of  his  father's  kingdom 
(Chalcis),  held  by  his  uncle  Herod.  In  53  he 
exchanged  this  kingdom  for  another,  made  up  of 
portions  of  (ialilec  and  Peraui,  and  thus  reigned 
to  his  death  in  100. 

The  following  table  exhibits  the  Herodian  rulers 
during  the  Apostolic  Age  : 

AntijMxs,  A. p.  4-39 — Galilee  ami  Peraja. 

I'hilip,  A.D.  4-34— beyond  Jordan. 

Airrippa  I.,  A.D.  87,  as  t«trarch  ;  39(41)-4*.  iw  kinff. 

'VKripi>all.,  A.D.  4^53  (of  Chalci8),-KH)  (of  Galilee,  PcrtDa.etc.). 

VI.  Pauline  DatE-S.— The  pre-eminence  of  St. 
Paul  in  the  Anostolic  Age  and  the  leading  part  he 
took   in   the  development  of   the  earliest  Church 


DATES 


DATES 


279 


have  fumishetl  tlie  ground  for  the  preservation,  in 
his  own  Epistles  and  in  tiie  Book  of  Acts,  of  a 
double  series  of  data  rej^rding  his  work.  These 
determine  not  only  the  general  order  of  the  facts 
of  his  ministry,  but  also  many  of  the  minuter 
details  of  time  and  place.  The  accuracy  of  the 
author  of  Acts  has  been  questioned,  especially  on 
matters  of  remoter  interest ;  but  his  reports  of  the 
movements  of  St.  Paul  are  coming  to  be  more  and 
more  recognized  as  drawn  from  personal  knowledge 
of,  companionship  with,  and  participation  in,  the 
Apostle  s  ministry.* 

A  fixed  starting-point  for  Pauline  chronology  is 
given  in  the  year  of  the  accession  of  Festns.  This 
took  place,  as  shown  above,  in  a.d.  60.  But, 
according  to  Ac  24=",  St.  Paul  was  detained  by 
Felix  a  prisoner  at  Csesarea  for  two  years.  His 
arrest  must,  therefore,  have  taken  place  in  58 
(possibly  as  early  as  May).  But  he  left  PMlippi 
40  days  earlier,  late  in  March  or  about  the  begin- 
ning of  April  ('after  the  days  of  unleavened 
bread').  From  Philippi  his  course  is  next  trace- 
able backward  to  Corinth.  His  presence  at  Philippi 
was  only  incidental,  his  purpose  being  to  journey 
into  Syria  (Ac  20^).  At  Corinth  he  had  spent  three 
months,  arriving  there  in  January  of  the  j'ear  58. 
This  visit  to  Corinth  immediately  followed  the 
memorable  and  troublous  residence  at  Ephesus. 
From  a  comparison  of  1  Co  16*"*  and  2  Co  2^^  with 
2  Co  7^  it  may  be  gathered  that  the  continuation 
of  the  whole  journey  from  Ephesus  to  Corinth 
through  Macedonia  was  prolonged  by  circumstances 
not  included  in  the  record.  A  fair  allowance  for 
these  yields  the  approximate  estimate  of  nine 
months  earlier,  or  the  spring  of  57,  for  the  end  of 
the  stay  at  Ephesus.  This  stay,  however,  lasted 
nearly  three  full  years.f  This  leads  to  the  year 
54.  The  departure  from  Antioch  in  the  spring  or 
summer  of  54  marks  the  beginning  of  the  third 
missionary  journey. 

The  interval  between  the  second  and  third 
missionary  journeys  is  not  given  detinitely.  It  in- 
cluded some  sort  of  a  visit  to  the  churches  inGal- 
atia  and  Phrygia,  and  a  sojourn  of  some  length 
in  Antioch  (Ac  18^  *  after  he  had  spent  some  time 
there ').  It  is  probable  that  this  stay  at  Antioch 
was  as  long  as  one  year ;  but,  assuming  that  it 
was  not,  there  is  still  the  period  of  three  years  to 
be  a.ssigned  to  the  second  missionary  journey. 
One  year  and  six  months  were  probably  consumed 
in  the  earlier  part  of  the  journey.  This  would 
bring  the  beginning  of  the  ]oumey  to  the  spring 
of  51 ;  or,  if  the  sojourn  at  Antioch  had  occupied 
a  whole  year,  to  50. 

The  second  missionary  journey  was  immediately 
preceded  by  the  Apostolic  Conference  at  Jerusalem 
on  the  question  of  the  admission  of  the  Gentile 
converts  ^vithout  the  rite  of  circumcision  (Ac  15). 
The  interval  between  the  Conference,  from  which 
St.  Paul  proceeded  immediately  to  Antioch,  and 
the  beginning  of  the  journey,  was  very  brief  and 
spent  at  Antioch.  The  Conference  itself  would 
thus  appear  to  have  been  held  in  49-50. 

The  chronology  of  the  years  between  the  con- 
version of  the  Apostle  and  the  Conference  at  Jeru- 
salem may  now  be  approached  from  another  point 
of  view.    The  item  furnished  by  the  allusion  to  the 

*  The  researches  of  W.  M.  Ramsay  and  A.  Hamack  have 
contributed  much  toward  this  result  (cf.  Ramsay,  St.  Paui, 
189S,  Luke  the  Phytieian,  1906;  Hamack,  Luke  the  Ph^tieian^ 
1907,  The  AeU  of  the  Apostles,  1909,  The  DaU  of  the  Acts  and  o) 
the  S^noplie  Goapeis,  1911). 

t  Although  in  Ac  19^  the  period  of  his  active  work  in  the 
synagogue  is  said  to  be  three  months  and  in  Ac  1910  his  teach- 
ing in  the  school  of  Trrannus  two  years,  the  further  detail  in 
Ac  19^  ('  for  a  season ')  would  tend  to  confirm  the  conclusion 
reached  here  that  the  'three  years'  of  Ac  2031,  though  possibly 
reckoned  in  the  Hebrew  sense  of  '  parts  of  three,'  were  in  real- 
ity more  nearly  three  entire  years  than  a  whole  year  with  mere 
fiagmente  of  the  year  preceding  and  the  year  following. 


*  ethnarch  of  Aretas '  at  Damascus  (2  Co  11** ;  cf. 
al)ove)  fixes  as  the  latest  limit  for  the  conversion 
of  St.  Paul  the  year  36,  but  admits  of  several 
years'  latitude  for  the  earlier  limit.  In  determin- 
ing this  earlier  limit  much  depends  on  the  identi- 
fication of  the  journey  to  Jenisalem  alluded  to  in 
Gal  2"^-.     Two  questions  must  be  answered  here  : 

(1)  When  did  the  14  years  begin — at  the  conversion 
or  after  the  three  years  mentioned  in  Gal  1"? 

(2)  Are  these  full  years  in  each  ca.se,  or  are 
they  reckoned  after  the  Hebrew  plan,  with  parts 
of  years  at  the  beginning  and  end  counted  in  the 
number  as  separate  years?  The  answers  to  these 
questions  yield  respectively  longer  or  shorter 
periods  between  the  conversion  and  second  visit  of 
the  Apostle  to  Jerusalem.  The  longest  period  ad- 
missible is  17  years ;  the  shortest,  12.  The  smaller 
of  these  figures  is  excluded  almost  certainlj^  by 
the  datum  found  in  connexion  with  the  control  of 
Damascus  by  Aretas,  which  does  not  admit  of  a 
later  date  for  the  conversion  than  36.  The  longer 
period  necessitates  the  very  early  date  of  32  or  33 
tor  the  conversion.  This  is  favoured  by  W.  M. 
Ramsay,  who  fixes  the  conversion  in  33.  But 
there  are  intermediate  possibilities.  The  interval 
may  have  been  13,  14,  or  15  years ;  which  would 
bring  the  conversion  in  any  one  of  the  years  34-36, 
with  the  probability  in  favour  of  the  earlier  dates. 

The  Conference  at  Jerusalem  arose  out  of  the 
conditions  produced  by  St.  Paul's  preaching  during 
the  first  missionary  journey.  This  is  shown  by 
the  place  given  it  by  St.  Luke,  and  also  by  the 
fact  that  it  was  during  this  journey  that  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel  met  with  large  success 
among  the  Gentiles,  and  that  a  definite  movement 
to  preach  to  the  Gentiles  independently  of  the 
Jews  was  inaugurated  (Ac  IS''*  14^).  From  these 
considerations  it  would  be  natural  to  draw  the 
inference  that  no  very  long  interval  separates  the 
end  of  the  journey  from  the  Conference.  In  spite, 
therefore,  of  '  the  long  time '  alluded  to  in  Ac  14'^, 
it  is  safe  to  fix  the  limits  of  the  first  missionary 
journey  at  47-48. 

Between  the  date  of  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul 
and  the  beginning  of  the  first  missionary  journey 
it  is  possible  to  identify  the  date  of  one  more  in- 
cident, viz.  the  visit  to  Jerusalem,  with  the  aid 
in  relief  of  the  famine.  Computations  inde{)endent 
of  the  life  of  St.  Paul  lead  to  the  placing  of  this 
date  in  the  year  45-46  (cf.  IV.  1).  For  reasons 
given  in  rehearsing  these  computations  it  is  im- 
possible to  identify  this  visit  with  that  made  in 
Gal  2'.  This  must  be  regarded  as  the  prolonged 
visit  for  purposes  of  conference  and  thorough  in- 
terchange of  views  with  the  leaders  of  the  Jeru- 
salem church  of  which  the  author  of  Acts  gives  an 
account  in  ch.  15.  The  chronology  of  the  life  and 
work  of  St.  Paul  yielded  by  the  above  items  may 
therefore  be  put  as  follows : 


A.D. 

Conversion      .        .        .  34-35 

Visit  to  Jerusalem  with 
aid  for  famine-stricken 
church ....  45-46 

First  missionary  jour- 
ney      ...        .  47-48 

Conference  at  Jerusa- 
lem      ...        .  49-50 

Second  missionary  jo«ir- 
ney       ....  51-54 

Third  missioDary  jour- 
ney      ....  54-57 

VII.  Apostolic  Church  Dates.— i.  Pente- 
cost.— It  is  manifestly  the  intention  of  the  author 
of  Acts  to  begin  his  narrative  with  the  significant 
event  of  Pentecost.  Just  as  he  had  closed  his 
Gospel  with  the  account  of  the  Resurrection  of  the 
crucified  Jesus,  he  opens  his  second  treatise  with 
the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  the 
Apostolic   Age,    Pentecost    becomes    the    epoch- 


Arrest  at  Jemsalem    .  58 

Impriaonmoit  at  Cb- 
sarea  .  5S-«0 

Removal  to  Borne       .  00 

Imprisonment  at  Rome  60-43 

Release  .62 

Last  missionary  jour- 
ney   ....  63-64 

AiT^t,  imprisonment, 
and  execution  at 
Rome        .  .  (65-«7t) 


280 


DATES 


DATES 


making  day.  But,  as  the  very  name  of  it  indi- 
cates, Pentecost  was  a  relative  date  in  the  year, 
being  computed  from  a  day  of  manifestly  more 
importance  than  itself.  Accordingly,  in  the  de- 
termination of  the  year  for  the  Pentecost  of  Ac  2 
it  is  necessary  to  revert  to  the  computation  which 
fixed  the  date  of  the  Crucifixion  (see  above,  I.). 
Pentecost  is  thus  dated  in  May  A.D.  30. 

2.  The  martyrdom  of  Stephen.— The  date  of 
this  event  is  fixed  with  approximate  certainty  by 
its  relation  to  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul.  It  was 
the  persecution  following  the  death  of  Stephen 
which  enlisted  Saul  in  tlie  eilbrt  to  exterminate 
the  nascent  Christian  community  and  thus  led  him 
on  the  way  to  Damascus  and  his  conversion. 
Stephen's  martyrdom  could  not  therefore  have 
preceded  the  conversion  by  a  very  long  interval, 
and  must  have  taken  place  between  32  and  34. 

3.  The  execution  of  James  the  son  of  Zebedee, 
together  with  the  imprisonment  and  deliverance  of 
St.  Peter,  is  so  closely  associated  with  the  death  of 
Herod  that  both  these  events  may  be  safely  placed 
in  the  same  year  (44).* 

4.  The  rise  of  Antioch  into  prominence  as  a 
centre  of  Christian  aggressiveness  must  be  placed 
at  some  time  before  the  year  46,  though,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  the  exact  time  cannot  be  fixed. 
From  Ac  2^  (cf.  Tacit.  Ann.  xv.  44)  it  is  clear 
that  some  time  before  the  year  of  the  famine  there 
was  a  large  number  of  believers  to  attract  atten- 
tion and  to  be  recognized  as  a  type  of  religionists 
different  from  the  Jews.  Immediately  after  the 
year  of  the  famine  the  church  at  Antioch  became 
the  fountain-head  of  missionary  activity. 

5.  The  Conference  at  Jerusalem  is  placed, 
through  its  relation  to  the  missionary  journeys 
of  St.  Paul,  in  the  year  50. 

6.  The  death  of  James  the  brother  of  Jesas. — 
From  the  time  of  the  Conference  at  Jerusalem,  St. 
James  was  recognized  as  one  of  the  foremost  men 
in  the  Christian  community  at  Jerusalem  (Ac  15'*, 
Gal  2").  In  consequence  of  his  relation  to  the 
mother  church,  he  bears  the  title  of  bishop  of  that 
church.  According  to  Josephus,  he  was  put  to 
death  during  the  interregnum  between  the  pro- 
curatorships  of  Festus  and  Albinus  {Ant.  XX.  ix. 
1).     This  was  in  the  year  62. 

7.  The  death  of  St.  Peter — For  the  date  of  St. 
Peter's  death  we  are  obliged  to  appeal  to  extra- 
historical  (purely  traditional)  information.  The 
diflRculties  of  estimating  the  value  of  such  informa- 
tion are  due  (1)  to  the  absence  of  sufficient  data 
regarding  the  original  witnesses  on  whose  authority 
such  information  secured  circulation,  and  (2)  to 
the  facility  with  which  even  good  historians  in 
antiquity  accepted  unverified  statements  where 
events  of  importance  were  concerned.  The  desire 
for  some  definite  data  often  overcame  whatever 
intuitive  sense  of  accuracy  may  at  other  times 
have  ruled  the  outlook  of  these  historians.  Thus 
tradition,  i.e.  the  unverifiable  belief  of  an  age  not 
capable  of  direct  contact  with  the  facts,  may  be 
credited  frequently  with  a  high  degree  of  pro- 
bability, more  frequently  with  less  probability ; 
in  most  instances  it  is  incapable  of  giving  more 
than  the  mere  possibility  of  what  it  attests.  In 
the  case  of  the  death  of  St.  Peter  several  consider- 
ations conspire  to  render  the  tradition  highlj' 
probable.  The  Apostle  was  in  Rome  at  a  time  of 
persecution.     This  appears  from  the  contents  of 

•  In  a  recently  published  fragment  of  Papias  (de  Boor,  Td 
V.  2,  p.  170)  it  is  said  that  'John  and  James  his  brother  were 
killed  by  the  Jews.'  This,  toprether  with  the  bracketing  of  the 
names  of  the  two  brothers  in  the  Martyrology  on  the  same  day, 
has  led  some  to  infer  that  the  death  of  John  tho  son  of  Zebedee 
took  place  in  44.  The  question,  however,  is  involved  in  the 
vexed  problem  of  the  identity  of  the  author  of  the  Founh 
Gospel,  and  must  be  left  open  for  further  investigation  and 
discussion.    See  art.  Jambs  and  Joun  (sons  of  Zebedee). 


1  Peter,  irresi)ective  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
writing.  Even  if  it  be  assumed,  as  seems  probable 
to  many  scliolars,  tliat  it  was  comi>osed  about  A.D. 
80,  it  would  issue  from  a  period  near  enough  the 
date  of  the  reputed  death  of  St.  Peter  to  afford  a 
reflexion  of  a  living  current  belief  regarding  his 
experiences.  The  allusion  to  'Babylon'  in  the 
Epistle  has  from  the  days  of  Papias  (Euseh.  HE 
ii.  15)  to  the  present  time  (with  slight  exceptions) 
been  taken  to  refer  to  Rome.  From  this  city  the 
Apostle,  according  to  Papias,  sent  the  letter  to  his 
fellow-Christians  dispersed  and  scattered  by  the 
persecution  of  which  he  was  made  a  victim.  But, 
even  granting  that  the  martyrdom  of  the  Apostle 
occurred  in  the  Neronian  persecution,  the  question 
of  the  exact  year  remains  uncertain.  Ilarnack 
believes  that  it  took  place  in  64  (Gesch.  der 
altchristl.  Lit.  bis  Euseb.,  pt.  i.  'Chron.,'  249  ff.). 
Erbes  (TU,  new  series,  iv.  [1900])  fixes  it  in  63. 
Of  the  older  historians,  William  Cave  (Lives  of 
the  Apontles,  1677,  '  St.  Peter,'  xi.  7)  also  believed 
in  the  date  64.  In  the  Chronicon  of  Eusebius,  how- 
ever, the  13th  or  14th  year  of  Nero  (67-68)  is  given 
as  tlie  date,  and  the  same  conclusion  is  accepted 
by  Jerome.  The  tradition  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  has  uniformly  adhered  to  the  period  42-67 
as  '  the  twenty-five  year  episcopate '  of  the  Apostle 
in  Rome.  Upon  the  whole,  this  later  date  seems 
best  supported.     See  IV.  5  and  art.  Petek. 

8.  The  pre-eminence  of  Ephesus  in  Christian 
activity  may  be  generally  placed  in  connexion 
with  the  ministry  of  St.  Paul  in  that  city  ;  but  its 
rise  to  the  first  rank  as  the  seat  of  apostolic 
influence  under  John  (the  Presbyter?)  must  have 
followed  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  but  cannot  be  fixed 
with  precision. 

9.  The  death  of  St.  John,  'the  beloved  disciple,' 
is  associated  by  tradition  with  his  residence  at 
Ephesus  to  an  extreme  old  age,  occurring  in  the 
reign  of  Trajan  (98-117).  See  art.  James  and 
John  (sons  of  Zebedee). 

VIII.  Literary  Z>>4r^s.— Nothing  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Age  was  fuller  of  significance  for  the  future 
than  the  production  of  the  NT  writings.  But, 
while  the  dates  of  production  of  a  few  of  these  are 
comparatively  easy  to  determine,  the  majority  do 
not  afford  sufficient  data  for  the  positive  solution 
of  the  problem  as  it  affects  tliem. 

1.  The  Epistle  of  James. — Discussions  of  the 
date  of  this  writing  are  based  for  the  most  part  on 
the  neutral  features  of  it.  The  character  of  the 
audience  to  which  it  is  addressed  does  not  l»etray 
an  advanced  development  of  Christian  thought  or 
practice.  There  is  no  allusion  to  Gentiles  in  the 
Church.  Compact  organization  has  not  yet  been 
achieved,  and  it  is  possible  for  teachers  (5iSd<rKaXoi) 
to  assume  the  function  at  will  (3' ;  cf.  Ac  13',  Ro 
12^).  The  eschatological  outlook  still  includes  the 
vivid  expectation  of  the  Parousia  (5^'*),  which  has 
not  been  disputed  as  in  2  P  3^*.  In  general  the 
author  addresses  Jews  as  if  the  new  doctrine  of 
Christianity  were  the  legitimate  and  rightful 
outcome  oi  historic  Judaism.  Such  a  point  of 
view  was  natural  in  the  early  beginnings  when 
the  challenge  to  Christianity  was  still  in  its  first 
forms,  but  scarcely  after  the  rupture  between 
Judaism  and  the  Church  had  issued  in  open 
and  wholesale  hostilities  on  each  side.  On  the 
other  hand,  certain  characteristics  of  language 
and  style,  together  with  supposed  allusions  to  tlie 
Pauline  doctrme  of  justification  by  faith,  have  led 
others  to  assume  an  extremely  late  date  for  the 
Epistle.  Upon  the  whole,  it  seems  probable  that 
the  date  40  to  44  is  the  correct  one.  Cf.  James, 
Epistle  of. 

2.  The  Thessalonian  Epistles.  — The  First 
Epistle  was  written  during  the  sojourn  at  Corinth 
(Ac  18").     The  reference  to  Achaia  (I''-)  is  decisive 


DATES 


DATES 


281 


on  this  point.  The  view  that  Athens  was  the 
place  of  writing,  held  by  Theodoret  and  many 
ancient  Fathers,  is  deduced  from  3',  which,  how- 
ever, evidently  refers  to  a  stay  at  Athens  some- 
what anterior  to  the  composition  of  the  Epistle. 
Since  the  Corinthian  sojourn  falls  in  52-53,  1  Thess. 
must  be  dated  accordingly.  The  Second  Epistle 
could  not  have  been  written  much  later  than  its 
predecessor.  It  is  evidently  designed  to  explain 
what  was  misunderstood  in  1  Thess.  (2  Th  2-),  and 
aims  to  do  tliis  as  speedily  as  possible.  Cf. 
Thessaloxiaks,  Epistles  to  the. 

3.  Galatians. — The  date  of  Galatians  has  been 
made  the  subject  of  a  new  discussion  as  the  con- 
sequence of  the  promulgation  of  the  South  Galatian 
theory  of  its  destination.  The  traditional  dating 
of  the  document  based  on  the  North  Galatian 
destination  fixed  it  in  the  sojourn  of  the  Apostle 
at  Ephesus  (Ac  19*).  The  reasons  for  this  view 
are  that  St.  Paul  proceeded  from  Galatia  to 
Ephesus  (Ac  18^),  and  must  have  written  either 
before  he  reached  that  city  (which  is  improbable) 
or  during  his  sojourn,  or  perhaps  on  the  way  from 
Ephesus  to  Corinth.  The  rise  of  the  South  Gala- 
tian theory,  however,  renders  it  possible  to  think 
of  a  much  earlier  date.  Accordingly,  many  argue 
for  its  priority  over  all  the  Pauline  writings 
(Emilie  Briggs,  New  World,  1900,  p.  115fr.  ;  C.  W. 
Emmet,  Expositor, 1th.  ser.,  ix.  [1910]  242  flF. ;  Garvie, 
Studies  of  Paul  and  his  Gospel,  1911,  p.  23 fF.); 
some  trace  it  even  to  a  time  anterior  to  the  Con- 
ference at  Jerusalem.  Calvin,  singularly,  held 
this  view  (cf.  Com.  on  Gal  2^),  fixing  the  date  at  48 
or  49.  Had  St.  Paul  written  it  as  early  as  this 
date,  however,  he  must  have  named  Barnabas, 
who  was  still  with  him  in  his  labours.  Upon  the 
whole,  the  year  54  still  appears  the  most  probable 
for  the  writing  of  this  Epistle.  See,  further,  art. 
Galatians,  Epistle  to  the. 

4.  The  Corinthian  Epistles.— The  First  Epistle 
was  written  in  Ephesus  some  time  before  Pentecost 
(1  Co  16*),  whether  before  or  after  the  Passover 
does  not  appear  (5®^).  The  Apostle  was  expecting 
to  leave  very  soon  ;  and  the  writing  must,  there- 
fore, be  placed  towards  the  close  of  the  stay  at 
Ephesus,  hence  about  the  time  of  the  Passover  in 
56.  On  the  assumption  of  the  unity  of  2  Cor.,  the 
intei^-al  between  it  and  the  First  Epistle  could  not 
have  been  very  long,  and  the  writing  must  accord- 
ingly be  placed  somewhat  later  in  the  same  year. 
But,  if  the  Epistle  is  a  composite  one,  as  it  seems 
reasonable  to  believe  upon  good  critical  grounds, 
the  probabilities  are  that  the  earliest  section  of  it 
(6"-7*)  constitutes  a  fragment  of  a  letter  earlier 
than  1  Corinthians.  The  second  section  in  point 
of  time  is  2  Co  10-13  ('the  painful  letter')  and  re- 
presents the  sequel  to  1  Cor. ,  growing  out  of  the 
situation  created  by  the  last-named  communication. 
This  portion  of  2  Cot.  is  accordingly  to  be  located 
in  56  as  above.  The  remainder  of  the  composite 
document  (2  Co  1-9,  exc.  6'^^)  must  be  dated  later 
than  chs.  10-13,  but  is  not  necessarily  separated 
from  this  section  by  a  long  interval.  If  the  phrases 
'  since  last  year '  (drb  -ripvai),  •  a  year  ago '  (2  Co 
8^*),  'for  a  year  past'  (9^)  refer  to  1  Co  16^  approxi- 
mately one  year  must  have  intervened  between 
this  portion  of  2  Cor.  and  the  First  Epistle.  This 
would  bring  the  date  to  57.  Thus  the  dates  of  St. 
Paul's  letters  to  Corinth  would  be  :  (1)  2  Co  6"-7' 
in  55  or  early  56  ;  (2)  1  Cor.  in  66  before  Pentecost ; 
(3)  2  Co  10-13  in  summer  of  66  ;  (4)  2  Co  1-9,  late 
56  or  57.     Cf.  CoRiXTHiAXS,  Epistles  to  the. 

5.  Romans.— Since  Ro  15  must  be  regarded  as 
an  original  part  of  the  whole  Epistle  (cf.  Moflatt, 
LNT,  p.  143),  the  allusion  in  v.^s  to  St.  Pauls  in- 
tended journey  to  Jerusalem  fixes  the  point  of 
departure  for  the  date  of  the  Epistle.  The  state- 
ment in  V.**  that  the  Apostle  had  'fulfilled'  the 


!  gospel '  from  Jenisalem  and  round  about  even  onto 
Illyricum,'  lias  led  some  to  place  the  writing  of 
Romans  in  Illyricum  ;  but  the  greater  proljability 
lies  with  the  view  which  identities  the  place  with 
Corinth,  and  fixes  the  date  as  the  eve  of  St.  Paul's 
departure  thence  for  'Sj'ria'  (Ac  20*).  This  was 
in  the  spring  of  58  (during  the  Apostle's  three 
months'  sojourn  at  Corinth).  See  art.  Romans, 
Epistle  to  the. 

6.  The  Imprisonment  Epistles.— Under  this  title 
are  usually  included  Ephesians,  Colossians,  Philip- 
pians,  and  Philemon.  Ephesians  is  by  many  made 
an  exception  to  this  class.  The  period  of  St.  Paul's 
imprisonment,  however,  is  divided  into  two  parts 
by  his  removal  from  Caesarea  to  Rome.  Assuming 
the  Pauline  authority  of  Ephesians,  it  has  been, 
with  Colossians  and  Philemon,  located  in  the 
Caesarean  period  of  his  imprisonment  (56-60;  so 
Meyer,  Weiss,  Sabatier  [The  Apostle  Paul,  1891, 
pp.  225-249]).  Others  have  included  even  Philip- 
pians  in  this  list.  But  it  is  difficult  to  think  of 
Philippians  and  Philemon  as  composed  elsewhere 
than  in  Rome  and  during  the  Roman  part  of  the 
imprisonment  (cf.  the  reasons  in  a  summary  by 
Bleek,  Einleitung  in  das  NT*,  1885,  §  161).  It  is 
possible,  though  not  probable,  however,  that  Col., 
which  was  written  earlier  than  Eph.,  may  have 
fallen  within  the  latter  portion  of  the  Caesarean 
imprisonment.  In  such  a  case  the  order  and  dates 
of  these  writings  would  be:  (1)  Colossians  in  59 
(Caesarea) ;  (2)  Ephesians  in  60  (Rome) ;  (3)  Phile- 
mon in  60  (Rome) ;  (4)  Philippians  in  61  (Rome). 
See  artt.  on  the  various  Epistles  named. 

7.  The  Pastoral  Epistles. — The  present  condition 
of  opinion  on  the  problem  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
presents  three  distinct  views  as  to  their  dates  :  (1) 
that  they  were  composed  by  the  Apostle  after  his 
release  from  the  Roman  imprisonment  (62),  towards 
the  end  of  his  fourth  missionary  journey  (66  or  67) ; 
(2)  that  they  represent  a  much  more  advanced 
stage  of  development  in  Christian  thought  and 
organization,  and  therefore  fall  between  the  date 
of  St.  Paul's  death  and  the  reign  of  Hadrian  (A.D. 
67-117),  with  the  greater  probability  for  90-100  (cf. 
Motfatt,  LNT,  pp.  395-^20) ;  (3)  that  they  represent 
short  letters  by  St.  Paul  produced  in  his  la.st  year 
and  expanded  by  interpolation.  The  merits  of 
these  views  it  is  not  possible  to  discuss  in  the  com- 
pass of  this  article  (cf.  J.  V.  Bartlet,  Acts  [The 
Century  Bible,  1901],  Moffatt,  loc.  ci7.,  and  the  artt. 
on  Timothy,  Ep.  to,  and  Titus,  Ep.  to). 

8.  Acts. — All  the  discussion  of  the  problem 
created  by  the  abrupt  close  of  the  Book  of  Acts 
seems  to  lead  to  but  one  clear  conclusion,  viz.  that 
the  author  knew  nothing  more  to  tell  about  St. 
Paul  and  the  fortunes  of  the  gosj>el,  and  that  the 
date  of  the  composition  of  the  book  coincides  with 
the  end  of  the  second  year  of  the  Apostle's  im- 
prisonment at  Rome  (62).  This  in  general  is  the 
simple  process  of  reasoning  that  ruled  opinion  in 
ancient  times  from  the  days  of  Eusebius  onwards 
(HE  11.  xxii.  6).  In  modem  times  its  advocates 
have  been  some  of  the  ablest  critics  ( Alford,  Godet, 
Salmon,  Rendall,  Bisping,  Rackham,  Blass,  and 
Harnack).  On  the  other  side,  it  is  argued  that, 
as  Acts  is  a  sequel  to  the  Third  Gospel  (rhw  iiiv 
rpGrrov  \(r/op),  which,  it  is  assumed,  was  written 
after  A.D.  70,  the  earliest  date  possible  for  Acts 
must  be  some  years  posterior  to  this  date.  The 
more  precise  determination  of  the  period,  however, 
becomes  a  question  of  extremely  debatable  con- 
siderations. Accordingly,  a  wide  variety  of  dates 
of  composition  is  proposed,  as  by  Zahn,  Ueadlam, 
Bartlet  (72-74) ;  by  Bleek.  Adeney,  Gilbert  (80) ; 
by  Jiilicher,  Burkitt,  Wrede  (c.  100);  by  the 
Tubingen  critics  (110-120),  or  even  later.  Hamack, 
however,  has  sho\vn  reasons  why  the  posteriority 
of  St.  Luke  to  the  year  70  cannot  stand  {The  Date 


282 


DATES 


DATES 


of  Acts  and  of  the  Sijiwptic  Gospcln),  and  the  tradi- 
tional datin;^  at  A.b.  62  may  l)e  said  to  liave  re- 
ceived a  rehabilitation  at  his  liands.  See  art. 
Acts  ok  thk  Ai'().sti,k.s. 

9.  The  Synoptic  Gospels.— That  the  Syii«i)Li(! 
Gospels  were  coinpoKed  njion  Mie  basis  of  pre-exist- 
ing collections  of  'Sayinys  of  .Jesus,'  throu},di  a 
process  of  development,  may  be  assumed  as  one 
of  tl>e  fairly  well-established  results  of  modern 
critical  study.  How  lon<^  this  process  continued 
is  of  secondary  importance.  The  order  in  which 
the  Gospels  evidently  appeared  is— Mark,  Luke, 
Matthew.  The  earliest  notices  of  the  time  of  tlie 
composition  of  iMark  are  not  perfectly  harmonious. 
Iren;eu3  (Ilccr.  iii.  1)  testilies  that  Mark,  'the 
disciple  and  interjjreter  of  Peter,'  published  'the 
things  preached  by  Peter'  after  the  dei)arture 
(i^oBov)  of  Paul  and  Peter ;  but  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, a  contemporary,  represents  the  Gospel  of 
Mark  as  written  in  the  lifetime  of  Peter,  and  adds 
that  the  Apostle  'neither  forbade  nor  encouniL'cd' 
the  work.  This  discrepancy  is  not  of  com- ■  ;i  < mi- 
tradiction.  The  'departure,'  to  which  Jiuiuriis 
makes  the  writing  of  Mark  jmsterior,  may  be  a 
mere  departure  from  Rome  (though  this  is  not 
likely) ;  or  it  may  be  that  the  statement  of  Clement 
merely  means  that  Peter  knew  of  Mark's  purpose 
to  write,  though  that  pur[)ose  was  not  actually 
carried  out  till  after  his  death.  The  best  view, 
however,  of  the  discord  is  that  neither  of  the  re- 
presentations is  primarily  based  on  chronological 
interest,  and  therefore  neither  can  be  used  as  a 
precise  datum  in  a  chronological  computation.  So 
far  as  the  passage  in  Irenajus  is  concerned.  Chap- 
man has  shown  this  to  be  true  (JThSt,  vi.  [1905] 
p.  503  if.),  and  Harnack  contends  that  it  is  also  true 
of  the  passage  in  Clement.  Such  an  estimate  of 
tliese  'testimonies'  of  the  ancients  leaves  the  time 
of  the  origin  of  the  Gospels  indefinite,  but  is  in 
itself  just.  Upon  the  whole,  therefore,  it  seems 
not  improbable  that  Mark  and  Luke  at  least  were 
composed  before  Acts  and  in  the  years  of  St.  Paul's 
imprisonment  in  Rome  or  even  earlier.  The  case 
is  slightly  different  with  Matthew,  where  signs  of 
a  later  time  are  more  clearly  visible  (27*  28^*  :  ^ws 
TTis  ffrifjLepov,  'until  to-day,'  implying  a  considerable 
interval  from  the  days  of  Jesus) ;  a  date  as  late  as 
70  or  even  later  is  quite  admissible.  See  art.  GOS- 
PELS and  artt.  on  separate  Gospels  in  DCG. 

10.  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. — The  evidence  as 
to  the  date  of  this  production  is  extremely  faint  and 
uncertain.  The  external  data  are  partly  some  free 
citations  from  it  in  Clem.  Rom.  (xix.  2,  xxi.  9  [cf. 
He  121],  xxxiv.  1  [cf.  He  2i»  3^  4--=  !-'•]),  and  partly 
a  certain  dependence  of  thought  on  St.  Paul  and 
on  1  Peter.  Internal  data  appealed  to  are  such  as 
that  the  Temple  service  was  still  operative  (7**  8^'® 
g6-9  1310J .  that,  considering  the  purpose  of  the 
writing,  if  the  Temple  service  had  been  rendered 
impossible  by  such  an  event  as  tlie  catastrophe  of 
70,  the  writer  must  have  mentioned  the  fact ;  the 
non-occurrence  of  any  severe  persecution  of  Chris- 
tians in  the  Hebrew  world  leading  to  martyrdom 
(12*),  the  possibility  of  which  is,  however,  kept  in 
view.  Otlier  items  are  slighter  and  less  conclusive. 
The  most  decisive  indications  of  time  seem  to  be 
the  allusions  in  10^^'-  12^  *"■,  which  show  that  the 
writer  was  thinking  of  an  attitude  in  his  readers 
of  shrinking  from  suflering  publicly,  whether  this 
was  imminent  or  actual,  though  not  severe.  In 
Palestine  this  attitude  of  mind  Avas  to  be  met  in 
the  years  of  the  Jewisii  war.  The  latter  portion  of 
the  period,  therefore,  or  the  years  68  and  69,  may 
very  well  be  taken  as  the  most  approjtriate  setting 
for  tlie  writing.     See,  further,  Hebrkws,  Epistle 

TO  THE. 

11.  The  Epistles  of  Peter  and  Jude.— The  date 
of  the  death  of  St.  Peter  as  already  iixed  necessi- 


tates a  date  for  1  and  2  Peter  priui  \<,  liT.  For  2 
l'eU'A{f/.v.),  in  the  present  conditio:  I  c  1  i.-  >  \idence, 
this  proves  impossible,  on  both  iuLcriKil  and  ex- 
ternal grounds.  The  conclusion  is  inevitable  that 
this  writing  (togetlier  with  Jude  [q.v.])  must  be 
detaclied  from  the  Apostolic  Age.  For  1  Peter, 
however,  there  is  a  very  natural  place  in  the 
Apostle's  sojourn  in  Rome.  The  mention  of  '  Baby- 
lon'(5'*)  has  been  from  very  early  days  (Euseb.  JIE\\. 
15)  referre<l  to  Rome,  in  harmony  with  the  literary 
methods  of  the  day.  The  conditions  reliected  in 
the  writing  al.so  correspond  with  those  that  pre- 
vailed in  the  reign  of  Isero.  Christians  had  been 
obliged  to  leave  the  capital  in  large  numi>ers  and 
create  a  new  '  Dispersion.'  It  was  a  time  of  tempta- 
tion to  fall  away  becau.se  of  hardships,  threatened 
or  actual,  for  bearing  the  name  '  Christian.'  Alto- 
gether, the  year  66  or  even  65  may,  therefore,  well 
have  been  the  date  of  the  writing  of  thb  Epistle. 
See,  further,  art.  PKTEii,  EpLSTLES  OF. 

12.  The  Johannine  writings. — Of  the  writings 
of  this  group  the  Apocalyp.se  oilers  the  clearest 
marks  of  its  age.  But  even  here,  from  the  earliest 
times,  difl'ering  views  have  prevailed.  Signs  of  an 
earlier  time  tlian  Domitiaii's  reign  may  easily  be 
pointed  out  in  the  book.  But  they  are  quite  as  easily 
accounted  for  as  reminiscences  or  traditions  incor- 
|)oiated  into  the  work.  The  undeniable  allusion 
to  the  worship  of  the  Emperor  (17'*' '-),  however, 
j)oints  to  the  reign  of  Domitian,  under  whom  for 
the  first  time  Emperor- worship  assumed  its  serious 
aspect  to  the  Christians.  This,  with  some  minor 
considerations,  gives  the  predominance  of  weight 
to  the  Domitianic  dating  of  the  Apocalypse.  See, 
further,  art.  Apocalypse. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  is  related  to  the  Apocalypse 
not  merely  by  the  external  and  superhcial  identity 
of  the  author's  name  but  by  the  substantial  agree- 
ment of  the  two  writings  in  view-point  and  doctrinal 
system.  Stylistic  and  linguistic  characteristics, 
however,  separate  them  very  widely,  and  the  atlili- 
ation  of  the  two  is  best  explained  on  the  groimd 
of  origin  within  a  Johannine  'school'  or  group. 
But  if  the  Apocalypse  was  written  between  85  and 
95,  the  Gospel  cannot  bo  dated  much  earlier  than 
the  latter  year,  since  such  a  Johannine  group  must 
have  taken  some  time  to  develop  its  characteristic 
point  of  view  and  conceptions.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  likelihood  that  Ignatius,  Justin,  and  Papias 
were  familiar  with  the  Gospel  fixes  the  latest  date 
for  the  latter  as  110.  It  must  be  dated,  then,  some 
time  between  95  and  110,  with  the  probability 
strongly  in  favour  of  a  year  prior  to  100. 

Of  the  Johannine  Epistles  (see  JOHN,  EpiSTLES 
OF)  the  First  must  be  connected  in  time  as  well  as 
authorship  with  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Whether  it 
preceded  the  larger  writing  or  followed  it  is  of 
small  importance.  Its  general  period  remains  the 
same.  The  two  minor  Epistles  by  the  Presbyter 
issue  from  the  same  group,  and  probably  belong 
to  the  same  general  period. 


James    . 

1  and  2  Thessaloiii- 
ans 

Galatians 

1  and  2  Uorinthi- 
ana     . 

Uonian!) 

Inilirisonment  Ep- 
istles (Col., 
Eph.,  Philuin., 
Phil.) 


ClIRONOLOaiCAL  Tablb. 
A.D. 

44  (80-100) 


.53 

f)4  (50-53) 


56-57 
58 


59-Cl 


A.D. 

Synoptic       Oospels 

(Mk.       fCOJ,     Lk. 

(Ulj,  Mt.  [GSJ)        .  60-68 
Acts  .        .         .        .62 
Pastoral    Epistles  (1 

and  2  Tim.,  Tit.)  .  60 
1  Pet.  .  .  .6(1 
Hebrews  .  .  .  (>9 
Apocalypsi-  .  s1-96 

Epistles  lit  John        .   JS  (?) 
Foiinli  tiospel  .         .  >.»O-100  (?) 


LiTKRATURK. — The  primary  sources  of  information  outside  the 
apostolic  records  and  Epistles  are  the  works  of  Josephus  (,4nt. 
and  BJ);  the  Amtaiioi  Tacitus  ;  Suetonius,  The  Lives  of  the 
Tvxlve  Canars  ;  and  the  works  of  Eusebius  (IlEiunl  Chrunieon, 
together  with  Jerome's  VH).  The  mmlern  study  of  the  subject 
h.18  issued  in  a  vast  number  of  discussions.  Some  of  these  are 
iucorporuted  in   worka  of  larger  scope,  such  as  E.  Schiirer, 


DAUGHTER 


DAY  AND  NIGHT 


283 


(ijy3  i.  [1901],  ii.  iii.  (189S)  (HJP,  Eng.  tr.,  188&-1890) ;  W.  M. 
R&msay,  St.  Paul  the  TratetUr  and  the  Homan  Citizen,  1S85 ; 
A.  Harnack,  (ii-fe/iiehte  der  altchrirtl.  Lit.,  ii.  (1S97] ;  C.  H. 
Turner,  un.  'fhronol.  of  NT'  in  HDB  i.  [1898]  403  ;  T.  Zahn. 
Introd.  to  the  ST  (Eng.  tr.,  19(»X  Appendix  ;  J.  Moffatt,  LST, 
1911.  Of  scjKirate  trealments  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  mention 
must  be  made  of  R.  Anger,  de  Temporum  in  Acti.i  Apott. 
Ratione,  1633 ;  T.  Lewin,  Fatti  Sacri,  1SC5 ;  G.  Hoennicke, 
ChtvnoLde*  UUntda  ApotteU  PatUm,  1903;  F.  Westber;?, 
BM.  CkrvnoL,  19ia  ANDBEW  C.  ZeNOS. 

DAUGHTER.— See  Family. 

DAYID  (Aoi'€/a,  but  TR  Aa/St'S).  —  David,  the 
must  popular  of  the  heroes  and  the  most  illostrious 
of  the  kings  of  Lsrael,  is  ofteu  alluded  to  in  the 
NT.  He  is  '  David  the  son  of  Jesse '  (Ac  13-),  a 
name  reminiscent  of  his  lowly  origin  ;  and  he  is 
'  the  patriarch  David '  (2^),  '  our  father  David ' 
(4*),  one  of  that  company  of  venerable  progenitors 
who  may  be  supposed  to  have  l>equeathed  some- 
thing of  their  spirit  to  all  their  descendants.  He 
is  habitually  thought  of  as  the  ideal  of  manhood, 
the  man  (annip)  after  God's  heart,  doing  all  His  will 
(13-) ;  and  as  the  devout  worshipper  who  desired 
to  find  a  habitation  for  the  God  of  Jacob  (7^). 
All  Israelites  loved  to  think  of  his  '  days '  (T'**)  as 
the  golden  age  of  Hebrew  history,  and  of  '  the  holy 
and  sure  blessings  '  shown  to  him  (13**),  or  Divine 

f>romLses  made  to  his  family,  as  pledges  of  ever- 
asting  favour  to  his  nation.  He  is  of  course  in- 
cluded in  the  roll  of  the  OT  heroes  of  faith  (He  11^-). 

These  were  matters  of  ancient  history,  but  the 
relation  of  David  to  the  Messiah  seemed  a  point 
of  vital  importance  to  every  Jew  and  Je\rish  Chris- 
tian, as  well  as  of  deep  interest  to  all  educated 
Gentile  Christians.  The  Davidic  descent  of  the 
coming  Deliverer — based  on  Is  11*,  Jer  23*,  Ps  132*^ 
— was  an  article  of  faith  among  the  scribes,  who 
connected  with  it  the  hope  of  regal  power  and  a 
restored  Kingdom.  It  would  be  too  much  to  say 
that  our  Lord's  own  discussion  of  the  point  (Mt 
22*S  Mk  12*s,  Lk  2t)^')  amounts  to  a  denial  on  His 
part  of  Davidic  descent,  but  it  clearly  implies  that 
He  did  not  attach  to  the  traditional  genealogy  the 
same  importance  as  the  Rabbis.  The  Messiah's 
spiritual  Lordship,  acknowledged  by  the  writer  of 
Ps  110 — who  is  presumed  to  be  David — is  for  Him 
the  essential  fact  (cf.  W.  Baldensperger,  Das  Selbst- 
betmisstsein  Jesti-,  1892,  p.  82  f.).  The  Apostolic 
Church,  however,  appears  to  have  taken  for  granted 
His  Davidic  extraction  on  the  male  side.  ThLs  fact 
is  genealogically  set  forth  in  Mt  1^'^*  and  Lk  3^**. 
Much  earlier,  St.  Paul  is  said  to  have  referred  to  it 
at  Pisidian  Antioch  (Ac  13-^),  and  in  Ro  P  he 
expresses  the  belief  that  Christ  was  '  bom  of  the 
seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh '  (cf.  2  Ti  2^). 
For  the  writer  of  the  Revelation,  too,  it  is  an 
article  of  faith  that  Christ  is  '  the  Root  (meaning 
shoot  or  scion  from  the  main  stem)  of  David'  (5*), 
'  the  Root  and  Oflspring  of  David '  (22'8). 

Before  the  rise  of  historical  and  literary  criti- 
cism, the  Psalms  were  assumed  to  be  Davidic  in 
authorship  and  many  of  tliem  directly  Messianic 
in  import.  In  Ac  1^*  the  69th  Psalm,  in  2»  Ps  16, 
in  2**  Ps  110,  in  4»  Ps  2,  in  Ro  4«  Ps  32,  in  11* 
Ps  69,  and  in  He  4"  Ps  95  are  ascribed  to  David. 
Ps  16  is  supix»sed  to  be  the  poetical  embodiment 
of  an  astonishing  vision  granted  to  David,  of  the 
resurrection  of  his  greater  Son.  In  its  original 
significance  it  was  a  cry  for  the  deliveranc-e  of  the 
Amter  from  death  and  the  expression  of  a  serene 
hope  that  tlie  prayer  would  be  answered.  St. 
Peter  is  struck  by  the  parallel  between  the  words 
of  '  the  patriarch  David '  and  the  experience  of 
Christ,  and  instead  of  abstracting  the  eternal 
principle  contained  in  the  Psalm — that  God  cannot 
leave  to  destruction  any  holy  one  with  whom  He 
had  made  a  covenant — and  applj-ing  it  to  Christ, 
be  assumes,  as  the  exegetical  methods  of  his  time 


permitted  him  to  do,  that  the  Psalmist  had  the 
actual  historical  events  directly  in  view  a  thousand 
years  before  their  occurrence.  In  the  same  way 
Ps  110,  which  ascribes  to  an  ideal  King  tlie  high- 
est participation  in  the  sovereignty  of  God,  is 
interpreted,  on  the  ground  that  Da\-id  himself 
'  ascended  not  into  the  heavens,'  as  a  prevision  on 
his  part  of  the  Ascension  of  Christ  (Ac  2**).  His- 
torical criticism  insists  on  the  rigid  separation  of 
all  the  Psalms  from  their  NT  applications.  Each 
of  them  had  its  own  meaning  in  its  own  time  and 
place.  The  words  '  his  office  let  another  take ' 
(Ac  1*  II  Ps  109*)  were  no  doubt  originally  spoken 
regarding  some  traitor,  but  probably  not  by  David, 
and  certainly  not  concerning  the  betrayer  of  our 
Lord.  Yet  '  the  idea  lying  behind  the  parallel 
perceived  ...  is  usually  profound,  admitting  of 
suggestive  restatement  in  terms  of  our  own  more 
rigorous  literary  methods'  (J.  V.  Bartlet,  Acts 
[Century  Bible,  1901],  p.  145). 

In  Rev  3^  the  Messiah  is  described  as  '  be  that 
hath  the  key  of  David.'  This  is  part  of  a  message 
of  comfort  to  the  persecuted  Church  of  Phila- 
delphia. The  whole  verse  is  an  adaptation  of 
Is  22—.  The  idea  is  that  the  steward  who  has  the 
key  of  the  house  possesses  the  symbol  of  unlimited 
authority  over  the  household.  As  the  Scion  of  the 
house  of  David,  Christ  has  supreme  power  in  the 
Divine  realm,  admitting  and  excluding  whom  He 
will.  '  And  the  key  of  the  house  of  Da^ad  will  I 
lay  upon  his  shoulder'  (Is  22"^')  is  synonymous 
with  'And  the  government  shall  be  upon  his 
shoulder'  (9*).  Vested  with  that  authority,  pos- 
sessing that  key,  the  Messiah  sets  before  the  Jew- 
ish Christians  of  Philadelphia,  who  are  shut  out 
from  the  synagogue,  the  ever-open  door  of  His 
eternal  Kingdom. 

LrrKEATTRB.— F.  Weber,  JOdisehe  Theologie,  Leip^,  1887,  p. 
3S2f. ;  C.  A.  Briggrs,  The  MetsiaA  of  theApoMet,  1S85,  pp.  42, 
74  ff. ;  E.  F.  Scott,  The  Kingdcmaitd  the  Measiak,  1911,  p.  175  ff. 

James  Straha^*. 
DAY  AKD  NIGHT  (figurative).*— Besides  theii 
literal    meanings,     '  day '    has    frequently,     and 
'  night '  on  two  or  three  occasions,  a  figurative 
signification. 

1.  By  a  species  of  synecdoche,  '  day '  is  often 
employed  generally  as  an  equivalent  lor  'time'; 
cf.  the  similar  use  of  cV  in  the  OT  (Gn  47*,  Jg  18*, 
2  S  211,  etc.)_  i  The  day  of  salvation  '  (2  Co  6*)  is 
the  time  when  salvation  is  possible ;  '  the  day 
of  visitation '  (1  P  2^-),  the  time  when  God  visits 
mankind  with  His  grace,  though  some  would  make 
it  equivalent  to  the  day  of  judgment ;  '  the  e^il 
day '  (Eph  6^'),  the  time  of  Satan's  assaults.  In 
this  use  of  the  word  the  plural  is  much  more 
common,  and  is  illustrated  by  such  phrases  as  '  for 
a  few  days'  (He  12'»),  'in  the  last  days'  (2  Ti  3^), 
'good  days'  (1  P  3^*).  Sometimes  'days'  is 
followed  by  the  genitive  either  of  a  person  or  a 
thing.  With  the  genitive  of  a  person  it  denotes 
the  period  of  his  life  or  public  activity.  'The 
days  of  David  '  (Ac  7**)  are  the  years  of  his  reign ; 
'the  days  of  Noah'  (1  P  3*),  the  time  when  he 
was  a  preacher  of  righteotisness  to  the  disobedient 
world.  With  the  genitive  of  a  thing,  '  days ' 
refers  to  the  time  of  its  occurrence,  as  'in  the 
days  of  the  taxing'  (Ac  5*^),  'in  the  days  of  the 
voice '  (Rev  10"). 

2.  In  Rev.  '  day '  is  used  as  a  mystical  symbol 
for  a  certain  period  of  tune.  As  to  the  length  of 
that  time  tlie  interpreters  of  apocalyptic  have 
widely  differed.  Some  have  taken  the  author  to 
be  using  words  in  their  literal  meaning  when  he 
writes  in  11»  12«  of  the  1260  days  (with  which  cf. 
the  corresponding  42  months  of  13*  and  the  '  time 
and  times  and  half  a  time,'  i.e.  3^  years,  of  12"). 
More  commonly  the  '  year-day  principle '  (cf .  Ezk  4*) 

*  For  '  day '  and  '  nigfat '  in  the  litenJ  sense  see  art.  Xikx. 


284 


DAY  OF  THE  LORD 


DEACON,  DEACONESS 


has  been  applied,  so  that  the  1260  days  have  stood 
for  the  same  number  of  years.  Similarly  the  '  ten 
days '  of  tribulation  (2'"),  instead  of  being  regarded 
as  a  round-number  expression  for  a  short  and 
limited  period  (cf.  Job  19^,  Dn  1"),  l,as  been  taken 
to  indicate  a  persecution  of  the  Church  at  Smyrna 
lasting  for  10  years. 
3.  In  a  specific  sense  '  the  day '  (Ro  13'-,  1  Co  3", 

1  Th  5»,  He  10=»,  2  P  l'»)  and  '  that  day '  (1  Th  5«, 

2  Th  I'o,  2  Ti  1"-  "  48)  are  used  metaphorically  for 
the  Parousia  with  all  its  glorious  accompaniments, 
in  contrast  with  which  the  present  world  of  sin 
and  sorrow  appears  as  '  the  night.'  '  The  night  is 
far  spent,'  St.  Paul  exclaims,  '  the  day  is  at  hand  ' 
(Ro  13'").  Elsewhere  he  conceives  of  Christ's 
people  as  illumined  already  by  the  glorious  light 
of  that  day's  dawn,  so  that,  although  they  still 
have  the  night  around  them  just  as  others  have, 
they  do  not  belong  to  it,  but  are  '  sons  of  light  and 
sons  of  the  day '  (1  Th  5"),  whose  calling  it  is  to  '  cast 
off  the  works  of  darkness '  and  to  '  put  on  the 
armour  of  light '  (Ro  13'" ;  cf.  1  Th  5*).  In  keeping 
with  this  metaphorical  description  of  the  glory  of 
the  Parousia  as  a  shining  day  is  the  conception  of 
the  heavenly  city,  illumined  by  the  presence  of  the 
Lamb  (Rev  21^),  as  a  city  of  unfading  light :  '  for 
there  shall  be  no  night  there  '  (v.=»  ;  cf.  22*-  »).  In 
this  distinctive  sense  '  the  day '  is  more  fully  de- 
scribed as  'the  day  of  the  Lord'  (1  Th  5*,  etc.), 
'  the  day  of  our  Lord  Jesus '  (2  Co  1"),  '  the  day  of 
Jesus  Christ'  (Ph  1»),  'the  day  of  Christ'  (v.'O), 
*  the  day  of  God '  (2  P  3'^), '  the  great  day '  (Jude«), 
'  the  great  day  of  God  Almighty '  (Rev  16").  It 
is  further  delined  by  a  variety  of  epithets  in  which 
reference  is  made  to  its  characteristic  manifesta- 
tions and  events.  Thus  it  is  '  the  day  of  judgment ' 
(2  P  29  3^  1  Jn  4"),  «of  wrath'  (Ro2»,  Rev  6'^), 
'  of  slaiighter '  ( Ja  5"),  '  of  revelation  of  the  right- 
eous judgment  of  God  '  (Ro  2*)  ;  but  also  '  tlie  day 
of  redemption '  (Eph  4**),  a  day  in  which  Christ's 
people  shall  not  only  have  boldness  (1  Jn  4'^),  but 
shall  rejoice  (Ph  2'®),  and  whose  coming  they  are 
to  look  for  and  earnestly  desire  (2  P  3'^). 

J.  C.  Lambert. 
DAY  OF  THE  LORD.— See  Eschatology. 

DAY-STAR.— In  the  OT  there  are  traces  of  the 
survival  of  a  dawn  myth  of  which  we  have  re- 
miniscences in  Job  3",  where  'the  eyelids  of  the 
dawn '  (in;f'-'5vcy  ;  LXX  iuatpdpov  dvaT^\\ovTa)  glance 
over  the  mountain-tops  to  behold  the  sleeping 
earth.  The  morning-  or  day-star  is  the  son  of 
the  dawn,  as  in  the  great  ode  on  the  overthrow  of 
the  ^king  of  Babylon  (in^^-j^  "j^'n ;  LXX  ew<7<j>6po%  6 
rrpwt  dvariWuv  ;  AV  '  Lucifer,  son  of  the  morning' ; 
but  RV  'day  star'  [Is  14'^]).  From  this  came  the 
metaphor.  But  in  the  NT  the  physical  associa- 
tions of  the  ligure  are  entirely  lost,  and  the  word 
'day-star'  has  become  the  equivalent  of  harbinger 
or  forerunner — some  joyful  event  or  appearance 
foretelling  the  end  of  the  night  of  distress  and 
sorrow,  and  the  dawning  of  a  new  and  better  day. 
'This  species  of  symbolism  was  employed  freely, 
as  every  reader  knows,  in  the  Gospels.  .  .  .  John 
the  Ba])tist  was  the  Forerunner,  the  Morning 
Star.  Christ  was  tlie  Sun,  tlie  Light  of  the 
World.  .  .  .  The  \isage  persisted  as  it  had  been 
originated '  (W.  M.  Ramsay,  Luke  the  Physician, 
p.  230  f.). 

Tlie  word  '  day-star '  occurs  in  the  NT  only  in  2  P 
1'* — Kai  (pwaipdpoi  dfareiKr)  iv  rats  KapSlaii  v/jidv — '  and 
the  day-star  arise  in  your  hearts'  (AV  and  RV). 
Tlie  thought,  however,  is  fairly  common  (cf.  such 
expressions  as  '  the  daysiiring  [dvaroXri]  from  on 
higli,'  Lk  P8  ;  '  his  marvellous  light '  [(f>Qs],  1  P  2"-' ; 
and  specially  'I  will  give  him  the  morning  star' 
[rbu  daripa  rbv  ■irpuiv6v'\.  Rev  2**  ;  '  the  briglit,  tlie 
morning  star'  [6  daTT)p  6  \afivp6i  6  Trpui'vdi],  22'*). 


In  the  Apocalyjpse,  it  should  be  noted,  the  usage 
(228  22'")  is  dillerent.  While  in  the  Gospels  '  an 
earlier  age  and  another  style  of  thought '  (Ramsay, 
on.  cit.  p.  234)  had  called  Christ  not  a  Star  but 
the  Sun  and  the  Light  of  the  World,  in  Revelation 
Christ  calls  Himself  the  Morning-Star  as  '  the 
herald  and  introducer  of  a  new  era,'  and  the  gift 
of  the  Morning-Star  means  '  the  dawn  of  a 
brighter  day  and  a  new  career.'  In  2  P  1'*  the 
writer,  discussing  the  efl'ect  produced  by  the 
Transfiguration  or  Jesus,  says  that  by  it  '  we  have 
the  word  of  prophecy  made  more  sure'  (RV).  The 
glorification  of  Christ  on  the  Mount  was  not  only 
a  partial  fulfilment  of  Messianic  prediction,  but 
was  in  itself  the  earnest  of  a  complete  glorification. 
In  the  squalid  place  of  the  world  (RVm  iv  avx/itjpi^ 
rdirq) — the  adj.  occurs  only  here  in  the  NT),  where 
the  Christian's  lot  is  cast,  the  prophecies,  even 
with  their  partial  fulfilment,  are  a  lamp  shining. 

The  new  day  heralded  by  the  day-star  may  be 
the  Second  Advent  (Bennett,  Century  Bible,  in 
loc.) ;  but  there  is  more  to  be  said  for  Plumptre's 
view  {Cambridge  Bible),  that  the  rising  of  the  day- 
star  points  to  a  direct  manifestation  of  Christ  in 
the  soul  of  the  believer  (iv  rats  KupdLats  iifiQv).  It  is 
the  revelation  and  confirmation  in  the  heart  of  the 
Christian  of  what  had  been  foreshadowed  both  by 
the  prophetic  word  and  the  earthly  manifestation 
of  God  8  Son.  Christ  in  the  heart  is  the  gleam, 
the  light,  the  Day-star,  which  the  believer  follows, 
and  to  which  he  moves.  He  has  therefore  the 
testimony  in  himself  that  he  follows,  not  wander- 
ing tires,  but  a  star. 

Witsius  (Trench,  Epp.  to  the  Seven  Churches^, 
London,  1867,  p.  155)  sums  up  the  import  of  the 
morning-star  as  follows:  (1)  a  closer  communion 
with  Christ,  the  fountain  of  light ;  (2)  an  increase 
of  light  and  spiritual  knowledge  ;  (3)  glorious  and 
unspeakable  joy,  which  is  often  compared  with 
light.  Such  hopes  2  Peter  holds  before  Christians 
in  the  squalidness  of  a  world  where  God  is  not 
known.  But  they  know,  for  the  day-star  shines 
in  their  hearts. 

'Nor  would  I  vex  my  heart  with  jjrief  or  strife 
Though  friend  and  lover  Thou  hast  put  afar, 
If  I  could  see,  through  my  worn  tent  of  life 
The  stedfast  shining  of  Thy  morning  star' 

(Louise  Chandler  Moulton). 

For  the  same  thought  in  the  hymnology  of  the 
Church  reference  may  be  made  to  the  Advent 
Hymns,  '  Light  of  the  lonely  pilgrim's  heart.  Star 
of  the  coming  day,'  also  '  Come,  O  come,  Immanuel.' 

LiTBRATURK.— W.  M.  Ramsay,  Luke  the  Physician,  London, 
1908,  pp.  230-234.  For  the  morning-star  in  the  symbolistn  of 
the  NT,  see  G.  Mackinlay,  The  Magi :  How  they  recognized 
Christ's  Star,  do.  1907.  W.   M.  GRANT. 

DEACON,  DEACONESS.— •  Deacon '  or  '  deacon- 
ess' (5idKovos,  masc.  or  fem.)  means  one  who  serves 
or  ministers.  In  classical  Greek  the  word  commonly 
implies  menial  service.  In  the  NT  it  implies  the 
noble  service  of  doing  work  for  God  (2  Co  6*  1 1", 
Eph  e'*',  1  Th  8^),  or  ministering  to  the  needs  of 
others  (Ro  16'  ;  cf.  1  Co  16'»,  2  Co  8^  9') ;  and  the 
meaning  of  the  tenn,  with  its  cognates  'service' 
or  '  ministry  '  and  '  to  serve '  or  '  to  minister ' 
{dMKovia  and  diaKovelv)  is  nearly  everywhere  quite 
general  and  does  not  indicate  a  special  office.  The 
only  passage  in  which  special  officials  are  certainly 
mentioned  is  1  Ti  38-'-,  where  v."  refers  to  women 
deacons  (RV)  rather  than  to  wives  of  deacons  (AV). 
But  it  is  highly  probable  that  'with  [the]  bishops 
and  deacons'  (Ph  1')  also  refers  to  special  officials  ; 
although  it  is  just  possible  that  St.  Paul  is  merely 
mentioning  the  two  functions  which  must  exist  in 
every  organized  community,  viz.  government  and 
service.  A  church  consists  of  rulers  and  ruled. 
The  case  of  Phcebe,  '  didKovos  of  the  church  which 


DEARTH 


DEBT,  DEBTOR 


285 


is  in  Cenchreie'  (Ko  16'),  is  doubtful.  She  may 
be  a  female  deacon  ;  but  this  is  very  unlikely,  for 
there  is  no  trace  of  deacons  or  other  officials  in  the 
church  of  Corinth  at  this  time.  Phcebe  was  prob- 
ably a  lady,  living  at  the  port  of  Corinth,  who 
remlered  much  service  to  St.  Paul  and  other 
Christians.  Milligan  (on  1  Th  S')  quotes  inscrip- 
tions which  show  that  SiiKovos  (masc.  and  fem.)  was 
a  religious  title  in  pre-Christian  times.  The  Seven 
(Ac  6j  are  probably  not  to  be  identified  with  the 
later  deacons.  The  special  function  of  deacons, 
whether  men  or  women,  was  to  distribute  the  alms 
of  the  congregation  and  to  minister  to  the  needs 
of  the  poor ;  they  were  the  church's  relieving 
officers.  They  also  probably  helped  to  order  the 
men  and  the  women  in  public  worship.  The 
qualities  required  in  them  (1  Ti  3*"'*)  agree  with 
tnis  :  '  not  greetly  of  sordid  gain,'  and  '  faithful  in 
all  things,'  point  to  the  care  of  money.  See  artt. 
CrirRCH  GovERXMEXT  and  Minister,  Mixistry. 

LrrBRATTKB.— F.  J.  A.  Hort.  The  Christian  Eetiesia,  London, 
1897,  pp.  196-217  ;  M.  R.  Vincent,  Philippians  {ICC,  Edin- 
burgh. 1S97),  pp.  36-51  ;  art.  '  Deacon  '  in  UDB. 

Alfred  Plummee. 
DEARTH.— See  Famine. 

DEATH.— See  Life  and  Death. 

DEBT,  DEBTOR.— The  Acts  and  the  Epistles 
give  few  glimpses  of  the  trade  of  the  time  (cf.  Ja 
4ijff.  1  xh  i?*  4",  2  Th  2,^-,  Ac  19^-,  1  Co  7» 
Ko  13'*-,  Rev  18*'*).  This  may  seem  all  the  more 
remarkable  since  Christianity  touched  the  com- 
merce of  the  Roman  world  at  so  many  points  and 
used  the  fine  Roman  roads  (see  art.  Trade  and 
Commerce).  The  allusions  to  debt  are  quite 
incidental,  and  come  in  generally  in  the  meta- 
phorical u=e  of  words. 

1.  Literal  use. — The  word  'debt'  signifying  a 
business  transaction  is  found  in  Philem  '*  (6<pei\€i), 
where  St.  Paul  delicately  refers  to  money  or 
valuables  stolen  from  Philemon  by  Onesimus. 
St.  Paul  here  uses  the  technical  language  of 
business — toOto  e/iol  fXXi^o.  We  meet  e\\o7^ci>  in 
pagan  inscriptions  and  in  an  Imperial  papyrus 
letter  of  the  time  of  Hadrian  (Deissmann,  Light 
from  the  Ancient  East-,  79 f.).  Dibelius  ('Kol.' 
in  Handbuch  zum  NT,  1912,  p.  129)  quotes  various 
examples,  as  tnrip  dppapQpoi  [rj  tJi^j  i\Koyovn£p[o]v 
(GrenfeU  and  Hunt,  ii.  67,  16  ff.).  In  the  rest  of 
St.  Paul's  half -humorous  sally  with  Philemon 
(bypa^pa  t^  e/x^  x^'PO  b®  probably  has  in  mind  to 
xeipoypa^wp  (Col  2'*).  The  debtor  could  have  an- 
other to  ^vrite  for  him  if  unable  to  write  himself 
(cf.  specimen  of  such  a  note  by  an  aypafinaros  from 
the  Fayyum  papyri  [Deissmann,  op.  cit.  p.  335]). 
The  common  word  for  '  repay  '  is  d-roiiiwfu  (cf.  Ro 
13'),  but  St.  Paul  here  uses  aroriau),  •  which  is  much 
stronger  than  droSwo-w'  (Deissmann,  p.  335  n.  ;  cf. 
also  Moulton  and  Milligan,  in  Expositor,  7th  ser., 
vi.  [1908]  19 If.).  St.  Paul  thus  gives  Philemon 
his  note  of  hand  to  pay  the  debt  of  Onesimus.  In 
Ph  4'*  St.  Paul  uses,  perhaps  in  playful  vein  again, 
the  technical  word  for  a  receipt,  dr^xw,  in  express- 
ing his  appreciation  of  the  liberal  contribution 
sent  to  him  by  the  Philippians  (cf.  d-rex^  for  a 
tax-receipt  on  an  ostracon  from  Thebes  [Deissmann, 
p.  111]).  The  term  eis  Xbr^ov  inQw  (Ph  4I')  has 
the  atmosphere  of  book-keeping  (cf.  also  etj  Xrf7oi' 
ihaews  rat  Xtj^^cwj  in  v.'*).  In  Ro  4*  we  find  the 
figure  of  credit  for  actual  work  as  a  debt — icard 
d<p€i\T}iJLa.  This  is  simply  pay  for  work  done  ( wages). 
The  word  6  iiwdbt,  hire  for  pay,  is  the  common 
expression  (cf.  the  proverb  in  1  Ti  5'®  and  filaOijiua 
(hured  house)  in  Ac  28**). 

In  Ja  5*  tlie  curtain  is  raised  upon  the  social 
wrong  done  to  labour  by  grinding  employers  who 
kept  back  (d^wrrtp^w)  the  wages  of  the  men  who 


k 


tilled  the  fields.  James  rather  implies  that  there 
was  little  recourse  to  law  in  such  cases,  but  con- 
soles the  wronged  workers  in  that  Giod  has  beard 
their  cries.  There  was  imprisonment  for  debt, 
as  was  the  case  in  England  and  America  till  some 
50  j-ears  ago,  but  it  was  only  with  difficulty  that 
the  workman  could  bring  such  a  law  to  bear  on  his 
employer.  In  Ro  13*'*  St.  Paul  expresBly  urges 
the  iu>man  Christians  to  pay  taxes,  a  form  of 
debt  paid  with  poor  grace  in  all  the  ages.  Christi- 
anity is  on  the  side  of  law  and  order,  and  recog- 
nizes the  debt  of  the  citizens  to  government  for 
the  maintenance  of  order.  '  For  this  cause  ye  pay 
tribute  also'  (v.*),  tpbpom  TeXen-e.  In  v.'  he  urges 
the  duty  of  paying  (a.-r65onrt)  back  in  full  (perfective 
use  of  dxo  as  in  dx^(i>  above)  one's  taxes.  ^>6poi  is 
the  tribute  paid  by  the  subject  nation  (Lk  20**, 
1  Mac  10^),  while  reXoi  represents  the  customs  and 
dues  which  would  in  any  case  be  paid  for  the 
support  of  the  civil  government  (Mt  17^,  1  Mac 
10*').    So  Sanday-Headlam,  Bomans,  in  loco. 

In  Ro  13^  St.  Paul  covers  the  whole  field  by  /itiSevl 
li-qbkv  dipeCKere.  We  are  not  to  imagine  that  he  is 
opposed  to  debt  as  the  basis  of  business.  The 
early  Jewish  prohibirions  against  debt  and  interest 
(usury)  contemplated  a  world  where  only  the  poor 
and  unfortunate  had  to  borrow.  But  already, 
long  before  St.  Paul's  time,  borrowing  and  lending 
was  a  regular  business  custom  at  the  basis  of  trade. 
Extortionate  rates  of  interest  were  often  charged 
(cf.  Horace  [Sat.  l.  iL  14],  who  expressly  states 
that  interest  at  the  rate  of  5  per  cent  a  month  or 
60  per  cent  a  year  was  sometimes  exacted).  Jesus 
draws  a  picture  of  imprisonment,  and  even  slavery, 
for  debt  in  the  Parable  of  the  Two  Creditors  (Mt 
18^**;  cf.  also  5^*-).  But  the  point  of  view  of 
St.  Paul  here  is  the  moral  obligation  of  the  debtor 
to  pay  his  debt.  In  few  things  do  Christians  show 
greater  moral  laxity  than  in  the  matter  of  debt. 
Evidently  St.  Paul  had  already  noticed  this  laxity. 
He  makes  this  exhortation  the  occasion  of  a  strong 
argument  for  love,  but  the  context  shows  that 
literal  financial  obligations  ((J^tXiJ,  common  in  the 
papyri  in  this  sense)  are  in  mind  as  well  as  the 
metaphorical  applications  of  d^iXw. 

2.  Metaphorical  uses.  —  The  examples  in  the 
apostolic  period  chiefly  come  under  this  heading. 
The  debt  of  love  in  lio  13*  is  a  case  in  point.  It 
may  be  noted  that  dydnj  can  no  longer  be  claimed 
as  a  purely  biblical  word  (cf.  Deissmann,  (^.  cit. 
p.  70).  None  the  less  Christianity  glorifies  the 
word.  The  debt  of  love  is  the  only  one  that  must 
not  be  paid  in  full,  but  the  interest  must  be  paid. 
For  other  instances  of  d^tXw  see  Ro  15'"",  1  Co  5'*. 
In  Ro  13^  d^(Xi7  covers  all  kinds  of  obligations, 
financial  and  moral  (cf.  also  1  Co  7'  [conjugal 
duty]).  The  metaphorical  use  of  d^tX^s  ap|>ears 
in  Ro  1",  Gal  5*,  etc.  The  metaphor  of  debt  is 
found  in  various  other  words.  Thus,  when  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  Christians  being  '  slaves  of  Christ,' 
he  is  thinking  of  the  obligation  due  to  the  new 
Master  who  has  set  us  free  from  the  bondage  of 
sin  at  the  price  of  His  o^\ti  blood.  The  figure  need 
not  be  overworked,  but  this  is  the  heart  of  it  (cf. 
Ro  6'»-=»,  Gal  2*  5',  1  Co  6»  7»,  Ro  3*»,  1  Ti  2«,  Tit 
2" ;  cf.  also  1  P  l'«.  He  9").  (See  Deissmann,  op. 
cit.  pp.  324-44  for  a  luminous  discussion  of  the 
whole  subject  of  manumission  of  slaves  in  the 
inscriptions  and  papyri,  as  illustrating  the  NT  use 
of  words  like  droXirrpoxrii,  \vTp6o>,  Xvrpop,  drrikvrpof, 
dyopdi'it),  Tifi/fi,  i\ev0ep6ti>,  iXeiSepoi,  iKevdepla,  Sov\<n, 
SovXei'U},  KaTabov\6<i),  etc.)  The  use  of  dfoSiSufu 
with  the  figure  of  paying  oflF  a  debt  is  common  (cf. 
Ro  2«  12'',  etc.).  appa^dup  (Eph  1")  presents  the 
idea  of  pledge  (mortgage),  earnest  money  to 
guarantee  the  full  payment  (Deissmann,  op.  cit. 
p.  340).  In  He  7**  in  the  same  way  tyyvm  is  surety 
or  guarantor.    It  seems  clear  that  StaO-fiKri  in  He 


286 


DECREE 


DEMAS 


9"'-  has  tl»e  notion  of  a  will  (testament)  wiiich  is 
paid  at  death.  Dcissmann  (op.  cit.  p.  341)  argues 
that  '  no  one  in  the  Mediterranean  world  in  the 
first  century  A. I),  would  have  thou<,'ht  of  lindinj,'  in 
the  word  5ta^7jK7;  the  idea  of  "  covenant."  St.  I'aul 
would  not,  and  in  fact  did  not.'  That  aweeping 
statement  overlooks  the  LXX,  however.  ('{.  art. 
COVKNANT.  Tlio  figurative  use  of  iWoydw  occurs 
in  Ro  51s. 

liiTKRATUBB.— Artt.  in  IIDIi,  DCG,  JE,  and  CE,  and  Com- 
luentaries  on  the  passapfes  cited  ;  A.  Deissmann,  Ilihle  SUidies, 
Eiij,'.  tr.,  1901,  and  Light /rani,  the  Ancient  Kasf\  1911;  A. 
Edersheim,  LT  ii.  p.  2C8ff.  ;  E.  Schiirer,  IIJ I' 11.  i.  362  f. 

A.  T.  Robertson. 

DECREE. — This  word  occurs  only  three  times  in 
the  NT,  once  in  the  singular  (Lk  2^),  where  it  is 
the  decree  of  Cujsar  Augustus  that  all  the  world 
should  be  taxed,  and  twice  in  the  plural  (Ac  IG^ 
17'),  the  reference  in  the  one  case  being  to  the  de- 
cisions of  the  Apostolic  Church  at  Jerusalem,  and 
in  the  other  to  the  decrees  of  the  Roman  Emperors 
against  treason. 

The  word  in  its  technical  or  theological  sense  of 
the  Divine  decree  of  human  salvation,  or  of  the 
decrees  of  (Jod  comprehended  in  His  eternal  purpose 
whereby  He  foreordains  whatsoever  comes  to  pass, 
is  therefore  not  found  in  the  NT  at  all.  The 
Greek  word  wiiich  it  most  nearly  represents  is 
■irp60€cns,  which  describes  the  purpose  of  God  in 
eternity  for  the  salvation  of  men.  'They  that 
love  God '  are  '  the  called  according  to  his  purpose ' 
(ol  Kard.  irpdOeffiv  k\t)toI,  Ro  8-**).  '  The  purpose  of 
God  according  to  election '  (t;  /car  iKXoyriv  irp60€<ns 
Tov  Oeov,  yi')  is  to  stand,  not  of  works  but  of  His 
own  sovereign  grace  who  calls  them  that  believe. 
Christians  are  '  allotted  their  inheritance,  having 
been  foreordained  according  to  the  purpose  of  liiin 
who  worketh  <all  things  after  tlie  counsel  of  Iiis 
will'  [irpoopLaOivres  Kara  irpdOecriv  tov  tA  Travra  ivep- 
yovvTos,  Eph  1").  The  Divine  purpose  is  '  a  purpose 
of  the  ages'  which  God  fulfilled  in  Christ  (Eph  3") 
as  He  had  purposed  it  in  Him  (irpo^Oero,  Eph  1^). 
God's  eternal  decree  depends  upon  the  counsel  of 
His  own  will,  for  it  is  '  not  according  to  our  works 
but  according  to  his  own  purpose  {Kara  Ldiav 
vpSdeffiv)  and  grace  given  in  Christ  Jesus  before 
times  eternal '  that  '  he  saved  us  and  called  us  with 
a  holy  calling '  (2  Ti  P).     See  artt.  Call,  Election, 

and  PnEDESTINATION, 

The  decree  of  God,  however,  is  not  to  be  con- 
ceived in  the  same  way  as  that  of  Darius  or  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, who  could  say,  '  I  have  made  a  decree  : 
let  it  be  done  with  speea'  (Ezr  6'-^).  God's  decree 
has  no  constraining  etl'ect  on  the  things  to  which  it 
is  directed,  because  it  is  not  promulgated  to  the 
world,  but  is  really  His  secret  plan  for  the  regula- 
tion of  His  own  procedure.  It  is  not  the  pro.ximate 
cause  of  events,  yet  the  objects  which  it  contem- 

Elates  are  absolutely  certain,  and  are  in  due  time 
rought  to  pass.  Whilst  the  decrees  of  God  are 
'  his  eternal  purpose  whereby  he  foreordains 
whatsoever  comes  to  pass,'  yet  He  accomplishes 
His  ends  by  the  means  proper  thereto,  and  even 
when  men  are  moved  by  Divine  grace  to  embrace 
the  gospel  ofier,  they  do  so  in  the  exercise  of  their 
liberty  as  free  agents.  As  St.  Paul  says  :  '  God 
hath  from  the  beginning  chosen  you  to  salvation 
through  sanctilication  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of 
the  truth '  (2  Tii  2^^).  T.  NiCOL. 

DELIVERER.— In  the  Acts  and  Epistles  the 
word  'ileliverer'  occurs  only  twice.  Once  (Ac  7^) 
the  original  word  is  6  Xi/rpwrijj  and  once  (Ro  11"*)  it 
is  6  pv6fjL€vo^.  The  reference  in  Acts  is  to  Moses, 
and  so  does  not  specifically  concern  us  here,  except 
that  the  word  is  one  of  a  group  (Xvrpov,  dvrlXvTpov, 
\vTp6u,  diroXt'Tpuffi^)  used  of  the  redemptive  work  of 
Christ.    In  the  Koine  the  word  Xirrpof  usually  meant 


the  purchase-money  for  the  manumission  of  slaves 
(A.  Oeissraann,  Lu/htfrrmi  tfu;  Aiu-ieuf  Kast'^,  1911, 
p.  331  f.).  In  the  LXX  (I's  19'*  68=»)  the  word 
\vTpo3rf)%  is  used  of  God  Himself,  and  the  XvTpoxm 
wrought  by  Christ  is  illustrated  by  that  wrought 
l)y  Moses  (Lk  l**  2**,  He  9'-,  Tit  2'^),  and  that 
notion  may  have  influenced  Luke's  choice  of  the 
word  in  Ac7^(R.  J.  Knowling,  FAtT,  'Acts,'  1900, 
p.  192).  The  passag<'  in  Ro  11"-*'  (6  pv6nevo%)  is  a 
quotation  from  Is  ,'i9-'"  and  is  given  the  Messianic 
interpretation.  '  There  shall  come  out  of  Zion 
the  Deliverer.'  It  is  a  free  quotation,  the  LXX 
having  iK  "Liibv  instead  of  iveKtv  "Li^v,  while  the 
Hebrew  has  '  to  Zion.'  Some  of  the  current  Jewish 
writings  (En.  xc.  33;  Sib.  Orac.  iii.  710  f.  ;  Pas. 
Sol.  xvii.  33-35)  cherished  the  hope  of  the  conver- 
sion of  the  Gentiles.  St.  Paul  here  seizes  on  that 
hoj)e,  and  the  OT  prophecy  of  the  Messiah  as 
Deliverer,  to  hold  out  a  second  hope  to  the  Jews 
who  have  already  in  large  mea-sure  rejected  the 
Messiah.  Before  He  comes  again,  or  at  His  com- 
ing, the  Jews  will  turn  in  large  numbers  to  the 
Delivereroncerejected(cf.  Sanday-Headlam,  Kom.^, 
1902,  in  loc).  In  1  Th  l'"  St.  Paul  had  already 
used  6  pvo/ievoi  of  Jesus  in  connexion  also  with  the 
expectation  of  the  Second  Coming  of  Christ.  It  is 
not  here  translated  '  the  Deliverer '  because  the 
l)articiple  is  followed  by -^/nS?,  'who  delivereth  us 
from  the  wrath  to  come.'  The  word  fivu  means 
properly  '  to  draw,'  and  so  the  middle  voice  is  '  to 
draw  to  one's  self  for  shelter,'  '  to  rescue.'  The 
word  emphasizes  the  power  of  Christ  as  our  De- 
liverer, £K  TTjs  opyrji  TTjs  ipxop^vri^.  The  deliverance 
is  complete  (^/c)  (Milligan,  Thess.,  1908,  in  loc). 
This  word  pvofiai  is  the  most  frequent  one  for  de- 
liverance by  God.  St.  Paul  in  2  Co  1'"  uses  it  of 
his  rescue  from  death  in  Ephesus  (ipvcyaro  i^ynas  Kal 
pvaerai — Kal  in  pvfferai).  It  is  the  word  for  our 
rescue  from  the  power  of  darkness  in  Col  1'^.  St. 
Paul  has  it  also  in  2  Ti  3"  when  he  tells  how  the 
Lord  delivered  him  out  of  his  persecutions.  In 
4'''*  he  uses  it  of  his  rescue  from  the  lion,  and  of 
his  hope  that  the  Lord  will  deliver  him  from  every 
evil  deed.  In  2  P  2*  St.  Peter  uses  it  also  for  God's 
help  in  temptation.  In  Gal  l*  St.  Paul  has  6Vwj 
e^i\T)Tai  for  Christ's  purpose  to  deliver  us  from  the 
present  evil  age.  The  word  is  i^aipiop.a.i,  *  to  take 
out  from,'  while  in  He  2'*  the  word  for  deliverance 
from  the  fear  of  death  is  dTraXXdcrtrw,  '  to  set  free 
from.' 

These  words  are  simply  those  that  in  the  RV 
happen  to  be  translated  by  '  deliver '  in  English. 
But  they  by  no  means  cover  the  whole  subject. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  all  the  atoning  work  of 
Christ  is  embraced  in  the  notion  of  deliverance 
from  sin  and  its  effects.  St.  Paul  himself  epito- 
mizes his  conception  of  Christ  as  Deliverer  in  his 
pajan  of  victory  in  1  Co  \b^^- :  '  Death  is  swallowed 
up  in  victory.  O  death,  where  is  thy  victory  ?  O 
death,  where  is  thy  sting?  The  sting  of  death  is 
sin  ;  and  the  power  of  sin  is  the  law  ;  but  thanks 
be  to  God,  who  giveth  us  the  victory  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  This  deliverance  applies 
to  the  whole  man  (soul  and  body)  and  to  the  whole 
creation  (Ro  8^*"^).  It  means  ultimately  the  over- 
throw of  Satan  and  the  complete  triumph  of  Christ 
in  a  new  heaven  and  anew  earth  (the  Apocalypse). 
A.  T.  Robertson. 

DELUGE.— See  Flood. 

DEMAS  ( AT7May,  perhapsashort  form  of  Demetrius, 
as  Silas  wiis  of  Sitvanus). — Demas  was  a  Christian 
believer  who  was  with  St.  Paul  during  his  imprison- 
ment in  Rome,  and  sends  greetings  to  the  Colossians 
(4'*)  and  to  Philemon  (v.^^).  Probably  he  was  a 
Thessalonian,  and  in  both  the  references  he  is  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  St.  Luke,  while  in  2  Ti 
4'"  his  conduct  is  contrasted  with  that  of  the  beloved 


DEMETRIUS 


DEMON 


287 


I 


phj'sician.  In  the  last-named  passage  we  are  in- 
formed that  Demas  left  the  Apostle  when  he  was 
awaiting  his  trial  before  Nero.  The  desertion 
seems  to  have  been  deeply  resentetl  by  St.  Paul, 
who  describes  liis  action  as  due  to  his  '  having  loved 
this  present  world.'  Probably  Demas  realized  that 
it  wa.-*  tlangerous  to  be  connected  with  one  who  was 
certain  to  be  condemned  by  Nero,  and  he  saved  his 
life  by  returning  to  his  home  in  Thessalonica.  The 
phrase  used,  however,  suggests  that  the  prospect 
of  worldly  advantage  was  tlie  motive  which  deter- 
mined Demas.  No  doubt  the  busy  commercial 
centre  of  Thessalonica  ottered  many  opportunities 
for  success  in  business,  and  love  of  money  may 
have  been  the  besetting  sin  of  this  professing 
Christian.  The  name  '  Demetrius '  occurs  t^vice  in 
the  list  of  politarchs  of  Thessalonica ;  and,  while 
we  cannot  say  with  certainty  that  the  Demas  of 
2  Ti  4'*  is  identical  with  either  of  these,  the  possi- 
bility is  not  excluded.  In  this  case  the  prospect  of 
civic  honours  may  have  been  the  reason  which  led 
him  to  abandon  the  hardships  and  dangers  of  the 
Apostle's  life  and  return  to  Thessalonica,  where  his 
family  may  have  held  i)ositions  of  influence. 
Perhaps  the  bare  mention  of  his  name  in  Col  4" 
and  the  reference  in  Ph  '2^-  -'  may  indic^ite  that 
the  Apostle  even  at  this  early  date  suspected  the 
genuineness  of  Demas,  who  was  vrith  him  at  the 
time  of  his  writing  to  Philippi  (cf.  Ilamsay,  St. 
Paul,  p.  358).  We  have  no  certain  assurance  that 
the  apostasy  of  Demas  was  hnal,  but  the  darker 
view  of  his  character  has  usually  been  taken,  as 
e.g.  by  Bunyan  in  The  Pilgrim's  Progress.  Epi- 
phanius  {Ever.  li.  6)  classes  him  among  the  apos- 
tates from  the  faith.  It  is  impossible  to  iden- 
tify Demas  with  any  Demetrius  mentioned  in 
the  NT. 

LiTERATURK. — W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Tratelifr  and 
the  Roman  Citizen^  1897,  p.  35*;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Colosgiaitg 
and  Phileinon'i,  1876,  pp.  36,  242 ;  artt.  in  HOB,  EDi,  and  SDB. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
DEMETRIUS.  — There  are  two,  if  not  three, 
persons  of  this  name  mentioned  in  the  NT— a  fact 
which    is   not    surprising,   considering    how  very 
common  the  name  was  in  the  Greek  world. 

1.  Demetrius,  the  sUversmith  of  Ephesus  (Ac  19). 
A  business  man,  profoundly  interested  in  the 
success  of  his  business,  Demetrius  was  a  manu- 
factiirer  of  various  objects  in  silver,  of  which  the 
most  protitable  were  small  silver  models  of  the 
shrine  of  the  Ephesian  gotldess  Artemis  (see 
DiAXA).  These  models  were  purchased  by  the 
rich,  dedicated  to  the  gofldess,  and  hung  up  within 
her  temple.  The  presiching  of  St.  Paul  was  so 
{jowerful  that  devotion  to  the  goddess  became  less 

Srevaient,  the  demand  for  sucli  oti'erings  was  re- 
uced,  and  Demetrius  felt  his  livelihood  in  danger. 
He  called  a  meeting  of  the  gild  of  his  handicraft 
to  decide  on  a  means  for  coping  with  the  new 
situation.  The  meeting  ended  in  a  public  disturb- 
ance. Nothing  is  known  of  the  later  life  of 
Demetrius. 

2.  Demetrius,  an  important  member  of  the  church 
referred  to  in  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of  St. 
John.  It  is  impossible  to  identify  the  church  with 
certainty,  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  was 
in  the  province  of  Asia.  The  presbyter-overseer  of 
the  church  is  absent,  and  in  his  absence  Gains  and 
Demetrius  act  in  the  truest  interest  of  the  members. 
Demetrius'  good  conduct  (3  Jn  ^)  is  attested  bv  all. 

3.  The  full  name  of  Demas  (Col  4",  2  Ti  4>", 
Philem'^)  may  very  well  have  been  Demetrius 
(possibly  Demodorus,  Demodotus) ;  see  Demas. 

LrrERATTRE. — See  W.  M.  Ramsay's  lifelike  picture  of  the 
scene  at  Ephesus  in  his  St.  PaiU  the  Traveller  and  the  Soman 
Citizen,  London,  1895,  p.  277  ff.  The  best  list  of  pet-naues  is 
found  in  A.  N.  Jannaris,  An  Historical  Greek  Grammar,  do. 
1897.  5  2S7.  A.  SOUTER. 


DEMON.— 1.  Nomenclature. — The  word  Satiiipiof 
(or  Saifiioy,  which,  however,  occurs  only  once  in  the 
NT  in  the  best  M8S,  viz.  in  Mt  8",  though  some 
MSS  have  it  in  Mk  5'-,  Lk  8^,  and  some  inferior 
ones  in  Rev  16'*  18"-)  is  almost  always  rendered 
'  devil '  in  EV,  though  RVm  usually  gives  '  demon.' 
In  the  KV  of  the  OT  'demon '  is  found  in  Dt  32", 
Ps  106",  Bar  4'  (Heb.  -tp,  LXX  Satfji6yiov).  Origin- 
ally Saifuov  had  a  somewhat  more  personal  conno- 
tation than  Saifiovior,  which  is  formed  from  the 
adjective  (i.e.  'a  Divine  thing');  and  both  had  a* 
neutral  sense :  a  spirit  inferior  to  the  supreme 
gods,  superior  to  man,  but  not  necessarily  evU. 
Some  trace  of  this  neutral  sense  is  found  in  the 
apostolic  writings.  Thus  Seiffidaifiwy,  SeiffiSaifMOfta 
have  probably  not  the  bad  sense  of  '  sui>erstitions,' 
'  superstition '  in  Ac  17**  23"^ — which  at  any  rate 
would  hardly  suit  the  former  passage,  where  St. 
Paul  is  not  likely  to  have  gone  out  of  his  way  to 
insult  the  Athenians — but  the  neutral  sense  of 
'  religious,'  '  religion.'  This  view  is  borne  out  by 
the  papyri,  where,  Deissmann  says  (Light  from 
Ancient  East,  1910,  p.  283),  the  context  of  these 
words  always  implies  commendation.  And  simi- 
larly St.  Luke's  phrase  (Lk  4")  'a  spirit  of  an  un- 
clean demon '  would  imply  the  existence  of  a  pure 
demon,  just  as  '  unclean  .spirits '  imply  the  existence 
of  pure  spirits.  The  neutral  .sense  is  also  found  in 
the  saying  attributed  to  our  Lord  by  Ignatius 
(Smym.  3  ;  see  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers^,  pt.  ii. 
vol.  ii.  [1889]  p.  296) :  '  Lay  hold  and  handle  me,  and 
see  that  I  am  not  a  bodiless  demon '  (daifiofiov  aaib- 
/jMTov),  a  saying  clearly  founded  on  or  parallel  to 
Lk  24^,  perhaps  due  to  an  independent  oral  tra- 
dition. But  ordinarily  in  the  NT  daifwvioy  has  a 
bad  sense,  and  signifies  '  an  evil  spirit.'  The  ex- 
pression '  to  have  a  demon '  (or  '  demons '),  which 
occurs  several  times  in  the  Gospels  (fx^ir  daifwvioy 
[Saifidvia],  equivalent  to  8aifiofi^€<r6ai,  which  is  also 
frequent  there),  is  the  same  as  the  paraphrases  found 
elsewhere  in  the  NT  which  avoid  the  word 
'demon'  (Ac  8'  'had  unclean  spirits,'  19"  'had 
evil  spirits,'  10*®,  etc.).  In  Christian  writings  the 
word  '  demon '  always  means  an  evil  being,  though 
it  is  curious  that,  in  the  NT  and  (as  far  as  tlie 
present  writer  has  observed)  in  the  Fathers,  Satan 
himself  is  never  called  Saifiwp  or  oaifiopioi'  ('  demon '). 
Conversely  his  angels  are  never  in  the  NT  called 
'devils'  (5td;JoXoi),  though  in  Jn  6'*  Judas  is  called 
did^oXos.  The  Fathers  emphatically  assert  that 
all  demons  are  evil :  see  e.g.  Tertull.  Apol.  22, 
Orig.  c.  Cels.  v.  5,  viii.  39  (the  Son  of  God  not  a 
demon),  Cypr.  Quod  idola  dii  non  sint,  6f.  By 
the  time  of  Augustine  even  the  heathen  used  the 
word  '  demon '  only  in  a  bad  sense  [de  Civ.  Dei, 
vs..  19). 

2.  Conceptions  about  demons  in  apostolic  writ- 
ings.— Demons  are  regarded  as  the  ministers  of 
Satan — a  host  of  evil  angels  over  whom  he  has 
command.  They  are  the  '  angels  which  kept  not 
their  own  principality  {apxnv)  but  left  their  proper 
habitation'  (Jude*'),  who  'when  they  sinned'  were 
'  cast  down  to  Tartarus '  (2  P  2*).  They  are  de- 
scribed as  the  Dragon's  angels,  forming  his  army 
(Rev  12^-  9 ;  cf.  Mt  25*>).  That  these  angels  are 
the  same  as  the  demons  appears  from  the  fact  that 
Satan  is  the  prince  of  the  demons  (Mk  3-),  and 
that  demoniacs  are  said  to  be  '  oppressed  of  the 
devil'  (tov  Sia^oXov,  i.e.  Satan  [see  Dea'IL],  Ac  10*  : 
cf.  Lk  13'*).  Thus  there  are  good  spirits  and  evU 
spirits  which  must  be  distinguished  and  proved  : 
tne  spirit  of  the  Antichrist  must  be  distinguished 
from  the  Spirit  of  God  (1  Jn  4'). 

St.  Paul,  in  not  dissimilar  language,  speaks  of 
discemings  of  spirits  (1  Co  12"* ;  cf.  2  Co  11*)  and 
of  evil  angels  as  being  'principalities'  {dpxai), 
'  powers,'  '  world-rulers  {KofffioKpdropfs)  of  this  dark- 
ness,' *  spiritual  beings  {ryevfiaTticd)  of  vic^edwess 


288 


dp:mon 


DERBE 


in  the  heavenly  [places]'  (Eph  6'^;  the  last  plnase 
may  be  roughly  rendered  '  in  the  sphere  of  spiritual 
activities';  of.  Robinson's  note  on  Eph  F  and  see 
art.  Air)  ;  perhaps  also  as  being  '  the  rulers  of  this 
age  which  are  coming  to  nought  .  .  .  the  spirit 
of  the  world'  (1  Co  2"- '■')  ;  or  collectively  as  'all 
rule  and  all  authority  and  power '  which  are  to  be 
abolished  (1  Co  15»*-  ^,  Eph  1»"-).  That  these  are 
Satan's  hosts  appears  from  the  context  of  the  Last 
passage  (2-),  which  speaks  of  the  Prince  of  the 
power  of  the  air  (see  Air). 

It  would  seem  that  St.  Paul  regarded  the  heathen 
gods  as  demons,  having  a  real  existence,  though 
they  were  not  gods.  On  the  one  hand,  '  no  idol  is 
anything  in  the  world,  and  there  is  no  God  but 
one'  (1  Co  S'') ;  on  the  other  hand,  tlie  sacrifices  of 
the  heathen  are  offered  to  demons,  not  to  God, 
and  therefore  Christians  must  not  attend  heathen 
temples  lest  tliey  have  communion  with  demons 
(lQ'.w.  .  nytg  ^\yQ  ijea  tijat;  sacrifice  involves  com- 
munion between  the  Avorshipper  and  the  wor- 
shipped). So  in  the  LXX  Ps  96»  aflirms  that  all 
the  gods  of  the  heathen  are  demons  (Heb.  d'"?'^H, 
i.e.  'vanities' ;  Vulg.  daemonia) ;  and  Dt  32'''  (see 
above)  both  in  the  Heb.  text  and  in  the  LXX 
clearly  identifies  the  heathen  gods  with  demons. 
And  similarly  in  Rev  9-"  the  worship  of  demons  is 
joined  to  that  of  idols. 

The  activity  of  demons  towards  man  is  great. 
Though,  after  a  fashion,  they  believe — not  with 
the  Christian's  faith,  which  is  born  of  love,  but  with 
faith  compelled  by  fear  (Ja  2^" :  they  '  siiudder') — 
yet  with  the  ingenuity  which  is  peculiarly  their 
own  (Ja  3^'  <ro4)ia  .  .  .  da(.fxoviu)8Tis),  they  try  to 
draw  man  away  from  his  belief :  they  are  '  sedu- 
cing spirits,'  whose  teaching  is  called  the  '  doctrine 
of  demons  '  (1  Ti  4^'-,  so  most  commentators) ;  their 
captain  is  called  the  '  spirit  that  now  worketh  in 
the  sons  of  disobedience  '  (Eph  2*,  where,  however, 
'  spirit '  is  in  apposition  to '  power,'  not  to  '  prince,' 
perhaps  by  grammatical  assimilation  ;  see  Robin- 
son's note  ad  loc).  The  demons  accordingly  in- 
stigate evil  men  against  the  good  ;  they  are  '  un- 
clean spirits,  as  it  were  frogs'  coming  'out  of  the 
mouth  of  the  dragon  .  .  .  for  they  are  spirits  of 
demons,'  instigating  the  *  kings  of  the  whole  world ' 
to  the  '  war  of  the  great  day  of  God '  (Rev  16'^'-). 
If  we  identify  them  with  the  '  rulers  of  this  age ' 
of  1  Co  2*  (see  above),  they  instigated  our  Lord's 
crucifixion  (v.*).    See  also  Devil. 

Demons  are  able  to  work  miracles  or  signs  (c-rjfiela, 
Rev  16'^),  as  Antichrist  can  (2  Th  2') ;  they  attract 
worship  from  men  (Rev  9^ ;  cf.  Dt  32"  above), 
and  have  their  temples  and  tables  (see  above). 
Rome,  the  corrupt  cajjital  of  the  heathen  world, 
designated  '  Babylon,'  is  the  habitation  of  demons, 
the  prison  of  every  unclean  spirit,  tiie  prison  of 
every  unclean  and  hateful  bird  (Rev  18-). 

Just  as  the  fruits  of  the  working  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  man  are  called  the  spirit  '  of  power  and 
love  and  discipline '  (2  Ti  1^)  and  '  of  truth '  (1  Jn  4«), 
so  those  of  the  demons  are  '  the  spirit  of  bondage ' 
(Ro  8"*),  and  ' stupor '  (KaTai/iyJewy,  11*),  and  'fear- 
fulness'  (2  Ti  V),  and  '  error'  (1  Jn  4«). 

3.  Demoniacal  possession. — This  subject  is  much 
less  spoken  of  in  tlie  writings  which  are  here  dealt 
Avith  than  in  the  Gospels.  The  evangelistic  records 
depict  a  much  stronger  activity  of  evil  in  Palestine 
during  the  earthly  life  of  our  Lord  than  that  which, 
as  the  rest  of  NT  would  lead  us  to  suppose,  existed 
elsewhere  and  at  a  later  time.  Yet  in  four  passages 
of  Acts  we  read  of  possession  by  unclean  or  evil 
spirits  :  at  Jerusalem  (5'*) ;  in  Samaria,  where  they 
Avere  expelled  at  the  preaching  of  Philip  (8^) ;  at 
Philippi,  Avhere  the  ventriloquist  maiden  is  said  to 
have  a  spirit,  a  Python  (16" :  irveO/ia  vvdwva  is  the 
best  reading) ;  and  at  Ephesus,  Avhere  by  St.  Paul's 
miracles  the  evil  spirits  were  expelled  (19'-).     In 


this  last  passage  we  read  of  the  evil  spirit  speaking 
out  of  the  possessed  man's  mouth,  and  of  the  man's 
actions  being  tliose  of  the  evil  sjiirit  (v.") ;  also  of 
Jewish  exorcists  who  endi;avourcd  to  expel  him  (the 
seven  of  v.'*  become  in  all  the  best  MSS  two  at  v."  ; 
probably  there  Avero  seven  brothers,  but  only  tAvo 
took  part  in  this  incident).  The  word  'exorcist' 
does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  NT.  The  pa.ssage 
about  the  Python  (16'")  is  very  remarkjible.  The 
name  is  derived  from  Pytho,  a  district  near  Delphi 
where  the  dragon  (called  Python)  Avas  slain  by 
Apollo.  The  title  Avas  thus  given  to  a  diviner : 
both  Apollo  and  tiie  Delphic  priestess  Avere  called 
'the  Pythian'  (6  Uddio^,  tj  ll^Ola).  Ventriloquists 
Avere  regarded  as  being  under  the  influence  of 
demons,  and  as  being  able  to  divine  ;  they  were,  as 
Plutarch  tells  us  (Moralin,  ed.  Xylander,  ii.  414  E, 
quoted  by  Wetstein  on  Ac  16'"),  called  truOuvf^, 
wvO(l)vi<T<Tai.  Here,  then,  we  have  the  conception  of 
something  other  than  ordinary  madness  being  a 

Eossession  by  evil  spirits ;  and  this  incident  may 
e  considered  as  a  stepping-stone  to  the  conception 
found  in  some  NT  Avriters  of  physical  disease  as 
being,  at  least  in  some  cases,  also  a  possession. 
This  is  the  case  especially  in  the  Avritings  of  Luke 
the  physician.  Thus  the  Avoman  who  Avas  '  bowed 
together '  is  said  to  have  had  '  a  spirit  of  infirmity ' 
(irveO/ia  A(TOivila.s,  Lk  13")  and  to  have  been  bound 
by  Satan  (v.'") ;  our  Lord  '  rebuked '  (eVerfACTjo-e)  the 
fever  of  Simon's  Avife's  mother  (Lk  4**),  as  if  it  were 
an  unclean  spirit ;  a  deaf-mute  is  said  to  have  a 
'  dumb  spirit '  or '  a  dumb  and  deaf  spirit  '(Mk  9"-^). 
There  is  nothing  which  leads  us  to  suppose  that 
the  conception  of  demoniacal  possession  Avhich  Ave 
find  Avell  established  in  the  four  Gospels,  especially 
in  the  Synoptics,  Avas  not  shared  by  the  other  NT 
Avriters  ;  but  it  is  noteAvorthy  that,  as  the  subject 
is  only  glanced  at  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  (Avith  refer- 
ence to  the  charge  against  our  Lord,  Jn  7^  8*^*- 
lO-'o'-),  so  it  is  not  dealt  with  at  all  by  St.  Paul, 
though  we  could  perhaps  hardly  expect  that  it 
should  be  spoken  of  in  epistolary  writings.  We 
may,  however,  remark  that  the  language  of  the 
famous  passage  Ro  7'<-2s,  in  which  the  Apostle 
speaks  of  the  poAver  of  sin  in  the  Christian — for 
Ave  can  hardly  think  that  he  is  speaking  of  himself 
only  before  his  conversion — bears  a  close  likeness 
to  that  used  to  describe  demoniacal  possession. 

Literature. — This  article  has  dealt  only  with  the  period  from 
the  Ascension  to  the  end  of  the  1st  cent.  ;  for  this  reference 
maybe  made  to  H.  St.  J.  Thackeray,  The  lielationoj  St.  Paul 
to  Contemporary  Jewish  Thought,  London,  1900,  ch.  vi.  For 
demoniacal  possession  see  R.  C.  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles 
of  our  LoriP,  London,  1870,  §  5  ('The  Demoniacs  in  the  Country 
of  the  Gadarenes ').  On  the  subject  in  general  see  H.  B.  Swete, 
The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  yew  Testament,  Ixmdon, 1900,  Appendix  C; 
A  Harnack,  The  Mis.tion  and  Kxpan.si<in  of  Christianitii,  Eng. 
tr.-',  1908,  i.  125 ff.  ;  O.  C.  Whitehouse  in  11 DB,  art.  'Demon, 
Devil' ;  W.  O.  E.  Oesterley  in />C(r',  art.  'Demon,  Demoniacs' ; 
R.  W.  Moss  in  SDB,  welt.  '  Devil,'  '  Possession.'  For  IKWt- 
apostolic  conceptions  of  demonology  see  H.  L.  Pass  in  ERE, 
art.  '  Demons  and  Spirits  (Christian) ' ;  for  those  of  other  nations 
see  the  various  articles  under  the  same  title  in  KRE. 

A.  J,  Maclean. 
DE  PUTY. — This  is  the  AV  translation  of  dv^i^iraroi, 
the  Gr.  equivalent  of  pro  conside,  '  proconsul '  (q.v. ). 
In  NT  times  '  proconsul '  Avas  the  name  given  to 
the  governor  of  a  senatorial  province — tliat  is,  a 
province  under  the  supervision  of  the  Roman 
Senate,  Avhich  appointed  the  governors.  In  the 
NT  the  foUoAving  senatorial  provinces  are  referred 
to  as  under  proconsuls  :  Asia,  governed  by  an  ex- 
consul,  callea  proconsul,  a  province  of  the  highest 
class,  and  Cyprus  and  Achaia,  each  governed  by 
an  ex-prsetor,  also  called  proconsul,  provinces  of 
the  second  class.  A.  SOUTER. 

DERBE  (A(?/)/3j?).— Derbe  Avas  one  of  'the  cities 
of  Lycaonia'  into  Avhicli  Paul  and  Barnabas  Hed 
Avhen  driven  from  Iconium  (Ac  14").  Stral>o  says 
it  Avas  '  on  the  Hanks  of  the  Isaurian  region,  ad- 


DESCENT  IKIO   HADES 


DESCENT  INTO  HADES 


289 


herin^  (fTire4>vK6s)  to  Cappailocia' (XII.  vi.  3).  It 
belonged  to  that  part  of  Lycaonia  which,  in  the 
1st  cent.  B.C.,  the  Romans  added,  as  an  'eleventh 
Strategia,'  to  the  territory  of  the  kings  of  Cappa- 
docia  (XII.  i.  4).  From  them  it  was  seized,  along 
with  tlie  more  important  town  of  Laranda,  bj 
Antipater  the  robber  (called  6  Aep^-rnii),  who  is 
otherwise  known  as  a  friend  of  Cicero  {ad  Fam. 
xiii.  73).  Antipater  was  attacked  and  slain  by 
AmjTitasof  Galatia  (c.  29  B.C.),  who  added  Laranda 
and  Derbe  to  the  extensive  territories  which  he 
ruled  as  a  Roman  subject-king.  On  the  death  of 
Amyntas  in  25  B.C.  his  kingdom  was  formed 
into  the  Roman  province  of  Galatia.  But  the 
'  eleventh  Strat€gia '  again  received  special  treat- 
ment. After  changing  hands  more  than  once,  it 
was  ultimately  added — as  the  inscriptions  on  coins 
indicate — to  the  kingdom  of  Antiochus  IV.,  and 
therefore  called  'Strategia  Antiochiane'  (Ptolemy, 
V.  6),  an  arrangement  which  lasted  from  a.d.  41 
to  the  death  of  Antiochus  in  72.  Derbe,  however, 
being  required  as  a  fortress  city  on  the  Roman 
frontier,  was  detached  from  the  Strategia  and  in- 
cluded in  the  province  of  Galatia,  after  which  it  re- 
ceived a  new  constitution,  and  was  named  Claudio- 
Derbe,  which  was  equivalent  to  Imperial  Derbe. 

Ethnically  and  geographically  Lycaonian,  the 
city  was  now  politically  Galatian.  As  in  Lystra, 
the  educated  natives  were  no  doubt  bilingual, 
speaking  Lycaonian  (XvKaovurrl,  Ac  14")  among 
themselves,  but  using  Greek  as  the  language  of 
commerce  and  culture.  Derbe  lay  on  the  great 
trade-route  between  Ephesus  and  Syrian  Antioch. 
All  the  cities  on  that  line  had  been  hellenized  by 
the  Seleucids,  whose  task  the  Romans  now  con- 
tinued. St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Derbe  was  very  suc- 
cessful ;  he  '  made  many  disciples '  (Ac  14^),  and  the 
city  is  not  mentioned  as  one  of  the  places  in  which 
he  was  persecuted  (2  Ti  3").  It  is  a  striking  fact 
that  he  made  Deroe  the  last  stage  of  his  missionarj-  i 
progress,  instead  of  going  on  to  the  neighbouring 
and  greater  city  of  Laranda.  His  action  appears 
to  be  prompted  by  a  motive  which  the  historian 
does  not  formally  state.  Because  Derbe  was  the 
limit  of  Roman  territory,  he  made  it  the  limit  of 
his  mission.  He  followed  the  lines  of  Empire. 
In  his  second  journey  he  evidently  crossed  the 
Taurus  by  the  CUician  Gates,  passed  through  the 
kingdom  of  Antiochus,  and  so  '  came  to  Derbe 
and  Lystra'  (Ac  15*^-16^).  A  third  visit  is  prob- 
ably implied  by  the  statement  that  'he  went 
through  the  region  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia  in 
order,  stablishing  all  the  disciples'  (18^).  On  the 
Southern  Galatian  theory,  the  Christians  of  Derbe 
formed  one  of  the  '  churches  of  Galatia'  (1  Co  16^ 
Gal  1^),  and  they  were  among  the  avomjToi  TaXaToi 
(Gal  34  whom  he  exhorted  to  stand  fast  in  their 
Christian  liberty  (5').  Imperial  Derbe  stood  in 
closer  relations  with  the  Roman  colonies  of  Antioch 
and  Lystra  than  with  the  non-Roman  Lycaones  of 
the  kingdom  of  Antiochus. 

Sterrett  (Wolfe  Expedition,  18S8,  p.  23)  placed 
Derbe  between  the  villages  of  Zosta  and  Bossola 
on  the  road  from  Konia  to  Laranda.  In  both  of 
these  places  there  are  numerous  ancient  cut  stones 
and  inscriptions,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  they  are  in 
situ,  and  W.  M.  Ramsay  thinks  that  the  position 
of  the  ancient  city  is  indicated  by  a  large  deserted 
mound,  called  by  the  Turks  Gudelissin,  about  3 
miles  "SV.N.W.  from  Zosta.  It  still  waits  to  be 
explored. 

Lttkratteb.— W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman 
Empire,  1S93,  pp.  54-56,  The  CitUso/St.  Paul,  1907,  p.  385 «f., 
Eut.   Com.  on  GaL,  1S99,  pp.  22S-234 ;  W.  Smitb,  DGRG  i. 

[i85«)770.  James  Stkahak. 

DESCENT  INTO  HADES.— 1.  By  the  Hebrews, 
Sheol  or  Hades  was  regarded  as  the  under  world, 

VOL.  I.  —  IQ 


a  subterranean  region  of  abysses  and  mysterious 
waters  upon  which  the  earth  rested  (Ps  24*  136*). 
It  was  the  region  to  which  all  souls  passed  after 
death,  there  to  live  a  shadow-like  existence,  in- 
capable of  the  higher  forms  of  spiritual  activity, 
such  as  the  praise  of  Jahweh  (Ps  6*).  In  NT 
times,  a  distinction  has  been  drawn  between  the 
departments  of  Sheol  inhabited  by  the  good  and 
the  bad :  '  Paradise '  is  the  resting-place  of  the 
righteous  and  penitent  (Lk  23**),  while  the  '  abyss ' 
(q.  V. )  is  spoken  of  as  the  abode  of  demons  (Lk  8"  ; 
cf.  Rev  91  IV  17»  20'). 

2.  Those  who  accepted  the  Jewish  cosmogony 
believed  that,  at  death,  every  soul  passed  to  this 
hidden  region.  The  death  of  Christ  involved  for 
Him,  as  for  every  son  of  man,  the  same  ionmey. 
To  the  first  disciples,  that  He  'descenaed  into 
Hades'  wotild  not  present  itself  as  an  article  of 
faith,  or  as  a  matter  of  revelation  ;  it  was  implied 
in  the  fact  of  His  death.  That  He  went  into 
'  the  abyss '  does  not  need  argument  for  St.  Paul 
(Ro  10^  ;  cf.  Eph  4*  kot^jSij  th  rd  KOTilrrepa  [Upti  rtji 
yrji) ;  that  His  soul  was  in  Hades  after  the  Cruci- 
fixion is  assumed  as  a  matter  of  course  in  Ac  2^'. 
No  one  in  the  Apostolic  or  sub-Apostolic  Age 
would  have  been  impelled  by  dogmatic  considera- 
tions to  insert  the  article  of  the  Descent  into  Hades 
in  the  baptismal  creed,  for  it  was  only  another  way 
of  saying  that  Christ  died.  In  the  NT,  accordingly 
(with  the  exception  of  1  P  3'®  4*),  the  references  to 
Christ's  Descent  into  the  under  world  are  incidental 
only,  introduced  to  illustrate  special  points ;  e.g. 
Ac  2*',  that  Christ  did  not  remain  in  Hades ;  Mt 
12**,  that  the  period  of  His  sojourn  '  in  the  heart 
of  the  earth'  was  '  three  days  and  three  nights' ; 
Eph  4',  that  the  Crucified  who  descended  is  the 
Ascended  Lord ;  and  Lk  23^,  that  the  penitent 
thief  would  be  in  security  with  Christ  in  the 
unseen  life  after  death.  (It  is  to  be  observed, 
however,  that  Lk  23^  is  not  quoted  by  the  Fathers 
as  illustrating  the  Descensus,  some  of  them — e.g. 
TertuUian — holding  that  Paradise  was  not  a  de- 
partment of  Hades,  but  distinct  from  it.) 

3.  But  the  question  was  inevitable  :  when  Christ 
descended  to  the  under  world,  what  oflSce  did  He 
perform  there?  And  in  attempting  to  find  an 
answer  to  the  question  as  to  the  consequences  and 
the  purpose  of  Christ's  Descent  into  Sheol,  the 
early  Christians  nattirally  betook  themselves  to 
the  "OT  and  to  the  forecasts  of  Messiah's  mission 
which  they  found  therein.  Even  before  specula- 
tion began  on  these  points,  it  had  been  natural  to 
use  OT  language  when  the  fact  of  the  Descensus 
was  mentioned  :  thus  Ro  10'  goes  back  to  Dt  30", 
and  Ac  2^1  to  Ps  16»*>.  Now  the  OT  suggested  a 
deliverance  of  the  righteous  from  Sheol,  and  this 
thought  was  destinetl  to  be  prominent  in  the 
development  of  Christian  eschatology. 

Sheol,  as  we  have  seen,  is  the  abode  of  the 
spirits  of  the  departed  (Ps  49'*),  and  it  is  from 
Sneol,  personified  as  the  ruler  of  this  gloomy 
region,  that  the  righteous  Hebrew  looked  for 
deliverance.  '  God  will  redeem  mv  soul  from  the 
power  of  Sheol '  was  his  hope  (Ps  49" ;  cf.  Ps  30»). 
The  Divine  promise  was,  '  I  will  ransom  them  from 
the  power  of  Sheol'  (Hos  13").  'Because  of  the 
blood  of  the  covenant  I  have  brought  forth  thy 
prisoners  out  of  the  pit  wherein  is  no  water '  (Zee 
9^^)  is  a  prophetic  forecast.*  To  St.  Paul's  thought, 
the  climax  of  Christ's  victory  was  the  conquest  of 
death  (1  Co  15**) ;  and  it  was  part  of  the  purpose 
of  His  humiliation  that  in  His  triumph  the  powers 
of  the  under  world  should  own  His  swayfPh  2^" 
Xva  rap  ybwv  Kdfi\Jnj  .  .  ,  KoraxOoriwr).  When  it 
was  asked  how  this  subjugation  was  exhibited, 
the  answer  was  ready  to  hand.  It  was  in  the 
deliverance  fiom  Satan's  bondage  of  the  dead  whom 

*  So  it  is  interpreted  by  C>TiI  of  Jemsalem  (Cot.  xiiL  3<X 


290 


DESCENT  INTO  HADES 


DESCENT  INTO  HADES 


he  had  in  thrall  in  Sheol.  Christ  has  the  keys  of 
death  and  of  Hades  (llev  l**). 

It  is  possible  that  some  such  conception  of 
Messiah's  mission  to  the  departed  was  prevalent 
in  pre-Christian  days.  Two  paasages  from  tlie 
Bereshith  Rabba  *  are  cited  as  testifying  to  Jewish 
belief  :  '  When  they  that  are  bound,  they  that  are 
in  Gehinnom,  saw  the  light  of  the  Messiah,  they 
rejoiced  to  receive  him ' ;  and  '  This  is  that  which 
stands  written,  We  shall  rejoice  and  exult  in  thee. 
When  ?  When  the  captives  climb  out  of  hell,  and 
the  Shechinah  at  their  head.'  But  the  date  of 
this  literature  is  uncertain,  and  it  may  be  affected 
by  Christian  ideas.  At  any  rate,  this  conception 
of  the  purpose  of  Christ's  Descensus  is  prominent 
in  the  earliest  Christian  documents.  Thus  in  a 
section  of  the  Ascension  of  Isaiah  (ix.  16  f.) 
assigned  by  Charles  to  the  close  of  the  1st  cent, 
we  hare :  '  when  lie  hath  plundered  the  angel  of 
death,  he  will  ascend  [sc.  from  Hades]  on  the 
third  day  .  .  .  and  many  of  the  righteous  will 
ascend  with  him '  (cf.    also  x.  8,  14  and  xi.  19, 

*  They  crucified  him,  and  he  descended  to  the 
angel  of  Sheol').  With  this  should  be  compared 
Mt  27'^  '^t  perhaps  the  earliest  suggestion  of  the 
tliought  that  the  saints  were  freed  from  the 
bondage  of  Hades  by  the  Descent  of  Christ.f  In 
a  '2nd  cent,  section  of  the  Sibylline  Oracles  (i.  377) 
M"e  have  :  birbr  hv  AiSwvio^  oIkov  \  /3-^<rrrot  d77A\wj' 
4iraLV(xaTa<TlTiv  TedveQiffiv  ;  and  tagain  (viii.  310):  T/j^eiB'eh 
^XlS-qv  iyyiWuv  iXirida  vacnv.  The  date  of  the 
(Christian)  interpolation  in  the  Latin  version  of 
Sir  24*'  is  not  certain,  but  the  words  interpolated 
are  significant :  '  Penetrabo  omnes  inreriores 
partes  terrae  et  inspiciam  omnes  dormientes,  et 
illuminabo  onmes  sperantes  in  Domino.'  We  have 
an  explicit  statement  in  Origen,  who,  commenting 
on  Ro  5",  says  :  '  Christum  vero  idcirco  in  infemum 
descendisse,  non  solum  ut  ipse  non  teneretur  a 
morte,  sed  ut  et  eos,  qui  inibi  non  tarn  praevarica- 
tionis  crimine,  quam  moriendi  conditione  habe- 
bantur,   abstraheret. '  :J:     Origen  elsewhere   inter- 

Srets  the  binding  of  the  '  strong  man '  of  Mt  12^^  as  a 
inding  of  Satan  in  the  under  world,  and  Irenaeus 
gives  the  same  exegesis.  §  This  is  the  general 
view :  the  express  purpose  of  Christ's  Descent  to 
Hades  was  to  liberate  the  souls  who  were  there 
in  thrall.  The  apocryphal  Gospel  of  Nicodemus 
works  out,  in  picturesque  detail,  the  story  of  the 

*  Harrowing  of^  Hell,'  a  legend  which  deeply  im- 
pressed the  consciousness  of  Christendom.  So 
wide-spread  was  this  belief  in  the  early  Christian 
period  that  a  controversy  arose  as  to  whether  the 
souls  of  Jews  or  of  Gentiles  or  of  both  were  in- 
cluded in  the  deliverance  Avrought  by  Christ  in 
Hades.  Marcion — if  Irenaeus  ||  is  to  be  trusted — 
held  that  it  was  only  for  the  redemption  of  the 
wicked  heathen  of  olden  time,  but  Justin  H  and 
Irenieus  **  restricted  it  to  the  righteous  of  Israel ; 
while  Clement  of  Alexandria  ft  and  his  school 
included  both  Jew  and  Gentile  in  its  grace.  We 
find,  then,  that,  while  the  NT  gives  no  explicit 
sanction  to  this  idea  of  the  conquest  of  the  powers 
of  the  under  world  and  the  deliverance  of  im- 
prisoned souls  by  Clirist's  Descent  into  Hades,  it 
was  firmly  established  in  the  2nd  and  3rd  cent., 
and  that  it  grew  out  of  OT  phrases  about  the 
redemption  from  Sheol. 

5.  Tlie  idea  that  C\m9,t  preaclied  in  Hades  to  the 
souls  who  were  in  bondage  there  has  a  somewhat 
ditlerent  history.  It  is  found  in  Ignatius tt :  '  even 
the  prophets,  being  His  disciples  in  the  spirit,  were 

*  Quoted  from  Weber  by  Bigg  on  1  P  Si»  {ICC,  1901,  p.  163). 
t  So  Origen  interprets  Mt  27^2  as  a  fulfilment  of  Ps  6818 


{Lommatzsch,  vi.  344). 
X  Lommatzsch,  vi.  844. 
I  ib.  I.  xxvii. 

**  adv.  Ucer.  xv.  xxvii.  2. 
ti  ad  Moan.  ix. 


g  adv.  Hcer.  v.  xxL  8. 
%  Tryph.  72. 
ft  Strom,  ii.  9. 


expecting  Him  as  their  teacher,  and  for  this  cause, 
He,  whom  they  rightlj-  awaited,  when  He  came, 
raised  them  from  the  dead.'  More  explicit  is  an 
oracle  quoted  both  by  Justin  *  and  by  Irenaeus  t  as 
from  Isaiah  or  Jeremiah,  although  it  is  not  in  the 
OT,  and  its  source  has  not  been  traced  :  '  The 
Lord  God  remembered  His  dead  people  of  Israel 
who  lay  in  the  graves,  and  descended  to  preach 
to  them  His  own  salvation.' +  In  like  manner, 
the  apocryphal  Gospel  of  Peter  (2nd  cent.)  tells 
of  a  voice  from  heaven  which  said,  'Thou  didst 
preach  to  them  that  sleep '  {^K-^pv^ai  toU  Kotfiunivoti). 
This,  according  to  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who 
does  not  countenance  the  legendary  developments 
of  the  idea  of  liberation,  was  the  sole  purpose  of 
Christ's  Descent  into  Hades,  viz.  that  He  should 
preach  the  gospel  there.§ 

Of  Christ's  preaching  in  Hades  there  is  no 
foreshadowing  in  the  OT,  although  Clement  of 
Alexandria II  Mill  have  it  that  Job  28^  predicts  it. 
But  it  is  plainlj'  stated  in  1  P  3'"  4',  and  the  eti'orts 
to  explain  these  passages  of  a  preaching  of  the  pre- 
existent  Christ  to  the  patriarchs,  or  of  His  mission 
to  the  spiritually  dead,  can  only  be  regarded  as 
after-thoughts  of  Christology,  although  they  have 
the  authority  of  Augustine  and  Aquinas.  The 
words  are  explicit  :  rots  iv  <pv\aK-§  irvev/juicnv  vopevdeli 
iK-qpv^ev  .  .  .  veKpoh  evirYyeXlffdr].  It  is  noteworthy, 
however,  that  early  Christian  belief  on  this  point 
was  not  founded  on  these  texts.  They  are  not 
cited  in  connexion  with  the  Descensus  by  the 
earliest  writers,  .such  as  Ignatius,  Justin,  or 
Irenaeus.  Cyprian  II  quotes  1  P  4*,  but  he  otters  no 
comment  upon  it ;  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  **  is 
the  first  to  use  1  P  3^*  to  illustrate  the  proclama- 
tion of  the  gospel  in  Hades.  Nothing  is  said  in 
either  passage  as  to  the  effect  of  the  preaching ; 
there  is  no  suggestion  of  that  triumphant  deliver- 
ance of  souls  from  Hades,  on  which  the  next  age 
loved  to  dwell.  Indeed,  1  P  3^^  does  not  speak  of  a 
preaching  to  all  the  spirits  of  the  departed,  but 
only  to  those  of  the  antediluvian  patriarchs ;  and 
this  limitation,  whatever  be  its  precise  significance, 
needs  to  be  kept  in  mind.  It  was,  perhaps,  because 
of  this  limitation  that  the  passage  was  not  quoted 
by  the  early  Christian  writers  when  debating  the 
meaning  of  the  Descensus ;  the  doctrine  was  de- 
veloping itself  in  quite  a  dilierent  way. 

6.  A  curious  passage  in  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas 
{Sim.  ix.  16)  throws  some  light  on  the  primitive 
Christian  conception  of  the  under  world.  A 
parable  is  told  of  the  building  of  a  tower  which 
represents  the  Church  at  rest.  All  the  stones 
which  are  built  into  the  tower  are  taken  from  '  a 
certain  deep  place'  {iK  pvOoO  Tiv6s),  i.e.  the  under 
world.  The  first  tier  represents  the  first  genera- 
tion of  men,  i.e.  from  Adam  to  Abraham ;  the 
second,  those  from  Abraham  to  Moses ;  the  third, 
the  prophets  and  ministers  (sc.  of  the  Old  Cove- 
nant) ;  while  the  fourth  tier  represents  the  apostles 
and  teachers  of  the  New  Covenant.  All  alike  had 
'to  rise  up  through  water'  that  they  might  be 
made  alive,  so  that  the  seal  of  baptism  is  needed 
for  all.  Now  the  'apostles  and  teachers'  differed 
from  the  rest  in  that  they  had  been  baptized 
before  they  passed  into  the  under  world  ;  but  when 
there,  'after  they  had  fallen  asleep  in  the  power 
and  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  they  preached  also  to 
them  that  had  fallen  asleep  before  tliem,  and  them- 
selves gave  unto  them  the  seal  of  the  preaching,' 
sc.  baptism.  Thus  Hermas  does  not  speak  of  a 
Descent  of  Christ  into  Hades,  but  he  finds  a  mission 

*  Tryph.  72.  t  adv.  Ha»:  in.  xx.  4. 

t  In  other  passages  of  Irenaeus  where  this  oracle  is  quoted 
(rv.  xxxiii.  12,  v.  xxxi.  1)  it  ends,  'descended  to  rescue  and 
deliver  them,'  no  mention  being  made  of  the  preaching  of 
Christ  in  Hades. 

«  Strom,  vi.  6.  II  ib. 

H  Test.  iL  27.  •*  Stnm.  vL  6. 


DESCENT  INTO  HADES 


DESCENT  INTO  HADES 


291 


there  for  the  apostles  and  teachers  of  the  Christian 
dispens<ation,  viz.  that  they  might  evangelize  and 
baptize  the  pre-Christian  saints,  so  that  tliey  too 
uiiglit  become  members  of  the  Church.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  '  quotes  this  pai^sage  from  Hermas, 
and  addst  that  the  apostles  preached  in  Hades, 
folloicing  the  Lord.  Probably  neither  writer  had 
formulated  a  quite  consistent  scheme  of  Christ's 
mission  to  the  under  world.  As  Clement  held  that 
the  apostles  were  follovctrs  of  Christ  in  Hades,  so 
Origen  taught  that  Christ  had  forerunners  there. 
He  held  that  as  the  prophets,  both  those  of  the 
OT  and  John  Baptist,  were  His  heralds  on  earth, 
to  they  were  His  heralds  in  the  under  world :  J 
'\-q<TOVi  (is  ^dou  yi-fove,  Kai  oL  rpixftTJrai  rpd  avrov,  xai 
TpoKTjfiMTffovffi  Tov  'KfHffTM/  TTji'  iriSTi/iiay. 

7.  The  primitive  view,  so  far  as  it  can  be  collected 
from  Hermas  and  Ignatius,  seems  to  be  correctly 
expounded  by  Loofs.§  Christians,  since  the  Re- 
demption wrought  by  their  Master,  were  not  sub- 
ject to  the  bondage  of  Hades  after  death  ;  from 
the  power  of  death  they  had  been  freed  once  for 
all.  And  what  Christ  did  for  the  patriarchs  in 
Hades  was  to  place  them  in  a  like  position  to  those 
who  had  been  favouK,^  by  His  presence  on  earth. 
Those  who  welcomed  Him  there  were  delivered 
from  thrall,  as  all  His  disciples  had  already  been 
delivered.  This  was  not  held  by  TertuUiaUii  or 
by  Irenaeus,"!  but  it  is  definitely  stated  by  Origen**  : 
edi*  draWayQfuv  yevo^evoi  jcoXm  Kai  dyadoi  .  .  .  ov 
KaT(\eixr6fie6a  els  ttji'  X'^P"^  5rov  ■weptififyov  tov  "S.purTOV 
til  xpo  7-7S  -rapovffias  airrov  Koifuifuvoi. 

This  may  have  been  the  significance  of  the 
preaching  in  Hades,  mentioned  in  1  P  3'"  4* ;  but 
it  remains  obscure  why  it  is  limited  (at  least  in  the 
first  passage)  to  the  antediluvian  sinners,  for  there 
is  no  hint  that  they  are  to  be  taken  as  typical  of 
all  men  who  lived  before  Christ's  Advent. 

8.  The  Descent  into  Hades  is  the  topic  in  several 
of  the  recently  discovered  Odes  0/  Solomon,  which 
date  from  the  2nd  century. 

These  remarkable  hymns  were  first  published  from  the  Sjriac 
by  Rendel  Harris  in  1909,  and  several  editions  have  appeared 
since  in  German,  French,  and  English.  Opinion  is  divided  as 
to  their  date  and  doctrinal  standpoint ;  but  it  is  not  doubtful 
that  the  passages  here  cited  are  Christian.  They  may  be  dated, 
provisionally,  between  A.D.  150  and  180. 

In  Ode  xxxL  1  ff.  we  have  a  Song  of  the  Victory 

of  Christ  in  the  under  world :  '  The  abysses  were 
dissolved  before  the  Lord :  and  darkness  was  de- 
stroyed by  His  appearance  :  error  went  astray  and 
perished  at  His  hand  :  and  folly  found  no  path  to 
walk  in  .  .  .  He  opened  His  mouth  and  spake 
grace  and  joy  .  .  .  His  face  was  justified,  for  thus 
His  holy  Father  had  given  to  Him.  Come  forth, 
3-6  that  have  been  afflicted  and  receive  joy,  and 
possess  your  souls  by  His  grace,  and  take  to  you 
immortal  life.'  And  in  xlii.  loft*.  :  ' Sheol  saw  me, 
and  was  made  miserable :  Death  cast  me  up  and 
many  along  with  me  ...  I  made  a  congregation 
of  living  men  amongst  his  dead  men,  and  I  spake 
with  them  by  lining  lips  .  .  .  and  those  who  had 
died  .  .  .  said,  Son  of  God,  have  pity  on  us  .  .  . 
and  bring  us  out  from  the  bonds  of  darkness  ;  and 
open  to  us  the  door  by  which  we  shall  come  out  to 
thee.' 

Here  we  have  the  redemption  of  souls  in  Hades, 
and  also  a  preaching  by  Christ  there  after  His 
Passion.  In  these  Odes  there  is  the  earliest  appear- 
ance of  the  detailed  doctrine  of  the  Descensus 
which  is  found  in  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  and 
was  afterwards  universally  prevalent  in  Christian 
circles.  The  Odes  do  not  appeal  directly  to  Scrip- 
ture ;  and  the  manner  in  which  they  allude  to  the 

*  Strom  iL  9.  t  *.  vi.  6. 

X  Horn,  in  1  Sam.  ?53-a»  (Lommatzscb,  xL  326). 

i  ERE  iv.  661.  !  de  Anima,  58. 

5  adv.  Hctr.  v.  xxxL  2. 

**  Horn,  in  1  Sam.  •»»-**  (Lommatzsch,  xi.  332). 


fact  and  the  purpose  of  the  Descensus  shows  that 
it  must  have  been  a  familiar  Christian  idea  at  the 
date  of  their  composition. 

9.  The  apocryphal  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  tells  (ii. 
10)  that  John  Baptist  announced  to  the  patriarclis 
in  Hades  that  he  had  baptized  the  Christ,  who 
would  soon  come  to  bring  them  deliverance.  We 
have  already  (§  6)  found  in  Origen  the  conception 
of  John  as  the  precursor  of  Clirist  in  the  under 
world  ;  but  we  have  now  to  notice  the  remarkable 
similarity  between  the  language  used  about  the 
Descensus  and  that  used  about  baptism.  Four 
points  in  particular  may  be  noted : 

(a)  The  Descent  was  a  going  down  into  '  the 
abyss '  (Bo  10').  A  text  of  the  OT  quoted  by  CjtU 
of  Jerusalem  *  as  pre-figming  this  is  Jon  2'- ',  wmch 
is  in  the  LXX : 

i^vaffos  iKviiXwaiv  fie  iax^rij, 

(Sv  ri  xe^oXi)  fiov  els  ffxifffMS  6peuiw, 

Kori^rpf  els  yf^v  ^j  6L  (jLoyXol  airrfjs  xdroxoi  aliivioi. 
Now  in  baptism  we  are  '  buried  with  him '  and 
'  united  with  him  by  the  likeness  of  his  death ' 
(Ro  6*- ').  The  Fathers,  e.g.  Basil,t  speak  explicitly 
of  our  baptism  as  a  reflexion  or  imitation  of  Christ's 
Descensus ;  as  a  "Western  Council  t  has  it,  '  in  aquis 
mersio,  quasi  in  infemum  descensio  est.' 

{b)  When  Christ  descended,  the  keepers  of  the 
gates  of  Hades  were  scared  (cf.  Job  38"  vvXtMol  ii 
4S0V  I56irres  ae  l-mj^ay),  and  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus 
(ii.  8)  speaks  of  the  brazen  gates  and  iron  bars 
being  broken  (cf.  Ps  107^®,  Is  45-).  The  powers  of 
the  under  world  were  terrified.  Now  the  Epistle 
of  Barnabas  (§  11)  quotes  as  predictive  of  baptism 
Is  45-  '  I  will  crush  gates  of  brass  and  break  in 
pieces  bolts  of  iron ' ;  and  the  same  text  is  alluded 
to  in  Odes  of  Solomon,  xviL  9,  where  again  the  re- 
ference is  to  baptism.  Further,  all  the  Eastern 
baptismal  rites  bring  in  the  idea  of  the  waters  (the 
mysterious  region  where  evil  spirits  dwell)  being 
terrified  at  the  coming  of  Christ  for  baptism, 
quoting  Ps  77'*  114'  2S^  as  forecasting  this.  We 
have  the  same  thing  in  Odes  of  Solomon,  xxiv.  1 
and  xxxi.  If.  In  some  pictorial  representations  of 
tlie  Baptism  of  Christ,  Jordan  is  depicted  allegoric- 
ally  as  starting  away  in  astonLshea  fear.  That  is, 
the  terror  of  the  powers  of  evil  is  described  in  the 
same  language,  whether  the  Descent  to  Hades  or 
Christian  baptism  is  the  topic. § 

(c)  The  main  purpose,  as  we  have  seen  (§  3)  of 
the  Descensus  was  the  release  of  captive  souls. 
But  that  baptism  is  a  release  from  bondage,  the 
bondage  of  sin,  is  a  commonplace  in  early  Christian 
literature.  Baptism,  says  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,;!  is 
cu'xAuiXwrMs  Xih-pof  (cf.  Odes  of  Solomon,  xvii.  11, 
xxL  1,  XXV.  1,  and  Ephraim  Syrus,  Hymns  on  the 
Nativity,  xv.  9  :  '  Blessed  be  He  who  has  annulled 
the  bonds'). 

(d)  The  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  describes  the 
passage  to  Paradise  of  the  saints  redeemed  from 
Hades  by  Christ.  It  was,  again,  a  familiar  thought 
in  early  Christian  speculation  that  in  baptism  we 
are  restored  to  Paradise,  to  the  state  from  which 
Adam  fell,  the  guilt  of  original  sin  being  annulled 
(cf.  Origen,^  CjTil  of  Jerusalem,**  Basil,tt  and 
Ephraim,:;:^  who  says  of  the  baptized:  'the  fruit 
which  Adam  tasted  not  in  Paradise,  this  day  in 
your  mouths  has  been  placed.'  See  also  Odes  of 
Solomon,  xi.  14). 

Other  illustrations  might  be  given,  but  these  are 
sufficient  to  show  that  what  may  be  called  the 
folklore  of  the  Descent  into  Hades  is  closely  con- 
nected with  the  folklore  of  baptism.     The  juxta- 

•  Cat.  xir.  20.  i  de  Spiritu  Saneto,  xv.  35. 

;  4tb  Council  of  TUedo  (633X  cap.  6. 

i  See  Bernard,  Odes  ofSoltmum  (TS  viiL  3  [1912]).  p.  33  f.,  for 
a  fuller  statement  and  for  references  in  regard  to  the  matter  of 
this  section  g^enerally. 

I  ProeaL  16.  H  in  Gen,  ».  **  Cat  L  i. 

ft  Horn.  xiJL  2.  tX  Epiphany  Hprnnt,  xiiL  17. 


292 


DESERT,  WILDERNESS 


DESTRUCTION 


position  of  the  two  thoughts — the  ministry  of  Christ 
in  Hades  and  the  ettieacy  of  baptism — in  1  1'  3"*'-  is 
remarkable,  and  deserves  a  closer  examination  than 
it  has  yet  received  from  commentators. 

10.  The  article  '  He  descended  into  Hell '  does 
not  appear  in  any  Creed  until  the  4th  cent.,  the 
Arian  Symbol  of  Sirmium  (359)  being  the  first  to 
include  it ;  and  it  is  not  included  in  the  baptismal 
Creed  of  the  Eastern  Churcli  to  this  day.  The 
motive  with  which  it  was  inserted  in  the  Creeds  of 
the  West  is  not  clear ;  but,  whatever  the  motive 
was  originally,  the  clause  now  is  useful  as  testify- 
ing to  the  perfect  humanity  of  Christ,  His  spirit 
having  passed  into  the  unseen  world  after  death, 
as  the  spirits  of  the  departed  do.  Nor  are  we  just 
to  early  Christian  tradition,  or  mindful  of  the 
implications  of  1  P  3"*  4^,  if  we  do  not  recognize 
that  this  Descensus  must  have  affected  in  some  way 
the  condition  of  souls  in  the  unseen  world. 

LiTERATURK. — This  is  very  copious.  The  artt.  '  Descent  to 
Hades  (Christ's)'  by  Loofs  in  KliE  and  '  Hell  (Descent  into)' 
by  Burn  in  DCQ  with  the  literature  there  cited  are  most  valu- 
able. A  lar^e  number  of  Patristic  references  will  be  found  in 
F.  Huidekoper,  Christ's  Mission  to  the  Underworld-,  New 
York,  1876.  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apostles'  Creed,  London,  1894  ; 
E.  C.  S.  Gibson,  The  Thirty-Xine  Articles  o/  the  Church  of 
England,  do.  189(>-97 ;  and  J.  Turmel,  La  Descente  du  Christ 
aux  enfers,  Paris,  1905,  <;ive  useful  summaries.  C.  Bigg,  Epp. 
of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Jiide  (ICC,  1901),  is  the  fullest  English 
Commentary  on  the  Petrine  texts.         J.   H.   BERNARD. 

DESERT,  WILDERNESS.— The  ideas  suggested 
to  our  minds  by  the  words  'desert'  or  'wilderness' 
differ  to  a  considerable  extent  from  those  conveyed 
to  an  Oriental  by  the  biblical  terms  so  translated. 
When  we  think  of  a  desert  we  tend  to  imagine  a 
bare  sandy  waste,  without  any  vegetation  or  water, 
such  as  the  Desert  of  the  Sahara  in  N.  Africa. 
The  '  desert '  of  the  Bible  is  rather  a  place  without 
human  habitations,  devoid  of  cities  or  towns,  but 
by  no  means  devoid  of  vegetation,  at  least  for  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  year.  Properly  speak- 
ing, the  desert  was  the  place  to  whicli  the  cattle 
were  driven  (Heb.  njin  from  nj^  'to  drive'),  an 
uncultivated  region  where  pasturage,  however 
scanty,  was  to  be  found.  Joel,  for  instance,  speaks 
of  the  fire  having  devoured  the  pastures  of  the 
wilderness  (P"),  and  of  the  locusts  leaving  a 
desolate  wilderness  behind  them  (2^).  It  was  in 
the  wilderness  that  the  shepherds  tended  their 
flocks,  and  other  forms  of  life  were  also  to  be 
found  there.  Thus,  e.g.,  pelicans  (Ps  102«),  wild 
asses  (Jer  2"^),  ostriches  (La  4^),  jackals  (Mai  P) 
had  their  home  in  the  desert.  As  the  pasture  to 
be  found  in  the  wilderness  was  scanty  and  in- 
sufficient to  support  a  fiock  of  sheep  for  any  length 
of  time,  the  shepherds  had  to  move  from  place  to 
place  in  order  to  obtain  the  necessary  food  for  their 
nocks.  The  desert  was  thus  the  special  home  of 
nomadic  or  wandering  tribes,  although  the  name 
'  desert '  or  '  wilderness '  was  applied  to  the  un- 
cultivated tracts  of  land  beyond  the  bounds  of 
the  cultivated  area  near  the  towns  or  villages. 
Some  of  the  deserts  mentioned  in  Scripture  are 
small,  and  correspond  to  the  English  'common '  or 
uncultivated  pasture  ground  near  a  village  on 
whicli  any  of  tlie  inhabitants  could  graze  their 
cattle.  Thus  we  read  of  the  Wilderness  of  Gibeon 
(2  S  2^*),  of  Tekoa  (2  Cii  2020),  of  Damascus  (1  K 
19^*).  On  the  other  iiand,  many  of  the  wildernesses 
referred  to  in  the  Bible  are  simply  parts  of  larger 
deserts.  Some  of  these  larger  tracts  of  unculti- 
vated pasture  land  are,  e.g. ,  the  Wilderness  of  Judah 
(Jg  V%  of  Moab  (Dt  2**),  of  Edom  (2  K  3").  The 
Wilderness  of  Judah  included  the  Wilderness  of 
Ziph,  of  Tekoa,  of  Engedi. 

The  best-known  desert  of  the  Bible  is  the 
Wilderness  of  Sinai,  where  the  tribes  of  Israel 
wandered  before  settling  in  Canaan.  God's  care 
for  the  people  in  those  days  of  wandering  is  re- 


peatedly referred  to  by  prophets  and  psalmists 
{e.g.  Hos  13»,  Jer  2«,  Am  2^i  Ps  78"  lOT*  1.36'«). 
In  the  same  way  the  sin  and  unbelief  of  the  people 
in  the  wilderness  are  mentioned  (e.g.  Ps  78**  106"), 
while  on  the  other  hand  several  of  the  prophets 
seem  to  look  on  the  time  of  the  sojourn  in  the 
wilderness  as  the  ideal  period  in  the  story  of 
Israel's  relation  to  God  (e.g.  Jer  2^  Am  5**). 

In  the  apostolic  writings  we  have  several  refer- 
ences to  'wilderness'  or  'desert.'  The  terms  em- 
ployed are  ipiifxla  and  ffyn/J-os,  the  latter  used  either 
as  a  noun  or  adjective  witli  tSttos  or  xt^P*  or  some 
similar  M'ord  understood.  In  the  life  of  our  Lord 
the  desert  holds  an  important  place.  It  is  the 
scene  of  the  Temptation,  of  the  feeding  of  the  5000, 
of  midnight  prayer  and  rest  from  labour.  In  tlie 
life  of  St.  Paul  we  have  a  reference  to  his  sojourn 
in  Arabia  (Gal  1")  after  his  conversion,  and  un- 
doubtedly we  are  to  understand  that  the  Apostle 
had  retired  to  the  desert  for  meditation.  The 
evangelist  Philip  is  instructed  by  the  Spirit  to  go 
to  meet  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  on  the  road  from 
Jerusalem  to  Gaza,  and  the  statement  follows, 
'  which  is  desert '  ( Ac  8^).  If  this  refers  to  the 
road  Avhich  passed  through  the  desert,  there  is  no 
difhculty  ;  but  the  natural  application  of  the  words 
is  to  Gaza  itself,  which  in  the  time  of  Philip  was 
a  prosperous  town.  G.  A.  Smith  (HGUL*,  1897,  p. 
186  f.)  supposes  that  the  reference  is  to  Old  Gaza, 
past  which  the  road  ran  ;  but  the  more  likely 
explanation  is  that  the  sentence  is  a  later  marginal 
gloss  inserted  after  Gaza  had  passed  away,  and  that 
it  at  length  crept  into  the  text  (cf.  HDD  iv.  918'*). 
In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  reference  is 
made  to  the  persecuted  followers  of  Christ  'who 
wandered  in  deserts  and  mountains '  (11^).  Prob- 
ably this  refers  to  the  Jewish  Christians  of  tlie 
Holy  Land  during  the  great  war  witii  Rome  and 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus.  The 
apostolic  writings  also  contain  repeated  allusions 
to  the  wilderness  of  Israel's  wanderings.  In  the 
speeches  of  St.  Stephen  and  St.  Paul,  as  recorded 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  we  find  the  story  of  the 
desert  sojourn,  in  the  accounts  of  the  hi.story  of 
God's  revelation  of  Himself  to  mankind  (Ac  73«-38- 
•«2-'»4  1318).  St.  Paul  in  1  Co  10»  refers  to  the 
temptation,  sin,  and  punishment  of  the  people  in 
the  Avilderness  as  a  warning  to  Christian  believers 
against  giving  way  to  temptation.  A  similar  use 
of  the  temptation  in  the  Avildemess  is  made  in 
He  38- 1^. 

In  Rev  12^'  '* '  the  woman  clothed  with  the  sun  ' 
has  a  place  prepared  for  her  in  the  wilderness, 
whither  she  nees  from  before  the  dragon,  while  in 
17*  the  seer  is  canied  to  the  wilderness  to  see  the 
'  woman  sitting  upon  a  scarlet-coloured  beast,  full 
of  names  of  blasphemy.'  The  thought  behind  the 
former  reference,  of  the  wilderness  as  a  place 
of  refuge  for  the  woman,  may  be  taken  from  the 
history  of  the  Jews  who  fled  from  Pharaoh  to  the 
wilderness,  but  there  may  be  no  more  than  the 
general  idea  of  the  wilderness  as  a  place  of  refuge 
and  concealment,  so  amply  illustrated  in  the  life 
of  David.  The  idea  in  the  latter  instance  may  be 
connected  with  the  Jewish  conception  of  the  desert 
as  the  liome  of  demons  or  evil  spirits  (cf.  art. 
Demon).  W.  F.  Boyd. 

DESTRUCTION.— The  material  is  scanty  in  St. 
Paul's  writings  for  '  a  detailed  theory  on  this  most 
awe-inspiring  of  all  subjects,'  and  it  is  proper  for 
us  to  note  '  the  "  wise  Agnosticism  "  (the  phrase  is 
Dr.  Orr's  in  discussing  the  teaching  of  Scripture 
on  eternal  punishment)  of  St.  Paul  with  the  at- 
tempted theories  of  the  Synagogue-theologians' 
(H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  St.  Paul's  Conceptions  ofth( 
Last  Things,  1904,  pp.  313,  315 ;  cf.  also  4  Ezr.  ix.  13, 
'  Enquire  not  further  how  the  ungodly  are  to  be 


DEVIL 


DEVIL 


293 


tormented,  but  rather  investigate  the  manner  in 
which  the  righteous  are  to  be  saved').  But  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  term  'destruction'  to 
St.  Paul  meant,  not  annihilation,  but  a  continual 
existence  of  some  sort  in  the  outer  darkness  away 
from  Grod.  St.  Paul  has  a  group  of  words  for  this 
idea.  <Jpr)  (1  Th  l'»,  Ro  2»-  »  5»)  is  a  more  general 
term  and  applies  to  the  Day  of  Judgment,  ffdwarot 
(Ro  6-'- "  8*)  is  not  the  death  of  the  body,  which  is 
true  of  all,  but  rather  the  second  death  of  Rev 
20*-  ".  The  NT  gives  no  scientific  description  of 
death,  nor  is  one  possible  in  the  spiritual  sphere. 
The  analogy  of  Nature  (see  Butlers  Analogy,  ed. 
Gladstone,  1896,  and  Drummonds  Satural  Law 
in  the  Spiritual  World,  1883)  does  not  make  an- 
nihilation necessary.  The  words  ipOeipa  and  <t>$opd 
(Gal  6^,  2  P  2^-)  have  the  notion  of  corruption. 
Note  the  contrast  in  1  Co  15**  between  ip  <l>dopq. 
and  iv  d(f>dapctif.  St.  Paul  uses  tpdeipu  in  1  Co  3" 
for  the  punishment  of  one  who  destroys  {<p0fipui) 
the  Temple  of  God.  In  Ro  3'^  destruction  {<rur- 
rpinfia)  and  misery  {raXai-rupia)  are  coupled  together 
for  the  ways  of  the  sinful.  Bat  the  chief  words 
for  the  idea  of  destruction  of  the  unbelieving  are 
arwXfia  (dsroXXicj)  and  6\edp<K,  both  from  6\\vfit,  '  to 
destroy.'  In  Rev  9^*  6  'AxoWiwi',  the  destroyer,  is 
the  title  of  Satan.  The  use  of  aro  in  dxdWi'/u  and 
dxiiXeia  is  perfective,  and  in  Greek  literature 
generally  the  terms  mean  'destruction.'  This 
fact  is  used  by  the  advocates  of  conditional  im- 
mortality in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  the  annihi- 
lation of  the  wicked,  but  it  is  by  no  means  clear 
that  the  words  connote  extinction  of  consciousness. 
Least  of  all  is  this  true  of  the  LXX  use  of  the 
words.  In  2  P  3"  oTwXeta  is  used  for  the  Day  of 
Judgment  and  punishment  of  the  wicked,  which 
implies  life  after  death.  In  Ph  1*^  the  word  is  in 
opposition  to  ffomjpia,  in  He  10®  it  is  opposed  to 
repiToiifffii  rip  fvxv^  (see  also  Ja  4",  Jude  ',  1  Co  1" 
lO*  IS^s,  2  Co  2«'-  4»,  Ro  2"  Ph  3",  Rev  17«- "). 
There  seems  no  good  reason  for  reading  into  the 
context  the  notion  of  annihilation  of  the  soul,  for 
that  was  probably  an  idea  wholly  foreign  to  St. 
Paul.  The  term  SXfdpos  meets  us  'in  1  Th  5^  2  Th 
P,  1  Ti  6»  (etj  SXfdpop  Kal  dx«\«ar).  In  2  Th  l^  we 
have  TL(rov<Tiv  SKtdpov  cutbriov,  which  is  the  only  pas- 
sage that  makes  a  statement  about  the  duration 
of  the  destruction  of  the  wicked.  Aristotle  (de 
Coslo,  L  9,  15)  defines  aliiv  as  the  limit  (t6  tAoi) 
either  of  a  man's  epoch  or  the  limit  of  aJl  things 
(eternity).  The  word  does  not  in  itself  denote 
eternity,  but  it  lends  itself  readily  to  that  idea. 
The  context  in  2  Th  1*  makes  the  notion  of  final- 
ity or  eternity  necessary  (Milligan,  Thess.,  1908, 
ad  loc.).  The  word  SkeOpot  denotes  hopeless  ruin 
(cf.  Beet,  The  Last  Things,  ed.  1905,  p.  122  fF.).  In 
4  Mac  10"  we  have  t^  aluwiov  rod  rvpavvov  6\e$pov 
in  contrast  with  top  doiSifiop  tQp  evaepdv  ^low  (cf. 
Milligan,  op.  cit.  p.  65).  St.  Paul's  natural  mean- 
ing is  the  ruin  of  the  v^icked,  which  goes  on  for 
ever.  It  is  a  dark  subject  from  any  point  of  view, 
but  eternal  sinning  seems  to  call  for  eternal 
punishing.  See  also  artt.  on  LIFE  AXD  Death, 
FrxiSHMEXT,  and  Perdition. 

A.  T.  Robertson'. 

DEVIL  {Std^oXos). — In  this  article  the  conception 
of  tiie  Evil  One  in  the  apostolic  ^vritings  and  of 
the  various  names  used  to  describe  him  Tvill  be 
considered  ;  for  the  passages  in  EV  where  '  devil ' 
represents  Scufioviov  see  Demon. 

1.  The  name  8idpoXo«. — {a )  It  is  used  as  a  common 
noun  or  as  an  adjective  to  denote  '  a  slanderer'  or 
'slanderous'  (NT  in  Pastoral  Epistles  only),  as  in 
1  Ti  3"  (women  not  to  be  slanderers),  2  Ti  3%  Tit  2* ; 
and  so  in  LXX  of  Haman  (Est  7*  8^ ;  Heb.  ly,  -ns, 
Vulg.  hostis  and  adversarius).  The  corresponding 
verb  is  used  of  accusation,  where  the  charge  is  not 
necessarily  false,  as  in  Lk  16^  (5te;3X^^)  of  the  unjust 


steward,  though  probably  a  secret  enmity  is  in- 
ferred ;  and  Papias  (apr.  £useb.  HE  m.  xxxix.  16) 
uses  the  verb  (unless  it  is  Eusebius'  paraphrase) 
with  reference  to  the  '  woman  accused  of  many 
sins  before  the  Lord.'  It  is  noteworthy  in  this 
connexion  that  the  devil's  accusations  against  man, 
though  undoubtedly  hostile,  are  not  always  untrue. 

(b)  As  a  proper  name  bid^oKm  is  constantly  used 
in  the  NT,  usually  with  the  article,  but  oocasion- 
aUy  it  is  anarthrous  (Ac  IS'",  1  P  o*.  Rev  l^  20»). 
It  is  explicitly  identified  in  Rev  12*  20*  with  the 
Heb.  name  Satan,  and,  like  that  name,  it  is  not 
used  in  the  NT  in  the  plnr.  (except  in  the  primary 
sense  of  '  slanderer '  as  above),  and  is  not  applied 
to  Satan's  angels,  as  we  apply  the  word  'cievils' 
to  them.  It  is  curious  that  we  never  in  English 
use  '  Devil '  as  a  proper  name  without  the  article, 
while  we  always  use  *  Satan '  in  this  way.  Hence 
the  title  does  not  convey  to  our  ears  quite  the  same 
idea  as  it  conveyed  to  the  Jews.  Conversely  we 
should  do  well  if  we  did  not  alxcays  treat  '  Christ ' 
as  a  proper  name,  but  sometimes  used  it  as  a  title 
or  attribute,  'the  Christ,'  as  occasionally  in  RV 
{e.g.  Lk  24=6).  In  the  OT  '  Satan '  (from  lej?,  '  to 
hate,'  •  to  be  an  enemy  to,'  the  root  idea  being  the 
enmity  between  the  serpent  and  the  seed  of  the 
woman,  Gn  3")  is  generally  used  with  the  article, 
iP^t",  as  denoting  the  adversary :  in  1  K  5*  it  is  used 
without  the  article,  as  denoting  any  adversary 
(LXX  ivipovXos,  Vulg.  Satan).  The  name  '  Satan,' 
liowever,  had  not  been  transliterated  into  Greek 
till  shortly  before  the  Christian  era,  for  we  never 
find  it  so  rendered  in  the  LXX,  but  always  6 
Sid^oXos.  The  latter  is  used  as  a  proper  name  in 
the  LXX  of  Job  !«•,  Zee  3^  (Vulg.  Satan),  and 
Wis  2^  (Vulg.  Diabolus) ;  and  so  often  in  the  NT. 
There  we  have,  as  frequently,  6  Zaravdi,  almost 
always  with  an  article,  but  in  2  Co  12^  we  have  ^arop 
or  Zaroj'a  without  the  article;  some  cursives  in 
Rev  20*  have  Zarapdt  anarthrous.  The  translitera- 
tion '  Satan '  is  found  34  times  in  the  NT,  of  which 
14  cases  are  in  the  Gospels. 

(c)  We  find  in  the  apostolic  writings  some  para- 
phrases of  the  name  '  Satan.'  '  The  EvU  One '  (6 
rornp6i)  is  used  in  Eph  6'«,  1  Jn  2^^  3"  5^«-  ;  this 
designation  is  also  found  5  times  in  the  Gospels, 
and,  in  addition,  probably  in  the  last  clause  of  the 
Lord's  Prayer.  In  the  Apocalypse  '  the  dragon '  is 
frequently  used  as  a  sjmonym  for  Satan,  6  dpaxup 
probably  meaning  '  the  sharp-seeing  one,'  from 
dipKOfiai.*  It  is  used  in  Rev  12»-  13-  *■  "  16»20* 
as  denoting  a  large  serpent  (as  in  classical  Greek), 
explicitly  identified  with  the  '  old  serpent '  of  Gn  3 
in  Rev  12*  20^.  This  identification  is  perhaps  im- 
plied in  Ro  16*>,  2  Co  11»  (cf.  Wis  2^).  Satan  is 
also  called  '  the  Accuser '  and  '  the  Destroyer '  (see 
below,  §  2).  For  other  names  see  AoyERSAUY, 
Air,  Belial. 

2.  Apostolic  doctrine  about  the  dcYil  or  Satan. 
— The  apostles,  like  their  Jewish  contemporaries, 
taught  that  Satan  was  a  personal  being,  the  prince 
of  evil  spirits  or  demons  (Rev  12^-  *,  Eph  2"-  ;  cf.  Mt 
25",  Mk  3^,  but  the  name  '  Beelzebub '  is  not  found 
in  the  NT  outside  the  Gospels),  and  therefore  one 
of  the  'angels  which  kept  not  their  own  princi- 
pality' (Jude®,  2  P  2*).  In  accordance  with  the 
conception  of  Wis  2^,  that  his  malignity  towards 
man  is  caused  by  envy  (for  Jewish  ideas  see 
Edersheim,  LT*,  1887,  L  165),  he  is  represented  as 
pre-eminently  the  adversary  of  man  (1  P  5*),  and 
as  accusing  him  to  God  (Rev  12^*  KaTrryopm  or 
Kar^iop ;  the  reference  seems  to  be  to  Job  and 
Joshua  the  high  priest).  He  has  power  in  this 
world,  though  only  for  a  while  (Rev  12"),  and 
therefore  is  called  the  '  god  of  this  world '  or  *  age ' 

•  The  wonl  iixUmr  in  the  LXX  renders  three  Hebrew  wotda : 
PJB,  tannin  (Job  712).  rij^,  naAdth  (Job  2613X  jn^S,  livtalhan 
(Job  4025). 


294 


DEVIL 


DEVIL 


(o/wc)  who  '  hath  blinded  the  thoughts  (vorifiaTa)  of 
the  unbelieving'  (2  Co  4*;  of.  Jn  H**  16"  'the 
prince  of  the  [this]  worid ').  This  '  power  of  Satan  ' 
IS  contrasted  with  '  God '  as  '  darkness '  with  '  light ' 
in  the  heavenly  vision  at  St.  Paul's  conversion 
(Ac  26'").  'The  devil'  has  'the  power  of  death' 
(He  2"),  not  that  he  can  inflict  death  at  will,  but 
that  death  entered  into  the  world  through  sin 
(Ko  5''^)  at  his  instigation  (Wis  2").  As  Westcott 
remarks  (on  He  2'^),  death  as  death  is  no  part  of 
the  Divine  order,  but  is  the  devil's  realm ;  he 
makes  it  subservient  to  his  end.  He  must,  there- 
fore, almost  certainly  be  iden tilled  with  '  the  De- 
stroyer' who  iin])ears  as  Apollyon  {iiroWvuv)  or 
Abaddon  ([nji*,  lit.  'destruction';  see  AnADDON) 
in  Rev  9",  the  king  of  the  locusts  who  has  power 
to  injure  men  for  five  months — the  name  is  akin  to 
'  Asmodaeus '  of  To  3*  (nps-x,  from  lot^, '  to  destroy '), 
but  not  with  the  'Destroyer'  of  1  Co  10'"  (see 
Angels,  8  (6)). 

The  devil  uses  his  power  to  seduce  man  to  sin ; 
he  tempts  Ananias  to  lie  to  the  Holy  Ghost  (Ac  5') ; 
he  deceives  the  whole  world  (Rev  12®  20*- '") ;  he 
is  pre-eminently  'the  tempter'  (1  Th  3»,  1  Co  7') ; 
he  tempts  with  wiles  and  devices  and  snares  (Eph 
6",  2  Co  2",  1  Ti  3^  2  Ti  2^6) ;  he  uses  evil  men  as 
his  instruments  or  ministers,  who  '  fashion  them- 
selves as  ministers  of  righteousness'  even  as  he 
'fashioned  himself  into  an  angel  of  light' (2  Co 
11"'- ).  A  passage  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  ( 1  Ti  3«) 
suggests  that  the  fundamental  temptation  with 
which  Satan  seduces  men  is  pride.  The  Christian 
iirlffKowo^  must  not  be  puffed  up  with  pride  lest  he 
fall  into  the  condemnation  (Kplfxa)  into  which  the 
devil  fell  (i.e.  when  cast  out  of  heaven  ;  this  seems 
to  be  the  most  probable  interpretation,  not  'the 
judgment  wrought  by  the  devil' ;  cf.  Jn  16"  'the 
prince  of  this  world  hath  been  judged,'  K^Kpirai). 
Satan  is  far  from  being  omnipotent ;  man  can  re- 
sist him,  and  he  will  nee  (Ja  4^) ;  man  must  not 
'give  place  to'  him,  i.e.  not  give  him  scope  to 
work  (Eph  4^").  Not  that  man  can  resist  by  his 
own  strength,  but  only  by  the  indwelling  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  who  helps  his  infirmity  (Ro  S^, 
1  Co  3'*,  and  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  passim  ;  cf.  Mt 
12^) ;  the  Holy  Spirit  is  man's  Helper  or  Para- 
clete against  the  Evil  Spirit. 

The  devil  is  described  as  instigating  opposition 
to  Christian  work  *  and  persecution  ;  whether  by 
blinding  the  minds  (lit.  thoughts)  of  the  unbeliev- 
ing (2  Co  4*),  or  directly  by  suggesting  opposition, 
as  when  he  '  hindered  '  St.  Paul's  return  to  Thessa- 
lonica  (1  Th  2'*),  perhaps  (as  Ramsay  thinks  {St. 
Paul,  1895,  p.  230  f.])  by  putting  into  the  minds  of 
the  politarchs  the  idea  of  exacting  security  for  the 
leading  Christians  of  that  city  (Ac  17*).  Similarly 
in  Rev  2'"  the  devil  is  said  to  be  about  to  cast  some 
of  the  Smyrnaean  Christians  into  prison  ;  and  Per- 
gamum,  the  centre  of  the  Emperor-worship  which 
led  to  the  persecution  described  in  the  Apocalypse, 
is  called  Satan's  throne  (2'^).  No  phrase  marks 
more  clearly  than  this  the  difference  of  attitude 
towards  the  Roman  official  world  between  the 
Seer  on  the  one  hand  and  St.  Paul  and  St.  Luke 
on  the  other,  or  (as  it  seems  to  the  present  writer) 
the  interval  between  the  dates  of  writing.  The 
Seer  looks  on  the  Emperor  and  his  officials  as 
closely  allied  with  Satan,  while  St.  Paul  and  St. 
Luke  look  upon  them  as  Christ's  instruments  (Ro 
13*,  etc.  ;  and  note  the  statements  about  Roman 
officials  in  Acts).  In  close  connexion  with  the 
above  passages,  the  persecuting  Jews  are  called  a 
'synagogue  of  Satan'  (Rev  2"  3"). 

3.  The  conflict  with   Satan. — Michael  and  his 

good  angels  are  represented  as  at  war  in  heaven 

with  the  devil  and  his  angels  (Rev  12^)  as  a  direct 

result  of   the  spiritual  travail  of  the  Christian 

*  In  this  sense  Peter  is  called  'Satan  '  in  Mt  1(1-'. 


Church  (vv,'"*).  Satan  is  cast  down  to  the  earth 
and  persecutes  the  Cliurch  (v.'*).  But  he  is  bound 
by  the  angel  for  a  thousand  years,  i.e.  for  a  long 
jieriod,  and  cast  into  the  abyss  that  he  may  no 
longer  deceive  (20*'-).  This  period  of  binding 
synchronizes  with  Christ's  reign  of  a  thousand 
years  (see  v.''),  when  the  triumph  is  shared  by  the 
martyrs  (vv.*-*) ;  this  is  the  '  first  resurrection,' 
and  is  best  interpreted  >is  taking  place  in  the  pre- 
sent life,  and  as  referring  to  the  cessation  of  the 
persecution,  which  w»is  to  last  for  a  comparatively 
short  time — 3^  days  (11*-  ")  as  comjjared  with  1000 
years  (20'^-  ■*),  and  to  the  establishment  of  a  domin- 
ant Christianity.  But  the  reign  of  Christ  is  not 
said  to  be  'on  earth.'  The  reign  of  the  martyrs 
was  not  to  be  an  earthly  one ;  they  '  would  live 
and  reign  with  Christ  as  kings  and  priests  in  the 
hearts  of  all  succeeding  generations  of  Christians, 
while  their  work  Iwre  fruit  in  the  subjection  of 
the  civilized  world  to  the  obedience  of  the  faith. 
.  .  .  The  age  of  the  martyrs,  however  long  it 
might  last,  would  be  followed  by  a  far  longer 
period  of  Christian  supremacy'  (Swete,  extending 
and  adapting  Augustine,  de  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  7ff.). 
In  other  words,  Satan's  power  for  evil  now  is  not 
to  be  compared  with  his  power  at  the  beginning 
of  our  era.  This  conception  of  an  anticipatory 
victory  over  Satan  may  be  compared  with  Ro  16'*', 
1  Jn  3»  5'8. 

After  the  thousand  years  the  devil  will  be  i-e- 
leased  (Rev  20^) ;  there  will  be  a  great  activity 
of  all  the  powers  of  evil  before  the  Last  Day  ;  but 
he  will  be  finally  overthrown  (v.'"),  and  Christ's 
triumph  will  be  complete.  This  is  the  great  mes- 
sage of  the  Apocalypse.  The  struggle  between 
the  Church  and  the  World  will  end  in  Satan  l>eing 
vanquished  for  ever. 

4.  Satan  dwelling  in  men. — This  subject  is  con- 
sidered in  art.  Demon  ;  but  certain  NT  phrases 
may  be  noticed  here. 

(a)  Wicked  men  are  called  'children  of  the 
devil '  (Ac  13'«,  Elymas  ;  1  Jn  3'») ;  and  in  Rev  2»* 
the  '  mysteries '  of  the  false  teachers  at  Thyatira 
are  called  '  the  deep  things  of  Satan,  as  they  .say,' 
as  opposed  to  the  '  deep  things  of  God '  of  which 
St.  Paul  speaks  (1  Co  2'« ;  cf.  Ro  ll^,  Eph  3'8) ; 
i.e.  '  the  deep  things  as  they  call  them,  but  they 
are  the  deep  things  of  Satan.'  In  these  wicked  men 
and  teachers  Satan  is  conceived  as  dwelling  ;  but 
pre-eminently  he  dwells  in  the  man  who  is  his  re- 

Eresentative,  and  who  is  endowed  with  his  attri- 
utes,  '  the  lawless  one '  (Antichrist)  who  works 
false  miracles  and  has  his  Parousia  even  as  Christ 
has  (2  Th  2*,  where  see  Milligan's  note). 

{b)  Delivering  unto  Satan. — This  phrase  is  found 
in  1  Co  5*'-  and  1  Ti  1-",  and  is  perhaps  ba.sed  on 
Job  1'^  2",  where  the  patriarch  is  delivered  to  Satan 
to  be  tried  by  sutlenng.  In  St.  Paul  the  phrase 
seems  to  denote  excommunication,  the  excommuni- 
cate becoming  a  dwelling-place  for  the  Evil  One. 
It  is,  indeed,  thought  by  some  that  the  phrase 
'destruction  of  the  flesh'  in  1  Co  5'  means  the 
infliction  of  death,  as  in  the  case  of  Ananias  and 
Sapphira  (Alford,  Goudge,  etc.).  But;  in  1  Tim. 
death  cannot  be  intended,  for  the  object  of  the 
discipline  is  that  the  offender  may  be  taught  not 
to  blaspheme  ;  and  in  1  Cor.  the  balance  of  proba- 
bility perhaps  lies  with  the  opinion  that  the 
oH'ender  is  the  same  as  the  man  who  was  received 
back  into  communion  in  2  Co  2"  7'^  (for  the  contrary 
view  see  A.  Menzies,  Second  Corinthians,  London, 
1912,  p.  xviitf.).  Ramsaythink8thatthephra.se 
was  an  adaptation  of  a  pagan  idea  in  which  the 
punishment  of  an  oH'ender  is  left  to  the  gods.  Un- 
doubtedly excommunication  in  the  early  Church 
was  a  severe  penalty  ;  bodily  sufferings  are  not 
impossibly  referred  to,  for  these  are  attributed  to 
Satan  in  the  NT  (Lk  13'".  tlie  woman  whom  Satan 


DIADEM 


DIAKA 


295 


had  bound),  and  St.  Paul  calls  his  '  stake  in  the 
Hesh,'  whatever  form  of  suffering  that  might  have 
been, '  a  messenger  of  Satan  to  buffet  me '  (2  Co  12^). 
Yet  this  discipline  is  intended  to  bring  about  re- 
pentance, '  that  the  spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day 
of  the  Lord  Jesus.' 

LiTERATCRB.— H.  St  J.  Tbackeray,  The  Relation  vj  St. 
Paul  to  Contemporary  Jevish  ThouglU,  1900,  p.  142  ff.  (esp.  p. 
170  f.);  E.  B.  Redlich,  St.  Paul  and  his  Companions,  1913, 
index,  t.v.  '  Satan ' ;  A.  Naime,  The  Epistle  of  Priesthood, 
1913,  pp.  57,  267  ff.  ;  T.  J.  Hardy,  Th«  Bsliffiou*  Instinct,  1913, 
p.  151  ff. ;  T.  Haerini:,  The  Christian  Faith,  Kog.  tr.,  1913,  i. 
4S1  f.  See  art.  Demos.  For  the  Apocalypse  passages  see  espe- 
ciallv  H.  B.  Swete's  admirable  Commentarv,  London,  1906. 

A.   J.   aiACLEAJT. 

DIADEM.— See  Crow^. 

DIANA.— The  use  of  the  name  *  Diana '  in  Acl9 

(AV  and  RV)  to  indicate  the  Ephesian  goddess  is 
probably  due  to  the  influence  of  the  Latin  Vulgate. 
From  a  very  early  time  the  Romans  used  the  Italian 
names  of  their  own  divinities  to  indicate  also  Greek 
divinities  whose  characteristics  were  analogous  to 
those  of  their  own.  It  was  thus  that  the  Greek 
maiden  huntress-goddess  Artemis  was  early  equated 
with  the  Latin  goddess  Diana,  maiden  and  huntress. 
(In  the  earliest  Roman  period  Diana  and  Janus 
[  =  Dianus]  are  male  and  female  divinities  corre- 
sponding to  one  another.)  But  the  Artemis  of 
Ephesus  is  a  divinity  entirely  difierent  in  char- 
acter from  the  ordinary  Greek  Artemis ;  and  that 
such  a  goddess  should  come  to  be  represented  in 
English  by  the  name  Diana  is  almost  ridiculous. 

The  goddess  of  Ephesus,  called  Artemis  by  the 
Greeks,  was  a  divinity  of  a  type  wide-spread 
throughout  Anatolia  and  the  East  generally  (cf.,  for 
instance,  ch.  iii.  in  Ramsay's  Cities  and  Bishoprics 
of  Phrygia,  Oxford,  1895).  She  represented  the  re- 
productive power  of  the  human  race.  The  Oriental 
mind  was  from  early  ages  powerfully  impressed  by 
this,  the  greatest  of  all  human  faculties,  and  wor- 
shipped it,  now  under  the  male  form,  now  under 
the  female.  There  are  still  in  India,  for  instance, 
sur%"ivals  of  phallic  worship.  The  Artemis  of  Ephe- 
sus was  represented  in  art  astnultimammia,  covered 
with  breasts.  The  worship  of  such  divine  repro- 
ductive power  nattirally  lent  itself  in  practice  to 
disgusting  excesses.  Instead  of  being  kept  on  a 
spiritual  level,  it  was  continually  made  the  excuse 
for  brutalizing  and  enervating  practices — prostitu- 
tion, incest,  etc. 

The  origin  of  the  name  'Artemis'  is  veiled  in 
obscurity,  and  the  attempts  of  both  ancients  and 
modems  to  derive  the  word  have  been  unsuccessful ; 
the  best  suggestion  is  that  of  Ed.  Meyer,  that  the 
word  is  cognate  with  dpra.uei'y,  dprafioi,  dprafiuy,  and 
means '  the  female  butcher. '  This  would  suit  certain 
early  aspects  of  the  cult  very  well.  But  it  is  as  a 
Nature-goddess  that  we  find  the  most  wide-spread 
worship  of  Artemis  in  the  earliest  days  of  which 
we  have  any  knowledge.  She  was  worshipped  on 
mountains  and  in  valleys,  in  woods  and  by  streams. 
Her  working  and  her  power  were  recognized  in  all 
life,  plant  and  animal,  as  beneficent  in  their  birth 
and  growth,  as  signs  of  wrath  in  their  destruction 
and  death.  "With  her  is  sometimes  united  a  male 
counterpart.  She  is  in  any  case  wife  and  mother ; 
she  nourishes  the  young,  aids  women  in  childbirth, 
and  sets  bounds  to  their  life.  Afterwards  various 
developments  in  this  original  conception  take  place. 
The  wife  and  mother  element,  with  the  growth  of 
the  Apollo  legend,  both  Apollo  and  Artemis  being 
children  of  Leto,  retires  into  the  background,  and 
Artemis  becomes  a  maiden  goddess.  She  also 
becomes  the  goddess  of  seafaring  men,  and  is 
patroness  of  all  places  and  things  connected  with 
them.  In  Homer  she  appears  mainly  as  the  god- 
dess of  death  of  the  old  Nature  religion.  From 
the  5th  cent,  onwards  we  meet  her  as  goddess  of 


the  moon,  while  Apollo  is  god  of  the  sun.  On  tlie 
boundaries  of  the  Greek  world  her  cult  is  associated 
with  the  barbarous  ceremonies  of  other  divinities 
recognized  as  related. 

The  most  important  aspects  of  the  Artemis  cult 
for  the  NT  are  naturally  those  connected  with  the 
life  of  Nature,  but  the  whole  idea  of  Artemis  must 
be  sketched  as  briefly  as  possible.  Various  trees 
are  sacred  to  her.  >Ioisture  as  fertilizing  them  is 
sacred  to  her — lakes,  marshes,  and  rivers.  She  is 
thus  also  a  goddess  of  agriculture.  Her  beneficence 
causes  the  crops  to  grow,  and  she  destroys  opposing 
forces ;  whence  offerings  of  crops  are  made  to  her. 
Of  all  seasons  she  loves  spring  best.  She  is  mistress 
of  the  world  of  wild  animals,  such  as  bears,  lions, 
wolves,  and  panthers,  and  also  of  birds  and  fish. 
Out  of  this  conception  the  huntress  idea  would 
naturally  develop.  And  it  seems  that  it  was  in  con- 
nexion with  this  that  the  idea  of  the  goddess  as  a 
virgin  arose.  She  was  also  the  protectress  of  cattle. 
Further,  she  was  reverenced  as  the  guardian  of 
yoimg  people,  and  to  her  maidens  made  ottering  of 
the  toys,  etc. ,  of  their  childhood.  Among  her  other 
attributes  was  that  of  goddess  of  childbirth,  goddess 
of  women  in  general,  especially  goddess  of  death 
(particularly  for  women),  and  as  such  she  demanded 
human  sacrifice.  She  was  a  goddess  of  war,  of  the 
sea,  of  roads,  of  markets  and  trade,  of  government, 
of  healing,  protectress  from  danger,  guardian  of 
oaths  (by  her  women  were  accustomed  to  swear), 
goddess  of  maidenhood,  of  beauty,  of  dancing  and 
music.     Finally  she  was  a  moon-goddess. 

The  Ephesian  cult  was  in  its  origin  non-Greek. 
The  application  of  the  name  Artemis  to  a  goddess 
of  the  characteristics  of  the  Ephesian  divinity 
shows  that  this  identification  must  have  been 
made  in  very  early  times,  before  any  idea  of  vir- 
ginity attached  to  the  godde-ss  among  the  Greeks. 
The  cult  of  the  Ephesian  goddess  remained  Oriental, 
and  she  was  never  regarded  as  virgin.  Her  temple 
was  a  vast  institution,  with  countless  priests, 
priestesses,  and  temple-servants.  The  priests  were 
eunuchs,  and  were  called  /teyd^Kfot ;  there  was  one 
high  priest.  The  goddess  was  also  served  bj-  three 
grades  of  priestesses,  called  /ieWi^pai,  UpcU,  and 
■wapiipai ;  at  the  head  of  these  was  a  high  priestess. 
Under  the  dominion  of  these  priests  and  priestesses 
there  was  a  large  number  of  temple-slaves  of  both 
sexes.  The  cult  was  wild  and  orgiastic  in  its  char- 
acter. As  a  result  of  partial  hellenization  two 
developments  took  place.  First,  the  worship  of 
Apollo  was  sometimes  associated  with  that  of  his 
Greek  sister.  Second,  games  were  established  on 
the  Greek  model,  called  'AprepUffta  or  OUov/itPiKd, 
and  were  held  annually  in  the  month  Artemision 
(= April). 

The  Ephesian  cult  of  Artemis  was  by  no  means 
confined  to  Ephesus.  The  statement  of  Acts  (19"), 
'whom  all  Asia  and  the  Roman  world  worship,' 
was  no  exaggeration.  Evidence  of  this  cult  has 
been  found  in  numerous  cities  of  Asia  Minor  as 
well  as  in  the  following  places  further  afield : 
Autun,  Marseilles,  Rhone  Mouth  (France),  Em- 
poriae,  Hemeroscopeum,  Rhode  (Spain),  Epidaurus, 
Megalopolis,  Corinth,  Scillus  (Greece),  Neapolis 
(Samaria),  Panticapaeum  (Crimea),  Rome,  and  Sj-ria. 
The  Ephesians  were  proud  of  the  goddess  not  only 
because  she  was  theirs,  but  because  her  worship 
brought  countless  visitors  from  every  part  of  the 
Empire.  This  of  course  was  also  good  for  trade, 
so  that  religion  and  self-interest  went  hand  in 
hand.  The  account  in  Acts  (19=^*^)  Ulustrates 
most  vi\-idly  the  enthusiasm  which  can  be  aroused 
when  religious  fanaticism  and  commercial  greed 
are  in  tune.  The  manufacture  of  offerings  to  the 
goddess  brought  in  extensive  profit  to  the  makers. 
St.  Paul's  preaching,  which  appealed  to  the  better 
educated  classes,  drew  many  away  from  the  coarse 


^96 


DIASPORA 


DIDACHE 


and  barbarous  cult  of  Artemis.  The  demand  for 
otferings  decreased ;  hence  the  meeting  and  the 
riot.  The  air  rang  with  shouts  of '  Great  Ephesian 
Artemis ! ' 

Ephesians  prized  very  greatly  the  honorary  title 
of  vfUKdpoi,  temple-keeper  (lit.  '  temple-sweeper  ') 
of  the  great  Artemis  and  of  her  image  which  fell 
down  from  the  sky  (Ac  19^).  This  image  was 
<ioubtless  a  meteoric  stone  of  crude  shape  like  the 
Palladium  preserved  at  Rome. 

It  was  in  Ephesus(5'.'W.)  that  the  Artemis  worship 
was  at  length  Christianized  in  the  middle  of  the 
5th  cent,  by  the  substitution  of  the  Mother  of  God 
{deordKos).     This  was  the  beginning  of  Mariolatry. 

LiTERATURB. — On  Anatolian  religion,  see  W.  M.  Ramsay's 
art.  'Religion  of  Greece  and  Asia  Minor'  in  IIDB,  vol.  v.,  and 
ch.  iii.  of  his  Cities  and  Bishoprics  of  Phrugia,  Oxford,  1895  ; 
on  Artemis,  see  L.  R.  Farnell,  Cults  of  the  Greek  States,  vol.  ii., 
Oxford,  1896,  cp.  425-486  ;  Schreiber,  '  Artemis,'  in  Roscher's 
Lexikon  der  Mythologie ;  and  Wernicke  in  Pauly-Wisaowa, 
to  the  last  of  which  the  present  writer  is  particularly  indebted. 

A.  SOUTER. 

DIASPORA See  Dispersion. 

DIDACHE. — 1.  Discovery. — That  at  one  time  a 
book  called  the  Teaching  or  Teachings  of  the 
Apostles  had  an  extensive  circulation  in  Christian 
circles  had  long  been  evident  before  the  actual 
discovery  of  any  MS.  The  nature  of  this  book, 
so  highly  esteemed  in  certain  quarters,  was  a 
matter  of  conjecture.  It  was  thought  by  some  to 
be  another  name  for  the  Apostolic  Constitutions. 
Others,  like  Archbishop  Ussher,  were  certain  that 
it  must  be  a  much  shorter  document,  omitting 
much  of  that  later  compilation.  It  came  to  be 
recognized  that  behind  the  whole  development  of 
works  like  the  Apostolic  Church  Ordinance,  and 
the  Apostolic  Constitutions  and  Canons  there  must 
be  a  common  original.  A  brilliant  attempt  at 
reconstruction  was  made  by  Krawutzscky  (Theol. 
Quartalschrift,  iii.  [1882]  pp.  359-445),  who,  from 
the  matter  common  to  these  two  works,  framed  a 
document  which  anticipated  with  wonderful  ac- 
curacy the  first  part  of  the  Didache,  but  which 
he  called,  after  Kufinus,  Ducb  Vice  vel  Judicium 
Petri. 

At  the  time  when  this  was  published,  a  MS  of 
the  Didache  had  already  been  discovered  in  the 
library  of  the  Jerusalem  monastery  in  the  Phanar 
or  Greek  quarter  of  Constantinople,  and  was  given 
to  the  world  in  the  end  of  1883  by  its  discoverer, 
Philotheus  Bryennios,  the  Metropolitan  of  Nico- 
media.  The  MS  belongs  to  the  11th  century. 
It  contains,  besides  the  Didache,  six  other  early 
writings  or  groups  of  writings,  beginning  with 
Chrysostom's  Synopsis  of  the  Old  and  Neto  Testa- 
ments, and  including  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  and 
the  Epistles  of  Clement  of  Konie.  At  its  close  the 
scribe  has  appended  a  note  to  the  effect  that  it  was 
finished  '  by  the  hand  of  Leo,  notary  and  sinner,' 
in  A.M.  6064,  i.e.  A.D.  1056. 

No  other  book  of  primitive  Christianity  outside 
the  NT  has  found  so  many  and  such  industrious 
editors.  This  MS  is  still  the  only  one  known  of 
the  whole  Didache,  but  in  Harnack's  edition  {TU 
ii.  1,  2  [1884])  von  Gebhardt  draws  attention  to 
a  Latin  fragment  from  a  MS  of  the  10th  cent., 
formerly  in  the  convent  library  of  Melk,  which, 
even  in  its  brevity,  has  one  marked  ditl'erence  from 
owe  Didache,  to  be  referred  to  later.  Then  in  1900, 
J.  Schlecht  published  from  a  Munich  MS  of  tlie 
11th  cent,  an  old  Latin  version  {Doctrina  XII. 
Apostolorum,  Freiburg  i.  B.,  1900),  co-extensive 
with  the  first  six  chapters  of  the  Didache,  contain- 
ing, among  other  variations,  the  same  notewortliy 
omission.  These  are  the  texts  on  which  all  present 
investigation  must  rest. 

The  re-discovery  of  the  Didache  created  a  great 
sensation,  and  it  was  hailed  as  a  most  important 


find.  It  was  seen  to  fill  a  gap  between  the  Apostolic 
Church  and  the  Church  of  the  2nd  cent.,  in  matters 
of  worship,  ministry,  and  doctrine. 

•  Until  the  discovery  of  the  DidaeM,'  says  Sanday  (ExpotUor, 
3rd  ser.  v.  [1887]  106),  '  there  were  certam  phenomena  of  the 
Apostolic  age  which  hung  as  it  were  in  the  air.  They  were  like 
threads  cut  off  abruptly  of  which  we  saw  the  beginning,  but 
neither  middle  nor  end.  It  is  just  these  phenomena  that  the 
Didaehi  takes  up,  brings  them  again  to  our  sight,  and  connects 
them  with  the  course  of  subsequent  history.' 

It  was  seen  to  be  the  actual  forerunner  of  a 
whole  series  of  later  works  in  the  East.  It  differs 
from  its  succes-sors  in  that  it  does  not  claim  direct 
apostolic  inspiration  ;  it  is  simply  the  summary  of 
what  its  author  conceived  to  be  the  teaching  of 
the  apostles, 

'  It  is  anonymous,  but  not  pseudonymous ;  post-Apostolin, 
but  not  pseudo- Apostolic'  (SchafT,  Oliest  Church  Maniial\ 
New  York,  1889,  p.  14). 

2.  Contents. — The  Didache  is  not  a  long  docu- 
ment. It  is  about  the  same  size  as  the  EpLstle  to 
the  Galatians.  In  the  MS  it  is  not  divided ;  but 
there  is  now  a  standard  division  into  chapters  and 
verses,  whicli  is  followed  in  this  discussion.  This 
division  is  quite  satisfactory  save  at  one  point — 
xi.  1,2  ought  to  belong  to  ch.  x. 

The  Didache  may  be  divided  into  two  main 
parts,  the  latter  containing  three  sections,  thus  : 

I.  Chs.  L-vi.  Pre-baptismal  moral  teachiuK. 

II.  Chs.  vii.-xvi.  General  instructions  to  the  Christian  com- 
munity concerning : 

(a)  Rites  (vii.-xi.  2). 

(b)  Office-bearers  (xi.  3-xv.). 

(c)  The  Last  Things  and  the  duty  of  watchfulness  (xvi.). 

At  the  head  of  the  MS  appears  the  title,  '  The 
Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles '  {Aidaxv  '"wj' 
5d)5eKa  diroffTdXuv).  The  first  part  opens  with  a 
sub-title  which  runs  continuously  with  the  text 
(see  facsimile  in  Schaff  or  Rendel  Harris).  The 
sub-title  is  '  The  Teaching  of  the  Lord  by  the 
Twelve  Apostles  to  the  Gentiles'  (AiSox^?  Kvpiov  did, 
Twv  dd)S€Ka  diroffTdXwv  rots  Idvecnv). 

This  sub-title  was  either  the  original  title  of  the  whole  work, 
the  present  title  being  an  abbreviation  (in  which  case  the  word 
€6ve<Tiv  refers  to  Gentile  Christians)  or,  as  is  just  possible  from 
its  position  in  the  MS,  it  was  originally  the  title  of  a  shorter 
work  corresponding  in  length  to  the  Latin  Version,  in  which 
case  eOveiTiv  means  '  those  not  yet  received  within  the  Christian 
fold,'  and  indicates  that  the  work  contains  the  moral  teaching 
given  to  those  who  are  stiU  outside  the  Church — the  candidates 
for  baptism. 

The  first  part  consists  of  a  delineation  of  the 
Two  Ways— the  Way  of  Life  and  the  Way  of 
Death.  The  Way  of  Life  consists  in  obedience  to 
three  commandments  :  (a)  Love  to  God,  (b)  Love 
to  one's  fellow-men,  and  (c)  the  Golden  Rule  in  its 
negative  form.  The  Way  of  Life  is  set  forth  not 
as  a  logical  development  of  these  three  in  turn, 
but  first  positively,  and  then  negatively.  The 
positive  development  (i.  3-6)  consists  mainly  of 
extracts  from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  The 
negative  begins  with  a  prohibition  of  gross  sins 
(ii.);  it  proceeds,  after  the  manner  of  a  Jewisli 
'fence  to  the  Law,'  to  a  warning  against  subtler 
forms  which  lead  on  to  the  grosser  (iii.);  it  con- 
cludes with  the  inculcation  of  duties  necessary  for 
a  true  life  in  the  Church  and  in  the  household 
(iv. ).  The  Way  of  Death  is  delineated  in  a  list  of 
sins  and  sinners  (v.).  The  moral  instruction  ends 
with  a  warning  against  going  astray  from  'this 
Way  of  the  Teaching,'  and  the  injunction  to  follow 
it  as  far  as  possible.  This  part,  unlike  the  rest  of 
the  book,  is  addressed  to  an  individual,  the  con- 
nectin<^  link  between  it  and  the  other  part  ad- 
dressed to  the  community  being  the  words :  '  Having 
first  taught  all  these  things,  baptize  ye.' 

The  second  part  begins  with  (a)  instructions  as 
to  the  baptism  which  is  to  follow  this  moral  in- 
struction of  the  cacechumen  (vii.);  fasting  and  its 
days ;  prayer,  its  times  and  its  form,  the  Lord's 
Prayer  (vii'i.) ;  the  Eucharist  and  the  common  meal 


DIDACHE 


DIDACHE 


297 


associated  with  it,  together  with  forms  of  prayer 
(ix.  and  x.).  It  is  added,  however,  that  the 
prophets  are  to  be  left  free  in  prayer.  The  men- 
tion of  the  prophets  leads  on  to  the  next  section, 
but  first  of  all  there  is  a  more  direct  connecting 
link  in  the  injunction  to  receive  all  who  come 
teaching  'all  these  things  aforesaid.'  {b)  The 
section  on  the  Christian  ministry  deals  first  with 
the  apostles  and  their  reception  as  they  pass  on 
their  way  to  their  fields  of  labour  (xi.  3-6),  then 
at  greater  length  with  the  prophets  (xL  7,  xii.),  who 
were  evidently  more  familiar  visitants.  Commonly 
they  were  itinerant,  but  they  might  be  settled  in 
one  community.  Simple  tests  of  character  are 
given,  for  there  is  the  constant  danger  of  being 
deceived  by  a  pretended  prophet.  The  itinerant 
prophet  suggests  the  hospitality  to  be  given  to 
way-faring  Christians  (xii.).  The  settled  prophet 
suggests  the  disposal  of  first-fruits  (xiii.),  as  also 
regulations  for  the  Lord's  Day  and  the  Eucharist 
(xiv.).  The  local  ministry  of  bishops  and  deacons 
is  dealt  with  in  a  short  chapter  (xv.)  which  closes 
this  section  on  the  office-bearers  of  the  Church. 
(c)  The  last  section  (xvi.)  counsels  watchfulness 
and  preparedness  in  view  of  the  approaching  end. 
Signs  of  the  end  are  enumerated,  and  '  then  shall 
the  world  see  the  Lord  coming  upon  the  clouds  of 
heaven.'  With  these  words  the  Didaehe  comes  to 
a  conclusion. 

3.  Sources. — To  begin  with  express  quotations, 
there  are  two  from  the  OT  (xiv.  3= Mai  1"-",  xvi. 
7  =  Zee  14*),  two  from  the  NT  (viiL  2  =  Mt6»«',  ix. 
5  =  Mt  7*),  and  one  probably  from  some  nnkncwn 
apocrj-phal  book  (i.  6).  There  are,  besides,  three 
separate  references  to  what  our  Lord  has  com- 
manded in  the  gospel  (xi.  3,  xv.  3,  4).  Apart  from 
express  quotations,  reminiscences  of  the  OT  are 
clear,  especially  in  the  first  six  chapters,  and  the 
same  applies  to  the  OT  Apocrypha  (Sirach  and 
Tobit).  Direct  borrowings  from  the  NT  are  even 
more  numerous.  Harnack  (op.  cit.  pp.  70-76)  has 
tabulated  23,  and  of  these  17  are  from  Matthew. 
(For  full  list  of  actual  parallels  with  the  NT  see 
Schaff,  op.  cit.  pp.  82-9-5.)  Certain  features  point 
to  acquaintance  with  Luke — e.g.  the  form  of  the 
quotations  from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  in  L 
3-5,  and  the  order  of  cup  and  bread  in  ix.  2.  3 — but 
there  is  no  conclusive  proof  that  Luke  was  actually 
used.  Mark  seems  to  be  unused.  The  case  of 
John  is  doubtful.  There  are  resemblances  to  Jn  6 
and  17  in  the  Eucharistic  prayers,  the  most  re- 
markable being  the  use  of  the  formula  '  Holy 
Father'  (irdTep  a^ie,  x.  2=Jn  17").  So  many  and 
so  subtle  are  the  parallels,  that  acquaintance  with 
John  must  be  admitted,  or  else  it  must  be  supposed 
that  the  Didachc,  or  at  least  its  liturgical  forms, 
originated  in  a  Johannine  milieu.  The  canonical 
Gospel  of  Matthew  seems  the  cliief  source  for  our 
author's  knowledge  of  the  teaching  of  the  Lord, 
but  alongside  this  written  Gospel  he  was  familiar 
with  phrases  from  the  oral  tradition.  On  the 
question  of  the  use  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  almost 
every  intermediate  position  has  been  occupied 
between  that  of  Harnack  (1884),  who  could  find  no 
single  clear  trace  of  their  use,  and  that  of  Armitage 
Robinson  {JTkSt  xiii.  [1912]  3o0),  who  regards  the 
writer  as  intimately  acquainted  with  1  Corinthians : 
'he  has  imitated  its  sub-divisions,  borrowed  its 
words  and  phrases,  and  modified  its  thoughts  to 
suit  his  own  purposes.'  There  are  certainly  traces, 
but  tliey  are  few  in  number.  His  debt  to  St.  Paul 
is  not  great.  Much  more  marked  is  his  debt  to 
Jewish  writings.  The  work  has  been  called  'a 
sort  of  Church  Catechism  intensely  Jewish '  ( West- 
minster Review,  Jan.  18So,  p.  206).  Apart  from  L 
3-5  there  is  little  that  is  specifically  Christian  in 
the  first  part,  and  nearly  all  of  it  has  its  parallels 
in  Durely  Jewish  literature.     For  this  section  there 


has  been  posited  as  source  a  Jewish  proselj-te 
catechism  of  the  'Two  Ways,'  and  parallels  and 
borrowings  are  not  wanting  in  the  later  portions  of 
the  Didaehe  as  well  (cf.  C.  Taylor,  The  Teaching  <^ 
the  Twelve  Apostles,  with  Illustrations  from  the 
Talmud,  Cambridge,  1886). 

4.  Integrity.— There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Didaehe 
as  we  have  it  in  the  Constantinople  MS  reads  like 
a  unity.  Its  parts  are  closely  knit  together  and 
follow  an  orderly  development.  That  the  primal 
Didaehe  was  co-extensive  with  our  text,  with 
perhaps  a  few  omissions  and  some  textual  varia- 
tions, seems  an  almost  certain  inference.  But  the 
two  facts,  that  the  Latin  of  Schlecht  (L)  contains 
only  the  first  part  with  no  sign  of  being  unfinished, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  with  a  conclusion  of  its  own, 
and  that  certain  apparently  dependent  writings 
seem  to  have  known  these  chapters  only,  suggest 
that  the  Didaehe  did  once  actually  exist  in  such  a 
shorter  form.  The  two  main  questions  which 
emerge  whenever  the  integrity  of  the  fuller 
Didaehe  is  discussed  arise  in  this  way.  Ever  since 
Taylor  pointed  out  the  numerous  Jewish  parallels, 
and  even  before  that,  the  theory  of  its  dependence 
on  a  Jewish  proselyte  catec'hism  of  the  Two 
Ways  has  been  advanced  and  defended.  The  dis- 
covery of  L  seems  to  confirm  this.  Was  there 
ever,  then,  such  a  Jewish  catechism  ?  And  was  it 
purely  a  catechism  of  the  Two  Ways,  or  did  it 
contain  further  material  ?  The  case  for  a  Jewish 
original  seems  proved.  It  was  natural  that  Chris- 
tians reared  in  Judaism,  familiar  with  Jewish 
missionary  propaganda  and  methods  of  instructing 
converts,  should  take  over  and  use  the  forms  which 
they  had  seen  observed  in  the  reception  of  prose- 
lytes, and  the  Didaehe  bears  many  a  trace  of  being 
such  a  Jewish  document  worked  over  in  the  Chris- 
tian interest.  Was  this  written  or  oral  catechesis 
of  Judaism  co-extensive  with  chs.  L-vi.,  or  are  we 
to  look  for  a  larger  document  having  matter 
parallel  with  some  parts  of  chs.  vii.-xvi.?  It  was 
surely  to  be  expected  that  any  such  instruction 
should  contain,  besides  moral  precepts,  teaching  in 
regard  to  the  ceremonial  and  legal  requirements  of 
Judaism — circumcision,  the  Sabbath,  foods,  tirst- 
fruits,  fasts,  prayers,  festivals,  and  so  forth.  And 
when  we  find  phenomena  such  as  these — the 
Christian  fasts  and  prayers  carefully  diflerentiated 
from  the  fasts  and  prayers  of  the  '  hypocrites  '  (viii. 
1, 2) ;  the  weekly  day  of  worship,  called  the  Lord's 
Day  of  the  Lord  {Kvpuuci}  Kvpiov,  xiv.  1),  correspond- 
ing to  the  '  Sabbath  of  the  Lord '  (Lv  23'),  instruc- 
tions for  the  disposal  of  first-fruits  (xiii.  3-7) 
obviously  dependent  on,  and  contrasted  with, 
Jewish  customs — then  it  seems  almost  a  certainty 
that  the  Jewish  source  did  contain  matter  corre- 
sponding in  some  measure  to  the  later  chapters 
of  our  Didaehe.  Further,  in  view  of  the  eschato- 
logical  interest  of  contemporary  Jewish  thought, 
it  would  be  natural  that  such  a  manual  should  con- 
tain an  eschatological  section  parallel  with  ch.  xvi. 

But  if  there  was,  as  seems  natural,  and  appears 
to  be  a  justifiable  inference  from  the  phenomena 
of  the  text,  a  Jewish  catechesis,  oral  or  written, 
corresponding  to  the  material  in  both  parts  of  the 
Didaehe,  it  seems  to  follow  that  the  first  form  of 
the  Didaehe  was  not  the  truncated  form  of  L,  but 
the  fuller  form  of  the  Constantinople  MS ;  in  a 
word,  that  chs.  vii.-xvi.  belong  to  the  primal 
document.  We  have,  then,  to  regard  L  as  an 
abbreviation.  But  is  this  crwiible?  How  could 
any  Christian  writer  abbreviate  in  the  manner  in 
which  this  has  been  done  ?  It  is  easy  to  explain 
the  omission  of  chs.  vii.-xvi.  If  L  belongs  to  the 
4th  cent.,  as  Schlecht  himself  maintained,  there 
would  be  at  least  two  factors  in  the  omission  :  (1) 
Church  conditions  did  not  at  all  correspond  in  his 
day  with  the  situation  in  the  Didaehe,  and  (2)  the 


298 


DIDACHE 


DIDACHE 


material  of  the  Didache  had  already  been  worked 
up  and  modernized  in  other  cognate  documents  to 
be  considered  in  the  next  section.  The  one  grave 
objection  to  this  whole  hypothesis— to  the  primary 
nature  of  the  whole  of  the  fuller  Didache— is  the 
omission  in  L  of  i,  3-ii.  1,  and  the  omission  in  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas  of  any  trace  of  this  passage. 
How  can  we  explain  the  psychology  of  an  ab- 
breviator  who  could  omit  the  one  specifically 
Christian  part,  supposing  it  to  be  primary? 
Certain  explanations  suggest  themselves.  He 
may  have  reckoned  these  verses  among  the 
counsels  of  perfection,  and  considered  it  unwise  to 
place  them  at  the  outset  before  catechumens.  Did 
they  not  belong  to  a  later  stage  and  a  higher  plane 
of  attainment?  Or  he  may  have  regarded  his 
version  of  the  Two  Ways  as  a  kind  of  equivalent 
to  the  abrenuntiatio  diaboli,  and  considered  posi- 
tive precepts  out  of  place.  In  all  probability  tnere 
was  a  negative  and  positive  baptismal  vow  from 
very  early  days  {anoTayi)  and  ffwrayi)).  Explana- 
tion is  not  impossible,  but  neither  is  it  necessary. 
The  conclusion  of  the  present  writer  is,  that  the 
fuller  Didache,  with  the  probable  exception  of  i. 
3-ii.  1,  or  parts  thereof,  and  a  few  isolated  ex- 
pressions later,  is  the  primary  form  ;  that  it  is  not 
an  expansion  from  a  form  corresponding  to  L,  but 
that  L  is  either  an  abbreviation  of  it,  which  is 
not  inexplicable,  or  more  probably  an  abbreviation 
of  an  earlier  form  of  the  complete  version. 

The  stages  in  tlie  history  of  the  Didache  were 
something  like  this:  (1)  Jewish  document  of  the 
Two  Ways  plits  instruction  in  the  practices  and 
customs  of  the  Jewish  faith  ;  (2)  a  Cliristian  adap- 
tation (A)  corresponding  to  our  Didache  with  some 
few  omissions,  from  which  (3)  the  I>atin  version  (L) 
is  an  excerpt,  and  of  which  (4)  our  Didache  (D)  is  a 
slightly  revised  version,  with  probably  a  few  more 
definitely  Christian  additions.  The  contents  of  A 
were  practically  identical  with  our  Didache.  (For 
analyses  of  the  history  of  the  text  which  employ  a 
greater  number  of  recensions  see  Harnack,  Gesch. 
der  altchristl.  Litteratur,  i.  [Leipzig,  1893]  87, 
and  Hennecke  in  ZNTW  ii.  [1901]  58  tl".) 

S.  Cognate  and  dependent  works.— (a)  Barna- 
bas.— That  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  is  a  cognate 
work  is  obvious.  But  the  significance  of  the 
common  material  has  been  interpreted  in  very 
different  ways.  The  diversity  of  opinion  is  per- 
haps most  clearly  seen  in  the  first  German  and  the 
first  English  editions.  The  very  phenomena  which 
prove  for  Harnack  the  priority  of  Barnabas,  for 
Hitchcock  and  Brown  prove  its  later  and  deriva- 
tive character.  The  bulk  of  the  common  matter 
is  to  be  found  in  three  chapters  (xviii.-xx.),  which 
contain  most  of  the  matter  in  Didache  i.-v,,  witli 
the  exception  of  i,  3-ii.  1.  But  there  is  also  a  very 
close  parallel,  too  close  to  be  a  coincidence,  with 
Did.  xvi.  2  in  Barnabas  iv.  9,  10.  It  should  be 
noted  in  passing  that  the  priority  of  the  Didache 
seems  to  be  hinted  at,  if  not  implied,  in  the  way  in 
which  this  common  matter  is  introduced  in  Barna- 
bas :  '  Let  us  pass  over  to  another  knowledge  and 
teaching  (SiSaxw).'  For  without  pressing  the 
word,  the  suggestion  is  here  at  least  of  transition 
to  a  new  source  of  material.  Without  entering 
into  details,  the  conclusion  come  to  is,  that  Bar- 
nabas used  the  Didache,  but  in  the  earlier  Christian 
recension  (A).  If  he  had  it  before  him'in  document- 
ary form,  he  expanded  it  freely,  but  he  may  have 
quoted  familiar  material  from  memory  and  ampli- 
fied it  in  the  process. 

(b)  Hernias. — The  connexion  with  Hermas  is 
neither  so  extended  nor  so  obvious.  The  relation- 
ship played  a  great  part  in  earlier  discussions  from 
its  bearing  on  the  question  of  date,  but  it  has  now 
receded  into  the  background.  It  is  matter  of 
general    agreement  now  that    Hermas    used  the 


Didaclie,  but  there  is  much  to  be  said  for  the 
thesis  of  Hennecke,  that  both  Barnabas  and 
Hermas  used  the  earlier  Christian  recension  (A), 
while  the  final  form  (I))  is  indebted  in  some  very 
minor  points  to  both. 

(c)  The  Apostolic  Church  Ordinance. — This  is  an 
adaptation  of  the  Didache  to  suit  the  altered 
ecclesiastical  condition  of  Egypt  in  the  end  of  the 
3rd  or  beginning  of  the  4tn  century.  Here  the 
bulk  of  tlie  material  of  the  first  part  of  the  Didache 
is  distributed  among  the  individual  apostles,  who 
in  turn  contribute  their  part  in  a  kind  of  dramatic 
dialogue.  Following  on  this,  and  corresponding  to 
the  rest  of  the  Didache,  are  similarly  delivered 
directions  about  bishops,  presbyters,  deacons, 
readers,  widows,  deaconesses,  the  conduct  of  tlie 
laity,  and  the  participation  of  women  in  the 
liturgical  service,  sliowing  in  botli  the  enumeration 
of  office-bearers  .and  the  powers  ascribed  to  them  a 
much  more  developed  stage  of  Church  organization. 
As  source  the  Apostolic  Church  Ordinance  has  a 
form  of  the  Didache  very  like  ours :  it  may  have 
been  the  earlier  Christian  recension,  though  the 
mass  of  textual  evidence  jioints  rather  to  its  being 
ours  plus  Barnabas. 

(d)  Didascalia. — This  work  fulfilled  for  Syria 
towards  the  end  of  the  3rd  cent,  what  the  last- 
named  did  for  Egypt  a  little  later.  It  is  not, 
however,  like  it,  simply  an  adaptation  of  the 
Didache.  Indeed,  it  was  earlier  regarded  as  com- 
pletely independent,  but  its  dependence  may  now 
be  held  as  proved  (cf.  C.  Holzhey,  Die  Abhdngigkeit 
d.  syr.  Didascalia  v.  d.  Didache,  Freiburg,  1898). 
No  certain  conclusion  can  be  drawn  as  to  what 
form  its  author  had  before  him. 

(e)  Apostoli<:  Constitutions  and  Canons. — The 
first  six  chapters  embody  the  Didascalia,  and  to 
that  extent  the  Didache  is  used  at  second-hand. 
Direct  relationship  is  confined  to  the  first  32 
chapters  of  the  seventh  book.  Most  of  the 
Didache  is  here  embodied,  but  with  significant 
alterations  and  additions  which  betray  a  later  age. 
The  adaptation  is  clearly  based  on  our  text  of  the 
Didache.  Here  at  last  there  is  no  serious  question 
of  dependence  on  an  earlier  recension. 

(/)  Other  works. — For  a  full  list  the  reader  is 
referred  to  Harnack  {Gesch.  der  altchristl.  Lift.  i. 
87),  Rendel  Harris  (Teaching  of  the  Apostles,  1888), 
and  Vernon  Bartlet  (HDB  v.  442).  Chief  among 
these  may  be  mentioned :  Athanasius,  Syntagma 
Doctrincc,  which  is  obviously  dependent  on  JDid. 
i.-vi.,  and  less  obviously  on  xii.  xiii.,  the  under- 
lying text  probably  being  the  earlier  recension  (A) ; 
the  pseudo-Athanasian  Fides  Niccena  and  Did- 
ascalia cccxviii.  Patrum,  where  the  basis  is 
evidently  the  Syntagma ;  the  Life  of  Schnudi, 
which  includes  most  of  the  first  part  in  an  Arabic 
version,  derived  probably  from  the  Apostolic 
Church  Ordinance. 

We  have,  therefore,  continuing  the  numbers  at 
the  end  of  §  4,  (5)  Barnabas  (B)  and  Hernias  (H), 
dependent  on  the  earlier  Christian  recension  (A) 
and  probably  known  to  the  maker  of  the  final  re- 
cension (D) ;  (6)  the  Apostolic  Church  Ordinance 
(CO),  possibly  based  on  A,  but  more  probably  on  D 
-l-B;  (7)  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  and  Canons 
(A),  clearly  based  on  D ;  (8)  the  Syntagma  (S)  and 
dependent  works  based  on  the  earlier  recension  (A). 

The  evidence,  then,  points  with  great  probability, 
for  it  can  never  amount  to  demonstration,  to  (1) 
the  circulation  and  use  of  two  recensions  of  the 
Didache,  an  earlier  and  a  later,  which  differ  in  the 
omission  and  inclusion  respectively  of  i.  3-ii.  1  and 
in  certain  other  ascertainable  points  of  slight  im- 
portance ;  (2)  the  gradual  disappearance  of  the 
second  part  of  the  Didache  in  the  two  ways  of  (a) 
omission,  as  in  B  and  L— in  B,  through  lack  of 
relevance,  in  L  through  lack  of  correspondence  to 


DIDACHE 


DtDACHE 


299 


actual  conditions;  (ft)  supersession  by  a  complete 
recast  of  mat«jrial  to  suit  altered  ecclesiastical  con- 
ditions as  in  CO  and  A,  and,  it  may  be  added,  by 
omission  and  supersession  jointly,  as  in  S ;  (3)  the 
fortunate  preservation  of  a  complete  copy  of  the 
later  of  these  recensions  by  a  scribe  -whose  full  MS 
shows  interest  in  what  he  conceived,  generally 
rightly,  to  be  genuine  remains  of  Christian  anti- 
quity. 
The  general  result  may  be  tabulated  thus : 


Jewish  Original 


6.  Place  of  origin  and  date.— (1)  Place. — Both 
place  and  date  seem  to  assume  importance  when 
we  begin  to  discuss  the  significance  of  the  work  in 
relation  to  the  problems  of  the  early  Church.  But 
this  is  true  of  the  place  only  to  a  very  limited  ex- 
tent. For,  though  it  were  proved  to  have  origin- 
ated in  some  more  isolated  community,  yet  its 
acceptance  by  so  wide  a  circle  would  show  that  it 
was  no  mere  reflexion  of  abnormal  conditions  which 
existed  nowhere  else.  Most  of  the  regions  in  which 
early  Christianity  had  any  hold  have  been  sug- 
gested as  the  place  of  origin — Syria  (in  particular, 
Palestine),  Egypt,  Asia  Minor,  Thessalonica,  Rome. 
But  the  great  bulk  of  opinion  is  almost  equally 
divided  between  Egypt  and  Syria.  On  behalf  of 
Egypt  it  can  be,  and  has  been,  urged  that  the 
earliest  references  and  quotations  belong  to  Egypt ; 
that  the  work  had  there  from  an  early  date  almost 
canonical  authority,  and  was  used  freely  from  the 
time  of  Clement  to  that  of  Athanasius  and  later. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  testimony  of  use  from  Syria, 
though  less  imposing,  is  also  strong.  Further,  the 
form  of  the  doxology  in  the  Lord's  Prayer  has 
Egj-ptian  affinities.  It  omits  '  the  kingdom  '  with 
the  Sahidic  version.  But  the  doxology  itself  origin- 
ated in  Svria,  and  was  thence  adoptea  into  Svrian 
texts  of  the  NT  (Westcott  and  Hort,  XT,  'l882, 
App.  p.  9).  Against  the  claim  for  Egypt  there  is 
what  Schaff  calls  'the  insuperable  objection  ' — the 
allusion  to  the  broken  bread  having  been  scattered 
in  grains  '  upon  the  mountains.'  But  after  aU  this 
only  proves  that  this  particular  form  of  praver 
here  incorporated  did  not  originate  in  Egypt,  Wt 
in  some  hillier  land.  The  objection  is  not '  insuper- 
able,' but  it  has  more  weight  than  is  commonly 
allowed,  for  later  Egyptian  works  certainly  felt 
the  difficulty.  ('Upon  the  mountains '  is  omitted 
in  Apost.  Const.,  and  represented  by  'upon  this 
table '  in  the  pseudo-Athanasian  tract  de  Virgini- 
tmte. )  On  behalf  of  Syria,  in  particular  of  Palestine, 
there  can  be  urged  the  marked  affinity  of  the 
Didache  with  the  Epistle  of  James  and  other  recog- 
nized products  of  Palestinian  Christianity,  and  the 
fact  that  it  must  have  arisen  in  a  community  where 
it  was  necessary  to  make  decisive  the  distinction 
between  themselves  and  non-Christian  Jews,  e.g. 
in  the  regulations  about  fasts  (viiL  1).     A  multi- 


tude of  lesser  indications  are  urged  on  both  sides, 
but  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to  make  any  decisive 
pronouncement  in  favour  of  either.  The  essential 
point  is  that,  from  an  early  date,  it  was  accepted 
in  both,  in  one  or  other  recension,  and  therefore 
comes  from  the  heart  of  a  situation  which  could 
not  be  regarded  as  impossible,  or  even  as  irregular, 
in  either. 

(2)  Date. — In  regard  to  date,  there  has  been  the 
same  wide  divergence — dates  having  been  sug- 
gested from  A.D.  50  to  500 — and  the  same  substantial 
agreement.  The  great  ma.ss  of  opinion,  however, 
is  again  divided,  in  somewhat  unequal  portions, 
between  two  periods — the  larger  number  favouring 
a  date  between  80  and  100,  and  the  smaller  cling- 
ing firmly  to  a  date  between  120  and  160.  Space 
forbids  a  detailed  examination  of  the  evidence.  It 
may  be  said  briefly,  in  regard  to  external  evidence, 
that  the  earlier  date  is  confirmed  by  such  indica- 
tions as  the  citation  of  the  Didache  as  Scripture  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria  and  the  fact  that  it  is  an 
adaptation  of  a  Jewish  manual.  Such  an  adapta- 
tion could  only  be  made  early.  And  one  thing  to 
be  remembered  is,  that  long  before  its  actual  dis- 
covery it  had  been  assigned,  necessarily  on  external 
evidence,  by  Grabe  (1698)  to  the  closing  years  of 
the  1st  cent,  or  the  very  commencement  of  the 
2nd.  Internal  evidence  confirms  this.  The  general 
correspondence  of  conditions  with  those  of  the 
Ascension  of  Isaiah  (see  HDB  v.  448-9),  the  vivid 
contrast  with  Jewish  customs,  the  simple  nature 
of  the  liturgy,  all  point  to  this  conclusion.  Another 
point  has  l)een  well  made  by  Taylor  (op.  cit.  p.  53), 
who  says  in  regard  to  the  rules  for  baptism  con- 
tained in  the  Didache : 

'  That  distinction  sboold  be  made  more  rabbinieo  between  the 
kinds  of  water  to  be  used  is  one  of  the  evidences  of  the  Jewish 
origin  and  early  date  of  the  Teaching.  TertalUan  (de  Bapt.  4) 
enamerates  the  various  kinds,  making  no  distinction  (KuIIa  dis- 
tinctio  est,  man  quis  an  stagno,  flumine  an  fonte,  lacu  an  alveo 
diluatur) ;  whilst  at  a  still  later  date  we  find  merely  the  injunc- 
tion to  baptize  in  water  {Apost.  Contt.  viL  22).' 

Bal  if  Barnabas  and  Hermas  had  influence  on  the 
text  of  oxaDidcu^j  we  seem  driven  to  some  such  con- 
clusion as  this — that  the  earlier  Christian  recension 
dates  from  the  earlier  period  (80-100)  and  the  later, 
which  differs  onlv  in  certain  insignificant  details, 
from  the  later  (120-160). 

7.  Tendency. — Before  we  go  on  to  discuss  the 
evidence  of  the  Didache,  and  the  bearings  of  that 
evidence  on  the  problems  of  the  Apostolic  and  sub- 
Apostolic  Church,  we  have  to  face  this  question : 
Has  the  Didache  any  special  purpose  or  tendency 
which  would  lead  us  to  suspect  or  to  discredit  its 
evidence?  In  this  connexion  we  encounter  first 
the  contention  of  Hilgenfeld  that  it  is  coloured  by 
Montanism.  But  the  general  discussion  to  which 
the  book  gave  a  great  impetus  has  made  clear  that 
it  must  be  pre-Montanist.  For  if  Montanism  had 
arisen,  and  its  problems  had  to  be  faced,  then  this 
book,  if  produced  in  the  orthodox  interest,  would 
have  said  much  less  about  the  prophets,  and  if 
written  from  a  Montanist  point  of  view,  it  could 
not  have  resisted  saying  more.  Krawutzscky,  who 
had  so  fully  anticipated  the  first  part  of  the  Did- 
ache in  his  reconstruction,  assigned  it,  on  its  ap- 
pearance, to  an  Ebionite  heretic  at  the  close  of  the 
2nd  century.  But  searching  criticism  has  failed  to 
discern  any  clear  trace  of  that  heresy.  It  has  been 
characterized,  on  obvious  grounds,  as  pro-Judaistic 
and  anti-Judaistic,  which  implies  that  it  preserves 
the  balance  of  normal  Christianity.  Research  has 
failed  to  displace  it  from  the  main  current  of  the 
Church's  life.  No  writer  with  a  predilection  for 
any  early  heresj-  could  have  hidden  it  so  well,  nor 
would  his  book  have  commanded  such  universal 
recognition. 

In  this  connexion  mention  must  be  made  of  the 
contention  of  Armitage  Robinson  that  the  book 


300 


DIDACHE 


DIDACHE 


reflects  no  actual  conditions  whicli  ever  existed 
anywhere,  but  is  a  '  free  creation '  of  the  author 
workinj,'  on  the  basis  of  1  Cor.  with  close  depend- 
ence on  Matthew  and  John.  But  it  is  surely  un- 
thinkable that  any  Christian  writer  could  have 
produced  a  manual  which  had  hardly  any  corre- 
spondence with  the  conditions  of  the  Church  of 
which  he  was  a  member  and  just  as  little  with 
the  conditions  of  the  Church  of  the  NT,  and 
with  no  suggestion  of  substituting  a  new  ideal  of 
Churcli  life  and  government.  The  Didachc  cer- 
tainly has  its  roots  in  the  NT ;  it  also  has  its 
dissimilarities  from  it ;  but  that  is  because  the 
Christianity  familiar  to  its  author  had  its  roots  in 
the  NT,  but  had  in  the  meantime  grown  to  some- 
thing ditterent.  Tlie  Didachc  represents  an  actual 
stage  in  the  development  through  which  the 
Church  passed.  The  pivpose  of  its  author  was 
evidently  to  represent,  justify,  and  confirm  actual 
conditions,  and  to  guard  against  evident  dangers. 

8.  Church  conditions. — It  is  a  simple  community 
with  which  we  are  brought  into  contact  in  the 
Didachc,  without  the  developed  organization  and 
manifold  official  activity  of  the  communities  for 
which  the  later  bodies  of  legislation  were  compiled 
(see  art.  Apostolic  Coxstitutions).  The  in- 
stru(!tions,  even  in  regard  to  baptism  and  the 
Eucharist,  are  addressed  to  the  community,  and 
not  to  any  official  personage  or  class  of  officials. 
The  '  sovereignty  of  the  community '  is  implied 
throughout.  Attempts  have  been  made  to  evade 
this.  The  latest  has  been  already  referred  to 
(JThSt  xiii.  33911").  The  significance  of  the  ad- 
dress is  here  discounted  as  a  mere  trick  of  style, 
borrowed  from  the  practice  of  St.  Paul.  But  this 
stands  or  falls  with  the  whole  theory  that  the 
Didache  is  a  '  free  creation '  of  the  author  with  no 
relation  to  actual  conditions,  a  theory  which  we 
have  just  shown  good  ground  for  rejecting.  No 
work  which  passed  over  and  slighted  the  recog- 
nized position  of  accredited  officials  could  have 
found  such  general  currency  and  acquired  such 
wide  repute.  The  community,  therefore,  is  sove- 
reign. It  tests  travellers  and  prophets ;  it  makes 
provision  for  the  Christian  poor  ;  it  sets  apart 
'  bisliops  and  deacons ' ;  it  exercises  discipline ; 
the  Sacraments  of  tlie  Church  are  its  concern.  It 
is  obviously  a  small  community,  but  not  isolated 
or  out  of  touch  with  the  general  body  of  Chris- 
tians. It  is  knit  to  them  by  the  golden  thread  of 
hospitality,  by  the  visits  of  itinerant  apostles  and 
prophets,  by  the  unity  of  the  one  bread.  It  is 
situated  in  a  locality  where  Christianity  is  past  its 
first  beginnings.  The  missionary  propaganda  of 
the  Church  is  now  further  afield.  Apostles  are 
known  only  as  exceptional  visitants  on  the  way  to 
their  proper  spheres  of  labour  elsewhere.  Though 
past  its  first  beginnings,  it  is  not  yet  beyond  the 
possibility  of  being  taken  by  outsiders  for  a  mere 
phase  of  Judaism.  Open  divergence  of  practice 
in  outward  ordinances  is,  therefore,  strongly 
emphasized.  The  moral  requirements  of  the  com- 
munity are  of  the  highest  order,  but  its  doctrinal 
position,  though  strictly  orthodox,  is  wanting  in 
precision  and  fullness.  The  lack  of  emphasis  on 
soteriology  seems  to  have  been  felt  by  Barnabas, 
who,  followed  in  this  respect  by  the  Apostolic 
Ch%irch  Ordinance,  added  to  the  opening  words  of 
the  Way  of  Life — '  Thou  shalt  love  God  who  made 
thee ' — the  words,  '  Thou  shalt  glorify  Him  who 
redeemed  thee  from  death.' 

The  members  meet  on  the  Lord's  Day  for  worship. 
Here  we  have  the  first  testimony  outside  the  NT 
to  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  day  of  public  worship.  A 
little  later  Pliny  reports  to  Trajan  from  Bitnynia 
that  the  Christians  there  were  accustomed  on  a 
fixed  day  (stuto  die)  to  assemble  before  daylight  to 
sing  hymns  to  Christ  as  a  God,  and  to  bind  them- 


selves by  a  sacravientum.  On  every  detail  of  this 
report  we  have  fresh  light  from  the  Didache.  \Vor- 
ship  is  on  the  Lord's  Day.  It  consists  in  the  break- 
ing of  bread,  giving  of  thanks,  and  confession  of 
sins — the  sacramentum  (?).  And  the  Eucharist  (see 
below)  has  as  one  of  its  closing  sentences, '  Hosanna 
to  the  God  of  David ' — a  hymn  to  Christ  as  a  God. 

Baptism  is  the  rite  of  initiation.  '  Living  water,' 
i.e.  water  of  spring  or  stream,  is  to  be  preferred  to 
other  kinds,  but  even  warm  water  is  allowed  in 
exceptional  circumstances.  Immersion  is  normal, 
but,  where  the  water  is  insufficient,  aft'usion  is  per- 
missible. The  rite  is  administered  after  a  definite 
course  of  instruction,  and  always  in  tlie  Name  of 
the  Trinity.  The  candidate  for  baptism  is  to  fast 
beforehand.  Fasting,  recommended  to  the  bap- 
tizer  and  those  associated  with  him,  is  enjoined  on 
the  baptized.  No  mention  is  made  of  any  anoint- 
ing, or  the  use  of  anything  save  water. 

The  Eucharist  is  the  centre  of  Christian  worship, 
but  the  evidence  of  the  Didache  has  proved  a  bono 
of  contention.  Instructions  in  regard  to  it  seem  to 
be  given  twice  over,  in  chs.  ix.  x,  and  in  ch.  xiv. 
It  is  with  regard  to  the  former  instructions  that 
difficulties  emerge  and  controversies  have  arisen. 
The  instructions  are  thus  introduced :  '  Now  as 
regards  the  Eucharist  (the  Thank-oflering)  give 
thanks  after  this  manner '  (irepl  5f  r^j  evxapi.ffTi.a.%, 
ovTU)  evxapicT-rio-ca-e).  Forms  of  prayer  are  given, 
simple  and  non-theological. 

'  We  thank  Thee,  our  Father,  for  the  holy  vine  of  David  Thy 
servant,  which  Thou  hast  made  known  to  us  through  Jesus, 
Thy  servant  [Trots] :  to  Thee  be  tJie  glory  for  ever." 

'"\Ve  thank  Thee,  our  Father,  for  the  life  and  knowledge 
which  Thou  hast  made  known  to  us  through  Jesus,  Thy  servant. 
To  Thee  be  the  glory  for  ever.  As  this  broken  bread  was 
scattered  (in  grains]  upon  the  mountains  and  being  gathered 
together  became  one,  so  let  Thy  Church  be  gathered  together 
from  the  ends  of  the  earth  unto  Thy  Kingdom :  for  Thine  is 
the  glory  and  the  power  through  Jesus  Christ  for  ever.' 

The  former  is  given  for  the  cup  {irorfipiov),  the 
latter  for  the  broken  bread  {KXdfffia),  and  there 
is  another  form,  similar  in  thought  and  diction 
but  longer,  for  the  close,  after  being  filled  (/xerd  t6 
ifiirXrjffdrivai). 

The  difficulties  in  regard  to  these  two  chapters 
arise  in  this  way.  There  is  no  trace  of  the  words 
of  institution,  and  there  seems  no  room  for  them. 
Were  these  simple  prayers  meant  as  consecration 
prayers  ?  Were  they  meant  for  the  use  of  the  pre- 
siding brother  at  all,  or  were  they  written  to  be 
used  by  the  recipient  (so  Box,  jfhSt  iii.  367  f.)? 
Why  does  the  thanksgiving  for  the  cup  come  before 
the  thanksgiving  for  the  bread?  Why  are  these 
words,  whicli  sound  like  an  invitation  to  the  Table, 
placed  at  the  very  end — '  If  any  one  is  holy,  let 
him  come  ;  if  any  one  is  not  holy,  let  him  repent'? 
And  why  does  the  previous  chapter  end  with  a 
similar  '  fencing  of  the  tables,'  given  in  the  very 
midst  of  the  forms  of  prayer  ('let  no  one  eat  or 
drink  of  your  Eucharist  except  those  who  have 
been  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord ')  ?  What 
do  the  words  ixera  rb  ^ij.ir\rjadrjv<u  imply  ?  Are  they 
to  be  interpreted  in  a  literal  or  spiritual  fashion  ? 
Finally,  wliy  was  it  necessary  to  give  instructions 
about  the  Eucharist  in  ch.  xiv.,  if  these  had  already 
been  given  in  detail  in  chs.  ix.  and  x.  ? 

Beginning  with  the  last  question,  it  has  been 
suggested  (V.  Ermoni,  L' Agape  dans VEglise primi- 
tive, 1904,  p.  17  fi".)  that  the  first  instructions  refer 
to  the  Agape,  and  the  Agape  alone.  But  there  ia 
no  other  case  in  which  any  writer  uses  the  word 
ei}xa/)i<rTia  in  the  sense  of  the  Agape  alone.  AH 
the  indications  point  to  a  combined  Agape  and 
Eucharist,  and  tne  word  evxapiffria  refers  to  this 
combination,  i.e.  it  includes  the  Agape,  just  as  in 
Ignatius  (Smj/rn.  8)  the  word  Agape  has  the  same 
meaning,  i.e.  it  includes  the  Eucharist.  The  words 
were  never  interchangeable,  but  either,  it  seems, 


DIDACHE 


DIDACHE 


301 


I 


might  be  used  of  the  combined  celebration.  The  pro- 
bability, then,  being  that  these  chapters  refer  tosuch 
a  combination,  can  we  disentangle  the  Agape  from 
the  Eucharist?  Are  thej-  inextricably  mingled,  or 
can  we  see  that  one  preceded  the  other  ?  Certain 
of  the  questions  asked  above  seem  to  point  to  the 
former  alternative,  but  the  balance  of  evidence  is 
•with  the  latter,  and  points  to  the  Agape  preceding 
the  Eucharist.  The  words  '  after  being  filled '  seem 
to  shut  us  in  to  that.  The  attempt  to  find  true 
analogies  to  a  spiritual  or  mj'stical  interpretation 
has  failed.  Jn  6'^  so  often  appealed  to,  makes  for 
the  opposite  view.  And  the  author  of  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,  who  was  dealing  with  the  Eucharist 
only,  has  to  alter  the  words  to  '  after  reception'  (/xera 
Si  rrir  furaXriftr).  The  prayers  already  given  for  the 
cup  and  the  bread  refer,  then,  to  the  Agape :  the 
*  fencing  of  the  tables '  at  the  end  of  ch.  ix.  is  pre- 
para.tory  to  the  Eucharist  proper ;  the  prayer  in 
ch.  X.  is  the  transition,  the  closing  prayer  of  the 
Agape,  or  the  opening  prayer  of  the  Eucharist, 
according  to  the  point  of  view;  the  Eucharist 
follows  immediately  on  the  prayer.  No  formula 
is  given  for  it.  The  words  of  institution  may  then 
have  been  recited.  At  both  Agape  and  Eucharist 
the  prophets  are  to  have  full  liberty  in  prayer. 
The  closing  invitation  is  to  catechumens  present 
to  come  forward  to  the  full  privilege  and  duties  of 
Church  membership.  One  grave  objection  to  this 
interpretation  is  that  it  presupposes  a  simple 
liturgy  for  the  Agape  and  none  at  all,  or  practi- 
cally none,  for  the  Eucharist.  A  priori,  we  expect 
the  exact  opposite.  But  no  other  explanation  seems 
to  satisfy  nearly  so  many  of  the  conditions.  Fur- 
ther, absence  of  fixed  forms  is  characteristic  of  the 
Eucharist  even  later.  Justin  Martyr  {First  Apo- 
logy, 65-67)  tells  us  that  the  presiding  oflBcial  (6 
rpoeardn)  offers  prayers  and  thanksgivings  accord- 
ing to  his  ability  {Sa-rj  dvya/m  ovrip). 

The  Agape,  then,  in  this  small  community,  is 
combined  with  the  Eucharist.  It  is  a  common  meal 
shared  by  the  brethren,  with  a  simple  liturgy  of 
its  own,  Jewish  in  origin,  with  marked  affinity 
to  Jewish  blessings  at  meals.  It  is  followed  by 
the  Eucharist  so  closely  that  it  is  all  one  service. 
None  but  the  baptized  participate.  Forms  are 
lacking,  as  a  member  of  the  charismatic  ministry 
seems  in  general  to  preside,  and  he  is  to  be  left 
free  to  follow  the  promptings  of  the  Spirit.  Cate- 
chumens and  members  under  discipline  are  not  ex- 
cluded from  the  place  of  celebration.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  are  expected  to  be  present,  and  are 
urged  publicly  to  acquire  or  recover  the  right  of 
participation.  The  Eucharist  is  a  sacrifice  (dvffia), 
and  the  words  of  Malachi  are  taken  as  a  prophecy 
of  it,  'In  every  place  and  time  offer  me  a  pure 
sacrifice,  for  I  am  a  great  King,  saith  the  Lord.' 
But  this  does  not  indicate,  as  Bickell  thought,  the 
germ  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Mass,  nor  what  is 
technically  knoNvn  as  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice. 
The  sacrifice,  as  all  approximately  contemporary 
use  of  the  word  confirms,  consists  in  the  prayers, 
the  praises,  the  worship,  and  the  gifts  of  believers 
(see  ERE  V.  546  f.). 

There  is  no  trace  of  a  Christian  year  in  the 
Didache,  but  there  is  a  Christian  week.  The 
Lord's  Day  is  the  day  of  worship  ;  "Wednesday  and 
Friday  are  fasts.  The  only  evident  reason  for  the 
choice  of  these  days  is  the  necessity  of  being  dLs- 
tinct  in  all  things  from  the  '  hypocrites' — the  un- 
belie^■ing  Jews — who  fast  on  Mondays  and  Thurs- 
days ;  but  the  real  underlying  reason  may  have 
been  that  which  was  put  forward  later  for  these 
days  as  semi-fasts,  viz.  that  Wednesday  was  the 
day  of  the  Betrayal  and  Friday  that  of  the  Cruci- 
fixion. There  is  also  what  may  be  called  a  Chris- 
tian day.  The  beginnings  of  a  certain  formalism 
in  devotional  exercises  appear  in  the  injunction 


to  pray,  using  the  Lord's  Prayer,  three  times  a 
daj'.  This,  too,  is  founded  on  Jewish  practice. 
No  definite  hours  are  named,  and  therefore  no 
change  of  hour  is  suggested.  Tertullian,  later, 
prescribes  definite  hours.  Christians  are  to  pray 
at  the  third,  sixth,  and  ninth  hours,  in  addition 
to  the  ordinary  morning  and  evening  prayers  of 
which  no  Christian  needs  to  be  reminded.  These 
devotions  are  to  include  the  Lord's  Prayer  (de 
Orat.  XXV.,  x.).  Clement  of  Alexandria,  in  the 
work  in  which  he  cites  the  Didache  as  Scripture, 
though  he  knows,  and,  to  some  extent,  commends, 
the  three  hours  of  prayer,  rather  disparages  the 
adhesion  to  these  definite  hours.  'The  yrwirruc&t 
prays  throughout  his  whole  life,  endeavouring  by 
prayer  to  have  fellowship  with  God '  {Strom,  vii.  7). 
It  was  in  its  account  of  the  office-bearers  of  the 
Church  and  the  nature  of  the  ministry  that  the 
recovered  Didache  produced  the  most  profound  im- 

f)ression.  Accounts  of  origins  and  development 
ike  Li^htfoot's  were  greatly  strengthened  in  most 
particmars,  but  others  received  from  it  a  fatal 
stroke.  The  details  and  even  the  general  trend  of 
these  controversies  lie  outside  the  scope  of  this 
article.  Our  attention  is  confined  to  the  evidence 
of  the  Didache  itself.  Even  in  its  first  section  it 
puts  a  very  high  value  on  the  ministry.  The  cate- 
chumen is  enjoined  to  '  remember  night  and  day 
him  that  speaks  to  thee  the  word  of  God,  for 
wheresoever  the  Lordship  is  spoken  of,  there  is 
the  Lord.'  "W'ho  are  included  among  those  that 
speak  the  word  of  God  ?  The  reference  plainly  is, 
in  the  first  place,  to  the  unlocalized  or  charbmatic 
ministry,  which  occupies  so  large  a  place  in  the 
part  dealing  with  office-bearers.  This  ministry  is 
not  appointed  by  the  members  of  the  Church,  their 
office  is  transmitted  through  no  human  channel. 
They  comprise  only  the  first  three  of  St.  Paul's 
list  in  1  Co  12® — apostles,  prophets,  and  teachers. 
The  apostles  are  e\idently,  as  already  said,  rare 
visitants.  The  missionary  work  of  the  Church  is 
elsewhere.  But  every  apostle  who  pays  a  visit  is 
to  be  received  as  the  Lord.  He  is  not  to  remain 
longer  than  two  days,  for  impostors  are  rife,  and 
the  desire  to  live  for  longer  than  two  days  on  the 
generosity  of  the  community  and  in  the  sunshine 
of  its  favour,  is  a  sure  sign  of  a  false  prophet. 
The  genuine  apostle  will  not  ask  for  money,  nor 
take  with  him  more  than  the  necessary  food  for 
the  next  stage  of  his  journey.  Prophets  are  more 
common,  but  are  held  in  high  esteem.  The  true 
prophet  is  not  to  be  tried  or  proved ;  his  word  is 
to  be  accepted  as  that  of  one  who  speaks  in  the 
Spirit.  He  is  to  be  free  from  the  rules  and  forms 
that  bind  other  men.  But  abuses  have  crept  into 
the  prophetic  office,  and  counterfeit  prophets  are 
to  be  detected  by  their  behaviour,  especially  by 
their  asking  for  money  for  themselves,  or  ordering 
an  Agape  for  their  own  benefit.  A  prophet  may 
wish  to  connect  himself  with  a  particular  com- 
munity. Such  a  settled  prophet  is  worthy  of  sup- 
port. First-fruits  are  to  be  set  aside  for  the  use 
of  these  men,  for,  in  this  respect,  they  are  like  the 
high  priests  of  the  Jews.  There  were  communities 
without  any  resident  prophet.  In  such  the  first- 
fruits  were  to  be  given  directly  to  the  poor.  An 
obscure  sentence  about  the  prophet  'making  as- 
semblies for  a  worldly  mystery'  or  'acting  with 
a  view  to  the  worldly  mystery  of  the  Church ' 
(even  the  translation  is  doubtful)  has,  as  yet,  re- 
ceived no  satisfactory  interpretation.  Little  is 
said  about  the  third  class  of  the  general  ministry, 
the  teachers.  They  too  are  worthy  of  support. 
This  implies  that  there  were  both  peripatetic  and 
settled  teachers.  The  slightness  of  the  reference 
cannot  be  due  to  their  rarity.  May  it  not  be  due 
to  the  following?  It  is  commonly  argued  that  the 
Shepherd  of  Hermas  passed  over  the  prophets  be- 


302 


DIDACHE 


DISCIPLE 


cause  its  author  belonged  to  that  order.  May  it 
not  equally  be  that  the  Didaclie  says  little  about 
the  teachers  for  a  similar  reason?  The  very  name 
of  his  work  would  indicate  tliat  its  author  was 
numbered  among  the  teachers. 

In  addition  to  this  ministry  to  the  whole  Church, 
there  is  a  local  ministry  of  bishops  and  deacons. 
They  are  appointed  and  set  apart  by  the  local 
church.  Tiieir  authority  is,  thus,  not  directly 
derived  from  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  are  in  danger 
of  being  despised,  but  are  to  be  honoured  along 
with  the  prophets  and  teachers.  Such  is  the  char- 
acter of  the  ministry  as  known  to  the  author  of 
the  Didachc.  It  shows  us  the  local  ministry 
strengthening  its  position  in  a  small  community 
and  in  need  of  having  its  position  strengthenecl, 
while  the  general  ministry  is  fading  into  tlie  back- 
ground through  tlie  prevalence  of  plausible  coun- 
terfeits from  mercenary  motives.  (For  fuller  dis- 
cussion of  the  significance  of  all  this  see  Harnack, 
TUii.  I,  2,  pp.  93-157;  C.  H.  Turner,  Studies  in 
Early  Church  History,  1912,  rip.  1-32  ;  T.  M.  Lind- 
say, The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  1902,  esp.  p. 
170  ff.) 

With  such  a  full-length  picture  of  contemporary 
Church  conditions,  it  is  not  remarkable  that  the 
Didache  was  hailed  as  a  most  important  find.  At 
times  its  importance  may  have  been  over-estimated, 
but  it  certainly  fills  a  blank  in  our  knowledge.  It 
sets  clearly  before  us  facts  which  might  have  been, 
and  indeed  were,  reached  by  gathering  together 
the  scattered  and  less  delinite  indications  of  other 
works.  It  sketches  the  nature  of  the  work,  the 
worship,  and  the  ministry  in  one  community  which, 
though  small,  was  not  isolated  ;  though  doubtless 
individual,  was  not  peculiar.  It  gave  the  initial 
impulse  to  works  of  a  similar  character  without 
which  our  knowledge  of  the  early  centuries  in 
these  matters  would  be  much  more  meagre  than 
it  is. 

LiTERATUnB. — In  addition  to  the  works  cited  and  named  in 
the  text  of  the  article,  the  following  may  be  referred  to  : 

I.  Editions.— H.  de  Romestin,  Oxford,  1S84  ;  A.  Hilg:enfeld, 
NT  extra  Canonem  receptuin,  fasc.  iv.",  Leipzig,  1884  ;  R.  D. 
Hitchcock  and  F.  Brown  2,  New  York,  1885 ;  P.  Sabatier, 
Paris,  1885 ;  H.  D.  M.  Spence,  London,  1SS5 ;  F.  X.  Funk, 
Doctrina  duodedin  Apostolorum,  Tubinjren,  1887  ;  E.  Jacquier, 
Lyons,  1891 ;  L.  E.  Iselin  and  A.  Heusler,  Eine  bisher  unbe- 
kannte  Version  des  ersten  Teileg  der  Apoftellehre,  in  T(J  xiii.  1, 
Leipzig,  1895  ;  C.  Bigg,  London,  1898 ;  H.  Lietzmann,  Bonn, 
1903. 

n.  D18CD8810N8.— (1)  General. — G.  Bonet-Maury,  La  Doc- 
trine des  douze  Apdtres,  Paris,  1884  ;  Th.  Zahn,  Porschungen 
zur  Geschichte  des  NT  Kanons  und  der  altkirchl.  Litteratur, 
pt.  iii.,  Erlangen,  1884  ;  G.  V.  Lechler,  Das  apostolische  und 
nachapostolische  Zeitalter'^,  Karlsruhe,  1885  (Eng.  tr.,  Edin- 
burgh, 18S6) ;  E.  Backhouse  and  C.  Tyler,  Early  Church 
History^,  London,  1885  ;  G.  Wohlenberg,  Die  Lehre  der  zwiilf 
Apostd  in  ihrem  Verhdltnis  zum  NT  Schrifttmn,  Leipzig,  1888 ; 
J.  Heron,  The  Church  of  the  Sub-Apostulic  Age  .  .  .  in  the 
Light  of  the  '  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,'  London,  1888  ; 
A.  Harnack,  art.  '  Apostellehre '  in  PAA'3  i.,  Leipzig,  189G;  F. 
X.  Funk,  Kirchengesehichtliche  Abhandhmgen,  li.,  Paderborn, 
1899;  A.  Ehrhard,  Die  altchristl.  Litterattir  und  ihre  Erfor- 
schung  von  18SU-1900,  Freiburg  i.  B.,  1900;  K.  Kohler,  art. 
'  Didache '  in  JE  iv.,  London,  1903  ;  P.  Drews  in  E.  Hennecke's 
HaTidbtiehzuden  NT Apocryphen,  Tnb\ngen,lO0i  ;  O.  Barden- 
hewer,  Patrology,  Freiburg  i.  B.  and  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1908  ;  H. 
M.  Gwatkin,  Early  Church  History,  London,  1909,  vol.  i. 

(2)  Special.— (a)  Ministry. — E.  Loaning,  Die  Genieindever- 
fassung  des  Urchristenthums,  Halle,  1888  ;  J.  R^ville,  Origincs 
de  Pipiscopat,  Paris,  1895  ;  J.  W.  Falconer,  From  Apostle  to 
Priest,  Edinburgh,  1900 ;  A.  Harnack,  The  Mission  and  Expan- 
sion of  Chrutianity  in  the  First  Three  Centuries'^,  London,  1908, 
vol.  i. — (b)  Worship. — O.  Moe,  Die  Aposteilehre  und  der  Dekalog 
im  Unterricht  der  alten  Kirche,  Giitersloh,  1896  ;  J.  F.  Keating, 
The  Agape  and  the  Eucharist  in  the  Early  Church,  London, 
1901 ;  P.  Ladeuze,  '  L'Eucharistie  et  les  repas  communs  des 
fid61es  dans  le  Didache'  in  Revue  de  I'Orient  Chritien,  1902, 
no.  3  ;  J.  C.  Lambert,  The  Sacraments  in  tlie  NT,  Edinburgh, 
1903 ;  A.  Andersen,  Das  A  bcndtnahl  in  den  zwei  ersten 
Jahrhunderten,  Qiessen,  1904  ;  E.  von  der  Goltz,  Tischgebete 
und  Abendmuhlsgebete  in  der  altchristl.  und  in  der  griech. 
Kirche  (TUxiv.  2b),  Leipzij.',  1905  ;  F.  M.  RendtorflF,  Die  Taufe 
im  Urchristentum,  do.  1905 ;  M.  Goguel,  L'Eucharistie.  Des 
origmes  d  Justin,  martur,  Paris,  1909 ;  J.  H.  Srawley,  art. 
'  Eucharist  (to  end  of  Middle  Ages)'  in  ERE  v.,  Edinburgh.  1912. 

Hugh  Watt. 


DIGAMY See  Marriage. 

DIONYSIUS.— See  Areopagite. 

DIOSCURI  (Ac  28",  KVm  ;  AV  « Castor  and 
Pollux,'  ItV  'the  Twin  Brothers').— The  Dioscuri 
were  the  sons  of  Leda  and  Zeus,  Castor  being 
mortal  and  Pollu.x  immortal.  They  were  famed 
for  many  exploits,  and  at  length,  in  a  battle 
against  the  sons  of  Aphareus,  Castor  was  slain  by 
Idas.  Pollux  besought  Zeus  that  he  too  might  die. 
According  to  one  fable  the  Father  of  the  Gods 
granted  Castor  life  on  condition  that  the  brothers 
should  alternately  spend  a  day  in  Hades,  but 
another  states  that  their  love  was  rewarded  by 
Zeus,  who  placed  them  together  among  tlie  stars 
as  the  Gemini.  They  were  regarded  as  the  patrons 
of  athletic  contests.  Castor  presiding  over  the 
equestrian  events,  Pollux  being  the  god  of  boxing 
{KdffTopd  Slinri^aiiov  Kal  irv^  a-yaBbv  IIo\uoet/K6a[Hom. 
11.  iii.  237]).  Their  worship  was  very  strictly  ob- 
served among  the  Dorian  peoples,  and  they  were 
also  held  in  special  reverence  at  Rome,  as  they 
were  popularly  supposed  to  have  fought  on  the  side 
of  the  Commonwealth  at  the  battle  of  Lake  Regillus 
and  to  have  carried  the  news  of  victory  to  the  city 
(Dion.  Hal.  Ant.  Bom.  vi.  13).  It  is  worthy  of 
note  that  they  were  specially  held  in  honour  in  the 
district  of  Cyrenaica  near  Alexandria  (schol.  Pindar, 
Pyth.  V.  6). 

The  ships  of  the  ancients  cairied  two  figures  as 
a  rule,  one  being  the  Hgure-head  (wapaarifjLov,  in- 
signe),  after  which  the  ship  was  named  (Virgil, 
jEn.  V,  116,  X.  166,  188,  209),  and  the  other  in  the 
stern.  The  latter  was  the  tutela  or  image  of  the 
divine  being  under  whose  guardianship  the  vessel 
was  supposed  to  sail.  The  Dioscuri  were  regarded  as 
the  guardian  deities  of  sailors,  and  Horace  speaks 
of  '  the  brothers  of  Helen,  the  beaming  stars,'  as 
shining  propitiously  on  those  at  sea  {Odes,  1.  iii.  2, 
xii.  25 ;  cf.  Catullus,  iv.  27  ;  Euripides,  Helena, 

1662-5).  F.    W.    WORSLEY. 

DIOTREPHES.  —  An  otherwise  unknown  man 
named  in  3  Jn^as  ambitious,  masterful,  and  tyran- 
nical. As  the  author.ship  of  the  Epistle,  its  des- 
tination, and  date  are  all  doubtful,  any  attempt 
to  identify  Diotrephes  is  futile.  His  main  interest 
for  the  student  of  the  Apostolic  Church  is  that  he 
is  a  witness  to  the  ojvposite  currents  of  thought 
which  disturbed  it.  The  writer  of  3  John  was 
apparently  responsible  for  a  band  of  travelling 
evangelists  to  whom  Diotrephes  refused  a  welcome. 
The  ground  of  refusal  appears,  from  the  references  to 
'  truth '  in  the  Epistle,  to  have  been  a  difference  of 
doctrine.  If  the  writer  was  a  '  pneumatic '  teacher, 
Diotrephes  would  probably  be  a  Catholic  officer  of 
inliuence,  but  of  lower  standing  than  the  writer. 
If  the  writer,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  Catholic 
teacher,  Diotrephes  was  probably  a  man  of  Docetic 
views.  The  name  occurs  in  profane  Greek  twice — 
once  as  son  of  Ileraclitus  in  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.,  and 
once  as  the  name  of  an  Antiochene  rhetorician 
(Pauly-Wissowa,  *.!>.).  W.  F.  Cobb. 

DISCIPLE. — The  use  of  the  word  'disciple' 
(Ata^Tyr^s)  in  the  NT  is  remarkable  and  very  in- 
structive. It  occurs  238  times  in  the  Gospels.  In 
the  Epistles  and  the  Apocalypse  it  does  not  occur 
at  all,  its  place  being  taken  by  '  saints '  (07104)  «uid 
'  brethren  (dSeX^oi).  Acts  e.xhibits  the  transition, 
with  '  disciple '  (/to^rpTjs)  28  times  and  the  feminine 
form  (/to^T^pio)  once,  but  with  '  saints '  4  times 
(gi3.  32.  41  2610)  and  '  brethren  '  (not  counting  ad- 
dresses, and  mostly  in  the  second  half  of  the  book) 
about  32  times.  In  Acts,  '  believers '  (viarevovTei, 
TTiffTfvffayres,  vtiriffrevKdres)  is  another  frequent  equi 
valent.     The  explanation  of  the  change  from  '  clis- 


DISCIPLLS^E 


DISCIPLINE 


303 


ciple'  to  the  other  terms  is  simple.  During  His 
life  on  earth,  the  followers  of  Jesus  were  called 
'  disciples '  in  reference  to  Him  ;  afterwards  they 
were  called  'saints'  in  reference  to  their  sacred 
calling,  or  'brethren'  in  relation  to  one  another 
(Sanday,  Inspiration',  1896,  p.  289).  In  Acts,  the 
first  title  is  going  out  of  use,  and  the  others  are 
coming  in  ;  in  ch.  9  all  three  terms  are  found. 
Christ's  charge,  '  Make  disciples  of  all  the  nations' 
(Mt  *28'*),  may  have  helped  to  keep  '  disciple '  in  use. 

'  Disciple '  means  more  than  one  who  listens  to  a 
teacher  ;  it  implies  his  acceptance  of  the  teaching, 
and  his  effort  to  act  in  accordance  with  it ;  it  im- 
plies beinga  'believer' in  theteacher  and  being  ready 
to  be  an  'imitator'  {fufirtn^)  of  him  (Xen.  Jlem.  I. 
vi.  3).  It  is  remarkable  that  St.  Paul  does  not  call 
his  converts  his  '  disciples ' — that  might  seem  to  be 
taking  the  place  of  Christ  (1  Co  l^^);  but  he 
speaks  of  them  as  his  '  imitators.'  In  the  Gospels, 
'disciple'  is  often  used  in  a  special  sense  of  the 
Twelve,  and  sometimes  of  the  followers  of  human 
teachers — Moses,  or  John  the  Baptist,  or  the 
Pharisees.  Neither  use  is  found  in  Acts :  in  19^ 
'  disciples '  does  not  mean  disciples  of  John,  as  is 
shown  by  '  when  ye  believed '  (xwrrewrajn-ej),  that  is, 
'  when  ye  became  Christians,'  which  is  the  dominant 
meaning  of  this  verb  in  Acts.  These  'disciples' 
were  imperfectly  instructed  Christians. 

See  also  ait.  Apostle.       Alfred  Plummee, 

DISCIPLINE.— The  root  meaning  of  '  discipline ' 
is  '  instruction,'  but  in  course  of  time  it  came  to  be 
used  for  '  moral  training,'  '  chastening,'  '  punish- 
ment.' The  subject  naturally  divides  itself  into 
two  parts  :  (1)  the  spiritual  discipline  of  the  soul ; 
(2)  the  ecclesiastical  discipline  of  offenders. 

1.  The  training  necessary  for  the  discipline  of 
the  soul. — This  may  be  under  the  guidance  of 
another  or  under  one's  own  direction. — (a)  In  order 
to  develop  and  perfect  man's  moral  nature,  (rod 
deals  with  him  as  a  wise  father  with  a  child.  The 
benefit  of  such  treatment  is  pointed  out  in  He 
101-13  icf.  Mt  5'*''-).  Its  final  efficacy  depends  upon 
the  spirit  in  which  it  is  received.  The  motive  for 
its  endurance  must  be  right,  and  the  end  in  view 
must  be  clearly  perceived.  The  Heavenly  Father 
does  more  than  simply  teach  His  children ;  He 
disciplines  them  with  more  (cf.  Pr  3",  Job  5^^)  or 
less  severity  (cf.  Pr  l*-  ^  4').  If  the  Author  of 
Salvation  was  made  perfect  through  sufferings  (He 
2i» ;  cf.  5»'-  7^,  Lk  13^-),  it  is  clear  that  the  '  many 
sons'  must  pass  through  the  same  process  and 
experience  as  the  '  well-beloved  Son.'  In  their 
case  the  need  is  the  more  urgent,  for  latent  powers 
must  be  developed,  lack  of  symmetry  corrected, 
the  stains  of  sin  removed,  evil  tendencies  eradi- 
cated. Errors  in  doctrine  and  action  must  be 
transformed  into  truth  and  righteousness  (1  Co 
ll^ff-,  2  Jn^o*-,  2  Ti  2i«'-  ;  cf.  Tit  3i«,  1  Co  5*-« 
2  Th  3*).  Body  and  mind  can  move  towards 
perfection  only  under  the  guiding  hand  of  the 
Holy  Father.  Pain  and  sorrow,  frustrated  hopes, 
long  delays,  loneliness,  changed  circumstances, 
persecution,  the  death  ef  loved  ones,  and  other 
'dispensations  of  Providence,'  are  designed  to 
chasten  and  ennoble  the  soul.  Character,  not 
creed,  is  the  final  aim.  Having  begun  a  good  work 
in  His  children,  God  will  '  perfect  it  until  the  day 
of  Jesus  Christ '  (Ph  1«). 

(b)  The  Christian  must  also  discipline  himself. 
Through  the  crucifixion  of  his  lower  nature  he 
rises  into  newness  of  life.  St.  Paul  describes  (Tit 
2^  the  negative  side  as  '  denying  ungodliness  and 
worldly  lusts,'  and  the  positive  as  to  '  live  soberly, 
and  righteously,  and  godly  in  this  present  world ' 
('  sobrie  erga  nos ;  juste  erga  proximum  ;  pie  erga 
Denm'  [St.  Bernard,  Sermon  xi.,  Paris,  1667-90])  ; 
see  Ro  128,  Tit  2^ ;  cf .  2  Ti  2^^,  1  P  4-,  1  Jn  2»« ; 


also  Lk  1",  Ac  17*»  24»  The  Christian  must  put 
away  anger,  bitterness,  clamour,  covetousness, 
envy,  evil-speaking,  falsehood,  fornication,  guile, 
hypocrisy,  malice,  railing,  shameful  speaking, 
undeanness,  wrath  (Eph  4'7-«,  Col  3*-"  ;  cf.  Ja  1«', 
1  P  2').  Then  he  must  acquire  and  mature  posi- 
tive virtues.  This  involves  at  every  stage  self- 
discipline  (see  Ro  6'»  8",  1  Co  9»«-,  Col  3* ;  cf .  Mt 
5»  18»,  Mk  9*^  Gal  5»«). 

Many  elements  enter  into  this  discipline  of  self. 
Amongst  others  the  following  deserve  special 
mention :  prayer,  '  the  hallowing  of  desire,  by 
carrying  it  up  to  the  fountain  of  holiness'  (J. 
Monson,  Com.  on  St.  Mattheti^,  1885,  p.  89) ;  see 
Ro  1212;  cf.  Ac  1",  Eph  6»8,  Col  4*-*,  1  P  4';  cf. 
Mt  28*1,  Lk  18'  21»  Fasting  is  frequently  as- 
sociated with  prayer :  e.g.  Ac  13'  14",  Did.  vii.  4, 
vUi.  1,  and  many  other  passages.  Ramsay  (St. 
Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen,  London, 
1895,  p.  122)  speaks  of  the  solemn  prayer  and  fast 
which  accompanied  the  appointment  of  the  elders, 
and  savs  that  'this  meeting  and  rite  of  fasting, 
A\hich  TPaul  celebrated  in  each  city  on  his  return 
journey,  is  to  be  taken  as  the  form  that  was  to  be 
permanently  observed.'  Sobriety  in  thought  and 
action  is  commended  (Ro  12» ;  cf .  1  P  4'  [Gr.],  1  Th 
5S.  8^  1  Xi  2?- '»  ;  cf.  Sir  18»  [Gr.]) ;  toatch/ulness  (Ac 
2415,  Ro  819- »,  1  Co  V  16",  2  Co  4^.  Eph  6i«,  Col  4-, 
Tit  213,  He  13",  1  P  4^  2  P  3"  ;  cf .  Mt  24^  26",  Mk 
13^,  Lk  21*) ;  obedience  (Ro  131',  2  Co  2*  7"  10«, 
1  Ti  21-',  Tit  31,  1  P  212- 1*  31,  1  Jn  23  3^) ;  patience 
(Ro  5»  8»  15*,  1  Th  1',  2  Th  l^-^  3*,  He  10«,  Ja  1»; 
cf.  Mt  ICF  24i»,  Lk  21") ;  conflict  against  error  and 
evil  forces  and  on  behalf  of  the  truth  (Eph  6'^"'*, 
1  Ti  li8-»  6",  2  Ti  2^*4^^,  PhUem»,  Jude^) ;  work 
(Ac  18»,  Eph  4^,  1  Th  4I',  2  Th  3»-") ;  almsgiving 
(Ac  24",  Ro  12"  15»- »,  1  Co  16i-»,  2  Co  9«- ',  Gal  6i», 
1  Ti  6"-i»,  He  1316,  Ja  2^^- 1«,  1  Jn  3" ;  cf .  Mt  e"- »  To 
4"-ii) ;  temperance  (Ac  24«,  1  Co  9»,  Gal  5» ;  cf. 
Sir  IS*  [Gr.],  Tit  1«,  2  P  1«);  chastUy  (Ro  13",  Gal 
524  1  p  211,  1  Jn  2i« ;  cf.  Sir  18*) ;  meekness  (Ro 
12i«,  Eph  4^  52,  Ph  2?,  Col  3'2,  1  Ti  6",  1  P  5*-  •). 

In  Ph  4*  and  2  P  !*■*  there  are  inspiring  direc- 
tions for  this  same  self-discipline.  '  If  there  be 
any  virtue,  and  if  there  be  any  praise,'  the 
brethren  are  to  '  think  on,'  or  '  take  account  of,' 
'whatsoever  things  are  true,  honourable,  just, 
pure,  lovely,  of  good  report.'  If  men  are  to  become 
partakers  of  the  Divine  nature,  and  to  escape  the 
corruption  that  is  in  the  world  by  lust,  they  must 
heed  the  injunction  :  '  For  this  very  cause  adding 
on  your  part  all  diligence,  in  your  faith  supply 
virtue ;  and  in  your  virtue  knowledge  ;  and  in 
j'our  knowledge  temperance  ;  and  in  your  temper- 
ance patience  ;  and  in  your  patience  godliness  ; 
and  in  your  godliness  love  of  the  brethren  ;  and  in 
your  love  of  the  brethren  love'  (see  also  1  Co  13 
and  1  Jn  41*).  This  will  save  from  idleness  and 
unfruitfulness.  They  wiU  give  the  more  diligence 
to  make  their  calling  and  election  sure. 

Xo  doubt  the  expectation  in  the  Apostolic  Age 
of  the  cataclysmic  and  immediate  coming  of  Christ 
led  to  rigour  and  austerity  of  life,  which  were 
afterwards  relaxed  in  many  places.  The  moral 
necessity  of  discipline  is  always  the  same,  even 
though  the  power  of  belief  in  the  second  coming  of 
Christ  in  spectacular  fashion  wanes  or  departs. 
After  the  close  of  the  1st  cent,  the  development 
of  asceticism  and  penance  became  pronounced. 
The  XT  gives  little  or  no  countenance  to  the 
extreme  forms  that  these  disciplinary  systems 
assumed. 

2.  Ecclesiastical  discipline. — For  self -protection 
and  self-assertion  the  early  Church  had  to  exercise 
a  strict  discipline.  Its  well-being  and  very  life 
depended  upon  the  suppression  of  abuses  and  the 
exptilsion  of  persistent  and  gross  offenders.  In 
some  cases  toleration  would  have  meant  unfaith- 


304 


DISCIPLINE 


DISPERSIOX 


fulness  to  Christ  and  degradation  to  the  commnnity. 
The  duty  of  maintaining  an  adequate  discipline 
•was  one  of  the  most  difficult  and  most  important 
tasks  that  confronted  the  primitive  Ecclesia. 
Jesus  Himself  gave  to  the  apostles  (Mt  16^*'  '^  Jn 
20'«-  ^)  and  to  the  Church  (Mt  18i»-J»)  a  disciplinary 
charter.  The  Church  followed  the  main  lines  of 
guidance  therein  contained.  Only  public  sins  were 
dealt  with  in  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  Private 
ofiences  were  to  be  confessed  to  each  other  (Ja  5'"), 
that  prayer  might  be  oHered  for  forgiveness  (5", 
1  Jn  5'®),  and  also  confessed  to  God  (1  Jn  1"). 
Further,  Christians  were  discouraged  from  carry- 
ing disputes  to  the  civil  courts  (1  Co  6^  cf.  5"  6'*). 
'  Let  not  those  who  have  disputes  go  to  law  before 
the  civil  powers,  but  let  them  by  all  means  be  re- 
conciled by  the  leaders  of  the  Church,  and  let  them 
rightly  yield  to  their  decision '  (see  Clem.  Ep.  ad 
Jacob.,  10).  The  object  of  ecclesiastical  discipline 
was  to  prevent  scandal  and  to  restore  the  ofiender. 
When  private  rebuke  and  remonstrance  failed  (Mt 
18'*;  CI.  1  Th  5'''),  the  wrong-doer  was  censured  by 
the  whole  community  (cf.  1  Ti  S^",  Gal  2").  This 
sentence  might  be  pronounced  by  some  person  in 
authority,  or  by  the  community  as  community. 
If  the  accused  person  still  remained  obdurate,  and 
in  the  case  of  heinous  sin,  the  Church  proceeded  to 
expulsion  and  excommunication  (Ro  16'^,  1  Co 
52. 11. 13^  2  Jn  *").  The  ofiender  was  thrust  out  from 
religious  "jatherings  and  debarred  from  social  inter- 
course. To  such  excommunication  might  be  added 
the  further  penalty  of  physical  punishment  (Ac 
51-10  gw,  1  Co  55,  1  Ti  52»)  or  an  anathema  {avMeixa, 
1  Co  16-^,  Gal  1*).  Knowing  the  great  influence 
of  the  mind  over  the  body,  one  can  readily  under- 
stand that  disease,  and  even  death,  might  follow 
such  sentences.  It  was  fully  believed  that  the 
culprit  was  exposed,  without  defence,  to  the  attacks 
of  Satan  (1  Co  S'^). 

The  whole  Church  exercised  this  power  of  dis- 
cipline. St.  Paul  addresses  the  community  in 
1  Cor,,  which  is  our  earliest  guide  on  the  subject. 
Laymen  on  occasion  could  teach,  preach,  and  exer- 
cise disciplinary  powers.  In  the  case  of  excom- 
munication it  was  not  necessary  that  there  should 
be  unanimity.  A  majority  vote  was  sufficient  (2 
Co  2").  It  was  believed  that  Christ  was  actually 
present  (Mt  18^")  to  confirm  the  sentence,  which 
was  pronounced  in  His  name  (1  Co  5*,  2  Co  2'"). 

No  doubt  the  procedure  followed  in  the  main 
that  of  the  synagogue,  where  expulsion  was  of 
three  types — simple  putting  forth,  excommunica- 
tion with  a  curse,  and  a  final  anathema  sentence. 
Discipline  was  designed  to  be  reformatory  and  not 
simply  punitive  or  retaliatory.  There  must  be,  if 
possible,  '  rectification '  (see  2  Ti  3^*,  where  eiravdp- 
0u(7is  is  significantly  joined  with  -n-aidela).  Repent- 
ance is  to  be  followed  by  forgiveness  (2  Co  2'"^'*, 
Gal  6S  Jude**).  The  penitent  was  probably  re- 
ceived into  the  Church  again  by  the  imposition  of 
hands  (cf.  1  Ti  5^2). 

Owing  to  persecution,  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
became  more  and  more  simply  moral  influence. 
The  demand  for  it  was  more  urgent  than  ever ; 
but,  while  some  communities  remained  faithful  to 
this  duty,  others  grew  more  lax  (e.g.  the  jjractice 
of  obtaining  libelli). 

See  also  Admonition,  Anathema,  Chastise- 
ment, and  Excommunication. 

LrrBRATURE.— J.  H.  Kurtz,  Church  History,  Eng.  tr.,  i.2, 
London,  18!)1 ;  F.  J,  A.  Hort,  The  Christian  Ecclesia.  do.  1897  ; 
C.  V.  Weizsacker,  Apogtolic  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  i.2,  do.  1897,  ii.,  1895  ; 
P.  SchafF,  llisto7~y  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  Eklinbureb,  1886;  E. 
Hatch,  Orfjanization  of  the  Early  Christian  Churches,  London, 
1880;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age, 
Edinburgh,  1897 ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Dissertations  on  the  Apos- 
tolic Age,  London,  1892  ;  H.  H.  Henson,  Apostolic  Christianitt/, 
do.  1898;  art.  '  Discipline  (Christian) '  in  ERE. 

H.  CaRISS  J.  SiDNELL. 


DISPERSION.  —  ^  Siaffiropd  (from  Siatrvflpuj  'to 
scatter,'  as  dyopd  from  dyelpu  'to  gather')  is  used 
collectively  in  the  LXX  and  the  NT  for  the  Jews 
.settled  abroad.  The  most  important  NT  reference 
occurs  in  Jn  7** :  '  Whither  will  this  man  go  that 
we  shall  not  find  him  ?  Will  he  go  unto  the  Dia- 
spora among  the  Gentiles,  and  teach  the  Gentiles  ? ' 
This  splenetic  utterance  was  an  unconscious  pro- 
phecy of  the  course  our  Lord  actually  followed, 
when,  having  reached  the  goal  of  His  public  minis- 
try, and  having  received  '  all  authority  in  heaven 
and  on  earth,'  He  went  on  '  to  make  disciples  of  all 
the  nations.'*  The  first  line  of  advance  was  al- 
ready marked  out  by  the  Diaspora.  It  was  the 
bridge  between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek,  and  soon 
the  sound  of  many  feet  speeding  over  it  with 
their  message  of  goou  tidings  was  heard  ;  or  it  was 
the  viaduct  by  which  the  living  waters  that  went 
forth  from  Jerusalem  were  led  to  the  cities  of  the 
Roman  Empire. 

The  Diaspora  partly  originated  from  causes  over 
which  the  Jews  had  no  control,  and  was  partly  the 
result  of  a  spontaneous  movement  outwards.  It 
was  largely  due  to  the  policy  adopted  by  the  great 
conquerors  of  antiquity  of  deporting  into  exile 
a  considerable  number  of  the  population  of  the 
countries  which  they  subdued.  The  various  trans- 
plantations sufiered  by  the  Jews  need  not  be  re- 
counted here.  But  their  dispersion  was  still  more 
largely  due,  in  Greek  and  Roman  times,  to  volun- 
tary emigration  from  Palestine.  The  conquests  of 
Alexander  the  Great  turned  what  had  hitherto 
been  barred  avenues  and  dangerous  tracks  into 
safe  and  open  roads,  and  the  Jews  were  not  slow 
to  take  advantage  of  the  openings,  both  in  the 
direction  of  secular  culture  and  of  commercial 
enterprise,  that  lay  before  them.  In  NT  times, 
they  were  domiciled  in  all  the  countries  along  the 
shores  of  the  Mediterranean.  The  accounts  of  Philo 
and  Josephus,  of  which  the  substantial  accuracy  is 
attested  by  inscriptions  (HDB  v.  92"),  enable  us  to 
see  how  much  at  home  the  Jews  were  in  Syria,  Egypt, 
Asia  Minor,  and  the  Greek  cities  and  islands,  and 
all  the  data  now  available  afford  grounds  for  be- 
lieving that  they  numbered  at  this  period  from 
three  to  four  and  a  half  millions,  and  that  they 
formed  about  seven  per  cent  of  the  population  of 
the  Roman  Empire  (EBi  i.  1112;  Harnack, 
Mission  and  Expansion^,  i.  10,  11). 

Following  Jeremiah's  advice  to  the  exiles  in 
Babylon,  they  '  sought  the  peace '  of  the  cities 
they  settled  in,  without,  however,  amalgamating 
with  the  other  inhabitants.  The  dislike  created 
by  their  aloofness  gave  way  a  little  before  the  invol- 
untary respect  commanded  by  their  intelligence, 
their  aptitude  for  work,  and  their  exemplary 
family  life,  but  was  never  completely  overcome. 
Yet  they  had  the  art  of  conciliating  the  great,  and 
of  gaining  powerful  patrons.  Several  of  the  Syrian 
and  Egyptian  kings  were  their  warm  friends. 
Amongst  their  friends  must  also  be  included  Julius 
Ca'sar,  who  with  the  prescience  of  genius  saw  in 
them  the  true  connecting  link  between  the  East 
and  West,  and  would  not  have  relished  their  being 
made  the  butt  of  Roman  wits.  Their  mourning 
for  his  death  ('  noctibus  continuis  bustum  frequent- 
arunt,'  Suet.  C.  Itdius  Ccesar,  84)  reminds  us  of  the 
mourning  of  the  Jews  in  London  for  Edward  VII. 

The  Jews  could  not  carry  on  their  sacrificial 
worship  in  foreign  lands — we  may  let  pass  the 
schismatic  attempt  to  do  so  at  Leontopolis  in 
Egypt — but  they  kept  in  full  communion  with 
Jerusalem  by  making  pilgrimages  to  the  great 
feasts,  and  by  sending  the  yearly  poll-tax  of  half  a 
shekel  for  the  upkeep  of  the  Temple  (cf.  Mt  17'-'*). 
'  The  Law  and  the  Prophets  and  the  Psalms '  went 

"  •  The  secret  which  niahce  had  divined  within  the  Saviour's 
lifetime'  (Gwatkin,  Earlp  Church  Hist.  i.  18). 


DISPERSION 


DISPERSION 


305 


I 


with  them  everywhere,  bat '  in  the  Greek  Diaspora 
.  .  .  strict  canonicity  was  accorded  only  to  the  , 
Torah'  (ERE  iL   580^).     The    obser\ance  which  j 
attracted  most  notice  from  their  Gentile  neighbours  ! 
was  that  of  the  Sabbath  rest.     On  the  day  of  rest 
all   classes  of   the   Diaspora  were  '  gathered  into 
one,'  and  felt  that  they  were  indeed  '  the  people  of 
the  Gotl  of  Abraham.' 

That  Julius  Caesar  had  regarded  them  as  his 
friends  was  not  forgotten  by  those  who  came  after 
him.  It  was  a  precedent  tnat  proved  of  immense 
advantage  to  the  Jews  settled  in  Rome.  The  free-  i 
dom  he  granted  them  in  the  exercise  of  their  re-  , 
ligious  customs  was  endorsed  by  hie  grand-nephew 
Augustus  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  10,  xvi.  6),  and,  after 
weathering  some  dangerous  storms,  became  the 
settled  policy  of  the  Empire.  In  Roman  law, 
Jewish  societies  were  collegia  licita,  privileged 
clubs  or  gilds.  Meetings  in  their  synagogues, 
or  Tpoo-ei-xai,  or  ca^^areia  (op.  cit.  xvi.  6.  2)  were 
not  hamfiered  with  any  troublesome  restrictions. 
They  could  settle  matters  pertaining  to  their  law 
without  going  to  the  Roman  tribunal  (cf.  Ac  18'''-  ^'), 
and  were  apparently  permitted  to  inflict  punish- 
ment for  what  they  looked  upon  as  scmsm  or 
apostasy  (Ac  26^',  2  Co  11**).  They  had  a  coinage 
ot  their  own  for  sacred  purposes  (HDB  v.  57').  In 
the  region  beyond  the  Tiber,  '  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  the  wharls  where  the  barges  from  Ostia  were 
accustomed  to  unlade'  (F.  W.  Farrar,  Life  and  Work 
of  .Sf.  Paul,  1  vol.,  1897,  p.  585),  many  of  them 
found  employment,  or  drove  a  brisk  trade.  The 
only  occasion  on  which  they  were  seriously  tlireat- 
enea  ^^•itll  the  loss  of  their  privileges  occurred 
under  Claudius,  who,  in  the  words  of  the  historian, 
'  ludaeos  irapulsore  Chresto  assidue  tumultuantes 
Roma  expnlit '  (Suet.  Claud.  25).  The  meaning  of 
these  words  is  uncertain  {HDB  iv.  307',  v.  98» ; 
EBi  i.  757  ;  JE  iv.  563 ;  Gwatkin,  Early  Church 
Hist.  i.  40  ;  Zahn,  Introd.  to  NT,  i.  433),  but  if  they 
refer  to  tumults  in  the  Jewish  quarter  caused  by 
the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  we  may  conjecture 
that  Aquila,  a  Jew  of  the  Dispersion,  had  been 
one  of  its  preachers  (Ac  18-).  The  edict  of  Claud- 
ius was  probably  found  unworkable  (Ramsay,  St. 
Paul,  254).  This  Emperor  seems  to  have  been  as 
favourable  to  the  Jews  as  his  predecessors  (Jos. 
Ant.  xix.  5.  2,  3). 

Long  before  they  had  acquired  a  political  status 
in  Rome,  a  great  inward  change  had  been  working 
among  the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion.  As  may  be  in- 
ferred from  the  fact  already  mentioned,  that  strict 
canonicity  was  accorded  only  to  the  Torah,  they 
carried  abroad  with  them  an  intensely  legal  con- 
ception of  their  religion.  It  was  conceived  as 
consisting  simply  in  the  observance  of  a  definite 
code  of  laws  as  to  worship  and  life,  given  bj'  (Jod 
on  Mount  Sinai.  So  long  as  this  conception  pre- 
dominated, their  relations  with  their  non-Jewish 
neighbours  were  little  more  than  ordinary  business 
relations.  But  as  soon  as  the  stimulus  exerted  by 
the  higher  culture  of  the  Greeks  was  felt,  an  in- 
ward change  began  to  work.  Habitual  intercourse 
with  a  people  so  advanced  in  civilization  could  not 
fail  to  have  its  effect.  They  were  captivated  by 
the  freedom  and  range  of  Greek  thought.  They 
recognized  in  their  philosophical  and  ethical  ideas 
a  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Wisdom.  There 
was  thus  evolved  a  tendency  to  tone  down  what 
was  repellent  in  Judaism  in  order  to  bring  their 
faith  into  harmony  with  the  Greek  mind.  Illustra- 
tions of  this  tendencj'  are  found  in  the  Prophetic 
and  Wisdom  literature,  in  the  modification  of 
OT  anthropomorphism  by  the  LXX,  in  the  serious 
attempt  of  Philo  to  find  the  philosophy  of  Plato 
and  the  Stoics  in  the  nanatives  of  Genesis  by  the 
method  of  allegorical  interpretation  (HDB  v.'l99). 
The  LXX  itself  was  the  outcome  of  the  keen  de- 

VOL.  I. — 20 


sire  to  make  their  religion  understood,  as  well  as 
to  guard  and  preserve  it  from  influences  hostile 
to  it.  The  favourable  reception  which  it  met  with 
brought  to  the  front  an  aspect  of  their  religion 
yet  scarcely  apprehended,  viz.  that  it  was  a  re- 
ligion of  hope  for  mankind.  The  words  of  the 
prophets  concerning  the  future  of  the  human  race 
began  to  be  read  with  a  more  open  mind.  There 
it  was  found  that  Israel  was  adled  to  be  the  mis- 
sionary to  the  nations.  Many  in  the  Dispersion 
realizea  that  they  were  in  a  specially  favoured 
position  for  undertaking  this  missionary ,  duty. 
In  spreading  the  knowledge  of  their  faith,  they 
laid  stress,  not  upon  ritual  details,  but  upon  the 
great  central  principles  of  the  unity  of  God,  and 
the  cleansing  and  saving  power  of  His  word.  As 
they  went  on  communicating  those  spiritual  prin- 
ciples to  others,  they  became  more  spiritual  them- 
selves, and  also  more  expectant  of  '  the  good  things 
to  come.'  A  large  number  of  high-minded  Greeks 
were  convinced  of  the  truth  of  their  doctrine  of 
God.  Those  whom  they  won  over,  the  <re^iJLtroi 
or  (po^ovfiepoi.  t6v  dedf  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  were  al- 
ready far  on  their  way  to  the  more  complete  satis- 
faction of  their  spintuai  wants  that  was  to  be 
found  in  Christianity. 

From  the  founding  of  Alexandria  and  Antioch, 
the  Jews  were  rol^Toi  (civex),  but  in  the  older 
Greek  cities,  except  those  of  which  the  constitu- 
tions were  altered  by  Alexander  or  his  successors 
(HDB  V.  104  f. ;  Expositor,  7th  ser.,  ii.  37  f.),  they 
were  simply /i^oocoi  (incolce,  'residents').  The  Jews 
of  Rome  whom  Cicero  mentions  as  possessing  the 
Roman  civitas  (pro  Flacco,  28)  probably  belonged 
to  the  class  of  libertini  or  enfranchised  slaves  (cf. 
Ac  6*).  Jews  of  Ephesus,  Sardis,  Delos,  etc.,  had 
the  R^man  civitas,  as  appears  from  the  edicts  pre- 
served by  Josephus  {Ant.  xiv.  10).  St.  Paul's  citi- 
zenship (y.w.)  of  the  Hellenistic  city  of  Tarsus  (Ac 
21*)  is  to  be  distinguished  from  his  Roman  citizen- 
ship (Ac  22^ ;  cf.  16^^).  The  latter  right  may  have 
been  conferred  by  some  Roman  potentate  on  cer- 
tain important  Tarsian  families  (Ramsay,  Ex- 
positor, 7th  ser.,  ii.  144,  152  ;  cf.  Schiirer,  HDB  v. 
105  f.).  It  was  not  the  least  important  of  St. 
Paul's  providential  equipments  for  the  Apostle- 
ship,  and  was  recognized  as  entitling  him  to  re- 
spect from  Roman  officials.  The  laws  of  the  Em- 
Eire  had  a  high  moral  value  for  the  Apostle,  and 
e  repaid  what  he  owed  to  them  by  fervent  inter- 
cessions for  those  who  administered  them  (Ro  13*-^, 
1  Ti  2'-  -). 

In  St.  Paul  himself — his  training,  his  conversion, 
his  missionary  calling,  his  Christian  achievement 
— we  can  study,  as  in  a  single  picture,  the  service 
rendered  by  the  Dispersion  to  the  free  course  of 
the  gospel.  Himself  a  Jew  of  the  Dispersion, 
educated  in  a  strict  Rabbinical  school,  he  bad 
the  two-fold  advantage  of  becoming  proficient  in 
Judaism,  the  religion  of  his  fathers  (Gal  1"),  and 
of  growing  up  in  his  CUician  home  under  the  pene- 
trating influence  of  Greek  civilization.  The  ques- 
tion of  Ro  3*,  'Is  God  the  God  of  the  Jews  only  ? 
Is  he  not  the  God  of  the  Gentiles  also  ? '  was 
one  that  he  must  have  often  asked  himself  in  his 
Pharisaic  days  ;  and  when  the  sight  and  the  call 
of  Jesus  had  given  him  the  decisive  answer,  '  Yea, 
of  the  Gentiles  also,'  this  became  the  moving  force 
of  his  strenuous  life  (cf.  Job.  Weiss,  Paul  and 
Jesus,  p.  67).  He  had  been  a  traveller  from  his 
youth,  for  the  joumej'  from  Tarsus  to  Jerusalem 
was  not  a  short  one  ;  but  now  he  took  a  wider  cir- 
cuit (Ro  15^*),  and  would  fain  have  embraced  the 
whole  world  in  his  travels  (v.^),  so  anxious  vyas 
he  to  proclaim  what  he  believed  to  be  the  religion 
of  redemption  for  all  mankind.  The  highest  ser- 
vice that  the  Dispersion  has  up  till  now  rendered 
to  the  world  is  its  becoming  tne  starting-point  of 


306 


DISPERSION 


DIVINATION 


the  aggressive  Christian  movement  of  St.  Paul  and 
his  felTovv-apostles ;  what  further  service  it  may 
be  designed  to  render,  in  the  form  in  which  it  now 
exists,  IS  yet  hidden  in  the  counsels  of  the  Eternal. 

It  may  cause  some  surprise  that  St.  Paul  never 
visited  Alexandria,  where  the  freest  development 
of  pre-Christian  J  udaism  took  place.  This  develop- 
ment, however,  was  in  many  respects  alien  to  St. 
Paul's  mind.  Alexandrian  Judaism  was  '  a  cul- 
tured Unitarianism  with  strong  ethical  convic- 
tions. The  old  dream  of  a  theocracy  was  forgotten, 
and  Messianism  aroused  no  interest'  (Inge,  EBE 
i.  309 ;  cf.  Wernle,  Beginnings  of  Christianity,  i. 
177).  This  brief  account  must  be  qualified,  how- 
ever, by  the  statement  in  Acts  (IS'*),  that  it  was 
a  gifted  Alexandrian  Jew,  Apollos,  who,  after 
'  the  way  of  God  had  been  expounded  to  him  more 
carefully,'  demonstrated  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus 
publicly,  before  the  Jews  in  Corinth,  with  energy 
and  success  (cf.  Harnack,  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  p. 
121).  The  illustrious  Church  of  Alexandria  must 
have  been  founded,  like  other  churches,  on  '  the 
Rejected  Stone.' 

Many  traits  of  the  Diaspora  mentioned  above 
are  illustrated  by  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles.  The 
long  list  of  foreign  Jews  present  at  Pentecost 
.shows  how  widely  scattered  their  settlements  were. 
Was  it  by  means  of  some  of  these  (Ac  2^**),  return- 
ing to  their  native  synagogue  '  in  the  power  of  the 
Spirit,'  that  the  faith  of  Christ  first  reached  the 
city  of  Rome?  At  Antioch,  some  Cyprian  and 
Cyrenaean  Christians  were  the  first  to  take  the 
bold  step  of  '  speaking  unto  the  Gentiles  also, 
preaching  Jesus  as  the  Lord'  (Ac  11-°,  'where  the 
sense  of  the  passage  seems  to  require  "EWijvas' 
[Gwatkin,  Early  Church  Hist.  i.  56n.]).  The 
names  of  Barnaoas  of  Cyprus,  Philip  of  Csesarea, 
Lucius  of  Cyrene,  Timothy  of  Lystra,  Jason  of 
Thessalonica,  Sopater  of  Bercea,  Crispus  of  Corinth, 
Aquila  of  Pontus,  illustrate  how  largely  the 
Church's  assets  consisted  of  Jews  settled  abroad. 
The  tent-making  of  Aquila,  in  which  St.  Paul 
joined  him,  gives  a  glimpse  into  the  industrial  life 
of  the  Diaspora.  Amongst  his  '  kinsmen '  in  Asia 
and  Europe  the  Apostle  found  some  of  his  most 
efficient  coadjutors ;  from  them  too,  and  not  only 
from  the  unbelieving  portion  of  them,  there  came 
some  of  his  most  fanatical  opponents. 

In  Ja  1^  St.  James  may  be  addressing  the  Chris- 
tian Jews  of  the  Eastern  Dispersion,  and  in  1  P  P 
St.  Peter  those  of  the  Western  (J.  B.  Mayor,  Ep. 
of  James^,  1910,  p.  30) ;  but  in  1  P  1^  it  is  much 
more  probable  that  the  whole  body  of  Christians 
living  at  the  time  are  addressed  as  being  now, 
spiritually,  '  the  Israel  of  God '  (Gal  6'* ;  cf.  Hort, 
First  Epistle  of  Peter,  I.  l-II.  17,  1898,  p.  7). 

There  are  few  data  to  satisfy  our  curiosity  about 
what  happened  to  the  Jewish  Diaspora  from  a.d. 
70  to  100.  The  rebellion  against  the  Roman 
authority  seems  to  have  met  with  no  sympathy  on 
the  part  of  the  Jews  of  Rome.  They  had  no  snare 
in  the  insurrections  under  Vespasian,  Trajan,  or 
Hadrian,  and  were  left  unmolested  (JE  iv.  563).* 
We  even  hear  that  'after  a.d.  70  till  perhaps  100, 
Judaism  made  many  converts  especially  in  Rome ' 
(Parting  of  the  Roads,  pp.  286,  305).  Those  Jews 
who  had  had  their  home  in  Jerusalem  were  com- 
pelled after  A.D.  70  to  live  after  the  manner  of 
their  brethren  of  the  Diaspora  [EBi  ii.  2286).  The 
story  of  the  re-organization  of  Judaism  on  a  non- 
sacerdotal  basis  by  Jochanan  ben  Zakkai,  the 
founder  of  the  School  of  Jamnia  near  Joppa,  and 
his  successors,  has  recently  been  re-tola  by  E. 
Levine  in  a  manner  that  commands  attention  and 
respect  (Parting  of  the  Boads,  299  f.).     But  to 

'  '  Even  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  scarcely  endangered  the 
toleration  of  the  Jews  at  Rome '  (Gwatkin,  Early  Church  Uiit, 
i.  40). 


pursue  this  interesting  line  of  study  would  take 
us  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Apostolic  Age. 

LiTBEATURE. — H.  M.  Gwatkin,  Early  Church  Uintory  to  A.D. 
SIS,  1909,  i.  1-72 ;  A.  Harnack,  The  Mintion  arid  Expansion  of 
Christianity  in  the  First  Three  Centuries^,  1908,  i.  1  ff.,  Act*  of 
the  Apostles,  1909,  p.  121 ;  The  Parting  of  the  Roads,  1912, 
Essay  iv.  :  '  Judaism  in  the  Days  of  the  Christ '  (Oesterley), 
Essay  ix.  :  'The  Breach  between  Judaism  and  Christianitv ' 
(Levine) ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Expositor,  6th  ser.,  v.  [1902) :  '  The 
Jews  in  the  Oricco- Asiatic  Cities,"  7th  ser.,  ii.  [1906] :  'Tarsus,* 
§§  xi.-xvii. ;  H.  Schultz,  OT  Theology,  1892,  i.  423  ;  J.  Weiss, 
Paul  and  Jesus,  1909,  pp.  69,  67 ;  P.  Wernle,  Beginnings  of 
Christianity,  1903-04,  i.  177 ;  Th.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  NT,  1909,  i. 
433,  ii.  184  ;  artt.  on  '  Dispersion '  or  '  Diasjwra  '  in  EBi  i.  1106 
(Guthe),  DCQ  i.  465  (M'Neile),  JE\v.  559  (Reinach),  HDB  v.  91 
(Schiirer),  Smith's  DB  i.  787  (Westcott).  See  also  HDB  ii. 
608b  (Sanday),  iv.  307  (Patrick  and  Relton),  v.  67»  (Buhl),  v. 
199  (Drummond);  EBi  u.  2286  (Guthe),  ERE  1.  309  (Inge),  iL 
580>>  (von  Dobschiiti).  JaME.S  DONALD. 

DIVINATION.— 1.  Definition.— Primitive  man, 
under  the  influence  of  animatism  and  animbm, 
came  to  think  of  himself  as  surrounded  by  in- 
numerable spirits.  These  in  course  of  time  became 
difi'erentiated  into  gods,  goddesses,  demons,  ghosts, 
etc.  These  beings  could  influence,  enter  into,  and 
animate  not  only  each  other,  but  human  beings, 
beasts,  and  things.  Man  gradually  realized  that 
it  was  his  duty  to  discover  and  cultivate  relations, 
friendly  or  defensive,  with  these — a  duty  inten.si- 
fied  by  his  covetousness  of  good  and  his  aversion 
to  calamities  or  privations.  Some  of  the  methods 
he  employed  for  doing  this  became  regulated  and 
systematized  into  forms  of  worship,  i.e.  approved 
methods  of  approaching  and  propitiating  tlie 
spirits.  As  these  forms  became  more  and  more 
universally  recognized,  they  acquired  a  sacred 
character,  which  difi'erentiated  them  from,  and 
placed  them  on  a  higher  level  than,  other  cere- 
monies. Still  the  latter  continued  to  be  practised, 
because  the  forms  of  worship  did  not  meet  all 
men's  necessities.  Unusual  circumstances  occurred 
through  which,  or  on  account  of  which,  the  di- 
vinities communicated  with  men,  or  by  reason  of 
which  men  felt  the  need  of  communicating  with 
those  beings  in  whose  hands  lay  the  destinies  of 
their  lives.  These  survivals  of  the  lower  culture, 
from  which  the  regular  forms  of  worship  had 
shaken  themselves  free,  may  be  grouped  under 
the  name  '  Divination.' 

The  Latin  name  for  a  divine  being  was  deus. 
Diviis  indicates  the  quality  possessed  by  a  thing 
which  makes  it  'godlike  ;  divinus  rather  the 
qualities  which  make  a  being  '  divine ' ;  divinitas 
means  '  the  divine  nature ' ;  divinare,  '  to  see  like  a 
god ' ;  and  divinatio,  '  the  power  of  seeing  like  a 
god.'  This  came  to  be  confined,  in  ordinary  use,  to 
the  power  of  foreseeing.  But  the  word  has  a  much 
wider  meaning.  To  Chrysippus  and  tlie  Stoics, 
'  divination '  was  the  means  of  communication 
between  the  gods  and  men.  Cicero  (de  Div.  i.  38) 
argues  that,  if  there  are  gods,  there  must  be  men 
who  have  the  power  of  communicating  with  them. 
In  English  'divination'  has  the  wider  meaning 
akin  to  the  original  significance.  Divination  tlien 
rests  on  the  idea  that,  apart  from  forms  of  wor- 
ship, a  divinity  and  a  human  being  can,  when 
necessary,  come  into  living  touch  witn  eacli  other, 
the  divinity  acting  on  or  through  the  man,  thus 
revealing  his  mind  to  him  ;  or  the  man  by  ap- 
proved methods  so  revealing  his  mind  to  the 
divinity  that  the  latter  acts  on  or  through  him. 

2.  Divination  and  magic. — Just  as  worship,  by 
becoming'  systematized,  left  behind  it  the  forms  of 
communication  called  'divination,'  so  divination, 
as  it  became  more  regulated  and  elaborated  in  the 
hands  of  professional  diviners,  left  behind  it 
cruder  and  lower  forms  of  communication  which 
may  all  be  included  under  the  term   'magic.'* 

•  A.  C.  Haddon,  Magic  and  Fetishism,  1906 ;  F.  B.  Jevons, 
Comparative  Religion,  1913. 


DIVI^^ATION 


DIVINATION 


307 


The  distinction  between  divination  and  magic  may 
be  briefly  and  not  inaccurately  stated  thus :  the 
diviner  is  in  toucli  with  the  divinities  because  he 
is  their  servant ;  the  magician,  because,  for  the 
time  being,  he  is  their  master.  Thus,  each  of 
these  forms  of  communication,  though  existing 
alongside  of  each  other  and  accepted  by  the  same 
people,  has  its  own  distinctive  features. 

3.  Development. — If  we  think  of  the  above  three 
methods  of  communication  between  the  divinities 
and  men  as  existing,  in  embryo,  in  the  earliest 
ages,  we  can  realize  how  they  were  each  developed 
by  such  great  races  as  the  Semites  and  the  Aryans, 
and  how  the  common  inheritance  of  each  of  these 
was  developed  along  distinctive  lines  by  the 
different  nations  springing  from  them.  Thus,  to 
confine  our  attention  to  divination,  we  have  that 
of  the  Semites,  *  developing  into  that  of  the  Meso- 
potamians,t  Persians,*  Jews,§  and  Arabians  ;1|  and 
that  of  the  Aryans,"i^  developing  into  that  of  the 
Vedas,**  Greeks,++  Romans,ti  Celts,§§  Teutons,  ;• 
and  Lithuanians;^^  while  that  of  the  Egyptians 
strongly  influenced  and  was  influenced  by  many  of 
these.*** 

The  Pax  Romana  and  the  toleration  of  the 
Roman  Government  permitted  the  cults  of  in- 
numerable divinities  and  all  these  forms  of  divina- 
tion to  spread  throughout  the  Empire  ;  and  Jews, 
Christians,  worshippers  of  all  kinds  of  Eastern  and 
Egyptian  deities,  diviners,  '  magicians,  astrologers, 
ancJ  wizards  jostled  each  other  in  a  theological  con- 
fusion to  which  no  parallel  can  be  found '  (K.  Lake, 
Tlie  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1911,  p.  47). 

i.  Divination  in  the  Apostolic  Age. — It  is  difficult, 
but  necessary,  to  realize  this  amazing  profusion  of 
divinities  as  a  distinct  feature  of  the  Apostolic  Age. 
Besides  mentioning  Jahweh,  the  God  of  the  Hebrews, 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  worshipped  by 
the  Christians,  and  some  of  the  innumerable  ethnic 
deities,  the  literature  of  the  Apostolic  Age  contains 
references  to  angels,  archangels,  living  creatures, 
Satan,  the  Devil,  the  Wicked  One,  the  Antichrist, 
demons,  unclean  and  evil  powers,  dominions,  princi- 
palities, authorities,  thrones,  and  glories. 

It  is  not  easy  to  decide  how  far  belief  in  these 
aflected  the  various  classes.  But  practically  this 
is  true :  each  man  had  his  favourite  divinity  to 
which  all  Gentiles  added  a  select  group  of  deities 
whom  they  reverenced.  Rationalists  like  the  Sad- 
ducees  denied  the  existence  of  d.',-/e\oi  and  -rvevfuiTa 
(Ac  23*) ;  many  of  the  more  educated  viewed  the 
existence  of  the  minor  supernatural  beings  with 

*  W.  Robertson  Smith,  SS^,  1894 ;  Th.  Xoldeke,  Sketehes/rvm 
Eostem  Hittory,  Eng.  tr.,  1S92  ;  ERE  L  390 ;  J.  E.  Carpenter, 
Comparatici  Religion,  1913 ;  BDB  v.  S3ff.  and  the  Literature 
there  mentioned. 

t  J.  E.  Carpenter,  op.  cit. ;  A.  H.  Sayce,  RsHgion  of  the 
Ancient  Babylonian*,  lo«7  ;  G.  Maspero,  Dawn  of  OvciliuUiot^, 
1896 :  Stephen  Langdon,  '  Private  Penance,'  in  Trantaetiont  of 
the  Third  International  Congrest/or  the  History  af  ReUgiont, 
1906,  p.  319  ;  L.  W.  King,  Bab.  Magic  and  Sorcery,  1806,  Bab. 
Religwn  and  Mjfthologt,  1889;  L.  B.  Funell,  Greece  and 
Babylon,  1911 ;  ERE  L  316,  iv.  783,  and  literature  there 
mentioned ;  R.  C.  Thompson,  The  Report  of  the  Magicians  and 
Aitrologen  of  Sineteh  and  Babylon,  1900,  also  The  DeviU  and 
Evil  Spirits  of  Babylonia,  1903-01. 

:  ERE  iv.  818 ;  J.  H.  Moulton,  Early  Religiout  Poetry  of 
Persia,  1911. 

§  ERE  It.  806 ;  S.  A.  Cook,  The  Religion  ofAndent  Palestine, 
1908 ;  T.  W.  DaTies,  Magic,  Diuination,  and  Demonology  among 
the  Hebreics  and  their  Neighbours,  1898 ;  BDB  L  611  ff. 

!  ERE  i.  659. 

•7  R.  V.  Ihering,  TheErx>lutumoftheAryan,tT.  Drucker,  1897  ; 
I.  Taylor,  The  Origin  of  the  Aryans,  1889 ;  ERE  L  11  and  the 
Literature  there  mentioned. 

*♦  lb.  iv.  8-27. 

ft  W.  R.  Halliday,  Greek  JMvination,  1913;  ERE  iv.  796,  vL 
401 ;  Gilbert  Murray,  Four  Stages  of  Greek  Religion,  1912. 

U  \V.  Warde  Fowler,  ITie  Religious  Experience  of  the  Roman 
People,  1911 ;  ERE  iv.  820. 

ii  lb.  in.  2TT,  iv.  787.  .  !  lb.  iv.  827. 

15  lb.  iv.  814. 

***  /6.  vL  374  ;  F.  Cumont,  Tfie  Oriental  Religions  in  Roman 
Paganism,  Eng.  tr.,  1911,  p.  73 ff. 


more  or  le^  scepticism ;  but  the  mass  of  people  lived 
in  the  belief  and  the  fear  of  these  divine  beings. 
In  that  age  men  felt  themselves  surrounded  by  a 
great  cloud  of  witnesses  (He  12*),  living  in  a  world 
where  the  gods  appeared  (Ac  14"  28*),  where  Jesus 
appeared  to  St.  Paul  (9'^-  ^  28")  and  to  Stephen 
(7**),  and  His  Spirit  prohibited  action  (16"),  where 
an  itinerant  preacher  was  received  as  a  messenger  of 
God,  or  even  as  Christ  Jesus  re-incarnated  (Gal 4") ; 
where  the  Holy  Spirit  was  a  distinct  living  person- 
ality, where  the  assertion  that  a  man  was  the  Son  of 
God  made  a  Roman  governor  tremble  (Jn  19*),  and 
the  patience  of  His  death  caused  a  Roman  centurion 
to  exclaim:  'This  was  a  Son  of  God'  (Mt  27**). 
In  such  a  world  the  Satan  fashioned  himself  into 
an  iyyeXoi  tporrds  (2  Co  11"),  dcUftoves  entered  into 
men,  and  were  cast  out  by  men  (Lk  11",  Mk  9"), 
converts  to  the  religion  of  Jesus  who  had  believwi 
and  were  baptized  proposed  to  purchase  the  ability 
to  confer  the  Holy  Spirit  (Ac  8"),  the  power  of  the 
evil  eye  was  exercised  (Mk  7"),  and  dpxal  and  divd- 
M€is,  'principalities'  and  'powers'  (Ro  8*^),  'mus- 
ter«i  their  unseen  array.'  2s or  must  we  think  that 
the  Christians  stood  far  removed  from  the  common 
beliefs  of  the  age.  This  is  clear  from  many  things. 
Think  of  their  belief  in  the  Satan,  the  antagonist 
who  stood  over  against  God.  He  was  conceived  as 
a  huge  dragon,  or  old  serpent  (Rev  12*  13"  [as 
amended  by  Charles  in  his  Studies  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse, 1913,  p.  100]  20*),  and  as  such  was  identified 
with  Si&^oKoi.  He  was  regarded  as  having  his 
abode  in  the  skies,  in  which  he  and  his  irf^eKoi  had 
been  defeated  by  an  dpx<i77«^os  Michael  and  his 
iyyeXoi,  and  thro^vn  down  on  the  earth  (12^"*)  to  be 
flung  into  the  abyss  for  a  thousand  years  (20*- '). 
He  had  his  subordinate  spirits.  Special  mention 
is  made  of  '  the  Lawless  One '  [according  to  K  B] 
(2  Th  2*),  and  the  dyyeXot  who  fought  for  him 
(Rev  12^-9),  and  afflicted  men  s  bodies  (2  Co  12^), 
and  even  destroyed  them  (1  Co  5').  He  himself 
could  masquerade  as  i.y/t\oz  (punbs  (2  Co  11"),  and 
could  equip  his  servants  with  full  powers,  the 
miracles  and  portents  of  falsehood,  and  the  full 
deceitfulness  of  evil  (2  Th  •!!?•  ").  The  Satan  was 
the  adversary  of  men  ;  his  chief  aim  was  to  seduce 
to  wrong  (Rev  20*-  *•  ^",  Eph  2^)  by  tempting  to  such 
sins  as  lying,  cheating  (Ac  5'),  incontinence  (1  Co  7', 
1  Ti  5^),  gross  sexual  excess,  '  his  deep  mysteries ' 
(Rev  2^,  Eph  2*).  He  gains  advantages  by  clever 
manoeu%Tes  (2  Co  2^"').  He  is  the  accuser  of  the 
members  of  the  Christian  brotherhood  (Rev  12^"). 
He  hinders  good  endeavours  (1  Th  2^),  but  the 
God  of  peace  crushes  him  under  His  people's  feet 
(Ro  16^).  Jews  hostile  to  the  religion  of  Jesus  are 
thought  of  by  the  Christians  as  his  servants  who 
form  his  synagogue  (Rev  2*  3*),  and  in  places  noted 
for  wickedness  he  dwells  in  power  as  a  king  on  his 
throne  (2^').  By  a  deliberate  act  of  judgment  an 
oflender  could  be  consigned  to  the  Satan's  power 
for  the  destruction  of  his  body  (1  Co  5',  1  Ti  l*"). 

The  natural  and  inevitable  outcome  of  this 
multiplicity  of  divinities  was  the  universal  practice 
of  divination.  The  testimony  of  history  to  this 
fact  is  fully  confirmed  by  the  discovery  of  con- 
temporary texts,  among  which  are  'innumerable 
.  .  .  horoscopes,  amulets,  cursing  tablets,  and 
magical  books.  .  .  .  The  whole  ancient  world  is 
full  of  miracles'  (Deissmann,  Light  from  the 
Ancient  East^,  1911,  pp.  284,  393).  Divination 
and  magic  were  prevalent  not  merely  among  sects 
like  the  Essenes,  but  among  the  Jews  generally 
(Schiirer,  HJP  n.  iii.  [1886]  p.  151  fl'.,  n.  ii.  [1885] 
p.  204).  The  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
show  the  relation  of  the  Christians  to  these  arts. 
In  the  Didache  among  other  commandments  are 
these,  '  thou  shalt  not  practise  magic,  thou  shalt 
not  use  enchantments,'  oi>  fw.yfvffeit,  ov  ipap/juuceiaets 
(ii.),   and   this  entreaty,    'become  not   an  omen- 


308 


DIVINATION 


DOCTOR 


watcher,  nor  one  who  uses  charms,  nor  an  astro- 
loger, nor  one  who  purifies,'  i.e.  one  who  averts 
disease  or  removes  sin  by  sacrifices,  fiv  yl^fov  olwvo- 
<TK6iros  .  .  .  fJLrjBi  ivaoi56s,  p^TjS^  fiaO-rj/xaTiKdi,  firjdi 
irfpiKadalpuv  (iii.).  Hernias  (Mand.  xi.  4)  cautions 
Cliristians  not  to  consult  soothsayers  (navrevovr ai). 
The  Didache  describes  the  Way  of  Death  as  full, 
among  other  things,  of  '  magical  arts  and  potions,' 
tiayelai,  fpapfWKLai,  (v,),  while  in  the  Way  of  Dark- 
ness, among  other  things  that  destroy  the  soul,  are 
'  potions  and  magical  arts,'  tpap/uiKeia,  fiayeia  (Ep. 
Barn.  xx. ).  Ignatius  speaks  of  the  birtii  of  Jesus 
as  destroying  or  making  ridiculous  every  kind  of 
magic,  jrao-a  juuiyeia  {Eph.  xix.),  and  exiiorts  his 
readers  '  to  flee  evil  arts,'  rds  KaKorexvi-a^  fpfOye,  but 
all  tlie  more  to  discourse  in  public  regarding  them 
{Ep.  to  Polycarp,  v.).  In  Ps. -Ignatius,  Ep.  to  the 
Antiochians,  xi.,  'the  practice  of  magic,' 707;reias, 
is  a  vice  forbidden  even  to  the  Gentiles.  Aristides 
(Apol.  xi. )  in  indicating  tlie  things  which  Christians 
should  not  do,  omits  all  reference  to  divination  or 
magic,  and  a  similar  omission  is  noticeable  in  Ep. 
Barn.  xix.  and  in  1  Clement,  xxx.  xxxv.  Hero 
is  warned  (Ps. -Ignatius,  Ep.  to  Hero,  ii.)  to  dis- 
trust any  one  teaching  beyond  what  is  commanded, 
even  '  though  he  work  miracles,'  k&v  ar}ij,e1a  irof^. 
In  the  description  which  Aristides  declares  the 
Greeks  give  of  their  gods,  he  writes  that  they  say 
some  of  them  were  '  sorcerers,'  (papixaKovs  {Apol. 
viii.),  'practising  sorcery,'  tpap/MKelas  (xiii.),  and  he 
calls  Hermes  'a  magician,'  fidyov  (x.).  But  it  is 
noticeable  that  in  Ps. -Ignatius,  Ep.  to  the  Anti- 
ochians, xii.,  among  the  Church  officials  is  'the 
exorcist,'  ewopKiaTi^s,  and  in  the  Ep.  to  the  Philip- 
pians,  v.,  Christ  is  by  way  of  honour  called  'this 
magician,'  ixdyo^  oZros,  while  in  Ephesians,  xx.,  the 
sacramental  bread  is  called  '  the  medicine  of  im- 
mortality,' (pdpfiaKov  ddava<Tias.  Pagan  testimony 
is  to  the  same  effect.  The  Emperor  Hadrian  (a.d. 
117-138),  writing  to  the  Consul  Servianus  on  the 
state  of  Egypt,  says :  '  There  is  no  ruler  of  a 
synagogue  of  Jews,  no  Samaritan,  no  Presbyter  of 
the  Christians  who  is  not  an  astrologer,  a  sooth- 
sayer, a  quack  [mathematicus,  harnspax,  aliptesl ' 
{Script.  Hist.  August., Ill 'i,  'Vopisci  Saturninus,'  8). 

These  supernatural  beings  communicated  with 
men  by  means  of  &YYe\oi  { '  angels '  or  '  messengers ') 
or  prophets,  by  possession,  by  means  of  the  hand, 
tongues,  dreams,  visions,  trances,  voices,  sounds. 

The  human  beings  in  touch  with  these  super- 
natural beings  were  variously  named  exorcists, 
soothsayers,  sorcerers,  enchanters  ;  and,  lower  still, 
magicians,  witches,  and  wizards.  They  had  various 
methods  of  bringing  the  power  of  the  divinities  to 
act  on  men,  all  of  which  may  be  classed  into  two 
groups  :  {a)  regular :  blessing,  cursing,  pronoun- 
cing anathema,  invoking  the  Name,  embracing, 
laying  on  of  hands,  shadowing,  signs  and  wonders, 
as  e.g.  healing,  or  smiting  with  disease  such  as 
blindness ;  (6)  exceptional :  the  lot,  the  vow,  the 
oath,  and  committing  to  Satan. 

As  religion  has  become  spiritualized,  divination 
has  more  and  more  lost  its  hold  on  the  minds  of 
men.  The  ultimate  end  will  be  reached  when 
worship  shall  be  the  approach  to  the  One  Father 
by  a  man,  who,  because  he  is  taught  and  led  by 
the  indwelling  Spirit  of  Jesus,  needs  no  divination, 
and  who,  because  he  can  protter  his  remiests  to  the 
Father  in  prayer,  scorns  all  magic.  But  the  end 
is  not  yet. 

LmiRATURE. — ^There  is  no  book  dealin^r  with  Divination  in  the 
Apostolic  Age.  Reference  to  its  various  phases  will  he  found 
in  modern  Commentaries  and  in  works  on  Comparative  Religion, 
and  Anthropology,  as  those  of  E.  B.  Tylor,  A.  E.  Crawley, 
J.  G.  Frazer,  F.  B.  Jevons,  J.  H.  Leuba,  and  R.  R.  Marett. 
In  addition  to  these  and  the  authorities  cited  throughout  the 
art.,  reference  may  be  made  to  F.  W.  M.  Myers,  on  'Greek 
Oracles,'  in  Essays,  1883,  and  to  the  series  of  articles  in  ERE 

vi.  775 fl.  P.  A.  Gordon  Clark. 


DIVINITY.— See  Chrlst,  Christology. 

DIVISIONS The  work  of  the  Apostle  Paul  was 

much  hindered  by  divisions  in  the  Church.  There 
are  many  passages  in  his  Epistles  which  refer  to 
this,  but  the  subject  cannot  be  better  studied  than 
in  1  Co  1""^.  The  Corinthian  Church,  though 
outwardly  united,  was  divided  in  its  allegiance  to 
different  teachers — '  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos, 
and  I  of  Cephas,  and  I  of  Christ.'  Much  ingenuity 
has  been  expended  in  sketching  the  characteristics 
of  these  four  parties,  but  it  is  not  easy  to  be  certain 
of  them.  Apollos  was  a  Jew  of  Alexandria  (Ac 
18**'^),  a  disciple  of  the  Baptist,  who,  being  more 
fully  instructed  by  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  was  bap- 
tized into  tlie  Christian  Church.  At  Corinth  his 
learning  and  eloquence  made  a  great  impression,  and 
there  might  be  many  who  would  regard  him  as  a 
leader  in  the  faith  ;  but  there  need  not  have  been 
any  serious  division  in  the  Church  on  this  account. 
Far  greater  difficulty  would  be  experienced  be- 
tween those  who  are  generally  known  as  the  Juda- 
izing  party  and  those  who  accepted  the  teaching 
of  the  Apostle. 

The  question  of  Gentile  converts  being  free  from 
the  yoke  of  the  Law  of  Moses  had  been  settled  by 
the  Council  held  at  Jerusalem  (Ac  15^"^),  but  the 
Judaizing  party  had  not  acquiesced  ex  animo  in 
that  decision.  The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  gives 
us  an  insight  into  their  tactics  then,  and  it  is  highly 
probable  that  in  the  'Christ'  party  of  1  Co  1"^- 
we  meet  with  the  same  line  of  action.  In  the 
Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  the  Apostle 
defends  his  authority  and  apostolicity  in  much  the 
same  way  as  he  does  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians (2  Co  10.  11.  12,  Gal  1"  2"^^). 

This  party  would  perhaps  point  to  the  obedience 
of  Christ  to  the  Law  during  His  life,  and  would 
strongly  advocate  the  position  that  Christianity 
was  an  outcome  of  Judaism,  and  that  the  Gentile 
in  accepting  Christ  mu8t|bow  his  head  to  tlie  yoke 
of  the  Law  as  well.  In  1  Cor.  we  see  this  partj-  in 
its  infancy  ;  but  in  2  Cor.  it  has  grown  to  much 
more  dangerous  proportions.  From  the  internal 
evidence  of  the  latter  Epistle  we  may  gather  some- 
thing of  their  claims.  Thej'  were  Hebrews  ;  they 
claimed  to  be  apostles ;  they  preached  another 
gospel  and  another  Jesus  (2  Co  1 1 ).  Their  insistence 
upon  obedience  to  the  ceremonial  Law  brought 
them  into  direct  conflict  with  St.  Paul's  teaching 
on  justification.  They  made  many  grievous  and 
unjust  charges  against  him,  and  sought  in  every 
way  to  discredit  him  and  to  belittle  his  authority. 
The  Epistle  makes  it  clear  that  they  met  with 
considerable  success.  The  Corinthians  were  in- 
fatuated with  their  new  teachers,  and  turned 
against  the  Apostle.  In  some  way  the  news  of 
the  defection  reached  St.  Paul,  and  led  to  his  paying 
a  visit  to  Corinth.  This  visit  is  not  recorded  in 
the  Acts  but  is  alluded  to  in  this  Epistle  (2  Co  13). 
This  was  followed  by  a  stern  letter  which  some 
think  is  preserved  in  2  Co  10-13 ;  and  finallj',  on 
receipt  of  the  good  news  of  their  repentance,  St. 
Paul  wrote  with  thankfulness  tlie  Epistle  which 
we  have  in  2  Co  1-9.  Morley  Stevenson. 

DIVORCE.— See  Marriage. 

DOCTOR.  — 'Doctor'  (Lk  2*«  5",  Ac  5")  = 
•teacher.'  The  'doctor'  was  a  scribe.  Till  40 
years  old  he  was  talmtd  ('scholar').  Probably 
after  examination  he  became  tnlmtd  hakham  ('  sage 
scholar').  On  receiving  a  call  from  a  particular 
community,  he  was  solemnly  ordained  to  office 
with  laying  on  of  hands,  and  became  rabbi 
('master').  Such  was  the  process  after  A.D.  70. 
In  the  NT  rabbi  has  not  so  specialized  an  applica- 
tion.    The  Law,  especially  the  oral  tradition,  was 


DOCTRINE 


DOMITIAX 


309 


the  great  subject  of  study  ;  it  was  learned  by  in- 
defatigable memorizing.  Discussions  were  held 
at  which  listeners  might  put  questions  (cf.  Lk  2*). 

LiTKRATCRK.— E.  Schurcr,  EJP  n.  i.  §25  (n.);  W.  Bonsset, 
Reliffion  desJutUntumtim  neutett.  Zeitalter,  1903,  iL  5,  p.  147  ; 
art.  '  Doctor '  in  UDB,  DCG,  and  CE. 

W.   D.   NiVEX. 

DOCTRINE.— See  Teachixg. 

DOG  (icvW,  Ph  3»,  2  P  2»,  Rev  22").— In  Pales- 
tine the  dog  plays  a  very  insignificant  and  con- 
temptible part,  and  is  in  consequence  the  symbol 
for  all  that  is  ignoble  and  mean.  The  ordinary 
pariah  street-dogs  are  from  two  to  three  feet  long, 
tawny  in  colour,  have  small  eyes,  short  fur,  and 
comparatively  little  hair  on  the  tail.  They  act  as 
scavengers,  clearing  away  carcases  and  offal,  which 
form  the  staple  of  their  food,  and  which,  but  for 
them,  might  create  pestilence  (cf.  H.  B.  Tristram, 
Natural  ffistorj/^",  p.  78).  They  bark  and  howl 
all  night  (cf.  Ps  59^  "),  but  as  a  rule  are  afraid  of 
men,  though  on  occasions  they  attack  travellers 
in  lonely  places.  Sometimes  they  are  trained  to 
act  as  sheep-dogs  (cf.  Job  30^),  not,  however,  for 
dri\'ing  the  sheep,  as  with  us,  but  for  guarding 
them  against  the  attacks  of  wolves  and  jackals  at 
night.  Dogs  were  seldom  regarded  or  treated  as 
pets;  this  was  perhaps  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
Jews  were  not  a  hunting  people.  Tristram,  how- 
ever, informs  us  that  he  had  no  difficulty  in  mak- 
ing a  pet  of  a  puppy  taken  from  pariah  dogs  (op. 
cit.  p.  80),  while  we  have  clear  evidence  in  Mt  15^ 
1  Mk  7*^  that  they  sometimes  became  household 
pets  ;  it  is,  however,  noticeable  that  the  term  used 
in  these  two  passages  is  the  diminutive  Kwdpiov. 
The  only  other  breed  of  dog  kno^\•n  in  Palestine 
is  the  Persian  greyhound,  which  resembles  our 
greyhound  in  general  form  and  appearance,  but 
is  larger  and  stronger,  though  not  so  swift.  This 
dog  is  used  by  shaikhs  for  hunting  the  gazelle. 

When  used  as  a  personal  epithet  in  OT  and  NT, 
'  dog '  is  a  term  of  absolute  contempt  when  applied 
to  others,  of  extreme  humility  when  applied  to  one- 
self. In  Ph  3-,  St.  Paul  applies  the  term  to  his 
•Judaizing  opponents — '  Look  to,  be  on  your  guard 
against,  the  dogs,  the  workers  of  mischief,  the  con- 
cision' (cf.  Lightfoot,  Philippians*,  1878,  p.  143) — 
a  party,  clearly,  well-defined  and  well-known  to 
the  members  of  the  Philippian  Church.  In  2  P  2^ 
the  'dog'  is  mentioned  along  with  the  'sow'  as 
in  Horace  (Epp.  I.  ii.  26) — the  dog  turning  to  his 
own  vomit  again,  and  the  sow  that  hath  bathed 
itself  (in  mud),  to  wallowing  in  the  mire.  The 
reference  is  to  apostates — those  who,  after  being 
converted  to  the  way  of  righteousness  and  having 
abandoned  the  filth  in  which  they  had  once  so 
zealously  'bathed,'  return  again  to  wallow  in  the 
mire  of  their  former  delights.  In  Rev  22^^,  the 
'  dogs '  are  those  who  are  corrupted  by  the  foul  vices 
of  the  heathen  world,  many  of  whom  were  doubt- 
less to  be  found  within  the  pale  of  the  Church  (cf. 
ou. :»{._  -2  Co  12-'). 

LiTERAirKE. — For  the  dog  in  Palestine  see  H.  B.  Tristram, 
Satural  History  of  the  BibU^O^  1911,  p.  78  ff. ;  also  SWP  :  '  The 
Fauna  and  Flora  of  Palestine,'  1SS4,  p.  21 ;  P.  G.  Balden- 
sperger,  '  The  Immovable  East,"  in  PEFSt,  1903,  p.  73,  1904, 
p.  361 ;  J.  E.  Hanauer,  '  Palestinian  Animal  Folk-Lore,'  in 
PEFSt,  1904,  p.  265  ;  W.  M.  Thomson.  The  Land  and  the 
Book,  new  ed.,  1910,  pp.  17S-179.  On  the  texts  see  especially 
J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Philippians*.  1878,  p.  143  f.  ;  C.  Bigg,  Epp. 
of  St.  PeUr  and  St.  Jude  (ICC,  1901X  p.  2S7  f. ;  H.  B.  Swete, 
The  Apocalypse  oj  Sf,  John,  1907,  p.  308. 

P.  S.  P.  Haxdcock. 
DOMINION.— This  word  is  used,  though  not  in- 
variably, in  the  translation  of  three  Gr.  expressions : 
(l)the  verb  Ki-ptevetv,  'to  be  lord  of,'  'to  have  do- 
minion over '  (Ro  6«- "  7^  AV  and  RV ;  2  Co  1^*  AV, 
where  RV  has  '  have  lordship ') ;  (2)  t6  Kpara ;  (3) 

TO  /cpdTos  is  rendered  thus  in  the  doxologies  in  1  P 


4"  5",  Jude=»,  Rev  1«  5^  (RV).  In  the  only  other 
doxology  where  it  occurs  (1  Ti  6'*)  RV  strangely 
retains  '  power '  of  AV.  Lightfoot  (on  Col  1")  says 
that  '  the  word  Kpdros  in  the  NT  is  applied  solely  to 
GJod,'  Tliayer  (*.i'.  Si/vo/wj),  more  cautiously,  that 
the  word  is  used  '  in  the  NT  chiefly  of  God ' ;  He 
2^*  is  an  exception. 

Kvpi6m)i  is  found  in  four  passages,  viz.  Eph  1", 
Col  li«  (plural),  Jude  8,  2  P  2>»;  RV  in  all  cases 
gives  '  dominion,'  AV  in  the  first  three,  and  in  the 
margin  of  2  P  2'"  (text,  'government').  In  Eph. 
and  Col.  a  class  of  angels  is  meant  (Milton's  '  Dom- 
inations ')  with  which  compare  1  Co  8',  where  angels 
are  called  /tv/uw  (Grimm-Thayer,  Lexicon,  s.v. 
KvpioTTii).  The  meaning  of  the  word  in  Peter  and 
Jude  presents  some  difficulty,  (a)  Many  suppose 
that  here  also  angels  are  referred  to,  which  2  P  2" 
and  the  reference  to  the  sin  of  the  Sodomites  seem 
to  support.  Cremer  (Lexicon,  s.v.  Kvpiirris)  says 
that  in  Peter  evil  angels  are  implied  from  the  con- 
text, tliough  not  in  Jude.  But,  as  Bennett  (C'en- 
tury  Bible :  '  The  General  Epistles,'  1901,  p.  334) 
points  out,  '  it  does  not  seem  likely  that  blasphemy 
against  angels  would  be  so  conspicuous  a  sin  of 
licentious  men  as  to  call  forth  this  emphatic  con- 
demnation.' (b)  KvpioTtji  may  be  understood  of  the 
power  and  majesty  of  God  (Bigg,  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Jude\_ICC,  1901],  p.  279),  or  the  Lordship  of  Christ, 
in  support  of  which  2  P  2'-  ®,  Jude  *■  ^*  may  be  quoted. 
(c)  It  may  refer  to  authorities  in  the  Church  whose 
legitimate  power  these  men  despised  and  spoke 
against.  Bennett  inclines  to  this  interpretation 
in  Jude  and  regards  it  as  included  also  in  2  Peter, 
where  he  gives  the  general  principle  of  the  argu- 
ment thus  :  when  good  angels  withstand  dignities, 
i.e.  evil  angels,  although  the  good  are  the  more 
powerful,  they  do  not  abuse  their  opponents ;  how 
absurd  and  wicked  for  evil  men  to  abuse  good 
angels,  or  perhaps  even  the  legitimate  Church 
authorities.  J.  R.  Lumby  (in  Speaker's  Comment- 
ary :  '  Heb.  to  Rev.,'  1881,  p.  395)  combines  (6)  and 
(c)  above  -.  '  the  railing  at  dignities,  though  its  fir.st 
exhibition  might  be  made  against  the  Apostles  and 
those  set  in  authority  in  the  Church,  yet  went 
further  and  resulted  in  the  denial  of  our  only 
Master,  God  Himself,  whose  dominion  these  sinners 
were  disregarding,  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
whose  glory  these  men  speak  evil  of  or  raU  at.' 

In  the  RV  of  1  Ti  2*^  ai/devreiy  dvdpos  is  translated 
'  to  have  dominion  over,'  AV  '  to  usurp  authority 
over.'    See  also  art.  Prixcipality. 

W.   H.  DUXDAS. 

DOMITIAN.— Titus  Flauius  Domitianus,  second 
son  of  Titus  Flauius  Vespasianus  (Emperor  A.D. 
69-79  ;  see  Vespasiax)  and  his  kinswoman  Flauia 
Domitilla,  and  brother  of  Titus  Flauius  Vespasianus 
(Emperor  A.D.  79-81 ;  see  TiTts),  was  Roman 
Emperor  from  A.D.  81  to  96.  He  was  bom  on  24 
October  A.D.  51  in  Rome,  during  the  principate  of 
Claudius,  almost  twelve  years  after  his  brother 
Titus.  He  lost  his  mother  and  only  sister  in  early 
life,  and  when  his  father  and  brother  entered  on 
the  Jewish  "War  in  A.D.  66,  Domitian  was  scarcely 
fifteen  years  old.  When  his  father  was  called  to 
the  Imperial  throne  on  1  July  69,  his  sons  received 
corresponding  honours,  each  being  named  Ca^ar 
and  princeps  iuuentutis.  Domitian  had  a  narrow 
escape  at  the  hands  of  the  Vitellians,  being  com- 
pelled to  leave  the  Capitol  in  the  robes  of  a  priest 
of  Isis,  which  a  freedman  had  procured  for  him. 
On  his   father's  accession  Domitian  received  the 

Eraetorship,   which    he  held   from    1   January   70, 
ut  exercised  for  the  most  part  by  deputy.     Follow- 
ing the  fashion  .set  by  Au^stus,  he  robbed  L. 
Lamia  .Eniilianus  of  his  wife  Domitia  Longina, 
and,  after  living  with  her  for  some  time  unmarried, 
i  finally  married   her.     It  was  unfortunate  for  his 
i  future  career  that  his   father  and   elder   brother 


310 


DOMITIAN 


DOMITIAN 


were  absent  for  a  lengthy  period  from  Rome  and 
Italy,  being  detained  by  the  Jewish  War.  The 
sudden  accession  to  power  and  influence  of  a  youtli 
of  barely  eighteen  years  of  age  ended,  as  might 
have  been  expected,  in  a  disastrous  perversion  of 
character.  The  complaints  against  him  served  to 
hasten  his  father's  return.  Before  21  June  70, 
Domitian  and  Mucianus,  the  most  prominent  sup- 

g)rter  of  the  Flavian  house,  left  Rome  for  the 
allo-German  war.  A  change  in  the  situation 
caused  Domitian  to  return.  He  lived  for  a  period 
in  his  Alban  villa  in  retirement  from  public  life. 
On  the  return  of  his  father  he  received  much  dis- 
tinction, but  so  far  as  direct  government  of  the 
Empire  was  concerned  he  was  kept  in  the  back- 
ground. He  was,  however,  six  times  consul  before 
he  became  Emperor.  On  the  death  of  Vespasian 
(79)  Titus  became  Emperor ;  Domitian,  tliough 
openly  spoken  of  as  consors  imperii,  was  wisely 
kept  in  an  inferior  position. 

On  the  death  of  Titus  through  fever,  Domitian 
became  Emperor  (13  September  81).  Henceforth 
his  title  was  Imperator  Ca;sar  Domitianus  (Domi- 
tianus  Caisar)  Augustus.  The  title  Gernianicus 
was  conferred  upon  him  in  84,  and  he  became 
censor  perpetuus  (after  5  Sept.)  in  85.  Certain  of 
the  important  events  of  his  reign  may  be  enumer- 
ated. It  was  probably  very  soon  after  tlie  death 
of  Titus  that  the  decree  for  the  construction  of  the 
arch  in  his  honour,  still  standing  at  the  Summa 
Sacra  Via,  was  passed.  On  it  are  the  famous 
representations  of  the  Golden  Candlestick,  etc.  (see 
art.  Rome).  His  first  year  was  also  signalized  by 
the  victories  of  Cn.  lulius  Agricola  in  Scotland 
and  the  establishment  of  fortified  posts  as  far  as 
the  line  of  the  Forth  and  Clyde.  In  82  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  Temple  of  Jupiter  on  the  Capitoline  Hill, 
which  had  been  destroyed  by  fire  in  80,  was  com- 
pleted. In  the  same  year  the  roads  in  the  Imperial 
provinces  of  Asia  Minor  were  repaired,  and  Agricola 
carried  out  his  fifth  campaign,  planning  also  an 
invasion  of  Ireland  which  never  took  place.  In 
83  an  expedition  to  Germany  took  place  as  the 
result  of  which  victories  were  gained  over  the 
Chatti.  Territory  was  added  to  the  Empire  in  the 
region  of  Taunus  and  Wetterau  on  the  right  bank 
of  the  Rhine,  and  secured  by  a  fortified  rampart 
(limes).  This  success  brought  the  title  Germaniciis 
to  Domitian  on  3  September  84  (cf.  Statins,  Siluce 
[passim]  for  the  use  of  the  name ;  passages  in 
Klotz's  index,  p.  187).  About  this  time  Domitian 
also  allowed  himself  to  be  appointed  consul  for  ten 
years,  and  received  the  censoria  potestas  for  life, 
and  other  honours.  The  pay  of  the  soldiers  was 
increased  by  a  third.  In  83,  on  his  sixth  campaign, 
Agricola  had  been  able,  with  the  co-operation  of 
his  fleet,  to  extend  his  hold  over  our  island.  He 
marched  as  far  north  as  Inchtuthill  near  Dunkeld, 
and  made  a  lasting  camp  there.  In  84  occurred 
the  battle  of  Mons  Graupius  (locality  uncertain), 
by  whicli  the  Caledonians  received  a  crushing  blow. 
Agricola  left  Britain  in  a  pacified  state,  when 
Domitian's  jealousy  recalled  him  soon  after  this 
victory.     In    the    period  85-87    Domitian  led  in 

fierson  two  expeditions  against  the  Dacians,  who 
lad  provoked  war.  They  crossed  the  Danube  and 
invaded  the  province  of  Mcesia.  The  governor  of 
Mcesia,  Oppius  Sabinus,  was  defeated  and  killed. 
The  Dacians  thereupon  ravaged  the  territory  on 
the  right  bank  of  the  Danube  and  destroyed  towns 
and  forts.  About  the  end  of  January  86  Domitian 
himself  took  the  field.  Of  the  details  of  the  war 
almost  nothing  is  known.  It  appears  that  Domitian 
issued  his  commands  for  the  most  part  from  the 
Imperial  camp  in  the  province  of  Mcesia.  The 
Decebalus  was  conquered,  and  Domitian  took  the 
credit  of  the  victory  to  himself.  He  was  back  in 
Rome  in  the  summer  of  86,  but  the  war  was  con- 


tinued by  Cornelius  Fuscus,  who  appears  to  liave 
suttered  a  heavy  defeat. 

About  the  .same  period  the  Romans  were  engaged 
in  warfare  against  the  Nasamones  on  the  African 
coast,  and  against  the  Germans.  It  was  in 
Domitian's  reign  that  the  custom  of  buying  off 
the  opposition  of  Rome's  enemies  began.  During 
this  period  the  Emperor  became  more  and  more  a 
tyrant  and  less  and  less  a  constitutional  prince. 
It  is  significant  that  he  allowed  liimself  to  be  called 
dortiinus  ac  dens  (A.D.  85-86).  Tyranny  aroused 
the  more  republican  of  the  senators,  and  many  were 
condemned  ;  a  conspiracy  against  the  Emperor  was 
discovered  and  crushed.  Probably  about  the  end 
of  89  Domitian  triumphed  over  the  Dacians  and 
the  Germans,  whose  governor,  L.  Antonius  Satur- 
ninus,  sought  to  dethrone  him.  Domitian  had 
taken  part  in  both  these  wars  himself.  We  learn 
also  of  an  expedition  against  the  Quadi,  the 
Marcomani,  and  tlie  Sarmatians,  all  of  whom  were 
allies  of  the  Dacians,  Domitian  was  recognized 
as  victor,  peace  was  made  between  the  combatants, 
and  large  sums  of  money  were  sent  by  Domitian  to 
the  Decebalus,  The  year  89  was  marked  by  further 
condemnations  of  distinguished  persons  and  the 
confiscation  of  their  property.  Twenty  years  after 
Nero's  death  (9  June  68)  a  false  Nero  appeared, 
and  caused  an  uprising  among  the  Parthians  which 
it  was  extremely  difficult  to  quell.  It  is  not  im- 
possible that  some  reference  to  this  occurrence  is 
latent  in  Rev  13^.  In  the  year  91  a  Vestal  virgin, 
charged  with  having  broken  her  vow  of  chastity, 
was  Dy  the  orders  of  the  '  censor '  Domitian  sud- 
jected  to  the  ancient  penalty  of  being  buried  alive. 
In  this  year  also  was  unveiled  the  great  equestrian 
statue  of  Domitian  in  the  Forum  (celebrated  by 
Statins  in  his  Sihtce,  i.  1),  the  base  of  which  is 
still  in  position.  In  92  (or,  strictly,  in  the  period 
Oct.  91  to  Sept.  92)  there  was  a  good  vine  crop 
but  a  bad  cereal  crop.  Domitian  in  consequence 
ordered  that  no  new  vineyards  should  be  laid  out 
in  Italy  and  that  the  vines  of  the  provinces  should 
be  reduced  to  one  half  their  former  number.  This 
measure,  intended  to  improve  agriculture,  was  not 
carried  out  strictly.  The  provinces  complained, 
among  them  Asia  Minor.  M.  Salomon  Reinach 
pointed  out  in  1901  (in  EA,  reprinted  in  Cultes, 
Mythes  et  Beligions,  ii.  [1906]  356-380)  that  there 
is  a  reference  to  this  edict  latent  in  the  difficult 
passage  Rev  6"  (see  Sanday  in  JThSt  viii.  [1906- 
07]  488  f.).  In  the  same  year  Domitian  conducted 
war  against  the  Sarmatians  with  success.  Next 
year  (93)  was  marked  by  more  condemnation  of  the 
nobility,  and  among  others  the  great  Agricola  fell 
a  victim.  Now  began  the  reign  of  terror  which 
ended  only  with  the  death  of  Domitian.  Among 
those  who  suffered  were  some  of  the  noblest  Romans, 
men  and  women,  that  ever  lived. 

It  was  in  the  year  Oct.  93  to  Sept.  94,  according  to 
the  Chronicle  of  Eusebius,  as  translated  by  Jerome, 
that  the  Domitianic  persecution  of  the  Christians 
began,  and  that  the  Apostle  John,  being  ban- 
ished to  the  island  '  Pathmus,'  saw  the  Ajwcalypse 
(cf.  other  ancient  references  recorded  in  the  intro- 
ductions to  theiCommentariesby  Swete,  Bousset.and 
Hort,  to  which  add  pseudo- Augustine,  Qucestiones 
Veteris  et  Novi  Testamenti  CXA'VII,  Ixxvi.  [Ixxii.] 
2  :  '  ista  Reuelatio  eo  tempore  facta  est,  a  no  ajjos- 
tolus  lohannes  in  insula  erat  Pathmos,  relegatus  a 
Domitiano  imperatore  fidei  causa ').  For  tlie  diffi- 
culty in  dating  the  Apocalypse  see  art.  Apoca- 
lypse. There  must  have  been  a  fierce  persecution 
of  Christians  in  Domitian's  time,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse would  seem  to  be  the  mirror  of  it.  The 
Church  always  believed  Domitian  to  have  been  the 
second  great  jjersecutor.  The  wonder  is  that  the 
outbreak  did  not  come  earlier,  in  view  of  Domitian's 
a.ssumption  of  the  titles  '  Lord  and  God  '  referred 


DOOR 


DORCAS 


311 


to  above.  It  has  been  usual  to  connect  with  this 
persecution  the  charge  of  '  atheism  '  (by  which,  of 
course,  the  Romans  meant  the  worship  of  no  god  in 
visible  form  :  they  had  long  charged  the  Jews 
with  the  same  [cf.  Lucan,  ii.  592-3 :  '  dedita  sacris 
incerti  ludaea  del '])  brought  against  two  relations 
of  the  Emperor.  These  were  Flauius  Clemens, 
the  consul  of  the  year  (95),  first  cousin  of  the 
Emperor,  and  his  wife,  FlauiaDomitilla,  niece  of  the 
Emperor.  Clemens  was  beheaded,  and  Domitilla 
was  banished  to  Pandateria.  A  grave  in  the  cata- 
combs near  Rome  belonged  to  the  latter.  Before 
the  summer  of  this  year  95  the  Via  Domitiaiia 
connecting  Sinuessa  and  Puteoli  was  completed 
(celebrated  by  Statins,  Siluce,  iv.  3).  This  meant 
a  saving  of  time  for  journeys  from  Rome  to  Naples 
and  beyond  (see  art.  ROADS  AND  Travel).  In 
the  year  96,  on  18  Sept.,  the  much-hated  Emperor 
met  his  death  at  the  hands  of  his  friends,  his 
freedman,  and  his  wife. 

Ltteratcrb. — Among  the  ancient  authorities,  his  beneficiaries 
Statins  and  Martial  say  all  and  more  than  all  the  good  there 
is  to  be  said  of  Domitian  ;  the  part  of  Tacitus'  Hut.  dealing 
with  him  has  perished  ;  there  are  occasional  references  in  con- 
temporary authors,  and  there  are  the  biography  by  Suetonius 
and  parts  of  Dio  Cassius,  Orosius,  etc.  The  b^  modern  work 
is  S.  GseU,  £ssai  sur  le  regne  de  I'empereur  Domitien,  Paris, 
1S94  ;  there  is  an  excellent  resume  with  references  and  literature 
\a  Weynand's  art.  in  Paulj'-Wissowa,  vi.  [1909]  2541-2596 ;  A. 
V.  Domaszewski,  Gesch.  d.  rom.  Kaiser,  Leipzig,  1909,  vol.  ii. ; 
general  histories  of  the  Empire.  On  Domitian  and  Christianity 
see  W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire, 
London,  1893,  chs.  xii.  and  xiii.  A.   SOUTER. 

DOOR.*  —  The  examples  of  the  concrete  use 
of  dvpa,  'door,'  are  all  found  in  Acts,  and  may 
be  treated  under  three  heads:  (1)  house  doors, 
(2)  prison  doors,  (3)  Temple  doors.  The  first  two 
occur  in  the  narratives  of  miraculous  events. 

1.  In  Ac  5*  the  feet  of  them  that  buried  Ananias 
are  said  to  be  itri  tj  dvfxf,  nigh  at  hand,  if  not  act- 
ually heard  by  those  within.  More  Wvid  still  is 
the  instance  of  12'^,  where  one  required  to  knock 
at,  or  beat,  the  door,  to  make  oneself  heard  with- 
in. (The  presence  of  a  knocker  for  the  purpose  is 
not  to  ])e  inferred,  for  Jewish  doors  at  least.)  Trjv 
Biipav  Tov  irvXQvos  (cf.  Ezk  40^^  [LXX])  is  best  under- 
stood as  a  door  abutting  on  the  street  or  lane, 
which  gave  the  entry  to  a  covered  passage  com- 
municating with  the  court  of  the  house,  in  which 
the  living  rooms  were  situated  (see  Gate).  Rhoda 
stood  in  this  passage,  hearing,  but  seeing  not  (be- 
sides, it  was  night),  the  Apostle  Peter,  who  was 
without,  and  being  in  command  of  the  way  so 
long  as  the  door,  not  the  gate,  remained  locked 
or  barred,  dvoi^avrts  (v.'*)  implies  door,  which  is 
rightly  not  expressed  in  RV.  For  modem  usage 
see  Mackie,  Bible  Manners  and  Customs,  1898,  p. 
95. 

2.  With  one  exception  (Ac  12®)  the  doors  of 
prisons  are  found  in  the  plural  (Ac  5'^-  ^  16^  ^). 
The  indications  afforded  by  the  narrative  of  Acts 
are  too  meagre  to  enable  us  to  reconstruct  the 
form  of  these  places  of  detention,  either  in  Jeru- 
salem or  at  Philippi.  Security  seems  to  have  been 
given  by  guards,  chains,  and  stocks  rather  than 
by  any  peculiar  strength  of  door.  Of  necessity 
the  bolt  or  bar  was  attached  to  the  outside,  of  cell 
doors  at  least.  For  the  situation  at  Philippi,  see 
Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895,  p.  220  f . 

3.  In  Ac  S'-*  the  Beautiful  Gate  of  the  Temple 
(cf  v.i*)  is  described  by  the  word  for  'door,'  which 
RV  brings  out.  As  in  the  private  house,  so  here, 
the  door  forms  part  of  the  gate,  the  latter  being 
in  reality  a  portal.  This  particular  gate  of  the 
Temple  is  now  believed  to  be  the  Corinthian  Gate, 
which  is  identical  with  the  Nicanor  Gate,  on  the 
east  side  of  the  Temple  precincts.     Its  doors,  and 

*  This  art.  deals  with  '  door '  as  distinct  from  '  gate,' '  gate- 
way,' or  '  porch,'  of  which  it  forms  a  part  (see  Gate). 


other  parts,  were  of  Corinthian  brass  (or  bronze), 
probably  solid,  being  shut  with  difficulty  by  twenty 
men  (Josephus,  BJ  VI.  v.  3 ;  cf.  Ant.  XV.  xi.  5,  BJ 
II.  xvii.  3,  V.  v.  3,  c.  Ap.  ii.  10).  They  seem  to 
have  been  double  doors  [EBi,  art.  '  Temple '),  stand- 
ing at  the  entrance  to  the  portal.  Compare,  for 
Babylonian  Temples,  PSBA,  1912,  p.  90  if.  For 
the  Beautiful  Gate  of  the  Temple  see  the  full  and 
illuminating  account  by  A.  R.  S.  Kennedy  in 
ExpTs.^.  [1908-09]  270  f.  ;  also  art.  Temple. 

We  read  (Ac  21**)  that  the  people  laid  hold  on 
St.  Paul,  and  dragged  him  out  of  the  Temple,  and 
straightway  the  doors  were  shut.  Farrar  {Life 
and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  1897,  p.  532)  locates  this 
turmoil  at  the  Beautiful  Gate,  but,  considering  the 
number  of  doors  that  gave  access  to  the  Temple 
precincts,  there  are  other  possibilities. 

In  Rev  21-*  we  can  picture  the  gates  as  provided 
Aivith  doors,  although  these  were  not  in  use. 

The  metaphorical  use  of  dvpa  in  Acts,  Epistles, 
etc.,  may  be  briefly  noted.  In  this  sense  the  word 
appears  without  the  definite  article,  Ac  14^  being 
no  exception:  'a  door  of  faith'  (RV).  In  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  mention  is  made  of  a  great  door 
and  effectual  (1  Co  16'),  a  door  being  opened  (2  Co 
2^),  a  door  for  the  word  (Col  4»),  all  with  the 
notion  of  opportunity  and  facUity.  The  idea  of 
the  nearness  of  judgment  is  brought  out  by  Ja  5* 
(cf.  Mt  24^8):  'The  judge  standeth  before  the 
doors,'  where  RV  replaces  the  singular  of  AV  by 
the  plural,  following  the  Greek. 

In  Rev  3'-  *  a  door  is  set  or  given,  iivei^iJiAvriv 
(note  peculiar  verbal  form),  i.e.  a  door  already 
opened,  which  none  can  shut  (see  Key),  and  in  4' 
a  door  is  already  opened  in  the  heavens  at  the 
moment  the  vision  commences.  In  contrast  to 
this  is  the  closed  door  of  Rev  3^,  a  passage  in 
which  is  concentrated  great  wealth  of  meaning. 
W.  Cruickshank. 

DORCAS. — This  name  occurs  in  the  narrative  of 
St.  Peter's  sojourn  in  the  plain  of  Western  Palestine 
after  the  dispersion  of  the  Jerusalem  Church  on 
the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  (Ac  9^®"*^).  It  is  given 
as  a  translation  of  the  Aramaic  proper  name 
Tabitha  ('Tabitha  which  is  by  interpretation 
Dorcas,'  Ac  9**).  The  word  t'bithd'  (kh'^e)  is 
Aramaic  corresponding  to  the  Heb.  s^bt  ('z^),  and 
is  either  the  term  applied  to  an  animal  of  the  deer 
species,  '  roebuck '  or  '  roe '  in  AV,  '  gazelle '  in  RV, 
or  a  proper  name  borne  by  women.  The  word  is 
translated  in  the  LXX  by  the  term  Sop/cds  (5^pKo/iat, 
'  see  ' — a  reference  to  the  large  eyes  of  the  animal). 
Both  the  Aramaic  and  the  Greek  terms  were  used 
as  proper  names;for  women,  and  the  writer  of  the 
Acts  gives  the  translation  for  the  benefit  of  his 
Greek  readers,  though  the  woman  was  probably 
known  as  Tabitha. 

The  bearer  of  the  name  was  a  dweller  in  Joppa, 
a  female  disciple  who  had  devoted  herself  to  '  good 
works 'and  to  'almsgiving.'  One  feature  of  her 
benevolent  acti\'ity  was  the  making  of  garments 
which  she  distributed  among  the  poor,  a  circum- 
stance which  is  regarded  as  indicating  special 
goodness,  as  a  woman  with  means  adequate  to 
provide  such  benefactions  might  have  been  content 
with  merely  giving  her  money.  This  circumstance 
has  in  later  Christianity  given  the  inspiration  and 
the  name  to  the  so-called  Dorcas  societies  devoted 
to  providing  garments  for  the  poor.  There  is  no 
ground  for  concluding  that  Tabitha  was  a  deacon- 
ess, nor  can  we  tell  whether  she  was  one  of  the 
widows  or  married. 

This  disciple  fell  ill  and  died  when  St.  Peter  was 
in  the  neighbouring  town  of  Lydda,  nine  miles 
distant.  The  believers  in  Joppa  at  once  sent  for 
the  Apostle.  Their  motive  for  so  doing  is  not 
apparent,  but  it  is  unlikely  that  they  expected  him 
to  work  a  miracle.     More  likely  the  sorrowing 


312 


DOXOLOGY 


DOXOLOGY 


friends  turned  to  St.  Peter  for  comfort  in  their 
bereavement,  and  his  proximity  led  them  to  send 
for  him.  On  his  arrival  the  mourners  showed  the 
Apostle  the  garments  Dorcas  had  made  and  spoke 
of  her  alms.  The  narrative  then  tells  how  St. 
Peter  put  them  all  out  of  the  room,  knelt  down 
and  jn-ayed,  and  turning  to  the  woman  said, '  Tabitha, 
arihie  ! '  when  she  opened  her  eyes,  sat  up,  and  was 
handed  over  to  the  widows.  This  raising  of  Tabitha 
is  reported  to  have  become  widely  known  and  to 
have  led  large  numbers  to  attach  themselves  to 
the  Church. 

The  account  of  the  raising  of  Dorcas  has  obvious 
points  of  similarity  to  that  of  the  raising  of  Jairus' 
daughter  (Mt  9^,  Mk  5«-",  Lk  8"),  but  there  is 
sufficient  dissimilarity  in  details  to  cause  us  at 
once  to  dismiss  the  notion  that  the  one  is  a  mere 
imitation  of  the  other.  It  is  natural  that  St.  Peter, 
who  was  present  at  the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter, 
should  follow  the  method  of  his  Master,  while  we 
see  how,  with  the  humility  of  Elijah  or  Elisha  (1  K 
17^,  2  K  4^^),  he  does  not  at  first  speak  the  word  of 
power  but  kneels  down  in  prayer.  Holtzmann  and 
Pfleiderer  regard  the  raising  of  Tabitha  as  parallel 
to  the  restoration  of  Eutychus  by  St.  Paul  (Ac 
20*'"),  but  beyond  the  fact  that  these  commen- 
tators suppose  both  Tabitha  and  Eutychus  to  have 
been  only  apparently  dead,  there  is  no  similarity 
between  the  two  cases. 


Literature.— R.  J.  KnowHng:,  ^EGT,  '  Acts,"  1900,  p.  247f.; 
I.  Edersheim,  Jewish  Social  Li/e,  1908,  p.  78 ;  HDB,  art. 
Dorcas ' ;  Conini.  ot  Holtzmann,  Zeller,  Meyer- Wendt, 


loco 


W.  F.  Boyd, 


DOXOLOGY  {5o^o\oyla,  only  in  eccl.  Greek).— 
The  name  is  given  to  brief  forms  of  praise  to  God 
(or  to  Christ,  or  to  the  Trinity)  used  in  early 
Christianity,  the  models  of  which  were  taken 
over  from  Judaism.  They  sometimes  occur  as  a 
momentary  interruption  in  the  midst  of  a  dis- 
course, a  sudden  breaking  forth  of  praise  at  the 
mention  of  the  name  of  God,  of  which  2  Co  IP' 
is  an  example.  We  shall  consider  the  most  im- 
portant of  these  in  chronological  order.  1.  Gal  l^. 
— The  appropriate  ascription  of  praise  to  the 
Father  for  His  redemption  of  mankind  according 
to  His  will,  wherein  is  revealed  His  attributes  of 
wisdom,  holiness,  love,  in  which  for  us  His  glory 
chiefly  consists.  2.  Ro  11*. — The  '  all  things '  are 
the  tilings  which  have  to  do  only  with  the  king- 
dom of  grace  to  which  He  has  invited  Jew  and 
Gentile,  and  the  doxology  is  the  natural  climax  of 
praise  for  such  wisdom  and  love ;  the  '  Him '  refers  to 
God,  not  to  Christ ;  v.**  is  an  echo  of  Is  40",  and 
v.^  of  Job  41'S  and  the  first  part  of  v.^*  cannot 
have  Trinitarian  reference,  as  the  context  does  not 
suit.  '  It  is  the  relation  of  the  Godhead  as  a  Avhole 
to  the  universe  and  to  created  things.  God  (not 
neces.sarily  the  Father)  is  the  source  and  inspirer 
and  goal  of  all  things.'  *  3.  Ro  16". — While  gram- 
matically the  '  to  whom  '  (if,  if  it  be  retained)  could 
refer  to  Christ,  and  while  according  to  the  spirit 
and  even  language  of  the  NT  there  is  no  objection 
to  sucli  reference,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the 
pronoun  refers  to  the  'only  wise  Go<l,' as  that  is 
in  .accordance  with  the  whole  purpose  of  the  writer. 
It  is  the  most  fitting  close  to  the  Epistle,  as  it 
embodies  the  faith  from  which  its  central  chapters 
proceed.!  The  dislocation  of  the  language  is 
probably  to  be  explained  by  the  intense  spiritual 
feeling  of  the  writer,  who,  without  waiting  to 
clear  the  matter  up,  bursts  out  into  the  usual 
doxolo^'y  to  God.  4.  Eph  3".— It  is  the  glory 
which  18  due  to  Grod  and  befits  Him.     It  is  rendered 

*  Sanday-Headlam,  Romanffi  {ICC,  1902),  p.  340. 

t  See  F.  .1.  A.  Hort  in  JPh  iii.  (1870)  56 ;  and  for  a  con- 
vincing discussion  of  the  tjenuinenees  of  this  doxology  see  E.  H. 
Gifford  in  Speaker's  Com.,  '  Romans,'  1881,  pp.  22-27. 


'  in  the  Church  *  as  the  special  domain  where  God 
is  interested,  viz.  in  a  social  brotherhood  having 
organic  life  in  Christ — the  praise  not  being  a  thing 
of  secular  or  voluntary  ritual,  but  having  its  life 
and  reason  only  in  Christ  and  in  a  society  redeemed 
and  possessed  by  Him.  5.  Ph  4**. — Notice  here 
also  the  emphasis :  the  glory,  that  glory  which  is 
His  attribute  and  element.  6.  1  Ti  1". — Here  we 
find  echoes  of  Jewish  forms  :  To  13"-  ^*',  Enoch  ix.  4, 
Rev  15'.  The  thought  and  phraseology  are 
Hebraic.  Bengel  thought  the  a^ons  had  indirect 
reference  to  Gnosticism,  but  this  is  not  necessary. 
7.  2  Ti  4".—'  The  Lord '  here  refers  to  Christ  (cf. 
17),  to  whom  this  doxology  is  addressed.*  8.  He 
13^. — This  doxology  may  be  to  the  '  God  of  peace ' 
of  v.^,  but  it  is  both  more  natural  and  more  gram- 
matical to  refer  it  to  Christ,  immediately  pre- 
ceding. Throughout  the  whole  Epistle  the  latter 
has  been  constantly  before  the  mind  of  the  writer. 
9.  1  P  4".— Hart  well  remarks  that  the  in.sertion 
of  'is'  (iffriv)  changes  the  doxology  to  a  statement 
of  fact,  and  thus  supports  the  interpretation  of 
'  whose '  (v)  as  referring  to  the  immediate  ante- 
cedent, Jesus  Christ,  >vnich  seems  al.so  otherwise 
required.  The  thought  is:  already  He  posses-ses 
the  glory  and  victory ;  therefore  (v.*^)  Cliristians 
endure  joyfully  their  present  sulFering.t  10.  1  P 
5". — This  refers  to  God,  and  '  dominion '  is  em- 
phasized as  a  consolation  on  account  of  the  per- 
secution. 11.  2  P  3^, — Here  we  have  another 
doxology  to  Chri.st.  '  For  ever '  signifies  lit.  '  unto 
the  day  of  eternity,'  and  occurs  only  here.  Cf. 
Sir  18'".  Bigg  makes  the  point  that  eis  rovs  alwvai 
('unto  the  ages')  became  so  immediately  the 
ruling  phrase  that  this  doxology  cannot  have  been 
written  after  liturgical  exprestsions  became  in  any 
degree  stereotyped.  12.  Jude  ^.—'  Majesty '  (else- 
where He  1'  only)  and  'power'  are  unusual  in 
doxologies.  13.  RcY  1'-  *.  —  '  The  adoration  of 
Christ,  which  vibrates  in  this  doxology,  is  one  of 
the  most  impressive  features  of  the  book.  The 
prophet  feels  that  the  one  hope  for  the  loyalists  of 
God  in  this  period  of  trial  is  to  be  conscious  that 
they  owe  everything  to  the  redeeming  love  of 
Jesus.  Faithfulness  depends  on  faith,  and  faith  is 
rallied  by  the  grasp  not  of  itself  but  of  its  object. 
Mysterious  explanations  of  history  follow,  but  it 
is  passionate  aevotion  to  Jesus,  and  not  any  skill 
in  exploring  prophecy,  which  proves  the  .source  of 
moral  heroism  in  the  churches.  Jesus  sacrificed 
himself  for  us ;  ainrip  i]  56^a.  From  this  inward 
trust  and  wonder,  which  leap  up  at  the  sight  of 
Jesus  and  His  grace,  the  loyalty  of  Christians 
flows.' i  14.  Rev  5".— God  and  Christ  ('the 
Lamb')  are  linked  together  in  this  doxology,  as 
often  in  thought  among  the  early  Christians  (Jn 
17*,  1  Ti  2',  Rev  7^" :  '  salvation  unto  our  God  who 
sitteth  on  the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb').  15. 
Rev  7^2.— It  is  a  fine  saying  of  Rabbi  Pinchas  and 
Rabbi  Jochanan  on  Ps  100- :  '  Though  all  oHerings 
cease  in  the  future,  the  offering  of  praise  alone 
shall  not  cease  ;  though  all  prayers  cease,  thanks- 
giving alone  shall  not  cease.' 

A  famous  passage  often  interpreted  a.s  a  doxolojjy  either  to 
Christ  or  to  God  the  Father  is  Uo  95.  For  rererrinj,'  all  words 
after  '  of  whom '  (or  '  from  whom,'  «f  S>v)  to  Christ  it  may  be 
argued  that :  (a)  it  supplies  the  antithesis  which  '  according  to 
the  flesh '  supports,  and  (6)  it  is  grammatically  better,  for  o  ur 
('  he  being ')  naturally  applies  to  what  precedes :  the  person  who 
is  over  all  is  naturally  the  person  first  mentioned.  If  we 
punctuate  so  as  to  read  '  God  who  is  over  all,'  there  are  objec- 
tions :  (1)  Civ  would  in  that  case  be  abnormal,  and  (2) '  blessed ' 
would  be  unparalleled  in  position,  as  it  ought  to  stand  llrst  in 
the  sentence  as  in  Eph  !'■>  and  in  the  LX.\.  Besides,  the 
doxology  to  God  seems  here  without  a  motive,  without  either 
psychological  or  rhetorical  reason,  a  solecism  which  Jare  on  the 

•  See  N.  J.  D.  White,  EGT,  '2  Tim.,'  1910,  p.  188. 
i  J.  H.  A.  Hart,  KGT,  '  1  Pet.,'  1910,  p.  78. 
t  J.  MofTatt,  EGT,  '  Rev.,'  1910,  p.  339,  also  art.  in  Expotitor, 
ethser.,  V.  302  fl. 


DRAGON 


DREAM 


313 


harmonies  of  St.  Paul's  pen.  Then  almost  all  the  ancient  inter- 
preters, whatever  their  views,  referred  the  whole  to  Christ 
From  consideration  of  language  Socinus  consented.  Against 
this  Stromann  argues*  that  (i-)  'God  blessed  for  ever*  occurs 
frequently  in  the  OT  (though  that  does  not  prevent  the  predicate 
from  being  also  used  for  Christ  in  the  NT);  (ii.)  'blessed  for 
ever'  is  u^  for  God  in  Ro  1^*  (but  similar  expressions  are  also 

fiven  to  Christ  in  the  XT  [see  above],  and  when  once  the  possi- 
iliiy  is  granted,  each  case  must  be  judged  on  its  merits) ;  (iii.) 
where  '  blesed '  is  used  in  the  NT  it  is  always  used  of  God  (but 
exactly  equivalent  expressions  are  used  also  of  Christ).  It  is 
true  that  the  fact  of  St.  Paul's  not  csilling  Christ '  God '  outright, 
but  even  making  a  distinction  (1  Co  6*),  strikes  Meyer  and 
Denney  t  so  strongly  that  they  cannot  allow  the  interpretation 
here.  But  to  this  theological  argument  it  may  be  replied  that 
passages  like  2  Co  4*  13",  Col  113-20,  ph  2S-u  ascribe  no  less 
dignity  to  Christ  than  if  St.  Paul  had  used  '  God '  of  Him. 
Wiiilel  a  Christian  Jew  would  ordinarily  use  '  God '  tor  the 
Father,  and  '  Lord '  for  Christ,  he  might  also  use  '  Lord '  lor  the 
Father  (1  Ck»  3»)  and  *  Spirit '  for  Christ  (2  Co  3»7).  As  soon  as 
the  religious  idea  that  meant  the  Divinity  of  Christ  reacted  in 
the  use  of  names,  the  word  '  God '  would  be  used  of  Him,  as  we 
see  in  John,  Ignatius,  Ac  2028  (the  two  oldest  >ISS),  and  Ti  2'3.  j 
There  is  no  impoesibility  in  such  a  use  here,  therefore,  and  we 
are  again  driven  back  to  the  natural,  and  grammatical,  inter- 
pretation. 

In  the  sub- Apostolic  Age  we  have  in  Clement  of 
Rome  (A.D.  97)  'to  whom  (God)  be  the  glory  for 
ever  and  ever,'  chs.  3S,  43,  45,  50  perhaps  of  Christ, 
58  'through  whom  (Christ)  is  the  glory,  etc.,'  and 
65  '  through  whom  (Christ)  be  glory  and  honour, 
power  and  greatness  and  eternal  dominion  unto 
him  (God)  from  the  ages  past  and  for  ever  and  ever. 
Amen.'  Ignatius  uses  none  of  the  doxologies. 
The  Didache  (c.  A.D.  1(X)  to  125)  adds  to  the  Lord's 
Prayer :  '  For  thine  is  the  power  and  glory  for  ever 
and  ever '  (ch.  8) ;  gives  in  the  Eucharistic  prayers 
twice  :  '  Thine  is  the  glory  for  ever  and  ever,'  and 
once :  '  For  thine  is  the  glory  and  the  power 
through  Jesus  Christ  for  ever  and  ever '  (ch.  9).  In 
the  post-Eucharistic  prayer  it  gives  twice  the  same 
benediction  again :  '  Thine  is  the  glory  for  ever 
and  ever,'  and  once  :  'Thine  is  the  power  and  the 
glory  for  ever  and  ever.'  The  doxologies  in  the 
Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  and  in  Justin  ^lartyr  are 
too  late  for  this  work. 

LiTERATTRK. — Besides  the  books  referred  to  above,  see  F.  H. 
Chase,  The  Lords  Prayer  m  the  Early  Church  (  =  TS  i.  3  [1891]), 
166-1 7S  ;  and,  especially  for  liturgical  use,  Thalhofer  in  Wetzer- 
Weltei.  iiL  2IJ0G-10;  P.  Meyer  in  PRE  3  y.  593-t ;  H. 
Fortescue  in  CE  v.  [1909]  150-1 ;  Wolff  in  RGG  ii.  [Tubingen, 
1910]  930 fL  ;  G.  Rietschel,  Uhrbuch  der  Liturmk,  Berlin,  1900, 

p-355f.  J.  Alfred  Faulkner. 

DRAGON  (5/xi/caw).— The  word  is  found  in  the 
NT  onlj-  in  Rev  12»-"  13-*-"  16'3  20^.  In  each 
case,  with  the  exception  of  13"  ('as  a  dragon'), 
the  reference  is  to  the  symbolical '  great  red  dragon ' 
with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  (12')  who  is  ex- 
pressly identified  with  '  the  old  serpent,  he  that  is 
called  the  Devil  and  Satan  '  (v.^ ;  cf.  20=).  When 
inquiry  is  made  into  the  origin  and  meaning  of  the 
symbolism,  it  becomes  evident  that  what  we  find 
in  Rev.  is  an  adoption  and  application  to  Christian 
purposes  of  certain  conceptions  that  played  a  large 
part  in  the  literature  of  pre-Christian  Judaism, 
and  had  originally  been  suggested  to  the  Jewish 
mind  by  its  contact  with  the  Babj-lonian  myth- 
ology. The  Apocryphal  book  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon 
testiiies  to  the  existence  in  Babylon  of  a  dragon- 
worship  that  must  have  been  associated  with  be- 
lief in  the  ancient  dragon-myth  which  forms  so 
important  a  feature  of  the  Babylonian  cosmogony. 
In  the  Creation-epic  Tiamat  is  "the  power  of  chaos 
and  darkness,  personified  as  a  gigantic  dragon  or 
monster  of  the  deep,  who  is  eventually  overcome 
by  Marduk,  the  god  of  light.  In  the' post-exilic 
Jewish   apocalyptic    literature    a  dragon    of  the 

•  ZSTW,  1907,  pp.  4,  319. 

t  Meyer,  Com.  in  loe. ;  Denney,  EGT,  '  Bom.,'  1900.  p.  658. 

J  See  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans,  pp.  233-238;  GifiFonl, 
Speaker's  Com.,  '  Romans,"  pp.  IS,  168, 178-9.  Lepsius,  Bischoff, 
and  Striimann  (ZSTW,  1907,  p.  319,  1908,  p.  80)  conjecture  that 
the  true  reading  is  uiv  6  (instead  of  6  ttv) :  i.e.  '  of  whom  (of  the 
Israelites)  is  God  over  all.  blessed  for  ever.' 


depths  becomes  the  representative  of  the  forces  of 
evil  and  opposition  to  goodness  and  God.  But  it 
was  characteristic  of  Judaism,  with  its  fervent 
Messianic  expectations,  that  the  idea  of  a  conflict 
between  God  and  the  dragon  should  be  transferred 
from  the  past  to  the  future,  from  cosmogony  to 
history  and  eschatologj-,  .so  that  the  revolt  of  the 
dragon  and  his  subjection  by  the  Divine  might  be- 
came an  episode  not  of  pre-historic  ages  but  of  the 
last  days  (cf.  Is  27S  Dn  7*).  In  Rev.  the  visions 
of  non-canonical  as  well  as  canonical  apocalyptists 
have  been  freely  made  use  of ;  and  the  Jewish 
features  of  the  story  of  the  dragon  are  apparent 
(cf.  12^  with  Eth.  Enoch,  xx.  5,  Assumption  of 
Moses,  X.  2).  But  what  is  characteristic  is  that 
the  figure  and  functions  of  the  dragon  are  turned 
to  Christian  uses,  so  that  they  have  a  bearing 
upon  Christ's  earthly  birth  and  heavenly  glory 
(12*),  upon  the  present  conflict  of  Christianity 
with  the  M-orld's  evil  powers  and  its  victory  over 
them  by  '  the  blood  of  the  Lamb '  and  '  the  testi- 
mony of  Jesus  Christ*  (vv.i^i*-"),  and  above  all 
upon  the  assurance  of  Christian  faith  that  God 
will  destroy  the  dragon's  present  power  to  accuse 
His  people  and  persecute  them  even  unto  death 
(w.'"-  "•  ^^  "),  and  will  at  the  appointed  time  send 
forth  His  angel  to  subdue  him  utterly  (20^''). 

Literature. — H.  Gnnkel,  Sehopfung  und  Chaos,  Gotttngen, 

1895  ;  'W.  Bonsset,  The  Antichrist  Legend,  Eng.  tr.,  London, 

1896  ;  art.  '  Dragon'  in  EBi.  J.  C.  LAMBERT. 

DREAM. — 'Dream'  may  be  defined  as  a  series 
of  thoughts,  images,  or  other  mental  states,  which 
are  experienced  during  sleep.  The  words  that  aire 
most  frequently  translated  '  dream '  in  the  Bible 
are  ci^q  and  tvap.  In  the  OT  dreams  are  described 
somewhat  in  detail,  especially  those  of  Jacob 
(Gn  28i*>-2*),  of  Joseph  (Gn  Tt^^"),  of  Nebuchadrezzar 
(Dn  2  and  4),  and  of  Daniel  (Dn  7).  In  the  NT,  the 
only  instances  given  are  those  of  the  appearance  of 
the  angel  to  Joseph  (Mt  V^^  2>^  ^^-  ^),  the  dream 
of  the  Magi  (Mt  2"),  and  the  notable  dream  of 
Pilate's  wife  (Mt  27^).  In  spite  of  the  fact  that 
certain  dreams  are  set  out  with  considerable  fullness 
of  detail,  the  instances  recorded  are  not  numerous, 
which  seems  to  indicate  that  God's  revelations  by 
this  medium  are  to  be  regarded  as  exceptional  and 
providential  rather  than  as  the  usual  means  of 
communication  of  the  Divine  will.  The  Fathers 
were  in  the  habit  of  warning  the  Christians  against 
the  tendency  to  consider  dreams  asomens  in  a  super- 
stitious sense. 

The  only  references  to  dreams  or  dreaming  in  the 
apostolic  writings  are  Ac  2*^  '  your  old  men  shall 
dream  dreams'  (quoted  from  Jl  2^),  and  Jude' 
'  these  also  (the  false  teachers  of  v.*)  in  their  dream- 
ings  defile  the  tiesh ' :  the  reference  is  understood 
by  Bigg  (Second  Pet.  andJude[ICC,  1901]),  follow- 
ing von  Soden  and  Spitta,  to  be  to  the  attempt  of 
the  false  teachers  to  support  their  doctrines  by 
revelations. 

The  earliest  theories  present  the  dream-world  as 
real  but  remote — a  region  where  the  second  self 
wanders  in  company  with  other  second  selves. 
The  next  stage  is  that  of  symbolic  pictures  unfolded 
to  the  inner  organs  of  perception  by  some  super- 
natural being.  The  general  depression  of  \-ital 
activities  during  sleep  may  produce  complete  un- 
consciousness, especially  during  the  early  part  of 
the  night,  but  portions  of  the  brain  may  be  in 
activity  in  dreaming,  with  the  accompanying 
partial  consciousness.  It  was  asserted  by  the  Car- 
tesians and  Leibniz,  and  as  stoutly  denied  by 
Locke,  that  the  soul  is  always  thinking  ;  but  many 
modem  ^^•riters  consider  that  dreaming  takes  place 
only  during  the  process  of  waking.  It  is  gener- 
ally admitted  that,  whilst  for  the  most  part  the 
1  material  of  our  dreams  is  drawn  from  our  waking 


314 


DRESS 


DRUNKEN^^ESS 


experiences,  the  stimuli,  external  or  internal,  act- 
ing upon  the  sense  organs  during  sleep  produce  the 
exaggerated  and  fantastic  impressions  m  the  mind 
which  are  woven  into  the  fabric  of  our  dreams. 
On  the  other  hand,  ¥.  W.  H.  My ern  (Human  Per- 
sonality) regards  dreams,  with  certain  other  mental 
states,  as  being  '  uprushes '  from  the  subliminal 
self,  and  sleep  with  all  its  phenomena  as  the  re- 
freshing of  the  soul  by  the  influences  of  the  world 
of  spirit.  This  view,  if  correct,  would  nllbrd  scope 
for  the  revelation  of  God's  will  as  narrated  in  the 
biblical  accounts,  if  not  in  exceptional  experiences 
of  the  present  time.  At  any  rate,  there  is  nothing 
in  raotfern  psychology  to  preclude  the  possibility 
of  Divine  manifestations  in  dreams.  Many  recent 
writers  enjoin  the  cultivation  of  restfulness  and 
repose  of  the  soul  in  order  that  sleep  may  be  bene- 
licial  and  may  not  be  disturbed  by  unpleasant 
dreams.  George  Macdonald  sings  in  his  Evening 
Hymn : 

'  Nor  let  me  wander  all  in  rain 

Through  dreams  that  mock  and  flee  ; 
But  even  in  visions  of  the  brain 

Go  wandering  toward  Thee.' 

LiTBRATDRE. — Art.  '  Drcams  '  in  IIDB,  'Dream'  in  DCG,  and 
'Dreams  and  Sleep'  in  J':HE;  J.  Sully,  Illusions  (ISS,  1882) ; 
F.  W.  H.  Myers,  Huiium  Personality,  new  ed.,  1907  ;  G.  T. 
Ladd,  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture,  1883,  ii.  429-436 ;  S.  Freud, 
Die  Trawndeutung,  1900  (Eng.  tr..  The  Interpretation  of 
Dreams,  1913).  A  ifuU  bibliography  will  be  found  in  Baldwin's 
Diet,  of  Philosophy  and  Psychology,  vol.  iii.  pt.  ii.  [1905]  p. 

1034.  J.  G.  James. 

DRESS.— See  Clothes. 

DRUNKENNESS.— It  may  be  taken  for  granted 
that  the  wine  of  the  Bible  was  fermented,  and 
therefore,  when  taken  in  excess,  intoxicating. 
Unfermented  wine  is  a  modern  concept.  The 
ancients  had  not  that  knowledge  of  antiseptic  pre- 
cautions which  would  have  enabled  them  to  pre- 
serve the  juice  of  the  {^rape  in  an  unfermented 
state.  It  was  the  inebriating  property  of  wine 
that  constituted  the  sting  of  the  calumny  with 
which  the  sanctimonious  tried  to  injure  our  Lord — 
'I5oi>  dvOpuTros  olvow&rrjs  (Mt  IP*,  Lk  7'*).  There 
would  have  been  no  scandal  in  His  habitually- 
partaking  of  a  beverage  which  was  never  harmful. 
Christ  bade  men  take  heed  lest  their  hearts  should 
be  overcharged  with  surfeiting  and  drunkenness 
{KpanrdXj]  Kai  fiiO^,  Lk  2P'*),  but  He  evidently 
regarded  it  as  possible  to  draw  the  line  between 
the  use  and  the  abuse  of  wine.  He  was  not  a 
Nazirite,  Rechabite,  or  Essene.  A  Palestinian 
movement  against  wine  and  strong  drink  might 
conceivably  have  been  begun  by  the  Baptist 
(Lk  V^),  but  not  by  Christ.  His  religion  was  not 
in  its  essence  a  system  of  ascetic  negations ;  it  was 
much  more  than  one  of  the  '  creeds  which  deny 
and  restrain.'  In  His  time  and  country,  drunken- 
ness, however  pernicious  in  individual  cases,  could 
not  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  deadly  national 
sins. 

'Orientals  are  not  inclined  to  intemperance.  The  warm 
climate  very  quickly  makes  it  a  cause  of  discomfort  and  disease ' 
(Mackie,  Bible  Manners  and  Customs,  1898,  p.  46).  Moreover, 
'the  wines  of  Palestine  may  be  assumed  on  the  whole  not  to 
have  exceeded  the  strength  of  an  ordinary  claret '  (A.  R.  S. 
Kennedy,  EBi  iv.  5319). 

It  was  Gentile  rather  than  Jewish  wine-drinking 
habits  that  Apostolic  Christianity  had  to  combat, 
and  Bacchus  (Dionysus)  was  notoriously  one  of  the 
most  powerful  of  the  gods  of  Greece  and  Home. 
The  apostles  did  not  fight  against  the  social 
customs  of  pagan  nations  with  a  new  legalism.  It 
was  not  the  Christian  but  the  Judaizer  or  the 
Gnostic  who  repeated  the  parrot-cry,  '  Handle  not, 
taste  not,  toucn  not.'  Christianity  goes  to  work 
in  a  wholly  difl'erent  manner.  It  relies  on  the 
power  of  great  positive  truths.     It  creates  a  passion 


for  high  things  which  deadens  the  taste  for  low 
things.  Its  distinction  is  that  it  makes  every  man 
a  legislator  to  him.self.  The  inordinate  use  of  wine 
and  strong  drink  becomes  morally  impossible  for  a 
Cliristian,  not  because  there  is  an  external  law 
which  forbids  it,  but. because  his  own  enlightened 
conscience  condemns  it.  St.  Paul  does  not  say  to 
the  Roman  Ciiristians,  '  Let  us  walk  lawfully,  not 
in  revelling  and  drunkenness,'  but  '  Let  us  walk 
becomingly'  (eu(TxviJ-^'"^^>  lio  13^^).  This  means 
tliat  there  is  a  beautiful  new  (txvm^  or  ideal  of 
conduct,  of  which  every  man  becomes  enamoured 
when  he  accepts  the  Christ  in  whom  it  is  embodied. 
Thereafter  he  feels,  with  a  shuddering  repulsion, 
hoAv  ill  it  would  become  him  to  walk  in  'revelling 
and  drunkenness,  chambering  and  wantonness.' 
He  abjures  the  thouglit  of  being  at  once  spiritual 
and  sensual.  Having  put  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
he  cannot  continue  to  make  provision  for  the  flesh, 
to  fulfil  its  lusts. 

It  is  true  that  the  moral  verdicts  of  the  Christian 
are  not  always  immediate  and  sure.  '  Manifest 
are  the  works  of  the  flesh,'  wrote  St.  Paul,  naming 
among  them  'drunkenness'  (/x^Oai,  Gal  5'*- **),  but 
they  were  far  from  being  so  manifest  to  all  his 
converts.  The  Christian  conscience  needed  to  be 
educated,  the  spiritual  taste  to  be  cultivated.  At 
Corinth  the  dydinj,  or  love-feast,  whicli  ended  in 
the  Lord's  Supper,  all  too  readily  degenerated  into 
something  not  very  unlike  the  banquets  in  tlie  idol- 
temples.  '  One  is  hungry,  find  another  is  drunken  ' 
(fj,edijei,  1  Co  IP^).  '  Paul  paints  the  scene  in  strong 
colours ;  but  who  would  be  warranted  in  saying 
that  the  reality  fell  at  all  short  of  the  description  ? ' 
(Meyer,  Com.  in  loc).  It  has  always  been  one 
of  tlie  enchantments  of  Bacchus  and  Comus  to 
make  their  devotees  glory  in  their  shame,  so  that 
they 

'  Not  once  perceive  their  foul  disfigurement, 
But  boast  themselves  more  comely  than  before' 

(Milton,  Comus,  74  f.). 

That  this  is  true  of  the  vulgar  and  of  the  educated 
alike,  both  in  pagan  and  in  Christian  times,  is 
attested  not  only  by  a  thousand  drinking-songs  but 
by  the  orgies  of  the  '  Symposium  '  and  the  '  Noctes 
Ambrosianae.'  Yet  even  Omar  Khayyam,  after 
all  his  praise  of  the  Vine,  is  obliged  to  confess  that 
he  has  '  drowned  liis  glory  in  a  shallow  cup '  ;  and, 
in  the  light  of  Christianity,  drunkenness  stands 
condemned  as  a  sin  against  the  body  which  is  a 
'  member  of  Christ.' 

Christianity  is  a  religion  of  principles,  not  of 
rules,  and  in  Ro  14'^  St.  Paul  states  a  principle 
which  justifies  any  kind  and  thouglitful  man,  apart 
from  considerations  of  personal  safety  and  happi- 
ness, in  becoming  an  abstainer.  In  doing  this  the 
Apostle  is  far  from  imposing  a  new  yoke  of  bondage. 
He  does  not  categorically  say  to  the  Christian, 
'  Thou  shalt  not  drink  wine,'  but  he  reasons  that 
it  is  good  (KoXdv) — it  is  a  beautiful  morale — in 
certain  conditions  and  from  certain  motives,  to 
abstain.  There  was  evidently  a  tendency  among 
Christian  liberals,  who  rightly  gloried  m  their 
free  evangelical  position,  to  say,  '  If  men  will  per- 
vert and  abuse  our  example,  we  cannot  help  it ; 
the  fault  is  their  own,  and  they  must  bear  the 
consequences.'  St.  Paul,  the  freest  of  all,  sees  a 
more  excellent  way,  and  chooses  to  walk  in  it, 
though  he  does  not  exercise  his  apostolic  authority 
to  command  otliers  to  follow  him.  What  is  his 
own  liberty  to  drink  a  little  wine  in  comparison 
with  the  temporal  safety  and  eternal  salvation  of 
thou.sands  who  are  unable  to  use  the  same  freedom 
without  stumbling  ?  He  cannot — no  man  can — live 
merely  unto  himself,  and  he  would  sooner  be  so  far 
a  Nazirite  or  an  Essene  than  do  any  tiling  to  hurt 
a  brother. 

It  is  noticeable  that  there  was  never  any  organ- 


DRUNKENNESS 


EAGLE 


315 


ized  movement  in  the  Apostolic  or  post -Apostolic 
Church  against  the  use  ot  strong  drink-  Many  of 
the  Fathers,  follomng  the  example  of  Philo — who 
wrote  .1  l)ook  -repi  iidd-ns  on  Gn  ^^ — dealt  with  the 
subject  at  length.  Clement,  Cyprian,  Chrysostom, 
Jerome,  and  Augustine  all  preached  moderation  to 
every  one  and  atetinence  to  some.  But  neither  the 
apostles  nor  the  Fathers  ever  dreamed  of  seeking 
legislation  for  the  prohibition  or  even  the  restric- 
tion of  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors. 
Since  their  time  two  things — the  discovery  of  dis- 
tilled liquors  in  the  13th  cent.,  and  the  trend  of 
ci>-ilization  northward — have  greatly  altered  the 
conditions  of  the  problem. 

'  Extremists  now  place  all  alcohol-containing  drinks  onder 
the  same  ban,  hut  fermented  liquors  are  still  generally  held  to 
be  comj>aratively  innocuous ;  nor  can  any  one  deny  that  there 
is  a  difference.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  if  spirits  had  never  been 
discovered  the  historj"  of  the  question  would  have  l)eeD  entirely 
different '  (A.  ShadweU,  ££rii  xsyi.  578).  '  The  evils  which  it  is 
desired  to  check  are  much  greater  in  some  countries  than  in 
others.  .  .  .  The  inhabitants  of  south  Europe  are  much  less  given 
to  alcoholic  excess  than  those  of  central  Europe,  who  agaio  are 
more  temperate  than  those  of  the  north '  (ti.  xvi.  759). 

Just  where  the  temptations  to  dmnkenness  are 
greatest,  the  Apostle's  principle  of  self-denial  for 
the  sake  of  others  is  evidently  the  highest  ethic. 
No  drunkard  can  '  inherit  the  Kingdom  of  God ' 
(1  Co  6^*;,  and  the  task  of  Christian  churches  and 
governments  is  'to  make  it  easy  for  men  to  do 
good  and  diflBcult  for  them  to  do  evil.' 

Since,  however,  it  is  notoriously  impossible  to 
make  men  sober  merely  by  legislation,  the  main 
factors  in  the  problem  must  always  be  moral  and  re- 
ligious. The  Apostolic  Chtirch  found  the  true  solu- 
tion. The  Christians  who  were  filled  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  were  mockingly  said 
to  be  filled  Avith  wine  (-yXevKos,  Ac  2^,  perhaps 
'  sweet  wine  ' ;  not  '  new  wine,'  as  Pentecost  took 
place  eight  months  after  the  vintage).  St.  Peter 
tried  to  convince  the  multitude  that  it  was  not  a 
sensual  but  a  spiritual  intoxication,  and  St.  Paul 
gives  to  all  Christians  the  remarkable  cotinsel,  '  Be 
not  drunken  with  wine,  wherein  is  dissolutenes.s 
(dffwria  ;  cf.  offwrus  in  Lk  15^),  but  be  filled  with 
the  Spirit'  (Eph  5^).  It  is  presupposed  that  every 
man  naturally  craves  some  form  of  exhilaration, 
loving  to  have  his  feelings  excited,  his  imagination 
fired,  his  spirit  thrilled.  And  drunkenness  is  the 
perversion  of  a  true  instinct.  It  is  the  fool's  way 
of  drowning  care  and  rising  victorious  over  the  ills 
of  life.  Intoxication  is  the  tragic  parody  of  in- 
spiration. What  every  man  ne^s  is  a  spiritual 
enthttsiasm  which  completely  diverts  his  thoughts 
from  the  pursuit  of  sensuous  excitement,  on  the 
psychological  principle  that  two  conflicring  passions 
cannot  dominate  the  mind  at  the  same  time.  That 
enthusiasm  is  the  gift  of  the  Divine  Spirit. 

The  injtmction  to  Timothy  to  be  no  longer  a 
water-drinker  {firjK^i  vSpordrei)  but  to  use  a  little 
wine  (1  Ti  5^)  is  now  generally  regarded  as  post- 
Pauline.     It  is  '  evidently,  in  the  context  in  which 


it  stands,  not  merely  a  sanitary  but  quite  as  much 
a  moral  precept,  and  thus  implies  that  Timothy 
had  himself  begun  to  abjure  wine  on  pounds  of 
personal  sanctity '  (F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Judaistic  Chris- 
tianity, 1894,  p.  144).  The  words  were  probably 
written  about  the  time  of  the  first  appearance  of 
the  Encratites  (EEE  v.  301),  who  made  abstinence 
from  flesh,  wine,  and  marriage  the  chief  part  of 
their  religion,  seeking  salvation  not  by  faith  but 
by  asceticism.  Water-drinking  thus  for  a  time 
became  associated  with  a  deadly  error.  This  was 
a  situation  in  which  Christians  felt  it  to  be  therr 
duty  to  assert  their  right  to  use  what  they  re- 
garded as  the  creature  and  gift  of  God  (1  Ti  4**  •). 
See,  further,  art.  Abstinence. 

James  Strahax. 
DSUSILLA  (Ac  24").  — The  youngest  of  the 
three  daughters  of  Herod  Agrippa  I.  She  was  but 
six  years  old  when  her  father  died  in  a.d.  44 
(Jos.  Ant.  xrx.  ix.  1).  He  had  betrothed  her  to 
Epiphanea,  son  of  the  king  of  Commagene.  This 
marriage  did  not  take  place,  as  Epiphanes  refused 
to  undergo  the  rite  of  circumcision  (Ant.  xx.  vii. 
1).  Drtisilla  was  given  by  her  brother  Agrippa  ll. 
to  Azizus,  king  of  Emesa.  The  marriage  took 
place  seemingly  in  a.d.  53.  Very  shortly  afterwards 
the  procurator  Felix,  who  had  lately  come  to 
Juda»,  met  the  yoting  queen  and  was  captivated  by 
her  charms  ('  She  did  indeed  exceed  all  other  women 
in  beauty'  [Ant.  XX.  vii.  2]).  Employing  as  his 
emissary  one  Simon,  a  Cypriote,  he  persuaded  her 
to  leave  her  husband  and  to  join  him  as  his  third 
wife — and  third  queen  ('  trium  reginarum  maritum,' 
writes  Suetonius  of  Felix  [Claud,  xx^iii.]).  Of 
this  union  there  was  issue  a  son,  who  was  given 
the  name  Agrippa,  and  of  whom  Josephus  (Ant. 
XX.  vii.  2)  records  incidentally  that  he  and  his 
wife  perished  in  the  eruption  of  Vesu>-ius  in  the 
reign  of  the  Emperor  Titus,  i.e.  in  a.d.  79.  Of 
DrusiUa  herself  nothing  is  recorded  later  than  the 
sta.tement  in  Acts,  which  permits  us  to  assume 
that  she  was  present  when  St.  Paul  had  audience 
of  Felix,  and  used  the  opportunity  to  reason  '  of 
righteotisness,  and  temperance,  and  the  judgment 
to  come.'  G.  P.  GOCUD. 

DYSENTERY  (AV  'bloody  flux';  Gr.  hvaew- 
Tf piov,  Ac  28*). — When  St.  Paul  and  his  com- 
panions, on  their  way  to  Kome,  were  shipwrecked 
on  the  island  of  Malta,  the  father  of  Publius  who 
was  governor  of  the  island  was  suttering  from  this 
malady  in  an  aggravated  form.  The  symptoms  of 
the  disease  are  inflammation  of  the  mucous  mem- 
brane of  the  large  intestine,  mucous,  bloody,  diffi- 
cult, and  painful  evacuations,  accompamiecl  with 
more  or  less  fever.  Owing  to  Publius'  kindness 
to  the  little  group  of  delayed  travellers,  the  Apostle 
visited  his  father,  '  prayed,  and  laid  his  hands  on 
him,  and  healed  him.'  This  was  evidently  a  case 
of  mental  healing,  made  effective  by  prayer  and  per- 
sonal contact.  C.  A.  Beck:with. 


E 


E16LE  (ierSs,  Rev  4'  8"  12").— There  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  the  'eagle'  of  the  EV  ought  in 
most  cases  rather  to  be  rendered  '  vulture.'  Both 
the  Hebrew  word  -t»i  (in  the  OT)  and  the  Greek 
word  deros  (in  the  NT)  are  used  to  designate 
'  vnlture '  as  well  as  '  eagle,'  and  it  is  a  bird  of  this 
species  rather  than  an  eagle  that  is  generally  re- 
ferred to  both  in  the  OT  and  the  NT.  though  in 


the  above-mentioned  passages   it  is  just  possible 
that  derdj  may  denote  an  eagle. 

Four  kinds  of  vultures  are  known  in  Palestine 
(cf.  Tristram,  SWF :  '  The  Fauna  and  Flora  of 
Palestine,'  1884,  p.  94),  viz.  (1)  Gypcetus  barbatus; 
(2)  Gypsfulvus,  or  *  gnfibn' ;  (3)  Neophron perenop- 
tents,  the  'Egyptian  vulture';  (4)  Vultur monachus 
(cf.   Post  in  HDB  i.   632).     The  Gyps  fulvu*  or 


316 


EAGLE 


EAR 


'  griffon '  is  supposed  to  be  referred  to  in  most  of  tlie 
passages  in  the  OT  and  the  NT. 

There  are  said  to  be  eight  different  kinds  of  eagle 
in  Palestine:  (1)  Aquila  chryscetus,  or  'Golden 
Eagle.'  This  is  seen  in  winter  all  over  Palestine, 
but  in  summer  it  is  only  to  be  found  in  the 
mountain  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon.  (2) 
Aquila  heliaca,  or  '  Imperial  Eagle,'  which  is  more 
common  than  the  Golden  Eagle,  and  does  not  leave 
its  winter  haunts  in  summer  time.  The  Imperial 
Eagle  prefers  to  make  its  nest  in  trees  rather  than 
cliffs,  and  in  this  respect  differs  from  the  Golden 
Eagle.  (3)  Aquila  clanga,  or  'Greater  Spotted 
Eagle.'  (4)  Aquila  rapax,  or  'Tawny  Eagle,' 
which  is  found  fairly  frequently  in  the  wooded 
districts  of  Palestine.  This  bird  breeds  in  the 
cliffs,  and  plunders  other  birds  of  their  prey.  (5) 
Aquila pennata,  or  '  Booted  Eagle,'  which  is  found 
chiefly  m  the  wooded  parts  of  Galilee,  the  Lebanon 
and  Phoenicia.  (6)  Aquila  nipalensis,  or  '  Steppe 
Eagle.'  (7)  Aqtiila  bonelli,  or  '  Bonelli's  Eagle,' 
which  is  not  uncommon  in  the  wadis  and  rocky 
districts  of  Central  Palestine.  This  bird  is  more 
like  a  falcon  than  an  eagle.  (8)  Circcetus  gallicus, 
or  '  Short- toed  Eagle.'  This  is  by  far  the  common- 
est of  all  Palestinian  eagles.  They  remain  from 
early  spring  to  the  beginning  of  winter,  when 
most  of  them  migrate,  probably  to  Arabia.  This 
fearless  and  dignified  bird  is  easily  recognized  by 
its  lar^e  flat  head,  huge  yellow  eyes,  and  brightly 
spotted  breast.  Its  short  toes  and  tarsi  are  covered 
with  scales  which  aftbrd  it  protection  against  the 
serpents  on  which  it  preys.  The  abundance  of  this 
species  is  doubtless  accounted  for  by  the  large 
number  of  lizards  and  serpents  found  in  Palestine. 
It  is  found  throughout  Central  Europe,  but  only 
rarely  ;  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  seen  fairly  often 
in  the  countries  bordering  on  the  Mediterranean. 
It  breeds  in  trees  and  not  on  rocks. 

In  Rev  4"  the  eagle  plays  a  part  in  the  vision  of 
the  tlirone  in  heaven  :  'And  the  first  creature  was 
like  a  lion,  and  the  second  creature  like  a  calf,  and 
the  third  creature  had  a  face  as  of  a  man,  and  the 
fourth  cieature  was  like  a  flying  eagle.'  These  four 
forms,  which  suggest  all  that  is  strongest,  noblest, 
wisest,  and  swiftest  in  animate  nature,  are  the  same 
as  those  in  Ezekiel's  vision  (Ezk  1"*),  but  here  the 
order  is  difterent,  and  each  '  living  creature '  has 
six  Avings,  while  in  Ezekiel  each  has  only  four 
wings.  Nature,  including  man,  is  thus  represented 
before  the  Throne  as  consciously  or  unconsciously 
taking  its  part  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  will  of  the 
Divine. 

In  Rev  8"  :  *  And  I  saw,  and  I  heard  an  ea^le, 
flying  in  mid  heaven,  saying  with  a  great  voice, 
Woe,  woe,  woe,  for  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth, 
by  reason  of  the  other  voices  of  the  trumpet  of  the 
three  angels  who  are  yet  to  sound,'  the  eagle  ap- 
pears as  the  herald  of  calamity.  The  first  series 
of  four  trumpet-blasts  have  gone  forth,  and  the 
forces  of  Nature  have  done  tlieir  work  ruthlessly, 
but  the  worst  is  yet  to  come.  The  eagle — which, 
it  will  be  noted,  was  heard  as  well  as  seen — is 
chosen  on  account  of  its  swiftness  as  a  fitting 
emblem  of  the  judgment  about  to  fall  upon  the 
pa^an  population  of  the  world. 

In  Rev  12^''  the  eagle  is  the  means  whereby  the 
woman — i.e.  the  Christian  Church — is  conveyed 
away  from  the  dragon  and  his  fury  to  a  place  of 
safety  in  the  wilderness.  The  actual  event  alluded 
to  was  no  doubt  the  escape  of  the  Church  of  Jeru- 
salem to  Pella  (cf.  Mk  13"  '  then  let  them  that  are 
in  Juda>a  flee  unto  the  mountains'),  though  the 
life  of  the  Church  and  her  members  must  always 
to  some  extent  be  a  solitary  life — i.e.  in  the  world 
but  not  of  it — and  her  vocation  will,  from  one 
]>oint  of  view,  always  be  that  of  a  'voice  crying 
in   the  wilderness.'    Again,  in  the  early  days  of  I 


Christianity  persecution  made  secrecy  necessary 
for  the  very  existence  of  the  Church.  Tfie  figure 
in  Rev  12"  is  paralleled  in  the  OT.  Thus  in  Ex 
19*  Jahweh  is  represented  as  saying,  '  Ye  have 
seen  what  I  did  unto  the  Egyptians,  and  how  1 
bare  you  on  eagles'  wings,  and  brought  you  unto 
myself,'  while  in  Dt  32"  He  is  likened  unto  an 
eagle :  '  As  an  eagle  that  stineth  up  her  nest,  that 
fluttereth  over  her  young,  he  spread  abroad  his 
wings,  he  took  them,  he  bare  them  on  his  pinions.' 
Lastly,  in  Is  40^'  the  promise  to  those  who  shall 
'wait  upon  the  Lord'  is  that  'they  shall  renew 
their  strength,'  and  '  mount  up  with  wings  as 
eagles.'  In  all  the  passages  in  Revelation,  it  is  pro- 
bable that  drr6j  denotes  '  vulture '  as  elsewhere. 

Liter ATUEB.— For  the  eagle  in  Palestine  see  H.  B.  Tristram, 
SWP,  "The  Fauna  and  Flora  of  Palestine,'  1884,  pp.  94-101, 
Natural  History  of  the  Bible^o,  i9ll,  p.  17'2ff.  ;  W.  M.  Thom- 
son, The  Land  and  the  Book,  new  ed.,  1910,  p.  150  f.  ;  E.  W.  G. 
Masterman,  in  SDJJ,  ZOO;  G.  E.  Post,  in  HDB  i.  632  ;  A.  E. 
Shipley  and  S.  A.  Cook,  in  EBi  ii.  1145.  On  the  texts  see 
especially  H.  B.  Swete,  T?ie  Apoealvpse  of  St.  John-,  1907, 
aa  io<=-  P.  S.  P.  HaNDCOCK. 

EAR. — The  finer  shades  of  biblical  statement  are 
discerned  only  as  we  succeed  in  placing  ourselves 
at  the  contemporary  point  of  view.  This  is  par- 
ticularly the  case  with  references  to  personality 
and  its  elements  or  manifestations,  since  primitive 
or  ancient  psychology  dift'ers  so  greatly  from  the 
psychology  of  the  present  time.  For  example, 
primitive psj'chology,  in  its  ignorance  of  the  nervous 
system,  distributes  psychical  and  ethical  attributes 
to  the  various  physical  organs.  There  are  triljes 
that  give  the  ears  of  a  dead  enemy  to  their  youths 
to  be  eaten,  because  they  regard  the  physical  ear 
as  the  seat  of  intelligence,  which  thus  becomes  an 
attribute  of  the  consumer  (J.  G.  Frazer,  The  Golden 
Bough^,  1900,  ii.  357  f. ).  Though  the  Bible  contains 
nothing  so  crude  as  this,  yet  the  same  idea  of  local- 
ized psychical  function  underlies  its  references  to 
the  ear.  The  high  priest's  ear  is  consecrated  by 
the  application  of  ram's  blood,  that  he  may  the 
better  hear  God  (Lv  8^^) ;  the  slave's  ear,  on  his 
renunciation  of  liberty,  is  pierced  by  his  master, 
as  a  guarantee  of  his  permanent  obedience  (Ex  21'", 
Dt  15''').  Such  practices  help  to  give  the  true  line 
of  approach  to  many  biblical  references  to  the  ear, 
the  full  force  of  which  might  otherwise  be  missed. 
The  'peripheral  consciousness'  of  the  ear  (cf.  1  S  3", 
Job  12'^  Ec  1^,  etc.)  must  be  remembered  in  regard 
to  phrases  which  have  become  to  us  simply  conven- 
tional, such  as  the  repeated  refrain  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, '  He  that  hath  an  ear,  let  him  hear '  (Rev  2% 
etc.  ;  oi5j).  This  greater  intensity  of  local  meaning 
gives  new  point  to  the  Pauline  analogy  between 
the  human  body  and  the  Church.  Since  '  the  body 
is  not  one  member,  but  many'  (1  Co  12"),  in  a 
psychical  and  moral,  as  well  as  in  a  physical,  sense, 
it  is  more  readily  conceivable  that  the  ear  might 
resent  its  inferiority  to  the  eye  (v.'*).  Its  actual 
co-operation  with  the  eye  is  therefore  a  more  eflec- 
tive  rebuke  to  the  envy  springing  from  Corinthian 
individualism. 

Moral  or  spiritual  qualities  are  assigned  to  the 
ear  in  several  passages,  according  to  the  frequent 
OT  usage  (Pr  15=*',  Is  59',  etc.);  one  example  is 
quoted  from  the  OT  and  applied  by  St.  Paul  to 
the  Jews  of  Rome  :  '  their  ears  are  dull  of  hearing ' 
(Ac  28^  ;  cf.  Ro  11^).  The  same  charge  is  brought 
by  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  against 
those  to  whom  he  writes  (5"  ;  ixoal,  not  oh).  This 
attribution  of  quality  to  the  organ  does  not,  of 
course,  imply  naturalistic  determinism  ;  the  ear  is 
part  of  the  responsible  personality.  If  men  '  hav- 
ing itching  ears,  will  heap  to  themselves  teachers 
after  their  own  lusts,'  it  is  because  '  they  will  turn 
away  tlieir  ears  from  the  truth '  (2  Ti  4^'-  ;  d/coij). 
The  OT  reference  to  the '  uncircumciaed '  ear  ( Jer  6'") 


EAKNEST 


EARTHQUAKE 


317 


is  several  times  repeated  (Ac  7"  ;  Ep.  Bam.  ix.  4, 
X.  12). 

The  only  significant  act  named  in  this  literature 
in  reference  to  the  ear  is  that  of  those  who  hear 
Stephen  declare  his  vision  of  Jesus  at  the  right  hand 
of  God  :  they  stop  their  ears,  that  the  blasphemy 
may  not  enter  (Ac  7").  Ignatius  writes  to  the 
Ephesians  (ix.  1),  with  reference  to  false  teachers, 
'  ye  stopped  your  ears,  so  that  ye  might  not  receive 
the  seed  sown  by  them.'  Irenieus  (ap.  Eus.  HE 
V.  20)  says  of  Polycarp  that  '  if  that  blessed  and 
apostolic  presbyter  had  heard  any  such  thing  [as 
the  Gnosticism  of  Florinus],  he  would  have  cried 
out,  and  stopped  his  ears.'  The  baptismal  practice 
of  a  later  a^  protected  the  ear  of  the  candidate  by 
the  Effeta  (Ephphatha),  a  rite  based  on  the  miracle 
recorded  in  Mk  7**.  The  priest  touched  the  ear 
with  his  finger  moistened  with  saliva  (Duchesne, 
Origines  du  Culte  Chretien*,  1908,  p.  311).  The  posi- 
tive side  of  the  baptismal  anointing  of  the  ear  seems 
to  be  implied  in  the  Odes  of  Solomon,  ix.  1 :  '  Open 
vour  ears,  and  I  •will  speak  to  you'  (cf.  J.  H. 
Semard,  TS  viii.  3  [1912]  ad  loc.).  For  the 
apostles,  therefore,  the  ear  forms  the  correlate  to 
'  the  word  of  faith  which  we  preach '  (Ro  10*"^'), 
which  is  conceived  with  equal  pregnancy  of  mean- 
ing as  the  vehicle  of  the  Spirit  (E.  Sokolowski, 
Die  Begi-iffe  Geist  tend  Leben  bei  Paidus,  1903, 
pp.  263-267).  Through  the  response  of  the  con- 
scious ear  to  the  spoken  word,  an  experience  is 
begun  which  eventually  passes  into  the  realm  of 
those  '  things  which  ear  heard  not '  (1  Co  2®  ;  cf.  1 
Clem,  xxxiv.  8,  2  Clem.  xi.  7),  and  of  those  '  un- 
speakable words  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man 
to  utter'  (2  Co  12^).       H.  Wheeler  Roblnsox. 

EARNEST  (appo^wj-).— The  word  occurs  three 
times  in  the  NT,  \\z.  2  Co  1-  5^  '  the  earnest  of 
the  Spirit,"  and  Eph  1"  '  the  earnest  of  our  inherit- 
ance." The  word  means  '  pledge,'  '  surety,'  '  assur- 
ance,' and  is  taken  from  an  old  Hebrew  term  used 
in  connexion  with  the  transference  of  property. 
The  Hebrew  equivalent  jia-rj  is  found  in  Gn  38"-  ^^-  ^ 
referring  to  the  pledge  of  a  staft'  and  a  signet -ring 
given  by  Judah  to  Tamar  as  an  assurance  that  she 
would  receive  her  hire.  Probably  the  word  came 
into  Greek  through  Phoenician  traders,  and  we 
find  it  in  Latin  in  three  forms :  arrhabo,  arrabo 
{e.g.  Plautus,  True.  m.  ii.  20),  and  arrha  (e.g. 
Aulus  GeUius,  xvn.  ii.  21).  It  is  found  in  the 
form  arra  or  arrhes  in  the  languages  most  directly 
derived  from  the  Latin.  The  Scotch  word  '  arles ' 
—the  coin  given  by  a  master  to  a  servant  on  en- 
gagement as  a  pledge  that  the  fee  will  be  duly 
paid — is  derived  from  the  same  source,  and  corre- 
sponds to  the  obsolete  English  word  'earlespenny.' 
The  word  signifies,  not  merely  a  pledge,  but  also 
a  part  of  the  possession.  In  the  conveyance  of 
property  in  ancient  times  it  was  usual  for  the 
seller  to  give  the  buyer  a  handful  of  earth  or  part 
of  the  thatch  of  the  house  as  a  token  that  the  wir- 
gain  would  be  binding,  and  that  the  whole  pro- 
perty, of  which  the  buyer  thus  received  a  part, 
would  be  delivered  over  in  due  course. 

In  Scripture  the  idea  underlying  this  conception  is 
frequently  referred  to.  Thus  in  Gn  24—  **  the  ear- 
rings and  the  bracelets  given  by  Eliezer  to  Rebecca 
are  tokens  of  the  wealth  of  his  master  and  evidence 
of  a  comfortable  home  in  Canaan.  In  the  NT 
passages  the  Holy  Spirit  which  is  given  to  believers 
is  regarded  by  the  Apostle  as  both  the  pledge  and 
the  tirst-fruits  of  the  inheritance  that  awaits  them. 
In  2  Co  1^  5'  'the  earnest  of  the  Spirit'  is  the 
earnest  which  is  the  Spirit.  The  present  posses- 
sions of  Christian  believers  imparted  by  the  Spirit 
are  both  pledge  and  foretaste  of  the  future  bliss 
that  awaits  them.  They  are  the  '  earnest '  of  the 
•inheritance'  (Eph  1").  W.  F.  Bo^i). 


EARTH,  EARTHEN,  EARTHY,  EARTHLY.— 
Earth  (yfj)  is  used  in  a  variety  of  meanings,  which 
may  be  distinguished  as  follows:  (1)  the  dust  or 
matter  of  which  the  first  man  was  made  (1  Co  l.V") ; 
(2)  the  fertile  soil  which  yields  grass  and  herbs 
and  fruit  (He  6',  Ja  5',  Rev  9*) ;  (3)  the  solid 
ground  upon  which  men  stand  or  fall  (Ac  9*-  *) ;  (4) 
the  land  in  contrast  %vith  the  sea  (2  P  3',  Rev  10*) ; 
(5)  the  whole  world  as  the  abode  of  men  (Ac  1*, 
etc.  ;  equivalent  here  to  the  more  frequent  oUov- 
uirv)  or  beasts  (Ac  10"  II*) ;  (6)  the  eartn  in  space, 
in  contrast  with  the  visible  heavens — skies  and 
stars  (Ac  2'*,  Rev  6") ;  (7)  the  earth  in  contrast 
with  the  invisible  heavens — the  dwelling-place  of 
Grod  and  Christ,  of  angels  and  perfected  saints 
(Ac  7«,  1  Co  15",  Eph  31*,  He  8*;  cf.  v.i) ;  (8)  the 
earth  in  contrast  with  the  underworld  (Ph  2'*, 
Rev  o*"  ") ;  (9)  the  earth  with  a  moral  connota- 
tion, as  the  sphere  of  a  merely  worldly  life  to 
which  is  opposed  the  heavenly  life  with  Christ  in 
God  (Col  3- »). 

Earthen  {itrrpdKanK,  fr.  &rrpaicoF=:' burnt  clay,'  or 
anything  made  therefrom). — The  Gr.  word  .occurs 
twice  in  the  NT,  but  in  EV  is  only  once  translated 
'  earthen.'  In  2  Ti  2^  the  rendering  is  '  of  earth,' 
and  the  reference  is  simply  to  the  material  of  the 
earthen  vessels  in  contrast  with  those  of  gold  and 
silver  and  wood.  In  2  Co  4",  where  *  earthen '  is 
used,  there  appears  to  be  a  suggestion  not  only  of 
the  meanness  of  the  earthen  vessels  in  contrast 
with  the  preciousness  of  the  treasure  they  con- 
tain, but  of  their  frailty  in  contrast  Avith  the  ex- 
ceeding greatness  of  the  Divine  power  of  God  who 
uses  them  as  His  instruments. 

Earthy  (xoi'^ds,  '  made  of  earth,'  fr.  xow  =  *  earth,' 
'  dust,'  by  which  in  the  LXX  is;  is  rendered  in  Gn 
2^,  etc.  ;  though  in  other  passages  yri  is  freguently 
employed  for  the  same  purpose,  just  as  it  is  by 
St.  Paul  in  1  Co  15*^). — The  only  occurrence  of  the 
word  is  in  1  Co  15"-  *^  **,  where  Adam  is  called 
'earthy,'  i.e.  consisting  of  earth-material,  in  con- 
trast with  Christ,  the  '  heavenly,'  i.e.  of  heavenly 
origin.  The  meaning  of  '  earthy '  here  is  thus  sug- 
gested by  (7)  above  as  well  as  by  (1). 

Earthly  (erifeioi,  *  upon  the  earth,'  '  terrestrial,' 
2  Co  51,  Ph  313,  Ja  3").— Outside  of  the  Fourth 
Gk>spel  '  earthly '  occurs  only  3  times  in  the  NT, 
but  (-riyeLos  is  found  also  in  1  Co  15**,  where  EV 
renders  'terrestrial,'  and  Ph  2'*,  where  EV  gives 
'things  on  earth.'  In  all  these  passages  there  is 
a  contrast  of  the  earthly  with  the  heavenly.  In 
1  Co  15**,  2  Co  5^  the  contrast  is  that  suggested 
under  (7).  In  Ph  3'*,  Ja  3'*  it  is  that  suggested 
under  (9).  In  Ph  2^",  while  '  things  on  earth  '  are 
contrasted  with  '  things  in  heaven, '  the  meaning  of 
iriyficK  itself  is  that  suggested  by  (5),  the  '  things  on 
earth '  being  the  inhabitants  ot  the  whole  world ; 
and  there  is  a  further  contrast  with  the  'things 
under  the  earth,'  the  inhabitants  of  the  under  world 
(cf.  (8)).  J.  C.  Lambert. 

EARTHQUAKE  {(reurfuii,  from  <reia;,  '  to  shake '). 
— In  the  ancient  East  all  abnormal  phenomena 
were  regarded  as  supernatural,  and  any  attempt 
to  explain  them  by  secondary  causes  was  dis- 
couraged as  savouring  of  irreverent  prying  into 
hidden  things.  Being  at  once  so  mysterious  and 
so  terrible,  earthquakes  and  volcanoes  were  traced 
to  the  direct  activity  of  One  'who  looketh  upon 
the  earth  and  it  trembleth  ;  he  toucheth  the 
mountains  and  they  smoke '  (Ps  104*^).  Minor 
tremors  were  not,  indeed,  always  interpreted  as 
signs  of  the  Divine  displeasure;  sometimes  quite 
the  contrary.  When  a  company  of  disciples  were 
praising  God  and  praying  after  the  release  of  St. 
Peter  and  St.  John  from  prison,  the  shaking  of 
the  room  was  regarded  as  a  token  that  the  Lord 
Himself  was  at  hand  to  defend  His  cause.     But 


31S 


EASTER 


EBIONISM 


more  severe  shocks  were  always  apt  to  cause  a 
panic  fear,  whicli  was  naturally  greatest  in  the 
breasts  of  those  who  were  conscious  of  guilt. 
When  St.  Paul  and  Silas  were  praying  and  singing 
in  a  Philippian  gaol,  the  place  was  sliaken  by  an 
earthquake  violent  enough  to  open  the  doors  and 
loose  every  man's  bands  (Ramsay's  explanations 
[St.  Paul,  1895,  p.  221]  are  interesting) ;  but  terror 
prevented  the  prisoners  from  seizing  the  oppor- 
tunity of  escaping,  and  the  chance  was  past  before 
they  had  recovered  their  wits. 

Eartiiquakes  play  a  great  rdle  in  prophetic  and 
apocalyptic  literature,  (iod's  last  self-manifesta- 
tion, like  the  first  at  Sinai,  is  to  be  in  an  earth- 
quake, and  His  voice  will  make  not  only  the  earth 
but  also  the  heaven  tremble.  While  the  things 
tliat  are  shaken  will  be  removed,  those  that  are 
unshaken  (ra  fi^  craXevd/aeva)  will  remain,  the  tem- 
poral giving  place  to  the  eternal  (He  12-*"^*;  cf. 
Hag  ^'•).  When  the  sixth  seal  of  the  Book  of 
Destiny  is  opened,  there  is  a  great  earthquake 
(Rev  6'*).  When  the  censer  filled  with  fire  is  cast 
upon  the  earth,  there  follow  thunders  and  an 
earthquake  (8*).  In  another  earthquake  the  tentli 
part  of  a  great  city  falls  (probably  Jerusalem  is 
meant,  though  some  think  of  Rome)  and  7000 
persons  are  killed  (11").  When  the  last  bowl  is 
poured  upon  the  air,  the  greatest  earthquake  ever 
felt  cleaves  Jerusalem  into  three  parts,  and  en- 
tirely destroys  the  pagan  cities  (16"*^). 

The  writer  of  the  Revelation  may  himself  have 
experienced  many  earthquakes,  and  at  any  rate  he 
could  not  but  be  familiar  with  reports  of  such 
visitations,  for  in  Asia  Minor  they  were  frequent 
and  disastrous.  In  a.d.  17  '  twelve  populous  cities 
of  Asia' — among  them  Sardis  and  Philadelphia — 
'  fell  in  ruins  from  an  earthquake  which  happened 
by  night '  (Tac.  Ann.  ii.  47).  In  A.D.  60  '  Laodicea, 
one  of  the  famous  cities  of  Asia,'  was  '  prostrated  by 
an  earthquake'  {ib.  xiv.  27).  Palestine  and  Syria 
were  very  liable  to  similar  disturbances  ;  regard- 
ing earthquakes  in  Jerusalem  see  G.  A.  Smith, 
Jerusalem,  1907-08,  i.  61  fi'. 

The  religious  impression  made  by  earthquakes 
in  pre-scientific  ages  was  profound  (see  e.ff.  Mt  27"*). 
They  were  regarded  as  judgments  or  warnings,  it 
might  be  as  si^ns  of  the  approaching  end  of  the 
world,  '  the  beginning  of  travail '  (Lk  13^=Mt  24^). 
Even  Pliny,  tlie  ardent  student  of  Nature,  asserts 
that  they  are  invariably  precursors  of  calamity 
{UN  ii.  81-86).  The  just  man  of  the  Stoics  was 
undismayed  by  them  :  '  si  fractus  illabatur  orbis, 
impavidum  fenent  ruinae'  (Hor.  Car.  III.  iii.  7f.). 
Jesus  assured  His  disciples  that  amid  all  the  '  Mes- 
sianic woes '  not  a  hair  of  their  head  should  perish 
(Lk  2118). 

It  was  not  till  the  middle  of  the  19th  cent,  that 
a  careful  investigation  of  the  phenomena  of  earth- 
quakes was  begun.  Seismology  is  now  an  exact 
science,  in  which  remarkable  progress  has  been 
made  in  Japan,  a  land  of  earthquakes.  But  while 
man  rationalizes  such  calamities,  and  can  no  longer 
rerard  them  as  strictly  supernatural,  he  is  practi- 
cally as  helpless  as  ever  in  their  presence.  In  the 
earthquake  of  1908  which  destroyed  Messina  and 
Reggio  (the  Rhegium  of  Ac  28'^)  the  loss  of  life 
was  appalling.  James  Strahan. 

EASTER.— See  Passover. 

EBIONISM. — Ebionism  is  best  understood  as  the 
generic  name  under  which  may  be  included  a 
variety  of  movements,  diverging  more  or  less  from 
Catholic  Christianity,  and  primarily  due  to  a  con- 
ception of  the  permanent  validity  of  the  Jewish 
Law.  Of  these,  some  were  merely  tolerable  and 
tolerant  peculiarities ;  some  were  intolerable  and 
intolerant  perversions  of  Christianity. 


As  soon  as  Christianity  became  conscious  of  its 
world-wide  mission,  the  problem  arose  as  to  its 
relation  to  the  Judaism  out  of  which  it  sprang. 
This  produced  what  we  might  a  priori  expect — a 
dillerence  within  the  primitive  Christian  com- 
munity between  a  liberal  and  a  conservative 
tendency.  It  was  a  liberalism  which  steadily 
advanced,  a  conservatism  which  as  steadily  hara- 
ened  and  became  more  intolerant,  and  drifted 
further  out  of  likeness  to  normal  Christianity. 
Jewish  Christian  conservatism  in  its  dillerent 
degrees  and  phases  gives  rise  to  the  various  species 
of  Ebionism. 

1.  Characteristics. — All  Ebionites  are  distin- 
guished by  two  main  and  common  characteristics  : 
(1)  an  over-exaltation  of  the  Jewish  Law;  (2)  a 
defective  Christology.  We  may  take  the  first  as 
fundamental.  The  second  is  deducible  from  it. 
To  hold  by  the  validity  of  the  Law  is  obviously  to 
find  no  adequate  place  for  the  work  of  a  Redeemer 
(Gal  5*).  Clirist  tends  to  be  recognized  merely  as 
a  new  prophet  enforcing  the  old  truth.  And  de- 
fective views  of  the  work  of  Christ  logically  issue 
in,  if  they  are  not  based  upon,  defective  views  of 
His  Person.  It  is  clear  also,  that  those  who  hold 
the  Law  to  be  permanent,  cannot  consistently 
accept  the  authority  of  St.  Paul,  so  we  find  that 
(3)  hostility  to  St.  Paul,  involving  the  rejection  of 
his  Epistles,  was  a  characteristic  common,  not  to 
all,  but  to  many,  Ebionites. 

2.  Main  groups.— There  are  three  distinct  classes 
of  Ebionites.  Ancient  authorities  speak  of  two 
sects  of  Ebionites,  the  more  nearly  orthodox  of 
which  they  call  Nazarenes.  It  is  necessary,  how- 
ever, to  add  as  a  third  group  those  Ebionites  whose 
system  results  from  a  union  of  other  elements  with 
the  original  mixture  of  Judaism  and  Cliristianity. 
Our  classification,  therefore,  of  the  Ebionite  sects 
is :  (1)  Nazarenes,  (2)  Ebionites  proper,  (3)  Syncre- 
tistic  Ebionites. 

The  clear  division  into  two  sects,  named  Naza- 
renes and  Ebionites,  appears  in  the  4th  cent,  in 
Epiphanius  (Hwr.  xxx.  1)  and  Jerome  {Ep.  112,  ad 
August.  13).  But  in  the  preceding  cent.  Origen 
speaks  of  '  the  two-fold  sect  of  the  Ebionites '  (c. 
Cels.  V.  61),  though  lie  has  not  the  name  Nazarene. 
In  the  2nd  cent.  Justin  Martyr  divides  Jewish 
Christians  into  two  classes  :  those  who,  while  they 
observed  the  Law  themselves,  did  not  require 
believing  Gentiles  to  comply  therewith,  and  who 
were  willing  to  associate  with  them ;  and  those 
who  refused  to  recognize  all  who  had  not  complied 
with  the  Law  (Dial.  c.  Tryph.  xlvii.).  Justin  has 
neither  name.  At  the  end  of  the  same  cent.,  we 
find  the  name  Ebionite  for  the  first  time  in  Irenoeus 
(adv.  Hcer.  I.  xxvi.  2,  etc.).  He  has  no  distinction 
between  Ebionites  and  Nazarenes,  and  in  this 
Hippolytus  and  Tertullian  follow  him.  It  is  not 
surprising  that  only  writers  who  had  special  oppor- 
tunity of  familiarity  with  Palestinian  Christianity 
should  be  aware  of  the  distinction. 

3.  Name. — In  all  probability  both  names,  Naza- 
renes and  Ebionites,  applied  originally  to  all  Jewish 
Christians.  It  was  not  unnatural  that  they  should 
be  called  Nazarenes  (Ac  24") ;  it  was  not  unnatural 
that  they  should  call  themselves  Ebionites,  a  name 
signifying  '  the  poor '  (Heb.  p'Sf ,  'cbrjon).  We  know 
that  the  Ebionites  identified  themselves  with  the 
Christians  of  Ac  4^'-,  and  claimed  the  blessing  of  Lk 
620(Epiphan.  xxx.  17).  (Gal2"'is  an  interesting  verse 
in  this  connexion.  It  seems  clear  that  '  the  poor,' 
if  not  a  name  for  the  whole  Christian  community 
of  Jerusalem,  is  to  be  understood  at  least  of  Jewisii 
Christian  poor. )  Or,  on  the  other  hand,  the  name 
may  have  been  attached  to  Jewish  Christians  in 
contempt.  At  all  events,  we  may  take  it  as  highly 
probable  that  the  two  names  were  originally  desig- 
nations of  Jewish   Christians  generallj',  and  the 


EBIONISM 


EBIONISM 


319 


retention  of  those  primitive  names  is  in  keeping 
with  the  essentially  conservative  character  of 
Ebionism. 

Some  of  the  Fathers  (the  earliest  of  them 
Tertullian)  derive  the  name  Ebionite  from  a 
certain  teacher,  Ebion.  In  modem  times  Hilgen- 
feld  is  inclined  to  support  this  view  [Ketzer- 
geschichte,  1884,  p.  422  tt.),  but  it  is  highly  probable 
that  this  is  a  mistake,  and  that  Ebion  had  no  more 
existence  than  Gnosticus,  the  supposed  founder  of 
Gnosticism.  Origen  has  another  explanation  of 
the  name  Ebionite  as  descriptive  of  the  poverty 
of  the  dogmatic  conceptions  of  the  sect.  This  is 
but  an  interesting  coincidence. 

4.  Nazarenes.  —  We  begin  with  the  Nazarenes, 
who  came  nearest  orthodoxy,  and  are  to  be  con- 
sidered not  as  heretics,  but  as  a  sect  of  Jewish 
Christians.  Our  information  regarding  them  is 
scanty,  and  several  details  are  obscure.  Our  main 
and  almost  sole  authorities  are  Jerome  (de  Vir. 
illustr.  iii.,  and  some  references  scattered  in  his 
Commentaries)  and  Epiphanius  (Hcer.  xxix.).  The 
latter,  who  on  almost  every  subject  must  be  used 
with  the  greatest  caution,  is  in  this  particular  case 
specially  confused,  but  has  the  candour  to  admit 
that  his  knowledge  of  the  Nazarenes  is  limited. 
Jerome  had  opportunity  of  gaining  accurate  ac- 
quaintance with  their  views,  and  unless  we  admit 
his  authority,  we  have  practically  no  knowledge 
of  the  sect  at  all. 

Mainly  from  Jerome,  then,  we  learn  that  the 
views  or  the  Nazarenes  on  the  three  important 
points  (bindingness  of  the  Law,  Christology, 
authority  of  St.  Paul)  were  as  follows  : 

(a)  As  to  the  Law,  they  held  that  it  was  binding 
on  themselves,  and  continued  to  observe  it.  They 
seem,  however,  to  have  distinguished  the  Mosaic 
Law  from  the  ordinances  of  the  Rabbis,  and  to 
have  rejected  the  latter  (so  Kurtz,  Hist,  of  Christian 
Church,  Eng.  tr.,  1860,  vol.  i.  §  48,  1).  They  did 
not  regard  the  Law  as  binding  on  Gentile  Chris- 
tians, and  did  not  decline  fellowship  with  them. 
They  honoured  the  Prophets  highly. 

(h)  As  to  Christ,  they  acknowledged  His 
Messiahship  and  Divinity.  They  termed  Him  the 
First-born  of  the  Holy  Spirit  from  His  birth.  At 
His  baptism  the  whole  fount  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
{omnis  forts  Spiritus  Sancti)  descended  on  Him. 
They  accepted  the  Virgin-birth.  They  looked  for 
His  millennial  reign  on  earth.  They  mourned 
the  unbelief  of  their  Jewish  brethren,  and  prayed 
for  their  conversion. 

(c)  They  bore  no  antipathy  to  St.  Paul,  and 
accepted  his  Epistles.  They  used  a  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  Matthew  in  Hebrew  (see  below).  "We 
shall  comment  on  these  views  below,  in  connexion 
with  those  of  the  Ebionites  proper. 

5.  Ebionites  proper. — In  strong  contrast  to  the 
Nazarenes  stand  the  Ebionites  proper,  regarding 
whom  our  information  is  fuller  and  clearer.  Our 
main  authorities  are  Irenaeus  (adv.  Ucer.  I.  xxvi., 
in.  XV.,  V.  iii.),  Hippolytus  {Ucer.  vii.  22,  x.  18), 
Epiphanius  (Hoer.  xxx.),  and  Tertullian  (de 
Prcescr.  Hcer.  xxxiii.).  Eusebius  (HE  iii.  27) 
and  Theodoret  (Hcer.  Fab.  ii.  2)  may  also  be 
mentioned.  In  the  main  these  give  a  consistent 
account,  which  may  be  summarized  as  follows  : 

(a)  The  Ebionites  not  only  continued  to  observe 
the  Law  themselves,  but  held  its  observances  as 
absolutely  necessary  for  salvation  and  binding  on 
all,  and  refused  fellowship  with  all  who  did  not 
comply  Mith  it. 

(6)  As  to  Christ,  their  views  were  Cerinthian 
(see  art.  Cerixthus).  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  yet  a 
mere  man,  born  by  natural  generation  to  Joseph 
and  Marj-.  On  His  baptism,  a  higher  Spirit  united 
itself  with  Him,  and  so  He  became  the  Messiah. 
He  became  Chnst,  they  further  taught,  by  per- 


fectly fulfilling  the  Law  ;  and  by  perfectly  ful- 
filling it  they  too  could  become  Christs  (Hippol. 
Phil.  viL  22).  They  agreed  with  the  Nazarenes  in 
expecting  a  millennial  reign  on  earth.  In  their 
\'iew,  this  was  to  be  Christ's  compensation  for  His 
death,  which  was  an  offence  to  them. 

(c)  The  Ebionites  denounced  St.  Paul  as  a  heretic, 
circulated  foolish  stories  to  his  discredit,  and  re- 
jected all  his  Epistles  as  unauthoritative.  They 
agreed  with  the  Nazarenes  in  accepting  a  Hebrew 
gospel,  and  in  addition  had  certain  spurious  writ- 
ings which  bore  the  names  of  apostles — James, 
Matthew,  and  John  (Epiphan.  Hcer.  xxx.  23). 
This  Hebrew  gospel  used  by  Nazarenes  and 
Ebionites  was  in  all  probability  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  the  Hebrews,  of  which  only  fragments  have 
survived.  "With  this  work  we  are  not  here  con- 
cerned. It  is  in  place  to  say  that  most  likely  it 
was  a  Nazarene  production.  In  ancient  writers 
it  is  sometimes  attributed  to  the  twelve  apostles, 
more  often  to  Matthew.  The  Ebionite  version  was 
accommodated  to  their  peculiar  views  by  both  muti- 
lation and  interpolation  ;  thus  it  omitted  the  firet 
two  chapters,  and  began  the  life  of  Jesus  with  the 
baptism.  For  full  treatment  of  this  subject  see 
E.  B.  Nicholson,  The  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews,  1879. 

From  the  information  at  our  disposal  we  cannot 
say  how  rapidly  Ebionism  developed,  nor  estimate 
the  position  it  had  reached  by  the  close  of  the  1st 
century.  No  doubt  all  the  essential  elements  were 
active  before  then.  In  the  NT  itself  we  see  the 
process  well  begun.  Dating  from  the  Council  of 
Jerusalem  (Ac  15),  we  can  see  not  only  the  possi- 
bility but  the  actuality  of  the  rise  of  three  distinct 
groups  of  Jewish  Christians :  (a)  those  who  em- 
braced Christianity  in  all  its  fullness,  and  developed 
with  it ;  (b)  those  who  accepted  the  indefinite  com- 
promise represented  in  the  finding  of  the  Council, 
and  did  not  advance  beyond  it,  which  is  essenti- 
ally the  position  of  the  Nazarenes ;  (c)  those  who 
did  not  agree  with  the  finding,  and  continued  to 
protest  against  it,  which  is  the  starting-point  of 
the  Ebionites  proper.  We  see  them  carrying  on 
an  active  propaganda  against  the  liberal  school 
whose  leader  was  St.  Paul.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  (q.v.)  is  St.  Paul's  polemic  against  them. 
In  Corinth,  too,  they  have  been  active  (2  Co  10-13). 
After  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  just  as  Judaism 
became  more  intolerant  and  more  exclusive,  so  we 
may  suppose  this  judaizing  sect  followed  suit,  and, 
retiring  more  ana  more  from  fellowship  with  the 
Church  at  large,  and  seeking  to  strengthen  their 
own  position,  they  by  degrees  formulated  the 
system  we  have  described. 

In  brief,  then,  while  the  Nazarenes  are  only 
Christians  of  a  stunted  growth,  the  Ebionites 
proper  are  heretics  holding  a  system  that  is  false 
to  the  real  spirit  of  Christianity.  While  the 
Nazarenes  are  Judaistic,  the  Ebionites  are  Juda- 
izers.  Neither  Nazarenes  nor  Ebionites  seem  to 
have  been  of  great  influence.  The  latter  were  the 
more  wide-spread,  and,  we  may  suppose,  the  more 
numerous.  While  the  Nazarenes  were  practicaUj' 
confined  to  Palestine  and  Syria,  Ebionites  seem  to 
have  been  found  in  Asia  Minor,  Cyprus,  and  as  far 
west  as  Rome. 

6.  Syncretistic  Ebionites. — The  most  conserva- 
tive movement  could  not  escape  the  syncretistic 
tendencies  of  the  age  with  which  we  are  dealing. 
We  have  notices  of  several  varieties  which  we  class 
together  as  Sj-ncretistic  Ebionites. 

(a)  The  first  of  these  we  may  term  the  Ebionites 
of  Epiphanius.  Epiphanius  agrees  with  Irenaeus 
in  describing  the  Ebionites  as  we  have  done  above. 
But  he  adds  several  details  of  which  there  is  no 
trace  in  Irenaeus.  Making  all  allowances  for  the 
generally  unsatisfactory  character  of  Epiphanius 


320 


ECSTASY 


EDIFICATION 


as  an  accurate  historian,  we  cannot  set  aside  what 
he  reports  so  clearly.  Tlie  easiest  explanation  is 
that  the  Ebionites  of  Irenaeus  developed  into  the 
Ebionites  of  Epiphanius,  i.e.  Ebionism  as  a  whole 
became  syncretistic.  The  Ebionites  of  Epiphanius 
show  traces  of  Samaritanism  and  an  influence 
which  we  may  with  great  probability  term  Essenic. 
The  former  is  shown  in  their  rejection  of  the 
Prophets  later  than  Joshua,  and  of  Kings  David 
and  Solomon  {Hccr.  xxx.  18).  The  latter  is  mani- 
fest in  their  abstinence  from  flesh  and  wine,  their 
rejection  of  sacrifices,  their  oft-repeated,  even 
daily,  baptism  (xxx.  15,  16). 

The  siege  and  fall  of  Jenisalem  were  events 
of  the  greatest  importance  for  Judaism  (see  art. 
Pharisees)  and  Jewish  Christianity  alike.  Jews 
and  Christians,  including  Ebionites,  settled  east  of 
the  Jordan.  There  they  came  into  close  contact 
with  a  Judaism  that  was  far  from  pure.  The  most 
important  form  of  this  was  Essenism  (see  art. 
EssENES).  There  were  also  the  Nasarseans,  who 
exhibited  the  very  peculiarities  described  in  the 
Ebionites  by  Epiphanius,  except  perhaps  as  regards 
the  baptisms  (Epiphan.  ffcer.  xviii.).  If,  as  seems 
probable,  the  Order  of  Essenes  was  broken  up  after 
the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  it  is  very  likely  that  many 
of  them  would  associate  with  the  Ebionites,  who 
held  the  Law  in  such  esteem,  and  would  be  able  to 
impress  their  own  customs  on  their  associates. 

(o)  A  still  more  pronounced  Essenic  influence  is 
patent  when  we  consider  the  Elkesaites.  The  Book 
of  Elkesai  was  in  great  repute  among  Essenes, 
Nasar.i?ans,  and  other  trans-Jordanic  sects,  and 
Ebionites  accepted  it  also  (Epiphan.  Hier.  xxx.  3). 
Tlie  book  appeared  about  a.d.  100.  Hippolytus 
(Phil.  ix.  8-12)  gives  details  regarding  it.  Its 
main  points  are  :  bindingness  of  the  Law  ;  sub- 
stitution of  frequent  baptisms  for  sacrifices  ;  re- 
jection of  the  Prophets  and  St.  Paul ;  Christ's 
appearance  in  Adam  and  others  ;  permissibility  of 
formal  idolatry  in  times  of  persecution  ;  majjic, 
astrology,  prophecy.  This  is  specially  interesting 
because  we  trace  here  a  germ  of  Gnostic  doctrine. 

Gnostic  tendencies  are  still  more  pronounced  in 
the  Ebionism  of  the  Clementine  Literature,  which, 
however,  falls  outside  the  period  we  are  concerned 
with.  Gnosticism  has  there  advanced  sufficiently 
to  induce  even  a  more  favourable  view  of  St.  Paul. 
The  union  of  Ebionism  with  Gnosticism  is  one  of 
the  strangest  cases  of  extremes  meeting.  In  most 
things  the  two  movements  are  completely  antitheti- 
cal :  one  pr.actically  denied  Christ's  humanity,  the 
other  His  Divinity  ;  one  made  salvation  depend  on 
obedience  to  the  Law,  the  other  on  speculative 
knowledge.  Yet  the  two  met  in  a  strange  amalgam. 
The  explanation  lies  in  the  Essenism  with  which 
Ebionism  entered  into  relation.  It  was  already  a 
Gnosticism  of  a  sort.  Ebionism  ran  its  course  till 
about  the  otli  cent.,  when  in  all  its  forms  it  was 
extinct.  It  was  despised  by  Jews  and  Christians 
alike,  and  had  no  strength  to  maintain  itself,  as  is 
shown  by  the  unnatural  union  it  entered  into  with 
its  own  antithesis. 

Literature. — Besides  the  works  mentioned  in  the  art.,  see  F. 
C.  Baur,  de  Ebianitarum  Origine,  1831,  and  Dogmengexchichte, 
1805-68;  F.  C.  A.  Schwegler,  Das  nachapustol.  Xeitalter, 
1846  ;  A.  Ritschl,  Die  Kntstehung  der  altkathol.  Kirche'^  1857  ; 
A.  Harnack,  Dogmengeschichte^,  1893  ;  G.  P.  Fisher,  Uist.  of 
Christian  Doctrine,  18!»0;  C.  v.  Weizsacker,  Apostol.  Age, 
Eng.  tr.,  ii.  [1895]  27  ;  E.  Reuss,  Hist,  of  Christian  Theol.  in 
Apoftol.  Age,  i.  [187'-'1 100  ;  Church  Histories  of  Neander,  Kurtz, 
Schaif,  and  Moeller ;  artt.  'Ebionism'  and  'Elkesaites'  in 
ERE;  'Ebioniten'  and  'Elkesaiten'  inPRE^;  'Ebionites'  in 
JE  ;  '  Ebionism '  in  DOG ;  '  Ebionites '  in  CE. 

W.  D.  NiVEN. 

ECSTASY.— See  Rapture  and  Tongues,  Gift 

OF. 

EDIFICATION.— The  term  (olKoSofj.i^)  means  liter- 
ally '  building  up.'    The  figurative  sense  of  building 


up  .•ipiritually  has  two  applications  in  apostolic 
usage.  (1)  It  signifies  the  spiritual  advancement, 
in  a  general  way,  of  the  Church.  (2)  It  is  the 
special  process  or  didactic  means  whereby  the 
faith,  knowledge,  and  experience  of  individuals 
were  established  and  enlarged. 

In  AV  olKodofi-ri  and  the  cognate  verb  olKoSo/xiw, 
in  the  figurative  sense,  are  translated  *  edification ' 
or  '  edify '  19  times.  The  two  meanings  indicated 
above  are  more  apparent  in  RV,  where  '  building 
up '  is  often  employed  to  express  the  more  general 
idea,  especially  where,  as  in  Eph  4'*,  '  the  pictur- 
esqueness  of  the  metaphor  must  be  preserved ' 
(Armitage  Robinson,  Ephesians,  1903,  p.  182), 
while  'edification'  or  'edify'  occurs  14  times. 
Half  of  these  are  found  in  1  Co  14,  where  they  bear 
the  special  meaning. 

1.  General. — The  figurative  use  of  the  term 
oUodofiri  for  that  which  huild.<!  up  generally  the 
Church  and  the  spiritual  life  of  individuals  within 
the  Christian  community  is  almost  exclusively 
Pauline.  The  germ  of  the  idea  is  probably  to  l>e 
found  in  the  saying  of  Christ  (Mt  16^*)  concerning 
the  building  of  His  Church  (Lightfoot,  Notes  on 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1895,  p.  191).  But  St.  Paul 
frequently  applies  the  metaphor  of  building  to  the 
structure  and  growth  of  the  Christian  life  (1  Co 
3»'-,  Eph  2««-,  Col  2^ ;  cf.  1  P  2').  Edification  is 
the  promotion  of  this  building  up  process  by  speech 
(Eph  4-")  or  conduct  (Ro  15^).  Ihree  elements  in 
the  Church  contribute  to  it — peace,  both  external 
(Ac  931)  and  internal  (Ro  W^) ;  love  (Eph  4'"-),  in 
contrast  especially  with  boasted  knowledge  (1  Co  8') 
or  self-seeking  (lO^'*) ;  and  service  (SiaKovla)  wherein 
each  may  share  in  the  ministering  of  all  (Eph  4'"-, 
1  Th  5"). 

2.  Special. — In  its  specialized  use,  oIkoSo/jltj  is  a 
technical  term  for  the  exercise  of  '  spiritual  gifts ' 
{xapicr^aTa)  within  the  Christian  congregation  by 
its  members,  for  the  mutual  'edification'  of  in- 
dividuals. St.  Paul's  description  of  the  variety 
and  exercise  of  these  endowments  in  Corinth  ( 1  Co 
12  and  14)  is  probably  true  of  most  places  in  which 
the  Church  was  established.  There  were  evidently 
meetings  held  almost  exclusively  for  '  edification,' 
to  which  unbelievers  were  admitted  (1  Co  14^'). 
It  was  not  a  formal  service  for  Divine  worship,  but 
rather  a  fellowship  meeting  with  the  practical  aim 
of  attbrding  members  with  a  '  gift '  an  opportunity 
of  using  their  supernaturally  bestowed  powers  for 
the  spiritual  welfare  of  all  present  (1  Co  12^;  cf.  1 
P  41'"-).  At  such  times  the  most  notable  contribu- 
tions would  be  :  (a)  teaching  (5t5ax^),  which  included 
the  '  word  of  wisdom '  and  the  '  word  of  knowledge ' 
(1  Co  12*)  ;  (6)  prophecy  {irpo<t)T]T€la),  which  dealt 
with  future  events  (Ac  11^)  or  revealed  an  in- 
sight into  the  needs  of  those  present  (1  Co  14*-  ^*'-) ; 
(c)  glossolalia  or  tongues  {yifrj  yXucrffQv),  which  were 
probably  incomprehensible  utterances  expressive 
of  prayer  or  praise  (v.^*). 

Closely  connected  with  prophecy  was  '  discerning 
of  spirits,'  and  M'ith  glossolalia  'the  interpreta- 
tion of  tongues'  (1  Co  121"  i4i.'7ff.),  j^  addition 
tliere  would  be  prayer,  the  reciting  or  singing  of 
hymns,  the  reading  of  Scripture,  and  the  '  word  of 
exhortation'  (1  Co  142«,  Eph  5'»,  Col  3",  Ac  13»). 

In  order  that  genuine  edification  might  result 
from  such  a  variety  of  gifts,  exercised  often  under 
stress  of  great  excitement,  two  rules  were  laid 
down  for  the  Corinthian  Church  :  (1)  the  compara- 
tive value  of  x^'P^"'/^''""'  m'lst  be  recognized — e.g. 
prophecy  is  superior  to  '  tongues '  for  purposes  "of 
edification  (1  Co  14'-'-');  (2)  there  must  be  an 
observajice  of  due  order  in  the  meetings  (vv.  *'■*'). 

LiTERATHRE.  —  FDB,  artt.  'Church,'  'Edification':  H. 
Cremer,  Bibl.-Theol.  Lex.  oj  .XT Greek,  s.w.  oiicoioniu),  oIkoSohtj  ; 
O.  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  Kng.  tr.'«.  1891,  i.  229-2.W  :  C.  von 
Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  Eng.  tr.s,  ii.  [1899]  246-279  ;  A.  C. 


EDUCATION 


EDUCATION 


321 


McGiffert.  History  <.f  ' 
l>p.  :>■:■ '    Ho  :  E.  von  Dc 
rhur.-h.  Kiis,'.  tr.,  11*04. 
atui  the  Miuitiri/   in   lui 


M.  Scott  Fletchek. 


EDUCATION.— 1.  Jewish.— The  Jews  from  early 
tiiuea  priztnl  eilueation  iu  a  measure  beyond  the 
nations  aruund  tliem.  It  was  the  key  to  the  know- 
ledge of  their  written  Law,  the  observance  of  which 
was  required  by  the  whole  people  without  respect 
of  rank  or  class.  They  were  the  people  of  a  Book, 
and  wherever  there  is  awTitten  literature,  and  that 
religiously  binding,  elementary  education,  at  least 
in  t^e  forms  of  riding  and  writing,  is  imperative 
and  indispensable.  The  rise  of  the  synagogue,  and 
of  the  order  of  Scribes  in  connexion  therewith, 
exercised  a  powerful  influence  upon  the  progress 
of  education  among  the  mass  of  the  people.  In  the 
4th  cent.  B.C.  there  was  a  synagogue  in  every  town, 
and  in  the  2nd  cent,  in  every  considerable  village 
as  well.  To  the  synagogues  there  were  in  all  pro- 
bability attached  schools,  both  elementary  and 
higher,  and  the  hazzdn  ('  the  attendant,'  Lk  ■4-''^ 
RV^)  may  well  have  been  the  teacher.  The  value 
of  education  was  understood  among  the  Jews  before 
the  Christian  era.  In  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve 
Patriarchs  we  read  :  '  Do  j'e  also  teach  your  chil- 
dren letters,  that  they  may  have  understanding 
all  their  life,  reading  unceasingly  the  Law  of  God ' 
('  Levi,'  xiii.  2).  In  the  Psalnis  of  Solotnon  the  fre- 
quent use  of  traiSeikw,  iraidevn^i,  and  -raiSeia  (with 
the  significant  addition  of  fiafiSos,  vii,  8,  and  of 
ixaar^,  xviii.  8)  points  to  the  existence  of  schools 
and  of  a  professional  class  of  teachers.  By  the 
Apostolic  Age  there  is  abundant  evidence  of  the 
general  difl'usion  of  education  among  the  people. 
•  Our  principal  care  of  all,'  says  Josephus  (c.  Ap.  i. 
12),  comparing  the  Jews  with  other  nations,  'is  to 
educate  our  children  well,  and  to  observe  the  laws, 
and  we  think  it  to  be  the  most  necessary  business 
of  our  whole  life  to  keep  this  religion  which  has 
been  handed  down  to  us.'  Among  the  Jews  every 
chUd  had  to  learn  to  read ;  scarcely  any  Jewish 
children  were  to  be  found  to  whom  reading  of  a 
written  document  was  strange,  and  therefore  were 
there  so  many  poor  Jewish  parents  ready  to 
deny  themselves  the  necessaries  of  life  in  order  to 
let  their  children  have  instruction  (c.  Ap.  iL  26 ; 
cf.  B.  Strassburger,  Gesch.  dcr  Erziehttng  bei  den 
Israeliten,  1885,  p.  7).  The  result  of  instruction 
from  the  earliest  years  in  the  home,  and  of  teaching 
received  on  the  Sabbath,  and  on  the  frequent  oc- 
casions of  national  festivals,  is,  according  to  the 
Jewish  historian,  '  that  if  anybody  do  but  ask  any 
one  of  our  people  about  our  laws,  he  could  more 
easily  tell  them  all  than  he  could  tell  his  own 
name.  For  Ijecause  of  our  having  learned  them  as 
soon  as  ever  we  became  sensible  of  anything,  we 
have  them  as  it  were  engraven  on  our  souls '  (c.  Ap. 
u.  19). 

Education  began,  as  Josephus  says,  'with  the 
earliest  infancy.'  Philo  speaks  of  "Jewish  youth 
'being  taught,  so  to  speak,  from  their  very  swad- 
dling clothes  by  parents  and  teachers  and  inspectors, 
even  before  thej'  receive  instruction  in  the  holy  laws 
and  unwritten  customs  of  their  religion,  to  believe 
in  Goil  the  one  Father  and  Creator  of  the  world ' 
(Legal,  ad  Gaium,  16).  '  From  a  babe  thou  hast 
known  the  sacred  writings,'  writes  St.  Paul  to 
Timotliy  (2  Ti  3^),  recalling  his  disciple's  early  ac- 
quaintance with  the  OT  Scriptures.  At  the  age  of 
six  the  Jewish  boy  would  go  to  the  elementary 
school  (Beth  ha-Sepher),  but  before  this  he  would 
have  received  lessons  in  Scripture  from  his  parents 
and  have  learned  the  Sh'ma  and  the  Hallel.  From 
the  sixth  to  the  tenth  year  he  would  make  a  study 
of  the  Law,  along  with  writing  and  arithmetic.  At 
the  age  of  ten  he  would  be  admitted  to  the  higher 

VOL,  I. — 21 


school  (Beth  ha-Midrash),  where  he  would  make  the 
acquaintance  of  the  oral  Law,  beginning  with  the 
Mishna, '  repetition,'  the  oral  traditions  of  the  Law. 
At  the  age  of  tliirteen  he  would  be  acknowledged 
by  a  sort  of  rite  of  confirmation  as  a  '  Son  of  the 
Commandment '  (Bar-mi»vah),  and  from  this  point 
his  further  studies  would  depend  upon  the  career 
he  was  to  follow  in  life.  If  he  was  to  become  a 
Rabbi,  he  would  continue  his  studies  in  the  Law, 
and,  as  Saul  of  Tarsus  did,  betake  himself  to  some 
famous  teacher  and  sit  at  his  feet  as  a  disciple. 

Although  schools  were  thus  in  existence  in  con- 
nexion with  the  synagogues,  it  was  nottlU  compara- 
tively late  that  schools,  in  the  modern  sense,  for 
the  education  of  children  by  themselves,  seem  to 
have  been  instituted  (see  art. '  Education  '  in  HDB). 
They  are  said  to  have  been  first  established  by 
Simon  beu-Shetach  in  the  1st  cent.  B.C.,  but  this 
is  disputed.     However  this  may  be,  schools  were 

E laced  upon  a  satisfactory  and  permanent  footing 
y  Joshua  bSn-Gamaliel,  who  is  said  to  have  been 
high  priest  from  A.D.  63  to  65,  and  who  ordained 
that  teachers  of  youth  should  be  placed  in  every 
town  and  every  village,  and  that  children  on  arriv- 
ing at  school  age  should  be  sent  to  them  for  in- 
struction. Of  him  it  is  said  that  if  he  had  not  lived, 
the  Law  would  have  perished  from  Israel.  The  love 
of  sacred  learning  and  the  study  of  the  Law  in 
synagogue  and  school  saved  the  Jewish  people  from 
extinction.  When  Jerusalem  had  been  destroyed 
and  the  Jewish  population  had  been  scattered  after 
the  disastrous  events  of  A.D.  70,  the  school  accom- 
panied the  people  into  the  lands  of  their  dispersion. 
Jamnia,  between  Joppa  and  Aishdod,  then  became 
the  headg^uarters  of  Jewish  learning,  and  retained 
the  position  till  the  unhappy  close  of  Bar  Cochba's 
rebellion.  The  learned  circle  then  moved  north- 
wards to  Galilee,  and  Tiberias  and  Sepphoris 
became  seats  of  Rabbinical  training.  Wherever 
the  Jews  were  settled,  the  family  gathering  of  the 
Passover,  the  household  instruction  as  to  its  origin 
and  history,  and  the  training  in  the  knowledge  of 
the  Law,  served  to  knit  them  together  and  to  in- 
tensify their  national  feeling  even  in  the  midst  of 
heathen  surroundings. 

WhUe  the  great  subject  of  school  instruction  was 
the  Law,  the  work  of  the  elementary  school  em- 
braced reading,  writing,  &nd  arithmetic.  To  make 
the  Jewish  boy  familiar  with  the  Hebrew  charac- 
ters in  every  jot  and  tittle,  and  to  make  him  able 
to  produce  them  himself,  was  the  business  of  the 
Beth  ha-Sepher,  '  the  House  of  the  Book.'  Reading 
thus  came  to  be  a  universal  accomplishment  among 
the  Jewish  people,  and  it  was  a  necessary  qualifi- 
cation where  the  sacred  books  were  not  the  exclu- 
sive concern  of  a  priestly  caste,  but  were  meant  to 
be  read  and  studied  in  the  home  as  well  as  read 
aloud  and  expounded  in  the  synago^e.  The  case 
of  Timothy  already  referred  to  is  evidence  of  this  ; 
and  the  Scriptures  which  the  Jewish  converts  of 
Bercea  '  examined  daily  *  were  no  doubt  the  OT  in 
Greek  which  they  were  trained  to  study  for  them- 
selves. Writing  may  not  have  been  so  general  an 
accomplishment,  but  it  must  also  have  been  in  con- 
siderable demand.  This  can  be  inferred  from  the 
numerous  copies  of  the  Scripture  books  which  had 
to  be  produced  ;  and  from  the  prevalence  of  fphiUin 
('phylacteries')  and  m'zuzoth,  little  metal  cases 
containing  the  Sh'ma',  the  name  of  God,  and  texts 
of  Scripture,  fastened  to  the  '  doorposts '  of  Jewish 
houses,  which  were  in  use  before  the  Apostolic  Age. 
The  simple  rules  of  arithmetic  would  be  wanted  to 
calculate  the  weeks,  months,  and  festivals  of  the 
Jewish  year. 

In  the  higher  school,  BSth  ha-Midrash,  'the 
House  of  Study,'  the  contents  of  the  Law  and  the 
Books  of  Scripture  as  a  whole  were  expounded  by 
the  authorities.    It  is  said  to  have  been  a  role  of 


322 


EDUCATION 


EDUCATION 


the  Jewish  schools  not  to  allow  all  and  sundry, 
without  regard  to  age,  to  read  all  the  books  of 
Holy  Scripture,  but  to  give  to  the  young  all  those 
portions  of  Scripture  whose  literal  sense  com- 
manded universal  acceptance,  and  only  after  they 
had  attained  the  age  of  twentv-five  to  allow  theiu 
to  read  the  whole.  Origen  tefls  of  the  scruples  of 
the  Jewish  teachers  in  regard  to  the  reading  of 
the  Song  of  Solomon  by  the  young  (Harnack,  Bible 
Beading  in  the  Early  Church,  1912,  p.  30  f.).  liut 
there  was  no  lack  of  materials  for  reading  and  ex- 
position. In  course  of  time  there  grew  up  tlie 
great  and  varied  literature  now  contained  in  the 
Talmud — tiie  Mishna,  the  Gemara,  and  the  Mid- 
rdshic  literature  of  all  sorts — narrative,  illustra- 
tive, proverbial,  parabolic,  and  allegorical  (see  I. 
Abrahams,  Short  Histury  of  Jewish  JAterature, 
1906,  ch.  iv.  ;  Oesterley  and  IJox,  lieligion  and 
Worship  of  the  Synagogue-,  1911,  ch.  v.). 

In  the  school  the  children  sat  on  the  floor  in  a 
circle  round  the  teacher,  who  occupied  a  ciiair  or 
bench  (Lk  2«  lO'^,  Ac  22»).  The  method  of  instruc- 
tion was  oral  and  catechetical.  In  the  schools  at- 
tached to  the  synagogues  of  Eastern  Judaism  to 
this  day,  committing  to  memory  and  learning  by 
rote  are  the  chief  methods  of  instruction,  and  the 
clamour  of  infant  and  youthful  voices  is  lieard  re- 
peating verses  and  passages  of  Scripture  the  wliole 
school  day.  This  kind  of  oral  repetition  and  com- 
mitting to  memory  undoubtedly  occupied  a  large 
place  in  the  earliest  Christian  teaching,  and  had 
an  important  influence  in  the  composition  of  the 
gospel  narratives.  The  purpose  of  St.  Luke  in 
writing  his  Gospel  was  that  Theophilus  might 
know  more  fully  the  certainty  of  the  things  con- 
cerning Jesus  wherein  he  had  been  instructed 
{KaTTjxv^Vs)  (Lk  V).  Apollos  having  been  thus  in- 
structed in  the  way  of  the  Lord  (Ac  18-')  taught 
with  accuracy  the  facts  concerning  Jesus.  But 
whilst  the  method  had  great  advantages,  it  had 
also  great  dangers,  tending  to  crush  out  all  origin- 
ality and  life,  and  to  result  in  barren  formalism. 

In  the  education  of  the  Jewish  boy,  punishment, 
we  may  be  sure,  was  not  withheld.  The  directions 
of  the  13ook  of  Proverbs,  whicii  is  itself  a  treasury 
of  sound  educational  principles,  were  carried  out 
not  only  in  the  home  but  in  tlie  school  (Pr  12-^ 
19^"  23'^).  St.  Paul,  addressing  a  self-righteous 
Jew,  exposes  the  inconsistency  of  the  man  who 
profes-ses  to  be  a  guide  of  the  blind  (odrjybv  rv(f)KQ)v), 
a  corrector  of  the  foolish  (xaiSeurTjv  ^.(ppdvwv),  and 
a  teacher  of  infants  (SiSaffKoKov  vr]iriu3v),  and  yet  does 
not  know  the  inwardness  of  the  Law  (Ho  2^'"-). 

Games  had  some  part  in  the  life  of  Jewish 
schoolboys.  One  game  consisted  in  imitating 
their  elders  at  marriages  and  funerals  (Mt  IP**'-). 
Kiddies  and  guesses  seem  to  have  been  common, 
and  story-telling,  music,  and  song  Avere  not  want- 
ing. But  when,  under  tlie  influence  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  a  gynmasion  for  the  athletic  perform- 
ances of  the  Greeks  was  set  up  in  Jerusalem  and 
the  youth  of  the  city  were  required  to  strip  them- 
selves of  their  clothing,  it  became  a  grievous  cause  of 
ottence  to  the  pious  among  the  people  (I  Mac  l""^'). 
See  art  '  Games '  in  HDB. 

Whilst  the  education  of  Jewish  youth  on  the 
theoretical  side  centred  in  the  Law  and  was  calcu- 
lated to  instil  piety  towards  God,  no  instruction 
was  complete  witliout  the  knowledge  of  some 
trade  or  handicraft.  To  circumcise  him,  to  teach 
him  tlie  Law,  to  give  him  a  trade,  were  the 
))rimaiy  obligations  of  a  father  towards  his  son. 
'  He  that  teadieth  not  his  son  a  trade  doeth  the 
same  as  if  he  taught  him  to  be  a  thief,'  is  a  Jewish 
saying.  Jesus  Himself  was  the  carpenter  (Mk  6*), 
and  Saul  of  Tarsus,  the  scholar  of  Gamaliel,  was  a 
tent-maker  (Ac  18*).  We  hear  of  Kabbis  who  were 
needle-makers,  tanners,  and  followed  other  occupa- 


tions, and  who,  like  St.  Paul,  made  it  their  boast 
that  their  own  hands  ministered  to  their  necessities 
and  to  them  that  acconijianied  them  (Ac  20"). 

The  education  of  the  Jewish  youth  began  at 
home,  and  the  parents  were  the  first  instructors. 
Of  a  noted  teacher  of  the  2nd  cent.  A.D.  it  was 
said  that  he  never  broke  his  fast  until  he  had  first 
given  a  lesson  to  his  son.  But  in  due  course  the 
children  were  sent  to  school,  in  Kabbinic  times 
apparently  under  the  protection  of  a  jnedagogue, 
better  known,  however,  in  Greek  family  life 
(Gal  3'-*).  The  teacher  was  required  to  be  a  man 
of  unblemished  character,  of  gentle  and  patient 
disposition,  with  aptness  to  teach.  Only  married 
men  could  be  eiii])loycd  as  teachers.  Women  and 
unmarried  men  were  excluded  from  the  oflice. 
The  oflice  itself  was  full  of  honour  :  '  A  city  which 
neglects  to  aj)point  tejichers  ought  to  be  destroyed,' 
runs  the  saying.  One  teacher  was  to  be  employed 
where  there  were  25  scholars  (with  an  assistant 
where  the  number  exceeded  25),  and  two  where  they 
exceeded  40.  In  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries  of  the 
Christian  era  teacliers  received  salaries,  but  the 
remuneration  was  in  respect  of  the  more  technical 
part  of  the  instruction.  Nothing  was  to  be  charged 
for  the  Midrdsh,  the  exposition  of  Scripture. 

The  girls  in  Jewish  families  were  not  by  any 
means  left  without  instruction.  The  women  of  the 
household,  like  Eunice,  the  mother,  and  Lois,  the 
grandmother,  of  Timothy  (2  Ti  P),  who  at  leiist  in- 
fluenced the  boys,  woula  have  a  more  active  part 
in  the  mstruction  of  the  girls.  This  means  that 
they  were  not  themselves  left  without  education. 
The  example  of  Priscilla,  the  wife  of  Aquila, 
shows  that  a  Jewess  (who  did  not  owe  all  her  train- 
ing to  Christianity)  might  be  possessed  of  high 
gifts  and  attainments  (Ac  18^).  In  the  Talmud 
similar  instances  of  gifted  and  accompli.Hhed  women 
are  to  be  found.  One  of  the  most  notable  features 
in  what  is  known  as  the  Reform  movement  in 
modern  Judaism  is  the  earnestness  with  which  its 
adlierents  insist  upon  the  more  general  and  the 
higher  education  of  women. 

Literature.— Kelevant  articles  in  J.  Hamburger,  Real-En- 
cyclafiddie  /iir  Bibel  und  Talmxtd^,  1884  ff. ;  S.  S.  Laurie, 
Hist.  Survey  of  Pre-Christian  Educatimi,  1895  :  'The  Semitic 
Races  ' ;  A.  Buchler,  The  Economic  Catiditions  of  Judcea  a/tei- 
the  Destruction  of  the  Second  Temple,  1912  ;  art.  '  Education 
(JewislO'  by  Morris  Joseph  in  ERE  v.  [1912]  194,  and  Litera- 
ture there  cited. 

2.  Greek. — Among  the  Greeks  education  was 
the  aUhir  of  the  State.  Its  purpose  was  to  prepare 
the  sons  of  free  citizens  for  tlie  duties  awaiting 
them,  first  in  the  family  and  then  in  the  State. 
Whilst  among  the  Jews  education  was  meant  for 
all,  without  respect  of  rank  or  class,  among  the 
Greeks  it  was  intended  for  the  few — the  wealthy 
and  the  well-born.  Plutarch  in  his  treatise  on  the 
education  of  cliildren  says  :  '  Some  one  may  object 
that  I  ill  undertaking  to  give  prescriptions  in  the 
training  of  children  of  free  citizens  apparently 
neglect  the  training  of  the  poor  townsmen,  and 
only  think  of  instructing  the  rich — to  wliich  the 
obvious  answer  is  that  I  should  desire  the  training 
I  prescribe  to  be  attainable  alike  by  all ;  but  if  any 
through  want  of  private  means  cannot  attain  it, 
let  them  blame  their  fortune  and  not  their  adviser. 
Every  eflort,  however,  must  be  made  even  by  the 
poor  to  train  their  children  in  the  best  possible  way, 
and  if  tliis  is  beyond  them  to  do  it  according  to 
their  means'  (de  Lib.  Educ.  ii.).  Down  to  the 
Roman  period  at  least,  this  educational  exclusive- 
ness  was  maintained,  and  only  the  .ions  of  those 
who  were  full  citizens  were  the  subjects  of  educa- 
tion, although  there  were  ca^es  in  which  daughters 
rose  to  distinction  in  letters,  and  even  examples 
of  slave.s,  like  the  philosopher  Ej)ictetus,  who 
burst  the  restraints  of  their  i)osition  and  showed 
themselves  capable  of  rising  to  eminence  in  learn- 


EDUCATION 


EDUCATIOX 


323 


ing  and  virtue.  We  even  read  of  beqaests  beii^ 
made  to  provide  free  education  to  cbiloren  of  both 
sexes,  but  the  rule  was  that  women  needed  no 
more  instruction  than  they  were  Jikely  to  receive 
at  home.  Being  an  afiair  of  the  State,  education 
was  under  the  control  of  i^cials  appointed  to 
superintend  it.  GymHcutie,  for  the  tnuning  of  tiie 
body,  and  music  in  the  larger  sense,  including 
letters,  for  the  training  of  the  mind,  were  the  sub- 
jects of  instruction.  These— athletics,  literature, 
music — \iere  regulated  by  a  body  of  guardians  of 
public  instruction  (r<u2ar^Mt).  We  hear  of  an 
Ephdioinh  at  the  head  of  a  collie  of  ifpti^oc,  or 
youths  who  have  entered  the  higher  school,  and  of 
a  Gymnasiarch  who  superintends  the  exercises  of 
the  roXuirrpa  and  pays  the  txaining-masters. 

The  stages  of  edncati<a  were  practically  the 
same  in  all  the  difii»ent  bnmehes  of  the  wide-spread 
Grecian  people.  First,  there  was  the  stage  of  home 
education,  extending  from  birth  to  the  end  of  the 
seventh  year,  when  the  children  were  under  paren- 
tal super^'ision ;  second,  the  stage  of  school  ednca- 
tion,  beginning  vfith  the  ^gfath  year  and  lasting  to 
the  sixteenth  or  eighteenth  year;  thirdly,  there 
was  the  stage  from  the  nxteenth  or  eighteenth  to 
the  twenty- hrst  year,  when  the  youths  were  i^n/jfiotj 
and  were  subjected  to  strict  discipline  and  training. 
Before  a  youth  was  enrolled  among  the  i^^  he 
had  to  undergo  an  examination  {iatu/mtria)  to  make 
sore  that  he  was  the  son  of  an  Atiienian  citizen 
and  that  he  had  the  phyaqne  for  the  duties  now 
devolving  upon  him.  This  was  really  the  univer- 
sity stage  of  lus  career,  for  he  then  attended  the 
class  of  the  rhetors  and  sophists  who  lectured  in 
such  institutions  as  the  Lyceum  and  the  Academy, 
and  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  rhetoric  and 
philosophy  (cf.  Ac  19^).  On  the  cmnpletion  of  this 
course  he  was  reauly  to  enter  upon  the  exercise  of 
his  duties  towards  the  State. 

When  the  boy,  at  the  age  of  seven,  wrait  to 
school — the  granunar  school  and  the  gymnastic 
school — he  was  accompanied  by  a  servant  called 
a  raiBarftfjos  who  carried  his  books  and  writing 
materials,  his  lyre  and  other  instamments,  and 
saw  him  to  school  and  back  (see  Schoolmaster, 
TCTOR).  The  school-rooms  of  ancient  Athens  seem 
to  have  been  simple  enough,  ccmtaining  little  or 
no  furniture — they  were  often  nothing  but  porches 
open  to  wind  and  sun,  where  the  children  sat  on 
the  ground,  or  on  low  benches,  and  the  teacher  <m 
a  high  chair.  At  first  the  child  would  be  exer- 
cised in  *  the  rudiments,'  t&  orotxaa  (cf.  Col  2^  and 
Xen.  Mem.  n.  L  1).  Great  stiess  was  laid  upon 
reading,  recitation,  and  singing.  In  partimlar,  the 
memory  was  exercised  upon  the  best  litoatore, 
and  cultivated  to  an  extraordinary  d^ree  of  re- 
tentiveness.  The  works  of  .^sop  and  Theognis 
were  much  in  use  in  the  dass^rooms.  Homer  was 
valued  not  merelv  as  a  poet  but  as  an  imspined 
moral  teacher,  and  the  Hiad  and  Odyssey  were  the 
Bible  of  the  Greeks.  Great  pains  were  also  taken 
with  the  art  of  writing.  Tablets  covered  with 
wax  formed  the  material  to  receive  the  writing, 
and  the  stylus  was  employed  to  trace  the  letters. 
By  aitostolic  times  papyrus  or  parchment  was  in 
use,  written  upon  with  pen  (cdAo/ios)  and  ink 
ipika^)  (2  Jn  »,  3  Jn» ;  cf.  2  Co  3»  and  2  Ti  4»). 
Sher^.s  (&rr/Muca)  were  a  conmion  writing  material 
—::..:  used  by  tiie  very  poor  in  ancient  E^rpt. 
Exercises  in  writing  and  in  grammar  have  hoea 
presCTved  to  us  in  the  soil  of  Egypt  written  on 
ostraca,  on  wooden  tablets,  on  tahlets  smeared  over 
with  wax,  and  have  now  been  recovered  to  let  us 
see  the  performances  of  the  school  children  of 
twenty  centimes  ago.  Among  th«n  are  school 
cofHes  giving  the  letters  of  the  ^phabet,  syllables, 
common  words  and  proper  names,  conjugation  of 
verbs,  pithy  at  proverlnal  sayings  as  headlines. 


and  there  are  even  exercises  having  the  appearance 
of  being  school  punishments  (E.  Zieljarth,  Avs  der 
caUiken  SehuU,  1910,  in  Lietzmann's  KUine  Texts). 

The  mention  of  school  punishments  leads  to  the 
subject  of  school  discipline.  At  home,  at  school, 
and  in  the  palaestra,  the  rod  and  the  lash  were 
freely  used.  It  is  from  school  life,  both  Jewish  and 
Greek,  that  St.  Paul,  as  noted  already,  derives  the 
imagery  of  a  well-known  passage  in  lus  Epistles 
(Bo  2"'^).  In  the  Psalms  of  &>lonum,  a  Jewish 
book  written  under  Greek  induraice,  there  is  refer- 
ence both  to  the  rod  (pifiSoi,  viL  8)  and  to  the  lash 
{fiicni,  xviiL  8)  as  instnunoits  of  puni^unoit; 
and  *  chastening,' '  correction '  (inuitia),  occurs  again 
and  again  in  this  smse  (Eph  6^  2  Ti  2,^,  He  12"  ; 
cL  IHdaeMe,  4). 

'We  are  given  over  to  grammar,'  says  Sextos 
Empiricns  {tidv.  Math.  L  41),  '  from  ehiluiood,  and 
almost  from  our  baby-clothes.'  Grammar  was 
saoceeded  by  rhetoric,  which  had  accomplished  its 
purpose  when  the  student  had  acquired  the  power 
of  speaking  ofihand  on  any  subject  under  discus- 
sion. In  addition  to  these  subjects,  philosophy 
was  also  taught,  its  technical  terms  bemg  mastered 
and  its  various  schools  discriminated.  Arithmetic, 
geometry,  astronomy  belcmged  to  the  programme 
of  secondary  educati<m,  and  from  Plato  and  Aris- 
totle there  have  come  down  to  us  the  seven  liberal 
arts — ^the  friviMm  and  tiie  quadnriwm  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  All  the  while  gynmastic  training  went 
hand  in  hand  with  tiie  training  of  the  inteUeetw 
The  gymnasum,  where  the  youths  of  Greece  exer- 
cised themselves  naked,  was  oicloeed  by  walls  and 
fitted  up  with  dressing-romns,  bath-rooms,  and 
requisites  for  running,  leaping,  wrestling,  boxing, 
and  other  athletic  exercises,  and  there  were  seats 
round  about  the  course  for  spectators,  and  porticoes 
where  philosofdiers  gi^ered. 

By  the  Apostolic  Age  it  had  become  the  practice 
for  promising  students  to  supplement  their  school 
education  by  seeking  out  and  attending  the  lectures 
of  eminent  teachers  in  what  we  should  call  the 
great  universities.  Roman  Emperors  like  Claudius 
and  Nero  had  dtme  much  to  encourage  Greek 
culture  and  to  introduce  it  into  Bome  itself,  where 
the  Athexueum  was  a  great  centre  of  learning. 
At  this  epoch  Athens  and  Bome  had  famous 
schools,  but  even  they  had  to  yield  to  Bhodes, 
Alexandria,  and  Tarsus;  and  Marseilles,  which 
had  been  from  the  very  early  days  of  Greek  history 
a  centre  of  Greek  influence,  was  in  the  time  of 
Strabo  m«He  frequented  than  Athms.  The  idea 
that  Barnabas  of  Cyprus  and  Saul  of  Tarsus  had 
met  in  eariy  life  at  the  university  of  Tarsus  is  by 
no  means  nncifnl,  and  it  was  to  his  education  at 
Tarsus  that  St.  Paul  owed  the  power  to  '  move  in 
Hellenic  Society  at  his  ease'  (W.  M.  Bamsay, 
Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  1910,  p.  346). 
That  St.  Luke  had  received  a  medical  education 
and  was  familiar  with  the  great  medical  writers  of 
the  Greek  world  is  now  almost  universally  ad- 
mitted ;  his  literary  style  and  the  frequent  echoes 
of  Greek  authors,  ai,  least  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Aposties,  prove  him  to  have  been  a  well-educated 
and  cultured  Uellenistw  Of  the  various  philosophic 
schools  then  exercising  an  influraioe  upon  thought 
in  the  Greek  world  two  are  expressly  mentioned 
in  the  Acts  (17**) — the  Stoics  and  the  Epicureans. 
St.  Paul  must  have  received  Stoic  teaching  at 
Tarsus,  where  the  school  flomiBfaed,  and  he  knew 
and  quoted  at  least  one  Stoic  poet  (Ac  17*).  A 
century  later  Marcus  Aurelius  endowed  the  four 
great  philosophical  schools  of  Athens — the  Aca- 
d»nic,  the  Peripatetic,  the  Epicurean,  and  the 
Stmc.  Justin  Martyr,  a  little  earlier,  in  the  ac- 
count he  gives  of  his  conversion  to  Christianity 
{Dial,  cum  Tryph.  2  S.\  shows  how  the  representa^ 
tives  of  the  Stoic,  the  Peripatetic,  the  Pythagorean, 


324 


EDUCATION 


EDUCATION 


and  the  Academic  (Platonic;)  Schools  in  turn  failed 
to  satisfy  his  yearning  after  trutli,  and  satisfaction 
came  to  him  when  he  found  Cliristianity  to  be  the 
only  philosoi)hy  sure  and  suited  to  the  needs  of 
man.  Christianity,  brought  into  contact  with 
the  society  in  which  tliis  philosophical  habit  of 
mind  had  established  itself,  modified,  stimulated, 
and  elevated  it,  and  in  turn  was  modified  by  the 
habit  of  ndnd  of  those  who  accepted  it.  '  It  was 
impossible  for  Greeks,  educated  as  they  were  with 
an  education  which  penetrated  tlieir  whole  nature, 
to  receive  or  to  retain  Christianity  in  its  primitive 
simplicity.  Their  own  life  had  become  complex 
and  artificial  :  it  liad  its  fixed  ideas  and  its  j)erma- 
uent  categories  :  it  necessarily  gave  to  Christianity 
something  of  its  own  form'  (E.  Hatch,  Influence 
of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages  upon  the  Christian 
Church  lUibbert  Lectures,  1888],  1890,  ch.  ii. 
p.  48f.). 

LiTKRATiTRR. — T.  Davidson,  Aristotle  (in  Great  Educators), 
1892 ;  S.  S.  Laurie,  llist.  Survey  of  Pre-Christian  Education, 
1895:  'The  Hellenic  Race';  J.  P.  Mahaffy,  The  Greek  World 
under  Human  Swap,  1800;  art.  'Education  (Greek)'  by  W. 
Murison  in  ERE  v.  185  and  Literature  there  cited. 

3.  Christian.  —  The  sentiment  which  caused 
education  to  be  so  prized  among  the  Jews  must  in 
course  of  time  have  caused  it  to  be  greatly  desired 
among  the  followers  of  Christ.  To  tlie  first  Cliris- 
tians,  as  to  the  Lord  and  His  ajwstles,  the  UT 
Scriptures  were  the  Bible,  and,  outside  the  Holy 
Land  at  least,  the  Bible  in  the  LXX  translation. 
No  doubt  it  was  a  roll  of  this  translation 
which  the  Ethiopian  eunucli  was  carrying  back 
with  him  to  his  home  far  up  the  Nile,  when  Philip 
the  Evangelist  joined  him  in  his  chariot  on  the 
Gaza  road  (Ac  8^"'-).  It  was  the  same  Scriptures 
wherein  the  youthful  Timotliy  was  instructed  from 
infancy  in  the  home  of  his  (ireek  fatlier,  under  the 
guidance  of  Eunice  and  Lois  (2  Ti  3^*).  St.  Paul, 
in  the  many  quotations  he  makes  from  the  OT, 
quotes  from  the  LXX  rather  than  from  the  Hebrew 
original.  'The  LXX  was  to  him  as  mucli  "the 
Bible  "  as  our  English  version  is  to  us ;  and,  as  is 
the  case  with  many  Christian  writers,  he  knew  it 
so  well  that  his  sentences  are  constantly  moulded 
by  its  rhythm,  and  his  thoughts  incessantly 
coloured  by  its  expressions'  (Earrar,  St.  Paul, 
1879,  i.  47).  It  was  not  till  the  second  half  of  the 
2nd  cent,  that  most  of  the  NT  books  were  recog- 
nized in  the  Church  as  the  Oracles  of  God,  and  on 
the  same  level  of  authority  as  the  books  of  the  OT. 
'  Among  the  Jewish  Christians,'  as  Harnack  points 
out,  '  tlie  private  use  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  simply 
continued ;  for  the  fact  that  they  liad  become 
believers  in  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  had  absolutely 
no  otlier  effect  than  to  increase  this  use,  in  so  far 
as  it  was  now  necessary  to  study  not  only  the  Law 
but  also  the  Prophets  and  the  Kethubim,  seeing 
that  these  afforded  j)rophetic  proofs  of  the  Messiah- 
ship  of  Jesus,  and  in  so  far  as  tlie  religious  inde- 
pendence of  the  individual  Christian  was  still 
greater  than  that  of  the  ordinary  Jew'  (Bible 
Mcading  in  the  Early  Church,  p.  32). 

That  the  private  study  which  had  been  devoted 
to  the  OT  came  in  due  course  to  be  given  to  tlie 
books  of  the  NT  may  be  seen  from  the  use  of  them 
in  the  writings  of  the  A))ostolic  Eathers.  The  OT, 
the  Gospels,  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  had  a 
wide  circulation  at  an  early  period,  in  all  the 
provinces  of  the  early  (Jhurch,  and  were  perused 
and  applied  to  tlieir  sjiiritual  needs  by  multitudes 
of  Christians,  not  clerical  only,  but  lay  ;  not  men 
only,  but  women.  '  Ye  know  tlie  Holy  Scriptures,' 
writes  Clement  of  Rome  to  the  Corinthian  Chris- 
tians (1  Clem.  liii.  1),  'Yea,  your  knowledge  is 
laudable,  and  ye  have  deep  insight  into  the  Grades 
of  (iod.'  'What  are  these  articles  in  your  hand- 
bag?'   asks  the  proooasul  Saturniuus  when  ex- 


amining Speratus,  one  of  the  band  of  Scillitan 
martyrs  in  N.  Africa.  '  The  books  and  eiiistles  of 
St.  Paul,'  was  the  reply  (7'6'  i.  2  [1891],  p.  114). 
The  feeling  grew  and  spread  that  it  was  at  once  a 
privilege  and  a  duty  thus  to  make  acquaintance 
with  tlie  meaning  and  teaching  of  Holy  Scripture. 
In  Asia  Minor  and  in  Gaul,  in  Syria  and  Egypt, 
this  feeling  juevaiied.  Men  like  Justin  Martyr, 
Tatian,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  became  Christians 
— such  is  their  own  a(;knowledgment — by  reading 
the  Scriptures  for  themselves.  By  and  by  wealthy 
Christians  had  Bibles  copied  at  their  own  expense 
to  be  given  or  lent  to  their  poorer  bretliren. 
Pamphilus,  the  friend  of  Eu-sebius,  whose  library 
at  Ca3.sarea  was  famous,  had  Bibles  copied  to  keep 
in  stock  and  to  be  given  away  as  occasion  demandetf, 
'  not  only  to  men  but  also  to  women  whom  he  saw 
devoted  to  the  reading  of  Scripture '  (Jerome,  Apol. 
c.  Rufin.  i.  9). 

All  tiiis  intellectual  activity  devoted  to  the 
study  of  the  Scriptures  imjjlies  throughout  the 
early  Church  a  considerable  level  of  educational 
attainment.  Tiiat  many  of  the  jioorest  and  least 
educated  found  in  Christ  and  His  teaching  the 
satisfaction  of  their  deepest  needs  is  manifest  from 
the  NT  itself  (1  Co  l^*"-),  and  Celsus  sought  to  dis- 
credit the  Christian  system  by  aspersing  the  in- 
tellectual as  well  as  the  moral  character  of  its  ad- 
herents. Origen  in  answer  points  to  the  passages 
of  the  OT,  especially  in  the  Psalms,  which  the 
Christians  also  use,  which  inculcate  wisdom  and 
understanding,  and  declares  that  education,  so  far 
from  being  despised  among  the  Christians,  is  the 
pathway  to  virtue  and  knowledge,  the  one  stable 
and  permanent  reality  (c.  Cels.  iii.  49,  72).  We 
must  not  suppose,  however,  that  the  Church  of  the 
first  days  took  any  steps  to  provide  schools  and  an 
educational  system  of  her  own.  Members  of  the 
Christian  community  !iad  no  alternative  but  to 
send  their  sons  to  the  schools  of  their  localities  to 
receive  instruction  along  with  scholars  who  were 
heathen  and  accustomed  to  the  usages  and  customs, 
the  superstitions  and  fables,  often  corrupt  and  un- 
clean, of  ])aganism.  Although  the  Eathers  of  the 
Church  did  not  permit  their  youth  to  become  in- 
structors ill  pagan  schools,  they  did  not  consider  it 
wise  to  deny  them  the  advantages  of  a  liberal 
education,  even  thougli  .associated  with  falsehood 
and  idolatry.  If  they  had  forbidden  their  attend- 
ance they  would  have  justly  incurred  the  charges 
made  by  Celsus  of  hostility  to  learning.  Christian 
parents  made  a  virtue  of  necessity,  which  TertuUian 
approves,  only  recommending  Christian  pupils  to 
accept  the  good  and  reject  the  bad  (de  Idolatria,  x. ). 

Scarcely  less  pressing  and  even  more  difficult 
was  the  question  of  the  propriety  of  studying  the 
productions  of  the  great  pagan  writers.  Among 
those  who  took  the  liberal  view  was  Justin  Martyr, 
who  held  that  '  those  who  lived  with  Logos  are 
Christians,  even  if  they  were  accounted  atheists : 
of  whom  among  Greeks  were  Socrates  and  Hera- 
clitus '  {Apol.  i.  46).  Clement  of  Alexandria  was 
conspicuously  broad  in  his  Christian  sympathies, 
and  his  quotations  from  classical  writers  have 
preserved  to  us  fragments  of  authors  whose 
works  have  otherwise  jierished.  Others,  like 
Cyprian,  drew  a  sliarp  dividing  line  between 
pagan  philosophy  and  Christian  doctrine. 

But  thougii  the  circumstances  of  the  times 
rendered  separate  Christian  elementary  instruc- 
tion impossible  and  inadvisable  in  the  early  Ciiurch, 
the  Church  was  not  iiuliflcrent  to  the  (Christian 
instruction  of  her  members.  Eoremost  among 
the  members  l)elonging  to  the  Body  of  Christ  are 
'  teachers,'  mentioned  along  with  '  apostles  '  and 
'  ]>rophets  '  (1  (^o  12*).  Elsewhere  they  are  classed 
with  'pastors'  (Ejih  4").  Among  the  gifts  that 
laiuister  to  the  upbuilding  of  the  social  fabric  of 


EGYPT 


ELECT  LADY 


325 


Christianity  is  'teaching'  (Ro  12").  Power  to 
teacli  was  a  qualitication  which  Timothy  was 
char^etl  to  look  for  in  the  blslions  whom  he  should 
apjtoint  (1  Ti  3-),  and  he  was  told  that  the  servant 
of  the  Lord  in  any  office  must  have  aptness  to 
teacli  (2  Ti  2^*).  The  teacher  as  a  separate  func- 
tionary seems  early  to  have  disappeared  from  the 
Church,  his  functions  being  absoroetl  by  the  more 
official  presb3-ter  or  bishop  {q.v.),  who  was  always 
required  to  be  able  to  teach  (Charteris,  I'he  Church 
of  Christ,  p.  32).  The  need,  however,  for  institu- 
tions for  higher  instruction  in  the  things  of  Christ 
came  to  be  felt  early.  Out  of  the  training  of  the 
candidates  for  baptism  grew  the  catechetical 
schools  in  great  centres  of  pagan  learning.  The 
first  and  most  notable  of  them  was  the  catecheti- 
cal school  of  Alexandria,  of  which  Pantfenus  was 
the  founder,  and  Clement  and  Origen  were  the  most 
distinguished  ornaments.  This  was  the  counter- 
part of  the  pagan  university,  offering  to  philo- 
sophic pagans  an  academic  and  articulated  view  of 
the  Christian  system,  and  to  earnest  Christians  of 
intellectual  gifts  and  tastes  training  for  the  offices 
of  preachers  ;ind  teachers.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus 
commends  Origen  as  having  t.iught  him  philo- 
sophy, logic,  mathematics,  general  literature,  and 
ethics  as  the  groimd-work  of  theological  training, 
after  which  he  proceeded  to  the  exiJosition  of  the 
sacreil  Scriptures.  Under  Clement  and  Origen 
the  school  was  great  and  prosperous,  and  schools 
at  C;esarea,  Jerusalem,  and  elsewhere  were  founded 
upon  its  model. 

The  share  which  woman  had  in  the  work  of 
Christian  education  apart  from  her  influence  and 
work  in  the  home  is  not  made  clear  in  the  records 
of  Church  history.  In  the  Syriac  Didascalia 
Apostolorum,  however,  translated  by  Mrs.  M.  D. 
Gibson  (1W3),  we  have  an  official  document  of  the 
3rd  cent,  directing  the  deaconesses  to  assist  in  the 
baptism  of  women,  to  teach  and  educate  them 
afterwards,  and  to  visit  and  nurse  the  sick. 

LrmtATtrR]!. — A.  Hamack,  Bible  Reading  in  the  Barly 
Church,  1912;  A.  H.  Charteris,  The  Church  of  Christ,  1906, 
under  '  Education'  and  'Teachers' ;  P.  Monroe.  Text-Book  in 
the  Uiitnrsi  of  Education,  1905  ;  art  '  Bible  in  the  Church '  by 
E.  von  Dobschiitz  in  ERE  u.  579.  THOMAS  NiCOL. 

EGYPT  (ktyxnrroiY—ST  references  to  Egypt  occur 
mostly  in  historical  retrospects.  As  the  land  which 
was  friendly  and  hospitable  to  the  Hebrews  in  the 
time  of  Joseph,  but  cruel  and  oppressive  in  that  of 
Moses,  it  is  mentionetl  twelve  times  in  Stephen's 
addre-ss  before  the  Sanhedrin  (Ac  7),  once  in  St. 
Paul's  speech  at  Lystra  (13'^),  and  four  times  in 
Hebrews  (3'*  8*  ll-*-^).  There  is  a  single  allusion 
to  contemporary  Egypt  in  the  account  of  the  first 
Christian  Pentecost :  among  the  Jews  and  prose- 
lytes who  were  '  sojourning  in  Jerusalem,'  and  who 
formed  St.  Peter's  audience,  were  '  the  dwellers  (oi 
KOTotKow-Tei)  ...  in  Egypt '  (Ac  2^-  ">). 

Philo  estimated  that  there  were  not  fewer  than 
a  million  Jews  in  Egypt  in  his  time  (in  Flaccum, 
6;  see  Schiirer,  HJP  n.  ii.  [1885]  229).  The 
movement  from  Palestine  into  Egypt,  partly 
by  voluntary  emigration  and  partly  by  forcible 
de{X)rtation,  had  been  going  on  for  six  centuries. 
Aristeas  (Epist.  13)  states  that  Psammeticns  (pro- 
bably the  Second,  594-586  B.C.)  had  Jewish  mer- 
cenaries in  his  army.  A  company  of  Jews  fled 
to  Egypt  after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  in  586  B.C. 
(Jer  42-43).  Some  Aramaic  papjTi  found  at  Assuan 
and  Elephantine  show  that  a  colony  of  Jews  was 
settled  at  this  garrison  and  trading  post  (59*3  miles 
S.  of  Cairo)  in  the  6th  and  5th  centuries  B.G.,  and 
that  they  had  built  a  temple  to  Jahweh.  Many 
Jews  were  attracted  to  Alexandria  at  the  time  of  its 
foundation  by  the  otier  of  citizenship  (Jos.  c.  Ap. 
iL  4,  Ant.  XIX.  v.  2).     Ptolemy  Lagi  carried  a  vast 


number  of  Jews  captive  to  Eg3'pt  (Aristeas,  Epist. 
12-14).  Philo  mentions  that  two  of  the  five  quarters 
into  which  Alexandria  was  divided  were  called  '  the 
Jewish '  (»»  Flaccum,  8).  In  no  country  M-ere  the 
Jews  so  prosperous,  so  influential,  so  cultured  as 
they  were  in  Egypt,  where  some  of  them  held  im- 
portant offices  of  State  under  the  Ptolemys  (Jos.  c. 
Ap.  ii.  5,  Ant.  Xlll.  x.  4,  xiii.  1,  2),  and  where  an 
attempt  was  made  to  fuse  Hellenic  with  Hebrew 
ideals. 

History  gives  no  trustworthy  account  of  the 
evangelization  of  Egypt.  The  statement  found  in 
Eusebius  {HE  ii,  16)  that  St.  Mark  was  the  first 
missionary  who  went  thither,  and  that  he  preached 
there  the  Gospel  which  he  had  written,  Ls  con- 
fessedly legendary,  and  the  idea  that  Apollos  had 
some  share  in  the  enlightenment  of  his  native  city 
is  no  more  than  a  natural  conjecture.  There  are 
few  materials  to  fill  the  gap  between  apostolic 
times  and  the  beginning  of  the  3rd  cent.,  when 
Alexandria  {q.v. ),  the  home  of  Clement  and  Origen, 
became  the  intellectual  capital  of  Christendom. 
Even  till  the  days  of  Constantino  the  progress  of 
Christianity  in  Egypt  was  almost  confined  to  this 
one  Hellenistic  city. 

'  The  great  city  which  spiritually  is  called  Sodom 
and  Egypt '  (Rev  1 1®)  is  probably  Jerusalem ,  regarded 
as  the  latter-day  enemy  of  righteousness  and  of 
God's  people,  such  as  Sodom  and  Egj-pt  had  been 
in  ancient  times.  The  alternative  view  is  that 
Rome  is  the  great  city  which  is  allegorically  or 
mystically  named.  If  the  addition  '  where  also 
their  Lord  was  crucified '  were  original,  it  would 
of  course  decide  the  point ;  but  this  may  be  a  gloss. 

LirERATdiE. — A.  Hamack,  The  Jftnion  and  Ea^ansion  of 
Ckrigtianity  in  the  First  Three  Ceniuriei^,  Eng.  tr.,  1908 ;  A. 
H.  Sayce  and  A.  E.  Cowley,  Aramaic  Paps/ri  diseovered  at 
Anouan,  Oxford,  1906 ;  artt.  in  SDB,  DCG,  SBi,  and  HDB, 
with  the  Literature  there  cited.  JaMES  STBAHAX. 

EGYPTIAN,  THE.— See  Assassins. 

ELAHITES. — Elamites  are  mentioned  in  Ac  2^ 
among  the  sojourners  in  Jerusalem  on  the  Day  of 
Pentecost.  Jews  settled  in  Elam  during  the  post- 
exUic  period,  whence  they  and  their  descendants 
came  up  to  the  Holy  City  for  the  annual  religious 
festivals.  Elam  lay  due  east  of  Babj-Ionia  and  the 
lower  Tigris,  and  corresponds  to  the  modem 
Khuzigtan.  Its  ruling  cities  were  Shushan  (or 
Susa)  and  Ansan  (or  Anzan),  and  the  earliest 
native  rulers  called  themselves /»a<ms,  or '  viceroys,* 
in  acknowledgment  of  dependence  upon  Babylonia. 
The  native  Elamites  had  been  gradually  en- 
croached ui>on,  from  the  west,  by  invading  Semites, 
who  brought  their  own  system  of  writing  with 
them.  This  system  was  adopted  by  the  Elamite 
princes  for  many  of  their  votive  Ablets  and  in- 
scribed monuments.  For  a  brief  period  after 
2300  B.C.  Elamite  chieftains  ruled  in  Babylonia, 
but  their  power  was  broken  by  Hammnrabi, 
whose  son  Samsu-Uuna  finally  restored  Babylonian 
supremacy. 

LmRATURK.— L.  W.  King:  ai>d  H.  R.  Hall,  Egypt  and 
Wettem  Asia  in  the  Light  of  Reeent  Diteoteries,  19U7,  ch.  v. ; 
H.  Winckler,  History  of  Babylonia  and  Asgyria,  Eng.  tr.,  1907, 
ch.  ii. ;  artt.  'Elam'  in  PRB^ and  JE, and  '  Elam,  Etamites'  in 
UDB.  A.  W.  COOKK. 

ELDER. — '  Elder '  preserves  better  than  *  presby- 
ter '  the  history  of  the  title,  which  goes  back  to 
the  fact  that  tribes  were  governed  by  the  heads  of 
their  component  families.  '  Elder '  is  probably 
the  earliest  name,  after  'apostle,'  for  a  Christian 
official  (Ac  11**).  See  Bishop  and  Chukch  Goverx- 

MEXT.  A.  PLUilMEK. 

ELECT  LADY.— See  JoHX,  Epistles  op. 


326 


ELECTION 


ELECTION 


ELECTION.  — 1.  Definition.  —  Election,  in  the 
teaciiing  of  the  apostles,  is  tlie  nietliod  l»y  which 
God  f^ives  eilect  to  His  eternal  purpose  to  redeem 
and  save  niaui<ind  ;  so  that  the  elect  arc  those  who 
are  niarketl  out  in  God's  purpose  of  grace  from 
eternity  as  lieirs  of  salvation. 

2.  Election  in  the  OT.— The  doctrine  of  a  Divine 
election  lies  at  the  very  heart  of  revelation  and 
redemption.  Abraham  was  chosen  that  in  him 
all  the  families  of  the  earth  should  be  blessed  (Gn 
12^).  It  was  through  the  chosen  people,  the  seed 
of  Abraham,  that  God  was  pleased  to  make  the 
clearest  and  fullest  revelation  of  Himself  to  man 
and  to  prepare  the  way  in  the  fullness  of  the  time 
for  the  world's  redemption.  Through  their  patri- 
archs and  their  Divinely  guided  history,  through 
the  laws  and  institutions  of  the  Mosaic  economy, 
through  tabernacle  and  temple,  through  jirophets 
and  psalmists,  through  their  sacred  Scriptures,  and 
at  length  through  the  Incarnate  Word,  born  of 
the  chosen  people,  the  world  has  received  the 
knowledge  of  the  being  and  spirituality  of  God, 
of  the  love  and  mercy  and  grace  of  our  Father  in 
heaven.  To  Israel  their  great  legislator  said : 
'  Thou  art  an  holy  people  unto  the  Lord  thy  God  : 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  chosen  thee  to  be  a  peculiar 
people  unto  himself,  above  all  peoples  that  are 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  The  Lord  did  not  set 
his  love  upon  you,  nor  choose  you,  because  ye 
were  more  in  number  than  any  peoj)le ;  for  ye 
were  the  fewest  of  all  peoples :  but  because  the 
Lord  loveth  you '  (Dt  7'^'').  Israel  was  chosen  to 
spread  abroad  the  Divine  glory,  and  God  desig- 
nates them  by  His  prophet  '  My  chosen,  the  people 
which  I  formed  for  myself,  that  they  might  set 
forth  my  praise'  (Is  43-"-^').  They  were  taught, 
also,  to  realize  how  great  were  their  privileges : 
*  Blessed  is  the  nation  whose  God  is  the  Lord  ;  the 
people  whom  he  hath  chosen  for  his  own  inherit- 
ance '  (Ps  33'2;  cf.  ISS'').  Their  very  position  on 
the  face  of  the  earth,  placed  in  the  midst  of  the 
nations,  was  chosen  with  a  view  to  tlioir  discipline 
and  sanctilication,  for  thus  the  Maccabican  annal- 
ist puts  it :  '  Howbeit  the  Lord  did  not  choose  the 
nation  for  the  place's  sake,  but  the  place  for  the 
nation's  sake '  (2  Mac  5^^).  And  the  destiny  of 
the  elect  people  was  to  culminate  in  the  Elect  Ser- 
vant of  the  Lord  :  '  Behold  my  servant  whom  I  up- 
hold ;  my  chosen  (TO?,  6  iKXe'icrds  fiov)  in  whom  my 
soul  delighteth  :  I  have  put  my  spirit  upon  him  ; 
he  shall  bring  forth  judgement  to  the  Gentiles' 
(Is  42'  RV  ;  '  the  Elect  one '  ap])ears  as  a  Messianic 
designation  in  the  Book  of  Enoch,  xl.  5,  xlv.  3, 
4,  5,  xlix.  2,  4,  and  is  found  applied  to  Christ  in  Lk 
9**  23^').  This  conception  of  Israel  as  the  people 
of  God's  election  colours  the  whole  of  the  teaching 
of  the  apostles  and  forms  the  subject  of  St.  Paul's 
great  discussion  in  the  chapters  where  he  deals 
with  the  problem  of  their  rejection  (Ro  9-11). 
That  the  Jewish  people  had  come  to  attribute  to 
it  an  exaggerated  and  erroneous  value  is  clear  not 
only  from  St.  Paul's  argument  but  also  from  the 
Rabbinical  literature  of  the  time  (see  Sanday- 
Headlam,  Roman^,  p.  248  fi'.). 

3.  Biblical  use  of  the  word.— In  biblical  Greek 
the  word  iKXcKrol  {iKX^ytcrOai,  eKXoyrj)  is  of  frequent 
occurrence.  In  the  OT  we  find  ^kKcktos  used  in  the 
sense  of  picked  men  (Jg  20'*,  1  S  24*) ;  of  indi- 
viduals chosen  by  God  for  special  service  (Moses, 
Ps  106^  [LXX  105]  ;  David,  Ps  SO^*-  "  [LXX  88]) ; 
of  the  nation  Israel  (Ps  106»  [LXX  105],  Is  45'' 
65»-  '•') ;  of  the  Servant  of  the  Lord  (Is  42' ;  cf.  52i»). 
In  the  NT  we  find  the  verb  used,  always  in  the 
middle  voice,  of  our  Lord's  choice  of  the  Twelve 
from  the  company  of  the  disciples  (Lk  6'^,  Jn  0"" 
I318  1519^  j\^.  i^i  .  Qf  j;|,g  choice  of  an  apostle  in  the 

filace  of  Judas  (Ac  1")  ;  of  Stephen  and  his  col- 
eagues  (Ac  6°) ;  of  God's  choice  of  the  patriarchs 


(Ac  13'") ;  and  of  the  choice  of  delegates  to  carry 
the  decisions  of  the  Apostolic  Council  to  the  Gen- 
tile churches  (Ac  IS**'  '■'■'*).  It  is  used  of  Gotl's 
choice  of  the  foolish  things  of  the  world  to  put  to 
shame  them  that  are  wise,  and  the  weak  things  to 
l)ut  to  shame  the  things  wliich  are  strong  (1  ("o  1-'') ; 
and  of  His  choice  of  the  poor  to  be  rich  in  faith 
and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  inomi-^cil  to  them  that 
love  Him  (Ja  2*). 

In  the  Gospels  ^KXeKroi  and  nXrjToi  are  distin- 
guished:  KXrjToi,  as  Jjightfoot  puts  it  (Colossuins*, 
1879,  p.  220),  '  being  those  summoned  to  the  privi- 
leges of  the  Gospel,  and  ^kXckto/  tiiose  appointed  to 
final  salvation  (Mt  24---  ''*■  =»,  Mk  13'*-  =«•  =^,  Lk  18^). 
But  in  St.  Paul  no  such  distinction  can  be  traced. 
With  him  the  two  terms  seem  to  be  co-extensive, 
as  two  aspects  of  the  same  process,  kXtjtoL  having 
special  reference  to  the  goal,  and  4kX€kto[  to  the 
starting-point.  The  same  persons  are  "called" 
to  Christ  and  "chosen  out  from  the  world.'  It 
is  to  be  noticed  in  the  Epistles  that  while  6  koXQv 
is  used  of  God  or  (Christ  in  the  present  tense  (1  Th 
212  5J4^  Qj^i  58j^  ^  iKXeydfxevos  is  never  used,  nor  the 
present  tense  of  any  jiart,  the  aorist  being  em- 
ployed to  describe  what  depended  upon  God's 
eternal  purpose  (Eph  1",  2  Th  2'3).  In  St.  Peter's 
Epistles  KXijrds  is  not  found,  nor  iKXiytaOai,  but  the 
verbal  adjective  (kXcktSs  is  fo\ind  four  times,  once 
of  'elect'  ])(!ople  (1'),  once  of  Christians  as  an 
'elect  race'  (2"),  and  twice,  following  the  UT,  of 
Christ  as  the  Living  Stone,  choice  and  'chosen'  to 
be  the  corner-stone  (2^-  ").  iKXoy-q  is  found  of  the 
Divine  act  (Ac  O'',  Ro  9"  li'-  =»,  1  Th  l^  2  P  1'"), 
and  once  as  the  abstract  for  the  concrete  £kX€ktoI 
(Ro  IV). 

i.  St.  Paul's  doctrine. — It  is  St.  Paul  who  most 
fully  develoi)s  the  doctrine  in  its  strictly  theological 
aspects.  His  teaching,  however,  imly  expands  that 
of  our  Lord  on  the  same  subject,  as  when  He  speaks 
of  those  whom  the  Father  had  given  Him  (Jn  6^-  "* 
17^'  -*),  to  whom  He  should  give  life  eternal,  and 
whom  lie  should  keei)  so  that  they  would  never 
perish  (Jn  10^).  St.  Paul  from  an  early  period 
of  his  missionary  labours  saw  results  which  were 
recognized  in  his  circle  to  be  due  to  an  inHuence 
higher  than  man's — to  the  predestinating  counsel 
of  God.  For  the  historian  tells  how,  on  St.  Paul's 
preaching  for  the  first  time  to  Gentiles  at  Antioch 
of  Pisidia,  '  as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal 
life  believed'  (Ac  IS'"*).  This  was  on  his  fii-st 
missionary  journey.  On  his  second  he  preached 
to  the  Thessalonians  among  others,  and  in  the 
two  Epistles  written  to  them  on  that  extended 
journey  there  is  the  clear  recognition  of  the  same 
influence.  Giving  thanks  to  God  for  them,  St.  Paul 
in  the  opening  words  of  the  First  Epistle  discerns 
in  their  experience,  and  sets  forth  for  their  comfort, 
theproofsof  their 'election '(iTh  l*-'**).  From  their 
response  to  the  gospel  call,  their  acceptance  of  the 
gospel  message,  their  patient  endurance  of  atlliction, 
and  the  joy  they  had  in  their  new  spiritual  life,  a 
joy  begotten  in  them  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  St.  Paul 
inferred  and  knew  their  election.  And  not  long 
after,  when  he  wrote  the  Second  Epistle  to  correct 
misapprehensions  produced  by  the  First,  he  set 
before  the  Thessalonian  Christians,  in  language 
still  loftier  and  more  explicit,  this  profound  and 
encouraging  truth  of  a  Divine  election  (2  Th  2"""). 
God  is  here  represented  as  taking  them  for  His  own 
(the  verb  is  e'CXaro,  not  i^eX^^aro),  and  it  is  'from  the 
beginning,'  from  eternity  (there  is  a  rejuling 
dwapx'^t',  '  firstfruits,'  instead  of  dv'  dpx^s).  that 
the  transaction  dates.  It  is  not  to  religious 
l>rivileges  merely,  nor  even  to  a  possible  or  con- 
tingent salvation,  that  they  have  been  chosen, 
but  to  an  actual  and  present  ex|)erience  of  its 
blessings,  felt  in  holiness  of  life  an<l  assurance  of 
the  truth.    This  was,  indeed,  what  they  were  calle<l 


ELECTION 


ELECTION 


327 


to  enjoj*  through  the  gospel  preaclted  by  St.  I'aul 
and  his  colleagues,  so  as  at  length  to  obtain  the 
glorv  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In  liLs  Epistle  to 
the  lioiuans,  written  not  long  after,  St.  Paul,  in  eh. 
8,  rising  to  tlie  loftiest  heights  of  Divine  inspira- 
tion, and  penetrating,  as  it  might  seem,  to  the  secret 
place  of  the  counsels  of  the  Most  High,  apprehends 
for  himself,  and  makes  known  for  the  encourage- 
ment of  faith,  the  links  of  the  great  chain  of  the 
Divine  election  by  which  the  Church  of  believers 
is  bound  about  the  feet  of  God  — '  foreknown,' 
*  foreordained,'  '  called,'  '  justified,' '  glorified  '  (lio 
gas-30)  Here  '  they  that  love  God  '  are  co-extensive 
and  identical  with  '  them  that  are  called  according 
to  his  purpose.'  They  are  'foreordained,'  so  that 
they  may  attain  the  likeness  of  Grod's  Son,  and, 
further,  that  He  may  be  glorified  in  them  and  see 
of  the  travail  of  His  soul  and  be  satisfied.  God's 
elect  (Ro  8**)  may  have  the  assaults  of  temptation 
and  trial  to  face,  and  tribulation,  anguish,  |>erse- 
cution,  famine,  nakedness,  peril,  and  sword  to  en- 
dure ;  but  nothing  can  separate  them  from  the  love 
of  God  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 

These  disclosures  regarding  God's  eternal  pur- 
pose of  grace  are  continued  and  extended  by  St. 
Paul  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  where  the 
spiritual  blessings  enjoyed  in  such  abundance  by 
them  are  tracetl  up  to  their  election  by  God — '  even 
as  he  chose  us  in  him  (Christ)  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy  and  with- 
out blemish  before  him  in  love:  having  fore- 
ordained us  unto  adoption  as  sons  through  Jesus 
Christ  unto  himself,  according  to  the  good  pleasure 
of  his  will,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  his  grace' 
(Eph  1*"^).  It  is  a  further  development  of  this 
when  St.  Paul  says  again  in  the  same  Epistle : 
'  We  are  his  workmanship,  created  in  Christ  Jesus 
for  good  works,  which  God  afore  prepared  that  we 
should  walk  in  them '  (Eph  2'").  The  unconditional 
character  of  the  Divine  choice,  emphasized  in  these 
statements  of  the  Ai)ostle,  is  affirmed  again  when, 
writing  to  Timothy,  he  bids  him  suffer  for  the 
gospel  '  according  to  the  power  of  God,  who  saved 
us  and  called  us  with  a  holy  calling,  not  according 
to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own  purpose 
of  grace  which  was  given  in  Christ  Jesus  before 
times  eternal '  (2  Ti  P). 

In  a  separate  passage  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  (chs.  9-1 1 )  St.  Paul  deals  with  the  mystery 
of  the  call  of  the  Gentiles  to  take  the  place  of  gain- 
saying and  disol>edient  Israel.  In  so  doing  he  first 
vindicates  Gotl  from  the  reproach  of  having  de- 
parted from  His  ancient  covenant — a  reproach  which 
would  be  well-founded  if  the  covenant  people  were 
rejected  and  the  Gentiles  put  in  their  place.  Such 
a  rejection,  he  contends,  would  not  be  altogether 
out  of  keeping  with  God's  treatment  of  His  people 
in  the  course  of  their  history. 

"There  was  from  the  first  an  element  of  inscrutable  selective- 
ness  in  God's  dealings  within  the  race  of  Abraham.  Ishniael 
was  rejected,  Isaac  chosen  :  Esaa  was  rejected  and  Jacob  chosen, 
antecedently  to  all  moral  conduct,  though  both  were  of  the 
same  father  and  mother.  Such  selectiveness  ought  at  least  to 
have  prevented  the  Jews  from  resting  their  claims  simply  on 
having  '•.\braham  to  their  father"'  (Gore,  'Argument  of 
Romans  ix.-xi.'  in  Studia  Bibiiea,  iil.  40 ;  ct  A-  B.  Bruce,  St. 
Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity ,  p.  312ff.X 

'  The  election  within  the  election '  here,  St.  Paul 
argues,  is  the  Christian  Church— the  Israel  after 
the  Spirit ;  and  the  reproach  of  "the  objector  falls 
to  the  ground  (Ro  9*"^).  Besides,  the  Apostle 
further  maintains,  God,  in  His  electing  purpose,  is 
sovereign,  as  is  seen  in  the  difference  between  the 
two  sons  of  Rebecca  ;  in  the  Divine  word  to  Moses  : 
'  I  will  have  mercy  on  whom  I  will  have  mercy ' ; 
and  in  the  hardening  of  the  heart  of  Pharaoh  (Ro 
9i»-i4)  ^j  after  all,  if  the  election  were  cancelled, 
the  blame  would  be  Israel's  own,  because  of  un- 
belief and  disobedience,  such  as  Moses  denounced. 


and  Isaiah  bewailed  when  he  said:  'All  the  day 
long  did  I  spread  out  my  hands  unto  a  disobedient 
and  gainsaj-ing  people '  (Ro  10-'). 

But,  despite  appearances,  Israel  was  not  east  off. 
Their  rejection  was  not  final.  There  were  believing 
Israelites,  like  St.  Paul  himself,  in  all  the  churches  ; 
and  he  could  say  :  *  At  this  j)resent  time  also  there 
is  a  remnant  according  to  the  election  of  grace' 
(Ro  11*).  Meanwhile  the  problem  of  Israel's  un- 
belief and  of  the  passing  over  of  spiritual  privilege 
to  the  Gentiles  (Ro  IP')  is  to  be  solved  by  the 
Gentiles  provoking  Israel  to  jealousy — appreciat- 
ing and  embracing  and  profiting  by  the  blessings 
of  the  Christian  salvation  to  such  an  extent  that 
Israel  will  be  moved  to  desire  and  to  possess  those 
blessings  for  their  own.  When  Jews  in  numbers 
come  to  seek  as  their  own  the  righteousness  and 
goodness  which  they  see  thus  manifested  in  the 
Uves  of  Christians,  and  are  stirred  up  to  envy  and 
emulation  by  the  contemplation  of  them,  the  time 
will  be  at  hand  when  all  Israel — Israel  as  a  nation 
— shall  be  saved.  Of  that  issue  St.  Paul  has  no 
doubt,  for  '  the  gifts  and  calling  of  God  are  with- 
out repentance '  (Ro  1 1-*). 

To  sum  up  St.  Paul's  teaching,  election  (1)  is 
the  outcome  of  a  gracious  purpose  of  the  heart  of 
God  as  it  contemplates  fallen  humanity  from  all 
eternity  (Ro  8^-  =»  ;  cf.  Ro  5*-'«) ;  (2)  is  a  display  of 
Di\-ine  grace  calculated  to  redound  to  the  glory 
of  God  by  setting  forth  HLs  love  and  mercy  towards 
sinful  men  (Eph  1^") ;  (3)  is  not  conditioned  upon 
any  good  foreseen  in  the  elect,  nor  in  any  fait  li  or 
merit  which  they  may  exhibit  in  time  (Ro  9""'*), 
but  is  '  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will ' 
(Eph  1'),  'according  to  his  own  purpose  of  grace' 
(2  Ti  1*),  of  God's  sovereign  purpose  and  grace 
(Ro  9"  11*-^) ;  (4)  is  carried  out  '  in  Christ '  (Eph  1* 
2"*)  through  the  elect  being  brought  into  union 
with  Him  by  faith,  that  they  may  receive  forgive- 
ness of  sins  and  every  spiritual  blessing  in  the 
heavenly  places  (Eph  l*-  ') ;  (5)  issues  in  sanctifica- 
tion  by  the  Spirit  and  assurance  of  the  truth  (2  Th 
2'*'-)  and  heavenly  glory  (Ro  8*) ;  and  (6)  is  proved 
by  acceptance  of  the  gospel  call  and  by  the  trust 
and  peace  and  joy  of  believing  and  obedient  hearts 
(1  Th  l*-«). 

5.  St.  Peter's  doctrine. — If  St.  Peter's  allusions 
to  the  subject  of  election  are  few  they  fully  support 
the  teaching  of  St.  Paul.  In  his  addresses  at 
Jerusalem  after  Pentecost,  he  speaks  of  '  the 
determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God' 
(Ac  2^)  with  reference  to  J^us.  It  is  fitting  that 
the  Apostle  of  the  Circumcision  should  speak  of 
Him  as  'a  living  stone,  rejected  indeed  of  man, 
but  with  Giod  elect,  precious '  (I  P  2* ;  cf.  dxo5e5«7- 
fUvov,  '  approved,'  Ac  2"—),  and  even  quote  concern- 
ing Him  the  prophetic  Scripture  :  '  Behold  I  lay  in 
Zion  a  chief  comer-stone,  elect,  precious '  (2* ;  cf. 
Is  28").  Of  Christ  he  speaks,  too,  as  '  foreknown  ' 
(1*;  Hort,  adloc,  'designated  afore')  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world. 

St.  Peter  gives  manifest  prominence  to  the 
doctrine  of  election  when,  in  the  opening  words  of 
his  First  Epistle,  he  addresses  the  Jewish  Christians 
of  Pontus  and  other  Asiatic  provinces  as  '  the  elect 
who  are  sojourners'  there  (^jtXe«:To*j  xopextoiJ/MHi 
Suur-ropai  Ubmov,  rrX.).  'Elect'  they  are  because 
their  lot  is  cast  in  favoured  lands  where  the 
messengers  of  the  gosjiel  have  proclaimed  the  good 
tidings — still  more  because  they  have  obeyed  and 
believed  the  message,  and  have  had  experience  of 
the  blood  of  sprinkling  and  of  the  sanctifying 
power  of  the  Holy  Spirit — yea,  because  they  have 
been  '  designated  afore,'  not  to  service  as  Christ 
was  from  the  foundation  of  the  world  (1^),  but  to 
blessing,  even  all  the  blessings  of  the  Christian 
salvation  by  God  the  Father  Himself  (I'-*).  Con- 
ceived of  as  the  Christian  Israel,  the  Israel  after 


328 


ELEMENTS 


ELEMENTS 


the  Snirit,  tliese  Jewisli  believers  are,  as  St.  I'eter 
elsewhere  calls  them,  '  an  elect  race,  a  royal  ))riest- 
hood,  a  holy  nation,  a  people  for  (jlod's  own 
possession '  (2®,  where  election  is  seen  to  be  not 
simply  to  jjrivile^e,  but  to  character  and  service, 
to  holy  livinj,'  and  the  setting  forth  of  the  Divine 
glory).  Although  they  are  an  '  elect  race  '  they  are 
also  in  the  same  context  described  as  'living 
stones'  (2'),  and  Hort  is  right  when  he  says  'tiie 
whole  spirit  of  the  Kpistle  excludes  any  swallowing 
up  of  the  individual  relation  to  God  in  the  corpo- 
rate relation  to  Him;  and  the  individual  relation 
to  God  implies  tlie  individual  election'  {First 
Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  J.  l-II.  17,  1898,  p.  14). 

Few  as  are  St.  Peter's  utterances  regarding  the 
doctrine,  they  entirely  support  St.  Paul,  even  when, 
emphasizing  the  urgency  of  the  matter  as  a  part 
of  i)ractical  religion,  he  bids  his  readers  give 
diligence  to  make  their  'calling  and  election  sure' 
(2  I'  1'"). 

6.  St.  John's  doctrine. — It  is  from  St.  John  that 
we  have  the  record  of  our  Lord's  most  impressive 
teaching  on  the  subject  of  those  whom  the  Father 
had  given  Him  (.In  6='"-  ^  17--  ^*).  In  his  Gospel  he 
uses  iKKifeadai,  always,  however,  as  employed  in 
His  discour.ses  by  the  Lord  Himself  and  with  a 
definite  reference  to  the  Twelve,  or  to  the  company 
of  the  disciples.  In  his  Second  Epistle  (vv.'-  ")  he 
has  iKXeKTT).  Whether  tiie  word  desci'ibes  an  indi- 
vidual or  a  society  it  is  not  easy  to  say,  but  at 
least  it  has  the  same  theological  signification  as  in 
St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter.  In  the  Apocalypse  (17")  ^^-- 
\eKTol  is  used  in  a  very  significant  connexion,  where 
they  that  are  with  the  Lamb  in  His  warfare  against 
the  powers  of  evil,  and  in  His  victory  over  tliem, 
are  'calletl  and  chosen  and  faithful.'  They  are 
'  called  '  (K\r]Tol)  in  liaA'ing  heard  and  accepted  the 
gospel  message  ;  '  chosen  '  {^kXcktoI)  as  thus  having 
given  evidence  of  their  Divine  election  ;  '  faithful ' 
(iricrTol)  as  having  yielded  the  loyal  devotion  of 
their  lives  to  their  Divine  Leader,  and  persevered 
therein  to  the  end.  That  '  the  elect '  are  the  same 
as  'tlie  .sealed'  (Rev  7'*)  may  be  inferred  from  tiie 
manner  in  which  the  144,000  pass  unscathed 
through  the  conflicts  and  terrors  let  loose  upon 
them  (W). 

From  this  passage  apparently  comes  the  thought 
of  the  '  number '  of  the  elect  as  in  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer  ('  Order  for  the  Burial  of  the  Dead ') : 
'that  it  mayplease  Thee  to  accomplisli  thenumber 
of  Thine  elect.'  The  thought  appears  early  in  the 
sub- Apostolic  Church,  for  in  Clement's  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians  he  urges  thum  to  '  pray  with 
earnest  supplication  and  intercession  that  the 
Creator  of  all  would  preserve  unharmed  the  con- 
stituted number  of  His  elect  in  all  the  world 
through  His  beloved  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  through 
whom  He  called  us  from  darkness  to  light, 
from  ignorance  to  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  His 
name'  (lix.  2  ;  cf.  ii.  4,  Iviii.  2;  Apostol.  Const,  v. 
15,  viii.  22).  No  countenance  is  given  in  the  Early 
Church  to  the  idea  that  '  the  elect '  may  live  as 
they  list  and  at  last  be  saved.  '  Let  us  cleave  to 
the  innocent  and  the  righteous,'  says  Clement  of 
Rome,  '  for  such  are  the  elect  of  God  '  {op.  cit.  xlvi. 
4).  'It  is  through  faith,' says  Hennas  {Vis.  in. 
viii.  3),  '  that  the  elect  of  God  are  saved.'  '  In  love 
all  the  elect  of  God  were  made  perfect,'  says 
Clement  again  (xlix.  5),  '  for  without  love  nothing 
is  wellpleasing  unto  God.' 

LiTERATtiHE. — C.  Hodg-B,  Systematic  Theology,  1874,  ii.  333  ff. ; 
H.  C.  G.  Moule,  Outlines  of  Christian  noctrine,  1889,  p.  :i7fl.  ; 
C.  Gore,  in  SIndia  /i/fc^/cn.'iii.  flSOll.STff. ;  Sanday-Headlam, 
Jlomam'^(ICC,  1902),  LMSff.  ;  A.  B.  Bruce,  St.  f  aid's  Concep- 
tion of  Christianity,  1S04,  p.  ."ilOff.  ;  Coiiiiuentaries  on  passages 
noticed  above,  especially  Ligrhtfoot  and  Hort,  ad  lore. 

Thomas  Nicol. 
ELEMENTS    {aToixf'ia,   elementa). — aTotxuov   is 
properly  a  stake  or  jieg  in  a  row  (orolxos) ;  then, 


one  of  a  .series,  a  component  part,  an  element.  The 
sj)ecial  meanings  of  cTTotxfia  are :  {a)  the  letters 
of  the  alpiiabet;  {b)  the  physical  elements  or  con- 
stituents of  the  universe  ;  (c)  the  heavenly  bodies  ; 
{d)  the  rudiments  or  princi2na  of  a  ."mbject ;  (c)  the 
elementary  spirits,  angels,  genii,  or  demons  of  the 
cosmos.  Eacn  of  these  meanings,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  first,  has  been  found  by  exegetes  in  one 
or  other  of  the  NT  passages  in  which  aroixfui, 
occurs.  In  one  ca.se  (lie  5'-)  the  interpretation  {d) 
is  beyond  dispute ;  the  others  have  given  rise  to 
much  discussion. 

From  Plato  downwards  aroixf'io.  frequently  de- 
notes the  elements  of  which  the  world  is  composed. 
Empedocles  had  already  reckoned  four  ultimate 
elements — fire,  water,  earth,  and  air — but  called 
them  pii^ibfiara  (ed.  Sturz,  1805,  p.  '255 If.).  Plato 
preferred  to  speak  of  the  aroixfio.  rov  vavrds  {Tim. 
48  B;  cf.  The.fKt.  '201  E).  In  the  Orphic  Hymns 
(iv.  4)  the  air  {aiOrip)  is  called  Koaixov  ffroix^ov 
dpiffTov.  Aristotle  distinguished  o-rotxf'a  from  dpxal 
(though  the  terms  were  often  interclianged)  as  the 
material  cause  from  the  formal  or  motive  {Metaph. 
IV.  i.  1,  iii.  1).  The  Stoic  definition  of  a  ffToix^^ov 
is  '  that  out  of  which,  as  their  first  jtrinciple, 
things  generated  are  made,  and  into  which,  as 
their  last  remains,  they  are  resolved  '  (Diog.  Laert., 
Zcno,  69).  ffTotxfta  has  this  meaning  in  Wis  7" : 
'  For  himself  gave  me  an  unerring  knowledge  of  tlie 
things  that  are,  to  know  the  constitution  of  the 
world,  and  the  operation  of  the  elements'  (saJ 
ivipyeiav  aToixeluv  ;  cf.  19"*).  In  2  Mac  7-"^  a  mother 
says  to  her  seven  martyr  sons  :  '  It  was  not  I  that 
brought  into  order  the  first  elements  ((rroixftwcrti') 
of  each  one  of  you.' 

This  is  probably  the  meaning  of  the  term  in  2  P 
3^" :  '  The  day  of  the  Lord  shall  come  as  a  thief  ; 
in  which  .  .  .  the  elements  shall  be  dissolved  with 
fervent  heat'  {aTot-x^ta  5k  Kav<rovn€va  \vdri<reTai  [or 
\v6ri<TovTai]) ;  and  v.^^:  'the  elements  shall  melt 
(TT^Kerat)  with  fervent  heat.'  Here  RVm  gives 
the  alternative  '  heavenly  bodies,'  which  is  a  mean- 
ing the  word  came  to  have  in  early  ecclesiastical 
writers.  The  stars  were  called  o-T-otxt'o  either  as 
the  elements  of  the  heavens,  or — a  less  likely  ex- 
planation— because  in  them  the  elements  of  man's 
life  and  destiny  were  supposed  to  reside.  Justin 
speaks  of  rd  ovpdvia  ffToixfia.  {Apol.  ii.  5).  Theoph. 
of  Antioch  has  aToixela  Oeov  {ad  Antol.  i.  4),  and  the 
word  bears  the  same  meaning  in  Ep.  ad  Diug.  vii. 
2.  In  2  P  3'"  the  situation  of  aToix^M  between 
ovpavol  and  717  favours  this  interi)retation ;  the 
universe  seems  to  consist  of  the  vault  of  heaven, 
the  heavenly  bodies,  and  the  earth.  But  as  the 
writer  of  the  Epistle  is  not  methodical,  and  as,  in 
painting  a  lurid  picture  of  final  destruction,  he 
evidently  uses  the  strongest  language  at  his  com- 
mand, it  is  probable  that  the  <rToix"«  who.se  burn- 
ing he  contemplates  are  the  elements  of  the  whole 
universe. 

The  Gr.  word  frequently  denoted  the  rudiments 
or  principia  of  a  science,  art,  or  discipline.  The 
(TTOLxe'ia  of  geometry,  grammar,  or  logic  are  the 
first  ])rinciples  ;  aroix^'ia.  t^s  X^|ewj  are  the  j)arts  of 
speech  (Aris.  Poet.  xx.  1)  ;  (xroixf'a  t^^  apfriis,  the 
elements  of  virtue  (Plut.  de  Lib.  Educ.  xvi.  2). 
The  word  unquestionably  has  this  meaning  in 
He  5'-,  '  the  rudiments  of  the  first  nrinciples  (tA 
(TToixfia.  TTJs  dpxv^)  of  the  oracles  of  God ' — the  ABC 
of  Christian  education,  what  is  milk  for  babes  but 
not  solid  food  for  men  (v.^"). 

The  phrase  in  regard  to  which  there  is  most 
division  of  opinion  is  rd  ffrotxf'^o-  tov  Kdapiov  (Gal  4", 
Col  2"-  ^  ;  rov  kIxthov  is  clearly  implied  in  Gal  4"). 
(i.)  Many  take  ffroix^'io-  J"  the  intellectual  sense: 
'  the  elementary  things,  the  immature  beginnings 
of  religion,  which  occupy  the  minds  of  those  who 
are  still  without  the  pale  of  Cliristianity' (Meyer 


ELEMENTS 


ELIJAH 


S29 


on  Gal  4') ;  'tlie  elements  of  religious  training,  or 
the  ceremonial  precepts  common  alike  to  the  wor- 
ship of  Jews  and  of  Gentiles '  (Grimm-Thayer,  s.v. ). 
To  this  view  there  are  strong  objections.  Those 
who  are  in  bondage  to  the  <rT<MXf  «x  of  the  world  are 
compared  with  heirs  who  are  still  under  guardians 
and  stewards  (Gal  4'-'),  where  the  parallel  suggests 
the  personality  of  the  <rr<Hx«*-  To  serve  the 
a-Toixfia  is  the  same  thing  as  serving  them  that  by 
nature  are  no  gods  (4*) — a  statement  by  no  means 
e\ident  if  the  arotxe'"  are  the  rudiments  of  religious 
instruction.  The  relapse  from  God  to  the  <rTotx«a 
(4*)  can  scarcely  be  a  return  to  a  mere  abstraction. 
The  observance  of  times  and  seasons  is  according  to 
the  ffTotx«a  of  the  world,  not  according  to  Christ 
(Col  2^) — a  contrast  which  suggests  that  the  (rrotxf'a 
and  Christ  are  personal  rivals.  When  men  died 
with  Christ  from  the  <n-otxe«a  of  the  world  (v.^), 
this  was  more  than  a  death  to  rudimentary  teach- 
ing; The  oTotxeJa  are  apparently  identical  with  the 
principalities  and  powers  of  which  Christ  is  Head 
and  over  which  He  triumphs  (w.^*-").  Finally,  a 
man's  knowledge  of  tlie  (rT«x«a  is  not  approved 
as  his  beginning  of  religious  education,  but  con- 
demned as  his  '  philosojihy  and  vain  deceit '  (v.*). 

(ii.)  Those  interpreters  come  nearer  the  facts  of 
the  case  who  suggest  that  the  aroixeia  to  which  the 
Galatian  and  Colossian  Christians  were  reverting 
were  the  heavenly  bodies  conceived  as  animated 
and  therefore  to  be  worshipped.  Such  worship 
was  certainly  common  enough  among  the  Gentiles. 
'  They  say  tliat  the  stars  are  all  and  every  one  real 
parts  of  Jove,  and  live,  and  have  reasonable  souls, 
and  therefore  are  absolute  gods '  (Aug.  de  Civ.  Dei, 
iv.  11).  Nor  was  the  belief  in  astral  spirits  confined 
to  pagans.  In  the  Prcedicatio  Petri  (ap.  Clem. 
Alex.  Strom,  vi.  5)  the  Jews  are  represented  as 
Xarpevovrei  ay^feXon  koX  apxo-yyiXon,  HTjyi  /coi  ffe\-f)VT;, 
and  this  worsliip  is  classed  with  that  of  the  heathen. 
Clear  evidence  of  this  belief  is  found  in  Philo  (de 
Mundi  Op.  i.  S4)  and  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  (xli. 
xliii.).  The  animated  heavenly  bodies,  however, 
would  rather  be  described  as  to.  a-roixe'ia  rov  ovpopov, 
and  the  ffroixeia  of  the  '  cosmos '  must  include  those 
of  earth  as  well  as  those  of  heaven. 

(iii.)  Many  recent  expositors  therefore  maintain 
that  the  (rroixfia  are  the  angels  or  personal  elemental 
spirits  which  were  supposed  to  animate  all  things. 
There  is  evidence  that  this  view  was  wide-spread. 
The  Book  of  Enoch  (Ixxxii.  10  f . )  speaks  of  the 
angels  of  the  stars  keeping  watch,  the  leaders 
dividing  the  seasons,  the  taxiarchs  the  months,  and 
the  chiliarchs  the  days.  Stars  are  punished  if  they 
fail  to  appear  when  due  (xviii.  15).  The  Book  of 
Jubilees  (ch.  ii.)  refers  to  the  creation  of  the  angels 
of  the  face  (or  presence),  and  the  angels  who  cry 
'  holy,'  the  angels  of  the  spirit  of  wind  and  of  hail, 
of  thunder  and  of  lightning,  of  heat  and  of  cold,  of 
each  of  the  seasons,  of  dawn  and  of  evening,  etc. 
The  same  species  of  animism  is  found  in  the  As- 
cension of  Isaiah  (iv.  18),  2  Es  8"'-,  Sibyll.  Orac. 
(vii.  33-35).  In  the  Testament  of  Solomon  (Migne, 
Pair.  Gr.  cxxii.  1315)  the  spirits  who  come  before 
the  king  say  :  '  We  are  the  <rrotxetd,  the  rulers  of 
this  under  world '  (oi  KocfioKpaTopes  rov  aKorovi  tovtov). 
The  belief  survives  in  modern  Greek  folk-lore,  in  I 
which  the  tutelary  spirit  who  is  supposed  to  reside 
in  every  rock,  stream,  bridge,  and  so  forth,  is  called 
a  <rr(HXfU)y. 

Not  a  few  passages  in  the  NT  indicate  the  pre- 
valence of  this  conception.  The  four  winds  have 
their  four  angels  (Kev  7^- '),  and  the  fire  has  its 
angel  (14'*).  Each  of  the  Seven  Churches  has  its 
angel  (2.  3).  Angels  take  the  form  of  winds  and  fire 
(He  r  Ps  104^).  The  inferiority  of  the  law  to  the 
gospel  is  due  to  its  administration  by  angels  (Gal 
3^).  The  belief  in  a  world  of  intermediate  spirits 
is  the  basal  thought  of  Gnosticism,  which  St.  Paul 


encounters  in  its  incipient  forms.  '  Jewish  wor- 
ship of  law  and  pagan  worship  of  gods  are  for  him 
fundamentally  tlie  .same  bondage  under  the  lower 
world-powers  which  stand  between  God  and  men.* 
Grant  that  this  language  is  paradoxical,  '  it  is 
still  extremely  .significant  that  Paul  dares  to  speak 
in  this  way  of  the  law '  (Bonsset  in  Die  Schnften 
des  NT,  ii.  62). 

Even  in  2  P  3"-  "  it  is  possible  that  the  <n-otxf  «i 
which  are  to  be  '  dissolved,'  or  '  melted,'  are  ele- 
mental spirits.  '  This  may  or  may  not  seem  strange 
to  us,  but  we  must  ever  learn  anew  that  bygone 
times  had  a  different  conception  of  the  world ' '( Holl- 
mann  in  Die  Schriften  de*  NT,  ii.  594),  Schoettgen 
quotes  the  Rabbinical  words  :  'No  choir  of  angels 
sings  God's  praises  t^^-ice,  for  each  day  God  creates 
new  hosts  which  siog  His  praises  and  then  vanish 
into  the  stream  of  fire  from  under  the  throne  of  His 
glory  whence  they  came.'  A  closer  parallel  is  found 
in  Test,  of  the  XII.  Pair.,  '  Levi,'  4,  where  it  is  said 
that  on  the  Judgment  Day  all  creation  will  be 
troubled  and  the  invisible  spirits  melt  away  {koI  rww 
aopcLTOiv  rpevfiaTOJv  TriKOitAvur). 

LiTEBATTRB. — Hermann  Diets.  EUmeniMm  :  Eine  Voturbeit 
ztiin  grieehUehen  und  lateinUehen  Theuntnu,  1899 ;  E.  T. 
Hinks,  'The  Meaning  of  the  Phrase  ri  orotycui  toG  kooiiov' 
in  .JBL^  vol.  XV.  [1S96],  p.  183ff.  ;  artt.  bv  G.  A.  Deissmann  in 
EBi  ;  by  M.  S.  Teny  in  SDB  ;  by  J.  Massie  in  UDB. 

J.\MES  StRAHAX. 
ELIJAH  ('HX/aj). — One  incident  in   the  life  of 
Elijah  is  recalled  by  St.  Paul  (Ro  ll-~*)  and  another 
by  St.  James  (o"*-). 

(1)  Much  is  to  be  learned  from  a  great  man's 
mistakes ;  the  memory  of  his  lapses  may  save 
others  from  falling.  In  a  mood  of  despair  Elijah 
imagined  that  the  worst  had  happened  to  Israel, 
and  that  the  worst  was  likelj'  to  overtake  himself. 
The  prophets  were  slain,  the  altars  were  digged 
down,  he  was  left  alone,  and  his  enemies  were 
seeking  his  life.  Ahab  and  Jezebel  and  the  false 
prophets  had  triumphed  ;  it  was  all  over  with  the 
cause  of  righteousness  and  truth  for  which  he 
had  laboured.  Seeing  that  all  Israel  had  proved 
unfaithful  to  God,  there  was  nothing  for  the  lonely, 
outlawed  prophet  to  live  for,  and  he  requested  that 
he  might  die.  But  the  answer — 6  xpi^MarurM^i,  the 
Divine  oracle — proved  him  to  be  the  victim  of  a 
morbid  fancy,  and  brought  him  back  to  facts. 
Among  the  faithless  many  others  were  as  faithful 
as  he.  God  had  reserved  for  Himself  seven  thou- 
sand men  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal. 
All  Israel  had  not  forsaken  Him,  and — what  Mas 
still  more  important — He  had  in  no  wise  forsaken 
Israel.  There  is  but  one  thing  that  could  ever 
conceivably  justify  pessimism  —  the  failure  of 
Divine  power  or  love ;  and  the  fear  of  that  calamity 
is  but  a  human  weakness.  Now  St.  Paul  could 
not  help  seeing  the  close  analogy  between  the 
conditions  of  Elijah's  critical  time  and  those  of  his 
own.  Israel  as  a  whole  seemed  once  more  to  have 
forsaken  God,  in  rejecting  the  Messiah.  In  certain 
moods  St.  Paul  might  be  tempted  to  compare 
himself — lonely,  hated,  hunted— to  the  sad  prophet. 
But  did  the  '  great  refusal'  of  the  majority  prove 
either  that  all  Israel  was  unfaithful  or  that  God 
had  cast  ofi'  His  people?  No,  for  (a)  now  as  in 
Elijah's  rime  there  were  splendid  exceptions,  form- 
ing a  remnant  (Xet^^a  =  iK7)  which  was  the  true 
Israel ;  and  (b)  God's  immutable  faithfulness  made 
the  idea  of  a  rejection  incredible  and  almost  un- 
thinkable. 

(2)  St.  James  (&""•)  takes  an  illustration  from 
the  story  of  Elijah,  and  in  doing  so  reminds  his 
readers  that,  though  so  great  in  life  and  so  remote 
from  ordinary  humanity  in  the  manner  of  his 
exodus  from  the  world,  the  prophet  was  yet  a  man 
of  like  passions  (or  'nature,'  RVm)  with  us — 
irdpcjroi  ofiotoraditi  ijfup—SO   that  his   experiences 


330 


ELYMAS 


EMPEROR- WORSH  IP 


may  sorve  as  a  lielp  fo  weak,  onliiiai y  niortiils. 
Till)  success  (if  liis  prayer  for  a  tiiiu!  <ii  'ln.u-lit, 
aiiila^^aiii  fur  rain  iu  a  lime  of  famine,  is  cii  cd  a«  an 
evidence  of  tlie  fact  that  '  tlie  prayer  of  .a  rij,diteons 
man  availetli  much  in  its  workin;,'.'  It  lias  to  he 
noted,  however,  tliat  the  OT  narrative  (1  K  17) 
contains  no  reference  whatever  to  tlie  former 
petition,  while  the  latter  is  scarcely  deducible  from 
1  K  18^^,  where  it  is  only  stated  that  the  prophet 
bowed  himself  down  upon  the  earth  and  put  his 
face  between  his  knees.  Siracli  (4S"^-  ^),  however, 
atlirms  that  he  '  brought  a  famine,'  and  '  by  the 
word  of  the  Lord  he  shut  up  the  heaven.'  In 
4  Ezra  (vii.  109)  Elijah  is  cited  as  an  example  of 
intercession  p?'0  his  quipluviam  anxperunt. 

James  Strahan. 
ELYMAS.— See  Bar-Jesus. 

EMERALD  {(rfi6.pa-ySo<i). — The  emeraldis  a  mineral 
of  the  same  species  as  the  beryl.  It  owes  its  value 
as  a  j;em  to  its  extremely  beautiful  velvety  f,aeen 
colour,  which  is  ascribed  to  the  chromium  it  con- 
tains. The  jirimary  form  of  its  crystal  is  a  hexa- 
gonal prism  variously  modified.  It  is  electric  by 
friction,  and  frequently  transjiarent,  Init  sometimes 
only  translucent.  Flinders  i'etrie  (JIDB  iv.  620) 
suggests  that  the  (xixapaySo^  with  which  the  rainbow 
(7/)tj)  round  about  the  throne  is  compared  (Rev  4^) 
was  rock-crystal,  as  only  a  coloui'less  stone  could 
throw  prismatic  colours.  IJut  the  nimbus  or  halo 
may  have  been  emerald  in  colour  and  only  like  a 
rainbow  in  form.  The  fourth  foundation  of  the 
wall  of  the  New  Jerusalem  is  emerald  (Rev  2V^). 

James  Strahan. 

EMPEROR.— See  Augustus. 

EMPEROR-WORSHIP.  — One  of  the  most  in- 
teresting and  important  facts  in  the  inner  history 
of  the  Roman  Lmpire  prior  to  the  adoption  of 
Christianity  as  the  State-religion  was  the  rise  of 
Emperor-worship.  Only  in  recent  years  have  the 
facts  regarding  it  been  adequately  investigated, 
and  their  importance  for  the  early  history  of  Chris- 
tianity recognized  and  appreciated. 

1.  Origin  and  development. — Emperor-worship, 
like  many  other  strange  phenomena,  was  first  of 
all  a  product  of  the  contact  and  fusion  of  Oriental- 
ism and  Hellenism,  which  for  all  practical  purposes 
may  be  dated  from  the  conquests  of  Alexander  the 
Great.  In  each  of  these  modes  of  thought  it  had  a 
root ;  and,  before  the  advent  of  Roman  power,  the 
reigning  monarch  had  been  regarded  as  divine  in 
those  regions  where  (ireek  and  Oriental  thought 
had  blended.  In  Oriental  societies  generally — e.(/. 
Egypt,  Babylon,  Persia,  China — it  was  the  custom 
from  early  times  to  speak  of  the  ruler  as  '  son  of 
God,'  and  in  otiier  ways  to  p.ay  him  divine  honour 
— a  custom  which  may  easily  be  derived  from  the 
genei-al  tendency  there  to  cringing  adulation  and 
extravagant  flattery  on  the  part  of  the  subject  (in 
Ac  12'--  we  have  a  good  example),  and  from  a  natural 
desire  on  the  part  of  tlie  monarch  to  confirm  so 
useful  a  sanction  of  his  authority.  In  the  Hellenic 
world  an  approach  to  this  is  fouml  m  the  custom 
of  raising  to  divine  rank  after  death  those  who  in 
their  lifetime  had  been  pre-eminent  for  bravery  or 
other  qualities  of  great  service  to  the  community. 
To  such  men  sacred  rites  and  festivals  were  decreed, 
and  in  one  formula  used  in  inscrii)tions  they  are 
spoken  of  as  '  gods  and  heroes  '  (E.  Rolide,  Psijche"^, 
Tiibingen,  1903,  ii.  353).  As  noted  above,  in  the 
kingdoms  formed  out  of  the  Empire  of  Alexander 
in  which  Orientalism  was  hellenized,  the  deification 
of  the  monarch  was  definitely  carried  out.  An  in- 
scription of  Halicarnassus,  c.  306  B.C.,  describes 
Ptolemy  I.  as  '^unrjp  koI  9e6s,  '  Saviour  and  God ' 
(Dittenberger,  Orient.  Gr.  Inscr.  Selcctw,  190.3-05, 
xvi,  2,  3).     The  Syrian  kings  named  Antiochns  are 


termed  0<<5j  (God),  the  infamous  Antiochus  iv.  being 
designated  on  his  own  coins  as  0e6j ' liTrti^avTjj  ('  the 
(jod  who  has  appearetl  among  men'). 

It  was  in  hellenized  Asia  that  the  deification  of 
the  Roman  power  began.  In  195  U.C  Smyrna  in- 
stituted the  worship  of  the  jiower  of  Rome,  and 
from  95  n.C  onwards  we  fintl  in  Asia  the  worship 
of  various  Ijenelicent  Roman  ollicials,  e.g.  Scaivola, 
Q.  Cicero  (cf.  Ramsay,  Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches, 
j».  117).  .Julius  Cicsar  was  honoured  in  his  lifetime 
man  P'phesian  inscriiition  as  '  the  God  descended 
from  Mars  and  Venus,  who  has  appeared  in  human 
form,  and  the  universal  Saviour  of  the  life  of  men' 
(  Dittenberger,  Sylloge  Gr.  Inscript.^,  Leipzig,  1898, 
.347,  1.  6  [vol.  i.  p.  552]).  Upon  his  successor,  the 
great  Augustus,  the  East  showered  divine  honours 
in  profusion.  A  temple  was  dedicated  at  Pergamum 
to  Rome  and  Augustus  with  a  gild  of  choristers 
'for  the  God  Augustus  and  the  Goddess  Rome.' 
A  similar  temple  rose  at  Ancyra  in  Galatia,  ami 
the  recognition  of  the  deity  of  Ciesar  Ixicame  wide- 
spread in  the  Orient. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  it  wiis  no  mere  flattery 
that  was  expressed  in  this  deification.  It  was  a 
sincere  sentiment  of  gratitude  that  led  the  East 
to  confer  on  Cicsar  the  highest  honour  conceivable. 
The  pax  Ruinana  which  he  gave  them  and  preserved 
for  them  was  an  inestim.able  boon,  lie  did  for 
them  what  their  gods  seemed  unable  to  do  :  he  put 
an  end  to  their  constant  dread  and  frequent  experi- 
ence of  warfare,  tyranny,  injustice.  He  gave  them 
security  of  life  and  goods,  kept  safe  the  highways, 
fostered  their  commerce,  and  developed  their  re- 
sources. And  all  those  benefits  were  safeguarded 
to  them  by  a  might  which  seemed  invincible  and 
irresistible.  Viewed  through  a  medium  of  Ea.stern 
poetic  emotion,  Cresar  easily  appeared  invested 
with  essential  qualities  of  godhe.ad — limitless  power 
wielded  for  the  good  of  the  subject.  Many  in.scrip- 
tions  miglit  be  quoted  which  show  that  the  Eiistern 
pagan  world  found  its  Messiah  in  Ciesar,  the 
language  in  some  cases  bearing  a  resemblance  to 
Jewish  Messianic  psalms  and  prophecies.  The 
following  will  serve  as  illustration.  It  is  an  in- 
scription of  date  9-4  B.C.  (Ramsay)  in  honour  of  the 
birthday  of  Augustus,  and  is  a  decree  of  the  com- 
mune or  Asia,  instituting  the  Augustan  era,  and 
ordered  to  be  put  up  in  all  the  leading  cities 
(Ramsay,  op.  cit.  436).     We  give  only  an  extract : 

'  This  daj-  has  given  tlie  earth  an  entirely  new  aspect.  .  .  . 
Rightly  does  he  judge  who  recognises  in  this  birthday  the 
beginning  of  life  and  of  all  the  powers  of  life,  now  is  the  time 
ended  when  men  pitied  themselves  for  being  born.  .  .  .  All- 
ruling  Providence  has  lilled  this  man  with  such  gifts  for  the 
salvation  of  the  world  as  designate  him  the  Saviour  for  us  and 
for  the  coming  generations,  of  wars  will  he  make  an  end,  and 
establish  all  things  worthily.  By  his  appearing  are  the  hopes 
of  our  forefathers  fulfilled.  .  .  .  The  birthday  of  Go<l  ha« 
brought  to  the  world  glad  tidings.  .  .  .  From  his  birthday  a 
new  era  begins.' 

(For  whole  inscription  see  Mitteilungen  Inst.  Athen. 
xxiv.  [1889]  275  If.) 

Nor  was  it  only  in  the  Orient  that  Caesar  ap- 
peared a  being  worthy  of  tlivine  honour.  The 
est.ablishment  of  his  power  meant  the  restoration 
of  tranquillity  and  security  to  Italy  after  a  reign  of 
terror.  The  last  two  centuries  of  the  Republic 
were  marked  by  a  constant  succession  of  revolu- 
tions, each  of  which  drenched  Rome  with  Roman 
blood,  and  none  of  which  could  produce  a  just  or 
stable  government.  The  patience  with  which  the 
tj'rannies  and  cruelties  of  the  bad  Emperors  were 
endured  is  eloquent  testimony  to  the  lasting  im- 
pression of  horror  which  the  nightmare  of  the 
expiring  Republic  had  produced.  And  the  early 
years  of  the  Empire  seemed  full  of  proini.se.  A 
new  era  seemed  begun  in  Italy  no  less  than  in  the 
East.  Vergil  wrote  his  well-known  '  Messianic  ' 
fourth  Eclogue  jiredicting  the  birth  of  a  son  who 
.should  '  put  an  entl  to  the  age  of  iron,  ami  cause 


E^rPEROR- WORSHIP 


EMPEROR- WORSHU^ 


331 


tlie  age  of  gohl  to  arise  for  the  whole  world,'  the 
reference  being,  according  to  tlie  most  probable 
view,  to  a  son  of  Augustus  wliose  birth  was  ex- 
pected A.u.  40.  Tlie  Senate  decreed  that  the  birth- 
place of  Augustus  was  a  holy  place  (Suet,  t'lesar 
Ortdr.  Aug.  5).  Stories  of  portents  and  miracles 
at  his  birth  grew  with  the  years.  The  new  name 
Augustus  borne  by  Octavian  and  liis  successors 
connoted  from  the  first  .something  of  superhuman 
dignity.  Thus  Rome  was  prepared  for  the  deifica- 
tion of  the  reigning  Ciesar ;  in  fact,  it  was  reluctance 
on  the  part  of  Augustus  to  accept  it  that  somewhat 
retarded  the  process.  He  limited  the  worship  of 
Romans  to  the  <lead  Julius  Ctesar  who  had  received 
ajxitheosis  in  42  B.C.  under  the  title  Dimts.  As 
early  as  a.d.  14,  however,  Augustus  accepted  dei- 
fication from  Beneventum. 

Thus  we  see  that  deification  was  an  honour 
spontaneou^^ly  offered  to  Ctcsar  by  grateful,  enthusi- 
astic, and  devoted  subjects.  What  was  the  attitude 
of  the  Roman  Government  towards  it  ?  Not  too 
much  weight  is  to  be  laid  on  the  reluctance  ^vith 
which  Augustus  accepted  the  dignity.  Reluctance 
in  accepting  offices  and  honours  offered  was  his 
settled  policy.  On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  that 
the  practical  mind  of  a  Roman  did  honestly  feel 
that  there  was  sonietliing  embarrassing,  ludicrous, 
or  even  impious  in  his  ovm  deification.  But  the 
same  practical  mind,  with  its  genius  for  govern- 
ment, soon  perceived  that  in  Caesar-worship  the 
Empire  would  secure  what  it  lacked — a  bond  of 
unity  and  a  jwwerful  safeguard  of  loyalty.  In  the 
East  especially  this  was  eminently  desirable  and 
conspicuously  lacking.  "We  must  simply  refer  the 
reader  to  Ramsay's  demonstration  {op.  cit.  pp. 
115,  127)  of  the  place  filled  by  Caesar-worship  as 
the  great  bond  of  Empire  in  that  region.  It  was 
because  of  this  special  need  of  the  Eastern  pro- 
vinces that  Augustus  accepted  deification  from 
them,  while  ostensibly  refusing  it  from  Italy.  But 
the  principle  once  adopted  as  part  of  Roman  state- 
craft could  not  be  limited  spatially  as  matter  of 
practice,  still  less  as  matter  of  theory.  Caesar 
could  not  be  a  god  in  one  province  if  he  were  mere 
man  in  another.  Hence  Caesar-worship  rapidly 
l>ecame  organized  and  highly  developed  as  the 
State-religion  of  the  Empire ;  the  Ca?sars  so  far 
conquered  their  reluctance  to  pose  as  gods  that 
Domitian  proudly  designatetl  himself  as  Dominus 
et  Deus,  'Lord  and  God'  (Suet.,  Domitian,  13). 
Caesar-worship  was  enforced  by  the  whole  might 
of  the  State  ;  refusal  to  worship  the  Emperor 
was  high  treason.  The  Jews  alone  were  exempt. 
For  details  as  to  the  organization  of  the  new  re- 
ligion, its  priesthood,  the  pomp  of  its  ritual,  etc.,  we 
must  refer  tlie  reader  to  Mommsen,  The  Provinces 
of  the  Roman  Empire ;  and  Lightfoot,  Apostol. 
Fathers,  pt.  ii.  :  '  Ignatius  and  Poly  carp.' 

2.  Caesarism  and  paganism. — It  is  necessary  to 
make  a  few  remarks  on  the  relation  of  the  new 
religion  to  the  old  paganism,  because  in  sermons 
and  other  popular  treatments  of  the  subject  the 
facts  are  often  mis-statetl.  In  no  sense  was  the 
worship  of  Caesar  either  enforced  or  adopted  as  a 
substitute  for  other  religions.  It  did  not  displace 
or  quarrel  with  any  of  them.  The  old  gods  did 
not  leave  the  stage  to  make  room  for  Caesar. 
Contrary  to  what  is  often  asserted,  the  old  religions 
were  very  far  from  liaving  l<»t ;  their  power.  The 
satirical  strictures  of  Juvenal  and  Martial  on 
Roman  city-society  are  no  proof  that  the  old 
Roman  religion  was  powerless.  The  fact  that 
several  of  the  Emperors  acted  munificently  towards 
the  temples  of  the  old  gods  shows  two  things — that 
the  old  religion  was  still  in  force  and  far  from 
negligible,  and  that  the  new  religion  was  not  at  all 
a  rival  to  it  (cf.  S.  Dill,  Roman  Society  from  Nero 
to  Marcus  Aurelius,  London,  1904,  bk.  iv.  ch.  3). 


Indeed,  the  very  Augustus  who  was  the  first,  and 
remained  the  ideal,  Emi>eror-god,  was  also  the 
restorer  to  the  ancient  Roman  religion  of  the 
dignity  it  had  lost  in  the  troublous  times  of  the 
dying  Republic. 

But  a  further  stage  was  reached,  and  first  of  all 
in  Asia,  at  which  the  new  religion  became  con- 
scious tliat  it  could  maintain  itself  only  by  cloeely 
allying  itself  with  other  religions,  by  associating 
Caesar  with  the  local  divinities.  How  Csesariam 
came  to  neetl  this  buttress  is  intelligible  enough. 
It  was  only  one  or  two  generations  that  could  have 
adequate  experience  of  the  vast  benefit  that  Caesar's 
rule  brought  with  it.  The  previous  state  of  social 
misery  became  more  and  more  a  dim  memory  as 
time  pa.ssed,  and  the  fervour  with  which  Caesar 
was  greeted  as  divine  could  not  and  did  not  last. 
Hence,  while  during  the  1st  cent,  the  State-religion 
was  simply  the  woi-ship  of  Rome  and  Caesar,  in  the 
2nd  cent,  a  modification  was  necessary ;  and,  as 
indicated,  this  consisted  in  associating  Ciesar  with 
a  local  god  who  could  call  forth  a  gennine  religions 
feeling.  On  coins  we  find  Rome  and  Augustas 
associated  ^vith  Diana,  Persephone,  etc.  (see 
Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  p.  123 f.).  Thus  it  is  entirely 
erroneous  to  say  that  the  new  religion  owed  any 
of  its  strength  to  the  decay  of  the  old  paganism ; 
it  was  only  in  close  alliance  ^vith  the  old  that 
Ciesarism  as  a  religion  could  continue  in  exist- 
ence. 

3.  Caesarism  and  Christianity. — It  will  be  con- 
venient to  treat  of  this  under  three  heads  :  (a)  the 
antagonism ;  (6)  the  resemblances ;  (c)  Cjesarisni 
in  the  NT. 

(a)  The  antagonism. — This  is  the  most  obvious 
and  familiar  point  in  the  relation  of  Caesarism  to 
Christianity.  It  is  known  to  all  that  Rome  per- 
secuted Christianity.  What  needs  to  be  noted  is 
that  persecution  was  not  a  spasmodic  thing  due  to 
the  whim  and  caprice  of  specially  '  bad '  Emperors, 
as  has  sometimes  been  represented.  Persecution 
of  Christianity  was  the  deliberate  and  settled 
policy,  not  of  this  or  that  tyrant,  but  of  the  Roman 
State.  From  the  time  that  Christianity  attained 
any  great  dimensions  to  the  day  of  Constantine's 
Edict  of  Toleration,  there  exLsted  between  it  and 
the  Roman  power  a  relation  of  antagonism ;  and 
a  condition  of  persecution  resulted  for  the  Church. 
The  persecution  might  be  wide-spread  or  local,  few 
or  many  Christians  might  be  involved :  that  de- 
pendetl  entirely  on  the  diligence  and  zeal  of  Roman 
officials.  From  what  has  been  said  above,  the 
reason  for  this  state  of  matters  is  quite  plain. 
Rome  had  no  option  but  to  persecute.  Caesar- 
worship  was  the  bond  of  Empire,  the  test  of  loyalty, 
and  Christians  refusetl  to  worship  Caesar.  They 
were,  therefore,  a  danger  to  the  State.  Other 
charges  were  preferred  agadnst  them,  but  this 
came  to  be  the  one  capital  charge — treason  to  the 
State  manifest  in  refusing  to  worship  Caesar.  The 
story  of  persecution,  of  course,  is  a  varied  one  ;  we 
cannot  trace  its  development  here.  But  we  have 
indicated  its  rationale — the  principle  which  from 
the  first  underlay  it,  and  gradually  became  explicit. 

^yith  Christianity  as  one  religion  among  others 
Rome  would  not  have  concerned  herself.  Because 
Christianity  threatened  what  had  been  adopted  as 
a  political  safeguard  of  the  first  importance  for  the 
coherence  of  the  Empire,  Rome,  without  a  reversal 
of  her  adopted  policy,  could  do  nothing  else  than 
attempt  to  extirpate  this  dangerous  sect. 

"The  Christuui  who  refused  this  sacrifice  (to  the  vma^  ol 
Caesar)  fell  automatkatlly  under  the  charge  of  majettat,  i.e.  of 
mortal  insult  w  treason  to  the  Emperor,  who  leprcacnted  in 
his  own  person  the  niajest>',  wisdom,  and  beneficent  power  of 
Rome'  (Workman,  Pen^vtion  in  the  Early  Church,  p.  lOlX 

Thus  the  fact  that  the  great  and  good  Marcus 
Aurelius  was  a  persecutor  of  Christians  does  not 


k 


332 


EMPEROR-WORSHIP 


ENLIGHTENMENT 


require  the  laboured  explaining  away  it  has  often 
received,  e.g.  from  Farrar  in  Seekerx  after  God, 
1891,  p.  25711".  The  fact  may  he  fully  accepted 
and  easily  (ixplained.  Just  because  oi  his  good- 
ness as  a  ruler,  he  was  a  persecutor.  His  first 
duty  was  to  suppress  anarchy,  and  in  the  view  of 
the  JRoman  (Jovernment  ('hristians  were  anarchists. 

We  do  not  need  to  expound  here  the  inner,  in- 
herent antagonism  of  the  two  religions.  It  was 
that  of  tlie  material  and  the  spiritual,  the  seen 
and  the  unseen,  the  temporal  and  the  eternal,  the 
glorification  of  success  and  the  exaltation  of  ser- 
vice even  wlien  it  meant  renunciation,  loss,  and 
self-sacrifice ;  the  one  boasted  of  a  throne,  the 
other  of  a  Cross. 

(/>)  lie.temblances. — The  opposition  of  Christian- 
itj"  and  Cii'sarism  becomes  more  marked  when  we 
consider  their  resemblances,  (a)  Both  were  uni- 
versal religions  ;  we  do  not  need  to  dwell  on  that. 
(/3)  Each  ])roclaimed  and  honoured  a  '  Messiah.' 
As  noted  above,  Caesar's  praise  was  celebrated  in 
phrases  closely  parallel  to  the  praises  of  Messiali 
m  Isaiah  or  the  Psalms.  The  prosperity  and  peace 
of  Messiah's  reign  as  pictured  in  Isaiah  have  been 
regarded  by  many  as  the  basis  of  Vergil's  Eclogue, 
though  there  is  no  probability  in  the  view.  Simi- 
lar '  Messianic '  passages  are  by  no  means  rare  in 
the  Latin  literature  of  the  period.  Throughout 
the  world,  indeed,  there  was  an  expectancy  of 
some  great  deliverer.  The  Cliurch  proclaimed 
Jesus,  the  pagan  world  acclaimed  Cn^sar.  (7)  All 
the  great  designations  by  which  Christians  ex- 
pressed the  dignity  of  Christ  had  already  been 
used  of  Ciesar.  This  is  the  most  striking,  as  it  is 
the  least  familiar,  thing  to  be  noted.  'Lord,' 
'our  Lord,'  'Saviour,'  'Son  of  God,'  'Image  of 
God,' '  God  manifest ' — precisely  the  greatest  n<ames 
applied  to  Christ  in  the  NT — were  all  familiar, 
throughout  the  East  at  least,  as  usual  terms  in 
which  to  speak  of  the  Emperor  (for  details  see  H. 
A.  A.  Kennedy,  in  Expositor.  7th  ser.,  vii.  [1909] 
289  fr.).  While  some  of  the  terms,  e.g.  'Son  of 
God,'  certainly  had  a  root  quite  independent  of 
Caesarisni,  and  all  as  applied  to  Christ  and  Chris- 
tians had  a  dillerent  content  from  the  same  terms 
applied  to  Caesar  by  pagans,  the  parallelism  is  too 
complete  to  be  pure  coincidence.  To  seize  as  emi- 
nently suitable  for  their  own  purpose  the  whole 
vocabulary  of  Ctesar-adoration  was  a  bold  and 
brilliant  stroke  of  poli(!y  on  the  part  of  the  preachers 
of  Christianity.  Tiie  humble  missionaries,  speaking 
of  Jesus  as  the  Emperor  was  spoken  of,  must  have 
made  a  startling  and  very  profound  impression. 
On  the  one  hand,  keen  hostility  would  be  aroused, 
but  on  the  other,  in  many  cases  an  eager  curiosity 
and  interest  would  be  awakened.  Any  religiously- 
minded  pagan  must  have  felt  the  difliculty  of  the 
real  godhead  of  Ciesar.  Cresarism  after  all  could 
not  satisfy  any  religious  instinct.  To  any  deep 
reflexion  it  must  appear  in  reality  the  negation  of 
religion. 

'  It  was  only  a  sham  religion,  a  matter  of  outward  show  and 
masrnificent  ceremonial.  It  was  almost  devoid  of  power  over 
the  heart  and  will  of  man,  when  the  lirst  stronj;  sense  of  relief 
from  misery  had  grown  weak,  because  it  was  utterly  unable 
10  satisfy  the  religious  needs  and  cravings  of  human  nature ' 
(Ramsay",  op.  cit.,  p.  123). 

The  proclamation  of  a  spiritual  Kingdom  with  a 
King  to  whom  all  the  higliest  titles  borne  by 
Ca'sar  really  ap])lied  cannot  but  have  made  a 
strong  appeal  to  the  interest  of  many  of  the  more 
serious  in  pagan  cities  (cf.  Kenneily,  loc.  cit.). 
From  another  point  of  view  this  strange  parallel- 
ism may  be  regarded  as  one  among  many  aspects 
of  a  providential  preparation  of  the  pagan  world 
for  Christianity.  Men  were  familiar  with  its 
greatest  conceptions  before  it  appeared  ;  their  con- 
ceptions required  only  to  be  spiritualized. 

(c)  NT  references. — Outside  the  Apocalypse  there 


is  only  one  clear  reference  to  Ca»sarism,  and  it  is 
slight,  viz.  the  mention  in  Ac  19*i  of  the  '  Asiarciis  ' 
who  were  friends  of  St.  Paul.  The  provinces  were 
united  in  communes  for  Civsar-worship,  and  the 
president  or  higli  priest  of  the  commune  of  Asia 
was  termed  '  Asiarch.'  So  in  Galatia  thcsre  was  the 
'Galatarch,'  in  IJithynia  the  '  Bithyniarch,'  et<'. 
The  Asiarcli  held  office  for  a  limited  period,  but  re- 
tained the  honorary  title,  hence  there  might  be 
several  Asiarchs  in  Ephesus  (see  EGTin  loc.),  Cf. 
art.  AsiAKCil. 

It  is  scarcely  too  much  to  say  that  in  Caisarism 
we  have  a  key  to  the  Apocalypse.  With  that  key 
many  obscurities  disappear,  and  the  value  of  part 
of  the  book  as  a  sober  historical  document  becomes 
plain.  Knowledge  of  the  history  of  Caisarism  makes 
it  clear  why  Pergamum  is  described  as  '  Satan's 
seat'  (Rev  2^^).  At  Pergamum,  the  administrative 
capital  of  the  province,  the  first  temple  to  Augustus 
was  built.  For  40  years  it  was  the  sole  centre  of 
Csesarism  for  the  province  ;  and,  after  other  temples 
were  established,  it  retained  its  primacy.  '  SaUin ' 
is  a  symbolic  expression  for  whatever  was  the  great 
obstacle  and  hostile  influence  to  Christianity ; 
hence  Pergamum  was  Satan's  seat  par  excellence 
(see  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  p.  294).  We  cannot  here  deal 
with  the  whole  subject  of  C.-esarism  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse. We  must  be  content  to  refer  briefly  to  ch. 
13,  which  Csesarism  explains,  and  which  makes  a 
contribution  to  our  knowledge  of  Csesarism.  The 
'  first  Beast '  is  the  Imperial  power,  the  '  second 
Beast '  is  the  government  of  the  Province  of  Asia, 
with  its  '  two  horns,'  proconsul  and  commune. 
The  chapter  proceeds  to  record  how  the  commune 
maintained  the  Imperial  religion,  the  worship  of 
'  the  first  Beast.'  '  It  maketh  all  to  worship,'  and 
orders  images  of  Ciasar  to  be  made  (vv.'-"). 
Verses  l.S-15  add  to  our  knowledge  the  fact  that 
p.seudo-miracles  were  practised  by  the  priests  of 
Csesarism.  The  miracles  in  question  were  the 
familiar  accomplishments  of  the  priests  of  many 
faiths — lire-producing  and  ventriloquism  ;  and,  as 
Ramsay  shows  (op.  cit.,  p.  99 11'.),  there  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  the  accuracy  of  the  account  here  given, 
tiiough  it  is  our  sole  authority  on  tiie  point.  Verses 
16-17  indicate  a  policy  of  '  boycott'  against  Chris- 
tians. This  might  quite  possibly  be  not  ordered 
by  the  proconsul,  but  recommended  by  the  com- 
mune. Other  points  in  this  interesting  chapter 
deserve  notice  ;  every  phrase  is  significant ;  but  the 
reader  must  be  referred  to  Ramsay's  exposition 
{oj}.  cit.  ch.  ix.), 

LiTERATi'iiK. — The  general  reader  will  find  the  following  suffi- 
cient :  W.  M.  Rainsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire, 
London,  1893,  2'A«  Letter.^  to  the  Sevn  Churches  of  Asia.  do. 
11)01;  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  art.  'Apostolic  Preaching  and  Km- 
peror  Worship'  in  ExptisUiir,  7th ser.,  vii.  289 ff.  ;  T.  R.  Glover, 
The  Conjlict  of  Hcligions  in  the  Early  lioman  Empire,  I^judon, 
1909;  J.  Iverach,  art.  '  Cajsarism '  in  ERE  iii.  [1910]  50  IT. 
For  further  study  may  be  mentioned :  T.  Mommsen,  The 
Provinces  of  the  Rom.  Empire",  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1909  ;  J.  B. 
Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers',  pt.  ii.:  '  S.  Ignatius  and  8.  I'oly- 
carp,*  do.  1889;  B.  F.  Westcott,  'The  two  Empires:  the 
Church  and  the  World,'  in  Epistles  of  St.  John,  do.  1883,  p. 
237  ff.  ;  C.  J.  Neumann,  Der  romliche  Staattind  dirallijeinrine 
Kirche,  Leipzig,  ISOO;  C.  Bigg,  The  Church's  Task  vniler  the 
Roman  Empire,  Oxford,  1905  ;  E.  G.  Hardy,  Studies  in  Roman 
Uistory,  London,  19l).'i ;  H.  B.  Workman,  Perseeutiwtx  in  the 
Early  Church,  do.  1906.  W.  D.  NiVEN. 

ENLIGHTENMENT  (^on-to-MiJt).— Enlightenment 
is  the  intellectual  and  moral  elloct  i)roduced  in  the 
sjjiritual  experience  of  l>elievers  by  the  reception 
of  the  Christian  revelation.  Objectively,  it  is 
called  'the  li^ht  ((pum<rn6u  RVm  'illumination') 
of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  tlie  fiice 
of  .lesus  Christ'  (2  Co  4").  The  gospel  is  God 
calling  us  'out  of  darkness  into  his  marvellous 
ligiit '  (1  P  2").  In  the  Fourth  ( Jo.spel  Christ  claims 
to  be  '  the  light  of  tlie  world,'  t£>  <^iy  tov  Kdap-ov 
(Jn  8'*  9*).     Even  before  His  Incarnation,  as  the 


ENXIGHTENMENT 


ENMITY 


338 


Divine  Lojios,  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  inform- 
ing princijile  of  both  life  and  truth  within  humanitj', 

•  the  true  lijjht  which  lighteth  (^K^rifet)  every  man  ' 
(Jn  1»).  Subjectively,  specihc  Christian  enli^'hten- 
ment  arises  in  the  consciousness  of  those  who 
actually  embrace  the  truth  revealed  in  the  person, 
teaching,  and  work  of  the  historic  Christ.  It  is  no 
mere  intellectual  iUumination  whereby  abstract  or 
doctrinal  truth  is  understood.  St.  Paul  regards  it 
as  a  gift  of  spiritual  insight  into  the  Divine  nature 
and  redemptive  purposes.     It  is  God's  bestowal  of 

•  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and  revelation  in  the  knowledge 
of  him ' ;  it  is  '  having  the  eyes  of  your  heart  en- 
lightened {ire<f>uTifffjieyovs)  that  ye  may  know'  (Eph 
I'"'-).  This  spiritual  insight  manifests  itself  in 
action.  It  has  ethical  as  well  as  intellectual  results. 
'  The  fruit  of  the  light  (6  Kaprbs  rod  ^wroj)  is  in  all 
goodness,  and  righteousness,  and  truth  ; '  hence 
the  enlightened  'walk  as  children  of  light'  (Eph 
S**-).  St.  Paul  calls  his  early  converts  'sons  of 
light,'  wot  <f)UT6s,  and  concludes,  '  Let  us,  since  we 
are  of  the  daj-,  l)e  sober '  ( 1  Th  5*-  *). 

Two  passages  in  Hebrews  (6^"*  lO'"''),  which  pre- 
suppose this  enlightenment,  call  for  special  attention 
because  they  have  been  thought  to  contain  refer- 
ence to  baptism  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  the  pagan 
Mysteries  on  the  other.  That  there  is  some 
allusion  to  baptism  in  6*  is  quite  probable,  for  the 
two  expressions,  '  once  enlightened,'  and  '  made 
partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,'  correspond  respec- 
tively to  the  preceding  expressions  in  v.  2,  '  teaching 
of  baptisms'  and  'laying  on  of  hands.'  As  in- 
struction in  Christian  truth  formed  part  of  the 
preparation  of  catechumens  for  baptism,  the  rite 
itself  attested  the  enlightenment  resulting  there- 
from. It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  the  terms 
'  baptism '  and  '  enlightenment '  soon  after  apostolic 
times  became  synonymous.  Syriac  versions  of  the 
NT  render  the  word  '  enlightened '  in  both  6*  and 
KF*  by  '  baptized.'  As  early  as  Justin  Martyr 
(150) '  enlightenment'  had  become  a  recognized  term 
for  baptism.  In  his  Apology  (i.  61),  aft«r  speaking 
of  baptism  as  a  '  new  birth '  (avarfiwriaLz),  Justin 
says  :  '  And  this  washing  is  called  enlightenment 
(/caXeirat  5^  rovro  to  Xovrpbv  ^orrur^ds)  because  those 
who  learn  these  things  [i.e.  the  Christian  teaching] 
have  their  understanding  enlightened.'  He  also, 
in  the  same  passage,  calls  the  recently  baptized 
'  the  newly  enlightened.'  Later  patristic  writers, 
understanding  '  enlightened '  in  He  6*  to  mean 
'  baptized,'  inferred  from  tlie  expression,  '  those 
who  were  once  (oira^,  '  once  for  aU ')  enlightened 
...  it  is  imijossible  to  renew,'  that  it  was  inad- 
missible to  rebaptize,  while  the  Montanists  and 
Novatians  went  so  far  as  to  deny  the  possibility  of 
absolution  for  those  who  sinned  after  baptism, 
holding  that  baptism  in  the  blood  of  martyrdom 
alone  would  avail  in  the  case  of  flagrant  sin. 

In  reference  to  the  ilysteries,  it  may  be  said  to 
be  probable  that  the  term  'enlightened,'  occurring 
in  these  two  pas-sages,  is  one  of  the  many  NT 
words  which  reproduce  the  phraseology  made 
current  by  these  pagan  cults.  In  He  6*"*  'en- 
lightened '  occurs  among  quite  a  number  of  other 
terms  or  ideas  which  were  current  in  connexion  with 
the  Mysteries.  For  instance,  '  perfection '  (reXet- 
dnp),  or  'full  growth'  (RVm),  was  the  technical 
term  for  the  state  of  the  fully  initiated  (oi  reXeioi) 
into  one  or  other  of  these  cults.  The  mention  of 
'baptisms 'in  this  connexion  reminds  us  that  the 
Mysteries  also  had  lustrations  among  their  initia- 
tory rites.  The  twice-mentioned  '  tasting '  sug- 
gests the  symlwlic  tasting  and  eating  in  the  pagan 
ceremonies.  The  expressions  '  made  partakers  of 
the  Holy  Ghost'  and  tasting  'the  powers  of  the 
age  to  cojne'  recall  the  fact  that  the  ideas  of  a 
possible  participation  in  the  Divine  nature  and  a 
future  life  were  central  in  the  symbolism  of  all  the 


Mysteries,  however  crudely  or  even  repulsively  set 
forth.  A.  S.  Carman  draws  attention  (Bibliotheca 
Sacra,  vol.  1.  [1893])  to  the  use  made  by  the 
NT  of  terminology-  drawn  from  the  Mysteries. 
G.  Anrich  contends  (Doji  antike  Mysterientoesen, 
1893)  that  no  direct  dependence  of  Christianity 
upon  the  Mysteries  could  be  established.  A 
more  complete  knowledge  of  the  nature  and 
diffusion  of  mystery-cults  in  apostolic  times, 
together  with  the  recognition  of  auiditional  terms 
in  the  NT  vocabulary  drawn  from  them,  makes  it 
easier  to  accept  the  recent  opinion  of  Clemen 
(Primitive  Christianity  and  its  non- Jewish  Sources, 
1912,  p.  345)  concerning  He  6*  that  '  the  expression 
(fHjni^ew,  which  also  occurs  in  10**  and  then  in  Eph 
\i&2?,  2  Ti  1^",  is  borrowed  from  the  language  of 
the  Mysteries :  and  this  is  the  more  probable 
seeing  that  in  the  Mysteries  there  was  also  a 
sacred  meal,  and  in  He  6*  "tasting"  and  "en- 
lightened" are  associated.' 

In  relation  to  the  dependence  which  the  NT 
shows  in  this  subject,  as  in  others,  upon  both  the 
phraseology  and  religious  ideas  of  earlier  and 
lower  cults,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  a  richer 
and  fuller  content  has  been  poured  by  Christianity 
into  those  pagan  forms  of  expression,  and  that 
here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Jewish  Law,  Christ 
came  '  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil.' 

IjnRATUKK. — On  the  relatioD  of  enlightenment  to  baptism  in 
He  6*  1033  see  Comni.  of  B.  F.  Westcott,  F.  W.  Farrar, 
A.  B.  Davidson,  A.  S.  Peake,  E.  C.  Wickham,  and  art. 
'Baptism  (Early  Christian)'  by  Kirsopp  Lake  in  ERE.  On 
the  connexion  between  Christianity  and  the  Mysteries  generally 
see,  in  addition  to  works  mentioned  above,  S.  Cheetbam,  The 
Mj/gteries,  Pagan  and  Chrittian,  1897 ;  R.  Reitzenstein,  Die 
heUenittitehen  MygterienreligUmen,  1910 ;  P.  Gardner,  The 
Religious  Experience  of  Saint  Paul,  1911,  cb.  ir.  on  "The 
Pauline  Mystery';  H.  A  A.  Kennedv,  St.  Paul  and  the 
Ml/gterv-Religions,  1913 ;  artt.  by  W.  M.  Ramsay  on 
'  Mysteries '  in  EBr^  and  '  Religion  of  Greece  and  Asia  Minor  * 
in  HDB,  voL  v.  p.  109  ;  artt.  on  '  Mvsterv '  bv  A.  Stewart  in 
BDB,  by  G.  A.  Jiilicher  in  EBi,  and  by  B.  W.  Bacon  in 
DCG.    See  also  A.  Loisy's  art.  "The  Christian  Mystery'  in 

HJ,  Oct.  1911.  M.  ScoTT  Fletcher. 

ENMITY  {ix^pa). — Human  life  is  disquieted  and 
embittered  by  enmities,  active  and  passive.  (1) 
Men  are  enemies  of  God  in  their  mind  (7-3  SiavoLf) 
by  their  wicked  works  (Col  1*^).  This  is  not  to  be 
taken  in  a  passive  sense,  which  would  imply  that 
they  are  hateful  to  God  [invisos  Deo,  says  Meyer, 
ad  loc.).  Their  enmity  is  active.  The  carnal 
mind  {(ppovrjfia),  caring  only  for  the  gratification  of 
the  senses,  is  hostility  to  («'$)  God  (Ro  8").  The 
friendship  {(piXla,  which  implies  '  loving '  as  well  as 
'  being  loved ')  of  the  world,  which  loves  its  o^\•n 
( Jn  15^'),  is  enmity  with  God  (Ja  4*,  Vulg.  inimica 
est  dei).  Some  who  profess  Christianity  are  sadly 
called  enemies  of  the  Cross  (Ph  3^) ;  and  a  man 
may  so  habitually  pursue  low  ends  as  to  become 
an  enemy  of  all  righteousness  (Ac  13*').  It  is  the 
work  of  Christ  to  subdue  this  active  inward  enmity 
to  God  and  goodness,  and  thus  to  undo  the  work 
of  the  Enemy  who  has  sown  the  seeds  of  evil  in  the 
human  heart  (Mt  13*^).  While  sinners  are  recon- 
ciled to  God,  it  is  nowhere  said  in  the  NT  that 
God,  as  if  He  were  hostile,  needs  to  be  reconciled 
to  sinners.  '  It  is  the  mind  of  man,  not  the  mind 
of  God,  which  must  undergo  a  change,  that  a  re- 
union may  be  effected '  (J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Col.',  1879, 
p.  159). 

(2)  The  enmity  of  Jew  and  Gentile  was  notorious. 
After  smouldering  for  centuries,  it  finally  burst 
into  the  flames  of  the  Bellum  Judaicum.  The  con- 
tempt of  Greek  for  barbarian  was  equally  pro- 
nounced. Christ  came  to  end  these  and  all  similar 
racial  antipathies.  By  His  Cross  He  '  abolished ' 
and  '  slew '  the  enmity  (Eph  2"-  ^*),  creating  a  new- 
manhood  which  is  neither  Jewish,  Greek,  nor 
Roman,  but  comprehensive,  cosmopolitan,  catholic, 
fulfilling  the    highest  classical    ideal    of    human 


334 


ENOCH 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


fellowship — '  huinanl  nihil  a  me    aliemini   \mto ' 
(Terence,  Henut.  I.  i.  25) — all  becau.se  it  is  Christian. 

(3)  The  Christian,  however,  cannot  hel])  liaving 
enemies.  Just  hecause  he  is  not  of  tlie  world,  the 
•world  liates  him  (Jn  lo'*""-).  But  the  spirit  of 
Chri.st  that  is  in  him  constrains  him  to  feed  his 
enemy  when  hungry,  give  him  drink  when  thirsty 
(Ro  VZ-'^),  and  so  endeavour  to  change  him  into  a 
friend. 

(4)  Every  preaclier,  because  he  is  bound  to  be  a 
moralist  and  reformer,  runs  a  special  risk  of  being 
mistaken  for  an  enemy.  Trutl),  though  s])oken  in 
love,  may  arouse  liatred  :  wtrre  ix^P^^  v/j-Qf  yiyoya 
d\rj9evwt>  v/u.tv  ;  (Gal  4'*).  Yet  a  moment's  tliouglit 
would  make  it  clear  that  the  aim  is  not  to  hurt 
but  to  heal,  and  the  surgeon  who  skilfully  uses  the 
knife  is  ever  counted  a  benefactor. 

(5)  The  courageous  faith  of  the  early  Church 
assumed  that  Christ  would  put  all  His  enemie.s 
under  His  feet  (1  Co  \b^  ;  cf.  He  1'^  W^),  i.e.  that 
every  form  of  evil,  moral  and  physical  alike,  would 
linally  be  subdued.  '  The  last  enemy  that  shall 
be  destroyed  is  death  '  (1  Co  15-"). 

(6)  A  smgle  passage  seems,  prima  facie,  to  imply 
that  men  may  sometimes  be  enemies  of  God  sensu 
passivo.  To  the  llomans  St.  Paul  says  of  the 
Jews,  '  They  are  enemies  for  your  sake  (Ho  11'^). 
They  are  treated  as  enemies  in  order  that  salvation 
may  come  to  the  Gentiles.  But  the  enmity  is  far 
from  being  absolute  ;  they  are  all  the  time '  beloved ' 
(ayaTTTjToi  Sia.  tovs  iraripas,  1\^}. 

James  Strahan. 

ENOCH  (Ei>uix)- — Enoch  (along  with  Elijah)  was 
regarded  as  havingaunique  destiny  among  the  saints 
of  the  OT,  in  that  when  his  earthly  life  was  ended  he 
was  taken  directly  to  heaven.  Gn  5^^  is  referred  to 
(1)  by  the  writer  of  Hebrews  (11"),  who  gives  Enoch 
tlie  second  place  in  his  roll  of  the  faithful.  Instead 
of  the  Hebrew  text  ('and  Enocli  walked  with  God, 
and  he  was  not,  for  God  took  him  '),  the  writer  had 
before  him  the  LXX  version  :  Kal  ev-qpiar-qaev  'Evwx 
r(^  ^ey-  Kal  oix  '>)vpi-(TKeTo,  8(.6ti  fxeridriKtv  avrbv  6  Bibs. 
The  phra.se  'he  pleased  God' — wliich  is  used  in 
other  places  (Gn  17'  24'"'  48'^  etc.)  where  the  original 
lias  '  he  walked  with  (or  before)  God ' — is  regarded 
Iry  the  author  of  Hebrews  as  a  testimony  to 
Enoch's  faith.  To  the  statement  that  'God  took 
(or  translated)  him '  the  Avriter  adds  the  explanatory 
words  '  that  he  should  not  (or  did  not)  see  death.' 
The  idea  of  immortality  has  rather  to  be  imported 
into  the  original  words,  which,  as  Calvin  saw, 
might  imply  no  more  than  '  mors  quaedam  extra- 
ordinaria.  But  the  tliought  that  Enocli  escaped 
death  had  already  been  suggested  by  Sirach  (49'^) 
in  his  eulogy  of  famous  men  :  '  No  man  was 
created  \\\im\.  the  eartli  such  as  was  Enoch  ;  for  he 
was  taken  up  {aveXrjfjLcpdr])  from  the  eartli.'  In  4 
Ezr,  vi.  26,  Enoch  and  Elijah  are  spoken  of  as 
men  'who  have  not  tasted  death  from  their  birth.' 
Josephus  preserves  tlie  ambiguity  of  the  original 
in  a  characteristic  phrase,  '  he  departed  to  the 
deity'  (dvexiipncf  ""pAs  rb  6dov),  but  instead  of 
venturing  to  infer  that  this  implies  actual  death- 
les.sness,  the  liistorian  merely  adds  :  '  whence  it  is 
that  his  death  is  not  recorded'  (Ant.  I.  iii.  4). 
The  'two  witne.s.ses '  in  Kev  11"  are  generally  re- 
garded as  Enoch  and  Elijah. 

(2)  In  later  Judaism  the  words  'and  Enoch 
walked  with  (xod'  were  interpreted  as  meaning 
that  he  was  made  the  recipient  of  special  Divini; 
revelations.  In  the  recovered  Hebrew  text  of  Sir 
44'®  he  is  described  as  'an  examide  of  knowledge' 
(changed  in  the  Greek  into  virddayfia  nerafolai  rai^ 
7c)'€ar$),  and  the  Jiook  of  Jnhili-rx  says,  '  He  was 
the  first  among  men  .  .  .  who  learned  writing  and 
knowledge  and  wisdom.  .  .  .  And  he  was  with 
the  angels  of  (Jod  these  six  jubilees  of  years,  and 
they  showed  him  everything  which  is  on  earth  and 


in  the  heavens  '  (ch.  iv.  [Charles,  Ajwr.  mid  Pseud- 
cpiff.,  1913,  p.  18  f.]).  Enoch  the  saint  was  thus 
transformed  into  the  j)atron  of  esoteric  knowledge, 
and  became  the  author  of  ajK>calyptic  books.  In 
Jude'^  he  is  designated  '  the  seventh  from  Adam,' 
a  ])hrase  taken  from  the  Book  of  Enoch  (Ix.  8, 
xciii.  3),  and  a  passage  is  (juoted  in  which  he  is  re- 
l)re.sented  as  threatening  judgment  upon  the  false 
teachers  of  the  early  Christian  Church. 

'  The  extraordinary  developments  of  the  Enoch -le^'end  in 
later  Judaism  could  never  have  grown  out  of  this  i^assage 
[(in  5^1-2^]  alone  ;  everythin^f  tfoes  to  show  that  the  record  hu 
a  niytholo((ical  basis,  which  must  have  continued  to  he  a  living 
tradition  in  Jewish  circles  in  the  time  of  the  Aix)calyi>tic  writers. 
A  clue  to  the  mystery  that  invests  the  fixture  of  Enoiih  has  been 
discovered  in  Babylonian  literature'  (Skinner,  GfiienU  [ICC, 
1910],  p.  1.S2).  He  is  there  identified  with  Knmeduranki,  who  is 
described  in  a  ritual  tablet  from  the  library  of  Asshurbanipnl 
as  a  favourite  of  the  ifo<l8,  and  is  said  to  have  been  initiated  into 
the  mysteiifs  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  instructed  in  certain 
arts  of  (livinaiion  which  he  handed  down  to  his  son. 

James  Strahan. 
ENOCH,BOOKOF.— /7?<rorfMc<«ry.— TheEthiopic 
Book  of  Eno(;h  (or  1  Enoch,  .as  it  is  now  more  con- 
veniently denominated)  is  the  largest,  and,  after 
the  canonical  Book  of  Daniel,  the  most  important 
of  the  Jewish  apocalyptic  works  which  have  so 
recently  come  to  be  recognized  as  supplying  most 
important  data  for  the  critical  study  of  NT  ideas 
and  phraseology.  The  Book — or  rather  the  Books 
— of  Enoch  the  reader  will  find  to  be  a  work  of 
curious  complexity  and  unevenness.  It  is  a  wonder- 
ful mass  of  heterogeneous  elements  ;  in  fact,  it  is 
quite  a  cycle  of  works  in  itself — geographical, 
astronomical,  prophetic,  moral,  and  historical.  In 
this  medley  we  find  certain  recurring  notes.  The 
temporary  success  and  triumph  of  the  wicked, 
idolaters,  luxurious,  rich,  oppressors,  rulers,  kings, 
and  mighty  ones,  and  the  present  suflerings  of  the 
righteous,  are  continually  contrasted  with  their 
future  destiny — after  death  or  after  judgment, 
according  to  tne  views  of  the  particuljir  author  as 
to  the  moment  at  which  moral  discrimination  will 
l)egin.  Another  recurring  note  is  the  subservience 
of  natural  phenomena  to  spiritual  and  qua.si-per- 
sonal  forces,  which  in  turn  are  responsible  and  as 
a  rule  obedient  to  God.  Kepeatedly  and  with 
dramatic  force  the  unfailing  order  of  Nature  is 
contrasted  with  the  disobetlience  of  man.  Yet 
another  recurring  feature,  and  one  common  to 
this  apocalyptic  literature,  is  the  reserving  of  the 
visions  and  the  books  of  Enoch  for  the  la.st  days, 
for  the  elect  to  read  and  understand.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  is  ever  and  anon  a  baffling  change 
in  the  presentation  of  ideas  about  the  Kingdom, 
the  Messiah,  the  form  of  the  future  judgment  and 
life  after  death.  The  pictures  of  the  Messianic 
Kingdom  take  on  a  shifting,  ever-changing  form, 
in  accordance  with  the  views  of  the  author  and 
the  particular  tribulations  under  which  each  indi- 
vidual writer  was  labouring.  Judgment  is  medi- 
ated now  by  angels  of  jiunishment,  now  by  the 
archangels,  or  the  sword  of  the  righteous  or  inter- 
necine strife,  or  by  the  Son  of  Man,  or  exercised 
immediately  by  God  Him.self.  Darkness  and 
chains  and  burning  fire,  valleys  and  the  abyss, 
loom  large  in  all  descrijitions  of  the  place  and  mode 
of  puni.shment.  There  is  a  highly  developed  angcl- 
ology,  in  keeping  with  the  general  conception  of 
Gods  transcendence,  and  an  equally  developed 
demonolo^,  wliich  is  connected  Avitli  the  interest 
of  the  various  authors  in  the  problem  of  the  seat 
and  origin  of  evil.  The  ixjwer  of  i>rayer — whether 
that  of  the  angels,  the  dei)arted  holy  ones,  or  the 
righteous  on  earth — is  recognized,  esjiecially  in  the 
bringing  in  of  judgment.  The  space  devoted  to 
the  calendar,  however,  and  the  movement.s  «)f  the 
heavenly  l.'odies,  and  the  secrets  of  natural  force.s, 
stands  in  sheer  contrast  to  the  NT  silence  on  those 
subjects. 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


335 


We  cannot  close  without  quoting  Cliarles's  words 
in  his  introduction  (Book  of  Enoch,  1912,  p.  x) : 

'  In  the  Age  to  which  the  Enoch  literature  belongs  there  is 
morcment  ever}  where,  and  nowhere  dogmatic  fixity  and  final- 
ity. And  though  at  times  the  movement  may  be  reactionarj', 
yet  the  general  trend  is  onward  and  upward.'  This  work  is  the 
most  imi>ortant  historical  memorial  '  of  the  religious  develop- 
niont  of  Judaism  from  200  B.C.  to  100  A.D.,  and  particularly  of 
the  li-M'lopment  of  that  side  of  Judaism,  to  which  historiciLUy 
ChrirUntlom  in  large  measure  owes  its  existence.' 

"NVe  have  only  to  take  the  single  example  of 
the  unique  portrait  of  the  'Son  of  Man '  in  the 
Parables — eternally  pre-existent  Avith  God,  recog- 
nized now  by  the  righteous,  and  hereafter  to  bie 
owned  and  adored  by  all,  even  His  foes — to  be 
assured  of  the  truth  of  this  verdict. 

1.  Contents. — Section  i.  :  chs.  i.-xxxvi. 

i.-v. — Enoch  takes  up  his  parable:  God's  com- 
ing to  judgment  to  help  and  bless  the  righteous 
and-  destroy  the  ungodly  (i.  1-9)  ;  Nature's  un- 
failing order  (ii.  1-v.  3)  contrasted  with  sinners' 
disobedience ;  a  curse  on  them,  but  forgiveness, 
peace,  and  joy  for  the  elect  (v.  4-9). 

vi.-xi.  {Xoachic  fragment).  — Fall  of  certain 
angels,  through  union  with  women  (vi.  1-vii.  1); 
birth  of  giants  who  devour  mankind  and  drink 
blood  (vii.  2-6).  Knowledge  of  arts,  magic,  and 
astronomy  imparted  by  fallen  angels  (viii.  1-4). 
Cry  of  souls  of  dead  for  vengeance  (viii.  4,  ix.  3, 
10)  heard  by  the  four  archangels,  who  bring  their 
cause  Ijefore  God  (ix.  1-11).  God  sends  Uriel  to 
Noali  to  warn  him  of  approaching  Deluge  (x.  1-3). 
Raphael  is  to  bind  Azazel  in  desert  in  Dudael  tUl 
judgment  day,  and  heal  the  earth  (x.  4-7) ;  Gabriel 
to  destroy  giants  by  internecine  strife  (x.  9-10, 15), 
Michael  to  bind  Semjaza  and  his  associates  for 
seventy  generations  in  valleys  of  the  earth  (x. 
11-14).  All  evil  is  to  cease,  and  the  plant  of 
righteousness  (i.e.  Israel)  to  appear  (x.  16).  All 
the  righteous  are  to  escape  and  live  till  they  beget 
thousands  of  children  (x.  17),  the  earth  is  to  yield 
a  thousandfold,  all  men  are  to  become  righteous 
and  adore  God  (x.  21).  Sin  and  punishment  will 
cease  for  ever  (x.  22).  Store-chambers  of  blessing 
in  heaven  will  be  opened  (xi.). 

xii.-xvi. — A  Dream  Vision  of  Enoch. — Enoch  is 
hidden  from  men  (xii.  1)  and  is  sent  to  the  fallen 
angels  ('Watchers')  with  the  message  :  'no  peace 
nor  forgiveness'  (xii.  4-6),  which  he  delivers  to 
Azazel  (xiii.  1,  2)  and  the  others  (xiii.  3)  ;  they 
beseech  Enoch  to  write  a  petition  for  them  (xiii. 
4-6) ;  as  he  reads  it  he  falls  asleep  and  sees  ^nsions 
of  chastisement,  which  he  recounts  to  them  (xiii. 
7-10).  The  message  of  the  vision  is  given  in  xiv. 
1-7  ;  the  manner  of  it  in  xiv.  8-xvi.  4.  He  ascends 
in  the  vision  to  heaven,  past  crystal  walls  into  a 
crystal  house  and  a  greater  house  beyond,  to  the 
blazing  throne  of  the  Great  Glory  (xiv.  20),  whom 
no  angel  can  behold.  He  entrusts  Enoch  with 
the  message  to  the  Watchers ;  they  had  sinned 
in  taking  wives  (xv.  3-7) ;  from  the  dead  giants' 
bodies  proceed  evil  spirits  which,  remaining  on 
earth,  do  all  harm  with  impunity  till  the  Great 
Judgment  (xv.  8-xvi.  1) ;  the  Watchers'  doom  is 
repeated  (xvi.  2-4). 

xvii.-xxxvi. — Enoch's  tioo  journeys :  through  the 
earth  and  to  Sheol.  —  (a)  xvii.-xix. — Enoch  is 
brought  to  the  ends  of  tlie  earth  and  views  trea- 
suries of  stars,  and  the  winds  that  uphold  heaven 
(xvii.  1-xviii.  3),  and  seven  mountains  of  precious 
stones  (xviii.  6),  and  beyond,  a  deep  abyss  of  fire 
(xviii.  11),  and  further,  an  utter  waste  (xviii.  12) 
with  seven  stars  like  burning  mountains,  bound  for 
ten  thousand  years  for  not  obser>'ing  their  appointed 
times  (xviii.  13-16).  Here  stand  the  fallen  angels, 
whose  spirits  seduce  men  to  idolatry  (xix.  1) 
and  their  wives,  turned  into  sirens  (xix.  2). — (b) 
X  \'.  -XX  x  vi .  — The  seven  archangels — Uriel,  Raphael, 
Raguel,  Michael,  Saraqael,  Gabriel,  Remiel — and 


their  functions  (xx.).  Enoch  proceeds  to  chaos  and 
the  seven  stars  and  the  abyss  of  xviii.  12-16  (xxi. 
1-7),  which  is  the  final  pn.son  of  the  fallen  angels 
(xxi.  »-10).  Elsewhere  in  the  west  he  se^  a 
great  mountain  with  three  ('  four'  in  text)  hollow 
places  (  =  Sheol),  to  contain  men's  souls  till  the 
Great  Judgment — one  for  martyrs  like  Abel  and 
other  righteous  men,  with  a  bright  spring  of  water 
(xxii.  5-9),  one  for  unpunished  sinners  (xxii.  10,  11), 
one  for  sinners  (who  suffered  in  life),  who  never 
rise  (xxii.  12-13).  Thereafter,  still  in  the  west, 
he  sees  the  fire  of  the  heavenly  luminaries  (xxiii.), 
and  elsewhere  again,  beyond  a  mountain  range  of 
fire,  seven  mountains  of  precious  stones,  the  central 
one  to  be  God's  throne  on  earth,  with  the  tree  of 
life  (xxiv.  1-xxv.  3)  to  be  transplanted  after  the 
judgment  to  the  holy  place,  where  the  righteous 
shall  eat  of  it  and  live  a  Ion"' life  on  earth  (xxv.  4-6). 
In  the  middle  of  the  earth  Enoch  sees  a  holy  moun- 
tain (Zion)  with  its  surrounding  summits  and 
ravines  (xxvi.),  and  the  accursed  valley  (of  Hinnom) 
which  is  to  be  the  scene  of  the  Last  Judgtnent 
(xxvii.).  Thence  he  goes  east  (xxviii.-xxxiii. ),  past 
fragrant  trees  and  mountains,  over  the  Erjtlirrean 
Sea  and  the  angel  Zotiel  (xxxii.  2),  to  the  garden  of 
the  righteous,  and  the  Tree  of  Wisdom,  w  liich  is 
fully  described  (xxxii.  3-6).  Thence  to  the  earth's 
ends  whereon  heaven  rests,  with  three  portals  for 
the  stars  in  east  and  west  (xxxiii.  3,  xxxvi.  2,  3) 
and  three  in  north  and  soutli  for  the  winds  (xxxiv. 
1-3,  xxxvi.  1). 

Sectiox  II.  :  chs.  xxxvii.-lxxi. — The  Parables. 
— xxxvii.  1  commences  '  the  second  vision  ...  of 
wisdom ' ;  till  the  pre-sent  day  such  wLsdom  has 
never  been  given  as  is  embodied  in  these  three 
Parables  recounted  to  those  that  dwell  on  the 
earth  (xxxvii.  4,  5). 

xxxviii.-xliv. — The  First  Parable. — When  the 
Righteous  One  appears,  where  will  the  sinners' 
dwelling  be?  Then  shall  the  kings  and  mighty 
perish  and  be  given  into  the  hands  of  the  righteous 
and  holy  (xxxviiL).  [Descent  of  the  Watchers — 
an  interpolation  (xxxix.  1,  2).]  A  whirlwind 
carries  otf  Enoch  to  the  end  of  the  heavens ;  he 
views  the  dwelling-places  of  the  holy  who  pray  for 
mankind,  and  the  Righteous  One's  abode  under  the 
wings  of  the  Lord  of  Spirits  (xxxix.  3-14) ;  an 
innumerable  multitude,  and  four  presences  (  =  arch- 
angels)— Michael,  Raphael,  Gabriel,  and  Phanuel 
— and  their  functions  (xl.);  heaven's  secrets  and 
weighing  of  men's  actions  (xii.  1,  2) ;  secrets  of 
natural  phenomena  and  sun  and  moon ;  their 
chambers  and  weighing  of  the  stars  (xii.  3-9,  xliii. 
1,  2,  xliv.) ;  the  stars  stand  for  the  holy  who  dwell 
on  the  earth  (xliiL  4).  A  fragment. — Wisdom  goes 
forth,  and  finds  no  dwelling-place  among  men, 
so  returns  to  heaven ;  while  unrighteousness  is 
welcomed  and  remains  with  men  (xlii. ). 

xlv.-lvii. — The  Second  Parable. — The  lot  of  the 
apostates  :  the  new  heaven  and  earth.  Those 
who  deny  the  name  of  Lord  of  Spirits  are  preserved 
for  judgment  (xiv.  1,  2).  'Mine  Elect  One'  on 
throne  of  glory  shall  try  men's  works  ;  heaven  and 
earth  transformed  (xiv.  3-6).  The  Head  of  Days 
and  Son  of  Man  (xlvi.  1-4)  shall  put  down  the  kings 
and  the  mighty  ;  they  have  no  hope  of  rising  from 
their  graves(xl  vi.  5-8).  '  In  those  days '  the  prayer  of 
the  righteous  united  with  angelic  intercession  was 
heard  (xlvii.  1,2);  the  Head  of  Days  on  the  throne 
of  His  glory,  books  of  the  living  opened,  vengeance 
of  righteous  at  hand  (xlvii.  3,  4).  Enoch  sees  the 
inexhaustible  fountain  of  righteousness  :  '  at  that 
hour'  the  Son  of  Man  was  '  named  '  in  the  i)resence 
of  the  Lord  of  Spirits  ;  he  is  a  staff"  to  the  righteous, 
the  light  of  the  Gentiles  :  in  His  name  the  righteous 
are  saved  ;  kings  and  mighty  are  to  bum  like  straw 
(xlviii. );  infinite  wisdom  and  power  of  the  Elect  One 
(xlix.).  [1. — An  interpolation*. — In  those  days  the 


336 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


holy  become  victorious  ;  the  others  (i.e.  (ientiles) 
witness  tiiis  antl  repent — tliey  have  no  luinour,  b\it 
are  saved  in  tlie  name  of  the  Lord  of  S|)irits.]  In 
those  days  eartli,  Sheol,  and  Abaddon  give  up  what 
tiiey  hold.  The  Elect  One  arises,  sits  on  God's 
throne,  and  (ihooses  out  the  righteous  amid  uni- 
versal rejoicing  (li.).  Enoch  sees  seven  metal 
mountains  (symbols  of  world-powers) :  they  will 
serve  the  Anointed's  dominion  (Hi.  4),  and  melt 
before  the  Elect  One  (lii.  6).  Next  he  sees  a  deep 
valley  with  open  moutlis,  and  angels  of  punishment 

1)reparing  instruments  of  Satan  to  destroy  the 
cings  and  the  mighty  (liii.  1-5) ;  after  tliis  the 
Iiighteous  and  Elect  One  shall  Clause  the  house  of 
His  congregation  to  appear  (liii.  6).  In  another 
part  he  sees  a  deep  valley  with  burning  fire  ;  here 
the  kings  and  the  mighty  are  cast  in  (liv.  1,  2), 
and  iron  chains  made  for  Azazel's  hosts,  whom  four 
archangels  will  cast  into  the  burning  furnace  on 
that  great  day  (liv.  3-6),  after  judgment  by  the 
Elect  One  (Iv.  3,  4)  ;  angels  of  punishment  with 
scourges  are  seen  proceeding  to  cast  the  Watchers' 
ciiildren  into  the  abyss  (Ivi.  1-4).  [Fragments. — (a) 
liv.  7-lv.  2  (Noachic). — Punisiiment  by  waters  im- 
pending, promise  of  non-recurrence,  (b)  Ivi.  5-8.  — 
The  angels  are  to  stir  up  the  Parthians  and  Medes 
to  tread  upon  the  land  of  God's  elect,  but  '  the  city 
of  my  righteous'  shall  hinder  their  horses ;  they  shall 
slay  one  another,  and  Sheol  shall  devour  them  in 
presence  of  the  elect,  (c)  Ivii.  1-3. — Ahostof  wagons 
IS  seen,  earth's  pillars  are  shaken  by  the  noise 
(return  of  Dispersion).] 

Iviii.-lxxi. — The  Third  Parable. — Endless  light 
and  life  for  righteous  (Iviii. ).  [Secrets  of  lightnings, 
anintrusionilix.).']  [Noachic fragment (ior  'Enoch' 
read  *  Noah'  in  Ix.  1). — The  Head  of  Days  on  the 
throne  of  glory  announces  the  judgment  (Ix.  1-6, 25) ; 
Leviathan  a  female  monster,  and  Behemoth  a  male, 
parted,  one  in  the  abysses  of  the  ocean,  the  other 
m  the  wilderness  to  the  east  of  the  garden  (Eden) 
where  Enoch  was  taken  up;  they  shall  feed  .  .  .  (pre- 
sumably till  given  as  food  to  the  elect  as  in  2  Bar. 
xxix.  4  ;  4  I'^zr.  vi.  52)  (Ix.  7-10,  24) ;  chambers  of 
winds,  secrets  of  thunder,  spirits  of  the  sea,  hoar- 
frost, snow,  mist  and  rain  (Ix.  11-23).] 

Third  Parable  resumed. — The  angels  are  seen 
with  long  cords ;  they  go  to  measure  Paradise 
(Ixx.  3)  and  recover  all  the  righteous  dead  from  sea 
or  desert  (Ixi.  1-5) ;  the  Lord  of  Spirits  places  the 
Elect  One  on  the  tiirone  of  glory  to  judge  (Ixi.  6-9) ; 
all  the  heavenly  hosts,  Cherubim,  Seraphim,  and 
Ophannim,  angels  of  power  and  of  principalities, 
the  Elect  One,  the  powers  on  earth  and  over  water, 
the  elect  who  dwell  in  the  garden  of  life,  and  all 
flesh  shall  join  in  praising  God  (Ixi.  10-13).  The 
kings  and  the  mighty  are  called  upon  to  recognize 
the  Elect  One,  now  seated  on  the  throne  ;  pained 
and  terrified,  they  glorify  God  (Ixii.  1-6)  and  adore 
the  Son  of  Man ;  but  are  delivered  to  the  angels 
for  jiunishment  (Ixii.  9-12) ;  the  righteous  had 
previously  known  the  Son  of  Man,  though  hidden 
from  the  beginning,  and  shall  eat  and  lie  down  and 
rise  up  for  ever  with  Him,  and  be  clothed  with 
garments  of  glory  and  of  life  (Ixii.  7,  8,  13-16) ; 
unavailing  repentance  and  confession  of  the  kings 
and  the  mighty  (Ixiii.) ;  vision  of  fallen  angels  in 
prison  (Ixiv.).  [Noachic  fragment  (Ixv.-lxix.  25). — 
Noaii  calls  on  Enoch  at  the  ends  of  the  earth  ;  he 
is  told  judgment  is  imminent  l>ecause  of  sorcery  and 
idolatry,  and  the  violence  of  the  Satans  ;  Noah  is 
to  be  preserved  :  fiom  him  shall  proceed  a  fountain 
of  righteous  and  iioly  (  =  Israel)  for  ever  (Ixv.) ;  the 
angels  of  j)unishment  hold  the  Flood  in  check 
(Ixvi.);  Noah  is  told  that  the  angels  are  making 
an  ark  for  him  (Ixvii.  1-3) ;  God  will  imprison  the 
angels,  who  had  taught  men  how  to  sin,  in  the 
burning  valley,  which  Enoch  had  shown  Noali ; 
thence  proceea  waters  which  now  heal  the  bodies 


of  the  kings  and  the  mighty  (Ixvii.  8),  but  it  will 
one  tlay  become  a  lire  ever-burning  Uxvii.  13). 
Enoch  gives  Noah  these  secrets  in  the  book  of 
Parables  (Ixviii.  1).  Michael  and  Raphael  are 
astonished  at  the  sternness  of  the  judgment  u]>on 
the  fallen  angels  (Ixviii.  2-5);  the  names  of  the 
fallen  angels  and  Satans  who  led  them  astray  and 
taught  men  kno%vle<lge  and  writing  (Ixix.  1-13) ; 
the  hidden  name  anil  oath  which  presei've  all  things 
in  due  order  (Ixix.  14-25).] 

Close  of  Third  Parable. — Universal  joy  at  the 
revealing  of  the  Son  of  Man,  who  receives  '  the 
sum  of  judgment '  (Ixix.  26-29).  [Two  fragments 
belonging  to  Parables:  (a)  Ixx. — Enoch  finally 
translated  on  the  chariots  of  the  spirit,  and  set 
between  the  north  and  the  south  (i.e.  in  Paradise). 
(b)  Ixxi. — '  After  this'  he  is  translated  in  sj)irit  ;  he 
sees  the  sons  of  (iod,  the  secrets  of  heaven,  the 
crystal  house,  and  countless  angels  and  the  four 
archangels,  the  Head  of  D.ays,  the  Son  of  Man, 
who  brings  in  endless  peace  for  the  righteous.] 

Section  in.  :  chs.  Ixxii.-lxxxii.— r^e  Book  of 
the  Courses  of  the  Heavenly  Lumiiuiries. — The  sun 
(Ixxii.),  the  moon  and  its  phases  (Ixxiii.),  the  lunar 
year  (Ixxiv.),  the  stars,  the  twelve  winds  and  their 
portals  (Ixxvi.),  the  lour  quarters  of  the  world,  the 
seven  great  mountains,  rivers,  islands  (Ixxvii.),  the 
moon's  waxing  and  waning  (Ixxviii. ),  recapitulation 
(Ixxix.,  Ixxx.  1),  perversion  of  Nature  and  the 
iieavenly  bodies  owing  to  man's  sin  (Ixxx.  2-8). 
Enoch  sees  the  heavenly  tablets  containing  men's 
deeds  to  all  eternity,  and  is  given  one  year  to 
teach  them  to  Methuselah  (Ixxxi.);  his  charge  to 
Methuselah  to  hand  on  the  books  to  the  genera- 
tions of  the  world  ;  blessing  on  the  observers  of  the 
true  system  of  reckoning — year  of  364  days  (Ixxxii. 
1-9) ;  stars  which  lead  the  seasons  and  the  months 
(Ixxxii.  10-20). 

Section  iv.  :  chs.  Ixxxiii. -xc.  —  Two  Dream 
Visions:  (a)  Ixxxiii.,  Ixxxiv.  ;  (b)  Ixxxv.-xc. — (a) 
Vision  of  earth's  destruction :  Mahalalel  bids 
Enoch  pray  that  a  remnant  may  remain  (Ixxxiii. 
1-9) ;  prayer  of  Enoch  for  survival  of  plant  of 
eternal  seed  (  =  Israel)  (Ixxxiii.  10-lxxxiv.  G).  (6) 
Second  dream,  in  which  Enoch  sees  Adam  and  other 
patriarchs  under  symbolism  of  bulls,  etc.  (Ixxxv.) ; 
stars  (  =  angels)  fall  from  heaven,  and  unite  with 
cattle  (Ixxxvi.,  Ixxxvii.) ;  the  first  star  is  cast  into 
the  abyss  ;  evil  beasts  slay  one  another  (Ixxxviii.). 
In  symbolism  Enoch  sees  the  history  of  Noah  and 
the  Deluge  ;  Israel  at  the  Exodus,  crossing  the 
Jordan,  under  the  Judges ;  the  building  of  the 
Temple ;  the  two  kingdoms  ;  the  Fall  of  Jerusa- 
lem (Ixxxix.  1-67).  Israel  is  entrusted  to  the 
Seventy  Shepherds  (  =  angelic  rulers)  from  the  Cap- 
tivity to  the  Mjiccaba'an  revolt  (Ixxxix.  68-xc.  12) ; 
the  enlightened  lambs  (=Chasids)  and  the  great 
horn  (  =  Judas  Maccabivus)  (xc.  6-12).  The  final 
assault  of  the  lieathen  ;  a  great  sword  is  given  to  the 
sheep  (=Jews)  ;  the  Lord  of  the  sheep  intervenes 
(xc.  13-19) ;  a  throne  is  erected  in  the  pleasant 
land  for  Him  ;  the  sealed  books  are  opened  ;  the 
sinning  star's  are  cast  into  the  abyss  of  fire,  also  the 
Seventy  Shepherds  ;  the  blinded  sheep  into  the 
abyss  in  the  midst  of  the  earth  (  =  Gehenna)  (xc. 
20-27) ;  the  old  house  (^Temple)  is  removed  ;  the 
Lord  of  the  sheep  brings  a  new  house,  greater  and 
loftier ;  the  sword  is  sealed  up ;  all  the  sheep 
'see  '  (i.e.  are  enlightened) ;  a  white  bull  ( =  Messiah) 
is  born,  and  is  adored  by  all ;  the  others  are  all 
transformed  into  white  bulls,  and  the  Lord  of  the 
sheep  rejoices  over  them  all  alike  ;  Enoch  awakes 
and  weeps  (xc.  28-42). 

Section  v.  :  chs.  xci.-civ. — (a)  Enoch's  Book  for 
his  Children  (xcii.  1). — Go«l  has  api)ointed  days  for 
all  things ;  the  righteous  are  to  arise  from  sleep 
and  walk  in  eternal  light,  and  sin  is  to  disjijijiear 
(xcii.).     Methuselah  and  his  family  are  sunuuoned 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


337 


and  exhorted  to  love  rigliteousness  ;  violence  must 
increase,  but  judgment  will  follow  ;  idols  will  fail, 
and  the  heathen  be  judged  in  fire  for  ever ;  the 
righteous  are  to  rise  again  (xci.  1-11). 

(6)  Apocalypse  of  Weeks. — 1st  week  :  Enoch  bom. 
2nd  :  the  first  end  ;  Noah  saved.  3rd  :  Abraham 
electetl  as  the  plant  of  righteous  judgment.  4th  : 
the  law  for  all  generations  made.  5th:  house  of 
glory  .  .  .  built.  6th  :  all  Israel  blinded ;  Elijah 
ascends  to  heaven  ;  the  Dispersion.  7th  :  general 
apostasy ;  the  elect  righteous  elected  to  receive 
seven-fold  instruction  concerning  all  creation  {  = 
Enoch's  revelations).  8th  :  week  of  righteousness 
and  of  sword  ;  Temple  rebuilt  for  ever  ;  all  mankind 
converted.  9th :  righteous  judgment  revealed  to 
the  whole  world  ;  sin  abolished.  10th  :  great  eternal 
judgment  on  angels ;  new  heaven ;  thereafter 
Aveeks  without  number  for  ever  (xciii.,  xci.  12-17). 

(c)-  Warnings  and  tcoes.  —  Warnings  against 
paths  of  unrighteousness  (xciv,  1-5) ;  Avoes  against 
oppressors  and  rich  (xciv.  6-11)  and  sinners  (xcv. 
2-7) ;  hope  for  righteous  (xcvi.  1-3) ;  their  prayer 
heard  (xcvii.  5) ;  woes  against  the  luxurious  and 
the  rich  (xcvi.  4-8,  xcvii.  1-10).  Warnings  against 
indulgence ;  sin  is  of  man's  own  devising,  and 
every  sin  is  every  day  recorded  in  heaven  (xcviii. 
1-8) ;  sinners  are  prepared  for  the  day  of  destruc- 
tion ;  they  will  be  given  into  hands  of  righteous 
(xcviii.  9-16).  AVoes  on  godless  and  law-breakers 
(xcix. ) ;  the  righteous  are  to  raise  prayers  and 
place  them  before  the  angels,  who  are  to  place  the 
sin  of  sinners  for  a  memorial  before  the  Most  High 
(xcix.  3).  Sinners  are  to  destroy  one  another 
(c.  1-3) ;  angels  descend  into  secret  places  and 
gather  all  who  brought  down  sin  (i.e.  fallen  angels) ; 
the  righteous  and  holy  receive  guardians  till  an  end 
is  made  of  sin  ;  though  the  righteous  sleep  long, 
they  have  nothing  to  fear  ;  angels,  sun,  moon,  and 
stars  will  witness  to  the  sins  of  sinners  (c.  4-13);  God 
is  obeyed  by  all  Nature,  therefore  His  law  should 
be  observed  by  men  (ci. ).  Terrors  of  the  judgment- 
day  ;  the  righteous  who  died  in  misery  are  not  to 
grieve  but  await  judgment  (cii.  1-5).  Taunts  of 
sinners — after  death  we  and  the  righteous  are  equal 
(cii.  6-11).  Enoch  knows  a  mystery  from  the 
lieavenly  tablets — the  spirits  of  the  righteous  dead 
shall  live  and  rejoice  (ciii.  1-4) ;  woes  of  sinners 
who  died  in  honour — their  spirits  descend  into 
darkness,  chains,  and  burning  flame  (ciii.  5-8) ; 
woes  of  the  righteous  (ciii.  9-15) ;  yet  in  heaven 
the  angels  remember  them  for  good,  and  their 
names  are  WTitten ;  they  shall  shine  as  lights  of 
heaven  (civ.  1,  2) ;  'cry  for  judgment,  and  it  shall 
appear '  (civ.  3).  The  writings  of  Enoch  are  to  be 
given  to  the  righteous — they  give  joy,  uprightness, 
and  wisdom  (civ.  9-13). 

[Messianic  fragment  (cv. ). — God  and  the  Messiah 
to  dwell  with  men.]  {Noachic  fragment  (cvi.- 
cvii.). — Lamech  has  a  wondrous  son  ;  Methuselah 
inquires  of  Enoch  at  the  ends  of  the  earth  about 
him ;  Enoch  replies  that  a  Deluge  is  to  come 
because  of  sin  introduced  by  the  fallen  angels ; 
this  son  shall  alone  be  saved — sin  will  arise  again 
after  him  till  the  final  anniliilation  of  evil.] 
An  independent  addition  (cviii.). — Another  book 
written  by  Enoch  '  for  his  son  and  those  who  keep 
the  law  in  the  last  days '  ;  the  righteous  are  to  wait 
for  the  destruction  of  the  ungodly,  whose  spirits 
sufler  in  fire  (cviii.  1-6) ;  the  spirits  of  the  humble 
who  lived  ascetic  lives  and  belonged  to  the  genera- 
tion of  light  shall  God  bring  forth  in  shining  light 
and  seat  each  on  the  throne  of  his  honour  in  never- 
ending  splendour  (cviii.  7-15). 

2.  Title. — The  work  is  referred  to  under  several 
titles.  Of  these  the  oldest  are  (a)  the  Books  of 
Enoch  [Test.  Jud.  xviii.  1,  Test.  Lev.  x.  5  [A] ; 
Origen,  c.  Celsum,  v.  54,  in  Num.  Horn,  xxviii.  2 — 
this  title  is  implied  in  the  division  of  the  work  into 
VOL.  I. — 22 


books ;  1  En.  xiv.  1,  IxxiL  1,  Ixxxii.  1,  xcii.  1, 
cviii.  1  ;  Syncellus,  Chronographia  [ed.  Dind.,  1829, 
i.  20,  etc.]) ;  (b)  the  Words  of  Enoch  (Jub.  xxi.  10 ; 
Test.  Benj.  ix.  1 ;  cf.  i  En.  i,  1,  xiv.  1).  Other 
titles  are  (c)  the  Book  of  Enoch  (Test.  Lev.  x.  5  [a]  ; 
Origen,  de  Princ.  I.  iii.  3,  etc.) ;  (d)  the  Writing  of 
Enoch  (Test.  Lev.  xiv.  1 ;  Tertullian,  de  Cultu  lent. 
i.  3) ;  (e)  Enoch  (Jude  "  ;  Ep.  Bam.  iv.  3  ;  Clem. 
Alex.,  Eclog.  Proph.  [ed.  Dind.,  1869,  iii  456,  474]  ; 
Origen,  in  loannem,  vi.  25,  c.  Celstim,  v.  54  ;  Ter- 
tullian, de  Cultu  Fern,  iL  10,  de  Idol,  iv.,  xv.). 

3.  Canonicity. — That  the  work  was  recognized 
as  inspired  in  certain  Jewish  circles  appears  from 
the  above  references  in  Jubilees  and  the  Test.  XII. 
Patriarchs.  St.  Jude  quotes  a  passage  from  it  as 
an  authentic  prophecy  of  Enoch.  The  Epistle  of 
Barnabas  (xvi.  5)  refers  to  it  in  the  words  X^ft  yhp 
f)  ypa<trfi ;  Athenagoras  (Leg.  pro  Christianis,  24)  as 
A  TO?s  wpcxpriTais  iKiretfxhvyirat ;  Tert.  (de  Idol.  XV.), 
'Spiritus  .  .  .  prececinit  per  ,  .  .  Enoch' ;  (de  Cultu 
i^ew.  i.  3),  '  scioscripturam  Enoch  .  .  .  nonrecipia 
quibusdam,  quia  nee  in  armarium  Judaicnm  admit- 
titur  .  .  .  cum  Enoch  eadem  scriptura  etiam  de 
Domino  praedicarit,  a  nobis  quidem  nihil  omnino 
rejicienduni  est,  quod  pertiueat  ad  nos.  ...  A 
Judaeis  potest  jam  videri  propterea  reiecta,  sicut 
et  cetera  quae  Christum  sonant. '  Origen,  however, 
in  c.  Celsum,  v.  54,  says :  iv  rah  iKKXijaiais  au  vdw 
(pdperaL  ihs  Ofta  rd  eiriyeypa/ifjiiva  tov  'Evujx  /3(/3X(a. 
Chrysostom  (Horn,  in  Gen.  vi.  1),  Jerome  (Coin,  in 
Ps.  cxxxii.  3),  and  Augustine  (de  Civ.  Dei,  XV. 
xxiii.  4)  denounce  the  work  as  apocryphal,  and  this 
opinion  henceforward  prevails. 

4.  Critical  structure  and  dates. — That  the  work 
was  composite  might  be  inferred  from  the  external 
evidence  of  the  titles,  '  Books '  or  '  Words  of  Enoch,' 
under  which  the  work  is  quoted  in  other  writings. 
But  internal  evidence  is  more  decisive.  The  fre- 
quent headings,  such  as '  the  book  written  by  Enoch ' 
(xcii.  1),  'another  book  which  Enoch  wrote'  (cviii. 
1),  and  the  divergence  of  historical  outlook,  of 
method  of  treatment,  of  ideas  and  phrases,  in  the 
various  parts,  point  even  more  clearly  to  the  fact 
that  the  work  in  its  present  form  is  a  redaction  of 
several  of  the  more  prominent  writings  belonging 
to  a  diffuse  and  varied  cycle  of  literature  passing 
under  the  name  of  Enoch.  The  work  as  we  have 
it  falls  naturally  into  five  quit«  distinct  main 
sections  as  shown  in  1  above  : 

Section  i.  :  Visions  and  jmimeys  (for  contents 
see  above). — xu.-xxxvi.  belong  to  the  earliest 
Enochic  portion  of  this  section ;  they  are  pre- 
Maccabaean,  as,  unlike  Ixxxiii.-xc,  they  make  no 
reference  to  Antiochus'  persecution.  They  fall 
into  subsections :  xii.-xvi.  (out  of  their  original 
order),  xvii.-xix.,  xx.-xxxvi.  Chs.  vi.-xi.  belong 
to  the  earlier  Book  of  Noah  (see  below).  Chs.  i.-v. 
appear  to  be  an  introduction  written  by  the  final 
editor  of  the  entire  work.  The  problem  in  this 
section  is  the  origin  of  evil,  which  is  traced  to  the 
fall  of  the  Watchers.  There  is  no  Messiah ;  God 
Himself  is  to  abide  with  men  (xxv.  3) ;  all  the 
Gentiles  will  become  righteous  and  worship  God 
(x.  21) ;  the  righteous  are  admitted  to  the  tree  of 
life  and  live  patriarchal  lives  with  very  material 
joys  and  blessings. 

Section  ii.  :  The  Parables  (formerly  known  as 
'the  Similitudes'). — There  are  three  Parables 
(xxxviii.-xliv.,  xlv.-lvii.,  h'iii.-lxix.),  while  xxxvii. 
forms  an  introduction,  and  Ixx.  a  conclusion  to 
them.  Ch.  Ixxi.  belongs  to  the  Third  Parable. 
There  are  many  interpolations.  Some  are  from 
the  Book  of  Noah— Ix.,  Ixv.-lxix.  25  confessedly, 
and  probably  xxxix.  1-2,  liv.  7-lv.  2  as  well. 
Behind  the  Parables  proper  lie  two  sources,  as  Beer 
(Kautzsch's  Apok.  und  Pseud,  ii.  227)  has  shown  : 
one  deals  with  the  '  Son  of  Man ' — xl.  3-7,  xlvi.- 
xlviii.  7,  Hi.  3-4,  Ixi.  3-4,  Ixii.  2-lxiiL,  Ixix.  26-29, 


338 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


Ixx.-lxxi.,  and  has  'the  an<jel  who  went  with  me' 
as  Enoch's  interpreter  ;  the  other  deals  with  '  the 
Elect  One' — xxxviii.-xxxix.,  xl.  1-2,  8-10,  xli.  1-2, 
9,  xlv.,  xlviii.  8-10,  l.-lii,  1-2,  5-9,  liii.-liv.  6,  Iv. 
3-lvii.,  Ixi.  1-2,  5-13,  ixii.  1,  and  has  the  'an<;el  of 
peace '  as  interpreter  of  tlie  vision  (so  Charles, 
Enoch,  p.  65).  Only  the  former  source  attributes 
pre-existence  to  the  Son  of  Man  (xlviii.  2).  This 
section  is  full  of  peculiar  features,  e.g.  '  Lord  of 
Spirits 'as  a  Divine  title;  Phanuel  replaces  Uriel 
as  the  fourth  archanf^el.  The  angelolo;,'y  is  more 
developed  :  besides  Clierubim,  we  have  Serapiiini, 
Ophannim,  angels  of  power  and  of  princijialities. 
And  so  is  the  demonology :  the  origin  of  evil  is 
traced  back  to  the  Satans  and  an  original  evil 
spirit- world.  The  Messiah  is  eternally  pre-existent, 
and  all  judgment  is  committed  to  Him.  The  date 
of  this  section  appears  to  lie  between  95  and  64 
B.C.  and  probably  between  95  and  79.  '  The  kings 
and  the  mighty '  are  evidently  the  later  Maccabamn 
princes  and  their  Sadduciism  supporters.  Tlie 
mighty  cannot  refer  to  the  Romans  ;  it  must  refer 
to  the  Sadducfean  nobles,  who  did  not  support  the 
Herods.  The  problem  is  the  oppression  of  the 
righteous  by  the  kings  and  mighty,  and  the 
solution  consists  in  a  vision  of  the  coming  liberator 
and  vindicator,  the  Messiah  of  supernatural  power 
and  privilege. 

Section  hi.  :  The  Book  of  the  Heavenly  Lumin- 
aries.—  (yhs.  Ixxii.-lxxviii.,  Ixxxii.,  Ixxix.  are 
original  to  this  section  ;  Ixxx.  and  Ixxxi.  are  in- 
terpolations. The  conceptions  at  times  approach 
those  of  i.-xxxvi.,  but  the  points  of  divergence  are 
very  numerous.  The  date  is  not  ascertainable. 
The  object  is  to  establish  the  solar  year  of  364  days 
as  a  Divine  law  revealed  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Enoch  (Ixxiv.  12  as  emended.     Cf.  Juh.  vi.  32-36). 

Section  iv.  :  The  Dream  Visions. — There  is  only 
one  interpolation — xc.  14^.  xc.  13-15  and  xc.  16- 
18  are  doublets.  Tliere  is  close  agreement  with 
and  evident  knowledge  of  vi.-xi.,  but  no  depend- 
ence on  them.  The  concei)tions  are  more  spiritual 
and  developed.  The  date  would  be  before  161  B.C., 
as  Judas  Maccabjeus  is  still  warring  (xc.  13) ;  the 
end  is  expected  to  be  about  140  B.C.,  as  the  fourth 
period  of  twelve  shepherds  would  end  then.  The 
problem  is  the  continued  depression  of  Israel  after 
the  Return,  which  is  attributed  to  the  neglect  of 
its  seventy  angelic  guardians. 

Section  v. — This  section  really  commences  with 
xcii.  1  (see  heading),  and  the  original  order  of  the 
first  four  chapters  was  xcii.,  xci.  1-10,  18-19,  xciii. 
1-10,  xci.  12-17,  xciv.  ;  of  these  xciii.  1-10,  xci.  12- 
17  form  the  short 'Apocalypse  of  Weeks.'  There 
is  a  close  resemblance  throughout  xci. -civ.  to  i.- 
xxxvi.,  in  phrases,  references,  and  ideas,  but  the 
divergences  are  not  less  numerous  (see  Charles,  p. 
21911".).  The  righteous  alone  rise,  and  in  spirit 
only,  not  in  body,  to  walk  in  eternal  light  in  heaven. 
Contrast  the  crude  materialism  of  i.-xxxvi.  The 
date  is  determined  by  the  interpretation  we  put  on 
ciii.  14,  15 — '  the  rulers  .  .  .  did  not  remove  from 
us  the  yoke  of  those  that  devoured  us  and  dispersed 
us  and  murdered  -us.'  If  the  massacre  of  the 
Pharisees  by  John  Hyrcanus  is  meant,  the  date 
must  be  later  than  that  year — 94  B.C.  (cf.  Parables). 
Otherwise,  104-95  B.C.  (so  Charles).  The  problem 
is  ethical  (the  seeming  impunity  of  the  prosperous 
wicked — who,  however,ataeathdescend  toSiieoland 
the  flame  for  ever),  not  national,  as  in  Ixxxiii.-xc. 

cv. — An  independent  Me.><sianic  fragment;  cvi.- 
cvii. — part  of  the  earlier   Rook   of   Noah  ;   c\  iii. 

Sresupposes  i.-xxxvi.  and  xci. -civ.,  and  is  later  in 
ate,  and  strongly  ascetic,  if  not  Essene,  in  tone. 
Book  of  Noah. — Scattered  through  the  work  we 
find  a  series  of  more  or  less  fragmentary  passages 
— vi.-xi.,  liv.  7-1 V.  2,  Ix.,  Ixv.-lxix.  25,  cvi.-cvii., 
and  probably  xxix.  1,  2*) — which  generally  refer 


to  Noah  and  the  Deluge.  Their  inclusion  appears 
to  be  due  to  the  final  editor,  who  forced  into  what 
are  often  awkward  contexts  fragments  of  this 
earlier  work,  or  series  of  works,  wiiicli  we  also 
know  from  Jtib.  vii.  20-39,  x.  1-15,  xxi.  10. 

5.  The  text.— The  t«xt  is  not  extant  in  the 
original  Semitic  form,  but  we  possess  a  Greek 
translation  of  a  part,  and  an  Ethiopic  version  of 
the  whole. 

(1)  The  Greek  version  exists  in  duplicate  to  some 
extent,  {a)  The  superior  in  point  of  text  is  to  be 
found  in  Syncellus  (Chronographia,  ed.  Dind.  i. 
20-23,  etc.),  who  quotes  vi.-x.  14,  xv.  8-xvi.  1,  and 
also  gives  viii,  4-ix.  4  in  variant  form.  He  also 
gives  a  quotation  '  from  the  first  book  of  Enoch 
concerning  the  watchers'  (ed.  Dind.  i.  47)  which 
does  not  occur  in  our  present  text,  (b)  The  longer 
but  less  accurate  text  for  i.-xxxii.  (and  xix.  3-xxi. 
9  in  duplicate)  was  discovered  in  1886-7  at  Aklimim, 
and  published  by  Rouriant  in  1892.  Another 
fragment,  in  tachygraphic  characters,  exists  in  a 
Vatican  Greek  MS — no.  1809  (see  at  eml  of  this  art. ). 

(2)  The  Ethiopic  version,  which  is  a  translation 
from  the  Greek,  is  known  in  '29  MSS,  of  whicli  15 
are  in  England.  The  best  are  numljered  gg^mqtu 
in  Charles's  Ethiopic  text  (q.v.).  This  text  is  in- 
ferior to  that  of  the  Syncellus  Greek  and  is  much 
nearer  to  that  of  the  Akhmim  Fragment  (known 
generally  as  the  '  Gizeh  Greek '). 

(3)  The  Latin  version  is  a  mere  fragment,  cvi. 
1-18,  discovered  in  1893  by  M.  R.  James  in  the 
Rritish  Museum  and  published  by  him  in  that 
year  in  TS  ii.  3. 

(4)  The  quotations,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  except 
for  those  in  Syncellus,  add  little  to  the  restoration 
of  the  true  text.  See  Lawlor,  art.  in  Journal  of 
Philology,  xxv.  [1897]  164-225,  and  Charles's  Intro- 
ductions under  '  Influence  on  Patristic  Literature' 
in  his  two  recent  editions. 

6.  Original  language. — The  original  language  is 
now  admitted  to  be  Semitic — either  Hebrew  or 
Aramaic.  Chs.  vi.-xxxvi.  were  almost  certainly 
in  Aramaic,  The  transliterations  tpovKd  (xviii.  8), 
/xavSo^apd  (xxviii.  1),  and  ^a^Srjpi  (xxix.  1),  all 
show  the  Aramaic  termination  ;  while  in  vi.  7  and 
viii.  3  the  proper  names  are  only  appropriate  in 
Aramaic.  To  the  rest  of  the  book  (except  Ixxxiii.- 
xc,  which  was  possibly  in  Aramaic)  Charles  un- 
hesitatingly assigns  a  Hebrew  original.  In  xxxvii.- 
Ixxi.  Hchmidt  (OT and  Se^nitic  Studies,  1908,  ii.  336- 
343)  argues  for  Aramaic,  but  is  answered  by  Charles. 

7.  Poetical  element.  —  This  bulks  largely  in 
1  Enoch,  but  was  first  recognized  by  Charles,  who 
prints  it  in  verse  form  in  his  two  recent  editions. 
Its  recognition  is  of  use  in  helping  at  times  to 
restore  the  true  order,  and  at  times  to  excise 
dittographs. 

8.  Influence  on  NT.— (1)  Diction  and  idea.s.— 
(a)  The  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  is  remarkable  for  con- 
taining, with  the  possible  exception  of  '2  Ti  3',  the 
only  two  direct  citations  from  pseudepigraj>hs  in 
the  NT.  And  of  these  two  citations  the  only  one 
made  by  name  is  from  the  Book  of  Enoch,  which 
is  quoted  as  though  it  pos.sessed  much  the  same 
authority  as  a  canonical  book  of  prophecy.  It  may 
be  instructive  to  compare  tlie  words  in  Jude  with 
the  text  of  Enoch  as  restored  by  Charles  : 

Jude  '■*•  "* — 'ISoii  7i\dei'  Kvpiot  iv  1  En.  i.  9— 'ISou  ipxtrax  avvnut 

ayi'atf  nvpidcriv  avToii,  fivpiairiy  ayt'aiv  avrou, 

iroiTjo'ai  KpitTiV  Ktna  irdvrutv,  iroti7(rai  Kpi<Tiv  vara  irai'rwM, 

(cat  f  Ae'yfai  irdi'Tas  Toiis  dat-  Koi  arroAfcrai  jroiTot  tous  airt- 

KaX  iXiy^ai  ndtrav  vapxa 
wept    ndi'Twv  (pyuv   ttj^  a<r<- 

/3«ia{  avTciii'  mv  r)<TfPr)(Tay 
Kai  (TK\r)pu>y  un*  eXdXTjfTav  ko- 

ytav  Kar'    avTOV    afxaprwAot 

(itrc/Sctt. 

For  the  aKX-qpol  Xdyoi  cf.  1  En.  v.  4,  xxvii.  2. 
Further,  St.  Jude's  (lescription  of  Enoch  as  'the 


TTcpt  Trai^wi'  Toil'  tpytav  aire- 
peiai  avriiv  mv  y\(Tf^Tiaov 

Ka\  mpl  jrotTioi"  tmv  aKKi\puv 
ttv  t\dX.ri<rav  xar'  ai>ToO  aft- 
apTuAol  acTc/Sctf. 


EXOCH,  BOOK  OF 


EXOCH,  BOOK  OF 


339 


seventh  from  Adam '  is  identical  with  tliat  in  the 
Noachic  interpolation  in  the  Parables  (Ix.  8). 

The  Epistle  is  full  of  reminiscences  of  Enoch. 
Cf.  Jude  *,  '  denying  our  only  Master  and  Lord, 
Jesus  Christ,'  with  1  En.  xlviii.  10,  'they  have 
denieil  tiie  I^ord  of  Spirits  and  His  Anointed ' ; 
Jude", 'angels  which  .  .  .  left  their  proper  habita- 
tion,' with  1  En.  xii.  4,  '  the  Watchers  .  .  .  who 
have  left  the  high  heaven,'  and  xv.  7,  '  as  for  the 
spiritual  ones  of  the  heaven,  in  heaven  is  their 
dwelling ' ;  Jude  ", '  kept  in  everlasting  bonds  under 
darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day,'  with 
1  En.  X.  4-6,  '  Bind  Azazel  .  .  .  and  cast  him  into 
the  darkness  .  .  .  and  cover  him  with  darkness, 
and  let  him  abide  there  for  ever  .  .  .  and  on  the 
day  of  the  great  judgment  he  shall  be  cast  into 
the  fire,'  and  x.  11,  12,  'Bind  Semjaza  .  .  .  bind 
them  fast  for  seventy  generations  .  .  .  till  the 
Judgment  that  is  for  ever  and  ever  is  consum- 
mated ' ;  Jude  ", '  wandering  stars,'  with  1  En.  xviii. 
15,  xxi.  2,  3,  6. 

(b)  2  Peter  is  closely  related  to  Jude,  and  2  P  2* 
is  more  than  an  echo  of  Jude®.  The  fuller  details, 
indeed,  may  be  due  to  1  Enoch,  while  the  juxta- 
position of  the  first  judgment  on  the  angels  in  2  P 
2*  with  the  Deluge  in  2  P  2*  is  characteristic  of  1 
Enoch  as  it  stands,  especially  in  its  Noachic  interpo- 
lations, e.j/.  x.  1-16,  Ixv.  1-lxvii.  4.  AsNoah  iscalled 
'  a  preacher  of  righteousness'  in  2  P  2^,  we  might 
venture  to  assume  that  this  title  implies  that  he, 
and  not  Christ,  was  taken  to  be  the  preacher  to 
the  spirits  in  prison  in  1  P  3"  by  the  author  of  2 
Peter.  If  this  be  admitted,  1  P  3i»-  ^  might  pos- 
sibly be  claimed  as  witnessing  to  the  original  form 
of  tlie  Noah  Apocalypse  in  which  it  was  not  Enoch 
but  Noah  who  was  sent  to  reprimand  the  Watchers 
(see  1  En.  xii.  1-4,  '  Enoch  was  hidden  .  .  .  and 
his  activities  had  to  do  with  the  Watchers.  .  .  . 
"Enoch,  thou  scribe  of  righteousness,  go  declare 
to  the  Watchers " ').  In  support  of  this  view  we 
may  note  (a)  that  the  references  to  the  sin  of 
the  angels  are  all  (except  Ixxxvi.  1)  in  Noachic 
passages  ;  (^)  that  in  defiance  of  chronology  and 
the  context  the  name  '  Noah '  has  been  altered  to 
•  Enoch '  in  Ix.  1  ;  that  '  the  longsuflering  of  God 
waited '  in  1  P  3**  seems  to  echo  1  En.  Ix.  5,  '  until 
this  day  lasted  His  mercy  ;  and  He  hath  been 
merciful  and  longsutfering.  .  .  .'  Cf.  too  Ixvi.  2 
and  Ixvii.  2,  where  angels  hold  the  waters  in 
check  and  other  angels  are  constructing  the  ark, 
with  1  P  S-"",  '  while  the  ark  was  a-preparing.' 
On  the  other  hand,  of  course,  there  are  great 
exegetical  difficulties  in  1  P  3'*'  **  in  the  way  of  this 
view,  thougli  '  the  spirits  .  .  .  which  aforetime 
were  disoljedient'  suggests  angelic  and  not  human 
offenders,  and  the  prison  of  the  angels  is  a  common- 
place in  1  En.  (x.  4,  12,  xix.  1,  xxi.  10,  Ixvii.  4, 
etc. ). 

(r)  In  St.  John's  First  Epistle  we  have  the  fre- 
quent contrast  between  light  and  darkness  so 
characteristic  of  1  Enoch  :  e.g.  1  Jn  1"  '  walk  in  the 
light '  I!  1  En.  xcii.  4  ;  1  Jn  2*  '  the  darkness  is  pass- 
ing away '  I!  1  En.  Iviii.  5.  The  warning  in  1  Jn 
2*',  '  love  not  the  world,  neither  the  things  that 
are  in  the  world,'  has  a  close  parallel  in  1  En. 
cviii.  8,  '  loved  not  any  of  the  good  things  which 
are  in  the  world,'  and  in  xlviii.  7. 

(d)  For  St.  James's  woes  against  the  rich  (5^"*), 
only  paralleled  in  the  NT  by  our  Lord's  words  on 
the  danger  of  trusting  to  wealth,  cf.  1  En.  xlvL  7, 
Ixiii.  10,  xciv.  8-11,  xcvi.  4-8,  xcvii.  8-10. 

(c)  The  Book  of  Revelation  is  naturally  full  of 
Jewish  apocalyptic  phraseology  and  imagery,  and 
parallels  are  abundant  with  1  Enoch,  (a)  Angel- 
olofjy. — 'Seven  (arch)angels  '  (Rev  8-  and?  1*  4')!! 
1  En.  XX.  1-8,  xc.  21 ;  'four  living  creatures'  (Rev 
4*)  y  '  four  presences '  (1  En.  xl.  2-9) ;  '  have  no 
rest  day  and  night'  (Rev  4*)  ||  1  En.  xxxix.   13; 


angels  ottier  men's  prayers  to  GJod  (Rev  &•*;  cf. 
5*)  I!  1  En.  ix.  1-3,  xlvii.  2,  xcix.  3 ;  angels  of 
winds  (Rev  7")  and  of  waters  (16')  [|  1  En.  Ixix.  22. 
(/3)  Demonology. — '  A  star  from  heaven  fallen  unto 
the  earth '  (Rev  9')— for  phrase  cf.  1  En.  Ixxxvi. 
1 ;  '  Satan  .  .  .  accuser  of  our  brethren  .  .  .  be- 
fore our  God'  (Rev  12*-"')  ||  'Satans  .  .  .  before 
the  Lord  of  Spirits  ...  to  accuse  them  who  dwell 
on  the  earth'  (1  En.  xl.  7);  the  false  prophet  'de- 
ceiveth  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth  ^  (Rev  13")  || 
the  '  hosts  of  Azazel  .  .  .  leading  astray  those 
who  dwell  on  the  earth '  (/  En.  liv.  56) ;  idolatry  as 
demon  worship  (Rev  9^)  \\  1  En.  xix.  1,  xcix.  7. 
(•y)  Boasting  of  rich. — '  I  am  rich  and  have  gotten 
riches '  (Rev  3")  I!  *  we  have  become  rich  A>-ith  riches 
and  have  possessions '  (i  En.  xcvii.  8).  (5)  Stages  of 
judgment. — Praj^er  of  saints  for  vengeance  (Rev 
6'")  II 1  En.  xlvii,  2,  etc.  ;  terror  of  the  kings  and 
the  great  at  the  sight  of  '  him  that  sitteth  on  the 
throne'  and  at  'the  ^v^ath  of  the  Lamb'  (Rev  6") 
ii  '  when  they  see  that  Son  of  Man  sitting  on  the 
throne  of  His  glory '  (i  En.  Ixii.  5) ;  the  sinners' 
blood  rises  to  the  horses'  bridles  (Rev  14^)  [[  to  the 
horses'  breasts  (i  En.  c.  3) ;  books  opened  (Rev 
20'-)  \\  1  En.  xc.  20 ;  book  of  life  (Rev  201*)  || 
books  of  the  living  (1  En.  xlvii.  3) ;  Satan  bound 
for  a  thousand  years  (Rev  20^)  and  then  cast  into 
lake  of  fire  (20^*)  i!  Semjaza  and  his  associates 
bound  for  seventy  generations  (i  En.  x.  12)  and 
then  led  off  to  the  abyss  of  fire  (x.  13).  (c)  Resur- 
rection.— The  sea,  death,  and  Hades  give  up  their 
dead  (Rev  20J»)  1|  the  earth,  Sheol,  and  hell  (i  En. 
li.  1),  the  desert  and  the  sea  (Ixi.  5)  restore  their 
dead,  (i")  The  future  reuxtrds  of  the  righteous. — 
'  Blessed  are  the  dead  wMch  die  in  the  tord '  (Rev 
14'*)  li  '  Blessed  is  the  man  who  dies  in  righteous- 
ness' (1  En.  Ixxxi.  4);  saints  in  white  raiment 
(Rev  3*)  II  angels  clothed  in  white  {1  En.  xc.  31) 
and  saints  (clad)  in  shining  light  (cviii.  12) ;  '  foun- 
tains of  waters  of  life '  (Rev  7'')  il  a  '  bright  spring 
of  water '  (i  En.  xxii.  9 ;  cf.  xlviii.  1) ;  eat  with 
Christ  (Rev  3»)  \\  '  with  that  Son  of  Man  shall  they 
eat  and  lie  down  and  rise  up  for  ever'  {1  En.  Ixii. 
14) ;  sit  on  throne  with  Christ  (Rev  3=^  ;  cf.  20*) 
II  'I  will  seat  each  on  the  throne  of  his  honour' 
(cviii.  12) ;  Christ  will  spread  His  tabernacle  over 
them  (Rev  7**)  II  '  I  will  cause  my  Elect  One  to 
dwell  among  them '  {1  En.  xlv.  4) ;  'no  turse 
any  more '  (Rev  22')|| '  no  sorrow  or  plague,'  etc. 
(i  En.  XXV.  6). 

(/)  In  Acts  we  have  a  parallel  with  1  Enoch  :  Ac 
10*  '  thy  prayers  .  .  .  are  gone  up  for  a  memorial 
before  God  'jj  1  En.  xcix.  3  '  raise  your  prayers  as  a 
memorial.  .  .  before  the  Most  High.' 

ig)  Hebrews.— With  He  4'*  cf.  1  En.  ix.  5  'all 
things  are  naked  and  open  in  thy  sight,  and  thou 
seest  all  things  and  nothing  can  hide  itself  from 
thee' ;  cf.  also  He  11'"  12-  (the  heaveni}-  Jerusalem 
built  by  God  Himself)  with  1  En.  xc.  29 ;  11*  refers 
to  the  translation  of  Enoch  and  nnderst^inds  'walked 
with  God'  in  Gn  5^  as  '  pleased  God.'  Cf.  1  En. 
XV.  1. 

{h)  St.  PauFs  Epistles.— 1  Th  5»  I!  /  En.  Ixii.  4 
'  then  shall  pain  come  upon  them  as  on  a  woman  in 
travail' ;  Ro838(cf.  2ThP,Eph  1-',  Col  l'«)iii^n.  Ixi. 
10 'angels  of  power  and  .  .  .  of  principalities.'  With 
2  Co  4"  cf.  1  En.  xxxviii.  4  '  the  Lord  of  Spirits  has 
caused  Ms  light  to  appear  (so  Charles)  on  the  face 
of  the  holy,  righteous,  and  elect' ;  2  Co  IP'  i|  1  En. 
Ixxvii.  1  '  He  who  is  blessed  for  ever ' ;  Gal  1*  |j  1  En. 
xlviii.  7  'this  world  of  unrighteousness'  ;  Ph  2'"  || 
1  En.  xlviii.  5  '  shall  fall  down  and  worship  before 
him  (=Son  of  Man)';  Col  2»  ;!  i  En.  xhi.  3  'the 
Son  of  Man  .  .  .  who  revealeth  all  the  treasures 
of  that  which  is  bidden ' ;  1  Ti  1'  i!  i  En.  xciii.  4  'a 
law-  shall  be  made  for  the  sinners' ;  1  Ti  1'*  J!  1  En. 
xciv.  1  '  worthy  of  acceptation ' ;  1  Ti  5=^  i|  i  En. 
xxxix.  1  ;  1  Ti  6'®  II 1  En.  xiv.  21  '  none  of  the  angels 


340 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


ENOCH,  BOOK  OF 


could  enter  and  could  holiold  liis  face  by  reason  of 
the  maj^nificence  and  glory,  and  no  Uesn  could  be- 
hold him.' 

(t)  NT  in  general.  — VhrnseB  which  recur  in  the 
NT  arc  '  Lord  of  lords  and  King  of  kings'  (/  En.  ix.  4, 
Rev  IT'*;  cf.  1  Ti  6">) ;  '  holy  angels  '  (i  A'n.  Ixxi.  1, 
etc.,  llev  14'",  etc.  ;  cf.  Ac  lO-") ;  'the  generation 
of  light' (2  En.  cviii.  11):  cf.  Eph  5"  'children 
of  light,'  1  Th  5»  'sons  of  light'  (so  Lk  16«, 
Jn  12*'). 

(2)  Theology.— (ffl)  T/ie  Messiah.— The  'Son  of 
Man '  in  the  Parables  is  pre-cxistcnt :  '  before  the 
sun  and  the  signs  were  created,  before  the  stars  of 
the  heaven  were  made,  his  name  was  named  before 
the  Lord  of  Spirits '  (xlviii.  3),  '  for  this  reason  hatli 
he  been  chosen  and  hidden  before  him,  before  the 
creation  of  tlie  world  and  for  evermore"  (xlviii.  6), 
'  for  from  the  beginning  the  Son  of  Man  was  hidden, 
and  the  Most  High  preserved  him  in  the  presence 
of  his  might,  and  revealed  him  to  the  elect  (Ixii.  7  ; 
cf.  xxxix.  6,  7,  xlvi.  1-3).  For  '  before  the  creation ' 
cf.  Col  1",  and  for  '  from  the  beginning'  cf.  Jn  P, 
IJn  P,  Rev  1"  21«  22'^  and  for  '  revealed '  cf.  1  Ti  3i«, 
1  Jn  3''*,  and  esp.  1  P  l'^.  He  is  a  supernatural 
being.  In  Dn  7'^  the  *  one  like  unto  a  son  of  man ' 
is  brought  before  God  and  dominion  is  bestowed  on 
him.  In  1  En.  xxxix.  6,  7,  xlvi.  1,  2,  Ixii.  7  the 
'Son  of  Man'  is  with  God  (cf.  Jn  1^)  and  will 
sit  on  His  throne  (li,  3).  He  is  the  ideally  Bight- 
coMs  One(xxxviii.  2) — 'theRigliteous  and  Elect  One 
(liii.  6  ;  cf.  xlvi.  3) ;  cf.  Ac  3^*  V^  22^*  1  Jn  2^.  He  is 
the  Elect  (xl.  5,  xlv.  3,  4,  xlix.  2,  4,  etc.) ;  cf.  Lk  9^ 
23*^;  tlie  Anointed  or  Christ  (xlviii.  10,  lii.  4).  He 
has  all  knowledge  (xlvi.  3,  xlix.  2,  4),  all  ivisdom 
(xlix.  1,3,  li.  3),  all  dominion  (Ixii.  6;  cf.  Mt  28i8). 
'  The  sum  of  judgment '  is  '  given  unto  the  Son  of 
Man'  (Ixix.  27  ;  cf.  Jn  5*^  ^).  God  '  appoints  a  judge 
for  them  all  and  he  judges  them  all  before  Him ' 
(xli.  9 ;  cf.  Ac  17^').  He  judges  both  men  and 
angels  (li.  2,  Iv.  4,  Ixi.  8,  Ixii.  2, 3).  He  is  Vindicator 
of  the  righteous  (but  not  redeemer  of  mankind).  He 
has  '  preserved  the  lotof  the  righteous '  (xlviii.  7)  and 
will  be  '  the  hope  of  those  who  are  troubled  of  heart ' 
(xlviii.  4).  He  has  been  revealed  to  the  righteous 
(Ixii.  7)  and  in  due  time  will  'cause  the  house  of 
his  congregation  to  appear '  (liii.  6).  Outside  the 
Parables  God  Himself  is  the  Judge  (cf.  1  P  1", 
Rev  20^2) ;  in  the  Parables  it  is  the  Son  of  Man 
(cf.  1  P  4»,  Rev  6i«-"  2212,  etc.).  It  is  an  unforgiv- 
able sin  to  deny  the  Anointed  One  (xlviii.  10).  The 
words  '  in  his  name  they  are  saved '  in  xlviii.  7 
must  refer  to  the  Lord  of  Spirits,  not  to  the  Son  of 
Man,  as  Charles  takes  it.  Eor  the  phrase,  however, 
cf.  Ac  412,  1  Co  6". 

(b)  Messianic  Kingdom. — Whereas  in  i.-xxxvi. 
there  is  a  very  sensuous  conception  of  Messianic 
bliss,  and  the  scene  of  the  Kingdom  is  the  existing 
Jerusalem  and  Holy  Land  purified  from  sin,  in 
Ixxxiii.-xc.  we  find  a  more  advanced  conception. 
The  centre  of  the  Kingdom  is  now  to  be  a  new  Jeru- 
salem brought  to  earth  by  God  Himself  (cf.  He  12^, 
Rev  3^2  21*),  and  the  citizens  of  it  are  to  be  trans- 
formed after  the  likeness  of  the  Messiah,  whose 
origin  is,  however,  natural  and  human.  In  xci.-civ. 
we  have  a  Kingdom  of  limited  duration,  followed 
by  the  last  judgment  (cf.  Rev  20'»-  »• ""'»).  In  the 
Parables  we  have  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth, 
under  a  supernatural  head,  the  fount  of  wisdom, 
righteousness,  and  power. 

(c)  The  Resurrection  in  i.-xxxvi.  is  of  soul  and 
body  to  a  limited  life  in  an  eternal  Messianic 
Kingdom  on  earth.  In  the  Parables  the  resurrec- 
tion is  to  a  spiritual  Kingdom,  in  which  the  holy 
are  clothed  with  a  spiritual  body,  'garments  of 
life  ...  of  glory '  (Ixii.  16 ;  cf.  1  Co  IS"-  ",  2  Co 
o'"*).  In  xci.-civ.  there  is  a  resurrection  of  the 
spirit  only. 

(d)  The  Judgment  in  2  Enoch  precedes  the  King- 


dom, except  in  xci.-civ.  (for  which  cf.  Rev  21""). 
See  under  8  (2)  (n)  above. 

(c)  Sheol  or  Hades  in  1  En.  xxii.  is  a  place  of  souls, 
good  and  bad,  in  the  intermediate  state,  in  1  En. 
Ixiii.  10,  xcix.  11,  ciii.  7  of  wicked  souls  in  their 
final  state  of  woe  ;  cf.  Rev  20"-'*  (of  wicked  only  (?) 
in  intermediate  state). 

(/)  lietribution  and  salvation. — In  xci.-civ.  the 
tone  is  extremely '  other-worldly,'  and  the  contrast 
between  the  present  prosperity  of  the  wicked  and 
the  sutterings  of  the  righteous  and  their  future 
destinies  is  emphasized  throughout.  Judgment 
will  be  according  to  works,  which  '  the  Son  of 
Man  will  try'  (xlv.  3)  and  judge,  'and  in  the 
balance  shall  (men's)  deeds  be  weighed '  (Ixi.  8  ;  cf. 
xli.  1).  These  works,  however,  are  the  outcome  of 
faith  on  the  part  of  '  the  righteous  whose  elect 
works,'  as  also  they  themselves,  '  hang  upon  the 
Lord  of  Spirits '  (xxxviii.  2  ;  cf.  xl.  5,  xlvi.  8).  The 
'  elect '  is  a  frequent  title  of  the  righteous,  and  im- 
plies dependence  \ipon  God's  grace. 

(g)  Sin  and  repentance. — Man's  will  is  free,  and 
the  two  ways  of  righteousness  and  violence  lie 
before  him  for  his  choice  (xci.  18,  xciv,  3).  Though 
sin  goes  back  in  origin  to  the  fallen  angels  and  the 
Satans,  '  man  of  himself  has  created  it '  (xcviii.  4  ; 
cf.  Ja  1"'").  1  En.  xl.  9  assigns  to  Phanuel  the 
oversight  of  '  repentance  unto  hope  of  those  who 
inherit  eternal  life.'  On  the  other  hand,  repent- 
ance will  be  unavailing  for  men  after  the  manifes- 
tation of  the  Son  of  Man  on  the  throne  of  gloiy 
(Ixiii.  1-11),  and  at  all  times  for  fallen  angels  (xii. 
6,  xiv.  4,  Ixv.  11). 

{h)  Angels.— 'M&m&ge  is  forbidden  to  them  (xv. 
7  ;  cf.  iMt  222S-33) ;  1  Co  ll^"  possibly  refers  to  the 
seduction  of  angels  by  women,  which,  however, 
agrees  with  the  narrative  of  the  angels'  fall  in 
Jubilees  rather  than  in  1  Enoch. 

(i)  The  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  is  expected 
generally  in  1  Enoch,  e.g.  x.  21, 1.  2,  xc.  30, 33,xci.  14. 

LlTKRATURB. — I.    ClIIEP    KD1TI0S8    OP    THK    TKXT. — (i.)    In    the 

Greek  vemions.—U .  Bouriant,  Fragments  du  texte  gree  du 
Livre  d' Henoch  {  =  Mimmres  publics  par  leg  meiubres  de  la 
missdon  archeologique  franfaise  au  Cajre,  Paris,  18y2-!)9.  toni. 
ix.  fasc.  i.),  pp.  91-136 ;  A.  Lods,  L'E'nangile  et  FApocali/pse 
de  Pierre  avcc  le  texte  grec  du  Livre  d'Henoch.  Fac-simiU  du 
manuserit  reproduit  en  Sh  planches  doubles,  en  heliogravure 
(=M<imoires  publics  par  leg  menibres  de  la  mission  archio. 
loqiqxte  fran<;aise  au  Caire,  torn.  ix.  fasc.  iii.),  also  Le  Livre 
d'Hinoch:  Fragments  grecs  decouverts  d  Akhniim,  publifs 
avec  les  variantes  du  texte  ithiopien,  traduits  et  annates,  Paris, 
1892  ;  A.  Dillmann,  '  Uber  den  neugefundenen  gTiechtschen 
Text  des  Henochbuches '  in  Sitzungsberiehte  der  kgl.  preuss. 
Akademie  der  Wissenschaften  zu  Berlin,  li.-liii.  | Berlin,  1892), 
pp.  1039-1054,  1079-1092;  R.  H.  Charles,  The  Hook  of  Enoch, 
Oxford,  1893,  pp.  318-370,  21912,  pp.  273-305 ;  H.  B.  Swete, 
OT  in  Greek,  vol.  iii.  [Cambrid;re,  1905],  pp.  789-809 ;  J.  Flem- 
ming  and  L.  Radermacher,  Das  Buck  Henoch,  Leipzig,  1901, 
pp.  18-60,  113-114.  For  the  Vatican  Fragment,  see  A.  Mai, 
Patrum  Nova  Bibliotheca,  Rome,  1844-71 ;  J.  Gildemeister, 
in  ZDMG  ix.  [1855]  pp.  621-4,  and  O.  von  Gebhardt  in  Merx' 
Archiv  fiir  witsenscha/tl.  Erforsehungen  des  AT,  Halle,  1872, 
ii.  243. 

(ii.)  In  the  Latin  version..— M.  R.  James,  \n  TS  n.  3  :  Apoc- 
rypha Anecdota,  Cambridge,  1893,  pp.  146-1.50  ;  R.  H.  Charles, 
BookofEnoch^,  pp.  372-375,  2pp.  264-268  ;  Anecdota  Oxonirnsia. 
The  Ethiopia  Version  of  the  Book  of  Enoch,  Oxford,  1906,  p. 
2  ff.  ;  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepiqrapha,  Oxford,  1913,  pp.  278, 279. 

(iii.)  In  the  Ethiopia  version. — R.  Laurence,  Libri  Enoch 
Versio  Aethiopica,  Oxford,  1838  ;  A.  Dillmann,  Liber  Ilenoeh, 
Aethiopice,  ad  quinque  codicum  fidem  editiis.  cum  variis  lee- 
tionibtis,  Leipzig,  1851  ;  R.  H.  Charles,  Anecdota  Oxoniensia. 
The  Ethiopia  Femon  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  ;  J.  Flemming,  Dot 
Buch  Ilenoch:  Aethiopischer  Text  (  =  TIT,  new  ser.,  vii.  1) 
Leipzig,  1902. 

(iv.)  In  translations.— R.  Laurence,  The  Book  of  Enoch  .  .  . 
now  first  translated  from  an  Ethiopia  MS  in  the  Bodleian 
Library,  Oxford,  1821 ;  A.  Dillmann,  Das  Buch  Henoch  iiber- 
setzt  und  erklart,  Leipzig,  1853  ;  G.  H.  Schodde,  The  Book  of 
Enoch  translated  with  I ntrodtiction  and  Notes,  Andover,  1882 ; 
R.  H.  Charles,  The  Book  of  Enoch  translated  from  DUlmann'i 
Ethiopia  Text  emended  and  revised  .  .  .,  Oxford,  1S93,  translated 
anew  from  the  Editor's  Ethiopia  Text  ....  Oxford,  1912;  G. 
Beer,  in  Kautzsch's  Apok.  vnd  Pseud.,  Tubingen,  1900,  ii.  286- 
310 ;  J.  Flemming:  and  L.  Radermacher,  Das  Buch  Henoch ; 
F.  Martin,  Le  Livre  d'HiUioch  traduit  sur  le  texte  tthiopim, 
Paris,  1906  ;  R.  H.  Charles,  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha, 
u.  188-281. 


EXVY 


EP.EXETUS 


341 


I 


II.  Chief  critical  WQnnuBS.—G.  C  F.  Liicke,  Einleitung  in 
die  Ofenbarung  des  Johaniug^,  Bonn,  1852,  pp.  8SK144. 1071-3 ; 
A.  rTillmann,  1)03  Buch  Henoch  iiOerseUt  uiid  erklari,  also  in 
PRE^  \\l  [I860)  308-310.  PRE^  xii.  [18S3J  350-352 ;  G.  H.  A- 
Ewald,  Abkandlung  iiber  det  athiopitehen  Buches  Hendkk 
Entstehung,  Sinn  und  Zusammenteteung,  Gottineen,  1854 ; 
Higtory  of  JtraeP,  London,  1869-80,  v.  345-9;  A.  HUgenfeld, 
Die  jiidiseke  ApokalyptiJt,  Jena,  1867,  pp.  91-184  ;  J.  Halevy, 
'  Recherches  sur  Is  lanf^e  de  la  i^daction  primitive  du  livre 
d'Enoch,  in  J  A,  1867,  pp.  352-395;  O.  von  Gebhardt,  'Die  70 
Hirten  des  Buches  Henoch  ..."  in  Merx'  Archie  j'iir  witten- 
tehafa.  Er/orsehung  des  AT,  vol  ii.  pp.  163-246  ;  Tideman,  'De 
Apokalypse  van  Henoch  en  het  Essenisme,'  in  Theol.  njdtekrtft, 
1875,  pp.  261-296 ;  J.  Dnunmond,  The  Jewish  Mestifth,  London, 
1877,  pp.  17-73;  E.  Schiirer,  HJP  u.  iii.  [Edinburi^h,  1886] 
pp.  54-73;  W.  Baidenspereer,  Das  Selbstbeicusttsetn  Jmu, 
Strassburg,  18SS,  pp.  7-16 ;  R.  H.  Charles,  Book  of  Enoch ; 
Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha,  ii.  163-1S5  ;  C.  Clemen,  '  Die 
Zusammensetzung  des  Buches  Henoch,'  in  Theoiogisehe  Studien 
und  KritiJcen,  Ixxi.  [1S9S],  pp.  211-227  ;  G.  Beer,  in  Kautzsch's 
Apok.  und  Pseud,  des  AT  ii.  224-230;  J.  Flemmingr  and  L. 
Radermacher,  Dag  Bueh  Henoch ;  F.  Martin,  Le  Livre 
d'Henoch.  A.  Ll.  DA^aES. 

ENYY. — Envy  is  the  feeling  of  mortification  or 
ill-will  occasioned  by  the  contemplation  of  the 
superior  advantages  of  others. 

'  Base  envy  withers  at  another's  joy, 
And  hates  that  excellence  it  cannot  reach' 

(Thomson,  Seasons,  'Spring,'  2S3X 

In  the  NT  the  word  is  used  to  translate  two  Gr. 
terms,  ipBopos  and  f^Xos,  the  former  of  which  is 
invariably  (with  the  possible  exception  of  Ja  4') 
taken  in  malam  partem,  while  the  latter  is  fre- 
quently used  in  a  good  sense. 

(1)  'fhose  who  are  given  up  to  a  reprobate  mind 
are  '  full  of  envy '  (^eoToi)?  tf>66vov,  Ro  1^),  and  the 
character  of  the  word  is  strikingly  indicated  by 
the  company  it  keeps,  <pd6vo%  and  <f>6vo^  ( '  murder  ) 
going  together.  Among  the  works  of  the  flesh 
are  '  envyings '  (Gal  5*^),  such  as  are  occasioned  by 
quarrels  about  words  (1  Ti  G*).  Christians  can 
recall  the  time  when  they  were  '  living  in  malice 
and  envy '  (Tit  3') ;  and  even  now  they  need  the 
injunction  to  '  put  away  all  envies'  (1  P  2^) ;  it  ill 
becomes  them  to  be  seen  '  provoking  one  another, 
envying  one  another '  (Gal  5*).  In  Rome  St.  Paul 
found,  witli  mingled  feelings,  some  men  actually 
preaching  Christ  from  en^-y,  moved  to  evangeli- 
cal activity  by  the  strange  and  sinister  inspiration 
of  uneasiness  and  displeasure  at  his  own  success  as 
an  apostle  (Ph  1")  (see  Faction).  If  the  RV  of 
Ja  4*  is  correct,  <f>doveu3  has  its  usual  evil  sense,  and 
this  difficult  passage  means,  '  Do  you  think  that  God 
will  implant  in  us  a  spirit  of  envy,  the  parent  of 
strife  and  hate  ? '  But  it  may  be  better  to  trans- 
late, either,  '  For  even  unto  jealous  envy  ('  bis  zur 
Eifersucht '  [von  Soden])  he  longeth  for  the  spirit 
which  he  made  to  dwell  in  us,'  or  '  That  spirit 
which  he  made  to  dwell  in  us  yeameth  for  us 
even  unto  jealous  envy.'  If  either  of  the  last  two 
renderings  is  right,  <f>d6vos  is  for  once  ascribed  to 
God,  or  to  a  spirit  which  proceeds  from  Him,  and 
the  word  has  no  appreciable  dilierence  of  meaning 
from  the  f^Xos  ('jealousy')  which  is  so  often  at- 
tributed to  Him  in  the  OT  {debs  fijXwnJj,  Ex  20*, 
etc.).  He  longs  for  the  devotion  of  His  people 
with  an  intensity  which  is  often  present  in,  as 
well  as  with  a  purity  which  is  mostly  absent  from, 
our  human  envy.  Very  different  from  this  passion 
of  holj'  desire  was  the  <pd6voi  of  the  pagan  go<ls  (t6 
^eloi'  TTav  e<m  <pdov€p6v,  says  Solon,  Herod,  i.  32 ;  cf. 
iii.  40) — that  begrudging  of  uninterrupted  human 
happiness  which  CrcESUs  and  Polyerates  had  so 
much  reason  to  fear. 

(2)  In  the  RV  of  Ac  7"  13*>  IT^,  Ro  V6^^,  1  Co  3», 
Ja  3'^  '^  '  jealousy '  is  .substituted  for  AV  '  en^'y,' 
in  Ac  5"  for  'indignation,'  and  in  2  Co  12^  for 
'emulation.'  In  all  these  instances  the  word  is 
f^Xoj  (vb.  fT/Xooj),  usetl  in  a  bad  sense,  though  in 
many  other  cases  it  has  a  good  meaning  and  is 
translated  '  zeal '  (Ro  W,  2  Co  7'-  "  9S  Ph  3«).  In 
2  Co  11-  i'T^Xfj)  deov  means  a  zeal  or  jealousy  like 


that  which  is  an  attribute  of  God,  most  pure  in  its 
quality',  and  making  its  possessor  intensely  solici- 
tous for  the  salvation  of  men. 

In  2  Co  9"  the  RVm  suggests  *  emulation  of  you ' 
as  the  translation  of  6  i'/uDv  f^Xoi.  William  Law, 
who  calls  envy  '  the  most  ungenerous,  base,  and 
wicked  passion  that  can  enter  the  heart  of  man ' 
(A.  Whyte,  Characters  and  Characteristics  of 
William  Law*,  1907,  p.  77),  denies  that  any  real 
distinction  can  be  diuwn  between  envy  and  emula- 
tion. 

'  If  this  were  to  be  attempted,  the  fineness  of  the  distinction 
would  show  that  it  is  easier  to  divide  them  in  words  than  to 
separat«  them  in  action.  For  emulation,  when  it  is  defined 
in  its  best  manner,  is  nothing  else  but  a  refinement  upon  envy, 
or  rather  the  most  plausible  p>art  of  that  black  and  poisonous 
passion.  And  though  it  is  easy  to  separate  them  in  the  notion, 
yet  the  most  acute  philosopher,  that  understands  the  art  of 
distinguishing  ever  so  well,  if  he  gives  himself  up  to  emulation, 
will  certainly  find  himself  deep  in  envy.' 

If  this  were  the  case,  there  would  be  an  end  of 
all  generous  rivalry  and  fair  competition.  But  it 
is  contrary  to  the  natural  feeling  of  mankind. 
Plato  says,  '  Let  every  man  contend  in  the  race 
without  envy '  (Jowett-,  1875,  v.  75),  and  St.  Paul 
frequently  stimulates  his  readers  with  the  lan- 
guage of  the  arena.  The  distinction  between 
<p66yos  and  f^Xos  (in  the  good  sense)  is  broad  and 
deep.  The  one  is  a  moral  disease — '  rottenness  in 
the  bones '  (Pr  14^),  '  aegritudo  suscepta  propter 
alterius  res  secundas '  (Cicero,  Tiisc.  iv.  8) ;  the 
other  is  the  health  and  vigour  of  a  spirit  that 
covets  earnestly  the  best  gifts.  Nothing  but  good 
can  come  of  the  strenuous  endeavour  to  equal  and 
even  excel  the  virtues,  graces,  and  high  achieve- 
ments of  another.  Ben  Jonson  has  the  line,  '  This 
faire  jeraulation,  and  no  envy  is,'  and  Dryden  •  a 
noble  emulation  heats  your  breast.'  f^Xos  (from 
f^w,  'boil')  is,  in  fact,  like  its  Hebrew  equivalent 
nicp  ('  heat,' '  ardour '),  an  ethically  neutral  energy, 
which  may  become  either  good  or  bad,  according 
to  the  quality  of  the  objects  to  which  it  is  directed 
and  the  spirit  in  which  they  are  pursued.  It  in- 
stigated the  patriarchs  (fijXwaojrrej,  Ac  7*)  to  sell 
their  brother  into  Egjpt,  and  the  Judaizers  (fijXoO- 
(Tip,  Gal  4")  to  seek  the  perversion  of  St.  Paul's 
spiritual  children.  Love  (aydri})  has  no  affinity 
with  this  base  passion  (oii  s'lyXoT,  1  Co  13*).  Love 
generates  a  rarer,  purer  zeal  of  its  own,  and  '  it  is 
good  to  be  zealously  sought  in  a  good  matter  at  all 
times '  (KoXdv  5^  ^-qXaOffOat  (v  Ka\(fi  iravTore,  Gal  4^*). 

jAilES  STKAHAK. 

EP.SNETUS  ('EvaLvfTos,  Ro  16*— a  Greek  name). 
— Epa?netus  is  saluted  by  St.  Paul  and  described 
as  '  my  beloved '  and  as  '  the  firstfruits  of  Asia 
unto  Christ '  (rbv  ayartjTOf  fiov,  os  effru'  drapxh  ttj% 
'Affiai  eli  XfuffrSy).  The  only  other  persons  de- 
scribed in  Ro  16  as  '  my  beloved '  are  Ampliatus 
(rbv  aya-rtfTov  fiov  iv  icvpuf),  v.^)  and  Stachys  (v.*). 
Persis,  a  woman,  is  saluted  perhaps  with  inten- 
tional delicacy  as  'the  beloved'  (v.^-).  Epaenetus 
was  probably  a  personal  convert  of  the  Apostle's, 
and  as  such  specially  dear  to  him.  He  was  the 
tirst  to  become  a  Christian  in  the  Roman  pro- 
vince of  Asia  (the  TR  reading  'Axatas  must  be  re- 
jected in  favour  of  'Afflas,  supported  by  the  over- 
whelming authority  of  KABCD).  Asstmiing  the 
Roman  destination  of  these  salutations,  Epjtnetus 
must  have  been  at  the  time  of  writing  resident 
in  or  on  a  \'i.sit  to  Rome.  (The  discovery  of  an 
Ephesian  Epaenetus  on  a  Roman  inscription  is 
interesting  but  unimportant  [Sanday-Headlam, 
Romaiu^  (ICC,  1902),  p.  421].)  But  the  reference 
to  Epaenetus,  together  with  the  salutation  of 
Prisca  and  Aquila  (v.'),  who  appear  in  1  Co  16'» 
and  again  in  2  Ti  4^8  as  living  in  Ephesns,  has 
given  rise  to  the  suggestion  that  this  section  of 
Romans  was  originally  addressed  to  the  Church  of 
Ephesus.     Epaenetus,  however,  is  not  said  to  have 


342 


EPAPHRAS 


EPAPHRODITUS 


been  an  Ephesian  (see  Lightfoot,  Biblical  Essays, 
1893,  p.  301). 

For  the  designation  'firstfruits'  we  must  com- 
pare the  description  of  the  '  household  of  Stephanas ' 
(1  Co  16'') — 'the  firstfruits  of  Achaia'  (dirapx')  t^s 
'Axalas) — and  note  the  suggestion  that  ministry  in 
the  Church  was  connected  at  first  with  seniority 
of  faith,  a  suggestion  more  than  supported  by 
Clement  of  Rome,  J<^p.  ad  Cor.  xlii.  Nothing 
could  be  more  natural  tlian  that  the  work  of  super- 
intending the  local  Christian  communities  should 
be  entrusted  to  those  among  tlie  first  converts  who 
were  found  capable  of  undertaking  it.  The  term 
'firstfruits'  had  a  special  religious  significance — 
that  of  dedication  to  God — and  this  idea  must  have 
been  present  when  the  original  nucleus  of  a  church 
was  so  called.  Epa!netus,  as  the  senior  Cliristian, 
had  a  position  of  responsibility ;  and  that  he  was 
actually  a  leader  would  appear  from  his  place 
in  these  salutations — second  only  to  '  Prisca  and 
Aquila  my  fellow-workers'  (Ro  16').  Cf.  also 
Andronicus  and  Junias  (or  Junia),  who  are  said  to 
'have  ))ccn  in  Christ'  before  tit.  Paul,  and  the 
possibility  that  tliey  were  known  as  apostles 
(v.'') ;  also  tlie  prominence  given  to  Mnason  as  an 
'original'  disciple  in  Ac  21'".  The  position  thus 
given  to  the  earliest  converts  of  the  missions  and 
the  services  demanded  from  them  may  have  been 
analogous  to  the  privileges  and  obligations  of  the 
relations  of  the  Lord.  Blood-relationship  with 
Jesus  gave  to  those  who  could  claim  it  an  official 
status  in  the  Church  which  was  handed  on  to  their 
descendants  (see  A.  Harnack,  Constitution  and 
Law  of  the  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  1910,  pp.  32-37). 

T.  B.  Allwokthy. 

EPAPHRAS  (shortened  probably  from  Epaphro- 
ditus,  but  not  to  be  identified  with  the  evangelist 
so  named). — Epapliras  was  a  native  or  citizen  of 
Colossic  (Col  4"),  the  founder,  or  at  least  an  early 
and  leading  teaclier  of  the  Church  there  (Col  V, 
wliere  Kal,  'also,'  is  omitted  in  the  oldest  MSS), 
who  had  special  relations  with  the  neighbouring 
churches  of  Laodicea  and  Hierapolis  (4'^).  St.  Paul 
had  not  yet  visited  this  community  when  he  wrote 
Col.  ;  but  if  the  reading  vir^p  i^ixwv  ('on  our  behalf,' 
'  as  our  delegate ')  be  accepted  in  V  (as  by  RV  on 
the  autiiority  of  the  three  oldest  MSS),  the  Apostle, 
during  his  long  residence  at  Ephesus,  when  '  all  who 
dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  Word '  (Ac  19'"),  must  have 
specially  commissioned  Epapliras  to  evangelize 
Colossaj  in  his  (St.  Paul's)  name  (Col  4'2-  '3). 
Epapliras'  intimate  association  with  St.  Paul  is 
shown  by  the  designations  '  beloved  fellow-bonds- 
man '  (P)  and  'fellow-captive'  (Philem'").  Tlie 
latter  word  (cf.  Col  4'»,  Ro  16^),  if  it  be  not  liere 
used  metaphorically,  suggests  either  that  Epaphras' 
friendship  with  St.  Paul  created  suspicion  and  thus 
led  to  his  arrest,  or  that  he  voluntarily  shared  the 
Apostle's  captivity  (Lightfoot,  Colossiatis^,  1879, 
p.  34  f.).* 

When  Col.  was  written,  Epaphras  had  recently 
arrived  in  Rome,  and  had  given  St.  Paul  a  report 
of  the  Church  of  Colossu;.  The  Apostle  assures 
the  Colossian  Christians  of  Epaphras'  great  zeal 
as  well  as  fervent  prayers  for  them  ;  and  he  conveys 
to  them  the  friendly  greeting  of  their  townsman, 
who  remained  in  Rome  witii  St.  Paul  (Col  4'--  '3). 
The  report  about  tiie  Church  of  Colossie  was  on 
the  whole  favourable.  Epapliras  testifies  to  the 
spiritual  life  and  fruitfulness  of  its  members  ;  to 
their  conspicuous  faith,  hope,  and  charity  (1*"*). 
There  was,  however,  a  disquieting  account  of  a 
peculiar  heresy,  which  had  broken  out  in  the  com- 
munity— a  combination  of  Judaistic  formalism  with 
Oriental  theosophy  (see  CoLO.s.siANS).     Ei)apiiras, 

*  Jerome  {Com.  on  Phileni^S)  mentions,  without  endorsing  it, 
a  tradition  Hiat  St.  Paul  and  Epaphras,  in  boyhood,  were 
carried  together  as  captives  iu  war  from  Judaja  to  Tarsus. 


liiled  with  anxiety,  had  wrestled  {iywuii;'6n€i>oi)  in 
prayer  for  his  converts  '  that  they  mightstand  fully 
assured  in  all  the  Mill  of  God '  (4'''').  Probably  one 
reason  of  his  visit  to  Rome  was  to  consult  St.  Paul 
about  this  new  peril.  The  solicitude  of  Ejiaphras 
was  shared  by  the  Apostle,  who,  amid  thanksgiving 
for  the  spiritual  progress  of  the  Colossians,  ad- 
monishes them  (1^)  to  abide  in  the  truth,  '  groundetl 
and  stedfast.'  Epaphras  sends  salutations  to  the 
household  of  Philemon,  the  letter  to  whom  was 
dispatched  along  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians. 
Thenceforth  Epaj)hras  disappears  from  reliable 
history  ;  later  traditions  represent  him  as  '  bishop' 
of  Colossa",  .as  suffering  martyrdom,  and  eventually 
having  his  bones  interred  under  the  Church  of  Sta. 
Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome. 

LiTKRATiiRK.— J.  D.  Strohhach,  (le  Epaphrd,  1710;  Commen- 
taries of  Lightfoot,  Ellicott,  Eadie,  Abbott,  Wohlenberg'. 
Maclaren,  Haupt.etc,  on  Colossians  ;  F.  Vigouroux,  Diet,  ae 
la  Bible,  1891-98  ;  art.  '  Kpapliras  '  in  IWIi,  SUB,  and  EBi. 

Henry  Cowan. 

EPAPHRODITUS  (  =  ' favoured  by  Aphrodite 
[VeniLs],'  'comely'). — Epaphroditus  was  a  lea<ling 
member  and  delegate  or  messenger  of  the  Philip- 
pian  Church,  mentioned  only  in  Ph  2^  and  4™. 
He  arrived  in  Rome  during  St.  Paul's  earlier  im- 
prisonment with  a  substantial  'gift'  (presumably 
of  money)  from  the  Philippian  Christians  to  the 
Apostle,  of  whose  impoverishment  they  had  heard. 
After  fulfilling  his  commission,  and  strengthening, 
through  his  own  warmly  affectionate  personality, 
the  bond  of  communion  between  the  Apostle  and 
his  '  dearly  beloved  '  Philippian  converts,  Epaphro- 
ditus remained  in  Rome  partlj'  to  render  personal 
service  to  St,  Paul,  as  the  representative  of  the 
devoted  Philippians,  and  partly  to  take  a  share  in 
the  '  work  of  Christ '  as  the  Apostle's  colleague  in 
missionary  ministry.  St.  Paul  describes  him  as 
'  my  brother,  and  fellow-worker,  and  fellow-soldier,' 
implying  at  once  'common  sympathies,  labours 
undertaken  in  common,  and  community  in  suffer- 
ing and  struggle'  (J.  S.  Howson,  Companions  of 
St.  Paid,  p.  235).  The  'true  yoke-fellow,'  also,  of 
Ph  4*  is  believed  by  Lightfoot  {Philippiani^,  1878, 
p.  158)  to  be  most  probably  Epaphroditus,  since  '  in 
his  case  alone  there  would  be  no  risk  of  making 
the  reference  unintelligible  by  the  suppression  of 
the  name.'  His  evangelistic  zeal,  however,  com- 
bined with  devotion  to  St.  Paul,  over-taxed  his 
strength,  and  became  the  occasion  of  severe  illness 
which  almost  issued  in  death  (2^*  ^).  It  is  notable 
that  St.  Paul,  whose  power  of  working  miracles  is 
frequently  referred  to  (Ac  W>  28»,  2  Co  12'^),  did 
not  exercise  it  in  the  case  of  Epaphroditus.  It 
was  a  power  Avhicli,  '  gi'cat  as  it  was,  was  not  his 
own,  to  use  at  his  own  will'  (Barry  in  Ellicott's 
Com.  on  NT,  1884,  Ph  2").  Some  inner  voice 
doubtless  enabled  apostles  to  know  when  the  time 
for  working  a  miracle  ha<l  come.  But  '  the  prayer 
of  a  righteous  man  availeth  much ' ;  and  earnest 
supplications  were  doubtless  offered  up  in  Rome  by 
St.  Paul  and  the  Church  there  for  the  recovery  of 
Epaphroditus.  These  prayers  were  heard.  '  Grod 
had  mercy  uiion  him,  and  not  on  him  only  but  on  me 
also,  lest  I  should  have  sorrow  on  sorrow'  (Ph  2/"). 

Meanwhile  the  Philippians  had  heard  of  their 
delegate's  illness,  and  by  and  by  their  anxiety 
became  known  at  Rome.  Partly  to  relieve  that 
solicitude  and  to  satisfy  the  '  longing '  of  Epaphro- 
ditus ;  partly  to  convey  the  Apostle's  grateful 
acknowledgment  of  the  recent  gift ;  partly  also, 
we  may  presume  (although  with  delicate  considera- 
tion this  reason  is  not  expressly  stated),  in  order 
that  the  invalid's  health  may  be  fully  restored 
through  entire  rest  such  as  he  would  not  take  in 
Rome,  the  Apostle  sends  him  back  to  Philippi 
with  a  cordial  testimony  to  his  zealous  lalK)urs  and 
chivalrous  service.     Epaphroditus  thereafter  dis- 


EPHESLAJN^S,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHE8IANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  343 


api>ears  from  NT  history,  leavinj;  behind  him  the 
fra^'rant  memory  of  self-forgetful  and  self-sacri- 
ficing devotion  at  once  to  the  person  of  St.  Paul 
and  to  the  cause  of  Christ. 

Theodoret  (Com.  on  Ph  2^)  represents  Epaphro- 
ditus  (with  some  hesitation)  as  *  bishop '  of  Pnilippi. 
Pseudo-Dorotheus  includes  him  (without  proba- 
bilitj',  however,  since  nothing  suggests  that  he 
was  a  Hebrew)  among  the  Seventj'  of  Lk  W  ;  and 
he  calls  him  'bishop*  of  Andriace,  the  port  of 
Myra  in  Lycia.  In  \-irtue  of  the  designation 
drotTToXos  (Ph  2®)  the  Greek  Church  places  Epaphro- 
ditus  in  the  same  rank  with  Barnabas,  Silas,  and 
others ;  but  the  context  suggests  the  original 
meaning,  'messenger.' 

Ltterattkb.— H.  S.  Seekings,  Men  of  Pauline  Circle,  1914  ; 
J.  S.  Howson.  Companions  of  St.  Paul,  1871 ;  E.  B.  Redlich, 
St.  Paul  and  his  Companions,  1913,  p.  230;  J.  A.  Beet,  in 
Expositor,  3rd  ser.  ix.  [1889]  54  ff. ;  Commentaries  of  Ellicott, 
Eadie,  Lightfoot,  Vincent,  Weiss,  von  Soden.  See  also 
arte.  iB  HDB,  SDB.  and  EBi.  HEXRY  CoWAN. 

EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.— 1.  Date  and 

place  of  writing. — From  internal  e\'idence,  there 
is  little  difficulty  in  determining  the  circumstances 
under  which  Ephesians  was  written.  St.  Paul  is  a 
prisoner  at  the  time  (3'  4'  &"),  and  writes  from 
prison  to  '  the  saints  which  are  in  Ephesus.'  His 
imprisonment  has  lasted  long  enough  to  give  rise 
to  grave  anxiety  among  the  Christian  communities 
(3''  6-).  He  speaks  of  himself  as  'the  prisoner' 
(3^  4^),  as  though  that  were  a  title  of  honour  con- 
secrated by  long  use.  This  in  itself  makes  it 
natural  to  date  the  Epistle  from  Rome  rather  than 
from  Cjesarea.  Other  internal  evidence,  though 
slight,  points  in  the  same  direction.  St.  Paul's 
captiWty  permits  at  least  some  liberty  in  preaching 
(6i»»' ;  cf.  Ac  2S^-''\  Ph  1^  ").  The  phrase  '  I  am 
a  chained  ambassador'  (6^)  certainly  has  more 
point  after  the  appeal  to  Cfesar,  and  suggests  that 
St.  Paul  has  reached  Rome  to  bear  wtness  for  the 
gospel  '  Ijefore  kings.'  And  the  grand,  almost  im- 
perial, width  of  outlook  which  the  Epistle  shows 
may  well  have  been  inspired  in  the  pro-vincial 
citizen  from  Tarsus  when  he  came  at  last  to  see 
with  his  own  eyes  the  city  which  ruled  the  world, 
with  its  centralized  authority  and  its  citizenship 
open  to  every  land  and  race  (cf.  Lock,  art.  '  Ephes- 
ians' in  HDB).  It  is  thus  natural  to  date  the 
Epistle  c.  A.D.  60. 

This  result  would  be  quite  inevitable  if  it  could 
be  maintained  that  Eph.  is  a  later  work  than  Phil., 
which  must  certainly  have  been  written  from  Rome 
(Ph  P^,  etc. ).  This  has  been  argued  by  such  writers 
as  Bleek,  Lightfoot  {PkUippians*,  1878,  p.  30 fF.), 
Sanday  (Smith's  DBT-  L  [1893]  627),  Hort  (Judaistic 
Christianity,  1894,  p.  115f.),  Lock  {loc.  cit.).  It  is 
true  that  Phil,  resembles  the  earlier  Epistles  in 
style  and  manner  more  than  do  the  other  Cap- 
tivity Epistles.  But  it  is  impossible  to  postulate 
an  orderly  development  in  these  things  in  such  a 
writer  as  St.  Paul.  There  is  nothing  in  Eph.  or 
Col.  more  startling  as  a  development  of  Pauline 
doctrine  than  Ph  •^".  And  the  not«  of  urgency 
and  anxiety  in  Phil,  marks  it  out  as  dating  from 
the  last  days  of  the  captivity  at  Rome  (cf.  Motfatt, 
LNT,  pp.  168-170  :  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller 
and  the  Roman  Citizen,  1895,  p.  357  f.). 

A  more  certain  result  as  to  Eph.  is  given  by  its 
relation  to  Col.  and  Philemon.  The  three  Epistles 
are  all  sent  l)y  the  hand  of  Tychicus  to  the  same 
district.  Col.  and  Philem.  at  least  were  sent  to- 
gether, and  the  literary  connexion  between  Col. 
and  Eph.  is  so  close  that  it  seems  inevitable  to 
associate  Eph.  with  the  other  two.  Philem.  at 
least  must  have  been  sent  from  Rome,  despite  the 
arguments  of  Reuss  and  Meyer ;  and  this  carries 
with  it  the  conclusion  that  Eph.  was  sent  from  the 
same  place  (see  art.  CoLOSSlAXS). 


2.  Occasion  and  porpose.— This  Epistle  stands 
alone  among  the  Pauline  literature.  The  other 
twelve  writings  ascribed  to  St.  Paul  have  all  some 
special  and  more  or  less  urgent  occasion  and  purjK>se, 
whether  personal  or  controversial.  Here  neither 
purpose  nor  occasion  can  be  clearly  traced.  The 
writer  is  not  concerned  to  press  his  claims  against 
rivals  or  opponents.  The  bitter  controversy  with 
Jndaizing  teachers  lies  in  the  past,  and  only  faint 
echoes  of  the  battle  can  be  heard  (2"-  '*• ").  The 
troubles  at  Colossae  are  in  the  background  (1"-" 
24.8  3J0  6«),  but  do  not  ruffle  the  serenity  of  the 
writer's  mind.  No  special  dangers  seem  to  lie  be- 
fore the  readers.  Apart  from  the  address,  indeed, 
it  would  be  difficult  to  see  that  any  special  readers 
are  intended,  though  in  the  main  the  Epistle  is 
addressed  to  Gentile  converts  (1"  2'-  "• "  etc.). 
Some  danger  of  false  teaching  is  perhaps  suggest^ 
in  4**-  '^,  but  the  references  are  quite  general  in 
character.  Controversy  is  laid  aside  for  the  time 
being,  and  the  writer  deals  with  the  problems  of 
the  Gentile  Church  in  a  spirit  at  once  detached 
and  lofty.  Two  special  points  emerge,  half  the 
Epistle  being  devoted  to  each.  Chs.  1-3  deal  with 
the  respective  positions  of  Jew  and  Gentile  in  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  from  which  we  may  conjecture 
that  this  was  one  of  the  main  difficulties  in  the 
churches  founded  by  St.  PauL  It  was,  indeed, 
inevitable  that  it  should  be  so,  as  the  controversies 
of  a  few  years  before  had  shown.  But  now  the 
position  is  changed.  The  danger  is  no  longer  that 
of  the  Judaizing  teacher,  but  rather  lest  the  grow- 
ing Gentile  communities  should  tend  to  despise  the 
Jewish  Christians  in  their  midst  {l^-^-  ""^^  ;  cf.  V--^*). 
Chs.  4-6  deal  with  the  most  constant  danger  of  the 
Gentile  convert — the  danger  of  relapse  into  the  vices 
of  paganism. 

But  neither  of  these  dangers  has  come  to  the 
front  in  any  special  form,  and  the  dominant  note 
of  the  Epistle  is  not  one  of  warning,  but  one  of 
praise  and  thanksgiving.  The  writer's  mind  is 
full  of  one  great  theme — the  unity  of  the  Church 
in  Christ,  predestined  from  all  eternity  to  all 
eternity,  bound  toother  in  faith  and  love.  And, 
as  he  takes  up  his  argument,  the  st3ie  ri.ses  in 
dignity  and  strength  until  we  seem  to  be  listening 
to  a  Eucharistic  hj-mn.  Against  the  dangers  of 
the  hour  he  sets  the  inspiration  of  a  great  ideal, 
the  One  Body  of  Christ  who  died  for  Jew  and 
Gentile  alike,  the  One  Church,  ordered  by  Christ 
Himself,  in  which  every  man,  if  he  will,  may  lead 
the  life  of  the  Spirit. 

3.  Analysis.— (A)  Chs.  1-3.  The  unity  of  the 
Church,  regarded  as  that  in  which  Jew  and 
Gentile  are  at  last  one.  The  whole  of  this  section 
is  an   expansion  of  the  typical  thanksgiving  and 

f»rayer  with   which    St.    Paul   usually  opens  his 
etters. 

(1)  11- ".  Salutation. 

(2)  1*"".  Thanksgiving  for  the  priviiegira  be- 
stowed in  Christ  upon  the  Church.  This  sec- 
tion falls  into  three  strophes,  marked  by  the 
refrain  '  unto  the  praise  of  his  glory,'  and  cor- 
responding to  the  three  Persons  of  the  Trinity. 

(a)  w.**.  Thank^ving  for  the  '  adoption  as  sons,'  pre- 
destined by  the  Father  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world. 

(6)  >T.7  13.  Thanksgiving  for  the  revelation  of  God's  good 
pleasure  in  Christ,  in  whom  we  have  redemption  frota 
sin,  grace  to  live  anew,  and  knowledge  of  our  place  in 
God's  purpose  to  sum  up  all  things  in  Him. 

(e)  v\-.i3-  ».  Thanksgiving  that  in  the  Holy  Spirit  both 
Jew  and  Gentile  have  even  here  and  now  an  earnest 
of  that  great  heritage. 

(3)  1^*-^.  Prayer  that  the  readers  may  grow  to 
a  fuller  understanding  of  the  work  of  Christ. 

(o)  VT.  13-19.  Prayer  that  they  may  realize  more  folly  Mm 
threefold  blessing  of  w.3-i-» — their  adoption  as  sons, 
their  heritage  in  Christ,  their  new  life  in  the  Spirit. 


344  EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


(6)  vv. 20-23.  Prayer  that  they  may  come  to  see  Christ  as 
He  really  is,  the  consumiiialion  of  all  thiii^'H  in  heaven 
and  earth,  and  supreme  Ueadof  Ilis  Chnrch. 

(4)  2'"^.  A  further  thanksgiving  for  all  that  is 
implied  in  this  conception  of  the  Cliurch, 
worked  out  especially  in  relation  to  the  position 
of  Jews  and  Gentiles  therein. 

(a)  vv.iio.  The  power  of  God  which  was  shown  in  Christ 
has  been  shown  too  upon  all  individual  Christians, 
whether  Gentile  (vv.l'2)or  .Iew(v.3),  raisinsj  tliem  from 
the  death  of  sin  (v.*  ;  cf.  12"),  causintr  them  to  ascend 
with  Christ  into  the  heavenly  sphere  (v."  ;  cf.  l'-""),  and 
frivinjj  them  a  place  in  the  Church,  throu(jrh  which 
Ood  has  purpoicd  to  work  (vv.7-lo ;  cf.  121-23). 

(b)  vv.ii---.  Thus  the  divisions  of  humanity  are  healed. 
The  Gentile  who  was  once  far  off  is  '  made  nigh  in  the 
hlood  of  Christ '  (vv.Ji  13).  The  barriers  set  up  by  the 
Jewish  Law  arc  broken  down  (vv.H- 15).  .Jew  and 
Gentile  now  stand  tofjether  in  one  fellowship,  both 
haviny;  their  access  to  the  Father  through  Christ  in  one 
Spirit  (vv.i"  IS).  So  is  the  Temple  of  God  built,  with 
Cnriat  as  its  chief  corner-stone  (vv.i!>--'2). 

(5)  3'-2'.  A  further  prayer  that  the  readers  may 
apprehend  tiie  fullness  of  this  great  life  in 
Christ,  in  which  all  the  saints  join  (vv.^^"), 
and  a  doxology,  closing  this  section  of  the 
Epistle  (VV.2W-  21). 

This  section  is  interrupted  by  a  passage  ( vv.^"^^) 
in  which  the  writer  dwells  upon  his  own  posi- 
tion as  the  '  chosen  vessel '  through  whom  this 
mystery  of  the  Church  was  to  be  preached  to 
the  Gentiles.  The  appointed  time  and  means 
had  been  fixed  by  the  purpose  of  God,  and  the 
revelation  given  in  the  Church  affected  not 
only  earth  but  also  all  heaven.  The  sufferings 
of  the  writer  are  thus  no  cause  for  discourage- 
ment. They  too  lie  in  the  purpose  of  God. 
(B)  Chs.  4-6.  The  unity  of  the  Church,  regarded 

as  a  principle  of  conduct,  enabling  all  to  lead  the 

higher  life. 

(1)  4^-5-'.  A  general  appeal  addressed  to  the 
whole  Church. 

(a)  41-3.  Exhortations  to  lead  the  life  of  love,  which  is 
the  life  of  the  Spirit. 

(b)  vv.'i-i"'.  The  unity  of  the  Church,  upon  its  practical 
side,  which  rests  upon  the  unity  of  God  (vv.'»-6).  it  is 
by  God's  gfift  that  the  organization  of  the  Church 
exists  in  diverse  ministries  (vv  .''-ii).  And  the  purpose 
of  it  all  is  '  the  perfecting  of  saints,'  that  each  may 
take  his  place  in  the  living  whole  of  the  Body  of 
Christ.perfect  in  faith  and  knowledge  andlove  (vv.i2-i6). 

(c)  VV.17--4.  The  old  Gentile  life,  based  upon  ignorance 
and  resulting  in  impurity,  contrasted  with  the  new 
life,  based  upon  knowledge  of  Christ  and  resulting  in 
'  righteousness  and  holiness  of  truth.' 

(d)  4--''-52i.  A  more  detailed  description  of  the  Christian 
life  as  it  should  be  lived  by  members  of  the  Church. 

(i.)  42s.  Truthfuhiess — a  lie  to  another  Christian  is 
a  lie  to  oneself. 

(ii.)  vv.2»-27.  Control  of  temper,  for  fear  of  the 
accuser,  t.e.  either  of  the  Satan  in  heaven,  or  of 
calumniators  on  earth. 

(iii.)  V.28.  Honesty,  as  the  basis  of  right  giving. 

(iv.)  VV.29. 30.  Pure  conversation,  lest  others  be  in- 
jured, and  the  Holy  Spirit  be  grieved. 

(v.)  vv. 31.32.  Gentleness,  as  God  was  gentle  in 
Christ. 

(vi.)  61-2.  Love,  as  Christ  loved. 

(vii.)  vv.8-14.  Purity  of  speech  and  action,  even  to 
the  avoidance  of  the  foolish  word  and  jest,  as  un- 
worthy of  our  calling  (vv.s.  4),  as  incurring  God's 
wrath  (vv.s.  6),  as  wholly  foreign  to  the  life  of  light 
in  Christ  fvv.714). 

(viii.)  vv. 15-17.  Wise  use  of  time,  since  the  days 
are  evil. 

(ix.)  vv.18-21.  Temperance  and  orderly  thanksgiving 
in  public  worship,  and  in  particular  at  the  love- 
feasts  (in  the  spirit  of  1  Co  11-14). 

(2)  S^-Gi^.  An  exhortation  to  members  of  Chris- 
tian families.  The  writer  takes  the  family  as 
the  type  of  the  Church  (cf.  3"),  and  applies 
the  general  principles  of  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit  to  the  details  of  family  life. 

(a)  622-24.  Wives  are  to  recognize  the  position  of  the 
husband  as  head  of  the  family,  as  Christ  is  head  of  the 
Church. 


(6)  vv.25-33.  Husbandsare  to  love  their  wives,  with  whom 
they  have  been  made  one,  as  Christ  loves  the  Church, 
with  which  He  is  one. 

(c)  (!i-3.  Children  mustobey  their  parents,  as  is  naturally 
right,  and  as  God  has  commanded. 

id)  v.*.  Parents  ought  to  train  their  children  wisely. 

(e)  vv.6-8.  Slaves  are  to  obey  loyally,  since  their  obedi- 
ence is  to  Ood  Himself. 

(/)  V.9.  Masters  must  treat  their  slaves  Justly,  since  they 
themselves  are  but  slaves  of  a  Master  io  heaven. 

(3)  6'°""*,  A   general  exhortation    to  all  Chris- 
tians to  fight  God's  battle  in  His  strength  (v.'") 
and  clad  in  His  armour  (vv."-  '^'"l,  seeing  that 
the  enemy  is  more  than  man  (v.'^).     The  sec- 
tion passes  into  a  request  for  prayer  for  the 
writer  in  prison  (vv.''-*- 2"),  and  thus  it  naturally 
leads  up  to  a  commendation  of  Tychicus,  the 
bearer    of    the    letter,  and    then   to   a  final 
greeting. 
i.  Authorship. — The  above  analysis  will  make  it 
clear  how  carefully  constructed  and  worked  out 
Ephesians  is.     The  long  sentences,  cumbrous  and 
difficult  to  follow  as    they  are,   are  yet  almost 
rhythmic  in   their    balance.     Everything  is  con- 
nected and  co-ordinated  with  the  one  great  idea, 
and  the  result  is  a  composition  quite  unlike  any 
other  writing  assigned  to  St.  Paul.     Yet  the  claim 
to  Pauline  authorship  is  quite  explicit.     It  not 
only  occurs  in  the  address  (P)  and  in  the  final 
messages  (6^*),  but  is  woven  into  the  very  structure 
of  the  Epistle  in  3'  and  4^     Either  we  have  a 
genuine  work  by  the  Apostle  or  else  a  pseudonymous 
writing,  composed  at  a  very  early  date  by  a  disciple 
upon  whom  had  fallen  a  double  portion  of  the 
Apostle's  spirit.     And  of  such  a  disciple  we  have 
no  other  trace. 

(1)  Internal  evidence. — The  very  simplicity  of 
the  references  to  St.  Paul  is  a  strong  argument  for 
the  authenticity  of  the  Epistle.  Tliere  is  a  great 
contrast  between  Eph.  and  2  Pet.  in  this  respect. 
The  laboured  allusions  of  the  latter  to  St.  Peter's 
life  are  not  convincing ;  but  could  even  a  close 
disciple  have  coined  the  beautiful  and  simple 
phrase,  'I  Paul,  the  prisoner  of  Christ  Jesus'? 
Or  would  he  have  been  likely  to  refer  to  his  great 
master  as  'less  than  the  least  of  all  saints  (3*) 
even  with  1  Co  15"  before  him?  On  the  other 
hand,  there  are  one  or  two  phrases,  apart  from 
questions  of  style  and  doctrine,  which  will  be  dis- 
cussed later,  which  seem  to  some  critics  to  be 
'  watermarks  of  a  later  age '  (Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  386). 
Such  is  the  phrase,  '  built  upon  the  foundation  of 
the  apostles  and  propliets'  (2-"),  an  expression  not 
very  suspicious  in  itself,  but  rendered  susi)ect  by 
the  phrase  'his  holy  apostles  and  prophets'  (3'). 
Such  language  would  certainly  be  natural  at  a 
later  date,  and  it  is  hardly  like  St.  Paul  to  include 
himself  under  the  term  'holy  apostles.'  Two  ex- 
planations have  been  given,  (a)  It  is  suggested 
that  the  word  ayCois  is  not  part  of  the  original  text. 
It  is  true  that  Origen  and  Theodoret  show  traces 
of  a  text  which  omitted  the  word,  but  this  is  not 
very  strong  evidence.  Yet  it  might  easily  have 
been  added  at  an  early  date  by  a  reverent  scribe, 
or  have  crept  in  by  dittography  from  droffriXois 
(TOICAnOICAnOCT  .  .  .),  or  by  confusion 
with  Col  1^.  (b)  It  is  pointed  out,  e.g.  by  Salmond 
('Ephesians'  in  EGT,  jip.  223  and  304),  that  &yios 
does  not  me.an  '  holy '  in  our  modern  sense,  but 
simply 'consecrated  to  God's  service.'  This  is  its 
sense  in  the  Pauline  salutations  and  in  3*,  and  it 
is  thus  possible  to  conceive  St.  Paul  including  him- 
self under  the  phrase  in  3'.  But  (c)  it  is  not 
obvious  that  he  does  do  so.  St.  Paul  liad  always 
stood  apart  from  the  original  Twelve,  and  though 
sometimes,  as  in  Gal.  and  2  Cor.,  he  is  concerned 
to  defend  liis  commission,  he  was  fully  aware  of  a 
real  difference  of  position  (1  Co  15").  Here  .some 
real  point  seems  to  lie  in  the  distinction.     St.  Paul 


EPHESIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  345 


is  argiiing  that  he  was  specially  chosen  of  God  for 
this  ministry.  Humble  though  he  was,  he  had 
shareii  the  revelation  given  to  the  Twelve  (of.  St. 
Peter  and  Cornelius),  and  he,  and  not  they,  had 
been  called  to  proi-laim  the  mystery  of  the  Church 
to  the  Gentiles  (3*).  The  words  in  3''-*  seem  to 
distinguish  him  from  the  'holy  apostles'  of  3', 
where  St.  Paul  is  not  thinking  of  himself  at  all. 
If  this  i<  so,  3',  though  certainly  unique,  is  not 
unnatural.  In  any  case,  whatever  he  the  explana- 
tion of  3*,  3®  remains  a  '  watermark '  of  St.  Paul 
himself,  as  indeed  does  the  whole  passage,  3-"^^,  in 
its  abraj»t  intrusion  into  the  sequence  of  thought. 
The  passage  •  ^\  hereby,  when  ye  read,  ye  can  per- 
ceive my  understanding  .  .  .'  (3^)  also  sounds  to 
Moflatt  characteristic  of  a  disciple  of  St.  Paul 
rather  than  of  St.  Paul  himself,  but  the  conclusion 
is  not  at  all  necessary. 

(2)  External  evidence. — This  preliminary  inves- 
tigation, then,  rather  favours  the  authenticity  of 
the  Epistle  than  otherwise,  and  this  result  is  en- 
tirely borne  out  by  the  external  evidence  of  early 
\vriters.  Ephesians  is  one  of  the  best-attested 
books  of  the  NT.  By  the  middle  of  the  2nd  cent, 
it  was  widelj-  known.  Both  the  Old  Latin  and  the 
Syriac  Versions  had  it.  The  evidence  of  Hippolytus 
shows  that  it  was  used  by  the  Ophites  {Philosophou- 
mena,  v.  8),  the  Valentinians  (vi.  34,  35),  and  per- 
haps by  Basilides  (vii.  25,  26).  Marcion  included 
it  in  his  Pauline  Canon,  under  the  title  'to  the 
Laodiceans'  (see  below).  It  seems  to  be  quoted 
by  Hernias  (cf.  4*  with  Sim.  ix.  13).  Earlier 
still  Polycarp  quotes  2-  ^  in  Phil.  i.  3,  and,  still 
more  definitely,  4'*  in  Phil.  xii.  1  (Lat.).  The 
evidence  of  Ignatius  is  almost  equally  certain : 
Polyc.  V.  1  is  a  definite  quotation  of  5^,  and  allu- 
sions may  be  seen  to  1'^  and  2^®  in  Smym.  i.  4,  to 
4*- »  in  Polyc.  i.  2,  to  5^  in  Eph.  i.  1,  x.  3.  The 
passage  in  Eph.  xii.  '  Paul  ...  8s  eV  rda-r}  e-ritrrdk-Q 
ljjrt}fu)i'€L'€i '  cannot  lie  translated  as  a  definite  refer- 
ence to  our  Epistle,  and  is  indeed  evidence  (see 
below,  §  5)  that  the  traditional  address  is  in  error- 
Traces  of  Eph.  have  been  found  in  Clement  of 
Rome  and  in  the  Didache,  but  they  cannot  be  called 
certain. 

This  evidence  is  sufficient  to  throw  the  Epistle 
into  the  1st  cent.,  and  provides  at  least  a  strong 
presupposition  that  it  is  Pauline. 

5.  Destination. — An  mimediate  difficulty  arises 
with  the  acceptance  of  Eph.  as  the  work  of  St. 
Paul.  He  was  very  well  known  in  Ephesus.  He 
had  spent  over  two  years  of  his  ministry  there  (Ac 
198-io)_  j^g  leaders  of  the  Church  there  had  been 
his  close  friends,  and  had  parted  from  him  at 
Miletus  with  every  dbplay  of  affection  (20^®), 
And  yet  Eph.  conveys  no  personal  greetings.  There 
is  no  hint  that  St.  Paul  was  known  to  the  readers, 
or  they  to  him.  All  that  we  can  gather  from  the 
letter  is  that  they  are  Gentile  Christians  (Eph  l^* 
•21.  u.  03. 17  31),  St.  Paul  has  heard  of  their  faith  in 
Christ  (P*).  He  does  not  seem  certain  whether 
thej-  all  know  how  definitely  and  specially  he  had 
been  commissioned  to  preach  to  the  Gentiles  (3*,  and 
hence  the  whole  digression  3-"^).  If  the  letter  was 
actually  sent  to  Ephesus  (so  Schmidt  in  Meyer* ; 
Alford),  this  is  incredible.  And  even  if  the  Patdine 
authorship  is  given  up  it  remains  quite  impossible 
to  think  that  a  disciple  of  St.  Paid  should  have 
written  in  his  master's  name  so  cold  a  letter  to  St. 
Paul's  friends.  The  evidence  of  Ignatius  raises 
a  further  difficulty,  since  he  definitely  ^^-rites  to 
Ephesus  about  '  all  the  letters'  of  St.  Paul  (Eph. 
xii.),  without  any  hint  that  the  most  sublime  of 
them  all  had  been  definitely  addressed  to  the 
Ephesians  themselves. 

This  being  so,  it  is  a  relief  to  find  that  the  ad- 
dress is  very  doubtful.  The  title  '  to  the  Ephesians,' 
though  known  to  TertulUan  ^adv.  Marc.  v.  11)  and 


given  in  the  Muratarian  Canon,  does  not  go  far 
back  into  the  2nd  century.  There  is  very  little 
doubt  that  the  original  text  of  V  had  no  allusion 
to  Ephesus  at  all.  The  vast  majority  of  MSS  have 
Toli  ayloii  rots  otxnp  iv  'Etp^ffip  Kai  rurrdii  cv  Xpum^ 
'IifffoO,  but  the  words  ^i-  'E^cry  are  absent  in  the 
first  hand  of  >{  and  B.  They  are  cancelled  by  the 
corrector  of  67,  who  had  access  to  verj-  good  textual 
material.  The  more  ancient  copies  known  to  Basil 
omitted  the  words.  Origen  evidently  did  not  read 
them  in  his  text,  since  he  translates  Toisoidv  '  those 
that  have  real  existence,'  illustrating  the  meaning 
from  the  use  by  Christ  of  the  phrase  'I  am.* 
Jerome  and  others  repeat  this  interpretation,  which 
Avas  also  known  to  BasiL  Most  important  of  aU, 
Marcion's  copy  evidently  lacked  the  words,  since 
he  regarded  the  Epistle  as  addressed  to  the  Laodi- 
ceans. And  that  Tertullian's  text  was  the  same 
is  shown  by  the  fact  that  TertulUan  only  abuses 
Marcion  for  changing  the  title,  but  says  nothing 
about  corruption  of  the  actual  text  {adv.  Marc.  v. 
11,  17). 

This  evidence  makes  it  almost  impossible  to  think 
that  any  place-name,  whether  Ephesus,  or  Laodicea, 
or  another,  stood  in  the  original  text  of  IS  since 
no  reason  is  apparent  for  its  wide-spread  omission 
and  corruption.  The  evidence  of  Basil  shows  that 
our  present  reading  grew  up  oidy  shortly  before 
A.D.  370.  And  in  any  case  it  is  most  unnatural 
Greek.  Hamack  {Die  Adresse  des  Epheserhriefs 
des  Paidvs,  1910)  has  recently  argued  that  Eph. 
was  originally  addressed  to  Laodicea,  being  in  fact 
the  letter  '  from  Laodicea '  of  Col  4^*.  He  conjec- 
tures that  the  change  in  the  address  took  place 
about  the  beginning  of  the  2nd  cent.,  with  the  de- 
cline of  the  Church  of  Laodicea  (Rev  3^*-  ^*),  on  the 
grounds  that  such  a  church  had  no  claim  to  own  a 
Patdine  letter.  The  conjecture  is  certainly  bril- 
liant, but  there  is  no  parallel  for  such  treatment  of 
the  NT  books,  and  the  MSS  with  no  place-name  at 
all  remained  unexplained  (see  Molfatt,  Expositor, 
8th  ser.  ii.  [1911]  193  f.).  What  then  may  he  in- 
ferred from  the  textual  evidence?  Three  alterna- 
tives are  possible. 

{a)  It  is  suggested  that  the  words  ir  'E<f)4a(p 
should  be  omitted,  and  that  our  present  text  is 
then  correct  (so  e.g.  Moflatt,  and  the  majority  of 
those  who  reject  the  Pauline  authorship).  Un- 
fortunately, as  indeed  Origen's  attempt  at  explana- 
tion shows,  the  reading  so  obtained  gives  rather 
poor  sense.  The  translation  '  the  saints  who  are 
also  believers  .  .  .'  (Meyer)  is  hardly  possible,  and 
'  the  saints  who  are  also  faithful  .  .  .'  (Light- 
foot,  Salmond)  is  still  diffictdt.  It  is  very  hard  to 
suppose  that  St.  Paid  woidd  make  so  pointed  an 
allusion  at  this  stage  to  '  saints '  who  were  unfaith- 
ful. The  difficulty  arises  not  so  much  from  the 
meaning  of  d^iotj,  which  here,  as  in  3*,  has  the 
Jewish  sense  of  '  consecrated,'  as  from  the  general 
force  of  the  passage. 

(6)  Again,  omitting  the  words  iv  'E^<r<p,  we  may 
suppose  that  a  blank  was  left  after  oCwti'  in  which 
Tychicus  could  insert  the  names  of  dilierent 
churches.  This  view  presupposes,  with  Beza,  that 
Eph.  was  sent  not  to  any  one  church,  but  to  the 
group  of  churches  in  Asia  foimded,  like  Colossae, 
Laodicea,  and  Hierapolis,  not  by  St.  Paul,  but  by 
such  agents  as  Epaphras.  This  would  account  for 
the  impersonal  tone  of  the  Epistle,  and  for  the 
absence  of  any  clear  trace  of  special  local  problems. 
The  view  that  Eph.  is  such  a  Pastoral,  with  a 
blank  left  for  the  address,  is  due  to  Archbishop 
Ussher,  and  has  been  held  by  most  conservative 
critics  (e.g.  Hort).  In  its  broad  outline  this  theory 
is  probably  right.  The  whole  character  of  the 
Epistle  shows  that  it  is  addressed  to  a  wide  circle  of 
readers,  and  not  to  any  one  church.  That  the 
readers  addressed  lived  in  the  neighbourhood  of 


346  EPHESIANS,  E?lSTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


Ephesiis  is  sujjgested  (1)  by  the  relations,  especially 
in  tl)ou<;ht,  with  Col.  ;  (2)  by  the  fact  tliat  E\>b.  is 
sent  by  the  hand  of  Tychicus  ;  and  aljovc  all  (3)  by 
the  tradition  associating  it  with  Enhesus,  where 
the  original  was  probably  preserved  (Haupt  and 
Zahn).  This  view  relieves  the  difficulty  as  to  the 
Pauline  authorship  due  to  the  impersonal  tone  of 
the  letter. 

It  does  not,  however,  solve  the  problem  of  P 
(see  Zalin,  Introd.  to  NT,  i.  479-483,  488  f.),  for 
(1)  there  is  no  parallel  for  such  a  method  of  corre- 
spondence ;  (2)  if  the  blanks  had  been  filled  in  with 
culi'erent  names  in  different  coi>ics,  we  should  not 
have  had  MSS  with  no  name  at  all ;  (3)  the  order 
in  the  Greek  is  unnatural.  Tlie  place-name  should 
come  elsewhere  (of.  Col  1',  Ph  1'). 

(c)  These  difficulties  have  driven  many  scholars 
to  think  that  the  text  of  1'  is  unsound,  whether, 
as  P.  Ewald  suggests,  through  the  wearing  of  the 
papyrus  or  otherwise.  Ewald  himself  suggests 
Toh  dyairTjroh  oScriv  Kal  inaToh,  '  those  wlio  are  be- 
loved and  faitliful.'  Zahn  prefers  to  follow  the 
reading  of  D,  rots  ayiois  oUffiv  Kal  iria-Tois,  '  those 
who  are  holy  and  faithful.'  This  is  at  least  easy, 
but  hardly  accounts  for  the  corruptions  (though 
dittograpiiy  miglit  have  brought  in  the  second 
rots).  Others  think  that  St.  Paul,  in  accordance 
with  his  general  custom,  must  have  mentioned 
some  delinite  destination.  The  most  ingenious 
conjecture  of  this  kind  is  that  of  K.  Scott  {The 
Pauline  Epistles,  p.  182) — ep  iOvecxiv  for  ec 'E0e<r<^, 
i.e.  'the  .saints among tlie Gentiles.'  This,  however, 
is  not  free  from  some  of  the  above  objections,  and 
is  wholly  without  supporting  evidence. 

Holtzmann's  etibrt  to  explain  V  as  a  bung- 
ling attempt  by  the  writer  to  adapt  Col  V  to  his 
more  general  purpose  is  eti'ectively  refuted  by 
Zahn  (o})-  cit.  p.  517  f.). 

As  a  result  of  the  above  discussion,  V  remains 
an  unsolved  problem,  but  it  is  clear  that  the  tra- 
ditional address  of  Eph.  is  no  part  of  the  text  of 
the  Epistle.  Its  existence  is  best  explained  on 
the  hypothesis  of  a  circular  letter,  sent  by  the 
hand  of  Tychicus  to  the  churches  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Ephesus.  To  explain  the  early  title  '  to 
Ephesians,'  as  does  Baur,  from  6^^  and  2  Ti  4'^ 
('  Pychicus  have  I  sent  to  Ephesus')  is  far-fetched. 
Whether,  as  Harnack  thinks,  Eph.  should  be 
identified  with  the  letter  'from  Laodicea'  to  be 
brought,  presumably,  by  Tychicus  to  Colossce, 
must  remain  doubtful  (see  art.  CoLOSSIANS). 
Whatever  be  the  exact  facts,  no  objection  to  the 
Pauline  authorsiiip  of  Ephesians  remains  on  the 
score  of  the  destination  of  the  Epistle. 

This  view  of  Ephesians  as  a  Pauline  pastoral 
has  been  held  (with  varying  theories  of  1')  by,  e.g., 
Bengel,  Keuss,  Lightfoot,  Hort,  Weiss,  Abbott, 
Salmond,  Zahn,  Peake.  Nevertheless,  its  authen- 
ticity has  been  widely  disputed  since  the  time  of 
Schleiermacher,  on  three  main  grounds :  (a)  the 
doctrinal  standpoint  ;  (b)  the  vocal)nlary  and 
style  ;  (c)  the  connexion  with  Col.  and  with  other 
NT  writings. 

6.  The  doctrine  of  the  Epistle. — Few  scholars 
still  support  the  view  of  the  Tubingen  School  that 
Eph.  sliows  traces  of  both  Montanism  and  2nd 
cent.  Gnosticism.  Sclnvegler  saw  Montanism  in 
the  empiiasis  on  the  Holy  Spirit  {e.g.  1"  2'*,  and 
especially  3'  4'*),  and  in  the  position  given  to  the 
prophets  (2-"  3'  4^').  Gnosticism  was  said  to  be 
the  source  of  such  terms  as  'pleroma'  .ind  'ajon.' 
Baur  argued  that  Eph.  was  not  written  against 
Gnosticism,  but  that  it  showed  signs  of  its  early 
phases.  As  we  now  know,  the  date  (A. D.  130-140) 
which  he  gave  on  this  hypothesis  would  be  much 
too  late.  Gnosticism  was  fully  developed  before 
the  middle  of  the  century.  Ililgcnfeld  and  O. 
Ptleiderer  see  iu  both  Eph.  and  Col.  a  polemic 


against  Gnosticism.  PHeiderer,  e.g.,  sees  in  ^^' 
an  allusion  to  *  a  Gnostic  theory  which  separated 
the  Christ  of  speculation  from  the  Jesus  of  the 
evangelical  tradition'  {Primitive  Christ ianiti/,  iii. 
303).  He  finds  that  the  quotation  of  Ps  68"*  in  4«- 
depends  on  the  '  Gnostic  myth  of  the  victorious  de- 
scent to  hell  and  ascent  to  heaven  of  the  Saviour- 
god  to  which  allusion  is  also  made  in  Col  2'^ '  (p. 
311).  He  traces  the  use  of  'pleroma'  to  Gnosti- 
cism, ignoring  the  fact  that  it  was  a  good  Pauline 
word  {e.g.  Ito  11-'),  and  that  it  is  certainly  not 
used  in  any  Gnostic  sense. 

The  external  evidence  alone  is  sufficient  to  rule 
out  such  theories,  throwing  the  Ejjistle  back  to  a 
date  before  the  technicalities  of  V'alentinianism 
had  been  developed.  More  plausible  is  the  view 
of  Holtzmann,  wlio  regards  Ephesians  as  written 
at  about  the  end  of  the  1st  cent.,  in  view  of 
incipient  Gnosticism  and  of  ecclesiastical  needs. 
He  tliinks  that  an  old  letter  to  Colosste  by  St. 
Paul  existed  and  that  Eph.  and  Col.  were  composed 
by  a  single  writer,  in  the  one  case  using  its  ideas 
and  in  tiie  other  expanding  it.  The  proof,  liow- 
ever,  that  there  is  nothing  necessarily  un-Pauline 
in  Col.  (see  art.  COLOSsiANS)  does  away  with  the 
need  for  this  theory,  which  is  in  any  case  hampered 
by  two  difficulties :  («)  that  of  tinding  a  writer 
capable  of  composing  such  a  work  and  at  the  same 
time  of  being  so  servile  in  his  adherence  to  the  lan- 
guage of  Colossians  ;  and  {b)  that  of  finding  a  his- 
torical setting  for  the  Epistle.  There  must  surely 
be  a  greater  gulf  between  it  and  Ignatius  with  his 
violent  attacks  on  Judaizers  and  Docetists  and  his 
emphasis  on  the  monarchical  epi8C0[)acy. 

It  is,  therefore,  more  common  nowadays  among 
those  Avho  find  difficulties  in  the  Pauline  author- 
ship to  assign  Eph.  to  a  Paulinist  writing  quite 
soon  after  St.  Paul's  death  (see  e.g.  Motlatt,  op. 
cit.  p.  388).  It  is  argued  that  the  theology  of  the 
Epistle  marks  a  transition  stage  between  at.  Paul 
and  the  Johannine  literature. 

'This  does  not  involve  the  assumption  that  Paul  was  not 
original  enough  to  advance  even  beyond  the  circle  of  ideas 
reflected  in  Colossians,  or  that  he  lacked  constructive  and  broad 
(lideas  of  the  Christian  brotherhood.  It  is  quite  possible  to  hoi 
that  he  was  a  fresh  and  advancing  thinker,  and  yet  to  conclude, 
from  the  internal  evidence  of  Kpliesians,  that  he  did  not  cut  the 
channel  for  this  prose  of  the  spiritual  centre '  (MofFatt,  op.  cit. 
p.  389). 

Upon  this  view,  the  theology  of  Eph.,  though 
quite  continuous  with  that  of  St.  Paul,  is  a  later 
development,  under  the  influence  of  Johannine, 
and  possibly  Lucan,  ideas. 

Such  it  view  is  too  intangible  to  admit  of  very 
easy  refutation.  At  the  same  time,  it  should  be 
noted  that  it  provides  very  little  ground  for  dis- 
jmting  the  strong  and  early  tradition  of  the 
Pauline  authorship  of  tlie  Epistle.  A  discussion 
of  the  doctrinal  standpoint  of  Eph.  will  serve  to 
put  the  matter  in  a  clearer  light. 

(«)  The  Church. — The  whole  Epistle  turns  upon  the 
doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  Church.  This  is  made 
the  key  both  to  the  relations  of  Jew  and  Gentile 
(2""^)  and  to  the  problems  of  the  Christian  life  (4 
and  5).  Its  unity  is  not  merely  that  of  any  human 
organization,  but  rests  directly  upon  the  unity  of 
God— Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  (4^-«).  That 
unity  is  derived  from  the  Father  (3"),  by  whom  it 
was  fore-ordained  in  Christ  (l"*- "'•)•_  It  is  ideally 
complete  in  Christ  and  in  Him  is  to  become 
actually  complete  (1»-  '^-  ^  2i»  4'2-'6).  Even  now  it 
has  as  its  principle  of  life  the  One  Spirit  (1"  2'»  3"« 
4*).  In  some  sense  it  is  the  comi)letion  of  the 
Incarnation  (1^;  cf.  Armitage  Robinson,  'On  the 
meaning  of  xXTjpw^ua '  in  Ephesians,  p.  255  H'. ),  for 
in  it  Christ  comes  into  all  the  saints  (3")  and  all 
the  saints  into  Him  ('2«-  '^  4"-'*).  The  organization 
of  the  Church  is  simply  the  expression  of  this 
unity,  and  the  means,  given  by  Christ  Himself, 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESIAKS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  347 


whereby  it  is  being  actualized  (4'"").  Baptism  is 
the  door  of  the  Church  (4*  5^),  faith  its  bond  of 
union  (4*),  love  the  expression  of  that  union 
(4-5-,  etc.).  The  unity  even  extends  beyond  this 
earth  into  the  heavenly  regions  (2*  ;  cf.  1*  3^*). 

Such  an  emphasis  upon  the  Church  is  certainly 
not  found  elsewhere  in  St.  Paul.  Yet  there  is  no 
one  feature  which  is  specifically  un-Pauline,  and 
no  reason  can  be  given  why  St.  l*anl  should  not  in 
a  time  of  leisure,  undisturbed  by  the  cla.sh  of  con- 
troversy, have  set  do\\Ti  for  the  churches  he  had 
founded  those  principles  which  had  underlain  all 
his  ministry. 

It  has  been  urged  that  St.  Paul  dealt  only  with 
individual  churches,  and  that  the  use  of  the  term 
'  church '  {^KKXrjffia)  in  Eph.  is  foreign  to  his  writings. 
But  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  idea  of  one  Church 
Universal  underlies  all  St.  Paul's  thought.  Especi- 
ally m  1  Cor.  he  appeals  throughout  to  general 
church  practice  {e.g.  1  Co  10»  11'*  14»-»).  He 
speaks  of  the  churches  as  a  whole  (Ro  16'^  I  Co 
41-  71-)  They  are  'one  body  in  Christ,'  with  an 
articulated,  organized  membership  (Ro  12*),  and 
this  conception  is  expanded  in  1  Co  12'^-.  They 
form  one  Church  (eic/cXijo-ta,  in  the  singular ;  cf.  1 
Co  12*-*,  Gal  V%  The  same  conception  and  usage 
are  repeated  in  the  later  Epistles  (Ph  3*,  Col 
11S.S4)  Tijg  statements  in  Col.  are,  indeed,  quite 
as  full  in  idea  as  those  in  Ephesians.  The  con- 
ception of  Christ  as  awaiting  '  fulfilment '  or  com- 
pletion in  some  sense  in  His  Body,  the  Church,  is 
present  in  Col  1-*.  The  organic  unity  of  Christ 
with  the  Church  as  its  Head  is  in  Col  1^*.  The 
conception  of  the  Church  as  extending  into  the 
heavenl}-  regions  is  directly  involved  in  St.  Paul's 
answer  to  the  Colossian  heretics  (Col  !''•  *).  This 
adaptation  of  his  thought  is  quite  natural,  though 
its  first  clear  formulation  in  his  mind  may  have 
been  due  to  the  troubles  at  Colossae,  leading  him 
to  correlate  his  views  on  angelology  (see  art. 
COLOSSIANS)  with  his  views  on  Christ  and  the 
Church.  The  thought  is  present,  in  an  unapplied 
form,  in  Ph  2r»  (with  which  also  cf.  Eph  2"', 
Ph  1="). 

It  is  urged  that  it  is  new  in  St.  Paul  to  find  the 
unity  of  the  Church  traced  back  to  Christ's  cosmic 
position  (Moflatt,  op.  cit.  p.  393).  But  this  is 
really  rather  a  question  of  Christology  than  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church.  Solidarity  in  Christ  is 
the  most  characteristic  part  of  St.  Paul's  teaching. 
The  thought  of  the  early  chapters  of  Romans  is 
simply  its  application  to  anthropology,  the  problem 
of  sin.  In  Eph.,  with  a  wider  purpose  in  view,  it 
is  applied  to  the  problems  of  humanity  regarded  as 
a  whole  in  its  relation  to  God.  The  cosmological 
form  which  the  argument  takes  is  doubtle-ss  due  in 
part  to  the  situation  at  Colosste.  But  Ro  8*- "  is 
a  hint  that  there  were  similar  elements  in  St. 
Paul's  thought  at  an  earlier  date. 

The  fact  that  in  Eph.  the  writer  seems  to  pose 
as  the  defender  of  Je\>-ish  against  Gentile  Chris- 
tians has  been  regarded  as  proof  that  he  is  not  the 
St.  Paul  of  the  Galatian  controversy.  But  it  may 
well  have  been  that  by  A.D.  60  there  was  danger 
that  the  Gentile  Christians  in  the  churches  of  Asia 
might  outnumber  and  tend  to  despise  their  Jewsh 
brethren.  St.  Paul's  concern  was  always  to  secure 
the  position  of  both  Jew  and  Gentile  in  the  Church. 
His  argument  in  Eph.  is  really  exactly  like  that 
in  Romans.  Both  Jew  and  Gentile  are  brought 
do^vn  to  one  level  by  sin  (Ro  3*"*,  Eph  2>-5 :  cf.  Gal 
3*^),  and  are  therefore  joined  in  one  redemption 
(Ro  W-  iF-s,  Eph  2'6-"').  In  Ro  11  we  find  the 
same  attitude  of  apology  for  the  Jews  as  in  Eph  2 
(cf.  also  Ro  7"  W^-).  Gal  ^-^^  also  gives  an 
argument  practically  identical  in  substance  with 
that  of  Ephesians. 

Some  have  thought  that  the  interest  in  church 


organization  is  nn-Pauline,  and  that  the  details 
mentioned  involve  a  later  date.  It  would  be 
possible  to  argue  that  the  very  reverse  is  the  case. 
The  mention  of  'apostles  and  prophets'  as  fore- 
most in  the  ministry  of  the  Church  (4")  is  exactly 
paralleled  by  1  Co  l-Z**.  Thus  there  is  nothing  un- 
natural in  the  special  position  given  to  them  in 
2®  3*.  From  the  earliest  days  the  ministry  of 
prophets  had  existed  in  the  Church,  and  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  by  the  end  of  St.  Paul's  life  the 
beginnings  of  the  organization  which  superseded 
them  were  not  beginning  to  appear.  By  the  time 
the  Did<iche  was  written  the  position  of  the  prophet 
was  becoming  equivocal,  and  the  allusions  m  Eph. 
could  hardly  have  been  written.  The  mention  of 
'  evangelbts '  (4*')  is  no  mark  of  a  later  date,  since 
no  such  office  became  definitely  established.  The 
general  interest  in  church  order  shown  in  Eph.  is 
no  greater  than  in  1  Cor.  (especially  1  Co  12). 

It  has  been  noted  as  curious,  in  the  light  of  1  Co 
10",  that  the  Eucharist  is  not  mentioned  in  con- 
nexion with  church  unity.  The  reference  to  1 
Cor.,  however,  is  not  quite  in  point,  since  the 
passage  is  concerned  not  with  unity  but  vrith  the 
dangers  of  idolatry.  And  there  is  no  other  hint 
either  in  St.  Paul  or  in  Acts  that  the  Eucharist  was 
regarded  as  a  bond  of  union  among  the  churches. 

(b)  God  the  Father. — This  doctrine  receives  no 
peculiar  expansion  in  Eph.,  though  it  is  certainly 
emphasized,  the  title '  Father '  occurring  eight  times 
as  against  four  in  Romans.  It  is  brought  into 
direct  connexion  with  the  ideal  unity  of  the  Church 
(4*),  which  springs  from  the  eternal  purpose  of  the 
Father  acting  through  and  in  the  Son  (i*-  s.  a.s3 
010.  u)  The  unique  Fatherhood  of  God  is  the 
principle  underlying  all  human  or  angelic  solidarity 
(3"),  and  it  is  for  this  reason  that  St.  Paul  treats 
the  family,  in  which  this  solidarity  is  exhibited  on 
a  small  scale,  as  an  exemplar  of  the  Church  itself. 
There  is  no  real  inconsistency,  as  has  been  alleged, 
between  the  view  of  family  life  in  5**-  ^  and 
the  personal  preference  for  celibacy  expressed  in 
lCo7«. 

The  emphasis  on  God's  eternal  purpose  is  also 
found  in  Romans.  Its  elBFect  in  the  ultimate  re- 
storation of  all  creation  appears  in  Ro  8'^*,  its 
eflect  in  uniting  Jew  and  Gentile  in  Ro  9-11. 

(c)  Christology. — The  Christology  of  Eph.  isclosely 
akin  to  that  of  Colossians.  In  both  Christ  is  pre- 
sented as  being,  in  the  eternal  purpose  of  God,  the 
bond  of  union  for  a  divided  creation,  including 
within  His  unity  heaven  and  eartii  alike,  which 
were  created  not  only  in  Christ  but  also  for  Him 
(1'",  Col  1'®- ").  ThLs  consummation  and  restora- 
tion of  all  things,  including  the  .ingelic  world,  in 
Christ  is  to  come  about  through  the  restoration  of 
man  in  the  Church,  which  is  His  Body,  His  fullness 
(14.31-3  39-u^  Col  ii»-a))  The  emphasis  on  Christ's 
pre-existence  is  much  more  clearly  marked  in  Col. 
(l'*f"  **• "),  though  in  Eph.  it  is  perhaps  implied 
in  God's  purpose  'in  him'  (1*-"  3'';  cf.  also  2*- 
4»«),  and  in  the  title  'Beloved'  (1«).  In  this, 
however,  there  is  nothing  really  new,  except  that 
the  Pauline  angelology,  of  which  traces  appear  in 
the  earlier  Epistles,  is  here  clearly  correlated  to 
the  doctrine  of  Christ.  It  was  at  Colossae  that  the 
angels  were  being  exalted  almost  to  the  position 
of  Christ  Himself,  and  it  is  in  Col.  that  the  state- 
ments of  Christ's  eternal  supremacy  take  their 
highest  form.  But  the  restoration  in  Christ  of  the 
dislocated  creation  appears  in  Ro  8^**.  The  share 
of  the  angels  in  this  is  alluded  to  in  1  Co  6*  ■•  15^. 
The  pre-existence  of  Christ  finds  expression  in  Ro 
8'  9*  (probably),  1  Co  10*  15*^  (and  context),  2  Co 
8',  and  is  clearly  connected  with  His  relation  to 
the  Creation  in  1  Co  8*,  where  the  emphasis  on 
unity  closely  resembles  the  thought  of  Ephesians. 
At  a  slightly  later  date,  almost  every  point  in 


348   EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


the  Christology  of  Col.  and  Eph.  is  embodied  in 
Ph  2*"". 

It  has  been  noted  as  un-Pauline  that  tlie  result 
of  the  Cross  should  be  seen  in  the  reconciliation  of 
Jew  and  Gentile  rather  than  in  relation  to  sin. 
But  this  objection  is  due  to  imperfect  exegesis. 
It  is  because  the  Cross  frees  all,  both  Jew  and 
Gentile,  from  sin  that  tliey  are  able  to  come  into 
the  unitj  of  Christ.  The  emphasis  on  individual 
redemption  is  just  as  much  present  in  Eph  2'""'  as 
in  Ro  1-7.  The  Pauline  doctrine  is  stated  directly 
in  V  (cf.  2'^).  The  annulling  of  the  Law  by  the 
Cross  (2^*)  is  the  very  point  of  St.  Paul's  argument 
in  the  Galatian  controversy  (Gal  3'^,  etc.  ;  cf.  also 
the  parallel  passage  in  Col  2").  The  thought  in 
Ephesians  nuiy  be  carried  rather  further,  but  it  is 
wiiolly  I'auline.  That  there  is  no  definite  allusion 
to  expiation  or  propitiation  is  not  of  any  real 
significance.  The  idea  was  unnecessary  to  the  pur- 
pose of  Ephesians. 

Again  it  is  said  that  there  is  in  Eph.  no  hint  of 
the  Parousia,  the  coming  of  Christ  in  the  near 
future,  and  that  the  idea  is  replaced,  on  Johannine 
lines,  by  a  vista  of  long  ages  before  the  final 
iudgment  (2^  3^^).  But  the  reference  in  2''  is  pro- 
bably to  agesffl/ifer  the  Second  Coming,  as  is  perhaps 
shown  by  the  parallel  in  1'-'  (see  §  3  above),  and 
this  may  also  be  the  meaning  in  3*\  In  any  case, 
the  same  language  occurs  in  Ro  P*  9'  and  in 
Gal  P,  a  close  parallel  to  3*'.  References  to  the 
Parousia  may  perhaps  be  seen  in  4''*"  5^.  It  is  true 
that  there  is  no  emphasis  on  the  doctrine,  but  St. 
Paul  was  never  a  fanatic  about  it,  as  2  Thess.  shows 
(cf.  Ro  U^). 

Other  points  which  are  said  to  be  rather  Johan- 
nine than  Pauline  also  find  parallels  in  the  earlier 
Epistles.  Love  is  emphasized  as  the  relation  of 
Christ  to  us  (2^  5^-  ^  ;  cf.  (ial  2^",  Ro  S^s-  ■^),  as  our 
relation  to  Christ  (6-'' ;  cf.  1  Co  16")  and  to  one 
another  {i^  i"  S-*-  -^ ;  cf.  1  Th  5'3).  Cf.  the  Hymn 
to  Love  in  1  Co  13.  The  emphasis  on  the  light  of 
Christ  amid  the  darkness  (5*'" ;  cf.  4^^),  while 
typical  of  St.  John,  is  found  in  1  Th  5*- »,  2  Co  6'*, 
Ro  13". 

{d)  The  Holy  Spirit. — Great  stress  is  laid  in  Eph. 
upon  the  Holy  Spirit  as  inspiring  the  life  of  the 
Church  (1»3  2's  35- «  4*-*-30  5"*  6").  This  is  quite 
Pauline  (cf.  l'^*- "  with  2  Co  1^,  4^-  *  with  1  Co 
12*-» ;  see  also  Gal  S'^'^S  Ro  15i3). 

(e)  Man  and  sin. — This  is  the  special  subject  of 
Rom.  and  not  of  Ephesians.  Yet  the  hints  in 
Eph.  are  quite  in  accordance  with  St.  Paul's  earlier 
teaching.  The  doctrine  of  the  (xdp^,  the  root-idea 
in  the  conception  of  original  sin,  appears  in  2*. 
The  characteristic  emphasis  on  the  grace  of  God 
which  saves  man  by  faith  and  not  by  works  is 
found  in  2*""  (cf.  3").  Predestination  to  life  is  the 
theme  of  1** """,  though  the  problem  of  free-will 
is  not  raised,  being  unessential  to  the  matter  in 
hand. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  there  is  an  un-Pauline 
emphasis  on  knowledge,  more  on  the  lines  of  tlie 
Fourth  Gospel  {e.g.  Jn  17^),  in  1«- ''  4»».  But  this 
does  not  really  conflict  with  St.  Paul's  opposition 
to  the  wisdom  of  this  world  in  1  Co  1-4,  from 
which  tlie  knowledge  alluded  to  {iirlyvuxris ;  cf. 
Armitage  Robinson,  Ephesians,  p.  248  fi.)  is  a  very 
diflerent  thing.  Cf.  also  Ro  10^,  1  Co  P*  2«-  \  Ph 
P,  Col  V>- 1»  22  3'«. 

This  sketch  of  the  doctrine  of  Eph.  will  serve  to 
show  how  closely  it  resembles  in  most  of  its  details 
the  doctrine  not  only  of  Colossians,  but  of  the 
earlier  Pauline  Epistles.  It  is  only  in  emphasis 
and  in  the  sustained,  almost  lyrical,  exposition 
that  there  is  any  real  contrast.  And  this  may 
well  be  explained  by  a  difference  of  circumstaiu^es 
both  in  St.  Paul's  own  jjosition  and  in  the  audience 
to  which  he  is  writing. 


7.  Style  and  language. — (I)  Language. — The 
vocabulary  as  a  wliole  presents  phenomena  very 
similar  to  tho.se  of  the  other  Pauline  letters. 
There  are  37  words  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  NT 
(as  compared  with  33  in  Gal.,  41  in  Phil.,  95  in  2 
Cor.),  and  39  which  occur  el.se where,  but  not  in  the 
recognized  Pauline  writings  (Holtzmann,  Kritik 
dcr  Ephcser-und  KolosHerhriefe,  p.  101  f.,  wliose 
list  is  critically  di-scussed  by  Zahn,  op.  cit.  pp.  518- 
522;  cf.  also  Mottatt,  op.  cit.  y.  385  f.).  This 
number  is  not  in  itself  suspicious,  and  Zahn's 
analysis  has  shown  that  the  majority  of  the  words 
are  of  little  significance.  Some  are  due  to  the 
occasion  and  the  turn  of  the  metaphor,  e.g.  tliose 
that  occur  in  the  account  of  the  Christian  armour. 
Some — e.g.  &ve/xos  (4'*),  C5wp  (5**) — are  terms  for 
which  no  synonym  was  readily  available.  Some 
are  cognate  to  forms  u.sed  elsewhere  by  St.  Paul, 
e.g.  KarapriafiSs  (4'-),  irpoffKapr^prjau  (6'"),  dyvoia  (4"*). 
And  against  these  are  to  be  set  about  20  words 
found  only,  outside  Eph.,  in  the  earlier  Pauline 
Epistles. 

Some  special  cases  have  been  thought  suspicious 
The  phrase  '  holy  apostles'  (3*)  has  been  dealt  with 
above  (§  i).  The  use  of  5idfio\os  (4"  6"  ;  cf.  1  Ti  3«, 
2  Ti  2^")  is  curious,  as  St.  Paul  elsewhere  employs 
the  name  '  Satan '  (also  in  the  Pastorals,  1  Ti  I'*). 
But  there  is  no  reason  why  he  should  not  have 
varied  in  his  usage  in  this  way  (as  happens  in  1 
Tim.).  And,  indeed,  the  reference  in  4^  may  not 
be  to  Satan  but  to  human  calumniators  ;  or  perhaps 
both  ideas  may  be  present,  and  the  usage  here  may 
also  have  attected  6".  The  phrase  '  in  the  heaven- 
lies,'  which  occurs  5  times,  is  curious,  but  might 
well  have  been  coined  by  St.  Paul  in  working  out 
the  theme  of  Eph.  (cf.  1  Co  l5*-'»8-*«).  The  word 
'  mystery '  is  difficult  in  5'^  but  is  used  in  the 
ordinary  Pauline  manner  in  1*  3^-  *•  *.  olKovop.la  has 
a  somewhat  changed  sense  in  3'''.  The  unique  use 
of  irfpnToL-qais  in  l^''  is  paralleled  by  other  trans- 
ferences of  words  from  an  abstract  to  a  concrete 
sense.  On  the  whole,  then,  the  peculiarities  of 
language  are  no  more  than  might  oe  expected  in 
any  one  short  document. 

(2)  Style. — This  problem  presents  more  difficul- 
ty. The  sentences  are  unusually  long  and  cum- 
brous, subordinate  clauses  being  strung  together 
in  a  loose  connexion  which  is  frequently  diihcult 
to  analyze,  e.g.  1*""  2)-'''  3^"^.  Yet  they  are  most 
carefully  wrought  and  in  places  are  almost  poetical 
in  form  and  balance  (esp.  P'",  which  falls  into 
three  'stanzas').  There  are  one  or  two  elaborate 
parentheses  (2"-  "  3^"^*).  These  features  are  only 
partially  paralleled  in  Col.,  and  present  a  wide  con- 
trast to  the  impassioned  rhetoric  of  the  earlier 
letters.  In  this  respect  Eph.  stands  by  itself.  To 
many  critics  the  general  impression  produced  by  the 
style  and  tone  of  the  letter  is  the  strongest  argument 
against  its  authenticity.  Yet  it  is  very  riish  to 
make  assumptions  as  to  the  possibilities  of  so  mobile 
and  powerful  an  intellect  as  that  of  St.  Paul.  In 
none  of  his  other  writings  is  the  clash  of  controversy 
or  the  appeal  of  friendship  wholly  absent.  At 
leisure  in  his  prison  he  may  well  have  looked 
back  over  the  triumphs  of  his  life  and  have  sat 
down  to  write  in  a  mood  of  quiet  yet  profound 
thanksgiving  for  which  his  earlier  career  had  seldom 
given  opportunity. 

8.  Relation  to  other  NT  writings.— (a)  Relation  to 
Colossians. — The  relation  of  Eph.  to  Col.  is,  from 
the  point  of  view  of  literary  criticism,  its  most 
striking  feature.  It  has  been  estimated  that  78 
out  of  the  155  verses  of  Eph.  contain  phraseology 
which  occurs  in  (Colossians.  This  is  not  merely 
due  to  the  connexion  of  ideas,  which  is  also  close 
(see  above),  but  is  of  a  character  to  show  that  the 
two  Epistles  are  closely  connected  in  their  com- 
position.   The  details  have  been  elaborately  worked 


EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


EPHESUS 


349 


out  by  Holtzinann,  De  "SVette,  and  others  (for  a 
good  smnraary  of  the  facts  see  Mofiatt,  op.  cit.  pp. 
375-381  ;  Holtzniann's  results  are  criticized  by 
Sandav,  art.  '  Colossians '  in  Sinitli's  DH^  and  by 
von  S.'.den  in  JPTh,  1887  ;  cf.  his  Hist,  of  Early 
Chriitiiin  Literature.  The  tcritings  of  the  NT). 
Results  difler  widely.  Holtzniann's  discussion  went 
to  show  that  neither  Epistle  could  l>e  regarded  as 
wholly  prior,  and  therefore  he  postulated  a  Pauline 
Col.,  expanded  at  a  later  date  by  a  writer  who  also 
composed  Eph.  upon  its  basis.  But  the  evidence 
for  the  division  of  Colossians  has  very  largely 
broken  down,  with  the  wider  view  of  the  Pauline 
angelology  (see  art.  COLOSSIANS).  The  tendency 
among  scliolars  is  now  to  assert  the  authenticity 
of  Col.  (so,  among  those  who  reject  Eph.,  von  ISoden 
[in  the  main],  Klijpper,  von  Dobscniitz,  Clemen, 
Wrede,  Motiatt).  This,  if  Holtzniann's  results  are 
accepted,  proves  the  authenticity  of  Eph.  also. 
The  two  Epistles  must  have  been  written  by  one 
author  at  about  the  same  time.  The  alternative 
is  to  regard  Eph.,  with  De  Wette,  as  a  weak  and 
tedious  compilation  from  Col.  and  the  earlier 
Epistles — a  position  which  will  appeal  to  few — or, 
more  sympathetically,  with  Mofl'att,  'as  a  set  of 
variations  played  by  a  master  hand  upon  one  or 
two  themes  suggested  by  Colossians '  (op.  cit.  p.  375). 
Bat  this  does  no  justice  to  the  real  independence 
of  thought  in  Ephesians.  The  two  main  themes — 
the  reconciliation  of  Jew  and  Gentile  in  the  Church, 
and  the  fact  of  the  Church  as  influencing  Christian 
life — do  not  appear  in  Colossians  at  all,  or  only  by 
allusion.  The  theology-  is  the  same,  the  applica- 
tion veiy  ditterent.  Further,  it  is  hard  to  think 
that  so  original  a  writer  would  have  followed  the 
very  structure  of  Colossians.  The  rules  for  family 
life,  e.g.,  are  an  integral  part  of  Eph.,  but  have  no 
very  clear  connexion  with  the  rest  of  Colossians. 
It  is  most  natural  to  suppose,  e.g.  in  Col  3'*'-^  that 
the  writer  is  summarizing  what  he  has  written  in 
Eph  5---6^,  even  at  the  risk  of  some  obscurity.  So, 
too.  Col  2'*  has  no  clear  connexion  mth  its  context, 
and  must  depend  upon  the  fuller  Eph  4^  '^  for  its 
explanation. 

No  parallel  for  the  curious  inter-connexion  of 
language  is  to  be  found  in  the  employment  of 
sources  by  Matthew  and  Luke  or  of  Jude  by  2 
Peter.  There  we  have  frank  copying.  Here 
there  is  nothing  of  the  kind.  Again  and  again 
phrases  are  used  in  Eph.  to  express  or  illustrate 
ideas  with  which  they  are  not  connected  at  all  in 
Col.  (cf.  Eph.  2«-  >«  II  Col  2»  1^,  Eph.  S'^  4^  \\  Col 
29,  Eph  2"*  1^  5"  ;:  Col  1^).  The  writer's  mind  is 
steeped  in  the  language  and  thought  of  Col. ,  but 
he  is  ^vTiting  quite  independently.  The  only 
probable  psychological  solution  of  the  problem  is 
that  one  \\Titer  wrote  both  Epistles,  and  at  no 
great  interval.  And  if  so,  that  writer  must  have 
beeu  St.  Paul.  It  is  quite  likely,  indeed,  that 
Col.  was  composed  while  Eph.  was  still  unfinished, 
since  the  latter  is  clearly  the  careful  work  of  many 
hours,  perhaps  of  many  days. 

(6)  Itelation  to  1  Peter. — There  is  a  considerable 
amount  of  resemblance  of  thought,  structure,  and 
language  between  Eph.  and  1  Peter.  This  is 
especially  obvious  in  the  directions  for  family  life 
(note  the  curious  phrase  '  your  own  husbands '  in  1 
P  3^,  which  seems  to  depend  on  Eph  5-).  Other 
parallels  quoted  are  1^  ^vith  1  P  1^  3"-  with  1  P 
pM.  (where  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to  argue  that 
1  Pet.  is  prior  :  the  two  passages  may  be  inde- 
pendent), 1^  with  1  P  119-20,  2"  with  1  P  2*,  l^* 
with  1  P  29  (the  use  of  xeptxoi->j(rts  in  Eph.  is  not 
dependent  on  that  in  1  Pet. ,  being  quite  different ; 
the  former  is  concrete,  the  latter  not),  1'^'-  with 
1   p  322 .  giof.  with  1  p  58. 9 .  49  with  1  P  319  4«. 

These  analogies  are  not  unnatural,  on  the  assump- 
tion that  St.  Peter  knew  Eph.,  and  certainly  do 


not  demand  the  priority  of  1  Pet.,  as  Hilgenfeld 
and  others  have  argued. 

(f)  Relation  to  the  Lttcan  and  Johannine  tcrit- 
ings.— Numerous  analogies,  mainly  of  thought, 
have  been  found  in  Eph.  to  almo.st  every  book  of 
the  NT,  but  especially  to  those  connected  with  the 
names  of  St.  Luke  and  St.  John.  I'arallels  of 
language  and  idea  have  been  seen  in  the  farewell 
address  at  Miletus  (Ac  20»»-» ;  cf.  Moffatt,  op.  cit. 
p.  384) ;  and  Lock  (loc.  cit. )  draws  out  the  parallels 
of  thought  with  the  Eucharistic  prayer  in  Jn  17.  It 
is  true  that  many  of  the  conceptions  of  Eph.  are 
found  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  but  this  is  not  at  all 
unnatural.  The  parallels  of  lano:uage  are  by  no 
means  striking.  The  connexion  with  Rev. ,  empha- 
sized by  Holtzmann,  is  very  slight,  and  that  with 
Heb.  is  not  much  more  definite  (details  in  Salinond, 
'  Ephesians,'  in  EGT,  p.  212  ff.). 

The  general  impression  made  on  the  present 
writer  by  the  study  of  these  various  affinities  is  the 
outstanding  resemblance  in  general  thought,  and 
even  in  expression,  between  Eph.  and  Romans — a 
resemblance  which  the  difference  of  style  does  not 
obscure.  This  in  itself  is  a  strong  witne.ss  to  the 
authenticity  of  the  Epistle. 

Literature. — The  following  is  only  a  small  selection  from  a 
verj-  voluminous  literature.  I.  Commentaries. — Besides  the 
older  Commentaries,  such  as  E.  W.  E.  Renss  (1S78X  H.  Alford 
(^1S74),  and  C.  J.  Ellicott  (31864),  the  most  notable  are  those  of 
A.  Klopper  (1691),  G.  G.  Findlay  {Expos.  Bible,  1S9-2),  H.  von 
Soden  (Hand-Kommentar,  1S93,  also  artt.  in  JPTh,  1SS7,  and 
Hist,  of  Early  Christian  Literature.  TheWritingtofthe  ST,  Ens. 
tr.,  1906),  T.  K.  Abbott  {ICC,  1S97,  lai^ely  linguisticX  E. 
Hanpt  (in  Meyer's  Krit.-exeg.  Kommentar  uber  das  XT,  1902, 
very  valuable  exegeticallyX  J.  Armitagre  Robinson  (1903, 
exegetical  and  philological,  no  introduction),  S.  D.  F.  Sal- 
mond  {EGT,  1903X  B.  F.  Westcott  (1906X  P-  Ewald  (in 
Zahn's  Kommentar  sum  ST,  1910).  Fundamental  for  modem 
critical  studies  is  H.  J.  Holtzmann's  Kritik  der  Epheser-und 
Kolosserbrie/e,  1872. 

II.  Against  Pauline  authorthip. — Besides  Baor,  Schwegrler, 
Hitzig,  are  S.  Davidson,  Introd.  to  ST^,  Ia94  ;  C.  v.  Weiz- 
sacker,  The  Apostolic  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  1894-95 ;  E.  von  Dobschiitz, 
Christian  Life  in  the  Primitire  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  1904  ;  O. 
Pfleiderer,i*nmrfi>«CAmt»aniti/,  Eng.tr.,  1906-11 ;  R.  Scott, 
The  Pauline  EpisUes,  1909;  J.  Moffatt,  LST^,  1912. 

III.  For  Pauline  authorship.— F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Prolegomena 
to  Roma  nsand  Ephesians,  1895 ;  A.  Robertson,  art. '  Eidiesiaiis ' 
in  Smith's  DB»,  1883;  W.  Lock,  art.  '  Ephesians'  in  HDB;  T. 
Zahn,  Introd.  to  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909  (a  storehouse  of  facts); 
A.  S.  Peake,  Crit.  Introd.  to  ST,  1909. 

L.  W.  Grensted. 

EPHESUS  ('E0«<Toj,  a  graecized  form  of  a  native 
Anatolian  name). — The  town  of  Ephesus  was  a  little 
south  of  latitude  38°  N. ,  at  the  head  of  a  gulf  situ- 
ated about  the  middle  of  the  western  coast  of 
Asia  Minor.  It  lay  on  the  left  bank  of  the  river 
Cayster,  at  the  foot  of  hills  which  slope  towards 
the  river.  In  ancient  times  the  river  reached  to 
the  city  gates,  but  its  mouth  has  gradually  silted 
up  so  that  the  city  is  now  some  four  to  six  miles 
from  the  sea.  The  effect  of  the  rivers  action  has 
been  to  raise  the  level  of  the  land  all  over.  The 
ruins,  the  most  extensive  in  Asia  Minor,  give  an 
idea  of  how  large  the  ancient  city  was.  The 
extent  of  the  area  covered  by  it  cannot  now 
be  exactly  estimated  ;  but,  as  the  population  in 
St.  Paul's  time  was  probably  about  a  third  of  a 
million,  and  in  ancient  times  open  spaces  were 
frequent  and  '  sky-scrapers '  unknown,  the  city 
must  have  been  large,  even  according  to  our 
standards.  The  temple  of  Artemis  (see  DiANA),  the 
ruins  of  which  were  discovered  by  Wood,  lies  now 
about  five  miles  from  the  coast,  and  was  the  most 
imposing  feature  of  the  city.  Its  site  must  have 
been  sacred  from  very  early  times,  and  successive 
temples  were  built  on  it.  Other  notable  features 
of  the  city  were  the  fine  harbour  along  the  banks 
of  the  Cayster,  the  aqueducts,  and  the  great  road 
following  the  line  of  the  Cayster  to  Sardis,  with  a 
branch  to  Smyrna.  The  heat  in  summer  is  very 
great,  and  fever  is  prevalent.     The  harvest  rain- 


350 


EPHESUS 


EPHESUS 


storms  are  violent.  The  site  was  nevertheless  80 
attractive  tliat  it  must  have  been  very  early  oc- 
cupied. The  ancients  dated  the  settlement  of 
Ionian  (Greeks  there  early  in  the  Uth  cent.  B.C., 
and  the  city  lon;^  before  St.  Paul's  time  had  be- 
come thorou;i;hly  Greek,  maintaining^  constant  in- 
tercourse with  Corinth  and  the  rest  of  Greece 
proper. 

The  history  of  the  city,  with  its  changing 
provernment,  need  not  be  traced  here.  It  fell  under 
Roman  sway,  with  tlie  rest  of  tlie  district,  which 
the  Romans  called  'Asia'  {q.v.)  by  the  will  of 
Attains  III.  (Philometor),  the  Pergamenian  king, 
in  133  H.C.  In  88  B.C.  the  inhabitants  sided  with 
Mithridates,  king  of  i'ontus,  and  slaughtered  all 
resident  Romans.  They  were  iJunished  in  84  by 
Sulla,  who  ravaged  the  city.  During  the  rule  of 
Augustus  tiie  city  was  embellished  by  a  number  of 
new  buildings. 

When  Ei^thesus  came  into  contact  with  Christi- 
anity, it  still  retained  all  its  ancient  glory.  With 
its  Oriental  religion,  its  (ireek  culture,  its  Roman 
government,  and  its  world-wide  commerce,  it  stood 
midway  between  two  continents,  being  on  the  one 
hand  tlie  gateway  of  Asia  to  crowds  of  Western 
officials  and  travellers,  as  Bombay  is  the  portal  of 
India  to-day,  and  on  the  other  hand  the  rendezvous 
of  multitudes  of  Eastern  pilgrims  coming  to  wor- 
shi])  at  Artemis'  shrine.  Traversed  by  the  great 
Imperial  highway  of  intercourse  and  commerce,  it 
had  all  nationalities  meeting  and  mingling  in  its 
streets.  No  wonder  if  it  felt  its  ecumenical  im- 
portance, and  believed  that  what  was  said  and 
done  by  its  citizens  was  quickly  heard  and  imitated 
by  '  all  Asia  and  the  world  '  {rj  oIkov/m^vt],  Ac  19''"). 

In  Ephesus  a  noble  freedom  of  thought  and  a 
vulgar  su]>erstition  lived  side  by  side.  The  city 
of  Tliales  and  Heraclitus  contained  many  men  of 
rich  culture  and  deep  philosophy,  who  were  earnest 
seekers  after  truth.  Prominent  citizens  like  the 
Asiarchs  {q.v.),  who  were  officially  bound  to  foster 
the  cultus  of  Rome  and  the  Emperor,  yet  regarded 
St.  Paul  and  his  message  with  markeci  friendliness 
(Ac  19^").  Nothing  but  a  wide-spread  receptivity 
to  fresh  ideas  can  account  for  the  wonderful  success 
of  the  lirst  Christian  mission  in  the  city,  and  for  the 
reverberation  of  the  truth  '  almost  throughout  all 
Asia'  (v.-"").  The  best  mind  of  the  age  was  wist- 
fully awaiting  a  new  order  of  things.  Having 
tried  eclecticism  and  syncretism  in  vain,  it  was 
'  standing  between  two  worlds,  one  dead,  the  other 
powerless  to  be  born.'  When,  tlierefore,  the 
startling  news  came  from  Syria  to  Ephesus  that 
the  Son  of  God  had  lived,  died,  and  risen  again, 
it  ran  like  wildfire  ;  its  lirst  announcement  created 
another  Pentecost  (v.^)  ;  and  in  two  years  '  all  they 
who  dwelt  in  Asia  heart!  the  word  of  the  Lord,  both 
Jews  an<l  Greeks'  (v.^"). 

Every  spiritual  revival  has  ethical  issues,  and 
Ephesus  quickly  recognized  that  the  new  truth 
was  a  new  '  Way '  (v.^).  The  doctrine  now  taught 
in  the  School  of  Tyrannus,  formerly  the  home  of 
one  knows  not  what  subtle  and  futile  theories,  had 
a  direct  bearing  \i\>on  human  lives.  That  was  why 
it  made  'no  small  stir'  (v.-^).  The  message  which 
St.  Paul  delivered  '  publicly  and  from  house  to 
house '  (20-"),  admonishing  men  '  night  and  day 
with  tears'  (v.'i),  was  morally  revolutionary.  It 
was  a  call  to  re])entance  and  faith  (v.-*) ;  and, 
though  no  frontal  attack  was  made  upon  the  estab- 
lished religion  of  Ephesus,  and  no  language  used 
which  could  fairly  be  construed  as  oH'ensive  (19*^), 
yet  it  soon  became  apparent  that  the  old  order  and 
the  new  could  not  thrive  peacefully  side  by  side. 
The  gospel  of  mercy  to  all  was  a  gage  of  battle 
to  many.  St.  Paul,  therefore,  found  that,  while 
J!phesus  opened  '  a  door  wide  and  efl'ectual '  (fvtp- 
7^j)  there   were   'many  adversaries'  (1   Co  16").  1 


This  did  not  surprise  or  disappoint  him.  The 
fanatical  hatred  of  Ephesus  wiis  better  than  the 
polite  scorn  of  Athens.  As  the  city  of  Artemis 
lived  largely  upon  the  superstition  of  tiie  multitude, 
not  only  the  priests  who  enjoyed  the  rich  revenues 
of  the  Temj)le,  but  also  the  artisans  who  made 
'  shrines '  for  j)ilgrims,  felt  that  if  Christianity 
triumiihed  their  occupation  would  be  gone.  Re- 
ligion was  for  Ephesus  a  lucrative  '  business ' 
{epyaffla,  Ac  19''"- ^),  and  the  'craft'  {r6  /xepoi,  this 
branch  of  trade)  of  many  was  in  danger.  Indeed, 
the  dispute  which  arose  affected  the  whole  city, 
being  regarded  as  nothing  less  than  a  duel  between 
Artemis  and  Christ.  If  He  were  enthroned  in  the 
Ephesian  heart,  she  would  be  dejK)sed  from  her 
magnificence,  and  the  greatest  temijle  in  the 
world  'made  of  no  account'  (PJ-'').  The  situation 
created  a  drama  of  real  life  which  was  enacted  in 
and  around  the  famous  theatre  of  Ephesus.  The 
"ild  of  silversmiths,  led  by  their  indignant  presi- 
dent Demetrius  (q.v.);  the  ignorant  mob,  excited 
to  fanatical  frenzy  ;  the  crafty  Jews,  quick  to  dis- 
sociate themselves  from  their  Christian  compat- 
riots ;  the  brave  Apostle,  eager  to  appear  before 
',the  people '  (rbv  Sij^tov)  of  a  free  city  ;  the  friendly 
Asiarchs,  constraining  him  to  temper  valour  with 
discretion  ;  the  calm,  dignilied,  eloquent  Secretary 
{ypafj./j.aTevs),  stilling  tiie  angry  passions  of  the 
multitude ;  and  behind  all,  as  unseen  presences, 
the  majesty  of  Imperial  Rome,  the  sensuous  charm 
of  Artemis,  the  spiritual  power  of  Christ — these 
all  combined  to  give  a  sudden  revelation  of  the 
soul  of  a  city.  The  practical  result  was  that  a 
vindication  of  the  liberty  of  prophesying  was 
drawn  from  the  highest  municipal  authority,  who 
evidently  felt  that  in  this  matter  he  was  interjiret- 
ing  the  mind  of  Rome  herself.  To  represent 
Christianity  as  a  religio  licita  was  cle.arly  one  of 
the  leading  aims  of  St.  Luke  as  a  historian. 

The  fidelity  of  St.  Luke's  narrative  in  its  politi- 
cal allusions  and  local  colour  has  received  conHrma- 
tion  from  many  sources.  As  the  virtual  capital  of 
a  senatorial  province,  Ejiliesus  had  its  proconsuls 
(ivdiiraroi,  Ac  19^),  but  here  the  plural  is  merely 
used  colloquially,  without  implying  that  there 
could  ever  be  more  than  one  at  a  time.  As  the 
head  of  a  convcntus  iuridicus,  Ephesus  was  an 
assize  town,  in  which  the  judges  were  apparently 
sitting  at  the  very  time  of  the  riot  (v.^).  Latin 
was  the  language  of  the  courts,  and  dyopaloi  dyovTai 
is  the  translation  of  conventus  arjimtur.  As  a  free 
city  of  the  Empire,  Ephesus  had  still  a  semblance 
of  ancient  Ionic  autonomy ;  her  affairs  were 
'settled  in  a  regular  assembly'  (v.^),  i.e.  either  at 
an  ordinary  meeting  of  the  Demos  held  in  the 
theatre  on  a  lixed  day,  or  at  an  extraordinary 
meeting  called  by  authority  of  the  proconsul. 
Irregular  meetings  of  the  populace  were  sternly 
I)rohibited  (v.*) ;  and,  indeeil,  the  powers  of  the 
lawful  assembly  were  more  and  more  curtailed,  till 
at  last  it  practically  had  to  content  itself  with 
registering  the  decrees  of  the  Roman  Senate.  The 
proud  claim  of  Ephesus  to  be  the  temple-warden 
\v€WK6pov,  lit.  '  temple-sweeper')  of  Artemis  (v.**)  is 
attested  by  inscriptions  and  coins  (W.  M.  Ramsay, 
Cities  and  Bishoprics  of  Phrycf  in,  1895,  i,  58  ;  Letters 
to  the  Seven  Churrhcs,  232).  The  Asiarchs  who  l)e- 
f  riended  St.  Paul  had  no  official  connexion  with  the 
cultof  Artemis ;  they  weremembersof  the  Commune 
whose  function  it  was  to  unite  the  Empire  in  a  re- 
ligious devotion  to  Rome. 

St.  Paul's  pathetic  address  at  Miletus  to  the 
elders  of  Ephesus  (Ac  20'**''),  in  which  he  recalls 
the  leading  features  of  his  strenuous  mission  in 
the  city — his  teai-s  and  trials  (v.'*),  his  i)ublic  antl 
private  teaching  (v.**),  his  incessjint  spiritual  and 
manual  toil  (vv.'""*') — and  declares  himself  pure 
from  the  blood  of  all  men  (v.**),  presents  as  Iiigh 


EPICUREANS 


EPICUREANS 


351 


an  ideal  of  the  ministerial  vocation  as  has  ever 
been  conceived  and  recorded.  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  it  gives  an  approximate  summary  of 
his  original  words  (cf.  J.  Mott"att,  LNT,  p.  306). 

With  tlie  religious  history  of  Ephesus  are  also 
associatiHl  tiie  names  of  Priscilla  and  Aqnila 
(Ac  IS'"),  Apollos  (18**,  I  Co  16'^),  Tychicus 
(Eph  6-»),  Timothy  (1  Til»,  2  Ti  4»),  and  especially 
John  the  Apostle  and  John  the  Presbyter. 
After  the  departure  of  St.  Paul  the  Ephesian 
Church  was  injured  by  the  activity  of  false 
teachers  (Ac  2(P-  »,  Rev  2*),  but  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
salem greatly  enhancetl  its  importance,  and  the 
influence  of  the  Johannine  school  made  it  the 
centre  of  Eastern  Christianity.  In  the  time  of 
Domitian  it  had  the  primsicv  among  the  Seven 
Churches  of  Asia  (Rev  2>).  'The  Letter  to  the 
Church  of  Ephesus  is  on  the  whole  laudatory. 
The  Christian  community  commandetl  the  writer's 
respect  by  its  keen  scrutiny  of  soi-disant  apostles, 
by  its  intolerance  of  evil,  and  its  hatred  of  the 
liliertinism  which  is  the  antithesis  of  legalism. 
But  it  had  declined  in  the  fervent  love  which  alone 
made  a  Church  truly  lovable  to  the  Apostle.  A 
generation  later,  however,  Ignatius  in  his  Ep.  to 
the  E/ihe-^ians  uses  the  language  of  profound  ad- 
miration : 

•  I  ouijht  to  be  trained  for  the  contest  by  you  in  faith,  in  ad- 
monition, in  endurance  in  long-suffering:'  (|  3);  'for  ye  all  live 
according-  to  the  truth  and  no  heresy  hach  a  home  among  you  : 
nay,  ye  do  not  so  much  as  listen  to  anj-  one  if  he  speak  of  aught 
else  save  concerning  Jesus  Christ  in  truth'  (J  6);  'you  were 
ever  of  one  mind  with  the  Apostles  in  the  power  of  Jesus  Christ ' 

(§nx 

Ephesus  had  a  long  line  of  bishops,  .ind  was  the 
seat  of  the  council  which  condemned  the  doctrine 
of  Nestorius  in  A.D.  431.  The  ruins  of  the  ancient 
city,  on  Coressus  and  Prion,  are  extensive  and  im- 
pressive. The  theatre  in  which  the  riot  (Ac  19) 
took  place  is  remarkably  well  preserved,  and  in 
1870  the  foundation  of  the  Temple  of  Artemis  was 
discovered  by  J.  T.  Wood.  The  modem  \'illage 
lying  beside  the  temple  bears  the  name  of  Ayaso- 
luk,  which  is  a  corruption  of  ayio%  <?eo\o7oj,  the 
title  of  St.  John  the  Divine  which  was  given  to 
the  Church  of  Justinian. 

LiTKRATTRE.— W.  M.  RamsAy,  Lettfrt  to  the  Stem  Churdut, 
1904  ;  Murray's  Handbook  to  Asia  Minor,  1895 ;  G.  A.  Zim- 
mermann,  Ephe»os  im  enten  ehrittL  Jahrhundert,  1S74 ;  art. 
'  Ephesus '  in  Pauly-Wissowa,  v.  (19u5] ;  J.  T.  Wood,  Diaeoeerieg 
at  Ephtnu,  1876;  E.  L.  Hicks,  Ancient  Greek  Interiptiong  in 
the  Brit,  Muaeum,  iii.  2  (1S9(J] ;  D.  G.  Hog^arth,  Excavation* 
in  Epkesug :  the  Archaic  Artemisia,  2  vols.,  1906. 

Alexander  Souter  and  Jame.s  Strahan. 

EPICURE  AN  8.— The  Epicurean  philosophers  are 
mentioned  only  once  in  the  NT,  viz.  in  Ac  17*^. 
During  his  second  missionary  journey  St.  Paul  met 
with  them  in  Athens.  Though  he  stayed  there 
not  more  than  four  weeks,  the  Apostle  was  deeply 
moved  by  the  sight  of  so  large  a  number  of  statues 
erected  in  honour  of  various  deities.  Not  content 
with  preaching  in  the  synagogue  to  Jews  and  prose- 
lytes, he  sought  pagan  hearers  in  their  famous 
market-place,  thus  imitating  Socrates  400  years 
before.  The  market-place  was  '  rich  in  noble 
statues,  the  central  seat  of  commercial,  forensic, 
and  philosophic  intercourse,  as  well  as  of  the  busy 
idleness  of  the  loungers '  (Meyer,  Com.  on  Acts,  Eng. 
tr.,  1877,  ii.  108).  As  the  'Painted  Porch'  in 
which  the  Stoics  taught  was  situated  in  the 
market-place,  and  the  garden  where  the  Epi- 
cureans gathered  for  their  fraternal  discussions 
was  not  far  away,  it  is  not  surprising  that  some 
members  of  these  two  schools  of  philosophy  were 
among  the  Apostle's  listeners.  Athens  was  tlie 
home  and  centre  of  the  four  great  philosophies 
founded  by  Plato,  Aristotle,  Zeno,  and  Epicurus. 
The  two  first,  however,  had  at  this  time  been 
supplanted  by  the  two  last ;  thus,  in  encountering 


the  Stoics  and  Epicureans,  St.  Paul  was  face  to 
face  with  the  most  influential  philosophies  of  the 
day.  Unfortunately,  we  know  but  little  of  the 
character  of  the  interview  or  its  results.  The 
discussion  was  jirobsibly  not  hostile  on  tlie  |>art  of 
the  philosophers,  though  Chevne  seems  to  incline 
to  this  view  (EBi,  vol.  iL  col."  1323  n.).  That  St. 
Paul's  teaching  most  Iiave  been  antagonistic  to 
theirs  seems  obvious. 

1.  EpicaroB  and  the  Epienreans.— ( 1 )  Epicurus. — 
Epicurus  was  bom  in  341  B.C.,  probably  at  Samos, 
an  island  ott'  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  and  lived 
about  70  years.  His  father  Neocles  was  an 
Athenian,  who  had  gone  to  Samos  as  a  colonist 
after  the  Greeks  had  expelled  a  large  number  of 
the  natives.  His  occupation  was  that  of  a  humble 
schoolmaster,  and  his  son  is  said  to  have  assu^ted 
him  for  some  time.  At  the  age  of  18  Epicurus 
left  for  Athens,  returning  home  a  year  later  to 
Colophon,  where  his  father  now  lived.  Of  the 
beginnings  of  Epicurus'  acquaintance  with  philo- 
sophy our  knowledge  is  slight  and  uncertain.  Two 
of  his  teachers  were  Nausiphanes,  a  disciple  of 
Democritus,  and  Pamphilus,  a  Platonist.  But,  as 
the  former  owed  much  to  Pyrrho,  the  well-known 
Sceptic,  it  is  hardly  likely  that  Epicurus  failed  to 
share  in  that  obligation.  He  claims  to  have  lieen 
his  own  teacher,  and  this  is  true  to  the  extent  that 
he  rejected  the  prevalent  philosophies  of  his  rime 
and  turned  to  such  predecessors  as  Demotrritns, 
Anaxagoras,  and  Archelatis.  It  w-as  at  Mitylene 
that  he  began  to  teach  philosophy,  and  at  Lamp- 
sacus  his  position  as  the  head  of  a  school  was 
recognizetl.  He  returned  to  Athens  in  307  B.C., 
and  settled  there  for  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
There  he  purchased  a  house  and  garden,  the  latter 
becoming  famous  as  the  home  of  a  large  band  of 
men  and  women  who  became  his  devoted  disciples 
and  friends.  He  died  in  270  B.C.  He  had  never 
enjoyed  robust  health,  and  his  general  feebleness 
and  ailments  were  the  ground  upon  which  his 
enemies  based  charges  of  evil  living. 

(2)  The  Epicureans. — The  community  lived  its 
own  separate  life.  The  calls  and  claims  of  public 
life  were  ignored  and  the  usual  ambitions  of  men 
stilled.  From  all  the  political  upheavals  through 
which  Athens  |>a.ssed  the  Epicureans  held  strictly 
aloof,  exemplifying  their  principles  by  indifference 
to  environment  and  the  endeavour  to  extract  the 
maximum  of  tranquil  gratification  from  life  by  the 
prudent  and  unimpassioned  use  of  it*  Thev  passed 
their  time  in  the  study  of  Nature  and  Morality, 
and  their  friendly  intercourse  with  each  other 
supplied  the  necessary  human  elements.  Most 
serious  charges  were  made  from  time  to  time 
against  both  Epicurus  himself  and  the  community, 
but  the  accusers  were  generally  either  disafi'ected 
ex-disciples  or  rivals,  and  their  motives  were 
malicious.  One  cannot  but  admit  that  the  ideal 
of  'pleasure'  was  well  calculated  to  produce  the 
most  disastrous  results  except  in  the  case  of  the 
noblest  of  men  ;  and  it  is  hard  to  believe  that  the 
garden  contained  onlj-  such.  Yet  consideration 
must  be  given  to  the  extraordinary  devotion  of  the 
brotherhood  towards  their  head,  in  whom  they 
recognized  their  deliverer  from  the  worst  fears  and 
desires  of  life.  An  example  of  their  unceasing 
allegiance  to  their  master  may  be  found  in  the 
statues  erected  in  Epicurus'  honour  after  his  death. 
Simplicity  was  the  note  of  the  community's  life. 
For  drink  they  had  water  with  a  small  quantity 
of  wine  on  occasion,  and  for  food  barley  bread.  In 
a  letter  Epicurus  writes :  '  Send  me  some  Cynthian 
cheese,  so  that,  should  I  choose,  I  may  fare  sumptu- 
on«ly.'  And  during  the  severe  famine  which 
afflicted  Athens,  Plutarch  informs  us  that  the 
Epicureans  lived  on  beans  which  they  shared  out 
from  day  to  day  {Demetrius,  34).     But  the  bond 


352 


EPICUREANS 


EPICUREANS 


which  held  this  remarkable  company  together  was 
the  personality  of  Epicurus,  who  rej^arded  his 
followers  not  only  as  disciples  but  as  friends. 

2.  Teaching. — hpicurus  is  said  to  iiave  written 
SOU  l>ooks,  but  all  have  disappeared,  and  we  are 
dependent  for  our  knowledge  on  writers  two 
centuries  later.  This  misfortune  is  probably  due 
to  the  teacher's  habit  of  summarizing  his  system 
so  that  the  disciples  might  commit  it  to  memory. 
His  reputed  lack  of  style  may  have  contributed  to 
the  same  end.  Nevertheless,  the  main  outlines  of 
his  teacliing  are  clear  enough,  though  on  import- 
ant details  uncertainty  prevails.  Epicurus  had  no 
interest  in  theories,  except  as  they  aided  practical 
life.  Mere  knowledge  was  worthless,  and  culture 
he  despised.  His  theoretical  teaching  treated  of 
Man  and  the  Universe  (his  Physics) ;  his  practical 
teaching  used  the  knowledge  so  gained  for  the 
regulation  of  human  conduct  (his  Ethics).  Under- 
lying tliese  was  his  peculiar  Logic.  Real  Logic  of 
the  Aristotelian  type  he  could  not  tolerate.  All 
he  wanted  was  a  criterion  of  truth,  or  to  ascertain 
the  grounds  on  which  statements  of  fact  could  be 
based.     This  is  usually  called  the  Canonic. 

(a)  Canonic. — The  criteria  of  truth  or  reality 
according  to  Epicurus  may  be  grouped  under  two 
heads. — (1)  Sensation.  Every  sensuous  impression 
received  by  the  mind  is  produced  by  something 
other  than  itself,  and  is  infallibly  true.  When 
these  feeling's  are  clear,  distinct,  and  vivid,  the 
knowledge  they  aflbrd  is  real.  Even  the  sensations 
of  the  dreamer  and  lunatic  are  true,  since  they  are 
caused  by  some  other  object  operating  on  the  mind. 
Any  error  arising  from  sensations  is  due  not  to  the 
sensations  themselves  but  to  the  mind's  misinter- 
pretation of  them.  But  Epicurus  does  not  make 
clear  what  that  vividness  is  which  is  reliable  and 
incapable  of  misinterpretation.  (2)  Conceptions  or 
pre-conceptions,  i.e.  ideas  which  have  been  left  in 
the  mind  by  preceding  sensations.  Here  memory, 
which  recalls  past  impressions,  and  reasoning, 
which  interprets  them,  have  been  active,  with  the 
result  that  the  mind  unconsciously  confronts  every 
new  sensation  with  impressions  which  may  modify 
any  effect  it  may  make.  These  conceptions,  the 
repetition  of  earlier  observations,  are  true.  But  it 
is  well  that  they  should  be  brought  from  time  to 
time  into  immecliate  connexion  with  the  sensation 
itself.  Thus,  if  a  distant  square  tower  appear 
round,  closer  examination  will  discover  the  error 
and  modify  the  impression  for  the  future.  It  is 
difficult  to  see  how  Epicurus  would  apply  this 
admirable  criterion  to  his  theory  of  the  '  atoms ' 
and  the  '  void. ' 

(b)  Physics. — Epicurus  relied  on  the  senses  alone 
as  the  true  basis  of  knowledge,  and  they  reveal 
only  matter  in  motion.  Consequently,  matter  is 
the  only  reality.  The  incorporeal  is  the  same  as 
the  non-existent,  i.e.  void,  and  this  applies  even  to 
mind.  When  Epicurus  explains  the  nature  of 
matter,  the  influence  of  Democritus  is  at  once 
evident.  The  immediate  impression  of  the  senses 
suggests  large  masses  of  matter,  but  this  is  not 
reliable.  In  reality  the  apparent  masses  are  com- 
posed of  extremely  minute,  invisible  particles  or 
atoms  which  differ  only  in  weight,  size,  and  shape, 
and,  though  near  to  each  other,  do  not  touch. 
Around  each  is  a  void.  By  analogy  he  argues  that 
this  is  true  not  only  of  the  nearer  world  but  also  of 
that  which  is  most  distant.  He  readies  this  ex- 
planation by  the  elimination  of  all  other  possible 
theories.  Atoms  then  being  presumed,  in  what 
way  do  they  move  ?  Aristotle  had  taught  that 
celestial  boilies  move  in  a  circular  manner,  and 
fire  upwards.  But  Epicurus  claimed  that  the  only 
movement  of  which  we  are  aware  is  that  of  the 
fall  of  bodies  to  the  earth — downward  movement. 
All  atomic  movement  then  is  eternally  straight 


downward.  But  this  brings  us  to  the  conception 
of  relative  stagnation,  as  every  body  is  moving  in 
the  same  direction  and  at  the  same  rate.  To  avoid 
this  difficulty,  Pipicurus  fell  back  upon  our  in- 
dividual experience  of  power  to  resist  forces  and 
cause  them  to  deviate  from  their  original  direction. 
He  then  claimed  for  atoms  something  of  the  same 
power.  How,  where,  and  when  this  strange  i>ower 
operates  we  are  not  informed ;  but,  by  assuming 
it,  Epicurus  arrives  at  an  explanation  of  those 
vast  aggregates  of  apparently  concrete  combina- 
tions of  wlii(;li  our  senses  are  conscious.  The  only 
difference  between  mind  and  matter  is  that  the 
former  is  composed  of  minuter  and  rounder  particles 
which  pervaae  the  body  like  a  warm  breath.  To 
explain  our  consciousness  of  taste,  colour,  sound, 
etc.,  Epicurus  resorts  to  a  curious  theory.  In 
addition  to  the  primary  particles  which  each  body 
possesses,  there  are  secondary  particles  which  vary 
in  each  case.  These  '  thin,  lilmy  images,  exactly 
copying  the  solid  body  whence  they  emanate,'  are 
continually  floating  away  from  it ;  and  when  they 
reach  the  various  human  organs,  they  produce  with- 
in the  mind  the  sensations  of  which  we  are  conscious. 
This  theory  also  accounts  not  only  for  our  visions 
of  the  ghosts  of  departed  friends,  whose  secondary 

E articles  may  float  about  long  after  their  death, 
ut  also  for  our  perceptions  of  the  gods ;  for, 
though  they  are  composed  of  much  finer  particles 
than  mortals,  their  '  films '  may  fall  with  impact 
upon  the  human  organism. 

Though  charged  with  atheism,  Epicurus  never 
questioned  the  existence  of  the  gods,  though  he 
taught  their  remoteness  from,  and  indiflerence  to, 
human  concerns.  He  ridiculed  ancient  mythology, 
whose  ett'ect  on  men  had  been  wholly  injurious, 
and  explained  such  portents  as  eclipses,  thunder, 
etc.,  on  purely  natural  jjrounds.  He  likewise 
denounced  the  belief  in  fate — a  belief  he  con- 
sidered even  more  hurtful  than  the  belief  in  Divine 
intervention.  His  teaching  being  frankly  material- 
istic, Epicurus  naturally  disbelieved  in  immortality. 
For  these  reasons,  he  argued,  man  need  have  no 
fear  :  the  gods  do  not  concern  themselves  with 
him ;  there  is  no  such  thing  as  fate ;  and  death 
is  nothing  but  the  end  of  all. 

(c)  Ethics. — Passing  by  the  idealism  of  Plato 
and  Aristotle,  Epicurus  had  recourse  to  the  doctrine 
of  Aristippus  of  Cyrene,  who  taught  that '  pleasure ' 
is  the  supreme  good  and  '  pain '  the  solo  evil. 
Socrates,  while  admitting  the  importance  of 
pleasure,  regarded  the  pleasures  of  the  n)ind  as 
greater  than  those  of  the  body.  Aristi])pus  pre- 
ferred the  latter  because  of  their  greater  intensity. 
His  ideal  was  the  intensest  pleasure  of  the  juissing 
moment,  entirely  undisturbed  by  reason,  its  greatest 
foe  ;  not  merely  the  absence  of  pain,  Init  pleasure 
that  was  active  and  positive.  The  difficulty  he 
found  in  attaining  this  ideal  led  him  to  allow  some 
value  to  prudence  as  an  aid  thereto. 

Epicurus  dittered  from  Aristippus  in  the  follow- 
ing respects  :  men  should  consider  less  the  fleeting 
pleasure  of  the  moment  and  aim  at  that  of  the 
whole  life ;  intense,  throbbing  ecstasy  is  less  desir- 
able than  a  tranquil  state  of  mind  which  may 
become  perpetual ;  indeed,  at  times,  the  highest 
possible  pleasure  may  be  merely  the  removal  of 
pain  ;  the  pleasures  and  pains  of  mind  are  more 
important  than  those  of  body,  because  of  the  joy 
or  distress  which  may  be  accumulated  by  memory 
and  anticipation.  Much  greater  emphasis  is  like- 
wise laid  on  the  virtue  of  prudence,  which  he  calls 
'  a  more  precious  thing  even  than  philosophv.* 
Prudence  is  in  fact  the  chief  virtue  of  all.  By 
its  means  rival  pleasures  are  judged  ;  and  even 
momentary  pain  may  be  cliosen,  that  a  tranquil 
life  may  be  fiirthered. 
Epicureanism  does  not  indulge  in  high  moral 


KPIMENIDES 


ERASTUS 


353 


ideals  or  insist  upon  any  code  of  duties,  whetlier 
public  or  private,  save  as  these  may  minister  to 
ones  own  pleasure,  but  neither  does  it  inculcate 
(in  theory)  low,  sensual  delights.  These  have  their 
place,  but  what  that  place  is  must  be  decided  by 
prudence,  with  a  view  to  securing  a  complete  li^ 
of  tranquil  pleasure.  Epicurus  is  to  be  regarded 
as  the  founder  of  Hedonism. 

LaTBRATtRK.— Lucretius,  de  Rerum  Natura;  Dior.  Laert. 
de  I'ilis  Philogophonun,  bk.  x. ;  Cicero,  de  FinHnts,de  Natura 
Deoruin,  Tiisculaiuv  Disputationes  ;  Plutarch,  Disputatio  q^ia 
docetur  ne  suaviter  ijtiidein  viripo^ne  secundum  Epiciiri decreta, 
adc.  Colotfiii ;  E.  Zeller,  Stoics,  Epieureatis  and  Sceptics,  Ene. 
tr.,  London,  ISSO ;  W.  Wallace,  Epicureanism,  do.  1880;  J. 
Watson.  Hedonistic  Theories,  Glasgow,  1895  ;  artt.  in  EDr^^, 
IJDB,  EBi;  Histories  0/  Philosophy,  by  Ritter,  etc. 

J.  W.  LiGHTLEY. 

EPIMENIDES.— See  Quotations. 

EPISTLE. — In  dealing  with  ancient  literature 
we  have  become  accustomed  to  make  a  distinction 
between  the  epistle  and  the  letter.  In  that  sphere 
we  frequently  meet  with  a  so-called  letter,  which, 
from  the  purely  external  point  of  view,  shows  all 
the  characteristics  of  a  genuine  letter,  and  yet  is 
in  no  sense  designed  to  serve  as  a  vehicle  of  tidings 
and  ideas  between  one  person  and  another,  or 
between  one  person  and  a  definite  circle  of 
persons,  but  on  the  contrary  has  been  written  in 
the  e.xpectation,  and  indeed  with  the  intention, 
of  gaining  the  notice  of  the  public.  Now,  in  de- 
signating such  a  document  an  'epistle,'  and  re- 
serving the  term  '  letter '  for  a  letter  in  the  true 
sense,  we  must  remember  that,  while  the  distinc- 
tion itself  was  quite  familiar  to  the  ancients,  our 
terminology  is  modem.  By  'epistle'  we  mean, 
accordingly,  a  letter  expressly  intended  for  the 
general  public.  Yet  it  must  be  admitted  that,  in 
the  sphere  of  ancient  literature,  it  is  not  always 
easy  to  decide  whether  a  particular  document  is  a 
letter  or  an  epistle,  as  will  appear  from  the  follow- 
ing considerations.  { 1 )  In  many  such  compositions 
there  is  nothing  to  indicate  whether  the  writer  de- 
sired to  address  the  general  public  or.  not.  (2)  The 
art  of  the  epistle-writer  consisted  very  largely  in 
his  ability  to  personate  a  true  letter-writer,  so 
that  the  reader  should  never  have  the  faintest 
suspicion  that  the  writing  in  his  hands  was  any- 
thing but  a  genuine  letter.  (3)  Even  in  letters 
properly  so  called  the  writer  did  not  always  allow 
his  words  and  thoughts  to  flow  freely  and  spon- 
taneously, but  sometimes — and  especially  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  ancient  era,  when  rhetoric  pre- 
vailed everywhere — as  we  find  even  in  correspond- 
ence whose  private  and  confidential  nature  is 
beyond  doubt,  invested  the  structure  and  style  of 
his  letter  with  rhetorical  features  such  as  we  might 
expect  to  meet  with  in  writings  designed  to  in- 
fluence the  public  mind,  and  therefore  of  necessity 
far  removed  from  the  free  and  easy  prattle  of  a 
letter.  (4)  Finally,  it  is  not  easy  to  specify  the 
point  of  transition  between  the  limited  circle  to 
which  the  private  letter  may  be  addressed  and  the 
general  public  to  which  the  epistle  makes  its 
appeal.  In  most  cases,  no  doubt,  it  is  possible  to 
decide  whether  an  epistle  is  meant  for  the  public 
eye,  but  it  is  frequently  far  from  certain  whether 
a  particular  letter  addressed  to  a  limited  public,  as 
e.g.  a  church  or  a  group  of  churches,  or,  say,  the 
bishops  of  a  metropolitan  province,  has  not  lost  all 
claim  to  be  regarded  as  a  real  letter.  Notwith- 
standing these  considerations,  however,  the  dis- 
tinction between  epistle  and  true  letter  has  every 
right  to  be  retained.  Like  all  such  distinctions,  it 
doubtless  fails  to  make  due  allowance  for  the 
li\'ing  current  of  literary  development,  but  it 
teaches  us  to  keep  an  open  eye  for  the  diversities 
and  gradations  of  literature,  and  thus  also,  when 
rightly  used,  helps  us  to  define  more  accurately 

VOL.  1. — 2^ 


the  character  of  the  epistolary  writings  in  the 
NT. 

Now,  as  the  Christian  writers  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  adopted  the  'epistle,'  and,  we  may  even  say, 
made  use  of  it  with  a  zest  that  may  be  inferred, 
in  particular,  from  the  fact  that  they  enriched  the 
literary  side  of  the  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse  by 
means  of  the  epistolary  form  (cf.  Lk  1**-,  Rev  l'"^-), 
it  is  necessary  to  give  due  weight  to  the  following 
points:  (1)  that  in  this  as  in  other  respects  the 
Apostolic  Age  was  embedded  in  the  same  literary 
tradition  of  later  antiquity  as  we  are  able  to  trace 
in  various  Greek  and  Latin  prototypes  of  non- 
Christian  origin ;  (2)  that,  nevertheless,  the 
structure,  style,  and  diction  of  the  primitive 
Christian  epistles  nearly  always  carry  us  into  a 
ditterent  sphere  of  culture  from  that  associated 
with  the  extant  post-classical  epistolary  litera- 
ture composed  on  classical  models ;  and,  finally, 
(3)  that  the  influence  of  the  hortatory  addresses 
of  Christian  preachers  in  the  primitive  Church  is 
clearly  traceable  in  these  Christian  epistles. 

Among  the  'epistles 'of  the  Apostolic  Age  the 
present  writer  would  include  the  following  :  James, 
1  Peter,  Jude,  Hebrews,  1  John,  and  Barnabas. 
These  for  the  most  part  ditt'er  in  no  essential  point 
from  hortative  addresses  to  a  congregation,  and 
the  epistolary  form,  where  it  is  present  at  all,  or 
where,  as  in  Hebrews,  it  is  no  more  than  suggested, 
is  merely  a  form,  which,  in  fact,  is  completely 
shattered  by  the  contents.  Among  these  Epistles 
there  is  not  one  which  in  virtue  of  a  refined  or 
even  well-schooled  art  could  claim  to  be  considered 
a  true  letter.  But  this  is  itself  a  striking  evidence 
of  the  significant  fact  that  the  Christian  writers 
of  the  Apostolic  Age,  greatly  as  they  had  been 
afl'ected  by  the  stream  of  literary  activity  in  the 
grander  style  of  the  ancients,  were  now  feeling 
their  way  towards  new  forms  in  which  to  com- 
municate their  religious  ideas  to  a  wider  public. 
With  tliis  end  in  view,  therefore,  they  had  re- 
course to  the  epistle,  as  the  literary  eidos  at 
once  of  the  simplest  character  and  lying  closest  to 
their  hands  ;  but  here — even  in  the  case  of  a  writer 
like  the  author  of  Hebrews,  who  has  obviously 
been  powerfully  influenced  by  the  elements  of 
Greek  rhetoric — the  substance  of  the  message  was 
for  them  of  much  greater  importance  than  the 
form.  The  fictitious,  pseudonymous  epistle  is  a 
literary  phenomenon  that  first  makes  its  appear- 
ance in  the  post- Apostolic  Age. 

LrrERATCRB. — R.  Hercher,  Epistolographi  Grceei,  Paris,  1873 
(a  collection  of  Greek  letters) ;  H.  Peter,  Der  Brief  in  der 
romi^chen  Litteratur,  Leipzig,  1901 ;  E.  Norden,  Die  antike 
Eunstprosa^,  do.  1909 ;  G.  A.  Deissmann,  Bibelstudien, 
Marburg,  1895,  pp.  187-225  (Eng.  tr.,  1901,  pp.  1-59)  ;  C.  F.  G. 
Heinrici,  Der  litterarische  Character  der  neatest.  Schri/ten, 
Leipzig,  1908,  p.  56flf. ;  J.  Weiss,  '  Literaturgesch.  des  NT,'  in 
BOG  iii.  [1912]  2175-2215  ;  H.  Jordan,  Gesch.  der  altchrisUiehen 
Literal  ur,  Leipzig,  1911,  p.  12o  If.  (containing  alsoa  historj-  of  the 
Christian  Epistle  till  a.d.  600) ;  P.  Wendland,  Die  hellenistisch- 
romische  Kuitur  in  ihren  Beziehungen  zu  Judentum  und 
Christentum,  'Die  urchristliche  Literaturfomien,'  Tiibingen, 
1912,  pp.  343-381.  H.  JORDAN. 

ERASTUS  CEpao-roj).— 1.  In  Ro  16^3  Erastus  is 
'  the  treasurer  of  the  city '  (6  okovo/toj  t^s  iroXewi, 
arcariiis  civitatis)  of  Corinth,  who  sends  saluta- 
tions with  '  Quartus  the  brother.'  His  office  was 
an  important  one.  He  stands  almost  alone  in  the 
NT  as  a  convert  of  position  and  influence. 

2.  In  Ac  19^-  the  name  is  given  to  one  of  two — 
Timothy  being  the  other — who  '  ministered '  to  St. 
Paul  in  Ephesus,  and  who  were  sent  by  him  on 
some  errand  into  Macedonia. 

3.  In  '2  Ti  4-*  Erastus  is  a  companion  of  St.  Paul, 
said  to  have  remained  in  Corinth,  i.e.  during  the 
interval  between  the  first  and  second  imprison- 
ments. 

Are  these  three  to  be  identified  ?    It  is  possible 


354 


ESAU 


ESCHATOLOGY 


that  2  and  3  are  the  same  man,  but  on  account 
of  the  nature  of  the  ofHce  held  by  1  it  seeniH  un- 
likely that  lie  could  have  been  a  missionary  com- 
panion and  messenger  of  the  Apostle.  To  meet 
this  difficulty,  it  might  be  suggested  that  he  had 
resigned  the  treasurership  on  becoming  a  Christian. 
Again,  if  1  and  3  are  identical,  there  would  seem 
to  be  little  point  in  St.  Paul's  informing  Timothy 
that  an  important  city  official  '  abode  at  Corinth.' 
It  is  held  by  some  scholars  that  the.se  salutations 
from  Corinthian  Christians  in  the  postscript  of  the 
'  Roman '  Epistle  point  to  an  Ephesian  destination 
of  the  passage.  It  is  easier  to  believe  that  the 
members  of  the  Cliurch  at  Corinth  had  friends  at 
Ephesus  than  at  Rome  ;  but,  as  Lightfoot  reminds 
us,  personal  acquaintance  was  not  necessary  in  the 
Apostolic  Church  to  create  Christian  sympathy. 
Also,  'the  descriptive  addition  "the  steward  of 
the  city  "  is  much  more  appropriate  if  addressed  to 
those  to  whom  his  name  was  unknown  or  scarcely 
known,  than  to  those  with  whom  he  was  personally 
acquainted'  (Lightfoot,  Biblical  Essays,  1893,  p. 
305).  If  we  could  accept  the  theory  of  the  Epliesian 
destination,  we  should  be  more  inclined  to  identify 
all  three  names.  T.  B.  Allworthy. 

ESAU  {'HeraO).— (1)  St.  Paul  (Ro  Q'"-")  uses  the 
pre-natal  oracle  regarding  Esau  and  his  brother 
(Gn  25^*-  ^)  as  an  illustration  of  the  principle  of 
Divine  election.  Before  they  were  born,  when 
neither  had  any  merit  or  demerit,  the  elder  was 
destined  to  serve  the  younger.  As  the  prophet 
Malachi  (P-^)  has  it,  'Jacob  I  loved,  but  Esau  I 
hated.'  In  both  of  the  OT  passages  quoted  there 
was  a  reference  not  merely  to  the  children  but  to 
their  descendants.  The  first  part  of  the  oracle 
runs,  '  Two  nations  are  in  thy  womb,  and  two 
peoples  shall  be  separated  from  thy  bowels ' 
(Gn  25^) ;  and  the  Prophet's  words  are,  '  Was  (or 
'is,'  RVm)  not  Esau  Jacob's  brother?  saith  the 
Lord  :  yet  I  (have)  loved  Jacob  ;  but  Esau  (have)  I 
hated,  and  made  his  mountains  a  desolation,  and 
gave  (given)  his  heritagetothe  jackals  of  the  wilder- 
ness.    Whereas  Edom  saith,'  etc.  (Mai  P-*). 

St.  Paul  is  engaged  in  proving  that  the  Divine 
promise  has  not  failed  though  the  majority  of  the 
children  of  Abraham  have  been  excluded  (or  have 
excluded  themselves  by  unbelief)  from  a  share  in 
its  fulfilment  in  Christ.  His  purpose  is  to  sweep 
away  a  narrow,  particularistic  doctrine  of  election, 
according  to  which  God's  action  ends  in  Israel,  and 
to  replace  it  by  a  grand  universalistic  conception, 
according  to  which  the  world,  or  all  humanity,  is 
the  end  of  the  Divine  action,  and  election  itself 
is  controlled  by  an  all-embracing  purpose  of  love. 
He  accomplishes  his  purpose  partly  by  a  very 
eflective  argumentum  ad  hominem.  The  Jews  so 
little  understood  the  humbling  principle  of  election, 
which  ascribes  all  the  merit  of  salvation  to  God, 
that  they  prided  themselves  on  having  been  chosen, 
while  their  neighbours,  Ishmael  and  Edom,  had 
been  rejected.  Since  Jacob — in  the  prophetic 
words  which  were  so  dear  to  them — had  been 
loved  and  Esau  hated,  it  was  clear  to  them  that 
they  were  the  objects  of  a  peculiar  Divine  favour. 
To  turn  the  edge  of  this  argument,  St.  Paul  had 
only  to  remind  them  that  many  of  the  rejected — 
erf.  Esau  and  all  his  descendants — were  children  of 
Abraham.  If  God  could  make  a  distinction  in  the 
chosen  family  in  former  times,  without  being  un- 
true to  His  covenant.  He  might  do  so  again.  A 
whole  nation  might  lose  its  birthright  like  Esau. 

(2)  The  writer  of  Hebrews  (12'«)  instances  Esau 
as  a  profane  per.son,  who  for  a  single  meal  (avri 
/3/)c6(rews  /*tas)  sold  his  birthright.  '  Profane  '(/Se'/STjXos), 
when  applied  to  things,  means  '  unconsecrated,' 
'secular.  The  wonl  occurs  in  the  LXX  of  Lv  lO^", 
'  ye  shall  put  dillerence  between  the  holy  and  the 


common  {tCov  /3e^7j\w>').'  It  was  the  fault  of  Esau, 
who  was  not  without  admirable  qualities,  that  he 
made  no  such  distinction.  To  him  the  most  .sacred 
things  were  common,  because  he  had  no  spiritual 
discernment.  He  despised  '  this  birthright '  (Gn 
25*-)  as  a  thing  of  no  worth.  He  did  not  de.spise 
the  blessing  which  had  material  advantages  at- 
tached to  it,  and  he  imagined  he  could  retain  it 
even  after  he  had  sold  tlie  birthright.  But  the 
poignant  moment  of  disillusionment  came,  when 
lie  realized  that  the  blessing  was  gone  beyond  re- 
call. His  regrets  were  vain  :  '  he  found  no  place 
for  repentance.'  This  signifies  that  there  was  no 
means  of  undoing  what  he  had  done  ;  the  past  was 
irreparable.  Jamks  Strahan. 

ESCHATOLOGY.— 

I.    TllK  EAHLIKSr  CiritJSTUX  ESCHATOLOQT. 

1.  Sources. 

2.  The  Jewish  back^ound  of  ideas. 

3.  The  new  Oiristian  niessa^^e. 

4.  The  chief  doctrines  of  the  l>ast  Things. 

5.  Extent  and  importance  of  the  aix)caTyptic  element. 

6.  Relation  to  the  teaehinjj  of  our  Lord. 

7.  Decline  of  the  earliest  type  of  Christian  eschatology. 

II.    Tin:  C'lltlSTIAN  Al'OCAIAI'riC  LIIEHATUKE. 

1.  Revelation  of  St.  John. 

2.  Non-canonical  Christian  apocalypses. 

III.  The  jouASNiNE  ty^k  of  eakly  CinasTiAN  eschat- 

Ol.OilY. 

1.  '  Spirituality '  of  the  teaching. 

2.  The  place  of  the  sacraments. 

3.  Later  history  of  this  type  of  eschatology. 

IV.  The  Pauline  tyi-e  of  hahlyCuristias  eschatology. 

1.  Eschatology  of  St.  Paul. 

2.  Eschatology  of  early  Gentile-Christian  churches. 

Scope  of  the  article. — Our  subject  is  the  eschat- 
ology of  the  Apostolic  Church  down  to  A.D.  100. 
By  '  eschatology '  we  understand  (1)  the  doctrine  of 
a  certain  series  of  events  a-ssociated  with  the  end  of 
this  world-era  and  the  beginning  of  another  ;  and 
(2)  the  destiny  of  the  individual  human  soul  after 
death.  We  shall  deal  first  with  the  earliest  type  of 
Christian  eschatology,  as  it  was  taught  by  the  first 
disciples  of  our  Lord,  in  the  primitive  JudjBO- 
Christian  communities ;  and  then  we  shall  en- 
deavour to  trace  the  various  lines  along  which  this 
l)rimitive  teaching  was  developed  and  modified. 

1.  The  earliest  Curistiax  eschatology. 
— 1.  The  sources. — In  studying  the  characteristics 
of  the  Ctarliest  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Last  Things, 
it  seems  not  unrea-sonable  (in  view  of  the  trend  of 
recent  scholarship)  to  base  our  conclusions  with 
some  confidence  upon  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  as  a 
history  '  which  in  most  points,  and  those  es.sential 
points,  stands  the  test  of  reliability'  (Harnack, 
The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  p.  303). 
The  evidence  from  the  speeches  must,  perhaps,  be 
used  with  a  little  more  reserve,  but  even  here 
there  appears  to  be  a  growing  tendency  to  recog- 
nize a  real  historical  value.  Evidence  su^)plement- 
ing  that  of  Acts  may  be  drawn  from  the  Epistles  of 
tlie  NT,  particularly  James,  Hebrews,  and  1  Pet«r, 
all  of  which  belong  to  a  Judtvo-Christian  type  of 
thought,  though  somewhat  later  in  date  than  the 
earliest  preaching  recorded  in  Acts  (see  artt.  on 
James,  Ep.  of  ;  Hebrews,  Ep.  to  ;  Peter,  Ei'.  of). 
From  these  NT  writings  it  is  po.ssible  to  gain  a 
fairly  clear  and  definite  conception  of  the  earliest 
Christian  eschatology. 

2.  The  Jewish '  background  of  ideas.'— The  tyj)e 
of  tiiought  refiected  in  these  early  Christian  writ- 
ings is  thoroughly  and  distinctively  Jewish.  Es- 
jtecially  is  this  the  ca.se  in  the  earlier  chapters  of 
Acts,  where  the  ideas  of  .Jewish  apocalyptic  form 
the  '  background  '  of  the  i)reaching— a  Viackground 
so  familiar  that  it  never  neetls  to  be  explained  or 
expounded  in  detail,  but  yet  never  allows  itself  to 
be  altogether  forgotten.  The  men  who  preached 
the  earliest  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Last  Tilings 
had  for  the  most  part  been  brought  up  in  a  religious 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


365 


atmosphere  impregnated  with  eschatological  ideas. 
The  Judaism  m  whicli  they  were  living  was  the 
Judaism  which  produced  ai>ocalyptic  A%Titing8  such 
as  the  Book  of  Jubilees,  the  Assumption  of  Moses, 
tlie  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  4  Ezra,  etc.  ;  and 
they  were  accustomed  to  think  and  speak  of  their 
religious  hopes  in  the  terms  of  Jewish  apocalyptic. 
Now,  although  the  details  of  apocalyptic  eschat- 
ology  vary  from  book  to  book  (see  e.g.  R.  H. 
Charle.s  in  HDB  i.  741-749),  yet  a  few  fixed  points 
stand  out  in  every  case,  arranged  accordin;|  to  a 
scheme  which  had  become  almost  stereotyped  in  the 
ai>ocalypses,  and  which  is  accepted  as  axiomatic  in 
the  apostolic  preaching.  This  scheme  is  as  follows  : 
(1)  the  signs  foreshadowing  the  end,  (2)  the  Com- 
ing of  the  Messiah,  (3)  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  (4)  the  Last  Judgment,  (5)  the  inauguration  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God.  The  NT  passages  in  which 
this  'eschatological  scheme'  is  implied  are  too 
numerous  to  be  cited  ;  for  typical  examples,  see 
Ac  2"-»  S^'-  42 10^  ISi*-!*  17*1,  Ja  S'"*,  He  1  and  2, 
1  p  4  5.  7. 17   1  xh  4  and  5,  2  Th  2^-»-,  etc. 

The  comparative  uniformity  with  which  these 
'fixed  points'  recur  in  the  Jewish  apocalyptic 
eschatology  may  be  traced  in  part  to  the  Jewish 
idea  of  predestination.  The  events  were  conceived 
of  as  already  fixed  in  the  mind  of  God,  and  (in  a 
sense)  already  pre-existent  in  heaven  ;  so  that  the 

1)rogress  of  history  may  be  regarded  as  an  '  apoca- 
ypse'  or  unveiling  of  the  Divine  plan  which  is 
even  now  '  ready  to  be  revealed  in  the  last  times.' 
It  is  necessary  to  realize  this  if  we  would  under- 
stand the  force  of  the  Judseo-Christian  appeal  to 
the  Old  Testament.  Modem  writers  generallj-  hold 
that  the  value  of  prophecy  consists  primarily  in  its 
insight  into  spiritual  truths,  and  only  indirectly  in 
its  foresight  into  the  future  ;  but  to  the  Jew,  a  co- 
incidence between  a  prophetic  prediction  and  a  subse- 
quent event  was  a  signal  proof  of  Di%"ine  inspiration, 
for  it  showed  that  God  had  '  unveiled '  before  the 
vision  of  His  prophet  some  detail  of  that  future  which 
was  already  predestined  and  lying  spread  out  before 
His  all-seeing  eyes  (cf.  Ac  l"*^-  2»"-»*  S^*"-  i^^  11» 
13^-41  173.11  1328  2Q^t-  etc..  He  4'  9=»,  and  esp.  1  P 
!>-«). 

But,  while  emphasizing  the  background  of  ideas 
common  to  primitive  Christianity  and  Jewish 
apocalyptic,  we  must  not  ignore  the  distinctive- 
ness of  the  former ;  and  this  now  claims  our  at- 
tention. 

3.  The  new  Christian  message. — (1)  The  Messiah 
h/is  come,  in  the  Person  of  Jesus. — The  belief 
that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  and  is  the  Christ,  and 
that  His  life  fulfilled  the  Scriptural  prophecies,  is 
the  central  truth  of  the  apostolic  preaching  (Ac 
236  32J  54:;  i72f.^  Ja  21,  He  1,  1  P  3^  4*,  etc.).  In  the 
Jewish  apocalypses,  two  Messianic  ideals  are  mani- 
fested. On  the  one  hand,  there  was  the  old  pro- 
f>hetic  expectation  of  a  warrior-king  of  David's 
ine,  raised  up  from  among  Grod's  people  to  rule 
them  in  righteousness  and  truth  (Pss.-Sol.  xvii. 
23-51,  etc.).  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  the 
purely  apocalyptic  conception  of  a  heavenly  Being 
descending,  like  Daniel's  Son  of  Man,  from  the 
clouds  of  heaven,  endowed  with  supernatural 
powers,  and  presiding  as  God's  viceroy  at  the 
Great  Judgment.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  NT 
conception  of  our  Lord's  Messiahship,  while  higher 
than  any  previously  set  forth,  is  much  more  nearly 
related  to  the  Danielle  '  Son  of  Man  '  than  to  the 
iwlitical  type  of  Messiah  (Ac  3-i,  1  Th  4^*,  2  Th  1^ 
etc.).  Now,  ii  Jesus  was  the  ile-ssiah,  then,  since 
He  had  actually  come,  and  had  l)een  rejected  by 
His  people,  several  consequences  seemed  (to  Jew- 
ish minds)  to  foiloAv  inevitably,  viz.  : 

(2)  The  Last  Days    are    now    in  progress. — In 

Jewish  apocalyptic,  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  is 

.  inv&riably  associated  with  the  end  of  this  world 


and  the  beginning  of  the  New  Era.  So,  when  the 
apostles  proclaimed  that  the  Messiali  had  come, 
they  thereby  conveyed  to  their  Jewish  hearers  the 
impression  that  the  Last  Days  had  also  come — 
not  merely  that  they  were  at  nand,  but  that  they 
had  actually  begun  and  were  in  progress.  And  in 
fact  this  belief  is  implied  in  many  NT  passages, 
the  full  meaning  of  which  often  escapes  the  notice 
of  the  casual  re^er,  who  is  full  of  modem  ideas. 
But  if  once  this  eschatological  outlook  is  realized, 
the  early  narratives  of  Acts  are  tilled  mth  new 
meaning.  In  particular,  it  will  be  noticed  that 
the  'appeals  to  i)rophecy,'  which  occur  so  fre- 
quently in  Acts,  are  often  connected  with  the  de- 
sire to  prove  that  the  Last  Days  have  at  length 
come ;  e.g.  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  at  Pente- 
cost is  hailed  by  St.  Peter  as  the  fulfilment  of 
Joel's  prophecy,  which  expressly  referred  to  '  the 
Last  Days '  (Ac  2i«-» ;  cf.  Jl  2^-^).  His  argument 
is  that,  since  the  propliecy  has  been  fulfilled,  it 
foUows  that  the  '  La-st  Days '  foretold  therein  must 
have  come.  Similarly,  the  charismata,  and  the 
gifts  of  healing  and  of  tongues,  which  were  pre- 
valent in  the  early  Church,  lent  themselves  readily 
to  the  view  that  they  were  a  part  of  the  miraculous 
'  signs  of  the  end '  foretold  by  prophets  and  apoca- 
lyptists  (Ac  218-  a  «  4»fl.  512-16  jgis  jge  oiS).  Again, 
the  Death,  Resurrection,  and  A.scension  of  our 
Lord  were  proclaimed  by  the  apostles,  not  merely 
as  interesting  historical  events,  but  as  part  of  the 
miraculous  portents  which  were  to  form  the  '  birth- 
pangs  of  the  Kingdom  of  God'  (Ac  2**-»  31*-*  26»). 
All  these  things  combined  to  deepen  in  the  minds 
of  the  first  disciples  of  our  Lord  the  conviction 
that  '  it  was  the  last  hour.' 

(3)  The  Messiah  is  immediately  to  return  as 
Judge. — Jesus,  the  Messiah,  has  been  rejected  by 
His  people,  but  there  remains  yet  another  act  in 
the  great  drama  of  the  Last  Things.  His  life  on 
earth  has  fulfilled  some  of  the  Messianic  pro- 
phecies ;  but  others  {e.g.  Daniel's  vision  of  the  Son 
of  Man)  are  still  awaiting  fulfilment.  So  the 
Messiah  is  about  to  come  again  immediately  in 
glory  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  to  judge  all  man- 
kind (Ac  1"  10*2  17"  24»  Ja  5«- »,  1  P  4')  and  to 
destroy  the  apostate  city  of  Jerusalem  and  the  in- 
habitsmts  thereof  (Ac  6").  Thus  the  apostolic 
preaching  Avas  in  part  a  stem  denunciation  and  a 
warning  of  judgment  to  come.  But  it  did  not  end 
here. 

(4)  God  is  granting  one  more  opportunity. — 
Herein  lay  the  'good  tidings*  of  the  apostolic 
preaching.  Although  the  Jews  had  incurred  the 
severest  penalties  of  the  Divine  judgment  by  cruci- 
fying the  Messiah  (Ac  S^**-),  yet  another  opportun- 
ity is  being  offered,  by  which  all  men  may  escape 
'  the  wrath  to  come,'  and  receive  the  Divine  for- 
giveness. The  only  conditions  demanded  by  God 
are  (a)  belief  in  Jesns  as  Lord  and  Messiaii  (Ac 
16*»^  ;  cf.  2»^*-,  etc.),  and  (6)  repentance  (Ac  2»  3" 
20^).  Those  who  'believe'  and  'repent'  will  be 
saved  in  the  Judgment  from  the  condemnation 
which  is  impending  over  all  the  world  (Ac  2" 
31s.  23-36j^  and  win  be  forgiven  by  the  Lord  Jesus, 
who,  as  Messianic  Judge,  alone  has  the  authority 
to  grant  such  pardon  (Ac  5*^  10**).  Thus  it  will  be 
seen  that  '  salvation '  and  '  forgiveness,'  as  terms 
of  Christian  theology,  are  in  their  origin  eschato- 
logical, though  they  have  been  found  capable  of 
development  along  non-eschatological  lines  (see 
below).  And  it  was  just  because  of  this  eschato- 
logical background  that  the  apostolic  '  gospel  * 
was  so  intensely  fervent  and  urgent;  for  there 
was  not  a  moment  to  spare ;  '  the  Judge  was  stand- 
ing before  the  doors '  ( Ja  5» ;  cf.  1  P  4*-  ^-  "),  and 
every  convert  was  indeed  a  brand  plucked  from 
the  burning  (Ac  2*'-*'-  *^  3^*-=*).  So  the  apostolic 
preaching  was  transformed  from  a  denunciation  and 


356 


KSCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


a  warning  of  iin})ending  judgment  into  an  evangel 
of  salvation  and  forgiveness. 

(5)  The  free  gifts  of  God, — To  descrilje  the 
apostolic  gospel  simply  as  a  promise  of  escape  from 
the  wrath  to  come  would  be  inadei^uate;  it  was  a 
promise  rich  with  new  gifts  and  blessings — e.g.  the 
outflowing  of  the  Divine  Spirit  (Ac  2*^'  """•  5*^),  and 
the  'seasons  of  refreshing,'  which  would  sustain 
the  elect  until  the  return  of  the  Messiah  and  tiie 
'restoration  of  all  tilings'  (Ac  3'®'-^ ;  see  below,  I. 
i  (5)).  And  these  blessings  were  not  to  be  labori- 
ously earned,  but  were  freely  offered  to  all  who 
would  'repent 'and  'believe.' 

4.  The  application  of  the  apostolic  message  to 
the  chief  doctrines  of  the  Last  Things. — Tlie  ideas 
underlying  the  most  primitive  Cliristian  escliato- 
logy,  as  we  have  outlined  it  above,  are  so  unfamiliar 
to  us  that  tlieir  bearing  upon  the  great  problems  of 
the  future  life  is  not  at  first  sight  evident,  and 
requires  a  brief  consideration. 

(1)  The  Second  Coming  of  our  Lord. — Most  early 
Christians  doubtless  conceived  of  this  in  tlie 
traditional  dramatic  form,  in  accordance  with  the 
teaching  of  Enoch  and  other  Jewish  apocalypses. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  remein leered  that 
(a)  the  'unearthly'  conception  of  the  Messiah  set 
forth  in  the  Enochic  *  Son  of  Man '  would  be  modi- 
lied  by  the  recollection  of  the  historical  human 
personality  of  Jesu»  the  Messiah ;  and  (h)  the 
apocalyptic  idea  of  Messiahship,  though  one-sided, 
and  therefore  inadequate  for  a  satisfactory  Christo- 
logy,  was  yet  a  high  and  transcendent  ideal — one 
■which  needed  to  be  supplemented  and  enlarged, 
rather  than  corrected.  It  formed  a  good  founda- 
tion, upon  which  Christian  thought  and  experience 
were  able  to  build  a  fuller  and  truer  doctrine  of  our 
Lord's  Person  and  Second  Coming. 

(2)  The  Last  Judgment.  —  This  also  was,  in 
primitive  Christian  thought,  closely  linked  with 
the  Person  of  our  Lord  as  Messianic  Judge.  It 
was  thought  of  as  limited  in  time  to  a  date  in  the 
near  future,  and  probably  localized  at  some  place 
on  the  earth  (perliaps  Jerusalem  ;  cf.  Ac  6'*,  1  P 
4").  Such  ideas,  however  crude,  were  capable  of 
being  '  spiritualized '  in  course  of  time,  without 
any  breach  in  the  continuity  of  Christian  teaching. 
A  more  serious  problem  is  raised  by  the  difficulty 
of  reconciling  the  doctrine  of  a  universal  Judgment 
(Ac  17^S  1  r  4')  with  the  doctrine  ol forgiveness, 
by  which  some  men  are  '  acquitted  '  beforehand  in 
anticipation  of  the  Judgment.  This  is  a  hard, 
perhaps  an  insoluble,  problem ;  but  it  is  not 
peculiar  to  eschatology  ;  for  it  confronts  us  wher- 
ever the  ideas  of  forgiveness  and  justice  are  placed 
side  by  side. 

(3)  The  Intermediate  State. — So  long  as  the 
Return  of  the  Lord  was  expected  to  occur  immedi- 
ately, there  was  little  room  for  any  speculations 
with  regard  to  the  state  of  those  wlio  had  '  fallen 
asleep  in  Christ.'  The  '  waiting- time '  seemed  so 
brief  that  it  did  not  invite  mucli  consideration. 
To  expect  to  find  in  the  NT  authoritative  state- 
ments either  for  or  against  prayers  for  the  dead, 
or  formal  distinctions  between  an  intermediate 
state  of  purgation  and  a  final  state  of  bliss,  is  to 
forget  the  peculiar  eschatological  outlook  of  primi- 
tive Christianity,  and  to  look  for  an  anachronism. 
The  beginnings  of  Christian  sjieculation  concerning 
the  Intermediate  State  come  before  us  at  quite  an 
early  stiige  (e.g.  in  1  Thess.) ;  but  they  do  not  be- 
long to  the  earliest  stage  of  all. 

Tlie  case  was  somewiiat  different  with  regard 
to  the  faithful  wiio  had  died  before  Christ  came. 
Christians  naturally  wished  to  know  how  these 
would  be  enabled  to  hear  the  'good  tidings,' and 
share  in  tiie  forgiveness  and  salvation  now  ofleretl 
by  Christ.  Two  well-known  i»assages  in  1  Peter 
bear  upon  this  point :  the  '  preaching  to  the  spirits 


in  prison  '(IP  3'"),  and  the  '  jneacliing  to  the  deatl ' 
(1  P  4').  A  detailed  discuasion  is  iinpo.ssible  here  ; 
see  the  Commentaries  ad  loc.  In  the  i)resent 
wvMtir' a  Primitive  Christian  Jisc/utlologu,  p.  254  ff., 
it  is  contendetl  that  the  passages  should  Ix;  inter- 
preted in  accordance  Avitii  the  methods  of  Jewish 
apocalyptic ;  and  that  their  main  purpose  is  to 
teach  tliat  the  '  good  tidings '  have  l^uen  proclaimed 
by  Christ  to  those  who  had  died  before  His  Coming, 
so  that  at  His  Return  they  may  have  the  same 
opportunities  of  repentance  as  those  who  are  alive 
at  the  time.  Broadly,  too,  we  may  see  in  these 
passages  Scriptural  warrant  for  the  view  that  there 
may  be  opportunities  for  repentance  after  death. 

(4)  The  Itesurrer.tion. — Questionings  with  regard 
to  the  nature  and  manner  of  the  resurrection  are 
scarcely  seen  at  all  in  the  earliest  eschatolo^  as 
reflected  in  Acts  and  the  Judajo-Christian  Epistles 
(see  Lake,  The  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  p.  91  f.). 
Generally  the  references  a])])ly  to  our  Lord's  Re- 
surrection, and  even  where  the  general  resurrection 
is  implied  (Ac  238-8  24">  26«-»)  no  details  as  to  the 
manner  thereof  are  forthcoming.  In  Ac  24'*  its 
universal  scope  ('both  of  the  just  and  unjust')  is 
asserted  ;  and  in  He  6'*  ^  dLviaraai^  veKp2iv  is  in- 
cluded among  'the  principles  of  Christ'  which 
are  too  well  known  to  neecf  a  detailed  exposition. 
But  we  find  nothing  corresponding  to  the  Pauline 
discussion  as  to  the  nature  of  the  resurrection -lxj<ly. 
In  the  Jewish  apocalypses,  the  doctrine  fluctuates 
from  an  extremely  material  conception  to  one 
which  is  purely  spiritual ;  and  probably  the  early 
Christians  inherited  various  views  on  this  point. 
The  idea  that  our  Lord's  Resurrection  was  a  '  first- 
fruits '  of  the  general  resurrection  is  imi)lied  in  Ac 
26'",  and  this  was  destined  in  time  to  influence  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  resurrection. 

(5)  Final  destinies. — Here  again,  no  detailed 
scheme  of  doctrine  is  yet  put  forward.  Broadly, 
it  is  implied  that  .supreme  joy  will  be  the  reward 
of  the  '  believers,'  and  that  a  dreadful  fate  awaits 
unbelievers  (Ac  3^).  The  phrase  '  restoration  of 
all  things'  (Ac  3^")  might  be  taken  to  imply  a 
'  universalistic '  view  of  future  destinies,  or  even 
some  idea  of  '  world-cycles '  by  which  the  eras  that 
are  past  .are  brought  back  in  course  of  time  ;  but 
a  similar  phrase  is  found  in  Mai  4'  (LXX),  and  may 
be  no  more  than  a  general  term  for  the  perfection 
of  the  Messianic  Kingdom. 

5.  The  extent  and  importance  of  the  apocalyptic 
element  in  the  earliest  Christian  eschatology. — 
Until  recent  years,  the  apocalyptic  element  in  the 
NT  received  but  scant  notice ;  but  of  late  a  new 
theory  as  to  the  teaching  and  'tone 'of  ajrostolic 
Christianity  has  been  put  forward  (see  e.g.  Lake, 
Tlie  Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paid,  or  Schweitzer, 
Paul  and  his  Interpreters).  It  is  contended  that 
the  '  gospel '  of  ])riinitive  Christianity  was  ex- 
clusively fin  eschatological  message,  foretelling, 
in  terms  of  current  Jewish  apocalyptic,  the  ap- 
proaciiing  end  of  this  world-era  and  the  beginning 
of  the  next.  If  the  interpretation  given  above  be 
correct,  there  is  a  measure  of  truth  in  this  •  Con- 
sistent Eschatological'  view  of  apostolic  eschato- 
logy ;  for  the  new  faith  did  not  at  once  sweei)  away 
the  old  methods  of  thought,  and  we  should  miss 
the  force  and  full  significance  of  NT  eschatology 
unless  we  interpreted  it  in  the  light  of  Jewish 
apocalyptic. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  'Consistent  Eschato- 
logists'  «lo  not  appear  to  give  suHicient  place  to 
other  factors:  e.g.  (I)  the  '  jwlitical'  type  of 
•Jewi.sh  thought,  in  which  the  Mes-siah  is  conceived 
of  as  an  eartldy  Monarch,  and  the  Kingdom  of  God 
as  an  extensive  Jewish  Empire.  Some  sucli  iK)litieal 
ideas  were  clearly  in  the  minds  of  the  apostles  at 
the  llrst  (Ac  1*),  and  they  may  well  have  existed  in 
the  primitive  Church  side  by  side  with  the  purely 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


357 


apocalyptic  eschatology.  And  (2)  the  '  Consistent 
Esthatologists '  under-rate  the  importance  of  the 
new  and  distinctively  Christian  element  in  the 
aixxstolic  eschatology.  Also  (3)  a  study  of  the  NT 
shows  that,  from  the  very  tirst,  moral  teaching 
held  a  place  second  to  none  in  the  ajH)stolic  preach- 
ing. In  view  of  these  facts,  it  would  appear  to  be 
an  exaggeration  to  speak  of  the  primitive  aijostolic 
'  gospel '  as  though  it  were  exclusively,  or  even 
predominantly,  an  eschatological  message. 

6.  The  relation  of  the  primitive  apostolic 
eschatology  to  the  teaching  of  our  Lord. — It  was 
from  the  teaching  and  worTc  of  our  Lord  that  the 
af)Ostolic  preaching  derived  its  primarj*  inspiration, 
and  hence  it  is  evident  that  the  apostolic  doctrine 
of  tlje  I>ast  Things  was  intended  to  be  founded 
upon  His.  And  since  recent  study  of  the  NT 
seems  to  have  shown  that  eschatology  held  an 
inijxfrtant  place  in  our  Lord's  teaching,  we  may 
not  regard  the  eschatological  •  tone '  of  the  primi- 
tive apostolic  message  as  an  element  foreign  to 
the  mind  of  Christ,  or  one  invent«tl  by  the  apostles 
merely  to  satisfy  their  own  predilections.  It  does 
not  follow,  however,  that  the  apostolic  teaching 
coincided  precisely  with  that  of  our  Lord.  It  wa.s 
only  natural  that  the  ajwstles  should  tend  to 
emphasize  those  aspects  of  His  teaching  which  were 
most  full  of  meaning  to  themselves,  and  to  lay 
but  little  stress  upon  whatever  appeared  to  them 
unfamiliar  or  incomprehensible.  And  so  the  pro- 
portions of  the  message  undergo  some  modification  : 
for  instance,  in  the  apostolic  preaching,  the  ex- 
pectation of  the  Second  Coming  is  set  forth  more 
definitely  than  in  the  words  of  the  Master  Himself. 

But  in  one  point  the  community  of  spirit  between 
the  eschatologj-  of  Christ  and  His  followers  is  most 
noteworthy :  the  close  link  between  the  eschatology 
and  practical  morality.  From  the  first,  the  call  to 
repentance  always  accompanies  the  eschatohjgical 
message  (Ac  2*,  etc.) ;  and  the  '  repentance '  of  the 

f)riniitive  Christians  involved  a  very  real  change  of 
ife.  Herein,  from  the  very  tirst,  lay  a  ditierence 
between  Jewish  and  Christian  eschatology :  the 
former  was  often  only  a  comfortable  theorj',  to  give 
encouragement  in  times  of  trouble  ;  the  latter  was 
always  an  inspiring  call  to  a  new  life  of  faith  and 
love.  This  was  an  essential  element  of  the  apos- 
tolic eschatology,  destined  to  survive  when  the 
forms  and  phrases  of  Jewish  apocalyptic  gave  way 
under  the  trials  of  the  long  delay  in  the  Master's 
Return. 

7.  The  decline  of  the  earliest  type  of  Christian 
eschatology. — The  form  of  the  earliest  Christian 
doctrine  of  the  Last  Things,  as  we  have  estimated 
it  above,  was  congenial  only  to  Jewish  surround- 
ings, and  it  soon  began  to  undergo  some  modifica- 
tion. Some  of  these  lines  of  development  may  be 
traced  to  the  influence  of  Gentile  thought,  as 
reflected,  e.g.,  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  ;  to  the  deepen- 
ing of  the  spiritual  ideas  underlying  the  dramatic 
eschatology,  as  we  see  in  the  Johannine  writings  ; 
and  to  the  rise  of  the  Christian  apocalyptic  litera- 
ture, with  its  close  resemblance  to  Jewish  apocalyp- 
tic. For  the  present,  our  consideration  of  these 
may  best  be  deferred.  But  in  certain  quarters 
the  primitive  Judfeo-Christian  eschatology  appears 
to  have  been  but  little  modified  by  external  in- 
fluences ;  only  it  shows  a  steady  decline  and  a 
gradual  loss  of  its  original  >'itality  and  power. 
The  beginnings  of  this  decline  may  be  seen  even 
in  the  NT  writings  which  we  have  already  been 
considering,  viz.  Acts,  James,  Hebrews,  1  Peter  ; 
its  later  stages  are  reflected  chiefly  in  Jude,  2  Peter, 
theDic/nche  (if  the  early  date  be  accepted),  and 
some  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  The  Johannine 
and  Pauline  writings  also  indirectly  throw  light 
upon  this  subject. 

(1)  Causes  of  the  decline. — (a)  The  recollection  of 


our  LonTs  teaching.— If,  as  we  have  contended,  the 
eschatology  of  our  Lord  wa-s  wider  and  deeper 
than  the  apostolic  interpretation  of  it,  it  was 
natural  that  some  of  the  half-understood  sayings 
of  the  Master — particularly  the  parting  commis- 
sions, Mt  28**,  Ac  1^-*,  which  are  so  notably  non- 
eschatological — should  remain  in  the  memory  of 
the  apostles,  and  that  in  course  of  time  a  fuller 
meaning  should  dawn  upon  their  minds.  So  it 
would  come  to  pass  that  the  moral  and  spiritual 
aspects  of  the  gospel,  and  the  world-wide  scope  of 
its  mission,  would  claim  an  increasing  pre-eminence 
in  the  apostolic  preaching.  (For  the  influence  of 
our  Lord's  teaching  on  St.  Paul,  see  Kennedy,  St. 
PauTs  Conceptions  of  the  Last  Things,  pp.  96-101.) 

(6)  A  keen  sense  of  moral  values.  — '  Practical 
morality'  was  from  the  first  held  in  the  highest 
esteem  in  the  Judseo-Christian  communities  (see, 
e.g.,  the  Epistle  of  James),  and  this  tended  to  draw 
the  centre  of  Christian  interest  away  from  escha- 
tology to  morality.  It  is  difficult  to  illustrate  this 
by  detailed  quotations  ;  perhaps  the  best  proof  may 
be  obtained  by  a  rapid  perusal  of  Acts,  by  means  of 
which  the  steady  diminution  of  the  eschatological 
expectation  as  the  narrative  proceeds  is  readily 
noticed.  In  the  later  speeches  of  St.  Paul,  at 
Miletus  (Ac  2(fi^^)  or  at  Jerusalem  (Ac  22),  escha- 
tology is  almost  ignored  ;  and  St.  Paul  before  Felix 
reasons  of  '  righteousness  and  temperance '  as  well 
as  of  'judgment  to  come'  (Ac  24-'^).  Also  the 
teachingof  1  Peter,  andmost  of  all  of  James,  suggests 
that  moral  and  spiritual  values  are  far  more  es- 
teemed than  eschatological  problems. 

(c)  The  charismata. — The  spiritual  gifts,  e.g.  of 
healing  or  of  tongues,  while  originally  regarded 
by  Jewish  Christians  as  '  signs  of  the  end '  (see 
above,  I.  3  (2)),  soon  began  to  acquire  an  intrinsic 
value  of  their  own  in  the  eyes  of  the  Christian 
community.  Men  knew,  as  a  fact  of  Christian 
experience,  that  they  had  been  freed  from  the  power 
of  sin  and  from  the  sense  of  guilt  before  God  ;  and 
so  they  began  to  use  the  terms  '  salvation,'  '  justi- 
fication,' etc.,  to  describe  their  own  spiritual  experi- 
ences rather  than  purely  eschatological  hopes.  (In 
Ac  16^^,  e.g.,  'salvation'  scarcely  seems  eschato- 
logical ;  and  in  Ac  10^  our  Lord  is  described  simply 
as  '  one  who  went  about  doing  good  and  healing.  ) 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  influences  we  have 
been  considering  tended  to  alter  the  proportions  of 
Christian  teaching  by  emphasizing  non-eschato- 
logical  factors  at  the  expense  of  eschatology.  But 
there  were  also  other  influences  at  work,  directly 
tending  to  break  up  the  primitive  doctrine  of  the 
Last  Things. 

(rf)  The  delay  in  the  Return. — This  was  the 
most  potent  of  all  the  factors  which  changed  the 
'  tone  of  Christian  eschatology.  As  the  days  and 
montlis  passed,  and  the  Son  of  Man  did  not  appear 
on  the  clouds  of  heaven,  it  was  impossible  to  repeat 
with  the  same  assurance  the  old  message :  '  The 
time  is  at  hand.'  Yet  the  old  hope  persisted  long 
in  Judseo-Christian  circles,  not  only  in  the  earlier 
writings,  e.g.  Ja  5*,  1  P  4^,  but  until  the  close  of 
the  1st  cent.,  e.g.  1  Jn  2'*,  Didache  16,  and  even  in 
the  Apology  of  Aristides. 

But  we  see  the  change  of  '  tone '  in  St.  Paul's 
charge  to  the  Ephesian  elders  (Ac  2(F-'*),  which, 
so  far  from  anticipating  an  immediate  Return  of 
the  Lord,  looks  forward  to  a  period  of  apostasy, 
and  to  an  extended  ministry  in  the  Church.  TN  e 
see  it  even  more  plainly  in  2  P  3^,  where  the 
mocking  question,  'Where  is  the  promise  of  His 
coming  ? '  is  met  by  the  old  answer  ot  Jewish  apoca- 
lyptists  :  '  One  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a  thou- 
sand years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day '  (2  P  3^ ; 
cf.  Slavonic  Enoch,  §  32).  Such  an  argument  vir- 
tually implies  that  the  primitive  confidence  in  an  im- 
mediate Return  had  been  surrendered.     The  gradual 


358 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


weakening  of  tliat  confidence  will  come  before  us 
a^ain  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  [see  below].  In  Didcu-hr,, 
16,  the  Return,  though  near,  is  to  be  preceded  by 
the  rule  of  Antichrist ;  and  the  rise  ot  '  Chiliasni ' 
in  the  2nd  cent,  thrust  the  final  consummation  still 
further  into  the  future. 

(tf)  The  problem  of  sin  in  the  Christian  commnnity. 
— This,  tliough  not  at  first  siglit  an  eschatological 
question,  indirectly  helped  to  modify  tfie  primitive 
doctrine  of  the  Last  Things.  The  early  Christian 
conception  of  final  destinies  was  simple  and  con- 
sistent :  those  who  believed  and  rejjented  would  be 
saved  ;  those  who  believed  not  would  be  condemned. 
This  view  assumed  that  Christian  practice  would 
always  be  in  complete  accord  with  Cliristian  pro- 
fession ;  and,  so  long  as  this  was  the  case,  it  was 
not  open  to  objection.  But  in  practice  it  was  soon 
found  that  professing  Christians  were  not  always 
consistent  in  their  lives  ( Ja  3'  4^-  - ;  cf.  Ac  20^). 
So  the  simjtle  two-fold  division  of  mankind  into 
'saved'  and  'not-saved'  became  unsatisfactory  to 
man's  sense  of  justice,  for  it  did  not  correspond  to 
the  facts  of  experience  ;  and  similarly  the  two-fold 
division  of  hnal  destinies  into  '  eternal  bliss '  and 
'  eternal  woe '  became  open  to  the  charge  that  it 
imputed  to  God  a  line  of  action  not  wholly  just. 

This  ditticulty  was  met  in  two  ways,  (a)  The 
stricter  minds  insisted  that  post-baptismal  sin  for- 
feited the  right  to  salvation,  and  incurred  con- 
demnation (He  6*"®).  By  this  means  all  Cliristians 
guilty  of  sin  were  classed  among  the  'not-saved,' 
and  the  two-fold  division  of  retribution  could  logi- 
cally be  maintained.  (jS)  A  more  lenient  view 
admitted  the  possibility  of  a  second  repentance 
after  post-baptismal  sin,  at  least  if  the  sin  were 
atoned  for  by  penance.  Soon  after  the  year  A.D. 
100  we  find  this  view  prevalent  (2  Clem.  7  ;  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas :  Vis.  iii.,  Sim.  vi.,  etc.).  Tliis 
view,  wliile  rich  in  charity,  surrendered  the  ideal 
of  a  consistent  Christian  life,  and  is  far  removed 
from  the  logical  simplicity  of  primitive  Christian 
eschatology.  A  further  application  of  the  idea  of 
*  penance '  to  the  future  life  resulted  in  the  doctrine 
or  purgatory,  whereby  the  primitive  two-fold  divi- 
sion of  the  other  world  becomes  three-fold.  (For 
the  beginnings  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  see 
ShepJierd  of  Hermas :  Vis.  iii.  7  ;  Clem.  Alex. 
Strom,  vi.  14 ;  and  some  of  the  Christian  apoca- 
lypses.) 

(f)  The  influence  of  Jewish  apocalyptic. — We  have 
already  referred  in  general  terms  to  this  influence 
under  '  the  Jewisli  biickground  of  ideas '  (see  above, 
I.  2),  and  its  full  results  will  come  before  us  at  a 
later  stage,  under  II.  At  this  point,  however,  it  is 
worth  noting  that  a  deliberate  imitation  of  the 
Jewish  apocalypses  in  writings  not  themselves 
apocalyptic  marks  the  decline  of  the  Judieo-Chris- 
tian  type  of  eschatology.  Jude  and  2  Peter  are  the 
most  notable  instances  in  the  NT.  Although  the 
language  is  at  first  sight  that  of  primitive  Chris- 
tianity, there  is  a  real  difference.  Instead  of  the 
bold  outlines  of  the  gootl  tidings  concerning  Jesus 
the  Messiah,  we  find  a  mass  of  detailed  revelations 
about  angels,  and  fallen  stars,  and  cosmic  convul- 
sions (Jude«-i«,  2  P  2«-"  3«-'3),  such  as  the  Jewish 
apocalyptists  delighted  to  describe,  but  which  liad 
ceased  to  attract  the  first  generation  of  Cliristians, 
because  of  the  all-absorbing  interest  of  tlie  '  good 
tidings.'  The  general  tone  of  these  Epistles  is  also 
far  more  pessimistic  than  that  of  the  earliest 
Christian  preaching,  and  reflects  the  position  of 
men  conscious  of  a  reaction  after  a  great  spiritual 
revival  (Jude  »'•  "'•,  2  P  2"-  S^-^).  This  again  agrees 
with  the  normal  characteristics  of  Jewish  ai)Oca- 
lyptic.  It  should  be  noted  al.so  that  Jude  "'•  is  a 
direct  quotation  from  Enoch  i.  9. 

A  still  later  stage  in  the  decline  of  the  primitive 
JudsBO-Christian    eschatology    under    apocalyptic 


influence  is  seen  in  Pajiias,  where  the  apocalyptic 
details  have  become  simply  puerile,  and  the  old 
virility  and  strong  moral  a.ssociations  of  eschatology 
have  practically  vanished  (see,  e.g.,  the  quotation 
from  Papias  in  Iren.  adv.  Ha:r.  V.  xxxiii.  .3f.). 

(2)  Results  of  the  decline. — A  number  of  causes, 
some  of  which  we  have  briefly  considered  above, 
slowly  but  surely  modified  the  primitive  doctrine 
of  the  Last  Things,  as  preached  in  Judjeo-Christian 
circles.  The  expectation  of  an  immediate  Return 
of  the  Messiah,  which  had  been  its  main  inspira- 
tion, died  away ;  and  nothing  replaced  it.  The 
result  was  that  this  type  of  eschatology  cea.sed 
to  be  a  living  force  in  the  Christian  Church. 
Where  it  was  elaborated  l)y  apocalyj)tic  details,  it 
(continued  for  a  time  (las  we  shall  see  in  the  case  of 
tiie  Christian  apocalypses)  to  enjoy  some  measure 
of  popular  favour ;  or  again,  where  it  was  inter- 
preted and  re-stated  by  master-minds,  sucli  as  St. 
Paul  and  St.  John,  its  abiding  value  was  revealed, 
and  has  never  ceased  to  be  recognized  by  thoughtful 
minds.  But  in  its  original  form  it  was  not  fitted 
to  survive,  and  so,  unless  it  was  transformed,  it 
slowly  expired. 

II.  The  Christian  apocalyptic  literature. 
— So  far,  we  have  been  considering  what  api>ear8 
to  have  been  the  '  normal '  type  of  earlj'  Christian 
eschatology  ;  and  we  have  seen  tliat  the  ideas  and 
phraseology  of  the  Jewish  apocalypses  often  occur 
in  Christian  literature  which  is  not  properly  '  apo- 
calyptic' in  its  literary  form  (e.g.  Acts,  2  Peter, 
etc. ).  In  these  cases  tlie  apocalyptic  influence  may 
be  called  indirect  or  incidental.  But  there  are 
other  Christian  writings  in  which  the  literary  form 
of  Jewish  apocalyptic  is  deliberately  imitated  in 
detail ;  and  in  these  writings — especially  those  of 
later  date — we  see  a  distinct  modification  of  the 
earliest  type  of  Christian  eschatology,  such  as  we 
have  considered  above. 

1.  The  Revelation  of  St.  John.— (1)  General 
scheme  of  the  book. — This,  the  greatest,  and  per- 
haps the  earliest,  of  the  Christian  apocalypses, 
contains  such  a  wealth  of  material  bearing  upon 
eschatology  that  a  detailed  treatment  is  here 
impossible.  If  (as  the  majority  of  scholars  hold) 
the  book  belongs  to  the  times  of  Nero,  Vespasian, 
or  Domitian  (c.  A.D.  65-70,  or  95),  it  is  an  ex- 
tremely imi^ortant  witness  to  the  histoiy  of  early 
Christian  eschatology,  wliatever  be  the  final 
decision  with  regard  to  its  authorship. 

Various  attempts  have  fjeen  made  to  dissect  the 
book  into  strata  of  diflerent  dates  ;  but,  viewed  as 
a  whole,  the  book  conveys  a  strong  impres.sion  of 
literary  unity.  In  particular,  with  regard  to  the 
eschatology,  the  various  parts  resemble  each  other 
in  tone  far  more  nearly  than  they  resemble  any 
other  known  apocalypse.  Also,  the  book,  if  re- 
garded as  a  whole,  otters  an  intelligible  scheme : 
(a)  the  Introduction  (!'■*) ;  (b)  the  letters  to  the 
Seven  Cliurches  (l'-3*^),  wliich  show  the  immediate 
jmrpose  for  which  the  author  wrote  the  book  ;  (c) 
the  vision  of  the  opening  of  the  Sealed  Book 
(4'-ll"'),  which  enforces  the  general  message  that 
'  the  end  is  at  hand  '  (see  below) ;  {d)  the  vision  of 
the  Fall  of  Rome  (12i-18^),  whicli  sets  fortli  in 
detail  the  particular  element  of  the  last  great 
crisis  which  for  the  moment  seemed  the  most 
important ;  (e)  the  vision  of  the  Last  Judgment 
(19'-20");  ami  (/)  the  vision  of  the  new  City  of 
God.  These  may  be  regarded  as  component  parts 
of  one  great  apocalypse.  It  will  be  .seen  that  they 
form,  broadly,  an  intelligible  and  progres.sive 
narrative,  on  the  lines  of  normal  Jewisli  apocalyp- 
tic ;  and  though  it  may  be  that  in  pnrts  tiie  visions 
are  'concurrent  rather  than  successive'  (.Mac- 
Culloch  in  ERE  v.  .387),  there  seems  no  sufficient 
reason  to  nostulate  a  '  literary  patchwork.' 

(2)  Thi  book  as  a  type  of  apocalyptic  literature. — 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


359 


The  writer  is  steeped  in  apocalyptic  thought  and 
language,  to  a  greater  extent  than  any  other  NT 
writer.  To  the  average  modern  reader  the  book 
appears  strange  and  unintelligible ;  but  to  those 
familiar  with  Jewish  apocalyptic  there  is  scarcely 
a  phrase  altogether  new  or  without  parallel.  From 
this,  two  imix>rtant  consequences  follow,  (a)  The 
interpretation  of  the  details  should  accord  with 
the  metho<is  of  interpretation  applied  to  ajjocalyp- 
tic  literature  in  general.  It  should  be  remembered, 
e.g.,  that  the  apocaly|)tists  were  in  the  habit  of 
'  heaping  up '  details  in  their  description  of  the 
Messianic  woes  and  the  last  catastrophe,  rather 
with  a  view  to  creating  a  vivid  picture  of  chaos 
and  terror  than  with  the  intention  of  depicting 
some  detinite  event  by  each  separate  illustration. 
So  it  is  probable  that  many  of  the  details  of  the 
NT  Apocalypse  are  not  intended  to  bear  a  too 
careful  analysis  or  interpretation,  (b)  If  the 
author  of  the  Apocalypse  be  identified  with  the 
author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Johannine 
Epistles,  it  is  clear  that  the  primitive  Christians 
were  able  to  '  put  aside '  their  apocalyptic  language 
and  ideas  at  will,  and  to  see  behind  the  dramatic 
imagery  to  the  underljing  spiritual  truths  thus 
symbolized.  And,  conversely,  in  early  Christian 
writings  which  are  apparently  non-apocalyptic,  it 
is  likely  that  eschatological  ideas  are  never  far 
absent  from  the  mind  of  the  writer,  and  may 
appear  incidentally  at  any  pciint. 

(3)  The  writer's  hope  of  an  immediate  Return  of 
the  Lord.  — The  writer  begins  by  claiming  to  reveal 
•the  things  which  shall  shortly  come  to  pass' 
(Rev  I'),  and  closes  with  the  Divine  promise :  '  I 
come  quicJdy'  (Rev  22^**).  Clearly,  then,  the  hope 
of  the  Second  Coming  in  the  near  future  had  not 
yet  faded  from  his  mind.  Indeed,  the  main  pur- 
pose of  the  book  is  similar  to  that  of  all  apoca- 
lypses— viz.  to  encourage  the  faithful  in  times  of 
trouble  with  the  assurance  that  the  hour  of  de- 
liverance is  at  hand.  In  particular,  this  may 
be  seen  in  the  vision  of  the  opening  of  the  Sealed 
Book  (chs.  4-11).  We  read  that  the  opening  of 
the  first  five  seals  is  followed  by  victory  (6'-  -),  war 
(w.*-  *),  famine  (vv.*-  ^),  death  (vr.^-  ^),  and  the  cry 
of  martyred  saints  (w.*-").  So  far,  the  vision  may 
well  be  taken  as  describing  the  position  of  the 
Church  at  the  close  of  the  1st  cent.  A.D.,  when 
Rome's  \-ictories  had  brought  famine,  war,  death, 
and  persecution  in  their  train.  But  when  we  pass 
to  the  opening  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  seals,  we 
are  at  once  confronted  with  cosmic  convulsions 
and  miraculous  portents,  which  form  the  '  birth- 
pangs 'of  the  New  Era  (6^"  8.9).  If  we  inter- 
pret this  vision  as  we  interpret  other  apocalypses, 
we  shall  conclude  that  the  writer  was  living  in  the 
times  of  the  breaking  of  the  fifth  seal,  so  that  the 
vision  np  to  that  point  is  an  apocalyptic  retrospect 
of  history,  and  after  that  point  is  an  apocalyptic 
prediction  of  the  '  Messianic  woes,'  which  were 
about  to  begin  immediately.  This  leads  on  to  the 
vision  of  the  two  witnesses,  their  destruction  by 
the  Beast,  their  resurrection  ( 1 1^^^' ;  probably  a 
picture  of  the  last  great  struggle  with  Antichrist), 
and  the  inauguration  of  the  Kingdom  of  God 
(ll"*"'*).  In  other  words,  the  gist  of  these  chapters 
is  a  message  of  encouragement,  assuring  the  per- 
secuted Christians  that  the  time  of  their  redemp- 
tion has  come. 

(4)  The  political  element  in  the  eschatology. — 
The  Roman  Empire  was,  to  the  mind  of  the  writer, 
the  greatest  enemy  of  Christ — almost,  indeed,  the 
Antichrist  himself.  So  he  devotes  seven  chapters 
(12-18)  to  a  vision  of  the  Fall  of  Rome,  which 
forms  a  kind  of  supplement  to  the  vision  of  the 
opening  of  the  Sealed  Book,  and  deals  with  the 
political  aspect  of  the  Last  Things.  The  details 
offer  many  difficult  problems  for  solution  ;  we  find 


a  medley  of  ideas,  mainly  from  Jewish  apocalyptic, 
blended  perhaps  with  the  popular  expectation  that 
'  Nero'  would  return  once  more  as  a  great  world- 
ruler  (13"  "*«  ;  see  Swete's  Apocalypse,  Introduction, 
eh.  viL).  The  political  outlook  of  these  chapters, 
with  their  intense  hostility  to  the  Roman  Empire, 
is  widely  different  from  that  of  most  NT  writers 
(e.g.  St.  Paul  in  2  Th  2«'-  or  Ro  13»-*).  In  so  far 
as  the  spirit  of  opposition  to  Christ  was  at  that 
time  bound  up  with  the  ix)licy  of  the  Empire,  the 
vision  is  true  to  deep  principles  of  Christian  escha- 
tology  ;  but  some  of  tne  passages  have  lent  them- 
selves to  political  or  ecclesiastical  bias  and  party- 
spirit. 

(5)  The  doctrine  of  the  Millennium. — The  vision 
of  the  Last  Judgment  in  chs.  19  and  20  contains  a 
doctrine  of  the  Millennium.  There  is  to  be  a  first 
resurrection  of  the  faithful  dead,  who  will  'reign 
with  Christ  a  thousand  years,'  during  which  time 
'  the  rest  of  the  dead  lire  not  till  the  thousand 
years  are  finished '  (20*-  ').  Then  follows  a  second 
resurrection,  and  a  second  judgment  of  all  man- 
kind, when  the  assignment  of  final  destinies  is 
made  to  each  soul  (\'v."-^'). 

The  idea  of  a  Millennial  reign  of  the  Messiah  on 
earth  is  found  in  Jewish  apocalypses  (e.g.  cf.  4 
Ezra  vii.  28-31  ;  Slav.  Enoch,  33) ;  but  there  is  no 
authority  for  it  in  the  teaching  of  our  Lord.  It 
seems  difficult  to  attach  to  it  any  meaning  of  per- 
manent spiritual  value  ;  moreover,  in  its  material- 
istic forms  it  has  been  a  source  of  weakness  rather 
than  of  strength  to  Christian  eschatology.  For 
the  later  history  of  ChUiasm,  see  Didache,  16 
(closely  based  on  Rev  19  and  20) ;  Papias  (quoteil 
Iren.  adv.  H(er.  V.  xxxiii.);  Ap.  Bar.  xxxix.  5; 
Ep.  Barnabas,  15 ;  Justin,  c.  Tryph.  80 ;  Iren. 
adv.  H(sr.  V.  xxxiv.  f.,  etc.  Justin,  while  hold- 
ing strongly  to  a  belief  in  the  Millennium  on 
earth,  admits  that  the  belief  was  not  held  '  ubique 
et  ab  omnibus '  in  the  Church. 

(6)  The  distinctiveness  of  the  Johannine  Apoca- 
lypse.— The  resemblance  between  the  NT  Apoca- 
lypse and  other  apocalypses  is,  as  we  have  seen, 
striking ;  but  not  less  striking  are  the  distinctive 
features  of  the  former. 

(a)  Alone  of  all  the  apocalypses,  Jewish  or  Chris- 
tian, it  is  given  under  the  name  of  the  writer,  and 
not  under  an  assumed  name  of  some  great  hero  of 
the  past.  ThLs  is  most  significant ;  for  it  shows 
the  prophetic  character  of  apostolic  eschatology. 
Unlike  apocalyptists  in  general,  the  writer  did 
not  shelter  himself  under  the  authority  of  the 
past ;  but  he  dared  to  speak  boldly  in  his  own 
name,  under  a  strong  conviction  that  he  had  a 
new  message  from  God  to  deliver. 

(b)  The  central  position  given  to  the  Person  of 
Jesus  the  Messiah  is  also  of  importance.  The 
writer  seems  to  feel  that  no  language  is  too  lofty 
to  describe  the  Person  of  our  Lord.  At  the  very 
outset,  the  Danielle  vision  of  the  Almighty  is  ap- 
plied to  our  Lord  without  the  least  hesitancy ; 
and  throughout  the  book  the  Chiistology,  though 
apocalyptic  in  form,  implies  the  most  exalted  con- 
ception of  Messiahship  (Rev  !»-"•  "^  5'-  ^^*  19"*", 
etc. ).  This  is  the  more  noteworthy  when  we  re- 
member that  in  many  of  the  Jew ish  apocalypses, 
especially  those  contemporary  with  primitive  Chris- 
tianity (e.g.  4  Ezra  and  Apocalypse  of  Baruch),  the 
figure  of  the  Messiah  plays  but  an  insignificant 
part. 

(c)  The  lofty  spirituality  of  the  book  is  another 
distinctive  feature.  No  tJook  of  the  NT  has  given 
more  noble  expression  to  the  highest  aspirations 
of  man  for  the  future  life  than  the  Apocalyjise  of 
St.  John.  Certainly  no  other  apocalypse  otlers 
anything  to  rival  its  masterly  word-pictures  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God  (see,  e.g..  Rev  7  21>-^  2i;^-22-). 
Such  passages  show  us  the  heights  to  which  the 


360 


ESCHATOLOGY 


E8CHAT0L0GY 


apocalyptic  type  of  Christian  escliatology  could 
attain  in  the  mind  of  an  inspired  master-tliinker. 
2.  The  non-canonical  Christian  apocalypses. 
— (1)  TIlo  chief  loritinf/s  of  this  (i//ic.  —  I'lie  Apo(;a- 
lypse  of  St.  John  stands  as  tiie  only  representa- 
tive of  Christian  apot;alyptic  in  the  NT;  but  one 
or  two  otiier  Christian  apocalypses  appear  to  l)e- 
long — at  least  in  part — to  the  Ist  cent.  A.D.  The 
determination  of  tlieir  dates  ia,  however,  a  difficult 
matter,  and  by  no  means  established  beyond  doubt. 
Such  are : 

(a)  Parts  of  the  Sibylline  Orackg  (e.g.  the  Proasniium,  bk.  iv. 
and  bk.  viii.  217-429 ;  see  IIDli  v.  CS). 

(6)  Parts  of  the  A»eension  of  Isaiah.  Charles  (Introd.  to 
Asc.  Is.)  assig^ns  chs.  iii.-v.  and  vi.-xi.  to  the  close  of  the  Ist. 
cent.  A.D.  ;  but  Armitage  Robinson  (///>B  ii.  500>>)  assigns  the 
Christian  element  in  Asc.  Is.  to  the  middle  of  the  2nd  cent.  a. p. 

(c)  The  Epistle  nf  Barnabas,  though  not  strictly  an  apocalypse 
in  form,  is  apocalyptic  in  tone,  and  has  been  assigned  to  the 
times  of  Vespasian  (so  Lightfoot),  Nerva,  or  Hadrian.  There 
are  also  several  Christian  apocalypses  which  probably  contain 
elements  belonging  to  the  2nd.  cent.  a.d. — e.g.  the  Apocalypse 
of  Peter,  the  Testament  of  Abraham,  the  Testament  of  Isaac, 
the  Vision  of  Paul,  etc.  These  help  us  to  realize  more  clearly 
the  distinctive  features  of  the  Christian  apocalyptic  literature, 
as  it  developed  in  later  times. 

(2)  The  eschatology  of  these  writings.  —  The 
Christian  apocalypses,  like  most  of  tiie  Jewish 
apocaly])ses,  were  proi)ably  desij^ned  for  circula- 
tion amonj^  the  less  educated  sections  of  the  com- 
munity. The  average  tone  is  puerile  and  petty  ; 
we  find  a  mass  of  trivial  details  and  crude  dram- 
atic colouring,  but  an  entire  absence  of  deep  or 
illuniinating  thoughts.  Nearly  all  these  books 
bear  the  marks  of  Egyptian  or  Alexandrian  origin  ; 
and  it  would  seem  that  the  religious  atmosphere 
of  these  parts  was  favourable  to  the  growth  of 
'apocalyptic'  (cf.  many  of  the  Jewish  apocalypses 
— Slav.  Enoch,  parts  of  Sib.  Or.,  etc.).  The  most 
noteworthy  features  of  the  eschatology  are  : 

(a)  The  profusion  of  detailed  'revelations.^ — 
While  the  normal  Jewish  scheme  of  eschatology  is 
retained,  the  broad  outlines  are  almost  obsoired 
by  the  mass  of  detailed  description  and  prophecv  ; 
and  the  result  is  a  type  of  eschatology  very  lar 
removed  from  that  oi  our  Lord,  or  of  the  ma- 
jority of  NT  books.  In  Asc.  Is.  we  find  graphic  de- 
scriptions of  the  Seven  Heavens  (Asc.  Is.  iii.  and  iv.) 
and  of  the  manner  of  the  resurrection,  which  is 
apparently  to  be  bodiless  (iv.  14  f.).  In  the  later 
apocalypses  these  details  become  more  and  more 
jtrofuse  :  the  conditions  of  the  Intermediate  State, 
the  punishments  of  the  wicked,  the  geography  of 
the  other  world,  are  expounded  with  minute  pre- 
cision. But  a  full  discussion  of  these  does  not 
properly  belong  to  'apostolic  eschatology.' 

(o)  The  prevalence  of  foreign  ideas. — In  these 
apocalynses  Babylonian,  Egyptian,  and  Zoro- 
astrian  legends  are  found  strangely  mingled  with 
Christian  ideas,  just  as  they  were  doubtless 
mingled  in  the  minds  of  the  cosmopolitan  populace 
of  Alexandria. 

(c)  The  coming  of  Antichrist. — This  is  a  feature  far 
more  prominent  in  these  apocalyjjses  than  in  any 
other  known  group  of  writings.  The  idea  seems 
derived  from  various  sources :  e.g.  the  Jewish  ex- 
pectation of  a  last  leader  of  the  hosts  of  evil 
(Ezk  38.  39,  Dn  \\^,  Apoc.  Bar.  xxxix. ,  4  Ezra  v.  6, 
Pss.-Sol.  ii.  33,  etc.);  the  Zoroastrian  'Satan,' 
chief  of  tlie  evil  spirits  (of  Asc.  Is.  ii.) ;  the  Baby- 
lonian Dragon-myth  (see  Bousset,  Antichrist 
Legend,  1896) ;  and,  in  particular,  the  expectation 
of  Nero's  return  to  resume  the  sovereignty  of  the 
world  (see  Lake,  The  Earlier  Epistles  cf  St.  Paul, 

E.  78 ft'.).  This  dread  of  Nero's  return  seems  to 
ave  been  an  outstanding  feature  of  Christian 
eschatology  as  reflected  in  these  apocalypses — see, 
e.g.,  Asc.  Is.  iii.  and  iv.,Sib.  Or.  iv.  117-122,  137  II", 
V.  138-141,  413-422,  viii.  88-90,  169-213,  etc.  For 
other  early  Christian  conceptions  of  Antichrist 


cf.  2  Th  2^-*  (see  below,  and  article  MAN  OF  Sin), 
1  Jn  4*  2  Jn'  (see  below) ;  Didarhe,  16  (where  he 
is  to  appear  'as  Son  of  God,'  i.e.  as  a  i).seudo- 
Messiah) ;  Ep.  Barn.  4.  The  conception  (like  the 
corresponding  one  of  the  Messiah)  varies  from  that 
of  a  human  momirch  to  that  of  a  supernatural  being, 
sometimes  closely  akin  to  'Satan.'  Various  titles 
are  used — e.g.  '  Beliar '  (Asc.  Is.),  'the  World's 
Deceiver'  (Didache),  'the  Black  One'(^;>.  Barn.), 
'the  Man  of  Sin'  (2  Tlie-ss.) ;  but  in  all  cases  the 
destruction  of  Antichrist  is  set  forth  as  one  of  the 
last  and  greatest  acts  of  the  true  Messiah.  The 
idea  of  a  coming  reign  of  Antichrist  tended  to 
'  tlirow  back '  the  Second  Coming  of  the  true 
Messiah  into  a  somewhat  less  immediate  future 
than  it  occupies  in  tiie  earliest  Christian  mes.sage. 

(d)  The  allegorical  interpretation  of  Scripture. — 
By  allegorizing  the  narratives  of  Scripture,  some 
of  the  Christian  apocalyptists  were  aule  to  find 
prophecies  of  the  Last  Things  in  unpromising  fields 
of  study.  In  Ep.  Barn.  15,  e.g.,  we  find  Gn  1  in- 
terpreted as  an  '  apocalypse '  of  the  world's  history, 
in  a  manner  that  reminds  us  of  both  the  Alexand- 
rian-Jewisli  apocalypses  (e.g.  Slav.  Enoch)  and  the 
Christian  Fathers  of  Alexandria. 

(3)  Value  uf  the  Christian  apocalypses. — These 
Christian  writings  are  valuable,  because  they 
show  us  one  of  the  lines  along  which  the  primi- 
tive Judieo-Christian  eschatology  developed  and 
decayed.  The  primitive  enthusiasm  for  the  few 
great  truths  of  the  gospel  faded  away,  and  it 
was  replaced  by  a  dilettante  curiosity  about  the 
things  of  the  other  world,  which  ran  riot  in  ex- 
travagant superstition,  and  eventually  died — as 
it  deserved  to  die.  In  these  writings  we  may  also 
see  the  beginnings  of  doctrines  absent  from  primi- 
tive Christian  eschatology,  but  prevalent  in  later 
ages  of  the  Church,  e.g.  purgatory  ( Vis.  Pauli,  22), 
or  prayers  for  the  dead  (Test.  Abr.  14).  But 
these,  again,  scarcely  fall  within  our  present  scoj)e. 

III.  The  Jotianmne  type  of  early  Chris- 
tian ESCHATOLOGY.— The  Gospel  and  Epistles 
traditionally  ascribed  to  St.  John  so  far  resemble 
each  other  in  their  eschatological  outlook  that  for 
our  purpose  it  seems  best  to  consider  them  to- 
gether, as  expressing  a  distinctive  type  of  escha- 
tology (see  A.  E.  Brooke,  T/te  Johannine  Epistles 
[ICC,  1912],  Introd.,  p.  xxi).  As  illustrations  of 
the  history  of  Christian  doctrine,  the  Johannine 
Epistles  are  easier  to  interpret  than  the  Gosjtel, 
because  in  the  latter  it  is  often  exceedingly  diffi- 
cult to  differentiate  between  the  purely  historical 
element,  based  upon  the  teaching  of  our  Lord 
Himself,  and  the  '  Johannine'  element,  due  to  the 
Evangelist.  But  since  the  eschatology  in  both 
Gospel  and  Epistles  partakes  of  the  same  '  tone,' 
Avliich  is  not  found  (to  the  same  extent)  elsewhere 
in  the  NT,  it  seems  reasonable  to  attribute  tliis 
distinctive  element  to  the  writer  in  both  cases, 
although  not  therefore  denying  the  likelihood  that 
it  may  be  indirectly  due  to  our  Lord's  own  teach- 
ing and  influence.     The  chief  points  to  note  are  : 

1.  The  '  spirituality '  of  the  teaching.—'  Spiritu- 
ality '  is  perhaps  the  l>est  word  to  describe  the  dis- 
tinctive cliaracteristic  of  tiie  Johannine  eschatology. 
It  bears  the  impress  of  a  mind  retentive  of  tradi- 
tional forms  of  belief,  but  not  content  with  the 
surface-meaning  of  current  teaching.  The  old 
phraseology  is  not  rejected  ;  but  it  is  regarded  as 
a  parable,  "half  concealing  and  half  revealing  the 
deep  spiritual  truths  over  which  the  writer  had 
pondered  in  the  hours  of  meditation.  The  signs  of 
foreign  influence  in  the  Johannine  writings  are 
very  slight ;  the  signs  of  the  inner  working  of  the 
writer's  mind  are  very  marked  indeed.  Hence  we 
lind  the  following  characteristics  : 

(a)  The  Jewish  phraseology  retained. — The  '  dra- 
matic setting '  of  Jewish  eschatology  is  sis  vividly 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


361 


displayed  in  the  Johanniue  writings  as  in  any  part 
of  tlie  NT.  Our  Lord  is  portrayed  as  tlie  Messianic 
'Son  of  Man,'  who  has  '  tleseendetl  out  of  heaven  ' 
(Jn  3'=*  e**"  8*»*);  who  is  the  Messianic  Judge 
( Jn  5~  -~) ;  who  has  returned  to  heaven  (Jn  6*^  iO'"), 
and  thence  as  gloritied  Messiah  pours  out  the 
Spirit  on  His  disciples  (Jn  1^) ;  and  wlio  will  one 
day  come  again  (Jn  21^).  His  Return  will  be  pre- 
ceded by  the  Messianic  woes  (Jn  15**  16--**,  etc.), 
by  the  Coming  of  Antichrist  (1  Jn  2-  4»,  2  Jn;), 
and  by  the  general  Resurrection  ( Jn  5^) ;  and  will 
be  followed  by  the  Last  Judgment  (Jn  12«).  The 
^vriter  of  the  Epistles  believes  he  is  living  in  '  the 
last  hour' — i.e.  the  'interim'  between  the  First 
and  Second  Comings  of  the  Lord  (1  Jn  2'*).  In 
the  Gtospel  the  time  of  the  Return  seems  more 
distant ;  e.g.  in  Jn  14  and  15  the  instructions  given 
do  not  suggest  a  very  brief  '  interim  '  on  earth. 

(b)  The  inner  meaning  of  eschatology  emphasized. 
— Although  the  Johannine  eschatology  so  far 
agrees  with  the  normal  Jewish  doctrine,  there  is  a 
ditterence.  The  writer  does  not  seem  to  regard 
this  '  dramatic  eschatology '  merely  as  a  prediction 
of  coming  events,  but  rather  as  a  parable  or  illus- 
tration of  great  spiritual  principles,  which  are 
continuously  at  work  in  all  history,  albeit  specially 
manifest  in  the  spiritual  experiences  of  Christians. 
In  this  sense,  the  Johannine  eschatology  may  be 
called '  timeless ' ;  the  Resurrection,  the  Judgment, 
the  Coming,  are  always  taking  place,  though  they 
will  attain  their  consummation  at  the  Last  Crisis 
(cf.  Brooke,  The  JoJuinnine  Epistles,  p.  37).  Specu- 
lations regarding  the  time  of  the  Second  Coming 
are  discouraged  (Jn  21—).  The  gift  of  eternal  life 
in  the  present  (Jn  3*»  11"^'- ;  cf.  1  Jn  3-*  4^^)  t«nds  to 
displace  the  dramatic  picture  of  '  entering  into  the 
Kingdom '  at  the  Last  Day,  while  spiritual  union 
with  Christ  at  once  emlows  the  believer  potentially 
with  the  resurrection-privilege,  which,  to  the  Jew, 

was  as  vet  in  the  unexperienced  future  (Jn  6^'** 
■pro.  ii^s'i^S), 

Again,  while  the  tcord '  Antichrist '  (1  Jn  2**,  etc. ) 
is  taken  from  Jewish  apocalyptic,  the  Uiea  is  com- 
pletely '  spiritualized '  —  so  much  so  that  com- 
mentators have  found  it  most  difficult  to  be  certain 
what  the  writer  himself  intended  to  signify  by  the 
term.  Broadly,  it  appears  here  to  designate  the 
spirit  of  evil  in  its  most  dangerous  form,  and,  in 
particular,  the  danger  which  came  from  perverted 
ideas  concerning  the  Person  of  our  Lord  ( 1  Jn  2^ 
4*'-,  2  Jn ").  Throughout,  the  writer  makes  us 
feel  that,  while  he  uses  JewLsh  phraseology,  he  is 
not  enslaved  to  it.  He  realizes  the  folly  of  idle 
speculations  regarding  the  future  (cf.  Jn  21—) ;  he 
feels  the  need  for  reverence  and  restraint ;  yet  he 
is  sure  that  Heaven  mil  not  fall  short  of  our 
deepest  spiritual  experiences,  nor  of  the  highest 
ideals  we  have  known — '  Beloved,  it  is  not  yet  made 
manifest  what  we  shall  be.  We  know  that,  if  he 
shall  be  manifested,  we  shall  be  like  him ;  for  we 
shall  see  him  even  as  he  is.' 

(c)  Apparent  paradoxes. — Hence  the  paradoxical 
nature  of  the  Johannine  eschatology  ;  the  writer 
feels  that  the  whole  truth  is  beyond  the  gi-asp  of 
the  human  mind,  and  he  sets  forth  first  one  aspect, 
then  another,  prepared  to  appear  inconsistent 
rather  than  one-sided.  Our  Lord's  First  Coming, 
e.g.,  was  not  for  the  Judgment  (Jn  3"),  yet  it  xcas 
a  judgment  (Jn  3'^  9^  12") ;  the  hour  of  the  general 
resurrection  is  still  to  come  (Jn  5-*'-  6**),  yet  the 
resurrection  is  a  fact  of  Christian  experience  in  the 
past  (Jn  5-'- "),  and  this  latter  is  the  more  important 
of  the  two  truth-  Mn  ll'^--*). 

2.  The  place  of  the  sacraments  in  the  Johannine 
doctrine  of  salvation. — Schweitzer  has  recently 
maintained  that  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  sacra- 
ments are  regarded  as  the  normal  channel  ])y  which 
eternal  life  is  bestowed  on  the  believer  {Paul  and 


his  Interpreters,  pp.  200-203).  'The  elements  of 
the  Lord  s  Sup|)or,  .  .  .  being  the  flesh  and  blood 
of  tlie  Son  of  Man,  ix>ssess  ti>e  capacity  of  being 
vehicles  of  the  Spirit.  As  a  combination  of  matter 
and  Spirit  which  can  be  communicatetl  to  the 
corporeity  of  men,  they  execute  judgment.  The 
elect  can  in  the  sacrament  become  partakers  of 
that  spiritual  substance,  and  can  thns  be  prepared 
for  the  resurrection'  (p.  200).  And  Christ,  we 
are  told,  taught  'that  in  the  future,  water,  in 
association  with  the  Spirit,  would  be  neces-sary  to 
life  and  blessetlness.  .  .  .  Jesus  came  into  the 
world  to  introduce  the  era  of  ettectual  sacraments ' 
(p.  202  f.).  This  theory,  if  true,  would  introduce 
into  the  scheme  of  Johannine  eschatology  a  factor 
which  has  commonly  been  supposed  to  be  of  later 
origin  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 

Certain  passages  may  seem  to  lend  themselves 
conveniently  to  this  theory :  e.g.  Jn  3'  G*'"*,  1  Jn 
5®,  and  the  use  in  the  Johannine  Epistles  of 
phraseology  suggestive  of  the  Mj-steries  {e.g.  ■xjtlaita. 
in  1  Jn  2*»-  ^ ;  a-yvi^b)  in  1  Jn  3') ;  but  they  are  far 
from  conclusive.  On  the  other  hand,  we  find  many 
passages  where  the  gift  of  '  eternal  life '  is  described 
siniply  as  a  free  gift  received  by  faith,  without  any 
mention  of  a  sacramental  medium  (Jn  I'-''-  3** 
6"*")  ;  and  the  idea  that  eternal  life  is  normally 
bestowetl  by  sacraments  seems  distinctly  contrary 
to  such  passages  as  Jn  3*  :  '  The  wind  bloweth 
where  it  listeth,  and  thou  hearest  the  voice  there- 
of, but  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh,  and  whither 
it  goeth  ;  so  is  every  one  that  is  bom  of  the  Spirit ' ; 
or  Jn  6® :  '  the  tcords  that  I  speak  unto  you  are 
spirit  and  are  life '  (cf.  1  Jn  1^  '  the  word  of  life '). 
In  these  passages  the  gift  of  eternal  life  is  con- 
vej'ed  through  the  influence  of  Chiist's personality 
upon  the  human  mind,  either  by  the  sjK)ken  word 
or  by  some  unseen  method,  not  through  a  vi.<ible 
ceremonial  act.  And  in  the  Johannine  Epistles 
'eternal  life '  has  a  strong  ethical  content  (1  Jn  3'^) ; 
it  is  '  in  Christ '  ( 1  Jn  5"*  ^  ;  cf .  2^),  but  no  reference 
is  marie  in  this  connexion  to  the  sacraments. 

Under  the  circumstances,  it  seems  that  Schweitz- 
er's theory  of  ' eschatological  sacraments'  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  not  supported  by  the  evidence. 

3.  The  later  history  of  the  Johannine  type  of 
early  Christian  eschatology. — Just  as  there  is  no 
real  parallel  in  the  sub-.-xpostolic  literature  to  the 
Johannine  books  of  the  NT,  so  there  is  no  real 
parallel  to  the  Johannine  eschatology — at  least, 
none  worthy  to  be  compared  with  it  for  width  of 
outlook  and  depth  of  feeling.  Generally,  the 
traditional  eschatology  is  interpreted  very  literally, 
even  prosaically.  But  the  emphasis  on  the  spiritual 
significance  of  eschatology  recurs  wherever  the 
writers  show  .signs  of  deep  meditation  on  the 
problems  of  life.  In  the  Pauline  Epistles  we  shall 
meet  with  a  similar  tendency  in  places.  In  the 
Odes  of  Solomon  it  is  very  noticeable  (see  e.g.  Odes 
iii.  and  xv.),  and  in  the  Alexandrian  Fathers  an 
allegorical  interpretation  of  eschatology  is  found 
[e.g.  Clement,  Exhort,  ad  Gentes,  9),  which,  though 
widely  diflerent  from  the  Johannine  doctrine,  re- 
sembles it  in  so  far  as  it  seeks  to  go  behind  the 
purely  chronological  aspect  of  eschatology. 

IV.  The  Paulise  type  of  early  Christian 

ESCHATOLOGY,  ASD    THE  ESCHATOLOGY  OP  THE 

GESTiLE-CHRiSTiAy  CHURCHES.— i.  The  escha- 
tology  of  St.  PauL— In  view  of  the  trend  of  recent 
criticism,  it  seems  reasonable  to  accept  as  a  work- 
ing hypothesis  the  view  that  all  the  'Pauline' 
Epistles  of  the  NT  are  genuine  letters  of  the 
Apostle,  though  in  the  case  of  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  the  verdict  can  hardly  be  regarded  as 
decisive.  This  long  series  of  letters  is  of  unique 
value  as  an  illustration  of  the  history  of  early 
Christian  doctrine,  as  taught  by  one  of  its  greatest 
exponents.     Several  problems  of  considerable  im- 


362 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


portance  demand  consideration  in  conne*ion  with 
St.  Paul's  eschatoloj»y. 

(1)  The  development  of  thotight  in  St.  PauVs 
Epistlcf.  —  Several  recent  writers,  approacliing 
the  subject  from  widely  diH'erent  standpoints, 
have  urged  that  the  supposed  change  in  St.  Paul's 
outlook  as  time  went  on  is  mainly  a  phantom 
of  the  critical  imagination  (e.g.  Schweitzer,  I'aul 
and  his  Interpreters,  p.  75  it.  ;  S.  N.  llostron. 
The  Christology  of  St.  Faid,  1912,  pp.  23-28).  To 
the  nresent  writer,  however,  the  signs  of  a  real 
development  of  doctrine  are  unmistakable,  if  the 
Epistles  are  studied  broadly  in  their  generally 
accepted  chronological  order.  The  divergence  of 
opinion  regarding  the  date  of  Galatians — before  or 
after  the  Thessalonian  Epistles — does  not  seriously 
affect  the  problem,  because  Gal.  is  dominated  by 
one  problem  of  immediate  urgency,  and  does  not 
deal  at  length  with  other  topics,  such  as  eschato- 
logy.  In  Gal.  the  supreme  emphasis  is  laid  on 
moral  virtues,  faith  and  love  (5" ;  cf.  2'*'  3'''-  '■*') ; 
neither  '  dramatic  eschatology '  nor  '  eschatological 
sacraments'  receive  any  detailed  notice.  But  if 
we  study  the  rest  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  under 
the  four  main  groups — («)  1  and  2  Thess.  ;  (6)  1  and 
2  Cor.,  Itom.  ;  (c)  Col.,  Eph.,  Phil.  ;  {d)  1  and  2 
Tim.,  Tit. — the  outlines  of  St.  Paul's  change  of 
standpoint  seem  clear  beyond  doubt. 

(a)  1  and  2  Thessaloniuns. — In  these  Epistles  the 
outlook  is  as  purely  and  consistently  Juuseo-Chris- 
tian  as  in  the  earlier  chapters  of  Acts.  The  hope 
of  an  immediate  Second  Coming  of  the  Lord  holds 
the  front  place  in  the  interests  of  both  St.  Paul 
and  his  readers.  The  *  wrath '  of  the  Last  Crisis 
is  impending  (i  Th  P"  2'")  ;  the  Christians  are 
waiting  for  the  Son  of  Man  to  descend  on  the 
clouds  of  heaven,  while  they  are  yet  alive  on  earth 
( I  Th  P"  4»3-i8  51-"-  23,  2  Th  p-'"  2i-").  The  language 
which  St.  Paul  uses  in  these  Epistles  to  describe  the 
Second  Coming  is  such  as  any  Jewish  apocalyptist 
who  accepted  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  might  have 
used ;  there  is  no  trace  of  Gentile  influence,  and 
he  himself  expects  to  be  '  in  the  body  '  at  the  time 
of  the  Return  (1  Th  4";  cf.  5^).  Again,  the 
eschatological  problems  discussed  in  these  Epistles 
are  such  as  would  present  themselves  to  Jewish 
minds ;  and  St.  Paul  answers  the  difficulties  as  a 
Jew  speaking  to  Jews.  The  problem  of  the  faith- 
ful departed  (1  Th  4'3-i8)  was  one  that  inevitably 
arose  as  soon  as  some  of  the  '  brethren '  had  died 
before  the  Lord  returned.  How  would  they  be 
enabled  to  share  in  the  joy  of  the  Parousia  ?  St. 
Paul's  answer  is  that  tliey  will  be  raised  in  time 
to  join  in  the  Lord's  Coming  (1  Th  4'®).  That 
such  a  question  should  have  already  come  to  the 
front  is  significant,  because  it  marks  perhaps  the 
earliest  of  the  m<any  perplexities  which  arose  in 
the  minds  of  the  faithful  when  the  Lord  did  not 
return  at  once,  and  when  consequently  the  simple 
scheme  of  the  primitive  Christian  eschatology  no 
longer  sufficed  to  solve  every  difficulty.  The 
gradual  change  of  doctrinal  outlook  which  resulted 
from  this  afl'ected  the  whole  Church,  and  there  is 
no  reason  to  doubt  that  St.  Paul  himself  was  in- 
fluenced by  it. 

In  2  Thess.  the  perplexity  caused  by  the  delay 
has  become  much  graver,  and  St.  Paul  counsels 
patience.  Again  he  adopts  a  thoroughly  Jewish 
line  of  argument :  his  language  still  implies  that 
the  lieturn  will  be  comparatively  soon ;  but  he 
reminds  his  readers  that  certain  of  the  '  signs  of 
the  end'  have  not  yet  been  fulfilled;  and  these 
must  precede  the  final  consummation.  The  '  signs ' 
which  he  mentions  are :  (a)  the  falling  away  (^7 
airoffTaffla,  2  Th  2^),  (ft)  the  revealing  of  the  Man 
of  Sin  (2  Th  2="-  ^-»),  (7)  the  taking  away  of  '  the 
Restrainer '  (6  KaWx'<"'»  or  rb  Karix^"^  2  Th  2**).  St. 
Paul  implies  that  he  is  speaking  of  ideas  familiar 


to  his  rejulers  (2  Th  2"-),  and  .similar  phrases  are 
found  in  the  descriptions  of  the  signs  of  the  eml 
in  the  Jewish  apocalypses ;  e.g.  an  '  apostasy '  is 
jiart  of  the  Messianic  woes  in  Jubilees,  23  ;  Test. 
XH.  Pair.  (Levi  10,  Dan  5),  etc.  Again,  the  de- 
scription of  the  'Man  of  Sin'  otters  close  parallels 
to  tne  figure  of  Antichrist  ((dias  '  IJeliar  '  or  Satan) 
in  many  of  the  ajjocalypses  {e.g.  in  the  contemjiorary 
writings  of  the  Ap.  Bar.  xxxix.  and  4 Ezra  v.  6,  and 
also  in  the  later  Christian  apocalypses,  notably  Asc. 
Is.  iii.  and  iv.,  and  Sib.  Oracles  [see  above]).  (For 
fuller  details,  see  article  Man  of  Sin,  and  Kennedy, 
St.  Paul's  Conceptions  of  the  Last  Things,  pp.  207- 
221.)  For  the  'taking  away  of  the  Restrainer'  it 
is  not  easy  to  find  an  exact  parallel  in  Jewish 
apocalyptic  ;  but  from  Daniel  onwards  we  find  that 
the  close  of  a  dynasty  is  often  regarded  as  one  of 
the  signs  of  the  end  ;  and  so  the  use  of  6  KaHx'^" 
might  well  suggest  to  St.  Paul's  readers  the  idea 
of  Imperial  Rome,  whose  downfall  would  surely 
mark  the  close  of  a  world-epoch.  The  important 
point  to  realize  is  that  in  this  passage,  so  obscure 
to  us,  St.  Paul  is  not  inventing  a  new  doctrine  of 
the  Last  Things,  but  is  taking  familiar  phrases  and 
ideas  and  applying  them  to  the  problems  wiiich 
were  then  confronting  the  Christian  community. 

Thus  the  characteristic  of  1  and  2  Thess.  is  tliat 
the  eschatology  is  the  '  central '  theme,  and  is 
completely  Juda?o-Christian  in  form.  At  the  same 
time,  it  is  closely  linked  with  moral  teaching  (1 
Th  3'*  43-8,  etc. ) ;  and  this  practical  aspect  of  St. 
Paul's  escliatology  (which  in  this  respect  is  in 
complete  accord  with  that  of  our  Lord)  remains 
unchanged  throughout  all  his  writings. 

(I))  1  and  2  Corinthians,  Romans  {and  perhaps 
Galatians). — In  these  Epistles,  Avhich  form  the 
second  group  of  Pauline  writings,  the  Jewish  form 
of  eschatology  is  still  prominent,  especially  in  1 
Corinthians.  The  Christians  addressed  are  '  wait- 
ing for  the  apocalypse  of  our  Lord '  (1  Co  1''),  which 
is  near  at  hand  (Ro  13",  1  Co  7'-^-^^),  and  will  be 
associated  with  the  Resurrection  (Ro  8'-^)  and  the 
Judgment  (1  Co  4"  6-,  Ro  2'").  All  this  resembles 
1  and  2  Thess. ;  yet  the  eschatology  no  longer 
occupies  the  centre  of  interest  in  these  Epistles ; 
other  themes  receive  a  larger  share  of  attention. 
The  spiritual  gifts  which  tlie  Christians  possessed, 
and  the  spiritual  power  which  had  transformed 
their  lives,  begin  to  claim  a  pre-eminent  place ; 
and  phrases  originally  eschatological  are  adoptecl 
to  describe  spiritual  experiences  in  the  past  and 
present ;  e.g.  2  Co  1'",  ts  .  .  .  ippvaaro  tj/j-S.^,  Kal 
p^fferai  (cf.  3'*  4^*'''-  5").  And  in  Romans  we  see 
how  'justification,'  which  is  properly  an  eschato- 
logical term  (signifying  the  act  by  which  the 
Messianic  Judge  pronounces  the  believer  '  not 
guilty'  at  the  Great  Judgment  [Ro  2^^-^^]),  is  be- 
coming weaned  from  its  old  associations.  For  St. 
Paul  teaches  that  the  believer  who  has  faith  is 
pronounced  '  not  guilty '  here  and  now,  in  anticipa- 
tion of  the  final  verdict ;  and  so  'justification'  be- 
comes severed  from  eschatology,  and  linked  with 
the  spiritual  experience  known  to  Christians  as 
'the  sense  of  forgiveness'  or  'assurance'  (cf.  Ro 
5',  etc.). 

In  this  group  of  Epistles  we  also  see  signs  of 
Gentile  influence,  modifying  the  Jewish  methods 
of  thought.  In  dealing  witli  the  Resurrection,  St. 
Paul  uses  a  distinctly  non-Jewish  line  of  argument 
(see  below),  and  his  vision  of  the  final  consummation 
(Ro  11-"-,  etc.)  is  far  wider  than  that  current  in 
Jewish  circles.  Moreover,  in  1  Co  15"'^  St.  Paul 
teaches  that  a  'kingdom  of  Christ'  on  earth  must 
precede  the  final  consummation  when  '  he  shall 
deliver  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father '  ( IS'^  ; 
cf.  the  Parable  of  the  Tares,  Mt  13*'-").  Such  a 
conception  implies  that  the  certainty  of  an  im- 
mediate coming  of  the  end  is  being  abandoned. 


K.^CHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


363 


(c)  Cofossifins,  Ei'lfst'iU'i,  PhUii>plitn.i. — In  tliis 
group  of  St.  Paul's  letters  we  timl  the  mollify- 
ing teiulfiuies  noted  above  still  further  developed. 
The  •tliainati''  '.^.li  >rn!ogy,  though  still  present 
(Col  P  o\  l*h  l.ph  4**),  has  receded  still 
further  fruiii  t;  [losition  it  held  in  1  and  2 
Tlie.s-.,  arnl  tii.-  n-e  of  eschatological  terms  in  a 
non-escliatoliiuiial  sen-e  becomes  more  and  more 
fret]uent  (Col  I'-*,  I'h  3'^  Eph  I*  2'^-,  etc.).  There  is 
no  distinct  assertion  that  the  Return  is  near  at 
hand  (it  may  be  implied,  Ph  3*) ;  and  some  passages 
suggest  til  at  a  prolonged  future  lies  before  the 
Church  on  earth  (e.g.  '  the  building  up  of  the  body 
of  Christ,'  Kph  4^''",  and  the  ingathering  of  the 
Gentiles,  Eph  2  and  3).  In  such  passages  St. 
Paul's  thoughts  seem  to  be  far  from  the  normal 
tone  of  Jewish  apocalyptic. 

(d)  The  Pastoral  Epistles.  —  Here  eschatology 
api>ears  to  rise  once  more  into  greater  prominence  ; 
but  it  is  not  quite  the  same  as  before.  The  earlier 
Christian  e>chatolog}-  had  sprung  from  enthusiastic 
hopes :  '  The  Last  Days  have  come,  liecause 
Messiali  lias  appeared.'  But  in  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  the  message  is  sadder,  and  more  like  that 
of  the  Jewish  apocalyptists  :  '  The  Last  Days  are 
at  hand,  because  the  times  are  e\-il'  (I  Ti  4^,  2  Ti 
31-s  41-8).  There  is  a  note  of  disappointment,  as 
the  Apostle  speaks  of  prevalent  apostasy  (2  Ti  2*®), 
which  accords  well  with  the  supposition  that  these 
Epistles  were  written  in  a  period  of  spiritual  re- 
action, when  the  early  hopes  were  being  strained 
by  the  prolonged  delay.  Under  such  circum- 
stances, it  was  necessary  to  guard  against  one-sided 
doctrines  of  the  resurrection  (2  Ti  2'^)  and  to  em- 
phasize the  objectivity  of  the  Last  Things  (1  Ti  6", 
2  Ti  4»-8,  Tit  1-). 

A  broad  survey  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  thus 
shows  that  the  Aix)stle"s  eschatological  teaching 
underwent  considerable  modification  in  the  course 
of  time,  from  the  somewhat  conventional  Jewish 
outlook  of  1  and  2  Thess.  to  the  broad  and  deep 
spiritual  teaching  of  Eph.  ;  and  finally,  in  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  we  see  signs  of  a  renewed  em- 
phasis upon  old  truths  which  were  in  danger  of 
l¥»ing  obscured. 

Paul's  doctrine  of  Judgment,  Interme- 
'<:,  Resurrectiony  Final  Destinies.  —  (a) 
.,,,„,,.'. — The  'dramatic'  conception  of  the 
Judgment  recirrs  frequently  in  the  Pauline  Epistles 
(2  Th  r*-,  Ro  2»-9-'«,  1  Co"4=),  but  there  are  very 
few  signs  of  the  Johannine  idea  of  a  continuous 
judgment-process  lieing  worked  out  in  history. 
The  Judgment  is  to  be  universal  (1  Co  6^  2  Co  5^*^") ; 
but  the  Christian  is  free  fiom  condemnation  (Ro 
8'"^),  and  indeed  has  already  been  'justified'  (see 
above). 

(b)  The  IntKnmdiate  State.— As  long  as  St.  Paul 
expected  the  Return  in  the  immediate  future,  there 
was  no  logical  place  for  any  thought  of  the  Inter- 
mediate State  of  the  'dead  in  Christ.'  Probably 
St.  Paul,  like  many  Jews,  believed  in  a  '  waiting- 
place  '  for  the  faithfnJ  souls  of  former  generations, 
who  had  been  evangelized  by  the  '  Descent  into 
Hell '  (Eph  49  ;  cf.  1  P  3i»  4«).  But  the  Christian, 
when  he  departs,  will  be  '  with  Christ'  (Ph  1^) — a 
phrase  scarcely  applicable  to  an  '  Intermediate 
State'  (cf.  2  Co  5'"^").  If  (as  seems  most  probable) 
Onesipiiorus  was  dead  when  2  Ti  V^  was  written, 
St.  Paul  did  not  scruple  to  pray  for  the  dead.  Yet 
such  a  prayer  is  but  the  instinctive  act  of  a  spiritu- 
ally-minded man,  to  whom  friendship  is  a  bond  too 
^trong  to  be  severed  by  death  ;  and  it  would  be 
unwise  to  deduce  from  it  that  St.  Paul  held  a 
reasoned-out  theory  concerning  the  possibility  of 
moral  change  in  the  life  to  come,  to  say  nothing  of 
a  clear-cut  doctrine  of  'purgatory." 

(c)  The  Resurnctirm. — To  the  Jews  a  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection   did  not  appear  strange,  though 


the  question  '  In  what  sha{)e  shall  the  dead  rise?' 
is  found,  e.g.  in  Apoc.  Bnmrli,  xlix.  2.  But  among 
the  (iencil.s,  even  where  a  belief  in  immortality 
was  present,  a  resurrection  was  incredible  (Ac  26**), 
So,  as  long  as  St.  Paul  '  spake  as  a  Jew,'  he  simply 
attimied  the  resurrection  without  comment  {e.g. 
I  Th  41");  but,  when  he  had  to  conmiend  the 
gospel  to  educated  Grentiles,  a  new  line  of  argument 
became  necessary,  snob  as  we  find  in  1  and  2  Cor- 
inthians.    A  brief  outline  of  the  famous  passages 

1  Co  15,  2  Co  4  and  5  is  all  that  can  be  attempted 
here.  The  chief  points  to  note  are :  (a)  he  bases 
the  Christian  hope  on  the  historical  fact  of  Christ's 
Resurrection  (I  Co  IS'^") ;  (^)  he  argues  from  the 
analogy  of  the  seed  (1  Co  15"''-) — an  argument 
which  would  appeal  to  the  GentUe  no  less  than  to 
the  Jew  ;  (7)  he  teaches  an  upward  movement  in 
history  ( 1  Co  15*),  implying  that  the  resurrection- 
life  wUl  be  no  mere  replica  of  this  life,  but  some- 
thing higher  and  greater ;  (5)  the  resurrection- 
body  will  not  be  'flesh  and  blood'  (1  Co  15**),  but 
a  'spiritual'  body  (1  Co  15").  Herein  St.  Paul 
differs  alike  from  the  materialistic  conception  of 
the  resurrection  and  from  the  Gentile  idea  that 
the  soul  at  death  is  freed  from  the  encumbrance  of 
a  body.  In  some  passages  St.  Paul  does  indeed 
seem  to  disparage  the  body  (2  Co  5*) ;  but  he  clearly 
teaches  that  the  highest  ideal  is  not  to  be  stripped 
of  the  body,  and  lead  a  bo<liless  existence  (which 
would  ren(ier  self-expression  unthinkable),  but 
rather  to  be  '  clothed  upon  '  with  a  higher  type  of 
body,  adapted  to  be  the  organ  through  which  the 
'ego'  may  fully  express  itself  in  the  'spiritual' 
sphere  of  existence  (2  Co  5-~* ;  cf.  1  Co  3-').  This 
'  transformation '  of  our  mode  of  life  is  to  take  place 
at  the  Last  Day  (1  Co  15*"*) ;  yet  the  spiritual  trans- 
formation of  the  believer  in  this  present  life  is 
described  in  similar  language  (2  Co  3'") ;  and  indeed 
the  two  are  not  irreconcilable,  for  the  last-named 
is  an  'earnest'  of  the  future  resurrection  (cf. 
Ph  3J<'- ",  2  Ti  2^8). 

The  Chiliastic  doctrine  of  a  reign  of  Christ  on 
earth,  in  an  intervening  period  between  a  '  first ' 
and  '  second '  Resurrection  (cf.  Rev  20*"''),  does  not 
appear  in  St.  Paul ;  the  '  reign  of  Christ '  in  1  Co  15^ 
is  far  more  applicable  to  the  working  of  Christ 
through  the  Church,  which  was  in  progress  when 
St.  Paul  wrote. 

Whether  St.  Paul  believed  in  a  general  resurrec- 
tion of  all  men  seems  doubtful ;  some  passages («.^. 
Ro  8'')  suggest  that  the  resurrection  is  'onditional 
upon  the  possession  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ;  but 
since  he  taught  that  the  judgment  is  to  l>e  universal, 
we  may  perhaps  infer  that  the  scope  of  the  resurrec- 
tion will  be  co-extensive. 

{d)  Final  f/<M/j/)R'.s.— Normally  St.  Paul  adopts 
the  usual  view  that  the  wicked  go  to  'eternal 
destruction '  and  the  believers  to  '  eternal  life ' 
(2  Co  2'"-,  etc. ) ;  but  the  latter  aspect  receives  much 
greater  emphasis  than  the  former.  The  thought 
of  the  '  rmendingness '  of  final  destinies  is  not  pro- 
minent in  the  Pauline  Epistles ;  sometimes  the 
word  aiupios  seems  used  to  express  intensity  rather 
than  interminable  duration  {e.g.  '  eternal  destruc- 
tion,' 2  Th   P,  or  '  an  eternal  weight  of  glory,' 

2  Co  4").  There  are  some  passages  where  St.  Patu's 
words  suggest  the  hope  of  the  final  salvation  of  all 
men  (1  Co  15-*  ;  cf.  Ro  11^).  Such  a  conclusion 
seems  naturally  to  follow  from  the  infinite  love  of 
Gotl ;  but  it  is'  hard  to  reconcile  with  the  fact  of 
human  sin. 

(3)  The  influence  of  Gentile  thought  upon  St. 
PauFs  eschatology. — (a)  Greek  influence. — On  this 
subject  various  \iews  are  held  :  some  contend 
that  '  the  eschatological  views  of  Paul  mark  a 
transition  from  purely  Jewish  to  Hellenistic 
notions'  (P.  Gardner,  The  Religions  Experience  of 
St.  Paul,  1911,  p.  126) ;  others  will  scarcely  admit 


364 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESCHATOLOGY 


the  possibility  of  any  Gentile  influence,  and  main- 
tain that  St.  Paul,  from  first  to  last,  liveil  and  sjioke 
and  wrote  as  a  Jew  (Scinveitzer,  Pdtil  and  his  Intr.v- 
pretcrs,  pn.  94,  227,  240,  etc.).  On  the  whole,  the 
chanjje  which  came  over  St.  I'aul's  theology  seems 
explicable  simply  as  tiie  natural  development  of  an 
active  mind  constantly  reconsiderinj^  the  problems 
of  Christian  experience.  On  the  other  hand,  St. 
Paul's  avowed  championship  of  the  rights  of  (ientile 
Christianity  may  well  have  led  him  to  be  favourably 
inclined  to  CJentile  ideas,  and  to  loosen  hisafl'ection 
for  purely  Jewish  methods  of  thought.  But  the 
actual  proofs  of  non-Jewish  ideas  are  to  be  seen  in 
the  gradual  modilication  of  his  teaching  to  which 
we  have  referred  al)()ve,  rather  than  in  the  presence 
of  distinctively  Hellenic  language.  The  latter  may 
perhaps  be  seen  in  the  depreciation  of  the  body 
(2  (Jo  5^'^),  in  the  description  of  transformation 
(2  Co  3"*  5*  ;  cf.  Seneca,  Ep.  vii.  1,  'non  emendari 
tantum,  sed  transtigurari  ),  in  the  coiiiii.irison  of 
the  body  to  an  earthen  vessel  (2  Co  I'  .">'),  uiid  in 
the  distinction  between  the  #$w  dvOpwiros  ami  tht;  i'cno 
dvfipuiroi  (2  Co  4'";  see  Clemen,  I'riinitii-r,  IJhris- 
tianity  and  it.t  non-Jewish  Sovrccs,  p.  (i8  fl'. ).  J>uL,  in 
so  far  as  Greek  influence  is  visible  in  these  passages, 
it  is  rather  due  to  unconscious  than  to  conscious 
borrowing  {ib.  p.  204). 

(b)  Influence  of  the  Oriental  cults. — Apart  frpm 
the  Mysteries  (see  below),  these  exercised  very 
little  influence  on  St.  Paul's  eschatology.  The  idea 
of  being  '  clothed  upon '  (2  Co  5^")  is  perhaps  derived 
from  Parsiism  (Clemen,  op.  cit.  \>.  174),  antl  other 
parallels  have  been  traced  ;  but  they  may  be  mere 
coincidences  (ib.  pp.  171-198). 

(r)  The  influence  of  the  Mysteries  upon  St.  Paid^s 
eschatolofjy . — The  Mysteries  claimed  to  make  men 
partakers  of  immortality,  by  means  of  initiatory 
rites  and  ceremonies,  through  which  a  '  sacramental 
grace'  was  (iojiveyed  to  the  worshippers  (see  Cumont, 
Oriental  licligions  in  Roman  Paganism,  pp.  91  f. , 
151).  It  has  recently  been  maintained  [e.g.  in  Lake's 
Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paid)  that  Christianity  was 
commonly  regarded  among  the  Gentiles  as  '  a 
superior  kind  of  Mystery-Keligion,'  and  that,  to 
them,  its  central  message  was  the  promise  of 
eternal  life  given  through  the  Christian  Sacra- 
ments. Thus  the  Sacraments  were  intimately  con- 
nected with  eschatology,  and  the  Gentile-Christian 
gospel,  like  the  Jewish  -  Christian  gospel,  was 
essentially  eschatological.  But  there  was  this 
distinction  between  the  two  types  of  Christianity  : 
'  to  the  average  Gentile  Christian  in,  for  instance, 
Corinth  .  .  .  the  centre  of  Christianity  was  the 
Sacraments.  .  .  .  On  the  other  hand,  for  a  Jewish 
Christian,  the  expectation  of  the  Parousia  was 
probably  quite  central '  (Lake,  op.  cit.  p.  437).  Of 
St.  Paul's  own  view  Lake  says :  '  Baptism  is,  for 
St.  Paul  and  his  readers,  universally  and  unques- 
tioningly  accepted  as  a  "mystery"  or  sacrament 
which  works  ex  opere  operato '  {op.  cit.  p.  385). 

Schweitzer,  in  Paid  and  his  Interpreters,  adopts 
a  line  of  argument  which  is  somewhat  different  ; 
but  his  conclusions  as  to  the  substance  of  St. 
Paul's  teaching  show  some  notable  points  of 
resemblance  to  Lake's  view.  Though  he  utterly 
denies  the  possibility  that  St.  Paul  was  influenced 
by  Greek   thought  or   by  the   Mysteries   (op.  cit. 

{)p.  208,  240,  etc.),  yet  he  affirms  that  the  Apostle 
leld  a  doctrine  of  '  eschatological  sacraments ' 
which,  after  all,  would  make  the  sacraments  not 
unlike  the  rites  of  a  '  Mystery.'  '  In  Paul  we  find 
the  most  prosaic  conception  imaginable  of  the  opus 
operatum  (p.  213).  '  Everywhere  in  the  Pauline 
sacraments  the  eschatological  interest  breaks 
through.  .  .  .  Their  power  is  derived  from  the 
events  of  the  last  times.  They  put  believers  in 
the  same  position  as  the  Lord,  in  that  they  cause 
them   to  experience  a  resurrection  a  few  world- 


moments  before  the  time,  even  though  this  does 
not  in  any  way  become  nmnifest.  It  is  a  jirccursory 
phenomenon  of  the  approaching  end  of  the  worhi. 
.  .  .  The  sacraments  are  confined  to  the  time 
between  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  and  His  i)arousia, 
when  the  dead  shall  arise '  (p.  210  f.).  During  this 
'interim'  perio<l,  the  present  world-era  and  the 
world  to  come  are  '  in  contact,'  and  only  while  this 
(iontact  lasts  can  men  i)ass  by  means  of  the  sacra- 
ments from  one  world  to  the  other  (p.  224).  Simi- 
larly, of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  baptism  lie  says  : 
'  The  dying  and  rising  again  of  Christ  takes  place 
in  him  without  any  co-operation,  or  exercise  of 
will  or  thought,  on  his  part.  It  is  like  a  mechani- 
cal process'  (p.  225  f.).  This  doctrine  of  'eschato- 
logical sacraments'  can  be  understood,  according 
to  Schweitzer,  '  entirely  on  the  basis  of  Jewish 
primitive  Christianity'  (p.  240).  On  the  other 
hand,  Clemen  (Primitive  Christianity  and  its  non- 
Jewish  Sources,  p.  266)  afhrms  that  '  it  is  simply 
false  to  say  "that  bai)tism  as  well  as  the  Lords 
Supper  already  within  the  books  of  the  NT  iinder- 
went  the  fateful  transformation  from  symbolic  act 
to  sacranientum  ejficax." '  But,  if  St.  Paul's  teach- 
ing is  rightly  interpreted  either  by  Lake  or  by 
Schweitzer,  it  would  follow  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  sacraments  was  a  more  important  factor  in 
early  Christian  eschatology — and  indeed,  in  early 
Christianity  at  large — than  has  commonly  been 
supposed. 

An  adeqiiate  discussion  of  the  problem  thos 
raised  is  impossible  here ;  but  one  or  two  points 
may  be  noted  : 

(a)  St.  Paul  certainly  associates  baptism  with  'death'  and 
'resurrection'  (Ro  O^,  Col  2i2),  and  with  the  reception  of  the 
Spirit  (1  Co  121-!).  But,  while  these  passages,  and  certain  others 
regardinjf  the  Kucharist  (1  Co  lOis  ll''^''-  ^),  may  be  consistent 
with  Schweitzer's  theory  of  '  effectual  sacraments,'  Ihey  are 
also  explicable  on  the  view  that  St.  Paul  is  regarding  the  rite  as 
the  symbol  of  grace  conferred — a  symbol  normally  linked  with 
the  spiritual  gift,  but  not  so  necessary  that  without  the  rite  the 
gift  cannot  be  conveyed,  nor  yet  mechanically  conveying  the 
gift  ex  opere  operato.  In  otic  of  the  above  passages  (Col  2^-) 
the  context  (2i'i'')  is  full  of  highly  metaphorical  language.  From 
these  passages  we  are  driven  to  conclude  that  the  theory  of  a 
Pauline  doctrine  of '  effectual  sacraments '  is  '  Not  proven.' 

(0)  But,  further,  there  are  other  passages  where  St.  Paul's 
arguments  are  definitely  against  the  view  that  sacraments  con- 
vey the  new  life  ex  opere  operato.  In  1  Co  8»i*  lO'*-^  he 
clearly  teaches  that  the  effect  of  partaking  in  a  communion- 
feast  is  dependent  on  the  state  of  mind  of  the  recipient.  The 
partaking  becomes  serious  if  it  arouses  uneasy  doubt  in  the 
mind  of  the  '  weaker  brother '  who  witnesses  his  act ;  but,  a(>art 
from  this  possibilitj',  and  if  the  recipient  is  clear  in  his  own 
conscience,  the  partaking  will  have  no  effect  ex  opere  operato. 
The  argument  here  refers  to  non-Christian  'sacraments,'  but 
it  is  consistent  with  the  Apostle's  general  attitude  towards 
external  rites  and  ceremonies  :  '  In  Clirist  Jesus  neither  cir- 
cumcision availeth  anything,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  faith 
working  through  love '(Gal  b*> ;  cf.  6^5  3-,  etc.).  The  omission 
of  any  reference  to  the  Christian  sacraments  in  such  passages 
would  be  strange  indeed,  if  the  future  salvation  of  the  Christian 
was  normally  conveyed  to  him  only  through  baptism  and  the 
Eucharist. 

(y)  The  references  to  the  sacraments  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
viewed  as  a  whole,  are  hardly  sufficient  to  warrant  the  theory 
that  the  sacraments  held  a  central  place  in  his  theolojjy. 
Lake  contends  that  this  silence  shows  that  the  importance  of 
the  sacraments  was  universally  accepted  in  the  Church,  and 
needed  no  further  emi)liasis  (up.  cit.  p.  233  n.).  But  we  may 
reasonably  ask  for  some  positive  evidence  that  the  sacraments 
had  already  sprung  into  a  position  of  central  importance  in  the 
Church,  before  we  set  aside  the  '  argument  from  silence.'  1  Co 
li'*,  '  I  thank  Ciod  that  I  baptized  none  of  you,'  docs  not  suggest 
that  St.  Paul  put  baptism  in  the  place  of  central  imjxirtance  in 
the  gospel. 

(5)  When  Schweitzer  tells  us  that  St.  Paul  'found  already 
existing  a  baptism  and  a  I^ord's  Supper  which  guaranteed  Ral- 
vation  (op.  cit.  p.  215 ;  cf.  p.  242),  and  that  his  do<;trine  of  the 
sacraments  '  is  integrally,  simply,  and  exclusively  eschatologi,'al ' 
(p.  244),  we  may  reasonably  ask  what  evidence  is  forthcimning 
from  the  Jewish  apocalypses  to  justify  such  assertions. 
Schweitzer  adduces  no  such  evidence  ;  nor  is  the  present 
writer  acquainted  with  any. 

We  conclude,  then,  that  the  evidence  does  not 
support  tlie  theory  that  the  jirimitive  Church  as  a 
whole  believed  that  eternal  life  was  convej'ed 
normally   by  the  sacraments,  but  rather   that  it 


ESCHATOLOGY 


ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF    365 


wa^i  a  free  uift  received  immediately  by  faith.  At 
the  ^;lIlK■  time,  it  i>  likely  enoujjh  that  the  less 
ediuuleii  (  lui.-ti;ui>  aid  regard  Christianity  as  a 
kind  of  Mystery  ruliuii'ti.  with  sacraments  of  a 
magical  character.  J  In  .'Kscure  custom  of  'bap- 
tism for  the  dead  '  may  luive  been  associated  with 
some  sucli  ideas  (1  Co  15"^),  but  it  does  not  appear 
that  they  were  shared  by  St.  Paul,  or  by  any  of 
the  NT  ^\riteIs.  (Fur  a  careful  discussion  of  this 
subject,  see  Clemen,  I'riniitivc  Christianity  audits 
non-jeiosli  S'iur>:t:s,  y\).  2'23-250.) 

2.  The  eschatology  of  the  early  Gentile-Chris- 
tian churches. — (1)  The  fruit  of  St.  Paul's  teaching. 
— St.  Paul  may  fairly  be  regarded  as  the  precursor 
of  a  Gentile  type  of  Christian  escliatologj' ;  for, 
although  the  instances  of  detinitely  Greek  ideas  in 
his  writings  are  but  few,  he  was  in  sympathy  with 
non-Jewish  ways  of  approaching  the  problems  of 
life,  and  he  was  the  champion  of  Gentile  claims 
within  the  Church  of  Christ.  Without  his  efl'orts 
Gentile  thought  would  have  been  debarred  from 
having  free  scope  in  the  Church.  But  in  the 
Apostolic  and  sub- Apostolic  Ages,  as  we  trace  the 
doctrine  of  the  Ljist  Things  through  Clement  of 
Rome,  Ignatius,  2  Clement,  Aristides,  and  Justin, 
down  to  Irenieus  at  the  close  of  the  2nd  cent., 
there  is  but  little  evidence  of  a  distinctively  Gentile 
type  of  Christian  eschatology.  Jewish  ideas  and 
phraseology  show  no  signs  of  disappearing  entirely ; 
and  indeed  Christian  eschatology  is  never  likely  to 
lose  all  traces  of  its  Jewish  antecedents. 

(2)  Distinctive  features  of  Gentile-Christian  escha- 
tology.— Yet  the  following  changes  may  be  attri- 
buted in  great  measure  to  the  induence  of  Gentile 
thought,  (a)  The  technical  Jewish  terms  are 
replaced  by  others  of  a  more  '  prosaic '  character  : 
e.g.  in  Clem,  ad  Cor.  we  find  the  Keturn  described 
as  an  e\ev<ns  (17)  rather  than  as  a  irapovcla  or  an 
oToicdXi'i/'is.  And  in  Ignatius  the  term  'Parousia' 
is  applied  to  the  First  Coming  of  our  Lord  at  His 
Nativity  (ad  Phil.  9).  Such  changes  show  that 
the  traditional  Jewish  .scheme  is  undergoing  a 
measure  of  '  re-statement '  at  the  hands  of  men  who 
were  unaccustomed  to  the  apocaljptic  scheme  of 
the  La.st  Things. 

(b)  Occasionally  we  meet  with  clear  signs  of 
Greek  thought,  e.g.  Ign.  ad  Rom.  3,  '  Nothing 
visible  is  good.'  And  some  thirty  years  later  we 
find  the  Epistle  to  Diognctus  reflecting  a  thoroughly 
Greek  theory  of  the  relation  of  the  soul  to  the 
body  (7,  10). 

(c)  The  conception  of  the  Eucharist  as  a 
'Mystei"y,' through  which  iininortulity  is  eonveyed 
to  the  believer,  though  {as  we  iuive  eouteiuled 
above)  not  sanctioned  bj-  St.  Paul  himself,  seems 
to  be  implied  in  some  of  the  sub-ajiostolic  writings  : 
e.g.  Ign.  ad  Eph.  20,  '  Breaking  one  bread,  which 
is  the  medicine  of  immortality,  and  the  antidote 
that  we  should  not  die,  but  live  for  ever' ;  cf.  Iren. 
adv.  Ha'r.  iv.  8,  '  Our  bodies,  when  they  receive 
tiie  Eucharist,  are  no  longer  corruptible,  having 
the  hope  of  resurrection  to  eternity.' 

(d)  The  idea  that  ■  salvation'  is  a  future  blessing, 
to  be  gained  by  external  acts,  or  by  membership  of 
an  organized  societj',  may  also  be  traced  to  the  sub- 
Apostolic  Age  :  e.g.  Ign.  ad  Phil.  3,  'If  any  man 
followeth  one  that  makcth  a  schism,  he  doth  not 
inherit  the  Kingdom  of  God.' 

As  a  re-ult  of  these  and  other  modifications, 
eiuly  (In  i-tian  eschatology  in  the  Gentile  churches 
gradually  assumed  a  form  whieh,  though  Jewish  in 
phra-seology,  was  sufficiently  intelligible  to  those 
who  were  not  familiar  with  the  presupposition  of 
Jewish  apocalyptic.  With  the  exception  of  a  few 
doctrinal  features,  such  as  Chiliasm,  which  proved 
to  be  but  temporary  phases  of  thought,  the  escha- 
tology of  the  Church  of  the  2nd.  cent.,  as  seen,  e.g., 
in  Irenaius,  had  discarded  its  distiuctively  '  primi- 


tive'characteii-i  ;i  -,  and  was  not  far  from  the  normal 
tyi)e  of  Cli!  iiatology  as  it  has  been  taught 

in  subseque;  the  Church. 

LiTERATURK.— For  apobtoUc  eschatology  in  genera),  see  S.  D. 
F.  Salmond's  art.  on  'Eschatology  o{  the  NT'  in  HDB,  and 
J.  A.  MacCulloch's  art.  on  'Eschatology'  in  the  ERE;  also 
R.  H.  Charles,  Eschatology  :  Hebrew,  Jewitk,  and  Ckrigtian-, 
1913;  E.  C.  Dewick,  PrimUivt  Chrutian  Esehatolom/,  1912; 
S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  Christian  Doctrine  of  JmmortatUy,  1904 ; 
etc. 

For  the  Jewish  '  background  of  ideas,'  see  Charles,  op.  eit., 
and  the  same  writer's  editions  of  the  Jewish  apocalj-pses, 
especially  his  Book  of  Enochs,  1912;  V.  H.  Stanton,  Th« 
Jeicish  and  Chrittian  Messiah,  1886. 

For  the  eschatologj-  of  the  N'T  books,see  the  Comm.  and  Artt. 
ad  loe.,  especially  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John, 
1909,  and  K.  H.  Charles,  Studies  in  the  Apoeaiypse,  1913;  and 
for  Pauline  eschatology,  H.  A.  A.  Kenn^y,  St.  PauTs  Con- 
ceptions of  the  Last  Things,  1904 ;  the  same  writer's  artt.  on 
'St.  Paul  and  the  Mystery-ReUgions '  in  the  Expositor,  8th  ser., 
iv.  [1912]  60,  212,  306,  434.  f>39 ;  K.  Lake,  The  Earlier  EpistUs 
of  St.  Paul,  1911 ;  A.  Schweitzer,  Paul  and  his  Interpreters, 
Eng.  tr.,  1912.  The  two  last-named  works  apply  the  'ConaLst- 
ent  Eschatological  theory '  to  the  apostolic  writings. 

For  the  influence  of  Gentile  thought  on  Christian  eschatology, 
see  C.  Clemen,  Primitive  Christianity  and  its  non-Jeicish 
Sources,  Eng.  tr.,  1912  ;  F.  Cumont,  The  Oriental  Religions  in 
Roman  Paganism,  1911 ;  E.  Hatch,  The  Influence  of  Greek 
Ideas  and  Usages  upon  the  Christian  Church,  1890  (Hibbert 
Lecture,  1SS8). 

Of  the  Christian  apocalj-pses,  many  are  edited  in  TS,  vols.  11. 
and  iii. ;  The  AsceTuion  of  Isaiah,  by  R.  H.  Charles,  1900 ;  The 
Sibylline  Oracles,  by  Alexandre,  1841-56,  and  Rzacb,  1892. 

For  particular  aspects  of  aixwtolic  eschatology,  see  the 
articles  in  this  Dictionary  on  Astichrist,  Heavex,  "Hkix,  Mam 
OF  Six,  SpiRire  is  Prisos,  Rescrrectiox,  etc. 

E.  C.  Dewick. 

ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF.— This  book 
is  quite  difi'erent  in  character  from  1  Es.,  which  it 
follows  in  the  English  Apocrypha.  It  belongs  to 
the  apocalyptic  order,  and  is  closely  related  in  time 
and  thought  to  the  Apocalypse  cf  Baruch  (q.v.). 
Some  early  writers  cite  it  as  prophetical — Clement 
of  Alexandria  {Strom,  iii.  16)  and  Ambrose  (de 
Excessu  Satyri,  i.  6-1,  66,  68,  69)  in  particular  ;  but 
Jerome  speaks  slightingly  of  it  as  a  book  he  had 
not  read  or  required  to  read,  because  it  was  not  re- 
ceived in  the  Church  (c.  Vigilant,  ch.  6).  In  the 
authenticated  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  it  is  relegated 
to  an  appendix,  along  with  1  Es.  and  the  Prayer  of 
Manasses.  It  is  not  reckoned  canonical  by  the 
Church  of  Rome,  nor  is  it  used  in  the  English 
Church. 

1.  Contents. — As  it  stands  in  our  Apocrj-pha, 
2  Es.  consists  of  16  chapters  ;  but  the  first  two  and 
last  two  are  separate  works  which  have  been  added 
to  the  original  book,  and  have  no  inward  connexion 
with  it.  The  prefixed  chapters  (1.  2),  though 
written  in  the  name  of  Esdras,  exliibit  an  anti- 
Jewish  spirit,  in  striking  contrast  to  that  of  the 
chapters  that  follow.  Thej"  .speak  of  the  rejection 
of  the  Jews  and  the  call  of  the  Gentiles  as  a 
Western  Christian  of  the  2nd  cent,  might  have 
done.  A  connexion  has  been  suggested  between 
them  and  the  Apocalypse  of  Zephaniah,  of  which 
fragments  are  extant  in  Coptic.  The  subjoined 
chapters  (15.  16)  make  no  mention  of  Esdras,  and 
their  contents  are  colourless  enough  to  admit  of 
either  a  Jewish  or  a  Christian  author.  In  imita- 
tion of  Jeremiah's  prophecies,  they  predict  wars 
and  tumults,  denounce  God's  wrath  on  the  wicked, 
and  encourage  the  righteous  to  endure.  The  pro- 
bable quotation  of  16*'  in  Ep.  xxix.  of  Ambrose — 
'extendit  coelum  sicut  cameram' — would  indicate 
that  these  chapters  were  known  in  the  middle  of 
the  4th  century.  Possibly  they  had  their  origin 
about  a  century  previously,  in  the  wars  of  the 
Arabian  Odenathus  and  Sapor  i.  of  Persia. 

Divested  of  these  additions,  2  Es.  is  a  series  of 
seven  visions,  separated  for  the  most  part,  in  the 
experience  of  the  seer,  by  periods  of  tasting  and 
prayer.  Their  purpose  is  to  shed  light  on  the 
mysteries  of  the  moral  world,  and  restore  the  faith 
in'God  and  reliance  on  His  justice  which  had  been 
shaken  by  the  downfall  of  Jei-usalem.     At  the  out- 


366     ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF 


ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF 


set  the  Hcer  announces  himself  as  Salathiel,  with 
the  parenthetical  explanation  that  he  is  also  Esdra.s. 
In  the  first  four  visions  (chs.  3-10)  tlie  anf,'el 
Uriel  api)ears,  to  resolve  the  doubts  of  the  seer, 
and  comfort  him  with  the  hope  of  God's  speedy 
intervention.  In  tlie  fifth  (ens.  11.  12)  a  great 
eagle  is  seen,  with  three  heads,  twelve  wings,  and 
certain  wings  of  smaller  size.  She  is  encountered 
and  annihilated  by  a  lion,  and  Esdras  learns  that 
the  eagle  is  the  fourth  kingdom  of  Daniel,  and  the 
lion  the  Messiah.  The  sixth  vision  (ch.  13)  reveals 
the  Messiah  as  a  wondrous  man,  coming  out  of 
the  sea,  destroying  His  enemies,  and  gathering 
the  righteous  and  peace-loving  to  Himself.  In  the 
seventii  (ch.  14)  Esdras  is  warned  that  the  end  is 
near,  and  instructed  to  have  ninety-four  books 
written,  but  only  to  publish  twenty-four  of  them 
(the  usual  Talmudic  reckoning  of  the  books  of  the 
OT).  On  the  accomplishment  of  his  task,  Esdras 
is  translated  to  heaven. 

2.  Text  and  versions. — The  original  text  no 
longer  exists;  but  versions  are  extant  in  Latin, 
Syriac,  Ethiopic,  Arabic  (two),  and  Armenian. 
Some  fragments  in  Sahidic  have  also  come  to  light 
(in  1904),  and  traces  have  been  found  of  an  old 
Georgian  translation.  The  Latin  version  is  in 
every  resi)ect  the  most  important,  as  well  as  the 
only  one  which  contains  the  ifour  additional 
chapters.  It  was  through  this  version  that  the 
booK  found  its  way  into  the  apj)endix  of  the  Vul- 
gate, and  thence  into  our  Apocrypha.  The  Oriental 
versions  are  of  value  chiefly  for  the  assistance  they 
ati'ord  in  testing?  and  correcting  the  Latin.  A 
curious  illustration  of  their  usefulness  in  this  way 
was  given  by  Bensly  in  1875,  when  he  discovered  a 
missing  fragment  of  the  Latin  text  consisting  of  70 
verses,  the  existence  of  which  had  been  suggested 
by  the  presence  of  these  verses  in  the  Oriental 
versions.  This  long  passage  has  now  been  restored 
to  its  place  in  our  Apocrypha,  between  verses  35 
and  36  of  the  seventh  chapter.  The  basis  of  all  the 
existing  versions,  with  tiie  possible  exception  of  the 
Armenian,  is  generally  acknowledged  to  be  a  Greek 
text,  now  lost ;  but  some  diflerence  of  opinion  has 
arisen  as  to  whether  that  was  the  original  text. 
While  the  more  prevalent  view  that  the  book  was 
composed  in  Greek  has  found  such  defenders  as 
Liicke,  Volkmar,  and  Hilgenfeld,  some  recent 
scholars,  including  Wellhausen,  Charles,  Gunkel, 
and  Box,  contend  for  a  Hebrew  original. 

Some  confusion  of  nomenclature  has  been  caused 
by  the  varying  titles  of  the  versions.  The  Latin 
MSS  mostly  distinguish  five  books  of  Ezra  :  the 
first  being  the  canonical  Ezra-Neheraiah,  the  second 
the  prefixed  chapters  of  2  Es.,  the  third  the  1  Es. 
of  the  Apocrypha,  the  fourth  chs.  3-14  of  2  Es., 
and  the  fifth  its  subjoined  chapters.  According 
to  this  arrangement,  our  book  is  now  commonly 
denominated  Jf  Ezra,  although  the  title  Ezra- 
Apocalypse,  suggested  by  Westcott  as  the  prob 
able  form  in  the  lost  Greek  text,  has  also  come 
into  use. 

3.  Literary  structure. — Of  late  years,  the  ques- 
tion of  tiie  literary  stru(!ture  of  the  book  has  as- 
sumed increasing  prominence.  Its  essential  unity, 
as  coming  from  tlie  hand  of  a  .single  writer,  who 
may,  however,  have  used  and  failed  to  assimilate 
adequately  material  previously  existing,  is  still 
maintained  by  such  scholars  as  Gunkel,  Porter, 
and  Sanday.  On  this  theory,  its  date  is  fixed 
with  some  decree  of  unanimity  between  A.D.  81 
and  96,  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  which  gives  occasion 
to  it,  being  rightly  referred  to  the  destruction  by 
Titus  in  A.D.  70,  and  tiie  difficult  Eagle  Vision 
being  inten)reted  of  the  succession  of  Roman 
Emperors  ( Vesjuisian,  Titus,  and  Domitian)  after 
that  event.  Another  theory,  however,  ascribing  a 
composite  character  to  the  book,  has  recently  been 


worked  out  with  much  ingenuity  by  Kabisch, 
Ciiarles,  and  Box.  Tlie  last-mentioned  finds  five 
independent  works  in  onr  Apocalypse  :  (1)  a  Sala- 
thiel Ajwcalypse  (S  =  clis.  3-10),  composed  about 
A.D,  100;  (2)  the  Eagle  Vision  (A  =  ch.s.  11.  12), 
belonging  to  the  time  of  Domitian  or  possibly 
Vespasian  ;  (3)  the  Son  of  Man  VLsion  (M=ch.  13), 
written  before  A.D.  70 ;  (4)  the  Ezra  Legend  (E*= 
ch,  14),  dating  about  A.D,  100;  and  (5)  extracts 
from  an'old  Ezra  Apocalypse  (E),  interjiolated  in  S, 
and  belonging  to  some  period  before  A.D.  70. 
Tliese  separate  documents  were  welded  into  a 
single  book  by  a  redactor  (K),  and  published  a)M)ut 
A.D.  120.  Whatever  may  be  said  for  tiiis  analysis, 
it  helps  to  elucidate  certain  features  of  the  book 
which  have  hitherto  been  puzzling  and  obscure : 
divergent  eschatological  conceptions,  varying  his- 
torical situations,  breaks  of  thought,  and  linguistic 
transitions. 

4.  Value  and  relation  to  NT.— On  either  theory, 
the  book  remains  of  great  importance,  especially 
for  the  understanding  of  later  developments  of 
Judaism,  and  the  environment  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian Church.  A  fine  expression  of  later  Judaism, 
it  reveals  a  passionate  clinging  to  the  merciful 
goodness  of  God,  notwithstanding  a  measure  of 
disai)pointment  with  the  Law,  and  the  most  dis- 
astrous experience.  Its  spirit  may  be  somewhat 
narrow,  its  style  not  infrequently  tedious,  its  later 
visions  lacking  in  imaginative  power,  and  its  solu- 
tions of  the  moral  problem  disappointing;  yet  it 
strikes  a  truly  reflective  note,  and  breathes  through- 
out an  unconquerable  faith  in  God  and  the  vindica- 
tion of  His  righteousness.  In  these  characteristics, 
perhaps,  no  less  than  in  its  unconscious  admission 
of  the  weakness  of  Judaism,  lay  the  strength  of  its 
appeal  to  Christian  readers ;  but  its  present-day 
value  is  chiefly  historical,  as  it  is  practically  con- 
temporaneous with  the  NT  literature,  and  shows 
points  of  contact  with  it.  Direct  dependence  can 
liardly  be  established,  yet  there  are  similarities  of 
thought  and  language  to  most  of  the  NT  Ixwks, 
while,  as  Gunkel  has  clearly  shown,  there  are 
marked  affinities  with  the  Pauline  letters  and  the 
Book  of  Revelation. 

(a)  The  speculations  of  .S^^.  Paul  are  clo.sely 
paralleled  by  the  discussions  of  moral  and  religious 
problems  in  the  earlier  part  of  2  E.sdras.  Our 
author  presumably  belonged  to  the  school  in  which 
the  great  Apostle  was  trained  ;  and,  especially  in 
his  treatment  of  sin  and  the  weakness  of  the  Law 
as  a  redemptive  power,  has  much  in  common  with 
him.  Sin  is  essentially  transgression  of  the  Law, 
and  alienates  from  Gocf  (2  Es  9»  7*» ;  cf.  Ro  S'*- »'). 
Its  origin  is  to  be  found  in  the  Fall  of  Adam  and 
the  evil  heart  {cor  maHqnum)  which  he  has  trans- 
mitted to  his  descendants  (2  Es  7»'»  3-'»----  "--"6  4*  ; 
cf.  Ro  5'-,  1  Co  15^^').  Accordingly  it  is  universal, 
and  has  universally  as  its  result  not  only  spiritual 
corrui)tion  and  infirmity,  but  physical  death  (2  Es 
3^;  cf.  Ro  512- 14- IS- "•  21),  In  further  agreement 
with  St,  Paul,  and  in  opposition  to  the  usual 
Rabbinical  doctrine,  our  author  despairs  of  the 
efficacy  of  the  Law  to  redeem  and  save  the  sinner 
(2  Es  9^^ ;  cf .  Ro  3^).  Its  promised  rewards  have 
little  encour.agement  or  inspiration  for  beings  so 
constituted  as  to  be  unable  to  keep  it  (2  Es  7»«-"'), 
At  the  best,  though  the  world  is  perishing,  it  may 
still  be  hoped  that  a  few  may  be  saved  (9'*-  **),  It 
is  all  a  puzzle  and  pain  to  tlie  ajwcalyptist.  Un- 
acquainted witii  the  great  solvent  ideas  in  which 
the  Ai)Ostle  found  .satisfaction  for  heart  and  mind, 
he  resigns  himself  to  the  inscruta,bleness  of  Goti's 
ways,  the  limitations  of  human  intelligence,  and 
the  pre-determined  Divine  purpo.se  in  the  history 
and  end  of  the  world,  while  talcing  what  comfort 
he  may  from  the  assurance  of  God's  faitlifulnes.s 
and  love  to  His  ancient  people  (47-'»-  ^^  »-*»  5"'-*'). 


ESSENES 


ESSENES 


367 


This  attitude  of  mind  may  not  have  been  uncommon 
amon^'  the  Jews  of  his  time. 

(b)  Tlie  points  of  comparison  with  the  Johanninc 
Apocalypse  are  of  an  eschatological  kind,  and 
appear  most  prominently  in  the  later  chapters  of 
2  E-sdras.  The  same  visionary  method  of  Divine 
revelation  is  pursued  ;  the  schemes  of  the  Last 
Thin;;s  run  \x\^n  similar  lines  ;  Rome  is  again  the 
hostile  world-power  standing  in  the  background  ; 
and  there  are  not  wanting  resemblances  of  diction 
close  enough  to  suggest  a  common  source  (cf.  2  Es 
9=»  and  liev  6»-",  2  Es  4*^  and  Kev  \^).  In  2  Es., 
too,  especially  when  the  earlier  chapters  are  com- 

f>ared  with  the  later,  an  inconsistency  of  eschato- 
ogical  representation  is  revealed,  which  is  reflected 
not  only  in  the  Book  of  Revelation,  but  in  other 
NT  books  as  well.  Probably  it  attached  to  the 
current  conceptions  of  the  time,  and  did  not  greatly 
trouble  the  author  or  redactor  of  our  book.  In 
the  earlier  chapters,  the  eschatolog^  is  entirely  of 
an  individual  cnaracter,  concerning  itself  with  the 
future  of  the  soul,  and  postulating,  immediately 
aft«r  death,  a  personal  judgment  and  entrance  into 
an  eternal  world  of  punishment  and  reward  (T^'^*). 
The  later  chapters  (11.  12)  are  prevailingly  political, 
and  revive  the  old  eschatology  of  the  nation,  with 
its  scheme  of  preliminary  woes,  world- judgment, 
and  earthly  Messianic  kingdom  of  indefinite  dura- 
tion. Some  attempt  is  made  in  the  book  to  adjust 
these  points  of  view  by  the  introduction  of  a 
temjwrary  reign  of  the  Messiah  before  the  final 
consummation,  which  ushers  in  the  glorious 
Heavenly  Kingdom.  This  reign  seems  to  have 
been  expected  to  compensate  tiie  nation  for  the 
years  of  oppression  in  Egypt ;  and,  by  a  comparison 
of  Gn  15'*  with  Ps  90^^^  j^g  length  was  fixed  at  400 
years  {"*''*).  By  a  similar  process  of  inference 
Slavonic  Enoch  had  determined  the  duration  of  the 
temporary  Messianic  kingdom  as  1000  years,  or  a 
millennium.  On  this  matter  the  Book  of  Revela- 
tion follows  Enoch. 

Withal,  there  are  still  left  in  2  Es.  a  number  of 
divergent  ideas.  At  one  time  the  Messiah  is  pre- 
sented as  a  purely  human  being,  an  earthly,  tem- 
poral ruler  of  the  line  of  David  (12*^-) ;  at  another 
time  he  appears  as  a  superhuman,  pre-existent 
being,  to  whom  the  title  '  Son  of  God '  can  be  ap- 
plied (7==^-  =®  13*^  ^-  5-  14»).  In  some  passages  the 
Judgment  is  personal  and  individual,  and  takes 
place  immediately  after  death  (7^-i*i-  '"•  ^26) .  jjj 
others  it  is  universal,  and  reserved  for  a  great  day 
at  the  end  of  the  world  (7»-  «-  «  8^).  Now  the 
Messiah  is  Judge  (12*'-  »),  now  Gotl  Himself  (6«). 
Side  by  side  with  the  old  restricted  view  of  a 
resurrection  of  the  righteous  only  stands  the  later 
>new  of  a  general  resurrection  (7'-^*~**),  the  one  at 
the  beginning,  the  other  at  the  close  of  the  Mes- 
sianic {jeriod,  as  in  the  Book  of  Revelation.  These 
discrepancies  belonged  to  the  environment  of  the 
early  Church,  and  it  was  part  of  her  intellectual 
task  to  combine  them  into  a  harmonious  belief. 

LrreRATTEE.— G.  Volkmar,  Das  vierte  Buck  Esra,  1S58;  A. 
Hagenfeld,  Mesnai  Judceorum,  1869 ;  F.  Rosenthal,  Vier 
apokryphUchf  Bucher,  1S85  ;  R.  Kabisch,  Vag  vierte  Bueh 
Etra,  isiit :  J.  Wellhausen,  Skizzen  und  Vomrieiten,  1899; 
R.  H.  Charles,  The  Apoealjfpse  of  Baruch,  1896,  and  Etchato- 
logy:  Hebrew,  Jewish,  and  Christian,  1S99  (21913);  R.  L. 
Benslyand  M.  R.  James,  The  Fourth  Book  of  Ezra  (=  TS 
iii.  2  [1S95])  ;  H.  Gankel,  *  Das  vierte  Buch  Esra,'  in  Kautzsch's 
Die  Apokryphen  und  Pseudepigraphen  des  AT,  1900;  Lten 
Vag^anay,  Le  Problime  egehatoloffiqite  dawt  le  IVe  livre 
d'Esdra^,  1906 ;  F.  C.  Porter,  The  ilesmije*  of  the  ApoctU^p- 
tieal  Writerg,  1905  ;  Bnino  Violet,  Die  Esra-Apokahjpse,  1910  ; 
G.  H.  Box,  The  Ezra-Apocalj/pse,  1912,  and  '  IV  Ezra '  in  R. 
H.  Charles's  The  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha  of  the  OT, 

1913.  D.  Frew. 

ESSENES. — The  Essenes  were  a  Jewish  monastic 
order,  proljably  long  preceding,  not  long  surviving, 
the  founding  of  Christianity. 

1.    Authorities.  —  Essenes    are    not    mentioned 


either  in  the  NT  or  in  the  Talmud.  Our  chief 
authorities  are  (1)  Joseph  us  {BJll.  viii..  Ant.  xvm. 
i.  5,  XIII.  V.  9,  XV.  X.  4ff.);  (2)  Philo  {Quod  omnis 
probus  liber,  12,  13) ;  (3)  Philonic  fragment  in 
Eusebius  (Prctp.  Evang.  VUI.  xi.);  (4)  Pliny  (HN 
V.  17,  probably  drawn  from  Alexander  Polyfiistor). 
Some  additional  details  are  to  be  found  in  the 
Fathers  (esp.  Hippolytos)  who  deal  with  Judaeo- 
Christian  heresies.  Probably  there  is  need  of 
criticism  of  the  main  sources,  but  we  may  take 
them  as  trustworthj-  as  to  the  facts  adduced. 

2.  Name. — This  occurs  as  Essenoi  (Jos.  14  times, 
Hippol.,  Synesius);  Essaioi  (Philo,  Hegesippus, 
Porphyry,  Jos.  6  times) ;  and  in  varying  forms  in 
Epiphanius — Ossaioi,  Ossenoi,  lessaioi.  For  a  dis- 
cussion of  various  etymologies  seeLightfoot(Co/<M- 
sians,  1875,  p.  115 ff.).  The  name  is  best  taken 
from  Syr.  hdse,  in  plur.  absol.  hdsen,  emphat. 
hasaia  ;  '  Essene' thus  =' pious.'  For  our  purpose 
we  are  not  concerned  with  giving  a  full  account  of 
the  Order,  nor  with  tracing  its  history,  and  specu- 
lating as  to  the  origin  of  its  peculiarities.  We 
have  merely  to  give  a  brief  outline  of  its  main 
features,  and  deal  chiefly  with  the  influence  it 
exerted  on  the  development  of  Christianity. 

3.  Organization  and  characteristics.  —  The 
Essenes  were  organized  as  a  close  Order  on  a 
basis  of  celibacy  and  absolute  communism  (.Jos. 
BJ  II.  viii.  3  f .  ;  Philo.  in  Euseb.  Priep.  Evang. 
VIII.  xi.  4).  Josephus  speaks  of  a  branch  who 
allowed  marriage  (BJ  II.  viii.  13),  but  this  must 
have  been  a  minority.  The  officials  were  elected, 
and  were  implicitly  obeyed  (u.  viii.  6).  The  Order 
was  recruited  by  voluntary  adhesions,  or  by  adopt- 
ing children  (viii.  2).  Candidates  passed  through 
a  two-stage  novitiate.  For  a  year  they  lived  under 
discipline,  then  they  were  admitted  to  the  solemn 
initiatory  ablution  which  separated  them  from  the 
world,  and  after  other  two  years  they  received  full 
privileges  of  table-fellowship.  They  bound  them- 
selves by  a  fearful  oath  to  reverence  God ;  to  do 
justice  ;  hurt  no  man  voluntarily  or  on  command  ; 
obey  the  officials ;  conceal  nothing  from  fellow- 
members,  and  divulge  nothing  of  their  afl'airs  even 
at  the  risk  of  death  ;  be  honest  and  humble  ;  com- 
municate doctrines  exactly  as  they  had  been  re- 
ceived; and  preserve  carefully  the  sacred  books 
and  the  names  of  the  angels  (II.  viii.  7). 

For  morality  the  Essenes  ranked  high.  '  In 
fact,  they  had  in  many  respects  reached  the  very 
highest  moral  elevation  attained  by  the  ancient 
world'  (EBr^  vs..  780*).  Their  lives  were  ab- 
stemious, humble,  helpful.  Sensual  desires  were 
sinful ;  passions  were  restrained.  Their  word  was 
as  good  as  an  oath,  and  they  forbade  swearing. 
Their  modesty  was  excessive.  They  condemned 
slavery  (BJ  II.  viii.  2,  5,  6  ;  Philo  in  Euseb.  Prcep. 
Evang.  wa.  xi  11). 

In  devotion  to  the  Law  and  in  ceremonial  cleans- 
ings  they  out-Phariseed  the  Pharisees.  The  Order 
was  in  four  grades,  and  contact  with  one  of  a  lower 
grade  constituted  a  defilement.  Where  the  Pharisee 
washed,  the  Essene  bathed.  Their  food  was  care- 
fully prepared  by  priests.  Their  Sabbatarianism 
was  extreme,  and  their  reverence  for  Moses  was 
such  that  thej'  treated  any  disrespect  to  his  name 
as  blasphemy  worthy  of  death  (BJ  II.  viii.  9). 

As  to  tcorship,  they  differed  from  normal  Judaism 
in  two  important  points  ;  (a)  they  rejected  animal 
sacrifice,  and  sent  to  the  Temple  only  oflerings  of 
incense  (Jos.  A  nt.  X\TII.  I.  5) ;  (b)  in  some  sense 
they  worshipped  the  sun  ;  '  daily  before  the  rising 
of  the  sun,  they  address  to  it  old  traditional  prayers 
as  though  supplicating  it  to  rise '  (BJ  II.  viii.  5). 

In  doctrine  they  held  strongly  a  doctrine  of 
Providence,  appearing  to  Josephus  to  be  fatalists 
(Ant.  XIII.  V.  9).  They  took  a  dualistic  view  of 
man's  nature.    Through  evil  desire  souls  fell  into 


368 


ESSENES 


ESSKNES 


uniting  tlieiniselves  with  bodies.  Free  from  tlie 
body,  the  80ul  of  tlio  good  will  rise  joyously,  as  if 
delivered  from  long  bondage,  and  find  a  resting- 
place  of  felicity  beyond  the  ocean,  whereas  for  the 
Dad  is  reserved  a  dark,  cold  region  of  unceasing 
torment  (ZiJ"  II.  viii.  11). 

They  revered  certain  esoteric  books  which  nro- 
bably  dealt  witli  angclology,  magic,  and  divination. 
They  were  in  re|)ute  as  nrophets  {BJ  II.  viii.  12). 
They  commended  speculation  in  theology  and 
cosmogony,  and  made  re.searches  into  medicine 
(viii.  6),  proliably  magical.  They  abhorred  the 
use  of  oil  (viii.  3) ;  and  that  they  abstained  from 
liesh  and  wine  has  been  often  asserted,  but  is  very 
uncertain. 

i.  Relation  to  Christianity.— That  in  several 
points  Essenism,  as  described,  is  in  agreement 
with  Ciiristianity,  is  beyond  question.  On  the 
groundofthose resemblances,  some,  e.r/.  DeQuincey, 
have  held  that  the  Essenes  are  but  Christian  monks. 
This  view  cannot  be  taken  seriously.  Others,  e.g. 
Ginsburg,  have  made  Christianity  a  development 
of  Essenism,  and  represented  Ciirist  as  a  member 
of  the  holy  Order.  With  the  question  as  to  the 
relation  of  Jesus  to  Essenism  we  are  not  concerned 
(Lightfoot,  Colossuins,  p.  158  ff.,  may  be  consulted). 
We  merely  note  that  the  dill'erences  between  the 
two  are  as  i)ronounced  as  the  resemblances. 

( 1 )  Was  James  an  Essene  ? — We  may,  however, 
deal  with  an  assertion,  sometimes  made,  that 
James,  the  writer  of  the  canonical  Epistle,  was 
an  Essene.  Those  who  believe  so  found  their  belief 
upon  the  account  of  James  given  by  Hegesippus 
(in  Euseb.  HE  ii.  23),  who  nourished  about  A.D.  170. 
He  asserts  that  James  abstained  from  flesh,  wine 
and  strong  drink,  and  the  bath  ;  that  he  allowed 
no  razor  to  touch  his  head,  no  oil  to  touch  his  body, 
and  that  he  wore  only  line  linen  (which  was  the 
dress  of  the  Essenes).  If  this  account  were  reliable, 
it  would  not  prove  that  James  was  an  Essene. 
Those  who  believe  so  must  hold  the  common,  but 
quite  wrong,  opinion  that  all  Jews  were  Pharisees, 
Sadducees,  or  Essenes,  and  tliat  all  showing  asceti- 
cism were  Essenes.  James  might  be  an  ascetic  with- 
out being  an  Essene,  as  one  may  to-day  be  an 
abstainer  without  being^  a  Good  Temjjlar.  In  the 
notice  of  Hegesippus  itself  we  have  conclusive 
evidence  that  James  could  not  be  an  Essene,  for 
he  abstained  from  the  bath,  which  to  the  Essenes 
was  of  such  importance.  Besides,  as  Lightfoot 
shows  (Col.  p.  168),  Hegesippus  is  far  from  trust- 
wortiiy  here.  There  is  no  evidence  at  all  for  the 
identitication  of  James  with  the  Essenes. 

(2)  Did  the  Apostolic  Church  copy  the  Order  ? — 
The  resemblances  are  striking,  and  we  shall  mention 
and  examine  tlie  most  imi)ortant. 

(«)  The  temporary  communism  of  the  early 
chapters  of  Acts  reminds  us  of  the  communism  of 
the  Essenes.  But  the  Christians  were  a  brother- 
hood, not  an  Order,  and  the  surrender  of  property 
was  a  voluntary  act,  not  necessary  for  recognition  as 
a  brother  (Ac  5^).  The  Christian  communism  admits 
of  easy  explanation  from  the  belief  in  tiie  almost 
immediate  lleturn  of  the  Lord,  (b)  Celibacy  is 
recommended  as  a  '  counsel  of  j)erfection '  in  i  Co 
7^*  *.  It  is  clear  from  v.'''"  that  this  too  depends 
on  the  belief  in  the  nearness  of  the  end.  (c)  The 
Essenes  substituted  a  sacramental  for  a  sacrilicial 
worship.  The  importance  of  this  has  very  seldom 
been  ap])reciated,  though  it  is  a  point  which  makes 
the  Order  of  great  interest  in  the  history  of  religion. 
Apart  from  their  multitudinous  ordinary  lustra- 
tions, there  was  the  solemn  initiatory  ablution  at 
the  end  of  tlie  first  novitiate.  It  cleansed  outwardly 
and  inwardly  and  made  the  ordinary  man  an 
Essene  (so  Bousset,  lielifjiondcs  Jndcntitms,  p.  436). 
Here  we  have  a  parallel  with  Christian  baptism 
and  baptismal  regeneration.    In  their  common  meal 


we  have  a  parallel  with  the  Christian  love-feast, 
if  not  with  the  Eucharist.  We  quote  Josephus's 
description  : 

'They  assciiihle  together  in  one  place,  and  having  clothed 
themselves  in  white  veils,  they  bathe  their  txtdies  in  cold  water. 
After  this  purillcation,  they  assenilile  in  an  apartment  o(  Ibeir 
own,  into  which  it  is  not  uUowed  to  any  8tran);er  to  enter.  .  .  . 
They  enter  as  if  it  were  some  holy  temjile,  and  sit  <lown  quietly. 
.  .  .  The  priest  prays  before  meat,  and  none  may  eat  before 
prayer  is  offered,  and  when  they  have  made  their  meal,  he  ai;ain 
l)rays  over  them.  .  .  .  And  when  they  begin  and  when  they 
end,  they  praise  God.  .  .  .  Nor  is  there  ever  any  clamour  or 
disturbance  .  .  .  which  silence  appears  to  outsiders  as  some 
tremendous  mystery'  (DJ  n.  viii.  6  ;  of.  Ant.  xvin.  i.  6). 

As  noted  above,  novices  were  not  admitted  to 
the  Table  ;  similarly  Christian  catechumens  retired 
Ixifore  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist.  It  must 
be  admitted  that  here  we  have  a  striking  resem- 
blance, but  to  conclude  that  the  Church  owed  its 
sacraments  to  the  E.ssenes  is  a  rash  proceeding. 
The  love-feast  has  many  other  parallels  elsewhere, 
and  could  grow  up  independently  of  any  of  them. 
Any  association  of  men  will  naturally  develop 
something  similar.  Baptism,  too,  is  no  rare  phe- 
nomenon. We  conclude  that,  while  the  parallel  is 
interesting,  the  Christian  develoimient  cannot  be 
shown  to  be  borrowed  from  Essenism,  and  is  intel- 
ligible without  any  reference  to  it. 

Other  resemblances  have  been  noted  (a  list  will 
be  found  in  HDB,  art.  'Essenes'),  but  they  are 
trilling  and  unconvincing.  The  fact,  e.g.,  that 
Christians  are  admonished  to  obey  them  that  have 
tlie  rule  over  them  gives  a  point  of  resemblance  to 
the  Essenes  certainly,  but  also  to  every  human  as- 
sociation that  ever  was  organized  on  principles  of 
common  sense.  It  is  useless  to  draw  out  laborious 
parallels  of  this  sort.  We  may  hold  that  the  early 
Church  cannot  be  proved  to  have  owed  anything 
to  Essenism,  and  can  be  explained  without  it.  On 
the  other  hand,  Essenism,  in  its  super-Pharisaism, 
its  retirement  from  the  world,  its  avoidance  of  the 
Temple  (cf.  Ac  3'  21-"),  its  views  of  the  body,  its 
sun-worship  and  magic,  is  in  sharpest  contrast  to 
Christianity.  Of  the  silence  of  the  NT  regarding 
the  Essenes  there  are  only  two  possible  explana- 
tions. One  is  that  Christianity  is  one  with  Essen- 
ism— a  view  we  have  rejected.  The  other  is  that 
Essenism  was  so  uninfluential,  so  entirely  out  of  re- 
lation to  Christianity,  or  any  active  movement  of 
the  time,  that  there  was  no  occasion  to  mention 
it.  When  Ave  remember  that  Pliny  knows  of 
Essenes  only  as  inhabiting  the  desert  shore  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  we  are  contirmed  in  choosing  this 
alternative. 

5.  Influence  on  heresies.  —  If  it  is  doubtful 
whether  the  Church  in  her  normal  development 
owed  anything  to  Essenism,  it  is  not  doubtful  that 
its  influence  is  discernible  in  the  rise  of  a  number 
of  heresies.  Here  too,  however,  its  influence  has 
sometimes  been  exaggerated.  It  is  highly  question- 
able whether  Essenes  have,  or  possibly  could  have, 
any  connexion  with  the  '  weaker  brethren '  of 
Romans  or  the  errorists  of  Colossians.  The 
former,  as  seems  indicated  in  Ro  IS'',  are  probably 
Gentiles  given  to  the  asceticism  which  was  not  un- 
common in  the  heathen  world  at  that  time  (A.  C. 
McGiflert,  Christianity  in  the  Aiwstol.  Age,  1897, 
p.  337).  The  latter,  though  scholars  like  Lightfoot 
and  Weiss  regard  them  as  clearly  E.ssenic,  are 
really  as  likely  to  be  Alexandrian  as  Palestinian 
Jews  (p.  368).  According  to  all  our  autiiorities, 
Essenes  were  confined  to  Palestine.  We  have 
stated  Pliny's  view  above ;  Philo  knew  of  them 
in  many  towns  and  villages  of  Jud;va;  Josephus 
knew  them  all  through  Palestine.  The  hi-st  two 
authorities  are  obviously  anxious  to  make  the 
most  possible  of  the  Essenes,  and,  had  they  had  a 
wider  distribution,  we  may  be  sure  we  should  have 
been  informed  of  it.     The  Essenes  arrived  at  their 


ESSENES 


ETERNAL,  EVERLASTING       369 


peculiarities  by  uniting  heatlien  elements  with 
Judaism  ;  and  wherever  Jews  came  in  touch  with 
like  influences,  similar  results  might  be  produced. 
Leaving  out  the  Roman  and  Colossian  errorists  as 
doubtfully  Essenic,  to  say  the  least,  we  proceed  to 
those  heretical  movements  where,  with  great  pro- 
bability, Essenism  is  intluential. 

(a)  The  Essenes  are  of  undoubted  interest  for  the 
history  of  Gnosticism  {q.v.).  They  may  be  called 
'the  Gnostics  of  Judaism.'  Their  fondness  for 
speculation  on  cosmogony,  their  allegorizing  of 
the  OT,  of  which  Philo  speaks,  their  dualistic 
views,  which  involve  a  depreciation  of  matter, 
their  magic  and  their  esoteric  books — all  connect 
them  with  Gnosticism.  And  they  are  important 
as  showing  that  in  essence  there  was  a  pre-Chris- 
tian Gnosticism.  (6)  They  influenced  those  Jew- 
ish Christians  who  came  into  contact  with  them 
(see  art.  Ebioxism).  The  Ebionites,  a.s  described 
by  Epiphanius,  sliow  traces  of  Essenic  influence  in 
their  asceticism  and  frequent  baptisms.  The  Elke- 
saites  are  Essenized  Ebionites.  Epiphanius  (Ucer. 
xix.  2,  XX.  3)  identifies  Elkesaites  with  Savipsceans 
(sun-worshippers),  and  calls  them  a  remnant  of  the 
Essenes  who  liad  adopted  a  debased  form  of  Chris- 
tianity, (c)  The  history  of  the  Essenes  after  the 
Fall  of  Jerusalem  is  obscure.  They  suffered  severely, 
and  enduretl  bravely,  in  the  persecution,  and  pro- 
bably their  Order  was  broken  up  (Lightfoot,  Col. 
p.  169).  Many  would  attacli  themselves  to  the 
neighbouring  Christians,  with  whom  they  would 
find  several  affinities,  and  carry  elements  of  their 
Essenism  with  them.  In  the  Palestinian  JudcEo- 
Christian  heresies,  then,  we  may,  with  practical 
certainty,  trace  Essenic  influence. 

6.  Conclusion. — The  whole  subject  of  Essenism 
is  wrapped  in  obscuritj' :  the  Essenes  remain,  and 
will  remain,  the  'great  enigma  of  Jewish  history.' 
The  obscurity  is  all  the  more  tantalizing  because 
we  know  enough  to  perceive  that  for  tlie  history  of 
religion  the  Essenes  are  of  surpassing  interest  and 
importance.  In  tliem  the  Western  world  saw  for 
the  first  time  a  monastic  Order  and  a  sacramental 
worship.  In  them,  too,  Gnosticism  began  its 
career.  These  are  three  points  of  vast  importance. 
The  'regions  beyond  Jordan'  are  of  special  in- 
terest for  the  syncretism  of  which  they  were  the 
scene.  There,  first  Judaism  and  later  Christianity 
were  unable  to  maintain  themselves  in  their  original 
form.  In  a  general  way,  we  can  understand  the 
process  of  this  syncretism.  In  that  region  Perso- 
Babylonian,  and  even  perhaps  Buddhistic,  influ- 
ences, pressing  westward,  impinged  ujwn  Judaism, 
and  Esj^enism  is  the  most  prominent  of  the  various 
amalgams  that  resulted.  In  the  more  obscure 
Sampsfeans,  Nasara?ans,  Hemerobaptists,  etc.,  we 
have,  no  doubt,  other  examples.  And  as  it  was 
with  trans- Jordan ic  Judaism,  so  it  was  with  trans- 
Jordanic  Judaistic  Christianity.  It  found  in 
Essenism  and  its  cognates  what  they  had  found  in 
eastern  heathenism — an  influence  too  strong  to  be 
resisted.  But  as  to  the  precise  details  of  both 
syncretisms,  we  are  left  in  ignorance,  and  nearly 
every  statement  must  begin  with  '  probably.'  As 
has  been  indicated,  in  estimating  their  influence  on 
Christianity,  Catholic  and  heretical  alike,  we  must 
beware  of  the  tendency  to  exaggerate  it.  Our 
view  is — the  Essenes  had  no  appreciable  influence 
on  the  development  of  Catholic  Christianity,  but 
in  Judseo-Christian  heresies  their  influence  is  con- 
siderable, while  for  the  history  of  Gnosticism 
they  are  of  great  interest. 

LiTERATCRK. — This  is  very  abundant.  We  mention  only  P. 
E.  Lucius,  Der  Essenisinus,  18S1 ;  J.  B.  Ligrhtfoot,  ColoMi'ang, 
ISTo;  E.  Schiirer.  HJP  u.  ii.  [1SS5]  188  ff.;  A.  HUgenfeld, 
Ketzergeschichte  des  Crehriitentums,  1884 ;  W.  Bousset,  He- 
ligion  des  JudenUnm  im  ST  Zettalter,  1903 ;  artt.  in  HD£, 
EBi,  J  a,  CE,  and  EBr'ii,  where  further  Literature  is  mentioned. 

\V.  D.  Nrv'EN. 

VOL.  I.— 24 


ETERNAL,  EYERLASTING.— '  Eternal '  and 
'  everlasting '  are  employed  in  the  AV  of  the  NT 
somewhat  indiscriminately  to  render  three  Greek 
word.s — dtSioj,  aiwy  (used  adjectivally  in  genitive 
plural),  and  alJiviOi.  dtSioi  is  found  only  in  Ro  1** 
and  Jude*,  AV  rendering  '  eternal '  in  the  first  case 
and  '  everlasting '  in  the  second.  '  Eternal '  is  the 
translation  of  tup  atw^wv  in  Eph  3",  1  Ti  1". 
aiwvios  is  of  very  common  occurrence  ;  but  while 
AV  in  most  cases  gives  'eternal,'  it  not  infrequently 
substitutes  •  everlasting,'  and  sometimes  d!oes  so, 
apparently,  for  no  other  reason  than  to  avoid  the 
repetition  of  the  same  English  word  (cf.,  e.g.,  Ac 
13**  with  v.«  ;  Ro  &^  with  v.»).  For  atSiot  (a  con- 
traction for  aeiSios,  fr.  dei  'ever')  RV  properly  re- 
serves 'everlasting.'  For  tQv  aiuvwv  it  gives  the 
literal  meaning  '  of  the  ages.'  For  aiwi'ioj  (fr.  auip) 
it  regularly  gives  'eternal,'  except  in  Philem^', 
where  aiwvioy  is  treated  as  an  adverb  and  rendered 
'for  ever.'  'Eternal'  for  aiuvtos  is  etymologically 
correct,  since  Lat.  (sternus  (for  asvitemus)  comes 
from  (evum,  the  digammated  form  of  otwv,  from 
which  aiwyioi  is  derived.  Moreover,  no  better 
English  word  can  be  suggested — unless  the  trans- 
literation 'seonian'  could  be  accepted.  None  the 
less,  '  eternal '  is  misleading,  inasmuch  as  it  has 
come  in  English  to  connote  the  idea  of  '  endlessly 
existing,'  and  thus  to  be  practically  a  synonym  for 
'everlasting.'  But  this  is  not  an  adequate  render- 
ing of  aiwvioi,  which  varies  in  meaning  with  the 
variations  of  the  noun  aiJiv,  from  which  it  comes. 

The  chief  meanings  of  aiuv  in  classical  Greek  are : 
(1)  a  lifetime  ;  (2)  an  age  or  period  ;  (3)  a  period  of 
unlimited  duration.  In  the  LXX,  which  is  largely 
determinative  for  NT  usage,  aid:v  (usually  repre- 
sentin«^  Heb.  c^iy)  is  employed  with  the  same 
variations  as  in  the  older  Greek  literature ;  and 
the  length  of  time  referred  to  must  be  determined 
from  the  context.  In  some  cases  els  t6v  alQva. 
refers  to  the  duration  of  a  single  human  life  (Ex 
19**  21*) ;  in  others  it  is  applied  to  the  length  of  a 
dynasty  (1  Ch  28*),  the  lasting  natui'e  of  au  ordin- 
ance (2  Ch  2*),  the  national  existence  of  Israel  (2 
Ch  9*),  the  perpetuity  of  the  earth  (Ec  1*),  the  en- 
during character  of  God  (Ps  9^)  and  of  the  Divine 
truth  and  mercy  (117*  118').  Similarly  aluvios  is 
applied  to  the  ancient  gates  of  Zion  (Ps  24^),  to 
certain  Levitical  ordinances  (Lv  16^-  **),  to  the 
covenants  of  God  with  men  (Gn  9'*  17^  etc.),  to  the 
Divine  mercy  (Is  54*)  and  love  (Jer  3P).  Only 
rarely  do  we  find  the  word  applied  directly  to  God 
Himself  (Gn  21»,  Is  4(F*).  Passing  from  the  LXX, 
we  have  to  notice  the  bearing  upon  NT  usage  of 
the  distinction  made  in  the  later  Jewish  theology 
(see  Schiirer,  HJF  II.  ii.  133)  between  the  present 
age  (n'n  nVij;)  and  the  coming  or  Messianic  age 
(K^n  D^iy),  a  distinction  which  reappears  in  the  NT 
in  the  expressions  6  aiwy  o&ros  and  6  cUwy  6  fiiWuv 
or  6  (pxofj^evos. 

Coming  now  to  the  NT  with  the  previous  history 
of  aiwv  and  aiuvios  in  view,  we  find  that  the  terms 
are  still  used  as  before  with  various  connotations. 
In  1  Co  8'*,  unless  St.  Paul  is  writing  by  way  of  pure 
hyperbole,  cduv  can  refer  only  to  his  own  lifetime. 
In  Ac  3^*  it  refers  to  the  age  of  prophecy.  Its  fre- 
quent employment  in  the  plural  suggests  that  in 
the  singular  the  word  denotes  something  less  than 
unending  time ;  while  the  phrases  rp6  twv  aiujvuv 
(1  Co  2')  and  to.  tAi;  tQ»  aiwvuv  (10")  point  to  ages 
that  were  conceived  of,  not  as  everlasting,  but  as 
having  a  beginning  and  coming  to  an  end.  Even 
the  coming  or  Messianic  alJjv,  as  contrasted  Mith 
the  present  time  (Mk  ICP,  Eph  1=",  etc.),  is  not  con- 
ceived of  by  St.  Paul  as  endless.  In  2  P  1"  Christ's 
Kingdom  is  described  as  a'nivioi ;  but  St.  Paul 
anticipates  a  time  when  Christ  shall  deliver  up 
His  Kingdom  to  God  the  Father  (1  Co  15^). 

The  use  of  the  adjective  is  again  similar  to  that 


370 


ETERNAL  FIRE 


irrHics 


of  the  noun.  Whether  alwviov  is  treated  as  an  ad- 
verb or  an  adjective  in  Phileni  ^"j  it  is  evident  that 
the  meaning  must  be  restricted  to  the  lifetime  of 
Onesimus  and  Pliilenion.  The  XP^>">'-  aiwfioi  of  Ko 
16^  are  the  ages  during  which  the  mystery  of  the 
gospel  was  kept  secret,  in  contrast  witli  the  age  of  its 
revelation.  Tliose  x/x^""'  a-idjvioi,  moreover,  are  not 
to  be  thought  of  as  stretching  backwards  everlast- 
ingly, as  is  proved  by  the  wp6  xpii^w  aluvluv  of  2  Ti 
P,  Tit  1*.  The  alilivia  6e6;  of  Ko  16""  carries  with  it 
unquestionably  the  idea  of  everlastingness  ;  but  it  is 
worth  noting  that  this  is  the  only  occasion  in  the  NT 
when  the  term  is  applied  to  God,  and  that  the  dox- 
ology  in  which  it  occurs  is  of  doubtful  genuineness. 
It  is  when  we  come  to  consider  the  expression 
fcjij  aiiLvtos  (cf.  auT-qpla,  [lie  5"],  Xi;r/)W(rtj  [9'"J,  Kkripo- 
i/o/xla  [v.">]),  which  is  of  very  frequent  occurrence 
in  the  Johannine  and  Pauline  writings,  together 
with  the  contrasted  conceptions  trOp  alibviov  (Mt  18* 
2o^\  Jude^),  /c6\a<ris  a/uiJ'tos  (Mt  25''*'),  dXedpoi  aiwvios 
(2  Th  P),  Kpifia  alwviov  (He  6'^),  that  we  lind  the 
real  crux  of  the  difficulty  of  translating  the  term. 
It  has  often  been  insisted  that  the  meaning  of  the 
word  is  the  same  in  either  case,  and  that  if  '  teonian 
tire'  is  less  than  everlasting,  'aeonian  life'  must 
also  be  less.  Sometimes  this  argument  has  been 
met  by  the  objection  that  aiibvios  is  not  a  quantita- 
tive but  a  spiritual  and  qualitative  term,  express- 
ing a  kind  rather  than  a  length  of  being.  That 
the  word  is  frequently  so  used  in  the  Johannine 
writings  appears  evident  (e.g.  Jn  17*,  1  Jn  S'"*-  ^'  5'^)  ; 
and  in  the  Pauline  Epistles  also  we  have  various 
examples  of  its  employment  in  a  sense  that  is  in- 
tensive rather  than  extensive — notably  the  equation 
in  I  Ti  6'2- 1"  (KV)  between  '  eternal  life '  and  '  the 
life  which  is  life  indeed.'  And  yet  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  whole  history  of  the  term  points 
to  the  underlying  idea  of  duration,  and  not  of 
duration  only,  but  of  a  duration  that  is  permanent. 
With  equal  clearness,  however,  that  history  shows 
that  the  permanence  affirmed  is  not  absolute,  but 
relative  to  the  nature  of  the  subject.  Whe;i  ap- 
plied to  the  loving  service  of  a  Christian  slave  to 
a  Christian  master,  aluvtos  denotes  a  permanence 
as  lasting  as  the  earthly  relation  between  master 
and  slave  will  permit.  VVhen  used  of  the  ages  be- 
fore the  gospel  was  revealed,  it  means  throughout 
the  whole  length  of  those  ages.  Wlien  applied  to 
God  or  to  the  Spirit  (He  9''*),  it  means  as  ever- 
lasting as  the  Divine  nature  itself.  And  when  we 
come  to  '  eternal  life '  on  the  one  hand  and  '  eternal 
lire '  or  '  eternal  destruction '  on  the  other,  they 
also  must  be  rendered  according  to  our  conception 
of  the  inherent  nature  of  the  thing  referred  to. 
And  many  will  hold  that  while  good,  as  emanat- 
ing from  God,  is  necessarily  indestructible,  evil,  as 
contrary  to  the  Divine  nature  and  will,  must  even- 
tually cease  to  be — '  that  God  may  be  all  in  all ' 
(1  Co  15'-''').  '  iEonian  lire,'  therefore,  may  mean  a 
tire  that  goes  on  burning  until  it  has  burned  itself 
out;  'aionian  destruction,'  a  destruction  that  con- 
tinues until  there  is  nothing  left  to  destroy.  But 
'  ieonian  life,'  being  life  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord 
(Ro  6^ ;  cf.  1  Jn  5"),  must  be  as  enduring  as  the 
Divine  immortality.  If  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ 
Jesus  dwells  in  us,  nothing  shall  be  able  to  separ- 
ate us  from  the  love  of  God  (Ro  8-'-  "•  »-^-').  See, 
further.  Life  and  Death. 

LiTERATDRE. — S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  Christian  Doctrine  of 
Immortalitu,  Edinburgh,  1895,  p.  649  ff.  ;  G.  B.  Stevens, 
Theol.  of  MT,  do.  1S99,  p.  224  ff.,  Christian  Doctrine  of  Saha- 
lion,  do.  1905,  p.  526  f.  ;  Expositor,  1st.  ser.  vii.  [1878]  405-424, 
.«rd.  ser.  vi.  [1887]  274-286,  viL  [1888]  266-278 ;  EBi  ii.  [1901] 

1403.  J,  c.  Lambert. 

ETERNAL  FIRE.-See  Fire. 

ETERNAL  LIFE.— See  Eternal  and  Life  and 
Death. 


ETHICS. — It  is  proposed  in  the  present  article 
not  to  discuss  the  vast  subject  of  ethics  in  general, 
but  to  attempt  to  ascertain  what  were  the  most 
striking  points  in  which  the  ethical  ideas  of  the 
Christians  of  the  Apostolic  Age  dill'ered  from  those 
of  earlier  speculators  on  the  subject. 

1.  Sources  of  information. — All  our  first-hand 
information  is  contained  in  the  writings  of  the 
NT  and  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  Indirectlj*  the 
works  of  later  Christian  authors,  who  treated  tlie 
subject  more  systematically,  may  throw  some  liglit 
by  way  of  inference  on  the  conceptions  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Age :  for  instance,  if  the  treatment  of  tl«e 
cardinal  virtues  by  St.  Augustine  and  others  shows 
a  marked  difference  from  the  treatment  found  in 
pre-Christian  writers,  it  may  perhaps  be  rightly 
inferred  that  the  difference  is  due  to  ideas  which 
already  prevailed  in  the  first  generation  of  Chris- 
tians. Rut  inferences  of  this  sort  are  precarious, 
for  it  is  hardly  possible  to  ascertain  accurately  how 
far  the  other  influences  which  contributed  to  the 
thought  of  the  later  writers  were  operative  in  the 
earliest  age ;  and  in  any  case  it  is  probable  that 
later  writings  would  not  add  anything  of  great 
importance  to  the  general  outline,  which  is  all  that 
is  being  attempted  here.  Attention  will  therefore 
be  confined  to  the  contemporary  documents.  And 
with  respect  to  these,  critical  questions  may  be 
ignored.  The  accuracy  of  the  historical  narrative 
is  not  in  question,  and  whatever  may  be  the 
authorship  or  the  precise  date  of  the  documents 
reviewed,  they  are  all  sufficiently  early  to  reflect 
ethical  ideas  which  belong  to  the  Apostolic  Age, 
and  not  those  which  belong  to  a  later  period, 

2.  General  characteristics  of  ethical  thought. — 
(1)  Absence  of  systematic  treatment. — Ethical  ques- 
tions are  constantly  touched  upon  in  the  NT,  but 
always  more  or  less  in  connexion  with  particular 
ca.ses  as  they  arise,  and  never  in  connexion  with  a 
complete  and  thought-out  system.  Here  there  is 
a  striking  contrast  with  Greek  philosophy.  The 
philosophers  tried  to  find  a  rational  basis  for  human 
life  in  all  its  relations.  In  ethics  they  di.scussed 
the  question  of  the  supreme  good — whether  it  was 
knowledge,  or  pleasure,  or  virtue ;  they  classified 
the  virtues,  and  discussed  in  the  fullest  manner 
their  various  manifestations.  There  is  nothing  of 
this  sort  in  the  NT.  The  morality  of  the  Jews, 
again,  was  very  different  from  that  of  the  Greeks, 
for  the  Jews  took  little  interest  in  purely  philo- 
sophical problems ;  but  thev  also  had  a  system, 
and  a  very  elaborate  one,  of  law  and  of  ceremonial 
observance,  with  which  their  morality  was  closely 
bound  up.  Although  the  Christians  inherited  so 
much  from  the  Jews,  this  system,  after  being,  as 
it  were,  raised  to  its  highest  power  in  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  was  definitely  set  aside  in  the 
Apostolic  Age.  And  in  the  place  of  a  system  we 
find  an  overpowering  interest  in  certain  historical 
facts.  The  Synoptic  Gospels  are  occupied  with  a 
fragmentary  narrative  of  the  life  of  Christ,  in 
which  a  good  deal  of  moral  teaching  is  contained. 
Rut  it  is  such  as  arises  incidentally  from  the  facts 
recorded  in  the  narrative,  and  it  is  not  presented 
as  part  of  a  scheme  of  ethics.  In  the  Fourth 
Gospel  there  is  something  more  nearly  resembling 
systematic  moral  discussion,  but  even  here  the 
discourses  arise  out  of  a  historical  framework,  and 
the  prevailing  interest  is  not  ethical  but  spiritual 
and  mystical.  The  Acts  contains  little  but  narra- 
tive, and  the  teaching  recorded  in  it  centres  almost 
monotonously  around  facts.  In  the  Epistles  ethical 
questions  are  constantly  dealt  with,  but  the  pro- 
blems are  practical,  and  arise  out  of  the  circum- 
stances of  the  time.  This  is  not  to  say  that  in 
these  writings  there  is  no  new  point  of  view,  but 
that  ethics  is  nowhere  treated  in  a  complete  and 
systematic  way,  and  that  there  appears  to  be  no 


ETHICS 


ETHICS 


371 


consciousness  on  the  part  of  the  writers  that  they 
Are  in  possession  of  a  new  ethical  theory  or  philo- 
sophy. The  difference,  therefore,  between  pre- 
Christian  and  Christian  ethics  does  not  consist  in  a 
new  theory  or  system.  The  subject  was  treated  in 
the  Apostolic  Age  from  the  practical  point  of  view. 

(2)  The  moral  ideal. — A  new  element  is,  however, 
introduced  into  ethics  by  that  very  concentration 
upon  a  single  historical  life  which  has  been  noted 
above.  The  ideal  man  had  figured  largely  in 
earlier  ethical  systems,  but  the  ideal  man  of  philo- 
sophy had  been  entirelj'  a  creation  of  the  imagina- 
tion, and  his  actual  existence  never  seems  to  have 
been  thought  of  as  a  practical  possibility.  Now, 
liowever,  an  actual  human  life  is  put  forward  as  a 
model  of  perfection,  and  it  is  assumed  without  dis- 
cussion that  all  ethical  questions,  as  they  may 
happen  to  arise,  may  be,  and  must  be,  tested  by 
this. 

(3)-  The  new  life. — There  is,  moreover,  in  the 
consciousness  of  the  Apostolic  Age  something  more 
potent  than  belief  in  a  historical  example.  There 
is  a  sense  which  pervades  every  writing  of  this  time 
that  a  new  force  has  come  into  existence.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  insist  upon  the  prominence  in  early 
Christian  teaching  of  the  belief  in  the  Resurrection. 
The  continued  life  and  activity  of  the  Person  who 
is  the  centre  of  all  their  thought  were  the  greatest 
of  all  realities  to  the  early  Christians.  With  it 
was  combined  the  belief  in  the  continual  indwelling 
and  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  this  seems 
to  explain  the  apparent  indifierence  to  ethical 
theory  which  has  been  noted.  For  to  the  early 
Christians  '  outward  morality  is  the  necessary  ex- 
pression of  a  life  already  infused  into  the  soul ' 
(Strong,  Christian  Ethics,  p.  69).  It  is  in  this 
respect  that  the  Christian  conception  presents  the 
most  marked  contrast  to  pre-Christian  thought. 
There  was  a  note  of  hopelessness  in  the  moral 
speculation  of  the  Greeks.  Even  a  high  ideal  was 
a  thing  regarded  as  practically  out  of  reach  for 
the  mass  of  mankind.  Plato  looked  upon  the 
ideal  State  as  a  necessary  condition  for  the  exercise 
of  the  highest  virtue,  and  its  conception  was  a 
wonderful  etlort  of  the  philosophical  imagination  ; 
but  it  was  not  considered  possible.  Even  the 
apparently  practical  conceptions  of  Aristotle  re- 
quire a  complete  reconstruction  of  society.  The 
Stoic  philosophers  abandoned  this  dream,  and  could 
suggest  nothing  better  than  the  withdrawal  of  the 
wise  man  from  all  ordinary  human  interests.  The 
Neo-Platonist  went  further,  and  sought  complete 
severance  from  the  world  of  sense.  Jewish  thought 
was  on  different  lines,  but  there  was  an  even  keener 
sense  of  sin  and  failure,  although  this  was  redeemed 
from  despair  by  the  hope  of  a  Messianic  Age  which 
would  redress  all  the  evils  of  the  existing  order. 
Above  all  there  was  no  sufficient  solution,  and 
among  the  Greeks  little  attempt  at  a  solution,  of 
the  problem  of  how  the  human  will  was  to  be 
sufficiently  strengthened  to  do  its  part  in  the 
realization  of  any  ideal.  In  the  writings  of  the 
Apostolic  Age,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  found 
not  only  a  belief  in  a  perfect  ideal  historically 
realized,  but  also  a  belief  in  an  indwelling  power 
sufficient  to  restore  aU  that  is  weak  and  depraved 
in  the  human  will. 

(4)  The  evangelical  virtttes. — In  the  XT  there  is 
no  regular  discussion  of  the  nature  of  virtue,  and 
no  formal  classification  of  virtues.  The  Greek 
philosophers,  while  they  differed  in  their  views 
of  what  constituted  the  chief  good,  were  agreed 
in  accepting  what  are  known  as  the  four  cardinal 
\T.rtues  —  prudence,  temperance,  fortitude,  and 
justice — as  the  basis  of  their  classification.  This 
division,  from  the  time  of  Plato  onwards  (and 
he  appears  to  assume  it  as  familiar),  is  generally' 
accepted  as  exhaustive,  and  other  virtues  are  made 


to  fall  under  these  heads.  But  although  this  classi- 
fication must  have  been  familiar  to  a  large  number 
of  the  early  Christians,  and  altliough  it  had  been 
adopted  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom  (8^j,  it  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  NT.  The  cardinal  virtues  reappeared 
in  Christian  literature  from  Origen  onwards,  and 
were  exhaustively  treated  by  Ambrose,  Augus- 
tine, Gregory,  and  medifeval  writers,  but  this  kind 
of  discussion  does  not  make  its  appearance  in  the 
Apostolic  Age.  Such  lists  of  virtues  as  that  which 
occurs  in  Gal  o"**  are  clearly  not  intended  to  be 
exhaustive  or  scientific,  and  the  nearest  approach 
to  a  system  of  virtues  is  made  by  St.  Paul  in  1  Cor., 
where  he  expounds  what  became  known  as  the  three 
theological  virtues  of  faith,  hope,  and  love.  These 
three  are  also  closely  associated  in  Ro  5^"*,  1  Th 
12*-,  and  Col  1*-' ;  and  two  other  NT  writers  (He 
10^'-*  and  1  P  l^^'-)  mention  them  in  conjunction 
in  a  suggestive  manner.  It  seems  that  they  were 
generally  recognized  as  moral  or  spiritual  states 
characteristic  of  the  Christian  life.  And  the  reason 
for  this  appears  to  be  that  they  are  regarded  as  the 
means  by  which  the  Christian  is  brought  into 
personal  relation  with  the  historical  facts,  and  with 
the  new  life  brought  by  them  into  the  world,  which 
have  been  spoken  of  above  as  the  point  on  which 
the  Christians  of  the  first  age  centred  their  atten- 
tion. The  insistence  on  these  spiritual  virtues 
brings  out  two  distinct  characteristics  of  the  ethical 
thought  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  which  are  nowhere 
defined  or  discussed  in  the  NT,  but  which  neverthe- 
less appear  to  be  consistently  implied.  These  char- 
acteristics are  a  new  doctrine  of  the  end  of  man, 
and  consequently  a  new  criterion  of  good  and  evil, 
and  a  new  view  of  human  nature. 

(a)  These  three  virtues  all  take  a  man  outside 
himself,  and  make  it  impossible  for  him  to  be  merely 
self-regarding.  They  bring  him  into  close  relation 
not  only  with  his  fellow-men  but  with  God.  So 
union  with  God  becomes  the  highest  end  of  man. 
This  union,  moreover,  is  not  absorption  :  whatever 
may  have  been  the  case  of  some  later  Christian 
mystics,  the  most  mystical  of  the  early  writers,  St. 
Paul  and  St.  John,  never  contemplate  anything  but 
a  conscious  union  with  God,  in  which  the  whole  in- 
dividuality of  man  is  preserved,  '  From  first  to  last 
the  Christian  idea  is  social,  and  involves  the  con- 
scious communion  between  man  and  man,  between 
man  and  God.  And  no  state  of  things  in  which  the 
individual  consciousness  disappears  mil  satisfy  this 
demand '  (Strong,  (^.  cit.  p.  88).  Faith,  hope,  and 
love  all  relate  to  a  spiritual  region  above  and  beyond 
this  present  life,  but  the  existing  world  is  not  ex- 
cluded from  it.  The  Kingdom  of  God,  which  oc- 
cupies so  large  a  place  in  the  thought  of  the 
Apostolic  Age,  is  regarded  as  future  and  as  tran- 
scendental, but  it  is  also  regarded  as  having  come 
already,  so  far  as  the  rule  of  Christ  has  been  made 
effective  in  this  life.  Thus  a  new  standard  for  moral 
judgments  is  set  up  :  those  actions  and  events  are 
good  which  advance  the  coming  of  the  Kingdom, 
and  those  are  evil  which  impede  it. 

(6)  Furtlier,  the  evangelical  virtues  assume  a 
unity  in  liuman  nature  which  pre-Christian  systems 
of  thought  failed  to  recognize.  Greek  thought 
either  regarded  human  nature  as  unfallen,  or  it 
adopted  more  or  less  an  Oriental  view  of  evil  as  im- 
manent in  matter.  When  evil  could  not  be  ignored 
it  might  be  ascribed  either  to  ignorance  or  to  the 
imprisonment  of  the  soul  in  an  alien  environment. 
In  neither  case  could  human  nature  be  regarded  as  a 
whole  which  in  its  own  proper  being  is  harmonious. 
The  body  and  the  emotions  which  are  closely  con- 
nected with  it  were  looked  upon  as  things  which 
must  either  be  kept  in  strict  subjection  to  the  in- 
tellect, or,  as  far  as  possible,  be  got  rid  of  altogether. 
In  early  Christian  thought,  on  the  other  hand,  hope 
and  love  are  mainly  emotional,  and  faith  is  by  no 


372 


ETHICS 


ETHIOPIANS 


means  exclusively  intellectual.  In  St.  Paul's  use 
of  the  term  it  includes  a  strong  element  of  emotion — 
it '  worketh  through  love  '  (Gal  5*) ;  and  it  is  almost 
more  an  act  of  the  will  than  of  the  intellect.  And 
although  asceticism  played  a  great  part  in  some 
departments  of  later  Christian  thought,  in  the 
Apostolic  Age  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  imjiort- 
ance  assigned  to  the  body.  The  conspicuous  Cliris- 
tian  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  tlie  body  assumes 
a  very  different  point  of  view  from  that  of  Oriental 
or  even  of  Greek  philosophy.  It  is  clear  that  the 
first  generation  of  Christians  regarded  human 
nature  as  fallen  indeed,  but  as  capable  in  all  its 
parts  of  restoration,  and  they  believed  tliat  none  of 
its  i>arts  could  be  left  out  from  the  salvation  of  the 
whole. 

(5)  The  conception  of  sin. — Sjieaking  generally, 
it  may  be  said  that  the  non-Christian  view  of  sin 
regards  it  as  natural,  and  that  tlie  Christian  view 
regards  it  as  unnatural.  This  is,  however,  a  broad 
generalization,  and  requires  further  definition.  No 
system  of  ethical  thought  can  altogetlier  ignore  tlie 
fact  of  sin,  though  it  is  sometimes  minimized.  But 
tliere  are  wide  differences  in  the  way  in  which  it  is 
regarded.  In  ))re-Christian  thought  it  was  often 
almost  identilied  with  ignorance.  It  was  assumed 
that  a  man  cannot  sin  willingly,  because  no  man 
desires  evil  for  himself.  Virtue  is  therefore  know- 
ledge, and  the  possibility  of  knowing  what  is  right 
and  doing  what  is  wrong  need  not  be  considered. 
This  was  the  teaching  of  a  large  section  of  Greek 
philosophy.  Again,  wherever  Oriental  ideas  had 
inrtuence,  the  seat  of  evil  was  thought  to  be  in 
matter.  Sometimes  the  strife  between  good  and 
evil  was  e-xjilained  as  a  contest  between  two  rival 
and  eveniy-bahmced  powers.  Sometimes  a  good 
deity  was  conceived  as  acting  upon  an  intractable 
material.  The  practical  conclusion  was  usually 
some  form  of  asceticism — an  attempt  to  be  quit  of 
the  body  and  all  that  it  implied  ;  and  this  asceti- 
cism, by  a  process  easy  to  be  understood,  not  infre- 
quently led  to  licence.  These  tendencies  often 
make  their  appearance  in  Church  history,  and 
traces  of  them  are  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of 
the  NT,  but  during  the  Apostolic  Age  the  ilangers 
of  Gnosticism  and  Antinomianisni  were  but  rudi- 
mentary. In  modern  times  the  view  of  evil  which 
regards  it  as  undeveloped  good,  or  as  the  survival 
of  instincts  that  are  no  longer  necessary  or  bene- 
ficial, has  some  points  in  common  with  the  old 
dualisms.  The  common  feature  of  all  these 
views  is  that  they  regard  evil  as  more  or  less  in- 
evitable and  according  to  nature.  It  would  not  be 
true  to  say  that  they  altogether  disregard  the 
human  will,  or  deny  human  responsibility,  but 
they  treat  the  body  rather  than  the  will  as  the  seat 
of  evil,  and  tliey  tend  to  look  upon  evil  as,  upon  the 
whole,  natural  and  necessary.  The  Ciiristian  view 
of  sin,  as  it  ap])ears  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic 
Age,  is  in  the  sharpest  contrast  to  this.  It  is  the 
Jewish  view,  carried  to  its  natural  conclusion,  and 
its  chief  characteristics  may  be  set  down  under 
three  heads. 

(a)  First,  the  freedom  of  the  will  is  not  considered 
from  the  philosophical  point  of  view  at  all.  Tiie 
metaphysical  ditliculties  are  not  even  touched  upon, 
nor  is  any  consciousness  shown  of  their  existence, 
liut  the  responsibility  of  man  is  always  assumed. 
Nor  is  it  for  his  actions  alone  that  he  is  responsible. 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  brings  home  to  him 
responsibility  for  every  thought,  and  for  his  whole 
attitude  towards  God.  And  in  doing  so  it  brings  to 
its  natural  conclusion  the  course  of  ethical  thougiit 
among  the  Jews.  If,  however,  the  root  of  sin  is 
in  the  will,  it  follows  that  it  is  not  in  matter,  or  in 
the  body,  or  in  anything  distinct  from  the  will  of 
man.  The  whole  universe  is  good,  because  it  is 
created  by  God,  and  sin  consists  in  the  wilful  misuse 


of  things  naturally  good.  Asceticism  therefore, 
except  in  the  sense  of  such  training  as  may  help  to 
restore  the  will  to  a  healthy  condition,  is  excluded. 

(b)  Se(rondly,  the  idea  of  the  holiness  of  God,  as 
forming  a  test  of  human  action  and  a  condemna- 
tion of  human  shortcomings,  is  another  concej)tion. 
inherited  from  Judaism.  Early  Jewish  ideas 
about  God  are  anthropomorphic,  but  the  anthropo- 
morpiiism  is  of  a  very  diflerent  kind  from  that  of. 
the  Greeks.  The  deities  of  Greek  mythology  who 
aroused  the  contemptuous  disgust  of  Plato  were 
constructed  out  of  human  experience  with  all  the 
evil  and  good  qualities  of  actual  men  emphasized 
and  heighteneff.  To  the  Jew  God  is  an  ideal,  the 
simrce  of  the  Moral  Law,  rebellion  against  which  is 
sin.  So  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  the  perfection 
of  God  is  held  up  as  the  ideal  for  human  perfection, 
and  St.  Paul  makes  the  unity  of  God  the  ground 
for  belief  in  the  unity  of  the  Church. 

(c)  Thirdly,  sin  was  regarded  as  a  thing  which 
ali'ects  the  race,  and  not  only  individuals.  The 
beliefs  of  the  Apostolic  Age  with  regard  to  Christ's 
redemptive  work  imply  that  there  is  a  taint  in  the 
race,  and  that  human  nature  it-self,  and  not  only 
individual  men,  has  to  be  restored  to  communion 
with  God,  and  requires  such  a  release  from  sin  as 
will  make  communion  with  God  possible.  Some 
practical  results  of  this  belief  in  the  solidarity  of 
mankind  are  conspicuous  in  early  Christian  writ- 
ings. One  is  the  exercise  of  discipline.  It  was 
felt  that  the  actions  and  character  of  individuals 
compromised  and  affected  the  whole  body,  and 
that  they  could  not  therefore  be  left  to  themselves. 
The  injury  done  by  the  rebellion  of  one  injured 
and  imperilled  the  whole  community.  Both  for 
his  own  sake  and  for  the  sake  of  the  Church  a  cor- 
porate censure  was  required,  extending  if  nece-ssary 
to  the  cutting  oil'  of  the  offending  member  (1  Co  5, 
2  Co  2,  Mt  18i»-=»,  etc.).  Another  result  of  the 
belief  in  solidarity  is  the  emphasis  laid  upon  social, 
virtues  in  connexion  with  the  corporate  character  of 
the  Church  {e.g.  Ro  12,  1  Co  12-14,  Gal  5,  etc.).  It 
partly  accounts  for  that  special  prominence  of 
humility  in  Christian  ethics  which  has  been  so- 
often  commented  on  froju  different  points  of  view, 
for  humility  is  regarded  not  only  as  a  duty  enforced 
by  the  example  of  Christ,  but  al.so  as  the  practical 
means  for  preserving  the  unitj'  and  harmonious- 
working  of  the  body  (Ph  28-«,  etc.). 

3.  Conclusion. — Ethics  in  the  Apostolic  Age  did 
not  consist  in  a  re-statement  of  old  experience  or 
in  a  sj'stem  of  purely  ethical  theory,  but  in  the 
recognition  and  acceptance  in  the  sphere  of  conduct 
of  the  practical  consequences  of  what  was  believed 
to  be  an  entirely  new  experience  of  spiritual  facts. 

Literature. — A.  Neander, '  Verhaltniss  der  hellen.  Ethik  zur 
christlichen,'  in  H'isgenschaftliche  Abhandlungen,  1851,  also 
GeschicfUe  der  christl.  Ethik  {=Theoloq.  VorlesMugen,  v.  [18&4]) ; 
W.  Gass,  Geschichte  der  christl.  Ethik,  18S1  ;  C.  E.  Luthardt, 
Geschichte  der  chrintl.  Ethik,  1888;  H.  Martensen,  Christian 
Ethics,  Entr.  tr.,  (General)  1885,  (Individual)  1881 ,  (Social)  1882  ; 
J.  R.  lUingworth,  Christian  Character,  1904 ;  T.  B.  Strong, 
CAr/.sfia?»£i'/jic«,lS96(to  which  this  article  isespecialljindebKHl); 
H.  H.  ScuUard,  Early  ChriMian  Ethics,10{)7  ;  T.  v.  Haeringr, 
Tlie  Ethioi  of  the  Christian  Li/e,.Eng.Xt.-i  1909. 

J.  H.  Maude. 
ETHIOPIANS.— Ethiopians  are  only  twice  men- 
tioned in  the  NT,  and  then  in  the  same  passage, 
viz.  Ac  8^,  where  Candace,  queen  of  (the)  Ethio- 
pians, and  her  tvvovxo^  Svvdffrrii  are  mentioned 
in  connexion  with  Philip  the  Deacon  (see  artt. 
Candace,  Ethiopian  Eunuch,  and  Philip). 
The  word  is  there  doubtless,  as  in  the  OT,  the 
Greek  equivalent  of  the  Heb.  Kmhi.  It  seems 
probable  that  Aiei(»j/  (?=' Redface')  is  only  a 
tira^cized  form  of  some  native  >vord,  not  a  proi>er 
description  of  their  facial  characteristic,  but  what 
that  word  was  can  only  be  conjectured.  '  Ethiopia ' 
in  NT  times  would,  appear  to  mean  the  soutliern. 


ETHIOPIAN  EUXUCH 


EUCHAKIST 


373 


Eirt  of  Egypt,  now  called  the  Suilan,  the  ancient 
ingdom  of  Meroe.  In  earlier  days  Napata,  a 
town  on  the  Nile,  somewhat  north  of  Meroe,  which 
was  likewise  on  the  Nile,  had  been  the  capital ;  bat 
though  Napata  still  retained  some  of  its  prestige 
as  the  sacred  city,  yet  the  seat  of  government  had 
been  removed  to  Meroe.  Another  kingdom,  that 
-of  Axum  in  the  mountain  region  of  Abyssinia 
proper,  seems  to  have  taken  its  rise  about  the 
middle  of  the  1st  cent.  A.D.,  but  that  does  not 
come  into  view  in  our  present  inquiry. 

ETHIOPIAN    EDNUCH.— PhUip  *  the    Deacon's 

convert  (Ac  8^*^-)  is  described  as  At'^to^  evvoOxK 
Swanrrtfi  KavSdo/s  jSaciXiWiji  AlOtorwy,  8i  ^p  iri  xcwr?;? 
TTJi  ydiTji  avT^i.  Aidio\p  has  been  briefly  discussed 
above,  tiVoCxos  implies  that  he  was  one  of  the 
Court  officials  and  perhaps  subject  to  the  physical 
disability  which  the  name  ordinarily  implies,  but 
not  'chamberlain '  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term, 
as  he  'was  in  charge  of  all  her  treasure'  (see 
Caxdace).  Becker  (Charicles,  Eng.  tr.,  1895,  p. 
-365)  notes  that  eunuchs  were  prized  for  their  re- 
puted fidelity  (xapa  Tolffi  ^apSapotai  [Herod,  viii. 
105]),  and  hence  were  employed  as  treasurers 
{eirifiKQi  yap  eiudecav  eirvovxovs  ^X^^"  yo-iO<pi'\aKai 
[Plutarch,  Demetr.  25]).  Sitcutttjs  suggests  that  he 
possessed  unusual  power  and  influence  at  Court ; 
the  word  is  not  found  in  a  similar  connexion  else- 
where in  the  NT  (it  is  used  of  God  in  1  Ti  6^'  and 
of  kings  in  Lk  1^^),  but  we  have  two  good  instances 
in  Xenophon  {Anab.  I.  ii.  §  20 :  tQv  wrdpxw  riya 
Bvvacrrrjv,  and  Cyrop.  IV.  v.  §  40 :  tov  jSafftXewj  Kai 
<L\Xwi'  SwcuttQiv  ;  cf.  Herod,  ii.  32  and  Plato,  liep.  473). 
There  are  no  means  hitherto  available  for  identify- 
ing this  personage  who  so  early  in  the  history  of 
the  Church  was  admitted  to  her  fold  by  holy 
baptism  *  from  the  GentUe  world ;  but  the  fact 
that  he  was  returning  from  worship  at  Jemsalem, 
and  was  reading  Is  53"-  *  in  the  LXX  version,  which 
here  differs  somewhat  from  the  Hebrew  text,  shows 
that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  Greek  language 
and  had  been  drawn  to  the  religion  of  the  Jews, 
although  he  was  not  very  deeply  versed  in  the 
Scriptures  (v.").  He  was  not  actually  a  proselyte, 
and  in  any  case  his  physical  condition  probably 
disqualified  him.  C.  L.  Feltoe. 

ETHNARCH.— This  comparatively  rare  term  is 
derived  from  idvos,  'a  race,'  and  ipx^iv,  'to  rule'; 
perhaps  the  nearest  English  equivalent  is  'chief.' 
The  word  is  not  known  before  the  2nd  cent.  B.C., 
and  appears  to  indicate  a  ruler  appointed  by  or 
over  a  people  who  were  themselves  part  of  a  larger 
kingdom  or  empire,  the  appointment  being  made 
or  recognized  by  its  overlord  or  suzerain  as  valid. 
The  purpose  of  such  an  appointment  was  perhaps 
primarily  to  safeguard  the  religion  of  a  people. 
The  earliest  instance  of  an  ethnarch  known  to  us 
is  that  of  Simon  Maccabaeus.  In  1  Mac  14*''  Simon 
accepts  from  the  people  the  following  offices — dpxt- 
fpOTfOffcw  Kai  elvai  arpaTrjybi  Kal  idydpxv^  tQv  'lovSaiwp 
Kai  iepeuv  Kai  tov  vpoffTarrictai.  rdrruv  ('to  be  high 
priest  and  to  be  general  and  ethnarch  of  the  Jews 
and  their  priests  and  to  rule  over  all ') ;  and  in  15^ 
a  letter  of  King  Antiochus  of  Syria  is  addressed  to 
him  as  iepei  (j.eya\i{)  Kai  idvapxTJ  ( '  great  priest  and 
ethnarch').  From  15^"''  it  is  clear  that  the  idvoi 
was  the  Jews  themselves,  and  indeed  almost  every- 
"where  where  the  term  '  ethnarch '  occurs,  it  refers 
to  a  ruler  over  Jews.  Josephus  (A  nt.  XTV.  vii.  2) 
shows  us  that  the  large  Je^vish  community  in  tlie 
great  city  of  Alexandria  had  an  'ethnarch'  over 
it,  and  lie  defines  his  duties  precisely  thus :  5toi«r 
re  rb  idvoi  Kai  8iaiT^  Kpiffeis  Kai  ffvfi^oXaiuiv  eTineXelrai 

'  The  formula  of  faith  contained  in  v.37  is  not  foand  in  the 
■oldest  MSS,  but  cannot  be  later  than  the  2nd  cent.,  as  it  is  quoted 
by  Irenaeus  (,Ucer.  m.  xiL  8). 


Kai  rpoffray/j-dTuv,  ws  &»  xoXiTttai  dpxwc  oiTorfXoCj 
('he  governs  the  race  and  decides  trials  in  court 
and  has  charge  of  contracts  and  ordinances  as  if 
he  were  an  absolute  monarch  '). 

An  inscription  (Le  Bas-Waddin^ton,  Voyage 
archeologique  en  Gr^e  et  en  Asie  Mineure,  Paris, 
1847-77,  vol.  iii.  no.  2196  =  W.  Dittenberger, 
Orientis  Grceci  In  sen  pt  tones  Selectee,  Leipzig,  1905, 
vol.  ii.  no.  616)  from  a  village,  El-MMikije  in  the 
Hauran,  mentions  by  the  names  '  ethnarch '  and 
'  general  (or  prretor)  of  nomads '  a  chief  of  nomad 
Arabs  of  the  time  of  Hadrian  or  Antoninus  Pius 
who  must  have  submitted  to  the  Emperor. 

These  passages  will  help  to  illustrate  the  refer- 
ence in  2  Co  11*^.  The  man  there  mentioned  was 
doubtless  ruler  of  the  Jews  in  Damascus  and  its 
territory,  who  were  '  permitted  to  exercise  their 
o^\•n  religious  law  very  freely  and  fully '  (Ramsay, 
Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  London,  1910, 
p.  99).  He  was  tinder  Aretas,  who  has  the  title 
^offiXei/j  ('  king,'  i.e.  of  Arabia),  and,  indeed,  as  has 
been  said,  the  ethnarch  was  ailways  lower  than  a 
king.  This  fact  is  illustrated  by  interesting  pas- 
sages in  Josephus  (BJ  II.  vi.  3,  Ant.  X^TII.  xi.  4), 
where  Caesar  Augustus  makes  Archelans  not  ^aoi- 
Xew,  but  edvdpxv^i  of  half  of  the  territory  that  had 
belonged  to  Herod,  promising  him  the  higher  title 
later,  if  certain  conditions  were  fulfilled ;  and  in 
Psendo-Lucian  (Macrob.  §  17,  ed.  Jacobitz,  Leip- 
zig, 1896,  vol.  iii.  p.  198),  where  a  man  is  '  pro- 
claimed ^aa-iXfvs  instead  of  idvdpxv^  of  the  Bosporus.' 

A.   SOUTER. 

EUBULUS  (Ei'^ouXoj).— A  friend  of  St.  Paul  and 
Timothy,  Eubulus  was  present  with  the  Apostle 
in  Rome  during  his  last  imprisonment,  and  along 
with  Claudia,  Pndens,  and  Linus  sent  greetings 
to  Timothy  (2  Ti  4-').  Probably  he  was  a  member 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and,  as  his  name  is  Greek, 
he  may  have  been  a  slave  or  a  Roman  freedman. 
Nothing,  however,  is  known  regarding  him. 

W.  F.  BOYD. 

EUCHARIST.— 1.  Scope  of  article.— The  scope 
of  this  article  is  limited  to  the  observance  of  the 
Eucharist  in  the  Apostolic  Church,  with  especial 
reference  to  St.  Paul.  The  Gospels  are  expressly 
excluded.  Therefore  the  question  as  to  the  possi- 
bility of  the  accounts  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels 
having  been  influenced  by  Pauline  ideas,  and  the 
many  questions  which  are  raised  by  the  Gospel 
according  to  St.  John,  will  not  be  treated  in  this 
article.  The  evidence  which  will  be  used  t^tII  be 
that  which  is  furnished  by  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
and  the  Pauline  Epistles.  Other  evidence  will 
only  be  adduced  in  so  far  as  it  has  a  direct  bearing 
upon  this. 

2.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. — In  Acts  we  have 
a  description  of  the  life  of  the  earliest  Christian 
community  in  Jerusalem.  We  are  told  that  '  they 
continued  stedfastly  in  the  apostles'  teaching  and 
fellowship,  in  the  breaking  of  bread  (rj  KXdaa  tov 
dpTov)  and  the  prayers'  (Ac  2*^).  Further,  we  read 
that  '  Day  by  day  continuing  stedfastly  with  one 
accord  in  the  temple,  and  breaking  bread  (/cXujjtcj 
ipTov)  at  home,  they  partook  of  food  with  gladness 
and  singleness  of  heart,  praising  God  and  having 
favour  with  all  the  people'  (vv.**-^).  The  latter 
passage  contrasts  their  breaking  of  bread  at  home 
with  their  attendance  at  the  Temple-worship. 
But  the  passage  may  be  no  more  than  a  general 
description  of  the  lile  of  the  community — that  it 
was  cheerful  and  social.  In  the  former  passage, 
however,  it  is  diflBcult  to  resist  the  conclusion 
that  i]  KXdffis  ToC  dpTov  must  have  some  religious 
significance.  It  has  indeed  been  held  that  it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  Last  Supper,  that  com- 
munitj-  of  goods  led  to  community  of  meals,  and 
that  no  more  than  that  is  intended  by  the  phrase. 
But  the  growing  belief  in  the  fact  of  redemption 


374 


EUCHARIST 


EUCHARIST 


tlirouf^h  the  Deatli  of  Christ,  togetlier  with  certain 
visions  of  tlie  Risen  Lonl,  wlio  apjieared  to  His 
disciples,  on  some  occasions,  according  to  our  ac- 
counts, at  meals,  led  to  a  connexion  being  estab- 
lished, in  the  minds  of  Christians,  between  the 
Last  Supi)er  and  the  common  meal.  Thence  the 
development  is  clear ;  and  there  is  no  ditliculty 
in  seeing  how  they  came  to  believe  in  some  mys- 
terious Presence  of  Jesus.  Thus  was  evolved  the 
Pauline  doctrine.* 

It  is  true  that  it  is  impossible  to  prove  any  con- 
nexion between  the  '  breaking  of  the  bread '  of 
Ac  2''-  and  the  Last  Supper,  lint  that  there  was  a 
religious  signilicance  attached  to  the  former  seems 
clear  from  the  way  in  which  it  is  mentioned. 
And  the  general  course  of  the  history  is  most 
easily  explained  if  we  suppose  that  already  in  the 
l>rimitive  community  at  Jerusalem  the  connexion 
existed.  It  does  not  seem  probable  that  St.  Paul's 
churches  diflered  wholly  in  their  usage  from  other 
churches,  and  the  facts  are  best  explained  by  the 
supposition  that,  from  the  first,  Christians  com- 
memorated their  Master  at  their  common  meal. 
The  suggestion,  to  which  allusion  has  been  made, 
that  visions  of  the  Risen  Christ  led  to  the  con- 
nexion being  established,  fails  to  account  for  the 
fact  that  it  is  Christ's  Death  that  came  to  be  com- 
memorated, and  that,  because  of  this,  the  Euchar- 
ist bore  from  very  early  times  a  sacrificial  char- 
acter. The  evidence  is  not  sufficient  to  lead  to 
any  certain  conclusions  ;  but  on  the  whole  it  seems 
to  point  to  the  germ  of  the  later  conception  being 
contained  in  these  earliest  'breakings  of  bread.' 
Whether  the.  '  breaking  of  bread '  denotes  the 
common  meal,  or  a  particular  action  at  the  common 
meal,  is  again  not  clear.  Batifl'ol  +  maintains  the 
latter,  but  his  arguments  are  not  conclusive; J 
and  the  matter  must  be  left  doubtful. 

In  Ac  20''"  we  read  that  the  Christians  of  Troas 
met  together  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  in  the 
evening  to  'break  bread.'  That  is  stated  to  be 
the  jiurpose  of  the  meeting.  The  writer  of  the 
Acts  is  himself  present,  and  gives  an  account  of 
the  scene.  There  are  many  lights  in  the  upper 
room.  St.  Paul,  who  is  leaving  Troas  the  next 
day,  discourses  until  midnight.  Then  he  breaks 
bread,  and  tastes  it,  and,  after  a  further  long  con- 
versation, departs  at  dawn.  There  is  no  indica- 
tion here  of  a  common  meal ;  for  the  inference 
drawn  from  the  use  of  the  word  '  tasting '  (yevcd- 
/Mfvos),  Avhich  is  said  by  some§  to  imply  a  meal,  is 
surely  unjustified.  The  '  breaking  of  bread  '  here 
appears  to  denote  a  ceremonial  action.  The  lan- 
guage employed  does  not  indeed  exclude  the  pos- 
sibility that  this  action,  and  the  partaking  by 
those  present  of  the  bread  so  broken,  may  liave 
taken  place  during  a  meal  which  was  held  about 
midnight.  But  there  is  no  hint  of  any  such  meal. 
It  is  noteworthy  that  this  meeting  talces  place  on 
a  Sunday.  There  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
a  similar  one  daily  during  St.  Paul's  stay.  And 
the  whole  narrative,  with  its  mention  of  the '  many 
lights,'  suggests  a  solemn  gathering  for  worship. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  in  this  passage  we 
have  to  do  with  a  Pauline  church  ;  and  therefore 
we  cannot  safely  argue  back  to  the  passages  in  Ac 
2.  But  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  '  break- 
ing of  bread '  in  this  passage  does  denote  a  signifi- 
cant religious  act ;  and,  in  the  light  of  the  evi- 
dence which  we  possess  in  1  Cor.  about  the  customs 
of  St.  Paul's  churciies,  we  conclude  that  the  '  break- 
ing of  the  bread '  derives  its  significance  from  the 
Last  Supper,  and  is  in  some  way  a  commemoration 
of  the  l-iord's  Death.     Significant  it  certainly  was ; 

•  Cf.  M.    Ooguel,    L'EvuiharistU.    Des  origines  A   Justin, 
martyr,  Paris,  1910. 
t  L'Euehariilie^,  Paris,  1913.  J  See  art.  Love-Fkast. 

§  e.g.  M.  Goguel,  op.  cit.  p.  142. 


and  its  significance  is  fixed  by  our  evidence  about 
the  Churcli  of  Corinth. 

3.  St.  Paul's  doctrine. — We  owe  to  purely  ac- 
cidental circumstances  the  preservation  of  an  ac- 
count of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  and 
a  description  of  the  Eucharist  in  the  Church  of 
Corinth.  Di-sorders  had  arisen  in  that  Church  in 
connexion  with  the  attitude  of  Christians  towards 
meals  in  idol-temples  and  in  connexion  with  the 
Eucharist.  St.  Paul  finds  it  necessary  to  deal 
with  these  matters  in  1  Corinthians.  Had  it  not 
been  for  this  necessity,  we  might  have  supijosed 
that  the  Pauline  churches  were  without  any  si)eciiil 
sacramental  teaching,  for  in  none  of  the  other 
Pauline  Epistles  is  there  any  allusion  to  the  sub- 
ject. This,  however,  is  accidental.  For  St.  Paul's 
language  to  the  Corinthians  makes  it  certain  that 
he  must  have  given  similar  teaching  to  his  con- 
verts elsewhere,  and  indeed  the  account  of  the 
'  breaking  of  bread '  at  Troas,  when  read  in  the 
light  of  the  passage  in  1  Cor.,  makes  it  clear  that 
there  too  the  Euciiarist  was  the  central  point  of 
the  Christian  assembly. 

It  appears  from  1  Co  1 1^'**  that  from  time  to 
time — presumably  on  Sundays — the  members  of 
the  Church  met  together  '  to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper.' 
This  supper  was  a  real  meal,  and  the  food  was 
providecl  Ly  those  who  attended  it.  But,  whereas 
it  ought  to  have  been  a  fraternal  gathering,  a 
bond  of  unity,  the  selfishness  and  greed  of  the  rich 
made  it  most  unsatisfactory ;  for  they  insisted 
upon  keeping  for  themselves  the  food  they  brought, 
whereas  all  the  food  brought  ought  to  have  been 
put  together  and  divided  among  the  whole  number. 
The  result  of  this  was  that  some  who  attended  had 
not  enough  to  eat  and  drink,  and  .some  had  too 
much.  There  were  even  cases  of  drunkenness. 
This  conduct  of  the  rich  naturally  led  to  divisions. 
Groups  were  formed,  and  the  general  spirit  of 
fraternity  was  broken. 

St.  Paul  reminds  the  Corinthians  of  the  great 
solemnity  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  reminds  them 
how  he  had  told  them  before  of  the  Last  Supper 
itself,  and  how  Jesus  had  instituted  there  a  rite  by 
which  Christians  were  to  proclaim  His  Death  until 
He  should  come  again.  He  reminds  them  that 
they  came  to  enter  into  communion  with  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ ;  that  this  is  a  solemn  matter  ; 
that  self-examination  is  necessary,  and  care  to  re- 
cognize the  distinction  between  what  is  received 
and  common  bread  ;  that  those  who  fail  to  come  up 
to  what  is  required  of  them  in  this  matter,  those 
who  receive  unworthily,  have  in  many  cases  already 
received  striking  punishments  from  God,  for  the- 
objects  to  be  received  are  so  holy,  that  not  only 
does  worthy  reception  bring  great  benefits,  but  un- 
worthy reception  brings  stern  judgment. 

In  1  Co  10  St.  Paul  warns  the  Corinthians  of 
the  dangers  of  idolatry.  He  holds  up  before  them 
the  example  of  the  Israelites,  who,  though  they  were 
'  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea,' 
and  ate  the  same  spiritual  food  and  drank  the 
same  spiritual  drink,  yet  died  in  the  wilderness 
because  of  their  sins  (vv.^-*).  There  is  a  clear 
analogy  with  the  case  of  Christians,  who  receive 
spiritual  food  and  drink,  and  yet  are  liable 
to  perish,  in  spite  of  their  privileges,  if  they  too 
sin.  The  particular  sin  of  Avhich  ne  warns  them 
is  idolatry.  He  affirms  that  those  who  partake 
of  a  meal  in  an  idol's  temple  really  enter  into 
communion  with  the  demons  who  are  at  the  back 
of  idolatrous  worship.  Communion  with  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  is  incompatible  with  communion 
with  demons.  '  You  cannot  drink  the  Lord's  cup 
and  the  cup  of  demons.  You  cannot  share  the 
Lords  table  and  a  table  of  demons'  (v.*').  In  his 
conception  the  meat  is  offered  to  the  idol  and  be- 
comes the  property  of  the  demons,  so  that  the 


EUCHAKIST 


EUCHARIST 


375 


demons  are,  as  it  were,  the  hosts  at  the  sacrihcial 
banquet.  It  is  their  cup  which  is  drunk  by  those 
who  attend.  It  is  their  table  at  which  the  guests 
sit.  The  parallel  which  St.  Paul  draws  between 
these  demonic  banquets  and  the  Lord's  Supper  sug- 
gests that  in  the  same  way  the  bread  ana  the  cup 
are  offered  to  the  Lord,  so  that  He  becomes  the 
host.  Therefore  the  Supper  is  His  Supper,  and  it 
is  His  Cup  and  His  Table.  But  the  thought  goes 
further  than  this.  For  not  only  do  the  communi- 
cants enter  into  communion  with  Christ  by  being, 
as  it  were,  His  guests  at  Supper ;  but  they  enter 
into  communion  with  His  Body  and  His  Blood. 
The  use  of  these  expressions  makes  it  clear  that 
what  is  meant  is  that  the  communicant  enters  into 
communion  with  Christ's  Death.  It  is  the  language 
of  saorihce  which  is  here  employed.  The  sacriiicial 
Death  of  Christ  is  an  essential  part  of  St.  Pauls 
thought.  The  worthy  communicant  feeds  upon 
that  ■sacrifice,  and  so  appropriates  the  blessing  won 
thereby. 

But  while  it  is  true  that  it  is  only  the  worthy 
communicant  who  obtains  the  blessing,  St.  Paul  s 
language  clearly  implies  that  the  bread  and  the 
wine  are  not  merely  symbols.  They  are  really 
to  the  communicant  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ — the  Body  broken  and  the  Blood  shed  in 
His  sacrificial  Death.  They  have  this  wonderful 
character  in  themselves,  apart  from  the  faith  of 
the  communicant.  For  the  unworthy  communicant 
receives  them  at  his  i)eril,  and  the  dangers  of  ir- 
reverence are  very  great.  The  communicant  must 
discern  the  Body.  The  suggestion  which  has  been 
made  that  '  the  Body '  in  this  phrase  means  Christ's 
mystical  Body,  the  Christian  Church,  is  worthy  of 
very  little  attention.  It  is  true  that  the  word  is 
sometimes  so  used,  but  here  the  context  makes  it 
necessary  to  understand  by  it  the  Botly  of  Christ 
which  is  represented  by  the  bread  and  partaken  of 
by  the  communicant. 

This  communion  takes  place  at  a  common  meal. 
The  Christians  of  the  community  come  together, 
probably  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  to  a  common 
meal.  The  question  arises  as  to  whether  the  whole 
meal  is  a  communion,  or  whether  communion  takes 
place  during  or  after  the  nieal.  v.^*  suggests  that 
the  latter  is  the  true  view.  '  The  cup  of  blessing 
which  we  bless,'  'the  bread  which  we  break,'  sug- 
gest that  during  or  after  the  meal  there  was  a 
solemn  blessing  of  a  cup,  and  a  solemn  breaking  of 
bread,  in  virtue  of  which  the  cup  becomes  '  the  cup  of 
blessing,'  and  both  it  and  the  bread  which  is  broken 
assume  their  special  character.  It  seems  clear 
that  the  '  blessing '  is  a  solemn  liturgical  act,  and 
the  parallelism  with  the  breaking  of  bread  indicates 
that  that  has  the  same  character.  The  '  cup  of 
blessing '  is  the  cup  over  which  a  blessing  has  been 
said,  or  the  cup  which  has  been  blessed.  There  is 
no  necessarj-  reference  to  any  cup  used  in  the  Pass- 
over. St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  cup  which  ■  we 
bless,'  but  this  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  the 
whole  assembly  blessed  the  cup,  or  broke  the  bread. 
In  fact,  the  language  of  Ac  20^',  where  it  is  said 
that  at  Troas  St.  Paul  himself  '  broke  the  bread,' 
suggests  that  the  '  liturgical '  action  was  performed 
by  a  single  person,  who  was  presiding.  A  definite 
'  blessing  '  of  a  cup  and  '  breaking  of  bread '  would 
seem  to  implj-  that  the  supper  as  a  whole  was  not 
the  communion,  though  the  supper  as  a  whole  was 
the  Lords  Supper,  for  the  Lord  was  host.  But  dur- 
ing supper,  or  more  probably  after  supper  (cf.  1 
Co  11^),  the  president  blessed  the  cup  and  broke  the 
bread  ;  and  the  cup  so  blessed  and  the  bread  so 
broken  assumed  their  special  and  sacred  character. 
As  we  have  seen,  the  supper  is  a  real  and  not  a 
symbolical  meal.  But  St.  Paul's  suggestion  that 
the  Corinthians'  own  houses  are  the  proper  places 
in  which  to  eat  and  drink,  and  his  injunction  that 


if  they  are  hungry  they  should  eat  at  home  (lI**-**> 
indicate  the  way  in  which  the  setting  of  the 
Eucharist  came  so  soon  to  be  altered.  For  these 
injunctions  lead  straight  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Christian  assembly  at  which  the  Lord's  Death  is 
shown  forth  is  not  a  suitable  occasion  for  the  satis- 
faction of  bodily  needs.  It  is  therefore  not  surpris- 
ing that  we  find,  when  next  we  have  any  evidence, 
that  the  Eucharist  has  been  detached  from  its  set- 
ting as  part  of  a  common  meal. 

There  are  two  further  points  which  deserve  notice 
before  we  come  to  consider  in  further  detail  St.  Paul's 
view  of  the  effects  of  communion.  The  first  is  the  fact 
that  in  10^*  St.  Paul  puts  the  cup  before  the  bread. 
We  find  the  same  thmg  in  the  Didache  ;  and  if  the 
shorter  text  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  be  the  right  one, 
we  find  it  also  there.  This  is  certainly  a  noticeable 
point.  But,  whatever  may  be  the  explanation  in 
St.  Luke  and  in  the  Didache,  it  is  not  possible  to 
suppose  that  at  Corinth  the  cup  actually  did  precede 
the  bread.  For  the  form  of  the  narrative  of  the 
Last  Supper  which  St.  Paul  gives  {ir-^**)  places 
the  bread  before  the  cup,  and  it  is  most  unlikely 
that  that  order  was  reversed  in  the  Corinthian 
Cliurch.  The  explanation  may  be,  as  M.  Goguel 
suggests,*  that  the  parallelism  between  the  Lord's 
Cup  and  the  cup  of  libation  at  a  heathen  sacrifice 
was  closer  than  that  betAveen  the  eating  of  a 
piece  of  bread  and  anything  that  took  place 
there.  It  may  be  for  this  reason  that  the  cup 
is  mentioned  before  the  bread.  Or  it  may  be 
merely  that  the  bread  is  put  second  because  St. 
Paul  is  to  speak  at  further  length  about  it  in  the 
next  verse.  But  in  any  case  it  is  misleading  to 
regard  10'®  as  having  any  real  connexion  with  a 
tradition  of  the  cup  having  preceded  the  bread  at 
the  Last  Supper. 

The  second  point  is  the  phrase  in  11^:  '  Ye  pro- 
claim the  Lord's  death  till  he  come.'  The  addi- 
tion '  till  he  come '  is  reminiscent  of  Mk  14^  and 
parallels,  though  the  saying,  as  recorded  in  the 
Gospels,  says  nothing  about  the  Lord's  return,  but 
speaks  onlj-  of  the  joys  of  the  Messianic  Kingdom, 
to  be  shared  by  Him  with  Christians.  The  idea 
implied  in  the  phrase  '  till  he  come '  is  similar — 
namely,  that  the  Eucharist  is  but  a  provisional  rite, 
and  looks  forward  to  the  day  when  communion  with 
Him  shall  be  more  direct  in  His  Kingdom. 

We  may  now  consider  St.  Paul's  view  of  the 
effects  of  communion,  and  here  the  main  thing  to 
notice  is  the  realistic  character  of  St.  Paul's  thought. 
Participation  in  the  one  loaf  produces  a  unity 
among  Christians.  '  Because  there  is  one  bread,  we 
who  are  many  are  one  body,  because  we  all  partake 
of  that  one  bread'  (lu").  This  unity  is  not  the 
cause  but  the  effect  of  the  commtmion.  There  is 
a  close  parallel  to  the  effect  produced  by  participa- 
tion in  an  idol-sacrifice,  in  which  the  worshippers 
are  united  to  one  another  as  well  as  to  the  demon. 
Besides  this  unity  of  believers  which  is  produced 
by  participation,  there  is  of  course  the  communion 
with  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.  It  seems  clear 
that  the  parallel  Avith  the  heathen  sacrifices  still 
holds  good.  The  communicant  really  enters  into 
communion  with  Christ  conceived  as  a  sacrificial 
Victim.  Whether  this  will  be  for  his  benefit  or  for 
his  undoing  depends  upon  his  own  disposition  ;  but, 
whatever  his  disposition  may  be,  in  no  case  is  that 
which  he  receives  ordinary  food.  The  bread  since 
it  has  been  broken,  and  the  cup  since  it  has  been 
blessed,  have  assumed  special  characters.  And  it 
is  no  light  matter  for  anyone  to  partake. 

Here  the  question  must  be  faced  whether  St. 
Paul's  views  on  the  subject  of  the  Eucharist  differed 
from  those  of  the  Corinthians.  It  has  been  held 
by  W.    Heitmiillert   that   St.   Paul's  conception 

•  Op.  eit.  p.  144,  foUowine  Heinrici. 

t  Taufe  U7td  Abendmahtbei  PatUtu,  Gottingen,  1903. 


376 


EUCHARIST 


EUCHARIST 


differed  from  theirs  in  that  lie  l>elieved  that  it  was 
the  dying  Christ  with  wliom  the  conininnicant 
entered  into  communion,  whereas  they  thoufjlit 
rather  of  the  glorilied  Christ.  According  to  una 
idea,  in  ch.  10  St.  I'aul  adopts  the  view  of  tlie 
Corinthians,  but  in  ch.  11  he  gives  them  his  own 
view.  It  is  true  that  the  behaviour  of  the  Corinth- 
ians at  the  supper  would  suggest  at  first  sight  that 
their  beliefs  aoout  it  were  of  no  very  solemn  charac- 
ter, and  it  may  seem  strange  that  men  who  believed 
that  they  were  actually  commemorating  Christ's 
Last  Supper  and  Death,  should  treat  the  meal  as 
an  opportunity  for  self-indulgence  ;  but  it  is  by  no 
means  impossible  that  this  may  have  been  so.  St. 
Paul's  attitude  throughout  is  that  of  a  man  who  is 
reminding  others  of  what  they  already  know  rather 
than  of  one  who  is  giving  new  instruction.  His 
view  of  the  nature  of  the  Eucharist  rests  ultimately 
upon  his  view  of  the  institution,  and  as  to  this  he 
expressly  states  that  he  had  given  them  instruction 
before  (11^).  It  is  not  an  uncommon  thing  for  men 
to  need  to  be  reminded  of  a  fact  with  which  they 
are  perfectly  well  acquainted,  nor  indeed  is  it  un- 
common for  men  to  act  in  a  way  which  is  quite 
inconsistent  with  their  religious  beliefs,  even  though 
these  beliefs  are  quite  honestly  held.  What  the  Cor- 
inthians had  learned  about  the  Eucharist  they  had 
learned  from  St.  Paul.  It  is  therefore  unlikely  that 
their  view  of  the  Eucharist  was  essentially  ditJerent 
from  his,  though  no  doubt  they  may  not  have  wholly 
understood  it.  Some  of  his  language  suggests  that 
they  thoufjlit  that  communion  would  benefit  them 
mechanically,  and  that  their  dispositions  did  not 
much  matter.  This  is  in  line  with  the  general 
view  of  them  which  we  get  from  the  Epistle  as  a 
whole.*  They  laid  stress  on  the  value  of  yvQa-n 
and  attached  insufficient  importance  to  morality. 
If  there  is  any  point  in  which  their  views  dittered 
from  St.  Paul's,  it  is  probably  to  be  found  here. 
It  may  be  that  when  he  speaks  of  the  possibility 
of  eating  and  drinking  judgment  unto  themselves, 
he  is  giving  them  new  teaching.  But  this  does  not 
involve  the  consequence  that  their  intellectual 
belief  about  the  Eucharist  was  seriously  different 
from  his,  but  rather  that  their  conscience  needed 
to  be  awakened. 

i.  St.  Paul's  account  of  the  institution  of  the 
Eucharist.  —The  investigation  of  the  relation  be- 
tween the  various  accounts  which  we  possess  be- 
longs properly  to  the  study  of  the  Gospels.  It 
will  be  sufficient  here  to  notice  that,  in  spite  of 
verbal  differences,  St.  Paul's  account  is  much  the 
same  as  that  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Matthew,  except 
that  it  contains  the  command  of  reiietition,  '  Do 
this  in  remembrance  of  Me,'  which  is  otherwise 
found  only  in  the  longer  text  of  St.  Luke.  Whether 
this  indicates  Pauline  inrtuence  upon  the  Gospels 
is  a  difficult  question,  but  one  whicii  does  not  fall 
within  the  scope  of  this  article.  St.  Paul  refers 
the  communion  at  Corinth  back  to  an  institution 
by  our  Lord  on  the  night  of  His  betrayal — an  in- 
stitution at  which  He  alluded  to  His  Death  in 
sacrificial  terms,  and  commanded  the  performance 
of  the  rite  in  memory  of  Himself.  This  narrative 
of  the  institution  (1  Co  ll^^^^)  is  introduced  by  the 
words  ^7(i>  ycLp  iraplXa^ov  dir6  toO  Kvpiov.  It  has  been 
supposed  that  by  this  expression  St.  Paul  means 
to  claim  that  he  had  received  the  whole  narrative 
of  the  institution,  which  he  goes  on  to  give,  by 
direct  revelation  from  Christ.  If  this  were  his 
claim,  it  would  very  seriously  affect  the  historic 
value  of  St.  Paul's  evidence  in  the  matter.  But 
his  words  do  not  necessarily  bear  any  such  mean- 
ing. The  theory  has  been  put  forward  that  we 
have  in  these  words  an  indication  that  the  Euchar- 
ist as  a  rite  was  invented  by  St.  Paul,  and  that  he 
was  the  first  to  connect  the  social  meal  of  the  Chris- 
*  See  art.  Corinthiaks,  Epistlks  to  tub. 


tians  with  the  Last  Sui)per  of  the  Lord.  But  it 
seems  by  no  means  improbable  that  the  words 
imjjly  merely  that  he  had  received  it  from  the 
Lord  through  tradition.  There  is  no  indication  of 
any  disagreement  between  St.  Paul  and  the  other 
apostles  on  this  subject.  And  it  has  been  pointed 
out  that  it  is  most  improbable  that  we  owe  to  St. 
Paul  the  mention  of  Christ's  Body  and  Blood.  If 
he  had  himself  been  inventing  his  terms,  he  would 
in  all  probability  have  spoken  of  Flesh  and  Blood.* 
He  seems  to  be  following  tradition,  or,  at  any  rate, 
to  be  under  the  irapressicm  that  he  is  following 
tradition,  in  his  account  of  the  Eucharist.  The  idea 
that  St.  Paul's  own  views  were  much  influenced  by 
conceptions  current  among  Corinthian  Christians 
has  no  support  in  our  authorities.  He  explicitly 
states  that  the  account  of  the  institution  is  no  new 
teaching,  but  that  he  has  taught  it  him.self  to  the 
Corinthians  before  ;  and  it  is  on  this  account  of 
the  institution  that  his  doctrine  is  based. 

Moreover,  the  theory  that  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of 
the  Eucharist  was  peculiar  to  himself,  and  arose  in 
the  first  place  owing  to  purely  local  causes  at 
Corinth,  fails  to  account  for  the  universality  of  the 
Eucharist.  If  it  was  only  St.  Paul  and  some  of 
his  converts  for  whom  the  Eucharist  was  a  real 
religious  rite — if,  that  is  to  say,  it  was  St.  Paul 
who  gave  a  religious  sigidficance  to  what  was  at 
first  merely  a  social  meal — the  universal  adoption 
of  St.  Paul's  ideas  constitutes  a  serious  historical 
problem.  Other  doctrines  of  St.  Paul  by  no  means 
met  with  such  wide-spread  acceptance.  His  doc- 
trine of  justification  was  hardly  understood  at  all 
by  anyone  until  the  time  of  St.  Augustine.  But 
we  know  of  no  church  without  a  Eucharist.  Even 
in  the  Didache  it  is  a  definite  rite,  though  its 
significance  is  doubtful.  It  stands  with  Baptism 
as  one  of  the  two  rites  which  belong  to  Christianity. 
Development  no  doubt  there  was.  The  '  breaking 
of  the  bread'  in  the  primitive  community  at 
Jerusalem  did  not  carry  with  it  all  the  ideas  which 
were  associated  with  the  Eucharist  at  Corinth. 
But  even  there  it  is  a  religious  rite,  and  not  a  mere 
social  meal. 

The  Didache  appears  to  show  us  a  community 
where  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  had  not 
developed  on  Pauline  lines.  There  is  no  clear  re- 
ference to  its  connexion  with  the  Last  Supper.  It 
is  tempting  to  bring  into  line  with  this  the  '  break- 
ing of  the  bread  '  in  the  Acts,  and  to  suppose  that 
there  too  there  was  no  thought  of  the  Last  Supper. 
And  in  favour  of  this  view  might  be  alleged  the 
fact  that  there  is  no  mention  of  the  Eucharistic 
cup  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  which  may  be  sup- 
posed to  indicate  an  absence  of  sacrificial  concep- 
tions. But  all  this  is  a  most  dangerous  form  of 
the  argument  a  silentio.  For  the  writer  of  the 
Acts  has  no  occasion  to  speak  of  the  ideas  which 
Christians  associated  with  the  'breaking  of  the 
bread.'  So  his  silence  on  the  matter  is  absolutely 
worthless  as  negative  evidence.  And,  though  there 
is  no  mention  of  a  Eucharistic  cup,  it  is  extremely 
unlikely  that  at  Troas  there  was  no  such  cup,  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  Troas  was  a  Pauline  church. 
The  Acts  makes  no  mention  of  a  cup.  This  is 
natural  enough,  for  the  writer  is  not  giving  a  full 
account  of  the  proceedings.  But  exactly  the  same 
consideration  applies  to  the/  breaking  of  the  bread  ' 
at  Jerusalem.  The  fact  that  no  cun  is  mentioned 
is  no  sort  of  evidence  tliat  the  meal  did  not  include 
the  blessing  and  partaking  of  a  cun.  If  it  did  so, 
the  writer  of  the  Acts  could  hardly  have  framed 
his  sentence  so  as  to  include  a  mention  of  it ;  and 
there  is  no  reason  why  he  should  have  done  so. 
As  has  been  pointed  out  above,  if  it  had  not  been 
for  accidental  circumstances  at  Corinth,  we  should 
not  have  heard  anything  about  the  Eucharist  in 
*  Heitmuller,  op.  cit.  p.  20. 


EUCHARIST 


EUODIA 


377 


Sit.  Paul's  Epistles,  and  should  have  supposed  that 
the  Pauline  churches  in  St.  Paul's  time  knew  of 
no  such  rite.  This  fact  is  in  itself  a  sufficient 
-warning  against  the  danger  of  drawing  conclusions 
from  the  silence  of  a  writer. 

In  the  absence  of  more  definite  evidence,  no 
theory  can  be  more  than  a  hypothesis.  But  the 
facts  are  best  accounted  for  by  the  hyiwthesis  that 
the  '  breaking  of  bread '  was  from  the  beginning  a 
religious  rite  associated  with  a  social  meal,  in  which 
Christians  commemorated  the  Last  Supper  of  our 
Lord  with  His  ajwstles.  As  Christians  came  in- 
creasingly to  realize  the  significance  of  our  Lord's 
Death  as  a  sacrifice,  a  conception  which  was  popu- 
Jarize<i  by  St.  Paul,  but  which  had  its  roots  in  the 
consciousness  and  teaching  of  Jesus  abotit  the 
necessity  of  His  Death  for  the  coming  of  the  King- 
dom, they  came  to  realize  increasingly  the  signifi- 
cance of  this  rite,  and  of  the  words  which  Jesus 
had  spoken  at  the  Last  Supper.  These  words  could 
not  be  understood  until  the  sacrificial  aspect  of  the 
Lords  Death  was  realized.  But,  when  that  was 
understood,  then  the  rite  of  the  'breaking  of  the 
bread '  was  bound  to  be  seen  by  Christians  to  have 
the  significance  which  St.  Paul  attached  to  it  and 
which  was  implicit  in  it  from  the  first,  although 
not  fully  understood — the  significance  of  the  parti- 
cipation by  the  communicant  in  Christ,  conceived 
of  as  the  sacrificial  Victim.  It  may  be  supposed 
that  the  Church  represented  by  the  Didache  had 
not  attained  to  the  understanding  of  the  sacrificial 
character  of  Christ's  Death,  and  therefore  had 
failed  to  appreciate  the  meaning  of  the  Eucharist. 
5.  The  Greek  mysteFy-religions.  —  The  view 
Avhich  has  been  widely  held,  that  St.  Paul  derived 
his  conceptions  about  the  Eucharist  from  the  Greek 
mj-stery- religions,  is  excluded  by  the  hypothesis 
which  has  just  been  put  forward.  Xo  doubt  there 
is  a  real  sense  in  which  Christianity  is  a  mystery- 
religion.  It  meets  and  satisfies  the  same  needs 
which  are  met  by  mystery-religions  in  the  Gra?co- 
Roman  world,  and  it  is  certainly  possible  that  St. 
Paul  may  have  been  influenced  by  the  intellectual 
and  religious  atmosphere  of  the  world  in  which  he 
was  bom  and  in  which  he  laboured.  But  it  must 
be  remembered  that  he  was  educated  in  Jerusalem 
at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel.  And  his  Rabbinical 
training  certainly  exercised  a  great  influence  upon 
his  mind.  It  is  hardlj'  conceivable  that  the  author 
of  the  1st  chapter  of  Romans  would  have  allowed 
himself  to  be  directly  influenced  by  any  particular 
heathen  cult.  It  is  true  that  he  treats  the  Eucha- 
rist as  analogous  to  the  heathen  sacrificial  feasts, 
but  it  is  only  to  emphasize  the  contrast  between 
them.  He  is  certainly  unconscious  of  any  borrov\-ing 
from  them. 

We  know  exceedingly  little  about  the  mystery- 
religions  which  were  current  in  the  time  of  St. 
Paul.*  But  it  may  be  noted  that  Johannine 
Eucharistic  teaching  has  at  first  sight  much  more 
in  common  with  the  later  mysteries  than  that 
of  St.  Paul.  The  very  able  argument  of  A. 
Schweitzer,  t  by  which  St.  Paul's  Eucharistic  doc- 
trine is  explained  on  the  basis  of  Jewish  eschato- 
logj-,  perhaps  hardly  carries  conviction  as  a  whole, 
but  his  criticism  of  those  who  allege  Greek  influence 
is  very  telling.  He  points  out  that  St.  Paul's 
theology  exercised  very  little  influence  on  the 
Crra?co-Roman  world,  and  was  not  understood  by 
the  Greek  Fathers.  This  carries  with  it  the  strong 
probability  that  St.  Paul's  theology  was  not  really 
Oreek,  but  Jewish.  Schweitzer's  interpretation  is 
that  we  are  to  look  for  an  explanation  of  St.  Paul's 
sacramental  doctrine  in  the  condition  of  the  world 
between  the  Death  of  Jesus  and  His  Coming,  ex- 
pected to  be  immediate.     '  The  Apostle  asserts  an 

*  See  art.  Mtstert,  Mtstkries. 

t  Pavl  and  hU  Interpreters,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1912. 


overlapi>ing  of  the  still  natural,  and  the  already 
supernatural,  condition  of  the  world,  which  becomes 
real  in  the  case  of  Christ  and  believers  in  the  form 
of  an  open  or  hidden  working  of  the  forces  of  death 
and  resurrection.'*     He  maintains  that  this  is  not 
Greek,  but  Jewish.    It  should,  however,  be  admitted 
that  the  form  of  some  of  St.  Paul's  statements  may 
be  due  to  the  atmosphere  in  which  he  lived  and 
worked.     What  is  here  maintained  is   that  the 
general  teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  the  subject  is  more 
easUy  explained  by  the  hypothesis  that  it  is  not 
drawn  from  Greek  sources,  but  is  an  explication  of 
something  that  was  already  implicit  in  the  '  break- 
ing of  bread '  of  the  earliest  community,  and  was  a 
true  interpretation  of  the  actual  intention  of  Jesus. 
LiTiRATi'RE. — To  the  books  mentioned  in  the  text  and  foot- 
notes of  the  article,  the  following  mav  be  added  :   HDB,  art. 
'  Lord's  Supper '  (A.  Plummer) ;  EIi£,  art.  '  Eucharist  <to  end 
of  Middle  -A^ges)'  (J.  H.  Srawley)  ;  EBi,  art.  'Eucharist'  (J. 
Armitag^e  Robinson)  ;  PBE'^,  artt.  '  Abenduiahl '  (Cremer  and 
Loofs);  F.  Spitta,  Zur  Gtschichte  und  LiUeratur  dea  Urehrit- 
tentums,  i.,  Gottingen,  1893 ;  C.  Gore,  Diaertation* an  Subjects 
connected  icith  the  Incarnation,  London,  1895,  p.  308,  also  The 
Body  of  ChrUt,  do.  1901 ;  A.  Schweitzer,  Das  Abendmahl  im 
Ztuammenhang  mil  dem  Leben  Jesu  und  der  Gegehiehte  dea 
Urchrigtentums,  Tubingen,  1901 ;  W.  B.  FranUand,  The  Eatiy 
Euchari;!t,  Ix>ndon,  1902;  J.  F.  Bethune-Baker,  An  Jntrodtie- 
tion  to  the  Early  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  do.  1903,  p.  393 ; 
i  J.  C.  Lambert,  The  Sacraments  in  the  ST  (Kerr  Lecture), 
I  Edinburgh,  1903;  R.  M.  Adamson,  The  Christian  Doctrine  of 
j  the  Lord's   Supper,  do.   1905;    P.   N.   Waggett,   The   Holy 
Eucharist,  London,  1906;  J.  V.  Bartlet,  in  ilansfieid  College 
:  Essays,  do.  19ii9,  p.  43  ;  D.  Stone,  A  History  of  the  Doctrine  of 
I  the  Holy  Eucharist,  do.  1909  ;  J.  Wordsworth,  The  Holy  Cam- 
■  munion^,  do.  1910 ;    F.   Dibelios,  Das  Abendmahl,  Leipzig, 
;  1911;    P.  Gardner,  The   Religious  Experience  of  St.  Paul, 
1  London-,   1911 ;    W.   Heitmtiller,  Taufe  und  Abendmahl  im 
j   Urehristentum,  Tubingen,  1911.  G.  H.  CLAYTON'. 

1      EUNICE  ['EvviK-n ;  the  spelling  Ewei/ti;  of  TR  is 
j  erroneous). — Eunice,  the  mother  of  Timothy  (2  Ti 
I  P)  is  referred  to  in  Ac  16^  as  a  Jewess  who  believed. 
Her  husband,  however,  was  a  Greek,  and  we  find 
;  that,  although  she  was  a  Jewess,  she  had  refrained 
I  from  circumcising  her  son,  probably  out  of  respect 
j  for  her  husband's  opinions.     The  grandmother  of 
I  Timothy  is  alluded  to  as  Lois  (q.v.),  and  she  was  in 
I  all  likefihood  the  mother  of  Eunice.     Some  have 
j  put  forward  the  conjecture  that,  as  both  Lois  and 
Eunice  are  Greek  names,  the  women  were  Jewish 
proselytes,  but  this  is  improbable  ;  nor  is  it  likely 
that  the  father  of  Timothy  was  in  any  way  attached 
to  the  Jewish  religion.     The  Apostle  refers  to  the 
i  faith  of  both  Lois  and  Eunice  (2  Ti  1')  and  to  their 
!  careful  training  of  Timothy  in  the  Jewish  scrip- 
tures (3").     As  we  find  Eunice  described  as  a  '  Jew- 
I  ess  who  believed,'  on  St.   Paul's  second  visit  to 
;  Lj'stra  (Ac  16'),   she  was  probably  converted  to 
I  Christianity   on   the  Apostle's    first  visit   to  the 
j  town.     One   of  the  cursives  (25)  adds  the  word 
I  x'JP*^  i"  -^c  16^ ;  and  although  this  is  undoubtedly 
,  a  marginal  gloss  that  crept  into  the  text,  it  may 
I  refer  to   an   early  tradition    that   Eunice  was  a 
widow  at  the  date  of  the  Ajwstle's  visit  to  Lystra, 
and  would  give  added  emphasis  to  the  injunction 
of  1  Ti  5*  regarding  the  treatment  of  widows  by 
their  children  or  grandchildren.        W.  F.  BoYB. 

EUNUCH.— See  Chambeblaix  and  ETmoPlAN 

EUXUCH. 

EUODIA  (Ei'oSia).  —  The  AV  reads  Euodias. 
The  word  in  the  Greek  text  occurs  in  the  accusative 
case,  Ei'oSt'av,  and  the  translators  mistakenly  re- 
garded this  as  the  accusative  of  a  masculine  form 
Euo5ios,  and  supposed  the  bearer  of  the  name  to  be 
a  man.  But  the  word  is  the  name  of  a  woman 
corresponding  to  the  male  form  EioStoj,  which  is 
also  found  in  Greek  literature,  several  early 
Christian  bishops  being  so  called. 

Euodia  was  a  woman,  prominent  in  the  Church 
of  Philippi,  who  had  a  ditlerence  of  opinion  with 
•  Op.  eU.  p.  244  f. 


378 


EUPHRATES 


EUTYCHUS 


Syntyche  (q.v.).  The  Apostle  exhorts  them  to  be 
'of  the  same  mind  in  the  Lord'  (Ph  4"''),  We  have 
no  means  of  ascertaining  the  nature  of  the  con- 
troversy between  tlie  two  women,  who  may  have 
been  deaconesses,  but  were  more  probably  prominent 
female  members  of  the  Church,  of  tlie  type  of 
Lydia  of  Ac  10'^-  "*.  In  fact,  it  has  been  suggested 
that  one  of  the  two  may  have  been  Lydia  {q.v.) 
herself,  as  the  term  '  Lydia'  may  not  be  a  personal 
name  at  all,  but  may  mean  simply  '  the  Lydian,' 
or  the  native  of  the  province  of  Lydia  in  which 
Thyatira,  the  home  of  the  wonmn,  was  situated. 
This,  however,  cannot  possibly  be  verilied.  The 
dillerence  between  the  two  was  more  probably  of  the 
nature  of  a  religious  controversy  than  of  a  personal 
quarrel.  The  Apostle  in  the  following  verse  refers 
to  their  previous  services  on  behalf  of  the  gospel 
as  a  reason  why  they  should  be  given  every  assist- 
ance to  come  to  a  better  state  of  mind.  The 
Synzygus  (AV  'true  yoke-fellow,'  but  probably  a 
proper  name),  whom  the  Apostle  exhorts  to  help 
the  women  towards  reconciiiiition  and  who  is  re- 
mintled  of  their  previous  assistance  to  the  Apostle, 
may  have  been  the  husband  of  one  or  other  of  the 
women  (see  Synzygus).  The  theory  of  Baur  and 
the  Tiibingen  school  that  Euodia  and  Syntyche 
are  symbolical  names  for  the  Jewisli  and  Gentile 
tendencies  in  the  early  Church  is  untenable,  and 
has  fallen  into  disrepute.  It  is  inconsistent  with 
the  simple  tenor  of  the  Epistle  <as  a  whole,  and 
sucli  a  mysterious  reference  would  certainly  not 
have  been  understood  by  the  first  readers. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
EUPHRATES.— The  Euphrates  was  a  famous 
river  of  Mesopotamia.  Its  ciiief  interest  for  us 
in  the  Apostolic  Age  is  its  adoption  as  a  term  in 
the  allegorical  apparatus  of  Christian  j)olemic  and 
apologetic.  In  Kev  9'''  the  sixth  angel  is  ordered 
to  release  the  four  angels  who  were  bound  at  the 
river  Eu])hrates,  and  in  16^-  the  sixth  angel  dries 
up  the  Euphrates  for  the  coming  of  the  kings  of 
the  East.  We  have  here  an  allusion  to  the  Nero- 
legend  which  told  that  Nero  had  lied  to  the  East, 
to  the  Medes  and  Persians,  beyond  the  river 
Euphrates,  and  would  again  cross  the  river  accom- 
panied by  myriads  of  soldiers  and  make  war  on 
Kome  (Sib.  Or.  iv.  119-122,  137-139).  In  accord- 
ance with  this  legend,  a  second  pseudo-Nero  ap- 
peared on  the  Euphrates  under  Titus  in  A.D.  80 
(cf.  K.  H.  Charles,  The  Ascension  of  Isaiah,  1900, 

f)p.  Iviii-lxi).  In  both  the  Apocalyptic  verses, 
lowever,  we  have  more  than  an  allusion  to  a 
Parthian  incursion.  In  the  allegorical  language  of 
the  period,  as  Egypt  was  the  type  of  bodily  life,  so 
was  Mesopotiimia  of  spiritual  (cf.  Hippol.  Bef.  v. 
3  :  '  Mesopotamia  is  the  current  of  the  great  ocean 
flowing  from  the  midst  of  the  Perfect  Man ').  On 
the  other  hand,  by  another  symbol  the  Euphrates 
stood  for  the  power  of  the  earthly  kingdom  and  the 
waves  of  persecutors  (e.g.  in  Bede,  Explan.  Apoc. 
ii.  9  [Migne,  Patr.  Lat.  xciii.  159]),  or  for  the 
human  as  opposing  the  Divine. 

Thus,  interpreting  the  mind  of  the  apostolic 
period  by  its  legacy  to  subsequent  ages,  Rupertus 
understands  the  waters  of  Euf)lirates  in  the  Apoca- 
ly[)se  as  the  foolish  reasonings  of  men  dried  up  by 
tne  judgment  of  God  in  order  that  the  saints  of 
Him  who  is  the  'East*  may  destroy  'the  deceits 
of  the  magi,  the  vain  inventions  of  philosophers 
and  the  fictions  of  the  poets'  (Com.  in  Apoc.  ix.  16 
[Migne,  Fair.  Lat.  clxix.  1123]).  Also,  as  the 
Euphrates  was  the  boundary  of  Paradise  and  of 
the  realm  of  Solomon,  it  came  to  signify  the  reason 
of  man  as  the  Vjoundary  to  be  passed  by  the 
spiritual  man  before  he  could  see  tne  light  of  the 
eternal  day.  In  this  way  the  evil  condition  of 
Euphrates  passed  easily  into  the  conception  of  it  as 
the  water  of  baptism.     Philo  has  yet  another  inter- 


pretation (de  Somn.  ii.  255).  Referring  to  Gn  15", 
lie  says  that  the  river  of  Egypt  represents  the  body 
and  the  river  Euphrates  the  soul,  and  that  the^ 
spiritual  man's  jurisdiction  extends  from  the  world 
of  change  and  destruction  to  the  world  of  incor- 
ruption,  the  two  terms  'river  of  Egypt'  and  'river 
Euphrates '  being  thus  opposed  as  blame  and  praise 
arc  opposed,  so  tliat  mau  may  choose  the  one  and 
eschew  the  other.  W.  F.  Cocu. 

EURAQUILO  ((i/paKv\ij)v).—'Vh\s  word  is  found 
nowhere  in  ancient  literature  except  in  Ac  27". 
It  is  the  name  given  to  the  tempestuous  wind 
(dv€/uos  Tvtpu}viK6s,  vorticosus,  'whirling')  which, 
suddenly  beating  down  from  the  central  mountains 
of  Crete,  caught  St.  Paul's  siiip  in  its  passage  from 
Fair  Havens  to  Phcenice,  drove  it  to  the  Island  of 
Cauda,  and  finally  wrecked  it  on  the  coast  of  Malta. 
The  word  is  a  hybi'id,  made  up  of  Eurus  (elpo^),. 
the  east  wind — an  ordinary  meaning  in  the  Latin 
poets,  thou<;h  eCpos  properly  meant  the  south-east 
— and  Aquilo,  the  nortn-east  wind,  so  that  it  de- 
notes the  east -north -east  wind.  '  Euro  -  auster ' 
( =  evpdvoTOi)  is  an  analogous  compound.  EuraquilO' 
corresponded  to  the  Greek  KaiKtas,  for  which  the 
Latins  had  no  specific  name :  '  Quem  ab  oriente 
solstitial!  excitatum  Graeci  KaiKidv  vocant,  apud 
nos  sine  nomine  est'  (Seneca,  Xat.  Quaest.  v.  16). 
St.  Luke  avoids  the  correct  Greek  term,  character- 
istically preferring  the  vivid  language  which  he 
had  doubtless  heard  the  mariners  themselves  use. 
His  addition  6  KaXovfxevos  perhaps  indicates  that  he 
knew  the  word  to  be  conhned  to  nautical  slang. 
It  was  doubtless  coined  by  the  sailors  and  traders 
of  the  Levant,  whose  successors  at  the  present  day 
still  call  the  dreaded  wind  the  '  Gregalia ' — the  final 
form  of  the  corruption  of  'Euraquilo,'  just  as 
'  Egripou '  is  of  '  Euripus.' 

evpoKXvdwv  (TR ;  '  Euroclydon,'  AV)  is  one  of  a 
great  number  of  textual  variants.  It  appears  in 
two  9th  cent,  uncials,  H  and  L,  and  the  majority 
of  the  cursives.  The  oldest  authorities,  KAB, 
have  eupaKiiXuv  ;  in  the  Codices  Bezai  and  Ephra;mi 
the  account  of  the  voyage  is  wanting.  A  reviser 
of  the  Vaticanus  has  inserted  T  over  A  and  A  after 
K,  and  has  altered  AfiX  into  Ail's,  but  in  so  doing 
he  has  left  the  right  foot  of  the  A  visible  beyond 
the  corner  of  his  own  A. 

LiTERATUHB.— J.  Smith,  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul,. 
1S80,  p.  119  f. ;  E.  Renan,  St.  Paul,  18G9,  p.  551 ;  Conybeare 
and  Howson,  St.  Paul,  1877,  ii.  402. 

James  Strahan. 
EUROCLYDON.— See  Euraquilo. 

EUTYCHUS  (ESrvxoi).  —  A  young  man  who 
listened  to  St.  Paul  preaching  at  Troas  on  his  final 
journey  to  Jerusalem  (Ac  20"''-).  As  the  Apostle 
was  leaving  the  next  day,  he  continued  his  speech 
till  midnight,  evidently  in  a  crowded  and  over- 
heated upper  room  where  many  torches  were  burn- 
ing. Eutychus,  who  was  seated  at  the  window,  fell* 
asleep,  and,  falling  down  from  the  third  storey,  was 
'  taken  up  dead  '  (ijpOr]  v€Kpd%).  The  narrative  states 
that  St.  Paul  went  down,  embraced  the  lad,  and 
told  the  company  not  to  trouble  themselves  as  life 
was  still  in  liim.  Then  he  went  upstairs,  broke- 
bread,  and  continued  speaking  till  morning.  As  they 
were  departing  Eutychus  was  brought  to  them  alive. 

Various  theories  have  been  put  forward  to  explain 
or  explain  away  this  incident.  Some  suppose  that 
the  youth  was  only  stunned  by  his  fall,  and 
appeared  to  the  spectators  to  be  dead  ;  others  that 
the  whole  story  is  unhistorical,  and  merely  intended 
as  a  parallel  to  the  narrative  of  St.  Peter's  raising 
of  Dorcas  (Ac  9^'*^).  But  the  narrative  leaves 
little  doubt  of  the  intention  of  the  historian  U>- 
relate  a  miracle.  As  Ramsay  (St.  Paul  the^ 
Traveller,  p.  291)  points  out,  the  passage  belongs- 


KVANGELIST 


EVE 


379 


to  the  '  we '  sections  of  Acts,  and  Luke,  as  a  medical  i 
man,  uses  precise   medical  terms,  and  as  an  eye-  i 
witness  certainly   means   to  state  that   Eutychus  I 
was    really    dead.      The    words    ifpdr]    pfKpSs    can  j 
only  bear  that  significance,  otherwise  we  should 
have,  as  in  Mk  9*,  ilxrd  veKpbs,  '  as  one  dead.'    There 
is  no  doubt  that  the  incident   is  related  as  an 
instance  of    the  power  of    the  Apostle  to   work 
miracles,  and  that  the  historian  believed  him   to 
have  done  so  on  this  occasion. 

LiTKRATURB.— W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  TrateUer,  1S95, 

fe•J-,«l ;   E.  Zeller,  Acts,  Eng.  tr.,   1S75-76,  ii.  p.  62  ;   H.  J 
oltzmann,  Uaiid-Komtnentar^,  '  Die  Apost«lgesch.,'  1S92.  p. 
^i.r> ;  R.  J.  KnowUng,  £GT,  '  Acts.'  1900,  p.  424. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 

EVANGELIST.— 'Evangelist'  comes  from  tCayyeX- 
i^e(T6ai,  '  to  evangelize '  or  '  publish  good  tidings,' 
a  verb  which  is  fairly  common  in  the  LXX,  and 
is  very  frequent  in  the  writings  of  St.  Luke  and  in 
the  Epistles,  especially  the  four  great  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul.  This  verb  is  derived  from  eia77fXto«', 
'  good  tidings,'  especially  the  good  tidings  of  the 
evangel  or  gospel.  '  Evangelist '  is  found  in  only 
three  passages  in  the  Bible.  Philip,  one  of  the 
Seven,  is  so  called  in  one  of  the  '  we '  sections  of 
Acts  (21*),  which  may  mean  that  he  was  the  evan- 
gelist out  of  the  Seven,  i.e.  the  only  one,  or  far  the 
best.  Again,  St.  Paul,  in  his  list  of  live  kinds  of 
ministers  which  have  been  given  by  Christ  to  His 
Church (Eph 4^'),  places  'evangelists' after  'apostles' 
and  '  prophets '  and  before  '  pastors '  and  '  teachers ' ; 
and  '  evangelists '  may  be  classed  \nth.  the  two 
groups  which  precede.  '  Apostles,  prophets,  and 
evangelists'  were  itinerant  ministers,  preaching 
wherever  they  found  a  door  opened  to  them,  while 
'  pastors  and  teachers '  were  attached  to  some  con- 
gregation or  locality.  Philip  was  a  travelling 
missionary.  He  went  from  Jerusalem  to  preach 
in  Samaria,  was  on  the  road  to  Gaza  when  he 
converted  the  eunuch,  was  afterwards  at  Azotus 
(Ashdod),  'and  passing  through  he  preached  the 
gospel  to  all  the  cities,  till  he  came  to  Caesarea ' 
(Ac  8'-  ^  *).  Pos-sibly  prophets  commonly  preached 
to  believers,  evangelists  to  unbelievers,  while 
apostles  addressed  either.  This  would  agree  with 
the  frequently  quoted  dictum,  that  '  every  apK>stle 
is  an  evangelist,  but  not  every  evangelist  is  an 
apostle.'  There  is  at  any  rate  some  evidence  that 
those  who  acted  as  missionaries  to  the  heathen 
were  called  evangelists.  The  word  itself  points  to 
this — 'publishers  of  good  tidings.'  It  is  when  the 
first  Christians  were  '  scattered  abroad,  and  went 
about  preaching  the  word '  after  the  martyrdom 
of  Stephen,  that  the  verb  '  to  publish  the  good 
tidings  '  is  often  used  bv  St.  Luke  (Ac  8*-  ^-  ».  ss-  *)j . 
and  Philip  '  the  evangefist '  is  one  of  these  preachers. 
An  evangelist  would  know  the  gospel  narrative 
thoroughly,  and  would  be  capable  of  explaining 
it,  as  Philip  did  to  the  eunuch.  But  we  need  not 
suppose  that  Eph  4'*  gives  us  live  orders  of  ministers 
specially  appointed  to  discharge  five  diilerent  kinds 
of  duties.  No  such  organization  existed.  The 
distinctions  of  ministry  lay  in  the  work  that  was 
done  by  individual  workers,  and  that  depended  on 
their  personal  gifts,  which  often  overlap^d  (West- 
cott,  Ephesians,  1906,  pp.  169-171).  Philip  was 
called  '  the  evangelist '  because  of  his  good  work  in 
preaching  to  the  heathen.  The  third  passage  is 
2  Ti  4*,  where  Timothy  is  charged  to  '  do  the  work 
of  an  evangelist '  in  addition  to  his  other  duties. 
He  is  in  charge  of  the  Church  at  Ephesus  in  place 
of  St.  Paul ;  but  he  is  not  to  omit  the  work  of  en- 
deavouring to  convert  unbelievers. 

'Evangelist,'  rare  in  the  NT,  is  not  found  in  the 
Apostolic  Fathers  or  in  the  DicUiche.  The  use  of 
the  word  for  a  writer  of  a  Gospel  is  later,  and  the 
use  for  one  who  read  the  gospel  in  public  worship 
is  perhaps  later  still.    When  the  reader  (aj>ayvil}<rTr\s 


or  lector),  an  official  first  mentioned  by  Tertollian 
{de  Frcescr.  41),  expounded  what  he  read,  he  re- 
sembled the  evangelists  of  apostolic  times ;  but  the 
latter  had  no  written  gospel  to  expound ;  they 
expounded  the  oral  gospel,  which  they  knew  by 
heart.  The  description  of  them  given  by  Eusebius 
(HE  iii.  37),  thouglx  somewhat  rhetorical,  is  worthy 
of  quotation. 

"They  preached  the  zospel  more  and  more  widely  and 
scattered  the  saving  see<u  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  broadly 
throughout  the  whole  world.  For,  indeed,  very  many  of  the 
disciples  of  that  time  (i.e.  disciples  of  the  apostlesX  whose  soul 
had  been  stricken  by  the  Divine  Word  with  a  more  ardent  love 
for  philosophy  (i.e.  the  ascetic  life),  had  previously  fulfilled 
the  Saviour's  injunction  by  distributing  their  poesessiona  to  the 
needy.  Then  setting  oat  on  long  joomeys  tbey  performed  the 
duty  of  evangelists,  being  eager  to  preach  Chnst  to  those  wbc 
had  never  yet  heard  anything  of  the  word  of  faith,  and  to  pasa 
on  to  them  the  Scripture  of  the  Divine  Gospels.  These  men 
were  content  with  simply  laying  foundations  of  the  faith  iii 
various  foreign  places,  and  then  appointed  others  as  pastors. 
entrusting  them  with  the  husbandry  of  those  newly  reclaimed, 
while  they  themselves  went  on  again  to  other  countries  and 
nations  with  the  grace  and  co-operation  of  God.' 

Harnack  (3Iission  and  Expansion  of  Christi- 
anity'-, 1908,  i.  321  n.)  thinks  that  'evangelists'  has 
been  inserted  in  Eph  4^^  into  the  usual  list  of 
'  apostles,  prophets,  and  teachers '  because  this 
circular  Epistle  is  addressed  to  churches  which 
had  been  founded  by  missionaries  who  were  not 
apostles  ;  also  (p.  338)  that  '  evangelists '  were  not 
placed  next  to  the  '  apostles,'  because  the  combina- 
tion 'apostles  and  prophets'  was  too  well  estab- 
lished to  be  disturbed.  There  was  no  such  close 
connexion  between  '  prophets '  and  '  teachers.'  The 
shortness  of  the  list  of  gifted  and  given  persons  in 
Eph  4'i  as  compared  with  the  three  lists  in  1  Co  12 
may  be  taken  as  evidence  that  the  regular  exercise 
of  exti-aordinary  gifts  was  already  dying  out.  Yet 
in  the  short  list  in  Eph  4'^  there  are  two  items 
which  are  not  found  in  any  of  the  other  lists,  viz. 
'  evangelists '  and  '  pastors. 

LrrEKATCRK. — In  addition  to  the  works  quoted,  see  J.  H. 
Bernard  on  2  11  43  {The  Faitoral  EpittUs  (Camb.  Gr.  Test. 
1399]) ;  R.  J.  Knowling  on  Ac  2is  in  EGT,  1900 ;  P.  BatifFol, 
Primitive  Catholicism,  Eng.  tr.,  1911,  p.  51;  artt.  in  HUB, 
SDB,  DCG,  and  EBi.  A.  PlUMMER. 

EYE  (Efa).— Eve  was  (according  to  J,  On  3»>  4») 
the  wife  of  Adam  (q.v.)  and  the  mother  of  the 
human  race.  (1)  St.  Paul  recalls  the  story  of  her 
fall  as  a  warning  to  his  young  and  attractive,  but 
weak  and  unstable,  Corinthian  Church.  As  God 
presented  Eve,  a  pure  virgin,  to  Adam,  so  St.  Paul 
has  espoused  his  Church  to  Christ,  and  hopes  to 
present  her  as  His  bride  at  His  speedy  return.  He 
fears,  however,  that  as  the  serpent  beguiled  Eve 
in  his  craftiness,  so  the  Church  may  be  corrupted 
from  the  simplicity  and  purity  of  her  devotion  to 
Christ.  St.  Paul's  noun  xavovpyia  (craftiness)  re- 
presents the  Heb.  en;;;  of  Gn  3^  better  than  the 
adjective  <pp6yLfj.o$  of  the  LXX  does.  It  was  appar- 
ently the  teaching  of  the  Rabbis  that  the  serpent 
literally  seduced  Eve  (4  Mac  18®"®  ;  cf.  Iran.  c.  Hcer. 
I.  XXX.  7) ;  and  a  Church  which  should  let  herself 
be  drawn  away  from  Christ,  who  has  the  right  to 
His  bride's  whole-hearted  love,  would  be  guilty  of 
spiritual  fornication.  The  identification  of  the 
serpent  with  the  devil,  which  was  far  from  the 
thoughts  of  the  writer  of  Gn  3,  first  appears  in 
Wis  2-^,  '  But  by  the  envy  of  the  devil  death 
entered  into  the  world'  (cf.  Ro  16»,  Rev  12»  20*). 

(2)  The  writer  of  1  Tim.  (2^^^*)  uses  the  story  of 
the  Fall  for  the  purpose  of  proving  woman's  natural 
inferiority  to  man.  He  remarks  that  man  was 
not  beguiled,  but  that  'the  woman' — a  word 
spoken  with  the  same  accent  of  contempt  as  in 
Gn  3^ — being  beguiled,  fell  into  transgression. 
The  writer  appears  to  think,  like  ililton,  that  the 
man  knew  better,  and  sinned,  not  under  stress  oi 


380 


EVERLASTING 


EVIL 


temptation,  but  in  generous  sympathy  with  his 
frail  partner,  whose  fate  he  resolved  to  share. 
This  is,  of  course,  a  man's  account  of  the  origin  of 
«in,  and  happily  the  original  story,  with  all  the 
Rabbinical  and  other  unwortiiy  inferences  that 
have  been  drawn  from  it,  is  no  longer  among  the 
•Christian  credencla.  James  Strahan. 

EYERLASTING See  Eternal. 

EYIL. — This  article  is  not  a  study  of  the  word 
'evil'  as  substantive,  adjective,  or  adverb  in  the 
:two  senses  of  '  bad '  and  '  Imrtful,'  for  which  the 
use  of  a  concordance  may  suffice  ;  but  of  the  con- 
ception of  evil  in  the  apostolic  writings.  Three 
senses  of  the  term  liave  been  distinguished  by 
Leibniz :  metaphysical — the  necessary  imperfection 
of  the  creature  as  compared  with  the  Creator ; 
physical — pain,  sutlering,  sorrow,  death  ;  and  moral 
— sin.  Although  the  NT  does  assert  the  ditference 
between  God  and  the  world  and  man,  and  the  in- 
feriority of  the  made  to  the  Maker,  it  does  not 
•conceive  creatureliness  as  itself  evil,  but  expresses 
its  limitation  and  impotence  in  the  term  'flesh.' 
For  this  as^^ect  see  art.  Flesh.  The  art.  Sin  deals 
with  the  third  sense  of  the  word  'evil.'  It  is  thus 
•with  physical  evil  alone  that  we  are  here  concerned. 
Its  existence  in  manifold  forms  is  assumed  by  all 
the  apostolic  writers  ;  but  generally  it  is  with  the 
sufferings  of  Christian  believers,  including  persecu- 
tion, that  they  are  concerned,  in  order  to  encourage 
patience,  ofler  comfort,  or  assure  deliverance. 

What  these  sorrows  were,  Paul's  account  of  his 
own  experience  shows  (Ac  20'^-",  2  Co  p-"  B"*-'" 
1123-33.  q{  yiq  8**-^).  Tliis  experience  is  regarded 
as  a  sharing  of  Christ's  suflerings  (2  Co  1",  1  P  4'^), 
^nd  even  as  a  completion  of  that  suffering  for  the 
good  of  the  Church  (Col  1^^).  'Paul  does  not 
•claim  to  fill  up  the  defects  in  Christ's  earthly  suffer- 
ing or  in  the  sufferings  of  the  Church,  but  in  the 
sufferings  which  he  has  to  endure  in  his  flesh, 
which  are  Christ's  sufferings,  because  he  and  Christ 
are  one '  (Peake,  EGT,  '  Col.,'  1903,  p.  515).  Sutter- 
ing  is  a  means  of  entering  into  closer  fellowship 
with  Christ  (Ph  3'").  As  suffering  was  a  condition 
of  perfecting  Christ  Himself  for  His  work  (He 
oicUis  415  58.9  728)^  go  also  it  perfects  Christian 
character  if  projierly  endured  (Ko  5^  1  Th  P,  He 
10^^,  1  P  5*").  It  is  to  be  regarded  not  as  penal, 
but  as  chastening  (He  12^-",  Ja  P-«  5").  It  can- 
not separate  from  the  love  of  God  (Ro  8^"^),  and  it 
prepares  for,  and  secures,  the  glory  hereafter  (Eph 
3",  Rev  7'*),  with  which  it  is  not  worthy  to  be 
compared  (Ro  8'^),  since  the  companions  of  Christ's 
suflerings  will  also  be  the  partners  of  His  reign 
(Ro  8",  2  Co  P,  Ph  3'<>,  2  Ti  2'i-ia,  1  P  4'^).  Of  all 
evils  death  is  regarded  as  the  greatest,  and  in  Paul 
we  find  a  painful  shrinking  from  it  (2  Co  5'"*) ;  ac- 
•cordingly,  it  is  evident  how  precious  a  comfort  was 
the  Christian  hope  of  immortality  and  resurrection 
"(Ro  8**"^).  Since  death  is  regarded  as  the  penalty 
of  sin  (Ro  512-21  621-23^  1  Co  l5-'-22.  sej^  ^i^  salvation 
in  Christ  includes  deliverance  from  death  for  the 
believer,  and  finally  the  abolition  of  death  (1  Co 
1524-28^  2  Ti  P»)  and  all  other  evils  (Rev  2P). 
Behind  death,  sin,  and  all  evil,  the  Apostolic 
Church  saw  the  devil  and  other  jjowers  of  wicked- 
ness (Eph  42^  1  Th  3»,  He  2",  Ja  4^  1  P  S*,  1  Jn  S'*, 
Rev  12"),  and  accordingly  Christ's  work,  especially 
His  deatli  (Col  2^'),  was  regarded  as  a  victory  over 
all  evil  powers  (1  Jn  3*). 

This  teaching  is  for  the  most  part  experimental 
and  practical,  and  can  still  minister  comfort  and 
•encouragement  to  the  Christian  believer.  There 
are  two  speculative  elements  in  it  which  modern 
'Christian  faith  cannot  unq^uestioningly  accept — the 
connexion  of  death  with  sm  as  its  penalty,  and  the 
•existence  of  the  devil  and  other  evil  powers.     As 


regards  the  first  i)oint,  the  Avriter  ventures  to  re- 
peat a  few  sentences  he  has  written  eisewiiere. 
'  It  is  generally  admitted  that  death  is  a  natural 
necessity  for  animal  organisms  such  as  man's,  and 
that  before  man  was  in  the  world  death  prevailed. 
It  seems  vain  to  justify  Paul  by  speculations  such 
as  these :  that  God  anticipating  sin  introduced 
death  into  the  natural  order  as  a  penalty  already 
prepared  for  sin,  or  that,  had  man  preserved  his 
innocence,  he  might  have  risen  above  this  natural 
necessity.  Paul's  interest  is  primarily  in  the  moral 
character  and  the  religious  consciousness.  What 
he  was  concerned  with  was  man's  sense  of  the 
mystery  and  dread  of  the  desolation  of  death, 
man's  looking  for  judgment  after  death.  In  such 
totality,  including  what  man  thinks  of,  and  feels 
about,  death,  surely  Paul's  view  of  the  connexion 
between  sin  and  death  is  not  altogether  false.  It 
is  man's  sense  of  guilt  that  invests  death  with  its 
terror  (1  Co  15'^).  Nor  are  we  warranted  in  say- 
ing that  conscience  here  is  playing  tricks  on  man, 
frightening  him  with  illusions.  If  there  be  indeed 
a  moral  order  in  the  world,  an  antagonism  of  God 
to  sin,  and  if,  as  there  is  reason  to  believe,  there  is 
a  moral  continuity  between  this  life  and  the  next, 
such  a  change  as  death  is  may  be  conceived  as 
fraught  with  moral  significance,  as  introducing  the 
soul  into  such  conditions  as  have  been  determined 
by  the  judgment  of  God  on  the  moral  character  of 
this  life '  (Studies  of  Paul  and  his  Gospel,  1911,  pp. 
146-7).  As  regards  the  second  point,  one  sentence 
regarding  Paul  will  suffice.  '  In  his  cosmology, 
angelology,  and  demonology,  as  well  as  his  eschat- 
ology,  he  remains  essentially  .Jewish' (op.  cit.  p.  17) ; 
and  this  is  equally  true  of  the  whole  Apostolic 
Church.  Christian  faith  need  not  burden  itself 
with  this  load  of  Jewish  beliefs. 

There  are  two  passages  in  which  Paul  attempts 
a  theodicy  (Ro  H^^'^  and  9-11),  the  first  dealing 
with  Nature  and  the  second  with  human  historj-. 
In  the  first  passage  he  attributes  to  Nature  con- 
sciousness of,  and  a  dissatisfaction  with,  its  present 
imperfection — a  desire  for,  and  an  expectation  of, 
its  completion.  He  includes  Nature  in  man's  griev- 
ous disaster,  but  also  in  his  glorious  destiny.  As 
by  the  sin  he  has  committed  he  has  brouglit  misery, 
so  by  the  grace  he  will  receive  he  will  impart  bless- 
ing. We  are  unable  to  accept  '  Paul's  account  of 
the  origin  of  physical  evil  as  altogether  due  to  man's 
sin.  There  can,  however,  be  no  doubt  that  man 
has  a  vital,  organic  relation  to  his  environment. 
The  evolution  of  the  world  and  the  development  of 
humanity  are  not  independent  but  connected  pro- 
cesses. If  we  are  warranted  in  believing  in  the  pro- 
gress of  the  race,  we  are  justified  in  hoping  for  a 
correspondent  and  consequent  transformation  of 
the  universe.  For  the  perfect  man  we  may  expect 
the  perfect  home'  (Romans  [Century  Bible,  1901], 
p.  193).  In  the  second  passage  we  are  not  here  con- 
cerned with  the  argument  as  a  whole,  but  only  with 
Paul's  conclusion,  that,  as  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews 
has  opened  the  door  for  the  faith  of  the  Gentiles,  so 
the  gathering  in  of  the  Gentiles  will  lead  to  the 
restoration  of  the  Jews.  '  For  God  hath  shut  up  all 
unto  disobedience,  that  he  might  have  mercy  upon 
air  (Ro  1P2).  Without  ascribing  to  Paul  on  the 
ground  of  this  and  similar  passages  a  dogmatic 
universalism,  against  which  tnere  is  contrary  evi- 
dence throughout  the  NT,  we  may  assign  to  the 
Apostolic  Church  the  hope  of  tlie  final  victory  of 
Christ  over  all  evil.  The  apostolic  attitude  towards 
the  problem  of  evil  cannot  be  described  smoptimistn, 
for  the  reality  of  sin  and  pain  is  too  seriously  and 
sympathetically  recognized,  nor  as  pessimism,  for 
the  possibility  of  redemption  is  too  confidently  and 
persuasively  ur^ed,  but  it  may  be  spoken  of  as 
meliorism,  for  it  has  the  faith  which  claims  a 
present  salvation  for  every  believer,  and  the  hope 


EVIL^PEAKIXG 


EXCOMMUNICATION 


38  L 


of  a  tinal  fultilnient  of  Gotl's  purpose  of  grace,  and 
both  aie  linked  with  a  love  that  sees  in  human 
need  ami  pain  an  opjtortunity  for  service  and  sacri- 
fice, in  which  n>an  can  regard  himself  as  a  fellow- 
worker  with  God  in  the  solution  of  the  problem 
of  evil.  To  revert  to  the  distinctions  made  in 
the  beginning  of  this  article,  the  apostolic  view 
recognizes  no  metaphysical  evil,  for  to  be  the 
creature,  subject,  and  child  of  God,  is  for  man  only 
good  ;  it  WnVs  physical  with  moral  evil,  and  makes 
deliverance  from  pain  dependent  on  salvation  from 
sin  ;  and  it  throws  all  the  emphasis  on  moral  evU  ; 
for  it  is  concerned  not  with  the  s^ieculative  intellect, 
but  only  with  the  moral  conscience  and  religious 
consciousness  of  man. 

LiTBRATrRB.— W.  Beyschlag:,  -Vr  Tkeoloffy,  Eng.  tx.,  1895, 
i.  22S,  ii.  107  ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  Theology  o/ the  ST,  l5s99,  pp.  187, 
375;  T.  V.  Haering,  The  Christian  Faith,  En^.  tr.,  1913,  ii. 
562-577  ;  J.  Martineau,  A  Stvdy  of  Relioion",  lsa9,  ii.  49-13-2  ; 
A.  B.  Brace.  Ap-jl--j^tics,  1S92,  p.  63  ;  A.  M.  Fairbairn,  The 
I'hiioiophij  of  the  Cfii-istian  Reliijion,  19Ce,  pp.  »4-168  ;  G.  W. 
Leibniz,  Enj^ais  de  Theodiceesur  la  Bontide  Uieu,la  Liberiede 
Vhomine  et  COrigine  du  mai,  1710. 

Alfred  E.  GAR\aE. 
EYIL-SPEAKING.— In    Greek,   as    in   English, 
there  is  a  ricii  vocabulary  e.\pre.ssive  of  different 
shades  of  this  prevalent  sin. 

(1)  Kara\a\€iy  is  'to  speak  down,'  'to  detract.' 
/cardXaXoi  is  translated  *  backbiters '  (Ro  1**),  and 
KaraXaXiai  '  backbitings'  (2  Co  1"2^'),  but  evil-speak- 
ing does  not  necessarily  take  place  behind  the  back, 
or  in  the  absence  of  the  person  hated.  *card\a\ot  form 
one  of  the  many  types  which  are  the  outcome  of  the 
reprobate  mind  (Ko  1*),  and  Christian  converts,  as 
new-born  babes,  must  put  away  all  KaraXaXiai  (1  P 
2'-  * ;  cf.  Ja  4'').  The  best  people  in  the  world  cannot 
escape  the  breath  of  detraction,  and  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Age  the  Christians  were  regarded  as  '  genus 
hominuDi  superstitionis  novae  et  maleficae '  {Suet. 
Xero,  16),  accusetl  of  '  odium  generis  humani '  (Tac. 
Ann.  XV.  44),  and  suspected  of  committing  the  most 
infamous  crimes  in  their  secret  assemblies.  In  such 
an  atmosphere  of  calumny  they  made  it  their  en- 
deavour to  live  in  such  a  manner  that  their  detrac- 
tors should  not  only  be  put  to  shame  (1  P  3'*),  but 
even  constrained  hy  their  good  works  to  glorify 
God  (21- ;  cf .  Mt  5^% 

(2)  ^XatripTi/xeiv  (3\(3uTtl>rjftos,  p\axr<f>r]/ua)  is  a  stronger 
term,  including  all  kinds  of  evil-speaking  against 
men  as  well  as  against  God.  In  a  number  of  pas- 
sages it  is  difficult  to  decide  whether  '  blaspheme  ' 
or  '  rail '  is  the  precise  meaning  of  the  word  (Ac 
13«  18«  26"  etc.).  St.  Paul  has  a  full  share  of 
^\aff<pr]fua  ;  he  is  'evil  spoken  of '  (1  Co  lO**)  and 
'slanderously  reported'  (Ro  3*).  \\Tiile  the  Gen- 
tiles speak  evil  of  the  foUowei-s  of  Christ  (1  P  4*), 
the  latter  must  calumniate  no  man  (Tit  3-) ;  railing 
(3\a(T<pJifiia)  is  one  of  the  sins  of  temper  and  tongue 
which  tliey  are  repeatedly  enjoined  to  put  away 
(Eph  4'',  Col  3*).  At  the  same  time  tney  must 
strive  to  prevent  their  '  good,'  or  '  the  word  of  God,' 
or  'the  way  of  truth,'  or  'the  name  of  God  and 
thedoctrine,'  from  being  blasphemed,  or  evil  spoken 
of  (Ro  14i«,  Tit  2*,  2  P  2-^  1  Ti  6').  St.  Paul  affirms 
that  the  name  of  God  is  blasphemed  among  the 
Gentiles  because  of  the  Jews  (Ro  2'-^).  The  false 
teachers  and  libertines  of  the  sub- Apostolic  Age 
spoke  evil  of  the  powers  of  the  unseen  world  (2  P 
2'',  Jude  1**)  ;  and  their  empty  logomachies  gave 
rise  to  mutual  railings  (^SXcwr^/ua*,  1  Ti  6^).  See, 
fuither,  art.  Blasphemy. 

(3)  5td/3oXos  (from  SiaSaWu,  Lk  16'),  which  de- 
notes, Kar  e^oxvy,  the  '  chief  slanderer,'  or '  devil,'  is 
applied  also  to  any  ordinary  calumniator.  Women 
who  are  called  to  the  office  of  the  diaconate  must 
not  be  slanderers  (1  Ti  3*'),  and  the  same  applies  to 
aged  women  who  are  to  influence  the  younger  by 
their  words  and  example  (Tit  2^).  In  grievous  post- 
apostolic  times,  which  seemed  the  last,  many  bad 


types  of  character   became  prominent,  including 
Sid^oXtH.  (2  Ti  3»). 

(4)  XoiSopeip  (a  word  of  uncertain  derivation)  is 
invariably  translated  '  revile '  in  the  KV,  whereas, 
the  AV  has  'rail'  and  'speak  reproachfully'  as 
variations.  St.  Paul  says  of  the  apostles  that, 
being  reviled  they  bless  (1  Co  4'*)  ;  that  the  so- 
called  brother  who  is  a  reviler  (XoiSofxn)  is  to  be 
shunned  (5") ;  and  that  revilers  shall  not  inherit 

}  the  Kingdom  of  God  (6**).  For  seeming  to  revile- 
the  high  priest  Ananias  in  a  moment  of  just  anger, 
St.  Paul  was  quick  to  make  apology  (Ac  24*).  In, 
a  time  of  persecution  St.  Peter  turns  the  minds  of 
his  readers  to  the  perfect  example  of  Christ,  who, 
being  reviled,  reviled  not  again  (I  P  2"^),  and  bids, 
them  render,  as  He  did,  '  contrariwise  blessing ' 
{3»). 

(5)  Analagous  terms  are  KaKoXoytTy,  '  to  siteak. 
evil  of  (Ac  19®),  ayriXeyety,  'to  speak  against' 
(28-),  and  SwiprjuLa,  '  evil  report,'  which  the  servant 
of  Christ  learns  to  accept,  equally  with  fv<pr)fua,  as- 
part  of  his  lot  (2  Co  6*).  '  Being  defamed  {Swr- 
(fyrifiov/ieyoi),  we  bless*  (1  Co  4**). 

James  Strahan. 
EXALTATION.— See  AsCEXSiox. 

EXCOMMDNICATION.— Excommunication  is  a. 
form  of  ecclesiastical  censure  involving  exclusion, 
from  the  membership  of  the  Church.  Such  ex- 
clusion may  be  temporary  or  permanent.  It  may 
cut  ott'  the  offender  from  all  communion  and  every 
privilege,  or  it  may  be  less  severe,  allowing  some- 
intercourse  and  certain  benefits. 

1.  The  term. — Tlie  word  '  excommunication '  is 
not  found  in  AV  or  RV,  nor  are  the  obsolete  fomi.s- 
'  excommunion '  (Milton),  'excommenge'  (Holin- 
shed),  '  excommuned '  (Gayton).  There  are  general 
references  to  the  subject,  and  one  or  two  cases  are 
mentioned  with  some  detail.  The  Greek  verb. 
a.<f>opi^u)  signifies  '  mark  off'  from  (dT6)  by  a  boundary 
(opos).'  It  is  used  sometimes  in  a  good  sense  (e.g. 
Ac  13-,  Ro  P,  Gal  V^),  and  sometimes  in  a  bad  one 
(e.g.  Lk  6- ;  note  the  three  degrees  of  evil  treat- 
ment— a<popiff<i}ffiv,  dyeiSiffuxriv,  (K^dXuffty  rb  6yofui).. 
See  also  Mt  13«  25**,  2  Co  6^',  Gal  2'*.  It  is  em- 
ployed by  various  Greek  writers  —  Sophocles,. 
Euripides,  Plato,  and  others — and  is  found  fre- 
quently in  the  LXX.  Excommunicatio  is  a  Latim 
word  of  later  origin.     It  is  used  in  the  Vulgate. 

2.  Warrant  for  the  practice  in  the  Apostolic 
Church.  —  Excommunication  in  apostolic  times 
rested  upon  a  threefold  warrant. 

(1)  Xatural  and  inherent  right. — Every  properly- 
constituted  society  has  the  right  and  power  to  ex- 
clude members  not  conforming  to  its  rules.  The- 
Church  has  authority  to  exercise  a  right  which 
every  society  claims.  An  analogy  is  sometimes 
drawn  between  the  Church  and  the  State.  The 
State  has  power  to  send  into  exile,  to  deprive  of 
ciWl  rights,  and  even  claims  and  exercises  the 
power  to  inflict  a  death-sentence.  So,  in  spiritnali 
matters,  the  Church  may  pass  sentences  of  separa- 
tion more  or  less  complete,  and  though  the 
supreme  judge  alone  can  pronounce  the  sentence  of 
death  in  an  absolute  sense,  yet  the  Church  can 
pass  such  a  sentence  in  a  relative  sense — the 
offender  being  regarded  as  dead  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  ecclesiastical  court.  Upon  this  ixnnt 
— whether  in  excommunication  and  in  '  binding 
and  loosing '  the  power  of  the  Church  is  final  and 
absolute — two  divergent  views  have  been  held. 
As  typical  of  these  two  schools  of  thought,  see 
Dante,  de  Man.  lU.  viii.  36 if.,  and  Tarquini, 
Juris  eccl.  Inst.*,  Rome.  1875,  p.  98.  The  former 
declares  it  is  not  absolute,  '  sed  respective  ad 
aUquid.  .  .  .  Posset  [enim]  solvere  me  non  poeni- 
tentem,  quod  etiam  facere  ipse  Deus  non  posset '  ;l 
the  latter  states  that  St.  Peter  (Mt  le"')  is  invested. 


382 


EXCOMMUNICATIOX 


EXCOMMUNICATION 


with    'potestas    claviuni,    quae    est    aUsoluta    et 
monarcliica. ' 

(2)  The  example  of  the  Jewish  nation  and 
Church. — In  the  l*entateucli  it  is  stated  that  certain 
heinous  sins  cannot  be  forgiven.  lij-  some  form  of 
excommunication  or  by  death  itself  (lie  siniuT  is 
to  be  '(lit  oil."  Thus  the  sanctity  of  tlir  nation 
is  resturcil  mid  ])r<>s(!rv<_Hi.  In  the  laLcr  ihiys  of 
.Indai^ni  I  he  pinialtics  lu'caiiH!  somewhat  milder  as 
a  L;t'ii(ji'ai  rule.  Tiic  loundat  iinis  of  Jewish  «'\c()m- 
munication  are  J-v  i:;'',  N\i  "r- ^  12'*' ^^  16,  Jg  5'-^ 
Ezr  7-*',  Nell  13-'.  Tlic  flints  are  described  in 
Ezr  7-"  10-^.  The  Tahinid  luintioiis  three  kinds  of 
excommunication,  tln'  tii>t  two  diisciplinary,  the 
third  complete  and  tlnal  expulsion.  There  was 
Reparation,  si'paration  with  a  curse,  and  final 
separation  with  a  t(rril)]e  anathema.  For  Gospel 
references  .se(>  Lk  (i--,  .In  9'-^- SJ. »  12«  16-.  The 
sentence  mi^dit  he  jnouounced  on  twenty-four 
difl'erent  j^idiiiids. 

(3)  The  antlmrifii  of  Jesus  Christ. — The  main 
basis  of  authority  for  the  Christian  Church  is  the 
teaching  of  its  Founder.  The  passages  of  most 
importance  on  the  subject  under  consideration  are 
Mt  16"*  18'*,  Jn  20^.  Excommunication  must  be 
preceded  by  private  and  public  exhortation,  con- 
ducted in  the  spirit  of  love,  with  caution,  wisdom, 
and  patience.  Only  as  a  last  resort,  and  when  all 
else  lias  failed,  must  the  sentence  of  banishment  be 
pronounced  (see  Mt  13"-^"-  36-«-  *^-^).  From  Christ 
Himself  the  Church  received  authority,  not  only  to 
'bind'  the  impenitent  and  unbelieving  and  to 
'  loose '  the  penitent  believer,  but  also,  in  its 
properly  constituted  courts,  to  condemn  and  expel 
gross  offenders  and  to  forgive  and  re-instate  them 
if  truly  penitent. 

3.  Legislation  in  the  Apostolic  Church. — 
The  general  methods  of  procedure  are  made  clear 
by  St.  Paul's  method  of  dealing  with  the  case  of 
the  incestuous  person  at  Corinth  (1  Co  5,  2  Co  2s-'i). 
The  excommunication  of  the  offender  was  a  solemn, 
deliberate,  judicial  act  of  the  members  of  the  Church 
specially  gathered  together  '  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ '  for  the  purpose,  and  equipped  with 
the  authority  and  '  power  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.' 
The  act  of  exclusion  was  that  of  the  Church  itself 
and  not  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  The  power  was  not 
in  the  hands  of  an  official,  or  body  of  officials. 
Wherever  it  has    become    the    prerogative  of    a 

!)riesthood  it  has  led  to  great  abuse  and  the  results 
lave  been  disastrous  both  to  priests  and  people. 

The  object  of  this  act  of  discipline  was  to  reform 
the  sinner  (1  Co  5'),  and  to  preserve  the  purity  of 
the  Church.  Where  a  difference  of  opinion  existed 
as  to  the  course  to  be  pursued,  the  verdict  was 
decided  by  the  majority  (2  Co  2*).  Tiie  sentence 
might  be  modified  or  rescinded  according  to  sub- 
sequent events  (2*"*).  'To  deliver  such  a  one  unto 
Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh,  that  the 
spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus ' 
(1  Co  5'),  is  an  obscure  passage.  Perhaps  St.  Paul 
thought  that  a  sin  of  the  flesh  was  more  likely  to 
be  cured  by  bodily  suffering  than  in  any  other 
way.  In  his  opinion  certain  afflictions  of  the  body 
were  due  to  the  operations  of  Satan  (2  Co  2"  12^, 

1  Ti  I'"').  Probably  he  thought  that,  in  accordance 
with  the  sentence  of  the  Church,  God  would  allow 
Satan  to  inflict  some  physical  malady  that  would 
lead  the  oft'ender  to  repentance.     If  we  may  take 

2  Co  2*'"  to  refer  to  the  same  case,  the  desired 
result  was  reached. 

'  It  cannot  have  been  unknown  to  Paul  that  he  was  hero 
using  a  fonn  of  words  similar  to  the  curses  by  which  the 
Corinthians  had  formerly  been  accustomed  to  consign  their 
personal  enemies  to  destruction  by  the  powers  of  tlie  world  of 
death.  It  seems  not  open  to  doubt  that  the  Corinthians  would 
understand  by  this  phrase  that  the  offender  was  to  suffer 
disease  and  even  death  as  a  punishment  for  sin  ;  and  Paul  goes 
on  to  add  that  this  punishment  of  the  flesh  is  intended  to  bring 
salvation   ultimately   to  his    soul  (i't'o  to    irvtvixa    a-ot^fj) :    by 


jihysical  suffering  he  is  to  atone  for  his  sin.  .  .  .  The  whole 
thought  stands  in  the  closest  relation  to  the  theory  of  the 
confession-inscriptions,  in  which  those  who  have  been  punished 
bv  the  god  thanlc  and  bless  him  for  the  chastisement'  (Ramsay 
in  i!;.r/>5' X.  [1898-99]  59). 

For  cases  in  which  physical  ill  followed  ecclesi- 
astical censure  see  Ac  5'  8""  13'".  Some  hold  that 
the  '  delivery  to  Satan  '  was  by  virtue  of  the  special 
authi)rity  of  St.  Paul  himself,  while  the  Cnurch 
iiad  ]H>wiT  t<i  (.'xjnd  oidy.  Tliere  is  nothing  in  the 
text  to  supjjort  such  a  view.  This  punishment 
must  not  be  confounded  with  the  anatliema  of  Ro 
9^  1  Co  16*2,  Gal  1«".  'The  attempt  to  explain 
the  word  (ivdOefia)  to  mean  "excommunication" 
from  the  society — a  later  use  of  the  Hebrew  in 
ltabbini(;al  writers  and  the  Greek  in  ecclesiastical 
— arose  from  a  desire  to  take  away  the  apparent 
profanity  of  the  wish'  (Sanday-Heaulam,  Romans^ 
[ICC,  llioii],  p.  228).  Calvin  and  some  other  re- 
formers thought  the  expression  dvdde/ia.  MapAv 
dOd  (1  Co  16'^-)  was  a  formula  of  excommunication. 
Buxtorf  (Lex.  Chald.,  Basel,  16.39,  pp.  827,  2466) 
says  it  was  part  of  a  Jewisli  cursing  lormula  from 
the  Prophecy  of  Enoch  {i\uW^).  iiicre  is  no  reason 
for  such  an  opinion.  It  was  not  held  until  the 
meaning  of  the  words  was  lost  or  partially  so. 
They  are  neither  connected  nor  synonymous  as 
some  have  supposed,  and  are  rightly  separated  in 
RV — '  If  any  man  lovetli  not  the  Lord,  let  him  be 
anathema.     Maran  atha '  (cf.  Ph  4'). 

In  addition  to  the  specific  case  at  Corinth  and 
general  references  in  such  passages  as  1  Th  5", 
2  Th  31^  (cf.  Ro  16",  Ja  5'«),  we  find  more  precise 
directions  in  later  books — the  Pastoral  Epistles 
and  General  Epistles  of  St.  John  (see  1  Ti  S'*-  ^  6», 
Tit  3'",  1  Jn  18'-  51*,  2  Jni",  3  Jn*-").  Heresy, 
schism,  insubordination,  usurpation  of  the  auth- 
ority of  the  Church  by  a  section,  Ijecame  grounds 
of  excommunication.  The  morals,  doctrine,  and 
government  of  the  Church  were  all  imperilled  at 
times  and  could  be  preserved  only  by  strict  dis- 
cipline and  severe  penalties  upon  wrong-doers.  As 
in  the  Jewish  community,  the  sentence  of  excom- 
munication might  be  lighter  or  heavier,  the  ex- 
clusion being  more  or  less  complete.  It  might 
mean  only  expulsion  from  the  Lord's  Table, 
but  not  from  tiie  Lord's  House  ;  or  it  might  be 
utter  banishment  from  the  Lord's  House  and  an 
interdict  against  all  social  intercourse  witii  it> 
members. 

It  is  beyond  the  scope  of  this  article  to  trace 
the  history  of  excommunication  in  the  Christian 
Church.  'Suffice  it  to  say  that  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  minor  (d<popt(Jtil>s)  and  major  (TravreXTj? 
dtpopiff/j-bs  dvdOefia)  forms  of  it,  which  existed  from 
very  early  times,  if  not  from  the  Apostolic  xVge  it- 
self, were  continued  for  centuries  with  a  Avealf  h  of 
elaborate  detail  as  to  the  exact  penalties  involved 
in  each,  and  as  to  the  attitude  of  tlio.-c  wit  Ida  tlie 
Church  to  those  without  its  pale.  Unfortunately, 
excommunication  often  became  an  instrument  of 
oppression  in  the  hands  of  unworthy  men.  In 
mediieval  days  it  frequently  entailLul  outlawry 
and  sometimes  death. 

'  The  censures  of  the  Church,  reserved  in  her  early  days  (or 
the  gravest  moral  and  spiritual  offences,  soon  lost  their  salutary 
terrors  when  excommunications  became  incidents  in  territorial 
squabbles,  or  were  issued  on  the  most  trivial  pretext ;  and  when 
the  unchristian  penalty  of  the  interdict  sought  to  coerce  the 
guUty  by  robbing  the" innocent  of  the  privilege  of  Christian 
worship  and  even  of  burial  itself '  (A.  Roberteon,  Rej/nuin  Dei 
[Bampton  Lectures,  1901],  p.  257). 

See  also   Anathema,    Chastisemfxt,    Disd 
PLiNE,  Restoration  of  Offenders. 

LiTEUATURK.— Artt.  '  Di'Jciplinf '  in  TIDE,  DCG,  'Discipline 
(Christian)'  in  KliE,  '  Kxcoiiiniuiiication '  in  DCG,  Smith's 
Dlf\  .//•-',  CK,  '  n.inn  (kin-hlic-her) '  in  PIlK-i;  E.  v.  Dob- 
schiitz.C/in'stiaii  Life  in  tlf  l'rimitire('hMrch,VA\^.  tr.,l.<>rnl.in, 
litlU;  H.  M.  Gwatkin,  Kadn  Church  Histnrij,  <ln.  r.Xf.t;  E. 
Schiirer,  lUP,   Edinburgh,  1S85-1800;  C.   v.   Weizsacker, 


EXHORTATION 


EXORCISM 


383 


Da*  apostolitche  ZeUalter^,  Tubingen,  1903  (Eng.  tr.  of  2nd  ed., 
London,  lS»t-9o);  A.  Edersheim.  LT*.  London,  1S87 ;  J. 
SmgYiaja.  Orifjinet  EceUnaiitictr,  do.  1706-1722;  H.  Hallam, 
Vieic  of  the  State  of  Europe  during  the  MidcUe  Age*^^,  do. 
1»53.  H.  CaRISS  J.  SiDNELL. 

EXHORTATION.  —  Exhortation  (xopd/cXi7<r«) 
played  an  imj>ortant  part  in  the  apostolic  ministry. 
Asa  technicai  term  for  a  specitic  kind  of  Christian 
teachinj;,  it  first  emerges  in  Acts  and  in  the  Epistles. 
No  mention  of  it  (as  such)  appears  in  the  Gospels, 
They  record  the  facts  and  teaching  of  Christ  upon 
which  the  later  exhortations  were  founded.  Ex- 
hortation, or  Taptt<c\Tj<ris,  may  be  described  as  a 
summons  to  the  will,  an  appeal — urgent,  per- 
suasive, and  even  authoritative — which  was  based 
.sometimes  on  Scripture  (Ac  13'*)  or  apostolic 
teaching  (1  Ti  6^  2  Ti  4^),  but  more  especially  on 
Christian  prophecy  (Ac  15^-,  1  Co  14*-  '^).  It  was 
what  we  call  in  modern  sermons  the  '  application.' 
Prophesying  and  exhorting  naturally  went  to- 
gether in  the  proclamation  of  salvation.  Cremer 
holds  that  exhortation  belongs  '  to  the  domain  of 
prophecy,  and  is  like  this  a  special  charisma  (Ro 
12*),  though  it  does  not  appear  to  have  manifested 
itself  5«/>a;-a^f/y  as  such'  (Bibl.-Theol.  Lex.  of  ST 
Greek^,  p.  337).  Generally,  no  doubt,  it  was  given 
by  the  Apostle  or  prophet  himself,  e.g.  by  St. 
Peter  (Ac  2**),  by  Barnabas  (Ac  11=),  by  St.  Paul 
(Ac  13""^-),  but  at  times,  so  it  would  appear  from 
Ro  12*,  the  one  who  did  the  '  exhorting'  might  be 
a  different  speaker  from  the  one  who  gave  the 
'prophecy"  or  'teaching.'  Frequently,  indeed, 
especially  in  times  of  persecution  or  unrest,  it  con- 
sisted in  a  mutual  exchange  of  encouragement  or 
warning  among  believers  (1  Th  4^*  5",  He  3**  1(P). 

As  the  word  irapd/cXijtrtj  has  many  shades  of 
meaning,  so  the  '  exhortations '  referred  to  in  the 
NT  have  many  tones  of  emotional  stimulus.  In 
fact,  the  character  of  the  exhortation  was  deter- 
mined by  the  circumstances  which  called  it  forth. 
In  times  of  threatened  apostasy  it  was  admonitory  ; 
amid  persecution  and  danger  it  promoted  comfort. 
Often  TapdA.X77<rij  can  only  mean  'comfort'  (q.v.), 
and  in  all  such  instances  it  is  so  translated  in  botli 
AV  and  RV  (Ac  ^\  Ro  15^  2  Co  P*) ;  but  in  all 
cases  where  the  AV  renders  it  '  exhortation  '  the 
RV  does  the  same  (except  in  1  Co  14',  where  it 
might  with  advantage  be  retained  instead  of 
'  comfort ').  Similarly  the  verb  xopoicaX^w  is  often 
appropriately  translated  '  comfort '  in  both  versions, 
but,  again,  wherever  in  AV  the  sense  requires 
'exhort'  it  so  appears  in  the  text  of  RV  (except 
in  Ac  18^  '  encourage '  and  2  Co  9^  '  intreat ').  To 
grasp  the  meaning  of  'exhort'  and  '  exhortation,' 
as  technical  terms,  it  should  be  noticed  that  the 
verb  rapaKoKiu  is,  in  many  cases,  translated  '  pray  ' 
or  '  desire '  in  AV,  and  '  beseech  '  or  '  intreat '  in 
RV  when,  however,  the  appeal  so  expressed  springs 
from  some  personal  wish  or  judgment,  whereas 
the  terms  '  exhort '  and  '  exhortation  '  are  retained 
for  instances  where  the  basis  of  appeal  is  some 
Divinely-given  truth  or  revelation  (cf.  xape/rdXow, 
'  besought,'  Ac  13*^,  and  irapaKoKovvris,  'exhorting,' 
Ac  14").  Exhortation  proper  (j.e.  as  part  of  the 
apostolic  ministry-),  while  it  contained  elements  of 
personal  entreaty  ('we  beseech  and  exhort'  [1  Th 
4^]),  partook  more  of  the  nature  of  a  spiritually 
authoritative  message  ('as  though  God  were  in- 
treating,  or  exhorting  [deov  rapaKoKodtrroi],  by  us,' 
2  Co  5=» ;  cf.  1  Th  •^■),  reproving  (Tit  2»j,  en- 
couraging (1  Th  2"),  commanding  (2  Th  S^'), 
strengthening  (Ac  14**,  Ib^-),  edifying  (1  Th  5"), 
and,  where  successful,  leading  the  hearers  to  a 
proper  state  of  mind  or  to  right  conduct  (Tit  2**- 
1  P  SI*-). 

It  might  be  given  to  individuals,  e.g.  to  Titus 
(2  Co  8"),  to  Timothy  (1  Ti  1'),  to  Euodia  and 
Syntyche  (Ph  4*) ;  or  it  was  a  message  addressed 


to  the  con^egations,  generally  in  their  meetings 
for  edification,  either  verbal  (Ac  13"  20*,  1  Co  14») 
or  epistolary  (Ac  15^""-,  He  13^,  1  P  5",  Jude'). 

Naturally  exhortation  was  prominent  at  a  time 
when  a  speedy  Second  Coming  of  Christ  was  ex- 
pectecl  ('exhorting  ...  so  much  the  more  as  ye 
see  the  day  drawing  nigh,'  He  ICP  ;  cf.  1  Th  4"). 
The  power  of  exhortation  was  regarded  as  one  of 
the  charismata,  or  '  gifts '  bestowed  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  for  the  edification  of  believers  (Ro  12*,  1  Co 
14').  Barnabas,  or  'son  of  exhortation,'  was  so 
sumamed  bj-  the  apostles  (Ac  4"  RVm)  because 
he  was  endowed  with  a  large  measure  of  this  gift 
(Ac  11=3).  Bm  jt  ^.j^g  g^  gj£{.  (^jjj^j  could  be  culti- 
vated. Its  intensity  and  jwwer  could  be  increased 
by  proper  attention,  and  so  St.  Paul  urged  Timothy 
to  '  give  heed  to  exhortation '  as  well  as  to  reading 
and  teaching  (1  Ti  4"). 

Lttbrati-re.— H.  Cremer,  Bibl.-Theol.  Lex.    of  ST  Greets, 

1880,  ».v.  KapdjcXTfvii  ;    O.  Pfleiderer,  Paulinitm-,  Eng.  tr., 

1881,  ToL  L  ch.  vi.  p.  236 ;  see  also  Literature  under  art.  COM- 

«>"•  M.  ScoTT  Fletcher. 

EXORCISM.  — 1.  Origin  and  definition.— It  is 
pointed  out  in  the  art.  Divixation  that  man,  at  a 
very  early  period,  came  to  think  of  himself  as  sur- 
rounded by  innumerable  spirits,  many  of  whom 
could  enter  into  and  influence  him.  He  realized 
that  it  was  his  duty,  and  for  his  advantage,  to 
cultivate  friendly  relations  with  these  spirits,  and 
one  of  the  forms  Avhich  this  eflbrt  took  developed 
into  divination.  The  coming  of  a  spirit  into  ch)se 
relations  with  a  man  brought  on  him  either  calami- 
ties or  blessings,  and  from  these  opposite  restilts 
the  spirits  came  to  be  grouped  into  good  and  bad. 
The  entrance  of  a  good  spirit — a  spirit  of  purity  or 
truth — caused  health  of  body  or  clearness  of  mind. 
Such  indwelling  in  its  highest  form  is  inspiration 
(Job  32®).  The  entrance  of  a  bad  spirit — a  dumb, 
unclean,  or  evil  spirit — caused  disease  of  body  or 
disorder  of  mind.  In  its  most  decided  form  this  is 
possession  (q.v.).  The  spirits,  and  the  divinities 
into  which  some  of  them  developed,  were  free  to 
enter  into  or  leave  a  person,  but  tneir  freedom  was 
limited.  As  '  the  spirits  of  the  prophets  are  sub- 
ject to  the  prophets '  (1  Co  14^),  so  certain  persons 
came  to  know  now,  bj'  a  proper  use  of  special  words 
and  acts,  to  make  the  spirits,  within  certain  limits, 
obedient  to  them.  (1)  Such  experts  were  able  to 
bring  a  person  into  such  close  contact  with  a  spirit, 
or  the  thing  in  which  a  spirit  or  divinity  dwelt, 
that  the  spirit  could  deal  etl'ectively  with  the  person. 
Such  bringing  into  contact  developed,  (a)  where 
the  person  was  able  or  willing,  into  administering 
to  him  an  oath  ;  (b)  where  unable  or  unwilling,  into 
solemnly  adjuring  him.  (2)  An  expert  could  call 
up,  call  upon,  or  permit  a  spirit  to  enter  another 
person,  to  work  his  will  in  him  ;  or  enter  into  him- 
self to  work  with  him  or  reveal  secrets  to  him.  (3) 
He  could  compel  a  spirit  to  come  out  of  a  person 
or  thing  into  which  it  had  entered  ;  ^rith  the  result, 
if  the  spirit  was  an  evU  one,  that  the  baneful  con- 
sequences of  possession  immediately  ceased.  The 
expert  who  could  do  this  was  an  exorcist,  and  his 
work  was  exorcism. 

2.  Derivation. — The  word  opjtoj  seems  primarily 
to  have  referred  to  a  spirit,  or  an  object  made 
sacred  by  the  indwelling  of  a  spirit,  and  so  came 
to  mean  the  thing  that  brought  a  spirit  into  efiec- 
tive  touch  with  a  person,  hence  'an  oath.'  opKiiew, 
in  the  same  way,  came  to  mean  to  bring  these  two 
together,  hence  (a)  '  to  administer  or  cause  to  take 
an  oath '  (Gn  50^,  Nu  5*") ;  or  (6) '  to  adjure '  (Jos  6-*, 
1  K  22»«,  2  Ch  18",  Ac  19i3),  When  the  high  priest 
said  to  Jesus  opKi^w  *  ae  icot4  rod  deov  toO  ftDrros 
(Mt  26*^),  he  thereby   brought  the  prisoner  into 

*  This,  not  e^ict^w,  is  the  reading  of  D  L.  The  reading  in 
Gn  243  is  c jbpcutf. 


384 


EXORCISM 


EXORCISM 


such  eflective  touch  with  Jalivveh  that  tlie  latter 
could  ))unish  him  if  he  did  not  speak  the  trutli. 
i^opKl^nv,  on  tlie  otlier  hand,  meant  the  separatinj; 
of  the  spirit  from  the  person,  and  from  it  comes 
^^opKifffids,  the  Latin  exorcismus,  and  the  Englisli 
'exorcism.' 

'The  formula  (fopKi^w  is  of  Oriental  origin.  It  is  absolutely 
unknown  in  Greek  and  Italian  tabellio  froiu  the  fifth  century 
B.C.  to  the  second  century  A.u.  ;  and,  when  it  does  anpear.  it 
appears  only  in  tablets  which  make  mention  of  Oriental  deities' 
(F.  B.  Jevons,  '  Defixioimm  Tabellfe,'  in  Transactions  uf  the 
Third  International  Coiujress/or  the  lligtory  of  Religions,  1908, 
vol.  ii.  p.  138).  A  heathen  amulet  has  the  inscription  (fopxi'^co 
vy.ai  Kara,  ToO  ayi'ou  ot'o/xaros  Btpantvaat,  tov  ^lovvaiov  ;  and  '  the 
adjective  is  of  constant  occurrence  in  the  ma^ric  pai)yri '  (Moulton 
and  Milli^fan,  '  TiCxicAl  Notes  from  the  Papyri'  in  Expositor, 
Vtliser.  \ii.  (19()9J  370). 

3.  History.— As  the  cause  of  disease  was  the 
incoming  of  an  evil  spirit,  so  the  cure  of  the  dis- 
ease consisted  in  its  expulsion.  All  exorcists  were 
not  equally  clever  at  their  work  ;  but,  thougii  a 
patient  might,  like  an  old  Babylonian,  complain 
that  '  the  exorcist  has  not  handled  my  illness  suc- 
cessfully' (F.  B.  Jevons,  Comparative  Religion, 
1913,  p.  7),  still  failures  were  overlooked  and  for- 
gotten, and  exorcism  prevailed  among  all  the 
nations  of  antiquity,  and  prevails  among  all  un- 
civilized peoples  to-day  (G.  T.  Bettany,  Primitive 
Religions,  1891,  pp.  20.  113,  128;  The  Book  of  Ser 
Marco  Polo,  tr.  ii.  Yule,  1871,  vol.  ii.  pp.  71,  78).* 
.Sometimes,  as  in  the  lustratio  of  the  Komans  (W. 
Warde  Fowler,  The  Religious  Experience  of  the 
Roituin  People,  1911,  p.  209)  and  the  Anthestcria 
of  the  Greeks  (Gilbert  Murray,  Four  Stages  of 
Greek  Religion,  1912,  p.  30),  the  exorcism  was 
national  and  periodic. 

In  private  life,  when  a  person  became  ill  ('was 
possessed  '),  an  exorcist  was  at  once  called  in  who 
by  various  means  attempted  a  cure.  David  by 
music  expelled  the  evil  spirit  from  Saul  (1  S  16'*"^), 
though,  when  the  spirit  came  migiitily,  he  failed 
(19";  Jos.  Ant.  VI.  viii.  2  and  xi.  3).  Embracing 
(another  form  of  exorcism)  is  mentioned  in  1  K  17'"'^, 
2  K  4^^,  Ac  20"*.  Solomon,  according  to  tradition, 
acquired  a  great  reputation  as  an  expert  prac- 
titioner of  the  art — '  a  science,'  says  Josephus  [Ant. 
VIII.  ii.  5),  '  useful  and  sanative  to  man.'  He  com- 
posed incantations  by  which  cures  were  effected, 
and  also  formulas  by  which  demons  could  be  ex- 
pelled. These  were  used  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Vespasian,  a  notable  instance  being  recorded  by 
Josephus  [loc.  cit.  ;  see  al.so  his  account  of  the  root 
of  Baaras  [.BJ  Vll.  vi.  3]).  In  the  OT  Apocrypha 
there  are  such  references  to  the  art  as  that  in 
To  6i»-"  8-^-  3.  Our  Lord  t  accepted  the  beliefs  of  His 
time  on  this  as  on  other  matters.  His  words  and 
deeds  show  us  the  evil  spirits  going  out  of  a  patient 
(Mt  IV*>,  Mk  5»,  Lk  S--^,  Mk  92»-««) ;  entering  into 
lower  animals  (Mt  S*^,  Mk  5^^,  Lk  8^3) ;  Avandering 
through  waterless  places  (Mt  12*^,  Lk  ir-*^)  ;  co- 
operating with  other  spirits  (Mt  12''^,  Lk  IP") ;  and 
re-entering  the  patients  from  whom  they  had  been 
expelled  (Mt  12**,  Lk  11»*).  In  contrast  to  the 
exorcists  of  His  time  (Mt  12=",  Lk  W^),  our  Lord 
exhibited  exceptional  skill  and  unbroken  success 
in  the  expulsion  of  evil  spirits.  He  healed  '  all 
who  were  tyrannized  over  by  the  devil '  (Ac  10^).* 
Exorcism,  it  must  be  observed,  is  not  nearly  so 
prominent  in  the  First  Gospel  as  in  the  Third,  and 
all  instances  of  its  use  are  omitted  in  the  Fourth 
(J.  Motratt,rAc  Theology  of  the  Gospels,\912,  pp.  13, 

*  Fora  psychological  explanation  of  exorcism  see  W.M"^Dou(raII, 
Psycholofjy ,  1912,  p.  196  ;  Andrew  Lannf,  Makincf  of  Reli'iion-, 
p.  129 ;  T.  J.  Hudson,  The  Law  of  Psychic  Phenouiena, 
1893. 

t  P.  Dearmer,  Body  and  Soul,  1909,  p.  146 ;  T.  J.  Hudson, 
op.  cit.,  chs.  xxiii.,  xxiv.  ;  G.  J.  Romanes,  Thoughts  on  Re- 
ligion*', 1S!»C,  p.  180  and  Gore's  note. 

J  KaraSwaaTtimtiivovf.  The  word  here  emi>loyed  is  used  in 
the  papyri  thus  :  '  I  am  being  harshly  treated  in  prison,  perish- 
ing  with  hunger,'  and  indicates  the  physical  sufferinK  arising 
from  possession  (Moulton  and  Milligan,  loc.  cit.  p.  477). 


120;  J.  M.  Thompson,  Miracles  in  the  NT,  1911,. 
p.  63).  It  is  especially  noteworthy  that  our  Lord  in 
exi)elling  evil  spirits  employed  no  outward  means 
(except  once,  the  spittle  [Jn  9*]) ;  He  simply  com- 
manded and  it  was  done.*  Perhaps  the  secret  of 
His  i>ower.  His  triumphant  and  universal  success, 
and  of  the  failure  of  others,  is  revealed  in  His 
words,  '  this  kind  cometh  not  out  except  by  prayer ' 
(Mk  9^).t  Prayer  is  the  complete  opening  up  of 
one's  entire  jiersonality  to  the  incoming  of  the 
entire  personality  of  God.  Jesus  was  able  to  do 
this  and  did  it ;  others  failed  and  fail. 

The  Twelve,  after  being  chosen,  were  ordained  to 
be  with  Jesus  in  order  that  they  might  go  forth 
(rt)  to  preach,  (6)  to  have  power  to  heal  diseases, 
and  (c)  iK^iXXfif  to.  Sai/x6via  (Mk  3'*-",  Mt  10'). 
When  He  did  send  them  fortii.  He  gave  them  power 
to  castoutall  unclean  spirits  (Mt  10',  MkG^  Lk  9'). 
St.  John  reported  to  Jes^usthathe  and  other  di.sciples 
saw  one  casting  out  diemons  in  His  name  (Mk  9**, 
Lk  9^") ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  tiie  disciples 
sometimes  failed  in  their  efforts  at  expulsion  (Mt 
17^").  Our  Lord  sent  out  the  Seventy  (a)  to  heal, 
(6)  to  proclaim  thenearnessof  the  Kingdom  (Lk  10"). 
When  they  returned,  they  reported  tliat  the  spirits 
were  subject  to  them  in  His  namelj:  (Lk  10'^). 
Finally,  Jesus  bequeathed  to  those  who  should 
believe  power  in  His  name+  to  cast  out  daemons 
(Mk  16").  After  the  death  of  Jesus  the  apostles 
continued  to  cure  those  troubled  (or  '  roused,' (5x- 
Xovixivovs,  Lk  6"*)  with  unclean  spirits  (Ac  5'"),  and 
a  similar  power  was  exercised  by  other  Christians 
over  spirits  wliich  came  out  '  shouting  with  a  loud 
cry '  (Ac  8^). 

When  the  Christian  missionaries  penetrated  into 
the  Roman  Empire,  they  met  the  victims  of  pos- 
session, and  had  to  deal  with  them.  At  Philippi, 
St.  Paul  and  Silas  encountered  a  young  girl,  tne 
slave  of  a  group  of  masters,  who  was  possessed  by 
a  spirit — a  Python,§  which  enabled  her  to  utter 
predictions.il  The  girl  so  forced  herself  upon  the 
missionaries'  attention  that  at  last  St.  Paul,  '  in 
the  name:^  of  Jesus  Christ,'  commanded  the  spirit 
to  come  out  of  her,  which  it  immediately  did  (Ac 
jgi6-i8)  Again,  at  Ephesus,  a  city  in  which  exor- 
cism flourished,  St.  Paul  seems  to  have  cast  out 
spirits  in  the  name:):  of  Jesus.  Further  cures  of 
a  somewhat  uncommon  [ov  ras  ruxovaai)  character 
were  ett'ected,  for  on  certain  articles  of  dress  which 
had  been  in  immediate  contact  with  the  body  (dird 
TOV  xpwToyll)  of  St.  Paul  being  applied  to  those 
afflicted,  the  evil  spirits  came  out  of  them  (Ac 

19'"-)- 

Such  success  roused  a  competitive  spirit  in  the 
minds  of  other  exorcists  and  revealed  to  them  the 
power  which  lay  in  the  use  of  the  name  of  Jesus. 
Seven  sons  of  Sceva,  a  Jewish  high  priest,  who 
formed  a  company  of  strolling  exorcists,  determined 
to  utilize  the  new  power.  Over  a  man  afflicted 
with  an  evil  spirit  they  pronounced  this  formula  : 
bpKl^u  i'iJ.a$  TOV  'lr]aovv  Sv  llaOXos  Krjpvffffei.  The 
ettbrt  proved  more  than  futile,  for  the  recitation  of 
tlie  formula,  instead  of  bringing  Jesus  into  such, 
effective  touch  with  the  man  that  the  evil  spirit 
had  to  yield  possession  to  Him,  roused  the  spirit 
to  stir  into  activity  that  abnormal  muscular 
strength  often  possessed  by  those  mentally  de- 
ranged (cf.  Lk  8--'),  and,  leaping  on  the  e.xorcists, 
tlie  man  assaulted  them  and  drove  them  out  of  the 
house  stripped  and  wounded  (Ac  19'^"'*).     The  men 

*  Dearmer,  op.  cit.,  p.  108. 

t  K  and  15  omit  xal  iTjo-rft'o  and  along  with  A  the  whole  of 
Mt  17-1. 

I  See  art.  Name. 

§  The  correct  reading,  according  to  KAB,  is  »rv*u»'a ;  see  art. 
Pytiio.v. 

II  liayrtvo^imr) ;  see  art.  .Sootiisaviso. 

^  Xpi'f,  literally  '  the  skin.'  See  Nestle  in  ExpT,  vol.  xiii. 
[1901-02]  p.  2S2,  and  art.  Al-RO.v. 


EXPEDIE^XY 


EXPEDIE^XY 


385 


who  had  become  Christians  realized  the  incompati- 
bility of  loyalty  to  Jesus  and  the  practice  of  such 
magical  arts,  and  they  publicly  burned  their  copies 
of  the  famous  'Eipfffus.  ypdfifiara  (v.^*). 

That  this  did  not  mean  the  absolute  abandonment 
of  exorcism  the  subsequent  history  of  the  Church 
all  too  clearly  proves.  The  reference  to  '  doctrines 
of  da?mons'  (I  Ti  4^)  and  'the  spirits  of  daemons 
performing  signs'  (Rev  16'*)  shows  how  exorcism 
still  lingered  in  the  Church.  The  words  which 
shed  light  on  the  struggle  from  the  higher  Chris- 
tian standpoint  are  those  in  Ja  4^ :  '  resist  the  devil, 
and  he  will  flee  from  you ' — w^ords  which  were  an 
exhortation  to  the  Christians  not  to  resort  to  exor- 
cism, but  to  rely  on  the  successful  resistance 
which  sprang  from  a  strong  exertion  of  their 
sanctified  wills  aided  by  the  power  of  God.  The 
means  employed  by  exorcists  ditier  in  different 
times  and  countries.  Four  only  are  referred  to 
in  the  Apostolic  Age — hands,  cloths,  the  name  of 
Jesus,  and  shadowing. 

When  we  pass  to  the  literature  of  the  Fathers, 
we  cannot  help  being  struck  with  the  almost  total 
absence  of  references  to  exorcism.  This  is  possibly 
to  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  work  of 
these  writers  forced  them  to  think  more  of  evan- 
gelism and  apologetic  than  of  combating  the  evils 
of  the  heathen  world.  In  the  spurious  Ignatian 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (ch.  v.)  Christ  is  by  way 
of  honour  called  '  this  magician '  {fjuiyoi  o5tos),  ancl 
in  the  spurious  Epistle  to  the  Anfim'hians  (ch.  xii.) 
we  find  'the  exorcists '  {iiropKurTds)  mentioned  among 
the  Church  officials. 

The  pi-actice  of  exorcism  continued  in  the  Church. 
The  ordinary  Christian  practised  it,  Gregory 
Thaumaturgus  even  casting  out  devils  by  sending 
letters  to  the  person  possessed.  As  a  rule,  how- 
ever, the  practice  was  confined  to  the  clergy,  and  by 
A.D.  340  the  e-iropKUTTTis  constituted  a  special  order, 
some  of  whom  were  ordained,  others  merely  recog- 
nized. The  rescripts  of  the  Emperors  granted  to 
them,  as  well  as  to  the  other  ordersof  clergy,  exemp- 
tion from  civil  offices.  Their  work  was  the  care  of 
the  possessed,  the  evepr^ovfuvoi,  the  catechists,  here- 
tics, and  schismatics,  the  exorcism  being  in  each 
case  connected  with  the  rites  of  exsiifftntion  and 
insiiJ/lation(seeJ.  Bingham,  Oriqines Eii:lesiastir(p, 
1843,  vol.  i.  p.  362  tl".  and  vol.  iii.  p.  277  tf.  ;  Smith 
and  Cheetham,  DC  A,  1875,  vol.  i.  p.  650;  ERE, 
art.  '  Abrenuntio,'  vol.  i.  p.  38).  The  office  of  ex- 
orcist continued  to  be  important :  we  read,  e.g.,  of 
St.  Patrick  landing  in  Ireland  with  a  number  of 
officials  among  whom  were  skilled  exorcists  (A.  K. 
Macewan.  Histary  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  vol.  L, 
1913,  p.  36). 

LrrERATTRE. — See  the  Literature  mentioned  in  the  foot-notes 
of  art.  DiTiSATios,  and  in  addition  W.  M.  Alexander,  Demonic 
Potgegiion  in  the  ST,  1902 ;  H.  A.  Dallas,  Gospel  Records  in- 
terpreted by  Human  Experience,  1903,  p.  201 ;  Andrew  Lang, 
Thi  Making  of  Reliriion^,  1900,  p.  12S  ;  R.  C.  Thompson,  The 
Devils  and  Evil  Spirits  of  Babylonia,  1903-04,  vol.  i.  p.  liii ;  J. 
G.  Frazer,  The  Golden  Bmiahi,  '  The  Magic  Art,"  1911,  i.  174  ff. ; 
E.  B.  Tylor,  Primitice  Cultures,  1891,  ii.  124ff. ;  artt.  in  DCG, 
i.  439  ff.,  and  ERE,  iv.  565,  578,  612,  with  the  Literature  there 
mentioned.  P.  A.  GORDON  CL-VRK. 

EXPEDIENCY.— In  the  XT  'expedient '  is  several 
times  used  in  translating  the  Gr.  ffv/j.<p(p€i,  or  neut. 
ffvtupepov  (2  Co  12').  Other  translations  of  the  word 
are  'it  is  profitable,'  'it  were  better,'  'it  is  good.' 
It  will  be  seen  when  we  come  to  consider  some 
of  the  passages  in  which  ffvpuptpei  occurs  that  it  is 
always  used  in  its  better  sense,  or,  we  may  say, 
in  its  original  sense,  i.e.  without  that  element  of 
selfishness,  or  the  attainment  of  personal  advan- 
tage at  the  expense  of  genuine  principle,  in  which 
sense  the  word  '  expedient '  is  now  generally 
employed.  It  is  never  found  in  the  sense  of  what 
is  convenient,  as  against  what  is  right ;  nor  has 

VOL.  I. — 25 


it  the  meaning  of  '  expeditioos,'  as  e.g.  in  Shake- 
speare : 

*  Expedient  mana^^  must  be  made,  my  liege, 
Ere  further  leisure  jield  them  further  means ' 

(fiicAard //.,Liv.3»X 

We  shall  first  of  all  refer  briefly  to  some  of  the 
passages  in  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts  where  (rvfup^fxi 
occurs,  and  then  examine  the  general  question  of 
Christian  expediency  as  it  is  treated  in  the  Epistles. 

1.  The  Gospels.— (1)  In  Mt  5^  we  have  what  may 
be  called  the  expediency  of  self-denial.  Here  Christ 
deals  with  the  question  of  adultery,  and  shows  how 
certain  members  of  the  body,  such  as  the  eye  and 
the  hand,  which  are  in  themselves  serviceable  and 
necessary,  may  become  the  occasion  of  sin  for  us, 
and,  therefore,  it  is  expedient  (o-i'^i^'pei)  for  a  man 
that  one  of  his  members  should  perish  and  not  his 
whole  body  be  cast  into  hell.  There  is  no  need  to 
ask  here  how  far  these  words  of  Christ  are  to  be 
understood  literally  (cf.  A.  Tholuck,  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  1860,  p.  211  tf.).  They  certainly  mean  that 
whatever  may  bring  temptation  to  a  man,  it  is 
expedient — it  is  the  best  and  wisest  course — for 
him  to  resign  ;  that  it  is  better  to  live  a  maimed 
life,  than  with  all  our  faculties  about  us  to  be 
destined  to  moral  death.  Christ  here  grounds  His 
precept  of  the  most  rigid  and  decisive  self-denial 
on  considerations  of  the  truest  self-interest. 

(2)  In  Mt  19^**  we  have  a  reference  to  the  ex- 
pediency of  celibacy.  The  teaching  of  Christ  con- 
cerning divorce  led  His  disciples  to  the  conclusion 
that,  without  freedom  to  divorce,  'it  is  not  good 
(RV  'expedient')  to  marry.'  Jesus  then  refers  to 
three  classes  of  persons  for  whom  marriage  is  in- 
expedient :  {a)  eunuchs  *  which  were  so  bom  from 
their  mothers  womb,'  i.e.  those  whose  physical 
constitution  unfitted  them  for  marriage ;  (b)  eunuchs 
'  which  were  made  eunuchs  of  men,'  i.e.  those  who 
by  actual  physical  deprivation  or  compulsion  from 
men  are  prevented  from  marrying ;  (c)  eunuchs 
'  which  made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom 
of  heaven's  sake,'  i.e.  those  who  voluntarily  al^tain 
from  marriage,  not  for  their  own  sake  only,  but 
also  for  the  sake  of  all  that  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven 
implies.  In  the  case  of  these  three  classes  it  is 
expedient  that  they  live  a  celibate  life  (cf.  1  Co  7"). 

(3)  In  Jn  11**  we  have  the  expediency  of 
Christ's  death  spoken  of  by  Caiaphas.  Here  we 
have  '  a  good  principle  basely  applied,  not  in  the 
interests  of  self-sacrifice,  but  to  cover  a  violation 
of  justice  and  truth '  (J.  A.  McClymont,  St.  John 
[Cent.  Bible,  1901],  p.  245).  For  the  preservation  of 
his  power  and  influence,  together  with  that  of  his 
confederates,  Caiaphas  says  that  it  was  expedient 
to  put  Jesus  to  death,  the  falsity  of  this  state- 
ment, says  F.  W.  Robertson  {Sermons,  1st  ser.,  1875, 
p.  132  tt".),  lies  in  its  injustice.  Expediency  can- 
not obliterate  right  and  wrong.  Expediency  may 
choose  the  best  possible  when  the  conceivable  best 
is  not  obtainable ;  but  in  right  and  wrong  there 
is  no  better  and  best.  Better  that  the  whole  Jewish 
nation  should  perish  than  that  a  Jewish  legislature 
should  steep  its  hand  in  the  blood  of  one  innocent. 
That  tlus  saying  of  Caiaphas  has  made  a  deep 
impression  upon  St.  John  is  evident  from  his  refer- 
ence to  it  again  in  18".  He  regards  the  words 
as  having  an  origin  higher  than  him  who  spoke 
them.     It  was  an  unconscious  prophecy. 

(4)  In  Jn  16"  Christ  refers  to  the  expediency  of 
His  Ascension.  '  Nevertheless  I  tell  you  the  truth; 
it  is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away,'  etc.  How- 
ever much  the  disciples  might  regret  their  Master's 
departure  from  them,  this  was  not  onlj'  necessary, 
but  would  also  be  to  their  advantage,  inasmuch 
as  the  glorified  Christ  working  in  them  would  be 
better  than  the  visible  Jesus  present  among  them 
(cf.  14i«-). 

2.  The  Acts. — In  Ac  20*  we  have  the  expediency 


386 


EXPEDIENCY 


EXPEDIENCY 


of  discrimination  in  teaching.  Here  St.  Paul  re- 
minds the  elders  of  Ephesus  that  lie  had  kept  back 
nothing  that  was  profitable  (tQv  avix<p€p6vTuv)  unto 
them.  As  in  the  case  of  the  Corinthians  (1  Co  3"-) 
the  Apostle  confined  his  statement  to  the  things 
that  were  profitable  or  expedient.  In  each  case  he 
considered  what  was  required  by  the  capacity  of 
his  disciples.  It  is  the  question  of  expediency  in 
the  matter  of  truth  to  be  declared.  The  teacher 
must  discriminate.  He  must,  on  the  one  hand, 
not  cast  his  pearls  before  swine,  must  not  give  to 
men  what  they  are  incapable  of  appreciating  (Pr  9'"- , 
Mt  7*) ;  nor  must  he,  on  the  other  hand,  give  strong 
food  to  the  weak  (He  5'"'-).  He  must  consider  what 
is  expedient,  jirofitable. 

3.  The  Epistles.— (I)  St.  PauVs  general  attitude  in 
1  Corinthians. — Here  we  shall  have  to  deal  chiefly 
with  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  more  especially 
1  Corinthians.  These  Epistles  represent  the  cam- 
paign and  slow  victory  of  the  new  Christian  spirit 
over  the  debasing  influence  of  the  Corinthian  ideal, 
which  was  the  relentless  pursuit  of  his  own  life  by 
each  individual.  In  1  Cor.  the  question  of  expedi- 
ency is  treated  in  connexion  with  several  matters 
relating  to  Christian  conduct.  This  Epistle  has 
been  aptly  called  '  the  Epistle  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
cross  in  application'  (Findlay,  The  Epistles  of  Paul 
the  Apostle,  p.  83).  Social  and  other  questions 
are  discussed  in  their  bearing  on  the  relationship  of 
men  to  Christ,  and  upon  principles  deduced  from 
the  word  of  the  Cross.  And  so  the  keynote  of  the 
Epistle  is  found  in  16^*  'Let  all  you  do  be  done  in 
love.'  The  first  direct  reference  to  expediency  is 
found  in  6'-  '  All  things  are  lawful  unto  me,  but 
all  things  are  not  expedient '  (dW  ov  irdvra  avfitp^pet). 
It  is  probable  that  St.  Paul  here  refers  to  some 
saying  of  his,  which  was  subsequently  drawn  out 
of  its  limiting  context  by  some  members  of  the 
Corinthian  Church  who  were  inclined  to  exaggerate 
Christian  liberty,  so  that  they  could  please  them- 
selves in  the  matter  of  food,  drink,  etc.  ;  or,  still 
worse,  that  with  an  easy  conscience  they  might 
satisfy  their  own  sinful  lusts.  Consequently,  the 
Apostle  shows  that,  while  he  still  held  to  what  he 
had  said,  the  words  have  by  no  means  an  unlimited 
application.  It  was  necessary  to  show  the  Cor- 
inthians that  there  is  an  essential  contrast  between 
things  in  themselves  indifferent  and  things  in 
their  very  nature  evil.  The  latter  can  be  neither 
lawful  nor  expedient  to  the  Christian,  since 
they  are  grossly  inconsistent  with  his  union 
with  Christ. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  pag^n  sentiment  viewed  ordinary- 
sexual  laxity  in  anythin;?  but  a  serious  light :  in  fact,  it  was  a 
prevalent  belief  among  the  heathen  in  apostolic  times  that  for- 
nication was  no  sin.  Hence  the  need  for  its  prohibition  by  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem  (Ac  15). 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  many  things  lawful 
which  are  not  always  expedient.  Meyer  (ad  loc.) 
describes  expediency  as  '  moral  profitableness 
generally  in  every  respect,  as  conditioned  by  the 
special  circumstances  of  each  case  as  it  arises.'  In 
all  things  must  the  Christian  ask  not  only,  Is  it 
lawful?  or  Does  it  lie  within  the  range  of  my 
liberty  ?  but  also.  Is  it  calculated  to  promote  the 
general  welfare  of  those  around  me  ?  There  is  no 
place  for  individualism  in  the  Christian  life.  One 
must  ask  not  merely,  What  does  my  liberty  permit  ? 
but.  How  will  my  conduct  help  or  hinder  my 
brother  ?  While  all  things  that  are  in  themselves 
indifl'erent  (a.5ia.<(>opa),  i.e.  not  anti-Christian,  are 
lawful,  still  it  must  be  remembered  that  this  liberty 
is  the  minister  of  love.  For  example,  although  in 
itself  one  kind  of  meat  is  neither  better  nor  worse 
than  another,  the  law  of  Christian  love  imposes 
restraint  where  indulgence  would  cause  offence  or 
lead  to  a  violation  of  conscience.  This  love  enables 
the  Christian  to  take  the  right  attitude  to  what  is 


allowed  ;  he  will  solve  the  questionable  (ca-suistic) 
cases  and  collisions,  not  by  rules  wliich  only  lead 
into  endless  reflexions  about  their  applicability  or 
inapplicability,  but  by  immediate  tact,  and  by  the 
I)Ower  of  the  personality. 

Again,  this  limited  freedom  is  also  in  truth  the 
highest  freedom.  'All  things  are  lawful  for  me, 
l)ut  I  will  not  be  brought  under  the  power  of  any' 
(6'^).  St.  Paul's  was  not  a  freedom  to  destroy 
freedom.  That  some  at  Corinth  exposed  them- 
selves to  this  danger  is  quite  evident.  By  indul- 
ging in  impurity  of  life,  as  though  that  were  as 
legitimate  as  eating  and  drinking,  they  tended  to 
alienate  their  liberty,  and  bring  their  soul  into 
bondage  to  sin.  It  is  when  one  recognizes  those 
limits  within  which  freedom  is  to  be  exercised  that 
one  enjoys  that  perfect  freedom  which  knows  no 
subjection  save  to  Christ  alone. 

Christian  freedom,  then,  is  a  freedom  which 
must  not  be  applied  to  the  injury  of  others  or  of 
oneself.  In  the  exercise  of  liberty  one  must  have 
regard  to  expediency ;  one  must  consider  what 
course  is  the  most  likely  to  promote  the  best 
interests  of  oneself  and  others.  In  this  section 
(chs.  6-10)  in  I  Cor.  St.  Paul  tells  us  again  and 
again  how  in  all  things  indifferent  he  thought  of 
others.  All  his  actions  were  founded  on  the  ground 
of  the  higher  expediency.  Being  free  from  all 
men,  yet  he  made  liimself  servant  unto  all,  that  he 
might  gain  the  more  (9").  He  became  all  things 
to  all  men  (9").  He  pleased  all  men  in  all  things, 
not  seeking  his  own  profit  (t6  dfiavroO  <rvfitp^poi>),  but 
the  profit  of  many  (1(P). 

By  some  modern  critics  St.  Paul  is  described  as 
hard  and  inflexible,  and  as  incapable  of  anything 
like  compromise  and  accommoaation  under  any 
circumstances.  But  the  above  passages,  as  well 
as  many  others  which  could  be  quoted,  by  no 
means  confirm  this  judgment.  That  he  could  be 
as  firm  and  as  inflexible  as  a  rock  where  a  question 
of  principle  was  at  stake  is  amply  proved  by  his 
statement  in  Gal  2*,  e.g.,  in  the  matter  of  the 
attempt  to  compel  Titus  to  be  circumcised :  '  to 
whom  we  gave  place  in  the  way  of  subjection,  no, 
not  for  an  hour.'  In  his  teaching  of  principles  he 
was  from  first  to  last  most  resolute  and  uncom- 
promising. But  in  things  indifferent  he  was  ever 
ready  to  go  any  length  in  order  to  avoid  giving 
offence  to  others.  In  such  matters  it  was  with 
him  always  a  question  of  expediency,  not  of  rights  ; 
what  was  profitable,  not  what  was  lawful.  To  the 
Romans  he  says  (Ro  15'):  'We  then  that  are 
strong  ought  to  bear  the  infirmities  of  the  weak, 
and  not  to  please  ourselves.'  And  again,  he  tells 
the  Corinthians  (1  Co  8'^):  'Wherefore,  if  meat 
make  my  brother  to  offend,  I  will  eat  no  flesh 
while  the  world  standeth,  lest  I  make  my  brother 
to  offend.'  While  he  held  tenaciously  to  great 
principles,  and  was  even  ready  to  sacrifice  life 
itself  in  their  defence,  yet  in  practical  conduct  he 
was  willing  to  submit  to  any  privation  and  suffer- 
ing to  meet  the  scruples  and  prejudices  of  the 
weak.  And  in  this  mode  of  conduct  he  claims 
to  be  following  the  example  of  Christ  (Ro  15'*-, 
1  Co  11'). 

It  will  be  seen  that  consideration  must  be  had, 
not  only  for  the  weak  members  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  but  also  for  those  who  are  without  the  pale 
of  the  Church.  Cf.  1  Co  10*-,  where  the  sphere  of 
moral  obligation  is  enlarged.  Jew  and  Greek,  as 
well  as  the  Christian  Church,  are  to  be  objects  of 
our  Christian  solicitude. 

(2)  The  dangers  of  expediency. — (a)  As  regards 
what  is  immoral,  and  so,  strictly  prohibitive.  The 
question  of  expediency  involves  that  of  accom- 
modation and  compromise.  Hence  in  an  endeavour 
to  win  men  over  one  must  always  guard  against 
allowing  oneself  to  countenance  what  is  unlawful. 


EXPEDIEXCT 


EYE 


387 


It  is  evident  that  some  at  Corinth  had  taken  SL 
Paul's  words  '  All  things  are  lawfol  unto  me '  as  a 
general  maxim.  Such  persons  are  always  inclined 
to  have  regard  to  the  lawfulness  of  an  action  rather 
than  to  its  expediency,  and  so  require,  for  their 
An  good,  to  be  hrmly  treated.  'A  great  many 
innot  be  pleased  unless  thou  cocker  their  lust ;  so 
that  if  thou  wilt  be  gracious  with  a  many,  thou 
must  not  so  much  regard  their  salvation  as  satisfy 
their  foUy ;  neither  mayest  thou  respect  what  is 
expedient,  but  what  they  covet  to  their  own 
destruction.  Thou  must  not,  therefore,  study  to 
please  such  as  like  nothing  but  that  is  evil '  (Calvin 
on  Ko  15-  [ed.  Beveridge,  1S44,  p.  396]). 

{b)  As  regards  what  is  indifferent,  (i.)  It  is 
possible  for  the  Church  to  show  itself  over- 
scmpuloos — a  thing  which  would  lead  to  govern- 
ment by  the  weak,  and  legislation  by  the  unin- 
telligent. And  so,  while  the  law  of  love  calls  upon 
the  strong  not  to  use  their  liberty  in  a  reckless 
manner,  and  demands  that  in  certain  cases  they 
should  abstain  from  certain  disputed  modes  of 
action,  in  order  not  to  shock  the  weak  members, 
and  thus  to  break  down  the  Church  instead  of 
building  it  up.  still  this  love  requires  that  this 
submission  shall  not  be  unlimited.  For  then  the 
eak  would  only  be  confirmed  in  their  mistake, 
hilst  the  strong  would  be  hindered  in  their  pro- 
gress. It  is  for  the  strong,  therefore,  to  seek  to 
lead  the  weak  to  a  clearer  knowledge,  and  to  show 
them  that  the  matters  in  dispute  may  be  contem- 
plated from  another  point  of  view  than  the  merely 
worldly  and  unethical.  Thus  accommodation  is  to 
be  combined  with  correction. 

(ii.)  But  perhaps  there  is  less  danger  of  this  than 
of  over-assertiveness,  i.e.  a  strong  and  persistent 
maintaining  of  one's  rights,  a^inst  which  St.  Paul 
again  and  again  w^ams  his  readers.  By  inditference 
to  external  observances  we  may  injure  another 
man's  conscience.  To  ourselves  it  is  perfectly  in- 
difi'erent  whether  we  conform  to  a  certain  obser- 
vance or  not.  But  we  are  called  upon  to  conform  for 
the  sake  of  our  weak  brother.  SttU,  this  call  to  sub- 
mission is  not  to  be  always  or  in  all  circumstances. 
(iii.)  Another  danger  to  which  a  man  who  always 
■nsiders  the  expediency  of  his  actions  is  exposed 

-  '■ -^.r  of  being  misjudged.     A  mode  of  conduct 

V  regulated  by  consideration  for  others  is 
•  s  open  to  misconception.  And  that  St.  Paul 
did  not  escape  the  charge  of  being  a  mere  obsequious 
time-server,  with  no  steadfast  principle,  aiming  only 
at  pleasing  men,  is  eWdent  from  his  writings.  TV  e 
can  easily  understand  how  readily  such  accusations 
would  be  set  on  foot,  and  how  plausible  they  could 
be  made  to  appear.  That  they  painfully  affected 
the  Apostle's  mind  is  evident  from  the  frequency 
of  the  references  he  makes  to  them,  and  from  the 
earnestness  and  deep  pathos  of  feeling  which  not 
infrequently  mark  these  references.  It  is  to  such 
sinister  criticism  that  he  alludes  when  in  2  Co  5", 
after  saying  '  we  persuade  men,'  he  adds,  '  but  we 
are  become  manifest  unto  God ' ;  i.e.  although  he 
did  make  a  habit  of  aiming  at  persuading  ( =  making 
friends  of »  men,  still  the  unselfishness  and  sincerity 
of  his  action  were  known  to  God.  Another  refer- 
ence to  this  matter  is  found  in  Gal  P*  '  For  am  I 
now  persuading  men,  or  God  ?  or  am  I  seeking  to 
please  men  ?  if  I  were  still  pleasing  men,  I  shotdd 
not  be  a  servant  of  Christ.'  Possibly  the  reference 
here  is  to  his  action  in  the  matter  of  the  Jerusalem 
Decree  (Ac  15)  and  the  circumcision  of  Timothy 
<Ac  16»). 

It  will  be  obeerred  that  the  case  of  TSmothy  and  that  of  Titos 
<Gal  2*)  j^re  totally  different.  The  former  being  by  birth  '  a  aon 
■M  the  law'  on  tus  mother's  side,  miirht  naturally  omifonn  to 

-  .16  nsages  of  what  was  so  far  his  national  reliKiaa.  Titos,  on 
".e  other  hand,  was  a  pure  Gentile,  and  his  circniDdsion  was 
urged  as  necesaary,  on  princiide,  and  not  as  a  rotxtntmrr  sacrifice 
to  expcAency  for  the  greater  good  of  otben.    Hence  it  is  clear 


that  St.  Paul  acted  with  perfect  rtmmttmcj.  There  a  no 
betrayal  of  principle,  no  unwortby  mimnat  to  win  tlw 
approval  of  men. 

To  sum  up,  we  see  that  expediency  in  its  XT 
sense  is  quite  consistent  with  loyalty  to  principle. 
It  denotes  the  noble  aim  of  one  seeking  'the 
greatest  good  of  the  greatest  number.'  It  is  not 
the  action  of  a  trimmer  ever  seeking  the  applause 
of  men,  but  rather  of  a  strong  man  willing  to  curb 
his  own  personal  inclinations  for  the  sake  of  others. 
And  it  may  be  said  that  the  more  steadfast  one  is 
when  principles  are  at  stake  the  more  ready  one  is 
to  give  way  on  non-essentials. 

LnnunniB.— Newman  Smjrth,  Ckrittiam  SMes,  18BS;  H. 
Martensen,  Chriitian  BUuet  (SoeuU  and  Indimdval^  ISSl-SS  ; 
G.  G.  FindUy.  The  MpUOu  tf  PmU  th»  ApoMe^  18B&.  See 
also  the  mioiw  NT  Commwitarins 

RoBEET  Roberts. 
EXPIATIOH.— See  Atoxemiixt,  Pbopitiatiok, 

S-\CBIFICE. 

ETE. — In  the  analogy  drawn  by  St.  Paul  be- 
tween the  htunan  body  and  the  Church,  the  eye 
(6<l>6a.\fi.os)  is  named  as  a  member  superior  in  rank 
to  either  the  ear  or  the  hand  (1  Co  12'*-  *^),  though 
dependent  on  the  co-operation  of  both.  In  virtue 
of  this  superiority,  the  eye  becomes  proverbial  for 
that  which  is  precious  (Ep.  Bam.  xix.  9),  and  St. 
Paul  writes  of  the  affection  of  the  Galatian  Chris- 
tians, '  ye  would  have  plucked  out  your  eyes  and 
given  them  to  me '  (Gal  4'*).  Partly  in  view  of 
those  words,  many  have  argued  that  St,  Paul's 
'  stake  in  the  flesh '  (2  Co  12")  was  ophthalmia  {e.g. 
Creighton,  EBi  ii  col.  1456;  Macalister,  HDB 
iiL  p.  331 ;  against  this  view,  see  the  weight v  argu- 
ments of  Lightfoot,  Galatians^'*,  1892,  p.  191  n.). 
The  blindness  with  which  St.  Paul  was  seized  on 
the  way  to  Damascus  has  been  medically  described 
as  '  a  temporary  amaurosis,  such  as  that  which  has 
been  caused  by  injudiciously  looking  at  the  sun' 
(Macalister,  loc.  cit.);  the  reference  to  the  re- 
moval of  '  scales '  in  the  account  of  his  recovery  is 
a  comparison,  not  a  pathological  detail  (Ac  9*-  ^-). 
Elymas  was  smitten  with  temporary  blindness  as 
a  punishment  for  his  opposition  to  St.  Paul  (13"). 
The  account  of  the  miraculous  restoration  of  Dorcas 
to  life  (9**)  shows  that  it  was  customary  in  Pales- 
tine, as  elsewhere,  to  close  the  eyes  of  a  corpse. 

The  eyes  are  frequently  named  by  ap<»tolic 
writers  in  connexion  with  spiritual  blindness  or 
sight.  St.  Paul  sees  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy  in 
the  closed  eyes  of  the  Jews  in  Rome  (Ac  28*^ ;  cf. 
Ro  11*-  *•),  and  is  sent  to  open  the  eyes  of  the  Gen- 
tiles (Ac  26*").  Hatred  of  a  brother  is  a  darkness 
blinding  the  eyes  (1  Jn  2").  Christ  says  to  the 
Laodicean  Church,  '  buy  eye-salve  to  anoint  thine 
eyes,  that  thou  mayest  see'  (Rev  S**).  On  the 
other  hand,  he  who  knows  Christ  has  the  eyes  of 
his  heart  enlightened  (Eph  !•*  ;  cf.  1  Clem,  xxxvi. 
2,  lix.  3 ;  also  the  reference  in  Mart.  Folyc.  ii.  3 
to  tortured  martjrs,  who,  '  with  the  eyes  of  their 
heart,'  ga^e  upon  the  good  things  reserved  for 
them).  The  realities  revealed  by  the  Spirit  of 
God  are  '  things  that  eye  saw  not '  (1  Co  2* ;  cf. 
Ep.  ad  Diognetum,  ii.  1).  But  these  spiritual 
realities  are  built  upon  historic  facts ;  the  basis 
of  the  Christian  gospel  was  that  which  apostles 
had  seen  with  their  eyes  (1  Jn  1').  As  a  cloud  hid 
Jesus  from  their  eyes  at  His  Ascension  (Ac  1*),  so, 
when  He  comes  with  clouds,  every  eye  shall  see 
Him  (Rev  1").  When  He  is  seen  in  vision.  His 
eyes  are  (searching)  as  a  tlame  of  fire  (Rev  1"  2^ 
19**)  ;  so,  to  the  eves  of  Grod,  all  things  are  naked 
and  laid  open  (He  4»;  cf.  1  P  3").  The  many 
eyes  of  the  '  living  creatures '  and  of  the  Lamb  of 
the  Apocalypse  symbolically  denote  vigilance  and 
range  of  vision  (Rev  4*-  *  5*). 

There  are  several  references  to  the  psychical  and 


388 


FABLE 


FACTION 


moral  qualities  of  the  eye,  according  to  that '  peri- 
pheral consciousness'  of  Hebrew  psycholofnr  (see 
art.  Ear),  which  is  so  amply  illustrated  in  the  OT 
(examples  in  Mansfield  tollene  Essays,  1909,  p. 
275).  No  doubt,  •  the  lust  of  the  eyes'  (1  Jn  2'«) 
can  be  satisfactorily  explained  to  a  modern  mind 
as  '  all  personal  vicious  indulj^ence  represented  by 
seeing'  (Westcott,  ad  loc),  but  a  deeper  meaning, 
corresponding  to  St.  Paul's  idea  of  sin  in  the  flesii 
(see  art.  Man),  underlies  this  phrase,  as  also  that 
referring  to  'eyes  full  of  adultery'  (2  P  2'^;  read 
fioix^lai  with  Bigg,  ad  loc).  The  most  striking 
apostolic  reference  to  the  eye  is  that  in  which  St. 
Paul  rebukes  the  Gaiatians  for  letting  themselves 


be  bewitched  by  (the  'evil  eye'  of  envious)  false 
teachers,  when  ne  had  already  '  placarded  '  Christ 
crucified  before  their  eyes,  who  should  have  arrested 
their  gaze  and  averted  peril  (Gal  3' ;  cf.  Lightfoot,. 
ad  loc).  This  expresses  the  characteristic  em- 
phasis in  apostolic  teaching  on  the  positive  side 
of  truth,  the  expulsion  of  the  false  by  the  true. 
Those  whose  eyes  are  turned  to  Christ  are  trans- 
formed into  the  same  image,  from  glory  to  glory 
(2  Co  3"*  ;  cf.  Odes  of  Solomon,  xiii.  1)  ;  those  who 
look  at  things  unseen  find  their  inward  man  re- 
newed day  by  day,  even  in  the  midst  of  visible 
affliction  (2  Co  41"-"). 

H.  Wheeler  Robinson. 


F 


FABLE.— In  the  NT  (AV  and  RV)  '  fable '  is  the 
translation  of  ixvdo%.  But  it  is  not  the  myth 
charged  with  high  moral  teaching  as  in  Plato,  for 
both  word  and  thing  have  degenerated  into  the 
expression  of  fantastic,  false,  and  profitless  opinions. 
/iC^oj  is  opposed  to  the  historic  story  (\670s)  or  to 
actual  fact  (dXiJ^eta) ;  cf.  art.  '  Pable'  in  HDB,  vol.  i. 
This  is  seen  in  the  references :  1  Ti  !•*  '  Neither 
to  give  heed  to  fables  .  .  .  the  which  minister 
questionings  rather  than  a  dispensation  of  God ' 
[RV] ;  1  Ti  4P  '  profane  and  old  wives'  fables ' ;  2 
Ti  4*  '  turn  aside  unto  fables ' ;  Tit  1"  '  not  giving 
heed  to  Jewisli  fables ' ;  2  P  1'*  *  We  did  not  follow 
cunningly  devised  fables.' 

The  Pastoral  Epistles  give  a  vivid  picture  of  the 
state  of  religious  feeling  in  Ephesus,  and  the 
Roman  Province  of  Asia  generally,  in  the  years 
A.D.  60-70.  It  was  a  favourable  soil  for  the  rank 
growth  of  the  fables  and  curiously  wrought  em- 
bellishments of  OT  history,  mention  of  which  we 
find  in  the  Pastorals.  There  is  no  diflerence  of 
opinion  as  to  their  origin.  They  were  Jewish,  and 
the  Gnosticism  supposed  to  be  found  in  them  is  as 
yet  incipient  and  hardly  conscious  of  itself. 

For  an  explanation  of  the  origin  of  these  fables 
we  must  turn  to  the  accretions  of  legend  and 
allegory  that  grew  up  in  the  Jewish  mind  round 
the  great  scenes  and  personages  of  the  OT.  It 
was  said  that  an  oral  law,  '  the  law  that  is  on  the 
lip,'  supplementary  to  the  written  law,  had  also 
been  given  on  Sinai,  and  handed  down  by  teachers 
from  Moses  through  the  centuries.  This  was  added 
to  and  illustrated  by  the  teaching  of  the  Rabbis, 
and  in  course  of  time  became  a  supplement  to  the 
written  law  of  the  Pentateuch — a  supplement  so 
ponderous  that  often  the  text  was  overlaid  and 
almost  buried  in  the  commentary.  To  this  our 
Lord  made  reference  when  He  asked  '  Why  do  ye 
also  transgress  the  commandment  of  God  because 
of  your  traditions  ? '  (Mt  15^).  These  rank  growths, 
in  deference  to  which  they  'paid  tithes  of  mint 
and  anise  and  cummin  and  left  undone  mercy  and 
faith,'  had  run  riot  in  the  Asian  Church.  Men 
were  turning  back  from  the  worship  of  '  the  King, 
eternal,  incorruptible,  invisible,  the  only  God,'  to 
old  wives'  fables,  the  profane  and  senile  curiosities 
of  people  in  their  dotage.  Jewish  and  heathen 
speculations  had  seduced  their  minds  from  the 
essential  parts  of  the  Christian  faith. 

We  have  specimens  of  these  '  feigned  words '  in 
the  numerous  legends  of  the  Talmud,  the  far- 
fetched subtleties  of  Rabbinical  teaching,  and  in 
the  allegorizing  of  Philo.  Timothy,  therefore, 
was  sent  to  recall  the  Church  to  the  pure  milk  of 
the  word,  and  to  nourish  it  on  '  the  words  of  the 


faith.'  'Such,'  says  J.  H.  Newman,  'was  the 
conflict  of  Christianity  with  the  old  established 
Paganism ;  with  the  Oriental  Mysteries,  Hitting 
wildly  to  and  fro  like  spectres'  (Develomiicnt  of 
Christian  Doctrine,  1878,  p.  358).  In  2  P  l'«  the 
writer  is  replying  to  a  taunt  by  which  the  opponents 
of  Christianity  tried  to  turn  the  tables  on  the 
teachers  of  the  Faith.  These  had  denounced  the 
religious  fables  with  which  men  were  deluding 
themselves,  and  to  that  the  reply  was  a '  tu  quoque.' 
The  Christian  doctrine,  they  .said,  was  also  built 
upon  fable,  and  its  preachers  were  fraudulent  and 
sophistical  persons  (o-eo-o^tcr/u^j'oO  who  for  ambition 
or  filthy  lucre's  sake  were  exploiting  the  churches. 
To  this  the  author  of  2  Peter  replies :  '  We  did  not 
follow  cunningly  devised  fables.'  In  proof  of  his 
religious  certainty — certitiido  veritatis — he  writes,. 
*  we  were  eye-Avitness  of  his  majesty ' ;  and  for 
certitiido  salutis  he  adds,  'we  have  the  day-star 
rising  in  our  hearts.'  The  answer  is  still  valid. 
Against  the  charge  of  following  sophistical  fables 
the  modern  apologetic  turns  to  '  the  fact  of  Christ,' 
and  the  heart  stands  up  and  answers,  '  I  have  felt.' 

W.  M.  Grant. 
FACTION. — Among  the  works  of  the  Hesh  are  ipit 
and  ipideiai,  'strife'  and  'factions'  (Gal  5^).   ipidda. is 
selfish  intriguing  for  office  (Aristotle,  Pol.  v.  2,  3), 
partisanship,  party-spirit. 

(1)  P'action  was  rampant  in  the  free  cities  of 
Greece.  Personalities  were  frequently  exalted 
above  principles,  and  the  public  good  was  sacrificetl 
to  private  ends.  Men  were  partisans  before  they 
were  patriots.  The  same  spirit  penetrated  the 
Church.  While  St.  Paul,  Apollos,  and  Cephas, 
differing  only»in  personal  idiosyncrasies,  preached 
essentially  the  same  gospel,  their  names  quickly 
became  the  party-cries  of  wrangling  sects  in  the 
Corinthian  Church.  '  There  are  contentions  (fpiStf, 
'  rivalries ')  among  j'ou '  (1  Co  1") ;  '  there  is  among 
you  jealousy  and  strife '  (^pis,  3'),  wrote  St.  Paul  Uy 
these  typical  Hellenes.  He  had  to  use  all  his  re- 
sources of  reason  and  appeal  to  overcome  their 
'strife,  jealousy,  wraths,  factions'  (2  Co  12*'). 

(2)  St.  Paul's  arrival  in  Rome  awoke  another, 
stranger  kind  of  partisanship  in  the  Roman  Church 
(Ph  V^^^).  His  presence  moved  the  preachers  of 
the  city  ;  it  quickened  the  evangelical  pulse  ;  but, 
while  some  began  to  preach  Christ  in  good-will  to 
him  {81  fi'doKLay),  others  did  it  through  envy  and 
strife  (Sik  pddvov  /cai  Hpiv),  out  of  faction  (^{  tpiOtiai), 
not  purely  or  sincerely  {ayvQi).  They  emulated 
his  labours  in  the  hope  of  robbing  him  of  his 
laurels  ;  then  actually  imagined  that  their  brilliant 
succe-sses  would  'add  affliction  to  his  bonds.'  But 
the  Paul  wljose  amour  propre  might  have  beea 


FAIR  HAVENS 


FAITH 


389 


-wounded  by  shafts  of  that  kind  had  long  ago  Iseen 
"'crucitied  with  Christ."  The  Paul  who  lived,  or 
rather  in  whom  Christ  lived  (Gal  2*'),  only  rejoiced 
if  there  were  indeed  greater  preachers  than  himself 
in  Rome.  Among  true  apostles  and  evangelists 
there  is  no  room  for  jealous  contention,  ignoble 
rivalry,  in  the  publication  of  the  gospel.  Only  one 
thing  matters— that  Christ  be  preached  and  His 
name  glorified.  St.  Paul's  great-mindedness  is 
similar  to  that  expressed  in  Browning's  Paracelsus : 

'  Lo,  I  forget  my  ruin,  and  rejoice 
In  thy  success,"  as  thou  '.    Let  our  God's  praise 
Go  bravely  through  the  world  at  last '.    What  care 
Through  me  or  thee  ? ' 

James  Stbahax. 
FAIR  HAYENS  (KaXol  AtM^vei).— Fair  Havens  is 
&  small  bay  in  the  S.  coast  of  Crete,  where  St. 
Paul's  ship,  after  working  slowly  westward  under 
the  lee  of  the  island,  found  shelter  in  rough  weather 
(Ac  27*).  It  is  not  referred  to  in  any  other  ancient 
writing  besides  Acts,  but  its  name  is  still  preserved 
in  the  modem  dialect — Aijuewvas  KaXoi/j.  While 
exposed  to  the  E.,  it  was  protected  on  the  S.W. 
by  two  small  islands.  In  this  roadstead  the 
Apostle's  ship  remained  'a  considerable  time' 
{'ucaifov  xpovov)  weather-bound,  strong  N.W.  winds 
apparentlj'  continuing  to  blow.  Two  leagues  west- 
ward is  Cape  Matala,  where  the  coast  abruptly 
trends  to  the  N.,  so  that  if  an  attempt  were 
made  to  round  the  point  the  ship  would  certainly 
be  exposed  to  the  full  force  of  the  wind.  But  as 
it  was  feared  that  Fair  Havens  was  not  commodious 
enough  to  winter  in,  a  council  was  held,  the  ac- 
count of  which  atlbrds  a  vivid  and  instructive 
glimpse  into  life  on  an  ancient  government  trans- 
port. While  the  captain  and  ship-master  (6  vav- 
■kXtipos)  thought  it  better  to  make  a  dash  for  Port 
Phoenix  {q.v.),  St.  Paul  considered  it  more  pru- 
dent to  remain  where  they  were.  The  Roman 
centurion  naturally  '  gave  more  heed '  to  the 
nautical  experts  than  to  the  landsman,  as  did  the 
majority  {ol  vXeiovs);  but,  as  Smith  remarks,  'the 
event  justified  St.  Paul's  advice.' 

*  It  now  appears  .  .  .  that  Fair  Havens  is  so  well  protected  by 
islands,  that  though  not  equal  to  Lutro,  it  mast  be  a  very  fair 
winter  harbour;  and  that  considering  the  suddenness,  the  fre- 
quency, and  the  ^-iolence  with  which  gales  of  northerly  wind 
spring  up,  and  the  certainty  that,  if  such  a  gale  sprang  up  in 
the  passage  from  Fair  Havens  to  Lutro,  the  ship  must  be  driven 
off  to  sea,  the  prudence  of  the  advice  given  by  the  master  and 
owner  was  extremely  questionable,  and  that  the  advice  given  by 
St.  Paul  may  probablv  be  supported  even  on  nautical  grounds ' 
<J.  Smith,  Voyage  and  Shipic'reek  of  St.  PavU,  18S0,  p.  S5X 

LiTKiLiTrRK.— W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Trartllerand  the 
Roman  Citizen,  1S95,  p.  S20  f.  See  also  artt.  in  Bible  Diction- 
aries, esp.  HDB  i.  S26  (W.  Muir). 

James  Strahax, 
FAITH.— 1.  In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.— In  the 

Acts  faith  is  spoken  of  as  (1)  inspired  by  Christ, 
(2)  directed  to  Christ,  (3)  corresponding  to  Christian 
teaching. 

(1)  After  St.  Peter  had  healed  the  lame  man,  he 
explained  that  the  miracle  had  been  wrought  by 
the  power  of  God  by  faith  in  the  name  of  the 
'  Prince  of  life,  whom  God  raised  from  the  dead ' ; 
"•  yea,  the  faith  which  is  through  him  (^  5i'  aih-oC) 
hath  given  him  this  perfect  soundness  in  the  pre- 
sence of  you  all '  (3^*).  The  health-bringing  faith 
both  in  the  apostles  and  the  cripple  had  been  in- 
spired by  Jesus,  the  Holy  One. 

(2)  More  frequently  the  faith  is  directed  to  Jesus 
Christ.  Thus  the  general  statement  is  made : 
'  Many  believed  on  (Ivl)  the  Lord  '  (^).  St.  Paul 
enjoins  the  Philippian  jailer  :  '  Believe  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ'  (16^^).  Similarly  Crispus,  the  ruler 
of  the  synagogue,  '  believed  in  the  Lord  with  all 
his  house '  (IS** ;  iirirrexxTev  T(fi  #ci;pt<^= '  believed  the 
Lord').  In  all  these  cases  the  faith  is  directed  to 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

(3)  In  several  passages  '  the  faith '  is  equivalent 


to  the  Christian  faith  or  Christian  religion.  In 
describing  the  multipl5-ing  of  the  disciples  in  Jeru- 
salem it  is  said  :  '  A  ijreat  company  of  the  priests 
were  obedient  to  the  taith '  (6^).  In  C3'prus  Elymas 
opposed  the  apostles,  'seeking  to  turn  aside  the 
proconsul  from  the  faith'  (13*).  St.  Paul  returned 
to  the  towns  in  Asia,  '  confirming  the  souls  of  the 
disciples,  exhorting  them  to  continue  in  the  faith' 
(H*"-).  In  each  of  these  cases  'the  faith'  has 
already  become  the  phrase  to  express  all  that  is 
implied  by  believing  m  Christ. 

We  can  see  the  transition  from  (2)  to  (3)  in  the 
expression  used  by  St.  Peter  when  speaking  of  the 
work  of  God  among  the  Gentiles.  He  says  that 
God  made  no  distinction,  'cleansing  their  hearts 
by  faith '  or  '  by  the  faith '  (15®). 

This  leads  us  to  note  that  in  Acts  faith  is  made 
the  medium  for  healing,  cleansing,  and  salvation. 
The  largest  result  of  faith  is  announced  by  St.  Paul 
when  he  promises  to  the  jailer  salvation  for  him- 
self and  his  household  as  the  blessing  ^ven  to 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  gift  of  the  HoTj-  Spirit 
is  associated  Avith  faith  in  Christ,  as  in  the  case  of 
Cornelius  and  his  friends  who  welcomed  the  preach- 
ing of  the  gospel  by  St.  Peter,  so  that  '  while  Peter 
yet  spake  these  words,  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on  all 
them  which  heard  the  word '  ( 10").  More  generally 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  follows  baptism  and 
the  laying  on  of  hands,  as  in  the  case  of  the  disciples 
of  John  the  Baptist  (19^)  and  the  Samaritans  whom 
Philip  had  led  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  {8''). 

It  is  noteworthy  that  in  describing  both  Stephen 
and  Barnabas  it  is  said  of  each  that  he  was  '  full  of 
faith  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit '  (6*  11*^),  and  probably 
it  is  implied  that  each  had  received  not  only  the 
permanent  gift  of  the  Spirit  (Stapedp,  2^)  but  also 
the  graces  {xapifffuiTa,  1  Co  12^)  imparted  by  Him 
through  a  full  and  obedient  faith. 

2.  In  the  Epistle  of  St.  James.- This  Epistle  must 
have  been  writteueither  in  the  very  earliest  apostolic 
times  or  in  a  period  that  is  almost  post -apostolic. 
The  whole  Epistle  is  practical  and  undogmatic, 
and  lays  the  chief  emphasis  on  ethical  observance. 
The  writer  appreciates  the  value  of  faith  when  he 
refers  to  those  who  are  '  rich  in  faith '  (2^)  and  to 
the  '  prayer  of  faith '  (5^') ;  but  in  the  section  of 
the  Epistle  which  deals  with  faith  and  works,  it  is 
not  too  much  to  say  that  he  looks  upon  faith  with 
a  measure  of  suspicion.  In  this  argument  (2^*"*) 
the  writer  evidently  defines  '  faith '  in  his  own 
mind  as  intellectual  assent  to  DiWne  truth,  and 
with  his  undogmatic  prepossessions  he  becomes 
almost  antidogmatic  in  tendency.  The  Apostle 
describes  this  faith  not  as  false  or  feigned,  but  as 
having  such  reality  only  as  the  faith  of  demons  in 
the  oneness  of  God.  To  him  'faith'  is  far  from 
being  an  enthusiastic  acceptance  of  a  Divine  Re- 
deemer. 

If  the  Epistle  was  written  in  very  early  times, 
the  argument  must  move  more  on  Judaic  than  on 
Christian  grounds,  and  a  certain  corroboration  of 
this  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  illustrations  are 
taken  from  OT  examples  like  Abraham  and  Rahab, 
and  that  the  typical  example  chosen  is  belief  in  the 
unity  of  God,  which  was  the  war-cry  of  the  Jew  as 
it  became  in  later  days  that  of  the  Muhammadan. 
If  the  later  date  is  chosen,  then  time  must  be  left 
for  a  general  acceptance  of  Christian  truth  so  that 
'  faith '  had  become  assent  to  Christian  dogma.  In 
either  case  the  argument  of  the  Epistle  cannot  be 
regarded  as  a  direct  polemic  against  the  teaching 
of  St.  Paul.  The  two  writers  move  in  different 
-spheres  of  thought,  so  that,  while  words  and 
phrases  are  alike,  theii-  definitions  are  as  the 
IX)les  asunder.  An  instance  of  this  is  found  in  the 
words  with  which  St.  James  closes  the  section  on 
'faith.'  The  Apostle  has  already  declared  :  'Faith, 
if  it  have  not  works,  is  dead  in  itself '  (2"),  so  now 


390 


FAITH 


FAITH 


he  Slims  up  :  '  As  the  body  apart  from  tlic  -pirit  is 
dead,  even  so  faitli  apart  from  works  is  iK-ail  (2-*). 
Here  we  find  that  so  far  from  faitii  being  the  in- 
spiration of  works,  as  St.  Paul  miglit  suggest,  St. 
James  teaches  that  works  are  tlie  inspiration  of 
faith.  Faith  may  be  a  mere  dead  body  unless 
works  prove  to  be  an  inner  spirit  to  make  it  alive. 
This  declaration  agrees  with  the  writer's  whole 
attitude,  for  throughout  this  letter  he  insists  that 
the  practical  carrying  out  of  '  the  faith  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ'  is  found  in  obedience  to  '  the  royal 
law  ' :  '  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.' 
This  practice  of  the  will  of  Christ  makes  faith  to 
be  alive. 

3.  In  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul. — In  the  writings 
of  St.  Paul  '  faith  '  and  '  grace '  are  the  human  and 
the  Divine  sides  of  the  great  experience  tliat  revolu- 
tionized his  own  life  and  the  lives  of  many  to  whom 
the  gospel  was  brought.  Occasionally  faith  is 
spoken  of  as  being  directed  to  God,  but  commonly 
it  is  directed  to  Jesus  Christ.  Thus  in  Gal  2'*  St. 
Paul  writes  :  '  Knowing  tliat  a  man  is  not  justified 
by  the  worksof  the  law, save  (butonly,^ai'/u^)  through 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  even  we  believed  on  Christ 
Jesus  that  we  might  be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ.' 
Here  the  reiteration  is  singular,  but  the  insistence 
on  '  faith  in  Christ '  is  characteristically  Pauline. 
To  St.  Paul  the  only  faith  that  is  of  value  is  the 
faitli  that  rests  on  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  who  was 
made  in  the  likeness  of  men,  died  for  our  sins,  and 
rose  again  from  the  dead.  The  Death  of  Christ 
occupies  so  large  a  place  in  his  thought  that  he  is 
determined  to  know  nothing  save  Jesus  Christ  and 
Him  cruciHed  (1  Co  2-),  while  he  insists  so  strongly 
on  tlie  Resurrection  as  to  declare  :  '  If  Christ  hatn 
not  been  raised,  your  faith  is  vain  '  (15^''). 

Tliis  revolutionizing  faith  is  awakened  by  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel :  '  Belief  cometh  of  hearing, 
and  hearing  by  the  word  of  Christ '  (Ro  10"),  i.e.  by 
the  word  concerning  Christ,  or,  as  it  is  called  earlier 
(Ro  10"),  '  the  word  of  faith,'  i.e.  the  word  that  deals 
with  justifying  faith.  This  faith,  according  to  St. 
Paul,  brings  salvation.  Thus  in  Eph  V^  '  the  word 
of  the  truth '  is  the  medium  by  which  faith  comes, 
and  through  faith  comes  salvation.  So  in  Eph  2^  it 
is  said  :  '  By  grace  have  ye  been  saved  through  faith' 
{SiciTrjs  Tr/ffrewy,  not  5(d  ttjv  irLariv,  i.e.  through  faith  as 
a  means,  not  on  account  of  faith  as  a  ground  of 
salvation).  Hearing  and  faith  are  associated  in  a 
similar  way  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  as  the 
means  by  which  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  came.  '  Re- 
ceived ye  the  Spirit  by  the  works  of  the  law,  or  by 
the  hearing  of  faith?'  (Gal  3*),  and  the  meaning 
varies  little  whether  we  conceive  of  faith  as  the 
accompaniment  of  hearing  or  as  its  product.  It  is 
possible  to  infer  from  Eph  P^'-  that  the  gift  of  the 
opirit  was  received  after,  not  contemporjineously 
with,  the  act  of  faith.  '  Having  also  believed,  ye 
were  sealed  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise.'  The 
sealing  with  the  Spirit  is  j^osterior  to  the  act  of 
faitli  and  may  be  associated  with  the  rite  of  baptism, 
which  came  to  be  known  as  a  sealing  ordinance. 

St.  Paul  dwells  frequently  upon  faith  as  a  definite 
act  in  his  own  life  and  in  the  lives  of  Christian 
converts.  Two  instances  only  need  be  given.  In 
Gal  2'*  he  says  :  '  We  believed  on  Christ  Jesus,' 
where  the  verb  iTrKrTevffa/itv  denotes  one  definite 
act  in  the  past  when  they  turned  in  faith  to  (e/s) 
Christ  Jesus.  Even  more  marked  is  the  sentence 
in  Ro  13"  :  'Now  is  salvation  nearer  to  us  (ij  Sre 
€7rt(rTei;(rayaei')than  when  we  believed,'  i.e.  than  when 
we  by  a  definite  act  of  faith  became  Christians. 
In  St.  Paul's  experience  and  teaching  this  act  of 
faith  leads  to  a  life  of  faith,  so  tliat  he  can  write  of 
himself  :  '  That  life  whicli  I  now  live  in  the  flesh  I 
live  in  faith,  the  faith  which  is  in  the  Son  of  God, 
wlio  loved  me  and  gave  himself  for  me'  (Gal  2**). 
Faith  is  not  a  solitary  act  but  a  continuous  attitude 


of  the  inner  life  towards  Christ  Jesus.  But  this 
does  not  iniply  tliat  either  at  the  beginning  or 
during  its  course  this  faith  is  perfect ;  it  may  be 
halting  even  when  real,  and  when  livin<i  it  grows 
ever  stronger  '  by  faith  unto  faith  '  (Ro  1").  Faith 
is  weak  in  the  experience  of  many,  .sometimes  in 
opi)Osition  to  the  enticing  [Mjwer  of  evil  when  flesh 
lusts  against  spirit,  sometimes  in  opiHJsition  to  law 
as  a  ground  of  salvation,  and  sometimes  in  failing  to 
appreciate  what  Christian  truth  implies.  This  la.8t 
form  of  weakness  is  discussed  by  St.  Paul  towards 
tlie  close  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (14),  where 
those  weak  in  faith  do  not  understand  the  extent 
of  their  freedom  in  Christ,  and  find  themselves 
bound  in  conscience  by  irritating  non-Christian 
customs.  St.  Paul  commends  a  faith  that  is  stronger 
find  freer,  but  he  declares  that  none  must  act  in 
defiance  of  their  faith.  They  must  be  clear  in 
mind  and  conscience  before  they  break  even  these 
customs.  '  Whatsoever  isnot  of  faith  is  sin' (RoH'*'). 
Even  when  Christians  are  perfect  {r^Xeioi,  Ph  3"), 
possessors  of  a  mature  faithas  well  as  full  knowledge, 
they  have  not  reached  the  goal,  but  they  must 
still  press  on  toward  the  goal  unto  the  prize  of  the 
high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  (v.^*). 

For  St.  Paul  faith  was  an  experience  that 
touched  the  inmost  part  of  his  nature,  but  it  had 
perforce  to  find  outward  expression.  Faith  and 
profession  are  necessarily  united.  The  believer  in 
Christ  must  be  a  witness  for  Christ.  The  state- 
ment of  Ro  10*°  puts  succinctly  what  St.  Paul  con- 
stantly implies :  '  With  the  heart  man  believeth 
unto  righteousness,  and  with  the  mouth  confession 
is  made  unto  salvation.'  These  are  not  so  much 
independent  acts  as  two  sides  of  the  same  act. 
Internally  faith  in  Christ  brings  a  change  of  heart, 
externally  it  implies  confession  of  the  Lord.  This 
confession  finds  its  formal  expression  in  baptism, 
and  the  Apostle  expected  that  in  this  way  as  well 
as  in  more  homely  ways  this  public  confession 
would  be  made.  In  St.  Paul's  view  the  believer 
in  Christ  must  be  a  professing  Christian. 

If  faith  must  be  associated  with  such  outward 
testimony  it  must  be  even  more  intimately  associ- 
ated with  many  Christian  graces,  and  especially 
with  love  or  charity.  St.  Paul  in  his  eulogy  of 
love  (1  Co  13)  declares  tliat  among  the  great  abid- 
ing virtues  love  is  the  chief.  '  If  I  have  all  faith 
so  as  to  remove  mountains,  but  have  not  love,  I 
am  nothing'  (1  Co  13").  This  exalted  praise  of 
love  is  the  more  remarkable  because  St.  Paul  is 
the  champion  of  faith  in  the  great  controversy  of 
which  we  get  his  own  statement  in  the  Epistles  to 
Galatians  and  Romans  (Gal  2  and  3,  Ro  1-5).  St. 
Paul's  experience  on  the  way  to  Damascus  when 
he  was  convinced  of  the  Messiahship  and  Lordship 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  became  the  dominant  factor 
in  all  his  life,  and  led  to  his  abandonment  of  al- 
legiance to  law  and  to  the  strenuous  vindication 
of  the  place  of  faith  in  the  religious  life.  Before 
his  conversion  St.  Paul  had  sought  iustification 
with  God  by  a  religious  obedience  to  the  Law,  but 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ  changed  his  whole  attitude 
and  revolutionized  his  whole  thought.  Faith  in 
Christ  was  not  conceived  by  him  primarily  as 
bringing  a  new  power  in  attaining  the  end  that 
he  had  previously  kept  in  view,  for  now  he  be- 
lieved that  justification  had  been  attained  at  once 
tlirough  faith  in  Christ  by  the  grace  of  God. 
Justification  was  the  beginning  of  true  life,  not  a 
blessing  to  be  attained  at  the  end  (Gal  2'*). 

The  faith  which  receives  this  blessint;  is  faith  in 
Christ  Jesus.  This  faith  is  conceived  by  St.  Paul 
not  as  a  mere  intellectual  a.ssent  or  as  a  recogni- 
tion of  the  unseen  world,  but  as  an  enthusiastic 
trust  in  Christ  as  Saviour,  and  as  a  complete  devo- 
tion to  Him  as  Lord.  The  whole  inner  nature, 
including  mind,  heart,  and  will,  is  committed  to 


FAITH 


FAITH 


391 


Him  in  trust  and  devotion.  In  receiving  Jesus  as 
Christ,  St.  Paul  gave  himself  to  Jesus  as  Lord. 
This'saving  faith  became  the  medium  of  all  Divine 
blessing  to  St.  Paul,  and,  drawing  upon  his  own 
experience,  he  taught  that  it  would  be  and  must 
be  the  medium  of  blessing  to  all.  Hence  he  gloried 
in  the  gospel, '  for  therein  is  revealed  a  righteous- 
ness of  God  by  faith  unto  faith'  (Ro  1").  The 
gospel  could  thus  become  a  universal  message  for 
mankind,  for  it  dealt  with  all  men  alike  as  sinners, 
and  ottered  to  all  who  believed  in  Christ  the 
righteousness  of  God,  *  being  justified  freely  by 
his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus' (3^). 

After  this  illuminating  experience  of  the  grace 
of  God  came  to  St.  Paul  he  turned  back  to  the  OT 
and  found  in  its  pages  that  in  the  religious  experi- 
ence there  narrated  the  blessings  of  God  had  come 
also  through  faith.  Thus  '  to  Abraham  his  faith 
was  reckoned  for  righteousness'  (Ro  4®,  Gal  3'). 
So  David  pronounced  blessing  upon  the  man  unto 
whom  Gou  reckoneth  righteousness  apart  from 
works  (Ro  4*).  He  found  that  Gods  method  had 
always  been  the  same.  His  grace  had  reached  its 
end  when  a  human  heart  had  responded  in  faith. 
Tliis  truth  is  utterlj-  opposed  to  St.  Paul's  former 
belief  that  righteousness  came  by  the  Law,  and 
both  in  Rom.  and  Gal.  he  labours  to  prove  that, 
whatever  the  work  of  the  Law  was,  it  was  not 
to  gain  a  right  standing  with  (rod.  It  had  a 
mission  even  concerning  faith,  but  it  was  the 
mission  of  an  attendant  slave  to  bring  those  who 
were  in  ward  unto  Christ ;  but  when  that  mission 
was  fulfilled,  they  were  no  longer  under  law,  but 
were  all  sons  of  God,  through  faith  in  Christ 
Jesus  (Gal  3-^*).  Thus  the  Christian  life  is  re- 
garded as  a  free,  loving,  spiritual  ser\-ice,  of  which 
faith  in  Christ  is  the  prime  origin  and  the  constant 
inspiration. 

In  the  Pastoral  Epistles  that  are  usually  associ- 
ated with  the  name  of  St.  Paul  we  find  '  the  faith ' 
frequently  used  as  equivalent  to  the  Christian 
faith  or  teaching.  Thus  in  1  Tim.  we  find : 
'Some  made  shipwreck  concerning  the  faith'  (P'). 
Deacons  must  hold  the  '  mystery  of  the  faith  in  a 
pure  conscience '  (3®).  '  In  later  times  some  shall 
fall  away  from  the  faith'  (4^).  'If  any  provideth 
not  for  his  own,  and  specially  his  own  household, 
he  hath  denied  the  faith '  (5*).  It  is  inferred  by 
some  that  the  use  of  '  the  faith '  in  this  sense  im- 
plies a  late  date  for  this  Epistle,  possibly  consider- 
ably after  St.  Paul's  death ;  but  it  is  significant 
that  in  Gal.,  Avhich  is  among  the  very  earliest  of 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  there  is  found  the  expres 
sion  :  '  Before  the  faith  came,  we  were  kept  in 
ward  under  the  law,  shut  up  unto  the  faith  which 
should  afterwards  be  revealed '  (Gal  S'-*^).  Here 
the  Apostle  describes  the  early  period  not  as  the 
time  before  faith  came,  for  faith  was  found  already 
in  the  OT.  but  as  the  time  before  the  faith  came, 
I.e.  the  faith  of  Christ.  Thus  in  this  early  Epistle 
we  have  the  starting-point  for  the  later  use. 

4.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. — In  this 
Epistle  faith  has  not  the  content  that  has  been 
foTind  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  It  is  true  that 
when  the  writer  is  speaking  of  '  the  first  principles 
of  Christ '  he  mentions  first,  in  a  manner  sug- 
gestive of  St.  Paul's  phrases,  the  '  foundation  of 
repentance  from  dead  works,  and  of  faith  toward 
God '  (firl  6f6v,  6^).  But  even  here  '  dead  works ' 
is  not  used  in  the  Pauline  sense  as  works  done 
apart  from  Christ  or  as  works  of  themselves,  and 
'  faith '  is  not  the  enthusiastic  trust  in  Christ 
which  St.  Paul  enshrines  as  the  central  feature 
of  experience  and  dogma.  In  Heb.,  faith  may  be 
defined  in  general  terms  as  the  human  response  to 
the  word  of  God.  When  man  refuses  to  respond, 
he  is  guilty  of  unbelief  and  of  hardness  of  heart ; 


when  he  responds  to  God  speaking  to  him,  then  he 
believes.  God  sent  His  word  through  agents,  such 
as  angels  (2"-)  and  prophets  (1^),  but  especially  in 
the  last  times  He  has  spoken  through  His  Son,  and 
has  borne  witness  to  this  message  by  'signs  and 
wonders,  by  manifold  powers,  and  by  gifts  of  the 
Holy  Ghost'  (2*- *).  Faith  is  the  obedient  response 
to  this  word  of  God,  and  has  been  found  in  all 
those  who  have  become  '  the  cloud  of  witnesses ' 
(12^).  The  secret  of  the  assurance,  devotion,  and 
endurance  of  the  OT  saints  is  found  in  their 
unceasing  confidence  in  the  God  who  revealed 
Himself  to  them  (1^).  The  greatest  example  of 
this  faith  was  Jesus  Himself,  'the  author  and 
perfecter  of  faith  '  (12-),  who  led  the  way  in  the 
career  of  faith  and  embodied  in  His  own  life  its  full 
realization.  This  believing  response  to  the  word 
of  God  produces  within  the  mind  certain  activities, 
the  chief  of  which  the  MTiter  describes  when  he 
^ves  faith  its  well-known  definition  (11*) :  'Faith 
is  the  assurance  of  things  hoped  for  (or  it  gives 
substance  to  things  hoped  for),  the  proving  of 
things  not  seen  (or  the  conviction  of  unseen 
realities.)'  Faith  is  the  conviction  of  the  reality 
of  things  not  made  known  through  the  senses,  and, 
so  far  as  religion  is  concerned,  it  is  produced  by 
the  word  of  God. 

It  ought  to  be  observed  that  throughout  this 
Epistle  there  is  also  implied  a  fjuth  in  the  work 
of  God  by  Christ,  the  great  High  Priest  and 
Mediator  of  a  new  covenant.  Possibly  this  work 
ought  to  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  word  of 
God,  for  the  writer  conceives  of  God's  word  coming 
in  the  OT  through  such  works  as  the  arrangements 
of  the  tabernacle  (9*),  as  weU  as  by  spoken  message, 
and  the  work  of  Christ  may  be  conceived  as  in  its 
entiretj'  the  message  of  God  to  men.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  possible  that  the  writer,  having 
described  the  complete  priestly  work  done  by 
Christ,  regards  faith  as  the  response  to  the  call 
then  made  by  God  to  enter  into  His  immediate 
fellowship.  Those  who  respond  will  draw  near 
to  God  'in  full  assurance  of  faith'  (eV  r\i}po<fH>piq. 
Turrews,  10~). 

5.  In  the  Epistles  of  St.  Peter.— There  is  little 
that  is  distinctive  in  the  doctrinal  teaching  of 
these  Epistles,  and  analogies  may  be  found  with 
both  St.  Paul  and  St.  James.  The  writer  of  1 
Pet.  makes  Christ  the  object  of  faith.  '  on  whom  {els 
of),  though  now  ye  see  him  not,  yet  believing,  ye 
rejoice  with  joy  unspeakable '  (1*).  He  also  makes 
Christ  the  means  of  faith  in  God  :  Christ  '  was 
manifested  at  the  end  of  the  times  for  your  sake, 
who  through  him  (5i'  airrov)  are  believers  in  God ' 
(eis  dedv,  1^  *^).  Similarly  those  who  are  suffering 
greatly  are  called  upon  to  '  commit  their  souls  in 
well-doing  unto  a  faithful  Creator'  (4^),  where  in 
a  tinique  phrase  God  as  Creator  is  presented  as  the 
object  of  trust.  Throughout  1  Pet.  salvation  is 
regarded  as  future,  certainly  near  at  hand,  but 
still  as  an  inheritance  to  which  Christians  are  to 
look  fonvard.  Hence  those  who  are  begotten  unto 
this  living  hope  must  look  upon  the  trials  they  are 
undergoing  as  tests  of  their  faith  (1®),  and  must 
recall  that,  as  Christ  suflered  in  the  flesh,  they 
must  arm  themselves  with  the  same  mind  (4*). 
But  the  real  defence  is  the  power  of  God,  by  wliich 
they  are  guarded  through  laith  (1').  Faith  brings 
under  the  power  of  God  those  who  are  tried,  so 
that  at  last  they  will  receive  the  end  of  their  faith, 
even  the  salvation  of  their  souls  (1'). 

6.  In  the  Epistles  of  St.  John.— 'Faith' is  not 
the  dominant  conception  in  these  Epistles,  but 
'  light,' '  knowledge,' '  love.'  Faith  and  love  are  pre- 
sented as  twin  commands  :  '  This  is  his  command- 
ment, that  we  should  believe  in  the  name  of  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  love  one  another'  (1  Jn  3**). 
The  thought  is  somewhat  varied  when  the  writer 


392 


FAITHFULNESS 


FAITHFULNESS 


says  that  a  believer  in  Christ  receives  new  life 
from  God,  and  one  si<jn  of  that  new  life  is  that  he 
loves  God  who  bejjat  nim,  and  also  every  other  one 
who  is  begotten  in  the  same  way  (5^).  True  faith 
includes  genuine  love.  The  knowledge  of  God,  of 
Christ,  and  of  ourselves  leads  to  faith.  •  We  know 
and  have  believed  tlie  love  which  God  hath  in  us' 
(4") ;  but  faith  also  develops  into  a  deeper  and 
surer  knowledge :  '  These  things  have  I  written 
unto  you,  that  ye  may  know  that  ye  have  eternal 
life,  even  unto  you  that  believe  on  the  name  of  the 
Son  of  God '  {5'3). 

Through  faith  there  comes  also  victory  over  the 
world  and  all  the  i)owers  of  the  world.  '  This  is 
the  victory  that  hath  overcome  the  world,  even  our 
faith '  (5*).  Thus  he  that  believes  that  Jesus  is  the 
Son  of  God  passes  by  the  way  of  forgiveness,  know- 
ledge, and  love  into  an  assured  confidence  and  a 
great  victory  over  the  world  and  the  things  that 
are  in  the  world. 

7.  In  the  Apocalypse.— It  is  unnecessary  to 
examine  the  Apocalypse  in  detail,  for  it  does  not 
deal  with  either  the  nature  or  the  defence  of  faith. 
In  some  respects  it  rises  to  a  higher  level  as  poetic 
and  prophetic  expression  is  given  in  it  to  the 
energy  of  the  deep  religious  faith  that  abounds  in 
the  heart  of  the  writer.  In  the  Apocalypse  we 
have  described  for  us  in  words  and  pictures  the 
unity  and  power  of  God,  the  dominion  of  Christ 
over  the  Church  and  the  world,  and  the  triumphant 
victory  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  over  all  the  powers 
of  evil.  With  all  its  problems  and  mysteries,  this 
book  has  proved  in  times  of  despair  the  means  of 
begetting  and  sustaining  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  as 
'  the  ruler  of  the  kings  of  the  earth '  (1"). 

8.  Conclusion. — In  whatever  ways  the  apostles 
differ  in  their  method  of  regarding  faith,  they 
agree  in  the  underlying  thouj^ht  that  in  and  by 
it  there  is  oneness  with  Jesus  Christ.  This  union 
is  dwelt  upon  by  St.  Paul  especially  in  passages 
that  deal  with  the '  unio  mjrstica '  (Eph  I^^,  1  Co  12'-, 
etc.),  but  it  appears  also  in  the  argument  of  1  Jn. 
(2^).  To  make  this  oneness  real,  there  is  required 
less  mere  intellectual  discernment  than  willingness 
of  heart  to  commit  soul  and  life  to  God  in  Christ. 
This  faith  is  the  answer  of  the  heart  to  the  grace 
of  God,  and  is  associated  always  with  repentance 
and  is  accompanied  by  love  and  other  Christian 
graces.  Tims  the  writer  of  2  Pet.  is  at  one  with 
all  the  apostles  in  saying  to  Christians  that  when 
they  become  partakers  of  the  Divine  nature  ( 1*)  they 
are  bound  to  add  to  the  faith — that  is  funda- 
mental— virtue,  knowledge,  temperance,  patience, 
godliness,  love  of  the  brethren,  love.  Faith,  that 
makes  a  believer  a  sharer  in  Christ's  salvation, 
makes  him  also  a  sharer  in  Christ's  mind  and  char- 
acter. 

LiTERATURB.— H.  BushncU,  The  New  Life,  1860,  p.  44  ;  J.  C. 
Hare,  The  Victory  of  Faith\  1874  ;  J.  T.  O'Brien,  The  Nature 
and  the  Ejects  of  Faith*,  1S77 ;  N.  Smyth,  The  Reality  of 
Faith,  1888,  also  The  Religiou-i  Feeling — a  Study  for  Faith, 
n.d.  ;  J.  Kaftan,  Glaube  und  Dogina^,  1889 ;  C.  Gore,  in  Lux 
Muiwiii'i,  1891,  p.  1 ;  J.  W.  Diggrle,  Religious  Doubt,  1895,  p. 
28;  J.  Haussleiter,  'Was  versteht  Paulus  unter  christlichem 
Olauben?'  in  Greifsioalder  Stiidien,  1895,  p.  159  flf.;  G.  B. 
Stevens,  Doctrine  and  Life,  1895,  p.  191 ;  A.  Schlatter,  Der 
Glaube  im  NT'-,  1890  ;  J.  Martineau,  Faith  a7id  Self-Surrender, 
1897;  W.  Herrmann,  Faith  and  MuraU,  1904;  G.  Ferries, 
The  Growth  of  Christian  Faith,  1905  ;  E.  GrifBth-Jones,  Faith 
and  Verilication,  1907  ;  W.  R.  Inge,  Faith,  1909 ;  H.  C.  G. 
Moule,  Paith,  1909  ;  P.  Charles,  La  Foi,  1910  ;  P.  Gardner, 
The  Religious  Experience  of  St.  Paul,  191l/x>.  206 ;  H.  Marten- 
sen-Larsen,  Zweifel  und  Glaube,  1911 ;  D.  L.  Ihmels,  Fides 
irnplicita  und  der  evangelitche  Ueilsglaxibe,  1912  ;  A.  Nairne, 
The  Kpistle  of  Priesthood,  1913,  p.  386  ff.  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
The  Teaching  of  Paul,  1913,  pp.  56,  163,  170,  182. 

D.  Macrae  Tod. 
FAITHFULNESS.— 1.  Faithfulness  of  God.— The 

apostolic  writers  agree  with  the  general  biblical 
teaching  in  ascribing  faithfulness  to  God  as  '  keep- 
ing covenant  and  mercy  with  them  that  love  him 
and  keep  his  commandments  to  a  thousand  gener- 


ations'  (Dt  7").  Two  general  examples  may  l)e 
given.  (I)  Among  the  faithful  sayings  in  the  NT 
letters,  there  is  found  one  in  2  Ti  2"'",  where  the 
writer  speaks  of  the  sufferings  that  he  gladly  en- 
dures, for  '  if  we  died  with  him,  we  shall  also  live 
with  him  ...  if  we  are  faithless,  he  abideth 
faithful ;  for  he  cannot  deny  himself.'  God's  faith- 
fulness rested  ujxm  His  own  nature  and  not  ui>on 
any  human  contingencies. 

(2)  The  writer  or  Hebrews  elaborated  this  truth 
when  he  dealt  with  the  blessings  that  were  to  come 
in  and  through  Abraham.  In  order  that  he  and 
all  believers  might  have  greater  assurance,  God 
not  only  made  gracious  promises,  but  also  inter- 
posed with  an  oath  so  that  He  might  show  more 
abundantly  unto  the  heirs  of  the  iiromise  the  im- 
mutability of  His  counsel.  God's  faithfulness  was 
assured  both  by  promise  and  by  oath  (He  6'*'^). 

This  Divine  faithfulness  was  made  by  the  apostles 
the  ground  of  forgiveness  and  cleansing  to  those 
who  confessed  their  sins  (1  Jn  P),  of  deliverance  in 
temptation  from  the  power  of  evil  (I  Co  6'^,  2  Th  3*), 
and  of  confidence  in  the  final  salvation  of  tho.se 
who  were  called  into  the  fellowship  of  Jesus  Christ 
(1  Co  P,  1  Th  5''''). 

2.  Faithfulness  of  Christ. — It  is  noteworthy  that 
in  the  Apocalypse,  where  Christians  are  being  en- 
couraged to  endure,  the  faithfulness  of  Christ  is 
made  prominent.  Thus  He  is  called  tiie  faithful 
witness  (Rev  P  3'^),  and  victory  is  ascribed  to  Him 
who  is  'faithful  and  true'  (19").  But  it  is  in 
Hebrews  again  that  we  find  this  faithfulness  en- 
larged upon.  In  the  earlier  sections  of  that  Epistle, 
where  the  writer  is  comparing  the  work  of  Christ 
with  tliat  wrought  by  angels  and  prophets,  he 
shows  that  both  Moses  and  Christ  were  examples 
of  faithfulness,  but  Christ  excelled,  insomuch  as  a 
son's  faithfulness  over  God's  house  excels  in  quality 
that  of  a  servant  in  the  house.  '  He  hath  been 
counted  of  more  glory  than  Moses,  by  so  much  as 
he  that  built  the  house  hath  more  honour  than  the 
house' (He  3i-«). 

3.  Faithfulness  of  Christians. — In  the  back- 
ground of  every  Christian  life  the  apostles  placed 
the  example  of  Christ  and  the  attributes  of  God, 
and  thus  the  faithfulness  they  sought  to  practise 
and  instil  was  linked  with  the  faithfulness  of  God. 
For  this  reason  St.  Paul  repelled  with  heat  the 
charge  of  fickleness  that  had  been  brought  against 
him  by  critics  in  Corinth  (2  Co  P*--^).  He  acknow- 
ledged that  there  had  been  an  alteration  in  certain 
details  of  his  plans,  but  he  asserted  that  this  was 
due  not  to  any  passing  inconsistency  in  his  mind, 
but  to  greater  faithfulness  to  his  unchangeable 
desire  to  help  them.  He  had  not  changed  his  plans 
capriciously,  sajnng  '  Yes '  to-day  and  '  No '  to- 
morrow, but  he'  had  adhered  to  principles  as  un- 
changeable as  the  gospel  he  preached.  As  God 
was  faithful  to  His  promise,  so  the  Ajjostle  did  not 
vacillate  ;  as  Christ  was  unchangeable,  .so  was  St. 
Paul.  The  steadfastness  of  St.  Paul  and  of  all 
Christians  found  its  source  in  the  Divine  stablish- 
ing  in  Christ.  This  is  only  one  example  of  the 
apostolic  belief  that  constant  faithfulness  in  Ciiris- 
tian  life  came  from  faith  in  Christ,  '  the  faitliful 
and  true,'  while  apostatizing  from  the  living  God 
came  from  an  evil  heart  of  unbelief  (He  3'*). 

The  faithfulness  urged  by  the  apostles  covered 
the  whole  of  life.  It  must  be  shown  by  Christians 
in  their  ordinary  callings.  When  many  Mere  in- 
clined, in  view  of  the  near  approacli  of  the  Day  of 
the  Lord,  to  abandon  their  ordinary  occupations, 
St.  Paul  wrote  to  the  Thessalonians  that  all  must 
work  with  quietness  and  eat  their  own  l)read,  and 
that  none  must  leave  their  common  work  antl  live 
in  idleness  (2  Th  3).  In  like  manner  St.  Paul  wrote 
more  than  once  that  those  who  were  called  to  be 
Christians  must  abide  faithfully  in  their  callings 


FAITHFULNESS 


FALL 


393 


and  perfonii  their  duties.  Masters  must  put  a  new 
spirit  into  tlieir  oversight ;  slaves  must  become 
only  the  more  diligent  and  faitliful  in  their  service  ; 
husbands  and  wives  must  remain  faithful  to  their 
marriage  vows,  even  when  the  new  bond  to  Christ 
has  l)een  fashioned. 

Within  the  Christian  Church  those  called  to  any 
■duty  were  required  to  exercise  their  gifts  faith- 
fully. He  who  was  called  to  be  a  minister  of  God 
was  reminded  that  a  steward  must  be  found  faith- 
ful (1  Co  4-).  Each  one  must  be  faithful  to  the 
graces  given  by  the  Spirit,  whether  of  prophecy, 
teaching,  giving,  or  ruling:  (Ro  1"2*).  St.  Paul 
■claimed  that  he  exhibited  his  faithfulness  in  teach- 
ing when  he  was  dealing  vrith  the  case  of  fathers 
and  their  unmarried  daughters  (1  Co  7*).  ^^^len 
he  was  expressing  his  judgment  on  this  matter  he 
said  that  he  had  no  '  command '  {(nrayi^y)  to  con- 
vey, but  he  gave  his  settled  'opinion'  {yvufiTf/w), 
conscious  that  in  so  doing  he  was  faithful  to  his 
stewardship  under  Christ. 

As  apostles  were  expected  to  be  faithful  in  their 
teaching,  so  all  Christians  were  expected  to  be 
faithful  to  the  teaching  they  had  received.  As 
some  of  them  were  in  danger  of  being  '  carried 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight 
of  men,  in  craitiness,  after  the  wiles  of  error' 
(  Eph  4"  ;  cf .  He  IS**),  they  must  all  be  on  their  guard 
to  hold  fast  the  faith  of  Christ,  and,  in  spite  of  all 
anti-Christian  influences,  they  must  hold  the  tradi- 
tions which  they  were  taught,  whether  by  word  or 
by  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  (2  Th  2^*).  Indeed,  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  faith  itself  is  almost  iden- 
titied  Arith  steadfast  loyalty  to  the  Unseen  God, 
and  thus  passes  into  faithfulness,  which  marks  the 
believer  under  manifold  trials. 

In  the  apostolic  life  faithfulness  to  friends,  and 
especially  to  those  who  were  fellow-workers,  was 
greatly  prized.  The  first  necessity  for  a  Christian 
worker  is  that  he  should  be,  like  Lydia,  '  faithful 
to  Christ '  {ricr-rriv  ry  Kvpitfi,  Ac  16^') ;  but  he  should 
be  also,  like  Timothy, '  faithful  in  Christ '  {narov  ev 
Kvpii^j,  1  Co  4^"),  i.e.  faithful  in  the  sphere  of  Chris- 
tian duty.  This  faithfulness  is  required  to  be 
shown  not  only  to  those  for  whom  work  is  done, 
but  also  to  those  with  whom  it  is  done.  Thus  when 
St.  Paul  speaks  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  of 
Tychicus  his  messenger  as  '  the  beloved  brother 
and  faithful  minister  and  fellow-servant  in  the 
Lord'  (Col  4"),  and  of  Onesimus  as  'the  faithful 
and  beloved  brother '  (4^),  he  has  before  his  mind 
chiefly  the  fidelity  of  these  two  brethren  to  himself 
the  apostle  and  prisoner  of  the  Lord.  In  2  Tim. 
we  have  represented  the  unfaithfulness  of  Demas, 
who  had  forsaken  the  Apostle,  '  having  loved  this 
present  world ' ;  the  faithfulness  of  St.  Luke  his 
companion — the  beloved  physician,  who  had  re- 
mained true  to  him  to  the  end ;  and  the  renewed 
faithfulness  of  John  Mark,  who  had  deserted  St. 
Paul  at  one  time,  but  who  in  later  years  was  a 
proved  and  faithful  servant  (2  Ti  4"*- "). 

Christian  faithfulness  was  to  be  observed  through- 
out the  whole  of  life,  and  especially  through  the 
many  trials  and  tribulations  of  Christian  experi- 
ence. In  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  we  find  the 
Apostle  on  no  fewer  than  six  ditlerent  occasions 
calling  upon  his  readers  to  '  stand  fast ' :  '  Stand 
fast  in  the  faith'  (rrriKeTe,  '  stand  firmly  and  faith- 
fully,' 1  Co  161*) .  .  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  '  (Gal 
5') ;  '  in  one  spirit'  (Ph  l^^) ;  'in  the  Lord'  (Ph  4^, 
1  Th  3*) ;  '  and  hold  the  traditions  which  ye  were 
taught '  (2  Th  2^=).  St.  Paul  was  urgent  that  be- 
lievers should  be  faithfxil  to  the  highest  in  all 
their  varied  experiences.  In  the  Apocalypse  we 
find  the  same  insistence.  The  Church  at  Smyrna 
was  exhorted  to  be  '  faithful  unto  death '  (Rev  2'*), 
and  the  Church  at  Pergamum  was  commended 
for  faithfulness  even  in  the  days  when  '  witness- 


ing '  for  Christ  became  *  martyrdom '  in  the  later 
meaning  of  that  word  (v.").  This  extreme  faith- 
fulness was  founded  on  faith  in  God  and  love 
to  Christ,  but  it  was  glorified  still  further  by  the 
expectation  of  'receiving  the  promise'  (He  lO**), 
of  enjoying  the  'great  recompense  of  reward' 
(v.'*),  and  of  being  awarded  'tne  crown  of  life' 
(Rev  2^*').  Even  when  faithfulness  meant  for  apos- 
tolic Christians  their  resisting  unto  blood,  they 
were  sustained  by  the  thought  of  the  Master,  who 
after  enduring  the  Cross  had  entered  into  His 
joy  and  was  set  do\^Ti  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
throne  of  God  (He  12*). 

LiTBRATTRB.— W.  A-  Bntler,  Sermotu^,  Ist  »er.,  1S52,  p. 
155  ;  H.  Bashnell,  The  Xfic  Life,  ISeO,  p.  191 ;  J.  L.  Jones, 
FaiU^ful^lM*,  1890,  p.  2 ;  A.  Shepherd,  The  Re^pongOnlity  oj 
Gud,  1906;  W.  H.  G.  Thomas,  in  Wegtmimter  BibU  Coi^er- 


enee,  Mondeeley,  1912,  p.  143. 


D.  Macrae  Tod. 


FALL. — It  is  now  generally  recognized  by 
scholars  that  the  story  of  the  Fall  in  Genesis  is  to 
be  regarded  neither  as  literal  history,  as  Irenaeus, 
Tertullian,  and  Augustine  taught,  nor  as  allegory, 
as  Clement  and  Origen,  following  Philo,  held ;  but 
as  a  myth,  common  to  the  Semitic  group  of  re- 
ligions, in  which  an  attempt  is  made  to  explain 
the  origin  of  the  evils  from  which  mankind  sutters. 
This  myth  has,  however,  been  transformed  to  bring 
it  into  accord  with  the  '  ethical  monotheism '  of 
the  Hebrew  religion.  For  the  present  purpose, 
the  exposition  of  the  apostolic  (in  this  case  exclu- 
sively the  Pauline)  doctrine,  it  is  not  necessary  to 
examine  any  alleged  similar  myth  in  other  re- 
ligions, to  cite  any  of  the  supposed  Babylonian 
parallels,  to  enter  into  the  details  of  the  narrative 
in  Genesis,  or  to  exhibit  the  truth  under  the  mytho- 
logical form,  which  expositors  have  found  in  the 
story  (for  all  these  particulars  the  artt.  in  UDB  i. 
839,  SDB  p.  257,  and  DCG  i.  571  may  be  con- 
sulted). 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  teaching  of  the 
OT  as  a  whole  on  the  subject  of  sin  was  in  the 
slightest  degree  aflected  by  the  narrative  in  Gn  3, 
as  the  instances  cited  to  the  contrary  disappear  on 
closer  scrutiny  ;  but  the  universality  of  man's  sin- 
fulness is  asserted  as  a  fact,  although  no  reason  for 
it  is  ofiered.  It  is  only  when  we  come  to  the 
apocryphal  Jewish  literature  that  the  story  is  given 
the  significance  of  doctrine.  Although,  as  the 
evidence  from  this  source  shows,  Jewish  theology 
in  the  time  of  Jesus  had  taken  up  the  question  of 
the  origin  of  sin  and  death,  yet  in  the  teaching 
of  Jesus  there  is  not  the  faintest  echo  of  Jewish 
thought  upon  the  subject.  His  standpoint  is  that 
of  the  OT,  although  His  revelation  of  God's  Father- 
hood and  man's  sonship  gives  to  the  sin  which 
separates  God  and  man  a  more  tragic  import.  St. 
Paul,  however,  has  given  a  place  in  his  theology  to 
this  contemporary  Jewish  doctrine,  and,  on  account 
of  the  light  it  throws  upon  his  teaching,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  examine  it  more  closely. 

1.  The  connexion  of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  with 
Jewish  teaching. — (a)  "WhUe  in  the  OT  we  have 
the  Ijeginnings,  but  only  the  beginnings,  of  the 
later  doctrine  of  Satan  (Job  l*-^  2'-^,  the  unbeliever 
in,  and  slanderer  of,  man's  goodness  and  godliness ; 
Zee  3^  the  adversary  of  man  to  hinder  God's  grace ; 
1  Ch  21\  the  tempter ;  cf.  2  S  24^  where  it  is  the 
Lord  who  moves  David  to  number  the  people),  yet 
it  is  not  till  we  come  to  "Wis  2--*  that  he  is  identi- 
fied with  the  serpent  who  tempted  Eve :  "  But  bv 
the  en\-y  of  the  devil  death  entered  into  the  world, 
and  they  that  are  of  his  portion  make  trial  thereof. ' 
This  identification  is  assumed  in  Ro  16'*  and  Rev 
12*  2(P  and  is  also  implied  in  Jn  8«  (cf.  1  Jn  S^-"). 

(b)  Woman's  share  in  this  tragedy  for  the  race  is 
mentioned  in  Sir  25^  :  '  From  a  woman  was  the  be- 
ginning of  sin ;  and  because  of  her  we  all  die.'    Of 


394 


FALL 


FALL 


this  detail  of  the  narrative  St.  Paul  also  makes  use 
by  way  of  warning :  '  But  I  fear,  lest  by  any 
means,  as  the  serpent  beguiled  Eve  in  his  crafti- 
ness, your  minds  should  be  corrupted  from  the 
simplicity  and  the  purity  that  is  toward  Christ' 
(2  Co  1 P).  It  is  not  impossible  that  in  this  allusion 
St.  Paul  has  in  view  the  opinion  of  apocalyptic  and 
Rabbinic  writers  that  the  temptation  was  to  un- 
chastity. 

'  The  thought  which  pervades  this  passage  is  that  of  conjugal 
loyalty  and  fidelity  to  one  husband,  and  it  is  dittlcult  to  resist 
the  conclusion  to  which  Everling  0ie  PaxUinUche  Angelologie 
u.  Ddmonologie,  61-57)  comes  in  his  able  discussion  o(  the  pas- 
sage, that  the  mention  of  Eve  in  this  connexion  in  a  clause  in- 
troduced by  an,  makes  it  necessary  to  understand  the  sin  into 
which  she  was  betrayed  as  similar  to  that  into  which  the  Cor- 
inthian Church  is,  figuratively  speakinj,',  in  danger  of  falling, 
namely,  unchastity  and  infidelity  to  her  husband '  (H.  St.  J. 
Thackeray,  The  Relation  of  St.  Paul  to  Conteinporarj/  Jeicish 
Thought,  1900,  p.  52;  cf.  Tennant,  T/w  Fall  and  Original  Sin, 
1903,  p.  251). 

If  this  was  St.  Paul's  belief,  it  adds  force  to  his 
argument  for  woman's  subordination  in  1  Ti  2''' 
'Adam  was  not  beguiled,  but  tlie  woman  being  be- 
guiled hath  fallen  into  transgression.'  Here  again 
St.  Paul  is  either  echoing,  or  in  accord  with,  Jewish 
thought,  for  in  the  Slavonic  Secrets  of  Enoch,  xxxi. 
6,  we  read  :  '  And  on  this  account  he  [Satan]  con- 
ceived designs  against  Adam  ;  in  such  a  manner  he 
entered  [into  Paradise]  and  deceived  Eve.  But  lie 
did  not  touch  Adam'  (cf.  Thackeray,  op.  cit.  pp.  51, 
52).  Such  an  opinion  would  explain  the  harshness 
of  his  tone  and  the  hardness  oi  his  dealing  with 
women. 

(c)  These  are,  however,  subordinate  features  of 
the  narrative ;  but  St.  Paul  is,  in  his  assertion  of 
human  depravity,  not  only  in  accord  with  some 
of  the  sayings  in  the  OT,  but  with  such  explicit 
teaching  as  is  found  in  2  Es  4"  '  How  can  he  that 
is  already  worn  out  with  the  corrupted  world 
understand  incorruption,'  and  7**  '  For  all  that  are 
born  are  defiled  with  iniquities,  and  are  full  of  sins 
and  laden  with  offences.'  But  such  a  view  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  imiversal,  for  Edersheim 
says  expressly  of  the  teaching  of  the  Talmud  :  '  So 
far  as  their  opinions  can  be  gathered  from  their 
writings,  the  great  doctrines  of  Original  Sin,  and 
of  the  sinfulness  of  our  whole  nature,  were  not 
held  by  the  ancient  Rabbis'  (LT*,  1887,  i.  165;  cf. 
Sanday-Headlam,  Bonmns^  [ICC,  1902],  p.  137). 

(d)  Man's  present  racial  condition  is  traced  back 
to  Adam's  fall  (irapdirrufj.a ;  Wis  10^  '  Wisdom 
guarded' to  the  end  the  first  formed  father  of  the 
world,  tliat  was  created  alone,  and  delivered  him 
out  of  his  own  transgression ').  The  teaching  in 
Ro  5'2-2i  is  very  fully  anticipated  in  2  Es  S^i-  ^- : 
'  For  the  lirst  Adam  bearing  a  wicked  heart  trans- 
gressed, and  was  overcome ;  and  not  he  only,  but 
all  they  also  that  are  born  of  him.  Thus  disease 
was  made  permanent ;  and  the  law  was  in  the 
heart  of  the  people  along  with  the  wickedness  of 
tlie  root ;  so  the  good  departed  away,  and  that 
which  was  wicked  abode  still ' ;  4^  '  For  a  grain  of 
evil  seed  was  sown  in  the  heart  of  Adam  from  the 
beginning,  and  how  much  wickedness  hath  it 
brought  forth  tinto  this  time  !  and  how  much  shall 
it  yet  bring  forth  until  the  time  of  threshing  come  ! ' ; 
7"*  'O  thou  Adam,  what  hast  thou  done?  for 
though  it  was  thou  that  sinned,  the  evil  is  not 
fallen  on  thee  alone,  but  upon  all  of  us  that  come  of 
thee.'  While  it  is  generally  assumed  that  in  these 
passages  man's  moral  corruption  in  the  sense  of 
inherited  depravity  is  traced  to  Adam's  trans- 
gression as  its  cause,  yet  Tennant  maintains  that 
the  available  evidence  does  not  support  the  view. 

'The  only  parallels  adduced  by  Sanday  and  Headlam  from 
approximately  contemporary  literature  are  the  passages  of  4 
Ezra  [the  passages  given  above]  relating  to  the  cor  maliijnum. 
But  the  cor  macignum  is  certainly  the  ptzer  hara  of  the  Kabbis, 
regarded  by  Pseudo-Ezra,  as  well  as  by  talmudic  writers,  as  in- 
herent in  Adam  from  the  first,  and  as  the  cause,  not  the  con- 


sequence, of  his  falL  St.  Paul,  curiously  enough,  nowhere 
appears  to  make  use  of  the  current  doctrine  of  the  evil  yezer ; 
certainly  not  in  connexion  with  the  Fall.  There  would  seem  to 
be  no  evidence  that  St.  Paul  held,  even  in  germ,  the  doctrine  ol 
an  inherited  corruption  derived  from  Adam '  (op.  cit.  p.  264  f.). 

To  the  explicit  challenge  of  a  common  under- 
standing of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  we  must  return 
when  dealing  with  it  in  detail  in  the  next  section  ; 
but  meanwhile  it  may  be  made  clear  that  it  is  not 
the  assertion  of  a  connexion  between  Adam's  fall 
and  man's  sinfulness  which  is  denied  in  these 
passages,  but  the  inference  from  them  that  Adam's 
tall  is  regarded  as  the  cause  of  moral  depravity, 
and  not  merely  as  its  first  instance. 

Support  is  given  to  this  interpretation  of  the  evidence  by 
Weber's  sunmiary  of  the  teaching  of  the  Talmud  (Altsi/n.  Theol. 
p.  216,  quoted  by  Sanday-Headlam,  op.  cit.  p.  137) :  '  liy  the 
Fall  man  came  under  a  curse,  is  guilty  of  death,  and  his  right 
relation  to  God  is  rendered  difficult.  Slore  than  this  cannot  be 
said.  Sin,  to  which  the  bent  and  leaning  had  already  been 
planted  in  man  by  creation,  had  become  a  fact ;  the  "evil  im- 
pulse" (=--cor  rnalignum)  gained  the  mastery  over  mankind, 
who  can  only  resist  it  by  the  greatest  efforts  ;  before  the  Fall  it 
had  had  power  over  him,  but  no  such  ascendancy  (Ceberrnacht).' 
After  this  quotation  Sanday-Headlam  continue  the  discussion 
in  the  words  :  '  Hence  when  the  writer  says  a  little  further  on 
that  according  to  the  Rabbis  "there  is  such  a  thing  as  trans- 
mission of  guilt,  but  not  such  a  thing  as  transmission  of  sin  (Es 
gibt  eine  Erbschuld,  aber  keine  Eriisiinde),"  the  negative  pro- 
position is  due  chiefly  to  the  clearness  with  which  the  Kabbis 
(like  Apoc.  Daruch)  insist  upon  free-will  and  direct  individual 
responsibility  '  (op.  cit.  p.  137  f.). 

The  conclusion  to  which  one  is  led  is  that  a 
common  doctrine  cannot  be  confidently  affirmed ; 
and  that  if  St.  Paul  does  teach  that  man's  moral 
nature  was  changed  for  the  worse  by  the  Fall,  he 
is  not  following  a  clearly  expressed  and  generally 
accepted  Jewish  doctrine  on  the  subject.  The 
bearing  of  his  distinctive  doctrine  of  the  flesh  on, 
and  the  meaning  of,  1  Co  15^'-''''  in  relation  to  the 
Jewish  doctrine  of  the  cor  malignum  must  be  re- 
served for  subsequent  discussion,  while  the  feature 
referred  to  in  the  above  quotation  may  here  be 
illustrated. 

(c)  There  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  distinctness  and 
emphasis  with  which  Jewish  thought  insists  on 
man's  individual  responsibility,  sometimes  even,  it 
would  seem,  in  opposition  to  the  view  of  a  moral 
solidarity  of  the  race,  as  the  following  passages 
show  :  2  Es  3-®  '  In  all  things  doing  even  as  Adam 
and  all  his  generation  had  done :  for  they  also 
bare  a  wicked  heart'  ;  8'9-««  'The  Most  Hi"h  willed 
not  that  man  should  come  to  nought :  but  they 
which  be  created  h<ave  themselves  deliled  the  name 
of  him  that  made  them,  and  were  unthankful  unto 
him  whicli  prepared  life  for  them ' ;  9"-  '^  '  As 
many  as  have  scorned  my  law,  while  they  had  yet 
liberty,  and,  when  as  yet  place  of  repentance  was 
open  unto  them,  understood  not,  but  despised  it ; 
the  same  must  know  it  after  death  by  torment.' 
The  strongest  assertion  of  tlie  exclusion  of  the 
derivation  of  any  guilt  from  Adam  is  found,  how- 
ever, in  Apoc.  liar.  liv.  15,  19  :  '  For  though  Adam 
first  sinned  and  brought  untimely  death  uijon  all, 
yet  of  those  who  were  born  from  him  each  one  of 
them  has  pre^iared  for  his  own  soul  torment  t« 
come,  and  again  each  of  them  has  chosen  for  him- 
self glories  to  come.  .  .  .  Adam  is  therefore  not 
the  cause,  save  only  of  his  own  soul,  but  each  one 
of  us  has  been  the  Adam  of  his  own  soul '  (Charles's 
translation  in  Apoc.  and  Pseudepig.  of  the  OT, 
1913,  ii.  511  f.).  While  St.  Paul  is  constant  in  his 
assertion  of  individual  liberty,  yet  he  does  not 
think  of  opposing  it  to,  or  trying  to  harmonize  it 
with,  the  common  sin  of  the  race,  sprung  from 
Adam.  Either  he  was  not  conscious  of  any  con- 
tradiction, or  regarded  it  as  a  problem  insoluble  by 
man's  wisdom. 

(f)  On  the  connexion  between  Adam's  sin  and 
the  introduction  of  death  there  is  no  such  un- 
certainty in  the  evidence.     The  curse  that  rests  on 


FALL 


FALL 


395 


man  since  the  Fall  is  mentioned  in  Sir  40' :  '  Great 
travail  is  creat€<i  for  many  men,  and  a  heavy  yoke 
is  upon  the  sons  of  Adam.'  The  connexion  between 
death  and  the  woman's  sin  stated  in  25^  and 
between  death  and  the  devil's  en^-y  aiBrmed  in 
Wis  2-'*  has  already  been  referred  to.  More  ex- 
plicit is  the  reference  to  the  narrative  of  Genesis 
m  2  Es  3" :  '  And  unto  him  thou  gavest  thy  one 
commandment :  which  he  transgressed,  and  im- 
mediately thou  appointedst  death  for  him  and  in 
his  generation.'  So  also  the  Apoc.  Bar.  xvii.  3: 
'  Adam  .  .  .  brought  death  and  cut  oti"  the  years 
of  those  who  were  bom  from  him'  (cf.  xxiii.  4). 
There  are  two  passages,  however,  that  seem  to 
teach  that  man  was  by  nature  mortal,  and  that 
the  Fall  only  ha.*tened  the  process :  '  Adam  hrst 
sinned  and  brought  untimely  death  {mortem  im- 
maturam)  upon  all'  (liv.  15);  and  'Owing  to  hLs 
transgression  untimely  death  (mors  ^uae  non  erat 
tempore  eius)  came  into  being'  (Ivi.  6).  Apart 
from  the  two  classical  passages  in  St.  Paul's  letter 
on  the  relation  of  Christ  and  Adam  in  Ko  5  and  1 
Co  15,  which  must  be  discussed  in  detail,  death  is 
connected  with  sin  as  its  penalty  in  Ro  6^  '  The 
wages  of  sin  is  death,'  and  in  Ja  1*'  '  Sin,  when  it 
is  fullgrown,  bringeth  forth  death.'  We  must  now- 
pass  to  the  discussion  of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  the 
Fall. 

2.  St.  Paal's  doctrine  of  the  Fall.— Although 
the  classical  passage  on  the  subject  is  Ro  5^"", 
yet  there  are  references  to  Adam  in  1  Co  lo^-  22-  «•  « 
which  may  be  briefly  examined  in  so  far  as  they 
present  doctrine  supplementary  to  that  in  Ro  5. 

(a)  1  Co  15-^-  ^  states  the  same  doctrine.  The 
contrast  is  emphasized  in  v.**  by  the  description  of 
the  first  Adam,  in  accordance  with  the  account  of 
his  creation  in  Gn  2^,  as  living  soul,  while  Christ, 
the  last  Adam,  is  a  life-giving  spirit.  Adam  was 
given  life  by  the  breath  or  spirit  of  God,  but  could 
not  impart  any  ;  Christ  not  only  has  life,  but 
gives  it.  The  psychic  order  of  the  first  Adam 
necessarily  preceded  the  pneumatic  order  of  the 
last  (1  Co  15*):  so  far  there  is  no  moral  censure 
of  the  first  Adam  implied,  and  the  Apostle's 
statement  corrects  an  eiTor  into  which  theological 
speculation  on  man's  primitive  condition  oft€n 
fell.  'The  Apostle,'  says  Godet  (ad  loc.),  'does 
not  share  the  notion,  long  regarded  as  orthodox, 
that  humanity  was  created  in  a  state  of  moral 
and  physical  perfection.  .  .  .  Independently  of  the 
Fall,  there  must  have  been  progress  from  an  in- 
ferior state,  the  psj-chic,  which  he  posits  as  man's 
point  of  departure,  to  a  superior  state,  the  spiritual, 
foreseen  and  determined  as  man's  goal  from  the 
first'  (quoted  by  Findlay,  EGT,  '  1  Cor.,'  1900,  p. 
938).  This  inferior  state  did  not  include  for  St. 
Paul  the  cor  maligmim,  which  Jewish  thought 
assigned  to  Adam.  It  is  not  so  certain  that  the 
next  statement,  'The  first  man  is  of  the  earth, 
earthy  :  the  second  man  is  of  heaven  '  (v.*"),  refei-s 

ly  to  physical  origin,   and  does  not  indicate 
loral  character. 

Xo'Ckoz,  as  Ph  3'*,  Col  3^  suggest,  seems  to  have 
a  moral  connotation.  But  even  if  this  be  so,  it 
does  not  make  certain  that  St.  Paul  assigned  the 
yezer  hara  to  the  unfallen  Adam,  as,  since  the 
reference  in  the  '  second  man  from  heaven '  is  not 
to  the  pre-existent  Word,  but  to  the  Risen  Lord, 
the  contrast  is  between  Adam  fallen  as  the  source 
of  death  to  mankind  and  Christ  risen  as  the  foun- 
tain of  its  eternal  life.  If  v.**  be  not  merely  a 
prediction,  but  an  exhortation,  as  many  ancient 
authorities  attest  (see  RVm),  this  moral  reference 
becomes  certain.  This  whole  passage,  accordingly, 
does  disprove  the  view  that  man's  primitive  con- 
dition was  one  of  such  perfection  that  there  was 
no  need  of  progress  ;  but  it  otters  no  support  to 
the  assumption   that   St.   Paul  regarded  Adam's 


position  as  so  inferior  morally  that  the  FaU  would 
to  him  appear  as  inevitable.  As  Ro  5"  shows,  he 
assigns  to  Adam  a  greater  moral  culpability  than 
to  his  descendants  before  the  Law  was  given,  for 
he  transgressed  a  definite  commandment  of  God. 
Nor  does  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  flesh  (q.v.) 
justify  any  such  assumption  about  the  moral  de- 
fect of  man's  state  before  the  Fall,  as  it  is  not  a 
physical,  but  an  ethical,  conception,  and  relates 
to  mankind  as  it  is  for  man's  present  experience, 
not  to  any  previous  state  of  man.  If  we  cannot, 
therefore,  identify  the  flesh  with  the  yezer  hara 
of  unfallen  man,  unless  we  leave  in  St.  Paul's 
system  the  antinomy  of  a  two-fold  origin  of  sinful- 
ness, one  individual,  the  other  racial,  we  are  forced 
to  conclude  that  in  some  way  he  did  connect  the 
presence  of  the  flesh  in  sinful  mankind  with  the 
entrance  of  sin  at  the  Fall. 

(b)  The  further  discussion  of  this  topic  brings  ti» 
to  the  closer  consideration  of  Ro  5*-'^.  (o)  The 
purpose  of  the  passage  must  be  clearly  kept  in 
view.  St.  Paul  is  not  proving  man's  universal 
sinfulness — he    has    done    that    by   an    empirical 

Eroof,  a  historical  induction,  in  chs.  1-3 ;  nor  is 
e  concerned  to  explain  the  origin  of  sin.  He 
assumes  as  not  needing  any  proof  that  man's  sin- 
fulness is  the  result  of  Adam's  fall.  From  that 
fact  he  deduces  the  conclusion  that  one  person  can 
be  so  related  to  the  race  as  to  be  the  author  to  it 
of  both  sin  and  death.  If  that  be  so  in  the  case 
of  Adam,  it  can  be  and  is  so  in  the  case  of  Christ 
as  the  Author  of  righteousness  and  life,  and  even 
so  much  more  as  Christ  is  superior  to  Adam.  The 
purpose  of  the  passage  is  to  show  that  Christ  can 
and  does  bring  more  blessing  to  man  than  Adam 
has  brought  curse.  We  go  beyond  what  St.  Paul's 
own  intention  warrants  in  asserting  that  his  doc- 
trine of  salvation  in  Christ  rests  on,  and  faUs  to 
the  ground  without,  his  teaching  on  the  Fall.  As. 
his  proof  of  the  sinfulness  of  mankind  is  empirical, 
so  ms  certainty  of  salvation  in  Christ  is  rooted  in 
his  experience,  and  not  in  the  opinions  he  shared 
with  his  contemporaries  regarding  the  origin  of 
sin.  It  is  important  at  the  outset  of  this  discus- 
sion to  assert  this  consideration,  as  it  will  relieve 
us  of  the  painful  anxiety,  wliich  many  exponents 
of  this  passage  hitherto  have  felt  and  shown,  to 
justify  in  some  sense  or  another  this  story  of  the 
Fall,  in  spite  of  the  origin  criticism  now  assigns 
to  it,  as  an  essential  constituent  of  Christian  theo- 
logy. 

(^)  In  V."  St.  Paul  aflirms  the  entrance  of  sin 
into  the  world,  and  death  as  its  penalty,  as  the 
result  of  Adam's  transgression,  and  the  diffusion 
of  death  among  mankind  in  consequence  either  of 
Adam's  sin  alone,  or  of  the  spread  of  sin  among 
all  his  descendants.  There  is  this  ambiguity 
about  the  meaning  in  the  clause  '  for  that  all 
sinned,'  which  is  not  only  grammatically  irregular, 
but  seems  even  to  be  logically  inconsistent.  To 
fix  his  meaning  we  must  examine  his  language 
very  closely.  The  connective  phrase  €<^  v  has 
been  variously  interpreted.  It  is  improbable  that 
(f)  is  masculine  and  the  antecedent  either  Adam  or 
death  ;  taking  it  as  neuter,  the  rendering  '  because '' 
is  more  probable  than  'in  like  manner  as'  or  'in 
so  far  as.'     In  what  sense  did   'all  .sin'   (xdjrres 

(I)  The  Greek  commentators  take  the  obvious. 
sense  of  the  words,  regarded  apart  from  the  con- 
text :  '  all  as  a  matter  of  fact  by  their  own  choice 
committed  sin.'  To  this  interpretation  two  objec- 
tions from  the  context  may  be  urged.  Firstly,  if 
individual  death  is  the  penalty  of  individual  sin, 
Adam  is  not  responsible  for  the  sin  or  the  death, 
and  so  there  is  no  parallelism  with  Christ  as  the 
source  of  righteousness  and  life  to  all ;  but  the 
purpose  of  the  whole  argument  is  to  prove  a  con- 


396 


FALL 


FALL 


nexion  between  Adam  and  tlie  race  similar  to  that 
between  Clirist  and  redeemed  humanity.  Secondlj', 
in  the  next  verse  St.  Paul  goes  on  to  show  tliat 
till  the  time  of  Moses,  in  the  absence  of  law,  the 
descendants  of  Adam  could  not  be  held  as  blame- 
worthy as  Adam  himself  was ;  while  sin  was  in 
the  world  it  could  not  be  imputed  as  personal 
guilt,  incurring  of  itself,  apart  from  the  connexion 
with  Adam,  the  penalty  of  death. 

(2)  Some  connexion  with  Adam  must  be  asserted  ; 
but  of  what  kind  ?  An  exjjlanation  accepted  by 
many  cominentators,  while  on  grammatical  grounds 
not  rendering  i<l>  i}  '  in  whom  '  but  '  because,'  yet 
treats  the  sentence  as  conveying  the  equivalent 
meaning.  Bengel  presents  this  view  in  its  classi- 
cal expression:  om7ies  peccarnnt,  Adamo  peccante. 
If  St.  rani  had  meant  this,  Avhy  did  he  not  supply 
the  words?  it  is  often  asked.  But  when  we 
observe  the  irregularity  of  the  structure  of  the 
veiy  sentence,  introducing  such  ambiguity  into 
St.  Paul's  meaning,  we  do  not  seem  entitled  to 
expect  him  to  express  himself  with  such  logical 
precision.  On  this  ground  alone  we  must  not  set 
aside  the  explanation.  But  even  if  we  accept  it, 
what  sense  are  we  to  attach  to  the  statement  that 
in  Adam's  sin  all  sinned  ? 

(i. )  Firstly,  there  is  the  realistic  explanation  : 
that  as  Adam  was  the  ancestor  of  the  race,  so  all 
his  descendants  were  physically  included  in  him, 
even  as  Levi  is  represented  to  have  paid  tithes  to 
Melchizedek  'in  the  loins'  of  Abraham  (He  T**'^"). 
But  such  a  physical  explanation  only  increases  the 
difficulty  of  understanding  the  connexion. 

(ii.)  Secondly,  there  is  the  lefjal  explanation,  so 
prominent  in  the  federal  theology  of  the  Reformed 
<I!hurch.  Adam  acted,  not  for  himself  alone,  but 
as  representative  of  the  race,  and  so  the  race  shares 
the  responsibility  of  his  act.  But  to  this  explana- 
tion there  is  the  obvious  objection  that  a  repre- 
sentative must  be  chosen  by  those  for  whom  he 
acts,  if  they  are  to  be  in  any  sense  responsible  for 
his  acts  ;  and  the  race  had  no  voice  in  the  choice 
■of  its  first  ancestor.  If  the  objection  is  met  by 
appealing  to  a  Divine  appointment,  the  plea  of  in- 
justice is  not  answered,  but  the  will  of  God  is  re- 
presented as  overriding  the  rights  of  man.  In  a 
Calvinistic  theology  alone  could  such  an  explana- 
tion carry  conviction. 

(iii.)  Thirdly,  the  explanation  more  generally 
accepted  is  that  from  Adam  all  mankind  has  in- 
herited a  tendency  to  evil,  which,  while  not 
abolishing  individual  liberty  and  responsibility  so 
as  to  make  individual  transgression  inevitable, 
yet  as  a  fact  of  experience  has  resulted  in  the  uni- 
versal sinfulness  of  the  race.  This  is  the  view  of 
Sanday-Headlam  {op.  cit.  p.  134),  and  they  support 
it  with  the  references  to  Jewish  literature  already 
noted.  The  writer  of  this  article  in  his  Com- 
mentary on  Romans  (Century  Bible,  1901)  accepted 
this  conclusion.  *  Without  expressly  stating  it, 
Paul  assumes  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  in  the 
sense  of  an  inherited  tendency  to  sin,  for  what  he 
affirms  beyond  all  doubt  here  is  that  both  the  sin 
and  the  death  of  the  human  race  are  the  ettects  of 
Adam's  transgression'  (p.  154).  A  further  study 
of  the  problem  has  led  him,  however,  to  recognize 
at  least  the  possibility  of  another  explanation. 
Tennant,  who  of  modern  writers  has  made  this 
subject  specially  his  own,  in  his  three  books.  The 
Origin  and  Propagation  of  Sin  (1902),  The  Sources 
of  the  Doctrines  of  the  Fall  and  Original  Sin 
(1903),  and  The  Concept  of  Sin  (1912),  has  not  only 
•contended  against  the  doctrine  of  such  an  inherited 
tendency,  but  has  also  maintained  that  this  idea 
is  not  present  in  St.  Paul's  mind  in  this  pass- 
age. Referring  to  S.anday-Headlam's  objection  to 
Bengel's  explanation  that  the  words  'in  Adam' 
would  have  been    given   had  St.   Paul  intended  I 


that  meaning,  he  presses  a  similar  objection  to 
their  view. 

'That  suggested  by  Dr.  Sanday  and  Mr.  Headlam,  from  whose 
weighty  opinion  it  is  here  vetilured  to  diverge,  is  an  equally 
important  element  to  be  "supplied."  Indeed,  it  may  be  asked 
whflher  the  idea  of  inherited  sinfulness,  as  the  cause  of  death 
to  all  who  come  between  Adam  and  Moses,  does  not  call  at 
least  as  loudly  for  explicit  mention,  if  St.  Paul's  full  meaning 
be  expressible  in  terms  of  it,  as  that  signified  by  Bengel's  ad- 
dition  of  "in  Adam"?  Would  it  not  be  e<|ually  novel  to  the 
reader,  so  far  as  our  knowledge  of  the  tliought  of  that  age  goes, 
and  more  remote  from  the  actual  language  of  the  verse  and  it8 
context  ? '  {The  Fall  and  Original  Sin,  p.  261). 

Reserving  for  subsequent  treatment  the  wider 
issue  of  whether  this  is  or  is  not  an  inherited  ten- 
dency to  evil,  we  must  meanwhile  look  at  the  ex- 
planation Tennant  himself  oilers  of  this  verse. 

(iv.)  Though  he  rejects  the  realistic  explana- 
tion in  any  form,  either  as  already  mentioned  or 
as  presented  in  Augustine's  theory  '  which  makes 
human  nature  a  certain  quantum  of  being  and 
treats  descent  from  Adam  as  a  division  of  this  mass 
of  human  nature  into  parts '  (Stevens,  The  Pauline 
Theology,  1892,  p.  136  f.),  he  accepts  the  following 
explanation : 

'  Much  more  probable,  in  the  opinion  of  the  present  writer,  is 
the  suggestion  that,  in  his  identification  of  the  race  and  Adam, 
St  Paul  was  using  a  form  of  thought  occurring  by  no  means  ex- 
clusively in  the  particular  verse  of  his  writings  with  which  we 
are  here  concerned.  Stevens  has  appropriately  named  it 
"mystical  realism."  "It  is  characteristic  of  Paul's  mind," says 
this  writer,  "  to  conceive  religious  truth  under  forms  which  are 
determined  by  personal  relationshiji.  These  relations,  espyecially 
the  two  just  specilied  (that  of  unregenerate  humanity  to  Adam, 
and  of  spiritual  humanity  to  Christ),  may  be  termed  myiticalva 
the  sense  of  being  unique,  vital,  and  inscrutable  ;  they  are  real 
in  the  sense  that  sinful  humanity  is  conceived  as  being  actually 
present  and  participant  in  Adam's  sin  .  .  ."  (op.  eit.  p.  32  f., 
and  elsewhere).  This  mystical  realism  is  a  style  of  thought,  a 
rhetorical  mode  ;  it  is  not  a  philosophy  :  the  realism  is  only  figu- 
rative. St.  Paul  identifies  the  race,  as  sinners,  with  Adam  in 
the  same  sense  that  he  identifies  the  believer  with  Christ.  "  The 
moral  defilement  of  man  is  represented  as  contracted  in  and 
with  the  sin  of  Adam  "  (op.  cit.  p.  37).  .  .  .  This  attractive  in- 
terpretation of  St.  Paul's  meaning  has  the  great  virtue  of  ex- 
plaining his  words,  which  involve  so  many  difficulties  when 
taken,  as  they  generally  have  been,  with  too  much  literalness, 
as  only  a  particular  case  of  a  mode  of  speech  which  is  character- 
istic of  the  apostle.  And  so  long  as  it  is  not  so  far  pressed  as 
to  lose  sight  of  the  undeniable  connexion  between  the  apostle's 
teaching  and  the  somewhat  indefinite  belief  which  he  inherited 
from  Jewish  doctors  as  to  the  connexion  between  the  Fall  and 
human  sin  and  death,  it  would  seem  to  supply  the  best  key  to 
the  thought  of  this  difficult  passage '  (TAe  Fall  and  Original  Sin, 
pp.  262-3). 

If  it  be  the  case  that,  as  Tennant  maintains, 
Jewish  thought  assigned  the  cor  malignum  or  the 
yezer  hara  to  Adam  even  before  his  Fall  as  well  as 
to  his  descendants,  and  so  did  not  teach  a  moral 
corruption  of  man's  action  as  a  result  of  the  Fall  (see 
op.  cit.  pp.  264-5),  it  does  appear  more  likely  that 
St.  Paul  did  not  hold  the  doctrine,  and  that  ac- 
cordingly it  cannot  be  here  introduced  to  explain 
his  meaning.  If  this  alternative  must  be  excluded, 
although  the  writer  is  not  finally  convinced  tiiat  it 
must,  the  explanation  Tennant  accepts  does  appear 
the  most  probable  among  all  the  others  already 
mentioned.  It  must  be  frankly  admitted  that  we 
cannot  reach  certainty  on  this  matter,  and  it  does 
not  seem  at  all  necessary  for  a  modern  reconstruc- 
tion of  Christian  doctrine  that  we  should.  What- 
ever St.  Paul's  view  of  the  Fall  and  its  consequences 
may  have  been,  seeing  that  it  rests  ultimately  on  a 
narrative  which  modern  scholarship  compels  us  to 
regard  as  a  myth,  however  purilied  and  elevated 
in  the  new  context  given  to  it  in  the  record  of  the 
Divine  revelation,  and  is  influenced  directly  by 
contemporary  Jewish  thought,  it  cannot  be  regarded 
as  authoritative  for  our  Christian  faith,  however 
great  may  be  its  historical  interest  as  an  instance 
of  the  endeavour  of  a  great  mind  to  find  a  solution 
for  a  great  jjroblem. 

3.  The  doctrine  of  the  Fall  and  modern  Chrii- 
tian  thought.— Although  the  writer  holds  the  con- 


FALL 


FA^HLY 


39r 


viclion  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  Christian 
theologian  to  try  and  save  as  much  as  he  dare  of 
the  wreckage  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Fall,  after  the 
siomi  of  literary  and  historical  criticism  lias  passed 
over  it,  a  few  sentences  may  be  added  in  closing 
this  article  as  to  the  relation  of  modem  Christian 
thought  to  the  doctrine. 

(o)  What  has  already  been  nrged  must  be  re- 
peated :  that  the  teaching  of  the  UT  regarding  sin 
and  salvation  does  not  rest  at  all  on  the  narrative 
in  Gn  3,  but  on  the  reality  of  human  experience 
and  the  testimony  of  human  conscience  ;  that  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  about  man  as  the  child  of  God, 
though  lost,  has  not  this  doctrine  as  its  foundation, 
but  comes  from  the  moral  insight  and  spiritual  dis- 
cernment of  the  sinlei^s  Son  of  God  and  Brother  of 
men  ;  that,  apart  from  a  few  casual  allusions  in 
the  rest  of  the  NT,  the  two  passages  which  have 
been  considered  in  Ro  5  and  1  Co  15  are  the  only 
express  statements  of  the  connexion  of  sin  and 
death  with  the  Fall ;  and  that  when  we  look  more 
closely  at  the  mode  in  which  the  classical  passage 
in  Ko  5  is  introduced  we  find  that  its  primary  in- 
tention is  not  to  prove  either  man's  sinfulness  or 
to  otter  an  explanation  of  its  origin,  but  to  demon- 
strate the  greater  etticacy  of  Christ's  obedience 
than  of  Adam's  transgression  in  their  consequences 
for  the  race.  These  are  surely  weighty  reasons 
why  modem  Christian  thought  should  no  longer 
assign  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Fall  the  prominence 
hitherto  accorded  to  it. 

(b)  It  is  with  the  presence,  guilt,  and  power  of 
sin  in  individual  experience  and  racial  history,  as 
the  human  need  which  the  Divine  grace  in  Christ 
meets,  that  Christian  theology  is  alone  concerned, 
and  all  other  questions  of  the  origin  of  sin  or  death 
are  speculative,  and  not  practical,  and  should  be 
assigned  the  secondary  place  that  properly  belongs 
to  them. 

(c)  Guided  by  these  two  considerations,  we  may 
lastly  ask  the  question.  How  much  remains  of  this 
doctrine  for  our  modern  Christian  thought?  (1) 
While  the  unity  of  the  human  race  has  not  been 
demonstrated  by  science,  this  theory  is  not  at  all 
improbable,  and  so  descent  from  one  pair  of  an- 
cestors is  not  incredible.  (2)  While  death  as 
physical  dissolution  is  proved  by  science  to  have 
been  antecedent  to  man's  appearance  on  earth,  and 
while  death  seems  a  natural  necessity  for  man  as  a 
physical  organism,  we  need  not  try  to  justify  St. 
Paul  by  assuming  either  that  God,  anticipating 
human  sin,  introduced  death  as  its  penalty  into  the 
very  structure  of  the  world  at  the  Creation,  or  that, 
haa  man  not  sinned,  he  would  so  have  developed 
morally  and  spiritually  as  to  have  transcended  the 
natural  necessitj'  of  death,  and  have  attained  im- 
mortality (because  these  speculations  have  no  con- 
tact ^^•ith  experience).  But  we  may  recognize  that 
for  him  death  was  not  physical  dissolution  merely, 
but  death  in  its  totality  as  it  is  for  the  human  con- 
sciousness, and  may  press  the  question,  Can  it  be 
denied  that  the  terror  and  darkness  of  death  for 
the  mind  and  heart  of  man  are  due  in  large  measure 
to  his  sense  of  guilt,  and  the  ettects  of  sin  on  his 
reason,  conscience,  and  spirit  ?  Between  death  as 
such  an  experience  and  sin  we  can  even  to-day 

_admit  that  there  is  a  connexion.  (3)  While  the 
jmmon  assumption  that  the  savage  represents 
imitive  man  is  unwarranted,  and  we  may  infer 

'?bat,  since  man's  mental,  moral,  and  spiritual  de- 
velopment in  history  proves  the  great  distinction 
between  him  in  his  natural  endowments  and  all  the 
lower  animals,  man  was  »ven  at  the  earliest  stage 
of  that  development  already  far  removed  from  the 
brute,  yet  all  speculation  as  to  what  he  originally 
was  is  precarious,  as  it  rests  on  no  solid  foundation 
of  assured  knowledge.  (4)  While  the  dispute  as 
regards  the  inheritance  of  acquired  characters  does 


not  directly  atl'ect  Christian  thought  (as  it  has  yet. 
to  be  proved  that  the  laws  of  physical  and  mental 
or  moral  inheritance  must  be  identical),  yet  t he- 
Christian  theologian  is  bound  to  admit  that  th& 
resemblances  we  do  find  between  parents  and 
children  may  be  explained  by  social  as  much  as  by 
physical  heredity,  by  the  influence  of  the  moral 
environment  in  youth  as  much  as  by  the  inheritance 
at  birth  of  the  moral  characteristics  of  parents. 
While  the  writer  is  not  convinced  that  Tennant  has, 
proved  his  contention,  that  the  appetites  and  im- 
pulses of  the  child  are  entirely  natural,  and  that 
the  factor  of  heredity  may  be  excluded  from  the 
origin  of  sin  in  the  indi\'idual,  he  has  at  least  com- 
pelled a  reconsideration  of  the  whole  question.. 
The  sin  in  the  race  does  atiect  the  development  of 
each  member  of  it  whether  by  social  or  by  physical, 
heredity  ;  but  when,  where,  or  how  sin  first  entered 
we  do  not  know,  for  that  neither  caa  wan  discover- 
nor  has  God  revealed. 

LiTERATrRB.— In  addition  to  the  aathorities  cited  throughout, 
the  art.,  see  J.  S.  Cajidlish,  The  Biblical  Doctrine  of  Sin,  1893;. 
J.  Laidlaw,  The  Bible  Doctrine  of  Man,  new  ed.,  l69o ;  H. 
Wheeler  Robijison,  The  Christian  Doctrine  of  Man,  1911 ;" 
J.  OiT,  God's  Image  m  Man  and  its  De/aeement  in  the  Light  of 
Modem  Denial*,  1905;  W.  E.  Orchard,  Modem  Theories  6/ 
Sin,  1909 ;  F.  J.  Hall,  Evolution  and  the  PaU,  1910. 

Alfred  E.  Gar\te. 
FALLING  AWAY.— See  Apostasy  and  Axxi-- 

CHKIST. 

FALSE  PROPHET.— See  Apocalypse. 

FAMILY.— 1.  The  idea  of  'family'  is  repre- 
sented in  the  XT  by  -ra-rpid,  oikos,  and  oIkio. — (a) 
rarpid  is  used  in  Lk  2*  for  '  lineage,'  '  descendants ' 
(of  David);  in  Ac  3^  (in  plural)  for  'races'  of 
mankind  ;  and  in  Eph  3^,  where  there  is  a  play  on. 
words  between  ya-Hip  and  its  derivative  rarpia: 
'the  Father,  from  whom  all  fatherhood  (RV  text :. 
'every  family,'  AV  wrongly  :  'the  whole  family'), 
in  heaven  and  earth  is  named.'  Though  'family' 
is  here  the  literal  translation,  yet,  since  the 
English  word  '  family '  is  not  derived  from  '  father,' 
the  above  paraphrase  suggested  by  J.  Armitage 
Robinson  (Com.  in  loc.),  who  here  follows  the 
Syriac  and  the  Latin  Vulgate,  is  best,  and  over- 
comes the  ditticnlty  presented  to  the  English 
reader  by  the  existence  of  'families'  in  heaven, 
in  opposition  to  Mt  22*.  Fatherhood,  in  a  real,- 
sense,  there  must  be  in  heaven,  and  it  is  '  named  ' 
from  God  the  Father.  Thackeray,  indeed,  suggests 
(The  Relation  of  St.  Paul  to  Contemporary  Jewish 
Thought,  1900,  p.  148  f.)  that  orders  of  angels  are 
meant,  and  he  quotes  a  Rabbinical  phrase,  '  His 
family  the  angels';  but  'families'  (plural)  of 
angels  are  not  mentioned,  and  the  suggestion  is 
hardly  necessar>%  Another  way  out  of  the  diffi- 
culty is  seen  in  the  i'.^.  tparpia  ( =  tppdrpa),  i.e.  '  tribe,' 
but  this  is  an  obvious  gloss  which  spoils  the  sense. 
Cf.  -rarpidpxii^  in  He  7* :  Abraham  the  '  father  of 
the  whole  family  of  faith'  (Westcott) ;  the  word  is 
used  of  David  and  of  the  sons  of  Jacob  in  Ac  2=*  7*. 

(b)  (HKos,  besides  being  used  for  'house'  in. 
the  sense  of  a  structure,  represents  (like  domus) 
familia,  the  'family'  in  its  widest  sense  (see  also 
Home).  It  is  used  (1)  for  all  living  under  one  roof 
— father,  mother,  near  relations,  and  dependents— 
frequently  in  the  NT :  Ac  7'"»  (Pharaoh),  10*  and 
11"  (Cornelius),  16*'  (Philippian  jailer:  so  v.** 
Tavotjct  'with  all  his  house,' here  only  in  NT),  18* 
(Crispus),  1  Co  li«  (Stephanas),  1  Ti  »«•  (the 
bishop),  o*  (the  widow),  2  Ti  l'*  and  4"  (Onesi- 

E horns,  who  apparently  was  dead,  and  whose 
ousehold  is  nevertheless  named  after  him  :  see 
j  below,  2  (d)).  He  11"  (Noah),  and,  in  plural,  1  Ti  S'- 
j  (deacons).  Tit  1"  (Christians  generally)  ;  (2)  for 
I  descendants,  Lk  1=^2*;  (3)  for  God: s  family,  the- 
I  house  of  God  (see  below,  3). 


398 


FAMILY 


FAlVnLY 


(c)  oiKla  is  similarly  used  for  a  '  household  '  in  Ph 
422  (Ciesar),  Mt  10"  12-»,  Jn  4'»  (the  Capernaum 
royal  officer),  1  Co  16^*  (Stephanas) ;  and  therefore 
for  'possessions'  in  the  phrase  'widows'  houses,' 
Mk  12^»,  Lk  20«,  and  inferior  MSS  of  Mt23'«. 

2.  Members  of  the  family. — (a)  Father.  —  The 
father,  if  alive,  is  the  head  of  the  family  {pater- 
familias), and  exercises  authority  over  all  its 
members.*  He  is  the  'master'  or  'goodman'  of 
the  house  (olKodeair&Tti^),  Mt  24«,  Mk  14"  (in  Lk 
22'^  olKoSeair&Ttji  t^j  oi/ciaj),  aJid  the  '  lord '  (Kvpioi) 
of  the  household  (oUfTtla),  Mt  24**.  That  in  some 
sense  he  is  the  priest  of  his  own  family  appears 
from  He  10"^  where  the  spiritual  family,  the  house 
of  God,  has  our  Lord  as  'a  great  priest  over'  it 
<see  below,  3).  The  subordination  of  the  family  to 
the  father  is  a  favourite  subject  with  St.  Paul, 
■who,  though  the  Apostle  of  liberty,  carefully 
ffuards  against  anarchy.  His  liberty  is  that  of  the 
Latin  collect :  '  Deus  .  .  .  cui  servire  regnare  est ' 
(paraphrased  :' O  God  .  .  .  whose  service  is  perfect 
freedom').  He  lays  down  the  general  principle  of 
subordination  for  all  Christians  in  Eph  5-^  (cf.  Ro 
13>,  1  Co  IS'*,  and  1  P  5»),  and  then  an))lies  it  to 
Christian  families.  The  husband  is  the  head  of 
the  wife  as  Christ  is  Head  of  the  Church  ;  husbands 
must  love  and  honour  their  wives,  for  they  are  one 
flesh,  and  wives  must  be  in  subjection  to  their 
husbands  and  reverence  them  (Eph  5-'-"'''  ^^"^,  Col 
3i«'-,  Tit  2«- ;  cf.  1  P  3'-^).  For  children  and  de- 
pendents see  below,  and  for  the  relation  of  husband 
and  wife,  see  Marriage. 

(i)  Mother. — On  the  other  hand,  the  position  of 
the  mother  in  the  family  is  a  very  important  one  ; 
to  this  day  in  Muhammadan  countries,  where  the 
women  are  more  in  the  background  than  among 
the  Oriental  Christians  (for  even  there  Christianity 
has  greatly  raised  the  position  of  women),  the 
influence  of  the  mother  is  immense.  We  find 
many  traces  of  this  in  the  NT.  In  1  Ti  5"  even 
young  mothers  are  said  to  '  rule  the  household ' 
{olKode(7iroT ftv).  In  1  P  3'  the  heathen  husband  is 
gained  by  the  influence  of  the  wife.  The  house- 
hold at  Lystra  in  which  Timothy  was  brought  up 
was  profoundly  influenced  by  the  '  unfeigned  faith ' 
of  his  mother  and  grandmother,  Eunice  and  Lois 
(2  Ti  1« ;  cf.  3"),  and  the  influence  of  the  former 
over  her  Greek  husband  (Ac  16')  may  have  been 
in  St.  Peter's  mind.  In  Mt  20^  '  the  mother  of 
the  sons  of  Zebedee'(a  curious  phrase)  is  put 
forward  to  make  petition  for  her  children. 
Further,  if  the  mother  was  a  widow,  she,  rather 
^han  one  of  the  sons,  seems,  at  least  in  some  cases, 
to  have  been  the  head  of  the  household.  Thus  we 
read  of  the  house  of  Mary,  the  mother  of  John 
Mark,  not  of  the  house  of  Mark  (Ac  12i=*)  ;  and  of 
the  house  of  Lydia  (Ac  16'"),  who  was  probably  a 
widow,  trading  between  Philippi  and  Thyatira,  a 
city  famous  for  dyeing,  witn  a  gild  of  dyers 
evidenced  by  inscriptions  (the  supposition  that 
Lydia  was  the  '  true  yokefellow '  of  Ph  4^*  rests  on 
no  solid  basis).  It  was  Lydia  who  entertained  St. 
Paul  and  his  companions,  not  her  sons  or  brothers. 
A  similar  case  is  perhaps  that  of  Chloe  ;  she  seems 
to  have  been  a  widow  whose  household  ('they  of 
Chloe,'  1  Co  1'')  traded  between  Ephesus  and 
Corinth.  Other  prominent  women  in  the  apostolic 
writings  are  Damaris  (Ac  17**),  whom  Kamsay 
thinks  not  to  have  been  of  noble  birth,  as  the 
regulations  at  Athens  with  regard  to  the  seclusion 
of  women  were  more  strict  than  in  some  other 
places,  and  a  well-born  lady  would  hardly  have 
been  likely  there  to  come  to  hear  St.  Paul  preach 
{St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895,  p.  252);  Phoebe,  a 
deaconess  who  had  been  a  'succourer  of  many' 

•  Ramsay  points  out  (Galatiaiu,  1899,  p.  343)  that  pater  has 
a  wider  sense  than  our  '  father' ;  he  was  the  chief,  the  lord,  the 
master,  the  leader. 


(Ro  16"') ;  Euodia  and  Syntyche,  who  were  pro- 
minent church  workers  at  Philippi  (Ph  4^'- ).  It  has 
often  been  noticed  that  the  position  of  mothers  of 
families  was  especially  strong  in  Macedonia  and  in 
Asia  Minor,  and  particularly  in  the  less  civilized 
parts  of  the  latter.  Of  this  there  are  some  traces 
in  the  NT.  Thus  the  influential  women  at 
Pisidian  Antioch,  the  '  devout  women  of  honour- 
able estate,'  are,  with  the  chief  men  {irpQroi)  of  the 
city,  urged  by  the  Jews  to  arouse  feeling  against 
St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  (Ac  13***),  and  the  'chief 
women'  are  specially  mentioned  at  The.ssalonica 
(IT*)  and  Beru;a  (17'*).  There  are  even  instances 
(not  in  the  NT)  of  women  holding  public  offices, 
and  of  descent  being  reckoned  through  the  mother 
(see  further  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Philijjpians,  1903  ed., 
p.  55  f.  ;  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman 
Empire,  1893,  pp.  67,  160-2),  It  is  curious  that 
Codex  Bezae  (U)  waters  down  the  references  to 
noteworthy  women  :  e.g.  in  Ac  17*^  it  omits 
Damaris ;  it  seems  to  reflect  a  dislike  to  the 
prominence  of  women  which  is  found  in  Christian 
circles  in  the  2nd  century. 

(c)  Children. — The  duty  of  obedience  to  parents 
is  insisted  on  by  St.  Paul  in  Eph  6'"*,  Col  S**'-, 
where  the  two-edged  injunction  of  the  Fifth  Com- 
mandment is  referred  to  as  involving  duties  of 
parents  to  children  as  well  as  of  children  to 
parents.  The  relation  of  the  younger  to  the  elder 
in  the  family  must  have  been  greatly  simplified  by 
the  spread  of  monogamy  in  the  OT  (see  MARRIAGE), 
and  in  Christian  times  there  would  have  been  very 
few  complications  in  this  respect.  Yet  it  was  often 
the  case,  as  it  still  is  in  Eastern  lands,  that 
several  families  in  the  narrower  sense  made  up  a 
'  family '  in  the  wider  sense,  and  lived  under  one 
roof :  thus  a  son  would  ordinarily  bring  his  bride 
to  his  father's  house,  as  Tobias  brought  Sarah  to 
that  of  Tobit,  so  that  his  parents  became  her 
parents,  and  the  Fifth  Commandment  applied  to 
her  relationship  with  them  (To  10""'"-).  So  we  note 
in  Mt  103"-,  Lk  12»2'-  that  the  mother-in-law  and 
daughter-in-law  are  of  one  family  or  household 
{oUiaKol  Mt.,  'in  one  house' Lk.).  The  brethren 
of  our  Lord  (whatever  their  exact  relationship  to 
Jesus)  appear  during  His  ministry  to  have  formed 
one  household  with  Mary  (Jn  2'"-',  Mt  12«'-  IS"'-, 
Mk  6^ ;  Joseph  was  probably  dead),  notwithstand- 
ing that  they  themselves,  or  some  of  them,  were 
married  (1  Oo  9').  It  is  because  of  this  custom 
that  [nn  {hdthdn,  '  bridegroom ')  and  n'?^  {kalldh, 
'  bride ')  and  their  equivalents  in  cognate  languages 
represent  the  relationship  of  a  married  man  and 
woman  to  all  their  near  relations  by  affinity.  In 
the  case  of  a  composite  '  family '  of  this  nature, 
the  father  still  retained  some  authority  over  his 
married  sons. 

{d)  Slaves  and  dependents. — These  formed  a  large 
portion  of  the  more  important  families  ;  the  '  de- 
pendents '  would  be  chiefly  freedmen.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  appears  that  liired  servants  were  not 
reckoned  as  part  of  the  family  {HDB  iv.  461). 
Among  the  Israelites  the  slaves  were  comparatively 
few,  -w-liile  in  Greek  and  Roman  families  they  were 
extremely  numerous.  In  Athens  the  slaves  were 
reckoned  as  numbering  four  times  the  free  citizens, 
and  elsewhere  the  proportion  was  even  greater. 
Some  Roman  landowners  had  ten  or  twenty  thou- 
sand slaves,  or  more  (Lightfoot,  Colossians,  1900ed., 
p. 3178".).  Theseslaveswereentirelyattheirmaster's 
disposal,  and  under  a  bad  master  their  condition 
must  have  been  terrible  (see  Lightfoot,  p.  319,  for 
details).  Yet  their  inclusion  in  the  '  family '  some- 
what mitigated  the  rigours  of  slavery  even  among 
the  heathen  in  NT  times  ;  and  this  mitigation  was 
much  greater  in  Christian  households.  The  Church 
accepted  existing  institutions,  and  did  not  proclaim 
a  revolutionary  slave-war,  which  would  only  have 


FAMILY 


FAMILY 


399 


produced    untold    miserj' ;    but    it    set    to    work 

Sadually  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  slaves, 
n  the  one  hand,  slaves  are  enjoined  by  St.  Paul  to 
obey  and  be  honest  to  their  masters,  whether  Chris- 
tian or  not,  as  in  Eph  6'"",  Col  3-^-  (where  the  great 
detail  was  doubtless  suggested  by  the  Onesimus 
incident),  1  Ti  6^^,  Tit  2«-  ;  cf.  1  P  2'"-.  These 
exhortations  were  probably  intended  to  take  away 
any  misapprehension  that  might  have  arisen  from 
such  passages  as  Gal  3^,  1  Co  7^'*,  which  assert 
that  in  Chnst  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free.  Chris- 
tianity did  not  at  once  liberate  slaves,  and  St.  Paul 
does  not  claim  Onesimus'  freedom,  though  he  in- 
directly suggests  it  (Philem  "'•).  On  the  contrarj-, 
it  taught  those  '  under  the  yoke '  to  render  true 
service.  At  the  same  time,  St.  Paul  points  out  that 
the  Fifth  Commandment  lays  a  duty  on  masters  as 
well  as  on  slaves  (Eph  6',  where  the  double  duty  is 
referred  to  just  after  the  application  of  this  Com- 
mandment to  fathers  as  well  as  to  children).  The 
Christian  head  of  the  house  must  proWde  for  his 
own  household,  or  be  w-orse  than  an  unbeliever  (1 
Ti  5*).  By  Christianity  masters  and  slaves  become 
brethren  (1  Ti  6-).  In  Philem^'  Onesimus  is  said 
to  be  '  no  longer  a  slave,  but  more  than  a  slave, 
a  brother  beloved.'  We  cannot  doubt  that  we  have 
here  a  reminiscence  of  such  words  of  our  Lord, 
orally  handed  down,  as  'no  longer  slaves  but  friends' 
(Jn  15" ;  cf.  He  2'^  '  not  ashamed  to  call  them 
brethren ').  It  was  owing  to  the  good  example  set 
by  Christian  slaves  to  their  heathen  masters  that 
Cnristianity,  Avhich  at  first  took  root  in  the  lower 
social  circles  of  society  (1  Co  I'*),  spread  rapidly 
upwards. 

The  domestic  servants  of  the  family  are  called 
'  they  of  the  house ' — oUerai,  Ac  10"  ;  or  oUfioi,  1  Ti 
58  (cf.  Eph  219  fig.) .  oj.  oiKiaKoi,  Mt  10»-  «  (this  in- 
cludes near  relations) ;  or  'the  household,'  otK^reia, 
Mt  24«  RV  ( = Offxtireia,  Lk  l->»2).  They  included  in 
their  number,  in  the  case  of  great  families,  many 
who  would  now  be  of  theprofessionalclasses,  but  who 
then  were  upper  slaves,  such  as  stewards  or  agents, 
librarians,  doctors,  surgeons,  oculists,  tutors,  etc. 
(for  a  long  list,  see  Lightfoot,  Philipjjians,  p.  172). 
Thus  in  the  NT  we  find  (I)  the  steward,  olKovofios, 
Lk  12*^  (cf.  Mt  24**) ;  such  were  the  unjust  steward 
of  the  parable  (Lk  16'*^*  ;  the  word  oUopofjLfiv  is  used 
for  '  to  be  a  steward '  in  v.^),  and  the  stewards  of 
1  Co  4',  Gal  4-.  The  '  steward '  of  a  child  was  the 
guardian  of  his  property  (Ramsay,  Gal.  p.  392). 
Metaphorically  oiKovofws  is  used  of  Christian  minis- 
ters (1  Co  41 ;  of  '  bishops,'  Tit  V),  of  Christians 
generally  (1  P  4i*>) — the  idea  is  doubtless  taken 
from  our  Lord's  words  about  the  'wise  slave 
whom  his  lord  had  set  over  his  household  to  give 
them  their  food  in  due  season  '  (Mt  24«).  (2)  The 
guardian  of  a  child,  eriTpoiros,  was  concerned  with 
his  education  (Gal  4-)  ;  perhaps  this  is  the  same  as 
the  following.  (3)  The  pedagogue  or  tutor  (roiSa- 
7ciry6s,  Gal  3-*'-,  1  Co  4")  was  a  slave  deputed  to 
take  the  child  to  school  (not  a  teacher  or  school- 
master, as  the  AY) ;  this  was  a  Greek  institution 
adopted  by  the  Romans,  for  in  education  Greece  led 
the  way.  (4)  Thephysician  (I'arpds,  Col  4^*)  was  also 
regarded  as  an  upper  slave.  It  has  been  pointed 
out  by  Ramsay  (6'#.  Paul  the  Traveller,  p.  316)  that 
a  prisoner  of  distinction,  such  as  St.  Paul  un- 
doubtedly was  {ib.  p.  310  f.),  would  be  allowed 
slaves,  but  not  friends  or  relations,  to  accompany 
him,  and  that  St.  Luke,  who  (as  the  pronoun  '  we' 
shows)  accompanied  Mm  on  his  voyage  to  Italy,  as 
also  did  AristarchiLS  (Ac  27-,  C0I41*),  must  have 
done  so  in  the  capacity  of  a  slave,  taking  this  office 
on  himself  in  order  to  follow  his  master. 

Under  this  head  we  may  notice  four  households 
mentioned  in  the  NT  :  the '  household  of  Caesar'  (17 
Kat(raposoiicio),Ph4^  ;  'theyof  Aristobulus.'Roie'*; 
'  they  of  Narcissus,'  Ro  16'* ;  and  '  they  of  Chloe,'  1 


Co  VK  For  the  last  see  above  (6) ;  but  the  first 
three  households  were  probably  all  part  of  the 
Imperial  *  family  *  at  Rome.  That '  Caesar's  house- 
hold '  does  not  necessarily  or  even  probably  mean 
near  relations  of  the  Emperor  is  shown  by  Light- 
foot  (Philippian^,  p.  171  H'.);  the  meaning  seems 
to  be  '  the  slaves  and  freedmen  of  Caesar.'  Light- 
foot  with  much  ingenuity  and  probability  identities 
several  of  the  names  mentioned  in  Ro  16  with  the 
household.  The  curious  phrases  in  Ro  16'*'-  are 
probably  due  to  the  fact  that  Aristobulus  and 
Narcissus  were  dead  (for  their  identification  with 
well-known  characters  see  Lightfoot,  and  Sanday- 
Headlam,  Roman^  {ICC,  1902],  p.  425),  and  that 
their  households  were  absorbed  in  that  of  Csesar, 
but  still  retained  their  old  names.  •  They  of 
Aristobulus'  would  be  equivalent  to '  Aristobuliani,' 
and  '  they  of  Narcissus '  to  '  Narcissiani.'  (If 
the  Wew  that  Ro  16  is  not  a  real  part  of  the 
Epistle  be  correct,  this  argument  fails  ;  but  its  veri- 
similitude is  some  ground  for  rejecting  that  view.) 

3.  The  Christian  Church  as  a  family. — In  the 
NT  the  word  '  house  '  (ol/cos)  is  used  figuratively  of 
the  Christian  community,  as  in  He  3^  *  (Christians 
successors  to  the  house  [of  God]  in  the  Old  Cove- 
nant), 10^1  (see  above,  2  («)),  1  Ti  3**  (where  oZicoi  is 
explicitly  defined  as  '  the  Church  of  the  living 
God ' ;  the  phrase  follows  the  instructions  as  to  the 
homes  of  bishops  and  deacons ;  see  Home),  1  P  2* 
(a  'spiritual  house'),  4".  The  metaphor  is  further 
elaborated  in  Eph  2^"^  where  the  foundation, 
comer-stone,  and  each  several  stone  that  is  laid 
(such  is  tlie  best  paraphrase  of  raff  a  oiKoSofi-q)  to- 
gether result  in  a  noly  temple,  of  which  Christians 
are  stones,  '  builded  together  for  a  habitation  of 
God.' 

The  conception  is  based  on  the  Fatherhood  of 
God  and  on  our  position  as  His  children.  It  is 
carried  out  by  various  analogous  metaphors.  The 
Church  is  the  Bride  of  Christ — this  is  the  outcome 
of  Eph  5=^- ;  cf.  Rev  19"  21»- »  22i'— and  He  is  the 
Bridegroom,  Mt  9''  2-2^-  25«,  Mk  2i»,  Jn  3^,  2  Co 
11^ ;  Christians  are  the  oiKeloi,  members  of  the 
household,  of  the  faith,  Gal  e'";  Christ  is  their 
brother.  He  2i"- ;  the  Church  is  a  brotherhood,  1  P 
21",  filled  with  brotherly  love  (^tXaSeX^m),  Ro  12", 
1  Th  4»,  He  131,  2  P  1"  ;  cf.  1  Jn  5*.  The  most 
usual  designation  of  Christians  among  themselves  is 
'  the  brethren  '  (Acts,  passim) ;  even  heretics  are 
'false  brethren,'  2  Co  11»,  Gal  2*.  'A  brother,' 
'  brethren,'  denote  Christians  as  opposed  to  un- 
believers in  Pliilem  **,  1  Ti  6- ;  and  so  in  1  Co  9* 
'  a  sister,  a  wife '  means  '  a  Christian  wife '  (the 
'  apostle '  may  have  a  Christian  wife ;  cf.  7**  '  only 
in  the  Lord');  in  1  Co  7'*  'the  brother  or  the 
sister '  means  the  Christian  spouse  of  an  unbeliever 
(cf.  V."  and  5");  in  Ro  16^  RY  ('Quartus  the 
brother')  the  definite  article  seems  to  distinguish 
this  Christian  from  some  unbelie\'ing  Quartus.  Cf. 
also  2  Co  8*^  ('the  brother  whose  praise  in  the 
gospel  is  spread  through  all  the  churches ' :  but 
some  translate  'his  brother' — i.e.  the  brother  of 
Titus,  and  interpret  the  phrase  as  applying  to  St. 
Luke)  8^-,  Philem  ",  Ro  16',  Ja  2^',  2  Jn  ^,  and  1 
Th  4*,  where  see  Milligan's  note. 

In  this  connexion  also  we  may  note  the  sym- 
bolical use  of  words  denoting  family  relationships. 
The  Israelites  of  old  were  '  the  fathers '  (Ro  15®), 
just  as  early  Christian  writers  are  called  by  us. 
Abraham  is  father  of  spiritual  descendants,  believ- 
ing Jews  and  Gentiles  alike  (Ro  4i"- 1«-,  Gal  3^  ;  in 
Ac  7"^,  Ro  41,  and  probably  in  Ja  2-i,  physical  descent 
is  referred  to).  The  teacher  is  father  of  his  dis- 
ciples (1  Th  2"),  though  sometimes  he  calls  himself 
'  brother '  (Rev  P,  '  I  John  your  brother ' ;  cf.  Ac 
15'^  RY,  '  elder  brethren').  Also  '  father'  is  used 
of  any  old  man  (1  Ti  5')  ;  in  this  verse  (unlike  v.") 
Tptff^iTepoi  cannot  refer  to  a  presbyter.  So  '  mother' 


400 


FAMILY 


FAMILY 


is  used  of  any  old  woman  in  v.'' ;  younfjer  men  and 
women  are  '  brothers  '  and  '  sisters  '  (v. "'•).  Jeru- 
salem is  called  'our  mother'  in  Gal  4'*,  just  as 
Babylon  in  Rev  17*  is  called  'the  mother  of  the 
harlots.'  In  Ro  16'^  '  mother'  is  a  term  of  aHection 
('  Rufus  and  his  mother  and  mine ').  Similarly  the 
expressions  '  without  father,'  '  without  mother,'  in 
He  7*  must  be  taken  figuratively.  Melchizedek's 
parentage  is  not  recorded  in  Holy  Scripture  :  '  he 
IS  not  connected  with  any  known  line  :  his  life  has 
no  recorded  beginning  or  dose'  (B.  F.  Westcott, 
Hebrews,  1889,  p.  172).  Disciples,  likewise,  are 
called  '  sons  '  or  '  ciiildren  '  of  their  master,  as  in  1 
P  5'»  (Mark),  Gal  4i»  (the  Galatians),  1  Ti  1^  2  Ti  I'' 
2»  and  Ph  2"^  (Timothy),  1  Co  4'«-  (the  Corinthians), 
Phileni  i"  (Onesimus),'l  Jn  2*  etc.,  3  Jn  *. 

4.  The  Christian  family  as  a  church. — We  often 
read  in  the  NT  of  families  or  households  becoming 
Christian  as  a  body  ;  e.g.  those  of  Cornelius  (Ac 
10- 1 1'''),  Lydia  (16'*  :  the  first  in  St.  Paul's  history), 
the  jailer  at  Philippi  (16»i-33),  Crispus  (18^).  So  in 
Jn  4*^  it  is  recorded  that  the  king's  officer  (^a<riXiK6s) 
at  Capernaum  believed  'and  his  whole  house.' 
Hence,  in  the  absence  of  public  churches,  which 

fiersecution  made  impossible  till  a  later  date,  a 
amily  became  a  centre  of  Christian  worship,  in 
which  not  only  the  household  itself  but  also  the 
Christian  neighbours  assembled.  Thus,  probably 
the  house  of  Lydia  was  the  beginning  from  which 
the  Church  at  Philippi  developed  ;  those  of  Steph- 
anas, whose  family  was  '  the  firstfruits  of  Achaia ' 
(1  Co  I"  oIkos,  16'*  oMa),  Titus  Justus  (Ac  IS'), 
Crispus  (18*  oIkos),  and  Gaius  (Ro  16'^)  perhaps 
became  centres  of  worship  at  Corinth.  Such,  again, 
was  Philemon's  house  nt  Colosste  (Philem^) ;  pro- 
bably Apphia  was  liiswife,  and  possibly  Archippus 
his  son  ( Philem  -,  Col  4'^).  Arcliippus  was  clearly 
a  church  official ;  lie  had  received  the  ministry 
(SiaKovia.)  in  the  Lord,  and  was  in  some  way  con- 
nected with  Philemon  ;  we  are  led  to  think  of  him 
as  '  bishop'  of  the  Church  at  CoIosspr,  or,  less  pro- 
bably, with  Lightfoot,  of  the  neighbouring  Church 
at  Laodicea  (so  Apost.  Const,  vii.  46,  which  makes 
Philemon  bishop  of  Colossa?  ;  but  it  is  more  likely 
that  Philemon  was  a  layman).  At  Laodicea  we 
read  of  Nymphas  or  Nympha  (Col  4"  ;  the  gender 
is  uncertain),  and  'the  church  that  is  in  their  house' 
(RV) — i.e.  probably  all  who  met  to  worship  there 
are  regarded  as  one  family.  Lightfoot  thinks 
(Colossians,  p.  241)  that  there  were  perhaps  more 
than  one  such  '  church '  at  Laodicea,  as  there 
certainly  were  in  Rome  (see  below). 

In  Jerusalem  such  a  private  house  was  at  first 
used  for  the  Eucharist  (Ac  2^ :  /car'  oIkov,  '  at 
home,'  as  opposed  to  'in  the  Temple'),  and  so 
doubtless  at  Troas  (20^).  For  preaching  to  out- 
siders, the  apostles  made  use  of  the  synagogues 
(17"" :  'as  his  custom  was'),  or  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem,  or  the  '  school  of  Tyrannus '  at  Epiiesus, 
which  was  probably  open  to  all  (19*),  or  other 
public  i)laces  ;  but  for  the  instruction  of  the  faith- 
ful the  Christians  gathered  in  a  private  house  (5'"^ 
'  every  day  in  the  Temple  and  at  nome'  ;  cf.  20^") ; 
in  Jerusalem  probably  in  that  of  Mary  the  mother 
of  John  Mark  (12'^),  for  her  family  was  certainly 
such  a  centre  of  worship.  As  St.  James  the  Lord's 
brother  was  not  present  in  the  house  where  the 
people  were  assembled  to  pray  for  St.  Peter  (v."), 
it  has  been  suggested  that  there  were  more  than 
one  such  iKKXt^ala.  in  Jerusalem  ;  but  this  is  uncer- 
tain. At  Ca-sarea  we  are  tempted  to  think  of 
Philip's  household  as  such  a  centre  (21*') ;  at 
Cenchreaj  of  that  of  Phoebe  the  deaconess  (Ro  16'). 
For  Ephesus  we  have  mention  of  Aquila  and  I'risca 
(or  Priscilla),  .and  'the  church  that  is  in  their 
house' — their  'family'  formed  a  Christian  com 
munity  (1  Co  16'").  Here  we  have  a  remarkable 
feature,  for  about  a  year  later  we  find  these  two 


workers  credited  with  another  '  church '  in  Rome 
(Ro  16**),  and  this  has  been  adduced  as  disproving 
the  integrity  of  Romans  as  regards  the  last  chapter. 
But  it  is  not  an  improbable  sui)position  that  they 
gathered  the  Christians  together  in  their  own 
household  wherever  they  were  ;  and  as  Sanday- 
Headlam  remark  {op.  cit.  p.  418  f.),  they  were,  like 
many  Jews  of  the  day,  great  travellers.  We  read 
of  Aquila  in  Pontus,  then  of  him  and  his  wife  in 
Rome  A.D.  52,  when  they  were  expelled  from  the 
capital  with  their  fellow-countrymen  (Ac  18"*) ; 
then  we  read  of  them  at  Corinth,  where  they  met 
St.  Paul  (Ac  18"-),  and  of  their  going  with  him  to 
Ephesus  (v.'*'*),  where  they  remained  some  time. 
Thence,  probably,  the  old  decree  of  expulsion  having 
become  obsolete,  they  returned  to  Rome,  between 
the  writing  of  1  Cor.  and  Rom.,  and  the  'church  in 
their  house '  in  Rome  was  then  founded.  Its  site 
has  been  identified  with  that  of  the  old  church  of 
St.  Prisca  on  the  Aventine,  and  this  is  quite  pos- 
sible, though  there  is  no  evidence  of  importance  to 
support  the  identification.  Hort  suggests  (Prole- 
gomena to  Romans  and  Ephesians,  1895,  p.  12  ft'.) 
that  Prisca  was  a  Roman  lady  of  distinction, 
superior  in  birth  to  her  husband  ;  and  this  would 
lend  probability  to  the  supposition  that  their  home 
was  a  centre  of  Christian  worship ;  but  Sanday- 
Headlam  think  that  they  were  both  freed  members 
of  a  great  Roman  family. 

There  are  traces  of  other  centres  of  worship  in 
Rome.  In  Ro  16  both  v.'*  and  v.'*  indicate  com- 
munities or  '  families '  of  Christians  at  Rome  in 
addition  to  that  of  A(|uila  and  Prisca  in  v.*.  In 
v.'*  only  men  are  mentioned,  and  yet  they  form  a 
community;  cf.  'the  brethren  that  are  with  them.* 
In  V.'*  Philologus  and  Julia  were  probably  husband 
and  wife  ;  Nereus  and  his  sister,  and  also  Olj'mpas, 
would  be  near  relations,  living  with  them,  but 
hardly  their  children,  for  it  would  not  be  likely 
that  Philologus'  daughter  should  be  referred  to 
here  as  '  the  sister  of  Nereus.'  This  household 
seems  to  have  been  a  large  Christian  centre :  '  all 
the  saints  that  are  with  them '  are  mentioned. 
The  multiplying  of  centres  in  one  city  at  a  time 
when  persecution  was  present  or  imminent  may  be 
illustrated  by  the  account  of  the  trial  of  Justin 
Martyr  before  the  prefect  in  Rome  (T.  Ruinart, 
Acta  Prim.  Mart.^,  1713,  p.  59).  Justin  tells  the 
prefect  that  the  Christians  in  the  city  do  not  all 
assemble  at  one  place,  for  '  the  God  of  the  Chris- 
tians is  not  circumscribed  in  place,  but,  being 
invisible,  fills  heaven  and  earth,  and  everywhere 
is  adored  by  the  faithful  and  His  glory  praised.' 
Justin  is  pressed  to  say  where  he  and  his  disciples 
assemble,  and  he  replies  that  hitherto  he  has  lived 
in  the  house  of  one  Martin.  The  Acta  may  prob- 
ably be  said  at  least  to  contain  the  traditions 
current  in  the  3rd  cent,  as  to  Justin's  death  (see 
Smith's  DCB  iii.  [1882]  562). 

Another  Christian  family  in  Rome  has  left  a 
relic  of  its  house  as  a  centre  of  worship  in  the 
church  of  San  Clemente.  This  now  consists  of 
three  structures,  one  above  the  other  ;  the  highest, 
now  level  with  the  ground,  is  meditcval,  but  con- 
tains the  Byzantine  furniture  (ambones,  rails,  etc.) ; 
the  middle  one  is  of  the  4th  cent.  (?)  and  used  to 
contain  this  furniture  ;  while  underneath  is  the  old 
house,  now  inaccessible  through  the  invasion  of 
water.  This  last  building,  there  is  little  rejison  to 
doubt,  was  the  meeting-place  of  the  Christians  of 
the  1st  cent.,  and  though  now  far  beneath  the  sur- 
face, was  once  level  with  the  ground.  Local  tradi- 
tion makes  it  the  house  of  St.  Clement  the  Bishop, 
anil  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  worshipped  in  it ; 
but  it  is  not  unlikely,  as  Lightfoot  suggests,  that 
it  was  the  house  of  Flavins  Clemens  the  Consul, 
whom  tradition  declares  to  have  been  buried  in  it, 
and  who  was  perhaps   'patron'  to  his  namesake 


FAMIXE 


FAST,  THE 


401 


the  Bishop  (Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  pt.  i.  : 
•  Clement /l890,  vol.  i.  p.  91  If. ).  The  Consul  was  a 
near  relative  of  the  Emperor  Domitian,  and  was 

gut  to  death  by  him,  perhaps  because  he  was  a 
hristian  ;  at  least  his  wife  Domitilla  was  a  be- 
liever (ib.  p.  53),  and  it  is  quite  probable  that  their 
household  became  a  Christian  «KXi7cr:a. 

A  further  illustration  of  the  '  family '  as  a  Chris- 
tian community  is  furnished  by  the  Church  of  SS. 
Giovanni  e  Paolo,  in  Rome.  The  present  church 
is  built  above  the  house  of  the  martyrs  so  named, 
wlio  perished,  according  to  tradition,  in  the  reign 
of  Julian  the  Apostate.  The  house  was  probably 
used  at  that  time  for  worship. 

On  the  other  hand,  Ro  16*®  does  not  refer  to  a 
number  of  iKKXrifflai  at  Ephesus.  St.Paulherespeaks 
on  behalf  of  the  whole  of  the  communities  of  Chris- 
tians which  he  had  evangelized,  or  perhaps  of  all 
throughout  the  world,  as  in  16*,  1  Co  7".  It 
should  be  noticed  that  the  word  ejcjtXijffia  is  not 
used  for  a  church  building  till  a  much  later  date. 

In  two  places  we  read  of  private  prayers  at  fixed 
hours  in  houses:  Ac  10*  (Peter  at  the  sixth  hour, 
on  the  flat  roof  :  see  House)  and  10*'-  *  (Cornelius 
keeping  the  ninth  hour  of  prayer  in  his  house). 
But  these  were  private  prayers,  not  family  worship. 
Before  public  daily  worship  became  generally 
customary,  in  the  4th  cent,  after  the  cessation  of 
persecution,  these  and  other  hours  of  prayer,  taken 
over  from  the  Jews,  were  frequently  observed  by 
Christians,  apparently  in  their  families.  See  the 
present  writer's  Ancient  Church  Orders,  1910,  p. 
59  tf. 

LiTBRATTRE. — This  is  given  in  the  course  of  the  art.,  but 
special  reference  is  due  tothe  Prolegomena  to  J.  B.  Uehtfoot's 
(Motiians  and  Philemon  (19U0  ed.)  and  Philippians  (1903  ed.X 
For  other  aspects  of  the  subject  see  artt.  on  '  Familv '  bv  W.  H. 
Bennett  in  HDB  and  E.  G.  Romanes  in  SDB  (these  both 
deal  almost  exclusively  %vith  the  OT) ;  by  C.  T.  Dimont  in 
DCG  (especially  for  the  teachinar  of  our  Lord  in  the  Gospels) 
and  J.  Straiian  in  ERE  ('  Family,  Biblical  and  Christian,' 
dealing  chiefly  with  the  OT).  There  are  several  articles  on 
the  '  Family '  in  ERE  from  ttie  point  of  view  of  other  nations 
of  the  world.  A.  J.  ilACLEAX. 

FAMINE. — '  Famine '  is  used  throughout  in  the 
RV  to  translate  \ifi6i,  having  taken  the  place  of 
'dearth'  in  Ac  7"  and  11^  (AV).  The  remaining 
pas.«ages  are  Ro  8**,  Rev  6*  18*.  The  most  im- 
portant of  these  references  is  Ac  1 1^,  where  neydXtjv, 
followed  by  ^rts,  the  reading  of  the  best  MSS,  pro- 
claims the  noun  as  feminine.  In  Lk  15^^  it  is  of 
the  same  gender,  but  in  4^  it  is  masculine.  In 
Josephus,  Ant.  XX.  v.  2,  rbv  fUycw  Xt/iw  appears. 

We  deal  first  with  the  great  famine  which  seems 
to  be  common  to  Josephus  and  the  Book  of  Acts. 
As  it  is  spoken  of  in  both  places  in  the  same  terms, 
so  both  passages  are  taken  to  refer  to  one  and  the 
same  event.  Uncertainty  attaches  to  the  scope  of 
the  famine,  which,  according  to  St.  Luke,  was 
spread  over  the  whole  world  as  then  knowTi,  but 
which,  according  to  Josephus.  was  restricted  to 
Judaea.  Schiirer  {GJV  i.  [1901]  567)  is  inclined 
to  regard  the  statement  of  Acts  as  unhistorical 
generalization,  and  for  this  he  compares  Lk  2'. 
The  Bible  historian  is  defended  by  W.  M.  Ramsay 
(St.  Paid  the  Traveller,  1S95,  p.  49):  'he  merely 
says  that  famine  occurred  over  the  whole  (civilized) 
world  in  the  time  of  Claudius  :  of  course  the  year 
varied  in  different  lands.'  As  a  matter  of  Jact, 
local  famines  did  frequently  occur  during  that 
reign  (see  Schiirer,  loc.  c'it.,  and  HDB,  s.v. 
'  Claudius ')  in  lands  other  than  Judaea.  The  date 
of  the  Judpean  famine  may  be  approximately 
determined  by  Herod  Agrippa  I.'s  death,  which 
took  place  in  a.d.  44  (cf.  Ac  U^-^o  and  12'^--^). 
The  dates  assigned  by  chronologists  range  from 
that  year  up  to  A.D.'46  (see  HDB  v.  480,  and 
Ramsay,  op.  cit.  68,  254).  For  the  actual  situation 
in  Palestine  compare  Josephus,  Ant,  m.  xv.  3,  XX. 

VOL.   I. — 26 


ii.  5,  V.  2 ;  in  the  last  two  paragraphs  the  succour 
given  by  Queen  Helena  is  detailed. 

St.  Luke,  while  careful  to  maintain  the  position 
of  Agabus  as  a  prophet,  here  in  the  sense  of  one 
foretelling  the  future  (cf.  Ac  21"),  himself  reWews 
the  situation  from  a  point  outside  the  reign  of 
Claudius,  which  terminated  in  a.d.  54.  He  there- 
fore could  sur\-ey  the  general  feature  of  that  reign, 
viz.  as  being  an  age  of  famine,  and  at  the  same 
time  give  particular  attention  to  the  local  famine 
in  Judaea,  which  involved  Barnabas  and  SauL 

The  whole  position  during  the  Apostolic  Age 
may  be  regarded  as  perilous  to  the  food  supply. 
It  was  so  for  the  Empire,  owing  to  State  policy, 
and  for  Palestine  because  of  the  insecurity  of  the 
times,  culminating  in  the  siege  of  Jerusalem, 
during  which  famine  was  extreme.  Natural  causes 
may  have  added  to  the  straits,  as  the  allusions  of 
classical  ^vriters  show.  This  matter  has  been  con- 
sidered from  a  novel  point  of  view,  viz.  the  relation 
between  famine  and  the  rainfall,  by  Ellsworth 
Huntington,  who  concludes  that  'the  second  half 
of  the  first  century  may  have  been  slightly  drier 
than  the  first  half,  for  at  that  time  famines  pre- 
vailed to  an  unusual  extent'  (Palestine  and  its 
Transformation,  1911,  p.  327).  He  supports  his 
main  theory  of  pulsatory  changes  in  cHmate  by 
calling  in  the  evidence  of  inscriptions,  and  he  finds 
that  the  decades  a.d.  61-70,  91-lOJ,  are  without 
inscriptions  (true  for  Syria),  and  these  are  taken 
to  be  intervals  of  desiccation  and  consequent 
scarcity.  While  illuminating  the  general  situation, 
this  does  not  bring  us  nearer  than  the  historians 
do  to  fixing  the  date  of  specific  famines. 

The  condition  pictured  in  Rev  6*-'  is  one  of 
scarcity,  when  wheat  and  barley  are  to  be  weighed 
out  with  care  to  prevent  a  worse  condition  arising. 
In  the  next  vision  (v.*)  this  worse  condition  is 
described,  when  death  results  from  famine,  among 
other  evTls. 

In  the  rhetorical  appeal  addressed  by  St.  Paul 
to  the  Christians  in  Rome  famine  appears  in  the 
catalogue  of  afflictions  (Ro  8*^).  Assuming  that 
Babj;lon  the  Great  is  to  be  identified  >vith  Rome,  it 
is  a  fitting  sequel  to  the  probable  experience  of  the 
Christians  there,  that  famine  should  be  one  of  the 
plagues  by  whicli  the  Imperial  city  is  to  be  finally 
overtaken  (Rev  18*). 

Famines  of  OT  times  are  recalled  :  (1)  in  Egypt 
and  Canaan  (Ac  7") ;  (2)  in  Israel  ( Ja  5"-  *",  the 
absence  of  rain  implying  lack  of  earth's  fruit ;  cf. 
Lk  4®,  where  famine  is  named). 

LiTKB^TrRE.— £rZ)B,  art.  'CHaudius';  £Bt,  art,  '  C!hronol<WT ' 
(f  76) ;  E.  Schurer.  GJ  I's  L  [1901]  667,  HJP  i.  iL  [1890]  169  n. ; 
W.  M.  Ramsay.  St.  Pard  the  Traveller,  1895,  pp.  48-51 ;  J. 
B.  Li£:htfoot.  BiUieal  Etta^t,  1893,  p.  216  f.  ;  A.  Hansrath, 
A  History  0/ ST  Times.  iL  [1896]  186  £f.;  O.  Pfleiderer,  Primi- 
Kve  Christianity,  iL  [1909]  227  f. ;  G.  A.  Smith.  Jerusalem,  ii. 
[1906]  563.  W.  CEUICKSHASK. 

FAST,  THE  (Ac  27").— The  passage  in  which  the 
reference  occurs  is  part   of   the  account  of  the 
voyage  of  St.    Paul.      It   reads  :  ixofoS  5^  xptwov 
diayevoiierov  Kal  orroi  ^17  €TuT<pa\o\h  toS  rXoin  Sia  rb 
Kai  TTiv  rT)<rreiav  ijSij  rapeXjjXvff^pai,  rapigrei  6  IIol'Xoj, 
ktX.  (•  Seeing  that  a  considerable  time  had  elapsed, 
and  that  already  sailing  was  dangerous,  and  also 
the  Fast  was  by  this  time  over,  Patd  exhorted,' 
etc.).     St.  Ltikeisanxioustoemphasizethefactthat 
the  period  when,  according  to  ancient  custom,  navi- 
gation mtist  cease,  was  imminent.     The  Romans 
reckoned  the  period  of  mare  clcitisum  from  11  Nov. 
to  10  March  (Vegetius,  de  Re  Milit.  iv.  39 ;  Pliny, 
i  HX  ii.  47).     Previous  to  this  was  a  period  (24  Sept. 
I  [the    autumnal    equinox]-ll  Nov.)  when    sailing 
i  was  regarded  as  attended  with  great  risk  (Caesar, 
I  Bell.  Gall.  iv.  36,  v.  23).     For  the  Jew,  navigation 
I  was  possible  only  from  the  Feast  of  Pentecost  to 
i  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Lewin,  Life  and  Epp.  of 


u 


402 


FAST,  THE 


FEAR 


f>t.  Paul,  1875,  ii.  192 n.,  quoting  Scliott^en,  JIorcB 
Heb.  i.  482).  By  general  consent  tlie  'P'ast' 
referred  to  by  St.  Luke  is  regarded  as  the  great 
Day  of  Atonement  (Lv  16-'«  23-'«-^2 .  jy^  ^„^  xiv. 
xvi.  4),  although  unsuccessful  attempts  have  been 
made  to  refer  it  to  the  third  day  of  the  Athenian 
Thesmophoria,  or  to  some  nautical  mo<le  of  ex- 
pression ( —exh-emum  autumni)  (cf.  Knowling,  EGT, 
1900,  iji  loco).  This  Fast  occurred  live  days  before 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  when,  according  to 
Jewish  reckoning,  sailing  was  no  longer  possible. 
The  problem  to  be  solved  is  to  account  for  the 
emphatic  May  in  which  the  language  is  heaped  up, 
so  as  to  imply  that  the  situation  for  those  on  board 
was  really  critical,  and  to  explain  the  advice  given 
by  St.  Paul  to  remain  where  they  were,  which  was 
disregarded  (Ac  27^"-  -').  The  sailing-master  and 
captain  were  anxious  to  reach  Phcenix,  a  Cretan 
port  further  on,  not  only  because  they  thought  it 
a  safer  port  to  winter  in,  but  also,  no  doubt,  that 
thej'  might  lose  less  time,  and  perhaps  gain  the 
glory  that  accrued  to  the  bringing  in  of  the  first 
corn-ship  to  Rome  in  the  sjiring  (cf.  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
4Sf.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895,  p.  322  ff.,  where  the 
whole  situation  as  between  St.  Paul  and  the  re- 
sponsible authorities  is  clearly  explained).  St.  Paul 
snowed  himself  not  only  the  more  prudent  sailor, 
but  as  having  the  greater  regard  not  merely  for 
human  life,  but  also  for  the  guidance  of  God. 
This  i)urpose  in  St.  Luke's  mind  is  revealed  in  his 
use  of  Kai  before  rrjv  vija-reiav,  '  also  the  Y&st  was 
now  gone  by.'  In  other  words,  less  than  five  days 
remained  from  the  date  (Feast  of  Tabernacles) 
when  to  sail  would  be  contrary  to  the  will  of  God. 
The  implication  is  that  they  actually  did  set  sail 
within  these  five  days. 

Two  questions  of  critical  interest  emerge  from  a 
careful  consideration  of  the  use  of  vq(XTela  in  this 
passage. 

1.  Chronological. — The  word  seems  to  .afford  an 
important  clue  to  the  exact  year  in  which  the 
voyage  of  St.  Paul  to  Rome  took  place.  In  this 
connexion  we  must  note  that,  in  all  probability, 
the  phrase  fivros  i^Stj  eiri<T<pa\ods  toO  irXoSi  refers  to 
the  Roman  mode  of  reckoning,  and  tliat  there  is 
a  studied  contrast  (implied  in  KaL)  in  the  verse 
between  the  Roman  and  the  Jewish  Calendar. 
The  KaL  reproduces  vividly  the  note  of  apprehen- 
siveness.  '  It  seems  to  follow,  therefore,  that  Luke 
is  writing  of  a  year  in  Avhich  the  Great  Fast  is 
subsequent  to  the  Autumnal  Equinox,  or  is  at 
all  events  very  late  indeed'  (W.  P.  Workman,  in 
ExpT  xi.  [1899-1900]  317).  Workman  deduces, 
after  a  careful  examination  of  the  various  dates 
proposed,  especially  of  A.D.  56,  58,  59,  that  A.D.  59 
18  the  one  tliat  fits  in  best  with  St.  Luke's  state- 
ment. The  Fast  took  place  on  Tishri  10,  which  is 
calculated  by  adding  173  days  to  Nisan  14  ;  the 
calculation  of  the  latter  date  presenting  some 
difficulty  only  in  A.D.  56,  which  for  other  reasons 
is  unsuitable,  although  championed  by  Blass  and 
Harnack.  Turner  in  HDB  i.  862,  art.  '  Chrono- 
logy,' argues  for  A.D.  58,  but  in  that  year  Tishri 
10  IS  16  Sept.,  eight  days  previous  to  the  equinox. 
If  Workman's  interpretation  of  the  contrast  in  St. 
Luke's  mind  between  the  two  modes  of  reckoning 
is  correct,  A.D.  58  is  therefore  unsuitable,  and  the 
only  possible  year  is  A.D.  59,  in  which  Tishri  10 
falls  on  5  October.  This  is  the  year  contended  for 
on  other  grounds  by  Ramsaj'  and  others.  Anotlier 
advantage  is  that,  by  this  means,  the  chronological 
difficulty  created  by  the  '  three  months' '  stay  in 
Malta  (Ac  28")  is  somewhat  alleviated ;  for  the 
party  could  not  possibly  set  sail  again  until  the 
very  beginning  of  February  at  the  earliest.  The 
s|)ring  equinox  occurred  on  9  Feb.  (cf.  Turner, 
JIDli  i.  422";  Zahn,  Introd,  iii.  454).  St.  Paul 
would  of  course  reckon  after  the  Jewish  Calendar 


(1  Co  16"),  and  it  is  quite  natural  that  St.  Luke, 
a  Gentile  Christian,  should  also  do  so  (Harnack, 
The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  [XT  Stndies  iii.],  p.  21 
[  =  Beitrage  zur  Einleltung  in  das  NT,  iii.  (19U8)]). 
2.  Authorship  of  Acts. — Does  the  mention  of  the 
Fast  imply  that  St.  Paul  observed  it?  This  ques- 
tion can  be  answered  adequately  only  in  connexion 
with  a  full  investijjation  of  his  attitude  towards 
Judaism.  Such  an  investigation  has  a  very  inii>ort- 
ant  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  Lucan  author- 
ship, and  cannot  be  entered  upon  here  (see  art. 
Acts  of  thk  Apcstles).  It  may,  however,  lie 
pointed  out  that,  on  the  most  probable  supi>osi- 
tion  that  St.  Paul,  along  with  his  companions 
Aristarchus  and  Luke,  did  observe  the  Fast,  the 
fact  is  illuminative  for  the  question  of  his  attitude 
to  Judaism  generally,  notwithstanding  his  principle 
that  the  Law  is  abrogated.  Waiving  the  general 
question  as  to  whether  such  conformity  on  the 
Apostle's  part  is  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of 
the  Epistles  (cf.  Ac  2r''"^-  23«  26«),  and  the  assump- 
tion that  on  this  account  the  portrait  of  St.  Paul  in 
Acts  is  therefore  a  Tc/u/cjis-prodnct,  we  may  find 
in  this  passage  an  important  confirmation  of  Har- 
nack's  position  that  a  mere  theory  of  accommodation 
to  Jewish  customs  for  the  sake  of  peace  on  St. 
Paul's  part  is  neither  worthy  nor  satisfjung.  No 
such  motive  could  be  in  place  under  such  circum- 
stances. He  observed  the  Fast  because  he  was  a 
Jew,  who  at  the  .same  time  did  not  seek  to  bind 
such  observances  on  Gentile  Christians.  His  one 
aim  was  to  promote  a  sense  of  brotherhood  '  in 
Christ '  between  Jew  and  Gentile.  '  St.  Paul, 
indeed,  took  up  a  position  even  then  no  longer 
tenable  when  he  regarded  "Judaism"  as  still  pos- 
sible within  the  Christian  fold,  while  he  himself, 
by  his  mission  to  the  Gentiles,  had  actually  severed 
Judaism  inside  Christianity  from  its  roots'  (Har- 
nack, Date  of  Acts  and  Synoptic  Gospels  [AT 
Studies,  iv.],  p.  76  [  =  Beitrage,  iv.  (1911)]). 

LiTERATDRB. — For  Chronology,  see  Literature  mentioned  in 
the  article  ;  and  for  tiie  whole  discussion  of  St.  Paul's  relation 
to  Judaism,  see  A.  Harnack,  Pate  of  the  Acts  and  of  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  Eng.  tr.,  1911,  p.  07 ff.,  also  his  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  p.  281  ff. ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  the  XT, 
Eng.  tr.,  1909,  iii.  l.')2 ;  E.  von  Dobschiitz,  Prohleme  des 
apostol.  Zeitalters,  1904,  p.  81  ff.  ;  J.  Weiss,  Vber  die  Ahsirht 
unddenlilerar.  Charahicr  der  Apostclieachiehte,  1897.  v-  36ff.  ; 
A.  JUlicher,  Neue  Linienind.  Kritikd.  ermine/.  I'brrhefemng, 
1906,  p.  59  f.  R,  H.  STRACHAN. 

FASTING.— See  Abstinence. 

FATHER.— See  Family. 

FATHERHOOD  OF  GOD.-See  GOD. 

FATHOM.— The  only  instance  of  this  measure- 
ment is  found  in  Ac  27^,  where  by  successive 
soundings  a  depth  of  20  and  15  fathoms  is  obtained. 
The  word  employed  (dfyyvid ;  cf.  Herod,  ii.  149.  4) 
denotes  the  length  from  finger  tip  to  finger  tip  of 
the  outstretched  arms,  measuring  across  the  breast. 
In  tables  of  length  it  appears  =  4  cubits  =  6  feet. 
The  actual  measurement  thus  depends  on  the 
length  of  the  cubit  or  foot.  According  to  recent 
authorities,  the  Roman-Attic  ft.  is  given  as  equiva- 
lent to  -971  English  ft.,  which  yields  70  in.  (aji- 
proximately)  as  the  length  of  the  fathom.  This  is 
slightly  under  our  jnesent-day  measure  of  6  feet. 
For  the  fathom  of  Julian  of  Ascalon  (74*49  in.)  see 
EBi,  art.  '  Weights  and  Measures.' 

W.  CnUICK.SHANK. 
FEAR  {tf>6^oi,  tpopelaeai,  (po^fp6s ;  d(t>6^ui,  '  without 
fear ' ;  fK<po^oi,  '  exceedingly  afraid '). — While  there 
is  a  natural  fear  in  the  presence  of  danger— c.*/. 
in  a  hurricane  at  sea  (Ac  27'")— which  is  not  si>eci- 
fically  human,  spiritual  fear  is  distinctive  of  man, 
whose  motives  and  actions  lack  their  finest  quality 


FEAE 


FEASTING 


403 


anless  they  are  influenced  by  it.  The  last  count 
in  the  indictment  which  St.  Paul  draws  up  against 
both  Jew  and  Gentile — comprehensive  and  explana- 
tory of  all  the  rest — is  that  there  is  no  fear  of  God 
before  their  eyes  (Ro  3^^).  This  is  the  stupid,  un- 
thinking fearlessness  of  men  who  are  blind  to  the 
realities  of  the  spiritual  world  to  which  they  be- 
long. If  they  but  knew  God,  they  could  not  but 
fear  Him,  supposing  they  are  guilty  of  even  a  frac- 
tion of  the  sins  which  are  here  laid  to  their  charge. 
So  soon  as  their  eyes  are  opened,  and  their  con- 
sciences quickened,  they  discover  that  it  is  a  fear- 
ful thing  {(po^epov)  to  tall  into  the  hands  of  the 
li\-ing  God  (He  10").  But  if,  conscious  of  demerit, 
they  cry  to  Him  for  mercy,  their  sins  are  forgiven, 
and  henceforth  they  live  as  in  His  sight,  recogniz- 
ing that  to  fear  God  and  keep  His  commandments 
is  the  whole  duty  of  man. 

This  was  the  religion  of  the  devout  Jew,  and 
whenthe  Gentile,  dissatisfied  alike  with  the  old 
gods  of  Olympus  and  the  cold  abstractions  of  philo- 
sophy, came  to  the  synagogues  of  the  '  dispersion ' 
in  search  of  a  higher  taith  and  a  purer  morality,  he 
was  taught  to  '  fear  God.'  He  became  a  ^o^oOpLevos 
(or  fft^ofjievoi)  rbv  deov,  though  he  might  never  com- 
pletely judaize  himself  by  accepting  the  mark  of 
the  covenant.  The  God-fearer  is  very  frequently 
referred  to  in  the  Apostolic  Age  (Ac  10^—  ^  13^®-  -** 
etc. ),  and  many  of  the  earliest  GentUe  converts  to 
Christianity  were  men  and  women  whose  fear  of 
God  had  prepared  them  for  the  reception  of  the 
gospel.  The  Torah  was  thus  a  tutor  to  bring  them 
to  Christ.  The  religion  of  law,  in  which  God  was 
a  Sovereign  to  be  obeyed  and  a  Judge  to  be  dreaded, 
was  consummated  by  the  religion  of  love,  in  which 
Goti  is  a  Father  and  Christ  a  Saviour-Brother.  It 
is  the  distinctive  message  of  Christianity  that  God 
wills  men  to  serve  Him  without  fear  (di^6,3ws,  Lk  1"*), 
with  a  love  which  casts  out  fear  (1  Jn  -t'*),  with  a 
boldness  which  seeks  His  immediate  presence  (He 
10^),  with  a  freedom  and  familiarity  which  prompt 
the  cry  '  Abba,  Father '  (Ro  8^*).  '  Ye  have  not  re- 
ceived the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear,  but  ye 
have  received  the  spirit  of  sonship.'  'EXevdepia,  vap- 
pT/ffia,  and  dydrr} — dominant  notes  in  the  gospel  of 
St.  Paul,  the  writer  of  Hebrews,  and  St.  John — are 
all  antipodal  to  fear.  The  atmosphere  of  the  house- 
hold of  God  is  filial  trust,  not  servile  suspicion  and 
dread. 

In  the  Christian  life,  nevertheless,  there  is  a  new 

{•lace  for  the  old  instinct  of  fear.  Wearing  a  fresh 
ivery,  it  is  transformed  into  a  guardian  of  the  be- 
liever's dear-bought  possessions.  Godly  repentance 
has  wrought — what  fear  !  (2  Co  7").  Thus  there 
is  an  ethical  fear  which  accompanies  a  great  re- 
sponsibility, a  passionate  love,  and  a  noble  heroism. 
There  is  a  fear  which  is  the  opposite  of  high-minded- 
ness  (Ro  11^),  and  without  which  no  man  can  work 
out  his  salvation  (Ph  2^-)  or  perfect  his  holiness 
(2  Co  7^).  There  is  a  fear  of  personally  coming 
short  and  permittin^^  others  to  come  short  (wrepij- 
Kivai,  He  4^.  There  is  the  paranymph's  jealous  fear 
lest  the  Bridegroom  should  lose  His  bride  (2  Co  IP), 
the  Apostle's  anxious  fear  lest  his  converts  should 
be  found  unworthy  (12^).  There  is  the  scrupulous 
fear  of  Bunyan's  Mr.  Fearing,  who  '  was,  above 
many,  tender  of  sin ;  he  was  so  afraid  of  doing 
injuries  to  others,  that  he  often  would  deny  himself 
of  that  which  was  lawful,  because  he  would  not 
offend '  (cf.  1  Co  8").  There  is  a  fear,  like  that  of 
the  angels  in  Sodom,  animating  those  who  snatch 
erring  ones  as  brands  from  the  burning,  while  they 
hate  even  the  garment  spotted  by  the  flesh  ( Jude  ^). 
From  the  natural  fear  which  listens  either  to  the 
whispers  of  inward  weakness  or  the  threats  of  out- 
ward despotism,  Christianity  suffices  to  deliver 
men.  For  the  sensitive  human  spirit,  which  often 
pathetically  confesses  its  '  weakness  and  fear  and 


much  trembling '  ( 1  Co  2* ;  cf.  2  Co  7'),  Christ  indeed 
shows  the  utmost  tenderness,  and  again  and  again 
St.  Paul  received  night-visions  in  which  his  Lord 
bade  him  'Be  not  afraid'  (ait;  <po^ov,  Ac  18»,  27-''). 
But  for  the  timidity  which  sacrifices  principles  and 
shirks  duties  Christianity  has  no  mercy.  To  this 
fear  it  gives  a  special  name,  calling  it  not  <l>6^ot 
but  deiXia  (2  Ti  1"),  a  fearfulness  which  is  synonym- 
ous with  cowardice,  and  the  fearful  {duXoi,  Rev  2P), 
who  prove  apostates  in  the  hour  of  danger,  denying 
Christ  and  worshipping  Caesar,  stand  first  in  the 
black  list  of  those  who  go  down  to  the  second 
death. 

The  NT  shrinks  from  attributing  ^/3o$  to  Christ, 
yet  something  would  have  been  lacking  in  His 
matchless  character  if  He  had  not  given  the  best 
illustration  of  the  presence  of  fear  in  even  the 
most  filial  life.  In  the  hour  of  His  agony,  when 
His  Father's  will  was  the  one  certainty  which 
nothing  could  obscure.  His  godly  fear  of  swerving 
an  inch  from  the  line  of  duty  gave  Him  the  su- 
preme moral  victory.  He  was  heard  for  His  euXd^Seto, 
that  perfect  reverence  which  dictated  a  perfect 
submission :  '  exauditus  pro  sua  reverentia '  ( >'ulg. ). 

James  Strahan\ 

FEASTING.  —  1.  Pagan  feastings.  —  These  are 
dealt  with  in  this  article  only  in  so  far  as  they  are 
alluded  to  in  the  apostolic  literature.  The  allu- 
sions are  incidental,  and  no  attempt  is  made  at 
minute  description. 

(1)  We  find  KwfjLOi  or  drinking-bouts  mentioned 
(Ro  13^,  Gal  5^,  1  P  4^),  and  the  licentious  con- 
duct of  those  who  participated  in  these  orgies 
may  have  suggested  to  St.  Paid  the  famous  pas- 
sages in  which  he  speaks  of  the  works  of  dark- 
ness (cf.  Eph  5^^'",  1  Th  5"-),  for  these  bouts  took 
place  at  night  as  distinguished  from  the  tempest iva 
convivia  which  ended  in  daylight:  'those  that  be 
drunken  are  drunken  in  the  night '  (1  Th  5"). 

'  When  night 
Darkens  the  streets,  then  wander  forth  the  sons 
Of  Belial,  flown  with  insolence  and  wine ' 

(Milton,  Paradise  Lott,  L  500ff.X 

To  Plato  also  they  suggested  a  picture  of  the 
licentious  tyrannical  soul  {Rep.  ix.  573) :  '  there 
will  be  feasts  and  carousals  and  revellings  and 
courtezans,  and  aU  that  sort  of  thing;  Love 
("Ep<iK)  is  the  lord  of  the  house  within  him,  and 
orders  all  the  concerns  of  his  soul.' 

Flagrant,  shameless  immorality  was  the  invari- 
able result  of  such  feasts,  and  so  we  find  associ- 
ated with  them  dffeXyeia,  fieOai,  olvo<p\iryia,  dfficria. 
'  Wine,  women,  and  song '  went  together.  Plato 
speaks  of  detrva  xal  airv  aiiXrirpUri  KUfwi  {Thecet. 
173  D),  and  it  may  be  that,  when  St.  Paul  exhorts 
Christians  to  use  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual 
songs,  he  is  contrasting  the  grand  reverent  music 
of  Christian  meetings  with  the  ribald  songs  of 
pagan  feasts.  One  may  compare  the  phrase  in 
Pliny's  correspondence  {Epp.  x.  97) :  '  carmen 
Christo  quasi  Deo  secum  invicem.'  A  favourite 
topic  of  conversation  at  such  gatherings  was  fpws, 
which  is  interesting  when  one  thinks  of  the  Chris- 
tian Agape. 

Although  philosophers  might  be  able  to  discuss 
this  topic  on  a  high  moral  plane  (cf.  Plato,  Sym- 
posiuvi),  yet  ordinarily  the  'love'  spoken  of  was 
simply  '  lust. ' 

St.  Paul  knew  that  just  as  Judaism  conld  de- 
scend to  this  worldly,  sensual  plane  of  living  when 
God  was  forgotten,  so  also  could  Christianity. 
The  motto  of  this  kind  of  life  was  '  Let  us  eat  and 
drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die ' — perhaps  the  philo- 
sophic creed  of  a  few,  but  certainly  the  practice  of 
many.  Hence  St.  Peter  calls  it  the  '  will  of  the 
Gentiles'  (1  P  4^),  and  St.  Paul  contrasts  it  with 
the  '  will  of  the  Lord '  'Eph  5^").  The  great  moral- 
ists of  paganism  condemned  these  bouts,  and  St. 


404 


FEASTING 


FEASTING 


Paul  (1  Co  15^)  quotes  Menander  (ace.  to  Jerome 
on  Gal  4-'*) — himself  an  Epicurean — against  the 
view  of  life  summed  up  in  the  aphorism,  '  Let  us 
eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die.'  The  Cor- 
inthians, doubting  the  resurrection-life,  must 
wake  up  from  drunkenness  in  a  righteous  fashion. 
Such  deeds  of  darkness  as  were  associated  with 
these  kQihoi  were  to  be  utterly  left  alone  (cf.  lio  13'*'*, 
a  passage  for  ever  associated  with  the  conversion 
of  St.  Auf^stine).  Christians  were  to  be  filled 
with  the  Spirit,  not  with  wine,  which  leads  to 
proHijjfacy  (do-on-ia).  Profligacy  is  associated  with 
drinking-bouts  in  2  Mac  6^  and  Test.  Jicd.  xvi.  1: 
*  There  are  four  evil  demons  in  wine — lust,  burn- 
in^sensual  desire,  profligacy,  base  greed  of  gain.' 
Disregard  of  a  future  life  easily  led  to  sensualism 
(see  Meyer's  Kommentar  on  1  Co  15*^  for  in- 
scriptions on  drinking-cups  recently  discovered). 
Clinstians  would  of  course  be  looked  on  by  their 
former  pagan  associates  as  austere,  gloomy  Puritans 
for  leaving  aside  these  practices.  So  St.  Peter 
declares,  and  Tertullian  later  on  says :  '  What  a 
jolly  boon  companion  that  young  man  was,  and 
now  he  is  good  for  nothing;  he  has  become  a 
Christian.  What  a  gay  woman  tliat  was,  how 
agieeably  wanton,  and  now  one  dare  not  utter  the 
least  indecency  in  her  presence '  (Apol.  3). 

(2)  It  was  not  simply  gross,  licentious,  heathen 
feasts  that  came  into  conflict  with  the  moral 
earnestness  of  Christianity,  but  also  feasts  con- 
nected with  religious  cults.  These  cults  were 
everywhere,  and  the  cult  of  the  Emperor  was  some- 
times associated  with  them.  They  constituted  a 
grave  danger  owing  to  the  religious  sanction  they 
gave  to  immorality  and  the  easy  path  they  opened 
up  towards  virtual  apostasy.  To  participate  in 
tliese  religious  feasts  was  distinctly  forbidden,  al- 
though, according  to  St.  Paul  at  least,  the  meat 
oflered  for  sale  in  the  open  markets  could  be 
bought. 

Christian  converts  had  been  brought  up  in  an 
atmosphere  Avhere  the  belief  in  the  influence  of 
demons  was  taken  for  granted,  and  indeed  tlie 
common  belief  of  Judaism  Avas  similar.  The 
Jew  incurred  pollution  through  partaking  of  food 
ofl'ered  to  idols.  It  was  believed  that  the  evil  spirit 
entered  the  food  and  resided  even  in  those  portions 
sold  in  public ;  '  lying  hid  tliere  for  a  long  time, 
they  (i.e.  demons)  blend  with  your  souls' (Clem. 
Horn.  ix.  9).  An  extreme  form  of  this  view  is  found 
in  Eusebius  {Pi-cep.  Evang,  iv.  23 — a  quotation  from 
Porphyry) :  '  Bodies  are  full  of  demons  ;  for  they 
particularly  delight  in  foods  of  various  kinds.  So 
wlien  we  eat  they  seize  upon  the  body.'  It  was 
therefore  absolutely  imperative  to  abstain  from 
festivals  connected  with  idol-worship. 

'  Where  the  feast  is  held  under  the  auspices  of  a  heathen 
L'od  and  as  a  sequel  to  his  sacrifice,'  then  abstinence  must 
follow  ;  '  participation  under  these  circumstances  becomes  an 
act  of  apostasy,  and  the  feaster  identifies  himself  with  the  idol 
as  distinctly  as  in  the  Lord's  Supper  he  identifies  himself  with 
Christ'  (G.  G.  Findlay  in  EGT  ii.  [19UU]  732). 

(3)  It  was  not  as  easy,  however,  to  decide  the 
right  Christian  attitude  in  the  case  of  civic  and 
business  festivities.  Trade-gilds  and  social  clubs 
were  numerous  and  gave  their  members  many 
social  and  commercial  advantages.  They  could 
hold  property,  and  they  gave  relief  in  cases  of  need 
to  their  members.  These  gilds  were  under  tlie 
patronage  of  some  deity  who  was  honoured  in 
feasts — common  meals  of  a  sacramental  kind  at 
which  members  ate  and  drank  reclining  on  couches. 
Tliese  meals  were  often  scenes  of  revelry  (see 
Kamsay  in  HDB  iv.  758-9),  and  it  required  great 
constancy  on  the  part  of  Christian  members  of 
such  gilds  to  keep  their  faith.  St.  I'aul  recognizes 
the  impossibility  of  absolute  aloofness  from  these 
and  from  social  gatherings ;  but  while  he  maintains 


the  nonentity  of  idols,  he  recognizes  the  practical 
power  of  demonic  influence.  He  allows  freedom 
of  intercourse  to  the  strong  Christian — provided  he 
keeps  from  idolatry  and  fornication — but  he  recog- 
nizes the  danger.  This  was  threefold.  The  weak 
brotlier  mightbe  made  to  stumble,  the  strong  Chris- 
tian might  himself  be  enticed,  and  the  lieatheu 
might  conclude  that  the  Christianity  of  the  Chris- 
tian participant  meant  little.  There  were  three 
dangers  the  Apostle  had  to  face  in  settling  this 
question.  Tliere  was  the  danger  of  asceticism, 
the  danger  of  a  relapse  into  Judaistic  rites,  and 
the  danger  of  aiitinomian  laxity.  The  danger  of 
asceticism  is  met  in  the  Colossian  Epistle.  St. 
Paul  combats  abstinence  (see  art.  Abstinence). 
From  his  mention  of  angel-worship  and  aroLxela.  it 
seems  clear  that  the  demonic  influences  referred  to 
above  were  believed  in  by  the  errorists  of  Colossa?. 
Judaistic  influence  is  also  discernible  (see  art. 
CoLOSSlANS)  The  Judaistic  errors  are  met  in  the 
Galatian  Epistle.  It  is  the  libertine  antinomian 
error  that  seemed  most  likely  to  overcome  the 
Gentile  Church.  St.  Paul  meets  it  in  1  Corintli- 
ians.  The  letters  to  Pergamos  and  Thyatira  meet 
it  with  forcible  denunciation  and  threatening  (see 

such   artt.    as  BALAAM,   JEZEBEL,    NiCOLAlTAXS), 

and  in  2  Peter  and  Jude  we  have  an  attitude  simi- 
lar to  that  of  St.  John  (Revelation). 

2.  Christian  feasts  (for  the  Jewish  feasts  men- 
tioned in  the  NT  see  artt.  New  Moon,  Pas,sover, 
Pentecost,  Sabbath,  etc.).  We  have  the  Lord's 
Supper  as  a  distinctively  Christian  feast  (see 
Eucharist),  and  at  least  once  Agape  occurs  (.see 
Love-F"east).  The  well-known  Church  festivals 
are  of  later  origin.  St.  Paul  once  ( 1  Co  5**)  uses  the 
term  '  feast '  in  a  metaphorical  sense  of  the  whole 
life  of  the  Christian  community.  Philo  had  inter- 
preted in  this  fashion  before  him  (de  Migr.  Abruh. 
16).  This  is  sug>^ested  to  St.  Paul  by  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  tnought  is  found  recurring  in  later 
writers.  Clement  of  Alexandria  speaks  of  the 
whole  Christian  life  of  the  true  Gnostic  as  a  holy 
panegyric  (joyful  assembly)  (Strom,  vii.  7).  Chry- 
sostom  also  says  that  for  Christians  their  whole 
life  is  a  feast  owing  to  the  superabundance  of  the 
good  gifts  bestowed  on  them  (quoted  by  Findlay, 
EGT,  on  1  Co  5").  This  feast,  says  St.  taul,  must 
be  held  in  sincerity  and  truth. 

In  2  P  2^^,  Jude  ^-  we  have  an  account  of  liber- 
tines who  frequent  the  Christian  feasts,  but  who 
turn  them  into  occasions  of  pleasure.  The  textual 
questions  involved  need  not  be  raised  here.  Even 
if  we  read  dTrdrats  in  2  Pet.  for  a.-y6.irai%  (as  in  Jude  '*), 
the  reference  seems  in  both  places  to  be  to  the 
Christian  love-feasts  (the  term  ein^ixla  is  used  of 
the  love-feast  by  Clem.  Alex.  Pad.  ii.  1.  6).  and  a 
class  of  men  is  brought  before  us  who  live  immoral 
lives  while  yet  claiming  the  right  to  participate  in 
the  Christian  love-feasts. 

These  Christian  feasts  were  early  misunderstood 
by  pagans.  Christians  were  accused  of  atheism,  of 
immorality,  and  of  cannibalism.  Pliny,  by  speaking 
of  the  innocence  of  Christian  feasts,  implies  that  he 
had  heard  these  accusations.  Similar  charges  are 
repudiated  by  Justin  Martyr  {Apol.  i.  26),  and  later 
by  Tertullian  (Apol.  7,  8).  The  Christians  defended 
themselves  on  tlie  ground  that  such  accusations 
were  baseless,  or  else  that  they  could  only  be  brought 
against  heretics  (cf.  Iren.  I.  xxv.  3,  and  Justin 
Martj'r,  Apol.  i.  26).  For  a  later  defence  see  Euse- 
bius, HE  4, 7.  That  there  was  some  ground  for  the 
charge  of  immoralitj',  even  Peter  and  Jude  l)ear 
witness,  but  they  testify  also  to  the  stern  morality 
of  true  Christianity. 

LiTBRATURB.— For  icujitoc  see  Classical  Dictionaries;  E.  H -■"-'' 
The    Organization   of  the   Earlu    Christian  Churcl,' 
Lecture  ii.  (jrives  references  to  asso<-'iations)  ;  W.  M.  R 
artt.  mllDBon  'Pergamus,'  'Thyatira,' etc.,  also  7'/. 


FEET 


FELLOWSHIP 


405 


in  the  Roman  Empire,  1S93,  Index,  <i.f.  •  Sodalitates."  Refer- 
ence must  also  be  made  to  XT  IntroductiODS  like  Zahn's  (Eng. 
tr.,  :*»)  and  works  on  the  Apostolic  Age. 

Donald  Mackexzie. 

FEET. — The  tendency  to  individual  detail,  which 
gives  so  much  vividness  to  Semitic  narrative, 
accounts  for  some  of  the  references  to  the  feet 
(t65€s)  in  apostolic  writings,  as,  for  example,  the 
reference  in  St.  Peter's  judgment  on  Sapphira: 
•  the  feet  of  those  wlio  buried  thy  husband  are  at  the 
door '  (Ac  59 ;  cf.  7«,  He  l•2=^  Rev  1'*  2>8  lOM-  The 
sinner's  feet  are  'swift  to  shed  blood'  (Ro  3"),  but 
the  Christian's  are  to  be  '  sandalled '  with  readiness 
to  proclaim  the  gospel  of  peace  (Eph  6^'),  and  are 
made  beautiful  by  that  mission  (Ro  10").  Behind 
such  allusions,  however,  there  is  something  more 
than  the  love  of  graphic  detail.  The  whole  body 
enters  much  more  into  biblical  ideas  of  personality 
than  the  modem  reader  usually  recognizes  (see  artt. 
Ear,  ^Iead).  In  St.  Paul's  analogy-  between  the 
human  body  and  the  Church,  the  head  needs  the 
service  of  the  feet,  and  the  foot  must  not  refuse 
its  ministry  because  its  service  is  humbler  than 
that  of  the  hand  (1  Co  12'5-  ^i ;  cf.  1  Clem,  xxxvii.  5). 
In  the  mystical  body  of  the  Odes  of  Solomon  (xlii.  18) 
the  feet  represent  the  saints. 

Other  references  to  the  feet  are  derived  from 
Oriental  customs.  The  sandals  are  removed  in 
holy  places  (Ac  7^),  as  before  entering  the  mosque 
of  to-day.  The  removal  of  the  master's  sandals  is 
a  slave's  work  (13^).  To  wash  the  dusty  feet  of 
guests  is  a  rite  of  hospitality  (cf.  Lk  7**,  Jn  IS'"-), 
and  the  habit  of  rendering  such  sendee  to  the 
'saints'  is  mentioned  amongst  the  qualifications 
of  'widows'  (1  Ti  5^";  see  art.  Widow).  Since 
the  Jewish  teacher  taught  whilst  sitting,  with  his 
scholars  at  a  lower  level  around  him,  St.  Paul  can 
say  literally  that  he  was  '  brought  up  at  the  feet  of 
Gamaliel '  (Ac  22*).  Contributions  to  the  common 
fund  are  laid  at  the  feet  of  the  apostles,  who  are 
thus  represented  sitting  as  teachers  (4^ ;  see  Holtz- 
mann,  ad  loc. ).  The  clothes  of  the  '  witnesses '  who 
stoned  Stephen  were  laid  at  the  feet  of  Saul, 
already  prominent  against  the  new  sect  (7^*).  The 
Oriental  habit  of  prostration  before  the  feet  of  a 
superior,  in  fear  or  reverence,  is  illustrated  by 
Sapphira  (5^»),  Cornelius  ( 10=^),  John  (Rev  li^  19'"  22» ; 
cf.  3^ ;  Hennas,  Vis.  III.  ii.  3).  The  ancient  custom 
according  to  which  the  victor  literally  trampled 
the  conquered  under  his  feet  (Jos  \^*  and  the 
monuments),  to  register  and  confirm  the  conquest, 
accounts  for  the  frequent  phrase  '  under  the  feet,' 
to  denote  subjugation  (1  Co  15^",  Eph  l^^,  He  2«, 
Ro  16^  ;  cf.  Rev  lO^  12').  In  the  spirit  of  dramatic 
symbolism,  Agabus  (q.v.)  bound  his  hands  and  feet 
with  St.  Paul's  girdle,  to  prophesy  the  Apostle's 
coming  bondage  (Ac  21").  St.  Paid  and  Barnabas 
shook  oft'  the  dust  of  their  feet  against  Pisidian 
Antioch  (13*' ;  cf.  Mt  10")  in  token  of  complete 
separation  from  its  doom. 

H.  Wheeler  Robixsox. 

FELIX  (Ac  23-<ff-).— A  freedman,  and  a  brother 
of  Pallas,  Felix  was  the  favourite  of  the  Emperor 
Claudius.  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  9)  calls  him  '  Antonius 
Felix.'  Of  his  public  life  prior  to  his  appoint- 
ment to  his  procuratorship  in  Palestine,  nothing 
is  known  ;  of  his  private  life,  only  that  he  had 
married  a  granddaughter  of  Antony  and  Cleopatra, 
whom  Tacitus  (loc.  cit.)  calls  Drusilla,  confusing 
her,  no  doubt,  ^vith  the  Jewish  princess  with  whom 
Felix  allied  himself  later.  Suetonius  knows  of 
yet  another  marriage — also  to  a  princess  (C7a«rf.  28). 

Josephus  and  Tacitus  are  at  variance  as  to  the 
time  and  circumstance  of  the  sending  of  Felix 
to  Palestine.  According  to  Josephus  (BJ  ii.  12 ; 
Ant.  XX.  6f.),  Felix  was  appointed  to  succeed  the 
procurator  Cumanus,  when  the  latter  was  con- 
demned and  banished  for  his  misrule.    According 


to  Tacitus  (Ann.  xii.  54),  Cumanus  and  Felix  were 
contemporaneously  procurators,  the  one  of  Galilee, 
the  other  of  Samaria.  It  seems  reasonable  to  follow 
Schiirer  (HJP  I.  iL  [1890]  174)  in  giving  preference 
in  this  matter  to  'the  very  detailed  narrative  of 
Josephus.'  This  fixes  the  arrival  of  Felix  in 
Palestine  in  A.D.  52,  or  early  in  the  follovting 
year. 

The  historians  are  entirely  at  one  in  their  esti- 
mate of  Felix  and  of  the  manner  in  which  he 
exercised  his  functions.  His  countryman  Tacitus 
(Hist.  V.  9)  describes  him  as  using  '  the  powers  of  a 
king  with  the  disposition  of  a  slave,'  and  says 
(Ann.  xii.  54)  '  he  deemed  that  he  might  perpetrate 
any  ill  deeds  with  impunity.'  Under  his  govern- 
ment the  state  of  Palestine  grew  rapidly  worse. 
If  there  had  been  occasional  disorders  under 
Cumanus,  'imder  Felix  rebellion  became  perma- 
nent.' The  boundless  cruelty  with  wMch  he  re- 
pressed the  more  open  opposition  of  the  '  Zealots  * 
to  the  Roman  rule  stimulated  the  formation  of  the 
secret  associations  of  the  'Assassins '  (Sicarii),  whose 
hand  was  against  all — Jew  not  less  than  Roman 
— who  did  not  further  their  designs.  Not  less 
significant  of  the  misery  of  the  people  was  their 
readiness  to  answer  the  call  of  religious  fanatics 
like  '  the  Egyptian '  mentioned  in  Ac  21^,  whom 
Josephus  (BJ  II.  xiii.  5)  credits  with  a  following 
of  thirty  thousand.  In  any  such  movement  Felix 
suspected  '  the  beginning  of  a  revolt,'  and  adopted 
measures  which  only  served  to  increase  the  popular 
disaffection.  For  the  intrigue  by  which  he  pos- 
sessed himself  of  the  youngest  daughter  of  Herod 
Agrippa  I. — the  newly  wedded  wife  of  King  Azizus 
of  Emesa — see  art.  Drusilla. 

The  cynical  disregard  of  Felix  for  justice,  and 
his  inordinate  greed  are  alike  brought  to  view 
in  his  treatment  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  Although 
possessed  of  information  'concerning  the  Way,* 
which  would  have  justified  him  in  releasing  the 
prisoner  when  he  was  first  brought  before  him,  he 
decided  to  adjourn  the  case  indefinitely  (Ac  24-), 
partly  to  curry  favour  with  the  Jews,  and  partly 
to  sene  his  own  rapacious  ends.  The  interview 
with  the  Apostle  recorded  in  Ac  24^  was  probably 
intended  by  the  procurator  and  his  wife  to  be 
somewhat  of  a  diversion — it  ended  for  Felix  in 
terror.  He  had  frequent  communings  with  St. 
Paul  during  the  time  he  detained  him  as  his 
prisoner  at  Ciesarea ;  but  seemingly  on  these  later 
occasions  Felix  kept  control  of  the  conversation 
and  directed  it,  though  unavailingly,  towards  his 
mercenary  aim. 

Two  years  after  St.  Paul  was  brought  to  Caesarea, 
Felix  was  recalled  to  Rome  in  connexion  with  a 
strife  which  had  broken  out  at  Caesarea  between 
the  Jews  and  the  Syrians  in  that  town — the  Jews 
asserting  for  themselves  certain  exclusive  rights, 
which  the  others  denied.  The  matter  was  referred 
to  the  Emperor.  The  investigation  proved  so 
damaging  to  Felix  that  'he  had  certainly  been 
brought  to  punishment,  unless  Nero  had  yielded  to 
the  importunate  solicitations  of  his  brother  Pallas ' 
(Jos.  Ant.  XX.  viii.  9). 

Of  the  subsequent  life  of  Felix,  nothing  is  known. 

LrrBRATCKB.— H.  M.  Lnckock,  Footprints  of  the  Apostles  at 
traced  by  St.  Lvke,  1905,  pt.  ii.  p.  243  ;  A.  Madaren,  Exposir 
turns :  'Acts,  ch.  xiii.-€nd,'  1907,  pp.  2S1.  2S7  ;  G.  H.  Morrison, 
The  FooUttps  of  the  Floek,  1904,  p.  362 ;  M.  Jones,  SL  Pajd 
the  Orator,  1910,  p.  202 ;  J.  S.  Howson,  The  CampoKiont  of  St. 
Paxd,  1874,  p.  145 ;  H.  Goodwin,  Parish  Sermons,  Snd  ser.S. 
1S61,  p.  179  ;  W.  H.  M.  H.  Aitken,  The  Glory  of  the  GotpO, 
n.d.,  pp.  193,  208,  223;  C.  H.  Turner,  'Eusebins'  Chronology 
of  Felix  and  Festns'  in  JThSt,  iu.  a901-02]  120;  S.  Boss. 
Roman  Late  and  History  in  the  ST,  1901,  p.  373. 

G.  P.  Gould. 
FELLOWSHIP.  —  Nothing  is  so  prominent  in 
early  Christianity  as  its  sense  of  fellowship.     The 
Corinthians,  with    their    extreme    individualistic 


406 


FELLOWSHIP 


FESTUS 


tendencies,  are  an  exception  among  the  Panline 
communities.  It  This  fellowship  is  primarily  a 
reli<,'ious  fact :  it  is  fellowship  with  the  heavenly 
Lord,  who,  though  hidden  in  heaven  (Ac  3-'),  is 
yet  sensibly  present  to  His  followers  (Mt  IS-"  28^"), 
Even  the  individual  believer  knows  that  he  is  in 
fellowship  witli  Christ.  St.  Paul,  using  a  mystical 
form  of  expression,  says  that  it  is  Christ  and  not 
himself  who  lives  and  acts  in  him  (Gal  2**).  He 
speaks  also  of  'the  fellowship  of  his  sufferings' 
(rh  3'"),  which  allows  his  own  sufferings  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  saving  power  of  Clirist's  afflictions 
for  His  Church  (Col  1",  Eph  3^»).  The  fellowship 
with  Christ  to  which  God  has  called  Christians 
(1  Co  P)  has  not  yet  been  fully  realized,  but  is 
still  to  be  hoped  for.  Tolbe  witli  Christ  for  ever 
is  tlie  whole  desire  of  the  Apostle  (1  Th  4",  Ph  l^^) ; 
in  the  present  time  he  has  but  a  foretaste  of  the 
joy  to  come.  St.  John  emphasizes  the  fact  that 
this  present  fellowship  with  Clirist  (1  Jn  1*)  is 
fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  the  Son  (P). 
Since  it  is  the  Holy  Ghost  who  mediates  between 
Christ  and  His  believers,  St.  Paul  speaks  of 
•fellowship  of  the  Spirit'  (Ph  2^)  as  well  as  of 
'  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost '  (2  Co  13"),  the 
same  Greek  word  {Koivuvla)  being  used  in  both 
passages.  Fellowship  with  the  heavenly  Lord, 
■who  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  and  makes  in- 
tercession for  His  followers  (Ro  8^* ;  cf.  1  Jn  2^, 
He  2'^  4'*  7^  etc. ),  is  realized  in  prayers  which  are 
heard  (2  Co  12«'-),  and  in  revelations  (2  Co  12',  Gal 
22 ;  cf.  1  Th  4i«).  Fellowship  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
is  realized  in  certainty  of  salvation  and  boldness 
in  prayer  (Ro  S'*'-  '^  ;  cf.  He  4><'),  in  moral  strength 
(Ro  8'^'-,  Gal  5^*^-).  and  miraculous  gifts  of  every 
kind — the  ecstatic  gifts  of  prophecy  and  speaking 
with  tongues,  and  the  natural  gifts  bestowed  by 
the  Spirit,  such  as  governing  and  helping  in  the 
Church  (1  Co  12^«-"^^^-). 

2.  Fellowship  of  the  faith  (Philem ')  is  fellowship 
of  the  faithful.  This  is  an  exclusive  fellowship : 
'  what  fellowship  have  righteousness  and  iniquity  ? 
or  what  communion  hath  light  with  darkness?' 
(2  Co  6'*).  St.  Paul,  and  still  more  St.  John,  strive 
hard  to  maintain  thisexclusiveness  in  their  churches 
— not  for  reasons  of  utility,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Greek  clubs ;  not  from  national  prejudice,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  Jewish  synagogues ;  but  from  the 
standpoint  of  Christian  morals :  the  fulfilment  of 
the  high  ordinances  of  the  gospel  is  only  possible 
in  the  midst  of  a  Christian  congregation  (1  Co  6^'"). 
The  separation  of  the  members  of  the  Church  from 
social  relationship  with  the  heathen  world,  which 
St.  Paul  endeavoured  to  effect  (cf.  his  scruples  re- 
garding invitations  to  heathen  houses  or  temjiles, 
1  Co  10"),  was  carried  out  in  later  times  (1  P  4^ 
3  Jn  ^)  ;  and  the  leaders  in  the  Church  even  began 
to  insist  on  avoiding  all  fellowship  with  Chris- 
tians of  doubtful  character  (2  Jn'*"-,  1  Jn  4'^-,  Rev 
ouff.  m.^  Jude'Sff-). 

To  this  exclusiveness  in  externals  there  corre- 
sponds an  inward  intensity  :  to  be  of  one  accord,  to 
have  the  same  mind  (1  Co  l^',  2  Co  13",  Ph  2-,  Ro 
12'«),  to  love  tiie  brethren  (Ro  12i",  1  Th  4»,  etc.), 
are  of  t-repeated  commands.  'Bear  ye  one  another's 
burdens'  is  a  law  of  the  Church  (Gal  6-);  all  are 
members  of  one  body  (1  Co  12'-'^-),  and  so  all  have 
joy  and  sorrow  in  common  (1  Co  12^,  Ro  12'^). 
One  sign  of  this  fellowship  is  mutual  intercession 
(2  Co  1",  Col  4»,  2  Th  3'),  another  is  the  ki.ss  of 
peace  (2  Co  13'2,  1  Th  5'^).  At  tlie  so-called  Apos- 
tolic Council,  James,  Peter,  and  John  gave  Paul 
and  Barnabas  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  in 
token  of  their  mutual  recoj^nition  of  one  another 
as  fellow- workers  in  their  different  mission  fields 
(Gal  2").  Later  on  it  became  customary  to  send 
messengers  and  letters  from  one  church  to  another. 
St.  Paul  mentions  not  only  his  fellow-workers  (Ro 


16-')  but  also  his  fellow-prisoners  (Ro  16'  Col  4'*). 
Christianity  is  called  a  brotherhood  (1  P  2"  5«,  1 
C'em.  ii.  4). 

3.  Fellowship — and  this  is  the  main  point — is  to 
be  exercised  actively  towards  all  members  of  the 
community.  In  this  sense  fellowship  is  one  of  the 
chief  characteristics  of  the  primitive  Church  of 
Jerusalem  (Ac  2*-) ;  it  is  characteristic,  too,  of  the 
relationship  between  the  Pauline  communities. 
St.  Paul  praises  the  Philippians  for  their  fellow- 
ship in  furthering  the  gos[)el  (Ph  1"),  i.e.  takins 
part  in  the  Apostle's  missionary  work  by  personal 
activity,  prayers,  and  contributions  of  money.  In 
this  way  they  had  fellowship  with  his  afffictions 
(Ph  4").  The  churches  of  Macedonia  besought 
the  Apostle  '  with  much  intreaty  in  regard  of  .  .  . 
the  fellowship  in  the  ministering  to  the  saints '  (2 
Co  8*),  i.e.  that  they  might  be  allowed  to  join  in 
the  collection  for  the  poor  of  Jerusalem.  Thus 
the  word  Koivuvia  acquires  a  meaning  wliich  the 
EW  have  tried  to  express  by  the  rendering  '  con- 
tribution'(Ro  15=»,  2  Co  9";  AV  'distribution') 
or  '  communicate '  (He  13"),  He  that  is  taught  in 
the  word  is  advised  by  St.  Paul  to  communicate 
unto  him  that  teacheth  in  all  good  things  (Gal  6'). 
Fellowship,  then,  becomes  a  system  of  mutual  help 
— the  care  of  the  poor  and  the  sick,  the  feeding 
of  widows  and  orphans,  the  visiting  of  prisoners, 
hospitality,  the  procuring  of  labour  for  travelling 
workmen  (Didache,  xii.  3ff.),  are  some  of  the 
proofs  of  fellowship.  By  these  means  early  Chris- 
tianity showed  itself  to  be  a  social  power  far  sur- 
passing all  rival  organizations  and  religions. 

Literature. — E.  von  Dobschutz,  Christian  Life  in  the  Primi- 
tive Church,  Eng.  tr.,  1904  ;  A.  Harnack,  Die  Mission  uni 
Aushreitung  des  Christentums  in  den  ersten  drei  Jahrhun- 
derten"^,  1906,  i.  127-171  (Enfj.  tr.,  Mission  and  Expansion^, 
1908,  i.  147-198).  Of.  also  the  Literature  at  the  end  of  the  art. 
Communion.  E.  VOX  DOBSCHtJTZ. 

FESTUS. — No  information  is  forthcoming  con- 
cerning Porcius  Festus,  who  succeeded  Felix  in 
the  procuratorship  of  Judaea,  other  than  that 
supplied  by  Ac  24-^  26*-  and  by  Josephus,  Ant.  XX. 
viii.  9f.,  ix.  1,  and  BJ  ll.  xiv.  1.  According  to 
Josephus,  Festus  set  himself  with  vigour  and 
success  to  restore  order  to  his  province,  which  he 
found  distracted  with  sedition  and  overrun  by 
bands  of  robbers.  '  He  caught  the  greatest  part  of 
the  robbers,  and  destroyed  a  great  many  of  them.' 
More  particularly  it  is  added  that  he  '  sent  forces, 
both  horsemen  and  footmen,  to  fall  upon  those  that 
had  been  seduced  by  a  certain  impostor,  who  pro- 
mised them  deliverance  and  freedom  from  the 
miseries  they  w  ere  under,  if  they  would  but  follow 
him  as  far  as  the  wilderness.  Accordingly,  those 
forces  that  were  sent  destroyed  both  him  tliat  had 
deluded  them  and  those  that  were  his  followers 
also.'  The  only  other  incident  in  the  administra- 
tion of  Festus  which  Josephus  relates  shows  hira,  in 
association  with  King  Agrippa  li.,  withstanding 
'the  chief  men  of  Jerusalem  {A7it.  XX.  viii.  11), 
and  permitting  an  appeal  to  Cresar — an  interesting 
combination  in  view  of  the  narrative  in  Acts.  The 
circumstances,  as  stated  by  Josephus,  were  these : 
Agrippa  had  made  an  addition  to  his  palace  at 
Jerusalem,  which  enabled  him  to  observe  from  his 
dining-hall  what  was  done  in  the  Temple.  There- 
upon '  the  chief  men  of  Jerusalem '  erected  a  wall 
to  obstruct  the  view  from  the  palace.  Festus  sup- 
ported Agrippa  in  demanding  the  removal  of  this 
wall,  but  yielded  to  the  request  of  the  Jews  that 
the  whole  matter  might  be  referred  to  Nero,  who 
upheld  the  appeal  and  reversed  the  judgment  of 
his  procurator. 

Josephus  evidently  regards  Festus  as  a  wise  and 
righteous  official,  affording  an  agreeable  contrast 
to  Albinus,  his  successor,  of  whom  he  says  that 
'  there  was  not  any  sort  of  wickedness  that  could 


FEVER 


FIRE 


407 


be  named  but    he   had   a   hand   in   it'   (BJ  U. 
xiv.  1). 

Turning  to  the  Book  of  Acts,  Ave  find  that  there, 
•while  justice  is  done  to  the  promptness  \i\t\\  which 
Festus  addressed  himself  to  his  duties  and  to  the 
lip -honia<:e  he  was  ready  to  pay  to  '  the  custom  of 
tlie  Komans,'  he  appears  in  a  less  favourable  light, 
and  the  outstanding  fact  meets  us  of  the  estimate 
which  St.  Paul  formed  of  him.  St.  Paul  preferred 
to  take  his  chance  with  Nero  to  leaving  his  cause 
to  be  disposed  of  by  this  fussy,  plausible  official. 
'I  api>eal  unto  Cresar,'  is  the  lasting  condemna- 
tion of  Festus.  He  was  persuaded  that  the  Apostle 
was  innocent  of  the  '  many  and  grievous  charges ' 
brought  against  him,  yet  he  Avas  quite  prepared 
to  sacrifice  him,  if  thereby  he  '  could  gain  favour 
with  the  Jews ' ;  hence  the  preposterous  proposal  of 
a  re-trial  at  Jerusalem.  The  noble  use  which  St. 
Paul  made  shortly  after  of  the  opportunity  given 
him- by  Festus  to  speak  for  himself  before  Agrippa 
and  Berenice  should  not  blind  us  to  the  callousness 
of  the  man  who  planned  that  scene  with  all  its 
pomp  and  circumstance,  and  deliberately  exploited 
a  prisoner  in  bonds  for  the  entertainment  of  his 
Heroilian  giiests.  Festus  died  after  holding  his 
office  for  a  brief  term — '  scarcely  two  years ' 
(Schiirer,  HJP  I.  ii.  [1890]  185).  See  art.  Dates  for 
discussion  of  the  chronology  of  the  procuratorship 
of  Festus. 

Lttbraturb.— S.  Bass,  Roman  Law  and  History  in  the  NT, 
1901,  p.  390 ;  C.  H.  Tmuer,  '  Eusebins'  Chronology  of  Felix 
•nd  Festus'  in  JThSt  iu.  [1901-02]  120;  G.  H.  Morrison,  The 
Footsteps  of  the  Flock,  1904,  p.  362  ;  M.  Jones,  St.  Paul  the 
Orator,  1910,  p.  212 ;  A.  Maclaren,  Expogitions  :  '  Acts,  ch. 
xiii.-end,'  1907,  p.  322.  G.  P.  GOULD. 

FEYER.— In  the  single  passage  (Ac  28^)  in  which 
the  word  occurs,  it  is  associated  with  dysentery 
(q.  V. ).  Fever  is  a  rise  in  bodily  temperature  above 
the  normal  of  98  "4°  F.  It  may  be  caused  by  physio- 
logical conditions — a  mechanical  interference  with 
the  nervous  system  which  prevents  heat-elimina- 
tion, as  in  sunstroke.  It  is  also  a  symptom  of  the 
reaction  of  the  body  to  infection  by  micro-organisms 
or  other  poisons  by  which  the  heat-regulation 
apparatus  Ls  disturbed.  The  effects  of  this  are 
evident  in  further  derangements  in  the  digestive 
glands,  the  liver  and  kidneys,  the  alimentary 
canal,  the  nervous  organism,  and  the  blood.  The 
name  is  given  to  many  diseases  of  which  fever  is 
the  leading  symptom,  as  e.g.  typhoid  fever.  At  a 
time  when  it  was  not  possible  to  explain  diseases 
by  reference  to  a  single  cause,  it  was  very  natural 
to  describe  the  derangement  by  two  or  more  of  the 
princijjal  symptoms,  as  in  the  instance  under  con- 
sideration. C.  A.  Beckwith. 

FIELD  OF  BLOOD.— See  Akeldama. 

FIG,  FIG-TREE  {ffvid},  avKov,  iXvi-flos).— Apart 
from  the  three  references  in  the  Gospels  (Mt  7^S 
Mk  1 1'*,  Lk  6*^),  figs  are  mentioned  onlj'  twice  in 
the  NT  ( Ja  3'-,  Rev  Q^).  In  James  the  ordinary 
words  cvKrj,  '  fig-tree,'  and  cfvkov,  '  fig,'  are  used, 
but  in  Rev.  CXwdos  is  the  Avord  employed  to  denote 
the  fruit.  The  latter  term  designates  a  fig  which 
grows  during  the  Avinter  under  the  leaves,  but 
seldom  ripens. 

The  meaning  of  Ja  3^*  is  clear  :  a  tree  is  knoAvn 
by  its  fruits  ;  a  fig-tree  cannot  bring  forth  oUa-cs, 
neither  can  an  oliAe-tree  bring  forth  figs  ;  a  man's 
'Avorks'  are,  in  short,  an  infallible  index  to  his 
'faith'  (Ja  2^%  In  Rev  6'*  figs  form  part  of  the 
imagery  in  the  vision  of  the  Opening  of  the  First 
Six  Seals.  The  Seer  beholds  the  stars  of  heaven 
falling  to  the  earth  '  as  a  fig-tree  casteth  her  un- 
ripe tigs,  when  she  is  shaken  of  a  great  gale.'  In 
the  ordinary  way  these  AAinter  fio^s  (S\\jv6oi)  did  not 
ripen,  so  here  the  judgment  predicted  is  not  about 


to  cut  off  prematurely  those  who  if  spared  aa-ouM 
develop  into  matured  and  useful  fruit,  but  those 
Avho  are  'without  hope  and  without  God  in  the 
AA'orld ' — in  short,  the  '  cumberers  of  the  ground.' 

The  fig-tree  is  native  to  Palestine  and  is  found 
either  cultivated  or  Avild  all  OA-er  the  countrj-. 
Those  Avhich  are  Avild  are  usually  barren  or  at  all 
CA'ents  bear  no  edible  fruit,  and  they  are  known 
as  '  male '  fig-trees.  There  are  many  varieties  of 
fig-trees  cultivated,  some  of  which  yield  a  sharp, 
bitter  fruit,  and  others  a  sweet,  mellow  one.  It 
is  noticeable  that  in  the  description  of  the  Pro- 
mised Land  (Dt  8*)  fig-trees  are  mentioned  as  one 
of  its  leading  natural  characteristics.  They  are  of 
moderate  size,  though  sometimes  attaining  a  height 
of  25  ft.,  while  the  stem  is  sometimes  over  3  ft.  in 
diameter.  The  bark  is  smooth,  and  the  size  and 
thickness  of  the  leaves  readily  explain  the  point  of 
the  JeAvish  proverb — '  to  sit  under  one's  oAvn  vine 
and  one's  oaati  tig-tree  '(IK  4^,  Mic  4*,  Zee  3^"). 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  its  foliage  affords  better  shade 
and  protection  than  any  other  tree  in  Palestine. 
It  is  one  of  the  earliest  trees  to  shoot,  and  its  first 
fruit-buds  appear  before  its  leaves  (of.  Mt  24**, 
Mk  13^,  Lk  21»- »).  The  fruit  is  an  enlarged  suc- 
culent hollow  receptacle,  containing  the  imperfect 
flowers  in  its  interior ;  consequently  the  flowers 
are  invisible  till  the  receptacle  has  been  opened. 
The  figs  are  eaten  both  fresh  and  dried,  and  they 
are  often  compressed  into  a  cake  (cf.  1  S  25^^  30^, 
1  Ch  12^).  The  time  the  tree  comes  into  leaf  and 
fruiting  varies  according  to  the  situation,  and  is 
later  in  the  hill-country  than  in  the  plains.  On 
the  hUls,  the  branches  which  have  remained  bare 
and  naked  all  through  the  Avinter  put  forth  their 
early  leaf-buds  about  the  end  of  March,  and  at 
the  same  time  diminutive  figs  begin  to  appear 
where  the  young  leaves  join  the  branches.  Tliese 
tiny  figs  continue  to  grow  with  the  leaves  until 
they  reach  about  the  size  of  a  cherry,  then  the 
majority  of  them  fall  to  the  ground  or  are  bloAvn 
doAATi  by  the  Avind.  These  are  the  S\v»6oi  of  Rev 
gi3  |ggg  aboA'e). 

LrTERATTRK.— H.  B.  TristraiJi ,  J'ofunif  £f wtofy  o/fA«  Biftfcio, 
1911,  p.  350  f. ;  H.  B.  Swete,  Apoealvpu  of  St.  Jokn^.  1907,  p. 
93 ;  W.  M.  Thomson.  The  Land  and  the  Book,  1910  ed.,  p. 
333 ;  J.  C.  Geikie,  The  Holy  Land  and  the  Bible,  1903  ed.. 
pp.  66,  74.  Cf.  also  SDB,  p.  262  f. ;  HDB  iL  5,  6 ;  EBi  ii.  1519- 
1522.  P.  S.  P.  HaXDCOCK. 

FINISHER.— See  Author  and  Finishkh. 

FIRE.— The  term  '  fire '  is  used  literally  to  denote 
the  familiar  process  of  combustion,  Avith  its  ac- 
companiments of  light  and  heat.  In  nearly  all 
the  passages  in  Avhich  it  occurs  from  Acts  to  Revela- 
tion, it  is  used  in  a  figurative  sense.  (1)  A  fcAv  of 
these  have  affinity  Avith  passages  in  the  OT  in 
Avhich  fire,  as  one  of  the  most  impressive  of  natural 
phenomena,  is  a  form  of  the  DiATue  manifestation. 
In  some  of  the  theophanies,  in  which  fire  is  a 
prominent  feature,  it  seems  to  express  the  concep- 
tion of  God  as  He  is  in  Himself  and  in  His  nature 
{e.g.  Ezk  !*•  ^) ;  in  others  it  is  a  manifestation 
of  Him  in  His  character  as  Avenger  or  Judge 
(Ex  W-  ^^  Ps  18^  50^,  Is  SCP).  The  NT  furnishes 
some  analogous  cases  in  which  the  theophanic  fire 
is  simply  a  manifestation  of  the  Divine  presence  or 
attributes  (Ac  2^,  Rev  1^**-  4'),  and  others  in  Avhich 
i  it  is  an  accompaniment  of  the  DiA-ine  judgment 
(2  Th  1*,  2  P  y^^-).  (2)  The  use  of  fire  as  a  testing 
and  purifying  agent  has  led  to  its  figurative  appli- 
cation as  a  criterion  for  distinguishing  between 
Avhat  possesses  genuine  moral  worth  and  what  does 
not,  and  as  a  means  of  purifying  human  character 
(iCo  3*^-,  1  P  1").  (3)  One  of  the  most  patent 
characteristics  of  fire  is  its  destructiveness,  AA-ith 
the  inevitable  effect  of  suttering  in  the  case  of  all 
forms  of  organic  being.    The  vivid  and  forcible 


408 


FIRE 


FIRE 


upjii'.'il  Aviiicli  it  iiKilcos  to  till!  iinajxinatioii  is  due 
to  (lie  acute  ,st'nsali(jn.s  it  ]ii()(hices  in  tlic  pliysieai 
or;^aiiism  hy  tiie  coiul)inati<)ii  of  intciisc  l)iiL;litue8s 
with  intense  iieat.  l''ire  is  llius  lilted  to  x  r\e  as 
an  ai)i)i-opriate  synitioi  ol'  tin-  Divine  juii^nient 
upon  sin.  Tiie  ( )  T  triMiueniiy  applies  imagery 
borrowed  from  tiiis  source  to  denote  the  punitive 
aspects  of  God's  nature,  or  punitive  instruments 
employed  by  Him,  and  tlius  lays  the  basis  for  the 
use  of  similar  imagery  in  the  NT. 

1.  Fire  as  a  form  of  Divine  manifestation.— (a) 
In  tliis  section  may  be  groujted  paftsar/es  in  which 
Jirc  is  .s'intpl//  (Ol  ijidicadon  of  the  Divine  pj'esence, 
or  symbol  of  Divine  attributes  other  than  tliose 
sp<Mi,illy  di-|ilay(il  in  the  punishment  of  sin.  (a) 
In  Ac  J'  one  ol  iIk;  two  outward  manifestations 
att<'iidiiig  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  on  tiie  disciples 
seated  in  the  upper  room  is  compared  with  lire. 
The  appearance  of  fire  (ucrel  irvpds)  assumed  by  the 
tongues  referred  to  the  Divine  presence,  which,  in 
this  instance,  conferred  on  those  assembled  together 
the  'gift  of  tongues,'  symbolized  by  the  tongne- 
lilce  flames  that  sat  on  the  head  of  each.  The 
reality  corresponding  to  the  appearance  was  the 
miraculous  power  of  ecstatic  utterance,  now  dis- 
])layetl  for  the  lirst  time,  but  afterwards  a  familiar 
feature  in  the  worship  of  the  Apostolic  Church 
(v.^ ;  ef.  10^'-,  1  Co  14  jmssim).  That  the  gift  thus 
imparted  had  a  Divine  origin  was  certified  by  the 
visible  accompaniment  of  iiery  tongues. 

(j8)  The  Cluistophany  described  in  Rev  1^'"^'  de- 
picts the  Risen  Christ  in  the  midst  of  the  churches 
with  eyes  like  a  flame  of  fire  (cf.  Dn  10^,  '  his  eyes 
as  lamps  of  fire').  The  ilame-lilce  eyes  (Rev  2'^ 
19'^)  are  emblematic  of  the  glance  of  omniscience, 
which  penetrates  the  depth  of  the  soul  with  its 
radiance,  and  reads  the  true  meaning  of  the 
tiioughts  and  actions.  'All  things,'  it  is  implied, 
'  are  naked  and  laiil  open  before  the  eyes  of  him 
with  whom  we  have  to  do'  (He  4'^;  cf.  Ps  11^, 
Pr  153). 

(7)  '  The  seven  torches  (AV  and  RV  '  lamps ')  of 
fire  burning  before  the  throne'  (Rev  4'')  describe 
the  Spirit  of  God  in  His  manifold  powers,  'the 
plenitude  of  the  Godhead  in  all  its  attributes  and 
energies'  (Alford,  ad  loc),  under  the  emblem  of 
fire.  '  Fulness,  intensity,  energy,  are  implied  in 
the  figure,  which  reflects  the  traditional  association 
(in  the  primitive  mind)  of  fire  and  flame  with  the 
divinity,  and  especially  with  the  divine  purity  or 
holiness'  (J.  Moflatt,  EGT,  'Rev.,'  1910,  p.  379). 
There  appears  to  be  a  reference  also  to  the  illumi- 
nating power  of  the  Spirit,  by  which  the  prophets, 
with  whom  the  apocalyptic  writer  identifies  him- 
self, were  qualified  for  bearing  their  testimony, 
especially  with  regard  to  the  future  (Rev  2^  4- ; 
cf.  191"). 

(b)  Passages  in  which  Jire  is  an  accompaniment  of 
the  Parousia. — (a)  According  to  the  rendering  of 
2  Th  I"'  in  AV,  fire  is  the  instrument  with  which 
Christ,  at  His  Second  Advent,  executes  vengeance 
on  Gentile  and  Jewish  enemies  of  the  Gospel.  The 
RV,  more  accurately,  separates  the  first  clause  of 
V.*,  'in  flaming  lire,'  from  what  follows,  and  con- 
nects it  with  V.''.  The  '  flame  of  fire,'  an  expression 
containing  a  reminiscence  of  OT  theophanies  of 
judgment,  is  the  element  or  medium  by  which  the 
glory  of  Christ  is  revealed  at  His  Return,  not  the 
means  by  wliicli  He  inflicts  punishment  on  the 
wicked.  Like  the  liuhtuiri'j.  wiiich  is  overywliere 
visible  at  the  same  time  iMt  •_'(-'>,  iliis  feature  i> 
fitted  to  arrest  the  attention  and  iini))ess  the  mind 
of  all  beholders. 

(jS)  Literal  fire  is  associntod  in  2  P  S^o-'^  witli  the 
Parousia  (' tlie  da y  of  the  l,<Ji-,l 'i  a-.  t!h'  mean- liy 
which  the  visililc  uTii\cr~c  i>  \n  !"■  doiroveii. 
Once  temporarily'  deslioyed  hy  the  watius  of  tlie 
deluge,   the  earth    and    the    heavens   iiave   been 


'  stored  up  for  fire'  (v.".  and  now  at  tin;  Ciiiiin-  of 
the  Lord  'the  iieav(.'n>  heiii;^'  on  lire  siiall  i,<-  dis- 
.solved,  and  the  elements  shall  melt  with  fervent 
heat'  (v.'-).  The  old  creation  is  to  be  dissolved, 
and  pu.ss  away  in  the  final  world-conflagration 
which  prepares  the  w  fiy  for  the  advent  of  new 
heavens  and  a  new  earth.  Other  passages  of 
Scripture  anticipate  thai  the  present  material 
order,  having  had  a  )«■;: inning,  is  de-tiiietl  to  come 
to  an  end.  They  also  foreshadow  the  emergence 
of  a  new  order,  free  from  the  defects  of  the  old, 
which  is  to  be  the  futur(>  aliode  of  the  redeemed 
(Is  65'^  66^2,  He  I--  -\  \U-x  i.'t»"  -21').  In  the  NT 
these  great  cosmic  clianges  are  associated  with  the 
last  Advent.  In  2  Pet.  alone  are  the  means  de- 
scribed by  which  tiie  transition  destined  to  result 
in  a  renovated  uiii\erse   '  I.     It  is  to  be 

by  fire,  which  is  the  onl\  liequate  to  the 

accomplishment  of  a  destrucuon  so  tiiorough  and 
complete.  Science  maintains  that  the  end  of  the 
universe,  as  at  present  const  itutcd,  is  to  be  brought 
about  by  the  gradual  loss  of  radiant  heat.  The 
steady  reduction  of  lemperature  is  to  render  the 
continuance  of  life  on  the  planet  impossible. 
Mayor  {Ep.  of  St.  Jude  and  Second  Er>.  of  St. 
Peter,  1907,  p.  209)  suggests  that  this  theory  re- 
quires revision,  in  view  of  '  the  stores  of  energy  in 
the  chemical  elements,  and  of  the  varieties  of 
radiant  energy  to  which  attention  has  been  promi- 
nently directed  by  the  discovery  of  radium.  Rut 
assuming  the  reasonableness  of  this  conjecture, 
the  passage  under  discussion  sheds  no  light  on  the 
constitution  of  the  new  environment  in  which  a 
spiritual  body  takes  the  place  of  a  natural  Ix>dy 
(1  Co  lo«). 

2.  Fire  as  a  testing  and  purifying  agent.— Fire 
and  water  are  the  two  elements  used  for  purifica- 
tion, and  of  the  two,  fire  is  the  more  drastic  and 
searching.  In  the  process  of  refining,  fire  is  the 
means  of  separating  the  precious  metals  from  dross 
or  alloys  (Zee  13*).  In  the  art  of  assaying,  the 
same  agent  is  employed  for  testing  the  quantity  of 
gold  or  silver  in  ore  or  alloys. 

(a)  The  use  of  fire  for  these  purposes  has  led  to 
the  Avord  being  figuratively  applied  to  the  trials, 
especially  in  the  form  of  severe  persecutions,  which 
the  early  Christians  Avere  called  on  to  endure  at 
the  hands  of  their  heathen  oppressors  (1  P  V). 
From  the  searching  ordeal  by  fire,  it  was  the 
Divine  design  that  their  faith  might  emerge,  more 
precious  than  gold,  thoroughly  tested  and  approved 
as  genuine.  In  a  later  passage  (4'^)  the  extremity 
of  their  sufferings,  arising  from  the  same  cause,  is 
compared  to  a  burning  or  conflagration  {irvpiaffn) 
by  which  character  is  tested  and  purified  ;  and  the 
sfiarp  discipline  they  are  undergoing  is  spoken  of 
appropriately,  considering  its  extreme  severit}',  as 
judgment  (Kplfia)  already  begun,  from  which  the 
righteous  escape  with 'difficulty  (v.^"'- ;  cf.  1  Co  3'*). 

(b)  The  figure  is  used  in  a  somewhat  similar 
manner  to  describe  the  judgment  by  wliicli  flu- 
work  of  Christian  teachers  is  to  be  testeil  at  the 
Parousia.  '  The  day  (of  Christ's  Second  Coming) 
is  to  be  revealed  in  fire'  (cf.  2  Th  1"'-),  'and  the 
fire  itself  shall  prove  each  man's  work  of  what  sort 
it  is '( 1  Co  31S-1S  RV).  The  fire  in  which  t  he  whole 
fabric  built  on  the  One  I'oundation  is  involved, 
detects  and  exposes  the  llinisy  and  worthless 
materials  by  consuming  them,  but  leaves  uninjured 
the  solid  and  durable  materials  that  are  lire-proof. 
In  liie  one  instance,  the  skilful  builder  has  the 
gratilication  of  seeing  his  work  survive,  and  him- 
self rewarded.  In  the  other,  the  unskilful  builder 
has  the  niortifienfion  of  seeing  his  work  de-tr(>\ed 
and    liis    labour    lo^-t  :    and    althou    ' 

csca]ies.  it  is  \\ith  dilliciijty.  as  onr  . 
burning   house — 'sa\('(!.    yet    so   as    ( 
The  picture    presente<l    i-    that    of  a 


:h   lire.' 
ral   con- 


FIRE 


FIRE 


409 


I 
I 


flagration.  It  may  have  been  suggested  by  *  the  con- 
flagration of  Corinth  under  Mummius  ;  the  stately 
temples  sta.nding  amidst  the  universal  destruction 
of  the  meaner  buildings '  (A.  P.  Stanley,  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians'^,  1858,  p.  67).  The  main  pomt  of  the 
illustration  is  not  the  purification  of  character,  but 
the  decisive  testing  of  the  diflerence  between  solid 
and  Avorthless  achievement.  The  fire  is  not  dis- 
ciplinary, and,  needless  to  say,  it  contains  no 
allusion  to  '  purgatorial  fire,  whether  in  this  or  in 
a  future  life^  (J.  B.  Mayor,  '  The  General  Epistle 
of  Jnde,'  in  EGT,  1910,  p.  276). 

3.  Fire  as  an  instroment  of  Diyine  ponishment. 
-'  '  In  this  section  may  be  grouped  together 
ics  in  ichichfire  is  a  symbol  of  GocFs  temporal 
J  .  ,.:i':nts  on  human  sin.  Such  passages  have  a 
close  affinity  with  frequent  references  in  the  OT, 
in  which  God  is  represented  '  as  surrounded  by,  or 
manifested  in,  tire,  the  most  immaterial  of  elements, 
and' at  the  same  time  the.agency  best  suited  to  re- 
present symbolically  His  power  to  destroy  all  that 
i-;  ^iinul  or  unholy'  (S.  R.  Driver,  Daniel  [Cambridge 
Bible  for  Schools,  1900],  p.  85 ;  cf.  Gn  15",  Nu  16*5,  Ps 
50»,  Is  30'^  33'^  Jer  4*  21i-,  Ezk  2P\  Dn  7^-,  Am  5^  7*). 

(a)  In  accordance  with  this  usage,  fire  is  employed 
in  Jude^  to  represent  the  present  judgment  which 
overtakes  the  second  of  the  three  classes  enticed 
into  licentious  living  by  the  antinomian  teachers 
(cf.  V.*),  There  is  no  reference  here  to  the  fire  of 
future  judgment.  There  is  an  evident  allusion  in 
the  phrase,  'snatching  them  out  of  the  fire'  (RV), 
to  Am  4^^  where  persons  who  had  just  escaped 
Mith  their  lives  from  the  earthquake,  are  referred 
to  ;  and  to  Zee  3^  where  the  high  priest  Joshua  is 
describe<l  as  a  brand  plucked  out  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity.  Fleshly  indulgence  exposes  those  ad- 
dicted to  it  to  present  penalties  as  well  as  to  future 
ones,  and  it  is  from  tliis  perilous  position  that  their 
rescuers  are  to  snatch  them  hastily,  and  almost 
violently. 

(j3)  Fire,  as  an  image  of  Good's  temporal  judg- 
ments, appears  in  tlie  symbolism  of  the  Apocalypse. 
When  the  Church  was  engaged  in  a  life-and-death 
struggle  with  Imperial  Rome,  her  members  re- 
garded terrible  visitations,  in  the  shape  of  the  three 
historic  scourges,  war,  famine,  and  pestilence,  as 
signs  of  the  approaching  end  of  the  age  and  Christ's 
Return.  The  1ST  Apocalyptist  heightens  the  effect 
of  the  lurid  pictures  in  which  he  forecasts  the 
judgments  impending  on  the  enemies  of  Christ  and 
His  Church,  by  the  introduction  of  fire,  in  one 
case  literal,  material  fire,  as  a  token  of  those 
judgments.  In  answer  to  the  prayers  of  suffering 
saints,  the  angel  fills  the  censer  with  fire  from  the 
altar,  and  casts  the  burning  contents  on  the  earth, 
as  a  sign  that  the  Divine  vengeance  is  about  to 
descend  upon  it  (Rev  8^  ;  cf.  Ezk  10^).  The  horror 
which  the  countless  host  of  horsemen  is  fitted  to 
inspire,  is  intensified  by  the  circumstance  that  fire 
and  smoke  and  brimstone  issue  out  of  their  mouths 
(9"^-).  In  14^*  it  is  the  angel  w^ho  has  power  over 
the  fire — in  this  instance  the  symbol  of  Divine 
wrath — that  brings  the  angel  with  the  sickle  the 
message  that  the  vintage  is  to  begin,  becanse  the 
world  is  ripe  for  judgment.  The  sea  of  glass  before 
the  Throne,  by  the  side  of  which  stand  the  victors 
in  the  conflict  with  the  Beast,  is  flushed  red  with 
the  fire  of  impending  judgments — the  seven  last 
plagues  which  are  the  precursors  of  the  downfall 
of  Babylon  (15"-  ;  cf.  17^). 

{-/)  Literal,  material  fire  is  the  means  by  which 
the  total  and  final  destruction  of  the  harlot-city, 
mystic  Babylon,  is  efiected  (IS  passim).  Nero 
Redivivus  and  his  Parthian  allies,  to  whom  the 
burning  of  the  city  is  attributed,  are  only  the 
lumian  instruments  in  God's  hand  for  executing 
His  judgment  upon  her  (18^-  ^*  19-). 

(5)  Supernatural  fire  is  the  agent  by  which  the 


nations,  Gog  and  Magog,  are  consumed,  and  tlieir 
attempt  to  capture '  the  l^loved  city '  frustrated  (20*). 

(6)  Fire  is  the  symbol  of  God's  future  and  final 
judgment  on  the  uricked. — (o)  In  view  of  the  near 
approach  of  the  Parousia  (He  10*^),  these  in  danger 
of  the  wilful  sin  of  apostasy  from  the  Christian 
faith  are  reminded  of  the  terrible  consequences 
which  await  those  succumbing  to  the  great  tempta- 
tion— 'a  fierceness  of  fire  which  shall  devour  the 
adversaries'  (v.^  RV).  The  solemn  reminder  is 
repeated  in  connexion  with  the  declaration  that 
the  present  transient  order  of  things  must  give 
place  to  the  new  and  eternal  order  (12").  In  con- 
trast with  the  material  fire  that  manifested  His 
presence  at  Sinai,  God  is  Himself  in  His  very 
essence  what  that  consuming  fire  denoted — im- 
maculate purity  which  destroys  everything  in- 
compatible with  it  (v.2> ;  cf.  Dt  4^^). 

(;3)  Outside  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  there  is  only 
one  explicit  reference  to  the  penal  fire  of  the  future 
world  as  the  fire  of  hell  (Gehenna).  The  Epistle 
of  James  traces  to  it  as  the  ultimate  cause  the 
wide-spread  mischief  caused  by  the  tongue,  which 
is  compared  to  a  spark  setting  fire  to  a  great 
forest  (3«). 

(7)  The  only  parallel  to  the  expression  Eternal 
Fire,  used  in  the  Synoptic  Gk)spels  to  denote  the 
futtire  punishment  of  the  wicked,  is  found  in 
Jude'',  where  the  writer  declares  that  the  cities  of 
the  Plain  are  'set  forth  as  an  example,  suffering 
the  vengeance  (RV  'punishment')  of  eternal  fire' 
(rOp  aluvtov).  According  to  the  renderings  of  AV 
and  RV,  which  regard  rvpds  as  grammatically  de- 
pending on  SiKTjv,  the  burning  of  these  cities  is 
spoken  of  as  still  persisting.  In  favour  of  this  idea 
Wis  10"  is  cited,  and  appeal  is  made  to  the  volcanic 
phenomena  in  the  region  of  the  Dead  Sea  as  likely 
to  suggest  the  continued  existence  of  subterranean 
fire.  Ftirther  confirmation  of  the  idea  is  sought  in 
the  Book  of  Enoch  (Ixvii.  6f.),  where  it  is  said 
that '  the  valley  of  the  angels  burned  continually 
under  the  earth.'  An  alternative  rendering  to 
that  of  the  AV  and  RV,  takes  oeiyfia  with  wvpos  in 
the  sense  of  'an  example  (or  'testimony")  of 
eternal  fire,'  the  pimishment  which  began  with  the 
destruction  of  the  cities,  and  stUl  continues,  fitting 
them  to  serve  as  such  example.  Whichever  view 
be  taken,  it  is  evident  that  the  example,  in  order 
to  be  eti'ective,  must  point  to  the  fate  which  awaits 
the  wicked  after  the  Last  Judgment.  Whatever 
may  be  the  condition  of  the  impenitent  between 
death  and  the  Judgment,  it  is  implied  by  the 
uniform  teaching  of  the  NT  on  the  Last  Things 
that  the  decisive  sentence  which  determines  their 
ultimate  condition  is  not  pronounced  till  the  Last 
Judgment.  The  vOp  alwviov  would  have  little 
relevancy  to  the  warning  which  the  passage  seeks 
to  enforce  if  that  expression  had  no  relation  to 
future  retribution.  That  being  so,  the  much- 
debated  question  as  to  the  meaning  of  aiiivLos  arises. 
'  This  verse,'  remarks  Charles  (Eschatology-,  1913, 
p.  413),  '  shows  how  Christians  at  the  close  of  the 
first  century  A.D.  read  their  own  ideas  into  the  OT 
records  of  the  past.  Thus  the  temporal  destruc- 
tion by  fire  of  Sodom  and  Gomonah  is  interpreted 
as  an  eternal  punishment  by  fire  beyond  the  grave.' 
The  attempts  made  to  substitute  the  expression 
'age-lasting'  for  'eternal'  as  the  meaning  of  the 
Greek  adjective,  so  as  to  prove  that  it  does  not 
imply  the  idea  of  unlimited  duration,  are  not 
particularly  convincing.  '  It  is  surely  obvious,' 
says  Mottatt  (British  Weekly,  28  Sept.  1905),  '  that 
the  NT  writers  assumed  that  the  soul  of  man  was 
immortal  and  that  its  existence  beyond  death,  in 
weal  or  woe,  was  endless,  when  they  used  this 
term  (ou'wi'ios)  or  spoke  of  this  subject.  How  else 
could  they  have  conveyed  what  corresponded  in 
their    minds    to    the    itiea    of    "eternal''?'.      It 


410 


FIRE 


FIRST-BORN,  FIRST-BEGOTTEN 


S 


must  be  admitted,  at  the  same  time,  that  the  term 
takes  us  out  into  a  region  where  the  categories  of 
time  and  space  do  not  apply,  and  where  '  objects 
are  presented  in  their  relation  to  some  eternal 
aspect  of  the  Divine  nature'  (A.  Bisset,  art. 
'Eternal  Fire,'  in  DCG  vol.  i.  [1906]  p.  537'';  see 
the  whole  article  for  a  thoughtful  and  temperate 
discussion  of  the  expression  '  eternal  tire '  in  its 
eschatological  bearings). 

(5)  In  the  Apocalypse  the  Lake  of  Fire  is  the 
place  of  final  punishment  to  which  are  consigned 
(1)  the  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet  (IQ-*"),  (2.) 
Satan  (20>*'),  (3)  Death  and  Hades  (20'^),  (4)  the 
dupes  of  Satan,  whose  names  are  not  written  in 
tlie  Book  of  Life  (20'^ ;  cf.  IS*  14«'-  19«'  20»).  The 
figure  of  '  the  lake  of  fire,'  otherwise  described  as 
'  the  lake  of  lire  burning  with  brimstone,'  seems  to 
have  been  suggested  by  a  shallow  pool  (Klixvit)  of 
blazing  sulphur  such  as  is  sometimes  found  in 
volcanic  districts.  Nothing  is  said  as  to  its  locality. 
•  Volcanic  forces,  indicating  the  existence  of  sub- 
terranean tire,  might  well  lead  the  ancients  to  place 
their  Tartarus  and  Gehenna  in  the  under-world ' 
(W.  Boyd  Carpenter,  'Rev.'  in  EUicott's  NT  Com. 
iii.  [1884]  622).     Swete  (Apoc.  of  St.  John-,  1907, 

258)  remarks  that  the  conception  of  '  the  lake  of 
re '  may  have  already  been  familiar  to  the  Asian 
Churches,  and  that  '  possibly  it  was  a  local  expres- 
sion for  the  'yievva.  tov  wvp6s  which  was  familiar  to 
Palestinian  Christians.'  The  expression  does  not 
occur  in  the  apocalyptic  writings,  but  in  the  Book  of 
Enoch  '  the  abyss  or  fire '  is  the  doom  in  store  for 
the  fallen  angels  in  the  Day  of  Judgment  (x.  13  ;  cf. 
xxi.  7-10),  and  in  the  Secrets  of  Enoch  (x.  2),  among 
the  torments  of  '  the  place  prepared  for  those  who 
do  not  know  God '  is  *  a  fiery  river.'  The  terse  out- 
line in  the  Apocalypse  referring  to  the  place  of 
woe,  appears  in  these  writings  as  a  finished 
picture  filled  in  with  elaborate  details.  The  refer- 
ence in  the  imagery  to  '  fire  and  brimstone '  is 
evidently  derived  from  the  historical  account  of 
the  destruction  of  Sodom  in  Gn  19-'',  mediated  by 
passages  such  as  Is  30^*,  in  which  Topheth  is  a 
symbol  of  God's  burning  judgments,  and  Is  66-'*, 
in  which  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  with  its  fire  con- 
tinually burning,  is  the  scene  of  final  judgment  on 
God's  enemies.  In  the  interval  between  the  close 
of  OT  prophecy  and  the  time  of  Christ,  the  idea  of 
penal  tire,  confined  in  the  OT  to  the  present  world, 
was  projected  into  the  unseen  world  as  an  image 
of  endless  retribution.  During  this  period  tlie 
writers  of  the  apocalypses  sought  relief  from  the 
glaring  anomaly  presented  by  tlie  contrast  between 
character  and  condition  in  the  present  life,  by 
transferring  the  scene  of  rewards  and  punishments 
to  the  world  beyond  the  grave.  In  accordan(!e  with 
this  view — the  view  recognized  throughout  the  NT 
— the  enemies  of  God  and  Christ,  who  often  escape 
His  righteous  judgments  here,  are  reserved  for  the 
severer  penalties  of  the  world  to  come.  There, 
deceivers  and  deceived  together  share  one  common 
doom  in  '  the  lake  of  fire,'  Avhich  is  identified  in 
20'^  with  '  the  second  death,'  '  the  nearest  analogue 
[in  the  new  order]  of  Deatli  as  we  know  it  here ' 
(Swete,  op.  cit.  p.  274).  '  It  is  not  certain,'  says 
Swete  again,  in  his  commentary  on  v.'"  (p.  270), 
'  that  these  terrible  words  can  be  pressed  into  tlie 
service  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Last  Things.  ...  It 
is  safer  to  regard  them  as  belonging  to  the  scenery 
of  the  vision  lather  than  to  its  eschatological  teach- 
ing. But  beyond  a  doubt  St.  John  intends  at 
least  to  teach  that  the  forces,  personal  or  imper- 
sonal, which  have  inspired  mankind  with  false 
views  of  life  and  antagoni.-m  to  God  and  to  Christ 
will  in  the  end  be  completely  subjugated,  and,  if  not 
annihilated,  will  at  least  t)e  prevented  from  causing 
further  trouble.  From  the  Lake  of  Fire  there  is  no 
release,  unless  evil  itself  should  be  ultimately  con- 


sumed; and  over  that  possibility  there  lies  a  veil 
which  our  writer  does  not  help  us  to  lift  or  pierce.' 

LiTKRATURB.— Artt.  '  Eachatology  of  NT'  (S.  D.  F.  Salmond) 
ill  IIDB,  '  Eternal  Fire'  (A.  Bisset),  'Eternal  Puiiishinent"  (W. 
H.  Dyson)  in  DCG,   '  Eschatology '  (R.   H.   Charles),  'Fire' 
(T.  K.   Cheyne),  '  Theophaiiy '  (G.    B.  Gray)  in  J-JJJi;  Com- 
uieiitiiriuxon  the  relevant  passa^'CH.     Fertile  ineaniii^'ofauui'tot, 
and  for  the  eschatoloji-ical   beartii(f  of   the   passajjes,   see   H. 
Cremer,  Bib.-Tluoi.  Lex.  of  ST  Greek\  l»sO ;  F.  W.  Farrar, 
Ktrrnal  Uope,  1878,  ilercy  and  Judgment,  IsSl  ;  J.  A.  Beet, 
The  Last  Things,  new  ed.  1!)05 ;  C.  A.  Row,  Future  I. 
tion,  18S7  ;  J.  Stephen,  Ksmijjb  in  EeclcKiasttcal  Li 
1907,  Epilogue;  A.  Jukes,  The  Second  Death  and  thi  ;, 
tionojAUThings'i-i.lVAT.  \V.   S.    MOXTGOMEUY. 

FIRST  AND  LAST.— See  Alpha  and  Omeoa. 

FIRST-BORN,  FIRST-BEGOTTEN  ( Trpwrciroxoi ; 
Vulg.  primoqenitus  in  the  NT  except  in  He  11*" 
12**).— 1.  The    privilege  of   the  first-born:    the 

birthright  (ra  vpuTordKia,  Vnlg. primitivu)  is  spoken 
of  once  in  the  NT,  in  He  12'*,  which  refers  to  Esau's 
act  in  selling  it  (Gn  25^^) ;  the  act  was  profanity, 
for  the  sacred  privilege  was  despised.  The  first- 
born was  the  heir  to  the  headship  of  the  family, 
and  received  a  double  portion  of  liis  father's  pro- 
perty (Dt  2P^);  this  was  always  the  case  unless 
for  some  special  cause  the  birthright  was  taken 
from  him,  as  in  the  cases  of  Esau,  Keuben  (1  Ch  5'), 
and  Manasseh  (Gn  48'^'"*).  Ishmael,  the  eldest 
son  of  Abraham,  had  not  the  birthright  because 
he  was  the  son  of  a  slave  woman  (Gn  21'"),  though 
he  was  not,  according  to  Hebrew  ideas,  a  slave 
(see  Roman  Law), 

2.  Usage  in  the  NT.— The  word  'firstborn'  is 
used  in  the  NT  both  literally  and  figuratively.  In 
Lk  2^  our  Lord  is  spoken  of  as  Clary's  '  firstlxirn ' ; 
in  Mt  1^  the  word,  though  found  in  CD  and  some 
versions,  is  clearly  an  interpolation.  It  implies  in 
Lk.  the  privilege  of  the  birthright ;  but  neitlier 
there  nor  in  the  OT  does  it  necessarily  imply  other 
children,  and  therefore  it  has  no  bearing  on  the 
identity  of  the  '  brethren '  of  our  Lord.  Another, 
and  still  more  important,  deduction  from  this  fact 
is  that  there  is  no  contradiction  between  '  Only- 
begotten  '  and  '  Firstborn '  applied  to  the  pre- 
existent  Christ  (see  below).  The  latter  title  does 
not  imply  that  there  are  other  sons  in  the  same 
Divine  sense. — For  the  'redemption  of  the  first- 
born '  at  the  Presentation  of  Jesus  in  the  Temple  see 
DCG  i.  596 f.  The  word  wpwrbTOKa  (Vulg.  priinitivu) 
is  used  literally  in  He  11-",  of  men  and  animals, 
with  reference  to  the  Egyptians. 

The  title  '  Firstborn '  is  given  figuratively  to 
our  Lord  in  three  difierent  aspects. — (n)  It  refers 
to  His  pre-existence  in  Col  1"  ('firstborn  of  all 
creation,'  irpurdroKos  Trdo-Jjs  KrLffews  ;  see  Liglitfoot's 
exhaustive  note  in  Colossianfr\  1879,  p.  144).  and 
in  He  1",  Avhere  it  is  used  absolutelj' :  '  the  First- 
born.' This  interpretation  of  Col  1"*  is  required 
by  the  context :  '  the  im.age  (eUuv)  of  the  invisible 
God  ...  in  him  were  all  things  created  ...  all 
things  have  been  created  through  him,  and  unto 
him,  and  he  is  before  all  things,  and  in  him  all 
things  consist  (cohere).'  This  is  also  the  exegesis 
of  all  the  earlier  Fathers ;  but,  as  the  Arians  used 
the  text  to  show  that  our  Lord  was  a  creiiture, 
several  (but  not  all)  of  the  Nicene  and  post-Nicciic 
Fathers  interpreted  it  of  the  Incarnate  Christ, 
while  the  later  Greek  Fathers  went  back  to  the 
earlier  interpretation  (see  the  references  in  Light- 
foot,  p.  146  f.).  The  jihrase  denotes  that  the  Son 
was  before  all  creation ;  to  the  Arians  it  was 
pointed  out  that  the  word  used  is  not  irpuiroKTuTToi, 
which  would  have  had  the  meaning  thej'  a--^si;jn('<i 
to  irpuriroKOs.  The  phrase  further  denotes  ihat 
He  is  the  Lord  of  all  creation,  for  He  has  the  right 
of  the  Firstborn.  Tiie  title  '  Firstborn '  was  used 
figuratively  by  the  Jews  of  Messiah,  from  Ps  89-'' 
(which  they  generally  interpreted  in  a  Messianic 


FIRST-FEUIT 


FLESH 


411 


I 


sense),  and  of  Israel  in  Ex  4-^ ;  this  paved  the  way 
for  the  NT  usage.  Lightfoot  (p.  144)  remarks  also 
that  both  vpwr&TOKo^  and  tUuiv  were  taken  from  the 
Alexandrian  doctrine  of  the  Logos  (see  also  OXLY- 
Begotten). 

(6)  In  Col  1'®  Jesus  is  called  '  firstborn  from  the 
dead,'  because  He  was  the  lirst  to  rise  ;  for  Lazarus 
and  others  only  rose  to  die  again.  So  also  in  Kev 
1* :  '  firstborn  of  the  dead.'  The  phrase  is  parallel 
with  '  the  firstfruits  (6.vapxfi)  of  them  that  are 
asleep '  in  1  Co  lo**. 

(c)  In  Ro  8'^  the  relation  of  the  first-bom  to  his 
brethren  is  spoken  of.  Here,  as  in  Col  1'^,  eUiliv 
occurs,  but  it  is  the  image  of  the  Son,  not  of  the 
Father  :  '  whom  he  foreknew  (took  note  of),  he  also 
conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might 
be  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren.'  The 
conformity  of  the  Christian  to  the  image  of  the 
Son  is  parallel  with  the  fact  that  the  Son  is  the 
image  of  the  Father ;  and  the  result  of  it  is  that 
all  Christians  become  members  of  the  family  of 
God  the  Father,  in  which  Jesus  is  the  First-l)om, 
and  brother  of  them  all  (He  2'^). 

The  title  is  used  in  the  plural  of  Christians  in 
He  12^:  'the  church  of  the  firstborn'  (Vulg. 
primitivortim).  Here  we  have  an  extension  of  the 
priWlege ;  there  is  not  only  one  first-bom  in  the 
family,  but  many.  We  may,  with  Lightfoot,  take 
the  reference  to  be  to  all  Christians  as  being  first- 
bom  because  all  are  kings  (Rev  1^) ;  the  idea  of 
ruling  is  so  closely  attached  to  the  title  that  it  can 
be  thus  extended,  though  the  metaphor  becomes 
confused — indeed,  it  was  used  by  some  Rabbis  of 
God  Himself  (Lightfoot,  p.  145).  Some,  however, 
interpret  the  phrase  of  the  faithful  departed  who 
have  gone  before,  and  so  are  in  a  sense  the  first- 
bora  of  the  dead  (cf.  Grimm,  Lex.  in  libros  NT, 
Leipzig,  1879,  s.  v.  vpurdroKos).  For  some  modifica- 
tion of  these  views  see  Westcott  on  He  12^.  In 
any  case  the  '  firstborn '  are  men,  not  angels,  to 
whom  the  word  would  be  inapplicable,  and  who 
could  not  be  described  as  'enrolled  in  heaven' 
(Westcott).  A.  J.  Maclean. 

FIRST-FRUIT  (dirapxi?,  class.  Gr.  usually  dTrapxai, 
from  dTrdpxofjiM.1,  'ofler  firstlings  or  first-fruits'). 
—  The  word  occurs  six  times  in  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  once  in  James,  and  once  in  Revelation. 
Its  siofnificance  depends  largely  on  the  belief,  which 
the  Hebrews  shared  with  many  ancient  nations, 
that  first-fruits  were  peculiarly  sacred,  and  on  the 
custom  which  prescribed  them  for  the  services  of 
Jahweh.  The  oflering  of  first-fruits  made  the  rest 
of  the  crop  lawful.  In  LXX  airapxr)  is  the  usual 
equivalent  of  r-c^Ki.  On  the  Jewish  institution  of 
first-fruits,  see  HDB  ii.  10  f . ;  EEE  vi.  46  f.  ;  and 
Schurer,  HJP  ii.  i.  [1885]  237-242. 

The  reference  to  this  institution  is  best  seen  in 
Ro  IV^  :  'and  if  the  firstfruit  is  holy,  so  is  the 
lump,'  where  the  allusion  is  to  the  heave-ottering 
mentioned  in  Nu  15^^-*.  The  Paidine  argument  is 
what  Jowett  has  called  '  an  argument  from  tend- 
encies'— 'as  the  beginning  is,  so  shall  the  comple- 
tion be  ;  as  the  cause  is,  so  shall  the  effect  be  ;  as 
the  part,  so  the  whole'  {Epp.  of  St.  Paul  to  Thess., 
Gal.,  Earn.,  1855,  ii.  273).  There  is  exegetical 
difliculty  here,  for  dxapx^?  and  ptfa  seem  to  denote 
difi'erent  phases  of  the  argument ;  but  there  is  little 
doubt  that  St.  Paul  refers  to  the  future  when 
mankind  shall  be  redeemed,  a  future  that  is  fore- 
shadowed by  the  present  conversion  of  individuals. 

In  the  same  manner  other  passages  are  to  be 
interpreted,  though  they  have  not  obvious  refer- 
ences to  Hebrew  customs.  In  Ja  1^^  Christians  of 
apostolic  times  are  called  dvapx-h  ''«,  'a  kind  of 
firstfruits.'  From  Clement  of  Rome's  Ep.  ad  Cor. 
xlii. ,  we  learn  that  the  apostles,  during  their  mis- 
sionary journeys,  appointed  their  '  firstfruits,' when 


they  had  approved  them,  to  be  bishops  and  deacons  ; 
and  it  is  interesting  to  find  that  St.  Paul  mentions 
two  men  who  were  outstanding  in  their  helpful- 
ness— Stephanas  and  Epjenetus.  Thus  1  Co  16" : 
'Ye  know  the  house  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the 
firstfraits  of  Achaia,  and  that  they  have  set  them- 
selves to  minister  unto  the  saints.'  In  Ro  16'  the 
same  words  are  used,  though  here  '  Achaia '  should 
be  'Asia,'  i.e.  proconsular  Asia,  with  the  addition 
of  et's  XpiffTbv.  These  men,  with  all  likeminded, 
were  the  first-fruits  of  a  new  creation  achieved  by 
the  spirit  of  Christianity,  and  they  were  the  pledge 
of  others  who  would  follow  their  inspiring  example. 

In  Rev  14'*  the  reference  is  to  a  specially  favoured 
class  who  have  been  '  purchased  from  among  men, 
the  firstfruits  unto  God  and  unto  the  Lamb.' 
Ro  8^  speaks  of  Christians  who  have  already  been 
blessed  by  the  Spirit,  and  who  have  the  sure  hope 
of  a  greater  harvest  of  blessing  when  mankind  shall 
be  fully  sanctified. 

The  most  notable  passage  is  1  Co  15^-  ^,  where 
Christ  is  called  the  'Firstfruits.'  There  maj'  be  in 
v.^"  a  reference  to  the  ottering  of  a  sheaf  of  ripe 
corn  on  the  second  day  of  the  Feast  of  Passover 
(cf.  Lv  23^'^-  ^^) ;  but  even  without  that  reference 
the  exegesis  is  plain.  Just  as  the  first-fruits  are 
the  earnest  of  later  harvesting,  so  the  Resurrection 
of  Christ  is  the  guarantee  of  our  resurrection. 
'  Christ  is  risen  !  We  are  risen  ! ',  and  we  shall  rise. 

In  the  early  Church  the  custom  and  doctrine  of 
first-fruits  were  used  to  support  the  practice  of 
levies  on  behalf  of  the  priesthood  (see  Didacke,  §  13). 
Aechibald  Main. 

FLESH  (adf^,  Kpias). — Of  the  two  words  rendered 
'  flesh '  in  the  EV  of  the  XT,  Kpias  is  found  only 
twice  (Ro  14"^,  1  Co  8^),  and  in  both  cases  applies 
to  the  flesh  of  slaughtered  animals  eaten  as  food, 
<rdp^  occurs  very  frequently  and  in  various  signifi- 
cations, of  which  the  following  are  the  most  im- 
portant. 

1.  Its  most  literal  and  primary  meaning  is  the  soft 
tissues  of  the  living  body,  whether  of  men  or  beasts 
(1  Co  15*^,  Rev  19'"*),  as  distinguished  from  both  the 
blood  (1  Co  15^^)  and  the  bones  (Eph  b^  TR;  cf. 
Lk  2439). 

2.  As  the  chief  constituent  of  the  body,  and  that 
which  gives  it  its  visible  form,  '  flesh '  frequently 
indicates  the  whole  body  (Gal  4^^),  which  it  desig- 
nates, however,  not  as  an  organism  (aQfia,  1  Co  12^), 
but  with  reference  to  its  characteristic  material 
substance  (2  Co  12^). 

3.  It  is  further  employed,  just  as  in  the  OT  (Gn 
29^^  37'^),  to  denote  relationship  due  to  natural 
origin  through  the  physical  fact  of  generation. 
Thus  St.  Paul  describes  Jesus  Christ  as  '  born  of 
the  seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh '  (Ro  1'), 
and  refers  to  the  Jewish  people  as  '  my  kinsmen 
according  to  the  flesh '  (9^),  or  even  as  '  my  flesh ' 
(11").  Similarly  he  calls  Abraham  '  our  forefather 
according  to  the  flesh '  (4^),  and  the  author  of  Heb. 
characterizes  natural  fathers  as  '  the  fathers  of  our 
flesh '  in  contrast  with  God  as  '  the  Father  of 
spirits' (He  12^). 

i.  Again  <rdp|  is  used,  in  the  same  way  as  aQ/fta., 
to  designate  the  Imcer  part  of  human  nature  in 
contrast  with  the  higher  part,  without  any  depre- 
ciation of  the  corporeal  element  being  thereby 
intended.  Thus  '  flesh '  is  combined  or  contrasted 
with  '  spirit '  (Ro  2»-  ^,  1  Co  5«,  1  P  Z^^),  as  '  body ' 
is  with  'sour  (Mt  10^)  or  'spirit'  (1  Co  &^,  Ja 
2^),  apart  from  any  idea  of  disparagement,  and 
only  by  way  of  indicating  the  fact  that  man  is  a 
unity  of  matter  and  spirit,  of  a  lower  part  which 
links  him  to  the  outer  world  of  Nature  and  a  higher 
part  which  brings  him  into  relation  with  God,  both 
of  them  being  essential  to  the  completeness  of  his 
personality  (1  Co  6is-  -^^  2  Co  o^-*). 

5.  In  many  instances  'flesh'  assumes  a  broader 


k 


412 


FLESH 


FLOOD 


meaning,  being  employed  to  denote  human  nature 
generally,  usually,  however,  with  a  suggestion  of 
its  creaturely  frailty  and  weakness  in  contrast  with 
God  Himself,  or  His  Spirit,  or  His  word.  'AH 
flesii '  (Ac  2",  1  P  I'")  is  equivalent  to  all  mankind  ; 
'  no  flesh '  (Ro  S^",  1  Co  1»,  Gal  2'«)  has  tiie  force  of 
'  no  mortal  man.'  Similar  to  this  is  the  use  of  the 
fuller  expression  'flesh  and  blood,'  as  when  St. 
Paul  says  that  he  'conferred  not  witli  llesh  and 
blood '  (Gal  1^*),  and  that  '  our  wrestling  is  not 
against  flesh  and  blood'  (Eph  6'^).  That  this  use 
of 'flesh,'  although  pointing  to  human  weakness, 
is  free  from  any  idea  of  moral  taint,  is  sufficiently 
shown  by  the  tact  that  it  is  employed  to  describe 
the  human  nature  of  Christ  Himself  (Jn  1'^,  Ro  1' 
9',  1  Ti  3'«,  He  2")  by  writers  who  are  absolutely 
convinced  of  His  sinlessness  ( Jn  8**,  1  Jn  3',  2  Co  5*', 
He  4^'  7^). 

6.  In  Heb.  we  have  a  special  use  of  '  flesh '  to 
designate  earthly  existence — a  use  which  must  be 
distinguished  from  those  that  have  been  already 
dealt  with.  '  In  the  days  of  his  flesh '  (He  5^)  does 
not  mean  in  the  days  Avhen  He  possessed  a  body, 
or  in  the  days  when  He  bore  our  human  nature ; 
for  the  autlior  firmly  believes  in  the  continued  and 
complete  humanity  of  our  heavenly  High  Priest 
(4"'-)'  It  evidently  means  in  the  days  when  He 
lived  upon  earth  as  a  man  amongst  men.  Simi- 
larly, '  through  the  veil,  that  is  to  say,  his  flesh ' 
(10^)  points  to  His  life  in  those  same  '  days  of  his 
flesh ' — the  whole  period  of  His  sutl'ering  humanity  ; 
and  when  the  writer  describes  the  rites  of  the  OT 
Law  as  '  ordinances  of  flesh '  (diKaicb/xara  <rapK6s,  EV 
'carnal  ordinances,'  9^")  and  contrasts  these  with 
the  blood  of  Christ  in  respect  of  atoning  efficacy, 
the  antithesis  in  his  mind,  as  the  context  shows,  is 
not  so  much  between  the  material  and  the  spiritual 
as  between  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly,  the  pass- 
ing and  the  permanent,  the  temporal  and  the 
eternal.  In  the  same  way  he  draws  a  contrast  be- 
tween '  the  law  of  a  carnal  {crapKlvTjs)  commandment ' 
and  '  the  power  of  an  endless  life '  (7"). 

7.  In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  which  may  all  be 
characterized  as  natural  meanings  of  'flesh,'  we 
find  the  word  used  by  St.  Paul  in  a  distinctly  theo- 
logical and  ethical  sense  to  denote  the  seat  and 
instrument  of  sin  in  fallen  humanity ,  as  opposed  to 
the  '  mind,'  or  higher  nature  of  man,  which  accepts 
the  Law  of  God  (Ro  7^),  and  the  'spirit,'  which  is 
the  principle  of  life  in  the  regenerate  (S^"'-,  Gal 
5i6tr.  g8j  jjj  precisely  the  same  way  he  employs  the 
adi.  'fleshly'  or  'carnal'  in  contrast  with  'spirit- 
ual '  (Ro  7",  1  Co  3\  etc.  ;  see,  further,  Caknal). 
Pfleiderer  and  others  have  sought  to  explain  this 
peculiar  usage  by  supposing  that  in  the  Pauline 
anthropology  there  was  a  fundamental  dualism  be- 
tween '  flesh '  and  '  spirit,'  and  that  the  Apostle  saw 
in  the  physical  or  sensuous  part  of  man  the  very 
source  and  principle  of  sin.  Such  a  view,  however, 
is  contraiy  to  St.  Paul's  thoroughly  Hebrew  con- 
ception of  the  unity  of  body  and  soul  in  the  human 
personality  (see  4),  and  is  expressly  negatived  by 
his  teaching  on  such  subjects  as  the  sinlessness  of 
Jesus  (2  Co  5-^)  and  the  sanctification  of  the  body 
(1  Co  6"-'^),  and  by  his  application  of  the  epithet 
'  carnal '  (3^)  and  of  the  expression  '  works  of  the 
flesh'  (Gal  5^®"'-)  to  sins  in  which  any  sensuous  or 
physical  elements  are  entirely  wanting.  The  most 
probable  explanation  of  this  Pauline  antithesis  of 
'  flesh '  and  '  spirit '  is  that  it  amounts  to  a  contrast 
between  the  natural  and  the  supernatural.  Sin  in 
St.  Paul's  presentation  of  it  comes  in  the  case  of 
fallen  man  through  natural  inheritance — all  man- 
kind descending  from  Adam  '  by  ordinary  genera- 
tion ' — and  is  therefore  characterized  as  '  flesh  ' ; 
while  the  life  of  holiness,  as  a  gift  of  the  Divine 
Spirit,  is  described  as  '  spirit '  with  reference  to  its 
source. 


LiTKRATURE.— H.  CttxMr,Lex.  of  A'TGreek^,  Edinburjrh,  1880, 
s.v.  (rdp(,  and  art.  '  Fleisch '  in  PRJi^  ;  H.  H.  Wendt,  Die  Be- 
griffe  Fleisch  u.  GeiU  im  hibl.  Spraehgebrauch,  Gotha,  1878 
J.  Laidlaw,  B^U  Doet.  of  3lan,  new  ed.,  Edinburgh,  1805,  p 
109 ff.,  and  BDB  li.  14  ;  W.  P.  Dickson,  St.  J'aulS  Use  of  tk 
Terms  '  Flesh '  and  '  Spirit,'  Gla8j,'ow,  1883  ;  A.  B.  Bruce,  St 
Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity,  Edinburgh,  1894,  ch.  xiv. 

J.  C.  Lambert. 

FLOGK. — One  of  the  most  familiar  pictures  in 
the  OT  is  that  of  the  Church  or  people  of  God  as  a 
flock.  In  Gn  48"  the  correlative  figure  is  found  in 
'  the  shepherding  God,'  and  is  repeated  in  the  Bless- 
ing of  the  Tribes  ('  the  Shephercl  of  Israel,'  Gn  49" ; 
cf.  also  Pa  23  and  Ezk  343').  !„  ig  4911  the  figure  is 
directly  employed  :  '  He  shall  feed  his  flock  like  a 
shepherd'  (in  tne  OT  generally  voifUvei  XaQv  meant 
'civil  rulers,'  as  in  Homer,  but  in  the  NT  the  phrase 
stands  for  'spiritual  guides  and  teachers'). 

The  OT  metaphor  is  carried  over  into  the  NT, 
where  t6  iroLfiviov  is  used  exclusively  in  the  figura- 
tive sense  of  '  church '  or '  congregation.'  It  appears 
thus  in  the  tender  address  of  our  Lord  :  ixit  ipo^od, 
Tb  fUKpbv  ■n-oi/j.viov,  '  Fear  not,  little  flock '(Lk  12*-). 
The  words  continued  to  beat  like  a  pulse  in  the 
breast  of  the  Church,  and  are  renewed  again  and 
again. 

(1)  St.  Paul  says  to  the  elders  of  Ephesus:  irpoffi- 
X^re  iavTo'is  Kal  -rravri  t<^  voiuviifi  .  .  .  iroifiaiveiv  ttjv 
iKK\-r}aiav  rod  deov,  '  Take  heed  unto  yourselves  and 
to  all  the  flock  ...  to  feed  the  Church  of  God' 
(Ac  20^'^").  The  overseers  are  themselves  part 
of  the  flock  {ev  y),  and  this  suggests  the  insigiit, 
sympathy,  closeness  of  intimacy,  and  the  personal 
knowledge  with  which  the  flock  is  to  be  superin- 
tended. '  The  bishop  is  and  remains  a  sheep  of  the 
flock,  and  must  thus  exercise  his  oversight  both 
on  himself  and  the  whole  flock'  (Stier,  The  Words 
of  the  Apostles,  1869,  p.  328).  '  Feed'  and  'guide,' 
therefore,  include  the  two  great  tasks  of  the 
ministry. 

(2)  Jesus  had  said  to  Peter  :  ^oa-Ke  ra.  dpvia  fiov  .  .  . 
irot/xaive  tcl  irpb^ard  /jlov,  '  Feed  my  lambs  •  .  .  tend 
my  sheep'  (Jn  21"-'^).  Accordingly  the  Apostle, 
'in  a  personal  reminiscence'  (W.  H.  Bennett,  The 
General  Epistles  [Cent.  Bible,  1901],  p.  36)  and,  in 
'  unobtrusive  allusions  to  Christ's  life  which  har- 
monize with  his  discipleship'  (Moflatt,  LNT,  1911, 
p.  335),  says  as  a  fellow-elder :  woiixavaTe  rb  iv  vfun 
TToi/xviov  ToD  deov  .  .  .  ti/ttoi  yivbfievoi.  toD  troip-vlov, 
'  Tend  the  flock  of  God  which  is  among  you  .  .  . 
making  yourselves  ensaniples  to  the  flock  '(IPS***; 
cf,  Pss.-Sol.  xvii.  45).  '  To  feed  the  flock '  takes  in 
the  whole  varied  duties  of  the  pastoral  office.  '  It 
is  not  right  that  a  man  should  only  preach  a  sermon 
every  Sunday,  and  after  that  pay  no  regard  to  the 
people '  (Stier,  op.  cit.,  328,  quoting  Gossner).  '  All 
moaes  of  watchfulness  and  help  are  to  be  displayed. 
Fold  as  well  as  feed  them  ;  guide  and  guard  and 
heal  them '  (Hastings,  Great  Texts  of  the  Bible,  '  St. 
John,'  1912,  p.  422).  In  the  AV  of  1  P  5»  the  flock 
is  called  '  God's  heritage,'  but  deoD  is  not  in  the  text, 
and  it  is  better  to  read  with  RV  '  the  charge  allotted 
to  you '  (cf.  Tindale's  Version  :  '  be  not  as  lordes 
over  the  parrishes ').  '  The  charge  allotted  to  you ' 
is  therefore  parallel  to  '  the  flock  of  God  which  is 
among  you,  i.e.  the  particular  Christian  society 
committed  to  your  care.  '  Each  separate  eKKXrjala 
was  thought  of  as  the  "portion"  (xX^pos)  of  the 
presbyter  who  watched  over  it'(E.  H.  Plumptre, 
Camb.  Bible, '  St.  Peter  and  St.  Jude,'  1880,  p.  154). 

It  is  evidence  of  how  completely  the  thought  of 
the  shepherd  and  the  flock  possessed  the  mind  of 
the  early  Church,  that  in  the  Catacombs  the  figure 
of  a  shepherd  with  a  sheep  on  his  shoulder  and 
a  crook  in  his  hand  is  the  most  frequent  of  all 
symbols.  W.  M.  Grant. 

FLOOD  {KaraKXvjubs,  which  is  used  in  the  LXX 
for  '??ac).~In  exhibiting    faith    as    the  principle 


FLUTE 


FOREKNOWLEDGE 


413 


w  hich  has  all  through  history  ruled  the  lives  of 
the  saints,  the  writer  of  Heb.  [IV)  instances 
the  faith  of  Noah,  who,  warned  of  things  not  j^et 
seen,  i.e.  of  the  coming  flood,  prepared  an  ark  for 
the  saving  of  his  house.  1  ret.  (3^)  alludes  to 
the  ark  in  which  eight  souls  were  saved  through 
•water.  2  Pet.  (2*)  Slustrates  the  retributive  jus- 
tice of  God  by  the  fact  that  He  brought  a  flood 
upon  the  world  of  the  ungodly,  and  (3'- '')  contrasts 
with  the  world  which  was  overflowed  with  water 
the  heavens  and  the  earth  which  are  stored  up  for 
lire.  The  wTiters  of  these  Epistles,  being  apostles 
and  evangelists,  not  men  of  science,  had  no 
thought  of  verifying  historical  documents  or 
investigating  natural  phenomena,  their  sole  desire 
being  to  awaken  or  strengthen  the  faith,  to  purify 
and  ennoble  the  lives,  of  their  readers.  Like  the 
writers  and  compilers  of  the  deluge  stories  in  Gen. 
(6-9'"),  they  doubtless  believed — as  most  Christians 
did  until  a  comparatively  recent  period — in  a 
universal  flood  which  destroyed  all  men  and 
animals  except  those  preserved  in  the  ark.  In 
the  light  of  science  and  criticism,  the  Gen.  narra- 
tives of  the  deluge  are  now  regarded  as  a  part  of 
the  folk-lore  of  Babylonian  or  Accadian  peoples, 
from  whom  it  was  borrowed  by  the  Canaanites. 

LiTKRATrRE. — The  discussion  of  the  problems  connected  with 
the  istor.v  of  the  flood — whether,  e.g.,  it  is  a  highly  coloured 
legend  based  on  actual  occurrences  or  a  Xature-myth  which 
ta^  assumed  the  form  of  a  history — is  relevant  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  narratives  in  Genesis,  but  would  cast  little  or  no 
light  upon  the  literature  of  Aix)stolic  Christianity.  It  is  there- 
lore  enough  to  refer  to  F.  H.  Woods'  art.  'Flood 'in  HDB 
and  '  Deluge '  in  ERE,  and  T.  K.  Cheyne's  artt.  '  Deluge  '  in 
the  EBi  and  EBr^  ;  R.  Andree,  DU  Flutsagen,  Brunswick, 
1691 ;  C.  J.  Ball,  Light  from  the  East,  London,  1899  ;  Elwood 
Worcester,  Geneiii  in  the  Light  qf  Modem  KruncUdge,  Xew 

York,  1901.  James  Stbahax. 

FLUTE See  Pipe. 

FOOL.  —  The  diversity  in  the  conceptions  of 
folly  is  strikingly  illustrated  by  the  use  in  the 
writings  of  the  Apostolic  Church  of  the  terms 
*  fool '  and  '  foolish,'  translating  the  Greek  words 
6.<(>(mv,  fiwpos,  ifffxpoi.,  dvoT/Tos,  davveros,  and  related 
forms. 

1.  There  appears  to  be  a  reference  to  folly  as 
intentional  clownishness  in  Eph  5*.  The  Christian 
must  avoid  '  foolish  talking  or  jesting '  {/uopoXoyia 
xai  eirrpaTeXia). 

2.  Unseemly  and  undignified  conduct  is  folly. 
Thus  St.  Pam,  vindicating  his  apostleship,  is  re- 
luctantly led  to  a  self-commendation,  such  as,  in 
other  circumstances,  only  a  fool  in  the  folly  of 
boasting  would  offer  (2  Co  Hie- is- 21  12";  cf.  5'^). 
There  is,  however,  a  deeper  folly— unwarranteid 
boasting  (12*).  Twice  in  these  2  Cor.  passages  a 
certain  play  on  the  idea  of  foUy  is  presented.  St. 
Paul  in  selt-defence  is  compelled  to  speak  as  a  fool, 
yet  are  not  the  real  fools  the  Corinthians,  ironi- 
cally (pp6vifxoi,  for  tolerating  fools,  namely  the 
false  teachers?  (11"- !»•  ■^■').  Again  the  Apostle, 
having  acknowledged  '  I  speak  as  a  fool '  (m  my 
boasting),  presently  comes  to  the  mere  supposition 
that  these  false  teachers  are  servants  of  Christ — 
the  sense  of  the  parenthesis  changes — '  Xow  in- 
deed, I  do  speak  out  of  my  mind '  (vv.-i-  ^). 

3.  The  term  '  fool '  {d<}>puv),  signifying  mental 
stupidity,  is  applied  to  the  imaginary  controver- 
sialist of  1  Co  15^,  who  finds  unnecessary  diffi- 
culties in  the  Kesurrection  (cf.  the  'foolii^  con- 
troversies" of  1  Ti  6*,  2  Ti  2^,  Tit  3*). 

4.  The  '  foolish  Galatians '  (ayorjrot)  appear  to  be 
rebuked  for  bad  judgment,  rather  than  for  moral 
perverseness.  They  must  be '  bewitched '  to  have 
so  readily  accepted  another  teaching  (Gal  3'**). 

5.  Instances  of  moral  folly  are  provided  by  those 
who  live  without  regard  to  the  chief  end  of  life. 
These  are  Suao<t>oi  and  dL<f>pove%  (Eph  5^^").     Foolish 


are  the  lusts  of  the  rich  (1  Ti  6»),  and  the  unre- 
generate  life  is  one  of  foolishness  (Tit  3'). 

6.  Heathenism  supplied  a  conspicuous  and 
illuminating  case  of  moral  and  intellectual  folly 
(Ro  1»8^;  cf.  2»).  To  St.  Paul,  the  worship  of 
wood  and  stone  indicated  an  underlying  moral 
defect  of  liking  for  the  unreal  rather  tnan  for 
the  real— for  make-belief  rather  than  for  belief 
(v. 25),  which  found  expression  in  morality  as  well 
as  in  worship  (v.*"-).  This  moral  folly  led  to 
intellectual  foolisliness,  which  '  learned  disputa- 
tions'  disguised  and  fostered.  There  must  be  a 
moral  element  in  sane  intellectual  judgment  (cf. 
2  Th  2"*"^*,  and  Carlyle's  comment  upon  Napoleon  : 
'  He  did  not  know  true  from  false  now  when  he 
looked  at  them, — the  fearfulest  penalty  a  man 
pays  for  yielding  to  untruth  of  heart '  [Heroes  and 
Hero-worship,  1872,  'The  Hero  as  King,' p.  221]). 

7.  In  the  judgment  of  the  critical  Greek  in- 
teUectualists,  the  preaching  of  '  Christ  crucified ' 
was  foUy  (1  Co  1"**  ="•  ^  **).  A  gospel  centred  in  the 
person  of  an  ignominiously  executed  criminal,  and 
finding  indeed  a  mystic  value  in  that  death,  Mas 
likely  to  provoke  the  contempt  of  a  highly  philo- 
sophical community.  In  contrast,  St.  Paul  pre- 
sents, as  the  true  norm  whereby  wisdom  and  folly 
are  to  be  judged,  a  mystic  yvwffK :  to  the  un- 
spiritual,  foolishness  (2"),  but  to  the  initiated,  the 
power  and  wisdom  of  God  (2^  1*  1^  **) — a  presenta- 
tion which  invites  comparison  with  the  yvQxm 
of  the  Mysteries.  Probably  the  distinction  here 
suggested  is  that  between  the  intuitional,  mystic 
experience  of  God  and  His  power,  and  the  in- 
tellectual theorizing  a 6(m<  God  and  His  dealings 
with  the  world.  Religious  'wisdom'  must  be 
judged  primarily  in  terms  of  spiritual  experience 
rather  than  of  theology.  At  the  same  time.  St. 
Paul  had  no  love  for  obscurantism  (1  Co  14). 

8.  The  evil  of  the  intellectualism  within  the 
Church,  indicated  in  1  Cor.,  was  not  that  it 
challenged  the  distinctive  forms  of  Christian 
faith,  but  that  it  gave  rise  to  the  bitterness  of 
religious  controversy — sacrificed  the  love  which 
never  failed  in  value  for  the  sake  of  the  more 
forms  of  knowledge,  which  at  the  best  necessarily 
passed  away  in  the  coming  of  greater  light  (1  Co 
13").  Let  these  childishly  (1  Co  S^-^)  '^ise' 
become  '  fools '  that  they  may  gain  the  •wisdom  of 
the  childlike  {y\.^^^). 

9.  'Fools  for  Christ's  sake' — so  St.  Paul  de- 
scribes himself  and  his  feUow-evangeUsts  in  1  Co 
41".  The  epithet  may  have  been  applied  on 
account  of  the  '  foolishness '  of  the  preaching  (7) ; 
the  contrast,  however,  ^ith  the  (ppofifioi  ir  X/hot^j, 
prudentes  in  Christo,  suggests  that  the  reference 
is  to  the  worldly-wiseman's  view  of  the  sanctified 
'abandon'  of  St.  Paul  and  his  kindred  spirits, 
their  flinging  aside  of  policy  and  cunning,  their 
counting  as  nought  the  things  which  the  world 
deems  precious.  The  Apostle  is  actually  regarded 
by  Festus  as  out  of  his  mind  (Ac  26**). 

H.   BULCOCK. 

FORBEARANCE.— See  Loxgsuffering. 
FOREIGNER.— See  Stranger. 

FOREKNOWLEDGE.— '  Foreknowledge  ■   is  the 

rendering  of  a  Greek  word  (-rpoyvuKjn,  Ac  2=^,  1  P  1*, 
the  cognate  verb  being  rpoyiydxTKeiv,  Ac  26'',  Ro  8^ 
11-,  1 P 1"*,  2  P  3^')  which  occurs  nowhere  in  the  LXX 
and  not  very  often  in  the  NT.  In  the  apocryphal 
book  of  Wis.  it  occurs  three  times  {6^  8*  18*),  always 
in  the  plain  sense  of  '  kno^\"ing  beforehand.'  In 
this  sense  St.  Paul  uses  the  verb  in  his  speech  be- 
fore Agrippa,  when  he  tells  him  how  his  manner  of 
life  was  known  to  all  the  Jews,  '  having  knowledge 
of  me  from  the  first,  if  they  be  Milling  to  testify ' 
(Ac  26*) ;  and  in  this  sense  also  St,  Peter  uses  it  in 


414 


FOREKNOWLEDGE 


FORGIVENESS 


the  concluding  warning  of  his  Second  Epistle  when 
he  reminds  his  readers  of  their  '  knowing  these 
things  beforehand '  (3"). 

In  the  remainder  of  the  references  given  above  it 
is  the  Divine  foreknowledge  wliich  is  in  the  mind  of 
the  Apostle,  the  object  or  objects  being  not  facts  or 
things  but  persons — these  persons  being  objects  of 
favourable  regard — and  tlie  tlieme  under  considera- 
tion being  some  aspect  of  the  Divine  purpose  of 
grace  towards  men.  When  St.  Peter,  in  addressing 
the  Jewish  multitudes  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
describes  them  as  having  by  the  hand  of  lawless  men 
crucilied  and  slain  Jesus  or  Nazareth,  he  speaks  of 
Him  as  '  delivered  up  by  the  determinate  counsel 
and  foreknowledge  of  God '  (Ac  2P).  That  death 
had  been  designed  and  planned  in  tlie  counsels  of 
eternal  love,  and  the  '  foreknowledge  of  God '  had 
rested  with  satisfaction  upon  the  Divine  sufferer 
who  had  undertaken,  by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself, 
to  win  redemption  for  men.  Of  the  same  purport 
is  the  expression  used  by  St.  Peter  when  in  his 
First  Epistle  he  speaks  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  a 
Lamb  without  blemisli  and  without  spot,  '  who 
Avas  foreknown  indeed  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  but  was  manifested  at  the  end  of  the  times 
for  your  sake'  (1-").  Mere  prescience  in  the  sense 
of  previous  knowledge  does  not  exhaust  the  mean- 
ing in  either  of  the  foregoing  passages.  Hort  {I'he 
First  Epistle  of  Peter,  1898,  ad  loc.)  sees  in  the 
latter  reference  '  previous  designation  to  a  position 
or  function.'  And  he  notes  the  pregnant  sense  of 
'  know '  in  such  passages  as  Jer  1',  '  Before  I  formed 
thee  in  the  belly  I  knew  thee' ;  Is  49^,  'The  Lord 
hath  called  me  from  the  womb ;  from  the  bowels 
of  my  mother  hath  he  made  mention  of  my  name ' ; 
and  Ex  33^^  (spoken  of  Moses),  '  I  know  thee  by 
name,  and  thou  hast  found  grace  in  my  sight '  (cf. 
2  Ti  2^^).  The  pregnant  sense  belonging  to  *  know- 
ledge '  may  well  belong  also  to  '  foreknowledge ' 
(1  P  P,  Kara,  irpoyvuaiv  deov  irarpoi). 

'This  knowledge,'  says  Hort  in  his  note  on  the  expression,  'is 
not  a  knowledge  of  facts  respecting  a  person,  but  a  knowledge 
of  himself ;  it  is,  so  to  speak,  a  contemplation  of  him  in  his  ih- 
dividualily,  yet  not  as  an  indifferent  object  but  as  standing  in 
personal  relations  to  Him  who  thus  "  foreknows  "  him.  It  must 
not  therefore  be  identified  with  mere  foreknowledge  of  existence 
or  acts  (prescience) ;  or  again,  strictly  speaking,  with  destination 
or  predestination  (opinio,  npoopCiui),  even  in  the  biblical  sense,  that 
is,  in  relation  to  a  Providential  order,  much  less  in  the  philo- 
sophical sense  of  antecedent  constraint.' 

When  we  turn  to  St.  Paul's  more  exact  and  precise 
exposition  of  doctrine  we  see  that  'foreknowledge' 
is  still  directed  to  persons  as  its  object,  and  also 
that '  prescience,'  '  knowing  beforehand,'  is  inade- 
quate to  the  expression  of  the  mysterious  thought 
conveyed.  Witli  St.  Paul  '  forelinowledge '  is  the 
first  link  in  the  chain  of  the  Divine  purpose  of 
grace,  the  first  step  in  the  spiritual  history  of  tlie 
believer  (Ro  8^,  oOs  irpoiyvu}),  '  foreordination '  the 
second,  'effectual  calling'  the  third,  'justification' 
the  fourth,  'glory'  the  fifth  and  last. 

'  Mere  prescience  [on  God's  part]  of  human  volition,'  saj-s  C.  J. 
Vaughan,  'leaves  man  the  originator  of  his  own  salvation,  in 
utter  contradiction  to  Scripture  here  and  everywhere.  That 
iTp6yvo>iji<s  which  is  made  the  lirst  step  in  the  spiritual  history 
seems  to  express,  not  indeed  so  nmch  as  predetermination  (which 
would  confuse  -npoeyvm  with  irpooipio-ev),  but  yet  a  resting  of  the 
mind  of  God  beforehand  upon  a  person  with  approval  (cf.  Ex  3312, 
Ps  16),  which  can  only  be  mentally  and  doctrinally  severed  from 
the  second  step,  irpowpio-ti' '  (,St.  PauVs  EpistU  to  the  Romans^, 
1870,  adloc). 

That  the  expression  is  used  also  of  Israel  by  St. 
Paul  is  quite  in  keeping  with  this  pregnant  sense  : 
'  God  did  not  cast  away  his  people  which  he  fore- 
knew '  (Ro  IP).  It  is  'the  chosen  people,'  'the 
covenant  people '  (6  Xao'j),  of  whom  the  Apostle  de- 
clares that  God  '  foreknew '  them.  Here,  again, 
'  foreknowledge '  is  thought  of  as  directed  not  to  a 
person  or  a  people  simply,  but  to  a  person  or  a 
people  in  relation  to  a  function,  for  Israel  Mas 


'designated  afore'  to  fill  that  place  in  the  purpose 
of  God  which  has  been  theirs  among  the  nations. 

There  is  no  ground  in  tlie  teaching  of  St,  Paul 
for  tlie  view  that  because  God  foreknew  that  certain 
persons  would  respond  to  the  gospel  call,  and  remain 
true  to  their  first  faith  to  the  end,  He  therefore 
foreordained  them  to  salvation.  Those  whom  God 
foreknew  as  His  own  of  sovereign  grace.  He  also 
foreordained  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  His 
Son ;  but  St.  Paul  makes  this  conformity  to  be  the 
result,  not  the  foreseen  condition,  of  God's  fore- 
ordination. *  Foreknew'  points  backward  to  God's 
loving  thoughtof  them  before  time  began;  their  con- 
formity to  the  image  of  His  Son  points  to  the  realiza- 
tion of  this  thought  of  God  and  its  being  carried  to  its 
furthest  goal  in  the  course  of  time.  Of  any  '  fore- 
knowledge '  by  God  of  others  than  those  who  are 
eliectually  called  according  to  the  Divine  purpose 
neither  St.  Paul  nor  any  other  NT  writer  has  any- 
thing to  say.  According  to  the  teaching  of  the  two 
apostles  already  referred  to,  the  Divine  foreknow- 
ledge represents  the  first  step  in  the  scheme  of 
redemption,  marking  out  the  Lamb  slain  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world  which  taketh  away  the  sin 
of  the  world,  and  the  first  movement  of  grace  in 
the  heart  of  God  towards  those  who  shall  be  saved. 

The  Patristic  usage  of  the  word  takes  no  notice 
of  its  theological  significance  as  we  find  it  in  St. 
Peter  and  St.  Paul.  Clement  speaks  of  the  first 
apostles  being  endowed  with  '  perfect  foreknow- 
ledge '  to  enable  them  to  hand  on  to  approved  suc- 
cessors the  ministry  and  service  they  had  fulfilled 
(1  Clem.  xliv.  2).  Hernias  attributes  to  tlie  Lord 
the  power  of  reading  the  heart,  and  with  foreknow- 
ledge knowing  all  things,  even  the  weakness  of 
men  and  the  wiles  of  the  devil  (Mand.  iv.  iii.  4). 

Literature.— F.  J.  A.  Hort,  The  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter, 
I.  l-II.  17, 1898,  pp.  18,  80  ;  Commentaries  on  Ro  829-30  by  C.  J. 
VauRhan  (31870),  Sanday-Headlam  (?ICC,  1902),  J.  Dennejr 
{KGT,  1900),  and  T.  Zahn  (Introd.  to  AT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909);  C. 
Hodge,  Systematic  Theology,  i.  [1872]  397-400,  545 ;  A.  Stewart, 
art.  '  Foreknowledge '  in  jErHJB.  THOMAS  NiCOL. 

FOREORDINATION.— See  Pkedestinatiox. 

FORERUNNER.— This  word  occurs  only  in  He 
6-",  where  it  is  used  of  our  Lord,  who  has  entered 
within  the  veil  as  the  Forerunner  of  redeemed 
mankind.  It  is  a  military  term  {irp65poixos)  used  of 
the  troops  which  were  sent  in  advance  of  an  army 
as  scouts  (Herod,  i.  60,  iv.  121,  122;  Thuc.  ii.  22, 
etc.).  Again,  a  forerunner  was  sent  in  advance 
of  a  king  to  prepare  the  way  for  him  (Is  4(F).  In 
the  NT  the  Baptist  becomes  tlie  forerunner  of  the 
Christ  (Mt  ll'").  The  author  of  the  Epistle  shows 
that  the  promise  made  to  Abraham  still  awaits 
its  complete  fulfilment — a  promise  which  is  made 
doubly  sure,  being  confirmed  by  an  oath.  This 
promise  has  been  fulfilled  by  Christ,  so  that  hope 
may  now  enter  where  Jesus,  the  Son  of  Man,  has 
already  entered  to  make  atonement  for  us. 

The  use  of  this  term  Trp6Spofj.os  emphasizes  the 
fact  that  Jesus  has  entered  heaven,  not  as  the 
Jewish  high  priest  entered  the  Holy  of  Holies,  to 
return  again,  but  to  open  a  way  by  which  His 
people  may  follow,  and  to  jnepare  a  place  for 
them  (Jn  14*).  Mohley  Stevensox. 

FORGIVENESS.— The  purpose  of  this  article  is 
not    to    discuss    the    large    tlieological    problems 
involved  (see  Atonement),  but   to  consider  tlie 
l)assages  in  which  the  term  actually  occurs  in  the 
Acts  and  the  Epistles.     The  general  word  i.-^ 
of  very  common  occurrence  in  the  NT,  e.'^i 
in  the  Gospels,  meaning  'send  away  from  uin  -v.. 
(Mt   13^),  'let  go'  (4-^),  'turn  away  from'  (19=*, 
1  Co  7"),  '  pass  over'  or  'neglect'  (He  6',  Mt  'iS"), 
'  relinquish  one's  prey'  (used  of  robbers  [Lk  10*'1or 
a  disease  [Mt  8",  Mk  P',  Lk  4^,  Jn  4«=»]),  or  simply 


FORGIYEXESS 


FORM 


415 


•  leave  a  i)erson  free '  (Mk  W*  14«,  Jn  11*^,  Ac  5^), 
or  treat  hiiu  as  if  one  had  no  more  concern  with 
hiui.  Hence  it  is  used  of  remitting  a  debt  (Mt  18" 
gis.  H)^  equivalent  to  oii  \oyiifff0ai  (2  Co  5'" ;  see  also 
Sanday-Headlam,  ^w«a»^»[/CC,  1902],  100);  the 
creditor  tears  up  the  bill,  so  to  speak,  or  never 
enters  the  debt  in  his  ledger.  The  verb,  however, 
is  rare  outside  the  Gospels  in  the  sense  of  '  forgive.' 
It  occurs  in  Ac  8'^  (the  forgiveness  of  the  thought 
of  Simons  heart),  Ja  5''^  1  Jn  1"  2'^  (in  each  case 
witli  '  sins'),  and,  as  a  quotation,  in  Ro  4^  (the  for- 
giveness of  '  lawlessnesses,'  ayofuai). 

Side  by  side  with  these  instances,  however,  we 
must  put  the  noun,  Htpean.  This  is  very  rare  in 
the  Gospels  tit  is  never  attributed  to  Christ  Him- 
self, save  in  quotations  and  in  the  institution  of 
the  Eucharist  in  Mt  26'^ — not  in  the  parallels).  It 
is  more  frequent  in  the  Acts — 2^  (baptism  for  for- 
giveness of  sins  in  the  name  of  Christ),  5'*  (repent- 
ance and  forgiveness  of  sins),  10**  (forgiveness  of 
sins  through  His  name),  13**  (through  Him  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  is  preached),  26'*  (forgiveness  of 
sins  ...  by  faith  that  is  in  Christ).  Here,  the 
object  is  always  '  sins  ' ;  forgiveness  is  sometimes 
explicitly  joined  to  rei)entance  and  baptism  ;  but 
more  particularly  connected  with  Christ,  Christ's 
name,  or  faith  in  Christ.  The  procedure  suggested 
by  these  passages  is  simple :  preaching  Christ, 
belief  in  Christ,  and  the  resultant  acceptance  of 
the  new  position  of  freedom  from  sin.  This  might 
be  all  that  was  explicit  in  the  experience  of  the 
early  believers  ;  it  is  ob\'iously  not  the  last  word 
for  the  preaclier,  the  theologian,  or  the  believer 
himself.  Hence,  the  fuller  expression  of  St.  Paul 
in  Eph  1",  'in  whom  we  have  our  redemption 
through  his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  our 
transgressions'  (cf.  Col  V^).  Here,  the  figure  of 
the  cancelling  of  a  debt  is  joined  to  another — rescue 
from  some  usurping  power  ;  and  this  (in  the  passage 
in  Eph. ,  not  in  Col. )  is  definitely  connected  with 
the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  Christ  at  His  death  ; 
so  in  He  9^'  (•'  apart  from  shedding  of  blood  there  is 
no  remission  of  sins ').  The  only  other  passage  in 
the  Epistles  where  the  word  occurs  is  He  10'^ 
where  forgiveness  of  sins  and  lawlessnesses  is  re- 
garded as  equivalent  to  their  being  remembered  no 
more  (Jer  31^),  and  so  needing  no  further  sacrifice. 

At  first  sight,  it  would  seem  strange  that  a<piT)fu 
is  not  used  oftener  ;  it  does  not  occur  at  all  in 
Rom.  in  the  sense  of  forgiveness,  save  in  a 
quotation  (Ro  4",  from  Ps  32').  But  the  reason  is 
not  far  to  seek.  The  conception,  as  already  said, 
was  not  final ;  it  was  a  figure,  and  one  of  several 
possible  figures ;  and  it  was  a  single  term  applied 
to  a  mysterious  and  far-reaching  experience  which 
required  further  analysis.  The  writers  of  the 
Epistles  do  not  neglect  the  experience,  but  they 
pass  beyond  the  expression.  In  the  primitive 
apostolic  teaching  of  the  Acts,  it  was  enough  to 
announce  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  that  He  had 
risen  from  the  death  to  which  the  rulers  of  the  Jews 
had  condemned  Him,  and  that  in  Him  the  old 
promises  of  forgiveness  of  sins  were  fulfilled — for- 
giveness even  for  the  sin  of  putting  Him  to  death. 
The  cardinal  notes  of  the  apostles'  early  preaching 
are  the  facts  of  the  Resurrection  and  5lessiahship 
of  Jesus,  and  the  necessity  of  belie\ang  in  Him  for 
the  promised  spiritual  change.  But  it  was  in- 
evitable that  further  questions  should  arise.  How 
can  this  forgiveness  be  reconciled  with  God's  un- 
changing abhorrence  of  sin  ?  What  is  the  con- 
nexion between  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  change 
in  me?  To  answer  these,  St.  Paul  takes  up  the 
suggestion  implied  in  the  word  fi^ecris,  '  a  cancelled 
debt,'  already  familiar  to  Pharisaic  thought,  and 
develops  it  into  his  doctrine  of  justification  :  there 
is  a  debt — all  men  owe  it — caused  by  the  non- 
performance of  the  necessary  works ;    judgment 


must  therefore  be  given  against  us ;  but  with  the 
Judge  who  would  pronounce  the  sentence  there  is 
also  grace.  Christ  the  Son  of  God  dies  for  our  sin ; 
and  this  same  death  we  also  die,  by  faith,  to  sin ; 
hence,  we  are  justified  before  God — that  is,  we  are 
like  men  who  have  never  contracted  a  debt ;  and 
there  is  nothing  for  us  but  acguittaL  This  forensic 
figure  is  worketl  out  by  St.  Paul  more  fully  than 
any  other;  but  he  lays  equal  stress  on  the  more 
mystical  conceptions  of  reoemption  (see  above)  and 
death  to  sin  (Ro  6^^  'estimate  yourselves  to  be 
mere  corijses  with  regard  to  sin ').  The  importance 
of  faith,  however,  is  never  left  unexpres.sed,  faith 
being  at  once  surrender  to,  reliance  on,  and 
identification  with  its  object.  Here,  St.  Paul 
brings  us  to  the  circle  of  the  thought  of  St.  John, 
which  only  once  refers  to  forgiveness  (see  above), 
but  moves  round  the  act  of  l^lieving  which  joins 
man  to  God. 

As  kindred  expressions  we  may  notice  the  words 
Xaptffatfew — properly,  '  do  a  favour  to  a  person,'  or, 
with  the  accusative  of  the  thing,  '  make  a  present 
of ' — sometimes  in  the  sense  of  making  a  j^resent 
of  an  act  of  wrong-doing,  i.e.,  not  insisting  on  the 
penalty  for  it  (2  Co  12i',  Col  2^) ;  rdptffis  (Ro  3=^), 
'  a  temporary  suspension  of  punishment  which  may 
be  one  day  inflicted,'  and  therefore  entirely  distinct 
from  forgiveness  (see  R.  C.  Trench,  XT  Synonym^, 
1876,  p.  110  ff.) ;  KoK&rTfiv,  '  to  conceal,  cover  over ' 
(cf.  the  Hebrew  kipper)  (Ro  4^  [quoting  from  Ps 
32^],  1  P  48) ;  and  \veii>, '  to  loose '  (Rev  l^). 

LrraRATTRB. — Forgiveness  has  very  little  modem  literature 
devoted  to  it ;  but  ir  is  discussed  in  all  literature  dealing  with 
Atonement  and  ReconciUation,  and,  at  least  indirectly,  in  that 
referring  to  Sin  and  Conversion.  See  the  artt.  Atoxkm'est,  Cox- 
VBRSiOK,  JrsTincATios,  Eepkstaxce,  Sk,  with  the  Literature 
there  cited.  Reference  may  also  be  made  to  G.  B.  Stevens, 
Tlieoiogy  0/  the  ST,  1S99 ;  A.  Ritschl.  The  Christian  Doctrine 
of  Jvttijieation  and  Reeaneiliatum,  Eng.  tr.,  1900;  W.  E. 
Orchard,  Modem  Tkeorie*  of  Sin,  1909  ;  W.  L.  Walker,  The 
Gospel  of  ReetmeOiatum,  1909 ;  P.  T.  Forsyth,  The  Work  of 
Christ,  1910;  R.  Mackintosh,  Christianitjf  and  Sin,  1913. 
W.  F.  LOFTHOUSE. 

FORM. — The  first  occurrence  of  this  word  in  the 
Epistles  is  in  Ro  2*',  where  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the 
Jew  as  '  ha^Tng  in  the  law  the  form  of  knowledge 
and  of  the  truth.'  The  word  he  uses  is  fi&fxfxMris, 
which  is  found  again  only  in  2  Ti  3'  ('having  the 
form  of  godliness '),  where  it  clearly  has  a  dispar- 
aging sense  and  may  be  taken  to  mean  an  afiecta- 
tion  of  or  an  aiming  at  the  au)/>^  of  godliness. 
fLOfxpri)  itself  is  that  which  manifests  the  essence  or 
inward  nature  of  a  thing,  '  outward  form  as  deter- 
mined by  inward  substance,'  in  contrast  with  axvf^ 
which  means  '  outward  form  as  opposed  to  inward 
substance.'  fiofxfHoffis  occupies  an  intermediate 
position  between  these  Avords;  the  Apostle  hesi- 
tates to  use  <rx^Ma,  yet  he  will  not  use  nofxpr/.  The 
term  happily  expresses  his  meaning  in  Ro  2'-* — the 
Law,  so  far  as  it  went,  was  an  expression,  one 
might  even  say  an  embodiment,  of  Divine  truth. 
It  did  not  go  far  enough  to  be  called  /top^,  yet  it 
was  more  than  mere  outward  fashion  {ffxvf"^)- 
There  is  not  the  same  note  of  disparagement  about 
the  word  here  as  in  2  Ti  3* ;  it  is  rather  one  of  in- 
completeness. 

We  may  turn  now  to  the  Avell-known  use  of  the 
word  fiofxpri  itself  in  Ph  2**-,  where  Christ  is  said  to 
have  been  in  the  form  of  God  and  to  have  taken 
the  form  of  a  slave.  The  first  thing  to  bear  in 
mind  is  that  St.  Paul  used  the  common  speech  of 
liis  day,  and  this  word,  like  many  others,  had 
wandered  far  from  the  accurate  metaphysical  sense 
in  which  it  was  used  by  Plato  and  Aristotle.  The 
lengthy  and  thorough  discussions  of  the  word  and 
its  relation  to  oixrla,  tpvais,  elSos,  and  similar  terms 
by  Lightfoot  {Philippians*,  1878,  p.  127  tt'.)  and  E. 
H.  Gilford  (The  Incarnation,  1897,  p.  22  fi.)  remain 
as  examples  of  fine  scholarship,  out  it  is  now 
generally  recognized  that  St.  Paul  uses  iiofxpv  here 


U 


416 


FORMALISM 


FORMALISM 


in  an  easy,  popular  sense,  much  as  we  use  the  word 
'nature.'  Several  passages  in  the  LXX  (c.^.  Job 
4'«,  Dn  5«,  Wis  18^-^  4  Mac  15*)  witness  to  the 
same  tendency — iJ.op(j>i]  is  the  ap))earance  or  look  of 
some  one,  that  by  which  onlookers  judge.  But, 
while  St.  Paul  avoids  metaphysical  speculations 
on  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  tlie  Father,  he  implies 
here,  as  elsewhere,  that  Christ  has,  as  it  were,  the 
same  kind  of  existence  as  God.  The  closest 
parallels  are  dK^v  rov  Oeov  (Col  P')  and  v\oij<tios  uv 
(2  Co  8"),  the  latter  passage  reminding  us  of  the 
great  antithesis  in  Ph  2*- ''  between  the  fiop(f>r)  OeoC 
and  the  /J.op<pr}  Sov\ov.  dovXos  stands  for  man  in 
opposition  to  God  and  must  not  be  pressed  literally. 
It  IS  worth  noting  that  St.  Paul  insists  on  Christ's 
direct  exchange  of  the  one  form  for  the  other,  in 
contrast  to  Gnostic  views  wliich  represented  Him 
as  passing  through  a  series  of  transformations. 
To  return  to  fiop^Tj,  which  here  denotes,  as  it  usu- 
ally does,  an  ade(]uate  and  accurate  expression  of 
the  underlying  being,  and  so  points  to  the  Divinity 
of  the  pre-existing  Christ,  one  may,  without  any 
detraction  from  this  honour,  point  out  that  St. 
Paul  always  regards  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of 
Christ  as  adding  something  to  it.  It  is  after  the 
return  to  glory  that  Christ  is  declared  the  Son  of 
God  '  with  power'  (Ro  P-  *),  and  becomes  Lord  (Ph 
2'*'").  It  only  remains  to  point  out  that  Christ's 
assumption  oi  the  '  form '  or  '  nature  '  of  a  servant 
does  not  imply  that  His  '  Ego,'  tlie  basis  of  His  per- 
sonality, was  changed.  (See  further  art.  Christ, 
Christology,  p.  193  f.) 

Before  leaving  this  word,  we  may  notice  the  use 
of  the  verb  fiopcpdu  in  a  beautifully  expressive  pas- 
sage. Gal  4^^,  where  tlie  Apostle  adopts  the  figure 
of  a  child-bearing  mother  ;  he  is  in  travail  for  tlie 
spiritual  birth  of  Christ  within  his  Galatian  friends, 
straining  every  power  to  shape  their  inner  man 
afresh  into  the  image  of  Christ.  The  use  of  the 
word  '  form '  in  Ro  9""  and  1  Ti  2^^  (in  each  case 
translating  irXdcro-w)  calls  for  no  remark. 

Two  other  passages  in  the  Epistles  demand  con- 
sideration. In  Ro  6"  St.  Paul  is  glad  that  the 
Romans  have  become  sincerely  obedient  '  to  tliat 
form  of  teaching'  to  which  they  were  delivered; 
and  in  2  Ti  V^  there  is  an  exhortation  to  '  hold  the 
form  (RV  'pattern')  of  sound  words  which  thou 
hast  heard  from  me.'  The  word  used  in  Rom. 
is  Tviros,  which  must  be  taken  in  its  usual  Pauline 
sense  of  '  pattern,'  '  standard.'  No  special  type  of 
doctrine  is  meant  (see  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Prolegomena 
to  Romans  and  Ephesians,  1895,  p.  32) ;  the  refer- 
ence is  to  a  course  of  simple  instruction,  like  that 
in  the  first  part  of  the  Didache  ('The  Two  Ways'), 
whicii  precedetl  baptism.  In  2  Tim.  we  have  the 
compound  vwordiruai.'s,  lit.  an  '  outline  sketch,'  and 
so  a  'pattern'  or  'examiJJe.'  It  is  the  emphatic 
word  in  the  sentence,  and  the  meaning  is  best 
brought  out  by  the  translation,  '  Hold  as  a  pattern 
of  healthy  teaching,  in  faith  and  love,  what  you 
heard  from  me.'  A.  J,  Grieve. 

FORMALISM. — As  thought  needs  language  and 
soul  needs  body,  so  the  spirit  of  religion  can  main- 
tain, manifest  and  propagate  itself,  can  relate 
itself  to  its  environment,  only  as  it  is  embodied  in 
external  form.  It  takes  intellectual  form  in 
doctrines  and  creeds ;  its  emotional  necessities 
create  forms  of  worship  ;  its  social  instincts  express 
themselves  in  ecclesiastical  organization  and  sacra- 
mental i-ites,  in  all  its  instruments  and  symbols 
of  corporate  action.  Hence  arises  inevitably  the 
danger  of  formalism :  the  '  form  of  godliness ' 
(2  Ti  3")  may  persist  after  the  power  which  origin- 
ally created  it  has  evaporated,  and  it  may  be  in- 
herited or  adopted  by  those  who  have  never  had 
experience  of  the  inward  reality.  Formalism  in 
this  proper  sense  of  the  word  is  to  be  distinguished 


from  hypocrisy  (the  consciously  fraudulent  assump- 
tion of  the  externals  of  religion),  and  other  varieties 
of  unreality  in  religion.  The  typical  formalist  is 
the  angel  of  the  church  in  Sartlis,  of  whom  it  is 
written  :  '  Thou  hast  a  name  that  thou  livest,  and 
thou  art  dead'  (Rev  3^).  Unlike  his  Laodicean 
neighbour,  who  is  '  neither  cold  nor  hot,'  he  sets  a 
high  value  upon  the  Christian  name,  and  firmly 
believes  that  to  do  so  is  to  be  earnestly  Cliristian. 
He  mistakes  ze<alous  performance  of  acts  of  worship 
for  real  devotion,  and  punctilious  orthodoxy  for 
living  conviction.  He  sincerely  respects  the  badges 
and  expressions  of  spiritual  life,  believes  them  to 
be  necessary  and  eflectual  unto  salvation,  while  he 
is  ignorant  of,  and  without  desire  for,  the  reality 
which  they  express.  He  is  a  '  well  without  water' 
(2  P  2"). 

In  the  apostolic  writings  formalism  of  various 
kinds  is  detected  and  rebuked. 

1.  The  substitution  of  religious  observances  for 
religious  reality. — (a)  Such  observances  may  be 
sacramental,  belonging  to  the  prescribed  ritual  ; 
and  to  these  the  danger  of  formalism  always 
attaches  in  a  high  degree,  the  performance  of  tlic 
ritual  act  being  always  regarded  by  the  unspiritual 
man  as  setting  him  in  a  right  relation  to  God. 
Thus  St.  Paul  accuses  the  Jews  of  formalism  witli 
regard  to  circumcision  (Ro  2'^'^),  admonishing 
them  that  '  he  is  not  a  Jew  who  is  one  outwardly 
.  .  .  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the 
spirit,  not  in  the  letter.'  Otherwise  it  is  become 
'  uncircumcision,'  a  falsehood  against  which  the 
virtue  of  the  unprivileged  Gentile  will  rise  up  in 
judgment.  In  St.  Paul's  controversy  with  the 
Judaizers,  the  issue  was  between  a  legal  and  a 
spiritual  conception  of  religion  rather  than  Ijetween 
formalism  and  reality.  Yet  the  latter  element 
also  was  involved,  and  is  emphasized  by  his  re- 
peatedly contrasting  both  circumcision  and  un- 
circumcision with  the  inward  essence  and  ethical 
manifestation  of  Christianity — '  a  new  creature  ' 
(Gal  6^*),  'faith  that  worketh  bvlove'  (5"),  'kee]>- 
ing  the  commandments  of  God  (1  Co  7'®).  Here 
with  deep  insight  St.  Paul  places  '  uncircumcision 
on  the  same  footing  with  'circumcision.'  If  thi' 
advocates  of  freedom  supposed  that  there  was  any 
virtue  in  uncircumcision  per  se,  they  were  only  sub- 
stituting one  fetish  for  another.  As  there  arc 
persons  who  make  a  convention  of  unconventional- 
ity,  so  in  religion  repudiation  of  form  maj'  become 
only  a  difi'erent  species  of  formalism. 

(o)  Not  only  ritual  or  sacramental  acts,  but  all 
observances  which  are  labelled  'religious,'  even 
those  which  are  most  directly  designed  for  instruc- 
tion and  edification,  are  exposed  to  the  same 
danger.  Having  exhorted  his  readers  to  '  receive 
with  meekness  the  implanted  word,'  St.  James 
(121-25)  hastens  to  preclude  the  notion  that  such 
'  hearing,'  as  a  mere  opus  opcratum,  has  any  re- 
ligious value.  Without  '  doing '  it  is  no  less  barren 
of  good  result  than  a  cursory  glance  at  one's  own 
image  in  a  mirror  (cf.  Ro  2'*).  Closely  akin  to 
tins  formalism  of  'hearing' is  that  Avhich  substi- 
tutes fluent  religious  talk  for  religious  conduct 
(Ja  pfi-").  The  pure  undeliled  OpttaKcia,  the  true 
Christian  cultvs,  is  to  '  visit  the  widows  and  the 
fatherless  in  their  affliction,  and  to  keep  oneself 
unspotted  from  the  world.' 

2.  The  formalism  of  intellectual  orthodoxy.— 
The  classical  passage  is  Ja  2'''-^.  Si'Tiifying  by 
'  faith  '  not  the  vital  spiritual  act,  but  tlie  orthodox 
confession  whicli  is  its  proper  '  form,'  the  writer 
vigorously  declares  that  such  faith,  'if  it  have  not 
works,' is  dead  in  itself  (v."*),  a  liodv  uninliabited 
by  the  quickening  sjiirit  (v.-*).  St.  Paul  advances 
even  beyond  this  position  when  (1  Co  13-)  he  asserts 
that  one  may  have  'all  faith,  so  as  to  remove 
mountains,'  yet  if  it  be  'witliout  charity,  he  is 


FORNICATION 


FORNICATION 


417 


nothing.'  The  First  Epistle  of  St.  John  is  occupied 
with  the  exposure  of  intellectual  formalisni  (for 
though  the  Gnostic  tenets,  against  which  it  is 
directed,  are  regarded  as  the  rankest  heterodoxy, 
the  principle  is  the  same).  To  imagine  that  we 
'know  God,'  while  not  keeping  His  commandments 
(2*-*),  or  that  we  are  '  in  the  light,'  while  hating 
our  brother  (2") ;  to  credit  ourselves  with  '  knowing 
Christ'  in  whom  is  no  sin,  while  continuing  in  the 
practice  of  sin  (S*),  is  to  stand  convicted  of  being  a 
'  liar.'  Only  he  who  loves  can  know  God,  who  is 
Love  (48). 

3.  Formalism  within  the  ethical  domain. — 
While  religious  observances  and  credal  orthodoxy 
are  always  to  be  submitted  to  the  test  of  ethics,  the 
last  hiding-place  of  formalism  is  within  the  ethical 
domain  itself.  There  is  the  formalism  to  which 
the  possession  of  a  high  moral  ideal  stands  for  high 
morality.  This  is  scathingly  rebuked  by  St.  Paul 
in  Ro  2i'-".  The  typical  Jew  gloried  in  the  lofty 
moral  standards  of  nis  race, '  resting  upon  the  law,' 
'  approving  the  things  that  are  excellent ' ;  but  ac- 
cording to  the  Apostle's  indictment  he  too  often 
regarded  an  enlightened  sense  of  duty  as  the  goal 
rather  than  as  the  starting-point  of  moral  life.  It 
is  a  still  subtler  formalism  when  the  ethical  impulse 
exhausts  itself  in  lofty  and  generous  sentiment,  or 
in  clothing  such  emotion  with  appropriate  verbiage 
(Ja  2^'-^®).  This  possibility  is  suggested,  with  a 
touch  of  delicate  irony,  in  1  Jn  3^^^*,  where  the  law 
of  self-sacrificing  brotherhood  is  first  stated  in  its 
highest  terms — '  We  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives 
for  the  brethren,'  and  then,  lest  any  one  should 
mistake  the  emotion  awakened  by  such  magnificent 
expressions  of  duty  for  the  discharge  of  duty  itself, 
the  issue  is  brought  down  to  the  pedestrian  level 
of  the  everyday  use  of  '  the  world's  goods '  for  the 
relief  of  the  need  that  is  before  one's  eyes.  Here, 
again,  St.  Paul  is  still  bolder  (1  Co  13^),  pointing 
out  that  conduct  may  fill  out  to  the  utmost  the 
'  form'  of  self-sacrifice  ('If  I  give  all  my  goods  to 
feed  the  poor,  and  if  I  give  my  body  to  be  burned '), 
and  yet  lack  the  inward  reality.  Ethical  reality 
is  attested  not  by  the  sensational  exploit,  but  by 
that  'walking  in  love'  which  is  so  inimitably 
described  in  the  following  verses. 

LiTKRATUBK.— A.  Whyte,  Bunyan  Charaeten,  i.  [1895]  132, 
271,  Bible  Charaeten:  'Chir  Lord's  Characters,'  1902,  pp.  150, 
284 ;  Stopford  A.  Brooke,  The  Finht  of  Faith,  1877,  p.  51 ; 
John  Foster,  Lectures^,  1853,  i.  131  ff. ;  J.  H.  Newman, 
Parochial  and  Plain  Sermons,  new  ed.,  Is68,  L  21,  124,  iv.  66  ; 
A.  Madaren,  Christ  in  the  Heart,  1&S6,  p.  226 ;  J.  B.  Mayor, 
The  Epistle  of  St.  JaiMi^,  1910;  Robert  Law,  TesU  of  Life, 
1909,  pp.  208  ft.,  231  ft.,  279  fit.  ROBERT  LAW. 

FORNICATION  {vopvela,  and  cognates).  —  1. 
Heaning  of  term. — (1)  vopveia  is  used  sometimes  in 
the  strict  sense  of  '  prostitution '  or  '  fornication'  (1 
Co  6^^).  It  is  thus  difterent  tioTtxpioixela,  or  'adul- 
tery '  (He  13^  [cf.  Mk  7-^]  Didache,  2  f.).  This  strict 
sense,  however,  can  be  retained  with  certainty 
only  when  the  two  words  occur  side  by  side.  In 
the  pagan  world,  while  notxeia  was  regarded  as 
sinful  on  a  woman's  part  mainly  on  the  ground 
that  it  infringed  the  husband's  rights,  fornication 
or  sexual  intercourse  outside  the  marriage  bond  or 
even  by  husbands  was  allowable.  St.  Paul  (1  Th 
43ff.)  demands  chastity  from  married  men.  The 
wife  (interpreting  ffKevos  as  'wife'  [see  Milligan's 
Thess.y  London,  1908,  for  opposite  view])  is  to  be 
had  in  holiness  and  honour.  Christian  morality 
is  contrasted  with  pagan  in  this  respect.  Illicit 
sexual  intercourse  with  a  married  woman  is  not 
only  an  infringement  of  the  husband's  rights,  but 
violence  done  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  Christianity 
regards  fornication  and  adultery  alike  as  sinful, 
Cato  looked  on  fornication  as  a  preventive  against 
libidinous  intrigues  with  married  women  (Horace, 
Sat.  i.  2).  Cicero  says  it  was  always  practised 
VOL.  I. — 27 


and  allowed  {pro  Ccelio,  xx).  It  was  defended  not 
only  as  customary  but  as  a  necessity  of  nature. 
Alexander  Severus  furnished  governors  with  con- 
cubines. The  Cynic  and  early  Stoic  philosophers 
excused  it  on  the  ground  that  '  naturalia  non  sunt 
tnrpia.'  This  St.  Paul  combats  (1  Co  6^^).  It 
is  not  a  natural  thing  like  food ;  for,  while  the 
nutritive  system  of  man  belongs  to  the  perishing 
schema  of  this  world,  the  body  is  the  organ  of  the 
spirit  and  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  bought  by 
Christ  for  His  own  service.  To  unite  it  to  a 
harlot  is  an  act  of  sacrilege,  of  self  -  violation, 
and  it  breaks  the  union  between  Christ  and  the 
believer. 

How  different  this  is  from  the  lame  censure  of 
Epictetus  (Enchir.  33)  and  the  practice  of  Marcus 
Aurelius,  who  had  his  concubine  (see  Lecky,  Histonf 
of  European  Morale,  London,  1888,  ii.  314  fi".). 

(2)  ropveia  is  used  also  in  a  generic  sense,  fioixein 
being  specific.  In  Pauline  terminology  /xotxei^w  ia 
found  in  quotations  from  the  LXX  (seventh  com- 
mandment), while  vopveia  is  used  for  immorality  in 
general  (cf.  Theophylact  on  Ro  !*•:  vSuraif  dxXws 
rrjv  iKa0ap<xiap  t<^  rrjs  ropveias  6v6ftari  TepteXa/3ei'). 
This  is  probably  the  meaning  in  Ac  lo'-^,  though 
some  interpret  it  of  marriage  within  the  prohibited 
degrees  (Lv  18-^).  The  Jews  allowed  proselytes 
to  marry  even  with  their  nearest  relatives,  and, 
according  to  John  Lightfoot  (Hor.  Heb.,  new.  ed., 
Oxford,  1859,  iv.  132),  the  case  of  incest  in  Corinth 
(1  Co  5"-),  where  a  Christian  had  married  his 
father's  wife,  while  the  father  was  possibly  stiU 
alive,  arose  out  of  this  custom.  Tins  is  highly 
doubtful.  In  Ac  15^  ®  iropvda  is  used  in  the 
general  sense  of  immorality.  We  are  not  con- 
cerned in  this  article  with  the  vexed  question  of 
what  constituted  fornication  in  the  case  of  re-mar- 
riage after  divorce.  Our  Lord's  teaching  on  this 
point  is  doubtful,  owing  to  the  absence  of  the 
qualifying  expression  in  Mark,  although  the  exist- 
ence of  the  qualification  in  Matthew  indicates 
that  in  the  early  Church  re-marriage  was  allowed 
to  the  guiltless  party.  Whether,  again,  marriage 
within  the  prohibited  degrees  constituted  vopweia. 
is  not  discussed  in  the  NT. 

But  from  the  richness  of  the  phraseology  for 
sensual  sins  we  can  gather  how  wide-spread  and 
multiform  this  evil  was.  We  find  uncleanness 
(aKadapffia.),  licentiousness  (d<reX7«a)  often  side  by 
side  with  vopvda  (2  Co  12^1,  Gal  5",  Eph  4^*).  So 
often  is  x\eov€^ia  found  alongside  -ropveia  that 
many  are  inclined  to  regard  the  former  as  itself  a 
form  of  sensuality.  But  it  is  best  to  regard  both 
as  characteristic  sins  of  heathendom.  Others  as- 
sociate them  psychologically,  sa3dng  that  forget- 
fulness  of  God  compels  the  creature  to  either  one 
or  other  (Bengel  and  Trench).  The  NT  seems  to 
have  a  genetic  account  of  this  sin  (fornication)  in 
more  than  one  place.  Our  Lord  (Mk  7)  deduces  it 
from  evil  thoughts ;  St.  Paul  from  the  desire  of 
evil  things  (1  Co  l&),  from  the  lusts  of  the  flesh 
(Gal  5"),  and  from  dSiKia  (1  Co  6^^),  The  lists  of 
vices,  however,  are  not  arranged  in  groups  follow- 
ing a  psychologic€il  order.  They  have  their  coun- 
terparts in  pagan  literatnre  (see  Dobschiitz,  Chris- 
tian Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  p.  406  tf.  ;  and 
Deissmann,  Licht  vcm  Osten^,  Tubingen,  1909,  pw 
238  f.).  They  vary  in  difierent  places.  The  con- 
nexion between  drunkenness  and  vice  is  also  re- 
cognized (Eph  5^* ;  cf.  Te^it.  Jud,  xvi,  1).  Group- 
ings of  vices  and  virtues  early  arose,  arranged  rn 
connected  lists  for  catechetical  and  homUetic  pur- 
poses, but  the  order  is  variable  (cf.  Hermas,  Vis. 
3).  There  was  no  public  opinion  in  paganism  to 
suppress  fornication.  Hetairai  moved  about  the 
streets  freely,  and  often  played  a  large  r61e  in 
public  affairs.  One  thinks  of  Phryne  and  others. 
Religious  associations  sanctioned  vice.   The  temples 


418 


FORNICATION 


FOUNDATION 


hnd  their  courtesans  (iep6dov\oi ;  see  Ramsay,  Cities 
and  Bishoprics  of  Phrygia,  i.  [Oxford,  1895],  94  f.). 
The  cult  of  Aphrodite  Pandemos  at  Corinth  may 
be  mentioned,  as  well  as  smaller  cults  like  that  of 
the  Cabiri  at  Thessalonica  and  the  Chaldiean 
Sybil  at  Thyatira.  Trade-gilds  (ipyaaiai),  which 
were  numerous,  afforded  means  of  corruption. 
Almost  everywliere  the  air  was  tainted,  so  tiiat 
to  have  no  intercourse  with  fornicators  was  like 
going  out  of  the  world.  Christianity  never  formed 
itself  into  a  ghetto,  and  so  the  danger  of  moral 
pollution  was  always  present.  The  very  fact  that 
the  pagan  gods  were  represented  as  prone  to  sen- 
suality had  a  degrading  influence  on  ordinary 
morality,  iiowever  much  the  stories  of  the  gods 
may  have  been  ridiculed  or  allegorized  in  en- 
lightened coteries.  '  If  a  god  does  so,  why  should 
not  I  a  man  ? '  (Terence,  Eunuch,  ill.  v.  42). 
Ancient  custom,  the  callosity  of  public  feeling,  the 
€ontaminiition  of  commerce  and  religion,  the  sanc- 
tions of  libertine  enlightenment — all  these  had  to  be 
combateil  and  overcome  in  the  interests  of  purity. 

(3)  TTopveia  is  sometimes  used  also  to  indicate 
apostasy  from  God — so  often  in  Revelation.  This 
meaning  lies  very  near  the  surface  whenever  the 
word  occurs  in  conjunction  with  idol-worship  or 
meats  offered  to  idols.  In  the  Apostolic  Decree 
this  thought  is  latent.  To  buy  meat  in  the  open 
market  was  dangerous— forbidden  in  Ac  IS-"*,  Kev 
2'''-2«>,  though  by  St.  Paul  it  was  allowed.  He 
bases  the  right  on  the  law  of  expediency,  but  he 
recommends  regard  for  the  weak  brother's  con- 
science (1  Co  8^-»»  10'8,  Ro  14'^"'-).  The  Greek 
Church  still  regards  this  law  of  meats  as  binding, 
though  tlie  Western  Church  followed  St.  Paul 
from  early  times.  But  everywhere  fornication  is 
prohibited.  At  Thyatira,  as  at  Corinth,  some  de- 
fended fornication  on  Gnostic  grounds,  as  Jezebel ; 
but  not  only  fornication  but  idol-meats  also  are 
prohibited  by  the  seer.  The  Christians  had  to 
break  away  from  their  trade-gilds  to  avoid  con- 
tamination ;  and  this  involved  serious  sacrifice. 
The  example  of  Israel  tempted  by  Moabitish 
women  to  apostasy  and  lust  at  Balaam's  instiga- 
tion was  a  warning  (Rev  2",  1  Co  10).  See  art. 
NicoLAlTANS.  It  is  probable  that  we  can  under- 
stand the  conjunction  of  fornication  and  idol-meats 
in  Rev  2'^-"  and  1  Cor.  only  on  the  early  Christian 
view  of  demonic  influence  acting  through  food  and 
thus  teni}tting  to  lust  (see  B.  \V.  Bacon  in  Exposi- 
tor, 8th  ser.  vii.  [1914]  40  ff.). 

2.  Attitude  of  Christianity  towards  fornication. 
— Christianity  opposed  fornication  in  every  form, 
not  only  overt  acts  but  even  lustful  thoughts. 
There  were  tilings  that  should  not  even  be  named 
among  Christians.  It  saw  in  marriage  a  preven- 
tive against  fornication  ;  St.  Paul,  though  desir- 
ing the  unmarried  to  remain  as  they  were,  yet, 
rather  than  run  the  risk  of  incontinence  or  the 
fire  of  lust,  allowed  them  to  marry.  So  strong 
was  the  reaction  against  impurity  that  St.  John 
regards  the  chaste  unmarried  {irapdivoi)  as  a  select 
group  (Rev  14'').  Fornication  is  a  sin  against  the 
body  ;  it  is  a  defilement  of  (Jod's  temple  ;  it  is  a 
violation  of  the  self  in  a  special  sense ;  for  it  the 
wrath  of  God  comes  on  men,  ami  God's  judgment 
awaits  it.  The  very  beginning  of  sanctification  is 
incompatible  with  fornication.  St.  Paul  condenses 
into  one  sentence  the  Christian  attitude :  '  Flee 
from  fornication '  (1  Co  6^'^).  It  is  directly  opposed 
to  God's  righteousness,  and  St.  John  brands  forni- 
cators with  the  opprobrious  terms  Kvvei,*  'dogs,' 
'defiled'  (Rev  17*  18^  etc.).  These  cannot  enter 
tlie  city  of  God.  St.  Paul's  dealing  with  the  Cor- 
inthian case  indicates  that  fornication  excludes 
from  church  fellowship. 

*  Perhaps  he  has  in  mind  sodomy  (irai.io<t>9opia  or  pnderasty 
of  Ro  127,  1  Ti  110, 1  Co  9»,  Didache,  2  f.). 


LiTBRATL'RB. — See  Commentaries  on  relevant  passages;  W. 
M.  Ramsay,  Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches,  London,  1904 ;  E. 
V.  Dobschiitz,  Christian  Li/e  in  the  Primitive  Church,  Enjj 
tr.,  do.  1004  ;  J.  G.  W.  Uhlhorn,  The  Condiet  of  Christiamty, 
Eng.  tr.,  New  York,  1879;  O.  Zdckler,  Askeseund  ilOnchtum^, 
Frankfurt  am  M.,  1897;  and  for  literature  on  A{>08tolic  Age 
(fenerally  see  Dobschiitz,  p.  380. 

Donald  Mackenzie, 

FORTUNATUS.— Fortunatus  was  one  of  three 
deputies  from  the  Church  in  Corintli  who  visited 
St.  Paul  in  Ephesus,  perhaps  bearing  letters,  and 
to  whom  he  refers  in  1  Co  16"*  ^^  Nothing  more 
is  known  of  him.  It  seems  unlikely  tliat  ail  the 
deputies  would  belong  to  one  housenold,  as  Weiz- 
siicker  (Apostol.  Age,  Eng.  tr.,  i.*[1897]  305)  sug- 
gests, or  that  all  were  .slaves  (so  T.  C.  Edwards, 
ad  loc. ).  Clement  refers  to  a  Fortunatus  (in  Ep.  ad 
Cor.  §  65)  as  accompanying  his  mes-sengers  from 
Rome  to  Corinth,  but  distinguislies  him  from  them  ; 
the  name,  however,  is  too  common  for  identification 
(see  AcHAicus  and  Stephanas). 

FOUNDATION.— In  the  NT,  ''foundation'  re- 
presents two  different  Greek  words  :  (a)  /cara/3o\^ 
(active,  except  in  He  IP',  and  always  in  the  niirase 
Kara^oXi]  KOff/x-ov) ;  (b)  de/j.d\ios,  -ov  (pass.),  with  both 
a  literal  and  a  figurative  meaning  (HDB,  art. 
'Foundation').  Cheyne  (ii'jyi,  art.  'Foundations,' 
1558)  says ' "corner-stone"  and  "foundation-stone" 
are  synonymous  terms  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.' 
The  metapliorical  sense  of  the  word  chiefiy  has 
religious  importance  for  students  of  the  Nl,  and 
will  be  noted  as  it  occurs  in  the  apostolic  writings. 
The  figurative  use  of  defi^Xios  goes  back  to  our 
Lord's  Parable  of  the  Wise  Builder — 8s  l<rKa\pe  Kal 
i^ddvpe,  Kai  (dr)Ke  dei^AXiov  iirl  rrjv  irirpav — '  wiio 
digged  and  Avent  deep  and  laid  a  foundation  upon 
therock'(Lk6«). 

The  significance  of  the  word  in  the  Epistles  will 
be  found  in  an  exegesis  of  the  passages,  viz.  :  (1) 
in  Ro  15-"  St.  Paul  expresses  his  determination  not 
to  build  upon  another  man's  foundation  :  IVa  /htj  iv 
aWoTpiov  dejxiXiov  oiKodofiCb.  He  covets  tlie  work  of 
a  pioneer  on  new  ground,  for  in  the  wide  field  of 
evangelization  {evayyeXif^ecdaL),  with  so  much  to 
do  and  so  little  done,  all  narrow  jealousies  are 
senseless  and  to  be  avoided.  He  is  not  desirous  to 
preach  in  occupied  fields  ;  his  ambition  is  to  spread 
the  gospel  and  not  to  make  it  the  subject  of  rivalrj'. 
The  rivalries  of  the  Christian  Church  in  heathen 
lands,  while  whole  tracts  are  lying  unevangelized, 
are  a  sad  sight. 

(2)  To  the  Church  of  Christian  Corinth,  St.  Paul 
writes  :  (is  ffo<p6s  apxt-riKToiv  deiUXiov  fdrjKa,  '  as  a 
wise  master-builder,  I  laid  a  foundation'  (1  Co  3'*), 
and  again  :  ^e/xeXtof  yap  &XXov  ovSeU  SOvarai  Oeivat 
Tapa  rbv  KeLfifvov,  cis  ^<tti.v  'IvjeroCs  Xpt<rr6s,  '  for  otlier 
foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  tliat  wliicli  is  laid, 
which  is  Jesus  Clirist'  (1  Co  3'i  RV).  J.  E. 
McFadyen  {The  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  London, 
1911,  p.  50)  translates  the  phrase  'alongside  of 
(Trapd  with  ace.)  the  one  laid'  and  comments: 
'  Jesus  is  the  foundation :  the  church  is  founded 
upon  a  Person,  not  upon  a  system  of  truths  .  .  . 
so  that  this  name  is  a  confession, — the  earliest, 
simplest,  profoundest  of  the  church.'  So  F.  W. 
Robertson  {Expos.  Lectures  on  St  Paul's  Epp.  to 
the  Corinthians,  London,  1873,  pp.  48,  49):  'Chris- 
tianity is  Christ.  .  .  .  Christianity  is  a  Life,  a 
Spirit' — '"That  I  may  know  Him,  and  the 
power  of  His  resurrection,  and  the  fellowshij)  of 
His  sufferings,  being  made  conformable  unto  His 
death".'  Thus  St.  Paul  lays  down  once  for  all 
'  tlie  absolute  religious  significance  of  Jesus,  in  all 
the  relations  of  God  and  man '  (J.  Denney,  Jesus 
and  the  Gospel,  London,  1908,  p.  23).  Denney  (p. 
380  ff.),  in  the  interests  of  faith  and  Christian  unity, 

t leads  for  such  a  simplification  of  creeds  as  will 
ind   men   to   Christ    in    the  light   of   St.    Pauls 


FOUNDATION 


FOUNDATION 


419 


declaration  that  the  building  is  related  to  the 
foundation-stone  alone,  and  not  to  anything  laid 
alongside :  '  We  remain  loyal  to  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  only  because  He  has  apprehended  us,  and 
His  hand  is  strong'  (p.  411). 

(3)  In  Eph  2-""  St.  Paul  describes  believers  as 
4roiKoSonT)6^vTfs  ^rl  ry  defifXUfi  tQv  aico<rr6\wv  koX 
TfKxp-nriliv,  '  Being  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the 
apostles  and  prophets.'  The  latter  are  of  course 
^T  teachers  and  exhorters  (the  omission  of  the 
Article  before  prophets  indicates  members  of  the 
same  class).  They  had  a  special  message  and 
function  to  the  Church  already  gathered  out  of 
paganism,  in  contrast  to  the  missionary  and 
pioneer  work  of  the  apostles. 

Considerable  variety  of  opinion  has  been  ex- 
pressed as  to  the  meaning  of  '  the  foundation  of 
the  apostles  and  prophets.'  A  careful  summary  is 
given  J>ySalmond(£(;r,  'Ephes.,'  1903,  p.  299)  of 
the  possible  interpretations  of  the  article  :  (a)  gen. 
of  apposition  =the  foundation  which  consists  of 
apostles  and  prophets  ;  (6)  gen.  of  originating  cause 
=  the  foundation  laid  by  them;  (c)  gen.  oi posses- 
sion =  the  apostles'  foundation  on  which  they  them- 
selves were  built.  Ellicott  (Ephesian^,  1864,  in 
loc.)  favours  (a),  so  that  St.  Paul  by  a  change  of 
metaphor  (1  Co  3")  presents  the  apostles  and  pro- 
phets as  themselves  the  foundation,  and  Christ  as 
the  comer-stone  '  binding  together  both  the  walls 
and  the  foundations.'  But  the  consensus  of  inter- 
pretations tends  to  (6),  the  gospel  of  the  apostles 
and  prophets  {HDB,  ii.),  the  doctrines  which  they 
preached  (H.  C.  G.  Moule,  Cambridge  Bible,  1886, 
%n  loc.,  also  Appendix  F,  168  f.).  G,  G.  Findlay 
{Expositor's  Bible,  '  Ephes.,'  1892,  p.  152)  combines 
(a)  and  (6) — 'These  men  have  laid  the  foundation 
— Peter  and  Paul,  John  and  James,  Barnabas  and 
Silas,  and  the  rest.  They  are  our  spiritual  pro- 
genitors, the  fathers  of  our  faith.  We  see  Jesus 
Christ  through  their  eyes ;  we  read  His  teaching, 
and  catch  His  Spirit  in  their  words.  .  .  .  Nor  was 
it  their  word  alone,  but  the  men  themselves — their 
character,  their  life  and  work — laid  for  the  Church 
its  historical  foundation.  This  "  glorious  company 
of  the  apostles  "  formed  the  first  course  in  the  new 
building.  .  .  .  They  have  fixed  the  standard  of 
C^hristian  doctrine  and  the  type  of  Christian  char- 
acter.' In  a  lesser  degree  this  is  true  of  aU  re- 
ligious founders  and  teachers.  For  generations 
the  churches  bear  the  impress  of  the  men  who 
gave  them  their  beginning. 

(4)  The  figure  of  '  the  foimdation '  is  used  in  an 
•unusual  form  (condensed  metaphor)  in  1  Ti  6'^ : 
drod-rjcavpii'ovTas  eavrois  df/JLeXiov  KaXby  els  t6  fj-eWov, 
'  laying  up  in  store  for  themselves  a  good  founda- 
tion against  the  time  to  come '  (cf.  Sir  P'  :  /cai  fiera 
tLvOpdnriov  Oefji^Xiov  alQyos  ivocaevee,  '  and  with  men 
she  [Wisdom]  built  a  foimdation  of  everlasting- 
ness ').  The  somewhat  involved  metaphor  is  per- 
haps due  to  a  reminiscence  of  our  Lord's  Parable 
(Lk  16"),  but  specially  of  Mt  6"  where  the  verb  is 
the  same  and  also  the  duty  enjoined  :  dyjcavpL^eTe 
3^  vfxlv  driffavpovs  iv  ovpavt^,  '  lay  up  for  yourselves 
treasures  in  heaven.'  Bengel  (Gnom.,  in  loc.) 
with  a  happy  illustration  gives  the  sense  '  Mercator 
naufragio  salvus,  thesauros  domum  praemissos 
invenit.'  Chejme  {loc.  cit.)  favours  the  emenda- 
tion KeLfxriXiov,  '  gift '  or  '  valued  memorial,'  which 
straightens  out  the  metaphor  but  at  the  expense 
of  the  text.  If  there  were  any  authority  for  the 
reading,  one  might  agree  that  this  '  must  surely 
be  right.' 

(5)  In  2  Ti  2^  6  /leyroi  ffreptin  0€fti\toi  rov  0em) 
icmiKfv,  '  Howbeit  the  firm  foundation  of  God 
standeth'  (RV),  the  Church  itself  is  described  as 
the  foundation  of  a  still  greater  building — 'the  holy 
temple  in  the  Lord  in  whom  ye  also  are  builded 
together  for  a  habitation  of  God  in  the  Spirit' 


(Eph  2-'-*').  'The  term  "foundation,"  here  used 
for  the  Church  of  God  on  earth,  is  remarkable,  and 
points  to  a  great  truth  :  that,  after  all,  this  life  is 
but  a  beginning,  and  that  "His  Church"  here  is 
but  a  foundation — is  only  the  first  and  early  storey 
of  that  glorious  Church  the  Divine  Architect  has 

ftlanned,  and  will  complete  in  heaven'  (Ellicott,  in 
oc;  cf.  also  He  11^°).  This  'foundation,'  in  re- 
miniscence of  ancient  custom  as  to  foundation- 
stones,  bears  a  two-fold  inscription,  e.xpressing 
both  its  origin  and  purpose :  '  The  Lord  knoweth 
them  that  are  his'  ('the  Lord  will  show  who  are 
his,  and  who  is  holy'  [Nu  16'])  and  'let  every 
one  that  nameth  the  name  of  the  Lord  depart  from 
unrighteousness. ' 

(6)  In  He  6*  there  occurs  the  warning  /uij  xiXtv 
defjL(\ioy  Kara^aWo/xevoi,  'not  laying  again  (and 
again)  a  foundation.'  The  meaning  Ls  apparent 
from  the  opening  words  of  the  chapter  :  '  wherefore 
let  us  cease  to  speak  of  the  first  principles  of  Christ, 
and  press  on  unto  perfection  (fall  growth).'  '  Let 
us  be  borne  on  to  perfection '  in  '  personal  surrender 
to  an  active  influence'  (Westcott,  Hebrews,  1892, 
p.  143).  The  subject  is  the  duty  of  progress,  and 
the  contrast  is  between  the  elementary  (x^ios  [5^^]) 
and  the  full  grown  (rAetoj)  in  the  Christian  life. 
The  difterent  elements  that  constitute  the  founda- 
tion, which  is  not  to  be  laid  again,  are  three,  taken 
in  pairs :  (i)  personal  attitudes  of  heart  and  mind  : 
repentance  from  dead  works  and  faith  toward  God ; 
(ii)  church  ordinances :  baptism  and  laying  on  of 
hands  ;  (iii)  leading  beliefs  :  resurrection  and  judg- 
ment. These  are  to  be  accepted  once  for  all — they 
are  the  foundation.  In  the  subjects  alluded  to  as 
foundation  facts  there  is  perhaps  a  reference  to 
some  well-known  formula  for  the  instruction  of  the 
catechumen ;  perhaps  the  allusion  is  to  the  usual 
evangelistic  presentation  of  the  gospel.  '  The  phrase 
implies  that  certain  things  have  been  done  and 
certain  teaching  has  been  given  to  the  readers  at 
the  outset  of  their  Christian  life  as  a  basis  on  which 
more  advanced  teaching  may  be  buUt '  (A.  S.  Peake, 
'Hebrews'  in  Century  Bible,  1902,  p.  141).  But 
such  a  foundation  needs  to  be  laid  only  once,  and 
the  use  of  it  is  for  suljsequent  building  ;  therefore 
progress  not  only  in  knowledge,  but  towards  the 
full  maturity  of  Christian  character,  is  incumbent 
on  all  believers. 

He  6^  has,  it  may  be  fearetl,  been  but  a  counsel 
of  perfection  in  certain  church  circles,  while  '  to 
preach  the  gospel '  has  often  meant  a  formal  and 
dry  presentation  of  a  few  elementary  truths,  that 
by  wearisome  repetition  have  had  all  their  fresh- 
ness rubl>ed  away.  Yet  this  has  been  called  'dwell- 
ing on  fundamentals.'  But  we  do  not  dwell  on 
a  foundation ;  we  build  upon  it.  Many  modem 
evangelistic  eflbrts  split  upon  this  rock,  and  the 
falling  away  of  professed  converts  has  often  arisen 
from  the  refusal  of  them  or  their  spiritual  guides 
'  to  have  done  with  the  elementary  doctrines  and 
to  go  on  towards  full  growth.'  The  complaint  is 
sometimes  heard  that  the  first  fresh  and  joyful 
emotions  are  so  soon  lost ;  and  to  revive  and  re- 
cover these,  men  are  tempted,  or  invited,  to  go  back 
in  thought  and  desire  to  some  former  visitation  of 
the  Spirit.  But  the  remedy  is  not  back,  but  for- 
ward. We  cannot  recover  the  emotions  that  are 
behind,  but  we  can  have  other  emotions  and  more 
joyful  experiences  new-bom,  by  going  forward  to 
explore  more  deeply  the  great  thmgs  of  God.  There- 
fore the  Apostle  says:  let  us  surrender  ourselves  to 
the  influence  which  will  carry  us  on.  '  The  influ- 
ence and  the  surrender  are  continuous  {(pepwfj^da) 
and  not  concentrated  in  one  momentary  crisis' 
(Westcott,  op.  cit.  p.  143). 

LiTBRATUEE. — In  addition  to  the  works  cited  throughout  the 
article,  reference  mav  be  made  to  W.  N.  Clarke.  What  ghall 
tee  think  of  Christiahit]/ }  1S99,  pp.  56-105;  Phillips  Brooks, 


420 


FOUR 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 


The  Candle  of  the  Lord,  1892,  pp.  68,  69 ;  S.  A.  Cook,  The 
Foumlatiom  of  Religion,  in  The  People's  Books ;  J.  Alcorn,  The 
Sure  Foundation,  1893,  p.  3;  W.  E.  Chadwick,  Soc iai /ie^aeiort- 
ships  in  the  Light  ofChrixtianity,  1910,  p.  154. 

W.  M.  Grant. 
FOUR.— See  Numbers. 

FRANKINCENSE  (X/^Sapoy).— Frankincense,  M-liich 
is  mentioned  (Kev  18'^)  as  part  of  the  vast  merclian- 
dise  of  Imperial  Rome,  is  a  gum-resin  yielded  by 
certain  species  of  trees  of  the  genus  Boswdlia.  In 
ancient  times  the  most  famous  of  these  grew  in 
Hadramant,  S.  Arabia.  To  obtain  the  frankin- 
cense a  deep  incision  is  made  in  the  trunk  of  the 
tree,  and  below  the  incision  a  narrow  strip  of  bark 
is  peeled  oil".  As  the  Heb.  rtp)  (from  which  the 
Gr.  is  derived)  signifies,  the  resiii  exudes  as  a  milk- 
like juice  {spuma  pinguis,  Pliny,  xii.  14),  which 
in  about  three  months  attains  the  necessary  degree 
of  consistency.  Frankincense  was  sold  in  semi- 
opaque,  round,  or  ovate  tears  or  irregular  lumps, 
which  were  covered  with  a  white  dust  as  the  result 
of  their  friction  against  one  another.  It  was  valued 
for  its  sweet  odour  when  burned,  and  it  often  served 
for  illumination  in  place  of  oil  lamps.  As  it  was  one 
of  the  ingredients  of  incense,  great  quantities  of  it 
were  required  for  the  sacrificial  ritual.  As  a  per- 
fume it  was  used  for  the  care  of  the  body  and  for 
the  flavouring  of  wine.  It  was  also  in  high  repute 
as  a  medicine.  James  Stkahan. 

FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 1.  Introduction.— 

Properly  speaking,  the  phrase  '  the  freedom  of  the 
will '  is  a  misnomer.  As  Locke  pointed  out,  the 
question  is  not  whether  the  will  is  free,  but  whether 
man  is  free.  Either  the  will  is  in  the  same  psycho- 
logical category  as  the  desires,  in  which  case  it  is 
obviously  limited  by  a  man's  mental  universe  and 
his  powers  of  concentration,  or  it  is  identical  with 
the  man's  self.  It  is  quite  evident  that  a  man  is 
not  determined  always  by  external  force,  and  that 
neither  others  nor  he  himself  can  always  predict 
what  he  will  do.  But  this  alone  does  not  make 
him  free.  On  the  other  hand,  set  any  two  men 
among  the  same  alternatives,  and  their  attitude 
M'ill  be  different ;  in  each  case  it  Avill  be  conditioned 
by  education,  tastes,  habits,  range  of  perceptions — 
in  fact,  by  the  whole  previous  life,  by  all  that  goes 
to  make  up  what  we  call  character.  Yet  the 
consciousness  of  freedom  persists ;  we  feel  that 
between  given  alternatives  we  have  the  power  of 
efi'ective  choice.  Hence,  the  antinomy  has  often 
been  solved  by  the  word  '  self-determination ' ; 
but  this  only  moves  the  difficulty  further  back. 
What  of  the  self  which  determines  ?  Is  that  dis- 
tinct from  the  other  self  ?  If  so,  what  is  its  rela- 
tion to  environment  and  character?  And  if  not, 
how  can  anything  be  the  agent  of  its  own  deter- 
mination ? 

The  interest  of  the  question  is  great,  but  it  is 
speculative  or  else  merely  juristic  ;  that  is,  what- 
ever the  answer  may  be,  men  will  continue  to  form 
their  own  ends  and  pur.sue  them,  and  to  '  weight 
the  alternative'  in  trying  to  influence  the  conduct 
of  others.  It  is  not  determinism,  but  fatalism, 
which  has  any  power  to  influence  conduct,  and 
fatalism  is  something  entirely  diflerent.  The  only 
result  of  determinism  in  practical  life  is  in  the 
formation  of  judgments  with  regard  to  personal 
responsibility  and  the  infliction  of  punislnnent. 
Punishment  would  become,  what  it  is  indeed  at 
present  often  held  to  be,  non-retributive  ;  it  would 
be  only  disciplinary  and  deterrent.  But  this  too 
would  leave  a  man's  way  of  conducting  his  own  life 
untouched. 

The  theoretical  problem  is  hardly  noticed  in  the 
NT.  The  interest  of  the  NT  writers  is  predomin- 
antly practical.  All  that  does  not  directly  or 
indirectly  aflect  a  man's  relation  to  his  univer^se  is 


ignored.  At  the  same  time,  the  intellectual  world 
of  the  NT  is  identical  with  that  of  the  OT,  but 
invaded  and  fertilized  by  the  conceptions  of  the 
Incarnation  and  Redemption  of  Christ.  For  the 
thought  of  the  OT,  the  problem  of  freedom  did  not 
exist.  Not  only  were  there  no  practical  considera- 
tions to  call  attention  to  it ;  it  was  excluded  by 
the  heartiness  with  which  the  Hebrew  mind  ac- 
cepted the  two  convictions  of  the  responsibility 
of  man  and  the  omnipotence  of  God.  Even  for 
Ezekiel,  who  came  nearest  to  realizing  the  anti- 
nomy, the  problem  was  one  of  individual  and  social 
responsibility  rather  than  of  freedom  and  necessity 
(see  14,18,  33).  On  the  other  hand,  God  can  always 
intervene,  though  man  may  still  be  answerable 
(1  K  2223'-,  Am  3«,  2  S  2i\  compared  with  I  €h  21»). 

2.  The  attitude  in  Acts.— '1  he  same  ingenuous 
yet  serviceable  attitude  (to  pass  over  instances  in 
the  Gospels)  is  found  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
While  actions  are  regularly  spoken  of  (as  in  all 
normal  literature)  as  originated  by  their  agents, 
yet  new  powers,  unattainable  otherwise,  are  be- 
stowed by  tlie  Spirit  (e.g.  2*),  whose  coming,  how- 
ever, may  be  hastened  or  caused  by  prayer  (8'*). 
Men  may  be  frustrated  in  some  purpose  by  the 
Spirit  of  Jesus  (16'),  constrained  by  the  Word  (18"), 
or  bound  in  the  spirit  (20*"-).  So,  too,  they  may 
act  in  ignorance  (3'^) ;  or  sin  may  even  be  the  re- 
sult of  Satan's  '  fllling  their  heart '  (5^,  but  contrast 
V.*).  But  this  interference  with  normal  powers  of 
choice  is  neither  felt  to  limit  man's  freedom,  nor 
does  it  aflect  the  writer's  faith  therein.  Tlie  con- 
ception of  some  Divine  power  as  temporarily  dis- 
placing a  man's  control  over  his  speech  or  thought 
was  by  no  means  strange  to  the  Hebrews,  or  to  the 
Greeks  and  Romans,  who  had  not  learnt  to  think 
in  terms  of  the  sub-conscious ;  and  when  we,  for- 
getting or  improving  on  our  philosophy,  say  '  he 
was  not  himself,'  they  would  have  said  '  God,  or 
some  evil  spirit,  entered  into  him'  (1  S  16**;  of. 
Verg,  jEn.  vi.  77  ft".).  But  while  cases  of  more  or 
less  permanent  possession  by  demons  were  familiar, 
the  entrance  of  the  Spirit  of  God  was  felt  chiefly 
on  special  occasions  (Ac  IQ**"^- ;  cf.  4^  6^). 

This  persistence  of  familiar  categories  of  thought 
in  the  presence  of  new  experiences  is  seen  especially 
in  references  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  '  falls  upon ' 
the  disciples  ;  he  gives  them  to  speak  with  '  other 
tongues'  (cf.  also  18'  20^);  but  from  the  Acts 
alone  it  is  impossible  to  say  how  far  this  is  regarded 
as  permanent ;  we  must  go  to  the  Epistles  for 
descriptions  of  the  power  of  the  Spirit  in  renewed 
lives,  quickened  hopes,  and  abiding  impulses  of 
joy  ;  and  although  the  choicest  graces  of  the  Chris- 
tian life  are  set  down  as  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  (as 
opposed  to  the  works  of  the  flesh,  Gal  S'"-  -),  yet 
they  are  all  subjects  of  exhortation  as  well  (e.g. 
Ro  1218,  ph  218). 

3.  St.  Paul's  view  of  the  problem. — But  when 
we  turn  to  St.  Paul,  we  And  a  dehnite  recognition 
and  discussion  of  the  problem  of  freedom.  Yet  it 
is  not  the  freedom  of  the  will  or  even  of  the  self. 
It  appears  in  two  forms,  each  arising  from  St. 
Paul's  own  experience  or  observation,  and  each, 
approaclied  only  when  necessitated  by  some  un- 
avoidable antagonism.  First,  the  actual  experi- 
ence of  slavery  to  sin,  or  (what  to  St.  Paul  himself 
was  involved  in  this)  to  the  Law.  Second,  the 
apparent  inability  of  an  individual  or  groups  of 
individuals  (Esau,  Pharaoh,  Israel)  to  will  what  is 
right  because  of  some  dealing  of  God  with  them. 
A  third  aspect  is  also  suggested,  thougli  St.  Paul 
seems  to  otter  a  formula  for  its  solution  without 
recognizing  its  difficulty.  What  is  the  relation  of 
the  redeemed  soul  to  God's  indwelling  and  inwork- 
ing?  Yet  a  fourth  form  of  the  problem  apjiears, 
which  is  predominantly  ethical.  What  actions  am 
I  as  a  Christian  man  at  liberty  to  perform  ?    What 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL   421 


restraints,  if  any,  am  I  bound  to  observe?  This, 
however,  springs  naturally  out  of  the  first  form  of 
the  problem.  It  'will  be  advisable  to  consider  these 
in  order. 

(1)  The  problem  of  freedom  from  sin  and  from 
4he  Late. — To  St.  Paul,  as  a  Hebrew  sprung  from 
Hebrews,  the  great  end  of  man  is  righteousness. 
It  was  to  him  more  than  an  end  :  it  was  a  passion. 
iBut  he  felt  it  to  be  unattainable:  a  mountain 
height  which  he  had  no  strength  to  scale.  His 
Jife  was  one  long  fruitless  struggle  towards  it.  He 
could  only  describe  that  life  as  a  bondage,  as  if  he 
had  been  sold  like  a  slave  to  a  master  who  would 
always  prevent  him  from  following  his  own  wishes 
(Ro  T'''),  or  as  if  he  were  actually  tied  to  a  weight 
which  kept  him  from  moving — the  weight  of  a 
■dead  body  (v.**).  This  master  was  sin  ;  but  as  in 
a  fevered  dream  the  patient  sometimes  imagines 
Ms  own  pain  to  be  external  to  himself  and  tortur- 
ing liim,  so  St.  Paul  speaks  of  sin  as  something 
external,  exercising  an  alien  and  hateful  tyranny 
over  him  which  can  only  end  in  death  (5^^).  It  is 
not  that  his  will  is  not  free  ;  it  is  not  that  he  can- 
not will  in  a  particular  way  ;  it  is  that  he  cannot 
act  as  he  wills.  The  compulsion  is  external.  And 
this  tyranny  further  makes  a  tyrant  of  what  should 
have  been  a  guide,  namely,  the  Law.  The  term 
*  law,'  it  must  be  remembered,  is  used  by  St.  Paul 
in  at  least  three  ways  :  for  the  Law  of  Moses,  for 
the  natural  law,  written  'on  the  heart'  of  the 
Gentiles,  and  for  the  Law  of  Moses  considered  as  a 
system  of  law  in  general.  Now  the  Law,  either  as 
tnown  to  the  Gentiles,  or  revealed  more  fully  to 
the  Jews,  with  its  lists  of  forbidden  acts,  should 
have  helped  man  to  righteoxisness ;  but,  enslaved 
as  he  was.  it  only  pointed  out  in  detail  what  he 
had  no  power  to  do,  thus  making  his  tjTant  doubly 
hateful,  and  himself  doubly  a  slave  (2'^  3-*). 

Now,  it  will  be  observed  that  there  is  no  meta- 
physics here,  and  no  psychology,  though  it  may  be 
thatSt.  Paul  is  giving  us  data  for  both.  Heissimply 
stating  his  own  experience — an  experience  which 
in  his  case  was  happily  only  temporary,  and  which, 
as  he  believed,  was  intended  to  be  only  temporary 
for  others.  No  conclusions  could  be  drawn  from  it 
as  to  the  will  in  general.  For  what  happened  ?  In 
this  hopeless  extremity  a  solution  was  found  in 
Ghrist.  St.  Paul  could  not  free  himself ;  but 
Christ,  as  the  Son  of  God,  was  free ;  and  through 
His  reconciliation  the  spirit  of  freedom,  of  sonship, 
of  life,  was  sent  forth  (8"-  ",  Gal  4*).  To  exercise 
faith  in  Christ  was  to  be  placed,  so  to  speak,  where 
Christ  was,  i.e.  in  the  position  of  one  to  whom 
complete  righteonsness  was  possible  and  actual. 
We  cannot  consider  here  the  rationale  of  St.  Paul's 
conception  of  the  Atonement  (see  art.  Atoxemext)  ; 
but  just  as  his  active  and  untiring  mind  worked 
out  into  a  Divine  drama  what  to  most  of  his  con- 
temporaries was  the  simple  experience  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ, 
so,  to  him,  abUity  to  do  right  was  imaged  forth 
as  the  change  from  being  the  slave  of  a  tyrant  to 
being  a  son  in  the  house  of  his  father.  He  is  no 
longer  kept  from  doing  what  he  longs  to  do ;  he 
does  it  as  if  he  had  been  bom  to  do  it.  And  this 
is  what  has  happened  :  he  has  been  bom  anew,  he 
is  a  new  creature. 

Yet  we  must  be  careful  not  to  drive  the  figure 
too  far  ;  or  rather,  we  must  be  prepared  to  go  far 
enough.  The  change  has  not  simply  been  wrought 
for  him,  but  in  him.  It  is  not  merely  a  change 
from  a  master  to  a  father  ;  but  from  the  spirit  of  a 
slave  to  that  of  a  son,  by  the  spirit  of  sonship. 
Cowed  and  overpowered  before,  acquiescing,  with  a 
true  slave's  mind,  in  the  very  things  he  hated,  now 
he  is  confident,  self-controlled  as  a  son  ;  not  an 
■emancipated  slave,  apt  to  mistake  a  broken  chain 
for  a  charter  of  licence  ;   his  freedom  from  sin  is 


freedom  for  righteousness.  He  can  thus  speak  of 
the  old  Law  as  replaced  by  a  new  one.  He  is  actually 
a  slave  once  more  ;  but  a  slave  to  Christ.  He  has 
gained  his  freedom,  only  to  surrender  it ;  or  rather, 
he  has  surrendered  it,  only  to  find  it  in  a  form  which 
is  entirely  stable  and  absolutely  satisfying  (2  Co  3*', 
no  more  '  veils,  reservations,  inconsistencies '  now 
[A.  Menzies,  Second  Ep.  to  Cor.,  1912,  ad  loe.\  5", 
Ro  7*,  Gal  5^ ;  Christians  are  even  slaves  to  one 
another,  because  slaves  to  Him  whose  law  is  love  : 
Ro  8-  6'8 ;    cf.  1  P  2'«,  Jn  S**"-). 

This  experience  St.  Paul  regarded  as  normal  for 
all  Christians.  But  in  the  Galatian  church  he  was 
confronted  with  a  return  to  the  Jewish  Law  by  those 
who  ought  to  have  learnt  that  circumcision  could 
profit  nothing.  This  raised  once  more  the  question 
of  freedom.  To  go  back  to  the  Law  was  to  go  back  to 
bondage  ;  not,however,to  the  exact  type  of  bondage 
from  which  St.  Paul  himself  had  been  delivered  at 
his  conversion.  There,  the  real  tyrant  had  been 
sin,  and  the  Law,  coming  in  upon  it,  had  made  it 
appear  in  its  true  character  (Ro  5^  7**).  But  at  the 
same  time  its  hold  upon  its  prisoner  was  tightened. 
Here  the  Law  is  regarded  in  its  other  aspect,  as  a 
vaiSa-fbr/os,  a  boy's  slave-attendant ;  and  thus  as 
an  integral  part  of  the  Divine  plan  (Gal  3^).  Man 
is  intended  to  live  as  a  son  in  his  father's  house, 
with  a  son's  freedom  ;  but  before  this  is  possible, 
he  must  obey ;  he  has  to  submit  himself  to  at- 
tendants (who,  in  a  Hellenic  or  Roman  household, 
would  themselves  generally  be  slaves).  Only  as  he 
grows  up  and  '  puts  away  childish  things '  does  he 
leave  behind  him  this  regime,  and  become  a  son  in 
actuality.  But,  having  once  left  this  state  of  things 
behind,  to  return  to  it  is  preposterous.  It  is  like 
preferring  the  state  of  the  handmaid  to  that  of  the 
wife,  Hagar  to  Sarah ;  or  leaving  Jerusalem,  our 
mother,  for  the  barren  heights  of  Sinai  (4^**).  It 
is  not  simply  refusing  to  live  as  a  son  ;  it  is  reject- 
ing the  spirit  of  sonship,  bestowed  on  him.  Which 
made  such  a  life  possible. 

This  is  what  the  Galatians  were  doing  in  listen- 
ing to  their  Judaizing  teachers.  It  was  more  than 
a  relapse  from  freedom  to  bondage  ;  it  was  a  relapse 
from  Spirit  to  flesh.  Instead  of  the  free  impmse 
of  the  Spirit  within  them,  or  of  Christ's  lining  in 
them,  they  were  being  guided  by  rules  which  de- 
manded a  merely  external  obedience  and  appealed 
to  merely  selfish  desires,  aptly  symbolized  by  an 
operation  on  the  external  surface  of  the  body. 
The  case  might  not  be  so  serious  if  entire  obedience 
to  these  rules  could  ever  be  given.  But  even  if  this 
were  possible,  the  spirit  of  a  life  so  lived  would 
still  be  hopelessly  wTong.  Freedom  is  life ;  and 
its  absence  is  nothing  less  than  death. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  St.  Paul's  whole 
view  of  the  relation  of  the  Law  and  the  works  of 
the  Law  to  grace.  But  the  bearing  of  the  question 
on  freedom  \vill  be  best  seen  by  comparing  the 
position  of  St.  Paul  with  that  ot  Kant.  At  first 
sight,  the  two  might  seem  to  be  absolutely  opposed. 
Kant  finds  freedom  just  where  St.  Paul  denies  its 

f)resence — in  strict  oliedience  to  the  Moral  Law.  But 
aw  has  a  very  difl'erent  meaning  for  Kant  and  for 
St.  Paul.  Law  to  Kant  is  essentially  that  which 
does  not  speak  from  without  but  from  within.  It 
appeals  to  no  interested  motives,  either  of  hope  or 
fear  ;  it  promises  no  rewards,  threatens  no  punish- 
ments. It  speaks  with  the  sole  authority  of  reason ; 
its  voice  is  the  voice  of  the  man  himself.  It  is  the 
experience  of  histrue  and  proper  rational  self.  'The 
will  is  not  subject  simply  to  the  law,  but  so  subject 
that  it  must  be  regarded  as  itself  giving  the  law, 
and  on  this  ground  only  subject  to  the  law'  (Kant, 
'  Metaph.  of  Morals,'  in  Theory  ofEth  ics,  ed.  Abbott, 
1879,  p.  70f.).  Hence,  only  by  obedience  to  it  is  free- 
dom possible  ;  for  freedom  is  not  determination  by 
oneself;  it  is  obedience  to  oneself.  To  be  influenced  by 


422   FEEEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 


anything  else  is  to  recognize  the  right  of  an  external 
authority,  to  relate  oneself,  as  a  Stoic  would  say,  to 
things  outside  one's  power.  But  this  recognition  of 
external  authority  is  just  what  St.  Paul  means  by 
the  Law  ;  whether  he  thinks  of  it  as  the  assessor  of  a 
tyrant,  as  in  Komans,  or  the  slave-attendant  in  tlie 
fatliers  house,  as  in  Galatians.  And  wiiat  Kant 
calls  law,  St.  Paul  calls  sonship.  The  difference — 
for  of  course  there  is  a  ditterence — is  that  Kant 
is  barely  a  theist,  St.  Paul  is  wholly  a  Christian. 
Where  Kant  is  conscious  only  of  an  imperative 
within  his  emancipated  breast,  St.  Paul  is  conscious 
of  a  Divine  Power  who  has  sent  forth  the  spirit  of 
sonship  into  him,  and  a  Saviour  who  has  lifted  him 
clean  out  of  the  sweep  of  ever^  influence  of  heter- 
onomy.  Freedom,  for  Kant,  is  obedience  to  self ; 
for  St.  Paul,  obedience  to  a  Person  in  whose  will  he 
acquiesces  with  enthusiasm.  Both  systems,  how- 
ever, are  definitely  opposed  to  Butler's  expedient 
of  placing  'reasonable  self-love'  on  a  level  with 
conscience.  In  so  far  as  Butler's  conception  of 
conscience  corresponds  witli  Kant's  categorical  im- 
perative, reasonable  self-love  leads  to  sheer  heter- 
onomy  ;  and  if  we  may  compare  obedience  to  con- 
science with  the  new  life  of  freedom  which,  in  St. 
Paul's  view,  is  enjoyed  by  the  Christian,  self-love 
is  nothing  more  than  obedience  to  the  flesh  whicli 
the  Christian  has  crucified  with  the  passions  and 
lusts  thereof  (Gal  5^^). 

One  word,  however,  may  usefully  be  added  at 
this  point  with  reference  to  Spinoza,  as  enthusi- 
astic an  exponent  of  freedom  as  Kant  or  St.  Paul. 
Human  freedom  Spinoza  defines  as  'a  form  of 
reality  which  our  understanding  acquires  through 
direct  union  Avith  God,  so  that  it  can  bring  forth 
ideas  in  itself,  and  ettects  outside  itself,  in  complete 
harmony  with  its  nature,  without,  however,  its 
efliects  being  subjected  to  any  external  causes,  so 
as  to  be  capable  of  being  changed  or  transformed 
by  them '  (Short  Treatise  on  God,  Man,  and  Human 
Welfare,  ch.  xxvi.).  In  the  moral  system  of  Spin- 
oza, God  is  as  central  as  in  tliat  of  Kant  He  is  peri- 
pheral ;  and  since  God  alone  has  freedom,  the  soul 
can  be  really  free  only  through  union  with  God. 
Such  a  view  lays  every  pantlieist  open  to  one  re- 
tort :  if  God  is  substance,  or  the  All,  and  therefore 
universally  immanent,  how  can  union  with  Him 
be  a  thing  which  the  soul  may  possess  or  lack? 
Spinoza  does  not  attempt  to  grapple  with  this 
difliculty.  St.  Paul,  on  the  other  hand,  does  not 
habitually  think  in  terms  of  union  with  God,  either 
in  the  sense  of  Spinoza  or  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
The  centre  of  his  system  is  not  God,  as  a  Divinely 
immanent  Being,  so  much  as  the  will  of  God,  with 
which  his  own  will  has  been  brought  to  move  in 
entire  conformity.  With  St.  Paul,  freedom  im- 
plies no  merging  in  a  wider  Being  ;  the  man  who 
IS  a  Christian  is  like  the  son  who  not  only  lives  in 
his  father's  house,  but  moves  in  the  atmosphere  of 
perfect  sympathy  and  understanding,  confidence 
and  obedience  (cf .  also  He  3").  The  thought  under- 
lying the  references  to  freedom  in  Jn  S'^^"^  is  sub- 
stantially the  same.  There  is  no  mention  of  law, 
but  sin  is  felt  to  mean  slavery ;  and  freedom  is 
only  attained  through  the  gift  of  the  Son.  Through 
Him  we  know  the  truth,  and  recognize  and  receive 
the  message  which  the  Son  brings  of  the  Fatlier's 
love  and  of  His  purpose  that  men  through  faith  in 
the  Son  should  be,  as  He  is,  members  of  the  Divine 
family  (cf.  15'").  This  breaks  the  slavery  :  to  be- 
lieve m  the  Son  makes  the  believer  himself  a  son. 

(2)  Relation  of  individual  will  to  purpose  of 
God. — We  now  pass  to  the  second  question,  which 
seems  to  touch  more  closely  the  familiar  questions 
of  modem  philosophy.  Two  things,  however,  are 
here  to  be  noticed.  The  discussion  is  not  philo- 
sophical, but  religious :  it  deals  with  the  relation 
of  the  human  will  to  the  purpose  of  an  omnipotent 


God.  And  it  is  not  general  but  specific  :  how  can 
we  explain  the  fact  that  the  Jews  have  been  re- 
jected? And  this  leads  to  a  third  point,  namely, 
that  the  question  of  freedom  is  raised  only  by  ac- 
cident. The  real  question  is  approached  thus. 
In  Bo  8  the  Apostle's  thought  has  reached  the  vic- 
torious love  of  Christ.  But  the  Jews  are  outside. 
Is  then  God's  promise  to  them  broken  by  the  re- 
jection of  His  people?  No  :  to  suppose  this  would 
be  to  limit  God's  power ;  for  He  was  supreme 
enough  to  put  conditions  on  that  promise  (I^^sac 
was  chosen,  and  notlshmael ;  Jacob,  and  not  Esau). 
Thus,  St.  Paul  carries  the  supremacy  of  God  further 
than  his  opponents  ;  his  argument  is  similar  to 
that  of  the  prophets,  who  had  to  oppose  the  rooted 
Israelite  belief  that  Jahweh  must  save  His  people. 
But  the  argument  does  not  stop  here.  God's  will 
is  not  capricious.  His  real  purpose  is  to  secure 
*  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith '  (9**),  which 
the  Jews  rejected.  Hence,  a  new  element  enters 
into  the  discussion :  human  responsibility.  As 
far  as  the  Jews  themselves  are  concerned,  laith  is 
open  to  all  (10*),  and  preaching  can  be  heard  by 
all  (10^^).  Thus,  the  Jews  have  only  themselves 
to  thank  for  their  fate.  Then,  St.  Paul  returns  to 
his  original  question.  Are  God's  people  rejected? 
(IP).  No,  tneir  revolt  was  their  own  sin;  the 
salvation  of  the  remnant  is  His  grace.  But  if 
there  is  revolt,  God  confirms,  yet  only  so  as  to 
over-rule  ;  it  is  all  the  better  for  the  Gentiles,  and, 
in  the  end,  for  the  Jews  also.  Next,  St.  Paul 
turns  to  the  Gentiles  :  '  You  too  will  find  that  re- 
sistance is  followed  by  severity.  But,  behind  all, 
is  goodness.  If  there  has  been  blindness,  it  is  in 
part ;  the  gifts  and  calling  of  God  are  without  re- 
pentance'( ll-i--"-*). 

A  contradiction  between  chs.  9  and  10  has  often 
been  felt.  This  is  because  St.  Paul  in  ch.  9  is 
looking  at  only  one  side,  viz.  God's  power  to  shut 
out  or  reject.  But  we  must  remember  that  he  is 
arguing  about  Isaac,  not  Ishmael ;  Jacob,  not 
Esau.  It  is  the  same  with  his  reference  to  Pharaoh 
(9").  He  is  Avriting  as  a  Jew,  and  his  purpose  in 
mentioning  Pharaoh  is  to  show  the  sweep  of  God's 
power,  not  the  limitations  of  Pharaoh's  freedom. 
Otherwise,  he  would  doubtless  have  written  in 
accordance  with  the  general  principle  which  we 
find  in  ch.  1  :  '  God  gave  them  up  (vv.-''-  2* ;  cf. 
also  Ac  IS-i^,  '  we  turn  to  the  Gentiles,'  IS**).  Two 
analogies  will  illustrate  St.  Paul's  thought :  that 
of  a  disease,  in  which  morbid  conditions  and  acts, 
if  persisted  in,  become  hopeless ;  and  that  of  family 
life,  wherein  conditions  are  laid  down  by  a  father 
to  fulfil  his  desire  of  mutual  love — if  the  son  re- 
fuses to  accept  these  conditions,  he  is  rejected. 
These  are  not  analogies  .simply ;  they  show  the 
working  of  the  same  universal  law.  St.  Paul's 
view  of  freedom  is  not  atomic.  Are  we  free  at 
any  given  moment?  No,  we  are  conditioned  by 
our  past,  and  by  our  environment.  To  St.  Paul, 
the  past  can  be  made  up  for ;  and  the  environ- 
ment is  one  of  love.  Hence,  St.  Paul's  conclusion  : 
mercy  is  the  supreme  law.  All  are  '  shut  up '  unto 
disobedience,  in  order  to  come  under  the  scope  of 
mercy  ;  i.e.  all  are  allowed  to  sufi'er  the  inevitable 
results,  both  of  ignorance  and  of  rejection,  so  that 
God's  mercy  may  have  its  way  with  them  (Ro  IP-). 

If,  however,  there  were  any  inclination  to  press 
ch.  9  as  identifying  St.  Paul  with  a  specific  specu- 
lative opinion,  it  would  be  enough  to  point  out 
that  his  whole  attitude,  to  both  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
belies  it.  Practice  even  went  beyond  theory : 
men  mifjht  be  '  given  up ' ;  but  this  did  not  pre- 
vent a  single  appeal  to  them.  If  St.  Paul  turned 
to  the  Gentiles  in  one  town,  he  would  go  straight 
to  the  synagogue  in  the  next.  Thus  the  two  ques- 
tions, though  apparently  unrelated  in  St.  Paul's 
mind,  reaJily  point  to  the  same  general  view.     The 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL   423 


spiritual,  like  the  natural,  world  rests  on  certain 
sequences :  if  A  takes  place,  then  li  follows.  We 
are  responsible  for  choosing  or  not  choosing  A, 
and  so  for  the  consequent  presence  or  absence  of 
B.  The  only  motl ideations  are  that  (a),  if  we  may 
judge  from  the  practice  of  St.  Patil  and  of  all  early 
Christian  evangelists,  we  are  never  justified  in 
acting  as  if  the  consequences  of  evil  were  finally 
fixed  ;  and  (6)  even  when  the  time  for  choice  seems 
to  have  gone  by,  and  man,  racially  or  individually, 
is  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  the  atoning  death  of 
Christ  provides  means  for  another  appeal  to  the 
will  (see  art.  Atonemext).  In  reality,  therefore, 
freedom  and  necessity  are  not  exclusive  states.  If 
psychology,  in  common  with  all  observation,  would 
point  out  that  choice  is  never  unconditioned,  re- 
ligious insight  shows  that  it  is  never  to  be  treated 
as  non-existent. 

(3)  Relation  of  redeemed  soul  to  God's  indwelling 
and  Jnworking. — The  third  form  of  the  question 
of  freedom  arises  when  St.  Paul  is  analyzing  the 
distinctively  Christian  experience.  Here  also 
puzzling  antinomies  are  met  with.  The  Christian 
IS  in  Christ,  saved  ;  he  shows  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit ; 
all  things  are  his.  Yet  he  must  watch  and  pray, 
and  'buffet  his  body'  (1  Co  9'^):  his  salvation  is 
not  complete  ;  it  needs  working  out.  Each  Epistle 
ends  with  practical  exhortations,  often  quite  ele- 
mentary. Here  St.  Paul  takes  refuge  in  what 
seems  a  contradiction  in  terms :  '  work  out  your 
own  salvation  .  .  .  for  it  is  God  that  worketh  in 
yon'  (Ph  2'-).  The  meaning  here  is,  however, 
'you  must  no  longer  be  dependent  on  me;  you 
must  live  your  life  yourselves  as  Christians ;  and 
you  need  not  be  apprehensive ;  for  it  is  God  that 
worketh  in  you.'  The  exact  question  of  the  rela- 
tion of  the  human  to  the  Divine  will  is  not  raised 
here  (see  art.  WILL) ;  but  a  conception  is  implied 
which  is  of  the  first  importance.  When  a  man  is 
freed,  i.e.  made  a  son  instead  of  a  slave,  he  is  not 
simply  transferred  to  a  new  kind  of  obedience  ;  he 
is  entered  by  a  new  spirit ;  his  freedom  is  the  free- 
dom of  the  Father  Himself ;  he  suffers  no  cancel- 
ling of  personality ;  nor  is  he  really  subjected 
again  to  law  in  any  full  sense  ;  he  attains  the  only 
freedom  which  is  complete.  But  this  is  ob\'iously 
not  freeflora  of  choice ;  nor  can  God's  freedom  be 
so  described  :  it  is  rather  freedom  of  unimpeded 
activity  ;  not  self-determination,  but  self-manifes- 
tation (see  artt.  GoD,  UxiON  with  God). 

(4)  What  actions  is  a  Christian  at  liberty  to  per- 
form?— The  fourth  form  is  practical  and  ethical, 
raised  by  a  community  which,  newly  rescued  from 
the  licence  of  heathenism,  recognizes  the  need  of 
laws  for  its  guidance  as  well  as  of  guidance  for 
its  attitude  to  law.  This  was  particularly  necessary 
for  a  community  of  Gentile  converts,  at  once  con- 
taining a  JeA\-ish  leaven  which  held  to  the  whole 
body  of  Mos.aic  restrictions  (cf.  the  discu-sions  in 
the  Aboda  Zara),  and,  apart  from  this,  liable  to 
various  puzzles,  e.g.  about  food  which,  offered  for 
sale  in  heathen  markets,  had  been  contaminated  by 
connexion  with  idolatry.  On  such  points  '  strong ' 
and  '  weak  '  brethren  would  easily  differ.  '  We  are 
free  from  the  Jewish  Law  ;  but  how  far  does  that 
freedom  take  us?'  St.  Paul  is  unhesitating;  he 
does  not  even  refer  to  the  Jerusalem  Decree  (Ac 
15^) ;  he  replies  :  '  all  things  are  lawful ;  freedom  is 
absolute  ;  but  not  all  things  are  expedient ;  and  the 
inexpedient  must  be  avoided'  (I  Co  6^-  ICP).  "Was 
this  a  back-stairs  way  for  the  return  of  law  ?  Not 
in  realit)'.  The  contrast  is  expressed  later  in  '  all 
things  do  not  build  up'  (v.^).  There  is  for  the 
Christian  no  body  of  Jewish  regulations  ;  but  the 
Christian  is  not  therefore  left  to  do  as  he  likes. 
That  woiild,  in  the  end,  involve  falling  under  the 
old  tyrannj-  of  desire  and  passion.  He  gained  his 
freedom  from  law  by  coming  into  the  family  of  God. 


Tlie  new  relation  to  God  means  a  new  relation  to 
men.  HLs  freedom  is  that  of  a  member  of  a  free 
society.  Obviously  this  means  that  he  will  always 
act  in  full  recognition  of  his  fellow-members.  To 
deny  their  claims  would  be  to  deny  his  own  exist- 
ence. It  would  destroy  freedom  and  everything 
else.  He  can  no  more  do  that  which  will  hinder  his 
brother's  life  than  he  can  take  the  limbs  of  Christ 
and  join  them  to  a  harlot.  But  is  not  this,  then, 
after  all,  simply  exchanging  one  law  for  another  ? 
Yes  ;  the  difference  is  that  under  the  old  Law  there 
could  be  no  acquiescence,  and  hence  there  was 
always  a  stimulus  to  disobedience  and  sin.  The 
essence  of  the  new  Law  is  that  the  Christian  sees  in 
it  the  expression  of  the  life  that  he  has  chosen.  It 
becomes  once  more  the  embodiment  of  the  real 
Torah  ('law,'  properly  and  by  derivation  'instruc- 
tion') as  we  meet  it,  e.g.,  in  Ps  119,  the  actuaJ  out- 
working in  detail  of  the  experience  of  the  grace  of 
God  in  the  heart. 

4.  Other  NT  books. — The  remaining  NT  writings 
call  for  little  notice.  The  weU-kBo\vn  passage  in 
St.  James  (1^)  speaks  of  the  law  of  freedom  into 
which  the  doer  of  the  word  looks,  as  opposed  to 
the  careless  glance  at  the  reflexion  of  himself  in  a 
mirror,  as  it  were,  which  is  cast  by  the  man  who 
is  only  a  hearer.  There  is  nothing  except  propin- 
quity to  suggest  that  St.  James  is  here  referring  to 
what  a  few  verses  lat«r  he  calls  the  royal  law : 
'thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself  (2*); 
and  he  says  nothing  further  in  explanation  of  a 
phrase  which  would  have  aptly  summarized  St. 
Paul's  argument.  But  a  metaphor  which  he  had 
just  used  (1^),  though  with  no  direct  reference  to 
freedom,  may  be  referred  to  at  the  close  of  this 
article,  as  summing  up  one  aspect  of  NT  teaching : 
'  of  his  own  will  he  brought  us  forth  by  the  word 
of  truth.'  The  paragraph  begins  with  a  call  to 
resist  temptation  ;  it  goes  on  to  show  the  inevitable 
results  of  attending  to  the  suggestions  of  evil ;  it 
ends  with  the  assertion  that  God  brought  us  forth  to 
be  first-fruits,  as  it  were,  of  His  own  creation — that 
is,  around  man's  freedom  of  choice  lies  God's  pur- 
pose of  blessing  and  salvation ;  and  we  complete 
the  NT  view  if  we  add  that  the  fulfilment  of  this 
purpose  means  a  freedom  which  is  no  more  of 
choice  but  of  absolute  oneness  with  the  great  orbital 
movement  of  God's  love. 

5.  Apostolic  Fathers. — These  two  views — of  St. 
Paul  and  St.  James — are  implied,  sometimes  more, 
sometimes  less  clearly,  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers. 
But  they  are  only  implied  ;  and  in  general,  we  find 
the  two  opposite  convictions,  of  man's  choice  and 
God's  omnipotence,  held  with  hardly  a  suspicion 
that  they  might  be  opposed.  Here,  as  elsewhere, 
the  sub-Apostolic  Age  is  far  nearer  to  the  OT,  or 
to  the  early  chapters  of  Acts,  than  to  the  Pauline 
and  Johannine  writings.  In  1  Clem,  the  Corinth- 
ians are  said  to  have  conflict  for  all  the  brother- 
hood, that  the  number  of  God's  elect  might  be 
saved  (2).  We  are  not  justified  through  ourselves, 
but  through  faith  (32).  None  can  be  found  in  love, 
save  those  to  whom  God  shall  vouchsafe  it  (50). 
A  similar  paradox  is  found  in  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad 
Ephes,  8 :  'let  none  deceive  you,  as  indeed  ye  are 
not  deceived,  seeing  ye  belong  wholly  to  God.' 
Ignatius  himself  dies  of  his  own  free-will  {eKdv),  yet 
as  a  f reedman  (dreXeiOepos)  of  Christ ;  and  he  wiU 
rise  free  in  Him  {ad  Rom.  4).  So  in  the  Ej).  Bam.  : 
'Before  faith,  the  heart  is  given  up  to  evil'  (16); 
and  even  now,  accurate  knowledge  of  salvation  is 
necessary  lest  the  Evil  One  should  enter  and  fling 
us  away  from  our  life  (2). 

LiTERATCRK — For  an  exposition  of  the  relevant  passwes,  see 
the  Commentaries,  especially  Sanday-Headlam  on  Bmnans 
(^ICC,  1902),  and  Lis:fatfoot  on  Galatians  (=1S76).  For  the 
theory  of  Freedom  as  a  part  of  Christian  Ethics,  see  J.  A. 
Domer,  Si/item  of  Christian  Ethics,  Eng.  tr.,l&s7,  pp.  253-2S3 ; 
T.  B.  Strong,  Chriitian  Ethics,  1896,  pp.  245-251,  pp.  35-46 ; 


424  FRIENDS,  FRIENDSHIP 


FRUIT 


G.  F.  Barbour,  A  Philosophical  Stud.!/  "/  Christian  Ethics, 
1911,  pp.  326-354.  For  fuller  discussions  of  the  Pauline  doc- 
trine, see  J.  B.  Mozley,  A  Treatise  on  the  Aiigustinian  Doc- 
trine of  Predestination"^,  1878;  D.  Somerville,  St.  Paul's 
Conception  of  Christ,  1897 ;  F.  R.  Tennant,  The  Origin  and 
Propagation  of  Stn^,  1806 ;  E.  Weber,  Das  Problem  der 
Heusgeschichte  naeh  Riim.  9-11,  1911 ;  see  also  artt.  (in  addi- 
tion to  those  referred  to  above)  on  Qracb,  Law,  Libbrty,  Sin. 
W.  F,   LOFTHOUSE. 

FRIENDS,  FRIENDSHIP.  — The  terms  them- 
selves are  rarely  found  in  the  apostolic  writinj^s. 
Ac  10"*  mentions  the  friends  of  Cornelius,  19^^  the 
Asiarchs  as  friendly  to  St.  Paul  in  an  hour  of  peril 
at  Ephesus,  27'  friends  of  the  same  Apostle  at 
Sidon  ;  12^  reveals  Blastus  in  the  character  of  '  a 
friend  at  court.'  Ja  2^*  reminds  us  that  Abraham 
was  called  the  friend  of  God.and  no  doubt  inculcates 
the  lesson  that  those  Avho  walk  in  the  patriarch's 
footsteps  may  attain  the  patriarch's  bfessing ;  4* 
that  'the  friendship  of  the  world  is  enmity  with 
God,'  and  that  *  whosoever  would  be  a  friend  of  the 
world  maketh  himself  an  enemy  of  God.'  The  only 
other  reference  is  3  Jn  ^*,  '  The  friends  salute  thee. 
Salute  the  friends  by  name.' 

It  has  often  been  pointed  out  that  friendship 
occupies  an  apparently  much  smaller  place  in  the 
NT  than  in  the  OT  or  than  in  tlie  writings  of 
pagan  antiquity.  But  this  is  only  a  superficial 
view.  The  name  may  not  be  conspicuous,  but  the 
reality  is  there.  There  are  some  Avho  hesitate  to 
speak  of  the  relationship  of  Jesus  to  the  Twelve 
and  to  the  wider  circle  of  disciples  which  included 
the  household  at  Bethany,  the  goodman  of  Jeru- 
salem at  Avhose  house  the  Last  Supper  was  eaten, 
and  the  women  who  so  affectionately  ministered  to 
the  Master,  as  one  of  friendship.  To  do  this  is  to 
deny  the  humanity  of  Jesus — a  loss  that  nothing 
can  compensate.  That  there  were  elements  in 
this  relationship  that  transcended  friendship  as 
ordinarily  conceived  and  experienced  all  will 
admit ;  but  friendship  as  we  know  it  was  none  the 
less  there,  and  Jesus  was  not  only  giver  but  receiver. 
When,  for  example,  ^lartha  was  feverishly  busy 
with  domestic  cares,  Mary  Avas  with  Jesus,  not 
saying  much  perhaps,  nor  even  listening  in  that 
hour  to  parable  or  precept,  but  ministering  to  Him 
the  '  one  thing  needful ' — the  quiet,  loving,  sympa- 
thetic response  to  One  who  eased  a  heavy  spirit  to 
her  as  He  could  not  do  to  His  uncomprehending 
apostles. 

When  we  pass  from  the  Gospels  to  the  passages 
enumerated  at  the  beginning  of  this  article  there 
are  only  tAvo  that  need  even  a  brief  comment. 
The  'friends'  at  Sidon  whom  St.  Paul  was  per- 
mitted to  visit  probably  mean  Christians  in  that 
city  ;  the  move  usual  term  would  be  '  brethren ' 
(AdeX^oi).  In  3  Jn  ^*  the  word  may  liave  the  same 
force,  but  there  is  probably  behind  it  an  allusion 
to  a  more  intimate  and  personal  relationship.  But 
'  friends '  {ol  <l>L\oi)  did  not  become  a  technical  name 
for  Christians  in  these  early  days.  As  Harnack 
puts  it  {Mission  and  Expansion  of  Christianity-, 
1908,  i.  421),  '  the  term  ol  <t>l\oL  did  not  gain  cunency 
in  the  catholic  church  owing  to  the  fact  that  ol 
d8€\<pol  was  preferred  as  being  still  more  inward 
and  warm.'  The  Gnostics  of  the  2nd  cent.,  on  the 
other  hand,  were  more  addicted  to  its  use,  and 
Valentinus  wrote  a  homily  '  On  Friends,'  while 
Epiphanius,  the  son  of  Carpocrates,  founded  a  gild 
of  friends  on  the  Pythagorean  model.  Among  tlie 
first  generation  of  Christians  the  glow  of  love  was 
cast  over  all  the  old  relationships  of  life,  and  family 
and  friendly  associations  alike  were  sublimated  in 
the  sense  of  belonging  to  the  household  of  God. 
The  bond  that  held  tlie  soul  to  Clirist  held  also  all 
who  were  thus  bound  ;  and  that  which  had  hitherto 
been  called  friendship  was  so  enriched  and  quick- 
ened that  the  old  term  was  felt  to  be  inadequate 
for  its  newly  reinforced  con  tent.     Thus  instead 


of  'friends'  and  '  fiicndshij) '  we  read  much  of 
'brothers'  and  '  fel!<j\\>liii) '  {KOLvui>ia). 

As  has  been  said,  tlie  reality  was  there — the 
kinship  of  spirit,  the  association  in  service,  the 
giving  and  taking,  the  mutual  self-sacrifice,  the 
oneness  of  aim  and  purpose,  the  reciprocal  opening 
of  the  heart — all  that  we  associate  witli  true  friend- 
ship. The  greatest  of  that  generation  might  in- 
deed have  said  of  himself,  as  Myers  has  said  of 
him  in  his  St.  Paul : 

'  I'luil  has  no  honour  and  no  friend  but  Christ," 

and  that : 

•Lone  on  the  land  and  homeless  on  the  water 
Pass  I  in  patience  till  the  work  be  done.' 

But  he  would  be  quick  to  auid : 

'  Yet  not  in  solitude  if  Christ  anear  me 
Waketh  him  workers  for  the  great  employ, 
Oh  not  in  solitude,  if  souls  that  hear  nie 
Catch  from  my  joyaunce  the  surprise  of  joy. 
Hearts  I  have  won  of  sister  or  of  brother 
Quick  on  the  earth  or  hidden  in  the  sod, 
Lo  every  heart  awaiteth  me,  another 
Friend  in  the  blameless  family  of  God.' 

We  have  only  to  think  of  the  travelling  comrades 
of  the  Apostle — of  Barnabas  and  Silas,  of  Timotliy 
and  Mark,  of  Luke  and  Titus,  of  Pri.scilla  and 
Aquila — to  realize  that,  so  far  from  being  friendless, 
he  enjoyed  the  ricliest  resources  of  that  relationship 
that  were  to  be  had  in  that  age.  So  far  as  we 
know,  he  never  laboured  alone,  except  in  Athens. 
In  his  letters  he  nearly  always  associates  with 
himself  one  or  more  of  his  colleagues  as  joint 
authors,  and  those  who  have  been  named  above 
were  the  ablest  Christian  thinkers  and  workers  of 
the  time.  And  when  he  speaks  of  others,  like 
Urban,  Epaphroditus,  Clement,  and  Philemon,  as 
his  fellow- workers,  or,  like  Andronicus,  Junias, 
and  Aristarchus,  as  his  fellow-prisoners,  or,  like 
Archippus,  as  his  fellow-soldiers,  it  would  be  very 
puerile  criticism  to  say  that  because  he  does  not 
term  tliem  technically  his  friends  there  was  no 
friendship  between  him  and  them.  In  the  vicissi- 
tudes of  travel,  in  the  new  campaigns  that  were 
undertaken,  in  the  different  problems  that  each 
province  and  city  presented,  in  the  failures  and 
successes  that  attended  his  mission,  there  must  have 
been  that  close-knit  sympathy  and  entire  fellow- 
ship that  mark  the  intercourse  of  friends.  Nor 
can  we  hesitate  to  apply  the  word  to  the  intimacy 
that  existed  between  the  Apostle  and  those  wlio 
became  responsible  for  the  work  of  Christ  and  the 
guidance  of  the  Church  in  every  place  where  it 
was  established.  Wherever  he  worked  there  were 
those  who  delighted  to  be  known  as  the  friends  of 
St.  Paul  and  \vliom  he  was  well  pleased  to  call  his 
friends. 

In  the  churches  themselves  the  term  '  brethren ' 
would  be  held  to  include  all  that  was  involved  in 
friendship.  Despite  tlie  shadows  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  and  llie  imperfections  of  a  nascent  infantile 
Christianity,  it  is  not  hard  to  discern  the  signs  of 
true  friendship.  The  records  of  the  2nd  cent,  con- 
tinue the  tale,  and  the  affectionate  loyalty  of 
Christians  to  each  other  in  times  of  peril  deeply 
impressed  their  enemies  and  persecutors.  In  some 
cases,  as  in  earlier  days  with  Peter  and  John, 
Andrew  and  Philip,  tlie  friendship  preceiled  and 
was  sanctified  by  the  Christian  tie,  in  othri^  it 
grew  out  of  that  bond.  A.  J.  c;ki!.\  ::. 

FRUIT.— 1.  The  word    in  its  literal   sense.— 

Before  considering  the  use  of  this  term  in  spirii  ual 
metaphor  it  will  be  convenient  to  enumerate  those 
passages  in  the  apostolic  writings  wliere  it  is  em- 
ployed in  its  natural  si'iisc.  ('0  (> nirra I. —Thi'se 
are  Ja  S^-'"  (in  illustration  of  ]i.uirn(t>  and  juayer), 
Ac  14''^  (God's  LMft  of  lain  nn<l  fruitful  >ca>on>).  1 
Co  9'' (in  sui'i'ou  oi  \Uv  apost  Ic.-'  ri-lit  to  Mi>tt'naiK'e; 


FRUIT 


FULNESS 


425 


«f.  2  Ti  2^),  Rev  18"  22- — passages  which,  like  some  I 
of  the  others,  are  on  the  borderland  between  the 
literal  and  the  symbolic.  Jude  '*  compares  the  '  un- 
godly '  of  the  day  with  '  trees  in  late  autumn  when 
the  miit  is  past.  In  Ac  2*  the  word  is  used  in  its 
physiological  sense. 

(6)  Spccijic. — References  to  specific  fruits  are  not 
numerous.  Ja  3"  asks  whether  a  fig-tree  can  yield 
olives  or  a  vine  tigs.  St.  Paul  in  Ro  ll^'*-  uses  the 
curious  idea  of  grafting  a  wild  olive  on  to  a  good 
olive  tree  ('contrary  to  nature,'  v.**)  to  illustrate 
the  participation  ot  the  Gentiles  in  the  promises 
made  to  Israel.  Rev  11*  identifies  the  'two  wit- 
nesses' (perhaps  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul)  with  the 
'  two  olive  trees '  of  Zee  4 ;  and  Rev  6^  in  its 
mention  of  a  fig-tree  casting  her  unripe  figs  in  the 
spring  tempests  recalls  Is  34^  Rev  14"'^  is  a 
vision  of  the  harvest  and  vintage  of  the  earth  when 
the  grain  and  the  grapes  are  fully  ripe.  St.  Paul's 
use  of  the  grain  of  wheat  in  the  great  Resurrection 
argument  of  1  Co  15  is  familiar  to  all,  and  is  an 
eciio  of  Christ's  word  in  Jn  12-^^. 

2.  The  term  in  spiritual  metaphor. — We  may 
begin  our  study  of  the  spiritual  lessons  inculcated 
under  the  image  of  fruit  with  another  passage  from 
Corinthians.  In  1  Co  3'  the  Apostle  reminds  his 
readers  that  they  are  'God's  husbandry','  i.e.  His 
'tilth'  or  'tilled  land.'  This  recalls  the  Parable 
of  the  Vineyard  spoken  by  Jesus  (Mt  21,  Lk  20) ; 
Christian  cliiurches  and  lives  are  fields  and  gardens 
from  which  the  owner  who  has  spent  love  and  time 
and  care  over  them  may  reasonably  expect  good 
results,  '  fiuit  unto  God'  (Ro  1*).  And  those  too 
who  are  His  overseers,  those  who  plant  and  water, 
naturally  look  for  produce  and  the  reward  of  their 
toil.  Thus  the  Apostle  hopes,  as  he  looks  forward 
to  his  visit  to  Rome,  that  he  may  '  have  some  fruit 
among'  the  people  of  that  city  as  he  had  in  Corinth 
and  Ephesus  (Ro  1^).  Two  passages  in  Phil,  may 
be  glanced  at  here  :  (a)  the  difficult  reference  in  1-, 
which  probably  means  that,  though  death  would 
be  gain,  yet  if  continuance  in  living  means  fruitful 
labour  ('fruit  of  work '  =  fruit  which  follows  and 
issues  from  toU),  St.  Paul  is  quite  ready  to  waive 
his  own  preference ;  (6)  4",  where,  thanking  the 
Philippians  for  their  kindly  gift,  he  says  he  wel- 
comes it  not  so  much  for  himself  as  on  their  behalf ; 
it  is  a  token  that  they  are  not  unfruitful  in  love, 
and  it  will,  like  all  such  evidences  of  Christian 
thought  and  ministry,  enrich  the  givers  as  much  as 
the  recipient  (cf.  2  Co  9«). 

(1)  The  way  is  now  clear  for  a  brief  survey  of 
the  main  topic — the  fruits  of  the  netv  life  in  Christ 
Jesus.  The  'fruit  of  the  light,'  says  St.  Paul 
<Eph  5'),  'is  in  all  goodness  and  righteousness  and 
truth,'  and  the  more  familiar  passage  in  Gal  5'^ 
speaks  of  the  'fruit  of  the  Spirit'  as  'love,  joy, 
peace,  longsuffering,  kindness,  goodness,  faithful- 
ness, meekness,  self-control.'  Trees  are  known  by 
their  fruit,  and  the  existence  of  these  virtues  in  an 
indiWdual  or  a  community  are  the  surest,  if  not 
the  sole,  signs  that  the  life  is  rooted  with  Christ  in 
God,  that  the  branches  are  abiding  in  the  True 
Vine.  It  was  the  Apostle's  greatest  joy  when  he 
could  congratulate  a  church  like  that  at  Colossae 
on  its  shave  in  the  fruit-bearing  which  the  gospel 
was  accomplishing  wherever  it  was  proclaimed  and 
accepted  (Col  1*),  when  it  bore  fruit  in  every  good 
work  (v.^*).  The  fruit  of  the  new  life  is  re- 
garded in  Ro  6"  as  sanctification.  On  the  other 
hand,  St.  .James  (3")  gives  it  as  one  of  the  character- 
istics of  the  '  wisdom  that  is  from  above ' — which  is 
perhaps  liis  way  of  speaking  of  the  Spirit — that  it 
is  '  full  of  .  .  .  good  fruits,  by  which  he  no  doubt 
means  'good  works.'  In  the  next  verse  he  says 
that  '  the  fruit  (i.e.  the  seed  which  bears  the  fruit) 
of  righteousness  is  sown  in  peace  for  them  that 
make  peace.'    The  'fruit  of  righteousness'  is  an 


OT  phrase,  and  meets  us  again  in  Ph  1"  and  He  12", 
where  '  righteousness,'  or  conformity  to  the  liighest 
moral  standard,  is  described  as  the  *  peaceful  fruit ' 
of  discipline  patiently  endured. 

Returning  to  the  loctis  classictis,  Gal  5^,  it  is 
worth  noticing  that  St.  Paul  introduces  the  nine 
virtues  Avhich  he  enumerates  as  one  '  fruit.'  Like 
the  chain  of  graces  in  2  P  1*-",  they  are  all  linked 
together  as  though  to  suggest  that  the  absence  of 
any  one  means  the  nullity  of  all.  We  need  not 
press  too  heavily  the  suggestion  that  the  nine  fall 
into  three  groups  describing  (a)  the  soul  in  relation 
to  God  ;  (b)  its  attitude  to  others  (this  Ls  to  make 
'  faith '  =  faithfulness,  and  though  St.  Paul  usually 
thinks  of  faith  as  the  basis  of  Christian  character, 
he  was  not  so  rigidly  systematic  as  not  to  see  in  it, 
or  at  least  in  an  increase  of  it,  a,  fruit  of  the  Spirit) ; 
(c)  principles  of  daily  conduct.  There  is  more 
perhaps  in  the  antithesis  between  the  '  works '  of 
the  liesh  (v.")  and  the  'fruit'  of  the  Spirit.  Yet 
the  dispositions  enumerated  show  themselves  in 
good  works,  though  these  are  not  expressly  specified, 
being  infinitelj-  varied  and  adaptable  to  cliauging 
conditions.  The  list  may  be  supplemented,  for 
example,  by  He  13^',  where  '  praise '  is  the  fruit  of 
a  thankful  heart  expressed  by  the  lips,  and  Ro  15^, 
where  the  generosity  of  the  Gentile  Christians  to- 
wards the  Judaean  poor  is  the  fruit  of  the  spiritual 
blessing  which  St.  Pauls  converts  had  received. 

(2)  The  unfruitful. — The  other  side  of  the  picture 
can  be  briefly  dismissed.  Those  who  walk  in  dark- 
ness are  spoken  of  as  unfruitful  (Eph  5").  '  What 
fruit  had  you  then  in  those  things  of  which  you 
are  ashamed  ? '  asks  St.  Paul  in  Ro  6^^  though  we 
might  possibly  translate,  'What  fruit  had  you 
then? — Things  (gratifications  of  sense)  of  which 
you  are  now  ashamed.'  In  Ro  7*  the  Apostle 
describes  the  unregenerate  life  as  producing  fruit 
'  unto  death,'  and  if  we  desire  an  enumeration  of 
these  poisonous  products  we  shall  find  them  in  Gal 
5^9-21  (cf.  Col  35-9).  For  the  final  harvesting  we 
have  the  picture  of  Rev  14. 

(3)  The  time  of  fruit-bearing. — It  is  the  will  of 
Jesus  that  His  disciples  should  bear  '  much  fruit ' ; 
in  His  words  on  this  theme  (Jn  15)  He  does  not 
seem  to  contemplate  the  possibility  of  bearing  a 
little.  It  is  much  or  none.  The  trouble  is  that 
churches  and  individuals  only  too  often  look  like 
orchards  stricken  by  a  blight,  and  where  a  little 
fruit  Ls  found  it  is  not  so  mellow  as  it  might  be. 
We  need  not  be  in  too  great  a  hurry  to  see  the  full 
fruit  in  young  lives.  There  is  a  time  for  blossom 
and  a  time  for  ripe  fruit,  and  the  intervening  stage 
is  not  attractive  though  it  is  necessary.  There  is 
a  time  for  the  blade  and  a  time  for  the  full  com 
in  the  ear,  but  before  we  get  this  harvest  there  is 
the  period  of  the  green  and  unsatisfying  ear.  We 
sometimes  speak  of  a  harvest  of  souls  following  on 
a  series  of  revival  or  mission  services ;  but  it  is 
only  the  blade  pushing  up  into  the  light — the 
harvest  is  still  far  distant. 

A  day  now  and  a^ain  with  a  fruit-grower  on  his  farm  will 
have  much  to  teach  the  preacher  as  to  natural  law  in  the 
spiritual  world.  He  will  learn  amongst  other  things  how  vital 
is  the  process  of  pruning,  and  how  no  stroke  is  made  at  random. 
He  will  learn  how  to  guard  the  nascent  life  against  frosts  and 
chills,  ita  need  of  nutriment  from  soil  and  sun  and  rain.  The 
wonderful  exploits  of  the  Californian  fniit-grower,  Luther 
Burbank,  will  open  up  a  whole  universe  of  possibilities ;  the 
story  of  what  irrigation  and  scientific  culture  have  done  in 
Australia  will  show  how  deserts  may  become  orchards.  And 
as  palm  trees  are  said  to  bear  their  heaviest  clusters  in  old  age, 
the  life  that  abides  in  Christ  may  be  confident  of  escaping  the 
reproach  of  crabbed  and  withered  senility — it  shall  bring  forth 
fruit  in  old  ase.  But  it  need  not  wait  for  old  age — it  shall  be 
like  the  tree  of  life  that  bears  its  fruit  every  month — fruit  that 
is  for  the  delectation  and  the  healing  of  the  world. 

A.  J.  Grieve. 
FULNESS. — The    word    to    be    considered    is 
pleroma  (v\T}pwjxa).     Nouns  of  the  -fia  termination 
properly  denote  the  result  of  the  action  signified 


426 


FULNESS 


FUTURE  LIFE 


by  the  cof^imte  verb;  and  therefore  wXripufia  (frona 
Tr\r]povi'  =  ' to  fill,'  or,  metaphorically,  '  to  fulfil ') 
primarily  means  that  which  possesses  its  full  con- 
tent, an  entire  set  or  series,  a  completed  whole  re- 
garded in  its  relation  to  its  component  parts,  or  in 
contrast  with  a  previous  deficiency  of  any  of  these 
parts.  The  full  crew  of  a  ship  or  'strength'  of  a 
regiment  is  a  pleroma ;  the  soul  becomes  a 
'  pleroma  of  virtues  by  means  of  those  three  excel- 
lent things,  nature,  learning,  and  practice'  (Philo, 
de  Prccmiis  et  Pcenis,  11). 

This  is  the  sense  in  Gal  4*  :  '  when  the  fulness  of 
the  time  came,'  i.e.  when  the  entire  mea.sure  of 
the  ap^tointed  period  had  been  filled  up  by  the 
lapse  of  successive  ages.  So  the  'fulness'  of  the 
Jews  (Ko  1112)  and  of  the  Gentiles  (Ko  ll^*)  is  the 
full  complement,  the  entire  number  contemplated 
(however  determined — by  predestination  or  other- 
wise). Lightfoot  in  his  classical  discussion  of  the 
word  (see  Literature)  denies  any  other  than  this 
passive  sense ;  but  his  argiiment  is  far  from  con- 
vincing. When  we  think  of  a  pitcherful  of  water, 
we  may  regard  tlie  water  as  a  completed  entity, 
which  by  successive  additions  has  reached  its  full 
quantity  and  become  a  pleroma  of  water ;  but 
much  more  naturally  we  think  of  it  as  that  which 
fills  the  pitcher,  and  is  its  pleroma.  This  active 
sense  must  be  accepted  in  Mt  9^*,  Mk  2^^  where 
t6  wXrjpufia  can  only  mean  the  patch  that  fills  the 
hole  in  the  worn-out  garment ;  in  Mk  8^°,  where 
airvpldiov  Tr\7jpu}fji.aTa  inevitably  means  '  basketfuls ' ; 
in  1  Co  10'-",  where  '  the  earth  and  the  pleroma 
thereof '  cannot  be  made  to  signify  anythmg  else 
tlian  'the  earth  and  all  that  it  contains,'  the 
abundance  that  fills  it.  So  also  in  Ro  13^°,  '  love 
is  the  pleroma  of  the  law,'  the  context  ('  he  that 
loveth  his  neighbour  has  fulfilled  the  law ')  shows 
that  pleroma  is  not  to  be  taken  passiv'ely,  as  the 
law  in  its  completeness  ;  but  actively,  as  that  which 
fills  up  the  whole  measure  of  the  law's  demands. 

The  use  of  the  word  as  a  theological  term  is  con- 
fined in  the  NT  to  those  closely  related  writings, 
( 'olossians,  Ephesians,  and  the  Fourth  Gospel.  In 
Col  V^  it  is  predicated  of  Christ  that  'it  pleased 
the  Father  that  in  him  the  whole  pleroma  should 
dwell,'  and  in  2^,  with  greater  precision  of  state- 
ment, '  in  him  dwelleth  the  whole  pleroma  of  the 
Godhead  in  a  bodily  fashion'  (cf.  Jn  P'*).  Here 
the  meaning  of  the  word  is  beyond  dispute.  All 
that  God  is  is  in  Christ;  the  organic  whole  of 
Divine  attributes  and  powers  that  constitute  Deity 
{deoTTji)  dwells  permanently  in  Him. 

The  term  with  such  an  application  is  a  startling 
novelty  in  NT  phraseology,  and  is  an  instructive 
example  of  the  hospitality  of  early  Christian 
thought,  of  the  promptitude  with  which  it  appro- 
priated from  its  complex  intellectual  and  religious 
environment  such  categories  as  it  could  convert  to 
its  own  use.  Since  the  connotation  of  the  word  is 
assumed  to  be  familiar  to  the  Apostle's  readers,  it 
is  evident  that  it  must  have  played  an  important 
part  in  the  speculations  of  the  Colossian  lieresy, 
as  it  did  also  in  the  Hermetic  theology  (R.  Reitzen- 
stein,  Poimandres,  1904,  p.  26).  In  the  developed 
Gnostic  systems  of  the  2nd  cent.,  and  especially  in 
the  scheme  of  Valentinus,  the  conception  of  the 
Pleroma  became  increasingly  prominent,  as  signi- 
fying the  totality  of  the  Divine  emanations.  But 
for  a  full  account  of  the  Gnostic  usage,  the  reader 
is  referred  to  Lightfoot's  exhaustive  note  (see 
Literature)  or,  in  briefer  compass,  to  the  artt. 
'  Pleroma'  in  HDB  and  '  Fulness '  in  DC'G. 


The  problem  witii  which  religious  thought  was 
wrestling,  as  for  centuries  it  hatl  done  and  was  still 
to  do,  was  how  to  relate  the  transcendent  God  to  the 
existent  universe,  to  effect  a  transition  from  eternal 
spirit  to  the  material  or  phenomenal,  from  the 
aosolutely  good  to  the  imperfect  and  evil.  And  in 
Colossae  the  solution  was  sought  not  in  a  Gnostic 
series  of  emanations,  but,  on  the  lines  of  Judai.stic 
speculation,  in  a  hierarchy  of  '  princii)alities,' 
' dominions,' and  'powers,'  the  ffroixeta  wno  ruled 
the  physical  elements  and  the  lower  world,  among 
whom  the  Divine  Pleroma  was,  as  it  were,  dis- 
tributed, and  to  whose  generally  hostile  rule  men 
were  continually  subject.  Against  this  doctrine, 
without  denying  the  existence  and  activity  of  such 
beings,  St.  Paul  lifts  up  his  magnificent  truth  of 
the  '  Cosmic  Christ '  and  his  vision  of  a  '  Christian- 
ized universe.'  Christ  is  not  one  of  a  series  of 
mediators  ;  in  Him  the  whole  Pleroma  dwells. 
He  is  not  only  Head  of  the  Church,  but  Head  over 
all  things,  delivering  His  people  from  bondage  to 
the  hostile  elements,  and  translating  them  into 
His  own  Kingdom,  that  new  cosmic  order  in  which 
God  will  finally  reconcile  all  things  unto  Himself. 

In  Ephesians  the  emphasis  is  not  so  much  upon 
Christ's  possession  of  the  Divine  Pleroma  as  upon 
His  communication  of  it  to  the  Church.  The 
Church  is  His  Body,  '  the  pleroma  of  him  that 
filleth  all  in  all'  (l''^;  for  exegetical  details,  see 
Armitage  Robinson  in  loc).  Whether  irXifipufia  be 
understood  in  an  active  sense  (the  Church  is  Christ's 
complement,  that  by  which  He  is  completed  as  the 
head  is  by  the  body)  or  in  a  passive  sense  (the 
Church  is  Christ's  fulness,  because  His  fulness  is 
imparted  to  it  and  dwells  in  it),  the  result  is  prac- 
tically the  same — the  one  sense  implies  the  other. 
The  Church  is  the  living  receptacle  and  instrument 
of  all  that  is  in  Christ,  all  grace  and  truth,  all 
purpose  and  power.  But  the  ideal  character  thus 
claimed  for  the  Church  is  yet  to  be  achieved  in 
the  sphere  of  human  aspiration  and  ettbrt.  Its 
rich  diversity  of  gifts  and  ministries  is  bestowed 
for  this  very  end,  that '  we  all '  may  be  brought  to 
that  unity  and  many-sided  completeness  of  spirit- 
ual life  in  which  we  shall  collectively  form  a  '  per- 
fect man,'  attaining  thus  to  the  *  measure  of  the 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ'  (4''*).  And,  as  in 
the  Apostle's  thought  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead 
descends  through  the  One  Mediator  to  the  Church, 
so  again  it  ascends  through  Him  to  the  first  crea- 
tive source.  The  end  of  all  prayer  and  of  all  at- 
tainment is  '  that  we  may  be  filled  unto  all  the 
fulness  of  God'  (3^").  The  Church,  redeemed 
humanity  in  its  vital  spiritual  unity,  grown  at 
last  to  a  '  perfect  man,'  to  the  '  fulness  of  Christ,' 
which  is  the  '  fulness  of  God ' ;  God  thus  possess- 
ing in  man  the  fulfilment  of  His  eternal  purpose, 
His  perfect  image,  the  consumnicate  organ  ot  His 
Spirit — even  this  is  possible  to  Him  who  is  able  to 
do  exceeding  abundantly  above  aU  that  we  ask  or 
think  (3'">). 

LiTRRATi-RE. — Artt.  'Pleroma'  in  HDB,  'Fulness'  in  DCG; 
C.  P.  A.  FrJtzsclie,  Pauli  ad  Romanos  Epistnla,  1830-43,  ii. 
469Pf. ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  ColossiansS,  1879,  p.  257  ff.  ;  J.  Armi- 
tage Robinson,  Ephesians,  1903,  p.  265  0. ;  H.  A.  W.  Meyer, 
Commentary  on  the  A'7',  '  Philippians  and  Colossians.'  1*75, 
'  Ephesians  and  Philemon,'  1880  ;  £rich  Haupt,  Die  (Jefaiiijen- 
nchaftsbriefe'!  in  Meyer's  Kommentar  turn  iiT,  1902 ;  D. 
Somerville,  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christ,  1897,  p.  156  ff. ; 
J.  Denney,  Jesus  and  the  Gospel,  1908,  p.  29  ff. ;  M.  Dibelius, 
Die  Gcisterwelt  im  Glavben  des  Pauitu,  1909 ;  W.  Bousset, 
Eauptptobleme  der  Gnosis,  1907,  p.  267. 

Robert  Law. 
FUTURE  LIFE.— See  Eschatoloqy. 


GAD 


GALATIA 


427 


6 


GAD.— See  Tribes. 


GAIUS  (r(iios=Caius,  a  Latin  name,  very  common 
as  a  Roman  praenomen).— 1.  In  1  Co  1'*,  a  member 
of  the  Churcli  of  Corinth,  baptized  by  St.  Paul, 
who  pK)ints  out  that  in  his  case,  as  in  the  case  of 
Crispus  and  in  that  of  '  the  household  of  Stephanas,' 
he  thus  deviated  from  his  usual  practice.  Crispus 
was  'the  ruler  of  tlie  synagogue'  (Ac  18*),  and 
Gaius  was  presumably  also  a  convert  of  some 
importance. 

2.  In  Ko  16^,  a  member  of  the  Church  of  Corinth, 
whom  St.  Paul  in  the  postscript  to  Romans  calls 
his  '  host'  and  the  host  of  '  the  whole  church,'  and 
whose  salutations  are  sent  to  the  readers  of  the 
letter.  He  was  evidently  a  man  of  position  and 
means  (the  greeting  from  him  immediately  pre- 
cedes that  from  Erastus, '  the  treasurer  of  the  city '), 
whether  his  hospitality  took  the  form  of  keeping 
open  house  for  Christians  and  Christian  \-isitors 
like  the  Apostle  at  Corinth  or  of  allowing  the 
Christians  to  meet  for  common  worship  and  edifica- 
tion under  his  roof. 

Everything  points  to  the  identification  of  1  and 
2.  The  same  Gaius  who  was  converted  and  bap- 
tized on  St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Corintii  entertained 
him  on  his  second  visit.  Now  it  is  perhaps  easier 
to  believe  that  this  Corinthian  would  have  friends, 
whom  he  would  wisli  to  salute,  at  Ephesus  rather 
than  at  Rome,  and  these  salutations  in  Ro  16^  are 
thought  by  some  scholars  to  point  to  an  Ephesian 
destination  of  the  passage.  But  as  Lightfoot  re- 
marks, in  the  Apostolic  Church  personal  acquaint- 
ance was  not  necessary  to  create  Christian  sympathy 
{Biblical  Essays,  1893,  p.  305). 

3.  In  Ac  19^,  a  companion  of  St.  Paul,  who  with 
Aristarchus  was  seized  at  Ephesus.  They  are 
described  as  '  men  of  Macedonia '  (MaiceSocas),  there 
being  very  little  support  for  another  reading,  '  a 
man  of  Macedonia,'  referring  to  Aristarchus  only. 

4.  In  Ac  20^,  a  companion  of  St.  Paul,  who 
accompanied  him  from  Greece  to  Asia  Minor.  He 
is  described  as  'of  Derbe'  (Aep/Satos),  possibly  in- 
tentionally to  distinguish  him  from  3. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  3  and  4. 
It  is  natural  to  do  so,  as  the  passages  stand  so  close 
together.  Emendations  of  the  text  have  been 
suggested  by  which  '  of  Derbe '  is  taken  -with 
'  Timothy,'  but  these  are  purely  conjectural,  and 
Timothy  was  apparently  a  Lystran  (Ac  16^-  ^). 
See  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the 
Roman  Citizen,  1895,  p.  280. 

5.  In  3  Jn^  the  person  to  whom  3  John  is  ad- 
dressed. He  is  described  as  '  the  beloved  '  (6  iya- 
TTfrbs),  and  is  commended  for  his  hospitality  (v.*). 
Nothing  is  known  of  this  Gaius,  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  him  to  have  been  any  one  of 
those  of  the  same  name  associated  with  St.  Paul. 

T.  B.  Allworthy. 
GALATIA    (FaXaWa).  —  Galatia  was  the    name 
given   by  Greek-speaking  peoples  to  that  part  of 
the  central  plateau  of  Asia  Minor  which  was  occu- 

fied  by  Celtic  tribes  from  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.  onwards, 
t  corresponded  to  the  Roman  Gallogrcecia,  or  land 
of  the  Gallograeci  {  =  'E\\TivoyaXdTai  [Diodorus,  V. 
xxxii.  5]),  who  were  so  named  in  distinction  from 
the  Galli  of  Western  Europe.  Manlius  in  Livy 
(xxxviii.  17)  professes  to  despise  them — '  Hi  jam 
degeneres  sunt :  mixti,  et  Gallogrteci  vere,  quod 
appellantur.' 

About  280  B.C.,  the  barbarians  who  had  been 
menacing  Italy  for  a  centurj'  began  to  move  east- 


ward. A  great  Celtic  wave  swept  over  Macedonia 
and  Thessaly.  Under  the  leadership  of  Leonorios 
and  Lutarios  a  body  of  20,000  invaders — half  of 
them  fighting  men,  the  rest  women  and  children — 
crossed  into  Asia  at  the  invitation  of  Nicomedes, 
king  of  Bithynia,  who  desired  their  help  in  his 
struggle  with  his  brother  (Livy,  xxxviii.  16).  His 
success,  however,  proved  costly  both  to  himself  and 
to  his  neighbours,  for  his  new  barbaric  allies 
established  themselves  as  a  robber-State  and  be- 
came the  scourge  of  Asia  Minor,  exacting  tribute 
from  all  the  rulers  north  and  west  of  Taurus,  some 
of  whom  were  fain  to  purchase  exemption  from  their 
degradations  by  employing  them  as  mercenary 
soldiers. 

Attains  I.  of  Pergamos  (241-197)  was  the  first  to 
check  the  fierce  barbarians.  Defeating  them  in  a 
series  of  battles,  which  are  commemorated  in  the 
famous  Pergamene  sculptures,  he  compelled  tliem 
to  form  a  permanent  settlement  with  definite 
boundaries  in  north-eastern  Phrygia.  The  Gala- 
tian  country,  an  irregular  rectangle  200  miles  long 
from  E.  to  W.  and  about  100  miles  wide,  became 
'  in  language  and  manners  a  Celtic  island  amidst 
the  waves  of  eastern  peoples,  and  remained  so  in 
internal  organization  even  under  the  empire' 
(T.  Mommsen,  The  Provinces  of  the  Boman  Empire^, 
1909,  i.  338). 

Like  Ctsar's  Gaul,  the  country  was  divided  into 
three  parts,  formed  by  the  rivers  Halys  and  Sanga- 
rius.  The  Tectosages  settled  round  Ancyra,  the 
Tolistobogii  round  Pessinus,  and  the  Trocmi  round 
Tavium.  According  to  Strabo  (XII.  v.  1),  the 
three  tribes  '  spoke  the  same  language  and  in  no 
respect  ditt'ered  from  one  another.  Each  of  them 
was  divided  into  four  cantons  called  tetrarchies, 
each  of  which  had  its  own  tetrarch  [or  chief],  its 
judge,  and  its  general.  .  .  .  The  Council  ot  the 
twelve  tetrarchies  consisted  of  300  men  who  as- 
sembled at  a  place  called  the  Drynemetum.' 

The  term  '  Galatians,'  which  at  first  denoted 
only  the  Gaulish  invaders,  was  in  course  of  time 
extended  to  their  Phrygian  subjects,  and  the 
'Galatian'  slaves  who  were  .sold  in  the  ancient 
markets  had  really  no  Celtic  blood  in  their  veins. 
For  two  centuries  the  proud  conquerors  formed  a 
comparatively  small  ruling  caste  in  the  country, 
like  the  Normans  among  the  Saxons  of  England. 
As  a  military  aristocrac}-,  whose  only  trade  was 
Avar,  they  left  agriculture,  commerce,  and  all  the 
peaceful  crafts  to  the  Phrygian  natives.  Averse 
to  the  life  of  towns  and  cities,  the  chieftains 
established  themselves  in  hill-forts  {(ppovpia  [Strabo, 
XII.  V.  2]),  where  they  kept  up  a  barbaric  state,  sur- 
rounded by  retainers  who  shared  witn  them  the 
vast  wealth  they  had  acquired  by  their  many  con- 
quests. For  siding  with  Antioclius  the  Great  in 
his  war  with  Rome,  and  frequently  breaking  their 
promise  to  refrain  from  raiding  the  lands  of  their 
neighbours,  the  Galatians  ultimately  brought  on 
themselves  a  severe  castigation  at  the  hands  of  Cn. 
Manlius  Vulso  in  189  B.C.  (Li\-y,  xxx^aii.  12-27, 
Polyb.  xxii.  16-22).  About  160  B.C.  they  obtained 
a  large  accession  of  territory  in  Lycaonia,  includ- 
ing the  towns  of  Iconium  and  Lystra.  Thereafter 
they  came  under  the  influence  of  the  kings  of 
Pontus,  but  Mithridates  the  Great  (120-63  B.C.), 
doubting  their  loyalty,  ordered  a  massacre  of  all 
their  chiefs,  and  this  savage  and  stupid  act  at  once 
drove  the  whole  nation  over  to  the  Roman  side. 
Their  new  alliance  proved  greatly  to  their  advan- 
tage, and  at  the  settlement  of  the  aflfairs  of  Asia 


428 


GALATIA 


GALATIA 


Minor  by  Pompey  in  64  B.C.,  Galatia  was  made  a 
Roman  client-State.  Three  chiefs  (tetrarchs)  were 
Appointed,  one  for  each  tribe,  of  whom  the  ablest 
and  most  ambitious,  Deiotarus,  tlie  friend  of  Cicero 
(ad  Fam.  viii.  10,  ix.  12,  xv.  1,  2,  4),  contrived  to 
seize  the  territories  of  the  others,  and,  in  spite  of 
the  hostility  of  Julius  Csesar,  ultimately  got  him- 
self reco>j;nized  as  king  of  all  Cialatia.  He  died  in 
40  B.C.,  and  four  years  later  his  dominions  were 
bestowed  by  Mark  Antony  on  Amyntas,  the  Roman 
client-king  of  Pisidia,  who  had  formerly  been  the 
secretary  of  Deiotarus.  This  brave  and  sagacious 
Oaul,  '  whose  career  was  in  many  points  parallel 
to  that  of  Herod  in  Palestine'  (H.  von  Soden,  Hist, 
of  Early  Christian  Lit.,  Eng.  tr.,  1906,  p.  69 f.), 
transferred  his  allegiance  from  Antony  to  Augustus 
after  Actium,  and  became  the  chief  mstrument  in 
■establishing  the  Pax  Romana  in  southern  Asia 
Minor.  Having  overthrown  Antipater  the  robber- 
chief,  he  added  Derbe  and  Laraiula  to  his  do- 
minions, but  lost  his  life  in  an  attempt  to  subdue 
the  Homanades  of  Isauria.  Galatia  then  ceased 
to  be  a  sovereign  State,  and  was  incorporated  in  the 
Roman  Empii-e  (in  25  B.C.). 

Cresar  [Bell.  Gall.  vi.  16)  says  of  the  Western 
Gauls,  '  Natio  est  omnis  Gallorum  admodum  dedita 
religionibus.'  But  the  faith  which  the  invaders  of 
Asia  brought  with  them  did  not  live  long  in  the 
new  environment.  The  un warlike  Phrygians  whom 
they  subdued  were  in  one  respect  intiexible,  and, 
as  in  so  many  instances,  '  victi  victoribus  leges 
■dederunt.'  If  the  Phrygian  religion,  with  its 
frenzy  of  devotion,  its  weird  music,  its  orgiastic 
dances,  its  sensuous  rites,  made  a  profound  impres- 
sion even  upon  the  cultured  Greeks,  one  need  not 
wonder  that  the  simple  Gallic  barbarians  were 
fascinated  by  the  cult  of  Cybele,  and  that  their 
chiefs  were  soon  found  by  the  side  of  the  native 
rulers  in  the  great  temple  of  Pessinus.  There  '  the 
priests  were  a  sort  of  sovereigns  and  derived  a  large 
revenue  from  their  office'  (Strabo,  Xll.  v.  3). 
When  the  old  warlike  spirit  of  the  Gauls  languished, 
as  it  naturally  did  after  the  establishment  of  a 
peaceful  provincial  government,  the  two  races 
gradually  approximated  in  other  things  than  re- 
ligion, but  a  long  time  was  needed  for  their  com- 
plete amalgamation.  '  In  spite  of  their  sojourn  of 
several  hundred  years  in  Asia  Minor,  a  deep  gulf 
still  separated  these  Occidentals  from  the  Asiatics ' 
<Mommsen,  op.  cit.  i.  338).  Even  in  the  4th  cent, 
the  far-travelled  Jerome  found  at  Ancyra,  along- 
side of  Greek,  a  Celtic  dialect  differing  little  from 
what  he  had  heard  in  Treves  (Preface  to  Comment- 
ary  on  Galatians). 

The  province  Galatia  included  the  greater  part 
of  the  wide  territory  once  ruled  by  Amyntas,  viz. 
Galatia  proper  (the  country  of  the  three  Galatian 
tribes),  part  of  Phrygia  (including  Antioch  and 
Iconium),  Pisidia,  Isauria,  and  part  of  Lycaonia 
(with  Lystra  and  Derbe).  For  nearly  a  century 
Galatia  was  the  eastern  frontier  province,  and 
every  fresh  annexation  to  it  marked  the  progress 
of  the  Empire  in  that  direction. 

Paphlagonia  was  added  in  ."i  B.C.,  Aniasia  and  Gazelonitis  in  2 
B.C.,  Komana  Pontica  (forming  with  Amasia  the  district  of 
Pontus  Galaticus  [Ptolemy,  v.  vi.  3])  in  a.d.  34,  and  Pontus 
Polenioniacus  (the  king^dom  of  Polemon  ii.  [Ptolemi',  v.  vi.  4))  in 
A.D.  C3.  The  south-eastern  part  of  the  province  was  somewliat 
contracted  in  a.d.  41  by  the  jfift  of  a  slice  of  Lycaonia,  including 
Laranda,  to  Antiochus  of  Commayrene  (called  .-ifter  him  Lycaonia 
Antiochiana),  so  that  Derbe  became  the  frontier  town  and 
customs'  station.  Ptolemy  defines  the  province  in  his  Geog. 
V.  4,  and  Pliny  in  his  HJf  v.  146,  147. 

Antioch  and  Lystra  (qq.v.)  were  made  Roman 
colonies  by  Augustus  ;  Iconium  and  Derhe  (qq. v.) 
were  remodelled  in  Roman  style  by  Claudius,  and 
named  Claud-Iconium  and  Claudio-Derbe.  In 
these  cities,  planted  in  the  most  civilized  and  pro- 
gressive part  of  central   Asia  Minor — the  region 


traversed  by  the  great  route  of  trallic  and  inter- 
course between  Ephesus  and  Syrijin  Antiocli — 
many  Greeks,  Romans,  and  Jews  swelled  the  native 
Phrygian  and  Lycaonian  populace. 

The  meaning  of  '  Galatia '  is  one  of  the  questionea 
vexatce  of  NT  exegesis.  Are  'the  churches  of 
Galatia'  (Gal  P;  cf.  1  Co  16')  to  be  sought  in  the 
comparatively  small  district  occupied  by  tiie  Gauls, 
about  Ancyra,  Pessinus,  and  Tavium,  or  in  the 
great  Roman  province  of  Galatia,  which  included 
Antioch,  Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe?  In  the 
absence  of  definite  information,  we  liave  to  make 
probability  our  guide,  and  to  the  ))resent  writer 
the  balance  of  evidence  appears  to  favour  the  Soutli 
Galatian  hypothesis.  The  chief  difficulty  is  createtl 
by  the  simultaneous  use  of  a  Roman  and  a  non- 
Roman  nomenclature.  It  was  the  policy  of  the 
Imperial  government  to  stamp  an  artificial  unity 
upon  all  tlie  diverse  parts  of  a  province,  often  with 
but  little  regard  to  historical  traditions  and  local 
sentiments.  The  old  territorial  designations  were 
of  course  still  popularly  used,  but  among  all  who 
looked  at  things  from  the  Imperial  standpoint — 
e.g.  the  Roman  governor,  the  coloni  of  cities 
founded  by  the  Romans,  the  incolce  of  semi- Roman 
towns,  and  the  Roman  historians — such  terms  as 
Galatia  and  Galata3,  Asia  and  Asiani,  Africa  and 
Afri,  denoted  the  province  and  the  people  of  the 
province. 

Tacitus  (Hist.  ii.  9)  mentions  'Oalatiam  ac  Pamphyliam  pro- 
vincias' ;  in  Ann.  xiii.  35  he  says,  '  et  habiti  per  Oalatiam  Cap- 
padociamque  dilectus' ;  and  in  Ann.  xv.  6  he  has  '  Galatirum 
Oappadocumque  auxilia.'  An  Iconian  inscription  to  an  Imperial 
officer  (CIG  3991)  designates  his  administrative  district  ToAa- 
TtKij  e-irapxtCa,  or  ' Galatic  province'.  Pliny  frequently  uses 
'  Galatia '  as  designating  the  province  (//A'  v.  27,  95,  etc.).  For 
other  instances  see  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  the  NT,  1909,  i.  184  f . 

The  crucial  question  is  whether  St.  Paul  assumed 
the  Imperial  standpoint  and  wrote  like  a  Roman. 
Zahn  {op.  cit.  i.  175)  holds  that  '  he  never  uses  any 
but  the  provincial  name  for  districts  under  Roman 
rule,  and  never  employs  territorial  names  wliicli 
are  not  also  names  of  Roman  provinces.'  Tho 
Apostle's  employment  of  the  terms  Achaia,  Mace- 
donia, Dalmatia,  Judoea,  Arabia,  Syria,  and  Cilicia 
is  regarded  as  consistently  Imperial.  Of  the  divi- 
sions of  Asia  Minor  he  names  only  Asia  and  Galatia, 
and  '  it  is  unlikely  that  he  meant  by  these  anytliing 
else  than  the  Roman  provinces  so  called,  for  the 
very  reason  that  he  mentions  no  districts  of  Asia 
Minor  whose  names  do  not  at  the  same  time  denote 
such  provinces '  {op.  cit.  i.  186).  Ramsay  similarly 
maintains  that  St.  Paul  always  thinks  and  speaks 
with  his  eye  on  the  Roman  divisions  of  the  Empire, 
i.e.  the  Provinces,  in  accordance  with  his  station 
as  a  Roman  citizen  and  with  his  invariable  and  oft- 
announced  principle  of  accepting  and  obeying  the 
existing  government.  Tins  view  is  contested  by 
the  South  Galatian  theorists.  Mommsen,  e.g.,  held 
that  'it  is  inadmissible  to  take  the  "(ialatians" 
of  Paul  in  anything  except  the  distinct  and  narrower 
sense  of  the  term '  (quoted  in  Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  96), 
and  P.  W.  Schmiedel  contends  that  'it  is  quite  un- 
permissible  to  say  of  Paul  that  he  invariably  con- 
fined himself  to  the  official  usage '  {EBi  ii.  1604). 
Both  the  old,  or  North  Galatian,  hyjwthesis  and 
the  new,  or  South  Galatian,  are  championed  by  an 
apparently  equal  number  of  distinguished  scholars.* 

It  is  certain  that  St.  Paul's  first  mission  north  of 
Taurus  was  conducted  in  the  Greek-speaking  cities 
of  Antioch  and  Iconium  (which  were  Phrygian), 

•  Among  the  North  Galatian  theorists  are  Lightfont.  .Inwott. 
H.  J.  Holtzmann,  Wendt.Oodet,  Blass,  Holsten,  Lir 
Zockler,  Schiirer,  von  l)ohsohiitz,  Jiilichor,  Bon 
Gilbert,  Findlay,  Chase,  Moffatt,  Stcinmann  ;  ami'i^^ 
Galatians  are  Perrot  (who  first  popularized  the  theory  in  li:> 
de    Galatia    Provincia    Romana,    1S67),    Renan,    HauTath, 
I*fleiderer,  Weizsiicker,  O.  Holtzmann,  von  Soden,  J.  Weiss. 
Clemen,   Belser,  Gififord,    Bartlet,  Bacon,    Askwith,  Kendall, 
Weber. 


GALATIA 


GALATIA 


42d 


Lystra  and  Derbe  (which  were  Lycaonian) — all  in 
ihe Proi-incia  Galatia,  but  far  from  Galatia  proper. 
The  historian  gives  a  graphic  account  of  the  found- 
ing of  churches  in  these  four  cities  (Ac  13'-»-14®), 
and  from  these  churches  St.  Paul  got  some  of  his 
fellow-workers  (16'  20*).  What  more  natural,  ask 
the  South  Galatian  theorists,  than  that  this  much- 
frequented  district  should  liecome  the  storm-centre 
of  a  Judaistic  controversy,  and  that  the  Apostle 
should  write  the  most  militant  and  impassioned  of 
all  his  letters  in  defence  of  the  spiritual  liberty  of 
the  converts  of  his  pioneer  mission  ?  On  the  North 
Galatian  theory,  the  founding  of  churches,  sav  in 
Pessinus,  Ancyra,  and  Tavium,  and  their  subse- 
quent development,  had  much  more  to  do  with  the 
extension  and  triumph  of  apostolic  Christianity 
among  the  Gentiles — which  was  St.  Luke's  theme — 
than  the  planting  of  the  South  Galatian  churches, 
and  the  historian  who  manifests  no  interest  in 
North  Galatia  stands  convicted  of  shifting  the 
centre  of  gravity  to  the  wrong  place.  It  is  diffi- 
cult, however,  to  believe  that  the  mission  in  which 
the  Apostle  was  welcomed  '  as  an  angel  from  heaven, 
as  Christ  Jesus '  (Gal  ■i)-*),  and  the  thrilling  experi- 
ences which  must  have  filled  his  mind  and  heart 
at  the  moment  when  he  joined  St.  Luke  in  Troas 
(Ac  16"),  are  alluded  to  in  no  more  than  a  single 
ambiguous  sentence  (16^),  which  Ramsay  character- 
izes as  'perhaps  the  most  difficult  (certainly  the 
most  disputed)  passage'  in  the  whole  of  Acts  (Church 
in  the  Roman  Empire,  1893,  p.  74  ff.). 

The  North  Galatian  school  accounts  for  the  his- 
torian's neglect  of  Galatia  proper,  and  for  the  curt- 
ness  of  his  narrative  at  this  vital  point  (Ac  16*^),  by 
his  desire  'to  get  Paul  across  to  Europe'  (Motfatt, 
LXT,  p.  94) ;  but  another  explanation  seems  more 
natural. 

'  I  would  rather  say  that  the  writer  passed  on  rapidly,  becaase 
the  joaniey  itself  was  direct,  and  iiDintemipted  by  any  import- 
ant incident  such  as  the  supposed  preatduag  and  founding  of 
churches  in  Xorthern  Galatia.  St  Paul's  mission  to  Europe 
was,  according  to  the  indications  given  in  the  narrative,  the 
di^"inely  appointed  purpose  of  the  whole  joomey.  Twice  he  is 
forbidden  to  turn  aside  from  the  direct  route  between  Antioch 
and  Troas.  "  To  speak  the  word  in  Asia,"  "  to  go  into  Bithynia," 
would  each  have  been  a  cause  of  much  delay  ;  and  in  each  case 
the  Apostle  found  himself  constrained  by  the  Spirit's  guidance 
to  go  straight  forward  on  his  appointed  way.  One  of  these 
Dirme  interpositions  occurred  before,  and  one  after  the 
supposed  digression  into  Northern  Galatia.  Do  they  not  make 
an  intermecBate  sojourn  in  that  district,  which  must  have  been 
of  long  duration,  and  of  which  the  writer  gives  no  hint  whatever, 
quite  inconceivable?'  (E.  H.  Gi£ford,  in  Expogitor,  4th  ser.,  i. 
[ls&4]  15). 

Similarly  Kenan  {Saint  Paul,  1869,  p.  12S) :  '  The  apostolic 
group  thusmade  almost  at  one  stretch  a  journey  of  more  than  one 
hundred  leagues,  across  |a  little-known  country,  which,  from  an 
absence  of  Boman  colonies  and  Jewish  synagogues,  did  not  offer 
them  any  of  the  facilities  which  they  bad  met  with  up  to  that 
time.' 

It  is  sometimes  confidently  asserted  that  the 
South  Galatian  theory  '  is  shipwrecked  on  the  rock 
of  Greek  grammar'  (F.  H.  Chase,  in  Expositor, 
4th  ser.,  viii.  [1893]  411,  ix.  [1894]  342).  On  the 
second  missionary  tour  St.  Paul  and  Silas  '  went 
through  the  region  of  Phrvgia  and  Galatia  (ttji» 
4>pir/tai'  Kal  TdXariKT^v  xiipa;'),  having  been  forbidden 
oif  the  Holy  Ghost  to  speak  the  word  in  Asia' 
(Ac  16^),  and  in  the  third  tour  '  they  went  through 
the  region  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia  (tt;i»  TaXaTiKrjv 
Xuipav  Ktti  <I>pi'7iay)  in  order,  stablishing  all  the 
churches'  (18^).  Ramsay  interprets  both  the 
Greek  phrases  as  '  the  Phrygo-Galatian  country,' 
i.e.  the  regie  which  is  ethnically  Phrygian  and 
politically  Galatian,  accounting  for  the  variation 
by  the  fact  that  in  the  one  instance  the  district 
was  traversed  from  west  to  east,  and  in  the  other 
from  east  to  west.  He  takes  the  phrases  to  denote, 
in  part  or  in  whole  (here  his  exegesis  wavers),  tlie 
South  Galatian  country  which  St.  Paul  had  already 
evangelized  in  his  first  tour.  Now  it  must  be 
admitted  that  if  the  modem  theory,  which  Ramsay 


has  so  long  and  strenuously  advocated,  were  bound 
up  with  this  interpretation,  there  would  be  no  little 
difficulty  in  accepting  it.  For  the  natural  reference 
of  the  words  'they  went  through  {SifiXdof)  the 
Phrygo-Galatic  region,  having  been  forbidden  (kuXv- 
dirrti)  ...  to  speak  the  word  in  Asia'  is  to  a 
district  east  of  Asia  and  north  of  Iconium  and 
Antioch,  South  Galatia  being  now  left  behind. 
Ramsay,  however,  contends  that  Kukvdiyrfs  is  not 
antecedent  to,  but  synchronous  with,  the  verb 
diij\6op,  and  translates  '  they  went  through  the 
Phrygo-Galatic  region  forbidden  ...  to  speak  the 
word  in  Asia.'  The  grammatical  point  is  fully 
discussed  by  E.  H.  Askwith  {The  Epistle  to  the 
Gal.,  1899,  p.  34 IF.),  who  produces  a  number  of 
more  or  less  similar  constructions  (of.  Gifibrd,  loc. 
eit.  16  fi'.).  (LrTaffd^tci'ot  in  Ac  25^  would  be  the  most 
striking  parallel,  but  here  Hort  thinks  that  some 
primitive  error  has  crept  into  the  text.  And  ab 
the  best  the  proposed  exegesis,  admittedly  unusual, 
is  very  precarious,  while  the  South  Galatian  theory 
is  really  independent  of  it.  Many  advocates  of  this 
theory  prefer  the  alternative  offered  by  GifTord, 
who  holds  (loc.  cit.  p.  19)  that  in  the  present  con- 
text '  the  region  of  Phrygia  and  Galatia '  can  only 
mean  '  the  borderlancl  of  Phry^a  and  Galatia 
northward  of  Antioch,  through  which  the  travellers 
passed  after  "having  been  forbidden  to  speak  the^ 
word  in  Asia."'  This  is  substantially  the  view  of 
Zahn  (op.  eit.  i.  176 ;  cf .  189  f. ),  who  is  willing  to 
make  a  further  concession.  *  It  could  be  taken  for 
granted,  therefore,  in  spite  of  the  silence  of  Acts, 
which  in  16®  mentions  merely  a  journey  of  the 
missionaries  through  these  regions,  that  Paul  and 
SUas  on  this  occasion  preached  in  Phrygia  and  a 
portion  of  North  Galatia;  and  that  the  disciples 
.  .  .  whom  Paul  met  on  the  third  missionary 
journey  to  several  places  of  the  same  regions 
(Ac  18**)  had  been  converted  by  the  preaching  of 
Paul  and  Silas  on  the  second  journey.'  Only,  as 
Zahn  himself  is  the  first  to  admit,  '  everyone  feels 
the  uncertainty  of  these  combinations.' 

The  present  tendency  of  the  North  Galatian 
theorists  is  greatly  to  restrict  the  field  of  the 
Apostle's  activity  in  Galatia  proper.  Lightfoot's 
assumption  that  he  carried  his  mission  through  the 
whole  of  North  Galaria  is  felt  to  be  '  as  gratuitous 
as  it  is  embarrassing'  (Schniiedel,  EBi,  ii.  1606). 
Tivium  and  Ancyra  are  now  left  out  of  account, 
and  only  '  a  few  churches,  none  of  them  very  far 
apart,'  are  supposed  to  have  been  planted  in  the 
west  of  North  Galatia  (ib. ) ;  but  the  more  the  sphere 
of  operations  is  thus  limited,  the  more  difficult 
does  it  become  to  believe  that  'the  churches  of 
Galatia'  are  to  be  sought  exclusively  in  this  small 
and  hypothetical  mission-field,  while  the  great  and 
flourishing  churches  of  South  Galatia  are  heard  of 
no  more. 

The  following  points,  though  severally  indecisive, 
all  favour  the  South  Galatian  theory.  (1)  The 
baneful  activity  of  Judaizers  in  Galatia  suggests 
the  presence  of  Jews  and  Jewish  Christians  in  the 
newly  planted  churches,  and  there  is  abundant 
evidence  of  the  strength  and  prominence  of  the 
Jews  in  Antioch  (Ac  13'*-"  14"),  Iconium  (14»),  and 
Lystra  (16'-' ;  cf.  2  Ti  1'  3"),  whereas  even  Philo's 
I  inflated  list  of  coimtries  where  Jews  were  to  be 
;  found  in  his  time  (Leg.  ad  Gaium,  xxxvi.)  does 
not  include  Galatia  proper,  and  among  the  Jews 
who  made  the  journey  to  Jerusalem  at  Pentecost 
there  were  Asians  and  Phrygians  but  apparently 
no  Galatians  (Ac  2*).  (2)  The  writer  of  Acts,  who 
in  general  uses  ethnographic  rather  than  political 
terms,  avoids  'Galatia,'  which  would  have  been 
taken  to  mean  Old  Galatia,  and  twice  employs  the 
phrase  '  Galatic  region.'  Ramsay's  view  is  that 
the  term  '  Galatic '  excludes  Galatia  in  the  narrow 
sense,  and  that  16*,  in  the  light  of  contemporary. 


430 


GALATIA 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLP:  TO  THE 


usage,  implies  that  St.  Paul  did  not  traverse 
North  Galatia  {Church  in  the  Roman  Emp., 
p.  81).  The  evidence  for  a  definite  usa<,'e,  however, 
IS  scanty,  '  Pontus  Galaticus'  (which  occurs  in 
Ptolemy  and  insori])tions)  not  being  quite  a  parallel 
case  ;  and  other  explanations  of  tlie  phrase  '  Galatic 
region '  are  certainly  admissible  (Motlatt,  LNT,  p. 
93).  (3)  The  pronoun  v/tay  in  Gal  2*  seems  to  imply 
tliat  the  Galatian  churches  existed  when  St.  Paul 
was  contending  for  the  spiritual  freedom  of  the 
Gentiles  at  the  Jerusalem  Council,  which  was  held 
before  the  journey  on  wliich,  according  to  the  old 
theory,  he  preached  in  North  Galatia.  Some  tliink 
that  St.  Paul  here  merely  claims  to  have  been 
figliting  the  battle  of  the  Gentiles,  or  the  Gentile 
Christians,  generally ;  but  in  that  case  he  would 
probably  have  said  '  you  Gentiles '  (Eph  2^'  3^).  (4) 
it  is  possible  to  make  too  mucli  of  the  parallel 
between  Gal  4'*,  '  ye  received  me  as  an  angel  of 
God,  as  Christ  Jesus,'  and  the  account  of  the 
Apostle's  remarkable  experience  at  Lystra,  where 
the  people  regarded  him  and  Barnabas  as  gods  (Ac 
14ii-i4j  st,iii  tije  coincidence,  as  Zahn  says  {op. 
cit.,p.  180),  is  probably  more  than  'a  tantalising 
accident.'  The  pagans  who  acclaimed  the  coming 
of  Jupiter  and  Mercury  would  be  likely  enough, 
when  partially  Christianized,  to  think  tnemselves 
recipients  of  a  visit  of  angels.  Even  Lightfoot 
(Galatians^,  1876,  p.  18)  admits  that  here  is  one 
of  the  '  considerations  in  favour  of  the  Roman 
province.'  (5)  The  charge  which  the  Judaizers  ap- 
parentlj'  made  against  the  self-constituted  Apostle 
of  freedom  of  being  still  a  preacher  of  circumcision 
(Gal  5^^)  is  best  explained  by  a  reference  to  the 
case  of  Timothy  (Ac  16'"*),  in  which  the  South 
Galatian  churches  had  a  special  interest,  Timothy 
being  a  native  of  Lystra.  (6)  The  repeated  allusion 
to  Barnabas  (Gal  2'*  **•  '^),  who  was  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  South  Galatian  Church,  would 
have  much  less  appositeness  in  an  Epistle  addressed 
to  North  Galatia,  where  that  apostle  w^as  not 
personally  known.  It  is  true  that  he  is  referred 
to  once  in  each  of  two  other  letters  (1  Co  9^,  Col  4"^), 
but  in  both  cases  there  were  special  reasons  for  tlie 
mention  of  his  name  (Zahn,  op.  cit.,  p.  179).  (7) 
While  some  of  St.  Paul's  helpers  came  from  South 
Galatia  (Ac  16^  20*),  and  while  Gains  and  Timothy 
■mai/  have  been  delegated  by  'the  churches  of 
Galatia'  (1  Co  16')  to  carry  their  otierings  to  the 
saints  at  Jerusalem  (a  somewhat  doubtful  inference 
from  Ac  20*),  North  Galatia  did  not,  as  far  as  is 
known,  provide  a  single  person  '  for  the  work  of 
ministering.'  (8)  There  is  evidence  that  Christi- 
a,nity  penetriited  North  Galatia  much  more  slowly 
than  South  Galatia.  '  Ancyra  and  the  Bithynian 
city  Juliopolis  (which  was  attached  to  Galatia 
about  297)  are  the  only  Galatian  bishoprics  men- 
tioned earlier  than  325  :  tliey  alone  appear  at  the 
Ancyran  Council  held  about  314'  (Ramsay,  Hist. 
Com.  on  Gal.,  1899,  p.  165). 

The  Roman  character  of  the  nomenclature  in 
1  P  P  is  rarely  questioned.  It  is  evidently  the 
writer's  purpose  to  enumerate  all  the  jirovinces  of 
Asia  Minor,  with  the  excention  of  Lycia- Paraphilia, 
where  '  the  elect'  were  still  few  (as  may  be  inferred 
from  Ac  13'*  14^*),  and  Cilicia,  which  was  reckoned 
with  Syria  (15^-  *').  And  just  as  he  includes  the 
Phrygian  churches  of  the  Lycus  valley — Colossae, 
Laodicea,  and  Hierapolis  (Col  1*2') — the  Church  of 
Troas  (Ac  20*"'^),  and  the  Churches  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse (Rev  1"),  in  the  province  of  'Asia,'  so  he 
reckons  the  Churches  founded  by  St.  Paul  in 
Lycaonia  and  Eastern  Phrygia  as  belonging  to  the 
province  of  'Galatia.' 

In  2  Ti  4'"  the  RV  has  '  Gaul '  as  a  marginal 
alternative  to  'Galatia.'  N  and  C  actually  read 
TaWla  instead  of  FaXar/a,  and,  besides,  the  latter 
word  was  often  applied  bj'  Greek  writers  to  Euro- 


pean Gaul.  If  it  could  be  assumed  that  St.  Paul 
was  able  to  carry  out  his  purpose  of  going  westward 
to  evangelize  Spain,  he  might  be  supposed  to  have 
visited  Southern  Gaul  en  route,  and  Crescens  might 
afterwards  have  gone  to  this  region.  Eusebius 
{HE'ui.  4),  Epiplianius(//<Er.  li.  II),  and  Theodoret 
{in  loco)  certainly  understand  that  Gaul  Ls  meant ; 
and  the  early  Christian  inhabitants  of  that  country 
naturally  liked  to  believe  that  their  Church  had 
been  founded  by  an  apostolic  emissary,  if  not  by 
an  apostle.  But  they  had  notliing  better  to  base 
their  belief  upon  than  conjecture,  and  it  is  mucli 
more  likely  that  the  reference  is  here  to  Asiatic 
Galatia,  since  the  other  places  named  in  the  con- 
text— Thessalonica  and  Dalmatia — are  both  east, 
not  west,  of  Rome. 

The  meaning  of  Takdrai  in  1  Mac  8*  is  disputable. 
The  RV  says  that  Judas  Maccabseus  (c.  162  B.C.) 
'  heard  of  the  fame  of  the  Romans,  that  they  are 
valiant  men.  .  .  .  And  they  told  him  of  their  wars 
and  exploits  whicli  they  do  among  the  Gauls,'  etc. 
A  reference  to  Spain  in  the  next  verse  might 
suggest  European  Gauls,  but  on  the  wliole  it  is 
much  more  likely  that  reports  of  Manlius's  victories 
over  the  Celtic  invaders  of  Asia  Minor  had  come 
to  the  ear  of  the  Jewish  leader. 

Literature.— J.  Weiss,  art.  '  Kleinasien '  in  PRE^  ;  W.  M. 
Ramsay,  art.  '  Galatia '  in  HDB ;  P.  W.  Schmiedel,  art. 
'  Galatia '  in  EJii.  The  chief  contributions  to  both  Hides  of  the 
Galatian  controversy  are  given  by  J.  Moffatt,  LMT,  1911,  pp. 
90-92.  The  important  nionoCTaphs  of  V.  Weber — Die  Abfans- 
ung  des  Galaterbrie/s  vor  dem  Apostelkonzil  (1900)  and  Der 
heilige  Paulus  vom  Apostelubereinkoininen  bis  mm  Apostel- 
konzil (1901)— are  South  Galatian,  while  those  of  A.  Steinmann 
— Die  AbfasxuiKjszeit  de3  Galaterlrrie/es  (1906),  and  Der  Leser- 
kreis  des  Galaterbrie/es  (1908)— are  North  Galatian. 

James  Strahan. 
GALATIANS,    EPISTLE     TO    THE.  —  1.    The 
Apostle,  the  Galatians,  and  the  Judaizers. — The 

'churches  of  Galatia'  to  which  the  Epistle  is  ad- 
dressed (1-)  owed  their  Christianity  to  the  preach- 
ing of  St.  Paul  (P).  Humanly  speaking,  one  may 
say  that  their  conversion  was  due  to  an  accident. 
Apparently  the  Apostle  had  set  out  with  some 
other  goal  in  view,  but  he  was  led  to  visit  Galatia, 
or  was  detained  there,  because  of  some  bodily  ail- 
ment (4'*).  The  nature  of  his  malady  was  such  as 
made  him  painful  to  behold  (4''*),  but  in  spite  of 
it  the  Galatians  welcomed  him  '  as  an  angel  from 
heaven,'  and  listened  eagerly  while  he  proclaimed 
to  them  Christ  crucified  as  the  only  way  of  salva- 
tion (3').  They  accepted  his  glad  tidings  and 
were  baptized  (3^).  They  had  made  a  good  start 
in  the  Christian  race  (5^),  strengthened  by  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  wliose  presence  within  them 
was  visibly  manifested  in  works  of  power  (3*"*). 

Once  again  *  St.  Paul  visited  the  Galatian 
churches.  A  little  plain  speaking  was  necessaiy 
concerning  certain  matters  of  doctrine  ami  con- 
duct (1*  5^^  4'*),  yet  on  the  whole  it  would  seem 
that  he  found  no  grave  cause  for  alarm. 

Subsequently,  liowever,  the  steadfastness  of  the 
Galatian  Christians  was  greatly  disturbed  by  the 
appearance  of  Judaistic  opponents  of  St.  Paul  {V 
3'  5'"),  who  denied  both  his  apostolic  authority 
and  the  sufficiency  of  the  gospel  which  he  preached. 
From  the  form  in  which  the  Apostle  cast  his  de- 
fence of  himself  and  of  his  teaching  (Gal  1-2,  3-5), 
it  is  not  difficult  to  deduce  the  doctrinal  position 
of  these  disturbers  and  the  ai  uuimiits  by  whicli 
they  bewitched  the  Galatians  (;;  ). 
•~'The  promise  of  salvation,'  said  they,  '  is  given 
to  the  seed  of  Abraham  alone  (3'-  "•  **).  Gentiles 
like  tlie  Galatians,  who  wish  to  be  included  in  its 
scope,  must  first  be  incorporated  into  the  family  of 

*  The  implied  antithesis  to  to  nportpov  (413)  is  not  rh  hrvrtpov 
but  rb  vOi'.  The  contrast  is  not  between  the  first  and  the 
second  of  two  visits,  but  between  the  former  happy  state  of 
things  and  the  changed  circumstances  at  the  time  of  writing. 
The  expression  to  nfMrepov  has  no  bearing  on  the  number  of  St. 
Paul's  visits  to  Galatia  (Askwith,  Gaiatiang,  p.  73  f.). 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    431 


Abraham.  This  means,  not  only  that  thev  must 
i)e  circiimciseii,  but  also  tliat  they  must  undertake 
to  keep  the  whole  of  the  Mosaic  Law  (4'*-  ^'  5-  6'-). 
•Only  on  these  conditions,  by  exact  performance  of 
-all  the  works  of  the  Law,  can  a  Gentile  \%'in  his 
M-ay  to  membersliip  in  the  Christian  Church  (2'*-**). 
St.  Paul  was  silent  about  tliese  conditions  because 
he  wished  to  curry  favour  with  you  (1'*),  yet  on 
occasion  even  he  has  declared  by  his  action  that 
■circumcision  is  binding  upon  Gentile  Christians 
•{5").  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  he  is  not 
an  apostle  in  the  same  sense  as  our  teachers,  the 
great  apostles  of  the  circumcision,  Peter,  James, 
and  John.  Tliey  received  their  authority  directly 
from  Jesus  Christ ;  his  was  derived  from  them. 
They  preach  the  whole  truth,  he  withholds  a  part ' 
(l»-2"). 

The  eflect  of  this  insidious  reasoning  was  like 
that  of  leaven  in  a  lump  of  dough  (5*).  St.  Paul's 
authority  was  undermined,  and  it  seemed  likely 
that  Tiis  labour  would  prove  to  have  been  wasted 
(4").  With  amazing  rapidity  (o&rws  rax^ws  [1*]) 
the  Galatians  were  turning  aside  from  the  gospel 
of  Christ  to  the  perverted  gospel  of  the  Judaizers 
(1").  They  were  minded  to  give  up  the  freedom 
■Christ  had  won  (5'),  and  to  take  upon  them  the 
yoke  of  the  Law  with  all  its  burdens  (4'"). 

At  the  time  when  St.  Paul  first  heard  of  their 
defection,  he  was  for  some  reason  unable  to  pay  a 
visit  to  Galatia  (4-'^).  To  meet  the  needs  of  the 
moment,  therefore,  he  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Gala- 
tians, denj'ing  the  insinuations  of  his  opponents 
with  respect  to  his  subordination  to  the  apostles 
at  Jerusalem,  and  pointing  out  the  fatal  conse- 
■quences  of  the  error  into  which  the  Galatians  were 
being  le<l — an  error  which,  pressed  to  its  logical  i 
conclusion,  was  equivalent  to  the  statement  that 
Christ's  death  was  gratuitous  and  unnecessary  (2^). 

To  the  attack  on  his  personal  authority  lie  re- 
plies by  stating  the  facts  of  his  immediate  Divine 
call  to  apostleship,  and  of  his  relations  with  the 
apostles  of  the  circumcision  (l''-2^*).  In  answer  to 
the  Judaizers'  insistence  on  the  necessity  of  cir- 
cumcision and  the  observance  of  the  Law,  he  sets 
forth  the  true  position  of  the  Law  in  God's  scheme 
of  redemption.  It  was  a  temporary  provision, 
inserted  parenthetically  between  the  promise  to 
Abraham  and  its  fulfilment  in  Christ.  The  Law 
itself  bears  witness  of  its  own  impotence  *  to  jus- 
tify '  (3*^"),  and  now  that  its  purpose  is  ser»-ed  it 
has  become  a  dead  letter.  The  gospel  of  Christ 
declares  that  we  are  '  justified  by  faith  and  not  by 
works  of  law  '  (2^''). 

Finally,  the  Apostle  meets  the  charge  of  pleasing 
men  by  exposing  the  motives  of  the  Judaizers, 
whose  main  object  was  to  escape  persecution  and 
to  gain  applause  (6^  ^*  4") ;  with  this  he  contrasts 
his  own  self-sacrificing  love  for  his  converts  (4^*) 
and  the  hardships  he  has  sutiered  for  his  fearless 
proclamation  of  the  truth   o''  6'"). 

2.  Summary  of  the  Epistle. — The  Epistle  falls 
into  three  main  divisions. 

A.  Chirjly  historical  (Ii-2»*). 

1^*'.  The  customary  salutation  is  so  framed, 
■with  its  insistence  on  the  writers  apostolic  author- 
ity, as  to  lead  up  to  the  main  subject  of  the  Epistle. 

l«-io  fjjg  tisual  thanksgiving  for  past  good  pro- 
gress is  displaced  by  an  expression  of  astonishment 
at  the  Galatians'  sudden  apostasy,  a  denunciation 
of  the  false  teachers,  and  a  declaration  of  the 
eternal  truth  of  St.  Paul's  gospel. 

l"-2".  This  gospel  was  derived  from  no  human 
source,  but  was  directly  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ. 
Obviously  it  could  not  have  been  suggested  by  the 
Apostles  early  training,  which  was  based  on  prin- 
ciples diametrically  opposed  to  the  gospel  freedom 
(!""").  Nor  could  he  have  learnt  it  from  the 
earlier  apostles,  for  he   did  not   meet  them  till 


some  time  after  his  conversion  (l**"'^.  When  at 
length  he  did  visit  Jerusalem,  he  saw  none  of  tlie 
apostles  save  Cephas  and  James,  and  them  only 
for  a  short  time.  Finally,  he  left  Jerusalem  un- 
known even  by  sight  to  the  great  majority  of 
Christians  (I»»-=»«). 

When  he  visited  Jerusalem  again,  fourteen  years 
later,  he  asserted  the  freedom  of  the  Gentiles  from 
the  Law  by  refusing  to  circumcise  Titus.*  On  this 
visit  he  conferred  privately  with  the  apostles  of 
the  circumcision,  on  terms  of  absolute  equality. 
They  on  their  side  commended  the  work  ne  had 
already  done  amongst  Gentiles,  and  treated  him  as 
a  feUow-apostle  (2^"").  His  independent  apostolic 
authority  was  further  demonstrated  at  Antioch, 
where  he  jpublicly  rebuked  St.  Peter  for  virtually 
denying  the  gospel  by  refusing  to  eat  with  Gen- 
tiles (2""").  The  particular  argument  used  by  St. 
Paul  against  St.  Peter  gradually  expands  into  the 
general  argument  which  forms  the  second  section 
of  the  Epistle. 

B.  Principally  doctrinal  (2«-4«). 

2"*-*^.  St.  Peter  himself  and  all  Jewish  Chris- 
tians, by  seeking  justification  through  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ,  tacitly  admitted  the  impossibility  of 
attaining  salvation  through  works  of  the  Law. 
St.  Paul's  own  experience  had  taught  him  that 
only  after  realizing  this  impossibility,  which  the 
Law  itself  brought  home  to  him,  had  he  come  to 
know  Christ  as  a  vital  power  within.  If  salvation 
were  attainable  by  obedience  to  the  Law,  then 
would  the  Cross  be  superfluous. 

3'"*.  The  Galatians  must  be  bewitched,  after 
having  experienced  the  reality  of  justification  by 
faith,  to  turn  to  works  of  law  as  a  more  perfect 
way  of  salvation.  Faith,  not  works  of  law,  makes 
men  true  children  of  Abraham  and  inheritors  of  the 
blessing  bestowed  on  him. 

310-18^  The  Law  brings  no  blessing  but  a  curse, 
to  free  us  from  which  Christ  died  a  death  which 
the  Law  describes  as  accursed.  Through  faith  in 
Him  we  receive  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise 
made  to  Abraham — a  promise  which  is  older  than 
the  Law  and  cannot  be  annulled  by  it. 

3i9_4ii_  The  Law  was  a  temporary  provision  to 
develop  man's  sense  of  sin,  and  to  make  him  feel 
the  need  of  salvation.  It  was  the  mark  of  a  state 
of  bondage,  not  contrary  to,  but  preparing  for,  the 
gospel.  Under  the  LaAV  we  were  in  our  spiritual 
minority.  Now,  as  members  of  Christ,  we  have 
reached  the  status  of  full-grown  men.  Being  one 
with  Him,  we  are  the  true  promised  seed  of 
Abraham.  We  have  outgrown  the  limitations  of 
childhood  and  come  to  the  full  freedom  of  spiritual 
manhood  as  sons  and  heirs  of  God.  How  then  can 
the  Galatians  desire  to  return  to  the  former  state 
of  bondage  ? 

412-20  "Tjjg  Apostle  begs  them  to  pause,  appeal- 
ing to  their  recollection  of  his  personal  intercourse 
with  them,  which  he  contrasts  with  the  self-in- 
terested motives  of  the  false  teachers. 

421-a^  The  witness  of  the  taw  against  itself  is 
illustrated  bv  an  allegorical  interpretation  of  the 
story  of  Sarali  and  Haga4  Hagar,  the  bondwoman, 
and  her  descendants  stand  for  the  old  covenant 
and  its  followers,  who  are  in  bondage  to  the  Law. 
These  are  thrust  out  from  the  promised  inheritance 
and  remain  in  bondage.  But  Isaac,  the  child  of 
promise,  bom  of  a  free  woman,  represents  the  true 
seed  of  Abraham,  namely,  Clirist,  and  them  who 
are  united  to  Him  by  faith.  These  possess  the  in- 
heritance, for  they  are  free. 

C.  Mainly  hortatory  (S'-S**). 

5*-^.  The  Galatians  should  therefore  cling  to  the 

*  The  '  Western  Text,'  which  omits  oTs  avU  (25),  implies  that 
TitU3  xcai  circumcised.  This  is  also  a  possible  interpretation 
of  the  generally  accepted  reading-.  On  the  whole  question 
see  K.  Lake,  Tlu  Earlier  EpigtlettJ  St.  Paul,  p.  2T5ff. 


432     GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


freedom  Avhich  Christ  has  won  for  them.  To  follow 
the  Judaizers  and  accept  circumcision  is  to  break 
away  from  Christ  and  return  to  bondage  under  the 
yoke  of  the  Law. 

513-26  Yg(;  liberty  must  not  be  confused  with 
licence.  The  fundamental  Christian  law  of  love 
declares  tliat  true  freedom  is  freedom  to  serve 
others.  The  works  whicli  result  from  the  indwell- 
ing of  Christ's  Spirit  cannot  possibly  be  mistaken, 
nor  can  those  of  the  ilesh. 

gi-io  -pijg  freedom  of  Christian  service  must  be 
practically  manifested,  in  forbearance  and  brotherly 
love  and  liberality. 

gn-j8  Peroration,  summing  up  the  main  points 
of  the  Epistle,  and  the  final  benediction.  The 
Apostle  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  at  any  rate 
for  these  closing  verses  he  has  dispensed  witii  the 
services  of  the  customary  amanuensis,  and  written 
his  message  in  his  own  large  handwriting  (6"). 
Possibly  the  words  (ypafa  rp  ifi^  x^V^  ^^^Y  refer  to 
the  whole  Epistle. 

3.  Leading  ideas. — (a)  Righteousness  and  justi- 
fication.— St.  Paul  and  his  Judaistic  opponents 
alike  expressed  their  teaching  in  conventional  Jew- 
ish terminology.  Both  agreed  that  the  object  of 
all  religion  is  the  attainment  of  'righteousness' 
(oi.K<uo(Tiv7}  [2^^'  3"^  5"]).  The  metaphor  underlying 
the  Mord  ' righteousness '  is  forensic,  and  has  its 
roots  far  back  in  the  usage  of  the  OT.  In  its  most 
primitive  sense  the  word  *  righteous '  (5/Kaios,  Heb. 
p^%)  is  used  to  describe  that  one  of  two  litigants 
whom  the  judge  pronounces  to  be  'in  the  riglit.' 
'Righteousness'  (SiKaioai/j'jj,  Heb.  pn^or  nijis)  is  the 
status  of  one  who  is  in  the  right.  The  verb  which 
denotes  the  action  of  the  judge  in  pronouncing  him 
'  righteous '  (Heb.  P'^sri)  is  represented  by  the  Greek 
word  SiKmovv  and  the  Englisn  '  to  justify '  (Lk  7^'). 
Used  in  the  religious  sense,  '  righteousness'  means 
the  status  of  one  who  is  in  a  riglit  relation  towards 
God,  in  a  state  of  acceptance  with  God.  'To 
justify'  (biKaiovv)  is  to  declare  one  to  be  in  a  state 
of  righteousness  (of.  Sanday-Headlam,  Boman^,  p. 
28  ff.). 

(b)  WorJcs  and  faith. — The  fundamental  differ- 
ence between  St.  Paul  and  his  opponents  was  not 
concerning  the  nature  of  righteousness,  but  con- 
cerning the  way  in  which  it  may  be  attained.  The 
Judaizers  maintained  that  righteousness  is  the 
reward  of  man's  own  effort.  It  is  the  fruit  of 
perfect  obedience  to  the  will  of  God.  The  Law  of 
Moses  is  the  most  complete  expression  of  the  Divine 
will  for  man.  Whether  for  Jew  or  Gentile,  there- 
fore, righteousness,  the  condition  of  salvation, 
depends  upon  an  exact  performance  of  all  the 
Mosaic  ordinances.  We  are  '  justilied  by  works  of 
the  law '  (216-  "i  5% 

St.  Pavil  exposes  the  fundamental  defect  of  this 
position.  The  doctrine  of  '  justification  by  works ' 
takes  no  account  of  the  inborn  weakness  of  human 
nature.  If  righteousness  be  attainable  by  perfect 
obedience  to  the  Law,  then  the  Incarnation  was 
unnecessary.  Christ's  death  was  superfluous  and 
meaningless  (2^^),  for  men  can  save  themselves. 
But  experience  shows  that  human  nature  is  so  con- 
stituted as  to  be  incapable  of  perfect  obedience. 
The  search  for  justification  by  works  has  been 
tried  and  has  failed.  Those  who  sought  most 
eagerly  have  been  most  acutely  conscious  of  their 
failure  (2'®-^^).  The  Law  could  not  help  thein. 
All  it  could  do  was  to  make  clear  the  Divine  com- 
mands, and  pronounce  sentence  on  such  as  failed 
to  keep  them  (3'*).  From  its  sentence  no  man 
escapes.  The  actual  result  of  the  giving  of  the 
Law  was  to  teach  man  by  bitter  experience  that '  by 
works  of  the  law  shall  lio  flesh  be  justilied '  (2^*). 

But  that  righteousness  which  man  cannot  win 
by  his  own  individual  efforts  he  can  now  receive 
as  a  free  gift  won  for  him  by  Christ  (1'  3'*'"). 


On  man's  side  the  one  condition  of  justification 
is  '  faith.'  Faith  is  much  more  than  mere  intellec- 
tual belief.  It  is  an  entire  surrender  of  the  whole 
self  to  Christ,  the  conscious  &ct  of  entering  into, 
vital  union  with  Him.  This  union  is  no  mere  meta- 
phor, but  a  living  personal  reality.  At  baptism 
the  believer  '  puts  on  Christ '  (3").  Thenceforward 
he  is  '  in  Christ,'  '  Christ  is  formed  in  him '  (4^*), 
until  he  can  say,  '  I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ 
liveth  in  me '  (2i»-=»).  Thus  '  tiiey  that  are  of  faith ' 
(3*)  are  justified,  not,  as  by  a  legal  fiction,  by  the 
imputation  to  them  of  a  righteousness  which  is  not 
really  their  own,  but  because,  as  members  of  Christ, 
they  have  become  living  parts  of  that  perfect 
human  nature  which  alone  is  conipletely  righteous, 
i.e.\\D.  complete  union  with  God.  Christ  s  righteous- 
ness is  theirs  because  they  are  one  with  Him  (3**). 

But  there  can  be  no  justification  without  the 
faith  which  is  absolute  self-surrender.  Christ 
must  be  everything  or  nothing.  If  men  persist  in 
relying  on  their  own  unaided  power  to  obtain 
righteousness  by  works,  they  cut  themselves  off 
from  Christ  and  have  no  share  in  the  righteousnesa 
which  human  nature  has  achieved  in  Him  (5*). 

(c)  The  Law  and  the  promise. — God  made  a 
promise  to  Abraham,  that  in  him  and  in  his  seed 
all  nations  should  be  blessed  (3^).  That  promise  is 
fulfilled  in  Christ.  He  is  the  true  seed  of  Abraham 
(3^''^),  and  the  blessing  received  by  the  human 
race  is  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  (3"),  which  is  the 
evidence  of  man's  justification.  But,  when  the 
promise  was  given,  no  mention  was  made  of  works 
or  law.  The  Scripture  speaks  only  of  the  '  faith' 
of  Abraham  (3").  The  promise  given  to  Abraham 
was  of  the  nature  of  a  covenant  signed  and  sealed. 
The  Law,  therefore,  which  came  more  than  400 
years  later,  cannot  annul  it  or  add  to  it  a  new 
clause  insisting  on  the  necessity  of  works  (3"- "). 
The  promise  came  first ;  the  Law  came  later.  The 
promise  is  absolute,  the  Law  conditional.  The 
promise  was  spoken  directly  by  God ;  the  Law  was 
issued  through  mediators,  human  and  angelic  (3"). 
These  facts  prove  that  the  Law  is  subordinate  and 
inferior  to  the  promise,  though  it  would  be  impious 
to  imagine  a  contradiction  between  the  two,  since 
one  God  gave  both  (3^').  The  Law  had  a  real 
purpose  to  serve.  By  its  exact  definition  of  trans- 
gressions and  the  consequent  deepening  of  man's 
sense  of  sin  and  helplessness  (S*'*),  it  prejjared  the 
way  for  his  acceptance  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 

Eromise,  the  offer  of  justification  by  faith  in  Christ. 
>ut  now  that  the  promise  is  fulfilled  the  Law  is  no 
longer  necessary  {^^-  ^). 

(5)  Christology. — The  Divinity  of  Christ  is  taken 
for  granted  (4*).  The  reality  of  His  human  nature 
is  indicated  by  references  to  His  birth  of  a  woman 
(4*),  His  nationality  (S^%  His  Crucifixion  (S^),  and 
His  Resurrection  {V).  That  He  is  man  not  individ- 
ually but  inclusively  (i.e.  not  'a  man '  but  '  man'), 
is  shown  by  the  whole  argument  of  the  Epistle, 
which  rests  on  the  conviction  that  '  by  faith '  all 
men  may  share  the  power  of  His  perfect  humaa 
nature  (2i»- 20  4'9). 

His  redemptive  work  centres  in  His  death.  He 
'gave  himself  for  our  sins,'  thereby  'delivering  us 
from  the  present  age  with  all  its'evils'  (1*).  He 
'  redeemed '  us  from  the  curse  pronounced  by  the 
Law,  by  Himself '  becoming  a  curse  for  us '  (3"-  "  4*), 
i.e.  hj  dying  a  death  which  the  Law  describes  as 
accursed  (Dt  21»).* 

(e)  T/ie  Holy  Spirit.— The  indwelling  of  the  Holy 

•Dt  2113  »?'?:ti  D'n^K  n^^p  means  not  that '  a  curse  restson  him 
who  is  impaled,'  but  that  'his  unburied  corpse  is  an  insult 
to  the  Goa  of  the  land  which  by  its  presence  it  defiles."  St. 
Paul  quotes  the  LXX,  which  takes  CV-7X  wronRly  as  subjectlre 
genitive.  St.  Paul  means  simply  'Christ  died  a  death  in  con- 
nexion with  the  outward  circumstances  of  which  the  Law- 
mentions  a  curse.' 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE     433 


Spirit  is  the  e\-idence  of  our  adoption  into  the  familj- 
of  God  (4*-  *).  His  presence  is  manifested  in  the  in- 
ward sense  of  sonship  (4**),  and  outwardly  in  works 
of  power  (3')  and  in  the  manifold  Christian  graces 
(o-*-).  He  is  personally  distinct  from  the  lather 
and  the  Son,  yet  the  three  act  as  one.  '  The  Father 
sends  the  Spirit  of  the  Son '  (4«). 

4.  Relation  to  other  books  of  the  NT.— (a)  Gala- 
tians  and  Acts. — The  autobiofrraphical  details  given 
by  St.  Paul  in  Gal  l^.ou  cover  a  period  of  which  a 
second  account  is  provided  by  the  writer  of  Acts. 
The  task  of  reconciling  the  two  narrati%-es  is  beset 
by  many  difficulties,  most  of  which  centre  round  St. 
Paul's  two  ^Tsits  to  Jerusalem. 

(1)  Tlie  Epistle  asserts  that  St.  Paul's  conversion 
was  followed  by  a  visit  to  Arabia,  a  'return'  to 
Damascus,  and  then,  'after  three  years,'  a  visit  to 
Jerusalem.  This  visit  is  described  as  being  of  a 
purely  private  nature.  St.  Paul  saw  none  of  the 
apostles  except  St.  Peter  and  St.  James,  and  de- 
parted to  Syria  and  Cilicia  unknown  even  by  sight 
to  the  faithfvil  in  Judaea  (l^*-^). 

Acts,  on  the  other  hand,  seems  to  imply  that  after 
his  conversion  St.  Paul  returned  directly  from 
Damascus  to  Jerusalem  (9^'*"^).  The  expression  wj 
Se  ir\r]povvTO  rjfiepai  iKaral  (9^)  sugjiests  that  the 
Apostle  spent  a  considerable  time  at  Damascus,  but 
nothing  is  said  concerning  any  visit  to  Arabia, 
Moreover,  the  description  in  Acts  of  his  visit  to 
Jerusalem  differs  considerably  from  that  in  the 
Epistle.  It  speaks  of  a  period  of  public  preaching 
sufficiently  widely  known  to  give  rise  to  Jewish 
plots  against  his  life  (9^-)-  H  this  be  true,  it  is 
difficult  to  believe  that  St.  Paul's  stay  in  the  city 
was  limited  to  fifteen  days  (Gal  1^^),  or  that  he  was 
unknown  by  sight  to  the  Christians  of  Judjea,  un- 
less it  be  assumed  that '  Judtea '  means  the  outlying 
districts  exclusive  of  Jerusalem  (cf.  Zee  12®  14^^). 

Yet  it  is  clear  that  both  accounts  refer  to  the 
same  visit,  for  both  place  it  between  St.  Paul's 
return  from  Damascus  and  his  departure  to  Cilicia 
(Ac  9*^,  Gal  1^).  Nor  do  the  two  narratives  appear 
irreconcilable,  when  the  different  objects  with  which 
they  were  written  are  borne  in  mind.  St.  Paul's 
purpose  was  to  give  a  complete  account  of  his  move- 
ments so  far  as  they  brought  him  into  contact  with 
the  apostles.  Consequently,  in  connexion  with 
his  visit  to  Jerusalem,  he  omits  everything  except 
his  intercourse  with  Cephas  and  James.  The 
object  of  the  Avriter  of  Acts  was  to  trace  the  growth 
of  the  Church.  He  might  well  omit,  as  irrelevant 
to  his  purpose,  all  mention  of  St.  Paul's  visit  to 
Arabia,  which  the  Apostle  himself  describes  as  a 
temporary  absence  in  the  course  of  a  long  stay  in 
Damascus  {vriarpf^a  [Gal  1'']). 

(2)  Gal  2^"^*  describes  a  second  occasion,  when  St. 
Paul  visited  Jerusalem  in  company  with  Bamabjis, 
and  interviewed  the  apostles  of  the  circumcision. 
According  to  Acts,  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  went  up 
to  Jerusalem  together  twice  :*  {a]  during  the  famine 
of  A.D.  46  (Ac  11**  12^) ;  {b)  at  the  time  of  the  so- 
called  Council  of  Jerusalem  (Ac  15-)  some  years 
later.  By  Kamsay,  Lake,  Emmet,  and  other 
scholars,  the  \-isit  of  Gal  2i-^*'  is  identified  with  (a); 
by  Lightfoot,  Zahn,  and  the  majority  of  modem 
critics  with  (b). 

In  favour  of  the  former  identification  it  is  urged  : 
(i.)Thatthenaturaiinference  from  the  language  of 
the  Epistle  is  that  St.  Paul's  second  interview  with 
the  other  apostles  occurred  during  his  second  visit 
to  Jerusalem,  and  Acts  places  his  second  visit  in 
the  time  of  the  famine  ;  (ii.)  that,  in  three  details  at 
least,  the  circumstances  of  Gal  2^"^"  agree  with  the 
account  of  Ac  ll-^"** :  the  journey  was  suggested 
'  by  revelation '  (Gal  2^  Ac  11^);  St.  Paul's  com- 

*  McGiffert  (History  of  Chrigtianity  in  the  Apoitolie  Affe,  p. 
lT2ff.)  is  almost  alone  in  argtiing  that  the  ivro  visits  oJ  Ac  15 
and  Ac  11  are  really  one  and  the  same. 
VOL.  I. — 28 


panion  is  Barnabas  (Gal  2',  Ac  11**);  each  account 
mentions  the  relief  of  the  poor  (Gal  2*",  Ac  11-*). 

In  support  of  the  alternative  ^-iew  it  is  argued  : 

(i. )  That  in  Ac  15  and  Gal  2'*^"  the  chief  persons  are 
the  same — St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  on  the  one  hand, 
St.  Peter  and  St.  James  on  the  other  ;  (iL)  the  sub- 
ject of  discussion  is  the  same,  i.e.  the  circumcision 
of  Gentile  converts ;  (iii.)  the  result  is  the  same,  i.e. 
the  exemption  of  Gentile  converts  from  the  enact- 
ments of  the  Law,  and  the  recognition  by  St.  Peter, 
St.  James,  and  St.  John  of  the  apostleship  of  St, 
Paul  and  Barnabas  (Lightfoot,  Ga?.»,  p.  123  ff,). 

The  acceptance  of  either  view  involves  diffictilties. 
Against  the  former  it  has  been  objected  : 

(L)  That  Acts  does  not  mention  any  meeting  be- 
tween St.  Paul  and  the  three  in  connexion  with  the 
'  famine  visit,'  but  rather  suggests  that  they  were 
absent  from  Jerusalem  at  the  time.  This  is  not  a 
serious  difficulty.  The  argument  from  silence  is 
always  precarious,  and  the  only  passage  which 
suggests  that  the  apostles  were  not  in  Jerusalem  is 
the  statement  that,  from  the  house  of  John  Mark's 
mother,  St.  Peter  went  eis  Irepov  rorov  (Ac  12^^, 
which  need  not  necessarily  mean  that  he  left  the 
city. 

(ii.)  That  the  language  of  Gal  2*  (rp^w  ij  fSpajxov) 
implies  that  St.  Paul  had  already  done  much  mis- 
sionary work  amongst  Gentiles,  whereas  the  events 
of  Ac  1 1^-^  took  place  before  his  first  missionary 
journey.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  if  this  objection 
has  any  weight,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  at  any  rate 
fourteen  years  had  elapsed  since  the  Apostle  first 
realized  his  special  vocation  to  preach  to  the  Gen- 
tUes  (Ac  222'). 

(ilL)  That  it  is  chronologically  impossible.  The 
date  of  the  famine  (and  therefore  of  St.  Paul's 
visit  to  Jerusalem)  is  fixed  by  the  independent 
evidence  of  Josephus  between  .\.D.  46  and  48.  On 
this  theory,  therefore,  the  date  of  St.  Paul's  con- 
version would  be  not  later  than  A.D.  33,  even  if 
the  fourteen  years  of  Gal  2^  are  reckoned  from  that 
event,  and  as  early  as  A.D.  30,  if  they  are  reckoned 
from  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  (Gal  1^*).  Most 
recent  students  of  NT  chronology,  however  (except 
Hamack,  who  accepts  the  date  A.D.  30),  place  St. 
Paul's  conversion  between  A,D.  33  and  37.  The 
difficulty  is  real  but  not  fatal.  All  chronological 
schemes  for  the  period  a.d.  29-46  are  merely  tenta- 
tive, and  those  who  argue  for  the  later  date  usually 
take  their  stand  on  the  assumption  that  the  visit 
of  Gal  2  is  the  same  as  that  of  Ac  15. 

The  alternative  theory,  that  Gal  2  and  Ac  15 
refer  to  the  same  occasion,  presents  special  difficul- 
ties of  its  own. 

(i.)  St.  Paul's  account  of  his  dealings  with  the 
mother  church  is  incomplete.  He  is  guilty  of  con- 
cealing his  second  visit  to  Jerusalem,  and  thereby 
his  personal  defence  against  the  Judaizers  is  in- 
validated. The  usual  answers  to  this  objection  are : 
(o)  St.  Paul  omits  his  second  visit  because  he  did 
not  meet  the  apostles  on  that  occasion  (see  above), 
or  03)  St.  Paul  refers  only  to  those  visits  of  which 
his  adversaries  had  given  a  distorted  accoxmt. 

(ii.)  The  most  obvious  inference  from  the  narrative 
of  Gail  2  is  that  St.  Paul's  dispute  with  Cephas  at 
Antioch  (2")  took  place  after  the  apostolic  meeting 
at  Jerusalem*  (2^-^*).  But  such  a  dispute  is  quite 
incomprehensible  if  the  relation  between  Jewish 
and  Gentile  converts  had  already  been  settled.  It 
is  just  possible,  however,  that  the  quarrel  occurred 
be/ore  the  meeting.  It  may  be  that  the  absence 
from  2"  of  the  fretra  of  the  earlier  sections  (l^*-" 
2^)  indicates  that  the  writer  is  no  longer  follo¥ring 
strict  chronological  order. 

(iii.)  Ac  15  states  that  the  Council  of  Jerusalem 

*  '  Gal  211-16  forms  the  climax,  from  St.  Paul's  point  of  view, 
in  his  triumphant  assertion  of  the  free  Christian  rights  belong- 
ing to  Gentile  converts '  (Moffatt,  LST,  p.  101). 


434    GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


dealt  with  and  settled  the  very  question  which  St. 
Paul  discusses  in  tlie  Epistle.  It  is  incredible  that 
tlie  Apostle  should  describe  a  private  interview 
with  tne  three  wliich  occurred  at  the  time  of  the 
Council  without  alludinj?  either  to  the  Council 
itself  or  to  its  decrees,  although  tlie  official  decision, 
that  Gentiles  need  not  be  circumcised,  would  have 
provided  a  conclusive  argument  against  the  Juda- 
izers.  Again,  St.  Paul  could  not  truthfully  have 
said  oidiv  irpoaaviOevTo  (Gal  2"),  after  accepting  the 
*  Gentile  food  restrictions '  *  passed  by  the  Council 
(Ac  15*').  These  objections  are  as  weighty  as  any 
argument  from  silence  can  be.  They  are  satis- 
factorily met  only  by  the  assumption  that  the 
Acts'  account  of  the  Council  is  wholly  or  partly 
unhistorical. 

The  identity  of  the  visit  of  Gal  2'-'<'  must  be  left 
uncertain.  If  it  be  that  of  Ac  11,  the  narrative  of 
Galatians  is  free  from  difficulties,  but  some  altera- 
tion is  necessary  in  the  generally  accepted  chrono- 
logy of  the  primitive  Apostolic  Age.  If  it  be  that 
of  Ac  15,  doubt  arises  as  to  the  historicity  of  the 
Acts'  account  of  the  Council,  and  the  reason  for 
St.  Paul's  silence  concerning  his  second  visit  to 
Jerusalem  must  be  left  to  conjecture. 

See,  further,  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  II.  2  (b). 

{b)  Galatians  and  Romans.  — '  Almost  every 
thought  and  argument  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians may  be  matched  from  the  other  Epistle '  {se. 
Rom.  [Lightfoot,  Gal.^,  p.  45]).  A  detailed  com- 
parison of  the  parallel  passages  shows  that  this 
agreement  exists  not  only  in  general  ideas,  but 
also  in  unusual  turns  of  expression  and  argument 
such  as  would  not  arise  inevitably  from  the  nature 
of  the  subject  {ib.).  More  or  less  consciously  the 
writer  must  have  had  the  one  Epistle  in  mind  when 
he  wrote  the  other,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  as 
to  which  is  the  earlier t  of  the  two.  'The  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians  stands  in  relation  to  the  Roman 
letter,  as  the  rough  model  to  the  iinished  statue ' 
(ib.  p.  49).  Yet  it  cannot  be  argued  from  the  close 
connexion  between  the  two  Epistles  that  they  must 
have  been  written  about  the  same  time.  Even 
after  the  lapse  of  several  years,  it  would  be  quite 
natural  for  a  writer  returning  to  an  old  topic  to 
slip  into  the  old  arguments  and  the  old  expressions. 

(c)  Galatians  and  St.  James. — The  subject  of 
'  faith  and  works '  is  treated  in  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James  (2i^-2«).  The  same  OT  illustration  (Gn  15") 
is  used  as  in  Gal.,  but  the  conclusion — 'faith  is 
vain  apart  from  works'  (2-'*) — seems  to  be  a  direct 
contradiction  of  St.  Paul's  teaching.  Yet  the  con- 
tradiction is  only  apparent,  for  the  two  writers  use 
the  terms  '  faith  '  and  '  works '  in  totally  different 
senses.  To  St.  James  '  faith '  means  intellectual 
assent  to  a  proposition  (2"),  '  works '  are  the  mani- 
fold Christian  virtues.  To  St.  Paul  '  works '  are 
acts  of  obedience  to  the  Law  considered  as  the 
ground  of  salvation,  '  faith '  is  a  personal  relation 
to  Christ.     The  statement  that '  faith  is  made  com- 

[ilete  by  works'  (Ja  2--)  is  almost  exactly  equiva- 
ent  to  the  assertion,  *  by  the  hearing  of  faitli  ye 
received  the  Spirit  .  .  .  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is 
love,  joy,  peace,'  etc.  (Gal  3-  5"). 

S.  The  locality  of  the  Galatian  churches. — The 
question  of  the  identity  of  the  Galatian  Christians 
is  the  centre  of  a  fierce  controversy.  The  point  at 
issue  is  the  meaning  of  'Galatia'  in  1^  (1  Co  16'). 
Two  rival  theories  hold  the  field  : 

(1)  The  North  Galatian  theory — i.e.  that  'Galatia' 
means  the  old  kingdom  of  Galatia,  the  region  in- 
habited by  the  descendants  of  the  Gauls  who  settled 

*  This  difficultj'  would  dis.appear  if  we  could  accept  as 
original  the  '  Western '  text  of  Ac  1.5-',  which  hy  oiniltiiii;  the 
words  icai  jTviicTili/  transforms  the  '  food  law '  into  a  '  moral  law ' 
(see  K.  Lake,  op.  cit.  p.  48  ff.). 

t  The  only  modern  scholar  of  repute  who  places  Romans 
before  Galatians  is  C.  Clemen  (Chroiwl.  der  patilin.  Brieft, 
Halle,  1893). 


in  Asia  Minor  in  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.  (see  Lightfoot, 
Salmon,  Chase,  Jiilicher,  Schmiedel,  etc.). 

(2)  The  South  Galatian  theory — i.e.  that '  Galatia ' 
si<^ifie8  the  larger  Roman  province  of  that  name, 
which  includea,  together  M-itli  Galatia  proi)er, 
those  portions  of  the  old  kingdoms  of  Phrygia  and 
Lycaonia  in  which  lay  Antioch,  Derbe,  Lystra, 
and  Iconium.  The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was 
addressed  to  the  Christian  communities  of  these 
cities  (see  Ramsay,  Zahn,  Rendall,  liartlet.  Bacon, 
Askwith,  Lake,  etc.). 

In  itself  either  meaning  of  '  Galatia 'is  admissible. 
Which  one  is  intended  by  St.  Paul  must  be  decide»l 
by  the  internal  evidence  of  the  Epistle  itself,  and 
the  information  supplied  by  the  account  given  in 
Acts  of  St.  Paul's  travels. 

{a)  Evidence  of  Acts. — The  Apostle  undoubtedly 
visited  the  cities  of  S.  Galatia  more  than  once  (Ac 
13.  14.  16).  Have  we  any  grounds  for  supposing 
that  he  ever  visited  Galatia  proper?  This  is  the 
first  question  to  be  faced,  'flie  only  evidence  for 
such  a  visit  is  derived  from  two  phrases  of  doubtful 
meaning,  which  occur  in  the  narrative  of  the  second 
and  third  missionary  journeys  (Ac  16*  18^). 

(a)  The  meaniny  of  t7)v  ^pvyiap  Kal  TaXariKrjv 
X^po.i' (Ac  16*). — The  crucial  point  is  the  exact  signi- 
iicance  of  Ac  16*.  The  preceding  verses  tell  how  the 
Apostle  passed  through  Syria  and  Cilicia  (IS*')  to 
Derbe  and  Lystra  (16').  Thence,  it  seems  to  be 
implied,  he  went  on  to  Iconium  (IQ'^"-).  His  next 
undisputed  stopping-place  was  somewhere  on  the 
borders  of  Bithynia  'over  against  Mysia.'  The 
route  by  which  he  travelled  thither  is  concealed 
in  the  words,  SiijXdov  5^  ttjv  ^pvyiav  Kal  TaXaTiKrjv 
X^pO''',  KuXvOivTCS  virh  tov  aylov  wvevfiaTos  XaX^<rai  rbv 
\b-yov  iv  rfi ' kalq..  What  is  the  district  described  as 
Tr)v  ^pvyiav  Kal  FaXariKT/v  X'^P"-^ ' 

(i.)  It  is  argued  that  the  participle  KuKvdivrts 
must  be  retrospective.  The  missionaries  went 
through  TTjv  ^pvyiav  Kal  VaXariKriv  x'^P"-"  because 
they  had  received  the  prohibition  against  preaching 
in  Asia,  and  consecjuently  after  they  had  received  it. 
But  such  a  prohibition  was  not  likely  to  be  given 
before  they  had  actually  entered  Asia,  or  were  on 
the  point  of  doing  so.  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
the  journey  through  rrjv  ^pvylav  Kal  FaXaTi/cTjv  x'^P"-" 
began  only  when  the  cities  of  S.  Galatia  were  left 
behind.  Since,  then,  the  'Galatic  region'  is  dis- 
tinguished from  S.  Galatia,  it  can  only  be  Galatia 
proper,  ^pvyiav  must  be  a  noun  (cf.  Ac  2'"  18^), 
and  the  whole  phrase  ttjj'  4>pvyiav  Kal  TaXariKriv 
xd}pav  must  mean  '  Phrygia  (Asiana)  and  (some 
North)  Galatic  region.'  The  strength  of  this  ex- 
planation is  that  it  needs  no  serious  straining  of 
grammar  or  syntax.  Its  weakness  is  firstly  that 
it  involves  an  inconsistency :  dUpx((r&cLi  in  Acts 
seems  to  have  the  special  sense  of  '  making  a 
preaching  journey,'  and  Phrygia  Asiana,  where  ex 
hypothesi  such  a  journey  was  maile,  lay  in  the 
region  where  preaching  was  forbidden ;  secondly, 
it  gives  no  ex]uanation  of  the  absence  of  the  article 
before  Ta\aTiK7)v  x^P^*")  "or  any  real  rea-son  for  the 
use  of  TaXariKTjv  x^P"-^  instead  of  VaXaTiav. 

(ii.)  The  alternative  explanation  rests  on  the 
conviction  that  the  single  article  in  the  ])hrase  Trjv 
^pvyiav  Kal  VaXaTLKTjv  x'^p'iv  proves  conclusively 
that  one  single  district  is  in  view.  -Hiv  ^pi^^iav  Kal 
TaXartKriv  x'^P^-"  nieans  that  region  wliich  is  both 
Phrygian  an<l  Galatian,' the  Phrygo-Galaticregion.' 
The  only  district  which  really  answers  to  this  de- 
scription is  that  part  of  the  old  kingdom  of  Phrygia 
which  was  included  in  the  Roman  province  of 
Galatia,  i.e.  the  country  which  extended  westward 
from  Iconium  to  Antioch  and  beyond,  south  of  the 
Sultan  Dagh. 

That  St.  Paul  had  passed  through  the  whole 
of  S.  Galatia  before  he  was  forbidden  to  preach 
in  Asia  is  a  mere  a.ssunii)tion.     At  Iconium  two 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIAXS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    435 


roads  lay  before  him — one  to  the  north,  leading  via 
Laodieea  into  Phrygia  Asiana,  the  other  to  the 
west,  leading  to  Phrygia  Galatica.  It  is  j>emiissible 
to  suppose  that  Iconium  was  the  point  at  which  he 
became  conscious  of  the  Divine  command  not  to 
preach  in  Asia,  and  that,  because  of  it,  he  chose 
the  western  rather  than  the  northern  road.  Sooner 
or  later  he  was  bound  to  enter  Asia  ;  but,  by  tak- 
ing the  western  road,  he  was  enabled  to  travel  as 
long  as  possible  through  a  region  where  missionary 
work  was  allowed.* 

The  chief  objections  to  this  interpretation  of  the 
phrase  are :  (a)  in  the  NT  ^pvyiay  is  elsewhere 
useti  only  as  a  noun  (Ac  2^"  18®) ;  (b)  it  is  straining 
language  to  give  /tat  the  force  of  'or' :  kcu  suggests 
two  districts,  not  one  (cf.  ttjf  MaKeSwlap  kcu  'Axatiw 
[19^Und  275]). 

(;3)  The  meaning  of  rijr  TaXariK^r  xtipay  xai 
ipvyiav  (Ac  18*^). — Of  this  phrase,  which  indi- 
cates the  route  by  which  St.  Paul  started  on  his 
third  journey,  only  one  translation  is  possible, 
i.e.  '  the  Galatic  region  and  Phrygia.'  The 
exact  meaning  attached  to  the  expression  will 
depend  on  the  interpretation  given  to  the  words 
of  Ac  16*.  It  can  be  adapted  to  either  of  the 
alternatives. 

(i.)  On  the  first  hypothesis,  rijp  TdkaruciiP  x'^fx^" 
will  mean  '  Galatia  proper '  as  in  16®,  and  Phrygia 
will  be  '  Phrygia  Asiana.' 

(ii.)  On  the  second,  ttjj*  TaXaTiKriv  ^wpav  signifies 
that  part  of  the  province  of  Galatia  in  which  were 
Derbe,  Lystra,  and  Iconium  (Lycaonia  Galatica). 
'Phrygia'  means  either  'Phrygia  Galatica'  (i.e. 
the  district  described  in  16*  as  rrjy  ^pvyiap  xal  TaXa- 
TiKTji'  x'^P^")  or  '  Phrygia  Galatica  and  Phrygia 
Asiana,'  for  the  Apostle  would  have  to  pass  through 
both  regions  in  order  to  reach  Ephesus  by  way  of 
t4  dvo-TepiKo.  fieprj  (Ac  19^).  The  absence  of  any 
further  definition  of  Phrygia  in  Ac  IS'^  is  naturally 
explained  by  the  fact  that  on  this  occasion  preach- 
ing in  Asia  was  not  forbidden. 

The  impartial  critic  must  admit  that  the  evi- 
dence of  these  two  passages  is  not  sufficient  to 
prove  conclusively  whether  St.  Paul  ever  visited 
N.  Galatia  or  not.  In  favour  of  the  X.  Galatian 
interpretation,  it  must  be  granted  that  it  represents 
the  most  straightforward  and  obvious  reading  of 
the  verses,  and  that  it  gives  a  uniform  meaning  to 
the  phrases  ttji'  TaXaTiKTjy  X'^P"-"  ^^^  ^pvyiay.  Yet 
it  fails  to  explain  some  things — e.g.  why  the  writer 
of  Acts  should  say  rriv  roXortr^i'  xw/w"  where  FaXa- 
Ttav  would  be  sufficient,  and  why  he  should  state 
in  the  same  verse  that  («)  preaching  in  Asia  was 
forbidden,  (b)  therefore  the  Apostle  preached  in  Asia. 
Again,  the  Acts  usuallj-  tells  its  story  at  greater 
length  when  the  gospel  is  being  taken  into  a  new 
district  for  the  first  time,  but  passes  over  as  briefly 
as  possible  second  visits  to  places  already  evangel- 
ized. The  extreme  brevitj-  of  the  reference  to  ttiv 
^pvyiay  xai  TaXaTiicriv  x'^W"  (16*)  suggests  that  it  is 
not  new  ground  to  the  missionaries. 

The    S.    Galatian  interpretation    avoids    these 
special  difficulties,  but  only  at  the  cost  of  some 
forcing  of  interpretation  and  straining  of  grammar. 
The  great  stumbling-block  to  its  acceptance  is  the  , 
fact  that  when  Acts  is  actually  speaking  of  the  S.  j 
Galatian  cities,  it  does  not  describe  them  politically 
as  'Galatian,'  but  ethnographically — 'Antioch  in  ' 
Pisidia'iia^^),  '  Lystra  and  Derbe,  citiesof  Lycaonia'  1 
(14*).     The  contribution  of  Acts  towards  the  dis-  i 
covery  of  the  destination  of  the  Galatian  Epistle 
is  simply  this.     St.  Paul  certainly  visited  the  cities 
of  S.  Galatia  ;  he  may  or  may  not  have  visited  N. 
Galatia. 

*  The  contention  that  KuXvOtrm  may  be  predicative,  and 
therefore  that  the  prohibition  may  have  been  given  at  the  close 
of  the  journey  through  rny  <tpvyiav  icai  roAartioji'  X"P<i»'  (Ask- 
»"ith,  p.  35  ff.),  cannot  be  regarded  as  proved. 


{b)  Evidence  of  the  Epistle  itself.— This  eNddence 
is  slight,  and  is  claimed  by  both  sides. 

(a)  For  the  N.  Galatian  theory  it  is  claimed  that : 

(i.)  St.  Paul  addresses  his  readers  as  VaXdrcu  (3»). 
This  term  applies  only  to  the  people  of  N.  Galatia. 
The  inhabitants  of  Antioch,  Derbe,  and  Lystra 
were  Phrygians  and  Lycaonians.  But  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  see  what  other  general  term  could  be  used 
to  include  the  inhabitants  of  all  these  cities.  It 
was  true  politically  if  not  ethnographically. 

(ii.)  Assuming  that  Gal  2'-"  refers  to  the  time 
of  the  Council,  we  should  expect,  on  the  S.  Galatian 
theory,  that  some  reference  to  the  evangelizing  of 
Antioch,  Derbe,  and  Lystra  would  follow  Gal  1". 
It  would  also  be  natural  to  look  for  some  mention 
in  Ac  13.  14  of  the  Apostle's  illness  (Gal  4"). 

(^)  Far  the  S.  Galatian  theory  it  is  urged  that : 

(i.)  The  circumstances  of  the  conversion  of  the 
Galatians  (4*^-^')  correspond  closely  to  the  account 
of  the  evangelizing  of  S.  Galatia  given  by  Ac 
13"-14^.  The  arguments  of  St.  Paul's  sermon  at 
Antioch  in  Pisidia  reappear  in  Galatians  (Ram- 
say, Gal.,  pp.  399-401). 

(ii.)  The  repeated  mention  of  Barnabas  (2^-  *•  ") 
implies  that  he  was  personally  known  to  the 
readers.  But  Barnabas  was  no  longer  with  St. 
Paul  on  his  second  journey. 

(iii.)  The  reference  to  the  circumcision  of 
Timothy,  supposed  to  lie  behind  Gal  5",  is  more 
naturally  understood  if  St.  Paul  was  writing  to 
Timothy's  native  place. 

None  of  these  arguments  taken  singly  or  com- 
bined are  strong  enough  to  bear  the  weight  of 
either  theory.* 

(c)  A  priori  arguments. — Zahn  [Introd.  to  NT, 
i.  177),  who  accepts  the  S.  Galatian  view  of  Ac 
16*  18^,  brings  against  the  N.  Galatian  theory  of 
the  Epistle's  destination  two  a  priori  arguments. 

(a)  It  is  not  likely  that  the  churches  of  N. 
Galatia  would  have  been  dismissed  so  briefly  in 
Acts  if  they  had  been  the  centre  of  a  fierce  con- 
troversy ;  nor  is  it  probable  that  the  important 
churches  of  S.  Galatia  should  be  left  with  scarcely 
a  trace  of  their  subsequent  development  in  the  NT. 

(P)  It  is  strange  that  Judaistie  teachers  from 
Jerusalem,  setting  out  to  oppose  St.  Paul's  in- 
fluence, should  have  passed  by  the  cities  of  S. 
Galatia  without  starting  any  considerable  anti- 
Pauline  movement,  and  begun  their  campaign  in 
the  imimportant  churches  of  a  remote  district. 

The  only  force  such  arguments  could  have 
would  be  to  strengthen  a  theory  proved  independ- 
ently.    By  themselves  they  have  little  weight. 

Svinniary. — The  equal  division  of  opinion  even 
amongst  critics  of  the  same  school  suggests  that 
the  e^ndence  is  insufficient.  Absolute  impartiality 
demands  an  open  verdict.  If  St.  Paul  did  actually 
found  churches  in  N.  Galatia,  it  is  the  most  natural 
—  though  not  inevitable  —  conclusion  that  the 
Epistle  was  addressed  to  them.  The  Apostle  un- 
doubtedly founded  the  churches  of  S.  Galatia,  but 
the  arguments  which  have  been  advanced  prove 
no  more  than  the  possibility  that  they  were  the 
recipients  of  the  letter. 

6.  Date  and  place  of  vriting. — It  is  generally 
agreed  that  St.  Paul  ^^Tote  his  letter  to  the  Bomans 
from  Corinth  on  the  eve  of  his  departure  to  Jeru- 
salem at  the  close  of  his  third  missionary  journey. 
Most  scholars  fix  the  actual  date  +  a.d.  58.  This 
gives  the  terminus  ad  quern  for  dating  the  Galatian 
Epistle  (see  above,  i). 

The  terminus  a  quo  is  not  so  easily  determined. 

•  Argruments  which  have  been  used,  but  which  are  now 
abandoned,  are  :  (a)  that  the  fickle  temperament  of  the  Gala- 
tians of  the  Epistle  points  to  the  X.  Galatians,  who  were  partly 
of  Celtic  descent  (lightfoot) ;  (fc)  that  X.  Galatia  was  not  likely 
to  be  visited  by  a  sick  man  (Gal  4i3),  owing  to  the  difficulty  of  the 
journey ;  (e)  that  the  legal  terms  used  in  the  Epistle  would  be 
intelligible  to  S.  Galatians  but  not  to  N.  Galatians  (Bamsay). 


436    GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


The  Epistle  itself  supplies  but  few  hints.  These 
are :  {a)  More  than  fourteen — perhaps  more  than 
seventeen  —  years  have  elapsed  since  St.  Paul's 
conversion,  (Turing  which  he  has  paid  at  least  two 
visits  to  Jerusalem  (l'*-2'*).  (b)  St.  Paul  has  paid 
at  least  two  visits  to  his  readers  before  writing  the 
Epistle  (19  5"  4'«). 

As  to  the  place  of  writing,  one  suggestion  alone 
is  given.  St.  Paul  implies  that  some  reason  pre- 
vented him  from  visitmg  Galatia  when  he  wrote 
the  Epistle,  though  he  longed  for  a  personal  inter- 
view with  his  converts  (4^). 

(a)  Date  on  the  N.  Galatian  theory. — If  the  N. 
Galatian  theory  be  accepted,  the  choice  of  dates 
is  limited.  The  Epistle  must  have  been  written 
during  St.  Paul's  third  missionary  Journey,  after 
his  second  visit  to  Galatia  (Ac  18^),  and  before 
the  end  of  his  sojourn  at  Corinth — i.e.  either  (i.) 
while  the  Apostle  was  on  his  way  from  Galatia 
to  Ephesus,  or  (ii.)  during  his  stay  at  Ephesus 
(Ac  19'-  '"),  or  (iii.)  during  his  journey  through 
Macedonia,  or  (iv.)  early  in  his  stay  at  Corinth 
(Ac  20"f). 

There  is  little  to  choose  between  these  sugges- 
tions. The  objection  brought  against  (i.)  and  (li.), 
that  from  Ephesus  it  would  be  easy  to  pay  a  visit 
to  Galatia,  is  not  serious.  The  obstacle  in  St. 
Paul's  way  (Gal  4^)  need  not  necessarily  have  been 
the  length  of  the  journey.  On  the  other  hand, 
Lightfoot's  attempt  to  prove  by  a  comparison  of 
the  thought  and  language  of  the  two  letters  that 
Galatians  must  be  later  than  2  Cor.  cannot  be 
regarded  as  convincing  (Gal.'^,  p.  49). 

(^)  On  t/t£  S.  Galatian  tlieory. — Some  supporters 
of  the  S.  Galatian  hypothesis  are  willing  to  agree 
with  their  opponents  as  to  the  date  of  the  Epistle 
(e.g.  Askwith,  p.  99  fl'.).  Others  avail  themselves 
of  the  opportunity  given  by  this  theory  of  placing 
the  Epistle  earlier  in  St.  Paul's  career. 

(i.)  Ramsay  suggests  that  it  was  sent  from 
Syrian  Antioch  just  before  the  beginning  of  St. 
Paul's  third  missionary  journey  {^t.  Paul  the 
Traveller,  p.  189  ff.).  A  serious  objection  to  this 
date  is  the  fact  that  the  Epistle  does  not  suggest 
that  St.  Paul  is  planning  a  visit  to  Galatia,  but 
rather  the  reverse  (4-"). 

(ii.)  Various  points  in  the  course  of  the  second 
missionary  journey  have  been  suggested  :  (a)  Mace- 
donia (Hausrath),  or  (b)  Athens  (L.  Albrecht, 
Paulus,  Munich,  1903,  pp.  114  f.;  C.  Clemen, 
Paulus,  Giessen,  1904,  i.  396  f.),  or  (c)  Corinth  (Zahn, 
Bacon,  Rendall).  The  arguments  used  in  favour 
of  (fi)  and  (c)  are  that  the  Epistle  must  be  placed 
as  soon  as  possible  after  St.  Paul's  second  visit 
to  Galatia,  and  at  a  time  which  will  explain  the  ^ 
absence  of  any  mention  of  Silas  and  Timothy. 
Silas  and  Timothy  were  not  with  St.  Paul  at 
Athens  or  at  the  time  of  his  arrival  in  Corinth. 

(iii.)  But  any  date  subsequent  to  the  Council  of 
Jeruf<alem  makes  it  very  difficult  to  explain  the 
silence  of  the  Epistle  with  regard  to  the  Council 
itself  and  to  its  decrees.  To  some  scholars  this 
argument  alono  seems  sufficient  to  prove  conclu- 
sively that  the  Epistle  was  written  before  the 
Council  (see  Calvin,  Beza,  Bartlet,  Round,  Emmet, 
Lake).  Consequently,  it  is  suggested  that  St.  Paul 
wrote  from  Antioch  just  before  going  up  to  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem  (W.  A.  Shedd,  ExpT  xii. 
[1900-01]  568  ;  Round,  Date  of  Galatians),  or  in  the 
course  of  his  journey  from  Antioch  to  Jerusalem 
(C.  W.  Emmet,  Expositor,  7th  ser.,  ix.  [1910] 
242  ff.  ;  Lake).  This  theory  would  be  very  at- 
tra-ctive  if  the  absolute  historicity  of  Ac  15  could 
be  established,  but  grave  doubts  exist  on  this 
point  (cf.  EBi,  art.  'Council  of  Jerusalem'). 

Summary. — The  date  of  the  Epistle  is  almost  as 
difficult  to  determine  as  its  destination.  To  a 
large  extent  the  two  questions  are  intertwined. 


If  it  can  be  proved,  on  independent  grounds,  that 
the  Epistle  must  have  been  written  l>efore  the 
events  which  lie  behind  the  narrative  of  Ac  15, 
then  the  S.  Galatian  theory  must  be  accepted,  and 
the  visit  of  Gal  2'-»»  identified  with  that  of  Ac  11, 
or  with  some  visit  unrecorded  in  the  Acts.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  the  N.  Galatian  theory  can  be  es- 
tablished on  independent  grounds,  the  date  of 
the  Epistle  is  confined  within  narrow  limits,  and 
is  in  any  case  later  than  the  Council.  Unfortu* 
nately,  conclusive  proof  of  either  position  cannot 
be  obtained. 

7.  Authenticity  and  permanent  value.  —  (a) 
Authenticity.  —  That  Galatians  is  a  genuine 
Epistle  written  by  St.  Paul  to  his  converts  has 
never  been  questioned  except  by  those  eccentric 
critics  who  deny  the  existence  of  anj^  authentic 
Pauline  Epistles  {e.g.  EBi,  art.  '  Paul ').  Such  a 
theory  scarcely  needs  refutation.  Its  supporters 
cut  away  the  ground  from  beneath  their  own  feet. 
If  no  genuine  works  of  St.  Paul  have  survived,  no 
standard  of  comparison  exists  by  which  to  decide 
what  is  genuinely  'Pauline'  anil  what  is  not  (cf. 
Knowling,  The  Witnessof  the  Epistles,^]}.  133-243). 
External  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  Gala- 
tians is  as  strong  as  can  be  expected  in  view  of 
the  scantiness  of  the  records  of  the  sub-Apostolic 
Age.  It  is  quoted  as  Pauline  by  Irenaeus  (c.  a.l>. 
180)  and  Clem.  Alex.  (c.  A.D.  200) ;  it  is  cited  by 
Justin  Martyr  (c.  A.D.  150)  and  Athenagoras  (r. 
A.D.  170) ;  it  is  included  in  the  canon  of  Marcion, 
(c.  A.D.  140)  and  in  the  old  Latin  version  of  the 
NT.  Earlier  still,  clear  references  to  its  phrase- 
ology are  found  in  Polycarp  {Phil.  iii.  5  [c.  A.D, 
110]). 

The  internal  evidence  of  the  Epistle  is  irresist- 
ible. It  is  unmistakably  the  work  of  a  real  man 
combating  real  opponents.  It  contains  nothing 
which  would  explain  its  motive  if  it  were  a  forgery, 
and  much  that  no  forger  would  be  likely  to  liave 
written.  The  question  with  which  it  deals  belongs 
to  a  very  early  stage  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 
The  existence  before  A.D.  70  of  large  churches  of 
Gentiles  who  had  not  been  compelled  to  accept 
circumcision,  proves  conclusively  that  by  that  time 
the  controversy  about  Gentile  circumcision  was 
a  thing  of  the  past.  Consequently  the  Epistle 
must  have  been  written  within  St.  Paul's  lifetime, 
and  no  valid  reason  remains  for  denying  the  tra- 
ditional belief  that  he  wrote  it. 

{b)  Permanent  value. — The  value  of  the  Epistle 
is  unaffected  by  uncertainties  concerning  its  date 
and  destination.  It  is  the  most  concise  and  vigor- 
ous, as  Romans  is  the  most  systematic,  expression- 
of  St.  Paul's  evangel.  It  displays  the  Apostle's 
power  of  penetrating  to  the  heart  of  things.  H«^ 
passes  beyond  the  immediate  question  of  circum- 
cision and  the  observance  of  the  Jewish  Law  to  the 
ultimate  principle  which  lies  beneath. 

Universal  experience  has  shown  that  men  cannot 
by  their  own  efforts  attain  perfect  righteousness. 
The  power  to  overcome  the  inherent  weakness  of 
human  nature  is  God's  free  gift  to  man  in  Christ. 
But  man  must  receive  it  on  God's  own  terms,  '  by 
faith' — that  is,  by  the  complete  self-suri'ender  Mhicn 
brings  him  into  vital  union  with  Christ's  perfect 
humanity.  Such  self-surrender  is  possible  to  all  who 
realize  their  own  utter  helplessness  (cf.  Mt.  18') ; 
but  if  'life  eternal'  (6*)  were  dependent  on  the 
complete  obedience  to  God's  will  of  unaided  human 
nature,  it  would  be  for  ever  bej'ond  man's  reach. 
The  truth  on  which  St.  Paul  so  strongly  insists  lies 
at  the  very  heart  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  is  a 
living  message  to  all  ages. 

In  pressing  home  his  point,  the  Apostle  u-ses  the 
dialectic  methods  of  the  Rabbinic  school  in  ^yhich 
both  he  and  his  opponents  received  their  training 
— e.g.  the  play  on  the  word  Kardpa  (3'*) ;  the  argu- 


GALEA 


GALILEE 


437 


nientof  3"',  which  is  based  on  the  use  of  the  singular 
ffTep,ua,  although  the  noun  is  collective  and  in  this 
sense  has  no  plural ;  the  allegorical  use  of  the  story 
of  Hagar  and  Ishmael  (i^'"). 

This  stj-leof  reasoning  no  longerappeals  to  us  with 
any  force,  but  it  must  be  rememljered  that  these 
are  not  the  real  arguments  on  which  the  Apostle's 
teaching  rests.  He  uses  the  OT  in  the  manner 
most  natural  to  a  Jew  of  the  1st  cent,  to  support 
and  illustrate  a  conclusion  really  reached  on  in- 
dependent grounds.  The  ultimate  basis  of  the 
Apostle's  doctrine  of  'justification  by  faith'  is  his 
own  personal  experience,  both  of  the  hopelessness 
of  the  search  for  righteousness  by  works,  and  of 
the  sense  of  peace  and  new  power  which  came  to 
him  when  he  could  say,  'I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ 
liveth  in  me'  (2*^;  cf.  Sanday-Headlam,  Roman^, 
p.  26  f.). 

LiiKRATTRK.— L  CosDnKTABns :    Ligrhtfoots  (1376);  G.   G. 

Findlay  {Expotitoi'i  BibU,  188S) ;  W.  M.  Ramsay  (1S99 ;  also 

Traveller,  1895,  and  The  Church  in  the  Roman 

) ;  F.  RendaU(JSGr,  1903) ;  T.  Zahn(1905) ;  A.  L. 

:amb.  Gr.  Test.,  1910);  C.   W.  Emmet  (fi«ad*r'» 

C  »;  .;-'  .i'7  r'j,  1912).    Valuable  notes  on  '  Righteousness,' '  Faith,' 

etc.,  will  be  found  in  Sanday-Headlam,  AwMai»«5(/CC,  1902). 

IT.  Gexeral  IxTBODrcnoss  to  XT :  G.  Salmon^  (1904) ;  A. 
Jiilicher(Eiiz.  tr.,  1901):  B.  W.  Bacon  (1900;  also  rA«  Story 
of  St.  Paul,  19"}o):  Zahn(Eng.  tr.,  1909);  J.  Mo&tt(1911 ;  also 
the  Historical  ST^,  1901). 

m.  Special  Studies:  E.  H.  Askwitb,  The  £pistle  to  the 
Galatian.^ :  its  Destination  and  Date,  London,  1S99 ;  Dongrlass 
Round,  The  Date  of  St.  PauVs  Epistle  to  the  Gaiatians,  Cam- 
bridge, WJ^. 

IV.  Moke  Gexeral  SruBixs :  A  C.  McGiffert,  A  History  of 
Christianity  in  the  Apostolie  Age,  Edinburgh,  1S97 ;  J.  V.  Bart- 
let.  The  Apostolie  Age,  do.  1900 ;  R.  J.  Knowling:,  The  Witness 
c  ftheBpiitles,  London,  1892,  The  Testimony  of  St.  Paul  to  Christ^, 
do.  1906 ;  Kirsopp  Lake,  The  Earlier  Epp.  of  St.  Paul,  do.  191L 

V.  Articles  :  '  Galatia,' '  Gaiatians,  Epistle  to  the,' '  Chrono- 
logy of  NT,'  in  HDB;  'Galatia,'  'Gaiatians  (the  Epistle),' 
'Council  of  Jerusalem,'  in  EBi. 

A  more  complete  bibliography  will  be  found  in  J.  MofiEatt, 
LST,  Edinbur-h,  1911.  F.  S.  MARSH. 

GALBA.  —  Seruius  Sulpicius  Galba  (after  his 
elevation  to  the  purple,  Seruitis  Galba  Imperator 
Ciesar  Augustus),  son  of  Seruius  Sulpicius  Galba 
and  Mnmmia  Achaica,  and  great-grandson  of 
Quintus  Lutatius  Catulus,  was  bom  on  24  Dec.  5 
B.C.  and  died  in  his  seventy-third  year  (15  Jan. 
A.D.  69).  His  native  place  was  near  Tarracina 
(modem  Terracina)  on  the  Appian  Way  by  the 
sea.  He  was  adopted  by  his  stepmother,  and  took 
the  names  of  Lucius  Liuius  Ocella  in  consequence. 
Both  Augustus  and  Tiberius  are  said  to  have 
predicted  that  he  would  become  Emperor.  He 
attained  the  dress  of  manhood  in  A.D.  14  and 
married  .^Elmilia  Lepida.  After  her  death  and 
that  of  their  two  sons  he  remained  unmarried. 
His  friendship  with  Liuia,  the  widow  of  Augustus, 
gave  him  great  influence  from  the  start.  On  her 
death  (A.D.  29)  he  inherited  largely,  but  his  in- 
heritance was  reduced  by  the  Emperor  Tiberius, 
Liuia's  son.  He  was,  however,  permitted  to  hold 
senatorial  offices  before  the  legal  age.  It  is  re- 
corded that  when  as  prsetor  he  gave  exhibitions  to 
the  people,  he  showed  elephants  walking  on  tight- 
ropes, a  sight  up  to  that  time  unknown  in  Rome. 
About  A.D.  31  or  32  he  was  for  one  year  legatus 
proprcEtorc  (governor)  of  the  province  of  Aquitania 
(S.W.  Gaul).  He  held  oflBce  as  consul  for  six 
months  of  a.d.  33.  Having  been  thereafter  ap- 
pointed legatus  pro  prcetore  prouincitB  Germanue 
Superioris  (governor  of  S.  Germany),  he  held  in 
check  the  barbarians  who  had  already  invaded 
Gaul.  As  legatus  in  41  he  conquered  the  Chatti 
and  gained  a  great  reputation  as  a  general.  He 
attended  the  Emperor  Claudius  on  his  expedition 
to  Britain  (see  under  CLAUDIUS),  and  attained  the 
proconsulship  of  Africa,  the  blue  ribbon  of  a  sena- 
torial career.  Besides  being  awarded  triumphal 
ornaments,  he  was  elected  to  various  ))riesthoods. 
His  last  ordinary  promotion  was  to  the  governor- 


ship of  the  province  of  Hispania  Tarraconensis, 
which  he  held  for  eight  years,  from  a.d.  60  to  68. 
In  the  latter  year,  as  the  result  of  long  dissatisfac- 
tion with  the  Neronian  government,  C.  lulius 
Vindex,  legatus  pro  prwtore  prouincice  Gallue 
Lugudunensis,  revolted  from  Nero,  and  GallMt 
gave  him  hb  support.  Vindex,  however,  was  de- 
feated by  the  legions  in  Germany,  and  committed 
suicide.  Galba  was  then  himself  saluted  Imperator 
by  his  soldiers.  Though  he  declared  himself  repre- 
sentative of  the  Senate  and  People  of  Rome,  the 
Senate  adjudged  him  a  public  enemy.  When  the 
news  of  the  death  of  Nero  reached  him,  he  acceptCMl 
the  title  of  Caesar  from  his  soldiers,  and  marched 
to  Rome.  Elected  consul  for  the  second  time  for 
A.D.  69,  he  was  put  to  death  on  15  Jan.  69,  and 
buried  in  his  suburban  villa  near  the  Via  Auxelia. 
As  Galba's  rule  lasted  only  seven  months,  there 
is  little  to  say  about  it.  That  he  was  an  able 
general  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever.  He  is 
credited  also  with  other  virtues,  which,  like  those 
of  Vespasian,  serve  to  recall  the  old  Roman  type. 
He  was  the  earliest  of  all  the  Emperors  not  of 
Cfesarian  blood,  and  he  first  manitested  clearly 
that  the  election  to  the  principate  lay  in  the  han(& 
of  the  army.  Supported  by  the  praetorian  guards, 
the  '  household  troops '  at  Rome,  he  was  recognized 
by  the  Senate,  a  deputation  from  which  met  him 
at  Narbo  Martins  (5*arbonne).  A  number  of  pre- 
tenders arose  about  the  same  time,  but  were  merci- 
lessly crushed.  What  ruined  Galba  was  on  the 
one  hand  his  lack  of  the  genius  for  rule,  and  on 
the  other  his  parsimony.  One  of  Tacitus'  immortal 
phrases  has  reference  to  him  :  '  omnium  consensu 
capax  imperii,  nisi  imperasset'  {Hist.  i.  49).  He 
used  severity  where  it  was  uncalled  for,  and  thus 
alienated  many  who  would  have  settled  down 
quietly  under  the  new  regime.  He  stirred  up 
against  himself  one  of  his  supporters,  M.  Saluius 
Otho  (see  Otho),  who  expected  to  be  adopted  by 
Gralba  as  his  successor  in  the  Empire.  The  soldiers 
declared  him  Imperator  and  put  Galba  to  death. 

LrrxRATCRE. — The  chief  authorities  are  Tacitns,  Historiat 
bk.  i. ;  Plutarch,  Gaiba  (ed.  E.  G.  Hardy.  London,  1890); 
Suetonius,  Galba ;  Die  Cassins,  Lxiii.-bdv.,  etc.,  and  inscrip- 
tions. The  facts  are  given  most  succinctly  in  P.  de  Rohdoi 
and  H.  Dessau,  Prost^ographia  Imperii  Roman*  seee.  i.  ii.  HL, 
pars  iii.,  Berlin,  1898,  p.  SSlfF.  (no.  723).  See  also  the  relevant 
parts  of  the  modem  Histories  of  the  Roman  Empire  (V.  Dnmy 
(Eng.  tr.,  London,  188S-86},  J.  B.  Bury  [do.  1883],  etc.);  A.  von 
Domaszewski,  Geseh.  dsr  romischen  Kaiser,  Leipzig,  1909,  IL 
79-85  ;  E.  G.  Hardy,  Studies  in  Roman  History,  London,  1906, 
pp.  295-3S4  (a  valuable  comparison  of  the  leading  ancient 
authorities^  also  2nd  aeries  of  the  same  work,  do.  1909,  pp. 
130-157.  A.  SOUTEB. 

GALILEE. — Galilee  is  seldom  mentioned  in  the 
NT  outside  the  Gospels.  The  only  references  are 
in  the  early  chapters  of  Acts  (1"  5"  ^  10"  13"). 
Most  of  the  apostles  belonged  to  this  northern 
province  (1"  13*^).  Judas,  the  leader  of  an  agita- 
tion in  the  days  of  the  enrolment  of  Quirinius,  is 
described  as  'of  Galilee'  (5^).  After  Satil's  con- 
version, peace  descended  upon  the  Christians  in 
Galilee,  as  well  as  in  Judaea  and  Samaria  (9^^). 
Walking  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord  and  the  comfort  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  their  numbers  greatly  increased. 

1.  The  name. — The  name  '  Galilee '  is  derived 
from  the  Heb.  '^-h%  {Galil),  through  the  Gr.  Ta\i\aia 
and  the  Lat.  Galilcea.  The  Hebrew  word,  denot- 
ing •  ring '  or  '  circle,'  was  tised  geographically  to 
describe  a  'circuit'  of  towns  and  villages.  As 
applied  to  this  partictdar  district  in  north-western 
Palestine,  the  form  used  is  either  'j'^jji,  '  the  district ' 
(Jos  20^  2F-,  1  K  9",  2  K  \^,  1  Ch  6«),  or  nvsn  h-% 
'  district  of  the  nations '  (Is  9^).  Given  originally 
to  the  highlands  on  the  extreme  northern  border, 
this  name  gradually  extended  itself  southwards 
over  the  hill-countr>-  tiU  it  reached  and  eventually 
included  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  (G.   A.   Smith, 


438 


GALILEE 


GALILEE 


HGHL*,  pp.  379  and  415).  For  the  most  part, 
however,  Esdraelon  seems  to  have  been  a  frontier 
or  arena  of  battle,  ratlier  than  an  actual  part  of 
Galilee. 

2.  The  boundaries. — The  natural  Iwundaries  of 
Galilee  never  agreed  with  its  political  frontiers. 
The  natural  limits  are  Esdraelon,  the  Mediterranean 
Sea,  the  Jordan  valley,  and  the  gorge  of  the  river 
Litany.  But  the  actual  borders  have  shifted  from 
time  to  time.  At  the  period  of  widest  extension, 
they  may  be  set  down  as  the  Kasimiyeh  or  Litany 
gorge  on  the  N.,  the  southern  edge  of  Esdraelon 
on  the  S.,  Phojnicia  (which  always  belonged  to 
Gentiles)  on  the  W.,  and  the  Upper  Jordan  (with 
its  two  lakes)  on  the  E.  These  boundaries,  exclud- 
ing Carmel  and  the  area  of  the  lakes,  enclosed  a 
province  about  50  miles  long  by  25  to  35  miles  broad 
— an  area  of  about  1600  square  miles.  Within  these 
limits  lay  'a  region  of  mountain,  hill,  and  plain, 
the  most  diversified  and  attractive  in  Palestine' 
(Masterman,  Studies  in  Galilee,  p.  4). 

3.  The  divisions.— J osephus  (BJ  iii.  iii.  1)  gives 
the  divisions,  in  his  time,  as  two,  called  the  Upper 
Galilee  and  the  Lower.  The  Mishna  (Shebuth  ix.  12) 
states  that  the  province  contained  '  the  upper,  the 
lower,  and  the  valley.'  The  latter  are  certainly 
the  natural  divisions.  The  mountains  separate 
very  clearly  into  a  higher  northern  and  a  lower 
southern  group,  and  the  '  valley '  is  the  valley  of 
the  Upper  Jordan. 

(a)  Upper  Galilee  is  less  easily  characterized 
physically  than  Lower.  '  It  appears  to  the  casual 
observer  a  confused  mass  of  tumbled  mountains, 
to  which  not  even  the  map  can  give  an  orderly 
view '  (Masterman,  p.  11).  It  is  in  reality  *  a  series 
of  plateaus,  with  a  double  water-parting,  and  sur- 
rounded by  hills  from  2000  to  4000  feet'  (G.  A. 
Smith,  HGHL*,  p.  416).  The  central  point  is  Jebel 
Jermak  (3934  ft.),  the  highest  mountain  in  western 
Palestine.  The  scantier  water  supply  of  Upper 
Galilee  is  compensated  for  by  the  copiousness  of 
the  dew-fall  throughout  the  later  summer  months. 

{b)  Lower  Galilee  is  easier  to  describe.  It  con- 
sists of  parallel  ranges  of  hills,  all  below  2000  ft. , 
running  from  W.  to  E.,  with  broad  fertile  valleys 
between.  The  whole  region  is  of  great  natural 
fertility,  owing  to  abundance  of  water,  rich  volcanic 
soil,  the  gentleness  of  the  slopes,  and  the  openness 
of  the  plains.  The  great  roads  of  the  province 
cross  this  lower  hill-country.  The  dividing-line 
between  Upper  and  Lower  Galilee  is  the  ran^e  of 
mountains  running  right  across  the  country  along 
the  northern  edge  of  the  Plain  of  Rameh. 

(c)  The  Valley  consists  of  the  Upper  Jordan  and 
its  two  lakes,  Huleh  and  Gennesaret.  The  river, 
taking  its  rise  from  springs  and  streams  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Banias  and  Tel-el-Kadi,  flows 
south  in  a  steadily  deepening  channel,  through 
Huleh,  till  it  empties  itself  into  the  Sea  of  Genne- 
saret, at  a  depth  of  689  ft.  below  sea-level.  It  has 
fallen  to  this  depth  in  about  19  miles.  Six  miles 
north  of  the  lake,  the  river  is  crossed  by  the  '  Bridge 
of  the  daughters  of  Jacob,'  on  the  famous  Via  Maris 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  principal  tiioroughfare  be- 
tween Damascus  and  the  Mediterranean  ports.  The 
Lake  of  Galilee  could  never  be  sutticiently  praised 
by  the  Jewish  Rabbis.  They  said  that  Jahweh 
had  created  seven  seas,  and  of  these  had  chosen 
the  Sea  of  Gennesaret  as  His  special  delight.  It 
had  rich  alluvial  plains  on  the  north  and  south,  a 
belt  of  populous  and  flourishing  cities  round  its 
border,  aoundance  of  fish  in  its  depths,  and  a  climate 
that  attracted  both  workers  and  pleasure-seekers 
to  its  shores.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Christian 
era,  it  presented  a  reproduction  in  miniature  of  the 
rich  life  and  varied  activities  of  the  province  as  a  j 
whole.  j 

4.  The    physical    characteristics.  —  These    are  i 


principally  two :  (a)  abundance  of  water,  and  (b) 
fertility  of  soil.  As  to  (a),  the  words  of  the  ancient 
promise,  •  for  the  Lord  thy  God  bringeth  thee  into  a 
good  land,  a  land  of  brooks  of  water,  of  fountains 
and  depths  springing  forth  in  valleys  and  hills' 
(Dt  8^),  are  literally  true  of  Galilee,  particularly  in 
its  southern  half.  Large  quantities  of  water  are 
collected  during  the  rainy  season  among  the  higher 
slopes  and  plateaus,  and  are  thence  dispersed  by 
the  rivers  and  streams  over  the  lower-lying  tracts, 
where  they  become  stored  in  springs  and  wells. 
There  are  the  two  lakes  already  mentioned — Huleh, 
3J  miles  long  by  3  miles  wicie  (the  Sameclionitis 
of  Josephus,  but  probably  not  the  Waters  of  Merom 
of  Jos  IP-''  [cf.  Masterman,  Studies  in  Galilee,  p. 
26  f.,  and  EBi  iii.  3038]);  the  Lake  of  Galilee 
(Gennesaret),  13  miles  long  by  8  miles  broad  at  its 
widest  point.  Round  its  shores  are  the  ruins  of 
at  least  nine  ancient  cities  or  towns.  These  are 
Chorazin,  Capernaum,  Magdala,  Tiberias,  Tari- 
chete.  Hippos,  Gamala,  Gergesa,  and  Betlisaida. 
The  principal  rivers  of  the  province  are  the  Jordan, 
the  Litany,  the  Kishon,  and  the  Belus.  In  addi- 
tion to  these  lakes  and  rivers,  there  are  many 
greater  streams  and  innumerable  springs  and  wells. 
These  waters,  together  with  the  copious  dews  of 
the  summer,  give  Galilee  the  advantage  over 
Samaria  and  set  it  in  marked  contrast  to  Judsea. 

As  to  (6),  all  authorities  unite  in  celebrating  the 
natural  wealth  of  Galilee.  The  other  half  of  the 
promise  made  to  the  Hebrews  was  also  true  of  this 
highly  favoured  province.  It  Avas  '  a  land  of  wheat 
and  barley,  and  vines  and  fig  trees  and  pomegran- 
ates ;  a  land  of  oil  olives  and  honey  ;  a  land  wherein 
thou  shalt  eat  bread  without  scarceness,  thou  shalt 
not  lack  any  thing  in  it '  (Dt  8**  ®).  Josephus  bears 
witness  that  the  soil  was  universally  rich  and  fruit- 
ful, and  that  it  invited  even  the  most  slothful  to 
take  pains  in  its  cultivation  (Jos.  BJ  III.  iii.  2). 
Even  to-day,  when  such  large  tracts  lie  unculti- 
vated, no  part  of  Palestine  is  more  productive.  The 
chief  products  were  oil,  wine,  wheat,  and  fisii.  *  In 
Aslier,  oil  flows  like  a  river,'  said  the  Rabbis,  who 
also  held  that  it  was  '  easier  to  raise  a  legion  of 
olive  trees  in  Galilee  than  to  raise  one  child  in 
Judtea.'  Gischala  was  the  chief  place  of  manufac- 
ture. There  were  also  large  stores  at  Jotapata 
during  the  Roman  W^ar.  Considerable  quantities 
were  sent  to  Tyre  and  to  Egypt.  Made  from  the 
olive  trees,  the  oil  was  used  principally  for  exter- 
nal application,  for  illumination,  and  in  connexion 
with  religious  ritual.  Wine  was  made  in  many 
quarters  of  the  province,  the  best  qualities  coming 
from  Sigona  ;  while  tvheat  and  other  grains  were 
plentifully  raised  all  over  Lower  Galilee,  especially 
round  about  Sepphoris  and  in  the  fields  of  the  Plain 
of  Gennesaret.  The  fish,  for  which  the  province  was 
always  noted  in  ancient  times,  was  caught  in  the 
inland  lakes,  particularly  in  the  Lake  of  Galilee.  It 
formed  a  large  part  of  the  food  of  the  lake-side 
dwellers,  and  a  considerable  trade  was  carried  on 
by  the  fish-catchers  and  lish-curers  of  the  large 
towns  on  the  shore.  The  best  fishing-grounds  were, 
and  still  are,  at  el-Bataiha  in  the  north,  and  in  the 
bay  of  Tabigha,  at  the  N.W.  corner.  Taricheae, 
in  the  south,  was  another  centre  of  the  industry. 
In  addition  to  the  above-mentioned  commodities, 
Galilee  produced  flax  from  which  fine  linen  fabrics 
were  woven,  pottery,  and  a  ricii  dj-e  made  from  the 
indigo  plant.  The  prosperity  of  the  province  was 
eniianced  by  its  proximity  to  the  Phanician  ports, 
and  by  the  network  of  highways  which  crossed  it 
in  all  directions. 

5.  The  inhabitants.— To-day  Galilee  possesses  a 
remarkably  mixed  population,  and  its  inhabitants 
are  physically  finer  than  those  of  the  southern  pro- 
vinces (cf.  Masterman,  pp.  17-20).  In  apostolic 
times,  the  same  was  true.     Along  the  western  and 


GALILEE 


GALLIC 


439 


northern  borders  were  the  Syrophocnicians(Mk7*), 
or  Tyrians  (as  Josephus  calls  them),  while  from 
the  east  nomadic  Bedouins  were  continually  press- 
ing in  ui)on  the  lower-lying  tracts.  But  besides 
these  Semitic  elements,  Greeks  and  Graecizetl 
Syrians  were  distributed  over  parts  of  the  land 
(Masterman,  p.  120),  and  Komans  made  their  in- 
fluence felt  throughout  a  large  area  of  the  province. 
Only  in  the  more  secluded  towns  among  the  hills 
would  Jewish  lite  be  preserved  in  its  characteristic 
purity.  In  spite,  however,  of  the  mingling  of 
nationalities,  the  Galilivans  were  thoroughly  and 

Jiatrioticaliy  Jewish  during  the  1st  cent,  of  the 
Christian  era.  Wherever  a  true  Jew  settled  abroad, 
he  kept  himself  distinct  from  his  neighbours,  cling- 
ing tenaciously  to  his  reli^on  and  to  his  racial 
customs.  And  the  same  thing  happened  with  the 
Jew  at  home,  when  Gentile  immigrants  settled 
within  his  borders.  His  contempt  for  foreigners 
and  foreign  ways  helped  him  to  keep  his  own 
character  and  traditions  intact.  The  Galilaeans 
-were  industrious  workers — the  bulk  of  them  being 
cultivators  of  the  soil  or  tenders  of  the  fruit- 
trees.  They  were  brave  soldiers  too,  as  may  be 
learned  from  the  chronicles  of  Josephus. 

'  The  GalUxans  are  inured  to  war  from  their  infancy,  and 
have  been  always  very  numerous ;  nor  has  their  country  ever 
been  destitute  of  men  of  courage '  (Jos.  BJ  m.  iii.  2). 

There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  suflBcient  ground 
for  the  dislike  and  contempt  in  which  the  Galilseans 
were  held  by  their  religiously  stricter  brethren  of 
Judjea.  Possibly  they  were  less  exact  in  their  ob- 
servance of  tradition.  But  they  were  devoted  to 
the  Law,  and  their  country  was  well  supplied  with 
synagogues,  schools,  and  teachers.  If  they  were 
less  orthodox,  from  the  Pharisaic  standpoint,  the 
Messianic  hope  burned  brightly  in  their  souls,  and 
they  crowded  to  the  ministry  of  Jesus.  They  were 
certainly  more  tolerant  and  open-minded  than  the 
Judfeans,  and  it  was  from  them  that  Jesus  chose 
most  of  the  men  who  were  to  give  His  teaching  to 
the  world. 

The  population  of  Galilee  in  apostolic  times 
was  considerably  greater  than  it  is  to-day.  At  the 
present  time,  it  is  estimated  to  be  somewhere  about 
250,000  (including  children),  spread  over  an  area  of 
1341  square  miles  and  inhabiting  some  312  towns 
and  villages.  This  gives  186  to  the  square  mile. 
Josephus'  figures  mean  that  the  population  in  his 
day  amounted  to  something  like  three  millions. 
He  speaks  of  204  cities  and  villages  ( Vita,  45),  the 
smallest  of  which  contained  above  15,000  inhabit- 
ants (BJ  III.  iii.  2).  Tliis  estimate,  in  spite  of 
the  arguments  of  Merrill  (Galilee  in  the  Time  of 
Christ,  pp.  62-67),  can  hardly  be  correct.  Good 
reasons  have  been  given  for  believing  that  400,000 
is  a  much  more  likeh*  figure,  which  means  a  popu- 
lation of  440  to  the  square  mile.  A  village  of  1,500 
inhabitants  is  reckoned  to  be  a  very  large  one  to- 
da\',  and  the  largest  towns  (with  the  exception 
of  Safed)  contain  fewer  than  15,000  people.  See 
Masterman,  pp.  131-134. 

6.  History  and  goYemment. — At  the  partition 
of  west  Palestine  among  the  twelve  tribes,  Galilee 
fell  to  the  lot  of  Issachar,  Zebulun,  Asher,  and 
Naphtali,  who  did  not  drive  out  the  original  in- 
habitants. The  population,  therefore,  continued 
to  be  a  mixed  one,  and  the  borders  of  the  province 
were  constantly  being  pressed  upon  by  foreigners. 
In  734  B.C.,  Tiglath-Pileser  iii.  carried  away  most 
of  the  inliabitants,  and  after  this  depopulation 
very  few  Jews  re-settled  in  the  district  till  the  ex- 
tension of  the  Jewish  State  under  John  Hyrcanus 
(135-104  B.C.).  At  this  time,  or  a  little  later, 
Galilee  became  thoroughly  judaized.  The  settlers 
were  placed  under  the  Law.  and  quickly  developed 
a  warm  patriotism,  which  made  them  ever  after- 
wards zealous  and   persistent   champions  of  their 


national  rights  and  traditions.  Later  on,  the  pro- 
vince was  the  principal  scene  of  our  Lord's  life  and 
ministry.  Later  still,  it  succeeded  Judaea  as  '  the 
sanctuary  of  the  race  and  the  home  of  their  theo- 
logical schools '  (G.  A.  Smith,  HGHL*,  p.  425). 

From  4  B.C.  to  a.d.  39,  Herod  Antipas  was 
tetrarch  of  Galilee  and  Peraea,  by  appointment  of 
the  Roman  Emi)eror.  Antipas  api>ears  to  have 
been  a  capable  ruler  on  the  whole.  Li ke  his  father, 
he  was  fond  of  building  and  embellishing  cities. 
He  re-built  and  fortified  Sepphoris,  his  first  capital, 
and  a  little  later  erected  a  new  capital  city  on  the 
west  shore  of  the  lake,  calling  it  Tiberias,  after 
the  Emperor  whose  favour  he  enjoyed.  Having 
.secured  the  banbhment  of  Antipas  in  .\.D.  39, 
Herod  Agrippa  I.  received  the  tetrarchy  of  Galilee, 
in  addition  to  the  territories  of  Philip  and  of 
Lysanias  which  he  had  previously  obtained.  From 
Claudius  (in  A.D.  41)  he  also  obtained  Judaea  and 
Samaria,  thus  establishing  dominion  over  all  the 
land  formerly  ruled  by  Herod  the  Great.  After 
Agrippa's  death,  in  A.D.  44,  Claudius  reverted  to 
the  method  of  government  by  procurator — a  change 
which  greatly  displeased  the  Jews  as  a  whole  and 
especiadly  stirred  the  animosity  of  the  zealots. 
Under  the  administration  of  the  new  procurators, 
the  people's  patience  became  exhausted,  and  in  the 
time  of  Gessius  Florus  (A.D.  64-66)  the  revolt  began 
which  endetl  in  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  State. 
In  the  spring  of  A.D.  67  Vespasian  assembled  his 
army  at  Ptolemais  and  began  the  reduction  of 
Galilee.  This  was  accomplished  in  the  course  of 
the  first  campaign,  despite  the  courage  and  per- 
sistence of  the  inhabitants.  But  it  was  not  till 
after  the  lapse  of  another  three  years  that 
Jerusalem  fell  (A.D.  70)  and  the  Jewish  State  was 
dissolved. 

Though  the  general  administration  of  Galilaean 
civil  attairs  lay  (tUl  a.d.  44)  with  the  tetrarchs, 
the  details  of  daUy  life  were  regtilated  by  the  Jews' 
o^vn  religious  laws  {DCG  i.  633).  The  Sanhedrin 
at  Jerusalem  exercised  the  chief  authority,  but 
there  were  also  local  'councils'  (Mt  5—  10^')  which 
had  limited  jurisdiction.  But,  throughout  ihe 
whole  period,  over  all  and  influencing  all,  was  the 
firm  rule  of  Rome. 

LrrKRATTBK.— Artt.  in  HDB  u.  9S-102  (S.  Merrill^,  DCG  i. 
632-634  (G.  W.  Thatcher),  and  PBr^  (Gnthe);  G.  A.  Smith, 
HGHL*,  1897,  chs.  xx.-xxi. ;  S.  Merrill,  GaliUe  in  tht  Time  of 
ChrUt,  Boston,  1881,  London,  1S&5 ;  V.  Gn^rin,  Description 
.  .  .dela  PaUttine,  pt.  iii. : '  Galilee,'  Paris,  1880 ;  F.  Buhl,  GAP, 
Freiburg  and  Leipzig,  1S96,  §§  lS-19,  66, 113-123 ;  E.  Schurer, 
HJP,  1885-91  (index);  E.  W.  G.  Masterman,  Studies  in 
Galilee,  Chicago,  1909;  A.  Neubaner,  La  Gioa.  du  Talmud, 
Paris,  1868,  §§  188-240 ;  SWP  i.  [1861].         A.  W.  C(X)KE. 

GALLIO.— GaUio  governed  Achaia  as  a  proconsul 
of  pnetorian  rank.  His  name  was  Marcus  Anna?us 
Novatus ;  but  he  was  adopted  by  L.  Junius  Gallio, 
a  Roman  orator,  and  took  his  name.  He  was  the 
elder  brother  of  Seneca  the  philosopher,  to  whose 
influence  at  court  he  may  have  owed  his  governor- 
ship. There  is  no  other  direct  evidence  that  Gallio 
governed  Achaia  than  St.  Luke's  statement  (Ac 
IS'-).  But  Seneca's  reference  to  Gallio's  catching 
fever  in  Achaia  and  taking  a  voyage  for  a  change 
of  air  so  far  corroborates  St.  Luke.  Gallio  came 
to  Corinth,  the  residence  of  the  governor,  during 
the  time  of  St.  Paul's  labours  there  (c.  A.D.  50-53).* 
Angered  by  the  conversion  of  prominent  members 
of  the  synagogue,  the  Jews  took  advantage  of  the 
new  governor's  arrival  to  lay  a  charge  against  St. 
Paul  which  they  tried  to  put  in  such  a  serious  light 
as  to  merit  a  severe  penalty.  But  Gallio  was  not 
so  complaisant  or  inexperienced  as  they  hoped. 
He  elicited  the  true  nature  of  their  complaint,  and, 
cutting  short  the  trial,  he  abruptly  dismissed  the 

*  On  the  exact  date  of  Gallio's  proconsulship  see  art.  Dates, 
IU.3- 


440 


GAMALIEL 


GAMALIEL 


case  as  referring  only  to  interpretations  of  Jewisli 
law,  not  to  any  civil  wrong  or  any  moral  outrage 
of  which  Roman  law  took  cognizance. 

Two  eflleots  of  this  decision  are  noted,  (a)  It 
was  a  snub  which  gave  the  Greek  bystanders 
grounds  for  venting  their  animus  against  the  Jews, 
by  seizing  and  beating  Sosthenes,  the  ruler  of  the 
synagogue.  This  seems  the  true  interpretation  of 
a  scene  which  has  been  supposed  to  describe  Jews 
beating  a  Christian — or  even  their  own  leader — in 
revenge  for  their  defeat.  But  such  a  savage  and 
illegal  protest  against  Gallio's  decision  could  not 
have  passed  unnoticed  by  him  ;  on  the  other  hand, 
a  public  demonstration  against  the  unpopular  and 
disputatious  Jews  whom  he  had  just  dismissed 
might  appear  to  him  a  rough  sort  or  justice  which 
he  could  alibrd  to  overlook,  especially  as  it  put 
the  seal  of  popular  approval  on  his  action  (see 
Sosthenes). 

(b)  The  decision  seems  to  have  influenced  St. 
Paul  in  another  direction.  Gallic  being  governor 
of  Achaia,  his  judgment  would  become  a  precedent 
and  would  have  tar-reaching  influence.  It  gave 
St.  Paxil  a  new  idea  of  the  protection  he  could  gain 
from  the  Roman  law.  Although  Judaism  was  a 
rcligio  licita,  evidently  the  Imperial  Government 
did  not  consider  Christian  preaching  illegal.  This 
amounted  to  a  declaration  of  freedom  in  religion 
of  immense  value  to  Christians.  From  this  point 
of  view  Gallio's  treatment  of  the  Jewish  complaint 
Avas  a  landmark  in  St.  Paul's  missionary  labour, 
and  did  a  great  deal  to  confirm  his  confidence  in 
Roman  protection  for  his  preaching. 

Gallio's  private  character  is  eulogized  by  Seneca 
in  glowing  terms.  He  was  very  lovable  and  fasci- 
nating ;  amiable,  virtuous,  just,  and  witty.  The 
casual  glimpse  we  get  of  him  in  Ac  18^^"^^  shows 
him  in  a  favourable  light  as  governor.  The  clause 
'  Gallio  cared  for  none  of  these  things '  does  not 
bear  in  the  least  the  interpretation  put  upon  it  by 
proverbial  Christian  philosophy.  No  doubt  he  had 
more  than  a  touch  ot  the  Roman  aristocrat's  con- 
tempt for  religious  quarrels  and  for  all  Jews.  But 
he  appears  as  an  astute  judge,  seeing  quickly  into 
the  heart  of  things,  firm  in  his  decisions,  and  not 
too  pompous  or  punctilious  to  turn  a  blind  eye  to 
a  bit  of  rough  popular  horseplay.  He  seems  to 
have  shared  the  fortunes  of  his  more  famous 
brother,  and  was  put  to  death  by  Nero. 

Literature.— flDi?,  art.  ' Gallio,' t6.  art.  'Corinth,' i.  481; 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895,  pp.  257-261,  The 
Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  1893,  pp.  250,  346-349 ;  R.  J. 
Knowlingr,  EGT,  'Acts,'  1900,  ad  loc. ;  F.  W.  Farrar,  Seekers 


after  God,  ed.  1879,  pp.  16-21. 


J.  E.  Roberts. 


GAMALIEL  {^^'hm,  TafiaXf^X,  'reward  of  God'). 
— 1.  Son  of  Simon  and  grandson  of  Hill  el,  a 
'  pharisee,  a  doctor  of  the  law,  had  in  honour  of 
all  the  people,'  and  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrin, 
Avho  intervened  in  the  trial  of  St.  Peter  and  the 
other  apostles  (Ac  5^*"'*^).  He  is  also  represented 
by  the  Apostle  Paul  as  his  early  teacher  (Ac  22^). 
Gamaliel  was  a  representative  of  a  broader  and 
more  liberal  school  among  the  Pharisees,  the  school 
of  Hillel  as  opposed  to  that  of  Shammai.  He  was 
interested  in  Greek  literature  and  encouraged  his 
students  to  study  it.  His  teaching  tended  towards 
a  broader  and  more  spiritual  interpretation  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  and  encouraged  the  Jews  to  friendly 
intercourse  with  foreigners,  allowing  poor  strangers 
equal  rights  along  Avith  Jews  to  the  gleanings  of 
the  corn,  while  he  exerted  himself  for  the  relief  of 
wives  from  the  abuses  of  the  law  of  divorce  and 
for  the  protection  of  widows  from  the  greed  of 
children  (Gittin  32,  34).  He  was  held  in  such  es- 
teem that  it  is  related  in  the  Mishna  (Sota  ix.  15), 
'  with  the  death  of  Gamaliel  the  reverence  for  the 
law  ceased  and  purity  and  abstinence  died  away.' 


Gamaliel's  attitude  towards  the  apostles  has 
been  variously  estimated.  His  advice  to  let  them 
alone  is  supported  by  the  reason  '  if  this  counsel  or 
work  be  or  men,  it  will  come  to  naught :  but  if  it 
be  of  God,  ye  cannot  overthrow  it,  lest  haply  ye  be 
found  even  to  fight  against  God'  (Ac  5^  ""•').  Some 
see  in  this  the  mark  of  a  humane,  tolerant,  gener- 
ous, liberal-minded  man  (C.  D.  Ginsburg  in  Kitto's 
Bibl.  Cycl.,  s.v.  '  Gamaliel  I. ') ;  others  regard  it  as 
the  statement  of  a  time-server  without  definite 
convictions,  and  incline  to  compare  him  unfavour- 
ably not  only  with  the  apostles,  but  with  his  col- 
leagues in  the  council,  who  were  consistent  and 
convinced  traditionalists.  Perhaps  the  view  of 
Milligan  (in  IIDB  ii.  106)  is  the  most  satisfactory. 
He  is  of  the  opinion  that  Gamaliel's  conduct  is 
to  be  attributed  rather  to  a  '  prudential  dread  of 
violent  measures  than  to  a  spirit  of  systematic 
tolerance.'  The  persecuting  zeal  of  his  pupil  Saul 
of  Tarsus  does  not  seem  to  indicate  that  universal 
tolerance  w<as  part  of  the  systematic  teaching  of 
Gamaliel,  though  a  pupil  may  depart  from  the 
views  he  has  been  taught. 

The  influence  which  Gamaliel  on  this  occasion 
exercised  in  the  Sanhedrin  has  been  explained  by 
the  acceptance  of  a  Rabbinic  tradition  to  the  efl'ect 
that  he  was  j)resident  of  the  Sanhedrin  ;  but  not 
until  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  when  the 
priesthood  had  lost  its  importance,  do  we  find  a 
Rabbi  occupying  this  position  (cf.  A.  Edersheim, 
History  of  the  Jeivish  Nation,  1896,  Appendix  iii., 
p.  522  ft'.  ;  also  Schiirer,  GJV*  ii.  257,  431).  The 
influence  of  Gamaliel  is  better  accounted  for  by 
the  predominating  influence  of  the  Pharisaic  party, 
which  was  represented  in  the  Sanhedrin  (Ac  23* ; 
Jos.  BJ  II.  xvii.  3,  Vita,  38,  39),  and  also  by 
the  personal  influence  of  the  man  himself.  The 
importance  of  this  latter  factor  is  borne  out  by 
unanimous  Rabbinic  tradition  and  is  attested  by 
the  fact  that  Gamaliel  was  the  first  among  the 
seven  teachers  who  received  the  title  Rabl)an — a 
higher  form  of  Rabbi,  which  in  the  form  Rabboni 
is  applied  to  the  risen  Jesus  by  Mary  Magdalene 
(Jn  20^**).  Another  incident  bearing  upon  his  com- 
manding position  in  the  Sanhedrin  is  related  in 
the  Mishna  (Edajoth  vii.  7).  The  council  had  re- 
cognized the  need  for  appointing  a  leap-year,  but, 
as  Gamaliel  was  absent,  resolved  that  theirdecision 
should  take  efl'ect  only  if  it  received  the  subse- 
quent sanction  of  their  leading  man. 

The  tradition  that  Gamaliel  was  a  secret  Chris- 
tian and  was  baptized  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul 
is  purely  legendary  (cf.  A.  Neander,  Hist,  of  the 
Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian  Church, 
ed.  Bohn,  i.  [1880]  46 ft'.).     He  died  c.  A.D.  57-58. 

The  historical  events  referred  to  in  the  speech 
ascribed  to  Gamaliel  in  Ac  5^'^-  have  given  rise  to 
much  discussion.  According  to  St.  Luke's  narra- 
tive, he  speaks  of  a  rising  under  Theudas  as  tak- 
ing place  before  the  rising  of  Judas  of  Galilee 
(A.D.  6).  Josephus  {Ant.  XX.  v.  1)  refers  to  a  rising 
under  a  certain  Theudas  which  was  put  down  by 
the  procurator  Cuspius  Fadus  (c.  A.D.  46).  Is  the 
Theudas  of  St.  Luke  identical  with  the  Theudas 
of  Josephus  ?  Has  one  or  other  historian  erred  as 
to  his  facts,  or  were  there  two  risings  under  two 
men  of  the  same  name,  one  in  A.D.  6  and  the  other 
in  46?  Or  are  we  to  suppose  that  the  whole 
speech  of  Gamaliel  in  Acts  is  unhistorical  ?  For 
further  discussion  of  these  questions  see  art. 
Theudas. 

2.  Gamaliel  II.,  grandson  of  the  former  and  the 
third  teacher  to  receive  the  title  Rabban,  the  most 
outstanding  Jewish  scholar  at  the  end  of  the  1st 
century.  He  presided  over  the  court  of  Jabne, 
recognized  as  the  higiiest  Jewish  authority  of  the 
day.  He  is  often  confused  with  1  (Schiirer,  GJV* 
ii.  35). 


GAMES 


GAMES 


441 


3.  Gamaliel  III.,  son  of  R.  Juda-ha-Nasi  {Aboth 
ii.  -1),  the  fifth  scholar  to  receive  the  title  Rabban. 
He  is  credited  with  having  expressly  recommended 
the  combining  of  the  study  of  the  Law  Avith  manual 
labour  or  business  activity  (Schiirer,  GJV*  ii.  379). 

i.  The  last  Ethnarch  or  Patriarch  of  the  Jews, 
deposed  by  the  Emperor  Theodosian  II.  in  the  year 
415(Schurer,  GJV*ni.  121). 

LiTERATTRE.— G.  MiUigTan,  in  UDB  ii.  flS99]  106 ;  C.  D. 
Ginsburg,  in  Kitto's  C'lclopcedia  of  Biblical  Literature^,  ii. 
[IStMl  6'J-Ol;  E.  Schurer,  GJV*,  1901-11;  R.  J.  Knowling:, 
EGT,  'Acts,'  1900,  p.  156.  W,  F.  BOYD. 

GAMES. — The  M-ord  'games,'  which  is  not  found 
in  the  AV,  appears  twice  in  the  RV,  viz.  in  1  Co 
9'-^  and  2  Ti  2'.  In  the  former  passage  aywvi.^6ixevoi, 
'striving,'  is  the  Greek  term  employed,  and  in  the 
latter  d^X^  (and  d^X^o-j),  '  contend.'  It  will  be  seen 
that  in  each  case  'in  the  games'  is  supplied  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  obvious  sense  of  the  verb.  This 
provides  a  starting-point  for  the  discussion  of  the 
mimerous  references  to  games  that  are  found  in 
the  NT,  the  Gospels  being  left  out  of  account. 

1.  Metaphors  of  St.  Paul.— dyo;'^,  with  derivatives, 
both  simple  and  compound,  supplies  most  of  the 
material.  This  word  is  itself  derived  from  fiyw, 
'gather,'  which  reveals  the  spectacular  nature  of 
the  games  of  antiquity.  While  private  games  of 
many  kinds  were  Known  and  practised,  either  as 
simple  pastimes,  or  for  the  exhibition  of  skill,  or 
to  satisfy  the  gambling  instinct,  games  of  a  public 
order  predominated,  and  this  was  more  than  ever 
the  rule  in  the  Apostolic  Age.  The  ditference  re- 
marked by  Gibbon  {Decline  and  Fall  of  tlie  Roman 
Empire,  ch.  xl.  §  ii.  [ed.  Bury,  vol.  iv.^,  1908,  p. 
218])  between  the  games  of  Greece  and  Rome  was 
now  very  pronounced :  '  the  most  eminent  of  the 
Greeks  were  actors,  the  Romans  were  merely  spec- 
tators.' "While  the  demand  of  the  age  was  for 
spectacles,  a  supply  of  competitors  had  still  to  be 
found ;  wliich  means  that  professional  athletes 
existed,  who  in  the  case  of  Rome  seem  to  have 
been  mostly  imported  from  Greece.  It  is  perhaps 
significant  of  the  spirit  of  the  times  that  the  strictly 

Professional  term  (d^X^w)  is  but  rarely  used  in  the 
:T  (2  Ti  2' ;  cf.  Ph  1=^  4?,  He  W-).  Degeneracy 
had  set  in,  and  the  onlookers  were  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  the  trained  athletes  who  provided  the 
sport. 

This  being  the  case,  it  is  all  the  more  surprising 
to  find  that  metaphors  and  similes  drawn  from  the 
sphere  of  athletics  should  enter  so  largely  into  the 
language  of  the  NT,  in  particular  into  the  letters 
of  St.  Paul.  It  has  been  customary  to  explain  this 
feature  of  the  Apostle's  writings  as  the  outcome  of 
his  experience  and  from  his  actual  presence  at 
great  athletic  assemblies,  but  now  the  idea  is  gain- 
ing ground  that  he  drew  rather  upon  the  word- 
treasury  of  past  generations,  and  used  such  figures 
of  speech  because  they  had  become  stereotyped  in 
language  and  arose  naturally  to  the  mind.  The 
same  fondness  for  the  imagery  of  the  athletic 
ground  has  been  remarked  in  Philo  {HDB  v.  206'' ; 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  Lxike  the  Physician,  1908,  p.  294), 
and  the  opinion  is  widely  entertained  that  St.  Paul 
owed  the  particular  metaphor  of  the  race  {e.g.  1  Co 
9^^-)  to  the  Stoics,  with  whom  it  was  a  favourite 
idea  (C.  Clemen,  Primitive  Christianity  and  its 
Non-Jewish  Sources,  Eng.  tr.,  1912,  p.  67).  Light- 
foot  has  called  attention  to  the  striking  similarity 
in  this  respect,  as  in  many  others,  between  the 
language  of  St.  Paul  and  that  of  Seneca  (Philip- 
pians*,  1878,  pp.  288  and  290). 

Modern  exegesis  has  brought  to  view  the  full 
scope  of  the  imagery  from  games,  obscured  in  the 
renderings  of  the  AV,  wliich  are  retained  for  the 
sake  of  euphony  in  the  RV  {e.g.  I  Ti  6'-  and  2  Ti  4^, 
-literallj',  '  strive  the  good  strife,'  '  I  have  striven 


the  good  strife').  It  is  not  apparent  that  in  2  Ti 
4^  the  figure  of  speech  in  the  first  two  clauses  La 
uniform  and  drawn  from  the  athletic  gi-ound  (con- 
trast 2**).  An  improved  reading  of  1  Ti  4",  in- 
corporated in  the  RV,  gives  dyuvi^6fit0a,  'strive,' 
instead  of  dveidi^dfj-eda,  '  suffer  reproach '  (AV).  The 
same  idea  of  contest  or  striving,  with  the  same 
basal  form  ayniv,  appears  in  Ro  15**,  1  Co  9^,  Ph  1**, 
Col  129  21  4«  1  Th  22,  He  12'-*,  Jude=«.  Specific 
features  of  the  athletic  contest  are  found  in  '  course' 
{8p6fjios ;  Ac  IS^^  20-^  2  Ti  4'),  'run'  (rp^xw  ;  Ro  9'*, 
Gal  22  5^  Ph  2J«,  2  Th  3\  1  P  4<), '  press  on '  (SwVw  ; 
Ph3'2ff-),  'stretching  forth'  {iireKTeivd/j-evos  ;  Ph  3"). 
Kord  (TKoirdv  ('mark,'  AV,  ' goal,'  RV  ;  Ph3"),  while 
relevant,  is  not  technical  to  racing  {HDB  iii.  244). 

Thus  far  the  language  is  suggestive  of  the  stad- 
ium, particularly  of  the  foot-race,  although  it  is 
not  forbidden  to  think  of  the  hippodrome  and  of 
chariot-racing.  Another  event  in  the  games  is 
recalled  by  the  expressive  term  -irvKTevu  (1  Co  9^), 
rendered  by  '  fight,'  '  box '  (RVm),  and  the  no  less 
expressive  dipup  (v.^),  '  beating,'  and  viruirtd^o}  (v.'-^), 
'  buffet '  or  '  bruise '  (under  the  eye),  y/xly  ij  iriXr}, 
'our  wrestling '  (Eph  6^^)^  seems  like  an  intrusion  of 
the  imagery  of  the  athletic  ground  into  the  meta- 
phor of  the  complete  warrior. 

Not  the  least  interesting  part  of  the  Pauline 
figures  of  speech  now  being  considered  is  related 
to  the  laws  and  regulations  governing  the  public 
games,  both  beforehand  and  during  the  actual  con- 
test (1  Co  9^^-),  and  the  conditions  attending  the 
giving  of  the  prize  {crTe<pavoi,  '  crown '  or  '  wreath '). 
The  reward  to  the  victor  follows  upon  the  decision 
of  the  umpires  {^pa^evrai),  and  the  herald's  an- 
nouncement {KTipvcTffeiv ;  cf.  1  Co  9^).  ^pa^etow 
(Ph  3")  is  the  word  used  for  the  prize  bestowed 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  games  (compare  /3/)a- 
^everci}.  Col  3^',  '  rule,'  'arbitrate,'  RVm,  and  ^cara- 
^pa^everw,  2^^,  'rob  you  of  your  prize').  The 
immediate  prize  in  the  shape  of  a  wreath  suggests 
the  idea  of  something  better  than  itself,  not  only 
in  connexion  A\-ith  the  actual  contest,  where  further 
honours  were  afterwards  bestowed  upon  the  victor, 
but  also  in  the  Christian  thought  of  St.  Paul 
(I  Co  925,  Ph  4\  1  Th  2-9,  2  Ti  4=*)  and  other  NT 
writers  (Ja  l^^,  1  P  5^  Rev  2i»  3"  4-'  etc.).  Some 
reluctance  has  been  felt  to  admit  the  use  by  Jewish 
writers  of  this  figure  drawn  from  the  ceremonial  of 
the  heathen  games  (R.  C.  Trench,  Synonyms  of 
the  iVr,  1865,  p.  76  f.),  but  it  is  probable  that  they 
were  indirectly  indebted  to  this  outstanding  phase 
of  ancient  life  {EDB  iv.  o5b^ ;  cf.  Ramsay,  op.  cit., 
p.  290  f.). 

WhUe  Ave  are  willing  to  believe  that  the  profitable 
aspect  of  bodily  training  (1  Ti  4^)  was  not  altogether 
in  abeyance  during  the  Apostolic  Age,  we  are 
chiefly  impressed  by  the  historical  evidence  for  the 
gross  degeneracy  of  the  public  games  during  the 
1st  cent.  A.D.  For  this  deterioration  the  Romans 
must  be  held  responsible.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
dwell  on  the  details  of  the  lust  for  blood,  both 
human  and  animal,  which  disfigured  the  public 
displays  of  the  Imperial  city  and  to  a  less  extent 
of  tne  provinces.  The  motto  of  the  age  Avas  '  bread 
and  races '  (panis  et  circense.'i),  and  coupled  Avith 
tliis  Avas  the  cry  :  '  The  Christians  to  the  lions ! ' 
{C'hristiani  ad  leones).  The  Christians  thus  had  a 
tragic  interest  in  the  ludi  circenses,  especially  in 
the  cruel  displays  of  the  amphitheatre.  St.  Paul's 
experience  at  Ephesus  may  be  taken  as  typical. 
There  he  fought  with  beasts  (ediipiofjLdxv<ra;  1  Co 
15^),  an  expression  Avhich  is  generally  understood 
figuratively  (see  art.  Beast),  but  Avhich  is  considered 
by  McGiffert  {Apostolic  Age,  1897,  p.  280)  and  %on 
Weizsacker  {Apostolic  Age,  i."  [1S97]  385)  as  setting 
forth  actual  fact.  In  the  same  city  the  Apostle 
and  his  friends  Gains  and  Aristarehus  came  near 
experiencing  the  violence  of  the  mob  in  the  theatre 


442 


GAMES 


GARLANDS 


(Ac  IQ^"^'))  which  was  the  recognized  place  of  as- 
sembly, and  even  of  execution  foUowinj,'  judgment 
(Jos.  BJ  VII.  iii.  3).  Originally  designed  for 
scenic  exhibitions  of  a  bloodless  type,  the  theatre 
had  developed,  or  rather  had  deteriorated,  into  the 
iimplutlieatre  with  its  wholesale  biitcheries. 

'1  lie  theatre  supplies  NT  writers  with  two  similes : 
d^arpov  =  diafia,  'a  spectacle,"  1  Co  4",  and  OecTpL^o- 
nevoi  (He  1(P),  translated  by  'gazingstock.'  In  ad- 
dition to  this  the  atrocities  of  the  amphitheatre 
doubtless  underlie  many  of  the  references  to  perse- 
cutions, being  most  patent  in  1  Co  IS*''  and  2  Ti  4'^ : 
'  I  was  delivered  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  lion.'  It 
should  be  noted  that  this  last-named  experience 
has  also  been  refined  into  a  proverb  (C.  Clemen, 
u/i.  cit.,  p.  134  ;  EBi\\.  5090 n.).  Considerable  un- 
certainty attaches  to  the  language  of  He  12^ :  *  Ye 
have  not  yet  resisted  unto  blood,'  in  which  it  is 
tempting  to  see  a  repetition  of  St.  Paul's  metaphor 
from  boxing  (1  Co  9-*'-),  or  even  a  reference  to  the 
extreme  penalty  of  martyrdom  suffered  by  some, 
after  the  example  of  '  the  author  and  perfecter  of 
our  faith.'  The  blood  may  have  been  shed  in  sight 
of  the  circle  of  spectators  in  the  amphitheatre  (cf. 
TTepiKfi/xevov,  He  12'). 

2,  History  and  archaeology.— The  Jews  Avere  not 
exempt  from  the  current  treatment  of  those  who 
had  incurred  the  wrath  of  the  State.  At  Caesarea 
Titus  caused  more  than  2,500  Jews  to  be  slain  in  a 
day,  fighting  with  the  beasts  and  with  one  another 
(Jos.  BJ  VII.  iii.  1  ;  cf.  VII.  ii.  1).  Under  this  same 
monarch  a  commencement  was  made  to  the  build- 
ing of  the  Colosseum,  which  was  dedicated  and 
first  used  for  gladiatorial  and  other  exhibitions 
(e.g.  venationes)  in  the  reign  of  Vesjiasian  (a.d.  80). 
The  provinces  soon  learned  to  copy  the  evil  example 
of  the  mother  country  (W.  M.  Ramsay,  TAe  Church 
in  the  Uoman  Empire,  1893,  p.  317  fl'.). 

Already  in  the  East,  under  Hellenic  influence, 
ample  provision  had  been  made  to  satisfy  the 
craze  for  public  amusements.  In  the  cities  of  the 
Decapolis  there  were  in  some  instances  two  amphi- 
theatres, while  some  possessed  a  vavnaxl^o. ;  and 
annual  llayKpAria  or  games  of  all  kinds  were  held 
(G.  A.  Smith,  HGHL\  1897,  p.  604).  King  Agrippa  1. 
continued  the  policy  of  Herod  the  Great,  building 
at  Berytus  a  theatre  and  an  amphitheatre,  ami 
giving  exhibitions  both  there  and  at  Ctesarea  (Jos. 
Ant.  XIX.  vii.  5,  viii.  2;  cf.  Ac  12'^^-^).  When 
lloman  influence  fully  pervaded  the  East,  the  zest 
for  sports  and  for  blood  became  still  more  pro- 
nounced. Nero  himself  lent  patronage,  but  not 
lustre,  to  the  Grecian  games,  and  took  a  personal 
part  in  them  (A.D.  67).  In  the  Roman  province  of 
Asia  festivals  with  games  were  held,  probably 
under  the  presidency  of  the  Asiarchs  {HDB  i.  172). 
The  climax  was  reached  in  the  2nd  cent.  A.D.  (see 
Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  p. 
317  f.).  Confirmation  of  the  wide-spread  love  of 
sport  at  this  time  is  found  in  the  well-preserved 
ruins  of  trans-Jordanic  towns — e.g.  (xerasa,  Phila- 
delphia, and  elsewhere  (G.  A.  Smith,  op.  cit.,  p. 
698  fi'.  ;  E.  Huntington,  Palestine  and  its  Trans- 
formation, 1911,  pp.  280  f.,  295). 

Such  facilities  for  games  even  on  the  verge  of 
the  Empire  speak  for  the  universal  practice  of 
heathendom.  The  Christians  stood  aloof  from 
these  displays,  and  became  steeled  against  them 
more  and  more  with  the  lapse  of  time.  In  the  3rd 
cent.  '  no  member  of  the  Christian  Church  was 
allowed  to  be  an  actor  or  gladiator,  to  teach  acting, 
or  to  attend  the  theatre'  (A.  Harnack,  The  Mission 
and  Expansion  of  Christianity-,  1908,  i.  301). 

According  to  the  Talmud,  the  religious  leaders 
of  the  Jews  were  only  slightly  less  rigid,  although 
they  could  not  altogether  prevent  attendance  at 
the  theatre  and  jiarticipation  in  games  of  chance 
(E.  Schiirer,  HJP  ll.  i.  [1885]  32 f.,  36). 


Literature.— Art.  'Games'  in  ///>/>,  SDB,  Imperial  liibU 
Diet.,  Smith's  Diet,  of  Class.  Antiiiuitits,  Se.vffert'b  Diet,  of 
ClnsM.  Antiijuities  (ed.  Nettlcshij)  and  Sandyk) ;  'Games, 
Classical,'  in  EBr^'^;  'Games  and  .S|)ort8'  in  JK,  'Games 
(Hebrew  and  Jewish)'  in  ERK\  E.  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall 
('/  the  Roman  Kinvire,  ch.  xii.  (ed.  Uury,  vol.  i.-*,  1906,  j). 
343 ff.) ;  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  IliUoiy  of  European  MoraUfi,  ISM, 
i.  271  ff.;  E.  Renan,  Les  Ap6tres,  1806.  ch.  xvii. ;  S.  Dill, 
Jiornan  Societi/  from  Sero  to  Marcus  Aurelius,  1904,  pp.  'i3-»- 
•244  ;  F.  W.  Farrar,  The  Life  and  Work  of  ^t.  Paul,  1897, 
Excursus  iii.,  p.  698  f. ;  W.  Warde  Fowler,  Social  Life  at 
Home  in  the  Age  of  Cicero,  l!M)s,  i)p.  28.5-318  ;  L.  Friedlander, 
Roman  Life  and  Manners  under  the  Etirlii  Emjiire,  tr.  J.  H. 
Freese  and  L.  A.  Mag'nus,  ii.  1-130;  T.  G.  Tucker,  Life  in  the 
Roman  World  of  Sero  and  St.  /'(H/;,  1910,  p.  200  flf.  ;  S.  Krauss, 
Talmudische  Archiioloqie,  iii.  (1912)  102-121 ;  E.  Schiirer,  <JJ  V* 
il.  [1907]  47-52,  00  f.,  67  (Enj{.  tr.,  IJJP  n.  i.  23-28,  etc.). 

W.  Cruick-shank. 

GANGRENE  (Gr.  ydyypaiva, '  an  eating,  spreading 
sore,'  from  ypaiveip,  'to  gnaw,'  AV  'canker.'  Two 
very  early  translations  of  2  Ti  2'^  niay  Ije  cited  : 
'  Ase  holi  writ  seiS,  "  hore  speche  .spret  ase 
cauncre  " '  [A  ncr.  Rules,  98,  ann.  1225  ;  see  '  canker ' 
in  OED] ;  '  The  word  of  hem  crepith  as  a  kankir ' 
[Wyclif,  Bible,  ed.  1382;  changed  to  'canker'  in 
1388  ed.  The  Vulgate  has  '  ut  cancer ']). — Until 
about  A.D.  1600, '  canker '  si<rnilied  corroding  ulcera- 
tions generally,  and  was  earlier  derived  from  Italian 
and  medical  Latin  cancrena.  '  Gangrene  '  is  the 
term  ai)plied  to  necrosis  or  mortification  of  a  part 
of  the  animal  body,  attacking  especially  the  ex- 
tremities, which,  as  it  moves  upward,  unless  ar- 
rested, involves  more  and  more  healthy  tissue,  and 
finally  results  in  death.  In  its  figurative  use  it 
symbolizes  anything  that  slowly  but  surely  and 
malignantly  corrupts,  depraves,  and  consumes 
what  is  good.  The  cause  of  the  '  gangrene '  re- 
ferred to  in  2  Ti  2'''  is  incii)ient  Gnosticism,  which 
subverted  the  Christian  teaching  concerning  the 
resurrection,  alleging  tliat  it  had  occurred  already, 
in  opposition  to  tlie  belief  of  the  apostles  that  tlie 
resurrection  was  future,  being  not  merely  spiritual 
but  involving  the  whole  man.  In  Ja  5*  '  cankered  ' 
in  the  AV  is  in  the  RV  translated  '  rusted.' 

C.  A.  liECKwrrH. 

GARLANDS  (Gr.  <rr^yu/xaTa).— This  word  is  found 
only  once  in  the  NT,  and  it  is  used  in  connexion 
with  heathen  sacrifices.  In  the  temples  of  the 
ancient  world  it  was  customary  to  make  large 
use  of  floral  decoration,  and  especially  of  wreaths 
or  garlands,  on  the  occasion  of  religious  festivals. 
Often  the  priests,  the  worshippers,  and,  in  particu- 
lar, the  sacrificial  victims,  were  adorned  with  such 
wreaths  of  flowers  or  leaves  at  the  time  of  sacrifice. 
The  Romans  had  a  specific  name  for  the  wreath  or 
garland  worn  by  the  priest  and  worshii)pers  when 
taking  part  insacriticial  worship — the  corona  sacer- 
dotalis,  or  'priestly  garland.'  We  have  repeated 
references  in  classical  writers  of  both  Greece  and 
Rome  to  the  practice  of  adornin"  the  sacrificial 
beasts  with  garlands  or  fillets  of  flowers  or  leaves 
(cf.  Virgil,  Aincid,  v.  366  ;  Euripides,  Heracleidce, 
529).  This  association  of  garlands  with  heathen 
worship  led  the  early  Christians  to  object  to  their 
use  altogether  (cf.  TertuUian,  de  Corona  Militis). 

In  Ac  14*-"*  we  are  told  that,  on  the  healing 
of  a  lame  man  by  the  Apostles  i'aul  and  Barna- 
bas at  Lystra  in  Asia  Minor,  the  i)eople  imagined 
the  wonder-workers  to  be  incarnations  of  the  gods 
Jupiter  and  Mercury,  and  declared,  '  The  gods  are 
come  down  to  us  in  the  likeness  of  men'  (v.^').  In 
accordance  with  this  idea,  and  probably  also  with 
a  view  to  reaping  the  fruits  of  the  religious  excite- 
ment that  had  been  aroused,  the  priest  of  Jupiter 
brought  forth  oxen  and  garlands  to  the  gates  of  the 
city  for  sacrifice  (v.'^).  The  garlands  here  were 
wreaths  or  chaplets  of  flowers  or  leaves  intended 
for  the  victims  and  probably  also  for  those  taking 
part  in  the  service. 

The  Gr.  word  <TT4<pavos,  which  is  usually  trans- 
lated '  crown '  in  the  English  version,  is  more  cor- 


GAEMENT 


GENEALOGIES 


443 


rectly  rendered  'wreath'  or  'garland,'  and,  like 
the  ffTenfiara  (tillets)  of  Ac  14",  consisted  of  leaves 
or  flowers,  and  was  not  only  used  in  sacritices  but 
awarded  as  a  prize  to  victors  in  war  or  at  the  games 
(cf.  art.  Crowx).  W.  F.  Boyd. 

GARMENT.— See  Clothes. 

GATE. — Two  terms,  tvXtj  and  rvXui',  are  rendered 
'gate'  in  EV,  but  in  certain  cases  the  latter  is 
diflerentiated  by  'porch,'  'portals'  (Mt  26'',  Rev 
21,  RYni  passim).  The  distinction  between  the 
two  seems  to  turn  upon  architectural  features. 
Where  the  entrance  alone  is  contemplated,  rvXrj  is 
used ;  but  where  the  whole  complex  of  buildings 
bound  up  Avith  the  entrance  is  present  to  view, 
xi'Xwj'  is  the  term  employed.  The  pylon  is  associ- 
ated mainly  with  Egyptian  Temples,  and  consists 
of  the  imposing  towers  flanking  the  gate  by  which 
access  was  given  to  the  court.  When  the  space 
between  these  towers  was  filled  in  above,  the  en- 
trance became  a  portal,  and  in  this  sense  the  term 
is  employed  for  private  houses  as  well.  An  inter- 
esting example  falling  within  this  period  is  Ac  12", 
where  mention  is  made  of  rijy  dvpav  tov  xi/XcDvoj. 
This  shows  that  the  portal  or  gateway  was  closed 
by  means  of  a  door  placed  at  the  end  fronting 
the  street.  The  passage  may  have  been  closed  in 
similar  fashion  at  the  other  end,  which  opened  on 
the  court  (see,  further,  DoOR).  A  similar  use  with 
reference  to  a  private  house  occurs  in  Ac  10'^.  In 
each  case  the  singular  is  used.  With  these  we 
have  to  contrast  Ac  14",  where  the  plural  is  found. 
Opinion  is  divided  as  to  whether  a  private  entrance, 
or  the  city  gate,  or  the  sanctuary  precincts  should 
here  be  understood.  The  most  reasonable  inter- 
pretation is  that  the  xiXwves  go  together  Vi-ith  the 
Temple  buildings  outside  the  city  (Lystra),  being 
near  the  point  where  sacrifice  was  wont  to  be 
made.  Barnabas  and  Paul  'sprang  forth,'  or 
'  rushed  out,'  as  probably  from  the  city  gate  as  from 
a  private  house.  The  remaining  instances  may  be 
classed  together  (Rev  21^  "•  "•  "•  ^  22>^),  where 
the  marginal  reading  '  portals '  gives  the  best  con- 
ception of  what  is  represented. 

In  cases  where  the  gate  of  a  city  is  referred  to, 
■wv\i)  is  the  usual  term.  It  is  used  thus  of  Damas- 
cus (Ac  9^^)  and  Philippi  (Ac  16" — here  AV  ren- 
ders 'city' — a  not  unnatural  substitution).  With 
these  instances  may  be  ranked  He  13^- — Christ 
suflering  without  tlie  gate  (of  Jerusalem).  We 
remark  the  singular  form  in  all  but  one  instance 
(Ac  9-*,  where  the  plural  is  waiTanted).  There  is 
one  example  to  be  classed  alone,  which  shows  how 
an  entrance  was  filled  up.  It  is  found  in  Ac  12'", 
where  the  epithet  '  iron '  applied  to  gate  is  attached 
t«  ri\r}  (it  would  not  suit  wXiJov).  Modem  struc- 
tures lead  us  to  think  of  iron  throughout,  but  it  is 
more  likely  the  gate  was  of  wood  and  faced  with 
iron.  That  the  more  solid  form  was  not  impossible 
we  gather  from  the  Temple  doors  (Jos.  BJ  VL  v. 
3  ;  cf.  discoveries  at  Pompeii,  and  Vergil,  .-En.  vL 
552-4).  If  we  accept  the  addition  of  Cod.  Bezae, 
seven  steps  led  down  from  this  gate  to  the  level  of 
the  street. 

The  Beautiful  Gate  of  the  Temple  (Ac  3--  ">)  has 
been  treated  under  art.  Door.  Although  it  is 
spoken  of  as  a  gate  (xi'X'?*,  we  have  reason  to  think 
this  was  a  portal  of  a  very  elaborate  type  (SDB, 
art.  'Temple').  W.  Ckuickshaxk. 

GAUL.— See  Galatia. 

GAZA  (rdfa). — Gaza,  the  most  southern  of  the 
five  chief  cities  of  PhUistia,  was  important  as  the 
last  place  of  call  on  the  road  to  Egypt.  It  was 
'  the  frontier  city  of  Syria  and  the  Desert,  on 
the  south-west,  as  Damascus  on   the   north-east ' 


(Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  London,  1877,  p.  259). 
Writing  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era, 
Stxabo  (XVI.  iL  30)  describes  it  as  '  once  famous, 
but  razed  by  Alexander  [the  Great]  and  remain- 
ing deserted '  (itai  fUvovca  ipTi/ios).  The  last  clause 
can  scarcely  be  correct,  for  Gaza  was  a  strong  city 
in  the  time  of  Jonathan  the  Maccabee  (1  Mac 
11*"-).  *nd  it  stood  a  years  siege  before  it  was 
destroyed  by  Alexander  Jannseus  in  96  B.C.  (Jos. 
Ant.  XIU.  xiii.  3).  Tliis  was  Old  Gaza  (^  xaXotd 
rdfa),  so  called  by  Diodorus  and  Porphjry  (see 
the  references  in  Schiirer,  HJF  ii.  i.  [EdinCurgh, 
1885]  70).  New  Gaza  (17  via  Tdfa)  was  built  by 
Gabinius,  Governor  of  Syria  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  v.  3), 
apparently  at  some  distance  from  the  former  site 
(Jerome,  Onomast.,  ed.  Lagarde,  Gottingen,  1870, 
p.  125).  In  the  time  of  Claudius,  Mela  describes 
it  as  '  ingens  et  munita  admodum'  (i.  11).  It  is 
said  to  have  been  destroyed  by  the  Jews  in  A.D. 
65  (Jos.  BJ  II.  xviii.  1),  but  the  ruin  cannot  have 
been  more  than  partisil.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  it  was  still  a  notable  Greek  city, 
where  paganism  stoutly  resisted  Christianity  ;  and 
it  played  an  important  part  in  the  time  of  the 
Crusades.  To-day  it  is  a  nourishing  town  of  16,000 
inhabitants,  built  on  and  around  a  hiU  rising  100 
ft.  above  the  plain,  and  separated  from  the  sea  by 
three  miles  of  yellow  sand-dunes.  Well  watered, 
with  broad  gardens,  and  a  great  olive  grove  stretch- 
ing northwards,  it  drives  a  considerable  trade  with 
the  nomadic  Arabs. 

Gaza  is  mentioned  once  in  the  NT  (Ac  8*) : 
'Arise,'  said  the  angel  of  the  Lord  to  Philip,  'and 
go  toward  the  south  (marg.,  at  noon)  unto  the 
way  that  goeth  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza : 
the  same  is  desert '  {aunj  e<rrip  tpnrinoi).  It  is  a 
much-disputed  point  whether  '  the  same '  refers  to 
the  way  or  to  Gaza.  (1)  If  the  former  interpreta- 
tion, which  is  the  ordinary  one,  is  right,  the  tract 
which  the  road  traversed  was  'desert'  only  in 
a  qualified  sense,  for  the  writer  expressly  states 
that  in  passing  through  it  Philip  came  upon  water, 
in  M'hich  he  baptized  the  eunuch.  The  guiding 
angel's  words  may  refer  merely  to  the  solitariness 
of  the  road,  being  spoken  '  to  bring  out  Philip's 
trustful  obedience,  where  he  could  not  foresee  the 
end  in  view '  (J.  V.  Bartlet,  Acts  [Century  Bible, 
1901],  p.  214),  or  simply  to  prepare  him  for  the 
uninterrupted  interview  which  he  enjoys  with  the 
eunuch.  It  is  always  possible  that  *  the  same  is 
desert '  is  a  remark  added  by  the  narrator  himself. 
(2)  G.  A.  Smith  (jyGZrZ,  London,  1897,  p.  186  ff.) 
and  Cheyne  {EBi,  1650)  hold  that  '  the  same ' 
{avrri)  refers  to  Gaza.  The  former,  to  whom  it 
seems  impossible  to  describe  any  route  from  Jeru- 
salem to  Gaza  as  desert,  suggests  that  while  New 
Gaza  was  built  by  the  seashore,  the  road  to 
Egypt  passed  the  inland  and  at  least  comparatively 
deserted  Old  Gaza.  This  view,  however,  puts  a 
strained  meaning  upon  '  the  same,'  while  Schiirer 
(II.  L  71)  holds  that  the  new  city,  to  which  af-nj 
would  naturally  refer,  also  lay  inland,  probably  a 
little  distance  to  the  south  of  the  old.  Some  scholars 
(Beza,  HUgenfeld,  Schmiedel,  and  others)  have  con- 
tended that  '  the  same  is  desert '  is  an  explanatory 
gloss.  Schmiedel  suggests  that  it  was  set  down  in 
the  margin  by  a  reader  who  had  been  misled  by 
Strabo,  and  then  incorporated  in  the  text. 

LrrsRATURE. — See,  in  addition  to  the  works  mentioned  above, 
E.  Robinson,  Biblical Re*earehe»  in FaUstine,  London,  1S41,  p. 
373  ff. ;  V.  Gcerin.  Description  giographique  .  .  .  de  la  Pales- 
tine, pt.  L  :  'Jad6e,'  Paris,  1869;  L-  Gantier,  Soucenirg  de 
Terre-Sainte,  Lausanne,  1S97,  p.  U6ff. ;  T.  Zaim,  Introd.  to 
the  yr,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1909,  iL  43S. 

Jajies  Steahax. 
GEHENNA.— See  Hell. 

GENEALOGIES.  —  The  value  attached  by  the 
Hebrew  people  to  genealogies  is  seen  in  the  long 


444 


GENEALOGIES 


GENERATION 


and,  to  modern  readers,  somewhat  wearisome,  lists 
of  Scripture.  Their  exaggerated  importance  was 
in  some  measure  due  to  family  pride,  which  loved 
an  old  descent ;  and  therefore  it  was  considered  a 
laudable  ambition  to  build  up  legendary  pedigrees 
of  heroes  and  founders  such  as  are  met  witn,  e.g. ,  in 
the  Book  of  Jubilees.  As  Judaism  became  politi- 
cally impotent,  it  took  to  dreaming  of  the  glories 
of  the  past,  and  there  sprang  up  a  '  rank  growth  of 
legend  respecting  the  patriaixhs  and  other  heroes ' 
(Hort,  Judaistic  Christianity,  Cambridge  and 
London,  1894,  p,  136).  Tliis  genealogical  matter 
is  found  in  Hebrew  and  in  Greek,  and  appears  in 
both  Philo  and  Josephns, 

In  the  genealogies  a  religious  interest  is  also 
apparent.  We  know  from  the  NT  how  obstinately 
the  later  Judaism  clung  to  the  merely  positive  and 
perishable  precepts  of  the  Law,  and  how  at  the 
same  time,  under  a  narrow  and  literal  doctrine  of 
inspiration,  the  attempt  was  made  to  extract 
nourishment  for  the  spiritual  life  from  every  part 
of  the  OT,  The  most  fantastic  doctrines  were 
drawn,  even  from  the  names  in  the  genealogical 
lists,  in  the  interests  of  a  supposed  ediiication. 

For  a  time  Judaism  bitterly  opposed  the  Church  ; 
then,  entering  it  as  Judaistic  Christianity,  it  sought 
to  capture  the  new  movement,  in  the  interests  of 
a  sect,  by  binding  upon  it  the  yoke  of  the  Law, 
which  Peter,  in  the  Jerusalem  Council,  said  '  neither 
our  fathers  nor  we  were  able  to  bear'  (Ac  15^"). 
'  Lastly,  it  becomes  a  fantastic  heresy  inside  the 
Church,  and  sinks  into  profane  frivolity.  "  Pre- 
tended revelations  are  given  as  to  the  names  and 
»enealogy  of  angels  ;  absurd  ascetic  rules  are  laid 
down  as  '  counsels  of  perfection,'  while  daring  im- 
morality defaces  the  actual  life  " '  (Plummer,  The 
Pastoral  Epp.  [Expos.  Bib.,  London,  1888],  p.  34; 
also  Expositor,  3rd  ser.,  viii.  [1888]  42) ;  cf.  Rev  2» 
'  I  know  the  blasphemy  of  them  which  say  they  are 
Jews  and  they  are  not.' 

With  this  '  unwholesome  stuff'  (Hort,  p.  137) 
there  was  combined  the  doctrine  of  seons  of  the 
Jewish  philosopher  Philo — the  incipient  Gnosti- 
cism of  the  Colossian  heresy.  The  'yvCi(xi.%  of  the 
NT  is  the  special  lore  of  those  who  interpreted 
mystically  the  OT,  especially  the  Law  (cf.  Hort, 
pp.  139-144).  This  so-called  Gnosticism  may  be 
traced  through  Philo,  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  and 
Sirach,  '  back  to  the  Persian  speculations  with 
which  the  Jews  became  familiar  during  the  Cap- 
tivity' (Dods,  Introd.  to  NT,  London,  1888,  p. 
141  f . ).  This  is  the  situation,  atmosphere,  and 
tendency  lying  behind  the  stern  rebukes  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles. 

In  1  Ti  l*  the  warning  is  given,  fi-qU  irpoa-ix^iv 
fxvOois  Kal  yeveoKoylais  dtrepavrois,  alnves  iK^7)Ti)cr€i.s 
■irap^Xov<^h  'neither  to  give  heed  to  fables  and 
endless  genealogies,  the  wldch  minister  question- 
ings.' These  genealogies  are  '  legendary  pedigrees 
of  Jewish  heroes '  and  '  haggadic  embroidery  of 
Jewish  biographies'  (Moftatt,  LNT,  Edinburgh, 
1911,  pp.  406,  408).  They  are  called  diripavToi 
{dira^  \ey.  in  NT) — '  endless,'  because  they  led 
nowhere,  and,  where  all  meanings  were  equally 
possible  and  equally  worthless,  one  interpretation 
was  as  good  as  another.  '  They  minister  question- 
ings ' — that  was  their  end.  '  Fanciful  tales  merely 
tickle  the  ears  and  loosen  the  tongue.  They  have 
no  relation  to  the  serious  business  of  life.  .  .  . 
They  end  in  conversation,  not  conversion '  (J. 
Strachan,  The  Captivity  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
[Westminster  NT,  London,  1910],  p.  203,  where 
Kohler  is  quoted  [p.  205] :  '  the  author  can  think  of 
no  more  striking  contrast  than  that  between  the 
endless  prattle  of  the  false  teachers  and  the  gospel 
of  the  glory  of  the  blessed  God '  [1  Ti  1"]).  Life  is 
a  stewardsiiip  of  God  (ohovoixia  deov),  but  this 
'  trashy  and  unwholesome  stuti",'  which  occupied 


'  men's  minds  to  the  exclusion  of  solid  and  life- 
giving  nutriment'  (Hort,  p.  137),  hinders  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  trust  of  life.  It  is  contrary  to  sound 
doctrine.  It  does  not  belong  to  the  healthy  (iryiaj- 
voijffr])  mind.  In  Tit  3*  the  warning  is  repeated  : 
'shun  foolish  questions  and  genealogies.' 

The  scornful  method  adopted  by  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  of  dealing  with  these  'silly  questions  and 
genealogies'  has  been  objected  to  as  un-Pauline, 
and  is  cited  as  an  argument  for  the  late  date  of  the 
Epistles.  Without  raising  the  question  of  author- 
ship, one  may  feel,  on  general  considerations,  that, 
in  the  interests  of  the  Church,  the  question  was  a 
vital  one — should  Christianity  be  allowed  to  de- 
generate into  a  blend  of  Mosaism  and  Gentile 
philosophy  or  theosophy  ?  Even  in  religious  con- 
troversy, rank  growths  are  not  to  be  eradicated 
with  a  pair  of  tweezers.  Mollatt's  rejoinder  (EBi 
5083)  to  McGiffcrt  {Ajwstolic  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897, 

f>.  402)  may  be  regarded  as  justified  and  satis- 
actory :  *  This  movement  [represented  by  fables, 
genealogies,  etc.]  is  met  by  .  .  .  methods,  which 
seem  denunciatory  merely  because  we  no  longer 
possess  any  statement  of  the  other  side,  and  are, 
therefore,  prone  to  forget  that  such  rough  and 
decisive  ways  are  at  times  the  soundest  method  of 
conserving  truth.  .  .  .  Firmness  and  even  ridicule 
have  their  own  place  as  ethical  weapons  of  defence.' 
See  Fable.  W.  M.  Grant. 

GENERATION  (ytved,  1  P  2^ :  'a chosen  genera- 
tion,' AV=7^;'os  iK\€KT6v  =  's,n  elect  race,' KV). — 
The  use  of  yeved  in  the  NT  closely  reproduces,  as 
in  the  LXX  it  translates,  the  Hebrew  nn.  The  two 
words,  however,  reach  their  common  significance 
from  different  directions.  Etymologically,  yeved 
expresses  the  idea  of  kinship.  It  signifies  de- 
scent, or  the  descendants,  from  the  same  ancestral 
stock  ;  then  those  of  the  same  lineage  who  are  born 
about  the  same  time ;  then  the  lifetime  of  such 
(measured  from  birth  of  parent  to  birth  of  child), 
or,  more  generally,  an  'age'  or  lengthened  period 
of  time.  The  root-idea  of  nn,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
a  period  of  time  :  hence  it  comes  to  mean  the  people 
whose  lifetime  falls  approximately  within  a  given 
period,  and  finally  acquires  the  genealogical  sense 
of  a  '  generation '  (see  Liddell  and  Scott  and  Oxford 
Hebrew  Lexicon,  s.v. ). 

In  the  apostolic  writings,  the  primary  meaning 
of  the  word  is  (a)  the  body  of  individuals  of  the 
same  race  who  are  born  about  the  same  time  (He  3'", 
Ac  13^,  AV  and  RVm) ;  but  this  sense  usually 
passes  into  that  of  (b),  the  period  covered  by  the 
lifetime  of  such  (Ac  13^  RV,  14'«  IS^i,  Eph  3») ;  and 
thus  the  plural,  yeveal,  comes  to  mean  (c)  all  time, 
past  or  future,  as  consisting  in  the  succession  of 
such  periods.  In  Col  1^,  '  the  mystery  hath  been 
hid  from  the  ages  and  from  the  generations,'  the 
'generation'  is  a  subdivision  of  the  'age'  and  is 
added  for  the  sake  of  emphasis,  and  in  Eph  3"  the 
Apostle,  struggling  to  express  the  idea  of  the 
Eternal  Future,  not  only  describes  it  as  '  the  age 
of  ages '  (the  age  whose  component  parts  are  them- 
selves ages),  but  adds  to  the  picture  the  endless 
succession  of  '  generations '  which  constitute  each 
'  age ' — '  unto  all  the  generations  of  the  age  of  ages ' 
(cf.  Ps  102-^  Enoch  ix.  4).  Finally  {d)  the  word  is 
used,  as  often  in  the  OT  (Dt  32«-2o,  Ps  12'  248  etc.), 
with  a  moral  connotation,  as  in  Ph  2"  and  Ac  2*. 
In  the  latter  passage  the  term  has  an  eschatological 
colouring.  'This  crooked  generation'  is  the  pre- 
sent, swiftly  transient  period  of  the  world's  histor>', 
which  is  leading  up  to  the  Day  of  Judgment  and 
the  New  Age. 

LiTBRATiRE.— H.  Cremer,  Bibl.-Theol.  Lexicon  of  NT  Gr«tt^, 
1880;  Grimm-Thayer,  Greek-English  Lexicon  of  the  NT^, 
1830:  Theodor  Ke'im,  Jes^uof  Aazara,  Eng.  tr.,  18S1.  vol.  v. 

p.  245  n.  Robert  Law. 


GENTILES 


GENTILES 


445 


GENTILES  (to.  idv-q,  '  the  natiuns,'  as  opposed  to 
Lsrael,  6  Xaot.  The  opposition  comes  out  clearly  in 
Lk  23-,  Ac  26^"-  ■■^,  Ko  15'".  Cf.  'am  and  cioytm  in 
T)t  2618- 1"  32«,  Is  42«.  In  Ko  lli'  15^7 16^  Gal  2'«- ", 
ilph  31  ?0j'r7  =  Gentile  Christians;  but  in  1  Co  12-, 
Eph  2"  4",  1  Th  4'  St.  Paul  lays  stress  upon  the 
moral  separation  of  such  from  the  idvt^  [cf.  Harnack, 
Expansion,  i.  67,  n.  1].  The  Vulg.  has  gentes  for 
fOvri,  but  nearly  always  Gentilis  for"EX\i;v['EX\7;vi5]. 
This  may  have  led  our  translators  to  render  "EXX17J' 
six  times  by  'Gentile'  [uniformly  'Greek,'  how- 
ever, in  RV].  When  the  Koine  [vernacular  and 
business  Greek]  became  the  international  language, 
those  Jews  who  spoke  it  began  to  apply  the  handy 
designation  of  '  Greeks '  to  all  non-Jews  in  order 
to  distinguish  them  from  themselves ;  hence  the 

{)hrase  'lovSaioi  re  Kal  "EXXtjccj  came  to  be  the  col- 
oquial  equivalent  of  6  Xads  /cat  to.  idvrj.  But  there 
are  passages  in  the  NT  where  '%\\ytves  appears  to  re- 
tain its  proper  national  sense  [Ac  16'*  ^  21^,  Ro  1^"*, 
1  Co  1",  Gal  2^,  Col  311 ;  cf.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  NT,  i. 
373 ;  Harnack,  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  p.  51]). — Intro- 
ductory.— The  account  of  what  occurred  at  Pisidian 
Antioch  when  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  preached 
there  the  second  time  (Ac  13^'*)  may  be  taken  as  a 
short  outline  of  the  principal  part  of  the  history  of 
the  Apostolic  Age.  The  Jews,  filled  with  jealousy, 
contradict  and  rail  at  the  preaching  of  the  gospel. 
The  two  apostles  then  speak  out  boldly,  and  say  : 
'  It  was  necessary  that  the  word  of  God  should  first 
be  spoken  to  you.  Seeing  ye  thrust  it  from  you 
.  ,  .  lo,  we  turn  to  the  Gentiles.'  The  Gentiles 
receive  the  word  with  joy,  and  many  of  them  be- 
lieve. The  history  of  the  Apostolic  Age  is  mainly 
the  history  of  how  Christ  was  brought  to  the 
Gentile  world,  and  how  the  Jewish  nation '  hardened 
its  heart  more  and  more  against  the  appeal  of 
Christianity' (Harnack,  op.  cit.  p.  xxx).  Add  another 
important  feature  to  the  history  of  this  period — 
that  the  door  which  was  set  wide  open  for  the  ad- 
mission of  the  Gentiles  into  the  Kingdom  of  God 
was  kept  wide  open  in  spite  of  the  attempt  of  a 
large  section  of  the  Judaeo-Christian  Church  to 
shut  it — and  the  outline  is  complete. 

1.  The  Gentiles  and  the  purpose  of  God. — When 
we  speak  of  God's  revealing  Himself,  we  mean  His 
opening  man's  eyes  to  such  a  sight  of  His  nature 
and  will  as  meets  a  universal  want  of  man's  spirit. 
We  believe  that,  since  man's  history  began,  there 
has  never  been  an  age  or  a  country  in  which  '  the 
Father  of  spirits '  has  not  entered  into  close  relation 
with  His  spiritual  children.  We  agree  with  Justin 
Martyr  when  he  says  that  the  wise  heathen  lived 
in  company  with  '  The  Word,'  and  that  all  that 
they  have  truly  said  is  part  of  Christianity  (Apol. 
i.  46,  ii.  13).  The  revelation  which  most  concerns 
us  is  the  special  one  contained  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. In  the  OT,  it  disclosed  certain  fundamental 
principles  which,  when  we  study  them  in  the  light 
of  Christianity,  we  perceive  to  have  been  also 
promises  of  a  purpose  of  mercy  for  the  whole  world. 
One  is  the  Unity  of  God.  This  implied  that  God 
should  be  the  one  object  of  worship  to  the  whole 
human  race.  Another  is  His  entering  into  succes- 
sive covenants  loith  men  of  various  periods.  This 
pointed  to  a  progressive  purpose  which  should 
finally  be  realized  in  His  drawing  all  men  unto 
Himself.  Further,  the  announcement  of  His  design 
of  blessing  all  the  families  of  the  earth  through 
that  family  which  He  chose  to  be  the  special  de- 
positary of  His  revealed  will,  was  virtually  His 
calling  Abraham  and  his  descendants  to  be  fellow- 
workers  with  Himself  in  bringing  all  nations  to 
love  and  obey  Him.  Those  principles  and  promises, 
understood  now  in  the  light  of  the  gospel,  convey 
to  us  the  assurance  that  the  cause  of  the  salvation 
of  the  Gentiles  is  to  be  found  '  in  the  bosom  and 
counsel  of  God.' 


2.  The  OT  and  the  Gentiles. — When  we  turn  our 
attention  to  the  OT  on  its  human  side,  we  meet 
with  a  confusing  variety  of  opinions  respecting  the 
Gentiles.  There  is  no  consistency  of  view,  no 
authoritative  standard  of  judgment  whereby  con- 
flicting utterances  may  be  reconciled;  and  the 
effect  of  this  is  often  depressing  to  those  readers 
who  do  not  bear  in  mind  that '  we  have  the  treasure 
in  earthen  vessels,'  or  that  the  instruments  whom 
God  employed  in  revealing  His  will  were  imperfect 
men.  OT  writers  often  speak  of  the  Gentiles  in 
the  language  of  reprobation.  In  Ps  9"  the  goyini 
are  synonymous  with  the  r'shd'tm,  '  the  wicked ' 
(cf.  Dt  9*) ;  they  are  the  ' am-ndbhdl,  'the  foolish 
people,'  in  Ps  74'^  (cf.  Sir  5(P) ;  they  are  the  b'ne- 
nekhdr,  '  the  strangers '  (in  a  hostile  sense),  '  whose 
mouth  speaketh  vanity,  and  their  right  hand  is  a 
right  hand  of  falsehood,'  in  Ps  144"  (ct.  Zeph  3'^). 
Israel  is  strictly  prohibited  from  *  walking  in  their 
statutes,'  or  following  their  idolatrous  practices 
{hukkCth  hag-goytm  [Lv  18*  20^=^,  2  K  17»]). 

The  virtues  of  individual  Gentiles,  it  is  true,  are 
often  referred  to  with  approval.  The  native  chiefs 
of  Canaan  treat  Abraham  with  respect ;  the 
Pharaoh  who  makes  Joseph  lord  of  his  house  calls 
him  '  a  man  in  whom  the  spirit  of  God  is ' ;  the 
daughter  of  the  Pharaoh  of  the  oppression  is  moved 
with  compassion  at  the  sight  of  the  child  Moses, 
and  brings  him  up  as  her  son  ;  Jethro  receives 
Moses  when  an  exile  into  his  family,  guides  him 
in  the  desert,  and  instructs  him  in  the  art  of 
governing  ;  Kahab  and  Ruth  '  take  refuge  under 
the  wings  of  the  God  of  Israel,'  and  their  names 
are  in  the  regal  genealogy  ;  Ittai  the  Gittite  cleaves 
to  David,  when  almost  all  have  forsaken  him  ;  the 
Queen  of  Sheba  comes  to  hear  the  wisdom  of 
Solomon  ;  the  Tyrian  Hiram  supplies  him  with 
materials  when  building  the  Temple,  having  been 
'  ever  a  lover  of  David  '  ;  the  widow  of  Zarephath, 
nearly  destitute  herself,  feeds  the  famishing  Elijah  ; 
and  Naaman,  the  Syrian  general,  confesses  his 
faith  in  the  God  of  Elisha  as  the  one  true  God ; 
Ebed-melech,  an  Ethiopian  slave,  rescues  Jeremiah 
from  death,  and  is  rewarded  with  a  promise  of 
personal  immunity  from  danger  ;  Job,  an  Arabian 
shaikh,  is  the  lofty  teacher  of  how  '  to  suffer 
and  be  strong ' ;  Cyrus  the  Persian  is  the  Lord's 
anointed,  and  the  deliverer  of  His  people. 

Nor  is  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  unity  of 
the  human  race  (Gn  1-11),  or  of  God's  ha\'ing  '  made 
of  one  every  nation  of  men  for  to  dwell  on  all  the 
face  of  the  earth '  (Ac  17^),  ever  lost  sight  of  by 
OT  writers.  He  who  brought  up  Israel  from  Egypt, 
Amos  says  (9''),  is  the  same  God  who  brought  the 
Philistines  from  Caphtor  and  the  Syrians  from  Kir. 
But  neither  in  this  saying  nor  m  the  later  one 
about  '  all  the  nations  over  whom  my  name  has 
been  called '  (cf.  Driver  on  Am  9^^)  does  the  prophet 
voice  the  belief  that  He  who  made  all  '  loveth  all,' 
or  wiU  admit  all  into  the  covenant  of  His  grace. 

Very  little  is  taught  by  the  pre-Exilic  prophets 
as  to  the  world  being  Israel's  mission-field,  but 
much  is  said  about  God's  chastising  the  nations. 
In  the  great  post-Exilic  book  of  national  consolation 
the  proof  of  Jahweh's  Godhead  is  followed  by  the 
proclamation  of  salvation  to  all  mankind  :  '  Look 
unto  me  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth ' 
(Is  45^^).  When  we  read  those  words,  and  'the 
Servant  of  the  Lord  Songs,'  with  their  bright  out- 
look on  the  Gentile  world,  the  expectation  is  raised 
that  the  missionary  calling  of  Israel  is  about  to  be 
fulfilled.  It  is  true  that  a  beginning  was  made, 
but  only  by  the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion.  The 
home-Jews,  led  by  Nehemiah,  took  the  course  of 
setting  up  an  impenetrable  fence  between  them  and 
their  nearest  neighbours.  E.  G.  Hirsch  says  that 
the  necessities  of  the  situation  justified  the  narrower 
policy  in  this  case  {JE  v.  616*).     But  we  cannot 


446 


GENTILES 


GENTILES 


fall  in  with  this  view,  when  we  think  of  the  books 
of  Job,  Jonah,  and  Kuth — of  the  larger  hope  of  the 
later  Psalmists  (Ps  67,  87,  100,  117,  145),  and  the 
remarkable  assertion  of  Malachi  (1")  that  the  name 
of  God  is  honoured  by  the  sincere  worshin  otl'ered 
to  Him  among  the  Gentiles  from  East  to  West. 

From  the  Wisdom  Literature  the  national  feeling 
against  Gentiles  is  almost  entirely  absent.  But  it 
is  far  otherwise  with  Jewish  apocalyptic,  the  Book 
of  Daniel  and  its  numerous  extra-canonical  suc- 
cessors— far  inferior  to  it  in  religious  value — in 
which  much  true  spiritual  insiglit  is  mixed  with 
carnal  views  and  human  passion.  The  noble  Mac- 
cabaean  struggle,  which  was  contemporaneous  with 
the  rise  of  this  class  of  literature,  saved  Israel  from 
becoming  hellenized  ;  but  it  had  the  result  also  of 
intensifying  the  exclusiveness  and  intolerance  of 
which  Tacitus  speaks  {Hist.  v.  5  :  '  adversus  omnes 
alios  hostile  odium '). 

The  teaching  of  the  OT  respecting  the  Gentiles 
may  be  characterized  as  hostile,  hesitating,  and 
hopeful  by  turns.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  in 
many  of  its  most  liberal  utterances  a  position  of 
supei"iority  is  assigned  to  Israel.  The  Gentiles  are 
still  servants,  not  equals.  In  Is  60^*  they  come 
and  bend  at  Israel's  feet  as  suppliants  and  vassals. 
Even  in  Is  19^^'^,  while  Egypt  and  Assyria  are 
admitted  into  covenant  with  God,  Israel  is  still 
distinguished  as  His  inheritance,  His  peculiar 
possession.  '  His  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of 
prayer  for  all  peoples'  (Is  56^),  but  it  is  Jewish 
feasts  that  the  nations  shall  keep  there  (Zee  14^®'^"), 
and  they  shall  be  joined  to  Israel  by  absorption, 
not  by  co-ordination  (Is  45^-^,  Jer  12i«,  Zeph  3», 
Zee  8-"'^).  A  great  concession  in  the  direction  of 
equality  is  made  in  Is  66^^  if  it  be  Gentiles  whom 
God  is  to  take  to  minister  in  His  sanctuary  ;  but 
the  promise  may  relate  to  Jews  of  the  Dispersion. 
In  the  magnificent  prophecy  of  Is  2-"^,  Mic  4^-*  the 
Temple-mountain  is  still  the  centre  from  which 
the  laws  of  God  go  forth  to  the  subjects  of  a  king- 
dom of  universal  peace.  But  the  material  and 
spiritual  elements  in  this  prophecy  are  combined 
in  a  way  that  the  Christian  Church  will  not  fully 
comprehend  before  the  coming  of  a  glory  that  shall 
be  revealed. 

3.  Christ  and  the  Gentiles. — Was  there  present 
to  the  mind  of  Clirist,  while  accomplishing  the 
work  of  Him  that  sent  Him,  a  purpose  of  salvation 
that  included  the  Gentiles  ?  Did  He  look  beyond 
'  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel '  to  other 
sheep  far  ott"  from  the  mountains  of  Canaan,  who 
had  also  to  be  sought  and  found  ?  When  Satan 
showed  Him  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,  did  He 
turn  away  from  tlie  sight  of  the  world  with  the 
repugnance  of  a  Jew  of  His  time,  or  did  the  sight 
move  Him  to  compassion,  and  enkindle  a  great 
hope  in  His  heart  ?  It  is  not  easy  to  see  how  the 
Christian  Church  can  cease  believing  that  Christ 
had  a  purpose  of  mercy  for  the  world,  and  the  ex- 
pectation of  subduing  it  unto  Himself,  unless  she 
IS  to  revise  her  whole  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  her 
Lord.  '  The  day  and  the  hour '  may  be  unknown 
to  Christ  as  the  Son,  but  the  Father's  purpose  of 
love  for  the  world  cannot  be  unknown  ;  if  He  be 
the  Son,  He  must  have  made  that  purpose  His  own. 

It  has  been  contended  that  although  His  preach- 
ing contained  '  a  vital  love  of  God  and  men,  which 
may  be  described  as  "implicit  universalism,"  the 
Gentile  mission  cannot  have  lain  within  the  horizon 
of  Jesus.'  It  was  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  that  led  His 
disciples  to  the  universal  mission,  but  He  issued 
no  positive  command  to  them  to  undertake  it 
(Harnack,  Expansion,  i.  40  H".).  This  conclusion 
is  based  upon  an  exhaustive,  but  biased,  exposition 
of  the  relevant  texts  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  the 
Fourth  being  set  aside  with  the  frank  avowal  that 
it  'is  saturated  with  statements  of  a  directly  uni- 


versalistic  character'  (p.  47).  It  is  to  be  admitted 
that  the  view  in  question  largely  owes  its  air  of 
credibility  to  that  perplexing  feature  of  the  narra- 
tive of  Acts — the  delay  of  the  original  ajiostles  in 
undertaking  the  Gentile  mission.  On  this  delay, 
which  is  one  of  the  imsolved  problems  of  Apostolic 
Christianity,  something  will  be  said  later.  At 
present,  let  us  endeavour  to  appreciate  the  strength 
of  our  position  by  surveying  its  defences. 

(1)  As  the  funoamental  principle  of  the  unity  of 
God  implied  that  He  was  the  God  of  all  nations 
upon  earth,  so  our  Saviour's  calling  Himself  'the 
Son  of  man'  expres.sed  His  universal  relation  to 
the  human  race.  And  if  a  reference  to  Dn  7''""  Ihj 
admitted.  His  using  the  title  also  pointed  to  His 
coming  Lordship  over  the  world.  There  is  thus 
an  antecedent  probability  tliat  Mt  28"*'*'',  which  so 
well  agrees  with  the  meaning  of  the  title,  is  a 
genuine  utterance  of  the  Risen  Lord. 

(2)  He  accepted  the  confession  at  Caesarea 
Philippi,  'Thou  art  the  Christ,'  with  an  emotion 
of  which  we  feel  the  glow  every  time  we  read  Mt 
lgi6.  17  n  follows  that,  from  the  time  when  the 
Voice  from  heaven  had  proclaimed  Him  to  be 
God's  Beloved  Son,  and  from  the  beginning  of  His 
*  training  of  the  Twelve,'  Jesus  had  been  conscious 
of  His  right  to  '  the  name  in  which  all  the  hopes 
of  the  OT  were  gathered  up '  {EBi  iii.  3063).  The 
announcement  of  His  Death  and  Resurrection 
which  immediately  followed  showed  what  His 
being  the  true  Messiah  meant  for  Him,  althougli 
His  disciples  were  '  slow  of  heart  to  believe '  that 
it  could  mean  what  He  said.  The  OT  picture  of 
the  sufiering  Saviour,  placed  as  it  was  side  by  side 
with  that  of  the  ruling  descendant  of  David,  be- 
came, as  Ed.  Konig  says  (Expositor,  8th  ser.,  iv. 
[1912]  113,  118),  dimmed  in  the  centuries  preceding 
His  Advent.  Christ  relumined  the  whole  picture 
by  His  sutt'ering,  and  then  by  His  being  'the  first 
by  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  to  proclaim  light 
both  to  the  people  and  to  the  Gentiles '  (Ac  26^). 

(3)  To  His  limiting  the  mission  of  the  Twelve  to 
Galilee  and  Judnea  on  His  first  sending  them  forth 
(Mt  10'-  ^),  we  may  apply  the  words  of  Is  28^" :  '  He 
that  believeth  shall  not  make  haste.'  It  was  con- 
sistent with  the  highest  wisdom  not  to  propel  them 
into  a  wider  field  than  the  one  in  which,  with  the 
training  they  had  hitherto  received,  they  could 
labour  with  profit.  His  words,  '  Go  not  into  any 
way  of  the  Gentiles,'  reveal  His  wisdom  in  another 
way.  By  giving  His  disciples  this  charge.  He 
abstained  from  needlessly  offending  His  fellow- 
countrymen,  to  whom  it  was  His  first  object  to 
commend  the  gospel.  His  heart's  desire  for  tliem 
was  that  they  might  be  saved  ;  He  called  the 
season  of  His  earthly  activity  among  them  '  the 
acceptable  year  of  tiie  Lord  '  (Lk  4^"),  and,  after  His 
departure  to  heaven,  extended  their  opportunity 
of  '  knowing  the  things  which  belonged  unto  their 
peace '  (cf.  Lk  Vd*^)  for  forty  years  (cf.  He  3»-  ").  In 
the  story  of  the  Syrophoenician,  we  iiear  Jesus  first 
telling  His  disciples  that  He  limited  His  own 
mission  of  healing,  as  He  had  previously  limited 
theirs,  to  the  afflicted  in  Israel;  but  in  another 
moment  we  see  Him  recognizing  in  tiie  illustrious 
faitli  with  which  a  poor  Gentile  woman  met  His 
refusal  of  her  petition  the  indication  of  His  Father's 
will  that  those  limits  should  l)e  transcended,  and 
that  His  saving  mercy  should  go  forth  to  all,  with- 
out distinction  of  race,  who  had  faith  like  hers  to 
receive  it.  The  words  reported  by  St.  Mark  (7"), 
'  Let  the  children  first  be  filled,'  also  suggest  that 
Jesus  had  in  view,  when  He  spoke  them,  the 
Gentiles,  who  should  not  have  long  to  wait  before 
they  too  could  come  to  His  full  table. 

(4)  If  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was  written  'at  the 
latest  in  the  sixth  decade  of  the  lirst  century ' 
(Harnack,  Date  ofttie  Acts,  p.  126),  and  '  M-as  known 


GENTILES 


GENTILES 


447 


to  both  the  other  Sj-noptists  in  the  same  form  and 
with  the  same  contents  as  we  have  it  now '  (Well- 
hausen,  Einleitung,  p.  57,  quoted  in  Burkitt,  Gospel 
Hist,  and  its  Traiisniission,  p.  64),  it  follows  that 
the  sayings,  'The  gospel  must  first  be  preached 
unto  all  tlie  nations  '  and  '  Wlieresoever  the  gospel 
~liall  be  preached  throughout  the  whole  world' 
13'*  14*),  were  put  on  record  in  little  more  than 
twenty  years  after  they  were  spoken.  'The 
Kingtloni  of  God  shall  be  taken  away  from  you 
and  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits 
thereof,'  is,  as  Burkitt  says  {op.  cit.,  p.  188),  the 
motto,  the  special  doctrine,  of  St.  Matthew's 
(..i-j.el.  This  sentence  occurs  in  one  of  the  last 
jiarables  of  judgment  (21*),  but  other  sayings  re- 
oorted  before  lead  up  to  it,  as :  '  Many  shall  come 
?rom  the  east  and  west ' ;  '  The  field  is  the  world ' ; 
'  The  last  shall  be  first,  and  the  first  last '  (8"  13» 
•3)^*).  From  St.  Luke's  account  of  our  Lord's  dis- 
course at  Nazareth  it  is  clear  that  His  hearers 
understomi  the  references  to  the  ministries  of 
Elijah  and  Elisha  as  pointing  to  the  admission  of 
Gentiles  into  the  Kingdom  (4^).  In  Luke,  too, 
Samaritans  are  exhibited  as  excelling  Jews  in 
compassionate  and  grateful  love  (10**  17*').  The 
value  of  his  report  of  the  commission  given  by  our 
Lord  to  His  disciples  in  the  upper  room  (24'*^"*), 
and  repeated  at  the  Ascension  (Ac  1*),  is  height- 
ened by  the  fact  that  '  it  seems  now  to  be  estab- 
lishetl  beyond  question  that  both  books  of  this 
[Luke's]  great  historical  work  were  written  while 
St.  Paul  was  still  alive'  (Hamack,  Date  of  the 
Acts,  p.  124). 

(5)  Finally,  as  a  historical  account  of  certain 
incidents  and  crises  in  the  life  of  Christ  which 
showed  Him  to  be  the  Son  of  God  (Jn  2(F),  the 
Fourth  Gospel  claims  to  have  the  authority  of  an 
eye-witness  behind  it.  The  truth  of  this  claim 
has  never  been  disproved.  This  Gospel  is  the 
crowning  proof  that  there  was  present  to  the  mind 
of  our  Lord  from  the  beginning  a  purpose  of  salva- 
tion which  comprehended  the  Gentile  world.  It 
clinches  the  argument,  it  is  the  keystone  of  the 
arch.  For  here  Jesus  calls  Himself  '  the  light  of 
the  world,'  speaks  of  'giving  his  flesh  for  the  life 
of  the  world,'  and  of  '  sending  his  disciples  into 
the  world  in  like  manner  as  the  Father  sent  him 
into  the  world ' ;  to  the  woman  at  the  well  He 
si)eaks  of  the  hour  when,  not  the  coming  to  God  at 
theaneientsanctuaries.butthecomingtothe  Father 
'  in  spirit  and  truth.'  will  be  the  mark  of  the  sin- 
cere worshipper ;  He  resides  two  days  with  the 
Samaritans ;  He  proclaims  to  the  leaders  of  the 
Jewish  Church  that  He  has  'other  sheep,  not  of 
this  fold,'  whom  He  must  bring,  and  who  will  re- 
cognize in  His  voice  that  of  their  Shepherd  ;  above 
all,  on  the  eve  of  those  sufferings  whereby  He  was 
to  enter  into  His  glory,  He  beholds  in  certain 
Greeks  desiring  to  see  Him  a  prospect  so  satisf jing 
to  His  heart  that,  in  the  exultation  of  His  sa%'ing 
love.  He  cries  :  '  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the 
earth,  will  draw  all  men  unto  me.'  The  preserva- 
tion of  such  sayings  as  these  made  the  work  of 
this  Evangelist  a  gospel  of  consolation  to  the  Gen- 
tile churches  of  Asia  Minor  at  the  close  of  the  1st 
cent.  ;  and  the  assurance  of  the  members  of  St. 
John's  immediate  circle  is  now  ours :  '  We  know 
that  his  witness  is  true'  (21*^). 

4.  Preparation  of  the  Gentile  world  for  Christ. 
— That  Christ  came  into  a  world  which  God  had 
slowly  been  preparing  in  the  course  of  ages  for  His 
appearing  was  perceived  by  St.  Paul  and  St.  John, 
each  from  his  own  special  point  of  view.  St.  Paul 
is  thinking  of  Christ  as  the  Kedeemer  from  sin 
and  its  curse  when  he  says  that  '  God  sent  forth 
his  Son  in  the  fulness  of  the  time,'  and  again,  that 
•Christ  died  for  the  ungodly  in  due  season'  (Gal 
4*,  Ko  5*).     St.  John  is  thinking  of  Christ  as  the 


Incarnate  Word  when  he  says :  '  There  was  the 
true  light,  even  the  light  wnich  lighteth  every 
man  coming  into  the  world'  (1*  RV  ;  cf.  6"  tr.  by 
Gwatkin  :  '  [The  Bread]  is  ever  coming  down,  ana 
ever  giving  life  unto  the  world').  This  fascinat- 
ing subject  also  engaged  the  attention  of  many 
early  Christian  Avriters.  Its  interest  has  been 
heightened  in  our  day  by  the  fuller  knowledge 
brought  us  by  archax)logical  research  and  the 
study  of  comparative  religion.  Thus  it  is  now  more 
clearly  seen  that  Christianity,  as  Plieiderer  said, 
came  as  '  the  rii)e  fruit  of  ages  of  development  in 
a  soil  that  was  already  prepared '  (Early  VkrUtian 
Conception  of  Christ,  19<J5,  p.  152). 

(1)  Philosophy. — The  early  Fathers  often  spoke 
of  Greek  philosophy  as  a  rparapoffKev^  or  -rpovaxbtia 
for  Christ.  Plato,  whose  Timceus  marks  the  trans- 
ition from  the  poljtheism  of  early  Greek  ages  to 
monotheistic  belief,  exercised  a  profound  influence 
on  religious  thought  and  speculation  during  the 
two  or  three  centuries  preceding  our  Saviours 
birth ;  and  his  teaching  was  still  a  living  force, 
although,  when  St.  Paul  visited  Athens,  'its 
Acropolis  was  stDl  as  full  of  idols  as  it  could  hold ' 
(Ac  17**  [Gwatkin]).  The  Epicureans  and  Stoics 
who  encountered  the  Apostle  on  that  occasion 
(v.**)  represented  the  two  chief  Schools  of  the 
period  ;  and  lx)th  Schools,  the  one  by  the  gentle 
humanity  of  its  teaching,  the  other  "by  its  moral 
earnestness,  are  justly  regarded  as  having  a  place 
in  the  preparation  for  the  Christian  faith.  The 
Stoic  philosophy,  with  its  watchwords  '  Endure ' 
and  'Refrain,'  was  that  with  which  the  Roman 
mind  had  most  affinity ;  and  its  great  teacher 
Seneca  (t  a.d.  65)  commended  self -discipline  and 
self-renunciation  as  the  true  healing  of  the  dis- 
eases of  the  soul,  with  a  passion  approaching  that 
of  the  Christian  preacher  (Dill,  Roman  Society, 
298,  321 ;  cf.  TertuUian,  de  Anitna,  xx :  '  Seneca 
sape  noster :   ...'). 

(2)  Eeligion. — 'The  world,'  says  Dill,  'was  in 
the  throes  of  a  religiotis  revolution,  and  eagerly  in 
quest  of  some  fresh  vision  of  the  Divine ' ;  and  he 
has  traced  in  his  great  work  the  rise  and  progress 
of  that  'moral  and  spiritual  movement  which  was 
setting  steadily,  and  with  growing  momentum, 
towards  purer  conceptions  of  God,  of  man's  rela- 
tions to  Him,  and  of  the  Life  to  come'  {op.  cit.,  pp. 
82,  585).  The  old  Roman  religion,  which  from  the 
Second  Punic  War  had  been  falling  into  decay, 
was  revive<l  by  Augustus  as  the  formal  religion  of 
the  State,  but  could  not  retard  the  progress  of  this 
movement.  People  sought  satisfaction  for  their 
religious  cravings  and  emotions  in  the  rites  and 
mysteries  of  Eastern  lands,  which  had  little  in 
common  with  old  Roman  religious  sentiment ; 
especiallj"  in  the  worship  of  Mithra,  which,  as 
recent  investigation  has  shown,  contained  a  moral 
element  that  made  it  a  real  help  to  a  truer  and 
purer  life,  till  in  the  light  of  the  higher  and  more 
efl'ectual  help  to  sanctification  held  out  in  Christ 
it  too  faded  away  and  was  forgotten. 

(3)  The  Empire  and  social  life. — The  most  signal 
illustration  of  the  historical  preparation  of  the 
GentUe  world  for  Christ  is  seen  in  the  vast  extent 
and  wonderful  cohesion  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
Its  political  unity,  though  not  of  such  a  nature  as 
to  lead  in  any  marked  degree  to  the  recognition 
of  human  brotherhood,  yet  materially  heli>ed  the 
diflusion  of  the  message  of  the  Cross  and  the 
Resurrection  which  made  men  conscious  of  a  new 
fellowship  wi"th  each  other.  Communication  be- 
tween the  Imperial  city  and  her  officials  at  a  dis- 
tance was  easy  and  rapid  :  sandj-  wastes,  trackless 
mountains,  and  broad  rivers  presenting  no  barriers 
which  she  had  not  been  able  to  overcome.  The 
subject  peoples  enjoyed  imder  the  Romans  peace, 
prosperity,  and  freedom ;  and   '  just  and  upright 


448 


GENTILES 


GENTILES 


governors  were  the  rule  and  not  the  exception ' 
(Dill,  p.  3).  The  good  treatment  which  St.  Paul 
received  from  Roman  officials  has  often  been  com- 
mented upon ;  less  frequently  has  it  been  noted 
that  his  missionary  journeys  were  never  impeded 
by  military  movements  or  interrupted  by  an  out- 
break of  hostilities  in  any  part  of  the  Empire. 

As  to  the  state  of  society  in  Kome  and  the  pro- 
vinces, attention  has  been  so  concentrated  ujion  its 
darker  side,  that  what  there  was  in  it  of  '  virtue 
and  praise'  (Ph  4^)  has  been  unduly  lost  sight  of. 
The  lines  of  Arnold's  well-known  poem  {Obermann 
Once  More),  in  which  he  depicts  the  ennui,  hardness, 
and  impiety  of  the  old  Roman  world  (cf.  Seneca, 
de  Brcv.  Vit.  xvi.  '  tarde  ire  horas  queruntur  .  .  . 
transilire  diesvolunt'),  are  oftener  quoted  than  those 
in  which  he  also  does  justice  to  the  sense  of  void  and 
unslaked  thirst  which  led  it  to  the  gospel  whereby 
hope  lived  again.  The  intense  indignation  at  cor- 
ruption and  baseness  that  barbs  the  pen  of  a 
Juvenal  or  a  Tacitus  bears  witness  that  in  a  con- 
siderable part  of  society  a  high  standjird  of  virtue 
still  existed.  Roman  inscriptions,  though  they 
hold  out  no  hope  of  a  life  beyond,  testify  to  the 
aliectionate  regai'd  in  which  family  life  was  held. 
Household  slavery  had  its  compensations  :  masters 
often  treated  their  slaves  as  humble  friends,  and 
felt  that  they  had  a  moral  duty  towards  them  apart 
from  the  legal  conventions  of  Rome  (for  instances, 
see  Dill,  p.  181  f.).  Many  manumitted  slaves  rose 
to  honourable  positions  in  the  service  of  the  State 
(ib.  p.  100).  Still  another  kind  of  preparation  for 
Christianity  is  found  in  the  institution  of  the 
sodalitia  or  collegia,  which  were  '  nurseries  .  .  . 
of  the  gentle  charities  and  brotherliness '  which 
'  the  young  Church '  was  able  to  teach  with  greater 
etlect  and  with  more  Divine  sanctions  (ib.  p.  271). 
Enough  has  been  said  to  indicate  the  moral  re- 
sources that  lay  still  undeveloped  in  Roman  society, 
waiting  to  be  changed  into  the  spiritual  wealth  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God  (Is  60'-  '^  RV). 

5.  The  Gentile  mission. — The  call  of  Jesus,  •  Lift 
up  your  eyes,  and  look  on  the  fields,  that  they  are 
wliite  already  unto  harvest '  ( Jn  4^^ ;  cf.  Mt  9^''-  ^), 
was  not  addressed  to  the  disciples  with  reference 
to  the  coming  to  Him  of  the  men  of  Sychar  only. 
It  had  a  wider  bearing.  At  the  great  harvest 
festival  of  Pentecost,  which  followed  the  forty  days 
during  wliich  He  had  manifested  Himself  to  them 
as  the  Risen  Lord,  the  Twelve  made  their  first 
day's  ingathering  of  about  3,000  souls  ;  and  it  was 
clearly  foreshown  to  them  by  word  and  sign  that 
those  that  were  far  oft'  were  to  be  made  nigh  (Ac 
23.5.11.17.39),  We  should  have  expected  that  the 
apostles,  after  having  been  so  amply  endowed  and 
encouraged  for  the  work  of  'making  disciples  of 
all  the  nations,'  would  have  proceeded  to  adopt 
measures  for  entering  upon  that  work.  Their 
delay  in  undertaking  the  Gentile  mission  has  been 
accounted  for  on  the  ground  tliat  the  giving  witness 
at  .Jerusalem  of  the  Resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and  the  piloting  of  the  newly  launched  vessel  of 
the  Church,  engrossed  their  attention.  But  when 
we  study  carefully  the  history  of  how  the  Gentile 
mission  was  started,  we  perceive  that  the  Twelve, 
bold  and  resolute  as  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  had  made 
them  in  the  face  of  Jewish  opposition,  were  far 
from  being  well  qualified  for  immediately  under- 
taking it.  Their  question  at  the  Ascension  (Ac  1*) 
showed  that  they  did  not  share  the  wide  outlook 
of  Jesus  ;  their  mental  horizon  was  still  limited  by 
their  national  feelings.  They  had,  as  the  event 
proved,  to  count  but  loss  much  that  at  present  ap- 
peared gain  to  them,  before  they  could  go  out  into 
the  world  and  build  a  Church  in  which  there 
should  be  no  middle  wall  of  partition.  The  terms 
on  which  Gentiles  were  to  be  received  had  not  been 
explicitly  laid  down  by  Jesus  in  His  parting  com- 


mission :  that  He  had  given  the  apostles  other 
important  directions  besides  those  M'hich  are  re- 
corded is  an  idea  that  we  cannot  entertain.  Ho 
had  made  them  fully  acquainted  with  the  nature 
of  the  work  to  be  done,  and  had  promised  them 
the  guidance  of  His  Spirit.  But  the  guidance  of 
tlie  Holy  Spirit  was  not  intended  to  sui)ersede  the 
use  of  their  own  understanding,  or  the  knowledge 
that  they  were  to  gather  from  the  teaching  of 
events,  as  to  the  practical  form  which  this  new 
departure  shoukl  take. 

This  is  best  illustrated  by  the  case  of  Peter. 
The  first  thing  that  seeins  to  have  shaken  his  Jew- 
ish prejudices  was  the  sight  of  what  tiie  grace  of 
God  efl'ected  among  the  Samaritans  through  the 
gospel  (Ac  8"'")  ;  the  next,  the  miraculous  conver- 
sion of  Saul  the  persecutor  (9-''  ^).  We  may  con- 
jecture that  to  have  time  for  meditation  upon  what 
the  latter  event  meant  for  the  Church  was  one 
purpose  of  Peter's  residence  at  Joppa ;  and  there, 
while  he  gazed  from  the  house-top  over  the  waters 
of  the  Mediterranean,  he  received  his  singular 
vision,  and  heard  the  Voice  that  interpreted  it, 
'  What  God  hath  cleansed,  that  call  not  thou  com- 
mon.' But,  having  baptized  Cornelius  and  other 
Gentiles,  he  did  not  proceed  a  step  further  in  the 
direction  pointed  out  by  the  Voice  wiiich  he  had 
heard  ;  the  discouraging  reception  which  his  admit- 
ting a  Gentile  met  with  at  Jerusalem  may  i)artly 
explain  this.  Philip  the  evangelist's  baptism  of  a 
Gentile  had  preceded  Peter's ;  we  cannot  help  won- 
dering whether  some  connecting  link  existed  be- 
tween Peter's  visit  to  Cornelius  of  Coisarea  and 
Philip's  residence  there  (Ac  8^"*"  21*). 

As  far  as  we  can  make  out,  it  was  not  till  eight 
years  after  Peter's  vision  that  some  unknown 
Cypriote  and  Cyrenian  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  took 
the  momentous  step  of  '  preaching  the  Lord  Jesus' 
to  the  Gentiles  at  Antioch  (Ac  11-",  where  "EXXijvaj 
is  the  true  reading).  The  Gentile  mission  is  thus 
for  ever  bound  up  with  the  veiy  name  of  '  Chris- 
tians';  for  'the  disciples  were  called  Christians 
lirst  in  Antioch '  (11-*).  We  hear  the  decisive  hour 
of  this  mission  strike  in  Ac  13'"*  :  these  four  verses 
are  among  the  most  important  that  St.  Luke  ever 
M'rote. 

The  work  in  '  the  third  city  of  the  Empire'  had 
been  greatly  blessed.  The  question  was,  Could  it 
be  extended  ?  Ought  the  Christians  of  Antioch  to 
make  a  serious  etlbrt  to  propagate  the  gospel  in 
the  lands  beyond  Syria,  in  Asia  Minor  and  the 
islands  ?  Barnabas  and  Saul  were  well  aware  that 
the  Lord  designed  them  for  a  wider  mission  than 
that  in  which  they  were  now  engaged  ;  had  the  time 
for  it  arrived?  They  referred  the  matter  to  the 
congregation,  hoping  that  an  expression  of  tiie 
Divine  will  would  be  given  through  one  of  their 
gifted  prophets.  This  hope  was  fulfilled.  The 
Holy  Ghost  said :  •  Separate  unto  me  Barnabas 
and  Saul  for  the  Avork  whereunto  I  have  called 
them.'  The  way  was  then  clear  ;  uncertainty  was 
at  an  end.  Another  meeting  of  the  congregation 
was  held,  probably  on  the  next  Lord's  day,  at 
which,  with  fasting  and  prayer,  and  by  '  the  laying 
on  of  hands ' — the  already  '  familiar  and  expres- 
sive sign  of  benediction' — the  two  apostles  were 
solemnly  set  apart  for  the  mission  ;  and,  having  been 
'  let  go,  or  '  bidden  God  speed,'  by  the  whole  con- 
gregation (airiXvaav  ;  Ramsaj",  St.  Piiul,  p.  67),  they 
immediately  set  forth  on  their  new  enterprise. 
'  So  they,  "being  sent  forth  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
went  down  to  Seleucia,  and  from  thence  they  sailed 
to  Cyprus'  (Barnabas's  island,  to  which  he  would 
naturally  feel  that  niissionarv  work  was  first  of  all 
due).  The  Creator-Spirit,  who  with  His  Divine 
breath  called  the  Church  into  being  at  Pentecost, 
thus  proclaimed  Himself  to  be  tlio  Author  of 
missions  and  the  Patron  of  missionaries,  signifying 


GENTLENESS 


GIFTS 


449 


that  their  work  of  showing  the  things  of  Christ  to 
all  the  nations  upon  earth  was  His  work,  and 
making  their  preaching  of  them  effectual  unto 
salvation  in  every  part  of  the  Empire.  After  this, 
St.  Lukes  principal  object  is  to  describe  the 
triumphant  progress  of  the  gospel  from  Antioch  to 
Rome. 

It  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  article  to 
trace  the  liistory  of  the  attempt  made  by  a  large 
section  of  the  adherents  of  Judaistic  Christianity 
to  obstruct  and  even  to  ^vreck  the  Gentile  mission. 
Before  St.  Paul's  missionary  labours  were  ended,  it 
was  evident  that  this  attempt  had  completely  failed. 
The  energetic  remonstrance  which  he  had  addressed 
to  St.  Peter  at  Antioch  on  his  withdraving  himself 
from  table-fellowship  with  the  Gentiles,  and  of 
which  we  may  infer  from  1  Co  3—  that  St.  Peter  had 
acknowledged  the  justice,  probably  had  an  import- 
ant effect  in  settling  the  question  of  Gentile  rights. 
Fourteen  or  fifteen  years  later,  St.  Paul  had  the 
happiness  of  testifying  to  what  his  eyes  had  seen 
of  '  the  mystery  of  God  *  now  revealed,  '  that  the 
Gentiles  are  fellow-heirs,  and  fellow-members  of 
the  body,  and  fellow-partakers  of  the  promise  in 
Christ  Jesus  through  the  gospel '  (Eph  3*).  While 
Gentile  Christianity  increased,  Judaistic  Christian- 
ity decreased,  and,  after  losing  its  local  centre  at 
Jerusalem,  it  became  '  the  shadow  of  a  shade.'  In 
the  striking  words  of  Gnthe  (EBi  23^1),  *  When 
Ciiristianity  and  Judaism  gradually  separated,  it 
was  as  if  a  mighty  river  had  changed  its  bed :  a 
feeble  current  still  crept  along  the  old  channel,  but 
the  main,  the  perennial  stream  flowed  elsewhere.' 
(For  the  cotintries  in  which  the  GentUe  mission 
had  gained  a  footing  before  the  close  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Age,  see  Gwatkin,  Early  Church  Hist.  i.  113.) 

LrmtATCRK. — ^J.  Adam,  The  Rel.  Teachers  of  Greece,  Edin- 
burgh, 1908,  pp.  2,  298,  373,  The  Vitality  of  PUUonigm,  Cam- 
bridsre,  1911,  pp.  179, 136,  228;  W.  H.  Bennett,  EBi  1679  fC; 
A.  Bonns,  DCG  L  641  f. ;  F.  C.  Bnrkitt,  The  Gospel  History 
and  its  Transmission,  £dinbaisfa,  1906,  p.  188 ;  S.  DtU,  Roman 
Society  from  Nero  to  Marcus  Aurdius,  London,  19(H ;  S.  R. 
Driver,  Joel  and  Amos,  Cambridge,  1897,  p.  223 ;  EzpT  xx. 
[1908-09]  304 ;  A.  E.  Garvie,  HDB  ▼.  32S ;  Grimm-Thayer, 
s.m.  tffwK,  Anos ;  H.  Gnthe,  EBi  23TI ;  H.  M .  Gwatkin,  EaHy 
Church  Historv  to  AD.  SIS,  London,  1909,  L 1-114 ;  A.  Harnack, 
Expansion  ofChriHianity,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1904-05,  i.  1-85,  The  Act* 
of  the  AposUes,  do.  1909,  pp.  xxx,  51,  Date  of  the  Acts,  do.  1911, 
pp.  124,  128;  W.  J.  Henderson,  DCG  ii.  193;  E.  G.  Hirscb, 
JB  V.  615  ff. ;  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  JndaisUe  Christianity,  Oambri<^ 
and  London,  1S&4,  p.  35;  J.  Kelman,  DCG  ii.  296ff. ;  R.  H. 
Kennett.  The  'Servant  of  the  Lord,' London,  1911,  pp.  U-28, 
55  ;  E.  Koaig,  '  The  Consommation  of  the  OT  in  Jesos  Christ,' 
Expositor,  8th  aer.,  iv.  [1912]  1,  97 ;  A-  C  McGifFert,  ERE  L 
62«ff. ;  J.  Orr,  HDB  ii.  850fl. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the 
TraxeOer,  London,  1895,  p.  67,  and  '  llie  Thought  of  Paul,'  Ex- 
positor, 8th  ser.,  ii.  [1911]  289 ff. ;  J.  Reid,  DCG  iL  194;  H. 
Schnhz,  OT  Theoloov,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1892,  iL  13,  373 ; 
J.  A.  Selbie,  HDB  ii.  149 ;  H.  Sidgwick,  History  of  Ethics, 
London,  lsS6,  pp.  96,  9S ;  J.  Skinner,  Isaiah,  Cambridsre,  1896- 
OS,  ii.  -230  ;  W.  R.  Smith,  EBi  iiL  3063 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  ST,  London,  1909,  pp.  78, 104  ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd. 
to  ST,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1909,  L  373. 

James  Donald. 
GENTLENESS.— See  Meekness. 

GHOST — See  Holy  Spirit. 

GIDEON  {Tcdediv). — Gideon  was  a  man  of  valour 
who,  according  to  Jg  6-8,  received  a  visit  from 
Jahweh's  messenger,  overturned  the  altar  of  Baal, 
saved  Israel  from  the  hand  of  Midian,  chastised 
the  men  of  Succoth,  and  finally  refused  a  crown. 
He  is  merely  named  in  Hebrews  ( 1 1*^)  among  the 
ancients  who  Avronght  great  deeds  by  faith,  time 
failing  the  author  to  recount  the  achievements  of 
all  his  heroes.  James  Strahan. 

GIFTS. — We  may  distinguish  for  the  purpose  of 
this  article  between  gifts  and  giving  generally, 
and  the  particular  endowments  which  are  connoted 
by  the  term  xapt<''A'«Ta>  translated  in  AV  and  RV 
'  gifts.' 

VOL.  I. — 29 


1.  General. — It  is  clear  that  in  the  Apostolic 
Age  the  Church  had  learnt  the  implications  of  the 
fact  of  the  Incarnation.  From  the  literature  of 
the  time  we  note  the  connexion  between  the  gift 
of  Giod's  grace  in  Christ,  the  'unspeakable  gift' 
(2  Co  9^'),  and  the  ethical  practice  of  Christ's 
followers.  The  Greek  verbs  SLSufii  and  dupio/uu. 
are  hallowed  by  new  associations  and  duties  to- 
which  both  the  theology  and  ethic  of  Christianity 
give  notable  contributions.  Specific  deeds  of 
charity  and  kindness  (see  Alms)  enter  naturally, 
as  the  result  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  into  Christian 
practice  (see  art.  Chkistian  Life  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  deacons  and  systematic  giving  in  the 
Church).  The  generosity  of  Stephanas  (1  Co  16**), 
which  impelled  him  at  his  own  expense  to  journey 
to  the  Apostle  with  Fortunatus  and  Achaicus  (his- 
slaves),  is  singled  out  by  St.  Paul  for  special  men- 
tion, as  setting  forth  a  new  duty  to  the  Church  on 
the  lines  of  the  old  Greek  Xeirovpyla  or  service  done 
to  the  State.  The  same  Epistle  (1  Co  16*)  empha- 
sizes the  duty  of  the  Christian  community  in  the' 
matter  of  the  collection  {q.v.) :  St.  Paul  insists  on- 
the  duty  of  supporting  not  only  the  Church  and 
its  ministry  but  also  poorer  churches  at  a  distance 
(2  Co  8*"* '9^'")  and  of  supplying  a  portion  for 
the  communion-meal,  while  nis  eulogy  of  cheer- 
ful giving  (2  Co  9')  in  general  sets  the  standard 
and  model  of  Christian  liberality  and  of  systematic 
gifts  to  spiritual  objects,  to  the  support  of  the 
poor  and  helpless  (cf.  Aristides,  Apol.  xv. ),  as  well 
as  to  the  furtherance  of  the  gospel.  Philanthropy 
is  bound  up  with  the  Christian  life  and  can  never 
be  dissociated  from  it. 

The  group  of  words  translated  '  gift '  {SQpor,  duped, 
86fta,  86<ris,  Suprj/ui)  forms  an  interesting  study, 
upon  which  see  note  on  Ja  1^  in  J.  B.  Mayors 
Commentary  (*  London,  1910).  Supnuia  (Ja  1",  Bo- 
s'*) is  used  of  a  gift  of  God,  and  so  is  bupea.  wher- 
ever we  find  it  in  the  XT  ;  8u>pow  is  used  of  offer- 
ings to  God ;  56.ua  (except  in  Eph  4*,  a  quotation 
from  LXX)  is  used  of  human  gifts ;  while  blxns 
may  refer  to  either  a  human  or  a  Divine  gift. 
The  use  of  Swped  as  the  *  free  gift '  of  God,  spring- 
ing from  His  x<ip«>  or  '  grace,'  is  found  in  Ac  2"  8* 
10**  11",  Ro  5»5-  ",  2  Co  9**,  Eph  Z*  4',  He  6*,  and 
is  also  used  by  apostolic  writers  like  Clement  (cf. 
1  Clem.  xix.  2,  xxiiL  2,  xxxiL  1)  and  Ignatius 
(Smyrn.  vii.  1). 

Christ  is  pre-eminently  the  gift  of  God's  volun- 
tary favour  to  the  race,  and  is  at  once  the  type 
and  source,  along  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  all" 
spiritual  impartations  and  endowments.  It  re- 
mains to  add  that  all  gifts  of  love  are  gifts  to  God 
in  the  apostolic  teacMng.  Gifts  of  the  sacrificial 
order  are  mentioned  by  the  author  of  Heb.  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Jewish  priesthood  only  to  be  ele- 
vated into  the  region  of  Christian  thought  and  to 
be  liberated  from  the  extemalism  and  legalism  of 
the  Mosaic  system.  The  gifts  of  the  one  High 
Priest,  'the  mediator  of  a  better  covenant,'  are 
inward  ;  the  new  law  is  written  on  the  heart,  and 
the  covenant  is  one  of  forgiveness  and  grace 
(He  5*  8*"-).  Like\^-ise,  the  approach  to  God  by 
the  believer  is  '  a  new  and  living  way '  in  that  it 
is  by  the  medium  of  the  soul  and  conscience,  un- 
accompanied by  outward  gift  or  sacrifice,  except 
that,  like  his  Lord,  the  believer  offers  himself,  at 
rather  his  body  (cf.  Ro  12*).  This  is  the  fotmda- 
rion  of  all  gi^'ing,  as  St.  Paul  hints  in  2  Co  8',  the 
giving  up  of  self  to  God  being  the  act  that  hallows 
all  other  gifts.  The  sanctions  of  Christian  mag- 
nanimity, practical  sympathy,  and  liberality  are 
rooted  in  Christian  doctrine,  and  especially  its 
doctrine  of  God  as  the  eternal  love  eternally  im- 
parting itself  and  historically  manifest  in  the  gift 
of  His  Son.  The  grace  of  God  and  His  kindness 
{(piXapepwria)  have  both  appeared  (Tit  2"  3^; ;  and 


450 


GIFTS 


GIFTS 


the  Apostle  asks  elsewhere  *  shall  he  not  with  him 
also  freely  give  (x^-plfferai)  us  all  tilings?'  (Ro  S''-). 

2.  Special. — The  quotation  last  given  reminds 
us  that  xap'O'Attt  ('charism'),  formed  from  the  verb 
Xaplj^ofiai,  means  a  '  free  gift,'  not  of  right  but  of 
bounty.  Unlike  duptd,  which  has  a  similar  mean- 
ing, x'ip'<''Ma  comes  to  be  used  almost  in  a  technical 
sense  in  Christian  terminology,  of  gifts  or  qualifi- 
cations for  spiritual  service.  F.  J.  A.  Hort(rAc 
Christian  Ecclesia,  London,  1897,  p.  153  f.)  thus 
defines  xa/«<''Ma  as  used  by  St.  Paul  and  by  one 
other  writer  only  in  the  NT,  namely  St.  Peter  : 

'  In  these  instances  it  is  used  to  designate  either  what  we 
call  "  natural  advantages  "  independent  of  any  human  process 
of  acquisition,  or  advantages  freshly  received  in  the  course 
of  Providence ;  both  alike  being  regarded  as  so  many  various 
free  gifts  from  the  Lord  of  men,  and  as  designed  by  llim  to  be 
distinctive  qualifications  for  rendering  distinctive 'services  to 
men  or  to  communities  of  men.' 

Even  in  the  passages  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
which  refer  to  the  charism  of  Timothy  (1  Ti  4^^, 
2  Ti  1*)  Hort  does  not  regard  the  specific  gift  of 
the  young  Apostle  as  a  supernatural  endowment 
suddenly  or  oy  miraculous  means  vouchsafed  for 
a  special  mission  or  service :  '  it  was  a  special  gift 
of  God,  a  special  fitness  bestowed  by  Him  to  en- 
able Timothy  to  fulfil  a  distinctive  function'  (p. 
185) ;  but  also  an  original  gift,  capable  of  being 
wakened  into  fresh  life  *  by  his  own  initiative  ;  it 
was  so  distinctive  as  to  mark  Timothy  out  as  a 
fit  colleague  of  St.  Paul  himself,  the  htness  being 
authenticated  to  the  Apostle  by  a  prophetic  oracle 
or  message,  and  consecrated  by  a  solemn  act  of 
benediction — the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
body  of  elders.  Schmiedel  (EBi,  s.v.  'Spiritual 
Gifts ')  distinguishes  between  the  non-technical 
use  of  x«/"<''M«  ill  such  pas.sages  as  Ro  S^'^  (where 
the  term  means  '  the  whole  aggregate  of  God's 
benevolent  operation  in  the  universe ' ;  cf.  Ro  1" 
g23  1129^  2  Co  P'),  and  its  technical  use  elsewhere, 
where  '  charism '  and  '  charisms '  denote  distinc- 
tive aptitudes  on  the  part  of  Christians  ;  cf.  Ro  12^ 
(where  '  tlie  grace  of  God '  is  mentioned  as  the 
source  of  the  several  capacities  designated),  1  Co  T 
124.  9. 28. 31^  1  p  4io_  In  the  great  passage  of  Eph  4" 
(with  which  Justin  Martyr,  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  xxxix. 
is  to  be  read)  the  term  x'^P^'^f^"-  is  not  mentioned, 
but  it  is  implied  in  the  words  '  He  gave '  (avrbs 
IduKev)  with  which  the  specihcation  of  functions  or 
services  commences.  The  term  is  not  found  in  the 
Apostolic  Fathers  ;  in  the  Did.  i.  5  it  is  used  only 
once,  and  then  of  temporal  blessings  in  the  general 
sense. 

The  locus  classicus  for  charisms  is  1  Co  12*''^  ^^d 
V.28,  which  has  to  be  studied  along  with  Eph  4". 
The  latter,  which  specilies  the  ministries  of  apostles, 
prophets  (see  Prophecy,  Prophet),  evangelists, 
pastors,  and  teachers,  indicates  the  types  of  Chris- 
tian service  which  tended  to  become  permanent  in 
the  life  of  the  Church.  The  Corinthian  passage, 
on  the  other  hand,  in  addition  to  the  more  stable 
and  authorized  modes  of  ministry,  mentions  several 
others  of  a  special  order,  perhaps  peculiar  to  the 
Corinthian  Church  with  its  exuberant  manifesta- 
tions of  spiritual  energy,  and  certainly,  as  the 
evidence  of  later  Church  history  shows,  of  a 
temporary  character,  and  exhausting  themselves 
(cf.  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  NT, 
London,  1909,  p.  320)  in  the  Apostolic  or  sub- 
Apostolic  Age.  The  Apostle  mentions  '  diversities 
of  gifts,'  'diversities  of  ministrations'  (diaKoviwu), 
and  'diversities  of  workings'  (ivepyr)/j.dTO)v) ;  these 
are  but  diflerent  aspects  of  the  same  function  ;  but, 
whereas  the  two  last  are  approi)riately  related  to 
the  Lord  Christ  and  God  the  Father,  xaptCAiaTa  are 
regarded  as  the  graces  bestowed  by  the  Holy  Spirit 

*  Cf.  1  Co  1231,  where  the  two-fold  idea  of  the  Divine  oriain  of 
charisms  and  the  necessity  of  human  effort  to  attain  them  is 
suggested. 


(cf.  a  similar  three-fold  relationship  with  the  three 
Persons  of  the  Trinity  in  Eph  4*).  St.  Paul 
mentions,  first,  charisms  of  the  intellectual  order, 
'  the  word  of  wisdom '  and  '  the  word  of  knowledge' ; 
second,  miraculous  gifts:  (a)  'faith,'  (b)  'gifts  of 
healing,'  (c)  'workings  of  miracles';  third,  'pro- 
phecy,' or  the  gift  of  spiritual  instruction  ;  fourth, 
'  discerning  of  si)irits,'  or  the  gift  of  discrimination, 
the  discerning  between  the  true  and  the  false ; 
and  finally,  '  tongues '  and  '  the  interpretation  of 
tongues '  (see  Tongues),  or  ecstatic  powers  and  the 
power  of  interpreting  them.  Then  in  1  Co  12-*  we 
have  the  following  classification :  '  God  hath  set 
some  in  the  church,  first  apostles,  secondly  prophets, 
thirdly  teachers,  then  miracles,  then  gifts  of^  heal- 
ings, helps  (dcrtX^/x^eis),  governments  (Kv^epvifaui, 
literally  *  pilotings '),  divers  kinds  of  tongues ' ;  this 
is  a  classification  of  charisms  in  order  of  spiritual 
rank  and  dignity.  It  has  l>een  suggested  that 
'helps'  and  'governments'  indicate  the  services 
rendered  respectively  by  '  deacons '  and  '  bishops,' 
in  which  case  we  have  here  '  the  faint  beginnings 
of  the  separation  of  offices '  (T.  C.  Edwards,  Com. 
on  1  Cor.^,  London,  1885,  in  loc).  The  absence 
of  any  reference  to  officials  later  designated  as 
'  bishops,'  '  presbyters,'  '  deacons,*  '  pastors '  (in 
Eph  4"),  suggests  a  rudimentary  church  organiza- 
tion, or  rather  a  purely  democratic  government  in 
the  Christian  community  at  Corinth  ;  and  it  may 
be  that  the  profusion  of  services  and  functions  witlx 
the  accompanying  perils  of  spiritual  pride  and  dis- 
order suggested  to  the  Apostle  the  necessity  of  the 
more  disciplined  and  edifying  forms  of  service  and 
administration  which  afterwards  prevailed  in  the 
apostolic  churches.  In  fact,  this  is  the  burden  of 
the  Apostle's  teaching  in  1  Co  14,  following  on  the 
exhortation  to  '  covet  earnestly  "the  greater  char- 
isms'"  (1  Co  12=*i),  and  the  noble  hymn  (1  Co  13) 
which  sets  forth  love  as  'a  still  more  excellent 
way '  in  that  it  transcends  all  the  x^p^MiTa  and 
is  the  real  foundation  of  the  Church.  It  is  love 
that  is  to  regulate  the  use  of  tiie  spiritual  gifts, 
inasmuch  as  under  its  influence  the  individual  will 
subordinate  himself  to  another,  will  avoid  ostenta- 
tion and  self-advertisement,  and  will  do  all  thin;,'s 
'  decently  and  in  order ' — that  is,  he  will  keep  his 
own  place  and  exercise  his  particular  functions,  so 
that  unity  may  be  attained  in  variety,  and  each 
several  capacity  may  be  subordinated  to  the  good, 
of  the  Church  as  a  whole. 

As  to  the  meaning  and  nature  of  the  charisms, 
guidance  must  be  sought  in  the  particular  articles 
which  deal  specifically  with  them  ;  nor  can  we 
enter  into  a  detailed  examination  of  the  problems 
which  such  a  classification  as  'faith,'  'gifts  of 
healing,'  '  workings  of  miracles '  creates.  Suffice 
it  to  say  that,  though  love  is  the  charism  par  ex- 
cellence, the  fount  and  source  of  all  others,  faith  is 
second  only  to  it  in  the  order  of  ethical  dignity. 
It  is  a  charism  out  of  which  spring  others  described 
in  1  Co  12»  as  'charisms  of  healing,'  where  the 
l)lural  appears  to  indicate  diflerent  powers  for 
healing  diflerent  forms  of  disease,  and  'workings 
of  powers  or  miracles.'  The  relation  of  faith  and 
its  offspring  prayer  to  healing  and  miracles  gener- 
ally is  clearly  seen  in  the  Gospels  which  record  our 
Lord's  cures  and  in  His  declaration  that  faitii  is 
the  sole  condition  of  miracle-working  (cf.  Mt  17''", 
INIk  1128-24) ;  while  the  use  of  physical  means  such 
as  oil  (see  the  notable  passage  in  Ja  5")  in  com- 
bination with  prayer  is  paralleled  not  only  by  our 
Lord's  method,  but  by  the  method  employed  by 
the  Twelve  in  Mk  6'*.  The  charisms  of  miracle- 
working  lasted  down  to  the  2nd  cent.,  if  we  may 
trust  the  evidence  of  Justin  Martyr  (Apol.  ii.  6) ; 
they  never  were  intended,  as  the  extreme  faith- 
healer  of  to-day  contends,  to  supersede  the  eflbrts 
of  the  skilled  physician ;  they  represent  the  creative 


GIFTS 

gift,  the  power  of  initiating  new  departures  in  the 
normal  world  of  phenomena,  which  is  rooted  in 
faith  (see  A.  G.  Hogg,  Christ's  Message  of  the 
Kingdom,  Edinburgh,  1911,  Dp.  62-70) ;  and  as  such 
reveal  a  principle  Mhich  holds  good  for  all  time. 

To  sum  up,  an  examination  of  the  passages  in 
apostolic  literature  which  treat  of  spiritual  gifts 
inevitably  brings  us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  life 
■of  the  early  Church  was  characterized  by  glowing 
enthusiasm,  simple  faith,  and  intensity  of  spLritnal 
joy  and  wonder,  all  resulting  from  the  consciousness 
of  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  also  that  this 
phase  of  Splrit-eflected  ministries  and  ser\'ices  was 
temporary,  as  such  '  tides  of  the  Spirit '  have  since 
often  proved,  and  gave  wa]^  to  a  more  rigid  and 
•disciplmed  Church  Order,  in  which  the  official 
tended  more  and  more  to  supersede  the  charismatic 
ministries.  At  first,  as  E.  v.  Dobschiitz  remarks 
{Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  Eng.  tr., 
London,  1904,  p.  283),  this  strikes  us  as  '  a  limita- 
tion and  a  moral  retrogression ' ;  but  on  reflexion 
we  see  that  while  the  principle  of  spiritual  gifts  as 
originating  in  the  individual  with  the  immediate 
Action  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  a  permanent  truth  for 
the  Christian  consciousness,  the  transient  character 
of  many  of  the  charismatic  gifts  is  due  largely  to 
the  abuses  to  which  they  were  liable.  The  growing 
ethical  standard  of  the  Church  rejected  all  self- 
chosen  teachers  or  ministers  who  were  proved  by 
the  test  of  character  to  be  without  a  Divine  calf. 
By  their  fruits  they  were  known;  and  the  x<^^f^> 
which,  however  admirable  in  itself,  was  not  associ- 
ated with  personal  worth  and  holy  influence,  could 
not  in  the  nature  of  things  be  recognized  as  making 
for  editication  and  order  in  the  Church  life.  The 
particular  injunctions  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  as 
to  the  character  of  bishops  and  deacons  point  to  a 
developing  sense  of  Christian  fitness  in  the  official 
life  of  the  Church  and  a  growing  feeling  for  the 
honour  of  Christianity.  Thus,  sooner  or  later,  the 
true  charismatic  was  sifted  from  the  false  charis- 
matic, whose  personal  vanity  and  self-seeking 
nullified  all  usefulness.  The  increase  of  discipline 
of  course  had  its  own  perils.  Sometimes,  as  in 
Jn  3,  we  detect  the  narrow  intolerance  which  re- 
sented any  new  influence  or  development  in  the 
Church  liie,  Diotrephes  being  a  type  of  mind 
which  is  ecclesiastically  conser\-ative  and  '  so  loses 
impulses  of  the  greatest  value'  (E.  v.  Dobschiitz, 
op.  cit.,  p.  221  f.).  To  Diotrephes  the  Ephesian 
John  is  a  charismatic  itinerant  preacher,  whose 
letters  must  be  withheld  from  tne  Church  and 
whose  messengers  must  not  be  welcomed.  Here 
-we  see  the  seed  of  conflict,  which  was  afterwards 
to  germinate  into  the  Montanist  controversy.  But 
the  authority  of  St.  Paul  determined  once  for  all 
the  inner  character  of  Christian  community  life. 
His  symbol  of  the  single  bodj-  with  many  members 
<Ro  12^,  1  Co  12^-'-'^)  shows  that  he  aimed  at  a  unity 
in  which  the  vsdtness  of  the  individual  should  have 
free  play  and  yet  be  subordinated  to  the  welfare 
of  the  community.  The  Christian  Church  gave 
full  scope  to  the  individual  x<i/"<''A'a  ;  nevertheless, 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the  impulse 
towards  association,  so  far  from  being  overpowered, 
was  most  powerfully  intensified  by  the  encourage- 
ment which  St.  Paul  (cf.  Hamack,  Mission  and  Ex- 
pansion, Eng.  tr.*,  i.  433)  gave  to  the  development 
of  spiritual  capacitj'  in  the  indiHdual.  While 
pointing  to  errors  of  unregulated  spiritual  enthusi- 
asm, he  none  the  less  pleads  mth  his  converts  to 
*  quench  not  the  Spirit'  and  '  despise  not  prophesy- 
ings'dThoi*). 

LiTERATUKB. — On  the  general  subject  of  Christian  giring^  the 
following  works  may  be  consulted:  G.  Uhlhorn,  Chrittian 
Charity  in  the  Ancient  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinbui^h,  1883 ;  A. 
Haniack,  Misaitm  and  Expansion  '•/  Chrittianity ,  Elng.  tr.-, 
London,  19CI«,  vol.  i.  ch.  4.  For  spiritual  srifts  (xopwrMara),  in 
■addition  to  the  works  quoted  above,  the  following  authorities 


GLORY 


451 


may  be  consulted :  R.  Sohm,  Kirehenrteht,  Leipzig,  1882 ;  H. 
Weinel,  Die  Wirkungen  de*  Geittet,  Freiburgr  L  B.,  1889 ;  H. 
Gankel.  Die  Wirkungm  detHeUigen  GtitUifi,  Gdttingen,  1909 ; 
T.  M.  Lindsay,  The  Church  and  Ute  MiniHry  in  the  Early 
Centwriefi,  London,  1903;  together  with  »rtt.  by  Cremer  on 
'Geistesgkben '  in  PRE^  (Leipsig,  180^  and  Gayford  in  HDB 
on  'Church.'  ^  MaKTIX  POPE. 

GIRDLE.— The  references  to  girdle  (fcinj),  the 
article  itself  being  either  expressed  or  implied, 
admit  of  a  three-fold  classification  :  (1)  The  girdle 
in  everyday  use,  which  (a)  was  put  on  before  one 
went  forth  (Ac  12*),  and  (6)  was  laid  aside  indoors 
(Ac  21").  From  the  fact  that  such  a  girdle  could 
be  used  to  bind  hands  and  feet,  we  may  infer  that 
it  was  of  soft  material,  such  as  linen.  (2)  The 
girdle  as  an  article  of  military  wear,  which  enters 
into  the  metaphor  of  Eph  6"*-.  This  transfers 
us  to  quite  another  environment,  and  to  a  girdle 
whose  materials  were  stiSer,  e.g.  leather  or  metal, 
or  a  combination  of  these.  Presumably  (1)  and 
(2)  were  worn  upon  the  loins,  and  their  use  was 
such  as  to  give  rise  to  the  figure  of  speech  which  is 
found  in  1  P  1^'  (cf.  Lk  12**),  viz.  girding  up  the 
loins  (of  the  mind).  (3)  The  girdle  in  its  orna- 
mental aspect,  as  appearing  in  Rev  1^  15*.  The 
epithet  'golden'  is  to  be  taken  as  applicable  to 
cloth  and  not  metal,  i.e.  the  gold  was  inv\Tonght 
in  a  girdle  of  linen  material  (cf.  Dn  10*,  a  similar 
passage,  where  'pure  gold  of  Uphaz'  [Heb.]  is 
rendered  ^maiixp  in  LXX).  A  noteworthy  difl"er- 
ence  emerges  in  the  location  of  the  girdle,  loins 
(Dan.)  being  replaced  by  breasts  in  Rev.  (xpd$  rdis 
fiaurrois  [1"],  Trepi  t4  trr^dri  [15*]).  The  girdle  is 
thus  an  '  upper '  girdle,  and  is  suggestive  of  Greek 
and  Roman  custom.  See  also  the  description  in 
Josephus,  Ant.  m.  vii.  2.     Cf.  art.  ApROX. 

W.  Cruickshaxk. 

GLASS.— See  House,  Mikeor,  Sea  of  Glass. 

GLORT. — It  is  not  proposed  to  embrace  in  this 
article  all  the  words  which  our  English  versions 
render  by  '  glory  ' ;  it  is  confined  to  the  most  im- 
portant of  these— Sdfo. 

As  applied  to  men  and  things,  So^a  has  two 
principal  meanings  :  (1)  honour,  praise,  good  repute 
(2  Co  68,  I  Th  2«) ;  (2)  that  which  by  exciting 
admiration  brings  honour  or  renown  ;  a  natural 
perfection  (1  P  1** :  '  the  glory  of  flesh '  ;  1  Co 
J540. 41.  '  glory  of  the  celestial  .  .  .  the  terrestrial,' 
etc.  ;  1  Co  11^  :  '  long  hair  is  a  glory  to  a  woman ') ; 
or  a  circumstance  which  reflects  glory  upon  one 
(1  Th  2^ :  St.  Paul's  converts  are  a  '  glory '  to  him  ; 
Eph  3"  :  St.  Paul's  suflerings  are  a  '  glory '  to  his 
converts ;  2  Co  8** :  worthy  Christians  are  the  '  ^lory ' 
of  Christ ;  Rev  21**-  ^  :  the  kings  of  the  eartli  and 
the  nations  bring  their  '  glory '  into  the  New  Jeru- 
salem.    Cf.  Hag  2'-3). 

Minor  significations  are  (a)  that  which  is  falsely 
regarded  as  bringing  honour  to  oneself  (Ph  3^), 
and  (6)  persons  endued  with  glory  (Jude*,  2  P  2'*= 
'  dignities '  in  both  AV  and  RY,  the  reference  prob- 
ably being  to  angelic  powers). 
I      In  the  numerous  and  important  passages  where 
!  the  idea  of  '  glory '  is  associated  with  God  and  the 
i  heavenly  world,  with  Christ,  Christians,  and  the 
j  Christian  life  here  and  hereafter,  we  find  the  same 
i  two  principal  meanings.     There  is  the  glory  which 
belongs  to  the  Divine  Being  in  itself,  in  which 
!  God  manifests  Himself  to  His  creatures,  so  far  as 
such  manifestation  is  possible,  and  the  glory  which 
He   receives  back  from   His  creatures  ;   the  out- 
shining (Erscheinungsform)  of  the  Divine  nature, 
and  the  reflexion  ot  that  outshining  in  the  trust, 
adoration,  and  thanksgiving  of  men  and  angels,  as 
also  in   the  silent   testimony  of  His  works,  and 
especially  by  the  results  of  the  Divine  redemption 
in  the  character  and  destiny  of  the  redeemed. 
I.  1.  The  glory  vhich  isnatiye  to  the  Being  of 


452 


GLORY 


GLORY 


God. — To  the  modem  mind  the  chief  difficulty  of 
this  conception,  as  presented  in  the  NT,  is  due  to 
that  fusion  in  it  of  the  physical,  the  rational,  and 
the  ethical,  -which  is  characteristic  of  biblical 
psychology  throughout.  In  biblical  thought  these 
elements  are  conceived  not  abstractly,  as  if  con- 
stituting separate  spheres  of  being,  but  as  they  are 
given  in  experience,  as  inter-dependent  and  integral 
to  tlie  unity  of  life.  Thus,  whatever  ethical  con- 
tent comes  to  be  associated  with  the  Glory  of  God, 
the  basis  of  the  conception  is  physical — the  splen- 
dour which  is  inseparable  from  the  Divine  Presence 
in  tlie  celestial  world.  In  the  OT,  when  Jahweh 
lifts  the  veil  that  hides  Him  from  mortal  eyes,  the 
medium  of  theophany  is  always  Light,  a  supra- 
mundane  but  actually  visible  radiance  (whicli  is 
localized  and  assumes  a  definite  uniformity  in  the 
Shekinah-glory). 

For  later  Judaistic  developments,  see  Weber's  JMische  Theo- 
logic,  ]>p.  162  ff.,  275  ff.  In  apocalyptic  the  '  glory '  is  definitely 
associated  with  the  sovereignty  of  Qod  in  tlie  heavenly  world 
(1  En.  XXV.  3),  and  is  especially  connected  with  the  Divine 
Throne  (ib.  ix.  4,  xiv.  20).  In  the  Ateengion  of  Igaiah  (x.  16, 
xi.  32)  it  is  equivalent  to  the  Person  of  God  ;  God  is  17  fieyoAT) 
6ofa.  Sofa  in  this  sense  of  '  radiance  '  is  unknown  to  ordinary 
Greek  literature.  Deissniann's  suggestion,  that  this  may  have 
been  an  ancient  meaning  which  survived  in  the  vernacular  and 
so  passed  into  the  dialect  of  the  LXX,  seems  more  probable 
than  Reitzenstein's,  who,  on  the  ground  of  certain  magical 
papyri,  claims  for  it  an  origin  in  Egyptian-Hellenistic  mysticism. 

In  the  NT  the  same  idea  lies  behind  the  use  of 
the  concept  b6^a.  AVherever  the  celestial  world  is 
projected  into  the  terrestrial,  it  is  in  a  radiance  of 
supernatural  light  (Mt  17»,  Ac  26'^^  Mt  283,  Ac  127, 
etc.);  and  this  is  ultimately  the  radiance  that 
emanates  from  the  presence  of  God,  who  dwells  in 
'light  unapproachable'  (1  Ti  6i«).  To  this  the 
term  5(5fa  is  frequently  applied — at  Betlilehem 
(Lk  28),  and  at  the  Transfiguration  (2  P  1")  ;  the 
'  glory '  of  God  is  the  liglit  of  the  New  Jerusalem  ; 
Stephen  looking  up  saw  the  '  glory  of  God '  (Ac  7^*) ; 
and  the  redeemed  are  at  last  presented  faultless 
before  the  presence  of  His  glory  ( Jude  ^ ;  cf.  i  En. 
xxxix.  12). 

With  St.  Paul  the  conception  is  less  pictorial ; 
the  rational  and  ethical  elements  implicit  in  it 
come  clearly  into  view.  With  him  also  the  56^a  is 
fundamentally  associated  with  the  idea  of  celestial 
splendour,  to  which,  indeed,  his  vision  of  the  glori- 
fied Christ  gave  a  new  and  vivid  reality  ;  but  tlie 
idea  of  revelation,  of  the  Glory  as  God's  self- 
manifestation,  becomes  prominent.  St.  Paul's 
thought  does  not  rest  in  tlie  symbol,  but  passes 
to  the  reality  which  it  signifies — the  transcendent 
majesty  and  sovereignty  that  belong  to  God  as 
God  ;  and  for  St.  Paul  the  most  sovereign  thing  in 
God,  divinest  in  the  Divine,  is  the  sacrificial  sin- 
bearing  love  revealed  in  the  Cross.  God's  glory  is 
displayed  in  His  mercy  (Ro  9-^),  in  the  '  grace 
which  he  freely  bestowed  upon  us  in  the  Beloved ' 
(Eph  1*)  ;  its  perfect  living  reflexion  is  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ  (2  Co  4*).  Yet  it  is  the  glory,  not 
of  an  ethical  ideal,  but  of  thelLiving  God,  God  upon 
the  Throne,  self-existent,  supreme  over  all  being. 
It  is  especially  associated  Avith  the  Divine  Kpdros 
(Col  1",  Eph  3'«)  and  irXoDros  (Ro  O^s,  Ph  4'»,  Eph 
3^®)  by  which  the  Apostle  expresses  the  irresistible 
sovereign  power  and  the  inexhaustible  fullness  of 
God  in  His  heavenly  dominion.  Believers  are 
'  strengthened  with  all  power,  according  to  the  Kpdroi 
of  his  glory,'  i.e.  in  a  measure  corresponding  with 
the  illimitable  spiritual  power  signified  by  the 
glory  which  manifests  the  Divine  King  in  His 
supra-mundane  Kingdom.  Every  need  of  oelievers 
is  supplied  'according  to  his  riches  in  glory,  in 
Christ  Jesus  '  (Ph  4"*),  i.e.  according  to  the  bound- 
less resources  which  belong  to  God  as  Sovereign 
of  the  spiritual  universe,  and  are  made  available 
through  Christ  as  Mediator.  Christ  is  raised  from 
the    dead    through    'the    glory  of    the    Father' 


(Ro  6^).  The  precise  sense  of  this  expression  has 
not  yet  been  elucidated  (in  Pss.-Sol.  xi.  9  there  is 
what  seems  to  be  a  parallel  to  it :  dvaarriaai  Kupios 
Tbv  'l(Tpai]\  iv  dv6/jMTi  rrjs  Sd^r/s  airrov),  but  it  would 
seem  tiiat  the  '  glory  of  the  Father '  is  practically 
equivalent  to  the  Kpdros,  the  sovereign  act  of  Him 
who  is  the  '  Father  of  glorv  '  (Eph  1").  To  formu- 
late is  hazardous ;  but  perhajjs  we  may  say  that  for 
St.  Paul  the  S6^a  is  the  self-revelation  of  the  tran- 
scendent God,  given  through  Christ,  here  to  faith, 
in  the  heavenly  world  to  that  more  direct  mode  of 
perce[)tion  which  we  try  to  express  by  saying  that 
laith  is  changed  to  sight. 

2.  The  Divine  glory  as  communicated.— (a)  As 
originally  given  to  man,  it  has  been  lost  (Ro  3*^). 

According  to  Rabbinic  doctrine,  when  Adam  was  created  in 
the  image  of  God,  a  ray  (Vt)  of  the  Divine  glory  shone  upon  his 
countenance,  but  among  the  six  things  lost  by  the  Fall  wns  the 
VJ,  which  went  back  to  heaven  (Weber,  JiidUche  Theologie, 
p.  222).  At  Sinai  the  VI  was  restored  to  the  children  of  Israel, 
but  was  immediately  lost  again  by  their  unfaithfulness  {ib.  p. 
275).  There  can  be  little  doubt  tliat  this  pictorial  rendering  of 
spiritual  truth  lies  behind  the  Apostle's  peculiar  mode  of  ex- 
pressing the  fact  of  man's  universal  failure  to  represent  the 
Divine  ideal  (see  Sanday-Headlam  in  loc).  The  same  allusion 
may  possibly  serve  to  explain  the  obscure  passage,  1  Co  117. 

(6)  But  the  departed  glory  is  more  than  restored 
in  Christ,  the  second  Adam,  to  whom  as  the  Image 
of  God  it  belongs  (2  Co  4^),  who  is  the  Lord  of 
Glory  (1  Co  2"),  and  in  whose  face  it  shines  forth 
in  the  darkened  hearts  of  men,  as  at  the  Creation 
light  first  shone  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  (2  Co 
4').  Here  the  conception  is  emphatically  ethical ; 
it  is  above  all  the  glory  of  Divine  character  that 
shines  from  the  face  of  Christ  and  in  the  hearts  of 
believers.  Yet  here  again  the  glory  is  not  that  of 
an  ethical  ideal  merely ;  it  is  the  full,  indivisible 
glory  of  the  Living  God  of  which  Christ  is  the 
eflulgence  (d7rai>yo(r/oca  [He  F]). 

(c)  By  Christ  as  Mediator  the  Divine  glory  is 
communicated,  not  only  to  believers,  but  to  every 
agency  by  which  He  acts:  the  Spirit  (1  P  4'^,  Epn 
31*),  the  gospel  (2  Co  4^  1  Ti  1"),  the  '  mystery  — 
God's  long-hidden  secret,  now  revealed,  the  eternal 
salvation  of  men  by  Christ  (Col  1^).  The  whole 
Christian  dispensation  is  characterized  by  '  glory ' 
(2  Co  3''"'^).  As  the  inferior  and  temporary  nature 
of  the  old  dispensation  is  typified  in  the  veiled  and 
fading  splendour  of  Moses,  its  mediator,  the  per- 
fection and  permanence  of  the  new  are  witnessed 
in  the  unveiled  and  eternal  glory  of  Christ,  which 
is  reflected  partly  here,  more  fully  hereafter,  on 
His  people  (a  merely  figurative  interpretation  is 
excluded  by  the  very  terms  eUuiv  and  5<5f  a).  Their 
transfiguration  is  in  process — already  the  'Spirit 
of  glory  and  the  Spirit  of  God'  rests  upon  them 
(1  P  A^*) ;  at  His  appearing  it  will  be  consummated 
(Ph  ^'\  Jn  3=*). 

(rf)  In  the  majority  of  cases  in  which  'glory'  is 
predicated  of  Christ,  of  Christians,  and  of  the  en- 
vironment of  their  life,  the  sense  is  distinctly 
eschatological.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  are  con- 
trasted with  their  after-glories  (1  P  I''-");  also 
those  of  believers  (1  P  4i»,  2  Th  2",  Ph  3").  As 
already  in  Jewish  eschatology,  5(ifa  is  a  technical 
term  for  the  state  of  final  salvation,  the  Heavenly 
Messianic  Kingdom  in  which  Christ  now  lives  and 
Avhich  is  to  be  brought  to  men  by  His  Parousia. 
This  is  the  'coming  glory'  (Ro  8"*),  'about  to  be 
revealed'  (1  P  5'),  the  'inheritance  of  God  in  his 
saints'  (Eph  1"*)  unto  which  they  are  prepared 
beforehand  (Ro  9=8),  called  (1  P  5'"),  led  by  Christ 
(He  2'<')  ;  it  is  their  unwithering  crown  (1  P  5"), 
the  manifestation  of  their  true  nature  (Col  3*), 
their  emancipation  from  all  evil  limitations  (Ro 
8'^')  ;  in  the  iiope  of  it  they  rejoice  (Ro  5-)  ;  for  it 
they  are  made  meet  by  the  indwelling  of  Christ 
(Col  r-"^)  and  by  the  discipline  of  the  present  (2  Co- 
4"). 


GNOSTICISM 


GNOSTICISM 


453 


II. — The  second  chief  sense  in  which  'glory 'is 
pretiicated  of  (Jod  or  Christ  is  that  which  may  be 
termed  ascriptional  in  contrast  with  essential. 
Passing  over  the  strictly  doxological  passages,  we 
note  that  '  glory '  is  given  to  God  (or  to  Christ) 
(a)  by  the  character  or  conduct  of  men :  by  the 
strength  of  their  trust  (Ro  4**),  in  eating,  drinking, 
and  ^  that  they  do  (1  Co  10*'),  by  thanksgiving 
(2  Co  4"),  brotherly  charity  (2  Co  8>»),  the  fruits 
of  righteousness  (Ph  1"),  repentance  and  confes- 
sion of  sin  (Rev  16*) ;  (b)  by  the  results  of  God's 
own  saving  work,  the  Exaltation  of  Christ  (Ph  2"), 
the  faithful  fulfilment  of  His  promises  in  Christ 
<2  Co  1*),  the  reception  of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles 
into  the  Church  (Ro  15"),  the  predestination  of 
believers  to  the  adoption  of  children  (Eph  1*),  the 
whole  accomplishment  of  that  predestination,  by 
faith,  the  sealing  of  the  Spirit,  and  final  redemp- 
tion (Eph  1"),  by  the  marriage  of  the  Lamb,  the 
final  and  eternal  union  of  Christ  with  the  re- 
deemed, sanctified,  and  glorified  Church  (Rev  19'). 

LiTZRATniK.— There  is,  so  Ur  as  known  to  the  present  writer, 
no  satisfactory  monograph  on  the  snbject,  either  in  l&igliidi  or 
in  German.  W.  Caspar!,  Die  Bedeutimgen  der  Worts^pe 
133  im  Hebraitehen,  Leipzig,  190S,  is  not  witboat  valoe  for  the 
student  of  the  NT.  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  St  Pavft  ConeeptMn 
of  the  Last  Things,  London,  1904 ;  P.  VoU,  Judiaeke  Btehato- 
iogie,  Tubingen,  1903 ;  F.  Weber,  Juditehe  Theotogie"*,  Leipzig, 
1887 ;  B.  Weiss,  BxbL  TheoL  of  ST,  Eng.  tr.3,  Edinburgh, 
1882-S3,  L  396,  ii.  1S7;  O.  Pfleiderer,  PauUnism,  Eng.  tr., 
London.  1S7T,  i.  135.  Conunentaries :  Sanday-Headlkm  (91903X 
and  Godet  (1S«6-ST)  on  Bomaru ;  Erich  Hanpt,  Die  Gefangen- 
iehaftsbri^fe',  in  ilever's  KriL-Exeget.  Kommentar,  1902;  J. 
B.  Mayor'  on  James  (31910X  Jvde,  wad  Second  Peter  (1907); 
artt.  '  Glory  '  in  EDB.  ROBEKT  LAW. 

GNOSTICISM. — Gnosticism  (Gr.  yvGxris,  'know- 
ledge ')  is  the  name  of  a  syncretistic  religion  and 
philosophy  which  flourished  more  or  less  for  four 
■centuries  alongside  Christianity,  by  which  it  was 
considerably  influenced,  under  which  it  sheltered, 
by  which  at  last  it  was  overcome.  Gnosis  is  first 
Uied  in  the  relevant  specific  sense  in  1  Ti  6** :  ypwau 
\l/€iSiI}vi'fjios — 'science  falsely  so-called.'  By  Chris- 
tian writers  the  word  'Gnostics'  was  at  first 
applied  mainly  to  one  branch  :  the  Ophites  or 
!Naasenes  (Hippol.  Philos.  v.  2  :  '  Xaasenes  who  call 
themselves  Gnostics';  cf.  Iren.  L  xL  1  ;  Epiphan. 
Hfer.  xxvi.).  But  already  in  Irenseus  the  term 
has  a  wider  application  to  the  whole  movement. 
Gnosticism  rose  to  prominence  early  in  the  2nd 
cent,  though  it  is  much  older  than  that,  and  reached 
its  height  before  the  3rd  century.  By  the  end  of 
the  latter  century  it  was  waning. 

The  above  description  will  require  justification. 
What  may  be  termed  the  popular  view  of  Gnosti- 
cism has  been  to  regard  it  as  a  growth  out  of 
Christianity,  an  overdone  theologizing  on  the  part 
of  Christians,  who  under  foreign  influences  simply 
carried  to  extreme  lengths  what  had  been  begun 
by  apostles.  Meantime  it  may  be  said  that,  in  the 
view  of  the  present  writer,  such  a  theory  is  an 
entire  misconception,  and  historically  untenable. 
Gnosticism  and  Christianity  are  two  movements 
originally  quite  independent,  so  much  so  that  it 
would  scarcely  be  an  exaggeration  to  say  that,  had 
there  been  no  Christianity,  there  could  still  have 
been  Gnosticism,  in  all  essentials  the  Gnosticism 
we  know. 

1.  Authorities. — Of  the  vast  literature  produced 
by  Gnostics  little  has  survived,  and  what  has  sur- 
vived is  almost  entirely  from  the  last  stages  of  the 
movement.  We  may  mention  as  survivals  Pistis 
Sophia,  the  Coptic -Gnostic  texts  of  the  Codex 
Brucianus,  the  two  Books  of  Jeu,  and  an  unnamed 
third  book  described  by  C.  Schmidt,  'Gnost.  Schrift- 
en  in  kopt.  Sprache  aus  dem  Codex  Brucianus' 
(TU  viii.  [ISSfe]).  Then  we  know  something  of 
works  deeply  tinged  with  Gnosticism,  such  as  the 
Acts  of  Thomas.    But  our  chief  sources  of  know- 


ledge are  the  writings  of  those  Fathers  who  oppose 
Gnosticism,  and  who  often  give  lengthy  quotations 
from  Gnostic  works.  These  fragments  have  been 
carefully  collected  by  Hilgenfeld  in  his  Kctzer- 
geschichte.  Most  important  of  the  Fathers  for  our 
purpose  are  Irenieus  {adv.  Ucer.  L  4),  Hippolytus 
(Philosopkoumena),  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Stro- 
mateis,  Exeerpta  ex  Theodoto),  Tertnllian  (adv. 
Marcionem,  adv.  Hermogenem,  adv.  Valentini- 
anas),  Epiphanius  {PaTiarion). 

2.  Main  features  of  Gnosticism. — Gnosticism  has 
often  been  described  as  a  hopelessly  tangled  mass 
of  unintelligible  fantastic  speculations,  the  product 
of  imagination  in  unrestrained  riot,  irreducible 
to  order.  In  its  various,  and  especially  its  later 
forms,  it  shows  a  wealth  of  details  which  are 
fantastic,  but,  if  we  do  not  lose  ourselves  in  too 
keen  a  search  for  minutiie,  we  shall  fiind  in  it  an 
imposing  and  quite  intelligible  system.  Prolxibly 
Gnostics  themselves  regarded  as  unessential  those 
details  which  to  us  seem  so  fantastic  (cf.  Rainy, 
Ancient  Catholic  Church,  p.  119).  Gnostic  schools 
generally  were  at  one  in  holding  a  system  the  main 
features  of  which  were  as  foUows. 

(1)  A  special  revelation. — The  word  yrOais  has 
misled  many  into  thinking  that  Gnosrics  are  essen- 
tially those  who  prize  intellectual  knowledge  as 
superior  to  faith.  By  gnosis,  however,  we  have  to 
tinderstand  not  knowledge  g^ned  by  the  use  of  the 
intellect,  but  knowledge  given  in  a  special  revela- 
tion. Not  greater  intellectual  power  than  the 
Christians  possessetl,  but  a  fuller  and  better  revela- 
tion, was  what  the  Gnostics  claimed  to  have.  They 
took  no  personal  credit  for  it ;  it  had  been  handed 
down  to  them.  Its  author  was  Christ  or  one  of 
His  apostles,  or  at  least  one  of  their  friends.  In 
several  cases  they  professed  to  be  able  to  give  the 
history  of  its  transmission.  Thus  Basilides  claims 
Glaukias,  an  interpreter  of  St.  Peter  {Strom,  ^-ii.  17 
[766],  106  f.),  or  Matthias  (Hipp.  vii.  20).  Valen- 
tinus  claims  Theodas,  an  acquaintance  of  St.  Paul's 
{Strom,  loc.  eit.).  The  Ophites  claim  Mariarane 
and  James  (Hipp.  t.  7).  Or  they  appealed  to  a 
secret  tradition  imparted  to  a  few  by  Jesus  Him- 
self (so  Irenseus  frequently). 

(2)  Dualism. — This  is  the  foundation  principle  of 
all  Gnostic  systems,  and  from  it  all  else  foUows.  In 
the  ancient  world  we  meet  two  kinds  of  dualism, 
one  in  Greek  philosophy,  the  other  in  Eastern 
religion.  Greek  dualism  was  between  ipcuwonera. 
and  vovfieva,  between  the  world  of  sense-appearance 
and  the  realm  of  real  being.  The  lower  was  but 
a  shadow  of  the  higher ;  still  it  Avas  a  copy  of  it. 

I  The  contrast  was  not,  to  any  great  extent  at  least, 
between  the  good  and  the  evil,  but  between  the 
real  and  the  empty,  formless,  unreal.  Eastern  dual- 
ism, on  the  other  hand,  drew  a  sharp  distinction  be- 
tween the  world  of  light  and  the  world  of  darkne^, 
two  eternal  antagonistic  principles  in  unceasing 
conflict.  In  Gnosticism  we  have  a  primarily  East- 
em  dualism  combined  with  the  Greek  form.  The 
world  of  goodness  and  light  is  the  Pleroma  {'  full- 
ness '),  i.e.  the  realm  of  reality  in  the  Greek  sense ; 
the  kingdom  of  evil  and  darkness  is  the  Kenoma 
( '  emptiness '),  the  phenomenal  w  orld  of  Greek  philo- 
sophy. Hence  the  Gnostic  dualism  comes  to  be 
between  God  and  matter,  two  eternal  entities,  and 
the  CXj;  (*  matter ')  is  essentially  eviL 

(3)  Demiurge. — As  the  Gnosric  surveyed  the 
world  of  matter,  he  found  patent  traces  of  law  and 
order  ruling  it.  How  did  matter,  in  itself  eril  and 
lawless,  come  to  be  so  orderly  ?  The  Gnostic  took 
the  view  of  Nature  which  J.  S.  Mill  took,  and 
argued  that  either  the  Creator  was  not  all-good  or 
He  was  not  aU-powerful.  The  Gnostic  reasoned 
that  the  world  which  with  all  its  order  is  yet  so 
imperfect  cannot  be  the  work  of  God  who  is  wholly 

i  good  and  all- wise ;  it  must  be  the  production  or 


454 


GNOSTICISM 


GNOSTICISM 


some  far  inferior  being.  The  world,  then,  it  was 
taught,  was  the  work  of  aDemiurce — a  being  distinct 
from  God.  The  character  of  this  Demiurge  was 
variously  conceived  by  ditterent  schools ;  some,  e.g. 
Cerinthus,  made  him  a  being  simply  ignorant  of 
the  higliest  God.  The  tendency  became  strong, 
however,  to  make  him  hostile  to  God,  an  enemy  of 
Light  and  Truth  (the  blasphemia  Creatoris).  The 
God  of  the  Jews  was  identified  with  this  Demiurge. 
As  to  the  origin  of  the  Demiurge,  some  held  him  to 
belong  ab  initio  to  the  realm  of  evil.  But  the  char- 
acteristic view  was  that  he  was  a  much-removed  em- 
anation from  the  Pleroma.  This  theory  of  emana- 
tions is  a  prominent  feature  of  most  of  the  systems, 
and  it  is  here  that  Gnosticism  ran  into  those  wild 
fancies  that  to  some  make  the  whole  system  so 
phantasmagoric.  The  view  was  that  from  God 
there  emanated  a  series  of  beings  called  'i^ions,' 
each  step  in  the  genealogy  meaning  a  diminution 
of  purity ;  and  the  Demiurge  was  the  creation  of 
an  Mon  far  down,  indeed  the  very  lowest  in  the 
scale.  Nature  and  human  nature,  then,  are  produc- 
tions of  a  Demiurge  either  ignorant  of,  or  positively 
hostile  to,  the  true  God.  While  in  a  few  schools 
there  was  only  one  Demiurge,  most  spoke  of  seven 
as  concerned  in  cosmogony.  The  origin  of  this 
is  clear.  The  seven  are  the  seven  astronomical 
deities  of  Perso- Babylonian  religion.  The  fusion 
of  Persian  and  Babylonian  views  resulted  in  those 
deities,  originally  beneficent,  being  conceived  of 
as  evil  (Orig.  c.  Cels.  vi.  22;  Zimmern,  KA'P  ii. 
620  ff.). 

(4)  Eedemption. — Christian  and  Gnostic  agree  in 
finding  in  this  world  goodness  fettered  and  thwarted 
by  evil.  They  differ  entirely  in  their  conception  of 
the  conflict.  The  familiar  Christian  view  is  that 
into  a  world  of  perfect  order  and  goodness  a  fallen 
angel  brought  confusion  and  evil.  The  common 
Gnostic  view  is  that  into  a  world  of  evil  a  fallen 
JEon  brought  a  spark  of  life  and  goodness.  The 
fall  of  this  JEon  is  variously  explained  in  different 
systems,  as  due  to  weakness  (the  ^on  furthest 
from  God  was  unable  to  maintain  itself  in  the 
Pleroma),  or  to  a  sinful  passion  which  induced  the 
/Eon  to  plunge  into  the  Kenoma.  Howsoever  the 
/Eon  fell,  it  is  imprisoned  in  the  Kenoma,  and 
longs  for  emancipation  and  return  to  the  Pleroma. 
With  this  longing  the  world  of  /Eons  sympathizes, 
and  the  most  perfect  yEon  becomes  a  Redeemer. 
The  Saviour  descends,  and  after  innumerable  suffer- 
ings is  able  to  lead  back  the  fallen  /Eon  to  the 
Pleroma,  where  He  unites  with  her  in  a  spiritual 
marriage.  Redemption  is  thus  primarily  a  cosmical 
thing.  But  in  redeeming  the  fallen  JEon  from 
darkness,  the  Saviour  has  made  possible  a  redemp- 
tion of  individual  souls.  To  the  Gnostic,  the 
initiated,  the  Saviour  imparts  clear  knowledge  of 
the  ideal  world  to  be  striven  after,  and  prompts 
him  so  to  strive.  The  soul  at  all  points,  before  and 
after  death,  was  opposed  by  hostile  spirits,  and  a 
great  part  of  Gnostic  teaching  consisted  in  instruct- 
ing the  soul  as  to  how  those  enemies  could  be  over- 
come. Here  comes  in  the  tangle  of  magico-mystical 
teaching,  so  large  an  element  of  the  later  schools. 
All  sorts  of  rites,  baptisms,  stigmatizings,  sealing, 
piercing  the  ears,  holy  foods  and  drinks,  etc.,  were 
enjoined.  It  was  important  also  to  know  the  names 
of  the  spirits,  and  the  words  by  which  they  could 
be  mastered.  Some  systems  taught  a  mmtitude 
of  such  'words  of  power';  in  other  systems  one 
master  word  was  given,  e.g.  caulacau  (Iren.  i. 
xxiv.  5). 

(5)  Christology.  —  Gnosticism  in  union  with 
Christianity  identified  its  Saviour,  of  course,  with 
Jesus.  As  to  the  connexion  see  below.  All  Chris- 
tianized Gnostics  held  a  peculiar  Christology. 
Jesus  was  a  pure  Spirit,  and  it  was  abhorrent  to 
thought  that  He  should  come  into  close  contact 


with  matter,  the  root  of  all  evil.  He  had  no  true 
body,  then,  but  an  appearance  which  He  assumed 
only  to  reveal  Himself  to  the  sensuous  nature  of 
man.  Some,  like  Cerinthus,  held  that  the  Saviour 
united  Himself  with  the  man  Jesus  at  the  Baptism, 
and  left  him  again  before  the  Death.  Others  held 
that  the  body  was  a  pure  phantom.  All  agreed 
that  the  Divine  Saviour  was  neither  born  nor 
capable  of  death.  Such  a  view  of  Christ's  Person 
is  Docetism,  the  antithesis  of  Ebionism. 

(6)  Anthropology. — Man  is  regarded  as  a  micro- 
cosm. His  tripartite  nature  (some  had  only  & 
bipartism) — spirit,  soul,  body — reflects  God,  Demi- 
urge, matter.  There  are  also  three  classes  of  man- 
kind— carnal  (v\iKoi),  psychic  (\pvxi-Kol),  spiritual 
(irvevfiaTiKol).  Heathen  are  hylic,  Jews  psychic, 
and  Christians  spiritual.  But  within  the  Christian 
religion  itself  tne  same  three  classes  are  found ; 
the  majority  are  only  psychic,  the  truly  spiritual 
are  the  Gnostics.     They  alone  are  the  true  Church. 

(7)  Eschatology.  —  While  Gnostics  alone  were 
certain  of  return  to  the  Kingdom  of  Light,  some 
at  least  were  disposed  to  think  charitably  of  the 
destiny  of  the  psychics,  Avho  might  attain  a  measure 
of  felicity.  Gnostics  denied  a  resurrection  of  the 
body,  as  we  should  expect.  The  whole  world  of 
matter  was  to  be  at  last  destroyed  by  fires  spring- 
ing from  its  own  bosom. 

(8)  Old  Testament. — While  there  existed  a  Juda- 
istic  Gnosticism,  represented  by  Essenes,  Gnostic 
Ebionites,  and  Cerinthus  (qq.v.),  who  with  various 
modifications  accepted  the  OT,  the  great  mass  of 
Gnostics  were  anti-Judaistic,  and  rejected  the  OT. 
This  followed  logically  from  their  identification  of 
the  God  of  the  Jews  with  the  Demiurge,  an  ignor- 
ant, and  in  some  cases  an  evil,  Being.  No  doubt 
they  found  also  some  plausible  support  in  Pauline 
anti-legalism.  We  can  see  here  what  ground  some 
schools  could  have  for  making  heroes  of  the  char- 
acters represented  as  wicked  in  the  OT.  If  it  was 
inspired  by  an  ignorant  or  wicked  Being,  truth 
would  be  found  by  inverting  its  estimates. 

Such  in  outline  is  Gnosticism  as  a  system,  though 
schools  varied  in  detail  under  every  heading  (cf. 
Harnack,  Dogmengeschichte ;  P.  A\  ernle,  Begin- 
nings of  Christianity,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1903-04  j 
Schaff,  Church  History,  '  xVnte  -  Nicene  Christi- 
anity'). 

(9)  Gnostic  cultus  and  ethic. — The  full  develop- 
ment of  these  (as  of  the  whole  system),  of  course, 
lies  outside  our  period,  but  of  the  latter  Ave  see  the 
tendencies  in  the  NT  itself  ;  and  it  is  desirable  to 
say  something  of  the  former,  to  make  our  sketch 
of  the  main  features  of  Gnosticism  complete. 

(a)  As  to  ctdtxis.  Gnosticism  produced  two  oppo- 
site movements  which  ai-e  comparable  with  puri- 
tanism  and  ritualism  respectively.  The  abhorrence 
of  matter  led  some  consistently  to  the  utmost 
simplicity  of  worship.  Some  rejected  all  sacrament* 
and  other  outward  means  of  grace,  and  the  Prodi- 
cians  rejected  even  prayer  (Epiphan.  Ha;r.  xxvi.  j 
Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  15  [304],  vii.  7  [722]).  On  the 
other  hand,  many  groups,  especially  the  ^lareosians, 
went  to  the  opposite  extreme  with  a  symbolic  and 
mystic  pomp  in  worship.  This,  while  inconsistent 
with  the  Gnostic  views  of  matter,  is  in  line  with 
the  ideas  of  magico-mj'stical  salvation  indicated 
above.  Sacraments  were  numerous,  rites  many 
and  varied.  It  seems  clear  that  they  led  the  way 
in  introducing  features  which  became  characteristic 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  They  were  distinguished 
as  hymn-writers  (Bardesanes,  Ophites,  Valentin- 
ians).  The  Basilideans  seem  to  have  been  the  first 
to  celebrate  the  festival  of  Epiphany.  The  Simon- 
ians  and  Carpocratians  first  used  images  of  Christ 
and  others  (see  Church  Histories  of  Schaft,  Kurtz, 
etc. ). 

(6)  The  ethic  also  took  two  directions— one  to- 


GNOSTICIS>[ 


GNOSTICISM 


455 


wards  an  unbridled  antinomianisni,  the  other  to- 
M'ards  a  gloomy  asceticism.  Antinoniian  Gnostics 
{e.g.  Nicolaitans,  Ophites)  held  that  sensuality  is  to 
be  overcome  by  indulging  it  to  exhaustion,  and  they 
practised  the  foulest  debaucheries.  The  Ascetics 
{e.g.  Satuminus,  Tatian)  abhorred  matter,  and 
strove  to  avoid  all  contact  'with  flesh  as  far  as 
possible.  This  let!  them  to  forbid  marriage  and 
indulgence  in  certain  kinds  of  food.  This  ethic  in 
both  branches  is  the  unfailing  outcome  of  the 
primary  dualism  characteristic  of  Gnosticism. 
Wherever  dualistic  notions  are  influential,  we  find 
this  twin  development  of  antinomianisni  and  asceti- 
cism. In  the  rsT  we  find  both  kinds  of  error 
referred  to  (see  below).  It  is  to  be  remembered 
that  neither  by  itself  is  sufficient  to  indicate 
Gnosticism.  There  are  many  sources  conceivable, 
for  asceticism  especially. 

3.  Origins. — The  older  view  was  that  Gnostics  are 
Christian  heretics,  i.e.  errorists  \\-itliin  the  Church 
who  gradually  diverged  from  normal  Christianity, 
uhder  an  impulse  to  make  a  philosophy  of  their 
religion.  To  fill  up  the  blanks  of  the  Christian 
revelation,  they  adopted  heathen  (mainly  Greek) 
speculations.  Mosheim  was  among  the  first  to 
perceive  that  the  roots  of  what  is  peculiar  in  Gnos- 
ticism are  to  be  sought  in  Eastern  rather  than  in 
Greek  speculation.  In  recent  times  there  has 
taken  place  a  thorough  examination  of  all  Gnostic 
remains,  and  knowledge  of  Eastern  speculation 
has  advanced.  The  result  of  the  two-fold  investi- 
gation has  been  to  show  that  Gnosticism  is  far 
more  closely  in  aflinity  with  Eastern  thought  than 
had  been  imagined,  not  only  in  its  deviations  from 
Christianity,  but  as  a  whole. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  age  with  which  we 
deal  wsis  marked  by  nothing  more  strongly  than 
by  its  syncretism.  All  the  faiths  and  philosophies 
of  the  world  met,  and  became  fluid,  so  to  say. 
Strange  combinations  resulted,  and  were  dissolved 
again  for  lack  of  something  round  which  they 
might  crystalli2e.  Alike  in  philosophy  and  re- 
ligion, attempts  were  made  to  establish  by  syn- 
cretism a  universal  system  out  of  the  confusion. 
Gnosticism  owes  its  being  to  that  syncretism.  In 
view  of  the  lack  of  definite  information,  any 
attempt  to  trace  or  reconstruct  its  actual  historj- 
mtist  be  made  with  diffidence.  Probably  we  should 
regard  its  primary  impulse  as  philosophical  rather 
than  religious.  It  was  an  answer  to  the  problem. 
Whence  comes  evil  ?  (Tert.  de  Prcesc.  Ecer.  vii. ; 
Euseb.  HE  v.  27  ;  Epiphan.  Hcer.  xxiv.  6).  This 
led  to  the  other  question.  What  is  the  origin  of  the 
world  ?  Oriental  thought  identified  the  two  ques- 
tions. In  the  origin  of  the  world  was  involved  the 
existence  of  exW.  A  full  explanation  of  the  one 
included  an  explanation  of  the  other. 

In  Perso-Ba  by  Ionian  sj-ncretism,  we  take  it, 
Gnosticism  has  it^  primary  root,  and  from  that 
alone  many  of  its  features  may  be  plausibly  derived. 
To  this  is  to  be  added  some  influence  of  Judaism. 
There  was  a  syncretistic  Judaism  of  varied  char- 
acter. We  know  definitely  of  three  forms :  (1) 
Essenic  (see  art.  EssEXES)-;  (2)  Samaritan,  which 
had  been  going  on  for  centuries  B.C.,  and  from 
which  sprang  the  system  of  Simon  Magus  (with 
his  predecessor  Dositheus,  and  his  successor  Men- 
ander),  who  is  distinguished  by  the  Fathers  as  the 
parent  of  Gnosticism  ;  (3)  Alexandrian,  represented 
mainly  by  Philo,  who  produced  an  amalgam  of 
Judaism  with  Greek  philosophy.  Probably  it 
would  be  justifiable  to  add  as  a  fourth  example  the 
Jewisli  ^abbala.  It  is  a  body  of  writings  unfold- 
ing a  traditional  and,  partly  at  least,  esoteric 
doctrine.  Its  most  characteristic  doctrines  are 
found  also  in  the  two  Gnostic  leaders,  Basilides 
and  Valentinus  (A.  Franck,  La  Kabbah,  Paris, 
1S43,  p.  350  fl'.).     It  is  difficult,  however,  to  prove 


that  the  Ij^abbala  is  not  later  than  Gnosticism, 
though  there  is  practical  certainty  that  it«  history 
was  a  long  one  before  it  took  final  shape. 

A  third  and  very  important  element  manifest 
in  the  fully  developed  Gnostic  systems  is  Greek 
philosophy.  Genetically,  then.  Gnosticism  may  be 
defined  as  largely  a  syncretistic  system  rising  from 
Perso- Babylonian  religion,  modified  to  some  extent, 
difficult  to  estimate,  by  Judaism,  and  in  some 
particulars  borrowing  from,  and  as  a  whole  clarified 
by  contact  with,  Greek  philosophy.  These  ele- 
ments might  be  efl"ective  in  very  varied  degrees, 
and  produced  varied  systems  as  this  or  that  element 
predominated.  But  from  those  three  sources,  apart 
altogether  from  Christianity,  Gnosticism  in  all 
essentials  may  be  derived.  And  all  three  were  in 
active  interaction  before  the  appearance  of  Chris- 
tianity. An  important  consideration  follows,  viz. 
that  it  is  absolutely  no  proof  of  a  late  date  for  any 
NT  writing  that  it  contains  allusions  to  even  a 
comparatively  well-developed  Gnosticism. 

4.  Connexion  with  Christianity. — How  is  this 
connexion  to  be  conceived  or  explained?  What 
did  Gnosticism  owe  to  Christianity  ?  Before  Chris- 
tianity we  picture  Gnosticism  as  vague,  fluid,  un- 
stable. When  Christianity  was  thrown  into  the 
mass  of  floating  opinions  in  the  ancient  world,  it 
afforded  the  vague  Gnostic  movements  a  point 
round  which  they  could  crystallize  and  attain  a 
measure  of  permanence  and  definiteness,  so  that 
out  of  more  or  less  loose  speculations  systems  could 
be  built.  Men  imbued  with  Gnostic  views  (the 
loose  elements  of  the  system  described)  would  easily 
find  points  of  resemblance  between  themselves  and 
Christianity.  It  dealt  in  a  way  with  the  very 
problems  that  interested  the  Gnostic.  And  in 
apostolic  teaching,  especially  in  St.  Paul,  there 
were  many  points  which  it  took  Uttle  ingenuity  to 
transform  into  Gnostic  views.  The  world  was  to 
be  overcome ;  it  lay  in  wickedness ;  the  flesh  was 
to  be  mortified ;  there  was  a  law  in  the  members 
warring  against  the  spirit.  Divorced  from  the 
general  teaching  of  the  apostles,  this  could  be 
claimed  as  just  the  Gnostic  position.  It  is,  we 
take  it,  a  misconception  to  regard  such  apostolic 
teaching  as  the  starting-point  of  Gnosticism.  In 
our  view  Gnosticism  had  already  a  considerable 
history,  and  had  attained  a  considerable  develop- 
ment as  a  system,  before  Christianity  appeared. 
But  in  such  teaching  Gnosticism  found  points  of 
attachment  to  Christianity,  and  other  points  might 
be  adduced.  Gnosticism  then  came  to  shelter 
within  the  Church,  never  learning  her  essential 
spirit,  but  going  on  its  own  evolution.  Growing 
at  first  from  distinct  roots  of  its  own,  it  twined 
itself  about  the  Church  and  became  a  parasite. 

It  is  not  easy  to  answer  the  question,  Is  the 
soteriology  of  Gnosticism  borrow^  from  Christi- 
anity, or  is  it  too  an  independent  thing?  Some 
points  are  quite  plain  which  may  justify  our 
accepting  the  latter  alternative.  It  is  clear  that 
between  the  Gnostic  Zorr^p  (Saviour)  and  the  his- 
torical Jesus  there  is  no  discernible  likeness.  The 
redemption  of  the  fallen  .Eon  by  the  Soter  has 
nothing  to  do  >vith  a  historical  appearance  on  earth 
and  in  time.  The  Gnostic  redemption-story  is  a 
myth,  an  allegory,  not  a  historical  narrative.  But 
under  the  influence  of  Christianity,  laborious  at- 
tempts were  made  to  bring  this  soteriology  into 
union  with  the  Christian  account  of  the  historical 
Jesus.  The  attempt  was  not  a  success.  '  In  this 
patchwork  the  joins  are  everywhere  stiU  clearly  to 
be  recognized'  (EBr^  xii.  [1910]  157»).  Indeed 
some  Gnostics  made  no  secret  of  the  difference 
between  their  Soter  and  the  Christ  of  ordinary 
Christians — the  Soter  was  for  Gnostics  alone,  Jesus 
Christ  for  'Psychics'  (Iren.  I.  vi.  1).  The  fact 
that  one  school  required  its  members  to  curse  Jesus 


456 


GNOSTICISM 


GNOSTICISM 


is  not  without  significance  in  the  same  direction. 
The  most  probable  view  is  that  Gnosticism  in  all 
its  elements  was  independent  of  Christianity,  but 
strove  to  put  over  itself  a  Christian  guise,  and  re- 
present itself  as  a  fuller  Christianity.  But  even 
the  master  minds  which  fornuilated  the  great 
systems  of  the  2nd  cent,  were  baJUed  to  conceal 
effectively  what  could  not  be  hidden,  the  essenti- 
ally alien  nature  and  origin  of  their  speculative 
flights. 

S.  Allusions  in  the  NT.— In  the  NT  there  are 
several  clear  indications  that  the  invasion  of 
Christianity  by  Gnosticism  is  already  in  progress. 

(1)  We  note  regarding  Simon  Magus  (Ac  8^'-) 
only  this,  that  in  the  narrative  we  have  an  allegory 
of  what  we  conceive  the  relation  of  Gnosticism  to 
Christianity  to  have  been.  He  was  attracted  to  the 
apostles,  was  baptized,  and  still  remained  in  the 
'  bond  of  iniquity.'  For  this  alone  he  may  well  be 
named  the  father  of  the  Gnostics  (see  art.  SiMON 
Magus). 

(2)  There  are  some  passages  which  seem  not  only 
to  be  designed  to  state  the  Christian  position,  but  to 
be  directed  against  errors  characteristic  of  Gnosti- 
cism :  (a)  against  Docetism ;  most  striking  is  He 
214-18 ,  (J)  against  the  demiurgic  idea  (Jn  1*,  He  1^ 
Col  li««-). 

(3)  A  definite  polemic  against  errorists  who  are 
almost  certainly  Gnostics  is  found  in  the  following 
passages : 

(a)  Colossians. — The  errorists  in  question  claim 
a  superior  knowledge  (2^*^'*),  pay  great  regard  to 
angels — beings  intermediate  between  God  and  man 
<v.^*) — teach  asceticism  (vv.-^-^s) ;  and  probably  their 
demiurgic  notion  is  refuted  in  1^^.  These  are  the 
«lements  of  Gnosticism,  and  most  likely  the  Colos- 
sian  errorists  are  Judaistic  Gnostics  of  the  same 
type  as  Cerinthus. 

(6)  Pastoral  Epistles. — The  references  to  Gnosti- 
cism are  so  clear  here  that  some  find  in  them 
a  main  ground  for  assigning  a  late  date  to  the 
Epistles.  Gnosticism  has  already  appropriated 
the  name  yvOxn^  (1  Ti  5^").  The  errorists  profess 
a  superior  knowledge  (Tit  P^  2  Ti  3'').  Their  pro- 
fane and  vain  babblings  (2  Ti  2^'),  old  wives'  fables 
(1  Ti  4^),  foolish  questions  and  genealogies  (Tit  3®), 
denial  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  (2  Ti  2^^), 
asceticism  and  depreciation  of  'creatures'  (1  Ti 
4*-*),  and  in  other  cases  their  antinomianism  (2  Ti 
5*,  Tit  P®)— all  are  tokens  of  Gnosticism. 

(c)  Peter  and  Jude.  —  The  gross  errorists  de- 
nounced in  2  P  2  and  Jude  show  close  affinity  with 
the  Ophite  sect,  the  Cainites  (q.v.)  (Hippol.  viii. 
20;  Strom,  vii.  17  [767];  Epiph.  Hcer.  xxxviii.). 
They  made  Cain  their  first  hero ;  and,  regarding 
the  God  of  the  Jews  as  an  evil  being,  and  the 
Scriptures  as,  in  consequence,  a  perversion  of  truth, 
honoured  all  infamous  characters  from  Cain  to 
Iscariot,  who  alone  of  the  apostles  had  the  secret 
of  true  knowledge.  Naturally,  they  practised  the 
wildest  antinomianism,  holding  it  necessary  for 
perfect  knowledge  to  have  practical  experience  of 
all  sins.  The  '  filthy  dreamers,'  who '  speak  evil  of 
dignities '  and  '  go  in  the  way  of  Cain,'  are  cer- 
tainly closely  allied  to  this  position. 

(d)  1  John. — There  is  throughout  a  contrast  be- 
tween true  knowledge  and  false.  Beyond  reason- 
able doubt  the  Epistle  has  mainly,  if  not  exclu- 
sively, Cerinthus  in  view.  He  is  interesting  in  the 
history  of  heresy  for  his  combination  of  Ebionite 
Christology  with  a  Gnostic  idea  of  thfe  Creator 
<see  art.  CERINTHUS).  It  is  mainly  the  former 
that  is  in  view  in  1  John  (2^"  4^^-),  but  2'''*  are 
directed  against  Gnostic  antinomianism. 

(e)  Pcevdation. — Here  we  have  definite  mention 
of  a  Gnostic  sect,  by  name  the  Nicolaitans  (2"-  '*). 
They  derived  their  name  from  Nicolas  of  Ac  6'. 
'  They  lead  lives  of  unrestrained  indulgence,  .  .  . 


teaching  that  it  is  a  matter  of  indifierence  to 
practise  adultery,  and  to  eat  things  sacrificed  to 
idols'  (Iren.  Hcer.  I.  xxvi.  3).  Clem.  Alex.  (Strom. 
iii.  4  [436  f.])  sajy^s  that  the  followers  of  Nicolas 
misunderstood  his  saying  that  'we  must  fight 
against  the  flesh  and  abuse  it.'  What  Nicolas 
meant  to  be  an  ascetic  principle,  they  took  to  be 
an  antinomian  one. 

We  have  notice  of  another  branch  of  antinomian 
Gnosticism  in  2-",  where  the '  prophetess  Jezebel '  in 
Thyatira  is  '  teaching  and  seducing '  the  faithful. 

Gnosticism  thus  plays  no  inconsiderable  part  in 
the  NT  itself.  It  is,  however,  to  exaggerate  that, 
to  find  references  to  Gnosticism  in  verses  where 
terms  occur  that  afterwards  became  technical  terms 
in  Gnostic  systems,  viz.  pleronia  (e.g.  Eph  1**), 
won  (e.g.  Eph  2^),  gliosis  (frequently).  These  had 
meaning  before  Gnostic  systems  made  them  pecu- 
liarly their  own,  and  the  passages  in  question  may 
be  understood  without  any  reference  to  Gnosticism. 

6.  Concluding  remarks. — If  it  be  difficult  to  in- 
dicate accurately  what  Gnosticism  owed  to  Chris- 
tianity, it  is  no  less  difficult  to  determine  to  what 
extent  Christianity  was  permanently  influenced  by 
Gnosticism.  Theological  preiudice  will  always 
afiect  the  answer,  and  some  will  find  in  the  Christo- 
logical  and  other  definitions  of  (Ecumenical 
Councils  a  fruit  of  what  Gnostics  began.  It  is 
easy  to  see  what  indirect  service  Gnosticism 
rendered  Christianity.  In  opposition  to  Gnosticism 
the  Church  was  compelled  (a)  to  develop  into 
clear  system  her  own  creed ;  the  true  yvQcrti  had 
to  be  opposed  to  the  false ;  (b)  to  determine  what 
writings  were  to  be  regarded  as  authoritative  ; 
against  the  Gnostic  schools,  each  with  its  own 
pretended  special  revelation,  the  Church  formed  a 
Canon  of  what  were  generally  regarded  as  authentic 
apostolic  writings ;  (c)  to  seek  for  a  just  view  of 
the  relation  of  Judaism  to  Christianity,  and  of  the 
permanent  value  of  the  OT  which  Gnostics  re- 
jected. This  is,  it  may  be  said,  an  unsolved  prob- 
lem still.  In  opposition  to  Gnosticism  the  Church 
was  perhaps  betrayed  into  the  other  extreme,  as, 
to  secure  permanent  authority  for  every  part 
of  the  OT,  a  fanciful  system  of  allegorizing  was 
adopted. 

As  to  direct  influence,  we  have  indicated  above 
that  Gnostics  led  the  way  in  some  developments  of 
worship  which  found  a  permanent  place  in  the 
Catholic  Church.  Probably  also  they  led  the  way 
to  the  magical  conception  of  Sacraments  whicli 
became  so  prominent.  The  clearness  with  which 
the  false  character  of  Gnosticism  was  perceived, 
and  the  successful  struggle  against  it,  are  among 
the  most  remarkable  and  praiseworthy  things  in 
the  history  of  the  early  Church.  It  remains  to  be 
said  that  the  various  phenomena  which  constitute 
Gnosticism  have  appeared  again  and  again  in  the 
history  of  the  Church  since  then.  Its  speculative 
flights  into  regions  where  revelation  does  not  guide 
and  reason  cannot  follow  ;  its  special  new  revela- 
tions ;  its  view  of  the  world  as  essentially  evil  in 
itself ;  its  stern  asceticism  or  antinomian  excess — all 
have  appeared  repeatedly. 

Literature.— J.  A.  W.  Neander,  Die  genetUche  F.nlxciekeU 
U7ig  der  vomehmsten  gnostisehen  Systeme,  Berlin,  1818;  F._  C. 
Baur,  Die  chrisUiche  Gnotis,  Tiibintren,  lb35  ;  R.  A.  Lipsius, 
Gnosticismm,  Leipzig,  1860  ;  H.  L.  Mansel,  Gnostic  Heresies 
of  the  Ist  and  Snd  Centuries,  London,  1875  ;  A.  Hilgrenfeld,  Die 
ketzergeschichte  des  Urehristenthums,  Leipzig;,  1884  ;  W.  Anz, 
Ursprung  des  Gnostizismus,  do.  1897 ;  R.  Liechtenhahn,  Die 
Offenbarung  im  Gnosticismru,  Gottingen,  1901 ;  E.  de  Faye, 
Introduction  d  V6tude  du  qnosticisme  au  ii'  et  au  lii^'  sii'clf, 
Paris,  1903  ;  W.  Bousset,  Uauptprobleme  der  Gnosis,  Gotting- 
en, 1907 ;  A.  Harnack,  History  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  London, 
1894-99 ;  F.  Loofs,  Leitf.  zum  Sttidiiim der  D-"''"--"'-"->-  ''-hte^, 
Halle,  1893;    R.   Seeberg,   Uhrbuch   der   1  hte, 

Leipzig,  1895-98;  Church  Histories  ot  P.  Sc  ;rgh, 

lS8;MKi),  W.   Moeller  (Eng.   tr.,  I/jndon,   1  .  -  ..   G.  P. 

Fisher  (do.  1894),  R.  Rainy  (Ancient  Catholic  Chxirch.  Edin- 
burgh, 1902).  W.  D.  NiVEN. 


GOAD 


GOD 


457 


GOAD  {Kiirrpov). — This  was  a  pole  about  8  ft.  in 
lenf^th,  carried  by  Eastern  plouglinien.  Armed  at 
one  end  with  a  spike  and  at  the  other  with  a 
chisel-shaped  blade,  it  was  used  now  to  urge  the 
yoked  beasts  to  move  faster,  now  to  clean  the 
share.  Only  one  hand  being  required  to  hold  and 
guide  the  light  plough,  the  other  was  free  to  wield 
the  goad.  The  kicking  of  oxen  against  the  goad 
(AV  the  pricks)  suggested  a  popular  metaphor  for 
futile  and  painful  resistance — cKX-npop  <t<h  vpin  xiv- 
Tpa  XaKTii^ew  (Ac  26" ;  all  uncials  omit  these  words 
in  9*).  The  same  figure  is  found  in  Pind.  Pi/th. 
ii.  173 ;  .<Esch.  From.  323 ;  Eurip.  Bacch.  795 ; 
Terence,  Phorm.  L  iL  28.         James  Strahan. 

GOAT  (T/xl-yoj). — ^The  Greek  word  signifies  a  '  he- 
goat  '  (Lat.  hireus),  and  is  used  in  the  LXX  as  the 
equivalent  of  the  Heb.  words  twe,  Tjy,  r:B  {all= 
*  he-goat ').  The  only  NT  references  to  the  '  goat ' 
outside  the  Gospels  are  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Heb- 
rews (9^  "• "  liH).  In  9^-  *»  it  is  associated  with 
calves  (i.e.  bullocks),  and  there  is  doubtless  an 
allusion  in  these  two  passages  to  the  sacrificial 
rites  of  the  Day  of  Atonement.  On  this  occasion, 
the  high  priest  oflered  up  a  bullock  as  a  sin-oftering 
for  himself  (Lv  16^^),  and  a  goat  as  a  sin-offering 
for  the  people  (Lv  16").  The  usual  phrase  to  de- 
signate sacrifices  in  general  is  used  in  9"  10*,  *  bulls 
and  goats '  or  'goats  and  buUs.' 

The  general  meaning  of  9^^*^  is  quite  clear. 
The  writer  says:  'if — and  you  admit  this — the 
blood  of  goats  and  bullocks,  as  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  cotild  sanctify  unto  the  cleanness  of 
the  flesh,  how  much  more  could  the  Blood  of 
•Christ,  the  Divine-Human  sacrifice,  cleanse  the 
■conscience  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God ! ' 

In  10*  the  -n-riter  abandons  his  rhetorical  style 
and  categorically  asserts  that  '  it  is  impossible  for 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  to  take  away  sins.' 
He  here  uses  the  general  term  for  sacrifices,  and 
thereby  denies  that  any  of  the  sacrifices  of  the  old 
Xaw  ever  did  or  ever  could  '  take  away  sins.' 

Many  difi'erent  breeds  of  domesticated  goats  are 
-known  in  Syria,  the  most  common  of  which  is  the 
^mamber  or  ordinary  black  goat.  These  animals 
attain  a  large  size,  and  pendent  ears  about  a  foot 
long  are  their  most  characteristic  feature.  Their 
peculiar  ears  are  apparently  alluded  to  in  Am  3^. 
They  generally  have  horns  and  short  beards.  An- 
other breed  found  in  N.  Palestine  is  the  angora, 
which  has  very  long  hair.  Goats  supplied  most  of 
the  mUk  of  Palestine  (cf.  Pr  27^,  and  the  young 
were  often  killed  for  food,  being  regarded  as  specif 
-delicacies,  as  they  are  to-day  (cf.  Gn  27^  Lk  15'^). 
Their  long  sUky  hair  was  woven  into  curtains, 
•coverings  of  tents,  etc  (cf.  Ex  35*,  Nu  31^),  and 
as  goat's-hair  cloth,  called  cilicium,  was  maide  in 
the  province  of  which  Tarsus,  the  birth-place  of 
St.  Paul,  was  the  capital,  and  was  exported  thence 
to  be  used  in  tent-making,  it  is  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Apostle  was  engaged  in  this  very 
trade  (Ac  IS*).  Their  skins  were  sometimes  used 
as  clothing,  and  doubtless  the  hairy  mantle  of  the 
prophets  (cf.  Zee  13*)  was  made  of  this  material 
(cf.  also  He  11^),  but  they  were  more  often  con- 
verted into  bottles.  The  early  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  (cf.  Gn  21i9,  Jos  9*,  1  S  25»»,  Mt  9^^  Mk 
2^,  Lk  3^),  just  like  the  modem  Bedouins,  utilized 
the  skins  of  their  cattle  and  their  docks  for  the 
piirpose  of  storing  oil,  wine,  milk,  or  water,  as 
the  case  might  be.  The  animals  whose  skins  were 
generally  chosen  for  the  purpose  were  the  sheep 
and  the  goat  as  at  the  present  day,  while  the  skin 
of  the  ox  was  used  for  very  large  bottles.  The 
legs,  or  at  all  events  the  lower  part  of  the  legs,  to- 
gether with  the  head,  are  first  removed,  the  animal 
is  next  skinned  from  the  neck  downwards,  great 
•care  being  taken  to  avoid  tearing  the  skin ;  all 


apertures  aie  then  carefully  closed,  and  the  neck 
is  fitted  with  a  leather  thong  which  ser\'es  as  a 
cork. 

In  view  of  the  numerous  uses  which  the  goat 
has  been  made  to  subserve,  it  is  not  surprising  to 
find  that  it  was  highly  valued  in  ancient  times 
even  as  it  is  now.  A  large  part  of  the  wealth  of 
Laban  and  of  the  wages  he  paid  to  Jacob  consisted 
of  goats,  while  '  a  thousand  goats  *  is  mentioned 
as  one  of  the  principal  items  in  Nabal's  property 
(1  S  25').  They  thrive  in  hilly  and  scantily 
watered  districts,  where  they  are  much  more 
abundant  than  sheep,  and  pasture  where  there  is 
much  brush-wood,  the  luxuriant  grasses  of  the 
plains  being  '  too  succulent  for  their  taste '  (Tris- 
tram in  Smith  s  DB'  1200").  They  are  largely 
responsible  for  the  barrenness  of  the  hills,  and  the 
general  absence  of  trees  in  Palestine. 

LiTEKATUSE. — H.  B.  Tristram,  Natural  History  of  tJie  Biblei'>, 
1911,  p.  88ff. ;  Smith's  DB,  ».c. ;  SffP  viL  6;  E.  C  Wick- 
ham,  2%«  J^piiOe  to  t^  ^ebrmet,  1910,  p.  68 ;  B.F.  Westcott, 
TheEputUtotheHebrem^.lBS&yf.  258  fl.;  R.  Lyddeker,  in 
Mmray's DB, «.«. ;  HDBu.  196 1 ;  SDB, p. 298 1.  ; EBiii.  17-I-2 ff. ; 
J.  C.  Geikie,2Vtego^XaiMt  and  flte  .Bafe.l903,jnp.  40, 80-S3, 113. 
P.  S.  P.  Handcock. 

GOD. — 1.  General  aspects  of  the  apostolic  doc- 
trine.— The  object  of  this  article  is  to  investigate 
the  doctrine  of  Grod  as  it  is  presented  in  the  Chris- 
tian writings  of  the  apostolic  period  ;  but,  in  view 
of  the  scope  of  this  Dictionary,  the  teaching  of  our 
Lord  Himself  and  the  witness  of  the  Gospel  records 
will  be  somewhat  lightly  passed  over. 

The  existence  of  God  is  universally  assumed  in  the 
NT.  The  arguments  that  can  be  adduced,  e.g.  from 
the  consent  of  mankind  and  from  the  existence 
of  the  world,  are  only  intended  to  show  that,  the 
belief  that  God  is  is  reasonable,  not  to  prove  it  as 
a  mathematical  proposition.  But  undoubtedly  the 
fact  that  the  doctrine  ia  by  such  arguments  sho\\-n 
to  be  probable  will  lead  man  to  receive  with  more 
readiness  the  revealed  doctrine  of  Gods  existence. 
The  biblical  writers,  however,  did  not,  in  either 
dispensation,  concern  themselves  to  prove  a  fact 
which  no  one  doubted-  Ps  10'  14^  53^  are  no  excep- 
tions to  this  general  consent.  The  tmgodly  man 
(the  '  fool ')  who  said  in  his  heart '  There  is  no  GJod,' 
did  not  deny  God's  existence,  but  His  interfering 
in  the  aflairs  of  men.  'The  wicked  .  .  .  saith. 
He  ^\"ill  not  require  it.  All  his  thoughts  are. 
There  is  no  God.* 

The  apostolic  doctrine  of  God  as  we  have  it  in 
Acts,  Revelation,  and  the  Epistles  does  not  come 
direct  from  the  OT.  It  presupposes  a  teaching  of 
our  Lord.  At  first  this  teaching  was  in  the  main 
handed  down  by  the  oral  method,  and  the  Epistles, 
or  at  least  most  of  them,  do  not  depend  on  any  of 
our  four  Gospels,  though  it  is  quite  likely  that 
there  were  some  written  evangelic  records  in  exist- 
ence even  when  the  earliest  of  the  Epistles  were 
written  (Lk  1^).  St.  Paul,  writing  on  certain  points 
of  Christian  teaching,  tells  us  that  he  handed  on 
what  he  himself  had  received  (1  Co  II'- ^  15* ;  the 
expression  dxd  rod  Kvpiov  in  11"  probably  does  not 
mean  '  from  the  Lord  without  human  mediation ' : 
it  was  tradition  handed  on  from  Christ). 

In  approaching  the  apostolic  \*'ritings  we  must 
bear  in  mind  two  points,  (a)  The  XT  was  not 
intended  to  be  a  compendium  of  theology.  The 
Epistles,  for  example,  were  written  for  the  imme- 
diate needs  of  the  time  and  place,  doubtless  without 
any  thought  arising  in  their  writers'  minds  of  their 
being  in  the  future  canonical  writings  of  a  new 
volume  of  the  Scriptures.  We  should  not,  therefore, 
a  priori  expect  to  find  in  them  any  formulated  state- 
ment of  doctrine,  (b)  There  is  a^considerable  differ- 
ence between  the  Epistles  on  the  one  hand  and  the 
Gospels  on  the  other  in  the  presentation  of  doctrine. 
The  Gospels  are  narratives  of  historical  events,  and 
in  them,  therefore,  the  giadual  unfolding  of  Jesus' 


458 


GOD 


GOD 


teaching,  as  in  fact  it  was  given,  is  duly  set  forth. 
This  is  especially  the  case  with  the  Synoptics, 
though  even  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  there  is  a  certain 
amount  of  progress  of  doctrine.  At  the  lirst  the 
doctrines  taught  by  our  Lord  are  set  forth,  so  to 
speak,  in  their  infancy,  adapted  to  the  comprehen- 
sion of  V)eginners  ;  and  they  are  gradually  unfolded 
as  the  Gospel  story  proceeds.  In  the  Epistles,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  writer  treats  his  correspondents 
■  as  convinced  Christians,  and  therefore,  though  he 
instructs  them,  he  plunges  at  once  in  medias  res. 
There  is  no  progress  of  doctrine  from  the  first 
chapter  of  an  Epistle  to  the  last. 

The  question  we  have  to  ask  ourselves  is,  What 
did  the  apostles  teach  about  God  ?  Or  rather,  in 
order  not  to  beg  any  question  (since  it  is  obviously 
impossible  in  this  article  to  discuss  problems  of 
date  and  authorship),  we  must  ask,  What  do  the 
books  of  tiie  NT  teach  about  God  ? 

2.  Christian  development  of  the  OT  doctrine  of 
God. — It  is  an  essential  doctrine  of  the  NT  writers 
that  a  new  and  fuller  revelation  was  given  by  the 
Incarnation  and  by  the  fresh  outpouring  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

(a)  The  revelation  by  the  Incarnate. — That  the 
Son  had  made  a  revelation  of  old  by  the  part  which 
He  took  in  creation  (see  below,  6  (e))  is  not  explicitly 
stated,  but  is  implied  by  lio  l'^,  which  says  that 
creation  is  a  revelation  of  God's  everlasting  power 
and  Divinity  (^etdrijs,' Divine  nature  and  properties,' 
whereas  OeoTTj^  is  '  Divine  Personality '  [see  Sanday- 
Headlam,  ICC,  1902,  in  loc.]).  But  the  Incarnate 
reveals  God  in  a  fuller  sense  than  ever  before : 
'God  .  .  .  hath  at  the  end  of  these  days  spoken 
unto  us  in  [his]  Son'  (He  1"').  The  revelation  by 
the  Incarnation  is  a  conception  specially  emphasized 
in  the  Johannine  writings,  not  only  in  the  Gospel, 
but  also  in  the  First  Epistle  and  the  Apocalypse. 
The  Prologue  of  the  Gospel  says  that  '  God  only 
begotten '  (or  '  the  only  begotten  Son '  [see  below, 
6  (c)])  '  which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  hath 
declared  him  '  (Jn  P*).  '  What  he  hath  seen  and 
heard,  of  that  he  beareth  witness '  (3*-).  The  reve- 
lation of  the  Son  is  the  revelation  of  the  Father 
(14^-").  The  'life  which  was  with  the  Father' 
was  manifested  and  gave  a  message  about  God 
(1  Jn  1^'^).  The  revelation  of  eternal  life  which  is 
in  the  Son  was  made  when  God  bore  witness  con- 
cerning His  Son  (S^"'-)-  This  new  and  fuller  revela- 
tion is  that  with  which  the  Apocalyptist  begins 
his  book  (Rev  V) :  '  the  revelation  (apocalypse)  of 
Jesus  Christ,  which  God  gave  him  to  shew  unto 
his  seivants '  (see  Swete,  Com.  in  loc,  who  gives 
good  reasons  for  thinking  that  the  revelation  made 
by  Jesus,  rather  than  that  made  about  Jesus,  is 
meant ;  cf.  Gal  P"), 

We  find  the  same  teaching,  though  in  a  some- 
what less  explicit  form,  in  the  Pauline  Epistles. 
Christ  is  '  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of 
God.  .  .  made  unto  uswisdom  from  God' (1  Col-*- 2"). 
In  Him  '  are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge  hidden '  (Col  2^).  In  the  new  '  dispensa- 
tion of  the  fulness  of  the  times'  God  has  'made 
known  unto  us  the  mystery  of  his  will '  (Eph  1*'-, 
a  passage  where  'mystery  specially  conveys  the 
idea  of  a  hidden  thing  revealed,  rather  than  one 
kept  secret).  To  St.  Paul  personally  Jesus  made 
a  revelation  (Gal  l''*;  see  above).  That  our  Lord 
made  a  new  revelation  is  also  stated  in  the  Synop- 
tics :  '  Neither  doth  any  know  the  Father,  save 
the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to 
reveal  [him] '  (Mt  ll-"^;  cf.  Lk  10~).  So  in  Acts, 
Jesus  bids  the  disciples  'wait  for  the  promise  of 
the  Father,  which  [said  he]  ye  heard  from  me '  (1*) ; 
and  St.  Peter  (10^")  calls  tne  new  revelation  '  the 
word  which  [God]  sent  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
preaching  good  tidings  of  peace  by  Jesus  Christ 
(he  is  Lord  of  all).'    Sanday  {HDB  ii.  212)  points 


out  that  the  pa.ssages  about  our  Lord  being  the 
'  image '  of  God,  and  '  in  the  form  of  God  (see 
below,  6  (c)),  express  the  fact  that  He  brings  to- 
men's  minds  the  essential  nature  of  God. 

(b)  The  revelation  by  the  Holy  Ghost. — The  new 
revelation  of  the  nature  of  God  by  the  full  out- 
pouring of  the  Spirit,  in  a  manner  unknown  even 
m  the  old  days  of  prophetical  inspirati<jn,  is  also, 
as  far  as  the  promise  is  concerned,  a  favourite 
Johannine  conception  (see  especially  Jn  14-16). 
The  promise  is,  however,  alluded  to  by  St.  Luke 
(Lk  24*",  Ac  1*),  and  its  fulfilment  is  dwelt  on  at 
great  length  in  Acts,  which  may  be  called  the 
'Gospel  of  the  Holy  Spirit,'  and  in  which  the 
action  of  the  Third  Person  in  guiding  the  disciples 
into  all  the  truth  (Jn  16"*)  is  described  very  fully. 
Jesus  gave  commandment  to  the  apostles  '  through 
the  Holy  Ghost'  (Ac  1*).  The  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  is  described,  e.gr.,  in2i"-  8*  10'»  11"  13n6«'-  20» 
2P',  though  these  passages  speak  rather  of  the 

{)ractical  leading  of  the  disciples  in  the  conduct  of 
ife  rather  than  of  the  teaching  of  the  truth.  St. 
Paul  says  that '  tlie  things  which  eye  saw  not '  (he 
seems  to  be  paraphrasing  Is  64'*)  have  been  revealed 
by  God  '  unto  us '  (riM'«'  is  emphatic  here)  '  through 
the  Spirit,  for  the  Spirit  searcheth  all  things,  yea, 
the  deep  things  of  God '  ( 1  Co  2»'- ;  so  v. '»),  It  is  the 
Holy  Spirit  only  who  can  teach  us  that  '  Jesus  is 
Lord' (123). 

3.  Attributes  of  God  in  the  NT. — Before  consider- 
ing the  great  advance  on  the  OT  ideas  made  by  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  God,  we  may  notice  certain 
Divine  attributes  which  are  emphasized  in  the  NT,. 
but  which  are  also  found  in  the  OT. 

(a)  God  is  Almighty. — The  word  used  in  the  NT 
(as  in  the  Eastern  creeds)  for  this  attribute  is  vavro- 
Kpdrup,  chiefly  in  the  Apocalypse  (P  4'^  11"  15'  16"-  ^* 
196.15  2122)^  but  also  in  2  Co  6^8,  as  it  is  used  in 
the  LXX,  where  it  renders  fbhd'Oth  and  Shaddai. 
We  notice  in  each  instance  in  Rev.  how  emphati- 
cally it  stands  at  the  end  :  '  the  Lord  God,  which 
is  and  which  Avas  .  .  .  the  Almighty,'  'the  Lord 
God,  the  Almighty' ;  not '  Lord  God  Almighty'  as 
AV  (the  AV  translates  the  word  by  *  omnipotent '  in 
Rev  19^  only).  The  word  omnipotens  occurs  in  the 
earliest  Roman  creed. — But  what  does  '  Almighty ' 
imply  ?  To  the  modern  reader  it  is  apt  to  convey 
the  idea  of  omnipotence,  as  if  it  were  iravTodvvano%, 
i.e.  '  able  to  do  everything,'  on  account  of  the  Latin 
translation  omnipotens.  So  Augustine  under- 
stands the  word  in  the  Creed  {de  Symbolo  ad  Cate- 
chumenos,  2  [ed.  Ben.  vi.  547]),  explaining  it,  *  He 
does  whatever  He  wills'  (Swete,  Apostles'  Creed, 
p.  22).  Undoubtedly  God  is  omnipotent,  though 
this  does  not  mean  that  He  can  act  against  the 
conditions  which  He  Himself  makes — He  cannot 
sin.  He  cannot  lie  (Tit  l^,  He  6^8 ;  so  2  Ti  2i«  of  our 
Lord).  As  Augustine  says  (loc.  cit.),  if  He  could 
do  these  things  He  would  not  be  onini{)otent.  But 
this  is  not  the  meaning  of  '  Almighty.'  As  we  see 
from  the  form  of  the  Greek  word  (iravTOKpdrwp),  and 
as  is  suggested  by  the  Hebrew  words  which  it 
renders,  it  denotes  sovereignty  over  the  world.  It 
is  equivalent  to  the  '  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth '  of 
Ac  17'*,  Mt  11^.  Everything  is  under  God's  sway 
(see  Pearson,  Eocpos.  of  the  Creed,  art.  i.,  especially 
notes  37-43).  The  Syriac  bears  out  this  interpreta- 
tion by  rendering  the  word  ahldh  kul,  i.e.  '  holding 
(or  governing)  all.' 

(6)  God  is  'living.' — He  has  'life  in  himself 
(Jn  528).  He  is  'the  living  God'  (Rev  V),  'that 
liveth  for  ever  and  ever'  (10*);  and  therefore  is 
eternal,  the  'Alpha  and  Omega,  which  is  and 
which  was  and  which  is  to  come'  (6  C)v  Kal  6  ^p  Kal 
6  ipx^nevos),  'the  beginning  and  the  end'  (Rev  1" 
21^;  cf.  16")— these  words  are  here  (but  not  in 
22"  ;  see  below,  6  (e))  rightly  ascribed  by  Swete  to 
the  Eternal  Father.     '  One  day  is  with  the  Lord  as- 


GOD 


GOD 


459 


a  thonsand  years,  and  a  thousand  vears  as  one 
day '  (2  P  3« ;  cf.  Ps  9(H  ;  see  also  Ro  l-^]. 

(c)  God  is  omniscient. — He  knows  the  hearts  of 
all  men  (KopSioyvC-ffra  rim-wp,  Ac  1** ;  cf.  15* ;  the 
prayer  in  !*•  is  perhaps  addressed  to  our  Lord) ;  He 
knows  all  things  (1  Jn  3**).  St.  Paul  eloquently 
exclaims :  '  O  the  depth  of  the  riches  both  of  the 
wisdom  and  the  knowletlge  of  God  !'  (Ro  11"),  and 
ascribes  glory  'to  the  only  wise  God,'  i.e.  to  God 
who  alone  is  wise  (16^  ;  the  same  phrase  occurs  in 
some  MSS  of  1  Ti  1",  but  '  wise '  is  there  an  int«r- 
polation).  Even  the  uninstructed  Cornelius  recog- 
nizes that  we  are  in  God's  siglit  (Ac  10**).  Such 
sayings  cannot  but  be  a  reminiscence  of  our  Lord's 
teaching  that  '  not  one  of  them  is  forgotten  in  the 
sight  of  God '  (Lk  12*).  They  are  summed  up  in 
the  expressions  *  God  is  light '  (I  Jn  1')  and  '  God  is 
true'  ('This  is  the  true  God,'  1  Jn  5^;  for  the 
reference  here  see  A.  E.  Brooke's  note  in  ICC, 
1912,  i«  loc.).     God  'cannot  lie' ;  see  above  (a). 

{(I)  God  is  transcendent. — This  Divine  attribute 
had  been  exaggerated  by  the  Jews  just  before  the 
Christian  era,  but  it  is  nevertheless  dwelt  on  in  the 
apostolic  writings.  The  'things  of  God'  are  indeed 
'  deep,'  so  that  man  cannot,  though  the  Spirit  can, 
'search  them  out'  (1  Co  2i-«-  ;  cf.  Job  11').  God, 
who  '  only  hath  immortality,'  dwells  '  in  light  un- 
approachable, whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  can  see ' 
( 1  Ti  6i« ;  cf.  Jn  1^*,  1  Jn  4i-  ^).  He  is  spirit  ( Jn  4>* 
RVm)  and  inWsible  (Col  1«,  1  Ti  1^",  He  ll^^),  un- 
changeable (He  61''- ;  cf.  Mai  3«,  Ps  102^),  infinite, 
omnipresent  (Ac  7^  17=*-*^;  cf.  Ps  139'*-)-  These 
statements  do  not  mean,  however,  that  God  is 
altogether  unknowable  by  men ;  for  God  in  His 
condescension  reveals  Himself  to  man  (see  above,  2). 

(e)  God  is  immanent. — That  God  dwells  in  man 
is  stated  several  times.  '  God  is  in  you  indeed,' 
says  St.  Paul  (1  Co  14^  AV  and  RVm ;  RV  text 
has  '  among ' ;  the  Gr.  is  iv  irfiiy).  '  There  is  one 
God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  over  all,  and  through 
all,  and  in  all'  (Eph  4*).  'Gkxi  abideth  in  us' 
(1  Jn  4**).  His  'tabernacle  is  with  men'  and  He 
'  shall  dwell  with  them  .  .  .  and  be  with  them ' 
(Rev  2P).  For  the  immanence  of  the  Son  and  the 
Spirit  in  man  see  below,  6  (e)  and  7. 

{/)  Moral  attributes. — God  is  love  (1  Jn  4^^*); 
love  is  His  very  nature  and  being,  and  therefore 
love  is  the  foundation  of  all  true  religion  ;  love  is 
of  God  (v.^ ;  see  Brooke's  notes  on  these  verses  [op, 
cit.']).  The  love  of  God  is  specially  emphasized  by 
Christianity  ;  cf.  also  Jn  3^*  (the  kernel  of  the  gospel 
message),  Ro  o'- »  8»-^,  2  Co  13",  Col  l^*  ('  the  Son 
of  his  love '),  2  Th  3*,  1  Ti  2*  (desire  of  universal 
salvation),  1  Jn  2*  3'.  The  '  love  of  (Jod '  may  be 
God's  love  for  us,  or  our  love  for  God  ;  but  the 
latter,  as  St.  Jolm  teaches  (see  above),  comes  from 
the  former. 

God  is  holi/.  This  attribute  is  emphasized  both 
in  the  OT  (Lv  11«)  and  in  the  XT  (1  P  l^").  The 
four  living  creatures  cry  '  Holy  {ayios),  holy,  holy 
is  the  Lord  God,  the  Almighty^  (Rev  4^  ;  cf.  Is  6»). 
'  Thou  only  art  holy '  (Sa-ios)*  cry  the  conquerors 
(Rev  15* ;  cf.  16*) — a  striking  comment  on  the  as- 
cription of  holiness  to  our  Lord  and  to  the  Spirit 
(below,  6  (e),  7).  Brooke  {op.  cit.)  thinks  it  un- 
necessary to  determine  whether  'the  Holy  One'  in 
1  Jn  2"^  is  the  Father  or  the  Son. 

God  is  fust ;  He  has  no  respect  of  persons  (Ac  10**, 
Ro  2»,  Gal  2«,  1  P  1" ;  cf.  Dt  W'). 

He  is  righteous  (for  the  meaning  of  this  see 
below,  6  (c)) ;  St.  Paul  not  only  speaks  of  the 
'  righteous  judgment '  {diKaioKpuria,  Ro  2*  ;  cf.  2  Th 
1'),  but  of  the  '  righteousness  '  (SiKatoffvvi)),  of  God 
(Ro  1"  3^  10^).  On  this  phrase.  SiKoioaivr)  Oeov,  see 
an  elaborate  investigation  by  Sanday  in  HDB  ii. 

'  The  word  oo-tos  (equivalent  to  the  Latin  piut)  '  represents 
God  as  fuJailinsr  His  relation  to  His  creatures,  even  as  He  requites 
them  to  fulfil  theirs  towards  Himself '  (Swete,  Com.  in  toe.). 


2<39-212 ;  it  was  familiar  to  the  Jews,  and  to  them 
meant  the  personal  righteousness  of  Go<l.  Many 
commentators  take  it,  as  used  in  the  NT,  to  mean 
the  righteous  state  of  man,  of  which  God  is  the 
giver.  But  in  either  case  it  predicates  righteousness 
of  God.  In  Ph  3*  we  find  -r^r  ix  9ew  SiKaiooCnpr, 
'the  righteousness  which  is  of  God.'  The  Apoca- 
lyptist  also  emphasizes  this  attribute  (Rev  15*  IB*- '). 

God  is  merciful  (Ro  U**  159,  etc).  This  is  really 
the  same  attribute  as  love ;  but  it  is  not  the  same 
as  the  Musulman  idea  of  the  mercy  of  God,  which 
can  scarcely  be  distinguished  from  indifference. 
Love  and  justice  combined  produce  the  true  Divine 
mercy. 

He  is  the  God  of  hope  (Ro  15'*).  A  despairing 
pessimism  is  rebellion  against  the  good  God  who 
makes  us  to  hope,  and  wno  promises  to  overthrow 
Satan. 

He  is  the  God  oi  peace  (Ro  15»  16»,  1  Th  5^,  2  Th 
S",  He  13»). 

ig)  God  is  Creator  and  Saviour. — ^That  God  the 
Father  is  the  Maker  of  the  world  is  again  and  again 
insisted  on  (Ac  14i*-"  17*^=',  Ro  l»-»  ll^*.  1  Co  3», 
Eph  2»'>  39  [cf.  v.i**-].  Col  115*-,  He  1^  4*  129  [the  spirits 
of  men],  Ja  I*"'-  ['  the  lights,'  the  heavenly  bodies]. 
Rev  4^^  10^).  Man  was  made  in  God's*  likeness 
(1  Co  IF,  Ja  39),  That  God  made  the  world  was 
also  much  emphasized  by  the  sub-apostolic  writers 
(Swete,  Apostles'  Creed,  p.  20),  in  opposition  to  the 
Gnostic  conception  of  a  Demiurge,  an  inferior  God 
who  was  Creator,  and  who  was  more  or  less  in 
opposition  to  the  supreme  God.  (For  God  the 
Father  as  Saviour,  see  below,  6  (e) ;  for  the  part  of 
the  Son  and  of  the  Spirit  in  creation  see  below,  6 
(c),  7). 

4.  The  Fatherhood  of  God. — We  now  pass  to  the 
great  developments  made  by  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  G^.  In  the  OT  it  had  been  freely  taught  that 
God  was  Father  ;  but  the  conception  scarcely  went 
further  than  a  fatherhood  of  the  chosen  people. 
'  Israel  is  my  son,  my  first  bom,  .  .  .  Let  my  son 
go  that  he  may  serve  me,'  is  Jahweh's  message 
to  Pharaoh  (EIx  4^).  The  Deuteronomist  goes  no 
further  (8*  32*,  and  especially  14^'-  :  '  Ye  are  the 
children  of  the  Lord  your  God  .  .  .  for  thou  art 
an  holy  people  tmto  the  Lord  thy  Gkxi,  and  the 
Lord  hath  chosen  thee  to  be  a  peculiar  people  unto 
himself  above  all  peoples  that  are  upon  the  face  of 
the  earth ').  The  restrictive  words  of  Ps  lOS'*  are 
very  significant:  'Like  as  a  father  pitieth  his 
children,  so  the  Lord  pitieth  them  that  fear  him.' 
The  prophets  made  no  advance  on  this.  To  Judah 
and  Israel  God  says :  '  Ye  shall  call  me.  My  father ' 
(Jer  319 ;  cf.  Is  63i^30i- »,  Mai  1«) ;  '  When  Israel  was 
a  child,  then  I  loved  him,  and  called  my  son  out  of 
Egypt' (HoslH). 

The  NT  greatly  develops  this  doctrine.  It  teaches 
that  God  is  Father  of  all  men,  though  in  a  special 
sense  Father  of  believers.  But,  above  all,  God  is 
the  Father  of  our  Lord  in  a  sense  quite  unique. 

(a)  The  Father  of  our  Lord. — Jesus  ever  makes 
a  difference  between  the  Father's  relationship  to 
Himself  and  to  the  rest  of  the  world.  The  striking 
words  of  the  twelve-year-old  Child  :  '  Wist  ye  not 
that  I  must  be  in  my  Father's  house?'  (or  'about 
my  Father's  business,'  iv  toTj  tw  -rarpbi  ftov,  Lk  2®) 
are  the  first  indication  of  this.  Jesus  speaks  of 
'  my  Father '  and  '  the  Father'  and  'your  Father,' 
but  never  of  'our  Father,'  though  He  teaches  the 
disciples  to  use  these  words  (Mt  6*).  In  Jn  20^^  the 
Evangelist  represents  our  Lord  as  using  what  would 
otherwise  be  an  unintelligible  periphrasis  :  '  My 
Father  and  your  Father,  and  my  God  and  your  God.' 
This  same  distinction  is  kept  up  in  the  rest  of  the 
NT.  Thus  in  Ro  8'  St.  Patd  c^ls  our  Lord  God's 
'  own  Son'  {rbr  iavrm)  vio^),  in  a  manner  in  which  we 
could  not  be  designated  '  sons '  ;  we  can  only  be 
•  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might 


460 


GOD 


GOD 


be  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren'  (v.^),  wliile 
Jesus  is  'liisownSon' (roD/5tou  vloC,  v.'^;  cf.  Col  1'*: 
'Son  of  his  love').  St.  Paul  exhibits  a  fondness 
for  the  plirase  '  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ'  (Ro  15»,  2  Co  P,  Eph  1";  cf.  Col  1» 
'  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ'),  which 
is  re-echoed  by  St.  Peter  (1  P  P),  and  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse (Rev  P:  'his  God  and  Father').  (On  the 
other  hand,  in  Eph  1"  we  read  :  '  the  God  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Father  of  Klory.')  In  Rev  3*^ 
our  Lord  is  speaking,  and  uses  the  words  '  my 
Father.'  This  distinction  is  at  the  root  of  the 
Johannine  title  '  Only-begotten,'  applied  to  our 
Lord  (1  Jn  4«,  Jn  l"-^»  a'"-'*).  See  Adoption, 
Only-Begotten. 

(b)  The  Father  of  all  men. — This  relationship  is 
«xpressly  affirmed  by  St.  Paul  in  his  speech  at 
Athens  (Ac  17**'- )•  God  has  created  us ;  'in  him 
we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being,  as  certain 
even  of  your  own  poets  have  said,  For  we  are  also 
his  offspring.'  And  he  endorses  this  heathen  saying 
by  continuing  :  '  Being  then  the  oll'spring  of  God,' 
etc.  (v.-**).  We  may  compare  our  Lord's  saying : 
'  that  ye  may  be  sons  of  your  Father  which  is  m 
heaven,  for  he  maketh  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil 
And  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  the 
unjust '  (Mt  5*")  ;  '  he  is  kind  toAvards  the  unthank- 
ful and  evil '  (Lk  &^).  The  same  thought  seems  to 
be  at  the  root  of  St.  Paul's  saying  that  all  father- 
hood (irfio-a  irarpti)  in  heaven  and  earth  is  named 
from  God  the  Father  (Eph  3"'- ;  see  Family). 
*  There  is  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  over 
all,  and  through  all,  and  in  all'  (Eph  4*).  'To  us 
tliere  is  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all 
things  and  we  unto  him'  (1  Co  8*).  In  several 
passages  in  the  Epistles  where  we  read  '  our  Father ' 
^Ro  V,  1  Co  P,  2  Co  P,  Eph  P,  Ph  42<>,  etc.),  there 
is  no  special  restriction  to  God's  relationship  to 
Christians,  such  as  we  find  with  regard  to  the 
chosen  people  in  the  OT  passages.  St.  James 
speaks  of  'the  Father  of  lights'  (Ja  1"),  i.e.  of 
the  created  heavenly  bodies.  And  the  writer  of 
Hebrews  refers  to  a  universal  Fatherhood  due  to 
■creation.  As  contrasted  with  the  '  fathers  of  our 
flesh,'  God  is  'the  Father  of  spirits' — the  Author 
not  only  of  our  spiritual  being  but  of  all  spiritual 
beings  (He  12^ ;  see  Westcott,  Com.  in  loc.). 

(c)  The  Father  of  believers. — Side  by  side  with 
the  doctrine  of  universal  fatherhood  is  the  special 
relationsliip  of  God  to  believers,  not  only  as  Saviour 
(1  Ti  4^")  but  as  Father.  Here  the  apostolic 
writers  ascribe  to  Christians  the  prerogatives  of 
the  chosen  people  in  the  old  covenant.  This  special 
fatherhood  is  brought  out  in  the  passages  where 
St.  Paul  applies  the  metaphor  of  adoption  to  Chris- 
tians (Ro  8"-"-23,  Gal  45'-,  Eph  P  ;  see  ADOPTION  ; 
cf.  also  1  P  1",  1  Jn  3"-,  Jn  V\  etc.). 

(d)  '  T/ie  Father'  in  general. — In  many  passages 
we  find  the  absolute  expression  '  the  Father,'  com- 
prehending any  or  all  of  the  above  meanings,  as, 
^.g.,  1  Co  8«,  Gal  P,  Epii  52"  ('give  thanks  in  the 
name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  God,  even  tlie 
Father '),  Col  l^^^  Ja  3"  RV  ( '  the  Lord  and  Father '), 
1  Jn  2'^- 15'-  ;  and  2  P  P'',  1  Jn  1^,  where  there  is  a 
special  reference  to  our  Lord. 

The  word  '  Father '  stanrls  at  the  head  of  most  Christian 
creeds,  but  it  is  probable  that  it  was  not  orifjinally  in  that  of 
Borne.  The  Creed  of  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  an  early  Western 
specimen,  though  coming  from  an  Eastern  bishop,  begins  :  '  I 
believe  in  Almijjhty  (navTOKpanopa)  God'  (Epiphaniua,  Haer. 
Ixxii.  3).  The  language  of  TertuUian  (de  Virg.  vel.  1 — one  of 
his  later  works)  leads  us  to  suppose  that  the  creed  used  by  him 
began  similarly  ;  he  speaks  of  '  the  rule  of  believing  in  one  only 
God  omnipotent,  the  Creator  of  the  universe,  and  His  Son 
Jesua  Christ.'  But  thenceforward  it  appears  in  the  Western 
creeds  (see  Swete,  Apostles'  Creed,  p.  19  f.). 

3.  The  Holy  Trinity.— («)  The  technical  terms  h\ 
which  the  Christian  Cliurch  has  expressed  the  faith 
that  it  derived  from  the  Scriptures  were  not  in- 


vented for  a  considerable  time  after  the  apostolic 
period.  Thus  no  one  would  expect  to  find  the 
terms  '  Trinity '  and  '  Person '  in  the  NT.  It  is 
usually  said  that  the  word  'Trinity,'  referred  to 
God,  was  first  used  by  Tlieophilus  of  Antioch  {ad 
Autol.  ii.  15;  c.  A.D.  180),  as  far  as  extant  Christian 
literature  is  concerned.  This  is  true,  but  the  con- 
text shows  that  it  was  not  then  an  accei>ted  techni- 
cal term.  The  first  three  days  of  creation  are  said 
to  be  '  types  of  the  trinity  (rptds),  God,  and  His 
Word,  and  His  Wisdom.'  Theophilus  goes  on  to 
say  that  the  fourth  day  finds  its  autityjio  in  man, 
who  is  in  need  of  light,  so  that  we  get  the  series : 
God,  the  Word,  Wisdom,  Man.  Swete  justly  re- 
marks that  an  author  who  could  thus  '  convert  the 
Divine  trinity  into  a  quaternion  in  whicli  Man  is 
the  fourth  term,  must  have  been  still  far  from 
thinking  of  the  Trinitj^  as  later  WTiters  thought ' 
{Holy  Spirit  in  the  Ancient  Church,  p.  47).  Or  we 
should  perhaps  rather  put  it  that  1  heophilus  did 
not  use  the  word  '  Trinity '  in  the  technical  sense 
which  immediately  afterwards  is  found  ;  as  wlien 
TertuUian  speaks  of  '  the  Trinity  of  the  one  God- 
head, Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit '  (de  Pudic.  21 ; 
cf.  adv.  Prax.  2),  and  as  when  Hippolytus  says : 
'  Through  this  Trinity  the  Father  is  glorified,  for 
the  Father  willed,  the  Son  did,  the  Spirit  mani- 
fested '  (c.  Noet.  14). 

The  words  which  we  render  '  Person'  {Owda-raan, 
irpbauirov,  persona)  are  of  a  still  later  date,  and  at 
first  exhibited  a  remarkable  fluidity  of  signification. 
Thus  virdiTTaais  was  used  at  one  time  to  denote 
what  is  common  to  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
what  we  should  call  the  Divine  'substance,'  at 
another  it  was  used  to  distinguish  between  the 
Three  ;  so  that  in  one  sense  there  is  one  vir6<xra<ni 
in  the  Holy  Trinity,  in  the  other  there  are  three. 
With  regard  to  the  word  '  Person,'  the  student 
must  necessarily  be  always  on  his  guard  against 
the  supposition  that  '  Person '  means  '  individual,' 
as  when  we  say  that  three  different  men  are  three 
'  persons' ;  or  that  '  Trinity'  involves  tritheism,  or 
three  Gods.  These  technical  expressions  are  but 
methods  of  denoting  the  teaching  found  in  the  NT 
that  there  are  distinctions  in  the  Godhead,  and 
that,  wliile  God  is  One,  yet  He  is  not  a  mere 
Monad.  These  technical  terms  are  not  found  in 
the  apostolic  or  sub-apostolic  writers ;  with  regard 
to  the  second  of  them,  it  may  be  remembered  that 
the  idea  of  personality  was  hardly  formulated  in 
any  sense  till  shortly  before  the  Christian  era  ;  and 
its  application  to  theology  came  in  a  good  deal 
later. 

{b)  The  name  *  God'  used  absolutely. — In  con- 
sidering the  distinctions  in  the  Godhead  taught  by 
the  NT,  it  must  be  bonie  in  mind  that,  when  the 
name  'God'  is  used  absolutely,  without  pronoun 
or  epithet,  it  is  never,  with  one  possible  exception, 
applied  explicitly  to  the  Son  as  such  or  to  the  Spirit 
as  such.  It  is,  indeed,  most  frequently  used  with- 
out any  special  reference  to  the  Person.  But  it  is 
often,  when  standing  absolutely,  used  in  contrast 
to  the  Son  or  to  the  Spirit,  and  then  the  Father  is 
intended.  Instances  of  this  are  too  numerous  to 
mention ;  but  we  may  take  as  examples  Ac  2~ 
('Jesus  of  Nazareth,  a  man  approved  of  God  .  .  . 
by  mighty  works  .  .  .  which  God  did  by  him'), 
13*'  ('  God  raised  him  from  the  dead '),  Ro  2'«  ( '  Got! 
shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  ...  by  Jesus 
Christ '),  Eph  4="*  ('  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God  %  This 
is  sometimes  the  ca.se  also  when  '  God '  is  not  used 
absolutely,  as  in  Ac  3'»  ('the  God  of  our  fathers 
hath  glorified  his  Servant  [waiSa]  Jesus'),  5^  ('  the 
God  of  our  fathers  raised  up  Jesus'),  2'2i*,  Ro  P 
('  I  thank  my  God  through  Jesus  Christ ').  In  Rev 
3"-  '^-  our  Lord  calls  the  Father  '  my  God ' ;  compare 
the  similar  Pauline  phrases  quoted  above,  4  (a). 
See  below,  8. 


GOD 


GOD 


461 


The  one  po«ibIe  exception  is  Ac  20* :  '  to  feed  the  church 
of  God  which  he  purchased  with  his  own  blood.'  This  is  the 
reading  of  KB  and  other  weighty  authorities  (followed  by  AY 
and  RV  textX  but  ACDE  read  'the  Lord'  instead  of  'God.' 
The  balance  of  authority  is  in  favour  of  the  reading  '  God,'  and 
it  is  decidedly  more  difficult  than  the  other  variant.  At  first 
sight,  to  say' the  least,  the  word  'God'  (if  read)  must  refer  to 
our  Lord,  and  yet  this  usage  is  unlike  that  of  the  NT  elsewhere, 
and  a  scribs  finding  fcov  would  readily  alter  it  to  mpiov  because 
of  the  strangeness  of  the  expression.  Thus  both  because  of 
superior  attestation,  and  because  a  difficult  reading  is  ordinarily 
to  be  preferred  to  an  ea^er  one,  0eov  has  oaoally  been  accepted 
here  (so  WH,  iL  [18S2J  Appendix,  p.  US).  To  get  rid  of  the 
strangeness  of  the  expression,  it  has  been  suggested  that  the 
reference  is  to  the  Father,  and  that  'his  own  blood'  means 
'  the  blood  which  is  his  own,'  i.e.  the  blood  of  Christ  who  is 
essentially  one  nith  the  Father  ;  but  this  seems  to  be  a  rather 
forced  explanation.  A  somewhat  more  probable  conjecture 
(that  of  Uort)  is  that  there  is  here  an  early  corruption,  and 
that  the  original  had  'with  the  blood  of  his  own  Son.'  The 
best  reading  of  the  last  words  of  the  verse,  snpiported  by  over- 
whelming authority,  is  iii.  tdv  aluaTot  nv  iSiov;  and  this 
conjecture  supposes  that  viov  has  dropped  out  at  the  end  (cf. 
Ro  8^  However  this  may  be,  it  would  seem  that  the  verse  as 
we  have  it  in  KB  was  so  read  by  Ignatius,  and  gave  rise  to  bis 
expression  '  the  blood  of  God  *  (Eph.  1)—*  very  early  instance  of 
what  later  writers  called  the  communieatio  uftonuUum,  by 
which  the  properties  of  one  of  our  Lord's  natures  are  referred 
to  when  the  other  nature  is  in  question,  because  of  the  unity  ot 
His  Person  (see  6  (6)).  Another  early  instance  is  perhaps  to  be 
found  in  Clement  of  Rome  (Cor.  iL  1) :  ri  ra^iuLTo.  airrou  ('  his 
sufferings 'X  Otov  having  just  preceded ;  but  the  reading,  though 
accepted  by  Lightfoot,  is  not  quite  certain.  On  these  two 
passages  see  Li^tfoot,  Apottolie  Fathers,  '  S.  Ignatius  and  S. 
Polycarp*,'  1889,  iL  29  f.,  'S.  Clement  of  Rome,'  1890,  ii.  lS-18. 
TertuHian  uses  Hie  expression  '  the  blood  of  God '  (ad  Uxor. 
ii.  3). 

(c)  Trinitarian  language. — In  the  NT  teaching 
the  Son  and  the  Spirit  are  joined  to  the  Father  in 
a  special  manner,  entirely  different  from  that  in 
which  men  or  angels  are  spoken  of  in  relation  to 
(iod.  Perhaps  the  best  example  of  this  is  the 
apostolic  benediction  of  2  Co  13",  which  has  no 
dogmatic  purpose,  but  is  a  simple,  spontaneous 
prayer,  and  is  therefore  more  significant  than  if  it 
was  intended  to  teach  some  doctrine.  The  'grace 
of  our  Lord,'  the  'love  of  God,'  and  the  'com- 
munion of  the  Holy  Ghost '  are  grouped  together, 
and  in  tliis  remarkable  order.  In  many  passages 
Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  are  grouped  together,  just 
as  the  Three  are  mentioned  together  in  the  account 
of  our  Lord's  Baptism  {Mt  3^*^),  only  in  a  still 
more  significant  way.  Thus  in  Ac  5*'*-  we  read 
that  God  exalted  Jesus  to  be  a  Prince  and  a 
Saviour,  and  gave  the  Holy  Ghost  'to  them  that 
obey  him.'  Stephen,  being  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
saw  the  glory  of  God,  and  Jesus  standing  at  the 
right  hand  of  God  (7^).  The  Holy  Ghost  is  in  one 
breath  called  bv  St,  Paul  the  '  Spirit  of  God '  and 
the  '  Spirit  of  Christ'  (Ro  8%  See  also  1  Co  12»-« 
('  the  Spirit  of  God  .  .  .  Jesus  is  Lord  .  .  .  the 
same  Spirit  .  .  .  the  same  Lord  .  .  .  the  same  God '), 
Ac  233,  1  P  12  ('  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father,' 
' sanctification  of  the  Spirit,'  'sprinkling  of  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ '),  Tit  3*-*  ('  the  kindness  of 
God  our  Saviour '  [the  Father],  '  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,'  '  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour'), 
1  Jn  4^,  and  especially  Jude  ^,  where  the  writer's 
disciples  are  bidden  to  pray  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  to 
keep  themselves  in  the  love  of  God,  and  to  look 
for  the  mercy  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

In  the  greeting  of  all  the  Pauline  Epistles  but 
one,  the  Father  and  Son  are  joined  together  as  the 
source  of  grace  and  peace  ;  e.g.  '  Grace  to  you  and 
peace  from  God  our  Father  and  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ'  (Ro  1^);  the  only  exception  being  Col  1* 
RV,  which  has  '  grace  to  you  and  peace  from  (5od 
our  Father.'  And  this  Pauline  usage  is  also  found 
in  '2  Jn  '.  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  the  possibility 
of  this  zeugma  unless  our  Lord  be  God.  With 
this  compare  St.  James's  description  of  himself 
as  '  a  slave  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ' 
( Ja  P),  and  many  other  passages  such  as  '  one  God, 
the  Father,  of  whom  are  all  things,  and  we  unto 
him  ;  and  one  Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  through  whom 


are  all  things,  and  we  through  him'  (1  Co  8*  ;  see 
above,  4  (6)) ;  '  in  the  sight  of  God  and  of  Christ 
Jesus'  (2  Ti  4') ;  'fellowship  with  the  Father  and 
with  his  son  Jesus  Christ  (1  Jn  1*);  'he  that 
denieth  the  Father  and  the  Son '  (2") ;  '  the  same 
hath  both  the  Father  and  the  Son'  (2  Jn»);  'the 
Lord  God,  the  Almighty,  and  the  Lamb  are  the 
temple  thereof '  (Rev  21**) ;  •  the  throne  of  God  and 
of  the  Lamb '(221- »). 

These  expressions  are  the  counterpart  of  our 
Lord's  words  in  the  Fourth  Gospel :  '  I  am  in  the 
Father  and  the  Father  in  me'  (Jn  14").  SVe 
might  try  the  effect  of  substituting  for  '  Son '  and 
'Spirit'  the  names  of  'Peter,'  'Paul,'  or  even  of 
'  Michael,'  '  Gabriel,'  to  see  how  intolerable  all 
these  expressions  would  be  on  any  but  the  Trini- 
tarian hypothesis.  St.  Paul  uses  a  similar  argu- 
ment in  1  Co  1" :  '  Was  Paul  crucified  for  you,  or 
were  ye  baptized  in  the  name  of  Patil?' 

These  passages  are  taken  from  the  NT  outside 
the  Gospels.  The  Fourth  Gospel,  which  is  full  oi 
the  same  doctrine,  is  here  passed  by.  But  one 
passage  of  the  Synoptics  must  be  considered. 
How  did  St.  Paul  come  by  the  phraseology  of  his 
benediction  in  2  Co  13'''  ?  Some  would  say  that  he 
invented  it,  and  was  the  real  founder  of  Christian 
doctrine  (see  below,  9).  For  those  who  cannot 
accept  this  position — and  the  Apostle  betrays  no 
consciousness  of  teaching  a  new  doctrine,  but,  as 
we  have  seen  (above,  1),  professes  to  hand  on  what 
he  has  received — the  only  conclusion  can  be  that 
the  benediction  is  based  on  teaching  of  our  Lord. 
In  the  Synoptics  there  is  one  passage  (Mt  28^*) 
which  would  at  once  account  for  St.  Paul's  bene- 
diction. According  to  this,  our  Lord  bade  His^ 
followers  '  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  into  the  name  (e:s  rb  6rofw.)  of  the 
Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.' 
This  passage  has  been  criticized  on  three  grounds. 
(1)  It  has  l^n  said  not  to  be  an  autlientic  part  of 
the  First  Gospel.  This,  however,  is  not  a  tenable 
position  (see  BAPTISM,  §  4) ;  but  it  is  important  to- 
distinguish  it  from  the  view  which  follows.  (2)  It 
has  been  acknowledged  to  be  an  authentic  part  of 
Mt.,  but  said  to  have  been  due  to  the  Christian 
theology  of  the  end  of  the  1st  cent.,  to  the  same 
line  of  thought  that  produced  the  Fourth  GJospel ; 
and  not  to  have  been  spoken  by  our  Lord.  (3)  In 
support  of  this  it  is  urged  that  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  earliest  baptisms,  as  we  read  in  Acts,  were 
not  '  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,'  but  'in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,'  or  the  like.  But  may  there  not  be  a  mis- 
take here  on  both  sides  ?  It  is  quite  unnecessary 
to  suppose  on  the  one  hand  that  the  passages  in. 
Acts  describe  a  formula  used  in  baptism,  or,  on, 
the  other,  that  our  Lord  in  Mt  28^  prescribed  one. 
All  the  passages  may,  and  probably  do,  express 
only  the  theological  import  of  baptism  (for  authori- 
ties, see  Baptism  as  above).*  It  was  not  the  custom 
of  our  Lord  to  make  minute  regulations,  as  did 
the  ilosaic  Law.  He  rather  laid  down  general 
principles  ;  and  it  M'ould  be  somewhat  remarkable 
if  He  made  just  one  exception,  in  regulating  the 
words  to  be  used  in  baptism.  (The  justification  of 
the  Christian  formula  is  the  general  consent  of  the 
ages,  dating  from  immediately  after  the  apostolic 
period.)  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  suppose  that  Mt 
28"  gives  us — anj'  more  than  the  other  Gospel 
records  do — the  ipsissima  verba  of  Jesus.  It  is  al- 
most certain  that  such  teaching,  if  given,  would 
be  much  expanded  for  the  benefit  of  the  hearers, 
and  tliat  we  have  only  a  greatly  abbreviated  re- 
cord. But  that  our  Lord  gave  such  '  Trinitarian  ' 
teaching  in  some  shape  on  the  occasion  of  giving 

*  We  are  not  here  concerned  with  the  meaning  of  *  in '  or 
' into  the  name.'  The  argnment  is  independent  of  the  disputed- 
interpretation  of  these  words. 


462 


GOD 


GOD 


the  baptismal  command  is  the  only  way  of  ac- 
counting for  the  phenomena  of  Acts,  Epistles,  and 
Revelation.  This  would  explain  not  only  the  apos- 
tolic benediction,  but  also  the  whole  trend  of  the 
teaching  of  the  NT  outside  the  Gospels, 

Having  now  considered  the  general  scope  of  apos- 
tolic teaching  with  regard  to  distinctions  in  the 
Godhead,  we  must  consider  in  particular  the  doc- 
trine with  regard  to  the  Godhead  of  our  Lord  and 
of  the  Holy  Gliost. 

6.  The  Godhead  of  oup  Lord. —  In  historical 
sequence  the  realization  of  our  Lord's  Divinity 
came  before  the  teaching  which  we  have  already 
considered.  The  disciples  first  learnt  that  their 
Master  was  not  mere  man,  but  was  Divine  ;  and 
then  that  there  are  distinctions  in  the  Godhead. 

(a)  Jestis  is  the  Son  of  God. — Of  this  the  apostles 
were  fully  convinced.  The  passages  are  too 
numerous  to  cite,  but  they  occur  in  almost  every 
book  of  the  NT,  whether  they  give  the  title  to  our 
Lord  in  so  many  words,  or  express  the  fact  other- 
wise (see  above,  4  («)).  Before  considering  the 
meaning  of  the  title,  we  may  ask  if  the  name  xaty 
('  child '  or  •  servant ')  appliea  to  our  Lord  (Ac  3"-  ^ 
427. 30)  jjf^g  ^\^Q  same  signification.  Sanday  points 
out  (HDB  iv.  574,  578)  that  irah  is  taken  in  the 
sense  of  'Son'  in  the  early  Fathers,  as  in  the 
Epistle  to  Diognctus  (viii.  9f.  ;  c.  A.D.  150?). 
This  may  also  lie  the  meaning  of  St.  Luke  in  Acts  ; 
but  it  is  equally  probable  that  he  refers  to  the  OT 
*  servant  01  Jahweh.'  This  is  clearly  the  meaning 
in  Mt  12'*,  where  Is  42'  is  quoted :  '  liehold  my 
servant  whom  1  have  cliosen,'  etc. 

But  what  is  the  significance  of  the  title  *  Son  of 
God '  ?  It  was  not  exactly  a  new  title  when  used 
in  the  NT,  though  Dn  3-'  cannot  be  quoted  for  it 
('a  son  of  the  gods,'  RV  ;  AV  wrongly,  '  the  Son  of 
God ').  It  is  probable  that  Ps  2^  was  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Jewish  conception  of  Messiah  as  Son.* 
And  therefore  the  title  '  Son  of  God '  had  probably 
a  different  meaning  in  tlie  mouth  of  some  speakers 
from  that  which  it  had  in  the  mouth  of  others. 
Thus  when  the  demoniacs  called  Jesus  the  Son  of 
God  (Mk  3"  b\  Mt  14^,  Lk  4^'),  they  would  mean 
no  more  than  that  He  was  the  promised  Messiali, 
without  dogmatizing  as  to  His  nature.  The 
mockers  at  Calvary  would  use  the  word  in  the 
same  sense.  *  If  thou  art  the  Son  of  God '  is 
thesameas  'If  thou  art  the  Christ '  (Mt27^<').  Tlie 
Centurion,  if  (as  seems  probable)  his  saying  as  re- 
ported in  Mk  15^^  Mt  27'*  is  more  correct  than 
that  given  in  Lk  23''^,  where  'a  righteous  man' 
is  substituted  for  '  the  Son  of  God,'  would  have 
borrowed  a  Jewish  phrase  without  exactly  under- 
standing its  meaning,  and  thus  St.  Luke's  para- 
phrase would  faithfully  represent  what  was  pass- 
mg  in  his  mind. 

But  Jesus  gave  a  higher  meaning  to  the  title, 
and  this  higher  meaning  is  the  keynote  of  the 
teaching  of  His  disciples.  It  is  true  that  in  Lk  3^ 
the  Evangelist  calls  Adam  a  [son]  of  God  (for  '  son ' 
see  v.^),  as  being  created  directly  by  God ;  but 
this  is  not  the  meaning  in  the  NT  generally. 
There  seems  to  have  been  a  suspicion  in  Caiaphas' 
mind  of  the  higher  meaning  given  to  the  title  by 
Jesus,  when  he  asked  Him  whether  He  was  'the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God '  (Mt  26«3).  There  is  almost 
an  approach  here  to  the  Johannine  saying  that  the 
Jews  sought  to  kill  Him  because  He  'called  God 
his  own  leather,  making  himself  equal  with  God' 
(Jn  5'*).  To  the  disciples  the  confession  that 
Jesus  was  the  ' Son  of  God'  (11^,  Martha)  or  '  the 
Holy  One  of  God '  (6«9  RV,  Simon  Peter)  meant 
the  oelief  that  He  partook  of  the  nature  of  God. 
This,  indeed,  miglit  have  meant  only  that  Jesus 
was  a  Divinely  inspired  man.     But  the  teaching 

•  We  are  not  here  concerned  with  the  connexion  between  the 
thought  of  Israel  as  Son  and  Messiah  as  Son. 


of  Jesus  lifts  the  title  to  the  highest  level  (Mt  11^, 
Jn  S'*'^  9**,  etc.  ;  for  St.  John's  own  teaching  see, 
e.g.,  Jn  3**'-).  In  this  sense  there  is  only  one  '  Son 
oi  God,'  who  is  tlie  Only-begotten,  the  Beloved 
(lj.ovoyevi}i  and  i.fair7rr6%  are  both  translations  of 
Tn; ;  see  Onlv-Begotten).  And  so  in  the  Epistles 
the  title  expresses  the  Divinity  of  our  Lord.  The 
apostolic  message  was  to  preach  that  Jesus  is  the 
Son  of  God  (Ac  9'-^  Jn  2(y").  While  the  first 
Christian  teacliers  proclaimed  the  true  humanity 
of  the  Lord  (e.g.  Ro  1* :  '  concerning  his  Son  who 
was  born  of  the  seed  of  David  according  to  the 
flesh'),  they  also  proclaimed  His  true  Godhead 
(v.*  :  'declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power'). 
The  saying  of  Justin  Martyr  (Apol.  i.  22)  exhibits 
no  advance  on  apostolic  doctrine :  '  The  Word  of 
God  was  born  of  God  in  a  peculiar  manner '  (i5iwi). 

The  Arians  distinguished  'Son  of  God'  from  'God,'  and  de- 
nied that  the  '  Son  '  could  be  in  the  highest  sense  '  God.'  The 
Clementine  Ilomilies  (wliich  used  to  be  thought  to  be  of  the 
2nd  or  3rd  cent.,  but  are  now  usuall)',  in  their  present  form, 
ascribed  to  the  4th  [JThSt  x.  (1908-09)  457])  make  the  same 
distinction  (xvi.  15).  St.  Peter  is  made  to  say  :  '  Our  Lord  .  .  . 
did  not  proclaim  Himself  to  be  God,  but  He  with  reason  pro- 
nounced blessed  him  who  called  Him  the  Son  of  that  God  who 
has  arran^'ed  the  universe.'  Simon  [Maffus]  replies  that  he 
who  comes  from  God  is  God  ;  but  St.  Puter  says  that  this  is  not 
possible;  they  did  not  hear  it  from  Him.  'What  is  begotten 
cannot  be  comi)ared  with  that  which  is  unljegotten  or  self- 
begotten.'  Sanday  (fl^ZlB  iv.  577*")  refers  to  this  passage  as  an 
isolated  phenomenon  ;  but  now  that  the  book  has  been  with 
much  probability  assigned  to  the  later  date,  we  may  say  that 
the  teaching  just  quoted  was  not  heard  of,  as  far  as  the  evi- 
dence goes,  till  the  4th  century. 

(b)  Jesus  is  the  Lord. — The  significance  of  this 
title  (6  Kvpios)  in  the  Apostolic  Age  is  not  at  once 
apparent  to  the  European  of  to-day.  The  name 
'Lord'  seems  to  him  applicable  to  any  leader  of 
religious  thought.  To  the  present-day  Greek 
Kvpie  is  no  more  than  our  '  Sir,  and  6  Kvpios  is  the 
way  in  which  any  gentleman  is  spoken  of,  as  the 
French  use  the  word  Monsieur.  But  to  the  Greek- 
speaking  Christian  Jew  of  the  1st  cent.,  6  /civptoy  had 
a  much  deeper  signification  ;  deeper  also  than  tlie 
complimentary  Aramaic  title  'Rabbi'  (lit.  'my 
great  one').  For  the  Jews  habitually  used  the 
word  'Lord 'as  a  substitute  for  'Jahweh.'  That 
sacred  name,  though  written,  was  not  pronounced. 
In  reading  the  Hebrew  OT,  '  Adonai '  was  substi- 
tuted for  it.  And  so  the  Hellenistic  Jews,  in  read- 
ing their  Greek  translation  of  the  OT,  found  6 
K'upi.os  where  the  original  has  'Jahweh.'  When, 
then,  St.  Paul  declares  that  '  no  man  can  say, 
Jesus  is  Lord,  but  in  the  Holy  Spirit'  (1  Co  12*), 
or  bids  the  Roman  Christian  '  confess  with  thy 
mouth  Jesus  as  Lord '  (Ro  10»  RV ;  cf.  Ph  2"),  he 
does  not  mean  merely  that  Jesus  is  a  great  teacher, 
but  he  identifies  Him  with  '  the  Lord '  of  tlie  Greek 
OT,  that  is,  with  Jahweh.  St.  Peter  uses  the 
same  identification  when  he  says :  '  Sanctify  in 
your  hearts  Christ  as  Lord'  (I  P  3'*  RV  ;  the  AV 
reading  is  not  supported  by  the  best  authorities) ; 
here  he  quotes  Is  8'*  LXX  (Kvpiov  avrbv  ayidaaTe), 
actually  substituting  rbv  Xpiffrdv  for  avrdv.  (C. 
Bigg  [ICC,  1901,  in  loc]  renders  'sanctify  the 
Lord,  that  is  to  say,  the  Christ,'  but  this  does  not 
affect  the  present  argument.)  This  identification 
is  frequent  in  the  NT.  The  title  'the  Lord'  is 
used  both  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son.  A  re- 
markable passage  is  J  a  5*"",  where  we  read  in 
quick  succession  of  'the  Lord  of  Sabaoth,'  'the 
coming  of  the  Lord,'  '  the  Lord  is  at  hand,'  '  the 
prophets  spake  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,'  '  the 
Lord  shall  raise  (the  sick  man)  up';  'the  Lord' 
means  here  sometimes  the  Fatlier  and  sometimes 
the  Son  (in  3"  RV  it  is  explicitly  used  of  the  Father). 
With  this  compare  the  way  in  which  in  4"  C.od  is 
said  to  be  the  one  '  lawgiver  and  judge,  who  is  able 
to  save  and  to  destroy,'  while  in  .5"  Jesus  is  the  judge 
who  '  standeth  before  the  doors.'  The  passage  1  Co 
10"  would  be  still  more  striking  if  we  could  be  sure 


GOD 


GOD 


463 


of  the  text.  Accordinj^  to  the  AV  and  RVm,  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  the  Israelites  who  sinned  against 
Jahweh  in  Nu  21'''  as  *  tempting  Christ ' ;  but  the 
reading  rbv  Xpun-dp  is  not  (juite  so  well  attested  as 
rbr  Kvpiop.  Another  identification  of  Jesus  with 
Jahweh  is  to  be  seen  in  the  taking  over  of  the 
expression  'the  daj-  of  the  Lord'  ('the  day  of 
Jahweh)  from  the  OT  (cf.  Am  5'^,  etc.)  and  the 
using  of  it  to  denote  the  return  of  Jesus,  in  1  Th  5', 
2  P  3'o,  which  have  '  the  day  of  the  Lord,'  and  1  Co 
5*,  2  Co  1",  which  have  '  the  day  of  [our]  Lord 
Jesus.' 

Again,  Jesus  is  in  the  NT  called  'Lord'  in  a 
manner  which  is  equivalent  to  *  Almighty,'  i.e.  '  all 
ruling'  (see  above,  3  (a)) ;  e.g.  Ac  1(P*  (''he  is  Lord 
of  all  ),  Ro  14*  ('  Lord  of  the  dead  and  the  living'), 
Ph  3**-  ('the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  .  .  .  is  able  even 
to  subject  all  things  unto  himself'),  1  Co  2*  ('cruci- 
fied the  Lord  of  glory ' — an  approach  to  the  com- 
municatio  idiomatum  [see  alx)ve,  5  (6)]),  Rev  1' 
('ruler  of  the  kings  of  the  earth'),  17"  19^*  (the 
Lamb,  the  Word  of  God,  is  '  Lord  of  lords  and 
King  of  kinirs' — a  phrase  used  in  1  Ti  6^  of  the 
Father);  cf.^He  l^^^^  (.^he  Son  .  .  .  upholding  all 
things  by  the  word  of  his  power')  and  Ro  ^  ('  who 
is  over  all ').  God  is  commonly  addressed  by  the 
disciples  as  '  Lord,'  as  in  Ac  1-*  (but  see  above.  3 
{c))4^  (explicitly  the  Father;  see  v.»)  10*- "  ll* ; 
and  this  is  the  way  in  which  Saul  of  Tarsus  and 
Ananias  address  the  Ascended  Jesus  in  their 
visions  (Ac  9^- i"-i3  [see  v."*-]  228-«>-i»  26^;  cf.  Mt 
25",  etc). 

The  title  'oar  Lord'  for  Jesos,  which  became  the  most 
common  designation  amon^  the  Christians,  is  not  very  common 
in  the  NT.  In  Kev  1115  it  13  used  of  the  Father  ('  our  Lord  and 
his  Christ  '>  In  II8  AY  it  is  used  of  Jesus,  but  aU  the  best  MSS 
here  have  'their  Lord.'  It  is,  however,  found  in  Ja  2i  ('our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  [the  Lord]  of  glory')  and  in  2  Co  13i*,  1 15 
IW,  2  n  1«,  He  7"  1320,  2  P  31S,  etc 

(c)  Our  Lords  Divinity  stated  in  express  terms. — 
Many  of  the  passages  about  to  be  given  in  this  sub- 
section have  been  keenly  criticized,  but  it  is  im- 
possible to  pass  over  the  whole  of  them.  This 
passage  or  that  may  possibly  be  explained  other- 
wise than  is  here  done,  or  in  some  cases  the  reading 
may  be  disputed  ;  but  the  cumulative  eflect  of  the 
whole  is  overwhelming.  Yet  it  must  be  remarked 
that  the  doctrine  of  the  Godhead  of  our  Lord  does 
not  depend  merely  on  a  certain  number  of  leading 
texts.  The  language  of  the  whole  of  the  apostolic 
writings  is  inexplicable  on  the  supposition  that 
their  authors  believed  their  Master  to  be  mere 
man,  or  even  a  created  being  of  any  sort,  however 
highly  exalted. 

In  Ro  9*  St.  Paul  says  that  Christ  is  '  over  all, 
God  blessed  for  ever.'  Such  is  the  interpretation 
of  the  AV  and  RV  (RV'm  mentions  the  transla- 
tions of '  some  modem  interpreters '),  adopted  'with 
some  slight,  but  onlj-  slight,  hesitation '  by  Sanday- 
Headlani  in  their  exhaustive  note  (ICC  in  loc.). 
The  alternative  interpretations  insert  a  fuE  stop, 
and  make  the  latter  part  of  the  verse  an  ascrip- 
tion of  praise  to  the  Father. 

In  2  Co  4^  Col  1«  Christ  is  called  the  '  image ' 
(ei/ciip)  of  God  ;  with  this  we  must  compare  the  re- 
markable passage.  He  l**-,  where  the  Son  is  called 
*  the  effulgence  {irajuyaa/xa ;  cf.  Wis  7**)  of  his 
glory  and  the  very  image  of  his  substance '  {xapairrrip 
TTJs  vroffTdaeojs  airrov),  and  is  declared  to  be  higher 
than,  and  worshipped  by,  the  angels,  and  to  have 
eternal  rule  ;  the  quotation  from  Ps  45*'%  begin- 
ning 'Thy  throne,  O  God,'  is  referred  to  the  Son. 
It  is  remarkable  that  whereas  no  Epistle  empha- 
sizes our  Lords  humanity  so  strongly  as  Hebrews, 
its  beginning  should  dwell  so  forcibly  on  His 
Divine  prerogatives.  The  meaning  of  these  ex- 
pressions 'inia^e,'  '  effulgence,'  is  seen  by  studying 
the  passage  Col  I*'"-  with  Lightfoot's  notes  (Colos- 


sians^,  1879,  »»  loc.).  Christ  is  'the  image  of  the 
invisible  God,  the  firstborn  of  all  creation'  (see 
FiRST-BoRX  for  Patristic  interpretations).  But 
our  Lord  is  not  the '  image '  of  God  in  the  same  way 
as  all  men  are  (1  Co  11",  Ja  3»,  Gn  1» ;  Clement  of 
Rome  uses  x«p«i«")/)  in  the  same  sense  [Cor.  xxxiii. 
4]  though  he  quotes  Gn  1*  with  eUwp).  Christ  is 
the  revelation  of  the  invisible  God  because  He  is 
His  '  express  image.'  He  is  the  '  firstborn  of  all 
creation,  as  being  before  all  creation,  and  having 
sovereignty  over  it  (Lightfoot).  There  can  be 
little  doubt  that  St.  Paul  here  refers  to  the  pre- 
incamate  Christ  as  the  earlier  Fathers,  and  even- 
tually the  later  Greek  Fathers,  held.  He  adds 
that  '  in  him  all  the  fulness  (rX-^pufia)  dwells '  (Col 
I''),  and  that  'in  him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness 
of  the  Grodhead  bodily '  (2*) :  the  totality  of  the 
Di\'ine  power  and  attributes  (Lightfoot)  are  in  the 
Incarnate  Jesus. 

In  Ph  2*^  St.  Paul  says  that  our  Lord  '  being 
{inrdpx(ay)  in  the  form  of  God,  counted  it  not  a 
prize  [a  thing  to  be  grasped  at]  to  be  on  an  equality 
with  God,  but  empried  (iKiviMrt)  himself,  taking 
the  form  of  a  servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness 
of  man.'  This  passage,  which  has  given  rise  to  the 
word  '  Kenotic,'  is  elaborately  treated  bv  Lightfoot 
(see  his  Phiiippians*,  1878,  p.  Ill  f.,  and  especially 
his  appended  Notes,  pp.  127-137).  It  expresses 
Christ's  pre-existence,  for  He  'emptied  himself.' 
Of  what  He  emptied  Himself  is  seen  from  the  pre- 
ceding words.  He  was  originally  {vrdpxt^y,  denot- 
ing '  prior  existence,'  but  not  necessarily  '  eternal 
existence '  [Lightfoot])  in  the  form  of  God,  partici- 
pating in  the  owrt'a  of  God.  Yet  He  did  not  regard 
His  equality  with  Gk)d  as  a  thing  to  be  jealously 
guarded,  a  prize  which  must  not  slip  from  His 
grasp. 

"We  cannot  lay  great  stress  on  Ac  20®,  for 
which  see  above,  5  (b),  because  of  the  uncertainty 
of  the  reading;  but  by  all  grammatical  canons 
(though  this  has  been  denied)  Tit  2"  must  apply 
the  name  '  God '  to  our  Lord  :  *  our  great  God  and 
Saviour,  Jesus  Christ '  (RV  ;  tow  fieydXov  OeoD  xai 
auTjjpos  ijfiuiv '  Iric-ov  XpwrroO),  and  this  interpretation 
is  borne  out  by  the  word  t-rupdi'eia  ('  manifestation ') 
which  imme<uately  precedes,  and  by  the  whole 
context,  which  speaks  of  our  Lord  (v.").  The 
phrase  in  2  P  1^  is  similar :  '  our  God  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ '  (RV  text). 

The  explicit  ascription  of  Divinity  is  found 
frequently  in  the  Johannine  writings.  In  1  Jn  5*, 
indeed,  the  phrase  '  This  is  the  true  God '  may  be 
applied  either  to  the  Father  or  to  the  Son  (see  above, 
3  (c)) ;  and  in  Jn  1'*  the  reading  is  disputed  (see 
Okly-Begottex)  ;  '  God  only  begotten '  {putwoyepip 
dedt)  is  somewhat  better  attested  than  'the  only 
begotten  Son '  (6  fwpoyewiti  \A6i)  and  is  the  more  diffi- 
cult reading  ;  Westcott  (Com.  in  loc.)  judges  both 
readings  to  be  of  great  and  almost  equal  antiquity, 
but  on  various  grounds  thinks  that  the  former  must 
be  accepted.  But,  whatever  view  we  take  of  these 
two  passages,  St.  Thomas's  confession,  '  My  Lord 
and  my  God '  (20^),  is  quite  explicit ;  and  so  is  the 
preface  to  the  Fourth  Gospel :  '  The  Word  was 
with  God,  and  the  Word  was  GJod '  (1*),  and  so  are 
our  Lord's  words,  '  I  and  the  Father  are  one '  (ip 
ifffiep,  1(P).  The  Johannine  doctrine  of  the  Logos 
or  Word,  which  cannot  be  altogether  passed  over 
even  in  an  investigation  which  deals  chiefly  with 
the  NT  outside  the  Gospels  (though  the  title 
'  Word  of  God '  occurs  only  in  Rev  19'^  outside  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  for  He  11'  [pvf^'rt  Oeov]  is  no  excep- 
tion to  this  statement),  is  equivalent  to  the  Pauline 
doctrine  of  the  Image.  The  Logos  is  an  eternally 
existent  '  Person '  through  whom  God  has  ever 
revealed  Himself ;  who  was  in  a  true  sense  distinct 
from  the  Father,  and  yet  'was  God'  (Jn  1') ;  who 
was  incarnate,  '  became  iiesh  and  tabernacled  (ecrjc^- 


464 


GOD 


GOD 


w(T€p)  anions  us '  (1").  Tlie  Logos  is  identified  with 
Jesus  Christ,  wliose  glory  the  disciples  beheld. 

{(l)  Pre-existence  of  our  Lord.  —  This  is  stated 
frequently  in  the  NT.  Besides  the  passages  just 
quoted  in  (c),  we  may  notice  Ro  8*  ('God  sending 
Ills  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh ')  ;  1  Co 
10*  (the  Israelites  of  old  '  drank  of  a  spiritual  rock 
that  followed  them,  and  the  rock  was  Christ '  [note 
the  past  tense  '  was ' :  it  is  not  a  mere  type]) ;  15" 
('the  second  man  is  of  heaven';  the  best  MSS 
omit  *  the  Lord,'  but  this  does  not  affect  the 
present  point ;  Robertson-Plummer,  however  {ICC, 
1911,  in  loc.\  think  that  the  reference  is  to  the 
Second  Advent  rather  than  to  the  Incarnation) ; 
2  Co 8*  ('though  he  was  rich,  for  your  sakes  he 
became  poor  ^  (eTrrwxeuae) — if  He  had  no  previous 
existence,  there  never  was  a  i)revious  time  when 
He  was  ricii) ;  Col  1"  ('  he  is  before  all  things,  and 
in  him  all  things  consist '  [hold  together] :  see  above 
(c)) ;  1  Ti  1^'  ('  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  ') ; 
3^*  ('  He  who  was  manifested  in  the  flesh ' :  the  read- 
ing 6e6s  for  Ss  [i.e.  0C  for  OC],  which  would  have 
made  this  verse  an  explicit  statement  of  our  Lord's 
Divinity,  has  '  no  sufficient  ancient  evidence ' 
[RVm],  but  this  ancient  hymn,  as  it  appears  to 
be,  is  good  witness  for  the  pre-existence) ;  2  Ti  I"* 
('  which  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  times 
eternal,  but  hath  now  been  manifested  by  the  ap- 
pearing of  our  Saviour  Christ  Jesus ') ;  He  1*  ( '  when 
he  bringeth  in  the  firstborn  into  the  world ') ;  1  P 
120  ('  ■who  Avas  foreknown  indeed  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  but  was  manifested  at  the  end 
of  the  times  for  your  sake') ;  1  Jn  3'"^  (He  'was 
manifested');  4^^  ('Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the 
flesh  ').  See  also  below  (e).  Some  of  these  expres- 
sions might  have  been  interpreted,  though  with 
difficulty,  of  an  ordinary  birth  ;  but  such  an  inter- 
pretation is  impossible  when  we  compare  them  all 
together. 

With  these  passages  from  the  Epistles  we  may- 
compare  a  few  examples  taken  out  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  The  Word  was  '  in  the  beginning '  and 
'became  flesh'  (Jn  !*•").  Jesus  speaks  of  Him- 
self, or  the  Evangelist  speaks  of  Him,  as  '  he  that 
cometh  from  above,  he  that  cometh  from  heaven ' 
(3^^),  'whom  thou  hast  sent'  (17*),  as  'he  that  de- 
scended out  of  heaven,  even  the  Son  of  Man  which 
is  in  heaven  '  (3'*  ;  the  last  four  words  are  omitted 
by  M  B  and  some  other  authorities,  and  are  thought 
by  WH  [Appendix,  p.  75]  to  be  an  early  but  true 
gloss).  Pre-existence  does  not  in  itself  imply  God- 
head ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  if  our  Lord  was  not 
pre-existent,  He  cannot  be  God. 

(e)  Divine  attributes  ascribed  to  our  Lord. — At 
the  outset  of  the  apostolic  period  St.  Peter  speaks 
of  Jesus  as  the  '  Prince '  (or  '  Author,'  apx-nyd^)  '  of 
life';  He  coidd  not  be  holden  of  death  (Ac  2**). 
This  resembles  the  sayings  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
that  Jesus  has  '  life  in  himself '  ( Jn  5^" :  see  below,  8), 
and  that  He  has  power  to  lay  down  His  life  and  to 
take  it  again  (10^*).  Jesus  'abolished  death  and 
brought  life  and  incorruption  to  light  through  the 
gospel'  (2  Ti  l^o).  He  is  'the  first  and  the  last, 
and  the  Living  One,'  who  '  was  dead '  but  is  '  alive 
for  evermore '  and  has  '  the  keys  of  death  and  of 
Hades'  (Rev  I"'-) ;  He  is  the  '  Alpha  and  Omega' 
(22>^),  a  title  which  had  just  before  been  given  to 
the  Father  (P  216;  gee  above,  3  (i)).  The  Lamb, 
as  well  as  the  Father,  is  the  source  of  the  river 
(Rev  22')  which  is  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  (see  Swete, 
Com.  in  loc.  ;  cf.  Jn  7'"')'  Christ,  being  the  Living 
One,  is  called  '  our  life,'  the  giver  of  life  to  us,  in 
Col  3* ;  cf.  2  Ti  P"  as  above,  and  Jn  6"  ('he  that 
eateth  me,  he  aLso  shall  live  because  of  me ' ;  see  8). 
And  therefore  He  is  'in  us'  (Ro  S'",  etc.). 

Our  Lord  is  represented  as  receiving  the  worship 
of  angels  (He  l"),  and  of  the  four-and-twenty  elders 
(Rev  5^'-),  and  of  the  angels  and  living  creatures 


and  elders  (vv.""").  He  took  part  in  the  creation^ 
of  the  world  (Col  I",  He  P"  3»,  1  Co  8«,  Ro  W^, 
Jn  P).  Both  He  and  the  Father  are  called  '  the 
Saviour.'  The  ascription  of  this  title  to  the  Father 
is  characteristic  of  tne  Pastoral  lOpistles  (1  Ti  P  2* 
410,  Tit  P  2'"  3* ;  cf.  2  Ti  P)  and  is  also  found  in 
Jude2»  RV,  Lk  1«  (cf.  Ja  4'2) ;  but  it  is  given  to^ 
our  Lord  in  2  Ti  1",  Tit  P  3"  (in  eacli  case  just 
after  it  had  been  given  to  the  Father),  as  it  is  given 
in  Eph  5'a,  Ph  3'«,  1  Jn  4'^  2  P  P- "  2«'  Z"^^^,  Lk  2", 
Jn  4",  Ac  531  1328  (cf.  also  Jn  l^\  He  1"^).  Hi» 
human  nfime  of  Jesus  was  given  Him  with  that 
very  signification  (Mt  P').  It  was  the  foundation 
of  the  gospel  message  that '  Christ  Jesus  came  into^ 
the  world  to  save  sinners'  (1  Ti  P*).  It  is  in  the 
same  way  that  the  Father  is  sometimes  said  to^ 
be  the  Judge,  sometimes  our  Lord.     The  Father 

i'udges  through  the  Son  (Jn  5*" ;  cf,  Ja  4'"  with  5»). 
le  that  sat  on  the  white  horse  '  doth  judge  and 
make  war'  (Rev  19''),  though  during  His  eartlily 
ministry  our  Lord  did  not  judge  (Jn  8").  These 
two  considerations,  that  Jesus  is  Saviour  and  Judge, 
might  not  be  so  conclusive  as  to  His  Divinity,  if  it 
were  not  for  another  office  ascribed  to  Him,  that 
of  the  One  Mediator  (1  Ti  2').  He  is  Himself  man 
(v.*),  or  He  could  not  mediate ;  and  by  parity  of 
reasoning  He  is  Himself  God.  A  mediator  must 
share  the  nature  of  both  parties  to  the  mediation. 
A  mere  man  can  only  supplicate ;  God  not  incar- 
nate can  be  merciful ;  but  God  incarnate  alone  can 
mediate. 

The  great  attributes  of  God — love,  truth,  know- 
ledge, holiness,  righteousness  (including  justice) — 
are  ascribed  to  our  Lord.  His  love  is  spoken  of  in 
some  of  the  most  pathetic  passages  of  St.  Paul  : 
'  the  Son  of  God  who  loved  me  and  gave  himself 
up  for  me'  (Gal  2-"),  'the  love  of  Christ  which 
passeth  knowledge'  (Eph  3"  ;  cf.  5^).  The  Apoca- 
lyptist  declares  that '  he  lovetli  us  and  loosed  us  from 
our  sins  by  his  blood '  (Rev  1').  It  is  because  of 
this  Divine  attribute  of  love  that  '  Christ  forgave ' 
sinners  (Eph  4^'^).  His  forgiving  sins  was  a  great 
scandal  to  the  Jews  (Mk  2*-''-'<').  Well  might  they 
ask,  from  their  point  of  view,  '  Who  can  forgive 
sins  but  one,  even  God  ?'  The  forgiveness  of  sins  by 
our  Lord  difJers  in  kind,  not  in  degree,  from  human 
absolutions  pronounced  by  Christian  ministers,  who 
do  not  profess  to  be  able  to  read  the  heart  or 
to  perform  any  but  a  conditional  and  ministerial 
action. — For  the  attribute  of  truth  see  Rev  3^-" 
('the  Amen ')  6'"  19"  (in  these  Jesus  is  [6]  dXij^ivAi, 
the  'ideal  or  absolute  truth,'  not  merely  'vera- 
cious'), Jn  P*  ('  full  of  grace  and  truth ')  14*  ('  I  am 
the  way  and  the  truth  and  the  life').  Our  Lord, 
then,  is  absolute  Truth ;  and  with  this  attribute 
is  associated  that  of  knoxclcdge  :  '  He  knew  all  men 
...  he  himself  knew  what  was  in  man '  ( Jn  2^)  ; 
without  this  He  could  not  be  the  Judge  (see  also 
1  Co  P-»-»»,  Col  23).— Most  emphatically  is  our  Lord 
called  holy.  His  is  an  absolute  sanctity  (Rev  3^ : 
'  He  that  is  holy,  he  that  is  true ') ;  not  only  the 
holiness  of  a  good  man  who  strives  to  do  God's 
will,  but  absolute  sinlessness.  This  attribute  is 
insisted  on  with  some  vehemence  in  2  Co  5-',  He  4'* 
7-*'-  ('  holy  '  [Scrtos ;  see  3  (/)  note],  '  separated  from 
sinners'),"  1  P  P"  2P,  1  Jn  3';  note  also  Ro  8^ 
('in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh').  Sanday-Headlam 
justly  remark  (ICC  in  loc.)  that  *  the  flesh  of  Christ 
IS  "  like  "  ours  inasmuch  as  it  is  flesh  ;  "  like,"  and 
only  "like,"  because  it  is  not  sinful.'  For  this 
attribute  see  also  Ac  3"  ('  the  Holy  and  Righteous 
One')  4=",  Rev  6'";  and,  in  the  Gospels,  Mk  1-'*, 
Jn  6**,  etc.  Both  the  demoniacs  in  a  lower  sense 
and  the  instructed  disciples  in  a  higher  one  call  our 
Lord  '  the  Holy  One  of  God.'  It  was  announced 
by  Gabriel  that  from  His  birth  Jesus  should  be 
called  holy,  the  Son  of  God  (Lk  1»  RV).— Lastly, 
the  attribute  of  righteousness  is  ascribed  to  our 


GOD 


GOD 


465 


Lord.  e.g.  in  Ac  3"  22",  2  Ti  4^  He  1»,  Ja  o\  1  P  S'*, 
Kev  19",  as  in  Jn  5**.  It  is  this  attribute  which 
assures  a  just  judgment ;  but  it  includes  more  than 
•  justice '  in  the  ordinary  human  sense  ;  it  embraces 
all  that '  uprightness '  stands  for.  (With  the  whole 
of  this  sub-section,  cf.  §  8  above.) 

(/)  Christ's  Godhead  w  not  contrary  to  His  true 
humanity. — In  weighing  all  the  above  considera- 
tions, we  must  remember  the  great  stress  that  is 
laid  in  the  NT  on  the  true  humanity  of  Jesus  {e.g. 
Ac  17",  Ro  1',  1  Ti  2*,  Rev  1«),  though  this  does 
not  come  within  the  scope  of  this  article.  The 
apostles  did  not  make  their  Master  to  be  a  mere 
Docetic  or  phantom  man.  Jesus  really  suffered  in 
His  human  spirit  as  well  as  in  His  human  body. 
But  when  we  review  all  the  passages  given  in  the 
preceding  paragraphs,  and  others  like  them,  what- 
ever deductions  we  may  make  because  of  a  doubtful 
reading  here  or  a  questionable  interpretation  there, 
we.  cannot  doubt  that  the  apostles  taught  that 
Jesus  is  no  mere  man,  or  even  a  created  angel, 
but  is  God.     See  further  below,  §  9. 

7.  Pcpsonality  and  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
— Much  is  said  in  the  OT  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  who 
from  the  first  had  given  life  to  the  world  (Gn  1-  2^, 
Job  33*).  The  '  Spirit '  in  Hebrew,  as  in  Greek  and 
Latin,  is  the  Breath  of  God  (rxi,  rpeOfta,  spiritus), 
who  not  only  gave  physical  life  at  the  first,  but 
is  the  moving  power  of  holiness.  The  Psalmist 
prays:  'Take  not  thy  holy  spirit  from  me'  (Ps 
51").  But  the  OT  teachers  had  not  yet  learnt 
what  Christian  theology  calls  the  personality  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  (see  above,  5  (a)),  though  in  the 
teaching  about  '  Wisdom,'  which  is  in  some  degree 
personitietl  in  the  OT,  e.g.  in  Pr  8  and  the  Sapi- 
ential books  of  the  Apocrypha,  and  also  in  tne 
phraseology  of  such  passages  as  Is  48^"  63^'*,  they 
made  some  approach  to  it.  In  Christian  times, 
while  there  has  been  on  the  whole  little  doubt 
about  the  Godhead  of  the  Spirit  (though  in  the  4th 
cent,  the  Arians  asserted  that  He  was  a  created 
being),  yet  men  have  frequently  hesitated  about 
His  distinct  personality,  and  have  thought  of  Him 
merely  as  an  Attribute  or  Influence  of  the  Father. 
It  is  therefore  important  to  investigate  the  apos- 
tolic teaching  on  the  subject.  We  must  first  notice 
that  the  NT  writers  fully  recognize  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  had  worked  in  the  Old  Dispensation ;  1^ 
'  spake  by  the  prophets '  [the  enlarged  '  Nicene ' 
Creed] ;  the  words  quoted  from  the  OT  are  the 
words  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (Ac  V^  28^,  1  P  1",  2  P 
1^,  Mk  12^,  etc.).  The  Pentecostal  outpouring 
was  not  the  first  working  of  the  Spirit  in  the  world. 
But  the  apostolic  writers  teach  a  far  higher  doc- 
trine of  the  Spirit  than  was  known  in  the  OT. 

(a)  The  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost. — We  have 
already  seen  (above,  5  (c))  that  the  Spirit  is  in  the 
NT  teaching  joined  to  the  Father  and  Son  in  a 
manner  which  implies  Godhead.  The  'Spirit  of 
God'  (see  below)  must  be  God.  When  Ananias 
lied  'to  the  Holy  Ghost,'  he  lied  not  'unto  men 
but  unto  God'  (Ac  o*** ;  cf.  v.*,  where  he  and 
Sapphira  are  said  to  have  'agreed  together  to 
tempt  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord ').  With  th&  we  may 
compare  Mk  3^,  where  blasphemy  against  the 
H0I3*  Spirit  is  said  to  have  '  never  forgiveness ' ; 
the  II  Mt  12*^'-  adds:  'Whosoever  shall  speak  a 
word  against  the  Son  of  man  it  shall  be  forgiven 
him.'  The  inference  is  that  if  the  Son  is  God,  the 
Spirit  is  God. — Di\'ine  attributes  are  predicated  of 
the  Spirit.  In  particular.  He  is  throughout  named 
holy.  We  may  ask  why  this  epithet  is  so  con- 
stantly given  to  Him,  for  it  is  obviously  not  in- 
tended to  derogate  from  the  Father  or  the  Son. 
May  not  the  reason  be  sought  in  the  work  of  the 
Spirit  ?  It  is  through  Him  that  man  becomes  holy, 
through  Him  that  God  works  on  man.  In  this 
connexion  we  may  notice  two  points.  (1)  In  the 
VOL.  I. — 30 


OT  we  do  not  find  the  al>solute  title  'the  Holy 
Spirit,'  though  the  Spirit  is  called  '  holy '  in  Ps  51" 
('thy  holy  spirit')  and  Is  63'**-  ('his  holy  spirit'). 
The  use  of  the  title  'the  Holy  Spirit'  is  a  token 
of  advance  to  the  conception  of  personality ;  see 
below  (b).  (2)  In  the  NT  there  is  frequently  a 
difference  between  the  title  when  used  without  the 
article  and  when  used  with  it,  so  that  rvevfta  iyiov 
('Holy  Spirit')  is  a  gift  or  manifestation  of  the 
Spirit  in  its  relation  to  the  life  of  man,  while  the 
same  words  with  the  article  (t6  rvevfui  t6  iyiw  or 
TO  iyioi'  Tvei/fxa)  denote  the  Holy  Spirit  considered 
as  a  Divine  Person  (Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
NT,  1909,  p.  396  f.).— Again,  knowledge  of  the  deep 
things  of  God  is  predicated  of  the  Spirit  (1  Co  2^**"). 
He  is  the  truth  (1  Jn  5? ;  cf.  Jn  15*).  He  is  the 
Spirit  of  life  (Ro  8*),  and  immanent  in  man  (Ro  ^ 
8»  14",  1  Co  6»  [cf.  esp.  2  Co  6'«]  7«  Gal  4«,  Jn  14", 
etc. ).  He  is  eternal  (He  9" ;  but  on  this  verse  see 
Swete,  p.  61). 

(b)  The  Personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost.— Tbia 
needs  careful  consideration.  Is  He  but  an  In- 
fluence of  the  Father?  The  NT  writings  negative 
this  idea ;  for,  though  they  join  together  the  Spirit 
with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  as  above,  5  (c),  yet 
they  represent  the  Spirit  as  being  in  a  real  sense 
distinct  from  both.  In  Jn  14^'  our  Lord  says :  *  I 
will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another 
(dXXo;')  Comforter.'  He  is  sent  by  the  Father  (14*), 
proceeds  from  the  Father  (15*),  and  is  sent  by  the 
Son  from  the  Father  (15^  16^).  He  is  called  by  St. 
Paul  in  the  same  context  '  the  Spirit  of  God '  and 
'the  Spirit  of  Christ'  (Ro  Sfi).  The  Father  is  not 
the  same  Person  as  the  Son,  and  if  the  Holy  Ghost 
is  the  Spirit  of  both.  He  must  be  distinct  from 
both.  This  is  seen  silso,  though  in  not  quite  so 
close  and  striking  a  context,  in  many  other  passages. 
He  is  called  '  the  Spirit  of  God '  also  in  1  Co  2^"^- " 
7*,  Eph  4*>,  Ph  3»,  1  Th  4*,  1  Jn  4-  «,  as  in  Mt  1228 
(where  the  i|  Lk  11"  has '  the  finger  of  God '  instead, 
the  meaning  being  that  God  works  through  the 
Holy  Ghost) ;  He  is  called  '  the  Spirit  of  your 
Father' in  Mt  10*;  and  'the  Spirit  of  Christ' or 
'of  Jesus'  or  'of  the  Son'  in  Ac  16' RV,  Gal  4«, 
Ph  1^,  1  P  1";  note  especially  Gal  4«:  'God  sent 
forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  our  hearts.'  Again, 
that  the  Spirit  is  distinct  from  the  Son  is  clear 
from  Jn  16^  ('  if  I  go  not  away  the  Comforter  will 
not  come  unto  you,  but  if  I  go  I  will  send  him  unto 
you')  and  v."  ('he  shall  take  of  mine  and  shall 
declare  it  unto  you '). 

Personal  acts  are  frequently  predicated  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  In  Ac  13-  *  we  read :  '  They  minis- 
tered to  the  Lord,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  said.  Separate 
me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I 
have  called  them.  ...  So  they,  being  sent  forth 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,'  etc.  In  Ac  15"*  the  formula 
which  became  the  common  usage  of  later  Councils 
is  used  :  '  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to 
us.'  So  we  read  that  the  Spirit  wills  (1  Co  12"), 
searches  (1  Co  2'"),  is  grieved  (Eph  4*'),  helps  and 
intercedes  (Ro  8**),  dwells  within  ua  (above  (a)), 
and  distributes  gifts  (1  Co  12"). 

In  the  sub-apo6tolic  period  there  ia  foood  some  oontonon 
between  the  Son  and  the  Spirit :  e.g.  Hermas,  Sim.  t.  6,  ix.  1 ; 
pseudo-Clement,  S  Cor.  ix.,  xxv. ;  Jostin,  ApoL  L  33.  Thus 
Justin  says:  "Hie  Spirit  and  the  Power  ■which  is  from  God 
must  not  be  thoaght  to  be  anght  else  bat  the  Word  who  is 
God's  First-begotten.'  Hennas  seems  to  identify  the  Spirit 
with  the  pre-existent  Dirine  nature  of  Christ :  '  The  hrfy  pre- 
existent  Spirit  which  created  the  whole  earth  God  made  to 
dwell  in  flesh.  .  .  .  Tliat  Spirit  is  the  Son  of  God."  But  the 
meaning  of  these  writers  seems  to  be  merely  that  the  pre- 
existent  Logos  was  spirit  and  was  Divine.  Swete  (Botif  Spirit 
in  the  Ancient  Church,  p.  31)  remarks  of  this  period  that '  there 
was  as  yet  no  formal  theology  of  the  Spirit  and  no  effort  to 
create  it;  nor  was  there  any  conscious  heresy.  But  the 
presence  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Body  of  Christ  was  recognized 
on  all  hands  as  an  acknowledged  fact  of  the  Christian  life.' 

8.  Subordination. — This  is  the  term  by  which 
Christian    theology  expresses    the    doctrine  that 


466 


GOD 


GOD 


there  are  not  tliree  sources  in  the  Godhead,  but 
that  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  derive  their 
Divine  substance  from  the  Father,  and  that,  while 
they  are  equal  to  Him  as  touching  their  Godhead, 
yet  in  a  real  sense  they  are  subordinate  to  Hiui. 
This,  however,  does  not  involve  tlie  Arian  con- 
ception of  a  Supreme  God  and  two  inferior  deities. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  human  language  is 
limited,  and  unable  to  express  fully  the  Divine 
mysteries ;  so  that  just  as  the  teclinical  terms 
*  Trinity,' '  Person,'  may  be  misused  in  the  interests 
of  Tritheism,  so  'subordination'  may  be  misused 
in  the  interests  of  Arianism. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  'spiritual  Gospel,' as 
Clement  of  Alexandria  calls  Jn.  (quoted  in  Eusebius, 
HE  VI.  xiv.  7),  though  it  insists  so  strongly  on  the 
Godhead  of  our  Lord,  yet  equally  emphasizes  the 
doctrine  of  subordination.  It  is  the  Father  who, 
having  'life  in  himself,'  gave  'to  the  Son  also  to 
have  life  in  himself,'  and  'gave  all  judgment  unto 
the  Son '  ( Jn  5'^-  ^).  Jesus  says  :  '  I  live  because 
of  the  Father '  (6"  ;  cf .  10'»).  It  has  been  disputed 
whether  Jn  14^"*  ('  the  Father  is  greater  than  I ')  re- 
fers to  Jesus'  humanity,  as  the  Latin  Fathers  ordin- 
arily explain  it,  or  to  His  Divinity,  as  the  Greek 
Fathers  interpret ;  if  to  the  latter,  we  have  here  a 
striking  instance  of  subordination  (see  Liddon, 
Bampton  Lechires,  ISGG^,  1878,  lect.  iv.  p.  199  f.). 
We  tind  the  same  thing  in  St.  Paul :  '  The  head 
of  Christ  is  God'(l  Co  IP);  'then  shall  the  Son 
also  himself  be  subjected  to  him  that  did  subject 
all  things  unto  him,  that  God  may  be  all  in  all ' 
(1528) ;  cf.  1  Co  8»,  '  of  whom  are  all  things.'  Sub- 
ordination is  also  suggested  by  the  frequent  phrase 
'  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ '  and 
the  words  '  my  God '  used  by  our  Lord  in  Rev  3* 
RV  3'^,  and  especially  in  Jn  20",  where  Jesus  dis- 
tinguishes 'my  God'  and  'your  God'  just  as  He 
distinguishes  'my  Father'  and  'your  Father' 
(above,  4  (a)). 

Both  the  Godhead  and  the  subordination  of  our 
Lord  are  expressed  by  the  phrases  '  God  of  (iK) 
God,' '  Very  God  of  very  God '  of  the  Nicene  Creed. 
The  Father  is  the  fount  or  source  of  Godhead,  and 
there  is  none  other. 

The  subordination  of  the  Spirit  is  implied  in 
much  that  has  been  quoted  above.  The  very  title 
'  the  Spirit  of  God '  denotes  that  He  is  subordinate 
to  the  Father  and  derives  from  Him.  Note  also 
Jn  16*^'-  :  '  He  shall  not  speak  from  himself,  but 
what  things  soever  he  shall  hear,  [these]  shall  he 
speak  ...  he  shall  take  of  mine  and  shall  declare 
it  unto  you,'  with  which  we  must  compare  \5}^  : 
'  all  things  that  I  heard  from  my  Father  1  have 
made  known  unto  you.'  This  refers  to  the  tem- 
poral mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  so,  probably 
(at  least  in  it*  primary  aspect),  does  the  saj'ing 
that  He  '  proceedeth  from  the  Father '  (15-*).  The 
procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  has  been  much  dis- 
cussed, and  the  controversy  has  been  complicated 
by  the  addition  of  a  word  (Filioque)  to  the  Nicene 
Creed  by  the  Western  Church  ;  but  most  of  those 
who  have  engaged  in  this  theological  warfare 
might  probably  agree  in  the  statement  that  He 
who  is  '  the  Spirit  of  Christ '  ])roceeds,  in  eternity 
as  well  as  in  time,  from  the  Fatlier  through  the 
Son.  In  any  ca.se,  procession  involves  what  is 
meant  by  '  subordination.' 

9.  The  Divine  unity.— Although  the  apostolic 
writers  emphasize  the  distinctions  in  the  Godhead, 
they  at  the  same  time  reiterate  the  OT  doctrine 
that  God  is  One.  They  show  no  consciousness  of 
teaching  anything  but  the  unity  of  God.  The 
saying  of  Dt  6*  (cf.  Is  44^)  that  '  The  Lord  our  God 
is  one  Lord'  is  repeated  by  the  Master  in  Mk 
1229.  'There  is  no  God  but  one,'  says  St.  Paul  (1 
Co  8* ;  so  V.8) ;  '  There  is  one  God,'  '  the  only  God ' 
(1  Ti  2'  1").    St.  James  makes  the  unity  of  God  a 


common  ground  between  his  opponents  and  him- 
self ;  even  the  demons  believe  [this]  (Ja  2"*).  A.s 
a  matter  of  fact,  Christianity  was  never  seriously 
accused  of  polytheism.  Aubrey  Moore  remarks 
(Lux  Mundi^,  1890,  p.  59)  that  at  the  present  day 
polytheism  has  ceased  to  exist  in  tne  civilized 
world ;  everj'  theist  is  by  a  rational  necessity 
a  monotheist.  And  this  tendency  had  begun  at 
the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era.  But  the 
Jews  of  that  day  made  the  Divine  unity  to  be  self- 
absorbed.  The  Divine  attribute  of  love  implies 
relations  within  the  Divine  Being ;  and  hence  the 
Jewish  idea  of  God  was  a  barren  one,  as  is  the 
Muhammadan  idea  to-day.  The  world  needed  a 
re-statement  of  the  doctrme  of  (iod,  and  this  was 
given  by  Christianity.  The  Christian  doctrine 
steers  ite  way  between  Tritheism,  which  postu- 
lates three  Persons  like  three  individuals,  and 
Sabellianism,  which  teaches  that  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit  are  but  three  aspects  of  God.  It  does  not 
profess  to  be  '  easy ' ;  it  was  the  desire  for  '  easi- 
ness '  that  led  to  Arianism  and  its  cognates,  which 
taught  that  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  were  inferior 
and  created  Divine  beings ;  and,  indeed,  it  was 
the  same  desire  that  led  to  all  the  old  Christian 
heresies.  But  we  need  not  expect  that  the  '  deep 
things  of  God'  (1  Co  2'"),  which  cannot  adequately 
be  expressed  in  human  language,  will  be  readily 
comprehensible  to  our  limited  human  intelligence. 
To  whom  is  this  re-statement  of  the  doctrine  of 
God  due  ?  Was  it  made  in  sub-apostolic  times,  or 
by  the  apostles,  or  by  our  Lord  Himself  ?  Those 
who  deny  that  St.  Paul  wrote  any  Epistles,  or  at 
least  any  that  have  survived,  and  who  make  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  and  perhaps  the  First,  to  be  2nd 
cent,  writings,  may  take  the  lirst  view.  Only  it 
is  difficult  to  imagine  what  unknown  genius  in  the 
sub-apostolic  age  could  have  made  such  a  revolu- 
tion in  thought.  This  view,  however,  may  safely 
be  passed  over,  as  involving  a  thoroughly  false 
criticism  of  the  NT  books.  More  attention  must 
be  paid  to  the  view  that  the  re-statement  of  doc- 
trine is  due  to  St.  Paul ;  tiiat  he  was,  in  reality, 
the  founder  of  Christian  doctrine,  and  that  the 
'original  Christianity  is  better  represented  by 
Ebionism.'  It  has  been  well  pointed  out  by  Gore 
{Bampton  Lectures,  1891,  Appended  Note  26,  p. 
254  fi".)  that  this  view  is  contrary  to  all  the  evi- 
dence. Those  books  of  the  NT  which  are  most 
independent  of  St.  Paul,  such  as  the  Second 
Gospel,  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse, give  the  same  doctrine  that  the  Apostle  of 
the  Gentiles  gives.  There  was  no  opposition  on 
tlie  subject  of  the  Person  of  Christ  between  St. Paul 
and  his  judaizing  opponents,  as  would  certainly 
have  been  the  case  had  Ebionism  been  the  original 
Christianity.  The  re-statement  of  the  doctrine  of 
God  was  fully  received  at  least  within  a  genera- 
tion of  the  Ascension.  For  example,  Sanday  points 
out  (HDB  iv.  573*)  that  the  use  of  'the  Father' 
and  '  the  Son '  as  theological  terms  goes  back  to  a 
date  which  is  not  more  than  23  years  from  that 
event  (1  Th  1^-  ^'^).  It  is  impossible  to  account  for 
such  a  rapid  growth  unless  the  re-statement  came 
from  Him  whose  bond-servants  the  apostles  loved 
to  profess  themselves.  The  concurrence  of  so 
many  independent  writers  can  only  be  due  to  the 
fact  that '  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ. 
No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time  ;  God  only  be- 
gotten [or  the  only  begotten  Son],  which  is  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him '  (Jn  I"'-). 

LiTKRATiTRK.— Out  of  a  vast  number  of  works  it  is  not  easy  to 
(jive  a  small  seleciion  which  will  be  useful  to  the  reader  ;  and 
therefore  only  Knglish  works  are  here  mentioned,  and  only 
those  which  bear  on  the  apostolic  period.  Reference  may  be 
made  to  J.  Pearson,  An  Exposition  of  the  Creed  (first  published 
in  leSD;  a  monument  of  theological  learning,  of  which  the 
foot-notes,  giving  the  Patristic  quotations,  are  specially  valu- 
able) ;  C.  Gore,  The  Incarnation  o/  the  Son  of  God  (Bampton 


GODLINESS 


GOG  AND  MAGOG 


467 


Ltehtrtt,  1891)  ;  H.  P.  Liddon,  The  Divinity  oj  Our  Lord  and 
Savicwr  Jettu  Ckritt  {Bampton  Lecture*,  1866)  ;  Lux  Mundfi, 
1890  (especaally  EsMtys  iv.,  v.,  vi..  viii.);  H.  B.  Swete,  ne 
ApostUf  CreedP,  1899,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  tMe  Sew  TeaUtmeia, 
1909,  and  The  Holg  ^rit  iu  the  Ancient  Ckureh,  1912 ;  R.  L. 
Ottley,  Aspects  of  tJu  OT  (Bampton  Lectures,  1897)  (especuUy 
Lecture  IT.  on  the  'Progressive  SeU-Revelation  of  God');  R. 
C  Moberley,  Atonement  and  Personalitt,  1901 ;  H.  C.  Powell, 
The  Principle  of  the  Ineamatitn,  1886;  A.  J.  Mason,  The 
Faith  of  the  G<Mpel,  1887-89.  Special  reference  luiuft  also  be 
made  to  artt.  '  God '  and  '  Son  of  God '  by  W.  Sanday  in  UDB 
mad  •  Trinity  ■  by  C  F.  DArcy  in  DCG. 

A.  J.  Maclean. 

GODLINESS. — This  word  appears  in  the  EV  of 
the  NT  as  the  translation  of  the  Gr.  ewr^/3«o  (1  Ti 
2*  316  47. 8  2  Ti  3*.  Tit  P,  2  P  1»- «•  ^  3",  also  Ac  3'2  RV). 
In  1  Ti  2»"  it  translates  Oeoai^eia.  Cf.  also  2  Clem, 
xix.  1  (cvffe'/Jettt),  XX.  4  {deoai^fux).  *  fvci^eta  is  a 
more  general  word  than  dtoci^ui,  and  Ls  almost 
equivjUent  to  the  Latin  pietas,  dne  esteem  of 
superiors,  whether  human  or  Divine,  while  deoai^eia 
is  restricted  to  God  as  its  object.  However,  in  the 
NT-  eiVe,3eitt  always  has  reference  to  God'  (J.  H. 
Bernard,  The  Pastoral  Epistles  [Camb.  Greek 
Test.,  1899],  p.  39  f.). 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  references  that  the 
word  evai^ewL  (deoat^tia)  is  particularly  character- 
istic of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  H.  J.  Holtzmann 
speaks  of  the  idea  represented  by  it  as  one  of  the 
most  individual  ideas  of  these  letters,  and  points 
out  that  its  appearance  in  them  (cf.  also  evce^Cn 
}t,p  [2  Ti  3",  Tit  2*2])  ig  connected  with  the  recession 
of  the  one-sidedly  religious  interest  of  the  great 
Pauline  Epistles  (GaL,  Rom.,  1  and  2  Cor.),  and 
the  coming  to  the  front  of  an  ethical  conception  of 
the  business  of  life  (see  his  NT  Theol.^,  Tubing- 
en, 1911,  ii.  306).  In  the  original  Paultnism  the 
supreme  stress  lies  on  the  religious  relation  to  God, 
and  the  central  idea  is  that  of  justification  by  faith ; 
while  the  ethical  note  is  struck  only  in  the  second 
place,  and  in  connexion  with  the  peculiar  Pauline 
mj'sticism.  The  Christian  united  to  Christ  in  His 
Death  and  Resurrection  is  a  new  man,  and  must 
accordingly  live  as  such.  In  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
however,  it  is  justification  by  faith  and  the  specifi- 
cally religious  relation  to  God  which  are  in  the 
background  ;  while  the  ethical  demand  of  Christi- 
anity comes  to  the  front  in  connexion  with  a  fresh 
idea — that  of  adhesion  to  the  Church,  its  doctrine 
and  practice.  It  is  just  this  latter  point  of  view 
as  a  whole  which  is  summed  up  in  the  word  eiae^eia. 
'  It  is  above  all  significant  of  the  tendency  of  our 
epistles,  that  this  conception  serves  to  gather  up 
in  one  both  of  these  lines,  in  which  the  entire 
thought  and  effort  of  the  author  moves,  viz.  the 
ecclesiastical  and  the  practical  character  of  the 
type  of  religion  recommended  by  him '  (Holtzmann, 
loc.  cit. ).  On  the  one  hand,  therefore,  godliness,  a^ 
adhesion  to  the  Church,  appears  as  guaranteeing 
true  doctrine  (the  teaching  which  is  according  to 
godliness  [1  Ti  6^  the  Imowledge  of  the  truth 
which  is  according  to  godliness  [Tit  1^],  the  mystery 
of  godliness  [1  Ti  3^®] ;  cf.  Ap.  Const.  iiL  5 :  kottj- 
Xetff^at  TCI  TTJs  eiae^eias  S&ynara).  On  the  other  hand, 
godliness  evidences  itself  in  good  works  and  a  life 
without  reproach  (1  Ti  2^  4'').  It  is  in  fact  because 
of  the  practical  and  ethical  character  of  Christian- 
ity that  its  doctrine  in  opposition  to  the  heretical 
speculations  of  Gnosis  is  sound  speech  (Tit  2"), 
sound  teaching  (1  Ti  V\  2  Ti  4^  Tit  1»  2^),  sound 
words  (I  Ti  6^  2  Ti  1") ;  cf.  'to  be  sound  in  the 
faith '  (Tit  l^^  2^).  On  all  this  see  Holtzmann,  op.  cit. 
Holtzmann,  of  course,  does  not  accept  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Bernard,  who 
does,  says  that  the  group  of  words  connected  with 
ewre^aa  was  within  St.  Paul's  sphere  of  knowledge, 
as  they  are  all  found  in  the  LXX  and  are  common 
in  Greek  literature ;  as  a  matter  of  fact,  too,  St. 
Paul  uses  the  corresponding  forms  dceSeia  and 
offf^qi  in  Romans.     *  But  why  he  should  not  have 


used  them  before  and  yet  should  use  them  so  often 
in  these  latest  letters  is  among  the  unsolved  prob- 
lems of  the  phraseology  of  the  Pastorals,  although 
corresponding  literary  phenomena  have  been  often 
observed '  {op.  cit.  p.  39).  The  problem  created  by 
the  use  of  these  words  is,  however,  only  a  part  of 
the  larger  problem  of  the  whole  change  in  thought 
and  atmosphere  which  has  taken  place  between 
the  'Hauptbriefe'  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles  (see 
the  writer's  Man,  Sin,  and  Salvation,  London, 
1908,  pp.  137-140). 

In  conclusion,  it  may  be  observed,  and  it  has  a 
bearing  on  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  the 
Pastorals,  that  the  idea  of  'godliness'  serves  to 
bind  these  letters  together  with  the  certainly  late 
and  unauthentic  2  Peter  and  2  Clement.  In  2  Pet., 
moreover,  dxri^ia  serves  to  denote,  just  as  in  the 
Pastoiuls,  the  religion  of  the  Church,  in  opposition 
to  that  of  a  heretical  Gnosis  (1"  2"-). 

Robert  S.  Franks. 

GOG  AND  MAGOG.— In  the  Book  of  Revelation 
(20"-  *)  the  seer  tells  that  Satan,  after  being  bound 
for  one  thousand  years,  shall  be  loosed  and  go  forth 
to  deceive  the  nations  which  are  in  the  four  qnarters 
of  the  earth,  Gog  and  Magog,  to  gather  them 
together  to  battle.  This  is  conceived  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse as  the  last  great  battle  between  the  powers 
of  evil  and  the  armies  of  God,  and  as  the  occasion 
of  the  final  overthrow  of  the  wicked,  when  fire 
comes  forth  from  heaven  to  devour  them.  In  this 
passage  Gog  and  Magog  are  represented  as  nations 
dwelling  in  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth  and 
symbolic  of  the  enemies  of  the  Lord.  The  names 
are  taken  from  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel  (chs.  38 
and  39),  where  Gog  is  represented  as  a  person, '  the 
prince  of  Rosh,  Meshech,  and  Tubal,'  and  Magog 
as  the  name  of  his  land  (3J8-).  The  prophet  depicts 
this  prince  as  leading  a  great  host  against  the 
restored  Israel,  and  being  utterly  defeated  and 
overthrown.  In  the  ethnological  table  in  Gn  10 
Magog  is  represented  as  the  son  of  Japheth  and 
brother  of  Gomer.  As  to  the  etymology  of  the 
names,  considerable  difference  of  opinion  exists. 
Driver  (in  SDB,  art.  'Gog')  states  that  the  name 
Gog  recalls  that  of  Gyges  (Gr.  ri^yiji,  Assyr.  Gugu), 
the  famous  king  of  Lydia  of  whom  Herodotus 
(L  8-14)  tells  us,  and  who,  Assurbanipal  states 
(KIB  ii.  173-5),  when  his  cotmtry  was  invaded 
by  the  Gimirra  (Cimerians),  expelled  them  with 
Assyrian  help.  The  name  may  have  reached 
Palestine  as  that  of  a  successful  and  distant  king 
of  barbarian  tribes  and  may  have  been  used  by 
Ezekiel  as  symbolic  of  powers  hostUe  to  the  King- 
dom of  God.  Anotlier  interesting  explanation  is 
that  of  Uhlemann  (ZWT\.  [ed.  Hilgenfeld,  1862], 
p.  265  ff.).  He  points  out  that  Magog  originally 
signified  '  dwelling-place,'  or  'land  of  Gog,'  and  that 
the  name  Gog  itself  means  'mountain.'  Accord- 
ing to  Uhlemann,  all  etymological  and  geographical 
indications  point  to  the  nation  of  Gog  being  the 
inhabitants  of  the  Caucasus,  as  the  KaxiK&aiow  odpot 
of  Herodotus  is  simply  the  Asiatic  '  Kauk '  or 
the  Asiatic  '  mountain  range.'  Others,  such  as 
Augustine  and  several  ancient  commentators,  con- 
nect the  word  with  Heb.  ii  '  roof,' '  cover'  or  '  protec- 
tion,' but  it  is  unlikely  that  there  is  any  connexion. 

The  Jews  themselves  regarded  Gog  and  Magog 
as  vague  descriptions  of  northern  barbaric  nations, 
with  whom  they  were  very  slightly  acquainted. 
Josephus  (Ant.  I.  vi.  1)  identifies  them  with  the 
Scythians — a  term  which  was  generally  used  to 
describe  vaguely  any  northern  barbaric  people. 
Perhaps  even  in  Ezekiel,  where  Gog  is  the  prince 
and  Magog  the  name  of  his  country,  the  terms  are 
little  more  than  symbolic  names  for  the  opponents 
of  God  and  His  people.  The  picture  that  Ezekiel 
gave  of  their  overthrow  gave  rise  to  the  apocalyptic 
conception  that  finally  the  enemies  of  God  and  His 


468 


GOLD 


GOOD 


people  would  be  utterly  overthrown  in  a  great  battle, 
and  the  names  Gog  and  Magog  frequently  appear 
in  later  Jewish  apocalyptic  literature  as  leaders 
of  the  hostile  world  powers  (cf.  Sib.  Orac.  iii.  319, 
322;  Mishna,  Eduyoth,  2.  10).  This  final  and  abor- 
tive attack  on  the  part  of  the  powers  of  evil  is 
referred  to  in  Rev  IQ^'^"^-,  while  in  20*  the  names  of 
Go^  and  Magog  appear  as  tlie  description  of  hostile 
nations.  Probably  Rev  19  and  20,  like  most  of  the 
book,  is  part  of  a  Jewish  apocalypse  which  has 
been  transformed  by  the  Christian  writer.  The 
Christian  seer,  like  the  Hebrew  prophet,  looks  for 
a  day  when  the  enemies  of  God  and  His  saints  will 
be  utterly  overthrown. 

Many  and  varied  are  the  interpretations  that 
have  been  given  of  Gog  and  Magog  by  those 
who,  ignoring  the  poetical  and  pictorial  nature  of 
apocalyptic  literature,  regard  the  Apocalypse  as  a 

1)rophecy  of  actual  historic  events.  Thus  the  names 
lave  been  applied  to  nations  beyond  the  bounds  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  to  Rar  Cochba,  the  Jewish 
Messianic  pretender,  and  frequently  to  the  Turks. 
These  interpretations  depend  on  the  view  taken  of 
the  '  thousand  years'  and  the  '  first  resurrection.' 
For  a  full   discussion   of   the   subject,   see  artt. 

ESCHATOLOGY,  PAUOUSIA. 

LiTERATURB.— A.  B.  Davtdson,  Ezekiel  (Camb.  Bible,  1892) ; 
F.  Diisterdieck,  Handbuch  iiber  die  Offenbarung  Johannis"^ 
in  Meyer's  Kommentar  iiber  das  NT,  1865  ;  W.  Bousset,  Die 
Offenbarung  Johannis^  in  Meyer's  Kommentar,  1896,  Der  Anti- 
ehrigt,  1895,  Religion  des  Jiuientumg  irn  NT  Zeitalter^,  1906 ;  J. 
Moffatt,  '  Uevelation '  in  BGT,  1910  ;  B.  Stade,  Geschichte  des 
Volkes  Israel,  1888  ;  E.  Scburer.GJV*,  1901-1911 ;  E.  Schrader, 
^^73,1902-03;  S.  R.  Driver,  artt.  ' Gog," Magog' in  52)£; 
A.  H.  Sayce,  artt.  '  Gog,'  '  Magog '  in  HUB. 

W.  F.  ROYD. 

GOLD  {xpvaSs,  -xpvalov,  *  gold ' ;  xP'^'^'f os,  *  golden ' ; 
Xpv(x6(j),  'adorn  with  gold,'  'gild'). — This  mineral 
may,  from  one  point  of  view,  be  classed  with  '  any 
other  yellow  pebbles'  (Ruskin,  Unto  This  Last, 
§29),  but  as  a  universal  standard  of  value  and 
means  of  adornment  it  claims  a  special  attention. 
From  the  earliest  times  the  imagination  of  man 
has  been  fired  by  the  thought  of  reefs  and  sands  of 
gold.  There  is  a  naive  wonder  in  the  first  and 
last  biblical  references — '  and  the  gold  of  that  land 
was  good '  (Gn  2'^),  '  and  the  street  of  the  city  was 
pure  gold'  (Rev  21^^).  There  are  good  reasons  for 
the  unquestioned  supremacy  of  gold  among  metals  : 
the  supply  of  it  is  neither  too  great  nor  too  small ; 
its  colour  and  lustre  are  permanent ;  it  is  the  most 
malleable  and  one  of  the  most  ductile  of  substances ; 
it  can  be  melted  and  re-melted  with  scarcely  any 
diminution  of  quantity.  In  its  state  of  perfect 
purity  it  is  too  soft  for  most  purposes,  but  a  small 
admixture  of  copper  gives  it  sufficient  hardness 
for  coinage  and  for  jewellery. 

Gold  is  often  found  in  solid  masses,  but  generally 
in  combination  with  silver  and  otlier  ores,  from 
which  it  requires  to  be  purified.  Peter  (1  P  V) 
refers  to  '  gold  proved  by  fire '  (xpvalov  dia  irvpbs 
SoKind^ofiivov  ;  cf.  Rev  3'*). 

'Strabo  states  that  in  his  time  a  process  was  employed  for 
refining  and  purifying  gold  in  large  quantities  by  cementing  or 
burning  it  with  an  aluminous  earth,  which,  by  destroying  the 
silver,  left  the  gold  in  a  state  of  purity.  Pliny  shows  that  for 
this  purpose  the  gold  was  placed  on  the  fire  in  an  earthen 
vessel  with  treble  its  wei^jht  of  salt,  and  that  it  was  afterwards 
again  exposed  to  the  fire  with  two  parts  of  salt  and  one  of 
argillaceous  rock,  which,  in  the  presence  of  moisture,  effected 
the  decomposition  of  the  salt ;  by  this  means  the  silver  became 
converted  mto  chloride '  {EBr^'^,  art.  '  Gold,'  xii.  199). 

India,  Arabia,  Spain,  and  Africa  were  the  chief 
gold-producing  countries  of  the  ancients.  Arabia, 
containing  the  lands  of  Seba,  Havilah,  and  Ophir, 
was  the  Eldorado  of  the  Hebrews.  Herodotus 
(vi.  47)  tells  of  the  Phoenician  quest  for  gold  in  the 
island  of  Thasos :  'a  large  mountain  has  been 
thrown  upside  down  in  the  search. '  Pliny  describes 
the  gold-mining  of  Spain  (UN  xxx.  4.  21).    The 


art  of  the  goldsmitli  flourished  in  all  the  ancient 
civilizations.  The  gold-work  of  the  Greeks,  Etrus- 
cans, and  Romans  may  be  rivalled,  but  can  scarcely 
be  excelled,  and  that  of  the  Egyptians  of  2,000 
years  earlier  was  no  less  exquisite. 

Gold  was  used  for  many  purposes,  secular  and 
sacred.  Crowns  were  made  of  it  (Rev  4*  9^  14'''), 
rings  ( Ja  2"-'),  vessels  of  great  houses  (2  Ti  2^),  idols 
(Rev  9-'" ;  cf.  Ac  l?'^).  Many  articles  of  gold  were 
in  the  merchandise  of  Rome  (Rev  18'^) ;  the  great 
city  itself  was  decked  with  it  (18'*);  the  scarlet 
woman's  cup  of  abomination  was  made  of  it  (17*). 
Much  of  the  furniture  of  the  real  Temple,  as  of  St. 
John's  ideal  one,  was  of  gold — the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant (overlaid  with  it.  He  9*),  the  censer  (He  9*, 
Rev  8=*),  the  altar  of  incense  (8»  9'^),  the  bowls  full 
of  incense  (5"),  the  pot  of  manna  (He  9*),  the 
candlesticks  (Rev  1^*-  "•  ^  2').  But  servants  of  God 
have  a  spiritual  rather  than  a  material  standard 
of  values  ;  for  tiiem  'the  true  veins  of  wealth  are 
purple — and  not  in  Rock,  but  in  Flesh'  (Ruskin, 
op.  cit.  §  40).  They  have  been  redeemed  not  with 
gold,  but  with  blood  (1  P  1^**).  Apostles,  though 
poor,  have  something  more  precious  to  ofler  than 
gold  (Ac  3^).  Women  have  a  finer  adornment  than 
jewels  of  gold  (1  Ti  2',  1  P  3^).  It  is  assumed  that 
even  the  noblest  metal  may  be  rusted  (Ja  5^),  and 
if  this  is  only  a  popular  iamcy,  at  any  rate  gold 
is  ultimately  as  perishable  as  all  other  material 
things  (1  P  V). 

It  is  natural,  however,  that  gold  should  be  a 
universal  symbol  of  purity  and  worth.  The  golden 
age,  the  golden  rule,  golden  opinions,  golden  oppor- 
tunities are  in  common  speech  the  best  of  such 
things.  Gold  is  likewise  an  inevitable  category  of 
apocalyptic  prophecy.  The  Son  of  Man  wears  a 
golden  girdle  (Rev  1'*),  as  does  each  of  the  seven 
angels  of  the  seven  golden  bowls  (15*-  '').  The 
twenty-four  elders  have  on  their  heads  crowns 
of  gold  (4^).  An  angel  receives  a  golden  reed  to 
measure  the  New  Jerusalem  (21''),  and  the  city 
itself  is  pure  gold  (2V«-  ^i ;  cf.  To  IS'"-  ").  The  gold 
of  the  Apocalyptist,  moreover,  has  a  transcendent 
quality  ;  differing  from  our  opaque  yellow  metal, 
it  is  '  like  unto  pure  glass,'  clear  and  transparent 
as  crystal.  The  gold  of  heaven  is  finer  than  earth's 
finest.  James  Strahan. 

GOMORRAH.— See  Sodom. 

GOOD. — The  adj.  'good'  (dya06s,  Ka\6s)  maybe 
used  of  any  quality,  physical  as  well  as  moral, 
thing,  or  person  that  may  be  approved  as  useful, , 
fit,  admirable,  right.  In  the  moral  sense  it  con- 
notes in  the  NT  not  only  righteousness  but  kind- 
ness, helpfulness,  love.  For  Jesus,  God  alone  was 
good  witnout  limitation  or  qualification  (Mk  10'*, 
Lk  18'^) ;  and  while  His  own  moral  discipline  on 
earth  was  going  on.  He  disclaimed  that  epithet 
for  Himself  (cf.  Mt  19",  with  its  attempt  to  escape 
the  apparent  difficulty  of  the  disclaimer).  This 
Divine  perfection  is  shown  in  an  impartial,  uni- 
versal beneficence  (Mt  5*^),  which  men  are  to  imi- 
tate (v.''*).  The  same  conviction  of  what  Go<l  is, 
and  what  man,  therefore,  should  be,  is  found  in 
St.  Paul's  counsels  (Eph  4="-5^).  Jesus  Himself  is 
the  expression  and  activity  of  this  Divine  perfec- 
tion, and  so  it  is  characteristic  of  Him  to  go  about 
'doing  good'  (Ac  10^),  as  He  Himself  indicates  in 
His  reply  to 'the  Baptist  (Mt  11*- ") ;  and  this,  too, 
He  enjoins  as  the  practice  of  His  discij)les  (Lk  6"  ; 
cf.  Mt  25="ff-,  Mk  14^  Lk  19«-  »).  St.  I'aul  echoes 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  when  he  bids  tlie  Romans 
'overcome  evil  with  good'  (Ro  1'2-'),  and  assures 
them  that  such  conduct  will  have  its  reward  (2"). 
The  distinction  St.  Paul  makes  between  '  a  righteous 
man  '  and  '  the  good  man  '  (Ro  5^)  deserves  special 
attention.     Just  as  God  because  He  is  righteooa 


GOOD 


GOOD 


469 


reckons  righteons  (Ro  3^),  so  it  is  because  God  is 
good  in  Himself  that  He  is  ever  showing  His  good- 
ness to  all  men,  especially  in  Christ  and  His  Cross 
(Ro  5*,  Eph  4**)  and  calling  all  men  to  be  the  imi- 
tators of  His  goodness  (1  Co  13). 

Although  the  following  article  is  dealing  -with 
the  Christian  moral  ideal  as  *  goodness,'  this  brief 
statement  in  introducing  the  subject  of  '  the  good ' 
as  man's '  chief  end '  has  been  made  for  two  reasons, 
(a)  In  the  Christian  view,  God  Himself  is  man's 
chief  good,  for  in  His  fellowship  alone  is  man's 
perfection,  glory,  and  blessedness,  and  it  is  God's 
goodness  that  man  enjoys  for  ever ;  and  (6)  it  is 
because  of  this  goodness — this  self-giving  of  God's 
perfection  as  love — that  the  chief  good  is  given  to 
man.  It  is  in  Christ  that  man  so  possesses  God, 
and  it  is  through  Christ  that  God  so  communicates 
Himself  to  man.  The  total  impression  of  the 
apostolic  \^Titings  is  that  Christ  Himself  is  the 
Good,  for  in  Him  and  through  Him  alone  man  has 
Grod  as  Love. 

We  must  note,  however,  that  the  chief  good  is 
presented  to  us  in  three  distinctive  phrases  in  the 
different  types  of  teaching  in  the  NT.  In  the 
Synoptics,  on  the  lips  of  Jesus  Himself,  it  is  '  the 
kmgdom  of  God '  (Mt  6^) ;  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
it  is  '  eternal  life '  (Jn  20^-  '^),  although  we  also 
find  the  second  representation  in  Mt  19'*,  Mk  10", 
Lk  18'*,  and  the  first  in  Jn  3^ ;  in  the  Pauline 
Epistles  it  is  '  the  righteousness  of  God  'or  'of 
faith '  (Ph  3'),  or,  more  generally,  salvation  (Ro 

116.  17). 

The  idea  of  the  good  combines  character  and 
condition ;  it  includes  rightness  and  happiness, 
holiness  and  blessedness,  or,  as  the  Shorter  Cate- 
chism puts  it :  '  man's  chief  end  is  to  glorify  God 
and  to  enjoy  Him  for  ever.'  Man,  by  claiming 
God's  goodness,  enjoying  and  praising  it,  and  by 
showing  a  like  goodness,  glorifies  God :  that  is, 
sets  forth  the  honour,  worth,  beauty,  and  majesty 
of  God's  moral  perfection  (Ro  lo«- »,  1  Co  G^,  2  Co 
9>2  ;  cf.  Col  31",  1  P  4i'-^-  ").  As  God  is  grace,  God's 
claim  on  man  is  for  faith,  and  this  is  his  supreme 
duty  (He  11®).  Thus  the  two  aspects  of  the  good 
pass  into  one  another :  man  fulfils  his  obligation 
to  God  by  making  fully  his  own  the  salvation  God 
oflers  in  Christ.  We  need  not  then  further  pursue 
the  idea  of  the  good  as  duti/,  but  may  confine  our- 
selves to  it  as  boon. 

(1)  For  Plato  and  Aristotle  the  good  necessarily 
included  both  well-being  {evdaifiovia)  and  also  well- 
doing ;  a  man  must  have  health,  wealth,  beauty, 
and  intellect  as  well  as  the  virtues  to  attain  fully 
the  good.  Here  the  first  great  distinction  of  the 
Christian  view  emerges.  A  man's  good  is  inde- 
pendent of  his  outward  circumstances.  As  Jesus 
taught  His  disciples  not  to  be  anxious  about  food 
or  raiment,  but  to  leave  all  to  the  care  and  bounty 
of  the  Heavenly  Father,  who  would  add  all  these 
things  to  those  who  first  sought  His  Kingdom  and 
righteousness  (Mt  6**"*^),  so  St.  Paul  assures  Chris- 
tian believers  that  even  the  very  worst  circum- 
stances imaginable  cannot  really  injure  them,  for 
'all  things  work  together  for  good  to  them  that 
love  God'  (Ro  8^).  The  declaration  has  some 
affinity  with  Stoic  thought ;  but  the  difference 
lies  in  this,  that  for  Stoic  self-sufficiency  there  is 
substituted  the  possession  of  the  love  of  God  in 
Christ  as  the  satisfying  portion  of  the  soul  (v.*). 
While  there  is  tliis  independence  of  outward  cir- 
cumstances, there  is  no  cjTiic-like  contempt  for 
bodily  needs,  and  the  labour  that  meets  these 
(1  Th  4",  2  Th  3'»,  Ro  12ii- 1").  Private  property 
even  may  become  part  of  the  Christian's  good,  as 
affording  the  opportunity  for  the  generosity  which 
is  so  highly  recommended  as  a  Christian  grace  (Ro 
128. 13^  2  Co  8'-'5). 

(2)  A  second  feature  of  the  Christian  view  that 


distinguishes  it  from  the  Greek  is  that  the  good 
is  not  the  result  of  fortune  or  the  reward  of  merit, 
but  the  gift  of  God's  grace  (Ro  5"  6*»).  It  does 
include  a  duty  to  be  done,  but  it  Ls  primarily  a 
boon  to  be  claimed.  Hence  the  pre-eminence  of 
faith  as  the  primary,  if  not  the  supreme,  grace 
of  the  Christian  life.  For  human  self-sufficiency 
there  is  substituted  dependence  upon  God  (2  Co  2" 
3»-«12»). 

(3)  A  third  characteristic  is  the  emphasis  on  sin 
in  the  Christian  view  as  the  evil  from  which  there 
must  be  escape.  The  good  includes  deliverance 
from  sin  in  the  two-fold  sense,  corresponding  to  the 
two-fold  reference  of  sin  in  relation  to  God,  and  in 
relation  to  a  man's  own  nature.  There  is  forgive- 
ness of  sin,  reconciliation  with  God,  the  peace  of 
God  (Ro  3^-^  6"  1'  2",  etc.) ;  a  man  is  set  in  right 
relation  with  God,  so  that  God's  approval  and  not 
His  displeasure  rests  upon  him,  and  he  does  not 
distrust,  or  feel  estranged  from,  God,  but  is  at 
home  with  God  as  a  child  with  a  father.  There 
is  also  the  breaking  of  the  power  of  sin,  and  the 
banishment  of  the  love  of  sin,  by  a  new  motive 
and  a  new  strength  (Ro  G'"  7»,  2  Co  5",  Ph  4i»). 
There  is  a  present  conquest  of  eviJ,  and  victory  over 
the  world.  This  is  a  present  good  claimed  more 
or  less,  according  to  the  measure  of  faith  ;  but  as 
Christians  are  not  merely  owTiers  of  the  present 
but  also  heirs  of  the  future  good  (Ro  8",  Tit  3^, 
1  P  1*  ;  cf.  He  11'),  hope  as  well  as  faith  is  neces- 
sary to  claim  the  full  salvation  (Ro  8^,  1  Th  5', 
1  P  P). 

(4)  Into  the  contents  of  the  Christian  hope,  the 
details  of  the  apostolic  eschatology  (q.v.),  it  is 
beyond  the  scope  of  this  article  to  enter  ;  but  one 
feature,  because  of  its  distinction  from,  or  even 
opposition  to,  the  Greek  view,  may  here  be  men- 
tioned. The  Greek  thinker,  if  he  did  hope  for  a 
future  life,  looked  for  the  release  of  the  soul  from 
its  imprisonment  in  the  body — for  a  disembodied 
immortality  ;  but  the  Christian  good  includes  not 
merely  the  survival  of  the  soul  in  death,  but  resur- 
rection— the  restoration  of  the  entire  personality 
(Ro  8=^,  2  Co  5^-*,  Ph  321).  This  does  not  involve  the 
absurdity  of  a  material  identity  of  the  body  buried 
and  the  body  raised,  for  St.  Paul  expressly  distin- 
guishes the  one  from  the  other  as  the  natural  and  the 
spiritual  (1  Co  15**"**),  but  only  the  conWction  that 
the  future  life  will  be  a  completely  human  one. 

(5)  As  we  may  surely  reckon  as  an  element  in 
the  Christian  good  the  fellowship  of  believers,  the 
membership  of  the  body  of  Christ  (1  Co  12"",  Eph 
1»),  the  Koivuivia  of  the  Spirit  (2  Co  13" :  the  com- 
mon life  of  the  Church  in  the  Spirit),  so  the  Chris- 
tian life  is  not  individual  but  universal ;  it  is  the 
subjection  of  all  things  to  Christ,  the  destruction 
of  aU  evil,  the  cessation  of  all  pain  and  grief,  the 
victory  of  the  saints,  and  God  all  and  in  all.  No 
such  wider  hope  inspired  the  Greek  thinkers.  It  is 
true  that  the  expectation  of  an  immediate  return  of 
Christ  in  power  and  glory  precludes  our  interpret- 
ing this  universal  good  as  a  historical  evolution 
of  mankind  in  manners,  morals,  laws,  institutions, 
and  pieties  to  so  glorious  and  blessed  a  consumma- 
tion, and  we  are  left  uncertain  as  to  the  mode  in 
which  the  process  is  to  be  conceived.  But  the  hope 
is  a  fact  of  apostolic  life. 

(6)  There  is  one  feature  in  the  Christian  good 
peculiar  to  St.  Paul.  As  a  Pharisee  he  had  felt 
the  burden  and  the  bondage  of  the  Law,  and 
groaned  under  its  judgment,  but  he  had  discovered 
its  impotence,  and  so  for  him  the  Christian  good 
included  the  end  of  the  Law  (Gal  4^-5'),  for  Chris- 
tian morality  is  not  legal — the  observance  of  the 
letter — but  spiritual — the  expression  of  the  new  life 
found  in  Christ  (2  Co  3'-").  It  may  be  doubted, 
however,  whether  even  all  believers  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Age  were  morally  mature  enough  to  be  re- 


470 


GOODNESS  (HUMAN) 


GOODNESS  (HUMAN) 


leased  from  all  outward  restraints,  and  to  be  left 
only  to  inward  constraint ;  and  St.  Paul's  counsels 
and  commands  even  in  his  letters  show  that  this  end 
of  the  Law  was  ideal  rather  than  actual.  It  is 
certain  that  the  Christian  Church  in  the  course  of 
its  history  generally  has  been  legal  rather  than 
spiritual  m  its  morality,  and  so  this  part  of  the 
Christian  good  has  been  unrealized. 

(7)  In  the  apostolic  view  of  the  Christian  good 
there  are  two  features  which  may  be  regarded  as 
of  temporary  and  local  rather  than  of  permanent 
and  universal  significance  for  Christian  faith  :  (a) 
the  expectation  of  the  speedy  Second  Advent  of 
Christ  in  power  and  glory  to  usher  in  the  Last 
Things,  which  faded  out  of  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness, with  from  time  to  time  futile  attempts  to  re- 
vive it,  as  the  course  of  human  history  contra- 
dicted it ;  and  (i)  the  belief  which  became  more 
prominent  in  subsequent  centuries  than  it  was  in 
the  Apostolic  Age,  that  the  evil  to  be  overcome 
and  destroyed  was  embodied  in  personal  evil  prin- 
ciples and  powers,  over  whom  Christ  gained  the 
victory,  and  from  whom  He  effected  deliverance  for 
the  believer  (Ro  S'S'^s,  1  Co  15-S  Eph  P',  Col  2'5). 
For  the  details  on  both  these  subjects  the  relevant 
articles  must  be  consulted,  as  all  that  is  here  neces- 
sary is  merely  the  mention  of  them  for  the  com- 
pleteness of  the  treatment  of  the  present  topic. 

Such  is  the  Christian  good ;  is  it  regarded  as 
destined  to  be  universal  ?  Does  the  NT  offer  us 
a  theodicy?  It  has  been  already  indicated  that 
the  Christian  hope  does  include  the  victory  of 
Christ  over  all  His  foes,  and  the  subjection  of  all 
things  to  Hira,  and  at  last  of  Himself  to  God 
(1  Co  IS^''^) ;  but  these  confident  predictions  do 
not  clearly  or  fully  answer  the  question  whether 
all  men  will  at  last  be  saved — that  is,  become  sharers 
of  the  good.  While  there  are  a  few  passages  point- 
ing towards  universal  restoration,  there  are  others 
indicating  eternal  punishment,  and  some  even  on 
which  has  been  based  a  theory  of  conditional  im- 
mortality. This  problem  seems  insoluble  even 
with  the  data  not  only  of  the  Scriptures,  but  also 
of  human  experience  ;  and  accordingly,  whatever 
Christian  wishes  and  hojies  may  be,  we  cannot 
affirm  that  the  Christian  good  presents  the  final 
destiny  of  the  race  in  cloudless  sunshine  without 
any  shadow ;  and  thus  the  believer  must  walk 
not  by  sight,  but  by  faith,  in  the  belief  that  what- 
ever the  Heavenly  Father  does  is  wisest,  kindest, 
best.  As  has  been  shown  in  the  art.  Evil,  the 
Christian  attitude  is  neither  optimism  nor  pessi- 
mism, but  meliorism — the  belief  that  the  world  not 
only  needs  redemption,  but  is  being  redeemed  in 
Christ. 

LiTBRATURB.— W.  Beyschlag:,  NT  Theology,  Eng.  tr.,  1895, 
bk.  i.  ch.  viii.,bk.  ii.  ch.  v.,  bk.  iv.  chs.  vi.  ix.,  bk.  v.  ch.  v. ; 
G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Thcolocjy  of  the  NT,  1899,  pt.  i.  chs.  iii. 
xii.,  pt.  ii.  chs.  vi.  vii.,  pt.  iv.  chs.  v.  viii.  xii.jjt.  vi.  ch.  v., 
pt.  vii.  ch.  iv. ;  T.  vonHaering,  The  Chrintian  Faith,  Eng.  tr., 
1913,  ii.  800-926  ;  A.  M.  Fairbairn,  The  Philosophy  of  the  Chris- 
tian Religion,  1902,  pp.  94-1G8  ;  O.  Pfleiderer,  The  Philosophy 
of  Religion'^,  Eng.  tr.,  1886-88,  vol.  iv.  ch.  iv. 

Alfred  E.  Garvie. 
GOODNESS  (HUMAN).*— Two  applications  go 
side  by  side  in  the  general  usage  of  the  Avord 
•  goodness '  and  are  also  found  in  the  NT.  On  the 
one  hand,  it  denotes  an  inherent  quality  without 
regard  to  its  efiect ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  '  good- 
ness' is  predicated  in  view  of  the  effect.  In  the 
latter  case,  however,  the  thought  of  the  inherent 
quality  as  producing  the  effect  is  never  quite 
absent  from  the  field  of  consciousness.  It  is  not 
possible  to  call  either  of  these  two  uses  the  older 
and  more  original  one  and  to  stamp  the  otlier  as 
secondary  and  developed.  Already  in  Homer  {Od. 
XV.  324,  II.  xiii,  284)  070^69  occurs  of  inherent 
quality  as  a  designation  of  the  well-born  class,  as 
*  For  Divine  goodness,  see  art.  God. 


distinguished  from  the  common  people  (cf.  our 
•better  class,'  'aristocracy').  When  these  are  at 
the  same  time  called  ayaOoi  in  the  sense  of  '  brave,' 
this  but  shows  tlie  close  connexion  between  the 
inherent  and  the  transient  reference  of  the  word. 
Bravery  is  the  goodness  of  the  aristocracy  in 
action.  Hence  in  the  frequent  sense  of  '  efficient,' 
'  adequate,'  the  adjective  does  not  describe  a 
momentary  or  spasmodic  efficiency,  but  the  habit- 
ual one  01  quality.  Good  objects,  good  circum- 
stances, 'goods,'  in  the  sense  of  wealth  or  of 
delicacies,  are  all  so  designated  because  of  their 
inherent  adaptation  to  benefit  the  owner  or  re- 
ceiver. The  force  of  the  word  in  such  connexions 
can  perhaps  be  felt  best  from  the  opposite  xovrjpoi. 
Both  meanings  are  transferred  to  the  moral  sphere. 
The  ethical  use  of  the  word  is,  liowever,  in  profane 
Greek  a  comparatively  late  development,  not  being 
frequent  until  the  philosophical  writers  (e.g.  Plato). 

In  the  NT  both  the  sub-ethical  and  the  ethical 
use  are  represented.  For  the  former  see  Mt  7", 
Lk  IM  88 1218- 1»  IG^,  Ro  8^  lO'*  13*,  Gal  6\  He  9", 
Ja  1",  1  P  3^".  For  the  latter,  used  of  persons, 
see  Mt  5«  123*  W«-  "  20'«,  Mk  10'»,  Lk  IS'"  23«>, 
Jn  V^  Ac  IP*,  Ro  5^  Tit  2» ;  of  things,  Mt  12«- » 
19'6,  Lk  SI"  10-'2,  Jn  52»,  Ac  23',  Ro  21"  7'=*-  ^«-  "  9" 
12»-  21  133  14'"  16'9,  2  Co  5J",  Eph  4="'  6*,  1  Th  3«  5", 
2  Th  2",  I  Ti  P-  i».  Tit  21",  1  P  3"-  »3- 1«,  and  fre- 
quently in  the  formula  '  good  works.' 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  ascription  of  good- 
ness to  persons  is  rare  in  the  NT.  The  reason 
for  this  is  not  to  be  sought  in  the  biblical  doctrine 
of  sin  as  excluding  human  goodness,  for  on  that 
view  the  affirmation  of  goodness  with  reference  to 
works  ought  to  be  equally  rare,  which  is  not  the 
case.  The  true  explanation  seems  to  lie  in  the 
God-centred  estimate  which  Scripture  places  upon 
man's  moral  character.  Man  is  measured  with 
strict  reference  to  the  nature  and  will  of  God  as 
his  norm.  The  conception  of  '  goodness,'  while 
not  excluding,  and  even  presupposing,  an  objec- 
tive standard  of  this  kind,  does  not  in  itself  ex- 
press it.  It  describes  the  quality  either  as  in- 
herent or  as  affecting  others,  but  does  not  explicitly 
relate  it  to  God.  This  the  word  SUaios  does,  for 
diKaio<rvvr)  means  goodness  as  conformity  to  the 
Law  of  God  and  as  approved  by  the  Divine  judg- 
ment. The  full  and  positive  conception  of  5i»raio- 
ffivT)  therefore  covers  all  that  is  dyadoi  and  adds  to 
this  the  God-related  element  just  named.  It  is 
not  at  variance  with  this  that  5katoj  occasionally 
occurs  in  a  negative  sense,  more  closely  adhering 
to  the  profane  and  popular  usage — a  sense  which 
places  it  below  d7a^<5s  in  the  ethical  scale.  Thus 
in  Ro  5''  the  SlKaios  {'  righteous ')  is  one  who  merely 
is  free  from  fault,  who  does  what  in  the  ordinary 
relations  of  life  can  be  required  of  him,  but  does 
not  go  beyond  this  to  the  spontaneous  exercise  of 
virtue  as  the  dyadbs  does.  The  term  'good'  is 
reserved  for  the  latter.  But  as  a  rule  dlKaio^  is 
not  less  comprehensive  than  dya66i,  covering  the 
Divine  demand  in  all  its  reach  (Ro  3'"). 

In  the  ethical  application  the  inherent  and  the 
beneficent  sense  lie  so  close  together  that  it  is  not 
always  easy  to  determine  which  stands  in  the 
foreground  and  which  is  the  mere  concomitant  of 
thought.  In  the  Hebrew  aio,  as  used  of  God,  both 
meanings  are  present,  but  the  sense  of  beneficence 
preponderates  (cf.  Ps  34").  In  regard  to  Mt  19" 
(  =  Mk  10^^  Lk  18'^),  usually  under;?tood  as  raising 
the  question  of  absolute  ethical  perfection,  G. 
Dalman  {Die  Worte  Jesu,  1898,  i.  277)  advocates 
the  same  meaning  of  beneficence.  Among  tlie 
passages  which  refer  to  human  persons  Ro  5'  not 
only  extends  the  reach  of  '  goodness'  beyond  that 
of  •  righteousness,'  but  also  finds  this  overIai>ping 
in  the  spontaneous,  benevolent  character  of  the 
former.     In  Lk  23'*'  the  same  distinction  may  be 


GOODNESS  (HUMAN) 


GOSPEL 


471 


found,  although  here  the  sequence  shows  that  the 
rigliteousness  before  God  is  estimated  higher  than 
the  mere  benevolence  towards  men.  In  1  P  2** 
the  '  good '  and  '  gentle '  masters  are  so  described 
from  the  point  of  view  of  their  treatment  of  ser- 
vants rather  than  of  inherent  quality.  In  Jn  7" 
there  is  some  doubt  as  to  whether  '  a  good  man ' 
(in  opposition  to  one  who  '  deceiveth  the  people ') 
means  a  man  of  good  character  or  one  of  good  in- 
fluence. Ac  11^  and  Tit  2*  seem  to  be  the  only 
clear  instances  of  the  use  of  the  word  to  describe 
inherent  goodness. 

The  same  difficulty  recurs  where  the  predicate 
applies  not  to  persons  but  to  things  in  the  ethical 
sphere.  The  '  good  things '  and  the  '  evil  things ' 
spoken  of  in  Mt  12^  "  are,  of  course,  in  themselves 
morally  right  or  wrong,  yet  in  the  context  the  re- 
ference is  to  blasphemy,  so  that  the  element  of 
the  good  or  bad  intent  and  effect  can  scarcely  be 
excluded.  When  St.  Paul  in  Ro  7"  says  that  the 
commandment  is  d^ia  jcat  otKola  xal  d-ya^,  the  in- 
herent perfection  of  the  Law  is  affirmed  not  only 
by  the  first  and  second  but  also  by  the  third  at- 
tribute ;  still  the  ensuing  question, '  Was  then  that 
which  is  good  made  death  unto  me  ? '  proves  that 
•  the  good'  is  felt  as  that  which  has  naturally  com- 
bined with  it  a  good  eflect.  The  same  thought 
must  be  present  in  Ro  12^.  The  'good'  of  the 
neighbour  which  is  to  be  promoted  according  to 
Ro  15^  is  his  ethical  good  ('unto  edification'),  but 
it  is  in  part  so  called  because  it  promotes  his  spirit- 
ual welfare.  In  Eph  6*  the  element  of  profitable- 
ness is  plainly  indicated  by  the  context  (cf.  y.^). 
The  '  good  work '  which  Goia  began  in  the  Philip- 

Eians  (Ph  1*)  is  good  primarily  because  it  has  a 
eneficent,  saving  purpose,  but  probably  the  notion 
that  it  is  productive  of  what  is  inherently  good  in 
them  is  also  present.  In  Philem  "  (cf.  v.*)  the  AV 
renders  t6  ar^adov  aov  correctly  by  'thy  benefit' 
(KV  'thy  goodness').  The  context  decides  in 
favour  of  '  beneficent '  in  1 P  3'*  (cf.  v."  and  3  Jn  "). 
•A  good  conscience '  (Ac  23S  1  Ti  l^^  1  P  3=^)  is  a 
conscience  deri\-ing  its  quality  from  its  content, 
and  therefore  presupposes  that  the  acts  approved 
by  it  are  good  in  themselves.  The  phrase  '  good 
works'  admits  equally  well  of  both  interpretations. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  Ac  9^,  Ro  13^  2  Co 
98,  1  Ti  2"  b^\  2  Ti  2^1  3",  Tit  l"  3'  the  reference 
is  mainly  to  the  good  intent  and  effect  of  the  deed. 
In  other  passages,  however,  like  Ro  2^*,  Eph  2", 
Col  P",  2  Th  2^',  the  emphasis  seems  to  i-est  not  on 
the  outward  beneficent  tendency,  but  on  the  in- 
herent good  character  of  the  work,  as  conformable 
to  the  iHvine  Law. 

The  Jewish  usage  of  the  conception  favours  this, 
for  in  it  not  the  helpfulness,  but  the  meritorious- 
ness,  the  religious  significance  of  the  observance 
of  the  Law,  stand  in  the  foreground.  While  St. 
Paul  denies,  of  course,  the  meritoriousness  of  good 
works  as  a  ground  of  justification,  he  nevertheless 
is  at  one  with  Judaism  in  emphasizing  their  specific 
religious  importance.  It  is  not  in  harmony  with 
the  Pauline  teaching  to  deem  of  importance  only 
the  spirit  and  intent  of  the  deed,  and  not  its  external 
performance.  Such  a  judgment  is  possible  only 
where  the  ethical  point  of  view  is  man-centred  and 
virtue  regarded  as  completed  in  itself.  St.  Paul's 
point  of  view  is  God-centred — the  virtue,  the  dis- 
position exist  for  the  sake  of  God  ;  and  in  order 
that  they  may  accrue  to  the  fuU  glory  of  God,  it 
is  necessary  that  they  shall  issue  into  act.  For 
the  reality  of  the  good  work  the  presence  of  the 
disposition  behind  it  is  indispensable,  but  it  is  no 
less  true  that,  for  the  completion  of  the  good  as  it 
exists  in  the  heart,  its  embodiment  in  the  good 
work  is  essential. 

The  noun  a.ytidt,xjvvT)  (Ro  15",  Gal  5^,  Eph  5', 
2  Th  1"— not  in  classiciBd.  Greek,  but  only  in  the 


Greek  translations  of  the  OT  and  in  St.  Paul)  pro- 
bably in  each  case  describes  that  form  of  goodness 
which  seeks  the  benefit  of  others.  In  Gal  5", 
standing  among  a  number  of  other  virtues,  it 
most  have  this  speciali2ed  sense.  This  is  favoured 
also  by  the  connexion  in  Ro  15"  ('able  to  ad- 
monish one  another').  In  Eph  5'  there  is  at  least 
nothing  to  contradict  this  meaning.  In  2  Th  1", 
'  Our  God  .  .  ,  may  fulfil  every  desire  of  goodness 
and  every  work  of  faith  with  power,'  the  desire 
and  the  work  stand  related  as  the  wish  and  the 
execution,  which  secures  for  aya6u<rirrri  here  like- 
wise the  same  sense  of  beneficence  as  is  asso* 
ciated  with  the  'work  of  faith.'  A.-^aOusav^Ti  then 
differs  from  arfo^injt  (likewise  a  word  of  the  later 
Greek)  as  benevdentia  does  from  bonUcu. 

ijTK&ATiJiiB. — J.  H.  A.  Tittmann,  De  Sjrnomfmts  in  Koto 
7e(tam«nto,  1820-32,  i.  19-27 ;  R.  C  Tr^ach,  SjpMnvmt  qf  tkt 
yT»,  1880,  pp.  231-235  ;  H.  Cremer,  Bihl.Thtol.  Lex.  of  ST 
Greets,  1880,  pp.  3-6,  183-193 ;  T.  Ziegler,  GeaekUhU  der 
ekriHlieAen  BtkiJk,  1886,  L  &6ff. ;  C  E.  Lntbardt,  HiMory  of 
Cktiftian  Ethiet,  Eng.  tr.,  1SS9,  i.  9Sff. ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot, 
Notet  on  EpUtle*  of  SL  Paul.  1895,  p.  2S6  f. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay 
in  ExpTx.  [1888-90]  107  ;  A.  Hamack.  The  MUsion  and  Ex- 
pansion of  ChrigUanUji  in  tAe  First  Three  Centuries,  Eng.  tr., 
1908,  L  147  ff.,  199  ff.  GEERHABDXJS  VOS. 

GOSPEL.  — 1.   The   meaning   of  the   term.— 

'Gospel,'  a  compound  of  the  O.E.  gdd,  'good,' 
and  spd,  'tidings,'  has  been  employed  from  the 
beginnings  of  English  translation  of  the  NT  to 
render  the  Greek  evayytXiov.  In  the  classics  this 
term  denotes  (a)  the  reward  for  good  tidings,  and 
is  so  used  in  the  LXX  (2  S  4^'),  v  ^^et  /le  dm}pai  ei- 
ayy{Xia  (pi.),  '  the  reward  I  had  to  give  him  for  his 
tidings ' ;  but  (6)  in  later  Greek  the  word  stands 
for  the  glad  message  itself.  In  the  NT,  however, 
tvayyiXiov  refers  not  to  the  written  record,  as  in 
the  modern  usage  of  '  gospel '  = '  book,'  but  to  the 
message  as  delivered  and  proclaimed.  The  gospel 
of  N.,  e.g.,  is  the  good  news  as  N.  announced  it,  and 
St.  Paul's  gospel  is  the  message  brought  by  the 
Apostle  in  his  preaching.  As  long  as  oral  teaching 
and  exhortation  could  be  had  from  eye-witnesses 
and  intimates  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  '  gospel '  was 
reserved  for  this  testimony ;  accordingly,  the  Apostle 
John  (1  Jn  1')  writes,  6  ^v  ar  dpx^s>  *  d/tijKooiiti',  i 
fupdKafier  rots  dipOaXfioit  "fi/Mw,  6  ideoffdfie&a  cat  al 
X«'p€S  rjfiQr  iifnjXdipijaai',  vepi  roS  Xd^row  ttjs  fur^,  '  that 
which  was  from  the  beginning,  that  which  we  have 
heard,  that  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  that 
which  we  beheld,  and  our  hands  have  handled, 
concerning  the  Word  of  life.'  These  are  the  cre- 
dentials of  his  message,  and  the  persuasion  of  it  to 
the  hearts  of  his  hearers.  Among  the  early  Chris- 
tians these  memories — airofuninovevnaTa — were  most 
prized,  and  that  word  rather  than  tiayyiXiov  was 
the  primitive  term  for  the  gospel  (cf.  Moflatt, 
LNT,  1911,  p.  44,  -svith  foot-note). 

But  as  the  eye-witnesses  and  their  immediate 
successors  passed  away,  believers  had  to  fall  back, 
perforce,  upon  a  written  record.  The  earliest 
certain  use  of  the  word  in  the  modem  sense  is 
found  in  Justin  Martyr  (c.  150  A.  D.) — '  The  apostles 
in  the  memoirs  written  by  themselves,  which  are 
called  " Gospels" '  (Apol.  i  66 ;  cf.  SDB,  DCG,  and 
HDB,  S.V.). 

The  passage  which  rules  the  use  of  fiiiy)fi\ior  in 
the  NT  is  Mk  1",  ^X^er  6  'It^toPj  eU  t^w  TaXtXaloM 
KTipi-ffffur  TO  evayyiXiov  rod  OeoO  (the  gen.  is  both 
subj.  and  obj.  ;  all  aspects  are  included),  'Jesus 
came  into  GaJilee  preaching  the  gospel  of  Grod.' 

The  word,  probably,  came  into  favour  through 
the  use  by  the  LXX  of  the  cognate  eva-y-yeXifetj'  and 
euayyeXl^eadai  in  2  Is.  and  in  the  Restoration- 
Psalms  (cf.  our  Lord's  discourse  [Lk  4'*J  in  the 
synagogue  of  Nazareth  concerning  the  glad  tidings 
of  His  Mission,  based  on  Is  61^).  But,  while  the 
term  (noun  and  verb)  is  of  fairly  frequent  occur- 


472 


GOSPEL 


GOSPEL 


rence  in  tlie  Synoptics,  it  owes  its  predominance  in 
apostolic  Christianity  to  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 
'  It  evidently  took  a  strong  hold  on  the  imagination 
of  St.  l*aul  in  connexion  with  his  own  call  to 
missionary  labours  (£i;'a77A(oi'  sixty  times  in  Epp. 
Paul,  besides  in  Epp.  and  Apoc.  only  twice ;  ev- 
ayye\l^€<T0ai  twenty  times  in  Epp.  Paul,  besides  once 
mid. seven  times  pass.)'  (Sanday-Headlam,/2o»ians', 
p.5f.). 

In  Mk  1',  dpxv  rou  tvayye\lov'Iri<ToO  Xptcrrov,  and 
Ilev  14®,  /cat  flSov  &Wov  dyyeXov  .  .  .  fx°*''''°-  ^'^' 
ayY^Xiovaiioviov  tvayye\lffai,\/e  see  theword  in  almost 
the  transition  stage  between  a  spoken  message  and 
a  book.  Before  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of 
Jesus,  '  gospel '  was  tlie  glad  message  of  the  King- 
dom, brouglitand  proclaimed  by  Himself  and  those 
whom  He  sent  out  to  prepare  tne  way  before  Him. 
But  in  Ac  20^*  '  the  gospel  of  the  grace  of  God,'  Ro 
V'^  'the  gospel  of  God  regarding  His  Son,'  and  2 
Co  4* '  the  gospel  of  the  glory  (manifested  perfection) 
of  Clirist,'  the  second  stage  is  approached. 

2.  The  content  of  the  gospel. — As  to  the  subject- 
matter  of  the  apostolic  gospel,  one  can  scarcely  say 
that  the  content  varied ;  it  was  rather  that  tlie 
emphasis  was  changed.  In  Iiis  synagogue  ministry 
to  the  Dispersion,  St.  Paul  found  the  soil  in  some 
measure  prepared.  The  7rat5a7W76s  had  brought 
men  so  far  that  certain  beliefs  might  be  taken  for 
granted  as  a  foundation  laid  by  the  Spirit  of 
Revelation  in  the  OT  Scriptures  both  legal  and 
prophetic.  This  would  rule  the  content  of  his 
gospel  message  to  them.  The  case  was  different, 
however,  in  purely  missionary  and  pioneer  work, 
not  only  in  rude  places  sucli  as  Lystra,  but  also 
among  the  more  cultured,  though  equally  pagan, 
populations  in  the  great  cities  of  the  Empire,  both 
in  Asia  and  in  Europe.  The  pioneer  gospel,  there- 
fore, would  have  notes  of  its  own.  Then,  again, 
after  a  district  had  been  evangelized  and  churches 
planted,  we  can  see  how  the  emphasis  of  the 
message  Avould  change,  as  apostolic  men,  prophets 
and  teachers,  souglit  to  lead  the  primitive  Christian 
communities  up  to  '  the  measure  of  the  stature  of 
the  fulness  of  Christ'  (Eph  4>»  ;  cf.  He  6^). 

From  1  and  2  Thess.  we  may  gather  the  content 
of  St.  Paul's  evangelistic  gospel  in  his  heathen 
mission.  '  Those  simijle,  childlike  Epistles  to  the 
Thessalonian  Church  are  a  kind  of  Christian  primer ' 
(A.  B.  Bruce,  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity, 
p.  15  fl'.).  From  the  address  on  Mars'  Hill  (Ac 
2730-31)  ^ye  liave  further  indications  of  the  staple  of 
his  message  to  those  outside.  But,  perhaps  more 
succinctly  and  perfectly  than  anywhere  else,  in  1 
Co  15^"*  we  have  the  evangelistic  Pauline  gospel — 
'for  I  delivered  to  you,  among  the  most  important 
things  (iv  irptlnois),  that  which  also  I  received,  that 
Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  scriptures  ; 
and  that  he  was  buried  ;  and  that  he  has  been 
raised  on  the  tliird  day  according  to  the  scriptures  ; 
and  that  he  apiieared  unto  Cephas ;  then  to  the 
twelve :  then  he  appeared  to  above  five  hundred 
brethren  at  once ;  of  whom  the  majority  survive 
to  this  day,  though  some  have  fallen  asleep.  Then 
he  appeared  to  James ;  then  to  all  the  apostles. 
And  last  of  all,  as  to  the  one  untimely  born,  he 
appeared  to  me  also.'  This  summary  of  the  Chris- 
tian Creed  reveals  what,  to  St.  Paul,  constituted 
the  essential  content  of  the  gospel  (cf.  J.  E. 
McFadyen,  The  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  [Inter- 
preter's Com. ,  1911],  T).  205  ff.). 

To  this  synopsis  of  liis  gospel  St.  Paul  adds  (1  Co 
15"),  '  Whether  then  it  be  I  or  they,  so  we  preach, 
and  so  ye  believed.'  In  all  essentials  St.  Paul 
stood  on  the  same  ground  as  the  Twelve — St.  Peter, 
St.  James,  and  St.  Paul  were  absolutely  unanimous. 
Had  it  been  otherwise,  one  can  hardly  see  how  he 
could  have  won  recognition  among  '  the  pillars '  or 
been  accepted  by  the  Church.     His  gospel  was  not 


a  difl'erent  {^repos)  gospel,  tliough  his  rapidly  chang- 
ing spheres,  and  the  pressing  need  of  tlie  occasion, 
may  have  shifted  the  accent.  This  he  acknow- 
ledges when,  speaking  of  the  evangelical  mission 
of  the  Church, he  says  (Gal  2''), '  I  had  been  entrusted 
with  the  gospel  of  (for)  the  uncircumcision,  even  as 
Peter  with  the  gospel  of  (for)  the  circumcision.' 
But  it  was  the  same  gospel  in  all  its  manifold 
adaptability.  There  is  no  schism  in  the  NT  as  to 
the  content  of  the  gospel  message.  The  opinion 
that  there  is  has  been  well  called  a  '  perversity  of 
criticism.'  Thus  (HDB,  s.v.)  the  apostolic  gospel 
may  be  defined  as  '  the  good  tidings,  coming  from 
God,  of  salvation  by  His  free  favour  through  Christ.' 
But  as  the  '  gospel '  of  a  church  is  to  be  sought  not 
only  in  the  message  of  its  preachers,  but  also  in  its 
condensed  creeds  and  in  its  hymns,  there  ought 
to  be  added  to  the  above  summary  at  least  two 
splendid  fragments  that  have  the  true  liturgical 
ring  about  them  : 

(1)  Christ  exalted:  1  Ti  3"  (5s,  not  Btbi,  is  Abe 
subject,  RV) — 

8s  i<f>av(pihOr)  iv  aapKl, 
iSiKaiuOr]  iv  wi/ev/xaTi, 
CbipdT}  dyyiXoii, 
iKrjpiJxOv  ^''  iOveaiv, 
iiriffTevdrj  iv  KdfffUfi, 
dv€\i/lfjL<f>dT]  iv  56^11. 

'This  fragment,  in  its  grand  lapidary  style,  is 
worthy  to  be  placed  by  the  side  of  the  Apostles' 
Creed  (Kohler,  quoted  by  J.  Strachan,  Captivity 
and  Pastoral  Epistles  [Westminster  NT,  1910], 
p.  218  f.). 

(2)  God  glorified :  1  Ti  6>5-i«— 

6  fiaKdpios  Kal  /xdvos  dwdcrr-qs, 
6  ^aaiKevs  tQjv  ^acriKevdvTuv 
Kal  Kijpioi  Twv  KvpievdvTUP, 
6  fxdvos  ?x'^''  ddavacriav, 
^ujs  oIkQv  dtrpdcriTov, 
6v  el8ev  ov8eU  dvdpihiruv 

ov8i  I8elv  dvvarai. 

(^  Ti/ii]  Kal  Kpdros  aidviov. 

3.  The  Felation  of  the  gospel  to  the  Law.— Ac  13 

records  the  opening  of  St.  Paul's  official  missionary 
labours,  and  there  (vv.^®-  *^)  we  have  the  first  indica- 
tion of  the  Pauline  attitude  to  the  Law.  In  his 
address  in  the  synagogue  of  Pisidian  Antioch,  he 
generalizes  the  incident  of  Cornelius  :  '  Be  it  known 
unto  you  therefore,  brethren,  that  through  this 
man  (Jesus)  is  proclaimed  unto  you  remission  of 
sins  :  and  by  him  everyone  that  believeth  is  justi- 
fied from  all  things,  from  -which  ye  could  not  be 
justified  by  the  law  of  Moses.' 

But  Ro  7,  with  its  logical  conclusion  in  ch,  8,  is 
the  crucial  passage  for  the  understanding  of  the 
relations  of  Law  and  gospel  in  the  life  of  St.  Paul, 
and  in  that  of  the  NT  Church  generally.  It  is  the 
Apostle's  account  of  the  struggle,  'often  bafBed, 
sore  baffled,'  that  filled  the  years  before  his  conver- 
sion. He  also  was  a  rich  young  ruler  troubled  with 
the  haunting  question,  '  What  shall  I  do  to  inherit 
eternal  life  ? '  For  years  he  had  struggled  to  put 
down  sin  in  his  own  heart,  to  be  righteous  in  the 
sight  of  God,  passionately  longing  to  have  the 
assurance  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  that  in  peace 
he  might  will  his  will  and  work  his  work.  In  this 
respect  he  is  like  his  spiritual  kinsmen,  Luther  and 
Bunyan.  In  some  respects,  St.  Paul  sharpened  the 
antithesis  between  Law  and  grace  to  a  \K>int  that 
Avas  extreme,  in  that  it  did  not  take  account  of  the 
prophetic  element  in  the  Old  Testament  which  was 
not  legal.  Jeremiah,  2  Isaiah,  and  Hosea  may  be 
instanced. 

But  in  his  day,  as  a  general  rule,  it  was  the  le^al 
aspect  of  the  OT  that  held  the  thought  of  the  Jewish 
people.     Judaism  knew  but  one  answer  to  such 


GOSPEL 


GOSPEL 


473 


questionings  as  St.  Paul's — '  Keep  the  law  ' ;  and  if 
a  man  replied,  '  I  cannot,'  the  answer  came  back 
remorselessly :  '  Nevertheless,  keep  it. '  '  Whosoever 
shall  keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  stumble  in  one 
point,  he  is  become  guilty  of  all '  (Ja  2^",  Gal  3"). 

As  the  Apostle  looked  back  on  the  long,  weary 
way  over  which  he  had  come,  he  found  that  he  han 
travelled  into  '  a  dark  and  dreadful  consciousness 
of  sin  and  disaster '  (Rainy  in  The  Evangelical  Suc- 
cession, p.  20).  And  this  refers  to  the  observance 
not  of  one  part  of  the  Law  but  of  the  whole  ;  what 
appealed  to  the  conscience  of  men  everywhere, 
ceremonial  Judaism,  and  the  tradition  of  the  elders 
— all  that  vo/nos  means  is  included. 

'All  his  experience,  at  whatever  date,  of  the 
straggle  of  the  natural  man  with  temptation  is 
here  [ch.  7]  gathered  together  and  concentrated  in 
a  single  jwrtraiture.  [But]  we  shall  probably  not 
be  wrong  in  referring  the  main  features  of  it  especi- 
ally to  the  period  before  his  Conversion '  (Sanday- 
Headlam,  op.  cit.  p.  186).  But  of  course,  as  St. 
Paul  presents  it  to  the  churches,  it  is  his  own  ex- 
perience universalized.  There  is  no  possibility  of 
winning  a  standing  before  God  by  the  Law — 

'  For  merit  lives  from  man  to  man, 
And  not  from  man,  O  Lord,  to  Thee.' 

He  had  discovered  also  that  there  was  no  life  to 
be  hoped  for  from  the  Law.  Such  had  never  been 
its  intention.  The  'parenthesis'  of  the  Law  had 
for  its  purpose  to  create  the  full  knowledge  of  sin 
(5«d  vofjiov  iTiyvwTis  afiapriai),  to  produce  in  the  con- 
science the  conviction  of  it. 

Moreover — such  is  the  weakness  of  human  nature 
— the  Law  tended  to  stir  sin  into  dreadful  activity, 
for  every  commandment  seemed  to  bring  up  a  new 
crop  of  sins  into  his  life. 

But  to  the  Law  St.  Paul  held  on  as  long  as  pos- 
sible ;  his  sudden  conversion  means  as  much.  The 
Law  was  the  one  outlet  to  the  hopes  of  Judaism  ; 
while  to  the  patriotism  of  St.  Paul  Christianity 
seemed  anti-national.  Therefore  he  hung  on  till 
he  could  hold  no  longer — '  O  wretched  man  that  I 
am  !  Who  shall  deliver  me  out  of  the  body  of  this 
death  ? '  (Ko  7^).  '  Any  true  happiness,  therefore, 
any  true  relief,  must  be  sought  elsewhere.  And  it 
was  this  happiness  and  relief  which  St.  Paul  sought 
and  found  in  Christ.  The  last  verse  of  Ro  7  marks 
the  point  at  which  the  great  burden  which  lay  upon 
the  conscience  rolls  away ;  and  the  next  chapter 
begins  with  an  uplifting  of  the  heart  in  recovered 
peace  and  serenity  ;  "There  is  therefore  now  no 
condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus " ' 
(Sanday-Headlam,  op.  cit.  p.  189).  He  had  found 
salvation  by  grace,  redemption  in  Christ,  and 
righteousness  by  faith  and  union  with  Him  ;  '  the 
law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  made  me 
free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  of  death '  (Ro  8*).  The 
very  essence  of  St.  Paul's  gospel  is  to  be  found  in 
his  conception  of  Christ's  relation  to  the  condemning 
Law.  There  is  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are 
in  Christ  Jesus,  because  He  stood  condemned  in 
their  place,  and  took  their  condemnation  upon  Him- 
self ;  therefore  St.  Paul  is  bold  to  say,  '  Christ  re- 
deemed us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  having  become 
a  curse  for  ns '  (Gal  3*'). 

It  is  characteristic  of  his  rebound  and  glad- 
ness of  spirit  that  he,  by  pre-eminence  in  the  NT, 
called  his  message  the  good  news  (ei'a77f'\toi'),  and 
the  discovery  sent  him  out  everywhere  ('  Woe  is  me 
if  I  preach  not  the  gospel ')  to  the  multitudes  of 
burdened  souls,  who  were  held,  as  he  had  once 
been  held,  in  this  strange  captivity.  Through  all 
his  letters,  the  contrast  between  Law  and  gospel 
as  mutually  exclusive  is  developed  in  the  anti- 
theses, law  and  faith,  works  and  grace,  wages  and 
free  gift — 'Ye  are  severed  from  Christ,  ye  who  would 
be  justified  by  the  law  ;  ye  are  fallen  away  from 
grace '  (Gal  5*).     In  the  Third,  the  Pauline,  Gospel, 


we  have  our  Lord's  story  of  the  two  debtors,  both 
of  whom,  when  they  had  nothing  to  pay,  were 
frankly  forgiven.  In  the  days  before  his  conver- 
sion, St.  Paul  had  been  painfully  trying  to  pay 
that  debt.  Brought  to  the  knowledge  that  he  had 
nothing  wherewith  to  pay,  he  made  the  great  dis- 
covery that  Christ  had  paid  th«  debt  and  set  him 
free.  And,  as  he  who  has  been  forgiven  much 
will  love  much,  therefore  evangelical  love  burned 
in  St.  Paul's  heart,  as  perhaps  never  in  the  heart 
of  man  besides,  to  the  '  Son  of  God  who  loved  me 
and  gave  himself  for  me.' 

Though  the  idea  of  the  Law  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  is  so  different  that  it  is  impossible  for  Gal. 
and  Heb.  to  have  come  from  the  same  pen,  yet  the 
contrast  between  the  Law  and  the  gospel  is  '  with- 
out doubt  identical  with  that  of  St.  Paul,  although 
the  writer  of  Hebrews  possibly  reached  that  posi- 
tion by  a  diflerent  road  (A.  B.  Davidson,  Hebretcs 
[Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes],  p.  19).  Both  writers 
hold  that  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  Law  to  every  one 
that  belie veth,  and  through  Him  is  the  Atonement 
made  once  for  all.  But  inasmuch  as  the  question 
between  Jews  and  Gentiles  had  in  the  days  of 
Hebrews  passed  beyond  the  stage  of  keen  contro- 
versy, and  a  free  gospel  was  preached  everywhere, 
the  wTiter  did  not  feel  it  needful  to  develop  the 
contrasts  between  Law  and  gospel  in  the  Pauline 
manner.  Yet  '  the  ceremonial  observances  are 
in  themselves  worthless  (He  7'*  10^"*) ;  they  were 
meant  to  be  nothing  more  than  temporary  (9^^"  8*') ; 
for  God  Himself  in  OT  Scripture  has  abrogated 
them  (7'*  10*) ;  and  the  believing  Hebrews  are 
exhorted  to  sever  all  connection  with  their  country- 
men still  practising  them  (13") '  (A.  B.  Davidson, 
op.  cit.  p.  19).  When  the  Sun  has  risen,  all  other 
lights  pale  and  fade.  The  substance  has  come,  the 
shadow  disappears. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  there  is  no 
sufficient  reason  for  assuming  a  schism  re  Law  and 
Faith  in  the  apostolic  writings.  St.  Paul  stood 
on  substantially  the  same  CTOund  as  the  Twelve  ; 
his  recognition  by  them  (Gal  2*"^'*),  and  much  more 
his  acceptance  by  the  Church,  imply  as  much. 
Nor  is  there  on  a  fair  and  careful  interpretation  any 
antagonism  between  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  and 
the  Epistle  of  James.  The  question  turns  on  the 
meaning  of  rums.  St.  James  is  not  denouncing 
the  Pauline  riaru,  but  the  caricature  of  it  in  a 
narrow  Judaism,  which  has  reduced  this  noble 
faculty  of  the  soul  to  the  mere  intellectual  accept- 
ance of  a  dogma — a.  fides  informis,  ethically  fruit- 
less— a  faith  without  works  ( Ja  2^).  St.  Paul,  on 
the  other  hand,  thinks  of  a  fides  formata,  '  faith 
wliich  worketh  by  love'  (Gal  5*).  Words  mean 
different  things  to  different  men.  To  St.  Paul 
'  works  '  mean  ipya  ro/wv,  while  to  St.  James  they 
correspond  to  what  St.  Paul  calls  '  the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit.'  Thus,  'so  far  as  the  Christian  praxis  of  reli- 
gion is  concerned,  James  and  Paul  are  atone,  but  each 
lays  the  emphasis  on  different  syllables '  (Moffatt, 
LNT,  p.  465).  It  is  nothing  strange  that  both 
go  to  the  story  of  Abraham  (Gn  15')  for  an  apposite 
example,  for  it  has  been  pointed  out  (Lightfoot, 
Gal.^,  1876,  p.  157)  that  this  passage  was  a  stock 
subject  of  discussion  in  the  Jewish  schools  and  in 
Philo.  St.  Paul,  quoting  Genesis,  affirms  that  the 
initial  act  for  which  Abraham  was  accepted  in  the 
sight  of  Giod  was  his  faith  ;  and  St.  James,  thinking 
more  of  Gn  22"  than  of  Gn  15*,  says  that  his  faith 
was  made  clear, '  seeing  thou  hast  not  withheld  thy 
son,  thine  only  son,  from  me.'  '  Faith  alone  justi- 
fies, though  the  faith  which  Justifies  does  not 
remain  alone.'  Thus  we  read  (Tit  3*),  •  I  will  that 
thou  affirm  confidently  to  the  end  that  they  which 
have  believed  God  may  be  careful  to  maintain 
good  works '  (cf.  the  Scots  Paraphrase  [56],  '  Thus 
faith    approves   itself    sincere,   by   active   virtue 


474 


GOSPELS 


GOSPELS 


crowned ').  But  while  all  real  opposition  between 
the  apostles  (whatever  may  be  tlie  temporal  rela- 
tion between  Romans  and  James)  may  be  dis- 
allowed, it  need  not  be  denied  that  the  formal 
differences  which  appear  in  the  Epistles  may  well 
have  risen  from  the  extremities  to  which  the  con- 
troversy was  pushed  in  the  different  schools  of 
thought  in  the  Church  {pnulinior  ipso  Faulo). 
The  Apostle  was  not  oblivious  of  misinterpretation 
(Ro  6'-  '^),  and  the  school  of  St.  James  doubtless 
had  those  who  carried  their  master's  doctrine  to 
extreme  lengths.  But  in  the  balance  of  Holy 
Scrinture,  the  truths  of  wliich  St.  James  and  St. 
Paul  are  protagonists  are  not  contradictories,  but 
safe  and  necessary  supnlementaries  in  the  body  of 
Christian  doctrine.  (Jb  or  the  relation  between  the 
doctrines  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  James  re  the  Law  and 
Faith,  reference  may  be  made  to  Romans'' [ICC],  p. 
102  If.  ;  James  [Cambridge  Bible,  1878],  p.  76  ff'.  ; 
The  General  Epistles  [Century  Bible,  1901],  p. 
163  ft",  ;  Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  465.) 

Literature.— Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  {ICC,  1902),  pp. 
184-189;  J.  Denney,  Sttidies  in  Theology,  1894,  p.  100  ff., 
•Romans'  in  EGT,  1900,  p.  632 ff.,  also  art  'Law  '  in  HDB;  R. 
Rainy  in  'The  Evangelical  Succession  (Lects.  in  St.  Georfre's 
Free  Church,  Edinburgh),  1882,  p.  20  ff. ;  A.  B.  Bruce,  The 
Kingdom  of  God*,  1891,  pp.  03-84,  St.  Paul's  Conception  of 
Christianity,  1894,  p.  293 ff.;  ExpT  vi\.  [1895-96]  297if.,  .\ii. 
[1900-01]  482>',  xxi.  [1909-10]  497  f.  For  the  Law  in  Hebrews, 
see  A.  S.  Peake,  Ilcbrews  (Century  Bible,  1902),  p.  30  ff. 

W.  M.  Gbant. 

GOSPELS.— I.  The  First  Three  Gospels.— 1. 
Date. — [a)  The  central  factor  here  is  the  date  of 
tlie  Second  Gospel.  Tlie  conspectus  of  dates  given 
in  Moffatt  {LNT,  p.  213)  will  show  that  this  Gospel 
is  dated  by  modern  writers  between  A.D.  44  and 
130,  and  that  recent  opinion  narrows  these  limits 
to  64-85.  Moffatt  himself  decides  on  a  date  soon 
after  70  on  the  following  grounds :  (1)  Irenaeus, 
adv.  Hmr.  in.  i.  1,  dates  the  Gospel  after  the 
death  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.  This  is  doubtful 
(see  below).  (2)  'The  small  apocalypse'  (ch.  13) 
suggests  a  date  soon  after  70.  This  is  based  on 
the  very  precarious  inference  that  Mk  13  could 
not  have  been  substantially  spoken  by  Christ.  He 
need  not  have  had  more  tlian  the  prophetic  insight 
of  a  Jeremiah  to  have  spoken  everything  contained 
in  this  chapter. 

Since  the  publication  of  Moffatt's  book  Hamack 
has  re-opened  the  whole  question  of  the  date  of  the 
first  three  Gospels  by  arguing  that  Acts  was  written 
at  the  end  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment  in  Rome.* 
It  would  follow,  of  course,  that  the  Third  Gospel 
must  be  earlier,  and  the  Second,  since  it  is  one  of 
the  sources  of  the  Third,  earlier  still.  "The  funda- 
mental question  here  is  the  evidence  of  Irenoeus. 
The  wliole  pas.sage  should  be  read  carefully.  One 
clause  in  it  has  generally  been  taken  to  mean  that 
St.  Mark  Avrote  his  Gospel  after  the  death  of  St. 
Peter  and  St.  Paul.  But  J.  Chapman, t  and  now 
Harnack,  argue  that  the  words  '  after  the  death  of ' 
do  not  date  the  writing  of  the  Gospel,  but,  taken 
in  the  light  of  the  whole  context,  mean  that  the 
apostolic  preaching  did  not  come  to  an  end  with 
the  death  of  the  apostles,  but  was  handed  down 
after  their  death,  in  written  books,  about  the  date 
of  the  composition  of  which  nothing  is  said. 

Harnack  is  tlius  left  free  to  place  the  Second 
Gospel  before  St.  Paul's  iinprisonment.  He  thinks 
that  the  late  evidence  of  Cflement  of  Alexandria,^ 
which  connects  the  Gospel  with  Rome,  may  per- 
haps mean  that  Mark  edited  there  his  previously 
written  Gospel.  Harnack  does  not  attempt  to  date 
the  Second  Gospel  more  narrowly. 

But  we  may  carry  the  argument  further.  If  the 
writing  of  Acts  at  the  end  of  St.  Paul's  imprison- 

•  Beilrdge  zur  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  iv.,  Leipzig;' 
1911. 
t  JThSt  vL  [1905J  ^6:i  S.  t  ^P-  i^us-  US  vi.  14. 


ment  affords  a  limit  after  which  the  Second  Gospel 
could  not  have  been  written,  the  relationship  be- 
tween the  Second  Gospel  and  the  First,  which  pre- 
supposes it,  may  furnish  another. 

(6)  The  First  Gospel  is  assigned  by  most  modem 
writers  to  the  period  65-90  (see  Moffatt).  Harnack 
thinks  that  it  must  have  been  written  near  the  Fall 
of  Jerusalem,  but  not  necessarily  before  it.  Moffatt 
is  clear  that  it  must  have  been  written  aft«r  that 
event. 

Apart  from  its  relationship  to  St.  Mark,  the  in- 
clination to  date  the  First  Gospel  relatively  late  is 
due  to  a  belief  that  it  reflects  the  atmosphere  of  a 
period  in  which  the  Church  has  become  organized 
and  developed.  It  is,  it  is  argued,  'Catholic'  in 
tone.  This  method  of  argument  seems  wholly  due 
to  the  fact  that  modern  critics  read  the  Gospel 
through  '  Catholic '  spectacles.  Read  it  from  the 
standpoint  of  a  Jewi-sli  Christian  of  Antioch  about 
the  period  of  the  controversy  as  to  the  admission 
of  Gentiles  into  the  Cliurch,  and  everything  is  in 
place.  In  particular,  two  lines  of  thought  in  the 
Gospel  point  to  this  period  :  (1)  the  writer's  belief 
in  the  permanent  validity  of  the  Mo.saic  Law,  (2) 
his  eschatology.  On  the  lirst  see  St.  Matthev^ 
(ICC,  1912),  p.  326,  and  ExpT  xxi.  [1909-10]  441. 
As  to  the  second  point,  a  few  words  may  here 
be  added  in  addition  to  what  is  written  in  St. 
MatthetiP,  p.  Ixix,  and  ExpT  xxi.  440. 

The  First  Gospel  is,  as  is  well  known,  the  most 
apocalyptically  coloured  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
But  there  are  many  who  do  not  realize  how  deeply 
the  apocalyptic  element  penetrates  the  book.  It 
is,  e.g.,  urged  by  E.  Buckley  *  that  the  presence  of 
passages  like  24'^^-"  does  not  presuppose  an  early 
date  for  the  Gospel,  because  the  Evangelist,  writing 
comparatively  late,  might  have  preserved  such  say- 
ings if  he  found  them  in  his  sources.  He  might  of 
course  have  done  so,  but  the  question  is  not  one  of 
a  few  isolated  passages  ;  it  affects  the  whole  Gospel. 
V.  H.  Stanton  t  also  says  that  the  language  of  ch. 
24  need  not  make  for  an  early  date,  because  the 
writer  could  quite  well  have  left  unaltered  expres- 
sions of  his  source.  This  misses  the  whole  point. 
Not  only  does  the  editor  leave  unaltered  expressions 
of  his  sources,  but  he  also  alters  St.  Mark  in  order 
to  bring  that  Gospel  into  line  with  the  idea  of  the 
nearness  of  the  Parousia  which  was  so  prominent  in 
his  own  mind  (cf.,  e.g.,  Mt  16'«»  with  Mk  91,  Mt  24» 
with  Mk  13-^).     It  is  not  only  one  or  two  isolated 

{)assages  in  one  of  his  sources,  it  is  the  Evangelist 
limself  giving  preference  to  one  eschatologically 
coloured  source  (Q)  and  revising  another  source  (St. 
Mark)  in  accordance  with  its  ideas.  There  are 
many  who  think  that  the  prominence  of  the  apoca- 
lyptic element  in  the  First  Gospel  is  due  to  the 
Evangelist  forcing  it  in  upon  the  tradition  of 
Christ's  sayings.  The  truta  is  rather  that  the 
Evangelist  had  one  source  full  of  this  element,  and 
that  he  was  so  heartily  in  sympathy  witli  it  that 
he  not  only  preserved  large  sections  of  it,  but  also 
allowed  himself  to  transfer  sayings  of  an  apocalyptic 
nature  from  it  into  appropriate  sections  of  St. 
Mark's  Gospel. 

That  the  apocalyptic  colouring  of  the  First 
Gospel,  in  so  far  as  it  is  peculiar  to  that  book,  is 
due  to  the  Evangelist  himself  and  not  to  one  of  his 
sources  seems  wholly  incredible.  Allow  that  the 
Gospel  was  written  about  the  year  A.D.  50  by  a 
Jewish  Christian  of  the  party  who  wished  to  enforce 
the  keeping  of  the  Law  upon  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
writer,  as  one  who  was  anxious  to  preserve  all 
those  sayings  of  Christ  which  represented  Him  as 
One  who  taught  that  He  was  the  Messiah  of  the 
Jews  who  would  shortly  inaugurate  the  Kingdom, 
is  in  his  natural  place  in  the  development  of  the 

•  Introduction  to  the  Synoiilie  Problem,  p.  278. 
t  T/u  (irospeU  as  UisloricaX  DocwnenU,  ii.  367. 


GOSPELS 


GOSPELS 


475 


Church.  He  is  contemporaneous  with  the  apoca- 
lyptic period  of  St.  Paul's  teaching.  Would  the 
Church  ever  hare  received  a  book  into  which  the 
writer  had  thrust  his  own  conception  of  Christ  as 
an  utterer  of  apocalyptic  fantasies  at  a  later  period 
when  they  had  a  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  ?  Its  reception 
by  the  Church  seems  explicable  only  on  the  ground 
that  it  was  a  book  written  early  in  the  history  of 
the  Church,  received  at  first  in  the  district  where 
it  was  written  by  a  community  which  was  in  agree- 
ment with  its  apocalyptic  teaching,  and  that  it  thus 
held  a  place  in  the  Church  from  which  it  could  not 
be  deposed. 

B.  H.  Streeter*  argues  that  the  Apocalypse, 
written  towards  the  close  of  the  century,  proves 
that  there  were  at  that  period  circles  with  a  strong 
liking  for  apocalyptic  literature,  and  seems  to  think 
that  the  First  Gospel  may  therefore  have  been 
written  comparatively  late.  But  the  two  cases 
are  not  in  the  least  parallel.  The  Gospel  was  read 
in  the  Church  at  an  early  date  and  everywhere 
received.  The  use  of  the  Apocalypse  was  long  con- 
tested. Moreover,  it  was  one  thing  for  the  Church 
to  value  an  Apocalypse  placed  in  the  mouth  of  the 
Ascended  Christ ;  it  would  have  been  quite  another 
matter  for  it  at  a  date  when,  as  the  Third  and 
Fourth  Gospels  show,  the  tendency  was  rather  to 
diminish  than  to  enhance  the  apocalyptic  element 
in  the  Lord's  words,  to  accept  a  Gospel  in  which 
(according  to  the  theory)  there  were  placed  whole- 
sale in  His  mouth  during  His  earthly  life  sayings 
couched  in  technical  apocalyptic  language  which 
He  never  used.  A  Gospel  so  judaized,  as  would 
be  the  First  Gospel  on  this  theory,  in  idea  and  in 
language,  would  have  been  recoguized  as  alien  to 
the  true  tradition  of  Christ's  life,  and  would  have 
stood  little  chance  of  being  received  as  an  apos- 
tolic writing. 

Notice  may  be  taken  here  of  a  few  passages  which 
are  supposed  to  suggest  a  late  date. 

Chs.  1  and  2  are  certainly  early.  Hamack 
now  recognizes  that  nothing  in  them  need  have 
been  written  later  than  a.d.  70.  The  sayings 
about  the  Chtirch  (16''"-  18"*^-)  are  certainly  early, 
for  they  are  couched  in  language  in  which  the 
Jewish  colouring  is  very  remarkable.  The  word 
•Church'  is  supposed  to  betray  a  late  date,  but 
why?  About  A.D.  52  St.  Paul  was  using  it  of 
the  Church  at  Thessalonica.  When  the  Evangelist 
wanted  a  Greek  word  to  represent  the  Aramaic 
word  used  by  Christ,  whatever  that  may  have  been, 
what  other  word  would  he  be  likely  to  choose  than 
the  €KK\ri<ria  of  sacred  osage  ? 

•As  to  the  last  point  [the  nae  of  '  Church  *]  it  is  enough  to 
note  that  the  word  occurs  nearly  a  hundred  times  in  the  LXX. 
Not  only  is  the  rest  of  the  vocabulary  essentially  Jewish,  but  it 
must  come  from  a  quarter  in  which  the  Jewish  "origin  and  rela- 
tions of  Christianity  were  strongly  marked,  i.e.  from  a  source 
near  the  fountain  head.'  f 

The  trinitarian  formula  in  28"  need  not  be  late. 
St.  Paul,  says  Hamack,  did  not  create  it  (op.  cit. 
p.  108 ;  cf.  also  The  Constitution  and  Law  of  the 
Church,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1910,  p.  259  fl'.). 

The  narratives  peculiar  to  St.  Matthew  are,  as 
Hamack  recognizes,  of  a  very  archaic  character. 

If  then  we  are  right  in  dating  the  First  Gospel 
about  A.D.  5<3,  we  have  a  further  limit  for  St. 
Mark.  His  Gospel  must  be  prior  to  that  date,  and 
fall  between  30  and  50.  Now  it  is  clear  from  the 
early  chapters  of  Acts  that  St.  Peter  was  prominent 
in  Jerusalem  as  leader  of  the  little  society  of 
disciples  of  Jesus  the  Messiah  (the  First  Gospel 
reflects  this  ri^^htly).  There  about  the  year  39  St. 
Paul  stayed  with  him  for  a  fortnight.  But  in  44 
St.  Peter  was  obliged  to  leave  Jerusalem  (Ac  12"), 
and  we  do  not  find  him  there  again  until  the 

•  Interpreter,  vui.  [1911]  37  ff. 

t  W.  Sanday,  in  Minutes  o/  Etridenee  b^ore  Boyol  Com.  on 
Mwree,  iii.  241. 


Council  some  five  years  later  (Ac  15).  During  this 
interval  the  Second  Gospel  may  well  have  been 
written.  The  absence  of  Peter  from  Jerosalem 
would  suggest  the  writing  down  of  his  teachings  to 
compensate  for  the  loss  of  his  personal  presence, 
and  no  one  was  so  fitted  for  this  work  as  John 
Mark.  If  written  at  Jerusalem,  the  Groepel 
would  naturally  have  been  composed  in  Aramaic, 
and  there  is  much  in  its  style  and  language  to 
suggest  this.  But  St.  Mark  did  not  stay  long  in 
Jerusalem.  He  left  with  his  cousin  Barnabas  for 
Antioch,  and  there  (c.  44-47)  it  may  have  been 
found  desirable  to  translate  the  Gospel  into  Greek. 
When  the  controversy  between  the  Churches  of 
Antioch  and  Jerusalem  broke  out  a  little  later,  the 
wTiter  of  the  First  Gospel  took  St.  Mark's  work  as 
his  basis,  and  wrote  a  longer  Gospel,  inserting  from 
another  source  much  of  the  Lord's  teaching  as 
preserved  at  Jerusalem.  The  Second  Gospel  may 
quite  well  have  been  re-edited  at  Rome  ;  but  if  so, 
the  changes  made  in  it  cannot  have  been  many,  for 
it  is  clear  that  the  editor  of  the  First  Gospel  had 
St.  Mark  before  him  much  as  we  have  it. 

(c)  The  Third  Gospel  is  generally  dated  c.  A.D.  80 
(see  Moffatt).  But  if  Hamack  is  right  about  the 
date  of  the  Acts,  the  Gospel  must  of  course  be 
earlier,  i.e.  it  must  have  b^n  written  somewhere 
between  A.D.  47  and  60.* 

2.  Authorship. — (a)  The  tradition  which  assigns 
the  Second  Gospel  to  St.  Mark  is  so  strong  that  it 
requires  some  boldness  to  set  it  aside.  It  goes 
back  as  early  as  Papias  (c.  A.D.  140),  who  gives  it 
on  the  authority  of  '  the  Elder '  (Ens.  HE  iii.  39), 
and  it  is  now  very  widely  accepted  (cf.,  e.g.,  Peake, 
[Critical  Introd.  to  NT,  p.  121],  Hamack,  Mofiatt, 
Bacon  [The  Making  of  the  NT,  p.  159]). 

(6)  The  majority  of  modem  writers  are  also  agreed 
in  referring  the  First  Gospel  to  an  unknown  writer. 
The  reasons  for  this  are  the  following.  (1)  The 
earliest  witness,  Papias  or  the  Elder  quoted  by  him, 
speaks  of  a  work  of  St.  Matthew  which  he  describes 
as  rd  Xo7ta.  This  term  does  not  describe  aptly  such 
a  book  as  our  First  Gospel,  but  would  more 
naturally  apply  to  a  collection  of  utterances  or 
sayings  (see  Moflatt,  p.  189).  (2)  Moreover,  this 
work  is  said  by  the  same  ■witness  to  have  been 
written  in  the  Hebrew  dialect  ( =  Aramaic  ?).  Now 
our  First  Gospel  is  certainly  not  a  translation  of 
an  Aramaic  or  Hebrew  work.  It  was  written  in 
Greek  by  a  writer  who  used  at  least  one  Greek 
source,  the  Second  Gospel,  and  who  used  also 
the  Greek  OT  (see  St.  Mattheid*  [ICC],  pp.  xiiiff. 
Ixii). 

But  the  inference  is  a  natural  one  that  the  name 
of  St.  Matthew  was  given  to  the  book  because  it 
largely  embodies  the  work  of  that  Apostle  referred 
to  by  Papias.  Modem  criticism  has  therefore  been 
largely  absorbed  in  an  endeavour  to  reconstruct 
this  Matthaean  work.  Foreign  scholars  for  the 
most  part  refuse  in  any  way  to  identify  the  dis- 
course source  which  has  been  used  in  the  First 
Gospel  with  Papias'  Matthaean  Logia  (Hamack, 
however,  admits  that  it  may  well  have  been  an 
apostolic  work).  They  prefer  to  give  it  a  name 
which  will  beg  no  questions  as  to  its  authorship, 
and  call  it  simply  Q  (  =  Quclle,  'source').  Three 
main  views  as  to  its  contents  exist:  (1)  that  of 
Bemhard  Weiss,  +  who  assigns  to  it  not  only 
material  found  in  both  Mt.  and  Lk.,  or  in  one  of 
them,  but  also  a  good  deal  that  is  common  to  all 
three  Gospels,  because  he  believes  that  St.  Mark 
borrowed  from  Q,*   which  therefore    lay  before 

*  For  a  refutation  of  the  argument  that  the  Go^id  {Mreaop- 
poses  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  see  Hwpack,  Beitruffe,  iv.  81  ff . 

t  Die  Quelien  der  tjrnoptitdien  Ubertieferung,  lieipcig,  190S. 

I  The  question  wbethtf  St.  Uaik  used  Q  has  been  much  dis- 
cussed recently.  F.  Nioolaxdot  iLe*  Proeidit  de  ridaetion  des 
trois  premiers  Eeang^Httes,  Paris,  1908)  thinks  that  he  did  so 
largely.    B.  H.   Streeter  Qat  Saodajr,  Ojjford  Sttidies  in  tJu 


476 


GOSPELS 


GOSPPXS 


Mt.  and  Lk.  in  a  double  form — (i.)  its  original 
form,  (ii.)  as  reproduced  in  Mk.  (2)  Harnack,* 
aeain,  assigns  to  it  only  material  found  both  in 
Mt.  and  Lk.  and  not  in  Mk.  (cf.  also  Hawkins 
and  Streeter  in  Sanday,  Oxford  Sttcdies  in  tlic 
Synoptic  Problem).  One  serious  objection  to  this 
theory  is  that,  since  it  is  almost  incredible  that 
Mt.  and  Lk.  should  either  have  both  embodied  the 
whole  of  Q  or  both  have  selected  the  same  sections 
from  it,  a  reconstruction  on  these  lines  must  give 
us  an  incomplete  Q,  and  possibly  one  so  incomplete 
that  no  sure  inferences  can  be  drawn  from  it  as 
to  the  nature  and  character  of  the  whole  work. 
(3)  Finally,  Allen  {Oxford  Studies,  p.  236  ff.)  be- 
lieves that  Q  is  best  represented  in  the  First  Gospel. 
He  thinks  that  if  most  of  the  sayings  and  dis- 
courses peculiar  to  Mt.,  and  those  common  to  Mt. 
and  Lk.,  are  grouped  together,  the  result  forms  a 
collection  of  discourses  of  a  very  primitive  char- 
acter which  may  well  be  the  Mattnsean  work  re- 
ferred to  by  Papias.  He  thinks  that  this  work 
was  not  used  directly  by  Lk.,  but  that  many 
sayings  drawn  from  it  passed  through  intermediate 
stages  into  St.  Luke  s  Gospel,  one  of  these  inter- 
mediate stages  being  possibly  the  First  Gospel. 

(c)  The  authorship  of  the  Third  Gospel  is  bound 
up  with  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  Acts. 
Critics,  like  JUlicher,  who  date  Gospel  and  Acts 
about  A.D.  lOUand  deny  that  the  writer  of  the  '  we ' 
sections  in  Acts  can  be  identified  with  the  writer 
of  the  whole  book  of  Acts,  cannot  of  course  accept 
the  tradition  that  St.  Luke,  a  companion  of  St. 
Paul,  wrote  both  Acts  and  Gospel.  But  recent 
criticism  has  moved  decisively  in  the  direction  of 
affirming  the  truth  of  the  tradition.  Harnack, 
following  on  the  lines  of  W.  K.  Hobart,t  argues 
that  the  style  and  language  of  Gospel  and  Acts,  in- 
cluding the  'we'  sections,  decisively  prove  that 
both  works  were  written  by  one  person  and  that  he 
was  a  physician.  :J  Moffatt  says  that  the  supposi- 
tion that  both  works  did  not  come  from  a  single 
pen  may  nowadays  be  '  decently  interred '  {LNT, 
p.  298).  It  is  probable  that  criticism,  after  long 
wandering  in  a  labyrinth  of  speculation  upon  this 

Eoint,  will  return  to  the  traditional  belief  in  the 
rucan  authorship  of  both  books.  It  is  accepted  in 
such  recent  works  as  that  of  Peake.  For  a  sum- 
mary of  the  linguistic  argument,  see  Harnack, 
Luke  the  Physician,  or  Moftatt,  LNT,  p.  297  f. 

Some  of  those  who  reject  the  Lucan  authorship 
of  the  two  books  are  inclined  to  think  that  Luke 
may  have  written  the  'we'  sections  (so  Bacon, 
Introduction  to  NT,  p.  211). 

3.  CharacteristicB.— (a)  The  Second  Gospel  is 
neither  a  history  nor  a  biography.  It  contains 
no  dates,  and  the  writer  is  at  no  pains  to  give  any 
details  of  time  or  place  which  would  help  to  make 
the  narrative  intelligible  to  a  reader  previously 
unacquainted  with  it.  The  central  figure  of  the 
book  is  introduced  under  the  description  'Jesus 
Messiah,  Son  of  God'  (P),  but  nothing  is  said  of 
His  human  parentage,  His  early  life,  or  the  period 
in  which  He  lived.  If  we  set  aside  the  last  five 
chapters,  which  describe  in  detail,  disproportionate 
to  tne  rest  of  the  book,  the  last  few  days  of  the 
Messiah's  life,  the  account  of  His  doings  in  l^-KP^ 
is  strangely  disconnected  and  without  sequence. 
No  hint  of  the  length  of  time  occupied  by  the  nar- 
rative is  given,  long  periods  are  passed  over  with- 
out comment,  whilst  the  events  of  a  single  day  are 
recorded  in  detail. 

Synoptic  Problem)  argues  that  he  did  so  only  to  a  limited 
extent.  Harnack  thinks  that  'this  assumption  is  nowhere 
demanded'  (Sayings  of  iJesus,  p.  226;  so  Moffatt.  LNT,  p. 
204  ff.  V 

•  The  Sayings  of  Jesm. 

t  The  Medical  Language  of  St.  Luke,  Dublin  and  London, 
X8a2. 

I  See  also  J.  C.  Hawkins,  Horoe  Synoptical,  Oxford,  1909. 


This  incompleteness  and  fragmentariness  sug- 
gest the  writer's  intention.  He  wished  to  put 
into  permanent  form  such  of  the  incidents  of  the 
Messiah's  life  as  were  well  known  from  St.  Peter's 
teaching  to  the  community  in  which  he  lived. 
Behind  the  book  there  lies  as  the  only  explanation 
of  it  the  Christian  community  (at  Jerusalem?) 
orphaned  of  its  chief  teacher.  If  this  be  lost 
sight  of,  the  book  remains  as  a  mere  narrative 
of  disconnected  incidents  in  the  life  of  one  Jesus 
of  Nazareth. 

If  a  keynote  to  the  Gospel  be  wanted,  it  may 
be  found  in  the  jihrase  'having  authority'  (1"). 
Jesus  is  depicted  as  one  whose  words  and  deeds 
proved  Him  to  be  endowed  with  power,  and  so  to 
be  the  Son  of  God.  Cf.  the  following  :— l^"  :  ♦  He 
was  teaching  as  having  authority ' ;  1^ :  'a  new 
teaching,  with  authority  he  commands';  2^": 
'  the  Son  of  Man  hath  authority ' ;  5*"  :  '  knowing 
the  power  which  had  gone  forth  from  him ' ;  6* : 
'the  powers  (miracles)  done  by  him.'  In  accord- 
ance with  this  is  the  emphasis  in  the  Gospel  upon 
the  impression  made  by  Him  upon  the  peasantry. 
Cf.  the  following  : — 1^ :  '  the  crowds  were  aston- 
ished at  his  teaching ' ;  2'-  :  '  all  were  astonished  ' ; 
b*^ :  '  they  were  astonished  with  great  amazement ' ; 
6^ :  '  the  populace  were  astonished ' ;  7^  :  '  they 
were  above  measure  astonished  ' ;  11'^ :  '  the  crowd 
were  astonished  at  his  teaching ' ;  1*^ :  '  the  whole 
city  was  gathered  at  the  door ' ;  1**  :  '  He  could  no 
longer  enter  into  a  city,  but  was  without  in  desert 
places,  and  they  came  to  him  from  all  sides ' ;  2^ : 
'  They  were  gathered  together,  so  that  the  space 
about  the  door  could  no  longer  contain  them ' ; 
3* :  '  He  bade  his  disciples  prepare  a  boat,  because 
of  the  crowd ' ;  3^  :  '  the  crowd  again  gathers,  so 
that  they  could  not  even  eat ' ;  4^ :  '  and  there 
gathers  to  him  a  very  great  crowd,  so  that  he 
embarked  into  a  boat ' ;  6*' :  '  There  were  many 
coming  and  going,  and  they  had  no  opportunity 
to  eat.' 

(b)  If  the  Second  Gospel  is  a  book  of  remin- 
iscences, or  rather  of  notes  of  a  great  teacher's 
reminiscences  of  the  life  of  his  Master,  the  First 
Gospel  is  a  theological  treatise  in  narrative  form. 
Its  purpose  is  to  prove  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
was,  though  rejected  by  the  rulers  of  His  people, 
the  true  Messiah,  in  whom  were  or  would  be  ful- 
filled all  the  Messianic  expectations  of  the  OT. 
The  phrase  'that  it  might  be  fulfilled'  may  be 
taken  as  the  keynote  of  the  book.  Ciiaracteristic 
of  the  book  are  the  following:  (1)  its  apologetic 
aspect ;  it  is  a  defence  of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus 
against  (i. )  current  slander  (cf.  esp.  chs.  1,  2),  (ii.) 
the  hard  fact  that  the  Jewish  autliorities  rejected 
Him  ;  (2)  its  consequent  polemic  against  the  recog- 
nized authorities  of  the  Jews  ;  (3)  its  conception  of 
the  Church  or  Society  of  the  Messiah  as  consisting 
of  Jews  or  proselytes  still  under  the  authority  or 
the  Mosaic  Law  ;  (4)  its  conception  of  the  Kingdom 
as  to  be  inaugurated  shortly  when  the  Messiali 
returned  on  the  clouds  of  heaven.  See  on  these 
points  5^.  Mattheufi,  pp.  309  tt",  326  ft'.  ;  ExpT  xxi. 
439  tf.  ;  and  art.  '  Matthew  (Gospel) '  in  DCG. 

(c)  In  the  Third  Gospel  we  come  at  last  to  a  pro- 
fessed biography  or  history  of  a  life.  It  is  best 
treated  when  taKen  as  the  first  part  of  a  great  his- 
torical work  of  which  Acts  is  tne  second  volume, 
and  some  of  the  following  features  characterize 
both  works:  (1)  if  in  the  First  Gospel  Jesus  is 
'He  who  fulfils'  and  in  the  Second  He  is  the  one 
having  authority  and  power,  in  the  Third  He  is 
the  Divine  Healer  ;  (2)  there  is  a  strong  universal- 
istic  note.  Jesus  is  the  Second  Adam,  and  His 
gospel  is  for  all  peoples  (cf.  2»-  ^i  3«) ;  (3)  promi- 
nence is  given  to  women  in  both  GosjmjI  and  Acts ; 
(4)  there  is  considerable  emphasis  upon  prayer, 
the  inUuence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  upon  Chris. 


GOSPELS 


GOSPELS 


477 


tianity  as   being  a  religion   marketl   by   thanks- 
giving, joy,  and  peace. 

Out  of  his  many  sources  St.  Luke  has  composed 
a  wonderful  book.  About  the  first  part  of  the 
Gospel  hangs  the  peace  of  God,  clothing  it  like  a 
soft  garment.  Into  the  world  has  entered  the 
Prince  of  Peace,  bringing  healing  to  the  souls  and 
bodies  of  men — not  of  Jews  only  but  of  all  man- 
kind, not  for  the  rich  and  privileged  classes  but 
for  the  poor  and  the  outcast,  not  for  men  alone 
but  for  women  also.  To  those  who  are  Christ's 
disciples  the  gates  of  prayer  are  ever  open,  and 
they  live  in  an  atmosphere  where  praLse  is  upon 
their  lips  and  joy  in  their  hearts.  About  the 
second  part  hangs  still  the  feeling  of  the  joy  and 
peace  which  Christianity  brings  with  it.  But 
there  is  now  a  new  note  of  triumph.  The  Chris- 
tian Church  as  St.  Luke  describes  it  in  the  Acts 
marches  victoriously  through  the  Koman  world 
from  conquest  to  conquest.  Hamack  somewhere 
titl>"  quotes  as  a  keynote  to  the  work  the  words 
of  the  old  Latin  hymn  'The  Royal  banners  forward 

go' 

IL  The  Fourth  Gospel.— The  Fourth  Gospel 
is  dated  by  many  modem  writers  in  the  early  part 
of  the  2nd  cent,  (so  recently  Clemen  *  and  Bacon  t). 
This  of  course  precludes  its  apostolic  authorship. 
The  line  of  argument  which  leads  up  to  this  posi- 
tion is  as  follows,  (a)  The  Fourth  Gospel  con- 
flicts with  the  first  three  in  facts  such  as  the  date 
of  the  Crucifixion,  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple, 
and  the  account  of  John  the  Baptist ;  it  is  there- 
fore hopelessly  unhistorical,  and  cannot  have  been 
written  by  an  apostle,  {b)  It  conflicts  with  them 
in  its  presentation  of  the  Person  of  Christ.  The 
Christology  is  so  diflerent  from  that  of  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  that  the  sayings  put  into  the  mouth  of 
Chnst  must  be  mainly  the  work  of  an  author  (not 
an  apostle)  who  is  writing  under  the  influence  of 
Je\%'ish  Alexandrian  Philosophy  and  of  Stoicism.  :J 
(c)  What  then  of  the  2nd  cent,  attribution  of  the 
Gospel  to  the  Apostle?  This  is  hopelessly  mis- 
leading. Irenaeus  misunderstood  Polycarp  and 
attributed  the  Gospel  to  John  the  Apostle  when 
he  ought  to  have  assigned  it  to  John  the  Elder. 
Irenaeus  is  wrong  again  when  he  said  that  John 
the  Apostle  lived  to  a  good  age  and  spent  the  last 
part  of  his  life  at  Ephesus.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
he  suflered  early  martyrdom  at  the  hands  of  the 
Jews.  § 

We  may  consider  further  some  points  in  this 
argument,  (a)  The  historical  inaccuracy  in  matters 
of  fact  needs  at  least  considerable  qualification. 
In  many  respects  the  writer  is  remarkably  accu- 
rate in  his  representation  of  Palestine  as  it  was 
before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  e.g.  in  geographi- 
cal and  topographical  detail,  in  his  knowleidge  of 
Jewish  custom,  the  relationship  between  Jewish 
parties,  their  religious  beliefs.  Moreover,  the 
Synoptic  tradition  is  too  one-sided  to  be  taken  as 
a  measure  or  gauge. 

(6)  The  contrast  drawn  between  the  Christology  of 
the  Synoptic  Gospels  and  that  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
is  open  to  the  same  criticism.  What  right  have 
we  to  regard  the  first  three  Grf)spel8  as  an  adequate 
presentation  of  the  Person  of  Christ,  aad  not  as 
three  slightly  varying  forms  of  a  tradition  which 
represented  a  very  meagre  part  of  a  life  which  was 
many-sided?  For  hints  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels 
of  a  Judaean  ministry  see  Motfatt,  LNT,  p.  541. 
With  respect  to  the  teaching  of  Christ,  the  Synoptic 
(Jospels  give  us  a  significant  hint  that  there  were 
sides  of  this  teaching  which  they  have  left  almost 
wholly  unrecorded.     The  saying  Mt  11*'  =  Lk  1(F, 

*  Die  Entstehung  des  Johannetevangeliumi,  Halle,  1912. 
t  The  Making  of  the  ST. 

t  See  Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  522  ;  Scott,  Fourth  Gotpel,  p.  29  ff. 
S  M<MEatt,  LST,  p.  602ff. 


with  its  emphasis  uiK>n  the  unique  Sonship  of 
Christ,  implies  the  whole  Johanuiue  Christology, 
and  is  no  doubt  a  fragment  from  a  whole  cycle  of 
teaching  such  as  that  which  has  survived  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel.  And  St,  Mark  has  another  allusion 
to  this  teaching  in  13"  ('the  Son').  The  modem 
critic  fashions  out  of  the  first  three  Gospels  a  Jesus 
after  his  liking,  and  then  denies  that  the  Christ  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel  is  compatible  with  this  Jesos 
whom  his  literary  criticism  has  created.  But  is  it 
not  more  likely  to  be  the  case  that  the  Jesus  of 
history  was  One  too  lofty  in  personality,  too  many- 
sided  in  character,  to  be  understood  by  His  contem- 
poraries ?  The  Synoptic  tradition  has  given  to  us 
one  impression  as  it  was  left  upon  some  of  His 
followers  (though  even  here  there  are  many  aspects 
of  character — teacher  of  virtue,  critic  of  Pharisaic 
religion,  mystic,  doer  of  miracles,  apocalyptic  seer, 
etc. ) ;  the  Fourth  Gospel  has  preserved  another 
side  of  His  character.  It  may  well  be  that,  had 
others  set  themselves  to  describe  the  life,  we  should 
have  had  information  which  would  have  given  us 
quite  a  fresh  conception  of  Him.  It  is,  moreover, 
easy  to  draw  quite  false  antitheses  between  the 
Fourth  Gospeliand  the  Synoptics.  It  is,  e.g.,  true 
that  the  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  dwells  by 
preference  upon  the  teaching  as  to  the  present 
possession  of  Christian  privileges  rather  than  upon 
that  as  to  their  future  consummation  (the  apoca- 
lyptic teaching  of  the  Synoptic  Gk>spels).  But  the 
whole  cycle  of  this  apocalyptic  teaching  is  pre- 
supposed. There  is  to  be  a  general  resurrection 
(5^).  Eternal  life  involves  a  resurrection  at  the 
last  day  (6***).  The  very  conception  of  eternal  life 
is  apocalyptic,  involving  the  thought  of  the  per- 
manence of  the  individual  life  and  its  future  entry 
into  a  Kingdom  which  will  be  a  fulfilment  of  the 
partial  manifestation  of  the  kingdom  in  the  present. 
The  retention  of  these  peissages  in  the  Gospel  is 
not  a  deliberate  departure  from  the  writer's  view 
of  life  as  present,  and  a  falling  back  on  a  primitive 
eschatological  view  (Scott,  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  249). 
Rather  they  are  a  hint  that  there  is  another  side 
of  the  doctrine  of  eternal  life  which  the  author 
knows  to  have  been  taught  by  Christ,  and  which 
he  will  not  altogether  omit  because  it  is  the 
necessary  corollarj-  of  such  teaching  on  eternal  life 
as  he  records.  They  who  have  eternal  life  cannot 
die  for  ever,  and  there  must  be  a  sphere  in  which 
their  life  wiU  be  manifested.  That  is  pure  apoca- 
lyptic. 

The  conception  of  the  Christology  of  the  book  as 
being  the  work  of  a  writer  strongly  influenced  by 
Alexandrian  philosophy  is  probably  a  false  one 
due  to  the  fact  that  modem  writers  on  the  Gospel 
know  something  about  Alexandrian  philosophy 
because  Philo  -wrote  in  Greek,  but  little  or  nothing 
about  Jewish  theology  in  the  time  of  Christ,  except 
at  second  hand,  or  in  so  far  as  it  can  be  ascertained 
from  Greek  sources  (the  apocalyptic  literature). 
The  Gospel  is  probably  thoroughly  Hebraic  in 
language,  in  method  of  argument,  in  idea,  and 
it  will  be  seen  to  be  so  when  Christian  scholars 
take  the  trouble  to  set  themselves  to  the  work  of 
critically  editing  the  Rabbinical  literature,  with 
a  view  to  ascertaining  how  much  of  its  theology 
they  must  carry  back  into  the  period  of  the  life  of 
Christ.* 

(c)  With  regard  to  the  2nd  cent,  tradition,  it  is 
significant  that  decision  as  to  its  value  seems  to 
depend  upon  a  prior  question — that  of  the  possi- 
bility of  an  apostolic  authorship  for  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  That  is,  critics  who  find  the  Gospel  so 
unhistorical  as  to  render  its  composition  by  an 
apostle  impossible  all  depreciate  the  value  of  the 
2nd  cent,  witness  to  St.  John  as  the  author.     And 

*  See  I.  Abrahams,  in  Cambridge  Biblical  EttayM,  London, 
1909,  p.  181  ff. 


478      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


indeed  what  need  to  trouble  abont  explaining  away 
this  witness  if  the  Gospel  on  its  own  showing  can- 
not be  apostolic?  On  the  other  hand,  all  who  do 
not  find  the  Gospel  to  be  so  unhistorical  as  to 
make  its  conii)osition  by  'm  ai)ostle,  or  its  depend- 
ence upon  him,  incredible,  find  the  2nd  cent, 
attestation  to  be  good.  The  most  recent  critical 
work,  that  of  Clemen,*  decides  in  favour  of  the 
literary  unity  of  the  Gospel ;  denies  a  confusion 
between  two  Johns,  a  presbyter  and  an  apostle ; 
argues  that  there  is  no  valid  ground  for  denying 
that  the  apostle  settled  in  Ephesus  at  the  end  of 
his  life,  and  none  for  supposing  his  early  martyr- 
dom. Clemen  believes  the  Gospel  to  be  too  far 
removed  from  history  to  have  been  written  by  the 
apostle  himself,  but  thinks  that  Johannine  tradi- 
tion is  a  main  element  in  it. 

Recent  attempts  to  analyze  the  Gospel  into 
sources  seem  to  have  failed,!  and  it  is  little  likely 
that  for  the  present  any  fresh  light  on  the  book 
will  be  forthcoming.  It  may  be  hoped  that  we 
shall  one  day  have  an  editor  of  the  Gospel  who  is 
trained  in  Rabbinic  exegesis,  as  well  as  in  Western 
scholarship.  Such  a  one  may  find  that  the  Gospel 
is  certainly  the  work  of  a  Jew,  and  may  see  no 
reason  for  denying  that  its  author  may  have  been 
John  the  son  of  Zebedee.  If  he  prefer  historical 
evidence  as  to  Christ's  teaching  and  Person  to  pre- 
conceived ideas  about  Him,  he  m<ay  also  see  no 
reason  for  denying  that  both  Synoptic  and  Johan- 
nine pictures  of  Jesus  are  substantially  true,  yet 
equally  one-sided,  and  that  the  Jesus  of  history 
must  have  been  One  of  whom  all  our  knowledge 
can  be  only  partial,  enough  to  elicit  our  devotion 
and  to  silence  our  criticism. 

Literature. — This  is  enormous.  The  following  are  some 
recent  books  in  English  :  V.  H.  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  His- 
torical Documents,  Cambridge,  pt.  i.  [1903],  pt.  ii.  [1909] ;  J. 
Moffatt,  LNT,  Edinburgh,  1911 ;  A.  S.  Peake,  A  Critical 
Introduction  to  the  JVT,  London,  1909;  W.  Sanday,  The  Life 
of  Christ  in  Recent  Research,  Oxford,  1907,  Oxford  Studies  in 
the  Synoptic  Problem,  do.  1911,  The  Criticism  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  do.  1905 ;  A.  Harnack,  Luke  the  Physician,  Eng.  tr., 
London,  1907,  and  Sayings  of  Jesus,  do.  190S ;  F.  C.  Burkitt, 
The  Earliest  Sotircesfor  the  Life  of  Jesus,  Boston,  1910;  J.  R. 
Cohu,  The  Gospels  in  the  Light  of  Modem  Research,  Oxford, 
1909 ;  E.  R.  Buckley,  -^rt  Introduction  to  the  Synoptic  Problem, 
London,  1912 ;  B.  W.  Bacon,  The  Making  of  the  NT,  do.  1912; 

E.  F.  Scott,  The  Fourth  Gospel,  Edinburgh,  1906  ;  J.  Armit- 
age  Robinson,  The  Historical  Character  of  St.  John's  Gospel, 
London,  190S ;  L.  PuUan,  The  Gospels,  do.  1912  ;  W.  C.  Allen 
and  L.  W.  Grensted,  Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  NT, 
Edinburgh,  1913.  W.  C.  ALLEN. 

GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL).— /n^rorftfc^ory.—l. 
•Tlie  Church,'  as  Origen  said — or  rather,  as  the 
translator  of  Origen's  Homilies  on  Luke  (i.)  said  for 
him — '  the  Church  has  four  Gospels,  heresy  has 
many. '  This  could  be  said  by  the  middle  of  the 
3rd  century.  A  century  earlier,  with  the  rise  of 
the  Gospel  canon,  a  sharp  distinction  had  been 
drawn  between  the  four  Gospels  of  the  NT  and  all 
other  writings  of  this  cla.ss.  The  present  article 
deals  with  the  latter,  not  in  relation  to  the  former 
but  rather  in  the  light  of  their  own  genesis  and 
structure  as  products  of  early  Christian  literature. 
Still,  two  preliminary  remarks  must  be  made  in 
connexion  with  the  distinction  drawn  by  Origen. 
One  is,  that  while  the  Church  had  only  four  Gospels 
in  the  sense  of  Scriptures  relating  to  the  life  of 
Jesus,  which  were  authorized  to  be  used  in  public 
worship  and  for  purposes  of  doctrine,  the  early 
Christians  did  not  by  any  means  confine  their  read- 
ing to  the  canonical  Gospels.  Their  piety  was 
nourished  upon  some  Gospels  which  found  no 
place  in  the  canon.     And  these  Gospels  were  not 

*  Die  Entstehung  des  Johannesevangeliums. 
t  J.  Wellhausen,  Eriveiterungen  und  Kndemngen  im  vierten 
Evangelium,  Berlin,  1907,  Das  Eimngelium  Johannis,  do.  1908: 

F.  Spitta,  Das  Johannes- Eeangrlium  als  Quelle  der  Geschichte 
Jesu,  Gottingen,  1910 ;  Bacon,  The  Fourth  Gospel  in  Research 
an4  Debate,  London,  1910. 


always  tinged  with  definite  heresy.  We  can  see, 
for  example,  from  the  evidence  which  Eusebius 
rather  grudgingly  furnishes  for  the  re|)ute  of  the 
Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  in  certain  circles,  that  an 
imcanonical  Gospel  like  this  hatl  a  vogue  which 
was  only  partially  afiected  by  the  necessity  of  ex- 
cluding it  from  the  canon.  Also,  before  the  canon 
gained  its  full  authority,  a  Gospel  like  that  of 
I'eter  could  still  keep  some  footing  within  a  com- 
munity. The  Church  might  have  its  four  Gospels 
as  classical  and  standard  documents  for  the  life 
and  teaching  of  Jesus ;  fortunately,  it  felt  obliged 
to  stamp  these  with  the  special  mark  of  ins])ired 
authority,  liut  Gospels  already  in  circulation  did 
not  disappear  at  once,  even  wiien  they  were  ex- 
cluded from  ecclesiastical  use.  Nor  again — and 
this  is  the  second  remark  to  be  made — did  the 
fixing  of  the  canon  put  a  stop  to  the  composition 
or  the  editing  of  such  Gospel  material.  Literature 
of  this  kind  continued  to  be  produced,  not  only  in 
circles  which  were  more  or  less  semi-Christian,  but 
especially  in  the  Egyptian  Church.  It  belonged 
to  the  category  of  religious  fiction  for  the  most 
l)art.  Still,  it  followed  in  the  wake  of  the  canoni- 
cal Gospels,  and  what  has  survived  the  •wreck, 
reaching  us  partly  on  the  planks  of  versions  and 
partly  on  broken  pieces  oi  the  original,  forms  a 
considerable  section  of  the  material  for  our  present 
survey. 

To  study  these  Gospels  against  the  background 
of  the  canonical,  and  to  mea.sure  them  by  the 
standards  of  the  latter,  is  to  do  them  too  much 
honour.  But  it  is  also  to  do  them,  or  some  of 
them,  an  injustice.  As  we  shall  see,  it  is  a  mistake 
to  speak  of  the  uncanonical  Gospels  as  if  they  were 
a  homogeneous  product.  They  vary  widely,  not 
only  in  age  but  in  spirit.  Some  of  them  are  docu- 
ments of  '  here.sy,'  *  and  were  never  meant  to  be 
anything  else ;  the  motive  for  their  composition 
was  to  adapt  one  or  more  of  the  canonical  Gospels 
to  the  tenets  of  a  sect  or  party  on  the  borders  of 
the  catholic  Church,  But  others  were  written  to 
meet  the  needs  of  popular  Christianity  ;  their  aim 
was  to  .supplement  rather  than  to  rival  the  canoni- 
cal GosiJels,  and  in  some  cases  they  can  be  shown 
to  be  almost  contemporary  with  the  latter — 
certainly  prior  to  the  formation  of  the  canon  itself. 
The  problem  is  still  further  complicated  by  the 
probability  that  now  and  then  a  Gospel  of  an- 
heretical  character  was  re-issued  in  the  interests 
of  later  parties,  while  a  Gospel  originally  Gnostic, 
for  example,  may  occasionally  have  been  pruned  of 
its  objectionable  features  and  started  on  a  career 
within  the  Church. t  Certain  phenomena  seem  to 
point  to  both  of  these  practices  in  early  Christian 
literature.  An  uncanonical  Go.spel  might  experi- 
ence either  change;  it  might  rise  or  fall  in  the 
world  of  the  Church,  And  this  would  be  all  the 
more  possible  just  because  it  was  uncanonical. 
Neither  its  text  nor  its  contents  ensured  it  against 
degeneration  or  stood  in  the  way  of  its  appropria- 
tion by  the  hands  of  the  orthodox.  Either  the 
Church  or  'heresy'  could  drag  over  a  document 
which  lay  close  to  the  border,  and  fit  it  to  strange 
uses.  HoAvever  this  may  be,  recent  phases  of 
critical  research  in  the  uncanonical  Gospels  show 
us  pretty  plainly  that  within  as  well  as  without  the 
early  Church  there  was  sometimes  a  good  deal  of 
what  not  only  later  generations  but  even  contem- 
poraries did  not  hesitate  to  call  '  heresy,'  that  this 
'heresy'  assumed  many  forms,  and  that  the  un- 
canonical Gospels,  as  we  now  have  them,  often  re- 
present heterogeneous  and  varied  interests  of  such 
Christian  or  semi-Christian  piety. 

*  i.e.  of  '  heresy '  which  repudiated  the  name  of '  heresy ' ;  cf, 
V.  H.  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Hist.  Documents,  1.  [igO.-?]  24«  f 

t  A  similar  process  went  on  in  the  case  of  some  of  the  un- 
canonical Acta. 


GOSPELS  (UNCAXOXICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      479 


a.  The  ext&nt  fragments,  mainly  Greek  and  LAtin,  were  first 
collected  in  a  critical  edition  by  J.  A.  Fabricios  (Codex  Apoe- 
ryphus  Sov.  Tttt.  .  .  .  editio  aeeunda,  emendatior,  Hambars^> 
1719  [1st  ed.,  1703]) ;  A.  Birch  (Auetarium  codidt  Apoayphi 
A'ooi  Tetiamenti  Fabrieiani  eontinen*  plura  inedita  alia  ad 
Adem  eodd.mu.emendatiuta^fretta.Copenbttgen,  1S&4)  ;  J.  C. 
ThBo  {Codex  ApoaryfkHi  Son  Tettamtnti,  Leipzig;,  1S3'2)  ;  and 
C  de  Tischendorf  (^winjrfia  Apocrypha^,  Leipzig,  1876). 
Later  discoveries  were  mainly  incorporated  in  the  texts  iasaed 
by  E.  Nestle  (Sovi  Testamenti  SuppUmentum,  Leipzig,  1896); 
E.  Prenschem  CAntiUgomena :  die  iUtte  der  aiisierkanoni$ehen 
SvangtUmiwMwrekntUieken  Uriteriieferungen,  henuugeaeben 
und  «MterM<2(S,  Gieaaen,  1906);  and  E.  Klosteniiaim  Qn  H. 
Lietzmann'8  Kleine  TezU,  3,  8,  and  11,  Bonn,  1903-O4X  But 
Thilo  and  Tischendorf  still  form  the  basis  for  research,  so  tar  as 
the  Greek  and  Latin  texts  of  several  important  docoments  are 
concerned.  In  E.  Hennecke's  IfetUettamenttie^  Apokrppken 
(Tiibingen  and  Leipzig,  1904)  there  are  Talnable  translations, 
with  inutxluctions  and  notes,  of  the  Goepel  of  the  Hebrews,  the 
Gospel  of  the  Ebionites,  the  Protevangetiom  Jacobi,  and  the 
Gospel  of  Thomas  (by  A.  Meyer),  of  the  Gospel  of  Peter  (by  A. 
Stiilcken),  of  the  Traditions  of  Matthias  and  some  Coptic  frag- 
ments, etc  (by  the  editor).  The  French  edition  in  course  of 
preparation  by  J.  Bonsquet  and  E.  Amann  (Lei  Apoerfpkes 
du  SouTfau  testament,  Paris),  includes  the  original  texts,  but 
as  yet  only  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi  has  appe^-ed  (1910X 

The  eighteen.th  century  brought  Augustin  Calmet's  Diiter- 
tation  sur  U*  EcangiUt  apoeryphes  in  his  '  Commentaire,*  Paris, 
1709-16,  vol.  viL  ;  Jeremiah  Jones'  jN>ir  and  FuU  Method 
of  Settling  the  Canonical  Authority  of  the  Sew  TettametU, 
London,  172&-37  (written  on  the  basis  of  Fabridas,  akmg 
apologetic  lines);  and  J.  F.  Klenker's  similar  Ueber  die 
Apol^lfphen  des  ST,  Hamburg,  1798 ;  followed  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  by  Arens'  essay  de  Eyang.  apoe.  in  eanonici* 
vtu  ki^orieo,  eritieo,  exegetteo,  Gottingen,  1S35;  K.  F. 
Borbergr's  Bibliothek  der  netUegtamenuiehen  Apokryphen, 
geaananeU,  vebertetzt,  und  erlatUert,  Stuttgart,  1341 ;  J.  Pons 
(ide  Kigr^pelisseX  Reehereket  ntr  les  Apoeryphe*  du  Souteau 
Tettament  (thite  hittorique  et  critique),  Montanban,  1850 ;  and  * 
R.  CUonens'  Die  geheimgehattenen  oder  tog.  apoktyphen 
Bvangelien ,  Stuttgart,  1850  ( voliune  of  German  translations).  A 
French  tr.  of  Thilo  was  issued  in  1S4S  by  G.  Brunet  (Lei 
^vangilei  apoeryphes-,  Paris,  1863X  and  a  poor  English  compila- 
tion, based  on  Fabricius,  Thilo,  etc.,  was  published  four  years 
later  by  J.  A.  Giles  (Codex  Apocryphui  Sovi  Tettamenti, 
LondonX  W.  Hone's  worthless  and  unworthy  Apoeryphal 
ST,  London,  1S20,  included  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi.  Useful 
volumes  of  English  t  translations  were  published,  however,  bv  A- 
Walker  (in  the  Ante-Sicene  Chr.  Lib.,  xvi.  [Edinburgh,  1S73]); 
B.  H.  Cowper  (The  Apoe.  GospeU,  London,  lse7,  '*1S74); 
and  B.  Pick  (Paralipomena :  Remaini  of  Gcspeli  and  Sayings 
of  Christ,  Chicago,  1908).  Two  French  treatises  overshadowed 
any  Elnglish  criticism  during  this  period,  one  a  critical  study  by 
M.  Nicolas  (£tiidet  tar  lei  ivangiiet  apoerypket,  Paris,  1S65) ; 
the  other  a  Roman  Catimlic  counterpart  by  Joseph  Variot 
(Lei  Erangilei  apoeryphei,  Paris,  1878X 

In  W.  Wright's  Contributions  to  the  Apocryphal  Literature 
of  the  Seia  Testament,  London,  1865,  Syriac  versions  of  the 
Protevangelium  Jacobi(a  fragment)and  the  Gospel  of  Thomas  the 
Israelite  were  published  and  translated  with  notes.  Otherwise, 
the  main  contributions  to  the  subject  duringthe  last  century  were 
monographs  upon  special  points  and  aspects,  like  P.  J.  Peltzer's 
Historische  und  dogmenkistoriiche  Elemente  in  den  apok. 
Kindheits  -  Erangelien,  Wnrzburg,  1864 ;  A.  Tappehom's 
Auiserbiblische  Saehriehten,  oder  die  Apokryphen  iiber  die 
Geburt,  Kindheit  und  doi  Lebemende  Jeiu  und  Maria,  Pader- 
bom,  1S85 ;  and  J.  Haver's  Die  apokryphiaehen  Bvangelien, 
aueh  ein  Beiceis  fUr  die  Glaubviirdigkeit  der  kanoniichen, 
Halberstadt,  lS98-99;t  with  S.  Baring-Gould's  Lost  and 
HoitUe  Gospels,  London,  1874,  p.  119  f. ;  J.  Chrzaszcz's  Die 
apokryphen  Etangelien,  insbeiondere  dai  Etangelium  seeun- 
dun^  Hebrceos,  Gleiwitz,  1888;  and  C.  Bost's  Les  Btangiles 
apoeryphes  de  Venfanee  de  J.-C.  atee  une  introduction  sttr  les 
rieiti  de  ilatthieu  et  de  Lue,  Montauban,  1S94. 

The  older  monographs  upon  their  relation  to  the  sources  for 
the  life  of  Jesus,  by  R.  Hofhiann  (Das  Leben  Jesu  nach  den 
Apokryphen,  Leipzig,  1851) ;  J.  de  Q.  Donehoo  (Apoe.  and 
Legendary  Life  of  Christ,  London,  1903);  and  L.  Couard 
(AltehriiU.  Sagen  iiber  das  Leben  Jetu,  Gutersloh,  1905)  have 
been  largely  superseded  by  the  exhaustive  work  of  W.  Bauer 
(Dai  Leben  Jem  im  Zeitalter  der  neutest.  Apokryphen,  Tubin- 
gen, 1909). 

An  excellent  survey  of  recent  Oriental  discoveries  and  dis- 
cussions in  this  field  is  given  in  Felix  Haase's  Literarische 
Untentiehungen  zur  orientaiiseh-apokryphen  Evangelien- 
literatur,  Leipzig,  1913 ;  the  Slavonic  versions  are  chronicled 
by  E.  Kozak  in  JPTh,  1892,  p.  127  f.,  as  weU  as  by  Bon- 
wetsch  in  Hamack's  AltehristL  Lilt.  L  [Leipzig,  1893],  p.  907  f. 

The  principal  general  articles  on  the  subject  are  by  G. 
Brunet  in  Migne's  Diet,  des  Apoeryphes,  i.  [1S56]  961  f . ;  R.  A. 
Lipsins  in  DCB  ii.  [1880]  700-17 ;  B.  F.  Westcott,  Introd.  to 
Study  of  the  GospeUfi,  London,il881,  p.  466  f . ;  Movers  in  Wetzer- 
Welte2,  L  (1882]  1036-84;  T.  ZaJm,  Geseh.  da Kanons,  u.  [Leipzig, 


*  Tiacdiendorf  8  prize  essay,  De  Bvangeliorum  Apoeryphorum 
origine  et  uiu,  appeared  in  1851 ;  Hilgenfeld's  serviceable  Eoan- 
geSum  tee.  Hebrceos,  etc.,  in  1866. 

t  C.  J.  Ellicott'a  '  Dissertation  on  the  Apocrj-phal  Gospels'  in 
Cambridge  Essays,  1856,  is  apok^etic. 

}  A  tnjoslation  of  the  Arabic  (lospel  of  the  Infancy,  with  notes. 


1892]  621-97  ;  A.  Hamack,  op.  eU.  i.  4-25,  ii.  L  589  f. ;  R.  Hot- 
maan,  in  PRB3  L  [1896]  653  f.  (Eng.  tr.  i.  [1908]  225-29);  M.  R. 
James  in  BBi  L  [1889]  SSS8-69 ;  Batiffol,  in  Vigooroox's  Diet,  de 
la  BibU,  iL  [1899]  2U4-18;  A.  Ehrhard,  AltehrittL  Lit.,  ¥k\- 
burg  i.  B.,  1900.  pp.  123-17 ;  O.  Bardenhewer.  Getek.  der. 
altkirchL  LU.^,  i.  [do.  1913]  §  31 ;  J.  G.  Tasker  in  UDB  v. 
[1904]  420-38;  A.  F.  Findlav  in  DCGi.  [1906]  671-85;  J. 
Leipoldt,  Geteh.  des  neutest.  Kanom,  i.  [Leipzig,  1907]  S  21 ; 
R.  Knopf  in  RGG  i.  [1908-09]  543  ff. ;  H.  Jordan,  Geteh.  der 
aitehristl.  Lit.,  Leipzig,  1911,  pp.  74-73;  H.  Waitz,  in  PRE* 
xxxii.  [1913]  79-93 ;  and  L.  St.  A.  Wells,  in  BRE  vL  [1913] 
34&-352.  The  discussions  of  LipeiiM,  Zatan,  and  H»rn«f;V  are 
most  important,  together  ^\ith  the  criticisms  of  ThakerandWaitx. 

In  several  NT  Introductions  the  nncanonical  Gospels  are 
included,  especially  by  F.  Bleek  (Binleitung  in  dot  ST*, 
Berlin,  1886,  p.  406L) ;  G.  Salmon  (Introd.  to  the  ST»,  London. 
1^9,  pp.  x-xi) ;  and  J.  E.  B«ls«r  (Einleittmg  in  dot  ST, 
Freiburg  L  B.,  1905,  p.  789 f.) ;  there  is  a  <diaptar  oo  tbem  in 
E.  Renan's  L'Eglise  ehretienne,  Paris,  1879,  ch.  xxvL,  as  weO 
as  in  F.  C  Borldtf  s  Gospel  Hist,  and  iti  Tranmiuicn, 
Edinborgh,  190&  p.  324  f. ;  and  a  recent  ^MOish  monogn^  fay 
E.  C  Carillo  (Lot  BoangOiot  Ap^erifot,  Par^  1913);  also 
the  relevant  paragraphs  in  Kesch's  Agrapha  (TU  y.  4,  Leip^, 
1889)  and  in  Histories  of  Christian  literature,  e.g.  C.  T. 
Cruttwell's  Lit.  Hist,  of  Early  Christianity,  London,  1883,  L 
160-174;  G.  Krfiger's  AltehristL  LitL\  Freibui^,  1898,  516; 
and  P.  Wendland's  Die  urehriM.  Literaturformen^,  Tubingen, 
1912,  pp.  292-301. 

3.  "Writing  at  the  close  of  the  1st  cent.  A.D., 
St.  Ltike  observes  in  the  preface  to  his  Gospel  that 
'many'  had  already  undertaken  to  compose  a 
narrative  of  the  life  of  Jesus :  xoXXoi  irexeipTjcar 
ajfard^affdai  Sii^ffw,  ktX.  (V).  He  does  not  intend 
to  convey  any  impression  of  disparagement  by  the 
term  irrexeip^av.  He  is  not  satisfied  with  their 
work,  but  he  does  not  dismiss  his  predecessors  as 
unauthorized.  Nor  does  he  claim  for  himself  any 
special  inspiration.  What  others  have  done  he 
proposes  to  do ;  only,  it  is  to  be  in  a  more  com- 
plete and  orderly  fashion. 

The  Muratorian  Canon,  in  its  extant  form,  does 
not  happen  to  mention  any  nncanonical  Gospels 
which  are  to  be  avoided  by  the  faithful,  unless  we 
are  meant  to  understand  some  of  them  as  included 
in  the  obscure  closing  words.  But  more  than  a  hun- 
dred years  after  St.  Luke  wrote  his  preface,  Grigen 
commented  on  it  as  follows :  '  Po.ssibly  the  term 
iTexeifn}<rav  contains  an  implicit  condemnation  of 
those  who  betook  themselves  hastily  and  without 
any  spiritual  gift  (xapiV/Miros)  to  the  composition 
of  Gospels.  Thus  ilatthew  ovk  (rfxeipvaa',  but 
wrote  under  the  impulse  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  so  did 
Mark  and  John,  and  similarly  LuKe.  But  those 
who  composed  the  Gospel  called  Kar  Aiyvrrlovi  and 
that  entitled  TQv  AwSeca,  they  iTexeipvffay.  There 
is  also  a  Gospel  Kara  Qufidv  current.  Basilides  has 
also  ventured  to  write  a  Gospel  Kara  Ba<Ti\i5i]p. 
Many  indeed  i-rexeipvo^ar :  there  is  the  Gospel 
KarA  Ma^iaj'  and  many  others ;  but  the  Church  of 
God  accepts  only  the  four.'  It  is  not  certain 
whether  ()rigen  intended  to  suggest  that  the  first 
two  or  three  Grospels  which  he  named  were  among 
the  uninspired  predecessors  of  Luke.  Probably  he 
did.  But  the  interest  of  the  passage  for  us  lies 
in  the  names  of  the  Gospels  which  his  erroneous 
interpretation  of  i-rextipriffav  leads  him  to  mention. 
They  must  have  been  among  the  most  prominent 
of  those  known  to  him. 

In  the  4th  cent.  Eusebius  {HE  iii.  25)  ends  his 
catalogue  of  the  canonical  or  accepted  Scriptures 
with  the  remark  that  his  object  in  drawing  it  up 
has  been  '  that  we  may  know  both  these  worfe 
and  those  cited  by  heretics  under  the  name  of  the 
apostles,  including,  for  example,  such  books  as 
the  Gospels  of  Peter,  of  Thomas,  of  Matthias,  or  of 
any  others  besides  them.  .  .  .  They  are  not  to  be 
placed  even  among  the  rejected  writings  (iw  v60ois), 
but  are  all  to  be  put  aside  as  absurd  and  impious.' 
Further  down  in  the  same  century  we  come  upon 
Ambrose  (CSEL  xxxii.  p.  10 f.),  in  his  prologue 
to  an  exposition  of  Luke,  following  Grigen  almost 
verbatim.  He  admits  that  some  of  these  nn- 
canonical Gospels  are  read  by  orthodox  Christians, 
e.g.   the  (iospel  of    the   Twelve,  the   Gospel    of 


480      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


Basilides,  the  Gospel  of  Thomas,  and  the  Gospel 
of  Mattliias  ('novi  aliud  scriptum  secundum 
Matthian ').  But  '  we  read,  le.st  we  should  be 
ignorant ;  we  read,  not  in  order  to  keep  but  to 
repudiate  them ' ! 

In  the  prologue  to  his  commentary  upon  Matthew, 
Jerome  (A.D.  346-420)  also  mentions  some  of  the 
uncanonical  Gospels,  but  his  information  adds 
nothing  to  the  data  supplied  by  Origen,  from 
whom  he  probably  derived  in  the  main  liis  know- 
ledge of  tliese  documents.  After  quoting  Luke's 
preface,  he  applies  its  language  to  Gospels  'like 
that  according  to  the  Egyptians,  and  according  to 
Thomas,  and  according  to  Matthias,  and  according 
to  Bartholomew,  also  the  Gospel  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles,  and  of  Basilides,  and  of  Apelles,  as  well 
as  others  which  it  would  take  a  very  long  time 
to  enumerate.'  Following  Origen,  he  interprets 
Luke's  iirexeipriffav  of  unauthorized,  uninspired 
attempts.  To  them  the  prophetic  word  of  Ezekiel 
applies  (13'-  *) :  '  Woe  to  tliem  that  prophesy  out  of 
their  own  heart,  who  walk  after  their  own  spirit, 
who  say.  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  has  not 
sent  them.'  Also,  the  word  of  Jn  10":  'all  who 
came  before  me  were  tliieves  and  robbers.'  Note, 
says  Jerome,  '  they  canie ' ;  not  '  they  were  sent' ! 

In  Pope  Innocent's  Epistle  (A.D.  405)  to  Jerome's 
friend,  Bishop  Exsuperius  of  Toulouse,  the  canonical 
list  is  followed  by  a  note  of  '  cetera  autem  quae  uel 
sub  nomine  Mathiae  sine  lacobi  minoris ;  uel  sub 
nomine  Petri  et  lohannis,  quae  a  quodam  Leucio 
scripta  sunt ;  uel  sub  nomine  Andrese,  quae  a 
Xenocaride  et  Leonida  philosophis ;  *  uel  sub 
nomine  Thomae ;  et  si  qua  sunt  alia ;  non  solum 
repudianda  uerum  etiam  noueris  esse  damnanda.' 
This  is  a  fair  specimen  of  the  opinions  held  by 
the  authorities  of  the  Western  Church ;  but  the 
official  view  did  not  represent  the  popular,  and,  as 
Leipoidt  observes,!  '  such  opponents  of  the  apoc- 
ryphal Gospels  were  doubtless  in  the  minority. 
The  majority  of  theologians  treated  books  like 
the  Gospels  of  James  and  Thomas  not  indeed  as 
canonical  but  still  as  genuinely  apostolic' 

Finally,  the  so-called  '  Decretum  Gelasianum  de 
libris  recipiendis  et  non  recipiendis '  X  includes  a 
list  of  apocryphal  §  Gospels  Avhich,  by  the  6th  cent., 
were  supposed  to  have  been  in  existence  : 

'  Evangelium  nomine  Mathiae 

,,  ,,        Barnabsell 

„  „        Jacobi  minoris 

„  „        Petri  apostoli 

,,  „        Thomte  quibus  Manichei 

utuntur 
Evangelia  nomine  Bartholomaei 
,,  ,,        AndreoB 

,,         quae  falsavit  Lucianus 
,,  ,,  ,,      Hesychius 

Liber  de  infantia  salvatoris 

,,       nativitate  salvatoris  et  de  Maria  vel 
obstetrici.' 

By  a  gross  blunder,  arising  perhaps  from  a  mis- 
reading of  Jerome's  prologue  to  the  Gospels,  the 
writer  mistakes  the  textual  recensions  of  the 
Gospels  made  by  Lucian  and  Hesychius  for  apoc- 
ryphal Gospels.  This  does  not  encourage  hopes 
of  accurate  information  with  regard  to  the  other 

*  For  a  defence  of  the  genuineness  of  this  clause,  which  refers 
to  the  Acts  of  Andrew,  see  JThSt  xiii.  [1911-12]  79-80. 
t  Geschichte  des  neutest.  Kanons,  i.  p.  179  (cf.  below,  p.  482). 

I  Ed.  von  Dobschiitz,  TU  xxxviii.  4  [1912].  He  arjifiies  for  its 
pseudonymous  character,  and  dates  it  between  a.d.  519  and  535. 

§  '  Apocrvphurn '  ('  apocr^'pha '),  which  is  appended  to  each 
title,  has  its  later  opprobrious  meaning. 

II  If  there  ever  was  a  Gnostic  Gospel  of  Barnabas,  it  may  have 
supplied  part  of  the  basis  for  the  Muhammadan  (Italian)  Oos])el 
of  Barnabas — a  curious,  docetic  production  (ed.  L.  and  L.  Ragg, 
Oxford,  1907).  Cf.  W.  E.  A.  Axon  in  JThSt  iii.  [1901-02]  441-451. 
The  Gospels  of  Barnabas  and  .Matthias  appear  also  at  the  end 
of  the  list  of  the  60  books  in  Cod.  Barocc.  200. 


works,  particularly  when  this  blunder  is  regarded 
as  a  misunderstanding  of  what  Jerome  had  written. 
Thus  the  writer  appears  to  have  had  no  independent 
knowledge  of  the  Gospels  of  Bartholomew  and 
Andrew ;  his  allusion  to  the  former,  as  well  as 
to  the  Gospel  of  Mathias  (  =  na/)a5(5<r«(s  Mardla),  is 
probably  drawn  from  Origen,  his  reference  to  the 
latter  from  Innocent.  He  also  confines  himself  to 
Gospels  bearing  apostolic  names. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  go  further  down  for  ecclesi- 
astical strictures  upon  uncanonical  Gospels.  Those 
already  mentioned  will  suffice  to  give  a  fair  idea  of 
the  principal  writings  belonging  to  this  cla.s8  which 
were  from  time  to  time  banned  by  the  authorities. 
Some,  no  doubt,  were  not  Gospels  at  all ;  *  some 
were  only  censured  from  hearsay ;  others,  as  we 
shall  see,  e.xisted  and  flourished  in  a  more  or  less 
provincial  or  surreptitious  fashion.  But  the  point 
IS  that  they  had  to  be  banned,  and  that  the  ban 
was  often  ineflective. 

i.  We  now  pass  from  verdicts  upon  the  uncan- 
onical Gospels  to  an  outline  of  the  information 
yielded  by  their  extant  fragments.  But  before 
turning  into  this  rank  undergrowth  of  popular 
literature  in  early  Christianity,  we  must  state  and 
define  one  or  two  general  principles  and  methods 
of  criticism  which  are  essential  to  any  survey  of 
the  position. 

(a)  The  present  state  of  research  offers  almost 
as  many  problems  as  results.  In  five  directions, 
especially,  further  inquiry  is  necessary  before  the 
materials  which  are  now  accessible  can  be  criti- 
cally arranged  and  assimilated,  (i. )  The  Coptic, 
Sahidic,  and  Ethiopic  fragments,  which  are  being 
still  recovered,  require  to  be  sifted.  In  some  cases, 
as  e.g.  with  regard  to  the  Gospel  of  Bartholomew, 
they  may  prove  to  furnish  data  for  reconstructing 
Gospels  which  hitherto  have  been  mere  names  in 
early  Church  history ;  in  other  cases,  they  may 
compel  the  re- valuation  of  material  already  known, 
(ii.)  The  entire  problem  of  the  Jewish  Christian 
Gospels  has  been  re-opened  by  the  researches  of 
critics  like  Schmidtke  and  Waitz ;  the  relevant 
factors  are  mainly  supplied  by  the  higher  criticism 
of  writers  like  Origen,  Jerome,  and  Epiphanius, 
but  the  outcome  of  the  discussion  seriously  afl'ects 
the  estimate  of  primitive  Gospels  like  that  of 
the  Hebrews  or  or  the  Egyptians.  The  subject- 
matter  here  is  not  so  much  new  material  as 
allusions  and  quotations  which  require,  or  seem  to 
require,  fresh  study,  (iii.)  Several  uncanonical 
Gospels  are  still  unedited,  from  the  standpoint  of 
mocfern  critical  research ;  even  the  extant  Greek 
and  Latin  MSS  are  not  properly  collated,  in  many 
cases.  The  Gospels  of  Thomas  and  of  Nicodemus 
are  instances  in  point.  There  is  some  prospect  of 
these  defects  being  remedied  systematically  by 
French  scholars,  but  English  investigation  has 
been  sadly  inditt'erent  to  such  pressing  needs  in  the 
field  of  early  Christian  literature,  (iv. )  Even  where 
texts  have  been  edited  thoroughly,  problems  of 
higher  criticism  arise.  In  the  case  of  Gospels,  e.g., 
like  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi,  we  are  confronted 
with  composite  productions  whose  sources  go  back 
to  difierent  circles  and  periods  ;  literary  problems  of 
structure  have  to  be  solved.  The  numerous  ver- 
sions of  some  uncanonical  Gospels  might  seem  to 
compensate  for  the  fragmentary  condition  of  others, 
but  in  reality  the  versions  are  often  equivalent  to 
fresh  editions  rather  than  to  translations,  and  in 
this  way  the  recovery  of  the  primitive  nucleus  is 
sometimes  rendered  more  dirticult  than  ever,  (v.) 
Finally,  the  form  and  the  content  of  the  uncanonical 

•  Tatian's  'Gospel,'  e.g.,  was  simply  the  Diatessaron ;  the 
Gospel  of  Andrew  was  probably  the  Gnostic  lltpio&oi  of  that 
apostle  ;  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  was  part  of  the  Acts-literature 
of  the  2nd  cent.;  and  several  so-called  Gnostic  'Gospels' 
were  no  more  than  treatises  on  religion,  as,  for  example,  the  Vat- 
entinian  '  Gospel  of  the  Truth '  (Iren.  iii.  11.  9). 


GOSPELS  (UlfCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      481 


Gospels  open  problems  of  their  own.  The  stories 
occasionally  show  tlie  naive  popular  imagination 
working  upon  the  OKI  Testament,  but  their  methods 
are  wider.  There  is  more  in  them  than  merely 
Haggudic  fancy.  '  Les  evangiles  apocryphes,'  says 
Kenan,  '  sont  les  Pouranas  du  christianisme ;  lis 
ont  pour  base  les  evangiles  canoniques.  L'au- 
teur  prend  ces  evangiles  comme  un  th^me  dont  il 
nes'ecarte  jamais,  qu'il  cherche  seulement  kdelayer, 
i  completer  par  les  procedes  ordinaires  dela  legende 
hebraique. '  But  it  was  not  simply  Semitic  methods 
of  compiling  a  midrash  that  were  followed  by  the 
authors  of  the  uncanonical  Gospels.  Allowance 
has  also  to  be  made  for  the  influence  of  Hellenistic 
romances,  particularly  in  the  light  of  recent  in- 
vestigations by  Norden  and  Reitzenstein.*  This 
line  of  inquiry  has  not  yet  been  followed  up;  it 
will  lead  probably  to  valuable  conclusions  with 
regard  to  the  literary  texture  of  certain  strata  in 
these  (lospels.  More  attention  has  been  paid  to 
the  influence  of  Buddhistic  and  Egyptian  religion 
upon  the  matter  of  Gospels  like  those  of  the 
Egyptians,  of  Thomas,  and  of  Peter.  Here  also 
problems  are  emerging  which  require  careful 
scrutiny,  in  view  of  contemporary  research  into 
the  syncretistic  religious  situation  of  the  2nd 
cent.,  particularly  but  not  exclusively  with 
regard  to  the  elements  of  Gnosticism.  In  the 
edifying  romance  of  Barlaam  and  loa^aph  a  later 
writer  adapted  boldly  the  story  of  Buddha  to  the 
ends  of  Christian  mona^ticism.  The  Indian  traits 
in  our  uncanonical  Gospels  are  less  plain,  but  they 
are  probably  present  under  passages  which  at  first 
sight  are  almost  covered  with  Christian  fancy  and 
doctrine. 

{b)  The  close  connexion  between  the  extant  frag- 
ments and  the  agrapha  renders  it  necessary  to  lay 
down  a  special  t  principle  of  criticism,  viz.  that 
when  the  same  saying,  in  slightly  difierent  versions, 
recurs  in  more  than  one  fragment,  three  possibili- 
ties are  open  to  the  critic,  (i. )  The  early  Christian 
writer  Avho  quotes  the  saying  as  part  of  some 
Gospel  may  be  quoting  loosely  from  memory,  and, 
either  for  that  reason  or  for  some  other,  confusing 
one  Gospel  with  another,  (ii. )  On  the  supposition 
that  the  quotation  is  correctly  assigned,  it  may 
have  been  preserved  in  more  than  one  Gospel ;  it 
is  imlikely  that  certain  sayings  were  monopolized 
by  one  document.  Or,  when  this  possibility  is  set 
aside,  (iii.)  one  Gospel  may  have  borrowed  from 
another.  There  has  been  a  tendency  to  ignore  the 
second  of  these  possibilities,  in  particular.  What 
we  know  of  certain  Gospels  may  be  enough  to 
show  that  a  given  quotation  is  incompatible  with 
their  idiosyncrasies,  but  not  all  quotations  possess 
this  characteristic  quality,  and  room  should  be  left 
for  the  hypothesis  that  some  allied  Grospels  con- 
tained a  good  deal  of  common  matter. 

One  illustration  of  this  may  be  quoted,  for  the 
sake  of  clearness.  Take  the  well-known  saying, 
'  He  who  seeks  shall  not  cease  till  he  finds,  and 
when  he  has  found  he  shall  wonder,  and  wondering 
he  shall  reign,  and  reigning  he  shall  rest.'  The 
last  two  clauses  are  cited  by  Clement  of  Alexandria 
as  part  of  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews 
{Strom,  ii.  9.  45),  but  elsewhere  (Strom,  v.  14.  96) 
he  quotes  the  whole  saying,  without  mentioning  its 
origin,  in  order  to  illustrate  Plato's  aphorism  that 
wonder  is  the  beginning  of  philosophy.  Independ- 
ently, the  entire  saying  has  turned  up  among  the 
agrapha  of  the  Oxyrhynchite  Papyri,  apparently 
as  part  of  a  collection  of  words  addressed  by  Jesus 
to  some  disciples,  including  Thomas.     In  the  later 

*  Cf.  Ii.  Radermacher's  Deu  JenttiU  un  Mythot  der  HeUenen, 
1903. 

t  But  not,  of  coarse,  an  exception^]  one.    It  bears  also  upon 
the  criticism  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  pardcolarly  in  the  differ- 
entiation of  Mark  and  Q. 
VOL.  I.— 31 


Acts  of  Thomas  (ed.  Bonnet,  1883,  p.  243)  an  echo 
of  the  saying  also  recurs :  '  Those  who  partake 
worthily  of  the  good  things  there  [i.e.  in  the 
treasury  of  the  holy  King]  rest,  and  resting  they 
shall  reign,'  and,  as  if  this  were  not  enough,  the 

f)roblem  is  further  complicated  by  what  sounds 
ike  an  echo  in  2  Clem.  v.  5  ('  know,  brothers,  that 
the  sojourning  of  the  flesh  in  this  world  is  little 
and  for  a  brief  time,  whereas  the  promise  of  Christ 
is  great  and  wonderful,  is  rest  in  the  kingdom  to 
come  and  in  eternal  life '),  and  by  a  very  famt  echo 
in  the  Traditions  of  Matthias,  if  we  can  trust  Clement 
of  Alexandria  {Strom,  ii.  9.  45),  who  cites  from  the 
latter,  '  Wonder  at  what  is  before  you,'  to  illustrate 
again  the  Platonic  doctrine  of  wonder. 

Now  it  is  tempting  to  deduce  from  this,  among 
other  indications,  that  the  common  source  of  the 
Oxyrhynchite  Logia  and  the  quotations  in  2  Clem, 
was  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians,  or 
that  this  saying  is  a  water-mark  of  some  Thomas 
Gospel.  The  former  hypothesis  would  be  cor- 
roborated if  the  source  of  the  quotations  in  2  Clem, 
could  be  proved  to  be  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians, 
for  the  echo  in  2  Clem,  follows  close  upon  one  of 
these  quotations  (see  p.  495),  and  upon  the  whole 
this  is  the  least  improbable  hypothesis.  But  the 
second  of  the  possibilities  (ii.)  is  as  feasible  as 
the  third  (iii. ).  It  is  at  any  rate  hasty  to  assume 
that  such  a  saying  was  only  accessible  in  a  single 
document. 

(c)  It  is  also  fair  to  remember  that  some  of  the 
early  uncanonical  Gospels  are  knowTi  to  us  only  in 
fragments  and  quotations  made  usually  for  the 
purpose  of  proving  their  outre  character.  This 
easily  gives  a  wTong  impression  of  their  contents. 
Suppose,  for  example,  that  all  we  knew  of  the 
canonical  Matthew  amounted  to  a  few  passages 
Uke  2^  5i*-i9  7«  8«-  17**-"  19"  and  27"-»,  sup- 
pose that  Luke's  Gk>spel  was  preserved  in  stray 
quotations  of  2*2-*>  4»  6^"  8'«  16»  188"  and 
24^"** — would  our  impression  of  the  Gospels  in 
question  be  very  much  more  misleading  than  may 
be  the  case  with  Gospels  like  those  of  the  Hebrews 
or  of  the  Egyptians  or  of  the  Nazarenes?  It  is 
possible  that  some  of  the  uncanonical  Gospels  may 
not  have  been  so  eccentric  as  they  seem  to  us. 
But,  even  when  allowance  is  made  for  this  possi- 
bility of  an  error  in  our  focus,  the  general  character 
of  most  of  the  uncanonical  Gospels  must  be  recog- 
nized (cf.  §  1).  When  Archbishop  Magee  preached 
before  the  Church  Congress  at  Dublin,  an  Irish 
bishop  is  reported  to  have  said  that  the  sermon 
did  not  contain  enough  gospel  to  save  a  tom-tit. 
An  evangelical  critic  might  say  the  same  about 
the  uncanonical  Gospels,  for  the  most  part,  and 
he  would  not  be  saying  it  in  haste.  It  is  rare, 
upon  the  whole,  to  come  across  any  touches  or 
traditions  which  even  suggest  that  by  their  help  we 
can  fill  out  the  description  of  the  Sjnoptic  Gospels. 
As  we  read  Marlowe's  Faustus  or  Goethe's  Faust 
for  reasons  quite  other  than  a  wish  to  ascertain 
the  facts  about  the  real  Faustus  of  the  16th 
cent.,  so  it  is  with  the  majority  of  the  un- 
canonical Gospels.  Their  interest  for  ns  is  not  in 
any  fresh  light  which  they  may  be  expected  to 
throw  upon  the  character  of  the  central  Figure, 
but  in  the  evidence  they  yield  us  for  ascertaining 
the  popular  religion  of  the  early  Christian  Churches, 
the  naive  play  of  imagination  upon  the  traditions 
of  the  faith,  and  the  fancies  which  the  love  of 
story-telling  employed  to  satisfy  the  more  or  less 
dogmatic  or  at  any  rate  the  pious  interests  of 
certain  circles  in  Syria  and  Egypt  especially. 
The  large  majority  of  the  uncanonical  Gosptels 
belong  to  Church  history  rather  than  to  NT  criti- 
cism, and  to  a  period  of  Church  history  which  is 
mainly  post-apostolic.  Their  varying  background 
covers  several  centuries  and  soils.      They  were 


482      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


being  produced  as  late  as  the  Muhammadan  era, 
and  as  early  as  the  Ist  cent.  A.D.  liut,  with  one 
or  two  exceptions,  we  cannot  do  justice  to  them 
unless  we  set  them  not  over  against  the  Gospel 
literature  of  the  first  hundrea  years  after  tlie 
Death  of  Jesus  but  among  tlie  currents  and  move- 
ments which  occupy  tlie  subsequent  two  hundred 
years  of  Christianity  in  the  Mediterranean  basin. 
The  interests  which  led  to  their  composition  were 
sometimes  doctrinal.  There  was  a  constant  desire  * 
to  convey  esoteric  teaching  under  the  guise  of 
revelations  made  by  the  risen  Christ  to  His 
disciples,  between  tlie  Resurrection  and  the  Ascen- 
sion, for  example  ;  there  was  also  a  desire  to  re- 
cast or  amplify  the  Synoptic  traditions  in  order 
to  express  certain  views  of  the  Christian  gospel. 
Furthermore,  dogmatic  interests  led  to  the  elabora- 
tion of  stories  about  tlie  birth  of  Mary  as  well  as 
of  Jesus,  and  to  the  composition  of  tales  which 
filled  up  the  childliood  of  Jesus.  But  the  latter 
were  as  often  due  to  naive  curiosity  as  to  dogmatic 
aim,  and  a  much  larger  part  must  be  assigned  to 
the  former  motive  (if  it  can  be  called  a  motive) 
tlian  is  usually  allowed.  Here  the  influence  of 
Oriental  folk-lore  and  mythology  would  naturally 
operate,  in  addition  to  the  desire  to  mark  the  fulfil- 
ment of  OT  prophecies.  And  it  would  operate  not 
as  a  purely  literary  motive  but  as  one  result  of 

fireaohing  and  teaching.  The  same  interests  which 
ed  to  the  rise  of  midrashic  literature  among  the 
Jews  led  to  the  rise  of  uncanonical  Gospel-stories 
among  the  early  Christians.  The  popularity  of 
the  latter  was  too  strong  to  be  put  down  by  ecclesi- 
astical decisions.  Not  even  the  strict  use  of 
the  canonical  Gospels  in  the  worship  of  the 
Churches  was  able  to  check  the  popular  appetite 
for  such  tales  and  traditions  as  survive  in  the  un- 
canonical Gospel  literature ;  they  were  read  for 
private  edification  t  even  when  they  were  not  used 
m  worship ;  and  recent  discoveries  have  proved 
how  numerous  and  wide-spread  were  the  versions 
of  such  Gospels  even  when  the  term  '  apocryphal ' 
in  its  opprobrious  sense  was  being  applied  to  them 
by  the  authorities.  The  historical  critic  has  some- 
thing better  to  do  than  look  in  these  Gospels  for 
primitive,  authentic  traditions  about  the  teaching 
and  ministry  of  Jesus,  which  may  correct  or 
supplement  the  nucleus  preserved  in  the  canoni- 
cal Gospels ;  if  he  does  so,  he  will  be  likely 
as  a  rule  to  look  for  a  kingdom  and  find  asses. 
On  the  other  hand,  he  has  sometliing  better  to 
do  than  to  pour  indiscriminate  ridicule  on  these 
popular  documents.  Their  ends  and  motives, 
however  little  they  may  appeal  to  a  modern 
mind,  were  not  always  perverse.  For  example,  in 
one  of  the  extant  Sahidic  Gospel-fragments  (TS 
iv.  2  [1896],  pp.  165,  237),  the  narrator,  after  de- 
scribing (partly  as  in  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi, 
21  ;  see  below,  p.  484)  how  the  star  of  Bethleliem 
had  '  tlie  form  of  a  wheel,  its  fi<^ure  being  like 
a  cross,  sending  forth  flashes  of  light ;  letters 
being  written  on  the  cross.  This  is  Jesus  the 
Son  of  God,'  anticipates  an  objection.  '  Some  one 
will  say  to  me.  Art  thou  then  adding  a  supple- 
ment to  the  Gospels?'  Unfortunately,  the  frag- 
ment breaks  off  here,  and  we  have  no  means  of 
knowing  how  the  writer  answered  his  critic,  unless 

*  Which,  as  we  learn  from  Clement  ot  Alexandria  (Eus.  HE 
li.  1),  was  by  no  means  confined  to  Gnostic  Christians  (see  W. 
Wrede,  Das  Measias(jeheimni/i  in  den  Evanrjelien,  1901,  p.  246  f .). 

t  There  is  a  8ij,'niricant  indication  of  this  in  Jerome's  letter 
to  I>aeta,  advising  her  how  to  bring  up  her  daughter  (A'p.  cvii. 
12).  The  girl  is  to  read  '  the  Gospels,  which  are  never  to  be 
laid  aside.  .  .  .  Let  her  eschew  all  apocryphal  writings ;  if  she 
desires  to  read  them  not  for  the  truth  of  their  doctrines  but  out 
of  reverence  for  their  miracles,  let  her  understand  that  they 
are  not  the  work  of  those  whose  names  they  bear,  that  many 
faulty  things  are  mixed  up  in  them,  and  that  it  requires  great 
discretion  to  look  for  gold  among  mud.'  This  was  written  in 
A.O.  403. 


from  a  Coptic  sermon  of  Euodius,  who  praises 
such  supplements — evidently  as  justified  by  Jn 
2030  212».  It  is  not  often  that  we  come  upon  any 
such  self-consciousness  in  the  writers  of  the  un- 
canonical Gospels.  Usually  we  have  to  infer  their 
spirit  and  aim  from  the  contents  of  tiieir  work. 
But  even  so,  the  naive  temper  which  characterizes 
several  of  the  leading  uncanonical  Gospels  is  as 
noteworthy  as  the  tlieological  tendencies  which 
dominate  others, 

8.  The  very  fact  that  such  Gospels  were  com- 
posed is  significant,  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
'  Gospel '  in  the  2nd  cent,  began  to  be  limited  to 
the  sayings  and  deeds  of  Jesus.*  It  proves  the 
steady  interest  in  Jesus,  even  in  circles  where  the 
interest  was  due  to  tendencies  more  or  less  semi- 
Christian  in  cliaracter.  No  doubt,  several  of  the 
uncanonical  '  Gospels,'  as  we  shall  see,t  were  not 
originally  called  Gospels  at  all,  while  even  those 
which  professed  to  be  such  should  be  rather  de- 
scribed as  religious  handbooks  or  treati-ses ;  still, 
even  after  we  make  sucli  qualifications,  we  must 
recognize  that,  whether  an  uncanonical  Gospel 
wished  to  make  Jesus  more  or  less  of  a  human 
being  than  the  Synoptic  or  Johannine  tradition 
presented,  there  was  a  wide-spread  desire  to  convey 
new  ideas  by  means  of  a  tradition  about  His 
personality.  Acts  of  various  apostles  were  not 
sufficient;  even  apocalypses  did  not  meet  the 
demand.  Gospels  were  necessary,  and  Gospels 
were  supplied.  J 

This  involved  not  only  a  dissatisfaction  with 
the  canonical  Gospels,  on  the  score  of  what  they 
contained  as  well  as  of  what  they  omitted,  but  a 
certain  dependence  upon  them,  in  several  cases. 
The  unknown  authors,  as  Kenan  neatly  puts  it, 
'  font  pour  les  6vangiles  canoniques  ce  que  les 
auteurs  des  Post -homer  ica  ont  fait  jiour  Homfere, 
ce  que  les  auteurs  relativement  modernes  de 
Dionysiaques  ou  d' Argonautiques  ont  fait  pour 
I'epopee  grecque.  Ds  traitent  les  parties  que 
les  canoniques  ont  avec  raison  negligees;  ils 
ajoutent  ce  qui  aurait  pu  arriver,  ce  qui  paraissait 
vraisemblable  ;  ils  developpent  les  situations  par 
des  rapprochements  artificiels  empruntds  aux 
textes  sacrds.'  For  a  certain  class  of  the  uncan- 
onical Gospels,  this  is  fairly  accurate,  but  others 
make  remarkably  little  use  of  the  canonical  nar- 
ratives except  as  points  of  departure.  Kenan's 
subsequent  remark  also  requires  modification : 
'  Comme  le  catholicisme  degener6  des  temps 
modernes,  les  auteurs  d'6vangiles  apocryphes 
se  rabattent  sur  les  c6t6s  puerils  du  christian- 
isme,  I'Enfant  Jesus,  la  sainte  Vierge,  saint 
Joseph,  Le  Jesus  veritable,  le  J6su8  de  la  vie 
pubhque,  les  depasse  et  les  eRraye.'  Kenan  is 
thinking  here  of  the  Gospels  of  the  lnfancy.§  But 
since  his  day  discoveries  of  papyri  and  manuscripts 
have  shown  that  even  the  Mission  and  Alanhood 
of  Jesus  did  not  entirely  escape  the  notice  of  the 
uncanonical  Gospels. 

This  enables  us  to  fix  upon  a  principle  of 
arrangement  for  these  Gospels.  It  is  open  to  the 
critic  at  this  point  to  follow  one  or  other  of  three 
paths.  One  is  to  group  them  on  a  principle  which 
partly  estimates  their  form  and  partly  takes  into 
account  their  character,  viz.  Gospels  of  the  Syn- 

•  Cf.  Harnack'8  ConilittUion  and  Law  cf  the  Church,  1910, 

p.  308  f . 

t  E.g.  the  Gospels  of  Nlcodemus  and  of  Andrew  (p.  480), 
besides  the  later  ^Eternal  Gospel'  of  Abbot  Joachim  (l>eg.  of 
13th  cent.)  based  on  Rev  14«.  The  Gosi>el  of  Thaddseus  owes 
its  existence  apparently  to  a  variant  reading  of  'Mathiw* 
as  'Matthioi'  in  the  text  of  the  Decretum  Gelasianum  (cf.  von 
Dobschiitz's  note  in  I'd  xxxviii.  4  (l".)lL'i  p.  293). 

t  The  literary  form  of  'Gospel'  came  to  be  indistinginslwble 
more  than  once  from  that  of  '  Acts '  (cf.  the  '  Gospel  of  Mary  ') 
as  well  as  from  that  of 'Apocalypse.' 

§  An  admirable  account  of  their  motives  and  charact«n«tic« 
is  given  by  Meyer  in  Uennecke's  Seutett.  Apok.,  pp.  96-106. 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      483 


optic  type  which  have  some  claim  to  represent 
early  trtuiition ;  Gospels  which  are  Gnostic  or 
heretical ;  and  Gospelf;  which  aim  at  supplementing 
the  paps  in  the  canonical  stories  especially  of  the 
Birth  and  Resurrection.  This  is  the  usual  method 
since  Harnack.  Another  is  (of.  Nicolas,  op.  cit. 
p.  17  f.)  to  divide  them  into  (a)  pro- Jewish,  i.e. 
Gospels  mainly  practical,  in  which  Christianity  is 

S resented  as  the  renovation  of  the  OT  ;  (b)  anti- 
ewish  ;  and  (c)  unsectarian.  But  there  are  serious 
difficulties  in  carrying  out  this  arrangement,  and 
it  is  best,  upon  the  whole,  to  classify  them  accord- 
ing to  their  subject-matter,  viz.  those  devoted  to 
the  parents  and  birth  of  Jesus,  those  Avhich  cover 
the  coul^se  of  His  life,  and  those  which  narrate  the 
Passion  and  Resurrection.  Tischendorf  s  plan  was 
different :  '  Quod  ita  instituam  nt  tria  liberorum 
horum  evangelicorum  genera  distinguara,  quorum 
primuni  corapreliendit  qui  ad  parentes  Jesu  attjue 
ipsius  or  turn,  alterum  qui  ad  infantiam  eius, 
tertium  qui  ad  fata  eius  ultima  spectant.'  But 
materials  have  accumulated  since  Tischendorf 
WTote,  which  show  that  the  middle  part  of  the  life 
of  Jesus  was  not  left  untouched  by  the  authors  of 
this  literature.  It  used  to  be  argued,  indeed,  that 
the  nncanonical  Gospels  showed  next  to  no  interest 
in  the  central  part  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  between  His 
Baptism  and  the  Passion.  Even  if  this  were  the 
case,  it  would  not  be  quite  so  remarkable  as 
might  appear.  Such  a  concentration  of  interest 
upon  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  life  was  natural 
to  the  early  Church.  For  example,  aft^r  finishing 
an  account  of  the  origin  of  the  four  Gospels,  the 
author  of  the  Muratorian  Canon  proceeds  :  '  Con- 
sequently, although  various  elements  are  taught 
in  the  several  books  of  the  Gospels,  this  makes  no 
difference  to  the  faith  of  believers,  inasmuch  as  by 
one  controlling  Spirit  all  things  are  announced 
in  all  of  them  with  regard  to  the  Nativity,  the 
Passion,  the  Resurrection,  His  intercourse  with  His 
disciples  (conversatione  cum  discipulis  suis),  and 
His  two-fold  advent.'  Here  the  salient  points 
selected  lie  outside  the  central  part  of  the  life  of 
Jesus,  unless  we  admit  a  partial  exception  in  the 
allusion  to  intercourse  with  the  disciples.  But 
the  uncanonical  Gospels  do  not  entirely  ignore 
this  section.  Even  apart  from  the  famous  corre- 
spondence of  Jesus  *  and  Abgar  (Eus.  HE  i.  13),  or 
— in  the  form  which  it  assumes  in  the  Doctrina 
Addcei — His  oral  message  to  that  monarch,  we 
possess  several  Gospels  which  must  have  covered 
the  ministry  of  our  Lord,  and  the  Oxyrhynchite 
fragment  (see  below,  p.  499)  now  swells  their  number. 
Any  classification  has  its  o>\-n  drawbacks,  owing 
to  the  heterogeneous  and  fragmentary  character 
of  the  extant  materials ;  but  the  triple  arrange- 
ment proposed  has,  upon  the  whole,  fewer  obstacles 
than  either  of  its  rivals.  In  the  following  dis- 
cussion, therefore,  the  uncanonical  Gospels  will  be 
treated  as  follows : 

(1)  Gospels  relating  to  the  Birth  and  Infancy  of 
Jesus  ;  (2)  general  Gospels,  covering  His  entire  life 
and  ministry,  from  the  Birth  to  the  Resurrection, 
either  on  the  type  of  Matthew-Luke  or  of  Mark- 
John  ;  (3)  Gospels  of  the  Passion  and  Resurrection. 
I.  Gospels  relatisg  to  the  Birth  axd  Is- 
FAycroFJEsrs.—[a)  The  ProteYangelium  Jacobi. 
— A  certain  element  of  romance  attaches  to  this 
uncanonical  Gospel.  During  his  travels  in  the 
East,  AVilliam  Postel,  a  French  humanist  of  the 
16th  cent.,  who  devoted  himself  to  Oriental  lan- 
guages and  comparative  philology,  came  across 
an  edifying  treatise  which  was  read   in  several 

*  For  traces  of  similar  epistles  of  Jesus,  cf.  Augustine,  de  Con- 
sensu erang.  i.  9-10.  For  the  '  epistle  of  Christ  which  fell  from 
heaven,'  cf.  G.  Morin  in  Revue  B&nMietine  (1899),  p.  217 f., 
and  a  monograph  on  its  Elastern  version  and  recension  by  M. 
Bittner  in  the  Denkschriflen  der  kaU.  Akad.  der  Wissensehaften 
(Philoe.  Hist.  Klasse,  vol.  IL  Abth.  1)  for  190e. 


churches.  He  procured  a  copy  of  the  work,  and 
cherished  great  expectations  about  his  find.* 
Here  was  the  original  prologue  to  Mark's  Gospel, 
'  evangelii  ad  hunc  diem  desiderata  basis  et  funda- 
mentum,  Ln  quo  sappletur  summa  fide  quicquid 
posset  optari.' 

Posters  Latin  version  was  pablished  in  1662  by  Theodore 
Bibliander  (ProUuan^um  tu  de  natalibtu  Jesu  Chritti  et 
ipnus  matrit  virmnis  Marice  termo  kitterietu  dm  Jaeobi 
tmnorif  ...  X  "^  Greek  text  wm  first  poUkted  hy  M. 
Nesnder  (Apocrypha ;  hoe  ett  narratumet  (U  Ckritto,  Maria, 
Jotepho,  cognaUone  et  /amilia  Jetu  Ckrigti  extra  BMia  .  .  . 
interto  etiam  PrttevangeUo  Jaeobi  greeee,  in  Oriente  nuper 
reperto,  needvm  edito  haetenut  .  .  .  1563,  re-iasaed  in  1567), 
who  did  not  share  Poetd's  or  BiUiaiidar's  entbusiasin  i  for  the 
treatise.  One  of  TischendorTs  M88  (A)  w«a  edited  by  C.  A. 
Suckow  in  1S40  (ProtevangeUmn  Jaeobi  ex  eodiee  ma.  Vene- 
tiano  deteriptit,  proiegcmettis,  varietate  leeUonwn,  notit  aritieit 
imtTuetum  edidit),  and  a  Fayyftra  parchment  fragment  con- 
taining 7^101  was  pablished  in  1896  by  B.  P.  Grenfell  (An  Alex- 
andrian Erotic  Fragment  and  other  Greek  Papyri,  pp.  13-19). 
In  spite  of  these  and  other  contribations,  however,  '  the  Greek 
MSS — the  oldest  of  which  is  a  Bodleian  fragment  from  Egypt  of 
cent,  v-vi — are  very  numeroos  and  very  incompletely  known  ; 
the  versions  have  not  been  exbaastirely  studied ;  and  many 
important  questions,  especially  those  affecting  the  integrity  of 
the  book,  mast  still  be  regarded  as  open'  (M.  B.  James,  in 
JThSt  xii.[19ia-ll]  623X 

The  work  itself  professes  to  be  a  Urropla  or  3ti^7Tj«r« 
(25^),  and  the  narrative  runs  as  follows. 

The  first  part  (1-18^)  opens  by  describing  how  the 
wealthy  Joachim  and  nis  wife  Anna  lamented 
over  the  fact  that  they  had  no  child.  Joachim  is 
told,  to  his  chagrin,  by  Reuben  (the  high  priest?) 
that  his  childlessness  disqualifies  him  from  pre- 
senting his  offerings  to  God.  Anna,  praying  in 
the  garden  and  looking  up  to  heaven,  is  reminded 
afresh  of  her  childlessness  by  the  sight  of  a 
sparrow's  nest  in  a  laurel  bnsh  ;  she  breaks  into 
the  following  lament  (3 :  spoiled  in  the  Syriac,  and 
omitted  in  the  Armenian,  version) : 

'  Woe  is  me  !  who  begat  me,  and  what  womb  produced  me  ? 
For  I  was  bom  accursed  before  the  sons  of  Israel, 
I  am  reproached,  and  they  have  driven  me  with  Jeers 
from  the  Lord's  temple. 

Woe  is  me  !  what  am  I  like  ? 
I  am  not  like  the  birds  of  heaven, 
for  the  birds  of  heaven  are  fruitful  before  thee,  O  Lord. 

Woe  is  me  I  what  am  I  like  ? 
I  am  not  like  the  beasts  of  the  earth, 
for  even  the  beasts  of  the  earth  are  fmitfal  before  tbee,  O 
Ix>rd. 

Woe  is  me  '.  what  am  I  like? 
I  am  not  like  these  waters, 
for  even  these  waters  are  fmltfal  before  Uiee,  O  LonL 

Woe  is  me !  what  am  I  like? 
I  am  not  like  this  earth, 
for  even  this  earth  bears  its  fruits  in  season  and  blesses 
thee,  O  Lord.' 

An  angel  assures  her  that  God  wiU  give  her  a 
child,  and  eventually  Mary  is  bom — the  idea  of 
the  story  corresponding  thus  to  that  of  John  the 
Baptist's  birth  in  Lk  l**-.  Anna  now  proceeds  to 
fulfil  her  vow  of  consecrating  the  child  to  God.t 
The  baby  is  not  allowed  to  walk  on  the  common 
earth  till  her  parents  take  her,  at  the  age  of 
three,  to  Jerusalem,  where  she  is  welcomed  by  the 
priest  and  left  in  the  temple,  '  like  a  dove  nestling 

*  Hallam  describes  him  as  '  a  man  of  some  parts  and  more 
reading,  bat  chiefly  known  .  .  .  for  mad  reveries  of  fanaticism ' 
(Introd.  to  the  Literature  of  Europe^,  1&17,  i.  468). 

t  Henry  Stei^en,  in  his  Introduction  au  traits  de  la  con- 
formite  des  merreilles  ancxennes  avee  lea  modemet,  ou  traite 
pr^parati/  d  Fapologie  pour  H&rodMe  (1568)^  openly  expressed 
his  disgiist  at  Postel's  production,  whose  origin  and  popularify 
he  could  e.xplain  only  as  a  deliberate  maniBOTre  of  Satan! 

X  Anna's  song  of  praise  (6^  is  more  appropriate  than  is  osnaDy 
the  case  with  such  songs  in  the  Bible  : 

•  I  will  sing  a  song  to  the  Lord  my  God, 

for  he  has  visited  me  and  taken  from  me  the  reproach  of  my 

enemies ; 
the  Lord  has  given  me  fruit  of  righteousness,  a  single  froit 
but  many-sided  in  his  sight. 
Who  will  tell  the  sons  of  Reuben  that  Anna  is  suckling  ? 
Hearken,    hearken,   ye    twelve    tribes   of   Israel :    Anna    is 
suckling.' 


484      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANOmCAL) 


there.*  Her  parents,  in  a  transport  of  wonder  at 
her,  depart.  They  vanisli  from  the  story,*  which 
at  once  (8)  hurries  on  to  describe  the  action  taken 
by  the  priests  Avhen  this  wonder-child  readied  the 
age  of  puberty  (twelve  or  fourteen  years — the  MSS 
vary).  An  angel  bids  Zecliariah,  the  high  priest, 
summon  the  widowers  ('  bachelors,'  in  the  Armenian 
version)  of  Israel :  '  let  each  bring  his  rod,  and 
whoever  has  a  sign  shown  him  by  the  Lord,  his 
shall  the  woman  be.'  Joseph  is  then  suddenly 
introduced  (9').  'And  Joseph,  throwing  aside  Ins 
axe ' — it  is  assumed  that  the  readers  know  he  was 
a  carpenter  or  joiner — went  out  to  meet  the  heralds 
(or,  tlie  widowers).  A  dove  emerges  from  his  rod, 
and  he  is  reluctantly  assigned  the  charge  of  Mary. 
He  protests,  '  I  have  sons,  and  I  am  an  old  man,t 
while  she  is  a  girl.  I  am  afraid  of  becoming 
ridiculous  to  the  sons  of  Israel.'  But  he  is  warned 
of  the  penalties  attaching  to  disobedience,  and 
eventually  agrees.  Only,  to  ensure  the  credibility 
of  the  virgin-birth,  the  author  observes  that  Joseph 
left  her  at  once  in  his  house  and  went  off  to  a 
distant  task  of  building.  Meanwhile  the  Annun- 
ciation takes  place,  Mary  visits  her  kinswoman 
Elizabeth,  and  returns  home.  When  she  is  six 
months  pregnant,  Joseph  returns  home,  and  is 
distressed  at  her  condition.  He  has  been  put  in 
chaige  of  this  virgin,  and  he  has  failed  to  keep  his 
charge  !  '  Who  has  deceived  me  (her)  ?  Who  has 
done  this  evil  deed  in  my  house  and  defiled  the 
maiden  ?  Has  not  the  story  of  Adam  been  re- 
enacted  in  my  case?  As  the  serpent  came  and 
found  Eve  alone,  and  beguiled  her,  when  Adam 
was  singing  praise,  so  with  me.'  In  a  dream, 
however,  an  angel  reassures  Joseph.  Neverthe- 
less, when  the  authorities  of  the  Temple  discover 
Mary's  condition,  Joseph  is  charged  with  the  crime 
of  having  secretly  married  a  virgin  whom  he  under- 
took to  guard.  First  he,  and  then  Mary,  are  made 
to  undergo  the  ordeal  of  Nu  5".  They  pass  the 
test  scatheless.  'And  the  priest  said,  "Since  the 
Lord  God  has  not  disclosed  your  sins,  neither  do 
I  condemn  you "  {ovde  iyd)  Kplvu  vfias ;  cf.  Jn  8"). 
So  he  sent  them  away.  And  Joseph  took  Mary 
and  went  home,  rejoicing  and  glorifying  the  God 
of  Israel.' 4: 

The  story  then  (17-18^)  describes  Joseph  and 
Mary  travelling  to  Bethlehem  as  in  Lk  2^.  On 
the  road,  '  Joseph  turned  and  saw  she  was  sad  ; 
but  he  said  to  himself,  "  Perhaps  Avhat  is  in  her  is 
paining  her."  Again  Joseph  turned  and  saw  she 
was  laughing.  So  he  said  to  her,  "Mary,  what 
does  this  mean?  Why  do  I  see  your  face  now 
laughing  and  now  sad?"  And  Mary  said  to 
Joseph,  "  Because  I  see  with  my  eyes  two  peoples, 
one  wailing  and  lamenting,  the  other  rejoicing  and 
exulting." '§  As  the  time  of  her  delivery  is  im- 
minent, Joseph  leads  her  into  a  cave  {(nn/i\ai.ov), 
leaves  her  in  charge  of  his  sons,  and  goes  oft"  *  in 
search  of  a  Hebrew  midwife  in  the  district  of 
Bethlehem '(18'). 

At  this  point  ( 18^)  the  narrative  ||  suddenly  changes 
to  the  first  person  :  '  and  I  Joseph  wasAvalking  and 
not  walking,  etc'    All  nature  is  still  and  silent. 

*  The  Armenian  version  (3)  kills  them  both  oflf  'in  one  year ' 
at  this  point. 

t  In  his  vehement  attack  on  Helvidius,  Jerome  insists  that 
Joseph  as  well  as  Mary  was  a  virgin.  The  ProtevangeHum  is 
content  to  show  how  he  could  not  have  been  the  real  father  of 
Jesus. 

t  This  must  have  been  a  serviceable  episode  for  apologetic 
purposes  ;  the  story  of  Mt  I'Sf-  did  not  vindicate  Mary  to  anyone 
except  her  husband.  But  it  was  specially  essential  to  the 
argument  of  our  author,  who  is  at  pains  to  show  that  there 
was  no  question  of  a  real  marriage  between  Josti)h  and  Mary. 

§  This  prophetic  vision  is  a  blend  of  Lk  2^*  and  On  l!.")-^  (where 
the  two  nations  are  in  Rebecca's  womb).  In  pseudo-Malthcw  they 
become  the  Jews  and  the  Gentiles.  Here  they  are  probably  no 
more  than  the  unbelieving  and  the  believing.  Mary  suffers  no 
birth-pangs  ;  her  sorrow  is  purely  spiritual. 

i  OLDeLacy  U'Leary  iu  ItUerti.'Joum.Apoc.xxxv.  [1913],  p.  70 1. 


The  birds  of  the  air  are  motionless ;  so  are  all 
animals  and  human  beings  within  sight.  Joseph 
secures  a  midwife,  carefully  explaining  to  her  tiiat 
Mary  has  conceived  by  the  holy  Spirit.  But  in  the 
midule  of  their  conversation  the  narrative  again  * 
resumes  the  third  person  (19').  and  a  further  abrupt 
touch  t  occurs  in  19',  where  the  midwife  leaves  the 
cave  '  and  Salome  met  her.'  Salome,  like  Thomas 
(Jn  20^),  refuses  to  believe  the  story  of  the  virgin- 
birth  without  tangible  evidence.  This  she  receives, 
with  a  temporary  punishment  for  her  incredulity. 
She  carries  the  child,  in  obedience  to  an  angel's 
command,  crying,  'I  will  worship  Him  (i.e.  God),t 
for  a  great  King  has  been  born  for  Israel.'  The  nar- 
rative then  proceeds  (20*) :  '  and  she  went  out  of  the 
cave  justified  (dediKaiwfjUvr]).  And  lo  a  voice  said  to 
her,  "  Salome,  Salome,  do  not  proclaim  the  miracles 
{wapddo^a)  you  have  seen,  till  the  child  reaches 
Jerusalem.''  And  (21 ')  Joseph  was  ready  to  go 
into  Judsea.* 

Here  the  line  of  the  narrative  is  again  broken 
abruptly.  Joseph  is  never  mentioned  again.  21'- 
22-  re-tells  Mt  2"-,  with  elaborations.  The  magi 
have  seen  '  a  star  of  enormous  size,  shining  among 
these  stars  and  eclipsing  their  light.*  The  star 
conducts  them  to  the  cave,  where  the  magi  see  '  the 
infant  with  his  mother  Mary ;  and  they  brought 
out  of  their  wallet  gifts  of  gold,  incense,  and 
myrrh.  And  being  instructed  by  the  angel  not 
to  enter  Judaea,  they  went  to  their  own  land  by 
another  road.'  §  The  omission  of  Joseph  would  not 
of  itself  be  significant  (in  view  of  Mt  2'"'^),  were  it 
not  that  in  22''^  the  initiative  is  assigned  to  Mary 
instead  of  to  Joseph  (as  in  Mt  2'^'-).  Hearing  of 
Herod's  order  to  mas.sacre  all  children  of  two  years 
and  under,  Mary  hides  the  child  Jesus  in  an  ox- 
stall.  Evidently,  the  original  narrative  ignored 
the  flight  to  Egypt.  But  what  it  substituted  for 
this  remains  a  mystery,  for  at  this  point  (22^)  the 
story  suddenly  breaks  into  an  account  of  John  the 
Baptist  and  his  parents.  The  child  John  is  among 
the  infants  sought  for  by  Herod,  and  Elizabeth  in 
despair  prays  to  a  mountain  in  the  hill-country, 
'O  mountain  of  God,  receive  mother  and  child.' 
The  mountain  immediately  parts  in  two  and 
shelters  them,  protected  by  a  light  ('for  an  angel 
of  the  Lord  was  with  them,  watching  over  them'). 
Herod,  unable  to  make  Zechariah  (who  is  high 
priest)  confess  the  whereabouts  of  his  child,  has 
Iiim  murdered  inside  the  Temple,  on  the  ground 
that  '  his  son  is  to  be  king  over  Israel.'  At  day- 
break, as  Zechariah  does  not  come  out,  one  of  the 
priests  ventui'es  inside  ;  he  sees  clotted  blood  beside 
the  altar,  and  hears  a  voice  saying,  '  Zechariah  has 
been  murdered,  and  his  blood  shall  not  be  wiped  up 
until  his  avenger  comes.'  His  body  is  never  found, 
but  his  blood  turned  to  stone.  The  Simeon  of  Lk 
2^'  is  chosen  by  lot  to  succeed  him,  and  with  this 
the  story  ends.  The  epilogue  runs :  '  I,  James,  the 
writer  of  this  history,  when  a  riot  arose  in  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  death  of  Herod,  withdrew  myself  to  the 
desert  till  the  riot  in  Jerusalem  ceased,  glorifying 
the  Lord  God  who  gave  me  the  gift  and  the  wisdom 
to  write  this  history.'  The  book  thus  professes  to 
be  written  not  only  by  an  eye-witness  but  imme- 
diately after  the  event. 

In  spite  of  Zalin's  and  Conrad3''s  arguments  to 

•  The  Syriac  fragment  passes  straight  from  1S2  to  19'. 

t  Possibly  echoed  in  Clem.  Strom,  vii.  16.  93. 

i  Jesus,  in  the  Syriac  as  in  pseudo-Matthew  (see  below, 
p.  488). 

§  The  simplicity  of  the  story  is  noticeable ;  in  the  primitive 
form  (expanded  in  the  versions  and  later  MSS)  the  magi  do  not 
even  adore  the  child,  and  no  attempt  is  made  to  name  them,  as 
in  the  Armenian  version,  which  calls  them  Melchior,  prince  of 
Persia,  Baltasar,  prince  of  India,  and  Gaspar,  prince  of  Arabia. 
The  angel  goes  to  them  at  once  after  the  Annunciation,  '  and 
they  were  led  by  the  star  for  nine  months,  and  then  came  and 
arrived  in  time  for  the  birth  from  the  holy  virgin.'  Thi»  it 
reproduced  in  the  Coventry  Nativity  play. 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCAl^^OXICAL)      485 


the  contrary,  it  is  almost  necessary  to  postulate 
the  composite  character  of  tlie  Protevangelium, 
although  the  sources  cannot  be  disentangled  with 
much  precision.  Even  in  1-18'  there  are  traces  of 
ditfereut  strata,  e.g.  the  sudden  introduction  of 
Joseph  in  9',  and  the  episotie  of  Mary  sewing  the 
purple  and  scarlet  *  for  the  veil  of  the  Temple  ( 10, 
12).  The  latter  episode  could  be  parted  from  the 
context  not  only  without  difficulty  but  with  a  gain 
to  the  sequence  of  the  narrative.!  On  the  other 
hand,  neither  1-18'  nor  18--22'^  can  be  regarded  as 
complete  sources.  The  legend  of  Zechariah's 
murder  in  22*- 24,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  water- 
mark of  late  origin.  In  the  light  of  the  investiga- 
tions by  A.  Berendts,:}:  it  is  clearly  subsequent  to 
Origen,  who  knows  quite  a  different  version  of 
Zechariah's  death — one  which  connects  it  closely 
with  the  virginity  of  Mary  (he  was  murdered, 
according  to  this  tradition,  between  the  Temple 
and  the  altar,  for  having  permitted  Marjr  to  ent«r 
the  court  of  the  virgins  after  she  had  given  birth 
to  Jesus).  Had  Origen  read  22*-24  in  his  ^ijiXoi 
'laxu^ov,  he  would  not  have  written  as  he  has  done 
npon  Mt  23^.  For  the  existence  of  the  legend  in 
the  form  of  22^-24  the  first  evidence  is  from  Peter 
of  Alexandria  (t  A.D.  311),  and  even  this  evidence 
is  not  absolutely  decisive. 

Whether  the  composite  work  underwent  suc- 
cessive expansions  or,  as  is  less  likeljr,  was  recast 
by  a  Gnostic  author,  l'-18',  which  is  practically 
a  yhnniffii  yiapiai,  probably  belonged  to  the  book  of 
James,  from  which  Origen  quotes.  His  quotation 
is  based  on  this  part,  and  on  this  part  alone ;  the 
rest  of  the  book  never  mentions  the  other  children 
of  Joseph.  If  the  conclusion  (25)  was  part  of  the 
original  romance,  the  story  must  have  included  the 
incidents  of  Herod's  massacre,  though  in  a  form 
differing  from  that  preserved  in  the  Apocalypse  of 
Zechariah  §  as  it  now  appears  in  22^-24.  For  some 
reason,  the  latter  must  have  been  substituted  for 
the  original  conclusion,  or  added  to  a  narrative 
which  had  lost  its  ending.  AVhether  18'-21'  was 
also  an  extract  from  some  Apocn/phnm  Josephi, 
which  became  appended  to  1-18',  or  whether  the 
author  of  the  book  of  James  himself  combined  the 
fragment  Avith  his  other  source,  is  a  problem  which 
cannot  be  decided  definitely  either  way,  in  view  of 
the  obscurity  surrounding  the  literary  origins  of 
this  as  of  most  other  pseudepigrapha. 

Here,  too,  as  in  the  Oxyrhynchite  fragment  (cf. 
p.  499),  the  attempt  to  describe  the  conditions  of 
Jewish  ritual  shows  the  writers  ignorance.  That 
Joachim  should  be  repelled  from  his  right  to  offer 
in  the  Temple.on  the  score  of  childlessness  (1*),  and 
that  girls  could  remain  within  the  Temple  like 
vestals,  are  only  two  of  the  unhistorical  touches 
which  indicate  unfamiliaritj'  with  the  pi^axis  of 
Judaism.     The  romancer  knows  his  OT  better. 

And  he  knows  it  in  Greek.  The  attempt  to 
establish  a  Hebrew  original  for  the  Protevangelium 
has  been  unsuccessful ;  it  is  bound  up  with  a 
desire  to  put  it  earlier  than  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
on  which,  as  on  the  LXX,  it  plainly  depends.  But, 
as  it  is  uncertain  whether  Justin  Martyr  owes  to 
it  touches  like  that  of  the  cave  ;  and  the  curious 

*  Perhaps,  like  the  emphasis  on  the  wealth  of  her  parents,  a 
reply  to  the  current  depreciation  (Orig.  Cels.  i.  28  f .)  of  their 
position.  But  the  wealth  of  Joachim  ia  probably  taken  over 
from  that  of  his  namesake  in  Sus  l-*. 

t  The  obscure  sentence  in  10,  '  At  that  time  Zechariah  was 
domb,  and  Samuel  took  his  place,  until  Zechariah  spoke,'  may 
be  an  interpolation  ;  but  even  if  'Simeon '  (cf.  Lk  2*)  is  read 
for  '  Samuel '  with  some  MSS,  it  remains  an  erratic  block.  It 
seems  to  presuppose  the  storj-  (or  the  tradition)  of  Lk  15t. 

{  Studien  ubir  Zaehariat  -  Apohryphen  und  Zaehariat  • 
Legtndtn,  1895,  p.  37  f. 

$  Some  details  from  this  seem  to  underlie  the  Armenian  version 
inch.  3. 

I  According  to  Chaeremon,  the  Egyptian  historian  (quoted  by 
Jo«ephas,|e.  Apian.  L  32  [292]),  the  mother  of  Barneses  also  bore 
him  m  a  cave. 


phrase  about  Mary  in  Dial.  100  (cf.  Protev.  12»), 
the  date  of  the  earliest  section  cannot  be  assigned 
definitely  to  the  first  quarter  of  the  2nd  century. 

In  the  Armenian  Church  the  Proterangelium  formed  the  basis 
for  the  first  part  of  a  large  work  which  iucluded  a  Gospel  of  the 
Infancy  and  later  apocn-pha  on  the  life  and  miracles  of  Jesoa. 
According  to  F.  C.  ConyDMn,  who  prints  one  or  two  chapters  of 
the  section  based  on  the  Protevangelium  {AJTIi  L  [1807]  424- 
442X  the  entire  work  consists  of  28  cb«>tet8,  and  goes  back  to 
an  older  Syriac  text  which  was  used  by  ^>hi«ni  Surras.  The  short 
Syriac  fragment  published  by  Wright  {ContrihmonM  to  the  Apoc- 
rifphal  Literature  of  the  NT,  pi.  17  f.)  gives  merely  a  somewhat 
abbreviated  form  of  17-25.  llie  larger,  complete,  Syriac  version 
pablished  by  Mrs.  A.  S.  Lewis  (Studia  SUnaxtiea,  xL  [1902]),  is  in 
all  probabilit>-  a  version  of  some  Greek  text  practically  corre- 
sponding to  Tischendorfs.  Both  in  the  Syriac  and  in  the 
Armenian  versions  the  Protevangelium  forms  only  the  intro- 
duction for  subsequent  apocrypha  on  the  Kativity  or  on  Mary. 
Versions  of  the  Protevangelium  abound,  testifWng  to  its  wide 
popularity  as  a  religions  story-book  in  the  early  Cliurch.  In 
addition  to  the  Araienian,  there  were  Arabic  and  Slavmiic 
versions  or  editions,  as  well  as  Egyptian.  A  small  «»iii^|j^ 
fragment  has  been  edited  by  Leipoldt  {ZSTW,  1906,  p.  1061). 

The  popularity  of  the  Protevangelium,  even 
apart  from  its  advocacy  of  the  absolute  virginity  of 
Mary,  is  not  unintelligible.  The  story  is  told  with 
much  simplicity  and  pathos,  in  its  original  form. 
There  are  vignettes  of  peasant  life,  of  nature,  and 
of  domestic  affection,  which  single  it  out  from  the 
other  uncanonical  Gospels — glimpses,  for  example, 
of  Anna  standing  at  the  door  as  her  husband  drives 
home  his  flocks,  and  running  to  embrace  him  ;  of 
Elizabeth  dropping  her  needlework  and  running  to 
the  door  when  Mary  knocks  ;  or  of  Anna  (in  the 
Armenian  text)  tossing  her  baby  merrily  in  her 
arms.  None  of  the  Infancy  Gospels  is  so  free  from 
extravagance  and  silliness.  The  child  Jesus  is  a 
child,  and,  if  the  halo  has  begun  to  glow  round  the 
head  of  Mary,  she  is  still  a  woman.  No  tinge  of 
Docetism  makes  her  unreal.  Even  the  narrator 
keeps  himself  strictly  in  the  background.  The 
skill  with  which  the  author  has  contrived  to  tell 
his  story  is  best  appreciated  when  we  compare  the 
crude,  coarse  handling  towhich  some  of  its  materials 
are  subjected  in  the  Gospel  of  Thomas  or  the  Gospel 
of  pseudo-Matthew. 

Occasionally  there  are  touches  which  remind 
the  reader  of  Buddhistic  legends ;  e.g.  in  the  1st 
cent.  (A.D.)  life  of  Buddha  (cf.  Chinese  version  in 
SBE  xix.  [1883])  Buddha  is  bom  miraculously,  'with- 
out causing  his  mother  pain  or  anguish'  (11'),  and 
at  his  birth  '  the  various  cries  and  confused  sounds 
of  beasts  were  hushed,  and  silence  reigned'  (11**). 
But  the  proofs  of  Buddhistic  influence  are  not 
cogent  (cf.  von  Dobschutz  in  ThLZ,  1896,  pp.  442- 
446);  the  comparative  study  of  folk-lore  in  its 
modem  phases  renders  hesitation  on  this  point 
prudent. 

Sfscial  Litxratckk. — L.  Conrad^'s  hypotheses  of  its  Semitic 
original  and  its  priority  to  the  birth-stories  of  Matthew  and 
Luke  are  printed  in  SK  (1889)  728-784,  and  Die  Quelle  der 
kanom»ehen  Kindheitagetehiehte  Je*iu,Gox.tiDsea,  1900.  The 
best  editions  are  both  French,  by  Emile  Amann,  Le  Prot- 
etangHe  de  Jacques  et  tea  remaniements  latins,  Paris,  1910 
(Greek  text  of  Protev.,  Latin  texts  of  pseudo-Manhew  1-17  and 
the  Nativity  of  Mary,  with  French  translation,  introduction, 
and  notes) ;  and  C.  Michel,  ProUvanffile  de  Jacques,  pseudo- 
Matthieu,  Scangiie  de  Thomat,  teXtes  annoti*  et  traduitt, 
Paris,  1911  (with  the  Coptic  and  Arabic  versions  of  the  History 
of  Joseph  the  Carpenter,  translated  with  notes  by  Peeters); 
cf.  Haase,  pp.  49-«0. 

(b)  The  Gospel  of  Thomas.— 

The  Il<u2(jca,  or  Gospel  of  Thomas,  survives  in  two  Greek  re- 
censions, one  (A)  longer  than  the  other  (BX*  but  the  MSS  are 
not  earlier  than  the  Hth  or  15th  centurj".  The  Latin  version  (LX 
however,  survives  in  a  Vienna  palimpsest  as  yet  undeciphered, 
and  the  Syriac  (S)  in  a  MS  of  the  5th  or  6th  century. 

No  satisfactory  edition  has  yet  appeared,  but  Tischendorfs 
Greek  texts  have  been  edited  and  translated  by  C.  Michel, 
BtiangUeiApoeryphes,  i  (1911),  ProticangHe  de  Jaequet.pteudo- 

*  In  PertffHnrts  Protexis,  1S79,  p.  39  f.,  J.  M.  Cotterill 
tries  to  show  that  .\  and  B  are  from  the  same  hand,  and 
that  the  author  not  only  uses  the  LXX  of  Eoclesiastes  but 
deUberately  parodies  some  verses  of  Proverbs— two  eqoaDy 
baxardoos  hypotheses. 


486      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


Matthieu.  Svangile  de  ThoinaK  ;  S  is  published  in  Wriftht's  Coji- 
tribtUioTUi  to  the  Apocryphal  Literature  of  the  yew  Testament, 
pp.  6-11,  etc. 

According  to  Hoase  (pp.  38-48),  L  represents  in  the  main  a 
version  of  A,  while  S  also,  though  independently,  resembles  A; 
but  all  imply  a  common  source  which  is  not  extant. 

We  know  from  Hippolytus  (Philosoph.  v.  2),  tliat 
the  Naassenes  appealed,  on  behalf  of  their  tenets,  to 
a  passage  in 'theGospel  according  to  Thomas,' which 
ran  as  follows  :  '  He  who  seeks  Me  will  find  Me  in 
children  of  seven  and  upwards  {iv  naidloi^  dirb  irihv 
iwrd),  for  hidden  there  I  shall  be  manifested  in  the 
fourteenth  age  {or  seon,  alQvi).'  No  other  citation 
has  been  preserved.*  Indeed,  apart  from  the 
reference  of  Eusebius  {HE  iii.  25.  6),  it  is  only 
mentioned  again  by  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  who  twice 
warns  Christians  against  it  as  a  Manichsean  produc- 
tion {Catech.  iv.  36,  'There  are  only  four  Gospels  in 
the  NT  ;  the  rest  are  pseudepigrapha  and  noxious. 
The  Manicha;ans  wrote  a  Gospel  according  to 
Thomas  which,  invested  with  the  fragrance  of  the 
evangelic  name,  corrupts  simple  souls';  vi.  31,  '  Let 
no  one  read  the  Gospel  according  to  Thomas,  for  it 
is  not  by  one  of  the  Twelve,  but  by  one  of  Manes' 
three  wicked  disciples').  Since  the  Manichaeans 
possessed  a  Gospel  of  Thomas  as  well  as  a  Gospel  of 
Philip  (see  below,  p.  501),  this  Manichsean  Scripture 
may  have  been  the  Gospel  mentioned  by  Hippolytus, 
possibly  in  a  special  form. 

Zahn  attempts  to  date  the  original  Gospel  quite 
early  in  the  2nd  century.  He  regards  the  second 
half  of  the  quotation  made  by  Hippolytus  as  a 
Naassene  comment,  and  thus  is  free  to  mini- 
mize the  Gnostic  character  of  the  work.  He 
further  argues  that  Justin's  description  of  Jesus 
{Dial.  88)  as  a  maker  of  'ploughs  and  yokes'  in 
His  native  village  is  derived  from  the  story  in  A  13 
=  S  13  =  L  11  (Joseph,  who  'made  ploughs  and 
yokes,'  had  an  order  from  a  rich  man  to  make  a 
bench.  One  jilank  turned  out  to  be  too  short,  but 
Jesus  rose  to  the  emergency,  pulled  the  plank  out 
to  the  proper  length,  and  thus  relieved  His  father). 
This  may  be  no  more  than  a  coincidence,  and 
Justin  might  have  derived  the  touch  from  oral 
tradition.  But  it  is  certainly  remarkable  how 
little  Gnostic  fantasy  pervades  the  Stoi-y  of  the 
Infancy,  in  any  of  its  extant  forms ;  apart  from 
the  'great  allegories'  of  the  letter  Alpha  which 
the  lad  Jesus  is  reported  to  have  taught  His  teacher, 
the  stories  and  sayings  are  naive  rather  than 
speculative.  On  the  other  hand,  the  childhood  of 
Jesus  is  possibly  filled  with  miracles  owing  to  a 
desire  of  heightening  His  Divine  claims  prior  to 
the  Baptism.  It  is  usually  argued  that  this  motive 
also  implies  a  Docetic  interest,  since  the  miracles 
represent  Jesus  as  not  really  a  human  child,  but 
exempt  from  the  ordinary  conditions  of  human 
nature.  This,  however,  is  not  a  necessary  or  even 
a  probable  interpretation  of  the  stories.  They 
exaggerate  the  supernatural  element,  but  they  do 
not  suggest  a  wraith  or  phantom  in  the  guise  of  a 
child.  In  S  6-8,  the  reply  of  Jesus  to  His  teacher 
does  recall  dogmatic  interests  ('I  am  outside  of 
you,  and  I  dwell  among  you.  Honour  in  tlie  flesh 
I  have  not.  Thou  art  by  the  law,  and  in  the  law 
thou  abidest.  For  when  thou  wast  born,  I  was  .  .  . 
When  I  am  greatly  exalted,  I  shall  lay  aside  what- 
ever mixture  I  have  of  your  race '),  but  the  tone 
and  even  the  wording  are  not  remote  from  the 
Fourth  Gospel ;  and,  as  the  Gospel  evidently  pas.sed 
through  several  editions  or  phases,  it  may  have 
accumulated  such  elements  in  the  gradual  course  of 
its  development.  The  above-quoted  passage,  for 
example,  is  peculiar  to  S,  as  we  can  see  from  the 
remark  of  Epiphanius  (li.  20).     There  was  even  a 

*  Even  this  one  is  echoed  onlj'  once,  and  that  vajfuely,  in  the 
pert  reply  of  Jesus  to  the  Jewish  schoolmaster  preserved  in 
pseudo-Matthew  30^  ('  I  was  among  you  with  children,  and  you 
did  not  know  me '), 


tendency  among  orthodox  Christians  *  to  accept 
stories  of  miracles  during  the  boyhood,  in  order  to 
refute  the  Gnostic  tlieory  that  the  JJivino  Christ 
did  not  descend  upon  Jesus  until  the  Baptism — a 
tendency  which  helps,  among  other  things,  to 
account  for  the  tenacious  popularity  of  such  tales. 
From  this  very  natural  point  of  view,  the  rise  of 
these  stories  may  have  been  due  to  interests  which 
were  not  distinctively  Gnostic,  whatever  be  the 
amount  of  dogmatic  tendency  that  must  be  ascribed 
to  their  later  form.t 

There  is  no  ground  for  denying  that  some  Gnostic 
Go.spel  of  Thomas  existed  during  the  '2nd  century. 
The  quotation  nreserved  by  Hippolytus  does  not 
occur  in  any  of  the  extant  recensions  of  the  Thomas 
Gospel  which  afterwards  sprang  up  ;  but  even  these, 
for  all  their  size,  cannot  have  corresponded  to  the 
entire  work,  which  (on  the  evidence  of  Nicephorua) 
extended  to  no  fewer  than  1300  stichoi,  almost 
double  the  length  of  the  longest  extant  recension. 
Even  in  these  exUmt  recensions  it  is  probable  that 
the  orthodox  editor  (or  editors)  must  nave  removed 
the  majority  of  Gnostic  or  Docetic  allusions.  And 
the  Hippolytus  quotation  would  naturally  be  one 
of  these.  Furthermore,  we  have  an  indirect  proof 
that  such  a  Thomas  Gospel  did  exist  prior  to 
Irenaeus.  In  describing  the  tenets  of  the  Mar- 
cosians,  that  Church  Father  charges  this  Gnostic 
sect  with  introducing  apocryphal  and  spurious 
scriptures  (i.  20.  1),  and  with  circulating  the 
following  legend.  '  When  the  Lord  was  a  boy, 
learning  his  letters,  and  when  his  master  said  to 
him  as  usual,  "  Say  Alpha,"  he  said  "  Alpha."  But 
when  the  master  went  on  and  ordered  him  to  say 
"  Beta,"  the  Lord  replied,  "  You  tell  me  first  what 
Alpha  means,  and  then  I  will  tell  you  what  Beta 
means."'  The  Marcosians,  Irenajus  adds,  told  this 
story  to  show  that  Jesus  alone  knew  the  mysterious 
significance  of  Alpha.  The  legend  illustrates  the 
mystic  content  which  the  sect  put  into  the  letters 
of  the  alphabet, t  but  its  immediate  interest  for  us 
lies  in  the  fact  that  this  story  occurs  in  the  Story 
of  the  Infancy. 

Irena;us  proceeds  (i.  20.  2)  to  show  how  the 
Marcosians  also  misinterpreted  the  canonical 
Gospels  to  suit  their  propaganda  ;  e.g.  Lk  2**  they 
explained  to  mean  that  the  parents  of  Jesus  did 
not  know  He  was  telling  them  alx)ut  the  Father ; 
in  Mt  19'*'^''  (quoted  as,  '  Why  call  me  good  ?  One 
is  good,  my  Father  in  the  heavens')  the  word 
'  heavens '  denotes  '  aeons ' ;  and  the  word  '  hidden ' 
in  Lk  19''2  denotes  the  hidden  nature  of  the  Depth 
{^d6o$).  Among  these  quotations  from  '  the  Gospel ' 
{i.e.  the  canonical  Gospels)  Irenaeus  includes  one 
which  does  not  occur  in  our  four  Gospels:  'His 
saying,  /  have  often  desired  to  hear  one  of  these 
words,  but  I  had  no  one  to  tell  me,  indicates  (they 
allege),  by  the  term  one,  Him  who  is  truly 
one  God.'  This  curious  and  unparalleled  Logion 
may  have  been  quoted  by  mistake  from  an  un- 
canonical  Gospel  like  that  of  Thomas,  but  we  can- 
not do  more  than  guess  upon  a  point  of  this  kind. 
In  an  11th  cent.Athos  MS  of  the  Gospels  (cf.  Stud. 
Bib.  v.  [1901-03]  173)  there  is  a  note  to  the  etlect 
that  the  pericope  adulterce  belonged  to  the  Gos- 
pel of  Thomas  {rb  KetpdXaiov  tovto  rod  Kard.  Qto/MP 
evayyeXlov  iirriv) ;  if  so,  it  must  have  occurred  in  an 
edition  which  has  not  been  preserved. 

The  extant  recensions,  to  which  we  have  just 
referred,  are  versions  of  a  Story  of  the  Infancy  (t4 
IlatSi/cd  ToO  Ki;p/oi;)  narrated  by  Thomas,  which  is, 
and  may  have  been  intended  to  form,  a  sequel  to 

•  Usually,  Jn  2"  was  held,  as  e.g.  by  Euthymius  Zigabenus, 
to  rule  out  such  legends  of  miracles  done  by  the  boy  Jesus. 

t  The  influence  of  Kgvptiaii  iiivthology  is  asserted,  but  ex- 
aggerated, bv  Conrady  iii  SK  (1!)()3)  397-459. 

t  e.g.  Alpha  and  Omi  ga.  One  of  the  Marcosian  fantasies  was 
that  the  dove  at  the  IJaptism  inditmted  the  perfection  of  Christ's 
nature,  the  symbol  of  a  dove  being  Omega  and  Alpha. 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      487 


the  stories  of  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi.  The 
resemblances  and  differences  between  the  four 
recensions  may  be  seen  by  comparing  their  accounts 
of  an  incident  which  happens  to  be  recorded  by  all 
the  four,  viz.  the  unpleasant  story  of  how  Jesus 
once  became  unpopular. 


him  do.'  On  the  otlier  hand,  a  better  spirit  is 
shown  in  the  following  anecdote  (S  16) :  '  And 
again,  Joseph  had  sent  his  son  Jacob  (James)  to 
gather  sticks,  and  Jesus  went  with  him.  And 
while  they  were  gathering  sticks,  a  viper  bit  Jacob 
(James)  in  his  hand.     And  when  Jesus  came  near 


B4-5 

Some  days  later,  when  Jestu 
was  pMsiiig  throngb  the  town, 
a  boy  threw  a  stone  at  him  and 
struck  him  on  the  shoulder. 
Jesus  said  to  him,  '  Thou  shalt 
not  g^  thy  way.'  And  at  once 
he  fell  down  and  died.  Those 
who  happened  to  be  there  were 
astounded,  saying,  '  Whence  is 
this  child,  that  every  word  he 
utters  becomes  act  and  fact  ? ' 
And  they  went  off  and  com- 
plained to  Joseph,  saying, '  Thou 
canst  not  dweD  with  ua  in  this 
town.  If  thou  dearest  to  do  so, 
teach  thy  child  to  bless  and  not 
to  curse ;  for  he  is  killing  our 
children,  and  ever)-thing  he  says 
bectnnesact  and  fact.' 

Joseph  was  sitting  on  bis  seat, 
and  the  child  stood  in  front  of 
him  :  and  he  caught  him  by  the 
ear  and  pinched  it  hard.  Jesus 
looked  at  him  steadily  and  said, 
'  That  is  enough  for  thee.' 


L5 

A  few  days  later,  as  Jesus  was 
\*-alking  with  Joseph  through 
the  town,  one  of  the  children 
ran  up  and  struck  Jesus  on  the 
arm.  Jesus  said  to  him,  '  Thou 
shalt  not  finish  thy  journey 
thus.'  And  at  once  he  fell  to 
the  earth  and  died.  But  when 
they  saw  these  wonders,  they 
cried  out,  sayin«r,  'Whence  is 
that  boy  ? '  Ana  tiiey  said  to 
Joseph,  'Such  a  boy  must  not 
be  among  us.'  Joseph  went  off 
and  brought  him,  but  they  said 
to  him,  'Go  away  from  this 
place;  but  if  you  must  be  among 
OS,  tfatch  him  to  pray  and  not 
to  curse.  Our  children  have 
been  insensate.' 

Joseph  caUed  Jesus  and  re- 
proved him,  saying, '  Why  dost 
thou  curse?  "These  inhabitants 
hate  us.'  But  Jesus  said,  'I 
know  these  words  are  not  mine 
but  thine ;  for  thy  sake  I  will 
say  nothing ;  let  them  see  to  it 
in  their  wiidom  : '  Immediately 
those  who  spoke  against  Jesus 
were  blinded ;  and  they  walked 
up  and  down,  saying, '  All  the 
words  that  proceed  from  his 
mouth  take  effect.'  But  when 
Joseph  saw  what  Jesus  had 
dmte,  he  ai^rily  caught  him  by 
the  ear.  Jesus  in  a  passion 
aud  to  Joseph, '  It  is  enough  for 
thee  to  see  me,  not  to  touch  me. 
For  thou  knowest  not  who  I  am  ; 
if  thou  kne west  that.thou  would- 
est  not  irritate  me.  And  al- 
though I  am  with  thee  now,  I 
was  made  before  thee.'  i 


8  4-5(te.  Wri^tX 

And  again  Jesna  had  gone 
with  his  father,  and  a  boy, 
running,  stmck  him  with  Ua 
shoulder.  Jesus  says  to  him, 
*  Thou  shalt  not  go  thy  way.' 
And  aU  of  a  sudden  he  fell  down 
and  died.  And  all  who  saw  him 
cried  out  and  said,  'Whence 
was  this  boy  bom,  that  all  his 
words  become  facts?'  And 
the  family  of  him  who  was  dead 
drew  near  to  Joeepii  and  say  to 
him,  *  Thou  hast  this  boy ;  thoa 
canst  not  dwell  with  us  in  this 
village  unless  you  teach  him  to 
Ueas.' 

And  be  drew  near  to  the  boy, 
and  was  teaching  him  and  say- 
ing, 'Why  doest  thou  these 
(things)?  And  these  people 
reckon  them,  and  hate  thee.' 
Jesoa  says, '  If  the  words  of  my 
Father  were  not  wise,  he  would 
not  know  how  to  instruct  child- 
ren.* And  again  he  said,  'It 
these  were  childroi  of  the  bed- 
chamber, they  would  not  re- 
ceive curses.  These  shall  not 
sec  torment.'  And  immediately 
those  were  blinded  who  were 
accusing  him.  But  Joseph  be- 
came angr}',  and  seized  hold  of 
his  ear,  and  pulled  it.  Then 
Jesus  answered  and  said  to  him, 
'  It  is  enough  for  thee,  that  thou 
sbouldest  be  commanding  me 
and  finding  me  (obedient)  ;  for 
thou  ha£t  acted  foolishly.' 


A4-5 

Again,  he  was  passing  through 
the  village,  and  a  boy  ran  and 
knocked  against  his  shoulder. 
Jesus  was  angry,  and  said  to 
him,  *  Thou  shalt  not  go  back 
as  tiiou  earnest.'  And  at  once 
he  fell  and  died.  Some  who  saw 
what  happened  said,  '  Whence 
was  this  child  born,  for  every 
word  of  his  becomes  act  and 
fact?'  And  the  parents  of  the 
dead  boy  went  to  Joseph  and 
blamed  him,  sajing,  '  With 
such  a  child,  thou  canst  not 
dwell  with  us  in  the  village. 
Or^  teach  him  to  bless  and  not 
to  curse ;  for  he  is  killing  our 
children.' 

And  Joseph  called  the  child 
apart  and  admonished  him,  say- 
ing, 'Why  doest  thou  such 
things?  These  people  suffer, 
and  hate  us,  and  persecute  us.' 
Jesus  said, '  I  know  these  words 
of  thine  are  not  thine.  Still,  I 
will  say  nothing,  for  thy  sake. 
But  they  shall  bear  theirpunish- 
ment.'  And  immediately  his 
accusers  were  blinded.  And 
those  who  saw  it  were  terribly 
afraid  and  perplexed  ;  they  said 
of  him,  that  every  word  he 
uttered,  good  or  bad,  became 
fact  and  proved  a  marvel.  And 
when  they  [he  '?]  saw  Jesus  had 
done  such  a  thing,  Joseph  rose 
and  took  hold  of  his  ear  and 
pulled  it  hard.  The  child  was 
much  annoyed  and  said  to  him, 
'  It  is  enough  for  thee  to  seek 
and  not  to  find.  Certainly  thou 
hast  not  acted  wisely.  Knowest 
thou  not  that  I  am  thine  ?  Do 
not  vex  me.' 

I  L  covers  the  childhood  of  Jesus  from  his  second  year,  A  from  his  fifth  to  his  twelfth  year,  and  B  from  his  fifth  to  his  eighth. 

A  fair  idea  of  the  characteristic  contents  of  this 
Gospel  may  be  derived  from  one  or  two  extracts, 
such  as  the  story  of  Jesus  and  the  sparrows  (B  3) : 
'  Jesus  made  out  of  that  clay  twelve  sparrows.  It 
was  the  Sabbath-day.  Ana  a  child  ran  and  told 
Joseph,  saying,  "Behold,  thy  child  is  playing 
about  the  stream  and  he  has  made  sparrows  out 
of  the  clay,  which  is  not  lawful."  When  he  heard 
this,  he  went  and  said  to  the  child,  "Why  dost 
thou  do  this,  profaning  the  Sabbath  ?  "  But  Jesus 
did  not  answer  him ;  he  looked  at  the  sparrows 
and  said,  "Fly  off  and  live,  and  remember  me." 
And  at  this  word  they  flew  up  into  the  air.  And 
when  Joseph  saw  it,  he  marvelled.'  On  the 
strength  of  this  anecdote  Variot  (op.  cit.,  p.  228  f.) 
ventures  to  compare  the  Gospel  of  Thomas  to  the 
Fioretti  of  St.  Francis.  Another  tale  is  that  of 
J^us  and  the  boy's  foot  (L  8)  :  'A  few  days  after- 
wards a  boy  in  that  town  was  splitting  wood,  and 
he  cut  his  foot.  As  a  large  crowd  went  to  him, 
Jesus  went  with  them.  And  he  touched  the  foot 
which  had  been  hurt,  and  at  once  it  was  healed. 
Jesus  said  to  him,  "Rise  up,  split  the  wood,  and 
remember  me.'"  It  is  as  a  tliaumaturgist  that 
Jesus  appears  in  A  11 :  '  When  he  was  six  years 
old,  his  mother  gave  him  a  pitcher  and  sent  him  to 
draw  water  and  bring  it  into  the  house.  But  he 
knocked  against  someone  in  the  crowd,  and  the 

Eitcher  was  broken.     So  Jesus  unfolded  the  cloak 
e  wore,  filled  it  with  the  water,  and  carried  it  to 
his    mother.*    And  when    his    mother    saw    the 
miracle  which  had  taken  place,  she  kissed  him. 
And  slie  kept  to  herself  all  the  mysteries  she  saw 
*  It  is  conjectured  that  this  was  suggested  by  Pr  30*. 


him,  he  did  to  him  nothing  more  but  stretched  out 
his  hand  to  him  and  blew  upon  the  bite,  and  it 
Avas  healed '  (from  Ac  28*^  ?). 

A  closes  with  quite  a  .sober  version  of  Lk  2"*'', 
which  substitutes  for  v.**  the  following  passage : 
'The  scribes  and  Pharisees  said,  "Are  you  the 
mother  of  this  child  ?  "  She  said,  "  I  am.  They 
said  to  her,  "Blessed  art  thou  among  women,  for 
God  has  blessed  the  fruit  of  your  womb ;  such 
glory,  such  virtue,  such  wisdom  we  have  neither 
seen  nor  heard." '  S  also  ends  in  this  way,  but  the 
passage  first  quoted  occurs  at  the  close  of  L  (in  sub- 
stantially the  same  form),  to  round  off  a  miracu- 
lous cure  (15  :  'A  few  days  later,  a  neighbouring 
child  died,  and  its  mother  grieved  .sorely  for  it. 
On  hearing  this,  Jesus  went  and  stood  over  the 
boy,  knocked  on  his  breast,  and  said,  "  I  tell  thee, 
chUd,  do  not  die  but  live."  And  at  once  the  child 
rose  up.  Jesus  said  to  the  mother  of  the  boy, 
"Take  your  son  and  give  him  the  breast,  and 
remember  me  " ')  which  occurs  earlier  (in  A  17). 

The  data  are  so  scanty  that  even  conjectures 
must  be  tentative,  but  we  may  attempt  to  explain 
the  literary  problems  by  assuming  that  an  original 
Gospel  of  Thomas  was  af temards  used  (edited ?)  by 
the  Marcosians  and  Xaassenes,  and  that  it  subse- 
quently formed  the  basis  for  the  story  of  the 
Infancy  in  its  various  recensions.  Was  another 
version  of  it  circtdated  among  the  Manichaean 
Christians  ?  *    Or  was  the  (Jospel  of  Thomas  which 

•  The  Manicfasean  literature  is  said  by  Timotheas  to  have 
included  also,  among  its  '  devilish'  and  'deadly '  contents, '  the 
living  Gospel'  (cf.  Photius,  BibL  85).  Diodoms  devotnl  the 
first  seven  of  his  twenty-five  books  against  the  Manirharanw 


488      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


they  used  an  independent  (native  or  Indian)  work? 
Tliese  are  questions  to  which,  in  the  present  state 
of  our  knowledge,  no  definite  answer  can  be  given. 

Protests  were  repeatedly  made  against  tlie 
UaiSiKd,  from  Chrysostom  onwards  ;  but  the  work 
must  have  enjoyed  a  popularity  among  Oriental 
Christians  which  orthodox  censures  were  unable  to 
check.  One  proof  of  tliis  popularity  may  be  found 
in  the  Gospel  of  pseudo-Matthew  and  the  Arabic 
Gospel  of  the  Infancy,  which  have  worked  up 
materials  furnished  by  the  Thomas  Gospel  into  in- 
dependent collections  of  stories  for  the  edification 
of  pious  Christians.  The  second  of  these  two 
Gospels  seems  to  have  circulated  among  Jews  and 
Muhammadans  as  well. 

(c)  The  Gospel  of  pseudo-Matthew.— The  Gospel 
of  pseudo  -  Matthew  owes  its  jjresent  title  to 
Tiscliendorf,  the  first  editor  of  the  Latin  text, 
since  the  MS  he  used  was  headed :  '  incipit  liber 
de  ortu  beatse  Maria?  et  infantia  Salvatoris  a 
beato  Mattha30  evangelista  hebraice  scriptus  et 
a  beato  Hieronymo  presbytero  in  latinum  trans- 
latus.'  Thilo  had  already  given  this  title  to  the 
Gospel  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary.  Both  pieces  (the 
former  at  least  in  one  or  two  MSS)  are  prefaced  by 
the  forged  correspondence  between  Jerome  and 
two  bishops,  in  which  the  latter  plaintively  bewail 
the  apocryphal  and  heterodox  character  of  the 
current  books  upon  the  birth  of  Mary  and  the 
Infancy  of  Jesus ;  they  have  heard  that  Jerome 
has  come  into  possession  of  a  Hebrew  volume  on 
the  subject  by  the  evangelist  Matthew,  and  beg 
him  to  translate  it  into  Latin  for  the  apologetic 
purposes  of  the  faithful.  Jerome  agrees,  explain- 
ing that  the  book  was  intended  by  Matthew  for 
Erivate  circulation,  and  that  in  making  it  public 
e  is  not  adding  to  the  canonical  Scriptures.  This 
is  the  author's  adroit  *  way  of  winning  a  welcome 
for  his  production  and  safeguarding  it  against 
suspicion.  He  had  the  fate  of  the  Protevangelium 
Jacobi  and  the  Gospel  of  Thomas  before  his  eyes. 
But  such  a  description  of  the  writing's  contents 
as  this  correspondence  presents  is  obviously  more 
suitable  to  the  Gospel  of  pseudo-Matthew  tlian  to 
the  little  treatise  on  the  Nativity  of  Mary,  which 
never  alludes  to  the  Birth  and  Infancy  of  Jesus. 
Tischendorf's  nomenclature  is  therefore  more  cor- 
rect than  Thilo's. 

The  Thomas  Story  of  the  Infancy  has  been 
exploited  by  the  author  in  the  third  part  of  the 
book  (25-42),  but  this  is  only  one  of  his  sources. 
The  Protevangelium  Jacobi  is  another  (1-16).  In 
fact,  the  Gospel  must  have  carried  the  name  of 
James  occasionally  ;  Hrotswitha,  for  example,  the 
Abbess  of  Gandersheim  (10th  cent.),  who  para- 
phrased it  in  Latin  hexameters  for  the  benefit  of 
her  nuns,  entitled  her  work,  '  Historia  nativitatis 
laudabilisque  conversationis  intactjB  Dei  Gene- 
tricis,  quam  scriptam  referi  sub  nomine  sancti 
Jacobi  fratris  Domini.' 

In  the  first  part  (1-17),  which  describes  the  birth 
and  maidenhood  of  Marv,  her  marriage,  the  virgin- 
birth,  and  the  escape  from  Herod,  the  features 
of  moment  introduced  are  as  follows.  The  home 
of  Mary's  parents  is  definitely  Jerusalem  (in  the 
Protevangelium  this  is  only  a  matter  of  infer- 
ence) ;  Joachim  does  not  offer  sacrifices  for  forgive- 
ness ;  he  absents  himself  for  five  months  instead 
of  forty  days  ;  Anna's  vow  to  consecrate  her  child 
is  made  before,  not  after,  the  angel's  announce- 
ment ;  an  angel  bids  her  go  to  meet  Joachim ;  in 

to  refuting  what  he  thought  was  their  '  vividum  evangelium,' 
but  which  was  really  the  'niodium  evangelium'  written  by 
Adda. 

*  Except  in  one  point.  He  makes  Jerome  plead  love  for 
Christ  as  the  motive  for  his  translation.  Did  he  forget  that  the 
author  of  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla  had  been  condenmed  in 
spite  of  his  plea  that  he  had  invented  the  Acts  out  of  love  for 
St.  Paul? 


Protev.  7  Mary,  aged  three,  dances  when  set  down 
on  the  third  step  of  tlie  altar,  but  here  (4)  slie  runs 
up  the  fifteen  steps  to  tiie  Temple  so  rapidly  that 
she  never  looks  back ;  she  is  mature  at  the  age  of 
three,  remains  in  the  Temple  as  a  paragon  of 
virginal  piety,  fed  daily  by  one  of  the  angels,  and 
often  in  conversation  with  them  ;  any  sick  person 
who  touches  her  goes  home  cured ;  her  courteous 
greeting  instituted  the  custom  of  saying  'Deo 
gratias  ;  she  refuses  to  be  married,  and  takes  the 
vows  of  virginity  ;  Joseph,  already  a  grandfather, 
is  chosen  from  tlie  widowers  to  take  charge  of 
(not  to  marry)  Mary  ;  the  jealousy  of  her  five 
maids  is  rebulied  by  an  angel ;  tlie  Annunciation  is 
made  wlien  she  is  working  at  the  purple  for  the 
veil  of  the  Temple  ;  Mary  does  not  hide  during  her 
pregnancy,  nor  does  she  visit  Elizabeth  ;  *  Joseph 
does  not  upbraid  her,  and  he  apologizes  to  her  for 
his  suspicions ;  after  she  successfully  passes  the 
ordeal  tor  virgins,  the  people  kiss  her  feet  and  ask 
her  pardon  ;  the  brilliant  light  in  the  cave  at 
Bethlehem  does  not  diminisli ;  Salome  adores 
Jesus  t  (not  simply  God,  as  in  Protev.  20),  and  is 
not  forbidden  to  d,eclare  the  wonder  of  the  virgin- 
birth  ;  only  angels  witness  the  birth,  and  as  soon 
as  Jesus  is  born  He  stands  on  His  feet ;  the  star  is 
the  largest  ever  seen  in  the  world  ;  the  magi  offer 
gifts  to  '  the  blessed  Mary  and  Joseph'  as  well  as 
to  the  child  ;  Mary's  fear  of  Herod's  fury  (Protev. 
22)  is  omitted. 

"The  second  part  (18-24)  describes  with  pictur- 
esque detail  the  flight  to  Egypt  and  the  residence 
of  tlie  holy  family  there.  Some  of  the  legends 
have  sprung  from  the  soil  of  the  OT.  For  example, 
when  Mary  is  terrified  by  dragons  issuing  from  a 
cave  (18),  the  infant  Jesus  leaves  her  bosom  and 
confronts  them,  till  they  adore  him  and  retire 
(from  Ps  148^).  Docile  lions  accompany  and  aid 
their  oxen,  and  wolves  leave  them  untouched  (in 
fulfilment  of  Is  65-').  Again,  when  Mary  and 
Jesus  entered  tlie  Egyptian  temple,  all  the  idols 
bowed  and  broke  (in  fulfilment  of  Is  19^).  The 
OT  is  enough  to  explain  the  last-named  legend, 
without  recourse  to  the  later  and  rather 
ditterent  Buddha-legend  in  the  Lalita  Vistara 
(viii.).  Athanasius,  by  the  way,  welcomes  this 
incident  (de  Incarnatione  Verbi  Dei,  36),  which  he 
accepts  without  a  shadow  of  suspicion,  as  a  jiroof 
of  the  supreme  glory  of  Jesus.  Another  pretty 
legend:!:  occurs  in  20-21,  where  Mary  rests  from 
tlie  heat  under  a  tall  palm-tree  and  longs  to  eat 
some  of  the  fruit  hanging  high  overhead,  Joseph 
tells  her  he  is  more  concerned  about  the  lack  of 
water,  since  their  water-skins  are  empty.  *  Then 
the  infant  Jesus,  resting  with  happy  face  in  the 
bosom  of  his  mother,  says  to  the  palm,  "  Bend  thy 
branches,  O  tree,  and  refresh  my  mother  with  thy 
fruit."  Immediately,  at  this  word,  the  palm 
bowed  its  crest  to  the  feet  of  the  blessed  Mary, 
and  they  gathered  from  it  fruits  with  which  all 
were  refreshed.  After  they  had  gathered  all  its 
fruit,  it  remained  bent,  waiting  his  command  to 
rise  at  whose  command  it  had  bowed  down.  Then 
Jesus  said  to  it,  "Raise  thyself,  O  palm,  be  strong, 
and  join  the  company  of  my  trees  which  are  in  the 
paradise  of  my  Father.  And  open  from  thy  roots 
the  vein  of  water  which  lies  hidden  in  the  earth ; 
let  the  waters  flow,  that  we  may  be  satisfied  there- 
with." At  once  the  palm  rose  up,  and  at  its  root 
a  spring  of  water  began  to  trickle  forth,  exceed- 

•  The  cleaving  of  the  mountain  to  shelter  Elizabeth  and  John 
the  Baptist  from  Herod's  fury,  and  indeed  the  whole  Zechariah 
legend,  is  omitted. 

t  The  angels  sing  Lk  2i-»  in  adoration  of  the  infant  Jesus  in 
the  cave  ;  the  ox  and  the  .-vss  in  the  stable  also  itu^essantly  adore 
him  (14)---in  fnltUment  of  Is  1^  and  Hab  3-  (LXX,  iv  liiam  ivo 
^J^iV  yviacr^cn]). 

■ ;  Which  passed  into  the  Qu'ran  (ed.  E.  H.  Palmer  {SBE  vi. 
and  ix.,  1900],  xix.  20-26)  in  a  simpler  form. 


GOSPELS  (TJNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      489 


ingly  clear,  cool,  and  bright.'  Next  day,  before 
leaving,  Jesus  rewards  the  palm  by  allowing  an 
angel  to  transplant  one  of  its  branches  to  paradise. 
'This  palm,'  he  tells  the  terrified  spectators,  '  shall 
be  prepared  for  all  the  saints  in  the  place  of  bliss, 
as  It  has  been  prepared  for  ns  in  this  lonely  spot.' 

The  third  part  (25-42)  describes  incidents  in  the 
boyhood  of  Jesus,  from  the  return  to  Judaea,  for 
the  most  part  on  the  unpleasant  lines  of  the  Gospel 
of  Thomas.  The  incident  of  the  taming  of  the 
lions  is  new,  however  (35-36).  Jesus,  a  boy  of 
eight,  went  out  of  Jericho  one  day  to  the  banks  of 
the  Jordan,  and  walked  deliberately  into  a  cave 
where  a  lioness  lay  with  her  cubs.  The  lions 
adored  him.  Jesus  then  improved  the  occasion  by 
telling  the  astonished  crowd,  'How  much  better 
are  the  beasts  than  vou  !  They  recognize  the  Lord 
and  glorify  him,  while  you  men,  made  in  God's 
image  ana  likeness,  do  not  know  him !  Beasts 
recognize  me  and  are  tame ;  men  see  me  and  do  not 
acknowledge  me.'  Jesus  then  crosses  the  Jordan, 
accompanied  by  the  lions,  the  waters  di\iding  to 
right  and  left  (cf.  Jos  3**,  2  K  2*),  and  dismisses  his 
wUd  companions  in  peace. 

{(i)  The  History  of  Joseph  the  Carpenter. — One 
of  the  latest  developments  of  the  legends  relating 
to  the  Infancy  of  Jesus  is  represented  by  the 
History  of  Joseph  the  Carpenter,  which  purports 
to  be  the  story,  told  by  Jesus  to  the  disciples  on 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  of  the  life  and  death  of  Joseph. 
It  is  a  genuinely  native  product  of  Egyptian  piety, 
not  earlier  than  the  4th  century.  At  several 
points  it  recalls  the  'Testament'  literature,  and 
probably  it  belongs  to  that  category  rather  than 
to  the  Gospel  category.  Sahidic,  Bohairic,  and 
Arabic  versions  (cf.  Haase,  pp.  61-66)  are  extant. 

(«)  Unidentified  fragments. — The  four  Sahidic 
fragments  upon  the  life  of  the  Viigin  Mary,  pub- 
lished by  Forbes  Robinson  {TS,  iv.  2  [1896], 
5.  2  flF. ),  maintain  her  virginity  after  the  Birth  of 
esus,  but  abjure  the  ideas  which  afterwards 
developed  into  the  dogmas  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception  ('  Cursed  is  he  who  shall  say  that  the 
Virgin  was  not  bom  as  we  are ')  and  the  Assump- 
tion ('Cursed  is  he  who  shall  say  that  the  Virgin 
was  taken  up  into  the  heavens  in  her  body.  But 
she  died  like  all  men,  and  was  conceived  by  man's 
seed  as  we  are').  The  outline  of  the  fragments 
generally  resembles  the  story  of  the  Protevangelium 
Jacobi  and  pseudo-Matthew,  with  some  curious 
idiosyncrasies.  Joachim  her  father  was  formerly 
called  Cleopas  (according  to  Codex  B  of  pseudo- 
Matthew  32,  Anna  married  Cleopas  after  the  death 
of  Joachim) ;  he  and  Zechariah  were  brothers,  and 
Anna  was  the  sister  of  Elizabeth  ;  a  white  dove 
(=Mary)  flies  to  Anna  in  a  vision  ;  Mary  in  the 
temple  'never  wa-shed  in  a  bath'  (a  favourite 
ascetic  feature  of  the  Egyptian  nuns),  nor  did  she 
use  perfumes ;  she  conceived  '  by  the  hearing  of 
her  ears,'  and  she  is  the  Mary  who  visits  the  tomb 
and  receives  the  commission  of  Mt  28^"  (cf.  Albertz 
in  SK  [1913]  483  f.,  on  this  point);  she  works 
miracles  of  healing  after  the  Resurrection,  but 
modestly  forbids  the  apostles  to  record  them ; 
when  she  dies,  her  soul  leaps  into  the  arms  of  her 
Son.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  if  these  fragments 
originally  belonged  to  a  Gospel  at  all.  Probably 
they  are  part  of  the  debris  of  the  Mary  litera- 
ture (cf.  Haase,  p.  77  f.)  which  developed  out  of 
the  legends  represented  by  Gospels  like  the  Prot- 
evangelium Jacobi,  where  the  main  interest  is 
really  in  Mary  rather  than  in  Jesus.  It  is  through 
the  channel  of  such  religious  fiction,  from  the 
Protevangelium  Jacobi  to  the  so-called  Transitus 
Mariae,  formed  in  part  by  local  legends  and  pagan 
views  on  the  relation  oetween  sex  and  religion, 
that  the  mythology  of  the  early  Church  flowed 
over  into  art  and  literature.     Painters  like  Titian 


and  Perugino,  poems  like  the  Byzantine  Christu* 
Pattens,  and  stories  like  the  Golden  Legend,  were 
as  indebted  to  this  source  as  the  calendar  of  the 
Roman  Church's  festivals.* 

II.  GrxERAL  Gospels,  covsrisg  the  extirb 
LIFE  ASD  MIS  1ST RY  OF  JESCS.—{a)  The  Jewish 
Christian  Gospels  (the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews, 
the  Gospel  of  the  Nazarenes,  the  Gospel  of  the 
Twelve,  the  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites). 

Special  Lttbratciie.— The  qaotations  from  and  the  Patriitic 
allusions  to  the  Gospel  accordui£r  to  the  Hebrews,  togetiier  with 
the  Gomel  of  the  Ebionites,  are  o(diected,  with  critical  8tadiM,t 
by  E.  W.  B.  Nicholson  {G<i*pA  aee,  to  Ute  Hebrewt,  t.««<v««j 
18791  Zahn  {Geich.  da  Kanona,  iL  642-7S3X  R-  Haadmaan 
(rcr  T.  $,  1888X  J.  H.  Ropes  (TU  xir.  2, 189«,  p.  77  tX  A.  Meyer 
(in  Hennecke's  NeuUtt,  Apok.\  and  A.  Schmidtke  ('Nene 
Fnwm.  a.  Untenachtmgm  ta  den  iadenduisU.  ETanxelien,' 
rtr  xxxviL  1,  1911) ;  cf.  also  Waltz's  important  atodj,  •  Das 
Evangelimn  der  rwolf  Apostel'  in  ZHTW Q3i2,  p.  338f.,  1913, 
pp.  38  f.,  UTf.).  In  the  light  of  Schmidtke's  and  Waits's  re- 
searches, it  is  no  loogor  poasifale  to  treat  the  Gond  aooordini; 
to  the  Hebrews  withoot  Handling  the  Gospel  <rf  uie  Naaarenes 
and  the  Gospel  of  the  Ebimiites,  since  the  qnotatkMis  nsoally 
assigned  to  the  first  are  disputed.  In  tilie  MlowiiK  section, 
therefore,  these  three  Gospels  will  be  disciused  tog^er. 

The  general  problem  may  be  stated  thus.  Four 
'Jewish  Chrisrian'  Gospels  are  mentioned  and 
quoted  in  the  literature  of  the  early  Church :  the 
Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  (HG),  the  Gospel  of  the 
Nazarenes  (SG),  the  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites  (EG), 
and  the  Gospel  of  the  Twelve,  i.e.  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  (TG).*  Were  there  really  four  Grospels  of 
this  kind?  Or  are  some  of  these  titles  no  more 
than  diflierent  descriptions  of  the  same  Gospel? 
This  is  a  problem  which  goes  back  to  the  5th 
century.  Jerome  apparently  held  HG=TG,  and 
this  equation  has  been  accepted  by  critics  like 
HUgenfeld,  Cassels  (Supemat.  Hel.,  1874-77,  pt.  iL 
ch.  iii),  Lipsins,  and  Resch,  with  varying  defini- 
tions of  its  age  and  content.  One  of  the  notable 
features  in  Schmidtke's  recent  monograph  is  that 
he  not  only  challenges  the  ordinary  equation  of 
HG  =  XG  in  recent  criticism,  but  reconstructs  an 
HG  which  absorbs  practically  all  the  material 
assigned  to  TG,  so  that  HG  becomes  equal  to  EG, 
as  Nicholson  had  already  argued.  The  usual 
identification  §  of  EG  =  TG  (Hilgenfeld,  Zahn, 
Hamack,  etc.)  is  combined  by  Waitz  with  a  re- 
fusal to  equate  HG  and  NG. 

Of  these  four,  TG  is  mentioned  much  less  often 
than  HG  ;  our  first  knowledge  of  it  is  of  a  Gospel 
bearing  this  title  (i.e.  with  the  twelve  apostles  as 
its  authors  or  authorities)  which  is  mentioned  by 
Origen  next  to  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians  (see 
above,  p.  479).  We  hear  of  NG  first  in  Jerome, 
and  for  EG  we  are  mainly  indebted  to  Epiphanius. 
But  we  do  not  know  to  what  extent  these  titles 
were  interchangeable,  and  whether  different  writers 
meant  the  same  work  when  they  mentioned  HG 
or  TG,  for  example.  The  most  hopeful  method  of 
arriving  at  some  solution  of  the  problem  is  to  ap- 
proach it  along  the  line  of  the  allusions  to  Jewish 
Christians  in  the  early  writers  of  the  Church. 

There  were  Jewish  Christians,  according  to 
Justin  {Dial.  88)  who  maintained  that  Jesus  was 
bom  in  the  ordinary  way.  Whether  all  the  Jewsh 
Christians  whom  Justin  knew  held  this  position, 

*  There  is  a  mouognfib  by  B.  Bdnsch  <m  Die  Pteudo-Swam 
gelien  von  Jetu  iind  Marias  Kindheit  in  der  romanitehen  vmd 
germaniiehen  Literatur,  Halle,  1ST9. 

t  The  varying  directions  of  criticism  are  traced  by  Handmann 
(cf.  MofEatt,'  lSt^,  Edinborgb,  1912,  ppt  2S9-261).  Of  the  eariier 
studies,  one  of  the  most  acate  is  in  cha.  viL-viiL  of  B.  Simon's  Hit- 
toire  critique  du  teate  du  Noueeau  TettamaU,  Rotterdam,  1680. 

t  A  later  Svriac  Qrarch-compilaUoo  with  this  title  has  been 
edited  by  J.  Bendel  Harris:  The  GotpAoftkeTwebteApotttet^ 
together  -with  the  Apoeairptet  of  each  one  ef  tJkem,  Oamlwidge. 
1900.  Wh^her  the  Coptic  fragments  edited  by  BeriDoat  (Pat- 
roiog.  Orient.,  u.  2.  Paro,  1903-05. 1)^.  1231)  bek>ng  to  this,  or  to 
some  allied  Qogpti  of  the  Twdve,  is  a  moot  point  (cf.  Baaae, 
p.  30LX  It  >1m  seems  doabtfol  whether  this  Syriac  TG  can 
be  shown  to  rest  oa  a  sooice  akin  to  the  EG  of  EfMphanias. 

S  OccasimiallyintheseosethatEGisDomorethananEbionitic 
copy  or  edition  of  the  anginal  catholic  HG. 


490      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


or  whether  it  was  only  some  of  them,  is  not  quite 
clear  ;  all  he  asserts  is  tiiat  the  majority  of  Chris- 
tians in  Iiis  day  preferred  to  believe  in  tlie  virgin- 
hirth.  The  real  dividing  line  among  Jewish 
Christians  was  drawn  by  their  view  of  the  Law 
(Dial.  47) ;  the  stricter  party  sought  to  enforce  the 
Law  upon  Gentile  Christians,  while  the  more 
tolerant  were  content  with  obeyinfj  it  themselves. 
It  was  over  this  question  of  practice,  not  over  a 
Christological  issue,  that  differences  arose.  With 
Irenaeus  the  situation  is  dillerent.  Writing  in 
the  West,  he  is  not  acquainted  with  the  varieties 
of  Jewish  Christians  in  Palestine  and  Syria ;  to 
him  they  are  all '  Ebionites,'  who  believe  Jesus  was 
the  son  of  Joseph,  reject  St.  Paul  as  an  apostate  from 
the  Law,  and  use  no  Gospel  but  that  of  Matthew 
{II(er.  i.  26.  2,  iii.  IL  7).  Origen  is  better  informed 
(Cels.  v.  61).  He  recognizes  the  two-fold  classifica- 
tion of  the  Ebionites  or  Jewish  Christians,  and  holds 
that  both  rejected  St.  Paul  (v.  65),  but  says  nothing 
about  any  special  Gospel  used  lay  those  who  re- 
jected the  virgin-birth.  The  difficulty  presented 
by  the  statement  of  Irenoeus  remains,  viz.  how 
could  any  party  in  the  Church  adhere  strictly  and 
specially  to  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  if  they  believed 
(iii.  21.  1)  in  the  natural  birth  of  Jesus?  Must 
they  not  have  omitted  all  or  part  of  the  first  two 
chapters  ?  Yet  Irenteus  seems  to  imply  that  they 
did  not  alter  or  abbreviate  Matthew's  Gospel,*  for 
he  contrasts  them  favourably  with  Marcion.  *  The 
Ebionites,  who  use  only  that  Gospel  which  is 
according  to  Matthew,  are  convicted  out  of  that 
Gospel  itself  of  holding  wrong  views  about  the 
Lord  ;  whereas  Marcion,  who  mutilates  the  Gospel 
according  to  Luke,  is  shown  by  the  parts  that  sur- 
vive in  his  edition  to  be  a  blasphemer  against  the 
only  living  God'  (iii.  11.  7;  cf.  iii.  21.  1).  The 
loose  statement    of    Irenaeus  is  corrected  or  ex- 

1)lained  by  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  {HE  iii.  27.  4) ; 
le  declares  that  the  Ebionite  Christians,  who  took 
so  low  and  '  poor '  a  view  of  Christ's  person  as  to 
believe  that  He  was  born  naturally,  and  who  re- 
jected St.  Paul  as  an  apostate  from  the  Law,  used 
the  so-called  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  and 
attached  little  value  to  the  other  Gospels.  But 
this  HG  was  not  the  special  possession  of  these 
Ebionite  Christians.  It  was  the  particular  delight 
of  Christian  Jews  (iii.  25.  5  :  <j3  ni'Kiara'Eppaluv  ol  rbv 
Xpurrbv  irapa8f^djj.€vot.  x^'-po^'^'-)-  More  than  that : 
the  last-named  passage  from  Eusebius  proves  that 
HG  was  ranked  by  the  Church  among  the  scrip- 
tures which  'though  not  within  the  canon  but  dis- 
puted are  nevertheless  recognized  by  the  majority 
of  the  orthodox  {napa  irXeiorots  tQp  iKK\i]<nacnKCiiv 
yiyvuffKOfi^vai).'  This  class  of  scriptures  includes 
the  Apocalypse  of  John  {el  (}>avd7],  Eusebius  puts 
in).  '  And  nowadays  (^Sij)  some  have  also  included 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews.'  By  '  some' 
Eusebius  plainly  means  orthodox  Christians,  as 
distinguished  from  the  Christian  Jews  whose  en- 
thusiasm for  this  Gospel  was  natural  and  taken 
for  granted.  He  implies  that  this  tendency  to 
disparage  the  Gospel  was  comparatively  recent. 

Here  we  begin  to  suspect  confusion.  What 
Eusebius  calls  the  Gospel  KaO'  'E^palovs  was  at  once 
the  sole  t  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites,  who  denied  the 
virgin-birth  as  well  as  the  authority  of  St.  Paul, 
and  the  favourite  Gospel  of  Christian  Jews.  It  was 
even  regarded  by  some  of  the  strictly  orthodox  as 
only  second  to  the  four  canonical  Gospels  and  dis- 

*  Their  Gospel  must  have  been,  apparently,  EG  ;  NG  contained 
Mt  1-2,  and  IIG  could  not  be  called  a  Matthieau  Gospel. 

t  At  the  same  time,  strict  Jewish  Christians  who  held  the  OT 
to  be  the  revealed  truth,  and  Christianity  a  consummation  of 
the  Jewish  religion,  would  not  necessarily  attach  the  same 
canonical  value  to  a  Gospel  as  other  Christians  (c(.  ITandn)nnn, 
p.  108  f.).  This  consideration  may  also  serve  to  account  (or  the 
targumistic  features  of  NG  and  the  freedom  with  which  the 
text  ia  treated  in  EG. 


tinctly  above  Gospels  like  those  of  Peter,  Thomas, 
and  Matthias ! 

The  suspicion  that  Kaff'E^paiovi*  was  being  used 
loosely  to  describe  more  than  one  Gospel  t  is  con- 
lirmed  by  two  other  lines  of  evidence. 

(l)The  first  of  these  runs  parallel  to  the  refer- 
ences already  quoted,  and  is  derived  from  the 
statements  of  Jerome.  It  is  to  Jerome  that  we 
owe  our  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  NG,  but  his 
statements  about  this  Gospel  and  the  Nazarenes  who 
used  it  require  to  be  carefully  sifted,  and  when  they 
are  sifted  they  witness  to  a  diti'erence  between  HG 
and  NG  which  Jerome  for  some  reason  ignored. 
At  first  sight,  almost  everything  would  seem  to 
turn  upon  the  interpretation  of  Jerome's  famous 
allusion  in  his  treatise  contra  Pelagianos,  iii.  2  :  •  In 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  written  in  the 
Chaldaic  and  Syriac  tongue  [i.  e.  Aramaic,  or  Western 
Syriac]:|:  but  in  Hebrew  letters,  which  the  Nazarenes 
use  to  this  day,  (the  Gospel)  according  to  the  apostles 
{secundum  apostolos)  or,  as  most  suppose,  according 
to  Matthew,  (the  Gospel)  which  is  m  the  library  at 
Caesarea,  the  story  runs,  "Behold  the  mother  of 
the  Lord  and  his  brothers  said  to  him,  John  the 
Baptist  is  baptizing  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  let  us 
<jo  and  be  baptized  by  him.  But  he  said  to  them. 
What  sins  have  1  committed,  that  I  should  go  and 
be  baptized  by  him  ?  Unless  perhaps  what  1  have 
just  said  is  (a  sin  of)  ignorance."  And  in  the  same 
volume,  "If  your  brother  has  sinned  in  word,  he 
says,  and  made  amends  to  you,  receive  him 
seven  times  in  one  day.  Simon  his  disciple  said  to 
him.  Seven  times  in  one  day  ?  The  Lord  answered 
and  said  to  him.  Yes  and  up  to  seventy  times  seven, 
I  tell  thee.  For  even  in  the  projjiiets,  after  they 
had  been  anointed  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  matter  of  sin 
was  found." '  The  opening  words  §  seem  to  suggest 
that  Jerome  identified  HG  and  TG  (  =  the  Gospel  of 
the  Ebionites),  but  he  is  simply  reproducing  at 
second  -  hand  the  conjecture  about  HG  and  the 
Gospel  of  the  Ebionites,  neither  of  which  he  seems 
to  have  known ;  as  the  only  Semitic  Gospel  he 
knew  was  NG,  he  naturally  attributes  to  it  the 
floating  titles  and  opinions  which  had  gathered 
round  the  others. 

This  is  corroborated  by  the  fact  that  he  sometimes 
uses  '  Nazaruei '  loosely  for  heretical  Jewish  Chris- 
tians (practically  =  the  'Ebionites'  of  earlier  writers), 
and  sometimes  speaks  of  them  in  special  connexion 
with  the  local  Church  at  Syrian  Bercea.  Now,  what- 
ever Gospel  or  Gospels  the  former  used,  and  whoever 
they  were,  it  is  plain  that  the  latter  class  of  Jerome's 
'  Nazaraji '  could  not  have  been  the  Ebionite  Chris- 
tians of  Irenaeus,  Origen,  and  Eusebius,  for,  accord- 
ing to  their  interpretation  of  Is  8^-9\  which 
Jeromequotes,  they  nonoured  St.  Paul  and  his  Gospel 
('per  evangelium  Pauli  ...  in  tenninos  gentium 
et  viam  universi  maris  Christi  evangelium  splen- 
duit').||     They   were    Jewish   Christians  of    non- 

*  The  size  of  the  IIG  known  to  Nicephorus  in  the  6th  cent, 
amounted  to  2,200  stichoi,  i.e.  larger  than  Mark  and  smaller  than 
Matthew— thoujfh  such  comparative  calculations  depend  on  the 
size  of  the  writing  being  the  same,  which  is  not  to  be  assumed 
invariably. 

t  This  was  felt  long  ago  by  Gieseler  (HisUnisch-kritisch  Vet' 
such  iiber  EntstehiiiKj  der  schriftl.  EeangHien,  1818,  p.  8  f.),  and 
elaborated  by  Credner  (Beitrdge,  1S32,  p.  399  f.),  who  almost  dis- 
tinguished EG,  HG,  and  NG  under  the  common  title  of  Ka$' 
'E/3paiov?.  How  easy  it  was  for  early  Christians  to  fall  into 
confusion  of  this  kind  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  in  some 
quarters  Tatian's  Diatessaron  was  actually  called  the  Gosi>el 
'  according  to  the  Hebrews*  (Epiph.  xlvi.  1). 

t  The  meaning  of, Jerome's  words  may  be  seen  by  comparing 
his  remarks  in  his  Preface  to  Sam.  and  Kitign  ( =  Prolog. Galeatus): 
'Syrorum  quoque  et  Chaldauorum  lingua  testatur,  qu»  Hebr*M 
magna  ex  parte  confinis  est.' 

§  Handmann  (p.  Ill  f.)  thinks  that  Jerome  wrote  '  secundum 
apostolos'  to  prevent  this  Gospel  from  bein^  confused  with  the 
heretical  Gospel  of  the  Twelve  ('evangelium  secundum  xii. 
apostolos').  .     ,    ,, 

il  Their  catholic  attitude  to  the  canonical  Scriptures,  including 
not  only  Matthew  but  Acts,  John,  and  even  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
is  excellently  deduced  by  Schmidtke  (p.  107  (.)  from  Jerome  s 


GOSPELS  (UNCANOXICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UXCAXOXICAL)      491 


heretical  opinions,  as  is  iniplietl  in  Jerome's  account 
in  de  Viris  UUi-stribus,  3: '  Matthew  who  is  also  Levi, 
the  apostle  who  had  been  a  tax-gatherer,  first  in 
Juda'a  composed  the  Gospel  of  Christ  in  Hebrew 
letters  and  words  for  the  benefit  of  those  belonging 
to  the  circumcision  who  had  believed.  It  is  not 
quite  certain  who  translated  it  afterwards  into 
Greek.  Further,  the  Hebrew  (orijrinal)  itself  is 
kept  to  this  day  in  the  library  at  Caesarea  which 
Paniphilus  the  martyr  gathered  most  diligently. 
I  was  also  given  permission  to  copy  it,  by  the 
Nazaroei  who  use  this  volume  in  Bercea,  a  town 
of  SjTia.' 

(2)  The  second  line  of  proof  which  suggests  that 
HG  and  NG  were  not  identical  is  as  follows.  In  his 
Epistle  to  the  Church  at  Smyrna  (iiL  1-2)  Ignatius 
writes :  '  I  know  and  believe  He  was  in  the  flesh 
even  after  the  resurrection.  And  when  He  came 
to  those  with  Peter,  He  said  to  them,  "  Take,  handle 
Me  and  see  that  I  am  not  a  bodiless  phantom.'" 
This  may  be  a  loose  paraphrase  of  the  Synoptic 
saying  in  Lk  24®,  but  the  early  Church  preferred 
to  regard  it  as  a  quotation  from  some  nn canonical 
Gospel.  Unfortunately,  the  three  writers  who 
mention  it  do  not  agree  upon  its  origin.  Origen 
(according  to  the  Latin  version  of  the  preface  to  his 
de  PrincCpiis)  said  it  came  from  a  little  book  called 
the  Teaching  of  Peter,  which  had  no  claim  to  be 
authentic  {'Ule  liber  inter  libros  ecclesiasticos  non 
habetur  .  .  .  neque  Petri  est  scripturanequealterius 
cuiusquam  qui  spiritu  dei  fuerit  inspiratus ').  This 
sounds  so  definite  that  we  are  surprised  to  learn 
that  Eusebius  (^i^  iii.  36.  11)  does  not  know  what 
source  Ignatius  used.  Jerome,  however,  twice 
asserts  that  it  was  the  Gospel  which  he  had  trans- 
lated. As  both  Origen  and  Eusebius  knew  HG, 
Jerome's  statement  must  be  an  error,  if  he  is  refer- 
ring to  HG.  But  it  is  very  difficult  to  suppose  that 
he  could  have  made  such  a  mistake  about  a  Gospel 
which  he  had  translated,  and  the  inference  must 
be  either  that  his  HG  was  a  diflerent  edition  from 
that  known  to  Origen  and  Eusebius,  or  more  pro- 
bably that  it  was  not  HG  but  NG.  This  latter 
hypothesis  explains  why  Eusebius  could  not  place 
the  quotation,  for  Eusebius  knew  HG  but  not  NG. 
There  is  no  reason  why  such  a  quotation  should  not 
have  occurred  both  in  NG  and  in  the  pseudo-Petrine 
document  mentioned  by  Origen.  It  is  of  course 
possible  that  one  of  them  borrowed  from  the 
other  ;  perhaps  Ignatius  used  the  Petrine  document 
(Zahn),  while  NG  used  Ignatius  or  that  document 
(Schmidtke).  But  the  last-named  hypothesis  im- 
plies that  Jerome  had  an  extremely  superficial  know- 
ledge of  NG,  and  this  is  on  other  grounds  unlikely. 
It  is  true  that  Jerome  required  an  expert  to  trans- 
late the  Chaldee  or  Aramaic  text  of  Tobit  into 
Hebrew,  that  he  might  render  it  into  Latin ;  and 
his  acquaintance  vrith  the  original  of  NG  must 
have  been  equally  second-hand.  But  this  does 
not  prove  that  he  could  not  have  known  its  contents 
with  sufficient  accuracy.  There  is  no  obvious 
reason  to  doubt  his  veracity,  or  to  hold  that  he  did 
not  know,  e.<^.,  that  this  or  that  quotation  occurred 
in  NG,  even  supposing  that  he  translated  the  latter 
as  rapidly  as  he  did  Tobit. 

references  in  his  Commentary  on  Isaiah.  But  we  do  not  see  why- 
it  follows  (pp.  125-126)  necessarily  that  their  Gospel  could  not 
have  inclua«l  the  nnhistorical  legend  about  the  appearance  of 
the  risen  Jesus  to  his  brother  James.  This  was  surelj  in  line 
withSt.  Paul'sowntradition(lCol57).  The  latter  no  doubt  puts 
the  appearance  to  James  fourth  instead  of  first  in  chronological 
order,  hut,  in  view  of  the  very  different  accounts  in  the  Gospels 
(particularly  Matthew  and  John),  we  can  hardly  lay  stress  upon 
the  prominence  assigrned  to  James  as  if  this  were  incompatible 
with  the  catholic  position  of  the  '  KazarsL'  After  all,  as 
Schmidtke  himself  admits,  they  were  keen  upon  circumcision 
and  the  Law  as  national  traditions.  .\s  MatUiew's  Gospel  had 
no  record  of  any  appearances  to  individual  disciples,  the  «-ay 
lay  open  for  a  harmless  legend  of  this  kind  in  honour  of  James 
the  Just.  If  St.  Paul  put  the  appearance  to  him  before  his  own 
vision,  why  should  not  the  '  Nazar^ei '  ? 


Schmidtke's  reconstruction  is  in  outline  as  follows.  At  an 
early  period  the  Church  at  Syrian  Bercea  broke  up— or,  at  any 
rate,  the  local  Jewish  Christians  soon  tonned  a  communit}-  of 
their  own,  apart  from  the  Gentile  Christian  Church.  It  was 
these  Jewish  Christians  who  were  the  real '  Nazarenes '  of  the 
early  Church.  Outside  Beroea  there  were  none.  \^'hen  Epi- 
phanius  calls  the  Naaarencs  a  sect  of  the  primitive  Church,  he 
IS  simply  confosing  them  with  the  Naiarenes  of  Ac  241-^^, 
where  St.  Paul  protests,  on  being  charged  with  betngaring-Ieader 
of  -nrt  riiv  NaJMpatMr  alpftrttt, '  I  cherish  the  same  bom  in  God 
as  they  (avrol  sftm)  accept.'  Here  svrot  oStm  meana  St.  Paul's 
Jewish accosen, bat Epiphanios  misto<A the worda  fora refer- 
ence to  the  Maarenea.  In  reality,  these  Nasurene  ChriMians 
of  Benea  preaerred  their  oooacioaaneaa  of  belonging  to  the 
Church  ;  they  accepted  the  rirgin-birth  of  Jeans  and  hononted 
St.  Paul  as  an  apostle  (see  above,  p.  490  n.X  tJKmgh  they  retained, 
like  some  of  the  Jewish  Christians  afterwards  known  to  Justin, 
a  number  of  Jewish  pecoliaritiea  of  custom  and  belief.  Their 
Goapel  was  an  Aramaic  version  (1S5-150  A.D.)  of  Matthew's 
Gospel,  which  was  a  sort  of  targnm ;  it  also  included  some 
touches  from  the  other  canonical  Gospels.  Now  it  waa  this 
document,  according  to  Sdunidtlce,  which  caused  all  the  sabee- 
quent  misonderstanidings  of  the  Chorch  about  the  Hebrew 
Gospel  which  formed  the  baas  of  the  canonical  Matthew.  This 
version  of  Matthew  was  soppoeed  to  have  been  the  original  of 
Matthew.  Papias  was  the  first  to  go  wroi^,  and  he  misled 
Eusebius  and  ApoDlnaiis,  as  weD  as  Ireiueas  and  Origen. 
Even  those  who  knew  Hebrew  and  Syriac  were  misled  uto 
calling  NG  a  Hebrew  document,  since  they  assnmed  it  was  the 
basis  of  the  canonical  Matthew  with  its  Jewish  Christian  ctMr- 
acteristics.  The  only  writer  who  had  a  first-handknowledge  of 
it  was  H^eoppos  (e.  jld.  180)l  Eusebius  second  a  copy  only 
when  he  wrote  the  Theophania ;  he  did  not  know  it  whoi  be 
composed  his  Church  History.  And  eren  when  he  did  read  it 
he  imagined,  thanks  to  Pajpias  and  others,  that  it  was  the 
Semitic  original  of  Matthew. 

The  copy  of  Eusebius  in  the  library  of  CVsarea  fell  into  the 
hands  of  Jerome.  But  Jerome,  like  Epiphanius,  for  the  most 
part  depended  not  on  this  Gospel  directly  but  on  the  information 
supplied  by  the  distingmshed  scholar,  ApoUinaris  of  lAodicea, 
who  had  edited  an  expoeiti(m  of  Matthew,  in  which  his  Hebrew 
scholarship  enaUed  him  to  quote  fragments  ol  this  Naaunean 
GospeL  That  dishonest  and  unreliable  writer,  Jerome,  had  no 
first-hand  acquaintance  with  the  Naiarenes,  of  whom  he  says 
so  ma<^    He  was  the  Defoe  of  his  age. 

Hegeaippus,  aa  Eusebius  points  out,  used  both  KG  and  HG. 
The  latter  *  was  an  independent  Greek  work,  equivalent  to  TG 
whereas  NG  was  neither  an  independent  work  nor  a  Greek 
oomposiUon,  but  a  Syriac  document  reproducing  Matthew's 
Gospel  in  the  main.  The  mistaken  identification  of  HG  and 
KG  was  Jerome's  &iult.  He  ima^ned  that  this  Gospel  of  the 
Kazarenes  which  he  saw  in  the  episcopal  library  of  Caasarea  was 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  and  Schmidtke  bluntly 
declares  that  his  story  about  translating  it  (c  a.i>.  390)  is  a 
fabrication,  t 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  discuss  the  details  of 
Schmidtke's  brilliant  and  searching  investigation. 
His  strictures  on  Jerome  (pp.  66-69)  are  too  sweep- 
ing ;  his  conjecture  about  the  relation  between 
ApoUinaris  and  the  extracts  from  the  Nazarene 
(jrospel  is  hardly  more  than  ingenious ;  and  his 
tendency  to  attribute  misunderstanding  to  early 
Christian  writers,  although  it  is  in  the  main  justi- 
fiable, carries  him  into  some  extreme  positions. 
But  his  analysis  of  the  extant  data  has  suc- 
ceeded in  showing  afresh  J  the  strong  case  for 
regarding  HG  and  NG  as  diflerent  works.  So  much 
at  any  rate  may  be  granted.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  identification  of  HG  and  EG  breaks  down ; 
Waitz  is  probably  right  in  regarding  EG  as  an  in- 
dependent work.  The  difl'erentiation  of  HG,  NG, 
and  EG  is  a  precarious  task,  however,  and  in  the 
present  state  of  our  knowledge  no  reconstruction 
can  claim  to  be  more  than  conjectural.  The  proba- 
bility is  that  there  were  several  Jewish  Christian 
Gospels  approximating  more  or  less  closely  to  the 
type  of  Matthew.    Jewish  Christians  who  claimed 

*  EG  (see  below)  was  aiao  a  Greek  composition,  but,  unlike 
HG  and  like  KG,  it  was  allied  to  Matthew,  though  not  so 
closely  as  KG. 

t  Bede,  in  the  beginning  of  the  8th  cent.,  made  the 
fact  of  Jerome  having  quoted  and  translated  the  Hebrew 
Gospel  the  reason  for  holding  that  the  latter  was  to  be  ranked 
'  not  among  apocrvphal  but  among  ecclesiastical  histories'  (in 
Luc  LIX 

I  The  loose  usage  of  co^  'Eftmuivs  as  a  Goqiel  title  was 
seal  by  several  earlier  writers  brides  those  already  mentioned 
(p.  490).  Holtzmann,  e.g.  (EinleUung  in  da»A'eve  Tettamenfi, 
189S,  p.  4S7f.X  suggested  that  it  was  applied  to  a  whole  series 
of  more  or  less  cognate  Greek  and  Aramaic  compositiona. 
lipsius  preferred  to  regard  HG  as  assuming  different  shapes  in 
different  circles  and  at  different  times.  This  is  almost  inevit- 
able, when  HG  and  TG  are  identified. 


492      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


to  be  the  true  '  Hebrews,'  and  who  saw  in  Christi- 
anity tiie  completed  form  of  Hel)rew  relij^ion, 
could  well,  as  Waitz  observes,  call  their  (iospel  a 
'  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,'  even  although 
it  was  written  in  Greek,  Thei'e  were  varieties  of 
such  Jewish  Christians,  from  the  orthodox  '  Naza- 
rfei'  to  the  extreme  wing  of  the  Ebionite  Chris- 
tians, and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  more 
than  one  Gospel  was  composed  and  circulated  by 
them.  If  one  of  these  was  an  Aramaic  version  of 
Matthew,  it  would  be  particularly  easy  for  later 
writers  to  use  KaO"E^palovi  \oose\y  ns  a  linguistic 
title,  and  thus  to  imagine  that  HG  meant  either  a 
Hebrew  (iosnel  or  the  supposed  original  of  Matthew. 
One  of  the  obstacles  in  aealing  Avith  the  entire  pro- 
blem of  the  Jewish  Christian  Gospels  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  some  early  Christian  writers  and  fathers 
often  mention  books  which  they  seem  never  to 
have  seen,  and  that  their  references  to  the  Gospel 
books  of  the  Jewish  Christians  are  too  loose 
and  vague  to  be  taken  at  their  face-value.  This 
applies  particularly  to  Epiphanius  and  Jerome, 
when  the  latter,  for  example  (de  Vir.  illustr.  2), 
introduces  the  quotation  about  the  Lord's  post- 
Resurrection  appearance  to  His  brother  James,  by 
declaring  that  it  occurred  in  '  the  Gospel  called 
"according  to  the  Hebrews,"  which  1  recently 
translated  into  Greek  and  Latin,  and  which  Origen 
often  uses,'  he  is  surely  confusing  HG  and  NG. 
He  is  anxious  to  prove  the  importance  of  NG ; 
that  is  why  he  says  it  was  often  cited  by  Origen.* 
But  what  Origen  cited  was  HG.  There  is  an  error 
of  memory  here,  at  any  rate.  So  with  Epiphanius. 
He  explains  (Hmr.  xxix.  7,  9)  that  the  Nazoraeans — 
Jewish  Christians  who  practised  Jewish  habits  of 
life,  and  who  had  their  headquarters  at  Syrian 
Beroea — possessed  and  used  the  Gospel  of  Matthew 
in  Hebrew ;  he  declares  that  their  edition  was 
unmutilated  (wX-qpicFTaTov),  but  does  not  know  if  it 
contained  the  genealogy  from  Abraham  to  Christ. 
This  is  to  distinguish  the  Nazoraeans  from  sectarian 
Christians  like  the  Cerinthians,  who  (Hmr.  xxviii.  5, 
XXX.  14)  used  a  mutilated  Matthew,  leaving  out 
passages  like  1'""  lO'^'  and  26'^.  Obviously,  his 
remarks  are  contradictory.  If  he  knew  that  the 
Gospel  used  by  these  Nazoraeans  Avas  unmutilated, 
he  must  have  known  whether  it  contained  Mt  1'"^^ 
or  not.  He  is  speaking  about  this  NG  either 
from  hearsay  or  from  a  hasty  perusal  of  Irenaeus, 
and,  with  a  carelessness  which  is  characteristic  of 
him,  at  several  points  confuses  it  with  EG. 

The  rival  theories  thus  are:  (i.)  HG  and  NG 
either  identical  or  different  editions  of  the  same 
work  ;  (ii. )  HG  and  NG  different  works  entirely. 
The  latter  seems  preferable,  but  in  any  case  it  is 
essential  to  have  the  extant  data  before  us. 

(a)  In  tlie  first  place  (cf.  Schmidtke,  pp.  1-31, 
63  f.),  we  possess  a  number  of  marginal  scholia  on 
Matthew  from  a  group  of  minuscule  MSS  Avhich, 
partly  on  the  basis  of  von  Sodeii's  researches  and 
discoveries,  Schmidtke  regards  as  witnessing  to  a 
special  type  of  text  or  a  special  edition  of  the 
Gospels  dating  not  later  than  A.D.  500.  These 
scholia  are  held  to  be  exegetical  notes,  probably 
drawn  from  the  Commentary  on  Matthew  whicii 
ApoUinaris  of  Laodicea  wrote,  prior  to  Jerome. 
They  profess  to  quote  the  readings  of  rb  'lovSaCK6v 
(sc.  evayyiXiov  Kark  '^iardatov).  Perhaps  the  discredit 
into  which  the  supposed  Aramaic  (original)  Matthew 
was  falling,  on  account  of  its  use  by  heretical 
sects,  led  to  the  pious  preservation  of  these  brief 
extracts  on  the  margin  of  Church  copies.  There 
is  a  good  deal  of  speculation  in  the  eye  of  this 
hypothesis.  The  scholia,  however,  are  unmis- 
takable. 

*  According  to  Schmidtke  (p.  134  f.),  Jerome  betrays  here  the 
fact  that  he  copied  this  story  from  Origen ;  but  this  is  not  a 
necessary  inference  (cf.  p.  490  n.}. 


In  Mt  4*  the  '  Jewish '  Gospel  read  iv  'XtpovcraXrui.  for  c t?  •riji' 
ayCa.v  voKiv,  in  S'-"-*  it  omitted  «i«ti7  and  in  (J'^_  the  doxology  to 
llie  Ijord's  prayer ;  at  7*  it  read  :*  '  If  ^'ou  are  in  my  t>oHoin  and 
do  not  the  will  of  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven,  I  will  cast  you 
out  of  my  bosom ';  in  10'*  it  read  turip  o<^(t«  for  &Jt  oi  oi^cit,  in 
1112  Jtopirafexai  for  ^ia^«Toi,  in  11-*  ciivopKTTtt)  for  <f OfxoAo-yoi/fiat  ; 
in  12'*"  it  omitted  tlie  second  '  three  days  and  three  nights' ;  in 
15'  it  read  xopfiav  o  v^ei?  ixiieKrfirfiTtiiSt  i{  rj^xuc ;  it  omitted 
l(j2b.3  and  read  '  son  of  John  '  for  Bar-Jonah  in  ISi?  ;  in  IH'-^  after 
'  seventy  times  seven  '  it  read  :  KaX  yap  ivroii  jrpo<^^Totv  fitra  to 
XpurOrivai  avrovt  iv  irvrvfiaTi,  ayCijt  tvpioKno  iv  avroli  Koyoi 
afxaprCai  ;  in  26''*  it  read  ;  koI  ripvriaaTO  (cat  ufiocrtv  /toi  Kart)pa.<TaTO  ; 
and  in  27"*  it  had  :  koi  vapeSioxtv  aurot?  avSpa^  ivonXov^  iVo 
Kadts^iivTat.  Kar    ivavriov  toO  (rmjAac'ou  Kol  Trip<o<Tiv  avrhv  rifiipai 

Kol  WKTOi. 

(b)  The  extant  quotations  may  best  be  classified 
according  to  the  source  : 

Clkment  op  Alexandria  cites  HG  twice — 

Strom,  ii.  9.  45  :  'as  it  is  written  also  in  the  Gospel  according 
to  the  Hebrews,  "  He  who  wonders  shall  reign,  and  he  who 
reigns  shall  rest." ' 

atrom.  V.  14.  96 :  '  He  who  seeks  shall  not  rest  until  he  finds  ; 
when  he  has  found,  he  shall  wonder,  and  wondering  he  shall 
reign,  and  reigning  he  shall  rest.' 

Obioen  (in  Joh.  ii.  6)  quotes  a  saying  of  the  Saviour  from 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  as  follows :  '  My 
mother,  the  Holy  Spirit,  took  me  just  now  by  one  of  my  hairs  t 
and  carried  me  off  to  the  great  mountain  Tabor.'  He  repeats 
the  quotation  in  his  Homilies  on  Jeremiah  (xv.  4).  It  is  evi- 
dently from  a  description  of  the  Temptation,  where  Jesus  had 
not  His  disciples  beside  Him,  as  He  had  at  the  Transfiguration. 
Origen  quotes  the  passage  in  order  to  prove  that  the  Word 
came  into  being  through  the  Spirit ;  he  adds  that  if  one  reads 
Mt  1250  one  cannot  have  any  difficulty  about  understanding 
how  the  Spirit  could  be  called  the  mother  of  Christ.  In  the 
Gospel,  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  the  Spirit  (  =  Wisdom  ;  cf.  Wis  I-"-  9", 
Lk  7a-«-38) 

The  Latin  version  of  his  CJommentary  on  Matthew  (W^^-)  has 
the  following  passage :  '  it  is  written  in  a  Gospel  called  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  (if  anyone  cares  to  receive  this 
not  as  an  authority  but  in  illustration  of  the  question  before 
U8),t  "the  other  §  rich  man  said  to  him,  Master,  what  good 
thing  shall  I  do  to  live  ?  He  said  to  him,  Man,  do  the  Law  and 
the  prophets.  He  answered  him,  I  have  done  them.  He  said 
to  him,  Go,  sell  all  you  possess  and  divide  it  among  the  poor, 
and  come,  follow  me.  But  the  rich  man  began  to  scratch  his 
head,  and  was  not  pleased.  And  the  Lord  said  to  him,  How  do 
you  say,  I  have  done  the  Law  and  the  prophets?  For  it  is 
written  in  the  Law,  You  shall  love  your  neighbour  as  yourself. 
And  lo,  there  are  many  brothers  of  yours,  sons  of  Abraham, 
clothed  in  filth,  dying  of  hunger,  while  your  house  is  full  of 
many  goods,  and  nothing  at  all  goes  out  of  it  to  them.  And 
turning  he  said  to  Simon  his  disciple,  who  was  sitting  beside 
him,  Simon,  son  of  John,  it  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  enter  by  the 
eye  of  a  needle  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."' 

This  popular  version  of  the  story  recounted  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  tallies  partly  with  Mt.  and  partly  with  Lk. ;  if  it 
represents  a  conversation  at  some  rich  man's  table  (.Meyer),  this 
is  a  Lucan  affinity,  for  in  Lk.  (18i«),  as  distinguished  from 
Mt.  and  Mk.,  the  incident  is  not  described  as  an  open-air 
episode. 

EusBBius  declares  that  the  story  of  the  woman  accused  of 
manv  sins  before  the  Lord,  which  I'apias  quotes,  was  contained 
in  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  (UK  iii.  39.  16).  In 
Theophan.  Syr.  iv.  12 (ed.  Gressmann,  1904,  p.  183f.) :  II  'the  reason 
of  the  divisions  between  souls  that  take  place  in  households 
[Mt  10  34-3,')]  He  taught — as  we  have  found  in  one  place  in  the 
Gospel  which  exists  in  Hebrew  among  the  Jews,  where  it  is 
said,  "I  (will)  choose  for  myself  the  excellent  [or,  worthy] 
whom  my  Father  in  heaven  gave  to  me."  '  On  the  authority  of 
Mai,  another  quotation  from  this  Gospel  has  been  usually 
referred  to  the  Theophania,  viz. :  'Since  the  Gospel  which  has 
reached  us  in  Hebrew  characters  pronounces  the  threat  not 
against  the  man  who  hid  the  money  but  against  him  who  lived 
riotously— "  for  he  had  If  three  servants,  one  who  spent  the 
master's  substance  with  harlots  and  flute-girls,**  one  who 
multiplied  it,  and  one  who  concealed  the  talent ;  the  one 
was  accepted,  the  other  was  merely  blamed,  and  the  tliird  was 
shut  up  in  prison" — I  judge  that,  according  to  Matthew,  the 
threat  immediately  following  the  conclusion  of  the  wortl  spoken 


•  Cf.  below,  p.  495. 

t  From  the  Jewish  story  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon  (v.W), 
where  an  angel  lifts  Habakkuk  by  the  hair  of  his  head  and 
transports  him  to  Babylon  (cf.  Ac  8»9).  In  the  Christian 
Haggada,  the  hairs  become  a  single  hair,  which  reminds  us  of 
Ezk  83. 

X  Origen  hesitates  to  quote  this  Gospel  as  Scripture,  not 
because  it  is  heretical,  but  because  the  canon  of  the  four  Gospels 
was  now  dominant — as  it  had  not  been  when  Clement  wrote. 

§  So  there  were  two :  for  Matthew 's  duplications,  cf.  S*  20*. 

II  On  this  passage,  cf.  J.  A.  Robinson  in  Expositor,  5th  ser., 
V.  [1897]  194  f. 

II  Or, '  it  contained '  (n(pi.tl\evy—\n  which  case  we  have  only  • 
cummary,  not  a  verbal  quotation. 

*•  This  phrase  recurs  in  an  Oxyrhynchite  fragment  (see 
p.  499> 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANOXICAL)      493 


against  him  who  did  nothing  does  not  apply  to  him,  but  was 
spoken  by  way  of  epanalepsis  with  reference  to  the  man 
formerly  mentioned,  who  had  eaten  and  drunk  with  drunkards.' 
But  Gressmann  shows  that  this  passage  does  not  belong  to  the 
Thtophania  (cf.  his  ed.  §29);  it  belongs  either  to  some  other 
author  altogether  or  to  some  other  treatise  of  Eusebius  (,T(I 
XXX.  3  [19061  363).  The  version  of  the  parable  given  in  this  ex- 
tract witnesses  to  the  dissatisfaction  which  was  felt  at  an  early 
date  with  what  seemed  to  be  the  severe  verdict  of  Mt  2o*9-30. 

In  addition  to  corroborating  the  reading  of  the  'Jewish* 
Gospel  in  Mt  4*  1617  and  26^*,  and  repeating  (on  Mic  T^)  Ongen's 
argument  from  and  citation  of  the  Tabor  saying,  Jkromk  affirms 
that  in  Mt  i*  it  *  read  '  Judah '  not  '  Jadsa ' ;  in  the  narrative 
of  the  Baptism  it  contained  the  following  conversation  :  'Behold 
the  mother  of  the  Lord  and  his  brothers  said  to  him,  "John 
the  Baptist  is  baptizing  for  the  remission  of  sins  ;  let  us  gro  and 
be  baptized  by  him."  But  he  said  to  them,  "What  sin  have  I 
committed  that  I  should  go  and  be  baptized  by  him  ?  Unless 
perhaps  what  I  have  just  said  is  (a  sin  of)  ignorance  "' — and  the 
following  incident :  '  But  it  came  to  pass  when  the  Lord  had 
ascended  from  the  water  that  the  entire  fountain  t  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  descended  and  rested  on  him,  and  said  to  him,  "  Mj' 
son,  in  all  the  prophets  I  looked  for  thee,  that  thou  mightest 
come  and  I  might  rest  in  thee,  t  For  thou  art  my  rest,  thou 
art  my  firstborn  son,  who  reignest  to  eternity  " ' ;  in  Mt  6ii  it 
read  mahar,  i.e.  (bread)  for  to-morrow ;  at  Mt  1210  it  inserted, 
'  I  was  a  stone-mason,  seeking  a  livelihood  by  my  hands  ;  I  pray 
you,  Jesus,  to  restore  my  health,  lest  I  beg  food  with  shame ' ; 
it  also  read  (at  the  passage  corresponding  to  Mt  IS-'—  ?),  ' "  If 
your  brother  has  sinned  in  word  and  made  amends  to  you, 
receive  him  seven  times  in  one  day."  Simon,  his  disciple,  said  to 
him,  "  Seven  times  in  a  day  ?  "  The  Lord  answered  and  said  to 
him,  "Yes,  I  tell  yon,  and  up  to  seventy  times  seven  !  for  even  in 
the  prophets,!  after  they  had  been  anointed  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  matter  of  sin  was  found  " '  (cf.  above,  p.  490) ;  in  Mt  219  jt 
read : '  Osanna  barrama '  (i.e.  Hosanna  in  the  heights) ;  instead  of 
'  son  of  Barachiah '  I  it  read  '  son  of  Jehoiada '  at  Mt  23^  ;  at  Mt 
27*1  it  read,  'the  lintel  of  the  temple,  which  was  of  enormous 
size,  broke  and  fell  in  pieces ' ;  and  it  contained  (in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Mt  5—  or  ISis-i")  a  saying  of  Jesus  to  His  disciples, 
'Xever  be  glad  except  when  you  look  with  love  at  your 
brother.' 

These  Jerome  quotations  show  a  (Sospel  in  which  Jesus  is 
called  '  Jesus '  as  well  as  '  the  Lord '  (only  the  latter  in  the 
Gospel  of  Peter),  where  the  narrative  of  the  Baptism  has  an 
apologetic  purpose  as  Matthew's  has  (31-*''-) — although  the  two 
differ — but  which  was  characterized  by  naive,  popular  traits 
rather  than  by  any  theological  tendencies.  It  must  have  ad- 
hered to  the  general  order  and  even  material  of  Matthew ; 
otherwise,  as  in  the  case  of  the  scholia,  it  would  have  been  out 
of  place  to  chronicle  slight  variations  of  text. 

It  is  more  easy  to  feel  that  HG  and  NG  were 
different  than  to  assign  these  fragments  to  one  oi" 
the  other.  This  is  the  precarious  side  of  the  hypo- 
thesis advocated  by  Schmidt  ke  and  Waitz  afresh. 
However,  to  HG  we  may  assign  the  quotations  of 
Clement  and  Origen,  to  NG  those  of  Jerome  and 
the  Jerusalem  scholia.  But  naturally  there  must 
have  been  some  material  common  to  both  (Jospels, 
and  we  have  evidence  of  this  in  the  fact  that  both 
Origen  and  Jerome  witness  apparently  to  the  in- 
terpretation of  Barabbas  as  '  son  of  (their)  teacher' 
and  to  the  Tabor  saying  IT  about  the  Spirit  as 
mother.  How  far,  if  at  aU,  the  scholia  of  the 
'  Jewish '  Gospel  att«st  the  text  of  HG  as  well  as 
of  NG  it  is  impossible  to  say.  The  daemon-saying 
quoted  by  Ignatius  came  from  NG,  if  it  came  from 
either  of  these  Gospels.  Probably,  though  not 
certainly  (see  note  on  p.  490),  the  following  passage 
belonged  to  HG :  '  But  when  the  Lord  had  given 
the  linen  cloth  to  the  servant  of  the  high  priest,  he 

•  '  Sicnt  in  ipso  Hebraico  l^mus.'  This  might  mean  '  in  the 
original  Hebrew  of  the  OT,'  but  the  analogy  of  the  other  refer- 
ences favours  the  meaning  of  'in  the  Hebrew  Gospel.' 

t  For  Jerome's  argument  (on  Is  11-),  the  emphasis  falls  upon 
the  word  '  entire.'  The  spirit  of  wisdom  is  '  poured  out  like 
water'  on  the  Elect  One  in  En.  xlix.  If.  (cf.  LXX  of  Is  llif). 
Spitta  (ZA'TW,  1904,  p.  316 f.) suggests  that /<m«  represents^ 
icoAvfi^ii^pa  (ira»-Tos  Tov  irvtv/ioTos  oyi'ov)  in  the  original,  and  that 
KoAvfijSij^pa  may  have  been  confused  with  koAvm/^  (eolumba}— 
which  would  explain  the  remarkable  absence  of  the  dove  here. 

t  Cf.£n.  xlii.  1-3. 

I  The  second  allusion  in  these  citations  to  the  OT  prophets. 

H  In  a  Coptic  fragment  of  some  late  Egj-ptian  (Gospel?) 
treatise,  Jesus  denounces  the  Jews  before  Pilate  for  killing  the 
prophets  down  to  '  Zeehariah  the  son  of  Barachiah  and  John 
his  son  '  (Patrol.  Orient,  ii.  165) — identifying  the  Zeehariah  of 
the  canonical  Matthew  with  the  other  (cf.  above,  p.  4So). 

^  As  we  can  see  from  the  Baptism-story  in  XG  (see  above, 
p.  490),  no  difficulty  was  felt  about  calling  Jesus  the  Son  of  the 
Spirit  and  mentioning  His  human  mother,  any  more  than  in  the 
S)-noptic  tradition  about  mentioning  His  father  Joseph  and  His 
Heavenly  Father. 


went  to  James  and  appeared  to  him ;  for  James 
had  sworn  he  would  not  eat  bread  from  the  hour 
when  tlie  Lord  had  drunk  the  cup  until  he  saw 
him  rise  from  those  who  sleep.  .  .  .  "Bring  a  table 
and  bread,"  the  Lord  says.  He  took  bread  and 
blessed  it  and  broke  it  and  gave  it  to  James  the 
Just,  and  said  to  him,  "  My  brother,  eat  yotir  bread, 
for  the  Son  of  Man*  has  risen  from  those  who 
sleep  " '  (quoted  by  Jerome).  The  Eusebius  quota- 
tions are  doubtful ;  the  Theophania  citations  point 
to  NG,  but  whether  the  story  of  the  accused  woman 
corresponds  to  that  of  Lk  1^^  or  to  that  of  Jn  7"- 
8^",  the  probability  is  that  Eusebius  means  to  say 
that  it  occurred  in  HG — a  fresh  indication  that  HG 
was  not,  like  NG,  a  sort  of  'Matthivan'  composi- 
tion or  version.  We  do  not  know  if  HG  had  any 
Birth-story  ;  t  perhaj)s  it  resembled  Mark  or  John 
in  this  respect.  And  its  contents  seem  to  have  been 
different  from  the  exact  Synoptic  or  Johanninetype. 
Both  HG  and  NG  were  Known  to  Hegesippus, 
who  brought  forward  material  from  both,  as 
Eusebius  informs  us :  ex  re  rod  jca0"Ej3p<uoi;s  evayyeXiou 
Koi  TOV  ^vpiaKov  Kal  ISion  ix  t^  'EjSpatSos  SiaXiinrov  riyd. 
ridriffiv  (iv.  22.  8 ;  cf.  iii.  25.  5).  Unless  we  regard 
the  Kol  between  ewi77eXt'oi'  and  tov  as  an  error  or 
interpolation  (Nicholson,  Handmann),  the  inference 
from  this  passage  is  that  '  the  Syriac  (Gospel) '  was 
used  by  this  Jewish-Christian  writer  as  well  as 
the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews.*  Furthermore,  since 
NG  was  probably  used  by  Ignatius  (cf.  p.  491),  it 
may  be  placed  not  later  than  the  end  of  the 
1st  cent.,  subsequent  to  the  composition  of 
Matthew's  Gospel.  It  was  the  special  Gospel  of 
the  Jewish  Christians  at  Beroea,  originally ;  it  was 
not  marked  by  anti-Catholic  tendencies,  §  but  owing 
to  its  language  it  never  attained  the  popularity  and 
circulation  of  HG.  The  latter  was  not  a  translation 
but  a  Greek  Gospel.  It  received  the  name  of  Kad' 
'E^palovi  or  'Hebrew  Gospel'  from  Christians  who 
were  not  Jews;  the  title  no  more  meant  that  it 
was  written  in  Hebrew  than  the  Gospel  according 
to  the  Egyptians  meant  a  Gospel  written  in  Coptic. 
It  was  the  readers,  not  the  language,  that  suggested 
the  sobriquet,  in  this  case.  Again,  unlike  KG  or 
even  EG,  it  had  not  Matthew's  Gospel  as  its  basis 
or  prototype.  Clement  and  Origen  never  quote  it 
or  refer  to  it  as  a  work  allied  to  Matthew.  So  far 
as  we  can  judge  from  the  few  allusions  and  cita- 
tions that  may  be  accepted  as  belonging  to  it,  the 
contents  of  HG  must  have  been  stamped  with 
characteristics  which  differentiated  it  from  the 
canonical  Gospels  and  yet  commended  it  for  a  time 
to  others  than  Jewish  Christians  both  in  Palestine 
and  Syria  (probably  its  original  home)  and  Egypt. 
But  we  do  not  possess  any  means  of  determining 
its  date  with  certainty ;  whether  it  was  contem- 
porary with  NG  or  written  early  in  the  2nd  cent., 
remains  an  open  question.  Later;;  than  NG  at 
any  rate,  and  further  from  orthodox  teaching  than 
either  NG  or  HG,  was  EG,  which  seems  to  imply  a 

*  This  is  one  note  of  primitive  oripn  or  ooloor ;  the  title '  Son 
of  Man '  is  extremely  rare  outside  the  Grospels,  and  later  writers 
of  uncanonical  Gospels  never  copied  it. 

t  Hegesippus  did  say  that  Domitian  dreaded  the  second  ap- 
pearance of  Christ  as  Herod  dreaded  the  first  (Eus.  HE  iii.  20. 
2),  but  it  does  not  follow  that  he  owed  to  HG  this  reference  to 
Herod.  Oral  tradition  (as  Handmann  sogg^ests)  m%ht  accoont 
for  it. 

I  Waits  (ZSTW,  1913,  p.  121)  thinks  it  was  EG  that  Hegeappos 
used,  not  HG ;  but  his  reasons  are  unconvincing.  There  is  no 
ground  for  supposing  that  HG  was  confined  to  Eferpt,  and  none 
for  assuming  that  James  was  a  vegetarian  (see  belowX  whose 
principles  would  be  shared  by  the  Jenpiah  Ouistiana— and  ex- 
pressed in  their  (Jospel  (i.e.  EG). 

§  It  is  still  a  question  how  far  the  text  and  traditions  of  NG 
represent  earlier  forms  than  those  of  the  Synoptic  narrative. 

$  But  if  EG  is  used  in  the  pseudo-Oementine  cnptryfu'^" 
neVpou,  and  if  the  latter  were  written  by  the  middle  of  the 
2nd  cent.,  as  Waitz  shows  good  reason  for  maintaining  (cf. 
ZSTW,  1913,  p.  49 f.),  our  Gospel  may  be  put  in  the  first  hall 
or  even  quarter  of  the  2nd  century.  This  is  corroborated  by 
Irensus  (ct  above,  p.  490),  if  his  EbioniUc  Chiisuaas  used  £G. 


494      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


knowledge  of  Luke  as  well  as  of  Matthew,  although 
it  is  Matthaean,  as  HG  does  not  appear  to  have  been. 
This  early  2nd  cent,  production  is  known  to  us 
from  the  quotations  made  by  Epiphanius,  which 
enable  the  following  outline  to  be  drawn  : 

{b)  The  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites. — According  to 
Epiphanius  {Ihvr.  xxx.  3),  tlie  Ebionites  accepted 
no  Gospel  except  that  of  Mattliew.  '  This  alone 
they  use,  like  the  adherents  of  Cerintiius  and 
Merinthus  ;  they  call  it  "  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Hebrews" — a  correct  description,  since  it  was 
Matthew  alone  in  the  New  Testament  who  com- 
posed the  narrative  and  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in 
Hebrew  and  Hebrew  characters.'  It  is  true,  he 
adds— and  he  repeats  this  in  xxx.  6 — that  Hebrew 
translations  of  John's  Gospel  and  of  Acts  were  said 
to  be  kept  in  the  Genizali  at  Tiberias,  which  had 
proved  useful  in  the  conversion  of  Jews,  liut 
Matthew's  Gospel  was  tlie  only  one  originally 
written  in  Hebrew.  This  idea  of  a  Hebrew 
Matthew  obsesses  Epiplianius  among  other  early 
Cliristian  writers;  it  is  needless*  to  spend  words 
upon  his  explanation  of  Kad"EppaLovs  as  suitable  to 
the  original  language  of  Matthew.  What  is  more 
important  for  our  present  purpose  is  to  notice  how 
he  proceeds  to  explain  that  this  Gospel  used  by  the 
Ebionites  was  not  the  canonical  Matthew,  however, 
but  a  mutilated  and  revised  edition  (xxx.  13).  It 
began  at  3'.  (1)  '  The  beginning  of  their  Gospel  is  : 
"It  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Herod  king  of 
JudiBa  that  John  came  baptizing  with  a  baptism 
of  repentance  in  the  Jordan  river  ;  he  was  said  to 
be  of  the  race  of  Aaron  the  priest,  the  son  of 
Zechariah  and  Elizabeth.  And  all  went  out  to 
him." '  The  story  of  the  Birth  and  the  genealogy 
were  therefore  absent  from  this  Gospel.  '  Cutting 
ofl"  the  genealogies  in  Matthew,  tliey  make  a 
beginning,  as  I  have  already  said,  in  this  way  :  "It 
came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Herod,  king  of  Juda5a, 
under  the  high  priest  Caiaphas,  that  a  certain  man 
named  John  came,  baptizing  with  a  baptism  of 
repentance  in  the  Jordan  river"'  (xxx.  14).  This 
suggests  that  the  author  had  Lk  3'  in  mind,  but 
in  the  following  extract  (2),  by  making  the 
Pharisees  accept  John's  baptism,  lie  dilfers  from 
the  Lucan  tradition  (Lk  3"-  7=^-=*"):  'John  came 
baptizuig,  and  the  Pharisees  went  out  to  him  and 
were  baptized,  and  all  Jerusalem.  And  John  had 
raiment  of  camel's  hair  and  a  "irdle  of  skin  round 
his  loins  ;  and  his  food  (says  tlie  Gosjjel)  was  wild 
honey,  t  the  taste  of  which  was  the  taste  of  manna, 
like  a  honey-cake  dipped  in  oil '  (xxx.  13).  The 
account  of  tlie  Baptism  of  Jesus,  however,  did  not 
immediately  follow,  as  in  the  canonical  Matthew, 
but  only  after  an  interval  {fiera  to  elirelv  iroWd). 
The  author  first  of  all  brought  Jesus  on  the  scene, 
and  placed  the  call  of  the  twelve  apostles  prior  to 
the  Lord's  Baptism,  possibly  to  make  it  clear  that 
they  had  not  been  originally  disciples  of  John, 
more  probably  to  convey  the  impression  that  they 
had  been  eye-witnesses  from  the  very  outset.  (3) 
*  There  was  a  man  named  Jesus,  and  he  was  about 
thirty  years  of  age  ;  he  chose  us  .  .  .  and  entering 
Capharnaum  he  went  into  the  house  of  Simon 
surnamed  Peter,  and  opening  his  lips  said,  "As  I 
walked  beside  the  lake  of  Tiberias  1 1  chose  John 

•  Even  after  Zahn's  (Gegch.  des  Kanons,  ii.  731  f.)  argrunient 
that  Epiphanius'8  statement  is  correct,  and  that  since  Orijr en  the 
Ebionitic  Christians  had  bepun  to  appropriate  for  their  own 
Gospel  the  honorific  title  of  the  Church's  HG. 

t  The  religious  vetfetarianism  of  the  Ebionite  Christians 
^Epiph.  xxx.  15)  made  them  change  'locusts'  (axpCSti,  Mt  3*) 
into  honey -cake  (iyKp{^).  The  verse  echoes  LXX  of  Nu  lis 
(«tal  Ijv  r;  riSovr)  avTOv  oKrei  yeviia  t'yxpU  f'f  t'Aat'ou).  Note  James 
was  an  ascetic  but  not  a  vegetarian.  The  words  of  Hegesii>pus, 
which  Kusebius  quotes  (iIE  ii.  23.  5),  ovSi  itj.ipvxov  f<l>ay(p, 
mean  that  he  was  careful  to  eat  only  '  kosher '  meat  (in  the  sense 
of  Ac  l.S''*  and  Jos.  Ant.  i.  102,  x<^P'f  ai'/iarot). 

}  This  is  almost  the  only  touch  in  the  extant  fragments  which 
recalls  the  Fourth  Gospel  ((>''<'),  and  even  this  need  not  be  a 


and  James,  sons  of  Zebedanis,  and  Simon  and 
Andrew  and  Thaddipus  and  Simon  the  zealot  and 
Judas  Iscariot ;  and  I  called  thee,  Matthew,  sitting 
at  the  receipt  of  custom,  and  thou  didst  follow  me. 
You  then  I  desire  to  be  twelve  apostles  for  a  testi- 
mony to  Israel"'  (xxx.  13).  The  narrative  of  the 
Baptism  (4)  diverges  in  order  and  in  some  details 
from  the  Synoptic  tradition.  '  When  the  people 
had  been  baptized,  Jesus  also  came  and  was 
baptized  by  John.  And  when  he  came  up  from 
the  water,  tiie  heavens  opened  and  he  saw  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  form  of  a  dove  descending  and 
entering  into  him.  And  a  voice  came  from  heaven 
saying,  "  Thou  art  my  Beloved,  in  thee  I  am  well- 
pleased" —  and  aj'ain  —  "to-day  have  I  begotten 
thee."  And  immediately  a  great  light*  shone  round 
the  place.  Seeing  tliis  (says  the  Gospel),  John  says 
to  him,  "Who  art  thou.  Lord?"  And  again  a 
voice  from  heaven  addre.ssed  him  [or,  said  of  him], 
"This  is  my  son,  the  Beloved,  in  whom  I  am  well- 

S leased."  And  then  (says  the  Gospel)  John  fell 
own  before  him  and  said,  "  I  pray  thee,  Lord,  do 
thou  baptize  me."  But  he  forbade  him,  saying, 
"Come,  this  is  how  it  is  fitting  that  all  should 
be  accomplished"'  (xxx.  13).  The  divergence  of 
EG  from  NG  at  this  point  is  clear :  tlie  one  has 
a  dove,  the  otlier  has  not  (cf.  above,  p.  493) ;  and 
EG  conflates  the  voices  from  heaven. 

The  Gospel  must  have  included  the  middle  part 
of  the  life  of  Jesus,t  for  two  sayings  are  quoted, 
one  (5)  a  curious  protest  against  sacrifices  ('1  came 
to  abolish  sacrifices,  and  if  you  do  not  cease  sacri- 
ficing, the  Wrath  will  not  cease  from  you,'  xxx.  16), 
and  the  other  (6)  a  version  of  Mt  12*'-«'  =  Mk  3'i-»» 
=  Lk  8'*''''  ('  They  deny  he  is  a  man,  on  the  ground, 
forsooth,  of  the  word  which  the  Saviour  spoke  when 
he  was  informed,  "Behold,  thy  mother  and  thy 
brothers  are  standing  outside. "  "  Who  is  my  mother 
and  my  brothers  ? "  And  stretching  his  hand  out  to 
his  disciples  he  said,  "These  are  my  sisters  and 
mother  and  brother,  who  do  the  will  of  my  Father,"  * 
xxx.  14).  If  (5)  was  substituted  X  for  Mt  5'^  (as  in 
tlie  case  of  (7)),  and  if  the  plural  deX^/xara  in  (6)  means 
the  various  injunctions  of  the  Law  as  God's  will, 
we  have  two  indications  of  the  Jewish  Christian 
syncretistic  and  anti-sacrificial  §  tendency  which 
dominated  the  Gospel. 

The  sole  saying  (7)  which  lias  been  preserved 
from  the  Passion  narrative  illustrates  the  vegeta- 
rian tendency  which  we  have  already  seen  in  the 
description  oi  John  the  Baptist's  food.  The  Lucan 
saying,  '  With  desire  have  I  desired  to  eat  this 
passover  with  you,'  became :  '  I  have  not  desired 
to  eat  this  passover  of  lle.sh  with  you'  (xxx. 
22).  II  The  Ebionites  were  vegetarians,  probably 
because  they  objected  to  sexual  relations  as  im- 
moral, and  con.sequently  to  animal  food  as  the 
product  of  such  relations  even  among  the  lower 
creatures. 

The  accuracy  of  Epiphanius  is  seldom  beyond 
question,  and  it  has  been  surmised  that  these 
quotations  in  whole  or  part  came  from  other  sources 
(so,  e.g.,  Credner,  Lipsius,  Westcott,  Schmidtke). 
Thus  (5)  may  have  come  from  the  Clementine  He- 
cognitions  (i.  39,  54)  and  (6)  from  Origen's  comment 
on  Jn  2'^  But  it  does  not  follow  that  they  were 
current  only  in  these  quarters.  And  as  Epipnanius 
does  show  some  close  acquaintance  with  the  tenets 

reminiscence.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Coptic  fragments  which 
some  propose  to  connect  with  this  Go8i>el  (cf.  606)  show 
marked  Johannine  colouring. 

*  See  Justin's  Dial.  88. 

t  Origen  (rfc  Princip.  iv.  22)  also  quotes  the  Ebionites'  inter- 
pretation of  Mt  ir)24. 

J  Nicholson  (p.  77)  suggests  that  it  was  part  of  a  paragraph 
answering  to  Lk  13in. 

{  This  led  them  (Epiph.  xviii.  2,  xxx.  8,  18)  to  criticize  {wrts  of 
the  Law  and  even  of  the  prophets,  in  spite  of  their  admiration 
of  the  OT. 

II  Or,  '  Have  I  desired  .  .  .  you?' 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      495 


and  practices  of  the  Ebionites,  it  is  fair  to  assume 
that  his  citations  from  their  Gospel  are  not  invari- 
ably inaccurate  or  imaginary.  As  the  quotation  (2) 
shows,  by  the  substitution  of  iyxpis  for  the  Synoptic 
dicptSfr,  the  original  text  was  Greek,  not  Semitic. 

Origen  (see  p.  479)  calls  it  ri  i-riyrypay.fUvov  rwr 
iij)8eKa  ei'ayy^ioy,  instead  of  using  /card,  as  he  does 
in  describing  the  other  Gospels  on  his  list,  and  as 
the  Latin  translator  renders  it  ('iuxta*  duodecim 
apostolos ').  The  probability  is  that  a  saying  like  (3) 
gave  rise  to  this  title  ;  it  would  suggest,  and  perhaps 
was  intended  by  the  writer  to  suggest,  that  the 
Gospel  was  composed  bv  Matthew  inthenameof  the 
twelve  apostles,  just  like  the  Gospel  of  Peter  or 
(according  to  one  legend)  the  Fourth  Gospel.  It  is 
true  that  a  similar  inference  may  be  not  unreason- 
ably drawn,  identifying  this  Gospel  with  HG,  which 
also  claimed  to  be  a  Gospel  of  Matthew  ;  but  the 
inference  would  not  be  so  conclusive,  for  in  any 
case  the  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites,  like  the  other 
Jewish-ChristianGospels,  was  based  on  the  canonical 
Matthew.  Its  original  title  may  have  been  '  the 
Gospel  of  the  Twelve  by  Matthew '  or  '  the  Gospel  of 
the  Twelve,'  for  'the'Gospel  of  the  Ebionites'  is 
naturally  no  more  than  a  description  of  it  which 
emanated  from  outside  circles.  It  belonged  to  the 
Synoptic  type ;  nowhere  can  it  be  proved  to  have 
derived  from  the  Johannine  Gospel. 

(t)  The  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians.— The  '  Gospel  of 
the  Egjptians '  means  a  Gospel  current  among  the 
Egyptians,  not  a  Gospel  composed  by  them.  The 
title  (rd  /COT  AiyvxTiovi  eua'y7Aio»')  first  occurs  in 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  observes  that  it  was  used 
by  people  (the  Encratites)  ol  rdrra  fidWow  ij  tQ  Kara 
TTjv  aXrjdeiap  evayye\iK(^  <rroiXT/l<fo^Tei  Kavbvi  (Strom,  iii. 
9.  66).  By  the  time  that  Origen  wTote,  it  had  been 
degraded  to  the  rank  of  a  heretical  writing,  but 
Clement's  language  implies  an  earlier  attitude 
which  was  more  favourable.  Thus  in  Strom.  iiL 
13.  92  he  remarks,  a  propos  of  one  quotation,  '  We 
possess  this  saying  {^xof^^  "f"^  pTrr6v)  not  in  the  four 
Gospels  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us,  but 
in  the  Gk)spel  according  to  the  Egj'ptians.' 

The  extant  quotations  are  for  the  most  part  taken  from 
dialogues  between  Jesus  and  Salome,  (a)  '  When  Salome  asked 
"  How  long  shall  death  prevail  ?  "  .  .  .  the  Lord  said,  "  So  long 
as  you  women  bear"'  (Clem.  Strom,  iii.  6.  45).  (6)  'Salome 
says,  "  How  long  shall  men  die  ?  "  .  .  .  The  Lord  answers,  "  So 
long  as  women  bear " '  (Strom,  iii.  9.  &4  ;  similarly  in  Bxcerpta 
Theod.  67).  (c)  '"Then,"  said  she  [i.e.  Salome],  "I  would 
have  done  well  in  not  bearing  ?  "  as  if  child-bearing  were  not 
allowed.  The  Lord  replies,  "  Eat  everj-  herb,  but  do  not  eat  the 
bitter  t  one  " '  (Strom,  iii.  9.  66).  (d)  A  fourth  quotation  is  less 
certain.  'Those  who  oppose  what  God  has  created,  in  their 
specious  (or  fine-sounding,  ev^^ov)continence  adduce  the  words 
spoken  to  Salome  which  we  have  mentioned  above.  They 
o«;ur,  I  think  (^xperoi  ii,  o*m<u),  in  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Egyptians ;  for  they  say,  "The  Saviour  himself  said,  /  eame  to 
dehroy  the  tcorks  ofthe/einaU  " '  (Strom,  iii.  9.  63).  The  hesita- 
tion is  curious.but  it  hardly  justifies  us  in  arguing  that  thequota- 
tion  must  have  come  from  a  work  like  the  Exegetica  of  Cassianus 
rather  than  from  the  Egyptian  Gospel.  In  any  case,  the  leading 
idea  of  (c)  and  (d)  is  that  the  d^nctions  of  sex  are  to  be 
obliterated  in  the  future  kingdom,  and  that  marriage  as  the 
bitter  herb  of  bodily  passion  is  therefore  to  be  avoided.  This  is 
still  more  vividly  put  in  (e\  a  fifth  quotation.  In  reply  to  another 
question  put  by  Salome  upon  the  time  when  the  kingdom  was 
to  be  revealed,  'The  Lord  said,  "When  you  tread  under  foot 
the  garment  of  shame,  when  t  the  two  become  one,  the  male 
with  the  female,  neither  male  nor  female  " '  (Strom,  iii.  13.  92). 
Here  the  'garment  of  shame'  is  the  body,  which  Ouaianua 
regarded  as  the  garments  of  skin  in  Gn  39.  The  perfect  state 
means  the  abolition  of  all  sexual  connexions  and  the  physical 
organism  which  forms  their  opportunity,  according  to  the 
P^hagorean  theosophy  or  perhaps  merely  Philonic  influence. 


*  By  'iuxta  '  he  meant  to  render  caro,  for  he  goes  on  to  tnns- 
late  Kara  Mofiiav  by  '  iuxta  Mathian.' 

t  G.  Wobbermin's  theorj-  (Reliffionxg^sehiehUieAe  Studien, 
1896,  pp.  96-103)  that  Orphism  has  influenced  this  Gospel  in- 
volves, among  other  improbabilities,  the  Uteral  meanii^  of 
'  herb '  here,  as  an  indication  of  vegetarian  tendencies^ 

J  This  kind  of  rhetoric  became  common  in  some  circles;  cf.,  e.^., 
tbe  Acta Philippi,  110 (p.  90,ed.Tischendorf)andthe4etoP«tr», 
38  (C.  Schmidt,  TU  X3dv.  [1903]).  But  the  curious  fantasy  of  the 
Logion  quoted  in  these  AUa  does  not  necessarily  imply  a  use  of 
the  Egj-ptian  GospeL 


The  dialogue  form  is  common  in  contemporary 
Rabbinic  tradition,  and  Salome  for  some  reason 
was  one  of  the  Synoptic  figures  to  whom  the  later 
Gnostics  (cf.  her  dialogues  with  Jestis  in  Putts 
Sophia,  102, 104, 114, 115, 343,381)  and  the  Carpocra- 
tians  (Orig.  Ceia.  v.  62)  assigned  an  important  r61e. 

The  allusions  of  Hippolytus  and  Epiphanins 
suggest  that  the  Gospel  must  have  contained  pas- 
sages capable  of  a  pantheistic  development,  out 
it  is  naturally  impossible  to  determine,  with  the 
scanty  data  at  our  disposal,  how  far  these  encratitic 
and  modalistic  theories  of  the  later  Naassenes  and 
Sabellians  were  due  to  the  text  of  the  Gospel  itself 
and  how  far  to  later  interpretations. 

The  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians  was  probably  used 
by  the  author  of  the  homily  ( -h  A.D.  150)  known  as 
2  Clement.  This  is  not  beyon  J  question  (cf.  Zahn  ; 
Haase,  p.  3  ;  and  BatifFol's  plea  in  his  study  of  the 
Gospel  m  Vigouroux's  Dictionnaire  de  la  Bible,  ii. 
1625-1627),but  the  e%'idence  points  strongly  in  favour 
of  such  a  hypothesis.  Thus  the  saying  quoted  in 
Strom,  iii.  13.  92  reappears  in  2  Clem.  xii.  2  :  'When 
questioned  by  someone  when  His  kingdom  would 
come,  the  Lord  said,  "  When  the  two  shall  be  one, 
the  outward  as  the  inward,  the  male  Avith  the 
female,  neither  male  nor  female." '  If  this  is  so,  it 
proves  that  the  (jospel  of  the  Egyptians  had  a  high 
place,  next  to  the  four  Gospels,  since  it  is  quoted 
alongside  of  them.  The  writer  of  2  Clement  gives 
quite  an  orthodox  and  moral  interpretation  of  the 
saying  which  he  cites,  and  this  would  again  corro- 
borate the  impression  that  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyp- 
tians was  not  originally  Encratitic,  but  only  that 
some  of  its  contents  lent  themselves  to  such  views. 
It  is  possible  but  hazardous  to  infer  that  the  three 
other  uncanonical  quotations  in  2  Clement  are  also 
derived  from  the  Egyptian  Gospel,  viz.  iv.  5  ('The 
Lord  said,  "  If  you  are  gathered  with  me  in  my 
bosom,  and  do  not  my  commands,  I  will  cast  you 
out  and  will  say  to  you.  Depart  from  me,  I  know 
not  whence  you  are,  you  workers  of  iniquity  "  '),* 
v.  2-4  ('  The  Lord  said,  "  You  shall  be  as  lambs  in 
the  midst  of  wolves."  And  Peter  answered  and  said 
to  him,  "Supposing  the  wolves  tear  the  lambs?" 
Jesus  said  to  Peter,  "  Let  not  the  lambs  fear  the 
wolves  after  death  ;  and  as  for  you,  fear  not  those 
who  kill  you  and  can  do  no  more  to  you,  but  fear 
him  who  after  death  has  power  over  soul  and  body, 
to  cast  them  into  the  fiery  gehenna  " '),  and  viii.  5 
( '  The  Lord  said  in  the  Gospel, "  If  you  did  not  guard 
what  is  small,  who  shall  give  you  what  is  great  ? 
For  I  teU  you  that  he  who  is  faithful  in  what  is 
least  is  also  faithful  in  what  is  much " ').  The 
attempts  to  identify  the  Oxyrhynchite  fragment 
(see  below,  p.  499),  the  Oxyrhynchite  Logia,  the 
Strassburg  Coptic  fragments  (cf.'p.  506),  the  Fayyftm 
fragment,  or  the  Gospel  of  Peter,  with  this  Gospel, 
have  not  succeeded  in  almost  any  case  in  establish - 
in^r  a  proof  which  is  beyond  que-stion,  although  the 
affinities  with  the  (first  series  of)  Oxyrhynchite 
Logia  perhaps  justify  us  in  assigning  the  latter 
provisionally  to  this  Egyptian  scripture  (cf.  J.  A. 
Kobinson  in  Expositor,  oth  ser.,  vi.  [1897]  417  f.). 

The  use  made  of  it  by  men  like  Julius  Cassianus, 
a  leader  of  the  Docetic  movement  who  was  tinged 
Avith  Encratitic  tendencies,  and  Theodotus,  the 
Egyptian  Valentinian,  together  with  its  popular- 
ity among  Christian  circles  like  the  Naassenes  and 
the  Sabellians.t  may  have  contributed  to  the  dis- 

*  In  the  context  of  a  passage  like  Ut  7^^?  Practically  the 
same  Logion  occurs  among  toe  sditdia  of  the  HG  (cf.  above, 
p.  492).  Does  this  mean  tl^t  the  Clement  quotations  go  hmA 
to  NG,  or  that  the  scholia  borrowed  from  2  dement^  or  that 
the  Logion  lay  in  both  NG  and  EG  ?    Cf.  Scfamidtke,  p.  297f. 

t  According  to  Hippol.vtus  (Philot.  v.  7%  it  ¥ras  one  of  the 
writings  exploited  by  the  Gnostic  Naassenes ;  according  to 
Epiphanius  (Ixii.  2),  tbie  SabeOians  med  it(Tow  trnXevfterov  Aiyyw- 
Tutv  cvayycAiov)  in  support  of  their  tenets.  Both  notices 
corroborate  the  Egyptian  provenance  of  the  GospeL  The 
Sabellians  used  it  along  vs-iih  the  OT  and  the  XT. 


496      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


favour  into  which  it  afterwards  fell.  Originally 
its  position  relative  to  tlie  canonical  Gospels  may 
have  resembled  that  of  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Hebrews.  Like  the  latter  and  the  Gospel  of 
Peter,  it  circulated  for  a  while  without  incurring 
any  suspicions  or  hostility  on  the  part  of  the 
authorities. 

Unlike  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  it  seems 
neither  to  have  been  a  translation  nor  to  have 
been  translated.  Kar'  AlyvtrTiovs  does  not  mean, 
'in  Coptic';  the  most  probable  explanation  is 
that  it  denotes  a  Gospel  meant  for  and  used  by 
the  native  Egyptian  converts,  Just  as  Kad"E^paiovi 
meant  a  Gospel  originally  de.signed  for  the  Jewish 
Christians  oi  Palestine.  It  is  possible  that  the 
Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  reached  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tians of  Alexandria  (Egypt),  and  that  the  Gospel 
of  the  Egyptians  was  so  named  in  order  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  its  contemporary ;  but  this  is  no 
more  than  conjecture,  although  Aly^imos  is  known 
to  have  meant  'provincial'  as  op})Osed  to  'Alex- 
andrian.' Zahn  accounts  for  the  title  and  circula- 
tion of  the  Gospel  by  supposing  that  already,  as 
in  later  days,  the  provincial  churches  of  Egypt 
did  not  invariably  follow  the  Alexandrian  Church, 
and  that,  while  the  latter  adhered  more  closely 
to  the  canonical  Gospels,  the  country  churches 
favoured  the  native  product.*  This  meets  the 
requirements    of  the  situation   during    the  later 

Eart  of  the  2nd  cent,  as  fairly  as  any  other 
ypothesis,  and  may  be  accepted  tentatively  as 
satisfactory.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  Egyptian  Gospel  only  followed  in  the 
wake  of  the  four  canonical  Gospels.  Unfortun- 
ately, our  knowledge  of  the  origins  of  Christianity 
in  Egypt  is  extremely  scanty  until  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  century.  I'here  is,  further,  the  lack  of 
adequate  information  about  the  exact  contents  of 
the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians.  But  if  the  latter 
could  be  used  by  tlie  author  of  a  non-Egyptian 
document  like  2  Clement  by  the  middle  of  the 
2nd  cent.,  the  Egyptian  Gospel  may  have  been 
current  c.  A.D.  125,  if  not  earlier. 

Special  Literature.  —  M.  Schneckenburger,  Ueber  das 
Evawjelimn  der  Aegypter,  Bern,  1834  (edition  of  the  Gospel 
of  the  Hebrews,  in  the  interests  of  an  Ejcyptian  Ebionitic  sect) ; 
Hilgenfeld,  Ketzerqeseh.  des  Urchristenthurns,  Leipzig,  1884,  p. 
546 f.  ;  D.  Volter,  Fetninerangelium oder  Aegypterevangelinini 
Tubingen,  1893  (cf.  ZNTW,  1905,  pp.  368-372) ;  O.  Pfleiderer, 
Prim.  Christianity,  iii.,  London,  1910,  pp.  225-228.  It  is  pos- 
sible (cf.  Baumstark  in  ZNTW,  1913,  pp.  232-247)  that  traces 
of  the  use  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians  are  to  be  found  in  the 
Ethiopia  'Testament  of  our  Lord  and  Redeemer  Jesus  Clirist,' 
recently  edited  by  L.  Guerrier  and  S.  Gr^baut  in  Patrologia 
Orientalis,  ix.  3  [1913]  ;  and  an  attempt  has  been  made  (by  F. 
P.  Badham  and  F.  C.  Conybeare,  IIJ  \\.  [1912-13]  805  f.)  to 
show  that,  like  the  '  Ascensio  Isaias,'  it  was  read  by  the  Cathars 
of  Albi. 

(d)  The  Gospel  of  Peter.— The  Gospel  of  Peter 
was  used,  either  for  jjrivate  reading  or  in 
public  Avorship,  by  the  Church  at  Rhossus  on  the 
coast  of  Syria,  not  far  from  Antioch,  in  the  last 
quarter  of  the  2nd  cent.  Its  use  appears  to 
have  occasioned  some  doubt  and  dispute,  however. 
Serapion,  the  bishop  of  Antioch  (A.D.  190-203), 
who  seems  to  have  been  either  a  casual  or  a 
tolerant  person,  at  first  declined  to  take  any  steps 
in  the  matter  ;  he  sanctioned  the  use  of  theGospel, 
without  troubling  to  examine  it  carefully.  Sub- 
sequently, he  borrowed  a  copy  from  some  Docetic 
Christians,  and  discovered  that  '  although  most 
of  it  belonged  to  the  right  teaching  of  the  Saviour, 
some  things  were  additions.'  By  the  time  Eusebius 
(HE  vi.  12)  wrote,  it  was  definitely  branded  as 
illegitimate. t  It  is  doubtful  whether  Eusebius 
knew  it  at  first-hand,  and  the  later  allusions  to  it 

*  The  author  is  unknown,  and  no  name  was  ever  connected 
with  it— which  is  one  mark  of  early  origin,  at  any  rate  of  an 
origin  apart  from  any  special  sect  or  tendency. 

t  The  harsh  censure  of  Eusebius  {11 E  iii.  3)  is  repeated  by 
Jerome  {,de  Vir.  iilusir.  1). 


are  probably  Ijorrowed  from  him.  At  the  same 
time,  it  has  to  be  remembered  that  the  Gospel  of 
Peter  was  not  obliterated  by  the  episcopal  censure 
of  Serapion.  Its  circulation  was  never  wide,  but 
it  was  tenacious.  Tlie  Syriac  Didascalia  (cf. 
TU,  new  sen,  x.  2  [1904],  p.  324  f.)  in  the  3rd  cent, 
and  Syriac  Jewish  Christians  as  late  as  the  5th 
witness  to  its  existence  and  popularity  (cf.  Theod. 
Hcer.  fabul.  ii.  2)  *  in  Syriac ;  and  the  discovery  of 
the  Akhmtm  fragment  attests  its  circulation  in 
Egypt.  Still  later  traces  are  detected  by  Usenet 
{ZNTW,  1902,  p.  353  f.),  Stocks  (ZKG,  1913,  p.  3), 
and  Leipoldt  [Geschichte  des  neatest.  Kanons,  i. 
177  f.). 

About  A.D.  246  Origen,  in  his  Commentary  on 
Matthew  (x.  17)  observes  that  'The  citizens  of 
Nazareth  (Mt  13'")  supposed  Jesus  was  the  son  of 
Joseph  and  Mary  ;  as  for  the  brothers  of  Jesus, 
some  say  they  were  .sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former 
wife  who  had  lived  with  him  before  Mary,  on  the 
ground  of  a  tradition  in  the  Gospel  entitled  xari 
Mirpov  or  the  book  of  James.'  This  tradition,  we 
now  know,  existed  in  the  primitive  source  of  the 
Protevangelium  Jacobi  (cf.  p.  484).  But  it  does 
not  follow  that  it  did  not  also  exist  in  the  Gospel 
of  Peter.  If  so,  that  Gospel  belongs  to  our  second 
class ;  and  one  consideration  in  favour  of  this  is 
the  extreme  unlikelihood  of  Peter's  name  being 
specially  attached  to  a  Gospel  which  did  not  cover 
the  ministry  of  Jesus.  Till  the  winter  of  1886- 
1887  this  solitary  reference  was  all  that  was 
known  of  the  Gospel ;  but  the  discovery  of  an 
8th  cent,  manuscript  of  fra^ients  of  Peter's 
Gospel,  Peter's  Apocalypse,  and  Enoch  in  Greek,  at 
Akhmim  in  Upper  Egypt,  revealed  more  of  the 
characteristics  of  this  Gospel.  Unluckily,  the  frag- 
ment begins  and  ends  abruptly.  It  opens  with 
the  end  of  the  trial ;  Pilate  has  washed  his  hands, 
but  none  of  the  other  judges  (including  Herod) 
does  so.  Herod  takes  the  leading  part  in  what 
follows,t  the  aim  of  the  author  being  to  exculpate 
the  Romans  and  emphasize  the  responsibility  and 
guilt  of  the  Jews.  In  the  story  of  the  Crucifixion 
one  of  the  malefactors  reproaches  not  his  fellow- 
criminal  but  the  Jewish  by-standers,  who  retaliate 
by  leaving  his  legs  unbroken  in  order  to  prolong 
his  agony.  It  is  at  this  point  that  the  Docetic  and 
semi-Gnostic  tendencies  of  the  writer  begin  to 
show  themselves.  On  the  Cross  the  Lord  'was 
silent,  as  having  no  pain ' ;  his  last  cry  is,  '  My 
Power,  my  Power,  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ? '  When 
His  dead  body  is  lowered  to  the  ground,  there 
is  an  earthquake.  The  Jewish  mob  and  their 
authorities  then  X  repent,  crying,  '  Alas  for  our 
sins !  the  judgment,  the  end  of  Jerusalem,  is 
nigh  ! '  At  this  point  the  author  §  brings  Peter  on 
the  scene.  '  I  and  my  companions  grieved,  and, 
struck  to  the  heart,  we  hid  ourselves,  for  we  were 
being  sought  for  by  them  [i.e.  the  Jews]  as  male- 
factors and  as  intending  to  set  fire  to  the  temple.' 
Meantime  Pilate  has  the  tomb  guarded,  at  the 
request  of  the  Jews.  The  author  then  ventures 
to  describe  the  Resurrection.il    '  There  was  a  loud 

*  But  Theodoret's  evidence  is  not  above  suspicion.  How 
could  'Nazarene'  Jewish  Christians  make  so  anti-Jewish  a 
book  their  favourite  Gospel  ?  Theodoret's  reference,  like  several 
other  references  of  the  same  kind,  may  be  to  a  different  volume 
from  our  '  Peter.' 

i  But  it  is  difficult  to  understand  why  the  writer  did  not 
draw  material  for  his  anti-Jewish  representation  from  the 
vain  appeals  of  Pilate  to  the  Jews,  or  from  their  deliberate  pre- 
ference of  Barabbas  to  Jesus.  Perhaps  these  were  noted  in 
sections  which  have  not  been  preserved. 

X  This  is  inconsequent ;  but  here  as  elsewhere  the  fragment 
does  not  seem  to  have  preserved  the  true  order  of  the  text. 
Or,  possibly,  it  has  omitted  connecting  material. 

§  This  Gospel,  like  the  Protevangelium  Jacobi  and  the^Gospel 
of  the  Twelve,  is  definitely  pseudonymous. 

II  On  the  connexion  between  what  follows  and  the  Jewish 
doctrine  of  the  heavenly  Adam,  see  Stocks'  essay  in  NKZ,  1902, 
1>.  302  f.,  ib.  1903,  p.  528  f.  The  Cross  probably  symbolizes  the 
soul  of  Jesus  (see,  further;  p.  &00). 


GOSPELS  (UNCAi^^ONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UXCANONICAL)      497 


voice  in  lieaven,  and  they  [i.e.  tlie  sentries]  saw 
heaven  opened  and  two  men  descending  thence, 
Avith  a  great  light,  and  approaching  the  tomb.' 
The  boulder  at  the  opening  moves  of  its  own  accord, 
the  two  figures  enter,  and  the  astonished  soldiers 
(including  the  centurion  and  the  elders)  '  see  three 
men  coming  out  of  the  tomb,  two  supporting  the 
third,  and  a  Cross  following  them  ;  the  heads  of 
the  two  reached  as  far  as  heaven,  but  the  head  of 
the  One  whom  they  escorted  was  higher  than  the 
heavens.  And  they  heard  a  voice  from  the  heavens 
saying,  "  Hast  thou  preached  to  them  that  sleep?" 
And  from  the  Cross  the  answer  came,  "Yes."' 
The  next  vision  is  that  of  a  man  descending  from 
heaven  and  entering  the  sepulchre.  The  party  of 
soldiers  and  Jews  then  retreat,  and  agree  to  say 
nothing  about  what  they  have  seen.  The  following 
paragraph  describes  how  Mary  Magdalene  took 
her  friends  on  the  morning  of  Sunday  to  wait  at 
the  tomb.  They  find  a  comely  youth  inside  [  =  the 
man  who  had  entered  ?] ;  he  tells  them  that  the 
Lord  has  risen  to  heaven  [there  is  no  Ascension], 
and  they  fly  in  terror.  The  fragment  then  breaks 
ofi"  abruptly:  'Now  it  was  the  last  day  of  Un- 
leavened Bread,  and  many  went  away  home,  since 
the  feast  was  over ;  but  we,  the  twelve  disciples 
of  the  Lord,  wept  and  grieved.  Each  left  for 
home,  grieved  at  what  had  occurred ;  but  I, 
Simon  Peter,  and  Andrew  my  brother,  took  our 
nets  and  went  to  the  sea,  and  with  us  were  Levi 
the  son  of  Alphaeus,  whom  the  Lord  .  .  .' 

According  to  '  Peter,'  there  are  no  Resurrection 
appearances  to  the  women  or  to  the  disciples  in 
Jerusalem.  The  fragment  breaks  off  on  the  edge 
of  what  seems  to  be  an  account  of  some  appearance 
at  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  Peter,  Andrew,  Levi  (and 
some  others  ?).  This  would  tally  with  the  appear- 
ance preserved  in  the  appendix  to  '  Jolin,'  only,  in 
'  Peter '  it  would  be  an  appearance  of  the  Ascended 
Christ,  for  the  word  of  the  young  man  (angel)  to 
the  woman  at  the  tomb  is,  '  he  has  risen  and  gone 
away  to  where  he  was  sent  from '  (dxeo-TdXij,  i.e. 
from  heaven,  as  in  Lk  4^,  where  Mark's  ^^\0or,  i.e. 
from  Capernaum,  is  changed  into  areffrdXTjv,  i.e.  from 
heaven).  A  further  idiosj-ncrasy  is  the  apparent 
length  of  interval  between  the  Resurrection  and  the 
flight  of  the  disciples  from  Jerusalem  to  Galilee. 
Did  the  writer  really  mean  that  a  week  elapsed  ? 
Or  is  his  description  due  to  chronological  in- 
accuracy ? 

Whether  the  terminus  ad  quern  for  the  com- 
position of  the  Gospel  can  be  carried  back  earlier 
than  the  last  quarter  of  the  2nd  cent,  depends 
upon  the  view  taken  of  its  relation  to  Justin  Martyr. 
It  had  been  already  conjectured  by  Credner  and 
others  that  the  Gospel  of  Peter  might  be  one  of  the 
apostolic  memoirs  used  by  Justin,  and  this  con- 
jecture seems  corroborated  by  the  Akhmim  frag- 
ment, which  apparently  supplies  the  basis  for  the 
references  in  Apol.  i.  35  (the  seating  of  Jesus  on 
the;3^^),i.  40  ('The  Spirit  of  prophecy  foretold  .  .  . 
the  conspiracy  formed  against  Christ  by  Herod,  the 
king  of  the  Jews,  and  the  Jews  themselves,  and 
Pilate  .  .  .  with  his  soldiers'),  and  possibly  i.  50, 
as  well  as  in  Diai.  103  (where  Herod  is  termed  '  a 
king').  Dial.  97  (XaxM/by  j3d\XojTes — the  phrase  in 
'  Peter '),  and  Di<il.  108.  Upon  the  whole,  this 
dependence  of  Justin  upon  the  Gospel  of  Peter 
seems  preferable  (so,e.g.,  Hamack,  von  Soden,Lods) 
to  the  alternative  hypothesis  of  von  Schubert  and 
Stanton  (Gospels  as  Hist.  Documents,  i.  [1903]  93 f., 
103  f.)  that  the  coincidences  between  the  two  are 
due  to  the  use  of  a  common  source,  viz.  the  Acts  of 
Pilate,  an  olficial  report  of  the  trial  of  Jesus  pur- 
jwrting  to  have  been  drawn  up  by  the  procurator 
and  perhaps  underlying  the  references  in  the  later 
Acta  Pilati  and  in  Tertullian. 
This  fixes  the  date  of  the  Gospel's  composition 
VOL.  I, — 32 


approximately  within  the  first  quarter  of  the  second 
century.  The  terminus  a  quo  depends  upon  the 
view  taken  of  its  dependence  on  the  canonical 
Gospels.  Those  who  find  in  it  traces  of  all  four — 
as  if  the  writer  knew  them  and  employed  them 
indifferently,  quoting  perhaps  from  memory,  to 
suit  his  own  dogmatic  ends — naturally  place  the 
Gospel  c.  A.D.  125  as  a  very  early  attempt  to  employ 
the  canonical  traditions  in  the  interests  of  a  Gnostic 
propaganda.  The  dependence  on  Mark  and  even 
Xiatthew  is,  we  think,  to  be  granted.  The  coinci- 
dences between  'Peter'  and  Luke  and  John  (cf. 
Lods,  op.  cit.  18 f.)  are  not  quite  so  clear.*  There 
is  room  still  for  the  hypothesis  that '  Peter'  repre- 
sents a  popular,  early  type  of  the  inferior  narratives 
which  Luke  desired  to  supersede.  At  several  points 
'  Peter '  marks  the  same  line  of  development  which 
recurs  in  Luke  and  John,  and  as  a  composition  from 
Syrian  Antioch,  with  which  the  traditions  of  Luke 
and  John  are  independently  connected,  it  may  even 
be  conjectured  to  have  arisen  within  the  1st  cen- 
tury. To  a  modem  reader,  a  comparison  of  its 
text  with  those  of  Luke  and  John  seems  at  first 
sight  to  put  its  dependence  on  them  beyond  doubt. 
But  doubts  recur  as  soon  as  we  recollect  that  the 
specific  traditions  which  for  us  exist  primarily  in 
Luke  and  John  were  already  in  existence,  at  least 
orally,  and  that  touches  which  are  extant  in  litera- 
ture in  these  canonical  (Jospels  for  the  first  time 
must  have  been  current  decades  earlier.  Take, 
for  example,  a  piece  of  evidence  like  that  of  the 
'  garden '  of  Joseph.  '  Peter  '  mentions  this.  The 
Fourth  Gospel  also  does.  Therefore,  it  is  assumed, 
'  Peter '  used  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Why  ?  It  is 
surely  illogical  for  those  who  believe  that  this 
formed  part  of  the  authentic  tradition  to  assume 
that  the  only  access  to  it  was  through  the  text  of 
a  Gospel  at  the  very  end  of  the  1st  century.  And 
even  apart  from  this,  such  a  tradition  may  have 
been  ea.sily  known  orally  decades  before  it  was 
committed  to  writing,  t  The  evidence  generally 
alleged  for  the  dependence  of  '  Peter '  upon  Luke 
and  John  must  be  sifted  in  the  light  of  this  con- 
sideration, and  also  with  a  desire  to  avoid  the 
mistake  of  supposing  that  inferior  traditions  are 
invariably  later,  chronologically,  than  the  written 
forms  of  what  is  more  authentic.  '  Peter,'  like  the 
Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  is  in  danger  of  being  read 
in  the  light  of  an  uncritical  assumption  that  the  1st 
cent.  A.D.  saw  nothing  but  the  circulation  of  good 
traditions  about  the  life  of  Jesus,  that  the  canonical 
Gospels  swept  up  all  of  these  into  their  pages,  and 
that  the  uncanonical  Gospels  represent  invariably 
the  later,  fantastic  efibrts  of  a  generation  which 
had  to  make  up  by  the  exercise  of  its  imagination 
for  the  lack  of  sound  materials. 

The  traces  of  Gnostic  speculation  confirm  the 
hypothesis  of  a  date  early  in  the  2nd  cent,  if 
not  Avithin  the  1st.  They  are  too  incipient  and 
naive  to  be  described  as  related  to  the  system  of 
Valentinus ;  neither  the  personification  of  the 
Cross  nor  the  allusion  to  Christ's  Divine  Power  is 
much  more  than  the  popular  setting  of  ideas  which 
form  the  basis  for  the  doctrines  attacked  in  the 
First  Epistle  of  John  and  in  Ignatius.  '  Peter '  is 
not  the  attempt  of  a  Gnostic  theorist  to  work  over 
the  canonical  texts  in  the  interests  of  Docetism  or 
Valentinianism. 

As  soon  as  the  Akhmim  fragment  was  published, 

•  '  Peter,'  e.g.,  introduces  Herod  among:  tlje  jadses  of  Jesus. 
So  far  be  agrees  witii  the  tradition  followed  by  Lake,  bnt  then 
be  calls  Herod '  the  king,'  whereas  Luke  corrects  this  (SP)  Marcan 
term  (6^*)  at  an  earlier  stage,  and  never  uses  it  in  the  Passion 
narrative. 

t  Even  apart  from  the  possibility  of  common  written  sources, 
the  factor  of  oral  tradition  must  be  estimated  if  we  are  not  here, 
as  in  the  Svnoptic  problem,  to  be  misled  by  the  juxtapcsition  of 
printed  texts  with  hj-potheses  which  are  ultra-literary  and 
artaiicial. 


498      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


it  was  conjectured  by  some  critics  that  tlie  Akhmlm 
fragment  of  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter  might  also  be 
a  part,  or  an  elaboration  of  part,  of  the  Gospel. 
The  Apocalypse  contains  a  vision  of  two  righteous 
saints  in  heaven  granted  to  the  twelve  on  '  the 
mountain,'  with  a  special  revelation,  granted  to 
Peter  alone,  of  hell.  A  similar  problem  emerges 
(cf.  p.  504)  in  connexion  with  the  so-called 
'Gospel  of  Bartliolomew.'  The  dividing  line 
between  Apocalj'pses  and  Gospels  of  our  third  class 
is  naturally  wavering,  and  if  on  other  grounds  it 
could  be  established  that  the  Gospel  of  Peter  was 
originally  a  Gospel  of  the  Death  and  Resurrection, 
there  would  be  less  improbability  about  the  con- 

Jecture    that    the    Petrine    Apocalyi)se    and    the 
'etrine  Gospel  were  either  the  same  work,  to  begin 
with,  or  organically  related. 

Repeated  attempts  have  been  made  to  connect 
this  Gospel  with  material  extant  in  other  qujirters. 
V5lter  (cf.  p.  496)  actually  identifies  it  with  the 
Gospel  of  the  Egyptians ;  Harnack  suggests  that 
the  Pericope  Adulteraj  originally  belonged  to  it ; 
and  H.  Stocks  (ZKG,  1913,  pp.  1-57)  argues  that 
lost  fragments  of  it  are  embedded  in  Asc.  Is.  xi. 
2-22,  iii.  13Mv.  18  (the  latter  passage  describes, 
inter  alia,  how  the  Beloved  appeared  on  the  third 
day  sitting  on  the  shoulders  of  Gabriel  and  Michael, 
Avho  had  opened  the  tomb). 

The  remarkable  phrase  about  Jesus  feeling  no 
pain  (d)s  fi-qS^v  irbvov  ^xwv)  on  the  Cross  ought  perhaps 
to  be  taken  in  the  light  of  the  description  of  the 
heroic  Blandina  amid  her  tortures  (/uijS^  aXcrdi^cnv 
(ti  tC)v  ffVfjL^aivdvrup  ^xow**  ^^^  '^''  ^^T/5a  kt\.,  Eus. 
HE  V.  1.  56). 

Spbcial  Liter aturb.— The  Akhniim  fragment,  first  published, 
six  years  after  its  discovery,  bj'  U.  Bouriant  in  Mimoirespxibliis 
par  les  membres  de  la  mission  archMogique  frangaise  au  Caire 
ix.  1  (Paris,  1892),  137-147,  with  a  photographic  reproduction 
{ib.  ix.  3,  1893,  p.  217  f.),  led  to  a  series  of  critical  editions  by  O. 
von  Gebhardt  (Das  Eeangelixim  und  die  Apokalypge  des  Peinis, 
Leipzig,  1893);  A.  l^ods*  {L'iivangile  et  I'apoealypse  de  Pierre 
.  .  .  avec  un  appendice  sur  les  rectijications  d  apporter  au  texte 
grec  du  livre  d' Henoch,  Paris,  1893);  H.  von  Schubert  t  {Die 
Composition  des  pseudo-petrinischen  Evanqelienfragments,  Ber- 
lin, 1893) ;  Zahn  {Das  Evangelium  des  Petrtis,  Erlangen  and 
Leipzig,  1893) ;  Harnack  {TLT  ix.  2,  Leipzig,  1893,  pp.  8  f.,  23  f.) ; 
J.  Kunze  {Das  neiiaufge/undene.  Bruehstiick  des  sogen.  Petrus- 
evangelium,  do.,  1893);  P.  Lejay  (in  REG,  1893,  pp.  59-84,  267- 
270) ;  van  Manen  {IJet  evangelie  van  Petrus.  Tekst  en  Vertaling, 
Leiden,  1893) ;  and  Semeria  (in  HO,  1894,  pp.  622-560).  English 
editions  by  J.  A.  Robinson  and  M.  R.  James  {The  Gospel 
according  to  Peter  and  the  Revelation  of  Peter",  London,  1892) ; 
H.  B.  Swete  {The  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  St.  Peter.  The  Greek 
text  of  the  newly  discovered  fragment^,  London,  1893 ;  also, 
Eitavye'Aio;'  koto.  ITc'Tpoi'.  The  Akhmim  fragment  of  the  Apoc- 
ryphal Gospel  of  S.  Peter  edited  with  an  introduction,  notes, 
and  indices,  London,  1893) ;  the  Author  of  '  Supernatural 
Religion '  {The  Gospel  according  to  Peter,  London,  1894) ;  and  A. 
Rntnerfurd  {Ante-Nicene  Chr.  Lib.  ix.,  Edinb.,  1897,  pp.  3-31, 
with  J.  A.  Robinson's  tr.).  Critical  studies  by  A.  Sabatier 
(L'Evangile  de  Pierre  et  les  ivang.  canonique's,  Paris,  1893)  • 
A.  Hilgenfeld  {ZWT,  1893,  p.  439 f.);  von  Soden  {ZTK,  1893, 
pp.  62-92);  V.  H.  Stanton  {JThSl  ii.  [1900-01]  Iff.);  Vblter 
{ZNTW,  1905,  p.  368f.);  K.  Lake  {The  Resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ,  London,  1907,  pp.  148 f.,  177  f.);  and  C.  H.  Turner 
(JThSt  xiv.  [1912-13]  101  ff.). 

(e)  The  Gospel  of  Basilides.  — In  Alexandria 
Basilides  and  his  school  maintained  their  apostolic 
succession  along  two  lines.  They  claimed  as  their 
authority  for  doctrine  Glaucias,  the  interpreter  of 
Peter  (Clem.  Strom,  vii.  17.  4),  and  they  circulated 
an  edition  of  the  Gospel  or  Gospels  which  liad  been 
prepared  in  their  own  interests.  This  is  the  so- 
called  '  Gospel  of  Basilides,'  though  the  title  (/card 
Ba<rtX(57;i')  was  of  course  due  to  his  opponents. 

There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  the  accuracy  of 
Origen's  reference  to  a  Gospel  of  Basilides,  which 
that  distinguished  Egyptian  Gnostic  must  have 
composed    before    the  middle    of    the    2nd    cent. 

*  Besides  an  earlier  study,  Evangelii  secundum  Petrum  et 
Petri  Apocalypseos  quce  supersunt  .  .  .  cum  latina  vergione  et 
dissertatione  critica,  Paris,  1892. 

t  A  smaller  pamphlet  by  this  writer  (Das  Petrusevangelittm. 
Synoptxsche  Tabelle  nehst  Uebersetzrtng und  kritischem  Apparat, 
Berlin,  1893)  was  translated  by  J.  Macpherson  (Tlie  Gospel  of 
St.  Peter,  Edinburgh,  1893). 


(possibly  under  Hadrian,  or  even  Trajan),  but  the 
only  means  of  determining  approximately  its 
character  is  furnished  by  the  quotations  made  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iv.  12)  from  the 
twenty-third,  and  by  the  Acta  Archelai  (Ixvii.,  ed. 
C.  H.  Beeson)  from  the  thirteenth,  of  the  twenty- 
four  books  of  Excgetica  which  Basilides  himself 
composed  as  a  conmientary  upon  it.  These  quota- 
tions make  it  improbable  that  the  Gospel  was 
merely  a  collection  of  sayings  of  Jesus,  like  the  so- 
called  Q  or  second  source  of  Mattliew  and  Luke. 
The  glimpses  we  can  gain  of  it  *  rather  point  either 

(a)  to  a  compilation  or  harmony  based  on  the 
canonical  Gospels  (Zahn,  Kriiger,  IJardenhewer),  or 

(b)  to  a  more  independent  Gospel  of  tlie  Synoptic 
type.  The  similarities  between  the  extant  frag- 
ments (e.g.  that  from  the  13th  book  relates  to  the 
Parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus)  and  Luke's  Gospel 
have  led  some  critics  (e.g.  Lipsius,  Windisch,  and 
Waitz)  to  conjecture  that  Ba.silides  simply  prepared 
an  edition  of  Luke  for  his  own  purposes.  In  this 
case,  his  Gospel  would  be,  like  that  of  Marcion,  an 
altered  form  of  our  canonical  Third  Gospel.  Origen 
more  than  once  refers  in  his  Homilies  on  Luke  to 
the  numerous  heretics  who  had  recourse  to  this 
Gospel,  quoting  it  like  the  devil  for  anti-divine 
purposes  of  their  own.  As  Basilides  is  grouped 
with  Marcion  in  Origen's  references,  and  as  the 
extant  fragments  can  almost  without  exception  t 
be  described  as  distinctively  Lucan,  it  is  not  un- 
likely that  his  fvayyiXiov  was  an  edition  of  Luke. 

Special  Literature.— Hilgenfeld's  Einleitung  in  das  Neue 
Testament,  p.  46  f. ;  Zahn's  Gesehichte  des  Kanons,  i.  70.'}-774  : 
'Basilides  und  die  kirchliche  Bibel';  and  H.  Windisch  in 
ZNTW,  1906,  pp.  236-246  :  '  Das  Evangelium  des  Basilides.' 

(/)  The  Oospel  of  Marcion. — Marcion's  '  Gospel ' 
was  certainly  an  edition  of  Luke,  prepared  for  the 
use  of  those  who  shared  his  anti]iathy  to  Judaism. 
This  dogmatic  purpose  explains  most  of  the  omis- 
sions— e.g.  of  the  first  two  chapters,  of  H^s-sa^  and 
of  20^'^^.  It  is  a  further  question  whether  his  text 
does  not  occasionally  reproduce  a  more  original 
form  than  that  of  the  canonical  Luke.  But  in  any 
case  his  '  Gospel,'  though  to  a  slight  degree  harmon- 
istic  (i.e.  introducing  material  from  other  Gospels), 
is  not  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term  an  inde- 
pendent uncanonical  production.  Its  title  was 
'the  Gospel  of  the  Lord.'  The  best  critical  recon- 
struction is  in  Zahn's  Gesch.  des  Kanons,  i.  674  f . ,  ii, 
409  f.,  together  with  Sanday's  Gospels  in  the  Second 
Century  (1876,  ch.  viii.).  Hahn's  earlier  reconstruc- 
tion (1823)  was  translated  into  English  by  J.  Ham- 
lyn  Hill  (Marcion's  Gospel,  1891). 

(g)  The  Gospel  of  Apelles. — Apelles,  Marcion's 
disciple,  is  said  by  Epiphanius  (xliv.  2)  to  have 
quoted  the  Logion,  ybecrde  dSKifioi  Tpairf^rai,  as 
occurring  iv  rip  evayyeXlifi.  If  so,  he  must  have 
used  other  Gospels  than  that  of  his  master,  for  the 
saying  does  not  occur  in  Marcion's  Luke.  But  it 
does  not  follow  that  he  edited  or  composed  a 
Gospel  of  his  own.  The  Logion  was  evidently 
current  in  many  quarters  (cf.  Resch,  TU  xxx.  pp. 
112-128),  though  it  never  occurs  in  any  fragment 
of  an  uncanonical  Gospel.  Apelles  simply  used  it  to 
corroborate  his  principle  of  selecting  from  Scripture 
the  salient  passages  (x/>w  y^p,  iprt^lv,  avb  trdat]!  ypa<pTJ^ 
dvaXiywv  rd  xP'Jc'A'tt). 

(h)  The  Gospel  of  the  Naassenes.— In  the  Philo- 
sophouniena,  Hippolytus  quotes  a  number  of  Gospel- 

*  Jesus  did  not  suffer  on  the  Cross  (Iren.  i.  24.  4),  but  changed 
places  with  Simon  of  Cyrene,  and  stood  mocking  those  who 
imagined  they  were  crucifying  Him.  This  Docetic  representa- 
tion of  IrensBus  differs  froin  that  of  Hippolytus,  according  to 
whom  the  Jesus  of  Basilides  really  died  and  rose  (cf.  p.  501). 

t  The  tragnient  {Strom,  iv.  12)  which  Zahn  connects  with  Jn 
91-3  tnay  be  connected  eqvially  well  with  Lk  21i'f-  or  2339f. ;  and 
the  other  fragment,  which  seems  to  echo  ,Mt  19'*  (S/rom.  iii.  1  -2) 
l>robably  was  taken  not  from  the  'EfTrj^TTiita  of  Basilides  but 
from  the  'llBiKa  of  Isidore  his  son  (mentioned  in  the  immediate 
context). 


GOSPELS  (UNCANOXICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCAXONICAL)      499 


sayings  from  the  usage  of  the  Ophite  Naassenes, 
but  whether  tliey  came  from  a  special  Gospel  com- 
posed by  this  Gnostic  sect  or  whether  they  are 
simply  citations  from  some  treatise  likeithe  Gospel 
of  Perfection  or  the  Gospel  of  Eve,  it  b  not  possible 
to  say.  In  the  former  case,  it  must  have  been  a 
Gospel  compiled  from  the  uncanonieal  Gospels. 
One  citation  is :  '  Why  call  me  good  ?  One  is 
good,  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven,  who  makes  his 
sun  rise  on  the  just  and  the  unjust  and  sends  rain 
on  the  holy  and  on  sinners'  (Lk  18>',  Mt  5"). 
Another  is  :  '  Unless  you  drink  my  blood  and  eat 
ray  flesh,  you  shall  not  enter  the  kingdom  of 
heaven — and  even  though  you  do  drink  the  cup 
I  drink,  whither  I  go  thither  you  cannot  enter.' 
Two  are  distinctively  Johannine  ;  one  runs  thus  : 
'  His  voice  we  heard,  but  his  form  we  have  not  seen  "^ 
and  the  other,  '  I  am  the  true  Door.'  The  follow- 
ing are  distinctively  Matthaean  :  '  You  are  whited 
sepulchres,  inwardly  full  of  dead  men's  bones,  since 
the  living  Man  is  not  among  you,'  and  '  The  dead 
shall  leap  from  the  tombs.'  The  Gospel — if  it 
was  a  Gospel — was  a  Gnostic  compilation,  but 
neither  its  date  nor  its  scope  can  be  determined 
from  the  few  extant  fragments.  The  general 
tenets  of  the  sect,  as  recorded  by  Hippolytus, 
suggest  that  it  had  some  affinities  with  the  circle 
which  used  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians. 

(i)  Three  Oxyrhynchite  (Greek)  fragments. — (i.) 
A  small  fragment  of  a  Gospel  in  a  papyrus  roll  is  as- 
signed by  Grenfell-Hunt  (Oxyrhynchns  Papyri,  iv. 
[1904],  pp.  22-2S)  to  a  period  not  later  than  A.D.  250. 
The  mutilated  opening  reads  like  a  short  para- 
phrase of  Mt  6^=Lk  1222-a  Mt  6^-  »=Lk  12"-  »*, 
Mt  62^-2i-^  =  Lk  12^29-n.  .fj-om  morning  t[ill 
evening,  nor]  from  even[ing  till  mjoming,  neither 
[for  your  food]  what  you  shall  eat  [nor]  for  [your 
clothing]  what  you  shall  put  on.  [You  are]  far 
better  than  the  [lil]ies  which  grow  but  spin  not. 
.  .  .  Having  one  garment,  what  [do  you  lack?]. 
.  .  .  "Who  could  add  to  your  stature?  He  will 
give  you  your  garment.'  Then  follows  (cf.  Jn 
li'**-)  a  question  put  by  the  disciples,  with  the 
answer  of  Jesus.  '  HLs  disciples  say  to  him,  "When 
wilt  thou  be  manifest  to  us,  and  when  shall  we  see 
thee?  He  says,  When  you  are  stripped  and  yet 
not  ashamed.  .  .  .'*  Finally,  a  mutilated  frag- 
ment at  the  end  may  be  deciphered  so  as  to  yield 
a  saying  like  that  preserved  in  Lk  11'-,  but  the 
restoration  is  too  conjectural  to  be  of  any  service 
in  determining  the  original  sense  of  the  passage. 

The  editors  think  the  Gospel  of  which  this 
formed  a  fragment  mtist  have  been  composed  in 
Egypt  prior  to  A.D.  150,  and  that  it  was  closely 
connected  in  some  way  mth  the  Egyptian  (Jospel 
and  the  uncanonieal  source  of  2  Clement.  The 
fragment  seems  to  be  from  some  homily  on  the 

Eassage  Mt  6^'*,  in  which  the  preacher  dramatizes 
is  teaching  by  putting  it  into  the  form  of  a 
dialogue.  The  edifying  tendency  corresponds  to 
the  primitive  Christian  instinct  about  marriage 
and  the  sexes  which  afterwards  developed  into 
Encratitism,  but  which  neither  then  nor  afterwards 
has  been  incompatible  with  orthodox  belief.  The 
question  and  answer  at  the  close  form  a  mystic  ex- 
pansion of  the  preceding  saying  about  the  garment 
— an  expansion  which  presupposes  a  verl^l  form 
of  the  Logion  like  that  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyp- 
tians as  it  appears  in  Clement's  citation,  not  in 
that  of  2 Clem.  (seep.  495),  although  here  the  ques- 
tion is  put  by  the  disciples  instead  of  by  an  indivi- 
dual (Salome?).  Resch  (TU  new  ser.  xiL  [1904] 
593  n.)  holds  that  the  whole  fragment  comes  from 
the  Egyptian  Gospel ;  but  there  is  not  enough  evi- 
dence as  yet  to  show  that  the  OxyrhjTichite  Gospel 

•  i.e.  when  the  Eden -innocence  (Gn  oj)  is  restored,  and 
Kzual  associations  abolished.  Cf.  R.  Reitzenst«in's  BMenii- 
tiiche  WunderendJihtngen,  Leipzig,  1906,  pp.  67-68. 


was  identical  with  this  early  document.  Such 
ascetic  tendencies  were  not  contined  to  any  one 
circle,  and  it  is  uncritical  to  assume  that  the  varied 
expressions  of  them  which  survive  in  Gospel 
fn^^ents  belonged  to  the  same  document,  or  even 
to  diiierent  recensions  of  the  .same  document.  The 
Oxyrhynchite  Gospel  may  have  been  the  source 
used  in  2  Clement ;  the  difference  in  the  M-ording 
of  the  two  passages  is  not  conclusive  against  this 
conjecture  as  it  is  against  the  theory  that  the 
Oxyrhj-nchite  Gfospel  or  the  Clementine  source 
is  identical  with  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews. 

(ii.)  A  second  Oxyrhynchite  fragment  was  pub- 
lished in  1907  by  Grenfell  and  Hunt  {op.  cit.  v.  840), 
from  a  vellum  leaf  of  the  4th  (5th  ?)  century.  It 
begins  with  the  conclusion  of  an  address  by  Jesus 
to  the  disciples  and  proceeds  to  a  dialogue  between 
Jesus  and  a  high  priest  in  the  temple*  at  Jerusalem 
(cf.  Mk  11^),  the  theme  of  which  (cf.  Mk  V^)  is  the 
contrast  between  inward  and  outward  purity : 

'"  .  .  .  before  doing  wrong  he  makes  all  aoidustical  excuses 
(vorra  oo^t^mu).  But  take  heed  lest  yoa  suffer  like  them,  for 
the  eril-doers  among  men  do  not  receive  [their  due]  among  the 
liring  simply,  bat  await  pmiishment  and  sore  torture."  And 
taking  tbcan  [t.«.  the  disciples]  he  broaght  them  into  the  sacred 
precinct  (to  ayFrvr^fHor)  and  walked  within  the  temple.  And 
a  Pharisee,  a  high  priest  named  Levi  (!%  came  up  to  ihem  and 
said  to  the  Saviour,  "  Who  aUowed  you  to  tread  the  precinct  and 
look  at  these  holy  vessels  when  vou  have  not  washed,  neither 
have  yonr  disoples  bathed  their  feet  ?  Nay,  yoa  are  defiled  and 
yoa  have  trodden  this  holy  Place  which  is  <jean,  which  no  one 
treads  unless  he  has  washed  and  changed  hu  clothes,  neither 
does  he  [rentnre  to  look  at]  the  holy  Teasels."  And  .  .  .  (with  T) 
the  disciples  .  .  .  [the  Saviour  said],  "Then  are  you  dean,  you 
who  are  in  the  temple  ?  "  He  says  to  him,  "I  am  clean ;  for  I  hare 
washed  in  the  pool  of  David,  and  after  descending  by  one  stair  I 
ascended  by  another,  put  on  clean,  white  clothes,  and  then  came 
and  gazed  on  these  holy  vessels."  IJieSavioursaidtohiminreply, 
"  Woe  to  you,  blind  folk,  who  see  not !  You  have  washed  in 
these  running  waters,  in  which  dogs  and  swine  have  been  flung 
night  and  day ;  and  yoa  have  wiped  clean  the  ootdde  skin, 
which  even  harlots  and  Snte-girls  f  anoint  and  wash  and  wipe 
and  adorn  to  excite  the  lust  of  men,  while  within  tbey  are  [full  ?] 
of  scorpions  and  [aU  rice?).  Xow  I  and  [my  disciples?],  who, 
you  say,  have  not  bathed,  have  bathed  in  the  [living?]  waters 
which  issue  from  .  .  .  But  woe  to  .  .  ."  ' 

Like  the  fotir  scraps  recently  discovered  {op.  cit. 
X.  [1913]  1224),  this  extract  cannot  be  assigned  to 
any  of  the  2nd  cent,  uncanonieal  Gospels.  That 
it  Delonged  to  this  century  is  questioned  by  the 
editors,  who  point  out  that  the  ecclesiastical  vogue 
of  the  canonical  Gospels,  which  became  strong  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  2nd  cent.,  would  make 
it  difficult  for  any  document  covering  the  same 
ground  to  gain  acceptance,  and  that  '  after  about 
.\.D.  180  authors  of  apocryphal  Gospels  generally 
avoided  competition  with  the  uncanonieal  Grospefs 
by  placing  their  supposed  revelations  in  the  period 
of  the  Childhood  or  after  the  Resurrection.'  If 
our  fragment  does  not  belong  to  the  (Jospel  of  the 
Egyptians,  it  at  any  rate  betrays  no  dogmatic  or 
heretical  tendency.  On  the  other  hand,  the  author's 
acquaintance  with  the  local  customs  of  the  Jewish 
temple  in  the  1st  cent,  seems  defective  (cf.  J. 
Horst  in  SK,  1914,  p.  451  f.,  and  Preusclien  in 
ZNTW,  1908,  pp.  1-12),  though  more  favourable 
verdicts  have  been  passed  occasionally  on  this 
feature  of  the  fragment  (cf.  A.  Biichler  in  JQR 
XX.  [1907-08],  330?.;  Sulzbach  in  ZNTW,  1908, 
p.  175  f.;  and  L.  Blau,  ib.  pp.  204-215). 

(iii.)  A  tattered  leaf  of  papyrus,  'copied  probably 
in  the  earlier  decades  of  the  4th  cent.,'  contain- 
ing fragments  of  a  Gnostic  (iospel,  has  been  pub- 
lished by  Hunt(  in  The  Oxyrhynchvs  Papyri, 
viii.  [1911],  p.  16  f.  From  what  can  be  deciphered, 
it  is  clear  that  the  contents  must  have  come  from 
some  Valentinian  or  Marcosian  source.     Not  only 

*  This  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  features  in  the  fragment. 
The  uncanonieal  Gospels  of  the  2nd  cent,  very  rarely  famish 
any  material  for  the  Jerusalem  ministry  of  Jesus. 

t  This  curious  collocation  occurs  in  another  ftagmoit  of  an 
uncanonieal  Gospel  (cf.  above,  p.  492).  probaUy  NO ;  Waits 
infers  that  our  fragment  came  from  the  latter. 


500      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCAITONICAL) 


is  the  Lord  called  (xur-Zip,  as  well  as  /ci/ptoj  (cf.  Iren. 
i.  1.  3),*  but  a  distinction  is  drawn  between  iraTijp 
and  irpoirdTup  {it.  i.  1.  1,  12.  3,  etc.).+ 

'Lord,  how  then  can  we  find  faith?  The  Saviour  sa.vs  to 
them,  When  .vou  pass  from  tliinj^s  hidden  [into  the  light  of?] 
things  vi8i>>le,  then  the  etHucnce  (iiroppoia)  of  conception 
(ecfoiaf)  will  show  to  you  how  faith  ...  He  who  has  ears  to 
hear,  let  him  hear.  The  Lord  (Stairo-nK)  of  [all  thing^a?]  is  not 
the  Father  but  the  Fore-father  ;  for  the  Father  is  the  source  of 
the  things  that  are  to  come  (apxi?  i<rrlv  rmv  fifK\6vTu>v).  .  .  . 
He  who  has  an  ear  for  what  is  beyond  hearing  [('.«.  for  the 
mystic  or  inner  meaning.  But  the  text  is  uncertain],  let  him 
hear.  I  speak  also  to  those  who  watch  not.  Again  ...  he 
said,  Everything  born  of  corruption  perishes,  as  the  pro<iuct  of 
corruption  ;  but  what  is  born  of  incorruption  (a.'i>Oapai.ai)  does 
not  perish,  but  remains  incorruptible  as  the  product  of  incor- 
ruption.   Some  men  have  been  deceived,  not  knowing  .  .  .' 

(j)  Three  Sahidic  fragments.  —  It  may  be  no 
more  than  a  coincidence  that  Thomas  should  be 
mentioned  in  the  second  series  of  the  Oxyrhynchite 
Logia,t  and  that  he  §  is  also  exceptionally  import- 
ant in  the  third  of  five  Sahidic  ||  Gospel  fragments 
published  by  Forbes  Robinson  (TS  iv.  2  [1896], 
pp.  168-176).  The  fragment  is  long  and  remark- 
able. In  the  description  of  the  feeding  of  the  five 
thousand,  Jesus  bids  Thomas  go  to  the  man  (lad) 
who  has  the  loaves  and  fi.shes.  After  the  miracle, 
Thomas  asks  for  a  further  proof  of  the  Resurrection, 
in  the  raising  of  a  man  from  the  tomb,  not  merely 
in  the  raising  of  a  dead,  unburied  person  like  the 
son  of  the  widow  of  Nain.  Then  the  dialogue  of 
Jn  20'"''^  is  used  to  introduce  the  raising  of  Lazarus. 
Jesus  takes  Thomas  (Didymus)  specially  with  him  : 
'  Come  with  Me,  O  Didymus,  that  I  may  show 
thee  the  bones  which  have  been  dissolved  in  the 
tomb  gatliered  together  again.'  The  entire  story 
(cf.  Revillout,  Les  Apocryphes  copies,  p.  132  f.)  is  re- 
told with  the  special  motive  of  re-as.suring  Thomas. 
It  is  Thomas  who,  at  the  bidding  of  Jesus,  removes 
the  stone  from  the  tomb. 

This  Gospel  must  have  been  comprehensive.  It 
included  (fragm.  1)  an  account  of  the  birth  of 
John  the  Baptist  and  of  Jesus,  and  also  the 
Ministry,  the  Death,  and  the  Resurrection.  Thus 
the  second  Gospel  fragment  describes  the  wedding 
at  Cana.  The  Johannine  account  is  embroidered 
with  some  fresh  details  ;  Mary  is  the  sister  of  the 
bridegroom's  parents,  and  it  is  they  who  appeal  to 
her  for  help  when  the  wine  fails,  pleading  that  this 
lack  will  disgrace  them  as  the  hosts  of  Jesus,  and 
that  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world  He  can  do  any 
miracle.  The  Johannine  reply  of  Je.sus  to  Mary 
(here  =  ' Woman,  what  wilt  thou  with  me?')  is 
softened  by  tiie  observation  that  Jesus  spoke  '  in  a 
kindly  voice,'  and  by  the  repeated  remark  that 
Mary  felt  sure  He  Avould  not  grieve  her  in  anything. 
The  rest  of  the  story  is  told  by  one  of  the  servants 
who  fill  the  waterpots.  The  fourth  fragments 
contains  a  conversation  on  the  mount  of  Jn  6^-  ^' 
between  the  disciples  and  Jesus,  in  which  Jesus 
asserts  that  His  kingdom  is  spiritual.  Pilate  and 
the  Roman  authorities,  however,  propose  to  make 
Him  King  of  Judaja ;  such  is  their  admiration  for 
His  miracles  and  character.    Herod  **  opposes  this. 

*  This  would  not  of  itself  mean  much ;  the  same  title  occurs 
in  the  earlier  Oxyrhynchite  fragment  (cf.  p.  499). 
t  ayeVioTTO?  also  occurs  in  the  lacunae. 

I  In  The  Oxyrhynchus  Logia  and  the  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
1899,  C.  Taylor  connects  the  first  series  with  the  Gospel  of 
Thomas ;  cf.  Scott-Moncrieff,  Paganism  and  Christianity  in 
Egypt,  1913,  p.  64  f . 

§  Photius  (\\\oief,{Bihliothe.ca,  232)  a  tradition  that  it  was  he,  not 
Peter,  who  cut  off  the  ear  of  the  high  priest's  servant  (Jn  1810). 

II  The  Egyptian  colouring  comes  out  in  the  cry  of  I^zarus, 
when  he  is  raised:  'Blessed  art  thou,  Jesus,  at  whose  voice 
Amenti  trembles.'  The  idea  of  Jn  1125.45  jg  expressed  by  say- 
ing that  the  multitudes  'gathered  together  to  Lazarus,  like  bees 
to  a  honeycomb,  because  of  the  wonder  which  was  come  to  pass.' 

%  It  corresponds  to  a  Coptic  f  rnginent  published  by  Revillout 
(Apocryphes  copies du  nmineau  'J'c.itament,  Paris,  1876,  p.  124  f.), 
and  is  assigned  by  that  scholar  to  his  '  Gospel  of  Gamaliel '  (see 
below,  p.  504). 

**  The  aiiti-Herodian  bias  is  even  more  marked  than  in  the 
Gospel  of  Peter. 


'And  straightway  there  was  enmity  between  Herod 
and  I'ilate  because  of  Jesus  from  that  day.'  On 
coming  down  from  the  mount,  the  disciples  and 
Jesus  meet  the  devil  in  the  guise  of  a  lisherman, 
with  many  demons  '  carrying  many  nets  and  drag- 
nets and  hooks,  and  castin<j  nets  and  hooks  on  the 
mount' :  Jesus  explains  this  vision  in  terms  of  Lk 
2231-^3,  John,  by  permission  of  .lesus,  challenges 
the  devil  to  a  iishing-contest.  The  devil  catches 
'  every  kind  of  foul  lish  which  was  in  the  waters — 
.some  taken  by  their  eyes,  some  caught  by  their 
entrails,  others  taken  by  their  lips.'  The  fragment 
then  breaks  oil",  before  Satan's  capture  of  sinners 
by  their  members  is  outdone  by  the  apostolic  cap- 
ture of  the  elect. 

The  Coptic  counterpart  of  this  fragment  pub- 
lished by  Revillout  is  apparently  followed  (op.  cit. 
184)  by  a  fragment  corresponding  to  Jn  7"*  "*• 
*".  .  .  the  time  is  accomplished."  When  he  said 
these  things,  he  went  into  Galilee.  When  his 
brothers  had  gone  up  to  Jerusalem  for  the  feast,  he 
went  thither  also,  not  openly  but  in  secret.  The 
Jews,  however,  sought  for  him,  and  said,  "Where 
is  he  ? "  Now  it  was  the  house  of  Irmeel  which  was 
his  place  of  residence  owing  to  .  .  .  the  multitude. 
Then  they  said,  "  What  are  we  to  do?"' 

The  fifth  fragment  describes  the  Resurrection 
(p.  179  f.).  The  anti-.Jewi.sh  tendency*  which 
emerged  in  the  fourth  fragment  re-appears  in  the 
determination  of  the  Jews  to  burn  the  very  wood 
of  the  Cross — a  plot  thwarted  by  Joseph  of  Arima- 
tha^a  and  Nicodemus,  who  preserve  the  Cross,  the 
nails,  and  the  written  title.  A  rich  Jew  called 
Cleojias,  the  cousin  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  buries  his 
son  Rufus  near  the  Saviour's  tomb.  The  imperfect 
state  of  the  text  at  this  point  leaves  the  course  of 
events  obscure,  but  evidently  Rufus  was  raised 
from  the  dead  by  Jesus,  in  response  to  the  prayer 
of  Cleopas,  who  sat  with  his  back  to  the  stone  at 
the  tomb  of  Jesus.  Cleopas  'saw  with  his  eyes  a 
figure  of  the  Cross  come  forth  from  the  tomb  of 
Jesus.  It  rested  upon  him  Avho  was  dead  [i.e. 
Rufus];  and  straightway  he  arose  and  sat.' 
Whereupon  Cleopas,  who  had  hitherto  been  un- 
able to  walk,  owing  to  a  disease  of  the  feet,  leapt 
up  as  if  he  had  no  disease  at  all.  The  description 
of  the  Cross  recalls  the  Gospel  of  Peter. 

The  fragments  are  all  late  ;  they  profess  to  quote 
from  Josephus  and  Irenteus,  and  in  any  case  must 
be  placed  not  earlier  than  the  3rd  century.  If 
there  was  some  connexion  between  later  forms  of 
the  Gospel  of  Thomas  on  the  one  hand  and  a 
Gospel  of  the  Twelve  (see  above,  p.  480)  on  the 
other,  these  fragments  might  be  placed  approxi- 
mately in  this  quarter.  But  as  the  fragments  are 
embedded  in  homiletical  material,  there  is  always 
the  possibility  that  such  stories  were  imaginative 
tales,  not  necessarily  drawn  from  any  written 
Gospel.  They  illustrate  also  the  difliculty  of 
assigning  material  like  this  to  our  second  or  to  our 
third  group  ;  the  later  fragments  tally  in  several 
respects  with  some  Coptic  fragments  which  fall  to 
be  noted  in  our  third  section. 

III.  Gospels  op  the  Passion  and  Resurrec- 
tion.—(a)  The  Gospel  of  Philip.— The  existence 
of  a  Gospel  of  Philip  is  attested  by  the  Pistis 
Sophia,  but  the  only  extant  quotation  occurs  in 
Epiphanius  (xxvi.  13) :  '  The  Lord  revealed  to  me 
what  the  soul  must  say  when  she  mounts  to 
heaven,  and  how  she  must  answer  each  of  the 
Powers  above.  "  I  have  known  myself,"  she  says, 
"and  gathered  myself  from  all  quarters,  and  have 
not  borne  children  to  the  Archon,  but  have  torn 
up  his  roots  and  gathered  the  scattered  members. 
And  I  know  who  thou  art.  For  I,"  she  says, 
"belong  to  those  above."    So  saying,  she  is  re- 

•  '  The  abuse  of  the  Jews  is  a  favourite  theme  in  Coptic 
apocryphal  sermons '  (cf .  p.  187)k 


GOSPEI^  (UNCANOXICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UXCANONICAL)      501 


leased.  But  if  it  is  found  that  she  has  borne  a  son, 
she  is  kept  below  until  she  is  able  to  recover  her 
cliildren  and  attract  them  to  herself.' 

The  fragment  reflects  the  Gnostic  idea  (cf. 
Bousset's  essay  in  Archiv  fur  Heligionsteissen- 
scha/t,  1901,  p.  155 f.)  of  the  ascent  of  the  soul 
through  the  heavens,  and  the  magic  pass-words  re- 
quired forthe  journey,  but  the  characteristic  feature 
is  the  antipathy  to  marriage,  which  agrees  with 
the  2nd  cent,  conception  of  Philip  the  Apostle. 

According  to  Epiphanius,  this  pseudo-Philip 
Gospel  was  used  during  the  4th  cent,  by  an 
immoral  sect  of  Egyptian  Gnostics  to  justify  sexual 
vice  instead  of  marriage  {ol  St  Aevirou  -rap  aCroTi 
KoXovfuyoi,  w  fiiffyoPTai  •Yuyai^iv,  dXAa  oXXi^Xots  fda- 
yoirrai}.  The  Gosi>el  of  Philip,  which,  according  to 
the  6th  cent.  Leontius  of  Byzantium  {de  Sectis, 
iii.  2,  X^70Wi  yap  EvayyiXiop  Kara  Oufidw  (coi  <f>iXtxxov, 
artp  rjfieii  oiiK  ttrfiev),*  was  used  by  the  Manichaeans, 
may  have  been  a  special  edition  of  the  original 
Philip  Gospel. 

The  Pistis  Sophia  (69-70)  proves  that  this  Gospel 
circulated  among  Gnostic  Christians  in  Egypt 
during  the  3rd  century.  If  it  was  the  source  of 
Clement's  tradition  that  Jesus  spoke  the  words  of 
Lk  Q*'  ('Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead')  to  Philip 
(Strom,  iii.  4.  25),  then  the  date  could  be  brought 
i>ack  to  about  the  middle  of  the  2nd  century. 
It  is  no  argument  against  this  conjecture  to  say 
that  the  Gospel  of  Philip  did  not  contain  Synoptic 
material  but  was  a  Gnostic  speculative  work  set 
in  the  post-Resurrection  period.  We  do  not  know 
all  that  the  Gospel  contained,  and  while  it  professed 
to  have  been  written  by  Philip  on  the  basis  of 
revelations  made  to  Thomas,  Matthew,  and  him- 
self by  the  risen  Christ,  what  Philip  wrote  was 
not  only  the  mysterious  visions  he  was  to  see  but 
'all  that  Jesus  said  and  all  that  he  did' — which 
might  (cf.  Ac  1^)  readily  include  an  incident  like 
that  of  Lk  9**.  But  the  identification  of  the 
anonymous  disciple  with  Philip  (which  re-appears 
in  the  later  Acts  of  Philip)  may  have  been  derived 
from  some  other  source  in  written  or  unwritten 
tradition ;  the  anti-marriage  view  of  Philip  was 
probably  older  than  the  Gospel  of  Philip,  and  the 
latter  cannot  safely  be  put  much  earlier  than  the 
last  quarter  of  the  2nd  century.  It  is  upon 
the  whole  better  to  place  this  writing  among  the 
Resurrection  Gospels  than  in  the  second  of  our 
groups. 

Philip  appears  in  a  curious  little  Coptic  fragment 
of  some  Gospel  (Revillout,  2^  Apocryphcs  copies, 
131-132),  where  he  is  accused  by  Herod  of  seditious 
conduct ;  Herod  persuades  Tiberius  to  allow  him 
to  confiscate  all  the  Apostle's  property.  But  it  is 
one  thing  to  put  Philip  into  a  Gospel — he  would 
naturally  appear  in  any  later  Gospel  of  the  Twelve 
— it  is  another  thing  to  make  him  the  author  of  a 
Gospel. 

(b)  The  Gospel  of  Matthias. — Neither  Origen 
nor  any  writer  after  him  quotes  from  the  Grospel 
of  Matthias.  It  is  simply  branded  (e.g.  by 
Eusebius,  HE  iii.  25.  6)  along  with  the  Gospels  of 
Peter  and  Thomas.  But  Hippolytus  (Philos.  vii. 
20)  declares  that  Basilides  and  Isidore  claimed  to 
have  received  X6701  a-r6Kpv<fxM.  from  Matthias,  who 
had  been  taught  them  privately  by  the  Saviour. 
Hippolytus  argues  that  the  contents  of  these  so- 
called  apostolic  \ir/0L  were  really  borrowed  from 
the  philosophy  of  Aristotle's  Categories.t  Again, 
Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  twice  from  the 
Traditions  (rapa5d<reis)  of  Matthias,  once  (Strom. 

*  These  Gospels  seem  to  have  been  Docetic  ;  the  Incarnation 
was  card  ^<u^a0'i<u' ;  Jesns  changed  places  uith  a  man  (Simon?), 
and  therefore  escaj^ed  suffering  on  the  Cross ;  Jesus  became 
invisible  when  transfigured,  etc. 

t  As  it  happens,  the  saying  about  wonder  as  the  gateway  to 
knowledge  occars  in  Aristotle  {Metapkys.  L  2.  15)  as  weQ  as  in 
Plato  {TheceUt.  155  D). 


ii.  9.  45)  in  illustration  of  the  principle  that  wonder 
is  the  beginning  of  knowledge  ('as  Plato  says  in 
the  Thetetetus  and  as  Matthias  advises  in  the 
Traditions,  "wonder  at  what  is  before  you,"  laying 
this  down  as  the  first  step  to  any  further  know- 
ledge '),  and  once  to  prove  the  responsibility  of  a 
good  example :  '  If  the  neighbour  of  an  elect 
person  sins,  the  elect  person  sins ;  for,  had  he 
behaved  as  the  word  [6  X6701]  prescribes,  his  neigh- 
bour wotild  have  so  esteemed  his  life  that  he  would 
not  have  sinned '  (Strom,  vii.  13.  82).  Elsewhere 
Clement  observes  that,  according  to  some  (yjyown 
•yoi/i'),  '  Matthias  taught  that  the  flesh  must  be 
fought  against  and  denied,  no  indulgence  granted 
to  its  intemperate  lust,  and  that  the  soul  should 
grow  by  faith  and  knowledge '  (Strom,  iii.  4.  26).* 
Are  the  Traditions  the  same  as  the  Gospel  ?  It  is 
not  decisive  against  this,  that  Matthias  Ls  intro- 
duced as  teaching,  for  both  Peter  and  Philip  are 
represented  in  their  respective  Gospels  as  giving 
instructions.  On  the  other  hand,  rapaSixreis  would 
be  a  strange  and  superfluous  title  for  a  writing 
which  was  known  as  a  euo77e'XMH'.  Clement,  like 
Hippolytus,  ranks  the  Basilidians  among  the 
Gnostics  who  put  themselves  under  the  aegis  of 
Matthias  (Strom,  vii.  17.  108,  ttjf  'Mardiov  ajJxwfi 
trpocdyeffOat  Si^of) ;  but  this  reference  is  not  conclu- 
sive, for  he  adds  :  '  as  the  teaching  which  has  come 
from  all  the  apostles  is  one,  so  is  their  tradition.'  He 
objects  to  one  apostle's  teaching  being  singled  out 
for  special  purposes  by  any  sect.  But  his  own 
references  to  the  teaching  of  Matthias  are  upon 
the  whole  respectful,  and  their  tone  does  not 
suggest  a  Gospel  identical  with  the  X6yot  dxojcpi^ot 
of  the  Basilidians.  We  might  conjecture  that  the 
Gospel  of  the  Basilidians  (icard  Batri\l5-r]v)  was  the 
Gospel  according  to  Matthias.  But  Origen's  evi- 
dence is  against  this,  and  such  data  as  we  can 
gather  for  an  estimate  of  the  Gospel  of  Basilides 
point  in  another  direction.  +  There  is  no  reason 
why  Traditions  of  Matthias  should  not  have  existed 
alongside  of  a  Gospel  of  Matthias,  and  the  Xo^ot 
d-rdxpuipoi  may  refer  to  the  former. 

Since  Matthias  was  elected  an  apostle  after  the 
Resurrection  (Ac  l''*"*),  it  would  be  natural  to  use 
his  name  and  tradition  as  the  vehicle  of  more  or 
less  secret  revelations  made  by  the  Risen  Lord  to 
the  disciples.  Hence  we  may  provisionally  rank 
his  Gospel  in  our  third  class. 

In  a  Coptic  fragment,  assigned  by  Revillout  to 
the  Gospel  of  the  Twelve  (Les  Apocryphes  copies, 
157  f . ),  Matthias  appears  at  the  Laist  Supper.  '  The 
Saviour  set  him  with  the  twelve  apostles,  and  the 
table  was  before  them.  When  the  Saviour  stretched 
his  hand  towards  the  food,  the  table  turned  round, 
so  that  they  stretched  all  their  hands  towards  what 
the  Saviour  ate,  and  he  blessed  it.  Matthias  set 
down  a  platter  on  which  was  a  cock.  The  salt  was 
on  the  table.  The  SaWour  stretched  his  hand  to 
take  the  salt  first,  and  as  the  table  turned 
round  all  the  apostles  partook  of  it.  Matthias 
said  to  Jesus,  "  Rabbi,  you  see  this  cock.  When 
the  Jews  saw  me  killing  it,  they  said.  They  will 
kill  your  Master  like  that  cock."  Jesus  sighed. 
He  said,  "  O  Matthias,  they  shall  accomplish  the 
word  they  have  spoken.  This  cock  will  give  the 
signal  before  the  light  dawns.  It  is  the  type  of 
John  the  Baptist  who  heralded  me  in  advance.  I, 
I  am  the  true  light  which  has  no  darkness  in  it. 

*  This  is  also  quoted  (from  Clement  ?)  as  a  word  of  Matthias, 
b}-  Xicephorus  Callistus,  HE  iii.  15. 

t  The  one  item  of  e\idence  that  makes  one  hesitate  is 
Clement's  version  of  Lk  19it  in  Strom,  iv.  6.  35,  which  begins, 
'  Zacchsns  (some  say,  llatthias)  .  .  .'  But  even  if  this  is  any 
more  than  an  instance  of  the  frequent  confusion  between 
llatthias  and  Mattbew,  it  might  simply  mean  that,  in  the 
Gospel  of  Baalides  or  of  Matthias,  llatthias  occupied  the  r61e 
of  Zacdueas.  Elsewhere  he  became  omfosed  not  only  with 
Matthew  but  with  Simon  the  Zealot  (cf.  Schermann,  TU  3rd 
ser.  L  3  [1907],  pp.  28S-285). 


602      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


When  this  cock  died,  they  said  of  me  that  I  wouKl 
die,  I  whom  Mary  conceived  in  her  womb.  I  dwelt 
there  with  the  cherubim  and  seraphim.  I  have 
come  forth  from  the  heaven  of  heaven  to  earth. 
It  was  hard  for  the  earth  to  bear  my  glory.  I  have 
become  man  for  you.  However,  this  cock  will 
rise."  Jesus  touched  the  cock  and  said  to  it,  "I 
bid  you  live,  O  cock,  as  you  have  done.  Let  your 
wings  bear  you  up,  and  fly  in  the  air,  that  you 
may  give  warninj'  of  the  day  on  which  I  am  be- 
trayed." The  cock  rose  up  on  the  platter.  It  flew 
away.  Jesus  said  to  Matthias,  "  iiehold  the  cock 
you  sacriliced  three  hours  ago  is  risen.  They  shall 
crucify  me,  and  my  blood  will  be  the  salvation  of 
the  nations  (and  I  will  rise  on  the  third  day)  .  .  . " ' 
This  fragment  witnesses  to  the  prestige  or  Matthias 
in  the  tradition  of  the  early  Church ;  he  is  ad- 
mitted to  the  fellowship  of  the  Last  Supper  of  Jesus, 
beside  the  twelve  apostles,  instead  of  being  merely 
(Ac  l''^"^)  added  to  their  company  after  the  Resurrec- 
tion. It  was  an  easy  step  from  this  to  make  him 
the  author  of  a  Gospel  or  the  vehicle  of  esoteric 
revelations. 

(c)  The  Gospel  of  Mary.  —  In  SBAW  (1896, 
p.  839  f. )  C.  Schmidt  describes  three  fragments  from 
a  still  unedited  Coptic  MS  of  the  5th  cent.,  and 
shows  that  the  title  of  the  first,  '  Gospel  of  Mary,' 
covers  them  all.  The  alternative  title,  '  An  Apoc- 
ryphon  of  John,'  belongs  to  the  second  fragment, 
but  this  is  intelligible,  for  the  Mary  literature 
tends  to  be  connected  with  apostolic  apocalypses 
(cf.  p.  503).  The  passage  in  Ac  1",  where  Mary  as- 
sociates with  the  apostles,  formed  a  suggestive  point 
of  departure  for  this  kind  of  religious  romance. 

The  Gnostic  references  in  these  fragments  tally 
so  exactly  with  some  of  the  data  supplied  by 
Irenseus  in  his  refutation  of  the  Barbelo  Gnostics 
(i.  29)  that  Schmidt  and  Harnack  infer  without 
hesitation  that  this  Gospel  of  Mary  must  have 
been  a  document  of  the  sect  and  known  to  Irenseus. 
Hitherto,  we  had  only  the  assertion  of  Epiphanius 
(xxvi.  8)  that  certain  Gnostic  sects  issued  a  number 
of  works  in  the  name  of  Mary.  The  present  find 
ratifies  this  assertion. 

•  Now  it  came  to  pass  on  one  of  these  days  when  John,  the 
brother  of  James — who  are  the  sons  of  Zebedee— had  gone  up  to 
the  temple  [cf.  Ac  3i],  that  a  Pharisee  named  Ananias  (?)  drew 
near  to  him  and  said  to  him,  "  Where  is  your  Master,  that  you 
are  not  following  him  ?  "  He  said  to  him,  "  He  has  gone  (?)  to 
the  place  whence  he  came."  The  Pharisee  said  to  him,  "  By  a 
deception  has  the  Nazarene  deceived  you,  for  he  has  .  .  .  and 
made  you  forsake  the  tradition  of  your  fathers."  When  I  heard 
this,  I  turned  from  the  temple  to  the  mountain,  at  a  lonely  spot, 
and  was  very  sad  in  heart,  and  said,  "How  then  was  the 
Redeemer  chosen,  and  why  was  he  sent  to  the  world  by  his 
Father  who  appointed  him  ?  And  who  is  his  Father  ?  And  how 
is  that  ajon  created,  to  which  we  are  to  come?"'  Suddenly 
heaven  opens  ;  the  Lord  appears,  explains  matters,  and  with- 
draws— the  audience  being  not  only  John  but  the  disciples. 
They  are  dismayed  at  the  prospect  of  having  to  preach  Jesus 
to  the  heathen.  ' ' '  How  can  we  go  to  the  heathen  and  preach  the 
gospel  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Son  of  Man  ?  If  they  refused  to 
receive  him,  how  will  they  receive  us?"  Then  Mary*  rose, 
embraced  them  all,  and  said  to  her  brothers,  "  Weep  not  and 
sorrow  not,  neither  doubt ;  for  his  grace  will  be  with  you  all 
and  will  protect  you.  Rather  let  us  praise  his  goodness,  that 
he  has  prepared  us  and  made  us  men."'  The  discussion  pro- 
ceeds, Mary  remonstrating  with  the  incredulous  disciples,  and 
finally  bursting  into  tears  at  a  sharp  rebuke  from  Peter.  Levi 
stands  up  for  her,  however.  But  at  this  point  our  fragment 
unfortunately  breaks  off,  and  the  next  episode  is  an  appearance 
of  the  risen  Christ  to  John. 

A  fragment  from  '  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus  Christ ' 
then  begins.  '  After  his  resurrection  from  the 
dead,  his  twelve  disciples  and  seven  women,  his 
women-disciples,  repaired  to  Galilee,  to  the  moun- 
tain which  ,  .  .'  The  Lord's  appearance  is  de- 
scribed as  'not  in  his  earlier  form  but  in  the 
invisible  spirit ;  his  form  was  that  of  a  great  angel 
of  light. '  The  disciples  question  him  on  topics  of 
Gnostic  speculation,  and  receive  answers. 

The  third  fragment  is  an  episode  from  the 
*  She  is  evidently  with  them,  u  in  Ac  V*. 


miraculous  career  of  Peter.  As  he  is  healing  the 
sick  on  the  day  after  the  Sabbath  (i.e.  the  KvpiaK-ff  or 
Lord's  Day),  a  man  taunts  him  with  failing  to  cure 
his  own  daughter,  who  had  been  for  long  paralyzed. 
Peter  then  heals  her.  The  story  closes  with  an 
account  of  the  conversion  of  a  pagan,  Ptolemceus. 

The  Gnostic  work  from  which  these  fragments 
are  preserved  was,  according  to  Schmidt,  an 
Egyptian  'Gospel  of  Mary'  (p.  842 f.),  and  its 
evident  use  by  Irenaeus  proves  its  existence  prior 
to  A.D.  130. 

(d)  The  Gospel  of  Bartholomew.— When  Bar- 
tholomew evangelized  India,  according  to  tlie 
tradition  preserved  by  Eusebius  (HE  v.  10.  3),  he 
took  with  liim  Matthew's  Gospel  in  Hebrew.  This 
is  not  what  Jerome  and  the  Gelasian  Decree  mean 
by  the  Gospel  of  Bartholomew,  which  they  rank 
among  the  apocrypha.  The  latter  may  now  be 
recovered,  in  stray  fragments  from  Latin,  Greek, 
and  even  Coptic  sources,  although  the  same  kind 
of  problem  emerges  here  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Gospel  of  Peter,  viz.  how  far  it  is  possible  to 
separate  the  extant  fragments  from  a  Gospel  and 
from  an  Apocalypse,  and  to  assign  them  to  either. 

The  Latin  fragments  are  preserved  in  a  Vatican 
MS  of  the  9th  cent.  (Reg.  lat.  1050),  in  which 
a  compiler  of  the  7th  or  8th  cent,  lias  written 
three  episodes  from  that  Gospel,  containing  con- 
versations between  Jesus  and  Bartholomew.  Thus 
Bartholomew  asks  Jesus  to  tell  him  who  the 
man  was  whom  he  saw  carried  in  the  hands  of 
angels  and  sighing  heavily  when  Jesus  spoke  to 
him.  Jesus  replies,  '  He  is  Adam,  on  account  of 
whom  I  came  down  from  heaven.  I  said  to  him, 
"Adam,  on  account  of  thee,  and  on  account  of  thy 
sons,  I  have  been  hung  on  the  cross."  Sighing,  he 
said  to  me  vnih.  tears,  "Thus  it  pleased  thee,  O 
Lord,  in  heaven."'  Bartholomew  then  asks  why 
one  angel  refused  to  ascend  with  the  other  angels 
who  preceded  Adam,  singing  a  hymn,  and  why,  on 
being  bidden  ascend  by  Jesus,  a  flame  shot  from 
his  hands  as  far  as  Jerusalem.  Jesus  explains 
that  the  flame  struck  the  synagogue  of  the  Jews, 
in  token  of  the  Crucifixion.  'Afterwards  Jesus 
said,  "  Await  me  in  yonder  place,  for  to-day  the 
sacrifice  is  offered  in  paradise."  Bartholomew 
said,  ' '  What  is  the  sacrifice  *  in  paradise  ? "  Jesus 
said,  "The  souls  of  the  just  enter  the  presence 
of  the  just  to-day."  Bartholomew  said,  "  How 
many  souls  leave  the  body  every  day?"  Jesus 
said,  "Truly,  I  tell  thee,  12,873  souls t  leave  the 
body  daily.'"  The  second  fragment  describes 
Jesus  reluctantly  alloAving  Bartholomew  and  the 
other  apostles,  with  Mary,  to  see  the  devil,  or  Anti- 
christ. Jesus  places  them  on  Mount  Olivet,  and 
after  a  blast  of  Michael's  trumpet  and  an  earth- 
quake, the  Evil  One  appears,  in  chains  of  fire,  under 
a  guard  of  6,064  angels.  He  is  600  cubits  hi^h  and 
300  broad.  Jesus  then  encourages  Bartholomew 
to  strike  Satan's  neck  with  his  feet,  and  to  ask 
him  about  his  ways  and  means  of  tempting  men. 
Bartholomew  kicks  the  devil,  but  returns  in  terror 
to  ask  Jesus  for  something  to  protect  him  during 
the  conversation.  Encouraged  by  Jesus,  he  makes 
the  sign  of  the  cross,  kicks  Satan  again,  and  forces 
the  furious  creature  to  tell  who  he  is.  The  third 
fragment  runs :  '  Then  Bartholomew  approached 
Satan,  saying,  "Go  to  thine  own  place  with  all 
like  thee.^'  And  the  devil  said,  "Wait  till  I  tell 
thee  how  I  was  caught  when  God  made  man.  I 
was  then  in  the  second  heaven  .  .  ." ' 

The  extant  Greek  fragments,  four  in  number, 
are  much  larger  than  the  Latin,  but  their  character- 

•  For  mxmus  the  Greek  has  fluo-io,  and,  in  the  reply  of  Jesus, 
'  Unless  I  am  present,  thev  do  not  enter  paradise." 

t  The  editors  Wilmart-f  isserant  (liV,,  1913,  pp.  161  flf.,  321  ff.) 
add  M  between  XII  and  D,  to  approximate  to  the  ;M),000  of  the 
Greek. 


GOSPELS  (UNCAXONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UXCANOXICAL)      503 


istics  are  the  same.  In  the  first,  Bartholomew 
asks  the  Lord  after  the  Resurrection  to  show  him 
the  mysteries  of  heaven.  The  apostle  explains 
that  when  he  followed  Jesus  to  the  Crucifixion,  he 
saw  the  anpels  descend  and  worship  Him,  but  that, 
when  the  darkness  came.  He  (Jesus)  had  vanished 
from  the  Cross  ;  all  that  Bartholomew  could  hear 
was  a  sound  from  the  under  world,  loud  wailing 
and  gnashing  of  teeth.  Jesus  explains,  'Blessed 
art  thou,  my  beloved  Bartholomew,  that  thou  didst 
see  this  mj'ster^.  And  now  I  shall  tell  thee  all 
thou  hast  asked  me.  "When  I  vanished  from  the 
Cross,  then  I  went  down  to  Hades  to  bring  up 
Adam,  and  all  who  are  with  him,  thanks  to 
(koto  rijf  rafxiKXrjaiy)  the  archangel  Michael.' 
The  sound  was  Hades  calling  to  Beliar,  *God 
comes  here,  as  I  see.'*  Beliar  thinks  it  may  be 
Elijah  or  Enoch  or  one  of  the  prophets,  and  en- 
courages Hades  to  bar  the  gates.  Hades  wails 
tliat  he  is  being  tortured  ;  it  must  be  God.  '  Then,' 
says  Jesus,  '  I  entered,  scourged  him  and  bound 
him  with  unbreakable  chains,  and  took  out  all 
the  patriarchs,t  and  so  returned  to  the  Cross.'  A 
Greek  replica  of  the  first  Latin  fragment  follows, 
after  which  Bartholomew  asks,  '  Lord,  when  thou 
wast  teaching  the  word  with  us,  didst  thou  receive 
the  sacrifices  in  paradise?'  Jesus  replies,  'Truly, 
I  tell  thee,  my  beloved,  when  I  was  teaching  the 
word  with  you,  I  was  also  sitting  with  my  Father.' 
Bartholomew  then  seems  to  ai-k  how  many  of  the 
souls  who  leave  the  world  daUy  are  found  just  (the 
text  is  corrupt  at  this  point) ;  Jesus  replies,  *  Fifty.' 
And  how  many  souls  are  bom  into  the  world  every 
day  ?  '  Just  one  more  than  those  who  leave  the 
world.'  Then  the  conversation  ends.  '  And  when 
he  said  this,  he  gave  them  peace  and  vanished 
from  them.' 

The  second  Greek  fragment  introduces  Mary. 
The  apostles  are  in  a  place  called  Cheltura,  when 
Bartholomew  proposes  to  Peter,  Andrew,  and 
John  that  they  ask  ilary  about  the  virgin-birth. 
None  of  them  cares  to  put  the  question  ;  Bartholo- 
mew reminds  Peter  that  he  is  their  leader,  but 
Peter  turns  to  John,  as  the  beloved  apostle  and  as 
the  '  virgin '  (rapdivos).  Eventually  Bartholomew 
himself  approaches  Mary.  The  text  becomes 
broken  at  this  point,  but  Mary  evidently  utters 
an  elaborate  prayer,  at  the  close  of  which  she 
invites  the  apostles  to  sit  down  beside  her,  Peter 
at  her  right  with  his  left  hand  under  her  arm, 
and  Andrew  similarly  supporting  her  on  the  left ; 
John  is  to  support  her  bosom,  and  Bartholomew  to 
kneel  at  her  back,  in  case  she  collapses  under  the 
strain  of  the  revelation.  She  then  tells  them  : 
'When  I  was  in  the  sanctuary  of  God,  receiving 
food  from  the  hand  of  an  angel,*  one  day  there 
appeared  to  me  the  shape  of  an  angel,  though  his 
features  could  not  be  fixed  (?  to  oi  -rpSawTrov  oiJtoi; 
fiv  dxi^ipTTTO")  ;  he  had  not  bread  or  a  cup  in  his 
hand  like  the  angel  who  formerly  came  to  me. 
And  suddenly  the  veil  of  the  sanctuary  was  torn, 
and  a  great  earthquake  took  place,  and  I  fell  on 
my  face,  unable  to  bear  the  sight  of  him.  But  he 
put  out  his  hand  and  raised  me,  and  I  looked  up 
to  heaven  ;  and  a  cloud  of  dew  came  .  .  .  sprink- 
ling me  from  head  to  foot.  But  he  wiped  me  with 
his  robe  and  said  to  me,  "  Hail,  O  highly  favoured 
one,  thou  chosen  vessel."  And  he  put  out  his  right 
hand,  and  there  was  a  huge  loaf  ;  and  he  laid  it  on 
the  altar  of  incense  in  the  sanctuary  ;  he  ate  of  it 
first,  and  gave  to  me.     Again,  he  put  out  his  left 

*  The  Slavonic  version,  which  differs  considerably  from  the 
Greek  text  at  this  point,  paraphrases  Ps  24't 

♦  One  of  the  themes  which  led  to  the  composition  of  the  so- 
called  G<»pel  of  Xicodemus.  This  Harrowing  of  Hell  became  a 
favourite  theme  of  mediaeval  reli^ous  romajice. 

t  As  in  the  Gospel  of  pseudo-Matthew  (see  above,  p.  4SS).  The 
first  annunciation  takes  place  earlier  in  the  Gospel  of  Baitholo- 
mew  than  in  the  other  Gospels  of  this  class. 


hand,  and  there  was  an  enormous  cup,  full  of  wine  ; 
he  drank  of  it  first,  and  gave  to  me.  And  I  beheld 
and  saw  the  cup  ftill  and  the  loaf.  And  he  said 
to  me,  "  Three  years  more,  and  I  will  send  thee 
my  word,  and  thou  shalt  conceive  a  son,  and  by 
him  all  creation  shall  be  saved  ;  and  thou  shalt  be 
for  the  saving  of  the  world.  Peace  to  thee,  my 
beloved  ;  yea,  peace  shall  be  with  thee  evermore. 
And  he  vanished  from  me,  and  the  sanctuary  be- 
came as  it  had  been  before.'  At  this,  fire  issued 
from  her  mouth,  and  threatened  to  put  an  end  to 
the  world  ;  whereupon  the  Lord  bids  her  keep 
silence  on  the  mystery.  The  apostles  are  terrified, 
in  case  the  Lord  is  angry  with  them  for  their  pre- 
sumption in  questioning  her. 

The  third  fragment  is  extremely  brief  and 
broken.  Evidently,  the  apostles  (through  Bar- 
tholomew ?)  had  asked  for  a  revelation  of  the 
under  world.  '  Jesus  said,  "  It  is  good  for  you  not 
to  see  the  abyss.  But  if  you  desire  it,  follow  and 
look."  So  ne  brought  them  to  a  place  called 
Chairoudek,  the  place  of  truth,  and  nodded  to  the 
western  (dvrucdis)  angels  ;  and  the  earth  was  rolled 
up  like  a  scroll,  and  the  abyss  was  revealed,  and 
the  apostles  saw  it  and  fell  on  their  face.  But  the 
Lord  raised  them,  sajnng,  "Did  I  not  tell  yon,  it 
is  not  good  for  you  to  see  the  abyss  t " ' 

The  long  fourth  fragment  corresponds  to  the 
second  and  third  Latin  fragments.  Jesus  takes 
them  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  accompanied  by 
Mary.  He  is  at  first  stem,  when  Bartholomew- 
asks  Him  for  a  sight  of  the  devil  and  his  ways,  but 
eventually  leads  them  down  and  orders  the  angels 
over  Tartarus  to  make  Michael  sound  his  trumpet ; 
whereupon  the  fearful  figure  of  Beliar  appears,  to 
the  terror  of  the  apostles.  Bartholomew,  as  in 
the  Latin  fragment,  is  encouraged  by  Jesus  to  put 
his  foot  on  the  giant's  neck  and  to  question  him 
about  his  names.  The  reply  is,  '  First  I  was  called 
Satanael,  which  means  angel  of  God  ;  but  when  in 
ignorance  I  rebelled  against  God,  my  name  was 
called  Satan,  which  means  angel  over  Tartarus.' 
He  proceeds,  against  his  wiU,  to  make  further 
disclosures.  '  When  God  made  heaven  and  earth, 
he  took  a  flame  of  fire,  and  fashioned  me  first,  then 
Michael,  thirdly  Gabriel,  fourthly  Raphael,  fifthly 
Uriel,  sixthly  Xathanael,  and  the  other  six  thou- 
sand angels,  whose  names  I  cannot  utter,  for  they 
are  the  bearers  of  God's  rod  (po;35ouxot  rod  dtoO),  and 
thev  beat  me  every  day  and  seven  times  every 
night,  and  never  let  me  alone,  and  waste  my 
strength  ;  the  two  angels  of  vengeance,  these  are 
they  who  stand  close  by  the  throne  of  God,  these 
are  they  who  were  fashioned  first.  After  them 
the  multitude  of  angels  were  fashioned.  In  the 
first  heaven  there  are  a  million,  in  the  second 
heaven  a  million,  in  the  third  heaven  a  million,  in 
the  fourth  heaven  a  million,  in  the  fifth  heaven  a 
mUlion,  in  the  sixth  heaven  a  million,  in  the 
seventh  heaven  a  million.  Outside  the  seven 
heavens.  .  .  . '  After  a  few  more  details  on  the 
angels,  the  fragment  then  breaks  off,  in  the  MS 
(lOth-llth  cent.)  from  the  library  of  the  Orthodox 
Patriarch  at  Jerusalem.  The  Vienna  MS  shows  the 
devil  continuing  the  list  of  the  angels  of  the  elements. 

The  contents  of  these  fragments  correspond  partly  with  what 
we  know  elsewhere  *  of  the  '  questions  of  Biutholomew '  (for 
the  Ethiopic  and  Coptic  versions  and  recensions  of  this  litera- 
ture, cf.  Liehtenhan  in  ZSTW,  1902,  p.  234  f.,  and  Haase,  p.  22  f.). 
Thev  also  throw  some  light  npon  what  lies  behind  the  remark 
of  Epiphanins  in  the  11th  cent,  (de  Vita  htatae  Virginit,  26) 
that  the  holy  UMetle BarttwIoDiew  sud,  'The  holy  Mother  of 
God  made  a  wiU.'  There  seems  to  be  some  connexion  between 
the  Gospel,  whose  fragments  we  have  just  cited,  and  the  sonrces 
of  the  later  Mary  fiteratore  which  is  preserved  m  Sahidic  and 
Coptic  fragments  (see  below).    The  Coptic  fragments  gfcuify 

*  There  is  another  allusion  in  pseudo-Dionysius  the  Areopagite 
(de  Mytt.  theoioffia,  L  §  3 :  '  Bartholomew  says  that  theologj-  is 
both  large  and  small,  and  that  the  gospel  is  broad  and  large 
and,  agam,  contracted  7- 


504      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UKCANONICAL) 


the  primacy  ot  Peter  and  the  prestige  of  Mary,  with  Gnostic 
and  Egyptian  colourintr  (Kevillout,  Les  Apocryphes  copies,  185  f.); 
they  begin  with  an  unsympathetic  denunciation  of  Judos  by 
JesuB,  one  of  the  first  things  tlie  Lord  does,  apparently,  being  to 
reproach  the  traitor  in  Amenti  and  contlrni  his  eternal  doom. 
The  Gospel  from  which  they  are  taken  was  a  Gospel  of  Bartholo- 
mew, for  that  Apostle  speaks  in  the  first  person. 

According  to  Wilmart  and  Tisserant,  the  Jerusalem  MS  ap- 
proximates more  than  the  others  to  the  primitive  text.  The 
original  Greek  Gospel  of  Bartholomew,  they  conclude,  appeared 
'  vers  le  IVo  siftcle,  dans  quelque  secte  chretienne  en  marge  de 
r^glise  d'Alcxandrie.'  It  was  on  the  basis  of  this  that  the 
Coptic  Bartholomew  compositions,  whether  in  the  form  of 
Gospel  or  of  Apocalypse,  developed  the  literature  whose  debris 
is  now  being  recovered  in  still  larger  quantities. 

(e)  The  Gospel  of  Nicodemus. — The  Gospel  of 
Nicodenuis  really  belongs  to  the  uncanonical  Acts. 
The  Acts  of  Pilate  and  its  allied  literature  go 
back  to  the  4th  or  6th  cent. — possibly,  in  some 
primitive  form,  even  to  the  beginning  of  the 
2nd  ;  but  while  Nicodemus  is  associated  with  the 
Acta  (in  one  Greek  edition  of  the  text,  they  pro- 
fess to  be  a  translation  of  what  Nicodemus  wrote 
in  Hebrew ;  in  another  Greek  edition,  Nicodemus 
is  a  Roman  toparch  who  translates  the  Hebrew 
record  of  a  Jew  named  .^neas ;  in  the  Latin 
version,  iEneas  is  a  Christian  Jew  who  translates 
the  Hebrew  record  of  Nicodemus),  they  are  never 
styled  'a  Gospel  of  Nicodemus'  till  the  13th 
century.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  title 
was  due  to  the  patriotism  of  the  British,  wlio 
claimed  Nicodemus  as  their  chief  apostle  ('quae 
coniectura  inde  aliquam  probabilitatem  habet  quod 
antiquissima  omnium  recentiorum  versionum  est 
anglosaxonica :  id  quod  documento  est  quanto 
honore  opus  istud  iam  pridem  in  Anglia  habitum 
sit,'  Tischendorf,  i.  p.  Ix,  n.  3) ;  but  wherever  and 
whenever  it  arose,  it  is  quite  adventitious. 

Critical  editions  are  promised  by  von  Dobschiitz 
(HDB  iii.  545)  and  in  the  French  series  (cf.  p.  479). 

(/)  The  Gospel  of  Gamaliel. — In  one  of  the 
Coptic  Gospel  fragments  edited  by  Kevillout 
(Patrologia  Orient,  ii.  172 f.),  the  phrase  occurs, 
'  I,  Gamaliel,  followed  them  (i.e.  Pilate,  etc.)  in  the 
midst  of  the  crowd,'  and  it  has  been  conjectured 
(e.g.  by  Ladeuze,  Revue  d'histoire  eccl6siastique,  vii. 
252  f.,Haase,  11  f.,  and  IJaumstark  in  EB,  1906,  pp. 
245-265)  that  if  these  fragments  belonged  originally 
to  the  Gospel  of  the  Twelve,  or  if  some  other  frag- 
ments of  the  later  Pilate  literature  can  be  referred 
to  such  a  source,  there  must  have  been  a  Gospel 
of  Gamaliel  in  existence,  perhaps  as  a  special 
recension  of  the  original  Gospel  of  the  Twelve. 
To  this  some  critics  (e.g.  Ladeuze  and  13aum- 
stark)  further  propose  to  relegate  one  or  more 
of  the  Sahidic  fragments  which  have  been  al- 
ready referred  to  (cf.  p.  500),  placing  the  com- 
position not  earlier  than  the  5th  cent.,  since 
it  implies  the  Acta  Pilati.  The  ramifications 
of  the  Pilate  literature  still  await  investigation, 
especially  in  the  light  of  recent  finds  (cf.  Haase, 
pp.  12  f.,  67  f.).  It  would  be  curious  if  it  could  be 
proved  that  there  was  a  tendency  to  use  the 
Gamaliel  of  Ac  5^"-  in  favour  of  Christianity,  as 
was  the  case  with  Pilate.  But  the  period  of  this 
Gospel  is  very  late  and  its  reconstruction  unusually 
hypothetical.  '  Si  I'jfivangile  de  Gamaliel  est  un 
sermon  compose  au  monastcre  de  Senoudah,  comme 
porte  k  le  croire  la  provenance  des  manuscrits,  11 
n'est  pas  etrange  qu'on  y  ait  voulu  mettre  en 
evidence,  dans  I'expose  de  la  vie  du  Christ,  le  role 
de  Barthelemy  dont  on  se  llattait  de  poss6der  le 
corps  au  monastcre,  et  qu'on  s'y  suit  servi  des 
apocryphes  dejh.  existants  sous  le  nom  tie  cet  apotre ' 
(Ladeuze,  loc.  cit.  265).  The  fragments  which  may 
be  conjecturally  assigned  to  this  Gospel  (?)  tally 
with  the  Coptic  Bartholomew  fragments  in  several 
features,  e.g.  the  description  of  Christ  in  Amenti, 
the  appearance  of  Christ  after  the  Resurrection 
to  his  mother  Mary  iirst  of  all  (cf.  p.  505),  the 
narrative  of  the  death  of  Mary,  and  the  bless- 


ing pronounced  on  Peter  as  the  archbishop  of 
the  whole  world.  Ladeuze's  suggestion  meets  the 
main  requirements  of  the  case  better  than  lievil- 
lout's  conjecture  (RD,  1904,  pp.  167  ff.,  321  ff.)  that 
some  primitive  orthodox  Gospel  of  the  Twelve  (see 
above)  profeases  to  have  been  edited  by  Gamaliel, 
the  teacher  of  St.  Paul,  who  had  become  a  Christian 
(cf.  Zahn's  Gesch.  des  Kanons,  ii.  673f.).  Even  if  the 
fragments  are  a.ssigncd  to  a  '  Gospel,'  they  repre- 
sent a  late  compilation,  based  primarily  on  the 
Johannine  naiTative,  and  expanded  on  tlie  basis  of 
legends  drawn  possibly  from  a  special  .source.  The 
tradition  of  Gamaliel's  conversion  is  noted  in  Clem. 
Recogn.  i.  65  and  quoted  by  Photius  (Bibliotheca, 
171)  from  earlier  written  sources  :  '  Reperi  quoque 
in  eodem  illo  codice,  Pauli  in  lege  magistrum 
Gamalielum  et  credidisse,  et  ba]itizatum  fuisse. 
Nicodemum  item  noctumum  (quondam)  amicum, 
diumum  etiam  redditum,  martyrioque  coronatum, 
quem  et  Gamalielis  patruelem  haec  testatur 
nistoria.  Baptizatum  vero  utrumque  a  Joanne  et 
Petro,  una  cum  Gamalielis  lilio,  cui  Alnbo  nomen.' 
Nicodemus  became  a  martyr  to  Jewish  fury,  on 
this  tradition  ;  once  the  idea  of  his  conversion 
and  authorship  of  a  Gospel  was  started,  it  was  not 
unnatural  that  Gamaliel  should  also  be  brought 
inside  the  Christian  circle. 

(g)  The  Gospel  of  Perfection. — '  Some  of  them,* 
says  Epiphanius  (xxvi.  2),  speaking  of  tlie  Nico- 
laitans  or  Ophite  Gnostics,'  bring  in  a  manufactured 
sort  of  adventitious  work  (^71674/46^  rt  troirj/jui)  called 
The  Gospel  of  Perfection,'  which,  he  adds  ironically, 
is  the  very  perfection  of  diabolic  mischief !  This 
notice  is  probably  derived  from  Hippolytus  (Phil- 
aster,  IT(C7:  33).  If  it  was  a  Gnostic  treatise  in 
Gospel  form,  it  may  have  resembled,  or  been  related 
in  some  way  to,  the  Gospel  of  Eve  ;  but  no  details 
or  quotations  have  been  preserved,  unless  we  may 
suppose  that  allusions  to  it  occur  in  the  Pistis 
Sophia,  where  uncanonical  Gospel  material  is  more 
than  once  employed. 

(h)  The  Gospel  of  Eve. — 'Others,'  Epiphanius 
adds  (xxvi.  2f.),  '  are  not  ashamed  to  speak  of  the 
Gospel  of  Eve,'  who  owed  her  gnosis  to  the  serpent. 
One  quotation  from  this  Gospel  is  given  :  •  I  stood 
on  a  high  hill,  and  I  saw  a  tall  man  and  a  short 
man  (dWov  ko\o^6v)  ;  and  I  heard  as  it  were  a  voice 
of  thunder  and  drew  near  to  listen,  and  it  spoke  to 
me  and  said,  "  I  am  thou  and  thou  art  I,  and 
wherever  thou  art  there  am  I  also,  and  I  am  sown 
in  all  (in  dirairiv  eifii  iffwapjiivoi).  And  Avherever 
thou  gatherest  me  from,  in  gathering  me  thou 
gatherest  thyself." '  Probably  the  quotation  which 
follows,  from  the  secret  books  of  the  Gnostics, 
was  also  derived  from  this  '  Gospel '  :  (iv  dTcoKpiLxpoii 
dvayivibcTKovTes  6tl)  '  I  saw  a  tree  bearing  twelve 
fruits  a  year,  and  he  said  to  me,  This  is  the  tree  of 
life.'  Epiphanius  (xxvi.  5)  explains  that  this  meant 
allegorically  menstruation.  But  this  so  -  called 
'  Gospel '  may  have  been  either  of  an  apocalyptic 
character  or  simply,  as  Lipsius  suggests,  a  doctrinal 
treatise  in  more  or  less  historical  form.  In  any 
case,  its  mj'sticism  assumed  a  sexual  form  which 
readily  lent  itself  to  obscene  interpretation. 

(i)  The  Gospel  of  Judas. — The  Gnostic  Cainites, 
in  the  2nd  cent.,  composed  'a  Gospel  of  Judas' 
(Iren.  i.  31.  1  ;  ffwrayp-dnov  ri,  Epiphan.  xxxviii.  1) 
in  the  name  of  their  hero,  Judas,  who  was  supposed 
to  have  alone  penetrated  the  Divine  secret,  and 
consequently  to  have  deliberately  betrayed  Jesus 
in  order  to  accomplish  it.  Notlung  lias  been  pre- 
served of  this  Gospel. 

The  lifth  of  Revillout's  Coptic  fragments  {Les 
Apocryphes  copies,  156-157)  contains  a  novel  tra- 
dition about  Judas.  The  disciples  speak  :  '  We 
liave  found  this  man  stealing  from  Mliat  is  put 
into  the  purse  every  «laj',  taking  it  to  his  wife,  and 
defrauding  the  poor  in  his  service.     Whenever  he 


GOSPELS  (UKC^VJS^ONICAL) 


GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL)      505 


returned  home  with  sums  of  money  in  his  hands, 
she  would  rejoice  at  what  he  had  done.  We  have 
even  seen  him  failing  to  take  home  to  her  enough 
for  the  malice  of  her  eyes  and  insatiable  greed. 
Whereupon  she  would  turn  him  into  ridicule.'  His 
■\viie  then,  like  a  Lady  Macbeth,  instigates  him  to 
the  crime  of  selling  Jesus.  '  "  Look  how  the  Jews 
pursue  your  master.  Up  then  and  betray  him  to 
them.  They  will  give  you  plenty  of  riches,  and  we 
will  bestow  them  in  our  house,  so  as  to  live  thereby." 
He  got  up,  the  unfortunate  man,  after  listening  to 
his  ^vife,  till  he  had  consigned  his  soul  to  the  hell 
of  Amenti,*  in  the  same  manner  as  Adam  listened 
to  his  wife,  untU  he  became  a  stranger  to  the  glory 
of  Paradise,  so  that  death  reigned  over  him  and  his 
race.  Even  so,  Judas  listened  to  his  wife  and  thus 
.set  himself  outside  the  things  of  heaven  and  the 
things  of  earth,  to  end  in  Amenti,  the  place  of  tears 
and  moaning.  He  went  to  the  Jews  and  agreed 
with  them  for  thirty  pieces  of  silver  to  betray  his 
Lord.  They  gave  them  to  him.  Thus  was  ful- 
filled the  word  which  was  written :  "  They  received 
the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  for  the  price  of  him  who 
is  appraised."  He  rose  up.  He  carried  them  to 
his  wicked  wife.' 

Here  the  motive  of  Judas  is  not  personal  greed ; 
he  is  a  thief,  as  in  the  Fourth  Giospel,  but  it  is 
owing  to  his  wife's  pressure.  She  is  a  temptress, 
and  the  misogynism  of  the  author  leads  him  to 
blame  her  more  than  her  poor  husband.  But  this 
is  a  catholic  exculpatory  estimate  of  Judas,  in 
Eg3rptian  circles,  which  is  very  different  from  the 
Gnostic  glorification  of  him  ;  he  is  not  the  author 
of  a  Gospel,  but  he  is  made  out  to  be  not  so  de- 
liberately the  author  of  Christ's  betrayal  as  in  the 
canonical  traditions.  We  cannot  tell  whether  the 
Gnostic  Gospel  made  use  of  any  such  motive  to  ex- 
plain his  conduct.  It  is  unlikely  that  this  would 
be  so,  for  his  conduct,  on  the  Gnostic  theory,  re- 
quired no  exculpation. 

Another  Coptic  Gospel  fragment,  assigned  donbt- 
fullv  by  Revillout  {op.  cit.  195-196)  to  the  (Jospel 
of  IJartholomew,  belongs  to  the  same  line  of 
tradition.  'The  apostle  Judas,  when  the  devil 
entered  into  him,  went  out  and  ran  to  the  high 
priests.  He  said,  "What  will  you  give  me  for 
handing  him  over  to  you  ?  "  Thej'  gave  him  thirty 
pieces  of  silver.  Now  the  wife  of  Judas  had  taken 
the  child  of  Joseph  of  Arimathaea  to  bring  him  up. 
The  day  when  the  unfortunate  Judas  received  the 
thirty  pieces  of  silver  and  took  them  home,  the 
little  one  (would  not  drink).  Joseph  went  into 
the  woman's  chamber  .  .  .  Joseph  was  utterly 
distressed  over  his  son.  When  the  little  child  saw 
his  father  (he  was  seven  months  old),  he  cried, 
saying,  "  My  father,  come,  take  me  from  the  hand 
of  this  woman,  who  is  a  savage  beast.  Since  the 
ninth  hour  of  this  day,  they  have  received  the 
price  (of  the  blood  of  the  just)."  When  he 
heard  this,  his  father  took  him.  Judas  also  went 
out.  He  took  .  .  .'  Then  follows  a  broken  pas- 
sage belonging  to  the  Acts  of  Pilate  literature. 

0")  Coptic  fragments. — (i. )  A  Coptic  Akhmim  MS 
(4th-5th  cent.)  contains  two  fragments,  which  may 
have  belonged  to  an  uncanonical  Gospel  of  the 
•2nd  century.  The  second  is  a  fragment  of  pro- 
phetic discourse  by  Jesus,  predicting  Ac  I'Z**-  (?). 
The  first  opens  ^vith  Mary,  Martha,  and  Mary 
Magdalene  going  to  the  sepulchre  to  anoint  the 
body,  and  weeping  when  they  find  the  sepulchre 
empty.  The  Lord  says  to  them,  '  "  AAHiy  do  you 
weep?  Cease  weeping,  I  am  he  whom  ye  seek. 
But  let  one  of  you  go  to  the  brethren  and  say : 
Come,  the  Master  has  risen  from  the  deai" 
Martha  went  away  and  told  this  to  us.  We  said 
to  her,  "  What  hast  thou  to  do  with  us,  O  woman? 
He  who  died  is  buried,  and  it  is  impossible  that 
*  An  EgA  ptian  touch  as  above  (p.  500). 


he  lives.'  Vt'e  did  not  believe  her,  that  the  Re- 
deemer had  risen  from  the  dead.  So  she  went  to 
the  Lord  and  said  to  him,  "  No  one  among  them 
has  believed  me,  that  thou  livest."  He  said,  "  Let 
another  of  you  go  and  tell  it  to  them  again. "  Mary 
went  and  told  us  again,  but  we  did  not  believe  her. 
She  went  back  to  the  Lord  and  told  him.  Then 
said  the  Lord  to  Mary  and  her  other  sisters,  "  Let 
us  go  to  them."  And  he  went  and  found  us  within 
and  called  us  outside.  But  we  thought  it  was  a 
ghost,  and  we  did  not  believe  it  was  the  Lord. 
fcio  he  said  to  us,  "  Come  and  .  .  .  Thou,  O  Peter, 
who  hast  denied  me  thrice,  dost  thou  still  deny?" 
And  we  went  up  to  him,  doubting  in  our  hearts 
whether  it  was  he.  So  he  said  to  us,  "  Why  do 
you  doubt  still  and  disbelieve  ?  I  am  he  who  told 
you,  so  that  on  account  of  my  flesh  and  my  death 
and  my  Resurrection  you  may  know  it  is  I.  Peter, 
lay  thy  finger  in  the  nail-marks  on  my  hands ; 
and  thou,  Thomas,  lay  thy  finger  in  the  lance- 
wounds  on  my  side  ;  and  thou,  Andrew,  touch  my 
feet  and  see  that  they  ...  to  those  of  earth. 
For  it  is  written  in  the  prophets :  *  phantams  of 
dreams  .  .  .  on  earth."  We  answered  him,  "We 
have  in  truth  recognized  that  ...  in  the  flesh." 
And  we  threw  ourselves  on  our  faces  and  confessed 
our  sins,  that  we  had  been  unbelieving.' 

This  fragment  professes  to  give  the  testimony  to 
the  Resurrection  which  the  disciples  bore,  based 
on  revelations  received  by  them  from  the  Lord. 
As  in  the  appendix  to  ^lark's  Gospel,  their  un- 
belief is  emphasized ;  they  refuse  to  believe  the 
story  of  the  women,  and  it  requires  the  direct 
appearance  of  Jesus  to  convince  them.  'There- 
fore .  .  .  we  have  written  to  you  concerning  .  .  . 
and  we  bear  witness  that  the  Lord  is  he  who  was 
crucified  by  Pontius  Pilate.'  The  apologetic  in- 
terest of  this  emphasis  on  the  originjil  incredulity 
of  the  apostles  may  be  to  heighten  the  importance 
of  the  Resurrection  appearances,  as  against  the 
denial  of  the  bodily  Resurrection  by  some  Gnostics. 
Even  the  disciples,  it  is  said,  held  it  impossible 
once  !  But  they  were  taught  the  truth  !  The 
fragment  mentions  '  Corinthus'  (  =  Cerinthtis)  and 
'  Simon'  (= Simon  Magus),  and  the  original  Greek 
Gospel  writing,  of  which  it  is  a  translation,  was 
e^•idently  a  piece  of  apologetic  fiction  issued  by 
some  pious  (Gnostic  ?)  Christian  in  order  to  refute 
the  heretical  tendencies  represented  by  these  two 
great  names.  It  professes  to  be  written  in  the 
name  of  the  Twelve,  and  probably  appeared  during 
the  first  half  of  the  2nQ  century.  The  data  do 
not  enable  us  to  determine  whether  it  belonged 
to  a  Gospel  of  the  Twelve  or,  as  Schmidt  thinks, 
to  the  pseudo-Petrine  literature. 

Sfecui.  Lttkratuss. — 'The  fragment  was  pobUshed  fint  bj 
C.  Schmidt  in  SB  A  W,  1886^  pp.  70&-711,  hot  a  taU  edition  is  stiO 
awaited;  Hamack's  en^  ^ipeared  in  ITudog.  Stvdien  B. 
Weitt  dargebradU,  G^;tiiq;en,  1887,  pp.  1-8 ;  cf.  Bardenhewer, 
397-399,  Haase,  36-37.  Harnack  dates  it  between  a.i>.  150  and 
ISO,  Schmidt  somewhat  eailier.  The  second  fragment  suggests 
that  the  Qcmpd  (if  it  was  a  Go^d)  was  a  Peter  GoepdTbat 
the  extent  and  aim  of  its  '  Gnosticism'  cannot  be  determined 
in  the  present  state  of  oar  knowledge. 

(ii.)  Some  lines  of  another  Coptic  papyrus  (4th- 
6th  cent.)  appear  to  contain  debris  of  what  was 
once  an  uncanonical  GJospel.  The  fragments  are  ex- 
tremely mutilated,  and  the  translators  and  editors 
disagree  upon  their  age  and  origin.  The  last  runs 
thus — ondently  the  close  of  a  Gospel  narrative 
which  describeii  a  post-Resurrection  scene  on  the 
mountain,  prior  to  the  Ascension:  '(that  I)  may 
manifest  to  you  all  my  glory  and  show  you  all 
your  power  and  the  mystery  of  your  apostleship 

*  Wis  ISi",  in  a  description  of  the  terrors  that  befell  the 
Egyptians  during  the  plagaes.  The  scriptural  aottKmty  of 
Wisdom  in  wide  cindes  daring  the  2nd  and  3rd  caitories 
is  well  known,  bat  fnobably  Origen  is  the  only  writer  who  ex- 
pressly calls  this  literature  prt^etic  iHmn.  m  LeviL  t.  2,  m 
£xod.\i.  IX 


506      GOSPELS  (UNCANONICAL) 


GOVERNMENT,  GOVERNOR 


.  .  .  (on  the)  mountain.  .  .  .  Our  eyes  penetrated 
all  places,  we  saw  the  glory  of  his  divinity  and  all 
the  glory  (of  his)  dominion.  He  invested  (us  with) 
the  power  of  (our)  apo.stle(ship).'  The  previous 
fragment,  whose  contents  are  only  separated  from 
the  other  by  two  or  three  lines,  may  be  either  a 
piece  from  tlie  same  setting  or  a  fragment  of  some 
Gethsemane  story.  It  runs  thus :  '  (that)  he  be 
known  for  (his)  hospitality  .  .  .  and  praised  on 
account  of  his  fruit,  since  .  .  .  Amen.*  Grant 
me  now  thy  power,  O  Father,  that  .  .  .  Amen. 
I  have  received  the  diadem  of  the  Kingdom,  (even 
the)  diadem  of  ...  I  have  become  King  (through 
thee),  O  Father.  Thoushalt  subject  (all)  to  me  .  .  . 
Through  whom  shall  (the  last)  Enemy  be  destroyed? 
Through  (Christ).  Amen.  Through  whom  shall 
the  sting  of  death  (be  destroyed)?  (Through  the) 
Only  Begotten.  To  whom  does  (the)  dominion 
belong?  (To  the  Son.)  Amen.  .  .  .  When  (Jesus 
had)  finished  all  .  .  .  he  turned  to  us  and  said, 
"The  hour  has  come  when  I  shall  be  taken  from 
you.  The  spirit  (is)  willing,  but  the  flesh  (is) 
weak  .  .  .  then  and  watch  (with  me)."  But  we 
apostles  wept  .  .  .  said  .  .  .  (Son)  of  God.  .  .  . 
He  answerecl  and  said  (to  us),  "Fear  not  destruc- 
tion (of  the  body),  but  rather  (fear)  the  power  (of 
darkness),  llemember  all  that  I  have  said  to 
you  :  (if)  they  have  persecuted  (me),  they  will  also 
persecute  you.  .  .  .  llejoice,  then,  that  1  (have 
overcome)  the  world,  and  have  .  .  ."  ' 

The  fragments  are  evidently  based  upon  the 
Gospels  of  Matthew  and  John  ;  so  much  is  clear 
even  from  what  can  be  deciphered.  Possibly  they 
l)elonged  to  some  uncanonical  Gospel  current  in 
Egypt  during  the  3rd  or  even  the  2nd  cent., 
but  the  internal  data  are  too  slender  to  support 
any  hypothesis  which  would  connect  them  with 
the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians  ( Jacoby)  or  even  with 
the  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites  =  the  Gospel  of  the 
Twelve  (Schmidt,  Zahn,  Revillout).  The  '  Gnosti- 
cism '  of  the  fragments  is  mild. 

Special  Literatcrb. — A.  Jacoby,  Ein  nexus  Evangelienfrag- 
merit,  Strassburfr,  1900;  C.  Schmidt  (GGA,  1900,  pp.  481-506); 
Za.hTi{NKZ,  1900, 361  f.);  Revillout,  I'atr.  Orient.  1907,  pp.  159- 
161 ;  Haase,  1-11  (where  further  literature  is  discussed). 

(iii. )  Another  Coptic  fragment  from  a  narrative  of 
the  trial  is  edited  by  Revillout  (Pa^r.  Orient., \Q\i.): 
* ...  to  Jesus  who  was  in  the  prsetorium.  He 
said  to  him,  "  Whence  do  you  come  and  what  do 
you  say  of  yourself  ?  I  am  sore  put  to  it  in  de- 
fending you,  and  I  .  .  save  you.  If  you  are  king 
of  the  Jews,  tell  us  definitely.  Jesus  answered  and 
said  to  Pilate,  "Do  you  say  this  of  yourself,  or 
have  other  people  told  you  about  me?"  Pilate  said 
to  him,  ' '  Am  I  a  Jew  ? — I !  Your  own  people  have 
handed  you  over.  What  have  you  done  ? "  Jesus 
replied,  "My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world.  If 
my  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  my  servants  would 
fight  to  prevent  anyone  handing  me  over  to  the 
Jews.  However,  my  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world." 
Pilate  said  to  him,  "  Then  you  are  a  king?"  Jesus 
replied,  "It  is  you  who  say  so;  I  am  a  king." 
Pilate  said  to  him,  "If  you  are  a  king,  let  me 
learn  the  truth  from  your  own  lips  so  that  you 
may  be  relieved  of  these  troubles  and  these  revolu- 
tions." Then  he  said  to  him,  "Behold,  you  confess, 
you  say  with  your  own  lips  that  I  am  a  king.  1 
was  born  and  I  have  come  into  tlie  world  for  this 
thing,  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth.  He  who  be- 
longs to  me  hears  my  voice."  Pilate  said  to  him, 
"  What  is  truth  ? "  Jesus  said  to  him,  "Have  yon 
not  seen — you  ! — that  he  who  speaks  to  you  is 
Truth?  Do  you  not  see  in  his  face  that  he  has 
been  born  of  the  F.ather  ?  Do  you  not  hear  from 
his  Avords  that  he  does  not  come  from  this  Avorld? 
Know  then,  O  Pilate,  that   he  whom  you  judge, 

*  According  to  Revillout,  these  '  Amens*  are  not  final  but  in- 
troductory = '  Truly.' 


he  it  is  who  shall  judge  the  world  with  justice. 
These  hands  which  you  seize,  O  Pilate,  have 
formed  you.  This  body  you  see  and  this  flesh 
which  they  .  .  ." ' 

The  fragment  is  also  assigned  by  Revillout  to 
his  Gospel  of  the  Twelve,  but  it  may  be  no  more 
than  a  paraphrase  of  Jn  IS""'-  from  some  early 
Egyptian  homily.  The  rest  of  Revillout's  frag- 
ments (cf.  al>ove,  p.  503)  are  plainly  from  an  Egyp- 
tian treatise  whicli  belongs  as  much  to  the  Mary 
literature  as  to  the  category  of  the  uncanonical 
Gospels. 

[k)  An  unidentified  fragment.— In  Augustine's 
treatise  contra  Adversarium  Legis  et  Prophetarum 
(ii.  14),  he  quotes  a  saying  from  some  apocryphal 
scripture — evidently  a  Gospel,  since  he  proceeds : 
'  but  in  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord,  which  is  not 
apocryphal' (i.e.  esoteric),  he  taught  the  disciples 
after  the  Resurrection  about  the  prophets  (Lk  24*''). 
The  Quotation  is  as  follows :  *  But  when  the  apostles 
askea  what  view  should  be  taken  of  the  prophets 
of  the  Jews,  who  were  thought  to  have  sung 
something  about  his  arrival  in  the  past,  our  Lord, 
vexed  that  they  still  took  such  a  view,  replied, 
"  You  have  sent  away  the  living  One  who  is  before 
you,  and  you  make  up  stories  about  the  dead  ! " ' 
This  may  have  come  from  some  Marcionite  or 
Ebionitic  (cf.  above,  p.  493)  Gospel.  J.  H. Ropes  {TU 
xiv.  2  [1896],  119-120)  suggests  that  it  would  fit  in 
with  the  story  of  Mt  8'^^,  but  the  context  in  Augus- 
tine points  rather  to  a  post- Resurrection  dialogue 
between  Jesus  and  the  disciples. 

(1)  The  Fayyiim  fragment. — The  Fajry^im  frag- 
ment, first  published  by  G.  Bickell  (cf.  Zeitschrift 
fur  kath.  Theologie,  1885,  pp.  498-504,  1886,  p. 
208 f.),  is  a  3rd  cent,  scrap  of  papyrus  which  has 
received  more  attention  than  it  deserves  ;  it  is  no 
more  than  a  loose  quotation  of  Mk  \4P^-^-  ^-'^ 
(so  Zahn,  as  against  Bickell,  Harnack  [TU  v.  4, 
481-497],  Resch  {TU  x.  2,  1894,  pp.  28-34],  P.  Savi 
[RB,  1892,  321-344],  and  others),  and  cannot  be 
assigned  with  any  probability  to  the  Gospel  of 
the  Egyptians  or  any  other  uncanonical  Gospel, 
The  fragment  runs  :  *  And  in  departing  he  spoke 
thus.  "  You  will  all  be  ofiended  (aKavStiKiadTtaeade) 
this  night,  as  it  is  written  :  /  will  smite  the  shep- 
herd, and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered."  Peter 
said,  "Though  all  [are  offended],  not  l!"  The 
Lord  said,  "  The  cock  will  crow  twice,  and  thou 
shaltbe  the  first  to  deny  me  three  times." '  Revil- 
lout (Les  Apocryphes  copies,  158-159)  places  it  as 
a  sequel  to  the  Matthias  fragment  quoted  above 
(pp.  601-502),  assigning  it  to  his  'Gospel  of  the 
Twelve.'  But  it  may  have  come  from  some  Gospel 
of  our  third  group,  if  it  came  from  any  Gospel  at  all. 

J.  MoFFATT. 
GOYERNMENT,  GOYERNOR.  — (1)  The  term 
'government'  occurs  twice  in  the  AV  of  the  NT, 
in  neither  case  with  reference  to  civil  government. 
In  the  first  passage,  1  Co  12'^,  it  occurs  in  the  plural, 
being  a  translation  of  the  Greek  Kv^epvrjfffis,  which, 
like  the  English  '  government,'  is  a  metaphor  from 
steersmanship  (see  following  article).  In  thesecond 
passage,  2  P  2'"  (cf.  Jude*),  the  word  appears  to  be 
abstract,  but  to  have  an  implicit  reference  to  the 
domination  of  angels  (see  art.  Dominion). 

(2)  The  word  '  governor '  occurs  many  times  in  the 
NT.  In  nearly  every  passage  it  is  a  translation  of 
riyefxibv  or  some  word  connected  with  it.  This  word 
is  the  most  general  term  in  this  connexion  in  the 
Greek  language  ( =  Lat.  prceses).  This  can  be  seen 
in  two  ways.  In  the  first  place,  in  Mk  13'  (and 
parallels)  and  1  P  2'*  the  word  is  coupled  with 
'  kings '  (emperors),  and  the  two  words  together 
include  all  the  Gentile  authorities  before  whom 
the  followers  of  Jesus  will  iiave  to  api)ear.  In  tiie 
second  place,  the  term,  or  its  cognates,  is  used  with 
reference  to  authorities  of  such  diverse  status  as 


GOVERNMENTS 


GRACE 


507 


the  Emperor  Tiberius  (Lk  3'),  the  legate  P.  Sul- 
picius  Quirinius  (Lk  2^  a  special  deputy  of  consular 
rank  sent  by  the  Emperor  Augustus  in  an  emergency 
to  have  temporary  rule  over  the  great  proWnce  of 
Syria),  and  the  successive  procurators  of  the  small 
and  unimportant  province  of  Judaea,  Pontius 
Pilate  and  Felix;  for  2  Co  11*^  see  Ethnarch. 
It  was  in  accordance  with  Greek  genius  to  avoid 
specific  titles  and  to  use  general  terms,  and  to 
the  Oriental  the  king  (emperor)  dwarfed  everyone 
else.  The  procurator  (agent)  was  really  a  servant 
of  the  Emperors  household,  never  of  higher  rank 
than  equestrian,  and  belonged  to  the  lowest  class  of 
governor.  He  is  never  called  by  his  o^vn  (Greek) 
name  (ivlTpoTo%)  except  in  a  variant  reading  of 
Lk  3>.  A.  SOUTER, 

GOVERNMENTS.— In  each  of  the  five  lists  of 
spiritual  gifts  or  of  gifted  persons  which  St.  Paul 
^aces  in  his  Epistles  (1  Co  i28-»<>-»-  »-*>,  Ro  126-8, 
Eph  4")  there  are  at  least  two  items  which  are  not 
found  in  any  other  list.  In  1  Co  12^  we  have 
'helps'  or  'helpings'  (drrtX^/t^ets)  and  'govern- 
ments '  or  '  governings '  (Kv^epviiaeis).  In  1  Co  12"-^ 
'  gifts  of  healings '  are  followed  by  '  helpings '  and 
'governings.'  These  two  form  a  pair,  and  refer 
to  management  and  direction  in  things  external. 
'  Governings '  is  a  word  which  comes  from  the  idea 
of  a  Kv^epvrjTrii,  a  shipmaster  (Ac  27",  Rev  18")  or 
pilot  (Ezk  27*-  ^-  ^),  directing  the  course  of  a  ship. 
The  word  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  NT,  but  in 
the  LXX  we  have  it  in  the  sense  of  '  wise  guidance ' 
in  peace  or  war  (Pr  11"  24*).  St.  Paul  probably 
uses  it  of  those  who  superintended  the  externals  of 
organization.  It  would  therefore  denote  those  who 
are  over  the  rest,  and  rule  them,  the  vpoiffTdfievoi  of 
1  Th  51-,  Ro  1**  and  the  iryov/ieyoi  of  He  13'-  "•  -^ 
Ac  15—.  The  '  governors '  are  directors  and  organ- 
izers, not  teachers ;  still  less  are  they  '  discemers 
of  spirits,'  as  Stanley  suggests.  They  are  persons 
with  a  gift  for  management.  It  is  possible  that 
they  afterwards  developed  into  a  class  of  officials 
as  '  elders '  or  '  bishops,'  but  that  stage  had  not 
been  reached  when  1  Cor.  was  written.  See  Helps 
and  Church  Goverxmext.  A.  Plummer. 

GRACE.— 1.  General  meaning  and  presupposi- 
tions.—  (a)  Divine  prevenience  and  generosity. — 
Grace  is  a  theistic  idea.  It  emerges  inevitably  in 
the  progress  of  religious  thought  and  practice  with 
the  idea  of  God's  separateness  from  man  (cf.  in 
India,  Brahmanism ;  in  Greece,  Orphism).  It 
deepens  in  character  and  content  in  the  growing 
sense  of  separateness,  with  the  concurrent  con- 
viction, ever  deepening  in  intensity,  of  the  Divine 
goodness  in  sustaining  fellowship  with  man  (cf.  in 
Israel,  Hebraism,  Judaism).  It  attains  perfect 
form  in  Christianity,  whose  Founder  exhibits  a 
personal  life  so  dependent  on  and  penetrated  by 
Grod  as  to  reach  absolute  maturity  simply  through 
the  Divine  power  immanent  within  it — the  cease- 
less sense,  possession,  and  operation  of  the  Divine 
Spirit.  Irresistibly  the  soul's  interior  experience 
of  that  fellowship  postulates  a  realm  of  Divine 

{>revenience  and  generosity.  Generally  the  postu- 
ate  embraces  three  features :  the  priority  of  God, 
His  self-donation  to  man.  His  regard  and  care  for 
man's  salvation — all  making  emphatic  the  given- 
ness  of  man's  best  life,  the  Divine  action  inviting 
his.  Grace  is  thus  a  purely  religious  affirmation 
expressing  the  soul's  assurance  that  God's  good- 
ness is  the  beginning,  medium,  and  end  of  its  life. 
Here  God  is  not  simply  a  great  First  Cause  :  first 
in  time,  foremost  in  space ;  He  is  rather  the  back- 
ground and  dynamic  force  of  man's  inner  being, 
and,  for  its  sake,  of  all  created  being ;  enfolding 
and  comprehending  it,  giving  it  its  origin,  reason 
of  existence,  unity,  completeness,  final  end;  the 


envelope  of  the  whole  b}'  which  the  parts  do  their 
best  and  issue  in  their  most  fruitful  results,  so 
that  the  soul  is  a  harmony  of  linked  forces,* 
Divine  and  human.  Here,  too,  the  soul's  blessed- 
ness is  not  simply  the  gift  of  God.  The  soul's  life 
is  through  Himself — 'His  very  self  and  essence 
all-Divine.' t  Its  various  stages,  the  growing  pro- 
cess of  His  grace,  do  not  depend,  nay,  disappear 
when  made  to  depend,  on  merely  mental  reference 
to  His  acts,  or  on  merely  self-originating  impulses. 
Such  attachment  of  the  human  to  the  Divine  is 
too  superficial.  The  inadequacy  of  man's  spirit 
to  work  out  its  own  perfection  is  irremediable. 
Salvation  is  only  secure  in  utter  and  entire  de- 
pendence on  the  Divine  Life,  distinct  from  man's, 
the  life  which  precedes  and  from  which  proceeds 
all  his  capacity  for  good:  in  which,  truly,  'we 
live  and  move  and  have  our  being.' 

(b)  The  Christian  experience.  —  The  apostolic 
doctrine  of  grace  presupposes  the  distinctive  Chris- 
tian experience.  The  S  T  teaching  falls  into  three 
groups :  Synoptic,  Pauline,  Johannine.  The  first 
reproduces  the  most  immediately  and  literally 
faithful  picture  of  Christ's  saj-ings  ;  the  second  and 
third  present  the  earliest  impressive  developments 
of  His  sayings  in  individual  realization,  and  are 
rich  in  exposition  and  explanation  of  the  subjective 
apprehension  and  appropriation  of  Divine  grace. 
It  is  the  process  in  man's  activity  that  is  detailed 
more  than  the  analysis  of  the  attribute  in  God. 
Between  the  two  types  we  are  conscious  of  marked 
contrasts,  not  only  in  their  form  but  in  the  sub- 
stance and  mode.  Along  with  a  deep  underlying 
unity  of  fundamental  thought,  it  is  true  to  say 
that  the  consciousness  of  the  apostles  is  not 
identical  with  the  consciousness  of  Christ.  Christ 
is  not  repeated  in  them.*  The  teaching  of  both  is 
the  direct  transcript  of  their  spiritual  history  ;  but 
their  spiritual  constitution  is  so  radically  diSerent 
that  their  teaching  is  bound  to  have  radical  difier- 
ences.  '  He  spoke  as  the  sinless  Son  of  God ;  they 
wrote  from  the  standpoint  of  regenerated  men.'§ 
The  principle  of  sin  alters  the  whole  position.  The 
^'iew-points  for  estimating  grace  increase.  Thus  it 
is  that  while  Christ  speaks  little,  if  at  all,  of  grace, 
it  is  a  central  conception  of  the  apostles.  There- 
fore also,  while  grace  is  in  both,  it  is  'in  Christ' 
in  a  \-itally  intimate  way  such  as  cannot  be  predi- 
cated of  the  apostles  except  '  through  Christ.'  It 
is  *  the  grace  of  Christ,'  as  '  of  God ' ;  not  the  grace 
of  the  apostles,  whose  it  is  only  '  by  his  grace.' 

Again  we  have  to  note  in  Christ's  case  no  trace 
of  that  separateness  of  the  human  from  the  Divine 
Spirit  in  their  communion  and  inter-operation  in 
the  relationship  of  grace,  which  is  so  clear  in  the 
case  of  the  apostles,  a  distinction  of  which  they 
are  so  confident  that  they  claim  a  special  illumina- 
tion and  infusion  of  supernatural  light  and  energy 
in  this  experience.  Christ's  mediation  of  grace  to 
them  is  basic.  It  differentiates  their  doctrine  not 
only  from  Christ's,  but  from  all  ethnic  and  pro- 
phetic ideas.  The  apostles  are  neither  mere  seekers 
after  God,  nor  simply  seers  or  servants  or  inter- 
preters of  Gk)d  :  they  are  sons,  the  bearers  of  Him- 
self ;  II  and  the  immensely  richer  experience  is 
reflected  in  the  ampler  refinement  of  their  idea  of 
grace  and  its  more  commanding  place  in  their 
system.  Nor  should  we  fail  to  observe  that  the 
term  'grace'  denotes  a  new  economy  in  human 
history.  Primarily  it  signifies  a  fresh  advance  of 
the  human  spirit  under  the  impetus  of  new  Divine 

•  Ct  Tennjrson's  picture  of  'the  »wfal  roee  of  dawn'  in  the 
Vigion  of  Sin. 

t  Cf .  Xewman's  hymn  :  '  Praise  to  the  Holiest  in  the  hei^t.' 

i  Cf.,  for  an  admirable  discussion  of  this  point,  P.  T.  Finrqrtb, 
The  Perion  and  Place  of  Jem*  Christ,  1909. 

§  W.  P.  Paterson,  The  ApottUT  Teaching,  pt  L :  'Ihe 
Pauline  Theology,'  1903,  p.  5. 

I  Cf.  the  early  Christian  term  for  belierers— X/koto^i^oi. 


508 


GRACE 


GRACE 


redemptive  force.  That  fact  implies  a  fresli  out- 
flow of  energy  from  God  and  a  fresh  uplift  of  the 
world's  life  ;  man  is  '  a  new  creation,'  *  the  world 
'  a  new  earth ' ;  t  there  is  revealed  a  new  stage  in 
the  fulfilment  of  the  eternal  purpose.  Grace  here 
has  cosmic  .significance.  Sin  is  over-ruled  for  good 
in  the  whole  world-order  as  it  is  in  the  individual 
Christian  heart.  History,  like  the  soul,  is  trans- 
formed through  Christ.  The  initial  and  control- 
ling causes  of  that  whole  vast  change  are  discovered 
to  the  primitive  Christian  perception  in  a  great 
surprise  of  God's  forgiveness,  pronounced  and  im- 
parted by  Christ,  and  made  elective  for  regenera- 
tion by  a  force  none  other  than,  not  inferior  to, 
His  Holy  Spirit.  Thereby  a  new  era  is  inaugur- 
ated— the  dispensation  of  '  the  gospel  of  the  grace 
of  God.' J  '  Grace,  then,  comprises  three  specific 
moments :  a  supernatural  energy  of  God,  a 
mystical  and  moral  actuation  of  man,  an  immanent 
economj'  of  Spirit. 

(c)  Essential  cimractcristics. — Grace,  accordingly, 
is  erroneously  regarded  when  defined  as  a  .substance 
or  force  or  any  sort  of  static  and  uniform  quantum. 
It  is  *  spirit  and  life,'  and  as  such  its  characteristics 
are  personality,  mutuality,  individuality.  The  ex- 
perience of  grace  is  that  of  'a  gracious  relation- 
ship'§  between  two  persons,  in  which  the  proper 
nature  of  either  in  its  integrity  and  autonomy  is 
never  at  all  invaded.  The  mode  is  not  impersonal 
or  mechanical.  The  blessing  is  not  an  influx  so 
much  as  response  to  an  influence ;  a  gift  yet  a 
task ;  a  mysterious  might  overpowering,  but  not 
with  power,  rather  witii  persuasion  ;  the  renewal 
of  the  entire  disposition  through  implicit  trust  in 
God's  goodness  and  by  the  diligent  exercise  of  the 
powers  of  Spirit,  ever  latent  and  now  let  loose, 
with  which  He  enables  and  quickens.  It  is  not 
only  an  awakening  of  the  moral  self  into  more 
active  freedom  :  it  is  first  the  conscious  springing 
up  and  growth  of  a  new  life,  sudden  or  gradual  and 
wondrous,  from  immersion  in  the  mystic  bath,||  fed 
by  the  heavenly  streams,  whose  cleansing  power, 
if  before  unknown,  is  not  alien,  and  invests  the 
finite  life  with  the  sense  of  infinite  worth  and  im- 
perishable interest — a  sense  welcomed  as  native 
and  as  needful  for  the  life's  predestined  end.  The 
process  is  easily  intelligible,  yet  readily  liable 
to  misunderstanding.  The  traditional  doctrine, 
Catholic  and  Protestant,  in  its  anxiety  to  safe- 
guard both  the  mystical  and  moral  constituents  of 
the  experience,  has  tended  towards  two  grave 
defects — the  separation  of  the  two  which  in  reality 
are  one,  and  the  confusion  of  the  mystical  with  tlie 
magical. H  Grace  then  becomes  a  material  quantity, 
instead  of  spiritual  quality.  Psychologically  a 
person  is  only  inasmuch  as  he  is  living,  growing. 
Man  is,  as  he  lives  in  God ;  and  his  capture**  and 
surrender  are  achieved  not  in  a  thing  but  in  a 
l^erson,  and  not  to  a  thing  but  to  the  One  Person, 
whose  right  to  claim  him  and  renew  his  life  con- 
sists precisely  in  this,  that  He  is  Himself  absolutely, 
infinitely,  and  actually  what  man  is  derivatively, 
finitely,  and  potentially.  Thus  the  act  which  binds 
man  to  God  does  so  for  growth  and  enhancement 
of  life.  All  that  comes  from  the  living  God  is 
worked  out  by  living  souls,  and  is  ever  living  and 
enlivening ;  it  is  as  varied  and  individual  as  the 
variety  of  individuals  concerned. 

The  apostles  were  Hebraic,  and  no  true  Hebrew 
could  misinterpret  this.     To  the  Fathers  it  was  so 

*  2  Co  5",  Gai:ci5.  f  Rev  211.  s.  j  Ac  2.(fi*. 

§  Cf.  art. '  Personality  and  Grace,'  v.,  by  J.  Oman  in  ExpngUor, 
8th  ser.  iii.  [1912]  46811. 

II  Cf.  St.  Paul's  '  baptism  with  Christ '  (Ro  C^,  Col  2i-').  Cf.  for 
the  idea,  art.  'St.  Paul  and  the  Mystery-Religions,'  in.,  by 
H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  in  Expos-itor,  8th  ser.  iv.  [1012]  COff. 

*II  This  criticism  does  not  apply  to  mjstical  piety  or  evangelical. 

**  It  is  a  seizing  by  God  as  well  as  a  yielding  by  man,  'appre- 
hension '  on  both  sides  (Pb  3>3). 


familiar.  The  covenant-relation  was  the  central 
truth  of  their  religion.  Its  very  essence  was  this 
mutualncss  of  religious  communion.  Vital  godli- 
ness hinged  on  two  realities — the  Divine  Being 
willing  to  be  gracious,  and  the  no  less  ready 
response  man  must  make  to  Him.  For  God  and 
man  to  come  together,  both  must  be  individually 
active.  To  God  s  willingness  to  help,  man  comes 
with  his  willingness  to  be  helped.  To  God's  desire 
to  forgive,  man  comes  with  a  penitent  mind.  By 
mutual  love,  the  love  of  God  to  man  meeting  the 
love  of  man  to  God,  the  two  are  reconciled.  Com- 
plete surrender  (religion)  brings  with  it  growing 
mdividualityand  independence  (morality).  Herein, 
further,  let  us  note,  rests  the  explanation  of  two 
conspicuous  facts  in  the  life  of  giace — the  fact,  viz, , 
tliat  the  inspiration  of  grace  is  neither  iii  fallible 
nor  irresistible  ;  *  and  the  fact  of  the  splendid  out- 
burst of  fresh  forms  of  goodness.  The  Church  in 
her  materialistic  moods  has  been  prone  to  forget 
both.  The  Apostolic  Age  is  so  rich  spiritually 
just  because  so  sensible  of  both.  'We  Iiave  this 
treasure  in  earthen  vessels'  is  the  precise  counter- 
part of  the  psalmist's  '  the  spirit  of  man  is  the 
candle  of  the  Lord.'  It  is  never  forgotten  that 
while  the  Divine  Life  is  the  milieu  of  the  human, 
the  human  is  the  medium  of  tlie  Divine,  its  assimi- 
lative capacity  adequate  only  to  the  present  need, 
not  to  the  ultimate  reality ;  f  while  its  readiness 
to  receive  is  never  in  vain  in  any  event  or  circum- 
stance or  relation  of  life.  The  human  spirit  may 
appropriate  only  within  limits ;  but  the  indefinite 
variety  of  limits  alone  bounds  the  operation  of 
grace.  Grace  is  all-sufficient ;  the  '  fruits  of  the 
Spirit'  correspond  to  its  plenitude. 

2.  Specific  redemptive  content. — In  seeking  to 
analyze  the  contents  of  grace,  wc  have  no  lack  of 
material.  What  grace  is  is  to  be  seen  in  the  spiritual 
personalitj'  it  produces.  The  Apostolic  Letters 
furnish  a  comi)lete,  typical  description,  of  rare 
intensity  and  lucidity,  of  two  such  personalities 
of  the  loftiest  order — St.  Paul  and  St.  John,  and 
we  possess  abundant  parallel  records  of  Christian 
sanctitjy^  of  every  later  age,  to  verify  our  conclu- 
sions. The  letters  are  not  so  much  doctrinal  systems 
as  a  sort  of  journal  intime  of  soaring,  searching 
spirits  :  autobiographies  of  spirit,  '  confessions '  of 
what  the  writers  saw  and  heard  Jind  knew  of  '  the 
mystery  of  Christ.' J  As  Christ  'witnessed'  of 
Himself,  the  apostles  'witness'  of  Chri.st.  Their 
witness  is  offered  in  two  distinct  types — the  pre- 
dominantly ethical  and  the  predominantly  con- 
templative— neither  of  which  has  ever  failed  to 
recur  constantly  in  subsequent  history.  It  may 
therefore  be  taken  as  comprehensive  and  normative. 
It  is,  moreover,  offered  with  a  minimum  reference  to 
the  material  througli  which  it  has  operated — the 
psycho-physical  organism  and  temperament  in 
which  the  gracious  working  has  developed  itself. § 
The  .scaffolding  has  been  taken  down,  and  the 
building  is  disclosed  unencumbered  with  immaterial 
detail.  From  that  fact  we  may  trust  in  the  apos- 
tles' balance  of  mind  and  credibility,  since  the 
very  richness  of  their  spiritual  vision  points  to  an 
unusually  large  subconscious  life  of  '  the  natural 
man'  and  its  insurgent  impulses,  not  e<asy  to 
subdue,  yet  which,  instead  of  dominating,  is  so 
exquisitely  kept  in  place  as  to  become  a  chief 
instrument  and  material  of  their  life's  worth  and 
works.     Regarding  our  data  in  this  light,  what  do 

"  See  art.  Pkrsbvkranxk. 

t  Cf.  a  sermon  by  I'hillips  Brooks.  'The  Candle  of  the  Lord' 
{The  Candle  of  the  Lord  and  Other  Sermo)ut,  1881). 

}  The  recent  extensive  literature  devoted  to  the  study  of  the 
apostles'  teaching  has  for  main  result  to  cist  into  bolder  relief 
the  splendid  spiritual  stature  of,  next  to  Christ,  the  two  grreat 
figures,  St.  Paul  and  St.  .lohn. 

§  Hints  occur  in  SU  Paul's  writings  (Ko  T^*  12',  1  Co  9'^, 
2  Co  lS7-8l2!i). 


GRACE 


GRACE 


509 


we  find? — At  once  a  continuity  of  experience  and 
an  identity  uf  essential  fact. 

(«)  Supeniatural  principle  of  li/c. — To  l)egin 
with,  we  find  tlie  life  of  grace  to  be  constitutetl  by 
the  supernatural  principle,  and  to  be  an  indivisible 
entity.  The  life  of  the  believer  is  by  a  new  birth 
from  above,*  translating  men  into  a  new  position 
before  God  and  a  new  disposition  to  sustain  it.t 
That  is  the  consentient  testimony  of  the  apostles, 
as  of  the  saints,  of  the  first  and  of  every  age.+ 
Grace  is  initially  regeneration,  the  work  of  God's 
Spirit,  'whereby  we  are  renewed  in  the  whole 
man  and  are  enabled  more  and  more  to  die  daily 
unto  sin  and  to  live  unto  righteousness.' §  Apos- 
tolic and  saintly  biography  shows  that  this  con- 
dition may  have  different  levels  and  values  in 
different  natures,  and  even  in  the  same  nature 
at  different  times.  It  shows  also  that  the  main- 
tenance of  that  condition  means  a  constant  and 
immense  effort,  a  practically  unbroken  grace- 
ge.tting  and  ever-growing  purity  in  conflict  with 
the  insistent  lower  self.  But  the  characteristic 
general  fact  of  renewal  remains,  as  something 
constant  and  inalienable — in  its  inferior  planes  as 
a  fight  against  the  devil  ;  in  its  higher,  a  struggle 
with  lower  self,  stimulated  and  impelled  by  GcJd's 
illumination  working  in  and  upon  the  soul :  con- 
stant and  inalienable  so  long  as  the  soul  keeps 
turning  towards  the  Light.  For  the  grace  of 
conversion!!  is  the  concomitant  of  regeneration. 
Conversion  is  an  act  of  the  soul  made  possible  by 
the  Spirit,  and  should  be  as  continuous  as  an  act 
as  regeneration  is  as  a  work.^  This  experience, 
which  on  one  side  is  regeneration  and  on  the  other 
is  conversion,  is  one  which  leaves  the  soul  different 
for  ever  from  what  it  was  before  ;  yet  not  in  such 
wise  as  to  prevent  the  soul  itself  living  on,  or  as  to 
raise  the  soul  above  its  limitations  and  failings,  so 
that  it  will  not  fall  from  grace,  and  wUl  be  kept 
from  sin.  Bat  the  endeavour  to  keep  from  fall 
and  lapse  is  now  on  a  larger  and  deeper  scale,  on 
a  higher  plane,  on  a  new  vantage-ground.  It  is 
always  attended  by  the  clear  consciousness  of  the 
effort  being  'in  God,'  'in  Christ,'  and  as  wholly 
their  work  as  the  soul's. 

This  double  consciousness  of  I>i\nne  and  haman 
action,  nevertheless,  does  not  divide  the  soul.  On 
the  contrary,  the  more  deeplj'  it  proceeds,  the  more 
does  the  soul  wake  up  and  fuse  itself  into  single 
vital  volition  to  cast  off  what  is  inconsistent  with 
its  growing  self  and  to  mould  what  remains  into 
better  consistency.  The  soul  as  the  subject  of 
grace  is  not  an  automaton  but  a  person,  and  the 
two  actions  are  but  two  moments  of  one  motion 
whose  activities  are  not  juxtaposed  but  inter- 
penetrate in  an  organic  unity.**  Spirit  and  spirit 
can  be  each  within  the  other  tt — a  favourite  idea  of 
the  apostles.:^^  In  St.  John  the  same  thought  is 
ever  present  under  the  categories  of  life,  light, 
knowledge,  love.§§  All  here  comes  from,  and  leads 
to,  a  life  lived  within  the  conditions  of  our  own 
existence  in  willed  touch  and  deliberate  union 
with  God. 

(6)  Blessings  of  Christ's  work  and  Person. — Next 

•  Cf.  Jn  113  3*.  2  Co  517,  Gal  615,  ja  ii8,  i  p  i»,  i  Jn  39. 

t  Cf.  Jn  W«,  Ro  52,  Eph  S*- 10- 18  313,  Ph  3»,  "Rt  S*-  6   He  719 

1019.  20. 

X  Cf.  for  the  typical  instance  of  mediaraljMety — St.  Catherine 
of  Genoa — the  remarkable  delineation  in  F.  von  Hugel's 
Mfstieal  Element  of  Reli^vn,  1908 ;  atoo  Lnther,  Bunj-an,  etc  ; 
and  for  Reformation  examples,  the  life  story  of  Luther.  See 
also  *  Studies  in  Conversion,'  bv  J.  Stalker,  in  Expositor,  7th  ser. 
\u.  [1909]  118,  322,  521. 

S  Shorter  Catechism  ;  cf.  Ro  12^,  2  Co  4i6,  Eph  43,  Col  310. 

I  It  belongs  to  the  life  of  'perseverance.' 

5  Cf.  Jn  6«,  Ac  2»  319- «  9  na  1730  •26IS,  1  Th  19,  Ja  4S. 

*•  Cf.  1  Co  1510,  2  Co  *  12112,  Eph  37-  20.  Ph  212- 13. 

tt  Cf.  Ro  gs. 

It  Cf.  Ro6»8l-9.10.ui48  iCo  10»-<15M,  200410^11135.  Gal 
3K,  Ph  la. 

§S  Jn  4"  521  29  ess.  «L  44  KJIO  1250  I4IO  15L  5  17X  »  1  Jn  41^  ». 


we  find  the  life  of  grace  to  be  a  progressive  process 
of  moral  purification  and  mental  enlightenment  in 
mystical  union  with  Christ.  It  Ls  a  growth  in 
grace  and  in  the  knowledge  of  Christ,*  in  the 
'  grace  and  truth '  that  are  come  bj'  Jesus  Christ. t 
St.  Paul  dwells  on  this  grace  as  '  righteousness,'  + 
St.  John  dwells  on  it  as  'truth'  (light,  know- 
ledge) ;  §  never,  however,  in  either  case  on  the  one 
as  exclusive  or  separate  from  the  other.  To  St. 
Paul  Christ  is  wLsdoni  as  well  as  righteousness ;  to 
St.  John  He  is  righteousness  as  well  as  truth, 
although  in  the  former  instance  the  point  of 
emphasis  is  on  righteousness,  in  the  latter  on 
light.  For  this  reason,  in  the  Pauline  doctrine  the 
description  of  the  source,  sphere,  and  effects  of 
grace  is  mainly  in  juridical  terms ;  in  the  Johan- 
nine,  in  abstract  terms — true  to  the  intellectual 
influences  to  which  they  were  subject.!!  The  two 
accotmts  necessarily  differ,  and  in  important  de- 
tails. The  fundamental  conceptions  are  identical. 
A  broad  statement  of  their  unity  may  well  precetle 
the  elucidation  of  their  divergences.  To  both 
types  of  idea:  (I)  Christ  is  not  'after  the  flesh,' 
but  is  Spirit  or  Life,1I^  i.e.  the  Risen  and  Glorified 
Christ  who  had  met  St.  Paul  on  the  way  to 
Damascus,  converting  him  ;  whom  St.  John  saw  in 
the  Vision  of  Patmos  for  his  comfort ;  '  the  second 
Adam,'  ** '  the  Man,  the  Lord  +t  from  heaven ' ;  '  the 
Lord  of  glory.'  Xi  (2)  Righteousness  and  truth  are 
objective  realities  as  well  as  subjective  qualities, 
powers  of  God  and  qualities  in  man  :  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  and  the  sanctity  of  man — the  first 
creative  of  the  second  through  faith.  §§  (3)  Christ 
is  the  ^lediator  of  righteousness  and  truth,  both 
of  which  He  is  Himself ;  11 1]  in  vii-tne  of  which  it 
is  said  that  '  the  grace  of  God '  is  the  '  grace  of 
Christ,'  ItH  and  the  life  of  grace  is  '  life  in  him '  or 
'life  in  the  Spirit.'***  (4)  This  Spirit  creates  or 
awakes  Spirit  (ryevfia)  in  man  through  the  infusion 
of  its  supernatural  principle  in  the  gift  of  right- 
eousness and  knowledge  (=  Spirit),  so  that  men 
are  partakers  of  these  as  they  are  in  God,  in  the 
measure  of  men.tt+  The  Apostle  finds  the  possi- 
bility, on  man's  side,  of  this  infusion,  in  the 
nature  of  the  human  xi-eO/ta.t^  which  then  becomes 
the  temple  of  the  indwelling  Divine  rrev/jM,  and 
from  which  as  basis  proceeds  the  sanctification  of 
the  whole  nature.  (5)  The  righteousness  and 
truth  (which  are  Spirit,  and  Christ),  mediated  to 
faith,  are  mediated  by  the  human  life  and  historic 
work  of  Christ :  in  the  Pauline  statement,  with 
special  relation  to  His  Death  and  Resurrection; 
in  the  Johannine,  with  reference  to  the  issues  for 
character  which  His  Coming  reveals  and  makes 
acute.  According  to  the  former,  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ  is  deliverance  from  the  curse  that  rests  on  sin 
and  the  alienation  from  God.  By  His  Resurrection 
Christ  so  completely  takes  possession  of  the  believ- 
er's heart  that  he  feels  his  life  is  not  so  much  his 
own  as  that  of  Christ  in  him — the  indwelling 
Spirit.  According  to  the  latter,  the  eternal  life 
of  the  pre-existent  Logos,  manifested  in  Christ's 
historical  Person,  is  in  believing  experience  incor- 

•  2  P  318.  t  Jn  1". 

t  Ro  117  10«,  1  Co  1»,  2  Co  521,  Ph  39,  etc 
5  Ct  Jn  1»  319 12»,  1  Jn  15-  7  23  5«,  Rev  225-  6,  etc 

I  We  take  St.  Paul's  mind  to  be  httle  influenced,  the 
Johannine  writings  to  be  moch  influenced,  by  Greek  thoaght. 

^  Jn  14«  1135, 1  Oo  15«.  «7,  2  Go  317, 1  Jn  l^A 
*•  1  Co  15«  tt  1  Co  1  a«7. 

Jt  1  Co  28,  Ja  21.  5§  Ac  31s. 

II  Ro  51s,  2  Co  521,  Ph  111,  2  P  11,  1  Jn  'Z^^  520. 

%^  Christ  is  its  bearer  and  bringer,  having  the  pleroma ;  see 
esp.  Col  1. 

***  The  Sinrit  of  grace. 

ttt  Jn  37  5»,  Ro  117  517  3M,  2  Co  5«,  Ph  3>. 

iit  The  Paoline  anthropokigy  is  an  intricate  snbject.  For  a 
remarkably  interesting  luid  (dear  statement  see  H.  Wheeler 
RobinscH),  Christian  Doetri»e  of  Man,  1911,  i^  104-136.  St. 
Paul  teaches  that  in  the  natoial  vrcvyts  of  man  lies  the  groand 
of  affinity  with  the  Divine  wvevfta. 


510 


GRACE 


GRACE 


porated  tlirough  the  mystical  fellowship  *  of 
believers  with  Christ,  who  are  translatea  from 
darkness  into  light,  from  death  to  life,  from  sin 
and  unrighteousness  to  love.f  (6)  In  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  (of  the  Pauline  type)  the  life  of 
grace  is  seen  at  work  in  Christ's  Personal  Life, 
making  it  clear  that  the  faith  in  Him  that 
is  receptive  of  grace  is  the  faith  of  Him  ;  so  that 
what  He  did  and  won  for  men  He  did  and  won 
for  Himself  as  a  work  of  spiritual  and  moral 
power  exerted  in  Him,  and  not  simply  upon  Him. 
'The  grace-enabling  faith  and  the  faith  enabled 
by  grace  to  overcome  sin  and  destroy  death,  the 
Divine  and  human  conspiring  to  produce  and  con- 
stitute the  new  righteousness  of  God  in  man  and 
man  in  God,  were  so  met  in  Jesus  that  He  Himself 
"was  the  revelation  because  He  was  the  thing  re- 
vealed.' :J:  (7)  The  appearance  of  this  Life  and  its 
blessings  of  grace  are  traced  to  the  spontaneous 
and  unmerited  beneficence  and  initiative  of  God,§ 
who  in  C'hrist  deals  with  sinful  mankind  not  on  tlie 
ground  of  merit  or  after  the  mode  of  Law,  as 
though  they  were  servants  or  subjects,  but  solely 
from  His  own  natural  instinct  of  Holy  Love,  as 
a  father  towards  his  sons.  Hence  the  gracious 
will  of  God  is  distinctive  in  the  incomparable 
fullness  and  excellency  of  the  motives  which  it 
comprehends. II  (8)  Divine  grace  consequently 
underlies  every  part  of  the  redemptive  process, 
in  an  imposing  array  of  objective  forces. IT  What 
are  its  parts  ?  Here  the  schemes  of  saving  grace 
in  the  two  types  widely  diverge  in  their  most 
conspicuous  features.  St.  Paul  conceives  of 
the  subject  of  grace  thus — the  sinner  is  a  criminal 
whom  the  Righteous  Judge  will  of  His  clemency 
save  ;  and  his  thought  moves  in  a  circle  of  juristic 
terms.  St.  John's  conception,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
of  the  world  (=human  life)  as  marred  by  sin  in 
opposition  to  God,  and  his  notion  moves  in  a  series 
oi  antitheses  reconciled  finally  by  the  manifesta- 
tion of  that  pre-existent  Logos  who  is  the  world's 
fundamental  principle.  Under  these  leading  con- 
cepts let  us  classify  the  respective  terms. 

(a)  The  Pauline  scheme. — 'Justification'  is  the 
point  of  stress  in  the  Pauline  list,  and  with  it  go 
'  redemption '  and  '  righteousness ' ;  '  adoption '  and 
'  reconciliation '  go  together ;  sanctification  is  their 
result.  The  source  of  the  whole  is  in  the  Divine 
predestination,  and  the  goal  is  man's  glorification. 
The  briefest  definitions  must  suffice.  Predestina- 
tion determines  on  God's  part  His  purpose  of 
grace.  Election  expresses  the  soul's  experience 
and  certainty  of  saving  grace.  Justification  is 
the  grace  which  acquits  and  accepts  the  sinner 
as  righteous.  By  justification  the  redemption  pur- 
chased by  Christ  is  made  effective.  Adoption  is 
the  grace  that  removes  the  obstacles  debarring  the 
sinner  from  fellowship  with  God,  and  inspires  him 
with  filial  trust,  freedom,  and  inheritance.  By 
adoption  reconciliation  with  God  is  made  effective. 
Sanctification  is  the  issue  of  these  already  men- 
tioned in  the  renewal  of  the  whole  man — spirit, 
soul,  body  —  a  renewal  leading  eventually  to 
resurrection,  life,  glory.  Though  the  parts  may 
thus  be  separated  in  thought,  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  they  are  inseparable  in  tlie  actual 
process.  The  prescience  and  prevenience  of  God 
are  not  otiose  ;  they  are  the  active  origin  and  basal 
ground  of  man's  salvation.  Justification  in  its 
attitude  of  faith  implies  the  implicit  energy  of 
sanctification.     Sanctification  is  but  a  '  continuous 

*  Cf.  the  discourses  in  tiie  Upper  Room,  Parable  of  the 
Vine,  etc. 

t  St.  John's  three jpreat  antitheses. 

i  W.  P.  DuBose,  The  Gospel  according  to  Saint  Paul,  1D07, 
pp.  85-86. 

§  Jn  112  637. 40,  Ro  5H- 10,  Eph  1*  28,  Col  18,  1  Jn  310  410. 

II  2  Co  98,  Ph  419, 1  P  410,  1  Jn  31. 

U  Ro  830. 


justification.'  *  Imputed  righteousness  is  vital  and 
IS  imparted.  The  '  peace  with  God '  which  these 
secure  is,  through  a  real  remission  of  sins  and 
rescue  from  God's  wrath,  fitted  to  partake  in  the 
ineffable  nature  of  the  Spirit  of  righteousness  and 
truth,  who  effects  salvation,  and  the  bliss  of  the 
Eternal  Life,  of  which  it  is  the  foretaste  and  first- 
fruit,  t 

St.  Paul  gives  two  '  sums '  of  grace,  the  one  in 
1  Co  P",  the  other  in  Ro  8^",  to  which  elsewhere  are 
added  '  adoption '  and  '  reconciliation  '  (Gal  4"'', 
Ro  5",  2  Co  S*").     We  may  tabulate  thus  : 

A.  Predestination  and  Election. 

Justification  Ado)>tion  Sanctification 

B.  and  and  and 
Redemption.          Reconciliation.        Righteouanew. 

C.  Resurrection  and  Glory. 

(/3)  The  Johannine  scheme. — Eternal  Life  is  the 
point  of  stress  in  tlie  Johannine  scheme.  It  works 
itself  out  in  a  series  of  three  antitlieses  subsumed 
under  the  general  and  inclusive  one  of  God  versus 
the  world,  viz.  light  v.  darkness,  life  v.  death,  love 
V.  sin  =  unrighteousness.  God  and  Christ,  working 
in  the  Pauline  scheme  as  righteou.sness  and  wisdom, 
work  here  as  light,  life,  love,  driving  away  dark- 
ness, death,  sin  ;  restoring  life  to  its  full  com- 
pletion by  this  self-revelation  of  the  Divine  Life 
which  is  at  the  same  time  the  principle  of  the 
world's  real  life  (Logos).  Resurrection  liere  is  just 
fullness  of  life,  the  perfection  of  personality,  which 
we  see  in  Christ  (historic),  who  is  the  Resurrection 
and  Life,  and  who  communicates  it  to  believers, 
with  self-evidencing  force,  in  the  life  of  love.  This 
new  life  is  attained  from  the  new  birth  in  an  ex- 
perienced succession  t  of  ever-deepening  intuitions 
and  acts  of  faith,  in  a  rich  immanence  of  Christ  in 
the  believing  soul,§  and  of  such  a  soul  in  Christ, 
like  that  of  the  Father  in  the  Son  and  the  Son  in 
the  Father.  II    We  may  tabulate  thus : 

A.  Pre-existent  IX)gos  and  Life. 

God  Light  Life  Love 

B.  V.        =        V.  V.  V. 
World.         Darkness.        Death.             Sin. 

C.  Incarnate  Logos,  Principle  of  Resurrection  and  Life. 

The  broad  result  of  both  descriptions  of  the  life 
of  grace  is  notable.  It  vindicates  the  outstanding 
fact  of  the  Synoptic  presentation  of  Christ :  the 
uniqueness  of  His  self-estimate  for  salvation. 
That  is  the  conspicuous  fact  likewise  of  apostolic 
experience :  '  the  mystery  of  Christ  now  revealed 
to  his  holy  apostles.'  Unique  as  His  life  was,  it 
yet  can  be  the  very  law  of  all  life.  And  it  is  so, 
when  a  relation  between  men  and  Christ  is  estab- 
lished of  such  a  nature  as  links  them  to  Him,  so 
tliat  they  abide  in  Him  as  in  their  element.  That 
relation  is  not  adequately  expressed  as  simply 
ethical  harmony.  It  is  rather  an  interpenetration 
of  essence,  in  which  the  soul,  gathering  up  all  its 
faculties  in  unitary  interplay  and  under  His  in- 
fusion of  His  Spirit,  enters  on  a  progressive  sanc- 
tification, the  illumination  of  the  mind,  the 
cleansing  of  the  Spirit,  until  the  whole  nature  is 
filled  with  the  rich  gifts  of  grace.  Man  in  all  this 
is  neither  depersonalized  nor  self-deified.  He  is, 
indeed,  a  self-contained  system  of  spiritual  opera- 
tions— a  little  cosmos.  But  he  is  this  in  order  to 
take  his  rightful  and  ordained  place  in  the  larger 

•The  phrase  is  Flint's,  in  Sermon*  and  Addresses,  1809,  p. 
230 — Christ  our  Righteousness.  It  is  a  merit  of  Ritschl  to 
have  broken  down  the  distinction  between  justification  and 
sanctification.  Cf.  his  chief  work,  Rechtjertigung  und 
Versohnung*,  1900. 

t  Ro  51. 

X  Cf.  \V.  R.  Inge,  art  'John,  Gospel  of,'  in  DCG  i.  885 fl., 
where,  however,  the  successiveness  of  the  stages  is  overdrawn, 
and  the  equally  true  simultaneity  is  obscured. 

§  Too  narrow  a  content  is  at  times  given  to  St.  John's  '  know- 
ledge' :  it  includes  not  only  the  mental  part,  but  all  the  parts 
of  a  man's  self. 

II  Jn  14a>-  21, 


GRACE 


GRACE 


511 


cosmos ;  for  the  fundamental  energy  in  his  new 
life  is  the  wider  fundamental  energy  which  Ls  co- 
extensive with  creation  \italizing  all  that  lives. 
So  large  is  God's  gift.* 

(c)  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.— Vie  find  the  life 
of  grace  to  oe  consummated  under  the  pre-ordained 
Divine  ideal  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  the  hope  of  glory.  The  life  of  grace  is  the 
eternal  life  in  its  earlier  stage.  The  gift  alone 
corresponding  to  the  requisite  grace  is  the  Holy 
Spirit.  It  is  a  gift,  the  natural  and  necessary 
sequel  to  the  process  just  described.t  For  the 
Spirit  is  the  agent  of  the  operations  of  grace.  If 
God  justifies,  adopts,  and  sanctifies,  regenerates 
and  converts,  it  is  but  fitting  that  He  take  means 
to  make  known  the  fact  to  them  who  are  subject 
to  these  acts  of  grace :  hence  in  justification  the 
Spirit  'sheds  abroad  in  our  hearts'  the  love  of 
God ;  Z  in  adoption  '  the  Spirit  beareth  witness 
with  our  spirits  that  we  are  the  children  of  God.'§ 
St.  John  dwells  on  the  importance  of  the  sending 
of  "the  Spirit.  II  The  Spirit  is  specially  the  gift 
of  God ;  His  mission  the  most  important  of  the 
consequences  of  Christ's  Exaltation.  As  Christ 
grew  Himself  in  grace  by  the  Spirit,  so  by  the 
SjJirit  He  did  His  work  for  man,  does  His  work  in 
man,  and  mystically  abides  in  man.  The  Spirit 
comes  not  to  supply  the  place  of  an  absent  Christ 
but  to  bring  a  spiritually  present  Christ.  He 
dwells  in  the  believer  as  that  Divine  personal 
influence  that  brings  Christ  into  the  heart  and 
seats  Him  there.  He  joins  us  to  Christ,  and  in 
Christ  we  are  joined  to  God — hence  the  terms 
'Spirit  of  Christ,'  'Spirit  of  the  Son,'  'Spirit  of 
Jesus  Christ.'  Again,  the  Spirit  does  His  work 
not  abstractly,  but  by  producing  conviction  of  sin, 
righteousness,  judgment  to  come,  in  relation  to 
Christ  whom  'He  glorifies.' IT  He  makes  the 
historic  facts  of  the  Life,  Death,  and  Resurrection 
of  Christ  the  vital  points  of  connexion  through 
which  He  acts ;  and  because  it  is  so,  men  experi- 
ence in  grace  those  energies  which  constitute  the 
Spirit  of  the  Son,  the  energies  of  God. 

Hence  His  indwelling  manifests  itself  in  the  par- 
ticular dispositions  and  graces  of  character**  which 
He  calls  into  existence,  called  'the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit.'  We  need  not  trace  the  forms  in  which  the 
spiritual  principle  unfolds  or  the  spheres  within 
which  it  operates,  tt  We  point  only  to  the  infinite 
variety  and  individuality  of  grace  in  its  exhibition 
here,  and  to  its  limitless  prospect  and  horizon. 
Crod  in  Christ  through  His  Spirit  is  the  Maker, 
the  Creator  of  this  new  spiritual  character.:^  It 
is  the  protlucrion  of  the  original  and  underived  con- 
ception of  His  mind,  not  an  origination  in  man's 
nature  nor  within  its  limits.     Hence  its  freshness, 

£regnancy,  fruitfulness,  and  hopefulness.  It  is  a 
fe  to  l>e  worked  up  to  (a  Divine  ideal),  not 
worked  out  from — and  no  man  can  fix  the  bounds 
of  its  splendour. 

It  finds  exercise  in  the  natural  virtues,  in  the 
spiritual  graces,  in  the  service  and  worship  of  God, 
in  the  religious  emotions,  and  in  the  realization  of 
the  blessings  of  salvation.  It  is  '  unto  good  works,' 
with  sublime  inclusiveness.  There  is  no  fixed 
pattern.  God  has  no  set  moulds  for  character  to 
run  in  :  nothing  is  fixed  but  the  predestined  path 

•Ro8. 

t  This  is  prominent  in  Romanist  teaching  of  gratia,  infusion 
of  Baring  energy  by  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  jost  as  in  Reformed 
doctrine  *  grace '  is  the  free  favour  of  God,  manifested  in 
justification,  which  bringB  with  it  assurance.  St.  Paul's  idea 
comprises  both. 

:  Bo  5».  $  Ro  8i«- 17. 

I  Jn  14, 16,  etc.  5  Jn  16". 

••  St.  Paul  gives  a  fine  list  (Gal  5*2. 23) ;  st.  John  gives  its  no 
less  fine  spirit— love  (1  Jn  3X). 

ft  Briefly,  the  Spirits  'manifestation'  is  (a)  ecstatical,  (6) 
ethical,  (c)  religious.  St.  Paul  g:ives  the  lowest  place  to  (al  the 
highest  to  (e)  (1  Co  13). 

U  Eph  210, '  we  are  His  "  poem"  created.' 


'  that  God  has  ordained  that  we  should  walk  in.'* 
The  same  idea  occurs  in  another  fine  setting  in  St. 
Peter. t  The  greatness  of  grace  lies  quite  as  much 
in  what  it  is  to  be  as  in  its  present  value ;  in  grace 
there  is  an  inherent,  indefinitely  prolonged,  and 
enduring  propagativeness,  another  aspect  of  grace's 
resources.  In  this  regard  the  Spirit  is  ♦  an  earnest.' 
An  earnest  implies  two  things — more  to  follow, 
and  more  of  essentially  the  same  kind.  The  pres- 
ence of  the  Spirit  in  a  man's  life  speaks  to  him 
with  assurance  of  the  future,  and  the  blessedness 
awaiting  ;  and,  if  it  does  not  enable  him  to  forecast 
the  particulars  of  that  life,  yet  it  does  enable  him 
to  foretaste  its  nobleness  and  bliss.  What  grace 
gives  here  J  will  be  enjoyed  there  in  perfect  glory 
and  perfected  fullness.  Only  let  us  'live  in  the 
Spirit'  and  'walk  in  the  Spirit' § 

3.  Historical  controYersie&. — The  subject  of  grace 
bristles  with  controversy.  Every  fresh  epoch,  bring- 
ing larger  thought  and  fresh  foci  of  emphasis,  sees 
the  recurrence  of  perplexities.  The  Apostolic  Age 
is  no  exception.  Its  apologetic  protagonist,  St. 
Paul,  discusses  at  least  four  points — grace  in  rela- 
tion to  (a)  nature,  (6)  merit,  (c)  freedom,  (d)  the 
Church  and  sacraments.  A  brief  note  on  each  may 
fitly  close  this  exposition. 

(a)  Grace  and  nature. — The  question  is  in  reality 
part  of  the  perennial  problem  of  nature  and  the 
supernatural,  and  their  relation.  With  the  Apostle 
it  offers  two  facets  :  (1)  the  extent  to  which  unre- 
generate  man  may  be  said  to  be  under  grace ;  (2) 
the  conversion  of  sinftil  nature  by  grace.  As  to 
the  former,  there  have  been  in  sub^quent  times 
two  attitudes :  (a)  man's  tinregenerate  nature  is 
wholly  outside  grace,  a  viassa  perditionis  (St. 
Augustine),  a  '  total  depravity '  (Calvin),  '  in  bond- 
age '  (Luther) ;  and  (^)  it  is  only  in  piart  outside 
the  operation  of  grace ;  grace  includes  natural 
%-irtue  as  well  as  supematuxal  gifts ;  in  the  work- 
ing of  reason  and  conscience  we  see  the  working  of 
God's  Spirit ;  the  question  is  one  of  degree.  As 
to  the  latter  there  have  been  also  two  attitudes  :  Is 
sin  radical  or  superficial,  imperfection  or  perver- 
sion? If  it  is  a  radical  perversion,  then  the  con- 
verting grace  required  is  above  nature,  the  free 
gift  of  God's  mercy ;  if  a  superficial  imperfection, 
moral  influence  by  way  of  education  will  suffice  to 
eradicate  it. 

These  attitudes  in  varying  guise  have  divided 
Christendom  through  the  centuries.  On  which 
side  may  we  range  the  apostles?  The  question  is 
not  easy  to  answer.  They  ofler  no  systematic  state- 
ment. Two  considerations  are  relevant.  First, 
they  inherit  the  national  attitude,  the  cardinal 
feature  of  which  is  the  natural  affinity  of  man  for 
Ciod  and  the  easy  access  of  God's  Spirit  to  man. 
The  Spirit  operated  specially  but  also  generally ; 
His  grace  lay  in  the  ordinary  as  well  as  in  the  ex- 
ceptional facts  of  moral  and  religious  life.  There 
is  no  sign  that  the  apostles  broke  with  this  point 
of  view  (nor  did  the  Patristic  age).'!  They  make, 
however,  a  most  significant  addition,  due  to  the 
vital  effect  of  Christ's  Personality  in  their  experi- 
ence, introducing  an  absolutely  new  strain,  form- 
ing a  new  centre  round  which  the  problem  gathers. 
The  inherited  theory  is  left  unreconciled  with  the 
new  focus ;  the  new  focus  inevitably  leads  to  the 
profoundest  widening  of  the  gulf  between  nature 
and  grace ;  and  pre-Chrisrian  moral  and  religious 
life  is  conceived  of  as,  in  its  general  disposition, 
evil,  abandoned  of  God,  even  if,  in  its  higher 
tendencies,  especially  in  Israel  under  the  Law,  it 
was  propedeutic  and  led  to  demands  for  revelataon 

•  Eph  210.  tip  1". 

X  '  The  Spirit  of  j^arj  aad  of  God  rests  upon  us  now '  (1  P  41'*)- 

S  The  beherer  wlio  has  the  Spirit  thus  has  Him  as  'a  seal' 
(2  C!o  123,  Eph  lis  430). 

i  The  Greek  Fathers  teach  that  the  Greek  i^iiloeopherB  are 
onder  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


512 


GRACE 


GRACE 


of  grace.  In  both  St.  Jolin  and  St.  Paul  the  con- 
ception of  .sin  is  inimeasuiubly  deepened — its  opposi- 
tion, even  enmity,  to  God  and  grace  starkly  ex- 
pressed. 

{b)  Grace,  (ind  iticrit. — The  doctrine  of  merit  in 
its  full  technical  sense  belongs  to  later  days.  It  is 
fully  developed  in  mediajval  scholasticism,  where 
it  occupies  a  large  place.  It  was  seriously  assaulted 
by  the  Keformers.  It  was  prepared  for  by  a  long 
anterior  development  from  small  beginnings  as 
early  as  the  sub-apostolic  teaching.*  Many  factors 
entered  in  tlie  course  of  history  to  enhance  its  theo- 
logical interest.  From  the  sub-apostolic  age  there 
begins  the  emphasis  on  works.  Again,  increasingly, 
Christianity  tends  to  become  a  new  Law,  the  Chris- 
tian life  its  submissive  acceptance.  Still  more,  as 
the  Church -consciousness  grew,  there  grew  tlie 
ecclesiastical  idea  of  redemption  as  a  great  system 
beginning  in  baptism  and  ending  in  resurrection  ; 
grace  working  not  spiritually  but  mechanically  in 
its  mode.t  The  Latin  Fathers  gave  a  strong  im- 
petus to  the  idea  of  merit  in  the  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline of  penance.  In  the  Pauline  anthropology 
the  idea  is  present  and  is  opposed  in  its  most  rudi- 
mentary form.  It  has  a  natural  basis,  which  the 
Apostle  takes  up,  and,  dissociating  it  from  the 
popular  view,  makes  serve  as  the  foundation  of 
his  doctrine  of  faith  as  the  human  factor  in  the 
renewal  of  the  believing  heart.  It  is  not  quite 
true  that  in  Pauline  theology  man  'can  do  nothing' 
and  'needs  to  do  nothing.'  Grace  requires  man's 
co-operation  in  faith,  which  is  not  simply  an  initial 
act,  but  a  constant  attitude.  Faith,  or  the  recep- 
tive heart,  implicit,  humble  trust  in  God,  may  be 
all  the  sinner  has  to  exercise — but  it  is  a  vast  deal, 
and  has  a  distinct  moral  worth. if  Its  worth,  how- 
ever, is  not  extended  to  the  good  qualities  or 
good  works  of  which  it  is  the  precursor  ;  these  are 
credited  solely  to  the  grace  whose  reception  faith 
renders  possible.§  The  Pharisaic  doctrine  of  merit 
is  before  the  Apostle's  mind ;  and  his  arguments 
emphasize  the  gospel  of  absolute  grace  in  reaction 
from  the  conception  of  Law  as  conditional  reward. 
He  labours  to  prove  that  the  Law  by  its  very  nature 
cannot  unite  the  sinner  to  Christ  or  God,  union 
with  whom  is  the  proper  idea  of  grace.  The  true 
relation  is  reversed  when  character  and  conduct  are 
made  pre-conditions  of  our  obtaining  Divine  grace 
instead  of  the  joyous  result  of  our  having  accepted 
it.  Besides,  even  faith  is  the  gift  of  God.  The 
Spirit  implants.  For  that  express  purpose  Christ 
is  exalted. II  These  principles  reappear  in  the 
Reformers'  polemic  against  the  Catiiolic  dogma. 
'  Faith  unites  the  soul  to  Christ.'  That  primary 
fact  it  is  that  outcasts  all  merit,  and  faith  is  '  the 
gift  of  God.' 

(c)  Grace  and  freedom. — In  the  life  of  grace  as  a 
human  experience  God  of  His  own  motion  takes 
part.  Another  problem  is  :  What  is  the  part  God 
takes,  and  what  is  man's  ?  The  problem  is  one  of 
tlie  most  difficult.  It  is  continually  emerging  in 
the  course  of  human  thought,  and,  like  all  of  these 
grace  problems,  has  continuously  divided  Christian 
loyalty.  Two  great  answers  have  been  given  which 
in  their  extreme  statement  are  directly  contradic- 
tory of  one  another,  but  modifications  of  which  are 
continually  proposed.  The  first  is  known  as  Pelagi- 
anism,  according  to  which  the  spiritual  life  of  a  man 
is  the  direct  result  of  his  own  choice.  The  second 
is  known  as  Augustinianism,  according  to  which 
the  spiritual  life  is  necessitated  by  God's  will.  The 
best-known  modification  is  Semi-pelagianisin,  which 

*  In  '  Ilermas '  we  have  the  idea  of  superero^jatory  merit ;  and 
also  o(  some  works  better  pleasing  to  God  than  others. 

t  Not  the  same  as  the  magical  worthing  of  the  impersonal 
'  infusion  '  of  later  scholasticism. 

J  He  118. 

5  This  is  all  more  fully  considered  under  art.  Jcstification. 

U  Ac  61. 


finds  prevailing  favour  in  the  Roman  Catholic  teach- 
ing, as  Augustinianism  does  in  Reformation  doc- 
trine. It  is  a  form  of  Synergism,  according  to  which 
Divine  grace  is  insuilicient  till  human  eflbrt  con- 
joins with  it.  The  three  may  be  thus  defined — in 
the  Pelagian  view,  grace  precedes  and  assists  the 
natural  (unregenerate)  will ;  in  the  Augustinian, 
grace  prepares  and  assists  the  regenerate  will ;  in 
tlie  Semi-pelagian,  grace  is  not  operative  at  all  till 
man's  will  (indifferent)  brings  it  into  play.  The 
answer  to  the  problem  depends  on  the  i)hilosophy 
of  personality  adopted.*  What  is  here  relevant  is 
the  ffict  that  the  apostolic  doctrine  has  nothing  of 
all  this  in  view,  however  much  it  may  suggest  it. 
These  eternal  values  are  carried  up  to  the  eternal 

Eurpose  of  God  and  at  the  same  time  tiie  ctiiical 
asis  of  moral  responsibility  in  human  freedom  is 
recognized.  The  Divine  control  of  human  life  in 
the  whole  of  its  activities  is  one  of  the  great  con- 
ceptions of  the  OT.  It  is  power  animated  by  a 
gracious  and  righteous  purpose  and  conditioned  by 
the  recognition  of  human  freedom.  Tlie  OT  idea 
of  providence  culminates  in  tlie  NT  itiea  of  salva- 
tion. The  assertion  of  human  freedom  runs  through 
both  OT  and  NT,  Divine  control  and  human  free- 
dom accompanying  each  other,  in  harmonious  in- 
timacy, regarded  in  a  purely  practical  manner. 
Whatever  invasion  of  '  freedom  there  is,  is  due  to 
sin  ;  but  the  evil  tendency  is  never  pressed  into 
determinism.  The  apostles,  as  later  the  Fathers, 
think  in  this  ancestral  descent.  Religious  depend- 
ence has  for  necessary  concomitant  moral  inde- 
pendence ;  the  deeper  the  dependence  (religious) 
the  richer  the  independence  (morality).  It  is  this 
independence  that  St.  Paul  emphasizes  in  the  bless- 
ing which  he  terms  '  the  glorious  liberty  of  the 
sons  of  God,' '  the  freedom  wherewith  Christ  sets  us 
free't — a  primary  feature  of  the  new  life.  Grace 
is  the  personal  relation  to  our  moral  self  by  which 
that  self  attains  emancipation.  Modern  moral 
theory  approves. 

{d)  Grace  and  the  Church  and  sacraments. — In 
apostolic  thought  the  Church  is  a  visible  and 
Divine  institution  :  the  Body  and  Bride  of  Christ. 
It  is  the  approjiriate  social  environment  for  the 
sanctified  soul,  wherein  at  once  the  gifts  of  each 
are  available  for  the  profit  of  all  and  the  spiritual 
atmosphere  conduces  to  the  uplift  and  sanctity  of 
all.  It  is  specially  the  '  fulness  of  him  that  filleth 
all  in  all,'  +  i.e.  the  complement  of  His  purpose,  the 
means  by  which  He  accomplishes  His  loving  .scheme 
for  man  s  salvation.  There  are  two  strata  of  con- 
cepts concerning  the  Church,  one  lower  than  the 
other,  which  have  given  some  justification  for  the 
belief  that  the  apostles  describe  the  Church  in  two 
aspects,  visible  and  invisible,  realistic  and  ideal- 
istic. Rather  they  find  in  the  Church  as  men  see 
it  something  evident  only  to  spiritual  insight. 
To  them  the  Church's  life  and  spirit  are  but  the 
realization  and  extension  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
Himself,  and  the  Church  possesses,  in  the  midst  of 
its  variety  of  spiritual  influence  upon  its  members, 
a  mysterious  unity,  which  is  not  only  the  sum-total 
of  all  present  variations,  but  something  always  be- 
yond and  far-reaching,  inviting  and  calling  and  as- 
sisting the  believin"  members  upward  and  onward 
identically  after  the  manner  of  Christ  Himself 
with  the  soul  living  in  Him.  To  magnify  tlie 
Church  is  to  magnify  this  Divine  Spirit  living  and 
working  in  the  Body  of  Christ. 

The  ordinances  of  the  Church  possess  a  particular 
character.  They  are  not  sul)ordinate  as  mere 
means  of  influencing  the  soul :  they  are  means  of 
grace  to  the  soul.  They  are  of  co-ordinate  import- 
ance with  the  Incarnation,  whose  eflfects  they 
continue,  with  the  Atonement,  which  they  com- 

*  A  question  into  which  we  need  not  here  enter, 
t  Gal  51.  :  Eph  123. 


GRAFTING 


GRAVE,  GRAVITY 


513 


memorate,  for  they  apply  the  {:n"ace3  of  these. 
This  efficacy  hangs  on  the  Living  Presence  of 
Christ,  whose  grace  they  convey  ;  for  the  effect  of 
sacraments  depends  on  the  action  of  Christ  Him- 
self. In  them  He  communicates  what  He  alone 
can  bestow,  for  the  use  of  which  faith  and  spiritual 
affections  are  required,  but  which  thej'  cannot 
create.*  Throu^  His  Spirit's  operation  they 
unite  us  with  Him  in  the  mystical  union.  The 
Church  in  this  sense  M-as  purchased  by  Christ's 
blood  t  and  is  the  object  of  justitication.*  Very 
earlj'  the  rapidly  growing  Christian  society  seized 
upon  this  conception  and  began  to  relate  the  grace 
of  Christ  tlirough  His  Spirit  to  the  sacraments  as 
feeders  of  the  mystery  of  the  inner  life.  The  whole 
ancient  Church,  e.g.,  connects  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
with  baptism.  Yet  there  is  no  disposition  to  regard 
the  rite  as  magical  or  mechanical :  the  spiritual  effi- 
cacy of  the  ordinance  is  due  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  § 
Not  the  rite  ex  opere  operato,  not  the  minister,  but 
the  Spirit  dispenses  grace  ;  the  visible  elements  and 
the  ministerial  action  derive  their  validity  from 
the  Spirit  alone.  Soon  pagan  and  superstitions 
elements  were  to  enter  in,  to  alter  this  free  spiritual 
idea  of  sacramental  grace  into  '  another  grace ' 
altogether — a  lapse  from  personal  to  sub-personal 
categories,  in  perfect  consonance  with  the  new  and 
attractive  idea  of  the  Church  in  its  \-isibility  and 
authority  as  the  exclusive  custodian  of  grace. 
Externally  as  that  idea  was  formulated,  and  false 
as  its  rapid  development  grew  to  be  to  the  apostolic 
mind,  its  opponents  too  often  forget  that  to  the 
apostolic  mind  there  is  no  idea  so  fundamental  as 
the  reality  of  a  great  spiritual  society  living  by  its 
own  truth  and  life,  having  its  own  laws,  and  these 
exclusively  spiritual.  For  the  life  of  grace  consists 
not  simply  in  the  new  life  of  the  soul.  It  is  the 
new  order  of  the  world,  a  new  permanent  order 
of  life,  a  real  supernatural  constitution  unfolding 
itself  in  the  world,  in  absolute  rupture  with  the 
present  world,  deeper  and  more  comprehensive 
than  the  life  of  believers,  having  objective  substan- 
tiality in  the  Life  of  God  as  the  Life  of  Christ  itself, 
whose  embodiment  on  earth  it  is — an  idea  whose 
present  and  practical  realization  the  modem  social 
necessities  imperatively  demand. 

iJTERATCsx. — Besides  the  books  referred  to  in  the  body  of 
the  art.,  the  following  will  be  found  useful :  the  artt. '  Grace '  in 
JE,  CE.  and  '  Gnade '  in  PRE'^ ;  the  Commentaries  on  Romans, 
particularly  that  of  Sanday-Headlam  in  ICC,  1902 ;  C.  Pie- 
pinbring,  Jfms  et  leg  Apotres,  Paris.  1911 ;  A.  E.  Carrie, 
Studies  of  Paul  and  hi*  Gofpel,  London,  1911 ;  J.  R.  Cohn, 
St.Paulinthe  Light  of  Modem  Research,  do.  1911 ;  G.  Steven, 
The  Ptychology  of  the  Christian  Soul,  do.  1911 ;  W.  A.  Cor- 
naby.  Prayer  and  the  Human  Problem,  do.  1912 ;  a  series  of 
artt.  by  W.  M.  Ramsay,  A.  E.  Garvie.and  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy 
in  the  Expositor,  8th  ser.  iii.  [1912].  iv.  [1912],  v.  [1913] ;  the  great 
work  of  H.  J.  Hoitzmann,  Die  Seutest.  Theologie^,  Tiibingen, 
1911,  and  an  older  work  of  great  merit — J.  W.  Nevin,  The 
Mystical  Presence,  Philadelphia,  1846.        A,  S.  MaKTIN. 

GRAFTING — The  Greek  word  used  (^r«T/>ffw) 
has  two  distinct  meanings  :  (1)  '  goad '  or  '  spur  on ' 
(cf.  Ac  26",  '  It  is  hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the 

foad  [Kirrpov'])'  and  (2)  '  inoculate '  or  '  graft.'  The 
English  word  '  graft'  is  derived  from  the  Gr.  7/>d^- 
tiv,  '  to  \\-rite,'  and  means  a  slip  of  a  ctiltivated  tree 
inserted  into  a  wild  one,  so  called  because  of  its 
resemblance  to  a  pencil.  In  the  NT  the  word 
occurs  only  in  Ro  11  "-2* ;  St.  Paul  here  follows  the 
Prophets  (cf.  Jer  lli«)  in  likening  Israel  to  an  olive 
tree  (cf.  art.  OLn'E).  Its  roots  are  the  Patriarchs, 
the  original  branches  are  the  Jews,  and  the 
branches  of  the  wild  olive  which  have  been  grafted 

*  The  point  is  not  how  Christ  acts  upon  us  by  His  Divine 
Humanity  in  the  Church  ordinances,  whether  by  transubstantia- 
tioa  or  spiritual  power,  but  the  fact  that  He  does  so  act  really 
and  truly,  whatever  the  mode. 

t  Eph  52s,  Tit  2W. 

I  Cf.  KitschI,  Rechtfertiffuna  und  Versolmung,  ii.  217  ff. 

i  Cf.  H.  B.  Swete,  Holy  Spirit  in  the  Ancient  Church,  1912. 
VOL.  I.— 33 


in  are  the  Gentile  Christians.  Some  of  the  original 
branches  have  been  broken  off  owing  to  their  lack 
of  faith,  and  by  a  wholly  unnatural  process  shoots 
from  a  wild  olive  have  been  grafted  into  the  culti- 
vated stock.  But  this  is  no  ground  for  self-adula- 
tion :  all  tlje  blessings  which  the  Gentiles  derive 
come  from  the  original  stock  into  which  they  have 
been  grafted  through  no  merit  of  their  own ;  let 
them  beware,  therefore,  lest  through  pride  and 
want  of  faith  they  also  are  cut  off,  for  it  would,  on 
the  one  hand,  be  a  much  less  violent  proceeding  to 
cut  oft'  the  wild  branches,  which  have  been  grafted 
in,  than  it  was  to  cut  off  the  original  branches  : 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  would  be  far  easier  and 
far  more  natural  to  graft  the  original  cultivated 
branches  back  into  the  stock  on  which  they  grew 
than  it  was  to  graft  the  Gentiles,  who  are  merely 
a  slip  cut  from  a  wild  olive,  in  amongst  the 
branches  of  the  cultivated  olive.  The  olive,  like 
most  fruit  trees,  requires  a  graft  from  a  cultivated 
tree  if  the  fruit  is  to  be  of  any  value.  A  graft 
from  a  wild  tree  inserted  into  a  cultivated  stock 
would  of  course  be  useless,  and  such  a  process  is 
never  performed ;  hence  the  point  of  St.  Paul's 
comparison. 

LrrERATCRE. — Sanday-Headlain,  Romans  (ICC,  1902X  pp. 
31*-3:«  ;  HDB  ii.  257  f . ;  EBi  3496  ;  SDB,  p.  314  ;  J.  C.  Geikie, 
The  Holy  Land  and  the  Bible,  1903,  p.  50 ;  W.  M.  Thomson, 
The  Land  and  the  Book,  1910,  p.  33. 

P.  S.  P.  Haxdcock. 
GRAYE,  GRAVITY  {<rf/ju>6i,  aeitv&rm,  1  Ti  2=» 
3*-  8- 1\  Tit  2-- ',  Ph  48).— The  translation  is,  as  a 
rule,  'grave,'  'gravity' ;  but  in  Ph  4*  the  AV  has 
'honest,'  'venerable'  (marg.)  (KV  'honourable,' 
'reverend'  [marg.]),  and  in  1  Ti  2^  'honesty' 
('gravity,'  RV).  The  Vulgate  has ptw/ictts,  except 
in  1  Ti  3*  (castitas)  and  in  Tit  2^  (gravUas).  '  The 
idea  lying  at  its  root  (ce/S)  is  that  of  reverential 
fear,  profound  respect,  chiefly  applied  to  the  bear- 
ing of  men  towards  the  gods'  (Cremer,  LesMOV?, 
1880,  p.  522).  It  is  akin  to  the  Latin  seriug, 
severux,  and  the  Gr.  evtrf^ua. 

1.  The  word  was  used  in  a  local  sense  of  places 
haunted  by  supernatural  powers — of  caves,*  of  the 
boundary  t  of  heaven  and  earth — as  pointing  to 
the  Divine  guardiansliip  of  the  world.  In  the 
LXX  the  word  is  used  in  this  sense  of  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem,  because  it  possessed  a  nva  0eov 
Svyafuf  which  miraculously  thwarted  Heliodorus 
when  he  sacrilegiously  tried  to  rob  it  (2  Mac  3). 
In  an  inscription  of  the  2nd  cent.  Beroea  is  called 
ffefivoTCLTT}  because  it  was  a  Temple-guardian  {peu- 
Kopos). 

2.  Akin  to  this  was  the  religious  application  of 
the  word  to  Divine  persons — a  usage  which  is 
common  in  early  Christian  literature.  In  Hermas, 
Mand.  iii.  4,  it  is  used  along  with  akjjdfs  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  It  is  used  of  the  name  of  the  Deity 
(2  Mac  8'*),  just  as  in  classical  Greek  the  word 
was  applied  to  the  gods,  'E/xri-es — ai  ae/xyai  deal. 

In  the  NT,  while  the  word  has  not  lost  its  re- 
ligious meaning,  it  is  used  mainly  in  a  moral  sense. 
It  occurs  only  once  outside  the  Pastorals  (Ph  4*), 
and  probably  was  familiarized  in  common  speech 
through  the  influence  of  popular  Stoicism.  The 
sophist  claimed  this  title  (Luc.  Bhet.  Prcec.  i.). 
In  Hermas,  Vis.  III.  viiL  8,  ^cfivanji  is  one  of  the 
daughters  of  Uians,  and  thus  has  a  place  among 
the  Christian  virtues.  The  word  is  applied  to 
persons  or  personal  qualities  in  two  senses — either 
subjectively,  of  a  conscious  moral  attitude  of 
gravity,  or  objectively,  indicating  the  influence 
produced  on  others  by  such  a  grave,  decorous 
behaviour.  The  best  translation  seems  to  be 
'gravity.'  Vergil  {^n.  i.  151  ff.)  speaks  of  a 
'pietate  gravem  ac  meritis  virum.'  At  his 
approach  a  seditious  mob  stands  still,  waiting 
*  Pind.  Pytk.  ix.  Sa  t  Eur.  Hippol.  746. 


514 


GRAVE,  GRAVITY 


GRECIANS,  GREEKS 


silently  to  hear  him  ;  and  he  rules  their  mind  and 
calms  their  passions  by  his  word. 

Tills  {ffavity  of  behaviovir  eminently  becomes 
Church  otiicials — bishops  (Tit  2''),  deacons  (1  Ti  3*), 
deaconesses  (v."),  and  the  ajjjed  in  general  (v.*,  Tit 
2^).  They  are  to  act,  in  all  their  official  duties, 
with  a  sense  that  they  are  dealing  with  holy 
things  ;  they  are  to  teach  with  grave  impressiveness 
(Tit  2^).  It  is  thus  the  opposite  of  lifjht-hearted 
flippancy  or  frivolity.  It  implies  dignity,  and  in 
this  sense  Aristotle  uses  it  of  the  high-souled  man 
(Eth.  Nic.  IV.  iii.  26). 

The  home  is  a  nursery  for  the  training  of  gra- 
vity (cf.  1  Ti  3'').  Hence  it  is  not  altogether  right  to 
."ay  that  'gravity  is  hardly  a  grace  of  childhood' 
(see  N.  J.  D.  White  in  EGT,  1910,  on  1  Ti  :i*). 
It  is  the  '  "  morum  gravitas  et  castitas"  which  be- 
fits the  chaste,  the  young,  and  the  earnest,  and  is, 
as  it  were,  the  appropriate  setting  of  higher  graces 
and  virtues'  (C.  J.  Ellicott,  27ie  Pastoral  Epistles 
of  St.  FauP,  1864,  p.  27).  It  befits  all  in  the 
home — children  and  women  as  well  as  the  heads 
of  the  household,  and  all  Christians  as  well  as 
Christian  ollicials  (1  Ti  2-).  This  aspect  of  gravity 
is  referred  to  by  Clement  more  than  once  in  his 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  (ch.  i. ).  In  an 
inscription  it  is  found  applied  to  a  wife  (see  J.  H. 
Moalton  and  G.  Miliigan  in  Expositor,  8th  ser. 
i.  [1911]  479).  llegard  for  becoming  conduct  must 
be  fostered  in  the  home,  and  women  and  youths, 
as  perhaps  more  open  to  frivolity  and  disobedience, 
must  live  <renvCos. 

So,  in  tiie  Cliurch,  gravity  is  the  opposite  of 
disorder,  of  shamelessness  of  behaviour.  It  is  the 
opposite  of  d7r6voia  (see  Theophrastus,  Char.  xiii.). 
In  1  Ti  2^  the  Apostle  inculcates  gravity  as  a 
Christian  attitude  towards  the  State,  and  for  this 
end  prayer  is  to  be  made  for  kings  and  all  in 
authority.  Christians  are  not  to  imitate  tiie  Jews, 
who  brought  on  theniselvps  Roman  hostility  by 
their  religious  contempt  of  authority  (Jos.  BJ 
II.  xvii.  2).  Because  God  wills  all  men's  salvation, 
and  Christ  gave  Himself  a  ransom  for  all,  Chris- 
tians are  to  respect  sincerely  all  authority  as  such. 

'  Christian  reverence  .  .  .  hallows  to  us  everythinjj  in  life. 
The  Christian  regards  himself  as  a  valued  work  of  God.  His 
body  is  a  temple  Imilt  through  ages  by  the  Almighty.  His 
race  is  a  divine  offspring.  lie  loves  even  in  the  unworthy  the 
stamp  of  their  Maker.  Material  nature,  human  history,  daily 
industry,  the  common  intercourse  of  life  gleam  for  him  with 
the  veiled  light  and  movement  of  the  Omnipresent'  (G.  G. 
Findlay,  Christian  Doctrine  and  Morals,  18i)4,  p.  19). 

Thus  in  Ph  4^  the  word  is  very  Avide  in  meaning 
— whatever  demands  and  commands  respect  as 
well  as  the  'noble  seriousness'  (M.  Arnold,  God 
and  the  Bible,  1884,  p.  xvi)  which  such  objects 
produce.  (Christian  gravity  is  not,  however,  '  that 
sham  gravity  which  so  often  discredits  the  word  ; 
not  .  .  .  the  gravity  of  self-importance,  or  narrow- 
ness, or  gloom  ;  but  ...  a  free  and  noble  reverence 
for  ourselves  (since  God  has  made  us  and  dwells  in 
us),  and  for  all  that  is  great  and  reverend  around 
us — the  grace  of  thought  that  guards  us  from 
mere  stu[)id  flippancy'  (F.  Paget,  The  Spirit  of 
Disriplim,  1891,  p.  74). 

There  Avas  a  tendency  in  Greece  to  oppose  the 
ff{fj.v6s  to  the  €virpoa-/iyopoi,  the  '  affable ' ;  and  thus 
grave  persons  got  the  reputation  of  being  proud 
and  unapproachable  (Thuc.  i.  130),  of  being  in- 
different to  the  public  weal  (pq.6vij.la),  of  being 
incapable  of  action,  of  looking  superciliously  on 
enjoyment,  and  of  casting  di.sdainful  looks  on 
tliose  who  did  not  philosophize  (cf.  Hadley's  note 
[1896]  on  Eur.  Alrest.  773  f. ).  The  virtue  of  gravity 
ea.sily  passes  into  the  vice  of  i>omj)osity.  Aris- 
totle says  of  the  high-souled  man  tliat  he  is  digni- 
fied towards  persons  of  afliuence  but  unassuming 
towards  the  middle  class.  A  tlignilied  demeanour 
towards  the  former  is  a  mark  of  nobility,  towards 


the  latter  it  is  vulgarity  (Eth.  Nic.  iv.  iii.  26). 
In  modern  times  gravity  ha.s  been  looked  on  as  a 
flower  that  withers  in  the  knowledge  of  natural 
law  and  in  the  change  of  social  and  political  con- 
ditions (see  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  History  of  European 
Morals^'\  1897,  i.  141  f.).  St.  Paul,  however,  adds 
irpoa-ipiXrj  to  fff/ivd.  '  By  this  the  apostle  seems  to 
advert  to  that  in  wliicn  religious  persons  are  too 
often  deficient,  who  by  an  au.stere  and  ascetic 
demeanour  not  a  little  prejudice  the  cause  of  re- 
ligion' (S.  T.  Bloomfield,  Gr.  Test.,  1832,  »1855,  on 
Ph  4«). 

He  also  adds  dXij^^-  '  Truth  is  the  basis,  as  it 
is  the  object  of  reverence,  not  less  than  of  every 
other  virtue '  (H.  P.  Liddon,  Bampton  Lectures 
for  18GG^,  1878,  p.  268). 

For  the  diflerence  between  the  form  and  the 
reality  of  reverence  see  Augustine  on  Seneca  in 
Westcott,  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  1883,  p.  248. 

Literature. — See  the  relevant  Commentaries  and  Literature 
referred  to  in  the  article  ;  HDD,  art.  '  Grave ' ;  B.  Whichcote 
has  13  sermons  on  I'hil  4>*  (4  vols.,  Aberdeen,  1751);  Isaac 
Barrow,  Sermnns,  London,  1861,  i.  40.  For  a  discussion  on 
Ueverence,  see  J.  Martineau,  TypeH of  EthicalTheory^,  Oxford, 
1898,  vol.  ii. ;  E.  Caird,  The  Emlution  of  Jielir/ion,  Glasgow, 
1893,  Lectures  vii.  and  viii. ;  W.  Paley,  Moral  Philosophy, 
London,  1817,  pp.  296-304.  For  Kant's  view,  see  The  Meta- 
physic  of  Ethics,  tr.  SenipleS,  Edinburgh,  1871 ;  J.  Kidd,  Moral- 
ity and  lielirjion,  do.  1895,  Lecture  iv. ;  H.  Sidewick,  The 
Methods  of  EthicsT,  London,  1907;  A.  Bain,  Mental  and  Moral 
Science,  1868,  p.  249.  DONALD  MACKENZIE. 

GRECIANS,  GREEKS.— These  two  terms  corre- 
spond respectively  to  the  Greek  words  ' EWrjviffral 
and  "EWrives.  The  term  "EWTjvts  is  projierly  the 
name  applied  by  the  inhabitants  of  Greece  to 
themselves,  which  the  liomans  rendered  by  the 
word  Grceci  (Eng.  '  Greeks ').  In  the  NT  the  term 
is  correctly  used  of  those  who  are  of  Greek  descent 
(Ac  16'  18*,  Ro  1"),  although  we  also  find  it  used 
as  a  general  designation  for  all  who  do  not  belong 
to  the  Jewish  race.  Thus  the  foreigners  who  came 
desiring  to  see  Jesus  at  the  Passover  are  referred 
to  as  Greeks  (Jn  12-") ;  so  the  Ajwstle  Paul  divides 
mankind  into  two  classes  when  he  says  (Ro  10'^): 
'  There  is  no  diflerence  between  the  Jew  and  the 
Greek'  (cf.  Ro  l'».  Gal  3-^).  In  these  passages  the 
term  is  practically  equivalent  to  '  Gentile' (y. v.). 
See  also  art.  GREECE. 

The  term  '  Grecians '  (EWrjvtffral),  on  the  other 
hand  (Ac  6^  9^"),  is  applied  to  Greek-speaking  Jews 
as  opposed  to  the  Jews  of  Palestine,  who  spoke 
Aramaic  and  are  designated  Hebrews.  From  the 
days  of  Alexander  the  Great  onwards,  large 
numbers  of  Jewish  emigrants  were  to  be  found 
all  over  the  known  Avorld.  In  Alexandria  in 
particular  a  great  number  had  settled,  but  in  all 
the  cities  of  the  West,  in  all  the  centres  of  trade, 
Jews  found  a  home.  Many  of  these  Jewish  settlers 
acquired  great  wealth,  and  adopted  (Jreek  speech, 
manners,  and  customs.  They  read  the  Greek 
poets,  and  many  of  thein  studied  Greek  philosophy, 
while  at  the  same  time  they  adhered  to  the  Jewish 
hopes  and  regarded  Jerusalem  as  the  centre  of 
their  life  and  worship.  They  were  free  from  the 
narrowness  and  provincialism  of  the  native  .Tews 
of  Palestine,  and  the  message  of  the  Christian 
missionaries  found  much  more  Avilling  hearers 
among  this  class  than  among  the  prejudiced  and 
exclusive  Palestine  Jews. 

A  question  of  considerable  interest  has  been 
raised  regarding  the  proper  reading  in  Ac  11*". 
Are  we  to  read  here  'Grecians'  or  'Greeks'? 
Were  those  to  whom  the  men  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene 
preached  Jews  or  Gentiles,  Grecians  or  Greeks? 
Internal  evidence  and  the  ma-ss  of  MS  authority 
seem  to  conflict.  The  reading  'EXXrji/iords  of  TR  is 
upheld  by  B  D^^  L  and  indirectly  by  K*,  and  has  the 
support  of  almost  all  the  cursives.  It  is  al.so 
retained  by   WH.     On   the  other  hand,  internal 


GREECE 


GREECE 


615 


eviilence  seems  to  demand  the  reading  'EWrjpei 
of  K'  A  D,  which  is  accepted  by  Scrivener,  Lach- 
mann,  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  and  the  text  of  the 
RV.  Wliy  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  men 
of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene  preached  to  Grecians  when 
that  had  already' been  done  ?  If  the  writer  intends 
to  refer  to  a  new  departure  in  missionary  enter- 
prise, the  context  seems  to  demand  the  reading 
*  Greeks '  (cf.  F.  H.  A.  Scrivener,  Introd.  to  Criti- 
cism of  NT*,  1894,  ii.  370  f.;  for  the  other  point  of 
%-iew  see  Westcott-Hort,  Introd.  to  Gr.  NT,  1882, 
A  pp.  p.  93  f.).  W.  F.  Boyd. 

GREECE  (or  Hellas  ;  Lat.  Grtecia,  Gr.  "EXXaj).— 
The  southernmost  part  of  what  is  now  called  the 
Balkan  Peninsula  was  the  cradle  of  a  race  whose 
ideas  contained  the  germs  of  our  present  Western 
civilization.  As  the  religious  life  of  mankind 
divides  itself  into  the  time  before  and  after  the 
dawn  of  Christianity,  so  the  rational  and  political 
life  of  mankind  divides  itself  into  the  time  before 
and  after  the  expansion  of  Hellenism.  The  mental 
activity  of  the  Greeks  in  the  great  classical  period, 
culminating  in  the  5th  and  4th  centuries  B.C., 
made  not  only  the  Hellas  of  later  times  but  all  the 
world  their  debtor.  The  language  they  spoke,  the 
art  and  literature  they  created,  the  spirit  of  liberty 
they  fostered,  and  the  philosophical  temper  in 
which  they  faced  the  problems  of  life,  form  essential 
elements  in  the  finest  modem  culture.  If  criticism 
is,  as  M.  Arnold  said,  'a  disinterested  endeavour 
to  learn  and  propagate  the  best  that  is  known  and 
thought  in  the  world  '{Essays  in  Criticism,  London, 
1895,  i.  38),  the  contribution  of  Greece  can  never 
be  neglecteil. 

Like  Palestine,  the  other  ancient  home  of  great 
ideas,  Hellas  proper  was  a  small  country.  The 
Hellenic  part  of  the  peninsula  (to  the  south  of 
Macedonia  and  Thrace),  with  the  isles  of  Greece, 
was  much  the  same  in  extent  as  the  modem  Greek 
kingdom — aljout  250  miles  in  greatest  length  and 
180  in  greatest  breadth.  In  a  large  sense,  hoAV- 
ever,  Hellas  was  an  ethnological  rather  than  a 
geographical  term,  for  it  embraced  every  country 
inhabited  by  the  sea-loving  and  enterprising 
Hellenes — all  their  settlements  on  the  coasts  and 
islands  of  the  Mediterranean,  on  the  shores  of  the 
Hellespont,  the  Bosporus,  and  the  Euxine  Sea.  As 
the  west  coast  of  the  homeland  was  mountainous 
and  harbourle-ss,  while  the  east  was  full  of  gulfs, 
bays,  and  havens,  Greece  turned  her  back  on  Italy 
and  her  face  to  the  .'Egean  and  Asia  Minor,  so 
much  so  that  in  the  6th  and  the  beginning  of  the 
5th  centuries  B.C.  the  centre  of  gravity  of  Hellenic 
civilization  is  to  be  looked  for  in  Ionia  rather  than 
in  Attica,  the  most  famous  names  in  science, 
philosophy,  and  poetry  being  at  that  time  associ- 
ated Avith  the  Asiatic  coast  or  the  neighbouring 
Cyclades.  But  the  Ionian  Greeks,  isolated  by  the 
estranging  sea  and  weakened  by  internal  jealousies, 
were  unable  to  oflFer  a  successful  resistance  to  the 
Persian  advance,  and  the  glory  of  saA^ing  European 
culture  is  due  to  the  Athenians  who  fought  at 
Marathon  and  Salamis. 

In  the  classical  period,  Greece  was  an  aggregate 
of  self-governing  city-States,  of  which  Aristotle 
surveys  no  fewer  than  158.  These  States  combined 
for  once,  with  brilliant  results,  in  face  of  the 
Asiatic  peril,  but  they  never  afterwards  seemed  to 
be  capable  of  united  action.  Wasting  their 
strength  and  resources  in  fratricidal  wars  which 
gave  now  Athens,  now  Sparta,  now  Thebes,  a 
temporary  hegemony,  they  proved  in  the  day  of 
reckoning  too  feeble  to  resist  the  military  power 
either  of  the  Macedonian  monarchy  or  of  the 
Roman  republic.  The  career  of  Alexander,  tlie 
pupil  of  Aristotle,  closed  the  Hellenic  and  opened 
the  Hellenistic  period  of  history.      It  created  a 


world-Empire  and  a  world-culture,  both  of  which 
borrowed  their  best  features  from  a  Greece  which 
was  'living  Greece  no  more.'  While  the  new 
order  reinforce<l  the  old  Hellenic  elements  in  Asia 
Minor,  it  brought  into  being  a  va.st  number  of 
Greek  cities — the  conqueror  himself  is  said  to  have 
founded  seventy— in  lands  hitlierto  barbarian.  It 
made  Greek  the  language  of  literature  and  religion, 
of  commerce  and  administration,  throughout  the 
Nearer  East.  And  when  the  Romans  became  the 
sovereign  people,  it  was  Greek  rather  than  Roman 
ideals  that  they  sought  to  make  effective  through- 
out their  Oriental  dominions.  '  The  desire  to 
become  at  least  internally  Hellenised,  to  become 
partakers  of  the  manners  and  the  culture,  of  the 
art  and  the  science  of  Hellas,  to  be — in  the  foot- 
steps of  the  great  Macedonian — shield  and  sword 
of  the  Greeks  of  the  East,  and  to  be  allowed 
further  to  civilise  this  East  not  after  an  Italian  but 
after  a  Hellenic  fashion — this  desire  pervades  the 
later  centuries  of  the  Roman  republic  and  the 
better  times  of  the  empire  with  a  power  and  an 
ideality  which  are  almost  no  less  tragic  than  that 
political  toil  of  the  Hellenes  falling  to  attain  its 
goal'  (T.  Mommsen,  The  Province*  of  the  Bom. 
Emp.-,  1909,  i.  253). 

Neither  the  Macedonians  nor  the  Romans  ever 
treated  the  conquered  Greeks  as  ordinary  subjects. 
The  sacred  land  of  art  and  poetry  was  not  ruled 
like  Egypt  or  Gaul.  There  was  a  province  {of 
Achaia,  but  never  of  Hellas.  Such  cities  as  Athens 
and  Sparta  were  spared  the  humiliation  of  being 
placed  under  the  fasces  of  a  Roman  governor  and 
having  to  pay  tribute  to  Rome.  New  Corinth, 
Caesar's  Roman  colony,  the  least  Hellenic  of  the 
cities  of  Greece,  became  the  seat  of  government. 
Nevertheless,  the  free  communities  had  little  more 
than  a  simulacrum  of  their  ancient  power.  The 
Roman  governor  could  always  make  Ids  voice 
heard  in  their  councils,  and  a  rescript  from  him 
brooked  no  delay  in  obedience.  The  right  of 
bringing  a  proposal  l^efore  the  Ecclesia  no  longer 
belonged  to  every  citizen,  but  was  confined  to 
definit«  officials,  and  the  conduct  of  business  was 
placed  in  the  bands  of  a  single  <rrpaTrjy6s.  The 
citizens  were  always  liable  to  be  called  to  account 
for  their  proceedings  (cf.  Ac  19**),  while  the  sovereign 
power  could  at  any  moment  cancel  the  constitu- 
tion of  a  free  city,  and  take  the  offenders  under  its 
own  direct  administration.  Atthebest,  Hellenistic 
life  was  now  sorely  cramped  by  the  limitation  of 
its  sphere  ;  '  high  ambition  lacked  a  corresponding 
aim,  and  therefore  the  low  and  degrading  ambition 
flourished  luxuriantly'  (Mommsen,  op.  cit.  i.  283). 
Shadowy  a.<semblies  still  convened,  engaged  in 
grave  debate,  passed  solemn  resolutions,  made 
appointments,  and  distributed  honours.  But 
political  life  of  a  serious  kind  was  a  thing  of  the 
past.  Hellenism  as  described  by  such  a  writer  as 
Plutarch  already  suggests  '  a  gilded  halo  hovering 
round  decay'  (Byron,  The  Giaour).  'The  genersd 
effect  produced  by  the  many  pictnres,  allusions, 
references,  illustrations  which  he  takes  from  the 
Greek  world  of  his  times  is  that  romantic  adven- 
tures, great  passions,  monstrous  crimes,  were 
foreign  to  the  small  and  shabby  gentility  of  Roman 
Greece.  The  highest  rewards  he  can  set  before 
the  keenest  ambitions  are  no  better  than  if  we 
should  now  fire  our  youths'  imagination  with  the 
prospect  of  becoming  parish  beadles,  vestrymen, 
or  at  most  town  councillors'  (J.  P.  Mahafly,  The 
Silver  Age  of  the  Greek  World,  1906,  p.  349). 

The  twenty  years'  civil  war,  which  ended  in  the 
transfomiation  of  the  Roman  Republic  into  an 
Empire,  was  calamitous  to  the  Greeks,  who  seemed 
fat^  to  be  always  on  the  losing  side.  They  pre- 
ferred Pompey  to  Ca'.sar,  Brutus  to  Antony,  and 
they  were  compelled  in  the  end  to  raise  levies  for 


516 


GREECE 


GRIEF 


Antony's  campaign  against  Octavian.  The  three 
decisive  battles  of  the  war — Pharsalus,  Philippi,  and 
Actiuiu — were  fought  on  the  soil  or  the  coast  of 
Greece,  and  the  contending  armies  almost  hied  the 

Soor  country  to  deatli.  Many  of  its  cities  fell  into 
ecay,  vast  tracts  of  arable  land  were  turned  into 
pasture  or  reverted  to  the  state  of  Nature,  and 
'Greece  remained  desolate  for  all  time  to  come' 
(Mommsen,  op.  cit.  i.  268).  The  dawn  of  the  Chris- 
tian era  saw  the  nadir  of  her  fortunes,  the  hour 
in  which  she  was  most  neglected  and  despised. 
Thinking  that  an  improvement  might  be  eliected 
by  a  change  of  administration,  the  Greeks  peti- 
tioned Tiberius  in  A.D.  15  to  transfer  Achaia  from 
the  senatorial  proconsul  to  an  Imperial  legate. 
This  arrangement  was  sanctioned,  and  lasted  till 
A.D.  44,  when  Claudius  restored  the  province  to  the 
senate ;  whence  there  Avas  once  more  a  proconsul 
(ivdviraroz)  in  Corinth  (Ac  18'^).  Nero,  who  posed  as 
a  Philhellenc,  was  accorded  so  flattering  a  reception 
during  a  progress  through  Greece  that  he  bestowed 
freedom  and  exemption  from  tribute  upon  all  the 
Greeks ;  but  Vespasian  found  it  necessary  to  re- 
store tlie  provincial  government  in  order  to  avoid 
civil  war.  Greece  received  its  greatest  Imperial 
benefactions  in  the  beginning  of  the  2nd  century. 

'As  Hadrian  created  a  new  Athens,  so  he  created  also  a  new 
Hellas.  Under  him  the  representatives  of  all  the  autonomous 
and  non-autonomous  towns  of  the  province  of  Achaia  were 
allowed  to  constitute  themselves  in  Athens  as  united  Greece,  as 
the  Panhellenes.  The  national  union,  often  dreamed  of  and 
never  attained  in  better  times,  was  thereby  created,  and  what 
youth  had  wished  for  old  apre  possessed  in  imperial  fulness.  It 
is  true  that  the  new  Panhellenion  did  not  obtain  political  pre- 
rogatives ;  but  there  was  no  lack  of  what  imperial  favour  and 
imperial  gold  could  ^ve.  There  arose  in  Athens  the  temple  of 
the  new  Zeus  Panhellenios,  and  brilliant  popular  festivals  and 
games  were  connected  with  this  foundation,  the  carrj'ing  out 
of  which  pertained  to  the  collegium  of  the  Panhellenes,  and 
primarily  to  the  priest  of  Hadrian  as  the  living  god  who  founded 
them  '  (Mommsen,  op.  cit.  i.  266). 

Even  in  the  period  of  greatest  depression  Hellas 
still  maintained  her  old  pre-eminence  in  education, 
though  for  a  time  the  univer.sities  of  Rhodes, 
Alexandria,  and  Tarsus  rivalled  that  of  Athens. 
The  life  of  studious  ease  was  to  be  enjoyed  in  the 
cities  of  Greece  as  nowhere  else,  and  Plutarch 
cheerfully  turned  back  from  the  vulgar  splendour  of 
Imperial  Rome  to  the  quiet  refinement  of  his  native 
Chteroneia.  In  all  that  pertained  to  good  taste  and 
humanity  the  Hellenes  continued  to  bear  the  palm. 
Gladiatorial  shows  were  never  popular  in  Greece, 
except  in  the  Roman  colony  of  Corinth,  and  Dio 
Chrysostom  (i.  385)  expressed  his  disgust  and  horror 
when  these  barbarities  began  on  occasion  to  be  seen 
even  in  Athens. 

In  religious  rites  and  ceremonies  Greece  was  re- 
markably conservative.  Pausanias  {Description  of 
Greece  [ed.  J.  G.  Frazer,  6  vols.,  London,  1898]) 
records  {passim)  that  as  he  went  through  the 
country  in  the  2nd  cent,  of  our  era  he  found  the 
primitive  worships  faithfully  maintained  in  every 
city  and  village  by  the  simple,  unquestioning 
natives.  And  the  great  religious  festivals — Olym- 
pic, Isthmian,  Pythian — never  failed  to  attract 
crowds.  It  is  a  familiar  fact  that  religious  beliefs 
which  science  has  discredited  may  still  have  a  long 
life  before  them.  Ever  since  the  days  of  Plato 
the  traditional  religion  of  Greece  had  been  '  a 
bankrupt  concern '  (Gilbert  Murray,  Four  Stages 
of  Greek  licligion,  1912,  p.  107).  And  among  those 
who  not  only  doubted  or  denied  the  existence  of 
the  Olympian  gods,  but  turned  in  weariness  and 
disappointment  from  Stoic,  Epicurean,  and  Aca- 
demic systems  alike,  tliere  was  a  thirst  for  some 
deeper  satisfaction  of  the  soul's  wants.  When 
Alexander's  empire  extended  tlie  bounds  of  know- 
ledge, attention  began  to  be  directed  to  foreign 
faitiis,  and  Oriental  mysteries  gradually  came  into 
vogue.     Sacrilice  and  prayer  to  Hera  or  Athene 


were  replaced  by  the  orgiastic  worship  of  Cybele  or 
the  mystic  rites  of  Isis.  The  Eleusinian  Mysteries 
— the  cult  of  Demeter  and  Cora — constitute  '  the 
one  great  attempt  made  by  the  Hellenic  genius  to 
construct  for  itself  a  religion  that  sliouid  keep  pace 
with  the  growth  of  thought  and  civilization  in 
Greece'  (W.  M.  liamsay,  EBr^  xvii.  [1884J  126). 
The  only  native  gods  of  Greece  who  could  hold 
their  own  against  foreign  rivals  were  the  mystery- 
deities,  Dionysus  and  Hecate.  The  cult  of  Isis 
secured  a  foothold  in  the  yEgean  islands,  spread 
to  Attica  in  the  3rd  cent.  B.C., to  Rome  in  the  1st, and 
ultimately  established  itself  throughout  the  wide 
Roman  Empire,  as  the  adoration  of  the  Madonna 
has  done  in  the  Catholic  world.  *  The  great  ])ower 
of  Isis  "of  myriad  names"  was  that,  transfigured 
by  Greek  influences,  she  appealed  to  many  orders 
of  intellect,  and  satisfied  many  religious  needs  or 
fancies'  (S.  DiUyliomanSoricti/froniJVcro  to  Marcus 
Aureliiis,  1904,  p.  569).  Christianity  was  preached 
in  some  of  the  leading  cities  of  Greece  soon  after 
the  middle  of  the  1st  cent,  (see  Athens  and 
Corinth),  but  made  slow  progress  throughout  the 
country,  where  paganism,  in  one  form  or  another, 
maintained  itself  till  about  A.D.  6(X). 

Ionia  (Javan)  was  known  to  the  later  Hebrew 
prophets  (Ezk  2V^,  Is  66i»),  and  the  Jews  of  the 
2nd  cent.  B.  C.  came  into  touch  with  Greece  proper. 
References  to  Atlienians  and  Spartans  occur  in 
1  Mac  12-14,  2  Mac  6>  9" ;  a  long  list  of  Greek 
cities  is  found  in  1  Mac  15^ ;  and,  according  to 
1  Mac  12",  Jonathan  the  Hasmona3an  greeted  tlie 
Spartans  as  brethren  and  sought  an  alliance  witli 
them  against  Syria.  During  the  Maccabwan  conflict 
the  term  '  Greek '  came  to  be  used  by  strict  Jew.s 
as  synonymous  with  anti-JeAvish  or  heathen  (2  Mac 
410.15  ga  1124)^  and  'Hellenism'  as  identical  with 
heathenism  (4^").     See  Hellenism. 

Literature.— A.  Holm,  Uistory  of  Greece,  Eng.  tr.,  London, 
1894-98 ;  J.  P.  Mabaffy,  A  Survey  of  Greek  CioUusation,  do. 
1897,  Rambles  and  Studies  in  Greece^,  do.  1897,  and  Progrens 
of  Hellenism  in  Alexander's  Empire,  Ao.  1905;  J.  G.  Frazer, 
Pausanias  and  Other  Greek  Sketches,  do.  1900  ;  J.  A.  Symonds, 
Sketches  and  Studies  in  Italy  and  Greece,  do.  lb!)8 ;  L.  R. 
Famell,  The  Cults  of  the  Greek  States.  5  vols.,  Oxford,  1S9(V- 
1909,  The  Higher  Aspects  of  Greek  l{eligion,*London,  1912  ;  artt. 
'Graecia'  in  Smith's  DGRG,  'Greece 'in  HDB,  EBi,  'Griechen- 
land  '  in  iR6r'G.  JaMES  STRAHAN. 

GRIEF  (ir6vo%,  obvv-q,  \vT-n,  irivOos,  and  cognate 
forms). — In  additionto  the  common  vexations  of  life 
(Ac  4- ;  cf.  16'^)  and  the  griefs  arising  from  mis- 
fortune (2  Co  12'')  and  human  mutability  (death> 
and  partings,  Ac  20^),  there  are  certain  cases  ot 
mental  distress  recognized  in  the  NT,  which  are 
significant  of  the  life  and  thought  of  the  early 
Church. 

(1)  To  the  sorrows  of  transgression  the  Church  is 
naturally  sensitive.  Sin  reaps  grief  among  its  sad 
harvest.  Esau's  carelessness  is  followed  by  un 
availing  tears  (He  12").  Those  lustful  after  riches 
pierce  themselves  with  many  sorrows  (1  Ti  6'"). 
Proud  Babylon  despises  God  ;  a  day  of  sorrow  and 
mourning  is  at  hand  for  her  (Rev  18).  The  wide- 
spread pain  caused  by  transgression  is  illustrated 
by  the  case  of  the  incestuous  member  of  tli<' 
Corinthian  Church  (2  Co  2i-^).  First,  St.  Paul,  ;i 
a  spiritual  father  of  the  Church,  has  been  com 
pelled  to  write  with  tears,  in  deep  suffering  and 
depression  of  spirits  (2  Co  2* :  ffXi^is  Kai  awoxh 
Kapdias),  to  admonish  the  careless  Churcli  whicli 
has  allowed  tlie  outrage  to  pass  unrebuked  (1  Co  5-); 
then  the  Church  itself,  realizing  its  shame,  is 
plunged  into  sorrow  (2  Co  2^ ;  cf.  7**");  and  tin 
actual  oft'ender  is  in  danger  of  being  driven  to 
despair  by  his  excess  of  grief  (v,').  Such  distress 
has,  however,  a  redeeming  feature,  inasmuch  a> 
it  leads  to  repentance  (T"'-)-  There  is  a  worldly 
sorrow   {toO  Kbaitov  Xvttt])  which,  embittering  and 


GROANING 


GROWTH,  INCREASE 


517 


hardening  insteatl  of  chastening  (He  12^",  2  Co  7*), 
worketli  deatli  (2  Co  7'^'). 

(2)  But  the  Christian  life  has  Us  own  set  of  mental 
distresses.  The  anguish  of  persecution  at  the  hands 
of  the  world  (Ro  S» ;  cf.  1  P  2i»)  is  but  one  of  the 
sorrows  of  the  Christian's  Via  Dolorosa ;  his  in- 
creasinfr  moral  sensitiveness  enlarges  the  possibility 
of  mental  pain.  The  spiritual  life  is  one  of  travail 
(Ro  S--*  2  Co  5"*;  see  art.  CJROANING).  The 
richer  soul  also  bears  the  cross  of  a  wide  human 
sympathy  (2  Co  11^,  Ph  2^™);  and  a  conscientious 
ministry  is  one  of  suffering,  anxiety,  and  tears  (Ac 
2019. 31^  2  Co  2>-*,  Ro  93  ;  cf.  He  13"). 

(3)  For  the  Christian  conquest  over  grief  see  art. 
Comfort. 

(4)  The  grief  of  God  over  human  perversity  is 
recomiized  in  He  3^**"  {rfxxroxdi^io),  and  in  Eph  4** 
the  Christian  is  warned  against  grieving  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

(5)  The  grief  of  Jesus  is  cited  in  He  5^"**  as  an 
indication  that,  so  far  from  taking  the  priesthood 
to  Himself,  He  shrank  from  the  sacrificial  function 
and  '  accepted  it  only  in  filial  submission  to  the 
will  of  Gotl,'  or  '  that  the  offering  of  prayers  and 
supplications  with  strong  crjTng  and  tears  corre- 
sponded to  the  high  priest's  offering  for  himself  on 
the  Day  of  Atonement  (Hofmann,  Gess).  .  ,  .  An 
interesting  parallel  (also  noted  by  Davidson)  is 
Hosea's  reference  to  Jacob's  wrestling  (12*),  in  which 
he  speaks  of  him  as  weeping  and  making  suppli- 
cation to  the  angel,  of  which  we  read  nothing 
in  Genesis '  (A.  S.  Peake,  Hebrews  [Century  Bible, 
1902],  p.  134). 

LrrsRATCRB. — A.  Maclaren,  Exposition* :  '  2  Cor.  ch.  vii.  to 
end,'  1909,  p.  S  ;  J.  Martineau,  Eiidearoiin  after  the  Christian 
Life,  1S76,  p.  44:  'Sorrow  r.o  Sin';  A.  W.  Momerie,  Thf 
Orimn  of  Evil,  1885,  p.  12 ff.:  "The  Mystery  of  Suffering'; 
H.  Bushnell,  Jforai  Uses  of  DarkThings,lS77  ;  B.  H.  Streeter, 
'  The  Suffering  of  God,'  in  HJ  xii.  [April,  1914] ;  D.  W.  Simon, 
The  Redemption  of  Man,  18S0,  ch.  vii.  H.  BULCOCK. 

GROANING.— The  verb  ffrevd^a  occurs  three 
times  in  Ro  8  (w.**-  ®-  ^)  and  twice  in  2  Co  5 
(w.2-  *),  denoting  the  distress  caused  apparently 
not  so  much  by  physical  suffering  and  material 
decay  as  by  the  conflict  in  the  present  order  between 
matter  and  spirit.  The  whole  creation  is  conceived 
as  involved  in  this  painful  struggle — it  '  groaneth 
and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until  now '  (Ro  8-). 

St.  Paul's  figure  may  have  been  suggested  by  the 
Jewish  tradition  of  the  '  birth-pangs  of  the 
Messiah':  --prn  'h^r.  (F.  Weber,  Altsyn.  Tkeol., 
Leipzig,  1880,  p.  350  f,  ;  cf.  Mt  24"-« :  '  Nation  shall 
rise  up  against  nation,  and  there  shall  be  famines 
and  earthquakes  in  divers  places.  These  things 
are  the  beginning  of  travail'),  although  the 
Apostle's  thought  is  more  psychological.  For  the 
sympathy  of  Nature  with  man's  fall  and  restoration 
see  Weber,  pp.  222  f.,  380  f.,  398. 

The  larger  life  of  the  Spirit  presses  painfully 
against  t  he  limitations  of  the  present  material  world. 
Not  creation's  physical  sufferings  under  the  bondage 
of  corruption,  but  her  '  earnest  expectation '  of 
deliverance  from  it,  creates  the  sense  of  almost  in- 
tolerable strain  ;  the  '  firstfruits  of  the  Spirit'  for 
the  moment  intensify  the  burden  of  the  flesh  ;  the 
deepest  groanings  of  the  saint  arise  from  his  sense 
of  exile,  from  his  '  longing  to  be  clothed  upon  \tith 
his  habitation  from  heaven '  (2  Co  5-).  The  soul 
in  its  holiest  moods  groans  in  its  impotence.  Its 
highest  yearnings,  though  kno^^•n  to  the  Searcher 
of  hearts,  have  no  language  but  a  painful  cry. 

'The  groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered'  with 
which  'the  Spirit'  maketh  intercession  for  us  (Ro 
8*)  seem  to  be  those  of  the  saint's  spiritual  nature. 
In  St.  Paul,  man's  higher  faculties  take  highly  jier- 
sonified  forms — the  indwelling  Divine  is  the  Spirit 
of  Christ  (cf.  Philo's  Logos,  identified  with  the 
archangel,  etc.,  or  the  Logoi,  identified  with  Jewish 


angels  and  Greek  daimons.  See  J.  Drnmmond, 
Philo  Judo- us,  1888,  ii.  235  f.,  for  a  discussion 
of  'the  suppliant  Logos,'  rbr  iKtryfv  Xoyov).  The 
•  Spirit '  of  Ro  8  is  distinguished  from  God ;  the 
'heart'  of  man  and  the  '  mind  of  the  Spirit'  seem 
i  synonj'mous,  and  the  *  unutterable  groanings '  suit 
better  a  limited  human  soul  than  a  heavenly  power. 
But  the  stirrings  of  the  Spirit  which  make  the 
soul  conscious  of  earth's  '  broken  arcs '  give 
the  promise  of  heaven's  •  perfect  round ' — of  '  the 
glory  which  shall  be  revealed  to  us-ward '  (cf.  St. 
Augustine's  Confessions,  bk.  ziii. ;  also  Browning's 
Abt  Vogler).  H.  BuLCOCK, 

GROWTH,  INCREASE  (Gr.  aij^ii).—ln  most  of 
the  passages  in  which  the  idea  of  growth,  growing, 
increase,  occurs  in  the  NT  the  words  in  use  in  the 
Greek  are  either  parts  or  compounds  of  the  verb 
av^dru.  The  abstract  noun  'increase'  (aS^u)  is 
found  in  only  two  passages — Eph  4^*,  Col  2" — but 
the  root  of  tlie  word  and  the  idea  underlying  occur 
frequently  all  through  the  apostolic  writings.  We 
also  find  -repuraeva,  '  abound,'  xpoKoxrw,  '  advance,' 
xXeovofw  and  ivSvpafi6u,  '  strengthen,'  translated  by 
the  word  'increase.'  Originally  and  in  classicai 
Greek  the  word  av^dvu  signified  'increase  by 
addition  from  the  outside,'  used  e.g.  of  a  State 
increasing  by  adding  to  its  territory,  but  in  the 
NT  the  word  is  mainly  used  of  seminal  growth 
from  ^vitllin,  such  as  the  growth  of  a  plant,  animal, 
or  person.  The  Hebrew  writers  were  fond  of  com- 
paring things  natural  with  things  spiritual,  and 
found  frequent  analogy  between  natural  and 
spiritual  processes.  They  had  a  great  wealth  of 
words  to  express  the  idea  of  growth,  and  most  of 
them  signify  the  organic  growth  of  living  objects. 
According  to  Hebrew  ideas,  the  natural  laws  of 
physical  growth  are  made  to  apply  to  the  spiritual 
realm.  God  is  supreme  in  the  world  of  Nature  and 
the  world  of  spirit  alike.  In  both  there  is  growth, 
and  that  is  represented  as  the  gift  and  working  of 
Gtod.  He  causes  grass  to  grow  (Ps  104"  147*),  while 
the  growth  of  restored  and  penitent  Israel  (Hos 
14*-^)  is  regarded  as  the  result  of  the  gracious 
operations  of  the  forgiving  God  who  is  '  as  the  dew 
unto  Israel.' 

These  ideas  are  carried  forward  to  the  NT,  and 
we  have  frequent  references  to  the  phenomena  of 
growth,  while  the  comparison  between  growth  in 
the  natural  and  in  the  spiritual  world  is  fully  de- 
veloped. Four  separate  connexions  in  which  the 
idea  of  growth  is  applied  can  be  distinguished. 

1.  In  Jn  3**  the  word  au^dpu  is  applied  to  the 
growing  power  and  authority  of  Jesus  Himself  as 
a  religious  teacher.  '  He  must  increase.'  The 
same  idea  is  expressed  in  Ac  9"  where  the  growing 
spiritual  power  of  St.  Paul  as  a  preacher  of  the 
gospel  is  referred  to.  The  word  used,  however,  is 
evSwafjidu,  which  emphasizes  the  aspect  of  power 
rather  than  the  growth  of  it. 

2.  In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  the  idea  occurs  in 
connexion  wth  the  progress  of  the  Church  as  an 
external  organization.  The  phrase  in  Ac  6"  12** 
19**,  '  The  word  of  God  increased '  or  '  grew,'  which 
seems  to  be  a  formula  used  to  close  the  various 
sections  in  the  historj',  refers  to  the  growth  of  the 
number  of  believers.  Here  the  word  used  is  av^pu. 
The  statement  in  Ac  16*,  '  The  churches  increased 
in  number  daily,'  wliich  also  closes  the  precetling 
section  dealing  ^vith  the  second  \Tsit  of  St.  Paul  to 
Asia,  varies  slightlj-.  The  verb  used  is  repuraeita, 
but  the  idea  is  the  same.  As  a  result  of  apostolic 
labours  the  number  of  believers  increased.  In  the 
same  way  we  read  in  St.  Stephen's  speech  that  the 
people  of  Israel  'grew  and  multiplied  in  Egypt' 
(Ac  7'-). 

3.  We  find  the  word  used  in  a  theological  con- 
nexion referring  to  the  growth  of  individual  be- 


518 


GUARD 


GUARD 


lievers  in  Christian  character  and  {graces.  The 
apostolic  preachovH  did  not  regard  tlieir  work  as 
finished  wlien  they  had  converted  Jews  or  lieathon 
to  Christianity.  The  Cliristian  life  hail  to  be  lived, 
and  Cliristian  character  had  to  be  formed.  Growth 
and  increase  must  follow  the  new  birth.  Tliis 
OTOwth  is,  on  the  one  hand,  regarded  as  a  natural 
development  from  the  new  seed  implanted  in  the 
new  birth.  The  new  creature  must  grow  in  faith, 
in  knowledge,  in  grace,  in  righteousness,  in  Chris- 
tian liberality  and  brotherly  love.  Thus  the  Apostle 
Paul  rejoices  that  the  faith  of  the  Thessalonians 
'  groweth  exceedingly '  (2  Th  1*).  He  prays  that 
the  Colossians  may  increase  in  the  knowledge  of 
God  (Col  P"),  and  beseeches  the  Thessalonians  that 
they  increase  (or  lit.  '  abound,'  Gr.  5re/)i<r<rei5w)  more 
and  more  in  brotlierly  love,  by  which  he  means 
Christian  liberality  (1  Th  4^").  For  the  purpose  of 
furthering  this  growth,  God  has  given  apostles, 
prophets,  evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers  (Eph 
4'"'").  In  the  same  way  St.  Peter  instructs  his 
converts  to  desire  the  sincere  milk  of  the  word,  that 
they  'may  grow  thereby'  (1  P  2-),  and  directly 
exhorts  them  to  '  grow  in  grace  and  in  the  know- 
ledge of  our  Lord  and  Saviour '  (2  P  3^**).  On  the 
other  hand,  tliis  increase  in  grace  or  Christian 
character  is  at  the  same  time  the  work  of  God. 
Thus  St.  Paul  prays  that  the  Lord  may  make  the 
Thessalonians  to  increase  and  abound  in  love  (1  Th 
3'^).  In  writing  to  the  Corinthian  Church,  he  com- 
pares the  work  done  by  himself  and  A  polios,  and 
declares,  '  I  planted,  Apollos  watered,  God  in- 
creased' (1  Co  3").  The  object  of  all  three  verbs 
is  the  faith  of  the  believers  in  Corinth,  which  St. 
Paul's  preaching  had  kindled  and  Apollos  had 
nourished  ;  but  the  work  of  both  Avould  have  been 
ineli'ective  but  for  God's  working,  His  making  the 
seed  to  grow  and  increase  (1  Co  3^).  Likeness  to 
Christ  is  regarded  by  the  apostolic  writers  as  the 
end  of  this  growth  (Eph  4'^). 

4.  But  not  only  is  the  idea  of  growth  applied  to 
the  Church  as  an  outward  organization,  the  visible 
Church  which  grows  in  numbers,  and  to  the  Chris- 
tian cliaracter  of  individual  believers;  it  is  also 
applied  to  the  Church  as  a  spiritual  unity  which 
the  Apostle  Paul  describes  as  the  '  body  of  Christ.' 
According  to  the  Apostle,  all  believers  are  members 
of  that  body  ;  but  the  growth  of  the  individual 
members  in  Christian  character  and  especially  in 
love  leads  to  the  growth  or  increase  of  the  body  as 
a  whole.  The  Churcli  will  finally  reach  consum- 
mation and  completion  by  a  long  process  of  growth 
and  development.  The  nature,  law,  or  order  of  this 
growth  of  the  Church  as  the  body  of  Christ  is  de- 
scribed in  Eph  4'"  as  'proceeding  in  accordance 
with  an  inward  operation  tliat  adapts  itself  to  the 
nature  and  function  of  each  several  part  and  gives 
to  each  its  proper  measure.  It  is  a  growth  that  is 
neither  monstrous  nor  disproportioned,  but  normal, 
harmonious,  careful  of  the  capacity,  and  suited  to 
the  .service  of  each  individual  member  of  Christ's 
body'  (S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  '  Ephesians,' in  £6^2',  p. 
338).  All  the  members  are  united  to  one  another 
and  to  Christ  the  Head,  and  draw  nourishment 
and  inspiration  from  Him  and  from  one  another, 
and  thus  increase  '  with  the  increase  of  God '  (Col 
2'"),  by  which  we  may  understand  either  the  in- 
crease which  God  supplies,  or,  better,  simply  the 
increase  such  as  God  requires. 

Literature.— S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  '  Ephesians,"  in  EGT,  1903; 
A.  S.  Peake,  'Colossians.'  in  EGT,  19<)3 ;  H.  A.  W.  Meyer, 
Dererstc  Brief  an  die  Korinther*  (Kommentar,  18G1),  Der  Brief 
an  die  Epheser^  (do.  1859),  Die  Brief e  an  die  J'hilipper,  Kolosser, 
nnd  an  Philemon^  (do.  186.1)  ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Colvusians  and 
Philemon,  1876;  B.  Whitefoord,  art.  'Growini,','  in  J)CG. 

W.  F.  Bo VI). 
GUARD.— (1)  In  Ac  5=3,  12«-  "»  the  AV  renders 
4>v\aKfs   '  keepers,'  which   the  IIV   retains   in  the 
former  passage,  where  the  watchmen  are  Jewisli, 


but  changes  into  'guards'  in  the  latter,  where 
they  are  Roman.  Arrested  by  the  high  [)riest 
Annas,  and  put '  in  public  ward'  (Ac  r>"* :  iv Tiqprfcftt. 
Srjfiofftq.),  Peter  and  Jolm  were  not  chained  ;  their 
keepers  merely  shut  the  prLson-liouse  (defffiorr-fipiov) 
and  stood  on  guard  outside.  But  when  St.  Peter 
was  arrested  by  Herod  Agrippa,  and  imprisoned 
in  the  fortress  of  Autonia  or  the  adjoining  barracks, 
he  was  chained  to  two  .soldiers,  while  other  two 
kept  watch  at  the  door  of  the  prison  (^uXokij,  Vulg. 
career).  The  station  of  the  latter  two  was  appar- 
ently 'the  first  ward'  (<f>v\aK^,  Vulg.  custoaUi), 
which  the  prisoner  had  to  pass  before  he  could 
eflect  his  escape.  The  four  soldiers  together  made 
a  quaternion  (rerpaSiov),  and  four  such  bodies  of 
armed  men  were  told  oil"  to  mount  guard  in  suc- 
cession during  the  four  watches  into  which,  in 
lloman  fashion,  the  night  was  divided. 

(2)  The  above-named  Agrippa  himself,  having 
incurred  the  disi)leasure  of  Tiberius,  once  had  the 
experience  of  being  chained  as  a  prisoner  for  six 
months  to  soldiers  of  the  Imperial  bodyguard  in 
Home.  It  was  fortunate  for  him  that  the  Emperor's 
sister-in-law  Antonia,  who  used  her  influence  with 
Macro,  the  prcrfcctus  prcetorio,  '  procured  that 
the  soldiers  who  kept  him  should  be  of  a  gentle 
nature,  and  that  the  centurion  who  was  over 
them,  and  was  to  diet  with  him,  should  be  of 
the  same  disposition'  (Jos.  Ant.  xviir.  vi.  7). 
Tiberius'  death  restored  him  to  liberty,  and  Cali- 
gula consoled  him  witli  tlie  gift  of  a  chain  of  gold, 
equal  in  weight  to  the  one  of  iron  which  he  had 
worn  (ib.  vi.  10). 

(3)  To  another  such  iron  chain,  which  coupled 
St.  Paul  to  one  soldier  after  another  of  the  same 
Imperial  guard,  allusion  is  made  in  each  of  the 
Captivity  Epistles.  Thanks  to  the  favourable 
report  given  by  the  centurion  Junius  on  handing 
over  his  charge  to  the  prtufect  of  the  Praetorians, 
St.  Paul  probably  received  better  treatment  than 
an  ordinary  prisoner ;  but  the  fact  remained  tliat 
in  his  own  hired  house  he  was  the  Siafxioi  of  Christ 
Jesus,  always  weai-ing  galling  '  bonds '  {Seanol,  Ph 
17.  13. 14.  16^  Col  418^  Philem  i"-  ",  2  Ti  2"),  called  also 
a  '  chain '  (aXwty,  Eph  6-",  2  Ti  V^).  Great  good, 
however,  resulted  from  his  imprisonment ;  for 
through  the  frequent  relief  of  the  guard,  and  the 
Apostle's  skill  in  changing  an  enforced  fellowsliip 
with  armed  men  into  a  spiritual  communion,  the 
real  significance  of  his  bonds — tlieir  relation  to  his 
faith  in  Christ — gradually  became  known  among 
all  'the  Praetorians,'  the  finest  regiment  of  the 
Ivoman  army  (Ph  l^^.  isj  "phe  arguments  for  this 
interpretation  of  the  word  irpatrupiou  are  fully 
stated  by  Liglitfoot,  Fhilipplans*,  1878,  p.  99  f. 
Other  possible  explanations  will  be  found  under 
Palace. 

In  the  llepublican  days  the  cohors  pra-torin,  or 
cohortes  prcetorice,  formed  the  bodyguard  of  the 
prcetor  or  proprcetor,  who  was  governor  of  a 
province  with  military  powers.  Under  the  Empire 
the  Praitorians  came  to  be  the  Imperial  Iwily- 
guard,  whicli,  as  constituted  by  Augustus,  was 
made  up  of  nine  cohorts,  each  of  a  thousand  picked 
men.  They  were  distinguished  from  other  legion- 
aries by  shorter  service  and  double  pay,  and  on 
discharge  they  received  a  generous  bounty  or  grant 
of  land.  Tiberius  concentrated  the  force  in  a 
strongly  fortified  camp  to  tiie  east  of  Rome,  on  a 
rectangle  of  39  acres,  where  the  modern  Italian 
army  also  has  barracks.  One  cohort,  wearing 
civilian  garb,  was  always  stationed  at  the 
Emperor's  house  on  the  I'alatine;  others  were 
often  sent  to  foreign  service.  The  Praitorians 
were  under  a  prcrfcctus  prcetorio,  or  more  often 
two,  sometimes  even  three  pr<r/ccti.  These  were 
originally  soldiers,  but  ultimately  the  office  was 
mostly  filled   by  lawyers,  whose  duty  it  was  to 


GUARDIAN 


HAGAB 


519 


relieve  the  Emperor  in  certain  kinds  of  civil  and 
criminal  jurisdiction.  One  of  Trajan's  rescripts  to 
Pliny  (Ep.  57)  indicates  that  the  proper  conrse  to 
take  with  a  certain  Bithynian  prisoner  is  to  hand 
him  over  in  chains  'ad  pnefectos  praetorii  raei,' 
and  the  case  seems  to  be  parallel  to  that  of  the 
Apostle,  who  made  an  appeal  unto  Ca?sar  (Ac 
25"-^).  James  Strahan. 

GUARDIAN.— See  Tutor. 

GUARDIAN  ANGELS.— See  Angels. 

GUILE. — Gnile  is  the  usual  translation  of  d6\oj 
(Lat.  dolus),  which  meant  tirst '  a  bait  for  fish '  {Od. 
xii.  252),  and  tlien,  in  the  abstract,  'wile,'  '  craft,' 

•  deceit.'    Guile  is  traced  to  the  workings  of  that 

*  abandoned  mind '  which  is  itself  the  punishment, 
natural  and  in  a  sense  automatic,  of  those  who 
reject  God  (Ko  l-®).  The  guile  which  character- 
ized Jacob  the  Jew  as  well  as  Ulysses  the  Greek 
was  indeed  often  admired  as  a  national  trait  by 
which  duller  races  could  be  outwitted.  But  it  is 
one  of  the  unmistakable  marks  of  a  Christian 
convert  that  he  puts  away  all  guile,  and,  like  a 
new-bom  babe,  desires  the  milk  that  is  without 
guile  {d5oXo»»  ydXa,  1  P  2'-).  Henceforth  he  refrains 
his  lips  that  they  speak  no  guile  (3"*).     People  who 


!  are  themselves  guileful  find  it  difficult  to  believe 
j  that  auylxxly  can  be  disinterested,  and  St.  Paul 
I  the  Apo.stle  (like  many  a  modem  missionary)  was 
i  often   supplied    to    be    cunningly    seeking  some 
I  personal  ends.     *  Being  crafty,  I  caught  them  with 
guile '  (2  Co  12'*),  is  a  sentence  in  which  he  catches 
up  some  wiseacre's  criticism  of  his  actions,  ami 
gives  it  a  new  turn.     His  own  conscience  was  clear  ; 
uis  'guile'  as  a  soul-winner  was  not  only  innocent 
but  praiseworthy.      His  exhortation  (xopdcXi^rw, 
•  evangelical  preaching')  was  not  of  error  nor  (in  any 
bad  sense)  in  guile  (1  Th  2») ;  he  was  neither  de- 
ceived nor  deceiver,  neither  fool  nor  knave.     But  he 
had  not  infrequently  encountered  men  of  the  latter 
I  type.     Bar-Jesus  the  Magian,  who  tried  to  under- 
j  mine  his  influence  at  the  court  of  Sergius  Paulns  (Ac 
13*),  was  actuated  by  a  mad  jealousy,  realizing  as  he 
did  that  the  position  which  he  had  skilfully  won 
I  was  fast  becoming  insecure.     Driven  to  his  wits' 
i  end,  and  seeing  that  exposure  was  imminent,  he 
'  felt  the  ground   shaking   beneath   his   feet.     His 
;  punishment    had    a    Dantesque    appropriateness. 
i  '  Full  of  all  guUe,'  he  was  yet  made  a  spectacle  of 
I  pitiful  impotence  :  '  there  fell  on  him  a  mist  and  a 
darkness,  and  he  went  about  seeking  some  to  lead 
him  by  the  hand '  (13">-  "J.       James  Strahan. 

GUILT.-See  Six. 


H 


HADES. — Hades  b  a  Lat.  word  adopted  from 
the  Gr.  'AiSi]s  (^5ijj),  which  is  used  in  the  LXX  to 
translate  the  Heb.  Skeol  and  in  NT  Gr.  to  denote 
the  same  idea  as  was  expressed  by  Sheol  in  the  OT, 
viz.  'the  abode  of  the  dead.'  The  word  has  been 
consistently  used  in  the  RV  of  the  NT  to  render 
4Si]s  on  each  of  the  10  occasions  of  its  occurrence 
(Mt  11^  16i«,  Lk  10'*  16-%  Ac  2»^-«  [in  1  Co  15» 
critical  texts  give  davare  for  aSij  of  TR],  Rev  1'^  6* 
20^-  "),  in  place  of  the  misleading  '  hell '  of  the  AV. 

In  Mt  11-^  (Lk  l(y*)  the  word  is  employed  in  a 
purely  figurative  sense.  Capernaum,  'exalted  unto 
heaven,'  is  to  'go  do^\Ti  unto  Hades,'  i.e.  is  to  be 
utterly  overthrown.  Figurative  also  is  the  state- 
ment in  Mt  16'*  that  '  the  gates  of  Hades  shall  not 
prevail  against'  the  Church  of  Christ.  As  the 
strength  of  a  walled  city  depended  on  the  strength 
of  its  gates,  '  the  gates  of  Hades '  is  a  metaphor  for 
the  power  of  death,  and  the  promise  amounts  to 
an  assurance  of  the  indestructibility  of  the  Church. 
In  Lk  16^  the  rich  man  lifts  up  his  eyes  in  Hades, 
being  in  torment,  and  sees  Abraham  afar  ofl'  and 
Lazarus  in  his  bosom.  Hades  is  used  here  in  its 
traditional  sense  of  the  under  world  of  the  dead, 
whether  righteous  or  unrighteous.  Not  only  Dives 
but  Lazarus  is  there.  But  it  is  no  longer  conceived 
of  in  the  negative  fashion  of  the  OT  as  a  realm 
of  undillerentiated  existence  in  which  there  are 
neither  rewards  nor  penalties.  In  keeping  with 
the  pre-Christian  development  of  Jewish  thought 
(cf.  2  Mac  12*5,  Eth.  Enoch,  22),  it  is  represented 
now  as  a  scene  of  moral  issues  and  contrasted  ex- 
periences— the  selfish  rich  man  is  '  tormented  in 
this  flame';  the  humble  beggar  is  '  comforted '  in 
Abraham's  bosom.  The  moral  lesson  that  the 
recompense  of  character  is  sure  and  that  it  begins 
immediately  after  death  is  very  clear ;  but  it  is 
going  bej-ond  our  Lord's  didactic  intention  in  a 
parable  to  find  here  a  detailed  doctrine  as  to  the 
circumstances  and  conditions  of  the  intermediate 
state. 


Ac  2"^  is  a  quotation  from  Ps  16"  which  in  v." 
is  applied  to  Christ,  of  whom,  as  lisen  from  the 
tomb,  it  is  said  that  He  was  not  '  left  in  Hades,' 
i.e.  in  the  regions  of  the  dead.  In  the  same 
general  and  ordinary  sense  the  word  is  used  in 
Rev  1^*  :  'I  have  the  kej's  of  death  and  of  Hades ' ; 
cf.  the  close  association  in  the  OT  of  death  with 
Sheol  (VslW,  Pro'). 

In  Rev  6*  Hades  is  personified  as  a  follower  of 
Death  upon  his  pale  horse.  In  the  author's  vision 
of  the  Judgment  (20"^)  the  sea  and  Death  and 
Hades  give  up  the  dead  which  are  in  them  (v. '3), 
and  finally  Death  and  Hades  are  themselves  cast 
into  the  lake  of  tire  (v."). 

LiTKRATTRK.— H.  CremcT,  Bib.-Theol.  Lexicon  of  ST  Gr., 
Ejig.  tr.-*, Edinburgh,  ISdo,  s.r.  aSjji;  G.  Dalman, art.  'Hades' 
in  PHES;  S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  Christian  Doctrine  of  Im- 
inortalit]/*,  Edinboigta,  1901,  p.  277 ff.,  also  art.  'Hades'  in 
BDB.  J,  C.  L-4MBERT. 

HA6AS  {'Ayap). — After  the  manner  of  the  later 
Jewish  interpreters  of  OT  history,  of  whom  Philo 
is  the  best  representative,  St.  Paul  treats  the  story 
of  Hagar  (Gn  16''"  21*-^)  as  an  allegory  (arwd 
i<rrw  aXXijyopoi'fiei'a,  Gal  4-^). 

'  AUe^ry  (oAAos,  other,  and  ayopcvetr,  to  qpeakX  a  figrnrattre 
representation  convening  a  meaning  other  than  and  in  addition  to 
the  literaL  .  .  .  An  allegory  is  distinguished  from  .  .  .  anana- 
loffy  by  the  fact  that  the  one  appeals  to  the  imaginatioD  and 
the  other  to  the  reason '  {EBr^  L  6S9*>). 

St.  Paul  neither  affirms  nor  denies  the  historicity 
of  the  Hagar  narrative,  but  his  imagination  reads 
into  it  esoteric  meanings,  which  make  it  singularly 
effective  as  an  illustration.  Ishmael  the  elder 
brother,  the  son  of  Hagar  the  bondwoman,  the 
seed  of  Abraham  by  nature,  persecuted  Isaac  the 
younger  brother,  the  son  of  the  freewoman,  the  child 
of  promise  and  heir  of  the  birthright,  and  Mas 
therefore  cast  out  and  excluded  from  the  inherit- 
ance of  the  blessing.  This  is  interpreted  as  mean- 
ing that  the  Christian  Church,  the  true  Israel  of 


520 


HAIL 


HALLELUJAH 


God,  endued  with  the  freedom  of  the  Spirit,  is 

Kraecuted  by  the  older  Israel,  which  is  under  the 
ndage  of  the  Law.  Hagar,  tlie  mother  of  bond- 
men, answers  to  the  present  Jerusalem  (rg  vvv 
'lepowraXiJyu),  but  the  Jerusalem  which  is  above  (^ 
di'w  'Iepovffa\-/iix)  is  the  mother  of  Christian  free- 
men. 

Luther  wisely  says  that '  if  Paul  had  not  proved  the  righteous- 
ness of  faith  ajrainst  the  righteousness  of  worlts  l)y  Htronp  and 
pithy  arjrunieiitH,  lie  should  have  little  prevailed  by  this  allegory. 
.  .  .  It  is  a  seemly  tiling  Hoiuetinies  to  add  an  alle;;ory  when 
the  foundation  is  well  laid  and  the  matter  thoroiij^hly  proved. 
For  as  painting  is  an  ornament  to  set  forth  and  garniHh  a  house 
already  budded,  so  is  an  allegory  the  ll(rht  of  a  matter  which  is 
already  otherwise  proved  and  conlirmed  '  (<ralatiani>,in  loe.).  So 
Baur  :  '  Nothing  can  be  more  preposterous  than  the  endeavours 
of  interpreters  to  vindicate  the  arvrument  of  the  Apostle  as  one 
objectively  true '  (/'aufw«2,  lam,  ii.  312,  Eng.  tr.,  1875,  ii.  284). 

If  the  words  '  Now  this  Hagar  is  mount  Sinai  in 
Arabia'  are  retained,  they  aluide  to  the  historical 
connexion  of  the  Hagarenes  (Ps  83*)  or  Hagarites 
(1  Ch  5'"),  the  'Aypaioi  of  Eratosthenes  {ap.  Strabo, 
XVI.  iv.  2) — of  whom  Hagar  was  no  doubt  a  personi- 
fication— with  Arabia.  (In  Bar  3^  the  Arabians 
are  called  the  *  sons  of  Ilagar.')  But  the  Greek  is 
extremely  uncertain,  and  Bentley's  conjecture,  that 
we  have  here  a  gloss  transferred  to  the  text,  has  (as 
Lightfootsays  [Gal^,  1876,  p.  193]),  much  to  recom- 
mend it.  The  theory  that  '  Hagar '  (Arab,  hajar, 
'  a  stone ')  was  a  name  sometimes  given  to  Mt.  Sinai, 
and  that  St.  Paul,  becoming  acquainted  with  this 
usage  during  his  sojourn  in  Arabia,  recalls  it  here 
(A.  P.  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  new  ed.,  1877, 
p.  50,  following  Chrysostora,  Luther,  and  others), 
IS  unsupported  by  real  evidence.  Such  an  etymo- 
logical allusion  would  certainly  have  been  thrown 
away  upon  St.  Paul's  Galatian  readers. 

To  atiirm  that  the  Jews,  who  were  wont  to  say 
that  *  all  Israel  are  the  children  of  kings,'  were  the 
sons  of  Hagar  the  bondwoman,  was  to  use  language 
which  could  not  but  be  regarded  as  insulting  and 
offensive.  But  in  lighting  the  battle  of  freedom 
St.  Paul  required  to  use  plain  speech  and  forcible 
illustrations.  If  he  was  convinced  that  men  might 
be  sons  of  Abraham  and  yet  spiritual  slaves,  he 
was  bound  to  say  so  (cf.  the  still  stronger  terms 
used  on  the  same  point  in  Jn  S").  St.  Paul  Avas 
far  too  good  a  patriot  to  jibe  at  his  own  race,  and 
too  good  a  Ciinstian  to  wound  any  one  wantonly. 
But  he  saw  the  unhappy  condition  of  his  country- 
men in  the  light  of  his  own  experience.  He  had 
lived  long  under  the  shadow  oi  Sinai  in  Arabia, 
the  land  of  bondmen,  before  he  became  a  free  citizen 
of  the  ideal  commonwe&lth^ Hierusalem  qum  snr- 
suin  est — the  mother  of  all  Christians.  Only  an 
emancipated  spirit  could  write  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians,  or  (as  its  sequel)  Luther's  Freedom  of  a 
Christian  Man.  James  Strahan. 

HAIL  (xiiXafa). — The  invariable  biblical  con- 
ception of  hail  is  correctly  represented  in  Wis  5^^ : 
'As  from  an  engine  of  war  shall  be  hurled  hail- 
stones full  of  wrath.'  Typical  instances  of  the  use 
of  hail  as  a  weapon  of  Divine  judgment  and  war- 
fare are  found  in  Ex  9^"-,  Jos  10'^.  Like  other 
destructive  natural  forces,  it  is  a  familiar  category 
in  apocalyptic  prophecy.  It  is  always  regarded  as 
a  'plague'  (irXtjyrj,  Rev  16^').  'Hail  and  lire,' 
'lightnings  .  .  .  and  great  hail,'  occur  together 
(8'  IP"),  as  in  Ex  9-"' :  '  hail,  and  fire  mingling  with 
(flashing  continually  amidst)  the  hail.'  Thunder- 
storms often  arise  '  under  the  conditions  that  are 
favourable  to  the  formation  of  hail,  i.e.  great  heat, 
a  still  atmosphere,  the  production  of  strong  local 
convection  currents  in  consequence,  and  the  passage 
of  a  cold  upper  drift'  {EBr^^  xii.  820).  True  hail, 
which  is  to  be  distinguished  from  so-called  'soft 
hail,'  is  formed  of  clear  or  granular  ice.  Impinging 
hailstones  are  often  frozen  together,  and  sometimes 


great  ragged  masses  of  ice  fall  witli  flisastrous 
results  to  life  and  propertj'.  Tlie  stnenth  angel 
having  poured  his  bowl  upon  ilnair,  'great  hail, 
every  stone  about  a  talent  m  wci-lit,  (Huaetli  down 
out  of  heaven  upon  men'  (Rev  IG*').  Diodorus 
Siculus  (xix.  45)  writes  of  storms  in  which  'the 
size  of  the  hail  was  incredible,  for  the  stones  fell 
a  mina  in  weight,  sometimes  even  more,  so  that 
many  houses  fell  under  their  weight  and  not  a  few 
men  were  killed.'  The  mina  was  about  2  lbs. — the 
sixtieth  part  of  a  talent.  James  Strahan. 

HAIR. — By  primitive  and  ancient  peoples  in 
general,  the  hair  (0pl^,  rplxe^)  is  regarded  as  a 
special  centre  of  vitality,  and  to  this  belief  the 
various  forms  of  the  hair-ottering  are  ultimately 
due.  The  only  examples  of  this  practice  in  the 
literature  under  review  are  atiorded  bjy^  St.  Paul's 
vow,  according  to  which  he  cut  off  his  hair  at 
Cenchreje  (Ac  IS'"),  and  by  the  similar  vows  of  the 
four  men  at  Jerusalem,  whose  expenses  St.  Paul 
paid  as  an  evidence  of  his  Jewish  piety  (21^). 
These  are  to  be  explained  from  the  Nazirite  vow 
of  the  OT  (Nu  6).  Josephus  writes  of  his  own 
times  that  '  it  is  usual  with  those  who  had  been 
attli(;ted  either  with  a  distemper,  or  with  any  other 
distresses,  to  make  vows ;  and  for  thirty  days 
before,  they  are  to  offer  their  sacrifices,  to  abstain 
from  wine,  and  to  shave  the  hair  off  their  head ' 
{BJ  II.  XV.  1).  St.  Paul  would  accordingly  oiler 
at  Jerusalem  the  hair  that  had  grown  during  the 
month  since  the  vow  began  at  Cenchrefc.  The 
same  belief  in  the  peculiar  vitality  of  the  hair  may 
underlie  the  proverbial  reference  to  it :  '  there 
shall  not  a  hair  perish  from  the  head  of  any  of 
you'  (Ac  27^* ;  cf.  1  S  14«,  2  S  14",  1  K  P\  Mt  10*>, 
Lk21'^),  though  the  number  and  minuteness  of  the 
separate  hairs  are  also  implied. 

The  elaborate  arrangement  and  adornment  of 
the  hair  are  found  in  primitive  as  veil  as  in 
advanced  civilizations  (e.g.  see  the  illustrations  of 
male  Fijians  in  Lubbock's  Origin  of  Civilization^, 
1902,  pi.  ii.  p.  68).  The  art  was  highly  developed 
amongst  Greek  and  Roman  women,  as  may  be  seen 
from  coins,  etc.,  belonging  to  this  period  (reproduc- 
tions in  Seytlert,  Diet,  of  Classical  Antiquities, 
1906,  pp.  26(5,  267  ;  J.  E.  Sandys,  .1  Companion  to 
Latin  Studies,  1910,  p.  198).  Ovid,  in  his  instruc- 
tions to  Roman  ladies  on  the  art  of  winning  lovers, 
emphasizes  the  effect  of  an  artistic  and  appropriate 
arrangement  of  the  hair  (de  Art.  Am.  iii.  136  f.; 
cf.  Bigg,  St.  Peter  and  St.  Jude,  1901,  p.  152). 
Judith  'braided  the  hair  of  her  head'  when  she 
set  out  to  fascinate  Holofernes  (Jth  10^),  and  there 
are  Talnindic  references  to  the  art  (Buxtorf'a 
Lexicon,  1639,  col.  389  ;  Cheyne,  EBi  ii.  col.  1941). 
Against  such  elaborate  adornment  and  all  that  it 
might  imply,  the  apostolic  warnings  (1  P  3',  1  Ti 
2" ;  see  art.  Adorning)  are  directed. 

The  greater  abundance  of  hair  posses.sed  by 
woman  as  compared  with  man  is  mentioned  by 
St.  Paul  in  an  argument  against  the  practice  of 
unveiled  women  praying  and  prophesying  (1  Co 
1 1^*'  ^*,  k6ht}).  Nature's  covering,  he  says,  shows 
that  the  veil  should  be  employed  ;  to  be  unveiled 
is  no  better  than  to  be  shorn  (vv.^-'').  The  same 
sexual  difference  is  in  view  in  the  description  of 
the  Apocalyptic  locusts  :  '  they  had  liair  as  the 
hair  of  women'  (Rev  9*).  In  the  Apocalyptic 
vision  of  Christ,  His  hair  is  said  to  be  '  white  as 
white  wool,  as  snow'  (Rev  l^''),  a  detail  of  dignity 
borrowed  from  the  OT  picture  of  Jahwen,  as 
'  ancient  of  days '  (Dn  7"). 

H.  Wheeler  Rorin.son. 

HALLELUJAH.*  —  '  Hallelujah,'      '  Praise     ye 
Jahweh,'  is  used  as  a  doxology  m  some  OT  Psalms, 
e.g.  104*'  105^'.     In  the  song  of  the  redeemed  (Rev 
•  The  form  '  Alleluia'  conxes  from  tlm  TAX. 


HAMOR 


HARDENING 


521 


19''")  it  appears  as  a  triumphant  acclamation 
at  the  Wedding  Feast  of  the  Lamb.  In  later 
Christian  use  it  was  attached  to  tlie  Paschal  Feast 
as  among  the  Jews  to  the  Passover.  If  the  Odes 
of  Solonum  may  be  ascribed  to  an  early  dat«  (see 
axt.  Hymns),  we  may  quote  the  frequent  use  of 
'  Hallelujah '  at  the  end  of  these  hymns  as  a  mark 
of  the  joyousness  of  early  Cliristian  worship. 
Tertullian  {On  Prayer,  xxvii.)  quotes  its  use  with 
certain  {)salms,  aft«r  the  Jewisli  manner,  said  or 
sung  by  the  whole  congregation.       A.  E.  BuRN. 

HAMOR.— See  Ser:ch£M. 

HAND. — Amongst  the  members  of  the  body,  the 
hand  (x"'p)  is  named  by  St.  Paul  as  being  superior 
to  the  foot,  and  necessary  to  the  eye  (1  Co  12"*  ^). 
The  work  of  human  hands  has  its  definite  limita- 
tions, whether  the  product  be  idols  (Ac  7**  19*)  or 
temples  (17-^ ;  cf.  Ep.  Barn.  xvi.  7) ;  but,  within 
its  true  sphere,  manual  labour  belongs  to  man's 
dignity  and  duty  (Eph  4=s,  1  Th  4").  St.  Paul 
could  display  his  toil-marked  hands  to  the  Ephesian 
elders,  as  evidence  of  his  example  of  unselfish 
ser\ice  (Ac  20** ;  cf.  1  Co  4^).  To  defend  them- 
selves from  political  suspicion  as  descendants  of 
David,  the  grandchildren  of  Jude  showed  their 
homy  hands  of  toil  to  the  Emperor  Domitian  (Eus. 
HE  III.  XX.  5). 

The  hand  is  employed  in  significant  gestures 
both  of  ordinary  life  and  of  religion.  It  hangs 
down  in  despair  (He  12^),  is  outstretched  in 
oratory  (Ac  26')  or  appeal  (of  God,  Ro  10*^),  is 
waved  to  gain  silence  (Ac  12"  IS'*  19»  2i*>),  is 
lifted  in  praver  (1  Ti2*;  cf.  Ps  134-)  or  in  taking 
an  oath  (Kev'lO* ;  cf.  Gn  l^^).  The  giving  of  the 
right  hand  {Be^io^)  in  token  of  fellowship  (Gal  2*  ; 
cf.  Pr  6')  is  not  a  specially  Jewish  custom,  and  may 
be  due  to  Persian  intiuences  (cf.  Lightfoot,  ad  loc.). 
The  Odes  of  Solomon  show  the  early  practice  of 
prayer  with  arms  extended  in  the  manner  of  the 
cross :  '  I  stretched  out  my  hands,  and  sanctified 
my  Lord ;  for  the  extension  of  my  hands  is  His 
sign  '  (xxvii.  1  ;  cf.  xxi.  1  and  J.  H.  Bernard's  notes 
in  TS  viii.  3  [1912]  ad  loc).  In  a  similar  spirit 
of  symbolism,  continuing  that  of  OT  prophecy, 
Agabus  (j.r.)  binds  his  o\vn  hands  and  feet  with 
St.  Paul's  girdle  (Ac  21" ;  see  art.  Feet).  Those 
who  belong  to  the  Apocalyptic  Beast  receive  his 
mark  on  hand  and  forehead  (Rev  13'«  \A?  2(>»). 
Deissmann  has  given  eWdence  for  connecting  this 
mark  with  the  Imperial  seal  placed  on  documents 
of  thLs  period  (Bible  Studies,  Eng.  tr. ,  1901,  p.  241  f. ). 
"We  may  perhaps  compare  the  three  seals  placed 
on  the  disciple  of  Mani,  i.e.  on  mouth,  hand,  and 
bosom,  as  a  converse  dedication  of  the  members  to 
purity. 

The  term  'hand'  is  employed  in  a  number  of 
graphic  or  figurative  phrases,  relating  either  to 
man  (Ac  2P  12\  He  8»,  1  Jn  1',  Ja  4»)  or  to  God. 
The  Hand  of  God  appears  in  the  activities  of 
creation  (Ac  7*^,  He  1"> ;  Ep.  Barn.  v.  10,  xv.  3 ; 
1  Clem,  xxvii.  7,  xxxiii.  4),  or  of  pro\-idence  (Ac 
428  1121  1  p  56j^  or  of  judgment  (Ac  13",  He  l(fi\ 
1  Clem,  xxviii.  2). 

The  most  striking  and  important  references  to 
the  hand  in  apostolic  Christianity  occur  in  con- 
nexion with  the  '  laying  on  of  hands.'  This  oc- 
curs for  three  purposes,  which  help  to  elucidate 
each  other.  By  contact  with  apostolic  hands  is 
wrought  healing  of  the  sick  (Ac  3"  5'^  9'-  *'  14' 28*), 
transmission  of  the  Spirit  (Ac  8"-  '*  19*),  and  ordina- 
tion to  '  office '  or  special  work  (Ac  6*  13*,  1  Ti  4" 
5**,  2  Ti  1*,  He  6-).  If  these  passages  are  ap- 
proached, as  they  should  be,  from  the  general 
standpoint  of  the  OT,  and  from  the  particular 
circle  of  ideas  which  constitutes  primitive  and 
ancient  psychology,  the  imposition  of  hands  will 


prolmblj'  be  seen  to  imply  more  than  an  outward 
sign  (ct.  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  ST,  1909, 
p.  384).  In  each  of  the  three  applications,  the 
conclusion  reached  by  Volz  in  regard  to  the  OT 
seems  fundamental  in  regard  to  the  NT  also  :  '  the 
laying  on  of  hands  is  the  process  by  which  the 
sacred  substance  is  conducted  from  one  body  into 
another  .  .  .  the  power  passes  not  primarily 
through  the  spoken  formula,  but  through  the 
physical  contact  itself  (ZATW,  1901,  pp.  93,  94  ; 
cf.  P.  Volz,  Der  Geist  Gottes,  1910,  p.  115). 

H.  Wheeler  Robinson. 

HANDKERCHIEF,  NAPKIN The  word  aovS&piop 

(=Lat.  sudai-ium)  is  translated  by  'handkerchiefs' 
(plur.)  in  Ac  19*^  but  elsewhere  in  the  NT  by 
*  napkin'  (Lk  19«>,  Jn  11«  -20^).  See  DCG,  s.v. 
'Napkin.'  Its  equivalent  appears  in  Talmudic 
literature  as  an  article  of  clothing  (one  of  the  over- 
garments), which  might  be  worn  round  the  neck 
(cf.  Suet.  Nero,  51)  or  carried  upon  the  arm  or 
over  the  shoulder.  It  was  also  in  use  as  a  head  or 
face  cloth,  approximating  in  idea  to '  veil '  (cf.  Suet. 
Xero,  48  ;  Quintil.  Instit.  VI.  iii.  60).  The  ffovddpior 
appears  among  the  items  of  dowry  in  marriage 
contracts  of  the  2nd  and  3rd  cent.  A.D.  (A.  Deiss- 
mann, Xeue  Bibelstudien,  1897,  p.  50).  According 
to  the  derivation  of  the  word,  it  was  a  sweat-cloth, 
corresponding  in  use  to  our  handkerchief.  Catullus 
{Carm.  xiL  14)  speaks  of  the  joke  of  abstracting  a 
neighbour's  napkin  at  meals.  According  to  this 
passage  the  articles  were  of  Spanish  manufacture, 
and  the  material  linen.  The  ffovSaptoy  was  em- 
ployed for  waving  in  public  assemblies.  It  served 
humbler  purposes  as  a  strainer  and  as  a  wrapper. 
See  especially  S.  Krauss,  Talmudische  Archciologie, 
i.  [1910]  166 f.  Cf.  also  art.  'The  Aprons  and 
Handkerchiefs  of  St.  Paul,'  by  E.  Nestle,  in  ExpT 
xiii  [1901-02]  282,  and  see  art.  Apron. 

W.  Crockshank. 

HANDS,  LAYING  ON  OF.— See  Ordixatiok. 

HANDWRITING.— See  Bond. 

HARAN  (AY  '  Charaan,'  Ac  7-  *).— Haran  was  a 
city  of  some  importance,  on  a  tributary  of  the 
Euplirates.  From  Ur  the  ancestors  of  Abraham 
emigrated  to  Haran  (Gn  11'^).  Here  one  division, 
under  Nahor,  remained.  Hence  it  is  called  'the 
city  of  Nahor '  (24^*).  It  was  a  famous  seat  of  the 
worship  of  Sin,  the  moon-god.  Abram  left  it  to 
enter  Canaan.  J.  W.  DUNCAN. 

HARDENING.— The  discussion  of  this  subject 
relates  to  a  single  striking  case,  which  St.  Paul 
and  later  theologians  have  taken  as  typical.  The 
dramatic  interest  of  the  legend  of  the  Exodus 
(Ex  5-14)  centres  in  a  conflict  between  the  Di\-ine 
and  the  human  will.  Pharaoh's  successive  pro- 
mises and  refusals  to  let  the  Israelites  go  into  the 
wilderness  are  the  outward  signs  of  an  inward 
vacillation  under  the  alternate  influences  of  in- 
sensate pride  and  abject  fear.  It  is  stated  that 
his  heart  was  hardened  (7"-  '*•  ^  8'»  9^  9**),  that  he 
hardened  his  heart  (S'*-**  9**),  and  that  Jahweh 
said  He  would  harden  (4-^  7*  14*),  and  did  harden 
(9'-  10^ 20-27  i]io  148)^  his  heart.  In  the  NT  the 
proposition  that  God  hardens  the  heart  occurs 
only  in  quotations  from  the  OT  («-&rp<iw  being  used 
in  Jn  12*^  and  ff/cXrjpi'vw  in  Ro  9'*). 

Critical  exegesis  makes  no  attempt  to  soften  or 
evade  the  natural  meaning  of  this  language,  which 
afiirms,  not  that  God  merely  permits  (as  Origen 
and  Grotius  thought),  or  that  He  foreknows,  but 
that  He  effects,  tlie  hardening  of  the  heart.  If 
such  a  statement  is  not  to  be  explained  awa\-,  can 
it  be  explained  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  credible  ? 
The  difficulty  of  accepting  it  is  a  particular  phase 
of  the  general   difficulty  of   reconciling  human 


522 


HARDENING 


HARDENING 


freedom  with  Divine  sovereignty.  It  has  been 
truly  said  tliat 

'  the  relation  of  man,  as  a  free  moral  personality,  to  Ood  is  even 
more  difficult  to  conceive  than  his  relation  to  nature ;  theolopy 
has  more  j)eril3  for  human  freedom  than  cosmoloifv.  To  think 
of  God  as  all  in  all,  and  jet  to  retain  our  belief  in  human 
freedom  or  personality,— that  is  the  real  metaphysical  dilli- 
culty '  (J.  Seth,  Ethical  Principles^,  WdH,  p.  395). 

The  assertion  that  God  hardens  a  man's  heart 
shocks  our  moral  sense,  because  it  seems  to  deny 
Divine  love  on  the  one  hand  and  liuman  freedom 
on  the  other.  It  is  partly  explained  by  tlie 
Semitic  habit  of  recognizinjj  the  l^irst  Cause  of  all 
events  and  ignoring  second  causes.  In  Nature, 
history,  and  ]iersonal  experience  the  controlling 
and  directing  hand  of  God  was  discerned  by  tlie 
Hebrews.  Now,  'piety  demands  such  an  em- 
phasizing of  God's  action  as  would  logically  take 
away  man's  freedom.  Moral  consciousness,  on  the 
other  hand,  demands  a  freedom  which,  looked  at 
by  itself,  would  exclude  all  divine  co-operation 
and  order'  (H.  Schultz,  OT  Tlieol.,  Eng.  tr.,  1892, 
ii.  196).  The  authors  of  the  Exodus  narrative, 
most  of  wliich  is  by  J  or  E,  are  typical  OT  writers, 
in  tliat  tliey  set  the  doctrines  of  sovereignty  and 
freedom  side  by  side  without  betraying  any  con- 
sciousness of  a  contiict  between  them  and  a  need 
to  harmonize  them.  Their  teaching  is  not  fatal- 
istic, for  fatalism  is  the  assertion  of  a  superhuman 
activity  which  leaves  no  room  for  moral  freedom. 
They  take  for  granted  that  responsibility  which 
the  conscience,  unless  corrupted  by  sophistry, 
regards  as  the  prerogative  of  every  human  being. 
The  tyrant  whom  they  depict  is  anything  but  a 
puppet  in  the  hands  of  an  absolute  and  arbitrary 
will.  The  Divine  sovereignty  never  excludes  the 
possibility  of  initiative  on  his  part.  In  every 
retrospect  of  his  own  conduct  he  feels  that  he 
could,  and  ought  to,  have  chosen  a  difierent  course. 
He  knows  that  he  has  failed  to  '  lay  to  heart '  the 
judgments  of  God  (Ex  7^).  He  confesses  again 
and  again  that  he  has  sinned  (9-''  10'"),  and  he  asks 
Moses  to  forgive  his  sin  and  pray  for  him  (10'^). 
He  might  at  any  moment  humble  himself  before 
God,  but  he  stubbornly  refuses  to  do  it  (10*).  His 
will  is  never  coerced  ;  it  is  by  his  own  deeds  that 
he  merits  the  penalty  which  is  ultimately  inflicted 
upon  him.  He  sins  and  suffers,  not  as  the  victim 
of  a  Divine  good-pleasure  which  hardens  whom  it 
will,  but  as  a  tyrant  who,  '  being  often  reproved, 
hardeneth  his  neck,'  and  wlio  is  therefore  '  suddenly 
broken,  and  that  without  remedy'  (Pr  29^). 

While  the  religious  leaders  of  Israel  assert  the 
efficiency  of  God  in  unqualified  terms,  they  lay  no 
foundation  for  that  high  predestinarianism  which 
maintains  the  Divine  sovereignty  and  leaves  only 
a  semblance  of  freedom  to  man.  The  theology 
of  the  OT  is  not  deterministic,  as  'the  accepted 
Muhammadan  theology  is  undoubtedly  determin- 
istic' (II.  P.  Smith,  The  Bible  and  Islam,  1896, 
p.  137).  All  the  prophets  and  prophetic  writers, 
among  whom  J  and  E  may  be  included,  accentuate 
moral  obligation  ;  they  regard  virtuous  and  vicious 
acts  as  originating  in  the  human  will ;  their  whole 
teaching  is  based  on  the  conviction  that  men  and 
nations  deserve  rewards  or  punishments,  and  are 
in  a  real  sense  the  authors  of  their  own  destiny. 
The  figure  of  the  clay  and  the  potter  (Jer  18®, 
Is  64^ llo  9^'),  which  clearly  recognizes  'a  divinity 
that  shapes  our  ends,'  says  nothing  of  the  prin- 
ciples according  to  which  these  ends  are  shaped 
(A.  B.  Davidson,  Thcol.  of  OT,  1904,  p.  131),  and 
all  apparently  predestinarian  language  is  meant 
to  be  moralized. 

'  Nor  does  any  one  doubt  that  it  is  an  effect  intended  by  Ood, 
when,  at  a  certain  stage  in  sin.  His  revelation  makes  the  heart 
harder.  God's  word  can  never  return  unto  Him  void.  Where 
it  ia  tiindered  from  blessing,  it  must  curse.    Light  must  make 


weak  eyes  weaker ;  nourishini,'  food  must  ajf^fravatc  the  viru- 
lence of  disease.  That  is  a  necessary  moral  ordinance — in 
other  words,  one  willed  by  God  from  eternity '  (H.  Bchultz, 
op.  cit.  ii.  207). 

Moses'  experience  of  the  hardening  effect  of 
Divine  truth  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh  was  one 
which  almost  all  prophets  liave  shared  with  him. 
There  is  biting  satire,  but  not  predestinarian 
doctrine,  in  the  command  which  Isaiaii  (6'")  puts 
into  the  moutii  of  God  :  '  Make  the  heart  of  this 
people  fat,  and  make  their  ears  dull,  and  besmear 
their  eyes,  lest  they  see  with  their  eyes,  and  hear 
with  their  ears,  and  their  heart  understand,  and 
they  turn  again  and  be  healed.'  This  propliet's 
language  is  quoted  witli  approval  by  our  Lord 
in  Mk  4'-,  Lk  8^" ;  and  with  an  important  modi- 
lication  in  Mt  W*-  ^\ 

'  It  is  conceivable  that  Jesus  might  use  Isaiah's  words  in 
Isaiah's  spirit,  i.e.,  ironically,  expressing  the  bitter  feeling  of 
one  conscious  that  his  best  efforts  to  teach  his  countrymen 
would  often  end  in  failure,  and  in  his  bitterness  representing 
himself  as  sent  to  stop  ears  and  blind  eyes.  Such  utterances 
are  not  to  be  taken  as  deliberate  dogmatic  teaching.  If,  as 
some  allege,  the  evangelists  so  took  them,  they  failed  to  under- 
stand the  mind  of  the  Master'  (A.  B.  Bruce,  EGT,  'The 
Synoptic  Gospels,'  1897,  p.  19G). 

The  hardening  of  Pharaoh's  (or  of  any  other 
guilty  man's)  heart  is  a  judicial,  not  an  arbitrary, 
act  of  God,  who  never  hardens  a  good  man's  heart. 
The  process  is,  in  Western  language,  natural  and 
inevitable.  '  By  abuse  of  light,  nature  jjioduces 
callousness;  and  what  nature  does  God  does' 
(M.  Dods,  EGT,  '  The  Gospel  of  St.  John,'  1897, 

E.  812).  If  He  gives  men  up  to  punishment,  it  is 
ecause  they  have  deliberately  given  themselves 
up  to  sin  (lio  12*-  28-  28).  The  story  of  Pharaoh's 
overthrow  has  great  and  permanent  value  as  a 
tlrama  of  freedom  abused,  and  its  moral  effect 
would  be  ruined  if  we  were  to  interpolate  in  it  at 
any  point  the  words  of  the  Qur'an  (x.  88) : 

'  And  Moses  said,  O  our  Lord,  Thou  hast  given  Pharaoh  and 
his  nobles  pomp  and  riches  in  this  world,  to  make  them  wander 
from  Thy  path  ;  O  our  Lord,  destroy  their  riches  and  harden 
their  hearts,  that  they  may  not  believe  until  they  see  exemplary 
punishment.' 

St.  Paul  uses  the  case  of  Pharaoh,  as  well  as  the 
figure  of  the  clay  and  the  potter,  to  establish  his 
doctrine  of  God's  sovereign  right  and  power  of 
disposing  of  men's  lives  as  He  will.  In  the  keen- 
ness of  his  dialectic  the  Apostle  employs  expressions 
which  seem  harsli :  '  So  then  he  hath  mercy  on  wliom 
he  will,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth '  (fiv  di  04\ei 
(TKXrjpiji'ei,  Ro  9'8).     St.  Paul 

'  has  none  of  that  caution  and  timorousness  which  often  lead 
writers  perpetually  to  trim  and  Qualify  for  fear  of  being 
misunderstood.  He  lays  full  stress  upon  the  argument  in  hand 
in  its  bearing  upon  the  idea  to  be  maintained,  without  con- 
cerning himself  about  its  adjustment  with  other  truths '  (G.  B. 
Stevens,  The  Pauline  rhcolugy,  1892,  p.  120 ;  cf.  C.  Gore,  Si. 
Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Jiomaiis,  ii.  [1900]  37  f.). 

He  approaches  the  painful  subject  of  the  harden- 
ing of  the  Jews  under  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
from  two  different  sides.  When  his  object  is  to 
humble  their  pride  and  pretension,  he  emphasizes 
(what  no  Jew  would  deny)  the  absoluteness  of 
God ;  when  his  aim  is  to  silence  their  excuse-s  he 
shows  them  that  it  is  for  their  own  sins  that  they 
are  rejected. 

'The  hardening  .  .  .  against  the  gospel,  which  in  Rom.  ix. 
and  xi.  he  considers  as  a  divine  destiny,  he  characterises  in 
chap.  X.  as  the  self-hardening  of  Israel'  (W.  Beyschlag,  ST 
Theol.t,  Eng.  tr.,  1896,  ii.  118). 

There  is,  however,  always  a  danger  in  the 
dialectical  use  of  the  language  of  absolutism.  If 
the  conversion  of  some  and  the  hardening  of 
others  are  ascribed  to  the  mere  will  of  (Jod,  it  is 
clearly  open  to  the  hardened  to  say,  '  Why  dotli 
he  yet  find  fault  ? '  (rl  (n  fxifjuperau,  Ro  9'») ;  and  if 
an  inspired  prophet  is  then  quoted,  '  Sliall  the 
thing  formed  say  to  him  that  formed  it  (rd  irXdafia 


HARLOT 


HARLOT 


523 


r(^  T\dffavTt),  •' Wliy  didst  thou  make  me  thus?"' 
the  answer  must  be  that  'a  man  is  not  a  thing, 
and  if  the  wltole  explanation  of  his  destiny  is  to  be 
sou<,'lit  in  the  l»are  will  of  God,  he  toUl  say.  Why 
didst  thou  make  me  thus?  and  not  even  the 
authority  of  Paul  will  silence  him'  (J.  Denney, 
£GT,  '  Romans,'  1900,  p.  663).  If  the  Potter  is  a 
God  of  infinite  love,  it  is  well  with  the  clay,  as 
Rabbi  Ben  Ezra  sees ;  but  if  the  Potter  is  a  God 
who  for  His  mere  good  pleasure  makes  '  vessels  of 
wrath,'  who  would  care  to  worship  Him  ? 

*  We  must  affirm  that  freedom  is  the  fixed  point  that  must  be 
held,  because  it  is  an  inalienable  certainty  of  experience,  and 
that  predestination  can  be  only  such  as  is  consistent  with  it : 
else  there  is  no  rational  and  responsible  life. . . .  Predestination 
in  other  fields  of  existence  need  not  trouble  us ;  but  perplexity 
and  anguish  unutterable  enter  if  we  admit  the  supposition,  or 
eren  the  genuine  suspicion  that  God  has  so  foreonlained  our 
actions  as  to  take  away  our  freedom.  To  this  the  history  of 
CSiristian  experience  bears  abundant  witness'  (W.  N.  Clarke, 
An  Outline  of  Christian  Theoloijy,  1896,  p.  146). 

It  Ls  certain  that  in  his  general  teacliing  St.  Paul 
held  fast  both  Divine  sovereignty  and  human 
freedom  (see  Ph  2^-).  It  is  equally  certain  that  he 
left  the  si)eculative  (question  of  the  relation  of  the 
two  where  he  found  it — as  an  antinomy  which  he 
could  not  transcend.  Nor  have  any  later  theo- 
logians or  philosophers  solved  the  enigma.  Finite 
thought  is  unable  to  comprehend  that  Divine 
activity  which  works  in  a  higher  way  than  any 
other  energy  in  the  world.  But  '  even  though  the 
ultimate  reconciliation  of  divine  and  human 
personality  may  be  still  beyond  us'  (J.  Seth,  op. 
cit.  396),  it  is  practically  enough  if  Christianity 
maintains  that  in  relation  to  free  beings  the  will 
of  God  is  never  an  arbitrary  will,  enforcing  itself 
without  moral  means. 

'  God  shows  respect  for  his  creatures,  and  for  himself  as  their 
creator,  and  upon  the  independence  that  he  has  0ven  them  be 
makes  no  attempt  forcibly  to  intrude '  (W.  N.  Clarke,  op.  cit. 
P.13J5). 

"While  the  Qur'an  (xiv.  4)  teaches  that  'God 
leads  astray  whom  He  will  and  leads  aright  whom 
He  will ;  He  is  the  Powerful,  the  wise,'  the  God 
revealed  by  Jesus  Christ  'wishes  not  that  any 
should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repent- 
ance' (2  P  3»). 

LiTERATURR. — In  addition  to  books  named  in  the  art.  see 
Calvin,  Institutes,  ed.  1S63,  i.  198  ff. ;  B.  Weiss,  Bib.  Theol. 
of  ST,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1882-83,  ii.  3ff.  ;  A.  B.  Brace,  St. 
I'auVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  do.  1S&4,  p.  121  ff.;  F. 
Godet,  Ronxang,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  lSSl-82,  iL  15Sff. 

James  Strahan. 

HABLOT  (-rdpv-q,  masc.   xdpvos).— The    RV  has 

dropped  the  words  whore  and  whoremonger.which 

the  AV  used  intercliangeably  with  'harlot'  and 

'  fornicator '  to  translate  the  Gr.  words  Tdpmj  and 

TOpPOS. 

1.  The  word  xo'pvjj  is  used  in  two  passages  (He 
11",  Ja  2^)  to  describe  Rahab.  This  Rahab  is 
mentioned  (Mt  1')  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus ;  and 
although,  as  Calvin  says  (on  He  11"),  the  term 
'harlot'  is  applied  only  to  her  former  life  ('ad 
anteactam  vitaui  referri  certum  est'),  yet  dLBBculty 
was  early  felt  as  to  the  propriety  of  giving  her  such 
an  honoured  position  as  she  has  in  the  NT. 

Theophylact  in  the  12th  cent,  expressed  doubt 
as  to  the  correctness  of  identifying  her  with  the 
Rahab  of  Jos  2'  ('There  are  some  who  think  that 
Rachab  was  that  Rahab  the  harlot  who  received 
the  spies  of  Joshua  the  son  of  Nave '  [Enarratio  in 
Mt  1^]).  He  has  been  followed  in  this  by  others, 
notably  the  Dutch  professor,  G.  Outhov  ('Disser- 
tatio  de  Raab  et  Racliab,'  in  Bibl.  hist. -phil. -theol. 
Bremensis,  Bremen  and  Amsterdam,  1719-25,  class 
iii.  p.  43S),  C.  T.  Kuinoel  (Nov.  Test.  lib.  hist., 
Grace,  London,  1835,  i.  2),  and  H.  Olshausen  (Com. 
on  Gospels  and  Actsr,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1852- 
54,  in  loc.).     Valpy  also  contends  that  the  two 


cannot  be  the  same  (Greek  Testament,  London, 
1836,  i.  4).  There  is  no  reason,  however,  for  doubt- 
ing that  the  two  are  identical.  Jewish  tradition 
makes  the  identification,  although  her  entrance 
into  the  Israelitish  community  is  variously  related 
(see  John  Lightfoot,  Horce  Hebraica,  ed.  Gandell, 
Oxford,  1859,  ii.  II,  for  details). 

Various  reasons  have  been  suggested  for  Rahab's 
inclusion  among  the  Saviour's  forbears  (cf.  also 
Tamar,  Ruth,  Bathsheba).  Grotitis  suggests  that 
it  IS  &  proludium  oi  the  gospel  of  Him  who  saved 
idolaters  and  criminals ;  Wetstein,  that  it  might 
meet  Jewish  objections  to  Mary's  position — auid 
this  seems  most  likely. 

There  have  been  attempts  also  to  weaken  the 
force  of  vopvT]  as  applied  to  her.  Josephus  (Ant. 
V.  i.  2)  speaks  of  her  house  as  a  KaTa-yur/iov.  She 
is  described  as  an  inn-keeper  in  the  Targum  on 
Jos  2^ — Kn'pTJTS  (vavdoKeirrpui).  In  the  NT  also  in 
some  texts  of  Heb.  (K^)  she  is  so  described,  and  in 
Clem.  Rom.  (Ep.  ad  Cor.  L  12)  various  readings 
show  a  tendency  towards  softening  down  rbprrf  (see 
J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  'Clem.  Rom.,' 
iL  [1890]  46 1£).  The  term,  however,  is  really  used 
in  the  ordinary  sense,  and  has  to  be  so  understood. 

In  He  1 1"  Rahab  has  a  place  in  the  catalogue  of 
the  heroes  of  faith  ;  while  in  Ja  2^  she  is  referred 
to,  beside  Abraham,  as  an  example  of  good  works. 
In  the  description  given  of  her  by  Clem.  Rom.  she 
is  praised  for  both  faith  and  works :  '  For  her  faith 
and  hospitality  Rahab  the  harlot  was  saved '  (i.  12). 
The  scarlet  thread  which  she  hung  out  from  her 
house  became  typical,  'showing  beforehand  that 
through  the  blood  of  the  Lord  there  shall  be  re- 
demption unto  all  them  that  believe  and  hope  on 
God.' 

Zahn  thus  describes  the  reason  why  James 
adopted  her  case  beside  that  of  Abraham :  *  The 
lesson  from  Abraham's  example  is  developed  to  its 
completion  and  finally  stated  in  Ja  2"^  ;  then  follows 
the  example  of  the  heathen  woman  Rahab,  which 
neither  substantiates  what  has  been  said  before  nor 
develops  a  new  phase  of  the  truth,  and  appears  to 
be  dragged  in  without  purpose.  It  does  have 
point,  however,  if  referring  to  a  number  of  Gentiles 
who  had  been  received  into  the  Jewish  Christian 
Churches,  and  if  designed  to  say  :  the  example  of 
Rahab  has  the  same  lesion  for  them  that  tlie  history 
of  Abraham  has  for  his  descendants'  (Introd.  to 
the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  i.  91).  J.  B.  Lightfoot 
(loe.  cit.)  thinks  that  Clement  is  trj-ing  by  her 
example  to  reconcile  the  Judaistic  and  Gentile 
parties  in  Corinth.  The  truth  is  that  Rahab's  case 
was  weU  known  and  might  easily  suggest  itself  to 
any  one  (along  with  Sarah,  Abigail,  and  Esther, 
she  was  considered  a  historic  beauty).  To  try  to 
fix  the  date  of  James's  Epistle  from  this  incident  is 
precarious. 

The  term  is  not  applied  to  any  other  person  in 
the  NT  unless,  with  some,  we  interpret  He  12'*  in 
such  a  way  as  to  make  the  rdpros  descriptive  of 
Esau.  Wetstein  (iti  loc.)  gives  citations  to  show 
that  later  Jewish  tradition  regarded  Esau  as  a 
fornicator.  The  text  is  not  decisive  (see  Alford, 
ad  loc.).  It  is  probable,  however,  that  Damaris 
('heifer ')  belonged  to  the  class  of  educated  Hetairai 
(see  W.  :M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895, 
p.  252). 

2.  The  attitude  of  the  Christian  Church  in  the 
Apostolic  Age  towards  fornication  is  given  in  art. 
FoRXICATION.  In  Hermas  we  find  stress  laid  on 
the  sinful  thoughts,  while  from  the  few  references 
to  overt  fornication  it  is  thought  that  Christian 
morality  had  succeeded  in  showing  in  practice  its 
victory  over  this  sin.  Hermas  is  concerned  with 
the  question  of  divorce,  from  the  point  of  view  of 
fornication  ;  and  his  teaching  is  that  the  husband 
whose  vrife  has  been  divorced  for  adultery  should 


524 


HAE-MAGEDON 


HARP 


not  re-many,  so  as  to  give  to  the  repentant 
wife  an  opportunity  of  returning,  and  vice  versa 
(Mand.  iv.  i.  4-8) ;  see  K.  Lake  m  Expositor,  7th 
ser.  X.  [1910]  416 fl".,  for  an  attempt  to  reconcile 
Hernias  and  the  Gospels  on  divorce,  and  C.  W. 
Emmet  in  reply  (Expositor,  8th  ser.  i.  [1911]  68  ff".). 

In  the  Apocalypse  (chs.  17-19)  we  have  the 
description  and  the  doom  of  '  the  great  harlot ' — 
Babylon.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
this  Babylon  is  Imperial  Home.  Tliat  tlie  term  i.s 
allegorical  is  proved  by  17",  '  On  tlie  forehead  of 
the  woman  was  written  a  mystery — Babylon  tlie 
Great.'  In  the  OT,  Tyre  and  Nineveh  have  this 
title  of  'harlot'  (Is  23i»-",  Nah  3<) ;  and  even 
•lerusalem  is  so  called  (Is  1-^).  How  and  when  the 
title  was  first  applied  to  Rome  we  cannot  say,  but 
the  OT  would  easily  supply  the  analogy  ;  and  very 
likely  this  mysterious  title  would  save  the  readers 
of  the  book  from  persecution,  because  the  term 
would  be  intelligible  only  to  the  initiated  (see  A. 
Souter  in  Expositor,  7th  ser.  x.  [1910]  373  fl".).  The 
term  is  used  in  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  bk.  v.  lines 
137-143  and  158-160  (ed.  Geffcken,  Leipzig,  1902), 
the  date  of  wliich  is  disputed. 

The  harlot  of  the  Apocalypse  has,  like  a  high- 
born Roman  dame,  a  band  round  lier  forehead. 
Her  dress  is  royal   purple — emblem  of  luxurious 

firide  (Juv.  Sat.  lii.  283).  Like  the  harlot,  she  has 
ler  name  exhibited  (see  quotations  in  Wetstein, 
who  refers  to  Juv.  Sat.  vi.  123  and  Seneca,  Controv. 
i.  2).  She  has  a  cup  in  her  hand  to  intoxicate  her 
paramours.  J.  Motliitt  (in  EGT,  'Revelation') 
quotes  a  parallel  from  Cebes'  Tabula :  '  Do  you 
see  a  woman  sitting  there  with  an  inviting  look, 
and  in  her  hand  a  cup?  She  is  called  Deceit;  by 
her  power  she  beguiles  all  who  enter  life  and  makes 
them  drink.  And  what  is  the  draught?  Deceit 
and  ignorance.'  Her  dress  is  luxurious,  with  gold 
and  pearls  (cf.  Test.  Jud.  xiii.  5,  where  the  harlot 
once  more  has  pearls  and  gold).  She  rides  on  a 
wild  beast,  like  a  Bacchante  ;  and  kings  are  her 
paramours.  But  the  harlot's  doom  awaits  her 
(17'®).  The  wild  beast  on  which  she  rides  has  seven 
lieads  (the  seven  hills  of  Rome  [see  Wetstein,  in 
loci)  8.nd  ten  horns.  We  cannot  enter  here  on  the 
vexed  question  of  the  seven  kings,  on  which  the 
date  of  the  book  depends.  The  harlot  is  doomed. 
Rome  shall  perish  in  the  blood  that  she  has  spilt. 
Her  fall  will  cause  lamentation  among  her  allies, 
but  jubilation  among  saints  on  earth  and  angels 
in  heaven. 

The  language  in  which  the  harlot's  doom  is 
described  by  the  seer  has  been  criticized  as  un- 
Cliristian.  '  He  that  takes  delight  in  such  fancies 
is  no  whit  better  than  he  that  first  invented  them ' 
(P.  Wernle,  The  Beqinnings  of  Christianity,  Eng. 
tr.,  i.  [1903]  370).  liut  tlie  downfall  of  O/Spts  in  a 
State  or  individual  eased  the  conscience  in  the 
ancient  world,  and  here  it  vindicated  the  existence 
of  a  righteous  God  who  avenged  the  slaughter  of 
His  saints.  The  lanj^uage  must  not  be  interpreted 
apart  from  the  situation. 

Literature. — For  Commentaries  on  the  Apooalvpse  see  J. 
Moffatt  in  EGT,  'Revelation,'  1910;  A.  B.  Swete  (21907) ; 
H.  J.  Holtzmann  (in  JIand-Commentar,  TUbinfjen,  1908);  W. 
Bousset  C'Cidttiiitjen,  1906).  For  Ilahab  see  J.  B.  Mayor, 
Epistle  of  .Jame.s'->,  1910 ;  A.  Martin,  Winning  the  Soul,  1S97, 

p.  47.  DoNALu  Mackenzie. 

HAR-MAGEDON  (RV  ;  Armageddon  AV).— Ac- 
cording to  Rev  16'*  this  is  the  name  in  Heb.  of  the 
scene  of  '  the  war  of  the  great  day  of  God,  the 
Almighty  '  (v.^*),  against  whom  the  three  unclean 
spirits  (v.")  have  gathore<l  together  'the  kings  of 
the  whole  world'  (v.''').  There  are  variations  in 
the  form  of  the  name  in  the  Gr.  texts  and  very 
different  interpretations  of  its  meaning,  but  li'Ap 
Ma7e5wi'  is  accepted  as  the  correct  form,  the  most 
satisfactory  explanation  is  that  which  takes  it  to 


mean  'the  mount  of  Megiddo'  ("Ap  =  IIeb.  nrr  'a 
mountain '),  By  its  geograi)hical  conformation  and 
strategical  situation  the  plain  of  Megiddo  was 
Itetter  suited  than  any  other  place  in  the  Holy 
Land  to  be  the  arena  of  a  great  battle,  and  the 
liistorical  memories  that  gathered  round  it  would 
fill  the  name  with  suggestion  for  the  readers  of  the 
A]iocalypse.  The  primary  reference,  no  doubt, 
would  l)e  to  Israel  s  victory  '  by  the  waters  of 
Megiddo'  over  the  kings  of  Canaan  (Jg  .'5'®),  which 
niiglit  be  taken  as  typical  of  the  triumph  of  God  and 
His  Kingdom  over  tlie  hostile  world-powers ;  but  the 
defeat  and  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  at  the  eastern 
extremity  of  the  plain  (1  S  31'),  the  disastrous 
struggle  of  Josiah  on  the  same  held  against  Fharaoh- 
necoh  (2  K  23»',  2  Cli  35-'-''),  and  Zechariah's 
reference  to  '  the  mourning  of  Hadadrimmon  in 
the  valley  of  Megiddon '  (Zee  12'^),  would  heighten 
the  suggestion  of  a  gi'eat  day  of  overthrow  and 
destruction.  The  chief  objections  oflcred  to  tiiis 
interpretation  are  that  a  mountain  is  an  unsuitable 
battlefield,  and  that  the  historical  battles  are 
described  as  taking  place  '  by  the  waters  of 
Megiddo'  (Jg  o'")  or  'in  the  valley  of  Megiddo' 
(2  Ch  35").  Against  this,  however,  must  be  set 
the  statements  that  Barak  with  his  10,0{X)  men 
'  went  down  from  mount  Tabor '  to  meet  Sisera 
(Jg  4''*),  that  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  'jeoparded 
their  lives  unto  the  death  in  the  high  places  of  the 
field'  (5'**),  and  that  Saul  and  Jonathan  fell  'in 
mount  Gilboa'  (1  S  31'- «;  cf.  2  S  1-').  And  the 
place  given  to  '  the  mountains  of  Israel '  in  Ezekiel's 
prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  Gog  and  Magog 
(Ezk  38"--'  39-- ^•'^),  to  which  the  Apocalyptist 
subsequently  refers  in  his  description  of  the  final 
overthrow  of  Satan  and  his  hosts  (Rev  20*),  may 
have  served  to  confirm  the  idea  that  a  mountain 
would  be  the  scene  of  '  the  war  of  the  great  day  of 
God,  the  Almighty.' 

Of  recent  years  considerable  support  has  been 
given  to  the  view,  first  propouncled  by  Gunkel 
(Schopfnng  und  Chaos,  268),  that  '  Har-Magedon' 

f (reserves  the  name  of  the  place  where  in  the  Baby- 
onian  creation-myth  the  dragon  Tiamat  was  over- 
thrown by  Marduk,  the  passage  Rev  16'^"'*  being 
{)resumably  a  fragment  from  some  Jewish  apoca- 
yijse  in  which  the  Babylonian  mythology  had 
been  adapted  to  an  eschatological  interest.  This 
theory,  however,  rests  upon  grounds  that  are  very 
speculative,  and  even  its  supporters  admit  that 
the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  would  be  ignorant  of 
the  mytiiological  origin  of  the  name,  and  would 
probably  understand  it  to  mean  '  the  mountain  of 
Megiddo.' 

LiTERATURK. — The  artt.  '  Ilar-Maj^edon '  in  HDB  and  '  Arma- 
geddon '  in  EBi;  J.  Moffatt,  E(,T,  'Revelation,'  1910;  H. 
Gunkel,  Schopfung  und  Chaos,  ls9o.        J.  C.  LAMBERT. 

HARP  {Kiddpa,  also  KiBapl^eiv,  *  to  harp,'  and  KiOap- 
ifiddi  [KiOap  +  doidSi]  '  a  harper'). — The  word  and  its 
two  derivatives  occur  only  in  1  Corinthians  and 
Revelation.  In  1  Co  14^ :  '  Even  things  without 
life,  giving  a  voice,  whether  pipe  or  harp,  if  they 
give  not  a  distinction  in  the  sounds,  how  shall  it 
be  known  what  is  piped  or  harped?'  St.  Paul 
by  this  musical  illustration  criticizes  a  prevalent 
and  unedifying  speaking  with  tongues,  thougli, 
in  the  light  of  the  phrase  eandcm  cantilcnata 
recincre,  his  figure  of  'harping'  has  come  in  col- 
loquial use  to  represent  ratlier  monotonous  per- 
sistency. In  Rev  5"  the  four  living  creatures  and 
the  four  and  twenty  elders  Avho  abased  tliemselves 
before  the  Lamb  have  each  of  them  a  harp  ;  and 
the  voi(!e  which  wiis  heard,  as  the  Lamb  and  the 
hundred  and  forty  and  four  thousiaud  stowl  on 
Mount  Zion,  is  described  as  that  of  '  harpers 
harping  witli  their  harps'  (14-).  The  victors  over 
the  beast,  his  image,  and  his  mark,  who  stand  by 


HARP 


HARVEST 


525 


'  the  glassy  sea  mingled  with  fire '  and  sing  the 
the  song  of  Moses,  have  '  harps  of  God '  to  sing 
His  praise  (15-).  In  18-  the  angel  who  doome<l 
the  great  city  of  Babylon  declared  that  it  would 
hear  no  more  the  voice  of  liarpers  (cf.  Is  23'*). 

When  we  attempt  to  describe  exactly  the  design 
and  manipulation  of  musical  instruments  in  use 
tliroughout  the  Apostolic  Age,  we  are  met  with 
almost  insuperable  difficulties.  The  apocalyptic 
character  of  the  book,  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
contains,  Avith  but  one  exception,  the  references  to 
harps,  turns  (one  to  Jewish  music  ;  but,  though 
there  is  much  relevant  information  in  Chronicles 
and  other  OT  writings,  it  is  lacking  in  precision. 
It  is  easier  to  describe  the  instruments  of  ancient 
Egypt  and  Assyria,  for  we  are  helped  by  sculptures 
and  pictures,  the  like  of  which  have  not  been  found 
in  Palestine.  We  must  rely,  therefore,  on  analogy 
guided  by  our  inexact  OT  descriptions. 

'  To  accompany  singing,  or  at  all  events  sacred 
singing,  stringed  instruments  only  were  used,  and 
never  wind  instruments '(Appendix  to  Wellhausen's 
'  Psalms '  [Haupt's  PB,  1898]).  It  may  be  too  much 
to  say  that  they  were  the  only  accompanying  in- 
struments, but  they  were  certainlj'  the  principal. 
In  the  OT  there  is  mention  of  only  two  stringed 
instruments  (if  we  except  the  curious  list  which 
appears  in  Daniel),  and  these  are  the  nis?  and  h^i. 
The  former  is  the  older,  and  tradition  points  to 
Jubal  as  its  inventor  (Gn  4-') ;  while  the  second 
does  not  appear  before  1  S  10^.  Tliese  are  trans- 
lated in  the  EV"  as  'harp'  and  'psaltery'  respec- 
tively. From  1  K  10'-  we  learn  that  their  frame- 
work was  made  of  almug  or  algum ;  from  2  Ch 
20^  that  both  were  portable,  and  from  many  OT 
passages  that  they  were  much  used  at  religious 
and  festive  gatherings.  It  is  difficult  to  determine 
with  exactness  the  difference  between  these  stringed 
instruments ;  but,  although  later  tradition  con- 
fused them,  they  were  certainly  not  identical, 
nor  were  their  names  used  indifferently  to  denote 
the  same  instrument.  There  are  several  reasons, 
however,  for  the  belief  that  the  lia?  resembled  a 
lyre,  and  that  the  V^l  was  a  form  of  harp  (the 
question  is  discussed  in  HDB  iii.  458  f. ).  Amongst 
these  are  (1)  the  fact  that  in  the  LXX  Kiddpa,  or  its 
equivalent  Acti't/xx,  isthealmost  invariable  translation 
of  T32  ;  (2)  the  evidence  of  Jewish  coins  pointing  to 
a  decided  similarity  of  ni3?  and  Kiddpa  (see  F.  W. 
Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jeicsr^,  1885,  pp.  231,  243) ; 
and  (3)  the  distinction  emphasized  by  early  Chris- 
tian writers  between  instruments  which  had  a 
resonance-frame  beneath  the  strings  and  those 
which  had  it  above  (see  St.  Augustine  on  Ps  42). 
Josephus,  who  has  a  description  of  the  frame-work 
and  strings  of  these  instruments  in  Ant.  VIII.  iii.  8, 
distinguished  the  Kivvpa  as  ten-stringed  and  struck 
with  a  plectrum  from  the  va^\a.  as  twelve-stringed 
and  played  with  the  hand.* 

The  Kiddpa  was  the  traditional  instrument  of 
psalmody,  and  the  Ki0apif)56s,  along  with  the  av\r)- 
TTjs,  performed  at  the  festive  seasons  of  Hebrew 
life  (cf.  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John-, 
1907,  pp.  80,  239).  Being  lighter  in  weight  than 
the  h^i,  the  lyre  was  much  played  in  processions, 
and,  as  we  leam  from  Ps  137-,  it  could  be  hung  on 
the  poplar  trees  of  Babylon  when  the  Hebrew 
exiles  were  in  no  mood  for  songs  of  rejoicing. 
The  Kiddpa  was  of  Asiatic  origin,  and  was  probably 
introduced  into  Egypt  by  Semites.  The  earliest 
representation  of  a  stringed  instrument  is  that 
excavated  at  Telloh  in  South  Babylonia,  which 
in  size  resembles  a  harp  but  is  shaped  like  a  lyre, 
i.e.  it  has  a  resonance- body  on  which  are  set  Wo 
almost  perpendicular  posts  between  which  are  the 
strings,  upright  and  fastened  to  a  cross-bar.     A 

*  See  S.  R.  Driver,  Joel  and  Amos  (Cambridge  Bible,  1898), 
p.  231ff. 


picture  which  better  illustrates  the  ordinary  lyre  is 
that  of  three  Semitic  captives  guarded  by  an  Assy- 
rian warrior  while  they  played  ;  but  perhaps  the  best 
illustration  is  that  on  the  Jewish  coins  mentioned 
above.  Archibald  Main. 

HARVEST  {e€pi<T/j.6s,  ^ep/fw).— 1.  Use  of  the  word 
in  the  NT.— The  Gr.  verb  (Oepil^eiv)  for  '  to  harvest ' 
or  '  to  reap '  properly  means  '  to  do  summer  work ' 
(from  depoi,  'summer').  In  addition  to  the  numer- 
ous allusions  to  sowing  and  reaping  contained  in 
the  Gospels,  there  are  several  other  references  to 
harvest-time  in  the  pages  of  the  NT.  Thus  St. 
Paul,  when  finding  it  necessary  to  upbraid  the 
Corinthian  converts  for  their  meanness  in  regard 
to  this  world's  goods,  sarcastically  asks  :  '  If  we 
to  you  did  sow  {i.e.  when  Ave  planted  the  church  in 
Corinth)  spiritual  things,  is  it  a  great  matter  if  we 
of  you  should  reap  material  things?'  (1  Co  9"). 
The  sower  is  entitled  to  expect  a  harvest  of  the 
particular  crop  which  he  sows — in  this  case  a 
spiritual  harvest ;  how  much  more  is  he  entitled 
to  a  mere  worldly  harvest  as  the  compensation  for 
his  toil,  inadequate  though  the  compensation  be. 
In  2  Co  9*  St.  Paul  reverts  to  the  same  metaphor 
and  in  the  same  connexion.  Niggardliness  would 
appear  to  have  been  a  besetting  sin  of  the 
Corinthians,  as  seemingly  also  of  the  Galatians 
(cf.  Lightfoot,  Galatians^,  p.  219).  The  proposi- 
tion here  set  forth  is  similar  to  that  enunciated  in 
Gal  6^  though  the  application  is  somewhat  dili'er- 
ent.  'He  that  soweth  sparingly  shall  reap  also 
sparinglj',  and  he  that  soweth  bountifully  shall 
reap  also  bountifully.'  In  Gal  6''  this  is  compressed 
into  the  single  sentence :  '  Whatsoever  a  man 
soAveth,  that  shall  he  also  reap.'  The  Apostle  then 
proceeds  to  apply  the  truth  embodied  in  the  proverb 
to  the  subject  to  Avhich  he  is  devoting  his  particular 
attention :  '  For  he  that  soweth  unto  his  own 
flesh,  shall  of  the  flesh  reap  corruption  ;  but  he 
that  soAveth  to  the  Spirit,  shall  of  the  Spirit  reap 
eternal  life.'  The  proverb  itself  is  a  common  one, 
and  is  found  not  only  in  the  Bible  but  also  in  the 
classical  writers  (cf.  Lightfoot,  op.  cit.  p.  219), 
and  the  aptness  of  the  simile  is  too  obvious  to 
require  any  comment.  Without  abandoning  his 
metaphor,  the  Apostle  next  addresses  those  Avho, 
though  faithful  up  to  a  point,  are  apt  to  be  faint- 
hearted :  '  in  Avell-doing,  let  us  not  lose  heart,  for 
at  its  proper  time  (i.e.  at  harvest-time)  we  shall 
reap  if  Ave  faint  not.' 

In  Gal  6~-  *  the  harvest  is  made  to  depend  on  the 
nature  of  the  ground  into  Avhich  the  seed  is  cast, 
but  in  1  Co  9"  the  reference  is  rather  to  the  par- 
ticular kind  and  quality  of  the  seed  soAvn  (cf.  Job 
4*),  Avhile  in  2  Co  9®  the  amount  soaa'u  is  the  point 
emphasized. 

In  Ja  5^  Ave  have  another  allusion  to  the  agri- 
cultiiral  operations  incidental  to  harvest-time : 
'  Behold,  the  hire  of  the  labourers  Avho  moAA'ed 
your  fields,  Avhich  is  of  you  kept  back  by  fraud 
{i.e.  comes  too  late  from  you),  crieth  out :  and  the 
cries  of  them  that  reaped  have  entered  into  the 
ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth.'  The  same  love  of 
money  evidently  prcA'ailed  among  those  here 
addressed  as  in  the  Galatian  and  Corinthian 
churches.  The  particular  manifestation  of  it 
Avhich  the  Avriter  singles  out  as  the  object  of  his 
special  denunciation  is  the  omission  to  pay  the 
labourers  their  Avages  promptlj'.  In  the  eyes  of 
the  laAV  this  Avas  a  heinous  oflence ;  thus  in  Lv 
19'*  it  is  enacted  that '  the  Avages  of  a  hired  serA-ant 
shall  not  abide  Avith  thee  all  night  until  the 
morning '  (cf.  also  Pr  3^-^,  Jer  22'*,  Mai  3^). 

In  Rev  14"-  '•*  the  Parousia  is  represented  as 
ushering  in  the  great  harvest  of  the  Avorld's  fruit 
(cf.  Mt  13^  '  the  harvest  is  the  end  of  the  Avorld '). 
In  Mt  IS^^"*  the  harvest  consists  in  gathering  up 


526 


HARVEST 


HATRED 


the  tares  as  well  as  the  wheat  with  a  view  to  their 
subsequent  separation  ;  here,  however,  only  the 
wheat  is  reaped,  and  the  evil,  whicli  in  the  Parable 
appears  as  tares,  is  treated  under  another  metaphor 
in  llev  14''^"-.  In  the  Parable  again  tlie  anj^'els  are 
the  reapers,  but  here  the  Son  of  Man  Himself 
gathers  tlie  fruit.  Of  tiiat  hour,  '  the  hour  to 
reap'  (v.'"'),  'l^nnweth  no  man,  no  not  the  angels 
which  ari!  in  lii'.ivcn,  neither  the  Son,  but  the 
Father"  (Mk  lo'-),  who  sends  an  angel  to  announce 
to  llu'  Divinely-commissioned  reaper  that  'the 
hour  to  reap  is  come  ;  for  the  harvest  of  the  eartli 
is  over-ripe'  (better  perhaps  'fully  ripe,'  though 
the  word  used  [i^rjpdvd-r]]  properly  refers  to  the 
'  drying  up'  of  the  juices  of  the  wheat). 

After  the  gathering  in  of  all  the  wheat,  another 
angel  conies  forth  fr<»m  the  Temple,  '  he  also 
having  a  sharp  sickle,'  and  a  second  rcaiiing 
follows  the  first.  This  second  reaping  follows  the 
first  just  as  the  vintage,  with  whicli  it  is  liere 
associated,  succeeded  the  wheat  harvest  (cf.  Jl  3'^). 
It  will  be  observed  that  the  Son  of  Man  reaps  the 
wheat,  Imt  the  work  of  destruction  is  fittingly 
consigned  to  an  angel.  The  '  children  of  the  king- 
dom '  are  in  this  chapter  identified  with  the  wheat 
as  elsewhere  in  the  NT,  but  the  wicked  are  identi- 
fied with  the  clusters  of  the  vine  destined  to  be 
trodden  in  the  winepress  '  of  the  wrath  of  God ' 
(cf.  '  the  vine  of  wrath '  in  Rev  H"*  ^"). 

2.  The  harvest  in  Palestine. — Of  the  various 
harvests  in  Palestine,  that  of  barley  takes  place 
first.  Generally  speaking,  it  begins  about  the 
middle  of  April,  but  in  the  Jordan  valley  in  March, 
while  in  the  coast  districts,  on  the  other  hand,  it 
commences  about  ten  days  later,  and  in  the 
elevated  regions  sometimes  as  much  as  a  month 
later.  Hence  the  labourers  from  the  hills  are  free 
to  assist  in  reaping  the  harvest  of  the  coast- 
dwellers,  while  the  latter  in  turn  can  lend  a  hand 
in  gathering  in  the  harvest  in  the  hill-countiy. 
The  wheat  harvest  commences  about  a  fortnight 
after  the  barley  harvest ;  the  gathering  of  fruit 
and  vegetables  takes  place  in  summer,  the 
gathering  of  olives  in  autumn,  and  the  vintage 
from  August  onwards.  The  harvest  of  course 
depends  on  the  rainfall,  which,  to  render  the 
best  results,  must  neither  be  very  large  nor  very 
small. 

Barley  is  the  universal  food  of  asses  and  horses 
and  is  also  the  staple  food  of  the  jxxjr,  Avho,  how- 
ever, generally  mix  it  with  wheatcn  meal  when 
they  can  aflord  to  do  so.  Wheat  thrives  well 
in  Palestine,  thirty-fold  being  quite  an  average 
crop.  It  is  reaped  with  a  sickle,  and  gathered 
into  bundles  which  are  generally  carried  off  at 
once  on  the  backs  of  camels  to  the  threshing-floor, 
whei'e  the  heads  are  struck  off  the  straw  by  the 
sickle.  The  threshing-floor  is  generally  common 
to  the  whole  village,  and  consists  of  a  large  open 
space  on  the  side  of  a  hill,  the  surface  of  the  rock 
being  levelled  for  the  purpose,  or,  failing  this,  an 
artificial  mortar  floor  is  prepared.  The  grain  is 
usually  separated  from  the  chaff  by  oxen  treading 
it  as  they  are  driven  round  and  round  a  circular 
heap  of  corn  in  the  centre  of  the  floor.  The  oxen 
as  a  rule  are  not  muzzled  (cf.  l)t  2'>*,  1  Co  9",  1  Ti 
5^*).  Sometimes,  however,  the  wheat  is  threshed 
by  means  of  a  heavy  wooden  wheel  or  roller,  or 
else  by  a  kind  of  drag  consisting  of  two  or  three 
boards  fastened  together,  the  under-surface  of 
which  is  studded  with  pieces  of  iron,  flint,  or  stone. 
It  is  drawn  by  a  horse  or  an  ass.  This  machine  is 
seen  more  frequently  in  the  northern  jiarts  of  tlic 
countrj'.  After  threshing  comes  the  process  of 
winnoA\iii,u.  -\s  smni  as  tlie  strnw  li:is  Ihmmi  re- 
moved, tlic  i-(ii-iL  i--  t  lirowii  nj)  into  ( lie  air  iiy  sli()\cl<, 
when  the  wind  blows  away  the  chatl  .'uid  the  m-ain 
falls  back.     When  tlieie  is  no  wind,  a  hir;;e  tan  is 


employed  (cf.  Mt.  .S'-).     The  cliopped  straw,  called 
tibn,  is  used  as  fodder  for  the  eaiile. 

IJiit,  even  after  the  a\  inndw  in-,  the  grain  is  still 
iiilxeil  wiih  Miiail  :..iir  ,  ],\:  '  :  i>i  clay,  unbruised 
ears  and  tares,  al!  ni  Wlmli  niut  be  removed  be- 
fore the  corn  is  ready  tor  u-e.  lleiiee  the  neee-.-ity 
of  the  further  j)roee-s  ol  siftiii;;.  Tlii^  work  is 
done  by  women.  The  sieve  generally  consists  of 
a  wooden  hoop  with  a  mesh  made  of  camel-hair. 
The  sifter  is  seated  on  the  floor  and  shakes  the 
sieve  containing  the  grain  until  the  chaff  comes  to 
the  surface ;  she  tiien  blows  it  away,  removes  the 
stones  and  other  bits  of  refuse,  after  which  the 
grain  is  ready  for  the  granary.  In  modern  times 
it  is  always  stored  in  underground  cliambers, 
generally  about  8  feet  deep ;  they  are  cemented 
on  the  inside  to  keep  the  damp  out,  the  only 
opening  being  a  circular  mouth,  about  15  inches 
in  diameter,  which  is  boarded  over  and,  if  conceal- 
ment is  desirable,  coverc'd  with  earth  or  grass. 
The  grain  thus  stored  will  keep  for  years.  See 
also  Sickle,  Vine,  Vintage. 

Literature.— H.  B.  Tristram,  Eastern  Customs  in  Bible 
Lands,  1894,  p.  123  f.  ;  J.  C.  Geikie,  The  Holy  Laml  and  the 
Bible,  1903,  pp.  53,  244,  252  ;  W.  M.  Thomson,  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  18(54,  p.  543  f.  ;  G.  Robinson  Lees,  Village  Life  in 
Palestine,  1897,  ch.  iv. ;  T.  S.  Evans,  in  Speaker's  Commentary, 
iii.  [1881]  302;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Galatians^,  1870,  p.  219  f.; 
J.  B.  Mayor,  The  Epistle  of  St.  Jame^,  1910,  p.  ir,7f. ;  H.  B. 
Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John^,  1907,  p.  18s  ff.;  ElU  i. 
80  f.  ;  HDB  i.  49flE. ;  DCG  i.  40  ;  SDB  16. 

P.  S.  P.  Handcock. 
HATRED.— In  the  time  of  Nero  the  Christians 
of  Rome  '  were  accused,  not  so  much  on  the  charge 
of  burning  the  city,  as  of  hating  the  human  race ' 
('baud  proinde  in  crimine  incendii  quam  odio 
humani  generis  convict!  sunt'  [Tac.  Ann.  xv.  44]). 
The  indictment  was  the  opposite  of  the  truth. 
Christianity  is  amor  generis  hxtmani.  Christ's  new 
commandment  is  'that  ye  love  one  another'  (Jn  13**, 
1  Jn  2*),  and  it  is  fulfilled  when  an  outward  cate- 
gorical imperative  {e.g.  Lv  19^^)  is  changed  into  an 
inward  personal  impulse,  the  dynamic  of  which  is 
His  own  self-sacrificing,  all-embracing  love.  '  We 
love,  because  he  first  loved  us'  (1  Jn  4^'),  and  it 
would  be  as  right  to  insert  '  the  human  race '  as 
'  him '  (AV)  after  the  first  verb.  By  precept  and 
example  Christ  constrains  men  to  love  one  another 
as  He  has  loved  them.  To  be  Christlike  is  to  love 
impartially  and  immeasurably.  Love  is  the  sole 
and  sufficient  evidence  that  a  man  '  is  in  the  light' 
(1  Jn  2^").  There  is  a  silencing  finality  in  St.  John's 
judgment  of  that  profession  of  Christianity  which 
is  not  attested  by  love  :  '  He  that  saith  he  is  in  the 
light,  and  hatetli  his  brother,  is  in  the  darkness 
even  until  now '  (1  Jn  2^).  The  negative  htj  Ayairav 
is  displaced  by  the  positive  fxiaelv,  for  there  is  no 
real  via  media,  cool  indifference  to  any  man  being 
quickly  changed  under  stress  of  temptation  into 
very  deciilcii  dislike.  6  fiicrCiv  tqv  a.5e\<pbv  avrov  is 
guilty  of  an  uiiiiat  ural  hatred,  and  though  '  brother' 
refers  in  the  first  instanet;  to  thosi;  w  ho  are  members 
of  the  body  of  Christ,  it  is  inipossilije  to  evade  the 
wider  ap])lication.  '  The  brt)ther  for  whom  Christ 
died'  (1  Co  8")  is  every  man.  In  the  searching 
language  of  the  Apostle  of  love,  hatred  is  equiva- 
lent to  murder  (1  .hi  S") :  the  one  concept  lacks 
no  hideous  element  that  is  present  in  the  other; 
the  animating  ideas  and  passions  of  the  hater  and 
the  murderer  are  tlie  same.  The  Christians  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  could  not  but  love  the  world  which 
'(lod  so  loved'  (Jn  3'"),  and  for  whose  sins  Christ 
is  the  propitiation  (1  dii  L' ).  'i'luMr  '  world'  hated 
I  hem,  .'Uid.  in  many  iii-;t  ance^.  (Milled  liy  iiiunhn'in^; 
tlieiii  :  liul  perseeulioii  and  hlooiUhed  only  con- 
strained them  t<)l()\e  the  more,  in  aeedidanee  with 
the  i)reee])ts  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Mt  .">■"). 
The  early  Church  exioileil  trom  tliai  ]iaL:an  wdild 
the  beautiful   tribute.    -See    how    these  ('hri^liaiis 


HEAD 


HEAD 


527 


love  one  another ! '  The  Spirit  of  Christ  moved 
His  followers  to  '  put  away  all  bitterness  and  wrath 
.  .  .  with  all  malice,'  to  be  '  kind  one  to  another ' 
(Eph  4"'*),  and  'put  on  love  as  the  bond  of  perfect- 
ness'(Col  3").  While  they  could  recall  the  time 
when  they  were  'hateful,  hating  one  another' 
{oTiryTjTol,  fitffovtrrts  dXXi)\oit,  Tit  3'  ;  Vulg.  '  odibiles, 
odientes  invicem '),  the  spirit  of  the  new  life  was 
<pi\ad(\<pia  (love  of  the  brethren),  to  which  was  added 
a  world-wide  oTtitnj  (2  P  1"). 

To  orthodox  Judaism,  as  well  as  to  cultared 
Hellenism  and  the  hard  pagan  Roman  world,  it 
seemed  natural  to  love  only  one's  friends.  When 
the  Rabbis  quoted  Lv  19'®,  'Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbour,'  they  did  not  hesitate  to  add,  on  their 
own  account,  the  rider,  'Thou  shalt  hate  thine 
enemy '  (Mt  5^).  To  Aristotle  the  only  conceivable 
objects  of  love  were  the  persons  and  things  that 
were  good,  pleasant,  or  useful  {Nic.  Eth.  viii.  2). 
Sulla,  a  typical  Roman,  \»ished  it  to  be  inscribed 
on  his  monument  in  the  Campus  Martins  that 
'  none  of  his  friends  ever  did  him  a  kindness,  and 
none  of  his  enemies  ever  did  him  a  wrong,  without 
being  fully  repaid'  (Plut.  Sulla,  xxxviii.).  Into  a 
world  dominated  by  such  ideas  Christianity  brought 
that  enthusiasm  of  humanity  which  is  the  reflexion 
of  Christ's  ovra  redeeming  love.  Associating  the 
ideas  of  hatred  and  death,  it  opposed  to  them  those 
of  love  and  life.  '  We  know  that  Ave  have  passed 
out  of  death  into  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren. 
He  that  loveth  not  abideth  in  death'  (1  Jn  3'*). 

Cicero  defines  hatred  {odium)  as  '  ira  inveterata' 
(Tusc.  Bisp.  iv.  9),  a  phrase  which  Chaucer  borrows 
in  Persones  Tale,  '  Hate  is  old  MTathe.'  But  ira  is 
in  itself  a  morally  neutral  instinct,  which  becomes 
either  righteous  or  unrigliteous  according  to  the 
quality  of  the  objects  against  which  it  is  directed. 
The  ^I'^j  itai  ipyfi  which  the  Christian  has  to  put 
away  include  all  selfish  kinds  of  hatred.  But  he 
soon  discovers  that  in  his  new  life  he  must  stUl  be 
a  'good  hater'  if  he  is  to  be  a  true  lover.  He 
must,  with  Dante,  '  hate  the  sin  which  hinders 
loving.'  '  What  indignation '(d7aFd*crT;<rts)  is  wrought 
in  him  by  a  sorrow  after  a  godly  sort !  (2  Co  7"). 
The  love  which  he  feels  as  he  comes  nearer  God  is 
hot  with  Avrath  against  every  'abominable  thing 
which  God  hates.'  The  capacity  for  hatred  is  set 
down  by  Christ  to  the  credit  of  the  Church  of 
Ephesus :  '  Thou  hatest  tlie  works  of  the  Nico- 
laitans,  which  I  also  hate'  (Rev  2*).  To  Christ 
Himself  the  words  of  Ps  45"  are  applied,  'Thou 
hast  loved  righteousness  and  hated  iniquity '  (He  1*). 
The  writer  of  Revelation  does  not  conceal  his 
loathing  of  pagan  Rome,  calling  it  '  a  hold  of  un- 
clean and  hateful  birds'  (Rev  18-),  and  Jude  (v.^) 
bids  evangelists  who  snatch  brands  from  the  burn- 
ing '  have  mercy  with  fear,  hating  even  the  garment 
spotted  by  the  liesh.' 

If  hatred  not  merely  of  evil  things  but  of  wicked 
persons  is  anywhere  ascribed  to  Gwi,  a  difficulty  is 
at  once  felt.  It  is  probably  a  mistake  to  take 
exOpoi  in  Ro  5'"  (cf.  Col  1^',  Ja  4*)  in  a  passive 
sense,  though  Calvin,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  others 
do  so.  The  meaning  is  '  hostile  to  God,'  not  '  hate- 
ful to  God  '  (Ritschl,  Lightfoot,  Sanday-Headlam). 
God,  who  hates  the  sin,  loves  the  sinner,  and  it  is 
only  in  the  alienated  mind  of  man  that  a  Ka.TaXKa~fTi 
needs  to  be  effected.  But  in  Ro  9^'  the  words  are 
quoted  which  Malachi  (l'^-)  attributes  to  Jahweh  : 
'Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I  hated.'  The 
saj'ing  may  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  Lk  14**, 
where  '  hate '  evidently  means  '  love  less ' ;  or  it 
may  be  taken  as  an  imperfect  OT  conception, 
which  St.  Paul  uses  in  an  argumentum  adhominem 
without  giWng  it  his  own  imprimatur. 

James  Strahan. 

HEAD. — The  im]X)rtance  attributed  to  the  head 
in  ancient  psychology  must  not  be  supposed  to 


spring  from  scientific  knowledge  of  the  function  of 
the  brain  and  nervous  system.  'The  psychical 
importance  of  the  head  would  be  an  early  result  of 
obserA"ation  of  the  phenomena  and  source  of  the 
senses  of  sight,  hearing,  taste,  and  smell,  and  of 
such  facts  as  the  pulsation  of  the  fontanel  in  infants 
and  the  fatal  effect  of  wounds  in  this  complex 
centre  of  the  organism '  (A.  E.  Crawley,  The  Idea 
of  the  Sold,  1909,  p.  239).  Plato  assigned  reason 
to  the  brain,  '  the  topographically  higher  region 
being  correlated  with  the  reason's  higher  worth  ' 
(Aristotle,  Psychology,  tr.  W.  A.  Hammond,  1902, 
Introd.  p.  xxvi) ;  but,  to  Aristotle,  '  the  brain  is 
merely  a  regulator  for  the  temperature  of  the 
heart  (ib.  p.  xxiv).  By  the  time  of  Galen  (2nd 
cent.  A.D.),  sensation  was  located  in  the  brain, 
acting  in  conjunction  with  the  nerves  ;  but  there 
is  no  evidence  that  such  technical  Greek  knowledge 
is  implied  in  the  literatureofapostolicChristianity.* 
We  are  there  concemed^n  general  with  an  extension 
of  Hebrew  psychology,  for  which  the  brain  was  of 
no  psychical  importance.  In  fact,  there  is  no 
Hebrew  word  for  '  brain,'  and  we  must  suppose 
that  it  would  simply  be  called,  as  it  actually  is  in 
Syriac,  the  '  marrow  of  the  head.'  Certain  (Ara- 
maic) references  to  '  the  visions  of  the  head '  in 
the  Book  of  Daniel  (2"*  etc.)  merely  refer  to  the 
position  of  the  organ  of  sight,  and  the  phrase  is 
actually  contrasted  with  '  the  thoughts  of  the 
heart ''(4*;  cf.  2*'). 

The  head  (/ce^XiJ)  is  named  as  a  representative 
part  of  the  whole  personality  in  St.  Paul's  words 
to  blaspheming  Jews  at  Cormth  :  '  Your  blood  be 
upon  your  oavu  heads'  (Ac  18®  ;  cf.  Jos  2",  2  S  1", 
etc.),  and  in  the  proverb  that  kindness  to  an  enemy 
heaps  coals  of  tire  on  his  head  (Ro  12*"  ;  cf.  Pr  25*^). 
The  mourning  custom  of  casting  dust  on  the  head 
(Rev  18^*  ;  cf.  Ezk  27**)  may  spring  from  the  desire 
to  link  the  dead  with  the  living,  if  the  dust  was 
originally  taken  from  the  grave  itself,  as  W.  R. 
Smith  and  Schwally  have  supposed.  (As  to  cutting 
off  the  hair  of  the  head,  because  of  a  vow,  see  art. 
Hair.)  St.  Paul  argues  against  tlie  Corinthian 
practice  of  allowing  women  publicly  to  pray  or 
prophesy  with  unveiled  heads,  on  three  grounds 
(1  Co  ll**-) :  (1)  there  is  an  upward  gradation  of 
rank  to  be  observed — woman,  man,  Christ,  God  ; 
(2)  woman  was  created  from  and  for  man,  and  so 
she  must  show  by  her  covered  head  that  she  is  in 
the  presence  of  her  superior — man  (cf.  the  covering 
of  the  bride  in  presence  of  her  future  husband,  Gn 
24®*) ;  +  (3)  the  long  hair  of  woman  shows  that  the 
covering  of  the  veil  is  natural  to  her.  If  she  unveils 
her  head,  therefore,  she  dishonours  it  by  making  a 
false  claim  for  the  i>ersonality  it  represents,  as  well 
as  by  outraging  decency,  which  should  be  the  more 
carefully  observed  because  of  the  presence  of  the 
angels  in  public  worship.  (No  satisfactory  explana- 
tion of  the  phrase  '  authority  [^loivia]  on  her  head ' 
[1  Co  11^**]  seems  yet  to  have  been  given,  but  the 
context  seems  to  imply  that  the  veil  expresses  the 
authority  of  man  over  woman,  in  accordance  with 
which  the  RV  inserts  the  words  '  a  sign  of  before 
'authority.'  See  art.  AUTHORITY.)  It  should  be 
noted  that  it  Ls  the  whole  head,  and  not  simply 
the  face,  that  is  covered  in  the  East :  '  The  women 
of  Egypt  deem  it  more  incumbent  upon  them  to 
cover  the  upper  and  back  part  of  the  head  than  the 
face,  and  more  requisite  to  conceal  the  face  than 
most  other  parts  of  the  person '  (Lane,  Modem 
Egyptians,  1895,  p.  67). 

The  custom  of  anointing  the  head  is  mentioned 
(figuratively)  in  1  Clem.  Ivi.  5  ;  Ign.  Eph.  xvii.  1  ; 

•Even  if  it  were,  Galen's  ascription  of  psychical  attributes 
to  organs  other  than  the  brain  would  show  the  wide  gulf 
between  ancient  and  modem  psychologv. 

t  The  orisrinal  motive  of  this  wide-spread  practice  is  probably, 
as  Crawley  suggests  {ERE  v.  54X  '  the  impulse  for  concealment 
before  an  "object  of  fear.' 


528 


HEAD 


HEART 


it  is  crowned  in  token  of  lionour  (Rev  4*  9^  12'  19'- ; 
cf.  lU').  The  frequent  references  in  tlie  Odes  of 
Solomon  to  a  crown  on  the  CiiristiaTi's  hi.ul  are  best 
explained  from  the  Eastern  practicr  oi  iilacinj,'  a 
garland  on  the  head  of  candidates  for  bajjlisni  (i.  1, 
ix.  8,  XX. 17,  8,  and  J.  H.  liernard's  notes  hiTS  viii. 
3  [1912]  ad  locc. ).  Tlie  seven  heads  of  the  Ajioca- 
lyptic  red  (ha;,'on  (i.e.  Satan  [Rev  12-'])  apparently 
denote  the  abundance  of  his  power  ;  tlie  seven  lieads 
of  his  agent,  the  Beast  (13^  17"),  are  explicitly  re- 
ferred both  to  the  seven  hills  of  Rome  and  to  seven 
Emperors.  The  head  smitten  to  death,  but  healed 
( 13*),  appears  to  be  Nero,  who  was  widely  believed 
not  to  have  died  in  A.D.  68  (see  Swete,  ad  loc). 
The  lion-heads  and  snake-headed  tails  of  Rev  9"-  '* 
merely  heighten  the  horror  of  the  scene. 

The  most  remarkable  use  of  the  term  'head' 
in  apostolic  literature  is  its  ap[iU(ation  to  Christ, 
the  'body'  being  the  Church.  This  analogy  is 
more  than  illustration  ;  it  forms  an  aimiment,  like 
the  psychological  analogies  of  AugusLiiie  in  regard 
to  tlie  Trinity.  Just  as  the  lower  level  of  primitive 
thought  represented  by  symbolic  magic  often  finds 
a  real  connexion  in  acts,  because  they  are  similar, 
so  ancient  theology  (cf .  the  '  Recapitulation '  doc- 
trine of  Irenams)  often  liiuls  positive  argument 
in  mere  parallelism.  In  the  Pauline  use  of  the 
analogy  between  the  human  body  and  the  Church, 
Christ  is  sometimes  identified  with  the  whole  body, 
and  sometimes  with  the  liead  alone ;  this  will 
occasion  no  difficulty  to  those  who  remember  St. 
Paul's  doctrine  of  the  believer's  mystical  union  with 
Christ,  so  that  his  life  is  Christ's.  In  the  most 
detailed  application  of  the  analogy  (1  Co  12'-'-  ;  cf. 
Ro  12^- '),  the  liead  is  simply  contrasted  with  the 
feet,  without  special  reference  to  Christ,  the  whole 
Church-body  being  identified  with  Him.  NT  com- 
mentators,* whilst  often  crediting  St.  Paul  with 
the  knowledge  of  modern  physiology,  usually  over- 
look the  contribution  of  Hebrew  psychology  to  the 
elucidation  of  this  analogy.  In  the  OT  the  body 
is  regarded  as  a  co-operative  group  of  quasi-inde- 
pendent sense-organs,  each  possessed  of  psychical 
and  ethical,  as  well  as  physical,  life  (see  artt.  Eye, 
Ear,  Hand,  and  cf.  Mt  b"^-  ^).  This  gives  new 
ix>int  to  tlie  comparison  witli  the  quasi-independent 
life  of  the  members  of  the  Church  ;  in  the  social 
as  in  the  individual  body,  health  depends  on  the 
(voluntary  )subordination  of  thisquasi-independence 
to  the  common  good.  This  unity  of  purpose  St. 
Paul  elsewhere  traces  to  the  Headship  of  Christ. 
The  Apostle  can  identify  the  head  with  Christ, 
without  at  all  thinking  of  the  brain,  because  the 
head  is  the  most  dignified  part  of  the  psyclio- 
physical  personality.  As  a  centre  of  life  (cf.  Mt 
5**),  not  specially  of  thought  or  iWi^ion  (which  St. 
Paul  located  in  the  heart),  the  head  dominates  the 
body,  the  separate  organs  of  which  each  contribute 
to  tne  whole  personality  '  according  to  the  working 
in  due  measure  of  each  several  part '  (Eph  4'*  ;  cf. 
Col  2'9).  Christ  is  '  the  saviour  of  the  body '  (Eph 
5'-*),  as  it  is  the  head  on  which  the  safety  of  the 
whole  body  depends,  because  of  the  special  sense- 
organs  located  in  it.  On  the  other  hand,  the  body 
is  necessary  to  the  completion  and  fullness  of  the 
life  of  the  head,  as  is  the  Church  to  Clirist  (Eph 
jz:.  23)  Elsewhere,  this  Headship  of  Christ  over  tlie 
body  denotes  simply  His  priority  of  rank  (Col  1'*), 
and  this  is  extended  to  His  dominion  over  the 
'principalities  and  powers'  of  the  unseen  world 
(2'"). 

The  bodily  union  of  the  members  with  Christ  the 
Head  is  conceived  in  close  relation  with  the  initial 

*  E.g.  .J.  Arinitajje  Itobinsoii  {Ephesiatu,  liW,"},  p.  103),  who 
bases  the  Pauline  thoui^lit  of  Christ  as  Head  of  the  body  on  the 
fact  that  '  that  is  tlie  seat  of  the  brain  which  controls  and  unifies 
the  orjjanisin,'  and  goes  on  to  speak  of  '  the  complete  systeni  of 
nerves  and  muscles  by  which  the  limbs  are  knit  together  and 
are  connected  with  the  head '  (p.  104). 


act  of  bai)tism  :  '  in  one  Spirit  were  we  all  baptized 
into  one  body'  (1  Co  12'*).  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  (or  of  Christ)  as  creating  the 
si)iritual  unity  and  efliciency  of  the  body  through 
which  it  circulates  from  the  head  has  an  interest- 
ing parallel  in  the  Pneuma  doctrine  of  contem- 
porary physiology.  According  to  this,  '  spirit '  was 
conveyed  by  the  arteries  to  tlie  different  sense- 
organs  (H.  Siebeck,  Gcsch.  der  Psychologic,  1884, 
ii.  p.  130  f.  ;  G.  S.  Brett,  A  History  of  Psychology, 
1912,  p.  286  f.).  Something  of  this  popular  doctrine 
may,  of  course,  have  reached  St.  Paul  through  tlie 
physician  Luke.  It  would  certainly  have  appealed 
to  him  as  an  example  of  '  spiritual '  law  in  the 
'  natural '  world,  conlirming  and  enforcing  his  own 
moral  and  spiritual  conception  of  the  Hebrew  doc- 
trine of  the  Spirit.* 

The  Pauline  analogy  of  '  body '  and  '  Church  ' 
is  employed  by  Clement  of  Rome,  though  without 
explicit  reference  to  the  Headship  of  Christ,  the 
head  being  named  here  simply  as  a  higher  member  : 
'  The  head  without  the  feet  is  nothing  ;  so  likewise 
the  feet  without  the  head  are  nothing :  even  the 
smallest  limbs  of  our  body  are  necessary  and  use- 
ful for  the  whole  body  :  but  all  the  members  con- 
spire and  unite  in  subjection,  that  the  whole  body 
may  l)e  .saved'  (1  Clem,  xxxvii.  5).  The  same 
analogy  re-appears  in  several  of  the  Odes  of  Solomon. 
Thus  Christ  says,  '  I  sowed  my  fruit  in  hearts,  and 
transformed  them  into  myself  ;  and  they  received 
my  blessing  and  lived  ;  and  they  were  gathered  to 
me,  and  were  saved  ;  because  they  were  to  me  as 
my  own  members,  and  I  was  their  Head '  (xvii. 
13,  14  ;  cf.  xxiii.  16).  Similarly,  Christ  speaks  of 
His  descent  into  Hades,  where  He  gathers  His 
saints  and  delivers  them  :  '  the  feet  and  the  head 
he  [Death]  let  go,  for  they  were  not  able  to  endure 
my  face'  (xlii.  18).  These  passages  continue  the 
mystic  realism  of  Pauline  and  Johannine  thought, 
and  throw  an  interesting  light  on  the  earlier  ideas 
of  the  relation  of  the  believer  to  Christ,  even  though 
they  belong  to  the  2nd  century. 

H.  Wheeler  Robinson. 

HEALINGS.- See  Gifts. 

HEART  ((copSi'o).  —  1.  Its  physical  sense.  — 
'  Heart,'  which  in  the  OT  is  frequently  employed 
to  denote  the  central  organ  of  the  body,  is  not 
found  in  the  NT  in  this  primary  sense,  though  we 
have  an  allusion  to  it  in  St.  Paul's  'fleshy  tables 
of  the  heart '  (2  Co  3*).  But  the  influence  of  tlie 
old  Hebrew  view  that  '  the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in 
the  blood'  (Lv  17")  still  persists;  and  in  Ac  14", 
Ja  5'  '  heart '  is  used  to  express  the  physical  life 
that  is  nourished  by  food  or  surfeited  with  luxury. 
Owing,  however,  to  the  close  connexion  in  the 
Hebrew  mind  between  body  and  soul  (see  art. 
Body),  the  transition  was  easy  from  the  physical 
life  to  the  sjiiritual  ;  and  in  the  NT  it  is  a  spiritual 
use  of  '  heart '  with  which  we  have  almost  wholly 
to  do. 

2.  Its  psychological  sense.  —  (1)  The  word  is 
frequently  employed  in  a  general  Avay  to  designate 
the  tvhole  inward  life  of  thought  and  feeling,  ciesire 
and  will,  without  any  discrimination  of  separate 
faculties  or  activities  (Ac  5*,  1  Co  14**,  1  P  '3*, 
He  13").  (2)  In  some  cases  it  applies  especially  to 
the  intellectual  powers  (Ro  P',  1  Co  2",  2  Co  4*, 
2  P  1"),  though  elsewhere  (He  8'"  10'«,  Ph  4^)  the 
heart  and  the  mind  are  distinguished  from  each 
other.  It  is  in  this  intellectual  reference  that  the 
scriptural  use  of  'heart'  differs  from  the  ordinary 
usage  of  English  speech  ;  for  though  with  us,  as 
with  the  biblical  writers,  the  word  is  employed 
with  a  wide  variety  of  application  as  descriptive 

*  From  this  '  biological '  Headship  of  Christ  must  be  distin- 
(Hiished  the  purely  architectural  fl(jure  of  Him  as  'the  Head  of 
the  corner '  (Ac  411,  1  P  'Z'). 


HEATHEN 


HEATHEN 


529 


of  the  inner  life  and  its  various  faculties,  it  is  not 
used  so  as  to  include  the  rational  and  intellectual 
nature,  from  which,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  expressly 
distinj^uished,  as  in  the  common  antithesis  between 
the  heart  and  the  head.  (3)  In  a  few  cases  it 
denotes  the  will  or  faculty  of  determination  (I  Co 
7",  2  Co  9^).  In  1  Co  4*  ^ovXal  tGiv  KapSiwv,  which 
EV  renders  '  the  counsels  of  the  hearts,'  would  be 
more  exactly  translated  by  '  the  purposes  (or  re- 
solutions) of  the  hearts.'  (4)  It  stands  for  the  seat 
of  feelings  and  emotions,  whether  joyful  (Ac  2^*) 
or  sorrowful  (Ro  9^,  2  Co  2*),  and  of  desires, 
whether  holy  (Ro  10^)  or  impure  (1-^).  Especially 
is  it  used  of  the  aflection  of  love,  whether  towards 
man  (2  Co  7^  1  P  l-")  or  towards  God  (Ro  5^ 
2  Th  3'). 

-3.  Its  ethical  and  religious  significance.— (1) 
Occasionally  '  heart '  represents  the  moral  faculty 
or  conscience  (Ac  2",  He  8'"  lO^^,  1  Jn  3^).  In  He 
1(P,  'having  our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil 
conscience,'  the  conscience,  if  not  identified  with 
the  heart,  is  thought  of  as  inhering  in  it.  (2)  As 
the  centre  of  the  personal  life  the  heart  stands  for 
moral  reality  as  distinguished  from  mere  appear- 
ance (2  Co  5^-).  The  'hidden  man  of  the  heart' 
(1  P  3^)  is  the  real  man,  the  obedience  that  comes 
from  the  heart  (Ro  6'^)  the  true  obedience.  Hence 
'heart'  becomes  equivalent  to  character  as  the 
good  or  evil  resultant  of  moral  activity  and  ex- 
perience. Thus  the  heart  may  'wax  gross'  (Ac 
28^)  or  may  become  'unblameable  in  holiness' 
(1  Th  3>3);  it  may  be  hardened  (He  3^^^  4')  and 
'exercised  with  covetousness '  (2  P  2"),  or  it  may 
bear  the  stamp  of  simplicity  (Eph  6',  Col  3^)  and 
be  purified  by  faith  (Ac  15®).  (3)  But,  as  this 
mention  of  faith  reminds  us,  the  heart  in  the  NT 
is  especially  the  sphere  of  religious  experience.  It 
is  there  that  the  natural  knowledge  of  God  has  its 
seat  (Ro  1-^),  and  there  also  that  the  light  of  the 
knowledge  of  His  glory  shines  in  the  face  of  Jesus 
Christ  (2  Co  4^).  There  faith  springs  up  and 
dwells  and  works  (Ro  10^-^",  Ac  IS'*),  and  there 
unbelief  draws  men  away  from  the  living  God  (He 
3^-),  It  may  become  the  haunt  of  unclean  lusts 
that  make  men  blind  to  the  truth  of  God  (Ro  1-*) ; 
but  it  is  into  the  heart  that  God  sends  the  Spirit 
of  His  Son  (Gal  4®),  and  in  the  heart  that  Christ 
Himself  takes  up  His  abode  (Eph  3^").  This  life 
of  the  heart  is  a  hidden  life  (1  P  3*,  1  Co  4^),  but  it 
lies  clearly  open  to  the  eyes  of  God,  who  searches 
and  tries  it  (Ro  8^7,  1  Th  2*).  And  the  prime 
necessity  of  religion  is  a  heart  that  is  'right  in 
the  sight  of  God '  (Ac  8*').  Such  a  heart  can  be 
obtained  only  through  faith  (Ac  15^,  Ro  10^",  Eph 
3")  and  as  a  gift  from  God  Himself  (cf.  the  OT 
saying,  'A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you,'  Ezk 
36-'*)  in  virtue  of  that  new  creation  in  Christ  Jesus 
(2  Co  5^")  whereby  a  heart  tliat  is  hard  and  im- 
penitent (Ro  2^)  is  transformed  into  one  in  which 
the  love  of  God  has  been  shed  abroad  through  the 
Holy  Ghost  (5*). 

LiTERATUKE.— H.  Crcmer,  Lex.  of  ST  Greel^,  Edinburgh, 
18S0,  s.v.  KopSCa,  and  PRE^i  vii.  773;  J.  Laidlaw,  Bible 
Doctrine  of  Man,  new  ed.,  Edinburgh,  1895,  p.  121 ;  B.  Weiss, 
Biblical  Theology  of  the  ST,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  lSS-2-3,  L  343. 

TOT*  \r  R 17  "D  T' 

HEATHEN.— The  word  'heathen'  still  finds  a 
measure  of  favour  with  the  OT  Revisers,  and,  in 
order  to  prevent  it  from  being  entirely  excluded 
from  the  NT,  it  might  well  have  been  retained  in 
at  least  one  or  two  of  the  passages  where  it  occurs 
in  the  AV  (Mt  6'  18^  Ac  4^5,  2  Co  ll^s,  Gal  l^*  2» 
3*).  'Gentiles'  is  substituted  for  it  throughout  in 
the  text  of  the  RV.  It  first  appears  in  the  Gothic 
Version  of  Ulfilas  (a.D.  318-388)  in  Mk  7^,  where 
"E\Xi;vts  is  rendered  by  haipno.  The  etymology  is 
uncertain.  It  was  long  believed  to  have  come 
from  the  Gothic  haipi,  'heath,'  and  to  have  de- 
VOL.  I.— 34 


noted  the  'dwellers  on  the  heath,'  who,  on  the 
introduction  of  Christianity,  stood  out  longest  in 
their  adlierence  to  the  ancient  deities  (cf.  Trench, 
Study  of  Word^,  p.  77).  Doubt  has  been  cast, 
however,  on  this  derivation  by  S.  Bugge  {Iiuloger. 
Forschungen,  v.  [1895]  178),  who  takes  haihnd  as 
indicating  a  masc.  hat)pans,  which  he  reiers  to 
Armenian  hetanos,  'heathen,'  an  adaptation  of 
Gr.  Idvoz  (cf.  OED,\o\.  v.,  s.v.  'Heathen,'  where 
Bugge's  theory  is  not  accepted). 

A  similar  etymological  uncertainty  presents  itself  in  the 
case  of  the  synonym,  'pagan.'  The  application  of  this  word  to 
uon-Christiaus  was  long  thought  to  be  due  to  the  fact  that '  the 
ancient  idolatry  lingered  on  in  the  rural  villages  and  hamlets 
[pagi]  after  Christianity  had  been  generally  accepted  in  the 
towns  and  cities  of  the  Roman  Empire'  {OED,  vol.  vii.,  s.v. 
'  Pagan ').  But  the  application  to  non-Christians  probably 
arose  at  an  earlier  dat«,  and  in  a  different  way  (£Bril  xx.  449). 
In  the  course  of  the  1st  cent.,  paganus  came  to  mean  in 
classical  Latin,  'a  civilian,'  as  opposed  to  a  miles.  The  'raw 
half-armed  rustics  who  sometimes  formed  a  rude  militia  in 
Roman  wars'  were  not  looked  upon  as  a  regular  branch  of  the 
service,  or  as  deserving  the  honourable  appellation  of  mitiUt, 
soldiers  of  the  standing  army.  They  were  pagani  (Tac.  Hist.  i. 
53,  ii.  14  :  '  pag^norum  manus  .  .  .  inter  milites ' ;  ii.  88, 
iii.  24,  43,  77,  iv.  20:  'paganorum  lixarumque';  Pliny,  Ep. 
X.  18  :  '  et  milit€s  et  pMtgani ').  Christians,  then,  having  taken 
the  title  of  milites  Dei  or  milites  Christi  for  their  own,  which 
St.  Paul  had  warranted  them  in  doing  (Eph  6i*f-,  2  Ti  23),  and 
for  which  they  found  a  further  warrant  in  the  early  application 
of  the  word  sacramentum,  'the  military  oath,'  to  baptism,  re- 
garded as  pagani  ('outsiders,'  not  soldiers  at  all)*  those  who 
had  not  abandoned  heathenism  and  committed  themselves  to 
Christ  as  their  leader.  This  derivation  seems  to  have  been  first 
suggested  by  Gibbon  (Decline  and  Fall  oj  the  Roman  Empire, 
ed.  Bury,  ii.  394  n.,  176X  and  has  been  adopted  by  Zaho  (SKZ 
X.  [1S99]  2Sf.)  and  Hamack  {Expansion,  oJ  Christianity,  L  315, 
iL22). 

Our  Lord's  three  allusions  to  the  heathen  (oi 
€6viKoi,f  TO  iOvrj)  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  were 
designed  to  illustrate  His  teaching  respecting  the 
righteousness  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  as  a  right- 
eousness which  demanded,  in  loving  one's  neigh- 
bour, much  more  than  that  reciprocity  of  courtesy 
which  even  heathens  practised  (Mt  o*'') ;  in  prayer, 
a  childlike  trustfulness  of  asking,  unlike  the  wordy 
clamour  of  heathen  worship  (6^) ;  and  in  work,  a 
loving  dependence  on  God,  which  would  exalt 
work,  and  make  it  quite  a  different  thing  from 
heathen  drudgery  (6^-). 

The  closing  words  of  Mt  18"  (^otw  aoi  uxnrep  6 
idviKbs  Kai  6  reXwinis)  must  give  us  pause.  Had  they 
stood  alone,  we  might  have  inferred  that  Jesus 
acquiesced  in  the  judgment  which  put  the  heathen 
and  the  publican  under  the  ban.  But  a  publican 
had  already  been  taken  into  the  number  of  the 
Twelve  (9*),  and  he  is  the  very  apostle  who  reports 
these  words.  St.  Matthew  has  also  recorded  before 
this  how  Jesus  had  put  forth  His  miraculous  power 
in  response  to  the  '  great  faitli '  of  a  heathen 
centurion  and  a  distressed  heathen  mother  (8** 
15"^).  That  the  words  imply  personal  contempt 
or  dislike  for  the  heathen  and  the  publican,  or 
pronounce  a  sentence  of  exclusion  upon  them, 
is,  accordingly,  out  of  the  question.  This  saying  is 
to  be  regarded  as  an  obiter  dictum  of  our  Lord's, 
spoken  to  His  disciples  from  their  present  Jewish 
standpoint,  and  therefore  of  use  to  them  at  the 
moment  in  interpreting  His  meaning.  Current 
Jewish  opinion  is  made  the  medium  of  conveying 
moral  and  evangelical  guidance. 

The  healing  of  the  Syrophcenician's  daughter  is 
another  occasion  on  which  our  Lord  appears  to 
speak  the  language  of  His  time.  Here,  however, 
the  severity  of  the  words,  '  It  is  not  meet  to  take 
the  children's  bread  and  cast  it  to  the  dogs'  (Mk 
7^),  is  intentionally  mitigated  by  the  use  of  the 
diminutive  Kwapia,  which  is  just  '  doggies '  in  onr 
language — no  word  of  scorn,  but  one  of  aflection 

*  Cf.  Fr.  pekin — a  name  originally  given  by  the  soldiers  under 
Xapoleon  i.  to  any  civilian  {OED  vii.  622). 

t  eflKucos  occurs  in  the  NT  4  times  (Mt  5"  67  1817,  3  Jn  0- 
Neither  t^iitos  nor  iBviKit^  (Gal  2")  is  found  in  the  LXX. 


530 


HEAVEN 


HEAVEN 


and  tenderness.  Nor  should  we  forget  that  the 
saying  which  iiinncdiately  precedes  is,  '  Let  the 
children _^rs^  be  hlled.'  Ihe  Syrophcenician,  witli 
the  quick  penetration  of  faith,  perceived  that  the 
two  sayings  were  to  be  taken  together,  and  knew 
that  she  was  not  really  repelled  (cf.  Wendt,  The 
Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  347). 

The  Tliird  Epistle  of  St.  John  is  '  a  quite  private 
note'  {EBi  ii.  1327),  recommending  to  the  kind 
attention  of  Gains,  a  friend  of  his,  some  '  travel- 
ling missionaries,'  described  as  men  who  '  for  the 
sake  of  the  Name  went  fortli,  taking  nothing  of 
the  heathen '  (v.' :  fitibiv  Xafi^dvofres  dirb  run  idvi- 
kG)v).  Seeing  that  these  itinerant  preachers  of  the 
gospel  deem  it  most  prudent  not  to  accept  hospi- 
tality from  '  them  that  are  without'  (cf.  1  Co  5'^ 
Col  4') — a  course  which  St.  John  approves — they 
are  the  more  dependent  on  the  (f>i\o^€via  of  the  few 
fellow-Cliristians  who  come  in  their  way  (cf.  Zahn, 
Introd.  to  the  NT,  iii.  374).  The  cutting  question 
which  St.  Paul  addressed  to  St.  Peter  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  congregation  at  Antioch  (Gal  2'"')  waa 
justly  aimed  against  the  moral  inconsistency  of  his 
first  eating  with  the  Gentile  converts  {ai  .  .  .  idvi- 
Kuis  f^s;  cf.  v.^2)  and  then  withdrawingjfrom  table- 
fellowsliip  with  them.  This  vacillation,  had  it 
been  allowed  to  go  on  without  remonstrance, 
would  have  arrested  the  progress  of  the  work  of 
Christ  among  the  heathen.  Few  occurrences  in 
Church  history  are  more  full  of  warning  than  this 
memorable  crisis,  which  might  have  divided  more 
than  the  Christians  of  Antioch  into  two  opposing 
camps,  and  made  the  Lord's  Supper  itself  a  table 
of  discord  (cf.  HDB  iii.  765'^). 

Over  against  the  dark  picture  of  heathenism 
which  he  draws  in  Ito  P*"^^  St.  Paul  sets  a  very 
different  presentment  in  2''"-,  wlicre  he  depicts 
heathen  human  nature  as  bearing  witness  to  a  law 
written  within,  and  being  guided  by  it  to  well- 
doing. The  Apostle  also  does  justice  to  heathen 
ethics  in  Ph  4^ — 'an  exhortation,'  as  Weizsiicker 
says  (Apostolic,  Age,  ii.  354),  '  whose  cliarm  to  this 
day  rests  on  the  appeal  to  the  common  feeling  of 
humanity,' and  on  the  principle  that  '  that  which 
was  valid  .  .  .  among  heathens  was  also  truly 
Christian'  (cf.  art.  'St.  Paul  in  Athens'  by  Ernst 
Curtius,  in  Expositor,  7th  ser.  iv.  441  f.). 

LiTERATURB.— £Bi  ii.  [1901]  1327;  KBAi  xiii.  [1910]  159, 
XX.  [1911]  449;  E.  Curtius,  in  Expositor,  7th  ser.  iv.  [1907] 
441  f.:  E.  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall  of  Roman  Empire,  ed. 
Bury2,  ii.  [1S97]  394  ;  A.  Haxnack,  Expansion  of  Christianity, 
Eng.  tr.,  1904-5,  i.  315,  ii.  22;  E.  Hatcii-H.  A.  Redpath,  Con- 
eordance  to  the  LXX,  ii.  [1893]  a.v.  tOvo^ ;  UDB  iii.  760b ; 
J.  Facciolati-A.  'FotctMmx,  Latin  Lexicon,  l^tH,\\.,  s.v.  'pa- 
Ifamis';  OKD  v.  [1901]  ».u.  '  Heathen,' vil.  [1909]  8. i;y.  '  Pajfan,' 
'Pekin' ;  W.  A.  Spooaer,  Histories  of  Taeitm,  1891,  iii.  24;  R.  C. 
Trench,  Stvdj/  of  Word^,  1858,  p.  76  f.  ;  C.  von  Weizsacker, 
The  Apostolic  Aqe?,  Enp.  tr.,  ii.  [1895]  352-354  ;  H.  H.  Wendt, 
The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  En  jr.  tr.,  1892,  ii.  347  ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd. 
to  the  HT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  iii.  374.  JaMES  DoNALD. 

HEAVEN.  —  Introductory. — The  subject  of 
heaven  is  difficult  to  treat  fully  without  diverging 
into  the  di.scussion  of  kindred  subjects  and  tres- 
passing on  the  province  of  other  articles.  The 
reader  is  referred  to  the  artt.  EsCH atolog Y,  Hades, 
Immortality,  Paradise,  Parousia,  and  Resur- 
rection, in  this  and  other  Dictionaries  for  discus- 
sion of  various  matters  which  are  relevant  to  the 
treatment  of  the  conception  of  heaven. 

Two  broad  general  lines  of  development  in  tilings 
eschatological  were  already  at  work  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Christian  era.  Palestinian  Judaism 
on  the  whole  tended  towards  literalism  and  more 
material  conceptions  of  tlie  Last  Things,  while 
Alexandrian  Judaism  was  moving  towards  a 
spiritual ization  of  the  principal  elements  in  the 
future  hope.  Both  these  tendencies  are  discernible 
in  the  development  of  Christian  eschatology  during 
the  Ist  century.     But  the  most  important  element 


is  the  influence  of  the  primitive  apostolic  beliefs 
concerning  the  Kesurrectitm  of  Cnrist  and  His 
state  of  existence  after  deatli.  Special  attention 
is  directed  in  this  article  to  the  influence  of  tiiese 
beliefs  on  the  development  of  the  Christian  con- 
ception of  heaven. 

1.  Jewish  apocalyptic. — (a)  Alexandrian. — The 
principal  foaturcs  of  Alexandrian  Jewish  escha- 
tology  in  relation  to  heaven  are  tlie  view  that  the 
righteous  enter  at  once  into  their  perfected  state 
of  happiness  after  death,  and  the  view  that  the 
resurrection  of  the  righteous  is  of  the  spirit  only. 
Hence  the  conception  of  heaven  is  wholly  spiritual- 
ized, and  the  tliought  of  it  as  an  intermediate 
place  of  rest  disappears.  But  it  must  not  be  sup- 
posed that  a  wholly  consistent  view  can  be  found 
in  the  apocalyptic  literature  of  the  period,  any 
more  than  in  the  NT  writers.  It  was  a  time  of 
change  ;  new  forces  were  at  work  mollifying  the 
older  beliefs,  and  the  above  statement  is  simply  a 
broad  generalization  of  the  trend  of  Alexandrian 
Judaism.  When  particular  passages  are  examined 
the  difficulty  of  constructing  a  homogeneous 
scheme  of  the  Last  Things  becomes  apparent  at 
once.  The  principal  difficulty  is  the  recurrence 
of  the  idea  of  the  earthly  Messianic  kingdom  (cf. 
Wis  3'"-  with  S"''),  whicii  is  incompatible  with  a 
purely  .spiritual  conception  of  resurrection  and  of 
heaven.  The  chief  passages  are :  Wis  3^""  4''"'* 
515-16^  2  £fi.  iii.-xxii.  (account  of  the  ten  heavens 
in  order ;  Paradise  is  in  the  third  heaven,  and  also 
the  place  of  punishment  for  the  wicked),  Iv.  2, 
Ixvii.  2,  4  Mac.  xiii.  16,  v.  .37,  xviii.  23  (note  the 
phrase  '  Abraham's  bosom '  used  for  the  place  of 
rest  for  the  righteous  after  death). 

{b)  Palestinian. — The  two  important  writings 
belonging  to  this  period  are  Apoc.  Bornch  and 
2  Esdras.  For  a  fiill  treatment  of  their  critical 
analysis  and  eschatological  system  see  Charles, 
Eschatology,  ch.  viii.,  also  Box,  'The  Ezra-Apoca- 
lypse, 1912,  and  the  edition  of  both  in  Charles,  Apoc. 
and  Pseudepig.  of  the  OT.  The  general  view  of 
heaven  in  Palestinian  apocalyptic  as  illustrated  bj' 
these  two  writings  is  as  follows. 

Heaven,  also  identified  with  Paradise,  is  the 
final  abode  of  the  righteous  (Apoc.  Bar.  Ii.,  S  Es. 
vii.  36,  viii.  52).  An  intermediate  place  of  rest  for 
the  righteous  (Apoc.  Bar.  xxx.  2)  is  described  as 
'  the  treasuries,'  '  in  which  is  preserved  the  number 
of  the  souls  of  the  righteous'  (cf.  also  2  Es.  iv.  41). 
Messiah  comes  from  heaven  to  establish  a  tem- 
porary Messianic  Kingdom,  and  returns  to  heaven 
at  the  close  of  it.  The  righteous  in  heaven  are 
made  like  to  the  angels  (Apoc.  Bar.  Ii.  10). 

2.  Pauline  literature.  —  In  dealing  with  any 
eschatological  conception  in  the  NT  it  is  necessary 
to  consider  first  of  all  how  mucli  is  due  to  the 
Jewish  background  of  thought ;  then,  in  the  case 
of  each  writer,  to  see  how  far  the  conception 
belongs  to  the  common  stock  of  primitive  Christian 
tradition,  and  how  far  it  is  peculiar  to  the  writer 
under  discussion.  In  dealing  with  St.  Paul  it  is 
also  necessary  to  examine  the  question  of  a  possible 
development  of  thought.  In  general  the  ortho<lox 
Jewish  view  of  heaven  represented  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  forms  the  background  and  starting-point 
of  all  the  NT  writers.  The  principal  points  which 
call  for  examination  in  St.  Paul's  correspondence 
are  the  relation  of  the  conception  of  heaven  to 
Christ,  and  the  conception  of  heaven  as  the  future 
place  of  abode  for  believers. 

(a)  Heaven  in  rclatioji  to  Christ. — Two  main 
questions  arise  from  St.  Paul's  treatment  of  this 
subject.  F'irst,  the  question  of  the  pre-existent 
life  of  Christ ;  and  second,  the  question  of  His  pre- 
sent state  of  existence. 

(1)  For  the  first  point  the  chief  passages  are 
1  Co  15*^,  Ro  10*,  and  possibly  in  this  connexion 


HEAVEN 


HEAVEN 


531 


Ph  2«  and  Col  1»»-".  In  1  Co  15",  reading  'the 
second  man  is  from  heaven,'  it  is  quite  possible  to 
interpret  the  passage  as  referring  to  the  Parousia 
ratlier  than  to  the  doctrine  of  a  pre-existent 
Heavenly  Man.  Ro  10*,  an  application  of  Dt 
30'-  "  to  Christ,  may  be  referred  to  the  present 
place  of  Christ ;  i.e.  it  is  unnecessary  to  bring 
Christ  do^vn  again  after  His  Resurrection  and 
Ascension.  Ph  2*  is  also  capable  of  being  inter- 
pretetl  as  referring  to  Christ's  moral  likeness 
to  God.  Thus  St.  Paul's  testimony  to  the  pre- 
existent  life  of  Chri.<t  as  in  heaven  is  not  clear, 
though  it  may  be  upheld  on  the  ground  of  the 
above  passages. 

(2)  The  second  point  is  far  more  vital  to  St. 
Paul's  thought,  and  has  largely  influenced  liLs  view 
ol  heaven  in  relation  to  the  future  condition  of 
believers.  The  words  '  ascended  into  heaven ' 
clearly  represent  the  consensus  of  primitive  apos- 
tolic tradition.  To  the  Jewish  ^'iew  of  the  tran- 
scendence of  God,  and  of  His  dwelling  in  heaven  as 
in  contrast  to  earth,  the  primitive  tradition  added 
the  doctrine  of  Christ's  present  existence  there 
with  God.  It  is  evident  that  St.  Paul  lield  the 
common  Jewish  views  of  heaven  (cf.  2  Co  12- :  the 
third  heaven,  or  Paradise,  regarded  as  God's 
dwelling-place ;  Ph  2^'* :  the  division  of  the  uni- 
verse into  things  heavenly,  earthly,  and  infernal ; 
Gal  1* :  an  angel  from  heaven ;  Ro  1'* :  God's 
wrath  revealed  from  heaven,  etc.).  But  it  is  still 
more  evident  that  he  had  also  thought  deeply  on 
the  question  of  Christ's  Resurrection,  its  nature, 
His  present  state  of  exbtence,  and  the  bearing  of 
these  questions  on  the  future  state  of  believers. 
This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  possible  con- 
clusions at  which  St.  Paul  may  have  arrived.  But 
we  can  see  tliat  his  thinking  on  this  point  tends 
in  the  direction  of  a  spiritualization  of  the  whole 
conception  of  heaven.  He  conceives  of  Christ's 
present  existence  as  spiritual ;  Christ  and  the 
Spirit  are  identified ;  Christ  is  for  the  present 
'hid  in  God'  (Col  3') ;  the  dead  believers  are  'at 
home  with  the  Lord'  (2  Co  5*).  It  is  generally 
conceded  that  Ephesians,  even  if  not  St.  Paul's, 
is  certainly  Pauline.  Hence  we  may  xise  it  here 
as  evidence  for  the  elaboration  of  the  conception 
of  a  quasi-material,  quasi-spiritual  rerion,  ra 
irovpdvta.  Here  Christ  is  seated  at  God's  right 
hand  ;  believers  have  here  their  proper  home  and 
their  characteristic  blessings  ;  and  here  is  being 
waged  the  age-long  conflict  between  the  spiritual 
powers  of  good  and  evil  (Eph  6'-). 

Lastly,  the  link  which  connects  this  side  of  the 
subject  with  the  more  purely  escbatological  use  of 
heaven  as  the  future  abode  of  believers  is  the 
passage  in  2  Co  5'-.  Here  we  have  the  conception 
(possibly  developed  directly  from  St.  Paul's  view 
of  our  Lord's  Resurrection,  although  the  conception 
of  a  '  body  of  light '  fotmd  in  Jewish  and  Gnostic 
sources  may  have  influenced  his  thought)  of  a 
spiritual  body  laid  up  in  heaven  for  the  believer. 
This  body  was  evidently  after  the  pattern  of  our 
Lord's  Resurrection  body  or  mode  of  existence  (cf. 
Ph  3-»,  1  Co  15«).  In  thinking  of  it  as  laid  up 
or  reserved  in  heaven,  St.  Paul  is  no  doubt  using 
Rabbinical  categories  of  thought.  For  example, 
the  Rabbinical  tradition  could  think  of  the  Law, 
the  Temple,  and  other  central  ideas  of  Judaism  as 
laid  up  with  God  before  the  creation  of  the  world. 

(6)  Heaven  as  the  future  abode  of  believers. — This 
conception  is  conspicuous  by  its  absence  from  St. 
Paul's  thought.  The  Parousia  is  always  'from 
heaven,'  alike  in  the  earliest  (1  Th  l'")  and  in  the 
latest  (Ph  3-»)  of  St.  Paul's  letters.  But  when  he 
speaks  of  the  future  place  of  existence  of  the 
Christian  it  is  always  '  with  the  Lord,'  '  witli 
Christ,'  and  apparently  he  has  been  chiefly  occupied 
with  the  fresh  question  of  the  mode  of  the  Chris- 


tian's future  existence  as  determined  by  Christ's 
existence.  Possibly,  also,  he  so  takes  it  for  granted 
that  believers  will  have  their  place  in  a  Messianic 
earthly  kingdom  that  he  does  not  think  it  necessary 
to  mention  it.  The  grief  of  survivors  in  1  Th  4" 
seems  to  imply  this  clearly,  also  the  reference  to 
the  judgment  executed  by  believers  in  1  Co  6*. 
But  what  seems  most  evident  is  that  St.  Paul 
passed  almost  unconsciously  from  the  traditional 
and  more  material  view  of  the  future  state  implied 
in  1  Th  4"  to  the  simpler  and  more  spiritual  con- 
ception of  future  likeness  to  Christ,  and  a  blessed 
existence  with  Him.  This  takes  the  place  of  all 
sensuous  joys  of  heaven. 

3.  Pe trine  liter atore. — If  the  Lucan  record  of  St. 
Peter's  speeches  may  be  taken  as  at  least  represent- 
ing Petrine  material,  then  we  have  one  or  two 
passages  relating  to  Christ's  present  place  in 
heaven.  Ac  2**"^  interprets  Ps  llO'  of  the  Ascen- 
sion of  Christ,  and  3*^  adds  that  it  was  necessary 
for  the  Messiah  to  return  to  heaven  because  the 
droKaTdoToaii  had  not  yet  arrived.  Both  passages 
show  that  the  belief  in  the  Messiah's  present  exist- 
ence in  heaven  was  an  essential  part  of  primitive 
apostolic  tradition,  and  also  that  the  early  tradi- 
tion was  very  little  occupied  with  heaven  as  a  place 
of  abode  in  the  future,  but  rather  as  the  place  whence 
God  would  intervene  by  sending  the  Messiah  again 
to  establish  the  kingdom  on  earth.  The  few 
passages  in  the  First  Epistle  which  speak  of  heaven 
add  nothing  to  this  position.  1  P  l*  echoes  Col  P : 
heaven  is  the  place  where  the  inheritance  incor- 
ruptible and  undefiled  is  kept  with  care  until  the 
moment  for  the  revelation  of  Messiah.  1  P  3^ 
re-aflBrms  the  doctrine  of  Eph  1^  4'*,  etc.  :  the 
Ascension  of  Christ  to  heaven  and  His  Exaltation 
over  all  the  spiritual  powers  in  the  heavenly  sphere. 
Hence,  as  far  as  the  literature  attributed  to  St. 
Peter  is  concerned,  we  do  not  find  anything  peculiar 
to  him,  but  only  a  confirmation  of  the  two  main 
elements  of  primitive  Christian  tradition — the 
present  existence  of  Christ  in  heaven  conceived  of 
in  a  quasi-material  way  as  a  place  or  sphere  con- 
trasted with  earth,  and  the  revelation  of  Christ 
from  heaven  bringing  the  accomplishment  of  all 
hopes  of  blessing,  all  that  is  comprised  in  aumfpia. 
The  connexion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  from  heaven 
with  the  eschatological  expectation  of  the  early 
Church  is  also  characteristic  both  of  the  speeches 
in  Acts  and  of  the  Epistle  (cf.  Ac  2^^^^,  1  P  1"). 
The  same  thought  is  frecjuent  also  in  St.  Paul 
(Ro  8^,  where  the  Spirit  is  the  dxapxi?,  an  anti- 
cipatory guarantee  of  the  blessings  yet  to  come  ; 
and  Eph  1",  where  the  Spirit  is  the  appa^wv). 

i.  Hebrews. — The  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  contributes  much  of  importance  to  our 
inquiry.  Possibly  he  is  the  only  one  of  the  NT 
writers  who  shows  clearly  the  influence  of  Alex- 
andrian Judaism  in  his  views  on  the  Last  Things. 
St.  Peter  represents  the  primitive  Jewish  Christian 
eschatologj'  in  its  simplest  form  ;  even  in  the  First 
Epistle,  silthough  Charles  finds  an  advance  on  the 
eschatology  of  Acts,  the  hope  is  still  rather  for  the 
kingdom  on  earth  ;  the  heavenly  nature  of  the  in- 
heritance is  not  to  be  understood  as  referring  to 
the  place  where  it  is  enjoyed,  but  rather  to  the 
place  from  which  it  comes.  Even  in  St.  Paul's 
case,  in  spite  of  the  clear  advance  towards  a  greater 
spiritualization  of  the  eschatology,  this  advance 
seems  to  consist  in  the  increasing  emphasis  laid  on 
the  spiritual  assimilation  of  believers  to  Christ  as 
the  goal  of  hope,  rather  than  in  an  abandonment  of 
the  hope  of  an  earthly  kingdom.  The  idea  of  the 
kingdom  falls  into  the  background,  but  its  abandon- 
ment cannot  be  proved  conclusively  from  St.  Paul's 
writings.  But  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
I  Hebrews  seems  to  have  arrived  at  this  stage  of  the 
>  development.     There  is  no  passage  in  lus  letter 


632 


HEAVEN 


HEAVEN 


which  points  clearly  to  the  belief  that  the  riphteous 
share  with  Christ  tlie  joys  of  a  kingdom  on  or  over 
the  earth.  The  principal  passages  for  consideration 
are  : 

(a)  Those  which  confirm  the  primitive  apostolic 
tradition  of  the  present  session  of  Christ  in  lieaven 
{4"  728  81  923- !").  The  writer  lays  stress  on  the  fact 
that  Christ  is  higher  than  the  '  heaven '  ;  he  implies 
a  contrast  in  the  phrase  '  heaven  itself,'  avrbv  rbv 
ovpa.v6v,  the  special  dwelling-place  of  God,  with  the 
heaven  of  Jewish  theology.  Jesus  has  passed 
'  through  the  heavens.'  Of  course  this  thought 
is  found  in  Eph  4i<*  also,  (b)  The  eschatological 
passages  (3^  IP"  12^-*»).  Believers  are  partakers 
of  a  '  heavenly  calling.'  This  might  be  understood 
as  the  source  of  the  calling,  but  in  the  light  of  the 
subsequent  passages  it  is  more  naturally  understood 
as  referring  to  the  place  and  goal  of  the  calling. 
In  11'^  the  writer  represents  the  believers  of  old  as 
seekinga  better  and  a  heavenlj'  country,  and  declares 
that  God  has  prepared  a  city  for  them.  In  12^'^^, 
the  climax  of  his  appeal,  he  depicts  the  heavenly 
city,  the  home  of  the  Christians  whom  he  is  address- 
ing. '  Ye  have  come,'  he  says,  implying  that  the 
city  exists  already,  and  that  it  contains  the  myriads 
of  angels,  the  assembly  of  first-begotten  ones  whose 
names  were  enrolled  in  heaven  (Lk  lO-""),  the  spirits 
of  righteous  men  who  have  been  '  perfected,'  and 
finally  Jesus  Himself,  the  Leader  and  Completer  of 
the  faith.  The  sense  of  TereXeiwu^voi  is  a  difficulty, 
but  its  interpretation  is  clearly  suggested  by  the 
author's  use  of  the  word  with  reference  to  Christ 
in  2'»  58  7^.  The  author  implies  that  Christ's 
present  existence  in  heaven  in  a  perfect  state  is  the 
result  of  Ills  experience  on  earth.  He  is  morally 
and  spiritually  perfected  as  Man,  and  hence  fitted 
to  be  the  Leader  and  Completer  of  the  faith.  His 
present  state  is  the  witness  and  the  guarantee  of 
the  future  state  of  those  who  follow  His  leadership. 
God  will  do  for  them  what  He  has  done  for  Christ. 
This  order  of  things  constitutes  the  heavenly 
kingdom,  the  '  unshakable  kingdom '  which  will  be 
manifest  at  the  Parousia,  when  everything  that  can 
be  shaken  will  be  removed.  The  writer  evidently 
regards  the  Parousia  as  the  moment  when  the 
material  heaven  and  earth  will  disappear,  the 
wicked  and  apostates  will  receive  the  just  judg- 
ment of  God,  and  nothing  will  remain  but  the 
heavenly  order  of  things  already  revealed  to  faith 
by  the  Resurrection  and  Attainment  of  Christ. 
Here  we  have  St.  Paul's  line  of  thought  carried  to 
a  clear  and  triumphant  conclusion.  Moral  and 
spiritual  progress  and  ultimate  full  conformity  to 
the  character  of  God  are  the  true  goal  of  hope. 
The  old  words  ffwTTjpia,  Attis,  KKfipovoixla  are  being 
filled  with  a  definitely  spiritual  content,  and  have 
practically  lost  their  temporal  and  material  signi- 
ficance. 

The  Pastorals,  James  and  Jude  add  nothing  of 
importance  for  the  study  of  this  particular  con- 
ception. 

5.  Johannine  literatare. — The  treatment  of  the 
Johannine  literature  as  a  whole  is  of  course 
impossible.  While  it  still  remains  a  tenable  posi- 
tion to  regard  the  Apocalypse,  the  Epistles,  and 
the  Gospel  as  the  work  of  the  same  author,  repre- 
senting three  ditierent  stages  of  his  spiritual 
development  (Ramsay),  the  question  is  too  com- 
plex to  discuss  here,  and  too  undecided  to  assume 
any  position  as  certain.  It  will  be  sufficient, 
therefore,  to  treat  our  subject  as  it  appears  in 
each  of  the  three  divisions  of  the  Johannine  litera- 
ture separately.  On  the  surface,  the  diflerence 
between  the  Apocalypse  and  the  Epistles  seems 
to  represent  the  extreme  movement  of  Christian 
thought  from  the  most  material  form  of  Jewish 
apocalyptic  to  the  most  deeply  spiritual  form  of 
the  Christian  hope. 


(a)  The  Apocalypse. — The  following  is  a  summary 
of  the  chief^  points  regarding  heaven  as  the  writer 
of  the  Apocalypse  uses  the  conception.  (1)  There 
is  the  current  division  into  heavenly,  earthly,  and 
infernal  (5^-1^).  (2)  The  principal  part  of  the  vision 
implies  a  sharp  contrast  oetween  heaven  and  earth 
as  spheres  of  moral  activity.  In  heaven  is  the  throne 
of  God ;  His  will  is  done  in  heaven  ;  Christ  is 
there ;  the  angels,  and  the  OT  symbols  of  the 
power  and  presence  of  God  in  Creation,  are  seen  in 
lieaven.  The  redeemed  are  seen  there.  Heaven  is 
the  source  of  every  action  directed  against  the 
power  of  evil.  On  the  other  hand,  earth  is  the 
scene  of  conflict  between  good  and  evil.  Those 
who  maintain  the  cause  of  God  and  Christ  are 
a  suffering  and  persecuted  minority.  From  the 
abyss  comes  the  moving  power  of  the  enmity 
against  God.  In  the  writer's  view,  earth  is  ruled 
by  the  abyss  rather  than  by  heaven.  Even  heaven 
itself  is  invaded  by  the  powers  of  evil,  and  we  have 
the  war  in  heaven  (12^)  and  the  victory  of  Michael 
and  his  hosts  over  the  dragon  and  his  hosts  ;  the 
heavens  and  all  those  that  dwell  therein  are  sum- 
moned to  rejoice  over  the  victory  and  the  final  de- 
liverance of  heaven  from  the  powers  of  evil  (12"). 
(3)  The  heavenly  city,  the  New  Jerusalem,  the 
dwelling  of  God,  of  Christ,  and  of  the  saved,  comes 
down  from  heaven,  after  the  earthly  kingdom  is 
over.  It  is  only  the  new  heaven  and  earth  that 
the  prophet's  vision  conceives  of  as  fit  for  the 
coming  of  the  holy  city.  Apparently  during  the 
millennial  reign,  the  city,  in  so  far  as  it  is  conceived 
of  realistically,  remains  in  heaven.  We  have,  on 
the  one  hand,  a  description  of  the  earthly  blessing 
of  the  risen  saints  and  martyrs  during  the  mil- 
lennial kingdom  (20'*"®) ;  on  the  other  hand,  the 
vision  itself  supposes  that  those  who  have  attained 
are  already  in  heaven.  The  elders  probably  re- 
present those  who  are  '  perfected  '  in  the  sense  of 
Hebrews.  There  are  the  multitudes  of  the  re- 
deemed (7^'^^) ;  the  souls  of  the  martyrs  are  seen 
under  the  altar  in  heaven  ;  they  are  granted  white 
robes,  and  rest  until  the  appointed  number  of  the 
martyrs  is  made  up.  Further,  the  description  of 
the  heavenly  city  supposes  that  there  is  built  up 
of  the  apostles  and  saints  a  spiritual  city  whose 
place  is  heaven.  The  difficulty  of  distinguishing 
between  symbol  and  the  literal  meaning  of  the 
vision  makes  it  a  hard  task  to  sum  up  clearly  the 
writer's  position.  He  is  obviously  lieir  to  all  the 
visions  of  the  prophets  and  the  apocalyptists,  and 
master  of  them  all.  The  spiritual  and  tlie  symbolic 
are  so  subtly  blended  that  it  is  hard  to  think  that 
the  writer  is  the  slave  of  his  symbols.  He  seems 
rather  to  have  brought  all  the  symbols  of  the 
previous  apocalyptic,  from  Babylonia  and  Egypt 
in  the  remote  past  down  to  the  almost  contem- 
porary visions  of  Ezra  and  Baruch,  under  the  sway 
of  the  spiritual  conception  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
If  we  may  read  him  so,  then  his  view  of  heaven 
must  be  so  interpreted  in  terms  of  the  ulti- 
mate and  fundamental  contrast  between  good 
and  evil,  progress  and  perfection,  struggle  and 
attainment. 

(6)  The  Epistlex.— These  add  practically  nothing 
to  our  inquiry,  although  they  are  of  importance 
for  the  study  of  the  Parousia  {q.v.).  The  only 
passage  that  calls  for  comment  is  1  Jn  3'■^  where 
the  ultimate  hope  of  the  believer  consists  in  being 
like  God  {avri^  really  has  0eov  in  v.^*  as  its  ante- 
cedent, but  it  is  characteristic  of  the  writer's 
method  of  thought  that  he  often  passes  from  Gotl 
to  Christ  without  apparently  being  aware  of  a 
change  of  subject;  m  2^,  e.*/.,  the  Parousia  is 
naturally  interpreted  as  Christ's,  but  '  born  of 
him '  in  v.^  must  refer  to  God  ;  cf.  also  3-*  with 
4").  We  have  already  noticed  the  tendency  in 
St.  Paul  and  Hebrews  to  represent  the  ultimate 


HEAVEN 


HEBREWS 


533 


goal  of  the  Christian  as  conformity  to  Gtod  or 
hrist. 

(c)  The  Gospel.— In  the  Gospel  we  have  :  (1)  the 
passajres  which  unequivocally  represent  heaven  as 
the  dwelling-place  of  the  pre-existent  Christ — 1'* 
3"  (which  retains  the  implication,  even  if  we  omit 
6  dv  ip  Tifi  oi'pavif  with  NBL  33  and  good  Western 
support)  3''  6*^  ^.  Unlike  the  Pauline  passages, 
these  examples  are  quite  unequivocal  evidence  of 
the  writer's  belief  on  this  point. 

(2)  The  escliatological  passages — 14'*'  17*^"^.  Here 
it  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  use  of  the  term  'heaven' 
is  avoided.  The  nearest  approach  to  a  suggestion 
of  a  place  is  the  phrase  '  in  my  Father's  house  are 
many  abodes,'  Avhich  maj'  perhaps  be  taken  as  a 
spiritualizing  of  the  Temple  (cf.  'my  Father's 
house'  in  2'*).  Apart  from  this,  the  idea  of  a 
place  of  material  joy  or  rest  does  not  appear. 
We  have  instead  the  phrases  '  where  I  am,'  *  witli 
me,'  *  receive  yon  unto  myself.'  The  satisfaction 
of  a  i>ersonal  relation  is  presented  as  the  hope. 
The  enjoyment  of  Divine  love  without  hindrance 
is  the  ultimate  goal,  a  spiritual  union  of  character, 
will,  and  atieetions  whose  type  is  the  union  that 
exists  between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  These 
things  constitute  heaven.  But  a  resurrection  state 
in  the  future  is  also  implied  by  6^-  **.  Neverthe- 
less, the  enjoyment  of  the  spiritual  blessings 
described  in  chs.  I-t  and  17  does  not  apparently 
depend  on  this  at  all.  For  the  writer  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  death  is  a  mere  incident  that  does  not  break 
the  continuity  of  eternal  life ;  and  where  such  a 
position  is  reached,  the  precise  conception  of  heaven 
has  evidently  become  irrelevant. 

6.  The  Apostolic  Fathers. — (a)  (Jlement  of  Borne. 
— In  1  Clement  we  have  the  following  passages: 
V.  4 :  Peter  '  went  to  his  appointed  place  of  glory'; 
V.  7 :  Paul  '  departed  from  the  world  and  went 
unto  the  holy  place';  1.  3:  'they  that  by  God's 
grace  were  perfected  in  love  dwell  in  the  abode 
of  the  pious  (Ixow"'  X'^po"  evae^Qv),  who  shall  be 
manifested  in  the  visitation  of  the  kingdom  of 
God.'  In  2  Clement  we  have — v.  5 :  '  the  rest  of 
the  kingdom  that  shall  be ';  vi.  9  :  '  with  what  con- 
fidence shall  we  .  .  .  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God?'  {to  ^offiXeiov  should  perhaps  be  rendered 
'  the  palace  of  God ') ;  xvii.  7  :  the  righteous  see 
the  torments  of  the  wicked  ;  ix.  5 :  the  righteous 
receive  their  reward  'in  the  flesh,' in  the  coming 
kingdom. 

No  striking  or  original  thoughts  as  to  the  future 

Elace  and  state  of  believers  are  found  here.  We 
ave  the  simple  acceptance  of  the  doctrine  tiiat  the 
righteous  enter  after  death  into  a  place  of  rest  and 
glory  with  Christ.  The  resurrection  of  the  flesh  is 
tauglit  and  apparently  is  referred  to  the  Parousia, 
but  the  nature  of  the  intermediate  condition  is  not 
clearly  stated. 

(6)  Ignatius. — In  the  Ignatian  correspondence 
there  is  no  explicit  doctrine  of  heaven,  but  the 
implication  of  several  passages  seems  to  be  that 
immediately  after  death  the  believer  is  perfected, 
•attains  to  God.'  His  emphasis  is  laid  principally 
on  the  resuiTection,  which  is  after  the  pattern  of 
Christ's  (rrs//.  ix.  2).  He  looks  forward  to  receiving 
his  inheritance  ;  he  will  rise  unto  God  {Rcym.  ii.  2); 
'  I  shall  rise  free  in  Him '  (iv.  3);  '  when  I  am  come 
thither  then  I  shall  be  a  man '  (^-i.  2).  Death  for 
him  is  new  birth  (6  tokctoj  fioi  iiriKenai,  vi.  1).  It 
is  ditticult  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  Ignatius 
thought  of  the  believer,  or  at  least  the  martyr,  as 
entering  upon  his  perfect  state  and  full  reward 
immediately  after  death.  His  view  of  heaven 
would  seem  to  coincide  with  the  developed  Johan- 
nine  conception,  though  several  phrases,  '  attaining 
to  resurrection,'  and  so  forth,  are  Pauline. 

(c)  The  Marti/rdom  of  Poly  carp  contains  one 
interesting    passage  describing    the   condition    of 


Polycarp  after  martyrdom :  '  Having  by  his  en- 
durance overcome  the  unrighteous  ruler  in  the 
conflict  and  so  received  the  crown  of  immortality, 
he  rejoiceth  in  company  with  the  Apostles  and  all 
righteous  men,  and  glorifieth  the  Almighty  God 
and  Father,  and  ble^th  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ' 
(xix.  2). 

The  Shepherd  of  Hernias  lies  outside  our  period, 
and  is  more  curious  than  valuable  for  information 
as  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church  of  the  Apostolic 
Age.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  we  are  no  longer  deal- 
ing with  a  creative  period.  The  doctrine  of  heaven 
is  becoming  stereotyped.  Such  a  man  as  Ignatius 
is  probably  hardlj'  representative  of  the  general 
thought  of  the  Church.  The  passage  from  the 
Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  probably  gives  the  com- 
mon view  of  the  state  of  the  believer  in  heaven 
after  death. 

Conclusion. — In  conclusion,  it  may  be  said  that 
for  the  Church  in  general  during  the  1st  half  of 
the  1st  cent,  the  centre  of  interest  was  not  heaven 
but  the  Parousia  of  Christ.  Heaven  occupied  the 
attention  of  the  NT  writers  principally  as  the  place 
where  Christ  was  and  whence  He  would  come.  St. 
Paul  and  others,  such  as  the  author  of  Hebrews, 
were  interested  principally  in  the  spiritual  conse- 
quences of  the  Resurrection  of  Christ.  The  author 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  presents  the  most 
striking  and  consistent  picture  of  the  future  state 
of  the  believer. 

As  the  century  advances,  the  tendency  appears 
in  the  literature  of  the  period  to  regard  the  Parousia 
more  as  an  article  of  the  faith  than  as  a  fact  of  immi- 
nent importance.  Side  by  side  with  this  tendency 
we  find  the  growth  of  firmly  established  ideas  of 
future  blessedness  based  on  the  imagery  of  the 
Apocalypse,  crowns  and  harps,  etc.,  and  no  search- 
ing analysis  of  the  reality  of  such  ideas.  It  remained 
for  the  fresh  creative  period  of  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria and  Origen  to  go  over  the  stereotyped  ideas 
of  heaven  and  transform  them. 

LiTKRATUKX. — R.  H.  Charles,  Etehatdogj^,  1913,  Apoaypha 
and  Piextdepigrapha  of  the  OT,  1913;  P.  VoLe,  Juditdu 
Etekatoloffie,  1903  ;  J.  B.  Liehtfoot,  ApottUie  Father*,  1  toL. 
1891 ;  C.  Clemen,  Primitive  Chrittianity  and  xt»  Non-Jewish 
Source*,  Eng.  tr.,  1912  ;  E.  F.  Scott,  The  Fourth  Gospel,  1906, 
The  Kingdom  and  the  Messiah,  1911 ;  W.  O.  E.  Oesterley, 
The  Last  Thing*,  1908;  S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  The  Chrittian 
Doctrine  of  Immortality*  1901 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypge 
ofSL  John'3, 1907;  B.  F.  Westcott,  Gospel  aee.  to  St.  John,  1808. 
Epistles  of  St.  John,  1883 ;  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  (ICC, 
1902) ;  artt.  in  HDB  and  DOG.  S.  H.  HOOKE. 

HEBREWS.— The  name  'Hebrew'  (Lat.  Heb- 
roBus,  Gr.  'E^poTos)  is  a  transcription  of  the  Aramaic 
'ebrdyd,  the  equivalent  of  the  original  word  '^sp, 
the  proper  Gentile  name  of  the  people  who  were 
also  described  as  '  Israelites '  or  '  Children  of  Israel.' 
The  people  themselves  preferred  as  a  rule  the 
designation  '  Israel.'  The  latter  was  the  name  of 
privilege  and  honour  given  to  the  race  as  the 
descendants  of  Jacob  and  the  people  of  God's  choice. 
Frequently,  too,  in  the  OT  the  term  '  Hebrew ' 
occurs  where  foreigners  are  introduced  as  speaking 
or  spoken  to  (e.g.  Ex  2«-  '• "  3^^  1  S  4«- »  13»  14" 
293,  Gn  401',  etc.).  These  facts  have  led  to  the 
conjecture  that  the  name  '  Hebrews '  was  originally 
given  to  the  race  of  Abraham  by  their  Canaanite 
neighbours,  and  that  this  name  continued  to  be 
the  designation  of  the  race  by  outsiders  all  through 
their  history,  just  as  the  Magyars  are  known  as 
'  Hungarians '  by  other  nations  of  Europe.  This 
conjecture,  although  it  has  much  to  commend  it, 
does  not  meet  all  the  facts  of  the  case,  for  the 
name  '  Israel '  is  often  found  in  the  OT  in  the  month 
of  foreigners,  and  it  even  occurs  on  the  Moabite 
Stone,  while  Israelites  are  found  describing  them- 
selves as  '  Hebrews  '(IS  133,  jej.  34U)  Robertson 
Smith  ix)ints  out  that  the  whole  usus  loquendi  is 
explaineil   by   the  consideration  that   the  regular 


534 


HEBREWS 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


Gentile  name  for  a  member  of  tlie  race  of  Israel 
is  '  Hebrew '  and  not  '  Israelite,'  the  latter  word 
beinj^  rare  and  apparently  of  late  formation  (EBr^ 
xi,  594). 

The  derivation  of  the  term  does  not  render  much 
help  in  discovering  its  original  signiticance.  The 
word  presupposes  a  nonn  Eber  as  the  name  of  the 
tribe,  place,  or  common  ancestor  from  wliich  the 
Hebrews  are  designated.  According  to  one  pas- 
sage in  the  OT  (Nu  24"),  Eber  figures  as  a  nation 
along  with  Asshur  or  Assyria,  while  in  the  genea- 
logical lists  of  (Jn  10  f.  Eber  is  represented  as 
ancestor  of  the  Hebrews  and  grandson  of  Shem. 
The  names  in  the  genealogical  tables — Eber,  Peleg, 
Reu,  Serug,  Nahor,  etc. — cannot  be  regarded  as 
names  of  persons.  Some  of  them  are  names  of 
places  near  the  upper  reaches  of  the  Euphrates 
and  the  Tigris,  ana  the  whole  genealogy  may  be 
regarded  rather  as  a  geographical  account  of  the 
wanderings  of  the  Hebrews  than  as  a  statement  of 
racial  aihnities.  Eber  means  'the  further  bank 
of  a  river,'  from  a  root  nay,  'to  cross.'  The  LXX 
in  Gn  14'*  translates  the  term  as  6  irepdrtji,  *  the 
Grosser.'  Jewish  tradition  gives  the  more  accurate 
form  6  irepatrris,  '  the  man  from  the  other  side,'  i.e. 
of  the  Euphrates.  This  theory,  which  has  generally 
been  accepted  by  the  Rabbis,  carries  with  it  the 
implication  that  tlie  name  was  originally  given  by 
the  original  inliabitants  of  Canaan  to  the  Hebrew 
immigrants.  A  modification  of  this  etymology  is 
found  in  the  view  which  takes  Eber  in  the  Arabic 
sense  of  a  'river  bank'  and  makes  the  Hebrews 
'dwellers  in  a  land  of  rivers.'  Ewald  (Gesch. 
Israels^,  i.  407  ff.)  discusses  fully  the  meaning  and 
etymology  of  the  term,  and  rejects  the  view  that 
the  name  was  given  by  outsiders  to  the  people  on 
their  entry  into  Cansian.  It  was,  he  holds,  rather 
the  name  commonly  in  use  among  the  people  them- 
selves from  the  earliest  times  up  to  the  time  of  the 
kings,  when  it  was  displaced  by  '  Israel '  as  the 
name  of  national  privilege,  which  again  was  in 
turn  displaced  in  common  use  by  the  term  '  Jews ' 
from  the  time  of  the  Exile.  In  the  period  imme- 
diately before  Christ,  an  artificial  interest  in  the 
past  and  a  revival  of  ancient  learning,  coupled  with 
the  exaggerated  reverence  for  Abraham  '  the 
Hebrew,'  led  to  a  revival  in  the  use  of  this  term, 
and  to  the  language  of  the  race  being  designated 
thereby,  although  Philo  calls  the  language  of  the 
OT,  Ciialdee  (de  Vita  Mosis,  ii.  5f.). 

In  the  NT  the  word  '  Hebrew '  is  seldom  found 
applied  to  members  of  the  ancient  race  of  Israel, 
'Jew'  having  become  the  usual  designation  of  the 
period.  In  apostolic  times  the  term  became  special- 
ized, and  was  applied  not  to  any  member  of  the 
ancient  race,  but  to  Palestinian  Jews  of  pronoimced 
national  sympathies  who  spoke  the  Aramaic  dialect 
and  retained  the  national  customs,  in  contrast  with 
the  Hellenistic  Jews  (AV  'Grecians'  [q.v.]),  who 
were  scattered  over  the  world,  spoke  Greek,  and 
were  interested  in  the  thought  and  life  of  Greece 
and  Rome.  In  Ac  6'  we  read  of  a  murmuring  of 
the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews  where  this  dis- 
tinction obtains.  In  2  Co  IP-  St.  Paul,  in  con- 
trasting himself  with  false  teachers,  calls  himself  a 
Hebrew,  and  in  Ph  3'  refers  to  himself  as  '  a  Hebrew 
of  Hebrews.'  Probably  in  both  cases  the  Apostle 
wishes  to  emphasize  his  true  Hebrew  descent  rather 
than  to  distinguish  between  himself  as  a  Hebrew- 
speaking  Jew  and  the  Greek-speaking  members  of 
the  race.  Eiisebius  at  a  later  date  does  not  adhere 
to  the  specialized  use  of  the  term  as  found  in  the 
Acts,  but  designates  Philo  {HE  ll.  iv.  2)  and  Aristo- 
bulus  (Prcep.  Eimng.  XIll.  xi.  2)  as  '  Hebrews,' 
although  both  were  Greek-speaking  Jews  witli 
little  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  tongue. 

The  Hebrew  language  is  on  several  occasions 
referred  to  iu  the  NT.     What  is  meant  is  not  the 


ancient  Hebrew  of  the  OT  but  the  Aramaic  dialect 
of  Palestine  which  was  understood  by  the  Jews  of 
Jerusalem  at  the  date  of  the  apostles  (Ac  21***  2'2'- 
26"). 

LiTKRATORK.— H.  Ewald,Ge«c/itcAted««  Volkea  IiraeP,  I.  (1864] 
407  ff. ;  W.  Robertson  Smith,  art.  '  Hebrew  language  and 
l.iterature '  in  J-:nr'>  xi.  .'^.94  ff.  ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Philippiam^, 
1809,  p.  14.") ;  J.  H.  Bernard,  MiT, '  2  Corinthians,'  1903,  i>.  105; 
H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  JiUT,  '  I'JiilippianB,'  1903,  p.  451;  artt,  in 
JIDIi  and  Mlii.  W.  F.  BOYD. 

HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.— 1.  Form  and 

object.— Of  all  the  NT  writings  whi(rh  bear  the 
mime  '  Epistle,'  that  which  is  commonly  called  tlie 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  presents  the  nearest^pproxi- 
mation  to  the  form  of  an  ordered  treatise.  The 
writer  pays  great  attention  to  style.  His  well- 
balanced  periods  appeal  to  the  ear  as  well  as  to  the 
intellect,  and  his  argument  is  arranged  with  ex- 
treme care.  We  do  not  find,  as  is  sometimes  the 
case  in  the  Pauline  letters,  several  distinct  ideas 
all  struggling  for  expression  at  the  same  time. 
Each  fresh  notion  comes  in  its  logical  order,  and 
the  mind  of  the  reader  is  first  carefully  prepared 
to  expect  it. 

'  The  whole  argument  is  in  view  from  the  beginning.  Whether 
in  the  purely  argumentative  passages  or  in  those  which  are  in 
form  hortatory,  we  are  constantly  meeting  phrases  which  are 
to  be  taken  up  again  and  to  have  their  full  meaning  given  to 
them  later  on.  The  plan  itself  develops.  While  the  figures  to 
some  extent  change  and  take  fresh  colour,  there  is  growing 
through  all,  in  trait  on  trait,  the  picture  which  the  writer 
designs  to  leave  before  his  readers'  minds '  (E.  C.  Wickham,  The 
Epiatle  to  the  Uebrews,  p.  xxi). 

Yet,  notwithstanding  these  general  characteris- 
tics and  the  absence  of  any  opening  salutation,  the 
Epistle  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  theological  essay 
addressed  to  Christendom  in  general.  It  is  a  real 
letter,  written  to  meet  the  needs  of  a  definite  and 
limited  circle  of  readers.  Such  a  circle  is  presup- 
posed by  the  personal  touches  of  13^*-  -^  and  by  the 
repeated  exhortations  (2^-*  31^-'*  4i-  "-i«  5"-6>-  lO"- 
12^),  in  which  the  writer  displays  too  much  personal 
feeling  and  too  exact  a  knowledge  of  the  spiritual 
conditionlof  his  readers  to  permit  the  supposition 
that  he  is  speaking  to  the  Church  at  large.  But 
even  if  these  passages  could  be  struck  out  of  the 
Epistle,  the  remaining  doctrinal  portions  would 
still  point  to  the  same  conclusion.  The  pains  taken 
by  tlie  writer  to  prove  that  the  sufferings  and 
death  of  Christ  were  not  only  intelligible  but  also 
a  necessary  part  of  His  human  experience,  or  again 
that  the  Levitical  order  was  a  temporary,  imperfect 
arrangement,  imply  that  the  readers  were  doubtful 
about  these  things.  Such  doubts  may  well  have 
arisen  in  a  small  band  of  Christians,  but  they  were 
never  characteristic  of  the  Church  as  a  whole. 

The  readers  for  whom  the  Epistle  was  intended 
were  Christians  (2^-  *),  who  at  the  first  liad  shown 
whole-hearted  devotion  to  the  faith  (10^-"").  But 
their  minds  were  dull.  They  seemed  incapable  of 
understanding  anything  beyond  the  merest  rudi- 
ments of  their  profession  (5"-  ^^  6>).  The  earthly 
humiliation  of  Jesus,  His  sufferings  and  tempta- 
tions, seemed  to  them  unworthy  of  Messiah.  To 
tliem,  as  to  the  Jews,  the  Cross  was  a  stimibling- 
block,  a  suffering  Christ  no  true  Christ  at  all. 
Nor  was  that  their  only  difficulty.  They  felt  the 
novelty  of  Christianity.  They  found  it  hard  to 
believe  that  the  new  religion  could  really  supersede 
the  ancient  Divinely-given  religion  of  the  Jews. 
They  were  conscious  also  of  its  lack  of  outward 
aids  to  faith  and  worship.  Christianity  had,  as  it 
seemed  to  them,  no  visible  priesthood  or  sacrifice. 
By  these  perplexities  their  faith  in  Christ  was 
being  gradually  undermined.  Their  minds  began 
to  turn  from  their  Christian  inheritance,  which 
contained  so  much  that  was  new  and  strange,  to 
the  familiar  sjjlendours  of  the  Temple  and  the 
teaching  of  Judaism.     But  it  was  impossible  for 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    535 


them  to  remain  in  a  state  of  hesitation.  A  crisis 
was  rapidly  approaching  which  most  determine 
their  course  of  action  (9^  1(P).  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  was  written  as  a  '  word  of  exhortation ' 
(13")  to  nerve  them  to  meet  that  crisis.  The 
writer  tries  to  explain  their  difficulties  and  to  make 
them  realize  the  meaning  of  the  earthly  life  and 
death  of  Clirist.  He  urges  them  to  make  the 
venture  of  faith  and  take  their  stand  by  the 
Master's  side  (13^^),  for  there  is  no  other  place 
where  '  et«mal  salvation '  can  be  found  (6*"*).  His 
argument  takes  the  form  of  a  systematic  contrast 
between  Christianity  and  Leviticalism.  Yet  its 
logical  conclusion  is  not  simply  that  Christianitj' 
is  the  better  of  the  two,  but  that  Christianity  is 
the  best  religion  conceivable,  the  final,  eternal 
revelation  of  God  to  men. 

2.  Summary  of  contents. — (I)  The  theme:  the  old 
dispensation  and  the  new.  — God  has  made  two 
revelations  to  men — the  first  partial  and  incom- 
plete, the  second  perfect  and  therefore  final.  The 
prophets  at  best  could  merely  proclaim  the  will  of 
God,  and  that  only  so  far  as  human  limitations 
allowed  them  to  perceive  it.  In  One  who  is  Son  the 
very  essence  of  the  Father  is  revealed.  Levitical 
priests  could  only  call  attention  to  the  sins  of  man  ; 
the  Son  has  washed  them  away.  In  Him  human 
nature  is  raised  to  the  right  hand  of  God  (1^~*). 

(2)  The  mediators  of  the  old  covenant  {angels, 
Moses,Josh  ua,  Aaron)  inferior  to  theone  Mediator  of 
the  neic. — The  Law  was  spoken  through  angels. 
The  Son  is  greater  than  any  angel,  not  only  in  His 
Divine  glory,  but  also  in  the  glory  of  His  humilia- 
tion. For,  as  perfect  man.  He  was  the  first  to 
achieve  the  high  destiny  of  mankind  set  forth  in 
Genesis  and  in  the  Psalms  (l'-2'*).  Jesus  is  the 
Moses  of  the  new  dispensation,  but  greater  than 
Moses,  as  a  son  is  greater  than  a  ser\ant.  He 
wrought  a  greater  deliverance  than  that  of  Moses, 
and  led  the  way  to  a  more  perfect  rest  than  that 
which  Joshua  won  for  his  people.  To  that  rest  He 
will  bring  us,  if  only  we  remain  constant.  The 
story  of  those  who  fell  of  old  in  the  wilderness  is 
a  solemn  warning  of  the  fatal  consequences  of 
apostasy.  Let  us  press  on,  remembering  that  the 
Leader  who  has  suffered  with  us  is  also  our  High 
Priest  who  will  bring  us  to  the  throne  of  grace 
(3i-4'«). 

(3)  The  Son  revealed  as  Priest  after  the  eternal 
order  of  Melchizedek. — The  essential  conditions  for 
all  priesthood  are  two — perfect  sympathy  with 
sinful  men,  and  a  Divine  call  to  the  office  of  priest. 
These  conditions  are  perfectly  fulfilled  in  Christ. 
He  is  Priest  not  after  the  order  of  Aaron,  but  after 
the  eternal  order  of  Melchizedek  (5^"^").  Throw  oft" 
your  dullness  and  lay  hold  on  the  meaning  of 
Christ's  Priesthood,  for  therein  lies  the  Christian 
hope.  Christ  is  man  and  one  with  us.  We  can 
therefore  follow  Him  into  the  inner  sanctuary  of 
God's  own  presence  whither  as  Priest  He  has  gone 
on  our  behalf  (S^-e*).  The  Psalmist  declared  that 
the  Christ  should  be  Priest  after  the  order  of 
Melchizedek.  Notice  that  the  promise  of  this  new 
priesthood,  spoken  while  the  Aaronic  priests  were 
in  possession,  shows  that  the  order  of  Melchizedek 
is  better  than  that  of  Aaron.  Its  superiority  is 
emphasized  by  the  Divine  oath  with  which  the 
promise  is  introduced.  The  account  of  ^Melchizedek 
given  in  Genesis  declares  both  by  its  statements 
and  by  what  it  leaves  unsaid  what  are  the  marks 
of  this  priesthood.  It  is  royal,  righteous,  peace- 
bringing,  personal,  dependent  not  on  lineal  descent, 
but  on  the  inherent  fitness  of  the  priest ;  it  is 
eternal.  Abraham,  and  by  implication  Levi,  did 
homage  to  this  priesthood  when  they  paid  tithes 
and  received  a  blessing,  thereby  acknowledging 
the  presence  of  something  greater  than  themselves. 
These  marks  of  the  eternal  priesthood  find  their 


perfect  fulfilment  in  Jesus.  Perfect  kingship  is 
manifested  in  the  royal  condescension  of  His 
earthly  humiliation,  and  ngbteoosness  in  His  sin- 
less life  as  man  ;  abiding  peace  is  the  result  of  His 
cleansing  of  man's  sin.  He  was  not  bom  of  the 
tribe  of  LevL  His  Priesthood  is  inherent  in  Him- 
self, working  '  according  to  the  power  of  an  endless 
life '  (7'*).  It  can  never  be  superseded  because  it 
has  perfectly  fulfilled  the  object  for  which  all 
priesthood  exists  (7). 

(4)  The  priestly  ministrations  of  Aaron  and  of 
Christ:  their  sanctuaries,  their  basal  covenants, 
their  stierifces. — ^We  have,  then,  a  High  Priest  who 
has  entered  upon  His  regal  state  of  Priesthood  in 
heaven,  the  true  sanctuary.  But  priesthood  im- 
plies sacrifice.  He  must  therefore  have  something 
to  offer ;  but  what  and  where  ?  Not  in  the  earthly 
'Holy  of  Holies' — that  is  already  occupied.  Be- 
sides, the  Bible  warns  us  that  the  earthly  sanctuary 
is  only  a  shadow  of  the  heavenly  reality.  Christ's 
priestly  ministry  and  sacrifice  belong  to  the  realm 
of  realities,  just  as  He  is  the  Mediator  of  a  new 
and  better  covenant  than  that  of  the  Jews.  For 
we  must  face  the  fact  already  realized  by  Jeremiah 
— the  old  covenant  was  imperfect  and  must  pass 
away  when  the  new  and  perfect  covenant  is  estab- 
lished (8).  The  Levitical  service  of  the  old  covenant 
was  not  lacking  in  outward  splendour,  but  its 
magnificence  served  only  to  emphasize  its  ineffec- 
tiveness. The  structure  of  its  sanctuary  was 
specially  designed  to  illustrate  its  weakness.  The 
entrance  to  the  Holy  of  Holies  was  covered  by  a 
veil  beyond  which  not  even  priests  might  pass. 
One  man  alone  could  ever  enter  there,  and  for  him 
the  way  was  beset  with  danger  and  open  only  once 
in  the  year.  Even  so  his  annual  sacrifice  was  no 
real  atonement.  The  material  offerings — blood  of 
bulls  and  goats — professed  to  deal  only  with  ritual 
errors  {a'fvoTjfidTwp,  9').  They  could  not  cleanse 
the  conscience  or  take  away  real  sin.  All  these 
things — the  inaccessible  sanctuary,  the  sin-stained 
high  priest,  the  annual  ineflective  sacrifices  — 
clearly  indicated  that  the  true  atonement  was  not 
yet  found  (Q^-i").  Christ  our  High  Priest,  on  the 
other  hand,  has  found  for  men  eternal  salvation. 
For  He  entered  into  no  material  sanctuary  but 
into  the  very  presence  of  God  once  for  all.  His 
sacrifice  was  no  mexe  symbolical  cleansing  of  ritual 
errors.  It  effected  the  actual  taking  away  of  the 
accumulated  sins  of  men,  and  opened  the  way  of 
free  access  to  God.  For  it  was  not  material  but 
spiritual,  not  annual  but  offered  once  for  all ;  it 
was  the  oflering  of  His  o^vn  life  (9^^"^'). 

Thus  the  new  covenant  rests  on  the  death  of  its 
Mediator.  Does  this  idea  seem  strange?  The 
following  analogies  may  help  you  to  understand : 
(a)  a  testament  is  a  covenant,  but  it  has  no  value 
unless  the  testator  die ;  (6)  the  old  covenant  was 
inaugurated  with  the  oflering  of  the  life  of  btdls 
and  goats ;  (c)  in  the  Levitical  Law  every  atone- 
ment is  symbolized  by  the  offering  of  the  life  of 
beasts.  By  such  oflerings  the  earthly  sanctuary 
was  cleansed.  But  nothing  short  of  the  most 
perfect  conceivable  offering  is  sufficient  for  the 
perfect  heavenly  sanctuary,  and  what  oflering  could 
be  more  complete  than  the  voluntary  laying  down 
of  the  High  Priest's  ovra  life?  Such  a  spiritual 
sacrifice  has  eternal  validity.  It  can  never  be  re- 
peated because  by  the  taking  away  of  sins  it  has 
established  for  ever  that  perfect  union  with  God 
which  all  sacrifice  symbolizes.  When  Christ  next 
appears  it  will  be  as  Deliverer  of  those  who  are 
expecting  Him  {9^*"^). 

(5)  Sum7ning  up  of  the  argument :  the  shadow 
and  the  substance. — The  Law  was  only  an  outline 
sketch  of  good  things  to  come  ;  its  repeated  sacri- 
fices were  symbols,  calling  attention  to  man's  sins, 
but  incapable  of  cleansing,  for  blood  of  bulls  and 


536    HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


goats  could  never  take  away  sins.  Clirist  long  ago 
aeclared  this  by  tlio  mouth  of  the  Psalmist,  and 
added  tliat  the  only  valid  offering  in  God's  sight 
is  tile  surrender  of  tlie  will  in  complete  obedience 
to  Him.  Such  an  oflering  Christ  lias  now  made. 
That  is  why,  in  contrast  to  the  Levitical  priest 
ever  oH'ering,  never  atoning,  He  sits  enthroned  at 
the  right  hand  of  God,  'waiting  till  his  enemies 
become  his  footstool.'  He  has  set  up  the  perfect 
covenant  (10''^^). 

(6)  Practical  applications  to  present  difficulties: 
appeal  to  the  example  of  the  Fathers :  renewed  ex- 
hortation and  final  greeting. — Jesus  has  rent  the 
veil  and  opened  for  all  tlie  way  to  the  heavenly 
sanctuary  over  which  as  Priest  He  presides. 
Where  lie  is,  we  too  may  go.  Let  us  then  imitate 
His  priestly  consecration  and  press  on  in  His  foot- 
steps, for  our  hope  is  certain.  We  must  urge  each 
other  on  and  not  isolate  ourselves,  for  the  crisis 
is  very  near  (10^"'^).  Under  the  Law  of  Moses 
apostasj^  involved  terrible  consequences.  How 
much  worse  to  reject  the  perfect  sacrifice,  to  wound 
the  personal  Saviour  (10'^®'"') !  Ilemember  your 
former  steadfastness  under  trial.  Do  not  throw 
away  your  boldness.  To  receive  the  promises,  all 
that  is  needed  is  patience.  Think  of  the  words  in 
which  Habakkuk  speaks  of  the  promise.  They 
who  shrink  back  forfeit  God's  favour.  His  'right- 
eous ones'  live  by  faith  (lO^-'-^").  The  faith  he 
means  is  unshaken  confidence  in  the  certainty  of 
God's  promises,  even  though  their  realization  seems 
far  off.  It  was  such  faith  as  this  that  inspired  the 
long  roll  of  Jewish  heroes  (11).  Wherever  we  turn 
in  the  sacred  records  we  meet  these  examples  of 
faith  in  the  unseen,  and  the  chief  of  them  all  is 
Jesus.  Let  us  fix  our  eyes  on  Him,  and,  stripping 
oil' everything  that  encumbers,  run  boldly  the  race 
He  has  run  before  us  (12^"*).  Be  not  discouraged 
at  the  prospect  of  suflering.  SuHering  sent  by  God 
is  a  means  of  discipline  ;  it  proves  that  we  are  really 
His  sons  (12^"'^).  Seek  peace  and  sanctification ; 
never  give  up  j^our  eternal  birthriglit  for  mere 
present  enjoyment  (12"-'^).  As  the  glories  of  the 
heavenly  Sion  eclipse  tlie  terrors  of  Sinai,  so  is  our 
responsibility  greater  tlian  that  of  Israel  of  old. 
Sion  too  has  its  earthquake  and  its  lire  which 
shatter  and  consume  all  that  is  unreal  (12'^'^). 
Do  not  forget  j'our  mutual  responsibilities  as 
brethren.  God's  help  is  sufficient  for  all  (13^"®). 
Follow  the  example  of  your  old  leaders  now  de- 
parted (13'').  Be  constant  in  your  belief,  for  Jesus 
Christ  is  eternally  the  same.  Break  loose  from  the 
associations  which  would  draw  you  away  from 
Him.  He  suflered  as  our  atoning  sacrifice  outside 
the  city  gate.  We  must  be  content  to  bear  the 
same  reproach  and  take  our  place  by  His  side. 
The  only  'abiding  city'  is  where  He  is.  Let  us 
then  offer  to  God  through  Him  the  spiritual  sacri- 
fices He  loves  (13^"").  Obey  your  rulers  ;  pray  for 
us  that  we  may  be  restored  to  you,  even  as  we  pray 
for  you  that  God  may  make  you  perfect  in  obedi- 
ence and  every  good  thing  (13'^"^').  H.ave  patience 
with  my  letter  of  exhortation.  Timothy  has  been 
released.  He  and  I  may  visit  you  together.  Greet 
your  rulers  and  all  the  saints.  'They  of  Italy' 
send  their  greeting  to  you.  '  The  Grace '  be  with 
you(1322-M). 

3.  Doctrine.-— (1)  Conception  of  Christianity. 
— The  writer  of  the  Epistle  thinks  of  religion  as  a 
coven.ant.  The  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  is  the  new 
eternal  covenant  (13-"")  of  which  the  prophet  spoke 
(g8-i3j^  for  He  alone  has  established  a  perfect 
covenant  relation  between  God  and  man.  He  has 
opened  for  man  the  Avay  of  free  and  unrestricted 
access  to  God.  He  has  removed  the  great  obstacle 
— sin.  The  symbolism  of  the  'old  covenant' 
pointed  to  this  ideal.  But  what  was  there  set 
forth  symbolically  a.s  an  unrealized  hope,  Christ 


has  made  actual.  In  Him  God  and  man  are  per- 
fectly united  ;  His  one  sacrifice  takes  away  sin,  not 
in  symbol  but  in  deed  ;  as  High  Priest  He  is  not 
simply  the  representative  of  the  people  but  their 
irpddpofjLos  (6*') — where  He  has  entered  they  too  may 
go ;  and  the  sanctuary  to  which  He  leads  them  is 
no  material  'Holy  of  Holies'  but  the  eternal 
presence  of  God  (9-^).  A  covenant  of  this  kind 
leaves  nothing  to  be  added.  It  has  eternal  validity, 
and  must  therefore  supersede  all  the  imperfect 
religions  which  have  gone  before. 

(2)  CllRlSTOLOGY.  —  The  finality  of  the  new 
covenant  rests  on  the  perfection  of  Him  who  is  its 
Mediator  (8«  9">  12^*)  and  Surety  (7^).  It  is  natural 
therefore  that  the  main  theme  of  the  Epistle  should 
be  the  person  and  work  of  Christ. 

(a)  Christ  the  Eternal  Son. — Christ's  perfection 
may  be  expressed  in  one  sentence — He  is  the  Son 
of  God  (P  4"  58  6«  T^-'-*  lO*).  Others  have  been 
described  in  the  Scriptures  as  sons  of  God  (cf.  l"*  *• " 
2'"),  but  His  Sonship  is  diflerent  in  kind  from 
theirs.  He  is  the  Son  of  God,  inseparable  from  the 
Father  as  the  ray  is  inseparable  from  the  light,  re- 
vealing the  essence  of  the  Father  as  completely  as 
the  device  engraved  upon  a  seal  is  revealed  by  its 
impress  on  wax  {diraOyaafia  ttjs  Sd^rjs  /coi  x<*P*'f'?P 
TTjs  iiiroffTdaewi  aiiTov,  1').  As  Son  He  is  the  Creator, 
the  Sustainer,  and  the  Heir  of  all  things  (P-  *).  His 
Sonship  raises  Him  far  above  angels  (P'"),  above 
Moses  (S"),  and  above  Aaron  (7'*).  It  gives  Him 
tlie  right,  now  that  His  earthly  task  is  completed, 
to  sit  enthroned  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty 
on  high  (P). 

{b)  The  Incarnation. — Having  once  clearly  stated 
at  the  outset  the  eternal  Divinity  of  the  Son,  the 
Epistle  dwells  almost  entirely  on  His  life,  work, 
and  exaltation  as  man.  The  reason  for  this  is  to 
be  found  in  the  apologetic  aim  of  the  writer.  His 
readers'  perplexities  centred  round  Christ's  earthly 
life  of  suffering  and  temptation,  which  they  re- 
garded as  unworthy  of  one  who  occupied  His  high 
position.  The  Epistle  declares  that  such  humilia- 
tion was  not  only  in  the  highest  degree  worthy  of 
Him  who  bore  it  and  of  God  who  sent  Him  (In-pcirtv, 
2" ;   cf.   7^''),   it  was  a  necessary  part  of  the  ex- 

Serience  of  one  who  fulfilled  the  office  of  universal 
[igh  Priest.  It  Avas  the  ground  of  His  subsequent 
exaltation  (cf.  Sid.  t6  Trddrjfia  toO  Oavdrov  .  .  .  iare- 
<f)av(j3p.ivoP,  2*). 

Nowhere  in  the  NT  is  more  emphasis  laid  on  the 
realitj'  of  His  human  nature  and  human  experience. 
He  who  bore  the  simple  iiunian  name  Jesus  (2"  3'  4'* 
620  722  1019  1312)  was  made  like  His  human  brethren 
in  all  things  (2"-  ").  He  partook  of  flesh  and  blood 
as  they  do  (2^*) ;  He  could  sympathize  Avith  their 
sufferings  and  temptations,  for  He  too,  as  man, 
suffered  and  Avas  tempted  (2^^  4") ;  like  them  He 
had  to  conquer  human  Aveakness  before  He  could 
learn  the  hard  lesson  of  obedience  to  God's  Avill  {S'-  *). 
The  only  difference  betAveen  their  struggle  and  His 
lay  in  the  issue.  They  sometimes  fail,  but  He  always 
conquered,  for  He  Avassinless(4").  By  His  participa- 
tion in  human  Aveakness  and  suffering  and  tempta- 
tion Christ  Avas '  made  perfect'  (reXetw^eij,  5' ;  cf.  2'*'). 
By  experiencing  them  in  His  OAvn  human  life  He 
gainea  the  perfect  sympathy  Avith  mankind  Avhich 
fits  Him  to  be  their  High  I'riest.  By  overcoming 
them  He  realized  in  Himself  as  man  the  high 
destiny  of  the  race.  He  became  the  first-born  of 
many  sons  Avho  shall  be  led  to  glory  (2"). 

(c)  The  Priesthood  and  Sacrifice  of  Christ.— {i.) 
The  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  find  their  final 
explanation  in  the  thought  of  His  High-Priestly 
office.  They  are  the  necessary  condition  of  His 
call  to  that  office.  Any  j)riest  Avho  is  called  to  be 
the  representative  of  men  must  himself  be  man, 
capable  of  sympathy  Avitli  human  Aveakness  and 
error  (5').     The  Levitical   priests  possessed  sym- 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    537 


patby  with  liuman  weakness,  but  they  were  also 
tainted  with  human  sin  (5*).  The  ideal  priest  must 
combine  jnirfect  sj-mpathy  with  the  sinner  with 
complete  freedom  from  sin  (4'*).  These  qnalitica- 
tions  were  united  in  Christ.  He  was  therefore 
called  by  God  to  be  Priest,  not  after  the  order  of 
Aaron,  but  after  the  eternal  order  of  Melchizedek 
(5^"*).  The  Aaronic  order  was  only  the  shadow, 
not  the  reality  of  priesthood.  Only  by  way  of 
contrast  could  it  set  forth  the  character  of  the 
eternal  Priesthood.  For  the  members  of  that  order 
held  office  by  virtue  of  mere  physical  descent  (7'*) ; 
their  ministry  could  call  sins  to  mind  but  could  not 
cleanse  them  (10^"');  they  could  not  unite  the 
people  to  God — even  into  the  earthly  symbol  of 
His  presence  the  high  priest  himself  could  enter 
only  once  a  year  alone  (9") ;  lastly,  the  Aaronic 
priests  were  mortal — their  work  was  confined  to 
one  generation  (7**). 

B\-  contrast  with  the  Aaronic  priesthood,  it 
follows  that  the  perfect  priest  must  be  really,  not 
ritually,  holy,  his  office  resting  on  his  own  perfect 
fitness  to  perform  it ;  he  must  be  able  to  take  away 
sin  and  to  unite  men  to  God ;  lastly,  he  must  be 
eternal — placed  beyond  the  reach  of  sin  and  death. 
The  essential  features  of  this  perfect  priesthood 
are  set  forth,  as  in  a  parable,  in  the  biblical  por- 
trait of  the  priest-king  Melchizedek.  The  name 
Melchizedek,  which  means  '  king  of  righteousness,' 
indicates  the  personal,  not  merely  official,  holiness 
of  the  true  priest ;  his  connexion  with  Salem, 
which  means  '  peace,'  points  to  the  abiding  union 
between  God  and  man  which  he  efiiects;  the 
absence  from  the  record  of  any  mention  of  Melchi- 
zedek's  parentage  and  of  any  references  to  his 
birth  or  his  death  suggests  that  the  perfect  priest- 
hood is  eternal  and  exercised  by  right  of  the  per- 
sonal qualification  of  the  priest  (7^"*).  Abraham, 
the  father  of  Levi,  acknowledged  the  superiority 
of  the  eternal  priesthood  when  he  paid  tithes  to 
Melchizedek  and  received  his  blessing  (7'''^'').  The 
eternal  priesthood  '  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,' 
as  the  Psalm  foretold,  is  perfectly  realized  in 
Christ.  His  office  rests  not  on  '  the  law  of  a  carnal 
commandment '  (7^*) — for  according  to  the  flesh  He 
was  not  bom  of  a  priestly  family  (7^^) — but  on  '  the 
power  of  an  indissoluble  life '  {7'"').  He  has  perfect 
sympathy  with  human  weakness  and  temptation, 
for  He  has  felt  them  (2'8  4"),  yet  He  is  not  tainted 
with  human  sin  (4^*  7-^).  He  is  really,  not  ritually, 
holy  and  without  blemish,  blameless  in  His  rela- 
tion to  God  and  to  man  (7^).  In  His  own  Person 
He  has  inseparably  united  man  with  God,  and 
opened  a  way  of  access  into  the  Divine  presence 
which  can  never  again  be  closed  (6^  10^^-  *).  For  His 
Priesthood  is  inviolable  and  eternal  (7^).  He  has 
passed  into  the  world  of  eternal  realities,  far  be- 
yond the  reach  of  sin  and  death  (P  6^  7*  9**). 
There  He  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for  us 
{7»), 

(ii.)  The  central  function  of  priesthood  is  to  oflFer 
sacrifice.  If  Christ  be  perfect  Priest,  what  has  He 
to  oSer  (8^)? — The  eternal  Sacrifice  which  corre- 
sponds to  the  eternal  Priesthood.  Once  more  theidea 
is  worked  out  by  means  of  a  contrast  Avith  Levitical 
institutions  and  the  exposition  of  a  verse  from  the 
Psalter.  LeWtical  sacrifices  were  material  and  fre- 
quently repeated.  Frequent  repetition  was  neces- 
sary because  they  had  no  efficacy  in  the  spiritual 
sphere ;  they  could  not  take  away  sin  or  cleanse 
the  conscience  (9^  lO^-^).  Long  ago  the  Psalmist 
recognized  their  futility  and  indicated  the  nature 
of  valid  sacrifice.     True  sacrifice,  he  declared,  is 

spiritual ;    its   essence  consists  in   self-sacrifice 

the  complete  surrender  of  the  will  in  voluntary 
obedience  to  God  (lO*-!").  Christ's  oblation  was  a 
sacrifice  of  self,  the  complete  surrender  of  a  per- 
fect self  in  willing  obedience  (7^  9").     '  The  (^vs 


of  His  flesh'  were  one  long  period  of  self -dedication, 
and  in  the  culminating  moment  on  the  Cross  His 
sacrifice  was  made  complete  (5'-  ^  9"  lO*"*- ").  Self- 
sacrifice  could  be  carried  no  further.  Christ's 
perfect  spiritual  Sacrifice — the  entire  devotion  of  a 
perfect  will — although  its  manifestation  took  place 
on  earth,  belongs  in  all  its  stages  to  the  world  of 
eternal  realities  (cf.  SiA  xvei'/iOToj  aiwviov,  9").  It 
has  the  power  '  to  cleanse  the  conscience  from  dead 
works'  (9")  and  'to  make  perfect  for  ever  them 
that  are  sanctified'  (10").  Because  it  possesses 
eternal  validity  it  can  never  be  repeated  (1"  9**"*). 
The  'indissoluble  life'  (7^*)  of  the  Priest- Victim  is 
made  available  for  all  men  by  the  one  off"ering. 
The  new  covenant-relation  between  God  and  man 
is  established  (9^^).  Henceforth  Christ  sits  en- 
throned in  the  heavenly  sanctuary  in  token  that 
His  task  is  done,  waiting  ontil  His  enemies  become 
His  footstool  (10'»-"). 

(rf)  The  Death  of  Christ.— The  supposition  that 
the  death  of  Christ  was  a  real  stumbling-block  to 
the  first  readers  of  the  Epistle  is  justified  by  the 
evident  pains  taken  by  the  writer  to  find  reasons 
for  that  death.  Firstly,  Christ  died  '  by  the  grace 
of  God '  (2») ;  God  willed  that  it  should  be  so. 
Secondly,  Christ  died  as  true  man.  To  die  once 
and  once  only  is  part  of  the  common  lot  of  men 
(9f).  Thirdly,  Christ  died  as  testator,  that  we 
might  enter  into  the  inheritance  He  has  bequeathed 
to  us  (9^*).  Fourthly,  the  death  of  Christ  was  the 
necessary  climax  of  the  experience  of  human 
sufl'ering  which  qualified  Htm  to  be  'captain  of 
salvation'  (21").  Fifthly,  Christ  died  to  free  ns 
from  the  fear  of  death.  From  the  time  of  the  Fall, 
death  was  terrible  because  it  was  regarded  as  the 
penalty  of  human  sin.  Jesus  Christ,  by  dying 
though  He  was  sinless,  broke  the  connexion  be- 
tween death  and  sin,  and  so  robbed  death  of  its 
enslaving  terrors  (2"-  ^).  Finally,  Christ's  death 
was  the  foundation  of  the  new  covenant,  the 
priestly  act  of  self-sacrifice  by  which  '  he  hath 
perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified'  (9" 
10"). 

That  the  voluntary  laying  down  of  Christ's  life 
was  a  sacrificial  act  is  regarded  as  self-evident, 
and  no  direct  answer  is  given  to  the  question,  '  How 
does  His  sacrifice  make  perfect  His  followers  ? '  Yet 
the  writer  provides  the  material  for  an  answer 
when  he  dwells  on  the  principle  of  Christ's  '  solid- 
arity with  sinners.'  '  He  that  sanctitieth  and  they 
that  are  to  be  sanctified  are  all  of  one'  (2",  sc. 
'  one  piece,  one  whole ' ;  cf.  Davidson,  Hebrews,  p. 
66,  n.  2).  Christ's  High-Priestly  acts  were  not  the 
acts  of  an  individual  but  of  the  representative 
man.  It  was  human  nature  which  in  Him  was 
perfected  through  obedience,  entered  the  heavenly 
sanctuary,  and  sat  down  on  the  throne  of  majesty. 
^^^lat  was  actually  efi'ected  in  Him,  was  effected 
IK)tentially  in  those  who  foUow  Him  (cf.  10^**). 
Christians  'are  included  in  that  purpose  of  love 
which  Christ  has  realised '  (Westcott,  Ep.  to  the 
Hebrews',  p.  314).  The  High  Priest  is  also  the  rp&- 
Spofios  (6^),  one  of  many  sons  who  are  being  brought 
to  glory  (2^*'),  who  becomes  the  cause  of  salvation 
to  His  hnman  brethren  because  in  Him  the  perfec- 
tion of  human  nature  has  been  realized  (5*). 

(e)  The  Parousia. — The  Epistle  speaks  of  '  the 
day  which  is  approaching'  (ICP),  when  God  'will 
shake  not  the  earth  only  but  also  the  heavens '  (12*), 
and  the  glorified  Christ  '  shall  appear  unto  salva- 
tion for  them  that  await  him'  (9*).  'The  day'  is 
unquestionably  the  prophetic  '  Day  of  Jahweh,' 
but  the  idea  of  the  day  intended  by  the  writer 
seems  to  be  that  of  the  older  OT  prophets  (cf.  Am 
5^*,  Is  2^},  rather  than  that  of  the  later  apocalj-p- 
tists.  It  is  'a  coming'  rather  than  ^  the  Coming' 
of  the  Christ.  About  the  final  Coming  the  Epistle 
has  nothing  to  say.     But  a  crisis  is  at  hand ;  the 


538     HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


readers  can  already  see  its  approach.      To  the 
writer  it  is  a  real  coining  of  Christ. 

'  The  Master  had  said  that  He  might  come  at  even  or  at  mid- 
night or  at  cock-crowing'  or  in  the  morning  (Mk  13*).  To  the 
writer  of  this  letter  the  thought  has  occurred  that  those  hours 
may  be  not  merely  alternative  but  successive.  And  now  that 
the  first  of  them  has  sounded  warning,  he  bids  his  friends  be 
ready '  (Naime,  The  Epistle  oj  Priesthood,  p.  210). 

(3)  The  Christian  Life.— The  'great  salva- 
tion '  (2*)  wrought  by  Christ  is  variously  described 
in  the  Epistle  as  the  realization  of  man's  lordship 
over  creation  (2*- "),  deliverance  from  the  fear  of 
death  (2"-"),  entrance  into  the  perfect  Sabbath- 
rest  of  God  (4^).  But  its  essence  consists  in  cleans- 
ing and  consecration,  the  taking  away  of  sin  (9"), 
and  the  opening  of  a  way  of  free  access  into  the 
Divine  presence  (10-"),  or,  as  it  is  expressed  in  one 
passage,  '  the  perfecting  for  ever  of  them  that  ai-e 
sanctihed  by  the  one  ottering  of  Christ'  (lO''*).  In 
one  sense  this  '  perfecting '  is  already  accomplished 
{T€T€\do)K€v,  10'*).  FroHi  anotlicr  point  of  view  it 
is  regarded  as  a  hope  yet  to  be  realized.  For  there 
is  nothing  mechanical  about  its  working.  Each 
individual  Christian  must  make  it  his  own.  If  we 
are  to  be  perfected,  our  will  must  be  united  with 
the  will  of  Christ  in  perfect  surrender  to  God  (S" 
10'").  Seen  from  this  standpoint,  the  Christian  life 
is  a  progressive  sanctification  (2"  10'*  12''*),  which 
may  be  figuratively  represented  as  a  race  or  a 
pilgrimage.  Hence  arises  the  need  of  solemn 
warnings.  It  is  possible  to  drop  out  of  the  Chris- 
tian race  before  the  goal  is  reached,  or  to  set  out 
on  the  pilgrimage  and  yet  never  arrive  at  the 
heavenly  city.  The  great  danger  which  besets  the 
Christian  is  faint-heartedness  {amaTla,  3'-),  the  loss 
of  the  vision  of  the  land  of  eternal  things,  and 
want  of  confidence  in  Him  who  leads  us  to  that 
land.  The  Christian  safeguard  is  '  faith. '  Faith 
is  the  power  which  lielps  us  to  grasp  the  abiding 
realities  which  lie  behind  the  world  of  sense,  and  to 
test  the  existence  and  character  of  things  which 
are  for  us  as  yet  unrealized  (11').  It  is  the  faculty 
by  which,  for  example,  we  recognize  the  eternal 
issues  which  were  decided  by  the  earthly  life  and 
humiliation  of  Christ,  and  the  futility  of  all  hopes 
that  stand  apart  from  Him.  The  practical  result 
of  such  faith  will  be  unswerving  devotion  and 
obedience  to  our  Captain  in  the  face  of  all  trouble 
and  difficulty  (5"),  for  He  Himself  has  run  the  race 
before  us  and  stands  waiting  for  us  at  the  goal 
(12^).  If  our  eyes  are  fixed  on  Him,  and  all  things 
which  might  impede  our  progress  are  thrown  aside. 
He  will  make  perfect  the  faith  which  He  has 

fiven  (12^),  He  will  grant  us  the  '  full  assurance  of 
ope'  (6"),  which  will  bring  us  safely  along  the 
path  whicli  He  has  trodden  to  the  end,  where  the 
fullness  of  His  salvation  is  revealed  in  the  eternal 
sanctuary,  the  very  presence  of  God  (cf.  6'*-^). 

4.  Date. — Tlie  first  generation  of  Christians  had 
passed  away  (2^  Vi') ;  members  of  the  Church  had 
already  suffered  persecution,  imprisonment,  and 
loss  of  property  (10^-"^*);  the  relation  of  Gentile 
and  Jewish  Christians  was  no  longer  a  burning 
question  of  the  day.  The  Epistle  cannot  therefore 
have  been  written  long  before  A.D.  70.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  cannot  be  placed  much  later  than 
A.D.  90,  for  it  was  extensively  used  by  Clement  of 
Rome  in  his  Ejnstle  to  tfie  Corinthians,  c.  A.D.  95- 
96  (cf.  ad  Cor.  9,  12,  17,  36,  45). 

Any  more  precise  determination  of  the  date 
must  rest  chietty  on  the  view  taken  of  the  crisis 
with  which  the  first  readers  of  the  Epistle  were 
confronted.  If  the  approaching  'day'  (lO'")  be 
taken  to  mean  the  Final  Coming  of  Christ,  the 
exact  date  of  tlie  Epistle  must  be  left  uncertain. 
But  if  it  be  rightly  interpreted  as  an  allusion  to 
the  inevitable  culmination  of  some  national  move- 
ment already  active — a  movement  wliich  forced 
upon  the  readers  u  final  choice  between  Christian- 


ity and  Judaism — it  is  most  naturally  regarded  as 
referring  to  the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war  which 
led  to  the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  date  of 
the  Epistle  would  then  fall  between  A.D.  63  and  70. 

No  chronological  argument  can  be  based  on  the 
fact  that  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  generally  uses 
the  present  tense  in  speaking  of  Levitical  institu- 
tions (7*-  ■•*  8^- »  98-  »• "  13'").  The  use  of  the  present 
tense  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  the  Temple 
was  still  standing  when  he  wrote.  Similar  lan- 
guage is  frequently  employed  in  reference  to  the 
Temple  service  in  writings  much  later  than  A.D. 
70  (e.g.  Clem.  Rom.  ad  Cor.  40-41 ;  Justin  Martyr, 
Dial.  117;  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  passim).  But 
what  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews  has  in  mind  is  not 
the  service  of  the  Temple  but  that  of  the  Taber- 
nacle. 'The  references  [of  the  Epistle]  to  the 
Mosaic  ritual  are  purely  ideal  and  theoretical,  and 
based  on  tlie  Law  in  the  Pentateuch'  (Davidson, 
op),  cit.  p.  15). 

Some  commentators  have  found  a  further  indica- 
tion of  date  in  the  writer's  application  of  the  words 
of  Ps  95  to  the  circumstances  of  his  own  day  (3'""). 
Special  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  fact  that  he  departs 
from  the  construction  of  the  original  passage  in 
connecting  the  words  '  forty  years '  with  the  pre- 
ceding clause  '  they  saw  my  works,'  instead  of  with 
that  which  follows.  It  is  suggested  that  the 
change  was  made  intentionally,  because  the  writer 
wished  to  point  out  that,  as  he  wrote,  another 
period  of  '  forty  years  of  seeing  God's  works '  was 
rapidly  drawing  to  a  close,  namely,  the  forty  years 
which  followed  the  Crucifixion  (c.  A.D.  30-70). 
Yet,  even  if  it  be  permissible  to  take  the  number 
forty  literally,  this  argument  has  little  value. 
The  language  of  the  Psalm  might  equally  well  be 
applied  to  the  period  A.D.  30-70  at  a  much  later 
date  by  a  writer  who  considered  that  the  '  to-day ' 
of  unbelieving  Israel's  opportunity  closed  with  the 
Destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  passage  has  even 
been  used  to  prove  that  the  Epistle  must  have  been 
written  some  years  later  than  A.D.  70  (Zahn, 
Introd.  to  the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  ii.  32Ifr.).  But  it 
seems  unlikely  either  in  the  original  Psalm  or  in 
the  quotation  that  'forty  years'  means  anything 
more  definite  than  the  lifetime  of  a  generation. 

5.  The  readers. — (1)  Jews  or  Gentiles? — A  unan- 
imous tradition,  reaching  back  to  the  2nd  cent, 
and  embodied  in  the  title  invariably  given  to  the 
Epistle,  asserts  that  it  was  addressed  irpbs'E^palovi. 
It  may  be  granted  that  the  title  does  not  go  back 
to  the  original  writer,  and  that  it  represents 
nothing  more  than  an  inference  from  the  contents 
of  the  letter,  but  the  inference  is  probably  correct 
if  not  inevitable.  The  traditional  view  remained 
unquestioned  until  the  19tli  cent.,  but  since  then 
it  has  frequently  been  maintained  that  the  Epistle 
was  addressed  to  Gentiles,  or  at  least  to  Christians 
generally,  without  regard  to  their  origin.  By 
isolating  certain  incidental  statements  contained 
in  the  Epistle,  it  is  not  difficult  to  present  a 
plausible  case  for  this  opinion.  It  has  been  said, 
for  example,  that  no  Jewish  convert  would  need  to 
be  taught  the  elementary  doctrines  enumerated  in 
6'*  ^ ;  that  conversion  from  Judaism  which  the 
>vriter  believed  to  be  a  Divinely-given  religion, 
would  never  have  been  described  by  him  as  turning 
'  from  dead  works  to  serve  a  living  God '  (9'*) ;  that 
the  faults  against  which  the  readers  are  warned 
(12'*  13*)  are  the  faults  of  heathen  rather  than  of 
Jews.  It  must  be  recognized,  however,  that  the 
details  on  which  the  argument  rests  are  capable  of 
more  than  one  interpretation,  and  that  similar 
passages,  equally  dubious  perhaps  (e.g.  the  use  of 
the  terms  '  seed  of  Abraham '  [2'"]  and  '  the  nation ' 
[2'^],  where  the  argument  rather  requires  '  man- 
kind '),  may  be  quoted  on  the  other  side. 

But  the  traditional    opinion   is  most  strongly 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    539 


supported  by  the  general  drift  and  tendencj*  of  the 
Epistle  taken  as  a  whole.  The  writer  appeals  to 
the  OT  as  to  an  independent  authority  which  may 
be  quoted  in  supiwrt  of  the  Christian  faith.  He 
assumes  that  his  readers  take  the  same  view  of 
the  OT.  This  would  be  true  of  Jewish  but  not  of 
Gentile  converts.  To  the  Gentile  the  OT  had  no 
meaning  apart  from  Christianity.  In  the  same 
waj*  the  main  argument  of  the  Epistle,  while  in- 
volving the  conclusion  that  Christianity  is  the 
perfect  and  final  religion,  yet  formally  proves  only 
that  Christianity  is  superior  to  Judaism.  This 
method  of  reasoning,  unaccompanied  by  any  refer- 
ence to  paganism  in  any  form,  is  only  intelligible  if 
addressed  to  men  avIio  were  either  Jews  by  birth  or 
who  had  adopted  Jewish  ways  of  thinking  so  com- 
pletely as  to  be  indistinguishable  from  bom  Jews. 
(2)  Place  of  residence. — The  Epistle  contains  no 
opening  salutation,  and  no  direct  information  as  to 
its  destination.  This  lack  of  evidence  makes  it 
very  difficult  to  locate  the  readers  for  whom  it  was 
intended.  The  ancient  title  -rpds  "ESpoiow  throws 
no  light  upon  the  question,  for  the  term  '  Hebrews ' 
is  national,  not  local.  Many  suggestions  have 
been  made  of  probable  places  where  such  a  circle 
of  readers  as  the  Epistle  presupposes  may  have 
existed.  The  claims  most  widely  upheld  are  those 
of  (a)  Jerusalem  or  some  other  Palestinian  or  Syrian 
community,  (b)  Alexandria,  (c)  Rome  or  some  other 
church  in  Italy. 

(a)  In  favour  of  the  first  hypothesis,  it  is  argued 
that  Jerusalem,  or  at  least  some  Palestinian  city, 
would  ]je  the  most  likely  place  for  a  purely  Jewish 
community,  and  that  there  too  the  practical  problem 
with  which  the  Epistle  deals  would  be  most  keenly 
felt.  But  the  language  used  in  the  Epistle  (2*), 
which  implies  that  the  community  addressed  had 
had  no  opportunity  of  hearing  the  gospel  from 
Christ's  own  lips,  certainly  does  not  favour  the 
theory  of  any  Palestinian  destination,  nor  do  the 
suggestions  of  the  comparative  wealth  of  the 
readers  (6'"  10^-)  agree  with  the  known  poverty 
of  the  primitive  church  of  Judaea.  Palestine  again 
is  not  a  place  where  Timothy  might  be  expected  to 
have  much  influence  (13^),  and  the  absence  of  any 
distinct  mention  in  the  Epistle  of  the  Temple  as 
opposed  to  the  Tabernacle  would  be,  to  say  the 
least,  remarkable  if  it  were  addressed  to  Judsea. 

(b)  Alexandria  has  been  suggested  chiefly  on 
account  of  the  affinities  of  thought  and  language 
between  the  Epistle  and  Alexandrian  Judaism  as 
represented  by  the  writings  of  Philo  and  the  Book 
of  Wisdom.  Such  affinities  undoubtedly  exist,  and 
may  perhaps  contain  a  hint  concerning  tlie  writers 
own  birth-place,  but  they  supply  no  eWdence  as  to 
the  destination  of  the  Epistle.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered also  that  the  Alexandrian  type  of  Judaism 
was  by  no  means  confined  to  Alexandria.  The 
theory  that  the  Epistle  was  written  with  particular 
reference  to  the  worship  of  the  Jewish  Temple  at 
Leontopolis  falls  to  the  ground  when  it  is  realized 
that  the  WTiter  had  in  view  not  the  worship  of  any 
particular  Temple,  but  the  Levitical  service  as  it 
is  described  in  the  Pentateuch  (K.  W'ieseler,  Unter- 
snchung  iiber  den  Eebrderbrief,  1861). 

(c)  What  little  evidence  the  Epistle  itself  supplies, 
may  be  quoted  in  favour  of  Rome  or  some  other 
Italian  community.  For  the  words  '  They  of  Italy 
send  greeting '  are  most  naturally  taken  as  imply- 
ing that  the  letter  was  sent  either  to  ox  from  Italy, 
and  some  less  vague  expression  than  oi  arb  r^j 
'IraX/as  (13-^)  might  reasonably  have  been  expected 
if  the  writer  were  actually  in  Italy  at  the  time  of 
writing.  Corroborative  evidence  for  regarding 
Rome  as  the  destination  of  the  Epistle  may  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  the  earliest  known  quotation 
of  its  language  occurs  in  the  letter  of  Clement  of 
Rome. 


But  the  question  of  the  Epistle's  destination 
must  remain  without  a  final  answer.  It  seems 
clear  tliat  it  was  addresseil  not  to  a  mixed  com- 
munity, but  to  Jews,  and  the  general  impression  it 
gives  is  of  a  limited  circle  of  readers  rather  than  of 
a  large  and  miscellaneous  gathering  (Zahn,  op.  cU. 
ii.  349 ff.).  Whether  that  circle  was  'the  cnorch 
in  so-and-so's  house,'  or  '  a  group  of  scholarly  men 
like  the  author'  (Nairne,  op.  cit.  p.  10),  cannot  be 
finally  determined. 

6.  Author. — 'But  who  wrote  the  Epistle  (Jod 
only  knows  certainly '  (rt's  Si  6  ypdfas  -nnv  erurrok-liw 
rb  tthf  &kiidh  Qfbi  otSev,  Origen,  ap.  Euseb.  HE  vi. 
25).  These  words  were  originaJly  spoken  with 
reference  to  the  amanuensis  or  translator  of  the 
Epistle.  Most  modem  scholars  are  content  to  ex- 
tend their  reference  to  the  actual  author.  The 
Avriter  keeps  tumself  in  the  background,  and  later 
research  has  never  finally  discovered  his  identity. 
In  this  respect  students  of  the  2nd  cent,  were  as 
much  in  the  dark  as  those  of  the  present  day.  It 
is  significant  that  the  Roman  Church,  which  was 
the  first  to  make  use  of  the  Epistle,  refused  for 
more  than  three  centuries  to  grant  it  a  place 
amongst  the  XT  Scriptures,  on  account  of  the  un- 
certainty of  its  authorship  (Euseb.  HE  iii.  3).  If 
Eusebixis  is  to  be  tnisted,  Roman  opinion  on  the 
subject  did  not  go  beyond  a  denial  of  the  author- 
ship of  St.  Paul.  The  only  positive  statement 
made  by  any  early  Latin  writer  occurs  in  a  work 
of  TertuUiau,  who  attributes  the  Epistle  without 
question  to  Barnabas  (de  Pudiciiia,  xx.).  This 
belief  may  perhaps  represent  a  Montanist  tradition 
generally  current  in  North  Africa.  It  is  difficult 
to  see  why  it  vanished  so  completely  from  the  other 
churches,  if  it  had  ever  been  more  widely  circulated. 

It  was  in  Alexandria,  after  the  Epistle  had 
already  been  accepted  as  canonical  on  its  own 
merits,  that  the  theory  of  Pauline  authorship 
gradually  arose.  The  writings  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria  (c.  A.D.  200),  Origen  (c.  A.D.  220),  and 
Eusebius  {c.  A.D.  320),  display  the  theory  in  process 
of  formation.  Clement  put  forward  the  suggestion 
that  St.  Paul  wrote  the  Epistle  in  Hebrew,  and  St. 
Luke  afterwards  translated  it  into  Greek.  The 
latter  conjecture  is  based  on  the  resemblance  of 
style  between  the  Greek  of  the  Epistle  and  that  of 
the  Acts  (Euseb.  HE  vi.  14).  Origen  expresses 
his  own  opinion  thus :  '  The  thoughts  are  the 
thoughts  of  the  Apostle,  but  the  language  and 
composition  that  of  one  who  recalled  from  memory, 
and,  as  it  were,  made  notes  of  what  was  said  by 
the  master'  (avotunniofewawrbi  tikk  to,  dxotrroXurd 
Kal  u<nrepe(  crxoXtcrypa^iTcrayrosret  eip^/ura  irrb  toO  diSaH' 
KoXov,  ap.  Euseb.  HJS  vi.  25).  Eusebius  himself, 
while  admitting  that  the  Roman  Church  did  not 
accept  the  Epistle  because  it  was  not  St.  Paul's 
{HE  iii.  3),  yet  declares  that  it  is  reasonable '  on  the 
ground  of  its  antiquity  that  it  should  be  reckoned 
with  the  other  wTitings  of  the  Apostle*  (iii.  37). 
Clearly,  none  of  the  three  writers  regarded  the 
Epistle  as  being  Pauline  in  the  full  sense,  yet  for 
the  sake  of  convenience  it  was  their  practice  to 
quote  it  as  *of  Paul.'  Later  Alexandnan  writers 
adopted  this  title  as  being  literally  true,  and  from 
Alexandria  belief  in  the  literal  Pauline  authorship 
of  the  Epistle  spread  throughout  the  Church.  In 
this,  as  in  other  matters,  the  Western  Church 
followed  the  lead  of  St.  Hilarj-,  St.  Jerome,  and 
St.  Augostine. 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  how  the  Epistle  became 
coimected  with  St.  Paul's  name.  When  once  an 
anonymous  letter  bearing  the  simple  title  rpbi 
'K^palovs  was  appended  to  a  collection  of  acknow- 
ledged Pauline  Epistles,  the  addition  to  the  head- 
ing of  the  words  toO  UavXov  would  only  be  a  matter 
of  time. 

Nevertheless,  as  Origen  already  felt,  internal 


540    HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


evidence  makes  the  theory  of  I'auline  authorsliip 
untenable.  It  is  incredible  that  St.  Paul,  who  in- 
sisted so  strongly  that  he  received  his  gospel  by 
direct  revelation  (Gal  1),  coxild  have  written  the 
confession  of  second-hand  instruction  contained  in 
He  2^  Nothing,  again,  could  be  more  unlike  St. 
Paul's  method  of  expression  than  the  elegant  and 
rhythmical  style  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ; 
and  behind  the  difference  of  style  lies  a  real 
diflference  of  mental  attitude.  The  characteristic 
Pauline  antitheses  'faith  and  works,'  'law  and 
promise,'  'fiesli  and  spirit,'  are  replaced  by  new 
contrasts — '  earthly  and  heavenly,  '  shadow  and 
substance,'  '  type  and  antitype.'  The  difference  of 
thought  which  separates  the  two  writers  becomes 
apparent  when  they  meet  on  common  ground. 
'  Faith '  and  *  righteousness '  are  key-words  in  St. 
Paul's  theology.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  also 
speaks  often  of '  faith '  and  sometimes  of '  righteous- 
ness' (P  5"  72  IV-  33  121'),  lJ^t  the  words  have  lost 
their  8])ecial  Pauline  sense.  '  Faith '  no  longer 
means  intimate  personal  union  with  Christ,  but 
e.xpressea  the  more  general  idea  of  '  grasp  on  unseen 
reality. '  '  Righteousness '  is  stripped  of  its  forensic 
associations.  It  simply  means  '  ethical  righteous- 
ness,' not '  right  standing  in  the  eyes  of  God.'  The 
same  contrast  is  visible  in  the  different  applications 
made  by  the  two  writers  of  the  only  two  OT  pas- 
sages quoted  by  both  (Dt  323«,  quoted  in  Ro  \2^^, 
He  103" ;  Hab  23  quoted  in  Ro  1",  Gal  3",  He  1037-  38), 

The  theory  of  Pauline  authorship  being  therefore 
necessarily  abandoned,  all  attempts  to  discover  the 
author's  name  are  reduced  to  mere  conjecture. 
Such  conjectures  have  usually  started  from  the 
assumption  that  his  acquaintfince  Avith  Timothy 
(13''3)  places  the  writer  of  the  Einstle  amongst  the 
circle  of  St.  Paul's  friends.  The  early  Church  sug- 
gested, as  having  at  least  a  share  in  the  authorship, 
St.  Luke  (Clem.  Alex.  ap.  Euseb.  HE  vi.  14),  or 
Barnabas  (TertuUian,  de  Pudicitia,  xx. ),  or  Clement 
of  Rome  (' some'  known  to  Origen  [ap.  Euseb.  HE 
vi.  25]).  Luther  {e.g.  Enarr.  in  Gen.  48^,  Op. 
Exeg.  xi.  130)  supported  the  claim  of  Apollos. 
More  recent  conjectures  have  been  Silas  (e.g.  C.  F. 
Boehme,  Ep.  ad  Heb.,  1825);  Aquila  (suggestion 
mentioned  but  not  approved  by  Bleek,  Der  Brief 
an  die  Hebrder,  i.  42) ;  St.  Peter  (A.  Welch,  The 
Authorship  of  Hebrews,  1898)  ;  Prisca  and  Aquila 
in  collaboration,  Prisca  taking  the  lion's  share 
(Harnack,  ZNTW,  1900);  Aristion,  the  Elder 
known  to  Papias  (J.  Chapman,  Revue  B6nidictine, 
xxii.  [1905],  p.  50) ;  and  lastly,  Philip  the  Deacon 
(Ramsay,  Expositor,  5th  ser.  ix.  401-422).  The 
evidence  in  favour  of  any  of  these  conjectures  is  of 
the  flimsiest  description.  The  affinities  of  language 
and  style  between  the  Epistle  and  the  Acts,  or 
the  resemblances  of  thought  between  the  Epistle 
and  1  Peter,  are  quite  insufficient  to  prove  com- 
nmnity  of  authorship.  The  quotation  of  long  pas- 
sages from  the  Epistle  by  Clement  of  Rome  serves 
only  to  emphasize  their  difference  from  his  own 
way  of  thinking  and  writing.  Barnabas,  Silas, 
Aquila,  IMiilip,  Aristion  remain  as  possible  authors 
chiefly  because  next  to  nothing  is  known  about 
them.  Apollos,  the  learned  Alexandrian  Jew, 
mighty  in  the  Scriptures  (Ac  18^),  companion  of 
St.  Paul,  is  the  sort  of  man  who  might  have  written 
the  Epistle,  but  no  shred  of  positive  evidence  exists 
which  would  justify  the  assertion  that  he  actually 
did  write  it. 

That  a  leaf  has  been  accidentally  lost  from  the 
beginning  of  the  Epistle  which  would  ])erhaps  have 
told  of  its  authorship  and  destination  (Fritz  Barth, 
Einleitung  in  das  NT-,  1911,  p.  114),  is  a  hypothesis 
which  cannot  be  verified.  It  is  at  least  more 
probable  than  the  suggestion  that  the  author's 
name  was  intentionally  removed  by  the  prejudice 
of  a  later  generation  which   demanded   that  all 


canonical  Epistles  should  be  of  apostolic  origin. 
But  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that  the  Epistle 
ever  had  a  formal  address.  It  is  clear  from  the 
contents  that  the  readers  knew  who  was  addressing 
them  and  by  what  authority,  and  many  reasons 
for  the  omission  of  any  formal  superscription  can 
be  easily  imagined  (cf.  Jiilicher,  Introct.  to  NT, 
Eng.  tr.,  p.  153). 

7.  AfHnities  of  thought  and  language.— (1)  T/u 
OT. — The  Epistle  makes  extensive  use  of  tlie  OT. 
Twenty-nine  distinct  quotations  occur,  twenty-one 
of  which  are  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  NT,  and 
there  are  frequent  allusions  to  i)assage8  of  the  OT 
which  are  not  definitely  cited.  The  writer  shows 
no  acquaintance  with  the  Hebrew  text,  but  follows 
the  LXX  even  where  it  differs  materially  from  the 
Hebrew  (e.g.  Ps  95^°,  Jer  Spi^-,  Ps  4(fi-\  Hab  2»-*, 
Pr  3",  quoted  in  He  3»  B*""  lO*"'-  3'-3»  i25- «).  Three 
of  his  OT  quotations  differ  both  from  the  LXX  and 
from  the  Hebrew  (Gn  22i«'-,  Ex  24»,  Dt  323* ;  cf. 
He  613'-  920  103").  The  last  of  these  occurs  in  the 
same  form  in  Ro  12'".  Amongst  the  more  general 
allusions  to  the  language  of  the  Greek  Bible  may 
be  noticed  the  reference  to  stories  contained  in  1 
and  2  Mac.  (He  U^-^;  cf.  especially  2  Mac  6.  7), 
and  the  possible  reminiscence  in  He  P  of  the  words 
of  the  Book  of  Wisdom  in  which  Wisdom  is  de- 
scribed as  dTra&yafffia  .  .  ,  (pwrbi  d'lSiov  .  .  .  Kal  eUuv 
TTJs  dyaO&rrjTos  avrov  (sc.  rov  deou,  Wis  7^). 

The  mode  of  citation  employed  in  the  Epistle 
is  worthy  of  note.  The  name  of  the  individual 
writer  is  never  mentioned,  but  in  every  case  (except 
2^°'-,  where  God  is  directly  addressed),  the  words  of 
the  OT  are  ascribed  to  God,  or  to  Christ  (2"-  '3 
IQe^-),  or  to  the  Holy  Spinfc  (3^^-  lO'^).  In  striking 
contrast  to  the  allegorical  method  of  Philo,  and  to 
St.  Paul's  custom  of  adopting  OT  phrases  to  express 
ideas  different  from  those  of  the  original  writer 
(e.g.  'The  just  shall  live  by  faith'),  the  author  of 
the  Epistle  is  true  to  the  historical  method  of  inter- 
pretation, and  uses  OT  passages  in  the  exact  sense 
which  the  first  writer  himself  put  upon  them.  This 
is  true  even  of  the  chapter  dealing  with  Melchizedek 
(He  7),  where  the  Epistle  seems  to  approximate 
most  closely  to  the  Philonic  method  of  exegesis. 
Melchizedek  remains  the  priest-king  of  Salem.  He 
is  not  a  mere  symbol,  still  less  is  he  identical  with 
Christ.  Lastly,  it  may  be  observed  tiiat  the  Epistle 
lays  stress  on  the  continuity  of  revelation.  The 
same  God  who  spoke  by  means  of  the  prophets 
speaks  in  the  Son,  and  the  principles  wliich  the 
prophets  revealed  in  part  are  the  same  i)rinciples 
which  He  reveals  in  full  perfection.  Thus,  it 
appears  to  the  writer,  Christhood  is  not  a  new 
thing.  The  eternal  Son  'inherited'  the  name  of 
'Christ'  from  partial  and  imperfect  Christs  who 
went  before  Him  (P;  cf.  Nairne,  op.  cit.  pp.  16 f., 
153,  24911.).  Words,  therefore,  which  in  the  first 
place  were  spoken  of  God's  anointed  ones  of  past 
ages — the  king  (p-e.  8. ».  la^^  ^y  yjg  nation  (2'-),  or 
the  prophet  (2'3)— are  unliesitatingly  applied  to 
'the  Christ'  in  whom  that  which  they  dimly 
shadowed  is  at  last  fully  realized.  (On  the  use  of 
the  OT  in  the  Epistle,  see  Westcott,  op.  cit.  pj). 
471-497  ;  Nairne,  op.  cit.  pp.  248-289.) 

(2)  Philo. — Much  has  been  written  about  the  in- 
fluence exercised  on  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  by 
the  Alexandrian  school  of  pre-Christian  Judaism, 
whose  chief  representative  is  Philo.  The  evidence 
bearing  on  the  question  may  be  arranged  as  follows. 

(«)  Itcsemblances. — (i.)  Both  use  tlie  LXX  in  a 
recension  closely  resembling  Cod.  A  (Bleek,  op. 
cit.  i.  369  ff.).  (ii.)  The  custom  in  the  Epistle  of 
quoting  the  OT  as  tlie  <Ureet  utterance  of  Go<l, 
without  mentioning  tiie  writer's  name,  finds  an 
exact  parallel  in  the  works  of  Philo.  (iii.)  Striking 
and  unusual  words  and  phrases  used  in  the  l^pistle 
occur  also  in  Philo's  writings,  e.g.  dra&yaafjM  (He  P ; 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    541 


(fc  Mundi  Op.  51 ),  xapasT^p  (He  1' ;  dc Plant.  iV  oc, 5), 
(ivfiia-n^piov  in  the  sense  of  ' altar*  (He  9* ;  Quis  rer. 
iliv.  htrr.  46),  xopaTXijtrI(i«(He2'*  ;  cf.  rbiraparX^ffiov, 
Quis 7-cr.  div.  hcer.  30),  utTpioTaOeiv (He sfi ;  deAbrah. 
44),  rpaxnWieiv  (He  4" ;  de  Vita  Mos.  i.  53),  Se^ets 
re  xal  'iKmipias  (He  5^  ;  de  Cherubim,  13),  Ifiadev  dip 
&»  ftro^ei' (He  5*  ;  cf.  6  raOuv  ditp</3ws  l/uiOev,  de  Somn. 
ii.  15),  Ixpfxfv  used  of  God  (He  2'" ;  de  Leg.  alleq. 
i.  15),  l\a(rT7ipiov  applied  to  the  lid  of  the  Ark  (He  9^  ; 
de  Vita  Mos.  iii.  8).  The  Epistle  describes  Christ 
as  rpwTOTOKot  and  dpxtepfvs  (He  1*  2"  3') ;  Philo 
applies  the  terms  rpea^vrepos  vi6s,  trpuniiyovo^  {de 
Agricidt.  12),  apxi-epevs  (de  Somn.  i.  38)  to  the  Divine 
Logos,  (iv.)  Both  display  the  same  habit  of  inter- 
weaving doctrinal  and  practical  passages,  the  same 
unusual  transposition  of  words  (cf.  xaXiv,  He  1*;  de 
Leg.  alleg.  iii.  9),  the  same  use  of  S-q  rov  (He  2^* ;  e.g. 
de  Leg.  alleg.  i.  3)  and  wy  #Toy  eiTuv  (He  7' ;  e.g.  de 
Plant.  Noe,  38).  (v.)  Both  argue  from  the  silences 
as  well  as  from  the  statements  of  Scripture,  attach 
imjwrtance  to  the  meaning  of  OT  names,  and 
emphasize  the  same  particular  aspects  of  the  lives 
of  Abel,  Noah,  Abraham,  and  Moses,  (vi.)  Philo 
speaks  of  an  eternal  universe  (6  Kdafws  vojjroi,  de 
Mundi  Op.  4-6),  of  which  the  visible  universe  (6 
KOfffios  aiffd-rjToi,  ib. )  is  a  transitory  copy.  The  writer 
of  the  Epistle  mentions  the  'heavenly 'Tabernacle, 
a  copy  of  which  Moses  reproduced  on  earth  (8'), 
and  frequently  alludes  to  earthly  institutions  as 
copies  or  shadows  of  heavenly  realities  (9^^^). 

(6)  Divergences. — (i.)  While  the  Epistle  resembles 
Philo  in  its  mode  of  citation  of  the  OT,  it  presents 
a  radical  ditierence  in  its  method  of  interpretation. 
Men  and  institutions  remain  what  they  are  said  to 
be  in  the  OT.  They  do  not  become  mere  symbols 
of  transcendental  ideas,  (ii.)  In  the  Epistle  stray 
expressions  may  be  applied  to  the  Son  which  Philo 
applies  to  the  Logos,  but  the  personal  'Son'  of 
Hebrews  is  essentially  diflerent  from  the  abstract 
impersonal  'Logos'  of  Philo.  (iiL)  The  ^vrite^  of 
the  Epistle  uses  language  which  recalls  the  Alexan- 
drian notion  of  the  real  invisible  world  which  cor- 
responds with  the  unreal  world  of  sense.  But  that 
idea  is  not  the  basis  of  his  conception  of  Christianity. 

'He  does  not  identify  Christian  truth  with  an  already  exist- 
ing system  of  thought :  his  Christian  thought  merely  possesses 
itself  "of  the  outlines  of  a  mode  of  conception  existing,  which  it 
fills  with  its  own  Contents"  (Davidson,  op.  eit.  p.  201). 

It  appears,  then,  that  the  Epistle  does  show  some 
affinities  with  Philo  and  the  Alexandrian  school. 
It  is  at  least  probable  that  the  writer  was  acquainted 
with  their  ideas  and  their  philosophical  termino- 
logy. But  his  message  is  all  his  own  ;  he  owes  little 
to  Alexandria  beyond  the  outward  expression.  So 
far  as  he  borrows  thoughts,  he  borrows  from  the 
gospel  tradition  and  the  OT  Scriptures  (see  G. 
>IilJigan,  The  Theology  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebretcs, 
pp.  20:i-211 ;  Bruce  in  HDB  ii.  335). 

(3)  The  Synoptic  tradition. — The  author  shows 
considerable  acquaintance  with  the  facts  of  our 
Lord's  life  on  earth.  He  knows  of  His  human 
birth  (2"),  of  His  descent  from  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(7"),  of  His  human  development  (5*),  of  His  tempta- 
tion (2^8  415),  of  His  fidelity  (3=),  of  His  sinlessness 
(4"),  of  His  preaching  (2^),  of  His  gentle  bearing 
towards  sinners  (2''"),  of  the  contradiction  He 
endured  at  the  mouth  of  ignorant  men  (12^),  of 
His  circle  of  disciples  (2^  -*),  of  His  agony  in  the 
Garden  (5"),  of  His  Ascension  (6»  7=*  9=*).  Though 
the  Resurrection  occupies  no  large  place  in  the 
writer's  doctrinal  teaching,  it  is  not  because  he 
is  ignorant  of  the  fact  (13^).  These  things  are 
mentioned  in  the  Epistle  quite  incidentally  and 
because  of  their  bearing  on  the  general  argument. 
It  is  not  likely,  therefore,  that  they  represent  the 
whole  of  the  ^Titer's  information  concerning  the 
earthly  ministry  of  Jesus.  The  additional  fact 
that  he  takes  it" for  granted  that  his  readers  need 


no  explanation  of  his  allusions  indicates  that  an 
evangelic  tradition,  not  unlike  that  of  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  was  already  in  circulation,  but  whether  it 
had  yet  taken  the  form  of  a  written  record  cannot 
he  ascertained  (see  Westcott,  op.  cit.  p,  465 ;  Bruce, 
The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  p.  63  f.). 

(4)  St.  Paul. — Allusion  has  already  been  made 
to  the  differences  between  the  Epistle  and  tlie  writ- 
ings of  St.  Paul,  Attention  must  now  be  directed 
to  their  similarities.  Definite  reminiscences  of  the 
language  of  Romans,  1  and  2  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
and  Philippians  have  been  discovered  in  the  follow- 
ing passages.  He  1*  ||  Ph  2?*- ;  2»  ||  Gal  S'* ;  2*  ;! 
lCol2";  2"||lCol5»;  5»l|lCo3»;  5"i|lCo2*: 
6^0  il  2  Co  8*;  10»  ii  Ro  12";  lO^s  ij  2  Co  IS*;  10» 
il  Ro  1"  ;  12"  II  Ro  14"» ;  12"  13«  ||  Gal  4«- ;  13"  il 
Ph  416.18 .  131M.  ji  2  Co  !"•  "  ;  13»  ii  Ro  15=3  ;  13=*  || 
Ph  421-  a  (Moffatt,  LNT,  p.  453).  It  may  be  doubted 
whether  direct  literary  connexion  can  be  proved  in 
any  of  these  cases.  Even  where  such  connexion 
seems  most  certain — when  the  two  writers  agree 
with  each  other,  while  diflering  both  from  the 
LXX  and  from  the  Hebrew,  in  the  text  of  an  OT 
passage  (He  1(P,  Ro  12i9)— it  is  possible  that  they 
are  quoting  independently  an  interpretation  which 
is  at  least  as  old  as  the  Targum  of  Onkelos.  Yet 
in  many  ways  the  Epistle  presupposes  the  work 
of  St.  Paul.  Though  they  see  things  from  a 
different  point  of  view,  the  two  are  in  fundamental 
agreement.  Both  display  '  the  same  broad  concep- 
tion of  the  universality  of  the  Gospel,  the  same 
grasp  of  the  age-long  purpose  of  God  wrought  out 
through  Israel,  the  same  trust  in  the  atoning  work 
of  Christ,  and  in  His  present  sovereignty'  (Westcott, 
op.  cit.  p.  Ixxviii).  That  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews 
can  take  up  an  attitude  of  wide  universalism  Avith- 
out  mentioning  the  question  of  circumcision  or  even 
naming  the  GentUes  at  all,  and  can  calmly  put 
aside  the  Law  almost  as  though  its  futility  were 
self-evident,  implies  that  the  Pauline  battle  of 
Galatia  and  Rome  has  been  fought  and  won. 

(5)  The  Fourth  Gospel.  —  In  point  of  time  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  stands  midway  between 
the  Pauline  Epistles  and  the  Johannine  writings. 
In  the  development  of  apostolic  theology  it  occupies 
precisely  the  same  place.  St.  Paul  had  a  hard 
struggle  to  establish  the  principle  of  the  universal 
application  of  the  gospel  to  Jew  and  Gentile  alike. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the  Fourth  Gospel 
both  take  this  for  granted.  St.  Paul,  though  he 
does  not  dwell  on  the  idea,  occasionally  speaks  of 
Christ's  death  in  terms  of  sacrifice  (Eph  1^  2^*  5-, 
1  Co  5",  Ro  3^  83  etc.).  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  deals  fully  with  the  sacrificial  aspect  of 
Christ's  death,  and  sets  forth  at  length  the  corre- 
sponding conception  of  His  Priesthood.  The  root- 
ideas  contained  in  the  doctrines  of  Christ's  Priest- 
hood and  Sacrifice  find  their  final  expression  in  the 
seemingly  simple  and  unstudied  language  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  even  though  the  terms  '  priest '  and 
'sacrifice'  are  never  used  (cf.  Jn  10^"=^  12^  16^  17). 
Lastly,  the  description  of  the  person  and  work  of 
Christ  given  in  the  opening  verses  of  the  Epistle  (He 
V'*)  might  almost  be  taken  to  be  a  first  sketch  of 
the  completed  picture  of  the  '  Divine  Word  made 
flesh'  contained  in  the  prologue  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 

'  The  teaching  which  St.  John  has  preserved  offers  the  final 
form  of  the  Truth.  St.  John's  theorj'  (if  we  may  so  speak)  of 
the  work  of  Christ  is  less  developed  in  detail  than  that  which  is 
found  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews ;  but  his  revelation  of  Christ's  Person  is  more  complete. 
He  concentrates  our  attention,  as  it  were,  upon  Him,  Son  of 
God  and  Son  of  man,  and  leaves  us  in  the  contemplation  of  facts 
which  we  can  only  understand  in  part '  (Westcott,  op.  eit.  p.  Ixf.). 

8.  Importance. — The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  has 
an  interest  peculiarly  its  own.  It  is  the  earliest 
exposition  of  the  Christian  tradition  by  one  who 
had  all  the  instincts  of  a  scholar  and  a  philosopher. 


542     HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


HEIFER 


Wherever  the  author  may  have  been  born,  he  may 
be  regarded  as  the  NT  representative  of  the  type 
of  mind  wliicli  afterwards  appeared  in  the  great 
teachers  of  tlie  Christian  school  of  Alexandria. 
At  the  same  time  he  is  altogether  free  from  the 
particular  limitations  of  that  school.  He  agrees 
with  the  Alexandrians  in  his  philosophical  bent 
and  his  love  of  cultured  and  scholarly  expression, 
but  he  is  also  of  one  mind  with  the  school  of 
Antioch  in  his  appreciation  of  the  importance  of 
fact.  His  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ  com- 
bines the  two  central  truths,  the  isolation  of  one 
of  which  was  the  cause  of  disaster  both  to  Alex- 
andria and  to  Antioch.  For  while  he  insists, 
equally  with  the  Alexandrians,  on  the  cosmic  work 
and  pre-incarnate  glory  of  tiie  Son,  he  is  not  less 
emphatic  than  the  Antiochenes  in  his  statement  of 
the  completeness  of  His  participation  in  human 
suffering  and  temptation  and  His  exaltation  in 
human  nature  to  the  right  hand  of  power.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  rendered  permanent  service 
to  the  Church  by  showing  tliat  the  way  to  under- 
stand something  of  the  meaning  of  the  Person  of 
Christ  is  not  to  minimize  either  the  Divine  or  the 
human  nature,  but  to  emphasize  both. 

In  his  interpretation  of  the  OT,  the  writer  of 
Hebrews  seems  to  be  in  sympathy  much  more  with 
Antioch  than  with  Alexandria.  His  exegesis  is 
based  on  principles  which  iiave  never  been  forsaken 
without  disastrous  consequences.  He  recognizes 
the  OT  as  a  Divinely-given  revelation,  and  yet  a 
revelation  which  is  partial  and  incomplete.  He 
realizes  the  true  method  of  historical  interpretation : 
a  passage  of  Scripture  must  be  explained  in  the  light 
of  its  context ;  its  real  meaning  is  that  which  the 
writer  intended  it  to  bear.  These  are  the  principles 
which  lie  at  the  root  of  all  sound  biblical  criticism. 

But  the  greatest  service  which  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  has  rendered  to  the  Church  is  its  inter- 

Eretation  of  the  Death  of  Christ  in  terms  of  Priest- 
ood  and  Sacrifice.  The  ideas  so  familiar  to  us 
were  new  when  the  Epistle  was  written.  The 
writer  was  'not  repeating  but  creating  theolo^' 
(Bruce,  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  p.  10).  He 
offers  no  formal  theory  of  the  Atonement,  but  he 
reveals  principles  on  which  it  rests,  and  states  them 
in  a  way  which  appeals  to  the  common  instincts  of 
mankind.  Salvation  of  others  can  be  wrought  only 
through  sacrifice  of  self.  The  priest  must  be  also 
the  victim.  He  must  give  his  life  to  others  as  well 
as  for  others,  and  his  life  hecomes  available  for 
others  only  through  death — the  death  of  self.  The 
priest  who  offers  the  perfect  sacrifice  must  himself 
be  perfect — perfectly  one  with  humanity  in  nature 
and  in  all  human  experiences ;  else  the  sacrifice 
would  be  impossible.  He  must  be  personally  sin- 
less ;  otherwise  the  offering  would  be  incomplete 
and  of  partial  efficacy.  If  his  act  of  self-sacrifice 
is  to  be  eternally  valid,  he  must  himself  be  eternal. 
Christ  has  fulfilled  these  conditions,  and  He  will 
never  change  :  '  Jesus  Christ,  the  same  yesterday, 
to-day,  and  for  ever '  (13*).  The  principles  here  set 
forth  leave  some  things  unexplained,  but  they  are 
sufficient  to  strengthen  faith  to  lay  hold  on  what 
must  always  remain  deeply  mysterious — the  in- 
expressible Divine  love  which  made  the  Eternal 
Son  lay  down  His  life  as  man.  To  enkindle  faith 
was  the  sole  object  of  the  writer.  In  one  sense  he 
may  be  called  a  visionary,  but  it  is  a  practical 
vision  that  he  sees — the  vision  of  a  few  weak,  halt- 
ing Christians  brought  safely  through  an  earthly 
crisis  by  the  outstretched  hand  of  the  eternal  High 
Priest  who  is  enthroned  in  the  heavenly  sanctuary. 

'  Every  student  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  must  feel  that 
it  deals  in  a  peculiar  degree  with  the  thoughts  and  trials  of  our 
own  time.  .  .  .  The  difflcullies  which  come  to  us  through 
physical  facts  and  theories,  through  criticism,  through  wider 
views  of  huiuan  history,  correspond  with  those  which  came  to 


Jewish  Christians  at  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age,  and  they 
will  tlnd  their  solution  also  in  fuller  views  of  the  Person  and 
Work  of  Christ"  (Westcott,  op.  cit.  Pref.  p.  v). 

LiTERATURR.— I.  COMMENTARIES:  F.  Blcck  (1828-40);  F. 
Delitzsch  (Eng.  tr.,  18CS-70);  A.  B.  Davidson  (1882);  F. 
Rendall  (1883);  C.  J.  Vaughan  (1800);  H.  von  Soden(1892); 
B.  F.  Westcott  (31903) ;  E.  C.  Wickham  (1010). 

II.  Articlks  :  '  Hebrews,  Epistle  to,'  bv  A.  B.  Bruce  in  UDB 
ii.  (1899);  'Hebrews  (Epistle),'  by  W.  Robertson  Smith  and 
H.  von  Soden  in  Elii  ii.  (1901). 

III.  NT  Introductions:  G.  Salmon  (71894);  A.  Jiilicher 
(Eng.  tr.,  1904) ;  T.  Zahn  (Eng.  tr.,  1909)  ;  A.  S.  Peake  (1909) ; 
J.  MofTatt  (1911). 

IV.  Special  Studiks  :  E.  K.  A.  Riehm,  Der  Lehrbegriff  det 
Ilebriierbrie/es,  1807;  E.  M6ndgoz,  La  TMologie  de  CipUre 
aux  Hibrenx,  1894  ;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  A  nistory  of  Christianity 
in  the  Apostolic  Age,  1897 ;  G.  Milligan,  The  Theology  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ilelrrews,  1899 ;  A.  B.  Bruce,  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews :  the  First  Apology  for  Christianity,  1899 ;  G.  B. 
Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  A  T,  1S99  ;  W.  P.  DuBose,  High 
Priesthood  and  Sacrifice,  1908;  A.  Nairne,  The  Epistle  of 
Priesthood,  1013.  F.  S.  MaUSH. 

HEIFER  (5dMa\tj  =  .Tj9,  *a  cow') — The  >vriter 
of  Hebrews  finds  a  parallel  between  '  the  water  (for 
the  removal)  of  impurity '  (C5ap  pavTio<rfiov  =  rni  'O, 
'water  of  exclusion')  and  the  blood  of  Christ  (He 
9"'-).  The  former  element  was  a  mixture  of  run- 
ning (living)  water  with  the  ashes  of  a  spotless 
heifer  slain  and  burnt  according  to  the  ritual  pre- 
scribed in  Nu  19.  As  contact  with  a  dead  body, 
a  bone,  or  a  grave  involved  defilement,  and  en- 
trance into  the  sanctuary  in  a  state  of  undeanness 
made  the  offender  liable  to  excommunication,  the 
use  of  this  holy  water  was  prescribed  as  a  means 
of  purification.  Every  detail  in  the  ceremonial 
leads  the  student  of  origins  back  to  the  childhood 
of  the  Semites.  '  Primarily,  purification  means 
the  application  to  the  person  of  some  medium 
which  removes  a  taboo,  and  enables  the  person 
purified  to  mingle  freely  in  the  ordinary  life  of  his 
fellows '  ( W.  R.  Smith,  IiS\  1894,  p.  425).  In  those 
days  there  was  probably  a  cult  of  the  sacred  cow, 
while  juniper,  cypress,  and  aromatic  plants  were 
supposed  to  have  power  to  expel  the  evil  spirits 
which  brought  death  into  the  home.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that,  when  Israel  began  to  put  away 
childish  things,  the  ancient  consuetudinary  laws 
in  regard  to  defilement  came  to  be  viewed  by  the 
more  enlightened  minds  as  mere  '  symbols  of 
spiritual  truths.'  To  the  awakened  conscience 
'  sin  was  death,  and  had  wrought  death,  and  the 
dead  body  as  well  as  the  spiritually  dead  soul  were 
the  evidence  of  its  sway ' ;  while  cedar-wood, 
hyssop,  and  scarlet  may  ultimately  have  been 
regarded — though  this  is  more  doubtful — as  'the 
symbols  of  imperishable  existence,  freedom  from 
corruption,  and  fulness  of  life'  (A.  Edersheim, 
The  Temple,  1909,  p.  305  f. ).  Discarding  all  magical 
ideas,  the  worshipper  of  Jahweh  thus  endeavoured 
to  change  the  antique  ritual  into  an  object-lesson 
or  sacramental  means  of  grace.  The  writer  to  the 
Hebrews  uses  it  as  a  stepping-stone  to  Christian 
truth.  Rejecting  the  Philonic  distinction  between 
Levitical  washings  as  directed  to  the  purification 
of  the  body  and  sacrifices  as  intended  to  effect 
a  purgation  of  the  soul,  he  views  the  whole  ritual 
of  lustration  and  sin-offering  alike  as  an  opus 
operatum  which  can  at  the  best  purify  only  the 
body.  Accepting  this  idea  on  the  bare  authority 
of  Scripture,  he  makes  it  the  premiss  of  an  ar^- 
ment  a  minori  ad  majtis.  Jj  (a  particle  which 
posits  a  fact,  and  scarcely  insinuates  a  doubt)  the 
Wood  of  goats  and  bulls  and  tiie  ashes  of  a  heifer 
cleanse  the  flesh,  defiled  by  contact  with  death, 
much  more  does  the  life-blood  of  the  Messiah 
cleanse  the  conscience  from  dead  works. 

LiTKRATURK.— Malmonides,  Uoreh,  iii.  47  ;  K.  C.W.  F.  B&hr, 
Symbolik  des  mosaischen  CuUw,  Heidelberg,  1837-39,  i.  493  ff.; 
W.  Nowack,  Lehrbuch  der  hebruischen  Archiiologie,  Krciburg  i. 
Ii.  and  Leipzig,  1894,  ii.  288;  art.  'Bed  Heifer'  in  IIDH  and 

JE.  James  Strahan. 


HEIR,  HERITAGE,  INHERITANCE 


HFJR,  HERITAGE,  INHERITANCE    543 


HEIR,  HERITAGE,  INHERITANCE.— 1.  Conno- 
tation of  the  terms  used. — The  words  K\r]poi>6nos, 
K\r]f>ovofila,  K\r]pofofi(u  (derived  from  K\ijpoi,  '  a  por- 
tion ')  have,  like  the  Heb.  verbs  trv,  hr.)  and  their 
derivatives,  which  they  render  in  the  LXX,  the 
idea  of  a  possession  rather  than  of  a  succession,  i.e. 
of  something  obtained  from  another  by  gift  (and 
not  gained  by  oneself,  KTTjfw.)  rather  than  of  some- 
thing that  one  has  become  possessed  of  through  the 
death  of  another  (see  Westcott,  Hebrews,  1889,  p. 
168).  This  is  especially  the  case  when  Israel  is 
regarded  as  the  'heir'  of  the  land  of  Canaan  ;  suc- 
cession to  the  Canaanites  is  not  prominent  in  the 
idea  of  this  inheritance,  for  Israel  inherited  from 
God,  not  from  the  i^eople  of  the  land.  In  this  sense 
K\T]povo/jda  is  nearly  equivalent  to  '  the  promise' ;  it 
is  a  free  gift  from  God — a  fact  emphasized  in  Ac  7*, 
where  Canaan  is  spoken  of,  and  20**,  where  the 
Christian  promises  are  in  question.  We  can  trace 
in  the  OT  (see  Sanday-Headlain  on  Ro  8^")  the  tran- 
sitions of  meaning,  from  the  simple  possession  of 
Canaan  to  the  permanent  and  assured  possession, 
then  to  the  secure  possession  won  by  Messiah,  and 
so  to  all  Messianic  bles.sings. 

On  the  other  hand,  tlie  Latin  heres  with  its 
derivatives,  used  by  the  Vulgate,  being  a  weak  form 
of  x^/x's,  '  bereft,'  has  the  idea  of  succession  ;  it 
means  literally  '  an  orphan,'  and  so  hints  at  the 
death  of  the  father.  The  English  '  heir,'  derived 
from  heres,  usually  suggests  that  the  father  is  alive, 
and  that  the  son  has  not  yet  come  into  possession  ; 
while  the  verb  '  to  inherit '  and  its  derivative 
'  inheritor '  usually  suggest  that  the  father  is  dead 
and  that  the  son  has  come  into  possession.  In  all 
the.se  English  words  the  idea  of  '  succession '  is 
prominent.  We  must,  therefore,  be  careful  to 
bear  in  mind  that  they  are  not  quite  equivalent  to 
the  Gr.  and  Heb.  words,  and  that  their  connota- 
tion is  slightly  different. 

It  may,  however,  be  noticed  that  when  K\Ttpov6fio%, 
etc.,  are  used  in  the  most  literal  sense  (see  below, 
3  (a)),  the  idea  of  succession  is  not  altogether 
absent ;  it  certainly  is  present  when  biadr\Ki]  is  used 
in  the  sense  of  '  a  will,'  as  in  He  O^^'-  (it  is  disputed 
whether  in  Gal  3^'*^-,  etc.,  it  means  'covenant'  or 
'  will ' :  for  the  latter  meaning  see  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
Galatians,  1899,  p.  349  ff.  ;  also  art.  CovEXAxf). 
But  it  is  obvious  that  where  Kkrjpovofjioi  is  used  of 
Israel's  inheritance  in  Canaan,  or  metaphorically  of 
the  Jewish  and  Christian  promises  of  salvation 
(below,  3),  the  idea  of  succession  must  pass  into 
the  background,  for  the  Heavenly  Father  does  not 
die  ;  and  this  fact  causes  the  difficulty  in  the  other- 
wise more  natural  interpretation  or  SiAd-qKij  as  a 
'testament '  or  '  will.' 

The  word  KXripos  in  Ac  26'*  and  Col  V-  is  rendered 
'  inheritance '  in  the  AV  and  the  RV  ;  and  in  1  P 
5'  Kkripoi.  is  in  the  AV  '  [God's]  heritage,'  which  is 
the  same  thing.  In  the  latter  passage  the  RV 
renders  '  the  charge  allotted  to  you,'  i.e.  the  per- 
sons who  are  allotted  to  your  care.  It  is  easy 
to  see  how  icX^pos,  '  a  lot,  came  to  mean  '  that 
which  is  obtained  by  lot'  (Ac  1'^  8-'),  and  so  'an 
inheritance '  with  the  connotation  ^ven  above.  In 
Col  1'*  the  fjieph  Tov  K\r)pov  is  equivalent  to  the  /lepls 
TTft  KXrjpovoijdas  of  Ps  16'.  In  Eph  1"  iK\TipdidTi/j.ev, 
which  in  the  AV  is  rendered  '  we  have  obtained  an 
inheritance'  (this  appears  to  have  no  good  justiti- 
cation),  is  translated  in  the  RV  '  we  were  made  a 
heritage,'  i.e.  '  we  have  been  chosen  as  God's  por- 
tion '  (J.  A.  Robinson,  Ephesians,  1903,  p.  34  ;  for 
the  metaphor  see  below,  3  (i)). 

2.  Laws  of  inheritance. — (a )  According  to  Jewish 
law  each  son  had  an  equal  share,  except  that  the 
eldest  son  had  double  the  portion  of  the  others 
(Dt  21").  This  law  did  not  apply  to  a  posthumous 
son,  or  in  regard  to  the  mother's  property,  or  to 
gain  that  might  have  accrued  since  the  father's 


death  (A.  Edersheim,  LT*,  1887,  ii.  243  f.  note). 
Thus  the  Prodigal  Son  (Lk  I5"''),  if  he  had  only 
one  brother,  would  have  received  on  his  father's 
death  one  third  of  the  property.  The  father  could 
not  disinherit  by  will,  but  in  nis  lifetime  he  could 
dispose  of  his  property  by  gift  as  he  liked,  and 
so  disinherit.  Wills  might  be  made  in  writing  or 
orally  (ib.  p.  259).  Daughters  were  excluded  if 
there  were  sons ;  but  if  there  were  no  sons,  the 
daughter — or,  presumably,  daughters — inherited, 
failing  whom  brothers,  failing  whom  father's 
brothers,  failing  whom  the  next  of  kin  (Nu  27*""). 
This  is  later  legislation,  for  at  first  daughters 
could  not  inherit ;  when  they  were  allowed  to 
become  heiresses  in  the  absence  of  sons,  they 
married  in  their  own  tribe,  so  as  to  keep  the 
inheritance  within  it  (Nu  36-"'*).  In  the  ordinary 
case,  however,  wherethere  were  sons,  the  daughters 
would  naturally  marry  into  another  family,  and 
cease  to  belong  to  that  of  their  father. 

(6)  The  Roman  and  the  Roman-Greek  laws  of 
inheritance  considerably  affected  the  XT  language. 
St.  Paul,  writing  to  persons  who  would  not  be 
familiar  with  Jewish  law,  refers  to  customs  and 
laws  which  they  would  at  once  understand.  Ac- 
cording to  Roman  law,  sons  must  inherit,  and  a  will 
leaving  property  away  from  sons  was  invalid 
(Ramsay,  op.  cit.  p.  344).  Sons  and  daughters 
inherited  alike  (Lightfoot  on  Gal  4").  Ramsay 
draws  out  the  differences  between  strictly  Roman 
law  and  the  law^  in  hellenized  countries  conquered 
by  Rome,  which  was  founded  on  Greek  law  :  the 
Romans  left  much  of  the  latter  in  force.  Accord- 
ing to  Greek  law,  a  son  could  be  disinherited  (Ram- 
say, p.  367).  In  Asia  Minor  and  Athens  a  daughter 
could  inherit,  and  an  adopted  son  probably  married 
the  heiress  {ib.  pp.  340,  363).  Daughters  in  Greek 
law  had  an  indefeasible  right  to  a  dowry  (ib.  p. 
367).  A  minor  came  of  age  at  the  time  fixed  by 
his  father's  will ;  if  there  was  no  will,  the  law  fixed 
the  period  of  nonage,  but  the  Greek  (Seleucid)  law 
diflered  from  the  Roman  as  to  the  period  (ib.  p.  392). 
See  RoMAX  Law. 

These  facts  help  us  to  understand  some  passages 
in  St.  Paul  which  speak  of  the  connexion  between 
sonship  and  heirship.  In  Ro  8'',  Gal  3^  4^ 
the  latter  is  deduced  from  the  former.  We  are 
God's  cliildren,  and  therefore  His  heirs.  '  Thou 
art  no  longer  a  bondservant  but  a  son  ;  and  if  a  son 
then  an  heir  through  God.'  '  If  ye  are  Christ's  then 
are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  heirs  according  to  promise.' 
Or  the  sonship  is  deduced  from  the  heirship  ;  in 
Gal  3"  '  they  which  be  of  faith ' — who  succeed  as 
heirs  to  Abraham's  faith  [here  the  idea  of  succes- 
sion may  be  faintly  seen] — '  the  same  are  sons  of 
Abraham.'  In  Col  3^  bondservants  are  promised 
'the  recompense  of  the  inheritance,'  but  this  is 
because  by  becoming  Christians  they  become  the 
sons  of  God.  Similarly  in  He  12*,  though  the  idea 
of  inheritance  is  not  explicitly  mentioned,  the 
promise  ( 1 1^)  can  be  attained  only  by  suffering  (cf . 
below,  3  {/)) ;  and  if  Christians  refuse  this,  they  are 
'bastards  and  not  sons.'  Bastards  cannot  inherit 
the  promise. 

3.  Usage  in  the  NT. — (a)  The  words  KX-npovo/jxn, 
KXrjpovo^Lia,  etc.,  are  used  literallv,  as  in  the  Parable 
of  the  Vineyard  (Mk  12^,  Mt  21^,  Lk  20'*),  where, 
however,  tliere  is  a  metaphorical  interpretation 
(see  (c)) ;  so  in  Lk  12'^  where  Jesus  is  asked  to 
divide  the  inheritance  between  two  brothers, 
apparently  to  settle  a  dispute,  and  in  Gal  4',  where 
the  son,  the  heir,  is  as  a  servant  during  his  nonage, 
though  lord  of  all  the  property,  the  reference  being 
to  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  The  words  are  also 
used  literally  in  the  NT  of  Canaan  as  the  land  of 
promise  ;  cf .  Ac  7',  where  it  is  meant  that  Abraham 
did  not  actually  enter  into  possession  ;  and  He  11"-, 
where  Isaac  and  Jacob  are  fellow-heirs  (avyKXrip- 


544    IIEIE,  HERITAGE,  INHERITANCE 


HELL 


ovofioi)  with  Abraham  ;  and  He  12",  where  Esau 
failed  to  inherit  tlie  blessing.  So  in  Gal  4""  (a 
quotation  from  Gn  21'")  Ishniacl,  the  son  of  the 
handmaid,  may  not  inherit  with  Isaac,  the  son  of 
the  f  reewoman  ;  this  also  is  applied  to  tlie  Law  and 
the  Gospel. 

(b)  From  the  literal  sense  the  passage  is  easy  to 
the  metaphorical — the  idea  of  the  Messianic  hope. 
Noah  became  '  heir  of  the  righteousness  which  is 
according  to  faith'  (He  IF).  Abraham  was 
promised  that  he  should  be  '  heir  of  the  world ' 
(Ko  4^^) — a  passage  which  has  given  some  difficulty 
to  commentators,  as  there  is  no  such  promise 
explicitly  made  in  the  OT  ;  the  reference  is  pro- 
bably to  Gn  12^  22'"  and  similar  passages :  in 
Abraham's  seed  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  should 
be  blessed  ;  cf.  Gn  18'8,  and  [of  Isaac]  2Q*.  This 
promise  is  quoted  in  Ac  3^'  by  St.  Peter,  and  in 
Gal  3'*  by  St.  Paul.  The  reference  in  Ko  4'^  can 
hardly  be  to  the  possession  of  Canaan,  which  would 
not  be  called  '  tlie  world '  (see  also  {d)  below).  By 
a  somewhat  ditl'erent  figure  Israel  is  said  in  the  OT 
to  be  God's  inheritance  or  portion  ( Dt  9-**  -^  32") ; 
and  in  the  LXX  addition  at  the  end  of  Est  4  the 
Jews  are  spoken  of  as  '  thy  [God's]  original  inherit- 
ance' (rrjp  i^  apxv^  KXrjpovo/xlav  ffov).  Conversely, 
God  is  said  to  be  the  inheritance  of  the  sons  of 
Aaron  or  of  the  Levites  (Nu  W,  Dt  10»,  etc.).  In 
the  sense  of  the  '  Messianic  hope'  (as  in  the  more 
literal  sense  of  the  possession  of  Canaan)  the  words 
'  inheritance '  and  '  promise '  become  almost  identi- 
cal, as  in  Gal  y\  He  6". 

(c)  The  '  promise '  is  fulfilled  by  Jesus  becoming 
incarnate.  He  describes  Himself  as  the  Heir  in  the 
Parable  of  the  Vineyard.  He  is  the  Heir  because 
He  is  the  Son,  the  First-born,  as  opposed  to  the 
servants — i.e.  the  prophets.  In  He  1^  Jesus  is 
called  the  '  heir  of  all  things '  because  He  was  the 
Instrument  in  creation  through  whom  the  Father 
made  the  worlds  (ro!>s  alQvas).  So  in  v.*  He  is  said 
to  have  '  inherited '  a  more  excellent  name  than 
the  angels.  The  metaphor  is  doubtless  based  on 
Ps  2" :  the  nations  are  given  to  Messiah  as  His 
inheritance  (see  Westcott,  op.  cit.  p.  8). 

{d)  In  Jesus,  Christians  are  Abraham's  heirs, 
whether  of  Jewish  or  Gentile  stock  (Ro  4'"'- ).  They 
inherit  Abraham's  faith,  and  are  therefore  his  sons  ; 
the  promise  did  not  depend  on  Abraham's  circum- 
cision, but  was  before  it,  though  it  was  conhrmed 
by  it ;  nor  was  it  dependent  on  the  Law.  Thus  all 
nations  are  blessed  in  Abraham,  and  he  is  the  heir 
of  the  world  (see  above  (A)).  In  Eph  l^'*  St.  Paul 
uses  in  regard  to  Gentile  Christians  the  very  words 
which  described  Israel's  privilege :  '  promise,' 
'  inheritance,'  '  emancipation,' '  possession  (Robin- 
son, op.  cit.  p.  36).  By  adoption  Ave  were  made 
fellow-heirs  with  Christ  (Ro  8'''),  and  a  lieritage 
(Eph  1").  Gentiles  are  fellow-heirs  Avith  Jews 
(Eph  3*',  Ac  26'") ;  and  Christians  are  fellow-heirs 
together  of  the  grace  of  life  (1  P  3^) — e.g.  husbands 
and  wives  are  fellow-heirs  because  they  are  Chris- 
tians.   See  art.  Adoption. 

(e)  The  inheritance  is  described  as  '  eternal  life ' 
in  Tit  3^  ('heirs  according  to  the  hope  of  eternal 
life' ;  cf.  the  Gospels :  Mt  ID^^,  Mk  10'^  [where  |1  Mt 
19^6  substitutes  'have'  for  'inherit'],  Lk  10'-«  W^); 
as  'the  kingdom'  in  Ja  2',  Eph  5'  ('kingdom  of 
Christ  and  God'),  and  by  inference  in  Col  P'^'- 
(these  seem  to  be  founded  on  our  Lord's  words 
recorded  in  Mt  25**,  where  the  predestination,  and 
the  giving,  of  the  kingdom  are  emphasized ;  cf. 
Dn  7^  and  the  Slavonic  Secrets  of  Enoch,  §9  ['  for 
(the  righteous)  this  place  is  prepared  as  an  eternal 
inheritance']).  In  He  l"the  inneritance  is  '  salva- 
tion,' and  so  by  inference  in  1  P  !•"•.  In  He  6'- 
it  is  '  the  promises.'  In  1  P  3"  it  is  the  '  grace  of 
life,'  i.e.  the  gracious  gift  of  eternal  life  (Alford, 
Bigg);  in  v.*  it  is  'a  blessing.'    It  is  the  portion 


(K\7/poj)of  the  saints  in  light  (Col  1"),  and  is  eternal 
(He9">),  incorruptible,  undefiled,  unfading  (1  P  I*). 
With  the  NT  idea  of  an  ethical  inheritance  or 
portion  we  may  compare  Wis  5',  Sir  4'^  (glory)  37» 
(conlidence  among  his  people),  the  f^thiopic  Book  of 
Enoch,  Iviii.  5  (the  heritage  of  faith),  Psalms  of 
Solomon,  xii.  8  (inheritance  of  the  promise  of  the 
Lord),  xiv.  7  (life  in  cheerfulness). 

(/)  One  condition  of  inheriting  is  self-denial  (Mt 
19-'«,  where  '  receive'  of  Mk  l(Pand  Lk  18**  becomes 
'  inherit'  when  applied  to  ♦  eternal  life ').  We  are 
'joint-heirs  with  Christ,  if  so  be  that  we  suffer 
with  [him] '  (Ro  8'').  We  must  imitate  those  who 
'  through  faith  and  patience  inherit  the  promises ' 
(He  6'^);  'he  that  overcometh  shall  inherit  and 
become  God's  son'  (Rev  2F — the  only  instance  in 
Rev.  of  K\r)povofjAti)).  Other  conditions  are  meek- 
ness and  humility  (1  P  3*,  '  not  rendering  evil  for 
evil  or  reviling  for  reviling,  but  contrariwise  bless- 
ing; for  hereunto  were  ye  called  that  ye  should 
inherit  a  blessing ' ;  cf.  Mt  5',  Ps  37'^)  and  sanctifi- 
cation  (Ac  20^^).  The  inheritance  is  forfeited  by 
self-indulgence  ( 1  Co  e**'-,  Gal  5''"),  and  is  not  reached 
by  '  flesh  and  blood  'or  by  '  corruption  '  (1  Co  IS"") 
— a  spiritual  regeneration  is  necessary  for  its 
attainment. 

(g)  In  a  real  sense  the  inheritance  is  already 
entered  upon.*  In  He  6'^  the  present  participle 
K\r]povo/jiovi>T(t)v  is  used :  'those  who  are  inheriting' 
(the  Vulg.  has  the  future  hereditabunt ,  but  some 
old  Lat.  MSS  have  the  present  j90<iMnij<r) ;  so  in  4* 
'  we  which  have  believed  do  enter — are  now  enter- 
ing {el(Tepx6fieda) — into  that  rest,'  not  as  Vulg.  in- 
grediemur,  'shall  enter' (see  Westcott,  op.  cit.  p. 
95).  The  kingdom  has  already  begun  (>It  3*^,  and 
the  parables  of  ch.  13).  Yet  the  inheritance  will 
not  be  fully  attained  till  the  Last  Judgment  (Mt 
2b^%  In  Eph  1'*  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  sealing 
'  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise  'as  'an  earnest 
{dppa^ibv)  of  our  inheritance,'  and  in  the  same  con- 
text (v.  ^"'•)  uses  language  which  shows  that  in  some 
sense  it  is  entered  upon  already  (cf.  2  Co  1^  5*). 
The  same  thing  is  seen  in  Col  1'-'- ;  Avhile  in  3** 
the  promise  to  Christian  bondservants  that  they 
should  receive  from  the  Lord  the  '  recompense  of 
the  inheritance '  rather  points  forward  to  the  world 
to  come.  So  in  IP  !*'•  the  reference  seems  to  be 
to  the  future :  '  an  inheritance  .  .  .  reserved  in 
heaven  for  you'  (so  Bi<'g ;  but  this  is  denied  by 
Hort  and  von  Soden).  In  this  connexion  we  must 
be  careful  not  to  confuse  our  thought  by  connect- 
ing 'inheritance'  with  our  own  death,  or  the 
'  death '  of  this  age.  There  is  no  idea  here  of  '  suc- 
cession '  (see  above,  1).  A.  J.  Maclean. 

HELL. — 1.  Context. — The  word  most  frequently 
so  rendered  in  the  EVis  the  Gr.  ^'Stjj  (see  HADES). 
In  the  NT,  outside  the  Gospels,  '  liell '  is  also  used 
in  translating  the  two  Gr.  words  -yiewa  ('  Gehenna ') 
and  the  very  rare  verbal  form  raprapAw  ('send  into 
Tartarus'). 

The  former  occurs  only  once,  viz.  in  Ja  3®, 
where  it  is  obviously  used  metaphorically  for  the 
evil  power  Avhich  is  revealed  in  all  forms  of  un- 
licensed, careless,  and  corrupt  speech.  In  the 
figurative  phrase  'set  on  fire  of  Gehenna,'  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  has  clearly  in  mind  the 
original  idea  of  tliat  name  in  the  a.ssociations  of 
the  Valley  of  Hinnom,  witli  its  quenchless  fire  and 
its  undying  Avorm  (2  Ch  28^  33«  Jer  7"). 

The  name  '  Tartarus '  (2  P  2^)  carries  us  out  of 
the  association  of  Hebrew  into  the  realm  of  Greek 
thought.  It  is  the  appellation  given  by  Homer  (//. 
viii.  13)  to  that  region  of  dire  punishment  allotted 
to  the  elder  gods,  Avhose  sAvay  Zeus  had  usurped. 

»  Cf.  the  concpption  of  the  heavenly  citizenship  and  eternal 
life  having  already  begun  in  this  world  :  Eph  2i9,  Jn  :fl*  XT',  1  Jn 
3U  6l2f.. 


HELL 


HELL 


545 


'I  will  take  and  cast  him  into  misty  Tarurus,'  says  Zeus, 
•  right  far  away,  where  is  the  deepest  guU  beneath  the  earth ; 
there  are  the  'g^te  of  iron  and  threshold  of  bronze,  as  far  be- 
neath Uades  as  heaven  is  high  above  the  earth.' 

The  Greek  word  passed  into  Hebrew  literattire, 
aiid  is  found  in  En.  xx.  2,  where  Uriel  is  said  to 
have  sway  over  the  world  and  over  Tartarus  (cf. 
Philo,  de  Ex.iecr.  %  6).  The  passage  in  2  Peter 
shows  evident  traces  of  the  effect  upon  it  of  the 
Book  of  Enoch,  so  it  is  not  necessary  to  go  further 
aheld  in  order  to  discover  the  source  of  the  word. 
In  the  Christian  sections  of  the  Sib.  Or.  the  word 
is  of  frequent  occurrence,  and  appears  sometimes  to 
be  used  as  equivalent  to  Gehenna  and  at  other  times 
as  the  name  for  a  special  section  of  that  region. 
Cf.  i.  126-129 : 

'  Down  they  went 
Into  Tartarean  chamber  terrible. 
Kept  in  firm  chains  to  pay  full  penalty 
In  Gehenna  of  strong,  furious,  quenchless  fire.' 

With  this  passage  should  be  carefully  compared 
En.  cviii.  3-6,  where  some  exceptional  features 
occur  in  the  description  of  heU.  The  passage  is 
in  a  fragment  of  the  earlier  Book  of  Noah,  now  in- 
corporated in  the  larger  work. 

'Their  names,'  sa\-s  the  seer,  'shall  be  blotted  out  of  the  book 
of  life,  and  out  of  the  holy  books,  and  their  seed  shall  be  de- 
stroyed for  ever,  and  their  spirits  shall  be  slain,  and  they  shall 
cry  and  make  lamentation  in  a  place  that  is  a  chaotic  wilderness, 
and  in  the  fire  shall  they  bum  ;  for  there  is  no  earth  there.  And 
I  saw  there  something  like  an  invisible  cloud ;  for  by  reason  of 
its  depth  I  could  not  look  over,  and  I  saw  a  flame  of  fire  Uazing 
brightly,  and  things  like  shining  mountains  circling  and  sweep- 
ing to  and  fro.  And  I  asked  one  of  the  holy  angels  who  was 
with  me,  and  said  unto  him :  "  What  is  this  shining  thing?  for 
it  is  not  a  heaven  but  only  the  flame  of  a  Mazing  fire,  and  the 
voice  of  weeping  and  cr>'ing,  and  lamentation  and  stroi^  pain." 
And  he  said  unto  me  :  "This  place  which  thou  seest — here  are 
cast  the  spirits  of  sinners  and  blasphemers,  and  of  tiioee  who 
work  wickedness,  and  of  those  who  pervert  everything  that  the 
Lord  hath  spoken  through  the  mouth  of  the  prophets." ' 

As  Charles  points  out  in  his  notes  on  this  passage, 
the  writer  has  confused  here  Gehenna  and  the  hell 
of  the  disobedient  stars,  conceptions  which  are 
kept  quite  distinct  in  the  earlier  sections  of  the 
book  (cf.  chs.  xxi.  and  xxii.). 

2.  The  idea  in  apostolic  and  sab-apostolic  litera- 
ture.— We  have  to  pass  beyond  the  strict  use  of 
the  word  '  hell '  to  discover  the  wider  range  of  the 
conception  in  the  literature  of  the  NT  that  comes 
within  the  scope  of  our  examination.  There  are 
two  or  three  terms  found  in  the  Apocalypse,  to 
which  we  must  now  turn. 

(a)  The  Apocahjpse  of  John. — (1)  In  Rev  9'  'the 
pit  of  the  abyss'  (see  Abyss)  is  regarded  as  the 
special  prison-house  of  the  devil  and  his  attendant 
evil  spirits.  This  conception  is  probably  derivable 
from  similar  sources  to  those  from  which  Tartarus 
comes,  though  there  are  pecnliarand  interesting  feat- 
ures abput  it,  details  of  which  will  be  found  in  the 
special  article  devoted  to  its  explanation.  Closely 
connected  with  the  idea  of  the  abyss  is  its  demonic 
ruler  Abaddon  (v.^i,  see  Abaddox),  whose  name 
figures  frequently  in  the  Wisdom -literature,  and 
is  generally  translated  in  the  LXX  by  a-riL\eia  = 
'  destruction.'  According  to  one  Hebrew  authority, 
Abaddon  is  itself  a  place-name,  and  designates  the 
lowest  deep  of  Gehenna,  from  which  no  sonl  can 
ever  escape  (see  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St. 
John,  in  loco).  In  the  Asc.  Is.  iv.  14  is  a  somewhat 
similar  passage :  '  The  Lord  wiU  come  with  His 
angels  and  with  the  armies  of  the  holy  ones  from 
the  seventh  heaven  .  .  .  and  He  will  drag  Beliar 
into  Gehenna  and  also  his  armies.' 

(2)  'The  lake  of  fire'  is  an  expression  found 
several  times  in  Rev.  (cf.  19^,  etc.).  It  is  described 
a.-i  the  appointed  place  of  punishment  for  the  Beast 
and  the  False  Prophet,  for  Death  and  Hades  them- 
selves, for  all  not  enrolled  in  the  Book  of  Life,  and 
iinally  for  those  guilty  of  the  dark  list  of  sins  given 
in  21*.  It  is  questionable  whether  the  original 
VOL.  I.— 35 


imagery  underlying  the  expression  is  derived  from 
the  story  of  the  Cities  of  the  Plain,  or  the  Pyri- 

Khlegethon— the  fiery-flamed  river — one  of  tlie  tri- 
utaries  of  the  Acheron  in  the  Homeric  vision  of 
the  under  world  (cf.  Od.  x.  513).  Probably  elements 
from  both  enter  into  it.  A  passage  in  the  Book  of 
the  Secrets  of  Enoch,  x.  1-6— remarkable  for  the  fact 
that  hell  is  here  set  in  the  third  heaven  (see  W. 
Bousset,  Die  Religion  des  Judentums,  Berlin,  1903, 
p.  273  n.) — has  close  parallels  with  the  passage  in 
Kev  21^  The  following  extracts  will  show  how 
close  and  suggestive  the  imagery  is — and  as  it 
probably  dates  before  a.d.  70,  the  actual  connexion 
is  not  improbable. 

'They  showed  me  there  a  very  terrible  place  .  .  .  and  all 
manner  of  tortures  in  that  place  .  .  .  and  there  is  no  light 
there,  bat  murky  fire  constantly  flameth  aloft,  and  there  is  a 
fiery  river  coming  forth,  and  that  whole  place  is  everj'where 
fire  .  .  .  and  those  men  said  to  me  :  This  place  is  prepared  Utt 
those  who  dishonoor  God,  who  on  earth  practise  .  .  .  magic- 
making,  aachantments,  and  devilish  witchcrafts,  and  who  bout 
of  their  wicked  deeds,  stealing,  lies,  calumnies,  envy,  ranooor, 
fornication,  murder  .  .  .  for  all  these  is  prepared  thia  place 
amongst  these,  for  eternal  inheritance '  (cf.  also  Ate,  I*,  iv.  15). 

In  the  Sib.  Or.  we  have  similar  language,  e.g.  iL 
313: 

'  And  then  shall  all  pass  through  the  bdmlng  stream 
Of  flame  unquenchable.' 

Again,  in  iL  353  ff.  we  have : 

'  And  deathless  angels  of  the  immortal  God. 
Who  ever  is,  shall  bind  with  lasting  bonds 
In  chains  of  flaming  fire,  and  from  above 
Punish  them  aU  I^  scom^  most  terribly ; 
And  in  Gehenna,  in  the  gloom  of  night. 
Shall  they  be  cast  'neath  many  horrid  beasts 
Of  Tartarus,  where  darkness  is  immense.'* 

(3)  In  Rev  20^*  '  the  lake  of  fire '  is  further  defined 
as  'the  second  death' — a  phrase  which  recurs  in 
other  passages  of  the  book  {e.g.  2^').  The  phrase 
seems  traceable  to  Jewish  sources,  for  it  occurs 
frequently  in  the  Targums  (cf.  Wetstein  on  Rev 
2").  It  seems  likely  that  the  Jews,  in  turn,  de- 
rived it  from  the  ideas  of  Egyptian  religion,  since 
we  find  Ani,  seated  on  his  judgment  throne,  say- 
ing, '  I  am  crowned  king  of  the  gods,  I  shall  not  die 
a  second  time  in  the  tinderworld'  {The  Book  of  the 
Dead,  ed.  E.  A.  Wallis  Budge,  London,  1901,  ch. 
xliv. ;  cf.  Moffatt  in  EOT,  1910,  on  Rev  2"). 

(b)  St.  Paid. — This  idea  of  the  'second  death' 
leads  naturally  to  St.  Paul's  use  of  '  death '  in  such 
passages  as  Ro  6^^.  When  the  Apostle  uses  the 
word,  he  evidently  intends  by  it  '  something  far 
deeper  than  the  natural  close  of  life.  .  .  .  For  him 
death  is  one  indivisible  experience.  It  is  the  cor- 
relative of  sin.  .  .  .  Death  is  regarded  as  separa- 
tion from  God.  ...  So  death,  conceived  as  the 
final  word  on  human  destiny,  becomes  the  synonym 
for  hopeless  doom'  (Kennedy,  St.  PavTs  Concqih 
tions  of  the  Last  Things,  1904,  pp.  113-117). 

(c)  Other  NT  books. — This  idea  is  also  strongly 
and  strikingly  put  in  Ja  1":  'Sin,  when  it  is  full- 
grown,  bringeth  forth  death'  (cf.  2  Ti  l^".  He  2"). 
In  Jude  *•  ^^  and  2  P  2"  we  have  the  expressions 

'  darkness '  and  '  the  blackness  of  darkness '  used  as 
descriptive  epithets  of  the  place  of  punishment. 
Once  more  we  are  face  to  face  with  the  peculiar 
imagery  of  apocalyptic,  and  we  recall  how  the 
word  is  employed  in  the  Gospels,  especially  in  the 
phrase  'the  outer  darkness'  (cf.  Mt  8^).  In  En. 
X.  4  we  read,  '  Bind  Azazel  hand  and  foot,  and  cast 
him  into  the  darkness,'  and  throughout  that  book 
the  imagery  frequently  recurs.  The  figure  is_  a 
natural  one,  and  needs  no  elaboration  to  make  its 
force  felt. 

(rf)  Apostolic  Fathers. — In  turning  to  the  Chris- 
tian literature  of  the  1st  cent,  that  lies  outside  the 
NT,  we  do  not  find  any  very  striking  additions  to 

*  These  translations  are  taken  from  the  English  version  by 
M.  S.  Terry,  New  York,  1899. 


)46 


HELL 


HELL 


the  ideas  contained  in  the  pages  of  the  canonical 
books.  In  Did.  16  we  read,  'All  created  mankind 
shall  come  to  the  fire  of  testing,  and  many  shall  be 
offended  and  perish,'  which  is  only  a  faint  reflexion 
of  the  Synoptic  statements.  In  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,  xx.,  the  way  of  sin  is  described  as  'a 
way  of  eternal  death  with  punishment,'  and  then 
follows  a  list  of  sins  reminiscent  of  Rev  2P.  In 
the  8th  Similitude  of  the  Sliepherd  of  Hernias — 
that  of  the  tower-builders — there  are  many  refer- 
ences to  judgment,  but  they  are  couched  in  such 
general  terms  as  'shall  lose  his  life,'  'these  lost 
their  life  finally,'  or  '  these  perished  altogether 
unto  God.'  In  Sim.  ix.  xviii.  2  there  is  a  striking 
passage  differentiating  between  the  punishment  of 
the  ignorant  and  those  who  sin  knowingly  :  '  They 
that  have  not  known  God,  and  commit  wickedness, 
are  condemned  to  death  ;  but  they  that  have 
known  God  and  seen  His  mighty  works,  and  yet 
commit  wickedness,  shall  receive  a  double  punisli- 
ment,  and  shall  die  eternally.'  In  ix.  xxviii.  7  it 
is  said :  '  Confess  that  ye  have  the  Lord,  lest 
denying  Ilim  ye  be  delivered  into  prison  (eJs 
decr/xuT^piov).'  There  can  be  no  doubt  here  that 
'  prison '  is  meant  to  signify  the  place  of  punish- 
ment beyond  death.  Tiie  imagery  may  be  derived 
from  the  saying  in  Mt  5-''-^,  but  we  must  remember 
that  '  bonds  and  imprisonment '  were  frequently 
the  terms  in  which  the  ai)ocalyptic  literature 
figured  future  punishment. 

(e)  First-century  apocalypses. — The  conception 
that  meets  us  in  tlie  Parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus, 
viz.  that  the  places  of  bliss  and  torment  are  visible 
the  one  from  the  other,  meets  us  in  two  or  three 
apocalypses  of  the  1st  century.  In  the  section  of 
2  Esdras  discovered  in  1875,  we  have  one  of  these 
passages  (vii.  36-38) : 

'  And  the  pit  (Lat.  "  place")  of  torment  shall  appear,  and  over 
against  it  shall  be  the  place  of  rest:  and  the  furnace  of  hell 
(Lat.  "Gehenna")  shall  be  shewed,  and  over  against  it  the 
paradise  of  delijfht.  And  there  shall  the  Most  High  say  to  the 
nations  that  are  raised  from  the  dead,  See  ye  and  understand 
whom  ye  have  denied,  or  whom  ye  have  not  served,  or  whose 
commandments  ye  have  despised.  Look  on  this  side  and  on 
that :  here  is  delight  and  rest,  and  there  fire  and  torments.' 

In  Ass.  Mos.  X.  10  occurs  the  passage  : 

'And  thou  wilt  look  from  on  high  and  see  thine  enemies  in 

Gehenna,  and  thou  wilt  recognize  them  and  rejoice,  and  thou 

wilt  give  thanks  and  confess  thy  Creator.' 

Very  similar  passages  are  found  in  the  Booh  of 
the  Secrets  of  Enoch,  chs.  x.,  xl.,  and  xli. 

This  idea  is  even  more  clearly  set  forth  in  the 
Apocalypse  of  Peter,  and  forms  the  beginning 
of  the  famous  passage  in  which  is  set  forth  the 
punishment  of  sinners,  in  the  manner  that  to  later 
ages  is  most  familiar  in  the  pages  of  Dante,  wliere 
the  forms  of  torment  bear  an  appropriate  relation 
to  the  sins  committed.  The  passage  begins  at 
§  20,  and  follows  immediately  on  the  description  of 
Heaven,  with  these  words  : 

'And  I  saw  another  place  over  against  that,  very  dark  :  and 
it  was  the  place  of  punishment :  and  those  who  were  punished 
there  and  the  punishing  angels  had  a  dark  raiment  like  the  air 
of  the  place.  And  some  were  there  hanging  by  the  tongue: 
these  were  those  who  blasphemed  the  way  of  righteousness,  and 
under  them  was  fire  burning  and  punishing  tiiein.  And  there 
was  a  great  lake,  full  of  flaming  mire,  in  which  were  certain 
men  who  bad  perverted  righteousness,  and  tormenting  angels 
afHicted  them." 

In  these  verses  we  trace  the  similarity  to  ideas 
and  figures  we  have  already  discovered  in  the  Apoc. 
of  John  and  elsewhere,  but  the  furtlier  descriptions 
of  this  Inferno  borrow  elements  from  Greek  and 
other  sources,  and  are  considerably  more  extra- 
vagant than  anything  within  the  limits  of  the  1st 
century.  It  may,  however,  be  onlj'  a  development 
of  the  conce))tions  found  in  such  2nd  cent,  docu- 
ments as  Jude  and  2  Peter. 

(/)  Josephns. — An  interesting  witness  to  con- 
temporary Jewish    thought   in    the    1st  cent,   is 


Josephus,  who  has  two  references  to  the  belief  of 
the  Pharisees  in  the  matter  of  future  punishment. 
In  Ant.  XVIII.  i.  3  we  read  : 

'They  also  believe  that  souls  have  an  immortal  vigour  in 
them,  and  '  ha  .  under  the  earth  ihere  will  be  rewards  or  punish- 
ments, acc<  rd  ng  as  they  have  lived  virtuously  or  viciously  in 
this  life;  aid  the  latter  are  to  be  detained  in  an  everlasting 
prison,  but  that  the  former  shall  have  power  to  revive  and  live 
again.'  Again  in  BJ  u.  viii.  14,  quotuig  the  doctrine  of  the 
Pharisees,  he  claims  their  view  to  be  '  that  the  souls  of  bad  men 
are  subject  to  eternal  punishment.' 

{q)  Testament  of  Abraham  and  Pistia  Sophia. — 
Before  our  survey  of  the  literature  closes,  note 
must  be  taken  of  two  striking  and  somewhat 
fantastic  conceptions  contained  in  two  works, 
which  probably  set  forth,  among  their  obviously 
later  material,  elements  of  an  earlier  tradition. 
The  first  is  found  in  the  Testament  of  Abraham, 
which  may  date  in  its  origin  from  the  2nd  cent,  of 
our  era,  and  doubtless  some  of  its  contents  are 
from  a  much  earlier  period.  In  its  present  form  it 
appears  to  issue  from  a  Jewish-Christian  source, 
and  its  place  of  origin  seems  to  be  Egypt.  Ele- 
ments of  Egyptian  thought  enter  into  its  literary 
form,  among  the  most  striking  of  which  is  the  idea 
of  the  weighing  of  .souls— a  scene  that  often  occurs 
on  the  Egyptian  pagan  monuments.  The  trial  of 
souls  is  tlireefold — once  before  Abel,  at  a  later 
time  by  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  and  finally  by 
the  Lord  Himself.  Abraham  is  permitted  to  wit- 
ness the  procedure  of  judgment,  and  he  finds  two 
angels  seated  at  a  table.  The  one  on  the  right 
hand  records  the  good  deeds,  and  the  one  on  the 
left  the  evil  deeds  of  the  soul  to  be  tested.  In 
front  of  the  table  stands  an  angel  with  a  balance 
on  which  the  souls  are  weighed,  while  another 
has  a  trumpet  having  within  it  all-consuming  fire 
whereby  the  souls  are  tried.  These  more  elaborate 
.and  somewhat  mechanical  methods  form  a  link 
Avith  the  imagery  of  medirevalism,  but  also  prove 
the  manner  in  w'hich  Christianity  was  proceeding 
along  eclectic  lines,  and  taking  to  itself  ideas  and 
figures  from  other  religions. 

In  the  curious  work  known  as  the  Pistis  Sophia, 
probably  of  Valentinian,  and  certainly  of  Gnostic 
origin,  we  have  a  bizarre  conception  of  the  place 
of  punishment — described  as  'the  outer  darkness.' 
It  is  presented  in  the  form  of  a  huge  dragon  with 
its  tail  in  its  mouth,  the  circle  thus  formed  en- 
girdling the  whole  earth.  Within  the  monster  are 
the  regions  of  punishment — '  for  there  are  in  it 
twelve  dungeons  of  horrible  torment.'  Each 
dungeon  is  governed  by  a  monster-like  ruler,  and 
in  these  are  punished  the  worst  of  sinners,  e.g. 
sorcerers,  blasphemers,  mv.rdcrers,  the  unclean, 
and  those  who  remain  in  the  doctrines  of  error. 
To  express  the  awfulness  of  the  torture,  it  is  said 
that  tbe  lire  of  the  under  world  is  nii^e  times 
hotter  than  that  of  earthly  furnaces  ;  the  fire  of 
the  great  chaos  nine  times  liotter  than  that  of  the 
under  world  ;  the  fire  of  the  'rulers'  nine  times 
hotter  than  that  of  the  great  chaos  ;  but  the  fire  of 
the  dragon  is  seventy  times  more  intense  in  its 
heat  than  that  of  the  'rulers'  !  In  S  Baruch,  iv. 
and  V.  there  is  the  mention  of  a  dragon  in  close 
connexion  with  Hades,  and  in  the  latter  chapter 
Hades  is  said  to  be  his  belly  (cf.  Hughes'  notes 
on  the  passage  in  Charles'  Apoc.  and  Pseudepig.). 
We  are  at  least  reminded  by  such  passages  of  the 
Jonali  legend,  and  it  maj'  well  be  that  behind  all 
three  is  a  conmion  origin.  The  dragon  is  obviously 
an  old  Semitic  myth,  and  this  particular  form  of  it 

{irobably  gives  fresh  significance  to  the  words  in 
iev  20^:  'the  dragon,  the  old  seri>ent,  which  is 
the  Devil  and  Satan.' 

8.  General  considerations.— Several  points  of 
importance  emerge  from  our  study  of  these  refer- 
ences in  the  literature  of  the  1st  century. 

(1)  The  surprisingly  few  passages  in  the  NT  in 


HELL 


HELLENISM 


647 


tchich  the  tcord  'heir  (or  even  the  idea  it  conveys) 
occurs. — Outside  the  Gospels  and  the  Apocalypse, 
there  are  practically  no  occasions  on  which  we  tind 
it  employed.  Its  a'bsence  from  the  writings  of  St. 
Paul,  Hebrews,  and  the  Epistles  of  John  is  most 
noteworthy.  Our  surjirise  is  not  lessened  by  the 
recollection  of  the  fact  t  hat,  according  to  the  Rabbis, 
•  seven  things  were  created  liefore  the  world — 
Torah,  Ge/tenna,  the  Garden  of  Eden,  the  Throneof 
Glory,  the  Sanctnarj',*Repentance,  and  the  Name 
of  Messiah.'  In  St.  Paul  at  least,  six  of  these  are 
frequently  in  evidence,  and  this  gives  more  signifi- 
cance to  his  silence  about  the  seventh. 

(2)  The  re-if rained  sanity  of  the  references  that 
do  occur. — When  we  compare  even  the  lurid 
images  of  the  Apocalyiise  with  those  we  have  cited 
(and  even  more  ^^nth  those  that  may  be  found  else- 
where in  the  same  books)  from  contemporarj'  works 
of  a  similar  character,  we  cannot  but  be  impressed 
with  the  soberness  of  the  language.  There  is  noth- 
ing of  the  morbid  curiosity  and  unpleasant  linger- 
ing on  horrors,  to  say  nothing  of  the  sense  of  gloat- 
ing over  vengeance  and  cruelty,  tliat  we  find  in 
so  many  kindred  passages.  TeiTible  imageiy  is 
sometimes  employed,  but  it  is  clearly  imbued  with 
a  high  moral  aim,  and  designed  to  convey  a  clearly 
spiritual  purjwse.  The  absence  of  such  allegoriz- 
ing methods  as  those  of  Philo  is  also  noteworthy. 
Imagery  is  the  method  in  which  the  truths  are  here 
conveyed,  not  allegor}-. 

(3)  T/ie  obvious  dependence  on  the  teaching  of  the 
Gospels  for  all  that  is  said  about  hell. — It  would  be 
hard  to  point  to  any  passage  in  the  NT  that  con- 
veyed any  fresh  or  fuller  ideas  about  the  place  of 
pimishnient,  its  nature  and  purpose,  than  are  to  be 
found  in  words  attributed  to  Jesus  in  the  Gospels. 
This  is  certainly  noteworthy  and  significant,  even 
if  the  Gospel  teaching  on  Gehenna  is  an  echo  of 
current  ideas.  In  form  it  probably  is,  but  in 
ethical  content  it  surely  goes  deeper,  and  we  are 
made  to  feel  that  in  the  conception  of  the  speaker 
this  place  also  is  founded  by  the  Eternal  Love — it 
too  is  part  of  the  Father's  Universe.  Dante,  the 
greatest  aiwcalyptist  of  subsequent  ages,  had  caught 
the  true  evangelical  spirit  of  this  most  awful  doc- 
trine when  he  ^^Tote : 

'  Jastice  incited  my  sublime  Creator ; 
Created  me  divine  Omnipotence, 
The  highest  Wisdom  and  the  primal  Love " 

(Inferno,  ill.  i). 

(4)  The  permanent  spiritual  lessons  to  be  derived 
from  the  descriptions  of  future  punishment. — (a) 
All  evil  powers—death,  sin,  and  their  forces — are 
to  be  finally  destroyed  in  the  fires  of  Divine  judg- 
inent  (Rev  iO*"-  ^•^,  2  P  2*.  Jude  i').  According  to 
St.  Paul,  all  powers  that  make  against  Christ  and 
His  Kingdom  are  to  come  to  final  ruin  (cf.  2  Th 
28-10,  1  Co  lo-*-^). 

(b)  Evil  in  the  heart  of  men  must  entail  punish- 
ment and,  if  persisted  in,  eternal  loss  and  shame, 
and  a  death  that  is  more  than  death  (Ko  6^**,  Rev 
21»).  The  terrible  nature  of  moral  evil,  and  of  the 
heart's  persistent  rebellion  against  God,  is  the  ap- 
palling reality  that  renders  these  pictures  of  judg- 
ment truly  significant,  and  reileems  them  from 
being  the  mere  pageantry  of  a  heatetl  imagination. 
Whatever  we  may  say  of  their  outward  fonn,  there 
is  an  inexpressible  giandeur  behind  them  that  rests 
in  a  true  conception  and  representation  of  the 
pi\-ine  Holiness.  '  The  fear  of  hell '  in  these  pages 
is  much  more  than  '  the  hangman's  whip ' ;  it  is  the 
cry  of  the  soul  in  the  presence  of  Him  who  is  re- 
vealetl  as  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity, 
but  who  is,  nevertheless,  the  Ketleemer  of  His 
Universe. 

LiTKRATCRE. — See  artt.  Hade-s,  Abtss,  Lifk  axd  Death,  etc., 
in  this  Dictionary,  and  also  in  HDB,  DCG,  EBr,  and  EBi.  In 
addition  to  the  works  referred  to  in  the  body  of  the  article, 


the  following  should  be  consulted :  R.  H.  Charles's  separate 
editions  of  the  various  apocalj-pses,  the  great  work  edited  by 
him.  The  Apocrypha  and  PteudepigrapM  oj  the  OT,  Oxford, 
1913,  and  Between  the  Old  and  Sew  Tetlament*,  London,  1914  ; 
E.  Hennecke,  Heutett.  Apokryphen  and  Handbuek  zu  den 
neutett.  Apokrfphen,  Tubingen,  1904  ;  J.  A.  Robinson  and  M. 
R.  James,  The  Gogpel  aec  to  Peter  and  the  Reflation  of 
Peter,  London,  1892;  A.  Harnack,  IJler  da*  gnotl.  Btiek 
PistisSophia  {=TU \u.  2X  Leipzig,  1891;  R.  H.  Charles,  A 
Critical  UUtory  of  the  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Lije\  London, 
1913 ;  S.  D.  F.  Salmond.  The  Chrigtian  Doctrine  of  Immor- 
talittf*,  Edinburgh,  1901 ;  E.  C.  Dewick,  Primitive  Chrigtian 
Etehatotogv,  CambridKe,  1912;  W.  O.  E.  Oesterley,  The 
Doctrine  of  the  Last  Thittgs,  London,  1908 ;  A.  Schweitzer, 
The  Quest  of  the  Historical  Jesus,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1910 ;  G. 
Dalman,  The  Words  of  Jesus,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1902  ;  P. 
Volz,  Judisehe  Eschatologie,  Tubingen,  1903. 

G.  CuRPJE  Maetix. 

HELLENISM The  word  '  HeUenisra,'  which  in 

Greek  writers  stands  for  Greek  civilization,  has 
now  come  to  be  used  with  a  four-fold  meaning. 
(1)  Since  Droysen,  it  describes  a  particular  peri«i 
of  Greek  history  and  civilization  ;  (2)  it  is  a  name 
for  the  influence  of  tliis  Greek  civilization  on  the 
Oriental  world ;  (3)  it  marks  a  certain  stream  in 
Judaism ;  and  (4)  it  denotes  a  party  in  primitive 
Christianity.  (1)  and  (2)  are  closely  related  to  one 
another,  and  so  are  (3)  and  (4). 

1.  Hellenism  as  a  period.— The  reign  of  Alex- 
ander the  Great  marks  a  period  in  Greek  history, 
not  only  by  reason  of  the  expansion  of  Greek 
influence  but  also  owing  to  the  rise  of  a  new  spirit 
which  affected  language,  literature,  art,  philosophy, 
science,  civilization  in  general,  and  religion. 

See  J.  G.  Droysen,  Gesehichte  des  Hellenistnus-,  Gotba, 
1S77-78 ;  J.  Kaerst,  Geschiehte  des  keUenistisehen  Zeitalters, 
Leipzig,  1901-09 ;  P.  Corssen,  '  (Jber  B^^riif  und  Wesen  des 
HeUenismus,'  ZSTW  ix.  (1908)  81-96. 

(a)  Language.  —  The  Greek  tribes,  hitherto 
separated  by  rivalry  and  diflerence  of  dialect  and 
customs,  became  mixed.  A  common  language,  the 
so-called  '  Koine,'  combining  in  its  vocabulary  and 
its  grammatical  forms  elements  from  various  dia- 
lects, took  the  place  of  the  local  dialects,  and 
succeeded  even  in  robbing  the  Attic  of  its  domin- 
ating position  in  literature.  Words  never  used  by 
Attic  writers  but  found  in  Ionic  poets  or  in  Doric 
inscriptions  became  current :  as,  e.g.,  yoyyv^ia,  kX/- 
pavos,  and  so  did  forms  like  Xadj,  va6s,  fin.yiv  instead 
of  IjP,  olSafief  instead  of  Ifffier.  The  formation  of 
compounds  went  on ;  as  the  prepositions  had  lost 
somewhat  of  their  meaning,  two  prepositions  were 
combined :  efaxoorAXw.  eriSiaTdcffw,  e-rurwdyw ; 
and  again  nouns  were  formed  from  these  com- 
pound verbs :  e|axo<rroX-ij,  eTrididrayfia,  eTuTvyaytiryri. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  tendency  to  use  the 
simple  where  in  former  times  a  compoimd  would 
have  been  used.  The  grammar  lost  certain  moods 
and  tenses :  the  dual  and  the  optative  became 
almost  obsolete ;  the  pluperfect  was  rare.  The 
syntax  tended  to  become  more  simple  ;  the  beauti- 
ful periods  constructed  by  the  Attic  cla-ssics  by 
means  of  particii)les  and  infinitives  used  as  nouns 
disappeared  ;  the  infinitive  was  generally  expressed 
by  tva  or  5s-a«  used  without  a  final  sense. 

Most  of  these  changes  can  be  explained  from 
the  point  of  view  of  the  evolution  of  the  Greek 
language  itself.  A  language  is  always  growing 
and  changing,  and  the  Koine  marks  only  a  step  in 
a  long  process  from  the  Greek  of  Homer's  time  to 
modern  Greek.  Of  course  this  development  did 
not  always  follow  a  straight  line :  there  was  a 
constant  reaction,  on  the  part  of  certain  authors, 
against  the  popular  current,  in  favour  of  culturecl 
literary  forms ;  besides  the  rich  and  flowery 
Asianism  an  artificial  Atticism  wa*<  cultivated  by 
the  ^vriters  of  the  Hellenistic  period. 

Moreover,  it  is  evident  that  an  admixture  of 
Oriental  elements  also  influenced  the  Greek 
language.  The  vocabulary  of  this  period  shows 
Persian  words  {rapddeuros,  dyyaptveir),  as  well  as 


648 


HELLENISM 


HELLENISM 


Hebrew  ami  Aramaic;  (irdo-xa,  aafi^aTov),  Egyptian 
(irairvpos,  'I'apaw),  and  Koman  (Srivdpiov,  KovaruSia). 
Many  of  the  grammatical  and  syntactical  pheno- 
mena may  be  explained  more  readily  by  refer- 
ence to  the  ])arallel.s  in  these  languages.  One 
Hebraism  is  vpoaioirov  tivos  \afipdveiv,  whence  come 
wpoffwTroXz/Trrwp  and  npoffUTToKrjxf/ia. 

See  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  Sonrcen  of  NT  Greek,  Edinbur^'h, 
1895  ;  A.  N.  Jannaris,  An  Ilistorical  Greek  Grammar,  London, 
1897  ;  A.  Deissmann,  art. '  Uellenistisches  Gricchisch '  in  J'JiE'-> 
vii.  627-039,  J'hUolony  of  the  Greek  Bible,  Eng.  tr.,  London, 
1908 ;  A.  Thumb,  />("«  griechische  Sprache  im  Zeitalter  des 
Hellenismus,  Strassburg,  1901 ;  J.  H.  Moulton,  Prolegomena 
to  the  Grammar  of  the  JiT3,  Edinburgh,  1908.  See  aiso  next 
article. 

{b)  Literature. — The  period  of  Hellenism  marks 
a  decrease  in  skilful  composition,  and  at  the  same 
time  e.xhibits  much  artificiality.  The  writing  be- 
comes more  popular  in  form  as  well  as  in  contents  : 
romance  and  novel  attain  to  a  large  circulation ; 
there  is  a  demand  for  biographjy,  special  history, 
travellers'  guide-books,  and  the  like  ;  many  subjects 
are  treated  in  the  form  of  letters.  Pseudepigraphy, 
i.e.  writing  under  an  assumed  name  of  some  great 
authority  of  former  times,  is  very  common.  By 
indulging  in  this  practice,  writers  acknowledge 
their  own  lack  of  authority  and  originality.  To 
imitate  classical  models  well  is  the  gieat  aim  of 
most  of  them,  and  this  is  what  they  are  trained  to 
do  in  the  schools.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  do 
their  best  work  when  MTiting  in  the  ordinary  style 
of  popular  talk ;  but  they  are  not  aware  of  this, 
and  always  aim  at  something  more  artistic,  taking 
the  artificial  for  the  artistic.  Many  Hellenistic 
writers  show  a  special  interest  in  strange  countries, 
peoples,  languages,  and  customs. 

See  U.  von  Wilamowitz-MoellendorfF,  &'e«cfcicfc(edergfriecA- 
ischen  Litteratur'i  (Kultur  der  Gegemrart,  i.  8,  Leipzig,  1907) ; 
F.  Susemihl,  Geschichte  der  griechigchen  Litteratur  in  der 
Alezandrinerzeit,  do.  1891-92 ;  W.  Christ,  Geschichte  der 
grieehischen  Litteratur^,  ed.  O.  Stiihlin  and  W.  Schmid,  Munich, 
1908-09. 

(c)  Art. — The  same  holds  true  of  the  fine  arts. 
It  is  a  period  of  decadence,  a  natural  decrease  of 
physical  and  mental  energy  following  on  a  period 
of  highest  achievement.  In  this  special  case  the 
movement  was  determined  by  Oriental  influences. 
The  idealism  of  classic  Greek  art  gave  place  to 
realism  and  symbolism  ;  natural  brightness  was 
turned  into  austere  solemnity,  beauty  into  mag- 
nificence, charm  into  sensuality. 

See  Springrer-Michaelis,  Uandhuch  der  Kunstgesehichte,  i. 
(=Z)a«.(i«ert!<»i!<),  Leipzig,  1911;  L.  vonSybel,  Weltgcschichte 
der  Ktinst  im  Altertum^,  Marburg,  1903;  S.  Reinach,  The 
Story  of  Art  throughout  the  Ages,  London,  1904 ;  J.  Strzy- 
gowski,  Orient  oder  Rom,  Leipzig,  1901 ;  E.  A.  Gardner,  art. 
'  Art  (Greek  and  Roman) '  in  Ji'JiE  i.  870. 

{d)  Philosojyhy.— The  philosophers  of  Hellenism 
are  mostly  eclectics ;  the  general  tendency  is  to- 
wards the  practical  questions  of  life.  Stoicism 
and  Cynicism  are  the  leading  schools ;  their 
teacliing  is  popular  and,  indeed,  is  very  often  a 
kind  of  preaching.  Philosophy  becomes  a  sub- 
stitute for  religion :  it  is  moral  education.  Here 
again  the  lack  of  originality  makes  itself  con- 
spicuous by  tlie  fact  that  recent  products  appear 
either  under  old  names  or  as  commentaries  on  old 
books.  There  is  a  tendency  to  rely  on  the  authority 
of  the  ancients.  Homer  and  I'lato  are  treated  as 
the  divine  te.vt-books  from  which  one  has  to  derive 
all  doctrines  by  means  of  allegorical  inter))retation. 
Mythology  is  turned  into  metaphysics  and  physics, 
or  psychology  and  morals.  There  is  a  particular 
interest  in  psychological  analysis. 

See  Ed.  Zeller,  Die  Philosophie  der  Griechen*,  Leipzig,  1909, 
vol.  iii. 

(e)  Hi.s'/ori/  and  science. — The  Hellenistic  jieriod 
is  one  of  collecting  :  Aristotle's  work  is  continued, 
but  the  i)ower  of  pervading  the  materials  collected 
with  a  real  constructive  spirit  is  absent.  There- 
fore history  becomes  a  collection  of  single  tales  of 


various  kinds  and  often  of  very  difierent  value,  not 
sifted  critically,  but  put  to^'ctiier  without  even  an 
effort  to  connect  them.  Similarly  science  is  no- 
thing but  a  vast  pile  of  collected  materials,  all 
kinds  of  real  observations  being  mixed  ui>  with  the 
most  ridiculous  superstitions.  Great  store  is  set 
by  what  is  extraordinary,  anil  only  the  miraculous 
is  regarded  as  of  any  importance. 

See  J.  P.  Mabaffy,  Greek  Life  and  Thought  from  the  Death 
of  Alexander  to  the  Roman  Cotujuenl'^,  London,  1896. 

(/)  Civilization  in  general. — Hellenism  marks 
a  period  of  the  highest  civilization,  in  the  .sense 
that  all  the  comforts  of  life  were  highly  developed. 
Travelling  had  become  fairly  easy,  and  whatever 
luxuries  a  refined  life  required  were  brought  by 
tradesmen  from  the  remotest  parts  of  the  worlci. 
Houses  were  furnished  in  the  most  costly  way, 
marbles,  metals,  ivory-carvings,  and  mural  paint- 
ings being  frequently  used  in  decoration.  Even 
the  cheap  furniture  in  daily  use  by  poor  ixjople 
was  seldom  without  decoration. 

The  social  differences  were  enormous :  there  were 
a  few  very  rich  people  while  the  majority  of  men 
were  poor.  Production  was  carried  on  by  slaves, 
who  were  imported  in  great  numbers  from  the 
East ;  although  there  was  also  room  for  the  Avork  of 
free  labourers.  Politics  did  not  occupy  the  citizen 
much,  for  power  had  passed  from  the  democracy 
to  the  monarchy.  The  free  citizen  devoted  his 
time  mostly  to  athletics,  and  the  games  were 
always  attended  by  a  large  crowd.  These  people 
were  accustomed  to  be  fed  and  entertained  by  the 
government  or  by  rich  politicians.  To  musical  and 
theatrical  performances  were  added  competitions 
between  orators.  The  cruel  and  sometimes  vulgar 
amusements  of  the  circus  came  more  and  more  into 
vogue,  and  the  people  even  wanted  criminals  to  be 
executed  in  the  arena.  Hellenistic  civilization 
made  people  unfeeling  and  at  the  same  time  Aveak 
and  effeminate  ;  in  spite  of  the  humane  doctrines 
of  the  Stoa,  many  people  were  cruel  to  their  slaves 
and  employees.  Human  life  was  not  valued,  and 
suicide  was  frequent. 

See  p.  Wendland,  Die  hellenistisch-rmnische  Kultur'^^(\n  H. 
laetzmann's  Z/anrf6?(cA  2«»n.  Ay,  new  ed.,  Tubingen,  1912);  F. 
Baumg:arten,  F.  Poland,  R.  Wagner,  DiehellenischeKuitun^, 
Leipzig,  1913  ;  J.  P.  Mahaffy,  The  iiilver  Age  of  the  Greek  World, 
Chicago,  1906. 

ig)  Religion. — The  old  family-cults  and  State- 
cult  were  continued  as  a  matter  of  course ;  but 
there  was  a  notable  reduction  of  local  cults,  the 
greater  gods,  so  to  speak,  swallowing  up  the  minor 
heroes.  On  the  other  hand,  a  tendency  towards 
deification  and  hero-worship  was  alwaj's  introdu- 
cing new  objects  of  worship.  The  most  prominent 
was  the  worship  of  the  kings,  and,  in  the  Koman 
period,  of  the  Emperor. 

As  early  as  Plato  the  old  Greek  religion  had 
changed  from  a  more  or  less  cheerful  worship  of 
Nature  into  a  kind  of  gloomy  mysticism.  The 
influence  of  the  Oriental  cults  strengthened  this 
tendency.  Man  tried  to  get  rid  of  his  own  mortal 
nature  by  entering  into  mystical  union  with  tiie 
divine  nature.  Immortalitj-,  continuation  of  life, 
became  the  prominent  notions,  and  this  brought 
to  the  front  the  conceptions  of  the  hereafter  and 
of  the  judgment,  of  a  life  of  bliss  and  of  penalties 
in  the  other  world.  The  feeling  of  guilt  became 
stronger  and  stronger.  Men  tried  by  all  means  to 
get  rid  of  sin,  wliich,  however,  did  not  mean  to  them 
moral  so  much  as  physical  evil.  Thus  the  Oriental 
rites  gained  all  the  greater  influence,  because  they 
promised  to  relieve  men  from  sin  and  death  by 
letting  tliem  share  in  the  life  of  the  deity.  The 
means  to  this  end  were  mostly  sacramental,  »'.'•. 
l)hysical :  communion  with  the  god  was  efl'ected  by 
eating  and  drinking  at  certain  sacred  meals,  witii 
the  use  of  certain  sacred  vessels,  and  certain  sacred 


HELLENISM 


HELLENISM 


549 


fominlsp,  by  froin<»  throngh  a  number  of  synilwHoal 
performances  and  keeping  many  roles,  the  reason 
of  which  nobody  could  explain.  The  individual 
rite  ventured  to  give  full  assurance  of  life,  but  the 
faithful  usually  resorted  to  a  variety  of  rites,  and 
the  prie.sts  could  not  object  to  this  ;  their  religion 
was  tolerated  and  must  be  tolerant :  this  is  implied 
in  the  system  of  jxdj'theism.  The  important  feat- 
ure is  not  the  individual  rite,  but  the  whole  attitude 
of  mind  produced  by  these  Mysteries. 

See  F.  Ctunont,  Le*  Reliwms  oruntales  dans  le  paqanittne 
romain^,  Paris,  1909;  R.  Reitienstein,  Die  kellenuUtiehen 
MffUrienreliaumen,  Leipzig,  1910  ;  L.  R  Famell,  art.  '  Greek 
Religion  '  in  ERE  \i.  42i>-5. 

2.  Hellenism  as  hellenization  of  the  Orient. — 

Alexander  had  conquered  the  Orient,  i.e.  Asia 
Minor,  Syria,  Egypt,  Persia,  etc.,  and  his  suc- 
cessors founded  there  several  kingdoms.  But  his 
idea  was  not  only  to  subdue  the  Orient  by  force  for 
political  purposes,  but  to  pervade  it  with  the  spirit 
of  Greek  civUization,  and  at  the  same  time  to  make 
Oriental  and  Greek  culture  a  unity.  A  marriage 
between  East  and  West,  symbolized  by  his  own 
wedding  with  Roxane  at  Persepolis,  was  his  aim. 
In  fact,  the  Greek  dynasties  of  the  Attalids,  Seleu- 
cids,  Ptolemys,  etc.,  succeeded  in  imposing  on  their 
respective  dominions  a  veneer  of  Greek  culture  : 
the  Greek  language  was  used  at  the  court,  in  the 
army,  on  the  coinage,  in  inscriptions,  and  as  the 
common  language  in  many  of  the  colonies  and  towns 
founded  by  these  kings  ;  Greek  law  was  used — with 
local  modifications  ;  Greek  cults  were  officiall}'  in- 
troduced beside  the  native  ones ;  Greek  artists 
constructed  the  palaces  and  public  buildings,  and 
decorated  them  in  the  Greek  style  with  sculptures 
and  pictmes. 

This  Greek  culture,  however,  was  but  a  veneer  ; 
it  was  only  on  the  surface,  and  had  only  a  temporary 
existence.  Underneath,  the  old  Oriental  civilization 
still  persisted,  and  came  to  the  surface  after  a  short 
time — more  especially  in  the  3rd  cent.  A.D.  We 
find  many  of  the  artihcial  Greek  names  of  localities 
disappear  and  the  old  place-names  reappear ;  we  ■ 
find  the  vernacular,  so  far  spoken  only  by  illiterate 
country  folk,*  recapture  the  cities  and  create  a  i 
national  literature.  The  cosmopolitan  feeling  of 
the  Hellenistic  period  was  replaced  by  an  outburst 
of  nationalistic  enthusiasm,  which  made  it  easy  for 
Muhammadanism  to  over-run  all  these  Eastern  pro- 
vinces and  sweep  away  the  last  remainders  of  the 
Hellenistic  civilization. 

In  the  meantime,  Hellenism  had  not  only  assimi- 
lated many  Oriental  notions  and  beliefs :  it  had 
opened  the  West  itself  to  Oriental  influence.  This 
is  in  fact  what  is  usually  called  Hellenism — that 
mixture  of  Greek  and  Oriental  civilization  which 
characterizes  the  culture  of  the  last  centuries  B.C. 
and  the  first  centuries  A.D.  We  have  already  seen 
how  it  influenced  Greek  language,  literature,  art, 
science,  etc.  The  most  significant  feature  was  re- 
ligious syncretism.  Not  only  were  the  Oriental 
gods  called  by  Greek  names  (Ammon  and  Baal 
became  Zeus  ;  Melkart,  Herakles  ;  Astarte,  Aphro- 
dite ;  Thoth,  Hermes,  etc.) — what  is  usually  called 
theocrasy — but  the  Oriental  gods  themselves  under 
their  own  names  were  introduced  into  the  West  and 
worshipped  by  Greeks  and  Komans  with  no  less 
fervour  than  by  their  own  countrymen.  But  it 
was  not  the  plain  Egyptian  cult  of  Isis,  or  the 
Phoenician  cult  of  Adonis,  or  the  Phrygian  cult  of 
the  Magna  Mater  and  Attis,  or  the  Persian  cult  of 
Mithra  that  made  so  many  proselytes  among  the 
Greeks  and  Romans :  on  their  way  to  the  West 
these  cults  had  been  transformed  into  Greek 
Mysteries,  and  it  was  in  this  form  that  they  proved 

*  When  St.  Paol  arrived  at  Ljstra,  the  i)eople  there  spoke 
Avcaofta'Tt  (Ac  14^),  bot  St.  Paul  pr»ched  in  Greek  and  was 
understood. 


<o  attractive.  The  Greek  notion  of  a  Mvstery — i.e. 
the  idea  of  a  community  of  initiated  believers  who 
sought  to  enter  into  union  with  the  god  for  the 

Curpose  of  obtaining  divine  immortality — took 
old  of  these  Oriental  cults,  whose  myths  were  ex- 
cellently adapted  for  this  ptirpose,  and  whose  strange 
rites  lent  themselves  to  the  sacramental  methods 
of  such  a  communion.  Moreover,  the  Orient  had 
produced  a  priestly  wisdom  which  was  easily  trans- 
formed into  a  Greek  gnosis:  Hellenism  identified 
the  objects  of  this  speculation  with  its  philosophical 
notions,  hellenizing  even  their  strange  names  into 
psychological  terms. 

It  is  the  special  character  of  this  Oriental  Hellen- 
ism that  one  can  scarcely  distinguish  its  separate 
elements  :  they  are  borrowed  from  all  parts  of  the 
Eastern  world,  and  so  mixed  up  with  Greek  elements 
that^the  whole  mass  appears  as  a  homogeneous  unity 
in  substance  and  form.  Many  of  its  features  may 
be  explained  as  readily  from  the  Greek  as  from 
the  Oriental  point  of  view. 

3.  Jewish  Hellenism. — Into  this  melting-pot  of 
Oriental  and  Greek  civilization  Judaism  was  throwm 
in  diflerent  ways. 

(a)  Babylon,  where  the  largest  number  of  Jews 
was  settled,  felt  the  Greek  influence,  after  the 
Persian  period,  but  only  for  a  comparatively  short 
time.  Thus  some  Greek  elements,  besides  the 
Persian  ones,  may  have  been  introduced  even 
here. 

(6)  Palestine  itself,  the  native  soil  of  Judaism, 
came  under  the  political  and  cultural  influence  of 
the  Ptolemys  of  Egypt  and  the  Seleucids  of  Syria, 
and  this  influence  became  so  strong  that  we  find  the 
religious  leaders  of  the  Jewish  people,  the  priestly 
aristocracy,  calling  their  sons  by  Greek  names 
(Menelaus  [Menahem]  or  Jason  [.Joshua,  Jesus]), 
and  making  them  practise  athletics  according  to 
the  Greek  usage.  They  came  very  near  to  a  hellen- 
izing of  their  religion  as  well,  untU  the  ill-timed 
attempt  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  168  B.C.  to 
introduce  Greek  idol-worship  in  place  of  the  Jewish 
cult  caused  a  reaction,  when  the  Maccabees  re- 
volted and  succeeded  in  delivering  their  country 
from  the  political  domination  of  the  Seleucids. 
They  were  less  successful,  and  probably  less  zealous, 
in  their  attempt  at  getting  rid  of  Hellenistic  civil- 
ization. To  learn  the  Greek  language,  to  be  in 
touch  with  the  Western  culture,  was  still  an  aim 
of  most  cultured  Jews.  All  the  time,  until  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  two  tendencies  were  at 
work  side  by  side  :  the  tendency  to  isolate  Judaism 
by  prohibiting  all  relations  with  Hellenistic  sur- 
roundings, and  tlie  tendency  to  give  Judaism  more 
influence  by  encouraging  Jewish  boys  to  learn  the 
Greek  language  and  to  assimilate  Greek  ideas.  It 
is  rather  diflicult  to  estimate  the  exact  measure  of 
the  Hellenistic  influence  on  this  Palestinian  Juda- 
ism ;  but  that  it  was  great  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
We  see  it  in  the  vocabulary  of  Rabbinical  Aramaic 
which  includes  terms  like  Stotfijoj,  Ka-Hfywp,  etc., ;  we 
see  it  further  in  many  notions  of  Jewish  psychology 
and  even  eschatology  :  it  is  Hellenistic  individual- 
ism which  distinguishes  later  from  earlier  Jewish 
theories. 

(c)  The  Greek  Diaspora. — TherealJewish  Hellen- 
ism, however,  was  to  be  found  among  the  colonies 
of  Jews  scattered  all  over  the  Grseco-Roman  world, 
the  so-called  Diaspora.*    These  Jews,  who  in  some 

filaces — as,  e.g.,  Alexandria  and  the  Cyrenaiea — 
ormed  a  third  of  the  population  and  had  a  power- 
ful organization,  had  opened  their  minds  to  the 
spirit  of  Greek  civilization.     They  not  only  spoke 

*  Besides  the  Jewish  Diaspora  there  was  a  smaQer  Samaritan 
one,  which  developed  the  same  Hellenistic  tendencies — «  Greek 
translation  ot  the  Bible,  a  poem  on  the  history  of  Scbeni, 
chronicles,  etc.  (Schiirer,  GJV*  iii.  [Leipzig,  19091  51,  481  ff.; 
P.  Glaue  and  A.  Bablls,  Fragmente  einer  grieek,  Vberuteunn 
dea  tamaritan.  Pentmteueka  (tiGG,  19U,  167  B.J). 


550 


HELLENISM 


HELLENISM 


the  Greek  language  in  addition  to  their  vernacular  ; 
it  was  their  vernacular :  they  used  it  in  Divine 
service,  when  they  gathered  in  the  synagogues  to 
worship  the  God  of  Israel ;  they  hatl  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  the  Law  of  their  God,  translated  into 
Greek  ;  they  had  writers  among  themselves  who 
had  as  great  a  masteiy  of  the  Greek  language  as 
any  Greek  author  ;  they  produced  poems  on  the 
history  of  the  Jewish  people  in  the  style  of  Homer, 
and  even  dramatized  tlie  Scriptures  after  the  model 
of  Euripides.  They  made  a  real  study  of  Greek 
philosophy,  and  themselves  contributed  to  the 
development  of  philosophical  thought.  While  the 
unknown  author  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom  under  the 
name  of  Solomon  sets  forth  the  Jewish  wisdom  as 
it  was  influenced  by  Greek  ideas,  Philo,  the  famous 
Jewish  philosopher,  finds  in  Greek  philosophy  the 
real  meaning  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures.  He  is,  of 
course,  a  Jew,  and  he  remains  so  ;  his  heart  belongs 
to  his  people  and  to  its  religion,  but  his  head  is 
filled  with  Greek  notions  and  speculations,  and  it 
is  from  the  Greek  philosophers  that  he  derives  what 
he  sets  forth  as  the  teaching  of  the  ideal  law-giver, 
Moses. 

This  Jewish  Hellenism  of  the  Diaspora  was  in 
fact  Judaism,  akin  to  the  true  Palestinian  Judaism 
in  substance,  but  it  was  a  special  kind  of  Judaism. 
Its  horizon  Avas  widened,  and  its  strictness  weak- 
ened. Starting  from  an  ejirlier  form  of  Judaism, 
it  did  not  share  in  the  specific  Eabbinical  develop- 
ment of  later  Palestinian  Judaism  ;  on  the  other 
hand,  it  developed  in  its  own  way.  Many  things 
were  possible  to  these  Hellenistic  J  ews  which  would 
have  been  intolerable  to  the  Palestinian  Kabbis ; 
and  many  things  were  uncertain  to  the  former 
regarding  which  there  was  no  question  among  the 
latter. 

Hellenistic  Judaism,  therefore,  was  regarded  by 
pious  Palestinians  as  a  Judaism  of  lower  rank,  a 
semi-heretical  second-class  Judaism.  Nevertheless, 
it  was  a  very  influential  pioneer  of  Judaism  anion" 
the  Greeks  and  lloinans.  The  broader  views  proved 
to  be  more  attractive  to  the  heathen.  They  took 
the  moral  injunctions  from  the  Law  without  being 
compelled  to  take  circumcision  and  other  strange 
rites ;  they  accepted  these  moral  views,  together 
with  the  great  Iiope  of  the  Jewish  people,  from  the 
Greek  Uible.  They  had  thus  the  guarantee  of  an 
old  revelation  transmitted  in  a  most  venerable 
book,  and  yet  it  sounded  quite  modern  when  inter- 

Sreted  by  men  like  Philo.  The  language  of  this 
ook  was,  of  course.  Oriental,  but  was  this  not  in 
itself  a  sign  of  something  Divine  or  an  evidence  of 
venerable  age  ?  Thus  many  a  heatlien  became  an 
adherent  of  this  broad  Judaism,  being  admitted  as 
a  worshipper  and  supporting  the  Jewish  congrega- 
tion by  means  of  his  wealth,  and  lending  it  his 
influence.  It  was  for  the  benefit  of  such  faithful 
proselytes  that  the  Jews  composed  a  moral  cate- 
chism in  poetical  form  under  the  name  of  Phoky- 
lides,  or  wrote  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  embodying 
the  hope  of  the  Jewish  people,  or  interpolated 
hints  to  Jewish  believers  into  the  works  of  the 
famous  Greek  authors.  This  Jewish  propaganda 
succeeded  in  gathering  around  the  synagogues  of 
the  Diaspora  numbers  of  proselytes  who  approached 
Judaism  in  various  degrees. 

Comparatively  few  Jews  were  led  by  contact 
with  Hellenism  to  apostasy,  like  Philo's  nephew 
Tiberius  Alexander.  For  the  most  part  the  Jew 
remained  a  Jew,  faithful  to  his  people  and  its  re- 
ligion even  amidst  Hellenistic  surroundings ;  and 
the  hatred  which  the  average  Greek  population 
felt  for  this  strange  element  in  their  midst  caused 
the  Jews  to  cling  togetlier  even  more.  The  ideal 
of  many  Jews  of  the  Diaspora  was  to  go  to  Jerusa- 
lem, not  only  for  a  short  pilgrimage,  but  with  the 
purpose  of  staying  there  and  being  buried  there  at 


their  death.  Thus  a  considerable  colony  of  Hellen- 
istic Jews  from  all  parts  of  the  world  settled  in 
Jerusalem  :  they  had  their  own  synagogues  ;  they 
retained  the  habit  of  speaking  Greek,  and  nourished 
their  peculiar  notions  about  the  Law  and  the  uni- 
versalism  of  salvation.  It  is  from  these  circles 
of  Hellenistic  Jews  in  Jerusalem  that  the  name 
'  Hellenist '  is  derived  (Ac  6'  9^). 

See  C.  Siegrfried,  '  Bedeutung  und  Schicksal  dcs  IlcUenismus 
im  Judischen  Volk,"  in  ./J'Th,  Ism,  p.  2-'8  ff.  ;  E.  Schurer,  GJV* 
iii.  [Leipzijf,  1909J ;  W.  Bousset,  Vie  JMiaioa  des  JuUnUuins 
im  neuteitt.  Zeitalter'^,  licrlin,  1?K)G ;  O.  Holtzmann,  ycitlest. 
Zeitgeschichte^,  Tubingen,  190(5 ;  W.  Staerk,  Xeutest.  /.eitge- 
schiehtc,  Leipzig,  19<)7,  also,'  Jiidentum  und  Ilelleiiismus,'  in  Da» 
Chrintentum,  do.  1908  ;  A.  Deissmann,  'Die  HellenisicrunK  des 
seniit.  Monotheismus,'  in  jVeue  Jahrlrucherfur  das  kUms.  Alter- 
turn,  1903,  p.  Itil  ff.  ;  M.  Friedlander,  Die  religumen  Le.ieeg- 
unqen  innerhalb  des  Jiidentums  im  Zeitalter  Jem,  Berlin, 
1905  ;  F.  Buhl,  art.  '  Hellenisten '  in  FRE^  vii.  623-637 ;  ct  art. 

PUILO. 

4.   Hellenism  in   primitive   ChrlBtianity.— The 

gospel  of  Jesus  was  a  Divine  message  to  Israel ; 
Jesus  Himself  had  confined  His  ministry  to  the 
lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  ;  it  was  only  occa- 
sionally that  He  dealt  with  pagans  such  as  the 
centurion  of  Capernaum  or  the  Syroplia-nician 
woman  ;  it  is  an  exceptional  case  also  when  we 
read  in  Jn  IS-"  that  there  were  certain  Greeks  who 
wished  to  see  Jesus.  The  primitive  community 
which  arose  in  Jerusalem  after  Jesus'  Death  and 
Kesurrection  was  a  purely  Jewish  one.  But  it  is 
remarkable  that  very  soon,  if  not  from  the  very 
first,  Hellenistic  Jews  joined  this  community  of 
Galilaeans.  The  very  tendency  of  the  gospel,  uni- 
versalistic  as  it  was,  appealed  to  these  broad- 
minded  people,  and  they  were  ready  to  deduce  the 
consequences. 

(a)  The  Hellenists  in  Jerusalem. — The  first  time 
we  hear  of  *  Hellenists '  is  on  the  occasion  of  a 
quarrel  between  the  two  sections  of  the  Christian 
community  in  Jerusalem,  the  'Hellenists'  com- 
plaining against  the  '  Hebrews '  that  their  widows 
were  overlooked  in  the  daily  food-supply  (Ac  6'). 
Here  the  term  seems  to  point  primarily  to  the 
ditierence  of  language,  but  we  remark  a  feeling 
of  solidarity,  a  certain  party-spirit,  among  these 
Hellenists  as  opposed  to  the  Hebrews.  The 
leaders  of  the  community  deal  with  the  matter, 
and,  in  order  to  satisfy  the  complaining  partj', 
elect  seven  prominent  men  from  among  the  Hellen- 
ists to  take  care  of  the  food-supply.  The  first 
officials  of  the  Christian  Church  —  except  the 
apostles — were  thus  Hellenists. 

It  was  the  Hellenists  that  occasioned  the  first 
struggle  of  Ciiiistianity  with  the  Jewish  authori- 
ties ;  St.  Stephen,  one  of  the  Seven,  was  accused 
of  having  spoken  against  the  Temple  and  the  Law, 
and  by  a  sudden  outbreak  of  popular  hatred  he 
was  put  to  death  (with  no  autiiorization  on  the 
part  of  the  Komans).  Tliis  was  tlie  signal  for  a 
general  persecution  of  the  Christians.  Again,  it 
was  the  Hellenists  who  spread  the  gospel,  not  only 
among  the  Samaritans  (Philip  the  Deacon,  Ac  8*"^) 
but  also  among  the  Greeks  in  Antioch  (Ac  11^). 
This  is  the  beginning  of  the  Gentile  mission  :  the 
nameless  men  from  Cyprus  and  Cyrene  who  are 
mentioned  here  are  the  forerunners  of  St.  Paul,  in 
some  sense  the  first  apostles  of  the  Gentiles,  the 
founders  of  tlie  Gentile  Church.  The  beginnings 
were  small,  but  the  fact  in  itself  is  of  great  import- 
ance. Having  seen  the  propaganda  carrieil  on  by 
Jewish  Hellenism  among  the  Gentiles,  we  may 
readily  understand  the  attitude  of  the  Christian 
Hellenists.  Their  mission  work  was  probably 
of  rather  an  occasional  kind,  and  they  did  not 
work  systematically  like  St.  Paul,  but  they  were 
creative. 

(b)  St.  Paxil  himself,  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles, 
was  not  a  Hellenist  strictly  speaking.  Born  in  the 
Diaspora,  at  Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  he  was  nevertheless 


HELLENISM 


HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK    551 


'a  Hebrew  of  Hebrews'  (Pli  3*) ;  he  had  Pharisaic 
surroundings,  and  was  brought  up  in  the  spirit  of 
the  Palestinian  Rabins  :  he  even  went  to  Jerusalem 
to  complete  his  Rabbinical  education.  In  spite  of 
his  writing  Greek  and  using  the  Greek  Bible,  he 
thinks  in  the  way  of  a  trained  Palestinian  Rabbi. 
After  a  missionary  period  of  about  -25  years,  he 
was  able  to  address  the  people  of  Jerusalem  in 
their  own  Hebrew  {i.e.  Aramaic)  language  (Ac  21''*' 
22^).  Whether  Hellenism  —  apart  from  general 
culture — had  any  notable  influence  u{)on  him  is  an 
open  question.  From  time  to  time  the  Hellenism 
of  St.  Paul  is  spoken  of  as  a  prominent  feature  in 
early  Christian  history  ;  then  again  his  predomin- 
antly Rabbinical  training  is  insisted  upon  by  another 
generation  of  scholars.  The  facts  are  that  Hellen- 
ism, as  we  have  seen,  was  in  itself  a  mixture,  which, 
in  addition  to  the  Greek  element,  included  much 
that  was  Oriental  ;  the  Rabbinical  education  also 
comprehended  a  good  many  Greek  notions;  and 
the  reasoning  of  the  Jewish  teachers  was  often 
very  similar  to  the  Stoic  philosophy,  as  the  popular 
Greek  language  of  the  Hellenistic  period  had  a 
Semitic  tinge.  Parallels  to  most  of  the  Pauline 
expressions  may  be  adduced  both  from  Rabbinical 
and  from  Greek  writers,  as  was  sho\vn  long  ago  by 
J.  J.  Wetstein  (1751).  It  is,  therefore,  very  diffi- 
cult to  tell  exactly  how  far  the  influence  of  Hellen- 
ism may  be  tracetl  in  St.  Paul.  The  one  thiag 
which  seems  certain,  however,  is  that  he  did  not 
borrow  consciously  from  the  Mystery  religions. 
He  is  afraid  of  the  demoniac  influences  in  these ; 
he  tries  to  keep  his  faithful  readers  from  any  con- 
taminating participation  in  idol-worship :  for  this 
is  the  sphere  where  the  demons  exercise  their 
influence  (1  Co  lO^'**).  Whatever  may  be  said 
about  St.  Paul's  indebtedness  to  the  Mysteries — 
and  a  good  deal  has  recently  been  said  by  Percy 
Gardner,  R.  Reitzenstein,  and  others — this  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind. 

(c)  St.  PauFs  companions. — There  is,  however, 
one  point  which  has  not  hitherto  received  due 
attention.  That  is  the  fact  that  St.  Paul's  com- 
panions belonged  more  or  less  to  the  Hellenists, 
and  that  he  may  thus  have  been  unconsciously 
subjected  to  the  influence  of  Hellenistic  notions. 
Barnabas  the  Levite  came  from  Cyprus  (Ac  4*). 
Silas  (Silvanus)  also  was  evidently  a  Hellenist. 
Timothy  wa.s  the  son  of  a  pagan  father  and  a  Jewish 
mother  ;  he  had  not  been  circumcised  before  St. 
Paul  took  him  into  his  company  (Ac  16'*^*  )•  Titus 
was  a  Greek  (Gal  2^).  ApoUos  was  a  Hellenistic 
Jew,  bom  and  trained  at  Alexandria  (Ac  18"-^). 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  were  Jews  from  Rome,  bom 
in  Pontus  (Ac  18-).  In  none  of  these  cases  (except 
that  of  Apollos)  can  we  make  out  exactly  how  far 
the  Greek  influence  went ;  but  it  is  probable  that 
most  of  the  people  referred  to  were  much  more 
Hellenistic  in  their  training  than  St.  Paul  him- 
self, while  Apollos  was  certainly  an  out-and-out 
Hellenist. 

We  see  the  difFerence  when  we  turn  from  St. 
Paul's  letters  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and 
the  so-called  Catholic  Epistles.  Hebrews  certainly 
came  from  the  pen  of  a  Hellenist  like  Apollos :  its 
language  and  style,  its  interpretation  of  the  OT, 
its  definition  of  faith  (11'),  its  psychology  (cf. 
214. 18  57.  Hj  arg  sufficient  evidence  of  this.  The 
same  is  proved  for  1  Peter  by  the  metaphorical 
language  in  1'^-  —  2',  and  the  terminology  taken 
over  from  the  Mysterv-cults  (2*  [diflerent  from 
1  Co  32,  He  5'2-'']  IS- ^3^-1).  The  language  of 
Jude  '^  ^®  points  in  the  same  direction.  In  2  P  2^ 
a  proverb  is  quoted  which  goes  back  to  Heraclitus 
(P.  Wendland,  Sitzungsberichte  der  Berliner  Aka- 
demie,  1898,  pt.  xlix. ),  and  the  eschatology  is  partly 
Stoic  (this  letter  we  should  perhaps  call  Hellenistic 
in  the  wider  sense).     The  Epistle  of  James  also  is 


Hellenistic  in  this  broad  sense,  as  may  be  seen  in 
the  psychological  analysis  of  temptation  (1"), 
in  the  de.scription  of  Go^'s  unchan<,'eableness  (1*^), 
in  the  notion  of  regeneration  (I"'),  in  the  parables 
(1-^-  **  3'-  *) ;  axoKi^y  (!'*•  '*)  belongs  to  the  termino- 
logy of  the  Hermetic  literature ;  the  *  wheel  of 
nature '  (3*)  is  a  Stoic  term,  etc.  1  Clement  uses 
tlie  legend  of  the  phoenix  to  demonstrate  the 
Christian  hope  of  resurrection. 

The  Johannine  literature,  on  the  other  hand, 
originates  in  a  Palestinian  Judaism  transplanted 
into  tiie  soil  of  Asia  Minor.  There  are  Hellenistic 
elements  in  it  (e.g.  the  notion  of  the  Logos),  but 
they  belong  to  the  latest  stratum  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  Johannine  doctrine. 

Christianity  was  thus  influenced  by  Hellenism 
in  various  ways:  after  the  Jewish  Hellenists  of 
Jerusalem  had  started  it  on  its  world-mission,  the 
Hellenism  of  tfie  Jewish  Diaspora  came  to  their 
aid,  and  the  Hellenism  of  the  Greek-Roman  world 
received  it  gladly,  after  having  prepared  a  way  for 
it.  In  receiving  it,  however,  Hellenism  tumetl  the 
gospel  into  a  ilystery  as  it  had  done  with  the 
other  Oriental  cults.  From  this  point  of  view 
Gnosticism  and  Catholicism  are  to  be  understood 
respectively  as  a  rapid  and  a  slow  hellenization  of 
Christianity. 

LiTERATCRE. — In  addition  to  the  works  already  cited,  see 
A.  Hamack,  Dogmengeaekiehte*,  f.  (TnbineeD,  lw09];  E.  voa 
Dobschiitz,  PrrMeme  des  apotioligeAtn  Zeitalters,  Leipzig, 
1904,  p.  97  a.;  The  ApogtoUe  Age,  London,  1909;  'Christentuiu 
und  Griechentuni,"  in  Dot  CkiiMentum,  Leipzig,  190s ;  G. 
Hoennicke,  Dag  Judenekristentum,  Berlin,  19(ji» ;  C  F.  G. 
Heinrid,  '  Hellenismiis  und  Cbrlstentum,'  in  BM.  Zeit-  vnd 
Streitfragen,  Leipzig,  1909 ;  W.  Glawe,  Dte  HeUenisUnmg  de» 
Ckrittentums  in  der  Gesehiehte  der  Theologie,  Berlin,  1912.  Cf. 
artt.  STfcPHES,  Pacl.  E.  VON  DOBSCHUTZ. 

HELLENISTIC  AMD  BIBLICAL  GREEK.— 1. 
Definition. — The  term  'Biblical  Greek'  denotes 
the  language  of  the  Greek  versions  of  the  OT,  and 
more  especially  the  LXX,  as  also  that  of  the  NT, 
with  which  may  be  associated  the  Apocrypha  and 
the  works  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  This  group 
of  writings,  however,  is  separated  from  the  world 
of  Hellenic  culture  not  so  much  by  any  peculiarity 
of  language  as  by  the  ideas  which  find  expression 
in  them.  In  point  of  fact.  Biblical  Greek  is  a 
deposit  of  the  widely-difiiised  Hellenistic  language 
— the  so-called  Koine. 

2.  The  term  'Koine.' — This  term  is  used  to 
signify  the  Gr.  language  in  its  development  from 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great  to  the  close  of  the 
ancient  period,  excluding,  of  course,  the  older  dia- 
lects so  far  as  they  survived  at  all,  and  excluding 
also  the  language  of  the  Atticists  (2nd-5th  cent. 
A.D.),  who  sought  to  revive  the  Attic  form  of 
speech,  but,  as  children  of  their  age,  were  unable 
to  free  themselves  wholly  from  the  influence  of  the 
living,  i.e.  the  spoken,  tongue.  In  designating  the 
common  language  of  the  Hellenistic  period  by 
the  single  word  '  Koine,'  we  are  but  following  the 
usage  of  the  ancient  grammarians,  who  employed 
the  expression  ^  kootj  StdXe/cTos  to  ditterentiate  the 
language  used  by  aU  from  Attic,  Ionic,  Doric,  and 
/Eolic.  *  But  as  the  words  Kcnyij,  koivov,  koipQs  were 
not  employed  by  the  ancients  in  a  uniform  way, 
we  may  venture  to  take  the  term  '  Koine '  as 
applying  both  to  the  spoken  tongue  and  to  its 
literary  form.  The  literary  Koine,  of  which  Poly- 
bius  may  be  called  the  most  typical  representative, 
is  a  compromise  between  the  spoken  Koine  and  the 
older  literary  language.  This  holds  good  of  every 
text  written  in  the  Koine,  such  works  diflering 
among  themselves  only  as  regards  the  degree  in 
which  the  two  elements  are  intermingled.  The 
so-called  Atticists,  i.e.  the  grammarians,  such  as 

*  Cf.  A.  Maidhof,  Zur  Begrifsbettimmung  der  Koine, 
Wnrzburjr,  1912,  and  the  criticism  of  Thomb,  in  MontUttekrifl 
fur  hohere  Sehulen,  Berlin,  1913,  p.  392  tt. 


552    HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK        HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK 


Moeris,  wlio  taught  tlie  rules  of  correct  Attic, 
usually  distinguislied  such  words  and  forms  of  the 
Koine  as  they  rejected,  by  tlie  term  'EWij^ej,  as 
contrasted  witli  the  'AttikoI,  the  linguistic  forms 
they  approved  of  ;  and  hence  iWrjvl^eiv  means  '  to 
speak  the  Hellenistic  language,'  and  the' E\\7]vi<Tral 
of  Ac  6' 9^  are  'Hellenistic-speaking  Jews'  (pos- 
sibly applied  also  to  other  Orientals). 

3.  The  geographical  domain  of  the  Koine.— The 
native  soil  of  Biblical  Greek,  i.e.  Palestine,  Syria, 
and  Asia  Minor,  formsbut  a  partof  the  great  Hellen- 
istic domain,  the  furthest  boundaries  of  which 
were  nearly  coincident  with  those  of  Alexander's 
Empire.  The  hellenization  of  those  parts  of  this 
area  which  were  originally  non-Hellenic  was,  of 
course,  not  uniform.  It  was  most  complete  in  Asia 
Minor,  which  in  the  Middle  Ages  became  the  home 
of  Byzantine-Greek  culture.  Even  in  the  Roman 
Imperial  period  Asia  Minor  was  almost  entirely 
Greek,  and  dominated  by  Greek  civilization  ;  nor 
is  this  contravened  by  the  fact  that  the  old  in- 
digenous languages,  such  as  Piirygian,  Cap- 
padocian,  etc.,  were  still  spoken  sporadically 
until  the  5th  and  6th  centuries.  Lycaonian  is 
referred  to  as  a  spoken  language  not  only  in  Ac 
14",*  but,  as  late  as  the  6th  cent.,  in  the  Legend  of 
St.  Martha,  while  the  Celtic  dialect  of  the  Gala- 
tians  was  still  a  living  vernacular  in  the  time  of 
Jerome.  HoU  t  rather  overestimates  the  import- 
ance of  the  evidences  he  gives  of  this  fact,  for  the 
dialects  in  question  occupied  a  position  in  Hellenic 
Asia  Minor  not  very  different  from  that  of  Albanian 
in  Greece  at  the  present  day  ;  and,  in  fact,  the  im- 
portance of  these  tongues  is  hardly  to  be  compared 
with  that  of  Welsh  in  England,  the  Phrygian 
dialect  alone  surviving  in  a  few  short  texts 
(sepulchral  inscriptions)  dating  from  the  Imperial 
period.  The  influence  of  the  ancient  languages  of 
Asia  Minor  upon  Greek  (i.e.  the  Koine)  was  like- 
wise of  the  slightest.^  In  Syria,  as  in  Egypt, 
Greek  was  probably  confined  in  the  main  to  urban 
districts.  In  the  numerous  Hellenistic  towns  situ- 
ated between  the  Pliojnician  coast  and  a  line  to  the 
east  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  and  the  Jordan — 
cities  like  Antioch,  Acco,  Damascus,  and  Gadara — 
the  Greek  language  prevailed,  as  also  did  Greek 
administration,  law,  and  culture.  As  regards 
Jewish  Palestine,  on  the  other  hand,  it  can  hardly 
be  said  that  there  was  any  real  hellenization  there 
at  all.  The  Jews  certainly  learned  Greek  as  the 
medium  of  intercourse  and  commerce  and  also  for 
literaiy  purposes,  but  they  retained  their  Aramaic 
mother- tongue  as  well.  Jesus  and  His  apostles 
spoke  Aramaic,  and  preached  in  Aramaic,  though 
they  may  not  liave  been  ignorant  of  Greek ;  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  ability  to  use  more  than  one 
language  is  not  uncommon  in  the  East  to-day,  even 
among  the  lower  classes. §  From  the  fact  that  Jesus 
and  the  apostles  spoke  Aramaic  it  is  to  be  inferred 
that  the  X67ta  'Iriaov  and  the  earliest  records  of 
His  life  were  originally  composetl  in  Aramaic,  and 
here  too  there  emerges  a  special  problem  regarding 
the  character  of  NT  Greek  (as  also  the  Greek  of 
the  LXX) — a  problem  which  will  engage  our 
attention  below.  But  the  general  character  of 
Biblical  Greek  can  be  understood  only  in  relation 
to  its  basis  in  the  Koine,  and  accordingly  we  must 
here  deal  first  of  all  with  the  sources,  the  origin, 
and  the  character  of  the  latter. 

i.  Sources  for  the  Koine. — The   Koine  was  a 

*  Cf.  J.  H.  Moultoii,  Einlfituiuf,  p.  0. 

t  '  Das  Fortlebeii  der  Volksspnichen  in  Kleinasicn  in  nach- 
chriatlicher  Zeit,'  in  Hermes,  xliii.  [lOOS]  240  ff. 

I  Thumb,  Die  griechische  Sprache  im  Zeitalter  des  Hellen- 
ismus,  p.  139  ff. 

§  On  the  diffusion  of  HellenlsUc  Greek  cf.  Thumb,  op. 
eit.  102  ff. ;  Mahaffy,  Th«  Progress  of  Uellenism  in  Alexander's 
Empire,  Chicago,  1005 ;  on  the  lang^uage  of  Jesus  see,  most 
recently,  Moulton,  np.  cit.  p.  10 1. 


natural  outgrowth  of  classical  Greek,  yet  in  its 
written  form,  as  has  been  said,  it  exhibits  a  com- 
promise between  the  traditional  literary  language 
and  the  vernacular  of  the  time,  and  accordingly  the 
extant  texts  of  the  Hellenistic  period  allord  at 
most  but  indirect  evidence  as  to  the  true  character 
of  the  vulgar  tongue.  It  is  only  what  is  new  in 
these  texts,  i.e.  what  dillers  from  Attic,  that  we 
can  without  hesitation  claim  for  the  living  language, 
while,  as  regards  the  element  in  which  the  written 
Koine  agrees  with  Attic,  we  are  uncertain  to  what 
extent  it  is  to  be  ascribed  to  tradition.  Nor  are 
the  various  texts  and  chisses  of  texts  all  of  the 
same  value  for  our  knowledge  of  the  true  forms  of 
the  vernacular. 

(1)  This  holds  good  in  a  peculiar  degree  even  of 
the  literary  productions  of  the  Hellenistic  period. 
The  LXX,  the  NT,  and  the  earliest  Christian 
writings  approximate  very  closely,  in  a  linguistic 
respect,  to  the  contemporary  papyri  and  inscrip- 
tions, and  may  as  a  whole  be  regarded  as  tlie  most 
faithful  literary  reflex  of  the  spoken  tongue,  w  hile 
the  Atticism  which  prevailed  about  the  same  time 
took  an  entirely  diflerent  direction,  and  sought  to 
purge  literature  of  all  admixture  with  the  ver- 
nacular. But  even  the  Atticists,  of  whom  Lucian 
of  Samosata  was  the  most  brilliant  representative, 
were  unable,  with  regard  to  either  vocabulary  or 
syntax,  to  free  themselves  wholly  from  tlie  influ- 
ence of  the  speech  of  their  day.*  But  they  suc- 
ceeded in  arresting  the  movement  that  from  the 
time  of  Xenophon  and  Aristotle  had  been  tending 
to  bring  the  literary  language  into  line  with  the 
cosmopolitan  development  of  Attic,  that  is  to  say, 
witii  the  Koine,  a  development  which  had  been 
followed  even  by  the  New  Attic  Comedy.  The 
language  of  Polybius  is  closely  akin  to  that  of  con- 
temporary inscriptions ;  he  does  justice  to  the 
demands  which  the  spoken  tongue  in  its  develop- 
ment laid  upon  literary  diction.  The  philosopher 
Epicurus, t  and  Teles  the  Cynic,t  as  also  Pliilo  of 
Byzantium,  the  engineer  (if  lie  was  a  contemporary 
of  Archimedes), §  may  be  regarded  as  the  immediate 
forerunners  of  Polybius. 

(2)  Our  best  sources  for  the  common  tongue, 
however,  are  the  papyri  of  Egypt  and  the  inscrip- 
tions— more  especially  those  of  Asia  Minor.  A 
comparison  of  these  two  documentary  groups  shows 
that  the  Hellenistic  Greek  of  Egj'pt  dillers  in  no 
essential  respect  from  that  of  Asia  Minor,  and  we 
may  therefore  safely  use  the  copious  discoveries  of 
papyri  as  throwing  light  upon  the  general  character 
of  the  Greek  spoken  in  the  age  in  which  they  were 
written  (for  details  see  below).  Of  papyri  and  in- 
scriptions alike  it  may  be  said  that,  the  less  educated 
the  writers,  the  more  faithfully  do  they  reflect  the 
current  speech,  and  accordingly  we  find  great  dis- 
parity between,  e.g.,  the  documents  of  the  Perga- 
menian  State  and  the  sepulchral  inscriptions  of  the 
common  people  ;  or,  again,  between  the  records  of 
the  Egyptian  government-offices  and  the  letters 
written  by  simple  folk.  These  differences  have 
not  yet  been  studied  in  detail. 

An  excellent  survey  of  these  sources,  with  copious  references 
to  the  literature,  is  found  in  Deissniann,  Licht  vom  OsUn-,  p. 
(iff.  (Eng.  tr.*,  1911,  p.  9  ff.).  Detailed  investigation  of  their 
language  has  made  remarkable  jirogress  in  recent  years,  (o) 
Inscriptions:  E.  Schwyzer  (Schwclzer),  Grammatik  der  per- 
gamenischen  Inschri/ten,  Berlin,  18!»8 ;  E.  Nacbnianson,  Laute 
und  Formen  der  magnetischen  Inschriften,  Upsala,  1!>03 ;  Dienst- 
bach,  De  Titulorum  Prienensium  sonix,  Marl)iirjj;,  1910.  A 
special  study  of  the  numerous  Cliristian  inscriptions  of  Asia 


•  Cf.  W.  Schinid,  Der  Attteismvs  in  seinen  Ilaiiptvertretern, 
.5  vols.,  Stuttgart,  1887-97. 

t  Cf.  P.  Linde,  De  Epicuri  voeabiilis  ab  optima  Atthide 
alienis,  Brcslau,  1906. 

t  3rd  cent.  B.C.  ;  cf.  Teletis  rdiqttia,  ed.  O.  Hense,  TUbingen, 
1909. 

8  Cf.  M.  Arnim,  /V  Philonis  Bpzantii  dieendi  genere, 
Greifswald,  1913. 


HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK        HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK    553 


Minor  would  be  of  great  advantagre  in  relation  to  the  NT.  (>•) 
Papj/ri :  E.  Mayser,  GrammatiJc  der  qrUchUchen  I'apyri  au» 
lUr  Ptolemderzeil,  Leipzig,  1906 ;  W.  Cronert,  Memoria  graeea 
Hemilanentii,  Leipzigr,  1903.  (c)  From  the  mass  of  epigraphic 
material  are  to  be  disUngaished,  as  a  special  class,  the  impreca- 
tory tablets,  which  are  composed  in  a  very  low  t>-pe  of  speech. 
They  have  been  collected  by  R.  Wunsch  in  the  Appendix  to  the 
CIA,  and  by  AudoUent,  Defixionum  tabeiUe,  Paris,  1904  (cf. 
Thumb,  in  Indogerm.  Foneh.  Ameiger,  xviii.  [1905-06)41  ff.) ;  as 
yet  only  the  Attic  tablets  have  been  studied  philologically :  df. 
E.  Schwvzer,  '  Die  Vul^anprache  der  attischen  Fluchtafeln,'  in 
Seue  Jdhrbueherfurdat  klam*ehe  AUertum,  v.  [1900]  244 IL  ; 
Rabehl,  De  Sfmume  defixufnum  attic.,  Beriin,  1906. 

(3)  Excellent  witnesses  to  the  nature  of  the  ver- 
nacular are  to  be  found  also  in  the  Grseco-Latin 
conversation  -  books  or  colloquial  guides  (ipfirjvei- 
pjiTo)  and  glossaries  used  for  the  purpose  of  learning 
either  language,  as  e.g.  the  Colloquium  Pseudo- 
Dotitheanum  *  and  the  Hermeneumata  Pseudo- 
Dositheana.\  The  abundant  Greek  material  found 
in  the  Corpus  glossarionnn  latinor-um  still  awaits 
expert  investigation ;  it  yields  much  fresli  infor- 
mation regarding  the  vocabulary  of  the  colloquial 
language. 

(4)  The  remaining  sources  for  the  Koine  are  of 
second-hand  authority,  but  are  not  less  important. 
Thus  we  have  the  references  of  the  Atticizing 
grammarians  of  the  Imperial  period,  as  in  the 
A^fetj  'ArrtKai  of  Moeris,  extracts  from  the  gram- 
marian Phrynichus,  and  the  ' AvTiaTTiKun-ii^.  The 
object  of  these  writings  was  to  formulate  rules  for 
the  correct  use  of  classical  Attic,  and  they  contrast 
the  latter  with  the  '  common '  language.  What 
they  reject  belongs  to  the  Hellenistic  vernacular, 
as  e.g.  the  forms  fip.yjp  (for  fiv),  Kpv^o)  {  =  KpinrTw), 
ypaia  (ypavi),  aiKXO-i-vofiat.  (instead  of  ^SeKirrrofuii) ; 
what  they  defend  and  explain  is  alien  to  it,  as  e.g. 
fjv,  f<TTT]v,  veoTTOi  (instead  of  vofftrSs). 

(5)  We  have  another  source  in  the  Greek  elements 
which  have  found  their  way  into  Latin,  Gothic, 
Ecclesiastical  Slavonic,  and  Oriental  languages. 
These  elements  exhibit  the  features  of  the  lan- 
guage current  at  the  time  of  their  adoption.  The 
Greek  words  in  Gothic,  and  especially  in  Old  Slavic,  J 
reflect  certain  phonetic  characteristics  of  the  Greek 
current  in  the  North,  while  those  in  Armenian, 
Rabbinical  Hebrew,  and  Coptic  exhibit  features 
of  tlie  Greek  spoken  in  Asia  Minor,  SjTia,  and 
Egypt.  These  foreign  sources  have  contributed 
much  to  the  Hellenistic  vocabulary,  which  is  en- 
riched not  only  by  fresh  meanings,  but  al-so  by 
new  words  and  new  forms.  The  Greek  elements 
preserved  in  the  Oriental  sources  are,  as  we  should 
expect,  of  special  importance  for  the  study  of 
Biblical  Greek  ;  but  so  far  Armenian  alone  has 
been  thoroughly  studied  in  its  bearings  on  the 
history  of  the  Greek  langiiage.§ 

(6)  The  two  foregoing  sources  are  surpassed  in 
the  value  of  their  contributions  by  Modem  Greek. 
For  the  student  of  the  Koine,  and  therefore  also 
for  the  investigator  of  Biblical  Greek,  a  knowledge 
of  Modem  Greek  is  as  necessary  as  a  knowledge  of 
the  Romance  languages  for  the  investigator  of  ver- 

•  Ed.  Krumbacher,  in  the  Festschrift  fiir  W.  von  Christ, 
Munich,  1S91. 

t  Ed.  G.  Goetz,  in  the  Corpus  glossariorum,  iii.  [Leipzig,  1892] ; 
cf.  J.  David,  in  Comment.  phildogcK  Tenenses,v.  [do.  18»4]  197  ff. 

J  Cf.  Vasmer,  Grceeo-Slavie  Stitdies  (Russ.),  2  pts.,  St.  Peters- 
burg, 1906-07. 

J  Cf.  Thumb,  'Die  griechische  Elemente  im  Amienischen,' 
in  ByzanL  Zntsehrift,  vs..  [1900]  SSS  ff.  For  the  other 
languages,  cf.  S.  Krauss,  Griechische  und  lateiiiisehe  Lehn- 
worter  in  Talmud,  Midrasch  und  Targum,  2  vols.,  Berlin, 
1898-99 ;  also  Thumb,  Indogerm.  Fonch.  Ameiger,  vi.  [1896] 
56ff.,  xi.  [1900]  96  ff.  ;  Perles,  in  Byzant.  Zeitsehrift,  viiL  [1899] 
539  ff . ,  X.  [1901]  300  ff. ;  A.  Schlatter,  '  Verkanntes  Griechisch,'  in 
Beitragezur  Forderung  ehriMlicher  Theolooie,  iv.  4  [1900],  49ff. ; 
Fiebig,  '  Das  Griechische  der  Misohna,'  in  ZSTW  ix.  [1908] ;  O. 
von  Lemm, '  Griechische  und  lateinische  Worter  im  Koptischen,' 
in  Bulletin  de  I'Academiede  St.  Petersbourg,  5th  ser.  xiii.  1  [1900] 
45  ff.  ;  Wessely,  '  Die  griechische  LehnwSrter  der  sahidischen 
und  boheirlschen  Psalmenversion,'  in  Denkschriften  der  Wiener 
Akademie,  liv.  [1909];  KahUs,' Griechische  Worter  im  Koptischen,' 
in  SB  AW,  1912,  p.  1036  ff. 


nucular  Latin.*  The  more  thorough  the  study  of 
the  modem  tongue,  the  greater  the  gain  for  its 
earlier  phase.  For  Modem  Greek,  witli  its  dialects 
(exclusive,  however,  of  the  Tsaconic  spoken  in  the 
Pamon  Mts. ,  a  descendant  of  the  Laconian  dialect), 
is  a  natural  development  of  the  Koine,  and  its 
origins  are  to  be  sought  therein.  The  knowledge 
of  Modem  Greek,  accordingly,  enables  us  to  under- 
stand many  features  of  the  Koine,  and  to  put  a 
proper  estimate  ujKtn  its  recorded  forms.  With 
the  help  of  the  modern  language  we  may  reconstruct 
its  Hellenistic  basis  and  thereby  supplement  in 
many  points  the  knowledge  derived  from  the  con- 
temporary Hellenistic  texts.  The  character  of  the 
Koine  as  a  whole  is  in  fact  to  be  inferred  from  the 
character  of  Modem  Greek ;  for,  since  the  dialects 
of  the  latter  are  to  be  traced,  not  to  the  various 
types  of  the  ancient  language,  such  as  Doric,  iEolic, 
and  Ionic,  but  to  the  Koine,  the  Koine,  the  direct 
deposit  of  which  we  find  in  the  inscriptions  and 
the  papyri,  must  have  supplanted  the  ancient  dia- 
lects, and  must  have  been  a  common  language  in 
the  proper  sense,  i.e.  a  language  spoken  by  all,  as 
is  affirmed  by  the  ancient  grammarians.  And 
what  holds  goiod  of  the  language  as  a  whole,  holds 
good  also  of  its  elements  in  detail.  Thus  certain 
forms  in  Hellenistic  documents — as  e.g.  fKeyav,  and 
the  like,  in  MSS  of  the  LXX  and  other  texts — are 
proved  to  have  belonged  to  the  spoken  Koine  by 
the  fact  that  they  survive  in  Modem  Greek.  This 
is  true  also  of  words  like  aiKxaivoncu  (Mod.  Gr. 
fftxaivo/Mi),  which  is  rejected  by  the  Atticists, 
and  of  LJat.  loan-words  like  KoXapSai  (in  inscrip- 
tions ;  Mod.  Gr.  ra  KoXavra).  Some  Latin  loan- 
words, as  e.g.  (6)<rTtTt  (hospitium),  'house,'  may  of 
course  be  regarded  as  ha\ing  been  introduced  into 
the  Koine  not  later  than  the  close  of  the  ancient 
periotl.  The  Hellenistic  substitution  of  Iva  for  the 
infinitive  culminates  in  the  ilod.  Gr.  loss  of  the 
infinitive,  and  it  is  therefore  quite  wrong  to  regard, 
e.g.,  every  Iva  in  Biblical  Greek  as  having  the  force 
of  the  classical  final  tva — a  fact  which  has  a  direct 
bearing  upon  biblical  interpretation.  Thus  the 
study  of  Modem  Greek  may  likewise  be  of  con- 
siderable service  to  the  biblical  scholar,  and  may 
often  enable  him  to  decide  a  doubtful  case.  If,  e.g., 
the  form  i>eXos  is  attested  as  Hellenistic  by  the 
ancients,  while  the  NT  has  voXos,  the  Mod.  Gr. 
71'aXi  (pron.  yali)  shows  that  the  NT  form  too  be- 
longed to  the  Koine. 

Moreover,  the  text  of  the  Bible  will  occasionally 
be  elucidated  by  a  knowledge  of  Modem  Greek. 
Thus  Wellhausen  (Das  Ev.  Matthtsi,  Berlin,  1904) 
conjectures  that  the  ^  Sipa  xapTJ\0ev  of  Mt  14'*  means, 
not  '  the  time  is  past,'  but  '  the  time  is  advanced' — 
an  explanation  which  is  supported  by  the  Mod.  Gr. 
use  of  -rapa.  in  xapaToxw,  '  above ' ;  while  the  Greek 
writer  Pallis  renders  the  ^pihfiara  of  Mk  7**  not  by 
'  meats,'  but  in  the  sense  of  the  homonymous  Mod. 
Gr.  word,  i.e.  as  '  stench,' '  filth ' — an  interpretation 
which  at  least  merits  the  attention  of  exegetes. 
Modern  Greek  also  tlirows  light  upon  the  question 
of  the  Semitisms  in  Biblical  Greek  (see  below).t 
The  projected  thesaurus  or  idiotikon  of  Modem 
Greek,  the  compilation  of  which  is  being  subsidized 
by  the  Greek  Government,  will  accordingly  prove 
of  great  service  in  the  study  of  Biblical  Greek, 
especially  as  regards  the  vocabularj-.^ 

5.  Origin  of  the  Koine. — In  its  essential  character 

'  Cf.  Thumb,  '  Value  of  Mod.  Gr.  for  the  Study  of  Ancient 
Greek,'  in  Class.  Quarterly,  viii.  [1914]  181  ff. 

t  On  the  subject  of  this  paragraph  cf.  Thumb,  Die  grieek. 
Sprache  im  ZeitaUer  des  HeUerusmtts,  p.  10  ff. ;  also  in  Xeue 
Jahrbucher  fiir  das  klass.  AUertum,  xviL  [1906]  247  ff. ;  A. 
Pallis,  A  few  Notes  on  the  Gospels,  based  chiefly  on  Modem 
Greek,  Liverjjool,  1903  (to  be  read  with  discrimination). 

J  Aids  to  the  study  of  Jfodern  Greek  :  G.  X.  Hatzidakis, 
Einleitung  in  die  neiigr.  Grammatik,  Leipzig,  1892;  Thumb, 
Handbook  of  the  Jtodern  Greek  i'emactdar,  tr.  S.  Angus,  Edin- 
burgh, 1912  (nith  a  bibliographical  appendix). 


554    HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GEEEK        HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK 


the  Koino  is  the  naturul  development  of  Attic. 
As  early  as  the  time  of  tlie  Dclian  Confetleratiuu, 
Attic  had  spread  beyond  the  coiiliiies  of  its  native 
region,  and  loiiie  elements— an  important  feature 
of  the  Koine — had  already  begun  to  lind  their  way 
into  the  Attic  vernacular.*  In  the  Attic  spoken 
outside  Attica — 'Great  Attic,'  as  we  might  call 
it — the  process  of  rejuvenescence  and  fusion  was 
much  more  rapid,  and  it  was  here  that  the  founda- 
tions of  the  Koine  were  laid.f  The  resultant 
modification  of  Attic  appears  most  clearly  in  tiie 
vocabuhuy.  Similar  features  had  already  mani- 
fested themselves  in  the  diction  of  Xenoplion  and 
the  New  Attic  Comedy.  This  modified  Attic  was 
used  at  the  Macedonian  court  before  the  time  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  But  it  was  in  reality  the 
conquests  of  Alexander  and  the  institution  of 
kingfloms  by  his  successors  that  diflused  the  new 
idiom  througliout  the  Oriental  world,  and  made  it 
the  universal  language  of  Hellenism.  It  is  never- 
theless quite  wrong  to  assert  that  this  language 
was  created  by  tlie  Macedonians.  The  Macedonian 
contribution  is  barely  discernible,  and  cannot  in 
any  case  have  been  large  ;  it  perhaps  included  the 
surax  -la-aa  in  fiacrlXiffaa.  In  this  process  of  expan- 
sion the  Attic,  as  miglit  be  expected,  lost  some  of 
its  characteristic  features.  Thus  the  aa-  found  in 
most  of  the  dialects,  including  Ionic,  more  and 
more  superseded  the  Attic  tt  (which  is  almost 
obsolete  in  Mod,  Or.),  and  non-Attic  forms  showing 
fxr  intermingled  with  forms  sliowing  pp.  Hence  ffo- 
prevails — in  accordance  witli  the  papyri — in  the 
LXX,  which,  however,  still  retains  r^rrwc  and 
iXaTTuv  ;  while  we  also  find  here  Apffrjv  and  (rarely) 
dppriv,  dappGi,  and  (rarely)  6ap<ru.  In  the  NT  like- 
wise TT  occurs  rarely,  while  e.g.  OappQ  and  Oapa-Q 
are  both  in  use.  That  the  use  of  pp  was  not  due  to 
the  influence  of  the  literary  language  is  shown 
by  Mod.  Or.  6appCi  alongside  of  (repviKds  {  =  dp<TeviK6i). 
The  Koine  develoi)ed  more  rapidly  in  the 
hellenized  lands  outside  Greece  tliaii  upon  its 
native  soil,  where  the  indigenous  dialects  ofl'ered 
some  degree  of  resistance  to  its  growth.  But  by 
the  time  when  the  uniform  Ionic-Attic  alpliabet 
was  adopted  (400-350  B.C.),  the  Attic  was  asserting 
its  power  everywhere,  and  from  the  4th  cent.  B.C. 
till  about  tile  2nd  cent.  A.D.  the  dialects  were 
gradually  dispossessed,  and  at  last  swallowed  up, 
by  the  Koine  ;  in  its  foreign  domains,  however,  the 
lioine  had  prevailed  from  the  outset,  and  had  thus 
gained  a  marked  ascendancy  alike  as  regards 
culture  and  as  regards  the  numbers  of  those  who 
spoke  it.  The  absorption  of  the  dialects  did  not 
proceed  everywliere  at  the  same  pace.  The  Ionic 
succumbed  most  rapidly ;  the  Doric  resisted  longest : 
in  the  Doric  area,  in  fact,  there  emerged  first  of  all 
a  Doric  Koine,  which  wedged  itself  also  into  the 
non-Doric  Arcadia,  between  the  ancient  Arcadian 
dialect  and  tiie  common  Attic  tongue.  The  various 
aspects  of  this  wliole  process  of  development  may 
be  traced  in  tlie  inscriptions.  In  many  localities, 
as  e.g.  Crete  and  Khodes,  the  gradual  subsidence 
of  dialectic  forms  which  is  traceable  in  the  inscrip- 
tions reflects  the  changes  in  the  living  language. 
In  other  parts,  as  e.g.  Bocotia,  the  inscriptions 
reveal  a  marked  linguistic  break,  thus  indicating 
either  that  the  local  dialect,  though  no  longer 
spoken,  was  kept  alive  for  a  time  as  a  literary 
language,  or  that  the  Koine  liad  been  introduced 
as  a  written  language  before  the  dialect  had  en- 
tirely disappeared.:;: 

•  Of.  Xenoph.  De  Ilfpuhl.  Atken.  ii.  8. 

t  Cf.  the  researches  of  J.  Schlageter  in  his  Zur  Laut-  und 
Formenlehre  der  axisserhalh  Attikas  ge/undenen  attischen 
Inschriften,  ProK-ramm,  Freiburir  i.  B.,  1!K)8,  and  Der  M'ort- 
schaU  der  ausserhalb  Attikas  ge/undenen  attisehen  Inschriften, 
Strassburg,  li)12. 

X  Cf.  Thumb,  Die griech.  Spraclie  im  ZeitaHerde*  HeUenismxta, 
p.  '18(1. ;  Wahrmann,  Prolegomena  ru  einer  Geschichte  der  griech- 


The  process  of  absorption,  of  course,  could  not 
but  react  upon  the  Koine  itself.  But  it  is  quite 
wrong  tosupiwse,  witli  I'.  Kretsciimer  (Die  Entnlck- 
■ung  der  Koine),  that  the  Koine  arose  from  a 
manifold  intermingling  of  the  various  (Jr.  dialects. 
This  hypothesis  finds  no  real  support  either  in  the 
documents  of  the  Koine  or  in  Modern  Greek, 
'riius,  to  take  but  a  single  instance,  Kretsciimer, 
in  citing  the  Mod.  Gr.  accentuation  in  dvOpCnroi 
{  =  &vdpuiroi),  i(piyav  (  =  ((^yov)  as  a  .survival  of  the 
ancient  Doric  accentuation,  overlooks  the  fact  that 
otlier  Mod.  Gr.  accentual  changes  of  the  same  kind, 
as  in  AvOpuTTov,  f(payafie,  have  nothing  to  do  with 
Doric  at  all ;  so  tliat,  if  the  latter  forms  are  due 
to  the  operation  of  analogy  (in  conformity  witli 
dvdpwwoi,  iipayav),  the  examples  cited  by  Kretschmer 
must  be  explained  in  the  same  way,  i.e.  as  due  to 
accentual  shifting  on  the  analogy  of  dvOpwirovs, 
((pdya/jLev.  What  took  place  in  the  districts  of  the 
ancient  dialects  was  simply  that  the  Koine  was  at 
first  slightly  coloured  by  the  native  idiom  :  and 
doubtless  this  local  character  showed  itself  still 
more  plainly  in  the  pronunciation,  just  as,  e.g.,  the 
domicile  of  those  who  speak  t^nglish — whether  it 
be  the  north  of  England,  the  south  of  England, 
Scotland,  or  North  America — can  be  inferred  from 
their  '  accent,'  even  though  they  use  the  forms  of 
the  literary  language.  But  the  recognizable  pro- 
vincialisms of  these  local  Koine  types  left  only  tiie 
slightest  traces  in  the  process  or  development  to- 
wards Modern  Greek,  the  reason  being  that  they 
had  no  source  of  support  outside  tiieir  native 
region.  Thu.s,  e.g.,  as  early  as  the  3id  cent.  B.C. 
the  veterans  in  tiie  Arsinoite  Nome  of  Egypt — men 
drawn  from  the  most  diverse  quarters  of  Greece — 
wrote  the  Koine  without  any  aclniixture  of  dialectic 
forms.  Taken  all  in  ail,  the  elements  derived  from 
tlie  local  dialects  of  the  Koine — apart  from  the 
Ionic — are  confined  to  certain  forms,  such  as  \a6s, 
vadi,  Xarofila,  the  preposition  Ivavn,  and  a  few 
special  words,  as  e.g.  fiowSs  (attested  for  Cyrene 
and  Sicily  by  the  ancients). 

We  cannot  easily  determine  the  influence  of  the 
vocabularies  of  the  various  dialects,  as  these  voca- 
bularies are  much  less  known  to  us  than  that  of 
Attic.  It  was  the  Ionic  dialect  alone  that,  from 
the  period  of  the  Attic  naval  league,  made  a 
distinct  contribution  to  the  development  of  the 
Koine.  But  even  in  the  case  of  Ionic,  the  extent 
of  its  dialectical  influence  cannot  always  be  defined 
with  precision.  Thus,  while  forms  like  fftpvpr)^  in 
tlie  LXX  and  the  NT,  or  dpovpris  in  early  Cliristian 
literature,  seem  to  bear  a  genuinely  Ionic  character, 
they  may  well  be  later  variations  formed  on  the 
analogy  of  S6^a,  ou^tjs  ;  ddXarra,  0a\dTTr]^,  find  the 
like  (cf.  Moulton,  Einlcititng,  p.  70  f.).  On  the 
other  hand,  words  like  ^dOpaKos,  vdOvrj,  vcxrcroi  in- 
dicate clearly  the  phonetic  form  of  Ionic,  while, 
again,  e.g.  the  aorist  fviKov  (in  the  papyri)  instead 
of  -^vEyKov,  and  the  preference  for  nouns  in  -/ia  are 
Ionic,  or  at  all  events  not  Attic,  features.  A 
specially  characteristic  indication  of  Ionic  influence 
appears  in  the  inflexion  of  nouns  in  -aj,  -aSos  and 
-oCy,  -oOSos.  Such  syntactical  usages  a.s  the  pre- 
ference of  iva  to  Sttwj  and  the  final  infinitive  (e.g. 
Mt  5^^ :  oi'K  ffKdov  KaraXvaai,  dWb.  irXr]pi2(rai)  may 
likewise  be  shown  to  be  Ionic.  Of  most  importance, 
however,  are  the  Ionic  elements  of  the  vocabulary, 
as  it  is  these  that  give  the  Koine  a  character 
diflerent  from  that  of  Attic.  Thus  a  calculation 
of  Schlageter  (Der  Wurtsclmtz,  etc.)  shows  that 
the  Attic  inscriptions  outside  Attica  (till  200  B.C.) 
contain  18%  of  Attic,  18%  of  new  (Hellenistic), 
and  a  little  over  0%  of   Ionic,  but  only  -75%  of 

ischen  Dialekte  iin  Zeilalter  des  Ilellenismug,  Projrramm, 
Vienna,  1907;  Kie<ker9,  'Das  Eindringen  der  Koine  in  KreU,' 
in  Indogerm.  Fomch.  xxvii.  [1910]  72fT. ;  Buttenwieser,  'Znr 
Geschichte  des  bootischen  Dialekts,"  in  ib.  xxviii.  [I91IJ  Iff. 


HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK         HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK   555 


distinctively  Doric  words.     Tiie  proportion  of  Ionic  j 
words  increases  till  about  250  B.C.,  and  then  de- 
creases, so  tliat  the  process  of  interfusion  virtually 
ceased  about  the  middle  of  the  3rd  cent.  B.C. 

This  feature  of  the  Koine  appears,  as  we  might 
expect,  also  in  Biblical  Greek.  Words  like  draprii^u 
(in  draprifffids),  ^KTpwfia,  Koxd^u  (of  the  wind),  SKwOos, 
aavSdXtov,  aKopirii'o),  etc.,  in  the  LXX  or  NT  are  of 
Ionic  origin.  The  Ionic  element  includes,  further, 
the  so-called  poetical  words  of  the  Koine,  i.e. 
Hellenistic  words  which  formerly  were  to  be  found 
only  in  the  poets,  but  which  from  the  fact  of  their 
occurrence  in  papyrus  texts  concerned  with  matters 
of  everyday  life,  and  partly  also  from  the  fact  of 
their  survival  in  Modern  Greek,  are  now  seen  to 
have  belonged  to  the  colloquial  language.  They 
include,  e.g.,  ^apiw,  evrp^rofiai,  Oafi^iw,  fieaovvKTioy, 
xeipdi^u,  ItdKOi,  upvo/iai  in  the  LXX  and  the  NT,  and 
d\(KT(i)p,  j3a<rTdfw,  fpi<pos,  (pavrd^u,  (pTjfjii^u  in  the  NT. 
Words  of  this  class  were  imported,  first,  from  the 
literary  Ionic  of  the  earlier  period  into  the  language 
of  poetry,  and  then  again  from  the  vernacular  Ionic 
of  the  later  period  into  the  Koine,  and  there  was  no 
direct  link  of  connexion  between  the  two  processes.  * 
In  the  literaiy  criticism  of  the  Hellenistic  wTiters, 
and  especiall}'  of  the  biblical  books,  the  facts  just 
indicated  yield  an  important  guiding  principle, 
viz.  that  their  use  of  Ionic  words  does  not  argue 
a  knowledge  of,  or  any  dependence  upon,  the  earlier 
Ionic  literature.  The  fact,  e.g.,  that  St.  Luke  makes 
use  of  medical  terms  found  in  Hippocrates  and 
other  physicians  in  no  way  implies  a  study  of 
medical  writings  ('Luke  the  physician'),  but  only 
some  acquaintance  with  the  ordinary  terminology 
of  his  age ;  many  such  medical  words,  indeed,  as 
e.g.  tyKvoi,  crreTpa,  or  ^eXovT}  ('  the  surgeon's  needle') 
had  passed  into  such  general  use  in  the  vemaculai 
that  they  prove  nothing  more  than  St.  Luke's 
familiarity  with  the  language  of  his  time. 

6.  The  influence  of  foreign  languages.  —  The 
Koine  may  thus  be  defined  as  a  development  of 
Attic  under  the  influence  of  Ionic.  But  as  it 
spread  to  non-Hellenic  lands,  such  as  Asia  Minor 
and  Egypt,  we  must,  finallj%  inquire  as  to  the  in- 
fluence upon  it  of  the  languages  of  these  countries, 
and  as  to  foreign  influence  generally.  Just  as 
the  Celts  of  Gaul  exercised  an  influence  upon  the 
grammar  and  vocabulary  of  French  (the  vtilgar 
Latin  of  Gaul),  so,  we  might  expect,  would  the 
Koine  be  aflected  by  the  native  populations  of  Asia 
Minor  and  Egypt.  The  Greek  spoken  bj'  these 
*  barliarians '  shows  traces  of  their  own  manner  of 
speech  in  the  confusion  of  i  and  e  soimds,  and  of 
tenues,  mediiP,  and  aspirates  (r,  5,  d).  Of  such 
modification,  however,  very  little  found  its  way 
into  the  general  development  of  Greek.  Probably 
the  pronunciation  of  irevre  as  pende,  and  of  \afnrp6s 
as  lambros,  and  the  like,  which  make  their  first 
appearance  in  the  dialect  of  Pamphylia,  as  also 
the  development  of  v  into  t,  arose  in  Asia  Minor ; 
the  disregard  of  the  distinction  between  long  and 
short  vowels  (w  and  o,  etc.)  perhaps  in  Asia  Minor 
and  Egypt.  It  was  once  more  the  vocabulary  that 
was  appreciably  aflected  by  foreign  languages — 
the  natural  result  of  intercourse.  Yet,  after  all — 
apart  from  the  local  use  of  Egyptian  words  in 
Egyptian  Greek — the  Oriental  languages  contri- 
buted to  the  Greek  vocabulary  in  Hellenistic  times 
hardly  any  more  than  in  the  classical  period  ;  the 
converse  influence,  e.g.  in  Rabbinical  Hebrew,  was 
incomparably  greater.  In  Biblical  Greek  likewise, 
Semitic  elements  are  scarcely  more  prominent  than 
elsewhere.  We  note,  e.g.,  dyyapeOoj  and  irapd5ei<Tos, 
which  are  of  Persian  origin ;  dppa^up,  Ori^ij,  kojSoj, 

•  There  exist  aa  yet  no  works  (except  those  of  Schlageter, 
mentioned  above)  dealing  specially  with  the  vocabulary  of  the 
papyri  and  the  inscriptions.  For  the  XT  cf.  T.  Naegeli,  Der 
n'ortsehatz  des  AposteU  PaiUus,  Gottingen,  1905. 


fd^Xa,  ffupaKot  (Sem.),  and  /Sdioi',  ari/ifu  (Egj'pt.); 
but  these  words  are  also  found  in  other  documents 
of  the  Koine ;  while,  of  course,  words  like  dp^di, 
dfii^y,  yievpa,  xdirxjn,  ad^^arop  {<rd/ipaTOp)  found  their 
way  into  the  Greek  world  through  the  Jewish 
Christian  sphere  of  ideas.  It  was  from  this  sphere 
also  that  the  names  of  the  days  of  the  week  (ijXiov 
ri/i^pa,  ff€\Tjpr]s  r]/M(pa,  etc.),  together  with  the  week 
of  seven  days  itself,  came  to  the  Greeks,  and  then 
spread  to  the  rest  of  Europe.* 

As  contrasted  with  the  Oriental,  the  Latin  con- 
tribution forms  a  noticeable  element  in  the  Koine. 
Again,  it  is  true,  the  grammatical  influence  was  of 
the  slightest.  A  number  of  suftixes,  such  as  -aroi, 
-apis,  -ovpa,  -urios  (Lat.  -atiis,  -arius,  -ura,  -ensis), 
were  introduced  into  Greek  through  the  medium 
of  Lat.  loan-words,  and  came  to  be  used  with  Gr. 
stems.  From  the  beginning  of  the  Roman  sway 
in  Greece  to  the  close  of  the  ancient  period,  Roman 
politics  and  traflic  imported  a  constantly  increas- 
ing number  of  Latin  words  into  Greek,  and  how 
eti'ectively  many  of  these  became  naturalized  is 
sho\Am  by  their  survival  in  Modem  Greek.  In  this 
respect  likewise  Biblical  Greek  reflects  the  condi- 
tions of  the  common  Hellenistic  language ;  in  the 
NT  we  find,  e.g.,  Kourap,  Kfprvpiwp,  \eyeusv,  TpouTd'piop, 
K'^vffos,  KoSpdpTTfs,  Srjvdpiop,  fiiXiop,  \4ptiov,  ffovSdpiop, 
(ppayiXXiov.  That  the  influence  of  Latin  on  Pales- 
tinian Greek  was  by  no  means  slight  is  attested 
indirectly  bj'  the  number  of  Lat.  words  more  or 
less  naturalized  in  the  Rabbinical  literature,  and, 
as  appears  from  their  form,  introduced  through 
the  medium  of  Greek.  Latinisms  were  occasion- 
ally formed  by  translation  ('loan-renderings'), 
and  just  as  the  Kevrvplwp  is  called  a  eKaTovrapxot  in 
Lk  23"",  so  we  may  regard  t6  iKavov  xoieiv  (ilk  15^) 
and  epyaaiap  oovvai  as  translations  of  Lat.  satisfacere 
and  operant  dare  respectively.  The  extra-biblical 
literature  of  early  Christianity  likewise  shows  the 
influence  of  Latin,  and  is  as  yet  free  from  puristic 
tendencies ;  thus,  e.g.,  Ignatius  does  not  hesitate  to 
adopt  SeaepTwp,  Serdcrira  ('pledge')  from  military 
usage,  or  i^efixXdpiop  ('legally  valid  copy')  from 
the  language  of  law.t 

7.  Local  variations  of  the  Koine. — In  order  to 
answer  the  question  whether  Biblical  Greek  shows 
a  definite  local  character,  we  must  first  of  all  in- 
quire whether  local  variations  or  even  dialects 
existed  in  the  colloquial  Koine.  AVe  certainly 
cannot  look  for  such  diflerences  in  the  written 
texts  of  a  cosmopolitan  language,  as  it  lies  in  the 
very  nature  of  a  written  language  to  tend  towards 
uniformity.  Our  investigation  must  therefore 
carefully  take  accotmt  of  all  phenomena  that  could 
be  regarded  as  pointing  to  local  variation.  In  view 
of  the  wide  expansion  of  the  Koine,  it  is  natnral 
to  suppose  that  local  varieties  would  exist,  i.e. 
that  the  common  language  would  not  be  spoken  in 
exactly  the  same  way  in  Egypt,  Asia  Minor  (Syria), 
and  in  the  ancient  Attic,  Ionic,  and  Doric  areas, 
since  the  ancient  dialects  themselves  or  the  lan- 
guages of  the  barbarians  who  had  just  learned  to 
speak  Greek  would  lend  a  certain  colouring,  in  pro- 
nunciation at  least,  to  the  Koine  of  the  various 
regions.  And,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we  are  able, 
partly  with  the  help  of  Modem  Greek,  to  deter- 

•  Ct  Thumb,  '  Die  Namen  der  Wochentage  ini  Griechischen, 
in  Zeitsehrijl  fur  deutsehe  Wortfonehung,  i.  [1900J  163ir. ; 
Schnrer,  'Die  siebentagige  Woche  in  der  christL  Kirche  des 
ersten  Jahrhunderts,"  in  ZSTW  vL  [1905]  Iff. 

t  Cf.  T.  Ecking'er,  Die  OrtAographie  latein.  Worter  in  ffrieek. 
Insehri/Un,  Munich,  1893 ;  We«ely,  '  Die  lat.  Hemente  in  der 
Graatat  der  Papyri,'  in  Wiener  Strtdien,  xiiv.  [1902]  99  ff..  xxv. 
[1903]  40S. ;  D.  Magie,  De  Romanontm  iurit  puMiei  saerique 
voealnilis  toUemnibus  in  grceewn  sermonem  eontersis,  Leipzig^, 
1905 ;  and  especially  L.  Hahn,  Rvm  und  Romanismus  im 
ffriediiseh^romisehen  Osten,  Leipzig,  1906  (reviewed  by  Thumb, 
Indogerm.  Forseh.  Anzeiger,  xxiL  [1907-08]  30 ff.),  also  'Znni 
Sprachenkampf  im  romischen  fieich,'  in  Pkitologus,  Snppl.  x. 
(1907). 


556    HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK        HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK 


mine  the  existence  of  a  niinilter  of  such  local  varia- 
tions. Thus  the  Greek-hpeakin<;  Egyptians  juul 
Asiatics  could  not  keep  the  e  and  i  sounds  *  distinct 
(a  phenomenon  which,  however,  had  notliing  to  do 
with  itacism),  and  confounded  t€nucs,  iiifdiM',  and 
aspirates,  probably  substitutinj,'  tcmics,  or  un 
voiced  media;,  for  the  last  two  groups,  'i'lic  77  li.id 
a  close  and  an  open  sound,  the  latter  probably  in 
the  East,  as  may  be  inferred  from  the  pronuncia- 
tion of  rj  as  r,  in  the  modern  dialect  of  I'ontus ;  v 
was  pronounced  as  t,  ii  and  u  {in),  though  it  is  im- 
possible to  define  the  local  limits  of  tlic  variations. 
Similarly,  the  intrusion  of  an  inter-vocalic  7  (as  in 
K\aiyu)  [  =  /iXaiw]  found  in  a  papyrus  of  the  2nd  cent. 
B.C.)  was  merely  local,  as  is  shown  by  Modern 
Greek ;  while  the  sound-change  of  X  into  p  as  in 
dSfp<p6i=:dS€\<p6s,  and  the  substitution  of  a  single 
for  a  duplicated  consonant,  cannot  have  been 
universal  in  the  Koine,  since  the  X  is  still  retained 
in  the  East  (Cappadocia  and  Pontus),  and  the  double 
letter  in  the  south-east  (Cyprus,  Rhodes,  etc.),  of 
the  Modern  Greek  area.  Einally,  the  retention 
and  omission  of  final  v  must  each  have  had  their 
own  local  distribution.  As  regards  inflexions,  we 
may  draw  attention  to  the  Egyptian  declension  in 
-ay,  -aros  as  compared  with  the  Ionic  -as,  -ados  (im- 
parisyllabic  nouns  of  this  class  are  not  found  in 
the  NT).  Further,  forms  like  y^yovav  on  the  one 
hand,  and  iirrjXdaa-i  on  the  other,  as  also  ijXdoaav 
and  the  like,  indicate  that,  as  in  Modern  Greek, 
different  regions  of  the  Koine  levelled  the  per-sonal 
endings  in  difterent  ways.  As  yet,  however,  the 
clearest  evidence  that  by  the  end  of  the  ancient 
period  the  Koine  had  already  split  up  into  actual 
dialects,  in  which  lay  the  germs  of  the  dialects  of 
to-day,  is  found  in  the  imprecation- tablets  of  Cyprus 
(3rd.  cent.  A.D.),  tiie  language  of  which  shows 
traces  of  both  the  ancient  and  the  modern  dialect 
of  that  island. t 

But  while  recent  investigation  has  thus  succeeded 
in  proving  the  existence  of  local  varieties  of  the 
Koine,  it  must  refuse  to  recognize  the  so-called 
varieties  whose  existence  has  been  maintained 
from  ancient  times,  viz.  the  Alexandrian  and 
Macedonian  dialects.  What  was  regarded,  alike 
in  ancient  and  in  modern  times,  as  characteristic 
of  these  dialects  is  found  to  have  belonged  to  no 
special  region,  but  to  the  common  Hellenistic 
language.  Not  even  the  stock  example  epavvdw 
{  =  ep€vvdo})  can  be  claimed  for  the  Alexandrian  dia- 
lect— let  alone  Alexandrian  Jewish-Greek — as  that 
phonetic  form  has  been  traced,  e.g.,  in  the  Koine  of 
Thera. 

8.  Biblical  Greek  as  a  local  variety  of  the 
Koine. — We  now  come  to  tlie  question  how  Biblical 
(Jrcek  is  related  to  tliese  local  idioms.  It  is  not 
l)ossible  to  describe  tiie  Greek  Bible  as  the  monu- 
ment of  a  distinct  dialect  of  the  Koine,  and  still 
less  as  the  monument  of  an  Alexandrian  or  Pales- 
tinian Jewish-Greek,  or  of  a  special  '  Christian 
Greek.'  Of  the  existence  of  an  Alexandrian  Jewish- 
Greek  there  is  no  real  evidence  at  all,  as  was  first 
explicitly  proved  by  Deissmann  (see  Lit.).  Psichari 
(see  Lit.),  who  has  recently  investigated  the  prob- 
lem, could  find  no  support  for  tlie  theory  that  in 
]iarticular  the  trfuisl.itors  of  the  OT  spoke  a  Jewisli 
Greek,  and  so  occasionally  introduced  Hebraisms 
into  their  version.  The  language  of  the  LXX  is 
in  reality  a  'translation-Greek,'  and  cannot  there- 
fore be  adduced  as  proving  the  existence  of  a 
Jewish  variety  of  the  colloquial  Koine  ;  nor  is  all 
our  wider  knowledge  of  the  Greek  spoken  in 
Palestine,  whether  derived  from  direct  or  indirect 
sources,  sutHcient  to  warrant  us  in  speaking  of  it 
as  a  distinct  type  ;  at  most  it  may  be  described  as 

*  Vowels  (a,  e,  i,  etc.)  as  in  Oerinan. 

t  Cf.  Thumb,  ifeite  Jahrbiicher  fur  das  klau.  AUciinui.  w  ii. 
[1906]  257. 


tlie  Syrian  Koine.  Bil)lical  Greek,  moreover,  is 
Iiv  no  means  identical  with  what  we  have  been 
able  to  establish  regarding  the  Greek  of  tiie  Pales- 
tinian Jews,  for  the  particular  change  of  meaning 
which  certain  Greek  words  underwent  in  llabbini- 
cal  usage  tlocs  not  appear  in  those  words  as  used 
in  Biblical  (Jreek;  thus,  e.g.,  Xtirovpyia  in  the 
Rabbinical  literature  means  '  service  rendered ' ; 
in  the  Bible  (as  in  Greek  generally),  'religious 
service.' 

It  is  a  controversy  some  centuries  old  whether 
the  language  of  the  I  Jibic  bears  a  '  Hebrew '  colour- 
ing or  not ;  tiie  so-cailcd  '  Purists'  sought  to  demon- 
strate the  classical,  the  Hebraists  the  hebraizing, 
character  of  Biblical  (!reek.  The  theory  of  the 
'specific  quality'  of  NT  Gr.  acquired  a  certain 
theological  importance  in  virtue  of  the  jiointed  ex- 
pression which  it  received  at  the  hands  of  R.  Rothc, 
viz.  that  the  NT  speaks  in  the  language  of  the  Holy 
Giiost,  who  'framed  for  Himself  a  quite  distinct 
religious  idiom  by  trarisfonaing  the  linguistic 
elements  which  lay  ready  for  Him,  as  also  the 
already  existent  concepts,  into  a  medium  appro- 
priate to  Him.'  *  The  research  of  the  last  fifteen 
years  has  shown  more  and  more  conclusively  that 
the  question  in  debate  was  wrongly  put,  since 
neither  classical  Greek  nor  a  supposed  .Jewish 
Greek  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  foundation  of  Biblical 
Greek.  To  Deissmann  (see  Lit.)  is  due  the  merit 
of  having  brought  clear  j)rinciples  to  bear  upon  the 
subject,  inasmuch  as  he  showed  that  Biblical  Greek 
cannot  be  treated  as  an  isolated  plienomenon,  and 
assigned  it  a  place  in  the  general  process  of  a  great 
natural  development  of  language.  First  of  all,  as 
regards  the  so-called  Hebraisms,  or,  more  accur- 
ately, Semitisms,  the  examples  usually  adduced 
are  either  simply  fallacious  or  else  indecisive. 
Leaving  out  of  account  the  pedantic  and  barbarous 
literality  in  translations  of  certain  parts  of  the  OT 
(as  e.g.  the  tr.  of  Aquila,  who  renders  "nx,  the 
sign  of  the  Heb.  accusative,  by  cr6i>),  we  must  admit 
that  the  syntax  of  the  LXX  has  not  been  modified 
Ijy  the  original  in  any  undue  degree ;  thus  even 
the  construction  irpotTTidivai.  witli  the  infinitive 
(Heb.  -)  loi'i  with  inf.)  cannot  be  regarded  as  non- 
Greek.t  Detailed  investigation  shows  that  the 
translators  were  quite  able  to  keep  themselves  free 
from  bondage  to  their  original,  and  that  they 
strove  with  success  to  represent  the  Hebrew  form 
of  expression  by  an  excellent  Greek  diction  (cf. 
Johannessohn,  in  Lit.).  In  the  NT,  again,  evi- 
dences of  a  Hebrew  giound-colour  have  proved  even 
less  cogent,  as  is  now  increasingly  recognized.  The 
statement  of  B.  AVeiss  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  has 
a  '  hebraisierender  Grundton '  has  been  recently 
challenged  by  Wellhausen  (Das  Evangelium  Johan- 
nis,  Berlin,  1908).  In  point  of  fact,  the  more 
thoroughly  we  work  through  the  papyri,  the  smaller 
grows  the  number  of  alleged  Hebraisms  ;  we  need 
cite  only  the  constructions  ey  fj.axa.ipv  ^^<i  f"  "''V 
6v6/MTi.  That  modes  of  expression  which  really 
occur  in  Greek,  though  but  rarely,  or  only  in  sjjecial 
circumstances,  should  be  found  more  frequently  in 
Biblical  Greek  when  they  liappen  to  coincide  with 
Hebrew  usage  (as  e.g.  iSov)  need  occasion  no  sur- 
prise ;  it  is  natural  enougii  in  translations  or  repro- 
ductions from  foreign  languages.:;:  Even  the  voca- 
tive 6  <?e6j,  the  use  of  which  in  Biblical  Greek  is 
explained  by  Wackernagel  §  as  an  imitation  of 
Hebrew,  may  be  brought  under  this  general  law, 
since  6  deSs  occurs  as  a  vocative — though  with  a 
diflerent  shade  of  meaning — also  in  Greek  ;  while 
the  predicative  ei'j,  and  such  expressions  as  xpiriii 

*  Cf.  Thumb,  Die  griechisehe  Sprache  im  Zeitalter  det  HtUtn- 
ismtts,  p.  IS!. 
t  Hclbiiiir,  Grammatik  tier  LXX,  p.  4. 
t  Cf.  also  Moulton,  Kinleiltinij,  pp.  20,  31. 
§  t/ber  einige  antike  Anredefonnen,  Oottinf^en,  1912. 


HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK         HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK   557 


dSiKtas,  '  the  unjust  judge,'  have  likewise  certain 
)K>ints  of  contact  with  Greek,  and  therefore  cannot 
rightly  be  described  as  non-Greek  Hebnii-ms  ov 
barbarisms. 

In  the  NT,  the  phenomenon  just  ex])lained,  viz. 
that  relatively  rarer  forms  of  expression  occur 
more  frequently  in  Biblical  Greek,  is  one  that  may 
l>e  expectetl  with  special  frequency  in  those  parts 
that  rest  on  an  Aramaic  original.  But  the  ques- 
tion whether  certain  parts  of  the  NT  go  back  to 
an  Aramaic  original  is  one  in  which  the  Hebraisms 
necessarily  play  a  leading  part,  and  which  cannot 
he  ettectively  solved  until  the  full  complement  of 
the  Hebraisms  has  been  established  beyond  dis- 
pute. Thus,  e.ff..  the  monotonous  sequence  of  nar- 
rative by  means  of  Kai  clauses  in  no  sense  proves  the 
presence  of  the  Semitic  genius  of  language — oft^n 
as  that  assertion  has  been  made.  Exact  statistical 
investigations,  such  as  alone  could  avail  us  here, 
are  still  lacking.  Probably  the  best  foundation 
for  such  investigations  would  be  the  arrange- 
ment of  words,  and  especially  the  position  of  the 
verb ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  frequent  occur- 
rence of  the  vei-b  at  the  beginning  of  clauses  in  the 
Gospel  narrative  seems  to  be  at  variance  with 
ordinary  Greek  usage,  and  to  have  been  influenced 
by  the  Hebrew  diction,  though  at  the  same  time  it 
is  not  unkno^vn  in  Greek.* 

The  influence  of  Hebrew  upon  the  phraseology 
of  Biblical  Greek  is  clearly  manifest  only  in  the 
LXX,  though  there  also  every  particular  instance 
demands  the  most  careful  scmtiny.t  In  the  NT 
the  formation  of  new  words  to  represent  special 
Christian  ideas  is  quite  an  unimportant  element. 
Ueissmann  estimates  the  number  of  '  biblical  words' 
in  the  NT  as  no  more  than  one  per  cent.  Chris- 
tianity was  able  to  formulate  its  distinctive  con- 
ceptions (e.g.  ffwrrtp,  evayyeXiov)  in  the  spirit  and 
with  the  linguistic  resources  of  the  Koine ;  as 
Deissmann  rightly  observes,  it  had  not  so  much  a 
word-forming  as  a  word-transfonning  ix)wer.  But 
such  alteration  in  the  meaning  of  existent  words 
takes  place  in  all  cases  where  a  profound  change 
occurs  in  the  civilization — including,  of  course,  also 
the  concepts  and  ideas — of  a  people.  The  discussion 
of  such  phenomena  forms  a  chapter  of  ordinary' 
semasiology,  for  Biblical  Greek  does  not  differ  in 
this  respect  from  Gr.  in  general.  In  many  cases 
the  NT  merely  carries  forward  in  Christian  con- 
cepts the  I'eligious  signification  which  had  already 
b^n  fully  developed  in  the  extra-Christian  Koine, 
as  e.g.  in  ffwr-qp,  '  saviour ' ;  +  for  other  examples  see 
the  works  of  Deissmann. 

How  the  study  of  the  Koine  texts  furthers  our  knowledge  in 
this  field  is  shown  also  by  G.  Thieme,  Die  Inschriften  von 
Magnesia  am  Maander  und  das  ST,  Gottingen,  1906,  and  J. 
Rouffiac,  Eeeherehes  sur  Us  earaetires  du  grec  dans  U  ST 
d^apris  Us  inscriptions  de  Priine,  Paris,  1911. 

Biblical  Greek,  then,  corresponds  to  the  Hellen- 
istic Greek  of  the  age  in  phonetics,  morphology, 
syntax,  and  vocabulary.  As,  however,  the  LXX 
took  form  in  Egypt  and  the  NT  on  Asiatic  soU,  it 
is  of  course  conceivable  that  the  pronunciation  and 
idiom  of  the  Egyptian  and  Asiatic  Greeks  would 
now  and  again  assert  themselves,  just  as,  e.g.,  the 
literary  German  of  the  Austrians  can  be  distin- 
guished from  that  of  the  Northern  Germans.  But, 
for  one  thing,  the  written  text  is  too  imperfect  a 
representation  of  the  actual  pronunciation,  and, 
for  another,  our  knowledge  of  the  finer  provincial 
differences  in  the  vocabulary  and  syntax  of  tlie 
Koine  is  too  meagre,  to  enable  us  to  trace  abnor- 
malities in  the  biblical  Koine  with  certainty.     In 

*  Cf.  E.  Kieckers,  Die  Stellung  des  Verbs  iin  Grieehisehen, 
Sttassburg,  1911,  p.  5. 

t  Cf.,  f.3..  Thackeray,  A  Grammar  of  the  OT  in  Gredt,  L  (Gam- 
bridge,  1909],  i>.  31  ff. 

t  CL  especially  Wendland,  ZA'TW  y.  [19(M]  335  ff. 


one  resi)ect,  however,  we  may  speak  of  a  dialectical 
raoditication  in  biblical  texts :  the  MS  tradition  of 
sounds  and  forms  is  not  homogeneous.  Each  par- 
ticular MS  betraj-8  the  influence  of  the  language, 
the  period,  and  the  country  of  the  writer ;  while 
in  certain  phonetic  features,  such  as  the  confusion 
of  mediae,  tenues,  and  aspirates,  or  the  confusion 
of  i  (et,  t)  and  v,  «,  and  of  e  and  ij,  some  of  the  older 
MSB  of  the  NT  {e.g.  A  and  K)  indicate  their 
Egyptian  or  Asiatic  origin.  It  should  also  be 
noted  that  in  the  LXX  we  find,  e.g.,  the  Xesdinj  of  B 
appearing  as  XaKai-ij  in  A ;  that  accusatives  like 
vvKTav  and  ^offiXiar  are  met  with  only  in  A  and  K, 
and  that  diflerences  appear  even  in  the  selection  of 
words,  as  where  Kovovy  and  ivexeev  in  A  correspond 
to  k6<Pivov  and  f^aXev  in  B.  To  what  extent  the 
original  text  itself  was  afiiected  by  the  local  idiom 
of  the  writers  (or  translators)  can  be  determined 
only  by  means  of  a  detailed  investigation  of  the 
MS'S.  Thus  the  accusative  form  pvtcrav  may  qnite 
possibly  be  due  to  the  translators  of  the  OT,  or  to 
some  of  them,  but  that  they  actually  used  it  (as 
Psichari  *  believes)  is  meanwhile  difficult  to  prove. 
In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  linguistic  form  of  the 
several  MSS  still  awaits  precise  investigation,  such 
apparent  trifles  as,  e.g.,  the  v  iipeXxvariKoif  or  the 
dropping  of  y  between  vowels,  and  such  variants 
as  fKafiap,  ekd^offi,  eXd^offOM,  must  not  be  overlooked. 

Possibly,  however,  we  may  be  more  succes-sfnl 
with  the  question  regarding  the  provincial  idiom 
of  the  biblical  writers,  if  we  examine  the  syntactical 
features,  as  the  MS  tradition  would  be  less  likely 
to  infringe  upon  the  original  text  in  that  respect. 
A  noteworthy  fact,  observed  by  Radermacher.t  is 
that  the  use  of  the  article  as  a  relative — a  usage 
authenticated  in  Attic  inscriptions  of  the  4th  cent. 
A.D.  and  here  and  there  in  Koine  texts — seems  to 
be  foreign  to  the  NT.  Further,  the  final  infinitive, 
which  is  a  favourite  construction  in  the  Ionic  of 
Homer,  but  is  seldom  used  in  Attic,  appears  with 
great  frequency  in  the  NT,  though  the  substitution 
of  ipa  for  the  infinitive  in  other  constructions  had 
developed  in  a  marked  degree.  Now  it  is  a  re- 
markable fact  that  the  final  infinitive  is  found  to 
depend  upon  verbs  of  the  same  class  alike  in  the 
NT,  in  the  early  Byzantine  author  Malalas  of 
Syria,  and  in  the  Pontic  dialect  of  to-day  (the  only 
dialect  that  still  retains  the  infinitive).  This 
suggests  the  inference  that  there  was  an  eastern 
Koine  dialect  marked  ititer  alia  by  its  retention  of 
the  infinitive,  and  that  the  language  of  the  NT 
was  more  closely  akin  to  that  dialect  than  to  the 
other  branches  of  the  Koine,  which  discarded  the 
infinitive  altogether,  and  in  this  respect  paved  the 
way  for  Modem  Greek  usage.  Another  and  per- 
haps even  more  characteristic  phenomenon  is  that 
the  Fourth  Gospel  makes  very  frequent  use  of 
the  adjectival  pronoun  efuts,  and  that  similarly  the 
Acta  Johannis  and  Acta  Philippi  prefer  the  ad- 
jectival a6s,  while  the  rest  of  the  NT  writings,  like 
Modem  Greek,  usually  employ  the  genitives  iiov 
and  aov.  As  the  adjectival  possessives  are  now  re- 
tained only  by  the  dialects  of  Pontus  and  Cappa- 
docia,  we  may  regard  the  authors  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  and  the  other  two  works  just  named — in 
view  of  their  preference  for  e/«os  and  <t&% — as  having 
belonged  to  Asia  Minor. 

It  is  therefore  possible,  with  the  aid  of  gram- 
matical characteristics,  to  assign  a  particular  book 
of  the  Bible  to  a  definite  portion  of  the  Koine  area. 
We  thus  at  the  same  time  trench  upon,  and,  in 
principle  at  least,  give  an  affirmative  answer  to, 
the  question  whether  the  various  constituent  parts 
of  the  Greek  Bible  ma}— not  only  as  regards  their 
style  but  aLso  as  regards  their  grammar— be  dis- 

*  '  Esai  sar  le  Grec  de  la  Septante,'  in  Remte  dts  eludes 
juives,  1908,  p.  164  f. 

t  XeuUsL  Grammatik,  Tiibingen,  1911,  p.  62. 


558    HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK       HELLENISTIC  &  lilBLICAL  GREEK 


tin<ruishc(l  from  one  another  in  such  a  way  as  to 
warrant  lis  in  associating  their  writers  with  ditlerent 
districts.  Investigation  of  tlie  local  varieties  of 
the  Koine  (see  above)  has  not  yet  yielded  such 
results  as  would  enable  us  to  deal  witli  the  problem 
on  a  comprehensive  scale.  So  far  as  individuality 
of  diction  has  as  yet  been  noted  in  tlie  various 
biblical  writers,  it  would  seem  to  involve  nothing 
more  tlian  diflerences  in  culture  and  in  stylistic 
tendencies  :  compare,  e.^.,  the  Gospels,  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  and  tiie  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  J.  H. 
Moul ton  has  called  attention  to  such  diflerences,* 
while  H.  St.  J.  Thackeray  t  has  successfully  utilized 
the  occurrence  or  non-occurrence  of  certain  words 
as  a  means  of  breaking  up  the  Greek  version  of 
the  OT  into  groups  whicli  must  have  come  from 
distinct  hands.  The  next  task  of  the  investigator, 
liowever,  will  be  to  examine  the  syntax  and  voca- 
bulary of  the  several  parts  of  the  Greek  OT  and 
NT  with  reference  to  the  question  Avhether  they 
cannot  be  brought  into  relation  also  with  local  and 
chronologiciil  modifications  of  the  Koine.  A  begin- 
ning has  been  made  in  tiie  works  of  Thieme  and 
lloufTiac  already  named. 

9.  The  more  important  grammatical  peculi- 
arities of  Biblical  Greek.  —  The  definition  of 
Biblical  Greek  as  a  monument  of  the  Koine  is  in 
no  way  affected  by  the  discussions  of  the  foregoing 
paragraph,  and  a  grammatical  study  of  the  former 
gives  us  a  good  idea  of  the  Koine  in  general  as 
contrasted  with  Attic  Greek. :J: 

(A)  Phonetics. — (1)  Itacism  had  become  a  fairly 
common  feature  of  Greek  pronunciation  in  Asia 
Minor  and  Egypt  by  the  beginning  of  the  2nd 
century  ;  et  was  pronounced  as  i,  at  as  e  (a),  and 
01  as  i^  (a  sound  resembling  it,  but  incapable  of  being 
more  precisely  determined ).§  The  rj  was  stili  an 
c  sound,  but  in  the  countries  named  was  sometimes 
confused  Avith  i  (t,  ei),  as  tlie  latter  had  there  a  very 
open  pronunciation.  The  itacistic  development  is 
reflected  in  such  biblical  modes  of  spelling  as  HSov 
(elSov),  AaveiS,  dvdireipos  =  &v(iirrjpo'i,  paLSr}  (also  piSrj), 
dv6yu)  (also  Avoiyu}).  Probably  av  and  ev  were  still 
pronounced  as  true  diphthongs,  i.e.  as  au,  eu.  Of 
the  consonants,  <p,  x,  /S,  and  y  still  retained  their 
original  values,  \iz.p  +  k,  k  +  h,b  and  g  ;  the  native 
Egyptians  and  Asiatics  made  no  distinction  between 
these  and  the  corresponding  unvoiced  explosives /) 
and  k  (see  above),  though  the  Modern  Greek 
aspirate  pronunciation  of  /S  and  y  had  already 
found  a  footing  :  cf.  dvoUi  for  dvoiyei  in  LXX  ;  and 
for  5  and  0,  the  English  pronunciation  of  voiced 
and  voiceless  th  would  seem  to  have  prevailed  in 
NT  times,  t  was  like  the  English  z  (voiced  s) ;  cf. 
the  MS  form  *Z/xu/)i/a.  (2)  The  distinction  between 
long  and  short  vowels  Avas  no  longer  maintained  in 
colloquial  speech  ;  but  in  the  LXX  o  and  u  are 
seldom  confused.  (3)  Peculiarities  in  the  usage  of 
vowels :  *Teffj€pdKovTa  (for  T€<x<xapdKovTa) ;  *Tndj^u 
(  =  7ri^fw),  'I  seize';  *Tafieiov  —  Tafiie'ioi>;  *vyeia  = 
i/yleia ;  *vo<ra6i  =  veo(Tcr6s.  (4)  Consonantal  peculi- 
arities :  *y'ivoiJ.ai  and  *yi.vib(TKiji ;  Kad'^rot,  *Ka0'iSlav  ; 
i<l)i\irLda  {i<t>7)\iri<jev,  IjXX)  ;  *d0i5e?»'  (the  spiritus 
aspcr  is  transferred  from  vfiipa.,  d(popdu).  The  relation 
of  *&pKo%  to  &pKTo%  is  obscure.  Examples  of  ovdeU 
{oiideis  also  used)  are  more  frequent  in  the  LXX 
than  in  the  NT,  and  this  corresponds  to  the  usage 
of  tlie  Koine  in  their  resi)ective  periods. 

(B)  Inflexion. — (1)  For  the  vocative  6  de6i  see 

•  Especially  in  his  'New  Testament  Greek  in  the  Light  of 
Modern  Discovery '  (Cambridge  liiblical  Essays,  London,  1909. 
p.  4GI  flf.). 

t  op.  cit.  i.  C  ff . 

X  In  what  follows,  a  8tar(')  pLiced  before  llic  word  indiiutcs 
that  the  form  is  found  in  both  the  LXX  and  the  NT ;  forms  not 
80  distinguished  are  in  the  NT. 

§  The  occasional  use  of  v  for  ov  in  papyri  (cf.  4CAo<  for  JoOAos 
in  LXX,  1  K  1421)  Hhows  that  it  was  al<m  to  u ;  b\it  at  an  earlv 
|>eriod  it  had  also  the  value  of  t  in  Asia  and  Egypt. 


above,  §  8.  Observe  tA  (for  6)  ^Xeos,  and  the  like. 
vovi  is  declined  vo6i,  vat  after  the  example  of  povi, 
/3o(5s.  (2)  For  vvKTav,  *xetpoi',  fia.ai.\4av,  etc.,  sci 
above.  (3)  rb  fiXaj  (for  6  aXj) ;  6pvi^  for  6pvi.%  i 
perhaps  a  Dorism.  (4)  Verbs  in  -fii  went  gradually 
out  of  use,  as  is  attested  by  the  MS  readings  lardw 
(LXX),J(rTd»'w,  *d<t)LU),  *<rvviw,  6fjLV\jw.  In  the  inflexion 
of  flfj.1  we  find  an  imp.  mid.  ijfivy-  The  earliest  un- 
mistakable use  of  Ivi  (  =  ii>eari),  from  wiiich  aroM 
the  Mod.  Gr.  eIfo«,  '  he  is,'  instead  of  ^a-ri  is  found 
in  the  NT  ;  the  imperative  is  iJTu  (for  fcrrw).  (5) 
ffTifiKu  (Mod.  Gr.  ariKU)),  the  use  of  which  is  better 
attested  in  the  NT  than  in  the  LXX,  is  an  innova- 
tion formed  from  IffrrjKa,  and  on  tlie  analog}'  of 
iJKw,  which  could  be  inflected  like  a  perfect  (LXX 
flKa/xev  and  T/zcare).  (6)  Contracted  verbs :  *irtivdv 
and  *5ii/'av,  but  *f^f  ;  the  Hellenistic  xP°^Oo-'-  i*^  !•"• 
meagrely  attested  in  Biblical  Greek.  (7)  Tin 
spelling  xi^«'i'w  (LXX  x''"'^)  ^^  of  special  interest,  a^ 
presents  with  w  occur  also  in  the  Cyprian  dialect 
of  to-day,  i.e.  in  P^astern  Greek.  (8)  Personal 
endings :  (a)  the  ending  -aav  extends  far  beyond 
its  original  usage,  but  occurs  more  frequently  in 
the  LXX  (-^XOoa-av,  ((pipoaav,  iytvvCjaav,  C^^iikovcav) 
than  in  the  NT  (dxoffav,  idopvfiovaav) :  in  Mod.  Gr. 
it  is  confined  to  contracted  verbs  ;  (h)  the  termina- 
tions of  the  first  and  second  aorists  be^in  to  coa- 
lesce, e.g.  *e'vpaixev,  *etSafi{v ;  as  found  in  the  im- 
perfect {e.g.  *l\fyav),  we  cannot  be  so  sure  tiiat 
they  belong  to  the  original  text;  (c)  in  3rd  plur. 
perf.  we  sometimes  find  -ai'  for  -act,  as  in  *iupaKav, 
yiyovav. 
(C)  Syntax. — (1)  Indications  of  the  decreasing 
use  of  the  dative  are  tlie  occasional  confusion  be- 
tween eh  with  ace,  and  iv  with  dat.,  the  preference 
for  the  gen.  and  the  ace.  after  prepositions  taking 
three  cases,  and  the  growing  use  of  the  ace.  after 
verbs  like  *xpo.o0O'';  Karapaadai,  ivedpeveiv.  After 
certain  verbs,  moreover,  the  ace.  tends  to  supersede 
the  gen.,  as  e.g.  Kparelv,  KaradiKd^eiv  rivd.  (2)  A  pre- 
positional construction  sometimes  takes  the  place 
of  simple  noun  with  case,  as  e.g.  iadUiv  iK  toD  iprov, 
dvixeffdai  dird.  (3)  The  aorist,  in  comj)arison  witli 
the  imp.  indie,  is  more  frequentlj''  usea  than  in  the 
classical  period ;  the  use  of  the  aorist  in  a  perfective 
sense  is  made  distinct  by  prejiositions,  thus  -n-pay- 
fiaTe{i(Tac6ai  (Lk  19'^),  '  trade  with,'  but  diairpaynaTfv- 
ffaadai  (v.^'),  'gain  by  trading.'  This  force  of  the 
])reposition  explains  also  why  a  preposition  is  more 
frequently  attached  to  the  aorist  than  to  the  pre- 
sent stem ;  but  presents  with  aoristic  force  could 
be  formed  in  a  similar  way  :  cf.  rbv  fuadbv  dirixovffi 
(Mt  6^'l** '*),  'they  have  received  their  reward'; 
dWxw  is  used  in  a  like  sense  in  receipts  found 
among  the  paiiyri.  A  characteristic  feature  of  the 
LXX  and  NT  is  that  they  always  employ  the 
aorist  imperative  in  invocations  of  God — a  usage  to 
which  we  find  an  analogy  in  Homer.  (4)  The  ex- 
tent to  which  the  perfect  was  used  in  Biblical 
Greek  with  tlie  force  of  the  aorist  is  disputed  ;  the 
usage  of  Hellenistic  Greek  generally  rather  favours 
the  aoristic  function  (as  e.g.  of  *el\r)<pa,  •^crxv^a)  in 
Biblical  Greek  as  well.  (5)  The  optative  was 
obsolescent,  alike  in  principal  anil  in  suliordinate 
clauses  ;  its  disuse  is  more  marked  in  the  NT  than 
in  the  LXX.  (6)  The  infinitive  shows  no  sign  of 
decay  in  the  LXX  ;  but  in  the  NT  it  is  widely  (as 
in  Mod.  Gr.  always)  .superseded  by  fvo,  hence  e.g. 
^r)Tu  iVa,  irapaKaXw  'iva ;  to  look  for  a  i)urposive 
force  in  every  iW  in  Biblical  (Jreek  is  a  mistake. 
The  infinitive  with  the  article,  however,  is  common 
also  in  the  NT,  and  it  may  be  remarked  that  a 
number  of  old  infinitive  forms  survive  in  Mod.  Gr. 
as  nouns,  e.g.  Tb<pi\l  =  rb  ^piXelv,  'the  kiss.'  (7)  The 
present  jjarticiple  active  shows  a  tendency  to  be- 
come rigid  (the  Mod.  Gr.  X^yovra^  is  indeclinable), 
an  e.g.  in  Jn  15':  fiivwv  iv  (fiol  Kayw  (fi^vu)  ifaiWifi. 
A  remarkable  feature  is  the  use  of  the  participle 


HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK        HELLENISTIC  &  BIBLICAL  GREEK    559 


without  copula  as  a  predicate.*  As  this  usage  is 
not  only  found  in  papyri,  but  is  still  very  common 
in  Malalas,  it  was  probably  a  peculiarity  of  the 
Eastern  Koine.  (8)  The  wealth  of  particles  char- 
acteristic of  the  classical  lanj^ia^e  has  been  largely 
lost.  The  Gosi>els,  like  the  popular  tales  of  Modern 
Greek,  generally  exhibit  a  simple  co-ordination  of 
clauses,  either  without  connectives  or  connected  by 
/cot,  T6Te,  S(,  firra  rovro,  4v  iKtlv<^  ri^  #caip<p.  As  already 
said,  it  is  quite  wrong  to  regard  this  feature — and 
in  particular  the  frequent  use  of  Kal — as  a  Hebraism, 
the  paratactic  sequence  of  clauses  bein^  in  reality  a 
characteristic  of  simple  popular  narrative.t  (9)  In 
Biblical  Greek  the  verb  would  seem  to  head  the 
sentence  more  frequently  than  in  Greek  generally. 
Its  initial  position  may  well  be  due  in  part  to 
Semitic  influence  (see  above),  but  we  must  on  this 
point  await  the  results  of  a  more  searching  and 
detailed  investigation. 

While  the  LXX  and  the  NT  belong  to  the  same 
linguistic  milieti,  yet,  as  has  been  more  than  once 
noted  in  the  foregoing  grammatical  sketch,  they 
exhibit  features  indicative  of  their  respective  stages 
of  development.  In  general,  we  may  regard  the 
contemporary  papyri  as  providing  the  nearest 
parallels  to  each,  though  the  LXX  is  occasionally 
more  archaic  than  the  papyri  of  its  age  ;  thus,  while 
we  find  in  it  the  forms  iJKafiev,  ^/tare,  iJKaffi,  we  do 
not  find  as  yet  riKei>cu,  tjkotuv.  No  comparison  has 
yet  been  made  between  the  LXX  and  the  NT  as 
to  the  relative  frequency  of  the  linguistic  changes 
in  each — an  tmdertaking  for  which  the  MS  tradi- 
tion would  have  to  provide  the  basis ;  such  a 
comparison  would  be  the  most  reliable  means  of 
measuring  the  interval  between  the  two  groups 
of  texts. 

10.  Post-Biblical  Greek. — In  certain  productions 
of  early  Christian  literature  outside  tlie  NT  canon 
(the  NT  Apocrypha,  the  Apostolic  Fathers)  the 
neologisms  of  the  Koine  bulk  more  largely  than  in 
the  biblical  ^^Titings,  so  that  these  non-canonical 
works  must  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  a  later 
linguistic  stratum ;  with  regard  to  particular 
books,  however,  it  is  more  difficult  than  in  the 
case  of  the  LXX  and  NT  to  determine  what  is  to 
be  set  down  to  the  MS  tradition,  i.e.  to  decide 
whether  forms  like  \iyow  {  =  \iyoi'<Ti)  in  the  Acts 
of  Pilate,  or  ■fiyairoi'v  {  =  iydru}i>  in  the  Acts  of 
Thomas,  were  not  originally  due  to  later  copyists. 
Apart  from  this,  the  linguistic  differences  found 
in  the  several  writings  of  this  group  themselves, 
and  the  linguistic  differences  between  this  group 
and  the  NT  canon,  are  marked  only  by  larger  or 
smaller  concessions  to  the  literarj'  language  of  the 
educated.  It  is  no  doubt  true  that,  even  in  the 
NT,  Luke  is  distinguished  from  the  other  Gospels 
by  a  certain  inclination  to  Atticism,  and  that 
other  early  Christian  productions  likewise  reflect 
the  literary  tendencies  of  the  age.  Nevertheless, 
there  was  at  the  outset  a  sharply  marked  contrast 
between  Biblical  Greek  and  the  literary  language 
of  the  period  ;  the  Atticism  (see  above)  then  coming 
into  vogue  aimed  at  the  revival  of  the  classical 
(Attic)  diction,  and  the  cultured  heathen  looked 
down  scornfully  upon  the  '  barbarous  sailor-speech ' 
of  primitive  Christianity  (|3op,Sapifoiva  fcord  Kpdro^ 
Kal  aoXoiKL^ovaa  and  dvo/JLaToirouai^  ^ivan  avm-eray- 
tUyr]).t  But  just  as  in  the  succeeding  centuries  the 
youthful  and  revolutionary  spirit  of  Chri.stianity 
allied  itself  more  and  more  witli  Greek  philosophy 
and  culture,  and  came  at  length  to  be  quite  hel- 
lenized,  so  too  the  lan^age  of  Christianitj-  soon 
lost  that  charm  of  originality  and  naive  freshness 

♦  Moulton,  Einleitung,  p.  352  ff. 

f  Elxamples  from  the  papjri  are  given  by  WiticowBki,  Glotta, 
vi.  (1914]  2-2  f. 
X  See  E.  Nordea,  Antike  Kunslprota,  Leipzig,  1898,  ii.  616 ff. 


which  is  chai-acteristic  of  Biblical  Greek.  It  is,  in 
fact,  only  in  the  Lives  of  the  Saints  and  similar 
productions  that  we  still  hear  the  speech  of  the 
simple  people  to  whom  the  earliest  preachers  of 
the  gospel  appealed.*  The  great  teachers  of  the 
Church  turned  aside  from  the  unschooled  language 
of  the  Gospels,  and  adopteil  the  style  of  cultured 
heathenism  ;  in  other  words,  they  followed  the 
literary  fashion  of  Atticism.  Even  the  early 
apologist  Tatian  aspired  to  be  an  Atticist,  though 
his  success  in  that  direction  was  but  meagre ;  t 
while  Chrysostom  actually  gave  an  Atticistic  form 
to  his  quotations  from  Scripture.iJ:  The  develop- 
ment in  the  language  of  Greek  Christianity  from 
the  NT  to  the  close  of  antiquity  is  a  faithful  re- 
flexion of  the  process  through  which  the  Christian 
religion  itself  passed.  In  the  course  of  a  few  cen- 
turies the  faith  of  humble  fisher-folk  became  the 
dominant  religion  of  the  Grieco-Roraan  world, 
and,  passing  from  its  native  lowliness  to  the  high- 
est places,  it  paid  its  tribute  to  the  culture  of  its 
new  sphere. 

LrrERATTRR.— Books  and  articles  already  fully  cited  in  the 
course  of  this  art.  are  not  further  mentioned  here. 

I.  Bibliographical  isformatios. — Earlier  lit.  in  G.  Meyer, 
Grieehisehe  Grammatiki,  Leipzig.  1896;  more  recent  in  A. 
Thumb, '  IHe  I'orschungen  uber  die  hellenistische  Sprache  in 
den  Jahren  1896-1901,'  in  Arehir  fur  Papynn/vrsclmng,  ii.  [1902] 
396fr.,  '.  .  .  in  den  Jahren  1902-1904,'  ib.  iiL  [1903]  443 ff. 
(al<o  Indoaenn.  Forsch.  Anzeiper,  i.  [1892]  4S,  vi.  [1896]  224ff.); 
Witkowshd,  '  Bericht  iiber  die  Literatur  zur  Koine  ans  den 
Jahren  1S9S-1902,'  in  C.  Bursian's  Jahregbtricht  uber  die  Pvtt- 
sehritte  der  klass.  AUertumsurmen*eha/l,  cxx.  [19W]  153  ff., 
'.  .  .  ans  den  Jahren  1903-1906,"  ib.  clix.  [1912]  Iff. ;  J.  H. 
Moolton,  '  Hellenistic  Greek,'  in  The  Year's  Work  in  CtasMcal 
Studies,  ed.  for  the  Classical  Association,  latest  art.  in  1913,  p. 
187  ff. ;  A.  Deissmann,  '  Die  Sprache  der  griechischen  Bibel,' 
in  Theologische  Rttndsehau,  I  [189S]  463 fl.,  ix.  [1906]  210 ff.,  xv. 
[1912]  339ff.  ;  further,  the  section  'Das  Neue  Testament*  (in 
recent  years  by  R.  KnopO  >n  the  3rd  dinsion  of  the  Theolog. 
Jahresberieht,  ed.  G.  Kriiger  and  il.  Schian,  Leipzig,  1809  ff., 
deals  very  fully  with  the  linguistic  side. 

II.  Grammar  op  thk  Koisk.— K.  Dieterich,  UnUnuekungen 
zur  Geichiehte  der  grieehiteJten  Sprache,  Leimdg,  1898;  G. 
Meyer  (as  aboveX  Thnmb-Brag^maim,  Gritehisehe  Grammatik*, 
Munich,  1913  ;  A.  N.  Jannaris,  An  Historical  Greek  Grammar, 
London,  1S97  (not  in  the  modem  method);  also  the  various 
works  mentioned  above  and  below. 

III.  Problems  axd  History. — C.  D.  Buck,  'The  General 
Linguistic  Conditions  in  Ancient  Italv  and  Greece,'  in  Clasgieal 
Journal,  i.  [1906]  99ff. ;  J.  P.  Mahafiy,  The  SUeer  Age  of  the 
Greek  Wortd,  Chicago,  1906  (deals  \i-ith  the  cultore  and  expan- 
sion of  Hellenism);  A.  Thnmb,  Die  grieehisehe  Sprache  im 
Zeitalter  des  HeUenittnus,  Strassburg,  1901,  '  Prinzipienfragen 
der  Koine-Forschung,'  in  Sette  Jahrbueher  fxir  das  klastisehe 
Altertum,  xviL  [1906]  246 ff. ;  P.  Kretschmer,  J>ie  Entstekung 
der  Koine,  Vienna,  1900;  D.  C.  Hesselingr,  De  Koine  en  de 
nude  dialekten  ran  Grieienland,  Amsterdam,  1906  (in  the 
publications  of  the  Koninklijke  Academie);  cf.  also  the  works 
of  Deissmann  and  Moolton  in  section  IV.  below  ;  a  sketch  of 
the  Koine  in  connexion  with  the  general  historj-  of  the  Greek 
language  is  given  in  J.  Wackemag-el,  Die  grieehisehe  Sprache 
(=:Kultur  der  Gegemeart,  pt.  i.  vol.  riiL  [^Leipidg,  1912]X  and  A. 
Meillet,  Aper^  d'uixe  histoire  de  la  langue  greeque,  Paris,  1913, 

;  p.  259  ff. 

J  IV.  Biblical  Grbbk. — (1)  General. — G.  A.  Deissmann,  Bibel- 
i  $tudien,  Marbui^,  1S95,  Seve  Bibelstudien,  do.  1S97  (Eng.  tr., 
Bible  Studies^,  Edinbui^b,  1903),  Die  spraehliehe  Erfortehvmg 
der  grieehisehen  Bibel,  Oiessen,  1898,  Jiew  Light  on  the  XT, 
Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1907,  The  Philology  of  the  Greek  Bible,  Eng. 
tr.,  Ix)ndon,  1908,  Lieht  torn  OsUn'^^,  Tiibingen,  1909(Eng.  tr.. 
Light  from  the  Ancient  East^,  London,  1911),  Die  Urgeschiehte 
des  Chriitentums  im  Lichte  der  Sprach/orschung,  Tubingen, 
1910 ;  A.  Thnmb,  '  Die  sprachgeschichtliche  Stellung  des  bib- 
lischen  Griechisch,'  in  TheologUehe  Ruitdsehau,  v.  [1902]  85 fL  ; 
J.  H.  Moulton,  A  Grammar  of  ST  Greelfl,  Edinbaigfa,  1908 
(Germ.  tr.  [in  reality  a  new  ed.],  Binleittntg  in  die  Sprache  des 
ST,  Heidelberg,  1911),  The  Science  of  Language  and  the  Study 
of  the  ST,  Manchester,  1906 ;  •  S.  Dickey, '  The  Greek  of  the  XT,' 
in  Princeton  Theological Revietr,  i.  [1903]  631  ff. ;  H.  Lietymann. 
•  Die  klassische  Philologie  und  das  NT,'  in  A'eue  Jahrbiieher  fiir 
das  klassische  Altertum,  xxi.  [190S]  Iff.  ;  S.  Angns,  'Modem 
Methods  in  NT  Philology,'  in  Uarcard  Theological  Review,  ii. 
[1909]  446  ff.,  also  Hellenistie  and  Hellenism  in  Our  Universities, 

•  Cf.  "Vogeser,  Zur  Sprache  der  griechischen  Beiligenlegenden, 
Munich,  1907. 

t  Cf.  Heiler,  de  Tatiani  apologette  dieendi  gentre,  Marbaig, 
1909. 

I  It  mav  be  observed  in  this  connexion  that  F.  Blass,  who  in 
his  edd.  of  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  John  uses  these  quota- 
tions as  a  means  of  '  emending '  the  MS  tradition  of  the  NT,  is 
here  working  on  entirely  wrong  lines. 


560 


HELMET 


HERESY 


Hartford,  Conn.,  liXM),  also  'The  Koin6 :  the  Ijinjfuage  of  the 
NT,'  in  Princeton  Tlteo/i>;jical  Jieview,  viii.  [1010]  4.SfT. 

(2)  Oramniars. — R.  Helbing,  Grammatik  der  LXX,  Gotlin- 
gen,  1907;  H.  St.  J.  Thackeray,  A  Crmnmnr  of  the  OT  in 
Greek,  i.,  (Janibridge,  190S) ;  Winer-Schmiedel,  Grammatik  di's 
neutent.  Sprachidioinn,  tiiitthitfon,  1804 fT.  (not  ji-t  coniplfted) ; 
F.  Blass,  Grammatik  den  neutcst.  Gri-echiKcli  (4th  ed.  hy  A. 
Debrunncr,  Oottinfcen,  11)13  ;  Kny;.  it.  by  Thackeray-,  London, 
1905);  L.  Raderniacher,  Ncntrnt.  Grammatik  (in  llandlnwh 
ztim  XT,  ed.  liicl/.niann,  i.  1),  Tiibinfren,  1011  ;  E.  A.  Abbott, 
Johannine  Grammar,  London,  190C  (Conybeare-Stock,  Selce- 
tioiisfrom  the  LXX,  Uuslon,  1905,  and  J.  Viteau,  Etudr  gur  le 
iirec  (in  NT  compari  avec  celui  des  Septaute,  Paris,  1897,  are 
out  of  dato). 

(3)  Important  monof^raphs.—H.  B.  Swete,  An  Introduction 
to  the  OT  in  Greek,  Cambridjte,  1900,  p.  289  fif.  ;  R.  Meister, 
'  Prolejfoinena  zu  einer  Cirunnnatik  der  LXX,'  in  Wiener  Studien 
xxix.  [1907]  228 flf.,  also  lieitriii/e  zur  Lautlehre  der  LXX, 
Vienna,  1909  ;  J.  Psichari,  '  Kjaa&\  sur  le  Qrec  de  la  Septante,'  in 
Revue  des  Mvdes  jiiires,  1908,  p.  161  fl.  ;  M.  Johannessohn, 
Der  Gehranch  der  Kasus  ■una  Prdpositionen  in  der  LXX, 
Berlin,  1910  ;  E.  de  W.  Burton,  Syntax  of  the  Moods  and  Temes 
in  NT  Grcek-\  Chicago,  1898  ;  Th.  Vogel,  Zxir  Charakteristik 
des  Lukas  nnch  Spraehe  und  Stil,  Leiiizij;,  1897  ;  M.  Krenkel, 
Josephtis  tind  Lukas,  do.  1894  ;  A.  Schlatter,  Die  Sprache  und 
Heirnat  des  U.  Evangclisten(  =  Be.itru(/e  ztir  Fiirderung  chrisl- 
ticker  Theolofiie,  vi.  4  [1902]),  andT.  C.  Laughlin,  The  i>oleci»)ns 
of  the  Apocalypse,  Princeton,  1902  (the  last  two  of  little  use) ; 
W.  Heitmiiller,  Im  Narnen  Jcsu,  (iottingen,  1903. 

(4)  Lexicoftraphy. — As  supplementing  the  standard  Greek 
lexicons  the  following  are  of  importance  :  E.  A.  Sophocles,  A 
Greek  Lexicon  of  the  lioman  and  Byzantine  Periods,  New  York, 
1887,  and  H.  van  Herwerden,  Lexicon  qrcecum  suppletorium. 
et  dialecticum'^,  Leiden,  1910 ;  for  the  LXX,  Hatch-Redpath, 
Concordance  to  the  LXX,  C  vols.,  Oxford,  1892-97  ;  for  the  NT, 
Grimm-Thajrer,  A  Greek- English  Lexicon  of  the  NT^,  1890  ; 
F.  Zorell,  Noci  Testamenti  lexicon  grcecum,  Paris,  1911 ;  E.  A. 
Abbott  (as  in  IV.  (2)  above);  Naegeli  (as  cited  in  art.);  the 
'  Lexical  Notes  from  the  Papyri'  (of  great  importance  for  the 
vocabulary  of  the  NT),  by  J.  H.  Moulton  and  G.  Milligan,  in 
recent  years  of  The  Expositor,  are  not  yet  completed,  and  are 
to  be  collected  and  published  separately. 

V.  PosT-HiBUCAL  Grkek. — H.  Reinh'old,De  grcecitatepatrum 
apostoliconim  librorumque  apocryphorum  {  =  Dissert,  philolog. 
Halenses,  xiv.  [Halle,  189S])  1  flf. ;  F.  Rostalski,  Sprachliches 
zu  den  apokryphen  Apostelgeschichten,  2  pts.,  Programm, 
M3'slowitz,  1910  and  1911 ;  E.  j.  Goodspeed,  Index  patristicus, 
Leipzig,  1907  ;  T.  M.  Wehofer,  Cfntersuchtmgen  zur  altchrist- 
licheti  Epistolographie,  Vienna,  1901 ;  J.  Compernass,  De 
sermone  greeco  volgari  Pisidire  Phrygiteque  meridionalls, 
Bonn,  1895  ;  X.  Hiirth,  De  Gregorii  Nazianzeni  orationibus 
funelirihiis  {  =  Dissert,  philolog.  Argent,  selectee,  xii.  1  [Strass- 

burg,  1907]),  p.  71  fl.  A.  Thumb. 

HELMET.— See  Armour. 


HELPS. — '  Help '  (di/WX7?ja^is)  is  fairly  common  in 
the  LXX,  in  tlie  Psalms,  and  in  2  and  3  Maccabees. 
In  Sir  IV^  5V  we  have  persons  who  are  in  need  of 
ivrlKyjufis.  The  plural  dvTi\-^/i\l/eii  occurs  in  1  Co 
12^*,  coupled  with  'governments,'  and  nowhere  else 
in  the  NT.  The  verb  from  which  it  comes  {avri- 
Xafi^dveffdai)  is  found  in  Lk  1^  in  a  quotation  from 
the  LXX,  where  it  is  frequent ;  also  in  Ac  20^  in 
a  speech  of  St.  Paul.  Tlie  verb  means  '  to  take 
firm  hold  of  some  one  in  order  to  help  (1  Ti  6^  is 
ditterent)  ;  and  by  '  helps '  or  '  helpings '  St.  Paul 
probably  means  the  succouring  of  those  in  need, 
as  poor,  sick,  and  bereaved  persons.  Perhaps  the 
helping  of  those  in  mental  perjdexity  or  spiritual 
distress,  and  all  whom  St.  P<aul  calls  'the  weak,' 
is  also  included.  H.  Cremer  (Bibl.-Theol.  Lcx.^, 
1880,  p.  38G)  is  mistaken  in  saying  that  this  sense 
of  '  helping '  is  '  unknown  in  classical  Greek ' :  it  is 
frequent  in  pajtyri,  in  petitions  to  the  Ptolemys 
(G.  A.  Deissmann,  Bible  Studies,  Eng.  tr.,  1901, 
p.  92).  The  Greek  commentators  are  also  mistaken 
in  interpreting  '  helpings '  as  meaning  deacons, 
and  'governings'  as  meaning  elders  ;  such  definite 
official  distinctions  had  not  yet  arisen.  St.  Paul  is 
speaking  of  personal  gifts.  He  is  not  speaking  of 
select  ijersons  whom  he  or  the  congregation  had 
appointed  to  any  ofllice  ;  and  neither  he  nor  they 
can  confer  tiie  gifts  ;  that  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit. 
He  exhorts  the  whole  congrejiation  to  '  continue  to 
desire  earnestly  the  greater  gifts' ;  and  individuals 
might  receive  more  than  one  gift  from  the  Spirit. 

We  have  an  instance  of  the  gift  of  '  helping  '  in 
Stephanas  and  his  household  (1  Co  IG'"'"),  and  it  is 


expressly  stated  that  tiiey  '  appointed  themselves 
to  minister  to  the  saints.'  The  Apostle  did  not 
nominate  them  to  any  oHice  of  'heli)er,'  nor  did 
the  congregation  elect  them  to  any  sucii  post.  A 
person  who  believed  that  he  possessed  the  gift  tried 
to  exercise  it.  Ff  he  was  right  in  this  belief,  the 
people  accepted  his  ministrations.  There  was  no 
otlicr  appointment,  and  there  was  no  class  of 
oHicials  into  wliich  he  cntere<l. 

LiTKRATURK.— F.  J.  A.  Hort,  The  Christian  Eccieaia,  1897, 
pp.  166-160;  Robertson  and  Plummer,  1  Corinthians,  1911, 
pp.  280-284  ;  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy,  Sotirces  of  NT  Gre^k,  1895, 
p.  90  ;  H.  B.  Swete.  The  Holy  ."ipirit  in  the  NT,  1909,  p.  186 f. ; 
art.  '  Helps '  in  HDD  and  SDU.  A.  PlUMMER. 

HERESY  (a'ipeais).  —  The  primary  meaning  of 
a'ip€<Ti%  is  '  taking,'  used  especially  of  '  taking  a 
town'  (Herod,  iv.  1).  Its  .secondary  meaning  is 
'choice,'  'preference.'  From  tliis  it  pa.sses  to  'the 
thing  chosen,'  and  so 'a  plan,'  'a  purpose.'  In 
later  classical  usage  it  comes  to  mean  a  philo.sophic 
school  of  thought,  and  hence  a  sect. 

In  the  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs  in  the 
Acts,  it  has  the  meaning  of  a  religious  party,  e.g. 
Ac  5"  :  17  aipiffis  rijjv  1,a5dovKaluv  ;  15'  26' :  Kard,  rrfv 
dKpi§fCT6.Trjv  aXpeffiv  ttj^  7]fitT4pa%  6pr](TKelas  l^rjffa  4>apt- 
(xaios.  Thus  it  is  used  of  the  Chri.stians  not  by 
themselves  but  by  others,  e.g.  24' :  irpuToardrriy  re 
TTJs  tQjv  Na^ojpaicov  alp^creus  ;  and  again,  v."  :  Kard  rrju 
odbv  fjv  \eyovaiv  aipea-iv  (see  also  28-^).  In  the  Epistles 
it  is  used  of  the  evil  principle  of  party  spirit,  divi- 
sion, and  self-assertion.  Thus  in  Gal  S**  it  is 
classed  among  the  works  of  the  flesh  in  company 
with  epiOelai  and  Sixoaraalai.  In  1  Co  IP"'-  St. 
Paul  uses  alp^creis  as  the  natural  outcome  of  o-xtV- 
/tiara  :  dAcoiyw  (rxiV/iara  ey  v/juv  virdpxfty,  Kal  jiipoi  ti 
iriffTfOu.  8fL  yap  Kal  aip^ffeis  iv  v/uy  dyai,  tya  oi  SoKifioi 
(pavepoi  yivuvrai  iv  vfiiv.  So  that,  bad  though  these 
things  are,  they  may  serve  a  providential  purpose 
in  testing  men's  characters  ana  showing  those  that 
can  stand  the  test. 

These  divisions  destroyed  the  harmony  of  the 
Agape.  The  brotherly  spirit  which  shouhl  have 
characterized  the  common  meal  was  absent  and 
the  sacredness  of  the  Communion  was  lost  in 
general  disorder.  In  this  pas.sage  'heresy'  and 
'schism'  {q.v.)  approach  very  nearly  to  becoming 
synonymous. 

As  St  Augustine  says  : '  Haeresis  auteni  schismainveteratuni ' 
(c.  Crescon.  Don.  ii.  7).  And  Nevin  quoted  by  Trench  (XT 
SymmymsB,  1876,  p.  359)  says :  '  Heresy  and  schism  are  not 
indeed  the  same,  but  yet  they  constitute  merely  the  different 
manifestations  of  one  and  the  same  disease.  Heresy  is  theoretic 
schism  :  schism  is  practical  heresy.  They  continually  run  into 
one  another,  and  mutually  complete  each  other.  Every  heresy 
is  in  principle  schismatic ;  every  schism  is  in  its  innermost 
constitution  heretical.' 

So  far  we  have  found  no  trace  of  atpean  being  used 
in  connexion  with  false  doctrine  but  simply  with 
divisions  and  factious  party  spirit.  But  in  2  P  2' 
a  new  meaning  is  introauced,  and  from  the  idea  of 
a  party  or  sect  we  pass  to  the  principles  and  tea(;h- 
ing  which  characterize  the  sect,  alpicreis  dirwXe/ai 
must  refer  to  doctrines  which  lead  to  destruction  ; 
indeed  the  following  words,  '  even  denying  the  Lord 
that  bought  them,'  point  to  a  specimen  of  such 
false  teaching,  implying  either  a  rejection  of 
Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  or  a  denial  of  His  re- 
demptive work.  As  this  Epistle  Mas  written  at 
a  much  later  date  than  the  Acts,  it  marks  the 
gradual  transformation  that  was  going  on  in  the 
meaning  of  '  heresy '  .as  it  passed  from  party  or 
sect,  first  to  schism  and  finally  to  erroneous  teach- 
ing. 

There  is  no  trace  in  the  NT  of  either  a'iptai^  or 
(Txtffp.a  denoting  a  party  that  had  separated  itself 
from  the  main  body.  Pharisees  and  Saddncees 
were  sects  in  Judaism,  not  withdrawn  from  it. 
Such  sects  were,  so  to  sjjeak,  recognized,  not  depre- 


HERITAGE 


HERMAS,  SHEPHERD  OF        561 


cated,  Aptain,  the  parties  in  the  Corinthian  Chnrch 
which  called  themselves  after  the  names  of  Paul, 
Cephas,  Apollos,  and  Christ  were  divisions  in  the 
Church,  not  separated  from  it.  It  was  the  harm 
done  by  strife  and  the  absence  of  that  spirit  of 
unity  and  charity,  which  is  the  very  essence  of 
Christianity,  that  called  for  the  Apostle's  rebukes. 
By  the  time  that  we  pass  into  the  sub-apostolic 
period,  aipfTi%  connotes  theological  error  and  false 
teaching,  and  the  sense  of  a  sect  or  party  gradu- 
ally recedes  till  it  passes  away  entirely.  Two 
passages  from  Ignatius  may  be  quoted  in  support 
of  this :  5x4  trivrtt  Kara  aXriOeiav  ^ijre  xai  5ti  iw  iifuv 
ov8t/ila  o?pf<rts  KaroiKfi  {ad  Eph.  vi.) ;  and  wapa/raXw 
otv  vfids  .  .  .  fi^y^  Tj  'KpiffTiatr^  fpfxp^  xp^^^^t  <i^o- 
r/xas  5^  /Sordj'ijs  direx^ffOf,  ijm  e<rrU'  alpeffts  {ad  Trail. 

vi.).  MoBLEY  Stevenson. 

HERITAGE.— See  Heik. 

HERMAS  (Epfidi,  Ro  16'^).— Hermas  is  a  Greek 
name,  a  contracted  form  of  several  names  such  as 
Hermagoras,  Hermeros,  Hermodorus,  Hermogenes, 
etc.,  common  among  members  of  the  Imperial 
household  (J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Philippians*,  1878,  p. 
176).  It  is  the  last  of  a  group  of  five  names  (all 
Greek)  of  persons,  and  '  the  brethren  with  them,' 
saluted  by  St.  Paul.  Nothing  is  known  of  any 
member  of  the  group.  It  is  conjectured  that  to- 
gether they  formed  a  separate  iKKXrjaia  or  '  church,' 
the  locality  of  which  we  shall  suppose  to  have 
been  Rome  or  Ephesus,  according  to  our  view  of  the 
destination  of  these  salutations.      Cf.  vv.^  "  and 

ferhaps  v.",  and  1  Co  16*'  and  perhaps  Ac  20^. 
ossibly  these  five  men  were  heads  of  five  separate 
household  churches,  or  leaders  or  office-bearers  in 
the  Church.  T.  B.  Allworthy. 

HERMAS,  SHEPHERD  OF.— This  valuable  and 
interesting  relic  of  the  life  and  thought  of  the  early 
Roman  Church  may  be  described  as  a  manual  of 

fersonal  religion,  cast  in  an  imaginative  form. 
t  has  been  compared  in  the  latter  respect  with 
Bunyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress,  with  Dante's  Divina 
Commedia,  and  with  the  visions  of  such  mystics  as 
St.  Teresa  and  St.  Catherine  of  Siena.  Whether 
it  be  looked  upon  as  a  work  of  allegorical  fiction, 
or,  as  G.  Salmon  strenuously  maintains  {Historical 
Introduction  to  the  NT^,  p.  529  S. ),  a  record  of  actual 
dream  experience,  or  again,  as  may  well  be,  a  com- 
bination of  both,  its  strong  moral  earnestness  and 
its  didactic  purpose  are  equally  apparent.  It  is 
primarily  a  call  to  repentance,  addressed  to  Chris- 
tians among  whom  the  memory  of  persecution  is 
still  fresh  (Vis.  iii.  2,  5,  Sim.  vs..  28),  and  over 
whom  now  hangs  the  shadow  of  another  great 
tribulation  ( Vis.  ii.  2,  iv.  2).  From  the  first  Vision, 
with  its  revelation  of  the  sinfulness  of  sins  of 
thought,  and  of  neglect  of  responsibility  for  others, 
to  the  last  Parable,  where  the  greatness  of  the  Shep- 
herd, the  supernatural  Being  '  to  whom  alone  in 
the  whole  world  hath  authority  over  repentance 
been  assigned'  {Sim.  x.  1),  is  ordered  to  be  declared 
to  men,  the  theme  is  repentance  and  amendment 
of  life. 

Indeed,  the  little  book  would  almost  seem  to 
have  been  written  partly  as  an  attempt  to  break 
through  the  iron  ring  of  despair  resulting  from  a 
rigorous  acceptance  of  those  words  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  which  speak  of  the  impossibility 
of  repentance  for  sin  committed  after  baptism  (6* 
and  12").  The  subject  is  discussed  in  the  Fourth 
Commandment  {Mand.  iv.  3)  in  a  curiously  simple 
manner.  The  authority  of  this  teaching  is  admitted 
verbally,  and  then  an  exception  is  made,  which 
covers  the  whole  teaching  of  the  book.  '  I  have 
heard.  Sir,'  says  Hermas,  '  from  certain  teachers, 
that  there  is  no  other  repentance,  save  that  which 

VOL.  I.— 16 


took  place  when  we  went  down  into  the  water  and 
obtained  remission  of  our  former  sins.'  The  Shep- 
herd replies  that  this  is  so.  They  that  have  believed, 
or  shall  believe,  have  not  repentance,  but  only  re- 
mission of  their  former  sins.  He  then,  however, 
goes  on  to  say  that,  if  after  this  great  and  holy 
calling  any  one,  being  tempted  of  the  devil,  shall 
commit  sin,  he  hath  only  one  (opportunity  of)  re- 
pentance. This  one  opportunity,  however,  would 
seem  to  be  embodied  in  the  Shepherd  himself,  who 
was  sent  'to  be  with  you  who  repent  with  your 
whole  heart,  and  to  strengthen  you  in  the  faith' 
(xii.  6),  and  whose  command  to  Hermas  is,  'Go, 
and  tell  all  men  to  repent,  and  they  shall  live 
unto  God ;  for  the  Lord  in  His  compassion  sent 
me  to  give  repentance  to  all,  though  some  of 
them  do  not  deserve  it,  for  their  deeds'  (Sim, 
viii.  11). 

1.  Authorship.  —  There  are  a  few  references 
scattered  through  the  work  to  the  circumstances 
of  its  author.  He  had  originally  been  a  slave,  and 
was  sold  to  one  Rhoda,  in  Rome  (Vis.  i.  1).  After 
his  freedom  he  had  engaged  in  business  and  pros- 
pered (iii.  6),  but  he  had  been  corrupted  by  the 
affairs  of  this  world  (i.,  iiL),  practising  deception  in 
the  course  of  his  business  (Mand.  iii.).  However, 
he  had  lost  his  riches,  and  become  useful  and 
profitable  unto  life  ( Vis.  iii.  6).  His  worldly  loss 
seems  to  have  been  connected  with  the  misdeeds  of 
his  children  (i.,  iii.),  who  had  not  been  very  strictly 
looked  after  by  him.  His  wife  is  represented  as  a 
person  who  did  not  sufficiently  restrain  her  tongue 
(ii.  2).  Hermas  depicts  himself  as  slow  of  under- 
standing, but  insatiable  in  curiosity  (Mand.  xii.  4, 
Sim.  V.  5),  and  at  the  same  time  as  '  patient  and 
good  tempered  and  always  smiling,'  '  full  of  all 
simplicity  and  of  great  guilelessness '  ( Vis.  i.  2). 

The  scene  is  laid  partly  in  the  house  of  Hermas 
in  Rome,  partly  in  the  country  where  he  abides 
(Vis.  iiL  1),  and  once  in  Arcadia  (Sim.  ix.  1). 
Mention  is  made  of  the  road  to  Cumae,  the  Cam- 
panian  Way,  and  the  river  Tiber,  in  which  Hermas 
sees  Rhoda  bathing  (Vis.  i.  1). 

To  the  question  who  Hermas  was  there  are  three 
possible  answers.  (1)  He  may,  as  Origen  supposes 
in  his  Commentary  on  Romans  (x.  31  [p.  683]),  have 
been  the  Scriptural  character  mentioned  by  St. 
Paul  as  a  member  of  the  Roman  Church  c.  a.d. 
58  (Ro  16").  (2)  Accoriling  to  the  Muratorian 
fragment  (c.  A.D.  180),  he  was  brother  of  Pope  Pius  I. 
during  his  Episcopate  (c.  a.d.  140-155).  (3)  He  may 
have  been  an  otherwise  unknown  person  who  was 
a  contemporary  of  Pope  Clement  (c.  A.D.  90-100). 
This  theory  involves  the  identification  of  the  Church 
official  mentioned  in  Vis.  ii.  4  with  the  Bishop  of 
Rome.  'Thou  shalt  therefore  write  two  little 
books,  and  shalt  send  one  to  Clement.  ...  So 
Clement  shall  send  to  the  foreign  cities,  for  this  is 
his  duty.'  Of  these  views  Lightfoot  with  some  diffi- 
dence prefers  the  second,  while  G.  Salmon,  Zahn,  and 
others  accept  the  third  (see  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Apos- 
tolic Fathers,  294 ;  G.  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the 
NT^,  46,  534). 

2.  Date  and  use  by  the  Church. — Whether  the 
work  was  written  in  the  beginning  or  in  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  cent.,  there  is  evidence  of  its  wide  circu- 
lation soon  after  the  latter  date.  Irenaeus,  Bishop 
of  Lyons  in  A.D.  177,  accepted  it  and  spoke  of  it  as 
Scripture.  '  Well  did  the  Scripture  speak,  saying, 
etc'  (ap.  Euseb.  HE  v.  8).  Clem.  Alex,  quotes  it 
several  times  (e.g.  Strom.  I.  xxix.  181),  while  Origen 
in  the  passage  above  referred  to  speaks  of  it  as  a 
very  useful,  and,  as  he  thinks.  Divinely-inspired 
writing.  Tertullian  approved  of  it  in  his  pre- 
Montanist  days,  but  afterwards  condemned  it  (de 
Piidic.  10).  The  author  of  the  Muratorian  Canon, 
while  seeking  to  deprecate  the  public  reading  of  the 
Shepherd  in  church,  commends  it  for  private  use. 


562        IIERMAS,  SHEPHERD  OF 


HERMAS,  SHEPHERD  OF 


'  But  the  "  Sheplierd  "  was  written  quite  lately  in  our  times  by 
Hermas,  while  his  brother  Pius,  the  bishop,  was  sitting  in  the 
chair  of  the  Church  of  the  city  of  Rome  ;  and  therefore  it  ouj^ht 
indeed  to  be  read,  but  it  cannot  to  the  end  of  time  be  publicly 
read  in  the  Church  to  the  people,  either  among;  the  prophets, 
who  are  complete  in  number,  or  amonf;  the  Apostles.' 

3.  Contents.— The  book  is  divided  up  into  five 
Visions,  twelve  Mandates  or  Coinmandinents,  and 
ten  Similitudes  or  Parables.  The  Visions  form  the 
introduction  to  the  rest,  the  Shepherd  not  appearinj; 
until  the  last  of  these.  The  following  outline  will 
give  an  idea  of  the  purport  of  the  work  as  a  whole. 

(1)  Visions. — In  the  first  Vision  Hermas  tells 
how,  while  journeying  to  Cumse,  he  saw  in  the 
opened  heavens  Ithoda,  his  former  owner,  whom 
he  had  recently  met  again,  and  whom  he  had 
begun  to  esteem  as  a  sister.  She  rebukes  him 
for  an  unchaste  thought  towards  herself,  and 
leaves  him  aghast  at  the  strictness  of  God's  judg- 
ment. Then  he  sees  a  great  white  chair  of  snow- 
white  wool  upon  which  an  aged  lady  in  shining 
raiment  seats  herself.  She  tells  Hermas  that  what 
God  is  reallj'  wroth  about  is  his  lack  of  strictness 
with  his  family  whereby  his  children  have  become 
corrupt.  She  then  reads  from  a  book  the  glories  of 
God,  but  Hermas  can  only  remember  the  last  words, 
for  the  rest  is  too  terrible  to  bear.  She  rises,  the 
chair  is  carried  away  towards  the  east  by  four 
young  men,  and  two  other  men  assist  her  to  depart 
in  the  same  direction.  As  she  goes,  she  smiles  and 
says,  •  Play  the  man,  Hermas.' 

The  second  Vision  takes  place  a  year  later,  and 
in  the  same  locality.  The  aged  lady  again  appears, 
and  gives  him  a  little  book  that  he  may  copy  its 
contents  and  report  them  to  the  elect  of  God.  He 
copies  it  letter  for  letter,  for  he  cannot  make  out 
the  syllables,  and  when  he  has  finished,  the  book 
is  snatched  away  by  an  unseen  hand.  After  fifteen 
days  the  meaning  is  revealed  to  Hermas,  who  is 
directed  to  rebuke  liis  children  for  their  wickedness, 
and  his  Avife  for  her  faults  of  the  tongue,  as  well  as 
to  exhort  the  rulers  of  the  Church.  A  great  tribu- 
lation is  at  hand,  with  danger  of  apostasy  by 
Christians.  One  Maximus,  in  particular,  is  to  be 
warned  against  a  second  denial.  Then  it  is  re- 
vealed that  the  aged  woman  is  not,  as  Hermas 
supposes,  the  Sibyl,  but  the  Church,  created  before 
all  things.  He  is  directed  by  her  to  write  two 
copies  of  the  book,  after  the  revelation  is  finished, 
and  send  one  to  Clement  that  he  may  send  it  to  the 
foreign  cities,  and  one  to  Grapte  that  she  may 
instruct  the  widows  and  the  orpiians.  Hermas  is 
to  read  it  to  the  city  along  with  the  elders  that 
preside  over  the  Church. 

The  main  part  of  the  third  Vision  is  the  revela- 
tion by  the  lady  of  the  Church  under  the  image  of 
a  tower  being  built  by  angels  upon  the  waters  of 
baptism.  The  stones  of  various  degrees  of  suita- 
bility (some  of  tliem  castaway),  are  explained  to 
mean  ditt'erent  kinds  of  members  of  the  Church, 
among  whom  are  'apostles  and  bishops  and  teachers 
and  deacons,'  and  'they  that  sufiered  for  the  name 
of  the  Lord.'  The  tower  is  supported  by  seven 
women.  Faith,  Continence,  Simplicity,  Knowledge, 
Guilelessness,  Reverence,  and  Love.  Hermas  is 
next  commissioned  to  rebuke  the  self-indulgence 
of  the  well-to-do  and  the  ignorance  and  divisions 
of  the  rulers  of  the  Church.  He  inquires  why  the 
lady  was  aged  and  weak  in  the  first  Vision,  more 
youthful  and  joyous  in  the  second,  and  still 
more  so  in  the  third,  and  learns  that  these  appear- 
ances were  the  reflexion  of  his  own  changing 
spiritual  state. 

The  fourth  Vision  occurs  twenty  days  later,  on 
the  Campanian  Way.  Hermas  sees  a  huge  cloud  of 
dust,  which  resolves  itself  into  the  form  of  a  beast 
like  a  sea-monster,  emitting  fiery  locusts  from  its 
mouth.  Its  length  is  about  a  hundred  feet,  and 
its  head  ■was  as  it  were  of  pottery,  coloured  black, 


fire  and  blood-colour,  gold  and  white.  This  is  a 
type  of  the  impending  tribulation,  but  it  does  not 
harm  Hermas,  for  the  angel  Segri  has  shut  its 
mouth.  The  colours  represent  this  world  (black), 
the  blood  and  fire  in  which  it  must  perish,  those 
that  have  escaped  from  the  world  (gold),  and  tlie 
coming  age  (white). 

Tlie  fifth  episode  is  called  a  revelation  {'AiroKd- 
\v\f/is,  not  "Opa<ris).  Tlie  Shepherd,  the  angel  of 
repentance,  now  appears  for  the  first  time,  glorious 
in  visage,  with  sheepskin  wallet  and  statf.  He 
has  been  sent  by  the  most  holy  angel  to  dwell  with 
Hermas  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  Hermas  at  first 
fails  to  recognize  him  as  the  being  to  whom  he 
was  delivered,  but  on  recognition  proceeds  to  write 
down  the  Commandments  and  the  Parables  dic- 
tated by  the  Shepherd. 

(2)  Mandates. — The  first  Commandment  is  to 
believe  in  and  to  fear  the  One  God,  the  Creator, 
the  incomprehensible  (&x'^PW^)f  ^^nd  to  practise 
continence ;  the  second  to  avoid  slander,  whether 
by  hearing  or  by  speaking  it,  and  to  be  generous 
to  the  needy ;  tlie  third  to  abstain  from  falsehood  ; 
the  fourth  to  be  pure  in  thought  as  Avell  as  in 
deed.  An  adulterous  wife  is  to  be  divorced,  if 
unrepentant,  but  her  husband  may  not  many 
again,  for  that  would  be  committing  adultery.  If 
she  repents  after  divorce  her  husband  sins  if  he 
does  not  receive  her  again  (after  baptism  only  one 
opportunity  of  repentance  is  given,  over  which  the 
Shepherd  has  authority).  If  a  husband  or  a  wife 
die,  the  other  may  marry  without  sin,  but  to  re- 
main single  is  better.  The  fifth  Commandment 
enjoins  longsuffering,  the  opposite  of  ill-temper 
((5|i/XoXia),  that  most  evil  spirit  which  causes  bitter- 
ness, wrath,  anger,  and  spite.  The  next  three 
Mandates  expand  the  provisions  of  the  first — faith, 
fear,  and  temperance.  Contrasts  are  drawn  be- 
tween the  two  ways  (and  the  two  angels)  of 
righteousness  and  wickedness,  between  the  fear 
of  God  and  the  fear  of  the  devil,  and  between 
temperance  as  to  what  is  evil,  and  indulgence  in 
what  is  good.  The  ninth  Commandment  extols 
faith  in  prayer,  and  condemns  doubtful -minded- 
ness,  while  the  tenth  exhorts  Hermas  to  be  clothed 
in  cheerfulness  and  to  put  away  sadness.  In  the 
eleventh  striking  descriptions  are  given  of  the  false 
prophet,  who  absents  himself  from  the  Christian 
assembly,  and  is  consulted  as  a  soothsayer  by  men 
in  corners,  and  of  the  true  prophet  upon  whom  the 
Divine  afflatus  comes  in  the  course  of  the  Church's 
worship.  The  last  Commandment  is  to  banish 
evil  desire  by  the  cultivation  of  desire  which  is 
good  and  holy. 

(3)  Similitudes. — The  first  Parable  is  a  simple 
expansion  of  the  theme  that  the  Christian  is  a  so- 
journer in  a  foreign  city,  and  should  act  as  a  citizen 
of  the  city  which  is  his  true  home.  In  the  second 
the  duty  of  the  rich  to  give  to  the  poor  is  illus- 
trated by  the  figure  of  an  elm  and  a  vine.  The 
former,  though  fruitless,  supports  the  fruitful  vine. 
So  the  intercessions  of  the  poor  man  prevail  on 
behalf  of  his  wealthy  benefactor.  In  the  next  two, 
a  similitude  is  drawn  between  trees  in  winter, 
when  all  are  leafless,  and  all  seem  equally  withered, 
and  in  summer,  when  some  are  sprouting,  while 
others  remain  withered.  The  winter  represents 
the  conditions  of  this  world,  the  summer  those 
of  the  world  to  come.  The  fifth  Parable  presents 
the  story  of  a  vineyard,  a  master,  and  a  faithful 
servant,  the  exposition  of  which  reveals  an  early 
belief  in  the  doctrine  of  works  of  supererogation, 
and  an  Adoptianist  conception  of  the  personality 
of  the  Son  of  God  (see  below).  In  the  next,  two 
shepherds  are  shown,  one  of  pleasant  mien  sport- 
ing with  his  sheep,  tlie  other  of  sour  countenance 
lashing  Ins  flock  with  a  whip  and  otherwise  mal- 
treating them.     Tiie  former  is  the  angel  of  self- 


nERMAS,  SHEPHERD  OF 


HER^rAS,  SHEPHERD  OF        563 


indulgence  and  deceit,  the   latter  the   angel  of 

Eunishment.  A  few  days  later  Hermas  is  amicted 
y  this  angel  of  punishment,  and  in  the  seventh 
Parable  he  is  taught  that  this  is  because  of  the  sins 
of  his  household.  The  next  two  are  long  and  com- 
plicated. First  Hermas  sees  a  great  willow  tree 
(the  Law  of  God,  which  is  the  Son  of  God  preached 
unto  the  ends  of  the  earth)  under  which  stands  a 
multitude  of  believers.  A  glorious  angel  (Michael) 
cut3  rotis  from  the  tree  and  gives  them  to  the 
people,  wlio  in  due  course  return  them  in  great 
variety  of  condition  —  withered,  grub  -  eaten, 
cracked,  green,  some  with  shoots,  and  some  with 
a  kind  ot  fruit.  These  last  are  those  who  have 
suflered  for  Christ.  They  are  crowned  and  sent 
into  the  tower  with  some  of  the  others.  The  re- 
mainder are  left  to  the  care  of  the  Shepherd,  who, 
as  the  angel  of  repentance,  plants  the  rods  in  the 
eai'th,  and  deals  with  the  owners  according  to  the 
results.  The  ninth  Parable  is  an  amplification  of 
the  third  Vision.  Hermas,  seated  on  a  mountain 
in  Arcadia,  sees  a  great  plain  surrounded  by  twelve 
mountains,  each  of  w  hich  has  a  dillerent  appear- 
ance. These  are  the  tribes  of  the  world,  varying 
in  understanding  and  conduct.  In  the  midst  of 
the  plain  is  a  great  and  ancient  rock,  with  a 
recently-hewn  gate  in  it.  This  is  the  Son  of  God, 
older  than  creation,  and  yet  recently  made  mani- 
fest. Upon  the  rock  a  tower  (the  Church)  is  being 
built  by  angels,  of  stones  that  are  brought  through 
the  gate.  The  first  course  is  of  ten  stones,  tbe 
second  of  twenty-five,  the  third  of  thirty-five,  the 
fourth  of  forty.  These  are  the  first  and  the  second 
generation  of  righteous  men,  the  prophets  and 
ministers,  and  the  apostles  and  teachers.  These 
stones  come  from  the  deep,  and  the  rest  come  from 
the  mountains.  Some  are  suitable  and  others  are 
rejected.  The  Shepherd,  as  in  the  former  Parable, 
deals  with  the  latter,  to  fit  those  that  are  capable 
for  a  place  in  the  building.  A  curious  feature  is 
the  introduction  of  the  Son  of  Gk)d,  already  sym- 
bolized bj-  the  rock  and  the  gate,  as  the  glorious 
man  who  inspects  the  tov.er  and  rejects  certain  of 
the  stones.  The  purport  of  the  concluding  Parable 
is  an  exhortation  to  Hermas  to  keep  the  Shepherd's 
commandments  and  to  publish  them  to  others. 

4.  References  to  organization  and  doctrine  of  the 
Church. — {a)  Organization. — In  the  first  respect, 
the  allusions  are  too  slight  to  give  more  than  a 
general  picture.  We  read  of  the  rulers  (1-^07701/- 
/xevoi)  of  the  Church,  whom  Hermas  is  directed  to 
exhort  {Vis.  ii.  2)  and  even  to  rebuke  for  their 
divisions  and  their  ignorance  (iii.  9).  There  are 
apostles,  bishops,  teachers,  and  deacons  (iii.  5), 
also  prophets  and  ministers  (diaKovoi ;  Sim.  ix.  15). 
There  are  deacons  who  plunder  the  livelihood  of 
widows  and  orphans,  and  make  gain  from  the  per- 
formance of  their  office  ^ix.  26),  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  bishops  who  exercise  hospitality  and  are 
like  trees  sheltering  sheep,  receiving  into  their 
houses  the  servants  of  God  at  all  times,  and  shelter- 
ing the  needy  and  the  widows  in  their  visitation 
(ix.  27).  Clement,  whose  duty  is  to  communicate 
with  foreign  cities,  may,  as  we  have  seen,  have 
been  the  bishop  of  Rome,  while  Grapte,  who  in- 
structs the  widows  and  the  orphans,  may  have 
been  a  deaconess  ( Vis.  ii.  4).  Hermas,  who  is  told 
to  read  his  book  to  the  city  along  with  the  elders 
who  preside  over  the  Church  (/trra  xQy  vpeff^vripwv 
tQv  rpoCcFTanivuv  t-^s  eKAcXTjffi'os),  may  well  have  been 
one  of  the  order  of  prophets.  Tlie  office  of  a 
prophet  is  held  in  estimation  by  the  Church. 
'  W  hen  then  the  man  who  hath  the  divine  Spirit 
cometh  into  an  assembly  {(rwa-yurfrj)  of  righteous 
men,  who  have  faith  in  a  divine  Spirit,  and  inter- 
cession is  made  to  God  by  the  gathering  of  those 
men,  then  the  angel  of  the  prophetic  spirit  who 
is  attached  to  him,  filleth  the  man,  and  the  man, 


being  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  speaketh  to  the 
multitude,  according  as  the  Lord  willeth '  {Mand. 
xi.).  The  false  prophet,  on  the  contrary,  is  dumb 
in  the  Church  assembly,  and  plies  a  wizard's  trade 
in  comers.  In  view  of  the  Roman  character  of 
the  Shepherd,  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the 
tower  which  represents  the  Church  is  represented 
as  founded,  not  on  Peter,  but,  in  the  third  Vision, 
upon  the  waters  of  baptism,  and,  in  the  ninth 
Parable,  upon  the  rock  of  the  Son  of  God. 

{b)  Doctrine. — The  doctrinal  references  reveal, 
at  least  in  the  case  of  Hermas,  a  creed  which  is 
simple  and  yet  has  its  own  peculiarities.  Perhaps 
the  most  striking  of  the  latter  is  the  conception  of 
the  Son  of  God.  In  the  Parable  of  the  vineyard 
(the  fifth)  the  Son  of  God  is  represented  as  a  slave 
placed  in  charge,  with  a  promise  of  freedom  if  he 
fulfils  his  allotted  duty.  He  does  so  much  more 
than  is  expected  of  him  that  the  Divine  master  of 
the  vineyard  resolves  that  he  shall  be  made  joint- 
heir  with  His  Son,  who  is  represented  as  the  Holy 
Spirit.  'The  Holy  Pre-existent  Spirit,  which 
created  the  whole  creation,  God  made  to  dwell  in 
flesh  that  He  desired.  This  flesh  therefore,  in 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelt,  was  subject  unto  the 
Spirit.  .  .  .  When  then  it  had  lived  honourably  in 
chastity,  and  had  laboured  with  the  Spirit,  and 
had  co-operated  with  it  in  everything,  behaving 
itself  boldly  and  bravely.  He  chose  it  as  a  partner 
with  the  Holy  Spirit '  (Sim.  v.  6).  This  Adoptianist 
conception,  which  illustrates  early  Roman  specu- 
lation on  the  Person  of  Christ,  finds  frequent 
expression  in  phrases  identifying  the  Spirit  with 
the  Son  of  Goa,  e.g.  '  For  that  Spirit  is  the  Son 
of  God'  (ix.  1).  In  this  same  fifth  Parable  we 
have  an  early  trace  of  the  doctrine  of  works  of 
supererogation,  which,  in  mediseval  times,  was  so 
prominent  in  the  Church's  system.  '  If  thou  do 
any  good  thing  outside  the  commandment  of  God, 
thou  shalt  win  for  thyself  more  exceeding  glory, 
and  shalt  be  more  glorious  in  the  sight  of  God 
than  thou  wouldest  otherwise  have  been'  (v.  3). 

Hermas  also  teaches  that  the  first  apostles  and 
teachers  who  had  died,  went  like  Christ,  and 
preached  unto  the  Spirits  in  prison  (ix.  16).  His 
eschatology  is  in  one  respect  severe  and  narrow. 
Not  only  are  unrepentant  sinners  to  be  burned, 
but  also  the  Gentiles,  because  of  their  ignorance 
of  God  (iv.).  In  the  fifth  Vision  there  is  an 
apparent  leference  to  the  belief  in  guardian  angels. 
When  the  Shepherd  at  first  appears,  Hermas  fails 
to  recognize  him,  as  apparently  he  should  have 
done,*  to  be  the  being  to  whom  he  was  '  delivered,' 
and  only  when  the  visitant  changes  his  form  does 
recognition  come.  It  seems  curious  that  while 
Baptism  is  plainly  mentioned  two  or  three  times 
{Vis.  iii.  3,  Mand.  iv.  3,  Sim.  ix.  16)  the  Lord's 
Supper  does  not  appear  to  be  alluded  to.  Fasting 
is  often  mentioned,  and  once  we  find  Hermas 
keeping  a  'station,'  as  the  early  fast-days  were 
called  {Sim.  v.  1),  In  this  case  he  is  commanded, 
not  to  abstain  entirely  from  food,  but  to  take 
bread  and  water. 

While  Hermas  shows  fewer  traces  of  the  influence 
of  St.  Paul  than  of  that  of  St.  James,  with  whose 
Epistle  he  shows  great  familiarity,  he  need  not  be 
definitely  classed  as  a  Judaizer.  His  office  is  that 
of  a  prophet,  and  his  mission  is  to  recall  Christians 
from   the   danger  of   too  intimate    contact  with 

Eagan  social  influence.  He  speaks  of  those  *  who 
ave  never  investigated  concerning  the  truth,  nor 
enquired  concerning  the  deity,  but  have  merely 
believed,  and  have  been  mixed  up  in  business 
affairs  and  riches  and  heathen  friendships,  and 
many  other  affairs  of  this  world'  (Mand.  x.  1),  as 
specially    without    understanding    and    corrupt. 

*  Another  explanation  is  that  a  previous  Vision  may  have 
dropi)ed  out  from  the  MSS  which  have  come  down  to  us. 


564 


HERMES 


HEROD 


Hence  his  standard  of  Cluistian  duty  is  put  in  the 
most  practical  shape :  '  faith,  fear  of  the  Lord, 
love,  concord,  words  of  righteousness,  truth, 
patience,  ,  .  ,  to  minister  to  widows,  to  visit  the 
orphans  and  the  needy,  to  ransom  the  servants  of 
God  from  their  afflictions,  to  be  hospitable,  .  .  . 
to  resist  no  man,  to  be  tranquil,  to  snow  yourself 
more  submissive  than  all  men,'  etc.  (viii.).  The 
indwelling  of  the  Spirit  of  God  is  a  feature  of 
Christian  life  prominently  insisted  on,  and  if  in- 
termediate beings  like  Faith,  Continence,  Power, 
Longsuflering  {Sim.  ix.  15)  seem  to  shape  the 
Christian  cliaracter,  these  are  declared  to  be 
'powers  of  the  Son  of  God'  (ix.  13).  God  is  the 
Creator  alike  of  the  world  and  of  the  Church.  '  Be- 
hold, the  God  of  Hosts,  who  by  His  invisible  and 
mighty  power  and  by  His  great  wLsdom  created  the 
world,  and  by  His  glorious  purpose  clothed  His 
creation  with  comeliness,  and  by  His  strong  word 
fixed  the  heaven,  and  founded  the  earth  upon  the 
waters,  and  by  His  own  wisdom  and  providence 
formed  His  holy  Church,  which  also  He  blessed' 
( Vis.  ii.  3). 

Hermas,  who  Avas  evidently  acquainted  with  the 
contents  of  the  Didache,  does  not  directly  cite 
Scripture  by  name,  but  he  continually  uses 
Scriptural  words  and  ideas,  handling  them  with  a 
light  touch,  and  working  them  into  new  combina- 
tions. C.  Taylor  (The  Witness  of  Hermas  to  the 
Four  Gospels)  has  investigated  tliese  allusions 
minutely,  and  considers  Hermas  to  be  a  valuable 
witness  to  the  Canon,  especially  in  the  case  of  the 
four  Gospels.  He  finds  in  the  four  feet  of  the 
couch  in  the  third  Vision  (13),  Avith  tlie  associated 
cryptic  utterance  '  for  the  Avorld  too  is  upheld  by 
means  of  four  elements,'  the  source  of  the  famous 
saying  of  Irenajus  that  there  can  be  neither  more 
nor  fewer  than  four  Gospels,  because  there  are 
four  regions  of  the  Avorld,  and  four  catholic  winds, 
etc.  (see  p.  13  ft".).  There  is  a  citation  of  the  lost 
Avork  Eldad  and  Medad  ( Vis.  ii.  3),  and  Segri,  the 
name  of  the  angel  who  shuts  the  monster's  mouth 
in  Vis.  iv.  2,  is  a  word  derived  from  the  Hebrew 
verb  in  Dn  6^  ^ shut  the  lions'  mouths'  (The  Johns 
Hopkins  University  Circular,  April,  1884,  iii.  75). 

8.  Text  and  Yersions.  —  There  is  no  complete 
Greek  text  of  the  Shepherd.  About  the  first 
quarter  of  it  is  contained  in  the  4tli  cent.  Sinaitic 
MS  (K),  Avhile  the  Athos  MS  (A)  Avritten  in  the 
14th  cent,  is  the  authority  for  the  rest  of  the  work, 
except  the  concluding  portion,  from  Sim.  ix.  30 
to  the  end,  Avhich  has  to  be  supplied  from  the 
Latin  versions.  These  are  tAvo  in  number,  the  so- 
called  Old  Latin  Version  (L)  found  in  about  tAventy 
MSS,  and  the  Palatine  Version  (Lj)  existing  in  one 
MS  of  the  14th  century.  There  is  also  an  Ethiopic 
Version  (E)  published  in  1860  Avith  a  Latin  trans- 
lation (see  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers, 
p.  295). 

LiTKRATORE.— J.  B.  Lightfoot,  The  Apostolic  Fathers,  1  vol., 
London,  1891;  O.  von  Gebhardt  and  A.  Harnack,  Patnim 
Apost.  Opera,  Kasc.  iii.,  Leipzig,  1877;  F.  X.  Funk,  Patres 
Apostolici.  Tubingen,  1901;  C.  Taylor,  The  Hhepherd  of 
//«rma«  (Translation,  Introduction,  and  Notes),  London,  1903- 
1906;  T.  Zahn,  Der  Uirt  des  Hermas,  Gotha,  18ti8 ;  A. 
Hilgrenfeld,  Ilermce  Pastor,  Leipzig,  1887;  C.  Taylor,  The 
Witness  of  Hermas  to  the  Four  Gospels,  London,  1892  ;  [Bp. 
Fell],  Barnabas  and  Hermas,  Oxford,  1C85  ;  G.  Salmon,  His- 
torical Introduction  to  iVT*,  London,  1891. 

A.  Mitchell. 
HERMES  ('Ep/x7js,  Ro  16'*). — Hermes  Avas  a  very 
common  Greek  name,  being  the  name  of  the 
popular  Greek  god.  Lightfoot  remarks  that,  in 
the  Imperial  household  inscriptions,  not  less  tlian 
a  score  of  persons  might  be  counted  Avho  bore  this 
name  about  the  date  of  Romans  (Philippians*, 
1878,  p.  176).  In  the  NT  it  is  found  as  the  third 
of  a  group  of  five  names  (all  Greek)  of  Christians 
saluted  by  St.  Paul  (see  Hermas).    It  is  significant 


that  a  Christian  should  Iiavc  no  scruple  in  retain- 
ing as  las  name  the  name  of  one  of  the  gods. 
Another  instance  is  Nereus  (v.'*). 

T.  B.  Allwokthy. 
HERMOGENES.— See  Phygelus. 

HEROD. — 1.  Antipas,  son  of  Herod  the  Great 
by  the  Samaritan  Maltliace.  Made  tetrarch  of 
Galilee  and  Pera;a  after  the  death  of  his  fatlier  in 
4  B.C.,  he  ruled  over  these  regions  till  a.d.  39, 
Avhen,  through  the  intrigues  of  Herod  Agi'ippa  and 
his  OAvn  ambition,  he  incurred  the  disfavour  of 
Caligula,  and  Avas  banished  to  Lugdunum  in  Gaul. 
Capable  and  successful  as  an  administrator,  lie  is 
held  up  to  reproach  in  the  Gospels  for  the  scandal 
of  his  private  life,  and  his  treatment  of  John  the 
Baptist  and  Jesus  (Mt  14'-i-,  Lk  IS^"-  23^-"). 
ElscAvhere  in  the  NT  there  are  only  two  references 
to  him.  The  first  (Ac  4-^)  occurs  in  the  thanks- 
giving of  the  early  disciples  over  the  release  of 
Peter  and  John  from  im[>risonment,  and  indicates 
their  vicAV  of  Herod's  relation  to  the  tragedy  of 
Calvary.  The  basis  of  the  thanksgiving  is  a 
Messianic  interpretation  of  the  2nd  Psalm  and  a 
belief  in  its  fulfilment  in  Jesus.  Herod  and  Pontius 
Pilate  are  represented  as  the  kings  and  rulers  of 
tlie  earth  Avho  conspired  (Lk  23'-')  against  the  Lord's 
Anointed,  and  Avreaked  their  Avill  on  Him,  Avhile 
all  the  time  they  Avere  being  used  by  God  to  further 
His  purpose  of  redemption.  The  fact,  hoAvever, 
that  God  over-ruled  their  evil  intentions  for  good, 
and  caused  their  Avrath  to  praise  Him,  though  it 
redounds  to  His  OAvn  glory  and  augments  the 
Avonder  of  His  Avorking,  is  not  regarded  as  any 
alleviation  of  their  guilt.  The  sin  of  Herod,  as  of 
Pilate,  in  relation  to  Jesus,  is  clearly  implied,  and 
evidently  seemed  as  heinous  to  the  early  believers 
as  did  his  crime  against  John  to  the  Baptist's 
folloAvers,  avIio  saw  in  the  disasters  of  his  Arabian 
Avar  (A.D.  36)  a  Divine  retribution  for  his  murder 
of  their  master  (Jos.  Ant.  xvill.  v.).  The  other 
reference  to  Herod  Antipas  (Ac  13')  is  unimportant, 
though  of  some  interest  for  the  sidelight  it  casts 
upon  the  age  of  Manaen  (q.v.),  one  of  the  leaders 
in  the  Church  at  Antiocli,  Avho  is  said  to  have  been 
his  foster-brother  or  early  companion. 

2.  Agrippa  l.,  son  of  Aristobulus,  Herod  the 
Great's  son  by  the  Hasmonrean  Mariamne.  After 
his  father's  execution  in  7  B.C.  he  Avas  sent  to 
Rome  Avith  his  mother  Bernice,  and  lived  on  terms 
of  intimacy  witli  the  Imperial  family.  In  A.D.  23 
his  intrigues  and  extravagances  had  brought  him 
to  such  straits  that  he  Avas  forced  to  retire  to  tlie 
IdumiBan  stronghold  of  Malatha  till  he  found  an 
asylum  Avith  Antipas  in  Galilee.  Evading  his 
creditors,  he  returned  to  Rome  in  A.D.  36,  and 
shortly  afterwards  Avas  committed  to  prison  for  an 
incautious  remark  that  had  reached  the  ears  of 
Tiberius.  There  he  lav  till  the  folloAving  year, 
Avhen  the  death  of  the  old  Emperor  and  the  acces- 
sion of  his  friend  Caius  (Caligula)  restored  him  to 
freedom  and  fortune.  The  ncAv  Emperor  bestoAved 
on  him  the  eastern  tetrarchyof  his  half-uncle  Philip, 
Avhich  had  been  vacant  for  three  years,  Avith  the 
title  of  king,  and  added  to  it  Abilene,  the  former 
tetrarchy  of  Lysanias  in  north-eastern  Palestine 
(Lk  3') ;  at  the  same  time  he  commanded  the 
Senate  to  decree  him  prsetorian  honours,  and  gave 
him  a  golden  cliain  of  the  same  Aveight  and  pattern 
as  that  Avhich  he  had  Avorn  in  his  captivity.  A  fcAV 
years  later  the  tetrarchy  of  the  exiled  Antipas  Avas 
also  conferred  on  him  ;  and  in  A.D.  41  Claudius,  on 
his  succession  to  the  throne,  still  further  enlarged 
his  possessions  Avith  the  gift  of  Samaria  and  Juda>a, 
and  raised  him  to  consular  rank.  In  the  splendour 
of  his  good  fortune  Agrippa  did  not  forget  his 
Jewish  countrymen,  but  fitfully  at  least,  and  prob- 
ably from  motives  of  policy,  exerted  his  intluence 


HEROD 


HIERAPOLIS 


666 


at  the  Roman  court  to  mitigate  the  wronjis  and 
restrictions  entailed  on  them  by  their  religion. 
On  assuming  the  government  of  his  new  dominions 
— greater  than  Jewish  king  ever  possessed — he  set 
himself  to  observe  the  laws  of  his  country  and  the 
practices  of  the  Jewish  faith  (Jos.  Ant.  XEX.  vii.). 
During  his  three  years  of  rule,  he  showed  himself 
sagacious,  liberal,  and  humane ;  though,  in  his 
desire  to  propitiate  the  Pharisaic  element  among 
his  subjects,  he  raised  his  band  against  the  followers 
of  Christ,  killed  James  with  the  sword,  and  would 
have  sacrificed  Peter  also,  had  he  not  miraculously 
escaped  (Ac  12'"^').  '  He  saw  it  pleased  the  Jews' 
is  the  explanation  given  of  this  severity  in  Acts 
{12^),  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  its  substantial 
accuracy.  The  end  came  to  Agrippa  with  tragic 
srtddenness  in  A.D.  44,  when  his  glory  was  at  its 
height.  Between  the  account  of  his  death  given 
in  Acts  (12"*-^)  and  that  of  Josephus  {Ant.  XIX. 
viiL)  there  is  no  more  inconsistency  than  might 
have  been  expected  from  the  different  circles  in 
which  they  originated.  The  latter  is  more  detailed, 
and  yet  omits  to  mention  the  deputation  from 
Tyre  and  Sidon  who  sought  reconciliation  with 
King  Agrippa  through  the  good  offices  of  his 
chamberlain.  According  to  Josephus,  the  occasion 
of  Agrippa's  display  at  Caesarea  was  a  series  of 
games  in  honour  of  tlaudius  ;  no  angel  of  the  Lord 
smote  him,  but  an  owl  appeared  as  a  portent 
before  the  fatal  seizure ;  he  was  carried  to  his 
palace,  and  lingered  in  agony  for  five  days.  There 
is  nothing  about  his  having  been  '  eaten  of  worms,' 
which  maj'  have  been  only  a  descriptive  phrase 
commonly  used  of  the  death  of  tyrants  (2  Mac  9"). 
Both  accounts,  however,  suggest  the  interposition 
of  a  higher,  avenging  hand  in  the  sudden  death  of 
the  king. 

3.  Agrippa  II.,  son  of  Agrippa  I.  and  Cypros,  the 
daughter  of  Phasael,  a  son-in-law  of  Herod  the 
Great.  At  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  he  was 
resident  in  Rome,  and  only  seventeen  years  of  age. 
Disposed  at  first  to  grant  him  the  succession  to  the 
Jewish  kingdom,  Claudius  allowed  himself  to  be 
dissuaded  by  his  ministers,  and  re-transformed 
it  into  a  Roman  province.  Detaining  Agrippa  in 
Rome,  the  Emperor  compensated  him  six  years 
afterwards  for  the  loss  of  his  paternal  inheritance 
by  giving  him  his  uncle  Herod's  kingdom  of  Chalcis, 
as  well  as  the  rights,  whicli  Herod  had  possessed, 
of  supervising  the  Temple  and  choosing  the  high 
priest.  A  year  before  his  death,  Claudius  allowed 
Agrippa  to  exchange  the  meagre  principality  of 
Chalcis  for  those  parts  of  his  father's  dominions, 
east  and  north-east  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  which 
had  formerly  been  the  tetrarchies  of  Philip  and 
Lysanias  (Batanaja,  Gaulonitis,  Trachonitis,  and 
Abila).  In  A.D.  56  Nero,  who  had  meauMhile 
succeeded  to  the  throne  and  expected  his  aid  against 
the  Parthians,  added  to  his  kingdom  the  regions 
of  Tiberias  and  Taricheie,  with  Julias,  a  city  of 
Peraea,  and  fourteen  villages  in  its  vicinity. 
Agrippa  showed  his  gratitude  by  changing  the 
name  of  his  capital  from  Caesarea  Philippi  to  Nero- 
nias,  in  honour  of  the  Emperor,  on  whose  l)irthday 
also  he  had  Greek  plays  annually  performed  in  a 
theatre  which  he  erected  at  Berytus.  Precluded 
by  his  position  from  independent  political  action, 
he  contented  himself  wth  adorning  his  cities  and 
conserving  his  possessions.  A  Roman  at  heart, 
and  devoted  by  education  and  circumstances  to  the 
Roman  influence,  he  endeavoured  to  bring  the 
customs  of  his  people  into  conformity  with  those 
of  the  Gentiles.  At  the  same  time,  he  e\*inced 
an  occasional  interest  in  the  Jewish  religion,  and 
sought  to  win  over  the  Pharisees  to  his  projects. 
In  the  final  straggle  between  the  Jews  and  Rome, 
which  he  did  his  utmost  to  avert,  he  maintained 
his  loyalty  to  the  Imperial  power,  and  at  the  close 


of  the  war  was  rewarded  with  an  enlargement  of 
his  territories.  We  hear  of  him  in  Rome  in  A.D. 
75,  when  he  Avas  raised  to  prsetorian  rank.  Later 
on,  he  corresponded  with  Josephus  about  his  His- 
tory of  the  Jewish  War.  He  died,  Avithout  issue, 
a1x)ut  the  end  of  the  century.  It  was  this  king, 
Agrippa  II.,  who  was  associated  with  Porcius 
Festus,  the  Roman  procurator  of  Palestine  (A.D. 
60-62),  in  the  trial  of^St.  Paul  recorded  in  Ac  25"- 
26^.  The  remark  imputed  to  him  on  that  occasion 
('almost  thou  persuadest  me  to  be  a  Christian,* 
26^)  is  interesting  for  the  evidence  it  affords  of 
the  early  currency  of  the  name  'Christian.'  The 
character  of  Agrippa  has  caused  doubt  to  be  thrown 
on  its  ordinary  interpretation  as  an  admission  of 
the  profound  impression  made  on  him  by  St.  Paul's 
appeal.  It  has  been  taken  to  mean  either  *  you 
are  persuading  me  somewhat  to  act  the  part  of  a 
Christian,'  or  '  on  slight  grounds  you  would  make 
me  a  believer  in  your  assertion  that  the  Messiah 
has  come'  (EBi  i.  754 n.,  ii.  2037). 

LrraKATmB.— The  great  authority  for  the  lives  of  the  Herods 
is  Josephus.  E.  Schfirer,  6JV*,  heipzig,  1901-U  (Eag.  tr.  of 
2nd  ed.  =  HJP,  Edinbarjrh,  1885-90) ;  A.  Hansrath,  A'TZG  (Eng. 
tr.  of  2nd  ed.,  London,  1895) ;  and  other  Histories  of  ST  Times, 
give  more  or  less  fall  accounts  of  the  bmily.  See  also  artt. 
s.v.  in  HDB  and  EBi.  D.  FKEW. 

HERODION  ('BpuSiup,  WH  'HfxpSiuy,  Ro  16",  a 
Greek  name,  suggesting  connexion  with  the  family 
of  the  Herods). — Herodion  is  sainted  by  St.  Paul 
and  is  described  as  '  my  kinsman '  {rbp  avfyani  /xov). 
Other  '  kinsmen '  saluted  in  Ro  16  are  Andronicus 
and  Junias  (or  Junia)  (v."),  whDe  three  '  kinsmen ' 
send  salutations  in  v.-'.  That  St.  Paul  means  that 
these  persons  were  relations  of  his  is  unlikely.  It 
is  this  interpretation  which  has  given  rise  to  one 
of  the  difficulties  felt  in  deciding  the  destination 
of  the  passage  vv.*-^.  Almost  certainly  we  should 
understand  '  fellow- Jews '  or  '  fellow-members  of 
my  tribe '  (see  Ro  9').  Lightfoot  connects  Herodion 
with  '  the  household  of  Aristobnlus '  saluted  in  the 
preceding  verse.  He  considers  that  Aristobulus 
was  a  member  of  the  Herodian  family,  and  that 
hLs  '  household '  would  naturally  include  many 
Orientals  and  Jews,  and  therefore  probably  some 
Christians  {Philippians*,  1878,  p.  175).  Of  the 
latter,  Herodion  may  have  been  one.  Others  have 
conjecttired  that  Herodion  belonged  to  '  the  house- 
hold of  Narcissus'  saluted  in  the  verse  which 
follows.  T.  B.  Allwoethy. 

HIERAPOLIS  ('lepdroXtj). — Hierapolis  was  a  city 
in  the  province  of  Asia,  picturesquely  situated  on 
a  broad  terrace  in  the  mountain  range  which  skirts 
the  N.  side  of  the  Lycus  valley.  On  the  S.  side, 
6  miles  away,  Laodicea  was  plainly  >Tsible,  while 
Colossje  lay  hidden  from  \-iew  12  miles  to  the  S.E. 
Differing  widely  in  history  and  character,  these 
three  cities  were  evangelized  together  soon  after 
the  middle  of  the  1st  century.  Hierapolis  was 
probably  an  old  Lydian  city,  but  in  the  Roman 
period  it  was  always  regarded  as  Phrygian.  A 
change  in  the  spelling  of  the  name  is  significant. 
"While  the  older  form — Hieropolis,  the  city  of  the 
hieron — limits  the  sanctity  to  the  shrine,  the  later 
form  —  Hierapolis,  the  sacred  city  —  conveys  the 
idea  that  the  whole  place  was  holy. 

In  such  an  environment  Christianity  had  to  con- 
tend not  merely  with  a  superficial  Hellenic  culture, 
but  with  a  deep-rooted  native  superstition.  Politic- 
ally of  little  account,  Hierapolis  was  important  as 
the  home  of  an  ancient  Anatolian  nature-worship, 
the  cult  of  Leto  and  her  son  Sabazios.  The  strik- 
ing physical  phenomena  of  the  place  were  clear 
indications  to  the  pruuitive  mind  of  the  dreaded 
presence  of  a  numen  which  reqtiired  to  be  propiti- 
ated. The  numerous  hot  streams  tumbling  down 
the  side  of  the  hill  on  which  the  city  stood  are 


566 


HIGH  PRIEST 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


etronj^ly  inii)regnate(l  with  alum,  and  the  snow- 
white  iuciuslations  whicli  cover  tlie  rocky  terraces 
present  the  ai)i)earance  of  *  an  immense  frozen 
cascade,  the  surface  wavy,  as  of  water  in  its  head- 
long course  suddenly  petrified '  (R.  Chandler, 
Travels  in  Asia  Minor^,  1817,  p.  287).  From  a 
hole  in  the  ground — probably  filled  up  by  Chris- 
tians after  a.d.  320 — there  issued  fumes  of  mephitic 
vapour,  which  seemed  to  come  from  Hades,  so  that 
the  awe-inspiring  spot  was  called  the  Plutonion  or 
Charonion  (Strabo  xiil.  iv.  14).  On  account  of  its 
marvellous  hot  springs — re<jarded  as  a  divine  gift 
— the  city  was  associated  with  the  medicinal  art  of 
yEsculapius,  and  under  the  Empire  it  became  a 
famous  health  resort.  It  was  the  birth-place  of 
Epictetus  the  Stoic. 

Hierapolis  is  mentioned  once  in  the  NT  (Col  4"), 
as  a  city  causing  grave  concern  to  Epaphras,  who 
was  apparently  the  fotinder  and  first  pastor  of  its 
church.  The  cities  of  the  Lycus  valley  no  doubt 
received  the  gospel  at  the  time  of  St.  I'aul's  pro- 
longed mission  in  Ephesus,  the  citj'  from  which  the 
ligiit  radiated  over  the  whole  province  of  Asia  (Ac 
1910. 26J  Having  acted  as  St.  Paul's  delegate  in  the 
Lycus  valley  (Col  V  [RV]),  Epaphras  knew  tliat 
the  Apostle  regarded  its  churches  as  in  a  manner 
his  own,  and  after  some  years  of  strenuous  labour 
the  'faithful  minister  of  Christ'  made  a  journey 
from  Asia  to  Rome  to  seek  counsel  and  help  in 
dealing  with  errors  of  doctrine  and  jiractice  which 
threatened  to  undo  his  work. 

There  is  a  trustworthy  tradition  which  connects 
the  name  of  Philip  the  Apostle  with  Hierapolis. 
Polycrates,  bishop  of  Ephesus  towards  the  end  of 
the  2nd  cent. — as  (juoted  by  Eusebius  (HE  iii.  31) 
— ^states  that  Philip,  '  one  of  the  twelve,'  Avas 
among  '  the  great  lights  of  Asia,'  and  that  he  was 
'buried  at  Hierapolis  along  with  his  two  virgin 
daughters.'  Theodoret  (Commentary  on  Ps  116) 
says  that  '  the  Apostle  Philip  controverted  the 
error  of  the  Phrygians.'  St.  John  is  also  believed 
to  have  preached  at  Hierapolis,  and  the  progress  of 
Christianity  there  was  represented  as  the  victory 
over  the  Echidna  or  serpent  of  ^sculapius,  which 
was  identified  with  Satan.  Hierapolis  Avas  made  a 
metropolis  by  Justinian.  The  ruins  of  the  city  are 
extensive  and  well-preserved.  The  theatre  is  one 
of  the  finest  in  Asia  Minor.  The  white  terrace 
now  bears  the  fanciful  name  of  '  Cotton  Castle ' 
(Pamhuk-Kalessi). 

Literature.— W.  J.  Hamilton,  Researches  in  Asia  Minor, 
1842,  i.  507  ff. ;  T.  Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  0/ St.  Paul\  1875, 
i.  356 f. ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.  of  Asia  Minor,  1890, 
p.  84,  and  Cities  and  Bishoprics  of  Phrygia,  i.  [1895]  84-120. 

James  Strahan. 
HIGH  PRIEST.-See  Priest. 

HOLINESS,  PURITY.— This  article  is  intended 
to  include  the  conceptions  of  holiness  and  purity 
as  we  find  them  in  the  literature  of  the  Apostolic 
Church.  So  far  as  the  Gospels  are  concerned, 
these  have  already  been  dealt  with  in  separate 
articles  in  the  DCG,  to  which  reference  is  now 
made.  There  is  a  certain  advantage  in  dealing 
with  both  subjects  in  one  article,  as  the  two  are 
fundamentally  connected  ;  and  in  the  course  of  the 
article  it  will  be  found  that  the  tie  is  very  close. 
Both  are  primarily  religions  ideas,  who.se  ethical 
significance  diverges.  In  the  NT  holiness  em- 
phasizes rather  tlie  Divine  side,  and  })urity  the 
human  side  of  that  comprehensive  condition  of 
l)eace  with  and  access  to  God  the  Father,  along 
with  all  the  consequences  for  character  which  had 
been  mediated  through  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ. 
There  seems  to  be  no  fundamental  difference  in 
the  use  of  tlie  terms  'holiness'  and  'purity'  by 
the  various  NT  writers.  Hence  the  metliod  fol- 
lowed in  the  article  has  been  to  use  in  illustration 


of  the  general  conceptions  certain  leading  NT 
])assages. 

1.  Holiness.— i.  The  general  conception.— The 
original  idea  is  stated  by  A.  B.  Davidson  (Ezekiel, 
Cambridge,  1892,  p.  xxxix)  to  be  'not  now  recover- 
able' (cf.  Robertson  Smith,  RS^,  London,  1894,  p. 
140).  The  most  plausible  suggestion  is  that  it  is 
connected  with  a  root=' separate.'  Our  idea  of 
holiness  is  misleading  for  the  interpretation  of 
both  OT  and  NT  meaning.  To  us,  holiness  is 
exclusively  an  ethico-religious  quality,  attaching  to 
persons,  in  so  far  as  they  are  God-like  in  life  and 
character  ;  and  applied  (less  accurately)  to  institu- 
tions (including  sacraments)  on  account  of  their 
religious  significance.  In  ancient  Semitic  religion, 
the  '  holiness '  of  God  or  of  men  had  nothing  to  do 
with  morality  and  ethical  j»urity  of  life.  Even  in 
Israel  it  came  to  be  an  appropriate  epithet  of, 
almost  a  synonym  for,  Deity  (cf.  Am  4*  6^  where 
God  is  said  to  swear  '  by  his  holiness,'  and  '  by 
himself,'  without  any  real  difierence  of  meaning). 
In  other  words,  '  holiness '  is  a  relative  term  in 
ancient  religion. 

'The  divine  holiness  was  not  so  much  an  object  of  intellectual 
contemplation  as  a  fact  borne  in  upon  the  mind  by  the  constant 
presence  of  things  and  persons  that  might  not  be  touched, 
places  that  might  not  be  entered,  and  times  in  which  ordinary 
employments  were  suspended,  because  of  their  appropriation 
to  the  service  or  worship  of  God '  (J.  Skinner,  UDB  li.  397» ; 
cf.  H.  Schultz,  OT  Theology,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1892,  p.  168  ff.). 

Holiness  is  not  to  be  confused  with  transcendence 
in  its  application  to  God.  Jahweh,  as  holy,  in 
Hebrew  thought  is  not  originally  opposed  to  the 
universe,  but  rather  is  guarded  or  guards  Himself, 
on  the  one  hand  against  the  arrogance  and  pre- 
sumption of  man  (1  S  6''"')  and,  on  the  other,  against 
the  false  deity  of  the  national  gods  (Jos  4"'"'-).  The 
Hebrews,  in  transferring  the  epithet  to  Jahweh, 
also  took  over  the  ancient  idea  involved  in  it,  and 
persisting  in  the  NT,  that  any  thing  or  person  that 
conies  into  any  relation  with  Deity  is  ipso  facto 
holy.  Any  part  of  God  Himself  may  be  holy  (e.g. 
His  arm.  His  spirit) ;  or  what  constitutes  His 
property  is  '  holy  (e.g.  His  sanctuary,  land,  people, 
offerings,  or  ministers).  Angels  are  also  calletl 
'  holy  ones '  (Job  5^). 

The  real  antithesis  to  '  holy '  in  this  original 
sense  is,  therefore,  '  profane '  or  '  common '  (hCI, 
/S^/St/Xos,  lit.  '  that  which  is  allowed  to  be  trodden ' 
[Lv  10'»,  1  S  21*,  1  Ti  4?  6^»,  2  Ti  2i«] ;  used  in  the 
NT  of  men  [1  Ti  P,  He  12'«]).  The  '  holy '  was  also 
accessible  only  under  certain  strict  ceremonial 
regulations.  And  it  is  just  at  this  point  that  the 
aflmity  of  holiness  and  purity  or  cleanness  becomes 
a])parent  (see  further  under  II. ). 

2.  The  NT  conception.— This  idea  of  'holiness' 
as  essentially  a  relationship  between  God  and  man, 
in  which  God  takes  the  initiative,  persists  all 
through  the  NT  ;  and  it  is  obvious  that,  as  the 
idea  of  God  develojjcd,  holine.ss  would  also  tend 
to  carry  with  it  ever-increasing  moral  demands  on 
character.  We  may  therefore  turn  to  the  uses  of 
the  word  in  the  NT. 

There  are  two  main  groups  of  words  translated 
'holy'  in  the  NT:  (1)  the  ^710$  group  (d7i<lfw, 
d7icw/i6j,  a.fi.&rT)^,  aynatrvvij) ;  (2)  the  fi<r«oi  group 
(baiimji,  oaius  [1  Th  2'"]).  Updi  is  also  twice  em- 
ployed (e.g.  2  Ti  3'^  1  Co  9'*),  but  it  need  not  be 
specially  distinguished. 

In  the  NT  the  terms  'holiness'  and  'holy'  are 
applied  (1)  to  Gotl ;  (2)  to  Jesus;  (3)  to  tlie  Sjjirit 
of  God  ;  (4)  to  things  and  places  ;  (5)  to  men. 

(1)  The  holiness  of  God.— Th&t  'holiness'  and 
•holy'  are  comparatively  infrequent  in  this  con- 
nexion in  the  NT  need  occasion  no  surprise.  The 
Apostolic  Church  in  the  name  'Father'  fcmnd  a 
term  that  included  and  transcended  the  holiness  of 
(!od.  Je-sus'  own  description  of  God  is  the  '  j)erfect ' 
One  (Mt  5««),  the  'good'  One  (Mt  19",  Mk  10^*). 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


567 


As  we  shall  see  later,  however,  the  judgment  of 
Kitschl  (Rei-htfertigung  und  Versohnung,  Bonn, 
1870-74,  ii.  89,  101 ;  Eng.  tr.  of  vol.  iii.,  Edinburgh, 
1900,  p.  274)  that  the  Divine  holiness,  'in  its  Old 
Testament  sense,  is  for  various  reasons  not  valid 
in  Christianity,  while  its  use  in  the  New  Testament 
is  obscure,'  cannot  be  upheld.  Rather  there  are 
whole  tracts  of  the  NT  literature  that  would  re- 
main a  sealed  book  were  it  not  for  the  guidance 
of  this  OT  conception.  07105  is  applied  to  God,  or 
to  the  'name'  of  God  (Lk  1*^,  Rev  48).  In  both 
these  usages  the  significance  is  the  same,  and  re- 
calls the  original  meaning.  The  conception  of  the 
majesty  of  God  is  most  prominent.  In  Rev  4"  it  is 
the  ^tfia  who  otier  the  ascription  of  praise  in  the 
form  of  the  Trisagion.  If  they  are  taken  as  repre- 
senting Nature,  and  the  forces  of  the  natural  world, 
&y'io$  here  no  doubt  emphasizes  the  sense  of 
'absolute  life  and  majestic  power'  (J.  Moflatt, 
EGT  V.  [1910]  381).  There  is  a  reminiscence  of 
Is  6*,  but  with  a  remarkable  absence  of  the  over- 
whelming impression  of  moral  purity  in  the 
prophet's  vision.  The  ethical  content  of  the  OT 
conception  is  apparent,  however,  in  Rev  6^".  There 
the  thought  has  affinity  with  Is  5^*,  where  God  is 
said  to  '  sanctify '  Himself,  by  inflicting  righteous 
punishment  on  the  sinners  of  Israel.  The  blood  of 
the  martyrs  cries  for  the  Divine  vengeance,  and  the 
holiness  of  God  must  always  express  itself  in  the 
form  of  intense  antagonism  to  the  sutiering  of  the 
innocent  and  the  sin  of  the  oppressor.  Probably 
another  side  of  the  same  idea  is  present  in  Jn  17  , 
where  the  Saviour  appeals  to  the  holiness  of  the 
Father  that,  in  view  of  the  trials  and  persecutions 
likely  to  come  upon  them,  the  disciples  who  are 
'in  the  world'  may  be  protected  and  vindicated 
(cf.  vv.  ^^-  ■^).  The  Father,  as  holy,  transcends 
and  is  separate  from  the  world,  but  condescends  to 
the  needs  of  the  disciples — in  other  words,  '  saves ' 
them  (H.  J.  Holtzmann).  The  usage  in  1  P  l^*-  is 
interesting ;  ayios  ought  to  be  translated  as  predi- 
cate. The  exhortation  is  based  on  Lv  11*^*,  and 
has  no  direct  connexion  with  the  more  profound 
thought  of  Mt  5''*.  The  'holiness'  inculcated  in 
the  Leviticus  passage  involves  the  disuse  as  food  of 
certain  'creeping  things'  regarded  as  repugnant 
and  an  '  abomination '  to  God.  As  often,  holiness 
and  physical  purity  tend  to  coalesce.  God  has 
called  Israel  out  of  Egypt  to  be  a  '  separate '  nation, 
and  He  is  '  holy '  or  '  apart  from '  the  impure  usages 
of  heathen  nations  (cf.  Skinner,  BDB  ii  397''; 
E.  Kautzsch,  ib.  v.  682).  The  idea  in  Leviticus 
does  not  go  beyond  ceremonial  purity  (see  under 
II.).  Similarly  in  1  P  l"**-,  while  the  idea  of  God 
has  of  course  become  moralized,  and  He  is  spoken 
of  as  '  Father,'  the  exhortation  is  essentially  to 
abandon  the  '  former  lusts,'  on  the  ground  that 
they  too  are  repugnant  to  the  nature  of  God  and 
unfit  men  for  the  service  of  the  '  living  God.'  The 
stress  is  still  on  the  outward  behaviour.  As  regards 
the  expression  wyuurdrfTb)  rb  6vo/id  aov  in  the  Lord's 
Praj'er  (Mt  6^  Lk  11-),  'name'  is  of  course  used  in 
the  ordinary  biblical  sense,  and  is  equivalent  to 
the  revealed  nature  of  God,  especially  as  revealed 
in  Jesus — His  Fatherhood.  There  is  an  implied 
contrast  with  a  pagan  type  of  prayer  (v."-),  which 
consists  in  formal  and  ceremonial  repetitions  of  the 
same  words.  Jesus  here  applies  the  same  revolu- 
tionary principle  to  prayer,  in  so  far  as  it  implies 
a  conception  of  the  character  of  God,  as  when  He 
abrogates  the  ceremonial  in  conduct  as  a  term  of 
fellowship  with  God  (Mt  15",  Mk  V%  God  is 
'  the  Holy  One  of  Israel,'  and  His  name  is  hallowed 
or  sanctified,  or  '  counted  as  holy,'  when  men  revere 
His  majesty  (Is  29'^),  by  recognizing,  in  willing 
and  trustful  submission.  His  Providence  (Mt  6*). 
The  whole  context  in  Mt  6^"*  is  useful  as  determin- 
ing the  sense  in  which  holiness  is  here  ascribed  to 


God  by  Jesus.  The  'hallowing'  of  the  name  is 
opposed  to  ostentatious  worship,  which  profanes  it. 
The  ethical  content  given  to  tne  word  (v.*)  by  our 
Lord  is  profound  and  far-reaching.  The  God,  and 
Father,  of  Jesus  is  indeed  '  exalted  above '  men  in 
the  perfection  of  His  '  goodness '  (Mk  10>»,  Mt  19^^) ; 
but  He  is  also  infinitely  accessible  to  all  those  who 
seek  Him.  Universalism  is  therefore  latent  in  this 
opening  petition. 

The  noun  af  lirrr)^  is  used  of  God  (a)  in  2  Co  1*'  (^i* 
ayi&rriTi  Kal  eiXucpiveiq.  tov  6eov) ;  and  (6)  also  in  He  12^' 
(els  t6  fieraXa^etv  rrjs  ayi&rrjroi  airrov)  (cf.  2  Mac  15*). 

(a)  Another  reading  is  aT\anrri  (K<=DEGL,  the 
Latin  and  Syrian  VSS).  ayioTTjri  is  supported  by 
K*ABCK_MP  17,  37,  73  and  the  Bohairic.  St.  Paul 
is  claiming  that  his  conduct  is  characterized  by  these 
Divine  qualities,  and  '  in  so  far  as  they  are  displayed 
in  men  they  are  God's  gift,  as  he  goes  on  to  explain ' 
(J.  H.  Bernard,  EGT  iii.  [1903]  42).  Denney  finely 
paraphrases :  '  In  a  holiness  and  sincerity  which 
God  bestows,  in  an  element  of  crystal  transparency, 
I  have  led  my  apostolic  life '  {2  Corinthians  [in  Ex- 
positor's Bible,  London,  1894],  p.  30).  Here,  agaio, 
the  affinity  is  apparent  between  the  conceptions  of 
purity  and  holiness.  St.  Paul  is  claiming  to  have 
walked  'in  the  light,  as  he  is  in  the  light.'  The 
thought  is  akin  to  the  Johannine  idea  '  God  is  light, 
and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all '  (1  Jn  1'). 

(6)  The  word  in  Hebrews  is  used  similarly  to  indi- 
cate a  holiness  of  God  that  can  be  imparted  to  men. 
The  conception  here  is  not  of  a  holiness  that  is 
only  possible  after  death  (H.  von  Soden).  We  may 
compare  12",  '  without  holiness,  no  man  shall  see 
the  Lord,'  where,  however,  the  word  is  ayiaafios,  or 
'consecration'  (see  SANCTIFICATIOX),  the  process,  of 
which  oLyibTTji  is  the  result.  Here,  again,  we  can 
detect,  shining  through  the  depth  of  ethical  mean- 
ing, the  fundamental  idea  of  holiness  as  '  separa- 
tion.' 

' "  Holiness  "  or  sanctity  in  God  is  properly  separation  or  dis- 
tance from  the  world  and  elevation  above  it ;  holiness  in  men 
is  separation  from  the  world  and  dedication  unto  God '  (A.  B. 
Davidson,  Hebrews,  p.  238). 

It  is  significant,  as  indicating  the  immense  pro- 
gress attained  in  the  Christian  idea,  that  in  the 
only  two  instances  in  the  NT  where  the  071671/$  of 
God  is  spoken  of  as  an  abstract  t«rm,  men  are 
represented  as  sharing  in  it. 

Th.  Haering  (The  Christian  Faith,  Eng.  tr., 
London,  1913,  i.  345)  aptly  cites  the  yfoiEs  'ye 
would  not'  (Mt  23*^)  as  the  expression  of  a  love 
that  is  also  holiness,  in  its  reaction  against  sin. 
These  are  words,  he  says,  'which  in  their  simple 
seriousness  are  not  surpassed  by  the  awful  say- 
ing in  He  \2^.'  The  love  of  God  in  the  NT  is 
awe-inspiring  in  its  holiness,  which,  equally  with 
love,  is  a  term  that  may  be  used  to  express  the 
glorious  fullness  of  His  moral  excellence.  Holiness 
is  the  principle  and  standard  of  God's  love,  which 
is  His  desire  '  to  impart '  Himself  and  all  good 
to  other  beings,  and  to  possess  them  as  His  own 
in  spiritual  fellowship  (W.  N.  Clarke,  Outline  of 
Christian  Theology,  Edinburgh,  1898,  p.  98  f.). 
The  reaction  of  the  nature  of  God  against  sin  is 
itself  love,  because  thereby  it  exercises  the  means 
for  overcoming  the  opposition  to  love.  The  '  wrath ' 
of  God  (e.g.  Ro  P*)  is  a  conception  that  can  be  ade- 
quately expressed  and  understood  only  in  terms  of 
the  biblical  conception  of  His  holiness.  Holiness, 
it  has  to  be  remembered,  is  not  strictly  an  attribute, 
but  the  fullness  of  the  Divine  nature,  as  love  is. 
We  cannot  set  these  two  conceptions  naiveh"  side 
by  side.  One  of  the  theological  tasks  of  the  pre- 
sent is  to  procure  an  adequate  adjustment  of  these 
two  aspects  of  the  Divine  nature  to  one  another. 
No  theological  writer  of  modem  times  has  realized 
and  met  the  need  so  strikingly  as  Haering  (see  esp. 
ii.  494  ff.  of  his  work  already  quoted). 


568 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


'We  are  .  .  .  face  to  face  with  the  mystery  of  the  Divine 
personality,  of  which  we  are  compelled  to  think  as  life  capable 
of  being  moved  to  its  utmost  depths,  without  however  being 
able  to  press  this  necessary  idea  [of  holiness]  to  its  logical  con- 
clusions '  (ib.  ii.  405). 

We  must  recognize  tliat  the  love  of  God,  like  all 
perfect  love,  has  'height,'  as  well  as  'depth,' if 
we  would  be  tilled  '  unto  all  the  fulness  of  God ' 
(Eph  3>»'-). 

(2)  The  holiness  of  Jesus. — In  Lk  1^  the  child  Jesus 
in  His  pre-natal  existence  is  called  tA  yewib/ievov 
&yiov,  '  tliat  holy  thing  that  is  being  generated '  (cf. 
Mt  1-'*').  The  expression  has  no  special  significance 
in  connexion  with  tlie  subject  of  this  article.  The 
Holy  Spirit  is  regarded  as  the  origin  of  the  physical 
existence  of  Jesus  ;  and  tlierefore  the  embryo  is 
entirely  holy,  as  deriving  existence  from  God.  The 
application  of  the  term  to  the  physical  nature  of 
Jesus  must  be  regarded  as  the  result  of  reflexion, 
no  doubt  influenced  by  Hellenistic  thought,  and 
perhaps  in  opposition  to  Docetic  theories  of  His 
Person.  It  belongs  to  a  milieu  where  the  theo- 
logical idea  of  tlie  pre-existence  of  Jesus  has  given 
way  to  a  more  popular  conception  of  His  physical 
birth  (cf.  Lk  1">)  (see  art.  HoLY  SPIKIT).  We  are 
also  faced  here  \vitli  the  problem  of  a  jiossible  inter- 
polation in  vv.»*»«  (Motlatt,  LNT,  p.  2681!".). 

Jesus  is  also  referred  to  as  '  the  Holy  One  of  God ' 
(Mk  P*,  Lk  43^  Jn  G""  [ace.  to  the  true  reading]). 
The  phrase  is  evidently  a  designation  of  the  Messiah. 
The  demons  are  represented  as  acknowledging  that 
Jesus  is  '  the  Holy  One  of  God,'  i.e.  One  who  has 
been  chosen,  equipped,  and  consecrated  for  the 
service  of  humanity  against  tlie  might  of  the 
demonic  powers  tliat  brought  disease  and  madness 
by  taking  possession  of  the  bodies  of  men.  This 
was  regarded  in  contemporary  Jewish  thought  as 
a  function  of  the  Messiali.  The  epithet  '  holy  '  is 
used  in  the  same  sense  of  consecration  to  special 
service  in  Jn  6'^'',  wliich  again  may  be  compared 
with  Jn  10^  :  6y  6  iraTijp  r]yia<rev,  i.e.  set  apart  for  a 
siiecial  mission.  No  feature,  liowever,  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  Jesus  in  the  Johannine  Gospel  is  more 
marked  than  the  emphasis  on  the  idea  that  Jesus 
in  His  essential  nature  transcends  the  ordinary 
Messianic  categories.  Therefore,  although  6  vlbs 
ToD  deoD  cannot  be  regarded  as  the  reading  in  Jn 
6'*,  the  same  conception  of  the  moral  and  religious 
relationship  of  Jesus  with  God,  His  unique  Sonsliip, 
as  transcending  Messianic  categories  (^o/'ovej'ijy),  ex- 
pressed so  frequently  in  the  Johannine  writings  by 
6  vibs  ToO  0eov,  or  6  vl6s,  must  be  regarded  as  implicit 
in  6  dyioi  Tov  Oeov  (cf.  pi^fiara  ^wrjs  aiuviov  ?Xf '^  [v^-**])- 
Jesus  is  called  6  017105  absolutely  in  Rev  3'  (6  1X7109  6 
dXrjdivSs)  and  in  1  Jn  2-*.  In  the  latter  passage  the 
idea  of  the  transference  of  the  XP^"'/^^  may  «r  may 
not  have  an  aflinity  with  Hellenistic  mystery- 
religion  (R.  Reitzenstein,  Die  hdlenistischcn  Mys- 
terienrcligioncn,  Leipzig,  1910,  p.  206 f.);  but  in 
any  case  the  XP^<^M^  itself  is  to  be  connected  with 
such  passages  as  Ex  29''  30'^  and  Jesus  is  '  holy ' 
because  He  has  been  '  anointed '  or  set  apart  for 
His  particular  mission,  wherein  He  perfectly  reveals 
and  perfectly  does  the  will  of  God.  In  Johannine 
thought,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  conferred  on  Jesus  with- 
out measure  (Jn  3^*) ;  it  '  abides '  in  Him  (P-'-).  It 
is  the  source  of  His  unique  filial  consciousness,  and 
in  this  sense  He  is  set  apart  by  God  for  His  mission, 
and  perfectly  carries  it  out.  It  is  extremely  ques- 
tionable if  the  Johannine  writings  ever  contemplate 
the  metapliysical  notion  of  the  essential  oneness  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  however  justifiable  it  may 
be  to  deduce  that  conception  from  the  main  position 
adopted,  viz.  a  'oneness'  of  love  and  will.  The 
Joliannine  position,  however,  as  to  the  'oneness' 
of  God  and  Jesus  is  clearly  developed  in  the  face  of 
])hysical  notions  of  union  with  deity,  derived  from 
the  Hellenistic  mystery-religions  (cf.  W.  Bousset, 


Kyrios  Christos,  Gottingen,  1913,  p.  18611'.).  it  is 
significant  that  the  relationship  expressed  by  ayia- 
^tiv  between  God  and  Jesus  is  one  that  may  be  con- 
ferred on  men  by  Jesus  (cf.  Jn  17"''"). 

In  tlie  Book  of  Acts  Jesus  is  called  rbv  &yiov  koI 
SIkmov  (3''*),  where  tlie  epithet  is  simply  an  equiva- 
lent for  the  Messiah  ;  and  it  lias  the  same  meaning 
in  4^  (rbv  dyiov  iraiSd  ffov),  where  vaiSa  is  to  be  trans- 
lated 'servant'  in  the  sense  of  Is  52"  6P  (see  R.  J. 
Knowling,  EGT  ii.  [1900],  on  Ac  3"). 

Hitherto  we  have  been  dealing  with  instances  of 
the  use  of  dyioi.  In  Ac  2'"  rbv  &<iibv  ffov  follows  the 
LXX  translation  of  Ps  W°,  and  is  rendered  in  the 
AV  and  RV  'Thy  holy  one.'  6<nos  is  generally 
used  in  the  LXX  to  render  hdsid  (cf.  Dt  33", 
2  S  22^,  etc.).  Hdsid  seems  to  be  governed  in  its 
primary  meaning  by  that  of  hesed  ( = '  loving-kind- 
ness'), and  to  mean  '  one  who  is  the  object  of  God's 
loving-kindness.' 

'  In  its  priniarj'  sense  the  word  implies  no  moral  praise  or 
merit ;  but  it  came,  not  unnaturally,  to  be  connected  with  the 
idea  of  clwued  as  "lovin>,'-kindiies8"  between  man  and  man,  and 
to  be  used  of  the  character  which  reflected  that  love  of  which 
it  was  itself  the  object ;  and  finally  was  applied  even  to  God 
Himself '  (A.  F.  Kirkpatrick,/'iia/7/w,  Cambridge,  1902,Appendix, 
note  I.,  p.  835  f.). 

6(j-(os  is  applied  to  God  only  in  Rev  15^  16'  in  the 
NT.  It  IS  again  applied  to  Jesus  in  He  7'-*  (dpxiepevt 
Saios  (S/ca/cos),  wliere  the  root  distinction  between 
Sffios  and  dyios  becomes  apparent.  The  writer  is 
speaking  of  Christ's  moral  htness  to  be  our  High 
Priest,  and  therefore  lays  stress  on  the  fact  that 
He  is  bffios,  as  exhibiting  a  perfect  filial  reverence 
and  devotion  to  His  Father's  will,  Scriot  here  is 
the  summary,  and  also  indicates  the  common  source 
of  those  inward  qualities  that  constituted  the  '  holy ' 
character  of  Jesus.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that 
Strioy  is  conjoined  with  dlKaios  (oo-iirijy  with  SiKaioavvyj 
in  Lk  P* ;  balus  with  5t/caiwy  in  1  Th  2'")  in  most  of 
the  instances  of  its  use  in  the  NT.  This  is  also 
frequently  the  case  in  classical  usage.  The  central 
idea  in  both  6aios  and  5lKa.io%  is  conduct  sanctioned 
by  Divine  Law ;  and  6(noi  seems  to  express  tlie 
God  ward,  Siratosthe  manward,  side  of  such  conduct. 
It  is  perplexing  to  find  that  in  classical  usage  o<rio5  came  to 
mean  also  '  profane,'  but  this  is  accounted  for  if  we  remember 
that  a  '  profane '  place  is  one  that  may  be  trodden  by  all  without 
doing  violence  to  the  majesty  of  the  god;  'profane' conduct, 
i.e.,  js  conduct  allowed  by  the  god.  Of  the  latter  usage  there  is 
no  trace  in  the  NT.  The  word  used  is  always  /3<'/St)Xos. 
li<no%,  therefore,  comes  to  mean  '  holy,'  approaching 
much  more  nearly  to  our  use  of  the  word  in  English. 
In  all  the  uses  of  the  word  in  the  NT,  even  in  the 
semi-technical  applications  to  Messiah  quoted  from 
Acts,  tlie  reference  is  to  moral  conduct,  considered 
as  fitness  for  the  service  of  God  (cf.  1  Ti  2*).  (For 
the  Greek  conception  of  6aios  see  art.  '  Holiness 
[GTQQ\iymERE.) 

In  Ro  I*  St.  Paul  says  that  Jesus  was  *  designated 
(almost  =  ' installed,'  boKrOivTo^)  Son  of  Goof  with 
power  according  to  tlie  Spirit  of  holiness  (Kara, 
vvevfia  dyiucr6vr]s)  by  a  resurrection  of  tlie  dead.' 
irffOfia  dyiua-vvrji  cannot  here  be  merely  an  equiva- 
lent of  '  Holy  Spirit '  (but  see  Feine,  Nctitcst. 
Theologie,  pp.  346  t.,  452).  The  expression  '  charac- 
terises Christ  ethically,  as  Kara  ffdpKo.  (v.^*)  does 
physically'  (Denney,  EGT  ii.  586).  It  is  along 
the  lines  of  this  clearly  implied  distinction  between 
wvev/xa  and  crdp^  that  the  meaning  must  be  found. 
There  is,  however,  here  no  accurate  and  definite 
theological  distinction  between  tlie  Divine  and  the 
human  nature  of  Jesus.  St.  Paul  is  thinking  of 
the  complete  Personality  of  Jesus  (as  also  wlien 
he  says  i>reviously  Kara  ffdpKa),  and  he  means  tlie 
human  Trvevfia  (as  the  human  <rd/)f)  of  Jesus,  the 
former  distins:uished  by  a  unique  '  holiness '  (cf. 
He  2'"  4'").  This  '  holiness,'  as  always,  consists  in 
comi)lete  and  unswerving  consecration  to  (Jod,  and 
is  manifested  in  all  those  qualities  that  <'on.stitutc(l 
tlie  Personality  of  Jesus.     The  Resurrection  of 


HOLINESS,  PtTEITV 


HOLIKESS,  PUEITY 


569 


Jesus  is  the  sip^al  acknowledgment  by  God  of  the 
fact.  The  idea  is  part  of  a  Messianic  apologetic 
against  current  Jewish  notions.  The  holiness  of 
Jesus  is  His  complete  response  to  the  choice  of  God 
in  sending  His  Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  men,  and 
evokes  an  equivalent  response  on  the  part  of  God 
in  the  miracle  of  the  Resurrection.  It  is  the  holi- 
ness of  men,  as  constituting  an  indestructible  re- 
lationship with  God,  that  is  the  basis  of  the  flicker- 
ing hope  of  immortality  in  the  sense  of  an  endless  life 
with  God  that  we  find  here  and  there  in  the  OT. 
Men  have  committed  themselves  to  Him,  with  all 
that  the  step  involves  for  conduct,  and  the  promise 
of  the  future  rests  on  His  faithfiilness  and  power 
(cf.  Ps  73'',  where  'sanctuary'  is  really  'the  holy 
things  of  God '  or  '  the  ultimate  deeds  of  God  in 
the  full  character  of  His  holiness'  [G.  A.  Smith, 
Modem  Criticism  and  the  Preaching  of  the  OT, 
London,  1901,  p.  206]).  It  is  not  without  signifi- 
cance, both  for  the  conception  of  ayiu>awn}  in  Ro  1* 
as  applied  to  Jesus  and  for  the  connexion  of  the 
Resurrection  of  Jesus  with  human  immortality, 
that  St.  Paul  here  uses  the  phrase,  strange  in  this 
connexion,  €|  dyooTdo-ews  vfKpQy,  evidently  meaning 
a  resurrection  in  which  others  will  share. 

(3)  Holy  Spirit  (see  art.  HOLY  SPIRIT). 

(4)  Holiness  applied  to  things  and  places. — The 
uses  under  this  heading  need  no  elucidation.  We 
have  d7toi'  xoKiv  (Mt  27**,  Rev  11»  21- '<») ;  ayiai 
8iadTjKri%  (Us.  V^) ;  ayiov  T6rK-ov{A.C&^)',  ayicus  ypa^xui 
(Ro  1") ;  5710$  v6fio%,  ayia  ivToKii  (Ro  7") ;  ar/iV  0*M" 
IJUTL  (2  Co  13'-) ;  a.yL(fi  6pti  (2  P  1'*) ;  0710$  raos 
(1  Co  3'").  In  one  or  two  of  these  {e.g.  2  P  1'^)  we 
seem  to  see  the  word  assuming  a  formal  or  tradi- 
tional sense.  This  usage  is  much  more  common 
in  the  OT  than  in  the  NT.  Over  these  things 
and  places,  as  specially  related  to  the  redemptive 
economy  of  God,  God  is  represented  as  [exercising 
a  watchful  care.  They  '  belong '  to  Him,  as  also  do 
His  '  saints '  (see  art.  Satn'T). 

(5)  Holiness  as  applied  to  7nen.—A  large  part  of 
what  is  appropriate  to  this  heading  will  be  found 
under  the  article  SAI^fT.  This  is  a  very  common 
term,  especially  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul, 
Hebrews,  and  Revelation,  for  the  ordinary  member 
of  the  Christian  community.  The  'saints'  are 
those  'consecrated'  to  the  sei^-ice  of  God.  The 
word  does  not  imply  necessarily  perfection  of  moral 
character,  but  it  does  imply,  and  is  used  frequently 
to  enforce  the  teaching,  that  those  that  are  '  holy ' 
in  this  sense  must  become  daily  more  fitted,  morally 
and  spirituallv,  for  the  service  to  which  they  are 
committed  (Ro  G''-  '*•  -,  1  P  1«-  iS). 

The  usage  of  the  word  07401  as  applied  to  men 
may  be  expected  to  be  governed  by  the  idea,  applic- 
able also  to  things  and  places,  that  what  is  related 
to  God  or  is  used  in  His  service  is  itself  'holy.' 
Accordingly  we  find  such  usages  as  0710*  irpo<fnjTai 
(Lk  1™,  Ac  3-',  2  P  3-) ;  07101'$  dro<rr6\ovs  (Eph  3«) ; 
0710*  7iTar«rej  (1  P  3').  All  these  are  so  spoken  of, 
primarily,  as  those  who  have  been  or  are  the  special 
instruments  of  the  Divine  will  and  in  intimate 
fellowship  with  Grod  in  the  work  of  revelation  and 
redemption. 

Those  uses  of  a7«£j-«  in  the  NT  where  the  domin- 
ant application  of  the  term  seems  to  be  deliverance 
from  the  guilt  of  sin  by  the  death  of  Jesus  are  not 
included  in  this  article,  but  will  be  dealt  with  under 
Saxctificatiox.  In  the  OT  '  guilt '  or  the  sense 
of  guilt  is  the  objective  effect  of  sin  (see  art.  Six  ; 
Schultz,  OT  Theology,  ii.  306  ff.).  It  is  a  state  of 
alienation  from  God,  a  rupture  of  the  relationship 
between  God  and  man,  or  God  and  the  nation, 
which  can  be  restored  only  by  an  act  of  expiation. 
It  must  be  carefully  noted  that  where  57101  or 
ayiai'u)  is  employed  in  the  NT  in  this  sense  the 
primary  meaning  of  the  words  as='in  relationship 
with  God '  is  stiU  retained.     In  one  passage  St. 


Paul  seems  to  use  ayiaj^u  as  practically  synonymous 
with  8iKcu6o>(l  Co  6")  (cf.  Feme,  Neatest.  Theologie, 
p.  436).  The  Corinthians  are  'justified'  or  'ac- 
quitted ' '  in  the  name  of '  Jesns,  i.e.  restored  to  a 
relationship  of  love  with  God  (cf.  Eph  5*,  He  10'*-  »)• 
Christian  holiness  in  its  moral  aspect  is  expressed 
by  KaOapi^eiw  in  He  9'*  (cf.  O.  Pfleiderer,  Paiuinitm, 
Eng.  tr.,  I^ndon,  1877,  ii.  68  fi'.). 

Two  Pauline  passages  call  for  special  mention : 
Ro  ll'«  and  1  Co  7"-**  (cf.  Eph  5^).  In  both  of 
these  the  conception  is  that  the  sanctification  of 
the  part  involves  the  sanctification  of  the  whole. 
In  the  one  case  St.  Paul  is  stating  the  grounds  on 
which  he  bases  his  confidence  in  the  future  of 
Israel.  He  bases  it  upon  the  holiness  of  the 
Patriarchs  (v.")  from  whom  they  are  descended. 

'  By  the  offering  of  the  first-froits,  the  whole  mass  was  con- 
sidered to  be  consecrat«d ;  and  so  the  holiness  of  the  Patriarchs 
consecrated  the  whole  people  from  whom  they  came '  (Sanday- 
Headlam,  Romant^,  Edinbut];h,  1902,  p.  328,  m  loco).  The 
thought  is  on  the  amlogy  of  Xu  15W-21. 

In  the  second  passage,  the  Apostle  is  dealing 
with  the  problem  of  marriage  with  an  unbeliever, 
and  argues  against  dissolution  of  the  tie  in  such 
cases,  on  the  ground  that  the  Christian  partner,  as 
one  member  of  the  relationship,  thereby  '  sanctifies ' 
the  other,  in  virtue  of  the  fact  that  they  are  one. 
The  result  attaches  to  the  children  also.  We  must 
be  careful,  however,  not  to  attach  too  great  moral 
significance  to  'sanctify.'  The  thought  moves 
strictly  within  the  biblical  conception  of  holiness. 
Only  such  marriages  are  contemplated  as  have 
taken  place  before  conversion  (2  Co  6'*).  The  un- 
believing husband  is  introduced  by  union  with  the 
believing  wife  into  the  sphere  of  '  holiness.'  Holi- 
ness is  not  a  moral  but  a  religious  condition.  At 
the  same  time,  it  is  not  going  beyond  the  actual 
thought  of  the  Apostle  to  say  that  the  effect  of  his 
words  on  the  believer  would  be  to  create  a  new 
conception  and  a  new  sense  of  moral  and  spiritual 
responsibility  for  the  unbelieving  partner.  The 
word  ayidfu  is  in  this  passage,  as  it  were,  caught 
in  the  act  of  passing  from  the  ceremonial  to  the 
moral  meaning.  It  is  a  legitimate  inference  that 
the  Christian's  friends,  or  i)ossessions,  or  abilities 
— all  that  is  indissolubly  connected  with  his  person- 
ality— should  in  this  sense  be  holy.  At  the  same 
time,  the  emphasis  on  physical  descent  in  Ro  11'* 
shows  that  St.  Paul  has  not  completely  transcended 
materialistic  and  ceremonial  notions  in  the  con- 
ception of  holiness ;  and  a  similar  emphasis  may 
be  detected  in  the  passage  from  1  Corinthians. 
The  idea  is  still  present  that  holiness  can  be  trans- 
feiTcd  by  physical  contact  (cf.  Ex  29*^,  Is  65*, 
reading  'lest  I  make  thee  holy'). 

In  conclusion,  it  is  advisable  to  point  out  the 
reason  for  laying  stress  on  the  primary  conception 
of  07105  in  our  interpretation  of  the  term  in  the 
NT.  It  is  impossible  to  miss,  in  the  application  of 
ayibxrvy-ri  to  Jesus  in  Ro  1'*,  or  in  the  frequent  con- 
junction of  the  iytos  and  KaOapos  groups  of  words, 
as  in  Eph  5^'-,  He  9^*,  or  in  many  of  the  uses  of 
07101  [e.g.  1  P  1^*),  the  sense  that  perfection  of 
moral  character  is  intimately  bound  up  with  the 
term,  and  is  never  absent  in  the  thought  of  the 
NT  writers.  Wherein,  then,  consists  the  signi- 
ficance of  the  fact  that  the  piimary  meaning  of  a 
relationship  to  God  or  to  ChrLst  i«  always  dominant  ? 
Why  is  it  so  pre-eminently  a  religious  rather  than 
an  ethical  conception  ?  It  is  very  remarkable  that 
an  idea  common  to  all  ancient  religions,  where 
often  it  has  an  origin  and  expression  in  material- 
istic forms  of  thought,  should  so  persistently  re- 
appear in  the  early  Christian  religion.  Undoubtedly 
therebj-  the  content  of  the  ideal  Christian  character 
has  been  enlarged,  deei>ened,  and  purified.  Holi- 
ness comes  before  moralitj',  as  the  source  before 
the  river.     In  the  Christian  ethics,  there  is  no 


570 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


divorce  botwcen  liolinej<s  and  virtue,  nor  can  there 
be.  The  choice  of  men  by  God,  His  call,  and  His 
setting  of  them  apart  for  liis  service — an  act  some- 
times conceived  as  not  a  thing  of  time  merely,  but 
begun  in  the  far-oil"  moment  of  pre-mundane  exist- 
ence '  in  Christ  Jesus '  (Eph  H)— must  have  increased 
a  thousand-fold  tlie  grandeur  of  the  moral  motive 
presented  even  to  the  weakest,  most  despicable, 
and  most  unworthy  '  saint.'  The  thought  is  indeed 
conceived  in  the  Spirit  of  Him  who  invited  all  to 
receive  the  love  He  came  to  reveal,  and  established 
for  all  time  in  the  heart  of  His  Church  the  value 
of  each  individtial  life  before  God,  the  Father. 
Moreover,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  meant  essenti- 
ally that  all  tlie  graces  of  the  Christian  character 
had  their  origin  in  the  gift  and  grace  of  God  Him- 
self. The  initiative  lies  with  Him.  Love  is  the 
fullilling  of  the  Law.  Christian  conduct  is  not  a 
task  set  by  God,  but  a  sharing  of  the  Divine  nature  ; 
not  a  doctrine,  but  a  life. 

'  To  the  men  who  wrote  the  NT  and  to  those  for  whom  they 
wrote,  the  Spirit  was  not  a  doctrine  but  an  experience ;  they 
did  not  speak  of  beheving  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  of  receiving 
the  Holy  Spirit  when  they  beheved '  (Denney,  DCG  i.  731»). 

The  gospel  of  Christ  has  ever  been  attended  with 
the  risk  of  antinomianism,  a  risk  that  it  has  alwaj's 
been  willing  to  take  and  able  to  meet  (Gal  5'*,  Ho 
6'^).  The  present-day  phenomenon  of  '  practical ' 
Christianity,  as  distinct  from  spiritual  and  de- 
votional—  'enthusiasm  for  humanity'  —  is  really, 
in  its  fundamental  conception,  out  of  accord  with 
the  teaching  of  the  NT  on  holiness,  as  a  summary 
of  the  Christian  character.  What  characterizes 
the  NT  writers  everywhere  is  their  '  enthusiasm 
for  God,'  as  revealed  in  Jesus,  and  the  social 
conscience  is  a  manifestation  from  the  same  re- 
ligious source.  'Thy  brother  for  whom  Christ 
died'  is  the  conception  that  has  revolutionized 
social  life.  The  term  liyioi  in  its  moral  demand 
dredges  the  conscience  of  men,  and  reaches  to  the 
very  springs  of  human  conduct  (cf.  2  Co  7').  The 
same  predicate  H-yi-os  can  be  used  of  God  and  of 
man  ;  and  where  the  need  of  a  substitute  is  felt, 
none  worthier  can  be  found  than  in  the  great  say- 
ing, icF€<jde  oZv  v/jt,els  riXeioi  us  6  Tra-Trip  vfjiCov  6  ovpavioi 
T^Xetos  ecrriv  (Mt  5'**).  The  notion  of  '  Christian 
perfection'  found  in  1  Jn  (5^*,  etc.)  can  only  be 
reached  by  realizing  that  in  the  Johannine  thought 
the  or  conception  of  holiness  is  for  the  most  part 
expressed  in  more  or  less  mystical  fasliion  under 
the  influence  of  Greek  thought  as  '  union  with  God 
in  Christ,'  but  that,  notwithstanding,  the  Johannine 
'  sinlessness '  is  not  in  the  end  faultlessness.  It  is 
rather  the  inevitable  issue  in  cliaracter  of  complete 
loyalty  to  Jesus  Christ  (see  Perfect,  Perfection). 

IL  Purity. — There  are  two  groups  of  words  in 
the  NT  that  are  translated  '  pure,' '  purify,' '  purge,' 
or  'cleanse.'  In  the  ItV  'cleanse'  is  substituted 
for  '  purge '  of  the  AV  in  certain  passages,  but  is  re- 
tained in  1  Co  5^  2  Ti  2^1,  He  1^  9"-  ^.  (1)  Kaeap6s, 
KaOapii'u)  (Hellenistic  form  of  Kadalpu),  Kadapia/ids, 
KaOapdTTjs  ;  Kadaipu  ;  diaKadapl^u ;  Kddap/xa,  irepiKd- 
dapfia  ;  aK&dapTos,  dKaOapaia  ;  (2)  ayv6i,  dyvii^u,  dyvb- 
T7)s,  dyvGis ;  a7J'e/a  ;  ayvifffj-bs.  In  addition  we  liave 
(iaiTTurfios,  in  the  sense  of  '  cleansing,'  in  jSlk  7*, 
He  6*  9'" ;  pavri^u,  pafricrpLos  (tr.  '  sprinkle,'  '  sprink- 
ling'), especially  in  Hebrews  ;  eiXiKpiv-fis  ('pure'). 

The  ideas  of  purity  and  holiness  are  most  clearly 
associated  if  we  consider  their  joint  affinity  with 
the  ancient  religious  notion  of  tabu.  The  subject 
cannot  be  fully  entered  upon  here,  but  Robertson 
Smith  {RS"^,  p.  152 if.)  and  A.  S.  Peake  ('  Unclean, 
Uncleanness  in  HDB)  should  be  consulted.  It  is 
of  advantage,  for  the  sake  of  clearness  of  thought, 
to  note  that  in  ancient  religion  the  notion  of  '  un- 
cleanness '  is  primary  and  positive,  and  that  '  clean- 
ness' is  really  its  opposite,  and  tlie  negative  form. 
This  consideration  is  of  importance  as  being  really 


the  origin  of  that  negative  morality  connected  with 
Jewish  ceremonial  religion  which  Jesus  abrogated 
for  ever  (Lk  ll«-»'). 

'  In  rules  of  holiness  the  motive  is  respect  for  the  gods,  in 
rules  of  uncleanness  it  is  primarily  fear  of  an  unknown  or  hostile 
power,  though  ultimately,  as  we  see  in  the  Levitical  legislation, 
the  law  of  clean  and  unclean  may  be  brouglit  within  the  sphere 
of  divine  ordinances,  on  the  view  that  uncleanness  is  hateful  to 
Ood  and  must  be  avoided  by  all  that  have  to  do  with  Him' 
(Robertson  Smith,  Itffi,  p.  153). 

The  attitude  of  Jesus  towards  ceremonial  unclean- 
ness does  not  i)roperly  fall  within  the  scope  of  this 
article  (see  artt.  '  Purification,'  '  Purity '  in  DCG 
ii.).  The  scribes,  by  an  elaborate  system  of  casu- 
istry, laid  down  minute  regulations  and  interpreta- 
tions of  the  ceremonial  laws  of  purity  ;  and  these 
dominated  the  whole  religion  of  Judaism  in  our 
Lord's  day.  They  became  a  grievous  burden,  under 
which  men  became  'weary  and  heavy-laden.'  The 
gracious  invitation  of  Mt  11'-*  is  also  the  herald  of 
a  great  religious  revolution,  and  it  is  in  connexion 
with  the  ceremonial  requirements  connected  with 
hand-washing  tiiat  Jesus  enunciates  tlie  great  law, 
repealing  all  the  Levitical  rules  as  to  unclean  meats 
(Mk  V'^,  Mt  15*'''").  No  longer  ceremonial,  but  only 
moral,  defilement  is  possible. 

As  regards  the  practice  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
the  incident  of  Ac  10*"^®  is  instructive.  We  may 
be  certain  that  St.  Peter  was  not  the  only  one  who 
was  '  much  perplexed  within  liimself '  as  to  the  full 
scope  of  Jesus'  principle  that  the  real  seat  of  defile- 
ment is  within.  The  Apostolic  Decree  of  Ac  15" 
was  essentially  a  concession  to  Jewish  prejudices, 
but  at  the  same  time  was  no  doubt  actuated  by  the 
spirit  of  Christian  love,  which  forbids  one's  doing 
violence  to  the  conscience  of  a  brother,  merely  for 
the  purpose  of  asserting  an  abstract  and  selfish 
liberty  (1  Co  S^^-  lO^^ff-).  It  has  to  be  borne  in 
mind  :  (1)  that  religious  scruples  are  to  be  respected 
(Mk  1*») ;  (2)  that  when,  for  example,  St.  Paul  be- 
came a  Jew  to  the  Jews,  and  submitted  to  a  rite  of 
purification  (Ac  2P^),  he  did  so  all  the  more  easily 
that  he  himself  did  not  cease  to  be  a  Jew  (see  art. 
Fast).  The  instances  of  obedience  to  the  Jewish 
ceremonial  Law  in  the  NT  are  not  entirely  to  be 
explained  by  a  theory  of  deliberate  and  conscious 
concession  or  adaptation. 

The  conception  of  purity,  however,  in  the  NT 
(as  in  the  prophetic  teaching  of  the  OT)  is  entirely 
ethical.  If  we  are  to  make  any  distinction  between 
ayvbi  and  Ka6ap6s,  it  will  be  found  in  the  direction 
of  the  distinction  laid  down  in  Westcott's  comment 
on  1  Jn  3"  (Ep.  of  St.  John,  London,  1883,  p.  98) : 
dyi/ds  connotes  the  feeling,  and  KaOapdi  the  state. 
dyv6$  implies  a  certain  inward  shrinking  from  pollu- 
tion and  is  applied  to  Jesus,  while  Kadap6s  ex- 
presses simply  the  fact  of  cleanness  (cf.  HDB,  art. 
'Purity').  In  the  LXX  d7J'6s  and  Kadap6s  are 
used  indiscriminately  to  translate  Heb.  ttlhur  (lit. 
'brightness');  KaOap6s  occasionally  for  bOr  (lit. 
'  separate ').  d7>'6s  (as  also  ayvdrris)  is  always  ethical 
in  meaning  ;  ayvlii'u  has  a  ceremonial  sense  in  Jn 
U"*,  Ac  21--«-  ^^  24>»  ;  ayvda='  chastity '  in  1  Ti  4"  5". 
Ka9ap6s  and  its  cognates  vary  in  meaning  between 
the  ceremonial  and  the  ethical.  In  such  a  passage 
as  Jn  15^  we  see  the  word  in  process  of  passing 
from  the  ceremonial  to  the  ethical  meaning. 

The  word  eiXt/cptj-^s  (Ph  1",  2  P  3')  and  its  noun 
elXiKpivda  (1  Co  5*,  2  Co  1'^  2")  are  worthy  of  special 
treatment.  In  the  instance  quoted  from  2  Peter,  it 
is  to  be  suspected  tliat  the  usage  of  the  writer  is 
not  very  accurate.  He  is  fond  of  '  bookish '  words. 
The  etymology  is  very  doubtful,  but  the  sense  is 
abundantly  clear.  In  Ph  1'"  the  mind  that  is  eAj- 
Kpivi]%  is  enabled  doKifidi^eiv  t4  diafpipovra  ('  to  approve 
the  things  that  are  excellent,'  KV  ;  cf.  Ro  2'*). 
Bengel's  note  is  '  non  modo  prae  malis  bona  sed  in 
bonis  optima.'  There  is  a  type  of  character  which 
may  hold  fast  the  good,  anu  miss  the  best  (cf.  our 


HOLINESS,  PURITY 


HOLY  DAY 


571 


Lord's  Parables  of  the  Treasure  hid  in  the  Field, 
and  the  Pearl  of  Great  Price).  The  character  de- 
scribed possesses  such  clear  moral  perception  that 
it  is  enabled  to  welcome  and  understand  and  love 
the  '  highest '  when  it  sees  it.  The  goal  and  ulti- 
mate standard  of  human  conduct  is  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ — '  the  day  of  Christ,'  as  the  Philippian 
passage  has  it.  In  Plato,  Phctdo,  81  B,  C,  the  ypvxri 
(iXiKpivris  is  contrasted  with  the  ^vxv  nf/juaff/xivri  Kai 
oLKadapTo^,  stained  and  polluted  by  its  connexion 
with  the  body.  The  use  of  etXtx/wi^s  in  the  NT  is 
an  example  ot  the  way  in  which  a  word  is  ennobled 
and  enriched  by  being  taken  over  into  Cliristian 
thought.  The  Orphic  doctrine  of  the  defilement 
of  the  spirit  by  contact  with  the  body  (<rcD/ia  ffijua — 
the  body  the  prison-house  of  tlie  soul  *),  elaborated 
by-Plato,  is  cast  aside,  and  the  great  result  of  pure 
ethical  Wsion  is  attained  through  the  discipline  and 
control  of  the  passions.  The  meaning  seems  to  be 
that  form  of  ethical  purity  which  is  expressed  in  a 
mind  uncontaminated  and  unwarped  by  sensual  or 
sordid  passion.  Clearly  St.  Paul  uses  it  in  this  sense 
in  2  Co  1*-  and  2'".  His  motives  are  unmixed  (cf. 
the  phrase  'the  unleavened  bread  of  e[\iKpivelai'  in 
1  Co  5^).  All  that  he  has  done,  or  is  doing,  is  worthy 
to  be  seen  as  in  an  atmosphere  of  pellucid  clearness, 
(y  ayi&rrp-i  /cot  eikiKpiveitf.  Toy  0eod,  ovk  iv  aoifiiq,  aapKiK^ 
dXX'  iv  xap'"  Oeov.  The  purity  of  which  he  speaks 
must  be  regarded  as  a  gift  of  God.  It  is  remark- 
able that  in  Phcedo  81  A  the  soul  that  is  eiXiKpiy-^s  is 
compared  with  the  experience  by  the  initiated  of 
the  Di\-ine  Vision.  In  any  case,  the  emphasis  is  on 
the  comprehensive  ethical  quality  of  purity,  in  the 
sense  of  'sincerity'  or  'reality,'  which  plays  such 
a  dominant  part  in  the  Pauline  ethics  (2  Co  13^ ; 
cf.  Weinel,  Biblische  Theologie  des  iVT,  p.  349  f.). 
(For  the  Stoic  conception  of  elkiKpivela  cf.  Posidonius, 
ap.  Sext.  Emp.  adv.  Math,  ix,  71-4 ;  Cicero,  T%isc. 
Disp.  i.  40,  42,  43 ;  and  E.  Bevan,  Stoics  and 
Sceptics,  Oxford,  1913,  pp.  107-8.) 

pajrrifffids  {pami^ui  •  paLvdi  in  classical  Greek)  is 
translated  'sprinkling'  in  the  EV.  It  is  applied 
to  the  cleansing  influence  of  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus 
on  the  human  conscience  (He  9^  -i  10^,  1  P  l^).  It 
is  frequently  used  in  conjunction  with  at/xa.  Its 
use  can  be  understood  only  if  we  remember  that 
'  in  the  consciousness  of  the  pious  Israelite,  sin, 
guilt,  and  punishment  are  ideas  so  directly  con- 
nected that  the  words  for  them  are  interchangeable' 
(Schultz,  OT  Theology,  ii.  306).  Guilt  is  a  state  of 
impurity  which  manifests  itself  in  a  consciousness 
of  alienation  from  God,  and  antagonism  to  the 
Divine  Law,  and  it  is  from  the  sense  of  guilt  that 
the  blood  of  Jesus  is  said  to  ' sprinkle'  or  '  cleanse ' 
men.  We  may  also  compare  He  12"^,  where  'a 
blood  of  sprinkling'  is  spoken  of  as  'speaking 
better  things  than  that  of  Abel.'  The  blood  of 
Abel  cried  for  vengeance  (Gn  4^*) ;  the  life-blood 
of  Jesus  is  a  more  powerful  appeal  than  the  mere 
martyr  blood.  ^Ve  shall  seek  in  vain  for  any  theo- 
retical principle,  on  the  basis  of  which  the  NT 
writers — especially  the  writer  of  Hebrews — apply 
the  symbolism  of  the  OT  sacrificial  system  to  the 
Death  of  Jesus.  The  situation  is  simply  that  w  hat 
was  experienced  in  the  worship  of  the  OT  was  ! 
experienced  in  full  and  satisfjing  reality  in  the  ' 
conscience  of  the  NT  believer.  The  probabUitj-  is  I 
that  no  principle  suggested  itself  or  Avas  felt  to  be 
needed  (cf.  A.  B.  Davidson,  Hebreus,  p.  176  fF.).  ! 
This  fact  suggests  a  profound   application  to  the 


ft6s  is  the  removal  of  the  obstacle  to  taking  a  real  part 
in  the  religious  services  of  the  sanctuarj-  (Nu  19). 
In  the  NT  the  obstacle  is  conceived  as  a  guilty  con- 
science, and  the  profundity  of  the  NT  conception 
consists  in  the  fact  that  a  guilty  conscience  is 
thought  of  as  an  obstacle  to  the  service  of  God  in 
the  fullest  ethical  sense.  It  is  a  hindrance  arising 
no  longer  in  the  external  region  of  bodily  defile- 
ment, but  in  the  inner  sphere  of  a  man's  own  con- 
sciousness. Here  we  have  another  link  connecting 
the  ideas  of  '  purity '  and  '  holiness '  (cf .  also  Pflei- 
derer,  Paulinism,  iL  66  ff.,  and  art.  Sanctifica- 

TION). 

LiTKiATURZ.— The  literature  cited  in  the  article ;  the  Commen- 
taries on  the  various  passages;  XT  Theologies  ot  H.  J.  Holtz- 
mann  C^^bingen,  1911)  uid  P.  Peine  (Leipag,  1<J10>;  H. 
Weinel,  Biblitehe  Tkedogie  des  XT,  Tnbingen,  1911 ;  artt.  in 
DCG,  BDB,  and  ERB.  More  practical  works :  F.  W.  Robert- 
son, S^rmofU,  3rd  ser.,  London,  1876,  p.  122  ff. ;  E.  H.  Askwith, 
The  Christian  Coneefiion  of  Holiness,  do.  1900 ;  G.  A.  Smith, 
Isaiah,  do.  188&-90,  L  63ff. ;  J.  H.  Jowett,  The  Epistles  of  St. 
Peter,  do.  1905,  p.  45  ff. ;  Amiel's  Journal,  tr.  Urs.  Humphry 
Ward,  do.  1891,  pp.  138,  207 ;  J.  R.  Seeley,  Eeee  Homo,  do.,  ed. 
1895,  p.  358ff. ;  A.  C  McGifiert,  ChristianUy  in  the  ApottoKe 
Age,  Edinborgh,  1897,  p.  508  ff. ;  A.  Madaren,  Sermons  preaithei 
in  Manchester,  2nd.  ser.a,  London,  1S73,  p.  112  ff. 

R.  H.  Strachan. 

HOLT  DAY. — The  term  was  employed  in  the 
Jewish  Law  to  denote  a  day  set  apart  for  the 
service  of  God.  Especially  is  it  used  of  the  Sabbath. 
It  might  be  a  day  on  which  certain  restrictions 
were  laid  on  individual  liberty.  The  scope  of  this 
article  is  confined  to  the  attitude  adopted  by  the 
Apostolic  Church  towards  the  Jewish  '  holy  days.' 
The  subject  is  really  part  of  a  much  larger  one — 
the  question  of  its  attitude  towards  the  Jewish 
Law.  Jesus,  while  completely  abrogating  the 
ceremonial  Law  (see  art.  HoLDiESS),  yet  attended 
JeAvish  feasts ;  and  St.  Patil,  notwithstanding  his 
attitude  towards  the  Jewish  Law,  is  represented 
in  Ac  20^®  as  hastening  his  sea-journey,  in  order 
to  be  at  Jerusalem  for  the  day  of  Pentecost. 

To  discuss  the  whole  question  of  the  Sabbath  in 
relation  to  the  Apostolic  Church  would  be  to  trans- 
gress the  limits  of  this  article,  but  the  position  that 
must  in  general  be  adopted  is  that  there  is  no  trace 
in  the  NT  of  an  arbitrary  and  conscious  substitu- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Day  for  the  Jewish  Sabbath. 
The  process  of  early  Christian  thought  in  this 
connexion,  as  in  connexion  with  hoh*  days  in 
general,  was  really  determined  not  by  enactment, 
but  by  the  action  of  the  great  guiding  principles 
of  spiritual  freedom  and  brotherly  love.  Indeed, 
the  original  motive  of  the  institution  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath,  before  its  observance  was  overlaid  with 
minute  Rabbinical  details,  was  not  so  much  that 
the  Israelite  should  rest  himself,  as  that  he  should 
give  others  rest.  The  life  and  work,  the  example 
and  precept,  and  above  all  the  Resurrection  of 
Jesus,  implied  the  complete  abrogation  of  the 
Mosaic  dispensatton  ;  but  as  that  dispensation  was 
still  pait  of  the  personal  environment,  and  eventu- 
ally bound  up  Avith  the  personal  religion  of  indi- 
vidual Christians — both  Jew  and  Gentile — for  many 
generations,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  its  cogency 
would  at  once  cease  to  be  felt.  '  The  dead  leaves 
of  Judaism  fell  off  gradually,  they  were  not  rudely 
torn  oil'  by  man'  (HDB  iiL  139^).     It  is  only  by 


keeping  the  principle  laid  down  by  Jesus  Himself 
in  Lk  5®  fully  in  view  that  the  relationship  of  the 
Apostolic  Church  to  holy  days  in  general,  and  to 
the  Sabbath  in  particular,  can  be  understood.  As 
vnR  be  seen,  the  determining  factor  in  the  gradual 
question  of  religious  unity  to-day,  esiiecially  in  [  displacement  of  the  Sabbath  by  the  Lord's  Day,  in 
r>nnTit.vinn   wifh  caoT^onionf ^   o,,ri    r^^^^irc,      T^  i^\,w.     ^jjg  Christian  Church,  determined  also  the  general 

attitude  to  all  holy  days.  That  factor  was  the 
Resurrection  of  Jesus,  the  experience  of  the  New- 
Creation,  and  the  inevitable  sense  of  victory  over 
all  that  would  fetter  Christian  freedom  (see  further, 
art.  Sabbath). 
Bearing  in  mind  what  has  been  said,  we  are  not 


region,  emphasis  on  the  necessity  of  principles 
tends  to  disimion,  on  common  experience  to  real 
and  fundamental  unity.  In  both  OT  and  NT 
thought  the  '  cleansing'  that  is  denoted  by  parrtcr- 

*  Cf.  J.  Adam,  The  Religious  Teachers  qf  Greece,  Edinburgh, 
1908,  p.  96  ff. 


572 


HOLY  DAY 


HOLY  DAY 


sui'prised  to  discover  a  certain  amount  of  com- 
promise, wherever  the  Apostolic  Church  had  to 
give  conscious  expression  to  its  views  and  to  give 
guidance  to  its  members  on  the  question  of  tlie 
observance  of  holy  days.  The  Apostolic  Decree  of 
Ac  15'*"^'  has  only  a  very  general  bearing  on  our 
particular  subject,  btit  the  matters  with  wliich  it 
deals — the  proolems  of  meals  and  heathen  religious 
practices — are  closely  connected.  We  must  also 
remember  that  as  Christianity  in  the  course  of  its 
missionary  expansion  came  in  contact  with  Hellen- 
istic Judaism,  the  Pagan  religious  spirit,  with  its 
insistence  on  the  observance  of  heathen  festivals, 
would  encourage  a  return  to  and  an  emphasis  upon 
'  holy  days.'  There  are  three  [jass.ages  in  St.  Paul's 
writings  tliat  may  be  adduced  in  illustration. 

1.  Gal  4^"*. — '  Ye  observe  days,  and  months,  and 
seasons,  and  years.'  St.  Paul  is  really  combating 
the  influence  of  those  who  were  making  the 
attempt  to  judaize,  insisting  that  submission  to 
Jewish  rites  was  necessary  for  salvation,  and  dis- 
crediting the  freedom  of  the  Pauline  gospel  as 
antinomianism.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  apparent 
from  the  context  that  the  Galatians  had,  no  doubt 
through  the  influence  of  Pagan  festivals,  laid  great 
stress  on  the  observance  of  these  days  as  connected 
with  deliverance  from  the  power  of  the  aToixela, 
which  are  undoubtedly  intermediate  beings,  con- 
nected with  the  gTowth  of  angelology  in  later 
Judaism,  and  readily  identified  by  the  Galatians 
with  heathen  demonic  powers,  in  which  they  once 
believed  (cf.  A.  S.  Peake,  EGT,  'Colosaians,' 
London,  1903,  p.  522  f.;  following  F.  Snitta,  Dcr 
zweite  Brief  des  Petrus  imd  der  Brief  dcs  Judas, 
Halle,  1885,  p.  263 f.).  They  were  in  bondage  to 
them  which  by  nature  are  'no  gods'  (v.^).  Such 
observances  would  destroy  the  spirit  of  sonship 
(v."),  the  privilege  of  immediate  access  to  the 
Father,  wliich  constituted  the  gospel  he  had 
preached  to  them.  Accordingly  we  may  conjecture 
that,  apart  from  the  demand  for  circumcision,  St. 
Paul  is  not  here  condemning  the  observance  of  holy 
days  as  such,  but  only  as  leading,  by  way  of  a 
revived  Judaism,  back  to  Paganism.  The  Gala- 
tians are  accused  not  so  much  of  wickedness,  as  of 
'foolishness'  [a.v6r]Toi  YaKirai,  3^),  or  want  of  judg- 
ment. No  doubt  it  was  really  moral  earnestness 
that  led  them  astray.  To  follow  the  definite  moral 
precepts  of  Judaism,  taken  over  into  Christianity, 
impressed  them  as  a  safer  course  than  to  venture 
on  the  broad  sea  of  Christian  freedom  and  the 
guidance  of  the  Spirit. 

2.  Ro  145-^. — The  situation  in  Rome  was  some- 
what difl'erent.  The  reference  here  to  the  observ- 
ance of  'days'  is  connected  with  the  question  of 
the  responsibility  of  the  strong  for  the  conscience 
of  the  weak  (v.^).  The  weak  in  faith  are  those 
who  have  an  inadequate  grasp  of  the  great  principle 
of  salvation  by  faith  in  Christ.  They  are  the 
'  scrupulous '  in  conscience,  who,  like  the  Galatians, 
are  afraid  to  be  guided  except  by  definite  legal 
enactments.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  St.  Paul 
does  not  call  the  weak  brother  aaOivr)^,  but  speaks 
of  Tov  do-flevowra  = ' one  who  may  become  strong' 
(F.  Godet,  Com.  on  Romans,  Eng.  tr,,  Edinburgh, 
1881-82,  ii.  329).  He  is  one  whose  conscience  lias 
to  be  considered,  but  within  limits,  as  the  rebuke 
to  his  censoriousness  in  v.*  shows.  The  days  men- 
tioned are  not  necessarily  Sabbath  days,  but  may 
be  any  lioly  day — a  fast  or  a  feast.  It  is  held 
by  some  (E.  von  Dobschiitz,  Christian  Life  in  the 
Primitive  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1904,  p.  126; 
J.  Denney,  EGT,  '  llomans,'  1900,  p.  702)  that  St. 
Paul  has  in  view  a  definite  sect  of  vegetarians.  If 
that  be  so,  the  days  in  »iuestion  would  be  days  on 
which  flesh  might  or  might  not  be  eaten,  while  in 
some  cases  complete  abstinence  from  flesh  might 
be  demanded.     In  any  case,  it  is  significant  that 


'eating'  is  closely  conjoined  with  the  observance 
of  the  '  day ' ;  and  whether  the  day  were  feast  or 
fast  or  Sabbath,  the  principles  inculcated  by  St. 
I'aul  apply  equally  well.  The  day  in  itself,  like 
the  eating,  is  indiilerent,  and  therefore  the  Chris- 
tian is  free  to  observe  it  or  not  according  as  the 
spirit  of  Christian  brotherhood  and  a  regard  for 
the  unity  and  peace  of  the  Church  may  dictate. 
By  inditt'erence  to  external  observances,  a  '  free ' 
Christian  may  injure  the  conscience  of  another. 
At  the  same  time  conduct  here,  as  always,  is  deter- 
mined ultimately  not  by  direct  reference  to  the 
'weak'  brother,  but  by  reference  to  Christ.  No 
man  liveth  to  himself,  but '  to  the  Lord'  (v.'').  It 
is  His  interest  alone  that  is  to  be  considered,  and 
the  weak  brother  is  to  be  considered  as  one  '  for 
whom  Christ  died.'  St.  Paul,  in  his  impartial 
fashion  in  dealing  with  all  such  questions,  rather 
creates  an  atmosphere  in  which  the  elements  for 
decision  are  clearly  seen  than  lays  down  any  legis- 
lative enactment.  The  authority  of  the  Church  is 
neither  more  nor  less  than  the  authority  of  Jesus, 
interpreted  by  the  individual  conscience,  in  close 
Christian  relationship  to  those  Avho  constitute  the 
Church  a  body  of  believers.  There  is  nothing 
whatever  that  is  purely  legal  and  statutory  in  the 
Christian  religion.     'AH  shall   stand  Ijefore  the 

i"udgment-seat  of  God,'  and  St.  Paul  asks  the 
lomans  to  remember  that  both  those  who  observe 
the  *  days,'  and  those  who  do  not,  are  striving  for 
the  same  end.  They  both  are  regarding  the  day 
'to  the  Lord,'  or  with  His  interests  in  view  (v.^). 

The  particular  difficulty  in  Rome  was  probably  of  Essene 
origin,  .ikin  to  that  in  Colossaj  (B.  Weiss,  Introd.  to  XT,  Eng. 
tr.,  London,  18S7-88,  i.  330  ;  Denney,  loe.  eit.).  A.  C.  McGiffert 
{Apostolic  Age,  Edinburgh,  1897,  p.  3C8)  contends  that  it  was 
due  to  some  form  of  Alexandrian  Judaism.  Certainly  the 
difficulty  is  not  occasioned  by  Pharisaic  Legalists,  as  in  Galatia. 

3.  Col  2^5  (in  the  AV  eoprTjs  of  this  verse  is 
translated  '  holyday,'  the  only  instance  of  the  word 
in  the  EV  of  the  NT).  The  argument  is  practically 
the  same  as  in  Ro  14'.  '  Let  no  man  judge  you  on 
tlie  basis  of  eating  and  drinking,  or  in  the  matter 
of  a  feast  or  a  new  moon  or  a  Sabbath.'  St.  Paul 
means  that  such  ground  is  inadequate  for  moral 
judgment  of  a  man.  ev  fiipei  fopriji,  kt\.  cannot  be 
translated  'in  the  partial  observance  of  (Chrysos- 
tom).  As  regards  the  character  of  the  movement 
which  is  opposed  by  St.  Paul,  and  finds  its  ex- 
pression in  the  legal  observance  of  holy  days,  it 
seems  to  have  been  a  theosophy,  consisting  of  a 
blend  of  Judaism  with  some  form  of  syncretistic 
religion.  It  is  impossible  to  identify  the  foreign 
element  exclusively  with  Essenism  or  Mithraism. 
It  is  simply  the  product  of  that  '  Hellenism'  which 
everywhere  confronted  the  Christian  missionary 
(cf.  E.  Bevan,  Stoics  and  Sceptics,  Oxford,  1913, 
cli.  iii.).  The  'days'  were  evidently  connected 
with  the  worship  of  aroixfia  or  '  intermediate 
beings'  (see  above),  whose  functions  were  '  not  only 
creative  but  also  providential,  in  a  sense,  resembling 
those  of  the  saints  in  Roman  Catholicism '  (Moflatt, 
LNT,  Edinburgh,  1911,  p.  152).  One  result  seems 
to  have  been  asceticism  (2-''-)-  The  material  was 
contrasted  unfavourably  witli  the  spiritual,  and 
the  body  was  considered  as  the  tomb  of  the  soul 
(the  ultimate  issue  of  the  o-w/ia  ffrjua  of  Plato). 
Moreover,  this  insistence  on  'days'  carried  with  it 
an  emphasis  on  individual  speculative  anil  mystical 
attainments  which  destroyed  the  universality  of 
the  gospel  (3"). 

Tlie  aim  of  this  article  has  been  to  indicate  the 
complexity  of  the  movement  in  the  Aiwstolic  Churcli 
that  issued  in  the  gradual  weaning  of  Christianity, 
as  interpreted  by  St.  Paul,  and  those  who  adhered 
to  liim,  from  the  observance  of  Jewish  holy  days. 
Missionary  activity  made  plain  in  experience  that 
the  multiplied  observance  of  'days,  and  months, 
and  seasons,  and  years '  as  legal  enactments  formed 


HOLY  OF  HOLIES,  HOLY  PLACE 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


573 


a  congenial  soil  on  whicli  heathen  conceptions  of 
deity  uiiglit  take  fresh  root  within  the  Christian 
Church.  The  missionary  activity  of  the  Christian 
Church  to-day  is  also  exercising  a  similar  profound 
inlluence  ou  Christian  thought.  No  one  ought  to 
pretend  that  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  so  far  as 
It  is  expressed  in  the  weekly  day  of  rest  and  worship, 
or  in  tlie  observance  of  seasons  or  sacraments,  is 
without  signiiicance  for  the  Christian  life.  It 
directs  attention  to  asfjects  of  the  Christian  faith 
that  would  otherwise  find  no  place  in  the  mechanical 
routine  of  ordinary  life  ;  yet  not  even  the  religious 
observance  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  ought  to  be 
regarded  as  legal  or  statutory.  An  act  of  faith 
was  the  source  in  which  it  originated,  and  its 
maintenance  must  be  conducted  in  the  free  atmo- 
sphere of  faith.  Many  things  are  yet  to  break 
forth  upon  the  mind  of  the  Church  from  the  Word 
of  God,  and  none  are  more  significant  than  the 
principles  relating  to  holy  days  that  were  brought 
into  being  through  the  contact  of  the  apostolic 
faith  with  contemporary  practice  and  thought.  It 
is  only  by  '  being  fully  assured  in  our  own  mind,' 
by  contracting  the  habit  of  deciding  for  ourselves 
in  such  matters,  and  at  the  same  time  by  having 
regard  to  the  mind  of  Christ,  as  expressed  in  the 
constraint  of  Christian  brotherhood,  that  true 
Christian  freedom  of  conscience  will  be  developed, 
and  that  fear,  which  so  often  manifests  itself  in 
scrupulosity,  obscurantism,  and  legalism,  will  be 
cast  out. 

Literature. — Besides  the  works  mentioned  in  the  article 
reference  may  be  made  to  J.  B.  Mozley,  L'nirersity  Sermons, 
London,  1876,  serm.  ii.  :  '  The  Pharisees ' ;  F.  W.  Robertson, 
Sermons,  3rd  ser.,  do.  1S76,  p.  246  ff. ;  J.  H.  Newman, 
Parochial  and  Plain  Sermons  (Selection,  ed.  Copeland',  do. 
1891),  p.  189  ff.  :  J.  R.  Seeley,  Ecce  Homo,  do.,  ed.  1S95,  ch.  xiii. ; 
Tracts  for  the  Timfs,  ii.  (1S34-35),  do.  1840,  no.  56 ;  J.  LL  Davies, 
The  Example  of  Chriit,  do.  1S60,  p.  350. 

R.  H.  Steachax. 
HOLY  OF  HOLIES,  HOLY  PLACE.— See  Taber- 
nacle, Temple. 

HOLY  SPIRIT.— The  community  brought  to- 
gether by  the  disciples  of  Jesus  was  sustained  by 
the  conviction  that  it  possessed  the  Spirit  of  God, 
and  in  that  possession  it  saw  the  peculiar  feature 
which  distinguished  its  members  alike  from  the 
Greeks  and  from  the  Jews.  This  is  a  fact  of 
fundamental  importance  for  the  entire  subsequent 
history  of  Christianity. 

I.  The  presuppositioss  of  the  convic- 
tion. —  1.  The  Jewish  doctrine  of  Scriptope  as 
the  sole  medium  of  the  Spirit. — The  term  '  Holy 
Spirit,'  r'pri  nn,  was  coined  by  the  theology  of 
the  Palestinian  Synagogue.  The  adjunct  'holy' 
was  rendered  necessary  by  the  fact  that  the  word 
'  spirit '  was  also  applied  to  the  force  from  which 
emanated  man's  inward  life  generally.  The  addi- 
tion of  the  adjective  '  holy '  signifies  that  the  spirit 
so  distinguished  belongs  to  God.  The  phrase 
derives  its  content  from  what  the  prophets  say 
regarding  the  nature  of  their  prophetic  experience, 
which  they  ascribe  to  their  being  movea  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  Hence  the  tradition  of  the  Syna- 
gogue associates  the  conception  with  the  writings 
by  which  the  message  of  the  prophet  is  mediated 
to  the  community.  By  the  time  the  Church  of  the 
New  Testament  took  its  rise,  the  doctrine  of  In- 
spiration was  already  formulated  as  a  dogma,  and 
dominated  the  whole  religious  life  of  Judaism. 
The  expression  '  Holy  Spirit,'  in  its  connexion 
with  the  wTitten  word,  was  at  once  taken  over  by 
Christianity  (Mk  \2^,  Mt  22«,  Ac  l^^  28^,  He  3^  9« 
10",  1  Ti  3^  2  P  121).  The  absolute  bondage  of  the 
SjTiagogue  to  the  Scriptures  had  the  result  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  assigned  only  to  the  prophets  of 
past  times,  and  not  to  persons  then  living.  As  the 
community  now  possessed  no  prophets,  but  was 


wholly  dependent  upon  Scripture,  its  tradition 
included  the  principle  that  '  the  Holy  Spirit  had 
been  taken  away  from  it.'  But  as  the  communion 
of  God  with  His  people  had  not  Ixien  broken  oil', 
that  principle  did  not  exclude  the  possibility  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  might  be  bestowed  upon  indi- 
viduals (cf.  Lk  2^) — at  times,  namely,  when  the 
gift  of  prophecy  was  vouchsafed  to  them— or  that 
the  conduct  of  the  people  as  a  whole  might  be 
directed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (cf.  the  saying  of 
Hillel,  Tdsephtd  Plsuhim,  iv.  2).  The  actual  scope 
of  this  idea,  however,  was  circumscribed  by  the 
fact  that  the  nation's  portion  in  God  was  based 
upon  the  Law.  It  was  therefore  necessary  that  the 
individual  should  learn  God's  will  from  Scripture, 
and  practise  obedience  thereto  by  his  own  effort. 
This  excludes  the  idea  of  a  Divine  work  manifest- 
ing itself  in  the  inner  life  of  man.  Hence  even  the 
teachers  of  the  Law  abstained  from  tracing  their 
learning  to  the  action  of  the  Spirit,  and  based  their 
authority  upon  the  experience  which  they  had 
derived  from  their  knowledge  of  the  Law  and 
tradition.  When  Scripture  proved  inadequate  to 
the  clear  ascertainment  of  the  Divine  will,  recourse 
was  had  to  signs,  and  especially  to  voices  coming 
from  above.  These  facts  show  clearly  how  far  the 
primitive  Church's  belief  that  it  was  guided  by  the 
Spirit  of  Grod  transcended  the  prevailing  religious 
ideas  of  contemporary  Judaism. 

2.  The  Messiah  as  the  new  vehicle  of  the 
Spirit. — The  second  presupposition  of  the  Chris- 
tian conviction  regarding  the  Spirit  lay  in  the  fact 
that,  in  accordance  with  the  promises,  the  Messiah 
was  expected  to  be  the  vehicle  of  the  Spirit.  Since 
it  was  His  function  to  bring  perfection  to  His 
people,  the  gift  that  distinguished  the  earlier 
servants  of  God  was  His  in  a  superlative  degree. 
Accordingly  He  has  the  Spirit  '  not  by  measure ' 
(Jn  3^).  By  the  Sx^irit  He  is  one  with  God,  and  Ls 
able  to  work  the  work  of  God  in  men.  This 
principle  is  common  to  the  Messianic  hope,  the 
preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  the  witness  of 
Jesus  to  Himself,  and  the  message  of  His  disciples 
in  all  its  various  forms.  The  conviction  was  in- 
tensified by  the  culminating  events  of  the  life  of 
Jesus,  since,  as  the  Risen  One,  He  reveals  in  Him- 
self the  work  of  the  Spirit ;  the  Spirit  giveth  life. 
Then,  as  He  still  maintains  in  His  state  of  exalta- 
tion His  intercourse  with  His  disciples,  and  does 
this  in  such  a  way  that,  like  God,  He  is  present 
with  them  and  reigns  over  them,  the  Spirit  becomes 
the  medium  by  which  He  consummates  His  work. 
Thus  the  avowal  of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus 
involved  the  doctrine  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is 
effectively  operative  in  man.  The  man  whom 
Christ  rules  is  guided  by  the  Spirit,  and  he  who  is 
united  with  Christ  partakes  of  the  Spirit. 

3.  The  prophetic  idea  that  the  Spirit  would  be 
given  to  all.  —  The  conception  of  the  perfected 
community  connoted  also  the  idea — derived  from 
prophecy — that  in  it  the  Spirit  would  be  vouch- 
safed to  all.  This  idea  likewise  was  ratified  by  the 
life  of  Jesus,  inasmuch  as  He  placed  His  relation 
to  His  disciples  wholly  under  the  law  of  love. 
Between  Himself  and  them  He  established  a  per- 
fect communion,  and  thus  all  that  belonged  to 
Him  passed  over  to  them.  His  filial  relation  to 
God  made  them  children  of  God  ;  His  Word,  with 
full  authority  to  do  wonders,  was  imparted  to 
them  too ;  His  passion  called  them  to  suffering 
and  death  ;  His  risen  life  and  His  coming  dominion 
invested  them  also  with  glory.  The  perfect  charac- 
ter of  the  fellowship  which  Jesus  instituted  between 
Himself  and  His  disciples  involved  the  conviction 
that  they  likewise  should  receive  the  Spirit  of 
God,  even  as  it  had  been  imparted  to  Him.  Thus 
the  events  of  Easter  by  which  that  fellowship  was 
consummated  after  His  death  were  directly  linked 


574 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIKIT 


with  the  holief  that  now  the  disciiilcs  nl-o  had 
become  possessed  of  the  Spirit ;  tlie  bic.iili  of  tlio 
Risen  Lord  imparts  the  Spirit  to  them  (Ju  20'--). 

II.  The  coming  of  the  Spirit  to  tee 
DISCIPLES  OF  Jesus— i.  A  fact  of  historical 
experience.— In  the  primitive  eoinmnnity's  recol- 
lections of  its  beginnmgs  it  stands  out  as  a  signifi- 
cant fact  that  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  is  re<,'arded 
as  a  particular  experience,  taking  place  on  a 
particular  day,  and  associated  with  the  founding 
of  the  Church  (Ac  2).  The  doctrine  of  the  Spirit 
thus  becomes  more  than  a  theological  inference 
from  the  character  of  God  or  of  Christ,  and  does  not 
remain  a  mere  hope  derived  from  the  utterances  of 
Scripture  or  of  Jesus  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  expresses, 
for  the  religious  consciousness  of  the  primitive 
Church,  something  that  it  had  actually  experienced, 
and  it  possesses  the  certitude  of  historical  fact.  The 
type  of  tradition  given  in  Ac  2  appears  also  in 
St.  Paul,  in  the  fact,  namely,  that  he  regards  the 
sending  of  the  Spirit,  no  less  than  that  of  the  Son, 
as  a  work  of  God — as  the  work,  indeed,  by  wiiich 
the  Advent  of  the  Son  was  fully  realized  (Gal  4'*'®). 
The  same  idea  appears  in  St.  John,  who  speaks  of 
the  descent  of  the  Spirit  as  the  act  of  the  Exalted 
Christ  ( Jn  1^  14i«-  ^  W%  This  interpretation  of 
religious  history  was  fraught  with  most  important 
consequences,  inasmuch  as  it  dissociated  the  con- 
ception of  the  Spirit  from  the  subjective  religious 
states  of  the  individual.  Believers  were  now  con- 
vinced that  their  possession  of  the  Spirit  was  not 
dependent  upon  their  purely  personal  experience. 
The  message  of  the  Spirit's  presence  came  to  all 
men  as  a  historical  fact  no  less  secure  than  the 
message  of  the  Advent  of  Christ  Himself.  It  is 
true,  of  course,  that  the  individual  could  recog- 
nize the  effects  of  the  Spirit's  presence  in  his 
personal  experience,  and  he  might  accoidingly  be 
asked  whether  he  had  on  liis  part  received  the 
Spirit  (Ac  19^;  cf.  1  Co  3"),  but  his  certainty  in 
the  matter  did  not  rest  wlioUy  upon  his  inward 
condition.  Hence  the  assertion  of  the  Spirit's 
operation  still  remained  unshaken  even  when  an 
individual  or  a  community  j)roved  unsteadfast ; 
the  belief  that  they  were  partakers  of  the  Spirit 
was  safeguarded  against  every  doubt  (cf.  Gal  3- 
5"  1  Co  3^6  with  33  6*").  That  belief  flowed  directly 
from  the  Christology  of  the  primitive  Church,  and 
could  become  liable  to  doubt  only  by  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  union  between  the  community  and 
Christ. 

2,  Connexion  with  the  inauguration  of  apostolic 
work. — It  was,  again,  a  matter  of  the  utmost 
importance  for  the  religious  experience  of  the 
primitive  community  that  it  associated  the  coming 
of  the  Spirit  with  the  beginnings  of  apostolic 
labour.  The  day  of  Pentecost  was  not,  indeed, 
included  in  the  Easter  period,  though  with  the 
glorified  life  of  Jesus  was  associated  the  conviction 
that  the  Spirit  liad  now  laid  hold  of  the  disciples 
too.  But  the  occurrences  which  manifested  to  the 
disciples  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  were  distin- 
guished from  the  events  of  Easter :  tlic  latter 
perfected  the  fellowship  of  Jesus  witii  His  dis- 
ciples, while  tlie  former  inaugurated  their  a))ostolic 
work  and  laid  the  foundation  of  the  Church.  In 
the  NT  doctrine  of  the  Sjiirit  this  continues  to 
manifest  itself  in  the  fact  that  the  Spirit  is  always 
associated  witii  the  task  imposed  upon  the  Church. 
The  Spirit  equips  the  Church  to  witness  for  Jesus, 
and  endows  it  with  power  for  its  Divinely-given 
work.  The  conception  of  the  Spirit  is  not  asso- 
ciated with  the  personal  blessings  which  the 
individual  craves  for,  as,  e.g.,  with  his  progress 
in  knowledge,  his  felicity,  or  his  moral  growth  and 
perfection  ;  what  was  expected  from  the  Spirit 
was  rather  the  equipment  for  the  ellective  work 
necessary  to  the  preaching  of  Christ  and  the  insti- 


tution of  the  Church.  Hence  the  apostles  were 
regarded  as  in  a  supreme  degree  the  mediators  of 
the  Spirit  (cf.  Ac  8'^''-  19»,  1  Co  12-»,  2  Co  3«),  this 
pre-eminence  extending  also  to  such  as  were 
actively  engaged  in  die  evangelization  of  the 
nations  (I  P  l'^,  2  Ti  2«'-,  1  Ti  4'*).  In  sending 
forth  evangelists  and  in  defining  their  spheres 
of  lalx)ur  (Ac  13'-'  16"'-),  in  the  judicial  procedure  by 
which  they  withstood  sin  (Ac  5^  Jn  2(P'-),  in 
prescribing  the  moral  regulations  which  were  to 
prevail  in  the  community  (Ac  15*),  their  action 
was  at  once  appropriate  and  effective  in  virtue  of 
the  Spirit's  guidance.  But  this  did  not  involve 
any  opposition  between  them  and  the  community 
at  large,  as  the  latter  was  called  to  full  and  com- 

£lete  fellowship  with  them  as  partakers  of  the 
'ivine  grace.  Thus  the  possession  of  the  Spirit 
was  not  the  exclusive  privilege  of  an  ofiicial  class, 
but  was  granted  to  the  entire  community  entrusted 
with  the  service  of  God,  and  baptism  is  accordingly 
offered  to  all  in  view  of  the  promise  of  the  Spirit 
(Ac  2=«  19='-,  1  Co  6"). 

3.  The  Spirit  sent  by  Christ. — The  community 
believed  that  the  sender  of  the  Spirit  was  Christ 
(Ac  2*^).  Accordingly  it  sought  to  prove  the 
Messiahship  of  Jesus  by  the  fact  that  the  Spirit 
was  revealed  in  the  community  (Ac  5^- ;  cf.  art. 
Paracletk).  This  made  it  impossible  to  separate 
the  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  from  the  doctrine  of 
Christ,  or  to  regard  the  former  as  superseding  or 
transcending  the  latter.  On  the  contrary,  the 
statements  which  set  forth  the  operations  of  the 
Spuit  serve  in  reality  to  enunciate  the  presence 
and  work  of  Christ.  The  Spirit  who  animates  the 
community  is  the  Spirit  of  Christ  (Ro  8»,  2  Co  2^\ 
Ac  16'').  This  inseparable  union  between  Christ 
and  the  Spirit,  making  it  impossible  for  any  one  to 
receive  the  Spirit  except  in  personal  connexion 
with  Christ,  is  clearly  formulated  by  St.  Paul  in 
the  words:  'the  Lord  is  the  Spirit'  (2  Co  3"). 
This  point  of  view  had  two  closely  inter-related 
consequences  :  first,  that  primitive  Christian  faith 
continued  to  base  itself  upon  the  earthly  life  of 
Jesus ;  and,  secondly,  that  it  did  not  consist  merely 
of  recollections  of  tliat  life,  but  developed  into 
fellowship  with  the  Exalted  Christ.  Had  tiie 
Spirit  occupied  a  position  independent  of  Christ, 
the  primitive  faith  would  inevitably  have  acquired 
that  mystical  tendency  which  finds  the  evidences 
of  Divine  grace  exclusively  in  the  inner  life  of 
man.  But,  as  it  is  the  Spirit's  function  to  lead 
men  to  Christ,  the  message  which  makes  known 
('hrist's  life  and  death  is  the  foundation-stone  of 
the  community.  Thus  the  conviction  that  one 
was  living  in  the  Spirit  involved  no  disdain  of  the 
body,  no  opposition  to  nature  and  history  ;  on  the 
contrary,  the  sure  token  of  the  Spirit's  influence 
was  not  the  belief  which  separated  Christ,  as  the 
mere  semblance  of  a  heavenly  being,  from  nature 
and  history,  but  the  confession  that  He  had  truly 
come  in  the  flesh  (1  Jn  4^'-,  2  Jn  '').  Nor,  again, 
did  the  believer's  relation  to  Christ  consist  merely 
in  his  knowledge  of  the  Saviour's  earthly  career  ; 
and,  in  point  of  fact,  that  consciousness  of  un- 
limited fellowship  with  Christ  which  forma  one  of 
the  essential  characteristics  of  the  NT  Epistles  is 
based  upon  the  belief  that  the  earthly  work  of 
Jesus  is  still  carried  on  in  the  operations  mediated 
by  the  Spirit. 

i.  The  Spirit  imparted  to  the  community  by 
God.— The  doctrine  that  the  Siiirit  reveals  Christ 
implies  another,  viz.  that  it  is  God  who  imparts 
the  Spirit  to  the  community,  and  that  He  Himself 
dwells  with  it  in  the  Spirit.  That  theological 
type  of  Christology  according  to  which  Ciirist  is 
the  Son  wlio  is  one  with  God  in  the  sense  that  God 
works  through  Him  passes  over  into  the  doctrine 
of  the  Spirit.    The  forraulaj  which  speak  of  the 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPmiT 


575 


work  of  Christ  as  a  manifestation  of  Divine  power 
are  therefore  applied  also  to  tlie  work  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Spirit  is  conceived,  not  as  a  substitute  for  the 
action  of  God,  but  as  its  medium  ;  nor  is  it  re- 
garded as  a  power  installed  between  God  and  man ; 
its  function,  rather,  is  to  bring  to  man  the  very 
presence  of  God  Himself.  Thus  the  community 
and  its  individual  members  are  spoken  of  as  the 
Temple  of  God — as  the  place  in  which  He  dwells 
(1  Co  3'«,  2  Co  6'«,  Eph  2^,  1  Ti  3»  1  P  2»,  1  Co  6"). 
In  this  we  can  trace  tlie  root  of  the  Trinitarian 
conception  of  God.  Christ  and  the  Spirit  are 
regarded  co-ordinately  as  the  two  agents  through 
whom  the  grace  of  God  completes  its  work  in  man, 
and  through  both  the  one  will  expressive  of  the 
Divine  grace  is  realized.  Thus  the  work  of  Christ 
and  that  of  the  Spirit  are  in  complete  harmonj- 
with  each  other  and  with  the  work  of  the  Father. 
It  is  this  formulation  of  the  Trinitarian  conception 
with  which  St.  Paul  introduces  his  enumeration  of 
the  gifts  of  the  Spirit  (1  Co  12»^ ;  cf.  1  Co  13^', 
Eph  4*"*) ;  and  it  appears  also  in  the  account  of 
what  Jesus  said  to  ]Sicodemus  (Jn  3*"-'),  where  the 
sequence  is  the  new  birth  due  to  the  Spirit,  belief 
in  the  Son,  and  the  deeds  'wrought  in  God.' 
Essentially  the  same  formulation  is  found  in  the 
salutation  of  1  Peter  (1-),  and  in  a  like  sense  we 
must  interpret  the  baptismal  formula  in  Mt  28"', 
where  the  one  Name  into  which  the  nations  are  to 
be  baptized  embraces  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  as 
well  as  the  Father,  because  the  work  of  calling 
man  to  God  and  of  bringing  him  within  the  Divine 
grace  is  etiected  by  Christ  through  the  medium  of 
the  Spirit. 

It  is  supposed  by  many,  indeed,  that  in  Mt  23^9  we  have  a 
formula  from  a  later  theology,  dating  from  the  post-apostolic 
period,  and  interpolated  into  the  Gospel.  We  must  bear  in 
mind,  however,  that  the  teaching  of  Jesus  certainly  contained 
the  statement  that  He  would  work  through  the  Spirit,  and  that 
He  would  do  so  by  impvarting  the  Spirit  to  His  people.  It  is 
inconceivable  that  in  primitive  Christian  times  there  could  have 
been  a  form  of  baptism  in  which  the  Spirit  was  not  named. 
Moreover,  even  if  in  that  age  the  Gospel  still  clung  closely  to 
the  Jewish  expectation  of  the  Messiah,  dissociating  Uie  working 
of  the  Spirit  from  the  present,  and  assigning  it  wholly  to  the 
coming  dispensation — the  idea  being  that  the  Spirit  would 
raise  from  the  dead  all  who  had  been  baptized  into  Christ — yet, 
even  on  that  hj-pothesis,  the  preaching  of  Christ  must  still 
have  embraced  the  promise  of  the  Spirit. 

Of  a  formulistic  use  of  the  Trinitarian  designa- 
tion of  God  the  XT  shows  no  trace.  Thus,  when 
the  Christian  community  is  questioned  regarding 
the  nature  of  its  Deity,  it  may  give  a  complete 
answer  by  saying  that  beside  the  one  Father  it  sets 
the  one  Lord  ( 1  Co  8®) ;  and  in  baptism  it  was  only 
necessary  to  invoke  the  name  of  Christ  (Ro  6*, 
1  Co  1^',  Gal  3").  But  in  such  cases  it  is  always 
implied  that  Jesus  manifests  Himself  to  men  as 
Lord  by  acting  upon  them  through  the  Spirit  (cf. 
Ac  2»  8^«  10«  195).  Primitive  Christianity,  how- 
ever, felt  the  overt  recognition  of  the  Spirit  to 
be  of  the  utmost  importance,  because  it  saw  the 
crowning  work  of  Di\-ine  grace,  not  in  its  general 
action  upon  human  beings  through  the  invisible 
government  of  God,  or  in  its  manifestation  in  the 
earthly  work  of  Christ,  but  rather  in  its  operations 
in  man  himself — in  its  quickening  of  his  thoughts 
and  his  love,  and  in  its  enrichment  of  the  inner 
life. 

5.  The  relation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  human 
spirit. — The  relation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the 
spirit  of  man  is  not  dealt  with  separately  in  the  NT. 
The  principles  which  here  guided  the  thoughts  of 
the  apostles  sprang  directly  from  the  distinctive 
characteristics  of  Divine  action.  The  intense 
desire  to  clothe  the  knowledge  of  God  in  clear  and 
pregnant  words  never  tempted  them  to  seek  to 
solve  the  mystery  that  veils  the  creative  operations 
of  God.  Hence,  too,  they  never  tried  to  explain  how 
the  Spirit  of  God  acts  upon  the  human  spirit,  how 


it  enters  into  and  becomes  one  with  it.  St.  John, 
in  intentionally  placing  near  the  beginning  of  his 
Gospel  Christ's  reference  to  birth  from  the  Spirit 
as  an  insoluble  mystery  (Jn  3*),  is  but  adhering  to 
a  principle  whicli  the  apostles  in  their  teaching 
never  departed  from.  But  the  Divine  action  has 
the  further  characteristic  that  it  frames  its  perfect 
designs  with  absolute  certainty.  Hence  the  action 
of  the  Spirit  likewise  is  set  forth  in  unconditional 
statements.  The  Spirit  endows  man  with  no  mere 
isolated  gifts,  but  creates  him  anew.  The  Spirit 
gives  life ;  by  it  men  are  bom  of  Grod  (Jn  3*  7*, 
1  Co  15«  Tit  3*).  Man's  knowledge  is  guided  hy 
the  Spirit  in  the  way  of  perfect  truth  (1  Co  2"-  ", 
1  Jn  2**).  The  faith,  hope,  and  love  which  the 
Spirit  bestows  are  enduring  gifts  (1  Co  13").  As 
the  Spirit  makes  the  human  will  perfectly  obedient 
to  the  Divine  will,  the  entire  demand  which  is  set 
before  believers  may  be  summed  up  in  the  precept, 
•  Walk  by  the  Spirit '  (Gal  5'*).  Thus  the  operation 
of  the  Spirit  is  not  restricted  to  any  particular 
function,  as,  e.g.,  the  increase  of  knowledge,  or  the 
arousing  of  joy,  or  the  strengthening  of  the  will. 
On  the  contrary,  the  Spirit  lays  hold  upon  human 
life  in  its  entire  range,  and  brings  it  as  a  whole 
into  conformity  with  the  ideal :  it  gives  man 
power  and  knowledge,  the  word  and  the  work, 
faith  and  love,  the  ability  to  heal  the  sick,  to 
raise  the  fallen,  to  institute  and  regulate  fellow- 
ship. It  is  in  virtue  of  the  efflux  of  the  Divine 
action  out  of  the  Divine  grace  that  the  work  of 
the  Spirit  reveals  itself  in  the  endowment  which 
raises  man  to  his  true  life  and  true  autonomy. 
Thus  the  thought  of  the  Spirit  is  associated  with 
the  idea  of  freedom  (2  Co  3",  Ko  8*,  Gal  5^),  inas- 
much as  man  receives  from  the  Spirit  a  power  and 
a  law  that  are  really  his  own.  It  is  this  that  dis- 
tinguishes the  operations  of  the  Spirit  from  morbid 
processes,  which  impede  the  proper  functions  of 
the  soul.  The  mental  dLsturbances  and  the  sus- 
pension of  rational  utterance  which  may  be  con- 
joined with  experiences  wrought  by  the  Spirit  are 
not  regarded  as  the  crowning  manifestation  of  the 
Spirit.  Its  supreme  work  consists  not  in  rendering 
the  human  understanding  unfruitful,  but  in  en- 
dowing it  with  Divine  truth,  and  permeating  the 
human  will  with  Divine  love  (1  Co  W*^-,  Ko  12*  5'). 
Hence  the  apostolic  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  in- 
volved no  violation  of  human  reason,  as  would 
have  been  the  case  had  it  absolved  the  inteUectual 
processes  from  the  laws  of  thought ;  nor  did  it 
assign  a  mechanical  character  to  the  will,  as  it 
would  have  done  if  the  prompting  of  the  Spirit 
had  superseded  personal  decision.  The  Spirit  gives 
man  the  power  of  choice,  makes  his  volition  effect- 
ive, and  induces  him  to  bring  his  will  into  sub- 
jection to  the  Divine  Law.  The  thought  of  the 
Spirit  does  not  do  away  with  the  sense  of  responsi- 
bility, but  rather  intensifies  it,  and  the  Law  now 
lays  upon  the  soul  a  sterner  obligation.  As  '  the 
conscience  bears  witness  in  the  Holy  Spirit '  (Ro  9*), 
its  authority  is  inviolable.  Those  who  live  in  the 
Spirit  are  therefore  reqtiired  to  walk  after  the 
Spirit  by  submitting  to  its  guidance  (Ro  8*- ", 
Gal  5^).  Nor  does  the  Spirit  lift  one  above  the  pos- 
sibility of  falling  away.  If  man  receives  the  gifts 
of  the  Spirit  in  vain,  refusing  its  guidance,  and  in 
selfish  desire  applying  these  gifts  to  his  own  ad- 
vantage, his  sin  is  aU  the  greater  (Eph  4**,  He  6**). 
To  this  line  of  thought  attaches  itself  quite  con- 
sistently the  fact  that  the  community  suliers  no 
loss  of  'liberty  through  the  doings  of  those  who 
speak  and  act  in  the  Spirit.  The  Spirit  gives  no 
man  the  right  to  assume  despotic  power  in  the 
community.  Hence  the  injunction  not  to  quench 
the  Spirit  is  conjoined  with  the  counsel  to  test  all 
the  utterances  that  flow  from  the  Spirit  (1  Th 
5i»-«  1  Co  14»^»,  1  Jn  4»). 


576 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


As  the  government  of  God,  the  Creator,  embraces 
both  the  external  and  the  internal,  the  operation 
of  the  Spirit  linally  extends  also  to  the  body. 
From  the  Spirit  man  receives  the  new,  incor- 
ruptible, and  immortal  body  (Ro  8",  1  Co  W*'*^). 
This  manifestation,  however,  does  not  take  place 
in  the  present  age,  but  is  connected  with  the  re- 
velation of  Christ  yet  to  come.  As  regards  the 
present,  the  experience  of  the  Spirit  generates  tlie 
conviction  that  the  goal  has  not  yet  lueen  reached, 
and  that  the  perfect  is  not  yet  come,  for  meanwhile 
the  Spirit  makes  manifest  the  Divine  grace  only  in 
the  inner  life  of  man.  It  is  true  that  in  the  pro- 
positions setting  forth  the  action  of  the  Spirit,  the 
Divine  grace  finds  supremo  expression.  In  them 
the  consciousness  of  being  reconciled  to  God  is 
clearly  set  forth.  Man's  antagonism  to  God  is  at 
an  end,  and  his  separation  from  Him  has  been 
overcome.  Fellowship  with  God  has  been  im- 
planted in  tlie  inner  life,  and  this  determines  man's 
whole  earthly  career  and  his  final  destiny.  At  the 
same  time,  liowever,  the  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  lays 
the  foundation  of  hope,  and  sets  the  existing 
Church  in  the  great  forward  movement  that  presses 
towards  the  final  consummation.  For  it  is  but  in 
the  inner  man,  and  not  in  tlie  body,  or  in  that  side 
of  our  being    which   nature   furnishes,   that  our 

Earticipation  in  the  Divine  grace  is  realized, 
[ence  the  Spirit  is  called  the  lirst-fruits,  and  the 
earnest  that  guarantees  the  coming  gift  of  God 
(Ro  82»,  2  Co  I^  55).  Thus  from  the  apostolic 
experience  of  the  Spirit,  side  by  side  with  faith 
there  arises  hope ;  and,  as  botli  have  the  same 
source,  they  reinforce  each  other. 

Here  again,  therefore,  there  was  a  profound 
cleavage  between  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the 
Spirit  and  the  pre-Christian  ideas  regarding  it. 
The  former  dissociated  itself  not  only  from  the 
mantic  phenomena  that  occupy  a  prominent  place 
in  polytneistic  cults,  but  also  from  the  ideas  with 
which  the  Jewish  Rabbis  explained  the  operations 
of  the  Spirit  in  the  prophetic  inspiration  of  Scrip- 
ture. The  intervention  of  the  Spirit  had  been 
universally  represented  as  the  supiwession  of  human 
personality.  This  view  was  founded  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  a  revelation  of  God  could  be  given 
only  in  the  annulment  of  the  human,  that  the  voice 
of  (Jod  became  audible  only  when  man  was  dumb 
or  asleep,  and  that  the  operations  of  God  were 
visible  only  when  man  was  deprived  of  volition  by 
an  overpowering  impulse.  Such  notions  are  far 
remote  from  the  propositions  expressive  of  the 
Spirit's  work  among  Christians,  although  they  may 
to  some  extent  .survive  in  the  early  Christian  view 
of  the  OT  Scriptures,  and  the  exegetical  tradition 
with  which  these  were  read.  The  profound  re- 
volution of  thought  seen  here  was  not  the  result  of 
any  merely  psychological  change,  or  of  fresh  theories 
regarding  the  nature  and  action  of  the  human  or 
the  Divine  Spirit,  but  was  due  to  the  transforma- 
tion wrought  in  the  conception  of  God  by  the 
earthly  career  of  Jesus.  The  faith  that  found  its 
object  in  Jesus  penetrated  all  the  ideas  by  which 
the  Christian  community  interpreted  the  govern- 
ment of  God,  and  subordinated  them  to  its  re- 
collections of  Jesus.  The  figure  of  Jesus  became 
the  pattern  to  which  all  its  thoughts  about  the 
Holy,  Spirit  were  conformed.  The  disciples  had 
seen  in  Him  a  human  life  marked  by  a  clear 
certainty,  a  solemn  vocation,  and  a  power  of 
freedom,  which  were  quite  individual  and  personal. 
Yet  that  life  was  AvhoUy  given  to  the  service  of 
God,  at  once  revealing  liis  character  and  fulfilling 
His  will,  because  the  will  of  God  manifested  itself 
in  the  life  of  Jesus  as  grace.  This  fact  did  away 
with  the  idea  that  the  Spirit  of  God  operates  in 
man  only  as  a  force  that  lays  hold  of  and  over- 
powers him — a  view  which  could  seem  the  sole 


possible  one  only  so  long  as  the  unreconciled  mind 
regarded  God  as  an  enemy  t«)  be  feared.  Similarly, 
there  was  now  no  place  for  the  thought  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  acted  only  upon  the  human  "under- 
standing, simply  endowing  the  mind  with  ideas. 
This  view,  again,  rested  upon  the  belief  that  the 
will  of  man  as  such  was  evil,  and  incapable  of  being 
used  in  the  service  of  God.  But  Jesus  had  im- 
planted faith  and  love  in  the  hearts  of  His  disciples, 
and  their  sense  of  being  reconciled  to  God  trans- 
formed their  thoughts  about  the  Holy  Spirit.  No 
longer  did  they  think  of  the  Spirit  as  annulling 
the  human  functions  of  life,  for  tiiey  now  realized 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  made  it  possible  for  man  to 
live,  not  from  and  for  himself,  but  from  and  for  (jod. 

6.  The  Spirit  given  in  a  special  measure  to  some. 
— With  the  belief  that  the  Spirit  lays  hold  of  all 
who  accept  Jesus  was  connected  the  fact  that  .some 
were  regarded  as  in  a  special  sense  'spiritual' 
{iTvevixa.TLKoi).  That  the  Divine  love  made  all  men 
equal  was  an  ideal  quite  alien  to  the  Apostolic 
Church.  It  was  expected  that  the  Spirit  would 
establish  the  fellowship  of  believers  in  such  a  way 
that  each  member  should  retain  his  own  individual 
type.  The  fact  that  the  same  Spirit  operated  in 
all  guaranteed  the  unity  of  the  Christian  body. 
That  unity,  however,  did  not  degenerate  into  uni- 
formity, for,  since  the  Spirit  works  in  all  as  a  life- 
giving  power,  the  community  combined  in  itself 
an  infinite  profusion  of  national',  social,  and  in- 
dividual diversities.  From  the  one  Spirit,  accord- 
ingly, proceeds  the  'one  body'  (1  Co  12'-'-,  Ro  12*, 
Eph  4*),  and  this  implies  that  the  many  who  com- 
pose the  community  have  not  all  the  same  power 
and  function,  but  difl'er  from  one  another  in  their 
gifts  and  vocations.  Hence,  besides  the  continuous 
activities  which  constitute  the  stable  condition  of 
the  Christian  life — besides  faith,  love,  repentance, 
knowledge,  etc. — there  are  special  and  outstanding 
occasions  on  which  the  individual  or  even  an 
assembly  is  'filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit'  (Ac  4^" 
13").  Similarly,  certain  individuals  stand  forth 
from  the  mass  as  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  vehicles  of 
the  Spirit,  and  as  making  its  presence  and  opera- 
tions known  to  the  community. 

To  the  link  with  Israel  and  the  acknowledged 
validity  of  the  OT  was  due  the  fact  that  the  highest 
position  among  the  npevfiaTiKoL  was  assigned  to  the 
prophet.  The  paramount  gift  for  which  the  com- 
munity besought  God  was  the  Word,  and  the 
prophet  was  one  in  whom  the  Word  asserted  itself 
in  such  manner  as  to  be  clearly  distinguishable 
from  his  own  thoughts,  and  to  give  him  the  con- 
viction that  he  spoke  as  one  charged  with  a  Divine 
commission.  We  have  here  the  remarkable  fact 
that  prophecy  once  more  arose  with  extraordinary 
power  in  connexion  with  the  founding  of  the 
Church.  It  burst  forth  in  Jerusalem — in  Barnabas, 
Agabus,  Judas  Barsabbas,  Silas,  the  daughters  of 
Philip — and  this  fact  shows  conclusively  that  the 
pneumatic  character  of  the  Church  was  not  a  result 
of  the  Apostle  Paul's  work,  but  was  inherent  in 
itself  from  the  first.  In  the  Gentile  communities 
too,  however,  prophecy  manifested  itself  immedi- 
ately upon  their  foundation  ;  thus  we  find  it  in 
Antioch  (Ac  13^),  probably  also  in  Lystra  (1  Ti  1'^), 
in  Thessalonica  (1  Th  o'"'-,  2  Th  2^),  in  Corinth  (I 
Co  14),  in  Rome  (Ro  12^),  in  the  Churches  of  Asia 
(Ac  20-^) ;  women  likewise  had  the  prophetic  gift 
(1  Co  11").  As  the  prophet  did  not  receive  the 
word  for  him.self  alone,  but  was  required  to  make 
the  Divine  will  known  to  all,  or  to  certain  in- 
dividuals (1  Co  14*"-),  he  came  to  occupy  a  position 
in  the  community  that  had  the  dignity  of  an  ofHce. 
To  his  utterances  was  ascribed  the  authority  of  a 
Divine  commandment  binding  upon  all.  Still,  the 
term  'office'  can  be  applied  to  the  jwsition  of  the 
prophet  only  under  one  essential  restriction,  viz. 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


677 


that  his  function  stood  apart  from  anything  in  the 
nature  of  judicial  administration,  being  based  upon 
an  inner  experience  wliicli  was  independent  alike 
of  his  own  will  and  the  decrees  of  the  community. 
Thus,  besides  the  vocations  of  the  prophets  and 
the  rvevfMTiKoi,  certain  special  offices — the  epis- 
copate and  the  diaconate — were  created  for  the 
discharge  of  functions  necessary  to  the  life  of  the 
comniunitj" — offices  which  did  not  demand  any 
peculiar  charismatic  gift,  but  only  an  efficient 
Christian  life  (1  Ti  3).  From  this  development  of 
ecclesiastical  order,  however,  it  must  not  be  inferred 
that  there  was  any  secret  antagonism  to  the 
prophets,  or  any  lack  of  confidence  in  the  leading 
of  the  Spirit.  On  the  contrary,  the  procedure  of 
the  apostles  and  the  communities  in  instituting 
these  offices  simply  gave  expression  to  the  feeling 
that  special  pro\'ision  must  be  made  for  the  activi- 
ties which  are  indispensable  to  spiritual  fellowship. 
With  that  procedure  was  conjoined  gratitude  for 
the  prophetic  gift  which  on  special  occasions  helped 
the  community  to  form  decisions  without  misgiving. 
The  Apostle  Paul  assisted  his  communities  alike 
in  securing  prophetic  instruction  and  in  instituting 
offices  (Ro  161,  ph  11). 

Correlative  with  the  word  which  came  from  God 
and  was  audible  in  the  community  was  the  worship 
offered  by  the  community ;  and  here,  again,  besides 
the  thanksgiving  that  united  all  before  Goid,  there 
was  a  special  form  of  prayer,  which  flowed  from  a 
particular  operation  of  the  Spirit  and  was  given 
only  to  some.  This  was  that  form  of  religious 
worship  for  which  the  community  framed  the  ex- 
pression '  speaking  with  a  tongue.'  It  took  its  rise 
m  Palestine  (Ac  2*  10**),  and  manifested  itself  also 
in  the  Gentile  communities,  as  in  Corinth  and 
Ephesus  (I  Co  14,  Ac  19").  This  kind  of  prayer 
was  specially  valued  because  it  directed  the 
speaker's  mind  towards  God  with  powerful  emo- 
tion (1  Co  14^^),  and  because  its  singular  mode  of 
utterance  broke  through  the  ordinary  forms  of 
speech.  As  on  high  the  angels  praise  God  with  angelic 
tongues,  so  the  earthly  Church  worships  Him  not 
only  >vith  human  tongues,  but  with  new  tongues — 
the  tongues  of  angels  (1  Co  13^).  "With  this  was 
associated  the  further  idea  that  the  utterance 
given  by  the  Spirit  united  mankind  in  the  worship 
of  God,  those  who  were  meanwhile  kept  apart  by 
the  diversity  of  tongues  being  made  one  in  faith 
and  prayer  (Ac  2). 

As  belief  in  the  Spirit  involves  the  idea  that  it 
manifests  the  power  of  God,  a  place  beside  the  I 
prophet  and  the  '  speaker  with  a  tongue '  was  as-  ' 
signed  also  to  the  xcorker  of  miracles.  The  special 
manifestations  of  the  Spirit  include  that  singular 
intensification  of  trust  in  God  which  brings  help  to 
those  in  special  distress,  and,  in  particular,  to  the 
sick  and  those  possessed  with  demons  (1  Co  12**-). 
The  belief  of  the  community  regarding  this  aspect 
of  the  Spirit's  work  was  moulded  by  its  memories 
of  the  life  of  Jesus,  and  in  part  also  by  its  ideas 
regarding  the  OT  prophets.  The  '  sign '  was  an 
essential  element  in  the  equipment  of  the  prophet. 
This  appears  from  the  fact  that  in  the  miraculous 
narratives  of  the  NT  miracles  are  not  represented 
as  every-dav  events  tliat  may  occur  in  the  experi- 
ence of  all  Ijelievers,  but  are  valued  as  a  peculiar 
provision  for  the  work  of  those  who  bear  a  special 
commission.  The  Gospels,  the  Book  of  Acts,  and 
the  utterances  of  St.  Paul  regarding  his  'signs' 
(2  Co  12'^),  all  show  distinctly  that  miracles  were 
intimately  related  to  the  apostolic  function. 

Further,  the  wevfiarixoi  as  a  special  class  bring 
out  the  difference  between  the  religious  life  of  the 
Christian  Church  and  that  of  the  Synagogue. 
The  prophet  was  then  unknown  in  the  latter,  and 
the  Di\'ine  word  came  to  it  exclusively  through 
the  Scriptures.  Now,  however,  the  prophetic 
VOL.  I.— 37 


word  taken  over  from  Israel  was  supplemented  in 
the  Church  by  an  operative  ntt«rance  of  Go<i.  And 
just  as  the  RabbLs  did  not  arrogate  to  themselves 
the  inspiration  of  prophecy,  so  tney  disclaimed  the 
power  of  working  miracles.  They  did,  however, 
always  recognize  a  supernatural  factor  in  the  order- 
ing of  human  affairs,  and  in  prayer,  in  dreams,  in 
times  of  distress,  the  thoughts  oi  the  devout  often 
dwelt  upon  the  Divine  omnipotence.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  need  of  ascertaining  the  Divine  will  from 
signs,  of  interpreting  dreams,  of  listening  for  Divine 
utterances,  of  inferring  from  one's  feelings  in  prayer 
that  the  prayer  was  heard,  of  deducing  the  eternal 
destiny  of  the  dying  from  their  last  words — of  all 
this  the  NT  knows  nothing,  and  that  not  in  spite 
of,  but  precisely  in  virtue  of,  its  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Inasmuch  as  the  Spirit  brings  men 
into  conscious  union  with  God,  there  is  no  further 
need  for  signs — such  need  having  a  place  in  religion 
only  so  long  as  men  bow  before  an  unknown  God 
and  an  inscrutable  will.  The  certitude  of  the  NT 
worker  of  mii-acles  who  felt  that  he  had  a  right  to 
invoke  the  aid  of  Omnipotence  forms  the  counter- 
part to  the  certitude  of  the  prophet  who  was  con- 
\'inced  that  he  spoke  under  a  Divine  compulsion, 
and  it  sprang  from  a  con\-iction  that  held  good  for 
all,  viz.  that  God  had  revealed  Himself  in  Christ 
in  such  a  w  ay  that  the  personal  life  of  the  believer 
was  rooted  in  His  perfect  grace. 

III.  DiPFEREST  TYPES  OF  THE  DOCTRISE  OF 

THE  Spirit  is  the  NT  period.—!.  The  Pauline. 
— The  considerations  by  which  St.  Paul  was  led 
towards  his  new  and  distinctive  theology  prompted 
him  also  to  frame  a  doctrine  of  the  Spirit. 

(a)  The  Spirit  and  the  Laic. — For  St.  Paul  the 
religious  problem  had  assumed  the  form :  Either 
the  Law  or  Christ ;  and  he  effected  his  union  with 
Jesus  by  a  resolute  turning  away  from  the  Law. 
A  religious  life  based  upon  the  Law  forms  a  clear 
antithesis  to  life  in  the  Spirit,  for  a  law  externally 
enjoined  upon  man — the  transgression  of  which  was 
guilt,  and  obedience  to  which  was  desert — excludes 
the  idea  that  God  Himself  acts  upon  man  inwardly. 
The  Law,  in  short,  sets  man  at  a  distance  from 
God,  making  him  the  creator  of  his  own  volition 
and  the  originator  of  his  own  sin  and  righteousness. 
In  this  fact  the  Apostle,  as  a  Christian,  saw  the 
plight  of  the  Jews,  and  of  mankind  in  general ;  for 
righteousness  can  be  won,  not  by  any  performance 
of  the  Law,  but  only  by  a  manifestation  of  the 
righteousness  of  God.  Thus  from  man's  own 
spiritual  state  arises  the  problem  of  how  he  is 
to  be  brought  into  that  relationship  with  God 
which  is  grounded  in  God's  own  work  and  the  gift 
of  His  grace.  The  gift  of  His  grace  cannot  consist 
merely  in  a  change  of  man's  external  condition,  as 
if  he  had  only  to  look  forward  to  a  transformation 
of  nature  and  a  re-organization  of  the  world.  To 
seek  for  help  in  that  direction  would  be  to  deny  the 
Law,  the  holiness  of  which  consists  precisely  in  this, 
that  it  makes  obedience  to  God  the  condition  of 
His  fellowship  with  man.  Hence  the  grace  of  God 
must  move  man  from  within,  and  must  so  act  upon 
him  as  to  make  him  obedient  to  God.  That  opera- 
tion of  God  in  man  in  virtue  of  which  man  sur- 
renders himself  to  God  the  Apostle  finds  in  the 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (Ro  8>-»,  Gal  5^).  Subjec- 
tion to  the  Law  is  thus  superseded  by  subjection 
to  the  Spirit  (Ro  7*},  and  legal  worship  gives  place 
to  worship  offered  through  the  Spirit  ( Ph  3»).  Chris- 
tians are  thus  absolved  from  the  Law  in  such  a  way 
that  the  Law  is  really  fulfilled. 

(b)  The  Spirit  and  the  Scriptures. — The  obedience 
rendered  by  the  Jews  was  based  upon  their  belief 
that  the  Duine  will  had  been  revealed  to  them  in 
the  Scriptures.  The  knowledge  of  God  was  there- 
fore to  be  obtained  by  study  of  the  holy  writings 
delivered  to  them.     The  Law  produced  the  scribe, 


678 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


the  theolofjical  investigator  (1  Co  l*").  As  a  Chris- 
tian, St.  Paul,  however,  rejected  this  method  of 
seoking  the  knowledge  of  God  as  decisively  as  he 
rejected  the  meritorious  character  of  Pharisaic 
works.  How  is  man  to  become  possessed  of  the 
knowledge  of  God  ?  He  knows  God  only  when  he 
is  known  by  Him.  But  how  is  he  to  acquire  a 
knowledge  of  God  that  does  not  come  to  liim 
through  Scripture  or  tradition,  but  is  given  by  the 
Divine  leading  of  his  inner  life?  The  knowledge 
of  God  is  shed  forth  in  man  by  the  Spirit  (1  Co  2^S 
2  Co  2" ;  cf.  3^).  Here  we  have  the  root  of  that 
vital  contrast  between  the  letter  and  the  spirit 
which  forms  one  of  the  distinctive  features  of  the 
Pauline  theology  (Ro  7«,  2  Co  S^). 

(c)  The  Spirit  and  the  flesh.— ^t.  Paul  uses  theterm 
'  flesh'  to  denote  man's  incapacity  to  bring  his  de- 
sires into  conformity  with  the  Divine  Law.  The 
Apostle  thereby  gives  expression  to  the  idea  that 
the  inner  life  of  man  is  dependent  upon  bodily 
processes.  In  deriving  the  evil  state  of  man  from 
that  dependence  he  was  not  simply  thinking  of 
the  impulses  which  are  directly  subservient  to  the 
needs  of  the  body,  but  he  also  recognized  in  the 
dimness  of  man's  consciousness  of  God  and  the 
meagreness  of  liis  religious  experience  that  des- 

fiotism  of  the  flesh  to  which  our  whole  inner  life 
ies  in  subjection.  From  ancient  times  '  flesh '  had 
been  used  as  the  correlative  of  '  spirit.'  How  is 
man  to  rise  above  himself,  and  be  delivered  from 
the  thraldom  of  sensuous  impressions  and  bodily 
appetites?  The  power  that  sets  men  free  from 
selfish  desire — natural  though  such  desire  may  be 
— and  turns  him  towards  the  Divine  purposes,  is 
the  Spirit  (Ro  8»-8). 

(d)  The  Spirit  and  the  work  of  Christ. — St.  Paul 
recognized  m  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of  Jesus 
the  factor  which  determined  the  relation  of  all 
men  to  Jesus  Himself.  That  the  Messiah  had 
been  crucified  and  raised  again  from  the  dead  was, 
in  the  Apostle's  view,  the  good  tidings  of  God. 
What  St.  Paul  saw  here  was  not  I^aw,  which 
dooms  man  to  death,  but  Love,  which  dies  for 
man  ;  nor  was  it  the  separation  of  the  guilty  from 
God,  but  rather  the  proffer  of  such  fellowship  with 
Him  as  takes  sin  away  by  forgiveness  ;  it  was  not 
the  preservation  of  the  flesh,  but  the  comf)lete  sur- 
render of  it — tlie  judgment  of  the  Divine  Law 
upon  the  flesh,  and  the  beginning  of  a  new  life,  a 
lire  no  longer  subject  to  natural  conditions,  but 
one  that  makes  manifest  the  glory  of  God.  By 
what  means,  tlien,  can  Christ  carry  on  in  man  the 
experience  which  He  had  consummated  in  His  own 
person,  and  so  eflect  the  due  issue  of  His  Death 
and  Resurrection  ?  For  St.  Paul  the  only  answer 
that  could  be  given  to  that  question  was  that 
Christ  reveals  Himself  through  the  Spirit.  Love 
asks  for  the  fellowship  that  rests  upon  an  inward 
foundation,  and  draws  men  to  Christ  not  by  force 
but  through  their  own  volition.  Thus  love  rises 
supreme  above  the  interests  of  the  flesh,  and  is 
directed  to  an  end  that  wholly  transcends  nature. 
Man  now  becomes  a  mirror  of  Christ's  glory  (2  Co 
3^*),  and  his  end  is  to  know  Christ  as  the  power 
which  raises  him  from  the  dead  (Ph  3'*'-). 

(e)  The  Spirit  and  faith. — Once  St.  Paul  had  come 
to  recognize  a  revelation  of  God  in  the  Death  and 
Resurrection  of  Jesus,  it  was  for  him  a  fact  beyond 
dispute  that  man's  participation  in  the  Divine 
grace  rests  upon  faith.  Man's  need  of  the  Divine 
forgiveness,  as  well  as  his  actual  experience  of  it, 
finds  its  consummation  in  the  fact  that  he  gives 
his  trust  to  God,  and  possesses  righteousness  in 
faith  alone.  This  attitude  implies,  however,  that 
he  is  now  delivered  from  self-centred  desire,  and 
has  renounced  all  the  cravings  of  the  flesh.  But 
the  act  of  thus  committing  oneself  wholly  to  the 
Divine  grace  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit.     Only  in 


virtue  of  that  work  can  our  faith  become  our 
righteousness.  The  very  fact  that  faith  has  a 
source  lying  above  human  nature  makes  it  possible 
for  faith  to  influence  our  thoughts  and  desires,  so 
that  we  can  now  act  hy  faith,  as  those  who  no 
longer  commit  sin,  but  do  the  will  of  God. 

(/)  TAc  Spint  and  the  Church. — St.  Paul,  in  re- 
garding the  Church  as  the  fellowship  of  faith, 
thereby  made  the  Church  free — the  sanctuary  of 
the  perfect  sincerity  which  safeguards  each  n-oni 
undue  accommodation  to  others,  and  the  home  of 
that  perfect  love  which  actuates  each  to  labour 
with  all  his  capacity  on  behalf  of  the  common 
fellowship.  St.  Paul's  confident  belief  that  the 
communities  maintain  their  unity,  even  though 
that  community  is  not  protected  by  external  force 
or  strengthened  by  an  outward  bond,  could  have  its 
source  only  in  his  conviction  that  tlie  unity  of  the 
Church  Avas  rooted  in  the  Spirit.  Because  he 
believed  in  the  one  Spirit  he  believed  in  the  one 
body. 

Thus  all  the  lines  which  exhibit  the  character- 
istic tendencies  of  the  Apostle's  thought  converge 
in  his  doctrine  of  the  Spirit.  As  St.  Paul  aspired 
to  a  righteousness  apart  from  the  Law,  and  to  a 
knowledge  of  God  apart  from  the  wisdom  of  the 
world  ;  as  he  sought  to  secure  the  victory  over  evil 
by  emancipation  from  the  flesh  ;  as  he  drew  from 
the  Cross  the  conviction  that  Jesus  binds  men  to 
Himself  in  a  perfect  union,  and  as  he  thus  came 
to  have  faith,  and  found  fellowship  with  all  through 
faith,  he  could  not  make  his  gospel  complete  with- 
out the  doctrine  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwells  in 
man.  Apart  from  that  principle,  his  doctrine  of 
sin  becomes  a  torment,  his  opposition  to  the  Law 
would  be  antinomianism,  his  union  with  the  Cruci- 
fied an  illusion,  his  idea  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith  a  danger  to  morality,  and  his  doctrine  of  the 
Church  a  fanaticism.  For  the  vindication  of  his 
gospel  it  was  therefore  necessary  that  his  Churches 
should  exhibit  the  workings  of  the  Spirit ;  only 
in  that  way  could  they  become  the  Epistles  of 
Christ  and  set  tlieir  seal  upon  the  Apostle's  com- 
mission (2  Co  3»  11*,  Gal  3"). 

The  structure  of  St.  Paul's  theology  renders 
it  unlikely  that  his  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  was 
materially  aft'ected  by  his  intercourse  with  philo- 
sophically-minded Greeks.  Nowhere  in  St.  Paul 
do  we  find  concrete  parallels  either  to  the  Platonic 
repudiation  of  sense  in  favour  of  reason,  or  to  the 
Cynic  protest  against  culture,  or  to  the  mystical 
teachings  which  implied  that  the  soul  is  an  alien 
sojourner  in  the  body.  It  is  certainly  possible, 
perhaps  even  probable,  that  the  forceful  way  in 
which  he  made  use  of  the  antithesis  between  flesh 
and  spirit  as  a  means  of  evoking  faith  and  repent- 
ance was  in  some  manner  related  to  the  dualistic 
ideas  whicli  prevailed  in  Greek  metaphysics  and 
ethics.  But  his  conscious  and  successful  rejection 
of  all  the  Hellenistic  forms  of  doctrine  in  that  field 
is  clearly  seen  in  the  remarkable  fact  that  there  is 
not  a  single  passage  in  his  letters  which  would  go 
to  prove  that  the  antithesis  between  the  materi- 
ality of  nature  and  the  immateriality  of  God,  be- 
tween the  concrete  image  of  sense  and  the  pure 
idea,  had  any  meaning  for  him  at  all. 

2.  The  primitive  type  of  the  doctrine  and  its 
relation  to  the  Pauline  type. — It  would  be  alto- 
gether erroneous  to  think  that  the  conviction  of 
the  Spirit's  indwelling  in  believers  was  first  intro- 
duced into  the  Church  by  St.  Paul.  Every  single 
document  of  primitive  Christianity  implies  that 
the  possession  of  the  Spirit  is  the  distinctive  feature 
of  tlie  Christian  society.  When  Christians  spoke 
of  themselves  as  '  saints,'  and  thus  indicated  the 
difl'erence  between  them  and  the  Jews,  they  had 
in  mind  not  the  measure  of  their  moral  achieve- 
ments, but  the  fact  that  they  were  united  to  God 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


579 


through  their  knowledge  of  Christ.  Their  union 
with  God,  however,  was  rendered  effective  and 
manifest  precisely  in  virtue  of  the  Spirit's  work 
in  their  lives.  But  while  St.  Paul  relates  every 
phase  of  the  Christian  life  to  the  Spirit,  so  that 
believers  may  learn  to  think  of  their  entire  Chris- 
tian experience  as  life  in  the  Spirit,  and  so  that 
the  Church  may  recognize  the  working  of  the 
Spirit  in  all  that  it  does,  the  leaders  of  the  Church 
in  Jerusalem  keep  tlie  thought  of  the  Spirit  apart 
from  their  own  self-consciousness.  It  is  certamlj 
the  case  that  here  the  Church's  relation  to  God  is 
conceived  as  determined  by  the  new  covenant 
which  the  coming  of  the  Spirit  has  brought  to 
all.  The  individual  believer,  however,  was  not 
encouraged  to  find  the  basis  of  that  belief  in  the 
work  of  the  Spirit  which  he  could  trace  in  his  ovra 
e.\perience ;  on  the  contrary,  each  found  the  ade- 
quate ground  of  his  conviction  in  that  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Spirit  which  is  apparent  to  all.  In  the 
eyes  of  the  Church  the  apostles  are  those  who 
teach  in  the  Spirit,  perform  miracles  in  the  Spirit, 
and  administer  judgment  in  the  Spirit,  and  beside 
them  stand  prophets  who  make  manifest  to  all 
the  reality  of  the  new  Divine  covenant.  The 
conception  of  the  Spirit,  however,  was  not  thereby 
rendered  particularistic,  nor  was  its  action  re- 
garded as  restricted  to  the  special  class  of  the 
iryevfiariKol.  It  was,  in  fact,  impossible  for  those 
who  confessed  Christ,  the  Perfecter  of  the  com- 
munity, to  divide  the  community  into  two  groups 
— those  who  know  God  and  those  who  know  Him 
not,  or  those  who  obey  Him  and  those  who  resist 
Him.  Only  in  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  as 
shared  by  all  was  it  made  certain  that  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  were  members  of  the  Kingdom 
of  God.  When  all  is  said,  however,  the  conscious- 
ness of  believers  in  which  they  know  that  they  are 
under  the  influence  of  Divine  grace  is  much  more 
vigorously  developed  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
than  in  the  documents  bearing  the  Palestinian 
stamp,  viz.  the  writings  of  James,  Matthew,  Peter, 
and  John. 

(a)  The  Epistle  of  James. — St.  James  assures 
those  who  draw  near  to  God  with  sincere  repent- 
ance that  God  will  draw  near  to  them  (4*).  But 
he  does  not  describe  how  the  presence  of  CJod 
becomes  an  experience  in  the  penitent.  The  wis- 
dom that  produces  pride  he  reproves  as  sensual 
(^uxtK^  [3^*]) ;  the  true  wisdom,  on  the  contrary, 
is  spiritual ;  but  he  is  content  to  say  of  it  simply 
that  it  comes  from  above.  To  one  who  is  in 
perplexity  as  to  his  course,  St.  James  gives  the 
promise  that  he  shall  receive  wisdom  in  answer 
to  prayer  (P).  Here  too,  therefore,  a  work  of  God 
is  said  to  take  place  in  the  inner  life — a  Divine 
operation  regulating  the  thoughts  and  desires  of 
man.  That  directing  power  of  God  acting  from 
within  is  just  what  St.  Paul  calls  Spirit,  but  this 
term  is  not  used  here.  Again,  man  is  bom  of 
God,  through  the  word  of  truth  (I^),  and  the  doer 
of  the  Law  is  brought  into  the  state  of  liberty  (1^). 
Both  of  these  assertions  approximate  to  what  is 
expressed  elsewhere  in  Scripture  by  statements 
referring  to  the  Spirit.  We  thus  see  that  the  ex- 
hortations of  the  Epistle  are  nowhere  based  upon 
the  legalistic  point  of  view.  The  injunction  of 
Scripture  or  the  precept  of  the  teacher  is  never 
regarded  as  taking  the  place  of  one's  own  ethical 
knowledge.  Casuistry  is  set  aside,  as  is  also  the 
idea  of  merit.  The  indi^•idual  is  called  upon  to 
submit  to  God  in  his  own  knowledge  and  love. 
But  the  writer  does  not  deal  with  the  manner  in 
which  this  autonomous  turning  of  the  will  towards 
God  is  brought  about. 

(6)  Matthew. — An  obN-ious  parallel  to  this  ap- 
pears in  St.  Matthew.  Here  baptism  into  the 
Spirit  implies  that,  besides  the  work  of  the  Father 


and  the  Son,  that  of  the  Spirit  likewise  avails  for 
all  who  are  called  to  follow  Jesus  (Mt  28'^).  Ex- 
cept in  this  connexion,  however,  the  Spirit  is  only 
once  referred  to,  viz.  as  a  special  support  to  those 
who  have  to  proclaim  the  message  or  Jesus  before 
the  secular  powers  (10^),*  Nevertheless,  the  voca- 
tion of  the  disciples,  in  all  its  grandeur  and  its 
solemn  obligation,  is  realized  with  extraordinary 
vividness  and  most  impressively  depicted  in  the 
First  Gospel.  The  disciples  are  the  light  of  the 
world,  the  stewards  of  the  treasure  committed  to 
them  by  Jesus,  the  loyal  husbandmen  tlirough 
whose  labours  the  vineyard  yields  fruit  for  God, 
the  tishers  of  men  who  must  cast  out  the  net,  the 
sowers  to  whose  exertions  the  harvest  is  due.  But 
the  Gospel  does  not  show  how  Christians  are  to 
acquire  the  inward  provision  for  their  task.  In 
the  con\-iction  that  they  are  the  guardians  of  the 
commission  of  Jesus  lies  also  their  glad  confidence 
that  they  are  able  to  discharge  it. 

(c)  First  Epistle  of  Peter. — ^As  Matthew  con- 
cludes with  a  distinct  reference  to  the  Trinity,  so 
the  First  Epistle  of  Peter  opens  with  one  (1-).  The 
sequence  of  the  Persons  here — God  the  Father,  the 
Spirit,  Jesus  Christ — which  finds  a  parallel  in  the 
salutation  at  the  beginning  of  Kevelation  (1*),  is 
probably  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  Jesus  is 
quite  unmistakably  represented  as  man,  even  when 
He  is  associated  with  the  Father  and  the  Spirit. 
The  same  fact  appears  also  in  the  statement  that 
Hb  blood  and  His  obedience  are  the  means  by 
which  the  sanctification  imparted  by  the  Spirit 
is  won,  in  accordance  with  the  foreknowledge  of 
God.  The  mention  of  Jesus,  accordingly,  foBows 
that  of  the  Spirit  through  whom  the  humanity  of 
Jesus  was  endowed  with  Divine  power  and  grace, 
just  as  believers  are  enabled  to  participate  in  what 
the  Cross  of  Christ  secures  for  them  in  virtue  of 
the  sanctification  bestowed  upon  them  by  the 
Spirit.  In  1  Pet.  the  Spirit  is  spoken  of  sQso  as 
constituting  the  endowment  of  those  who  had 
carried  the  gospel  to  Asia  Minor  (1'^),  and  as  thus 
setting  them  beside  the  prophets  in  whom  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  spoke  (I").  Since  the  new  birth  is 
effected  by  the  Word  ( I**),  it  is  not  surprising  that 
the  community  should  be  called  the  Temple.  The 
sacrifices  which  it  offers  bear  the  impress  of  the 
Spirit  (2*).  Those  who  are  brought  before  secular 
tribunals  for  Christ's  sake  are  assured  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  rests  upon  them  (4"),  and  here  the 
promise  which  Jesus  gave  to  His  disciples  is  ex- 
tended to  the  Church  at  large.  Those  who  after 
death  obtain  the  gift  of  life  receive  it  through  the 
Spirit  (4*),  just  as  Jesus  Himself,  after  being  put 
to  death,  was  quickened  by  the  Spirit  (3^*).  We 
thus  see  that  this  hortatory  Epistle  proceeds  upon 
the  idea  that  it  is  the  Spirit  of  God  that  secures 
for  the  Church  its  portion  in  the  Divine  grace. 
But  the  Epistle  furnishes  nothing  that  can  com- 
pare with  the  great  utterances  of  St.  Paul  regard- 
ing the  operations  of  the  Spirit,  as  e.ff.  in  Ro  8, 
Gal  5,  1  Co  2.  12,  2  Co  3.  Its  exhortations  appeal 
to  the  ethical  knowledge  and  the  power  of  volition 
which  reside  in  believers  themselves. 

(d)  The  Johannine  tcrifings. — (1)  Revelation. — A 
similar  representation  is  given  in  the  Revelation 
of  St.  John.  That  Jesus  governs  the  Christian 
society  through  the  Spirit  is  attested  here  by  its 
having  received  the  gift  of  prophecy.  What  the 
Apocalypse  speaks  of  figuratively  as  a  writing  of 
Jesus  to  the  angels  of  the  Churches  it  also  desig- 

*  It  is  true  that  in  12*1^  Christ  and  the  Spirit  are  conjoined 
as  the  revealers  of  Divine  grace,  and  in  guch  a  way  as  to  imply 
that  the  offer  of  Divine  grace  is  consiunmated  through  the 
Spirit,  so  that  the  guilt  of  those  who  speak  against  it  is  irre- 
versible. Yet  it  is  not  distinctly  said  here  that  the  Spirit  will 
become  manifest  also  after  the  earthly  mission  of  Jestis.  The 
primarj-  reference  of  the  passage  is  to  the  revelation  of  God 
which  18  eSect«d  by  the  works  of  Jesus. 


580 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


nates  literally  as  a  speaking  of  the  Spirit  to  the 
Churches  (2',  etc.  ;  cf.  19'").  When  consolation  is 
given  to  those  who  are  dying  in  the  Lord,  or  when 
the  Church  prays  for  the  Coining  of  Jesus,  it  is  the 
Spirit  that  speaks  (14'^  22'^).  As  every  prophet 
receives  the  Spirit  in  such  wise  as  to  possess  Him 
individually,  the  Spirit  is  also  referred  to  as 
plural :  God  is  the  Lord  of  the  spirits  of  the 
prophets  (22« ;  cf.  1  Co  U^^).  The  relation  of  the 
Spirit  to  Christ  is  set  forth  in  the  assertion  that 
the  Lamb  has  seven  eyes,  which  are  the  seven 
spirits  of  God  (5*) :  the  Spirit  gives  Jesus  the 
power  of  vision  by  which  He  surveys  the  world 
from  the  throne  of  God.  Tlie  Spirit's  relation  to 
God  is  expressed  in  the  figurative  statement  that 
the  seven  spirits  burn  as  lamps  before  the  throne 
(4*;  cf.  1*):  the  Spirit  is  tne  light  of  heaven. 
These  figures  do  not  imply,  however,  that  St.  John 
regarded  the  Spirit  as  broken  up  into  seven  inde- 
pendent and  co-ordinate  beings.  That  no  such 
idea  was  in  his  mind  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
he  ascribes  these  seven  Spirits  to  God  and  Christ, 
in  whom  the  unity  of  personal  life  is  inviolable. 
Whether  the  metaphor  was  in  some  way  suggested 
by  astronomical  conceptions,  as  e.g.  the  seven 
heavens,  or  the  seven  planets,  it  is  impossible  to 
determine,  as  other  metaphors  of  the  Apocalypse 
speak  only  of  a  single  heaven,  and  never  refer  to 
the  planets  at  all.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  clear 
that  the  form  of  the  metaphor  was  in  some  way 
influenced  by  the  Messianic  interpretation  of  Zee 

The  Spirit,  however,  is  not  nearly  so  prominent 
in  St.  John's  prophetic  visions  as  are  the  angels. 
While  the  Spirit  is  the  source  of  knowledge — of 
the  omniscience  of  Jesus  and  God,  and  of  the 
certitude  of  the  Christian  which  surveys  the  Last 
Things — yet,  when  the  catastrophic  interventions 
of  Divine  power  in  the  world's  history  are  to  be 
portrayed,  it  is  the  angels  who  appear  as  the 
agents  of  the  Divine  purposes.  Still  St.  John 
summons  Christ's  people  to  that  heroic  conflict  and 
that  service  of  perfect  love  in  which  they  are 
ready  to  die  for  Christ's  sake,  and  to  stand  against 
the  world  even  when,  under  a  single  head,  it  con- 
centrates all  its  force  to  make  war  upon  Christ. 
In  this,  however,  their  eyes  are  not  bent  upon 
their  own  spiritual  standing ;  rather  they  are 
turned  away  from  man  towards  the  higher  realm 
where  the  Lamb  seated  upon  the  throne  of  God 
rules  all  things. 

(2)  Gospel. — The  great  theme  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  is  the  Divine  sonship  of  Jesus ;  the  faith 
of  the  disciples  finds  its  oljject  in  Him,  and  their 
love  is  service  to  Him.  His  credentials  consist  in 
His  possession  of  the  Spirit  (1*-  3**).  The  Spirit 
is  the  medium  through  which  Jesus  accomplishes 
His  work.  Hence  the  two  metaphors  with  which 
St.  John  expresses  the  work  of  Jesus,  viz.  '  life ' 
and  '  light,'  apply  also  to  the  work  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Spirit  is  one  with  the  word  of  Jesus,  and 
makes  that  word  the  source  of  life  (6®^).  It  is 
associated  with  baptism  in  such  wise  that  the 
water  initiates  the  new  life  in  man  (3") ;  it  works 
in  the  flesh  and  blood  of  Jesus,  so  that  they  can 
be  eaten  and  drunk,  and  thus  give  life  to  believers 
(6"*).  After  the  departure  of  Jesus,  moreover,  the 
Spirit  is  the  power  by  which  the  disciples  complete 
their  task,  for  the  truth  dwells  in  them  through 
the  Spirit  (cf.  art.  Paraclete).  The  Spirit  in- 
stitutes the  new  type  of  worship  in  the  community 
(4^).  In  the  Fourtii  Gospel,  therefore,  the  Spirit 
is  in  its  Divine  pre-eminence  exalted  above  the 
human  consciousness.  It  is  manifested  only  in  its 
work,  and  this  is  simply  the  Christian  life — the 
faith  directed  to  Jesus,  and  the  love  tendered 
Him ;  for  the  Spirit  does  not  reveal  itself,  but 
glorifies  Christ. 


(3)  First  Epistle. — According  to  the  First  Epistle 
of  St.  John,  again,  it  is  the  Spirit  that  bestows  the 
word — not  only  the  word  of  propliecy,  but  also  tliat 
of  confession  (41''').  The  Spirit  Ijecomes  maniiest 
in  leading  men  to  confess  Jesus.  Hence  it  is  con- 
joined with  the  water  and  the  blood  as  the  power 
that  generates  faith  in  Christ  (5*),  and  therefore  it 
is  also  that  gift  which  manifests  and  safeguards 
the  perfect  fellowship  of  Jesus  with  believers  (3**). 
It  keeps  the  community  from  the  seduction  of 
error,  for  it  teaches  and  reveals  tiie  truth  (2''''  "). 
The  community  must  have  absolute  confidence  in 
the  guidance  of  the  Spirit ;  by  its  possession  of  the 
Spirit  it  secures  fellowship  with  the  apostle,  since 
tlie  Spirit  makes  it  submissive  to  him  (4'*),  and  at 
the  same  time  it  secures  its  independence,  since 
it  discovers  knowledge  for  itself,  and  is  not 
fettered  to  the  apostle.  The  designation  here 
applied  to  the  Spirit,  viz.  'oil  of  anointing' 
ixplff/j-a  [2-*^]),  reminds  the  readers  of  what  im- 
parted the  Spirit  to  them :  they  possess  Him  as 
the  property  of  the  Anointed  (Xpia-rds),  who  con- 
summates llis  fellowship  with  them,  and  shares 
with  them  His  chrism,  in  the  fact  that  the  Spirit 
leads  them  to  knowledge  and  certitude. 

The  references  to  the  Spirit  in  all  the  three 
documents  just  dealt  with  reveal  their  specifically 
Johannine  colouring  in  their  speaking  of  the  Spirit 
as  the  source  of  knowledge.  As  the  Christian  life 
consists  in  the  knowledge  of  God,  it  is  the  Spirit 
also  that  brings  about  the  new  birth  from  God. 

That  point  of  view  common  to  all  the  Palestinian 
teachers,  which  distinguishes  their  utterances 
regarding  the  Spirit  from  the  Pauline  doctrine,  is 
clearly  related,  both  positively  and  negatively,  to 
the  religious  attitude  of  the  Jews.  From  that 
attitude  sprang  the  Cliristian  sense  of  being  under 
obligation  to  God,  and  the  Christian  estimate  of 
obedience  as  the  chief  element  in  religion.  The 
promise  of  the  Spirit  did  not  lead  the  Christians  of 
Palestine  to  observe  its  work  in  themselves,  to 
find  their  joy  therein,  and  to  enrich  and  perfect 
their  spiritual  life  thereby ;  it  prompted  them, 
rather,  to  do  the  will  of  God  in  obedience  to  Jesus. 
It  was  therefore  enough  for  them  that  the  work  of 
the  Spirit  should  be  manifest  in  the  existence  of 
the  Church  and  the  word  that  sustained  it. 
Simultaneously,  however,  their  controversy  with 
the  Jews  wrought  with  profound  eflect  upon  the 
religious  standpoint  of  the  Christians.  The  Jew, 
in  virtue  of  his  Divine  calling,  acquired  a  proud 
self-consciousness,  and,  after  every  religious  ettbrt 
he  put  forth,  he  was  inclined  to  display  and  admire 
it.  Thus  the  apostolic  preaching  came  to  be  a 
ceaseless  striving  against  religious  vainglory. 
Might  not  the  conviction  that  the  Church  possesses 
the  Spirit  engender  pride?  Must  it  not  prove 
positively  baneful  that  man  shpuld  discern  the 
workings  of  Divine  grace  in  the  movements  of  his 
thought  and  will?  With  a  humble  but  bold 
sincerity  the  leaders  of  the  Palestinian  Church 
sought  to  prevent  believers  from  dwelling  upon 
their  personal  experiences  of  the  Spirit,  and  dis- 
countenanced introspection  except  as  a  means  of 
maintaining  their  union  with  Jesus  in  penitence 
and  obedience.  In  this  attitude  we  see  also  the 
strength  of  the  hope  which  turned  their  longings 
towards  the  coming  world  and  the  coming  Christ : 
in  that  consummation  the  work  of  the  Spirit  will 
at  length  be  fully  manifested  in  those  whom  it 
raises  from  the  dead. 

3.  Hellenistic -Jewish  tendencies.  —  The  tend- 
encies introduced  into  the  Gentile  Churches  by 
Hellenized  Jews  were  fraught  with  important 
consequences.  The  issues  are  seen  with  special 
clearness  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  but 
it  is  evident  from  Ph  3  that  similar  plienomcna 
had  emerged  in  liome  and  Macedonia,  ^^hile  the 


HOLY  SPIRIT 


HOME 


581 


Pastoral  Epistles  and  the  Johannine  writings  show 
that  they  had  appeared  also  in  Asia  Minor.  In 
this  Gentile  soil  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  was  accounted 
the  supreme  prerogative  of  Christians.  But  tlie 
idea  of  perfection  was  taken  over  from  the  Greek 
and  Jewish  religious  tradition,  and  fused  with 
faith  in  the  Spirit.  In  Corinth  this  led  to  the 
zealous  cultivation  of  glossolalia — partly  because 
of  the  state  of  devout  exaltation  to  which  the  gift 
raised  the  speaker  and  in  which  he  experienced  a 
strange  delight,  partly  because  of  the  admiration 
which  its  striking  manifestations  evoked.  That 
one  who  prays  should  be  exalted  above  reason  by 
the  Spirit  was  regarded  as  something  eminently 
desirable.  Here  too,  however,  Christianity  simul- 
taneously acquired  an  intellectualistic  tendency. 
The  Spirit  endows  man  with  knowledge,  and  sets 
liim  among  the  wise  who  can  interpret  the  work  of 
God.  In  his  conduct,  again,  the  weviiaTiKos  attests 
his  privilege  by  the  daring  which  enables  him  to 
do  what  for  others  would  be  a  sin.  He  enters 
heathen  temples  without  fear  (1  Co  8^°);  he  does 
not  need  to  shun  impurity  (6*^),  and  he  can  even 
contract  a  marriage  revolting  to  ordinary  human 
feeling  (5').  In  Corinth,  like^vise,  the  possession 
of  the  Spirit  was  supposed  to  be  attested  by 
contempt  for  the  natural,  and  this  in  turn  gave 
rise  to  ascetic  tendencies  (7^).  As  the  perfectionist 
finds  complete  satisfaction  in  the  communion  with 
God  bestowed  upon  him  by  the  Spirit,  his  hope  for 
the  future  dies  away  (15^^  2  Ti  2'*) ;  for  naturally 
such  a  religious  attitude  could  have  no  final  ideal 
standing  supreme  above  present  attainment.  It 
thus  tended  to  arrest  that  forward  process  into 
M-hich  St.  Paul  had  brought  his  churches  (Ph  3). 
Moreover,  the  link  with  the  earthly  career  of  Jesus 
was  dissolved.  The  moral  intensity  of  His  call  to 
repentance  was  not  realized,  and,  accordingly,  His 
Death  upon  the  Cross  lost  all  significance.  The 
Exaltation  of  Jesus  could,  therefore,  no  longer  be 
based  upon  the  self-humiliation  in  which  He  became 
obedient  to  the  death  of  the  Cross  (Ph  2*"").  The 
immediate  outcome  of  these  views  was  a  division 
of  the  Church  into  distinct  groups,  since  the  wev- 
tuariKol  had  sought  to  institute  a  spiritual  despotism 
over  it  (1  Co  3*-=»,  2  Co  11-^),  treating  the  rest— 
tliose  who  did  not  possess  the  characteristic  tokens 
of  the  Spirit — as  spiritual  minors.  These  facts 
explain  the  manner  in  which  the  later  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul  speak  of  the  Spirit ;  and,  with  regard  to 
the  Johannine  wTitings  as  well,  we  must  take  into 
consideration  not  only  their  relation  to  the  Pales- 
tinian type  of  Christianity,  but  also  their  opposition 
to  the  irvev/jLariKoi  Avho  made  the  Spirit  subservient 
to  religious  egotism.  Similar  considerations  must 
be  kept  in  view  in  our  interpretation  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.  This  Epistle  does  not  treat  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Sjiirit  with  anything  like  the 
elaboration  we  find  in  its  Christology ;  it  says  very 
little  of  the  Spirit's  work  in  the  Church.  It  refers 
to  it  once  as  the  power  which  lends  authority  to 
the  words  of  those  who  preach  Jesus  (2*) ;  and, 
again,  it  brings  out  the  awful  degree  of  guilt 
incurred  by  those  who  fall  awaj',  by  pointing  to 
the  greatness  of  the  gift  they  have  despised  (6*  1(P). 
The  apostles  sought  to  maintain  the  purity  of 
their  views  regarding  the  Spirit  and  to  prevent  its 
being  made  a  mere  tool  of  religious  egotism  by 
making  the  Church  subordinate  to  Jesus,  and 
engaging  it  in  the  practical  tasks  necessarj-  to  the 
formation  of  pure  and  perfect  fellowship  within  its 
own  circle  and  in  all  the  natural  relations  of  life. 
It  was  the  operation  of  that  ideal  that  led  to  the 
ranking  of  faith  alx)ve  knowledge,  and  to  the 
expulsion  of  the  egoistic  tendency  from  tlie  religious 
life  of  the  Cliurch.  The  preaching  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion of  Jesus  as  the  act  of  Go<l  that  procures  life 
for   the  world  (1   Co   15);    the  concentration  of 


personal  volition  on  the  one  aim  of  knowing  Christ 
(Ph  3) ;  the  Johannine  representation  of  the  unity 
of  Jesus  with  the  Father  as  that  which  exalts  Him 
above  all ;  the  portraj'al  of  Jesus  in  Hebrews  as 
the  One  Priest,  who,  having  Himself  been  made 
perfect  through  sutierings,  has  also  made  us  perfect 
— all  these  converge  in  a  single  point :  they  show 
that  the  essential  element  of  the  Christian  life 
is  faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  Perfectionism  with  its 
egotistic  tendency  is  thus  overcome,  for  faith  turns 
us  away  from  ourselves,  and  looks  to  the  grace  of 
Christ  as  the  source  of  our  righteousness  and  of 
our  spiritual  life.  In  this  way  the  Christian  society 
maintains  its  place  in  the  great  forward  process 
which  presses  towards  the  realization  of  the  perfect 
in  the  future  age. 

And  with  faith  in  Jesus  the  apostles  co-ordinated 
the  commandment  of  love,  calling  upon  the  Church 
to  engage  in  the  tasks  that  arise  out  of  our  inter- 
course with  one  another.  This,  again,  meant  not 
only  the  overcoming  of  the  intellectualistic  tendency 
which  would  have  made  the  Church  the  arena  of 
theological  disputation,  but  also  the  repudiation  of 
all  opposition  to  the  natural  relations  of  human 
life,  for  love  becomes  perfect  only  when  it  takes 
account  of  our  neighbour's  situation  as  a  whole, 
and  cares  for  his  natural  as  well  as  his  spiritual 
needs.  Thus  the  labours  and  controversies  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  had  as  their  outcome  the  establish- 
ment of  the  prijiciple  that  the  Spirit  of  God 
manifests  His  work  in  man  by  endowing  him  with 
faith  and  love  (cf.  1  Ti  1*). 

LiTERATrRK.— I.  (a)  For  the  Jewish  tradition  :  P.  Volz,  Der 
GeiH  GotUi,  Tubingen,  1911 ;  (fc)  for  the  conceptions  current  in 
Hellenism,  H.  Weinel,  Die  Wirkrtngen  des  Gtistes  uiirf  der 
GeisUr  tin  naehapostolisehen  Zeitalter  bis  auf  Ireruetig, 
Freiburg  i.  B.,  1899.  II.  H.  Gnnkel,  IHe  Wirtungen  des 
hriligen  Geistes^,  Gottingen,  1909 ;  M.  Kahler,  Dofftnatiieke 
Zeitjragen,  i.,  Leipzig.  1S9S :  '  Das  schriftmassige  Bekenntnis 
zaxn  Geiste  Christi,"  p.  137 ;  H.  H.  Wendt,  Die  Begrife  Fleiteh 
und  Geist  im  biblisehen  Sprachgebraueh,  Gotha,  1S78.  III.  J. 
Gloel,  Der  heilige  Geist  in  der  HeiUrerkiindigung  des  Paulus, 
Halle,  18S8 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  ST,  London, 
1909 ;  F.  von  Hugel,  Eternal  Life,  Edinburgh,  1912. 

A.  Schlatter. 

HOME.— 1.  The  English  word  'home '  represents 
more  than  one  Greek  word  ;  most  commonly  oIkos 
gives  the  idea.  Thus  Kar'  oUov  =  '  at  home  '  (Ac  2** 
RV  and  AVm,  and  5*^  RV ;  AV  '  from  house  to 
house '  and  '  in  every  house ') ;  while  /cor  oUovt  in 
2(P  =  'from  house  to  house,'  AV  and  RV,  private 
as  opposed  to  public  teaching  being  referred  to ; 
and  Kara  rovs  o&coiv  in  8*  =  '  [entering]  into  every 
house.'  '  At  home '  renders  if  olK(f  in  1  Co  11**  14^. 
In  1  Ti  5*  widows'  children  are  bidden  evcrt^eiv  t6i> 
l5iov  oTkop,  '  show  piety  at  home'  (AV),  or  '  towards 
their  own  family'  (RV).  In  Tit  2^  RV  the  young 
married  women  are  to  be  oUovpyoi,  '  workers  at 
home '  ( AV  oUovpol,  '  keepers  at  home ' ;  the  former 
word  is  not  found  elsewhere,  but  is  attested  by  all 
the  best  MSS). 

The  same  idea  is  given  by  rd  fSia,  lit.  'their 
own  belongings,'  in  Ac  21*  ('  returned  home ') ;  * 
and  figuratively  in  2  Co  5*"  ®  by  ivSriixeiv,  '  to  be  at 
home "  (lit.  '  among  the  people '),  and  iK5i],u€iv, '  to  be 
absent  from  home ' ;  perhaps  also  by  the  phrase,  ^i" 
Tois  Tov  UarpSt  fMv,  '  in  my  Father's  house '  (figura- 
tively, or  else  lit.  of  the  Temple),  of  Lk  2". 
Again,  xiXts  (Lat.  civitas)  conveys  the  idea  of  a 
'home'  (cf.  He  ll"*- is  los  13U  and  especially  Mt 
12^  :  x<5\ts  fi  oMa).  To  us  the  word  '  city '  conveys 
the  idea  of  streets  and  buildings ;  to  a  Greek  or 
Roman,  and  so  to  an  early  Christian,  it  means  an 
organized  society  which  is  the  home  of  those  who 
inhabit  it  (see  B.  F.  Westcott,  Hehreics,  1889,  p.  388 
tl".).     So  also  we  may  paraphrase  Ph  3**  thus  :  '  Our 

*  Cf.  01  Miot,  'one's  own  people,'  in  1  Ti  58,  and  especially  in 
Jn  111,  where  both  expressions  are  joined  together.  The  Incar- 
nate came  to  His  own  home  (ra  cSta),  but  His  own  chosen 
people,  the  Jews  (oi  litot),  received  Him  not. 


582 


HONEST 


HONEY 


home  (iroXis)  is  in  heaven,  while  on  earth  we  are 
only  tnavelleiH  and  passers-by.' 

2.  The  idea  of  home  is  much  dwelt  upon  in  the 
Pastoral  Epistles.  There  is  a  striking  ditference 
in  the  NT  between  the  qualifications  of  an 
'  apostle '  in  the  widest  sense,  of  a  travelling  mis- 
sionary having  oversight  of  the  churches  (such  is 
also  the  meaning  of  '  apostle '  in  tlie  D'ulache),  and 
of  the  local  '  bishop '  or  '  presbyter '  and  deacon. 
The  'apostle'  may  l)e  married  (1  Co  9"),  but  his 
liome  life  is  not  emphasized  ;  while  in  the  case  of 
the  local  officials  the  home  is  much  spoken  of. 
Thus  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  the  bisliop  must  be 
husband  of  one  wife,  given  to  hospitality,  ruling 
well  his  own  house,  having  his  children  in  subjec- 
tion ;  for  ruling  his  family  well  leads  to  his  ruling 
his  flock  well  ;  a  test  or  his  having  trained  his 
children  well  is  that  they  believe,  and  are  not 
accused  of  riot  and  are  not  unruly  (1  Ti  3'-',  Tit  1«). 
Deacons  must  be  husbands  of  one  wife,  ruling 
their  cliildreu  and  their  own  houses  well  (1  Ti  3'^). 
These  Epistles  also  deal  generally  with  Christian 
home  life  ;  the  faithful  are  to  provide  for  their 
own  households  (1  Ti  5*) ;  married  women  must  be 
good  house  workers  (above,  1 ;  cf.  the  virtuous 
woman  of  Pr  Sl'"*^),  and  must  love  their  husbands 
and  children  (Tit  2^'-).  Among  widows'  qualifica- 
tions is  that  of  having  brought  up  children,  who 
in  turn  are  bidden  to  requite  their  parents  by 
supiiorting  the  widowed  mother  and  grandmother 
(1  Ti  5" ;  cf.  vv.*- 1«).  We  have  several  distant 
glimpses  of  devout  Christian  homes  in  the  NT — of 
Timothy  witii  his  mother  and  grandmother  at 
Lystra,  of  Philip  with  his  daughters  at  Caesarea, 
and  of  some  otliers,  for  which  see  Family. 

3.  Hospitality  is  closely  connected  with  the  idea 
of  '  home.'  Eor  the  large  guest-rooms  which  made 
this  possible  on  a  comparatively  extended  scale, 
see  House.  Instances  of  hospitality  are  common 
in  tlie  apostolic  writings.  Simon  the  tanner  enter- 
tains St.  Peter  (Ac  10*),  Lydia  at  Philippi  shows 
hospitality  to  St.  Paul  (16''''-*'),  the  jailer  there 
brings  the  apostles  into  his  house  and  sets  meat 
before  them  (16'^);  Titus  Justus  at  Corinth  (18^), 
Philip  at  Cajsarea  (2P),  Mnason  of  Cyprus  at 
Jerusalem,  or  at  a  village  between  Cajsarea  and 
Jerusalem  (21'«;  see  W.  M.  Kamsay,  St.  Paul  the 
Traveller,  1895,  p.  302  f.),  Publius  in  Malta  (28')— 
all  entertained  the  Apostle  hospitably.  In  Ro  16^ 
Gaius  is  famous  for  this  quality;  he  is  the  host 
of  the  whole  Church,  apparently  at  Corinth  (cf. 
1  Co  1").  It  is  just  possible  that  he  may  be  the 
same  as  the  hospitable  Gaius  of  3  Jn  ^- ",  but  the 
name  is  a  connnon  one.  With  the  last  passage 
contrast  the  want  of  hospitality  shown  by  Dio- 
trephes  in  3  Jn ^'^ 

The  duty  of  sliowing  hospitality  is  insisted  on 
in  the  case  of  a  '  bishop '  in  1  Ti  ^^,  Tit  1*  (he  is  to 
be  tt>iK6i€vos),  and  in  the  case  of  a  widow  in  1  Ti  5'" 
{i^evoZ^xyiaev) ;  and  Christians  in  general  are  bidden 
to  '  pursue '  (Ro  12'^)  and  '  not  to  forget '  (He  IS'-*) 
love  unto  strangers  {tpiXo^evia),  to  be  '  lovers  of 
strangers '  ((piXbievoi,  1  P  4"),  i.e.  not  to  be  givers 
of  feasts  but  to  receive  strangers  (C.  Rigg,  .S"^. 
Peter  and  St.  Jude  {ICC,  1901],  173;  cf.  Job  3P^). 
In  these  iniunctions  there  is  a  reminiscence  of  our 
Lord's  words, '  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye  took  me  in ' 
(Mt  25^).     See,  further,  art.  Hospitality. 

A.  J.  Maclean. 

HONEST.— 1.  Tlie  word  'honest '  in  the  AV  bears 
the  Latin  {honestns,  fr. /iono*=' honour')  and  the 
older  English  senses  of  (a)  'regarded  with  honour,' 
'  honourable,'  and  (b)  'bringing  honour,' '  becoming' 
(art.  'Honest,  Honesty'  in.  JJDB).  It  is  used  \n 
translating  (1)  jxaprvpovnivoi  (Ac  6^) ;  the  'deacons' 
must  be  men  of  'honest  report'  (AV),  i.e.  of 
honourable  repute  (cf.  He  11--  *•,  etc.).  (2)  /caXrft  ; 
it  is  a  Christian  duty  '  to  take  thought  for  things 


honourable  (AV,  '  honest')  in  the  sight  of  all  men ' 
(Ro  12"),  i.e.  to  live  morally  above  suspicion  in 
the  eyes  of  the  world.  The  same  phrase  (taken 
from  the  LXX  translation  of  Pr  3*)  occurs  in  2 
Co  8^'.  St.  Paul's  precautions  to  avoid  slander  in  the 
administration  of  Church  funds  provide  an  illus- 
tration of  the  principle.  Ka\6z  is  translated  in  the 
RV  'honourable'  ('  honest,'  AV)  in  2  Co  13^  and 
'  seemly '  ('  honest,'  AV)  in  1  P  2^2.  Since  integrity 
wins  men's  moral  respect,  '  honestly '  is  retained 
as  the  RV  translation  of  koKQs  in  He  13'*,  and  the 
RVm  rendering  of  ko.\C}v  fpyuv  in  Tit  3'*  is  '  honest 
occupations.'  (3)  eva-xvi^'"^^  (Ro  13'*,  1  Th  4'*) ; 
both  the  AV  and  the  RV  translate  '  honestly,'  but 
'  becomingly '  or  '  worthily '  seems  preferable  (the 
same  adverb  is  translated  '  decently '  in  1  Co  14***). 
(4)  aefivd  ;  '  whatsoever  things  are  honest  (AV  ; 
'  honourable,' RV)  .  .  .  think  on  these  things '(Ph 
4*).  Various  renderings  have  been  suggested — 
'  reverend '  (AVm),  '  seemly '  (Ellicott), '  venerable ' 
(Vincent),  '  whatever  wins  respect'  (Weymouth), 
'  the  things  which  produce  a  noble  seriousness ' 
(M.  Arnold).  The  corresponding  noun  in  1  Ti  2" 
is  translated  in  the  RV  '  gravity.' 

2.  The  idea  of  honesty  in  our  modem  sense  is 
fairly  conspicuous  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic 
Church  (ct.  the  Gospels,  where  there  is  practically 
no  direct  reference  to  this  virtue ;  see  art.  '  Honesty ' 
in  DCG).  Thieves  and  avaricious  men  shall  not 
enter  the  Kingdom  of  God  (1  Co6*-'").  Liars  cannot 
enter  the  New  Jerusalem  (Rev  21=^  22'')  :  their 
part  is  in  the  fiery  lake  (21*).  Deceit  [5o\j\os)  finds 
its  place  in  the  black  list  of  pagan  vices  (Ro  1^) : 
it  is  one  of  the  signs  of  an  unregenerate  world 
(3'2;  cf.  2^') ;  the  Christians,  becoming  new  men, 
must  put  away  falsehood,  and  speak  trutli,  eac-li 
man  with  his  neighbour  (Eph  4--'-  -^  Col  3*).  He 
that  stole  must  steal  no  more,  but  must  work  with 
his  hands  '  in  honest  industry '  (Eph  4-'').  None 
must  suffer  disgracefully  for  thieving  (1  P  4'''). 
The  dishonesty  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira  meets 
with  terrible  punishment  (Ac  5).  Fair  dealing  in 
sexual  relations  is  recognized  (1  Co  7").  A  con- 
temptible form  of  dishonesty  is  that  of  a  relifjious 
teacher  whose  motive  is  self-interest,  and  who  is 
so  degraded  as  to  trick  his  hearers  (2  Co  2'^  ll'^,  Ro 
16'*,  Eph  4'").  St.  Paul,  in  contrast,  asserts  his 
own  purity  of  motive  (1  Th  2'"-,  2  Co  7^  12'«'-,  Ac 
20^)  and  honesty  of  message  (2  Co  4=).  The  burden 
of  the  social-reform  prophets  of  tlie  OT  is  repeated 
in  the  denunciations  of  the  unscrupulously  rich — 
'  Behold,  the  hire  of  the  labourers,  who  mowed 
your  fields,  which  is  of  you  kent  back  by  fraud, 
crieth  out'  (Ja  5*).  See  furtlier  art.  'Honest, 
llonesty '  in  HDB  for  literary  illustrations  of  the 
use  of  the  Avord  '  honest.'  H.  BULCOCK. 

HONEY  (AtAi).— The  words  of  God  are  often 
compared  to  food  that  is  exceedingly  agreeable  to 
the  palate— sweeter  than  honey  (Ps  19'»  119'<»). 
The  prophet  of  the  Revelation  received  from  an 
angel  s  hand  a  little  book  (j3tj3Xapi5to»')— evidently 
some  special  source,  probably  Jewish,  which  he  has 
incorporated  in  his  own  work — and  was  enjoined 
to  eat  it  (Rev  10*'-).  In  his  mouth  it  was  sweet  as 
honey  (cf.  Ezk  3'),  but  as  soon  as  lie  swallowed  it 
he  felt  its  bitterness  (Rev  10'").  To  be  taken  into 
God's  council  and  made  cognizant  of  His  ])uri)oses 
gave  promise  of  the  most  delightful  experiences; 
but  a  prophet's  sense  of  the  reaction  of  Divine 
holiness  against  the  world's  sin,  and  his  call  to 
be  the  herald  of  Divine  judgments,  often  made 
his  ministry  anything  but  enviable.  Jeremiah,  to 
whom  God'^s  revelation,  when  first  received,  was 
the  joy  of  his  heart,  afterwards  found  the  truth 
so  bitter  that  he  refused  to  publish  it,  until  it  l)egan 
to  be  like  a  fire  shut  up  in  his  bones  (Jer  15"*  20»). 
Every  true  messenger  of  God,  resolute  in  facing 


HONOUR 


HOPE 


583 


hard  facts,  endured  suHerings  to  which  the  false 
prophet,  optimistically  predicting  smooth  things, 
was  an  utter  stranger.  '  The  persecutions,  tlie 
apostasies,  the  judgments  of  the  Church  and  people 
ot  the  Lord  saddened  the  spirit  of  the  Seer  and 
dashed  his  joy  at  the  first  reception  of  the  mystery 
of  God '  (Alford  on  Rev  10»»).  The  alternation  of 
spiritual  joy  and  sorrow — the  fu\i  and  the  riKpla 
of  evangelism — has  been  the  lot  of  every  true 
prophet,  ani.'ient  and  modem.  '  Laughter  was  in 
this  Luther,  as  we  said  ;  but  tears  also  were  there. 
Tears  also  were  appointed  him ;  tears  and  hard 
toil.  The  basis  of  his  life  was  sadness,  earnest- 
ness' (Carlyle,  Heroes  and  Hero-Worship,  1872,  p. 
131).  James  Strahax. 

HONOUR.— In  the  NT  two  Gr.  words,  in  various 
forms,  are  thus  translated :  (1)  5d|a,  Sojdfeu',  as  in 
the  phrases  '  by  honour  and  dishonour '  (2  Co  6*), 
and  'one  member  be  honoured'  (RVm  'glorified,' 
1  Co  12^) ;  the  woi'ds  are  derived  from  SoKtlv,  '  to 
think,'  'hold  an  opinion,'  or  'hold  in  repute  or 
honour ' ;  hence  the  noun  has  the  significance  of 
'good-repute,'  'honour,'  'glory';  (2)  ti/*^,  rifidy, 
Tifiios  (from  the  root  riew,  *  to  pay  a  price'  and  then 
'to  pay  honour'),  rifiri  is  the  most  frequent  word 
for 'honour'  in  the  NT.  Primarily  it  means  the 
price  wliich  is  paid  or  received  for  something,  as 
in  the  phrase  '  the  price  of  blood '  (Mt  27*,  also  Ac 
4**  5-  19^-').  The  metaphorical  sense,  indicating 
something  of  price,  worth,  or  value,  naturally 
follows,  like  'dignity,'  'veneration,'  'honour,'  and 
'ornament,'  as  in  the  expression  'a  vessel  for 
honour '  (Ro  9^^), '  in  honour  preferring  one  another' 
(Ro  12'"),  '  honour  to  whom  honour'  (Ro  13").  The 
verb  Tifidv  is  used  in  the  sense  of  valuing,  as  '  the 
price  of  him  that  was  priced,  whom  certain  of  the 
children  of  Israel  did  price'  (Mt  27') ;  but  elsewhere 
it  has  the  meaning  '  to  venerate,' '  hold  in  honour,' 
as  'Honour  thy  father  and  mother'  (Eph  6^), 
'  honoured  us  with  many  honours'  (Ac  28''>). 

The  words  56|a  and  rt^^  and  their  verbal  forms 
are  employed  in  the  LXX  to  translate  i-n,  T-5  and 
18%  The  two  words  '  glory '  and  '  honour '  appear 
together  in  descriptions  of  the  Exaltation  of  Christ 
— 'crowned  with  glory  and  honour'  (He  2'-  *,  2  P 
1'^);  of  the  bliss  of  the  future  world — 'glory, 
honour,  and  immortality '  (Ro  2^-^") ;  of  what  the 
kings  are  to  bring  into  the  heavenJy  Jerusalem — 
'They  shall  bring  the  glory  and  honour  of  the 
Gentiles  {levoiv)  into  it '  (Rev  21*").  The  two  words 
are  also  used  together  in  the  description  of  the 
triumph  of  faith's  trial  'that  it  might  be  found 
unto  .  .  .  glory  and  honour  at  the  revelation  of 
Jesus  Christ'  (1  Pi''),  and  in  doxologies  ascribing 
'  praise,  honour,  and  glory '  to  Christ  (Rev  5^  "), 
and  to  God  (1  Ti  l^".  Rev  4  '•  "  7^-). 

Three  passages  where  rifi-^  occurs  require  separate 
treatment.  In  1  Ti  5",  'Let  the  elders  that  rule 
well  be  counted,  worthy  of  double  honour,  especially 
those  who  labour  in  the  word  and  teaching'  (RV), 
the  context  plainly  indicates  that  the  '  honour '  is 
to  be  taken  as  'honorarium'  or  'stipend.'  The 
reason  given  for  such  treatment  is  expressed  in  the 
words  which  follow  :  '  For  the  scripture  saith.  Thou 
shalt  not  muzzle  the  ox  when  he  treadeth  out  the 
com.  And,  The  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire' 
(1  Ti  51* ;  cf.  J.  R.  Dumraelow,  The  One  Volume  Bible 
Commentary,  p.  999  ;  H.  R.  Reynolds,  in  Expositor, 
1st  ser.  vol.  iv.  p.  47  ;  see  also  HDB  v.  441). 

In  1  P  2^  the  phrase  vtilv  ovv  i]  ti/jltj  tois  xurrevovffiv  is 
variously  translated :  '  Unto  you  therefore  which 
believe  he  is  precious '  (AV) ;  '  For  you  therefore 
which  believe  is  the  preciousness '  (RV) ;  'in  your 
sight  ...  is  the  honour'  (RVm).  In  the  preceding 
context  reference  is  made  to  Christ  as  a  '  precious ' 
stone  (1  P2*-*),  and  if  that  connexion  is  maintained 
in  vj,  the  sense  would  be  '  unto  you  who  believe 


Christ  is  all  that  God  had  declared  ;  you  have 
seen  Him  as  precious,  the  preciousness.  But  it 
is  possible  to  connect  the  words  with  the  phrase 
immediately  before  them,  and  read  them  by  way 
of  amplification—'  He  that  believeth  on  Him  shall 
not  be  put  to  shame ;  unto  you  therefore  who 
believe  he  is  the  honour,  or  ornament,'  i.e.  'in- 
stead of  shame  you  find  the  honour  or  ornament  of 
your  life  in  Christ.'  Our  opinion  favours  the  latter 
rendering. 

The  other  passage  is  in  Col  2®,  oix  iw  rifiy  nwl  xpAs 
r\r)ffpu>pj)v  TTJi  ffapKdi,  which  is  translated,  '  not  in  any 
honour  to  the  satisfying  of  the  flesh '  ( AV),  '  not  of 
any  value  (honour,  RVm)  against  the  indulgence 
of  the  flesh '  (RV).  Both  translations  are  unsatis- 
factory :  the  AV  because  it  does  not  give  any 
clear  or  practical  meaning,  and  the  RV  because, 
though  it  gives  a  good  sense,  it  gives  a  some- 
what strained  force  to  x/x5s.  Eadie's  translation 
and  interpretation  seem  to  us  the  best :  '  Which 
things,  having  indeed  a  show  of  wisdom  in  super- 
stition, humility,  and  corporeal  austerity,  not  in 
anything  of  value,  are  for,  or  minister  to,  the 
gratification  of  the  flesh.'  '  The  apostle  means  to 
condemn  these  precepts  and  teachings;  his  censure 
is  that  they  produce  an  effect  directly  the  opposite 
to  their  professed  design'  {Com.  in  loco).  Other 
commentaries  on  the  passage  may  be  consulted  for 
the  various  interpretations  which  are  attached  to 
it.  WH  bracket  the  words  along  with  the  three 
which  precede  them,  as  indicating  a  doubtful  text. 
It  is  possible  that  some  word  or  particle  has  dropped 
out  of  the  passage. 

The  man  of  the  world's  conception  of  honour  does 
not  appear  in  the  NT. 

IdXDLATDBE. — Wilke-Grimm,  Clavu  Xovi  Testamenti,  1868, 
«. vr. &>|a,  iojo^w ;  DCy  L.art.  'Honour';  HDBii.,  art.  'Ok>ry'; 
J.  R.  Dmnmelow,  The  One  Volume  BibU  Ccmauntary,  1909, 
p.  999 ;  H.  R.  Reynolds  in  Expotitor,  1st  »er.  toL  iv.  p.  47 ; 
A.  S.  Peake,  EGTy  '  Coloesians.'  1903,  p.  535;  G.  Jackson 
in  Sxpotitor,  6th  ser.  toL  xiL  pp.  lSO-193. 

JOHX  REID. 

HOPE  (Axt'j). — 'Hope  may  be  defined  as  desire 
of  future  good,  accompanied  by  faith  in  its 
realization.  The  object  both  of  faith  and  of  hope 
is  something  unseen.  Faith  has  regard  equally  to 
past,  present,  or  future,  while  no  doubt  in  Scripture 
referring  mainly  to  the  future.  Hope  is  directed 
only  to  the  future.  Expectation  difiers  from  hope 
in  referring  either  to  good  or  evU  things,  and 
therefore  lacks  the  element  of  desire '  (J.  S.  Banks 
in  HDB,  S.V.). 

We  shall  divide  our  study  of  the  word  and  idea 
in  the  Apostolic  Church  into  two  parts:  (1)  the 
Pauline  conception  of  hope ;  (2)  the  idea  of  hope 
in  other  apostolic  and  sub-apostolic  writings,  ex- 
clusive of  the  Gospels. 

1.  The  Pauline  conception. — According  to  St. 
Paul,  hope  has  for  its  object  those  benefits  which, 
though  promised  to  the  Christian  Church,  are  not 
yet  within  its  reach  (Ro  8^).  It  is  therefore 
described  generally  as  the  hope  of  salvation  (1  Th 
5* ;  cf.  Ro  8^**),  as  indeed  the  last  term  includes 
generally  deliverance  from  all  e>"ils  and  the 
bestowment  of  all  good.  It  is  the  hope  of  the 
resurrection  (1  Th  4^*),  inasmuch  as  the  resurrection 
is  at  once  deliverance  from  death  and  the  begin- 
ning of  future  felicity.  It  is  the  hope  of  glory  or 
of  the  glory  of  God  (Ro  5^  Col  1^^;  cf.  2  Co  3"), 
in  so  far  as  the  happiness  of  the  future  state  is  set 
forth  under  the  figure  of  splendour  and  brightness, 
involving  the  perfection  of  the  outward  as  well 
as  of  the  inward  life.  Again,  it  is  the  hope  of 
righteousness  (Gal  5*),  i.e.  of  justification,  inas- 
much as  justification,  or  the  acceptance  by  God  of 
believers  as  righteous,  is  the  necessary  condition  of 
and  prelude  to  final  felicity.  Once  more,  as  all 
these  benefits  are  to  be  realized  at  the  Parousia  of 
Christ,  it  is  spoken  of  as  the  hope  of  the  Lord 


584 


HOPE 


HOPE 


(1  Th  P).  Again,  inasmuch  as  these  same  bless- 
ings are  to  be  enjoyed  in  heaven,  our  hope  is  said 
to  be  laid  up  in  heaven  (Col  1") ;  and  as  the 
mystical  indwelling  of  Christ  is  the  earnest  and 
promise  of  future  salvation  (cf.  the  present  writer's 
Man,  Sin,  and  Salvation,  95 If.),  Christ  in  us  is 
spoken  of  as  '  the  hope  of  glory'  (Col  1'"). 

Hope  is  also  variously  characterized  by  St. 
Paul  in  reference  to  the  foundation  on  which  it 
rests.  It  is  the  hope  of  the  gospel  (Col  1^),  in- 
asmuch as  it  is  guaranteed  by  the  gospel  promises ; 
it  is  the  hope  of  the  Scriptures  (Ro  ]5*),  inasmuch 
as  it  rests  upon  those  of  the  OT.  It  is  the  hope  of 
the  Divine  calling  (Eph  P'  4*),  in  so  far  as  it  is 
substantiated  to  the  individual  by  the  immediate 
call  of  God.  It  is  hope  in  Christ  (1  Co  15**),  as 
founded  in  faith  upon  Him  ;  while  God  is  the  God 
of  hope  (Ro  15'^),  as  its  Object,  Inspirer,  and  Giver 
(cf.  2  Th  2'»). 

In  Ro  5  St.  Paul  has  described  the  growth  of 
hope  with  experience.  As  justified,  we  already 
rejoice  in  the  hope  of  the  glory  of  God  (v.^). 
Tribulations,  however,  serve  to  intensify  and  deepen 
our  hope.  Tribulation  works  patience,  and 
patience  experience  {SoKifiri,  the  approved  character 
of  the  veteran),  and  experience  hope  (vv.*-  ^)  ;  and 
this  hope  never  disappoints,  because  the  love  of 
God  is  shed  abroad  in  the  heart  through  the  Holy 
Spirit  given  unto  us  (v,*). 

Finally,  hope  is  one  of  the  most  distinctive 
marks  of  the  Christian  life  in  opposition  to  the 
hopelessness  of  the  Gentile  world  (Eph  2^^;  cf. 
1  Th  413). 

2.  In  the  other  apostolic  and  sub  -  apostolic 
writings.— The  only  difierence  between  St.  Paul 
and  the  other  apostolic  and  sub-apostolic  writers  is 
that,  just  as  they  have  less  of  a  theological  system 
than  St.  Paul,  so  the  references  to  hope  in  their 
writings  have  a  less  distinctly  theological  char- 
acter.    But  the  sul)stance  of  the  idea  is  the  same. 

Christians  are  heirs  of  salvation  in  hope  (Tit 
1=3^).  Christ  is  our  hope  (1  Ti  V,  Tit  2^^;  Ign. 
Eph.  xxi.  2,  Magn.  xi..  Trail.  Introd.  ii.  2,  Phil. 
xi.  2).  We  hope  in  Him  {Ep.  Barn.  vi.  3,  viii.  5, 
xi.  11,  xvi.  8),  in  His  Cross  (xi.  8).  God  has  united 
us  to  Himself  by  the  bond  of  hope  (He  7^*,  1  Clem. 
xxvii.  1  ;  cf.  Ac  24^',  1  P  P') ;  we  hope  in  Him 
(lTi4i»5»6'7). 

A  striking  expression  for  the  value  of  hope  in 
the  Christian  life  is  found  in  1  P  1^  :  God  has 
begotten  us  again  unto  a  living  hope  by  the  Resur- 
rection of  Christ  from  the  dead.  Cf.  Ep.  Barn. 
xvi.  8,  i\irlaa.vrei  .  .  .  ^yev6/j.eda  Kaivol ;  cf.  also 
Herm.,  Sim.  ix.  xiv.  3,  'When  we  were  already 
destroyed,  and  had  no  hope  of  life,  (the  Lord) 
renewed  our  life.'  Hope,  in  fact,  is  the  content  of 
the  Christian's  life  (1  P  l'^  3»,  He  3»  6"  lO^^; 
Clement,  ad  Cor.  li.  1,  Ivii.  2;  Ep.  Bam.  xi.  8; 
Herm.  Vis.  I.  i.  9,  Mand.  v.  i.  7,  Sim.  ix.  xxvi.  2 ; 
Ign.  Magn.  ix.  1,  Phil.  v.  2).  In  the  beautiful 
language  of  He  6"  it  is,  moreover,  '  an  anchor  of 
the  soul,  both  sure  and  stedfast,  and  entering  into 
that  which  is  within  the  veil  ;  whither  as  a  fore- 
runner Jesus  entered  for  us.' 

Looking  at  the  Apostolic  and  sub- Apostolic  Age 
as  a  whole,  St.  Paul  included,  we  may  say  that 
hope  is  one  of  its  chief  characteristics.  '  We  are 
accustomed  to  describe  the  Apostle  Peter  as  the 
Apostle  of  Hope  on  the  ground  of  the  first  letter 
ascribed  to  him,  but  wrongly,  in  so  far  as  the 
strong  emphasis  on  hope  is  not  peculiar  to  him, 
but  can  be  demonstrated  equally  in  all  other 
writings  of  this  time,  although  indeed  certain 
nuance.i  exist'  (A.  Titius,  Die  NT  Lchre  von  dcr 
Seligkeit,  iv,  71).  Tlie  special  fervour  of  hope  in 
the  NT  and  the  Apostolic  Fathers  is,  of  course,  in 
part  traceable  to  the  belief  in  the  immediate  near- 
ness of  the  Parousia,  Avhich  is  common  to  the 


Apostolic  and  sub-AjK)stolic  Age  as  a  whole.  The 
hope  of  the  Parousia  Ijroiight  the  future  vividly 
into  connexion  with  the  present.  Hence  Titius  in 
the  above-mentioned  work  thus  describes  the  age 
in  question :  '  The  value  of  the  present  consists 
(for  it),  though  not  exclusively,  yet  essentially,  in 
that  tlie  future  belongs  to  it.  If  the  expectations 
of  the  future  should  turn  out  to  be  deceitful, 
therewith  everything  wliich  makes  the  nresent 
religiously  valuable  would  be  annihilated '  {loc, 
cit.).  Christianity,  therefore,  difi'ers  from  what 
has  gone  before  it  just  in  its  'newness  of  hope' 
(Ign.  Magn.  ix.  1),  its  better  hope  (He  7'*). 

We  may  ettectively  illustrate  tlie  meaning  of 
St.  Paul's  contrast  between  the  hopelessness  oftlie 
heathen  world  and  the  hope  of  the  Christian 
Church  by  a  reference  to  E.  Rolide,  Psijche^,  ii. 
393  f.  Here  a  dark  picture  is  given  of  the  later 
Hellenic  culture.  There  were  certainly  hopes  of 
continued  existence  after  death,  scattered  abroad 
in  the  Greek  world.  But  thej'  liad  no  delinite  or 
dogmatically  defined  content.  '  And  it  is  forbidden 
to  no  one  to  give  his  dissentient  thoughts  a  hearing 
in  his  own  mind  and  a  voice  upon  his  tombstone, 
though  they  should  lead  to  the  oi)i)Osite  nole  from 
these  hopes.  A  doubting  "If"  frequently  inserts 
itself  in  tlie  inscriptions  on  the  graves  before  the 
expression  of  the  expectation  of  conscious  life,  full 
sensibility  of  the  dead,  the  rewarding  of  souls  after 
tlieir  deeds  :  "  if  there  below  is  still  anywhere  any- 
thing."   The  like  is  to  be  found  often.' 

Sometimes  even  doubt  is  put  on  one  side,  and  it 
is  definitely  declared  that  there  is  no  life  after 
death.  All  that  is  told  of  Hades  with  its  rewards 
and  punishments  is  an  invention  of  the  poets. 
The  dead  become  earth  or  ashes,  pay  tlie  debt  of 
nature,  and  return  to  the  elements  whence  tliey 
were  made.  '  Savage  accusations  of  the  survivors 
against  death,  the  wild,  loveless  one,  who,  without 
feeling,  like  a  beast  of  prey  has  torn  from  them 
their  dearest,  allow  us  to  recognize  no  gleam  of 
hope  of  the  preservation  of  the  departed  life' 
(p.  394).  But,  again,  complaints  are  declared  to  be 
useless,  resignation  alone  remains.  '"Be  of  good 
cheer,  my  child,  no  one  is  immortal,"  runs  the 
popular  formula,  which  is  written  on  the  graves  of 
the  departed.  "Once  I  was  not  yet,  then  I  was, 
now  I  am  no  more,  what  is  there  further?"  says 
the  dead  on  more  than  one  tombstone  to  the  living, 
who  soon  will  share  the  same  lot.  "  Live,"  he 
cries  to  the  reader,  "since  to  us  mortals  nothing 
sweeter  is  given  than  this  life  in  the  light " '  (ib.). 

Finally  we  meet  with  the  thought  that  the  dead 
lives  on  in  the  memory  of  posterity,  in  general 
form  and  still  more  in  tlie  devotion  of  his  family  ; 
this  is  the  only  comfort  which  many  a  one  in  this 
late  Hellenism  can  find  to  enable  him  to  bear  the 
thought  of  his  own  transitoriness. 

Over  against  this  sombre  background,  then, 
Christianity  shines  out  in  the  ancient  world  like  a 
Pharos,  radiating  the  light  of  a  clear  and  certain 
hope  into  the  darkness.  Nor  is  that  hope  absolutely 
bound  up  Avith  the  nearness  of  the  expectation  of 
the  Parousia,  though  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  was 
that  which  gave  to  the  early  Christian  hope  its 
extreme  keenness.  The  essence  of  the  Christian 
hope  is  the  hope  of  immortality  guaranteed  by 
God  in  Christ ;  as  the  contrast  with  the  uncertainty 
of  the  decadent  Hellenic  culture  well  shows. 

Literature.— E.  Reuss,  Hititory  of  Christian  Theology  in 
the  Apostolic  Arje,  1S72-74  (particularly  valuable  for  its  treat- 
ment of  St.  Paul's  cou'-eption  of  hope  ;  it  has  been  freely  drawn 
upon  in  this  article);  R.  S.  Franks,  Man,  Sin,  and  Halration, 
1908,  p.  95 fT.;  A.  Titius,  Die  ST  Lfhrf  ron  rfcr  SHifjkctt, 
]8i».T-lS)09,  iv.  71;  E.  Rohde,  yXi/fA,-',  1903,  ii.  393  f.;  C. 
Buchnicker,  art.  '  Jloffnmip,'  in  PHK^  viii.  [1900]  232ff. ; 
H.  M.  Butler  in  Cainl»i<lii>-  Thcolnqical  Essai/x,  llKi.'.,  p.  fi7.l; 
J.  R.  lUingworth,  Christian  Chaiartrr,  1!)04,  i>.  W.  W. 
Adams  Brown,  The  Christian  Jlojie,  1912,  p.  0;  J.  Armitagre 
Robinson,  Unity  in  Christ,  1001,  pp.  123,  163,  '2{ii> ;  Mandell 


HORN 


HOfiSE 


585 


Creighton.  The  Hind  (if  SL  PeUr,  19W,  p.  1 ;  P.  J.  MacUgan, 
The  Gomel  Viev  of  Thing*,  1906,  p.  203 ;  R.  G.  Bury,  The 
Valut  of  Hope,  1S87.  R.  S.  FKANKS. 


HORN  (/c^/xii).  — Except  in  Lk  1®  ('horns  of 
salivation '),  the  only  allusions  to  '  horns '  in  the 
NT  are  in  the  Apocalyptic  Visions  (Rev  5*  9"  12* 
13'"  17*- '•**•").  The  horn  as  an  emblem  of 
strength  and  power  is  obviously  derived  from  the 
animal  world.  The  bull  has  always  been  recog- 
nized among  primitive  peoples  as  a  fitting  symbol 
for  strength  ;  hence  the  horn  of  a  bull,  which  is 
the  characteristic  feature  of  that  animal  and  its 
natural  weapon  of  otlence,  acquired  a  special 
significance.  We  thus  find  it  used  symbolically 
by  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  the  homed  cap 
being  the  distinguishing  mark  of  the  gods.  The 
first  occurrence  of  its  emblematic  use  in  the  OT  is 
in  Dt  33'",  where  Ephraim  is  said  to  have  the  horns 
of  a  wild  ox  (cxi).  Other  examples  will  be  found 
in  1  S  2'- "  and  also  in  1  K  22",  where  Zedekiah  is 
said  to  have  made  '  horns  of  iron,'  whereby  Israel 
would  '  push  the  Syrians,  until  they  be  consumed.' 
In  the  later  books  of  the  OT  the  horn  is  used  as 
'the  symbol  of  a  dynastic  force'  (cf.  Zee  1'^-, 
Dn  v*^-  S*^-),  and  it  is  used  in  the  same  sense  in 
Rev  12^  131-  "  17*^-. 

In  Rev  5*  the  *  seven  horns '  sjTnbolize  the  power 
of  the  Lamb  as  the  victorious  Christ,  and  the 
'  seven,'  which  throughout  the  OT  and  the  NT 
represents  fullness,  here  denotes  the  all-sufficiency 
of  that  power.  In  the  '  horns  of  the  golden  altar ' 
in  Rev  9^^  we  seem  to  have  an  echo  of  Ex  27'-  -  ;  as 
H.  B.  Swete  says  {The  Apocalypse  of  St.  Jokn^, 
121),  there  may  here  be  some  allusion  to  the  'four 
comers  of  the  earth'  mentioned  in  7',  and  the 
'  single '  voice  is  a  suitable  mouthpiece  for  the 
single-hearted  and  unanimous  desire  of  the  Church 
throughout  the  world.  In  Rev  12^  the  great  red 
dragon  is  furnished  A\-ith  ten  horns.  The  horns, 
however,  are  not  crowned,  and  it  is  interesting  in 
this  connexion  to  compare  and  contrast  the  account 
of  the  wild  beast  of  the  sea  (13*),  where  the  beast 
is  represented  as  having  ten  diadems  on  its  ten 
horns.  The  ten  crowned  horns  in  the  latter  pas- 
sage (13')  denote  ten  kings  and  represent  the  forces 
which,  arising  out  of  the  Roman  Empire  itself,  like 
horns  out  of  a  beast's  head,  would  ultimately  bring 
about  its  dissolution.  The  second  beast  (Rev  13") 
is  of  a  diflerent  character  :  he  has  '  two  horns  like 
unto  a  lamb,'  but,  notwithstanding  his  gentle  and 
docile  appearance,  '  he  spake  as  a  dragon.'  He 
represents  a  religious  power,  and  at  once  recalls 
the  '  false  prophets  (Mt  7'')  which  come  to  you  in 
sheep's  clothing,  but  inwardly  aie  ravening  wolves.' 
Lastly,  '  a  scarlet-coloured  beast .  .  .  having  seven 
heads  and  ten  horns '  (Rev  17'),  is  the  undoer  of  '  the 
great  harlot'  (v.'*).  The  reference  is  again  to  the 
doom  of  the  Roman  Empire.  The  ten  homs  are 
'  ten  kings  which  have  received  no  kingdom  as  yet ' 
(v. '2),  but  are  destined  to  '  receive  authority  as 
kings,  with  the  beast,  for  one  hour.'  Both  the 
kings  and  the  beast  to  whom  *  they  give  their 
power  and  authority'  will  be  impotent  in  their 
attack  against  the  Lamb,  but  nevertheless  they 
are  destined  to  be  the  willing  or  unwUling  agents 
of  tlie  Divine  purpose — '  they  shall  hate  the  harlot, 
and  shall  make  her  desolate  and  naked,  and  sliall 
eat  her  flesh  and  shall  bum  her  utterly  with  fire. 
For  God  did  put  in  their  hearts  to  do  his  mind.' 
The  harlot  is  the  great  city  (i.e.  Rome;  v.'^),  and 
she  was  to  receive  her  death-blow  at  the  hands  of 
those  who  '  have  received  no  kingdom  as  yet.'  The 
Seer's  prediction  was  amply  verified  by  the  numer- 
ous invasions  of  barbarian  hordes,  which  blackened 
the  page  of  Rome's  history  in  the  5th  and  6th  cen- 
turies A.D.,  and  finally  laid  its  long-established 
Empire  in  i-uios. 


LiTERATTRX.— H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apoealgpte  <ff  St.  John^, 
1907,  pp.  78,  120,  no,  221  f.,  224  t. ;  Mumy's  DB,  356 ;  HDB  iL 


iBi  L2O0f. 


P.  S.  P.  Haxdcock. 


HORSE.— In  the  NT,  as  in  the  OT,  the  horse  is 
alwaj's  the  war-horse,  never  the  gentle,  domesti- 
cated creature  beloved  by  the  modem  Arab. 
Asses,  mules,  and  camels  were  the  beasts  used 
by  the  Jews  in  common  life,  both  for  riding  and 
burden-bearing. 

(1)  When  Cliristian  art  depicts  the  conversion  of 
St.  Paul,  it  usually  represents  him  as  falling  from 
an  affrighted  horse  to  the  earth.  The  narrative  in 
Acts  does  not  state  that  be  was  riding  at  all,  but 
it  seems  probable  that  as  the  emissary  of  the  High 
Priest,  engaged  on  important  and  urgent  business 
(Ac  9"-),  he  would  not  make  a  joumey  of  150  miles 
on  foot.  His  task  and  his  spirit  were  warlike — he 
was  breathing  threatening  and  slaughter — and  he 
may  have  taken  a  small  troop  of  horsemen  with 
him.  Strict  Pharisees,  however,  never  rode  on 
horseback,  and  it  is  at  least  as  likely  that  he  and 
his  companions  were  mounted  on  asses  or  mules. 

(2)  W  hen  St.  Paul  was  arrested  in  Jerusalem, 
and  had  to  be  taken  beyond  the  reach  of  con- 
spirators, he  was  escorted  to  Csesarea  by  a  company 
of  70  horsemen  (Ac  23^  **).  These  cavalry,  which 
had  been  temporarily  assisting  the  Roman  garrison 
in  Judaea,  had  their  headquarters  at  Caesarea. 
Josephus  makes  repeated  reference  to  an  ala  of 
Sebaistian  and  Caesarean  horsemen  that  was  at- 
tached to  the  auxiliary  cohorts  (see  Schurer,  HJP 
I.  ii.  [1890]  52).  The  single  cohort  which  was 
stationed  in  Jerusalem  all  the  year  round  was 
apparently  re-inforced  at  the  time  of  the  Passover 
by  cavalrj-  and  infantry  from  Caesarea. 

(3)  St.  James  (3**-)  uses  the  bridling  of  the  horse, 
whose  'whole  body'  is  thereby  turned  at  the 
rider's  pleasure,  to  illustrate  the  complete  self- 
control  which  a  man  achieves  by  merely  bridling 
liis  lips.  It  is  generally  true  tliat  if  the  tongue 
does  not  utter  tne  angry  word,  the  hand  does  not 
grasp  the  sword,  the  feet  do  not  run  to  evil  and 
make  haste  to  shed  blood. 

(4)  The  horse  is  conspicuous  in  the  symbolism 
of  the  Apocalypse  (15  references).  Like  the  fiery 
steed  in  Job  (39'*"^),  he  goes  forth  to  meet  the 
armed  men,  and  smells  the  battle  from  afar. 
Whether  he  belongs  to  the  Church  militant,  or  to 
some  worldly  power,  or  to  the  under  world,  he  is 
always  the  war-horse — always  'prepared  unto 
battle '  or  '  running  to  battle '  (Rev  9"- ').  He  is 
familiar  -with  '  the  sounds  of  chariots '  (9*).  When 
he  appears,  we  expect  to  see  the  rider's  drawn 
sword  (19^) ;  we  are  not  surprised  at  the  sight  of 
blood ;  and  in  one  gruesome  scene  the  deep  pools 
of  gore  come  up  to  the  horses'  bridles  (14^).  A 
white  horse  represents  victory,  a  red  horse  carnage, 
a  black  horse  famine,  and  a  pale  horse  death  (6*^ 
One  victorious  trooper  carries  a  bow  (6*) ;  he  is  the 
light-armed  Parthian,  whose  shafts  were  so  dreaded 
by  the  Romans — '  fidentemque  fuga  Parthum  vers- 
isque  sagittis'  (Virg.  Georg.  iiL  31).  A  host  of 
liendish  mounted  horses,  200,000,000  strong,  armed 
with  breastplates  of  red,  blue,  and  yellow  (of  fire 
and  hyacinth  and  brimstone,  9'"),  are  more  like  the 
steeds  of  those  heavy-armed  Parthians  who  ap- 
pearetl  at  Carrhse  'with  their  helmets  and  breast- 
plates flashing  with  flame  .  .  .  and  the  horses 
equipped  with  mail  of  brass  and  iron'  (Pint. 
Crassits,  24).  But  these  fiend-horses  are  monsters, 
which  have  the  heads  of  lions,  and  breathe  fire  and 
smoke  and  brimstone  (cf.  Wis  11'*;  Virg.  ./En.  vii. 
281).  Against  the  armies  of  earth  and  Hades 
Christ  comes  forth  from  the  openeil  heavens  sit- 
ting on  a  white  horse,  and  all  His  followers  ride 
on  white  horses  and  are  clad  in  white  uniform 

I  (Rev  19"'").     The  combined  forces  of  evil  make 


586 


HOSEA 


HOUSE 


war  in  vain  against  this  Rider  and  His  horsemen 
(19^®),  who  are,  in  the  phrase  of  a  later  time, 
Knights  of  tlie  Holy  Ghost. 

James  Strahan. 
HOSEA  (Uffjii). — This  prophet's  gracious  words 
in  2-'^,  containing  a  Divine  promise  that  faithless 
Israel  will  be  restored  to  God's  favour  and  be  for 
ever  His  faithful  people,  receive  in  St.  Paul's 
revolutionary  exegesis  (Ilo  9'^'-)  a  new  api)lication 
to  the  Gentiles,  wlio  liad  not,  till  the  Christian 
era,  been  the  people  or  the  beloved  of  God,  but 
who  at  length  become  the  objects  of  His  love  and 
are  called  tiie  sons  of  the  living  God.  Before  the 
coming  of  tlie  Messiah  there  was  probably  no  more 
Christ-like  teacher  than  the  prophet  of  Mount 
Ephraim,  who  provided  our  Lord  with  His  favourite 
quotation,  'I  will  have  mercy  [  =  hesed,  love]  and 
not  sacrilice ' ;  and  it  is  evident  that  his  prevision 
of  a  new  covenant,  linking  Divine  and  human  love 
in  everlasting  bonds,  was  scarcely  less  precious  to 
the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  than  to  the  Saviour  of 
the  world.  James  Strahan. 

HOSPITALITY  (^i\o^evla,  lit. '  love  of  strangers '). 
— Hospitality,  by  which  is  meant  the  reception 
and  entertainment  of  travellers,  is  and  always  has 
been  regarded  as  one  of  the  chief  virtues  in  the 
East ;  it  is  therefore  not  surprising  to  find  com- 
paratively frequent  references  to  the  duty  of  its 
strict  observance  throughout  the  pages  of  the  NT 
(Lk  I**'';  Ro  1213-  2",  1  Ti  3^  5i«,  Tit  1«,  He  IS^,  1  P  4», 
3  Jn"^-).  The  customs  of  hospitality  were  clearly 
recognized  as  binding  in  the  time  of  Christ  (Lk  l**^-), 
and  hospitality  was  regarded  as  the  proof  of  right- 
eousness, and  the  natural  test  of  a  man's  character 
in  the  final  judgment  (Mt  25^*).  The  conditions  of 
the  time  made  hospitality  practically  a  necessity 
for  travellers,  while  it  was  vital  to  the  very  ex- 
istence of  the  early  Christian  Church.  The  ordin- 
ary ties  of  friendship  as  well  as  kinship  had  in 
many  cases  been  severed,  and  Christians  regarded 
themselves  and  were  regarded  by  the  outside  world 
as  aliens,  bound  together  as  the  members  of  one 
family.  The  coherence  of  that  family  required 
that,  whenever  a  Christian  migrated  from  one 
place  to  another,  he  should  be  received  as  a  welcome 
guest  by  the  Christians  residing  there  (cf.  Sanday- 
Headlam,  Roman^  [ICC,  1902],  363)  and,  indeed, 
witliout  such  hospitality  missionary  work  would 
have  been  out  of  the  question  (cf.  Ac  10*^  21^", 
Ro  16-3).  -yy-g  accordingly  lind  it  commended  and 
enjoined  as  a  duty  incumbent  on  the  various  Chris- 
tian communities  in  the  letters  of  the  apostles,  as 
well  as  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
(e.g.  Clement*).  Thus  St.  Paul,  in  writing  to  the 
Romans,  urges  them  to  '  communicate  to  the  neces- 
sities of  the  saints,' and  to  be  '  given  to  hospitality.' 
The  duty  of  entertaining  the  ordinary  wayfarer 
was  not  indeed  ignored.  Thus  in  He  13^  the 
faithful  are  enjoined  not  to  forget  '  to  show  love 
unto  strangers  ;  for  thereby  some  have  entertained 
angels  unawares,'  while  later  on,  the  heathen 
writer  Luciant  ridicules  the  liberality  shown  by 
Christians  towards  strangers.  Discrimination  must, 
however,  be  exercised,  and  no  hospitality  is  to  be 
accorded  to  those  who  come  as  the  heralds  of 
another  gospel — '  receive  him  not  into  your  house, 
neither  bid  him  God-speed  :  for  he  that  biddeth 
him  God-speed  is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds' 
(2  Jni"'-). 

But  the  Chiistian,  though  under  an  obligation 
to  strangers  in  general,  was  obviously  under  a 
greater  obligation  to  his  fellow-Christian.  The 
distinction  between  these  two  obligations  is  recog- 
nized in  1  Ti  5'",  where  tlie  writer,  in  his  enumera- 
tion of  the  various  virtues  which  qualify  women 
to  be  '  enrolled '  as  widows,  says,  '  if  she  hath  used 
*  ad  Cor.  i.  17.  t  de  iluitc  Pcrcgrini,  §  lb. 


hospitality  to  strangers,  if  she  hatli  washed  the 
saints'  feet,'  i.e.  accorded  especial  hospitality  to 
Christians  as  opposed  to  strangers.  The  washing 
of  a  guest's  feet  by  his  host  was  a  inark  of  honour 
to  the  guest  and  of  deep  humility  on  the  part  of 
the  host  (cf.  1  S  25") ;  hence  the  significance  of 
our  Lord's  rebuke  to  Simon  the  Pharisee  (Lk  7**), 
and  of  His  own  action  at  the  Last  Supper  ( Jn  IS***). 
Again,  kissing  was  and  is  another  act  of  courtesy 
usually  accorded  to  strangers  of  distinction,  but 
significantly  denied  to  our  Lord  by  His  Pharisaical 
host  (Lk  7**).  In  Palestine  to-day  the  natives  may 
be  seen  kissing  the  mouth,  the  beard,  and  even  the 
clothes  of  their  honoured  guests  (cf.  Geikie,  The 
Holy  Land  and  the  Bible,  i.  143).  They  refuse  all 
remuneration  for  their  services,  but,  after  three 
days,  the  host  may  ask  his  guest  whether  he  in- 
tends to  prolong  his  stay,  and,  if  so,  the  host  may 
provide  him  with  work.  For  three  days  tiie  hospi- 
tality accorded  is  regarded  strictly  as  a  right  to 
which  the  guest  is  absolutely  entitled,  and  the 
guest  can,  of  course,  on  the  expiration  of  three 
days,  take  up  his  abode  in  another  tent  in  the  same 
place,  and  thus  renew  his  right.  During  his  so- 
journ, the  person  of  the  guest  is  inviolable,  and 
this  is  the  case  even  if  he  be  the  sworn  enemy  of 
the  man  of  whose  hospitality  he  is  partaking.  The 
Oriental  view  of  the  binding  nature  of  this  virtue 
is  well  expressed  in  the  two  local  proverbs — 'every 
stranger  is  an  invited  guest,'  and  *  the  guest  while 
in  the  house  is  its  lord.' 

Literature. — B.  F.  Westcott,  The  EpUUe  to  the  Hebrews, 
1889,  p.  429 ;  E.  C.  Wickham,  The  Epistle  to  the  Hehrewg, 
1910,  p.  123  ;  C.  J.  EUicott,  The  Pastoral  Epistles  of  St.  PauP, 
1864,  pp.  73 f.,  185;  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  (ICC,  1902), 
363;  Speaker's  Commentary:  'Romans  to  Philemon,'  1881,  p. 
786 ;  C.  Bigg,  St.  Peter  and  St.  Jttde  (ICC,  1901),  173 ;  W. 
M.  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  tlie  Roman  Empire,  1893,  pp.  288, 
368  ;  W.  N^lThomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,\nevf.  ed.,  1910 ; 
J.  C.  Geikie,  The  Holy  Land  and  the  Bible,  1887,  i.  143, 306, 443  ; 
H.  C.  Trumbull,  Studies  in  Oriental  Social  Life,  1894,  pp.  73- 
142 ;  A.  Edersheim,  Sketches  of  Jewish  Social  Life,  1908 ;  G. 
Robinson  Lees,  Village  Life  in  Palestine,  new  cd.,  1905; 
Smith's  DB,  ed.  Fuller,  vol.  i.  pt.  i.  pp.  1401-03 ;  SDB  365-67  ; 
I>CG  i.  751.  P.  S.  P.  HaNDCOCK. 

HOUR  (figurative).* — As  in  the  literal  sense 
'  hour '  signifies  a  point  in,  or  part  of,  the  course 
of  a  day,  so  in  the  NT  it  is  used  metaphorically  to 
signify  a  point  or  period  in  a  course  of  historical 
development.  In  Ro  13'^  the  use  is  vividly  real- 
istic. The  present  time  of  trial  is  like  the  dark 
and  gloomy  night,  but  'salvation'  draws  nigh; 
already,  therefore,  it  is  '  the  hour  to  awake  out  of 
sleep.'  With  this  single  exception,  the  metaphori- 
cal sense  of  the  word  is  peculiar  to  the  Johannine 
group  of  writings  (cf.  Jn  2^4'-^  12^  13',  etc.),  and 
may  be  delined  as  the  Jixcd  time,  in  distinction 
from  Kaipdt,  the  ^^  time  ('the  boast  of  heraldry, 
the  pomp  of  power  .  .  .  await  alike  th'  inevitable 
hour').  Thus  the  Apocalypse  speaks  (14"")  of  the 
'  hour'  for  reaping  the  harvest  of  the  earth,  which 
is  the  'hour'  of  God's  judgment  (14^)  upon  the 
pagan  world.  To  the  faithful  church  in  Phila- 
delphia (3'")  safe-keeping  is  promised  from  the 
'  hour  of  testing '  which  is  about  to  come  upon 
the  whole  earth,  i.e.  the  period  of  trial  which 
is  to  usher  in  the  Messianic  deliverance.  This 
is  defined  (13'*"")  as  a  time  of  seduction  to  the 
worship  of  the  Beast  (the  Imperial  cult) ;  but  in 
1  Jn  2"*  tlie  sign  of  this  '  last  liour '  is  already  .seen 
in  the  rise  of  Antichrist,  yea,  of  '  many  antichrists,' 
i.e.  the  Gnostic  propagandists.  In  many  passa«?es 
tlie  appearance  of  false  teachers  is  foretola  or  dis- 
cerned as  a  symptom  that  the  last  hour  of  this 
world's  day  is  running  its  course  (Mt  24'- "-^--^ 
Lk  218,  1  T'i  4'-',  2  P  3^,  etc.).  RouEUT  Law. 

HOUSE. — In  this  article  the  references  in  the 
*  For  '  Uour '  in  the  literal  sense  see  Timi:. 


HOUSE 


HOUSE 


587 


NT  to  the  structure  and  appointments  of  a  boose 
will  be  collected  together,  and  a  description  of  a 
house  in  apostolic  times  will  be  given,  with  illus- 
trations from  the  present  writer's  observations  in 
his  Eastern  travels.  For  '  house '  in  the  sense  of 
those  who  inhabit  the  building,  and  of  descendants, 
see  Family. 

1.  Foundations  and  materials. — Great  attention 
was  paid  to  the  foundations  ;  they  were  if  possible 
of  stone,  even  if  the  walls  were  of  mud.  The  foun- 
dations (the  apostles  and  prophets)  and  the  comer- 
stone  (Christ)  are  the  principal  elements  in  the 
spiritual  house  (Eph  2^).  The  importance  of  the 
foundations  of  the  wall  of  the  holy  city  is  illustrated 
in  Kev  21**'-  by  their  being  adorned  with  precious 
stones.  It  thus  happens  in  the  present  day  that  in 
theordinary  Eastern  liouse  the  foundations  often 
cost  as  much  as  all  the  rest  of  the  building  put 
together.  In  places  where  stone  is  plentiful  all 
houses  are  built  of  that  material ;  otherwise  only 
the  very  rich  men's  houses  are  of  stone  and  all 
others  are  built  of  sun-dried  bricks  (sometimes  of 
kiln-dried  bricks,  which  are  more  expensive),  or 
even  of  mud  set  in  layers,  each  layer  being  left  to 
dry  hard  before  the  next  layer  is  placed  on  the  top 
of  it.  The  sun-dried  bricks  are  made  sinaply  of 
clay  with  which  chopped  straw  is  mixed  (Ex  5"), 
ana  aie  set  to  dry  in  the  sun  for  a  few  days  before 
they  are  wanted  for  the  building.  Thus  brick- 
making  and  house-building  go  on  together  on  the 
same  ground.  The  perishable  nature  of  the 
material  explains  why,  with  the  exception  of 
the  royal  palaces,  which  were  built  of  stone, 
nearly  all  Xineveh  has  completelj'  vanished. 
If  Layard's  rather  doubtful  theory  is  correct 
(Nitieveh  and  its  Bemains,  London,  1849,  vol.  ii. 
p.  236  ff. ),  that  vast  city  of  '  three  days'  journey ' 
[round  the  waUs]  (Jon  3')  occupied  the  large  area 
betAveen  the  fortresses,  Mliich  alone  remain  to  this 
day,  aiul  was  some  75  miles  in  circumference  ;  but 
of  the  buildings  in  the  centre  of  the  area  there  is 
not  a  trace.  The  same  thing  also  explains  the 
references  to  '  digging  through '  houses  in  Mt  6^ 
24'**,  Lk  12^ ;  this  is  quite  an  easy  thing  to  do. 

2.  The  roof  (d^/xa;  sometimes  ar^yrj,  Mt  8*, 
Lk  7*). — This  is  flat,  made  of  mud  laid  on  beams 
of  wood,  crossed  by  laths,  and  covered  with  mat- 
ting. It  is  used  in  summer  as  a  sleeping-place,  and 
by  day  (especialh'  in  the  evening)  as  a  sitting-room, 
or  often  as  a  promenade,  for  roofs  of  adjacent  houses 
in  the  villages  are  frequently  joined  together.  It 
is  possible  sometimes  to  walk  from  one  end  of  the 
village  to  the  other  wthout  descending  the  ladders 
or  staircases  to  the  courtyards  and  streets.  Hence 
in  time  of  persecution  the  fugitive  would  do  well  to 
liee  along  the  roofs  rather  than  fall  a  prey  to  the 
enemy  in  the  streets  (Mt  24»s  Mk  12,^,  Lk  W^). 
So  St;.  Peter  goes  to  the  roof  to  pray  (Ac  10*).  The 
roof  is  a  favourite  place  for  village  gossip  ;  this  is 
the  'proclamation  on  the  housetops'  of  Mt  ICF, 
Lk  12^.  The  nature  of  the  material  of  the  roof 
explains  how  easy  it  was  to  dig  through  it  (Mk  2*, 
efopi'la^res  ;  cf.  Gal  4*')  in  order  to  let  the  paralytic 
down  ;  the  mention  of  tiles  in  H  Lk  5'*  is  merelj'  a 

Earaphrase  adopted  bv  St.  Luke  for  the  compre- 
ension  of  his  more  ^Vestem  readers — or  at  least 
of  readers  less  acquainted  with  the  customs  of 
Palestine  than  those  of  St.  Mark  (W.  M.  Kamsay, 
Was  Christ  born  at  Bethleliem/',  1898,  p.  57  f.). 

3.  The  windows  {dvpidei).  —  In  the  East  these 
now  usually  look  into  the  courtyard,  not  into  the 
street,  as  privacj-  is  of  the  greatest  importance. 
Such  was  probably  the  case  in  Ac  20®,  where  Euty- 
chus,  sitting  in  a  window,  falls  from  the  third  story 
{drb  Tov  TpiffTe-iOv) ;  as  Eastern  houses  are  usually 
of  two  stories  (for  the  kitchen  see  below),  we  must 
here  have  an  exception  to  the  general  rule.  It  is 
not  common  for  windows  to  be  in  the  outside  wall 


of  a  town ;  yet  this  must  have  been  the  case  in 
Ac  9^,  2  Co  11»  where  St.  Paul  is  let  down  through 
the  town  wall  and  escapes,  in  both  cases  from 
Damascus,  for  both  passages  seem  to  refer  to  the 
same  incident  (cf.  also  Kahab,  Jos  2").  Except  in 
the  better  houses,  no  glass  is  used  in  the  windows ; 
oiled  cotton  or  paper  serves  instead  of  glass  in  the 
winter,  being  removed  in  the  summer.  Glass 
(other  than  that  used  for  mirrors)  is  mentioned  in 
the  NT  only  in  Rev  4'  15*  21'*-  ** ;  its  costliness  in 
ancient  times,  as  in  the  modem  East,  is  seen  by  its 
being  coupled  with  gold  in  Job  28*^  RV. 

4.  The  house  -  gate,— The  door  or  gate  itself 
is  dipa  (Mk  2*,  Jn  18*«,  figuratively  in  Rev  3»), 
but  rvKibv  is  the  gateway  or  entrj-  of  a  house, 
especially  if  large,  as  weU  as  of  a  city  (Mt  26^', 
Lk  I6r",  Ac  Kfi''  12*3^;  in  the  last  passage  the 
full  expression  'door  of  the  gate'  {Ovpa  toC  vvX&kk) 
is  used,  but  in  v.'*  rvXuif  includes  dOpa,  for  it  is 
'  opened '  by  Rhoda ;  cf.  artt.  DooB  and  Gate), 
For  a  house-gate  -ri/Xv  is  not  ordinarily  used ;  it 
is  the  gate  of  a  city,  and  so  of  a  public  bmlding 
like  the  Temple  or  a  prison  (Ac  S*"  12i»,  but  3* 
has  0vpa).  The  house-gate  was  naturally  kept 
locked  in  troublous  times,  as  in  Ac  10*'  12**"**,  and 
was  guarded  by  a  porter  (Mk  13^,  o  dvpupii)  or  a 
portress  (Jn  18*«,  ^  dvpiopos ;  cf.  Mk  14®,  Ac  12*«-), 
just  as  the  figurative  sheepfold  in  Jn  10*  is  guarded 
by  '  the  porter,'  probably  the  Holy  Spirit  (H.  B. 
Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  NT,  1909,  p.  146). 
The  entry  {vvkdip)  is  either  the  same  as,  or  else 
leads  into,  the  fore-court  (rpoavXiov)  of  Mk  14**, 
where  i]  Mt  26'*  has  rvXdiv.  Outside  the  gate  of  the 
great  houses  the  beggars  sit  (Lk  16^,  Lazarus),  as 
they  did  at  the  gate  of  the  Temple  (Ac  3-*').  Inside 
the  gate,  perhaps  in  the  fore-court,  were  the  water- 
pots  for  washing  (Jn  2*);  evidently  not  in  the 
guest-room. 

5.  The  courtyard  (oiJXi}).  —  This  occupied  the 
centre  of  the  house  (Mt  26«^,  Mk  14**- «).  We 
read  of  a  charcoal  fire  in  it — a  brazier  in  the  open 
air  (Mk  14«-  '~,  Lk  22»f-,  Jn  18*«-  ■^),  in  the  middle 
(Lk  fS^).  On  this  courtyard  the  rooms  opened ; 
bur  Lord  inside  was  visible  to  Peter  in  the  court 
(Lk  22**).  The  rooms,  in  places  where  there  is 
little  cold  weather,  might  be  entirely  open  to  the 
court,  as  may  be  seen  at  the  present  day,  e.g.  at 
Mosul ;  or,  in  colder  places,  might  open  on  the 
court  with  doors  and  windows,  with  or  without  a 
covered  gallerj-. 

6.  The  kitchen. — The  kitchen  itself  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  NT,  though  the  oven  (Mt  6**)  and 
kitchen  utensils  (Mk  7*)  are  referred  to.  Yet  in  all 
but  the  richer  houses  it  is  the  most  commonly  used 
part  of  the  house,  and  the  family  ordinarily  live  in 
it ;  in  some  Eastern  countries  it  is  emphatically 
called  '  the  house '  as  opposed  to  '  the  rooms.'  The 
oven  is  a  hole  in  the  floor ;  the  fire,  of  dried  manure, 
is  kindled  at  the  bottom ;  and  the  sides  are  made 
of  hardened  clay,  to  which  the  flaps  of  dough  adhere 
until  they  are  baked  and  readj-  to  be  hooked  out  as 
bread.  Other  food  is  cooked  over  the  tire  in  pots. 
As  there  is  no  chimney  (in  our  sense  of  the  word), 
tlie  kitchen  must  necessarily  be  of  one  story  only, 
to  allow  of  a  hole  in  the  roof  for  the  escape  of  the 
smoke. 

7.  The  rooms. — («)  There  is  not  in  the  East,  in 
the  ordinary  houses,  the  distinction  usually  found 
in  the  West  between  bedrooms  and  sitting-rooms. 
The  latter  are  turned  into  bedrooms  by  spreading 
the  bedclothes  on  the  floor.  Thus  the '  bed-cnamber ' 
{koituiv,  Ac  12*')  of  which  Blastus  was  guardian 
would  be  unusual  except  in  a  great  house  such 
as  that  of  Herod. 

(6)  Most  houses,  even  of  the  comparatively  poor, 
have  a  fairly  large  room  or  rooms,  often,  out  not 
always,  on  the  first  floor,  to  entertain  guests  who 
come  unexpectedlj',  for  Eastern  hospitality  is  great 


588 


HOUSE 


HUMILITY 


(see  Home).  Hence  we  read  that  tlie  upper  room 
{dvuryfov  or  Avuryaiof  or  dvuyfuv  or  dvdyaiov)  of  Mk 
14''"-,  Lk  22'"-  wa.s  large,  and  it  is  expressly  called 
a  'guest-chamber,'  KaTdXv/ia,  i.e.  a  ]>lace  where  the 
guests  unpack  their  baggage ;  it  may  be  doubted 
if  KaTd\v/j.a  in  Lk  2^  is  rightly  rendered  '  inn,'  for 
this  in  1(P*  is  called  iravSoxf'^ov.  Probably  the 
KardXvfia  was  a  guest-chamber  in  a  house  where 
Joseph  expected  to  lodge,  but  it  is  a  word  elastic 
in  meaning  (see  A.  Plummer,  St.  Luke^[ICC,  1898], 
54).  The  Tipper  room  of  the  Last  Supper  was  very 
probably  the  place  where  the  Ten  and  the  rest 
were  assembled  on  Easter  Day,  and  if  so  must  have 
been  somewhat  large,  though  tlie  word  used  (rjOpoia-- 
fiivovs,  Lk  24^*  11 V  ;  cf.  v.")  suggests  crowding,  just 
as  the  compounds  cwriOpoKTixivoi,  cwadpoiffas  in  Ac 
1212  ]c)25  suggest  a  large  assembly.  In  Acts  the 
word  used  for  suoii  an  upper  room  is  vrrep<^ov,  P^ 
937.  s»  (Uoieas)  20'  \,.t  Troas).  The  room  mentioned 
in  1'*  must  have  been  large,  for  it  held  120  i)eople  ; 
and  it  was  perhaps  the  same  as  the  coenaculum  of 
Mk  14'^'-,  lor  it  is  called  'the  upper  room '  (RV). 
It  has  been  suggested  that  as  different  words  are 
used,  the  rooms  must  have  been  different ;  yet  this 
would  not  account  for  St.  Luke's  using  dviliyeov  in 
his  Gospel,  and  always  virepi^ov  in  Acts.  It  was  no 
doubt  in  such  a  guest-chamber  on  the  first  floor 
that  Jesus  healed  the  paralytic,  for  it  was  under 
the  roof.  (With  this  arrangement  for  an  upper 
room  we  may  compare  the  ordinary  provision  in  a 
caravanserai  of  <a  room  or  rooms  over  tlie  gateway 
for  the  guests,  while  the  stables  are  below,  and 
round  the  courtyard.)  Such  an  upper  room  is  j^rob- 
ably  the  ^evia  in  Philem-"^,  Ac  28'" — a  lodging  in 
a  private  house.  In  response  to  St.  Paul's  request, 
Philemon  would  doubtless  otter  his  own  guest- 
room. When  the  Apostle  arrived  in  Rome  lie 
probably  at  first  lodj^ed,  guarded  by  soldiers,  in 
the  guest-room  of  a  friend,  though  afterwards  he 
hired  a  i)rivate  house  dj-Ladufia,  Ac  28''*').  For  the 
use  of  these  guest-rooms  as  the  lirst  Christian 
churches,  see  Family. 

((•)  Resides  the  above  rooms  we  read  in  tlie  NT 
of  a  ra^etoj'  (better  rafxieiov)  and  an  diroO-qKri.  The 
latter  is  a  barn  or  granary  (Mt  3'^  G-"  13=*",  Lk  3" 
1218.24).  The  former  is  properly  a  store-chamber 
(Lk  12-^),  and  is  usually  used  in  that  sense  in  the 
LXX  (Dt  28«,  etc.).  All  Eastern  houses  have  such 
chambers,  and  for  security  they  are  usually  placed 
so  as  not  to  have  an  outside  wall,  but  to  open  ott" 
the  kitchen.  Hence  any  inner  chamber  used  for 
living  in  came  to  be  so  called  (Mt  6"  242«,  Lk  12^). 
The  Latin  translations  of  ra/xeTov  vary  greatly 
(Plummer,  St.  Luke",  318). 

8.  Paving  of  the  rooms.— This  is  very  seldom  of 
wood  (except  in  Solomon's  Temple,  1  K  6'*-  **,  where 
the  wood  was  overlaid  with  gold),  but,  even  on  the 
upper  floors,  of  beaten  mud,  sometimes  of  a  sort 
01  cement.  In  rich  houses  pavements  of  stone  or 
marble  were  used  ;  thus  the  (iabbatha  {AiOdarpuTov) 
of  Jn  19'^  was  probably  a  hall  paved  with  stone. 

9.  Furniture  of  the  rooms.— Very  little  is  said 
of  this  in  the  NT  ;  and,  in  truth.  Eastern  houses 
need  little  furniture.  Carpets  (with  straw  mats 
under  them  to  jn-otect  them  from  the  mud  floor), 
mattresses,  and  bedclothes  are  practically  the  only 
necessaries.  When  we  read  in  the  NT  the  various 
words  for  a  '  bed  '  as  used  for  sleeping  in—KXlvrj  (Mt 
9-,  Lk  r>'8),  kXiuIBiov  (Lk  5»»-  =" ;  the  same  as  KXivrj, 
V.18),  Kpd^liarov  (Mk  2*  6»,  Jn  58)— only  mattresses 
and  bedclothes  are  meant.  The  man  wlio  rises  in 
the  morning  '  takes  up  his  bed,'  and,  rolling  it  up 
in  an  outer  cover,  places  it  against  the  wall,  where 
it  serves  as  a  cushioa  in  the  day-time.  The  same 
is  probably  true  of  kUvti  in  Mk  7^,  Lk  17**,  Rev  2--, 
where  either  sense  is  possil)le  ;  and  of  the  KXtvdpia 

'  ~  3aTa   in  Ac   5'*   (inferior    MSS   substitute 


K\lt>ai  for  the  former  word),  where  the  sick  are  laid 


in  the  streets.  On  the  other  hand,  the  low  couches 
{K\lyai,  triclinia,  rpiKXivia  [the  last  not  in  the  NT]) 
used  for  meals  are  clearly  articles  of  furniture  in 
Mk  4^'  7*  (here  a  '  Western '  addition,  but  it  may 
be  genuine),  Lk  8'" ;  for  a  lamp  may  be  put  under 
them  (cf.  dpxi-rpUXivoi,  Jn  2").  On  these  couches 
the  people  reclined  ;  hence  dvdKeinai  is  '  to  sit  at 
meat'  (Mt  9'",  etc.),  and  the  jjuests  are  dvaKdp.evoi 
(Mt22'*).  It  seems  doubtful  if  ba/s-tcads  axe  ever 
mentioned  in  the  NT ;  see,  further,  art.  Rkd, 
Couch.  The  *  candlestick '  or  lamp-stand  (Xvxvla) 
mentioned  in  the  above  nassages  is  also  a  piece  of 
furniture,  set  in  the  middle  of  the  room  to  hold 
the  light.  Chairs  and  tables  are  not  much  used 
by  non-westernized  Orientals  to  this  day ;  but 
sometimes  a  low  stand  is  placed  on  the  floor  to  hold 
food  at  meals,  though  more  often  the  meats  are 
placed  on  a  tal)leclotli  on  the  ground.  Thus  '  table ' 
in  the  Rible  does  not  usually  denote  an  article  of 
furniture,  except  in  the  case  of  the  money-changers 
in  Mt  21'-,  Mk  11^',  Jn  2'*,  where  a  house  is  not 
being  spoken  of.  The  throne  (/Sij^a),  of  a  king  is 
mentioned  in  Ac  12*^  and  figuratively  tiie  0p6vos  of 
God  and  the  dp6voi  of  angels  or  men  (Mt  19'-'*,  Rev 
20*,  etc.)  are  spoken  of;  but  ordinary  people  sat, 
as  they  still  sit  in  the  true  East,  on  the  ground,  or 
on  cushions,  thougii  chairs  or  seats  {KaO^dpai)  were 
not  unknown  (Mt  2V\  Mk  11"^). 

Literature.— C.  Warren  in  HDD  ii.  431,  art.  'House' 
(especially  for  the  OT) ;  A.  J.  Maclean  and  W.  H.  Browne, 
The  Catholicos  of  the  East  and  hii  People,  IjOiidon,  1892 ;  A.  H. 
Layard,  Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  do.  1849,  especially  pt.  i. 
ch.  vi.  and  vii.,  pt.  ii.  ch.  ii.  A.  J.  MACLEAN. 

HUMILITY    (Ta.Treivo<t)po<xvvri).  —  1.    In   the  OT.— 

The  word  is  common  in  the  NT,  but,  according 
to  Lightfoot  {Fhilrppians*,  1878,  p.  109),  does  not 
occur  earlier.  '  Even  the  adjective  raireivdippwv  and 
tlie  verb  Taireivo(ppovelv,  though  occurring  once  each 
in  the  LXX  (Pr  29^3,  Ps  130-),  appear  not  to  be 
found  in  classical  Greek  before  the  Christian  era.' 
Moreover,  in  lieathen  writers  raireivbs  has  almost 
invariably  a  bad  meaning  :  it  signifies  '  grovelling,' 
*  abject.' 

'  It  was  one  great  result  of  the  life  of  Christ,'  says  Lightfoot 
{loe.  dt.),  'to  raise  "  humility"  to  its  proper  level ;  and.  it  not 
fresh  coined  for  this  purpose,  the  word  raTrnvo^potrvvri  now 
first  became  current  through  the  influence  of  Christian  ethics.' 

All  the  same,  it  is  to  be  recognized  that  the  virtue 
of  humility  is  greatly  commended  in  the  OT,  and 
its  place  in  the  Christian  ethic  can  only  be  properly 
understood  when  we  remember  this.  Especially 
in  the  Psalms  and  Proverbs  and  some  of  the 
I'rophets  is  the  value  of  humility  recognized,  anil 
tiie  NT  writers  sometimes  enforce  wliat  they  have 
to  say  on  the  sulnect  by  a  quotation  from  the  OT 
(cf.,  for  instance,  Pr  2?*,  Ja  4«). 

2.  In  the  NT. — The  value  of  humility  was  a  chief 
point  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  Himself,  and  the 
ajiostolic  writers  follow  Him  in  their  estimate  of 
it.  The  root  of  humility,  as  it  is  descri)>ed  in  the 
NT,  is  a  true  estimate  of  oneself  as  in  the  sight 
of  God.  It  presupposes,  therefore,  a  knowledge  of 
our  weakness.  'Recognizing  this,  man  ceases  to 
hold  himself  of  great  account,  and  therefore  easily 
believes  that  others  are  more  excellent  than  iiiiu- 
self,  nor  takes  it  amiss  that  they  are  preferred 
before  him'  (J.  F.  '[\\nU\e\ii^,  Iiistitutioves Tlieotoijim 
Moralis,  Leipzig,  ed.  1727,  p.  141). 

Above  all,  however,  the.  recognition  of  one's 
position  in  the  sight  of  God  leads  to  humility 
towards  Him.  Before  Him  no  one  can  Iniast 
(1  Co  4*) ;  whatever  merit  one  possesses  rests  nj)on 
the  Divine  grace  (1  Co  4").  •  He  is  humble  before 
God,  who  attributes  nothing  to  himself,  or  to  his 
own  strength,  and  regards  himself  as  .simply  un- 
worthy of  all  Divine  benefits'  (Duddeus,  loc.  cit. ; 
cf.  1  P  6«,  Ja  4'«,  Ac  2»'). 


HOIILITY 


HYMEX^US 


589 


But,  as  has  been  ah-eady  indicated,  humility  is 
.il>o  to  be  exercised  towards  our  fellow-men.  St. 
Paul  and  St.  Peter  alike  enforce  the  need  of  such 
humility  (Ph  •23\  Col  3'- ;  cf.  1  Co  13*,  1  P  5'). 
St.  Paul,  moreover,  adduces  as  the  jrreat  example 
of  such  humility  the  humility  of  Christ  in  the 
Incarnation,  in  that  He  laid  aside  the  form  of  God, 
and  took  upon  Him  that  of  a  servant,  becoming 
obedient  to  death,  even  the  Death  of  the  Cross 
(Ph  2*^).  It  is  not  necessary  here,  in  simply  treat- 
ing of  the  virtue  of  humility  in  the  apostolic  writ- 
ings, to  go  on  to  discuss  the  Kenosis,  on  which  so 
much  has  been  said  and  written  ;  but  it  may 
perhaps  titly  be  pointed  out  how  this  instance  of 
the  Lord's  "humility  in  the  Incarnation  has  been 
made  use  of  in  Catholic  Christianity  from  Augustine 
onwards.  Pride,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  is  the 
root  of  all  sins  ;  therefore  to  cure  it  God  wrought 
in  the  Incarnation  by  introducing  into  humanity 
the  antidote  of  humility.  The  humility  of  Christ 
is  the  cure  of  man's  pride.  By  St.  Francis  of 
Assisi  this  humility  of  Jesus  was  connected,  closely 
with  the  thought  of  His  earthly  privations ;  and 
thus  was  struck  the  key-note  of  the  peculiar 
medineval  piety  of  the  imitation  of  the  lowly  Jesus. 

3.  In  the  Apostolic  Fathers. — Among  the  sub- 
apostolic  writings  outside  the  NT,  1  Clem,  stands 
out  because  of  its  particular  emphasis  on  humility. 
It  may  indeed  almost  be  regarded  as  a  sermon  on 
humility,  with  many  instances,  examples,  and 
exhortations.  The  emphasis  on  this  particular 
virtue  follows  naturally  from  the  situation  at 
Corinth,  which  the  Epistle  of  the  Roman  Church 
through  Clement  is  intended  to  deal  with.  A 
contention  has  taken  place  in  the  Church,  in  which 
two  parties  are  involved.  The  majority  of  the 
community  are  on  the  one  side,  led  by  a  few  head- 
strong and  self-willed  persons  (1^).  On  the  other 
side  are  the  ofiicers  of  the  Church,  the  presbyters, 
with  very  little  support  in  the  Church.  During 
the  conflict  some  presbyters  have  actually  been 
deposed  by  the  Church  (44®).  The  Epistle  of  the 
Roman  Church,  indited  by  Clement,  is  intended 
to  bring  about  the  submission  of  the  Church  to 
its  presbyters,  and  so  restore  unity.  No  wonder 
then  that  such  stress  is  laid  on  the  virtue  of 
humility.  "What  is  aimed  at  is  to  produce  a  proper 
submission  to  constituted  authority  in  place  of  the 
present  sedition  against  it.  To  quote  the  passages 
on  humility  would  occupy  too  much  space,  rawetyos 
occui-s  in  XXX.  2,  Iv.  6,  lix.  3  ;  ravewoippoveo)  in  ii.  1, 
xiii.  I,  3,  xvi.  1  f.,  17,  xviL  2,xxx.  3,  xxxviii.  2,  Ixii. 
2  ;  Taireivo<ppocrvfr]  in  xxi.  8,  xxx.  8,  xxxi.  4,  xliv.  3,  Ivi. 
1,  Iviii.  2  ;  raveivoippwv  in  xix.  1  ;  rareifoa  in  xviii. 
8,  17,  lix.  3 ;  and  raTreivuan  in  xvi.  7,  liii.  2,  Iv.  6. 
Two  passages  will  give  an  idea  of  the  general  drift 
of  the  exhortation  and  argument  on  the  point  of 
humility.  '  Let  us  therefore  be  lowly-mindetl, 
brethren,  laying  aside  all  arrogance  and  conceit 
and  folly  and  anger,  and  let  us  do  that  which  is 
written.  For  the  Holy  Ghost  saith.  Let  not  the 
wise  man  boast  in  his  wisdom,  nor  the  strong  in 
his  strength,  neither  the  rich  in  his  riches  ;  but 
he  that  boasteth,  let  him  boast  in  the  Lord,  that 
he  may  seek  Him  out,  and  do  judgment  and 
righteousness'  (xiii.  1  [Lightfoot's  tr.]).  'For 
Christ  is  with  them  that  are  lowly  of  mind,  not 
with  them  that  exalt  themselves  over  the  flock. 
The  sceptre  [of  the  majesty]  of  God,  even  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  came  not  in  the  pomp  of  arrogance 
or  of  pride,  though  He  might  have  done  so,  but  in 
lowliness  of  mind,  according  as  the  Holy  Spirit 
spake  concerning  Him  [here  are  quoted  Is  5S^-^ 
and  Ps  2'y--].  Ye  see,  dearly  beloved,  what  is  the 
pattern  that  hath  been  given  unto  us  ;  for  if  the 
Lord  was  thus  lowly  of  mind,  what  should  we  do, 
who  through  Him  "have  been  brought  under  the 
yoke  of  His  grace '  {ib.  xvi.  1,  2,  17). 


The  Epistle  of  Bai'nabas  also  commends  humility : 
it  is  a  point  in  the  way  of  light  (xix.  3).  Cf.  also 
Ign.  Smym.  vi.  1,  « I^t  no  one's  position  putt"  him 
up ;  for  faith  and  love  are  everything,  of  which 
things  nothing  takes  precedence''  Cf.  yet  again 
Hermes,  Mand.  xi.  3,  where  humility  appears  as 
the  mark  of  the  true  prophet,  by  which  he  may  be 
surely  known  from  all  false  prophets. 

4.  St.  Paul  and  false  humility. — In  conclusion, 
mention  must  be  made  of  St.  Paul's  condemnation 
of  a  false  humility  in  Col  2^-*.  Certain  false 
teachers  had  appeared  at  Colossje,  who  maintained 
that  a  perfection  beyond  that  attainable  by  ordinary 
Christians  could  be  realized  only  by  a  yvQKii.z,  which 
paid  special  worship  to  the  angelic  powers,  and 
reverenced  the  particular  ordinances  enjoined  by 
them.  '  Amongst  these  ordinances  were  Jewish 
circumcision  and  the  observance  of  Jewish  feast- 
days,  new  moons  and  sabbaths.  We  may  remember 
that  Paul  himself  in  Gal.  (3^9  4?-  «-iO)  regards  the 
Jewish  ceremonies  as  ordinances  of  the  angels  of 
the  Jewish  law.  But  it  was  not  merely  the 
Jewish  law  which  was  observed  by  the  Colossian 
teachers ;  they  added  other  precepts  of  their  own 
of  an  ascetic  character  by  the  observance  of  which 
especially  communion  with  the  angels  might  be 
attained.  The  idea  is  that,  as  the  angels  are  above 
this  world,  so  the  ascetic,  by  cutting  himself  off 
from  the  things  of  the  world,  draws  near  to  the 
angels,  and  becomes  fit  to  associate  with  them' 
(R.  S.  Franks,  Bible  Notes  an  the  Writings  of  St. 
Paul,  1910,  p.  76). 

St.  Paul  declares  all  such  subservience  to  the 
angels  to  be  a  false  humility,  inasmuch  as  it 
detracts  from  the  true  reverence  due  to  Christ 
alone,  who  is  the  Head  of  the  angels,  whose  power 
over  the  world,  moreover.  He  has  broken  by  His 
Cross,  by  dying  on  which  He  annulled  the  bond 
they  held  against  men  in  the  Law  (Col  2^-'-^'). 

LiTERATCML— A.  Ritschl,  The  Christian  Doctrine  ofJusti/ea- 
tion  and  Reeoneiiiation,  Enp^.  tr.,  1900,  p.  632 ;  W.  Hemnaim, 
The  Communion  of  tie  Christian  yMk  God,  Eng.  tr.,  1906, 
p.  267;  E.  Hatch,  Utmorialt,  ISQO,  ^pp.  137,  213;  H.  P. 
Liddon,  Sermons  preadud  before  the  University  of  Oxford,  1st 
ser.,  1569,  p.  139.  2nd  ser.,  1879,  p.  IS ;  W.  R.Jnsre,  PaUh  and 
Knowledge,  1904,  p.  107 ;  J.  Warschauer,  The  Way  of  Under- 
standing, 1913.  p.  140.  R.  S.  FbaNKS. 

HUSBAND.— See  Family,  Marriage. 

HYACINTH.— See  Jacinth. 

HTHEN.£nS. — Hymenjeus  is  a  heretic  men- 
tioned in  1  Ti  1^  in  conjunction  with  Alexander 
(q.v.)  as  one  who  had  made  shipwTeck  of  the  faith 
and,  therefore,  had  been  delivered  to  Satan.  He 
is  also  mentioned  in  2  Ti  2'^  in  conjunction  with 
Philetus  as  teaching  a  doctrine  which  ate  into  the 
body  of  the  Church  like  a  gangrene — the  doctrine 
that  the  resurrection  was  past  already.  Nothing 
further  is  known  of  the  three  teachers  mentioned 
in  the  two  texts,  and  their  sole  importance  to  the 
student  lies  in  die  nature  of  their  doctrine.  It 
came  from  the  masters  of  Gnosticism,  who  from 
Simon  Magus  onwards  had  taught  the  inferior  or 
eWl  character  of  matter,  in  opposition  to  the 
fathers  of  the  Catholic  Chtirch,  who  assigned  to 
the  world  a  sacramental  character.  According  to 
I  Irenseus  {adv.  Hter.  n.  xxxi.  2),  the  followers  of 
i  Simon  and  Carpocrates  taught  that  '  the  resurrec- 
tion from  the  dead  was  simply  an  acquaintance 
with  that  truth  which  they  proclaimed.'  Ter- 
tnllian  (de  Ees.  Cam.  xix.)  charged  his  adversaries 
with  alleging  that  even  death  itself  was  to  be 
imderstood  in  a  spiritual  sense,  since  death  was 
not  the  separation  of  body  and  soul,  but  ignorance 
of  God,  by  reason  of  which  man  is  dead  to  God, 
and  is  not  less  buried  in  error  than  he  would  be  in 
the  grave. 


590 


HYMNS 


HYMNS 


'Wherefore  that  also  must  be  held  to  ],c  tho  n?<urroctioii, 
when  a  man  is  re-animated  by  access  to  thr  trnih,  ukI  havinjf 
dispersed  the  death  of  ifjnorance,  and  biinjf  endowed  with  new 
life  by  God,  has  biirst  forth  from  the  sepulchre  of  the  old  man, 
even  as  the  Lord  likened  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  to  "  wliited 
sepulchres"  (Mt '.'.'J-'").  Whcin'e  it  follows  (hat  they  who  havo 
by  faith  attained  to  tin-  i  ■  iiirri  li.n  ari'  with  the  Lord  aftiT 
they  have  once  put  Him  on  in  t  li.  ir  h.qilisin.' 

The  ground  for  tliis  spiritualizinj,'  of  death  is 
{jiven  in  a  homily  of  Valentinus  quoted  by 
Clement  Alex.  {Strom.,  iv.  13) : 

"  Ye  are  originally  immortal,  and  children  of  leonian  life, 
and  ye  willed  that  death  should  be  your  portion,  that  you 
might  exhaust  it  and  consume  it,  so  that  deatli  niiifht  die  in 
you  and  through  you.  For,  when  you  release  tiie  world,  you 
yourselves  are  not  undone,  but  are  lords  over  creation  and  over 
all  corruption.' 

According  to  Clement,  Basilides  also  held  that 
a  '  saved  race '  had  come  down  from  above  in  order 
to  remove  death,  and  that  the  origin  of  this  death 
was  to  be  sought  in  the  Demiurge.  And  a  little 
later  in  the  same  chapter  Clement  tells  us  that 
the  followers  of  Valentinus  called  the  Catholics 
'  psychical,'  as  did  the  '  Phrygians,'  the  implica- 
tion being  that  the  Catholics  thought,  when  death 
was  mentioned,  of  the  death  of  the  body,  and  the 
Gnostics  of  the  death  of  the  soul.  A  further  im- 
plication is  tiiat  the  moment  of  regeneration,  or 
of  passing  through  the  third  gate,  overshadowed 
in  the  Gnostic  mind  the  incident  of  physical  death, 
as  not  merely  giving  a  change  of  status,  but  as 
being  an  actual  admission  into  the  Divine  world, 
and  therefore  into  a  world  over  which  physical 
death  had  no  jurisdiction.  With  this  should  be 
compared  the  passage  in  Rev  20'-  *  which  speaks 
of  '  the  first  resurrection '  and  of  the  blessed  and 
holy  state  of  him  who  had  part  in  it.  'It  is  "the 
souls "  of  the  martyrs  that  St.  John  sees  alive ; 
the  resurrection  is  clearly  spiritual  and  not  cor- 
l>oreal'  (H.  B.  Swete,  Apocalypse  of  St.  JohnP, 
1907,  p.  266).  In  agreement  with  this  we  have 
Jn  5^^  Avhich  says  that  both  Father  and  Son 
quicken  the  dead  and  raise  them  up ;  and  v.-^, 
which  declares  that  he  who  has  come  to  put  his 
trust  in  the  Son  hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life. 
(The  clause  which  refers  the  resurrection  to  the 
last  day  in  Jn  6*-  **•  ^*  may  be  suspected,  with  J. 
Kreyenbiihl  [Dns  Ermifj.  der  Wahrhcit,  Berlin, 
1905,  ii.  52],  to  be  an  interpolation.) 

The  delivering  of  llymenicus  and  Alexander  to 
Satan  is  to  be  understood  as  an  excommunication 
from  tiie  fold  of  grace  and  safety,  and  a  conse- 
quent transition  into  the  world  outside  the  Church 
where  Satan  has  his  throne — the  world  of  sufi'ering, 
disease,  and  death.  It  is  not  impossible  that 
'  Hynienreus '  is  an  ironical  nickname  denoting 
that  t!ie  bearer  was  one  wiio  shared  the  Gnostic 
dislike  of  marriage,  or  else  scoHiiig  at  the  Gnostic 
doctrine  of  the  mystic  niiuriage  of  the  soul  with 
the  spirit.    Cf.  Antipas,  Balaam,  Nicolaitans. 

W.  F.  Cobb. 

HYMNS.— The  hymns  of  the  Apostolic  Church 
included  the  OT  Psalms  and  the  Evangelical  Can- 
ticles of  Lk  1  and  2.  We  possess  also  some  frag- 
ments embedded  in  NT  writings,  which  show 
how  they  were  used  to  express  religious  emotion 
both  in  public  and  in  private.  St.  Paul  suggests 
further  that  they  should  be  used  for  instrticlion 
and  warning  (Col  3'*).  He  distinL;iiislio^  (as  in 
Eph  5"*)  between  three  kinds — i»saliii>.  liymns,  and 
spiritual  songs  (odes)  (see  Psalms,  Simhitual 
Songs).  The  word  'psalm'  (1  Co  14'*,  Ja  5^*) 
properly  includes  the  idea  of  a  musical  accompani- 
ment (Basil,  Horn,  in  Ps.  44  ;  Greg.  Nyss.,  Horn,  in 
Ps.,  ch.  iii.).  The  Avord  'liymn'  might  be  used  of 
a  song  of  praise  to  God  wlictlicr  accompanied  or 
not.  The  word  '  song '  ('  ode  ')  .^jplies  to  all  forms 
of  song,  and  was  in  fact  a  general  term  for  lyrical 
poetrj'.    In  Eph  5'*  the  terms  '  singing'  and  '  play- 


ing' corre.spond  with  the  words  'hvimi-'  and 
'psalms.'  They  ai<'  to  !»•  uddr.'sscd  'f.'i  tho  l.wi,!,' 
just  as  Pliny  in  his  famous  Irticr  to  I'lajaii  [K/k 
X.  97)  describes  the  Christian-  as  meeting  licfoic 
dawn  and  singing  a  hymn  to  Chii-t  as  God  anti- 
phonally  (secuin  invicem). 
The  fragment  in  Eph  5^* 

'  Awake,  thou  that  sleepest, 
And  arise  from  the  dead, 
And  Christ  shall  shine  upon  thee ' 

is  possibly  a  fragment  of  a  hymn  addressed  to  a 
convert  at  baptism. 

Another  fragment  is  1  Ti  3^*  : 

'  He  who  was  manifested  in  the  fiesh, 
Justified  in  the  spirit. 
Seen  of  ani^els. 
Preached  anioiiji  the  nations. 
Believed  on  in  the  world, 
Received  up  in  jflory.' 

Such  examples  throw  light  on  the  difficult  question 
of  the  source  of  the  quotation  in  1  Co  2^*  which  is 
apparently  a  free  translation  or  laiaplira-c  from 
the  Hebrew  ofis  64''.  Clem.  Rom.  {'nl  Cur.  xxxiv.) 
mixes  it  up  with  the  LXX.  According  to  Jerome, 
the  passage  occurs  in  the  A.^cension  of  Isaiah  and 
the  Apocalypse  of  Ellas.  Origen  (on  Mt  27*  [Migne, 
Patr.  Grceca,  xiii.  1769])  says  St.  Paul  quotes  from 
the  latter.  As  Lightfoot  puts  it  {Notes  on  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul,  1895,  p.  177),  '  If  it  could  be  shown  that 
these  apocryphal  books  were  prior  to  St.  Paul,  this 
solution  would  be  the  most  probable.'  But  they  are 
not.  So  we  fall  back  on  the  suggestion  that  St.  Paul 
(and  they  also  ?)  quoted  an  early  Christian  hymn 
based  on  Isaiali  like  the  Sanctus  of  the  liturgies. 

The  doxologies  in  1  Ti  1"  6^^,  2  Ti  4'»  may  like- 
wise have  been  fragments  of  hymns.  Only  one  of 
the  hymns  in  the  Apocalypse  alludes  to  the  situa- 
tion described  in  the  vision,  i.e.  5-',  referring  to  the 
opening  of  the  Book  with  the  Seven  Seals.  The 
rest  express  generally  the  praise  which  the  Church 
offers  to  God  and  to  Christ.  It  is  quite  natural 
that  reminiscences  of  Christian  hymns  should  find 
their  way  into  the  seer's  book.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  they  are  the  first  efibrt  of  an  inspired  imagina- 
tion, we  may  regard  them  as  types  of  future  hym- 
nody.  The  Song  of  Moses  in  15',  like  the  older 
Song  of  Moses  in  Dt  32,  which  was  used  as  a 
Sabbath  hymn  in  the  Jewish  liturgy,  found  its 
way  into  the  liturgical  Psalter  of  Codex  Alex- 
andrinKS. 

The  Song  of  the  living  creatures  in  4^  varies  from 
the  Sanctus  of  Isaiah's  vision  which  is  followed  in 
the  Liturgies  and  the  Tc  Deum.  It  is  addressed 
to  God  as  Almighty,  and  evokes  the  response  of 
the  elders,  who  in  the  words  '  our  God '  claim  '  a 
relation  to  Him  which  the  Creation  as  such  cannot 
elaiiii'  (H.  B.  Swete,  The  A/iocnh/pse  of  St.  John^, 
1907,  p.  74). 

In  5^^  the  angels  offer  a  fuller  doxology  to  the 
Lamb,  and  the  response  of  all  creation  with  a  four- 
fold doxology,  and  of  the  living  creatures  with 
the  familiar  'Amen'  which  ended  the  eucharistic 
thanksgiving  of  the  Clmreh  on  earth,  is  'liigldy 
suggestive  of  the  devotional  attitmli'  of  llie 
Asiatic  Church  in  tlie  time  of  Domitian  towards 
the  Person  of  Christ'  (Swete,  op.  rit.  p.  sj).  Of  a 
similar  character  is  the  Song  insert  iil  in  the  pro- 
phety  (U''"'"'*')  Avhen  'great  voices'  announce  the 
coming  of  the  kingdom,  and  the  elders  respond  : 

'  We  give  thee  thanks,  ()  Lord  God,  the  Almighty, 
Which  art,  and  which  wast ; 

Because  thou  hast  taken  thy  great  power,  and  didst  reign. 
And  the  nations  were  wroth, 
And  thy  wrath  came. 
And  the  time  of  the  dead  to  be  ju<Iirfd. 
And  to  give  their  reward  to  thy  sorwuif:.  tlii>  iimiilipts, 
And  to  the  saints. 
And  to  them  thnt  fear  thy  name. 
The  small  and  the  -rent  ■ 
And  to  destro\  ihein  tlint  doetro\  tlic  (artl: 


HYMXS 


HYPOCRISY 


591 


The  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  add 
nothin"  to  our  knowledge,  though  Ignatius  de- 
lights in  the  thought  of  the  hymn  of  praise  for 
his  martyrdom  which  the  Church  in  Rome  will 
sing  (ad  Bom.  2) :  '  that  forming  yourselves  into 
a  chorus  in  love  ye  may  sing  to  the  Father  in 
Jesus  Christ,  for  that  God  has  vouchsafed  that 
the  bishop  from  Syria  should  be  found  in  the 
West,  ha^-ing  summoned  him  from  the  East '  (of. 
Eph.  4). 

From  these  hints  we  may  construct  an  ontline 
of  the  psalmody  of  the  early  Church,  to  which  we 
may  probably  add  a  very  interesting  collection  of 

Srivate  psainis  recently  discovered  by  Rendel 
[arris  and  published  by  him  in  1909 — the  Odes  of 
Solomon  (q.i\).  He  found  them  with  the  Psalms 
of  Solomon  in  a  MS  of  the  15th  or  16th  cent,  from 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  Tigris.  He  thinks  that 
they  were  written  in  Palestine  about  the  vear 
A..D.  100  (Batiffol  [Les  Odes  de  Salomon,  Fr.  tf.  by 
Batilibl  and  Labourt,  1911]  gives  the  date  as  100- 
120).  On  the  other  hand,  Hamack  {TL-,  3rd  ser. 
v.  4  [1910])  regards  all  the  Christian  allusions  as 
interpolations  of  the  date  c.  A.D.  100  in  an  earlier 
Jewish  collection  of  c.  A.D.  70.  He  calls  the  find- 
ing of  the  Odes  the  most  important  discovery  since 
the  Didaehe,  and  epoch-making  for  the  higher 
criticism  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  because  these 
Je\vish  Odes  (not  only  the  Christian  edition)  con- 
tain all  the  essential  elements  of  the  Johannine 
theology,  together  with  its  religious  tone.  F.  C. 
Burkitt,  however  {JT/iSt  xiii.  [1912-13]  374),  who 
has  found  a  Xitrian  MS  of  the  15th  cent,  in  the 
British  Museum,  regards  them  as  later,  as  *  part  of 
the  literary  activity  of  the  Syriac  Monophysite 
community  in  Egypt.'  He  attributes  absence  of 
direct  references  to  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist  to 
the  fact  that  the  author  was  '  \\Titing  in  the  style 
appropriate  for  pseudepigraphical  composition.' 
One  feels  that  superhuman  skill  would  be  required 
by  a  writer  who  attempted  to  reconstruct  the  un- 
developed theology  of  the  Odes  without  betraying 
his  later  standpoint. 

Hamack,  with  justice,  calls  the  writer  an 
original  poet,  whose  metaphors  and  similes  are 
excellently  chosen  and  arrest  attention  by  their 
beauty  and  strength.  His  mystical  teaching  on 
peace  and  joy  and  liglit  and  living  water  is 
thoroughly  Johannine. 

Ode  i  opens  with  a  historical  allusion  to  some  attempt  to  alter 
the  site  of  the  Lord's  Sanctuary,  probably  a  reference  to  the 
cloeing  and  dismantling  of  the  temple  of  Onias,  at  Leontopolis 
in  Egypt,  by  the  Romans  in  a.d.  73 :  '  Xo  man,  O  my  God, 
cfaangeth  thy  holj-  place  ;  and  it  is  not  [possible]  that  he 
should  change  it  and  pat  it  in  another  place  :  because  he  hath 
no  power  over  it,' 

As  a  specimen  of  the  style  Ode  7  may  be  quoted  :  '  As  the  im- 
pulse of  anger  against  evil,  so  is  the  impulse  of  joy  over  what  is 
lovely,  and  brings  in  of  its  fruits  without  restraint.  My  joy  is 
the  Lord  and  my  impulse  is  towards  Him  :  this  is  my  excellent 
path  :  for  I  have  a  helper,  the  Lord.  He  has  caused  me  to  know 
Himself,  without  grudging,  by  His  simplicity :  the  greatness  of 
His  kindness  has  humbled  me.  He  became  like  me,  in  order 
that  I  might  receive  Him  :  He  was  reckoned  like  mjrself  in  order 
that  I  might  put  Him  on ;  and  I  trembled  not  when  I  saw  ffim  : 
because  He  is  my  salvation.  Like  my  nature  He  became  that  I 
might  learn  Him,  and  like  my  form,  that  I  might  not  torn  back 
from  Him  .  .  .  and  the  Most  High  shall  be  known  in  His  wnts, 
to  announce  to  those  that  have  Songs  of  the  Coming  of  the 
Lord ;  that  they  may  go  forth  to  meet  Him,  and  may  ang  to 
Him  with  joy  and  with  the  harp  of  many  tones.  The  seers 
shall  come  before  Him  and  they  shall  be  seen  before  Him,  and 
they  shall  praise  the  Lord  for  His  love  :  because  He  is  near  and 
beholdeth,  and  hatred  shall  be  caken  from  the  earth,  and  along 
with  jealousy  it  shall  be  drowned :  for  ignorance  has  been 
destroyed,  because  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  has  arrived.' 

It  would  be  easy  to  multiply  quotations,  but  this 
is  impossible  here.  There  are  many  phrases  which 
arrest  attention,  like  the  first  words  of  Ode  34, 
which  Harnack  calls  the  '  pearl  of  the  collection ' : 
•No  way  is  hard  when  there  is  a  simple  heart.' 
But  even  more  attractive  than  the  phrases  and 
the  metaphors  is  the  consistent  spirit  of  joyful- 


ness :  '  Grace  has  been  revealed  for  your  salvation. 
Believe  and  live  and  be  saved.'  Thus  the  last 
words  of  Ode  34  lead  np  to  the  triumphant 
*  Hallelujah  '  which  closes  each  hymn.  Whatever 
may  be  the  final  verdict  of  critics  as  to  the  date, 
the  beauty  of  the  thoughts  is  an  abiding  posses- 
sion for  all  who  are  interested  in  early  Christian 
hymns.* 

LmuuTUKX.— H.  Leifiit  Bennett,  art.  •  Greek  Hymnody,'  in 
Julian's  Diet,  of  Hymnologjfi,  1907 ;  F.  Cabnd,  art. '  CkntiqDes,' 
in  his  Dia.  d'anhMogie  ekr^tienne  tt  d«  Uturgie,  1909;  E. 
A.  Abbott,  Light  <m  the  Cl<»pei/rom  an  andent  Poet,  1912 ;  see 
also  the  series  of  artt.  on  '  Bynms  (Christiaa) '  in  SRJB. 

A.  E.  Bimx. 
HYPOCRISY  (ux<kpt(r«).  —  The  noun  inroKpi-rni 
does  not  occur  after  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  but 
vTOKpuris  is  found  in  Gal  2»,  1  Ti  4»,  IP  2\  and 
the  compound  verb  avpinroKfAweadai,  *to  dissemble 
along  viith  another,'  is  used  in  Gal  2^. 

The  development  of  the  meaning  of  vrocptccvAot  can  be 
clearly  traced.  In  Homer  and  Herodotus  it  meant '  to  reply,' 
e.  g.  '  to  give  an  oracular  answer '  (Herod,  i.  78,  91) ;  then  '  to 
answer  on  the  stage,'  '  to  speak  in  dialogue,' '  to  play  a  part ' 
(Arist.  Pol.  V.  xL  19) ;  then  '  to  be  an  actor  in  real  hfe,"  'to  dis- 
semble,' '  to  feign,' '  to  pretend.'  The  last  is  probably  U»e  only 
meaning  of  the  word  in  the  XT,  though  £.  Hatch  (JS^Mys  tn 
BibHeal  Greek,  1889,  p.  93)  thinks  that  amoi^  Greek-spei^ing' 
Jews  vrotpunt  had  come  to  mean  '  irreligion,' '  impiety.' 

'Sincerity,  a  deep,  great,  genuine  sincerity,  is 
the  first  characteristic  of  all  men  in  any  way 
heroic'  (Carlyle,  Heroes  and  Hero-Worship,  1872, 
p.  42).  The  hypocrite  does  not  dare  to  show  him- 
self as  he  is.  His  fear  of  criticism  compels  him  to 
wear  a  mask.  inroKpurn  includes  both  simulation 
and  dissimulation.  Bacon's  definitions  (Essays, 
vi. )  are  clear  and  sharp  as  usual : 

'  There  be  three  degrees  of  this  hiding  and  veiling  of  a  man's 
self.  The  first.  Closeness,  Reservation,  and  Secrecy ;  when  a 
man  leaveth  himself  without  obaerration,  or  without  hold  to 
be  taken,  what  he  is.  The  second,  IMssimuIation,  in  the  nega- 
tive ;  when  a  man  lets  laJl  sign*  and  ai^nments,  that  he  is  not 
that  he  is.  And  the  third.  Simulation,  in  the  affirmative ; 
when  a  man  industrioody  and  expressly  feigns  and  pretends  to 
be  that  he  is  not.' 

Gal  2"'"  alludes  to  a  crisis  in  which  even  the 
Apostle  Peter  dissembled,  the  other  Jewish  Chris- 
tians of  Antioch  dissembling  with  him  (<rwrwr- 
fKpl0i)aaf),  and  even  Barnabas,  against  his  better 
judgment,  was  carried  away  by  their  vrftKptau. 
The  fear  of  offending  the  narrow  guardians  of 
Judaistic  orthodoxy  was  the  cause  of  all  this 
inconsistency  on  the  side  of  the  party  of  Christian 
liberty  and  progress.  St.  Peter  did  not  really 
believe  that  he  would  be  defiled  by  eating  Gentile 
food.  At  Joppa  he  had  learned  to  cast  his  cere- 
monial scruples  to  the  winds  (Ac  10*"^®) ;  at  Caesarea 
he  had  preached  in  the  house  of  the  Italian  Cor- 
nelius, keeping  company  with  'one  of  another 
nation'  (dXXo^iJX^  v.*),  and  witnessing  a  Gentile 
Pentecost  (w.**-") ;  and  with  the  Greek  Christians 
of  Antioch  he  at  first  saw  no  more  harm  in  eating 
and  drinking  than  in  singing  and  praying.  But 
circumstances  arose  in  which  he  had  not  the 
courage  to  continue  putting  his  principles  into 
practice.  When  he  had  to  choose  between  giving 
the  cold  shoulder  to  hb  Gentile  brethren  and  dis- 
pleasing the  circumcised,  the  vacillating  weakness 
of  his  character  was  illustrated  once  more.  He 
was  not  even  yet  quite  worthy  of  his  great  name — 
Peter,  the  man  of  rock.  Concealing  his  liberal  con- 
victions, he  behaved  as  if  he  were  a  strictly  conser- 
vative Jew.  And  his  example  proved  infectious, 
for  he  could  not  act  as  a  mere  private  indi\idual. 
The  influential  leader  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  drew 
after  him  many  Jewish  Christians,  including  even 

*  The  Christian  teaching  indudes  references  to  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  (19,  23X  the  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man 
(36,  3X  born  of  a  Virgin  (19X  the  pre-existent  (19),  who  became 
Man  (7),  suffered  (31>,  died  on  the  Cross  (27,  42X  descended  into 
HeU  (42),  was  justified  (31X  and  exalted  (iXy. 


592 


HYPOCRISY 


ICONIUM 


St.  Paul's  fellow-.a])<istle,  who  had  been  liviiifr  for 
years  in  intimate  fellowship  with  the  ceremonially 
unclean.  Whatever  excuses  may  be  made  for  St. 
Peter's  conduct — which  some  moaern  scholars  (like 
most  of  the  Fathers  of  the  early  Church)  are  dis- 
posed to  regard  in  a  much  more  favourable  light 
than  St.  Paul  did  (A.  C.  McGitiert,  Apostolic  Age, 
1897,  p.  206  f. ) — it  was  a  betrayal  of  the  cause  of 
spiritual  freedom.  His  silent  withdrawal  from  his 
Gentile  brethren  was  as  eloquent  as  any  words 
could  have  been.  It  did  as  much  harm  as  if  he 
had  issued  a  proclamation,  'Before  we  Jews  can 
eat  with  you  (ientiles,  ye  must  bend  your  necks  to 
the  yoke  of  tlie  law.'  It  was  becau.se  in  his  heart 
he  no  longer  believed  anything  of  the  kind  that 
his  action  was  rightly  called  virdKpia-is.  But  the 
terms  in  which  he  is  elsewhere  spoken  of  in  the 
same  letter  (1'^  2^'-)  make  it  evident  that  liis 
aberration  was  only  temporary,  and  that  there 
remained  no  essential  tliHerence  between  '  the 
gospel  of  the  uncircumcision '  and  '  the  circum- 
cision '  {2''). 

In  1  Peter,  which  many  critics  still  accept  as 
genuine,  this  same  Apostle  enjoins  his  readers  to 
put  away  all  hypocrisies,  and  to  make  a  fresh 
start  as  if  they  were  new-born  babes  (2^'-).  The 
injunction  implies  the  possibility.  It  is  sometimes 
pessiniistically  said  that  tliere  is  no  remedy  for 
hypocrisy.  J.  K.  Seeley  (Ecce  Homo,  1873,  p.  116) 
calls  it  '  the  one  incurable  vice.'  The  Divine 
Comedy  represents  the  hypocrite  as  clothed  for 
ever  in  a  robe  of  lead — '  O  in  eterno  faticoso 
rnanto ! '  (Inferno,  xxiii.  67).  J.  B.  Mozley 
(University  Sermons^,  1876,  p.  34)  says:  'The 
victim  of  passion  then  may  be  converted,  the 
gay,  the  thoughtless,  or  the  ambitious  .  .  .  they 
may  be  converted,  any  one  of  these — but  who  is 
to  convert  the  hypocrite?  He  does  not  know  he 
is  a  hypocrite.  .  .  .  The  greater  hypocrite  he  is, 
tlie  more  sincere  he  must  think  himself.'  It  is 
perhaps  faitliless,  however,  to  despair  of  any  man, 


and  one  may  doubt  whether  our  Lord  would  have 
expended  such  a  passionate  energy  of  scorn — 
which,  in  a  heart  like  His,  is  a  form  of  love— upon 
incurables  (Mt  23).  '  Every  son  of  Adam  can 
become  a  sincere  man,  ...  no  mortal  is  doomed 
to  be  an  insincere  man'  (Carlylc,  op.  cit.  p.  116). 

Jamks  Strahan. 
HYSSOP  (ii<r<TWTros,  2^^). — Hyssop  is  a  wall- 
growing  plant  used  by  the  Jews  in  ritual  sprink- 
lings. It  is  mentioned  by  the  writer  of  Heorews 
in  his  review  of  the  ordinances  of  the  OT  (He  9'*). 
Scarcely  any  other  Scriptural  plant  has  given  rise 
to  so  much  discussion.  The  hyssop  cannot  be  the 
ifffffwiros  of  Greek  authors  (Ilyssopus  officinalis), 
which  is  not  a  native  of  Syria.  Among  the  many 
stiggestions  that  have  been  made  (see  J.  G.  B. 
Winer,  Bibl.  Realworterbnch^,  Leipzig,  1847-48, 
s.v.  'Ysop'),  the  choice  seems  to  lie  between  the 
caper  (Capparis  spinosa)  and  a  kind  of  wild  mar- 
joram (Satureja  thymus)  which  the  Arabs  call 
sdtar.  Both  these  plants  grow  on  Syrian  rocks 
and  walls.  Tristram  argues  for  the  caper  (Nat. 
Hist,  of  the  Bible,  1867,  p.  455  f.).  One  objection 
to  this  plant  is  that  its  prickly  branches  and  stiff 
leaves  make  it  unsuitable  for  forming  a  bunch  or 
wisp ;  another,  that  it  is  ditlerently  named  in 
Scripture  (•■^JV5^?  in  Ec  12').  The  sdtnr  was  first 
suggested  by  Maimonides  (de  Vacca  liufa,  iii.  2), 
followed  by  D.  Kimchi  (Lex.  s.v.).  It  is  excel- 
lently adapted  for  use  as  a  sprinkler.  Its  identity 
with  the  hyssop  is  accepted  by  Thomson  (La7id 
and  Book,  new  ed.,  London,  1910,  p.  93),  who 
describes  it  as  '  having  the  fragrance  of  tliyme, 
with  a  hot,  pungent  taste,  and  long,  slender  stems,' 
and  by  G.  E.  Post,  who  says  (Smith's  DB,  Am. 
ed.,  p.  1115,  foot-note):  'The  fact  that  many 
stalks  grow  up  from  one  root  eminently  fits  this 
species  for  the  purpose  intended.  The  hand  could 
easily  gather  in  a  single  grasp  the  requisite  bundle 
or  bunch  all  ready  for  use.' 

James  Sxbahan. 


ICONIUM  ("IkSvlov,  now  Kama  or  Konyeh). — 
This  city,  wliich  was  partly  evangelized  by  St. 
Paul,  occupied  one  of  the  most  beautiful  and  fertile 
inland  sites  of  Asia  Minor,  compared  by  T.  Lewin 
(The  Life  and  Ejmstles  of  St.  PauP,  1875,  i.  144 f.) 
to  the  oasis  of  Damascus.  Lying  in  a  crescent  of 
Phrygian  hills  at  the  western  limit  of  the  vast 
upland  plain  of  Lycaonia,  and  watered  by  perennial 
streams  which,  through  irrigation,  make  it  to-day 
a  garden-city,  it  must  have  been  a  place  of  import- 
ance from  the  earliest  times.  Xenophon,  the  first 
writer  who  mentions  it  (Anab.  I.  ii.  19),  says  that 
Cyrus,  travelling  eastward,  came  '  to  Iconium,  the 
last  city  of  Phrygia ;  thence  he  pursued  his  route 
through  Lycaonia.'  The  inhabitants  always  re- 
garded themselves  as  of  Phrygian,  not  of  Lycaonian, 
extraction,  and  the  strongest  evidence  that  they 
were  right  was  their  use  of  the  Phrygian  language. 
On  the  other  hand,  many  writers— Cicero  (ad  Fam. 
XV.  iv.  2),  Strabo  (Xll.  vi.  1  [p.  568]),  Pliny  (HN  v. 
25),  and  others — having  regard  to  tlie  later  history 
of  Iconium,  invariably  designate  it  as  a  city  of 
Lycaonia  (y. v.).  During  the  3rd  cent.  B.C.  it  was 
ruled  and,  to  a  great  extent,  hellenized  by  the 
Seleucids.  After  the  battle  of  Magnesia  (187  B.C.), 
it  was  presented  by  the  Romans  to  the  king  of 
Pergamos  ;  but  as  he  never  took  effective  possession 
of  it,  the  Galatians  appropriated  it  about  165  B.C. 


Mark  Antony,  the  'king-maker,'  gave  it  to  Polemon 
in  39  B.C.  and  transferred  it  in  36  to  Amj'ntas,  king 
of  Galatia,  whose  wide  dominions,  after  his  deatli 
in  25  B.C.,  were  formed  into  the  lloman  province 
Galatia.  Under  Claudius  the  city  was  honoured 
with  the  name  of  Claud-Iconium,  a  proof  of  its 
strong  Roman  sympathies,  but  it  was  not  raised  to 
the  rank  of  a  Colonia  till  the  reign  of  Hadrian.  It 
remained  a  city  of  the  province  Galatia  till  A.D.  295, 
when  Diocletian  formed  the  province  Pisidia,  with 
Antioch  as  its  capital  and  Iconium  as  its  '  second 
metropolis.'  In  372  Iconium  became  the  capital  of 
the  new  province  Lycaonia,  an  arrangement  which 
held  good  all  through  the  Byzantine  period. 

When  St.  Luke  relates  that  the  Apostles  Paul 
and  Barnabas,  being  persecuted  at  Iconium,  '  fled 
into  the  cities  of  Lycaonia'  (Ac  14®)— an  expression 
which  implies  that  in  his  view  Iconium  was  not 
Lycaonian — he  adheres  to  the  popular  and  ignores 
the  oflicial  geography.  So  central  and  prosperous 
a  city,  traversed  by  a  trade-route  leading  direct  to 
the  Cilician  Gates,  and  connected  by  a  cross-road 
with  tiie  great  high-way  to  the  Euphrates,  natur- 
ally attracted  many  tratlers  and  settlers  from  the 
outside  world.  Well-chosen  as  a  sphere  of  mission- 
ary activity,  the  first  attempt  to  preach  the  gospel 
in  it  proved  very  successful,  and  though  the  enmity 
of  the  Jews  compelled  the  apostles  to  desist  from 


IDOLATRY 


IDOLATRY 


593 


their  efforts  for  a  time,  St.  Luke  speaks  of  the 
faith  of  '  a  great  multitude  both  of  Jews  and  of 
Greeks' (Ac  14»). 

Iconium  figures  largely  in  the  Galatian  contro- 
versy. What  is  certain  is  that  St.  Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas preaclied  and  made  many  converts  in  the 
city  during  their  first  missionary  campaign,  and 
that  they  re-visited  it  on  their  homeward  journey, 
'  confirining  the  souls  of  the  disciples '  (14'-  ^).  The 
persecutions  which  St.  Paul  endured  there  are 
alluded  to  in  2  Ti  3".  On  the  South-Galatian 
theory,  he  paid  the  city  two  more  visits,  if,  as 
Ramsay  and  others  assume,  Iconium  is  included  in 
'the  region  of  Phrj'gia  and  Galatia'  (16*)  and  in 
'  the  region  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia '  (18^).  In  the 
interval  between  the  Apostle's  last  two  visits,  he 
received  the  alanning  tidings  that  his  Galatian 
churches — which,  on  this  hypothesis,  were  Antioch, 
Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe— were  bein^  perverted 
by  Judaizers,  whose  fatal  errors  his  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  was  immediately  written  to  confute. 
Some  indication  that  his  vehement  letter  and  his 
final  visit  accomplished  his  purpose  is  attbrded  by 
the  fact  that  the  Galatian  Church  contributetl  part 
of  the  Gentile  love-offering  to  the  poor  saints  in 
Jerusalem  (1  Ck>  16').  On  the  North -Galatian 
theory  St.  Paul,  using  '  Galatians '  in  the  popular, 
not  the  Roman,  sense,  \\TOte  to  churches  which  he 
had  founded  in  Galatia  proper,  which  Livy  calls 
Gallo-Grsecia  (see  Galatia). 

It  is  a  mere  legend  that  Sosipater  (Ro  16*')  was 
the  first  and  Terentius  or  Tertius  (16-)  the  second 
bishop  of  Iconium.  The  city  is  the  principal  scene 
of  the  Acta  Pauli  et  Theclce,  which  date  back  to 
the  2nd  cent,  and  have  a  foundation  in  fact  (see 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Born.  Emp., 
1S93,  p.  375  ff.).  The  Council  of  Iconium  was  held 
in  235.  When  the  city  became  the  capital  of  the 
Seljuk  State,  which  was  founded  about  1072,  its 
splendour  gave  rise  to  the  proverb,  '  See  all  the 
world  ;  but  see  Konia.'  To-day  it  has  a  population 
of  50,000. 

LaiKRATCRE.— W.  M.  Leake,  Asia  Minor,  1S24;  W.  J. 
Hamilton,  Researches  in  Asia  Miner,  1S42;  Morrajr's  Guide 
to  Asia  Minor,  ed.  C.  Wilson,  1895,  p.  133f.  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
The  Cities  of  St.  Paul,  1907,  pp.  315-382. 

James  Strahan. 

IDOLATRY.  — So  deep-rooted  was  the  Jewish 
hatred  of  idolatry,  and  so  general  had  been  the 
condemnation  of  the  practice,  that  our  Lord  found 
no  reason  for  insistence  upon  the  generally  accepted 
commandments  on  the  subject.  But  as  soon  as  the 
gospel  message  began  to  be  preached  outside  the 
pale  of  Judaism,  the  matter  became  one  of  the 
pressing  questions  of  the  day.  Protests  against 
the  popular  practice  had  not  been  wanting  from 
the  older  Greek  thinkers  ;  Heraclitus,  Xenophanes, 
and  Zeno  had  all  raised  their  voices  against  image- 
worship.  But  the  popular  mind  was  not  affected 
by  their  teaching,  and  many  were  the  apologists 
who  wrote  in  favour  of  the  established  custom.  It 
is  not  surprising  to  read  (Ac  17'*)  that,  when  St. 
Paul  visited  Athens,  '  his  spirit  was  provoked  with- 
in him,  as  he  beheld  the  city  full  of  idols,'  even 
though  the  statement  is  not  strictly  accurate.  His 
whole  training  rendered  him  antagonistic  to  any- 
thing approaching  idolatry  ;  and  in  his  letters  the 
same  feeling  is  expressed.  No  Christian  was  to 
keep  company  with  idolaters  (1  Co  S"**-),  who  could 
not  inherit  the  Kingdom  of  God  (6^  Eph  5').  He 
reminds  the  Thessalonians  that  they  had  abandoned 
the  old  idolatrous  worship  '  to  serve  the  living  God ' 
(1  Th  1').  Yet  from  the  Christian  point  of  view 
there  is  only  one  God,  and  the  true  Christian  can- 
not but  recognize  that  thus  *  no  idol  is  anything  in 
thcAvorld'  (1  Cos*). 

But  there  are  two  aspects  of  idolatry  which  caused 
the  greatest  anxiety  in  the  primitive  Church. 
VOL.  I. — ^8 


(a)  The  decision  of  the  Jerusalem  Council  as  to  the 
duties  incumbent  upon  heathen  converts  contains 
the  significant  phrase,  '  that  they  abstain  from  the 
pollutions  of  idols '  (Ac  15"),  '  from  meats  offered  to 
idols '  (v.^).  The  command  is  intended  as  a  com- 
prehensive one,  meaning  that  idolatry  in  every 
form  is  to  be  avoided  ;  '  participation  in  the  idola- 
trous feasts  is  especially  emphasised,  simply  because 
this  was  the  crassest  form  of  idolatry '  (A,  Hamack, 
The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  p.  257). 
But  it  was  also  the  means  of  subtle  temptation, 
which  gave  rise  to  a  serious  question.  The  proba- 
bility was  that  most  of  the  meat  sold  in  the  markets 
as  well  as  that  set  before  the  guests  at  Gentile 
tables  had  been  '  offered  to  idols.  What  was  the 
Christian  to  do  ?  Was  he  to  buy  no  meat  ?  Must 
he  refuse  all  such  invitations  ?  It  must  not  be  for- 
gotten that  the  breach  between  St.  Paul  and  the 
Judaizers  had  never  been  really  healed.  The  par- 
tisans on  either  side  were  ever  on  the  look-out  for 
opportunities  to  widen  it.  The  leaders  did  their 
utmost  to  heal  the  quarrel.  Therefore,  in  dealing 
with  the  questions  raised  by  the  Corinthian  Church, 
St.  Paul  was  compelled  to  remember  that  he  must 
not  give  any  offence  to  the  Judaizing  section,  which 
was  evidently  represented  there  (1  Co  V^^-),  since 
he  had  acquiesced  in  the  Apostolic  Decree.  It  is 
true  that  this  was  only  in  the  nature  of  a  com- 
promise, but  its  recommendations  must  be  carried 
out  as  far  as  possible.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Gentile  section  of  the  community,  which  was  re- 
sponsible for  raising  the  question,  wa.s  in  favour 
of  a  broad-minded  view.  And  St.  Paul's  dilemma 
was  increased  by  the  fact  that  his  sympathies  were 
with  them.  He  lays  the  greatest  stress,  there- 
fore, upon  the  principle  that  idolatry  is  wholly 
hateful  and  must  be  carefully  guarded  against 
(1  Co  lO'*).  In  the  worship  of  Israel,  to  eat  the 
sacrifices  of  the  altar  is  to  have  communion  with 
the  altar.  It  is  true  that  the  idol  is  nothing,  and 
the  sacrifice  therefore  has  no  meaning,  yet  idolatry 
among  the  heathen  is  demon-worship  rather  than 
the  worship  of  God  ;  would  they  wish  to  have  com- 
munion with  demons?  (1  Co  10''^).  It  was  all 
very  well  to  shelter  behind  the  fact  that  Christians 
really  know  that  there  is  only  one  God  ;  but  aU 
have  not  this  knowledge  :  consequently  the  weaker 
brethren — that  is,  those  who  are  perplexed  and 
troubled  by  these  questions — may  be  led  into  danger 
by  our  actions.  Yet  a  compromise  is  possible.  They 
are  to  buy  what  is  offered,  and  eat  what  is  set 
before  them,  asking  no  questions  (v.^^^-).  If  either 
the  seller  or  the  host  say,  '  This  has  been  offered  to 
idols,'  w  hether  in  a  friendly  or  a  hostile  spirit,  the 
Christians  must  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  It  is 
all  a  matter  of  expediency  and,  in  part,  of  love. 
God's  glory  must  come  first ;  neither  Jew  nor  Greek 
nor  the  Church  must  be  needlesslj'  offended. 

(b)  The  second  aspect  of  idolatrj'  afforded  even 
more  grievous  trials,  and  was  eventually  the  source 
of  serious  persecution  :  it  was  the  rise  of  Emperor- 
worship.  It  is  not  difficult  to  see  that  such  a  cult 
was  almost  inevitable  under  existing  circumstances. 
There  had  always  been  a  tendency  among  Greeks 
and  Romans  to  deify  heroes  of  the  past,  but  the 

Eractice  gradually  grew  up  of  erecting  temples  in 
onour  of  living  heroes  (Plutarch,  Lysander,  xviii.  ; 
Herodotus,  v.  47).  It  was  perhaps  not  unnatural 
that  a  cult  of  the  all- victorious  city  of  Rome  should 
arise,  and  as  early  as  195  B.C.  there  was  a  temple 
in  its  honour  at  Smyrna.  Taking  all  these  facts 
into  consideration,  the  development  of  the  Imperial 
cult  under  the  Empire  was  only  to  be  looked  for. 
After  the  death  of  Julius  Caesar  a  temple  in  his 
honour  was  erected  at  Ephesus  (29  B.C.),  and  it 
was  only  a  step  to  pay  a  like  honour  to  Augustus 
during  his  lifetime  (Tacitus,  Ann.  iv.  37).  Such 
men  as  Gains  and  Doraitian  were  ready  enough  to 


594 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


encourage  the  idea  (Suetonius,  Domit.  xiii.).  In 
the  province  of  Asia  the  cult  was  hailed  withdelight, 
and  the  result,  as  touching  Christians,  is  seen  in 
the  Apocalypse  (13).  Such  a  cult  was  bound  to 
change  the  whole  relationship  between  Christianity 
and  the  Roman  power.  As  a  general  rule  it  would 
be  quite  possible  to  escape  oHending  susceptibilities 
with  i-egard  to  the  worship  of  the  older  gods,  but 
the  new  cult  was  so  universal  and  so  popular  that 
it  soon  became  fraught  with  grave  danger  for 
members  of  the  Christian  community.  Antichrist 
had  indeed  arisen,  and  fierce  warfare  could  be  the 
only  result. 

LiTERATDRR.  — For  the  whole  subject:  J.  G.  Frazer,  The 
GoWen  JBowflrAi,  1900,  also  edition  of  Pausanias,  1898  ;  V.  Chapot, 
La  Province  romaine  procoimvlaire  d'Asie,  1904  ;  for  (a) :  Com- 
luentariesof  Heinrici  (1890),  Schmiedel  (1892),  Ellicott  (1887), 
Stanley  (21858),  Robertson- Plummer  (1911)  on  1  Co  8-10  ;  and 
for  (6):  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  Johrfi,  1907,  pp. 
Ixxviii-xciii ;  B.  F.  Westcott,  Epp.  of  St.  John,  1883,  pp.  260- 
282  ;  E.  Beurlier,  Le  Cidte  imperial,  1891 ;  G.  Boissier,  La 
Religion  romaine,  1892,  i.  109-180;  G.  Wissowa,  Religion  und 
KuUus  der  Romer,  1902,  pp.  71-78,  280-289. 

F.  W.  WonsLEY. 
IGNATIUS.— 1.  Life.  — From  the  date  of  the 
Apostolic  Decree  (Ac  15''^'--*)  onwards,  i.e.  from 
about  A.D.  50,  there  is  absolutely  no  evidence  as 
to  the  history  of  the  Church  of  Antioch.  In  the 
time  of  Origen  and  Julius  Africanus,  Ignatius  was 
considered  as  the  second  of  the  Antiochene  bishops. 
Between  him  and  Theophilus  (f  c.  185)  three 
bishops  were  usually  placed — Hero,  Cornelius,  and 
Eros,  of  whom  nothing  was  known  but  their 
names.  Euodius  was  regarded  as  Ignatius'  prede- 
cessor (Harnack,  Chronologie,  i.,  Leipzig,  1897,  p. 
210).  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  as  Liglitfoot  {Apos- 
tolic Fathers^,  pt.  ii.  vol.  ii.,  London,  1889,  p.  471) 
says :  '  The  dates  of  the  first  century,  the  accession 
of  Euodius  A.D.  42,  and  the  accession  of  Ignatius 
A.D.  69,  deserve  no  credit.'  The  information 
to  be  gleaned  from  the  Apost.  Constit.  vil.  xlvi.  4 
(ed.  Funk,  Paderborn,  1905),  such  as  that  Euodius 
was  ordained  bishop  by  St.  Peter  and  Ignatius  by 
St.  Paul,  does  not  seem  to  be  of  any  greater  value 
than  the  foregoing.     St.  John  Chrysostom,  in  the 

fanegyric  which  he  pronounces  at  Antioch  on  St. 
gnatius,  supposes  that  Ignatius  knew  the  apostles 
and  received  the  laying  on  of  hands  from  them  [in 
S.  Martyrem  Ignatium,  1  and  2  [Migne,  Patrologia 
Graeca,  1.  587  f.]).  The  Apost.  Constit.  and  St. 
John  Chrysostom  represent  the  same  legend  in  for- 
mation. The  extent  of  Eusebius'  information  {HE 
III.  xxxvi.  2)  was  that  St.  Peter  was  the  first 
bishop  of  Antioch  and  that  Ignatius  was  his  second 
successor,  Euodius  being  the  first.  He  depends 
for  his  knowledge  on  Origen  (Horn,  in  Lucam,  6), 
and  is  in  turn  folloAved  by  Jerome  {dc  Vir.  illustr. 
16). 

Apart  from  the  fact  that  he  was  bishop  of 
Antioch  and  the  details  furnished  by  his  authentic 
letters,  the  history  of  Ignatius  is  absolutely  un- 
known. Some  critics  have  tried,  with  more  zeal 
than  discretion,  to  fill  up  the  gaps  in  the  history 
with  conjectures,  but  these  are  quite  worthless. 
For  example,  E.  Bruston  {Ignace  d  Antioche,  Paris, 
1897,  p.  112 f.)  advances  the  theory  that  Ignatius 
was  neither  Greek  nor  Syrian,  but  Roman,  his 

froof  being  that  Ignatius'  name  is  a  Latin  one  (cf. 
orcellini-De-Vit.,  Onomasticon,  s.v.  'Ignatius  = 
Egnatius'),  and  that  he  has  all  the  characteristics 
of  the  Roman  mind,  which  is  essentially  practical ! 
Von  Dobschiitz  {Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive 
Church,  ling,  tr.,  1904,  p.  235  f.)  says,  with  equal 
justification:  'Ignatius  is  a  genuine  Syrian.  His 
Iliction,  which,  for  Greek,  is  almost  intolerably 
affected,  everywhere  reveals  the  iiery  rhythm  of 
Syriac  poetrj-  with  its  wonderful  richness  of  colour- 
ing ana  imagination.' 

In  the  signature  of  eacli  of  his  seven  letters, 
Ignatius  calls  himself  'i-yvinoi  6  koJ  Qeoipdpoi.     On 


tlie  analogy  of  expressions  like  iiaCXos  6  xai  llaCXot 
(Ac  13"),  we  may  suppose  that  Oeo<f>6poi  is  not  an 
epithet  but  a  proper  name  (Lightfoot,  p.  22). 
Zahn  (p.  3)  compares  it  with  Ovimos  'Eviyados  in 
Eusebius,  HE  V.  i.  9.  As  to  when  and  why 
Ignatius  took  the  name  of  Qeo<p6poi,  we  have  to 
confess  complete  ignorance. 

The  author  of  the  Passion  of  Ignatius,  entitled  the 
Martyrium  Colbertinuni  (Funk,  ii.  276),  calls  him 
a  'disciple  of  the  Apostle  John '  and  'a  thoroughly 
apostolic  man,'  but  he  gives  no  evidence  for  tlie 
truth  of  his  statements.  In  his  Letter  to  Polycarp 
(i.  1)  Ignatius  seems  to  say  that  he  has  just  met 
Polycarp  for  the  first  time  (Funk,  Kirchcngeschichtl. 
Abhnnalungen,  ii.  [Paderborn,  1899]  340).  As 
Polycarp  was  an  Asiatic  disciple  of  St.  John,  this 
would  be  a  proof  that  Ignatius  was  not  a  co- 
disciple  of  his.  Besides,  Ignatius  is  absolutely 
silent  on  the  subject  of  the  Apostle  John,  which, 
had  Ignatius  known  him,  would  be  very  puzzling, 
considering  that  Ignatius  wrote  a  long  letter  to 
the  Ephesians. 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  find  in  Romans, 
iv.  3,  an  indication  that  Ignatius  was  a  slave.  But 
the  text  has  probably  a  spiritual  and  not  a  literal 
meaning  (of.  Philaddphian^,  viii.  1  ;  Lightfoot,  p. 
210).  It  is  inconceivable  that  a  slave  should  ever 
have  been  jjut  at  the  head  of  a  Christian  com- 
munity. 

Ignatius  was  not  a  Roman  citizen,  since  he  was 
condemned  to  be  thrown  to  tlie  beasts.  The 
modest  expressions  that  Ignatius  uses  in  speaking 
of  himself  suggest  that  he  was  not  a  Christian  by 
birth,  but  became  one  later  on.  His  previous  life 
may  have  had  some  analogy  with  that  of  the 
Apostle  Paul  before  his  conversion.  '  But  for  mj'- 
self  I  am  ashamed  to  be  called  one  of  them  [i.e. 
the  Antiochene  Christians] ;  for  neither  am  I 
worth3',  being  the  very  last  of  them  and  an  un- 
timely birth'  {Romans,  ix.  2).*  There  are  similar 
protestations  of  humility  in  Eph.  xxi.  2,  Trail. 
xiii.  1,  and  Smyrn.  xi.  1. 

Eusebius  places  the  martyrdom  of  Ignatius  in 
the  time  of  Trajan  (A.D.  98-117) — a  wide  choice  of 
date  to  which  no  objection  can  be  raised  (Light- 
foot, p.  469  f.).  There  seems  good  reason,  however, 
for  deciding  on  the  last  years  of  Trajan's  reign  as 
the  most  likely  date  (Harnack,  Chronologie,  i.  406). 

According  to  the  Martyrium  Colbertimim,  ii. 
1-2  (Funk,  ii.  276),  Ignatius  appeared  before 
Trajan  in  the  9th  year  of  his  reign  (26  Jan.  106- 
26  Jan.  107),  when  the  latter  was  passing 
through  Antioch  on  a  march  against  the  Parthians 
(the  war  against  the  Parthians,  however,  only 
began  in  112).  He  was  condenmed  by  the  Emperor 
and  sent  to  Rome,  Avhere  he  died  on  20  Dec.  107, 
in  the  consulate  of  Sura  and  Senecio  (vii.  1,  p. 
284).  This  date  is  debatable,  for  the  oldest  known 
reference  to  the  '  natale '  of  Ignatius,  found  in  the 
Syriac  Martyrology  publislicd  by  Wright,  fixes 
the  anniver.sary  as  17  Oct.  (Bolland,  AS,  Nov.  i.  1 
[1894],  p.  Ixii.  [text  restored  by  Duchesne] :  /cat  ef ', 
l7cdTtos  iirljKOiroi  'Avrioxfias  iK  rdiv  Apxaluv  pLaprOpuv). 
The  place  of  the  martyrdom  is  not  mentioned. 
Wright's  Martyrology  is  certainlj'  not  later  than 
the  middle  of  the  4th  cent.,  and  appears  to  have 
been  compiled  in  Antioch.  This  date  (17  Oct.)  is 
confirmed  by  St.  Jolm  Clirysostom  and  other  writers 
and  documents  (H.  Quentin,  Les  Martyrologes 
historiques,  I'aris,  1908,  p.  548).  Lightfoot  says  (p. 
434) :  '  The  only  anniversary,  which  iias  any  claims 
to  consideration  as  the  true  day  of  the  martyrdom, 
is  October  17.'  If,  then,  the  date  of  20  Dec.  'for  the 
martyrdom  of  Ignatius  is  not  correct,  no  reliance  can 
be  placed  on  the  date  of  the  consulate  of  Sura  and 
Senecio.     The  main  part  of  the  Martyrium  Colber- 

•  The  translations  of  the  text  of  Igrnatius  are  taken  from 
Lightfoot. 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


59$ 


tinuin  belong  to  the  5th  or,  at  the  earliest,  the 
end  of  the  4tn  century.  For  its  chronology  it  de- 
j>enils  on  Eusebius'  Chronicle,  and  even  it  gives  no 
guarhntee  of  absolute  exactitude.  All  one  can 
say  is  that  Eusebius  i>lace<l  the  martjTdom  of 
Ignatius  in  the  time  ot  Trajan.  Nothing  more 
definite  is  given. 

No  historical  value  can  be  attached  to  the  rest 
of  the  Martyrium  C'olbertinum,  or  to  the  Mar- 
ti/rium  Vaticanum  (which  is  independent  of  the 
foregoing  and  perhaps  dates  from  the  5th  cent.),  or 
to  the  Latin,  Annenian,  or  Greek  texts  where  the 
two  Martyria  are  combined  (on  this  worthless 
hagiographic  literature  see  Bardenhewer,  Gesch. 
der  altkirchl.  Lift.  i.  pp.  14S-145). 

Apart  from  these  documents,  we  have  no  infor- 
mation as  to  the  circumstances  in  which  the  bishop 
of  Antioch  was  imprisoned  and  then  sent  to  Rome. 
Bat,  if  the  martyrdom  took  place  a.d.  110-117  we 
have  the  evidence  of  Trajan  for  this  period,  in  his 
letter  to  Pliny  (Pliny,  Ep.  xcviii. )  defining  the  legal 
position  of  Christianity :  Christianity  is  a  religio 
illicita,  but  public  action  can  be  taken  against 
Christians  only  by  means  of  the  delatio  ;  '  Puniendi 
sunt,  si  deferantur  et  arguantur.'  It  may  be  sup- 
posed, then,  that  Ignatius  was  ddatiis  to  the  Roman 
magistrates  of  Antioch. 

In  Eph.  xxi.  2,  he  writes :  '  Pray  for  the  church 
which  is  in  Sj-ria,  whence  I  am  led  a  prisoner  to 
Rome — I  who  am  the  verj-  last  of  the  faithful 
there ' ;  in  Bom.  ix.  1 :  '  Remember  in  your  prayers 
the  church  which  is  in  Syria,  which  hath  God  for 
its  shepherd  in  my  stead.  Jesus  Christ  alone  shall 
be  its  bisliop — He  and  your  love.'  Some  time  after 
— i.e.  on  his  arrival  in  Troas — Ignatius  seems  to 
have  given  up  all  anxiety  about  the  Church  of 
Antioch :  '  Seeing  that  in  answer  to  your  prayer 
and  to  the  tender  sympathy  which  ye  have  in 
Christ  Jesus,  it  hath  bee:i  reported  to  me  that  the 
church  which  is  in  Antioch  of  Syria  hath  peace,  it 
is  becoming  for  you  as  a  church  of  God,  to  appoint 
a  deacon  to  go  thither  as  God's  ambassador,  that 
he  may  congratulate  them  when  they  are  assembled 
together,  and  may  glorify  the  Name '  (Philad.  x.  1). 
He  ^^Tites  to  Polycarp :  '  Seeing  that  the  church 
which  is  in  Antioch  of  Syria  hath  peace,  as  it  hath 
been  reported  to  me,  through  your  prayers,  I  my- 
self also  have  been  the  more  comforietl  since  God 
hath  banished  my  care '  (vii.  1 ).  To  the  SmymKans 
he  is  even  more  explicit :  '  It  is  meet  that  your 
church  sliould  appoint,  for  the  honour  of  God,  an 
ambassador  of  God  that  he  may  go  as  far  as  Syria 
and  congratulate  them  because  they  are  at  ijeace, 
and  have  recovered  their  proper  stature,  and  their 
proper  bulk  hath  been  restored  to  them '  {to  tSiof 
ff(i]fJLaTeTov  ;  xi.  2) ;  and  he  adds  :  '  It  seemed  to  me 
a  titling  thing  that  ye  should  send  one  of  your 
own  people  with  a  letter,  that  he  might  join  with 
them  in  giving  glory  for  the  calm  which  by  God's 
will  had  overtaken  them,  and  because  they  were 
already  reaching  a  haven  through  your  prayers' 
(xi.  3).  If  it  were  a  question  of  a  persecution 
limited  to  Antioch,  it  would  not  be  very  clear  how 
peace  could  have  restored  its  stature  to  the  Church 
of  Antioch,  i.e.  its  spiritual  stature,  in  the  sense  of 
Eph.  inscT.  :  eiXo-pifiev-r)  if  fie'/idn.  W*e  are,  then, 
led  to  suppose  that  it  is  not  peace  after  persecu- 
tion but  peace  after  discord  that  is  meant.  With 
Ignatius  gone,  the  Church  of  Antioch  was  left 
without  a  pastor,  and  the  community  (o-w/tarelby) 
had  become  disunited  and  was  in  a  state  of  schism. 
The  insistence  with  which  Ignatius  speaks  of  the 
return  of  the  repentant  rebels  to  union  with  God 
and  communion  with  the  bishop  (Philad.  iii.  2, 
viii.  1,  Sinyrn.  ix.  1)  is  perhaps  the  consequence  of 
the  painful  experience  he  has  just  passed  through 
in  Antioch. 
Ignatius,  though  arrested  aoid  condeomed   in 


Antioch,  is  sent  to  Rome.  He  knows  that  he  is 
condemned  to  be  thrown  to  the  beasts  (Rom.  v.  1-2). 
In  Eom.  iv.  1,  he  begs  the  Christians  of  Rome 
not  to  intervene  to  rob  him  of  the  martyrdom  he 
awaits,  and  it  is  thus  obvious  that  he  must  have 
been  tried  and  found  guilty  in  Antioch.  The  iact 
of  his  being  condemncNd  in  Antioch  and  yet  under- 
going his  sentence  in  Rome  is  not  unique.  Rome 
gathered  victims  from  all  the  ends  of  the  earth 
to  take  i)art  in  the  cruel  games  of  her  amphi- 
theatre. 

In  Polycarp's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  we  find 
that  Ignatius,  on  his  arrival  in  Phiiippi  in  Mace- 
donia, was  no  longer  alone  but  in  the  same  convoy 
as  other  Christians  in  chains  (Phil.  L  1,  ix.  1, 
xiiL  2).  The  journey  from  Antioch  to  Rome 
was  made  partly  by  land  and  partly  by  sea  (Rom. 
V.  1 ) ;  Ignatius  was  in  chains,  and  a  squad  of  ten 
soldiers  guarded  him  night  and  day  and  spared 
him  no  ill-treatment  (Rom.  v.  1 ;  cf.  Passio 
Sanctce  Perpettue,  iii.  6 :  *  •  .  .  concussurae  mill- 
turn'). 

The  first  to'wn  we  know  of  Ignatius'  passing 
through  is  Philadelphia  in  proconsular  Asia(PAj7arf. 
yiL  1).  Of  the  itinerary  he  followed  between 
Antioch  and  that  town  we  know  nothing. 

After  Philadelphia  we  find  him  in  Smyrna,  where 
Polycarp  is  bishop.  Later  he  thanks  the  Smyr- 
nseans  effusively  for  the  welcome  they  gave  mm 
and  his  two  companions  Pliilo  and  Rheus  Agatho- 
pus  (Smyrn.  ix.  2,  x.  1).  In  Smyrna  he  made  a 
comparatively  long  stay — time  enough  to  get  to 
know  the  Smyrnaean  families  he  greets  at  the  end 
of  his  letter  (xiii.  1,  2).  WhUe  he  was  in  Smjrna 
the  neighbouring  churches  sent  deputations  to 
greet  him  and  console  him  in  his  imprisonment. 
Prom  Smyrna  itself  Ignatius  writes  a  letter  of 
thanks  to  each  of  the  churches  who  had  sent  dele- 
gates :  the  first  is  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, 
the  second  the  Letter  to  the  Church  of  Magnesia  on 
the  Maeander,  the  third  the  Epistle  to  the  Trallians. 
From  Smyrna,  too,  Ignatius  sends  his  Letter  to  the 
Romans,  which  alone  bears  a  date — the  ninth  day 
before  the  Kalends  of  September,  i.e.  2-4  Aag. 
(Rom.  X.  3). 

The  zeal  of  the  neighbouring  churches  to  greet 
Ignatius  is  very  remarkable.  '  For  when  ye  heard 
that  I  was  on  my  way  from  Syria,  in  bonds  for  the 
sake  of  the  common  Name  and  hope  ...  ye  were 
eager  to  ^Tsit  me,'  writes  Ignatius  to  the  Ephesians 
(i.  2).  The  Ephesians  sent  their  bishop,  Onesimus 
(i.  3),  their  deacon,  Burrhus  (ii.  1),  and  several  other 
Christians — Crocus,  Euplus,  Fronto,  etc.  (ib.).  The 
Magnesians  sent  their  bisliop,  Damas,  the  pres- 
byters Bassos  and  Apollonius,  and  their  deacon 
Zotion  (ii.).  At  the  end  of  his  Epistle  to  the 
Magnesians,  Ignatius  writes :  '  The  Ephesians  from 
Smyrna  salute  j'ou,  from  whence  also  I  write  to 
you.  They  are  here  with  me  for  the  glory  of  God, 
as  also  are  ye  ;  and  they  have  comforted  me  in  all 
things,  together  with  Polycarp,  bishop  of  the  Smyr- 
means.  Yea,  and  all  the  other  churches  salute 
you  .  .  .'  (xv.).  The  Trallians  sent  their  bishop, 
Polybins  (i.  1).  To  them  Ignatius  writes  :  '  I  salute 
you  from  Smyrna,  together  with  the  churches  of 
God  that  are  present  with  me  ;  men  who  refreshed 
me  in  all  ways  both  in  flesh  and  in  spirit '  (xiL  1). 
The  way  in  which  these  three  Asian  churches  vied 
with  each  other  to  pay  court  to  Ignatius  leads  ns 
to  believe  that  other  churches  probably  followed 
suit :  '  I  write  to  all  the  churches,  and  I  bid  aU 
men  know,  that  of  my  own  free  will  I  die  for  God 
.  .  .'  (Rom.  iv.  1) ;  and  again  :  '  My  spirit  saluteth 
you,  and  the  love  of  the  churches  which  received 
me  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  not  as  a  mere 
wayfarer :  for  even  those  church^  which  did  not 
lie  on  my  route  after  the  flesh  went  before  me  from 
city  to  city '  (ix.  3). 


696 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  not  a  roi)ly  to  a 
direct  deputation  sent  to  Ignatius  by  the  Church 
of  Rome.  Ignatius  has  been  informed  of  tlie 
Romans'  feelings  towards  him  and  of  tlieir  desi^jn 
to  snatch  him  from  martyrdom  if  possible,  and  he 
forestalls  them  by  begging  tliem  to  do  nothing. 
He  sends  them  the  letter  by  the  hands  of  Ephesian.s 
who  have  apparently  told  him  of  the  Romans' 
plans  (x.  1),  and  who  have  means  of  transporting 
the  letter  to  Rome.  Ignatius  uses  this  means, 
although  he  knows  that  Antiochene  devotees  have 
gone  straight  to  Rome.  He  says  of  them :  '  As 
touching  tliose  who  went  before  me  from  Syria  to 
Rome  unto  the  glory  of  God,  I  believe  that  ye 
have  received  instructions ;  whom  al.so  apprise  that 
I  am  near '  (x.  2). 

From  Smyrna,  Ignatius  and  his  guard  journey 
to  Troas,  probably  by  sea.  From  there  Ignatius 
dispatches  three  letters  :  the  first  to  the  Church  of 
Philadelphia  ('  The  love  of  the  brethren  which  are 
in  Troas  saluteth  you,'  xi.  2) ;  the  second  to  the 
Smyrna^ans  ;  and  the  third  to  Polycarp,  bishop  of 
Smyrna.  In  the  last  letter  Ignatius  apologizes  for 
not  being  able  to  write  to  all  the  churches,  the 
reason  being  that  he  has  just  been  suddenly 
ordered  to  embark  at  once  for  Neapolis  in  Mace- 
donia, the  port  for  Philippi. 

Before  leaving  Troas,  Ignatius  receives  comfort- 
ing news  of  his  beloved  Church  of  Antioch.  He 
suggests  that  Polycarp  should  depute  one  of  the 
Smyrnjeans  to  go  to  Antioch  to  show  the  love  that 
the  Church  of  Smyrna  bears  to  the  Church  of 
Syria  (vii.  2).  '  I  salute  him  that  shall  be  ap- 
pointed to  go  to  Syria,'  he  writes.  '  Grace  shall  be 
with  him  always,  and  with  Polycarp  who  sendeth 
him '  (viii.  2).  He  begs  Polycarp  to  write  to 
the  churches  lying  between  Smyrna  and  Antioch, 
enjoining  them  to  send  messengers  or  letters  to 
the  Church  of  Antioch  as  a  token  of  their  love 
(viii.  1).  He  writes  to  the  same  effect  to  the 
Philadelphians.  '  As  a  church  of  God '  they  ought 
to  elect  a  deacon  and  commission  him  to  cany 
their  congratulations  to  the  devotees  assembled 
together  at  Antioch  and  to  glorify  '  the  Name ' 
with  them.  If  they  do  this,  they  will  be  following 
the  example  of  several  churches,  some  of  whom 
have  sent  a  bishop,  and  some  presbyters  or  deacons 
(X.  1-2). 

From  Neapolis  Ignatius  is  taken  to  Philippi.  A 
few  details  of  this  journey  may  be  gleaned  from 
Polycarp's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  written  in 
reply  to  a  letter  sent  from  the  Philippians  to  Poly- 
carp (iii.  1):  'Ye  wrote  to  nie,  both  ye  yourselves 
and  Ignatius,  asking  that  if  any  one  should  go  to 
Syria  lie  might  carry  thither  the  letters  from  you. 
And  this  I  will  do,  if  I  get  a  fit  opijortunity,  either 
I  myself,  or  he  whom  I  shall  send  to  be  ambassador 
on  your  behalf  also  '  (xiii.  1).  From  this  passage 
■we  may  infer  that  Ignatius  wrote  to  Polycarp 
during  liis  stay  in  I'hilippi ;  and  that  the  Philip- 
pians wrote  to  the  Church  of  Antioch  at  the  same 
time  as  to  Polycarp.  The  Philippians  had  given 
Ignatius  a  hearty  welcome,  and  Polycarp  com- 
mends them  for  having  '  received  the  followers  of 
the  true  Love  and  escorted  them  on  their  way  .  .  . 
those  men  encircled  in  saintly  bonds  which  are  the 
diadems  of  them  that  be  truly  chosen  of  God  and 
our  Lord  '  (i.  1). 

By  the  time  Polycarp  wrote  this  letter,  Ignatius 
had  left  Philippi  .and  was  en  route  for  Rome: 
'  Moreover,  concerning  Ignatius  himself  and  those 
that  were  with  him,  if  ye  have  any  sure  tidings, 
certify  us '  (xiii.  2).  It  would  be  difficult  to  believe 
that  this  request  for  news  of  Ignatius  could  by  any 
possibility  be  later  than  the  receipt  of  the  tidings 
of  his  death.  It  is  true  that  in  another  passage 
Polj'ciirp  commends  the  patience  of  '  the  blessed 
Iguatiu»,  and  Zosimus,  and  Rufus,'  and  compaies  it 


with  that  of  St.  Paul  and  the  other  apostles,  add- 
ing :  '  all  these  ran  not  in  vain  .  .  .  they  are  in 
their  due  place  in  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  with 
whom  also  they  suffered '  (ix.  1,2);  but  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  the  last  phrase  refers  only  to  St. 
Paul  and  the  other  apostles.  On  this  hypothesis, 
then,  Polycarp  would  not  know  the  fate  of  Ignatius, 
Zosimus,  and  Rufus  till  after  the  dispatcli  of  his 
letter  to  the  Philippians. 

From  the  time  he  left  Philippi  we  know  nothing 
further  of  Ignatius.  Origen  says  that  he  fought 
against  the  beasts  in  Rome  during  the  persecution. 
Eusebius  (HE  in.  xxxvi.  3)  repeats  this  statement, 
and  adds  that  in  Rome  Ignatius  became  '  food  for 
the  beasts.'  In  this  he  was  certainly  influenced  by 
Ignatius'  letter  to  the  Romans  ('  I  am  God's  wheat, 
and  I  am  ground  by  the  teetii  of  wild  beasts,'  iv.  1), 
This  Epistle  is  the  sole  extant  reference  to  the 
martyrdom  of  Ignatius.  Even  in  Rome  itself 
there  seems  to  have  been  no  note  made  of  the 
incident. 

From  Jerome  we  learn  that  Ignatius  was  buried 
in  Antioch  :  '  Reliquiie  corporis  eius  in  Antiocliia 
iacent  extra  portam  Daphniticam  in  coemeterio' 
(de  Vir.  illustr.  16).  This  was  written  in  A.D. 
392,  and,  as  far  as  we  know,  Jerome  did  not  take 
his  information  from  any  written  source,  but  pro- 
bably speaks  de  visu. 

*In  his  panegyric  on  Ignatius  pronounced  in 
Antioch  (386-97),  St.  John  Chiysostom  cele- 
brates the  triumphal  return  of  the  martyr  to  his 
episcopal  city,  and  the  honours  tliat  were  paid  him 
by  the  cities  on  the  route  [Pair.  Graeca,  1.  594]. 
The  orator  no  doubt  takes  his  clue  from  spectacles 
of  the  same  nature  seen  for  some  years  previously 
in  diflerent  centres  of  the  Eastern  Empire.  It  is 
quite  evident  that  the  remains  of  the  holy  martyr 
could  not  have  been  brought  back  in  this  way  in 
the  very  thick  of  the  persecution'  (H.  Delehaye, 
Les  Origines  du  culte  des  martt/rs,  Brussels,  1912, 
p.  69  ;  so  also  Lightfoot,  p.  431  f.). 

In  the  time  of  Theodosius  ll.  (408-450),  Ignatius' 
remains  (or  bones  believed  to  be  his)  were  trans- 
ferred from  the  cemetery  extra  muros  to  the  ancient 
Temple  of  Fortune,  now  turned  into  a  basilica 
(Euagrius,  HE  i.  16  [ed.  Bidez-Parmentier,  London, 
1899,  p.  25  f.]). 

The  whole  question  of  the  transference  of 
Ignatius'  bones  from  Rome  to  Antioch  is  a  diflicult 
one.  Delehaye  writes :  '  It  is  diflicult  to  come  to 
any  finding  on  the  question  of  the  reality  of  the 
transference  of  St.  Ignatius'  remains  from  Rome 
and  of  the  period  when  this  took  place'  (loc.  cit.). 
If  St.  Ignatius  suffered  martyrdom  in  Rome,  and 
if,  as  Euagrius  says,  *  he  met  his  death  in  the 
amphitheatre  of  Rome,  findin";  his  tomb  in  the 
bellies  of  the  wild  beasts  in  fulfilment  of  his  own 
wish,'  one  may  suppose  that  nothing  remained  of 
his  body.  In  Rom.  iv.  2  he  wrote :  '  Rather  entice 
the  wild  beasts,  that  they  may  become  my 
sepulchre  and  may  leave  no  part  of  my  body  be- 
hind.' Of  course  one  may  always  agree  with 
Euagrius  that  at  least  Ignatius'  'tougher  bones' 
were  saved. 

As  to  the  time  of  the  transference,  if  it  did  take 
place,  we  are  equally  at  sea.  By  the  end  of  tiie 
4th  cent.,  as  we  have  seen  above,  public  opinion  was 
quite  decided  that  Ignatius'  remains  were  in 
ccemeterio  in  Antioch.  But  the  transference  of  the 
remains  in  the  2iid  or  3rd  cent,  would  be  an  ana- 
chronism, and  in  the  4th  cent,  some  note  would 
undoubtedly  have  been  taken  of  the  fact.  We 
must  conclude,  then,  that,  if  the  remains  of  Ignatius 
preserved  in  Antioch  are  authentic,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  Ignatius  did  not  suffer  martyrdom  in 
Rome  at  all,  but  returned  to  Antioch  and  died 
there.  The  existence  of  his  tomb  in  Antioch  is 
more  probable  on  this  supposition  than  ou  the 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


597 


hypothesis  of  the  transference  of  liis  rtMiiains  from 
Rome  to  Antioch. 

2.  HSS  and  YSS  of  the  Epistles.— The  words  of 
Polycarps  Epistle  to  tlie  I'hilippians  (xiii.  2)  are 
the  earliest  evidence  of  a  collection  of  Ignatius' 
letters  :  '  The  letters  of  Ignatius  which  were  sent 
to  us  by  him,  and  others  as  many  as  we  had  by  us, 
we  send  unto  you,  according  as  ye  gave  charge ; 
the  which  are  subjoined  to  this  letter  ;  from  which 
ye  will  be  able  to  gain  great  advantage.  For  they 
comprise  faith  and  endurance  and  every  kind 
of  edification,  which  pertaineth  unto  our  Lord.' 
Eusebius  (HE  iii.  36)  apparently  knows  of  a  col- 
lection of  seven  of  Ignatius'  letters,  vdtXi  Poly- 
carp's  Letter  to  the  Philippians,  which  is  identical 
with  our  present  group  of  letters,  even  down  to  the 
order  in  which  the  Epistles  are  given  :  Eph. ,  Magn. , 
Trail.,  Rom.,  Philad.,  Polyc,  Smym.,  and  Poly- 
carp's  Philippians. 

This  original  collection  of  letters  fell  into  the 
hands  of  a  forger,  who  made  interpolations  in  the 
text  of  the  authentic  Epistles  and  also  manu- 
factured six  additional  letters — Mary  of  Cassobola 
(there  is  a  Cilician  town  called  Castabala,  possibly 
the  same  as  Cassobola)  to  Ignatius,  Ignatius  to 
Mary  of  Cassobola,  to  the  Tarsians,  to  the  Philip- 
pians, to  the  Antiochenes,  and  to  Hero  the  Deacon. 
We  have  thus  an  Ignatian  collection  of  thirteen 
letters.  The  identification  of  the  forger  with  the 
unknown  compiler  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  is  a 
theory  highly  favoured  by  Funk.  Heregards  him  as 
having  been  a  Syrian  Christian  of  the  beginning  of 
the  5th  cent.,  probably  belonging  to  an  ApoUinarist 
order,  and  he  even  finds  in  his  work  points  of  con- 
tact \nt\\.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (Pair,  apostol. 
opera,  ii.  pp.  ix-xiii,  and  Kirchengeschiehtl.  Ah- 
handlungen,  ii.  [Paderborn,  1899],  pp.  347-359). 

Three  other  spurious  letters  of  Ignatius  may  be 
passed  over  quickly — one  supposed  to  be  addressed 
to  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  with  the  Virgin's 
reply,  and  two  addressed  to  the  Apostle  John. 
The  oldest  witness  to  these  three  Latin  letters 
is  Denis  of  Chartreux  (t  1471) ;  the  oldest  MS  of 
them  dates  from  the  12th  century.  These  Epistles 
are  usually  regarded  as  forgeries  of  Latin  prove- 
nance and  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

In  1845,  Cuieton  published  Eph.,  Magn.,  and 
Earn,  in  a  Syriac  version,  which  comprises  the  three 
authentic  Epistles  in  an  abridged  form.  Cnreton 
put  forward  the  hypothesis  that  the  Syriac  text 
represents  all  that  is  authentically  Ignatian,  and 
that  consequently  Trail.,  Philad.,  Pobjc,  and 
Smym.  are  spunous  compositions.  This  theory 
was  accepted  for  some  time  by  quite  a  number  of 
critics,  but  it  has  now  been  abandoned  :  the  three 
Syiiac  letters  are  nothing  more  nor  less  than  an 
abridgment  of  the  three  Greek  .  Epistles.  (These 
apocryphal  texts  may  be  found  in  the  editions  of 
Zahn,  Lightfoot,  and  Funk.) 

We  may  now  turn  our  undivided  attention  to 
the  Greek  collection  of  the  seven  authentic  letters. 

The  authenticity  of  these  Epistles  was  for  long 
a  matter  of  keen  controversy.  At  first  only  the 
Latin  collection  comprising  the  Epistles  to  the 
Apostle  John  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  or  the  three 
apocryphal  letters  published  in  Paris  in  1495,  were 
Imown.  Three  years  later  (1498)  Lef^vre  d'Etaples 
published  in  Latin  the  collection  comprising  the 
thirteen  spurious  or  interpolated  letters,  the  Greek 
text  of  which  was  printed  at  Dillingen  in  1557. 
This  collection  was  speedily  recognizSi  to  be  un- 
authentic, but,  though  the  Magdeburg  Centnri- 
ators  repudiated  the  thirteen  letters  e»  hloc,  Bar- 
onius  and  Bellarmin  defended  them  en  hloc.  The 
Protestant  Scult«tus,  in  his  Medullae  theologiae 
patrum  syntagma  (Neustadt,  1609)  was  of  opinion 
that  only  the  seven  letters  attested  by  Eusebius 
were  authentic.     In  1646  Vossins  published  the 


authentic  Greek  text  of  six  of  the  seven  letters, 
the  Greek  text  of  the  seventh — the  Letter  to  the 
Romans — being  published  by  Ruinart  in  1689. 
But  it  was  a  long  time  before  the  authenticity  of 
these  seven  letters  was  generally  accepted.  It 
would  be  useless  to  retrace  the  history  of  this  pain- 
ful controversy  with  its  tedious  conflict  of  confes- 
sional (Saumaise,  Blondel,  Daille)or  pseudo-critical 
(Baur,  Hilgenfeld,  Lipsius)  prejudices,  which  was 
finally  terminated  by  Zahn  s  Ignatius  von  ArUi- 
ochien  (Gotha,  1873)  and  F,  X.  Yvink'a  Die  Eehtheii 
der  ignatianischen  Brief e  (Tubingen,  1883).  E. 
Bruston's  objections  and  conjectures  {Ignaee  d'An- 
tioche)  were  never  taken  seriously,  nor  were  those 
of  D.  Volter  (Die  ignatianischen  Brief e,  Tubingen, 
1892).  See,  however,  M.  Rackl,  Christologie  des 
heiligen  Ignatius  von  Antiochien,  Freiburg  i.  B., 
1914,  pp.  11-86. 

A  reply  to  the  diflBculties  raised  by  the  opponents 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  letters  will  be  found  in 
J.  Reville's  Les  Origines  de  Pipigcopat  (pp.  442-81) 
and  in  E.  Hennecke's  Handbuch  zu  den  neutest. 
Apokryphen  (Tiibingen,  1904,  p.  191  f.).  Difficulties 
naturally  exist,  writes  R.  Knopf,  but  they  are  not 
to  be  weighetl  against  '  the  uninventible  form  of 
these  writings,  the  originality  of  the  man  which 
seems  to  speak  forth  from  the  pulsing  lines,  and  the 
wealth  of  personal  references  which  entwine  the 
letters '  {Das  nachapostolische  Zeitalter,  Tiibingen, 
1905,  p.  37;  cf.  O.  Stahlin,  Christl.  griech.  Litt., 
Munich,  1914,  p.  975). 

The  seven  Epistles  of  Ignatius  are  attested,  as 
we  have  said,  first  by  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp,  and 
then,  at  the  beginning  of  the  4th  cent. ,  by  Eusebius. 
Between  these  two  witnesses  we  may  insert 
Irenaeus  (adv.  Haer.  v.  xxviii.  4),  who  does  not 
name  Ignatius  but  cites  his  Letter  to  the  Romans  : 
'  Quemadmodum  quidam  de  nostris  dixit,  propter 
martyiium  in  Deum  adiudicatns  ad  bestias, 
"quoniam  frumentum  sum  Christi  et  per  dentes 
bestiarum  molor  ut  mundus  panis  inveniar." ' 
Hamack  thinks  that  Clement  of  Alexandria  is  so 
closely  dependent  on  Ignatius  that  he  must  have 
read  him  (cf.  Paedag.  I.  vi.  38,  ll.  viii.  63,  Excerpt. 
Theod.  74  with  Trttil.  yuL  1,  Eph.  xvii.  1,  xix.  2) ; 
so  also  Origen  (de  Orat.  20=Eom.  iii.  3 ;  Horn.  vi. 
in  Luc.  =  Eph.  xix.  1;  in  Cant.  Cantic.  prolog.  = 
Eom.  vii.  2).  Hamack  ignores  all  doubtful  wit- 
nesses like  Melito,  Athenagoras,  Theophilus,  Ter- 
tullian,  the  Lyons  Martyrs,  and  the  Acts  of  St. 
Perpetua.  We  shall  pass  over  all  attestations  later 
than  Eusebius  (see  Hamack,  Die  Ueberlieferung  der 
altchristl.  Litteratur,  Leipzig,  1893,  pp.  79-86). 

The  question  whether  Lucian  the  satirist,  in  lines  169-170  of 
his  d<  MorU  Pereyrini,  was  thinking  of  Ignatius  or  even  had 
direct  knowledge  of  his  letters  is  a  point  on  which  one  hesitates 
to  decide.  F^nk  (Patr.  apostol.  L  pp.  Ix-lxi)  and  Reville 
(Oriffine*  de  tipigeojpat,  Paris,  1895,  p.  448  f.)  incline  to  an  affir- 
mative view,  while  Hamack  {Ueberlie/erung,  p.  79)  remains 
doabtful. 

Smym.  iii.  3-xii.  1  is  preserved  in  the  Papyrus- 
kodex  10581  (5th  cent.)  of  Berlin  (see  C.  Schmidt 
and  W.  Schubart,  Altchristl.  Texte,  Berlin,  1910,  pp. 
3-12).  The  Greek  text  of  all  the  authentic  letters 
except  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  given  in  the 
Codex  Laurentianus,  Ivii.  7  (11th  cent. ),  fol.  242-252, 
which  was  used  by  Vossius  for  the  editio  princeps. 
The  MS  G.  V.  14  (16th  cent. )  in  the  Casanate  Librarj- 
is  a  copy  of  the  Laurentianus.  The  letter  to  the 
Romans  is  given  in  the  Paris  gr.  1491  (10th  cent.), 
which  was  used  by  Ruinart.  The  separation  of 
the  Letter  to  the  Romans  from  the  six  other 
authentic  letters  is  perhaps  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
first  collection  of  Ignatius'  letters  was  made  in 
Asia — witness  what  Polycarp  says  in  his  Philip- 
pians— and  thus  did  not  contain  the  EpLstle  to  the 
Romans  (so  Hamack,  Ueberlieferung,  p.  76). 

The  Latin  version  published  by  Ussher  (Oxford, 
1644)  was  the  work  of  Robert  Grosseteste,  bishop 


598 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


of  Lincoln  (13th  cent.) ;  it  was  translated  from  an 
excellent  Greek  MS  now  lost,  and  is  an  extremely 
close  renderinf^  of  tiie  orifjinal.  Ussher  had  at  his 
disposal  two  Latin  AISS — one  the  lost  Codex 
Montaciitianus  and  the  other  the  existinj;  Codex 
Caiensis,  395  of  Camhridge  (15th  cent.).  Grosse- 
teste'a  version  comprises  the  lirst  six  authentic 
letters  and  the  Martyrium  Colbertinuia,  including 
the  Letter  to  the  Romans. 

We  also  possess  the  seven  letters  in  an 
Armenian  translation  possibly  dating  from  the 
5tii  cent.,  and  some  fragments  of  a  Syriac  transla- 
tion which  formed  the  bjisis  for  the  Armenian 
rendering.  Lightfoot  and  Harnack  think  that  the 
Syriac  collection  of  Eph.,  Mafjii.,  and  Jlom.  in  an 
abridged  form  published  by  Cureton  is  an  excerpt 
from  this  Syriac  translation  of  the  seven  authentic 
letters. 

3.  Ecclesiastical  position.— (1)  Church  orgnniza- 
tion. — If  one  had  to  prove  that  the  Christianity  of 
the  beginning  of  the  '2nd  cent,  was  a  city-religion 
one  would  find  ample  material  in  the  letters  of 
Ignatius.  The  visible  unity  is  the  Church,  and 
each  church  bears  the  name  of  the  city  where  it  is 
established :  '  the  church  which  is  in  Ephesus  of 
Asia,'  '  the  church  which  is  in  Magnesia  on  the 
M?eander,'  '  the  holy  church  which  is  in  Tralles  of 
Asia,'  '  the  church  of  God  the  Father  and  of  Jesus 
Christ  which  is  in  Philadelphia  of  Asia,'  '  the 
church  of  God  the  Father  and  of  Jesus  Christ  the 
Beloved  .  .  .  which  is  in  Smyrna  of  Asia' — so 
Ignatius  styles  the  churches  in  the  inscriptions  of 
his  letters. 

The  Church  of  Antioch  is  called  'the  church 
which  is  in  Antioch  of  Syria'  (Philad.  x.  1,  Smyrn. 
xi.  1),  but  it  is  also  spoken  of  as  '  the  church  which 
is  in  Syria'  [Mar/n.  xiv.,  Eph.  xxi.  2,  Horn.  ix.  1). 
Ignatius  calls  himself  '  bishop  from  Syria '  (Rom. 
ii.  2).  This  has  been  taken  as  an  indication  that 
Ignatius  was  bishop  not  only  of  Antioch  but  of  the 
whole  province  of  Syria,  Syria  being  understood 
as  including  several  lesser  churches  and  several 
lesser  bishops  (K.  liiibeck,  licichseintciliiiig  tmd 
Jcirchliche  Hicrarchie  dcs  Orients,  Miinster,  1901, 
p.  43  ;  Harnack,  Mission  und  Aiisbreitung,  Leipzig, 
1902,  i.  384).  The  text  of  Philad.  x.  2,  which 
speaks  of  'the  churches  which  are  nearest'  (al 
fyyiffTa  iKKXtiffiai),  does  not  say  which  city  they  are 
near  ;  they  may  be  churches  of  Asia  or  even  of 
Cilicia  (H.  de  Genouillac,  L'Eglise  chritienne  an 
temps  de  saint  Ignace  d'Antioche,  Paris,  1907,  p. 
67 1.).  Even  if  it  were  proved  that  Syria  contained 
other  churches  than  Antioch,  e.g.  the  churches  of 
Apamia  or  Bercca,  the  bishop  of  Antioch  might 
still  have  considered  himself  emphatically  the 
bishop  of  Syria,  without  being  in  anj-  sense  a 
metropolitan.  To  speak  of  a  metropolitan  bishop 
in  the  time  of  Ignatius  is  an  anachronism. 

The  Christian  community  bearing  the  name  of 
the  churcli  of  such  and  such  a  city  is  not  a  purely 
mystical  body,  but  a  visible  unity  having  frequent 
assemblies.  '  Let  meetings  (a-waywyai)  be  held 
more  frequently,'  Ignatius  writes  to  I'olycarp  (iv. 
2,  3).  '  Seek  out  all  men  by  name.  .  .  .  Let  slaves 
not  desire  to  be  set  free  at  the  public  cost'  (d7r6 
roD  Kotvov  eXevdepovcrdai ;  note  the  expression  r6  KoivSy, 
a  synonym  for  the  local  church  [Philad.  i.  1].  If 
the  community  can  buy  out  slaves,  it  must  have 
a  common  purse).  In  the  Letter  to  the  Smyrnaians 
(vi.  2),  the  heretics  are  reproached  for  acting 
contrary  to  the  Spirit  of  God  :  '  They  have  no  care 
for  love  {uyd-irrt^),  none  for  the  widow,  none  for  the 
orphan,  none  for  the  afflicted,  none  for  the  prisoner, 
none  for  the  hungry  or  thirsty.'  In  these  words 
we  have  a  r6sum6  of  the  gospel  of  love,  and  an 
indication  of  the  practical  assistance  rendered  by 
every  Christian  community  to  those  in  nee<i. 
Ignatius  begs  Polycarp  to  call  together  the  faithful 


into  a  sort  of  deliberative  assembly  {ffvfifioi'fXiov)  to 
cle(;t  ixfipoTovTJffai)  a  messenger  to  go  to  Antioch 
(vii.  2 ;  cf.  Philad.  x.  1  and  Smyrn.  xi.  2).  The 
church  assembles  dirl  t6  avrd,  'in  one  place':  not 
to  come  firl  t6  aiirS  is  to  show  pride  and  to  stand 
self-condemned  {Eph.  v.  2) :  to  come  cirl  rd  oi)r6  is 
to  cast  down  the  powers  of  Satan  (xiii.  1).  The 
faithful  must  give  the  Gentiles  (fOvtaiv)  no  occasion 
to  calumniate  God's  people  (t6  eV  6{ip  irXfidos,  Trail. 
viii.  2) ;  they  must  abide  in  concord  and  in  common 
prayer  (xii.  2) ;  they  must  tlee  evil  arts  (KOKorexi'taj) ; 
women  must  be  'content  with  their  husbands  in 
llesii  and  in  spirit'  {Polyc.  v.  1).  If  a  Christian 
desires  to  abide  in  chastity  to  the  honour  of  the 
llesh  of  the  Lord,  he  may  do  so,  but  on  condition 
that  he  does  it  without  pride  (v.  2  ;  this  is  a  some- 
what remarkable  recommendation,  as  it  is  a  re- 
pudiation of  the  Encratite  conception  of  the  Chris- 
tian life).  Each  church  has  its  widows,  whom  it  has 
to  care  for  (Polyc.  iv.  1  ;  Smyrn.  xiii.  1).  Ignatius 
recommends  that  those  who  marry — male  or  female 
— should  not  enter  into  wedlock  without  the  consent 
of  the  bishop,  for  marriage  should  be  'after  the 
Lord  and  not  after  concupiscence '  (Polyc.  v.  2). 

Each  church  has  a  bishop  at  its  head  ;  this  is 
true  not  only  of  Antioch,  but  also  of  Ephesus 
(Eph.  i.  3),  Magnesia  (Magn.  ii.),  Tralles  (Trail,  i. 
1),  Philadelpiiia  (P/u7rrrf.  i.  1),  and  Smyrna  (.S'myrH. 
xii.  1).  Next  to  the  bishop  there  is  a  irpfa^vripiov 
or  group  of  vpeff^vrfpoi :  so  at  Ephesus  (Eph.  iv.  1 , 
XX.  2),  Magnesia  (Magn.  ii.,  xiii.  1),  Tralles  (Trail. 
ii.  2,  xiii.  2),  Philadclpliia  (Philad.  vii.  1),  and 
Smyrna  (Smyrn.  xii.  2).  Under  the  presbyters, 
there  are  deacons  (Eph.  ii.  1,  Magn.  ii.,  Trail,  ii. 
3,  iii.  1,  vii.  2,  Philad.,  subscr.,  vii.  1,  x.  1,  Smyrn. 
viii.  1,  xii.  2). 

The  Epistles  are  a  perpetual  appeal  to  unity  on 
the  part  of  the  Christian  community  by  submission 
to  tlie  deacons,  the  presbytery,  and  the  bishop. 
Ignatius  Avrites  to  the  Ephesians  :  '  I  have  received 
your  whole  multitude  (iroXi'TrXTjOlav  vfiwv)  in  tlie 
person  of  Onesimus'  (Eph.  i.  3).  They  will  1-te 
sanctified  if  they  submit  to  their  bishop  and  pres- 
bytery (ii.  2),  if  they  and  tiieir  bishop  have  but 
one  thought,  if  their  presbytery  is  unitetl  to  tlie 
bishop  as  '  its  strings  to  a  lyre '  (iv.  1).  The  bishop 
is  to  be  regarded  as  the  steward,  whom  the  pro- 
prietor (olKooeariruTrjs)  has  entrusted  with  the  manage- 
ment of  his  house  (oiKovo/xiap) ;  and  even  as  the 
Master  Himself  (vi.  1).  In  Magn.  (ii.)  Ignatius 
commends  Zotion  the  Deacon  for  submitting  '  to 
tlie  bishop  as  unto  the  grace  of  God  and  to  the 
presbytery  as  unto  the  law  of  Jesus  Christ.'  The 
presbyters,  again,  are  subject  to  their  bishop,  how- 
over  young  he  may  be  (iii.  1).  The  bishop  is  but 
the  visible  bishop ;  above  him  is  the  invisible 
Bishop,  God  the  Father,  the  universal  Bishop 
(6  navTuiv  e ir la- k ottos,  iii.  1,  2).  The  bishop  presides, 
and  thus  takes  the  jilace  of  God  ;  the  luesbyters 
represent  the  council  ((xwidpiov)  of  the  apostles ; 
the  deacons  are  entrusted  with  the  diaconate  of 
Jesus  Christ  (vi.  1  :  'a  service  under  Jesus  Christ' 
[Lightfoot,  ii.  12U]).  The  Magnesians  are  to  con- 
tinue in  union  with  their  revered  bishop,  and  '  with 
the  fitly  wreathed  spiritual  circlet  of  the  presbytery, 
and  with  the  deacons  who  walk  after  God '  (xiii.  1). 
The  same  advice  is  found  again  in  Trail,  (ii.  1-2, 
iii.  1,  xii.  2,  xiii.  2),  Philad.  (ii.  1,  iii.  2,  vii.  1), 
and  Smyrn.  (viii.  1,  xii.  2). 

The  ecclesiology  of  Ignatius  does  not  reganl 
union  and  discipline  merely  as  a  means  of  sancti- 
fication  but  as  the  condition  of  Christianity.  Some 
call  their  chief  'bishop,'  but  'in  everything  act 
apart  from  him,'  and  'do  not  assemble  themselves 
together  lawfully  according  to  commandment'  (/irj 
/ie/iafws  Kar  ivToXriv  avvaOpoli'effOai,  Magn.  iv. ). 
'Neither  do  ye  anything  witii<mt  the  bishop  and 
the  presbyters'  (vii.  1).     Apart  from  the   bishop, 


[GNATTUS 


IGNATIUS 


599 


the  presbyterj-,  and  the  deacons,  '  there  is  not  even 
the  name  of  a  church'  (x<«'P*s  To&rwy  eKK\r)<Tia  ou 
KaXeirai,  Trail,  iu.  1).  Similar  declarations  may 
be  found  in  Philad.  (iii.  2).  To  the  Smymaeans 
Ij^atius  writes  (viii.  1-2)  :  '  Let  no  man  do  aught 
of  things  pertaining  to  the  Church  apart  from  the 
bishop.  Let  that  l^  held  a  valid  (/Se.Sat'a)  eucharist 
which  is  under  the  bishop  or  one  to  whom  he  shall 
have  committed  it.  "Wheresoever  the  bishop  shall 
appear,  there  let  the  people  (v\i)do%)  be.  ...  It  is 
not  lawful  apart  from  the  bishop  either  to  baptize 
or  to  hold  a  love-feast'  (a-fivr);  i.e.  'euchanst'). 
The  Letter  to  Polycarp  contains  a  still  more 
striking  piece  of  advice :  '  Please  the  Captain  in 
whose  array  ye  serve,  from  whom  also  je  will 
receive  your  pay.  Let  none  of  you  be  found  a 
deserter'  (vi.  2). 

A.  Michiels  (IJOrigine  de  Vipiscopat,  Louvain, 
1900,  pp.  396-98)  has  tried  to  show  that  Ignatius 
regards  this  three-grade  hierarchy — •  and  notably 
the  episcopate' — as  of  Divine  institution.  But 
Ignatius  does  not  look  at  the  problem  from  this 
point  of  view  at  all.  He  regards  the  Church  as  a 
sort  of  extension  of  the  gospel  by  the  apostles  :  '  I 
take  refuge  in  the  gospel  as  the  flesh  of  Jesus  and 
in  the  Apostles  as  the  presbytery  of  the  Church ' 
(Philad.  V.  1).  The  Church  is  the  visible  realiza- 
tion of  salvation  :  '  For  a.s  many  as  are  of  God  and 
of  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  with  the  bishop  ;  and  as 
many  as  shall  repent  and  enter  into  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  these  also  shall  be  of  God,  that  they 
may  be  living  after  Jesus  Christ '  (iii.  2).  And  '  if 
any  man  followeth  one  that  maketh  a  schism 
(<7xt'fo»rrt),  he  doth  not  inherit  the  Kingdom  of  God. 
If  any  man  walketh  in  strange  doctrine  {iv  iWorpiif 
yvilifjLTi  irepi-raTei)  he  hath  no  fellowship  with  the 
passion '  (iii.  3).  This  is  equivalent  to  saying  that 
union  with  the  local  church,  under  tlie  authority  of 
the  bishop,  is  the  sine  qua  noti  for  justification  by 
the  blood  of  Christ,  for  inheriting  the  Kingdom  of 
God,  and  for  life  after  Jesus  Christ.  Union  with 
the  Church  is  thus  not  a  matter  of  ecclesiastical 
law  or  of  individual  choice,  but  one  condition  of 
salvation.  If  this  is  the  view  taken  by  Ignatius, 
how  could  he  help  believing  that  the  visible  and 
hierarchical  Church  was  instituted  by  the  will  of 
God  ?  *  He  has  an  intensely  clear  perception  that 
the  mind  of  God  for  man's  salvation  has  expressed 
itself  not  in  any  mere  doctrine  but  in  a  divinely 
instituted  society  with  a  divinely  authorized  hier- 
archy. This  is  the  mind  of  God  ...  so  clearly 
that  he  who  would  .  .  .  run  in  harmony  with  the 
divine  purpose  must  perforce  have  merged  his 
individuality  in  the  fellowship  of  the  Church  and 
submitted  his  wilfulness  to  her  government' 
(C.  Gore,  The  Ministry  of  thi  Christian  Church\ 
London,  1888-89,  p.  299). 

J.  Keville  {Les  Origincs  de  Vipiscopat,  pp.  508- 
519)  is  very  firm  on  the  authenticity  of  the  Ignatian 
letters,  but  sets  himself  the  task  of  minimizing 
the  witness  they  bear  to  the  three-grade  hierarchy 
and  principally  to  the  monarchical  episcopate. 
First  of  all  he  holds  that  this  episcopate  took  its 
rise  in  Asia,  and  that  in  the  time  of  Ignatius  it  did 
not  exist  or  scarcely  existed  outside  Asia  ;  he  con- 
cedes, however,  that  Antioch  had  a  monarchical 
episcopate.  Let  us  say  at  the  very  beginning  that 
nowhere — not  even  in'his  Letter  to  the  Romans — 
does  Ignatius  lead  us  to  think  that  the  monarchical 
episcopate  was  found  only  in  Syria  or  Asia  :  he 
even  suggests  that  such  an  episcopate  exists  every- 
where, when  he  saj's  to  the  Ephesians  :  '  Even  as 
the  bishops  that  are  settled  in  the  farthest  parts 
of  the  earth  are  in  the  mind  of  Jesus  Christ'  (ol 
(■K'ixTKovoi  ol  Kara.  to.  -repara  opixrOeyrfs,  Eph.  iii.  2 ; 
for  the  meaning  of  koto,  rk  repara,  cf.  Pom.  vi.  1 : 
rd  xepara  tov  Kocrfiov).  Reville  is  wrong  in  saying 
that  '  the  monarchical  episcopate  makes  its  entry 


into  the  history  of  the  Church  at  the  beginning  of 
the  2nd  cent.,'  for  in  Ignatius'  letters  it  is  already 
an  established  institution.  And  even  supposing 
Ignatius  '  gives  us  his  ideal  rather  than  the  ecclesi- 
astic reality  of  his  time,'  this  ideal  is  merely  the 
submission,  union,  and  perfect  conformity  of  all 
to  the  bishop  in  each  church ;  it  is  not  the  exist- 
ence of  a  single  bishop,  for  that  is  already  an 
accomplished  fact  in  eacli  church.  '  Ignatius' 
testimony  presents  us  with  the  monarchical  episco- 
pate as  firmly  rooted,  completely  beyond  dispute. 
,  .  .  He  speaks  of  the  bbhops  as  established  in 
the  farthest  parts  of  the  earth.  He  knows  of 
no  non-episcopal  area'  (Gore,  op.  cit.,  p.  300 f.). 
Hamack's  conclusions  on  this  point  are  hesitating 
{Entstehung  und  Entwickdung  der  Kirchenverfass- 
ung,  Leipzig,  1910,  pp.  60-63). 

Each  church  has  common  worship.  '  If  the 
prayer  of  one  and  another  hath  so  great  force,  how 
much  more  that  of  the  bishop  and  of  the  whole 
Church?'  (Eph.  v.  2).  The  assembly  is  above  all 
a  gathering  together  for  prayer,  '  for  thanksgiving 
to  God  and  for  his  glory '  (awipxeffOax  eU  ei^xaptcfTioj' 
deov  Kal  eis  So^av,  xiii,  1),  prayer  for  all  men 
that  they  may  find  God  (x.  1),  for  the  other 
churches  (xxi.  2),  or  for  any  private  individual 
(XX.  1).  In  the  assembly  there  is  to  be  but  one 
prayer,  one  supplication,  one  mind  in  common 
(3fugn.  viL  1).  'And  do  ye,  each  and  all,  form 
yourselves  into  a  chorus  (x^pos  yiveffOe)  that  being 
harmonious  in  concord  and  taking  the  keynote 
of  God  (xp^lJ^  diov)  ye  may  in  unison  (avfut>wvoi) 
sing  with  one  voice '  (gSip-e  ev  tfxairg  fuf,  Eph.  iv. 
2 ;  this  metaphor  is  to  be  understood  of  the 
unanimity  of  the  Christians  in  each  church, 
but  it  presupposes  also  the  use  of  singing  in 
Christian  assemblies).  The  bishop  presides  at  the 
assembly  (Sviym.  viii.  1-2) ;  it  is  he  w  ho  sits  in 
the  chief  place  (rpoKa0r]fjiivov,  Magn.  vi.  1). 

Ignatius  does  not  tell  us  the  procedure  for  the 
election  of  a  deacon,  presbyter,  or  bishop,  but 
three  times  over  (Philad.  x.  1,  Smyrn.  xi.  2,  Polyc. 
vii.  2)  the  word  x^'/x""*"*"'  i^  used  to  express 
the  metljod  by  which  the  assembly  elects  an  am- 
bassador to  go  to  some  distant  church  ;  it  is  not  a 
far  cry  to  suppose  that  the  members  of  the  hier- 
archy were  elected  in  the  same  way  by  the  general 
vote.  But  Ignatius  believes  that  God  ratifies  this 
choice  and  the  one  elected  is  the  elect  of  God  ;  he 
congratulates  the  bishop  of  Philadelphia  on  having 
been  invested  with  '  the  ministry  which  pertaineth 
to  the  common  weal  (rrtv  SiaKoviay  rijy  e/s  rb  Kotydf), 
not  of  himself  or  through  men,  nor  yet  for  vain 
glory,  but  in  the  love  of  God  the  Father  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ'  (Philad.  i.  ;  this  is  not  an 
allusion  to  party  factions,  as  Reville  maintains, 
but  an  echo  of  St.  Paul  [Gal  1']  and  an  assimilation 
of  the  episcopate  to  the  apostolate). 

Nowhere  in  Ignatius'  Epistles  is  there  any 
mention  of  Christians  credited  with  personal 
charismata,  nor  is  there  any  word  of  local  or 
itinerant  prophets  such  as  we  find  in  the  apostolic 
period  (C.  H.  Turner,  Studies  in  Early  Church 
History,  Oxford,  1912,  p.  22  f.).  The  bishop,  ac- 
cording to  Ignatius,  has  the  sole  right  of  speaking 
in  the  name  of  the  Spirit.  As  von  Dobschiitz  says  : 
'  It  is  interesting  to  see  how  in  this  quite  Catholic- 
minded  bishop  [Ignatius],  who  thinks  only  of  the 
great  of  the  Old  Testament  past  as  prophets,  there 
yet  speaks  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor  a 
"  minister  of  the  spirit "  (6eo<p6p(K),  living  wholly  in 
ecstasy  and  revelations  (Eph.  xxi..  Trail,  v., 
Philad.  vii.,  Polyc.  ii.)'  (Dotechiitz,  Christian 
Life  in  the  Primitive  Church,  p.  238). 

Baptism  is  mentioned  (Polyc.  vi.  2)  as  a  compact 
as  binding  as  the  relation  of  soldier  to  militia. 
No  baptism  may  take  place  without  the  bishop 
(Smyrn.  viii.  2).     The  Eucharist  may  not  be  cele- 


600 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


brated  without  the  bishop  :  '  Let  that  be  held  a 
valid  eucharist  wliich  is  under  the  bishop  or  one 
to  whom  he  shall  have  committed  it'  (viii.  1). 
The  one  to  whom  the  Eucharist  is  committed  is 
someone  lower  than  the  bishop :  apparently  a 
presbyter.  To  celebrate  the  Eucharist  is  called 
dydvTjv  iroielv  (viii.  2).  Mention  is  made  of  it  again 
in  J'Jph.  XX.  2  :  ' .  .  .  that  ye  may  obey  the  bisliop 
and  the  presbytery  without  distraction  of  mind  ; 
breakin<j  one  bread  (iva  dprov  KXwvres),  wliich  is 
the  medicine  of  immortality  ((f>6.piia.Kov  a6avaala%) 
and  the  antidote  that  we  should  not  die  but  live 
for  ever  in  Jesus  Christ.' 

In  the  Letter  to  the  Philadelphians,  again,  we 
find  :  '  Be  careful  therefore  to  observe  one  euchar- 
ist (for  there  is  one  ilesli  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  one  cup  unto  union  in  His  blood  •  .  .  )'  (iv.). 
The  text  oi  Smyrn.  vi,  2-vii.  1  is  less  clear :  the 
heretics  'abstain  from  eucharist  (thanksgiving) 
and  prayer,  because  they  allow  not  that  the 
eucharist  is  the  flesh  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 
.  .  .  They  therefore  that  gainsay  the  good  gift  of 
God  (Suspeq.  Tov  Oeov)  perish  by  their  questionings.' 
By  dupeg.  TOV  OeoO  Ignatius  means  the  Incarnation  ; 
'the  "gift  of  God"  is  the  redemption  of  man 
through  the  incarnation  and  death  of  Christ' 
(Lightfoot,  ii.  307).  To  talk  of  the  Eucharist 
being  '  the  flesh  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ'  is  a 
very  direct  expression  of  eucharistic  realism,  but 
it  may  have  a  secondary  meaning  and  be  used  as 
a  metaphor  to  designate  the  presence  of  Christ  in 
the  Church  (C.  Gore,  The  Body  of  Christ,  London, 
1901,  p.  292  f.).  The  ministry  of  the  deacons 
stands  in  close  relation  with  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist.  They  are  '  deacons  of  the  mysteries  of 
Jesus  Christ ' ;  they  are  not  '  deacons  of  meats 
and  drinks  but  servants  of  the  Church  of  God' 
(Trail,  ii.  3).  didKovoi  fJLVcrrTjpiuv  'Irjffov  Xpiffrov 
might  be  taken  to  refer  to  tlie  eucharistic  liturgy, 
but  this  interpretation  is  extremely  conjectural, 
and  'mystery  probably  means  'faith'  (cf.  Eom. 
vii.  3,  where  the  terms  dpros  and  wdfia,  adp^  and 
al/ia  refer  to  Christ  in  heaven). 

(2)  The  false  teachers.  —  The  unity  in  each 
church  is  contrasted  with  the  divisions  among 
heretics.  Onesimus,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  praises 
his  flock  for  their  orderly  conduct  (iv  detfi  evra^lav), 
for  '  living  according  to  truth,'  and  letting  no 
heresy  '  have  a  home  among  them  '  (ovdefila  al'peo-is 
KaroiKei,  Eph.  vi.  2).  Ignatius,  too,  congratulates 
the  Ephesians  on  the  fact  that  there  lias  never 
been  any  dispute  among  them  (fi7)8efila  ?/)ij),  and 
that  they  have  always  'lived  after  God'  (viii.  1). 
But  there  are  false  teachers,  men  who  bear  the 
Christian  name  and  yet  act  in  a  manner  unworthy 
of  God.  These  men  are  to  be  '  shunned  as  wild- 
beasts  ;  for  tliey  are  mad  dogs,  biting  by  stealth ' 
(vii.  1).  Ignatius  praises  the  Ephesians  for  not 
allowing  them  to  sow  bad  seed  among  them  and 
for  stopping  their  ears  so  as  not  to  hear  them 
(ix.  1).  Woe  to  him  who  'through  evil  doctrine 
corrupts  the  faith  of  God,'  for  he  'shall  go  into 
unquenchable  fire  ;  and  in  like  manner  also  shall 
he  that  hearkeneth  unto  him'  (xvi.  2). 

In  his  Letter  to  the  Magnesians  Ignatius  gives 
some  more  definite  characteristics  of  these  false 
teacliers.  He  seems  to  make  a  distinction  between 
(1)  irepodo^lai  and  (2)  fivdeOfiara  iraXaiA.  dpw<pe\y 
(Magn.  viii.  1).  But  this  antithesis  is  probably 
purely  verbal,  fivOeiJuara  being  the  equivalent  of 
irepoSo^iai,  and  both  terms  recalling  1  Ti  1*  i'', 
Tit  1".  So  dvu)^f\-/ii  is  probably  an  echo  of  Tit  3" 
and  vaXaid  possibly  of  1  Co  6^,  Ignatius  thus  mak- 
ing use  of  St.  Paul's  language  to  designate  the 
errors  of  his  time.  In  tlie  same  Epistle  Ignatius 
adds :  '  For  if  even  unto  this  daj'  we  live  after  the 
manner  of  Judaism,  we  avow  that  we  have  not 
received  grace' — an    expression   which  might  be 


taken  as  meaning  that  the  fivOevfiara  are  Judaistic 
errors,  but  this  would  be  an  abuse  of  the  term 
lovSal'cTfi^s,  which  is  also  taken  from  St.  Paul  (Gal 
I'*),  and  is  diverted  from  its  proper  sense  to  signify 
here  life  witliout  tlie  grace  of  redemption.  The 
Magnesians  are  to  live  *  after  Christ'  and  not  ap- 
peal to  the  '  prophets '  as  an  excuse  for  living 
otherwise,  for  even  the  lioly  prophets  lived  '  after 
Christ'  (viii.  2).  They  must  no  longer  aafifSarl^eiv 
{i.e.  live  as  a  Jew — without  grace,  ix.  1),  but  learn 
to  live  *  as  beseemeth  Christianity  '  (/rari  xptcrtaj/- 
ifffidv  ;  the  first  example  of  the  use  of  xpiffnav- 
ifffids),  knowing  that  '  whoso  is  called  by  another 
name  besides  tliis,  is  not  of  God '  (x.  1).  They  are 
to  reject  the  old  leaven  {t'^p^V  '''V"  irdXaLudelffav), 
and  betake  themselves  to  the  new,  which  is  Jesus 
Christ  (x.  2).  It  is  absurd  to  pronounce  the  name 
of  Christ  and  practise  Judaism  (lov8atl;^eii>),  for 
'  Christianity  did  not  believe  in  Judaism,  but 
Judaism  in  Christianity'  (x.  3).  Ignatius  con- 
cludes his  argument  by  saying  :  '  I  would  have 
you  be  on  your  guard  betimes,  that  ye  fall  not 
into  the  snares  of  vain  doctrine  (KevoSo^ia) ;  but  be 
ye  fully  persuaded  concerning  the  birth  and  the 
passion  and  the  resurrection'  (xi.).  The  homo- 
geneity of  this  exposition  suggests  that  the  false 
teaching  Ignatius  has  in  mind  is  Docetism,  and 
that  it  is  the  Docetists  that  he  accuses  of  '  juda- 
izing,'  not  that  there  was  a  party  of  Docetists  on 
one  side  and  a  party  of  Judaizers  on  the  other. 

In  his  Epistle  to  the  Trallians,  Ignatius  returns 
to  the  same  subject :  '  Take  only  Christian  food 
{ry  xptc"""^  '■/'00s).  and  abstain  from  strange 
herbage,  which  is  heresy'  (vi.  1).  'Not  indeed 
that  I  have  known  of  any  such  thing  [as  heresy] 
among  you  '  (viii.  1).  Jesus  Christ  is  a  descendant 
of  David  and  the  son  of  Mary  ;  He  was  born,  ate 
and  drank,  suflered,  died  on  the  Cross,  and  was 
truly  {dXridCos)  raised  from  the  dead  (ix.  1-2).  The 
heretics  Ignatius  has  in  view  deny  the  reality  of 
the  humanity  of  Christ  (\4yovffiv  t6  doKelf  ireirovddvai 
a&r6v,  X.),  and  herein  lies  their  error — Docetism. 
'  Shun  ye  therefore  those  vile  ofishoots  that  gender 
a  deadly  fruit,  whereof  if  a  man  taste,  fortlnvith 
hedieth'(xi.  1). 

In  Phil.  ii.  1  we  find  similar  advice  with  regard 
to  the  KaKooida<TKa\la^,  *  those  noxious  herbs,  which 
are  not  the  husbandry  of  Jesus  Christ'  (iii.  1).  If 
anyone  interprets  the  prophets  in  the  sense  of 
Judaism  (idv  rts  lovdai<rfibv  (p/j.r]V€vr]  vixiv),  the  Phila- 
delphians are  not  to  listen  ;  '  for  it  is  better  to 
hear  Christianity  from  a  man  who  is  circumcised 
tlian  Judaism  from  one  uncircumcised '  (vi.  1). 
Tlie  Docetists  whom  Ignatius  accuses  of  'juda- 
izing '  are  uncircumcised — apparently  Greeks. 

Again  in  Smyrn.  ii.,  Ignatius  repeats  that  Christ 
suflered  really  (dXTjdQs  firadev),  really  rose  again 
{dXrjdws  dviarriaev  kavrbv),  and  did  not  sutler  only  in 
appearance  (t6  Sokciu  r-eirovd^vai)  '  as  certain  un- 
believei's  say  '  (here  the  reference  is  ap])arently  to 
the  same  Docetists  as  are  described  in  Trail. ).  If 
it  was  only  in  semblance  (t6  SokcIv)  that  Christ 
lived  His  life  on  earth,  then  it  is  only  in  semblance 
that  Ignatius  is  in  chains  (KdyCi)  to  doKeiv  S^Sffuu, 
iv,  2)  ;  but  Christ's  Passion  was  as  real  as  Ignatius', 
and  what  ^jrofit  is  it  to  him  if  men  praise  him  and 
blaspheme  the  Lord,  not  confessing  that  He  was  a 
bearer  of  flesh  ?  (v.  2).  Here  we  have  an  indication 
tliat  Docetists  were  to  be  found  in  Smyrna  and 
that  th^  were  anxious  to  deal  kindly  with  the 
captive  Ignatius,  but  he  would  have  none  of  them. 
The  names  of  these  men  are  the  names  of  infidels 
(ocd/tara  diriffra),  wliich  he  will  not  even  write. 
'  Far  be  it  from  me  even  to  remember  them,  until 
tliey  repent  and  return  to  tlie  passion  '  (v.  3),  i.e. 
to  faith  in  the  reality  of  the  Passion  of  Christ. 
Note  that  the  Docetists  he  denounces  had  not 
penetrated  to  Ephesus,  they  had  met  with  no  sue- 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


601 


cess  in  Tralles,  and  Ignatius  puts  the  Snijrm«ans 
on  their  guard  against  these  'wild  beasts  in  human 
form '  (dvi  tQv  OripltiJi'  tQv  iy0purofU>p<f>(i)v).  The 
Smymreans  are  not  to  welcome  them  (xapo3ex«ff^ai), 
nor  even  to  meet  them  (ffwayrav),  but  to  pray  for 
their  conversion,  however  difficult  such  conversion 
niaj'  be  (iv.  1).  '  I  have  learned,'  he  writes  to  the 
Ephesians  (ix.  1),  'that  certain  persons  passed 
through  you  from  yonder'  {(KeWev  :  here  again,  as 
in  Smym.,  he  mentions  no  names.  Tlie  heretics 
may  possibly  have  come  from  Smyrna,  and,  in  any 
case,  they  infest  Asia  and  are  an  equal  peril  to  the 
Philippians.  There  is  nothing  to  prove  that  Ignatius 
did  not  become  acquainted  with  them  in  Antioch). 
In  the  Letter  to  the  Romans,  no  heretics  are 
mentioned. 

The  heretics  denounced  by  Imatius  in  Asia, 
and  perhaps  more  definitely  in  bniyma,  are  not 
Judaizers  in  the  proper  sense  of  tlie  word,  for  they 
only  '  judaize'  to  the  extent  of  denying  the  flesh 
of  Christ  and  the  redemptive  power  of  His  Passion. 
They  are  at  war  with  the  hierarchy,  are  dissenters 
from  the  Church,  and  seem  to  have  separated  them- 
selves voluntarily.  Ignatius  speaks  of  them  as 
'outside  the  sanctuary'  {iicros  ffixricumjpiov),  i.e. 
•without  the  bishop  and  presbytery  and  deacons' 
{Trail,  vii.  2).  Wheresoever  the  Bishop  is,  there 
the  people  should  be,  'even  as  where  Jesus  may 
be,  there  is  the  universal  Church'  (^/cel  ij  KaOoXiKi) 
iicK\riffia,  Smym.  viiL  2).  Here  we  have  for  the 
first  time  in  history  the  terra  KadoXticg  iKKXr/aia  in 
the  sense  of  '  universal  Church,'  the  universality 
of  the  Church  throughout  the  world  being  con- 
trasted with  the  local  churches  where  each  has  its 
own  bishop  (Lightfoot,  pp.  310-312 ;  cf.  Smyrn.  i. 
2 :  €v  evi  <Twfw,Ti  t^s  eKK\T)<Tias).  The  epithet  KaOo- 
XiKTi  is  used  in  a  geographical  sense,  and  not  yet 
in  its  ecclesiastical  sense,  where  '  catholic '  is  con- 
trasted with  '  heretical '  (cf.  1  Clem.  lix.  2  and 
Didache,  ix.  4). 

i.  Sources  of  Ignatius'  teaching. — Among  the 
sources  of  Ignatius'  teaching,  first  place  must  be 
given  to  St.  Paul.  In  his  letters  Ignatius  never 
fails  to  do  special  honour  to  the  churches  he 
addresses  if  they  have  received  a  letter  from  St. 
Paul.  e.g.  the  Ephesians  (Eph.  viii.  1,  xii.  2)  and 
the  Romans  {Bom.  iv.  3).  In  all  his  letters  we 
find  reminiscences  of  the  Pauline  Epistles,  esp. 
1  and  2  Cor.,  Rom.,  Gal.^  Pliil.,  1  and  2  Thess,, 
Philem.,  Eph.,  Col.,  1  and  2  Tim.,  and  Titus  (see 
E.  von  der  Goltz,  Ignatius  von  Antioihien  als 
Christ  und  Theologe  [=7'-Sxii.  3,  Leipzig,  1894],  pp. 
17S-194.  who  gives  parallel  texts  of  Ignatius  and 
St.  Paul).  We  might  add  1  Pet.  {ib.  p.  194  f.), 
but  the  dependence  of  Ignatius  on  Heb.  and  James 
is  not  evident. 

According  to  von  der  Goltz,  Ignatius  did  not 
know  the  Fourth  Gospel,  although  his  letters  are 
full  of  Johannine  thoughts,  but  merely  partici- 
pated in  the  Johannine  Gedankemcelt,  without 
actually  reading  the  Gospel.  It  is  more  probable, 
however,  that  Ignatius  used  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
without  quoting  it.  It  is  a  very  curious  fact  that 
in  his  Letter  to  the  Ephesians  Ignatius  makes  not 
the  slightest  allusion  to  the  Apostle  John.  Ignatius 
certainly  knew  the  Synoptic  tradition,  for  there 
are  clear  traces  of  his  dependence  on  Matthew, 
although  we  have  no  sign  of  dependence  on  Mark, 
and  only  one  doubtful  allusion  to  Luke. 

Ignatius  makes  frequent  appeal  to  what  he  calls 
eia-y-y^oi',  to  the  apostles,  and  to  the  prophets: 
'  takipg  refuge  in  the  Gospel  as  the  flesh  of  Jestis 
and  in  the  Apostles  as  the  presbytery  of  the 
Church.  Yea,  and  we  love  the  prophets  also' 
{Philad.  V.  1  f. ).  The  prophets  are  the  OT  (Smyrn. 
V.  1) ;  the  Gospel  gives  us  authentic  knowledge  of 
Jesus  Christ  (xpurrofiAdiay,  Philad.  viii.  2).  In  this  j 
connexion  Ignatius  Amtes :   '  For  I  heard  certain  I 


persons  saying,  If  I  find  it  not  in  the  charters 
(dpxeta),  I  believe  it  not  in  the  Gospel.  And  when 
I  said  to  them.  It  is  written  (yi-ypa-mxi),  they 
answered  me.  That  is  the  question  (xporetrcu) '  (no 
doubt  a  reference  to  the  Docetists).  The  gospel 
is  a  written  document  about  which  there  is  much 
controversy.  Further  on  Ignatius  describes  the 
contents  of  the  gospel,  ».c.  the  Incarnation  or 
rapovffiav  rod  ffurijpot,  the  Passion  and  the  Resur- 
rection (ix.  2).  The  gospel  is  a  fulfilment  of  OT 
prophecy  {ib.).  The  Lord  and  the  apostles  are 
nearly  always  mentioned  together  :  •  Do  your  dili- 
gence therefore  that  ye  be  confirmed  in  the  ordi- 
nances (S&yfMTa)  of  the  Lord  and  of  the  Apostles ' 
(Magn.  xiii.  1),  and  Jiilicher  was  right  in  saying 
that  the  words  of  Serapion  (bishop  of  Antioch,  c. 
A.D.  200),  '  We  receive  Peter  and  all  the  other 
apostles  as  Christ'  (Euseb.  HE  vi.  xii.  3),  might 
have  been  pronounced  a  century  earlier  {Einleitiing 
in  das  NT^-  «,  Tubingen,  1906,  p.  430).  Yet  in  the 
time  of  Ignatius  the  canon  of  the  NT  was  not  '  a 
purely  ideal  canon,'  as  Jiilicher  thinks,  and  when 
Ignatius  speaks  of  yeypaTrat  and  dpx"*  he  is  think- 
ing of  authentic  documents,  which  have  been 
accepted  by  the  Church.  There  is  no  doubt,  how- 
ever, that  Ignatius  accepts  elements  foreign  to  our 
ecclesiastical  canon,  as  e.g.  the  words  of  the  Risen 
Christ ;  '  I  am  not  a  demon  without  body '  {ScufjLOPior 
ourufiaTOf,  Smyrn.  iiL  2),  which  may  have  origin- 
ated in  the  Kripv/fia  Uerpov,  in  the  Gospel  of  the 
Hebrews,  or  in  a  gloss  on  Lk  24®.  Another 
foreign  element  is  the  description  of  the  wonderful 
Nati\"ity  star  {Eph.  xix.  2),  which  is  probablj'  a 
gloss  on  Mt  2-  and  an  echo  of  Xu  24'". 

5.  Ignatius'  theology,  christology,  and  pneo- 
matology. — The  doctrine  of  Ignatius  as  shown  in 
his  vocabulaiy  and  ideas  gives  no  hint  of  Hellenic 
culture,  (rod  is  One  ;  but  the  philosophic  implica- 
tions of  this  statement  are  not  to  be  sought  for.  God 
manifested  Himself  through  Jesns  Christ  His  Son 
and  Word  {eU  deii  itmr,  6  ifxwepdMrai  iavrbw  Sia  'Ii/troO 
XpiffToO  Tov  vioO  a^ov,  6s  i<rrv  a&rov  \&yoi  dxA  tnyrjt 
■rpoeXduv,  Ss  icard  rdrra  evtipi<rn)aa'  T<fi  -ri/vf/arri  aird^, 
Magn.  viiL  2).  Jesus  Christ  pre-existed  in  Gtod  ; 
He  was  with  the  Father  before  the  worlds  and 
appeared  at  the  end  of  time  (  .  .  .  'Ii^roO  Xpurrod, 
Si  -rpd  cUuruir,  -rapd  -rarpi  fiv  koX  iv  riKti  e<pdvTj,  vi.  1). 
Christ  is  One :  *  He  came  forth  from  One  Father  and  is 
with  One  and  departed  unto  One '  (Jra  'Iij<row'  Xpurrdr 
rdr  auft  twos  rarpds  rpoeXdorra  Kai  et't  Ira  6rra  koX 
Xuprficrarra,  vii.  2  [the  last  phrase  is  an  allusion  to 
the  Ascension]).  Christ  was  in  God  before  time, 
invisible,  impalpable,  impassible,  and  it  was  for 
us  He  became  visible  and  passible  {Polyc.  iii.  2). 
Christ  is  the  Word  coming  forth  from  the  silence 
of  God,  i.e.  He  is  revealed  to  the  world  by  the 
Incarnation  (there  is  no  reference  to  the  part  the 
Word  had  in  the  Creation) ;  He  comes  forth  from 
the  Father  to  reveal  Himself  (no  reference  to  the 
eternal  generation  of  the  Word — in  fact,  Christ  is 
in  (iod  dyiytnjTo^  as  He  is  dxadi^,  Eph.  viL  2).  See 
J.  Tixeront,  Hist'^ire  des  dogmes,  i.  [Paris,  1905], 
p.  136. 

Ignatius'  christology  is  presented  as  a  refutation 
of  Doceti-sra,  Avhich  regards  Christ  as  a  pneumatic 
being,  and  special  stress  is  therefore  laid  on  the 
real  humanity  and  the  bodily  and  passible  being 
of  Christ.  Christ  was  conceived  in  the  womb  of 
Mary  {eKvo<j>op^0r}  iTb  3Iapiaj),  He  is  of  the  seed  of 
David  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (eV  ffT4pfiar<K  /jtiw  Aavl8, 
rvevfMLTos  8i  ayiov) ;  He  was  bom  and  was  baptized 
{Eph.  x^-iii.  2).  He  was  really  bom  of  a  virgin  ' 
{yeyepmjfUyor  a.\i}ffQs  iK  rapBevov,  Smyrn.  LI).  '  He 
was  the  son  of  Mar\%  who  was  truly  bom  and  ate 
and  drank,  was  truly  persecuted  under  Pontius 
Pilate,  was  truly  crucified  and  died  .  .  .  ;  who  more- 
over was  truly  raised  from  the  dead'  {Trail,  ix.  1, 
2) ;  '  truly  nailed  up  in  the  flesh  for  our  sakes  under 


602 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


Pontius  Pilate  iind  Herod  the  tetrarcli'  {Smijni.  i. 
2) ;  '  He  was  in  the  Hesli  even  after  the  resurrection  ; 
and  when  he  came  to  Peter  and  his  company  {rovs 
irepi  lUrpov)  .  .  .  they  touched  him,  and  they  be- 
lieved' (iii.  2). 

Ignatius  tcaclies  the  corjjoreity  of  Christ  with 
such  insistence  because  Christ  is  by  nature  wvevfui 
(Harnacic,  Dogmciifjcschichte*,  Tubingen,  lOOfl,  i. 
213  ;  W.  Sanday,  Chrlstolo(jics  Ancient  and  Modern, 
Oxford,  1910,  p.  10).  Christ  is  'of  flesh  and  of  spirit, 
generate  and  ingenerate,  God  in  man,  true  Life  (i.e. 
God)  in  death  (in  a  mortal  body),  son  of  Mary  and 
Son  of  God,  lirst  passible  and  then  impassible '  (trap- 
KiKbs  Kal  trvev/jiariKdi,  yevfTjrbs  xal  ayivvrjros,  iv  avOpwirif 
de6^,  iv  davdri^  ^wrj  dXij^tvr},  Kal  (k  Mapi'aj  Kal  ^k  deov, 
irpCJTov  ira9r}Tbi  Kal  T&re  (XTradrjs,  Eph.  vii.  2  ;  cf.  Pvlyc. 
iii.  2).  Ignatius  thus  posits  in  Christ  the  dualism 
of  (rAf^  and  irveviui :  tlirough  tlie  aap^  Christ  is 
generate,  born  of  Mary,  passible  and  mortal ; 
tlirough  tiie  irvevixa  He  is  ingenerate  (i.e.  witliout 
beginning).  He  is  life,  He  is  impassible,  He  is  God  ; 
in  a  word,  Christ  is  God  come  in  the  flesh  (iv  aapKl 
yevdfievos  $f6^}. 

Tlie  interpretation  that  Christ  in  the  flesh  be- 
came God  has  the  context  against  it,  for  Christ  did 
not  become  dyiwyiros,  nor  iK  OeoO :  He  realizes  at 
one  and  the  same  time  the  two  antinomial  series 
of  predicates.  Through  the  irvevfia  which  is  iv  a-apKl, 
Christ  is  one  with  the  Father :  lie  is  irvevfiariKQs 
7]vu3nivo<s  T(p  irarpi  (Siuyrn.  iii.  3),  and  yet  after  the 
Hesli  He  is  subordinate  to  the  Fatlier  ([vTrorayeU]  rip 
irarpl  Kara  ffdpKa,  Maqn.  xiii,  2)  and  has  pleased 
God  who  sent  Him  (evrjpi<rT7](Tfv  rtp  iri/jL\f/avTi  aiir6v, 
viii.  2),  It  is  very  difficult  (in  spite  of  Harnack 
[Dogmengesch.*  i.  21C])  not  to  recognize  in  these 
statements  of  Ignatius  all  tlie  presuppositions  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  two  natures ;  in  any  case, 
adoptianism  is  excluded. 

The  union  of  man  and  God  in  Christ  is  nowhere 
delined  by  Ignatius,  but  one  passage  may  be  taken 
to  have  this  meaning  :  '  If,'  says  Ignatius  to  the 
Ephesians  (v.  1),  'I  in  a  short  time  liad  such  con- 
verse (Toi.a(jrT}v  avvT/jOeiav)  witli  your  bishop,  which 
was  not  after  the  manner  of  men  but  in  the  Spirit, 
how  much  more  do  I  congratulate  you  who  are 
closely  joined  witli  him  (iyKCKpafiivovi)  as  the  Church 
is  with  Christ  Jesus  and  as  Jesus  Christ  is  with  the 
Father,  that  all  things  may  be  harmonious  in  unity ' 
(IVa  irdvTa  iv  ivoTTjri  <n''fjL<l>uva  §),  Here  we  have  the 
union  of  Christ  witii  the  Father  compared  to  the 
union  of  the  Church  with  Christ,  and  the  union  of 
the  believers  with  the  bishop.  The  two  terms 
ffwrjOeia  and  iyKpdffis  are  not  equivalent,  the  second 
being  metaphorical,  and  only  the  first  counting. 
But  it  would  be  rather  risky,  especially  when 
dealing  with  Ignatius,  to  base  a  whole  logical 
theory  on  a  single  word. 

Christ  is  called  tfeo's,  altliongh  He  is  distinct  from 
the  Father.  Ignatius  speaks,  e.g.,  of  '  the  will  of 
the  Father  and  of  Jesus  Christ  our  God'  (iv  deX-ri- 
fiart  roO  iraTpbs  Kal  'Irjixov  XpidTov  roD  OeoO  iipiCiv,  Eph. 
inscr.).  Even  in  His  Incarnation  Jesus  is  called 
Oeoi :  b  Oeb^  i)p.u!v  'lijaovi  b  Xpiffris  iKvocpopi^Orj  inrb 
Mapi'ay  /car'  oiKovofiiav  deov  (Eph.  xviii.  2  ;  cf.  Rom. 
inscr.  and  iii.  3).  Von  der  Goltz  is  quite  justified 
in  saying  that  Ignatius  distinguishes  between 
Christ  and  the  Father  in  so  far  as  He  is  a  person, 
pre-existent,  historical,  or  exalted  ;  all  modalism  is 
excluded,  and  only  subordination  remains  possible. 
In  the  opinion  of  the  present  writer  Ignatius  regards 
Jesus  Clirist  as  God  in  His  own  person.  Von  der 
Goltz  supposes  that  for  Ignatius,  Jesus  Christ  is 
God  in  relation  to  us,  but  Ignatius  himself  excludes 
relativism.  In  Eph.  xv,  3  he  writes :  '  Nothing 
is  hidden  from  the  Lord,  but  even  our  secrets  are 
nigh  unto  Him.  Let  us  therefore  do  all  things  as 
knowing  that  He  dwelleth  in  us,  to  the  end  that 
we  may  be  His  temples  and  He  Himself  may  be  in 


us  as  our  God,  This  is  so,  .  .  .'  (ha  SipLtv  avroO  vaol 
Kal  avrbi  iv  ii/xlv  debs'  6irta  Kal  ((Ttiv),  Christ  is  our 
God  not  only  in  .so  far  as  lie  lives  in  us,  but  absolutely 
(5ir«p  Kal  IffTiv).  The  expression  debs  rj/Awv  does  not 
jjive  God  a  purely  subjective  value.  Again,  .Jesus 
Christ  is  not  only  our  God  or  God  for  us,  He  is  very 
God  :  '  I  give  glory  to  Jesus  Christ  the  God  who 
bestowed  such  wisdom  upon  you'  (5o^dfw  'lr]<rovv 
Xpiarbv  rbv  Oebv  rbv  outws  ufids  ffo<pl(Tavra,  Siuyrn.  i. 
1);  cf.  Trail,  vii,  1  and  Smi/rn.  x.  1,  where  the 
designation  dtoi  is  given  to  Christ  absolutely.  We 
shall  omit  Smgrn.  vi.  1,  where  a  gloss  has  been 
inserted  in  the  text. 

The  work  of  Christ  consisted  in  giving  man  a 
knowledge  of  God.  Jesus  Christ  is  the  X670J  of 
God,  come  forth  from  the  silence  of  God  (Magn. 
viii.  2).  He  is  the  mouth  which  lieth  not,  and  in 
which  the  Father  hath  spoken  truly  (rb  dfevdit 
ffrb/xa  iv  ip  b  Trarrip  iXdXrjcrev  d\T)du)S,  liom.  viii.  2). 
He  is  the  knowledge  of  God  :  '  wherefore  do  we 
not  all  walk  prudently,  receiving  the  knowledge 
of  God,  which  is  Jesus  Christ '  (Xa^bvres  deov  yvuxriv, 
6  i(TTiv '  lrj(Tous  Xpiarbs,  Eph.  xvii.  2  ;  cf.  iii.  2).  The 
teaching  of  Christ  is  a  doctrine  of  incorruptibility 
(8i5axi)  dipdapalas,  Magn.  vi.  2).  The  incorrupti- 
bility is  not  the  fruit  of  the  biSaxn  but  the  fruit  of 
the  Death  and  Resurrection  of  Clirist.  The  Cross, 
'  which  is  a  stumbling-block  to  them  that  are  un- 
believers, is  to  us  salvation  and  life  eternal '  (o-w- 
TT]pia  Kal  fwTj  alcjvios,  Eph.  xviii.  1).  God  Ijecame 
manifest  in  the  flesh  to  prove  the  newness  of  im- 
perishable life,  and  the  destruction  of  death  (Kaivb- 
Trp-a  aibiov  i^cjrjs  .  .  .  davdrov  KardXvffiv,  xix.  3). 
Tiie  Passion  of  Christ  and  His  blood  shed  for  us 
are  an  earnest  of  this  renewal  of  humanity  ;  it  is 
what  Ignatius  calls  olKOvofiias  els  rbv  Kaivbv  dvOpwirov 
'Irjcrovv  Xpurrbv,  iv  ry  aiirov  irlarei  Kal  iv  t-q  airrou  dydwrj, 
iv  irddei  aurou  Kal  dvacrrdaei  (xx.  1).  Ignatius  gives 
no  explanation  of  this  mystery — either  of  the 
virtue  of  Christ's  Passion  or  of  the  manner  in 
which  this  virtue  is  communicated  to  the  believing. 
But  he  lays  great  stress  on  tlie  Passion  of  Christ 
and  on  the  d<f>dapala  it  procures — an  insistence 
which  is  explained  when  we  remember  not  only  that 
he  was  refuting  Docetism  but  also  that  this  tenet  of 
Pauline  theology  was  for  him  one  of  fundamental 
importance. 

That  the  Spirit  stands  in  opposition  to  the  flesh 
we  have  already  gathered  from  many  examples. 
Tills  was  a  familiar  article  of  faith  to  Ignatius : 
the  flesh  is  man,  the  Spirit  is  a  principle  which 
comes  from  God  and  acts  in  man  (rb  irvevna  ... 
dTrb  deov  6v)  searching  out  his  closest  secrets  (I'hilad. 
vii.  1).  The  prophets  were  the  disciples  of  the 
Spirit  (Magn.  ix.  2).  The  Spirit  inspires  the 
spiritual  man,  and  Ignatius  is  conscious  of  being 
so  inspired :  '  It  was  the  preaching  of  the  Spirit; 
who  spoke  on  this  wise'  [by  my  mouth]  (rb  irvev/xa 
iKifpvaaev  Xiyov  rdoe,  Fhilud.  vii.  2).  On  this  point 
Swete  shrewdly  observes :  '  It  is  interesting  to 
observe  that  Ignatius  can  combine  a  claim  to  pro- 
phetic inspiration  with  a  passionate  zeal  for  a 
regular  and  fully  organized  ministry'  (The  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  Ancient  Church,  London,  1912,  p.  14). 

The  believers  are  the  '  building  of  God  the 
Father'  (oiKo5op.r\v  Oeov  irarpbs),  'hoisted  up  to  the 
heights  through  the  engine  of  Jesus  Christ  (fiyjxavrjs 
'I1JC0V  XpiffTou),  which  is  the  Cross,  and  using  for  a 
rope  the  Holy  Spirit'  ((rxoiviip  xp'^'Mfo*  Tip  Trvev/xan 
Tip  ayiip,  Eph.  ix.  1).  Ignatius  adjures  the  Mag- 
nesians  to  remain  united  in  flesh  and  spirit  (aapKl 
Kal  TTvevnaTt),  by  faith  and  love,  in  the  Son,  the 
Father,  and  the  Spirit  (iv  vltp  Kal  irarpl  Kal  iv  irveO- 
/xari,  Magn.  xiii.  1).  The  Spirit  is  named  along 
with  the  Logos  (iv  dfiupup  irvev/jLan  Kal  Xoyip  deov, 
Smyrn.  inscr.).  The  apostles  were  obedient  rip 
XpiffTip  Kal  T(p  -Karpl  Kal  rip  -irvevfiaTi  (Magn,  xiii.  2 ; 
it  is  diflicult  not  to  regard  this  as  an  example  of 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


603 


the  trinitarian  baptismal  forniola  [Hamack,  Dog- 
nicngesch.*  i.  175]). 

The  Father  is  plenitude  (rXiypw/ia,  Eph.  inscr.). 
The  Son  is  the  Logos  of  God  {Magn.  viii.  2),  the 
thouglit  of  God  (yvwiiri  6eov,  Eph.  iii.  2),  and  the 
knowledge  of  God  (yvwcis  OeoO,  xvii.  2).  The  Spirit 
is  the  x'^P"^f^  of  Christ  (rb  xapiaixa  d  v(voii<txv 
dXijOws  6  (ci/ptoj,  ib.),  and  in  this  sense  the  Spirit  is 
the  Spirit  of  Jesus  Christ  (Philad.  inscr.),  although 
one  cannot  identify  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
any  way,  as  Hamack  would  have  us  do  (Dogmen- 
gesch.*  i.  214),  basing  his  argnnient  on  Magn.  xv., 
where  dSidxpiTOP  rvevfjia  is  a  synonym  of  bfiovoia.  and 
not  of  a-yiov  -ryevfjia.  The  Word  and  the  Spirit  are 
not  known  except  by  their  missions  in  time. 

Christianity,  in  opposition  to  Judaism,  is  the 
life-of  Christ  in  us  ('IijcroCs  Xptirros  to  a.\-r]Bi.vbv  rjfiQy 
f^f,  Smgm.  iv.  1 ;  cf.  JEph.  iii.  2,  xi.  1,  Magn.  i.  2, 
ix.  2),  which  is  manifested  through  faith  and  love 
{Eph.  xiv.  1  ;  cf.  Smyrn.  vi.  1,  Philad.  ix.  2),  This 
life  is  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit ;  it  is  the  Spirit  in 
contrast  with  the  flesh.  '  The  ffapKucoL  cannot  do 
t4  rvivfuiTiKd,  neither  can  the  iri'ei/.uaTiAroi  do  rd 
crapKtxa.'  (Eph.  \ii\.  2),  and  Ignatius  even  goes  the 
length  of  saying,  '  No  man  professing  faith  sinneth ' 
(oi"3eis  irLffTiv  exayyeWoftevoi  afiaprdvei,  Eph.  xiv.  2). 

As  Christ  is  joined  to  the  Father  so  the  Church 
is  joined  to  Christ  {Eph.  v.  1),  for  Christ  is  in  every 
believer  ( XV.  3).  He  'breathes  incomiption  upon 
the  Church'  (xvii.  1).  He  is  the  High  Priest  to 
whom  is  committed  the  holy  of  holies ;  to  Him 
alone  the  secrets  of  God  are  confided,  He  is  the 
door  of  the  Father  through  which  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  the  Prophets,  tlie  Apostles,  and  the 
Church  enter  in  {Philad.  i.  9). 

The  time  of  the  end  is  at  hand  ('These  are  the  last 
times,'  i<rx,aToi  Kaipoi,  Eph.  xi.  1).  All  those  who  be- 
lieve in  Clirist  will  rise  again  {Trail,  ix.  2).  The 
believers  are  members  of  Christ  through  His  Cross 
and  Passion,  and  the  Head  cannot  exist  apart  from 
the  members,  so  that  in  the  end  there  will  be  unity, 
God  Himself  being  Unity  {toD  0eov  evwaiv  i-rayyeX- 
\ofjiivov,  8s  fffTiv  avTos,  Trail,  xi.  2).  We  find  no 
trace  of  millennarianism  and  no  apocalyptical 
imagery.  The  things  of  heaven  (ret  i-rovpavw.)  are 
mentioned  only  in  the  abstract  (Trail,  v.  2),  and 
with  them  the  angelical  orders  (ris  Tovodeaias,  rdj 
a.yye\iKa.i,  rdi  o-itrrdcrety,  rds  apxovriKdi  :  terms  whicii 
seem  to  foreshadow  Gnosticism).  Cf.  Polyc.  ii.  2: 
'And  as  for  the  invisible  things,  pray  thou  that 
thej'  may  be  revealed  unto  thee'  (rd  ok  dopara  airei 
Lva  (Toi  <pav€pu6^). 

This  short  analysis  of  the  theologoumena  of 
Ignatius  will  have  shown  the  justice  of  F.  Loofs' 
verdict  {Leitfaden  zum  Studium  der  Dogmenge- 
schichte\  Halle,  1906,  p.  102)  that  '  Johann'ine  and 
Pauline  thoughts  ring  through  the  theology  of 
Ignatius ' ;  but  it  is  not  correct  to  say  that  his 
theology  is  'a  theology  of  Asia  Minor'  distinct 
from  '  ordinary  Gentile  Christianity '  (cl.  Hamack, 
Dogmengesch.*  i.  16S).  It  is  rather  the  theology  of 
the  presbj-ters  quoted  by  Irenaeus;  his  theology, 
as  Hamack  says  (op.  cit.  i.  241)  is  of  the  same 
nature  as  that  of  Melito  and  Irenteus,  '  whose  pre- 
decessor he  is ' ;  it  is  the  tutiorist  theology  of 
tradition  Avhich  afterwards  triumphantly  withstootl 
the  Gnostic  crisis;  it  was  not  brought* into  being 
by  that  crisis,  but  must  certainly  have  existed 
prior  to  it  although  later  than  the  monarchical 
episcopate.  Ignatius  has  no  creative  genius,  but, 
as  Sandfly  aptly  says,  '  the  striking  thing  about 
him  is  the  way  in  which  he  seems  to  anticipate 
the  spirit  of  the  later  theology  ;  the  way  in  which 
he  singles  out  as  central  the  points  which  it  made 
central,  and  the  just  balance  and  proportion 
which  he  observes  between  them'  (Christoloqies, 
p.  10  f.). 

A\  hat  has  given  authority  to  Ignatius'  letters  is 


his  martyrdom.  His  letters,  written  in  an  abnipt 
and  nervous  stjie,  overloaded  with  metaphors, 
incoherent,  popular,  and  lacking  every  Hellenic 
grace,  are  yet  endowed  with  such  pathetic  faith 
and  such  passionate  joy  in  martyrdom,  with  such 
overwhelming  love  of  Christ,  that  they  are  one 
of  the  finest  expressions  of  the  Christianity  of  the 
2nd  centurj'. 

6.  Special  points  raised  by  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans. — Some  special  questions  raised  by  the 
Letter  to  the  Romans,  whose  authenticity  we 
assume  as  beyond  question,  have  been  reserved  for 
separate  treatment. 

Ignatius  says  that  he  has  been  most  eager  to 
see  the  'godly  countenances'  of  the  Christians  of 
Rome,  and  he  hopes  to  salute  them  '  for  wearing 
bonds  in  Christ  Jesus'  {JRam.  i.  1).  He  implores 
them  to  do  nothing  to  save  him  from  martyrdom  ; 
he  dreads  their  very  love ;  for  '  it  is  easy  for  them 
to  do  what  they  will '  {vfuv  yap  evxepii  eany,  S  ffiXere 
xoi^at,  i.  2),  t.e.  the  Romans  were  in  a  position 
to  ensure  Ignatius'  liberation.  As  Hamack  says 
(Dogmengesch.*  i.  486;  cf.  Lightfoot,  p.  196), 
'  Ignatius  presupposes  great  influence  on  the  part 
of  the  separate  members  of  the  community  in  the 
higher  ruling  circles.'  The  insistence  with  which 
Ignatius  endeavours  to  dissuade  the  Romans  from 
any  possible  intervention  on  his  behalf  would  seem 
to  indicate  that  the  Romans  had  some  definite  plan 
in  hand  and  that  he  had  been  informed  of  it. 

Again,  in  the  Letter  to  the  Romans  (iii.  1)  we 
And :  '  Ye  never  grudged  any  one ;  ye  were  the 
instructors  of  others  (dXXois  eSiSd^art).  And  my 
desire  is  that  those  lessons  shall  hold  good  which 
as  teachers  j-e  enjoin '  (iyd  Se  deXu  Iva  KdKtiva  ;3e/Jaia 
3  d  fiadTjTfvoirTes  eyreWeffde).  The  word  nadrjTeveiy 
means  '  to  make  disciples,'  as  fiadrjreuecrdai  means 
'to  be  a  disciple'  (Eph.  iii.  1).  Thus  the  Romans 
gave  instruction,  made  disciples,  and  laid  down 
l)recepts.  Ignatius  is  here  probably  thinking  of 
such  documents  as  1  Clement,  where  the  Church 
of  Rome  instructs  other  churches  in  their  duty  (so 
Duchesne,  Eglises  siparees,  Paris,  1896,  p.  129 ; 
Hamack,  loc.  cit.  ;  and  Batiflol,  Eglise  naissante, 
Paris,  1909,  p.  170),  or  he  may  have  had  in  mind 
practical  examples  of  martyrdom  in  the  Church  of 
Rome  (in  Eph.  i.  2  he  hopes  to  be  able  to  follow 
the  heroic  example  of  these  martyrs  [ipa  erirvxei" 
Swijdio  fiaOrjrTJi  (Irat ;  cf.  Magn.  ix.  2,  Eom.  iv.  2, 
V.  3]).  The  second  interpretation  jierhaps  suits 
the  context  better  (cf.  Lightfoot,  ii.  202). 

In  Rom.  iv.  3  Ignatius  says :  '  I  do  not  enjoin 
vou,  as  Peter  and  Paul  did.  They  were  Apostles, 
1  am  a  convict.'  The  word  icardicpiToi  (condemnatus) 
is  difficult  to  explain  ;  but  it  may  at  any  rate  be 
taken  as  an  expression  of  Ignatius'  humility  such 
as  is  found  in  Trail,  iii.  3  :  '  I  did  not  think  myself 
competent  for  this,  that  being  a  convict  I  should 
order  you  as  though  I  were  an  apostle '  (Iva  Civ  Kard- 
KpiTos  d's  dirajToXos  vfuv  Siardaawfiai).  The  apostles 
were,  after  Jesus  Christ,  the  authorities  of  most 
account.  '  I  do  not  command  you,  as  though  I  were 
somewhat '  (ov  Siardiraoiuu  vfuy  (is  Sjv  tu),  writes 
Ignatius  to  the  Ephesians  (iii.  1 ;  cf .  1  Co  7").  In 
the  quotation  from  Rom.  iv.  3  given  above  Ignatius 
mentions  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  because  they  alone 
of  all  the  disciples  had  any  dealings  with  the 
Romans  :  '  they  had  been  at  Rome  and  had  given 
commandments  to  the  Roman  Church '  (Lightfoot, 
ii.  209).  This  allusion  to  St.  Peter  is  generally 
taken  as  evidence  of  the  fact  that  St.  Peter  went 
to  Rome  (cf.  F.  Sieflert,  art.  '  Petrus '  in  PRE^  xv. 
[1904]  200 ;  F.  H.  Chase,  art.  '  Peter  (Simon) '  in 
HDB  iii.  [1900]  769). 

"While  Ignatius  is  still  in  Asia,  Christians  of 
Antioch  go  directly  before  him  from  Syria  to  Rome 
'  unto  the  glory  of  Got!.'  Ignatius  is  aware  of  this 
fact,  and  he  writes  to  the  Romans  (x.  2) :  '  they  are 


604 


IGNATIUS 


IGNATIUS 


all  worthy  of  God  and  of  you,  and  itbecometh  yon 
to  refresli  tliem  in  all  things.' 

From  this  we  may  luarn  that  there  were  great 
facilities  for  communication  between  Antioch  or 
Ephesus  (x.  1)  and  Rome.  The  Christiana  from 
Syria  were  most  heartily  welcomed  at  Rome,  and 
from  that  time  onwards  the  Church  of  Rome  was 
known  for  its  hospitality  and  generosity.  In  the 
address  of  the  Letter  to  the  Romans,  the  Church  of 
Rome  is  saluted  in  most  emphatic  terms.  If  we 
compare  this  with  the  addresses  of  the  other  letters 
we  shall  find  that  this  emphasis  is  part  of  Ignatius' 
style  (Polycarp,  on  the  other  hand,  couches  his 
atfdress  to  the  I'liilippians  in  the  simplest  terms) ; 
but,  all  the  same,  he  salutes  the  Church  of  Rome 
with  more  emphasis  than  the  other  churches,  which 
shows  the  great  consideration  shown  at  this  time 
by  other  churches  (esp.  the  Church  of  Antioch)  to 
the  Churcli  of  Rome.  As  Harnack  says  :  '  However 
much  one  tones  down  the  exaggerated  expressions 
in  his  Letter  to  the  Romans,  so  much  is  clear — that 
Ignatius  assigns  to  the  Roman  community  a  posi- 
tion of  real  superiority  over  the  sister-communities 
.  .  .  the  efTusiveness  of  the  address  shows  that  he 
values  and  salutes  this  community  as  the  fore- 
most in  all  Christendom'  (Harnack,  loc.  cit.). 

Three  of  the  predicates  applied  to  the  Roman 
Church  by  Ignatius  in  the  address  may  now  be 
considered. 

(1)  The  believers  are  dirodivXicrfi^voi  dirb  iravrbs 
aWorplov  xp^yttaros,  '  filtered,'  'pure,'  'free  from  all 
polluting  colouring  matter '  (cr.  Lightfoot,  p.  193). 
As  we  have  already  noted,  Ignatius  does  not 
think  there  are  any  heretics  in  Rome,  and  here  he 
praises  the  Romans  for  not  mixing  any  foreign 
colouring  matter  with  the  purity  whicli  befits  them, 
as  elsewhere  he  expresses  a  wish  that  among  the 
Ephesians  there  may  be  no  plant  of  the  devil  (Eph. 
X.  3).  In  the  case  of  the  Ephesians  it  is  a  mere 
wish,  but  with  the  Romans  it  is  an  accomplished 
fact. 

(2)  The  Church  of  Rome  irpoKdOrjTai  ev  Towip 
X'^piov'Vufialwi'.  The  verb  ir/DOKd^T/yuat  is  translated 
praesUho,  TrpoKadiffis  sessio  {in  throno,  in  tribtinali) ; 
irpoKd0rjTai  =  '  has  the  chief  seat,  presides,  takes  the 
precedence'  (Lightfoot,  ii.  190).  Ignatius  applies 
tins  epithet  elsewhere  to  the  bishop  and  the  pres- 
bytery {irpOKadrj/Mevov  rod  iiriffKdirov  els  rbirov  deov,  Kal 
tQv  irpec^vT^pwi'  els  rvwov  crvveSpiov  tCiv  dwoaTbXwv 
[Magn.  vi.  1] ;  and  again  ivdidriTe  rQ  ^iria-Kdircp  Kal 
Tois  irpoKadr)fj.4i>ois  els  rvirov  Kal  Sidaxh"  d(pdap<rias 
[ib.  2]).  Ignatius  thus  attributes  to  the  whole 
Roman  Church  a  giavity  comparable  with  that  of 
the  bishop  and  the  presbytery.  Zahn  thinks  that 
iv  Tbirip  is  a  bad  reading,  and  suggests  ^i*  ruTrcf} : 
'  Ecclesia  igitur  Romana  tamquam  exem])lar,  ab 
omnibus  imitandum,  hominibus  imjierio  Romano 
subditis  praiest '  ( '  Ignatii  et  Polycarpi  Epistulaj,'  p. 
57).  Tliis  correction  has  not  been  accepted  by  any 
other  critic,  and  indeed,  if  Ignatius  had  wanted  to 
say  that,  he  would  have  written  rather  els  t^ttov. 
Then  again,  irpoKdO-nrai  is  not  to  be  taken  with 
xupiov,  as  if  Ignatius  were  saying  that  the  Roman 
Church  presided  over  the  Roman  region  and  '  the 
suburbicarian  bishops '  (Lightfoot,  ii.  190) ;  but  it 
is  to  be  understood  absolutelj',  and  ev  Tbirq)  x^ptou 
'VufiaLuv  designates  the  place  where  the  Church 
presides.  The  curious  tautology  ev  rbiri^  x'^P^ov  must 
be  equivalent  to  iv  rbiri^  rj  x^p^V.  "■nd  thus  sijmifies 
the  town  of  Rome.  This  interjjretation  of  l^unk's 
seems  more  objective  than  Lightfoot's  (p.  190  f.), 
who  prefers  to  give  the  text  a  '  suburbicarian ' 
meaning. 

(3)  The  Church  of  Rome  is  called  d^i60eos,  di,U- 
iraivos,  diioeirirevKTOs,  d^layvos  Kal  TrpoKaOrjfiivr)  ttjs 
dydirTjs,  xpto'Tdvofios,  iraTpwvvfios,  This  accumulation 
of  epithets  is  an  example  of, Ignatius'  emjiliasis  ;  but 
the  expression  irpoKadrifx^vif]  ttjs  dydirrjs  does  have  a 


more  i)rccise  meaning.  This  time  irpoKaOrjpAvr)  is  not 
to  be  taken  absolutely  but  construed  along  with 
dydirris :  the  Roman  Church  presides  over  love. 
Lightfoot  (p.  192)  takes  the  meaning  to  be :  '  the 
Church  of  Fiome,  as  it  is  first  in  rank,  is  first  also  in 
love,'  but  it  is  doubtful  if  dydirrjs  has  this  cau.sative 
sense  of  d7d7rj7  or  iv  dydirrj.  The  Latin  version  of 
the  interpolated  Letters  of  Ignatius  translates  the 
words  '  fundatur  in  dilectione  et  lege  Christi,' 
but  the  verb  irpoKdOrmai  has  not  this  meaning  in 
Ignatius.  Harnack's  interpretation  '  itrocuratrix 
fraterni  amoris'  is  not  exact  either.  The  verb 
irpoKddTjfiai  with  the  genitive  implies  presidency 
over  a  city  or  a  region  :  iKelvos  roiyapovv  6  ()\I/i(ttos  Kal 
p-iyiffTOS  Zei/j,  6  irpoKadji/jievos  rijs  XanvpordT-qs  vfiwv 
ndXeus  writes  the  Emperor  Maximin  Daia  in  a  letter 
to  the  people  of  Tyre  (Euseb.  HE  IX.  vii.  7).  Eunk 
(Pair,  apost.  i.  253)  quotes  from  Theodoret  tlie 
expression  applied  to  Rome  :  ttjs  olKovfxivrjs  irpoKa- 
Orjfi^vT] ;  and  from  John  Malalas  that  applied  to 
Antioch  :  irpoKadrjfjL^vrjv  rrjs  dvaroKrjs.  We  may  com- 
pare also  Philostorgius  representing  Constantine 
irpoKaO-ripAvov  tQv  ewicFKbirwv  [II E  vii.  6  [ed.  IJidez, 
1913,  p.  85]).     Tims  the  word  dydiry)  must  be  a  meta- 

Ehorical  word  for  some  collectivity,  which  cannot 
e  the  Church  of  Rome,  because  here  the  Church 
of  Rome  is  the  subject  of  which  irpoKadTjfiivr]  is  the 
epithet.  It  would  be  very  extraordinary  if  d7dir77 
meant  the  Christian  communities  near  Rome,  or 
even  the  Christian  communities  of  Italy,  for  that 
would  be  limiting  arbitrarily  the  meaning  of  the 
word  dydirr].  We  are  left  then  with  the  explana- 
tion that  dydirr]  is  that  in  which  tlie  distant  churches 
like  Antioch  and  Ephesus  are  united  to  the  Church 
of  Rome.  Ignatius  writes  to  the  Trallians  (xiii.  1) : 
dcTTrdferai  vfids  t)  dydirVi  HifMvpvaiuv  Kal'K<pe<riu>v  ;  and 
to  the  Romans  (ix.  3)  :  dawd^erai  vfids .  .  .  rj  dydinj  rCov 
eKK'Xrjffiwv  Twv  Se^apAvuv  fxe  (cf.  Philad.  xi.  2  and 
Smyrn.  xii.  1  :  d(r7rdferat  vixds  7}  dyd-n-ri  tCov  dSe\(p(i!)v 
Twv  iv  TpwdSt).  Just  as  the  collectivity  of  the 
believers  of  one  church  is  designated  by  the 
expression  dydirr)  tQv  d8eX<f>Qv,  and  two  or  three 
churches  are  designated  l)y  the  phrase  dydirrj  rdv 
iKKXrjffiwv,  so  it  is  natural  that  irpoKaOrj/x^vr]  ttjs 
dydirrjs  should  mean  irpoKadrjfiivr)  ttjs  dydirrjs  tCjv 
iKKk-qaiGiv,  '  president  of  the  love  or  <;ollectivity 
of  the,  churches.' 

The  Letter  to  the  Romans  presents  one  difficulty 
formulated  by  J.  W'ordsworth  {Ministry  of  Grace, 
London,  1901,  p.  126)  in  these  words:  Ignatius 
'  twice  speaks  of  himself  as  "Bishop  of  Syria  "or 
"of  the  Church  of  Syria"  (chs.  2  and  9) :  but  he  is 
entirely  silent  as  to  any  such  office  in  the  Church 
of  Rome.  .  .  .  If  then,  Clement,  or  any  other  single 
Church  officer,  had  been  "  Rishop  of  Rome,"  in  the 
sense  that  Ignatius  was  "Bishop  of  Syria,"  the 
language  of  the  latter  in  writing  to  Rome  would  be 
almost  inexplicable'  (cf.  also  J.  Reville,  Origines 
de  V^piscopat,  p.  510).  If  we  take  the  trouble  to 
read  the  Letter  to  the  Romans  carefully,  we  shall 
find  still  more  extraordinary  facts,  viz.  that 
Ignatius  does  not  speak  of  presbyters  or  deacons 
either,  so  that  if  the  objection  of  Wordsworth  and 
Reville  is  valid,  we  should  have  to  say  that  the 
Church  of  Rome,  at  the  time  of  Ignatius'  Letter, 
had  no  hierarchy,  no  deacons,  no  presbytery,  no 
bishop.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Ignatius  regarded 
each  church  as  having  its  unity  in  its  totality,  and 
his  letters  are  addressed  to  churches,  to  each  church 
as  such  (exc.  the  Epistle  to  Polycarp),  just  as  the 
Epistle  of  Clement  <loes  not  bear  the  name  of 
Clement,  but  is  addressed  by  '  the  Church  of  (Jod 
which  sojourneth  in  Rome  to  the  Church  of  (iod 
which  sojourneth  in  Corinth.'  It  is  very  probable 
that  Clement  was  vpoKaOrifievos,  although  in  his 
time  the  line  of  demarcation  Itetween  episcoimte 
and  presbytery  was  still  blurred.  It  is  difficult  to 
say  when  the  monarchical  episcopate  strictly  began 


IGNORANCE 


ILLYRICUM 


605 


in  Kouie,  but  the  episcopal  lists  of  Rome,  Antioch, 
Corinth,  etc.,  must  have  been  nothing  but  forgeries 
if  there  was  not  early  in  the  communities  a 
primus  inter  pares,  at  the  head  of  the  presbytery, 
such  as  Clement  was  when  he  wrote  to  tlie  Church 
of  Corinth  (Hamack,  Entstehung  und  Entitnckel- 
ting,  p.  72).  Thus  the  silence  of  Ignatius  in  his 
Letter  to  the  Romans  cannot  be  taken  as  a  proof 
that  Rome  had  no  hierarchy  at  the  time  at  which 
it  was  written.  On  Ignatius  and  the  Roman 
primacy  see  A.  Harnack,  '  Das  Zeugnis  des  Ignatius 
iiber  das  Ansehen  der  romischen  Gemeinde,'  in 
SBAW,  1896,  pp.  111-131 ;  J.  Chapman,  in  Revue 
Binidictine,  1896,  pp.  385-400;  ¥xixik.,\Kirchen- 
geschichtl.  Abhandlungen,  i.  [Paderbom,  1897], 
pp.  1-23. 

LrrKRATTRB. — This  has  been  cited  thronghoat  the  artide. 
For  general  bibliography  see  O.  Bardenhewer,  Geich.  der 
aitkirchl.  Litteratur,  i,  Freiburg  i.  B.,  1902,  pp.  119-145, 
and  M.  Rackl,  Ckrigtoloffie  de*  heiligen  Ignatius,  do.  1914, 
pp.  xv-xxxii.  The  best  modem  critiod  editions  are  those  of 
T.  ZaJin  ('  Ignatii  et  Polycarpi  Epistols '  in  P(Ur.  apostoL  opera, 
ii.,  Leipzig,  ls76) ;  F.  X.  Fimk  (in  Opera  pair,  apoatolieorum, 
Tiibingen,  ISTSff.) ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot  (Apoitolie  Fathers^,  pu  iL 
vol.  ii.,  London,  1889).  See  also  A.  Lelong,  Ignaee  d'Antioehe, 
Paris,  1910.  P.  BaTIFFOL. 

IGNORANCE.— As  the  apostolic  writers  dealt 
mostly  with  moral  and  spiritual  matters,  they 
usually  spoke  of  ignorance  in  a  sense  that  was  not 
merely  intellectual.  Thus  (Eph  4^*)  the  ignorance 
of  the  Gentiles  was  associated  with  vanity  of  mind, 
darkening  of  understanding,  alienation  from  God, 
and  hardening  of  heart,  in  a  way  that  linked  it  to 
the  deeper  faculties  of  the  soul.  Even  voC-s  is  the 
faculty  for  recognizing  moral  good  as  well  as  in- 
tellectual truth,  and  Stdvota  includes  feeling  and 
desiring  as  well  as  understanding.  Ignorance 
arose,  according  to  the  aix)»tles,  as  much  from  the 
condition  of  the  conscience  and  the  spirit  as  from 
the  state  of  the  mind  (cf.  2  Ti  3^).  Holding  this 
conception,  the  apostles  taught  that  ignorance 
sprang  either  from  the  state  of  the  heart  or  from 
lack  of  the  Christian  revelation.  The  latter  condi- 
tion was  much  dwelt  upon,  for  to  a]l  tlie  apostles 
the  Coming  of  Jesus  Christ  was  the  shedding  forth 
of  so  great  a  light  that  all  who  had  not  seen  that 
light  dwelt  in  darkness,  while  they  insisted  also 
that  light  sufficient  was  given  in  the  world  to  learn 
about  God,  if  only  men  had  not  been  led  away  by 
evil  desires  (Ro  l-*).  Thus  arose  the  ignorance  of 
God  (Ac  \7^),  the  yielding  to  lusts  (1  P  1"),  the 
rejection  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  (Ac  3^"),  and,  in  St. 
Paul's  own  experience,  the  persecution  of  the 
followers  of  Jesus  Christ  (Ac  26^). 

The  double  source  of  these  sins  of  ignorance  led 
to  God's  method  of  dealing  with  them.  As  they 
arose  from  evil  in  men,  they  were  not  left  un- 
punished by  God  (Ro  1^) ;  but,  as  they  were  done 
in  ignorance  of  the  full  revelation,  they  were 
•winked  at'  or  'overlooked'  by^  God  (Ac  i"^),  or 
in  the  forbearance  of  God  were  passed  over  (Ro  3^). 
This  passing  over  (xdpeo-ts)  did  not  exclude  punish- 
ment, and  was  not  equivalent  to  forgiveness 
(d^ffis) ;  but  it  prepared  the  way  for  repentance 
(Ac  3^)  and  for  the  receiving  of  the  mercy  of  God 
in  Christ  Jesus  (1  Ti  l^^). 

The  densest  ignorance  came  to  those  who  had 
heard  the  gospel  of  Christ  and  had  persisted  in 
rejecting  it,  for  on  them  the  curse  foretold  by 
Isaiah  was  abiding  (Ac  2S^).  Such  people,  what- 
ever their  superficial  knowledge  might  be,  were 
walking  in  such  darkness  that  they  were  content 
to  live  in  sin  and  to  be  guilty  of  hatred  of  their 
brothers  (lJn3«  2"). 

Even  in  the  experience  of  those  who  had  come 
to  a  knowledge  of  Christ  as  Sa\iour  and  Lord 
there  existed  much  ignorance. 

(1)  If  Christ  Himself  knew  not  the  day  of  the 


Great  Appearing,  it  was  not  to  be  wondered  at 
that  the  times  and  the  seasons  for  the  coming  of 
God's  Kingdom  in  glory  were  hid  from  His  disciples 
(Ac  1^).  It  is  evident  from  some  of  the  apostolic 
writings  (cf.  1  Thess.)  that  many  believed  that  the 
Great  Day  was  to  come  almost  immediately,  and 
were  totally  ignorant  of  the  delay  that  was  to  ensue. 

(2)  Another  subject  of  which  there  was  much 
ignorance  was  the  state  of  the  dead.  The  apostles 
in  their  eschatology  did  little  to  dispel  the  dark- 
ness connected  with  the  present  condition  of  the 
dead.  Sometimes  they  referred  to  the  blessedness 
of  those  '  with  Christ'  (Ph  1^),  sometimes  to  their 
quiescence  in  a  state  of  sleep  (1  Co  15^),  and  some- 
times to  the  activities  carried  on  (1  P  4*),  but  the 
intermediate  state  was  comparatively  uninterest- 
ing to  the  Apostolic  Age,  as  their  main  thought 
centred  in  the  Resurrection  and  the  Paronsia. 
Even  with  regard  to  these  great  events  of  the 
future  there  was  not  always  assured  knowledge; 
disciples  of  Christ  were  not  only  doubtful  of  the 
Resunection,  but  even  opposed  to  its  teaching, 
and  St.  Paul  laboured  to  dispel  their  ignorance; 
whUe  many  sorrowed  about  their  brethren  who 
had  passed  away  as  if  they  had  lost  the  opportunity 
of  being  present  at  the  Paronsia  of  Christ,  not 
knowing  that  both  those  asleep  and  those  alive 
would  then  together  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air 
(1  Th  4«). 

(3)  According  to  the  apostles,  ignorance  could 
never  be  wholly  eliminated  from  Christian  life, 
whUe  the  circle  of  knowledge  must  be  constantly 
enlarged.  The  apostles  were  never  content  to 
leave  even  the  humblest  Christians  in  a  state  of 
ignorance,  and  one  indication  of  this  desire  may  be 
found  in  the  phrase  that  recurs  so  often  in  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul :  '  I  wotdd  not  have  you  to  be 
ignorant,  brethren'  (Ro  l^^  11»,  i  Co  10»  12',  2 Co 
P,  1  Th  4'3).  But  the  apostles  acknowledged  that 
ignorance  was  found  even  in  the  most  mature  Chris- 
tian experience.  Thus  they  taught  that  there  had 
been  revealed  to  all  Christians  the  great  end  of 
their  life,  viz.  the  perfecting  of  salvation,  but  they 
indicated  that  there  was  constantly  shown  a  real 
ignorance  of  what  was  needed  at  any  particular 
crisis  in  life.  Hence  Christians  knew  not  what  to 
pray  for  as  they  should  at  particular  moments  (Ro 
8^),  but  in  this  ignorance  the  Holy  Spirit  helped 
^vithin  the  heart  by  unutterable  groanings.  Still 
further.  Christian  experience  was  limited  by  its 
o^vn  capacity  in  face  of  the  boundlessness  of  the 
Divine  attributes.  The  apostles  proclaimed  that 
the  love  of  God  was  made  known  pre-eminently  in 
the  life  and  death  of  Christ,  but  there  were  depths 
in  God's  love  that  could  never  be  fathomed  by 
human  knowledge.  Christians  knew  that  love, 
but  even  at  the  end  they  had  to  confess  their 
ignorance,  for  it  passed  knowledge  (Eph  3^*).  The 
apostles  had  no  hesitancy  in  believing  in  a  real 
knowledge  of  God,  but  they  declared  that  a  com- 
plete or  exhaustive  knowledge  lay  beyond  even 
the  most  mature  Christian  experience.  The  only 
thorough  Agnosticism  spoken* of  by  the  apostles 
was  such  as  certain  Corinthians  were  in  danger  of, 
according  to  St.  Paul,  and  was  associated  with 
their  low  ethics,  their  heathen  intimacies,  and  their 
disbelief  in  the  Resurrection.  These  character- 
istics were  liable  to  produce  a  persistent  ignorance 
of  God  (ayvoffia  ffeoO,  1  Co  15^)  which  was  shared 
with  the  worst  of  the  heathen  and  from  which 
they  could  be  saved  only  by  being  aroused  from 
the  stupor  of  pride  and  sensualism. 

D.  Macrae  Tod. 
ILLUMINATED.— See  Exughtexmext. 

ILLYRICUM  {'IXKvpiK6p).—This  was  the  name 
of  a  Roman  province  botmded  on  the  W.  by  the 
Adriatic,  and  extending  from  Pannonia  on  the  N. 


606 


IMAGE 


IMAGE 


t;^ 


to  Macedonia  on  tlie  S.  Tliongh  so  m  m  (h  Italy, 
it  was  for  long  comparatively  unknown.  Strabo 
writing  about  A.D.  20  says  :  '  lUyria  was  formerly 
neglec  ted,  through  ignorance  perhaps  of  its  fertility ; 
but  it  was  principally  avoided  on  account  of  the 
savage  manners  of  the  inhabitants,  and  their 
)iratical  habits'  (VII.  v.  II).  It  was  subjugated 
jy  Tiberius  in  A.D.  9.  When  St.  Paul  contem- 
)lated  a  journey  by  Rome  to  Spain,  he  justified 
lis  desire  for  fresh  fields  by  saying  that  from 
Jerusalem  and  round  unto  Illyncum  (Kal  ki^kX^ 
/i^XP'  '■oi'  'J\'>^vpiKou)  he  had  fully  preached  the  gospel 
of  Ciirist(Ro  IS'"). 

Meyer,  Gifford,  and  others  (m  Joco)  explain  icuxXwas  the  region 
round  Jerusalem,  i.e.  Judxa,  Syria  and  Arabia.  'But  in  order 
to  bear  this  sense  the  word  would  re(|uire  the  article.  The 
meaning  is  rather  that  all  the  countries  between  Jerusalem  and 
lUyricum — Syria,  Cilicia,  Galatia,  Asia,  Macedonia,  Achaia — 
forming  a  rough  arc  of  a  circle,  have  been  evangelized  by  the 
Apostle. 

The  words  *  unto  Illj-ricum '  do  not  necessarily 
imply  that  he  had  i)reached  within  this  province. 
He  may  be  indicating  the  exterior  rather  than  the 
interior  limit.  In  his  third  journey  he  revisited 
Macedonia,  and  '  having  made  a  missionary  pro- 
gress through  those  parts'  (dieXOuv  8^  to.  fiipri  sKdva) 
he  came  to  Greece  (Ac  20^).  'Those  parts'  might 
include  the  south  of  Illyricum,  but  probably  meant 
no  more  than  the  west  of  Macedonia.  Strabo 
(VII.  vii.  4),  describing  the  Via  Egnatia,  whicli 
began  at  Dyrrachium  (the  modern  Diirazzo),  notes 
that  it  traverses  a  part  of  Illyria  before  it  enters 
Macedonia,  and  that  '  on  the  left  are  the  Illyrian 
mountains.' 

'  .St.  Paul  would  have  followed  this  road  as  far  as  Thessalonica, 
and  if  pointinjr  Westward  he  had  asked  the  names  of  the  moun- 
tain region  and  of  the  peoples  inhabiting  it,  he  would  have 
been  told  that  it  was  "  Illyria."  The  term  therefore  is  the  one 
which  would  naturally  occur  to  him  as  fitted  to  express  the 
limits  of  his  journey  to  the  West '  (Sanday-Headlam,  in  loco). 

Writing  as  a  lloman  citizen  to  Christians  in 
Rome,  St.  Paul  avoids  the  ordinary  Greek  'IWvpis 
or  'IWvpia,  and  merely  transliterates  the  Latin 
provincial  term  Illyricum.  In  the  second  half  of 
the  1st  cent,  the  name  Dalmatia  (q.v.),  wliich  had 
formerly  meant  the  S.  part  of  the  province  of 
Illyricum,  began  to  be  extended  to  the  whole. 
For  a  time  Illyricum  and  Dalmatia  Avere  con- 
vertible terms.  Pliny  has  both  ;  Suetonius  marks 
the  change  from  the  one  to  the  other  ;  and  from  the 
Flavian  period  onward  the  term  regularly  iised  is 
Dalmatia.  St.  Paul,  keeping  pace  with  Roman 
usages,  emploj's  the  new  provincial  name  in  a  part 
of  2  Tim.  which  is  generally  accepted  as  genuine 
(4'"). 

St.  Jerome  and  Diocletian  were  Illyrians.  The 
region  now  comprises  Bosnia,  Herzegovina,  Monte- 
negro, and  N.  Albania,  and  is  as  wild  and  un- 
settled as  ever. 

'  The  eastern  coast  of  the  Adriatic  is  one  of  those  ill-fated 
portions  of  the  earth  which,  though  placed  in  immediate  contact 
with  civilization,  have  remained  perpetually  barbarian '  (T. 
Arnold,  Hist,  of  Rome,  1838-43,  i.  492). 

LrrERATURK.— T.  Mommsen,  Ui^t.  of  Rome,  Eng.  tr.,  1S94, 
Index,  X.V.;  J'ror.  of  Rom.  Emp.^,  19()9,  i.  199  ;  artt.  s.v.  in  IIDIi 
(Ramsay),  SDB  (Souter),  and  Smith's  DGRG  (E.  B.  James). 

J.  Strahan. 

IMAGE. — The  use  of  this  term  in  the  apostolic 
writings  may  be  conveniently  discussed  under 
three  heads. 

1.  Connexion  with  idolatry. — Apart  from  Ro 
1^,  where  St.  Paul  is  reviewing  the  corruption  of 
the  pagan  world  and  the  perversity  with  wliich 
men  neglected  the  living  God  for  '  the  likeness  of 
an  image '  of  men,  birds,  quadrupeds,  and  reptiles, 
all  our  references  are  found  in  the  Apocalypse  and 
concern  the  narticular  form  of  idolatry  that  acutely 
distressed  the  early  Cliurch,  viz.  the  wor.shiji  of 
the  bust  of  Caesar.  Tiiis  '  image  '  is  first  brought 
forward  in  Rev  13"'-  (but  cf.  'Satan's  throne'  at 
Pergamum,  2'").  The  Seer  has  described  the 
Roman  Empire  in  the  guise  of  a  monster  rising  out 


of  the  sea  (v.'"'-),  and  its  counterjiart,  a  monster 
from  the  land  (afterwards  described  as  the  false 
prophet),  Avho  represents  the  Ca;sar-cult  and  its 
nriests  in  the  Eastern  provinces.  This  sacerdotal 
land-mon.ster  is  plausible  and  seductive,  and  his 
inducements  to  Cliristians  toshow  them.selves  good 
citizens  are  backed  up  by  miracles.  The  image  or 
statue  of  the  first  monster,  i.e.  the  bust  of  the 
Emperor,  is  set  up  among  the  statues  of  the  gods 
to  receive  the  oflerings  and  devotion  of  the  citizens, 
and  tlirougli  ventriloquy  it  seems  to  have  the 
power  of  speech.  The  cult  Avas  enforced  with  all 
the  resources  that  could  be  devised,  and  to  counter- 
act it  an  angel  utters  fearful  judgment  on  all  who 
worship  the  monster  and  his  statue  (U"-").  The 
supremely  hapjiy  fate  of  those  M'ho  resisted  both 
blandishment  and  compulsion  is  depicted  in  15*'* 
and  20* ;  the  punishment  of  those  who  conformed, 
in  16"''  and  19^".     See,  further,  art.  Idolatry. 

We  may  note  at  this  point  that  the  word  tlxuiv  (like  tlSuXov) 
in  classical  Greek  usually  stands  for  the  portrait  statues  or  paint- 
ings of  men  and  women  ;  seldom  for  images  of  the  gods.  An 
instance  of  its  use  in  the  NT  which  may  be  regarded  as  focusing 
the  range  of  its  varied  application  and  as  a  transition  from  the 
above  discussion  to  those  which  follow,  is  found  in  He  lOi, 
where  the  Mosaic  Law  is  spoken  of  as  being  a  mere  'shadow  ' 
of  the  coming  bliss,  instead  of  representing  its  reality  or  being 
its  '  very  image.'  'The  "shadow"  is  the  dark  outlined  figure 
cast  by  the  object  .  .  .  contrasted  with  the  complete  representa- 
tion (eiKuiv)  produced  by  the  help  of  colour  and  solid  mass.  The 
cIkiov  brings  before  us  under  the  conditions  of  space,  as  we  can 
understand  it,  that  which  is  spiritual '  (B.  F.  Westcott,  in  loc). 

2.  Christ  as  the  image  of  God. — Two  of  tlic 
passages  where  Christ  is  spoken  of  as  the  image  of 
God  are  Pauline — 2  Co  4*  ( '  the  image  of  God '),  and 
Col  V^  ('the  image  of  the  invisible  God').  The 
first  is  in  a  context  which  clearly  points  back  to 
the  Apostle's  conversion  experiences.  All  his 
thought  turns  on  his  doctrine  of  the  Divinity  of 
Christ,  and  the  basis  of  that  doctrine  was  the  bright 
vision  he  had  beheld  on  the  way  to  Damascus. 
This  was  his  distinctive  gospel,  that  which  marked 
him  oft"  from  tliose  who  simply  knew  the  human 
Jesus,  blameless  and  pure  though  His  life  had 
been.  In  the  second  passage  he  is  concerned  to 
set  before  the  people  of  Colossa;  the  overwhelming 
superiority  of  Christ  as  a  mediator  between  man  and 
God,  over  the  many  and  strange  spirits  and  forces 
wliich  they  thought  of  as  intervening  between  the 
Divine  and  the  human.  Hence  he  uses  the  word 
elKtiv,  which,  even  in  its  material  sense  already 
referred  to,  connotes|true  representation  rather  than 
accidental  similarity,  and  representation  of  that 
which  is  at  any  rate  temporarily  out  of  sight.  His 
thouglit  is  that  Christ  is  the  external  expre.ssion  as 
it  were  of  God :  at  once  His  representJition  and 
manifestation.  '  Ethically  and  essentially  He  is 
at  once  the  Revealer  and  the  Revelation  of  the 
Eternal  Spirit'  (J.  Strachan,  The  Captivity  and 
the  Pastoral  Epp.  [Westminster  NT,  1910],  p.  41). 
It  is  not  simply  that  He  is  like  God — He  is  God 
manifest.  And  beyond  the  reference  to  the 
earthly  life  and  ministry  of  Christ,  even  primarily 
perhaps,  there  is  the  implication  tliat  in  the  time- 
less heavenly  life  He  is  the  eUthv  dead,  God's  repre- 
sentative acting  in  the  sphere  of  the  visible  (cf.  Jn 
1'*,  He  P).  AVe  may  state  it  more  fully  thus : 
Christ  is  the  outcome  of  His  Fatlier's  nature,  and 
so  related  to  Him  in ''a  unique  manner  ;  and  He  is 
especially  tlie  moans  by  which  the  Father  has 
manifested  Himself  to  all  that  is  without,  from  the 
first  moment  of  creation  and  for  ever,  though  the 
centre  and  focus  of  that  manifestation  is  the  Incar- 
nation, We  recall  at  once  the  Johannine  doctrine 
of  the  Logos  ;  the  one  is  a  manifestation  to  the 
mind  of  man  through  Ear-gate,  the otlicr  ('Image') 
through  Eye-gate.  A  title  given  to  the  Logos  in 
the  Midrash,  '  the  light  of  tlie  raiment  of  tlie  Holy 
One,'  is  suggestive  in  this  connexion.  We  are  re- 
minded also  of  Christ's  own  word  recorded  in 
Jn  14":  'he  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen    the 


IMAGE 


IMMORTALITY 


607 


I'atlier'  (cf.  also  {>"•■").  There  are  other  modes  of 
the  Divine  manifestation ;  through  creation  itself 
lie  who  has  an  eye  to  see  may  behold  '  the  invisible 
things  of  God'  (Ro  1**),  but  there  is  no  revelation 
or  manifestation  so  sure,  so  adequate,  so  satisfyuig 
as  that  in  Christ. 

Al  this  point  we  may  notice  the  striking-  expression  in  He  13 
where  Christ,  in  a  passage  reminding  us  of  Colossians,  is  spoken 
o(  as  *  the  very  image  of  God's  substance.'  The  word  used  is 
XafuxxT^p,  which  meant  originally  a  graving  tool  and  then  the 
impression  made  by  such  a  tool,  especially  on  a  seal  or  die,  and 
the  figure  struck  off  by  such  seal  or  die  ;  hence  the  translations 
'  stamped  with  God's  own  character '  (Moffatt),  '  the  impress  of 
God's  essence '  (Peake).  The  Son  is  thus  the  exact  counterpart 
of  the  Father,  the  exact  facsimile,  the  clear-cut  impression 
which  jKxssesses  all  the  '  characteristics '  of  the  original.  Again 
it  is  noteworthy  that  Philo  (rf<  Plant.  Hoce,  §  5)  speaks  of  the 
Logos  as  the  impression  on  the  seal  of  God.  Westcott  (m  loc.) 
distinguishes  x'ip°-Krrip  from  ciinuv  by  saving  that  the  former 
'  conveys  representative  traits  only,'  while  the  latter  '  gives  a 
complete  representation  under  the  condition  of  earth  of  that 
which  it  figures ' ;  and  from  iiop^-n,  '  which  marks  the  essential 
form.' 

3.  Man  as  the  image  of  God  or  of  Christ— The 

funilamental  text,  Gn  1^-^,  is  the  basis  of  St.  Paul's 
statement  in  1  Co  IP  (cf.  Col  3^").  Man  is  the 
image  of  God  in  those  matters  of  rational  and 
moral  endowment  which  distinguish  him  from  the 
humbler  creation.  St.  Paul  would  no  doubt  have 
subscribed  to  Justin  Martyr's  statement  that  God 
'in  the  beginning  made  the  human  race  with  the 
power  of  thought  and  of  choosing  the  truth  and 
doing  right,  so  that  all  men  are  without  excuse 
before  God  ;  for  they  have  been  bom  rational  and 
contemplative'  (Apol.  i.  28).  In  neither  the  OT 
nor  the  NT  are  we  to  press  for  a  diflerence  between 
'image '  and ' likeness,'  which  are  used  as  synonyms. 
The  image  has,  however,  been  marred  and  obscured 
by  men's  sin.  Yet  there  is  the  glorious  possibility 
of  its  renewal  and  restoration.  The  new  man  in 
Christ  Jesus  bears  once  more  the  image  of  his 
Creator  (Col  3^") ;  he  becomes  akin  to  Gwl,  is  able 
to  know  Him  (ds  ivi'^u<riv)  and  His  wUl  in  all  the 
affairs  of  life.  In  this  perfected  likeness  to  God 
humandistinctionSjWhetheroi  nationality,  religious 
ceremonial,  culture,  or  caste,  fall  away — 'in  it  there 
is  no  room  for  Greek  and  Jew,  circumcised  and 
uncircumcised,  barbarian,  Scythian,  slave  or  free 
man  ;  Christ  is  everything  anH  everywhere.'  This 
agrees  with  Ro  8^,  in  which  the  elect  are  spoken  of 
as  sharing  the  image  of  God's  Son — that  He  might 
be  the  firstborn  of  a  great  brotherhood.  Thus  it 
matters  little  whether  we  speak  of  bearing  Christ's 
image  or  God's,  and  it  is  fruitless  to  debate  which 
is  prior  in  time.  The  two  are  one.  To  be  con- 
formed to  the  image  of  Christ  is  to  share  not  only 
His  holiness  but  His  glory — a  thought  brought 
l)efore  us  in  2  Co  3'®  ('  \Ve  all  mirror  the  glory  of 
the  Lord  with  face  unveiled,  and  so  we  are  being 
transformed  into  the  same  image  as  himself,  pass- 
ing from  one  glory  to  another')  and  in  1  Co  15** 
('as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  material  man  so 
we  are  to  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly  Man'). 
In  the  first  of  these  passages  the  spirit  of  the  be- 
liever is  likened  to  a  mirror  which  receives  the 
unobstructed  impression  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord. 
That  glory  takes  up  its  abode  in  the  Christian,  and 
instead  of  fading  as  in  the  case  of  Moses,  becomes 
ever  more  glorious  (cf.  Ro  8").  The  assimilation 
of  Christ's  mind  and  character  involves  the  assimi- 
lation of  His  splendour.  The  outer  man  may 
perish  but  the  inner  man,  the  real  man,  waxes  more 
and  more  radiant,  strong,  and  immortal,  till  it 
dwells,  like  its  Lord,  wholly  in  the  light.  With 
these  passages,  and  especially  with  the  second, 
which  points  forward,  we  may  compare  1  Jn  3^-, 
*  W'e  are  to  be  like  him,  for  we  are  to  see  him  as 
he  is.'  While  the  primary  implication  is  ethical 
and  spiritual  it  is  not  the  only  one  in  the  NT 
thought  of  our  likeness  to  Christ. 

LiTKRATTRK. — Besides  the  Commentaries,  especiallv  A.  S. 
Peake,  EGT:   'Colossians,'  1903;  A.  Menzies,  The  Second 


EpittU  of  the  Apoitle  Paul  to  the  Corinthiam,  1912  ;  and  B.  F. 
Westcott,  Epistle  to  the  Hebrew*,  1889  ;  see,  lor  Christ  as  the 
image  of  God,  W.  L.  Walker,  Chrift  the  Creative  Ideal,  1913. 
pp.  52  f.,  60  f. ;  H.  R.  Mackintosh,  The  Doctrine  o/  the  Perton  of 
Jftus  Christ,  1912,  pp.  65,  83  ;  for  man  as  the  image  of  God.  H. 
Wheeler  Robinson,  Christian  Doctrine  of  Han,  1911,  p.  164  f. ; 
on  image-worship  in  the  Roman  Empire  and  its  parallels  to-day, 
C.  Brown,  Heavenly  Visiom,  1910,  pp.  70f..l7&-183. 

A.  J.  Grieve. 
IMMORTALITY.  — The  subject  of  immortality 
may  be  treated  from  many  points  of  view — doc- 
trinal, metaphysical,  biological.  But  the  scope  of 
this  article  is  necessarily  limited  to  the  historical 
method  of  treatment,  and  is  further  confined  to  a 
definite  portion  of  the  historical  field — the  1st  cent, 
of  Christianity.  Hence  many  aspects  of  the  sub- 
ject are  excluded.  For  the  previous  development 
of  the  belief  in  immortality  the  reader  is  referred 
to  the  articles  dealing  with  this  and  the  related 
subjects  in  HDB,  DCG,  and  ERE.  The  following 
is  the  outline  of  the  treatment  of  the  subject  in 
this  article : 

I.  General  discussion  of  the  place  occnpied   in  reUgions 
thought  at  the  beginning  of  the  Apostolic  Age  by  the 
belief  in  immortality. 
n.  Particular  history  of  the  development  of  the  belief  daring 
the  Apostolic  Age : 

1.  Pauline  doctrine  of  immortality. 

2.  Petrine  doctrine  of  immortality. 

3.  Johannine  doctrine  of  immortality. 

4.  Apostolic  Fathers'  doctrine  of  immortality. 
III.  Conclusion.    Literature. 

I.  Geseral  DISCUSSIoy.— At  the  beginning  of 
the  Apostolic  Age  the  Grseco-Roman  world  might 
almost  be  compared  to  the  Pool  of  Bethesda  at  the 
critical  moment  of  the  angelic  visitation.  There 
was  a  troubling  of  the  waters,  and  a  steadily  in- 
creasing number  of  seekers  after  spiritual  health. 
The  subject  of  immortality  was,  so  to  speak,  in 
the  air.  The  various  Mystery-cults,  with  varying 
forms  of  ritual,  all  agreed  in  oflering  to  the 
initiate  the  hope  of  a  future  life  of  bliss  after 
death.  Abundant  evidence  for  this  may  be  found 
in  books  and  monographs  dealing  with  the  subject 
of  the  Mystery-cults  in  the  Roman  Empire.  At 
the  same  time,  along  a  totally  different  line  of  de- 
velopment, the  Jew  had  arrived  at  a  conception  of 
immortality  which  was  bound  up  with  a  spiritual 
conception  of  God  and  man's  relation  to  God.  In 
communion  with  God  lay  both  the  essence  of  im- 
mortality and  its  gtiarantee  for  faith.  In  Alex- 
andrian Judaism,  as  represented  by  Philo,  we 
have  the  blending  of  the  Platonic  doctrine  of  im- 
mortality, based  on  the  distinction  between  the 
higher  and  the  lower  elements  in  man,  with  the 
Pharisaic  assertion  of  the  value  of  the  individual 
to  God  and  its  grasp  of  the  eternal  character  of 
the  soul's  communion  with  God.  Hence  we  can 
discern  at  least  three  distinct  elements  at  work  in 
the  formation  of  current  ideas  about  immortality. 

(1)  The  view  of  a  future  life  which  rested  upon 
the  Eastern  dualistic  attitude  towards  matter  and 
spirit.  This  Eastern,  and  especiallj-  Persian,  ele- 
ment which  entered  so  largely  into  the  Mjstery- 
cults  of  the  century  before  and  the  century  follow- 
ing the  birth  of  Christ,  laid  stress  upon  the 
deliverance  of  the  soul,  by  purificatory  rites  and 
by  asceticism,  from  the  bondage  of  the  body,  and 
thus  pointed  a  way  to  ultimate  salvation  and  im- 
mortality by  union  with  the  god.  The  resem- 
blance of  the  rites  of  the  Mysterj-cults  to  various 
elements  in  the  Christian  sacraments  has  led  many 
scholars  to  trace  the  influence  of  these  cults  of  the 
Gra?co-Roman  world  upon  the  form  which  Christi- 
anity assumed  as  it  developed  a  sy.stem  of  ritual 
and  doctrine.  This  point  wUl  be  ai.scussed  brieflj- 
in  dealing  with  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  immortality. 

(2)  The  Platonic  element  in  Alexandrian 
Judaism,  modified  by  Stoic  influence,  laying  stress 
on  the  eternity  of  Reason,  and  hence  offering  an 
abstract  form  of  immortality  in  which  the  continu- 
ance of  personal  identity  was  not  involved. 


608 


IMMORTALITY 


IMMORTALITY 


(8)  TIio  1 

its  illsisl<Mir 


iaiis;ii(!  doctrine  <il   iinnii 
■r  (in  1  In-  ]t('niianeiu:c;(jt'  |ii  r- 
11   ciiiiuiniiiiun  witli  G<)<l. 
was    iiui    clearly    defined, 
of 


ulalit  \'   \\  itli 
iiiial  idiiil  it  y 

'I'hf  pi:ir,.  .;f 

tiR'  lidily  was  iiui  clearly  defined,  as  I'liaii-aic 
Judaism  held  1  lie  iiiiiiioiiality  "f  the  soul  in  com- 
bination witli  various  l'(inii>  of  e-(liat()lu;;ical  ex- 
pectation, in  ^\lliell  a  body,  yj)iriLual  or  (luasi- 
spiritual,  was  invohcd. 

The  Jewish  \  iew  w  ;is,  of  course,  not  confined  to 
Palestine,  but,  ,is  we  know,  was  spreail  thro>ij;i;li- 
out  Egypt,  Asia  Minoi-,  ami  all  the  Mediterranean 
coasts  by  means  of  (he  ^~yll,■l;^oL;■^^e.  All  these  ele- 
ments interniiii^led  ami  foniKHl  the  basis  of  the 
popular  attitude  towards  the  future  life,  in  the 
1st  cent,  of  Christianity. 

But  the  form  wliich  tlie  doctrine  of  immortality 
took  in  jiriiiiiiive  (  liristianity  is  by  no  means  (ex- 
plained M  hen  we  lia\(',  examined  the  conditions  of 
thought  under  which  if  ^rew  up.  It  certainly 
cannot  be  explained  without  them,  but  neither 
can  it  be  explained  wholly  by  them.  Christianity 
gave  its  own  definite  form  to  all  that  it  took  up 
from  the  current  tlionuht  of  its  time,  Jind  the  out- 
standing factor  in  IIk;  form  which  the  primitive 
Christian  hope  assumed  is  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ.  It  has  been  argued  that  the  form  which 
the  belief  in  the  Resurrection  took,  especially  in 
S(.  Paul.  \vas  determined  by  these  external  influ- 
ences, es|ie(  ially  by  the  existence  in  various 
Mystery-cults  of  the  idea  of  the  death  of  the  god 
ami  his  resurrection.  But  these  ofler  no  true 
])arallel  to  the  belief  in  a  historic  Resurrection  and 
do  not  explain  either  its  existence  or  the  peculiar 
moral  value  attached  to  the  Resurrection  of  Christ 
by  the  primitive  Church. 

When  we  come  to  the  historical  account  of  the 
doctrine  of  immortality  in  the  1st  cent,  of  Chris- 
tianity, we  find,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  in- 
separably connected  with  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ,  and,  secondly,  that  it  is  also  inseparable 
from  primitive  Christian  eschatology.  '  The 
resurrection  of  the  body  and  the  life  of  the  world 
to  come '  is  the  phrase  which  crystallizes  the  growth 
of  the  idea  of  immortality  for  the  popular  mind 
during  the  early  stages  of  Christianity.  We  shall 
find,  however,  in  both  I'auline  and  Johannine  teach- 
ing, much  that  transcends  the  form  of  belief  as 
crystallized  in  the  credal  phrase. 

II.  Particular  historical  development. 
— 1.  Pauline. — It  is  impossible  to  work  through 
the  Pauline  treatment  of  the  subject  without  dis- 
covering that  St.  Paul  had  no  doctrine  of  immor- 
tality, lie  deals  with  the  subject  only  so  far  as  it 
arises  out  of  the  question  of  salvation  through 
Christ  and  the  implications  of  salvation.  Hence 
tin;  most  illuminating  method  of  understanding 
St.  I 'aul's  attitude  towards  immortality  will  be  to 
trace  the  bearings  of  his  tlieory  of  salvation  as 
it  is  worked  out  in  Uoinans,  the  most  definitely 
soteriolouical  of  his  E{)istles.  The  following  are 
the  jninciiial  jioints  that  arise  from  the  examina- 
tion of  the  Epistle. 

(1)  Eschatological  background.  —  There  is  an 
eschatological  background  to  the  whole  of  St. 
Paul's  thinking  on  the  subject  of  salvation.  This 
is  not  to  say  that  tin;  ethical  nature  of  the  sal- 
vation is  excluded;  on  tlii'  contrary,  the  ethical 
is  in.separable  from  the  eschatological,  the  con- 
nexion between  life  and  righteousness  being  of  the 
very  essem  e  of  St.  Paul's  thought.  But  from  the 
outset  and  right  through,  the  eschatcdogical  out- 
look is  apparent.  In  Ro  •_''.  one  of  t  In;  most  general 
statements  on  the  subject.  Si.  I'aul  says  that  in 
the  nnelation  of  God's  righteous  judgment  He 
will  render  eiernal  life  to  ail  those  who  are  seek- 
ing glory  and  honour  and  immortality  (d^^a/jtr/a)  ; 
in  5'-,  there  is  the  just  Hied  lioast  in  the  hoi)e  of  tiie 
glory  of  God ;  in  5'',  those  who  receive  the  gift 


oi  1  i-hteousness  shall  reign  in  life;  in  8",  the 
iiioital  bodies  of  those  indwelt  by  the  Spirit  are 
to  be  quickened. 

This  eschatological  colouring  is  more  apparent 
in  the  e;irlier  llpistl.'s,  c.i;.  1  and  2  Thessaloiuans, 
than  in  the  later.  IJut  even  in  the  later  Efiistles, 
i\<i.  in  Pialippians,  it  ajipears :  ;{-"■-',  'for  our 
citi/.inship  is  in  heaven;  from  whence  aNu  we 
wait  for  a  Saviour,  the  Lord  JcsUs  Clui-i  :  who 
shall  fashion  anew  the  body  of  our  liumiliation, 
that  it  may  be  conformed  to  the  lioily  of  hi-  ;.lory, 
aecoi'fling  to  t  lie  woi'kiTig  whereli-v  he  i-  .-i  iile  even 
to  suhject  all  things  unto  himself. 

Thus  the  eschatologi<tal  element  in  the  liejief  is 
not  secondary  or  non-essential;  it  shows  in  the 
first  place  that  St.  Paul's  sense  of  the  nect;s.-,iiy  (»f 
a  future  glorified  life  is  part  of  a  larger  scheme  of 
things — the  future  Kingdom  of  God  and  its  mani- 
festation on  earth. 

(2)  Christ  as  an  earnest  of  the  future  life. — The 
present  condition  of  Christ  s  existence  is  both  the 
pattern  and  the  guarantee  of  the  believer's  future 
state  of  existence.  This  is  perhaps  the  most  char- 
acteristic and  original  part  of  St.  Paul's  thinking 
on  this  subject,  and  requires  the  most  careful 
study.  It  is  true  that  various  elements  exi-ted 
in  Apocalyjitic  and  Rabbinical  systems  of  tliou;^liL 
in  St.  Paul's  lime  which  may  have  suggested  in 
details  the  form  of  his  thought.  For  exam)>le,  the 
idea  of  a  spiritual  body  was  not  new  ;  it  occurs  in 
Midr.  Bab.  and  in  the  Gnostic  Hymn  of  the  Soul 
(see  Rendel  Harris's  edition  of  the  Odes  and  Psalnis 
of  Solomon,  1909,  Introduction,  p.  67  f.)  and  the 
conception  of  the  transformation  of  the  righteous 
into  tne  likeness  of  Messiah  occurs  first  in  Enoch 
xc.  38. 

But  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of  Christ  as 
historical  facts  are  the  decisive  elements  which  St. 
Paul  lays  hold  of  and  works  out  in  their  relation 
to  the  Kingdom  of  God,  making  new  combinations 
of  old  ideas,  throwing  fresh  light  on  the  purpose 
of  God,  and  filling  the  old  categories  of  thought 
with  a  new  vital  force.  No  apocalyptic  scheme 
ofi'ered  any  such  conception  as  the  Death  and 
Resurrection  of  Messiah,  and  the  acceptance  by 
St.  Paul  of  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of  Jesus 
as  historical  facts,  together  with  his  identification 
of  Jesus  with  the  Mes.siah,  set  a  train  of  thought 
working  in  his  mind  which  yielded  entirely  new 
forms,  not  to  be  ex]ilained  by  any  patch-work  of 
older  elements  to  be  found  in  them.  'I'liere  are 
certain  essential  points  of  St.  Pauls  s'lieme  of 
things  which  were  never  grasped  by  the  Apologists 
and  the  early  interpreters  of  Apostolic  Christianity. 
This  was  partly  because  the  eschatological  element 
was  not  understood,  and  perhaps  still  more  because 
St.  Paul's  attitude  towards  the  human  side  of  the 
Incarnation  was  not  understood.  The  side  upon 
which  Irenaeus  lays  stress,  the  answer  to  the 
question  Cur  Dens  Homo?  was  fully  grasped  and 
developed,  viz.  the  '  deification  '  of  man  through 
the  Incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God.  But  owing  to 
the  rise  of  christological  controversies  the  emphasis 
laid  by  St.  Paul  and  the  primitive  Church  on  the 
ethical  value  of  the  Resurrection  of  Christ  and  its 
implications  dropped  out  of  sight. 

(ffl)  Fii-stof  all,  then,  for  St.  Paul  the  Resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  has  an  ethical  value  which  is  of 
great  importance  in  his  view  of  I  lie  future  life  of 
believers.  The  Resurrection  of  Christ  was  not  a 
foregone  conclusion  resulting  from  His  Divinity, 
but  it  was  intimately  connected  with  Christ's  faith 
and  holiness  as  man.  His  Re.suriection  was  ac- 
cording to  the  Spirit  of  holiness;  He  w;is  rai-ed 
from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  I  ;itlier.  In  11  is 
Resurrection  the  full  working  of  the  law  of  tin? 
.Spirit  of  life  was  disjilayed.  'He  lives  to  God.' 
The  word 'glory '  which  St.    I'aid  uses  to  describe 


KklMORTALITY 


IMMORTALITY 


609 


the  present  state  of  the  risen  Christ  as  well  as  His 
fnture  manifestation  has  both  an  ethical  and  a 
qnasi-niaterial  significance.  The  full  moral  like- 
ness to  God  which  Christ  displayed  has  its  counter- 
part in  His  present  state  of  existence,  '  the  glory  of 
God  in  the  face  (ev  -wpoaiinri^,  possibly  better  rendered 
'  in  the  person  '  [cf.  2  Co  2'"])  of  Jesus  Christ.' 

(6)  This  resurrection  state  of  Christ  is  spiritual. 
The  historic  Christ  retaining  His  moral  character- 
istics has  passed  into  a  spiritual  condition,  by 
the  operation  of  a  law  made  manifest  for  the  first 
time  in  His  case.  Christ  is  identified  with  the 
Spirit.  He  is  no  longer  limited  in  manifestation 
by  time  and  space,  but  can  dwell  in  those  who  re- 
ceive Him  by  faith.  It  is  the  real  Christ  that 
St.  Paul  conceives  of  as  dwelling  in  believers  and 
thereby  bringing  into  operation  in  them  the  same 
law  that  resulted  in  His  own  Resurrection  and 
victory  over  '  the  law  of  sin  and  death.' 

(c)  The  ultimate  result  of  this  indwelling  of 
the  Spirit  of  Chi-ist  is  to  assert  the  complete 
triumph  of  life  over  death  even  in  the  bodies  of 
believers  (Ro  8").  The  full  manifestation  of  this 
life  will  bring  deliverance  for  creation  (v.-^)  from 
the  bondage  of  corruption  (<p6opd).  For  St.  Paul, 
then,  immortality  is  not  aOavoffia,  but  atpdapffia. 
It  is  an  integral  part  of  the  triumph  of  the  King- 
dom of  Gk)d,  besnnning  with  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ  (1  Co  15**-23  .  dirapxv  Xpirros). 

(3)  The  corporate  nature  of  the  future  life. — 
The  last  point  that  comes  out  from  the  study  of 
St.  Paul's  teaching  on  this  subject  is  the  corporate 
nature  of  the  future  existence,  in  strong  contrast 
to  the  immortality  presented  by  Plotinus  and  the 
later  Neo-Platonists — an  immortality  of '  the  Alone 
Avith  the  Alone.'  The  indwelling  Spirit  of  Christ 
is  the  ground  of  unity,  as  well  as  the  assurance  of 
immortality  ;  the  future  life  of  bliss  is  the  life  of 
a  blessed  community  of  glorified  persons,  united 
to  Christ  and  like  Him  morally  and  spiritually, 
finding  their  joy  in  the  activities  of  eternal  life, 
doing  the  will  of  God. 

The  Pauline  view  of  the  subject  is  also  bound  up  with  the 
Parousia  and  with  the  closely  aUied  subject  of  the  resurrection 
of  believers.  Hence  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  articles  on 
these  subjects  in  this  Dictionary  for  supplementarj-  discussion 
of  the  Pauline  teaching. 

2.  Petrine  and  other  primitiYe  teaching.— For 

the  sake  of  convenience,  the  general  teaching  of 
the  Catholic  Epistles  and  the  Pastorals  is  taken 
together  with  the  Petrine  doctrine  of  immortality. 
The  doctrine  of  1  Peter  may  be  said  to  represent 
the  general  standpoint  of  the  primitive  Apostolic 
Church  on  this  matter,  while  the  Pauline  and  the 
Johannine  teaching  contain  developments  which 
profoundly  aflected  the  thought  of  the  Church  but 
which  were  never  wholly  understood  and  accepted. 

(1)  The  First  Epistle  of  Peter  shows  the  same 
eschatological  background  that  we  find  in  St. 
Paul  and  everywhere  in  the  primitive  Chtirch, 
and  the  same  view  of  the  ethical  value  of  the 
Resurrection  of  Christ :  '  who  through  him  are  be- 
lievers in  God,  which  raised  him  from  the  dead, 
and  gave  him  glory  ;  so  that  your  faith  and  hope 
might  be  in  God'  (I  P  \^). 

But  there  is  nothing  of  the  extraordinary 
development  of  the  consequences  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion-life of  Christ  in  the  Spirit,  and  the  resultant 
view  of  the  Kingdom  as  already  manifested  in  its 
working.  The  most  important  passage  for  our 
purpose  is  1  P  3^*-'-\  the  'Descent  into  Hell'  of 
the  Creeds. 

Rendel  Harris  {SideUghlg  on  ST  Research,  1908,  p.  208)  has 
proposed  the  emendation  iv  w  <tai  'Ei^x  '>n  ^^^  supposition 
that  'Eiiox  has  dropped  out  tj-  haplography,  and  would  refer 
the  passage  to  a  reminiscence  of  the  visit  of"  Enoch  to  the  con- 
demned watchers  and  his  intercession  for  them  (see  Enoch  xiL, 
■sin.).  But  the  interruption  to  the  general  sense  of  the  passaj;e 
is  too  serious,  except  on  a  very  low  estimate  of  the  logical 
VOL.  I.— 39 


sequence  of  thought  in  the  Bpistle,  to  admit  of  the  probabiHty 
of  this  ingenious  sugrgestion. 

If  the  passage  be  interpreted  to  refer  to  the  visit 
of  Christ  to  the  souls  in  Sheol  during  the  interval 
between  His  Death  and  His  Resurrection,  then 
this  is  the  only  NT  passage  which  supports  such 
a  conception,  and  it  is  a  possible  view  that  the 
Christian  interpretation  of  the  passage  has  been 
influenced  by  the  strong  belief  which  grew  up  in 
the  primitive  Church  in  the  descent  of  Christ  to 
Hades.  But  the  passage  requires  fuller  treatment 
than  space  allows  of  here  (see,  further,  art.  De- 
SCEXT  INTO  Hades).  If  the  credal  interpretation 
be  accepted,  the  passage  is  evidence  rather  for  an 
intermediate  state  than  for  any  clearly  defined 
doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  It  does 
not  necessarily  imply  more  than  is  implied  in  the 
later  Jewish  view  of  Sheol.  Still  more  perplexing 
is  4®,  if  the  same  interpretation  be  attache  to  it. 
But  it  is  possible  to  interpret  both  passages  of  the 
preaching  of  Noah  to  those  who  though  dead  now, 
were  alive  at  the  time  when  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
in  Noah  preached  to  them.  Then  the  last  clause 
of  4®  may  be  evidence  for  the  future  state  of  the 
condemned.  Aft«r  judgment  they  continue  to 
live  in  spirit  in  relation  to  God.  Apart  from 
this  the  writer's  attention  is  fixed  on  the  coming 
'  glory,'  '  the  crown  of  glory,'  to  be  revealed  at  the 
Parousia. 

(2)  Hebrews. — The  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  retains  the  eschatological  background 
common  to  the  early  Church,  but  adds  to  our  in- 
quiry one  important  new  conception — that  which 
is  implied  in  the  term  TereXetw/w'j'oj.  Christ  in  His 
present  risen  state  is  spoken  of  as  TereXeiofifvos 
(7^) ;  the  spirits  in  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  are 
called  the  spirits  of  '  the  perfected  righteous,' 
diKcdwv  rereKeiufUvuv  (l^^ ;  cf.  also  o»  11«,  Lk  13*»). 
It  is  difficult  to  find  the  Pauline  conception  of  a 
glorified  body  here.  It  would  rather  seem  to 
present  the  Alexandrian  Judaistic  point  of  view 
that  the  righteous  immediately  after  death  reach 
their  perfected  state  of  bliss  in  full  communion 
with  God.  The  writer  undoubtedly  believes  in 
the  Resurrection  of  Christ  and  also  in  the  ethical 
aspect  of  it  already  mentioned,  but  he  does  not 
seem  to  carry  on,  as  St.  Panl  does,  the  conse- 
quences of  this  to  the  bodily  resurrection  of  be- 
lievers. But  he  clearly  looks  forward  to  a  ffop^ar- 
uTjxSi  for  the  people  of  God,  a  heavenly  city,  and 
a  corporate  immortality,  all  based  upon  the  pre- 
sent risen  life  of  Clirist. 

(3)  The  Pastoral  Epistles  add  one  or  two  points. 
The  dogmatic  conception  of  abstract  immortality 
— what  Friedrich  von  Hiigel  (Eternal  Life)  calls 
'  quantitative  immortality ' — perhaps  appears  in 
1  Ti  6^®  :  6  ftovoi  Ix'^"  tidapturlar.  In  4^  a  sharp  dis- 
tinction is  dra^vn  between  '  the  life  that  now  is 
and  that  which  is  to  come,'  a  sign  of  the  passing  of 
the  eschatological  form  of  the  distinction  between 
'the  present  age'  and  'the  coming  age.'  The 
rich  are  charged  to  lay  hold  on  what  is  truly  life 
(t^s  Svtus  for^s,  6^). 

In  2  Ti  1^  we  have  the  Pauline  conception,  '  the 
promise  of  life  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus ' ;  2",  •  if 
we  sufler  with  him  we  shall  reign  with  him ' ;  4^, 
living  and  dead  are  to  be  judged  by  Christ  at  His 
appearing ;  4**,  '  shall  save  me  unto  his  heavenly 
kingdom.'  But  the  two  most  characteristic  pas- 
sages in  this  Epistle  are  1^",  where  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ  has  annulled  death  and  brought  life 
and  immortality  [dtpdafxriav)  to  light,  through  the 
gospel ;  and  2'*,  where  speaking  of  '  the  elect '  the 
writer  says  '  that  they  too  may  obtain  the  salva- 
tion that  is  in  Christ  Jesus  with  eternal  glory.' 
Tit  1^-2  echoes  the  phrase  of  2  Ti  1^  the  hope 
of  eternal  life,  still  reflecting  the  eschatological 
colouring.     In  Tit  2'-"^*  '  the  present  age '  is  con- 


GIO 


IMMORTALITY 


IMMORTALITY 


trasted  witli  *  the  appearing  of  tlie  glory  of  the 
great  God  and  our  Saviour  Christ  Jesus,'  also 
spoken  of  as  *  the  blessed  liope ' ;  in  3^"^-  the  bath  of 
regeneration  {vaXivyevea-la)  and  the  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  are  connected  with  righteousness  and 
the  hope  of  eternal  life  after  the  Pauline  manner. 

3.  Johannine. — ^The  three  groups  of  Johannine 
literature  are  here  treated  separately. 

(1)  The  Apocalypse. — The  phrase  which  is  so 
characteristic  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  'eternal  life,' 
does  not  occur  in  the  Apocalypse.  For  our  subject 
we  have  the  following  passages  :  2",  the  overcomer 
'shall  not  be  hurt  of  the  second  death';  3*,  the 
overcomer's  name  will  not  be  blotted  out  of  the 
book  of  life.  In  4*  the  '  elders '  (who  may  possibly 
represent  those  who  have  attained — the  'elders' 
of  Ho  11)  are  seen  in  the  symbolic  garb  of  victors. 
In  6"  the  souls  of  the  martyrs  are  seen  under  the 
altar,  crying  for  vengeance.  In  7^^'"  there  is  a 
description  of  those  who  have  come  out  of  great 
tribulation  and  who  enjoy  perpetual  bliss  before 
the  throne  of  God.  In  20'*  those  who  are  slain 
during  the  great  tribulation  are  raised  for  the 
millennial  kingdom,  and  reign  with  Christ  for  a 
thousand  years,  20'  adds  'the  rest  of  the  dead 
lived  not  again  until  the  thousand  years  were 
ended.'  Then  in  20"-^''  *  the  dead  small  and  great,' 
i.e.  apparently  '  the  rest  of  the  dead,'  are  raised 
and  judged  according  to  their  works,  and  all  not 
found  Avritten  in  the  iJook  of  Life  are  cast  into  the 
Lake  of  Fire. 

Here  again  the  eschatological  interest  is  para- 
mount. The  future  existence  of  individuals  is  not 
a  question  of  psychological  or  philosophical  interest, 
but  is  determined  by  the  view  of  the  future  King- 
dom of  God.  Hence  'quantitative  immortality' 
does  not  appear.  The  righteous  receive  the  reward 
of  their  worlcs  and  patience,  and  enter  on  a  blessing 
which  appears  to  extend  beyond  the  millennial 
kingdom,  and  at  any  rate  reaches  its  climax  there. 
The  writer  is  not  so  interested  in  anytliing  after 
that.  But  the  future  fate  of  the  wicked  is  indeter- 
minate. The  view  taken  as  to  this  depends  upon 
our  interpretation  of  the  writer's  symbolism. 
The  lire  may  be  destructive,  purgative,  or  penal. 
The  torment  of  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  is 
spoken  of,  but  the  final  end  of  the  wicked  is  not  ex- 
plicitly stated.    They  are  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire, 

(2)  The  Epistles.— In  the  Johannine  Epistles  the 
Parousia  still  forms  the  background  of  Christian 
hope,  but  the  precise  form  of  the  hope  is  vague,  and 
shows  signs  of  transformation  into  a  purely  spiritual 
expectation.  The  contribution  of  the  Epistles 
belongs  rather  to  the  subject  of  the  Parousia 
(q.v.).  The  term  'eternal  life' occurs  frequently, 
but  never  with  the  eschatological  sense  in  which  it 
is  used  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  and  the  Pastorals. 
But  the  profound  ethical  implication  of  likeness  to 
God  and  to  Christ  tills  the  term  Avith  a  new  mean- 
ing. '  The  life  of  the  coming  age,'  the  original 
sense  of  tlie  term  D^y  ';n,  has  become  the  life  of 
God,  expressed  in  Christ,  imparted  to  the  believer, 
working  itself  out  in  moral  likeness  to  God,  and 
perfected  when  Christ  appears.  He  who  dwells 
in  God  and  God  in  him  can  never  die,  and  he  who 
loves  dwells  in  God,  and  partakes  of  God's  eternal 
life.  Immortality  is  'qualitative'  wholly  here, 
with  no  tiiought  of  duration. 

(3)  The  Fourth  Gospel. — Here  the  transformation 
of  the  eschatological  background  is  practically 
complete.  Subsequent  developments  really  con- 
sisted, not  in  a  deeper  and  riclier  spiritualization 
of  the  eschatological  view-point,  with  all  its 
stimulus  and  insistent  pressure  of  the  real  world 
surrounding  and  penetrating  the  phenomenal  world, 
but  in  the  total  abandonment  of  eschatology  and 
consequent  im]>nverishinont  of  the  Church's  life. 
But  iu  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  intensity  and  reality 


of  the  hope  are  retained,  while  the  particular 
Jewish  colouring  and  schemes  of  thought  are 
quietly  dropped,  with  a  few  exceptions. 

In  this  Gospel  'eternal  life'  is  the  principal 
category  under  which  the  subject  of  immortality 
falls  to  be  considered.  The  most  imnortant  group 
of  passages  is  in  the  6tli  chapter.  Here  our  Lorcl, 
after  the  miracle  of  the  loaves,  and  evidently,  in 
the  mind  of  the  author  of  the  Gospel,  explaining 
the  significance  of  the  miracle,  claims  that  He  is 
the  living  bread  come  down  from  heaven.  Those 
wlio  eat  of  this  bread  live  for  ever.  Continuing  to 
explain  the  saying,  our  Lord  adds  that  the  bread  is 
His  flesh  and  11  is  blood,  and  that  he  who  eats  the 
flesh  and  drinks  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  Man  has 
eternal  life,  and  Avill  be  raised  by  Christ  at  the 
last  day.  Again,  '  he  that  eateth  this  bread  shall 
live  for  ever.  It  is  possible  that  we  must  accept 
the  predestinarianism  of  vv.***'^  as  part  of  the  older 
eschatological  colouring.  But  evidently  a  difficult 
point  is  involved  here.  Schweitzer  would  explain 
the  passage  as  the  expression  of  'a  speculative 
religious  materialism  which  concerns  itself  with 
the  problem  of  matter  and  spirit,  and  the  per- 
meation of  matter  by  Spirit,  and  endeavours  to 
interpret  the  manifestation  and  the  personality  of 
Jesus,  the  action  of  the  sacraments  and  the  possi- 
bility of  the  resurrection  of  the  elect,  all  on  the 
basis  of  one  and  the  same  fundamental  conception ' 
(Paul  and  his  Interpreters,  p.  202  f.).  That  is, 
broadly  speaking,  the  immortality  described  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  sacramental,  conditioned  entirely 
by  participation  in  the  sacraments  which,  through 
the  communication  to  them  of  the  Spirit  of  the 
Risen  Christ,  have  received  this  potency. 

Like  so  much  of  Schweitzer's  exegesis,  this  is 
brilliant  and  stimulating,  but  not  wholly  sound. 
Throughout  the  Gospel  the  possession  of  eternal  life 
is  independent  of  sacraments  and  connected  simply 
with  faith  in  Christ :  '  he  that  believeth  on  me 
hath  everlasting  life,'  'he  that  believeth  on  me, 
though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live,  and  he  that 
liveth  and  believeth  on  me  shall  never  die.'  The 
charge  of  'unintelligent  spiritualizing'  is  hasty 
and  unfounded.  As  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  .so 
also  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  Schweitzer  has  not 
recognized  the  peculiar  ethical  element  which  is 
the  real  basis  of  the  primitive  Church's  view  of  the 
Resurrection  of  Christ,  and  of  the  resurrection  and 
future  state  of  believers. 

So  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  immortality  implied 
is  at  bottom  ethical  ;  it  is  the  life  of  God  which 
Christ  is  in  Himself  and  has  come  to  earth  to 
reveal,  and  in  order  to  impart  it  in  its  fullness  He 
must  enter  upon  the  spiritual  state.  It  is  expedient 
for  them  that  He  should  go  away.  After  His 
departure  they  will  know  that  He  is  in  the  Father, 
they  in  Him,  and  He  in  them. 

Hence,  while  in  St.  Paul  we  have  the  eager 
movement  of  the  new  life  towards  its  glorious 
consummation,  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  we  have 
rather  the  steady  contemplation  of  the  fully 
revealed  nature  of  the  life  of  God  in  this  world 
now.  In  both  cases  all  the  interest  is  centred  on 
the  purpose  of  God  in  its  realization,  rather  tluan 
on  the  individual  man  and  his  ultimate  fate.  So 
that  we  have  the  api^earance  of  the  conditional 
immortality  which  is  found  in  Athanasius,  reall}' 
only  apparent,  because  the  nature  of  immortality 
as  a  dogma  was  not  in  question,  but  the  wider 
issue  of  the  coming  in  of  the  Kingdom  of  God.  In 
the  Fourth  Gospel  we  have  also  the  corporate 
nature  of  the  life  insisted  on.  In  St.  Paul,  spirit, 
soul,  and  body  are  to  be  preserved  to  the  day  of 
Christ;  there  is  no  immortality  of  the  soul  con- 
ceived of  as  a  mere  abstraction,  but  the  eternal 
gain  for  the  Kini^tlom  of  (iod  of  a  person,  whole 
and  entire,     lu  the  Fourth  tluspol  there  is  not  the 


IMMORTALITY 


mCENSE 


611 


same  prominence  given  to  the  resarrection  of  the 
body,  but  ultimately  the  l»ody  of  him  who  possesses 
the  life  of  God  must  pass  under  the  law  of  eternal 
life,  although  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
never  states  the  expectation  in  the  same  way  ;  it 
is  not  '  your  mortal  bodies,'  but  '  I  will  raise  him 
up.'  The  incident  of  the  grave  clothes  also  shows 
that  the  writer's  conception  of  the  Resurrection 
was  purely  spiritual :  the  Lord  had  become  a  Spirit, 
althougU  capable  of  revealing  His  continued 
personal  existence  to  His  disciples.  So  for  the 
Fourth  Gospel  the  ultimate  thing  also  is  the  gain 
of  the  individual  :  'no  man  is  able  to  pluck  them 
out  of  my  Fathers  hand.' 

4.  The  Apostolic  Fathers. — Here  we  have  much 
less  of  vital  importance.  The  creative  impulse  has 
died  away,  and  we  can  trace  the  process,  already 
mentioned,  of  the  gradual  abandonment  of  much 
that  was  most  characteristic  of  the  teaching  of  St. 
Paul.  Ignatius  oflers  the  closest  affinities  with  the 
point  of  view  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  as  is  well 
enough  known.  The  following  are  the  principal 
relevant  passages : 

{1)1  Clement. — The  principal  passage  in  this 
Epistle  is  in  chs.  xxiv.-xx\i.  The  future  resur- 
rection is  ba.sed  on  the  Resurrection  of  Christ,  and 
the  simile  of  the  seed  is  used.  Ch.  xxvi.  seems  to 
limit  the  resurrection  to  the  faithful,  '  those  who 
served  Him  in  holiness,  in  the  confidence  of  a  good 
faith.'  Those  who  have  died  as  martyrs  or  in  the 
faith  are  spoken  of  as  having  obtained  the  inherit- 
ance of  glory  and  honour  (cf.  v.  3,  7,  xlv.  7).  In 
1.  3  '  those  wlio  were  perfected  in  love  by  the  grace 
of  God  have  a  place  among  the  pious  who  shall  be 
made  manifest  at  the  visitation  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Christ.' 

(2)  -2  Clement  has  several  interesting  passages : 
V.  5,  '  our  sojourning  in  this  world  in  the  flesh  is  a 
little  thin^  and  lasts  a  short  time,  but  the  promise 
of  Christ  is  great  and  wonderful,  and  brings  us 
rest,  in  the  kingdom  which  is  to  come,  and  in 
everla-sting  life.'  In  vi.  7  rest  is  contrasted  with 
eternal  punishment  (atwi'toi'  KoXd^eow).  The  future 
existence  depends  on  the  keeping  of  the  baptism 
undefiled ;  the  first  occurrence  of  this  conception 
is  in  vi.  9,  viL  6,  ^^ii.  6.  In  ch.  ix.  there  is  the 
assertion  of  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh  to  judg- 
ment, based  on  the  Incarnation  and  not  on  the  Re- 
surrection of  Christ.  Ch.  xiL  contains  the  curious 
Agraphon  possibly  from  the  Gospel  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, '  When  the  two  shall  be  one,  and  the  outside 
as  the  inside,  and  the  male  with  the  female,  neither 
male  nor  female.'  It  is  interpreted  by  the  author 
as  referring  to  the  moral  perfection  and  asceticism 
suited  to  the  kingdom. 

In  xiv.  5  we  have  an  imjxjrtant  passage.  After 
a  somewhat  strained  analogy  of  the  flesh  as  the 
Church,  referring  to  the  Church  as  pre-existent  and 
possessing  the  Spirit,  the  author  says :  '  So  great 
a  gift  of  life  and  immortality  (i6a.vaalaif)  has  this 
flesh  the  power  to  receive  if  the  Holy  Spirit  be 
joined  to  it.'  In  xix.  3,  4  we  have  a  statement  of 
immortality  in  fairly  quantitative  terms,  and  the 
expression  '  the  immortal  fruit  of  the  resurrection' 
{tov  addvaTOf  rijs  droffraaeois  Kaprov).  In  XX.  5  Christ 
is  the  Saviour  and  Leader  of  immortality  (dpxTyo" 
Tj}i  d^apcias). 

(3)  Ignatius. — We  owe  to  Ignatius  the  famous 
phrase  'the  medicine  of  immortality,'  <(>dpnaKo» 
ddavoffiai  (Eph.  XX.  2),  which  is  so  often  repeated 
by  later  patristic  writers.  Ignatius  frequently  uses 
the  word  'immortality,'  but  as  frequently  shows 
that  his  conception  is  ethical — qualitative,  not 
quantitative.  What  he  seeks  is  not  mere  duration 
of  bliss,  but  true  life  (to  d\yfda>6p  ^rjv,  xi.  I).  Faith 
and  love  constitute  this  true  life,  the  life  of  God 
(xiv.  I).  Christ  has  breathed  immortality  on  the 
Church  (dtpeapaiay,  xviL  1).     At  the  Incarnation 


'God  was  manifest  as  Man,  for  the  newness  of 
eternal  life '  (etr  Koivimp-a  dtStoy  for^),  a  reminist'ence 
of  Ro  6^,  but  dtSiop  is  never  used  of  life  in  the  NT. 
In  XX.  2  it  is  the  Sacrament,  the  bread,  which  is 
the  medicine  of  immortality. 

Other  passages  are  Magn.  i.  2,  ix.  2 :  a  reference 
to  the  Descensus ;  Trail,  ii  I,  ix.  2 ;  Jiom.  vi.  2 ; 
Phil.  ix.  2 :  the  gospel  is  '  the  perfecting  of  im- 
mortality' (dxdpTUTfia  dipdapaiai) ;  Snif/}~n.  xii.  2, 
'  resurrection  both  fleshlj'  and  spiritual ' ;  ad 
Polyc.  IL  3,  '  the  prize  is  immortality  and  eternal 
life.' 

The  remaining  literature  of  our  period  adds 
nothing  of  importance. 

III.  COXCLUSIOS.—The  principal  trend  of  the 
teaching  of  the  NT  lies  mainly  along  the  lines  laid 
down  by  our  Lord,  and  expanded  by  the  original 
thinking  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  John,  if  we  may 
assume  a  name  for  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
for  convenience'  sake.  The  expansion  followed  lines 
which  were  principally  determined  by  the  accept- 
ance of  the  Resurrection  of  Christ  as  a  historical 
fact.  The  emphasis  thus  lies  on  the  value  of  com- 
plete personality  brought  into  the  sphere  of  the 
operation  of  the  Kingdom  of  Go<l.  Those  opera- 
tions take  on  the  form  of  eschatological  expecta- 
tions, but  express  fundamental  and  eternal  realities 
of  religion.  The  pale  and  thin  conception  of  mere 
duration  of  existence  is  of  no  interest  to  the  apos- 
tolic writers.  It  was  of  fundamental  importance 
to  p<ffisess  true  life,  the  life  of  God ;  and  as  the 
meaning  of  the  Incarnation  was  explored,  the  con- 
ception of  eternal  life  grew  in  depth  and  breadth 
and  height. 

LrTKBATTKB.  —  Sanday-Headlam,  RoBunufi  (ICC,  1903); 
Robertson-Plnmmer,  Corinthian*  (ICC,  1911);  J.  Aimitag^ 
Robinson,  Ephesians,  1903;  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  1  Peter,  1888; 
B.  F.  Westcott,  St.  John,  2  vols.,  1908.  and  The  Spigllf*  of 
St.  John,  ISSa ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse^,  \9D~.  See  also 
A.  Sabatier,  The  Apostle  Paul,  Ei^.  tr.,  1891 ;  P.  Gardner, 
The  Religious  Experience  oj  St.  Paul,  1911 ;  A.  Schweitrer, 
Paul  and  his  Interpreters,  Eng.  tr.,  1912 ;  E.  Underbill,  The 
Mystic  Way,  1913 ;  F.  von  Hiigel,  Eternal  Life,  1912  ;  S.  D.  F. 
Salmond,  The  Christian  Doctrine  o/Immortaliti~*,  1901 ;  E.  F. 
Scott,  The  Kingdom  and  the  ilemah,  19U,  also  The  Fotirth 
Gospel,  1906 ;  W.  Sanday,  (Ariatdogiet,  Andent  and  Modem, 
1910 ;  C.  Bis^g:,  The  Christum  PlattmiaU  of  Alexandria,  rep. 
1913;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  The  ApostoHe  Father*.  1891;  J. 
Dmmmond,  Philo  Judceus,  2  toIs.,  1888;  H.  J.  Holtzmann, 
AT  Theologie,  2  vols.,  1911 ;  A.  Hamack,  HUtorv  of  Dogma, 
Eng.  tr.3,  7  vols.,  1S91-99,  also  The  Misgion  aiid  Expansion  of 
(Jhriatianitil,  E^.  tr.>,  2  vols..  1908;  R.  H.  Charles,  Etchato- 
^gjf—Hebretc,  Jeurisk  and  Christian,  1899 ;  G.  Dalman,  The 
Word*  of  Jesus,  Eng.  tr.,  1902;  F.  Cnmont,  The  Oriental 
Rdigions  in  Roman  Paganism,  1911 ;  S.  Reinacb,  Orphau, 
Eag.  tr..  1909.  S.  H,  HOOKE. 

IMPUTATION.— See  Justification. 

INCARNATION.— See  Ghbist,  Cheistology. 

INCENSE  (evfiiafia,  generally  plural).— The  burn- 
ing of  aromatic  substances  on  the  altar  of  incense 
was  part  of  the  daily  Temple-ritual,  and  the  office 
for  each  occasion  was  assigned  by  lot  to  a  priest 
who  had  never  before  enjoyed  the  honour.  The 
moment  for  the  beginning  of  the  rite  was  carefully 
fixed,  and  served  to  mark  the  time  of  day.  When 
the  cloud  of  fragrant  smoke  ascended,  the  people 
outside  the  Temple  bowed  in  prayer,  in  accordance 
with  the  ancient  association  of  prayers  and  incense 
(Ps  141-).  In  the  primitive  Semitic  cultus  the 
perfume  which  rose  into  the  upper  air  was  supposed 
to  give  a  sensuous  pleasure  to  the  Deity  ;  but  when 
more  spiritual  thoughts  of  the  Divine  nature  and 
character  prevailed,  the  incense,  if  it  was  to  be  re- 
tained, hawi  to  be  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  the 
prayers  breathed  from  earth  to  heaven.  In  Rev 
5**-  (which  maj',  however,  be  a  gloss)  the  golden 
boMls  full  of  incense  are  expressly  identifietl  with 
the  prayers  of  the  saints.  In  Rev  8*  the  smoke  of 
incense'goes  up  before  God  out  of  the  angel's  hand 


612 


INCORRUPTIOK- 


INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION 


for  [so  KViii,  more  accurate  than  with,  IIV]  the 
prayers  of  tlie  saints.  Some  internreters  think 
that  the  incense  added  by  the  angel  is  here  Bup- 
posed  to  give  some  kind  of  eflieacy  to  the  prayers  ; 
out,  while  interceding  angels  and  archangels 
appear  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  (ix.  3-11,  xv.  2,  xl.  7, 
xlvii.  2,  civ.  1),  the  thought  in  Rev.  is  probably 
no  more  than  that  the  prayers  of  earth  are  ratified 
in  heaven.  Tlie  prophet's  symbolism  indicates 
that  the  saints  are  praying  for  things  agreeable  to 
God's  will,  so  that  their  petitions  cannot  fail  to  be 
granted.  James  Strahan. 

INCORRUPTION.— See  Uncorkuptnkss. 

INSPIRATION  AND  REYELATION.— Definition 
of  terms. — llevelation  is  the  '  discovery '  or  '  dis- 
closure' (d7roK(iXi'i|t'(j)  of  God  (i.e.  of  the  being  and 
character  of  God)  to  man.  Inspiration  is  the 
mode,  or  one  of  the  modes,  by  which  this  discovery 
or  disclosure  is  made  ;  it  is  the  process  by  whicli 
certain  select  persons  were  enabled,  through  the 
medium  of  speech  or  of  writing,  to  convey  special 
information  about  God  to  their  fellows. 

It  will  be  obvious  that  the  two  terms  must  be 
closely  related.  To  a  large  extent  they  are  strictly 
correlativs.  Kevelation  is  in  large  part  the  direct 
product  of  inspiration.  The  select  persons  of  whom 
we  have  spoken  imparted  revelation  about  God 
because  they  were  inspired  to  impart  it.  So  far  as 
revelation  has  been  conveyed  by  speech  or  writing 
we  call  the  process  inspiration  ;  we  say  that  holy 
men  of  old  spoke  and  wrote  as  they  were  moved 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  (2  P  1").  What  is  meant  by 
this  we  shall  explain  later. 

A.  Revelation. — Revelation  is  the  Avider  term. 
There  is  such  a  thing  as  revelation  by  facts,  as  well 
as  by  words.  And  revelation  by  facts  is  again  of 
two  kinds :  there  is  the  broad  revelation  of  God  in 
Nature ;  and  there  is  also  a  special  revelation  of 
God  in  history. 

1.  Revelation  by  facts. — («)  Revelation  of  God 
in  Nature. — The  Jew  under  the  OT  rose  up  from 
the  contemplation  of  Nature  with  an  intense  belief 
in  Divine  Frovidence.  For  him  the  heavens  de- 
clared the  glory  of  God,  and  the  firmament  showed 
His  handiwork.  The  sight  of  the  heavens  brought 
home  to  him  the  contrast  between  the  majesty  of 
God  and  the  littleness  of  man.  The  phenomena  of 
storm  and  tempest  heightened  his  sense  of  Divine 

f tower  and  of  the  goodness  which  intervened  for 
lis  own  protection.  The  beneficent  ordering  of 
Nature  turned  his  thoughts  to  tliankfulness  and 
praise  (Ps  65  104).  The  tendency  of  the  Hebrew 
mind  was  towards  optimism.  His  religious  faith 
was  so  strong  that  the  darker  side  of  Nature  did 
not  trouble  him  ;  its  destructive  energies  only  filled 
him  with  awe,  or  else  he  regarded  them  as  directed 
against  his  own  enemies  and  God's.  The  questions 
that  perplexed  him  most  arose  not  so  much  from 
Nature  as  from  the  observation  of  human  life. 

The  most  pressing  problem  of  all  was  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  righteous  and  the  prosperity  of  the 
wicked.  To  this  problem  are  devoted  several 
Psalms  and  the  whole  Book  of  Job.  But,  how- 
ever urgent  the  problem  might  be  and  however 
imperfect  the  solution,  it  never  shook  the  deep- 
rooted  faith  that  was  Israel's  greatest  heritage. 
The  same  may  be  said  even  of  the  complicated 
questions  w  hich  exercise  the  author  of  Eccfesiastes 
— a  late  and  comparatively  isolated  phenomenon. 

{b)  Revelation  of  God  in  history. — The  truth 
which  Israel  grasped  with  the  greatest  tenacity 
was  the  intimacy  of  its  own  relation  to  God  as  tiie 
Chosen  People.  Not  all  the  shocks  M-hich  it  en- 
dured in  its  political  career,  tossed  to  and  fro  as  a 
shuttlecock  between  its  more  powerful  neighbours, 
could  weaken  its  hold  on  this.     It  idealized  its 


history — emphasized  its  deliverances,  dwelt  on  its 
few  moments  of  comparative  greatness  and  pros- 
perity, and  explained  its  own  decline  as  due  to  its 
raithlessness  and  disoljcdienee.  It  saw  the  hand  of 
God  throughout,  even  through  suflering  and  failure, 
guiding  it  in  unexpected  ways  towards  the  better 
fulfilment  of  its  mission.  The  nation  became  a 
Church  ;  and  even  in  exile  and  dispersion  Israel 
still  bore  witness  to  its  God.  Then,  on  the  toj)  of 
Jill  this,  comes  Christianity.  Another  apparently 
insignificant  series  of  facts — the  Life  and  Death  of 
One  who  lived  as  a  peasant  in  an  obscure  comer  of 
the  Roman  Empire — is  followed  by  enormous  con- 
sequences. A  wave  of  religious  enthusiasm  jtassed 
over  an  exhausted  world,  and  its  veins  were  filled 
with  new  life  which  has  lasted  down  to  the  present 
day. 

2.  Revelation  in  word.  —  Ideally  speaking,  it 
might  be  suj)po8ed  that  the  historical  panorama 
roughly  sketciied  above  would  impress  itself  on 
the  mind  of  all  observers ;  that,  so  far  as  it  con- 
tained a  revelation  of  God,  that  revelation  would 
be  intuitively  apprehended.  But  to  expect  this 
would  have  been  to  expect  too  much,  especially 
when  we  think  of  the  poor  and  low  beginnings 
from  which  the  human  race  has  gradually  risen. 
It  has  always  needed  leaders  and  teachers.  Lar^e 
and  penetrating  views,  such  as  those  involved  m 
the  process  we  have  been  describing,  have  always 
belonged  to  the  few  rather  than  to  the  many,  and 
have  been  mediated  to  the  many  through  the  few. 
In  this  way  it  will  be  seen  that  revelation  by  facts 
has  had  to  be  supplemented  by  revelation  conveyed 
in  words.  The  facts  have  been  there  all  the  time  ; 
but,  apart  from  Divine  stimulus  and  guidance, 
working  upon  minds  sensitive  to  them,  the  great 
mass  of  mankind  would  have  allowed  them  to  pass 
unheeded.  The  pressure  of  mere  physical  needs  is 
so  great  that  ordinary  humanity  would  be  apt  to 
be  absorbed  in  them,  if  it  were  not  for  the  influence 
of  a  select  few  more  highly  endowed  than  the  rest. 
But  these  select  few  have  never  been  wanting — 
not  in  Israel  alone  but  in  every  race  of  men,  and 
conspicuously  in  those  races  that  we  call  the 
'higher.'  The  Divine  education  of  mankind  has 
always  worked  in  this  way — by  an  infinite  number 
of  graduated  steps,  leading  men  onwards  from  one 
truth  to  another,  from  truths  that  are  simple  and 
partial  and  rude  in  expression  to  other  truths  that 
are  more  complex  ana  more  comprehensive,  more 
nicely  adjusted  to  the  facts  which  they  embrace. 

There  is  thus  a  natural  transition  from  revela- 
tion by  fact  to  revelation  by  word.  The  fact  comes 
first ;  it  is  there,  so  that  all  who  run  may  read. 
But  it  is  not  read,  because  it  is  not  understood  ;  it 
is  a  bare  fact ;  it  needs  an  interpreter.  And  the 
interpretation  is  supplied  by  the  inspired  man  who 
speaks  and  writes,  who  seizes  on  the  secret  and 
then  publishes  it  to  the  world. 

3.  Apostolic  treatment  of  these  matters.— This, 
then,  is  substantially  what  we  find  in  the  OT,  and 
in  the  Jewish  writings  which  follow  upon  the  OT. 
The  prophets  and  psalmists  and  wise  men  lead  the 
way  in  expressing  the  feelings  aroused  by  the  con- 
templation of  God  in  Nature  and  in  history.  Such 
Scriptures  as  Ps  19^""  65  104,  Is  40'--"  are  spontane- 
ous outbursts  excited  by  the  external  world  ;  such 
passages  as  Job  38  39  (cf.  2  Mac  9*)  enforce  the 
lesson  of  Ps  S*'- ;  Ps  77"-»  105  106,  Hab  3  are 
typical  retrospects  of  the  hand  of  God  in  Israel's 
history;  Pr  ^^•^\  Job  28,  Sir  24,  Wis  7  8  are 
equally  typical  examjdes  of  the  praise  of  Divine 
AVisdom  as  expressed  m  creation  and  in  the  order- 
ing of  human  life. 

All  this  the  apostolic  writers  inherited,  and  they 
go  a  step  further  in  philosophizing  upon  it.  They 
not  only  give  expression  to  the  feelings  which  the 
contemplation  of  the  works  of  God  excites  in  tbeni, 


IXSPIRATIOX  AJ^iD  RFT^TXATIOX 


IXSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION    613 


but  they  distinctly  recognize  the  difterent  forms  of 
external  revelation  as  pariaof  the  method  of  Divine 
Providence  in  dealing  \vith  men.  The  most  instruc- 
tive passages  from  this  point  of  view  are  to  be 
founci  in  the  speeches  of  Acts,  both  in  those  ad- 
dressed to  heathen  (as  in  Ac  14"*""  17-"")  and  in 
those  addressed  to  Jews  (as  in  Ac  7  13'*-*M.  "We 
need  not  enter  into  the  question  how  far  these 
speeches  represent  what  was  actually  spoken  on 
the  occasions  referred  to,  and  how  far  they  embody 
what  the  historian  thought  appropriate  to  those 
occasions.  A  comparison  of  tne  speeches  attri- 
buted to  St.  Paul  with  the  contents  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles  would  suggest  that,  however  much  the 
shaping  of  the  discourse  may  be  due  to  the  his- 
torian, he  probably  had  before  him  some  authentic 
notes  or  traditions  of  the  discourses  actually  de- 
livered (cf.  JThSt  xi.  [1910]  171-173).  In  any  case, 
the  views  expressed  seem  to  have  been  practically 
common  to  all  the  leaders  of  Christian  thought. 
We  may,  therefore,  proceed  to  set  them  forth  with- 
out discriminating  between  different  circles.  At 
the  same  time  the  major  jjart  of  the  extant  evidence 
is  derived  (mediately  or  immediately)  from  St.  Paul, 
(rt)  0/  the  revelation  of  God  in  Nature. — It  is 
to  be  noted  that,  although  St.  Paul  shared  to  the 
full  his  countrymen's  horror  of  idolatry — both  as 
inherently  wrong  in  itself  and  because  of  its  cor- 
rupting influences — he  nevertheless  clearly  recog- 
nized the  elements  of  good  in  heathen  religions, 
and  regarded  them  as  having  a  place  in  the  wider 
order  of  Divine  Pro\-idence.  The  heathen,  too — 
with  God's  revelation  of  Himself  in  Nature  before 
them — had  ample  opportunities  of  knowing  God, 
and  it  was  only  by  their  own  deliberate  fault  that 
they  suppressed  and  ignored  this  knowledge  (Ro 

118-21). 

And  yet  all  was  not  lost.  God  had  implanted 
in  the  human  breast  the  desire  for  Himsell ;  men 
were  seeking  Him,  if  haply  they  might  feel  after 
Him  and  find  Him  ;  even  pagan  poets  had  realized 
that  mankind  was  His  offspring  (Ac  17^'^).  He 
took  care  that  they  should  not  be  left  without 
witness  to  His  goodness,  in  that  He  gave  them 
from  heaven  rains  and  fruitful  seasons,  filling  their 
hearts  with  food  and  gladness  (14"). 

We  observe  how  the  Apostle  singles  out  at  once 
the  best  and  the  most  prominent  side  of  pagan 
religion,  making  abstraction  of  its  worst  features. 
The  most  urgent  of  human  needs  was  that  the 
earth  should  bring  forth  fruits  in  their  seasons. 
Men  were  conscious  of  this,  and  they  were  really 
thankful  for  the  bounty  of  Nature.  At  the  bottom 
of  most  of  the  pagan  cults  that  prevailed  over  the 
East— as,  for  instance,  in  the  wide-spread  worship 
under  the  names  of  Osiris,  Adonis,  Attis — was  the 
celebration  of  see<l-time  and  harvest.  What  there 
was  of  evil  mixed  up  with  such  worship  was  a  pro- 
duct of  the  root  of  evil  in  the  human  heart,  and 
was  capable  of  being  eliminated  without  loss  to 
the  fundamental  idea. 

The  revelation  of  God  in  Nature  was  thus  not 
altogetlier  in  vain.  And  there  was  another  form 
of  revelation  which  came  really  imder  this  head. 
There  was  a  certain  reflexion  of  God  in  the  heart 
of  man :  HLs  wUl  was  made  known  through  the 
conscience.  And  here,  too,  there  was  many  a 
pagan  who,  though  without  the  privileges  which 
the  Jew  enjoyed  through  the  possession  of  a  written 
law,  faithfully  observed  such  inner  law  as  he  had. 
St.  Paul  fully  recognized  this,  and  used  it  as  an 
a  fortiori  argument  addressed  to  his  own  Jewish 
converts,  and  to  those  whom  he  desired  to  make 
his  converts. 

Another  point  that  may  be  worth  noting  is  that, 
when  St.  Paul  appeals  to  the  revelation  of  God  in 
Nature,  he  singles  out  in  particular  those  attri- 
butes of  God  as  revealed  which  the  impression 


derivetl  from  Nature  is  l»est  calculated  to  convey  : 
'  the  invisible  things  of  him  since  the  creation  of 
the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  perceived  through 
the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  everlasting 
power  and  divinity'  (Ro  1»;  cf.  Wis  13^.  The 
truths  that  Nature  can  tell  us  about  God  are  not 
the  whole  truth  ;  it  can  tell  us  of  His  power  and 
majesty  and  Divine  sovereignty,  but  it  cannot  of 
itself  make  kno^vn  the  inlinite  tenderness  of  His 
love.  Nature  has  its  destructive  aspect  as  well  as 
its  aspect  of  beneficence ;  and  even  Nature,  as  we 
see  it,  appears  to  be  infected  with  the  taint  which 
is  seen  most  conspicuously  in  man.  To  judge  from 
external  Nature  taken  by  itself,  it  might  well  seem 
that  a  malign  as  well  as  a  gracious  Power  was  at 
work  behind  it.  Caliban  on  Setebos  is  not  wholly 
without  reason.  For  a  complete  revelation  of  God 
we  must  supplement  the  data  derived  from  this 
source  by  those  Avhich  are  derived  from  history, 
and  especially  from  the  culminating  series  of  events 
in  all  history — the  events  bound  up  in  the  origin 
and  spread  of  Christianity.  It  is  these  pre- 
eminently, and  indeed  these  alone,  which  bring 
home  to  us  the  full  conviction  that  God  in  the 
deepest  depths  of  His  being  is  essentially  and 
unchangeably  Love.  (For  strong  indictments  of 
Nature  as  it  actually  exists,  see  J.  S.  MUl,  Three 
Essays  on  Religion,  London,  1874,  pp.  28-31  ;  and 
the  hypothesis  of  a  Cacoda;mon  in  R.  A.  Knox, 
Some  Loose  Stones,  do.,  1913,  p.  25  f.) 

(b)  Of  the  revelation  of  God  in  history. — When 
the  apostles  or  Christians  of  the  first  generation 
preach  to  Jews,  their  preaching,  so  far  as  we  have 
record  of  it,  is  always  an  appeal  to  history,  some- 
times on  a  larger  scale,  sometimes  on  a  smaller. 
When  the  preaching  is  fullest  and  most  systematic, 
it  starts  from  a  survey,  more  or  less  complete,  of 
the  history  of  Israel  as  a  HeUsgeschichte  or  scheme 
of  Redemption,  predetermined  in  the  coimsels  of 
God  and  worked  out  in  the  history  of  the  Chosen 
People.  This  begins  of  right  with  the  choice  of 
Abraham  and  the  patriarchs  (Ac  7*'^*  13" ;  cf.  3^). 
Then  come  Moses  and  the  deliverance  from  Egypt 
(7^*"*)  and  the  royal  line  culminating  in  David 
{7«f.  1323  1518)  Uo'tii  Moses  and  David  prophesied 
of  One  who  was  to  come  in  the  aftertime — Moses, 
of  a  prophet  like  himself  (S-^-  7**) ;  David,  of  a  de- 
scendant of  his  own  who  should  not  see  corruption 
(.22S-31  1334-J7),  This  leads  on  to  a  bold  affirmation 
of  the  fulfilment  of  these  and  of  other  prophecies 
in  the  Life,  Death,  and  Resurrection  of  Christ 
^cy^-n  313-13.  a*  los^-B  13:3-37  26^  23)_     In  the  Epistles 

especial  stress  is  laid  upon  the  two  salient  facts  of 
the  Crucifixion  and  the  Resurrection  (1  Co  15^, 
Ro  4^*,  and  in  many  other  places).  These  two 
great  acts  have  a  significance  beyond  themselves, 
as  the  basis  and  guarantee  of  the  Christian's  hope 
of  salvation.  The  historic  scheme  is  completed  by 
the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  itself  also  a 
fulfilment  of  prophecy  (Ac  2^*"^^). 

The  long  series  of  historical  facts  is  given,  and, 
taken  together,  they  constitute  a  broad,  definite, 
objective  revelation.  But  if  that  revelation  had 
remained  alone  without  comment  and  interpreta- 
tion, it  would  have  passed  unregarded,  or  at  least 
imperfectly  realized  and  understood. 

(c)  It  is  at  this  point  that  the  other  form  of 
revelation  comes  in — revelation  by  word.  And  at 
the  same  point  we  may  also  cross  over  to  the  con- 
sideration of  that  other  great  factor  in  our  subject 
— the  inspiration  by  which  the  revelation  is  con- 
veyed. There  is  what  may  be  called  a  classical 
passage  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  in 
which  the  two  conceptions  meet  in  a  way  that 
throws  clear  light  upon  both. 

B.  IssPlRATioy.—i.  The  fundamental  passage 
— 1  Co  2"'-". — We  cannot  do  better  than  begin  our 
discussion  of  inspiration  with  this  passage,  which 


614    INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION 


INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION 


must  be  given  in  full  :  •  We  speak  God's  wiwloni 
in  a  mystery,  even  the  windoni  that  liath  lieen 
hidden,  which  God  foreordained  Vjefore  the  worlds 
unto  our  glory :  which  none  of  the  rulers  of  this 
world  knoweth  :  for  had  they  known  it,  they  would 
not  have  crucified  the  Lord  of  glory  :  l)ut  as  it  is 
written,  Things  which  eye  saw  not,  and  ear  heard 
not.  And  which  entered  not  into  the  heart  of  man. 
Whatsoever  things  God  prepared  for  them  that 
love  him.  But  unto  us  God  revealed  them  through 
the  Spirit :  for  the  Spirit  searcheth  all  things,  yea, 
the  deep  things  of  God.  For  who  among  men 
knoweth  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of 
the  man,  which  is  in  him  ?  Even  so  the  things  of 
God  none  knoweth,  save  the  Spirit  of  God.  But 
we  received,  not  the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the 
spirit  which  is  of  God ;  that  we  might  know  the 
things  that  are  freely  given  to  us  by  God.  Which 
things  also  we  speak,  not  in  words  which  man's 
wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the  Spirit  teacheth ; 
comparing  spiritual  things  with  spiritual.  Now 
the  natural  man  receivetli  not  the  things  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  :  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him  ; 
and  he  cannot  know  them,  because  they  are  spiritu- 
ally judged.  But  he  that  is  spiritual  judgeth  all 
things,  and  he  himself  is  judged  of  no  man.  For  who 
hath  known  the  mind  of  the  Lord,  that  he  should 
instruct  him  ?    But  we  have  the  mind  of  Christ.' 

2.  The  two  modes  of  inspiration.  —  We  have 
seen  that  there  are  two  distinct  modes  of  revela- 
tion, which  may  be  called  primary  and  secondary, 
or  objective  and  subjective :  the  one  a  series  of 
facts,  the  other  embodying  the  interpretation  of 
those  facts.  Inspiration  corresponds  to  the  second 
of  these  modes ;  it  has  to  do  with  interpretation  ; 
it  is  the  process  bv  which  God  has  made  known 
His  nature,  His  will,  and  His  purpose  in  regard  to 
man.  But  there  is  some  diflerence  in  the  way  in 
which  inspiration  works,  according  as  it  is  (a) 
intermediate  between  the  series  of  facts  and  the 
interpretation,  dependent  upon  the  facts  and  co- 
extensive with  them,  or  (6)  as  it  were,  a  new  begin- 
ning in  itself — what  might  be  called  a  direct  com- 
munication from  God.  Speaking  broadly,  it  may 
be  said  that  the  prophetic  inspiration  of  the  OT 
was  mainly  of  this  latter  type,  while  the  Christian 
or  apostolic  inspiration  of  the  NT  was  mainly  of 
the  former.  Sucli  distinctions  are  indeed  only 
relative.  The  prophets  also  frequently  presuppose 
those  objective  revelations  through  Nature  and 
history  of  which  we  have  spoken.  And  yet  tlie 
great  difference  between  the  prophets  and  the 
apostles  is  just  this,  that  the  outstanding  Christian 
facts — the  Incarnation  or  Life,  the  Death,  and  the 
Resurrection  of  Christ — have  intervened  between 
them.  In  the  one  case  a  preparation  had  to  be 
made,  the  first  advances  hud  to  be  taken  and  the 
foundation  laid ;  in  the  other  case  the  foundation 
was  alre.-uly  laid,  and  the  chief  task  which  re- 
mained for  the  Christian  teacher  was  one  of  inter- 
pretation. We  shall  return  to  this  distinction 
presently,  when  we  try  to  map  out  the  course 
which  the  Christian  revelation  as  a  whole  has 
taken.  But  in  the  meantime  we  must  go  back  to 
our  fundamental  passage,  and  seek  with  its  help 
to  acquire  a  better  understanding  of  the  nature  of 
inspiration. 

3.  The  psychology  of  inspiration.  —  We  begin 
by  observing  that  the  passage  is  descriptive  speci- 
ally of  the  Christian  or  apostolic  inspiration.  It 
is,  indeed,  jwssible  to  generalize  from  it  and  to 
treat  it  as  applying  to  the  inspiration  of  the  OT 
as  well  as  oi  the  NT.  Yet  the  passage  implies 
throughout  what  we  have  callecl  the  Christian 
facts — the  whole  historical  series  of  revelations 
culminating  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  preaching  which 
the  Apostle  has  in  his  mind  has  for  its  object  that 
those  to  whom  it  is  addressed  might  know — i.e. 


intelligently  know,  grasp,  and  understand — the 
things  that  were  freely  given  to  them  by  God, 
the  whole  bountiful  purjwse  of  God  in  Christ,  the 
Incarnation  with  all  that  led  up  to  it  and  that 
followed  from  it  —  its  consequences  nearer  and 
more  remote. 

And  now  we  must  try  to  analyze  the  jjassage 
and  see  what  it  contains.  There  are  two  trains  of 
thought. 

{a)  The  knowledge  which  inspiration  imparts  is 
wholly  exceptional  and  sui  generis.  It  is  not 
possessed  by  the  worldly-wise  or  by  the  most 
jiowerful  of  secular  rulers.  It  was  their  ignorance 
of  it  which  led  to  tiie  terrible  mistake  of  not 
recognizing  but  crucifying  the  Messiah  when  He 
came.  It  is  a  knowledge — chiefly  of  values,  of 
values  in  the  spiritual  sphere,  of  the  spiritual 
forces  at  work  in  the  world.  The  knowledge  of 
these  values  is  hidden  from  the  mass  of  mankind. 
Any  criticism  of  those  who  possess  it  by  those  who 
do  not  possess  it  is  futile.  It  is  as  if  the  critics 
were  devoid  of  a  natural  sense — like  the  varied 
hues  of  Nature  to  the  colour-blind,  or  the  world  of 
musical  sound  to  those  who  have  no  ear.  The 
expert  in  this  new  knowledge  stands  apart  by 
himself :  he  can  judge,  but  he  cannot  be  judged ; 
he  is  superior  to  the  world  around  him. 

(fj)  If  it  is  asked  how  he  came  by  this  know- 
ledge, the  answer  is  that  it  was  imparted  to  him 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  acting  upon  his  own  spirit.  It 
is  a  well-known  peculiarity  of  the  psychology  of 
St.  Paul  that  he  often  mentions  the  Divine  Spirit 
and  the  human  spirit  together  in  such  a  way  that 
they  seem  to  run  into  each  other.  It  is  often  hard 
to  tell  whether  '  spirit '  should  be  spelt  with  a 
capital  or  not ;  the  thought  passes  backwards  and 
forwards  with  the  finest  shades  of  tr.ansition.  A 
good  example  may  be  seen  in  several  passages  of 
Ro  8 :  c.(^.  v.'*'-  :  '  But  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  but 
in  the  spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelletli 
in  you.  But  if  any  man  hath  not  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  he  is  none  of  his.  And  if  Christ  is  in  you, 
the  body  is  dead  because  of  sin  ;  but  the  spirit  is 
life  because  of  righteousness';  and  again,  v."'-: 
'  For  as  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
these  are  sons  of  God.  For  ye  received  not  the 
spirit  of  bondage  again  unto  fear  ;  but  ye  received 
the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba, 
Father.'  In  the  former  passage,  the  domination 
of  the  spiritual  part  or  higher  self  of  man  is 
brought  about  by  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  of  God 
(or  of  Christ)  which  is  described  as  'dwelling  in 
liim,'  and  the  result  is  that  the  human  spirit  is 
instinct  Avith  life  and  immortality,  and  triumphs 
over  death.  In  the  latter  passage,  a  like  operation 
of  the  Divine  Spirit  results  in  an  attitude  of  the 
human  spirit ;  without  any  line  of  demarcation 
between  to  indicate  where  the  one  ends  and  the 
other  begins.  The  reason  for  these  subtle  transi- 
tions would  seem  to  be  that,  while  the  subject  of 
them  is  conscious  of  Divine  influence  within  him, 
that  influence  is  felt  in  a  part  of  his  being  which  is 
beyond  the  reach  of  conscious  analysis ;  it  is  one 
of  those  sub-conscious  and  unconscious  motions 
which  are  known  only  by  their  eflects  and  do  not 
come  within  the  cognizance  of  the  reflective 
reason.  There  is  something  more  than  an  affinity 
between  the  human  spirit  and  the  Divine ;  when 
the  one  is  in  contact  with  the  other,  it  is  beyond  our 
power  to  distinguish  the  point  of  junction  or  to  .say 
with  dogmatic  precision,  'Thus  far  and  no  further.' 

Sviien  it  is  said  that  the  Spirit  searches  the  deep 
things  of  God  and  then  bestows  a  knowledge  of 
tliese  deep  things  on  men,  it  is  not  meant  that 
there  Is  a  mechanical  transference  of  information. 
Tlie  process  is  dynamic,  and  not  mechanical. 
What  is  meant  is  that  the  same  Holy  Spirit  which 
mirrors,  as  it  were,  the  consciousness  of  Deity,  so 


INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION 


INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION   615 


acts  upon  the  htuiian  faculties,  so  stimulates  and 
directs  them,  as  to  produce  in  them  a  conscious- 
ness of  God  which  is  after  its  own  pattern.  The 
self-consciousness  of  God  must  needs  be  in  itself 
altogether  transcendent  and  incommunicable  ;  the 
reflexion  of  it  in  the  heart  of  man  is  not  absolute, 
but  rel.ative ;  it  is  expressed  in  human  measures ; 
it  is  still  a  reaching  forth  of  the  human  soul  to- 
wards Go<l,  feeling  after  Him  if  haply  it  may  find 
Him.  But  it  is  such  a  reaching  forth  as  is  icord  ffedv 
(Ro  8^),  what  God  would  have  it  to  be,  a  human 
product  stamped  with  Divine  sanction  and  approval. 

4.  Prophetic  inspiration. — The  above  is  an  ex- 
planatiou — so  far  as  explanation  can  be  given — of 
the  process  of  inspiration.  It  really  covers  all  the 
varied  forms  that  inspiration  can  take.  But  it  is 
natural  to  ask  in  what  relation  it  stands  to  the 
prophecy  of  the  OT. 

The  prophetic  inspiration  is  really  the  outstand- 
ing phenomenon  of  the  OT.  It  is  the  fundamental 
attribute  which  gives  to  the  OT  its  character  as  a 
sacred  book  ;  it  marks  the  point  at  which  God  meets 
man  ;  it  is  Israel's  most  characteristic  possession. 

Comparing  what  we  know  of  OT  prophecy  with 
the  account  just  given  of  inspiration  by  St.  Paul, 
there  is  nothing  that  clashes  or  is  essentially 
diflerent.  It  is  only  the  difference  of  a  simpler 
and  a  more  advanced  dispensation.  OT  prophecy 
is  best  known  by  its  eflects.  The  main  note  of  it 
is  that  certain  men  spoke  with  an  authority  con- 
ferred upon  them  directly  by  God  ;  they  were  em- 
powered to  say,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord.'  In  the 
earlier  documents  stress  is  frequently  laid  on  the 
giving  of  '  signs '  as  proofs  that  a  prophet's  mission 
is  from  God  (Ex  i^<^-  ^^-,1  S  2»»,  1  K  13^  2  K  19-=' 
20*''-,  Is  T^"*-)?  and  a  test  is  laid  down  for  distin- 
guishing true  from  false  prophecy  in  Dt  18^'-.  But 
in  the  days  when  prophecy  was  most  active  the 
conhdence  (■ir\ripo(popia)  with  which  the  prophet 
spoke  would  seem  to  have  been  taken  as  creden- 
tials enough.  Even  when  the  prophet  was  un- 
popular and  his  message  was  resisted  by  king  or 
people  (as  in  the  case  of  Micaiah  and  Jeremiah),  it 
was  with  an  uneasy  conscience  and  with  a  sense  of 
revolt  against  the  Divine  will. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  existence  of  a 
prophetic  order  is  characteristic  of  the  NT  as  well 
as  of  the  OT.  We  read  in  Ac  13'  of  '  prophets  and 
teachers '  as  collected  at  Antioch.  Individual  pro- 
phets are  repeatedly  mentioned,  as  Agabus  in 
Ac  11^  21'*^,  Judas  and  Sila.s  in  15^-,  the  daughters 
of  Philip  in  2P.  A  passage  like  IS-'-  supplies  the 
key  to  others  such  as  16"-  20^ ;  when  it  is  said 
that  '  the  Holy  Ghost '  or  '  the  Spirit  of  Jesus ' 
forbade  such  and  such  an  act,  or  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  '  testified '  to  such  and  such  an  eftect,  what 
is  meant  is  the  Holy  Ghost  speaking  by  the  mouth 
of  inspired  prophets.  In  the  Epistles  '  prophets ' 
are  frequently  mentioned  along  with,  but  after, 
'apostles'  as  a  standing  office  in  the  Church  (1  Co 
12^-,  Eph  2--»  3'  4").  The  diflerence  between  OT 
and  NT  prophets  lies,  not  in  the  nature  of  the 
gift  or  of  the  functions  in  which  it  was  exercised, 
but  only  in  the  comparative  degree  of  their  import- 
ance. The  NT  prophets  M-ere  overshadowed  by 
the  apostles,  who  possessed  the  special  qualifica- 
tion of  having  been  in  the  immediate  company  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  {Ac  I''"-).  Those  who  are  men- 
tioned expressly  as  '  prophets  '  occupy  as  a  rule  a 
secondary,  rather  than  a  primary,  place  in  the 
history  of  the  Church.  At  the  same  time  it  was 
quite  possible  for  an  apostle,  and  even  a  leading 
a[)ostle  like  St.  Paul,  to  be  endowed  with  the  gift 
of  prophecy  along  with  other  gifts  (cf.  1  Co  14'»'-). 

5.  Apostolic  inspiration.— We  may  really  couple 
together  '  apostles '  and  '  prophets '  as  representing 
the  characteristic  forms  of  inspiration  in  apostolic 
times.     But  this  inspiration  must  not  be  thought 


of  as  sometliing  isolated.  It  was  not  a  peculiar 
and  exceptional  phenomenon  standing  by  itself ;  it 
was  rather  the  culminating  point,  or  one  of  the 
culminating  points,  in  a  wide  movement.  This 
movement  dates  in  its  outward  manifestation  from 
Pentecost ;  it  was  what  we  should  call  in  modem 
phrase  a  '  wave '  of  religious  enthusiasm,  the 
greatest  of  all  such  waves  that  history  records, 
and  the  one  that  had  most  clearly  what  we  call 
a  supernatural  origin.  Language  of  this  kind  is 
always  relative ;  it  is  not  as  if  the  su[jematural 
was  present  in  human  life  at  certain  periods,  and 
absent  at  others.  The  supernatural  is  always 
present  and  always  active,  but  in  infinitely  varied 
degrees  ;  and  the  Incarnate  Life  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  with  its  consequences,  is  an  epoch  in  the 
world's  history  like  no  other  that  has  ever  been 
before  or  since  ;  in  it  the  Spirit  moved  on  the  face 
of  the  waters  of  humanity  as  it  had  done  before 
over  the  physical  waters  of  the  Creation.  This 
particular  movement  was,  in  a  higher  sense  than 
any  before  it,  spiritually  creative. 

The  double  character  of  the  movement — a  super- 
natural impulse  and  energy  working  upon  and 
through  natural  human  faculties — is  well  brought 
out  in  1  Th  2'^  :  '  For  this  cause  we  also  thank  God 
without  ceasing,  that,  when  ye  received  from  ns 
the  word  of  the  message,  even  the  word  of  God,  ye 
accepted  it  not  as  the  Avord  of  men,  but,  as  it  is  in 
truth,  the  word  of  God,  which  also  worketh  in  you 
that  believe.'  With  this  should  be  taken  the  con- 
text immediately  preceding,  which  shows  how  the 
Apostle  concentrated  all  the  gifts  of  sympathy  and 
interest  with  which  he  was  so  richly  endowed  upon 
the  service  of  his  converts.  He  moved  among 
them  as  a  man  among  men ;  and  yet  they  were 
conscious  that  there  were  Divine  forces  behind 
him.  They  were  conscious  that  he  was  an  instru- 
ment in  the  hand  of  God,  the  medium  or  vehicle  of 
a  Divine  message — a  message  that  was  in  its  ulti- 
mate source  none  the  less  Divine  because  it  was 
shaped  by  a  human  mind  acting  in  accordance  with 
its  own  proper  laws. 

Another  very  vivid  picture  of  the  apostolic 
ministry  is  given  in  1  Co  2'"^ :  '  And  I,  brethren, 
when  I  came  unto  you,  came  not  with  excellency 
of  speech  or  of  wisdom,  proclaiming  to  you  the 
mystery  of  God.  For  I  determined  not  to  know 
anything  among  yon,  save  Jesus  Christ,  and  him 
crucified.  .4nd  I  was  with  you  in  weakness,  and 
in  fear,  and  in  much  trembling.  And  my  speech 
and  my  preaching  were  not  in  persuasive  words  of 
Avisdom,  but  in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit  and  of 
power:  that  your  faith  should  not  stand  in  the 
wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the  power  of  God.'  The 
Apostle  here  discriminates,  and  the  distinction  is 
constantly  present  to  his  mind,  between  the  re- 
sources which  he  brings  to  his  work  as  man  and 
the  effect  which  he  is  enabled  to  produce  by  the 
help  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  He  is  nothing  of  an 
orator ;  he  has  none  of  the  arts  of  rhetoric  ;  when 
he  first  preached  at  Corinth,  he  was  in  a  state  of 
utter  physical  prostration.  But  all  this  only  threw 
into  stronger  relief  the  success  which  he  owed  to  a 
Power  Ijeyond  himself ;  the  wisdom  and  the  force 
with  which  he  spoke  were  not  his  but  God's. 

Besides  these  Pauline  passages  there  is  another 
classical  passage  outside  the  writings  of  St.  Paul. 
This  is  contained  in  the  opening  verse  and  a  half 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews :  'God,  having  of 
old  time  in  many  portions  and  in  many  modes 
spoken  unto  the  fathers  in  the  prophets,  hath  at 
the  end  of  these  days  spoken  unto  us  in  his  Son.' 
Here  we  have  a  historical  retrospect  of  the  whole 
course  of  revelation  and  inspiration.  The  history 
is  mapped  out  in  two  great  periods.  There  is  the 
period  of  revelation  by  inspired  men ;  and  over 
against  this  there  is  the  great  concentrated  and 


616     INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION        INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION 


crowning  revelation  by  Him  who  is  not  a  prophet 
of  God  but  His  Son. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  each  case  the  pre- 
position used  is  not  (as  in  AV)  '  by,'  i.e.  *  by  means 
of,'  '  through  the  agency  of,'  but  *  in '  —  in  the 
prophets  and  in  the  Son.  In  each  case  it  is  the 
same  internal  process  of  which  we  have  been 
speaking  above.  The  prophets  spoke  through  the 
operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  working  upon  their 
own  human  faculties.  The  Son  spoke  through  His 
own  essential  Deity  acting  through  the  like  human 
faculties  which  He  assumed  at  His  Incarnation. 
When  we  think  of  this  internal  process  we  are 
reminded  of  the  words  of  our  Lord  to  the  Samaritan 
woman  :  '  Every  one  tliat  drinketh  of  this  water 
shall  thirst  again  :  but  whosoever  drinketh  of  this 
water  that  I  sliall  give  him  shall  never  thirst ;  but 
the  water  that  I  shall  give  him  shall  become  in 
him  a  well  of  water  springing  up  into  eternal  life ' 
(irrjjT]  iidaros  aWofi^vov  els  fwJjv  alibviov,  Jn  4^*'  ^*). 
There  are  few  natural  objects  to  which  the  pro- 
cess of  inspiration  can  so  well  be  compared  as  to  a 
spring  of  wliat  the  Jews  called  '  living,'  i.e.  running, 
water.  The  cool  fresh  waters  come  bubbling  and 
sparkling  up  from  unknown  depths ;  they  gather 
and  spread  and  speed  upon  their  way  in  a  fertilizing 
stream.     Even  so  is  the  way  of  the  Spirit. 

We  observe  that  the  prophetic  revelation  is  de- 
scribed as  taking  effect  '  in  many  portions  and  in 
many  modes.'  This  brings  out  a  new  point.  It  is 
not  in  accordance  with  God's  methods  to  reveal  the 
full  truth  all  at  once.  He  has  revealed  Himself 
piecemeal,  in  portions,  a  bit  here  and  a  bit  there, 
'  line  upon  line  and  precept  upon  precept.'  There 
has  been  a  gradual  development,  a  development  in 
steps,  each  step  marking  an  advance  upon  what  had 
preceded. 

For  comprehensive  illustration  Ave  only  need  to 
turn  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Mt  5^-**).  This, 
it  will  be  remembered,  is  based  upon  an  authority 
no  less  venerable  and  commanding  than  the  Deca- 
logue. '  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  to  them  of 
old  time,  Thou  shalt  not  kill  .  .  .  Thou  shalt  not 
commit  adultery  .  .  .  Thou  shalt  not  forswear 
thyself  ...  ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said.  An 
eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth  ...  ye  have 
heard  that  it  was  said,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neigh- 
bour, and  hate  thine  enemy.'  And  then,  in  eacli 
case,  a  corrected  version  of  the  commandment  is 
given  ;  a  new  commandment  is  placed  by  the  side 
of  the  old  :  *  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  .  .  . 
but  I  say  unto  you  .  .  .'  The  last  of  these  com- 
mandments brings  home  to  us  in  a  very  vivid  way 
at  once  the  greatness  and  the  limitations  of  the 
older  inspiration.  The  old  version  was,  '  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbour,  and  hate  thine  enemy.' 
The  new  version  is,  '  Love  your  enemies  and  pray 
for  them  tliat  persecute  you.'  Again,  there  is  the 
well-known  incident  of  the  Samaritan  village  which 
in  accordance  with  the  Til  used  to  run :  '  And 
when  his  disciples  James  and  John  saw  this,  they 
said,  Lord,  wilt  thou  that  we  command  lire  to  come 
down  from  heaven,  and  consume  them,  even  as 
Elias  did  ?  But  he  turned,  and  rebuked  them,  and 
said,  Ye  know  not  what  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of. 
For  the  Son  of  man  is  not  come  to  destroy  men's 
lives,  but  to  save  them.  And  they  went  to  another 
village'  (Lk  Q^'^).  The  reading  may  not  be 
original,  but  the  sense  is  rightly  given  ;  the  longer 
version  does  but  expand  the  meaning  of  the  shorter. 
Such  instances  may  show  how  far  our  Lord  Him- 
self went  in  correcting  or  modifying  portions  of 
the  older  Scriptures,  which  in  their  original  con- 
text had  been  truly  inspired,  but  on  a  lower  level. 
It  is  difficult  to  exhaust  the  significance  of  this 
great  passage  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ; 
but  a  word  must  just  be  said  about  that  other 
phrase,  'In  many  modes.'    It  miglit  bo  takon  as 


including  the  different  classes  of  persons  through 
whom  God  spoke ;  not  only  prophets,  but  also 
psalmists  and  wise  men.  Tliese  classes  too  shared 
in  a  genuine  inspiration,  though  they  did  not 
exactly  use  the  special  fornmla  '  Thus  saith  the 
Lord.'  The  whole  nation,  as  the  Chosen  People,  was 
really  a  medium  of  Divine  communication,  though 
as  a  rule  such  communication  was  conveyed 
through  individuals  who  were  specially  inspired. 

Then  there  is  the  further  question  oi  the  manner 
of  the  communication.  There  is  a  large  body  of 
evidence  which  goes  to  show  that,  under  tlie  New 
Dispensation  as  well  as  under  the  Old,  the  Holy 
Spirit  made  use  of  vision  and  trance  and  dream. 
Some  of  the  examples — as,  for  instance,  those  from 
the  •  we-passages '  of  the  Acts — are  very  well  attested 
indeed.  Another  strong  example  would  be  tlie  vision 
of  the  Apocalypse,  though  that  is  probablj'  the  case 
of  a  book  basedupon  a  vision,  rather  than  co-extensive 
with  the  actual  vision.  The  book  itself  would  seem 
to  have  been  constructed  uj>on  literary  methods. 
That  would  be  another  instance  of  the  '  many 
modes.'  The  Gospels  are  really  a  new  and  special 
form  of  literature.  The  Epistles  are  of  more  than 
one  kind.  Some  are  what  we  should  call  genuine 
letters,  others  are  rather  treatises  in  the  form  of 
letters.  When  once  the  epistolary  type  was  iixed 
it  would  be  natural  to  employ  it  in  different  ways. 

Before  we  leave  the  passage  from  Hebrews,  we 
must  go  back  to  the  main  point :  the  distinction 
between  revelation  '  by '  or  '  in  '  the  prophets,  and 
revelation  '  by  '  or  '  in  '  the  Son.  The  distinction 
is  sufficiently  explained  by  the  words  that  are 
used.  The  prophets  were  '  sjjokesmen '  of  God  ; 
the  Son  was  the  Son — none  other  and  none  less. 
His  inspiration  came  to  Him  as  the  Son.  It  was 
the  product  of  His  direct  and  constant  filial  com- 
munion with  the  Father.  The  nature  of  this 
inspiration  is  explained  in  that  other  famous 
verse  :  '  All  things  have  been  delivered  unto  me 
of  my  Father  ;  and  no  one  knoweth  the  Son,  save 
the  Father  ;  neither  doth  any  know  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth 
to  reveal  him'  (Mt  1P^  Lk  10"). 

For  a  further  exposition  we  may  turn  to  the  pro- 
logue of  St.  John's  Gospel,  where  the  correct  read- 
ing perhaps  is :  '  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any 
time  ;  God  only  begotten,  who  is  in  the  bosom  of 
the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him '  ( Jn  1'*).  The 
phrase  '  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father '  denotes 
exactly  that  close  and  uninterrupted  communion 
between  the  Son  and  the  Father  of  which  we  have 
been  speaking.  The  Son  is  admitted  to  the  inner- 
most counsels  of  the  Father ;  and  therefore  it  is 
that  He  is  able  to  communicate  them  to  men. 

6.  The  historical  setting.— When  we  were  quot- 
ing above  from  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
we  were  really  extracting  a  page  or  two  from  the 
autobiogi-aphy  of  St.  Paul ;  but  the  Apostle  gives  us 
plainly  to  understand  that  his  experience  was  shared 
by  many  other  Christians.  That  groupof  phenomena 
which  we  call  insjjiration  Avas  part  of  the  movement 
described  in  general  as  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  and  St.  Paul,  with  his  natural  bent  for 
analysis,  classifies  and  labels  the  different  forms  of 
manifestation  which  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  assumed 
(1  Co  12*'").  Some  of  these  concern  us,  and  .some 
do  not ;  but  the  '  word  of  wisdom,'  the  '  word  of 
knowledge,'  '  prophecy  and  the  discerning  of  spirits ' 
are  all  directly  in  point.  In  these  various  wavs 
the  men  of  that  day  might  have  been  seen  to  be 
carried  out  of  and  beyond  their  natural  selves ; 
and  we  possess  a  permanent  written  expression  of 
the  movement  in  the  books  of  the  NT.  The  gift 
(if  'speaking  with  tongues'  was  a  by-product  of 
the  same  movement. 

Like  all  other  spiritual  forces,  these  too  needed 
to  be  regulated  ;  they  needed  the  controlling  hand 


INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION        INSPIRATION  AND  REVELATION     617 


to  lit  them  in  orderly  fashion  into  their  place  in 
the  organized  life  of  the  society.  Left  to  them- 
selves, the  exuberant  outgrowths  of  spiritual  ex- 
altation were  apt  to  run  riot  and  cross  and  interfere 
with  one  another.  It  is  such  a  state  of  things  that 
St.  Paul  deals  with  in  1  Co  14.  From  a  chapter 
like  that  we  may  form  a  good  idea  as  to  what  the 
primitive  assemblies  for  worship  were  like  in  a 
community  that  was,  perhaps  rather  more  than  the 
average,  subject  to  religious  excitement.  The 
Apostle  lays  down  rules  w  hich,  if  observed,  would 
keep  this  excitement  within  due  bounds. 

Great  movements  such  as  this  which  we  have 
seen  to  be  characteristic  of  the  Apostolic  Age  do 
not  come  to  an  abrupt  end,  but  shade  off  gradually 
into  the  more  placid  conditions  of  ordinary  times. 
Hence,  though  it  was  natural  and  justihable  to 
regard  the  sphere  of  this  special  inspiration  as  co- 
extensive with  the  literature  which  claims  to  be 
apostolic,  the  extension  of  the  inspiration  to  the 
whole  of  that    literature  and    the  denial  of  its 

f)resence  in  any  writing  that  falls  outside  those 
imits,  must  not  be  assumed  as  an  exact  and 
scientific  fact.  The  Epistles,  e.g.,  of  Ignatius  of 
Antioch  are  not  inferior  to  those  which  pass  under 
the  names  of  2  Peter  and  Jude.  There  are  two 
places  in  the  Epistles  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the 
Corinthians  (lix.  1  and  Ixiii.  2)  which  appear  to 
make  what  we  should  call  a  definite  claim  to  in- 
spiration ;  and  Ignatius  reminds  the  Philadelphians 
(vii.  1)  how,  when  he  was  present  in  their  assembly 
he  had  suddenly  exclaimed,  under  an  impulse  which 
he  could  not  master,  '  with  a  loud  voice,  with  the 
voice  of  Gk)d:  "Give  heed  to  the  bishop,  to  the 
presbytery,  and  to  the  deacons.'"  He  clearly  re- 
garded this  utterance  as  prompted  by  the  Holy 
Spirit.  He  certainly  did  so  in  complete  good  faith  ; 
and  there  is  no  reason  for  disputing  his  claim,  any 
more  than  there  would  be  in  our  own  day  in  the 
case  of  one  who  spoke  under  strong  conviction, 
with  deep  emotion,  and  with  a  profound  sense  of 
direct  responsibility  to  God.  It  would  not  follow, 
even  so,  that  the  claim,  standing  alone,  was  in- 
fallible— it  would,  like  all  such  claims,  be  subject 
to  '  the  discerning  of  spirits ' — but  it  would  at  least 
have  a  prima  facie  right  to  a  hearing. 

7.  False  claims  to  inspiration. — As  in  the  case 
of  the  OT,  so  also  in  the  case  of  the  NT,  we  have 
to  reckon  with  false  claims  to  inspiration.  There 
were  prophets  who  were  not  deserving  of  the  name. 
In  both  Testaments  the  prophets  are  regarded  as 
forming  a  sort  of  professional  class,  which  contained 
unworthy  members.  There  is  more  than  one 
allusion  to  false  prophets  of  the  elder  dispensation 
(Lk  6=»,  2  P  2').  The  Jew  Bar-Jesus  (or  Elymas) 
is  described  as  a  magician  or  false  prophet  (Ac  13*). 
But  there  are  special  warnings  against  false 
prophets  (Mt  7"),  more  particularly  in  connexion 
with  the  troubled  times  which  precede  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  (Mk  13"  =  Mt  24--';  cf.  v."). 
False  prophets  are  a  fixed  feature  in  the  eschato- 
logical  scheme.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  must 
have  been  numerous  towards  the  end  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  (1  Jn  4^,  2  P  2>) ;  and  hence  it  is 
that  in  the  Book  of  Revelation  the  class  is  summed 
up  in  the  personification  of  the  False  Prophet  (Rev 
13Uff.  iQiu.  i9»  .2oio)_  The  dangers  from  this  source 
were  met  by  a  special  gift  of  discernment  between 
false  inspiration  and  true  (1  Co  12^'^). 

8.  Temporary  element  in  the  apostolic  con- 
ception of  inspiration.— The  apostolic  conception 
of  inspiration  did  not  difler  in  kind  from  that  which 
prevailed  in  Jewish  circles  at  the  time.     It  was  the 

Eroduct  of  reflexion  upon  the  earlier  period  of  the 
istory  when  prophecy  had  been  in  full  bloom. 
Under  the  influence  of  the  scribes  from  Ezra  on- 
ward, the  idea  of  prophecy  and  of  Scripture  gener- 
ally had  hardened  into  a  definite  theologoumenon. 


It  was  not  to  be  exi)ected  that  the  doctrine  thus 
formed  should  be  checked  by  strict  induction  from 
the  facts.  The  prophets  spoke  with  authority, 
which  they  claimed  to  be  Divine.  They  did  not 
enter  into  any  precise  psychological  analysis  in 
accordance  with  which  they  distinguished  between 
the  human  element  in  the  process  and  the  Divine. 
They  knew  that  the  impulse — the  overpowering 
impulse  and  influence — came  from  outside  them- 
selves. It  was  only  natural  that  they  should  set 
down  the  whole  process  to  this.  Thus  there  grew 
up  the  belief  that  the  inspired  word  was  in  all 
respects  Divine  and  endowed  with  all  the  properties 
of  uiat  which  is  Divine.  The  word  of  God,  whether 
spoken  or  written,  must  be  as  certain  in  its  opera- 
tion as  the  laws  of  Nature.  '  As  the  rain  cometh 
down  and  the  snow  from  heaven,  and  retumeth 
not  thither,  but  watereth  the  earth,  and  maketh 
it  bring  forth  and  bud,  and  giveth  seed  to  the 
sower  and  bread  to  the  eater ;  so  shall  my  word  be 
that  goeth  forth  out  of  my  mouth :  it  shall  not 
return  unto  me  void,  but  it  shall  accomplish  that 
which  I  please,  and  it  shall  prosper  in  the  tiling 
whereto  I  sent  it'  (Is  55^*'- )•  It  was  perfectly  true 
that  the  broad  Divine  purpose  as  such  was  in- 
fallible. But  it  was  a  further  step— and  a  mistaken 
step — to  suppose  that  every  detail  in  the  human 
expression  of  that  purpose  shared  in  its  infallibility. 
Yet  the  step  was  taken,  and  gradually  hardened 
into  a  dogma  (for  the  Jewish  doctrine  see  W. 
Bousset,  Die  Religion  des  Judentumsr,  Berlin,  1906, 
p.  172).  The  apostles  in  this  respect  did  not  difler 
from  their  countrymen.  The  infallibility  of  the 
Scriptures — and  indeed  the  verbal  infallibility — is 
expressly  laid  down  in  Jn  ICP  (where  the  Evangelist 
is  si)eaking  rather  than  his  Master).  Yet  the  as- 
sertion of  the  doctrine  in  this  instance  is  associated 
with  an  argument  which,  to  modern  and  Western 
logic,  is  far  from  infallible.  And  the  same  must 
be  said  of  St.  Paul  (Gal  3**),  where  he  argues  after 
the  manner  of  the  Rabbis  from  the  use  of  the 
singular  'seed'  instead  of  the  plural  'seeds.' 
There  is  more  to  be  said  about  the  minute  fulfil- 
ments which  are  so  often  pointed  out  by  St. 
Matthew  and  St.  John  (Mt  1-  etc.,  Jn  2^  etc.); 
on  these  see  esp.  Chevne,  Com.  on  Isaiah,  London, 
1S81,  ii.  170-189. 

Broadly  speaking,  it  would  be  true  to  say  that 
the  application  of  the  OT  by  the  apostles  shows  a 
deepened  grasp  of  its  innermost  meaning  (e.g.  St. 
Paul's  treatment  of  '  faith,'  of  the  election  of  Israel, 
the  call  of  the  Gentiles,  the  nearness  of  the  gospel 
[Ro  10^-]  and  the  like).  But  these  are  instances 
of  their  deepened  insight  generally,  and  are  not 
diflferent  in  kind  from  the  Rabbinical  theology, 
which,  though  often  at  fault,  from  time  to  time 
shows  flashes  of  great  penetration. 

Summary. — In  regard  to  the  conception  of  reve- 
lation and  inspiration  as  a  whole,  the  same  sort 
of  gradual  shading  oft"  is  to  be  observed.  The 
idea  itself  is  fundamental ;  it  must  hold  a  per- 
manent and  leading  place  in  the  mind's  outlook 
upon  the  world  and  on  human  history.  There  is 
a  certain  amount  of  detachable  dross  connected 
with  it,  but  the  essence  of  it  is  pure  gold.  And 
this  essence  is  not  to  be  too  closely  circumscribed. 
There  were  adumbrations  of  the  idea  outside  Israel. 
In  Israel  itself,  in  the  prophetic  order,  the  idea 
received  its  full  provisional  expression ;  but  the 
coping-stone  was  placed  upon  it  by  Christianity ;  God, 
who  in  time  past  had  spoken  to  the  Chosen  Race 
by  the  prophets,  at  the  end  of  the  ages  spoke,  not 
only  to  them  but  to  all  mankind,  by  His  Son  (He  1'). 

LrreRATXTRB. — The  present  writer  is  not  aware  of  any  work 
dealin?  specificaUy  with  the  apostolic  conception  of  Inspiration 
and  Revelation  :  but  on  the  general  subject  reference  may  be 
made  to  artt.  •  Bible '  and  '  Bible  in  the  Church '  in  ERE,'\o\. 
ii.  ;  to  B.  Jowett  on  'The  Interpretation  of  Scripture*  in 
Esxay*  and  Rteiftet,  London,  1S60 ;  G.  T.  Ladd,  What  U  the 


618 


intp:rcession 


INTERCESSION 


Bible  f.  New  York,  1888  ;  C.  A.  Briggs,  The  Bible,  the  Church, 
and  the  Benson,  Edinburgh,  18!}2 ;  R.  F.  Horton,  lievetation 
and  the  Bible,  London,  ISU'J;  W.  Sanday,  InKiiiration^ 
(Bampton  Lectures  for  ISOJ),  do.  ISQQ ;  B.  B.  Warfield,  artt. 
'"It  says":  "Scripture  says":  "God  says,"'  in  I'resb.  and 
Ref.  Review,  x.  [lSt>i»]  472 ff., and  '  "God-inspired  .Scripture,'"  in 
ib.  xi.  [1900]  89  ff.  ;  F.  Watson,  Inapiralion,  I^iidou,  1906;  J. 
Orr,  Revelation  and  Inspiration,  do.  1910 ;  A.  S.  Peake,  The 
Bible,  do.  1913 ;  W.  Koelling,  I'roleijomena  zur  Li-hre  von  der 
Theopnewstie,  Hreslau,  1890;  H.  Cremer,  art.  '  I napi ration,'  in 
PRE^  ix.  [Leipzig,  1901] ;  M.  Kahler,  Wisgemchaft  der  christl. 
Lehre,  Leipzig,  1905 ;  H.  Vollnier,  art.  '  Inspiration,'  in  RGG 
iii.  [Tiibingon,  1911];  also,  on  tlie  nature  of  Inspiration,  H. 
Gunkel,  Dii-  Wirknnaen  des  heiliyen  Geistett'^,  Gottin^cn,  1899  ; 
H.  Weinel,  Die  Wirkunyen  des  Geistes  und  der  Geuter,  Frei- 
burg i.  13.,  1899 ;  P.  Volz,  Der  Geixt  Gottes,  Tiibingen,  1910. 

W.  Sanday. 

INTERCESSION.— Tlie  word  Ivrev^n,  translated 
'  intercession '  (1  Ti  2'  4"),  means  literally  '  drawiufj 
close  to  God  in  free  and  familiar  intercourse.'  But 
the  modern  use  of  the  word,  which  limits  the 
meaniiiji:  to  prayer  for  others,  need  not  obliterate 
the  original  meaning.  It  is  in  proportion  as  the 
person  praying  for  others  is  able  to  enlarge  his 
own  intercourse  witli  God  that  he  can  be,  like 
Moses,  Samuel,  Elijah,  able  to  uphold  others. 

In  the  NT  human  capacity  for  this  work  is  seen 
to  be  immeasurably  incre.'ised  through  the  example 
and  teacliing  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by  the  co- 
operation of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  intercedes  '  with 
groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered '  and  '  according 
to  the  will  of  God '  (Ho  8-*-  ^).  We  may  expect, 
therefore,  to  find  that  the  work  of  intercession 
will  grow  as  the  Church  grows,  with  great  widen- 
ing of  experience  and  influence.  The  enlarged 
teaching  of  St.  Paul  in  his  later  letters  corresponds 
with  the  facts  narrated  in  the  Acts,  where  inter- 
cessory services  are  quoted  at  all  great  crises.  The 
apostles  and  brethren  pray  for  guidance  in  the 
appointment  of  a  successor  to  Judas  (Ac  !-■*),  as 
when  they  appoint  the  Seven  (6"  ;  cf.  13^),  or  pray 
for  the  deliverance  of  St.  Peter  from  prison  (12^). 
The  farewell  prayers  with  the  elders  of  Ephesus 
(2(P),  and  the  Avhole  congregation  of  Tyre  (2P-  "), 
are  typical  in  all  probability  of  many  similar 
services. 

The  teaching  and  the  practice  of  the  mother 
Church  in  Jerusalem  are  retiected  in  the  Epistle  of 
James  (5^*),  where  the  prayers  of  the  elders  of  the 
Church  on  behalf  of  the  sick  are  definitely  en- 
joined ;  nor  is  sickness  of  the  soul  forgotten  in 
prayer  for  forgiveness  (5'"). 

1.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  help  our  imagination 
to  go  further  in  reproducing  the  method  of  inter- 
cession in  the  Apostolic  Church.  Intercession  is 
continually  linked  with  thanksgiving.  Making 
mention  of  the  Thessalonians  in  his  prayers,  he 
refers  to  their  faith,  hope,  and  love  (1  Th  1^- ^), 
and  their  acceptance  of  his  message  as  the  Word 
of  God  (2'^),  '  praying  exceedingly  that  he  may  see 
their  face  and  may  perfect  that  which  is  lacking 
in  their  faith '  (3'").  So  in  2  Th  I"  he  prays  that 
God  may  count  them  worthy  of  His  calling  and 
the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  glorified  in 
them.  In  response  he  asks  for  their  intercession 
that  '  the  word  of  the  Lord  may  run  and  be  glori- 
fied,' and  lie  himself  may  be  delivered  from  un- 
reasonable and  evil  men  (3^'').  There  is  a  striking 
phrase  in  2  Co  1",  when  he  has  received  the  good 
news  from  Corinth,  and  pictures  their  prayers 
for  his  deliverance  from  peril :  '  Ye  also  helping 
together  on  our  behalf  by  your  supplication  ;  that, 
for  the  gift  bestowed  upon  us  by  means  of  many, 
thanks  may  be  given  by  many  persons  on  our 
behalf.'  J.  A.  Beet  (ad  loc.)  translates  'from 
many  faces,*  a  graphic  word-picture  of  the  up- 
turned faces  of  the  whole  congregation. 

To  the  Roman  Christians,  whom  he  has  not  yet 
seen,  St.  Paul  writes  that  he  makes  mention  of 
them  unceasingly  (llo  1*'^^),  praising  God  for  their 
faith,  and  praying  that  he  may  be  enabled  to  come 


and  impart  to  them  some  spiritual  gift  of  grace. 
They  can  help  him  by  mutual  encouragement. 

In  Eph  I"*''-,  rejoicing,  as  always,  in  what  is 
fairest  in  the  character  of  his  friends,  he  prays 
that  they  may  have  '  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and  revem- 
tion,'  growth  in  that  knowledge  of  God  which 
alike  proves  our  efficiency  and  increa-ses  it  in  our 
use  of  His  revelation,  when  our  eyes  are  opened  to 
see  the  wealth  of  the  glory  of  Ilis  inheritance  in 
the  saints,  and  the  greatness  of  His  power.  He 
speaks  from  liis  own  experience  of  knowledge 
issuing  in  power. 

In  his  next  prayer  (Eph  S'-  "•")  St.  Paul  puts 
the  need  of  Divine  power  first  as  '  a  condition  of 
ability  to  iij)prehend  "  the  whole  range  of  the 
sphere  in  which  the  Divine  wisdom  and  love  find 
exercise'"  (Chadwick,  p.  290).  His  social  teach- 
ing here  is  noteworthy.  Every  family  is  enabled 
to  live  its  common  life  in  proportion  as  the  in- 
dividuals live  up  to  their  personal  ideal.  So  he 
prays  that  Christ  may  dwell  in  each  heart,  for  the 
strength  of  Christ  is  conveyed  only  to  those  who 
are  fully  strong  enough  to  know  the  love  of  Christ. 

Again,  writing  to  the  Colossians  (P"^*),  he  prays 
that  they  may  be  '  endowed  with  all  wisdom  to 
apprehend  [God's]  verities  and  all  intelligence  to 
follow  His  processes,  living  in  the  mind  of  the 
Spirit — to  the  end  that  knowledge  may  manifest 
itself  in  practice '  (J.  B.  Lightfoot,  ad  loc. ).  Hav- 
ing this  sure  grasp  of  principle,  he  can  dare  to  pray 
for  them  as  patient  and  long-suttering,  and  always 
thankful  despite  discouragement. 

In  Ph  P"  he  prays  that  love  and  knowledge 
and  discernment  may  inspire  them  to  approve 
things  that  are  excellent  with  a  pure  conscience 
that  offends  none,  and  a  life  filled  with  the  fruits 
of  righteousness. 

Thus  the  method  of  St.  Paul  is  exactly  parallel 
to  the  method  of  our  Lord's  High-Priestly  prayer 
(Jn  17**),  in  which  intercession  is  concentrated  first 
on  the  needs  of  those  given  to  Him  out  of  the 
world.  The  hope  of  the  future  depends  on  the 
strengthening  oi  Christian  centres  before  anytiiing 
is  said  about  those  '  who  shall  believe  througli 
their  word.'  The  beauty  of  the  Christian  life  is 
the  irrefragable  proof  of  the  truth  of  Christian 
teaching ;  so  it  is  to  uphold  the  ideal  of  Christian 
character  that  St.  Paul  prays  most  earnestly.  But 
this  does  not  mean  that  tiie  corporate  intercessions 
should  not  take  also  a  wider  range.  In  I  Ti  2"- 
he  exhorts  that  'supplications,  prayers,  interces- 
sions, thanksgivings,  be  made  for  all  men,  for 
kings  and  all  that  are  in  high  place,'  a  direction 
which,  as  we  shall  see  presently  in  the  letter  of 
Clement,  was  fervently  followed  in  the  Church  in 
Home,  from  which  city  he  wrote  this  last  Epistle. 

It  is  a  strange  commentary  on  this  teaching  of 
St.  Paul  that  Josephus  should  actually  ascribe  the 
origin  of  the  war  which  ended  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  to  the  refusal  of  the  Jews,  at  the  in- 
stigation of  Eleazar,  to  offer  prayer  for  Gentile 
rulers  (BJ  li.  xvii.  2). 

2.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (7^)  there  is 
an  important  passage  on  the  intercession  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  as  our  High  Priest.  '  In  the  glorified 
humanity  of  the  Son  of  man  every  true  human 
wish  fincfs  perfect  and  prevailing  exjjression'  (B.  F. 
Westcott,  ad  loc).  In  reliance  n\)on  Christ's  ad- 
vocacy as  both  social  and  personal,  the  writer 
naturally  asks  for  the  ]irayers  of  his  readers  (13'^''), 
and  especially  that  he  may  be  restored  to  theiu 
the  sooner. 

3.  In  1  John  (5")  intercession  is  regarded  as  the 
expression  of  j)erfect  boldness  in  prayer  which 
consciousness  of  a  Divine  life  brings  to  believers : 
'The  energy  of  Christian  life  is  from  the  first 
social'  (Westcott,  ad  loc.).  Its  prevailing  jwwer 
is  assured  on  behalf  of  all  who  sin  a  sin  not  unto 


intercp:ssion 


IXTERPRETATIOX 


619 


tleath,  sins  which  How  from  human  imperfection. 
In  regard  to  sin  whicli  wholly  sei>arates  from 
Christ,  the  Apostle  does  not  forbitl,  tliough  he 
cannot  enjoin  (v."). 

4.  The  teaching  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  follows 
the  lines  already  laid  down  by  the  NT  writers. 

(a)  Clement  j,'oes  to  the  root  of  the  troubles  at 
Corinth  when  lie  asks  that  intercession  should  be 
made  '  for  them  that  are  in  any  transgression,  that 
forbearance  and  humility  may  be  given  them '  (Ep. 
ad  Cor.  Ivi.).  And  he  shows  what  a  prominent 
place  in  the  eucharistic  prayers  of  the  Church  was 
given  to  intercessions  (lix.):  'Save  those  among 
us  who  are  in  tribulation ;  have  mercy  on  the 
lowly  ;  lift  up  the  fallen ;  show  Thyself  unto  the 
needy ;  heal  the  ungodly ;  conveii;  the  wanderers 
of  Thy  people ;    feed    the    hungry ;    release  our 

Erisoners  ;  raise  up  the  meek  ;  comfort  the  faint- 
ear  ted.  Let  all  the  Gentiles  know  that  Thou  art 
God  ahme,  and  Jesus  Christ  is  Thy  Son,  and  we 
are  Thy  people  and  the  sheep  of  Thy  pasture.' 

The  prayer  for  rulers  and  governors  may  also  be 
quoted  (Ixi.)  :  '  Grant  unto  them  therefore,  O  Lord,- 
health,  peace,  concord,  stability,  that  they  may 
administer  the  government  which  Thou  hast  given 
them  without  failure.  .  .  .  Do  Thou,  Lord,  direct 
their  counsel  according  to  that  which  is  good  and 
well-pleasing  in  Thy  sight,  that,  administering  in 
peace  and  gentleness  with  godliness  the  power 
which  Thou  hast  given  them,  they  may  obtain 
Thy  favour.' 

(6)  The  joy  of  intercession  finds  striking  expres- 
sion in  Hernias  (Mand.  x.  3),  who  teaches  our  need 
of  cheerfulness  and  maintains  that  the  intercession 
of  a  sad  man  hath  never  at  any  time  power  to 
ascend  to  the  altar  of  God.  He  paints  also  in  the 
Parable  of  the  elm  and  the  vine  (Sim.  ii.)  the  diffi- 
culties of  the  rich  man,  who  in  the  things  of  the 
Lord  is  poor,  and  his  confession  and  intercession 
with  the  Lord  are  very  scanty,  because  he  is  dis- 
tracted alx)ut  his  riches.  As  the  vine  seeks  the 
support  of  the  elm,  let  him  help  the  poor  man,  who 
is  rich  in  intercession,  and  gain  the  support  of  his 
prayers. 

(c)  Turning  from  the  Church  in  Rome  to  the 
Church  in  Antioch,  we  find  Ignatius  on  his  way  to 
martyrdom  asking  for  intercession  in  the  Eucharist 
that  he  may  succeed  in  lighting  with  wild  beasts 
{Eph.  i.),  and  'for  the  rest  of  mankind  (for  there 
is  in  them  a  hope  of  repentance),  that  they  may  hnd 
God  '  (ib.  10).  He  requests  prayer  for  the  Church 
in  Syria  in  all  his  letters.  'For,  if  the  prayer 
of  one  and  another  hath  so  great  force,  how  much 
more  that  of  the  bishop  and  of  the  whole  Church ' 
(ib.  5).  To  the  Romans  he  writes  :  '  Only  pray  that 
I  may  have  power  within  and  without'  (ib.  3). 

These  quotations  may  suffice  to  show  how 
thoroughly  the  practice  of  intercession  was  carried 
out  by  the  primitive  Church. 

(d)  Aristidcs  in  his  Apology  says:  'I  have  no 
doubt  that  the  world  stands  by  reason  of  the  inter- 
cession of  Christians '  (ch.  16). 

(e)  In  the  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  (A.D.  155), 
viii.,  it  is  recorded  how  the  aged  Martyr  remem- 
bered '  all  who  at  any  time  had  come  in  his  way, 
small  and  great,  high  and  low,  and  all  the  Uni- 
versal Church  throughout  the  world.' 

(/)  A  little  later  Tertullian  wrote  these  beautiful 
words  (de  Orat.  29):  '[Christian  prayer]  has  no 
delegated  grace  to  avert  any  sense  of  suffering  ; 
but  it  supplies  the  sufiering,  and  the  feeling,  and 
the  grieving,  with  endurance :  it  amplifies  grace 
by  virtue,  that  faith  may  know  what  she  obtains 
from  the  Lord,  understanding  what — for  God's 
name's  sake — she  sutlers.  .  .  .  Likewise  it  washes 
away  faults,  repels  temptations,  extinguishes  per- 
secutions, consoles  the  faint-spirited,  cheers  the 
high-spirited,  escorts  travellers,  appeases  waves, 


makes  robbers  stand  aghast,  nourishes  the  poor, 
governs  the  rich,  upraises  the  fallen,  arrests  the 
falling,  confirms  the  standing.' 

LiTERATCRK.— A.  J.  Worlledge,  Prayer,  1902 ;  W.  H.  Frere 
and  A.  L.  Illingworth,  Surmm  Corda,  1905 ;  W.  E.  Chad- 
wick,  The  Pastoral  Teaching  of  St.  Paul,  1907  ;  see  also  under 
P«^^KK-  A.  E.  BUBN. 

INTERMEDIATE  STATE.— See  Eschatology. 

INTERPRETATION.  —  This  word  is  used  in 
difterent  senses  by  Christians  in  the  Apostolic  Age. 
(1)  St.  Paul  applies  it  to  that  spiritual  '  gift '  which 
enabled  one  to  expound  the  unintelligible  utterance 
known  as '  tongues '  (ep/xriveia  [  1  Co  12^"  14"'*],  diepfirjvevu 
[1  Co  12*'  145. 13. 27-]^  8iepfir,vevr^s  [1  Co  U^).  (2)  Later 
writers  'interpret'  a  foreign  word  by  giving  its 
Greek  equivalent  (epntjvevu  [Jn  1^  9',  He  7-],  Supurfv- 
(v(o  [Ac  9^],  fjiedep/jLvvevu  [Mt  1^3  Mk  5*^  15-  »*,  Jn 
138- «,  Ac  4^  138]).  When  Papias  calls  St.  Mark  St. 
Peter's  interpreter  {epfjL-nvevri^s  [Euseb.  HE  iii.  39]), 
he  may  be  supposing  that  St.  Peter  preached  in 
Aramaic  (or  Hebrew)  and  that  St.  Mark  translated 
the  sermon  to  the  Greek  audience.  This  is  histori- 
cally improbable,  hoAvever,  and  possibly  Papias 
means  only  that  St.  Mark,  since  he  composed  his 
Gospel  on  the  basis  of  St.  Peter's  sermons,  is  there- 
by St.  Peter's  'expounder.'  (3)  In  the  sense  of 
Scriptural  exposition,  the  word  '  interpretation '  is 
rarely  used  in  the  NT.  The  meaning  of  '  private 
interpretation '  in  2  P  I*  (iSlas  e-iri\v(X€oii)  is  doubt- 
ful, though,  in  view  of  what  follows,  it  seems  to 
signify  the  prophet's  complete  subordination  to 
God's  will.  In  Lk  24'^  (diepfirivsvw)  direct  reference 
is  made  to  Christian  interpretation  of  the  OT 
Ixjoks — a  practice  which  was  very  general  and  very 
important  in  the  apostolic  period. 

The  OT  occupied  a  unique  place  in  the  life  and 
thought  of  the  first  Christians.  St.  Paul  pre- 
supposed his  readers'  acquaintance  with  its  writ- 
ings, which  he  assumed  to  be  the  final  court  of 
appeal  in  all  argumentation.  Apollos,  whom 
certain  Corinthians  set  up  as  St.  Paul's  rival,  was 
also  'mighty  in  the  scriptures'  (Ac  18^^).  OT 
language  and  thought  are  frequently  appropriated 
by  the  NT  writers.  According  to  H.  13.  Swete 
(Introduction  to  the  OT  in  Greek,  Cambridge,  1900, 
p.  381  f.),  there  are  78  formal  quotations  in  St. 
Paul,  46  in  the  Synoptists,  28  in  Hebrews,  23  in 
Acts,  12  in  John,  and  about  a  dozen  in  the  remain- 
ing books.  Even  where  formal  quotations  are 
lacking,  OT  phraseology  is  sometimes  frequent 
(e.g.  Rev.).  The  early  Christians,  like  the  Jews, 
believed  in  the  Divine  origin  and  authority  of 
Scripture.  In  spite  of  his  breach  with  Judaism, 
St.  Paul  still  held  the  Law  and  the  Commandments 
to  be  holy,  righteous,  and  good  (Ro  7'-),  and  he 
repeatedly  affirmed  that  these  things  were  written 
'  for  our  sake '  (Ro  4-»'-  15^  1  Co  9^«-  1U«-  ").  Here 
he  found  a  clear  revelation  of  God's  purposes  and 
an  infallible  guide  for  Christians  in  matters  of 
conduct  and  doctrine  (cf.  Ro  1^  3^- 1"^-  43^-  8^  9«*- 
lQ6fl;  119f.  i6  1311  i5!»ff.  21^  1  Co  6i«  9^- 1*  IQi*  11^'-  14-1- « 
153. 40.  M^  2  Co  12»  3i=»'  6i«ff-  8^3  99,  Gal  38- 1*-  22).  The 
Evangelists  saw  in  the  OT  foreshadowings  of  Jesns' 
career  and  proof  of  His  Messialiship  (e.g.  Mt  l- 
•25.15.23  414  gi7  iiTff.  12"  1333  2P,  Mk   1=^-  4»"-  ll**- 

1.210f.  36  1427^  Lk  421  727  .2444^  Jn  1238  1525  1712  1924.  28.  36)^ 

For  Matthew  OT  prophecy  is  virtually  a  'source' 
of  information  about  Jesus'  career,  as  when  Mk 
11^'''  is  made  to  conform  to  the  first  evangelist's 
interpretation  of  Zee  9^  (Mt  21i-^  ;  see  also  Mt  1-^ 
2*'- 151^'- etc.). 

OT  language  serves  other  important  purposes  in 
the  Gospels.  God  speaks  in  this  language  at  Jesus' 
Baptism,  and  again  at  His  Transfiguration  ;  it  is 
used  in  the  conversation  between  Jesus  and  Satan  ; 
and  it  furnishes  phraseology  for  some  of  Jesus' 


620 


INTERPRETATION 


ISAAC 


most  forceful  and  solemn  pronouncements,  where 
sometimes  the  sound  of  Holy  Writ  seems  to  be 
prized  above  perspicuity  {e.g.  Mt  lO**"-,  Mk  4''^ 
12^  1534).  fhe  history  of  the  early  community  is 
also  Scripturally  authenticated  (Ac  1*  2'*"'-  4^*-)- 
Thus  the  NT  writers  derived  not  only  incidental 
and  descriptive  details,  but  on  occasion  more  im- 
portant features  of  tlieir  narratives  from  the  OT. 
riuH  was  only  natural,  since  these  sacred  books 
were  believed  to  be  inspired  of  God,  prolitable  for 
teacliing,  reproof,  correction,  and  instruction,  and 
able  to  make  njen  '  wise  unto  salvation '  (2  Ti  3""-  ; 
cf.  2  P  I'^f).  Christians  gave  to  the  OT  all  the 
prestige  it  had  in  Judaism,  Ijelieving  that  they, 
througli  their  faitli  in  Christ,  had  come  into 
possession  of  the  <mly  key  to  all  true  interpretation. 

The  exact  content  and  text  of  the  first  Christians' 
'  Bible '  are  not  known.  They  were  doubtless 
familiar  with  the  three-fold  division  of  the  Jewish 
canon — the  'Law,'  the  'Prophets,'  and  the  'Writ- 
ings '  (Lk  24^^  [?]),  but  they  probably  did  not  discuss 
questions  of  canonicity.  Iheir  feeling  of  spiritual 
elevation  left  no  room  for  such  academic  discus- 
sions. And  in  tlie  portions  of  Scripture  used  in- 
dividual choice  seems  to  have  had  free  play.  The 
evangelists  favour  the  Prophets  and  the  Psalms, 
while  St.  Paul  and  the  author  of  Hebrews  cite 
mainly  from  the  Pentateuch.  But  there  is  scarcely 
a  book  of  the  OT  with  which  some  NT  writer  does 
not  show  acquaintance.  Obad.,  Ezr.,  Neh.,  and 
Est.  are  the  only  exceptions  (according  to  Toy, 
Quotations  in  the  NT,  p.  vi,  n.  1).  Apocryphal 
books  and  popular  legends  are  also  used  (cf.  1  Co 
10^,  Gal  3'»,  Ac  7**,  2  Ti  3»,  He  2-  ll^^,  Jude^-*-"). 
Textual  problems  seem  to  have  been  ignored. 
Quotations  are  mostly  from  the  LXX,  though  use 
of  the  Hebrew  text  has  sometimes  been  supposed. 
This  is  very  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  prove, 
since  we  do  not  know  the  exact  form  of  Greek  text 
which  a  NT  writer  may  have  used.  A  part  of  the 
early  community  ordinarily  spoke  Aramaic  (Ac  6'), 
but  Greek  writers  naturally  followed  the  LXX 
rendering,  even  when  the  original  tradition  was  in 
Aramaic  or  Hebrew.  In  fact,  there  seems  to  have 
been  little  thought  about  slavish  adherence  to  any 
text.  Cliristians  possessed  a  superior  understan(l- 
ing,  whiclx  allowed  them  to  alter  phraseoloii:y,  to 
paraphrase  freely,  or  even  to  cite  loosely  from 
memory. 

Thus  tlieir  methods  were  more  spontaneous  than 
those  of  scribism,  yet  the  general  character  of  their 
internretation  was  predominantly  Jewish.  Its  free 
handling  of  the  text,  its  disregard  for  the  original 
setting,  its  logical  vagaries,  its  slight  tendency  to 
become  artificial,  were  all  Jewish  traits.  To  illus- 
trate from  tlie  NT,  Mk  1^'*  changes  the  wording  of 
prophecy  and  disregards  its  natural  meaning  in 
order  to  make  the  Christian  application  possible. 
A  logical  non  sequitur  is  illustrated  in  Mk  12-^'-, 
where  an  original  statement  about  the  historic 
earthly  career  of  Abraham  is  made  the  basis  for 
an  inference  about  his  future  heavenly  career. 
St.  Paul's  argument  from  '  seed '  and  '  seeds '  (Gal 
3'®),  his  comparison  between  Hagar  and  Sarah  (Gal 
A^*^-),  and  his  interpretation  of  the  OT  injunction 
against  muzzling  tlie  ox  (1  Co  9"'),  all  tend  to  be- 
come artificial.  Christians  appropriated  and  imi- 
tated Jewish  Midrajihim  seemingly  without  hesita- 
tion, as  when  St.  Paul  made  Cln'ist  the  spiritual 
rock  (1  Co  lO-*;  cf.  'Kabbah'  on  Nu  P).  They 
argued  from  word-derivation  (Mt  P'"^-),  and  from 
the  numerical  value  of  letters  (Rev  13'*;  cf.  art. 
'  Gematria '  in  JE) ;  and  they  freely  employed 
figures,  types,  analogies,  allegories  (q.v.).  They 
also  copied  the  more  sober  type  of  Haggadic  Mid- 
rashim.  Their  emphasis  upon  the  example  of  tlieir 
Master,  their  preservation  of  His  teaching,  their 
harking  back  to  the  ancient  worthies,  are  all  in 


line  with  Jewish  custom.  The  work  of  the  NT 
interpreter  is  not  so  very  unlike  that  of  the  ideal 
scribe  of  Sir  39"^-.  Yet  early  Christian  interpreta- 
tion did  not  run  to  the  same  extreme  of  barren 
artificiality  as  that  of  the  scribes,  nor  was  it 
pursued  merely  for  its  own  sake.  As  the  hand- 
maid of  the  new  faith,  it  was  subordinated  to  the 
consciousness  of  a  new  spiritual  authority  in 
personal  experience,  a  fact  wliich  may  explain  why 
Christians  were  partial  to  OT  pa.s.sages  dealing 
with  personal  religious  life. 

LiTKRATtiRB.— C.  H.  Toy,  Qwtations  in  the  NT,  New  York, 
1884,  where  earlier  literature  is  cited  ;  F.  Johnson,  The  Quota- 
tions of  the  A'ew  Testament  from  the  Old,  London,  18JKJ;  A. 
Clemen,  Ver  Gelrravch  de*  A  T  in  den  netUest.  Sehri/ten, 
(Jiitersloh,  1895;  E.  Hiihn,  Die  alltest.  Citate  vnd  Ilemiuiii- 
cenzen  im  NT,  Tiibiiigcn,  1!)(K);  W.  Dittmar,  I'etux  Teiita- 
tnentum  in  Novo,  Oottinfjeii,  I'.iO'.i;  E.  Grafe,  />«»  UrehrUi- 
tentum  und  das  AT,  Tiibingeii,  1007  ;  P.  Glaue,  hie  V'orletninij 
lieiliger  Schriften  im  Gottc^ienste,  i.,  lierlin,  IsXiT  ;  S.  J.  Case, 
'The  NT  Writers*  Interpretation  of  the  OT,"  in  BW  xxxviii. 
[1911]  92  ff.  The  more  general  treatises  on  Ilermeneutics 
usually  have  a  section  on  the  apostolic  period. 

S.  J.  Case. 
IRON  {ffiSrjpo^;  adj.  ffiSvpeoi). — Iron,  the  com- 
monest, cheapest,  and  most  useful  of  heavy  metals, 
is  mentioned  (Rev  18'*)  among  the  merchandise  of 
'  Babylon '  ( =  Rome).  The  Iron  Age  of  civilization 
succeeded  the  Ages  of  Copper  and  Bronze.  *In 
Egypt,  Chaldaia,  Assyria,  China,  it  reaches  far 
back,  to  perhaps  4000  years  before  the  Christian  era. 
Homer  represents  Greece  as  beginning  her  Iron 
Age  twelve  hundred  years  before  our  era '  (EBr^^ 
xiv.  [1910]  800).  Rome  was  supplied  with  iron 
from  India,  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea,  Spain, 
Elba,  and  the  province  of  Noricum.  The  apoca- 
lyptic Messiah  is  to  rule  the  nations  with  a  rod 
of  iron  (Rev  2""  12^  19'»),  a  symbol  of  inflexible 
justice  (cf.  Ps  29).  The  iron  gate  leading  from  the 
Fortress  of  Antonia  into  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
opened  to  St.  Peter  and  the  angel  of  its  own  accord 
{avTOfidri],  Ac  12'") ;  cf.  Homer's  avrd/JLarai  Si  irOXai 
fivKov  ovpavou,  8ls  ix°^  ^iipai  (II.  v.  749),  and  Virgil, 
jEn.  vi.  81  f.  James  Strahan. 

ISAAC  (IffaiK). — Isaac,  the  son  of  Abraham  and 
Sarah,  was  supoiior  in  a  variety  of  ways  to  his 
half-brother  Ishniael.  He  was  '  the  son  of  the  free- 
woman  '  (6  5^  iK  rrji  eXevd^pas,  Gal  4^  ;  rov  vlov  riji 
iXevd^pas,  v.**) ;  he  was  '  born  through  a  promise  ' 
(5i  eirayyeXias,  v.^)  given  to  his  parents  in  their  old 
age  ;  he  was  '  born  after  the  Spii'it '  (Kara  irvfCfia, 
v.^-*),  who  gave  the  i)roniise  and  i)erhaps  the  strength 
els  KaralioXriv  anipnaroi  (He  11")  ;  and,  as  the  true 
son — even  called  the  only-begotten  (rbv  fiovoyevrj, 
v.'^) — he  inherited  the  covenant  promises  given  by 
God  to  Abraham.  His  brother,  on  the  other  hand, 
was  '  the  son  of  the  handmaid '  (6  fikv  ^k  rrji  iraiSiaKi^i, 
Gal  4^  ;  6  vibs  ttjs  naiSiffKTjt,  v.**) ;  he  was  '  born  after 
the  flesh '  (6  Kara  ffdpKa  yevvijOfU,  v.^)  ;  and  he  could 
'  not  inherit  with  the  son  of  the  freewoman '  (v.**). 

St.  Paul  uses  the  relations  of  the  two  brothers  to 
their  father  and  to  one  another  to  help  him  to  make 
good  his  distinction  between  '  the  children  of  the 
promise,'  who  are  'reckoned  for  a  seed,'  and  'the 
children  of  the  flesh,'  who  are  not  '  children  of 
God '  (Ro  9*).  Grappling  with  the  problem  of  the 
incidence  in  his  own  day  of  tlie  promises  first  given 
to  Abraham,  he  contends  that  while  mere  Jewish 
birth  and  upbringing  do  not  constitute  a  claim 
of  right  to  sjjiritual  privileges,  no  barrier  except 
unbelief  can  prevent  the  Gentiles  from  inheriting 
them.  Compressing  his  teaching  into  a  single 
suggestive  sentence,  he  says :  '  We  [the  Christian 
Church],  like  Isaac  (Kard.  'IcradK),  are  children  of 
promise '  (eirayyeXlai  r^Kva,  Gal  4^ ;  cf.  tA  rixva 
riji  ^wayyeXlai,  Ro  9*).  Born  in  tlie  fullness  of  time, 
made  free  by  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  and  destined  for 
a  gi'eat  heritage,  the  Christians  of  every  land  are 
prefigured  in  Isaac.     'If  ye  are  Christ's,  then  are 


ISAIAH 


ISAIAH 


621 


ye  Abraham's  seed,  heirs  according  to  promise '  (Gal 
3^).  The  carnal  Ishmael,  who  in  tliLs  daring 
allegory  represents  orthodox  Judaism,  may  '  per- 
secute' the  Spirit-bom  Isaac  (according  to  the 
Itabbinic  interpretation  of  the  ori^nally  innocent 
word  '  playing '  in  Gn  21*) ;  but,  while  the  child  of 
the  freewoman  (the  Church)  is  established  for  ever 
in  the  Fatliers  house  by  a  covenant  of  grace,  the 
son  of  the  bondwoman  (the  Jewish  jpeople)  is  cast 
out.  If — as  Luther  says  on  Gal  4**—'  allegory  is 
not  ar^ment,'  it  may  at  least  be  extremely  effec- 
tive illustration.  The  Apostle's  strong  imagina- 
tion makes  the  simple  old  folk-tale  suddenly  flash 
with  new  meanings,  which  serve  to  illuminate  a 
complex  and  ditficult  modem  situation. 

Two  other  incidents  in  Isaac's  life  are  referred  to 
in  He  11  *■''•.  (1)  He  was  virtually  offered  up  as  a 
sacrifice  to  God  (cf.  Ja  2*') ;  in  a  figure  {ev  rapa^ok-g) 
he  came  back  from  the  dead,  passing  through  the 
likeness  of  death  and  resurrection  (see  ABRAHAM). 
(2)  By  blessing  his  son,  he  gave  evidence  of  his 
faith  concerning  things  to  come  {repl  fie\X6rTav). 
His  trust  in  God  made  future  possibilities  as  real  as 
present  certainties.  His  faith  corresponded  to  the 
definition  in  He  IP:  it  was  the  sutetantiating  of 
things  hoped  for  (iXri^ofiivwv  inr6<rraaii). 

James  Strahan. 

ISAIAH  ('H<ro?aj  or  'Ho-ataj,  Vulg.  Isaias,  in  the 
Fathers  also  Esaias). — Isaiah,  the  grandest  figure 
among  the  prophets  of  Israel,  is  named  3  times  in 
Acts  "(8^  »  28*)  and  5  times  in  Romans  (9^-  ^ 
1Q16.20  1512)  Nothing  is  said  in  the  NT  of  his 
personal  history,  except  that  i-rpiadTjcav  in  He  11*^ 
probably  alludes  to  the  tradition — found  in  the 
Ascension  of  Isaiah  (i.  9,  v.  1),  and  repeated  in 
Justin's  Trypho  (ch.  120,  rplon  ^vXlrtp  irpiffare) — 
that  he  was  sa^v^l  asunder,  a  tradition  which, 
though  not  incredible,  is  without  historical  value. 
Every  NT  reference  to  the  prophet's  name  is  ac- 
companied by  a  quotation  from  liis  writings,  which 
were  for  the  Apostolic  Age  the  words  tnat  'the 
Holy  Ghost  spake  by  Isaiah '  (Ac  28^).  Yet  cer- 
tain spontaneous  notes  of  appreciation  from  the 
lips  and  pen  of  St.  Paul  are  precious  as  indications, 
slight  but  real,  of  the  impression  made  upon  one 
master-spirit  bj'  the  writings  of  another.  '  Isaiah 
crieth'  (ic/>dj"et,  Ro  9^)  is  an  appraisement  of  the 
emphasis  of  his  utterance  ;  '  well  (or  finely)  spake 
the  Holy  Spirit  through  Isaiah'  (koXws  iXdXrjiTe, 
Ac  28'^)  expresses  hearty  sympathy  with  the  pro- 
phet's teaching  and  admiration  of  the  language  in 
which  it  is  conveyed  ;  and  '  Isaiah  is  very  bold ' 
('H<r(was  5^  a-roToX/tqi,  Ro  ICP)  is  one  spiritual  pro- 
tagonist's tribute  to  another's  personal  courage.  It 
needed  heroism  for  Isaiah  to  proclaim,  in  the  face 
of  Israel's  haughty  exclusiveness,  a  gracious  Divine 
purpose  which  embraced  all  the  Gentiles  ;  and  St. 
Paul,  whose  life-work  it  was  to  fulfil  that  purpose 
in  spite  of  fanatical  Jewish  opposition,  was  the 
man  to  appreciate  a  splendid  boldness  inspired  by 
great  faith. 

The  NT,  of  course,  makes  no  distinction  between 
a  First,  Second,  and  Third  Isaiah.  The  prophet's 
name  impartiallj-  covers  a  variety  of  ^v^itings 
which  criticism  now  pronounces  to  be  productions 
of  widely  different  periods.  He  is  eqnsQly  the  seer 
of  the  Root  of  Jesse  (Is  lli"  :  Ro  15**)  and  of  the 
suffering  servant  of  the  Lord  (Is  53^!'  Ac  8^).  It 
was  a  passage  in  '  Isaiah  the  prophet '  (ch.  53)  that 
the  Ethiopian  was  reading  in  liis  chariot  when  he 
was  joined  by  St.  Philip,  whose  interpretation  of 
that  mysterious  utterance — the  profoundest  in  the 
OT — in  the  light  of  Christ's  Passion  led  the  eunuch 
to  faith  and  baptism. 

Two  NT  ^mters  had  minds  steeped  in  the  pro- 
jihecies  of  I>aiah — St.  Paul  and  the  writer  of  the 
Apocalypse.  (1)  Tlie  siieeches  attributetl  to  St. 
Paul  in  Acts  furnish  e>'idence  of  bis  indebtedness 


to  those  writings.  When  he  announces  to  the 
Jews  cf  Pisidian  Antioch  his  epoch-making  decision 
to  'turn  to  the  Gentiles,'  it  is  in  an  utterance  of 
Isaiah  (49")  that  he  seeks  the  Divine  sanction  of 
his  action  :  '  I  have  set  thee  for  a  light  of  the 
Gentiles'  (Ac  13").  When  he  reasons  with  the 
Athenians  as  to  the  error  of  making  the  Godhead 
'  like  unto  gold  or  silver  or  stone,  graven  by  art 
and  man's  device '  (Ac  17^),  he  seems  to  eclio  the 
words,  if  not  the  ironical  tones,  of  the  prophet  of 
the  Exile  (Is  40").  His  experience  among  the  Jews 
of  Rome  reminded  him  of  what  befell  Isaiah  in 
Jerusalem  many  centuries  earlier.  Both  the  pro- 
phet and  the  apostle  seemed  to  be  sent  to  hearers 
impervious  to  Divine  truth,  who  cmild  not  be  con- 
verted and  healed.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
supplies  the  strongest  proof  of  St.  Paul's  absorp- 
tion in  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.  It  is  significant 
that  most  of  his  quotations  occur  in  the  chapters 
which  contain  his  philosophy  of  the  fall  and  rising 
again  of  Israel  (9-11),  and  that  many  of  them  are 
taken  from  Deutero-Isaiah.  His  doctrine  of  elec- 
tion inevitably  suggests  the  clay  and  the  potter 
(Ro  9*^  II  Is  45»).  He  is  helped  to  face  the  Jemsh 
rejection  of  the  Messiah  by  the  conception  of  the 
Remnant  {to  Karakfifi/xa,  Ro  9"  0  Is  10^) — a  concep- 
tion which  seemed  to  the  prophet  so  important  that 
he  gave  one  of  his  own  children  the  symbolic  name 
of  '  Remnant-sball-retum '  (Is  T').  The  thought  of 
Christ  as  a  stumbling-stone  to  the  Jews  is  parallel 
to  that  of  Jahweh  as  a  stumbling-stone  to  the 
houses  of  Israel  (Ro  9»  !l  Is  8").  While  the  uni- 
versal proclamation  of  the  gospel  suggests  the 
'  beautiful  feet '  of  those  who  preached  deliverance 
from  Babylon  (Ro  10'*  ||  Is  52^),  the  sadness  of 
speaking  to  deaf  ears  prompts  the  question,  '  Who 
hath  believed  our  report?'  (Ro  10"  ||  Is  53').  The 
prevenient  grace  of  God  excites  the  wonder  of  both 
the  prophet  and  the  apostle  (Ro  10^  |;  Is  61'),  and 
Israel's  present  insensibility  seems  to  them  both  a 
spirit  of  stupor  (Ro  11*  J!  Is  29"').  The  assurance  of 
the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  Israel  is  based  on  the 
advent  of  a  Deliverer  (Ro  11*  fl  Is  59*) ;  but  both 
writers  confess  a  reverent  agnosticism  in  presence 
of  the  mysteries  of  Divine  providence  (Ro  11**  |1 
Is  40").  The  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  also  prove 
the  affinity  of  these  great  minds.  Both  writers 
know  the  unprofitableness  of  mere  earthlv  wisdom 
(1  Co  l'»  II  Is  29'*,  1  Co  1*  I!  Is  38'8) ;  both  believe 
in  a  spiritual  creation  which  will  make  all  things 
new  (2  Co  5" !'  Is  43'«^) ;  and  both  of  them,  with 
all  their  breadth  of  outlook,  recognize  the  impera- 
tiveness of  separation  from  heathendom  (2  Co  6'"  I! 
Is  52").  Isaisih's  hope  of  immortality,  the  strongest 
that  is  found  (apart  from  Daniel)  in  the  prophetic 
writings,  is  used  to  clinch  St.  Paul's  great  argu- 
ment for  the  resurrection  of  the  dead — 'death  is 
swallowed  up  in  victory'  (1  Co  15**  Is  25®;  eU 
y'lKos,  which  takes  the  place  of  the  prophet's  'for 
ever,'  is  due  to  the  Aram,  sense  of  the  Heb.  word). 
(2)  The  other  NT  writer  who  especially  felt 
Isaiah's  spell  was  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse. 
His  Christ,  as  the  First  and  the  Last,  is  clothed 
with  the  attributes  of  Isaiah's  God  (Rev  1"  [\  Is  41* 
44*).  The  trisagion  of  his  living  creatures  was 
uttered  by  the  seraphim  in  the  heavenly  Temple 
(Rev  4*  i;  Is  6').  His  vision  of  the  rolling  up  of 
heaven  as  a  scroll  was  Isaianic  (Rev  6'*  11  Is  34*), 
and  his  exquisite  description  of  the  final  state  of 
the  blessed — 'they  shall  htmger  no  more  .  .  . 
wipe  away  every  tear  from  their  eyes ' — is  a  cento 
of  prophetic  phrases,  which  are  now  used  to  picture 
the  consummation  of  the  redemptive  work  of  the 
Lamb  (Rev  7'*'-  :  Is  49'"  2o«).  '  Fallen  is  Babylon ' 
— a  voice  of  scera  indignatio  reminiscent  of  Rome's 
own  '  Carthago  est  delenda ' — ^was  the  doom  of  the 
real  Babylon  before  it  was  pronounced  upon  the 
mystical  one  (Rev  14*  y  Is  21').     The  description  of 


622 


ISRAEL 


ISRAEL 


tlie  militant  Messiah  as  clothed  in  a  garment 
sprinkled  with  blood  is  suggested  by  the  attributes 
of  the  Hero  who  came  from  the  conquest  of  Edom 
(Kev  19'"  II  Is  63"^-).  The  desire  for  a  new  heaven 
and  a  new  earth  was  not  itself  new  (Rev  2V  ||  Is 
65'^),  and  tlie  ideal  city  is  depicted  in  Isaianic 
colours  (Rev  2V^-  -"■  11  Is  BO'"-  »•  ").  The  free  invi- 
tation witli  which  the  Revelation  properly  ends 
(22"*-'  being  a  harsh  editorial  jwatscript)  only 
echoes  the  words  of  welcome  uttered  by  the  evan- 
gelical prophet  (Rev  22"  ||  Is  55'). 

James  Strahan. 

ISRAEL. — Israel  was  the  nation  to  which  God's 
promises  had  been  given.  Generally  the  idea  of 
privilege  is  associated  with  the  use  of  the  word, 
just  as  '  Israel'  was  originally  the  name  of  special 
privilege  given  by  God  to  Jacob,  the  great  ancestor 
of  the  race  (Gn  322**  3510),  it  diflers  from  both 
*  Hebrew  '  and  '  Jew,'  the  former  standing,  at  least 
in  NT  times,  for  Jews  of  purely  national  sympathies 
who  spoke  the  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  dialect  (Ac  6') ; 
the  latter,  a  term  originally  applied  to  all  who 
belonged  to  the  province  of  Judah,  and,  after  the 
Babyloni.an  captivity,  to  all  of  the  ancient  race 
wherever  located.  '  Israel,'  on  the  other  hand,  is  pre- 
eminently the  people  of  privilege,  the  people  who 
had  been  cliosen  by  God  and  received  His  covenant. 
Thus  frequently  a  Jewish  orator  addressed  the 
people  as  'men  of  Israel'  (Ac  2^2  3'2  48- 1»  5^  13'« 
etc.). 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  we  find  the  word 
used  historically  with  reference  to  the  ancestors  of 
the  Jews  of  apostolic  times  and  also  applied  to 
these  Jews  themselves.  The  past  history  of  Israel 
as  God's  chosen  people  is  referred  to  in  the  speeches 
contained  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  e.g.  by  St.  Stephen 
(723. 37. 4-2)^  and  by  St.  Paul  (13"  28^»).  It  is  usually 
assumed  or  suggested  in  the  Acts  that  the  Jews  of 
the  time,  to  Avhom  the  gospel  was  being  preached, 
are  the  Israel  of  the  day,  the  people  for  whom  God 
had  a  special  favour  and  who  might  expect  special 
blessings  (5=*^  1323). 

But  tlie  refusal  of  the  message  of  the  ajiostles  by 
many  of  those  who  by  birth  were  Jews  led  to  a 
change  in  the  use  of  the  term,  which  gives  us  what 
we  may  call  the  metaphorical  or  spiritual  signifi- 
cance of  the  word.  The  Apostle  Paul's  contention 
with  the  legalistic  Jews  of  his  day  led  him  to  draw 
a  distinction  between  the  actual  historical  Israel 
and  the  true  Israel  of  God.  He  speaks  on  the  one 
hand  of  '  Israel  after  the  flesh '  (1  Co  10'*),  or  of 
those  who  belong  to  the  'stock  of  Israel'  (Ph  3^*), 
and  on  the  other  hand  of  a  '  commonwealth  of 
Israel '  (Eph  2'-),  from  which  many,  even  Jews  by 
birth,  are  aliens,  and  into  which  the  Ephesians 
have  been  admitted  (v.^*),  and  also  of  the  'Israel 
of  God '  (Gal  6'®).  By  this  ' commonwealth  of  Israel ' 
or  'Israel  of  God'  the  Apostle  means  a  true 
spiritual  Israel,  practically  equivalent  to  'all  the 
faithful.'  It  might  be  defined  as  'the  whole 
number  of  the  elect  who  have  been,  are,  or  shall 
be  gathered  into  one  under  Christ,'  or,  in  other 
words,  the  Holy  Catholic  Church. 

This  true  Israel  does  not  by  any  means  coincide 
with  the  nation  or  the  stock  of  Abraham.  '  They 
are  not  all  Israel  which  are  of  Israel'  (Ro  9^),  i.e. 
by  racial  descent.  Branches  may  be  broken  off 
from  the  olive  tree  of  God's  privileged  people  and 
wild  olive  branches  may  be  grafted  into  the  tree 
(Ro  11""-').  Sometimes  it  is  difficult  to  determine 
the  exact  application  of  the  term  in  difVerent  pass- 
ages in  the  Pauline  Epistles.  Thus  the  sentence, 
'  All  Israel  shall  be  saved'  (Ro  IP"),  refers  not  to 
the  true  or  spiritual  Israel  in  the  sense  of  an  elect 
people,  as  has  been  held  by  various  commentators, 
e.g.  Augustine,  Theodoret,  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
others,  nor  to  an  elect  remnant,  as  is  held  by 
Bengel  and  Olshausen.     The  Ai)ostle  is  speaking  of 


the  actual  nation  of  Israel  as  a  whole,  and  contrast- 
in"  it  with  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles.  It  is  his 
belief  that,  when  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles  is 
come  in,  Israel  as  a  nation  will  also  turn  to  God 
by  confessing  Christ.  Tiie  phrase  '  all  Israel '  does 
not  necessarily  apply  to  every  member  of  the  race, 
nor  does  the  passage  teach  anything  Jis  to  the  fate 
of  the  individuals  who  at  the  Apostle's  day  or  since 
then  have  composed  the  nation  (cf.  Meyer,  Kojn- 
mentar,  p.  520;  Denney  in  EG'1\  'Rom.,'  p.  683; 
H.  Olshausen,  liom.,  p.  373  ;  Calvin,  Rom.,  p.  330). 

Just  as  the  ancient  historical  Israel  was  the 
recipient  of  special  privileges  and  stood  in  a  i)ar- 
ticular  relation  to  God,  so  the  spiritual  Israel  of 
apostolic  times  is  the  bearer  of  sj^ecial  privileges 
and  stands  to  God  in  a  unique  relationsiiip.  Ancient 
Israel  had  '  the  oracles  of  God '  (Ro  3-).  They  had 
the  sign  of  circumcision.  To  them,  St.  Paul 
declares,  pertained  '  the  adoption,  and  the  glory, 
and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the  Law,  and 
the  service  of  God,  and  the  promises ;  whose  are 
the  fathers,  and  of  whom  as  concerning  the  flesh 
Christ  came'  (Ro  9^-  ^).  The  great  essential  features 
of  these  privileges  are  transferred  to  the  spiritual 
Israel,  the  believing  Church  which  has  been  grafted 
into  the  true  olive  tree.  They  have  the  adoption, 
they  are  sons  of  God  (Ro  8'*''").  They  have  the 
glory  both  present  and  future  (Ro  8'*).  They  are 
partakers  of  the  new  covenant  which  has  been 
ratified  by  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  (1  Co  ll^^). 

The  analogy  between  the  Jirst  and  the  second 
covenant  is  fully  worked  out  by  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  who  dwells  upon  the  ritual 
and  ceremonial  aspect  of  ancient  Israel's  relation- 
ship to  God,  and  shows  the  higher  fulfilment  of 
that  relationship  under  the  new  covenant,  M'licre 
there  is  direct  personal  access  to  God.  Here  the 
human  priesthood  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  and  the 
sacrifices  of  bulls  and  goats  are  superseded  by  a 
Divine  Mediator  who  ofTered  Himself  a  sacrifice 
once  for  all  (V  10'").  The  Mediator  of  the  new 
covenant  has  entered  not  into  an  earthly  temple 
but  into  heaven  itself,  there  to  make  continual 
intercession  for  His  people  (7*^).  The  writer 
further  emphasizes  the  superiority  of  the  new 
covenant  relationship  of  the  spiritual  Israel  as 
being  a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of  Jer  3P'-^*, 
which  presupposes  that  the  old  covenant  had  proved 
ineflective  (He  8^).  The  Law  is  no  longer  to  be 
written  on  tables  of  stone,  but  in  the  mind  and  the 
heart  (v.'"). 

In  the  Book  of  Revelation  ancient  Israel  is  referred 
to  historically  in  connexion  with  Balaam,  'who 
taught  Balak  to  cast  a  stumblingblock  before  the 
children  of  Israel'  (2'^).  On  tlie  other  hand,  the 
symbolic  or  metaphorical  use  of  the  term  applied 
to  the  spiritual  Israel  is  found  in  connexion  with 
the  sealing  of  the  servants  of  God  which  takes 
place  according  to  the  tribes  of  the  children  of 
Israel  (7^*),  and  also  in  the  description  of  the  New 
Jerusalem,  where  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes 
are  engraven  on  the  twelve  gates  (21^-).  The 
author  of  the  Apocalypse,  following  the  usage  of 
St.  Paul  and  the  example  of  St.  Peter  (1')  and  St. 
James  (P),  applies  the  passage  7'''*,  regarding  the 
sealing  of  the  tribes  taken  from  a  Jewish  source, 
to  the  true  spiritual  Israel,  who  are  to  be  kept 
secure  in  the  day  of  the  world's  overthrow.  It  is 
the  same  class  which  is  referred  to  in  7''"  who 
apj)ear  in  heaven  clothed  in  white  robes  and  with 
palms  in  their  hands  (cf.  J.  Mofiatt  in  EOT, '  Revela- 
tion,'1910,  p.  395  f.). 

For  the  lustory  and  religion  of  Israel  in  apostolic 
times  see  artt.  Pharisees,  Heroi>. 

LiTKRATURK.  —  Joscphus,  AiiL,  HJ ;  H.  Ewald,  Q^'seh.  dea 
Voltes  Israel,  Gottinjreii,  1SG4-60;  E.  Schiirer,  (IJV*,  I^eipzip, 
lWl-11  ;  C.  von  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Atu;  Enjr.  tr.,  ISJM- 
05.     The  following  Coniine'iitaries  on  tlit  rcknanl  passages  nioy 


ISRAELITE 


ITALY 


623 


be  cited  :  on  Rotnani  :  Calvin  (1S44),  Olshausen  (1S66).  Meyer 
(1872X  Denney  (EGT,  1900X  Sanday-Headlam  (ICC,  1902) ; 
on  Hebretcf.  A.  B.  Davidson  (1SS2),  Westcott  (18S9X  See 
also  the  artt.  '  Israel,  Uistorv  of,'  in  HDB,  '  Israel,  Israelite'  in 
DCG,  'Israel'  in  EBi,  and  'Hebrew  Religion'  in  EBr. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
ISRAELITE. — An  Israelite  was  one  who  belonged 
to  the  nation  of  Israel,  rerarded,  raore  especially 
from  the  point  of  view  or  tlie  nation,  as  the  re- 
cipient of  DiWne  favour  and  special  privilege.  An 
Israelite  is  a  member  of  a  chosen  people  and  as 
such  is  the  sharer  of  the  blessings  belonging  to 
that  i»eople.  It  is  a  name  of  honour,  and  is  to 
be  distinguished  from  both  '  Hebrew '  and  '  Jew,' 
the  former  being,  at  least  in  NT  times,  a  Jew  iR-ith 

Eurely  national  sympathies,  who  spoke  the  native 
[ebrew  or  Aramaic  dialect  of  Palestine ;  while  the 
Jew  was  one  who  belonged  to  the  ancient  race 
wherever  he  might  be  settled  and  whatever  his 
views.  Every  Jew,  however,  regarded  himself  as 
a  true  Israelite,  and  prided  himself  on  the  privileges 
which  he,  as  a  member  of  the  favoured  nation, 
had  received  when  other  nations  had  been  passed 
by.  The  Apostle  Paul  refers  to  these  privileges 
when  he  describes  his  '  kinsmen  according  to  the 
flesh '  as  Israelites  '  whose  is  the  adoption,  and  the 
glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the 
law,  and  the  service  of  God,  and  the  promises' 
(Ro  9^).  He  knows  the  way  in  which  the  Jew 
boasts  of  them,  and  claims  that  he  can  share  in 
that  boasting  as  well  as  any  of  his  detractors. 
'Are  they  Israelites? — so  am  I.  Are  they  the 
seed  of  Abraham? — so  am  I'  (2  Co  11^).  This 
feeling  of  exclusive  national  privilege  led  in  many 
cases  to  the  rejection  of  the  gospel  by  the  Jews, 
who  did  not  wish  their  privileges  to  be  extended 
to  the  heathen  world.  This  rejection  of  his  mes- 
sage by  those  who  were  Israelites  by  birth  caused 
the  Apostle  to  conceive  of  a  true  or  spiritual 
Israelite  as  equivalent  to  a  believer  in  Jesus  Christ 
— one  after  the  type  of  Nathanael  of  Jn  1*^,  an 
Israelite  indeed  in  whom  is  no  guile  (cf.  art. 
ISRAFX).  The  Apostle  applies  the  term  in  its 
natural  sense  to  himself  in  Ko  11\  'I  also  am  an 
Israelite,'  in  order  to  show  that  all  the  members 
of  the  race  have  not  been  rejected  by  God,  but 
that  there  is  a  remnant  according  to  the  election 
of  grace — Israelites  Avho  are  Israelites  indeed,  not 
merely  by  outward  physical  connexion,  but  also 
by  moral  and  spiritual  characteristics. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
ISSACHAR.— See  Tribes. 

ITALIAN  BAND.— According  to  Ac  lO^,  the 
centurion  Cornelius,  of  the  (rreipa  'IroXticiJ,  was  in 
Cresarea  about  A.D.  40.  The  adjective  indicates 
that  the  'cohort'  (RVm)  consisted  of  native 
Italians.  Now,  as  a  province  of  the  second  order, 
Judsea,  of  which  Cfesarea  was  the  administrative 
centre,  was  not  garrisoned  by  legionaries,  who 
were  Roman  citizens,  but  by  auxiliaries,  who 
were  provincials.  How,  then,  could  an  auxiliary 
cohort  be  called  Italian?  Josephus  states  that 
there  were  five  cohorts,  composed  of  citizens  of 
Cfesarea  and  Sebaste,  stationed  in  the  former  city 
at  the  time  of  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa  {Ant. 
XIX.  ix.  2,  XX.  viii.  7),  and  Blass  suggests  (m  loco) 
that  one  of  the  live  may  have  been  called  the 
cohors  Italica,  as  being  composed  of  Roman 
citizens  who  had  made  their  home  in  one  or  other 
of  the  two  cities.  Schiirer  has  no  doubt  that  one 
of  the  five  is  the  Augustan  cohort  mentioned  in 
Ac  27*,  but  he  refuses  to  identify  another  (or  the 
same  one)  with  'the  Italian.'  Indeed,  while  he 
produces  monumental  evidence  that  'at  some 
tune  or  other  a  cohors  Italica  was  in  Syria,'  he 
thinks  that  the  story  of  Comelitis  lies  under  sus- 

Eicion,  '  the  circumstances  of  a  later  period  having 
een  transferretl  back  to  an  earlier  i>eriod '  {HJP 


I.  ii.  [1890]  53  f.).  Ramsay  regards  this  suspicion 
as  groundless,  and  makes  effective  use  ( Was  Christ 
bom  at  Bethlehem  ?,  1898,  p.  260  f.).of  an  inscription 
recently  discovered  at  Camuntnm  on  the  Upper 
Danube — the  epitaph  of  the  young  soldier,  Pro- 
cultis,  a  subordinate  officer  (optio)  in  the  second 
Italian  Cohort,  who  died  there  while  engaged  on 
detached  ser\ice  from  the  Syrian  army.  Syrian 
troops,  under  Mucianus,  were  certainly  engaged  on 
the  Lower  Danube,  and  probably  on  the  Upper, 
in  69  B.C.  (Tacitus,  Hist.  iiL  46).  When  their 
campaign  was  ended,  they  were  doubtless  sent 
back  to  Syria ;  and  the  same  legions  frequently 
remained  a  very  long  period,  sometimes  for  cen- 
turies, in  one  province. 

'  The  whole  harden  of  proof,  therefore,  rests  with  those  who 
maintain  that  a  Cohort  which  was  in  Syria  Itefore  [a.d.]  69  was 
not  there  in  40.  There  is  a  stronjf  probability  that  Luke  is 
right  when  he  alludes  to  that  Cohort  as  part  of  the  Syrian 
garrison  about  a.d.  40.'  Besides, '  the  entire  subject  of  detach- 
ment-service is  most  obscure  ;  and  we  are  very  far  from  being 
able  to  say  with  certainty  that  the  presence  of  an  auxiliar}' 
centurion  in  Caesarea  is  impossible,  unless  the  Cohort  in  which 
he  was  an  officer  was  stationed  there '  (Ramsay,  op.  eit.  285, 

288).  James  Strahan. 

ITALY  ('iToXta). — The  name  was  originally  con- 
fined to  the  extreme  southern  point  of  the  Italian 
peninsula.  For  the  Greeks  of  the  5th  cent.  B.C.  it 
denoted  the  tract  along  the  shore  of  the  Tarentine 
Gulf,  as  far  as  Metapontum,  and  thence  across  to 
the  Gulf  of  Posidonia.  By  the  time  of  Pol3bius 
the  name  had  been  extended  to  the  whole  penin- 
sula, for  he  speaks  of  Hannibal  crossing  the  Alps 
into  Italy,  and  of  the  plains  of  the  Padus  as  part 
of  Italy  (Hist.  ii.  14,  iii.  39,  54).  At  a  later  time, 
it  is  true,  Gallia  Cisalpina  was  officially  regarded 
as  part  of  Ca?sar's  province,  and  therefore  not 
strictly  in  Italy,  which  he  did  not  enter  tiU  he 
cros.sed  the  Rubicon  ;  but  from  the  Augustan  Age 
onward  the  word  hatl  its  present-day  meaning. 
Scarcely  any  country  has  more  clearly-marked  and 
obvious  boundaries. 

The  Latin  language  was  inscribed  upon  the  Cross 
of  Christ,  but  none  of  the  books  of  the  XT  were 
Avritten  in  it.  The  founders  of  Christianity  were 
not  so  greatly  influenced  by  Italian  as  by  Hebraic 
and  Hellenic  ideals.  Nor  did  Italy  herself  dream 
that  she  had  any  kind  of  evangel  for  the  East  which 
she  conquered.  Her  plain  task  was  to  give  and 
maintain  law  and  order  everywhere,  and  her  Im- 
perial ideal  certainly  found  its  counterpart  in  the 
apostolic  conception  of  a  world-wide  Church.  But 
her  own  spiritual  mission,  so  far  as  she  was  con- 
scious of  having  one,  was  merely  to  be  the  apostle 
of  Hellenism,  of  which  she  had  for  some  centuries 
been  the  disciple. 

'  The  desire  to  become  at  least  internally  Hellenised,  to  become 
partakers  of  the  manners  and  the  culture,  of  the  art  and  the 
science  of  Hellas,  to  be — in  the  footsteps  of  the  great  Mace- 
donian— shield  and  sword  of  the  Greeks  of  the  East,  and  to  be 
allowed  further  to  civilise  this  East  not  after  an  Italian  but 
after  a  Hellenic  fashion — this  desire  pervades  the  later  centuries 
of  the  Roman  republic  and  the  better  times  of  the  empire  with 
a  power  and  an  ideality  which  are  almost  no  less  tragic  than 
that  political  toil  of  the  Hellenes  failing  to  attain  its  g^oal' 
(T.  Mommsen,  The  Provinces  of  the  Roman  Empirt^,  Eng.  tr., 
1909,  i.  253). 

Some  of  the  cities  of  Italy — certainly  Rome  and 
Puteoli,  and  probably  others,  though  there  is  no 
definite  information  on  the  point — had  felt  the 
presence  of  Judaism  before  they  were  offered  Chris- 
tianity. Josephus  mentions  the  Jewish  colony  of 
Puteoli  in  his  story  of  the  Jewish  impostor  who 
claimed  to  be  Alexander  the  son  of  Herod  (c. 
4  B.C.).  '  He  Avas  also  so  forttmate,  upon  landing, 
as  to  bring  the  Jews  that  were  there  under  the 
same  delusion'  (Ant.  xvn.  xii.  1),  and  'he  got 
very  large  presents '  from  them  (BJ  ll.  \-ii.  1) ;  but 
Augustus  himself  was  not  so  easily  deceived  (Ant. 
XVll.  xii.  2).  Over  half  a  century  later,  the  fii-st 
Puteolan  Christians,   whose  fellowship  St.   Paul 


624 


ITALY 


JACOB 


enjoyed  for  a  week  on  his  way  to  Koine  (Ac  28'^), 
were  evidently  drawn  from  that  same  Jewish  com- 
munity and  its  proselytes.  The  presence  of  a  great 
Jewish  colony  in  Home,  dating  from  the  time  when 
Pompey  brought  his  prisoners  of  war  from  Jeru- 
salem, is  abundantly  attested  by  Latin  historians 
and  poets.  It  is  egually  certain  that  they  made 
many  proselytes.  The  swindling  of  Fulvia,  '  a 
woman  of  great  dignity,  and  one  that  had  embraced 
the  Jewish  religion'  {Ant.  XVIII.  iii.  5),  by  another 
Jew  of  the  baser  type  was  the  signal  for  an  out- 
burst against  the  whole  colony  in  the  time  of 
Tiberius  (Tac.  Ann.  ii.  85;  Suet.  Tiber.  36).  Ac- 
cording to  Ac  18^  Claudius  went  the  length  of 
expelling  all  the  Jews  from  Home  (cf.  Suet.  Claud. 
25).  Even  if  his  decree  only  amounted  to  the 
interdicting  of  their  assemblies  (Dio  Cassius,  Ix. 
6),  this  milder  measure  would  doubtless  cause  a 
great  exodus  from  the  city.  Some  of  the  exiles 
merely  emigrated  to  the  neighbourhood,  perhaps 
to  Aricia  (for  the  evidence  see  E.  Schiirer,  HJP 
II.  ii.  [1885]  238),  but  others  went  abroad.  This 
was  the  occasion  of  the  journey  of  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  'from  Italy'  to  Corinth  (Ac  18-). 

Italy  was  the  destination  of  the  prisoner  Paul 
when  he  made  his  appeal  to  Cicsar  (Ac  27').  The 
narrative  of  his  journey  from  point  to  point — 
Cajsarea,  Myra,  Melita,  Puteoli,  and  then  overland 
by  the  oldest  and  most  famous  of  Roman  roads, 
the  Via  Appia — illustrates  the  fact  that  '  most  of 
the  realms  of  the  ancient  Koman  Empire  had 
better  connections  than  ever  afterwards  or  even 
now.'  Dangers  could  not  be  wholly  avoided,  but 
'travelling  .  .  .  was  easy,  swift,  and  secure  to  a 
degree  unknown  until  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century '  (L.  Friedliinder,  Roman  Life  and 
Manners  under  the  Early  Empire,  1908,  i.  268). 


In  He  13^  'they  of  Italy'  (ot  diriT^s'IraXfoj)  join 
the  writer  in  sending  salutations,  ol  airb  denotes 
persons  who  have  come  from  the  place  indicated 
(cf.  Mt  15',  Ac  6»  10^).  It  is  a  mistake  to  imagine 
that  the  writer  was  himself  in  Italy,  and  that  he 
was  thinking  of  the  Italian  Christians  around  him 
there.  On  the  contrary,  the  phrase  implies 
that  the  author  was  absent  from  and  wTiting  to 
Italy,  while  there  were  in  his  company  natives  of 
Italy  who  had  embraced  Christianity,  and  who 
desired  to  be  remembered  to  their  believing  com- 
patriots in  some  part  of  the  home-land.  It  is 
not  an  equally  .safe,  but  still  a  plausible,  con- 
jecture that  Italy  —  probably  Rome  —  was  the 
writer's  own  home  (see  art.  Hebrews,  Epistle 
TO  THE).  James  Strahan. 

lYORY  (adj.  eXecpdvTiPos,  noun  to  iXefAvrivov,  fr. 
i\i((>a% ;  Skr.  ebhns,  Lat.  ebur,  Er.  ivoirc). — Ivory 
was  prized  by  all  the  civilized  nations  of  antiquity. 
The  OT  contains  a  dozen  references  to  its  l)eauty 
and  value.  '  Every  article  of  ivory '  (Rev  18")  was 
found  in  the  market  of  the  apocalyptic  Babylon 
(Rome).  It  was  used  for  the  adornment  of  palaces, 
for  sculpture,  for  the  inlaying  of  furniture  and 
chariots,  for  numberless  domestic  and  decorative 
objects.  'Ebur  Indicum'  (Hor.  Car.  I.  xxxi.  6; 
cf.  Verg.  Georg.  i.  57)  was  known  to  everyone. 
Statues  (Georg!  i.  480),  sceptres  (Ov,  Met.  i.  178), 
lyres  (Hor.  Car.  II.  xi.  22),  scabbards  (Ov.  Met.  iv. 
148),  sword-hilts  (Verg.  ^n.  xi.  11),  seals  (Cic, 
Verr.  ll.  iv.  1),  couches  (Hor.  Sat.  II.  vi.  103),  doors 
(Verg.  ^n.  vi.  148),  curule  chairs  (Hor.  Ep.  i.  vi.  54) 
are  samples  of  Roman  workmansliip  in  ivory.  As 
the  substance  is  so  hard  and  durable,  many  ivory 
works  of  art  have  come  down  from  the  ancient 
world.  James  Stbahan. 


JACINTH  {voLKivOo^,  Ital.  gincinto). — Jacinth,  or 
hyacinth,  is  tiie  colour  of  the  eleventh  foundation- 
stone  of  the  New  Jerusalem  (Rev  21^).  The  cui- 
rasses of  apocalyptic  horsemen  are  partly  hyacinth- 
ine  (9").  The  vdKiydos  of  the  ancients  was  probably 
our  sapphire  (21'^"  [RVm]).  The  modern  hyacinth, 
a  vaiiety  of  zircon,  of  yellowish  red  colour,  may 
have  been  the  stone  known  in  Gr.  as  \oyi''pi.ov  and 
in  lleb.  as  leshem  (the  RV  of  Ex  28'«  39'^  has 
'  jacinth '  where  the  AV  has  '  ligure ') ;  but  Jlinders 
Petrie  (HDB  iv.  620)  suggests  that  the  latter  was 
yellow  quartz  or  agate.  Many  Greek  and  Roman 
'  hyacinths,'  used  for  intaglios  and  cameos,  were 
probably  only  garnets.  James  Strahan. 

JACOB  ('IaKW/3). — Jacob,  the  younger  son  of 
Isaac,  was  the  father  of  the  twelve  patriarchs  who 
were  the  heads  of  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

The  story  of  the  ante-natal  struggle  of  Esau  and 
Jacob  (to  which  allusion  is  made  in  Hos  12'),  and 
of  the  oracle  spoken  to  their  motlier  (Ro  9"  ||  Gn 
25®),  is  a  folk-tale  which  vividly  reflects  the  rival- 
ries of  Israel  and  Edom.  The  Hebrews  boasted  of 
their  superiority  to  the  powerful  kindred  race 
which  dwelt  on  their  southern  border.  To  be  more 
than  a  match  for  those  hereditary  foes,  gaining  the 
advantage  over  them  either  by  force  of  arms  or  by 
nimbleness  of  wit,  was  a  point  of  national  honour. 
By  hook  or  by  crook  the  Israelites  rarely  failed  to 
come  ofr  victorious  over  the  Edomites.  And  the 
popular  mind  liked  to  think  that  the  character- 
istics and  fortunes  of  the  two  rival  nations  were 


mysteriously  foreshadowed  before  the  birth  of  their 
far-ofi' ancestors.  From  tiie  beginning  God  chose 
the  younger  son  for  Himself,  and  decreed  that  tlie 
elder  should  be  servant  to  the  younger.  In  the 
words  of  a  prophet  who  on  this  matter  expresses 
the  general  belief,  God  loved  Jacob,  but  hated 
Esau  (Mai  P-  *).  St.  Paul  uses  this  Divine  prefer- 
ence to  illustrate  that  principle  of  election  whicli 
he  sees  operating  all  through  the  history  of  Israel, 
and  of  which  he  finds  startling  contemporary  evi- 
dence in  the  nation's  apostasy  from  the  Messiah, 
and  God's  choice  of  the  Gentiles.  That  the  elder 
brother  (and  nation)  should  serve  the  younger, 
that  the  natural  heir  should  be  foredoomed  to  lose 
the  birthright  and  the  blessing,  that  (apart  from 
good  or  evil)  the  one  should  ajppear  to  be  accepted 
and  the  other  rejected — all  this  was  evidence  of  an 
inscrutable  selectiveness,  by  which  God  works  out 
His  universal  purpose  (^  kolt  iKkoyi^v  roO  Oeov 
irpddecns  [see  ESAU]).  The  election  of  grace  {^KXoyrj 
xdpiTos)  is  the  central  idea  in  St.  Paul's  philosophy 
of  history.  It  is  an  attempt  to  give  a  rationale  of 
the  fact  that  '  Universal  History,  the  history  of 
what  man  has  accom))lished  in  this  world,  is  at 
bottom  the  History  of  the  Great  Men  who  have 
worked  here'  (Carlyle,  On  Heroes  and  Hero-Wor- 
ship,  Lect.  i.). 

In  a  speech  before  the  Sanhedrin,  Stephen  made 
allusion  to  the  story  of  Jacob's  sending  his  sons 
(lown  to  Egypt,  of  .loseph's  sending  for  his  father, 
and  of  Jacobs  descent  into  Egyjtt  and  death  there 
(Ac  ?*•  "•  '*).     As  an  evidence  of  Jacob's  faith,  the 


JAILOR 


JAMES  AlfD  JOHN 


625 


\\Titer  of  Hebrews  selects  a  death- bed  scene  (11"). 
'  He  blessed  the  two  sons  of  Joseph,'  giving  them 
one  of  the  finest  benedictions  ever  uttered  by 
human  lips,  invoking  the  God  of  history,  provi- 
dence, and  grace  to  be  their  Shepherd-God  (Gn 
4gi5.  i6j  Then  '  he  worshipped  leaning  upon  the 
top  of  his  start".*  In  the  original  (Gn  47'^)  this  act 
precedes  the  blessing,  and  while  the  LXX  reads 
'upon  the  top  of  his  staff,'  other  versions,  includ- 
ing the  English,  have  'on  the  bed.'  The  differ- 
ence of  reading  is  due  to  Heb.  punctuation  {ns^n 
'the  start','  .Tp?n  'the  bed'),  and  does  not  greatly 
alter  the  sense.  Jacob,  who  is  here  the  ideal 
Israelite,  gives  conscious  or  unconscious  proof  of 
his  faith  by  taking  leave  of  life  with  a  high  dignity 
and  solemnity.  Meekly  submitting  himself  to  the 
will  of  God,  he  teaches  all  his  posterity  to  worship 
the  '  God  of  Jacob '  with  their  latest  breath. 

Stephen  refers  (Ac  7*")  to  David's  desire  '  to  find 
a  habitation  for  the  God  of  Jacob.'  Here,  too, 
Jacob  is  not  an  individual  but  a  nation.  The 
usage  was  common  in  every  epoch  of  Hebrew 
literature :  in  the  earliest  period — '  Come,  curse 
me  Jacob '  .  .  .  '  Who  can  count  the  dust  of 
Jacob  ? '  (Nu  23^-  '*>) ;  in  the  Exile—'  Fear  not,  thou 
worm  Jacob'  (Is  41") ;  and  in  the  Maccabsean  age, 
when  Judas  'made  Jacob  glad  with  Ids  acts'  (1 
Mac  3^) ;  after  which  it  was  naturally  taken  over 
into  the  NT.  Jacob's  other  name  '  Israel '  had  the 
same  two  senses,  personal  and  national,  a  circum- 
stance which  gives  piquancy  to  the  Pauline  dictum 
(Ro  9*) :  '  Not  all  who  are  of  Israel  {i.e.  born  of  the 
patriarch)  are  Israel'  (i.e.  the  chosen  people  of 
God).  Many  of  them  are  only  6  'lo-paTjX  xarit  aapKa, 
Israelites  by  birth,  whereas  in  a  higher  sense  all 
Christians  are  6  'Io-pa7j\  rod  OeoO  (Gal  6'*).  Natur- 
ally the  name  '  Jacob '  never  acquired  this  new 
meaning :  Israel  was  the  ideal  people  of  God, 
whether  Jewish  or  Gentile,  Jacob  the  actual 
Jewish  nation  composed  of  very  imperfect  human 
beings.  The  two  words  are  appropriately  com- 
bined in  St.  Paul's  prevision  of  a  far-off  Divine 
event  which  must  be  the  goal  of  history :  '  All 
Israel  shall  be  saved,  for  ...  a  Deliverer  .  .  . 
shall  turn  away  iniquity  from  Jacob'  (Ro  11^). 

James  Steahan. 

JAILOR.— The  AY  translates  8eff^Lo<f>v\a^  in  Ac 
16^  '  jailor,'  and  in  vv.^^-  ^  '  keeper  of  the  prison.' 
The  RV  adheres  to  the  term  '  jailor '  in  all  three 
verses.  The  person  so  designated  occupied  the 
position  of  supreme  authority  as  governor  of  the 
prison  (cf.  dpxioefffio<pv\ai,  Gn  39^  LXX),  and  must 
be  distinguished  from  persons  holding  the  sub- 
ordinate position  of  guard  or  warder  (0i/Xa|,  Ac  5P 
12® ;  AV  '  keeper ').  It  was  to  the  custody  of  this 
oflBcial  that  the  duumviri  at  Philippi  committed 
St.  Paul  and  Silas,  with  the  strict  injunction  to 
'  keep  them  safely.'  The  fact  that  Philippi  was  a 
Roman  colony  lends  a  certain  amount  of  proba- 
bility to  R.  B.  Rackham's  suggestion  that  he  was 
a  Roman  oflicer,  occupying  the  rank  of  centurion 
{Com.  on  Acts,  1901).  Chrysostoms  attempt  to 
identify  him  with  Stephanas  (1  Co  16")  overlooks 
the  fact  that  Stephanas  was  among  the  '  firstfniits 
of  Achaia,'  not  Macedonia  ;  while  a  later  suggestion 
that  he  was  Epaphroditus,  though  it  is  more  pro- 
bable, lacks  adequate  data  to  support  it. 

Modem  criticism  seriously  questions  the  credi- 
bility of  the  portion  of  the  narrative  (Ac  16^*^) 
containing  the  account  of  the  jailor's  conversion, 
on  the  ground  of  inherent  improbabilities  (B. 
Weiss,  Weizsacker,  Holtzmann,  Hamack,  Bacon, 
Cone).  Most  of  the  objections  have  been  ade- 
quately dealt  with  by  W.  M.  Ramsay  in  St.  Paul 
the  Traveller,  1S95,  pp.  221-223 ;  and  a  summary 
of  them,  with  their  refutation,  is  given  in  an 
article  bv  Giessekke  (described  in  the  ExpT  ix. 
[1S98]  274  f.).  The  legendary  character  of  the 
VOL.  I. — 40 


narrative  has  been  maintained  for  the  further 
reason  that  it  is  not  guaranteed  by  the  '  we '  section, 
which  ends,  it  is  alleged,  with  v.-^.  'Yet  these 
verses  betray  such  unimpeachable  tokens  of  the 
style  of  St.  Luke  as  to  prevent  us  from  even  think- 
ing of  them  as  interpolated'  (A.  Hamack,  Luke 
the  Physician,  Eng.  tr.,  1907,  p.  113).  Nor  does  it 
follow  that  the  '  we '  section  ends  with  v.**,  because 
the  first  person  is  no  longer  used.  After  his  separa- 
tion from  St.  Paul  and  Silas,  owing  to  their  arrest 
and  imprisonment,  the  narrator  wo^d,  of  necessity, 

Eroceed  to  describe  the  subsequent  events,  when 
e  was  no  longer  in  their  company,  in  the  third 
person.  The  presence  of  the  miraculous  element, 
if  the  earthquake  is  to  be  so  regarded,  in  no  way 
militates  against  this  assumption,  for  the  'we- 
sections  are  fall  of  the  supernatural'  (Hamack, 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  p.  144). 

Leaving  aside  the  alleged  improbabilities,  it  must 
be  admitted  that  the  description  of  the  night-scene 
in  the  prison  is  most  vivid  and  life-like.  Assume 
the  possibility  of  the  earthquake,  which  in  itself 
is  a  natural  occurrence,  treated  in  this  case  as  a 
special  instance  of  providential  interference,  and 
there  is  nothing  absolutely  inexplicable  in  the 
course  of  events  which  follows.  The  diflBculties 
are  largely  due  to  the  brevity  of  the  narrative, 
which  does  not  allow  of  entering  into  minute 
detaiL  The  author  (whether  St.  Luke  or  another) 
is  not  describing  an  '  escape '  from  prison,  miracu- 
lous or  otherwise,  for  the  release  of  the  captives 
takes  place  next  morning.  The  interest  of  the 
narrative  centres  in  the  conversion  of  the  jailor 
and  his  household,  and  it  is  as  leading  up  to  this 
most  interesting  and  happy  denouement  that  the 
earlier  incidents  of  the  eventful  night  are  depicted. 
When  the  main  object  of  the  story  is  borne  in 
mind,  the  difficulties  which  it  presents  will  not 
be  regarded  as  sufficient  to  justify  its  wholesale 
rejection.  W.  S.  Moxtgomzry. 

JAMES  AND  JOHN,  THE  SONS  OF  ZEBEDEE. 

— 1.  In  Synoptic  Gospels. — The  sons  of  Zebedee 
are  mentioned  in  the  following  passages  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels.  The  call  of  the  two  orothers  is 
related  in  Mk  l^^  (  =  Mt  4^^,  Lk  5"^-).  After 
the  call  of  Andrew  and  Simon  and  their  immediate 
response,  Jesus  goes  on  further  and  sees  the  two 
brothers  James  and  John  in  their  boat,  mending 
their  nets.  Their  response  to  His  call  is  equally 
prompt ;  they  leave  their  father  and  the  hired 
servants  in  the  boat  and  go  away  after  Him.  The 
Matthsean  account  is  practically  identical  with  the 
Marcan,  save  for  the  omission  of  any  reference 
to  the  hired  servants,  a  characteristic  cutting  out 
of  unnecessary  detail.  In  these  two  accounts  the 
call  of  the  four  disciples  is  the  first  event  recorded 
after  the  beginning  of  the  ministry  ;  it  is  followed 
by  the  account  of  the  entry  into  Caperaaum  and 
the  teaching  in  the  Synagogue.  St.  Luke  in  his 
Gospel  places  the  incident  later,  after  his  record  of 
events  at  Nazareth  and  Capernaum.  It  is  not 
easy  to  determine  whether  his  reason  for  the 
change  is  historical,  to  account  for  the  promptness 
with  which  the  call  of  an  unknown  stranger  is 
obeyed,  or  whether  he  is  following  a  different  tra- 
dition. The  relation  of  the  Lucan  account  to  the 
Johannine  Appendix  (ch.  21)  is  also  difficult  to 
determine.  Competent  scholars  are  found  to  main- 
tain both  the  view  that  the  Johannine  narrative  is 
based  on  an  account  (similar  to  the  Lucan)  of  the 
call  of  Peter,  and  the  view  that  St.  Luke,  in  his 
record  of  the  call  to  discipleship,  has  borrowed 
details  from  an  account  of  a  post-Resurrection  ap- 
pearance to  Peter  in  Galilee.  But  the  question 
has  no  direct  bearing  on  the  call  of  the  sons  of 
Zebedee,  the  Lucan  additional  matter  having  to 
do  with  Peter  alone.    The  only  detail  which  he 


626 


JA^IES  AND  JOHN 


JAMES  AND  JOHN 


adds  with  reference  to  Jolin  and  James  in  that 
they  were  partners  with  I'eter,  which  might  liave 
heen  deduced  from  the  Marcan  account.  And  the 
more  obvious  explanation  of  their  prompt  obeiiience 
is  that  sug^'csted  by  the  Ist  chapter  or  St.  John — 
previous  acquaintance  at  an  earlier  stage,  probably 
in  connexion  with  the  Baptist's  preaching  (cr. 
below,  §  8). 

In  St.  Mark's  Gospel  the  four  are  represented  as 
going  with  Jesus  to  Capernaum,  and  the  same 
Evangelist  also  notices  the  presence  of  the  sons  of 
Zebedee  in  the  house  of  Simon,  on  the  occasion  of 
the  healing  of  his  wife's  mother.  This  detail  finds 
no  place  in  the  other  Gospels.  Their  names  ap- 
pear  next  in  the  calling  of  the  Twelve  where  they 
are  found  in  all  three  lists  among  the  Jirst  four,  the 
only  dillerenco  being  that  St.  Mark  places  tiiem 
before,  the  other  Synoptists  after,  Andrew ;  and  St. 
Mark  also  adds  the  giving  of  the  name  Boanerges. 

No  thoroughly  satisfactory  explanation  of  either  part  of  this 
word  has  been  found,  ^oai'e  is  liardly  a  possible  tranaliteration 
of  'J5  ;  it  can  only  be  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  it 
is  due  to  conflation,  either  the  o  or  the  a  being  a  correction  of 
the  other.  The  second  half  of  the  word  has  been  connected 
with  Aram.  Vin  (  =  Ileb.  e'J";,  tumultualus  ext;  cf.  Ps  2i, 
Ac  426,  and  for  iiVil,  Jl  SJ'i,  strepitun,  see  Payne  Smith,  Tlies. 
Syr.  1879-1901).  But  the  root  never  has  the  meaning  of 
'thunder.'  U")  has  also  been  suggested;  cf.  Job  37^  iVfj  ta'l?, 
of  thunder,  and  SO-'-*  \ry\  V]]-}.'^.  But  the  meaning  of  the  word 
is  'raging,'  not  'thunder.'  Burkitt  has  suggested  that  the 
Syriac  translator  connected  the  word  with  Aram,  k-^'m-]  (1  K  ISU 
=  I'lDH  '  crowd  ')  of  which  he  took  'g* JT  for  the  status  absolutus. 
Jerome  conjectured  that  the  name  waa  originally  ciTf  'J3  (on 
Dn  18,  'emendatius  legitur  bene-reem'),  in  which  case  the  ex- 
planatory gloss,  o  ((TTiv  viol  Ppoi-TTJ?,  is  older  than  the  corrupt 
transliteration  ;  but  it  would  be  difficult  to  account  for  the  cor- 
ruption of  a  correct  transliteration  of  Dyi  '^3  into  poavtpyei. 
Wellhausen  suggests  tliat  jiossibly  the  name  Raqashal  may 
point  to  Ii('qes  =  '  thunder,'  a  meaning  of  which  he  says  no  other 
trace  is  found  (i'o.  Marci^,  1909,  p.  23). 

We  have  no  evidence  as  to  the  occasion  of  the 
giving  of  the  name.  The  incident  recorded  in  Lk 
9**  may  have  suggested  it,  or  the  character  of  tlie 
brothers.  The  later  explanations  which  refer  it  to 
the  power  of  their  preaching  do  not  give  us  any 
further  information.* 

The  next  mention  of  the  brothers  is  in  the  story 
of  the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  (Mk  5^,  Lk  8"), 
where  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  record  the  admission 
of  the  three  intimate  di.sciples  alone  to  the  house 
of  Jairus,  a  detail  which  does  not  appear  in  St. 
Matthew's  account.  All  tiiree  Synoptists  record 
the  presence  of  the  same  three  on  the  Mount  of 
Transfiguration  (Mk  9»,  Mt  17^  Lk  O^*).  The  next 
recorded  incident  is  that  of  the  ambitious  request 
(Mk  W^"-,  Mt  202"'^),  attributed  by  St.  Mark  to 
the  brothers  themselves,  by  St.  Matthew  to  their 
mother  on  their  behalf.  Tiie  later  character  of 
the  Matthaean  acccmnt  is  clearly  seen  in  .some 
details  (use  of  irpoaKwovaa ;  elire  for  St.  Mark's  dds 
i)iuu ;  the  omission  of  reference  to  the  '  baptism ' 
[?]),  but  the  approved  critical  explanation  of  the 
change  in  the  si)eaker  is  hardly  convincing.  To 
do  honour  to  the  sons  of  Zebedee  by  making  them 
sliield  themselves  behind  their  mother  is  a  strange 
kind  of  reverence  !  The  bearing  of  this  incident 
on  the  question  of  the  martyrdom  of  John  must  be 
discussed  later.  The  indignation  of  the  other  dis- 
ciples against  the  brothers  is  retained  in  both 
accounts.  St.  Luke  omits  the  incident  altogether. 
In  Mk  13'  (cf.  Mt  24^  Lk  2F)  the  question  wliich 
leads  to  the  eschatological  discourse  is  attribute<l 
to  the  four  disciples,  for  which  St.  Matthew  has 
ol  iJLa6r)ral,  St.  Luke  nvei.  In  connexion  with  Getli- 
semane,  tlie  three  are  mentioned  by  name  in  Mk 
14»  and  Mt  26^.  St.  Luke  only  mentions  tiie 
disciples  generally  (22^"  ;  cf.  v.'"). 

*  Of.  Cramer,  Catena,  1844,  i.  p.  297,  4io  to  fitya  xai  iia- 
npv<r^ov,  r)\fi<rai  rn  oixov/Lietq^  tijs  0to\oyi<n  to  SoyiLara,  and  see 
Suicer,  s.v.  Ppovni. 


To  these  references,  where  the  Synoptists  seem 
to  be  almost  wholly  dependent  on  the  Marcan 
account,  we  must  add  Lk  9**,  the  desire  of  James 
and  John  to  call  down  lire  from  heaven  on  the  in- 
hospitable Samaritans,  a  story  which  may  be  con- 
nected with  at  least  the  interpretation  of  the  name 
'  Boanerges.'  On  two  occasions  only  is  John  men- 
tioned without  his  brother.  St.  Mark  (9*)  and  St. 
Luke  (9*")  record  his  confession  that  the  disciples 
had  '  forbidden '  one  who  cast  out  devils  in  Jesus' 
name  because  he  followed  not  with  them.  And 
St.  Luke  (22*)  adds  the  detail  that  the  disciples 
who  were  sent  forward  to  prepare  for  the  Passover 
were  Peter  and  John. 

In  the  Synoptic  narrative,  then,  the  sons  of 
Zebedee  are  represented  as  forming  with  Peter, 
and  occasionally  Andrew,  tlie  most  intimate  group 
of  the  Lord's  disciples.  No  special  prominence  is 
given  to  John  ;  he  almost  always  appears  with  his 
brother ;  thrice  in  St.  Mark  and  once  in  St. 
Matthew  he  is  characteristically  described  as  '  the 
brother  of  James.'  His  position  is  very  clearly 
tliat  of  the  younger  brother,  who  takes  no  inde- 
pendent lead.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppo.se  that 
'  Q '  contained  any  additional  information  about 
the  brothers.  The  special  sources  on  which  St. 
Luke  drew  added  a  few  details.  It  is  noticeable 
that  in  the  Lucan  list  of  apostles  the  name  of  John 
precedes  that  of  James.  This  corresponds  with 
the  history  of  the  Acts,  which  must  next  be  con- 
sidered. 

2.  In  Acts. — The  sons  of  Zebedee  are  placed  next 
to  Peter  in  the  list  of  apostles  (Ac  1"),  the  name  of 
John  being  placed  before  that  of  James,  as  in  the 
Lucan  Gospel.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the 
author's  view,  who  assigns  to  John  a  place  of  im- 
portance second  only  to  Peter  in  the  history  of  the 
growth  of  the  Church  in  Palestine.  He  is  still 
the  companion  of  Peter,  as  in  the  Gospel  he  was 
the  '  brother  of  James,'  but  in  Peter's  company  he 
is  present  at  the  healing  of  the  lame  man  in  the 
Temple  (S^*^* ;  see  csp.  v.* :  dreviffas  di  Jl^rpos  eli 
avTov  avv  rqi'luavji,  and  v."),  and  during  the  speech 
of  Peter  which  follows.  Apparently  he  is  arrested 
with  Peter  (4'- ') ;  at  their  examination  the  Rulers 
are  said  to  notice  the  irappr]<rla  of  Peter  and  John 
(4'^),  and  he  shares  Peter's  refusal  to  keep  silence 
(4""-).  In  8'*  Peter  and  John  are  sent  to  Samaria 
in  consequence  of  the  spread  of  tiie  faith  there. 
After  the  imposition  oi  hands,  and  the  episode 
of  Simon,  their  return  to  Jerusalem  is  recorded. 
There  is  no  further  mention  of  John  in  the  Acts, 
except  that  in  the  account  of  his  martyrdom  James 
is  described  as  the  brother  of  John  (12^).  But  the 
position  assigned  to  John  is  fully  l>orne  out  by 
the  single  reference  to  him  in  Gal  2",  as  one  of  the 
'pillars'  who  gave  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  to 
Paul  and  Barnabas,  a  jiassage  which  alone  is  ade- 
quate refutation*  of  the  strange  theory  of  E. 
Schwartz  ( Ueber  den  Tod  dcr  Suhne  Zebcatri),  who 
finds  in  the  prediction  assigned  to  Jesus  in  Mk  1(P 
proof  that  both  sons  of  Zebedee  must  have  been 
killed  by  Herod  on  the  same  day  !  The  account 
in  Acts  (12'^)  of  the  martyrdom  of  James  at  the 
Pa.ssover  of  the  year  44  has  been  supposed  to  show 
traces  of  modification  by  cutting  out  any  mention 
of  the  death  of  his  brotlier  (E.  Preuschen,  Apostel- 
gesrhichte,  in  Leitzmunn's  Ifandhiirh  zum  Nl ,  1912, 
p.  75).  The  construction  of  v.',  if  harsh,  is  how- 
ever not  impossible,  and  the  '  Western '  addition 
in  V.',  ■i)  iirix^ip-qini  ai)roO  iirl  toi)s  viarovs  (D  Lat.  [vf* 
ygcodj  gyy  [lil'"8]),  even  if  original  is  adequately  ex- 
plained by  the  language  of  v,'  {KaKwaal  Tiva%). 

3.  Evidence  of  martyrdom  of  John. — The  other 
evidence,  however,  fur  tlie  martyrdom  of  John 
deserves  serious  consideration. 

•  Except  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  very  early  date  for  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians. 


JAMES  AND  JOHX 


JAMES  AND  JOHN 


627 


{I)  Papias. — So  long  as  we  had  only  the  state- 
ment of  Georgius  Hamartolus  (c.  a.d.  850),  or 
perhaps  of  some  corrector  of  his  text,  whose  addi- 
tions are  found  in  the  Paris  MS,  Coislin.  305 : 
I'ludvinii]  ixapTvpiov  KaTTj^iurai.  IIair/aj  ydip  6  'lepa- 
ir6Xf  wj  (ir  iff  KOTOS,  airT&imjs  ToCrovyevdfievos,  ivrtfi  Sevrdpip 
Xoyip  tQv  KvptaKwy  \oiyluv  ipdffKet,  5t<  irrd  'lovSaluv  cunj- 
pidrjt  it  was  possible,  in  the  light  of  his  reference 
to  Origen,  to  explain  the  statement  as  due  to 
homoioteleuton  omission  in  his  source  of  the  Papias 
quotation,  'Iwdv^nji  [fiif  ito  toO  'Pupuiiwv  paatXiuK 
KareSiKd/rSri  fiaprvpCiP  eU  TldTfiov,  'IdKujSo;  5^]  irrb 
'lovdaiup  avripi&r).  De  Boor's  discovery  of  the 
excerpts,  protwibly  going  back  to  Philip  of  Side,  in 
Ckxl.  Baroccianus  142  (Oxford),  among  which  is 
found  the  sentence,  Ilaxjas  iv  t(^  5ewe'/Xfj  \&Y<p  "SJyei, 
OTt  'Iwdj'j'i/j  6  ^eoXo^oy  koI  'IdicwjSos  6  doeX^os  a&rov 
inrb  'lovSaiwp  dvripidjfaaf  places  the  matter  in  a 
wholly  ditierent  position.  There  must  have  been 
some  such  statement  about  the  death  of  John,  the 
son  of  Zebedee,  at  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  in  Papias' 
work.  As  C.  Clemen,  whose  discussion  of  the 
whole  evidence  should  be  consulted  {Die  Ent- 
stehung  dcs  Johannesevangelittms),  says,  this  does 
not  prove  the  historical  accuracy  of  the  statement, 
but  it  is  important  evidence  of  a  different  tradition 
from  that  which  represents  the  son  of  Zebedee  as 
living  on  in  Ephesus  to  an  advanced  old  age,  and 
dying  a  peaceful  death.  Zahn's  suggestion  (Introcl. 
to  NT,  Eng.  tr. ,  iii.  206),  that  the  statement  referred 
to  John  the  Baptist,  is  hardly  satisfactory  in  spite 
of  the  clear  evidence  of  confusion  between  the  two 
afforded  by  the  Martyrologies.  In  the  light  of  the 
common  tradition,  why  should  anyone  have  made 
the  mistake?  The  silence  of  Eusebius  is  an  im- 
portant factor  in  the  case,  but  it  is  not  conclusive, 
as  Hamack  (Chronologic,  Leipzig,  1897,  p.  666) 
suggests,  against  the  presence  of  such  a  sentence 
in  Papias.  Eusebius  might  well  suppress  as 
fivOiKwrepov  a  Statement  so  completely  in  contradic- 
tion to  the  received  tradition  on  the  subject.  The 
real  difficulty  is  to  account  for  the  growth  of  a 
different  tradition  at  Ephesus,  if  the  tradition  of 
John's  martyrdom  was  known  at  Hierapolis  in 
Papias'  time. 

(2)  The  evidence  of  Heradeon  (see  Clem.  Alex. 
Strom.  IV.  ix.  71)  should  never  have  been  brought 
forward.  Heracleon  is  distinguishing  between 
those  who  confessed  '  in  life '  and  '  by  voice '  before 
the  magistrates.  No  one  could  have  included 
John  among  those  who  had  not  made  the  confes- 
sion 5td  ifxavris,  in  view  either  of  Patmos  or  of  the 
legend  of  the  cauldron  of  oil.  His  absence  from 
Heracleon's  list  therefore  proves  nothing. 

(3)  The  evidence  of  the  tract  de  Rebaptismate 
(Vienna  Corpus,  iii.  p.  86),  which  shows  that  the 
saying  of  Mk  10^  was  interpreted  of  the  baptism 
of  blood,  and  the  testimony  of  Aphraates  {Homily 
21),  who  speaks  of  James  and  John  following  in 
the  footsteps  of  their  Master,  if  they  point  to  the 
tradition  of  martyrdom,  also  suggest  the  natural 
explanation  of  its  ori^,  if  it  is  not  historical,  viz. 
the  attempt  to  find  a  literal  fulfilment  of  the  words 
of  the  Lord. 

(4)  The  evidence  of  the  Martyrologies  also  points 
to  the  same  tradition,  even  if  they  are  capable  of 
another  explanation.  The  Syriac  Calendar  which 
Erbes  {ZKG  xxv.  [1904])  dates  411,  and  341  for 
the  part  concerned,  gives  for  Dec.  27  :  '  John  and 
James,  the  Apostles,  in  Jerusalem.'  Bernard's 
explanation  that  such  a  celebration  does  not 
necessarily  imply  martyrdom  (see  Irish  Church 
Quarterly,  i.  [1908]  6<jff.)  is  not  altogether  convin- 
cing. The  Latin  Calendar  of  Carthage  also  gives 
for  Dec.  27  :  '  Sancti  Johannis  Baptistse,  et  Jacobi 
Ai)OPtoli,  Cfuem  Herodes  occidit,"  which  may 
]x)ssibly  point  the  same  way.  as  June  24  is  the  day 
uf  commemoration  of  the  liapliiiL.     And  according 


to  Clemen  (op.  cit.  p.  444)  tlie  Gothic  Missal, '  which 
represents  tlie  Galilean  Littirgy  of  tlie  6th  or  7th 
century,'  represents  James  and  John  as  martyrs. 

The  evidence  is  certainly  not  negligible.  Whether 
the  tradition  owes  its  existence  to  attempts  to  in- 
terpret the  Synoptic  saying,  or  is  a  reminiscence  of 
actual  fact,  is  in  the  light  of  our  present  knowledge 
difficult  to  determine.  From  the  available  evidence 
we  must  regard  the  martyrdom  of  John  the  son  of 
Zebedee  as  probable.  But  as  to  time  and  place  our 
ignorance  is  complete.  Erbes'  suggestion  that  the 
son  of  Zebedee  met  his  death  in  Samaria  in  the 
troubles  of  the  year  66  {ZKG  xxxiii.  [1912])  cannot 
be  discussed  fully  here.  It  cannot  be  said  to  have 
risen  above  the  class  of  ingenious  conjectures,  out 
of  which  it  is  unsafe  to  attempt  to  reconstruct 
history.  The  Synoptic  saying  about  the  cup  and 
baptism  (Mk  10**)  is  certainly  insufficient  proof  of 
actual  martj-rdom.  St.  Mark,  and  even  the  other 
Synoptists,  have  much  matter  which  later  reflexion 
found  it  necessary  to  modify  or  did  not  care  to 
emphasize.  But  everything  was  not  cut  out  which 
caused  difficulty.  And  we  may  perhaps  venture 
to  say  that  there  are  traces  of  modification  and 
omission  in  regard  to  this  very  saying  which 
suggest  that  it  did  cause  difficulty.  St.  Matthew 
drops  the  mention  of  the  baptism,  retaining  only  the 
drinking  of  the  cup,  and  St.  Luke  omits  the  incident 
altogether.  The  position  assigned  to  John,  as 
compared  ^\ith  James,  in  the  Acts  would  be  difficult 
to  explain  if  he  met  with  an  early  death. 

4.  John's  residence  in  Ephesus. — Even  if  the 
story  of  John's  death  at  the  hand  of  the  Jews  is 
historical,  it  does  not  exclude  the  possibility  of  his 
residence  at  Ephesus,  though  it  certainly  over- 
tlrrows  the  traditional  account  of  his  long  residence 
there  tUl  the  reign  of  Trajan  and  his  wonderful 
activity  in  extreme  old  age  as  the  last  surviving 
apostle  and  '  over-bishop '  of  Asia. 

In  the  question  of  the  Apostle's  residence  in 
Ephesus  we  are  confronted  with  another  problem 
of  which  our  present  knowledge  offers  no  certain 
solution.  The  absence  of  any  reference  to  such  a 
residence  in  the  later  books  of  the  XT  affords  no 
conclusive  evidence  against  the  possibility  that 
John  \-isited  Asia  and  resided  there.  The  sUence 
of  the  Ignatian  letters  is  more  significant.  Why 
are  the  Romans  reminded  {Ep.  ad  Rom.  iv.  3) 
of  what  Peter  and  Paul  did  for  them,  and  the 
Ephesians  addressed  as  llai\ov  avfifi^rai  {Ep.  ad 
Eph.  xii.  2),  while  there  is  no  mention  of  John  in 
the  Ephesian  Epistle?  The  immediate  occasion 
of  the  reference  to  Paul — the  passing  through 
Ephesus  of  martyrs  '  on  their  way  to  God  ' — pre- 
cluded the  mention  of  John.  But  the  reference  in 
the  preceding  chapter  to  the  presence  of  apostles  at 
Ephesus  (xi.  2 :  oZ  Kai  rdls  dirooriXoiJ  irdrroTe  ffvy^trav) 
— even  if  aimTJaop  and  not  ffw-gveaav  be  the  true  text 
— is  not  much  to  set  against  the  absence  of  any 
direct  reference. 

The  fact  that  Polycarp  never  mentions  him  in 
his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  has  very  little  bear- 
ing on  the  question.  The  natural  interpretation 
of  Papias'  Prologue  is  that  at  the  time  when  he 
was  collecting  his  information  {c.  A.D.  100)  John 
the  son  of  Zebedee  was  dead.  His  name  occurs  in 
the  list',  introduced  by  the  past  tense  rt  elrev ;  as 
contrasted  with  the  are  \eyovffir  which  follows. 
But  this  does  not  preclude  an  earlier  residence  at 
Ephesus. 

It  is  probable  that  Polycrates  of  Ephesus,  in  his 
list  of  the  fieyd\a  rroixeia.  of  Asia  which  he  gives 
in  his  letter  to  Victor  of  Home  (A.D.  190),  regards 
as  the  son  of  Zebedee  the  John  whom  he  places — 
no  doubt  in  the  chronological  order  of  their  deaths 
— after  Philip  'the  Apostle.'  But  his  account  of 
the  friffTTidtoi  is  clearlj'  legendary,  and  sufficient 
time  had  elaj)sed  since  the  death  of  the  John  of 


62d 


JAMES  AND  JOHN 


JAMP:S,  the  LORD'S  BROTHER 


Ephesus  (?  110),  to  whom  he  refers,  for  the  ji^rowth 
oi  confusion,  whether  '  deliberate '  or  unconscious. 

The  evidence  aj^ainst  the  Asiatic  residence  of 
the  Apostle  winch  Corssen  (ZNTW  v.  [1901],  p. 
2tf.)  finds  in  the  Vita  Polycarj)i  has  been  carefully 
discussed  by  Clemen  (p.  421).     It  is  not  conclusive. 

It  is  impossible  to  repeat  in  detail  the  well- 
known  evidence  of  Irenieus,  TertuUian,  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  for  the  accepted  tradition 
of  their  time.  It  is  too  wide-spread  to  be  derived 
from  any  one  single  source,  and  is  difliciilt  to 
reconcile  witli  the  view  that  tlie  son  of  Zebedee 
had  no  connexion  at  all  with  Asia  and  Ephesus. 
However  we  interpret  the  relation  of  Irenceus  to 
Polycarp,  and  the  former's  account  of  the  latter  in 
his  Letter  to  Florinus,  we  cannot  be  sure  that  the 
John  of  whom  Polycarp  used  to  speak  was  really 
the  Apostle  and  not  the  '  Elder,'  or  the  author  of 
the  Apocalypse  (if  these  two  are  not  to  be  identi- 
fied). Justin's  attribution  of  the  Apocalypse  to 
the  Apostle  proves  that  the  tradition  connectinj,' 
his  name  with  Asia  is  at  least  as  old  as  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  century.  And  if  Irenseus  derived  from 
Papias  not  only  the  words  of  the  Elders  but  also 
the  description  which  he  gives  of  them,  the  words 
'  non  solum  Joannem,  sed  et  alios  apostolos '  (Iren. 
II.  xxii.  5)  would  show  that  Papias  also  knew  of 
the  tradition. 

On  the  whole,  the  least  unsatisfactory  explana- 
tion of  the  evidence,  with  all  its  difficulties  and 
complexities,  is  the  hypothesis  that  the  Apostle 
did  spend  some  years  of  his  later  life  in  Ephesus, 
where  he  became  the  hero  of  many  traditions 
which  belonged  of  right  to  another  or  to  others. 

S.  The  Fourth  Gospel. — The  use  which  may  be 
made  of  the  Fourtii  Gospel  as  a  source  of  informa- 
tion about  the  sons  of  Zebedee  depends  on  ques- 
tions of  authorship  which  cannot  Le  discussed  in 
this  article.  They  are  never  mentioned  by  name 
in  the  Gospel,  and  only  once  in  the  Appendix  (21-). 
Probably  the  author  of  this  Appendix  identified 
the  '  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved '  with  the  younger 
son  of  Zebedee,  and  not  witli  one  of  the  &\\oi  6vo, 
unless  indeed  he  intends  to  introduce  a  new-comer 
in  v.^.  He  certainly  identilies  the  loved  disciple 
with  the  author  of  the  Gospel  (v.''*,  if  this  verse 
comes  from  his  pen).  The  natural  interpretation 
of  19**  distinguishes  between  the  author  and  that 
disciple,  if  the  '  witness'  of  that  verse  is  to  be  iden- 
tified with  the  loved  disciple.  The  only  other 
definite  references  to  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved  are  19**  ('Behold  thy  son')  and  13'-^  (the  un- 
masking of  the  Traitor).  The  customary  identifi- 
cation of  him  with  the  dXXos  /xadrjT-^s  of  18^^'-  (known 
to  the  high  priest  who  gained  admission  for  Peter 
into  tlie  ai'Xri)  and  of  20^'-  (who  went  with  Peter  to 
the  Tomb),  is  probable  but  not  necessary.  He  is 
usually  found  in  the  other  disciple  of  the  Baptist, 
who  at  his  suggestion  followed  Jesus  (1^).  The 
phrase  rbv  dSfX^dv  rbv  t5ioi>  Tili/jiwva  cannot  be  pressed 
to  indicate  this.  In  the  Greek  of  the  period  tdios 
is  hardly  more  than  synonymous  with  the  posses- 
sive pronoun.  And  the  natural  interpretation  of 
the  passage  is  tiiiit  Andrew  Jirsf  finds  his  (own) 
brotiier  Simon,  and  next  day,  when  wishing  to 
return  home  to  Galilee,  Philip,  to  whom  Jesus  says, 
'  Follow  me.'  At  the  same  time  the  whole  story 
of  Jesus'  first  meeting  with  the  disciples  who  came 
over  to  Him  from  John  contains  much  which  is 
difficult  to  explain  (see,  however,  M.  Dibelius, 
Die  urchristl.  Uberlieferung  von  Johannes  d. 
Taufer  in  Forschungen  zur  Religion  und  Litteratur 
des  alien  und  neticn  Testaments,  Gottingen,  1911, 
]).  106  ft.  J  as  apologetic  invention.  It  suggests  the 
recollection  of  early  and  treasured  experiences, 
and  gives  a  Avholly  probable  account  of  the  rela- 
tions between  Jesus  and  John,  and  the  undoubted 
connexion  between  the  two,  to  which  the  Synop- 


tists  bear  witness,  though  other  and  later  elements 
in  the  story  are  abundantly  clear. 

On  the  whole,  though  the  pre-eminence  of  John 
in  the  Synoptic  account  is  hardly  such  that  he 
must  have  appeared  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  if  he 
were  not  the  author,  yet  the  facts  of  the  Gospel 
and  the  traditions  of  later  times  about  it  are  most 
easily  explained  by  the  view  that  '  behind  the 
Gosjiel  stands  the  Son  of  Zebedee '  (see  Harnack, 
Chronologie). 

LiTRRATURK.— In  addition  to  the  ordinary  Commentaries  on 
the  Synoptic  and  Fourth  Gospels,  the  following  books  and 
articles  may  be  mentioned :  T.  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  KT, 
Entf.  tr.,  London,  1909;  C.  Clemen,  Vie  Entstehung  den 
Johannesevangeliums,  Halle,  1912;  J.  B.  Mayor,  art. 
'James 'in  II DB  (where  the  usual  references  will  be  found  for 
the  legendary  history  of  St.  James  in  Spain);  P.  W.  Schmiedel, 
art.  'John,  Son  of  Zebedee,'  in  EBi ;  B.  W.  Bacon,  The  Fourth 
Gospel  in  Rcxnarch  and  Debate,  London,  1910  ;  J.  R^ville,  Le 
Quatrihne  fJvanf/ile,  Paris,  1901 ;  E.  Schwartz,  Ueljer  den 
Tod  der  Suhnn  jiehedcei  (AGG,  new  ser.  vii.  5),  Berlin,  1904, 
also  art.  'Johannes  und  Kerinthos,'  in  ZNTW,  x\.  [1914); 
W.  Heitmiiller,  '  Zur  Johannes-Tradition,'  ib. 

A.  E.  Brooke. 
JAMES,  THE  LORD'S  BROTHER.— In  Mk  Q^ 

( II  Mt  13")  James  is  mentioned  first,  presumably 
as  the  eldest,  among  the  brethren  of  Jesus.  In 
Mk  321- 8"^-  (llMt  12*«-,  Lk  8""-)  we  hear  of  an  at- 
tempt on  the  part  of  Jesus'  mother  and  His 
brethren  to  restrain  Him  as  being  'beside  himself.' 
In  Jn  7'  we  are  told  that  '  his  brethren  did  not 
believe  on  him.'  In  1  Co  15^,  however,  St.  Paul 
mentions  an  appearance  of  the  risen  Jesus  to 
James. 

According  to  the  curious  story  which  Jerome  (de  Vir.  lllustr. 
ii.)  quotes  from  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  James  (repre8entc<l 
as  present  at  the  Last  Supper)  had  vowed  not  to  eat  until  he 
should  see  Jesus  risen  from  the  dead.  Jesus  accordingly  ap- 
peared to  him  first  and  took  bread  and  blessed  and  brake, 
saying,  '  My  brother,  eat  thy  bread,  for  the  Son  of  Man  is  risen 
from  them  that  sleep.' 

In  Gal  1^*  we  find  James  closely  associated  with 
the  apostles  at  Jerusalem,  and  in  Gal  2"  we  hear 
how  those  who  were  '  accounted  jnllars ' — James 
and  Cephas  and  John — wished  God-speed  to  Paul 
and  Barnabas  in  their  mission  to  the  Gentiles. 
There  is  perhaps  a  hint  of  irritation  in  St.  Paul's 
reference,  a  few  verses  earlier,  to  those  '  who  were 
accounted  somewhat'  (2*),  as  though  the  accord 
had  not  been  reached  without  some  difficulty,  and 
in  v.12  -vve  find  that  St.  Peter's  vacillation  in 
the  matter  of  intercourse  with  the  Gentiles  is  at- 
tributed to  the  fear  of  certain  who  came  '  from 
James,'  though  it  does  not  follow  that  they  repre- 
sented his  attitude.  In  Acts,  James  always  ap- 
pears as  a  leader.  St.  Peter  sends  the  news  of  his 
escape  'to  James  and  the  brethren'  (12").  At 
the  Apostolic  Conference  he  sums  up  the  discus- 
sion, proposes  a  policy,  and  apparently  drafts  the 
decree  (IS'^"-').  In  2p8'-  he  receives  St.  Paul  at 
the  close  of  his  Third  Missionary  journey,  and,  it 
is  implied,  approves  the  fateful  proposal  designed 
to  conciliate  the  legalist  Christians. 

He  is  understood  to  be  meant  by  the  modest 
self-designation  '  James  the  servant  of  the  Lord ' 
(Ja  1'),  and  the  author  of  the  Ep.  of  Jude  is  con- 
tent to  describe  himself  as  the  '  brother  of  James.' 
In  view  of  the  fact  that  he  seems  to  have  remained 
constantly  at  Jerusalem,  it  is  at  least  uncertain 
whether  he  is  included  among  the  brethren  of  the 
Lord  who  '  led  about'  a  wife  (1  Co  9*). 

That  the  '  brethren  of  the  Lord '  were  the  sons 
of  Maiy  and  Joseph  is  the  natural,  though  not  in- 
evitable, inference  from  the  language  of  Scripture 
(Mt  I**,  Lk  2^  Mk  6»,  etc.).  Those  who  prefer  to 
believe  otherwise,  hold  cither  (1)  that  they  were 
the  sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage,  or  (2) 
the  sons  of  Mary's  sister.  These  three  views  are 
sometimes  called,  respectively,  from  their  early 
defenders,  the  Helvidian,  Epiphanian,  and  Hier- 
onymian.     (For  discussion  see  J.   B.  Mayor,  TIic 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


JA^rES,  EPISTLE  OF 


629 


Ep.  of  St.  James',  pp.  vi-xxxvi  ;  J.  B.  Lightfoot, 
Galatians^,  1876,  pp.  252-291  ;  and  art.  '  Brethren 
of  the  Lord'  in  HDB,  DCG,  and  SDB.) 

Turning  to  the  extra-canonical  references,  we 
find  in  Josephus  {Ant.  XX.  ix.  1)  an  account  of  the 
circumstances  of  the  death  of  James.  The  high 
priest  Ananus  (a  son  of  the  Annas  of  the  Gospels), 
a  man  of  violent  temper,  seized  the  opportunity 
of  the  interval  between  the  death  of  Festus  (c. 
A.D.  62)  and  the  arrival  of  his  successor  Albinus  to 
bring  to  trial  'James  the  brother  of  Jesus  who 
was  called  Christ  and  some  others '  as  law-breakers, 
and  delivered  them  to  be  stoned.  This  account  is 
inherently  probable.  It  is  sometimes  rejected  as 
an  interpolation,  on  the  ground  that  Josephus 
makes  no  other  mention  of  Jesus  or  of  Christian- 
ity ;  but  it  may  be  noted  that  F.  C.  Burkitt  has 
Fately  defended  the  genuineness  of  the  famous 
reference  to  Jesus  in  Josephus,  Ant.  xviii.  iii.  3 
{ThT  xliii.  [1913]  pp.  135-144).  Hamack  has 
signified  agreement  (Internationale  Monatsschrift, 
vii.  [1913]  pp.  1037-1068).  If  this  be  accepted, 
the  present  passage  presents  little  difficulty. 
Hegesippus  (ap.  Euseb.  HE  ii.  23)  gives  a  much 
more  highly  colouretl  account  of  James's  mar- 
tyrdom, representing  him  as  hurled  from  the 
pinnacle  of  the  Temple  because  he  refused  to 
make  a  pronouncement  against  Jesus  (which  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  had  confidently  expected  of 
him !).  Among  other  personal  traits  Hegesippus 
mentions  that  James  was  a  Nazirite  and  strict 
ascetic,  and  that,  so  constant  was  he  in  prayer, 
his  knees  had  become  hard  as  a  camel's.  There  is 
a  variant  of  the  martyrdom  story  in  Clem.  Rccog. 
1.,  Ixix.,  Ixx.,  where,  after  James  has  shown  'by 
most  abundant  proofs  that  J^us  is  the  Christ,'  a 
tumult  is  raised  by  an  enemy,  and  he  is  hurled 
from  the  Temple  steps  and  left  for  dead,  but 
recovers. 

The  tendency  to  exalt  the  position  of  James  in 
later  times  is  seen  in  the  statement  of  Clem.  Alex. 
(ap.  Euseb.  HE  ii.  1)  that  Peter  and  James  and 
John  chose  him  to  be  bishop  of  Jerusalem  ;  while 
in  the  letter  of  Clement  prefixed  to  the  Clem. 
Horn,  he  is  addressed  as  'lord,'  and  'bishop  of 
bishops.' 

LiTERATCRB.— To  J.  B.  Mayor,  The  EpUtle  of  St.  Jamais, 
1910,  Introduction,  ch.  i. :  'The  Author,'  and  the  other  litera- 
ture mentioned  above,  add  T.  Zahn,  '  Bnider  und  Vettern 
Jesu,'  in  Forgehungen  zur  Gfschichte  da  nerttestamentliche-n 
Kanons,  vi.,  Leipzig,  1900,  rp.  225-363 ;  A.  E.  F.  SiefFert,  in 
PRE3,  viii.  574 ff. ;  F.  W.  Farrar,  Earl}/  Datj*  of  Chrigtian- 
ity,  18S2,  Tol.  i.  chs.  six.,  xx.  _         W.  MONTGOMERY. 

JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF.— 1.  Literary  character- 
istics.— The  Epistle  strikes  us  at  once  as  the  ex- 
pression of  a  vigorous  personality.  The  author 
plunges  into  his  subject  A\ith  a  bold  paradox,  and 
his  short,  decisive  sentences  fall  like  hammer- 
strokes.  He  constantly  employs  the  imperative, 
and  makes  much  use  of  the  rhetorical  question. 
His  rebukes  contain  some  of  the  sharpest  invective 
in  the  NT  (4^~*  5^'*),  and  he  knows  when  irony  will 
serve  him  best  (2'®).  He  piles  up  metaphor  upon 
metaphor  until  the  impression  becomes  irresistible 
(3*"i-),  and  multiplies  attributes  with  the  same  effect 
of  emphasis  {e.g.  '  earthly,  sensual,  devilish  '  [3^*  ; 
cf.  I''-  *•  ^*]).  Like  most  vigorous  writers,  he 
delights  in  antithesis  (cf.  \^  1—  ^  3'  4").  In  his 
illustrations  he  uses  direct  speech  with  dramatic 
effect  ( '  sit  thou  here  in  a  good  place,'  etc.  [2^ ;  cf . 
216  4i3j)  Every  here  and  there  are  struck  out, 
like  sparks  from  the  flint  of  this  rather  hard-edged 
style,  phrases  of  arresting  beauty  and  significance  : 
'  the  crown  of  life  which  the  Lord  promised  to  them 
that  love  him '  (1^-) ;  '  the  grace  of  the  fashion  of  it 
perisheth'  (1") ;  'mercy  glorieth  against  judge- 
ment '  (2'')  ;  '  What  is  your  life  ?  For  ye  are  a 
vapour,  that  appeareth  for  a  little  time,  and  then 


vanisheth  away '  (4") ;  '  Behold,  the  husbandman 
waiteth  for  the  precious  fruit  of  the  earth,  being 
patient  over  it,  until  it  receive  the  early  and  latter 
rain '(5^);  'the  supplication  of  a  righteous  man, 
when  it  puts  forth  its  strength,  availeth  much' 
(5«). 

The  form  is,  in  the  main,  the  terse,  gnomic 
form  of  the  Wisdom  literature,  but  the  spirit 
that  inspires  it  has  deeper  roots.  It  goes  back  to 
OT  prophecy.  It  is  an  Amos  that  we  seem  to  hear 
in  the  vigorous  denunciation  of  5^"* ;  Isaiah  is  the 
direct  inspirer  of  the  stately  passage  in  l'**-,  and 
the  writer  has  distilled  the  quintessence  of  the 
prophets  into  that  fine  saying  which  sums  up  his 
teaching  and  comes  home  with  special  force  to  the 
modem  world  :  '  Pure  religion  and  undefiled  before 
our  God  and  Father  is  this,  to  succour  (cf.  Lk  1*®) 
the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  affliction,  and 
to  keep  oneself  unspotted  from  the  world'  (1^). 

It  is  in  part,  at  least,  owing  to  this  gnomic  style  ^ 
and  prophetic  t«mper  that  the  Epistle  does  not 
form  a  logically  constructed  whole,  according  to 
"Western  theories  of  composition.  This  is  not  to 
say  that  it  has  no  cohesion.  A  considerable  part 
of  it  Ls  grouped  round  three  or  four  main  ideas — 
temptation,  the  bridling  of  the  tongue,  the  danger 
of  lip-religion,  the  relation  of  rich  and  poor. 
Within  and  between  these  groups  the  movement 
is  determined,  to  an  extent  which  seems  curious  to 
our  wajs  of  thought,  by  verbal  associations.  The 
emphatic  word  of  one  sentence  becomes  a  catch- 
word linking  it  to  the  next. 

It  may  be  worth  while  to  analyze  a  paragraph  with  a  view  to 
bringing  this  out.  The  salutation,  'James  .  .  .  to  the  twelve 
tribes  .  .  .  giveth  joy '  (V),  snppUes  the  key-word  for  the  ap- 
parently  abrupt  opening :  'And  joy  unmixed  count  it,  brethren, 
when  .  .  .'  (v.^  Again,  '  that  ye  may  be  perfect,  Uieking  fioth- 
itig  (y.*y.  And  if  any  lack  wisdom  [for  the  apparently  abrupt 
introduction  of  wisdom,  see  belowj,  let  him  a^i  .  .  .  (v.S),  bat 
let  him  a^  in  faith '  (r.^  This  idea  is  then  developed  up  to 
the  end  of  v. 8.  The  transition  to  v.9,  'Now  let  the  lowly 
t>rother,'  etc.,  is  apparently  again  abrupt  (see  below).  Verse  12 
returns,  as  though  w.-t-n  might  be  considered  as  a  digresaon, 
to  the  idea  of  temptation,  and,  passing  from  the  sense  of  '  trial ' 
to  that  of '  inducement  to  evil,"  deals  with  some  diflSculties  con- 
nected therewith.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  two  abrupt 
transitions  in  the  above  can  be  explained,  with  considerable 
protebility,  as  due  to  Uteraiy  reminiscence.  In  v.s  we  want  a 
connexion  between  '  wisdom,'  which  appears  unexpectedly,  and 
the  ideas  of  'perfect'  and  'lacking' ;  and  this  certainly  seema 
to  be  supplied  by  Wis  9* :  '  For  even  ii  a  man  be  perfect  among 
the  sons  of  men,  yet  if  the  tci-sdotn  that  cometh  from  thee  be 
not  icith  him,  he  shall  be  held  in  no  account.'  Again  in  v.^, 
where  the  transition  appears  quite  abrupt,  a  connexion  with 
the  central  idea  of  wisdom  is  supplied  by  Sir  111 :  •  The  wisdom 
of  the  lowly  shall  lift  up  his  head,'  and  with  the  next  verse  Sir 
318 may  be  compared:  "The  greater  thou  art,  humble  thyself 
the  more,  and  thou  shalt  find  favour  before  the  Lord '  (cf.  also, 
for  the  double  antithesis.  Sir  20ii). 

2.  Religious  attitude  and  teaching. — The  main 
purpose  of  the  Epistle  is  to  protest  against  pre-  ► 
vailing  worldliness  (4*),  which  finds  expression  in 
avarice  (4^  5*),  pleasure-seeking  (I"  4^),  the  vaunt 
of  a  barren  orthodoxy  (2^**-),  social  arrogance  and 
sycophancy  {2}^),  bitter  contentions  (4^*-),  sins  of 
the  tongue  (1*  3^^").  Against  these  the  author 
holds  up  the  ideal  of  a  life  inspired  by  the  '  wisdom 
which  is  from  above'  (3'"),  which  here  plays  the 
part  assigned  to  the  Spirit  (as  gift)  in  St.  Paul  and 
the  NT  generally.  (With  3"  cf.  Gal  5*^,  and  with 
1*  cf.  Lk  111*  and  jn  3M  )  xiijs  heavenly  wisdom 
is  above  all  things  '  pure '  (a^i^),  primarily  no  doubt 
in  the  sense  of  unstained  loyalty  to  God  (cf.  the 
reference  in  4*  to  the  worldly-minded  as  /totxaX'Sei, 
and  see  2  Co  11-),  and  expresses  itself  in  humility 
(1"),  meekness  (1^-  3'^>,  reasonableness  (3^'),  peace- 
ableness  {3^'^),  mercifulness  (2^*  3^'),  whole-hearted 
earnestness  (3"  5*-*),  active  beneficence  (1"^  3^"), 
dependence  on  the  Divine  will  (4"- 1"-  ^^),  obedience 
inspired  by  faith  (2^^-^).  It  has  often  been  re- 
marked that  purely  theological  conceptions  occupy 
little  space  in  the  Epistle.  And  this  is  literally 
true ;    but  there  is   a  good  deal    of  compressed 


630 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


tlieology  in  expressions  like  '  of  his  own  will  lie 
^  brought  us  to  birth  by  the  word  of  truth,  that  we 
should  be  a  kind  of  firstfruits  of  bis  creatures' 
(1»«;  cf.  Jn  V  6®,  Ro  10"  8"«),  «the  implanted 
word,  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls '  (V^^ ;  cf. 
Ro  1"),  *the  perfect  law  of  liberty'  (1^;  cf.  Mt 
5"'*",  Ko  8'),  '  heirs  of  the  kin},'doni  wliich  he  pro- 
mised to  them  that  love  him  '  (2"),  '  the  parousia  of 
the  Lord  is  at  hand '  (5*) ;  not  to  mention  2^  if 
with  some  very  good  scholars  we  take  Trjs  Sd^rjs 
as  in  apposition  to  roD  KvpLov  ruiGiv  '  \i}(jod  Xpurrod,  and 
understand  '  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  glory '  (in 
J  conformity  with  2  Co  4«,  He  l^  Jn  1"),  as  a  refer- 
ence to  the  Incarnation.  It  is  remarkable,  how- 
ever, that  the  Epistle  contains  no  reference  to  the 
Death  and  Resurrection  of  Jesus,  or,  in  connexion 
witli  such  a  passage  as  5^"^-,  to  His  earthly  life. 
The   writer    is  apparently  little   interested  in 

Juestions  of  organization  (ct.  the  DidacJie,  Clement, 
gnatius).  It  is  only  incidentally  that  we  hear  of 
the  '  elders  of  the  Church '  (5")— the  only  officials 
mentioned ;  and  we  infer,  rather  than  are  told, 
that  the  teaching  office  was  not  strictly  regulated 
(3>).  Incidental,  too,  is  the  mention  of  the  meeting 
for  worship  (2^*),  and  we  hear  nothing  as  to  its 
conduct.  ( For  awayuyi^  in  the  sense  of  a  Christian 
assembly  cf.  Herm.  Marul.  xi.  9  ;  Ignat.  ad  Polyc. 
iv.  2.) 

3.  Reception  in  the  Church. — Re-ascending  the 
stream  of  tradition  from  the  point  at  which  our 
present  NT  canon  may  be  considered  as  definitely 
established  in  the  Western  Church  (Third  Council 
of  Carthage,  a.d.  397),  we  find  that  the  acceptance 
*-  of  the  Ep.  of  James  long  remained  dubious. 
Jerome,  de  Vir.  Illustr.  ii.  (A.D.  392)  says  that, 
while  some  asserted  it  to  have  been  issued  by 
another  under  the  name  of  James  ('  ab  alio  quodam 
sub  nomine  eius  edita'),  it  had  gradually,  as  time 
went  on,  established  its  authority.  Eusebius,  HE 
iii.  25  (c.  A.D.  314)  mentions  it  along  with  Jude,  2 
Peter,  2  and  3  John,  among  the  books  which, 
although  widely  known,  Avere  '  disputed '  (avrCKey- 
6neva).  Again,  in  ii.  23,  after  mentioning  the 
martyrdom  of  James,  he  proceeds  :  '  whose  epistle 
that  IS  said  to  be  which  is  first  among  the  Epistles 
styled  Catholic,'  adding  that  it  was  not  free  from 
suspicion  (lit.  'is  held  spurious'  {sc.  by  some]), 
because  many  ancient  writers  make  no  mention 
of  it,  as  was  also  the  case  with  Jude,  though  all 
the  Catholic  Epistles  were  publicly  read  in  most 
churches.  Origen  (c.  240)  suggests  the  same  un- 
certainty when  he  refers  to  it  as  the  Epistle  '  which 
goes  under  the  name  of  James '  (^  (pepofiivr)  'laKw^ov 
iiri<TTo\ri  [in  Joann.  xix.  6]),  though  according  to 
the  Latin  version  of  the  Homilies  he  elsewhere 
quotes  it  as  Scripture  (Com.  in  Ep.  ad  Rovi.  iv.  1), 
and  as  by  'James  the  Lord's  brother'  {ib.  iv.  8). 
It  is  noteworthy  that  in  his  Com.  in  Matt.  (x.  17) 
he  mentions  the  Ep.  of  Jude  but  not  that  of  James. 
The  Muratorian  Canon  omits  it,  along  with  Heb- 
rews and  1  and  2  Peter  (on  the  other  hand,  the 
Feshitta  includes  it,  while  omitting  Jude,  2  Peter, 
2  and  3  John,  and  the  Apocalypse).  Clement  of 
Alexandria  is  said  to  have  incUmed  a  commentary 
on  '  Jude  and  the  rest  of  the  Catholic  Epistles '  in 
his  Hifpotyposeis  (Euseb.  HE  vi.  14)  ;  but,  while 
his  notes  on  1  Peter,  1  and  2  John,  and  Jude  are 
extant  in  a  Latin  translation,  James  is  wanting. 
As  regards  the  indirect  evidence  of  quotations,  the 
earliest  work  for  which  a  dependence  on  James 
can  be  established  with  any  high  degree  of  proba- 
bility is  tlie  Shepherd  of  Hernias,  which  is  variously 
dated  between  A.D.  10<)  and  150.  (For  Hernias' 
use  of  James  see  the  art.  by  C.  Taylor  in  JPh 
xviii.  [1890]  297  ff.  on  the  priority  of  the  Didache 
to  Hermas.)  Some  critics  are  inclined  to  see  in 
Clement  of  Rome  evidences  of  the  use  of  James. 
But  none  of  the  passages  are  decisivei  and  in  an 


extended  reference  to  the  faith  of  Abraham  (lul 
Cor.  X.  1  fi.)  Clement  quotes  Cn  15*  in  its  proper 
context,  followin"  St.  Paul ;  and,  tliough  he  leferh 
to  the  sacrifice  o?  Isaac,  he  speaks  of  it  as  offered 
5i'  viraKori^  and  not  Sik  irlarfus. 

4.  Date  and  authorship. — As  might  perhaps  have 
been  expected  from  the  character  of  the  external 
evidence,  the  internal  evidence  is  enigmatic.  This 
will  appear  from  a  statement  of  some  of  the  various 
theories,  with  the  difficulties  which  each  involves. 

A.  Take  first  the  theory  which,  accepting  tin; 
traditional  authorship,*  makes  the  Ep.    prior  to 
the  main  Epp.  of  St.  Paul  ami   unrelated  to  his   > 
teaching.     Against  this  the  following  objections 
are  alleged. 

(a)  There  is  strong  evidence,  it  is  held,  that  the 
passage  in  2^*"-  has  in  view  St.  Paul's  teaching  in 
Ro  3  and  4,  and  is  therefore  subsequent  to  that 
Epistle.  The  arguments  advanced  in  favour  of 
this  position  are  as  follows.  (1)  In  denying  that 
a  man  is  saved  by  faith  without  works,  James  is 
attacking  a  paradox ;  but  no  one  is  at  pains  to 
attack  a  paradox  unless  someone  else  has  previously 
maintained  it.  Now  there  is  no  evidence  that  this 
paradox  had  been  maintained  previous  to  St.  Paul. 
Faith  had  been  praised  and  works  had  been  praised, 
and,  if  we  may  accept  2  Esdras  (whatever  its  actual 
date)  as  a  witness  to  pre-Christian  Jewish  beliefs, 
the  combination  of  taith  and  works  had  been 
praised  (13^;  cf.  9'^),  but  the  antithetic  opposition 
of  faith  and  works,  to  the  apparent  disparagement 
of  the  latter,  originated,  so  far  as  our  evidence 
goes,  Avitli  St.  I'aul.  (2)  The  Scripture  example 
to  which  both  writers  appeal  is  much  more  favour- 
able to  St.  Paul's  arfjument  than  to  James's.  In 
Gn  IS**  '  Abraham  believed  God,'  etc.,  refers  specifi- 
cally to  belief  in  God's  promise ;  James  by  an 
exegetical  tour  deforce  gives  it  a  prospective  refer- 
ence to  Abraham's  'works'  in  the  sacrifice  of 
Isaac.  This  is  the  procedure,  not  of  a  writer  who 
is  choosing  his  illustrations  freely,  but  of  one  who 
must  at  all  hazards  wrest  from  an  adversary  a 
formidable  weapon.  (3)  The  passage  is  written  in 
a  technical  phraseology :  BiKaiovaOai  t'/c  irto-rewj, 
diKaiovadai  c^  epyoov,  irLcxTii  X'^P'^  ■'■'^''  ^py^",  PfKpds 
(applied  to  faith,  where  St.  I'aul  applies  it  to 
works).  It  is  less  probable,  it  is  urged,  that  this 
terminology  was  invented  by  James,  who  only 
employs  it  in  this  controversial  passage,  than  by 
St.  Paul,  for  whom  it  is  the  necessary  expression 
of  some  of  his  fundamental  doctrines. 

{b)  In  a  number  of  other  passages  there  are 
points  of  contact,  and  in  some  of  them  the  sugges- 
tion of  literary  priority  is  distinctly  on  the  side  of 
St.  Paul.  For  example,  if  we  compare  St.  Paul's 
statement  in  Ro  8-',  '  the  law  of  the  Sjjirit  of  life  in 
Christ  Jesus  hath  made  me  free  (-fjXfvO^puai  /ue  [v.l. 
ere])  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death,'  w  ith  James's 
references  to  the  law  of  liberty  (vofios  ttjj  f\(v6(pias 
[133  2'^]),  the  latter  succinct,  technical-looking  ex- 
pression has  the  air  of  an  already  coined  and 
current  phrase,  while  St.  Paul  seems  to  be  stating 
a  fact  or  experience,  t 

(c)  With  the  exception  of  the  language  of 
Hebrews,  the  Greek  is  the  most  accomplished  in 
the  NT.  There  is  a  certain  amount  of  rhetorical 
elaboration ;  there  is  an  unusual  proportion  of 
non-LXX  classical  words ;  there  are  many  allu- 
sions to  the  Hellenistic  Wisdom  literature,  and 
apparently  some  to  Greek  classical  literature. 
This  is  not  exactly  the  style  we  should  have  ex- 

*  The  tenn  '  genuineness '  is  strictly  inapplicable,  since  the  Ep. 
ni.ikes  no  explicit  claim  to  be  by  James  the  Ixird's  brother.  It 
has  occasionally  been  attributed  to  James  the  son  of  Zeliedee. 
Pfleidorcr  (PriTnitive  Christianity,  Eng.  ir.,  London,  1906-11, 
iv.  311)  thinks  of  some  unknown  James. 

t  Other  parallels  which  have  been  noted  are  Ja  l^-  i  Ro  S^^-  ; 
Ja  l-'2  '.a  li  Ko  L'i3 ;  Ja  41  t  1  Co  33  143;i,  iio  7=3 ;  Ja  4<  |  Eo  8^  ; 
Ja  lur.  g  Rq  14-1 ;  Ja  3"  (  Qal  ga^ 


JA^IES,  EPISTLE  OF 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


631 


pected  from  the  James  of  tradition,  who  was  of 
intensely  Jevt'ish  sympathies  and  presided  over  the 
Aramaic-speaking  church  of  Jerusalem.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  possibility  of  its  being  a  transla- 
tion is  denied  by  the  great  majority  of  those  com- 
petent to  speak  on  the  i)oint  (whatever  their 
opinion  as  regards  the  authorship). 

{(l)  The  constitution  of  the  membership  of  the 
Church,  including  a  considerable  proportion  of  rich 
people,  does  not  point  to  an  early  date. 

(e)  While  it  would  be  rash  to  affirm  that  a  de- 
clension of  Christian  life  such  as  the  Epistle  implies 
could  not  have  taken  place  within  two  or  tnree 
decades,  the  vices  of  avarice  and  worldliness  which 
are  most  prominent  suggest  a  more  settled  and 
prosperous  community  than  we  should  have  ex- 
pected. 

(/)  In  the  rebuke  of  the  rich  merchants  for  the 
irreligious  temper  in  which  they  laid  their  plans, 
we  should  have  expected,  in  these  early  decades,  a 
reference  to  the  imminence  of  the  Parousia,  rather 
than  merely  to  the  uncertainty  of  the  individtial 
life. 

ig)  We  should  also  have  expected  some  reference 
to  the  Death  and  Resurrection  of  Christ,  and  to 
Messianic  doctrine,  which,  as  all  the  evidence 
seems  to  show,  formed  the  staple  of  early  Christian 
preaching. 

(A)  The  address  itself  constitutes  a  difficulty. 
If,  as  seems  natural  in  a  Christian  writing,  it 
means  Jewish  Christians  in  the  literal  Diaspora, 
where  were  these  to  be  found  prior  to  the  Pauline 
missions?  Moreover,  there  is  no  hint  that  the 
churches  addressed  contained  Gentile  Christians. 
But  were  there  ever  any  purely  Jewish-Christian 
churches  except  in  Palestine?  And  how  could 
they  be  described  as  in  the  Diaspora? 

To  these  objections  the  following  answers  are 
given  : 

(a)  (I)  While  we  have  no  evidence  on  the  point, 
it  is  not  improbable,  in  view  of  the  stress  laid 
upon  faith  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  that  the  faith- 
and-works  paradox  may  have  come  up  in  early 
Christianity  prior  to  St.  Paul.  (2)  Abraham  was, 
in  the  Jewish  schools,  a  stock  example  of  faith 
(see  Ligbtfoot,  Gal.^,  London,  1876,  p.  159  f.),  so 
that  James  and  St.  Paul  might  have  introduced 
him  quite  independently  of  one  another ;  and  the 
following  passage  shows  that  James's  rather  loose 
employment  of  Gn  15®  is  not  peculiar  to  himself  : 
1  Mac  2*-,  'Was  not  Abraham  found  faithful  in 
temptation,  and  it  was  reckoned  unto  him  for 
righteousness  ? '  Mayor  reverses  the  point  of  the 
argument  by  remarking  that  it  is  inconceivable,  if 
James  wrote  after  St.  Paul,  that  he  did  not  make 
an  attempt  to  guard  his  position  against  so  formid- 
able an  attack  {Ep.  of  St.  Jame^,  p.  xcviii).  (3) 
The  technical  language  may  have  been  already  in 
existence  (see  under  (1)).  Moreover,  some  of  the 
terms  used  occur  in  a  more  clearly  defined  form  in 
St.  Paul  (cf.  Ro  3».  2*.  as.  18 .  f^g^  vdfiov,  tuxtis 
XpiffTov  or  'iTjffoO  XpurroD) — which  ptoints  to  a  later 
date  and  a  deliberate  guarding  against  misunder- 
standing. 

(6)  Arguments  of  this  kind  depend  so  much  upon 
subjective  impression  that  no  great  stress  can  be 
placed  on  them. 

(c)  There  is  a  good  deal  of  evidence  that  Gali- 
laeans  were  generally  bilingual ;  and,  as  there  was 
certainly  a  large  Greek-speaking  element  in  the 
church  at  Jerusalem,  the  leader  of  that  church 
would  need  to  acquire  some  facility  in  using  Greek. 
Moreover,  it  is  quite  possible  to  exaggerate  the  ex- 
cellence of  the  authors  Greek.  He  avoids  periods 
of  any  length  ;  and,  though  more  '  correct,'  does 
not  give  the  impression  of  writing  with  the  same 
ease  as  St.  Paul. 

(d)  (e)  We  have  no  stifficient  evidence  to  enable 


us  to  pronounce  definitely  on  these  points,  and 
individual  estimates  of  probability  are  not  an 
adequate  ground  on  which  to  base  arguments. 
Mayor  refers  those  who  are  impressed  with  the 
declension  of  Christian  morals  '  to  a  study  of  the 
life  of  Fox  or  Wesley,  or  of  any  honest  missionary 
journal'  {op.  rit.  p.  eliii). 

(/)  The  author  may  lie  here  using  an  argumentum 
ad  hominem.  Individual  mortAlity  was  an  un- 
deniable fact ;  a  reference  to  the  imminence  of  the 
Parousia  would  depend  for  its  impressiveness  on 
the  liveliness  of  the  faith  of  those  addressed.  A 
little  further  on,  when  encouraging  the  faithful 
oppressed  to  patience,  the  author  does  refer  to  the 
Parousia. 

{g)  These  facts  were  the  staple  of  missionary 
preaching;  here  the  author  can  assume  them  as 
known. 

(A)  Zahn  {Introd.  i.  76  f.,  91  f.)  takes  the  address 
as  referring  metaphorically  to  Christians  generally, 
the  existing  Christians  being,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
those  of  the  Palestinian  churches.  Mayor  (p. 
cxxxvii)  refers  it  to  the  Christians  of  the  Eastern 
Diaspora  (cf.  Ac  2*  and  St.  Paul's  raid  on  the 
Christians  of  Damascus  [Ac  9^]). 

Farther  positive  arg:ninent8  in  favour  of  the  '  genuineness ' 
and  early  date  of  the  Ep.  are :  (a)  the  unassuming  character  of 
the  writer's  self-designation,  whidi  makes  against  forgerj-,  while 
his  authoritative  tone  implies  a  position  of  influence ;  (fi)  the 
number  of  apparent  echoes  from  sayings  ol  Jesus,  which  yet 
never  take  the  form  of  quotations  from  die  Gospels :  (y)  the 
number  of  linguistic  coincidences  \rith  the  speech  of  James  at 
the  Apostolic  Conference,  and  Uie  Decree,  which  was  apparently 
drafted  by  him  (salutation  x"^"'  l^^  i  -^^^  IS^ ;  name  called 
'  upon '  persons  [LXX]  [27  I  Ac  1517] ;  « hearken.  breUiren '  13*  I 
Ac  1513] ;  iwuTniwTtotfmt.  (l^  I  Ac  151'] ;  iwurrpt^itir  {S^^  |  Ac 
1519]  ;  rigpctr,  2utTi|pcu>  covrovs.  ami  Pl27  |  Ac  1529]  ;  repetition 
of  brethren  (brother)  [411 1  Ac  15M]).  (In  taf«ar  of  the  histor- 
icity of  the  Decree  see  Lake,  Earlier  Bpp.  of  St.  Paul,  1911, 
pp.  30 £f.,  48  ft.)  (2)  In  favour  of  an  early  date  we  have  the 
unorganized  character  of  the  teaching  office  {ifi),  the  mention 
of  elders  only  (S^'X  the  anointing  of  the  sick  with  a  view  to 
healing  (51*),  the  confession  of  sins  one  to  another  (516). 

B.  Those  who,  while  holding  the  traditional 
view  as  to  the  authorship,  feel  obliged  to  recognize 
in  Ja  2^**-  a  reference  to  Pauline  teaching,  have 
recourse  to  the  hypothesis  that  the  Ep.  was  written 
either  after  the  appearance  of  Romans  or  at  least 
after  James  had  received  reports  as  to  the  Pauline 
teaching.  Against  this,  the  objection  lies  that, 
once  the  controversies  raised  by  St.  Paul's  preach- 
ing had  begun,  it  is  inconceivable  that  an  Ep. 
wnitten  to  Jewish  Christians  of  the  Diaspora 
should  contain  no  reference  to  the  burning  ques- 
tions about  the  relation  of  Gentile  converts  to 
circumcision  and  the  Law  (cf.  Mayor,  pp.  ex,  cxlv  f., 
and  Zahn,  Introd.  i.  136  f.).  The  present  writer  is 
not  aware  that  any  satisfactory  answer  has  been 
given  to  this  objection,* 

C.  The  hj-pothesis  that  the  Ep.  is  an  originally 
Jewish  work  adapted  by  a  Christian  writer  has 
been  maintained  by  Spitta  and  Massebieau  (see 
Literature  below)  on  the  grormd  of  (I)  the  scanti- 
ness of  specifically  Christian  doctrine — an  immis- 
takably  Christian  reference  is  admitted  onlj-  in  1^ 
and  2^ ;  (2)  close  affinities  with  Jewish  literature  ; 
(3)  the  suggestion  of  tnteri>olation  in  the  curious 
position  of  r^i  So^s  in  2',  where  a  simplification 
would  be  introduced  by  omitting  iiiiwp^lrjffod  XpurraS. 

To  this  it  is  replied  (1)  that  there  is  more  specifi- 
cally Christian  doctrine  than  these  writers  admit : 
e.g.  in  1**  the  combination  of  the  ideas  of  '  beget- 
ting,' 'word  of  truth,'  and  '  firstfruits'  is  much 
more  naturally  referred  to  Christian  doctrine  than 
to  the  original  creation  (as  Spitta) ;  and  phrases 
like  '  the  coming  (Parousia)  of  the  Lord '  (5""*),  '  the 

*  Felne,  who  feels  its  force  (Jakobu^nief,  p.  58X  tries  to  evade 
it  by  the  hypothesis  that  the  £^  was  originally  a  homily 
addressed  to'the  church  at  Jerusalem,  which  was  only  later,  as 
a  kind  of  afterthought,  circulated  in  the  Diaspora  (p.  95).  For 
criticism  of  Feine,  see  E.  K.  Kuhl,  SK  ixvu.  [ISW],  esp.  p.  813  ff. 


632 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 


perfect  law  of  liberty'  (l'"),  'the  elders  of  the 
church '  (5'*),  '  the  goodly  name  by  which  ye  are 
called'  (2^),  'my  beloved  brethren*^  (P*-"  2*),  cer- 
tainly suggest  a  Christian  atmosphere.  No  evi- 
dence is  produced  that  a  faith-and-works  contro- 
versy sucli  as  that  implied  in  2'*'"  had  arisen  in 
pre-Christian  Judaism.  (2)  That  the  work  should 
show  close  uttinities  with  the  OT  and  with  Jewish 
Hellenistic  literature  is  in  no  way  surprising  if 
the  author  was  a  Jewish  Christian.  (3)  That  a 
Christian  interpolator  should  have  been  content  to 
interpolate  only  in  1'  and  2^  is  hardly  conceivable. 
Accepting  the  text  of  2^  as  it  stands,  there  is 
nothing  very  violent  in  taking  Ttjs  SS^rjs  as  an  ap- 
pellation of  Christ,  in  apposition  with  toO  KvpLov 
ilnQv  'l7)<rod  XpiaToC ;  cf.  Lk  2*^  and  perhaps  1  P  4''' 
(so  Mayor  and  Uort,  following  Bengel ;  see  Mayor*, 
p.  80  tr.). 

Two  further  considerations  against  this  view 
have  to  be  added :  (a)  that,  if  there  is  little  that 
is  distinctively  Christian,  there  is  nothing  distinct- 
ively Jewish.  Hamack  writes  :  •  Spitta  has  for- 
gotten to  consider  what  the  Epistle  does  not  con- 
tain.' Christianity  was  a  reformation  of  Judaism 
which  discarded  a  mass  of  religious  and  ritual 
material.  Now  of  this  Jewish  material  which 
Christianity  discarded  the  Ep.  contains  no  trace 
(Chronol.  489  n.).  (b)  Again,  the  apparent  echoes 
from  the  teaching  of  Jesus  are  hardly  satisfactorily 
accounted  for  by  the  hypothesis  of  a  common 
source. 

D.  A  theory  which  shares  with  the  last  the 
hypothesis  that  the  name  of  Jesus  in  P  and  2'  is 
not  original  is  that  of  J.  H.  Moulton,  who  holds 
that  the  Ep.  was  written  by  James  the  Lord's 
brother,  but  for  non-Christian  Jews,  and  that 
therefore  distinctively  Christian  phraseology  was 
deliberately  omitted.  The  mention  of  the  name 
of  Jesus  came  in  by  way  of  a  gloss  [Expositor,  7th 
ser.  iv.  45-55).  This  tlieory  has  the  advantage  of 
accounting  for  the  textual  difficulty  in  2*,  for  the 
Judaistic  tone  combined  with  the  presence  of  (un- 
emphasized)  Christian  thoughts,  and  for  the  ulti- 
mate though  late  and  disputed  reception  of  the 
book. 

Against  this  it  is  urged  that  (1)  the  curious 
subtlety  of  mind  involved  in  the  writing  of  the  sup- 
posed veiled  tract  harmonizes  ill  with  the  sternness 
and  vigour  of  the  writer.  (2)  It  is  not  clear  what 
the  writer  could  have  hoped  to  accomplish  by  it. 
(3)  Moreover,  some  of  the  more  definitely  Christian 
phrases  quoted  above  are  not  easy  to  dispose  of, 
and  the  difficulty  about  2"^-  remains,  for  those 
who  cannot  find  its  presuppositions  entirely  in 
Judaism. 

E.  There  is  the  type  of  theory  according  to 
which  the  Ep.  was  written,  not  by  James  the 
Lord's  brother  and  not  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  but 
by  an  unknown  autlior,  late  in  the  Lst  or  early  in 
the  2nd  century.  The  attractions  of  this  type  of 
theory  are  that  it  gets  rid  of  the  difficulty  arising 
from  the  knowledge  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  com- 
bined with  absence  of  reference  to  the  controversies 
about  the  Law,  as  also  of  that  arising  from  the 
knowledge  of  Jesus'  teaching  combined  with  ab- 
sence of  reference  to  His  life.  It  accounts  for  the 
moralism,  the  absence  of  Messianic  doctrine,  the 
slightness  of  the  reference  to  the  Parousia.  It 
accounts,  better  than  the  early  date,  for  the  con- 
dition of  the  Church,  with  its  worldliness  and  lip- 
religion. 

Of  the  theories  of  this  type  the  most  definite  is 
that  of  Hamack.  He  finds  a  positive  indication 
of  date  in  the  references  to  persecution  in  2"-.  He 
understands  this  of  the  apostasy  of  worldly  Chris- 
tians and  their  betrayal  of  their  fellow-Christians. 
To  this  lie  finds  an  exact  parallel  in  Hernias,  Sim. 
ix.  19,  where  the  'mountain  black  as  soot'  (ix.  1) 


represents  those  who  have  revolted  from  the  faith 
and  spoken  wicked  things  against  the  Lord,  and 
betrayed  the  servants  of  God  (cf.  also  chs.  21,  26, 
'28).  Such  delations,  as  frequent  occurrences,  can- 
not be  placed  earlier  than  about  A.D.  120.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Ep.  which 
would  require  us  to  bring  it  down  beyond  the  first 
tliird  of  the  2nd  century.  He  therefore  dates  it 
between  120  and  130.  But  it  is  not  to  be  thought 
of  as  a  forgery,  for  (1)  anyone  composing  an  os- 
tensible letter  would  have  taken  more  pains  to 
cast  it  into  epistolary  form ;  (2)  a  forger  would 
have  made  it  clearer  who  he  professed  to  be  ;  and 
(3)  he  would  not  have  contradicted  the  generality 
of  the  address  by  the  particularity  of  some  of  the 
references.  The  most  probable  hypothesis  is, 
therefore,  that  it  was  a  compilation  from  the 
writings  of  one  of  those  prophetic  teachers  who, 
far  down  into  the  Post- Apostolic  Age,  still  spoke 
with  a  sense  of  inspiration  and  an  admitted  autlior- 
ity.  Shortly  after  his  death  this  was  issued  by  a 
redactor,  anonymously.  In  its  an(mymous  form 
it  had  a  limited  circulation  among  Palestinian 
Christians.  About  the  end  of  the  2nd  cent,  it 
found  its  way  into  '  the  early  Catholic  world,'  and, 
in  view  of  the  conceptions  then  prevailing  as 
to  the  primitive  apostolic  type  of  doctrine,  it 
is  not  surprising  that  it  should  have  been  attri- 
buted to  James.  (In  addition  to  Chronol.  ii.  1. 
p.  485  f.,  see  the  excursus  on  the  Cath.  Epp.  in  TU 
li.  1.  p.  106  f.,  where  the  general  presuppositions  of 
the  hypothesis  are  more  fully  and  lucidly  set 
forth.) 

Against  this  theory  the  following  objections  are 
ofFered.  (1)  The  hypothesis  is  unduly  complicated. 
(2)  The  religious  spirit  of  the  Ep.  gives  tlie  im- 
pression of  being  very  much  earlier  than  that  of 
Hernias.  (3)  The  ultimate  association  of  the  Ep. 
with  James  of  Jerusalem  and  its  consequent  re- 
ception are  not  fully  accounted  for.  The  passage 
relied  on  to  prove  the  date  (2®'-)  is  susceptible  of  a 
difi'erent  interpretation.  The  rich  man  and  the 
poor  man  of  '2^  apparently  both  come  into  the 
Christian  assembly  as  strangers,  and  there  is 
nothing  to  show  that  the  rich  of  v.®  are  Christians 
rather  than  outsiders.  In  fact,  the  latter  relation 
is  suggested  by  the  fact  that  they  are  said  to 
blaspheme  the  name  by  which  '  you '  (not  '  they ') 
have  been  called. 

As  is  sufficiently  apparent  from  the  number  and 
variety  of  the  theories  (of  which  this  survey  is  by 
no  means  exhaustive),  the  problem  of  date  and 
authorship  admits  of  no  easy  and  convincing  solu- 
tion. In  a  work  of  the  present  character  it  seems 
best  simply  to  be  content  to  say  so. 

LiTERATCRB  (grouped  according  to  the  critical  theories  noticed 
above.  Where  other  theories  are  advocated,  some  indication  is 
given). — A.  J.  B.  Mayor,  Ep.  of  St.  James,  London,  1S92 
(S1910);  R.  J.  Knowling:,  Ep.  of  St.  James,  in  Westminster 
Comm.,  do.  1904  ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  AT,  Eng.  tr.  of  3rd  ed., 
Edinburgh,  1909,  i.  73-151. 

B.  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Ep.  of  St.  James  (as  far  as  47 ;  ed.  J.  O.  F. 
Murray),  London,  1909;  P.  Peine,  Der  Jakobusbrief,  nach 
Lehranschautmgen  mid  Entiiti'huit;isrerh(iltnii-iien  uiitersucht, 
Eisenach,  1893;  A.  Plummer,  T/ie  General  Epi>.  of  St.  James 
and  St.  Jude  (Expositor's  Bible,  London,  1S91)  (date  either 
A.D.  45-49  or  53-62). 

C.  F.  Spitta,  Zur  Geseh.  m.  Litt.  des  Urchristentttms,  ii., 
Gottingen,  1S96,  pp.  1-155;  L.  Massebieau,  'L'Epitre  de 
Jacques,  est-elle  I'oBuvre  d'un  Chrtitien?'  in  RUR  xxxii.  [1895] 
249-283. 

D.  J.  H.  Moulton,  'The  Ep.  of  James  and  the  Sayings  of 
Jesus,'  in  Expositor,  7th  ser.  iv.  [1907]  45-55. 

E.  A.  Harnack,  Die  Chronoloijie,  Leipzig,  1904,  ii.  1.  p.  485  ft., 
TUii.  1  [1884]  100 f. ;  A.  Jiilicher,  Introd.  to  XT,  Eng.  tr.,  Lon- 
don, 1904  ;  J.  Moffatt,  LA'T,  Edinburgh,  1911 ;  B.  W.  Bacon, 
Ititrod.  to  St,  New  Yorlt,  1900;  A.  S.  Peake,  A  CrU.  Introd. 
to  the  NT,  London,  1909. 

Other  views :  G.  Currie  Martin,  '  The  Ep.  of  James  as  a 
Storehouse  of  the  Sayings  of  Jesus,'  in  Exponitor,  7th  ser.  iii. 
[1907]  174-184  (Ep.  woriis  up  collection  of  S.iyings  made  by 
James);  W.  Briickner,  Die  chronol.  Reihcufolfie,  in  vrlrher 
die  Briffe.  des  A'T  verfasst  sind,  Haarlem,  1890,  pp.  2^7-29.') 
(addressed  to  a  conventicle  of  Jewish  Christians  of   h>sene 


JANXES  AND  JAMBRES 


JEPHTHAH 


633 


Bympathies  at  Rome  in  the  nign  of  Hadrian) ;  O.  Pfleiderer, 
Primitice  Christianity,  iv.  (Eng.  tr.,  London,  1911)  293-311 
(2nd  bAlf  of  2nd  cent.).  W.  MONTGOMERY. 


JJLNMES  AND  JAMBREB These  two  men  are 

referred  to  in  2  Ti  3*  as  having  withstood  Moses ; 
they  are  traditionally  identitied  with  two  leading 
men  among  the  magicians  (Ex  1^^  ^ ;  of.  Gn  41^  *•). 
They  are  mentioned  in  the  Gospel  of  JS'icodemus 
(eh.  o)  in  the  warning  given  to  Pilate  by  Nicodemus 
that  he  should  not  act  towards  Jesus  as  Jannes  and 
Jambres  did  to  Moses.  Origen  [c.  Cels.  iv.  51)  says 
that  Nuraenius  (2nd  cent.  a.d.  ;  probably  following 
Artapanos,  an  Alexandrian  Hellenist  of  the  2nd 
cent.  B.C.),  related  the  story  also  ;  and  in  his  com- 
mentary on  Mt  27*  he  says  that  the  reference  In 
2  Tim.  was  derived  from  a  'secret  book'  (perhaps 
the  'Liber  qui  appellatur  Poenitentia  Jamnte  et 
Mambras,'  an  apocryphon  referred  to  in  the  De- 
cretum  Gdasiannm),  as  he  suggests  was  the  case 
with  1  Co  2«  and  Mt  27'  itself  {Pair.  Grceca,  xiii. 
1769).  Eusebius  also  quotes  Numenius  in  his 
Prcep.  Ev.  ix.  8  as  relating  the  story  to  Jannes 
and  Jambres,  two  'Egyptian  scribes'  (cf.  csc-in 
'  magicians '  above,  where  the  primary  meaning  is 
'scribes,'  and  the  secondary  'magicians').  The 
Acts  of  Peter  and  Paul  (Ante-Nicene  Christian 
Library,  xvi.  [1873]  268)  makes  the  two  apostles 
warn  Xero  against  Simon  Magus  by  the  example 
of  Pharaoh,  who  was  drowned  in  the  Red  Sea 
through  listening  to  Jannes  and  Jambres.  The 
Apost.  Const,  (viii.  1)  compares  the  action  of  Jannes 
and  Jambres  to  that  of  Annas  and  Caiaphas.  It 
is  possible  that  the  two  magicians  were  identified 
by  hostile  Jews  with  John  and  Jesus  (cf.  Levy, 
Chald.  Worterbuch,  p.  337),  but  the  story  seems 
older. 

The  licentious  play  of  fancy  which  meets  us 
everywhere  in  the  superstitions  about  magicians 
throughout  the  two  centuries  before  and  the  two 
centuries  after  Christ,  is  responsible  for  the  varie- 
gated and  contradictory  legends  about  Jannes  and 
Jambres.  They  were  sons  of  Balaam,  and  accom- 
panied him  on  his  journey  to  Balak  ;  they  perished 
in  the  Eed  Sea ;  they  were  among  the  '  mixed 
multitude ' ;  they  were  killed  in  the  matter  of  the 
golden  calf ;  they  flew  up  into  the  air  to  escape 
the  sword  of  Phinehas,  but  were  brought  down  by 
the  power  of  the  Ineffable  Name  and  slain.  All 
these  legends  are  in  the  style  of  the  Midrash,  pious 
but  groundless,  and  serve  only  to  illustrate  the 
mind  of  the  period  in  which  they  rose  and  took 
form.  Whether  the  author  of  2  Tim.  is  quoting 
from  oral  legend  or  from  an  apocryphal  work  is 
uncertain.  Origen  suggests  the  latter,  Theodoret 
the  former.  Nor  is  there  any  final  certainty 
about  the  origin  and  meaning  of  the  names.  The 
first  has  been  identitied  with  Johannes  or  John, 
and  may  have  contained  an  allusive  reference  to 
Heb.  .-;:;,  'to  oppress'  (cf.,  further,  artt.  BALAAM, 
NiCOLAlTAXS).  Jambres  occurs  in  the  form  Mambres 
also  (the  b  in  both  is  probably  euphonic  only),  and 
may  have  been  treated  as  if  from  Aram.  »c!??, 
'rebellious'  (cf.  the  opprobrious  ;•?,  'heretic'). 
But  the  polemic  use  of  the  two  terms  as=' op- 
pressor' and  'rebellious'  does  not  explain  their 
origin.  H.  Ewald  (Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,  1864- 
66,  I.  ii.  128),  F.  J.  Lauth  (Moses  der  Ebrder, 
1869,  p.  77),  and  J.  Freudenthal  {Alexander  Poly- 
histor,  1875,  p.  173)  regard  the  names  as  Graeco- 
Egyptian.  In  1  Mac  9*^  the  '  children  of  Jambri ' 
are  mentioned,  an  Arab  tribe,  and  perhaps  not 
Amorites,  but  there  is  no  good  ground  for  tracing 
Jambres  to  this. 

We  can  only  conclude,  therefore,  that  all  that 
is  certain  about  Jannes  and  Jambres  is  that  they 
were  the  names  of  two  men  who  were  believed  in 
the  Apostolic  Age  to  have  been  the  leaders  of  the 


magicians  who  withstood  Moses,  and  that  they 
have  been  made  the  centre  of  pious  legends  and 
the  cause  of  much  critical  ingenuity. 

W.  F.  Cobb. 
JASON  ('ItUrwr).— Jason  is  a  Greek  name,  often 
adopted  by  Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  sometimes  as 
not  unlike  the  names  Joseph  or  Joshua. 

1.  In  Ac  17**-,  the  host  of  St.  Paul  and  Silas  at 
Thessalonica,  who  was  seized  with  other  converts 
and  dragged  before  the  politarchs.  These  authori- 
ties bound  over  Jason  and  his  friends  in  security 
that  there  should  be  no  further  disturbance  and 
perhaps  that  St.  Paul  should  leave  the  city  and 
not  return  (see  Ramsay,  St.  Pavi  the  Traveller  and 
the  Boman  Citizen,  1895,  p.  230  f.). 

2.  In  Ro  16^,  a  person  whose  greetings  St.  Paul 
sends  to  his  readers  with  greetings  from  Timothy, 
Lucius,  and  Sosipater,  all  of  whom  he  describes  as 
his  '  kinsmen,'  i.e.  fellow-Jews  or  perhaps  members 
of  the  same  tribe.  It  is  quite  probable  that  1  and 
2  are  the  same  man.  T.  B.  ALLWOKTinr. 

JASPER  (fao-xts,  from  Assyr.  aspHi). — The  king  on 
the  heavenly  throne  is  like  a  jasper  stone  (Rev 
4') ;  the  luminary  of  the  New  Jerusalem  is  like  a 
stone  most  precious,  as  it  were  a  jasper  stone,  clear 
as  crystal  (21") ;  and  the  first  foundation  stone  of 
the  wall  is  a  jasper.  The  jasper  of  mineralogy  is 
an  opaque,  compact  variety  of  quartz,  variously 
coloured — red,  brown,  yellow,  or  green.  As  this 
stone  does  not  answer  the  description  '  clear  as 
crystal,'  some  think  that  the  diamond  is  meant 
(Smith's  DB  s.v.),  while  others  suggest  the  opal 
(EBi  s.v.).  The  taans  of  the  LXX  (Ex  28-'^)  may 
have  been  the  dark  green  jasper,  which  was  known 
to  the  Egyptians  and  the  early  Greeks. 

jAJfES  Stbahan. 

JEALOUSY.  — Jealousy,  as  the  translation  of 
f^Xoj  (vb.  fTjXo'w),  denotes  the  state  of  mind  which 
arises  from  the  knowledge  or  fear  or  suspicion 
of  rivalry.  (1)  It  is  often  begotten  of  sell-love. 
Those  who  have  come  out  of  heathen  darkness  into 
Christian  light  should  no  longer  walk  in  strife  and 
jealousy  (Ro  13"),  which  are  characteristics  of  the 
carnal  or  selfish  mind  (1  Co  3*).  Bitter  jealousy 
ipiXop  -riKpov)  and  faction,  in  which  rivals  are  '  each 
jealous  of  the  other,  as  the  stung  are  of  the  adder' 
{King  Lear,  Y.  1.  56  f.),  and  exult  over  {KaraKaifxaffOf) 
every  petty  triumph  achieved,  are  an  antithesis  of 
Christianity,  a  lying  against  the  truth  (Ja  3"). 
Where  jealousy  and  faction  are,  there  is  anarchy 
(dicoraoTaffta)  and  every  vile  deed  (3'^).  The  Jewish 
opponents  of  the  gospel  were  tilled  with  jealousy, 
e.g.  in  Jerusalem  (Ac  5")  and  Pisidian  Antioch 
(13«).  'Jealousies'  (j-^Xw,  2  Co  12»,  Gal  5»)  are 
the  inward  movements  or  outward  manifestations 
of  this  un-Christian  feeling. 

(2)  But  the  heat  of  jealousy  (cf.  njcp)  is  not 
always  false  fire.  To  the  Corinthians  St.  Paul 
says,  '  I  am  jealous  over  you  with  a  godly  jealousy ' 
(fijXw  Tip  vfids  deoD  i^riXif,  2  Co  11-),  i.e.  with  a 
jealousy  like  that  of  God.  In  the  OT  Jahweh  is 
the  husband  of  Israel,  loving  her  and  claiming  all 
her  love ;  in  which  sense  He  is  a  jealous  God. 
A  somewhat  similar  jealousy  is  once  ascribed  to 
Christ  (in  Jn  2",  i^Xos,  '  zeal ') ;  and  St.  Paul,  who 
has  betrothed  the  Corinthian  Church  to  the  Lord, 
and  hopes  to  present  her  as  a  pure  bride  to  Him, 
ia  jealous  over  her  on  His  behalf,  feeling  the  bare 
thought  that  she  may  after  all  give  herself  to 
another  to  be  intolerable.  Some  take  deov  fi)Xy  to 
mean  '  with  a  zeal  for  God,'  but  the  context  de- 
mands a  stricter  sense  of  the  word. 

James  Strahax. 

JEPHTHAH  ('le^^de).— Jephthah,  the  Gileadite 
warrior  who  became  the  conqueror  of  the  Ammon- 
ites, and  whose  vow  compelled  him  to  sacrifice  his 
own  daughter  (Jg  11-12),  is  named  among  the  men 


634 


JERICHO 


JERUSALEM 


uf  the  (JT  who  achieved  great  things  by  faith  (He 
ll"*-).  Ho  is  mentioned  after  Samson,  though  he 
was  historically  earlier,  the  author  probably  trust- 
ing his  memory,  or  not  being  over-studious  of 
minute  accuracy.  James  Strau AN. 

JERICHO  i'lfpiyci,  WH  'Icfpfix*^).— The  fall  of  the 
walls  of  Jericho  is  mentioned  as  an  illustration  of 
the  miracle-working  ]>ower  of  Israel's  faith  (He 
1  !*•).  Enervated  by  the  heat  and  fertility  of  tlie 
deep  valley  in  which  the  city  stood,  the  inhabitants 
of  Jericho  were  always  un-warlike,  and  the  story 
in  Jos  6  gives  an  idea  of  the  astonishing  ease  witli 
whicli  their  stronghold  was  captured.  The  site  of 
Jericho  shifted  several  times.  The  Canaanite  city 
has  been  identified  witii  a  tell  or  mound,  1200  ft. 
long  and  about  50  ft.  high,  beside  Elisha's  Fountain. 
This  has  now  been  carefully  e.xplored  under  the 
direction  of  E.  Sellin  of  Vienna,  and  the  mud  walls 
of  the  old  town  laid  bare.  See  '  The  German  Ex- 
cavations at  Jericho,'  in  PEFSt,  1910,  pp.  54-68. 

James  Strahan. 

JERUSALEM. —1.  The  name.— Two  forms  occur 
in  the  NT  :  (a)  lepoyo-aXij/x,  the  'genuinely  national 
form,'  '  hieratic  and  Hebraising,'  used  '  where  a 
certain  sacred  significance  is  intended,  or  in  solemn 
appeals ' ;  it  occurs  forty  times  in  Acts,  and  is  also 
found  in  the  letters  of  St.  Paul,  in  Hebrews,  and  in 
the  Aj)ocalypse  ;  it  is  indeclinable,  and  without 
the  article  except  when  accompanied  by  an  adjec- 
tive ;  (b)  lepoff6\v/j.a,  the  hellenized  form,  favoured 
by  Josej)hus,  and  occurring  over  twenty  times  in 
Acts,  and  in  the  narrative  section  of  Galatians. 
As  a  rule  it  is  a  neuter  plural,  with  or  without  the 
article.  In  each  case  the  aspirate  is  doubtful. 
For  a  discussion  of  the  forms  see  G.  A.  Smith, 
Jerusalem,  i.  259 11'.  ;  W.  JNI.  Kamsay,  Luke  the 
Physician,  London,  1908,  p.  51  If.  ;  and  T.  Zahn, 
Introduction  to  the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1909, 
ii.  592  ir. 

2.  Topography. — The  chief  autliority  for  Jeru- 
salem in  tiie  1st  cent.  A.D. — its  topography  no  less 
than  its  history — is  the  Jewish  writer  Josephus. 
His  historical  works  cover  the  period  with  which 
we  have  here  to  deal,  and  it  is  to  the  details  there 
furnished  that  we  owe  most  of  our  knowledge  of 
the  fortunes  and  aspect  of  the  city  in  the  Apostolic 
Age.  Any  account  of  the  topography  of  Jerusalem 
at  this  time  must  necessarily  follow  the  descriptions 
of  Josephus,  as  interpreted  by  the  majority  of 
modern  scholars.  It  has  always  to  be  kept  in 
mind,  however,  that  there  is  considerable  difl'erence 
of  opinion  on  many  points,  and  tiiat  the  views  of 
the  minority,  or  even  of  an  individual,  although 
we  may  not  be  able  to  accept  them,  are  to  be  re- 
gai'ded  with  respect. 

i.  The  City  Walls,  as  they  existed  at  the  time 
of  the  siege  in  A.D.  70,  first  claim  attention. 

(a)  First  Wall. — In  historical  order,  but  not 
according  to  the  standpoint  of  the  besiegers,  for 
whom  the  first  wall  was  the  third,  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem  on  the  north  side  proceed  from  the  in- 
terior to  the  exterior  of  the  city.  At  all  times  the 
.south  side  of  the  city  had  only  one  encompassing 
wall,  but  during  most  of  our  period  there  were 
three  walls — the  third  only  in  part  —  upon  the 
north  side.  The  first  of  these  northern  walls  com- 
menced on  the  W.  of  Jerusalem  near  the  modern 
Jaffa  Gate,  and  ran  in  an  easterly  direction  along 
the  northern  face  of  the  so-called  S.W.  Hill,  cross- 
ing the  Tyropocon  Valley,  which  then  markedly 
divided  the  city  from  N.  to  S.,  and  joining  the  W. 
wall  of  the  Temple  enclosure.  At  its  W.  extremity 
it  was  marked  by  the  three  towers  of  Herod  the 
Great  —  Hippicus,  Phasael,  and  Mariamne  (or 
Mariamrae) ;  and  at  the  Temple  end  it  ran  near  to 
the  bridge  which  gave  access  from  the  S.W.  Hill 
to  the  outer  court  of  the  Temple.    This  point  is 


now  marked  by  the  modern  Bab  cs-Silsileh,  and 
Wilson's  Arch  found  here  stands  over  tiie  remains 
of  an  older  bridge  whicii  is  doubtless  the  viaduct 
of  Josephus's  time.  From  the  Tower  of  Hipj)icus 
the  wall  ran  southwards  and  followed  approximately 
the  line  of  the  modern  W.  wall,  but  it  extemled 
further  south,  turning  S.E.  along  Maudslay's  Scarp 
and  proceeding  in  a  straight  course  to  the  l*ool  of 
Siloam,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tyropceon  Valley, 
At  this  time  the  pool  possibly  lay  outside  the  wall 
(F.  J.  Bliss  and  A.  C.  Dickie,  Excavations  at 
Jerusalem,  1S94-1897,  pp.  304,  325),  although  G, 
A.  Smith  places  it  inside  (Jerusalem,  i.  224). 
After  crossing  the  Tyropceon,  at  some  point  or 
other,  the  wall  was  continued  in  a  N.E.  direction, 
running  along  the  slope  of  Ophel  to  join  the  Temple 
enclosure  at  its  S.E.  angle.  A  considerable  part 
of  this  wall  upon  the  S.  side  of  the  city  has 
been  excavated  by  Warren,  Guthe,  Bliss,  and 
Dickie.  The  last  two  explorers  found  remains  of 
two  walls  with  a  layer  of  debris  between.  Bliss  is 
of  opinion  that  the  under  wall  is  the  one  destroyed 
by  Titus,  and  he  says  further  :  '  There  is  no  evid- 
ence, nor  is  it  probable,  that  the  south  line  was 
altered  between  the  time  of  Nehemiah  and  that  of 
Titus'  (Excav.  at  Jerus.,  p.  319). 

We  are  here  concerned  with  the  subsequent 
history  of  the  wall  upon  the  S.  side  only  in  so  far 
as  after  the  destruction  by  Titus  it  appears  to  have 
been  rebuilt  on  a  new  line  to  form  the  S.  side  of 
the  Roman  camp  upon  the  S.W.  Hill,  tliis  being 
the  line  of  the  modern  city  wall  on  the  S.  The 
part  upon  the  W.,  together  with  Herod's  three 
towers,  was  spared  by  Titus  and  utilized  by  him 
for  the  '  Camp.'  So  also,  we  may  infer,  was  the 
wall  skirting  the  W.  side  of  the  Tyropceon,  running 
N.  and  S.  from  the  neighbourhood  or  the  bridge  to 
the  region  of  the  Pool  of  Siloam  to  form  the  E. 
boundary  of  the  S.W.  Hill.  This  Avail  is  not 
mentioned  by  Josephus,  but  its  presence  may  be 
concluded  from  the  ract  that  Titus  had  to  commence 
siege  operations  anew  against  that  division  of  the 
city  which  stood  on  the  S.W.  Hill  ('The  Upper 
City').  According  to  C.  AV,  Wilson,  the  ground 
enclosed  by  the  walls  of  the  Upper  City  extended  to 
74^  acres.  The  new  wall  drawn  on  the  S.  side  over 
the  summit  of  the  hill  reduced  the  area  to  about 
48J  acres,  only  a  little  short  of  the  normal  dimen- 
sions of  a  '  Camp '  {Golgotha  and  the  Holy  Sepulchre, 
p.  143  f.). 

(b)  Second  Wall. — According  to  Josephus,  this 
commenced  at  the  Gate  Genath  (or  Gennath)  in 
the  First  Wall,  and  circled  round  the  N.  quarter  of 
the  city,  running  up  to  Antonia,  the  castle  situated 
at  the  N.W.  corner  of  the  Temple  area.  It  had 
fourteen  *  towers,  compared  with  sixty  on  the 
First  Wall  and  ninety  on  the  Third.  Its  extent 
was  therefore  limited  in  comparison  with  the  others. 
There  is  much  discussion  as  to  its  actual  line  in 
view  of  the  importance  of  this  for  the  determina- 
tion of  the  site  of  Golgotha  and  the  Holy  Sepulchre. 
This  is  a  question  that  falls  to  be  treated  under 
the  Gospel  Age,  although  we  have  an  interest  in 
the  projection  of  the  wall  towards  the  N.,  since 
upon  this  depends  the  view  taken  of  the  line  of  the 
Tnird  Wall.  With  the  majority  of  modern  in- 
vestigators we  decide  for  a  limited  compass,  no 
part  being  further  N.  than  the  extremity  which 
went  up  from  the  Tyropceon  to  Antonia.  The 
Gate  Genath  has  not  been  located,  but  it  must 
have  been  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  three  great 
towers,  and  perhaps  lay  inside  of  all  three.  C.  M. 
Watson  concludes  from  a  study  of  the  records  and 
from  personal  investigation  of  the  site  that  the 
Second  Wall  was  most  probably  built  by  Antipater, 
father  of  Herod  the  Great.     He  interprets  Josephus 

•  Ti<raaaa.<i  itou  ie'ica  (Xiese) ;  Whiston  reads  '  forty '  {BJ  v. 
iv.  8). 


.,^SCA.LE,^ 


■2  2S40  feet  ^'i  Mile 


636 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 


as  spcakinp  of  '  a  new  constniction  necessitated 
by  tlie  growth  of  the  new  suburb  on  the  north- 
western liill '  (The  Story  of  Jerusalem,  p.  85).  The 
Second  Wall  is  usually  identified  with  the  North 
Wall  of  Neheiniah  (Smith,  Jerusalem,  i.  204).  In 
the  opinion  of  Smith  'we  do  not  know  how  the 
Second  Wall  ran  from  the  First  to  the  Tyropoeon  ; 
we  do  not  know  whether  it  ran  inside  or  outside 
the  site  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre '  (i6. 
p.  249).  Wilson  also  leaves  the  question  open 
{Golgotha,  n.  137). 

(c)  Third  Wall. — As  already  noted,  the  line  of 
the  Third  Wall  is  bound  up  with  the  question  of 
the  line  of  the  Second  Wall.  Following  Robinson, 
both  Merrill  (Ancient  Jerusalem,  ch.  xxiv. )  and 
I'aton  (Jerusalem  in  Bible  Times,  pp.  lll-llo) 
place  it  a  considerable  distance  N.  of  the  modern 
city  wall.  Most  other  students  of  the  subject  are 
content  to  accept  the  present  North  Wall  as 
marking  the  site  of  the  Third  or  Agrippa's  Wall. 
Conder  (The  Uittj  of  Jerusalem,  pp.  16'J-166)  occu- 
pies an  intermediate  position,  giving  a  northerly 
extension  beyond  the  present  limits  only  on  the 
side  W.  of  the  Damascus  Gate.  The  wall  was 
commenced  about  A.D.  41  on  a  colossal  plan  ;  but, 
suspicion  having  been  aroused,  operations  had  to 
be  suspended  bv  order  of  Claudius.  The  wall  was 
liurriedly  completed  before  the  days  of  the  siege. 
The  main  purpose  of  the  Third  Wall  was  to  enclose 
within  the  fortified  area  of  the  city  the  new  suburb 
of  Bezetha,  which  had  grown  up  since  Herod  the 
Great's  time  on  the  ridge  N.  of  the  Temple  and 
Antonia.  The  most  conspicuous  feature  on  the 
wall  was  the  Tower  of  Pscphinus  at  the  N.W. 
corner,  which  is  named  in  conjunction  with  the  three 
great  towers  of  Herod,  and  may  have  existed  at 
an  earlier  time  (Smith,  Jerusalem,  ii.  487),  being 
also  tiie  work  of  Herod  (EBi  ii.  2428).  The  W. 
extremity  of  the  wall  was  at  Hippicus;  the  N.W. 

Joint  at  Psephinus ;  the  N.E.  point,  according  to 
osephus,  at  the  Tower  of  the  Corner,  opposite  the 
'  Monument  of  the  Fuller ' ;  and  the  E.  extremity 
at  the  old  wall  in  the  Kidron  Valley,  i.e.  the  N.F^. 
point  of  the  Temple  enclosure.  Merrill's  view 
(Anc.  Jerus.,  ]m.  44,  51)  is  that  the  line  of  this 
wall  in  its  southerly  trend  would  cut  the  line  of 
the  present  wall  a  little  E.  of  Herod's  Gate ;  in 
other  words,  the  present  N.E.  corner  of  the  city 
was  not  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  before  its 
destruction  by  Titus.  Tliis  view  has  much  to  com- 
mend it,  although  it  is  not  admitted  by  those  who 
advocate  that  the  Third  Wall  followed  the  line  of 
the  present  wall  in  its  entire  course  (Smith,  Jeru- 
salem, i.  245  ff.). 

ii.  Temple  Walls.— The  remainder  of  the  peri- 
meter of  the  outer  wall  of  Jerusalem  was  made  up 
by  the  E.  wall  of  the  Temple,  which  in  Herod's 
time  coincided  with  the  city  wall  (Smith,  Jerusa- 
lem, i.  234  f.).  The  enclosure  of  the  sanctuary  did 
not,  liowever,  extend  so  far  N.  as  it  does  to-day. 
Warren's  Scarp,  as  it  is  called,  marks  the  N.  limit 
of  the  outer  court  of  Herod's  temple  (ExpT  xx. 
[1908-09]  66).  This  would  cut  the  E,  wall  only 
slightly  N.  of  the  present  Golden  Gate.  An  ex- 
tension to  the  N.  was  perhaps  made  by  Agrippa  I. 
(Smitii,  Jerusalem,  i.  237  f.),  but  even  then  tlie  N. 
boundary  must  have  fallen  considerably  short  of 
the  present  wall.  The  fore-court  of  Antonia  must 
therefore  have  projected  some  distance  into  the 
present  5aram  area,  and  the  rock  on  which  tlie 
castle  stood,  while  scarped  on  the  other  three  sides, 
must  on  the  S.  have  formed  part  of  the  same  ridge 
as  that  on  which  the  Temple  lay.  The  N.  Temple 
area  wall  presumably  joined  this  rock,  while  the 
W.  Temple  area  wall  started  from  the  S.W.  point 
of  the  fore-court  of  Antonia  and  ran  S.  to  meet 
the  S.  wall  lower  down  the  Tyropoeon  Valley. 
Examiaatioa  of  the  rock  levels  has  proved  that 


the  S.AV.  corner  of  the  Temple  area  is  upon  the 
far  side  of  the  valley,  i.e.  upon  the  S.W.  Hill. 

A  proper  understanding  of  this  complex  of  walls 
is  essential  to  an  appreciation  of  Josephus's  narra- 
tive of  the  sie^e  of  a.d.  70,  which  in  turn  gives  the 
key  to  the  whole  situation  within  Jerusalem  in 
the  time  of  the  apostles.  The  city  was  fortified 
in  virtue  of  its  complete  circuit  of  walls.  When 
the  most  northerly  wall  was  breached  it  still  was 
fortified  by  the  second  N.  wall  and  all  that  re- 
mained. When  the  second  wall  was  taken,  access 
was  given  to  the  commercial  suburb  (irpodareiov)  in 
the  Upper  Tyropreon  V'alley.  Antonia  formed  a 
fortress  by  itself,  likewise  the  Temple  both  in  its 
outer  court  and  in  the  inner  sanctuary.  After  the 
Temple  was  taken  the  way  was  open  to  the  '  Lower 
City  and  the  Akra,  whicn  is  almost  synonymous 
with  the  'Lower  City,'  i.e.  the  Lower  Tyropoeon 
Valley  from  the  First  Wall  to  the  Pool  of  Suoam 
together  with  the  S.E.  Hill,  of  Avhich  Ophlas 
formed  a  part.  Lastly,  the  S.W.  Hill,  on  which 
stood  the  '  Upper  City '  with  the  '  Upper  Agora,' 
was  completely  fortified,  and  doubtless  the  Palace 
of  Herod  at  the  N.W.  corner  of  the  '  Upper  City' 
also  was  a  strong  place  within  four  walls,  Avith  the 
tliree  great  towers  upon  the  N.  side. 

iii.  Changes  in  the  City  during  the  Apostolic 
Age. — While  there  was  nothing  to  equal  the  great 
building  achievements  of  Herod  the  Great,  activity 
was  by  no  means  stayed  during  the  interval  between 
the  Death  of  Christ  and  the  Destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem (c.  A.D.  30-70).  This  we  judge  from  the  fact 
that  it  was  not  until  c.  A.D.  64  that  operations  in 
the  courts  of  the  Temple  were  at  an  end.  Even 
then  the  cessation  of  work  involved  about  18,000 
men.  To  prevent  disaftection  and  privation,  they 
Avere  transferred  with  the  sanction  of  Agrippa  ii. 
to  the  work  of  paving  the  streets  of  the  city  (Jos. 
Ant.  XX.  ix.  7).  Reference  has  alre.ady  been  made 
to  the  building  of  the  Third  Wall  during  the  reign 
of  Agrippa  i.,  and  this  was  necessitated  by  the 
growth  of  the  suburb  Bezetha,  or  New  Town, "lying 
north  of  Antonia  and  the  Temple  on  the  N.E. 
ridge.  The  Lower  Aqueduct,  which  brought  water 
to  the  Temple  enclosure  from  a  distance  of  200 
stadia,  is  ascribed  to  Pontius  Pilate  during  the 
years  preceding  his  recall  .and  was  in  a  way  re- 
sponsible for  his  demission  of  office  (A.D.  36). 
Several  palaces  were  built  at  this  time — all  over- 
looking the  Tyropoeon :  that  of  Bemice,  near  the 
Palace  of  the  Hasmonajans  (see  below) ;  of  Helena, 
Queen  of  Adiabene,  who  was  resident  in  Jerusalem 
during  the  great  famine  (Ac  ll'*) ;  of  Monobazus, 
her  son  ;  and  of  Grapte,  a  near  relative.  Agrippa 
II.  enlarged  the  Hasmonfean  Palace,  which  was 
situated  on  the  S.W.  Hill  near  the  bridge  over 
the  Tyropoeon,  and  when  finished  overlooked  the 
sanctuary.  This  was  a  cause  of  friction,  and  led 
to  the  building  of  a  screen  -within  the  sacred  area 
(Ant.  XX.  viii.  11).  Most  of  these  notable  buildings 
were  destroyed  or  plundered  during  the  faction 
fights  on  the  eve  of  the  siege  (BJ  ll.  xvii.  6,  IV.  ix. 
11)  and  during  its  course  (vi.  vii.  1). 

While  stone  was  freely  used  in  construction,  it 
ought  to  be  realized  that  timber  also  played  a  large 
part — much  more  so  than  at  the  present  day 
(Merrill,  Anc.  Jerus.,  np.  1.S6,  150,  152).  The 
Timber  Market  was  in  Bezetha,  the  new  suburb. 
For  ordinary  building  purposes  wood  was  brought 
from  a  distance,  but  during  the  siege  the  Romans 
availed  themselves  of  the  trees  growing  in  the 
environs,  totally  altering  the  external  aspect  of 
the  city.  Still  more  fatal  to  its  beaut}'  was  the 
havoc  wrought  by  fire  within  the  Temple  area,  and 
in  the  various  quarters  of  the  city  after  the  victory 
of  the  Romans,  and  most  of  all  in  the  execution  of 
Titus's  order  to  raze  the  city  to  the  ground.  In 
spite  of  Josephus's  testimony,  all  writers  are  not 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 


637 


of  one  niind  regarding  the  extent  of  the  ruin. 
Thus  Wilson  saj's  of  the  'Upper  City'  at  least : 
'Many  houses  must  have  remained  intact.  The 
military  requirements  of  the  Roman  garrison 
necessitated  some  demolition ;  but  there  is  no 
evidence  that  a  plough  was  passed  over  the  ruins, 
or  that  Titus  ever  intended  that  the  city  should 
never  be  rebuilt'  (Golgotha,  p.  52;  cf.  Merrill, 
Anc.  Jcrus.,  p.  179). 

iv.  Sacred  sites  pektaixixg  to  the  Apostolic 
Age. — For  this  department  of  our  subject  we  must 
call  in  the  aid  of  tradition,  in  so  far  as  this  appears 
to  be  in  any  measure  worthy  of  credence.  The 
sites  to  be  dealt  with  are  mostly  suggested  by  the 
narrative  of  the  Book  of  Acts. 

(a)  The  Ccenaeulum. — Outside  the  present  S.  city 
wall  on  the  S.W.  Hill  lies  a  complex  of  buildings, 
which  since  the  16th  cent,  have  been  in  Moslem 
possession  and  are  termed  en-Nebi  Dd'iid.  Under- 
ground is  supposed  to  be  the  Tomb  of  David,  but 
this  part  is  not  open  to  the  inspection  of  Christians. 
Immediately  above  this  is  a  vaulted  room  (show- 
ing 14th  cent,  architecture),  wMch  is  now  identified 
with  the  'large  upper  room'  in  which  the  Last 
Supper  was  held,  where  Christ  appeared  to  His 
disciples,  in  which  the  early  Christians  assembled, 
and  where  the  Holy  Ghost  was  given.  It  is 
supposed  to  be  the  house  of  Mary,  the  mother  of 
Jonn  Mark.  According  to  a  later  tradition — which 
probably  arose  from  a  confusion  of  this  Mary  with 
the  Mother  of  Jesus — this  is  also  the  scene  of  the 
death  of  the  Virgin.  Here  also  Stephen  was 
thought  to  be  martyred  (stUl  later).  The  earliest 
tradition  Avith  which  we  are  here  concerned  dates 
from  the  4th  cent.  A.D.,  being  preserved  by 
Epiphanius  (rfe  Mens,  et  Fond.  xiv.  [Migne,  Pair. 
Grceca,  xUii.  col.  25911'.];  cf.  Wilson,  Golgotha, 
p.  173) : 

'  He  [Hadrian]  found  the  whole  city  razed  to  the  g^tind,  and 
the  Temple  of  the  Lord  trodden  under  foot,  there  being-  only  a 
few  houses  standing,  and  the  Church  of  God,  a  snmU  building, 
on  the  place  where  the  disciples  on  their  return  from  the  Meant 
of  Olives,  after  the  Saviour's  Ascension,  assembled  in  the  upper 
chamber.  This  was  built  in  the  part  of  Sion  which  had  escaped 
destruction,  together  with  some  buildings  round  aboat  Sion, 
and  seven  synagogues  that  stood  alone  in  Sion  like  cottages.' 

Since  then  there  have  been  many  changes  in  the 
btdldings  themselves  and  in  their  owners,  but  the 
tradition  has  been  constant.  What  it  is  worth 
still  awaits  the  test,  but,  as  Stanley  says :  *  there 
is  one  circumstance  which,  if  proved,  would  greatly 
endanger  the  claims  of  the  "Ccenaeulum.'"  It 
stands  above  the  vault  of  the  traditional  Tomb  of 
David,  and  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  any  resi- 
dence, at  the  time  of  the  Christian  era,  could  have 
stood  within  the  precincts  of  the  Koyal  Sepulchre' 
{Sinai  and  Palestine,  new  ed.,  London,  1877,  p. 
456).  It  may  be  noted  that  the  Tomb  of  David  is 
now  sought,  although  it  ha-s  not  been  found,  on  the 
S.E.  Hill,  where,  in  the  opinion  of  most,  the  '  City 
of  David,'  or  Zion,  lay  (Paton,  Jerusalem,  p.  74  f.). 
From  the  language  of  Ac  2'^  the  tomb  was  e>identh- 
in  the  neiglibourhood  of  Jerusalem  (cf.  Ant.  xni. 
viii.  4,  XVI.  \-ii.  1,  BJ  I.  ii.  5).  Sanday  is  prepareti 
to  give  the  tradition  about  the  Ccenaeulum  'an 
unqualified  adhesion '  (Sacred  Sites  of  the  Gospels, 
p.  78),  and  proceeds  to  argue  the  matter  at  length 
(pp.  78-88).  His  argument  is  contested  by  G.  A. 
Smith  (Jerusalem,  ii.  56711'.).  whose  opinion  is  that 
'  while  the  facts  alleged  (by  Dr.  Sanday)  are  within 
the  bounds  of  possibility,  thej'  are  not  very  pro- 
bable' (p.  568).  Wilson  is  more  favourable,  and 
thinks  that  here  'amidst  soldiers  and  civilians 
drawn  from  all  parts  of  the  known  world,  the 
Christians  may  have  settled  down  on  their  return 
from  Pella,  making  many  converts  and  worshipping 
in  a  small  building  [see  Epiphanius,  a.s  above] 
which  in  happier  times  was  to  become  the  "  Mother 
Church  of  Sion,"  the  "  mother  of  all  the  churches  " ' 


(Golgotha,  p.  54 ;  cf.  T.  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the 
ATr,  ii.  447  f.). 

(b)  The  Temple  and  its  precincts. — Although 
tradition  has  fixed  on  one  spot  as  being  the  special 
meeting-place  of  the  first  Christians,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  they  still  continued  to  frequent  the 
Temple.  While  they  had  indeed  become  Chris- 
tians they  did  not  cease  to  be  Jews,  at  least  not 
that  section  which  remained  in  Jerusalem  during 
the  years  preceding  the  Fall  of  the  city.  Accord- 
ingly we  find  in  the  Book  of  Acts  a  considerable 
body  of  evidence  regarding  the  presence  of  Chris- 
tians in  and  about  the  Temple,  A  detailed  notice 
of  all  these  references  properly  belongs  to  another 
article  (Temple),  but  a  brief  mention  of  those  con- 
cerning the  enA-irons  may  here  be  made. 

(a)  'Peter  and  John  were  going  up  into  the 
t«mple  at  the  hour  of  prayer'  (Ac  3').  This  is 
topographically  exact,  whether  we  take  the  outer 
court  or  the  sanctuary  proper,  which  only  Jews 
could  enter  (Ac  21'^*-).  There  were  ramps  and 
stairs  and  steps  at  many  points.  An  exception 
would  have  to  be  made  if  we  accepted  Conder's 
identification  of  the  Beautiful  Door  or  Gate  (Ac 
3*-  ^**)  as  being  the  main  entrance  on  the  W. , 
'  probably  at  the  end  of  the  bridge  leading  to  the 
Koyal  Cloister'  (The  City  of  Jerusalem,  p.  129). 
But  for  several  reasons  this  cannot  be  entertained. 
A.  R.  S.  Kennedy  has  shown  (ExpT  xx.  270  If.  ; 
cf.  Schiirer,  HJP  u.  L  [1885]  280)  that  the  Beauti- 
ful Door  is  to  be  sought  in  the  inner  courts,  and 
preferably  on  the  E.  side  of  the  Court  of  the 
Women.  Little  value  can  be  attached  to  the 
tradition  that  the  Golden  Gate  above  the  Kidron 
Valley  is  the  gate  referred  to  in  Ac  3'-. 

(P)  The  porch  or  portico  along  the  E.  side  of  the 
Temple  area  is  the  Solomon's  Porch  of  Ac  3'^  5^-. 
Its  appearance  may  be  realized  from  the  frontis- 
piece (by  P.  Waterhouse)  of  Sacred  Sites  of  the 
Gospels,  where  a  full  view  is  given  of  the  so-called 
Koyal  Porch  on  the  S.  side.  This  is  generally 
supposed  to  have  had  an  exit  on  the  W.  by  a  bridge 
crossing  the  Tyropceon  (see  Conder,  above)  at 
Robinson's  Arch,  but  Kennedy  has  shown  that 
nearly  all  modems  are  in  error  about  this  (ExpT 
XX.  67  ;  cf.  Jos.  Ant.  XV.  xi.  5).  On  the  W.  and 
N.  sides  there  were  also  porches  or  cloisters  which 
met  at  the  entrance  to  Antonia. 

(c)  Antonia. — This  fortress  is  about  the  most 
certainly  defined  spot  within  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem. To-day  it  is  occupied  in  part  by  the  Turk- 
ish barracks,  on  the  N.W.  of  the  ^aram  area.  In 
Herod  the  Great's  time  the  castle  was  re-built  on 
a  grand  scale  and  strongly  fortified.  Later  it  was 
occupied  as  a  barracks  (xape^oX^,  Ac  21**-*^,  etc.) 
by  the  Romans,  who  here  maintained  a  legion 
(rdy/uL  [BJ  V.  v.  8],  understood  by  Schiirer  [HJP 
I.  ii.  (1890)  55]  as  =  ' cohort';  this  is  not  accepted 
by  Merrill  [Anc.  Jerus.  216  f.]).  As  shown  above, 
it  is  probable  that  some  slight  re-adjustment  of  the 
forecourt  of  Antonia  and  of  the  N.  side  of  the 
Temple  area  had  taken  place  in  the  interval  follow- 
ing Herod  the  Great's  reign.  From  the  vivid 
narrative  of  Ac  21*^**  it  is  evident  that  the  Temple 
area  was  at  a  lower  level  than  the  Castle,  for  stairs 
led  down  to  the  court.  According  to  Josephus 
(BJ  V.  V.  8),  on  the  comer  where  Antonia  joined 
the  N.  and  W.  cloisters  of  the  Temple  it  had  gang- 
ways down  to  them  both  for  the  passage  of  the 
guard  at  the  Jewish  festivals.  While  the  exact 
plan  of  the  ground  can  hardly  be  determined,  there 
seems  to  be  no  justificarion  for  '  a  valley '  and  '  a 
double  bridge,'  as  .supposed  by  Sanday  and  Water- 
house  (Sacmi  Sites,  p.  108  and  plan  [p.  116];  cf. 
Smith,  Jerusalem,  ii.  499  n.).  By  cutting  down 
the  cloisters  a  barricade  could  be  erected  to  prevent 
entrance  to  the  Temple  courts  from  the  Castle,  as 
was  done  by  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Floras  (a.d.  66 


638 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 


[BJ  11.  XV.  6;  cf.  VI.  ii.  9,  iii.  1]).  O])inion  is 
divided  as  to  whether  tlie  Koinan  procurator  made 
his  headquarters  in  Antonia  or  in  Herod's  Palace 
on  the  S.W.  Hill,  but  tlie  evidence  seems  to  be  in 
favour  of  the  latter.  This  appears  most  clearly 
from  the  proceedings  in  the  time  of  Florus  {BJ  il. 
xiv.  8,  9  ;  see  Wilson,  Golgotha,  p.  41  f,  ;  Smith, 
Jerusalan,  ii.  57311'.).  Antonia  was  certainly  used 
as  a  place  of  detention,  as  is  plain  from  Ac  22^. 
This  leads  us  to  remark  on  the  position  of — 

(rf)  The  Council  House. — The  meeting-place  of 
the  Sanhedrin  in  apostolic  times  is  of  some  import- 
ance in  view  of  the  experience  of  St.  I'cter,  St. 
John,  and  St.  Paul.  From  data  provided  by 
Josephus  we  judge  that  it  lay  between  the  Xystus 
and  the  W.   porch  of  the  'femple,  i.e.  near  the 

1)oint  where  the  bridge  cro.ssed  the  Tyropoeon. 
^'rom  Josephus  (BJ  vi.  vi.  3)  we  also  infer  that  it 
was  in  tlie  '  Lower  City,'  for  it  perished  together 
with  Akra  and  the  place  called  Ophlas.  It  is 
reasonable  to  seek  in  proximity  to  the  Council 
House  the  prison  of  Ac  4^  5'* ;  that  of  Ac  12*  was 
probably  in  connexion  with  the  Palace  of  Herod, 
where  presumably  Agrippa  I.  lived  and  maintained 
his  own  guard  (seeylj!^.  xix.  vii.  3).  The  tradi- 
tional spot  was  shown  in  the  12th  cent.  E.  of  whei-e 
this  palace  stood,  in  the  heart  of  the  '  Upper  City,' 
while  the  present  Zion  Gate  upon  the  S.  was  taken 
to  be  the  iron  gate  of  Ac  12"*  (Conder,  The  City  of 
Jerusalem,  p.  16). 

(c)  Sites  associated  with  the  proto-martyrs. — (1) 
St.  Stephen. — The  association  of  St.  Stephen  with 
the  Coenaculum  dates  from  the  8th  cent.,  and  with 
the  modern  Bdb  Sitti  Maryam  (St.  Stephen's  Gate) 
from  the  15th  century.  These  traditions  may  be 
i^'nored,  and  attention  fixed  on  the  site  N.  of  the 
city,  where  Eudocia's  Clmrch  was  built  as  early  as 
the  5th  centui-y.  Its  site  was  recovered  in  1881. 
It  must  be  recalled  that  when  St.  Steplien  perished 
(between  A.D.  33  and  37)  the  Third  Wall  was  not 
in  existence,  and  the  total  irregularity  of  the  pro- 
ceedings at  his  stoning  leads  us  to  tnink  that  he 
was  killed  at  the  readiest  point  outside  the  citj\ 
If  on  the  N.  side,  as  the  tradition  bound  up  with 
Eudocia's  Church  seems  to  imply,  it  w'ould  probably 
be  outside  the  gate  of  the  Second  Wall. 

(2)  James  the  Great,  the  brother  of  John,  is 
supposed  to  have  been  beheaded  in  a  prison  now 
marked  by  the  W.  aisle  of  the  Church  of  St. 
James  in  the  Armenian  Quarter — a  tradition  of 
no  value.  It  is  worthy  of  note,  however,  that,  as 
in  the  case  of  St.  Peter,  the  spot  is  not  remote 
from  the  Palace  of  Herod. 

(3)  James  the  Just,  '  the  brother  of  Jesus,  who 
was  called  the  Christ' (/!«<.  XX.  ix.  1),  according 
to  Hegesii)pus  (preserved  in  Eusebius,  HEll.  xxiii. 
4tt".)  also  suflered  a  violent  death  (c.  A.D.  62)  after 
a  mode  which  is  very  imjirobable  (see  HDB,  art. 
•James,'  §  3),  the  stoning  excepted,  to  which 
Josephus  testifies.  The  Grotto  of  St.  James  near 
tlie  S.E.  corner  of  the  Temple  area,  on  the  E.  side 
of  Kidron,  is  supposed  to  be  his  tomb  (15th  cent, 
tradition),  or  preterably  his  hiding-place  (6th  cent, 
tradition).  While  the*  tomb  is  as  old  as  the  days 
of  the  Apostle,  or  even  older,  the  inscription  above 
its  entrance  bears  reference  to  the  B'nc  Ifczir  (S.  R. 
Driver,  Notes  on  Heb.  Text  of  Books  of  SanmeP, 
1913,  p.  xxi). 

if)  T/ie  tree  {with  the  bridge)  where  Judas  Jianged 
himself,  and  Akddama,  the  field  of  blood  (Ac  1'*), 
are  shown,  but  tiiere  are  rival  .sites  for  the  latter, 
and  the  former  has  often  changed  (Conder,  The 
City  of  Jerusalem,  p.  18  f.). 

{g)  Sites  associated  with  tlie  Virgin.  —  Besides 
the  tradition  of  the  Dormitio  Sanctre.  Mariic,  the 
scene  of  the  Virgin's  death,  in  proximity  to  tlie 
Ccenaculum,  tlic  Tomb  of  the  Virgin  is  marked  by 
a  church,  originating  in  the  5th  cent.,  in  the  valley 


of  the  Kidron,  outside  St.  Stephen's  Gate  (Sanday, 
Sacred  Sites,  p.  85). 

{h)  The  scene  of  the  Ascension. — Discarding  Lk 
24"*,  Christian  tradition  early  laid  hold  upon  the 
summit  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  (cf.  Ac  1'^)  as  the 
scene  of  the  Ascension.  The  motive  for  tliis  will 
be  understood  from  what  has  been  written  by 
Eusebius  {Demons.  Evang.  vi.  18  [Migne,  Patr. 
Grceca,  xxii.  col.  457  f.];  cf.  Wilson,  Golgotha,  Tp. 
172): 

'All  believers  in  Christ  flock  together  from  all  quarters  of  the 
earth,  not  as  of  old  to  behold  the  beauty  of  Jenisal<?in,  or  that  they 
may  worship  in  the  former  Temple  which  stood  in  Jerusalem, but 
that  they  may  abide  there,  and  both  hear  the  stor^  of  Jerusalem, 
and  also  worship  in  the  Mount  of -Olives  over  against  Jerusalem, 
whither  the  glory  of  the  Lord  removed  itself,  leaving  the  earlier 
city.  There,  also,  according  to  the  published  record,  the  feet 
of  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  who  was  Himself  the  Word,  and, 
through  it,  took  upon  Himself  human  form,  stood  upon  the 
Mount  of  Olives  near  the  cave  which  is  now  pointed  out  there.' 

Constantine  erected  a  basilica  on  the  summit, 
where  the  Chapel  of  the  Ascension  now  stands. 
His  mother,  the  Empress  Helena,  built  a  diurch  at 
the  same  point,  and  another,  called  the  Eleona,  to 
mark  the  cave  where  Christ  taught  His  disciples 
(Watson,  Jerusalem,  p.  124).  The  latter  has  re- 
cently been  discovered  and  excavated  (RB,  1911, 
pp.  219-265). 

3.  History. — i.  Jerusalem  under  Rojian  Pro- 
curators ;  Agrippa  i.  and  Agrippa  ii.  (a.d.  30- 
70). — The  writings  of  Josephus  afl'ord  evidence  that 
it  is  i)ossible  to  narrate  tlie  history  of  events  in 
Jerusalem  during  the  Apostolic  Age  without  re- 
ference to  the  Christians.  From  our  point  of  view 
we  must  sit  loose  to  the  fortunes  of  the  Jews  as 
such,  in  whom  Josephus  was  interested ;  but  for 
a  due  .appreciation  of  the  history  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  Jerusalem  a  sketch  of  contemporary 
events  must  first  be  given,  special  note  being  made 
of  points  of  contact  with  the  narrative  of  Acts, 

Pontius  Pilate  continued  in  office  for  some  years 
after  the  Death  of  Christ.  At  the  beginning  of 
his  term  (A.D.  26)  he  had  shown  marked  disregard 
for  the  feelings  of  the  Jews  by  introducing  ensigns 
bearing  images  of  Caesar  into  Jerusalem,  Later, 
he  gave  further  offence  by  appropriating  the  Corban 
in  order  to  carry  out  his  scheme  for  the  improve- 
ment of  the  water-supply  of  the  city  and  of  the 
Temple.  Even  though  the  work  proceeded,  Pilate's 
cruelty  in  this  instance  was  not  forgotten  and 
helped  to  swell  the  account  against  him,  which 
resulted  in  his  recall  for  trial  (A.D.  36).  Vitellius, 
governor  of  Syria,  paid  a  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
Passover  of  the  same  year,  and  adopted  a  more 
conciliatory  policy,  remitting  the  market-toll  and 
restoring  the  high-priestly  vestments  to  the  custody 
of  the  Jews.  The  procurators  of  Caligula's  reign 
(A.D.  37-41)  may  be  left  out  of  account. 

The  government  now  passed  into  the  hands  of 
King  Agrippa  I.,  who  ruled  in  Jerusalem  during 
the  last  years  that  the  apostles  as  a  body  continued 
there  (A.D.  41-44).  Agrippa  had  already  rendered 
service  to  the  nation  of  the  Jews  by  preventing 
Caligula  from  setting  up  his  statue  in  the  Temple. 
He  was  promoted  by  Claudius  to  be  King  of  Judiea, 
as  his  grandfather  Herod  had  been.  He  journeyed 
to  Jerusalem,  and  as  a  thank-offering  dedicated 
and  deposited  in  the  Tem])le  a  chain  of  gold,  the 
gift  of  Caligula,  in  remembrance  of  the  term  he 
had  passed  in  prison  before  good  fortune  attended 
him. 

While  keeping  the  favour  of  the  Emperor,  he 
also  took  measures  further  to  ingratiate  himself 
with  the  Jews.  According  to  Josephus,  so  good 
a  Jew  was  he  that  he  omitted  notiiing  that  the 
Law  required,  and  he  loved  to  live  continually  at 
Jerusalem  {Ant.  XIX.  vii.  3).  His  Jewish,  or  rather 
his  Pharisaical,  policy  seems  to  have  V)een  at  the 
root  of  his  scheme  for  building  the  Third  Wall, 


JERUSALEM 


JERUSALEM 


639 


and  also  explains  his  persecution  of  the  Christians 
(Ac  12*).  His  coins  circulating  in  Jerusalem  bore 
no  image,  as  an  accommodation  to  Jewish  scruples. 
Outside  the  Holy  City,  however,  he  was  as  much 
under  the  influence  of  the  GrsEco-Roman  culture 
of  the  age  as  his  grandfather  had  been.  After 
his  death,  in  the  manner  described  in  Ac  12"^  (of. 
A  nf.  XIX.  viii.  2 ;  see  art.  JosEPHUS),  Palestine  re- 
verted to  the  rule  of  procurators,  so  far  as  civil  ad- 
ministration was  concerned.  In  religious  matters 
control  was  entrusted  to  Agrippa's  brother.  Herod 
the  King  of  Chalcis,  whom  the  younger  A^ippa 
succeeded.  Hence  the  intervention  of  the  latter 
at  the  trial  of  St.  Paul  (Ac  2513^-26).  With  one 
or  two  exceptions  the  procurators  who  followed 
were  distasteful  to  the  Jews,  wliose  di-scontent 
\^orked  to  a  head  in  A.D.  66,  when  the  open  breach 
with  Rome  occun-ed. 

Under  Cuspius  Fadus  (A.D.  44-^)  the  custody 
of  the  high-priestly  vestments  was  resumed  by  the 
Roman  authorities,  and  once  more  they  were  guarded 
in  Antonia,  but  this  was  countermanded  upon  a 
direct  application  of  the  Jews  to  Claudius.  During 
the  rule  of  Fadus  and  his  successor  Tiberius  Alex- 
ander (A.D.  46-48)  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  like 
their  brethren  throughout  Judaea,  were  oppressed 
by  the  great  famine  (Ac  ll^"^'),  which  Queen  Helena 
of  Adiabene,  now  resident  in  Jerusalem  (see  above), 
did  much  to  relieve  (Ant.  XX.  ii.  5,  v.  2 ;  cf.  art. 
Famine).  In  the  time  of  Ventidius  Cumanus  (k.d. 
48-52)  the  impious  act  of  a  Roman  soldier  at  the 
Passover  sea.son  led  to  serious  collision  with  the 
Roman  power  and  to  great  loss  of  life  (Ant.  XX.  v. 
3,  BJl\.  xii.  1).  This  was  the  first  of  a  series  of 
troubles  that  led  to  Cumanus  being  recalled. 
Antonius  Felix  (A.D.  52-60)  was  sent  in  his  stead, 
and  under  him  matters  proceeded  from  bad  to 
worse.  Owing  to  the  violent  methods  of  the 
Sicarii,  life  in  Jerusalem  became  unsafe,  and  even 
the  high  priest  Jonathan  fell  a  victim  to  their 
daggers.  Jsot  only  against  Rome  was  there  revolt, 
but  also  on  the  part  of  the  priests  against  the  high 
priests  (Ant.  XX.  viii.  8).  The  events  recorded  in 
Ac  23  and  24  fall  within  the  last  two  years  of 
Felix's  rule.  Porcius  Festus  (60-62)  succeeded 
Felix,  and  died  in  office.  In  the  confu.sion  follow- 
ing his  death,  which  was  fomented  by  Ananus  the 
high  priest,  Agrippa  II.  intervened,  and  Ananus 
wa-s  displaced,  but  not  before  James,  the  brother 
of  Christ,  had  suffered  martyrdom  at  his  hands 
(Ant.  XX.  ix.  1).  The  date  (A.D.  62)  is  regarded 
as  doubtful  by  Schiirer  (HJP  l.  ii.  187).  Albinus 
(A.D.  62-64)  devoted  his  energies  to  making  himself 
rich,  and  under  him  anarchy  prevailed,  which  be- 
came even  worse  under  GcssiUs  Florus  (a.T>.  64-66). 
His  appropriation  of  the  Temple  treasures  precipi- 
tated the  great  revolt  from  Rome,  which  ended 
with  the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  (Sept.,  A.D.  70). 

Agrippa  II.  enters  into  the  history  of  Jerusalem 
during  the  procuratorship  of  Festus,  whose  services 
he  enlisted  against  the  priests  in  their  buUding  of 
a  wall  within  the  Temple  area  counter  to  hLs 
heightened  Palace  (see  above).  Along  with  his 
sister  Bernice  he  sought  in  other  ways,  outwardly 
at  least,  to  conciliate  the  Jews.  While  Bernice 
performed  a  vow  according  to  prescribetl  ritual 
(BJ  II.  XV.  1),  Agrippa  showed  some  zeal,  but  little 
discretion,  in  matters  aflecting  the  Temple.  His 
eflbrts  at  mediation  upon  tlie  outbreak  of  hostilities 
were  in  vain  ;  he  was  forced  to  take  sides  with 
Rome,  and  appears  in  attendance  upon  Titus  after 
he  assumed  the  command. 

The  harrowing  details  of  the  last  four  years  pre- 
ceding the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  the  factions,  priva- 
tions, bloodshed,  and  ruin,  lie  apart  from  the 
history  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  and  are  here 
omitted.  At  an  early  stage  of  the  war  the  Chris- 
tians escajied  to  Pella  beyond  Jordan  (Euseb.  HE 


III.  V.  3),  where  they  remained  till  peace  was  con- 
cluded and  a  return  made  possible.  This  is  usually 
dated  fully  half  a  century  later,  after  the  founding 
of  the  Roman  city  il£lia  Capitolina  in  the  reign  of 
Hadrian  (A.D.  136),  but  nothing  is  known  for  certain 
beyond  the  fact  of  the  return  (Epiphanius,  de 
Mens,  et  Pond.  xv.  [Migne,  Patr.  Grceca,  xliii.  col. 
261  f.]).  Some  would  date  the  return  as  early  as 
A.D.  73  (see  Wilson,  Golgotha,  p.  54  f.). 

ii.  The  Christians  ix  Jeru.salem.  —  Apart 
from  the  Book  of  Acts  there  is  little  information 
regarding  the  Christians  during  the  years  that 
they  tarried  in  Jerusalem.  A  not  unlikely  tradi- 
tion gives  twelve  years  as  the  period  that  the 
Twelve  remained  at  the  first  centre  of  the  Church. 
After  that  arose  persecution  and  consequent  dis- 
persion. This  may  be  dated  in  the  short  reign  of 
Agrippa  I.  (A.D.  41-44).  Subsequent  to  this  the 
Church  in  Jerusalem,  which  from  the  first  had 
been  Jewish-Christian,  became  pronouncedly  Juda- 
istic,  perhaps  an  essential  to  its  own  preservation. 
Up  to  the  time  of  the  revolt  (A.D.  66),  while  there 
were  indeed  conflicts  with  the  Jewish  authorities, 
more  or  less  coincident  with  interregna  in  the  pro- 
curatorship, there  was  no  open  breach.  The  sect 
was  tolerated,  as  others  were,  by  the  Jewish  leaders, 
so  long  as  there  was  outward  conformity  to  the 
ritual  of  the  Temple.  The  progressive  movement 
in  Christianity  was  external  to  Jerusalem  and  even 
to  Palestine ;  the  Church  in  the  metropolis  of  the 
faith  became  increasingly  conservative,  and  in  the 
end  ceased  to  have  any  standing  within  the  Church 
Catholic.  But  this  did  not  take  place  until  the 
post- Apostolic  Age.  Attention  must  be  fixed 
cliiefly  on  the  first  few  decades  following  the  Death 
of  Christ,  years  in  which  originated  much  that 
became  permanent  within  the  Church  as  well  as 
features  that  were  destined  to  pass  away. 

(a)  The  disciples  and  the  Lord. — Throughout  the 
Book  of  Acts  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  fact  that 
Christ  had  risen  from  the  dead.  So  far  as  can  be 
discovered,  the  first  Christians  had  no  concern  for 
the  scene  of  the  Crucifixion  nor  yet  for  the  empty 
tomb.  It  was  not  until  the  4th  cent.  A.D.  that 
these  spots,  so  venerated  in  after  ages,  came  to  be 
marked  by  a  Christian  edifice.  The  thoughts  of 
the  early  Christians  were  upon  the  living  and  not 
the  dead.  They  cherished  the  hope  of  the  speedy 
return  of  Christ  to  earth  in  all  the  glory  of  His 
Second  Coming,  and  reckoned  that  they  lived  in 
the  time  of  the  end,  when  the  fullness  of  Messiah's 
Kingdom  was  about  to  be  ushered  in.  This  being 
the  case,  they  made  no  provision  for  posterity  in 
the  way  of  erecting  memorials  to  the  Christ  who 
had  sojourned  among  them  in  the  flesh,  and,  as  the 
extracts  from  Patristic  writers  (see  small  type 
above)  reveal,  after  'sacred  sites'  began  to  be 
marked,  thev  were  those  associated  with  the  post- 
resurrection  life  of  the  Lord. 

(b)  Relation  of  the  Christians  to  other  dwellers  in 
the  city. — The  desire  to  make  converts  to  the  faith 
must  have  brought  the  Christians  into  contact 
with  their  fellow-citizens  and  with  those  of  the 
Dispersion  who  chanced  to  be  present  in  the  city. 
Their  assembling  in  the  Temple,  for  instance,  was 
not  simply  to  fulfil  the  Law  (Ac  3^),  nor  yet  for  the 
sake  of  meeting  with  each  other  (o^),  but  to  work 
upon  the  mass  of  the  i>€ople  through  the  words 
and  wonders  of  the  apostles.  Only  by  public  ac- 
tivity could  the  numbers  have  grown  with  the 
rapidity  and  to  the  extent  they  did.  Of  necessity 
this  propaganda  was  att^ndea  by  a  measure  of 
opposition  from  those  who  were  the  traditional 
enemies  of  the  Lord.  But,  so  long  as  Roman  rule 
was  exercised,  persecution  could  not  make  head- 
way. While  thus  mixing  to  some  extent  with 
other  elements  in  the  city,  the  Christians  also  livetl 
a  life  apart  for  purposes  of  instruction  and  fellow- 


640 


JERUSALEM 


JESTING 


Bhii),  and  for  the  pcrfonuunce  of  the  simple  ritual 
of  the  faith  (Ac  2*^  12'",  etc.).  Tlierc  is  no  evidence 
that  they  possessed  any  special  building  like  u 
synago^^Mie.  A  private  Iiouse,  Kuch  as  that  of 
Mary,  the  mother  of  John  Mark,  M'oiild  have  served 
their  j)urpose,  and  according  to  tradition  (see  above) 
this  was  the  recognized  centre.  Kven  at  the  time 
of  the  so-called  Council  (Ac  15')  no  indication  is 
given  that  tlie  assembly  was  convened  in  an  oihcial 
building. 

(c)  Urganization. — Those  who  had  companied 
with  Jesus  in  the  days  of  His  public  ministry  were 
from  the  outset  regarded  as  leaders  in  the  Cnurcli, 
and  were  in  possession  of  special  gifts  and  powers. 
To  the  Twelve,  who  were  Hebrews,  there  were 
shortly  athled  the  Seven,  perhaps  as  an  accommoda- 
tion to  the  Hellenists  (Ac  6').  This  step  probably 
marks  the  lirst  cleavage  in  the  ranks  of  the  Chris- 
tians, as  they  began  to  be  called,  and  paved  the 
way  for  the  wider  breach  which  in  a  few  years 
severed  tiiose  at  the  ancient  centre  of  Jewish  faith 
and  practice  from  the  numerically  stronger  division 
of  Gentile  believers  in  other  places.  Harnack  re- 
gards it  as  possible  that  the  Seven  were  '  Hellen- 
istic rivals  of  the  Twelve'  (The  Constitution  and 
Law  of  the  Church,  30),  the  chief  being  St.  Stephen, 
whose  adherents  were  persecuted  after  his  death, 
the  apostles  tliemselves  oeing  let  aXone  (The  Mission 
and  Expansion  of  Christianity"^,  i.  50  f.  ;  cf.  Ac  8^). 

The  appointment  of  the  Seven  reveals  the  fact 
that  in  one  respect  the  initial  practice  of  the  Chris- 
tians had  been  tentative  and  could  not  be  sustained. 
The  community  of  goods,  which  theoretically  was 
an  ideal  .system,  ultimately  proved  unworkable, 
and  was  not  imitated  in  other  Christian  communi- 
ties. The  poverty  of  the  mother  Church,  which 
continued  after  Gentile  churches  had  been  planted 
at  many  points,  has  been  regarded  as  the  outcome 
of  this  experiment,  but  it  is  likely  that  the  causes 
of  this  poverty  in  Jerusalem  lay  deeper  than  that. 
G.  A.  Smith  (Jerusalem,  ii.  563)  has  shown  that 
Jerusalem  is  naturally  a  poor  city,  and  he  attri- 
butes her  chronic  poverty  to  the  inadequacy  of 
her  own  resources  and  tlie  many  non-productive 
members  her  population  contained.  These  condi- 
tions were  not  altered  in  apostolic  times.  In  view 
of  the  circumstance  that  at  a  comparatively  late 
stage  the  further  commission  was  given  to  St. 
Paul  and  Barnabas  to  remember  the  poor  (Gal  2'"), 
i.e.  at  Jerusalem,  this  may  conceivably  be  grounded 
not  upon  special  need  but  upon  the  analogy  of  the 
tribute  paid  by  those  of  the  Diaspora  to  head- 
quarters. '  The  church  at  Jerusalem,  together 
with  the  primitive  apostles,  considered  themselves 
the  central  body  of  Christendom,  and  also  the 
rejiresentatives  of  the  true  Israel'  (Harnack, 
Mission  and  Expansion^,  i.  330  f.). 

(d)  The  position  of  James,  the  Lord's  brother. — 
More  than  any  of  the  Twelve,  m  ho  at  first  were  so 
prominent,  is  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  associated 
witii  the  Church  in  Jerusalem.  He  appears  sud- 
denly in  Acts  as  possessed  of  authority  equal  to 
that  of  the  greatest  of  the  apostles,  and  at  the 
Council  he  occui)ies  the  jiosition  of  j)resident.  When 
St.  PaiU  visited  the  city  for  the  last  time  he  reported 
himself  to  James  ancl  the  elders.  From  extracts 
of  Hegesippus  preserved  by  Eusebius,  and  from 
Eusebius  himself,  we  learn  that  James  owed  his 
outstanding  position  to  his  personal  worth,  as  also 
to  his  relationship  to  Jesus,  and  it  seems  evident 
that  he  was  the  leading  representative  of  Judaistic 
Christianity,  of  that  section  which  by  its  adherence 
to  the  Law  and  the  Temple  was  able  to  maintain 
it«elf  in  Jerusalem  after  others,  even  the  chief 
u|K)stles,  had  been  compelled  to  leave  the  city. 
Hut  James  also  suflered  martyrdom  (see  al)ove,  2, 
iv.  (c)).  He  was  followed  by  his  cousin  Symeon, 
whom  Hegesippus  (Euseb.)  styles  'second  bislioj*.' 


There  is  great  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  when  this 
appointment  was  made  (Wilson,  GolgotJui,  p.  55n.). 
'1  he  date  of  his  death  is  ])laced  c.  A.D.  107.  As 
Eusebius  learned  that  until  the  siege  of  Hadrian 
(A.D.  135)  there  were  fifteen  bishops,  all  said  to  be 
of  Hebrew  descent  (HE  iv,  v.  2),  the  tradition  is 
hard  to  believe.  Harnack  thinks  that  relatives  of 
Jesus  or  presbyters  may  be  included  in  the  number 
(Mission  and  Expansion'-,  ii.  97). 

(e)  Effect  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  upon  the  Church 
there. — The  final  destruction  of  the  city  in  A.D.  70 
is  generally  regarded  as  crucial  not  only  for  the 
Jews  but  also  for  the  Christians,  not  because  the 
latter  were  present  at  the  time,  but  because  there 
had  perforce  to  be  a  severance  from  the  former 
ways  now  that  the  Temple  had  ceased  to  be.  IJut 
ths  importance  of  this  event  has  been  over-rated 
(A.  C.  McGiilert,  Tlie  Apostolic  Age,  p.  546).  As 
regards  the  Church  Catholic,  the  centre,  or  centres, 
had  already  been  moved,  while  the  local  church, 
which  escaped  the  terrors  of  the  siege,  was  small, 
tending  indeed  to  extinction.  The  Church  in  iElia 
Capitolina  was  Gen  tile -Christian,  with  Mark  as 
lirst  bishop.  It  fashioned  for  itself  a  new  Zion, 
on  the  S.W.  Hill ;  and  when  in  the  3rd  cent. 
Jerusalem  became  a  resort  of  pilgrims,  the  '  sacred 
sites '  did  not  include  the  Temple  area,  the  Jewish 
Zion,  which  indeed  was  regarded  by  the  Christians 
'  with  an  aversion  which  is  really  remarkable,  and 
which  increased  as  years  passed  by '  (Watson,  Jeru- 
salem, p.  119). 

Literature.  —  (a)  Contemporary  authorities  and  Patristic 
tcorks  are  frequently  citeti  in  the  article,  and  need  not  be 
repeated. — (6)  Dictionary  articles  are  numerous:  HDB,  SDB, 
DCG,  EBi,  JE,  etc. — (c)  Of  topoijraphical  works  those  found 
of  most  service  are :  C.  W.  Wilson,  Golgotha  and  the  Holy 
Sepulchre,  London,  1906 ;  G.  A.  Smith,  Jerusalem,  do.  1907-08  ; 
L.  B.  Paton,  Jerusalem  in  Bible  Times,  Chicago  and  London, 
1908 ;  C.  R.  Conder,  The  City  of  Jerusalem,  London,  1909 ; 
S.  Merrill,  Ancient  Jerusalem,  Ixindon  and  New  York,  1908 ; 
C.  M.  Watson,  The  Story  of  Jermalem,  do.  1912 ;  F.  J.  Bliss 
and  A.  C.  Dickie,  Excavations  at  Jerusalem,  18914-97,  London, 
1898 ;  W.  Sanday  and  P.  Waterhonse,  Sacred  Sites  of  the 
Gospels,  O.xford,  1903.  Other  works  not  alread}-  cited :  K. 
Baedeker,  Palestine  and  Syria,  Leipzig,  1912,  pp.  19-90  ;  F. 
Buhl,  Oeog.  des  alten  Paldstina,  Freiburg  and  Leipzig,  1806, 
pp.  144-154;  H.  Vincent,  Jerusalem  antique,  Paris,  1913ff. — 
Id)  Historical  icorks :  E.  Schiirer,  HJP,  Edinburgh,  1885-91 ; 
A.  C.  McGiffert,  A  History  of  (Christianity  in  the  Apostolic 
Age,  do.  1897,  pp.  36-93,  549-568 ;  C.  von  Weizsacker,  The 
Apostolic  Age  of  the  Christian  Church-,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1897- 
98,  bk.  i.  chs.  i.-iv.,  bk.  ii.  ch.  iii.,  bk.  iv.  ch.  i.,  bk.  v.  ch.  ii.  ; 
A.  Harnack,  The  Mission  and  Expansion  of  Christianity  in 
the  First  Three  Centuries",  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1908,  i.  44-64,  182-184, 
ii.  97-99,  The  Constitution  and  Law  of  the  Church  in  the  First 
Two  Centuries,  Eng.  tr.,  do.  1910,  pp.  1-39. 

W.  CRUICK.SHANK. 

JESSE  ('leffo-ai). — Jesse  is  mentioned  in  Ac  13^ 
and  Ko  15'-  as  the  father  of  David. 

JESTING  (eOrpaweXla,  Eph  5^).— That  the  Greek 
word  is  used  in  an  unfavourable  sense  is  shown  by 
its  association  with  'filthiness'  and  'foolish  talk- 
ing,' as  well  as  by  its  characterization  as  'not  be- 
fitting.' But  in  itself  (being  derived  from  ev,  '  M'ell,' 
and  rpiiru},  '  I  turn ')  it  was  morally  neutral,  and 
originally  it  had  a  good  sense.  '  On  the  subject  of 
pleasantness  in  sport,'  says  Aristotle  (Eth.  Nic.  ll. 
vii.  13),  '  he  who  is  in  the  mean  is  a  man  of  grace- 
ful wit,  and  the  disposition  gi'aceful  wit  (ei>rpoireX/a) ; 
the  excess  ribaldry,  and  the  person  ribald  ;  he  who 
is  in  defect  a  clown,  and  the  habit  clownisliness." 
And  again  (IV.  viii.  3),  'Those  who  neither  say 
anything  laughable  themselves,  nor  approve  of  it 
in  others,  appear  to  be  clownish  and  narsh,  but 
those  who  are  sportive  with  good  taste  are  calle<l 
e irrpiir f\oi,  as  possessing  versatility,'  etc.  This  was 
a  characteristic  of  the  Athenians,  whom  Pericles 
praised  as  'qualified  to  act  in  the  most  varied 
ways  and  with  the  most  graceful  ver.satility  *  (eirrpa- 
ttAws  [Time.  ii.  41]).  Aristotle  admits  that  even 
'  buttbons  are  called  men  of  graceful  wit'  (eiVpd- 
v(\oi),  but  questions  their  right  to  the  term  (IV. 


JESUS 


JEW,  JEWESS 


G41 


viii.  3).  The  nearest  Latin  equivalent  was  urbfiniias. 
But  gradually  the  coinage  was  debased,  and  et-rpa- 
xeXt'a  came  to  mean  no  more  than  badinage,  per- 
sidage,  ynt  without  the  salt  of  grace;  in  Chry- 
sostom's  striking  phrase,  it  was  '  graceless  grace ' 
(xipti  <Sx<V")-  See  K.  Trench,  NTSt/nonym^,  1876, 
p.  li9f.  James  SxBAHAif. 

JESUS.— This  is  the  Greek  form  of  the  Hebrew 
name  Joshua  ('salvation  of  Jahweh'),  as  we  find 
it  in  the  LXX  and  NT  writings.  It  is  thus  applied 
to— 

1.  Jesus  Christ ;  see  art.  Christ,  Christologv. 

2.  Joshua  the  son  of  Nan,  who  led  Israel  into 
Canaan  ;  referred  to  by  Stephen  in  his  speech 
before  the  council  (Ac  7**)  and  by  the  writer  to  the 
Hebrews  (He  4*).     See  Joshua. 

3.  Jesos  surnamed  Justus  (Col  4"),  a  Christian 
convert  of  Jewish  descent  who  was  with  the 
Apostle  Paul  in  Rome  at  the  date  of  his  writing 
the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.  He  is  described, 
along  ^vith  Mark  and  Aristarchus,  as  a  fellow- 
worker  unto  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  as  having 
been  a  comfort  unto  the  Apostle.  This  reference 
singles  out  the  three  mentioned  as  the  only 
members  of  the  '  circumcision '  who  had  been  help- 
ful to  the  Apostle  in  Rome,  and  reminds  us  of  the 
constant  hatred  which  the  narrower  Je^vish  Chris- 
tians exhibited  towards  St.  Paul,  and  also  of  the 
failure  of  many  of  the  Roman  Christians  to  assist 
and  stand  by  the  Apostle  during  his  imprisonment 
(cf.  Ph  2^-\  2  Ti  4»»).  It  has  been  pointed  out 
that  the  mention  of  Jesus  in  this  passage  by  the 
Apostle  creates  difficulties  for  those  who  impugn 
the  authenticity  of  the  Epistle  and  suggest  that  it 
is  based  on  Philemon.  If  Philemon  is  genuine, 
why  add  an  unknown  name  which  might  arouse 
suspicion  ?  It  is  extremely  unlikely  that  an  imi- 
tator would  add  a  name  which  so  soon  became 
sacred  among  Christians  (cf.  A.  S.  Peake,  in  EGT, 
'Colossians,'  19<J3,  p.  546).  W.  F.  Boil). 

JESUS  CHRIST.— See  Christ,  Christology. 

JEW,  JEWESS.— The  term  'Jew'  (Heb.  n^n^ 
Gr.  'loi'Oatoj)  originally  signified  an  inhabitant  of 
the  province  of  Judaea,  or,  more  strictly,  a  member 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah  in  contrast  with  the  people 
of  the  Northern  Kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes.  After 
the  Babylonian  captivity,  however,  the  term  was 
applied  to  any  member  of  the  ancient  race  of  Israel, 
wherever  settled  and  to  whatever  tribe  he  may  have 
belonged.  Josephus,  referring  to  Nehemiah's  use 
of  the  term  in  addressing  the  returned  exiles,  says : 
'  That  is  the  name  they  are  called  by  from  the  day 
that  they  came  up  from  Babylon,  which  [name]  is 
taken  from  the  tribe  of  Judah,  which  came  first 
to  these  places ;  and  thence  both  they  and  the 
country  gained  that  appellation'  (Ant.  XI.  v.  7). 

The  name  is  almost  always  regarded  as  a  purely 
racial  designation,  marking  off  all  who  belonged  to 
the  ancient  nation  ;  but  as  the  nation  was  distin- 
guished from  the  heathen  world  by  its  religious 
views,  the  term  came  to  signify  one  who  was 
separated  not  only  by  race  but  by  religion  from  the 
rest  of  mankind.  The  Jew  himself  preferred  to  be 
called  an  '  Israelite,'  as  the  latter  was  the  name  of 
national  honour  and  privilege  (cf.  art.  Israel), 
and  we  find  '  Jew '  to  be  the  designation  usually 
applied  by  foreigners  to  members  of  the  Chosen 
People. 

In  the  NT  the  term  is  found  applied  to  those  who 
belonged  to  the  ancient  race  in  contrast  with 
various  other  groups  or  classes  of  men.  The  Jews 
themselves  divided  the  whole  world  into  Jews  and 
GentUes  ;  and  we  find  the  Apostle  Paul  using  this 
contrast  in  speaking  of  God's  judgment  on  sin  : 
'  tribulation  and  anguish,  upon  every  soul  of  man 
VOL.  I.— 41 


that  doeth  evil,  of  the  Jew  first,  and  also  of  the 
Gentile '  (Ro  2*).  Again  the  term  is  used  iu  con- 
trasting Jews  and  Samaritans  (Jn  4'),  the  latter 
being  descended  from  tlie  mixed  race  of  ancient 
Israelites  and  the  settlers  introduced  by  the  As- 
syrian conquerors  (cf.  2  K  17^^*^). 

The  Jew  is  also  contrasted  witli  the  proselyte 
who  was  a  Jew  by  his  adopted  religious  beliefs, 
but  not  by  birth  (Ac  2>«).  In  the  Fourth  Gospel 
we  find  the  term  'Jews'  applied  to  those  who 
opposed  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  as  contrasted  with 
believers  in  Christ,  whatever  their  nationality 
might  be ;  but  generally  the  Jewish  rulers  seem  to 
be  indicated  by  the  name  in  this  GospeL  Thus 
'  the  Jews '  censure  the  man  for  carrying  his  bed 
on  the  Sabbath  (5'**),  and  contend  with  the  man 
bom  blind  (9").  Perhaps  this  usage  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  arose  from  the  influence  of  later  times, 
when  the  Jews,  and  especially  the  Jewish  authori- 
ties, were  bitterly  opposed  to  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  In  the  other  parts  of  the  NT  the  term  is 
never  used  in  contrast  with  believers  in  Christ. 
Thus  in  Gal  2^  '  the  Jews '  are  the  Christians  of 
Jewish  race.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (2**-  ^) 
we  find  a  distinction  made  between  a  Jew  who  is 
such  outwardly  and  a  Jew  who  is  such  inwardly. 
Here,  as  also  in  Ro  3^,  the  Apostle  uses  the  term 
'Jew,'  where  we  should  naturally  expect  to  find 
'  Israelite,'  to  designate  a  member  of  the  Chosen 
People  as  a  recipient  of  special  Divine  favour. 
Some  who  belong  to  the  Jewish  race  are  not  spirit- 
ually partakers  of  the  blessings  which  attach  to  it. 
In  the  passage  where  the  writer  of  the  Apocalypse 
(2^  3®)  speaks  of  those  '  who  say  they  are  Jews,  and 
are  not,  but  are  the  sjrnagogue  of  Satan,'  he  may 
be  referring  to  men  who  made  a  false  claim  to 
belong  to  the  Jewish  nation,  or  to  Jews  by  race 
who  were  far  from  belonging  to  the  true  Israel  of 
God. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  features  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Jews  in  the  apostolic  times  was 
their  world-wide  dispersion.  From  Spain  in  the 
West  to  the  Persian  Gulf  in  the  East  Jews  had 
settled  in  every  large  city.  Their  exclusive  re- 
ligion and  their  contempt  of  the  heathen  kept 
them  together  as  a  community  within  the  larger 
population  where  they  found  a  home,  and  their 
capacity  for  commerce  often  enabled  them  to  be- 
come extremely  wealthy.  Their  exclusiveness  and 
the  commercial  dishonesty  of  many  of  them  led  to 
their  being  hat«d  by  the  common  people,  while 
their  wealth  made  them  exceedingly  useful  to 
rulers  and  princes,  who  thus  were  induced  to  pro- 
tect them.  The  Dispersion  was  one  of  the  most 
important  factors  in  the  spread  of  the  Christian 
faith  in  apostolic  and  sub-apostolic  times.  Wher- 
ever the  apostolic  missionaries  went,  they  found  a 
Jewish  synagogue,  where  they  had  access  not 
merely  to  the  Jewish  population,  but  to  the  more 
earnest  among  the  heathen  who  had  been  attracted 
by  the  monotheism  and  the  moral  characteristics 
of  Judaism,  and  who  often  formed  the  nucleus  of  a 
Christian  Church.  The  Jewish  religion  was  toler- 
ated in  the  Roman  Empire,  being  regarded  as  a 
religio  lieita  ;  and,  so  long  as  Christianity  grew  up 
and  flourish^  in  the  shelter  of  the  synagogue,  it 
too  might  be  regarded  as  enjoying  the  same  toler- 
ation. This  fact  no  doubt  enabled  the  new  faith 
to  secure  a  footing  in  these  early  days.  In  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  we  see  how  the  Roman  pro- 
consul Gallio  (18"-")  simply  regards  Christianity 
as  an  insignificant  variation  of  Judaism,  and  the 
same  view  is  taken  by  King  Agrippa  (26*^),  as  well 
as  by  the  town-clerk  of  Ephesus  (19").  The 
author  of  the  Acts  is  careful  to  state  these  favour- 
able opinions  of  officials.  Probably,  however,  the 
popular  hatred  of  the  Jews,  which  was  always 
smouldering  and   ready    to    burst    forth  at  any 


642 


JEZEBEL 


.lOB 


moment  among  the  excitable  populace,  was  one 
of  the  first  causes  of  Christian  persecution,  as  it 
took  some  considerable  time  before  Christianity 
Avas  fully  recognized  as  an  independent  religion. 
The  Jews  themselves  became  the  most  persistent 
and  implacable  persecutors  of  the  Christians. 
They  were  ever  ready  to  stir  up  the  disallected 
l)eople  and  divert  attention  from  themselves  by 
turning  it  on  the  adherents  of  the  new  faith. 
Probably  the  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  Rome  by 
Claudius  (Ac  18"'')  was  the  result  of  dissensions  re- 

Sarding  the  new  religion,  which  had  sprung  from 
udaism  and  threatened  to  overwhelm  it.  The 
reference  of  Suetonius  (Claiidms,  2ii)  to  Chrestus, 
which  is  probably  a  mistake  for  ChinMus,  seems  to 
favour  this  idea,  although  various  views  have  been 
taken  of  the  passage  (cf.  K.  J.  Knowling,  EGT, 
'Acts,' p.  384  f.). 

In  Kome,  as  well  as  in  many  other  cities  of  the 
Empire,  Jews  obtained  consitferable  influence,  in 
spite  of  the  popular  aversion  to  them.  Their 
wealth  opened  many  doors  which  otherwise  would 
have  remained  shut  against  them.  Jews,  and 
especially  Jewesses,  were  to  be  found  in  many 
prominent  Roman  families,  and  intermarriage 
Detween  Jewish  women  and  Gentiles  was  by  no 
means  uncommon.  Thus  Eunice,  the  mother  of 
Timothy  (Ac  16'),  was  a  Jewess  who  had  married 
a  Greek,  while  Drusilla,  the  wife  of  Felix  the 
governor  of  Syria  (Ac  24-^),  is  also  described  as  a 
Jewess.  In  both  references  the  word  simply  implies 
that  the  women  belonged  to  the  ancient  race  of 
Israel,  without  any  thought  of  the  particular  tribe 
from  which  they  may  have  claimed  descent. 

LiTKRATunK.— H.  H.  Milman,  History  of  the  Jews^,  1SC3 ;  J. 
J.  I.  DSUing'er,  Heidenthuin  und  Judenthum,  1857  ;  O.  Holtz- 
mann,  NTZG,  1895  ;  E.  Schurer,  GJ  V*,  1901-11 ;  A.  Harnack, 
Mission  und  Ausbreitunq",  190(5 ;  A.  Berliner,  Geschichte  der 
Juden  in  Rom,  1893 ;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the 
Roman  Empire,  1893,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1895  ;  R.  J.  Know- 
lingr,  EGT,  '  Acts,'  1900,  M.  Dods,  KGT,  '  The  Gospel  of  St. 
John,"  1897 ;  Sanday-Headlam,  Romans^  (ICC,  1902) ;  artt.  in 
UDB  and  EBi.  -W".  Y.  BOYD. 

JEZEBEL.— Jezebel  is  referred  to  in  the  NT  in 
Rev  2-"  :  'I  have  somewhat  against  thee,  because 
thou  dost  tolerate  the  woman  Jezebel  who  calleth 
herself  a  proplietess,  and  teacheth  my  servants  to 
commit  fornication  and  to  esit  of  tilings  offered 
to  idols  and  leadeth  them  astray.'  [Some  MSS, 
NCP  and  about  10  minuscules,  insert  ffov  after 
ywalKa,  so  as  to  give  the  sense  '  thy  wife,'  but  the 
ffov  is  placed  in  the  margin  by  WH  and  rejected 
by  Nestle.  It  probably  reflects  some  copyist's 
view  that  the  '  angel '  of  the  Church  was  its 
bishop.]  The  passage  goes  on  to  say  that  her 
misdoing  was  of  some  standing,  that  the  woman 
gave  no  sign  of  amending  her  ways,  and  that 
therefore  she  and  her  companions  in  sin  would  be 
cast  into  a  bed,  or  triclinium,  defined  as  great 
affliction,  while  her  children  would  be  smitten 
with  death.  One  result  of  this  punishment  would 
be  that  all  the  Churches  would  recognize  Jesus  as 
the  Searcher  of  the  thoughts  and  wills.  Further, 
this  Jezebel  taught  what  she  and  her  followers 
called  '  the  deep  things,'  to  which  the  author 
sardonically  adds  'of  Satan.' 

It  is  fairly  clear  from  these  hints  what  *  Jezebel ' 
stands  for.  In  the  first  place,  the  opprobrious 
terra  may  mark  an  actual  prophetess.  For  Thya- 
tira  possessed  a  temple  of  Artemis  and  a  temple 
of  a  local  hero  Tyrimnus  taken  over  by  Apollo, 
while  outside  the  city  was  the  cell  of  an  Eastern 
Sibyl  known  as  Sambethe  (CIG  3509:  Fabius 
Zosimus  set  up  a  burial-place  for  himself  and  his 
sweetest  wife  Aurelia  Pontiana  in  a  vacant  place 
in  front  of  the  city  in  the  neighbourhood  or  quarter 
where  was  a  fane  of  the  Chaldtean  Sambethe  [vol. 
ii.  p.  840].     The  date  is  probably  about  A.D.  120). 


Though  it  is  not  at  all  probable  that  by  Jezebel 
this  Sibyl  could  be  aimed  at,  seeing  that  the  ob- 
noxious teacher  was  within  the  Thyatiran  Church, 
yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  a  Chaldtean  prophet- 
ess outside  might  stimulate  a  Christian  prophetess 
inside  the  Church.  It  is  of  course  always  possible 
that  Jezebel  is  not  a  j)ersonal  name  at  all,  but  a 
scornful  designation  of  a  Gnostic  group  inside  the 
Christian  community  at  Thyatira,  whose  action 
and  doctrine  the  author  regarded  as  being  like 
those  of  the  OT  Jezebel-religion,  in  that  it  tended 
to  seduce  its  followers  from  the  '  form  of  sound 
words.' 

One  characteristic  of  the  civic  life  of  Thyatira 
was  to  be  found  in  the  gilds  into  which  the  bakers, 
potters,  weavers,  and  artificers  in  general  were 
grouped.  As  one  inscription  (CIG  349)  speaks  of 
'  the  priest  of  the  Divine  Father  Tyrimnus,'  and 
as  all  heathen  religions  celebrated  periodically 
religious  banquets,  there  is  little  doubt  that  from 
time  to  time  Christian  members  of  these  gilds 
were  faced  by  the  question  whether  it  was  lawful 
for  them  to  partake  of  these  banquets  as  coming 
under  the  head  of  things  ottered  to  idols.  Rigorists 
would  hold  that  to  eat  at  such  banquets  was  to 
communicate  with  idols  and  so  to  commit  spiritual 
fornication.  Jezebel,  whether  a  prophetess  or  a 
group,  taught  apparently  that  Christians  might 
lawfully  partake  of  these  religious  banquets,  and 
this  the  writer  of  the  Apocalypse  regarded  as 
equivalent  to  Jezebel's  idolatry  in  the  OT. 

It  is  also  plain  that  the  followers  of  'Jezebel' 
were  Gnostics,  for  the  latter  were  explicitly 
inquirers  into  the  '  deep  things,'  the  esoteric 
truths  which  the  ordinary  person  was  incompetent 
to  understand.  In  1  Co  2'"  St.  Paul  claims  for  his 
disciples  that  the  Spirit  who  searches  all  tilings 
(same  verb  as  is  used  in  Rev  2"),  yea,  the  deep 
things  of  God,  had  revealed  these  hidden  things 
to  them.  The  apocalyptic  writer,  however,  is 
more  concerned  here  with  the  opposite  depths — 
those  of  Satan.  Thus  in  2^  he  speaks  of  the  false 
Jews  in  Smyrna  who  formed  a  synagogue  of  Satan. 
In  2'^  he  says  that  Satan  had  his  throne  at  Per- 
gamum.  In  3^  Philadelphia  is  charged  with  har- 
bouring a  synagogue  of  Satan.  These  passages, 
taken  in  connexion  with  the  references  to  the 
teaching  of  Balaam  in  2'^  and  of  the  Nicolaitans 
in  2^',  favour  the  interpretation  of  Jezebel  which 
sees  in  the  name  a  term  of  opprobrium  applied 
dyslogistically  to  a  heretical  sect  or  form  of 
doctrine.  That  the  deptlis  of  Satan  are  Gnostic 
doctrines  is  clear  from  Iren.  (ll.  xxii.  1),  who  says 
that  the  Ptolemff>ans  said  that  they  had  found 
the  mysteries  of  Bythns,  a  phrase  repeated  in  II. 
xxii.  3  (cf.  Hippol.  H(er.  v.  vi.,  and  Tertullian, 
ndv.  Valent.  i.,  de  Res.  Carnis,  xix.).  The  name 
.fezebel  does  not  occur  anywhere  in  the  Apostolic 
Fathers.  W.  F.  COBB. 

JOB  CluiS).— Job  is  named  by  Ezekiel  (W*-^)— 
in  the  6th  cent.  B.C.,  probably  about  two  centuries 
before  the  writing  of  the  Book  of  Job— along  with 
Noah  and  Daniel  as  a  proverbially  righteous  man. 
After  the  publication  of  the  great  drama,  it  was 
natural  that  he  should  be  regarded  rather  as  a 
model  of  patience  in  affliction  (virbSfiyna,  t^j  koko- 
■tra.eda^Kalixa.Kpoevixlas.i&S^''-  ").  While  the  profound 
speculations  of  the  book  regarding  the  problems 
of  pain  and  destiny,  as  well  as  the  theological  doc- 
trine which  the  poet  intended  to  teach,  might  be 
beyond  the  grasp  of  the  ordinary  reader,  the  moral 
appeal  of  the  simple  opening  story  came  home  to 
all  suflering  humanity.  'Ye  have  heard  of  the 
patience  (t7)v  Wofjiovriv)  of  Job '  (5").  Similarly  the 
conclusion  of  the  tale,  which  revealed  (iod's  final 
purpose  in  regard  to  His  servant  (r6  WXos  Kvplov), 
proving  Him  to  be  full  of  pity  and  merciful  {to\v- 


JOEL 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


643 


(rirXo7x«'os  /coi  oiKTipnuv),  presented  a  situation  whicli 
all  readers  might  be  asked  to  observe.  The  im- 
perative Idrre,  which  is  as  well  supported  as  elSere, 
calls  tlieir  attention  to  a  surprising  fact,  which 
they  might  well  mark,  learn,  and  inwardly  digest. 
The  Quran  repeats  the  admonition  and  the  lesson. 
•  And  remember  Job ;  when  he  cried  unto  the 
Lord,  saj'ing,  Verily  evil  hath  afflicted  me  :  but 
thou  art  the  most  merciful  of  all  those  who  show 
mercy.  Wherefore  we  [God]  heard  him  and  re- 
lieved him  from  the  evil  which  Avas  upon  him,  and 
we  restored  unto  him  his  family,'  etc.  {sitra  21). 
'  Verily  we  found  him  a  patient  person  :  how  ex- 
cellent a  servant  was  he '  (silra  38). 

James  Strahan. 
JOEL  {'loniX). — Joel  is  proved  by  internal  evi- 
dence to  have  been  one  of  tlie  latest  of  the  Hebrew 
"prophets.  The  prominence  in  his  writings  of 
priests  and  ritual  at  home,  and  of  a  diaspora 
abroad,  his  reference  to  the  distant  sons  of  Greece, 
Ins  use  of  Aramaic  words,  and  the  lurid  apoca- 
lyptic colouring  of  his  prophecies,  clearly  point  to 
the  Persian  period.  But  Joel  has  not  tlie  wide 
outlook  of  some  of  the  other  prophets.  He  is 
not  fascinated  either  by  Isaiah's  visions  of  Israel 
as  the  light  of  the  Gentiles,  or  Malachi's  of  the 
heathen  waiting  upon  Jahweh.  He  has  not  the 
humanitarian  feeling  of  the  author  of  Jonah,  who 
may  have  been  his  contemporary.  He  is  a  rigid 
and  exclusive  Israelite.  In  his  view  the  heathen, 
as  being  apparently  beyond  redemption,  are  to  be 
destroyed,  not  to  be  won  to  the  knowledge  of  God. 
But  if  he  is  narrow,  he  is  intense ;  and  while  he 
cherishes  the  priestly  ideals,  his  hope  for  Israel 
lies  rather  in  such  a  diftusion  of  the  proplietic 
spirit  as  shall  create  an  inspired  nation.  Nothing 
less  will  satisfy  him  than  the  fulfilment  of  Moses' 
wish :  '  Would  to  God  that  all  Jahweh's  people 
were  prophets. '  For  him  the  goal  of  Hebrew  his- 
tory, the  Divine  event  to  which  all  things  move, 
is  that  God  shall,  by  the  mighty  working  of  His 
Spirit,  so  enlighten  and  control  His  people,  so 
adapt  them  to  share  His  confidence  and  receive 
His  revelations,  that  the  thrilling  experiences 
which  have  hitherto  been  confined  to  the  prophets 
shall  then  be  shared  by  all  Israel.  '  Your  sons 
and  your  daughters  shall  prophesy,  and  your  old 
men  shall  dream  dreams,  and  your  young  men 
shall  see  visions  :  and  also  upon  the  servants  and 

upon  the  handmaids  in  those  days  will  I  pour  out 
my  spirit' (2*-»- 29), 

This  particular  prophecy  wins  for  Joel  aprominent 
place  in  the  NT.  St.  Peter  at  once  recognized  its 
fulfilment  in  that  outpouring  of  the  Spirit,  that 
baptism  of  fire,  that  Divine  intoxication,  which 
was  experienced  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  He 
quoted  the  prophet's  words,  and  the  question 
naturally  arises  how  he  interpreted  'upon  all 
flesh.'  Was  he,  like  the  prophet  himself,  still  a 
particularist,  extending  the  promised  blessing  to 
all  the  Jews  of  the  Diaspora,  but  limiting  it  to 
them,  and  so  making  the  old  distinction  of  Israel 
from  the  heathen  more  marked  than  ever?  Or 
did  he  there  and  then  change  his  standpoint  so  as 
to  include  the  nations  in  his  purview?  Did  he 
in  that  hour  of  inspiration  read  into  Joel's  words 
the  later  universalism  of  St.  Paul  ?  Probably  the 
issue  did  not  become  clear  to  his  mind  so  soon.  It 
was  not  a  day  for  correct  definitions  but  for  over- 
whelming impressions.  Enough  that  to  the  eflusion 
of  the  Spirit  there  was  meantime  no  limit  of  sex 
('your  sons  and  your  daughters'),  of  age  ('your 

Soung  men,  your  old  men'),  or  of  condition  (' my 
ondmen  and  my  bondwomen').  Time  would  also 
show  that  there  was  to  be  no  limit  of  race  (Jew 
or  Gentile) ;  for  however  men  (even  prophets) 
may  limit  'all  flesh,'  to  Christ  and  His  Church  it 
means  '  all  humanity.'  J  AMES  Strahax. 


JOHN.— See  James  and  Johx,  Sons  of  Zebe- 

DEE. 

JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF.— I.  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE. 
— 1.  Contents. — It  is  not  easy  to  summarize  the  con- 
tents of  the  First  Epistle.  The  '  aphoristic  medi- 
tations '  of  this  mystic  writer  are  strung  together 
in  such  fashion  that  they  almost  defy  analysis. 
The  most  successful  attempt  is  that  of  T.  Haring 
('Gedankengang  und  Gmndgedanke  des  l*** 
Johannesbriefs,'  in  Th^ol.  Abhandlungen  C.  von 
Weizsdcker  gewidmet,  Freiburg  i.  B.,  1892).  If  we 
cut  oH"  the  first  four  verses,  which  are  clearly  an 
introduction,  and  also  5'^-',  whirrh  form  a  final 
summary,  the  main  lx)dy  of  the  Epistle  gives  us 
a  triple  presentation  of  two  leading  idea.s.  The 
ethical  thesis,  '  Without  walking  in  light,  more 
specially  defined  as  love  of  the  brethren,  tliere  can 
be  no  fellowship  with  God,'  is  developed  in  the 
sections  l«-2",  2^^'-3",  4?-^\  The  christological 
thesis,  '  Beware  of  those  who  deny  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,'  is  similarly  developed  in  2'*  ■■^,  4*'*, 
5i(t5)-i2,  In  the  first  presentation  (l'-2«')  the  two 
theses  are  stated  without  any  indication  of  their 
nmtual  connexion ;  in  the  second  (2-'^-4*)  they  are 
again  presented  in  the  same  order,  but  the  verses 
(3^-  ^)  which  form  the  transition  from  the  one  to 
tlie  other  are  so  worded  as  to  bring  out  clearly 
the  intimate  connexion  which  the  author  finds 
Ijetween  them  ('his  command  is  that  we  should 
believe,  and  love  as  he  commanded ') ;  in  the  third 
(4"-5^^)  tliey  are  inseparably  intertwined.  A  rough 
analysis  may  be  attempted. 

1^-*. — The  introduction  states  the  writer's  pur- 
pose— to  rekindle  the  true  joy  of  fellowship  in  his 
readers,  by  recalling  the  old  message  of  Life,  which 
has  been  from  the  beginning,  and  of  late  has  been 
manifested  in  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God  (l'~*). 

l*-2^. — (a)  The  burden  of  that  message  is  that 
God  is  Light.  As  the  light  must  shine,  so  it  is  of 
His  essence  to  reveal  Himself  to  those  whom  He 
has  made  to  share  His  fellowship.  In  spite  of 
what  some  Gnostics  may  say,  there  is  nothing  in 
His  nature  that  hides  Him  from  all  but  a  few 
select  souls.  But  '  light '  describes,  so  to  speak. 
His  character  as  well.  Fellowship  with  Light  is 
only  possible  for  those  who  'walk  in  light.'  To 
claim  fellowship,  and  go  on  committing  deeds  of 
darkness,  is  to  tell  a  lie.  But  for  those  who  try. 
He  has  prescribed  a  way  of  dealing  with  their 
partial  failures  (v.").  Two  similar  false  pleas  are 
then  set  aside  :  the  denial  that  sin  is  a  real  power, 
active  for  evil,  in  those  who  have  sinned,  and  the 
denial  that  actual  sin  has  been  committed.  They 
are  shown  to  be  contrary  to  experience,  and  to 
what  we  know  of  God's  dealing  with  men  (w.*"^*). 
In  2^  the  writer  sets  aside  a  false  inference  which 
might  be  drawn  from  what  he  has  said.  The  uni- 
versality of  sin  might  seem  to  be  an  excuse  for 
acquiescence.  The  writer  states  that  he  writes  to 
prevent,  not  to  condone,  sin.  And  this  is  possible, 
for  in  the  Christian  society  the  means  are  ready  to 
hand  for  dealing  with  the  sins  which  occur.  The 
Paraclete  is  pleading  their  cause  in  heaven,  and 
He  is  the  propitiation  He  ministers.  And  men 
can  know  how  they  stand.  Obedience  is  the  sign 
of  knowledge  of  God.  Men  are  in  union  with  God 
when  they  try  to  follow  the  steps  of  the  Christ 
(yy  2-6)  jjj  yy,7-i7  thesis  and  warning  are  put 
forward  on  the  groimds  of  the  readers'  circum- 
stances and  experiences.  Obedience  to  command 
suggests  a  general  statement  of  the  command  to 
love.  '  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour '  is  an  old 
command.  It  received  new  force  and  meaning  in 
the  light  of  Christ's  life,  and  the  new  life  which 
Christians  have  learned  to  live.  This  is  more 
clearly  realized  as  in  the  new  society  the  darkness 
I  passes  away.    A  man  cannot  be  in  the  light  and 


644 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


hate  his  brother  Christian.  Love  lights  the  path, 
so  that  he  can  walk  without  stumbling. 

The  writer  then  turns  to  immediate  circum- 
stances (vv.i'--").  The  sin  which  keeps  them  far 
from  God  has  been  removed  ;  the  experience  of  tlie 
old  and  the  strength  of  the  young  have  secured 
victory  (vv.^*-  '^).  This  explains  how  he  could 
write  as  he  has  written.  Iheir  knowledge  and 
strength  made  it  possible  for  him  to  use  the  words 
he  has  penned  (vv.'^''- ").  But  there  is  need  of 
hard  striving.  Love  of  the  world  may  soon  destroy 
all  tliat  they  iiave  gained.  The  world  is  passing  ; 
only  that  which  is  done  according  to  God's  will 
abides  (vv."*"). 

(b)  So  he  passes  to  the  first  statement  of  the 
christological  thesis  (vv.'*"^).  Faith  in  Jesus  as 
the  Christ  is  the  test  of  fellowship  with  God.  The 
passing  of  the  transitory  suggests  the  signs  of  the 
times.  The  last  hour  has  struck.  The  saying 
'Antichrist  cometh '  is  being  fulfilled  in  the  many 
false  teachers  who  have  appeared.  The  Faith  had 
gained  a  decisive  victory,  in  the  unmasking  of  the 
traitors,  who  had  to  go.  The  crisis  had  shown 
that  all  such  false  teachers,  however  they  differed 
among  themselves,  were  aliens,  and  no  true  mem- 
bers of  the  Body.  This  the  readers  knew,  if  they 
would  use  their  knowledge.     Their  anointing  had 

fiven  to  all  of  them  knowledge  to  det«ct  falsehood, 
'alsehood  culminates  in  the  denial  that  Jesus  is 
the  Messiah.  This  denial  includes  denial  of  the 
Father,  in  spite  of  Gnostic  claims  to  superior 
knowledge.  All  true  knowledge  of  the  Father 
comes  through  the  Son.  It  is  gained  in  living  and 
abiding  union,  the  eternal  life  which  He  has  pro- 
mised (vv.'^"^).  This  much  he  must  write  about 
the  deceivers.  If  his  readers  had  used  their  know- 
ledge, he  need  not  have  written  it  (vv.^-  ^).  Let 
them  abide,  and  confidence  will  be  theirs  when 
'  He '  appears  (v.^).  Who  can  have  this  confidence  ? 
Those  wlio  know  that  God  is  just,  and  who  there- 
fore learn  in  the  experience  of  Christian  life  that 
the  doing  of  righteousness  is  the  true  test  of  the 
birth  from  God  (v.2»). 

228_46_ — ((j)  yYe  pass  to  the  second  statement  of 
the  ethical  thesis  (2'-^(')-3**) :  the  doing  of  righteous- 
ness, i.e.  love  of  the  brethren,  shown  in  active  ser- 
vice, is  the  sign  by  which  we  may  know  that  we 
are '  loving  God.'  In  3'-®  thesis  and  warning  are  con- 
sidered in  the  light  of  the  duty  of  self-purification, 
laid  upon  us  by  the  gift  of  sonship  and  the  hope  of 
its  consummation.  Everyone  who  has  this  nope 
must  of  necessity  purify  himself  here  and  now. 
Lawlessness  does  not  consist  only  in  disobeying 
the  injunctions  of  a  definite  code.  There  is  a 
higher  Law  which  is  broken  by  every  act  of  afiapria, 
of  failure  to  realize  in  life  the  ideal  set  before  men 
in  the  human  life  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  further 
explained  in  vv-''^^^,  introduced  by  an  earnest  warn- 
ing against  deceivers.  The  doer  of  righteousness 
alone  has  attained  to  Christ-like  righteousness. 
The  doer  of  sin  still  belongs  to  the  Devil,  who  has 
been  working  for  sin  throughout  human  history. 
So,  if  we  realize  that  for  us  rigliteousness  finds  its 
clearest  expression  in  love  of  the  brethren,  we  gain 
a  clear  contrast:  God's  children,  always  striving 
to  realize  the  ideal  of  sinless  love,  and  the  children 
of  the  Devil,  striving  after,  or  drifting  towards, 
their  own  ideal  of  sinful  hate  and  seltisli  greed. 
Sinlessness,  i.e.  righteousness,  is  not  the  monopoly 
of  a  chosen  race,  or  section  of  men.  It  is  the 
natural  outcome  of  the  new  life  which  every  man 
majr  have,  if  he  will  take  it  and  use  it,  to  follow 
Christ,  not  Cain,  whose  evil  life  found  its  natural 
expression  in  the  final  issue  of  hatred — murder 
^vith  violence  (v."^).  Verses  13-18  contain  varia- 
tions on  tiie  same  theme.  The  world's  hatred 
should  not  surprise  tiiem ;  it  is  the  natural  atti- 
tude of  those  who  cannot  stand  the  sight  of  good. 


They  really  ought  to  know  tliat  love  and  death, 
murder  and  eternal  life,  have  nothing  in  common. 
And  Christ's  example  has  siiown  what  love  is.  At 
least  they  can  show  their  love  in  helping  their 
bretliren.  He  who  has  not  even  got  so  far  as  that 
need  not  talk  of  God's  love.  With  an  exhortation 
to  sincerity  in  loving  service  (v.**)  tlie  meditation 
passes  over  once  more  to  the  tests  of  truth.  How 
can  we  know  that  we  are  on  the  side  of  truth,  and 
still  the  accusations  of  our  consciences? — By  throw- 
ing ourselves  on  God's  omniscience.  Wfien  a  man 
feels  confidence  towards  God  and  finds  that  his 
prayers  are  answered — tliat  he  wishes  for  and  does 
the  things  that  God  wills — his  conscience  ceases  to 
accuse  (vv.'"'^-^).  God's  will  is  shown  in  His  com- 
mand— which  is  more  than  a  series  of  jirecepts : 
He  bids  men  have  faith  in  Christ  and  love  like 
His.  These  lead  to  fellowship  witli  Him.  Men 
know  that  they  have  it  by  their  possession  of  tfie 
Spirit  which  He  has  given  (vv.^-  2<). 

{b)  Thus  the  interlacing  of  Faith  and  Love  leads 
on  to  the  second  presentation  of  the  christological 
thesis  (4^"''),  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  its  vital  con- 
nexion with  the  ethical.  The  mention  of  the 
Spirit  suggests  the  form  of  the  new  statement. 
All  spiritual  phenomena  could  not  be  regarded  as 
the  work  of  God's  Spirit.  Tlie  spirits  must  be 
tested  by  their  attitude  to  the  Clirist.  The  reality 
of  the  Incarnation  as  a  permanent  union  between 
God  and  man  is  the  vital  trutli.  The  statement 
(42.  3)  jg  followed  by  a  short  meditation  (vv.**)  on 
the  attitude  of  the  Church  and  the  world  to  the 
two  confessions  and  those  who  make  them.  The 
spirits  of  truth  and  error  are  clearly  discerned  by 
the  kinds  of  people  who  listen  to  them. 

4''-5^'. — In  these  verses,  the  last  and  most  intri- 
cate section  of  the  Epistle,  we  have  the  third  pre- 
sentation of  the  two  theses.  Tlie  remainder  of 
ch.  4  is  predominantly  ethical,  the  opening  verses 
of  ch.  5  christological,  or  at  least  doctrinal.  But 
the  two  theses  are  interwoven,  and  can  hardly  be 
separated.  Love  is  the  proof  of  fellowship  with 
God,  for  God  is  Love.  The  true  nature  of  love  has 
been  made  clear,  in  terms  intelligible  to  men,  in 
the  sending  of  His  Son,  as  faith  conceives  it. 

In  the  first  explanation  of  the  two  combined 
ideas  (4''"2'),  it  is  shown  that  love  based  on  faith  in 
the  revelation  of  love  given  in  Christ's  life  and 
work  is  the  proof  of  '  knowing  God '  and  of  being 
'loved  of  God.'  In  the  second  explanation  (5^*-) 
faith  is  first.  Victory  over  the  world — the  forces 
opposed  to  God — is  gained  by  faith  in  Je.sus  as  the 
Alessiah,  the  Son  of  God.  This  faith  rests  histori- 
cally on  a  three-fold  witness — of  the  water  (the 
Baptism  in  which  He  was  set  apart  for  His 
Messianic  work),  of  the  siifl'ering  (which  culmin- 
ated on  the  Cross,  and  which  has  dealt  witli  sin), 
and  of  the  Spirit  (who  interprets  these  facts  to 
men).  And  the  work  of  the  Spirit  continues  in 
those  who  follow  Christ  as  thus  conceived.  They 
realize  the  truth  in  tlieir  own  experience. 

513-21 — go  the  last  christological  statement  passes 
out  into  yet  another  answer  to  the  question,  '  How 
can  we  know?'  (vv.^^'").  True  confidence  is 
established  when  men  know  that  prayer  is  heard 
because  wliat  is  asked  is  in  accordance  with  God's 
wUl.  The  true  answer  to  j^rayer  is  the  immediate 
consciousness  that  what  is  taken  to  God  has 
reached  His  ear,  and  may  be  safely  left  in  His 
care.  Where  intercession  is  possible  it  will  suc- 
ceed. Then  (vv.^^'^'),  with  a  triple  otSa/xev,  the 
writer  sums  up  the  things  he  has  to  say  whicfi 
matter  most.  .Sin  can  be  conquered  ;  we  belong  to 
God,  whom  we  have  learned  to  know  in  the  revela- 
tion of  Him  which  His  Son  lias  brouirht  down  to 
men.  The  Epistle  closes  with  tlie  terse  warning 
that  His  '  chiklren '  must  reject  all  meaner  concep- 
tions of  God. 


JOHX,  EPISTLES  OF 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


645 


2.  The  false  teachers.— If  the  analysis  given 
of  the  teaching  of  the  First  Epistle  is  correct,  it 
follows  that  edification  and  exhortation  rather 
than  controversy  are  the  writers  primary  objects. 
He  reiterates  the  leading  ideas  of  his  teaching, 
already  familiar  to  his  readers,  to  kindle  once 
more  the  enthusiasm  of  their  faith  and  lirst  love, 
■whicli  is  growing  cold,  to  gnard  them  from  the 
dangers  which  threaten,  and  to  give  them  tests  by 
which  they  may  'know'  the  security  of  their 
Christian  position. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  clear  that  in  all  he  writes 
he  has  in  view  definite  forms  of  false  teaching 
which  have  proved  dangerous,  errors  both  doc- 
trinal and  ethical,  the  fascination  of  which  is  a 
serious  menace  to  their  Christian  life. 

A  careful  study  of  the  language  of  the  Epistle 
makes  it  probable  that  the  author  is  combating 
more  than  one  kind  of  false  teaching.  His  oppon- 
ents are  not  all  to  be  fotmd  in  the  same  camp. 
The  opinions  which  he  refutes  might  all  have  been 
held  by  the  same  opponents ;  but  they  do  not  form 
a  complete  system  :  still  less  can  they  be  separated 
into  a  series  of  complete  homogeneous  systems. 
Probably  he  otiers  a  few  leading  truths  which  in 
his  opinion  are  the  antidote  to  the  manifold  errors 
by  which  his  readers  are  threatened,  while  there 
is  one  particular  party,  to  whose  opinions  recent 
circtimstances  have  given  a  predominant  import- 
ance. 

The  expressions  used  suggest  variety.  Many 
antichrists  have  come  (2^*) ;  all  of  them,  whatever 
their  ditierences  may  be,  are  aliens  to  the  truth 
(v.^S).  The  repeated  use  of  xaj  (w.^-  ^)  suggests 
manifold  and  varied  opposition.  '  Those  who  lead 
astray'  are  spoken  of  in  the  plural  (v.*).  The 
one  x/>«^A'a,  which  all  have,  should  have  taught 
them  all  things.  The  same  variety  is  suggested 
by  ch.  4.  Many  false  prophets  are  gone  out  into 
the  world.  Every  spirit  which  does  not  confess 
(dissolves  ?)  Jesus  is  *  not  of  Ciod '  ;  Antichrist  is 
working  in  many  subordinates  (vv.-  ^).  It  is  only 
in  ch.  5  that  the  writer  seems  to  narrow  the  issues 
down  to  one  particular  form  of  error :  the  denial 
that  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  were  an 
essential  part  of  His  Messianic  work.  Even  here 
his  method  is  the  same.  He  emphasizes  a  few 
fundamental  truths  which  should  safeguard  his 
readers  from  all  the  varied  dangers  which  threaten. 
A  special  incident  is  the  occasion  of  his  writing. 
He  has  in  view  several  forms  of  error. 

(1)  Judaism. — Jews  who  have  never  accepted 
Christianity  are  not  the  only  enemy.  The  words 
€|  TifiQiv  e^fjXdov  (2^)  must  refer  to  a  definite  seces- 
sion of  those  who  were  generally  recognized  as 
Christians.  But  Jewish  opposition  is  clearly  a 
serious  danger.  This  is  shown  by  the  writers 
insistence  on  the  confession  that  Jesus  is  the 
Messiah  (2^ ;  cf.  4^  5%  The  Jewish  controversy 
is  prominent  throughout.  The  Jewish  War  and 
the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  must  have  pro- 
foundly aHected  the  relation  of  Judaism  to  Chris- 
tianity. Jewish  Christians  were  placed  in  a 
desperate  position.  Hitherto  they  had  no  doubt 
hoped  against  hope  for  the  recognition  of  Jesus 
as  ilessiah  by  the  majority  of  their  countrymen. 
But  the  final  catastrophe  had  come,  and  the  Lord 
had  not  returned  to  save  His  people.  Christians 
had  not  been  slow  to  draw  the  obvious  conclusion 
from  the  fate  of  Jerusalem.  And  Jewish  Chris- 
tians could  expect  nothing  but  the  bitterest  hos- 
tility from  their  fellow -cotmtrymen.  Apostasy  was 
now  the  only  possible  condition  of  reunion.  If 
some  openly  accepted  the  condition,  many  Jewish 
Christians  must  have  been  sorely  tempted  to  think 
that  their  estimate  of  Jesus  as  Messiah  had  been 
mistaken,  and  to  regard  Him  as  a  Prophet  indeed, 
but  not  as  Messiah,  still  less  as  the  unique  Son 


of  Gk)d.  This  danger,  which  threatened  Jewish 
Christians  primarily,  must  have  affected  the  whole 
body.  The  prominence  of  the  Jewish  controversy 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  now  generally  recognized. 
It  is  less  prominent  in  the  Epistle,  bat  there  is  no 
essential  difference  of  situation. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  only  one  element  in  the 
situation.  A.  Wurm  {Die  Irrlehrer  im  1.  Johan- 
nesbricf,  1903)  is  not  justified  in  deducing  from 
the  words  of  2^  the  exclusively  Jewish  character 
of  the  false  teaching  combated.  The  author  cer- 
tainly deduces  the  fact  that  the  opponents  *  have 
not  the  Father '  from  their  false  Christology.  It 
does  not  follow,  however,  that  he  and  his  op- 

Sinents  were  at  one  in  their  doctrine  of  the  Father, 
e  could  not  have  written  as  he  has  unless  they 
claimed  to  '  have  the  Father ' ;  but  they  may  have 
claimed  it  in  a  different  sense  from  that  of  orthodox 
Christians.  The  passage  is  more  easily  explained 
if  we  suppose  that  the  writer  has  in  \iew  a  claim 
to  a  superior  knowledge  of  the  Father  imparted  to 
a  few  'spiritual'  natures,  unattainable  by  the 
ordinary  Christian.  All  true  knowledge  of  the 
Father  comes  through  Jesns,  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God.  Bv  rejecting  the  truth  about  Jesus  they 
forfeited  all  claim  to  knowledge  of  the  Father. 

(2)  Grnostidsm. — There  is  no  clear  evidence  in 
the  Epistles  of  the  ful^  developed  Gnostic  systems 
of  the  2nd  century.  There  are,  for  instance,  many 
simpler  explanations  of  the  use  of  erxep/io  aih-oO  in 
3^  than  Pfleiderer's  hypothesis  that  it  refers  to  the 
system  of  Basilides,  But  undoubtedly  Gnostic 
ideas  are  an  important  element  in  the  mental 
circumstances  of  the  writer  and  his  age.  The 
burden  of  his  message  is  that  God  is  Light  (1*),  and 
the  reiteration  of  this  in  negative  form  is  probably 
aimed  at  the  view  that  the  Father  of  all  is  un- 
knowable or  that  knowledge  of  Him  is  the  monopoly 
of  a  'pneumatic'  minority.  The  Gnostic  claim, 
real  or  supposed,  that  the  rvevfiartKoi  are  superior 
to  the  obligations  of  the  Moral  Law  is  roughly 
handled.  Ajid  the  insistence  with  which  intellectual 
claims  are  met  by  the  challenge  to  fulfil  the  Chris- 
tian duty  of  love  and  its  obligations  is  significant. 
The  confession  demanded  of  '  Jesus  Christ  come  in 
flesh '  is  a  protest  against  the  Gnostic  doctrine  of 
the  impossibility  of  real  union  between  the  spiritual 
seed  and  flesh.  And  at  the  same  time  the  writer's 
sympathy  with  Gnostic  ideas  is  obvious.  Here  as 
elsewhere,  he  is  always  reminding  his  'children' 
that  they  are  old  enough  to  refuse  the  evil  and  to 
choose  the  good. 

Gnostic  ideas  afford  no  criterion  for  dating  the 
Epistles  of  John.  It  is,  of  course,  a  perversion  of 
history  to  assume  that  Gnostic  ideas  first  came 
into  contact  with  Christianity  when  Christians 
began  to  think  in  terms  of  Greek  philosophy, 
towards  the  middle  of  the  2nd  century.  The 
movement  is  Oriental  rather  than  Greek,  and  far 
older  in  date.  But  its  reflexion  in  these  Epistles 
is  a  patent  fact. 

(3)  Docetism. — It  is  customary  to  speak  of  the 
Johannine  Epistles,  and  also  of  the  Grospel,  as  anti- 
Docetic  (cf.  Schmiedel  [EBi  s.v.  'John,  Son  of 
Zebedee,'§  57],  Moflatt  [LNT,  1911,  p.  586]).  If 
the  term  is  used  popularly  of  all  teaching  which 
denied  or  subverted  the  reality  of  the  Incarnation, 
this  is  true.  '  The  Word  was  made  Flesh,'  '  Jesus 
Christ  came  in  flesh,'  are  the  watchwords  of  Gospel 
and  Epistles.  But  there  is  no  real  trace  in  these 
writings  of  Docetism  in  the  stricter  sense  of  the 
term,  i.e.  the  teaching  denounced  by  Ignatius 
{Smyrn.  2ff.  ;  cf.  Trail.  10  f.),  which  assigned  a 
purely  phantasmal  body  to  the  Lord.  And  it  is 
probable  that  in  the  development  of  christological 
thought  theories  of  pure  Docetism  are  a  later  stage 
than  the  assumption  of  a  temporary  connexion 
between  a  Heavenly  Power  and  the  real  manhood 


646 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  (of.,  however,  Lightfoot  and 
Pfleiderer). 

(4)  Cerinthianism. — We  have  seen  that  the  writer 
has  to  deal  with  dangers  which  threaten  from 
several  quarters.  As  the  Epistle  proceeds,  his 
attack  becomes  more  direct,  and  the  christological 
jtiissa^^'o  in  ch.  5  contains  clearer  reference  to  one 
(lelinite  form  of  error — the  denial  that  Jesus,  the 
Son  of  God,  came  by  '  blood '  as  well  as  by  '  water,' 
i.e.  that  the  Sutlerings  and  Death  of  Jesus  were  as 
essential  a  note  of  His  Messianic  work  as  tlie 
Baptism  by  John.  This  suits  the  teaching  of 
Cerinthus  as  described  by  Irenajus  (c.  Har.  I. 
XX vi.  1) :  '  post  baptism  um  descendiase  in  eum  ab  ea 
principalitate  qu.e  est  super  omnia  Cliristum  figura 
columW  et  tunc  annunciasse  incognitum  patrem, 
et  uirtutes  perfecisse,  in  fine  autem  reuolasse 
iterum  Christum  de  lesu,  et  lesum  passum  esse 
et  resurrexisse,  Christum  autem  imuassibilem  per- 
seuerasse,  existentem  spiritalem.'  Tlie  traditional 
view  that  ch.  5  contains  a  reference  to  Cerinthian- 
ism has  been  held  by  the  majority  of  scholars  of 
all  scliools  who  have  dealt  witli  the  Epistle.  This 
view  has  been  seriously  challenged  especially  by 
Wurm  (op.  cit.)  and  Clemen  (ZNTW  vi.  [1905] 
271  li.)  on  the  ground  that  2'^*  excludes  Cerinthian- 
ism, as  it  implies  that  the  writer  and  his  opponents 
are  conscious  of  no  difference  of  view  in  their  doc- 
trine of  the  Father.  If  the  suggestion  made  above 
(§  2  (1))  that  that  passage  gains  in  point  if  the 
opponents  claimed  a  superior  'having  tlie  Father' 
to  that  of  ordinary  Christians,  the  objection  falls 
to  the  ground.  The  limits  of  this  article  preclude 
a  general  discussion  of  our  knowledge  of  Cerinth- 
ianism. The  present  writer  has  discussed  it  at 
length  in  his  Johannine  Epistles  {ICC,  1912),  p. 
xlvfK).  There  are  good  reasons  for  thinking  that 
Hippolytus  in  his  Syntagma  ascribed  to  Cerinthus 
the  view  that  the  Spirit  (not  the  Christ)  descended 
on  Jesus  at  the  Baptism.  If  so,  this  gives  additional 
force  to  the  description  in  5*"-  of  the  proper  function 
of  the  Spirit.  It  would  seem  that  Cerinthus  con- 
tinued these  Judaizing  and  Gnostic  tendencies 
which  the  author  of  these  Epistles  regarded  as 
most  dangerous.  But '  many  Antichrists  had  come 
to  be'  even  if  Cerinthus  is  most  prominently  in 
his  thoughts. 

(5)  Ethical  error.  —In  his  denunciations  of  ethical 
error  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  writer 
has  a  dillerent  class  of  opponents  in  view.  He 
could  not  have  connected  his  ethical  and  christo- 
logical theses  as  he  has,  if  the  two  sources  of 
danger  Iiad  been  separate.  At  the  same  time,  in 
his  practical  warnings  as  well  as  in  his  christo- 
logical teaching  his  words  liave  a  wider  reference 
than  one  particular  body  of  opponents.  There  is 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  of  the  opponents 
had  been  guilty  of  the  grosser  sins  of  the  flesh. 
The  phrase  imOv/ila  rrji  arapKoi  (2^'')  does  not  imply 
this.  And  the  Epistle  is  not  directed  against 
Antinomianism,  as  lias  been  sometimes  wrongly 
inferred  from  3*.  It  would  seem  that  they  claimed 
a  superior  knowledge  of  God  to  which  ordinary 
Christians  could  not  attain,  while  disregarding 
some  at  least  of  the  requirements  of  the  Christian 
code,  especially  the  love  which  shows  itself  in 
active  service  for  the  brethren.  They  liardly 
recognized  the  obligation  of  the  new  command  of 
Jn  IS**.  Wliile  condemning  lawlessness  (cf.  3^) — 
and  many  of  tliem  no  doubt  recognized  the  obliga- 
tions of  the  Mosaic  Law — they  failed  to  see  that 
all  falling  short  of  the  ideal  revealed  as  possible  in 
the  human  life  of  Jesus  is  disobedience  to  God's 
highest  Law.  The  indifference  of  conduct,  as  com- 
pared with  other  supposed  qualifications,  as  e.g. 
•lescent  from  Abraham,  or  possession  of  the  '  pneu- 
matic '  seed,  is  clearlj^  part  of  tlioir  ethical  creed. 
In  this  sphere  aliio  a  mixture  of  Judaizing  and 


Gnostic  tendencies  such  as  may  reasonably  be 
attributed  to  Cerinthianism  will  explain  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Apostle  in  which  the  ethical  short- 
comings of  the  opponents  are  denounced. 

3.  Relation  to  the  Gospel. — The  authorship  of 
the  Epistles  is  closely  connected  with  the  question 
of  the  authorship  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  imiKJssible 
to  attempt  here  even  a  summary  of  the  controversy. 
The  relation,  however,  of  the  longer  Epistle  to  the 
(Jospel  and  to  the  shorter  Epistles  must  be  con- 
sidered. The  similarity  of  style  and  content  is  so 
marked  that  the  obvious  explanation  of  common 
authorship  might  seem  to  need  no  further  dis- 
cussion. But  the  views  of  an  increasing  number 
of  competent  critics  cannot  be  neglected.  Holtz- 
niann's  articles  {JPTh  vii.  [1881],  viii.  [1882])  are 
still  the  fullest  and  fairest  statement  of  the  views 
of  those  who  reject  the  idea  of  common  authorship. 
A  rough  estimate  makes  the  vocabulary  of  the 
Epistle  295  words,  of  which  69  only  are  not  found 
in  the  Gospel.  The  general  impression  formed  by 
reading  verses  or  chapters  of  the  documents  is 
probably  a  safer  guide.  There  can  be  no  doubt  as 
to  the  prevalence  of  characteristic  and  distinctive 
words  and  phrases  common  to  both.  The  similar- 
ity extends  to  common  types  of  phrases  variously 
filled  up.  Attention  has  often  been  called  to  the 
following  points  of  similarity  in  style :  the  carrying 
on  of  the  thought  by  the  use  of  o^  .  .  .  dXXd,  by 
disconnected  sentences,  by  the  positive  and  negative 
expression  of  the  same  thought ;  the  use  of  the 
demonstrative,  iv  roijTq),  etc.,  followed  by  an 
explanatory  clause  to  emphasize  a  thought ;  the 
repetition  of  emphatic  words.  Such  phenomena 
leave  us  with  the  choice  between  an  author,  vary- 
ing his  own  phrases  and  forms  of  expression,  and 
a  slavish  imitator. 

The  similarity  extends  to  content  as  well.  The 
leading  ideas — the  reality  of  the  Incarnation,  the 
life  which  springs  from  Christ  and  is  identified 
with  Him,  abiding  in  Christ  and  in  God,  the  send- 
ing of  the  Son  as  the  proof  of  God's  love,  the  birth 
from  God,  the  importance  of  witness,  many  well- 
known  pairs  of  opposites — are  equally  prominent 
in  both  writings.  They  find  that  kind  of  similar 
but  varied  expression  which  suggests  an  author 
doing  what  he  would  with  his  own,  rather  than 
the  work  of  a  copyist.  And  the  differences,  though 
real,  are  not  greater  than  are  naturally  explained 
by  differences  of  time,  circumstances,  and  object. 
The  question  of  priority  has  also  been  the  subject 
of  long  controversy.  The  priority  of  the  Epistle 
has  been  maintained  on  the  following  grounds  : 

(1)  The  introductory  verses  are  said  to  present 
an  earlier  stage  of  the  Lo^os  doctrine  than  the 
Prologue  of  the  Gospel.  Trie  personal  Logos  is  a 
stage  not  yet  reached.  Even  if  this  is  true,  the 
facts  might  equally  well  be  explained  by  the  theory 
that  in  the  Epistle  we  have  a  further  accommoda- 
tion to  the  growing  Monarchianism  of  a  later 
period.  And  if  we  take  the  whole  Epistle  into 
account,  it  is  clear  that  the  '  personal  differentia- 
tion '  of  Father  and  Son  is  stated  in  the  Epistle  as 
definitely  as  in  the  Logos  doctrine  of  the  Gospel. 
And  it  is  far  easier  to  explain  the  opening  expres- 
sions of  the  Epistle  as  a  summary  of  that  Prologue 
than  vice  versa. 

(2)  The  aXXos  irapd/tX^Toj  of  Jn  14'*  has  been 
explained  by  the  doctrine  of  the  Epistle  which 
presents  Christ  as  irapdKXrjros.  But  the  two  ideas 
are  different,  and  not  mutually  exclusive.  The 
dXXos  of  the  Gospel  finds  its  natural  explanation  in 
the  approaching  withdrawal  of  the  bodily  presence 
of  the  speaker. 

(3)  The  Epistle  shows  an  immediate  exi>ectation 
of  the  Parousia  which  the  author  of  the  Gospel  is 
said  to  have  abandoned,  substituting  tiie  Presence 
of  the  Spirit  for  the  hope  of  the  Coming.     Again, 


JOHX,  EPISTLES  OF 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


647 


the  point,  if  true,  is  not  decisive.  It  could  as 
plausibly  be  explained  as  a  modification  of  more 
original  and  less  popular  views.  But  serious  diver- 
gence can  only  be  maintained  by  the  excision  of 
52S-S*  QM.  j^jjj  other  inconvenient  passages  from 
the  Gospel.  Tlie  diflerences  are  definite,  but  not 
fundamental.  The  treatment  of  the  Antichrist 
legend  in  the  Epistle  is  as  complete  a  process  of 
'  spiritualization '  as  that  of  popular  eschatology  in 
the  Gospel. 

(4)  It  has  also  been  maintained  that  on  the  snb- 

J'ect  of  Propitiation  the  Epistle  is  nearer  to  the 
*auline  standpoint  than  the  Gospel,  which  con- 
ceives of  Clirist's  work  merely  as  the  jrlorifying  of 
the  Father  by  the  Son's  revelation  of  Him  to  men. 
Again  there  is  a  diflerence  of  relative  prominence, 
but  there  is  no  reason  to  neglect  what  is  involved 
in  Jn  l^  9«"-. 

(5)  In  the  record  of  the  piercing  of  the  side  a 
misunderstanding  of  1  Jn  5*  has  been  found  by 
some  writers.  It  is,  however,  more  natural  to  see 
in  the  Epistle  a  reference  to  a  well-known  story, 
though  the  incident  itself  does  not  afford  a  com- 
plete explanation  of  the  meaning  of  the  verse. 

(6)  External  evidence  is  equally  indecisive.  The 
probable  'quotation'  of  the  Epistle  by  Polycarp 
proves  nothing,  especially  if  Schwartz  and  Light- 
foot  are  right  in  their  view  that  Papias  knew  and 
valued  the  Gospel. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  many  passages  in 
the  Epistle  which  seem  unintelligible  without  a 
knowledge  of  corresponding  passages  in  the  Gk>spel 
to  explain  them.  If  there  is  no  clear  proof  of 
borrowing  in  the  Epistle,  it  is  almost  indisputable 
that  'the  Gospel  is  original,  the  Epistle  is  not.' 
And  it  is  hard  to  escape  the  general  impression 
left  by  the  study  of  the  two  documents,  that  in 
the  Epistle  the  writer  summarizes  the  important 
parts  in  the  teaching  of  the  Gospel,  which  his 
readers  had  failed  to  make  their  own.  They  were 
therefore  in  danger  of  falling  victims  to  errors 
which  their  '  knowledge '  ought  to  have  enabled 
them  to  detect  and  avoid. 

i.  Relation  to  Mystery  religions.— The  time  has 
hardly  come  for  a  satisfactory  treatment  of  the 
question  of  the  relation  of  the  Johamiine  writings 
to  the  Mystery  religions.  The  valuable  work  of 
Dieterich,  Reitzenstein,  and  others  is  well  known. 
But  until  the  actual  dates  of  documents  can  be 
determined  with  greater  certainty  than  is  at 
present  possible,  the  influence  of  the  Mysteries  on 
early  Christian  thought  and  literature  must  remain 
a  matter  for  conjecture.  Reference  may  be  made 
to  the  valuable  treatise  of  C.  Clemen  (Der  Einfluss 
derMysterienrdigionenaufdasaltesteChristentum, 
1913)  and  to  the  admirable  summary  in  Feine's 
Theologie  tics  Neuen  Testaments^,  1911,  p.  556  fi'. 
mth  reference  to  the  Johannine  books. 

II.  The  SHORTER  Epistles.— ±.  Authorship.— 
It  is  unnece.ssarj'  to  waste  time  in  discussing  the 
common  authonship  of  the  two  shorter  Epistles. 
The  close  parallelism  of  their  general  structure, 
and  the  similarity  of  their  style,  vocabulary,  and 
ideas  (see  Hamack,  TU  xv.  3  [1897])  leave  us  with 
as  high  a  degree  of  certainty  as  such  evidence 
can  ever  give,  though  the  reference  which  many 
scholars  find  in  the  Third  Epistle  to  the  Second 
is  improbable.  Their  relation  to  the  P'irst  Epistle 
is  less  certain.  External  and  internal  evidence 
raises  the  possibility  of  diflerent  authorship.  The 
problem,  however,  is  clearly  similar  to  that  of  the 
relation  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Gospel.  A 
study  of  the  facts  leads  to  a  similar  answer.  It  is 
a  case  of  common  authorship  or  conscious  imitation. 
The  freedom  of  handling  of  the  same  tools  points 
to  the  former  alternative.  The  shorter  EpLstles 
aie  the  most  obviously  ' genuine '  of  the  five  books 
generaUy  attributed  to  St.  John.    Common  sense 


and  sound  criticism  alike  shrink  from  the  hypo- 
thesis that  either  the  Gospel  or  the  First  Epistle 
is  modelled  on  them. 

2.  Contents  of  Second  Epistle.— The  object  of 
the  second  letter  is  to  give  advice  to  the  church 
or  family  addressed  in  it  about  hospitality  to 
Christians  from  other  churches.  The  question  of 
the  reception  of  the  higher  order  of  ministers  who 
moved  from  place  to  place  ('apostles,  prophets, 
teachers,  evangelists '),  and  who  claimed  authority 
over  the  resident  officers,  was  a  bumins  one  in 
early  days,  and  the  situation  presupposed  in  this 
Epistle  is  parallel  with  that  found  in  tlie  Didache. 
The  stages  of  development  are  similar,  though  it 
does  not  follow  that  they  had  been  reached  at  the 
same  date  in  both  centres.  The  answer  given  to 
the  question  is  the  application  of  the  two  tests, 
practical  and  doctrinal,  of  the  First  Epistle. 
Those  who  '  walk  in  love '  and  who  confess  '  Jesus 
Christ  coming  in  flesh'  are  to  be  welcomed-  (A 
possible  interpretation  of  epxofievof  as  opposed  to 
ekrikvd&Ta  (1  Jn  4')  suggests  that  doubts  as  to  the 
Parousia  had  come  into  greater  prominence,  but 
this  is  far  from  certain. ) 

3.  Destination  of  Second  Epistle. — The  contro- 
versy whether  the  letter  is  addressed  to  a  church 
or  an  individual  is  still  acute.  The  latter  hypo- 
thesis has  been  ably  maintained  by  Rendel  Harris 
(Expositor,  6th  ser.  iiL  [1901]  194111)  and  others. 
The  attempts  to  find  a  proper  name  either  in 
Kyria  or  Eclecta  are  not  convincing.  If  a  lady 
is  addressed,  it  is  best  to  suppose  that  her  name 
is  not  given.  The  language  in  which  the  writers 
afiection  is  expressed,  and  the  subjects  with  which 
the  letter  deals,  point  to  a  church  rather  than  to 
an  individual.  And  the  interchange  of  singular 
and  plural  in  the  use  of  the  second  person  is  almost 
decisive  in  favour  of  the  former  view. 

i.  Contentsof  Third  Epistle.— The  Third  Epistle 
also  deals  with  the  question  of  hospitality  to 
travelling  missionaries  and  teachers,  emphasizing 
in  a  particular  instance  the  duty  of  Christians  in 
this  respect,  as  the  Second  deals  with  its  necessary 
limitations.  The  objects  of  the  letter  are  to  claim 
a  suitable  welcome  for  some  travelling  missionaries 
about  to  visit  the  Church  of  Cains  to  whom  the 
letter  is  addressed,  and  to  re-instate  Demetrius  in 
the  good  opinion  of  the  members  of  that  church. 
The  connexion  of  Demetrius  with  the  missionary 
band  is  a  matter  of  uncertainty.  But  it  is  clear 
that  he  had  fallen  under  suspicion,  and  that  Dio- 
trephes,  a  prominent  member  of  Caius's  church, 
had  succeeded  in  working  on  the  resentment  felt 
at  the  '  Elder's '  support  of  a  '  suspect,'  to  raise 
the  question  of  the  Elder's  right  to  interfere  in 
the  afiairs  of  the  church,  and  to  persuade  his 
fellow-Christians  to  ignore  a  letter  which  the  Elder 
had  written  to  the  church  on  the  subject.  On  the 
whole,  it  is  improbable  that  this  letter  (mentioned 
in  V.*)  is  to  be  identified  with  the  Second  Epistle, 
which  does  not  deal  with  the  questions  which  must 
have  been  discussed  in  such  a  letter.  But  it  is 
evident  that  the  majority  of  the  church  are  inclined 
to  take  the  side  of  Diotrephes  against  the  Elder, 
whose  right  of  supervision  is  in  serious  danger  of 
being  set  aside,  though  he  is  still  confident  that  he 
can  maintain  it  by  personal  intervention. 

5.  Historical  background  of  the  shorter  Epistles. 
— Several  interesting  attempts  have  been  made  to 
reconstruct  the  historical  background  of  the  two 
shorter  Epistles,  among  which  mention  should  be 
made  of  the  ingenious  suggestions  of  J.  Chapman 
{JThSt  V.  [1903-04]  357,  517),  who  finds  the 
Demetriris  of  the  Third  Epistle  in  Demas  (2  Ti 
4^*),  and  identifies  the  church  addressed  as  TbeEsa- 
lonica,  while  in  the  Second  Epistle  (cf.  v.*  with 
Jn  10^"-)  he  finds  a  warning  addressed  by  the 
Presbyter,  who  may  or  may  not  be  the  son  of 


648 


JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 


JOPPA 


Zebedoe,  to  the  Cliurch  of  Rome  (cf.  1  P  5"), 
against  the  False  Teachers  who  are  trying  to  get 
a  hearing  in  the  metropolis  now  tlmt  the  First 
Epistle  1ms  closed  the  Asiatic  churolies  to  them. 
Vernon  Bartlet's  sound  criticism  (JThSt  vi.  [1904- 
05]  204)  of  the  dithculties  of  these  hypotheses 
should  also  be  mentioned,  and  Rendel  Harris's 
vigorous  support  of  the  view  that  the  Second 
Letter  is  addressed  to  an  individual  ladv  and  not 
to  a  church.  Harnack's  contribution  (£U  xv.  3) 
to  the  interpretation  of  the  Epistles  is  of  far  more 
permanent  value.  lie  has  shown  the  importance 
of  their  evidence  as  throwing  light  on  an  obscure 
period  in  the  development  of  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion in  Asia,  when  the  old  missionary  organization 
is  breaking  down,  and  the  monarchical  episcopate 
is  beginning  to  emerge.  He  is,  however,  on  less 
sure  ground  in  arguing  that  the  '  Presbyter '  is 
fighting  a  losing  battle  against  the  new  movement. 
Tt  is  at  least  as  probable  that  he  sees  in  it  the  best 
way  of  dealing  with  the  dangers  caused  by  the 

{)rivate  ambitions  of  prominent  members  of  tlie 
ocal  churches,  such  as  Diotrephes  and  other  trpo- 
dyovres.  Put  Harnack  is  probably  right  in  his  view 
that  the  diflerences  found  in  the  Ignatian  Epistles 
point  to  a  stage  of  development  later  by  some 
iifteen  or  twenty  years. 

6.  Date. — The  questions  of  author.nhip  and  date 
cannot  be  discussed  satisfactorily  apart  from  the 
wider  question  of  the  autiiorship  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  If  the  view  maintained  above  is  correct, 
that  the  author  of  the  Gospel  wrote  the  Epistles  at 
a  somewhat  later  date,  to  emphasize  those  points 
in  its  teaching  which  seemecl  needed  to  meet  the 
special  dangers  of  somewhat  changed  circum- 
stances, the  date  of  the  Epistles  cannot  be  very 
long  before  or  after  the  close  of  the  1st  century. 
The  only  natural  interpretation  of  the  language  of 
the  first  verse  of  the  First  Epistle  is  that  tiie  author 
claims  to  have  been  an  eye-witness  of  the  Ministry, 
unless  indeed  we  are  driven  by  other  considerations 
to  regard  this  as  impossible.  The  tradition  which 
assigned  the  two  shorter  Epistles  to  the  '  Elder ' 
offers  the  least  difficult  solution  of  a  difficult  prob- 
lem. In  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge  we 
must  rest  content  with  the  suggestion  that  the 
same  aiithor  is  responsible  for  the  First  Epistle  and 
the  Gospel  in  something  very  like  the  form  in 
which  they  have  come  down  to  us.  It  is  probable 
that  he  has  used  the  ideas  and  the  recollections  of 
another  who  was  better  qualified  than  himself  to 
tell  of  the  '  sacred  words  and  no  less  .sacred  deeds ' 
of  the  Lord,  and  to  interpret  them  in  the  light  of 
Christian  experience. 

The  external  evidence,  which  cannot  be  discussed 
in  detail  here,  if  naturally  interpreted,  points  to 
similar  conclusions.  There  is  very  little  ground 
for  doul)ting  that  Papias  and  Polycarp  knew  and 
valued  the  Epistles,  or  at  least  the  first  two 
Epistles.  Probably  the  name  of  Ignatius  should 
be  added  to  the  list.  The  traces  of  Johannine 
thouglit  in  his  Epistles  are  clear.  Iteference  may  be 
made  to  the  articles  by  H.  J.  IJardsley  in  JThSt  xiv, 
[1912-13]  207,  489,  though  he  has  hardly  succeeded 
in  proving  the  literary  use  of  aiwstolic  documents. 
But  the  absence  of  direct  references  to  the  Apostle 
John,  where  we  might  reasonably  expect  them, 
are  undoubtedly  significant.  The  practically 
unanimous  evidence  of  writers  at  the  close  of  the 
2nd  cent,  as  to  the  Apostle's  residence  at  Ephesus 
till  the  days  of  Trajan  must  be  interi)reted  in  the 
light  of  the  probability  of  confusion  between  Elder 
and  Apostle,  and  the  strong  probability  that  the 
work  of  Papias  contained  a  statement  of  the 
martyrdom  of  John,  the  son  of  Zebedee.  There 
are  no  serious  grounds  for  setting  aside  the  tradi- 
tion which  connects  all  the  Johannine  books  with 
Asia  Minor,  and  especially  with  Ephesus. 


LiTBRATUiiB. — The  only  ancient  Commentaries  extant  are 
those  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (on  1  and  2  John  :  extant  only 
in  Cassiodorus'  I>atin  Summary  [Clement,  ed.  Stkhlin,  iii.,  1909]), 
CHcumenius,  Theophylact,  Augustine,  and  Bede.  Among 
modern  Commentaries  mav  be  mentioned  those  of  F.  Liicke^ 
(1820-5(5),  J.  E.  Huther»"(in  Meyer's  Kmnintntar,  1855-80), 
H.  Ewald  (1862),  E.  Haupt  (Eng.  tr.,1879),  R.  Rothe  (1878), 
B.  F.  Westcott  (1883),  B.  Weiss  (in  Meyer's  Komtnentar, 
1899),  H.  J.  Holtzmann3(in  Ilamlkommentar  zum  A'2',  1908), 
and  H.  Windisch  (in  Uandbueh  zum  AT,  1911). 

Among  the  more  important  monographs  and  articles,  besides 
those  mentioned  in  the  article,  ore  W.  A.  Karl,  Johanneigehe 
Sludien,  1898  ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Johannine  Theology,  1894  ; 
Wilamowitz,  in  Hermes,  xxxiii.  [1808],  p.  531  ff. ;  Woblenberg:, 
in  A'KX  xxvi.  [1902] ;  S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  in  HUB  ii.  [1899] 
728  ff.  ;  R.  Law,  Tests  of  Life,  1909.  A.  E.  BROOKE. 


JOPPA  ('I67r7r7; ;  Josephus,  'l&irri ;  Arab.  YdfA  ; 
modern  name  Jaffa). — Joppa  is  a  maritime  town 
of  Palestine,  33  miles  8.\V.  of  Jerusalem.  Built 
on  an  eminence  visible  far  out  at  sea — whence  its 
name,  'the  conspicuous' — it  owes  its  existence  to 
a  ridge  of  low  and  partly  sunken  rocks  running 
out  in  a  N.W.  direction  from  the  8.  side  of  the 
town,  and  forming  a  harbour  which,  tliough  small 
and  insecure,  is  yet  the  best  on  the  whole  coast 
of  Palestine. 

Down  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  Joppa  was 
a  heathen  town,  which  the  Jews  sometimes  used 
but  never  possessed.  Jonah's  ship  of  Joppa  was 
manned  by  a  heathen  crew  (Jon  P).  One  of  the 
strongest  proofs  of  the  political  sagacity  of  the 
three  famous  Maccabaean  brothers  lay  in  their 
resolve  to  make  Judaja  a  maritime  power.  Each 
of  them  attempted  to  capture  Joppa,  and  Simon 
succeeded.  On  the  family  memorial  at  Modin, 
meant  for  the  eyes  of  '  all  that  sail  on  the  sea,'  he 
caused  carved  ships  to  be  represented  (1  Mac  13^). 
The  historian,  in  eulogizing  his  career,  says : 
'And  amid  all  his  glory  he  took  Joppa  for  a 
haven,  and  made  it  an  entrance  for  the  isles  of  the 
sea'  (14'>).  From  that  time,  Avith  but  few  inter- 
ruptions, Joi)pa  remained  in  the  possession  of  the 
Jews  for  more  than  two  centuries.  When  Pomjjey 
(66  B.C.)  included  Judjea  in  the  province  of  Sj-ria, 
Joppa  was  one  of  the  cities  which  '  he  left  in  a 
state  of  freedom '  (Jos.  Ant.  XIV.  iv.  4) ;  and  Julius 
Caesar  decreed  '  that  the  city  of  Joppa,  which  the 
Jews  had  originally  when  they  made  a  league  of 
friendship  with  the  Romans,  shall  belong  to  them 
as  it  formerly  did'  (x.  6). 

No  city  was  more  completely  judaized  than  this 
late  possession.  Joppa  became  as  zealous  for  the 
Law,  as  patriotic,  as  impatient  of  Gentile  control 
and  culture,  as  Jerusalem  herself.  Herod  the 
Great,  who  did  much  to  hellenize  Palestine,  left 
the  Pharisaic  purity  of  Joppa  untainted.  Yet 
this  stronghold  of  Jewish  legalism  was  the  city  in 
which  St.  Peter  received  the  vision  which  taught 
him  that  Jew  and  Gentile,  as  spiritually  equal 
before  God,  must  be  impartially  welcomed  into  the 
Church  of  Christ  (Ac  10"'^*).'  Nowhere  was  the 
contrast  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean — 
the  devoutly  scrupulous  observers  of  the  Law  and 
the  jostling  crowd  of  foreigners — more  marked. 
St.  Peter  probably  never  realized  so  intensely  the 
need  of  ceremonial  purification  before  his  midday 
meal  as  when  he  brought  into  the  tanner's  house 
the  defilement  of  contact  with  so  many  lawless 
and  profane  people.  To  his  Jewish  instincts  such 
contamination  was  intolerable.  But  he  experi- 
enced a  swift  and  mysterious  reaction,  which  was 
probably  the  result  of  much  past  l)rooding  as  well 
as  of  present  prayer.  "While  he  lingered  ujwn  the 
housetop,  waiting  the  call  to  eat,  he  became  un- 
conscious of  the  sights  and  sounds  of  the  harlM)ur 
beneath,  and  fell  into  a  trance,  in  which  he  learned 
how  different  are  God's  thoughts  of  religious  purity 
from  man's.  He  became  convinced  that  all  manner 
of  meats — and,  infercntially,  all  manner  of  men — 
that  Mere  commonly  counted  unclean,  M'ere  clean  in 


JOSEPH 


JOSEPHUS 


649 


God's  sight.  It  is  as  the  birthplace  of  this  revolu- 
tionary principle,  which  virtually  gave  the  death- 
blow to  Judaism,  that  the  old  town  of  Joppa  has 
a  place  in  the  history  of  human  thought.  St. 
Peter,  always  impulsive  and  uncalculating,  went 
straight  to  pagan  Csesarea,  and  delivered  a  speech 
which  oj>ened  the  gates  of  Christ's  Church  to 
'  every  nation '  (Ac  10®).  Joppa  has  also  a  place 
in  the  history  of  Christian  beneficence.  It  is  re- 
membered as  the  home  of  a  gentlewoman  who  was 
believed  to  have  been  raised  from  death  to  life, 
and  whose  example  has  in  all  ages  been  an  incen- 
tive to  '  good  works  and  almsdeeds '  (Ac  9*"*^). 

To  the  ancient  Greeks  Joppa  was  known  as  the  place  where 
'  Andromeda  vzs  exposed  to  the  sea-monster'  (Stnbo  xn.  iL 
2S).  By  primitive  fancy  the  turj  ci  the  sea  was  ascribed  to 
serpents  and  dragons.  Modem  writers  rationalize  the  pbeno- 
iQenon.  'More  iMata  are  upset,  and  more  lives  are  Io6t  in  the 
breakers  at  the  nmrth  end  of  the  ledge  of  rocks  that  defend  the 
inner  harbour,  than  anywhere  else  on  this  coast.'  One  cannot 
'  look  without  a  shudder  at  this  treacherous  port,  with  its  noisy 
surf  tumbling:  over  the  rocks,  as  if  on  porpoee  to  swallow  up 
unfortunate  boats.  This  is  the  true  monster  which  has  devoured 
manv  an  Andromeda,  for  whose  deUveranoe  no  gallant  Perseus 
was  at  band'  (W.  M.  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  1864, 
p.  516). 

Jaffa  is  now  famons  for  its  orange  gardens  and 
orchards,  each  of  which  has  an  unlimited  supply 
of  water.  '  The  entire  plain  seems  to  cover  a  river 
of  vast  breadth,  percolating  through  the  sand  en 
route  to  the  sea'  (W.  M.  Thomson,  loc.  eit.). 

LrrKRATTRK.— E.  Schnrer,  HJP  n.  i.  [1885]  79-S3;  G.  A. 
Smith,  HGHL,  1S97,  p.  136  f.  ;  H.  B.  Tristram,  BMe  Place*, 
1897,  p.  70  f .  ;  V.  Guerin,  Description  gtographique  .  .  .  dela 
PaUitiM  :  '  Judee,"  1868,  L  1  f.  J  AMES  SXRAHAX. 

JOSEPH  {'Iu<r^).—i.  The  elder  of  Jacob's  two 
sons  by  Rachel,  the  eleventh  Patriarch,  the 
ancestor  of  the  tribes  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh. 
In  St.  Stephen's  address  before  the  Sanhedrin 
reference  is  made  to  Joseph's  being  sold  by  his 
brothers,  God's  presence  with  him  in  Egypt,  his 
promotion  to  be  governor  of  the  land,  his  manifes- 
tation of  himself  to  his  brethren,  his  invitation  to 
his  father  and  all  his  kindred  to  migrate  to  Egypt 
(Ac  7*"'^),  and  finally,  at  a  ranch  later  date,  the 
rise  of  a  Pharaoh  who  '  knew  not  Joseph'  (7^*). 

The  question  of  the  historicity  of  the  narrative  in  Genesis 
was  never  raised  by  the  Apostolic  Church,  nor  by  the  modem 
Church  till  the  dawn  of  the  age  of  criticism.  The  critical 
verdict  is  that  the  stor>-  is  based  upon  facts  which  have  been 
idealized  in  the  spirit  of  the  earlier  Hebrew  prophets.  That 
the  tradition  of  a  Hebrew  minister  in  Egypt,  who  saved  the 
country  In  time  of  famine,  '  should  be  true  in  essentials  is  by 
no  means  improbable"  (J.  Skinner,  Gcnesit  [ICC,  1910]  441). 
Driver  thinks  it  credible  that  an  actual  person,  named  Joseph, 
'  underwent  titbgtantiaUi/  the  experiences  recounted  of  him  in 
Gn. '  (HDB  iL  771«>).    See  H.  Gunkel,  Genesit,  1910,  p.  356  f. 

In  He  11"  allusion  is  made  to  the  blessing  re- 
ceived by  Joseph's  two  sons  from  his  dying  father. 
In  11*^  Joseph  is  placed  on  the  roU  of  the  '  elders ' 
— saints  of  the  OT — who  by  their  words  and  deeds 
gave  evidence  of  their  faith.  The  particular  facts 
selected  as  proving  his  grasp  of  things  unseen — 
which  is  the  essence  of  faith  {IV) — are  his  death- 
bed prediction  of  the  exodus  of  the  children  of 
Israel  and  his  commandment  regarding  the  dis- 
posal of  his  bones  (Gn  50^  ^ ;  cf.  Jos  34**). 
Though  he  was  an  Egyptian  governor,  speaking 
the  Egyptian  language,  and  married  to  an  Egyp- 
tian wife,  he  was  at  heart  an  unchanged  Hebrew, 
and  his  dying  eyes  beheld  the  land  from  which  he 
had  been  exiled  as  a  boy,  the  homeland  of  every 
true  Israelite. 

2.  Joseph  Barsabbas,  sumamed  Jastos,  was  one 
of  those  who  accompanied  Jesus  during  His  whole 
public  ministry  and  witnessed  His  Resurrection. 
He  was  therefore  nominated,  along  with  Matthias, 
for  the  office  made  vacant  by  the  treachery  and 
death  of  Judas  Iscariot  (Ac  1^"**).  After  prayer 
'  the  lot  fell  upon  Matthias'  (1*).     It  is  admitted 


even  by  radical  critics  that  Jesos  deliberately 
chose  twelve  disciples  (corresponding  to  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel),  and  it  was  natural  that  these 
should  seek  to  keep  their  sacred  number  un- 
impaired. The  name  'Barsabbas'  (or  '  Barsabas,' 
C,  Vulg.,  Syrr.)  has  been  variously  explained  as 
•  child  of  the  Sabbath,'  '  son  of  Sheba,'  '  warrior,' 
or  'old  man's  son.'  The  Roman  surname  Justut 
was  adopted  in  accordance  with  a  Jewish  custom 
which  prevailed  at  the  time — cf.  '  John  whose  sur- 
name was  Marcos'  (Ac  12'--  ^),  and  '  Satil,  who  is 
also  Pardus'  (13*).  It  is  a  natural  conjecttire — no 
more — that  this  Joseph  was  the  brother  of  Judas 
Barsabbas  (15^).  Eusebius  {HE  i.  12)  regards 
him  as  one  of  '  the  Seventy '  (Lk  lO^),  and  records 
(iii.  39)  that  a  *  wonderful  event  happened  respect- 
ing Justus,  sumamed  Barsabbas,  who,  though  he 
drank  a  deadly  poison,  experienced  nothing  in- 
jurious {fir}Siy  a.7)S4s),  by  the  grace  of  God.' 

3.  Joseph,  sumamed  Barnabas  (Ac  4^).  See 
Barnabas.  James  Strahan. 

JOSEPHUS. — For  a  proper  understanding  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  there  are,  apart  from  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  no  documents 
of  such  value  as  the  writings  of  Josephus. 

1.  Life  and  character. — We  have  an  account  of 
the  life  of  Josephus  from  his  own  pen.  He  was 
bom  in  Jerusalem  in  A.D.  37,  his  father  being 
Matthias,  a  priest  of  noble  lineage,  and  belonging 
to  the  first  course  of  the  priesthood,  i.e.  Jojarib, 
while  on  his  mother's  side  he  was  connected  with 
the  royal  Hasmonsean  house.  He  was  a  child  of 
excellent  parts,  and  received  a  superior  education. 
He  studied  the  principles  of  the  three  main  sects 
of  Judaism  under  professional  teachers  of  each,  and 
lived  for  three  years  in  the  society  of  an  ascetic 
hermit  named  Banus — a  discipline  then  regarded  as 
a  desideratuiu  of  good  breeding  (we  find  something 
of  the  same  kind  in  the  early  life  of  Seneca).  At 
the  age  of  nineteen  he  attached  himself  to  the 
Pharisaic  party.  In  a.d.  64  he  visited  Rome, 
where,  through  the  influence  of  a  Jewish  actor 
named  Alityrus,  he  succeeded  in  gaining  the  ear  of 
the  Empress  Poppaea — first  the  mistress,  and  from 
A.D.  62  the  wife,  of  Nero — and  so  securing  the 
liberation  of  some  Je^vish  priests  who  had  been 
put  in  bonds  by  Felix.  Josephus  had  scarcely  re- 
turned to  Jerusalem  when,  in  A-D.  66,  he  was 
drawn  into  the  movement  which,  springing  from 
the  long-accumulating  hatred  of  Rome  among  the 
Jews,  and  fanned  by  the  agitation  of  certain  fana- 
tics, soon  burst  forth  in  the  lurid  flames  of  revolt 
and  war.  It  is  true  that  the  more  eminent  priestly 
ranks  to  which  Josephus  belonged,  as  also  the 
leaders  of  the  Pharisaic  party,  were  altogether 
averse  to  an  insurrection  against  the  overwhelming 
power  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Presently,  however, 
the  movement  resolved  itself  so  decisively  into  a 
national  cause,  a  war  of  the  Lord,  that  Josephus 
was  quite  unable  to  stand  aloof.  He  undertook 
the  command  of  Galilee,  where,  in  spite  of  the 
personal  hostility  of  the  zealot  John  of  Gischala, 
he  organized  the  Jewish  defence  during  the  winter 
of  66-67.  For  six  weeks  he  withstood  with  great 
skill  and  daring  the  Roman  assault  upon  Jotapata, 
a  fortress  commanding  the  line  of  approach  from 
Ptolemais,  and  then  played  his  part  with  such 
address  that,  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  Romans 
as  the  last  survivor  of  the  siege,  he  caught  the 
personal  notice  of  Vespasian  by  means  of  a  pro- 
phecy. His  life  was  spared,  and  when  his  predic- 
tion was  at  length  fulfilled  by  the  proclamation  of 
Vespasian  as  Emperor  (3  Jul}-,  a.d.  69),  he  re- 
gained his  freedom.  From  that  time  he  called 
himself  Flavins  Josephus,  and  for  the  remainder 
of  the  war — during  the  siege  of  Jerusalem — the 
erstwhile  leader  in  the  rebellion  acted  as  ad\iser 


650 


JOSEPHUS 


JOSEPHUS 


and  interpreter  in  the  headquarters  of  Titus. 
Tliereafter  lie  accompanied  the  victorious  Titus 
to  Rome,  and  settled  down  as  a  litterateur,  enjoy- 
ing the  esteem  and  the  bounty  of  the  Flavian 
Emperors,  and  devoting  himself  to  the  task  of 
doing  battle  with  spiritual  weapons  for  the  now 

Jolitically  shattered  cause  of  his  nation.  As 
osephus  mentions  the  death  of  Agrippa  II.  (A.D. 
100  :  Photius,  Cod.  33),  he  must  have  survived  till 
the  reign  of  Trajan.  He  was  four  times  married, 
and  had  live  sons.  According  to  Eus.  HE  ill.  ix. 
2,  a  statue  was  raised  in  his  honour,  and  his  works 
were  placed  in  the  public  library. 

In  personal  character,  as  even  the  above  brief  out- 
line of  his  career  suflices  to  show,  Josephus  was  not 
free  from  decidedly  sinister  traits.  A  thorough 
Jew,  he  was  always  able  to  make  the  most  of  his 
opportunities,  and  was  not  over-scrupulous  as  to 
the  means  he  employed.  Even  his  vanity  serves  to 
bring  him  into  clearer  light.  As  a  man  he  was 
far  from  great.  It  is  not,  however,  the  man  that 
concerns  us  here,  but  the  historian  ;  and  if,  even 
in  that  capacity,  his  talent  was  of  a  distinctly 
mediocre  order,  yet,  in  virtue  of  our  interest  in 
his  subject,  he  is' for  us  one  of  the  most  important 
historical  autliors  wo  have. 

2.  Works.— (a)  The  Jcvish  War. — Josephus  de- 
voted his  powers  first  of  all  to  a  work  of  the  most 
vital  moment  for  us,  viz.  a  history  of  the  Jewish 
war  against  Rome  (Bcllnm  Judaicum  [referred  to 
as  BJ]).  Although  he  had  doubtless  learned  Greek 
in  his  youth,  he  felt  th.at  he  could  not  yet  write  as 
a  Greek  author.  He  therefore  composed  his  first 
work  in  his  native  language,  i.e.  Aramaic,  and 
afterwards,  with  the  help  of  literary  collaborators, 
reproduced  it  in  a  Greek  form,  which,  however, 
was  not  a  mere  translation,  but  rather  a  recast  of 
the  original.  This  Greek  edition  was  published 
in  the  closing  years  of  Vespasian's  reign,  between 
A.D.  75  and  79.  As  against  the  many  unreliable 
and  merely  hearsay  reports  of  the  war,  and  the 
mischievous  distortions  of  fact  emanating  from 
anti-Jewish  feeling,  Josejihus  proposed,  as  an  eye- 
witness, to  give  an  unbiased  and  veracious  chron- 
icle, which,  by  means  of  a  just  estimate  of  the 
Jewish  people,  of  their  good  qualities  and  their 
military  achievements,  should  not  only  exhibit  in 
a  clearer  light  the  tragic  element  in  the  catastrophe 
they  had  brought  upon  themselves,  but  should 
also  make  manifest  the  real  greatness  of  the  Roman 
triumph.  Accordingly,  in  the  seven  books  of  this 
work,  after  a  survey  of  Jewish  history  from  the 
Maccabaean  revolt  to  the  death  of  Herod  the  Great 
(bk.  I.),  he  shows  how  events  moved  swiftly  to- 
wards the  rebellion  :  the  mismanagement  of  aifairs 
under  the  sons  of  Herod,  the  growing  maladminis- 
tration of  the  Roman  procurators,  and  more 
particularly — after  a  short  interlude  of  national 
Pharisaic  ascendancy  in  the  reign  of  Agrippa  I. — 
of  the  incompetent  Albinus  and  Gessius  Floras 
(bk.  II.).  The  history  proi)er  begins  with  the 
expedition  of  Vespasian  to  Judaea  at  a  time  when 
the  whole  land  was  already  in  arms :  bk.  III.  de- 
scribes the  conquest  of  Galilee,  with  its  two  cul- 
minating points,  the  capture  of  Jotapata  and  that 
of  Tariciieie ;  bk.  IV.  narrates  the  somewhat  dilatory 

Iirosecution  of  the  war  to  the  time  of  Vespasian's 
)eing  proclaimed  Emperor,  and  his  withdrawal  to 
Egypt,  and  tells  also  of  the  anarchical  state  of 
Jerusalem ;  bks.  v.  and  VI.,  starting  from  the 
return  of  Titus  from  Alexandria,  describe  the 
siege  of  the  capital,  and  the  internecine  strife  of 
the  besieged,  and  close  with  the  burning  of  the 
Temple  (10th  of  the  month  Ab= Juh'-August  A.D. 
70) ;  and  bk.  VII.  serves  as  an  epilogue  to  the 
whole,  recording  the  triumph  of  Titus  and  the  long- 
protracted  subjugation  of  the  southern  part  of  the 
country  till  the  Fall  of  Masada  (April  73).     In  bk. 


III.  (ch.  iii. )  Josephus  gives  a  description  of  Galilee, 
and  in  bk.  v.  (chs.  iv.  and  v.)  an  account  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  of  the  Temple  and  its  services.  At  the 
end  of  ch.  v.  he  indicates  his  intention  of  dealing 
with  the  city  more  exhaustively  in  a  later  work. 

(b)  The  Antiquities. — He  fulfilled  this  design  in 
his  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,  which  he  completed  in 
A.D.  93-94.  The  work  was  probably  composed  on 
the  plan  of  the  Roman  Archceology  of  Dionysius  of 
Halicarnassus,  published  almost  exactly  a  century 
before  (8  B.C.).  In  the  .i4n^(^(?^a'<^es  Josephus  recounts 
in  twenty  books  the  history  of  liis  people  from  the 
creation  of  the  world.  His  principal  source  was 
the  OT,  with  wiiich,  however,  he  deals  very  freely, 
and  he  does  not  scruple  to  introduce  Haggadic 
elements.  In  bk.  I.  he  carries  the  narrative  to  the 
death  of  Isaac,  and  in  II.  to  the  exodus  from  Egypt ; 
III.  describes  the  giving  of  the  Law  ;  IV.  the  wancfer- 
ings  in  the  desert,  and  Moses'  directions  for  the 
organization  of  the  future  commonwealth ;  V.  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  under  Joshua  and  the  Judges ; 
VI.  and  VII.  the  reigns  of  Saul  and  David  respec- 
tively ;  Vlll.-X.  the  reign  of  Solomon,  and  the 
period  of  the  kings  until  tlie  Exile ;  XI.  the  restora- 
tion of  the  nation  under  Cyrus,  and  its  history 
till  Alexander  the  Great ;  xil.  Judaja  under  the 
Seleucids;  xiil.  the  Maccabaean  revolt,  and  the 
Hasmonsean  rule  till  Alexandra's  death  (67  B.C.); 
XIV.  the  intervention  of  the  Romans  under  Pompey, 
consequent  upon  the  wars  between  the  brothers 
Hyrcanus  and  Aristobulus ;  XV.  Herod's  winning 
the  crown,  and  his  reign  till  the  building  of  the 
Temple  ;  XVI.  the  tragedy  of  Herod's  family  till 
the  execution  of  Alexander  and  Aristobulus,  the 
sons  of  Mariamne  ;  XVII.  the  period  from  the 
execution  of  Antipater  and  the  death  of  Herod  till 
the  deposition  of  Archelaus  (A.D.  6) ;  XVIII.  the 
Roman  administration  ;  xix.  the  period  of  the 
Emperors  Gains  and  Claudius — otherwise  the  reign 
of  Agrippa  I.  (t  A.D.  44) ;  XX.  the  last  Roman  pro- 
curators till  the  outbreak  of  the  rebellion  (A.D.  66). 
Thus  bks.  XIII. -XX.  of  the  Antiquities  run  parallel 
with  bks  I.  and  II.  of  the  BJ. 

(c)  Minor  works  ;  projected  worlcs  ;  pseudonymous 
works. — Josephus  hoped  to  supplement  his  Anti- 
quities by  a  narrative  bringing  down  the  history  to 
the  reign  of  Domitian — i.e.  by  an  abridgment  and 
continuation  of  the  BJ  [Ant.  XX.  xi.  3  [267]),*  and 
he  also  projected  an  account  of  the  Jewish  faith 
and  the  Jewish  Law  in  four  books  {ib.  [268]). 
Neither  of  these  works,  if  ever  written,  has  come 
down  to  us.  The  Antiquities,  however,  is  followed 
by  an  autobiography  (Vita),  written  after  A.D.  100, 
and  here  Josephus  endeavours  to  meet  the  charges 
with  which  Justus  of  Tiberias  assailed  his  conduct 
during  the  war  in  Galilee  in  A.D.  66-67.  The 
apology  for  Judaism  in  two  books,  in  which 
Josephus  replies  to  the  attacks  of  Apion,  an 
Alexandrian  littirateur  (contra  Apionem),  may 
be  regarded  as  in  some  degree  a  compensation  for 
the  second  of  the  projected  works,  and  was  com- 
posed subsequently  to  the  Antiquities.  The  two 
works  entitled  Of  self-governing  Reason  (irepl  avro- 
Kparopos  \oyKXfiov  —  the  so-called  Fourth  Book  of 
Maccabees)  and  Of  the  All  (irepl  rod  iravros),  ascribed 
to  Josephus  by  Eusebius  and  Photius  respectively, 
are  certainly  not  his.  The  former  was  probably 
written  by  an  Alexandrian  Jew  ;  the  latter,  whicn 
survives  only  in  a  small  fragment,  is  in  all  likeli- 
hood the  work  of  Hippolytus. 

3.  Literary  methods.  —  The  manner  in  which 
Josephus  seeks  to  present  Judaism  to  the  Greek 
mind  ranks  him  among  the  Alexandrian  apolorists 
of  that  faith,  though  he  claims  to  write  merely  as 
a  historian  ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  he  owes  more 
to  the  tradition   of  Palestinian   Rabbinism  than 

*  The  divisions  follow  Whiston'e  Eng.  IranRlation,  with  the 
numbering  of  Niese'a  Gr.  t«xt  in  wjuare  braclieks. 


JOSEPHUS 


JOSEPHUS 


651 


to  that  of  Alexandria.  His  hellenizing  tendency 
manifests  itself  strikin^y  in  his  reprwiuction  of 
biblical  history  ;  unlike  Philo,  he  gives  the  biblical 
names  in  a  Greek  form,  -miting  Adamos,  Abelos, 
Abranios,  Isakos,  lakobos,  Esauos,  losepos,  etc.  ; 
and,  what  is  more,  he  hellenizes  even  the  ideas, 
especially  in  the  speeches  and  prayers  of  the 
Patriarchs,  which  he  introduces  quite  in  the  style 
of  contemporary  historical  conijwsition,  as  e.g.  in 
Ant.  I.  xviii.  6[272f.];  other  instances  are  Solomon's 
prayers  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temple  (\Tll.  iv. 
2  f,  [107  fi".]),  and  his  correspondence  with  Hiram  of 
Tyre  (vm.  ii.  6,  7  [51-54]).  A  genuinely  apologetic 
idea  lies  in  the  statement  that  the  Egyptians  owed 
their  far-famed  proficiency  in  mathematics  and 
astrologj'  to  Abraham  (I.  viiL  2  [167]).  Josephus 
tells  us,  further,  that  Moses  composed  in  hexa- 
meters (II.  x\-i.  4  [346]),  and  David  in  trimeters 
and  pentameters  (vii.  xii.  3  [305]).  He  devotes 
considerable  space  to  the  traditions — taken  from 
the  Epistle  of  Aristeas  —  regarding  the  Greek 
version  of  the  Mosaic  Law  executed  at  the  court 
of  Ptolemy  n.,  by  seventy-two  wise  men  from 
Jerusalem  (xn.  ii.  [11-118]).  But  perhaps  the 
most  characteristic  instance  of  his  hellenizing 
tendency  is  his  description  of  the  Jewish  sects 
(XIIL  V.  9  [171-173],  BJ  U.  viii.  2-14  [119-166]), 
which  he  seeks  to  divest  of  all  political  significance, 
and  to  represent  as  the  exact  counterparts  of  the 
philosophic  schools  of  Greece  (Pharisees  =  Stoics  ; 
Sadducees  =  Epicureans ;  and  Essenes  =  Pytha- 
goreans) :  an  affinity  which  he  tries  to  establish 
by  introducing  quite  irrelevant  considerations, 
such  as  their  attitude  to  the  problems  of  free-wiU 
and  fate — thus  misleading  even  modern  investiga- 
tors— while,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  unphilosophical 
and  non-Hellenic  character  of  the  sects  reveals 
itself  at  every  point.  Thus  Josephus,  in  spite  of 
his  Hellenic  guise,  is  in  all  things  a  genuine  Jew,  a 
Palestinian  Rabbi :  witness,  for  instance — as  com- 
pared with  the  tractates  of  PhUo — his  version  of 
the  story  of  Moses,  where  he  not  only  gives  us  the 
name  of  Pharaoh's  daughter  (Thermuthis),  but 
also  relates  how  Moses  as  a  child  was  presented  to 
Pharaoh,  and  how,  when  the  king  put  his  diadem 
on  the  child's  head,  the  latter  threw  it  upon  the 
ground ;  and  again,  how,  when  Moses  haa  grown 
to  manhood,  and  was  in  command  of  an  Egyptian 
army  in  a  war  against  Ethiopia,  he  broke  a  way 
into  that  all  but  inaccessible  country  by  making  use 
of  ibises  to  destroy  the  serpents  which  obstructed 
the  march,  and  further,  how  he  captured  the  im- 
pregnable city  of  Saba  (or  Meroe  ;  Pliila?,  an  island 
in  the  Nile?)  by  gaining  the  love  of  Tharbis,  the 
daughter  of  the  Ethiopian  king  {Ant.  n.  ix.  5,  7 
[224-227,  232-237],  x.  2  [243-253]).  This  is  pure 
Rabbinical  Haggada.  Of  the  same  character  are 
the  fabulous  embellishments  of  the  story  of  Joseph 
(II.  iv.  [39-59]),  as  also  the  many  references  to 
superstitions  which  the  Jews  of  the  day  had  in 
common  with  the  Greeks,  as  e.g.  in  the  stories 
about  Solomon  (viii.  ii.  5  [42 if.]):  here  Josephus 
states  that  he  had  personally  witnessed  an  exorcism 
which  a  Jew  named  Eleazar  performed  before  Ves- 
pasian and  his  officers  by  means  of  a  ring,  a  root, 
and  certain  incantations,  all  associated  with 
Solomon.  How  little  the  horizon  of  Josephus 
extended  beyond  Palestine  is  shown  also  by  the 
brevity  with  which  he  treats  of  the  persecutions  of 
the  Jews  in  Alexandria,  and  of  the  famous  embassy 
of  Philo  to  the  court  of  Gains  Caligula  (xvm.  viii. 
l[257ff.]). 

4.  Sources. — Josephus  is  throughout  very  depend- 
ent on  Ms  sources.  "Where  the  biblical  narrative 
fails  him,  a  constraint  falls  upon  his  language. 
Of  the  period  between  Cyrus  and  Alexander  the 
Great  he  has  nothing  to  record,  and  he  lures  the 
reader  across  the  gap  by  a  long  extract  from  the 


Epistle  of  Aristetu.  For  the  history  of  the  Macca- 
bees he  keeps  close  to  1  Mac.  For  the  succeeding 
period  he  cites  numerous  documents,  which,  unlike 
the  speeches,  he  did  not  invent  but  probably  quoted 
verbatim  (as  found  in  a  collection  formed  by 
Agrippa  I.  ?).  For  the  facts  of  universal  history  he 
was  indebted  first  to  Polybius  (till  143  B.C.)  and 
then  to  .Strabo.  For  the  reign  of  Herod  the  Great 
he  manifestly  utilizes  the  voluminous  work  of 
Nicolaus  of  Damascus,  who,  as  the  counsellor  of 
Herod,  had  exalted  his  patron  to  the  skies.  It  is 
true  that  Josephus  controverts  Nicolaus,  but,  while 
he  sets  many  matters  of  detail  in  a  different  light, 
he  borroAvs  from  him  the  actual  facts ;  hence,  too, 
the  profusion  of  material  in  bks.  XV.-xvn.  as  con- 
trasted with  the  meagre  data  of  the  following 
period.  But  even  for  the  latter  he  is  not  entirely 
dependent  upon  his  own  personal  recollections,  but 
falls  back  upon  documents ;  and,  in  fact,  while  pre- 

Earing  this  part  of  his  Antiquities,  he  seems  to 
ave  re-examined,  and  here  and  there  to  have 
more  fully  utilized,  the  same  authorities  from 
which  he  had  already  quoted  more  brieHy  in  BJ 
I.  and  n.  He  has  thus  to  some  extent  furnished 
us  with  the  means  of  controlling  his  work  as  a 
historian. 

5.  Credibility. — Our  estimate  of  the  historic  re- 
liability of  Josephus,  despite  the  personal  attesta- 
tion of  Titus  and  the  sixty-two  conunendatory 
letters  of  Agrippa  II.  (c.  Apion.  i.  9  [51  f.],  Vit.  65 
[363  f.]),  will  scarcely  be  a  favourable  one  if  we 
compare  the  Vita  wjth  the  relative  sections  of  the 
BJ,  inasmuch  as  each  differs  greatly  from  the 
other  in  the  impression  it  conveys  of  his  conduct 
during  the  Galilsean  campaign.  We  must  re- 
member, however,  that  the  former  is  really  a  book 
of  personal  reminiscences,  and,  like  most  works  of 
its  kind,  exhibits  the  writers  tendency  to  excul- 
pate himself ;  and  it  would  therefore  be  far  from 
right  to  found  our  judgment  of  Josephus  as  a 
historian  upon  the  Vita.  As  r^ards  the  BJ,  we 
may  certainly  affirm  that  it  is  a  carefully  executed 
work,  and  that  in  the  Antiquities  the  author  has 
in  general  reproduced — though  with  a  veneer  of 
Hellenism — what  his  sources  supplied.  But  he 
exaggerates  in  his  numerical  data,  and  he  over- 
praises the  generosity  of  the  Romans.  As  another 
misleading  tendency  we  need  only  mention  his 
having  done  his  best  to  suppress  the  Messianic 
expectations  of  his  people,  or  at  least  to  purge 
them  of  all  political  im^wrt.  He  set  the  seal  on 
tliis  attitude  by  assuring  Vespa-sian — the  oppressor 
of  his  nation — in  God's  name  that  the  coming 
sovereignty  of  the  Avhole  world  should  one  day  be 
his  (BJ  m,  viiL  9  [401  f.]). 

Nevertheless,  the  manner  in  which  he  has  woven 
his  materials  into  the  texture  of  his  narrative  fre- 
quently arouses  misgiving.  A  number  of  his  refer- 
ences to  other  passages  of  his  writings  (cf.  Ant.  xi. 
viiL  1  [305],  xvrn.  ii.  5  [54])  cannot  be  verified  in 
his  extant  works,  and  must  therefore  have  been 
inadvertently  taken  over  from  the  source  he  hap- 
pened to  be  using.  In  chronology  especially  he 
shows  himself  to  be  a  very  unsafe  guide.  He  has 
no  regular  method  of  dating — neither  consulates 
nor  reigns — and  it  is  only  occasionally  that  we 
find  such  chronolorical  references  as  '  the  third 
year  of  the  177th  Olympiad,  when  Quintus  Hor- 
tensius  and  Quintus  Metellus  were  consuls'  (Ant. 
XIV.  i.  2  [4]),  i.e.  67  B.C.  Moreover,  events  from 
different  sources  and  of  different  dates  are  tlirown 
promiscuously  together.  A  characteristic  instance 
IS  found  in  the  history  of  Pilate.  While  in  BJ 
(n.  ix.  2-4  [169-177])  Josephus  refers  to  Pilate  only 

in  connexion  with  the  two  tumults  which  he  caused 
by  introducing  into  Jerusalem  standards  bearing 
the  figure  of  the  Emperor  and  by  using  the  Temple 

funds  for  the   construction  of    an  aqueduct,   he 


652 


JOSEPHUS 


JOSEPHUS 


apparently  {jives  a  much  fuller  record  in  Ant. 
(xviii,  ii.  2-iv.  2  [35-89]).  Here,  after  referring  to 
Valerius  Gratus  as  the  first  procurator  of  Juutna 
under  Tiberius  (14-37) — the  four  successive  chanj,'es 
in  the  high-priesthood  being  all  that  he  thinks 
worthy  of  mention  in  the  eleven  years  of  that  pro- 
cnratorship — Josephus  records  (in  xvilI.  ii.  2  [35]) 
Pilate's  accession  to  the  office,  an  event  that  can- 
not be  dated  earlier  than  A.D.  26.  But  before 
dealing  (in  xvili.  iii.  1-2  [55-62])  with  the  tumults 
which  he  had  already  described  in  BJ,  he  describes 
from  another  source  the  founding  of  Tiberias  by 
Herod  Antipas  (xvill.  ii.  3  [36-38]),  the  embroil- 
ments among  the  Parthians  consequent  upon  the 
death  of  Phraates  (A.D.  16  ;  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  1  f.),  the 
extinction  of  the  royal  house  of  Commagene  in 
the  death  of  Antiochus  (A.D.  17  ;  Tac.  ii.  42),  and 
the  murder  of  Germanicus  (10  Oct.  A.D.  19;  Tac. 
ii.  69 IF.).  Next,  after  recounting  the  two  Jewish 
tumults  referred  to,  he  relates  two  events  which 
evidently  had  already  been  conjoined  in  the  Roman 
tradition  (Cluvius  liufus?),  for  only  the  second  be- 
longs to  his  subject  (as  giving  an  example  of 
the  ill-fortune  that  beset  the  Jews) :  the  first  deals 
with  the  outrage  in  the  Temple  of  Isis  in  Rome, 
where  the  priests  lent  themselves  to  a  trick  by 
which  a  Roman  lady  of  repute  was  beguiled  sub 
prcetcxtii  religionis  to  yield  herself  to  a  lover 
(XVIII.  iii.  4  [65-80]) ;  the  second  with  the  fraud 
practised  by  four  Jews  upon  another  Roman 
matron — an  incident  wiiieh  led  to  the  expulsion  of 
the  Jews  from  Rome  by  the  decree  of  Tiberius, 
and  to  the  drafting  of  4,000  recruits  from  amongst 
them  to  Sardinia  (a.d.  19)  (XVIII.  iii.  5  [81-84]; 
cf.  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  85).  Then  at  length  the  narrative 
returns  to  Pilate,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that 
he  was  deposed  by  Vitellius  in  consequence  of  a 
revolt  of  the  Samaritans  (xvill.  iv.  1  [85  fl".]),  and 
that,  after  his  ten  years  of  office,  he  was  sent  to 
Rome  to  defend  his  actions  before  Tiberius,  arriv- 
ing there,  however,  only  after  the  Emperor's 
death  (16  March,  A.D.  37).  This  outline  will  serve 
to  show  how  little  the  narrative  takes  account  of 
strict  chronological  sequence,  as  also — to  take  but 
one  instance — how  unwarranted  it  is  of  Schiirer, 
on  the  supposed  evidence  of  Josephus,  to  assign 
tlie  foundation  of  Tiberias  to  a  date  after  A.D.  25, 
while  numismatists,  with  a  considerable  show  of 
reason,  had  fixed  it  in  A.D.  17.  Similarly,  from 
the  statement  of  Josephus  that  the  defeat  of  Herod 
Antipas  in  the  war  against  his  father-in-law  Aretas 
of  Arabia  (an  event  which  should  probably  be 
assigned  to  A.D.  36)  was  regarded  as  a  punishment 
for  his  murder  of  John  the  Baptist,  we  have  no 
right  to  draw  conclusions  as  to  the  date  of  that 
event  or  to  that  of  the  entrance  of  Jesus  upon  His 
public  ministry,  as  has  been  done  by  Keim  and 
others,  who  have  on  the  same  grounds  fixed  upon 
A.D.  35  as  the  date  of  tiie  Crucifixion. 

6.  Attitude  to  Christianity.— A  question  of  the 
utmost  importance  is  that  of  the  attitude  of 
Josephus  to  Ciiristianity.  As  he  describes  the 
period  in  such  minute  detail,  we  naturally  ask 
whether  he  ever  alludes  to  tliat  powerful  move- 
ment amongst  his  fellow-countrymen ;  and  his 
mention  of  the  slaying  of  John  the  Baptist  prompts 
the  question  whether  he  records  the  Crucifixion  of 
Jesus  and  the  martyrdom  of  His  disciples.  It  is 
certainly  true  that  in  the  Antiquities,  between  the 
two  sections  dealing,  as  noted  above,  with  Pilate, 
we  find  the  following  passage  (XVIll.  iii.  3  [63-64]) : 

•  Now  about  this  time  appeared  Jesus,  a  wise  man,  if  indeed 
one  may  call  Him  a  man  ;  for  He  was  a  doer  of  marvellous 
works,  a  teacher  of  such  men  as  receive  the  truth  with  flad- 
ness,  and  He  drew  to  Himself  many  of  the  Jews,  as  also  many 
of  the  Greeks.  He  was  the  Christ;  and  when,  on  the  indict- 
ment  of  the  leading  men  amonpst  iis,  Pilate  had  sentenced  Hmi 
to  the  Cross,  those  who  loved  Him  at  the  first  did  not  cxase  to 
do  80 ;  (or  on  the  third  day  Ue  o^ain  appeared  to  them  olive, 


as  the  divine  prophets  had  aflSrmcd  these  and  innumerable 
other  things  concerning  Him.  And  the  race  of  Christians, 
which  takes  its  name  from  Him,  is  not  yet  extinct.' 

On  the  strength  of  this  testimonium  de  Chriato, 
which  is  quoted  by  Eusebius  (HE  I.  xi.  7,  8 ;  cf. 
Demonstr.  Evang.  ill.  iii.  105 ;  Theoph.  v.  44), 
Josephus  was  reckoned  among  Christian  writers 
by  Jerome  {de,  Vir.  Illustr.  13),  and  honoured  as 
such  throughout  the  Middle  Ages.  But  modern 
criticism  has  thrown  serious  doubts  upon  the 
authenticity  of  the  passage,  and  not  without  good 
reason.  For  not  only  does  Origen  seem  to  be  un- 
acquainted with  it — otherwise  he  would  certainly 
have  referred  to  it  in  in  Matth.  tom.  x.  17  and 
c.  Celsum,  i.  47 — but,  as  regards  its  contents,  it 
simply  could  not  have  come  from  a  man  like 
.Josephus,  more  especially  in  view  of  the  fact  that, 
as  we  have  seen,  he  anxiously  avoids  all  reference 
to  the  Mes.sianic  expectations  of  his  people.  (The 
view,  proposed  by  Burkitt  and  strengthened  by 
Harnack,  that  Josephus  used  the  failure  of  the 
Messianic  movement  in  the  case  of  Jesus  for  the 
purpose  of  demonstrating  that  no  Messianic  aspira- 
tions were  left  after  this  in  the  Jewish  people,  is 
not  supported  by  the  text  as  it  stands.)  Thus  the 
only  question  that  remains  is  whether  an  authentic 
statement  of  Josephus  has  been  worked  over  by  a 
Christian  hand  (so,  recently,  among  others,  the 
Roman  Catholic  scholar,  J.  Felten  [NTZG,  Regens- 
burg,  1910,  i.  618]),  or  whether  tne  M'hole  is  an 
interpolation  of  Christian  origin  (so  Niese,  Naber, 
Schiirer,  and  others).  Even  on  the  first  alternative 
it  is  hardly  possible  to  make  out  what  Josephus 
himself  could  have  written.  The  parallel  cited 
by  Zahn  (Forschnngen  zur  Gesch.  des  neutest. 
Kanons,  vi.  [Leipzig,  1900],  p.  302)  from  the  Acta 
Pilati  belongs  to  the  late  Byzantine  recension  of 
that  work,  and  is  in  reality  an  echo  of  the  very 
passage  under  consideration. 

A  second  passage  of  similar  character  is  Ant. 
XX.  ix.  1  [200  f.],  where  the  judicial  murder  of 
James  '  the  brother  of  Jesus  who  was  called  Christ' 
(Messiah?)  and  of  some  others,  by  Ananus,  the 
high  priest,  is  referred  to  as  having  been  dis- 
approved of  by  the  strict  observers  of  the  Law 
(Pharisees?).  But  here  too  the  work  of  another 
hand  is  unmistakable:  Origen  (locc.  citt.,  and  also 
c.  Celsum,  ii.  13)  had  read  a  similar  interpolation  in 
Josephus,  though  in  some  other  part  of  his  works. 

The  whole  question  has  become  somewhat  more  complicated 
by  A.  Berendls'  discovery  of  a  Slavonic  recension  of  the  BJ. 
Just  as,  side  by  side  with  the  accurate  Lat.  version  of  the  Ant. 
executed  at  the  instance  of  Cassiodorus,  a  very  free  translation 
of  the  £J,  the  de  Excidio  Hierusalem  of  Hegesippus  (the  so- 
called  losippus),  bearing  a  thoioupfhly  Christian  character, 
was  current — often  under  the  name  of  Ambrose — in  the  West, 
80  there  was  found  among  the  Slavonic  MSB  a  very  peculiar 
form  of  the  DJ,  giving  a  detailed  account  of  the  trial  of  Jesus. 
Berendts  propounded  the  theory  that  this  really  represented 
the  original  form  of  the  BJ,  and  had  therefore  preserved 
authentic  utterances  of  Josephus  regarding  Christ  (the  Slavonic 
Enoch,  which  in  part  goes  back  to  a  Judaco-Aramaic  original, 
would  furnish  a  i>arallel  case).  Berendts  was  able  to  show  that 
in  this  Slavonic  BJ  we  have  a  record  largely  divergent  from 
the  Greek  text,  and  exhibiting  a  markedly  anti-Kom.in  bias — a 
record,  too,  which,  as  e.g.  in  the  chapter  dealing  with  the 
Kssenes,  appears  to  have  been  used  by  Hippolytus,  so  that,  in 
spite  of  the  legendary  air  of  many  of  its  features,  it  is  hanlly 
reasonable,  with  Schiirer  and  others,  to  assign  it  to  a  late  date. 
Jloreover,  its  references  to  Jesus  are  not  of  a  character  that 
suggests  interi)olalion  from  the  Christian  side.  Hence,  if  we 
reject  the  hypothesis  of  Berendts,  the  only  theory  that  we 
have  to  fall  back  upon  is  that  of  an  early  Jewish  reda<;tion,  as 
proposed  by  R.  Secberg  and  Frey.  A  final  verdict  will  lie  pos- 
sible only  when  the  complete  text  is  in  our  hands. 

7.  Relation  of  St.  Luke  to  Josephus.— I'inally, 
a  question  of  special  importance  for  our  knowledgt; 
of  the  Apostolic  Age  is  that  of  the  relation  of  St. 
Luke  to  Josephus.  Many  scholars  believe  that 
the  numerous  resemblances  between  them — intel- 
ligible enough  surely  where  both  writers  are  deal- 
ing with  the  same  period — can  lie  exjilained  only  on 
the  theory  that  St.  Luke  made  use  of  Josephus. 


JOSEPHUS 


JOSHUA 


653 


Were  this  really  the  case,  it  would  certainljr  be  a 
fact  of  great  importance,  not  only  for  our  estimate 
of  the  Evangelist's  credibility,  but  also  for  fixing 
the  date  of  his  works,  which,  on  this  theory,  could 
not  have  been  written  till  after  the  publication  of 
the  Antiquities  (A.D.  93-94),  i.e.  the  beginning  of 
the  2nd  century.  The  most  thorough-going  adher- 
ent of  the  theory  is  Krenkel  (Josephm  unci  Lucas), 
who  linds,  for  instance,  in  St.  Luke's  narrative  of 
tixe  Infancy,  a  free  reproduction  from  the  Vita ;  but 
the  majority  restrict  the  theory  to  certain  Lucan 
passages  which  they  hold  to  be  dependent  on 
Josephus  (e.g.  Lk  3',  Lysanias  of  Abilene,  and 
Ac  25'^  Agrippa  and  Berenice  with  Festus,  etc.). 
The  crucial  passage,  however,  is  Ac  5^'*,  with  its 
inaccurate  historical  sequence,  Theudas— Judas  of 
Galilee ;  and  the  error  is  supposed  to  be  explained 
by  Ant.  XX.  v.  1,  2  [97  f.,  102],  where  the  slaying 
of  the  sons  of  Judas  by  Tiberius  Alexander  is  re- 
corded after  the  crushing  of  Theudas's  insurrection 
by  Cuspius  Fadus.  The  theory  would  impute  to 
St.  Luke  an  almost  increilible  misunderstanding, 
which  would  indeed  presuppose  his  having  used 
Josephus  in  a  manner  so  superficial  as  to  lead  one 
to  say  that,  if  he  had  ever  read  the  work  of 
Josephus  at  all,  he  must  have  forgotten  it  entirely. 
The  two  authors,  in  point  of  fact,  are  obviously 
quite  independent  of  each  other.  Thus  St.  Luke 
(13"-)  mentions  a  Galiliean  revolt  of  which  Josephus 
takes  no  cognizance,  while  the  three  revolts  re- 
corded by  Josephus  as  ha\nng  occurred  under 
Pilate  find  no  mention  in  Luke. 

It  is  particularly  instructive  to  compare  their 
respective  accounts  of  the  death  of  Agrippa  i. 
{Ant.  xrx.  viii.  2  [343-352];  Ac  12=o-^).  Here 
Josephus  writes  as  follows : 

'  Xow  when  [Agrippa]  had  reigned  three  years  over  all  Jndxa 
he  came  to  the  city  of  Caesarea,  which  was  formerly  called 
Strato's  Tower,  and  there  he  provided  games  in  honour  of 
Cesar,  thus  instituting  a  festival  for  the  emperor's  health.  To 
this  festival  a  great  number  of  the  officials  and  eminent  people 
of  the  province  had  come  together.  On  the  second  day  of  the 
games  he  put  ou  a  robe  made  wholly  of  silver  and  of  a  wonder- 
ful texture,  and  came  into  the  theatre  at  the  dawn  of  day. 
The  silver,  illuminated  by  the  first  beams  of  the  sun,  shone  forth 
in  a  strangely  awe-inspiring  manner  and  gleamed  fearfully  in 
the  eyes  of  those  who  looked  on.  Presently  his  flatterers,  one 
here,  another  there,  called  out  words  which  were  not  to  turn 
out  to  his  good,  addressing  him  as  a  god,  and  adding:  "Be 
thou  propitious ;  if  till  now  we  feared  thee  as  a  man,  henceforth 
we  confess  that  thou  art  ejtalted  above  mortal  nature."  This 
the  king  did  not  rebuke,  nor  did  he  reject  the  impious  flattery. 
But  when  after  a  while  he  looked  upwards,  he  saw  the  owl  [in 
svin.  ri.  7  [195-200]  it  is  related  that  the  owl  had  appeared  to 
Asrrippa  at  Rome]  sitting  on  a  rope  over  his  head,  and  he  per- 
ceived at  once  that  it  was  a  messenger  of  misfortune,  as  it  had 
formerly  been  a  messenger  of  good  fortune,  and  he  experienced 
an  anguish  that  struck  through  his  heart.  He  was  seized  with 
severe  intestinal  pain,  which  set  in  vnth  great  force.  Springing 
up,  he  said  to  his  friends  :  '*  A  god  in  your  eyes,  I  must  never- 
theless even  now  resign  my  life  :  fate  thus  immediately  punishes 
the  lies  you  falsely  spoke,  and  I,  whom  you  named  immortal, 
am  carried  away  by  death ;  but  a  man  must  accept  his  destiny, 
as  it  pleases  God ;  yet  we  have  lived  by  no  means  ill,  but  ina 
splendour  worthy  of  praise."  Having  spoken  these  words,  he 
was  seized  with  increasing  agony.  He  was  accordingly  carried 
hurriedly  into  the  palace,  and  the  news  of  his  imminent  death 
soon  spread  to  all.  Then  the  multitude,  with  wives  and  children, 
all  IjTng  in  sackcloth,  according  to  their  native  custom,  besought 
God  for  the  king,  and  everj-tliing  was  full  of  sighing  and  lamenta- 
tion. And  when  the  king,  lying  upon  the  high  roof,  looked 
down  and  saw  them  thus  prostrated  in  prayer,  he  could  not 
himself  refrain  from  tears.  After  he  had  been  sorely  tormented 
with  intestinal  pains  for  five  days,  he  resigned  his  life,  in  the 
fifty-fourth  year  of  his  age,  and  in  the  seventh  of  his  reign.' 

When  we  compare  this  diffuse  narrative,  with 
its  sentimentality  and  superstition,  with  the  short, 
vigorous,  and  sincerely  pious  record  of  St.  Luke, 
we  see  at  once  the  vast  diflerence  between  the  two 
writers :  on  the  one  side,  Josephus,  the  hellenizing 
Jew  ;  and,  on  the  other,  St.  Luke,  a  Christian  of 
heathen  origin,  reading  history  in  the  light  of  the 
Bible.  For  further  comparison  we  might  take,  e.g. , 
the  account  of  St.  Paul's  shipwreck  (Ac  27.  28)  and 
that  of  a  similar  experience  of  Josephus  (Vit.  3 
[14  ff.]).     Josephus  is  of  importance  for  us,  there- 


fore, not  as  a  source  of  St.  Luke'.<»  writings,  but 
as  a  means  of  supplementing  and  checking  them  ; 
and,  indeed,  it  would  be  impossible  without  his  help 
to  WTite  a  history  of  New  Testament  times. 

LrraRATrRB.— I.  Eornoss  asd  Tras8i.atiosb.— (a)  The  best 
critical  cd.  is  that  of  B.  Niese,  7  vols.,  Berlin.  1887-95 ;  a  smaller 
ed.  by  S.  A.  Naber,  Leipzig,  188S-96  (besides  the  usual  division 
into  chapters  and  poracnrapra,  both  of  these  arrange  the  material 
incontinaously  numhoredsectionsX  (6)  Germ,  tr.:  H.  Clementz, 
Halle,  1900-01.  (e)  Eng.  tr.  :  R.  TraiU,  ed.  L  Taylor,  London. 
1847-51;  W.  Whiston,  rev.  A.  R.  Shilleto,  do.  1SS9-80.  (d) 
Lat.  tr. :  ed.  C.  Boysen,  in  CSEL  xxxvii.  6,  Vienna  and  ^«Kue, 
1898.  (e)  Hegesippus:  ed.  C.  F.  Weber  and  J.  Caesar, 
Marburg,  1S5&-6*.  (/)  Svriac  ti.  ot  BJ  yL  (aa  6  Mac):  ed. 
Ceriani,  Milan,  1883;  H.  Kottek,  Beriio,  1886.  (9)  Armenian  tr. : 
cf.  F.  C.  Conybeare,  JThSt  ix.  [1908],  pp.  5n-683  (who  proves 
that  Moses  of  Khoren  made  use  of  it).   (A)  On  the  Slav.  Joeephna: 

A.  Berendts,  i>i>  Zeugnitte  vom  Ckritienttnn  im  »lavi$ehen  'De 
Belio  Judaieo'  des  Jotephtu  in  TU,  new  ser..  xiv.  4.  Leipzig. 
1906,  '  AnalecU  zum  slaviscben  Josephtis,'  in  ZNTW  ix.  [1^]. 
I^.  47-70,  and  'Die  iltesten  ansaerchristlichen  Nachrichten 
liber  die  Entstehnn^;  des  Christentoms,'  in  MitteUvngen  und 
NaehriehUH  fur  d*«  etangelisehe  Kirehe  in  Rtuidand,  IxiiL 
[1910],  pp.  157-173 ;  abo  E.  Schfirer,  TkLZ  xxxL  [1906]  no.  9 ; 
R.  Seebergr,  Von  Christtis  vnd  dem  CkritUntum,  Groas- 
Lichterf elde,  1908,  and  J.  Frey,  D«r  «lanseA«  JotephvsberieJU 
uber  die  urehristliehe  Getekiehte,  Leipsg,  1908.  (0  A  late  Heb. 
ed.  of  the  10th  cent,  written  imder  the  name  of  Joappus  or 
Joseph  ben  Gorion  (Gorionides) :  Heb.  and  Lat.  ed.  J.  F. 
Breithaupt,  Gotha,  1707;  J.  Wellhansen,  'Der  arabische 
lodppoe,'  in  AGG,  |^uL-hi^  Klasse,  new  ser.,  i.  [1897] ;  Trieber, 
N&i,  phil.-hi8t.  Klaase.  1895;  J.  Winter  and  A.  Wiinsche. 
T>Ujmveh«  LitUratur,  Treves,  1896,  iiu  309-3U ;  E.  Schorer, 
GJVL^*  [Leipaog,  1901]  150-161. 

IL  Works  dkauxq  wtth  Jossphob  asd  his  wRinxes.— (a) 
Schfirer,  GJV  i.^*  74-106  (giving  all  the  important  Ut);  H. 
St.-J.  Thackeray,  in  HDB  v.  461-473 ;  S.  Kranss,  in  JE  vU. 
274-281.  (6)  On  the  or  text  used  by  Josephus :  A.  Mez,  DU 
Bibel  des  Jotepkvt,  Basel,  1895.  (c)  On  the  Haggada:  O. 
Holtzmann,  STZG^,  Tubingen,  1906,  p.  190  f.  (d)  On  JosefAoa 
as  apologist :  P.  Krfiger,  Phiio  und  Jostphtu  als  ApologeUn 
da  Judentunu,  Leipzig,  1906 ;  A  von  Gntschmid,  lecture  on 
e.  Apion.  in  KUine  SehriJUn,  iv.,  do.  1893,  pp.  336-384.  («)  On 
Josephus  as  historian :  C.  Wachsmnt,  EinUitunq  in  da» 
Studium  der  alUn  GesehichU,  do.  1S95,  pp.  43S-449 ;  H.  Peter, 
IHe  geteUekUiehe  Literatur  uber  di«  romigehe  Kaiterzeit,  do. 
1887,  L  394-401 ;  O.  Stahlin,  in  Chnst-Schmid,  GetekiekU  der 
grieekiaehtn  LitUratur,  ii.  1  [SMonic^  1911],  pp.  448-456 ;  G. 
Misch,  GettJdekU  der  Autobiigraj^Ue,  L  [Leipii|r.  1907]  189  ff. ; 

B.  Brune,  Jotephtu  der  GesehieUaiekreiber,  Wiesbaden,  1912, 
Flatiru  Jo*ephu$  und  seine  &Jiriften  in  Utrem  Verhdltnis  aan 
Judentume,  zur  grieekiseh-romitehen  WeU  und  zum  Christen- 
tume,  Gut^loh.  1913.  (/)  On  the  sources  of  Josephus :  H. 
Bloch,  Die  Quellen  des  Ptaoius  Josephus  (Leipzig,  1879X  J.  t. 
Destinon  (Kiel,  1883)  (for  AnL  xii.-xvii.),  F.  Schemann 
(Marbursr,  1SS7)  (for  bks.  xviii.-xx.),  and  G.  HOlscher  (Leipog, 
1904) ;  H.  Luther,  Josephus  u.  Justus  von  TiUrias,  Halle,1910. 
(g)  On  his  imitation  of  Thucydides :  J.  T.  H.  Driiner,  Unter- 
f-itchungen  Uber  Josephus,  Marburg,  1896.  (A)  On  his  style : 
W.  Schmidt,  de  Flavii  Josephi  eioeutione,  Leipag,  1894.  (0 
On  the  testimonium  de  CkrMo :  of.  Schnrer,  op.  eit.  i.  544- 
549 ;  A.  Goethals,  Josiphe  timoin  de  Jisus,  Paris,  1910 ;  F.  C. 
Bnrkitt,  '  Josephus  and  CSirist,'  in  ThT,  1913,  pp.  135-144 ; 
A.  Hamack,  '  Der  judische  GeschichtsBchreiber  Josephus  und 
Jesus  Christus,'  in  Internationale  Monatssehrift  Jvr  Wisten- 
scha/t.  Kunst  und  Teehnik,  viL  [191S]  1037-€3 ;  K.  Linck,  De 
antiq.  vet.  quae  ad  lesum  Nazarenum  speeiimt  testinunOs 
(Religionsgesehiehtl.  Versuehe  u.  Vorarb.,  xiv.  1  [1913]) ;  E. 
Norden.  Josephus  w.  Taeittu  uber  Jesus  Christus  (Ifeue 
Jahrbueher  fUr  das  klass.  Altertum,  xvL  [191S]  637-666);  P. 
Corssen  in  ZSTW,  xv.  [1914]  114-140.  O^  On  Josephus  and 
St.  Luke:  M.  Krenkel,  Josephus  und  Lucas,  Leipzig,  1894; 
H.  H.  Wendt,  Die  Aposteigesehieht^,  Gottingen,  1913,  pp. 
42-45;  A  Hamack,  3Vu«  OntersuekttngemurApostelgesekiekl* 
{Beitrage,  iv.),  Leipzig,  19U,  p.  80 ;  artt  in  JE  and  ERE. 

E.  VOX  DOBSCHtJTZ. 

JOSES.— See  Barnabas. 

JOSHUA  (E2'"'-T,  later  cnr,  '  Jahweh  is  deliverance 
or  salvation '). — Joshua,  the  successor  of  Moses  in 
the  leadership  of  Israel,  was  named  'Iijo-oi/j  in  the 
LXX  and  NT,  and  therefore  'Jesus'  in  the 
English  AV ;  but  the  Revisers,  in  accordance  with 
their  rule  of  reproducing  OT  names  in  the  Hebrew 
rather  than  the  Greek  form,  have  changed  this  into 
'Joshua.'  St.  Stephen  in  his  apologia  speaks  of 
the  fathers  entering  with  Joshua  into  the  posses- 
sion of  the  nations  (Ac  7") ;  and  the  writer  of 
Hebrews,  imbued  with  Alexandrian — i.e.  Platonic 
and  Philonic — teaching  astothedistinction  between 
visible  things  and  their  heavenly  ideas,  says  that 
the  rest  which  Joshua  gave  the  Israelites,  when  he 
led  them  into  the  promised  land,  was  after  all  not 


654 


JOY 


JOY 


the  Rest  of  God,  but  only  the  material  symbol 
suggesting  the  spiritual  reality — the  yabbath-rest 
which  remains  in  the  unseen  world  for  the  people 
of  God  (He  4*- ").  James  Strahan. 

JOY. — 1.  Context. — Various  words  correspond  in 
the  original  to  the  word  '  joy '  of  the  English  Bible, 
its  derivatives  and  synonyms.  The  terms  xap«i  and 
Xo/petv  (etyniologically  allied  to  x<^P^f>  '  fliarm,' 
'  grace ')  uenote  pleasurable  feeling  experienced 
in  the  mental  sphere.  On  the  other  Iiand,  i]5ovri, 
1}8e(T0ai  (the  verb  not  found  in  tlie  NT)  largely 
denote  joy  in  tiie  sphere  of  the  senses.  Alongside 
of  this  distinction  runs  the  other  ditt'erence  that 
xapa  stands  for  the  wholesome,  unredecting  joy 
which  occupies  itself  with  the  object  of  its  source, 
whereas  rjSovq  designates  the  joy  whicli  subjectively 
dwells  on  its  own  sensation,  in  the  NT  the  latter 
term  is  used  only  scnsti  malo  (Lk  8'^  Tit  3^  Ja  4\ 
2  P  2'^).  The  terms  evcppaiveiv  and  eiKppoavi'T) 
describe  a  genial,  pleasurable  state  of  feeling  such 
as  is  engendered  by  good  fare  or  some  other  happy 
festive  condition  (usually  rendered  by  '  to  he 
merry,'  Ho  make  merry'  [Lk  I2i9  jS^s-^j-m- 32  jgia, 
Ac  2*  V^  W,  Ho  W,  2  Co  22,  Gal  4^,  Kev  Hi" 
12'*]).  The  terms  eOdvfioi,  evdv/xws,  e{>6vtieiv  are 
used  of  hopeful  good  cheer  with  reference  to  the 
outcome  of  some  situation  or  undertaking  (Ac  24'" 
2722. 28. 86^  ja^  gisj  ayaWLaais,  dyaXXidv  stand  for  the 
deep  joy  of  exultation,  hence  are  joined  by  way  of 
climax  to  xa'petv  (Mt  5'-,  Lk  l"*--"-"  lo'^i,  Jn  5=» 
8»,  Ac  228-  •*«  16**,  He  P,  1  P  18- «  4",  Jude^^  Rev 
19').  In  still  another  conception,  that  of  Kavxa.(Tdai, 
the  element  of  joy  is  an  inevitable  ingredient,  but 
the  word  as  such  denotes  a  specific  state  of  mind, 
viz.  'glorying,'  the  exalted  feeling  in  which  the 
consciousness  of  the  spiritual  worth  of  the  religious 
subject  in  its  association  with  and  subserviency  to 
the  glory  of  God  expresses  itself  (for  this  concep- 
tion cf.  A.  Ritschl,  Die  christliche  Lehre  von  der 
Rechtfertigung  unci  Versohmmg-,  ii.  [1882]  365-371 ; 
A.  Titius,  Die  neutest.  Lehre  von  der  Seiigkeit,  ii. 
[1900]  91-96). 

2.  Joy  as  a  general  characteristic  of  the  Chris- 
tian life. — Joy  appears  in  the  NT  writings  as  an 
outstanding  characteristic  of  the  Christian  life  in  the 
Apostolic  Age.  In  the  Pauline  Epistles  especially 
it  figures  prominently.  It  is  one  of  the  three 
great  ingredients  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  (Ro  14'^) ; 
it  receives  the  second  place  in  the  enumeration  of 
the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  (Gal  5^ ;  cf.  1  Th  1«) ;  the 
descriptions  of  the  Christian  life  frequently  refer 
to  it  (Ac  2«  S^*  13'2  \%^,  Ko  12^^,  2  Co  l^*  6'«  8=, 
Ph  12»,  1  P  18).  That  this  joy  is  not  a  mere  by- 
product of  the  Christian  state  without  inherent 
religious  significance  appears  from  the  further  fact 
that  the  constant  cultivation  of  it  is  enjoined  upon 
believers  (2  Co  13",  Ph  3'  4*  ['rejoice  always'], 
1  Th  5^8,  Ja  P,  1  P  413).  rjhe  Apostle  even  makes 
it  an  object  of  prayer  (Ro  15'^),  and  represents  its 
attainment  as  the  goal  of  his  apostolic  activity  for 
the  churches  (2  Co  1-^  Ph  l**).  The  prevalence  of 
a  joyful  state  of  mind  in  the  early  Church  may 
also  be  inferred  from  the  numerous  references  to 
thanksgiving  as  a  regular  Christian  occupation 
(Ro  P>,  2  Co  82,  Eph  5''-  20,  Ph  48,  Col  1»2  2'  3'^  42, 
1  Th  3*  5'8).  In  view  of  all  this,  it  may  l)e  surmised 
that  the  conventional  formula  of  salutation  by 
means  of  xa^P""  has  perhaps,  when  used  among 
believers,  acquired  a  aeeper  meaning  (cf.  Mt  28", 
Lk  128,  Ac  15=^,  2  Co  13",  Ja  1',  2  Jn  '"• "). 

When  we  come  to  inquire  into  the  causes  of  the 
facts  just  reviewed,  the  first  place  must  be  given  to 
(a)  the  vivid  consciousness  of  salvation  which  is 
present  in  the  Apostolic  Age.  Through  the  re- 
stored fellowship  with  God  and  the  forgiveness  of 
sin  a  joy  streams  into  the  heart  which  is  coloured 
by  the  contrast  of  the  opj>osite  experience  belong- 


ing to  the  state  of  estrangement  from  God.  The 
Christian  joy  is  specifioallj'  a  joy  in  God  (Ro  5", 
Ph  38  4'").  Joy  apiKjars  associated  with  faith,  as 
well  as  with  hope  (Ac  S^^  16^*,  Ro  15",  2  Co  l-^ 
Ph  r-",  1  P  18).  It  likewise  accompanies  the 
ethical  renewal  of  the  mind  Jis  a  new-born  delight 
in  all  that  is  good  (1  Co  138). 

A  second  cause  may  l>e  found  in  (b)  the  highly 
pneumatic  character  of  the  religious  experience  in 
tlie  Ai)ostolic  Age.  The  Spirit  as  the  gift  of  the 
Ascended  and  Glorified  Christ  to  His  followers, 
manifested  His  presence  and  power  in  tliese  early 
days  after  a  most  uplifting  fashion,  and  among 
other  things  produced  in  believers  an  exalted  state 
of  feeling  in  which  the  note  of  joyousness  pre- 
dominated. The  conjunction  of  joy  and  the  Spirit, 
however,  does  not  merely  mean  that  the  Spirit 
produces  this  joy  :  it  is  due  to  the  inherent  cnar- 
acter  of  the  Spirit,  so  that  to  be  in  the  Spirit  and 
to  be  filled  Avitii  joy  become  synonymous  (Ac  2*' 
13'2,  Ro  14").  The  Spirit  possesses  this  inherent 
ciiaracter  as  a  Spirit  of  joy  because  He  is  essenti- 
ally the  element  of  the  life  to  come.  This  leads  to 
the  observation  that  in  the  third  place  (c)  the  joy- 
fulness  of  the  early  Christian  consciousness  must 
be  explained  in  the  light  of  the  fact  tliat  the 
Christian  state  is  felt  to  be  semi-eschatological,  i.e. 
in  many  important  respects  an  anticipation  of  the 
consummated  life  of  the  Kingdom  of  Go<l.  Through 
the  entrance  of  the  Messiah  into  glory,  tlirough 
His  pneumatic  presence  and  activity  in  tne  Church, 
and  through  the  prospect  of  His  speedy  return, 
believers  have  been  brought  into  real  contact  with 
the  world  to  come.  The  specific  ciiaracter  of  the 
world  to  come  is  that  of  blessedness  and  joy,  and 
to  the  same  degree  as  this  world  projects  itself 
through  experience  or  hope  into  the  present  life, 
the  latter  also  comes  to  partake  of  this  joyful 
complexion.  Especially  in  St.  Paul  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  can  we  trace  this  connexion, 
though  it  is  not  absent  from  any  of  the  NT  writings 
(Ro  1212  14"  15^3,  He  10^^  12",  1  P  P- «  4",  Jude  =«, 
Rev  19'').  Jesus  Himself  had  already  represented 
the  spiritual  coming  of  the  Kingdom,  the  time  of 
His  presence  with  the  disciples  as  a  period  of  joy, 
resembling  a  wedding- feast  (Mk  2'*),  and  had 
pointed  forward  to  the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit 
as  a  period  of  joy  (Jn  U'^  15"  le-""-  22.  24 1713),  q^ 
this  principle  is  to  be  explained  the  paradoxical 
character  which  the  Christian  joy  assumes  through 
entering  into  contrast  witli  the  tribulation  and 
affliction  of  this  present  life.  It  even  makes  out 
of  the  latter  a  cause  for  rejoicing,  inasmuch  as  the 
believer,  from  the  power  of  faith  which  sustains 
him,  receives  the  assurance  of  his  '  approvedness ' 
{boKifi-i))  with  God,  and  thus  the  strongest  con- 
ceivable hope  in  the  eschatological  salvation.  Ro 
5'"'-  is  the  classical  passage  for  this,  but  the  same 
train  of  thought  meets  us  in  a  number  of  other 
Pauline  passages,  and  occasionally  elsewhere, 
sometimes  in  pointedly  paradoxical  formulation 
(Ac  5",  Col  1",  1  Th  18,  He  10=»,  Ja  P,  1  P  A^). 
Most  frequently  this  specific  kind  of  joy  is  expressed 
in  connexion  with  the  idea  of  Kavx^aOAi,  '  to  glory ' 
(cf.  alwve;  Ro  52- s,  2  Co  ll**  12»,  Ja  P). 

3.  The  joy  of  St.  Paul.— To  be  distinpiished 
from  this  general  joy  as  a  common  ingreaient  of 
all  Christian  experience  is  the  specific  joy  which 
belongs  to  the  servant  of  God  engaged  in  the  work 
of  his  calling.  Of  this  ioy  of  ministering,  the 
delight  and  satisfaction  that  accompany  the  suc- 
cessful discharge  of  the  apostolic  task,  the  NT 
makes  frequent  mention.  The  Pauline  Epistles 
are  full  of  it.  The  Aixjstle  runs  his  course  with 
joy  (Ac  202*  [gome  textual  authorities  here  omit 
'  with  joy  ']) ;  rejoices  exceedingly  over  the  obedi- 
ence 0/  believers  (Ro  16'") ;  though  sorrowful,  yet 
is  always  rejoicing  in  his  work  (2  Co  6'") ;  over- 


JUD^A 


JUDAIZING 


655 


flows  with  joy  on  account  of  his  converts  (2  Co  7*) ; 
makes  his  supplication  with  joy  on  their  behalf 
(Ph  1*) ;  their  progress  in  love  and  harmony  makes 
full  his  joy  (Ph  2°) ;  he  rejoices  in  the  prospect  of 
being  offered  upon  the  sacrifice  and  service  of  their 
faith  (Ph  2'");  rejoices  in  his  sufferings  for  their 
sake  (Col  1") ;  feels  that  no  thanksgiving  can 
adequately  express  his  joy  before  God  on  their 
account  (1  Th  3*).  Specific  developments  in  his 
ministry  furnish  occasion  for  special  joy  (1  Co  16'", 

2  Co  23  7"- 1«,  Ph  1"  2«  ;  cf.  Ac  11°  He  13",  2  Jn  *, 

3  Jn  '•  *).  This  joy  in  ministering  coalesces  witli 
the  prosi)ective  eschatological  joy,  inasmuch  as  in 
the  day  of  the  Lord  the  results  of  one's  ministry 
will  be  made  manifest  and  become  for  the  servant 
of  Christ  a  special  'joy'  or  'crown  of  glorying' 
(2  Co  1»  Ph  4',  1  Th  2^). 

LiTERATCKB.— A.  Hamack,  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Eng. 
tr.,  1909,  p.  277 ;  Voluntas  Dei,  1912,  p.  265  ;  H.  Busbnell,  The 
Heir  Life,  1S60,  p.  147 ;  R.  C.  Moberly,  Christ  our  Life,  1902, 
p.  93  ;  j.  Clifford,  The  Gospel  of  Gladness,  191>,  p.  1. 

Geerhardus  Vos. 

JDD^A  ('lovSaia,  used  by  the  LXX  in  later  books 
of  the  OT  [Ezr.,  Neh.,  Dan.]  instead  of  'Ioi/5a,  as 
the  translation  of  .Ti?n^  or  •n-^"). — Judaea,  the  Grse- 
cized  form  of  '  Judah,'  was  the  most  southern  of 
the  three  districts  into  which  Palestine  was  divided 
in  the  Greek  and  Roman  periods,  the  other  two 
being  Samaria  and  Galilee.  The  territory  occupied 
by  the  Jews  who  returned  from  Babylon  was  at 
first  smaller  than  the  ancestral  kingdom  of  Judah, 
but  it  was  gradually  enlarged,  e.g.  by  the  ilacca- 
bfean  capture  of  Hebron  from  the  Edoraites  ( 1  Mac 
5^),  and  the  cession  by  Demetrius,  king  of  Syria, 
of  the  Samaritan  toparchies  of  Aphaerema,  Lydda, 
and  Ramathaim  (11**).  According  to  Josephus 
{BJ  III.  iii.  5),  Judiea  extended  from  Anuath- 
Borka?os  in  the  north  (identified  with  'Aina-Berktt 
in  PEFSt,  1881,  p.  48)  to  the  village  of  Jordas 
(perhaps  Tell  '  Arad)  on  the  confines  of  Arabia  in 
the  south,  and  from  Jordan  in  the  east  to  Joppa 
in  the  west.  The  sea-coast  as  far  as  Ptolemais, 
with  the  coast  towns,  also  belonged  to  Judaea. 

Josephus  {loc.  cit.)  states  that  the  country  was 
divided  into  eleven  toparchies  (Toucapxiai.  or  K\i)p- 
ovxiat),  all  west  of  Jordan :  Jerusalem,  Gophna, 
Akrabatta,  Thamna,  Lydda,  Emmaus,  Pella, 
Idumea,  Engaddi,  Herodiiim,  and  Jericho.  Pliny 
(HN  V.  xiv.  70)  gives  a  list  which  contains  the 
seven  names  given  here  in  italics,  along  with 
Jopica,  Betholeptephene,  and  Orine.  Schiirer 
(HJP  II.  i.  [1885]  157)  thinks  '  we  may  obtain  a 
correct  list  if  we  adopt  that  of  Josephus  and  sub- 
stitute Bethleptepha  for  Pella.'  The  division  was 
no  doubt  made  for  administrative  purposes,  and 
especially  for  the  collection  of  revenue. 

Judsea  proper  was  a  small  country,  its  whole 
area  not  being  more  than  2,000  sq.  miles.  Apart 
from  the  Shephelah  and  the  Maritime  Plain,  it  was 
a  plateau  of  only  1,350  sq.  miles.  But  the  term 
was  often  loosely  employed  in  a  more  compre- 
hensive sense.  Tacitus  says  that  '  eastward  the 
country  is  bounded  by  Arabia ;  to  the  south  lies 
Egypt ;  and  on  the  west  are  Phoenicia  and  the 
Mediterranean ;  northward  it  commands  an  ex- 
tensive prospect  over  Syria '  (Hist.  v.  vi. ).  Strabo 
very  vaguely  describes  Judaea  as  being  '  situated 
above  Phoenicia,  in  the  interior  between  Gaza  and 
Antilibanus,  and  extending  to  the  Arabians'  (XVi. 
ii.  21).  Herod  the  Great,  who  was  called  the  king 
of  Juda'a,  certainly  had  a  territory  much  wider 
than  Judaea  proper.  Ptolemy  states  that  there 
were  districts  of  Judaea  beyond  Jordan  (v.  xvi.  9), 
and  it  is  difKcult  to  obtain  any  other  meaning  from 
'  the  borders  of  Judaea  beyond  Jordan  '  in  ilt  19^, 
though  A.  B.  Bruce  thinks  '  it  is  not  likely  that 
the  writer  would  describe  Southern  Peraea  as  a 
part  of  Judaea'   {EGT,   'The  Synoptic  Gospels,' 


1897,  p.  244).  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  St.  Luke 
often  extends  the  term  Judaea  to  the  whole  of 
Palestine  west  of  the  Jordan  (Lk  4**  [?]  2y,  Ac  2» 
10"  26»). 

After  the  death  of  Herod,  his  son  Archelaus 
became  ethnarch  of  Judaea.  He  was  never  really 
its  king,  though  royalty  is  implicitly  ascribed  to 
him  in  the  /ScwiXeiki  of  Mt  2**,  and  explicitly  in 
Josephus  {Ant.  x\ail.  iv.  3).  He  was  soon  deposed, 
and  from  a.d.  6  till  the  overthrow  of  the  State  in 
70  Judaea  was  under  procurators,  except  during  the 
brief  reign  of  Agrippa  i.  (41-44).  The  procurators 
resided  in  Caesarea  {Ant.  xvil.  xiii.  5 ;  xviu.  i.  1, 
ii.  1). 

'  The  statement  of  Josephus  that  Jadaa*  was  attached  to  the 
province  of  Syria  and  placed  under  its  governor  {Ant.  xvii.  xiii. 
5 ;  xvni.  i.  1,  iv.  6)  appears  to  be  incorrect ;  on  the  contrarj-, 
Jadjea  probably  formed  thenceforth  a  procuratorial  province 
of  itself '  (T.  Mommsen,  The  Provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire-, 
Eng.  tr.,  1909,  iL  ISon. ;  cf.  Schiirer,  i.  iL  42  f.).  The  governor 
was  a  man  of  equestrian  rank,  so  that  Judsa  belongMl  to  the 
third  class  of  imperial  pro\lnces  mentioned  by  Strabo  (xvn.  iii. 
25).  The  usaal  designation  for  such  a  governor — en-iVpoirot — 
occurs  frequently  in  Josephus,  though  he  occasionally  uses 
iirapx<K  or  ^ycfuJK  The  last  term,  which  is  equivalent  to 
praesei,  is  the  one  most  often  employed  in  the  NT. 

It  was  usual  to  speak  of  Jerusalem  and  Judaea, 
instead  of  'and  the  rest  of  Judaea*  (Mt  4^,  Mk  1*, 
Ac  1^  etc.).  The  Talmud  explains  this  practice  by 
saying  that  the  holy  city  formed  a  division  by 
itself  (A.  Neubauer,  La  Geugr.  du  Talmud,  1868, 
p.  56).  The  occurrence  of  Judaea  between  Meso- 
lX)tamia  and  Cappadocia  in  Ac  2®  is  very  peculiar. 
Jerome  reads  Sj-ria  instead  ;  Tertullian  suggrats 
Armenia  (c.  Jud.  vii.) ;  and  Bithj-nia,  Idumea,  and 
India  have  also  been  proposed  {EGT  in  loco). 
When  Palestine  was  divided  into  First,  Second, 
and  Third  {Code  of  Theodosius,  A.D.  409),  Palestina 
Prima  comprehended  the  old  districts  of  Jndaea 
and  Samaria ;  and  this  division  is  still  observed  in 
the  ecclesiastical  documents  of  the  Ea-stem  Church. 

James  Strahax. 

JUDAH.— See  TRIBES. 

JUDAIZING.— It  is  obvious  that  the  transition 
from  Judaism  to  Christianity  could  hardly  be 
made  without  difBculty.  To  the  Jew  it  must 
have  seemed  almost  incredible  that  he  should 
divest  himself  of  the  observance  of  Mosaic  Law, 
and  equally  incredible  that  the  Gentile  should  be 
admitted  into  the  Kingdom  of  Grod  Avithout  accept- 
ing the  same  Law,  It  was  inevitable  that  the 
question  should  soon  arise  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Church,  whether  tiie  Church  of  the  future  should 
be  Catholic  or  Jewish.  It  was  only  to  be  expected 
that  this  controversy  should  give  rise  to  a  party 
in  the  Church  who  were  in  favour  of  the  latter 
alternative,  consisting  of  those  who,  being  Chris- 
tians, yet  retained  their  affection  for  the  ilosaic 
Law  and  wished  to  impose  it  upon  every  member 
of  the  Christian  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
keen  intellect  of  a  Stephen  or  a  Paul  saw  at  once 
that  any  attempt  to  enforce  the  Mosaic  Law  or 
even  the  initiatory  rite  of  circumcision  upon  the 
Gentiles,  meant  stagnation  and  death  to  the 
Church. 

No  inconsiderable  part  of  the  Acts  and  the 
Epistles  is  taken  up  with  the  description  of  the 
attempts  of  the  Judaizers  to  gain  their  end,  and  of 
the  resolute  resistance  to  them  of  St.  Paul  and 
those  who  thought  with  him. 

1.  In  the  Acts. — In  the  Acts  the  three  most  im- 
portant crises  of  this  question  are  (a)  the  speech 
of  St.  Stephen,  (b)  the  conversion  of  Cornelius, 
and  (c)  the  Council  at  Jerusalem. 

(a)  The  importance  of  St.  Stephen's  speech  con- 
sists in  the  principles  which  underlie  the  historical 
summary  which  is  its  main  feature.  He  had  been 
accused  of  blaspheming  the  Temple  and  the  Law. 
No  doubt,  the  charges  were  exaggerated  and  his 


656 


JUDAIZING 


JUDAS  P.ARSABBAS 


language  dihtorted  by  false  witnesses.  But  there 
was  tliat  half  truth  in  them  whicli  made  tliem 
colourable.  The  principles  which  come  out  in  the 
speech  are  those  which  we  can  also  trace  in  Christ's 
attitude  towards  Judaism,  viz.  that  Christianity 
would  fulfil  and  also  succeed  the  older  dispensation. 

(i)  The  importance  of  the  incident  of  Cornelius 
is  emphasized  by  the  two-fold  account  of  it  in 
the  Acts  and  by  the  two  special  manifestations  of 
the  Divine  will  made  to  8t.  Peter  to  teach  liim 
what  he  should  do.  The  vision  of  the  sheet,  with 
the  clean  and  unclean  animals,  showed  that  the 
Apostle's  act  was  a  new  departure,  requiring 
special  and  Divine  sanction ;  and  the  outpouring 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  prior  to  baptism,  was  needed 
to  teach  him  that  he  might  initiate  his  converts 
into  tiie  Christian  Church  by  that  sacrament. 

(c)  Now,  as  the  first  of  these  incidents  had  dealt 
with  the  general  principles  regulating  the  relation 
of  Christianity  to  Judaism,  and  the  second  had 
shown  that  Gentiles  were  to  be  admitted  into  the 
Christian  body,  so  the  third  determined  what  re- 
quirements, if  any,  should  be  made  of  Gentile  con- 
verts. The  four  precepts  required  are  not  to  be 
regarded  simply  as  concessions  to  Jewish  prejudices. 
Three  out  of  the  four  deal  with  great  mysteries  of 
human  life  and  induce  corresponding  forms  of 
reverence.  Nor  were  these  precepts  intended  to 
be  applied  either  universally  or  permanently,  but 
rather  to  meet  a  local  and  temporary  difficulty. 

In  addition  to  these  three  important  incidents, 
there  are  many  references  in  the  Acts  to  this 
question,  showing  the  prominent  place  it  took  in 
the  Church  thought  and  life  of  the  day.  We 
cannot  go  into  all  these  references,  but,  as  an 
example,  we  may  quote  the  narrative  in  Ac  21-'"'^' 
in  which  St.  Paul  is  advised  to  take  some  step 
that  may  disarm  the  prejudices  of  the  Judaizers 
against  him. 

2.  In  St.  Paul's  Epistles.— When  we  turn  to  the 
Epistles,  we  have  to  notice  that  St.  Paul  was 
attacked  on  personal  as  well  as  on  doctrinal 
grounds,  and  that  his  authority  as  an  apostle  was 
called  in  question.  This  was  especially  the  case 
at  Corinth,  as  we  learn  from  the  Second  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians.  In  the  First  Epistle  he  had 
dealt  with  the  divisions  in  that  Church  (see  Divi- 
sions). But  in  the  Second  Epistle  he  defends  his 
own  apostolic  authority.  He  could  produce  no 
comrnendatory  letter  from  the  Church  in  Jerusalem 
as  his  opponents  were  able  to  do,  nor  would  he 
do  so  ;  he  did  not  derive  his  authority  from  any 
apostle,  but  direct  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Himself. 

When  we  turn  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
we  lind  the  controversy  accentuated,  'fhe  Gala- 
tians had  been  '  bewitched '  by  the  Jewish  emis- 
saries. They  had  relapsed  from  the  simplicity  of 
the  gospel  into  the  ceremonialism  of  Judaism. 
The  authority  of  the  Apostle  had  been  disparaged 
and  denied.  St.  Paul  was  evidently  deeply  stirred, 
as  well  as  fully  conscious  of  the  danger  to  Chris- 
tianity which  was  caused  by  the  action  of  the 
Judaizers.  The  result  was  an  Epistle  which,  in 
burning  words,  pleads  for  the  liberty  of  the  gospel 
and  warns  against  the  retrograde  step  of  again 
submitting  to  the  bondage  of  the  liaw. 

The  Church  in  Colossae  was  aflected  by  the 
Judaism  of  the  Dispersion,  which  diflered  in  some 
respects  from  the  Judaism  of  Jerusalem.  The 
view  of  the  Colossian  heresy  Avhich  was  held 
formerly,  as  expounded  by  J.  B,  liigiitfoot  in  his 
Commentary  (*1879,  p.  74  f.),  was  that  this  heresy 
was  a  form  of  Gnosticism,  but  F.  J.  A.  Horc  in 
his  Judaistic  Christianity  (1894,  p.  11611'.)  con- 
tends that  St.  Paul  had  in  mind  a  form  of 
Judaism  rather  than  of  Gnosticism.  It  is  not  the 
Judaism  of  Jerusalem  which  laid  stress  upon  the 
importance  of  circumcision  and  the  Law,  out  the 


Judaism  of  the  Disper.sion,  which  concerned  itself 
with  such  questions  as  dillerence  of  food,  differ- 
ence of  days,  etc.  (Col  2'*'-  *"•  -').  According  to  this 
view,  the  <pi\o<To<f>ia  of  Col  2"*  refers  to  the  detailed 
passage  in  Col  2'*'^,  and  the  meats,  drinks,  feasts, 
now  moons,  and  Sabbaths,  are  Judaic. 

Hort  also  takes  the  same  view  with  regard  to 
the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and  concludes  his  argument 
as  follows : 

'  On  the  whole  then  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  no  less  than  in 
Colossians,  it  seems  imposiiible  to  And  clear  evidence  of  specu- 
lative or  Gnosticisinx  tendencies.  VVe  do  find  however  a 
dangerous  fondness  for  Jewish  triflinpr,  both  of  the  legendary 
and  of  the  legal  or  casuistical  kind.  We  find  also  indications, 
but  much  less  prominent,  of  some  such  abstinences  in  the 
matter  of  foods  (probat)l.v  chiefly  animal  food  and  wine)  as  at 
Colossa)  and  Konie,  with  a  probability  that  marriage  would 
before  long  come  likewise  under  a  religious  ban.  But  of  cir- 
cumcision and  the  perpetual  validity  of  the  Law  we  have 
nothing '  (p.  146). 

3.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.— With  all 

the  mystery  wliich  surrounds  the  identity  of  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the 
community  to  which  it  was  addressed,  it  is  clear 
that  the  whole  argument  is  directed  against  the 
Judaizers.  The  people  addressed  are  evidently  in 
danger  of  aposta.sy.  They  do  not  see  what  the 
gospel  can  otter  them  in  exchange  for  the  loss  they 
have  sustained  in  being  expelled  from  the  syna- 
gogue. 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  detail  the  argument 
of  the  Epistle,  which  may  be  studied  in  the  art. 
on  Hebrews,  Ep.  to  the,  or  in  the  article  in 
HDB ;  but  the  superiority  of  Christ  over  Judaism 
is  its  main  burden,  and  the  Epistle  is  pregnant 
with  the  difficulties  of  Christianity  confronted 
with  Judaizing  teachers.  It  deals  with  those 
who,  as  Hort  says,  '  without  abjuring  the  name  of 
Jesus,  .  .  .  treat  their  relation  to  him  as  trivial 
and  secondary  compared  with  their  relation  to 
the  customs  of  their  forefathers  and  their  living 
countrymen'  (p.  157). 

In  conclusion,  we  may  say  that  Judaistic  Chris- 
tianity was  a  natural  product  of  the  circumstances 
of  the  Apostolic  Age,  a  product  which  was  des- 
tined to  be  a  source  of  internal  trouble  to  the 
primitive  Church.  It  lived  on  for  some  time, 
with  occasional  outbursts  of  revival,  and  at  length 
died  naturally  away. 

Judaism  decreased  as  Christianity  increased. 
Jews  who  became  Christians  were  not  forbidden 
to  observe  the  laws  and  customs  to  which  they 
were  attached,  but  were  enjoined  to  seek  beneath 
the  letter  of  the  ordinance  for  the  truth  of  which 
it  was  the  exponent.  No  attempt  was  to  be  made 
to  enforce  upon  Gentile  Christians  the  bondage  of 
the  Law  or  to  take  away  the  liberty  with  which 
Christ  had  made  them  free. 

Literature.— In  addition  to  the  works  alre.adv  mentioned, 
see  R.  J.  Knowling,  '  Acts,'  in  EGT,  1900  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the.  Roman  Citizen,  1895  ;  F.  W. 
Farrar,  Lifr,  ami  Work  of  St.  Paul,  18'.»" ;  K.  Lake,  The 
Earlier  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  1911,  p.  14;  A.  de  Boysson,  La 
Loi  et  la  Foi,  1912,  MORLEY  STEVEXSON. 

JUDAS  BARSABBAS.— After  the  Council  of  the 

apostles  and  elders  held  at  Jerusalem  to  settle  the 
matter  in  dispute  between  the  Jewish  and  Gentile 
Christians  at  Antioch,  it  was  resolved  to  send  to 
Antioch  along  with  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas  two 
deputies  entrusted  with  the  letter  containing  the 
decrees  of  the  brethren  of  Jerusalem.  These 
deputies  were  Judas  Barsabbas  and  Silas  (Ac  15"). 
The  fact  that  they  were  selected  as  deputies  of 
the  Jerusalem  Church  on  this  important  mission 
proves  that  they  were  men  of  considerable  influence 
in  the  Church.  They  are  called  chief  men  among 
the  brethren  (ijyovfiivovf),  and  were  probably  elders. 
The  narrative  tells  us  that  both  were  endowed 
with  the  prophetic  gift  (v,*-)  and  that  they  con- 


JUDAS  (OF  DAMASCUS) 


JUDAS  ISCARIOT 


657 


tinueJ  a  considerable  time  in  Antioch  teaching 
and  exhorting  tue  believers  there.  Aft«r  their 
work,  the  restoring  of  peace  among  the  contend- 
ing factions,  was  accomplished,  they  were  free  to 
depart.  Judas  returned  to  Jerusalem,  while  Silas 
remained  and  became  the  companion  of  St.  Panl 
on  his  second  missionary  journey.  The  contention 
of  some  critics  that  Silas  returned  to  Jerusalem 
with  Judas  and  that  v."  is  spurious,  is  met  by  the 
view  of  Ramsay  {St.  Paul,  p.  174  f.),  who  holds 
that  V."  simply  means  that  freedom  was  given 
to  the  two  deputies  to  depart,  and  that  v.**  was 
omitted  by  a  copyist  who  misunderstood  v.**  (cf. 
Zahn,  Einieitung,  i.  148). 

Beyond  these  facts  nothing  certain  is  known  of 
Barsabbas.  It  has  been  suggested  that  he  was  a 
brother  of  Joseph  Barsabbas  who  was  nominated  to 
succeed  Iscariot  in  the  early  days  of  the  Jerusalem 
Church  (Ac  1^),  as  Barsabbas  is  a  patronymic  son 
of  Sabbas.  If  this  be  so,  Judas  had  in  all  proba- 
bility, like  Joseph,  been  personally  acquainted 
with  Jesus,  and  a  disciple.  This  would  account,  to 
some  extent  at  least,  for  the  influential  position 
he  seems  to  hold  at  the  Council  of  Jerusalem. 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  him  with 
others  bearing  the  name  Judas,  but  all  such  at- 
tempts must  be  relinquished.  The  Apostle  Judas 
*not  Iscariot'  was  the  son  of  James  (Lk  6^®  RV), 
and  in  the  narrative  in  the  Acts  Barsabbas  is 
clearly  distinguished  from  the  apostles.  Some 
have  suggested  that  he  may  be  the  ^^•rite^  of  the 
Epistle  that  bears  his  name,  but  the  writer  describes 
himself  as  the  brother  of  James  (Jude^),  and  this 
James  must  either  have  been  the  son  of  Joseph  the 
husband  of  the  Virgin  or  the  son  of  Alphseus  (see 
art.  JUDE) — in  any  case,  not  the  son  of  Sabbas. 

LiTERATTRE.— R.  J.  KnowlingT,  'Acts,'  in  EGT,  1900,  p. 
326;  W.  M.  Ramsay,  5f.  Paul  the  Tratelier  OTid  the  Roman 
Citizen,  1895,  p.  174  f. ;  T.  Zahn,  Einieitung  in  dag  ST^,  1906- 
07,  L  148 ;  aitt.  in  HDB  and  EBi.  W.  F.  BOYD. 

JUDAS  (of  Damascus).— In  Ac  9^^  the  disciple  \ 
Ananias  is  told  by  the  Lord  in  a  \ision  to  go  to  ; 
the  street  called  '  Straight '  and  inquire  in  the  house  | 
of  Judas  for  one  named  Saul,  a  man  of  Tarsus. 
Nothing  further  is  known  of  this  Judas. 

JDDIS  THE  GALILEAN.— Judas  the  GalU^an, 
a  Zealot  leader  at  the  time  of  the  census  imder 
Quirinius,  was  probably  the  son  of  Hezekiah 
( Josephus,  Ant.  XVII.  x.  5,  BJ II.  iv.  1),  a  leader  of 
a  band  of  robbers  (i.e.  revolutionists)  in  Galilee. 
Herod,  while  representing  his  father,  had  captured 
and  summarily  executed  Hezekiah  with  a  number 
of  his  followers  without  ha\"ing  recourse  to  the 
Sanhedrin  or  Hyrcanus  (BJ  I.  x.  5,  Arit.  XIV.  ix. 
2,  3,  x\ni.  x.  5).  If  this  identification  be  correct 
(so  Graetz,  Schiirer,  Goethe ;  contra  Krenkel, 
Schmiedel),  it  enables  us  to  trace  the  development 
of  the  Zealot  movement  from  its  origin  as  the 
Messianic  party  favouring  'direct  action.'  The 
death  of  Hezekiah  apparently  left  Judas  at  the 
head  of  a  movement  against  Roman  rule  similar  to 
that  of  Mattathias  and  his  body  of  revolutionaries 
against  the  Sjrians. 

Josephus  declares  in  A  nt.  XVIII.  L  1  that  Judas 
was  born  in  Gamala  in  Gaulonitis,  but  in  BJ  II. 
viii.  1  and  elsewhere  he  calls  him  a  Galiliean  (so 
too  Ac  5^).  This  discrepancy  may  be  due  to  a 
confusion  of  a  Galilean  Gamala  with  the  better- 
known  town  of  the  same  name  east  of  Jordan  ; 
or  to  the  fact  that  the  acti\-ities  of  Judas  were 
largely  confinetl  to  Galilee  ;  or  to  the  loose  use  of 
the  word  '  Galilrean '  to  describe  a  Jew  born  near 
Galilee. 

During  the  administration  of  Quintilius  Varus 
(6-4  B.C.)  .Judas  took  advant^e  of  the  disorders 
following  the  death  of  Herod  I.,  seized  and  plun- 

VOL.  I. — 42 


dered  Sepphoris,  and  armed  his  followers  with 
weapons  taken  from  the  city's  arsenal.  He  is 
charged  by  Josephus  (Ant.  XVlI.  x.  5,  BJ  II.  iv.  1) 
with  seeking  to  make  himself  king.  This  accusa- 
tion, however,  like  the  description  of  his  followers 
('  of  profligate  character ')  by  Josephus,  is  probably 
to  be  charged  to  the  bias  of  the  historian.  For, 
when  Quirinius  undertook  to  make  a  census  of 
Judaea  (see  DCG  i.  275*),  Judas  allied  himself  with 
a  Pharisee  named  Zadok  and  raised  the  signal  for  a 
theocratic  or  Messianic  revolt,  calling  upon  the 
Jews  to  refuse  to  pay  tribute  to  the  Romans  and 
to  recognize  God  alone  as  their  ruler  (Ant.  xviil. 
i,  1,  XX.  V.  2,  BJ  u.  viii.  1).  Whether  he  suc- 
ceeded in  actually  organizing  a  revolt  is  not  alto- 
gether clear  (Ant.  XX.  v.  2  is  not  so  reliable  as 
xviu.  i.  1 ),  but  in  BJ  vil.  viii.  1  he  is  said  ♦  to 
have  persuaded  not  a  few  of  the  Jews  not  to  sub- 
mit to  the  census.'  That  he  was  the  centre  of 
actual  disturbance  is  by  no  means  improbable  in 
the  light  of  succeeding  events ;  for  from  this  com- 
bination of  revolutionary  spirit  and  Pharisaism 
emerged  the  fourth  party  of  the  Jews,  the  Zealots. 
From  this  time  until  their  last  stand  at  Ma.sada, 
the  Zealots  were  the  representatives  of  a  politico- 
revolutionary  Messianism,  as  distinguished  from 
the  eschatological  hopes  of  the  Pharisees  and 
Essenes.  Judas  ('a  cunning  Sophist'  [BJ  ll.  xvii. 
8])  was  evidently  bent  on  putting  into  practice  a 
political  programme,  and  may  very  likely  have 
undertaken  to  organize  a  theocracy  without  a 
human  ruler.  If  so,  we  know  nothing  as  to  the 
actual  results  of  his  endeavours  except  that 
Josephus  (Ant.  XYlll.  i.  1,  6)  attributes  to  him 
and  his  '  philosophy '  the  violence  and  miseries 
culminating  in  the  destruction  of  the  Temple. 
This  philosophy  he  describes  as  a  compound  of 
Pharisaic  beliefs  and  revolutionist  love  of  liberty. 

We  have  no  precise  knowledge  as  to  the  fate  of 
Judas,  but  in  Ac  5"  he  is  said  to  have  '  perished.' 
From  the  fact  that  he  is  here  mentioned  after 
Theudas  (q.v.),  it  has  been  conjectured  that  Luke 
has  confused  his  fate  with  that  of  his  sons.  Too 
much  weight,  however,  should  not  be  given  to 
this  conclusion,  for  it  seems  hardly  probable  that 
Josephus  should  have  omitted  any  misfortune  com- 
ing to  a  man  he  so  cordially  disliked. 

Judas  left  three  sons,  all  of  whom  were  leaders 
in  the  Zealot  movement.  Of  these,  two — Jacob 
and  Simon — were  crucified  by  Tiberius  Alexander 
the  procurator  (a.d.  46-48),  for  leading  a  revolt 
(Ant.  XX.  V.  2),  and  the  third,  Menahem  (also  a 
'  Sophist ' — a  word  indicating  a  propagandist  as 
well  as  a  revolutionist),  became  a  leader  of  the  ex- 
treme radicals  during  the  first  period  of  the  war 
with  Rome.  After  having  armed  himself  from 
the  Herodian  arsenal  at  Masada,  he  became  for 
a  short  time  the  master  of  a  part  of  Jerusalem, 
but  was  tortured  and  executed,  together  with  his 
lieutenants,  by  Eleazar  of  the  high-priestly  party. 
Shailer  Mathews. 

JUDAS  ISCARIOT.— The  only  biblical  reference 
to  Judas  Iscariot  by  name  outside  the  Gospels  is 
Ac  116-20. 25^  and  there  he  is  called  neither  '  Iscariot ' 
nor  '  the  traitor'  (Tpod&rris,  as  in  Lk  6'*),  nor  is  his 
action  spoken  of  by  the  term  rapaSiSdpai.  He  is 
described  in  v."  as  the  one  who  'became  guide 
(odrr/ds)  to  them  that  arrested  Jesus,'  and  in  v.^  as 
having  '  fallen  away  (xape'/STj)  from  the  ministry  and 
apostleship  to  go  to  his  own  place'  (see  Place). 
It  is  interesting,  however,  to  note  the  other 
allusions  to  our  Lord's  betrayal  in  the  Acts  and  in 
the  Epistles.  (1)  In  Ac  3"  "St.  Peter  attributes  it 
virtually  to  the  Israelites  themselves  (81'  vfieU  rap- 
eSwirare  kt\.  ;  cf .  2P),  and  so  again  (2)  in  7'-  does  St. 
Stephen  (toO  BtKalov  ov  vvv  vfiets  -rpoSorai  Kal  ipofeii 
tyiveffOe).  (3)  In  Ro  4^  St.  Panl,  quoting  Is  53^- 
(LXX),  says  less  definitely  that  Jesus  our  Lord 


658 


JUDAS  ISCARIOT 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


irapeS60ri  Sia  rA  vapairTUfiara  rip-Qv  ;  (4)  but  in  1  Co  11^ 
the  very  act  and  time  of  betrayal  are  alluded  to  in 
connexion  with  the  institution  of  the  Last  Supjier 
(i»  T^  vvktI  rj  irapfSiStTO  kt\.).  On  the  other  hand, 
St.  Paul  three  times  describes  the  betrayal  from 
the  point  of  view  of  our  Lord's  own  voluntary  sub- 
mission, viz.  (5)  (lal  2*"  :  irapa56»'ros  iavrdy  virip  tfiod  ; 
(6)  Eph  5'  :  nrap^duKev  ^ain-^x  vvip  rj/iuiv  ;  (7)  v.^  :  ^aiTiv 
irapiduKfv  virep  ^KKXrjaiai  (cf.  1  P  2-^  :  irapeSidov  tQ 
KplvovTi  SiKalui,  and  see  Jn  10""  ^^  17'"  etc.);  and 
once  (8)  even  of  the  Father  Himself  {vvip  T]fiC)v 
irdm-wv  TrapiduKcv  avrdv,  Ro  8"^). 

As  to  Judas's  grievous  end  itself,  as  recorded  in 
the  Acts,  it  is  not  neces.sary  here  to  compare  it  in 
detail  with  the  account  given  in  Mt  27*"'-  ;  it  is 
sufficient  to  say  that  in  the  jiresent  state  of  our  in- 
formation tlie  two  accounts  are  well-nigh,  if  not 
quite,  irreconcilable.  13ut  various  points  in  the 
Lucan  record  remain  to  be  reviewed. 

(a)  St.  Peter  in  his  opening  address  at  the  elec- 
tion of  St.  Matthias  infers  that  the  inclusion  of 
the  traitor  in  the  number  of  the  apostles  and  his 
obtaining  a  share  in  their  ministry  was  a  mysterious 
dispensation  by  wliicii  was  fulfilled  the  prediction 
of  Ps  41*,  so  recently  quoted  by  our  Lord  Himself 
(Jn  13'"),  together  with  its  necessary  consequences 
as  foreshadowed  in  two  other  Psalms  (69'-^  and 
109*) :  that  is,  if  v.-**  be  an  original  part  of  St. 
Peter's  speech,  and  not,  as  is  possible,  a  jiart  of  the 
Lucan  (or  later)  elucidation  of  the  passage  contained 
in  vv.'**'*.  In  any  case,  all  three  quotations,  but 
specially  for  our  purpose  now,  the  last  two,  are  of 
interest  as  illustrating  the  free  use  made  of  the 
text  of  Scripture  and  its  secondary  application. 
In  Ps  41"  the  actual  wording  bears  little  likeness 
to  the  LXX,  being  a  more  literal  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew,  while  its  original  reference  is  to  some 
treacherous  friend  {e.g.  Ahithopiuil,  the  unfaithful 
counsellor  of  David).  In  Ps  69^  the  text  is  more 
exact,  but  the  original  figure  employed  (^  ^iravXis 
avTwv,  not  aiirov)  suggests  a  nomad  encampment  of 
tents  rendered  desolate  because  of  the  cruel  persecu- 
tions which  their  occupants  had  pi-actised,  while 
Ps  109*  has  in  view  one  particular  official,  like  Doeg 
or  Ahithophel,  who  has  been  false  to  his  trust,  and 
therefore  it  is,  to  our  modern  notions,  more  ap- 
propriately and  with  less  strain  transferred  to  the 
case  of  Judas. 

(b)  The  passage  vv.'*-^",  Avith  or  without  v.^  (see 
above),  would  seem  to  be  an  editorial  comment 
inserted  in  the  middle  of  St.  Peter's  address  either 
by  the  author  of  the  Acts  himself  or,  as  has  been 
thought,  by  some  later  glossator  or  copyist.  Of 
the  latter  view  there  is,  we  believe,  no  indication 
in  the  history  of  the  text.  If,  as  is  more  likely, 
therefore,  it  is  due  to  St.  Luke,  he  has  here  adopted 
an  account  of  the  traitor's  grievous  end  which  is 
independent  of,  and  in  some  details  apparently  ir- 
reconcilable with,  St.  Matthew's  (27^"^-),  but  to  a 
less  extent,  we  are  inclined  to  think,  than  is  some- 
times held.  For  it  is  not  out  of  keeping  with 
eastern  modes  of  treating  facts  for  St.  Luke  to 
speak  of  the  '  field  of  blood'  being  acquired  by  the 
traitor  himself  with  the  price  of  his  iniquity  (qui 
facit  per  alium,  far.it  per  sc),  which  St.  Matthew 
more  accurately  says  was  actually  purchased  by 
the  chief  priest,  wiiilst  the  horribly  graphic  de- 
scription of  his  suicide  is  little  more  than  a 
conventional  way  of  representing  St.  Matthew's 
simple  aw(\d(j}v  dir-fjy^a.To. 

(c)  For  the  title  AlccldamaSknCi  its  interpretation 
see  separate  article,  s.v. 

It  remains  to  remark  that  St.  Peter's  expression, 
as  recorded  in  his  address,  and  the  apostolic  prayer 
of  ordination,  for  which  he  was  probably  re8ponsil)le 
and  the  mouthi)iece,  breathe  much  'more  of  the 
spirit  of  primitive  Christianity  in  their  restrained 
and  chastened  style  than  the  more  outspoken  and 


almost  vindictive  statements  of  vv.'*-"*,  so  that 
one  would  not  be  altogether  surprised  to  find  that 
the  latter  are,  as  has  been  suggested,  a  less  genuine 
tradition  of  a  later  age.  C.  L.  Feltoe. 

JUDE,  THE  LORD'S  BROTHER.— The  list  of  the 

Lord's  brothers isgiven  in  MkG^ as  'James,  and  Joses, 
and  Judas  [AV  'Juda'],  and  Simon,'  in  Mt  13**  as 
'James,  and  Joseph,  and  Simon,  and  Judas.'  It  would 
be  precarious,  even  apart  from  the  variation  in  order, 
to  infer  that  Judas  was  one  of  the  younger  brothers 
of  Jesus ;  still,  this  is  not  improoable,  especially 
if,  as  the  present  writer  believes,  '  the  brethren  of 
the  Lord  were  sons  of  Josepli  and  Mary.  We 
know  practically  nothing  of  his  history.  If  the 
statement  in  Jn  7'  can  be  trusted,  that  at  that  time 
the  brethren  of  Jesus  did  not  believe  in  Him,  he 
cannot  be  identified  witli  '  Judas,  the  son  of  James,' 
who  is  mentioned  in  Luke's  list  of  the  apostles 
(Lk  6'",  Ac  1'^),  and  described  in  Jn  14^^  as  'Judas 
(not  Iscariot).'  We  may  assume  from  Ac  1"  that 
in  the  interval  between  the  incident  recorded  in 
Jn  7^'"*  and  the  Ascension,  Jude  and  his  brothers 
had  recognized  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus.  We 
gather  from  1  Co  9^^  tiiat  '  the  brethren  of  the 
Lord'  were  married  to  Christian  wives,  by  whom 
they  were  accompanied  on  missionary  journeys. 
Presumably  these  references  included  Jude.  He 
seems  to  have  taken  no  very  prominent  position  in 
the  Church,  being  overshadowed,  like  Joses  and 
Simon,  by  James.  The  date  of  his  death  is  un- 
certain, but  the  evidence  of  Hegesippus,  quoted  in 
Euseb.  HE  iii.  xx.,  stiggests  tliat  he  died  before 
Domitian  came  to  the  throne.  Eusebius  informs 
us  that  the  grandchildren  of  Jude  were  brought 
before  Domitian,  as  descendants  of  David,  but 
released  when  the  Emperor  discovered  that  they 
were  horny-handed  husbandmen,  who  were  ex- 
pecting a  heavenly  kingdom  at  Christ's  Second 
Coming.  They  survived  till  the  reign  of  Trajan. 
The  last  statement  suggests  tliat  a  considerable 
interval  elapsed  between  the  interview  witii  the 
Emperor  and  their  death  ;  and,  inasmuch  as  the 
reign  of  Domitian  (A.D.  81-96)  was  separated  from 
that  of  Trajan  (A.D.  98-117)  only  by  Nerva's  short 
reign  of  two  years  (A.D.  96-98),  we  should  probably 
place  the  interview  quite  early  in  Domitian's  reign. 
Since  not  Jude  alone  but  i)resumably  the  father  of 
these  grandsons  was  apparently  dead  at  the  time, 
it  is  liardly  likely  that  the  death  of  Jude  occurred 
at  a  later  date  than  the  decade  A.D.  70-80,  when 
he  would  be  well  advanced  in  years.  This  has 
an  important  though  not  decisive  bearing  on  the 
question  whether  the  P'pistle  of  Jude  is  rightly 
assigned  to  him  (see  following  article). 

A.  S.  Peake. 

JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF.— 1.  Relation  to  2  Peter.— 
The  striking  coincidences  between  this  Epistle  and 
the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  covering  the  greater 
part  of  the  shorter  writing,  raise  in  an  acute  form 
the  question  of  relative  priority.  It  is  best,  how- 
ever, to  investigate  eacli  Epistle  independently 
before  approaching  the  problem  of  their  mutual 
relations.  Since,  liowever,  the  present  \vriter,  in 
spite  of  the  attempts  made  by  Spitta,  Zahn,  and 
liigg  to  prove  the  dependence  of  Jude  on  2  Peter, 
is  convinced,  with  the  great  majority  of  critics, 
that  2  Peter  is  based  on  Jude,  the  discussion  of 
this  question  is  not  raised  in  this  article  but 
postponed  to  that  on  Peter,  Epistles  OF. 

2.  Contents.— The  writer  of  the  Epistle  seems  to 
have  been  diverted  from  the  project  of  a  more  ex- 
tensive composition  by  the  urgent  necessity  of 
exhorting  his  readers  '  to  contend  earnestly  for  the 
faith  which  was  once  for  all  delivere<i  unto  the 
saints '  (v.*).  Whether  he  had  made  any  proj^ress 
with  his  work  on  '  our  common  salvation,'  or,  if  so, 
whether  he  subsequently  completed  his  interrupted 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


659 


enterprise,   we  do  not    know.     In  any   case,  we 

Eossess  no  other  work  from  his  hand  than  this 
rief  Epistle.  Tlie  urgency  of  the  crisis  completely 
absorbs  him.  His  letter  is  wholly  occupied  with 
the  false  teachers  and  their  propaganda,  which  i<< 
imperilling  the  soundness  of  doctrine,  thepurity 
of  morals,  and  the  sanctities  of  religion.  He  does 
not  refute  them  ;  he  denounces  and  threatens  them. 
Hot  indignation  at  their  corruption  of  the  true 
doctrine  and  loathing  for  the  vileness  of  their  per- 
verted morals  inspire  his  tierce  invective.  The 
situation  did  not  seem  to  him  appropriate  for 
academic  discussion ;  the  unsophisticated  moral 
instinct  was  enough  to  guide  all  who  possessed  it 
to  a  right  judgment  of  such  abominations.  History 
shows  us  their  predecessors,  and  from  the  fate 
which  overtook  them  the  doom  of  these  reprobates 
of  the  last  time  can  be  plainly  foreseen  (vv.*-^-  "). 
Indeed,  it  had  been  announced  by  Enoch,  who  in 
that  far-ofi'  age  had  propiiesied  directly  of  the 
Divine  judgment  that  wotdd  overtake  them  (v. ^*'-)- 
But,  while  nothing  is  wanting  to  the  vehemence 
of  attack,  we  can  form  only  a  very  vague  im- 
pression as  to  the  tenets  of  the  false  teachers. 
The  >\Titer  assumes  that  his  readers  are  familiar 
with  their  doctrines,  and  his  method  does  not 
require  any  exposition  of  their  errors  such  as  would 
have  been  involved  in  any  attempt  to  refute  them. 
It  is,  accordingly,  not  strange  that  very  divergent 
views  have  been  held  as  to  their  identity.  Our 
earliest  suggestion  on  this  point  comes  from 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iii.  2),  who  taught 
that  Jude  was  describing  prophetically  the  Gnostic 
sect  known  as  the  Caq>ocratian3.  Grotins  {Prcep, 
in  Ep.  Jiul(e)  also  thought  that  this  sect  was  the 
object  of  the  writer's  denunciation ;  but,  since 
he  held  that  Jude  was  attacking  contemporary 
heretics,  he  assigned  the  Epistle  to  Jude  the  last 
Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian. 
This  \-iew  has  found  little,  if  any,  acceptance  ;  but 
the  identification  of  the  false  teachers  with  the 
Carpocratians  has  been  widely  accepted  by  modem 
scholars.  There  are  certainly  striking  points  of 
contact. 

Carpoorates,  who  lived  at  Alexandria  in  the  first 
half  of  the  Snd.  cent,  (perhaps  about  A.D.  130-150), 
taught  that  the  world  was  made  by  angels  who 
had  revolted  from  God.  The  soul  of  Jesus  through 
its  superior  vigour  remembered  wliat  it  had  seen 
when  with  God.  He  was,  however,  an  ordinary 
man,  but  endowed  with  powers  which  enabled  Him 
to  outwit  the  world-angels.  Similarly,  any  soul 
which  could  despise  them  would  triumph  over  them 
and  thus  become  the  equal  of  Jesus.  Great  stress 
was  laid  on  magic  as  a  means  of  salvation.  The 
immorality  of  the  sect  rivalled  that  of  the  Cainites. 
It  was  defended  by  a  curious  doctrine  of  trans- 
migration, according  to  which  it  was  necessary  for 
the  soul  to  go  through  various  human  bodies  till  it 
completed  the  circle  of  human  experience ;  but  if 
all  of  this — including,  of  course,  the  full  range  of 
immoral  conduct — could  be  crowded  into  one  life- 
time, the  necessity  for  such  transmigration  was 
obviated. 

The  language  of  the  Epistle  would  quite  well 
suit  the  Carpocratians,  especially  in  its  reference  to 
the  combination  of  error  in  teacliing  -with  lascivi- 
ousness  in  conduct.  The  railing  at  dignitaries 
with  which  the  ^vriter  charges  the  false  teachers 
(v.^)  wotdd  answer  very  well  to  the  attitude  of 
Carpocrates  towards  the  angels.  But  we  should 
probably  reject  any  identification  so  definite.  The 
characteristics  mentioned  by  Jude  were  the  mono- 
poly of  no  sect.  The  indications  point  to  teaching 
of  a  much  less  developeil  type.  It  is  not  even 
certain  that  it  was  Gnostic  in  character,  though 
the  signs  point  strongly  in  that  direction.  The 
Gnostics  were    wont   to   describe    themselves  as 


'  spiritual,'  and  the  ordinary  members  of  the  Church 
as  *  psychics.'  If  the  false  teachers  were  Gnostics, 
we  understand  why  Jude  should  retort  upon  them 
the  accusation  that  they  were  'sensual'  (lit. 
•psychics'),  'not  having  the  Spirit'  (v.«).  They 
blaspheme  that  of  which  they  are  ignorant.  The 
charge  that  they  deny  the  only  Master  (v.*)  may 
be  an  allusion  to  the  dualism  of  the  Gnostics,  which 
drew  a  distinction  between  the  supreme  God  and 
the  Creator.  They  are  dreamers  (v.*),  i.e.  false 
prophets,  who  speak  swelling  words  (v.").  The 
statement  that  they  have  gone  in  the  M-ay  of  Cain 
(t.**)  reminds  us  very  forcibly  of  the  Ophite  sect 
known  as  the  Cainites  {q.v.).  But,  while  all  these 
indications  point  to  some  rudimentary  form  of 
Gnosticism,  it  cannot  be  said  that  they  definitely 
demand  such  a  reference.  Not  only  are  they  very 
vague  and  general ;  they  could  be  accounted  for 
Avithont  recourse  to  Gnosticism  at  all.  The  problem 
in  some  respects  hangs  together  ■ivith  that  presented 
by  other  descriptions  of  false  teaching  which  we 
find  in  the  NT,  especially  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  the  Letters  to 
the  Seven  Churches,  and  the  Epistles  of  John 
iq.v.).  In  the  judgment  of  the  present  writer,  the 
identification  with  a  Gnostic  tendency  seems  on  the 
whole  to  be  probable,  but  by  no  means  so  secure  as 
to  determine  without  more  ado  the  question  of  date, 

3.  Date  and  authorship. — The  determination  of 
the  date  is  closely  connected  with  the  problem  of 
authorship.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  the  clause  'the  brother  of  James'  (v.')  is 
meant  to  identify  the  author  as  Jude  the  Lord's 
brother.  If  the  conclusions  reached  in  the  pre- 
ceding article  are  correct,  this  Jude  was  probably 
dead  at  the  latest  by  A.D.  80.  The  question 
whether  the  Epistle  can  have  been  written  so  early 
is  not  easy  to  decide.  The  author  not  only  dis- 
tinguishes himself  from  the  apostles,  which  the 
Lord's  brother  wotdd  naturally  have  done,  but  he 
looks  back  on  their  age  as  one  which  has  already 
passed  away  (v."),  and  is  conscious  that  he  is  living 
in  'the  last  time,'  when  their  prophecy  of  the 
coming  of  'mockers'  is  being  fulfilled  (v.").  The 
language  has  a  striking  panulel  in  1  Jn  2^',  and  it 
would  be  easier  to  understand  in  the  closing  decade 
of  the  1st  cent,  than  twenty  years  earlier.  Such 
phrases  as  ' the  faith  which  Mas  once  for  all 
delivered  unto  the  saints '  (v.*),  or  '  your  most  holy 
faith'  (v.*),  are  also  more  easily  intelligible  when 
the  fluid  theology  of  the  primitive  age  was  harden- 
ing into  a  definite  creed.  The  external  evidence 
can  be  reconciled  with  either  view.  It  is  true  that 
the  earliest  attestation  of  the  Epistle  is  late.  If 
the  usual  view  is  correct,  Jude  was  employed  by 
the  author  of  2  Peter ;  but,  since  that  work  itself 
belongs  in  all  probability  to  a  date  well  on  in  the 
2nd  cent.,  its  evidence  is  of  little  value  on  this 
point.  Jude  is  reckoned  as  canonical  in  the 
Muratorian  Canon  ;  it  is  quoted  by  Tertullian  {de 
Cultii  Fern.  i.  3),  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Peed.  iii. 
8.  44,  Strom.  iiL  2),  and  Origen  (in  Matth.  x.  17, 
XV.  27,  xvii.  30) ;  not,  however,  by  Irenieus,  Ensebius 
(HE  iii.  25.  31 ;  cf.  ii.  23.  25)  regards  it  as  one  of 
the  disputed  books,  and  Jerome  (a«  Vir.  illustr.  iv. ) 
tells  us  that  in  his  time  it  was  rejected  by  many. 
But  the  lateness  of  any  quotation  of  it  and  the 
suspicion  entertained  of  it  are  of  little  moment. 
Its  brevity  would  sutficiently  account  for  the  silence 
of  earlier  writers ;  the  fact  that  it  was  not  written 
by  an  apostle,  or  its  reference  (w.^  •**•)  to  Jewish 
Apocalypses  (The  Assumption  of  Moses  and  The 
Book  of  Enoch),  would  explain  its  rejection  by 
those  to  whom  Ensebius  and  Jerome  refer.  These 
objections  simply  rest  on  a  theoretical  assumption 
of  what  a  canonical  work  ought  to  be;  no  his- 
torical evidence  lies  behind  them. 

The  opening  words  of  the  Epistle,  'Jndas,  a 


660    JUDGE,  JUDGING  (ETHICAL) 


JUDGE,  JUDGING  (ETHICAL) 


serviint  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  brother  of  James,' 
constitute  a  weighty  argument  in  favour  of  tiie 
traditional  view  that  it  was  written  by  Jude  the 
Lord's  brother.  The  attempt  t«  treat  this  as  era- 
bodying  a  false  claim  deliltcrately  made  by  the 
autlior  is  open  to  grave  objections.  Apparently 
we  have  to  reckon  with  the  ileliberate  aaoj)tion  of 
a  pseudonym  by  the  author  of  2  Peter.  But  this 
case  is  probably  solitary  in  the  NT ;  and,  unless 
we  are  driven  to  adopt  such  suggestions,  it  is  de- 
sirable to  avoid  them  as  far  as  possible.  A  part  from 
this,  however,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  why  the  author 
should  have  hit  upon  a  personality  so  obscure  as 
Jude.  If  he  did  so  because  the  relationship  to 
James  gave  iiis  name  prestige,  it  might  be  asked 
why  he  should  not  have  attributed  it  to  James 
himself.  The  suggestion  that  it  was  sent  to 
districts  where  Jutle  had  laboured  and  Avas  held 
in  high  regard  is  exposed  to  the  difliculty  tliat  the 
recipients  would  naturally  ask.  How  is  it  that  we 
hear  of  this  letter  for  the  first  time  now  that  Jude 
has  been  some  years  dead  ?  We  are  then  reduced 
to  the  alternatives  of  admitting  the  authenticity, 
or  of  supposing  that  the  identification  with  the 
Lord's  brother  was  no  original  part  of  the  Epistle. 
If  the   preceding  discussion    has  pointed   to   the 

Srobability  that  the  false  teaching  assailed  was 
Inostic  in  character,  and  that  other  phenomena  in 
the  Epistle  make  it  unlikely  that  it  was  earlier 
than  the  closing  decade  of  the  1st  cent.,  the  second 
alternative  must  be  preferred.  In  that  case  the 
most  probable  explanation  of  the  opening  words  is 
that  the  authors  name  was  really  Jude,  and  that 
the  phrase  '  and  brother  of  James '  was  inserted  by 
a  scribe  who  wislied  to  make  it  clear  which  Jude 
was  intended.  The  precise  date  must  of  course 
remain  very  uncertam.  Nothing  compels  us  to 
go  below  the  year  a.d.  100.  Moreover,  the  author 
has  apparently  a  new  situation  to  deal  with.  It 
ought,  however,  to  be  frankly  recognized  that  tiie 
Epistle  is  quite  conceivable  as  the  work  of  Jude 
the  Lord's  brother  in  the  decade  A.D.  70-80. 

4.  Destination. — Nothing  is  known  as  to  the 
destination  of  the  Epistle,  nor  can  anytliing  be 
inferred  with  confidence.  It  is  not  clear  whetlier 
the  Epistle  is  cutholic  or  is  addressed  to  readers  in 
a  definite  locality,  though  the  former  is  perhaps 
the  more  likely  view. 

LiTBRATuaE.— Commentaries  by  Huther  in  Meyer  (1852, 
Enff.  tr.  from  4th  ed.,  1881),  Meyer-Kiihl  (1897),  Meyer-Knopf 


Comtuentary  to  EGT  (1910),  Hollmann  (1907),  Windisch  (1911) ; 
F.  Spitta,  Derzweite  Brief  des  Petrm  undder  Brief  den  Judas, 
1885  ;  the  relevant  sections  in  NT  Introductions,  especially 
those  by  H.  J.  Holtzraann  (3l89i;) ;  A.  Jiilicher  (nnoo,  Enij. 
tr.,  1904);  T.  Zahn  (Ktiff.  tr.,  1909,  ii.);  W.  F.  Adeney  (1899), 
and  J.  Moffatt  (1911) ;  artt.  by  F.  H.  Chase  in  II DB,  SiefiFert 
in  Piti's,  O.  Cone  in  EBi,  R.  A.  Falconer  in  SDB. 

A.  S.  Peake. 
JUDGE,  JUDGING  (Etliical).— No  account  of 
judging  in  the  Apostolic  Church  can  be  complete 
which  is  not  based  on  our  Lord's  prohibition,  'Judge 
not,  that  ye  be  not  judged '  (Mt  7^"-).  This  is  not 
to  be  interpreted  as  a  disparagement  of  the  intel- 
lectual faculty  of  criticism  per  se,  but  as  a  limita- 
tion of  it  in  harmony  with  the  Christian  stand- 
point. In  the  corresponding  passage  in  Lk  6,  the 
repression  of  the  critical  spirit  is  directly  associated 
with  the  character  of  God,  who  makes  no  distinc- 
tions in  His  gifts,  but  is  kind  and  merciful  to  all 
alike.  The  section  in  Matthew  has  rather  a 
relation  to  the  temper  of  the  Pharisee,  which  was 
supercilious  and  narrowly  strict  in  its  judgments 
of  others.  The  Pharisee  '  despised  others ' ;  hence 
his  incapacity  to  understand  human  nature,  his 
judgments  being  rooted  in  contempt.  The  citi/en 
of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  on  the  other  hand,  has 
to  avoid  the  censorious  temper  and  make  the  best 


of  everyone  and  everything  ;  he  lias  to  repress  tlie 
tendency  to  be  uncharitable  ;  otherwise,  when  he 
is  obliged  to  utter  a  moral  verdict,  it  will  be  of 
small  weight.  But  our  Lord  never  countenances 
the  easy-going  tolerance  which  in  effect  abrogates 
the  ri^nt  of  moral  judgment.  He  does  not  absolve 
His  followers  from  discriminating  l>etween  right  and 
wrong — even  in  the  case  of  a  '  brother'  (Mt  IS'""'") — 
and  indeed  urges  upon  them  the  duty  of  '  binding 
and  loosing,'  condemning  and  acquitting,  according 
to  the  recognized  moral  standard  of  the  Kingdom. 

The  teaching  of  St.  James  has  many  echoes  of 
the  ethical  injunctionsof  our  Lord,  and  the  passage 
41  "•  in  his  Epistle  recalls  the  spirit,  if  not  the  actual 
language,  ot  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  We  are 
not  to  indulge  in  the  habit  of  fault-finding  :  '  Who 
art  thou  that  judgest  thy  neighbour?'  We  are 
never  to  judge  from  any  other  motive  than  the 
moral  improvement  of  the  person  judged  :  we  are 
to  remember  our  own  defects,  and  to  utter  our 
verdict  with  a  due  sense  of  responsibility  ;  other- 
wise we  '  speak  against  the  law  and  judge  the  law.' 
The  Apostle  means  by  this  that  there  is  to  bo  a 
proper  standard  of  right  and  wrong,  and  not  a 
subjective  criterion  formed  out  of  our  own  likes 
and  dislikes.  If  we  make  our  own  standard,  we 
set  ourselves  above  the  law-giver  and  the  law. 

In  similar  strain  St.  Paul  writes  (Ro  14''),  '  Who 
art  thou  that  judgest  another  man's  .servant  ?  To 
his  own  master  he  standeth  or  falleth.'  The  words 
are  suggested  by  the  relationsiiip  between  the 
' strong '  and  the  '  weak.'  The  '  strong,' conscious 
of  their  freedom  in  Christ,  may  despise  the  '  weak,' 
who  still  feel  it  their  duty  to  continue  an  ascetic 
habit,  even  though  they  have  accepted  Christ ;  on 
the  other  hand,  the  '  weak,'  condemning  what 
seems  to  them  the  laxity  of  the  '  strong,'  may  be 
led  into  the  habit  of  censorious  judgment  (see 
an  admirable  discourse  by  A.  Souter  in  ExpT 
xxiv.  [1912-13]  5ff.).  The  same  Apostle,  however, 
while  thus  discountenancing  tlie  habit  of  judging 
one  another,  expressly  advocates  the  duty  of  acting 
according  to  a  moral  standard  in  dealing  with 
moral  ofiences.  In  1  Co  5,  e.g.,  he  condemns  the 
Corinthians  for  allowing  a  case  of  immorality  to 
go  unchallenged  and  unjudged.  At  the  same  time 
the  Christian  Church  is  to  limit  its  judgments  to 
those  that  are  within  ;  those  that  are  without  are 
to  be  left  to  the  judgment  of  God  (1  Co  5'^).  It 
would  appear,  then,  that  the  Apostle,  while  not 
absolving  the  Christian  from  the  duty  of  judgment 
in  offences  against  morality,  advocates  tlie  widest 
tolerance  in  minor  matters  of  everyday  life,  e.g.  in 
Ro  14'*"^'* — a  passage  which  closes  with  the  state- 
ment :  '  we  shall  all  stand  before  the  judgement- 
seat  of  God.' 

In  the  same  way  the  apostolic  writers  press  upon 
their  readers  the  duty  of  discrimination  according 
to  certain  standards  of  right  and  wrong.  They 
are  to  '  test  all  things  and  hold  fast  that  which  is 
right'  (1  Th  5'-^,  and  to  'test  the  spirits  whether 
they  be  of  God'  (1  Jn  4\  the  word  SoKifna^tLv  being 
used,  which  more  definitely  suggests  the  approval 
which  results  from  a  test  or  touchstone  than  the 
simpler  and  more  familiar  Kplvnv).  They  are  to 
pronounce  anathema  on  the  proclaimer  of  '  another ' 
gospel  (Gal  P),  and  to  refuse  hospitality  to  a  false 
teacher,  on  the  ground  that  a  welcome  or  salu- 
tation involves  participation  in  his  evil  works 
(2  Jn  i"'-).  Thus  doctrine,  like  life  and  conduct,  is 
to  be  brought  to  the  test  of  a  moral  standard,  and 
what  is  subversive  of  the  person  and  teaching  of 
the  Lord  is  to  be  rejected.  'Happy,'  says  the 
Apostle  Paul  (Ro  14-),  'is  he  that  judgeth  not 
himself  in  that  whicii  he  approvetii '  (ooKifii^ti). 
This  passage  ap])ears  to  combine  the  two  ideas 
whicli  enter  into  the  NT  treatment  of  the  subject : 
the  Christian  must  avoid  censorious  judgment  and 


JUDGE,  JUDGING  (ETHICAL) 


JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION       661 


yet  courageously  exercise  his  judgment  in  the 
reahu  of  ethics  and  doctrine;  he  is  happy  in  the 
strength  of  his  faith,  which  enables  him  so  to  act 
as  to  escape  self-condemnation  or  misgiving.  In 
another  passage  (Ro  14^*)  St.  Paul  plays  on  the 
double  use  of  Kplru,  viz.  as  indicating  a  hasty 
and  tmcharitable  judgment,  and  as  implying  the 
determining  of  a  course  of  conduct  for  oneself. 
'  Let  us  not  judge  one  another  any  more,  bat  judge 
ye  this  rather,  that  no  man  put  a  stumblingblock 
in  his  brothers  way' — the  latter  sense  being 
IKiralleled  by  2  Co  2\  '  I  formed  this  judgment  or 
.determination  for  myself,'  and  1  Co  2-  5^  Tit  3'-. 
A  similar  usage  occurs  in  the  famous  statement  in 
2  Co  5'^,  '  because  we  thus  judge  that  if  one  died  for 
all,'  etc. — the  word  signifying  a  conviction  that 
has  been  formed  out  of  spiritual  experience  (cf. 
also  1  Co  11^,  Avhere  there  is  an  appeal  to  a  judg- 
ment based  on  common  sense). 

For  the  judgments  of  others  on  the  Christian 
there  are  two  passages  worth  our  notice,  viz.  Col 
2^*,  where  the  false  teaching  which  infected  the 
Colossian  Church  is  made  the  subject  of  warning, 
eating  and  drinking  being,  according  to  the 
Apostle,  mere  shadows  of  the  reality,  and  therefore 
not  matters  on  which  a  judgment  should  be  based — 
'let  no  man  take  you  to  task  in  eating  and  in 
drinking ' :  scrupulous  ritual  and  asceticism  are  a 
return  to  an  order  of  life  which  the  gospel  has 
rendered  obsolete.  The  other  passage  is  Ja  2^*, 
'So  speak  ye  and  so  do  as  men  that  are  to  be 
judged  by  a  law  of  liberty '  (cf.  1^).  This  is  St, 
James's  variation  on  St.  Paul's  '  law  of  the  spirit 
of  life  in  Christ  Jesus ' — not  a  system  of  codified 
regulations  enforced  from  without,  but  a  law 
freely  accepted  and  obeyed  as  the  result  of  a  new 
relationship  to  God.  '  It  will,'  says  J.  B.  Mayor 
(The  Epistle  of  St.  Jamcs^,  1910,  p.  94),  'be  a 
deeper-going  judgment  than  that  of  man,  for  it 
will  not  stop  short  at  particular  precepts  or  at  the 
outward  act,  whatever  it  may  be,  but  will  pene- 
trate to  the  temper  and  motive.'  And  it  destroys 
all  morbid  anxiety  and  questioning  '  as  to  the  exact 
performance  of  each  separate  precept '  if  there  has 
been  true  love  to  God  and  man.  '  The  same  love 
which  actuates  the  true  Christian  here  actuates 
the  Judge  both  here  and  hereafter.' 

The  reader  is  referred  to  a  concordance  for  the 
numerous  passages  in  which  God  or  Christ  is 
spoken  of  as  Judge  of  humanity  ;  we  have  here 
limited  our  sur\ey  to  the  non-forensic  side  of  judg- 
ment. There  is  a  passage,  however,  which  calls 
for  comment,  viz,  1  Co  6^  'Do  ye  not  know  that 
the  saints  shall  judge  the  world?'  This  is  to  be 
taken  along  with  a  previous  warning  in  4*,  'Judge 
nothing  before  the  time,  until  the  iXrd  come,'  etc. 
The  meaning  is  that  the  saints  will  be  associated 
with  their  Lord  in  the  act  of  judging  the  world  at 
the  Last  Day,  and  their  judgment  will  be  exercised 
not  only  on  the  world,  but  on  '  angels '  (6*),  mean- 
ing the  hierarchy  of  evil  or  fallen  spirits.  This 
doctrine  of  the  future  is  stated  in  Rev  20*  and  lie- 
came  a  rooted  conviction  of  the  post-Apostolic 
Church,  as  we  see  from  Euseb.  BE  ^^.  42,  where 
the  saints  are  called  neroxoi  t^s  Kpureun  aurm;,  '  as- 
sociates in  His  judgment.'  The  Divine  Judgeship 
is  a  truth  essential  to  human  thought.  Experi- 
ence deepens  the  sense  of  the  ignorance  and 
fallibility  attaching  to  man's  judgments.  The 
epigram  tout  connaitre  c'est  tout  pardonner  is  in 
effect  an  expression  of  human  helplessness ;  and 
the  aspiration  of  David,  'Let  me  fall  now  into  the 
hand  of  the  Lord  .  .  .  and  let  me  not  fall  into  the 
hand  of  man'  (I  Ch  21"),  is  really  the  cry  of 
humanity  for  ever  conscious  of  the  limitations  of 
its  own  judgments. 

See,   further,  artt.   JUDGMENT  and   Trial-AT- 
Law. 


LiTBiUTi-RE.— C.  Gore.  Sermon  on  Uu  Mount,  Loiid<Mi,  1807. 
ch.  ix. ;  J.  B.  Mayor,  The  EpiUte  of  St.  Jametii,  do.  1897,  p. 
221;  J.  R.  Seeley,  Beee  HonuH^^  do.  1S76.  ch.  ii. ;  J. 
Martinean.  Tjfptt  of  Btkieal  Theoty^,  Oxford,  ISSS,  vol.  u. 

<*•  »•  K.  AIartin  Pope. 

JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION.— The  idea  of  judg- 
ment is  involved  in  that  of  government :  a  ruler, 
if  he  is  to  assert  his  authority  and  maintain  order, 
must  call  recalcitrants  to  account.  Since  the  Deity 
has  always  been  thought  of  as  exercising  some  kind 
of  sovereignty,  the  idea  of  judgment  may  be  said 
to  be  co-extensive  with  that  of  religion. 

1.  The  OT  conception. — Long  before  the  days  of 
the  great  prophets,  Israel  worshipped  Jahwe"h  as 
a  God  of  judgment.  Jahweh  avenged  not  only 
insults  against  His  own  honour,  but  also  deeds  of 
violence  and  wrong  (Gn  4'^,  Jg  9**'*).  Justice  was 
administered  in  His  name,  and  as  the  supreme 
Judge  He  saw  that  right  was  done.  It  would, 
however,  be  too  much  to  say  that  His  actions  were 
regarded  as  invariably  regulated  by  a  regard  for 
justice.  He  had  His  favourites  among  individuals, 
and  Israel  was  His  favourite  nation  (1  S  1",  2  S 
12**).  In  the  exercise  of  His  despotic  power.  He 
could  act  in  a  certain  way  simply  because  it  so 
pleased  Him.  For  His  rejection  of  Saul  and  His 
surrender  of  Israel  into  the  hand  of  the  Philistines 
the  older  tradition  knew  no  reason.  Not  till  we 
come  to  the  great  prophets  do  judgment  and  justice 
appear  as  equivalent  terms. 

The  prophetic  conception  of  Divine  judgment 
can  be  summed  up  in  a  few  sentences.  Jahweh  is 
the  World-ruler  and  Judge  :  not  only  Israel  but  all 
nations  of  the  earth  stand  at  His  "bar  (Am  1.  2). 
His  judgments  rest  on  purely  moral  grounds  and 
are  absolutely  just  (Is  28*^  45^).  Even  in  the  case 
of  Israel,  justice  must  take  its  course  (Am  3*). 
Though  individuals  are  occasionally  spoken  of  as 
suffering  for  their  private  sins,  in  the  main  it  is 
not  with  the  individual  but  with  the  nation  that 
Jahweh  reckons.  The  individual  is  merged  in  the 
State  and  shares  its  fate.  The  theatre  of  judg- 
ment is  this  earth :  of  reward  or  punishment 
beyond  death  the  prophets  know  nothing.  Good 
and  bad  alike  descend  to  Sheol  and  share  the  same 
bodyless,  pithless  existence  in  separation  from 
Jahweh  (Is  14*"^®,  Ps  6').  Judgment,  at  least  so 
far  as  Israel  is  concerned,  never  appears,  except 
perhaps  in  Amos,  as  an  end  in  itself  and  the 
ultimate  law  of  Jahweh's  working.  Israel  has  a 
worth  in  Jahweh's  eyes;  He  refuses  to  give  her 
up  ;  and,  when  His  judgments  have  accomplished 
their  disciplining  work,  salvation  will  surely  follow 
(Is  40^  *).  That  the  correspondence  between  desert 
and  lot  in  the  existing  order  is  but  imperfect,  and 
salvation  an  object  of  hope  rather  than  of  experi- 
ence, are  facts  to  which  the  prophets  are  keenly 
alive.  But  their  faith  finds  refuge  in  the  concep- 
tion of  a  great  day  in  the  near  future,  '  the  day  of 
the  Lord,'  in  which  Jahweh  will  interpose  in  a 
decisive  way  in  human  afl'airs,  to  overthrow  His 
enemies  and  inaugurate  a  new  and  happier  era. 
For  Israel  this  day  will  be  one  of  sifting  and 
purging,  for  her  oppressors  a  day  of  terror  and 
anguish  (Is  2"-  ^*,  Jl  2""").  To  this  conception,  as 
we  shall  see,  the  subsequent  development  attached 
itself. 

With  the  Book  of  Daniel  a  new  chapter  opens 
in  the  history  of  Hebrew  eschatology.  '  I  beheld,' 
we  read,  '  till  thrones  were  placed,  and  one  that 
was  ancient  of  days  did  sit.  .  .  .  Thousand  thou- 
sands ministered  unto  him,  and  ten  thousand 
times  ten  thousand  stood  before  him :  the  judg- 
ment was  set  and  the  books  were  opened.  .  .  . 
And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the 
earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life  and 
some  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt '  (Dn  7" 
12*}.     Compared  with  the  outlook  of  the  great 


662       JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION 


JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION 


prophets,  this  conception  of  a  resurrection  of  the 
dead  for  judgment  and  sentence  is  something  alto- 
getlier  new.  Written  in  the  crisis  of  the  Macca- 
biean  struggle  (165  B.C.),  the  IJook  of  Daniel  forms 
tlie  first  01  the  long  series  of  Jewish  Apocalypses. 
For  an  understanding  of  NT  eschatology  tliese 
writings  are  of  such  cardinal  importance  that  it  is 
necessary  to  give  some  account  of  their  leading 
ideas. 

Apocalyptic  had  its  roots  in  the  hope  held  up 
before  Israel  by  the  prophets  of  a  glorious  day  in 
the  future,   'the  day  of^  the  Lord,'  when  her  op- 

Eressors  would  be  overtlirown,  and  she,  purified  by 
er  suflerings,  exalted  to  a  position  of  unparalleled 
splendour  and  power.  Through  her  fidelity  to  God 
and  her  supremacy  among  the  nations  God's  reign 
on  earth  would  be  visibly  realized,  and  Nature 
itself  would  be  made  fairer  and  more  generous  to 
grace  the  new  order.  This  national  hope  proved 
itself  vital  enough  to  survive  the  most  disillusion- 
ing experiences,  but  somewhere  in  the  dark  days 
of  Persian  or  Greek  ascendancy  it  was  subjected 
to  radical  modification,  and  htted  into  a  world- 
view  widely  difl'erent  from  tliat  to  wliich  it  origin- 
ally belonged.  The  new  development  was  char- 
acterized in  the  first  place  by  a  thorough-going 
pessimism.  In  the  eyes  of  apocalyptic  writers  the 
existing  world  or  age  is  incurably  evil,  incapable 
of  being  transformed  by  any  conceivable  process 
of  moral  renewal  into  a  kingdom  of  God.  Human 
beings  are  in  the  mass  hoi)elessly  corrupt,  and 
wicked  men  occupy  the  seats  of  power.  And  this 
is  not  all.  A  portentous  development  of  the  belief 
in  evil  spirits  lends  to  apocalyptic  pessimism  a  still 
darker  hue.  The  world  is  the  haunt  of  throngs  of 
such  spirits,  who,  under  Satan  their  head,  form  a 
demonic  hierarchy.  With  unwearied  activity  they 
prosecute  their  hellish  work,  thwarting  the  will  of 
the  Almighty,  hounding  on  the  heathen  persecutors 
of  His  people,  inciting  men  to  wickedness  and 
smiting  them  Avith  disease.  To  these  sinister 
figures  God,  by  an  inscrutable  decree,  has  sur- 
rendered the  government  of  the  world.  Satan  is 
the  world's  real  master.  But,  despite  this  pessi- 
mism with  regard  to  the  existing  order,  apocalyptic 
writers  have  no  thought  of  surrendering  their  faith 
in  God  or  in  His  promise  to  Israel.  Only,  tlieir 
faith,  finding  nothing  in  the  present  to  which  it 
can  attach  itself,  takes  refuge  in  the  future  and 
becomes  eschatological.  The  present  world  is 
given  up  to  destruction,  and  religious  interest 
transferred  to  the  new  and  glorious  world  which 
God  will  reveal  when  the  old  has  been  swept  away. 
With  passionate  eagerness  tlie  great  catastrophe 
that  shall  open  the  way  for  tlie  Kingdom  is  antici- 
pated, and  the  horizon  scanned  for  signs  of  its 
approach.  Wlien  it  arrives,  its  opening  scene  Mill 
be  one  of  judgment.  To  tiie  bar  of  the  Almighty 
the  whole  world,  Jews  as  well  as  Gentiles,  and— 
what  is  still  more  significant — the  dead  as  well  as 
the  living,  will  be  gatiiered  to  answer  for  the  deeds 
they  have  done.  The  fate  of  each  soul  having  been 
decided,  sentence  will  at  once  be  executed.  For 
the  righteous  there  is  reserved  a  blessed  and  death- 
less life  in  the  i>resence  of  God ;  for  the  wicked, 
everlasting  destruction. 

Before  leaving  Jewish  apocalyptic,  two  points 
must  be  more  j)articularly  noted  as  bearing  on 
questions  that  will  emerge  later.  The  first  relates 
to  the  personality  of  the  Judge.  In  most  writings 
it  is  God  Himself  who  is  represented  as  occupying 
the  throne  (Dn  T'-*-  '^  En.  i.  3-9,  xc.  20,  2  Es  6"  7*=*). 
Sometimes,  however,  the  Messiah  or  Son  of  Man 
appears  as  conducting  the  Judgment  in  (iod's  name 
{En.  li.  1.  2,  Ixix.  27  ;  Apoc.  Bar.  Ixxii.  2).  There 
was  no  fixed  doctrine  on  the  subject ;  the  one 
matter  of  importance  was  that  the  Judgment  was 
a  Divine  Judgment.     The  second  point  relates  to 


the  fate  of  the  wicked.  Here  again  we  find  no 
uniform  view,  except  that  their  fate  involves  final 
and  irretrievable  ruin.  Many  passages  assume 
that  only  the  righteous  will  be  raised  from  the 
dead,  lior  the  sinner  deatli  will  be  the  end  {Ps.- 
Sol.  iii.  13-16,  Apoc.  Bar.  xxx.).  Sometimes,  how- 
ever, Sheol,  into  which  the  dead  descend,  is  itself 
transformed  into  a  place  of  punishment,  so  that  to 
be  left  there  does  not  mean  annihilation  (Eth.  En. 
xcviii.,  xcix.,  civ.).  We  have  also  passages  in 
which  Sheol  is  the  abode  of  the  lost  only  until 
the  Day  of  Judgment,  when  they  are  thrust  into 
Gehenna  or  hell,  to  suH'er  eternal  torment,  witli 
devils  for  tlieir  companions  (En.  liii.  3-5,  liv.  1.  2). 

This  belief  in  a  resurrection  of  tlie  dead  and 
a  universal  judgment  forms  a  landmark  in  the 
liistory  of  Hebrew  religion.  We  .see  in  it  the 
victory  of  individualism.  It  is  no  longer  the 
nation  but  the  individual  that  is  the  religious  unit. 
The  worth  of  the  individual  is  recognized,  and  he 
is  set  solitary  before  God.  How  is  the  rise  of  the 
apocalyptic  conception  of  things  to  be  explained  ? 
Partly,  no  doubt,  by  the  calamitous  .situation  of 
the  Jewish  people  under  Persian  and  Greek  rule. 
A  fulfilment  of  the  proplietic  promise  through  the 
means  that  the  prophets  had  in  view — inner  reform, 
political  revolution,  a  victorious  leader — no  longer 
seemed  within  the  range  of  possibility.  God  had 
ceased  to  speak  to  the  people  through  the  living 
voice  of  prophecy,  and  a  feeling  was  abroad  that 
He  had  forsaken  the  earth.  This  explanation  is, 
however,  only  partial.  The  pessimism  and  dualism 
of  the  ajiocalyptic  world-view,  its  demonology  and 
angelology,  its  conception  of  a  death-struggle  be- 
tween the  kingdom  of  Satan  and  the  kingdom  of 
God,  its  conception  of  a  resurrection  from  the  dead 
and  a  Final  Judgment,  can  be  accounted  for  only  on 
tlie  hypothesis  of  I'ersian  influence. 

2.  In  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  —  So  far  as  its 
outward  form  is  concerned,  Jesus'  conception  of 
judgment  and  punishment  is  wholly  on  apocalyptic 
lines.  The  Judgment  will  come  at  the  end  of  the 
world  ;  it  will  be  a  judgment  of  individuals ;  and 
it  will  be  universal  (Mt  22'=*  le^^).     The  sentence 

f)ronounced  will  be  final :  nowhere  do  we  find  a 
lint  of  future  probation.  With  respect  to  the 
person  of  tlie  Judge,  Jesus  follows  the  tradition 
that  assigns  the  oihce  to  the  Son  of  Man.  '  For 
the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his 
Father  with  his  angels ;  and  then  shall  he  render 
unto  every  man  according  to  his  deeds'  (Mt  16^ 
13^'  25'M.  No  particular  significance  is,  however, 
attached  to  this  fact :  the  emphasis  falls,  not  on 
the  personality  of  the  Judge,  but  on  the  judgment 
He  conducts.  What  is  Jesus'  teaching  with  regard 
to  the  doom  of  the  lost?  Uniformly  He  follows 
the  tradition  that  regards  them  as  consigned  to 
Gehenna  or  hell  (Mt  522- 2»  lO-'S  18»).  And,  as  in 
apocalyptic,  Gehenna  appears  as  a  fiery  furnace  in 
which  the  wicked  sufler  unending  torment  (Mt  5^, 
IJc  16^,  Mt  25^").  Jesus  is  no  theologian,  but 
something  incomparably  greater.  In  the  main  He 
appropriates  the  conceptions  of  His  time,  modify- 
ing or  rejecting  them  only  when  they  conflict  with 
some  vital  religious  or  ethical  interest.  What  is 
original  in  His  teaching  is  not  the  theological  con- 
ceptions but  the  new  content  with  which  they  are 
charged.  If  His  conception  of  the  Judgment  and 
of  punishment  is  in  formal  respects  that  of  Jewish 
anocalyptic,  the  spirit  of  which  it  is  the  vehicle  is 
all  His  own.  New  is  the  moral  earnestness  Avith 
which  He  brings  each  individual  soul  face  to  face 
with  the  righteous  Judge.  '  And  be  not  afraid  of 
tliem  which  kill  tlie  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill 
the  soul :  but  ratlier  fear  him  whidi  is  able  to 
destroy  Ixith  .soul  and  body  in  hell'  (Mt  10^). 
New  also  is  the  moral  purity  with  which  the  con- 
ception of  judgment  is  cariied  out.     Everything 


JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION 


JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION       663 


national  and  sectarian  falls  away.  Of  a  mechanical 
balancing  of  good  and  bad  actions  we  hear  nothing. 
The  one  test  is  character,  and  character  in  its 
deepest  principle — the  love  in  which  lies  the  root  of 
all  morality  and  all  religion.  '  I  was  an  hungred, 
and  ye  gave  me  meat :  1  was  thirs-ty,  and  ye  gave 
me  drink.  .  .  .  Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it  nnto  one  of 
these  my  brethren,  even  these  least,  ye  did  it  unto 
me'  (Mt  25**^-)-  And  what  is  true  of  Jesus'  teach- 
ing about  judgment  is  true  also  of  His  teaching 
about  punishment.  The  element  of  originality  is 
to  be  found  not  in  the  formal  conceptions  but  in 
the  spirit  they  enshrine.  In  the  descriptions  of 
hell  in  Jewish  apocalyptic  embittered  national  and 
ecclesiastical  feeling  is  at  least  as  much  in  evidence 
as  moral  hatred  of  iniquity.  Far  otherwise  is  it 
when  we  turn  to  Jesus.  What  comes  to  expression 
in  His  almost  fierce  words  regarding  the  fate  of  the 
wicked  is  His  buraing  indignation  against  all  high- 
handed sin,  particularly  against  hypocrisy  and 
heartlessness,  His  deep  sense  of  the  infinite  and 
eternal  diflerence  between  right  and  wrong,  His 
immovable  conviction  that  the  first  means  ever- 
lasting life  to  a  man  and  the  second  everlasting 
death.  '  And  if  thy  hand  or  thy  foot  canseth  thee 
to  stumble,  cut  it  off  and  cast  it  from  thee  :  it  is 
good  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  maimed  or  halt, 
rather  than  ha\-ing  two  hands  or  two  feet  to  be 
east  into  the  eternal  fire '  (Mt  IS*). 

3.  In  the  Apocalypse  of  John. — We  begin  our 
study  of  the  apostolic  writings  with  the  Apocalypse 
of  John,  not  because  it  is  the  earliest  of  these  writ- 
ings— in  its  present  shape  it  cannot  be  dated  before 
A.D.  95 — but  because  the  description  it  gives  of  the 
events  of  the  End  is  by  far  the  most  detailed,  and 
because  we  are  probably  justified  in  regarding  it  as, 
in  the  main,  representative  of  primitive  Christian 
views.  In  his  programme  of  eschatological  events 
the  writer  follows  closely  his  Jewish  models.  At 
His  Parousia,  Christ  avlII  smite  the  nations  of  the 
earth  assembled  against  Him  in  battle,  and  pre- 
pare the  way  for  His  millennial  reign  (19^1-20*). 
The  close  of  this  reign  will  see  a  last  uprising  of 
the  powers  of  evil,  ending  in  their  utter  and  final 
overthrow  (20''-^'').  Then  will  come  the  general 
resurrection  and  the  Judgment  (20"'i*).  The 
Judgment,  which  is  universal  in  its  scope,  is  con- 
ducted not  by  Christ  but  by  God  (20").  Men  are 
judged  'according  to  their  works,'  and  out  of 
certain  books,  one  being  singled  out  by  name  as 
'  the  Book  of  Life.'  The  books  contain  a  record  of 
the  deeds,  good  and  bad,  of  each  individual :  the 
Book  of  Life  is  the  list  of  God's  elect  people.  Ex- 
ceedingly brief  is  the  account  of  the  fate  of  the  re- 
ftrobate.  'Death  and  Hades  were  cast  into  the 
ake  of  fire  .  .  .  and  if  any  was  not  found  ^vritten 
in  the  book  of  life,  he  was  cast  into  the  lake  of 
fire.'  Though  the  writer  describes  this  as  'the 
second  death.'  it  is  clear  that  he  is  thinking  not  of 
annihilation  but  of  an  eternity  of  sullering  (14i*-  "). 
It  must  be  admitted  that  the  Book  of  Revelation 
does  not  everj-where  maintain  the  high  level  of  the 
Christian  spirit.  It  comes  to  us  from  a  time  when 
the  Church  was  passing  through  the  same  harrow- 
ing experiences  as  were  the  lot  of  the  Jewish 
people  in  the  daj's  when  apocalyptic  had  its  birth. 
And  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other  persecution 
has  resulted  in  an  exacerbation  of  feeling  and  a 
narrowing  of  sympathy. 

i.  In  St.  Paul.— For'St.  Paul  as  for  the  Christian 
community  in  general  the  Last  Judgment  is  a  great 
and  dread  fact  with  which  believer  and  unljeliever 
have  equally  to  reckon.  He  knows  the  terror  of 
the  Lord  (2  Co  5").  '  We  must  all  be  made  manifest 
before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ ;  that  each  one 
may  receive  the  things  done  in  the  body,  according 
to  what  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad ' 
(2  Co  5»»,  Ro  2*-"  W>,  1  Co  3«  4').     In  this  and  in 


the  majority  of  relevant  passages  it  is  Christ  who 
sits  as  Judge.  But  that  the  point  is  not  regarded 
as  dogmatically  fixed  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the 
Apostle  can  also  speak  of  God  as  the  Judge  (Ko 
2^  "  14'*).  What  18  his  teaching  with  respect  to 
the  fate  of  the  w  icked  ?  The  Book  of  Revelation 
^ves  us  two  pictures — one  of  the  redeemed  in 
Paradise,  the  other  of  devils  and  condemned  souls 
in  the  lake  of  fire.  Of  the  second  picture  there  is 
not  a  single  trace  in  the  Pauline  Epistles.  The 
wicked  simply  disappear  from  the  scene,  the  nature 
and  term  of  their  punishment  being  left  shrouded 
in  obscurity.  By  bringing  together  a  number  of 
scattered  indications  we  may,  however,  arrive  at  a 
fairly  certain  notion  of  what  the  Apostle  thinks 
regarding  their  fate.  That  he  contemplates  a 
universal  restoration  is  an  idea  that  may  at  once 
be  put  aside.  Support  has,  indeed,  been  sought 
for  it  in  certain  statements  of  a  general  character : 
'As  in  Adam  all  die,  so  also  in  Christ  shall  all 
be  made  alive,'  'God  hath  shut  up  all  nnto  dis- 
obedience that  he  might  have  mercy  upon  all' 
(I  Co  15%  Ro  1132,  Col  1",  Eph  1'").  But  such 
statements  cannot  be  pressed  in  their  letter  against 
the  multitude  of  passages  that  assert  in  unambigu- 
ous terms  the  final  ruin  of  the  ungodly  (Ro  2*-  i*, 
Ph  3^8,  2  Th  1*).  They  are  but  examples  of  the 
Apostle's  sweeping  and  antithetical  way  of  putting 
things.  Quite  decisive  against  the  idea  of  restora- 
tion is  the  fact  that  nowhere  do  we  find  a  single 
syllable  that  suggests  future  probation. 

One  point  only  is  open  for  argument,  whether 
the  Apostle  has  in  his  mind  anniliilation  or  an 
eternity  of  suiiering.  With  regard  to  this,  the 
words  used  in  describing  the  fate  of  the  wicked  are 
not  in  themselves  decisive.  Of  these  words  the 
two  most  important,  both  from  the  frequency  of 
their  occurrence  and  from  their  intrinsic  signifi- 
cance, are  'death'  {Odyarcn)  and  'destruction' 
(dxtiXeta).  Death  is  for  St.  Paul  sin's  specific 
penalty,  its  wages  (Ro  5^*  6"-  **  8*).  What  does 
the  term  connote?  Not  necessarily  annihilation, 
since,  according  to  current  ideas,  the  dead  descended 
into  Hades  to  lead  there  a  wretched  phantasmal 
existence.  We  can  take  from  it  nothing  more 
than  this — the  loss  of  all  that  gives  to  life  its 
value,  the  loss  of  all  that  is  signified  by  salvation. 
Not  materially  ditterent  is  the  connotation  of  the 
term  'destruction.'  The  wicked  are  brought  to 
utter  ruin,  swept  from  the  place  of  the  living  and 
the  presence  of  God.  But,  if  a  study  of  terms 
leaves  the  question  of  annihilation  or  eternal 
suffering  an  open  one,  the  general  tenor  of  the 
Apostle's  thought  points  conclusively  to  the  former 
alternative.  Weight  must  be  attached  to  the  fact 
of  an  absence  of  any  reference  to  a  place  of  tor- 
ment. The  tribulation  and  anguish  of  Ro  2*  need 
refer  to  nothing  beyond  the  experience  of  destnic- 
tion.  On  two  things  only  does  St.  Paul  lay  stress 
— that  the  wicked  have  no  inheritance  in  the 
Kingdom  of  God,  and  that  they  are  cleared  off' 
the  face  of  the  world.  Still  more  decisive  is  this 
other  fact — that  the  universe  he  contemplates  as 
the  goal  of  redemption  is  one  reconciled  to  God  in 
aU  its  parts.  If  the  demonic  powers  are  not  ulti- 
mately reconcile*!,  as  in  one  passage  he  seems  to 
indicate  (Col  1'"),  they  are  abolished  (1  Co  15"). 
Grod  becomes  all  in  all.  St.  Paul  leaves  us  with 
the  vision  of  a  world  that  is  without  a  devil  and 
without  a  hell,  without  a  shadow  on  its  brightness 
or  a  discord  in  its  harmony. 

The  Apostle's  allusions  to  the  Judgment  are 
neither  few  nor  ambiguous,  yet  we  have  to  take 
account  of  the  perplexing  fact  that,  in  those  pass- 
ages where  he  gives  a  detailed  programme  of  the 
End,  not  only  is  all  reference  to  the  great  event 
omitted,  but  no  place  seems  to  be  left  for  it.  In 
1  Th  4**""  we  read  of  a  resurrection  of  believers 


664       JUDGMENT,  DAMNATION 


JUDGMENT-SIi:AT 


wlio  have  died  and  of  a  gathering  of  these  and  of 
living  believers  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air  and  be 
for  ever  with  Him,  but  there  is  no  mention  of  a 
resurrection  of  the  wicked  and  a  Final  Jud^jnient. 
These  events  seem  to  be  excluded.  So  is  it  also 
in  1  Co  15^"^.  Though  the  picture  here  is  more 
detailed,  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked  and  the 
Judgment  find  no  place  in  it.  And  in  2  Co  G'^" 
and  Ph  1-'  the  Apostle  speaks  as  if  death  at  once 
ushered  tlie  believer  into  the  presence  of  Ciirist. 
To  dei)art  is  to  be  with  Christ.  Here  not  only  the 
Judgment,  but  the  whole  drama  of  the  End,  in- 
cluding the  Parousia,  falls  away.  How  are  we  to 
account  for  this  perplexing  fact?  That  St.  Paul 
ever  consciously  broke  with  the  apocalyptic  tradi- 
tion in  any  of  its  main  features  is  incredible.  In 
Philippians,  one  of  the  later  Epistles,  he  still  bids 
his  readers  expect  the  Parousia  (4*).  More  can  be 
said  for  the  hypothesis  that  his  ardent  longing 
for  union  with  Christ  leads  him  to  overleap  inter- 
vening events  and  liasten  to  the  goal.  This,  how- 
ever, is  not  tlie  Avhole  exi)lanation.  The  truth  is 
that  there  are  elements  in  the  Apostle's  thought 
which,  though  he  is  hardly  conscious  of  tlie  fact, 
are  carrying  liim  away  from  the  apocalyptic  scheme. 
In  Judaism  the  Judgment  has  its  main  significance 
as  the  instrument  for  eHecting  a  separation  be- 
tween the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  But  for  St. 
Paul  this  separation  has  already  been  virtually 
effected.  By  tlie  fact  of  their  unbelief  the  wicked 
are  already  condemned  ;  by  the  fact  of  their  faith 
the  righteous  are  already  justilied.  It  is  true  that 
the  Apostle  does  not  think  of  the  believer's  present 
state  of  salvation  as  absolute.  But  against  this 
we  have  to  set  the  emphasis  which  he  places  on 
the  element  of  assunance.  '  Who  is  he  that  shall 
condemn  ?  It  is  Christ  Jesus  that  died  ! '  Had  the 
Judgment  been  to  St.  Paul  all  that  it  was  to  a 
pious  Jew,  he  could  hardly,  in  his  account  of  the 
End  and  in  his  contemplation  of  death,  have  left 
it  unnoticed.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel,  to  Avhich  we 
now  turn,  this  drift  from  apocalyptic  is  much  more 
pronounced. 

5.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel.— No  more  than  St. 
Paul  does  the  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  con- 
template a  formal  breacii  with  the  traditional 
apocalyptic  ideas.  'The  hour  cometh,'  Christ  is 
represented  as  saying,  '  in  which  all  that  are  in 
the  tombs  shall  hear  his  (the  Son  of  man's)  voice, 
and  shall  come  forth ;  they  that  have  done  good 
unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have 
done  ill  unto  the  resurrection  of  judgment'  (5-^-  -"  ; 
cf.  12«,  1  Jn  4'").  But,  if  the  Evangelist  yields 
this  reco^ition  to  traditional  views,  his  own 
peculiar  thought  moves  on  other  lines.  The  judg- 
ment on  Avhich  the  stress  falls  is  that  which  Christ 
accomplished  in  the  course  of  His  earthly  ministry 
and  is  always  accomplishing.  While  He  lived  on 
earth,  He  was  already  invested  with  the  sovereign 
power  to  judge.  '  For  judgment  I  am  come  into 
the  world,  that  they  which  see  not  might  see,  and 
that  they  which  see  might  be  made  blind  '  (9^*  5^ 
gis.  16  1231).  jf  passages  appear  in  which  He  is 
made  to  disclaim  the  office  of  Judge — '  I  came  not 
to  judge  the  world  but  to  save  the  world' — they 
are  added  in  order,  by  seeming  contradiction,  to 
drive  thought  deeper  (12^''  5"  3'^).  His  real  pur- 
pose is,  indeed,  to  save,  but  none  the  less  His  ap- 
pearance in  the  world  has  the  inevitable  result 
that  a  separation  is  efiected  between  the  children 
of  light  and  the  children  of  darkness.  The  former 
are  attracted  to  Christ,  to  find  in  Him  their  salva- 
tion ;  the  latter  are  renelled  and  driven  into  hos- 
tility. In  the  attituae  which  a  man  takes  up 
towards  Christ  he  is  already  judged.  '  This  is  the 
condemnation  that  light  is  come  into  the  world, 
but  men  loved  the  darkness  rather  tiian  the  light' 
(3'").     In  the  matter  of  doom  we  find  a  similar 


siiifLing  of  tlie  centre  of  gravity  from  the  future  to 
the  present.  Sin's  real  punishment  is  not  physical 
death  or  even  suHering,  but  exclusion  from  the 
higher  life  that  comes  into  being  through  the  birth 
from  above.  '  He  that  heareth  my  word  .  .  .  hath 
eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgement,  but  hath 
pa.ssed  out  of  death  into  1  ife '  (5-*).  The  popular  notion 
of  hell  disappears  as  completely  as  in  St.  Paul. 

But  notwithstanding  this  spiritualizing  train  of 
thought,  the  traditional  ai)ocalyptic  notions — the 
Parousia,  a  resurrection  of  the  just  and  unjust, 
final  judgment  by  Christ  and  eternal  punishment 
for  the  lost — succeeded  in  maintaining  themselves 
in  the  Church's  faith.  Not  till  the  introduction  of 
the  idea  of  purgatory  do  we  meet  with  any  import- 
ant modilication  of  this  scheme.  And  it  was  not 
till  the  beginning  of  the  3rd  cent.,  with  Origen, 
Cyprian,  and  the  Gregorys,  that  the  idea  of 
jmrgatory  began  to  emerge. 

6.  Only  one  other  point,  and  that  of  minor  im- 
portance, remains  to  be  noted.  Not  a  few  early 
Christian  writers  speak  of  a  descent  of  Christ  into 
Hades  and  a  preaching  to  tlie  dead.  In  1  P  3""'" 
it  is  the  disobedient  of  the  days  of  Noah  to  whom 
Christ  brings  the  message  of  salvation  ;  in  Irenajus 
(IV.  xxvii.  2)  it  is  the  Patriarchs ;  in  Marcion  (Iren. 
I.  xxvii.  3)  it  is  Cain,  the  Sodomites,  Egyptians, 
and  other  heathen.  It  is  imjirobable  tliat  tiiis  con- 
ception was  a  creation  of  the  Church  ;  rather  have 
Ave  to  think  of  the  adoption  and  Christianizing  of 
a  current  pagan  myth  of  a  saviour-god  descending 
into  the  under  world  to  wrest  the  sceptre  from  its 
powers.  The  mythological  details  are  stripped  ott, 
and  Christ's  mission  becomes  one  of  preaching  to 
those  from  whom  in  their  lifetime  the  gospel  had 
been  withheld.  Also  from  the  ranks  of  the  dead 
Christ  will  win  His  trophies.  Judged  according  to 
men  in  the  flesh,  they  will  live  according  to  God  in 
tlie  Spirit  (1  P  4*)  (see  W.  Bousset,  Ki/rios  Christos, 
1913,  p.  32  ff.).  See,  further,  art.  De.scent  INTO 
Hades. 

Literature. — R.  H.  Charles,  Efichatnlortji :  Hebrew,  Jewish, 
and  Christian,  1S99 ;  P.  Volz, ./(('/.  Egchalolorjie  von  Daniel  bis 
Akiba,  190:i ;  A.  Harnack,  History  of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.,  i.  [1894] 
and  ii.  [1S96].  W.  MORGAN. 

JUDGMENT-HALL.— In  ancient  times  justice 
was  dispensed  in  the  open,  usually  in  the  market- 
place, near  the  city  gate.  With  the  development 
of  civic  life,  however,  special  courts  of  justice 
began  to  be  built.  Thus  Solomon  had  his  '  throne- 
room  '  or  portico  erected  within  the  complex  of  his 
palace  buildings  (1  K  7'),  where  justice  continued 
to  be  administered  no  doubt  till  the  latest  period 
of  the  Monarchy.  The  Sanhedrin  also  convened 
for  judgment  in  the  '  Hall  of  Hewn  Stone'  on  the 
south  side  of  the  great  court  of  the  Temple.  In 
Rome,  too,  the  Imperial  Age  saw  the  law-courts 
transferred  to  basilica;,  or  open  colonnades  near 
the  Forum,  and  finally  to  closed  halls,  where  cases 
were  heard  in  secret  {in  sccretario).  The  adminis- 
tration of  justice  in  basilica;  has  been  traced  to 
Pompeii  and  other  centres  of  Boman  life,  but  was 
apparently  not  the  custom  in  Palestine,  the  word 
translated  'judgment  hall'  in  the  AV  (Jn  is^-*^ 
19',  Ac  23^)  being  really  vpanupiov  or  palace. 

A.  R.  Gordon. 

JUDGMENT-SEAT.— The  judge  invariably  sat 
on  a  special  'seat'  or  throne.  Thus  Jerusalem 
and  the  smaller  cities  alike  had  their  '  thrones  for 
judgement'  (Jg  4^,  1  K  V,  Ps  122\  etc.).  In  Rome 
magistrate  and  jury  were  seated  together  on  the 
raised  tribunal,  or  '  Ijench,'  the  magistrate  on  his 
sella  curnlis,  or  '  chariot  seat,'  specially  associated 
with  the  Roman  impcriitm.  The  cusrom  extended 
.also  to  the  Provinces.  In  the  NT  Kpirripia  ('  tri- 
bunals ')  is  used  of  law-courts  generally  (in  1  Co  6'--  ■• 
and   Ja  2*),  while   PvM-O't   lit-  '  step,     '  seat '  (for 


JULIA 


JUSTICE 


665 


parties  in  a  law-suit),  is  applied  to  the  'judg- 
ment-seat '  not  only  of  the  Emj>eror  (Ac  25'**),  but 
also  of  the  governors  Pilate  (Mt  27»»,  Jn  19'*), 
Gallio  (Ac  18'-- 1")  and  Festus  (25«- "),  and  even 
metaphorically  of  God  (Ro  W>)  and  Christ  (2  Co 
S*").     See,  further,  Tkial-at-Law. 

A.  R.  Gordon. 

JULIA  ('loi'Xto,  Ro  16",  a  Latin  name,  the  femi- 
nine form  of  Julius  [the  name  of  a  famous  Roman 
gens].  Both  of  these  were  extremely  common 
names.  The  name  Julia  is  very  frequently  found 
as  a  name  of  female  slaves  belonging  to  the  Im- 
perial household). — A  woman  saluted  by  St.  Paul 
and  coupled  with  Philologus.  They  maj'  liave 
been  brother  and  sister,  or  more  probably  husband 
and  wife.  Other  couples  saluted  in  Ro  16  are 
Aquila  and  Prisca  (v.^,  the  order  being,  however, 
'Prisca  and  Aquila'),  perhaps  Andronicus  and 
Junia  (v." ;  see  JuxiAS),  and  Kerens  and  his  sister 
(v.").  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  names  in 
this  verse  are  those  of  persons  forming  a  Christian 
family  with  a  household  church  (koi  tows  ffup  avroh 
rdmrat  ayiovs).  If  this  be  so,  Philologus  and  Julia 
Avere  perhaps  the  parents  of  Nereus  and  his  sister 
(Nerias)  and  Olympas,  and  the  leaders  of  the  little 
community  which  gathered  for  worship  at  their 
home  (cf.  v.^,  where  a  married  couple  are  saluted  as 
'  fellow-labourers '  with  the  Apostle,  and  the  salu- 
tation includes  'the  church  which  assembles  at 
their  house').  The  locality  to  which  we  assign 
this  circle  of  Christians  will  depend  upon  our  view 
of  the  destination  of  Ro  16^^.  Nothing  further  is 
known  of  any  of  these  persons. 

T.  B.  All  WORTHY. 

JULIUS  (lovXtos). — After  the  decision  of  Festus 
to  send  St.  Paul  to  Rome,  he  was  entrusted  to  the 
care  of  a  '  centurion  named  Julius  of  the  Augustan 
cohort '  (Ac  27^"^).  The  Apostle  was  treated  with 
kindness  and  consideration  by  the  centurion,  who, 
although  he  disregarded  St.  Paul's  advice  as  to 
the  place  of  wintering  (vv.^'^),  deferred  to  his 
recommendation  regarding  cutting  away  the  boat 
(v."),  and,  in  order  to  save  him,  refused  to  allow 
the  soldiers  to  kill  the  prisoners  (v.-'^).  On  arriv- 
ing in  Rome  Julius  handed  over  his  prisoner  to 
the  '  captain  of  the  guard '  (28'®).  !Much  discussion 
has  gathered  round  the  phrase  'Augustan  cohort' 
to  which  Julius  belonged.  Ramsay  regards  it  as 
probable  that  .Julius  belonged  to  the  corps  of  official 
couriers,  employed  as  emissaries  to  various  parts 
of  the  Empire — the  peregritii ;  and  the  '  captain 
of  the  guard'  is  supposed  to  have  been  their 
commanding  officer  (see  artt.  Baxd,  Augustan 
Band). 

As  Julius  was  the  family  name  of  the  members 
of  the  Roman  Imperial  house,  it  was  assumed  by 
many  of  tlie  vassal  kings  from  the  days  of  Julius 
Caesar  onwards.  It  was  borne  by  all  the  Jewisli 
princes  from  Antipater,  the  father  of  Herod  the 
Great.  Josephus  mentions  a  Julius  Archelaeus, 
son-in-law  of  Agrippa  I.  (Ant.  XIX.  is.  1;  cf. 
Schiirer,  i.  561,  also  index,  p.  69). 

LrreR.\TrRB.--R.  J.  Knowling:,  EGT,  '  Acts,'  1900,  p.  516  ; 
W.  M.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  1S95,  p.  315 ;  E. 
Schiirer,  GJ  V*  i.  [1901]  460-462.  W.  J-,  BOYD. 

JUNIAS,  JUNIA  (Ro  16^).— A  person  saluted  by 
St.  Paul  and  coupled  Avith  Andronicus,  As  the 
name  occurs  in  the  accusative  (lowlav),  it  may 
be  Junias,  a  masculine  name  contracted  from 
Junianus,  or  Junia,  a  common  feminine  name ;  in 
either  case  a  Latin  name.  If  the  name  is  that  of 
a  woman,  she  was  the  sister,  or  more  likely  the 
wife,  of  Andronicus.  Other  couples  saluted  in  Ro 
16  are  Aquila  and  Prisca  (v.',  the  order,  however, 
being  '  Prisca  and  Aquila'),  Philologus  and  Julia, 
Nereus  and  his  sister  (v.'*).  Andronicus  and 
Junia(s)  are  described  as '  kinsmen '  of  the  Apostle, 


as  his  '  fellow-prisoners,'  as  *  of  note  among  the 
apostles,'  and  as  having  become  Christians  before 
St.  Paul  (see  Axdroxicus).  It  is  surely  not  at 
all  impossible  that  St.  Paul  should  include  a 
woman  among  the  apostles  in  the  wider  sense  of 
accredited  missionaries  or  messengers,  a  position 
to  which  their  seniority  in  the  faith  may  have 
called  this  pair.  So  Ciirysostom  understood  the 
words  (Horn,  in  S.  Pattli  Ep.  ad  Rom.). 

T   T$   At  lw^orthy 

JUPITER  (Ac  14«»  [RVni  'Zeus']  19»  [AV 
and  RV  '  the  image  which  fell  down  from  Jupiter ' ; 
RVm  '  from  heaven ']). — The  Oriental  setting  of 
the  events  which  took  place  at  Lystra  is  strongly 
evident  in  the  first  of  these  passages.  The  miracle 
of  healing  at  once  causes  the  barbarians  to  suppose 
that  the  gods  had  come  to  pay  them  a  \Tsit,  and 
the  impassive  Barnabas  is  regarded  as  the  chief. 
'  True  to  the  oriental  character,  the  Lycaonians 
regarded  the  active  and  energetic  preacher  as  the 
inferior,  and  the  more  silent  and  statuesque  figure 
as  the  leader  and  principal '  (W.  M.  Ramsay,  The 
Church  in  the  Boman  Empire,  1893,  p.  57  n.).  It 
was  not  that  such  visits  were  supposed  to  be 
common,  but  a  well-known  legend  (Ovid,  Metam. 
viii.  626  If.  ;  cf.  Fasti,  v.  495  ff.)  told  of  such  a  visit, 
when  the  aged  couple  Philemon  and  Baucis  had 
alone  received  the  august  visitors  and  had  been 
suitably  rewarded ;  this  had  been  localized  in 
several  districts.  The  people  cried  out  in  the 
speech  of  Lycaonia,  and  the  original  name  of  the 
local  god  given  by  them  to  Barnabas  has  been 
here  replaced  by  the  Greek  equivalent,  Zeus.  In 
v.^  Codex  Bezie  has  a  slightly  different  phrase 
which  reads,  '  the  temple  of  Zeus-before-the-city.' 
The  participle  in  the  phrase  tov  tvros  Aim  Upor^Xews 
is  used  in  a  way  characteristic  of  Acts,  viz. 
to  introduce  some  title  or  particular  phrase,  and 
we  must  consider  that  D  is  correct  here.  Zockler 
(ad  loc.)  and  Ramsay  (op.  cit.  p.  51  f.)  compare  an 
inscription  at  Claudiopolis  which  has  Zeus  Pro- 
astios  (i.e.  '  Jupiter-before-the-town ').  The  title 
here,  then,  is  Propoleos,  which  is  actually  found 
in  an  inscription  at  Smyrna.  The  Temple  would 
be  outside  the  city  proper,  and  it  is  not  quite 
clear  whether  'the  gates'  where  the  sacrifice  was 
prepared  were  those  of  the  Temple,  or  of  the  city, 
or  of  the  dwelling-house  of  the  apostles.  It  is 
most  probable  that  the  Temple  is  referred  to,  the 
gates  being  chosen  as  a  special  place  for  the  offer- 
ing of  a  special  sacrifice  (Ramsay). 

Baur,  Zeller,  Overbeck,  and  Wendt  regard  the 
whole  incident  as  unhistorical,  since  such  people 
would  rather  have  considered  that  the  miracle- 
workers  were  magicians  or  demons.  But  the  local 
legends  give  ample  support  to  the  text. 

In  19*^  the  translation  should  follow  RVm  :  '  the 
image  which  fell  down  from  the  clear  sky.' 

LITKBAT0RB.— See  R.  J.  Knowling:,  EGT,  1900,  ad  loc;  A. 
C.  McGi£Eert,  AposMie  Age,  1S97,  p.  189  f. 

F.  W,  WOESLEY. 

JUSTICE. — In  his  analysis  of  justice  (5t<ccuo<nJn;), 
Aristotle  (Xicomachean  Ethics,  bk.  v.)  distin- 
guishes the  justice  which  is  co-extensive  with 
virtue — is,  in  fact,  'perfect  virtue' — from  the 
special  justice  which  consists  in  fairness  of  dealing 
with  our  neighbours.  The  NT  writers  use  the 
word  StKaioffC'VT)  almost  exclusively  in  the  former 
sense,  connecting  it  with  the  righteousness  of  God 
(see  Righteousness).  The  les.ser  righteousness  is, 
however,  included  under  the  greater ;  and  though 
the  emphasis  is  laid  on  mercy  or  love  as  '  the  ful- 
filling of  the  law '  (Ro  13'"),  justice  is  also  recog- 
nized as  a  duty  towards  Him  who  is  '  just '  as  well 
as  the  merciful  '  justifier '  of  them  that  believe  (see 
Love).  Thus  the  Apostle  enumerates  '  things  just ' 
(offtt  B'tKaia)  in  his  catalogue  of  Clu-istian  virtues 
(Ph  4*).     He  urges  hb  readers  likewise  to  set  their 


666 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


thoughts  (in  tliat  which  is '  honoiimble '  or  '  seemly ' 
(/taXd),  not  only  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  but  also 
in  tlie  sigiit  of  men  (Ro  12'^  2  Co  8"  13').  This 
Cliristian  justice  covers  the  whole  round  of  life. 
AH  men  are  entitled  to  their  full  dues,  alike  of 
tribute,  custom,  fear,  honour,  service  and  wage. 
The  Christian  master  respects  the  honournotmerely 
of  his  wife  and  children,  but  even  of  his  slaves  (Epli 
S'-""-,  Col  S"'"'-).  The  servant  also  deals  justly  with 
his  master,  not  stealing  or  purloining,  as  heathen 
slaves  were  wont  to  do,  but  '  with  good  will  doing 
service,  as  unto  the  Lord,  and  not  unto  men '  (Eph 
e'"^-,  Col  3--'"-,  Tit  2"'«^-,  1  P  2'8ff-).  For  such  service 
the  labourer  is  worthy  of  an  honest  wage  (1  Ti  5'*, 
2  Ti  2*").  The  .same  principle  applies  to  the  preacher 
of  the  gospel,  even  thougn  he  refu.se  to  accept  his 
privileges  ( 1  (^o  Q""^- ).  In  their  relations  as  citizens, 
Christian  men  are  actuated  by  the  most  sensitive 
regard  for  honour.  Though  he  stands  for  Christian 
freedom,  the  Apostle  feels  morally  obliged  to  send 
back  Philemon  s  slave,  however  lielpful  he  found 
him  to  be ;  and  he  further  takes  on  his  own 
shoulders  full  liability  for  Onesimus'  misdeeds 
(Philein '*"''•).  In  order  that  public  justice  may 
be  upheld,  too,  the  Christian  is  urged  to  pray  for 
kings  and  all  in  high  places  of  authority  (1  Ti  2"-), 
and  to  be  subject  to  all  tiieir  ordinances  for  the 
Lord's  sake  (Tit  3"-,  1  P  2'3»f-).  But  he  himself 
is  entitled  to  justice  before  the  law.  No  man 
suHered  more  for  his  Master's  sake  than  St.  Paul ; 
and  no  one  wrote  more  serious  words  on  the  sin 
of  litigiousness  (1  Co  6'^-)'  Yet,  in  defence  of  his 
just  rights  as  a  citizen,  he  not  only  asserted  liis 
lioman  freedom  (Ac  16^'  22'-'-^  25'"),  but  defended 
himself  before  the  courts  to  the  very  last  (Ac 
24iotf.  25io>-,  2  Ti  4'«f-).  For  to  him  the  courts  were 
there  to  secure  justice  for  all.    See  Trial- at-Law. 

A.  R.  Gordon. 
JUSTIFICATION.— 1.  Considerations  on  the  his- 
tory of  the  doctrine.— Justification  by  faith  formu- 
lates the  distinctive  principle  of  Protestantism.  It 
has  been  a  war-cry  and  word  of  passion,  and  embodies 
a  spiritual  and  theological  conflict.  It  claimed  to 
be  an  advance  on  the  Catholic  idea,  as  more  true 
to  apostolic  experience  and  more  adequate  to  the 
sinner's  need.  It  is  advisable  at  the  outset  to 
investigate  this  claim  as  preparatory  to  a  dispas- 
sionate analysis  of  the  apostolic  doctrine.  Justifica- 
tion is  a  complex  conception.  Neitlier  in  Luther 
nor  in  the  Council  of  Trent  are  ambiguities  and 
inconsistencies  Avanting.  The  combatants  on  both 
sides  in  subsequent  controversy  have  in  consequence 
easily  fallen  into  serious  misunderstandings.  The 
vital  current  re-animating  modern  religious  theory 
is  disclosing  tiie  fact,*  and  producing  a  better- 
proi)ortioned!perspective.  Kid  of  the  war-dust,  we 
see  clearly  the  salient  features  of  the  main  respec- 
tive ])Ositions  and  their  conspicuous  divergences. 
What  are  these?  It  is  a  rich,  fresh  experience 
Luther  describes  in  his  finest  statement  of  his 
faith.  The  Liberty  of  the  Christian  Man.  It  finds 
no  commensurate  exposition  in  the  liUtheran  or 
Reformed  Confessions.  Luther  himself  was  no 
theologian  ;  and  his  varying  expressions  are  diffi- 
cult to  harmonize.  But  the  tenclency  of  his  teach- 
ing is  plain. t  The  character  of  Tridentine  teach- 
ing is  as  plain.  Luther's  is  aus  eincm  Git$se(' of 
one  mould '),  born  of  an  intense  travail  of  soul.  The 
Catholic,  polemical  in  import  and  comprehensive 
of  aspect,  has  in  view  efficient  discipline  of  souls. 
Grace,  according  to  Luther,  is  known  in  personal 
relationsiiip  with  Christ  {Com.  on  Gal  2*) ;  it  is  a 
sense  of  God's  favour  ;  it  saves  from  God's  wrath  ; 

*  Cf.  particularly  inter  rnxUtos  alim  Ritschl  in  his  great  work, 
Die  ehristl.  Lehre  von  der  Reeht/ertigimg  und  Versuhnung, 
Bonn,  1870-74,  i.  and  iii. 

f  For  Luther's  works  consult  the  Erlanjren  ed.,  1820  ff.  ;  H. 
Wace  and  C.  A-  Buchheim,  LiUher's  Primary  Workt,  London. 
1800. 


it  saves  at  once  and  wholly  by  God's  free  mercy,  is 
a  complete  and  perfect  thing,  conditioned  upon 
faith,  bringing  with  it  assurance  of  salvation  (see 
Against  Latomus).  It  is,  in  his  own  words,  '  the 
favour  of  God  not  a  quality  of  soul'  (ib.  489), 
identical  with  forgiveness,  release  from  His  wrath, 
enjoyment  of  His  favour,  a  present  status  rather 
than  a  new  character.  To  receive  such  "race  is  to 
be  justified.  The  Council  of  Trent*  defines  it« 
doctrine  in  reference  to  three  questions :  the 
manner  of  gaining  justification,  of  maintaining  it, 
and  of  regaining  it  when  lost  through  mortal  sin. 
The  answers  are  that  it  is  gained  in  baptism, 
through  which  are  received  not  only  remission  of 
sins  but  sanctification  and  renewal  of  the  inner 
man  (sess.  vi.  ch.  7) ;  it  is  maintained  by  perform- 
ance of  good  works,  keeping  the  commandments  of 
God  and  the  Church,  resulting  in  an  increase  of 
justification  (ch.  10) ;  it  is  regained  by  penance 
and  penitential  'satisfactions'  (ch.  14).  'That 
which  truly  justifies  the  heart  is  grace,  which 
is  daily  created  and  poured  into  our  hearts ' 
(J.  Fischer's  Refutation  of  Luther,  1523).  Grace  on 
this  view  is  a  Divine  substance,t  ex  ojierc  operato 
imparted,  increased  by  man's  aid,  dependent  on 
faith  and  good  works  as  co-ordinate  in  worth,  all 
part  and  parcel  of  the  same  idea,  '  the  infusion 
of  grace ' — the  novel  feature  in  Catholic  dogma. 
Catholic  dogma,  equally  with  Protestant,  safe- 
guards the  Divine  initiative  and  the  work  of  Christ, 
but  neither  the  honour  of  Christ  nor  individual 
assurance,  since,  concerning  the  former,  Christ, 
though  His  righteousness  is  available  for  our  salva- 
tion, is  not  regarded  as  indwelling  in  us  as  our 
Righteousness ;  and,  concei'ning  the  latter,  the 
organized  machinery  of  means  of  grace  brings  in 
all  the  elements  of  uncertainty,  leaving  the  doctrine 
unsatisfactory  in  the  most  crucial  point.  Luther's  is 
a  purely  religious  conception,  vastly  deeper  within 
its  limits  than  the  other,  com[>rising  not  only  pardon 
of  sin  and  escape  from  the  Divine  wrath,  but  peace 
of  conscience  and  assurance  of  salvation.  Its  weak- 
est features  are  the  idea  of  faith,  which  is  limited 
to  belief  and  trust  in  Christ's  satisfaction,  apart 
from  subjective  appropriation  of  its  experience 
through  the  indwelling  Christ  which  faith  makes 
possible,  and  the  resulting  unbridged  chasm  be- 
tween justification  and  sanctification ;  and  the 
lack  of  any  really  vital  relation  between  the  new 
status  and  the  new  character  of  the  justified.^ 
Judged  by  the  standard  of  apostolic  truth,  both 
fall  short.  In  the  apostolic  consciousness  justifica- 
tion is  more  than  merely  God's  favour  or  pardon  of 
sins :  it  is  release  from  the  power  as  well  as  guilt 
of  sin,  a  new  character,  in  principle  at  least,  with 
the  new  status.  Therein  the  Catholic  opposition 
to  Luther  was  justified.  But  the  new  character  is 
erroneously  regarded  by  Catholicism  as  the  gradual 
transformation  of  human  nature  (which  is  sanctifi- 
cation), a  process  in  this  life  always  incomplete, 
and  liable  to  be  imperilled  by  stagnation  and 
lapse.  Nor  are  the  Catholic  formula;  adequate  to 
the  profoundly  spiritual  and  final  representations 
in  apostolic  exjierience  of  the  acts  and  operations 
of  grace  in  the  believing  heart  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  Christ's  Person  and  Spirit.  This, 
however,  is  a  deficiency  only  in  theology;  it  is 
compensated  for  in  actual  religious  practice  in  the 
Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  where  faith  is  more  genially 
receptive  and  heartfelt  devotion  more  warmly 
active  in  realizing  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in 
all  His  justifying  force.     The  Mass  is  to  the  creed 

♦The  best  ed.  of  the  'Decrees'  of  Trent  is  that  of  A.  L. 
Richter  and  F.  Scliulte,  Lcipzisr.  1853. 

t  For  the  recent  ideas  of  Catholic  divines  on  justification  see 
art.  in  CE. 

}  For  Luther's  doctrinal  position  consult  J.  Kostlin,  Life  oj 
Luther,  Eng.  tr.,  London,  1883,  and  T.  .M.  Lindsay,  Luther  and 
the  Gertnan  Reformation,  Edinburgh,  1900. 


JUSTIFICATK  )X 


JUSTIFICATION 


667 


in  the  lloiuau  >.y>U'm  \vh:  ak,  *  Hebrews' 

i.->  to  ■  Kum;u;>  '     in  I'auli;  i. 

2.  The  problem  of  jostificatiou.  -Ju-stiiication  is- 
a  religious  jnobleni,  the  answer  to  an  interior 
inqxiiry  of  Christian  experience.  The  OT  cry, 
'How  is  man  just  with  God?'  Ls  deepened  in  the 
NT:  'How  is  God  gracions?'  and  'How  are  we 
sure  of  His  grace  ?"  That  again  is  the  problem 
of  fellowship  with  Go<l  —  the  most  engrossing  of 
modern  quests.  Of  fellowsliip  with  God  the  very 
foundation  and  certaintj-  is  justilication.  In  con- 
sequence motlem  spiritual  philosophy  is  eagerly 
interested.  It  is  better  equipped  to  cope  with  the 
exquisitely  delicate  character  of  the  inquiry  than 
any  past  age.  The  modem  idea  of  Divine  imma- 
nence in  Natxire  and  man  adds  immeasurably  to  our 
perception  of  the  nature  of  the  human  spirit,  its 
workings,  their  relation  to  the  Divine  Spirit ;  and 
furnishes  a  key  to  the  representation  and  recon- 
struction of  inner  soul-processes  beyond  the  appar- 
atus of  the  older  theology.  The  mystical  emotion 
is  its  highest  form,  and  is  no  exceptional  super- 
addition  to  man's  nature ;  rather  it  is  his  natui-al 
consummation.  It  is  not  merely  the  secret  action 
of  the  mind  upon  itself  ;  while  an  inborn  instinct, 
it  comes  to  distinct  form  and  growth  from  causes 
objective  to  itself,  operating  on  it  by  the  inwork- 
ing  of  external  and  historical  circumstance  and 
the  exercise  and  outworking  of  ethical  faculty. 
Psychologically  it  is  not  of  the  ordinary  emotive 
life  :  it  is  higher,  inclusive  of  all  the  parts  of  human 
nature,  gathering  up  into  it-self  adl  those  inner 
powers  in  w  hose  interplay  under  its  guidance  and 
inspiration  in  one  harmonious  unity  its  life  consists. 
In  operation  it  is  w  holly  personal,  conscious,  ener- 
getic, intensely  individual.  Into  it  entere  the  force 
of  historic  fact,  out  of  it  passes  the  power  of  moral 
life ;  but  itself  is  a  self  inbreathing  the  one,  out- 
breathing  the  other.  The  constitution  of  this  self 
is  the  modem  construction  of  justification.  The 
life  of  that  self  is  commtmion  with  God  ;  justifica- 
tion is  its  origin  and  basis. 

What  is  the  origin? — the  Divine  graciousness t 
(Luther)  or  Divine  grace  (Catholic) ;  a  '  reckoning 
righteous,'  or  a  'making  righteous '^T  by  God? 
Neither  of  these  alternatives  standing  solitary  is 
to-day  an  intelligible  concept  applicable  to  the 
Di\Tjae  or  the  human  personality ;  nor  is  the  one 
or  the  other  a  felt  fact  of  religious  experience,  the 
ultimate  test  of  every  theory.  These  are  otiose 
ideas,  as  useless  as  absolute  ideas.  God  and  His 
grace  cannot  be  otiose.  '  He  speaks  and  it  is  done.' 
His  grace  is  at  once,  as  grace,  prescient  and  pre- 
venient,  operans  and  co-operans,  sufficient  and 
efficient,  and  cannot  be  defined  in  merely  legal  or 
logical  terms,  or,  in  fact,  in  anjthing  short  of  that 
'  interpenetration  of  essence '  of  God's  self  or  char- 
n,rpr.<  with  man's  self  or  character,  bestowing  on 
profoundest  promise  and  potency ;  and 
translating  it  into  the  status  and  char- 
acter of  life  tlv  -anctitied  after  His  image, 
and  on  His  in:  What  Protestant  thought 
clumsily  enclose-^  \Mtiuii  two  notions,  'justification ' 
and  *  imputation,'  l:  may  be  regarded  under  one 
more  modern — '  development.'  Then,  man's  self  is 
appreciated  from  the  Divine  standpoint,  as  God 
saw  creation  in  its  first  being,  not  as  it  actually  is 
in  present  attainment,  nor  as  it  will  be  in  perfect 
fruition,  but  as  it  is  ideally  becoming  when  put 
upon  the  right  basis  and  in  the  right  atmosphere, 

•  See  f  3,  V.  '  Hebrews.' 

t  This  is  the  sense  of  '  grace '  in  Luther  ;  cf.  A.  C.  McGififert, 
Protestant  Thought  before  Kant,  London,  1911,  p.  23. 

t  The  familiar  contrast  between  Romanist  and  Protestant  ideas. 

§  The  only  adequate  phrase  to  denote  the  NT  conception  of 
the  relation  of  the  ransomed  soul  to  its  Redeemer. 

n  Imputation  is  specially  offensive  to  modem  ethical  sensitive- 
ness ;  the  sense  of  responsibility  insists  that  each  is  himself, 
not  another. 


the  condition  we  find  in  '  the  stature  of  a  perfect 
man ' — Christ — the  root  and  direction  rather  than 
the  end  or  goal  determining  the  judgment  of  its 
character.     That  appreciation  is  justification. 

The  faculty  of  self  1  '  exercise  the  new 
-tatus  and  generation  ;  id  is 'faith.'    By 

'  faith '  the  Divine  Life  >. ,.  ^...  i.u  man's  soul  and 
Divine  truth  becomes  power.  Faith  here  is  more 
than  spiritual  insight,  it  is  spiritual  grasp;  more 
than  a  receptive  force,  it  is  also  the  bestowing  fact, 
softening  the  harsh  independence  of  these  two 
realities.  The  truth  is  that  every  approach  of 
God  to  man  has  a  true  tendency  to  create  the  faith 
Avithout  which  the  approach  can  never  become  a 
real  entrance.  Faitli  is  man's  welcome  of  Him, 
created  in  man's  heart,  as  the  face  of  a  friend 
coming  towards  us  reclaims  us  for  his  friendship. 
Paith  again  is  more  than  assent  or  trust :  it  is  the 
sotd's  entrance  into  healthy  relationship  to  Him 
who  is  its  true  life ;  an  entrance  fuUer  or  weaker 
according  to  the  soul's  capacity,  and  ever  growing 
with  the  sovd's  growth.  Faith  thus  understood 
widens  its  mental  and  emotional  constituents. 
God  and  man  underneath  all  obscuring  media  are 
of  like  nature  ;  God  is  the  '  element '  of  man's  true 
life.*  God  is  unceasingly  solicitous  in  seeking 
man,  and,  finding  man  reciprocate,  apprehends 
him,  but  as  Life  apprehending  life,  or  the  ocean 
refreshing  the  tide's  eddy,  or  the  tree  qiuckening 
the  branch.  The  term  'justification'  may  be 
technically  a  juridical  one,  but  that  which  it  aims 
at  expressing  is  in  idea  and  fact  a  spiritual  trans- 
action unexpressible  in  forensic  terms,  not  even 
conceivable  as  a  process  having  acts  and  stages. 
It  may  better  be  compared  to  a  gem  +  having  many 
facets,  simidtaneous,  not  successive,  and  glowing 
in  enhancing  splendotir  with  every  ftirther  advance 
into  light.  This  is  the  essence  of  the  idea  in  believ- 
ing experience.  It  is  also  the  essence  of  the  idea 
in  the  apostolic  conscience — the  love  of  God  seek- 
ing the  love  of  man  and  finding  it.J 

3.  The  apostolic  doctrine  of  justification. — The 
apostolic  doctrine  is  characterized  by  a  singular 
originality,  comprehensiveness,  self  -  consistency, 
and  spirituality.  Its  systematic  statement  is  elabo- 
rate, developing  itself  consciously  along  three  lines 
— exp^eutial,  historical,  speculative.  A  careful 
analysis  is  necessary  to  separate  its  essential  sub- 
stance and  abiding  cogency  from  their  first  local 
form.  Its  originality  is  evident  when  compared 
with  similar  ideas  in  ethnic  and  Jewish  religion ; 
its  comprehensive  and  self-consistent  character  by 
the  exhibition  of  its  contents;  its  spirituality  by 
the  demonstration  of  its  purely  religious  valioity  ; 
its  permanent  worth  by  the  al^oluteness  witli 
which  it  solves  the  religious  problem  of  which 
avowedly  it  is  an  answer. 

L  Originality.— The  idea  of  justification  does 
not  originate  w  ith  Christianity,  although  truly  it 
comes  to  its  full  expres-sion  there.  Wherever  re- 
ligion becomes  personal  in  actual  communion  with 
God,  it  brings  with  itself  inquiry  as  to  the 
specific  nature  of  the  power  known  and  felt  and 
the  peculiar  character  of  its  working  in  the  soul. 
This  we  find  occurring  in  religious  history  generally, 
and  especially  in  Hebrew  religion.  Ethnic  faiths 
for  the  most  part  are  so  lacking  in  belief  in  a  per- 
sonal God  that  the  inquiry  hardly  anywhere  attains 
more  than  rudimentary  shape.  Even  in  more 
advanced  faiths  the  Divine  personalit}-  is  mingled 
with  such  unworthy  elements  that  fruitful  concep- 
tions are  rare.  The  indelible  convictions  won  are 
only  two  :  the  gravity  of  the  need,  and  the  failure 

*  Cf.  St.  Augustine,  Coi^fetaioiu,  LI:'  Thou  hast  made  us 
for  Thvself,  and  our  heart  is  restless  till  it  find  its  rest  in  Thee.' 

t  Cf.  the  soul  as' pearl '(MtlS*). 

t  Cf.  the  Parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  the  perfect  picttire  of 
'  justification.' 


668 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


of  provision  to  meet  the  need.  A  more  positive 
impetus  enters  with  Semitic  religion,  in  •whose  re- 
ligious observances  the  reception  of  the  Divine  life 
is  increasingly  the  centre  of^attention.  The  grow- 
ing consciousness  of  Divine  force  is  mediated  in  tlie 
Hebrew  spirit  by  sacrifice,  prayer,  wisdom,  and 
prophetic  inspiration  ;  in  tlie  experience  of  suH'er- 
ing  also  very  notably,  as  in  Jeremiah  and  Deutero- 
Isaiah ;  in  mystical  union  Avith  the  righteous 
spirit  of  the  Law,  as  in  the  finer  Psalms  ;  and  real- 
ized as  pardon  of  sin  (Ps  32),  life  in  God's  favour 
(PsSO),  righteousness  (Ps  4,  etc.),  mercy,  and  salva- 
tion, covering  all  aspects  of  the  soul's  state.  '  The 
Law'  at  its  best  (Ps  119)  was  spirit  and  life, 
obedience  to  its  precepts  clothing  the  spirit  and 
life  of  man  with  their  imperishable  energy,  which 
is  none  other  tlian  that  of  God  who  gave  them. 
Pre-Christian  evolution  deepened  the  conscience 
in  at  least  three  directions — the  difttculty  in  the 
way  of  justification,  the  possibility  of  its  accomplish- 
ment, the  mode  and  means  of  its  reality.  The 
advent  of  C'hrist,  the  tout  ensemble  of  His  l*er- 
son  and  Work  as  one  organic  influence,  raised  the 
whole  problem  in  ajKistolic  experience  and 
thought  to  an  incomparably  richer  plane,  on  which, 
while  the  ditticulty  is  enlarged,  the  possibilities 
are  matured  and  a  final  mode  with  adequate  means 
provided.  Here  tlie  centre  of  gravity  is  Christ 
and  His  own  justification  (1  Ti  3'*,  He  3.  5.  6): 
'being  manifest  in  the  flesh,  he  was  justified  in 
the  spirit.'  Wherein  consists  His  being  justified  ? 
The  true  answer  is — in  all  that  by  which  His  higher 
origin  was  made  known  ('  His  glory'  in  St.  Jolin, 
manifested  in  words,  works,  resurrection  {V^  "**=• 
2"  2,"^  14";  cf.  Mt  1^,  Ko  \\  Ac  2««,  etc.];  'His 
high-priesthood  '  [He  3.  5.  6] ;  '  His  righteousness' 
[Ko  10^,  1  Co  \^,  2  Co  5^',  Ph  3«,  etc.,  in  St.  Paul]). 
It  is  a  description  drawn  in  contrast  with  the  pre- 
ceding phrase,  '  manifest  in  the  flesh,'  and  includes 
all  by  which  He  is  proved  to  be  the  very  Person  He 
truly  was.*  This  general  proof  is  further  special- 
ized into  the  events  of  His  Death  and  Resurrection, 
its  ultimate  and  most  impressive  parts,  which  as 
such  procured  the  redemption  from  sin  through 
wiiich  we  are  justified  (ilo5*  4^=,  He  8.  9.  10).  His 
own  justification  consisted  in  the  accomplished 
fact  of  His  perfect  holiness  and  His  risen  life.  It 
is  ours  after  the  same  manner  ;  only  it  is  His  right- 
eousness that  is  mediated  to  us  to  become  ours, 
and  that  in  virtue  of  our  union  with  Him  by  faitli 
(llo  3~''^  5).  The  old  distress  of  man's  nature  is 
irrevocably  dissolved  under  the  assured  potency  of 
the  new  condition  in  which  it  stands. 

ii.  COMPLETENKSS.  —  The  general  meaning  of 
justification  is  clear,  nay  simple  ;  but  the  greatly 
simple  is  the  organization  of  the  complex.  And 
the  apostolic  exposition  is  complex.  It  compre- 
hends many  elements,  commands  a  variety  of  rela- 
tions. It  derives  its  material  from  the  Apostle's 
unique  fellowship  witli  the  glorified  Lord ;  and 
that  experience,  fundamentally  the  same  in  all,  is 
varied  oy  the  diversity  of  individuality  in  each. 
Again,  the  reasoning  of  the  apostles  relates  itself 
directly  to  immediate  issues  and  is  affected  by  tlie 
circumstances  of  the  readers  to  whom  it  is  ad- 
dressed. Further,  the  intellectual  equipment  of 
the  writers  colours  their  statements.  To  all  this 
we  must  add  the  fact  that  their  doctrine  had  to 
establish  itself  on  the  successful  displacement  of 
two  solutions  already  on  the  field,  one  of  them 
strongly  entrenched,  viz.  the  ministration  of  the 
Law.  The  most  systematic  and  dispassionate 
statement  is  given  by  St.  Paul  in  the  Epistle  to  tlie 
Itomans,  with  which  is  to  be  associated  the  sub- 
sidiary matter  (more  or  less  disputatious)  in  Kj)!!., 
2  Cor.,  (ial.,  etc.  Isolated  references  and  suspects 
of  the  doctrine,  more  or  less  coiiii)lete,  are  to  be 
*  Uu  own  use  of  the  word  '  justified '  (Lk  T^^). 


found  in  Acts,  the  General  Epistles,  and  Hebrews. 
The  relation  of  these  to  one  another,  and  of  them 
all  to  the  Synoptic  teaching  of  Jesus  Himself,  has 
to  be  adverted  to. 

(1)  St.  Paul. — Justification  is  by  God's  grace 
(Ro  3"  4«,  Eph  2»,  Tit  3^),  by  man's  faith  (Ac  13'», 
Ro  51),  by  Christ's  Death  (Ro  5"),  by  His  Resurrec- 
tion (Ro  4^).  It  is  a  justification  of  the  ungodly 
(Ro  4",  2  Co  5'*,  etc.)  ;  it  is  not  of  works  of  the  Law 
(Ro  3=»,  Gal  3",  etc.),  not  of  the  law  written  in  the 
heart,  the  uncircumcision  (Ro  2").  It  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  judgment  by  works  (1  Co  9-",  Ph  3«-"). 
It  is  for  remission  of  sins  (Ro  3^),  peace  with  God, 
access  into  grace  and  hope  of  glory  (Ro  5'' '), 
righteousness  (Ro  4-'2-  =**  5"  3^',  2  Co  5-',  Ph  3»),  for 
life  (Ro  5^*  :  'a  justification  taking  eflect  in  life  '), 
which  is  through  the  body  of  Christ  (Ro  7*)  and  by 
His  Spirit  (Eph  2^»,  Ro  5«  S^-  *•«•  ">•  ",  etc.).  To 
the  foregoing  add  the  corroborative  statement  in 
Ro  4  as  to  Abraham's  justification.  There  are 
five  points.  Justification  is  by  faitli,  not  works 
(4^'*),  therefore  by  grace  (4"').  Being  by  grace 
through  faith,  it  came  not  through  law  but  through 
promise  (4^* ;  cf.  Gal  3^**).  It  is  not  by  circumcision 
or  outward  privilege  (4"-  ^"^  ^')  ;  it  leaves  no  room 
for  boasting  or  self-righteous  confidence  (3^  4-). 
According  to  the  Apostle,  justification  is  not  an 
act  of  man  but  an  act  of  God.  It  issues  from  His 
holy  Fatherly  love  and  righteousness,  which  can 
have  no  possible  relation  to  unrighteousness  but 
that  of  wrath.  It  is  fundamentally  related  to  be- 
lieving self-surrender  and  trust  (faith)  on  man's 
part.  It  is  manifested  in  the  historical  work  of 
Jesus.  Its  force  resides  in  God,  the  object  of  faith, 
as  He  in  His  righteousness  and  clemency  appears 
in  the  Death  and  Life  after  Death  of  His  Son,  by 
whose  life  we  are  saved  (Ro  5"*).  This  justifica- 
tion is  not  cogently  interpreted  as  'a  reckoning 
righteous,'*  nor  as  'a  making  righteous';  it  is 
more  than  the  first,  and  other  than  the  second.  It 
includes  the  juridical  features  within  the  larger 
personal  and  spiritual,  for  there  enter  into  it  {a) 
grace  and  {b)  faith,  (c)  Christ's  Spirit  and  (d)  the 
believer  in  Christ,  all  in  a  plane  of  spirit  and  life. 
Here  God  cannot  just  be  understood  as  a  Judge 
acquitting  a  criminal ;  f  the  culprit  has  his  position 
completely  reversed,  and  is  advanced  to  the  honours 
and  privileges  to  which  he  would  have  been  entitled 
by  a  perfect  obedience.+  He  not  only  goes  free 
from  merited  penalty  ;  he  is  transferred  into  a  new 
freedom  for  righteous  service,  gains  unrestricted 
admittance  to  the  oi)erations  of  grace,  the  right  of 
sonship,  with  all  the  glorious  future  involved. 
All  that  future  is  here  in  its  initial  stage  in  germ, 
so  that  the  whole  is  regarded  as  already  in  the 
l)otential  possession  of  the  believer,  and  God  gives 
as  God  and  Father,  not  after  the  manner  of  an 
earthly  tribunal.  The  stress  of  the  Pauline  state- 
ment rests  on  the  fact  that  he  conceives  the  energies 
of  the  Spirit  to  be  liberated  for  the  believer  by  the 
justifying  Death  of  Christ,  and  mediated  to  the  be- 
liever by  the  present  life  of  '  the  Lord,  the  Spirit ' 
(2  Co  3^^),  to  whom  the  believer  is  joined  to  form 
'  one  spirit '  (1  Co  6^^).  It  is  a  statement  of  spirit, 
not  logic ;  experience  and  life,  not  legal  forms. § 

The  Apostle  proceeds  next  to  plead  for  its  efii- 
cacy  by  contrasting  it  with  two  earlier  attempts  in 
the  history  of  the  race  to  restore  mans  righteous- 
ness— attempts  which  had  miserably  failed.  There 
was  first  the  working  of  the  natural  conscience  in 

•  The  meaning  of  the  term,  a  judicial  word. 

t  To  Ilim  as  Jiidj'e  tlie  situation  is  a  legal  impassf  out  of 
which  there  is  no  legal  way  ;  recourse  is  had  to  the  Divine 
ciemencv. 

t  Cf.  \V.  P.  Paterson,  Pauline  Theoln(jy,  Ixindon,  1903,  p.  71. 

§  St.  Paul  uses  metaphors,  some  drawn  from  juristic  termin- 
ology, others  from  the  ceremonial  on  the  Ureal  l>ay  of  Atone- 
ment. These  metaphors  are  to  he  intirj>reted  not  in  separation 
but  in  their  combined  cumulative  (fleet,  if  the  comprehensive 
character  of  his  idea  is  to  be  nuiintaiued. 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


669 


the  Gentile  world.  There  is  a  light  of  nature 
which  otters  knowledge  sufficient  to  impress  on 
men  the  fact  that  their  just  due  to  GtAl  is  full 
obedience  to  His  will.  By  t  heir  wilful  disobedience 
that  light  that  was  in  them  hatl  been  turned  to 
darkness,  with  the  result  not  of  heightening  tlie 
possibilities  of  human  nature,  but  rather  of  increas- 
ing its  unrighteousness,  in  fellowship  with  the  god 
of  this  world,  the  Devil ;  and  now  the  world  was 
lying  in  wickedness  under  Go<i's  wrath  (Ro  l^-  ^ 
3»* ",  Gal  3-,  Eph  2-),  and,  in  the  indiiridual  heart, 
earnestly  endeavouring  to  keep  from  its  contamina- 
tion, the  conflict  proved  the  prepotency  of  sin 
(Ro  7).  Then  there  was  the  moral  conscience 
trained  under  the  Law  of  Moses.  It  was  desigiietl 
to  remedy  the  moral  disaster  of  the  natural  con- 
.  science.  Was  it  successful  ? — It  had  been  most 
ineflectnal.  Law  could  '  not  make  alive'  (Gal  3-^) 
either  in  its  precepts  or  in  their  sanctions.  It  might 
furnish  an  ideal  of  right  and  deepen  the  conscious- 
ness of  sin,  and  it  might  etlucate  to  a  higher  type 
of  virtue.  It  could  also,  on  the  contrary,  incite  to 
larger  disobedience  and  to  fresh  vices.  Its  rigours 
working  on  sensitive  souls  tended  to  paralyze  the 
will.  But  the  only  solution  must  lie  in  re-inforce- 
ment  of  the  will.  In  Cluist  alone  was  that  end 
won.  He  is  'the  Wisdom  and  Power'  of  God,  to 
them  who  believe,  ideal  and  motive  force  in  one 
Spirit.  Nothing  short  of  the  religious  conscience 
renewed  by  Hini  could  suffice.  The  religious  con- 
science begins  in  one  subjective  act  on  man's  part, 
the  act  of  faith.  It  is  preceded  or  accompanied  by 
repentance,  but  it  is  itself  the  simple,  childlike, 
submissive,  enthusiastic,  unconditional  self-sur- 
render of  the  man's  whole  being,  intellect,  affec- 
tions, purpose,  to  the  will  of  God  in  Christ.* 

(2)  St.  James. — The  Epistle  of  St.  James 
emphasizes  two  practical  consequences  of  faith, 
(a)  It  works  in  the  heart  as  a  new  law,  obedience 
to  the  perfect,  royal  law  of  liberty  (1^  2*).  The 
point  here  is  the  contrast  between  the  external 
compelling  force  of  the  older  Law  and  the  internal 
impelling  force  of  the  new,  the  '  word '  in  the  heart, 
able  to  save  the  soul  (1^).  (6)  It  works  in  the 
conduct  as  good  works.  The  controversy  that  has 
arisen  over  the  supposed  antagonism  between  St. 
Paul  and  St.  James  is  barren,  and  need  not  detain 
us.  '  Faith '  and  '  works '  have  two  different  con- 
notations in  the  two  instances.  St.  James  means  by 
'faith'  not  self-surrender  so  much  as  mental  assent, 
and  by  'works'  not  the  legal  deeds  enjoined  by 
the  Law,  but  acts  of  mercy  and  kindness  prompted 
by  the  law  of  love  in  the  soul.  The  motive  and 
interest  of  the  two  apostles  differ ;  there  is  no 
room  for  opposition.  Faith  to  St.  James,  as  to  St. 
Paul,  is  the  pre-condition  of  good  works,  and  the 
condition  of  acceptance  with  Grod.  Like  St.  Paul 
also,  he  sees  justifying  energy  active  in  the  con- 
crete circumstances  of  life — '  a  man  is  blessed  not 
through  but  in  his  deed.'  Further,  there  is  no 
suggestion  of  merit  in  these  good  works  of  faith. 
The  sub-apostolic  age  was  not  slow  to  materialize 
both  '  the  new  law '  and  the  *  merit  of  works,'  but 
St.  James  is  not  responsible.t 

(3)  St.  Peter. — From  the  speeches  (Ac  3)  and 
First  Epistle  we  gather  three  features,  (a)  In 
justification  the  pardon  of  sins  and  clearing  of 
guilt  are  explicitly  connected  with  Christ's  suffer- 
ings (Ac  31*^,  1  P  119  2**) ;  also,  as  the  righteous 
suffering  for  the  imrighteous,  Christ  *  brings  us  to 
God '  (3^*).  (6)  The  gift  of  grace  is  the  result  of 
Christ's  Resurrection  (1  P  1-^) ;  it  is  the  ground  and 
guarantee  of  the  new  life  and  of  the  gift  of  strength 

•  We  are  not  here  concerned  with  the  '  Rabbinic '  form  of  St. 
Paul's  argumentation  nor  with  the  character  of  his  judgment 
on  Gentile  and  Jew,  but  only  with  his  thought. 

f  For  a  different  view  of  St.  James's  position,  see  Piepen- 
bring,  Jems  et  let  Apdtrts. 


to  overcome  Satan,  (c)  The  comins;  of  grace  into 
the  heart  finds  its  necessary  com])lement  in  the 
life  of  love  for  the  brethren.  In  the  Second 
Epistle  both  freedom  from  sins  and  the  power  to 
work  the  righteousness  of  God  dejiend  upon  faith 
in  and  knowletlge  of  Christ  ( I'-  •).  Knowledge  here 
is  akin  to  the  Johannine  idea — the  inner  personal 
apprehension  of  the  saving  Spirit  of  Christ. 

(4)  St.  John. — The  Epistles  and  Apocalypse  do 
not  share  in  the  fullness  of  volume  of  mystical 
idealism  pervading  the  Gospel.  Yet  the  essential 
elements  are  here — the  unity  of  life  with  God  in 
Christ,  the  significance  of  Christ's  Person,  Death, 
Resurrection,  fellowship  with  Him  in  'sonship.' 
Especially  emphatic  is  the  writer  on  the  two  facts, 
that  it  is  God's  love  to  sinners,  not  sinners'  love  to 
God,  that  is  the  ground  of  faith  and  healing ;  that 
in  sonship  are  to  be  included  religious  as  well  as 
moral  ideals.  In  the  Apocalypse  the  same  ideas 
are  central — but  under  sacrificial  designations : 
Christ's  Sacrifice  (the  Lamb)  and  Resurrection 
(alive  for  evermore)  are  the  source  of  the  stream 
of  life  proceeding  from  the  very  essence  of  God 
which,  received  by  man,  is  in  him  a  life  of  un- 
interrupted sacrifice. 

(5)  Hebreics. — This  Epistle  is  a  continuation  of 
the  Pauline  'apologia'  for  the  gospel  as  against 
the  claims  of  the  Old  Covenant.  "What  is  done  in 
Romans  for  grace  as  against  law  is  here  done  for 
Christ's  sacrifice  as  against  Levitical  offerings. 
Justification  by  faith  is  expounded  in  connexions 
different  from  those  St.  Paul  and  St.  John  have  in 
view,  and  the  exposition  stands  midway  between 
theirs,  filling  up  an  evident  lacuna.  Some 
scholars  assert  that  the  problem  is  here  less  deeply 
discussed,  justification  being  narrowed  to  forgive- 
ness and  faith  to  spiritual  insight  apart  from 
spiritual  grasp.  That  would  be  to  leave  Hamlet 
out  of  the  play.  The  author  has  a  definite  aim, 
and,  notwithstanding  an  obscuring  vocabulary  and 
analogies,  elaborates  it  admirably.  His  aim  is  to 
demonstrate  the  accessibility  of  God  through 
Christ's  sacrificial  work.  His  demonstration  puts 
in  bold  relief  two  aspects  hitherto  untouched  in 
apostolic  thought :  (n)  justification  as  a  subjective 
fact  as  well  as  an  objective  act ;  {b)  the  principles 
of  its  mode.  The  justification  of  Christ  (above, 
§  3.  i.)  is  constituted  by  His  sinlessness,  effected 
as  a  spiritual  fact  in  His  own  experience.  The 
justification  of  the  sinner  as  a  spiritual  fact  in  his 
experience  is  eftected  after  the  same  manner  as  in 
Christ,  and  by  Christ :  viz.  in  *  the  purging  of  the 
conscience  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living 
God,'  and  in  resisting  unto  blood  (Q**"-).  These 
aspects  are  set  forth  in  detail  and  give  the  book 
its  character.  In  both  Christ  and  the  believer  the 
inner  experience  is  identical  (o)  'through  eternal 
Spirit '  (9")  and  (^)  through  their  vital  union : 
'he  that  sanctifieth  and  they  who  are  sanctified 
are  all  of  one'  (2").  The  word  'sanctify'  is  used 
in  this  Epistle  in  its  Hebraic  sense  of  'conse- 
crate.' *  Just  as  in  St.  Paul  the  justified  are  ac- 
cepted and  become  members  of  the  Body  of  Christ, 
so  in  virtue  of  membership  in  the  New  Covenant, 
the  believer,  according  to  Hebrews,  is  set  in  right 
relation  to  God,  receives  forgiveness,  cleansing  of 
conscience,  and  is  ayial^ofievoi,  even  TereXeitofUvo! : 
'  by  one  offering  he  hath  perfected  for  ever  them 
that  are  sanctified'  (10^*).  The  faculty  in  man 
rendering  this  possible  is  faith,  whose  full  conrent 
it  takes  '  hope '  (6'^  T^*),  'obedience'  (5«  11),  as  well 
as  '  faith '  (11*),  to  express.  It  is  not  merely  spiritual 
perception  of  the  unseen  ;  it  is  rather  the  power  of 
soul  which  makes  the  unseen  future  present,  the 

*Gf.  the  Vr  use  of  'saint'  — one  of  the  covenant-people, 
the  potentially  holy — of  whom  moral  qualifications  are  asserted 
not  as  a  feet  bat  as  a  duty.  See  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  The  Fint 
EjntUe  0/  St.  Peter,  1 1—n.  17,  London,  1896,  p.  70. 


670 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


unseen  present  visible,  and  by  so  doing  unites  us 
to  Christ  in  His  present  and  future  plenitude 
(lO^**),  from  wlioni  Hows  the  transforming  in- 
fluence creative  of  the  graces  of  life  which  are 
never  separated  from  faith  nor  faith  from  tliem. 

The  elHcacy  of  His  Sacriiice  rests  fundamentally 
on  the  majesty  of  His  Person.  His  High-l'riestly 
act  is  an  expression  of  the  eternal  Spirit  of  the 
Divine  love.  IJy  it  He  has  destroyed  every  liarrier 
of  sin  which  lay  between  man  and  God.  II <;  lias, 
as  the  sin-otrenng  for  humanity,  freed  nil  men 
potentially  from  the  guilty  consciousness  of  sin, 
and  brought  Christians  to  the  heavenly  rest  of  God. 
The  emphasis  is  on  what  follows,  viz.  :  '  the  enter- 
ing within  the  veil,'  less  the  surrender  of  His  life 
than  its  presentation  witliin  the  veil,  implying  that 
the  love  and  merciful  kindness  of  God,  which  were 
manifested  in  time  and  in  the  earthly  ministry, 
are  eternal  and  (ihangelcss  principles  perpetually 
operative  on  our  behalf.  This  must  ultimately  be 
the  ground  of  our  acceptance  and  the  assurance  of 
our  life  in  communion  with  Him.  The  benefits 
and  ellicac^  of  His  perfect  Sacrifice  are  conditioned 
by  our  attitude  of  faith  and  trust. 

(6)  The  apostolic  doctrine  in  relation  to  Christ's 
teaching. — Is  the  apostolic  teaching  a  necessary 
consequence  of  Christ's  self-witness?  Yes;  if 
certain  considerations  be  kept  in  view.  We 
see,  e.g.,  that  it  was  not  drawn  l)y  conscious 
deduction.  It  is  an  original  construction  derived 
from  life,  from  their  experience  of  Christ  reveal- 
ing Himself  in  them  (Gal  l'**),  as  Christ's  is  from 
the  manifold  fruitfulness  and  insight  of  His  own 
sublime  Personality.  Then  we  see  it  elaborated 
under  stress  of  the  Judaistic  and  Hellenistic  en- 
vironment of  that  age,  in  the  endeavour  to  establish 
and  justify  itself  in  the  intellectual  atmosphere  of 
the  nascent  Church-life.  It  was  not  possible  to 
accomplish  this  with  success  except  by  a  process 
which  should  display  the  hidden  significance  of 
what  at  first  seemed  so  simple,  and  is  so  simple 
to  simple  hearts.*  That  age,  however,  was  not 
simple-hearted  ;  t  it  was  a  highly  intellectual,  pro- 
foundly perplexed,  saddened  age,  sobl)ing  its  heart 
out  in  weakness ;  requiring  accordingly  the  doc- 
trine that  would  strengthen  and  comfort  with 
effect  to  be  in  the  mould  of  its  own  speculation  and 
intuition.  Christ's  teaching  is  a  plain,  positive 
statement  on  the  practical  religious  plane,  deliver- 
ing itself  as  easily  as  the  flow  of  the  stream,  in 
conflict  only  with  the  hindrances  of  inditlerence 
and  want  of  faith.  That  attitude  characterizes 
the  General  Epistles,  which  are  close  echoes  of  the 
Master's  style,  and  directed  to  the  same  general 
consciousness  of  religion  as  His  was.  It  is  other- 
wise with  the  Pauline  and  Johannine  Epistles :  in 
them  we  have  the  underlyin<j  universal  quality 
and  principle  of  His  teaching  disclosed,  beaten  out 
inch  by  inch  on  the  hard  anvil  of  bitter  controversy 
(Pauline) ;  or  reflecting  the  more  lambent  genius 
of  the  mystic  (Johannine).  The  differences  are 
great,  but  they  are  not  oppositions,  nor  vitiations. 
The  same  facts  are  lookecf  at  and  loved,  by  means 
of  the  same  great  powers  of  soul,  and  within  the 
same  great  principles  and  convictions.^  Nor  must 
we  forget  tiiat  since  Christ's  Person  is  the  source 
of  this  inspiration  and  enlightenment,  their  state- 
ment is  coloured  throughout  its  whole  extent  by 
that  all-pervading  fact.  It  is  a  fact  which  leaves 
the  writers  free  to  be  careless  of  superficial  har- 
monizations, conscious  as  they  are  of  the  sub- 
stantial unity  below  all  apparent  divergences  and 
dissonances.    That  unity  is  impressive  ;  its  outlines 

•  Ab,  e.g.,  in  Christ's  teaching. 

t  Cf.,  for  a  popular  dcsoription,  M.  Arnold's  Obermann. 

i  Cf.,  tor  an  able  vindicition  of  this  view  of  the  relation  of  the 
apostolic  doctrine  to  Christ's,  J.  Denney,  Jesits  atid  the  Gospel, 
Jvondon,  190S, 


strong  and  vivid.  In  contrast  with  Gentile  wisdom 
and  Jewish  Law,  which  were  both  powerless  to 
redeem  men  from  sin,  Christ  stands  out  as  Saviour. 
He  is  the  answer  to  the  age-long  cry,  '  How  shall 
man  be  just  with  God  ? '  He  is  '  the  new  and  living 
way'  of  access  into  God's  presence  (He  lO'-""),  as  He 
Himself  claimed  (Jn  14®).  By  Him  is  proclaimed 
'  the  forgiveness  of  sins'  (Ac  13^).  He  is  exalted 
to  give  forgiveness  (Ac  5^'),  and  gives  it  (Eph  V, 
Col  1'*,  etc.).  He  has  broken  down  the  'wall  of 
partition'  (Eph  2")  and  'rent  the  veil'  of  the 
Temple  (Mt  27",  Mk  15»8,  Lk  2.3«).  He  has 
effected  'so  great  salvation'  (He  2^)  in  His  own 
body  on  the  tree  (I  P2''^),  by  eternal  Spirit  (He  9"), 
in  Himself  and  for  Himself,  as  the  Author  and 
Finisher  of  our  faith,  really,  vitally,  consciously, 
not  with  a  dull  sense  of  unintelligible  burden,  but 
wholly  rationally,  intensely  sj)iritually,  in  an  ex- 
perience where  tlie  issues  are  of  life  and  death, 
fought  out  in  a  fiery  heat  of  thought  and  emo- 
tion, of  deeply  moving  religious  conscience.  The 
apostolic  consciousness  has  caught  the  rich  impress 
or  this  travail  of  .soul.  It  sets  it  forth  for  mankind 
in  varying  form  and  mode — the  picture  of  the  great 
and  guiltless  sorrow  bearing  the  sins  of  the  world, 
and,  in  bearing  them,  bearing  them  away.  As  the 
soul  of  the  age  was  sobbing  itself  out,  here  a  nobler 
soul  shares  the  fellowship  of  its  suffering  and  of  all 
suffering,  but  not  in  weakness ;  for  the  pain  is  fully 
faced  and  taken  up  into  conscious  life,  there  to  be 
transmuted  into  abiding  life.  Thus  was  Christ 
justified  ;  thus  are  we. 

iii.  Spirituality  and  absoluteness.— Justifi- 
cation is  a  purely  religious  problem.  The  apostolic 
solution  is  purely  religious.  Its  spirituality  may 
be  vindicated  by  reference  to  its  source,  its  ground, 
its  results. 

(rt)  Grace  the  source. — Justification  presupposes 
the  election  of  grace  (q.v.),  to  which  is  traced 
its  unconditional  freeness  (Ro  3-^  Eph  1'),  its 
plenitude  (Col  1",  Ro  5'^,  etc.),  its  Divine  provision 
(1  Jn  4^",  Ro  5^-  ^°).  The  riciies  and  freeness  of 
God's  grace  are  manifested  in  the  redemption  they 
provide.  It  is  a  manifestation  in  which  there  is 
nothing  else  than  a  free,  unprompted,  unsolicited 
expression  of  God's  own  nature  and  love  to  man- 
kind. It  is  conditioned  by  nothing  in  man  but 
man's  clamant  need,  by  nothing  in  God  but  His 
own  holy  love.  Men  are  not  pardoned  on  account 
of  their  faith  or  by  their  faith.  Pardon  already  is 
in  God's  attitude  toward  them ;  what  they  have 
to  do  is  to  realize  it  by  faith,  and  enjoy  its  bless- 
ing.* Nor  does  God  pardon  because  of  Christ's 
satisfaction.  Christ's  sacrifice  is  the  outcome  of 
His  forgiving  mercy.  It  does  not  create  or  impel 
God's  love,  it  displays  it  (Ro  5*- ^*').  The  Atonement, 
so  far  from  being  inconsistent  w-ith  the  Fatherhood 
of  God,  is  its  most  distinct  proof.  Faith  in  Christ's 
atoning  love  only  makes  more  conspicuously  clear 
God's  paternal  love,  for  it  is  the  marvellous  way 
He  took  to  struggle  down  through  human  experi- 
ence to  give  us  healing.  This  assured  love  of  God 
is  the  living  root  of  the  justified  life  ;  t  in  its  ampli- 
tude all  are  pardoned  if  they  would  only  realize  it 
in  actual  standing.  It  is  the  cause  also  of  con- 
fident and  bold  access  to  God  (Eph  3>2,  1  Jn  2^  S*') 
and  the  ceasing  from  confidence  in  the  flesh  (Ph  3^). 
Assurance  of  the  Divine  love  in  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  already  contained  in  it  the  whole  idea  of 
salvation,  and  holds  together  all  the  parts  of  the 
Divine  life  in  their  necessary  nexus  :  the  justifica- 
tion of  the  sinner  before  God  and  the  jninciple  of 
freedom  for  the  consciousness  of  the  justified  subject 

•  Theolosry  even  in  its  most  dreary  day  never  made  faith  the 
operative  but  simply  the  instruniental  cause  of  justiflcation. 

t  Cf.  Calvin's  Inslitvte.-i,  in  which  justiflc^ition  is  related  to 
predestination  :  '  comprehension  of  the  divine  purpose  creating 
confldence  in  the  elect '  (bk.  iii.  cb.  2). 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


671 


himself  in  all  his  relations.*  In  that  principle  lies 
secmely  embedded,  along  with  our  acceptance  by 
God,  our  assurance  of  salvation.!  Starting  from 
God,  who  from  eternity  has  been  beforehand  with 
us,  held  by  His  preuestinating  love,  creating, 
calling,  pardoning,  we  raise  our  fabric  of  life  in 
continual  growth  for  eternal  glory  (Ro  8^'"®).  All 
along  it  is  of  God's  initiative,  of  grace  ;  all  along 
it  is  an  appeal  to  faith ;  man's  dependence  is 
absolute. 

(b)  Christ's  mediation  the  ground.  —  Here  the 
apostolic  teaching  assumes  the  form  of  a  three-fold 
presentation :  (a)  Christs  righteousness  is  made 
peace ;  (;3)  Christ's  blood  is  made  obedience  ;  (7) 
Christ's  life  is  made  presence.  The  first  is  Pauline, 
the  second  that  of  Hebrews,  the  third  Johannine — 
in  such  a  way  that,  while  each  of  the  three  has  its 
predominant  element  as  thus  classified,  we  are  not 
to  suppose  that  each  has  no  affinities  with  the 
others  ;  on  the  contrary,  the  fullness  of  truth  is  in 
each,  but  ranged  around  the  predominant  element 
of  each  type. 

(a)  The  neiD  righteousness. — '  Christ  is  made  unto 
us  righteousnass '  (I  Co  1**);  'he  is  our  peace' 
(Eph  2i3-i«).  The  argument  is  in  Ro  S^"-  ^^-\  and 
proceeds  by  a  winding  course  through  the  following 
chapters  to  the  eighth.  There  are  three  kinds  of 
righteousness :  '  God's  righteousness,'  '  our  own 
righteousness,'  and  'the  righteousness  of  faith.' 
Before  God's  righteousness  no  man  can  stand. 
The  attempt  was  made  through  His  Law,  given 
by  Moses.  The  result  was  a  self-righteousness 
that  failed  to  bring  peace  between  God  and  man 
for  two  reasons — firstly,  the  righteousness  of  the 
Law  consisted  in  our  OAvn  unaided  obedience ;  and 
secondlj',  that  self- righteousness  was  the  condition 
of  our  acceptance  with  God.  It  contained  all  the 
elements  of  uncertainty  of  salvation.  It  was  in- 
effectual. There  is  another  righteousness  never 
lost  sight  of  under  the  Old  Law,  which  has  now 
appeared  in  Jesus  Christ.  By  Him  it  is  made  ours. 
Presented  in  Him,  it  awakes  in  the  sinner  peni- 
tence and  faith — a  love  of  Christ's  holiness,  a  hatred 
of  his  own  sinfulness  ;  this  by  God's  grace.  There 
is  nothing  in  the  self-righteousness  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  Law  to  bridge  the  chasm  between  God 
and  sin.  The  provision  for  that  end  is  the  verj- 
thing  provided  in  Christ.  How  so?  In  Christ 
God  gives  His  o^vn  righteousness,  which  is  the  end 
and  meaning  of  all  faith.  He  who  receives  it  in 
initio  receives  it  virtually  in  extenso ;  such  is  the 
mode  of  Goil's  gift  of  it.  The  condition  of  possible 
or  future  righteousness  is  the  right  attitude  or  in- 
tention of  mind  towards  actual  present  unright- 
eousness. It  is  possible  to  justify  or  accept  as  right 
only  that  attitude  which  at  the  time  is  the  nearest 
right  possible  for  the  person.  In  the  initial  moment 
of  contrition,  the  only  possible  and  right  posture 
of  the  sinner  is  that  consciousness  of  himself  which 
could  not  be  the  beginning  of  his  hatred  of  sin  if  it 
were  not  to  the  same  extent  the  beginning  of  a 
love  of  holiness.  Where  this  exists  in  truth  and 
sincerity,  even  though  it  be  but  the  beginning  of 
an  infinite  process,  it  is  possible  and  right  to  accept 
and  treat  as  right  that  which  as  yet  is  only  a  first 
turning  to  and  direction  towards  right  (cf.  1  Jn 
J8-10J  Thus  the  righteousness  of  faith  begins  with 
our  sense  of  sin  and  experience  of  impotence,  and 
God's  lo\"ing  acceptance  of  this  repentance  in  us 
is  the  condition,  starting-point,  and  earnest  of  a 
righteousness  in  us  which  is  maintained  and  in- 
creased through  Christ's,  in  whom  we  see  revealed 
all  the  presence  and  power  of  God  in  us,  and  in 
consequence  all  the  power  in  ourselves  necessary 

•  It  is  the  permanent  worth  of  Luther's  doctrine  to  have  set 
forth  these  two  points  with  passionate  cogencj-  {The  Liberty  of 
the  Christian  Man). 

t  Not  the  same  as  assurance  of  the  love  of  God. 


to  its  actual  attainment  and  possession.  Faith  in 
Christ  as  our  righteousness  can  justify  us  because 
it  is  based  on  the  one  condition  in  ourselves  of 
becoming  righteous — a  loyal  disposition — and  the 
one  power  without  oun^elves  to  make  us  righteous 
— the  righteousness  of  God.  The  grace  of  God  in 
Christ  makes  the  sinner  righteous,  by  enabling 
him  to  make  himself  righteous.  It  starts  the 
process  by  regarding  and  treating  as  righteous 
the  penitent  believer :  *  •  justifying  freely  through 
grace  by  faith.' 

(/3)  The  new  obedience.—'  He  learned  obedience 
by  the  things  which  he  suffered ' ;  '  the  obedience 
of  faith'  (He  5\  Ro  5i»  16»,  He  S^' 4"  ioti«--3-" 
12).  A.  B.  Bruce  t  has  made  the  invaluable  sug- 
gestion that  by  the  author  of  Hebrews  the  blood 
of  Christ  has  been  translated  from  body  to  spirit, 
and  as  such  enters  into  heaven,  and  is  available 
for  our  benefit.  The  blood  of  Christ,  says  St.  John, 
is  ever  actively  cleansing  us  from  all  sin  (1  Jn  1^). 
That  blood-spirit  becomes  to  us  the  law  of  all  life 
because  it  is  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  itself 
(Ro  8*).  Obedience  to  that  law  clothes  us  with 
its  power.  How  so  ? — Manifestlj-  not  simply  as  a 
general  consequence  of  that  which  Christ  has  done 
for  us,  as  if  we  found  ourselves  through  the  Atone- 
ment on  the  Cross  under  such  changed  relation  to 
God  as  enables  us  to  approach  Him  at  will.  That 
\-iew  is  little  distinguishable  from  the  main  position 
of  Rationalism  (Socinianism),  whose  central  convic- 
tion is  the  assumption  of  a  general  order  of  Divine 
forgivene.ss  independent  of  Christ,  in  accordance 
with  which  pardon  is  bestowed  on  the  condition  of 
the  active  obedience  of  faith.  Ritschl  X  has  demon- 
strated the  hoUowness  of  this  assumption.  Both 
'  faith '  and  '  obedience '  lose  their  peculiar  quality  : 
for  faith  becomes  merely  assent  to  past  teaching  or 
trust  in  past  acts  ;  and  obedience,  instead  of  being 
motived  by  faith  in  the  sense  of  surrender  to 
Christ's  spirit,  is  merely  conformity  to  certain 
legal  requirements.  Nor  is  it  enough  to  go  a  step 
further,  and  to  conceive  that  Christ  bj-  His  Death 
established  a  fund  of  merit  of  which  we  can  on 
certain  conditions  make  ourselves  participants 
(Romanism).  Scriptural  figures  of  speech  there 
are  that  seem  to  give  some  warrant  to  such  a  view 
of  a  spiritual  reservoir  of  grace  which  waits  only 
for  our  willingness  to  dive  into  it. 

Faith's  view  of  the  High  Priest's  intercession  in 
heaven  will  correct  such  notions.  Nay,  the  narrow 
notion  of  faith  may  become  a  snare  to  us.  It  is, 
we  admit,  the  first  condition  in  our  conscious 
looking  for  the  new  spirit  of  life.  But  we  must 
not  confound  the  possession  of  the  condition  with 
the  bestowal  of  the  gift,  or  make  our  qualification 
to  receive  supersede  the  act  of  the  Giver.  Some- 
thing far  more  eflectual  happens.  As  we  invoke 
His  intercession,  we  do  not  merely  awake  an 
ancient  memory  ;  we  hear  a  living  voice  and  see  a 
living  form,  our  Advocate  and  Comforter,  against 
every  accuser  (Ro  8^'**),  and  discern  them  repro- 
ducai  in  our  hearts  by  His  Spirit  'who  maketh 
intercession  for  us  with  groanings  which  cannot  be 
uttered '  (Ro  8^-  -'^).  It  is  God  that  justifieth.  It 
is  the  Son  risen  for  our  justification. 

(7)  The  new  presence. — '  It  is  expedient  that  I  go 
away ;  for  I  will  send  the  Spirit '  ( Jn  16^  Ac  1*) ; 
'  Ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy  One  and  know 
all  things '  (1  Jn  2^- ^) ;  'If  our  heart  condemn  us 
not,  then  have  we  confidence  toward  God '  (3^^) ; 
'  I  saw  in  the  midst  of  the  Church  the  Son  of  man 
all  glorious'  (Rev  1*^^^).  St.  John  views  the  justi- 
fied life  as  a  new  life  in  the  deepest  sense — not  a 
doctrine  merely  for  the  mind  to  embrace ;  not  an 

*  For  a  full  discussion  see  DuBose,  The  Gospel  according  to 
St.  Paui,  chs.  vi.  and  %ii. 
t  HDB,  art.  '  Hebrews,'  voL  ii.  p.  333. 
X  Reeh(fertigut\g  tmd  Yertohnung,  ch.  viiL 


672 


JUSTIFICATION 


JUSTIFICATION 


event  simply  to  be  reiiieuibered  witli  faitli  ;  not 
the  constitution  only  of  a  new  order  of  spiritual 
relations  for  fallen  man  ;  but  a  new  power  into  the 
very  centre  of  human  nature,  the  power  of  a  new 
Divine  principle.  Because  of  this  new  principle  it 
is  a  new  creation,  a  new  creation  which  indeed 
does  not  annihilate  the  old  but  transnuites  it,  and 
fulfils  it — a  pro<'ess  possible  because  tlie  principle 
of  the  new  is,  if  not  continuous  with  the  organic 
princi[>le  of  the  old,  still  consistent  with  that 
principle,  the  Logos  being  the  cosmic  counterpart 
of  the  Spirit.  That  new  power,  new  principle,  in 
the  very  centre  of  humanity  is  Spirit,  i)resence. 
How  so?  By  organic,  living,  universal  develop- 
ment. Christ's  force  was  not  intended  to  stoj)  in 
the  person  of  one  man  to  be  transferred  soon  after 
to  heaven.  Nor  was  it  intended  to  be  a  fund  or 
quantum  to  l>e  ajiplied  subsequently  in  the  way  of 
outward  imjmtation.  It  goes  fortii  to  heal  and 
justify  the  world,  not  as  something  standing  be- 
yond itself  and  by  a  power  external.  He  gathers 
humanity  rather  into  His  own  Person,  stretches 
over  it  the  law  of  His  own  life,  so  that  it  holds  in 
Him  as  its  root.  Into  this  new  order  of  existence 
we  are  not  transferred  wholly  at  once.  We  are 
apprehended  by  Him,  in  the  first  place,  only,  as  it 
were,  at  a  single  point.  But  this  point  is  central. 
The  new  life  lodges  itself,  as  an  efflux  from  Christ, 
in  the  inmost  core  of  our  personality — the  inmost 
self  (above,  §  2, '  Problem  or  justification').  Here  it 
becomes  the  principle  or  seed  of  our  sanctilication, 
conceived  always  not  as  a  substance  but  as  personal, 
a  presence ;  Christ  is  in  the  soul  as  a  magnetic 
centre  (Jn  12^^),  producing  in  its  life  continually 
an  inward  nisus  in  the  direction  antagonistic  to 
sinful  impulse,  a  process  which,  if  continued,  will 
at  last  carry  all  in  the  soul  its  own  way,  as  the 
soul's  forces  increasingly  yield  themselves  in  their 
totality  to  the  totality  of  His  Presence.  The  soul 
thus  grows  into  His  very  nature.  It  is  with 
reason  that  Schleiermacher  speaks  of  the  com- 
munication which  Christ  makes  of  Himself  to 
believers  as  moulding  the  person  (see  Der  christ- 
liche  Glaube\  1830-31,  §  140).  The  Presence  of 
Christ  is  the  ground  of  all  proper  Christian 
personality,  '  the  new  man '  m  Christ  Jesus 
(Eph  2"  4«,  Col  310).  The  end  of  the  process  is 
the  higher  justification  (2  Co  5'^),  the  fruition  of 
that  lirst  justification  which  M'as  but  the  begin- 
ning. It  is  a  process  which  from  beginning  to 
end  is  only  and  wholly  of  Divine  life. 

{c)  Christ-in-iis  the  result. — The  feud  between 
'  faith '  and '  works '  is  an  old  one.  Certain  points  are 
clear.  It  is  not  a  question  of  sinners  being  justified 
by  works  whether  'legal'  or  'good.'  The  impeni- 
tent are  never  justified.  It  is  not  a  question  of 
believers  bein^  justified  by  good  works  only.  By 
his  Avorks  the  believer  will  be  judi^ed.  These  are 
bald  positions  easily  excluded.  The  crux  of  the 
controversy  is  that  works  to  be  good  must  spring 
from  no  motive  other  than  the  one  proper  motive, 
the  new  life  in  Christ.  There  are  three  alter- 
natives :  ( 1 )  Our  own  merit.  We  can  go  beyond  the 
legal  requirements  so  far  that  we  are  able  to  com- 
pensate for  our  wrongdoing.  (2)  Others'  merit. 
Others  may  compensate  similarly  for  us,  either  by 
way  of  being  our  substitute  or  by  w.ay  of  trans- 
ference of  their  supererogatory  virtue  to  us.  Both 
positions  lose  force  in  face  of  the  Divine  claims 
upon  us  and  all  men  for  the  whole  devotion  of 
which  we  are  capable  at  every  moment ;  even  then 
we  are  'unprofitable  servants.'  (3)  Not  of  merit 
but  of  faith.  By  this  it  is  not  meant  that  we  are 
justified  because  faith  shows  that  we  have  altered 
our  ways  and  that  faith  can  complete  itself  in  good 
works,  or  because  faith  has  in  it  the  germ  of  all 
that  God  approves ;  we  are  justified  by  faith,  not 
on  the  ground  of  the  holy  life  that  may  follow,  but 


on  the  ground  of  Him  who  by  faith  is  indwelling 
in  our  spirits  and  implants  us  in  a  new  world  of 
spiritual  reality,  where  love  (as  He  is  love)  alone 
is  power.  '  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  all  law.'  In 
pre-Christian  ages  that  principle  might  be  in  men 
like  Abraham  in  unconscious  operation  and  be 
credited  to  them  for  its  worth.  Similarly  to-day 
in  the  world  outside  Christ.  But  implicitly  or 
explicitly  it  must  be  present  whenever  this  is  so  ; 
good  works  are  the  outcome  of  character  not  of 
ordinances,  of  love  not  of  law,  and  the  character 
and  love  are  of  Christ  in  us.  The  apostles  plainly 
conceive  of  Christ  in  this  reference  in  an  ascending 
scale  of  presence  in  the  world.  He  is  in  the  Cosmos 
as  its  principle.  He  is  in  humanity,  of  which  He 
is  the  *  recapitulation.'  He  is  in  the  Christian 
body,  of  which  He  is  head.  Good  works  are  good 
from  the  principle  underlying  them.  It  is  that 
principle  that  justifies  the  doers  of  them.  That 
])rinciple  is  Christ.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
labours  to  show  that  Christ  as  Priest  and  Victim 
is  perfect,  eternal,  final,  from  the  fact  that  He  is 
character,  not  ordinances.  The  Johannine  Epistles 
are  pregnant  with  the  idea  that  Christ  in  the  heart 
is  Love.  But  character  and  love  are  pure  Spirit. 
Its  implanting  into  us  for  ever  saves  our  'good 
works '  from  degenerating  into  a  mere  moral  code, 
and  furnishes  us  with  a  richer  and  more  personal 
basis  for  our  confidence  in  doing  our  goodness. 
Our  virtues  cannot  be  things  without  us  :  they 
must  be  self-determined  ;  but,  if  my  self  is  deter- 
mined by  Christ  in  me,  we  can  truly  say,  and  ought 
to  say,  of  our  good  works,  as  of  all  else  in  our  life, 
'  Not  I,  but  Christ  in  me.'  This,  further,  we  can 
say  from  the  first,  and  with  assurance.  The  con- 
fidence is  secure  in  the  implanted  principle ;  it  is 
not  bound  to  the  good  Avorks,  which  are  themselves 
not  independent  but  based  on  the  principle.  No 
doubt  the  real  and  vital  relation  of  the  Christian 
to  Christ  is  invariably  and  inevitably  accompanied 
by  its  practical  sense  and  the  actual  experience  of 
its  living  results  in  his  quickened  and  risen  self ; 
but  it  is  not  the  accompaniment,  it  is  the  relation 
itself,  that  is  the  ground  of  certainty.  Kitschl  *  is 
out  of  the  true  lineal  descent  of  Reformed  theology 
when  he  argues  that  the  individual  believer  attains 
certainty  of  salvation  only  as  in  the  exercise  of  his 
religious  experience  he  reaches  dominion  over  the 
world  ;  he  is  back  on  the  old  plane  of  '  ordinances ' 
and  '  works '  which  incited  Luther's  polemic. 

There  Luther  was  on  sure  ground — true  to  his 
own  experience,  true  to  the  apostolic  mind.  That 
mind  conceived  and  solved  the  problem  of  justifi- 
cation with  splendid  invincible  spirituality,  as  the 
act  of  God  alone.  In  so  doing  it  at  the  same  time 
set  its  finality  on  the  firmest  foundation.  If  the 
idea  of  the  union  between  the  Divine  and  the 
human  be  true,  and  the  actualization  of  it  necessary 
to  satisfy  the  deepest  want  of  the  human  spirit, 
before  it  finds  peace  with  God,  all  that  the  case 

*  Ritschl's  is  the  most  exhaustive  and  ori^'inal  discussion  in 
modern  theoloify  of  the  doctrine  of  justification.  No  references 
can  give  any  idea  of  its  wealth.  The  distinctive  features  of  his 
definition  are  only  partly  true  to  Lutheran  tradition.  They  are 
as  follows:  (1)  the  identification  of  justification  and  forsriveness 
of  sins ;  (2)  the  denial  of  any  punishment  of  sin  except  the 
sinner's  separation  from  God ;  (3)  the  rejection  of  the  ideas  of 
the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ  and  His  substitutionary 
suflering  ;  (4)  the  subordination  of  reconciliation  to  justification  ; 
(f))  the  ascription  of  justiHcation  to  the  Christian  community  ; 
(6)  the  inclusion  in  the  idea  of  justification  of  a  reference  to 
man's  relation  to  the  world. 

The  adequate  reason  of  justification  Kitschl  maintains  to  be 
the  fatherly  love  of  God,  not  His  judicial  riu'hteousness ;  the 
condition  of  its  human  appropriation  is  faith,  which  does  not 
directly  include  love  to  man,  hut  implies  freedom  from  all  law. 
This  justification  is  primarily  attached  to  the  community  of 
t'hristians  and  only  to  individuals  as  members  of  it.  The  l)est 
exposition  in  Enirlish  is  A.  K.  CJarvic's  liiUchlian  Theotoijp, 
Kdinhursrh,  1899.  Gomi  translations  of  vols.  i.  and  iii.  are  now 
accessible,  the  former  bv  J.  .Sutlurland  Black  (Edinburgh,  1872), 
the  latt«r  by  U.  R.  Mackintosh  atid  A.  B.  Mocaulay  (do.  1900). 


JUSTIFICATION 


KINDNESS 


673 


can  possibly  demand  is  met  in  Christ,  in  whom  it 
is  met  not  in  idea  merely  but  in  reality.  In  every 
part  of  His  life  He  shows  a  power  of  love.  He 
otfers  Himself  through  its  force  unreservedly  to 
God.  Equally  He  offers  Himself  through  its  force 
unreservedly  to  men,  for  the  purpose  of  drawing 
them  to  God  and  uniting  them  among  themselves 
and  with  God.  He  is  a  centre  of  love.  Divine  and 
human,  intensely  interwoven  ^^•ith  power  to  em- 
brace the  whole  of  humanity  and  to  influence  it 
without  exhaustion  of  His  fullness.  Such  an 
exhibition  has  never  been  j)aralleled  or  approached. 
There  is  no  room  to  think  higher  than  this.  It 
cannot  be  transcended. 

LrreKATfRB. — There  is  neither  a  good  history  of  the  doctrine 
nor  a  comprehensive  discassion  of  the  problems  it  raises, 
"niere  are  excellent  articles  in  fTJJf-J  and  CE,  giving  full  state- 
ments of  modern  Protestant  and  Romanist  ideas.  The  older 
books  of  Faber,  Alex.  Knox,  Newman,  simply  confuse  the  issues. 
A  thoroughly  live  investigation  of  the  apostolic  doctrine  will  be 
found  in  A.  C  McGiffert,  Apottolie  Age,  Edinburgh,  lSd7; 


and  of  St  Paul's  in  Sanday-Headlam.  Com.  on  RomantfiUCC, 
do.  1902).  Interesting  expositions  are  those  of  C.  Gore, 
Itomatts,  London,  1899-1900 ;  A.  E.  Garvie,  Studio  of  Paul 
and  his  Gorpel,  do.  1911 ;  W.  P.  OuBose.  The  Gospel  aeeording 
to  St.  Paul,  Xew  York,  1907.  Of  older  books  stall  worth  study : 
Andreas  Osiander,  De  putijieatione,  1550,  and  Be  unu-o 
inediatore  Jejtu  ChrUto  et  jutti/ieatione  fidei,  1551 ;  Ersldne  of 
Linlathen,  The  Cneonditional  Freenest  of  the  Gotpel,  Edin- 
burgh, 1831.  The  Cunningham  Leeturei  for  1866  by  Jas. 
Buchanan  furnish  a  fxJl  exposition  of  the  'Forensic  Theory.' 
The  few  brochures  of  the  immediate  present  show  the  tendency 
of  thought  to  be  that  argued  for  in  the  article — that  Joatiflca- 
tioa  meets  two  needs — the  sense  of  alienation  from  God  and  the 
sense  of  weakness  to  do  right — by  substitatii^  a  loyal  dis- 
position for  the  performance  of  a  legal  code.  On  the  more 
general  problems  of  Pauline  thought  to  which  jostaflcation  is 
related,  the  following  are  worth  study :  E.  too  Dobschtitz, 
ProbUme  des  apottolutehen  ZeittUten,  Leipzig,  1901 ;  M. 
Goeuel.  VApOtre  Paul  et  Jisut-Christ,  Paris,  1904 ;  A.  Hans- 
rath,  STZG^,  Leipzig,  187»-77,  and  Jetut  und  die  nevlett. 
SekrtftsteUer,  Berlin.  190»-09;  H.  J.  Holtzmann,  Die  AptMel- 
gesehieht^,  Tabingen,  1901,  and  2feute*t.  Theologie,  do.  1911 ; 
C.  I^epenbriner,  Jista  et  let  Ap6tre»,  Paris,  1911. 

i  A.  S.  Martin. 

JUSTUS.— See  Jesus,  Joseph,  Titjjs  Justus. 


K 


KEEPER See  Guard. 

KEY. — It  is  remarkable  that  '  key '  in  the  con- 
crete form  does  not  occur  in  the  apostolic  \vritings. 
The  four  occurrences  in  Rev.  are  symbolical. 
There  are  certain  passages  in  Acts  where  we 
should  expect  mention  of  a  key,  but  the  circum- 
stances are  exceptional,  and  'key'  is  omitted  (Ac 
1210  le*.  27)  When  a  porter  was  in  attendance, 
admittance  was  given  from  the  inside,  and  a  key 
to  open  was  not  necessary  (cf.  Ac  12^*-  ^).  From 
the  fact  that  city  gates  were  guarded,  the  need  for 
a  key  was  in  this  case  also  absent.  It  may  be 
noted  that  the  chains  by  which  prisoners  were 
secured,  and  the  stocks  in  which  their  feet  were 
made  fast,  were  in  all  likelihood  secured  by  the 
equivalent  of  a  key  (.A.c  12*-  ^  16^  etc.). 

We  remark  the  difference  between  the  Hebrew 
word  (C???),  'that  which  opens,'  and  the  Greek 
and  Latin  (sXety,  clavis),  '  that  wliich  shuts.'  This 
seems  to  correspond  with  actual  usage.  Among 
the  Hebrews  the  lock  was  arranged  in  such  a 
manner  that  the  key  was  requisitioned  only  for 
opening  (see  illnst.  in  HDB  ii.  836).  The  bar  was 
shot,  and  the  lock  acted  of  itself,  but  it  could  be 
withdrawn  only  by  aid  of  a  key  or  opener.  This 
advanced  mode  of  making  fast  a  door  was  doubt- 
less preceded  and  attended  by  a  simpler  process, 
whereby  the  bolt  or  bar  could  be  moved  forwards 
and  backwards  by  means  of  a  hook  passing 
through  a  slit  in  the  door.  This  ser^'ed  to  shut 
the  door,  but  did  not  make  it  absolutely  secure  as 
in  the  other  case.  For  the  age  with  which  we 
have  to  deal  we  must  think  of  the  key  as  a  device 
by  which  one  outside  held  command  over  the 
closed  door.  Having  shut  it  in  the  first  instance, 
one  had  power  to  open  it  by  applying  the  key. 

The  imagery  of  Rev.,  so  far  as  'key'  is  con- 
cerned, implies  power  and  authority  on  the  part 
of  one  standing  outside  and  having  possession  of 
the  key.  This  power  is  in  the  hands  of  angelic 
beings,  who  are  above  earth,  and  chiefly  in  the 
hands  of  the  Risen  Christ.  Their  dominion  is 
manifested  upon  earth  and  in  the  under  world, 
over  living  and  dead. 

(1)  Christ  has  the  keys  of  death  and  of  Hades 
(Rev  1",  RV).  This  power  is  Imperial,  exercised 
from  without  and  from  above.  There  are  inter- 
esting parallels  to  this,  apart  from  Scripture,  in 
VOL.  I.— 43 


literature,  both  earlier  and  later.  When  Istar  de- 
scended to  the  land  of  no-return  she  called  imperi- 
ously to  the  porter  to  open  the  door,  and  threatened 
in  case  of  refusal  to  shatter  the  door  and  break 
the  bolt.  Here  the  power  is  primitively  conceived, 
and  remains  largely  ^\•ith  the  one  within.  For 
later  and  more  advanced  conceptions  see  Dante, 
Purg.  ix.  65  ff.,  and  Milton,  Paradise  Lost,  iL 
774  tf.,  850  ff.  In  both  these  instances  the  power, 
although  great,  is  still  limited. 

(2)  Angelic  authority  is  evident  in  Rev  9^  20^, 
where  the  key  of  the  '  pit '  or  '  well '  of  the  abyss, 
or  of  the  abyss  simply,  is  spoken  of.  This  power 
was  delegated  ('was  given,'  9^).  That  some 
symbol  of  power  was  bestowed  seems  clear  from 
20^,  where  the  key  and  a  great  chain  for  binding 
are  seen  in  the  angels  hand  (or  attached  to  his 
person).  The  figure  of  the  key  here  directs  our 
thought  to  the  pits  or  wells  of  ancient  times, 
whose  opening  was  safeguarded  against  illegiti- 
mate use  by  a  covering  of  some  kind.  The  primi- 
tive setting  of  such  coverings  would  naturally  be 
horizontal,  but  here  the  imagery,  extending  to 
key,  points  rather  to  a  door  set  upright  and  se- 
cured by  bolt  or  lock.  The  stone  doors  of  tombs 
may  be  compared. 

(3)  Upon  earth  itself  Christ's  unlimited  author- 
ity is  exercised  over  the  churches,  including  that 
in  Philadelphia  (Rev  3').  The  'key  of  DaWd' 
here  mentioned  is  reminiscent  of  Is  22'-'*,  where 
some  sort  of  investiture  is  in  the  ^Titer's  mind 
{HDB  v.  172).  In  this  instance  power  is  exhibited 
in  the  most  absolute  form,  and  made  over  to  the 
Church  in  the  sense  of  a  'door  opened,'  for  the 
enjoyment  rather  than  for  the  extension  of  the 
gospel  (see  R.  W.  Pounder,  Hist.  Notes  on  the 
Book  of  Revelation,  1912,  p.  140).  It  is  not  sur- 
prising that  the  reading  of  this  verse  should  have 
been  attracted  to  1^,  as  appears  in  some  inferior 
MSS  {abov  for  \awiS). 

See  further  DCG,  art.  '  Keys.'  For  specimens  of 
actual  keys  discovered  in  the  course  of  excava- 
tion see  R.  A.  S.  Macalister,  The  Excavation  of 
Gezer,  1912,  i.  187  and  ii.  271.  Further  Ulustra- 
tions  in  A.  Rich,  Diet,  of  Roman  and  Greek 
Antiquities?,  1873,  s.v.  '  Clavis.' 

W.  CrUICKSHAXK. 

KINDNESS.  —  In  its  substantival,  adjectival, 
verbal,  and  adverbial  form  this  term  occurs  in  the 


674 


KINDNESS 


KING 


English  NT  in  the  following  passages :  Lk  C, 
Ac  2V  282,  1  Co  13*.  2  Co  6«,  (lal  5»  (IIV  only), 
Eph  2^  4»«,  Col  3",  Tit  2»  (RV  only),  3S  2  P  V  (AV 
only;  IIV  'love  of  the  brethren').  In  all  tliese 
passages  (except  Ac  27'  28^",  where  it  renders  <pt\- 
av0pj)irui,  <(>i\avepwirla,  Tit  2',  where  it  renders 
Aya06i,  and  2  P  V,  where  'brotherly  kindness' 
renders  ipi\a5e\tf>la)  the  original  has  xPV<^'''^^t  XPV<^- 
t(5tj;s,  x/"?"^''*''***'-  These  Greek  words,  however, 
occur  in  several  other  places,  where  the  Englisli  NT 
does  not  employ  the  term  'kindness,'  viz,  Mt  11^ 
('easy'),  Lk  S*"  (AV  xpWT&rtpoi,  'better,'  IIV 
XPV<rr6s,  '.good '),  Ro  2<  "M'  goodness '),  S'"  ( '  good '), 
11!"  ('goodness'),  1  Co  15»  ('good'),  Gal  5"  (AV 
'gentleness,' RV  'kindness'),  1  P  2' (' gracious'). 
Tliese  passages  will  have  to  be  taken  into  account 
in  determining  the  precise  meaning  of  the  con- 
ception. 

XPV<tt6s  is  the  verl)al  adjective  of  xP'i'^>  *  ^^'^•'  Its 
primary  meaning,  therefore,  is  '  usable,'  '  service- 
able,' 'good,'  'adequate,'  'efficient'  (of  persons  as 
well  as  of  things).  This  utilitarian  sense  of  '  good- 
ness' pa.sse8  over  into  the  ethical  sense  in  wliich 
it  becomes  the  opposite  to  such  words  as  irovrjpbs, 
fiox0riP<^^f  aicrxpds.  It  further  passes  over  into  the 
more  specialized  ethical  meaning  of  '  kind,'  '  mild.' 
The  process  of  the  latter  transition  may  perhaps 
still  be  observed  in  the  phrase  rd  xp'7<'^''<i  = '  good 
services,' '  benefits,'  '  kindnesses.' 

In  the  NT  there  is  only  one  instance  where  it 
has  the  sub-ethical  meaning  '  good  for  use,'  viz. 
Lk  5^' ;  here  the  old  wine  is  said  to  be  '  good '  or 
'better.'  According  to  Trench  (Synonyms  of  the 
NV,  1901,  p.  233),  even  here  the  thought  is 
coloured  by  the  ethical  employment  of  the  word  in 
other  connexions,  xP'7''^tos=' mellowed  with  age.' 
This  is  certainly  true  of  Mt  ll''",  where  Christ's 
yoke  is  called  xpv<^'''os  because  it  is  a  figure  for  de- 
mands that  are  kind  and  mild.  In  all  other  in- 
stances the  ethical  application  is  explicit.  Tlie 
precise  shade  of  meaning,  however,  attaching  to 
the  word  in  this  sense  is  not  easy  to  determine. 
In  certain  instances  it  may  de.signate  moral  good- 
ness in  general.  This  seems  to  be  the  case  in 
Ro  3'*  (iroiQv  xPV<^'''^''"ir''0''  "■  quotation  from  Ps  14'^, 
where  xpv<^'''o»  is  the  LXX  rendering  for  aio).  In 
1  Co  15'^  the  proverbial  sayinix  (pBelpovaiv  ijdrj 
Xp7i<TTh.  ofiiXiai  KaKai,  '  evil  companionships  corrupt 
good  morals'  (or  'characters'),  lias  XPV'^'''^^  in  the 
same  general  sense,  the  opposite  here  being  /caK(5s. 
In  all  other  cases  there  are  indications  that  some 
specific  quality  of  moral  goodness  is  intended. 
Most  clearly  tliis  is  apparent  in  Gal  5^^,  for  here 
XpiyirriTj/s  stands  among  a  numl)er  of  Christian 
graces  and  is  even  distinguished  from  dyaOua-vvrj, 
'goodness.'  A  similar  co-ordination  is  found  in 
Col  3'-,  where  XPV<^'''^V^  occurs  side  by  side  with 
vpattTTji.  Various  attempts  have  been  made  at 
defining  that  conception.  Jerome  in  his  exposi- 
tion of  tial  5'-*  renders  xp'?o'7-(5ri;y  by  bcnignitas  (cf. 
the  rendering  by  Wyclif  and  in  the  Rheims  Ver- 
sion), and  quotes  the  Stoic  definition  :  '  benignitas 
est  virtus  sponte  ad  benefaciendum  exposita.'  The 
difference  between  xPV<^^^''"n^  and  dYo^wo-yi'i;  he 
finds  in  this,  that  the  latter  can  go  together  with 
a  degree  of  severity,  whilst  it  is  inherent  in  xpv<^- 
t6tt}%  to  be  sweet  and  inviting  in  its  association 
with  others.  This,  however,  does  not  quite  hit 
the  centre  of  the  biblical  idea.  Most  shrewdly,  it 
seems  to  us,  the  latter  has  been  pointed  out  by 
Tittmann  (de  Synonymis  in  NT,  1829-32,  i.  141)  as 
consisting  in  the  trait  of  beneficence  towards  those 
who  are  evil  and  ungrateful :  '  x/""'^''<^s  bene  cupit, 
neque  bonis  tantum  sed  etiam  nialis.' 

A  closer  inspection  of  the  several  pa.ssages  will 
bear  this  out,  at  least  as  the  actual  implication  of 
the  NT  usage,  if  not  as  the  inherent  etymological 
force  of  the  word,     lu  Lk  6^**  God  is  said  to  be 


Xpj/fTTij  towards  the  unthankful  and  evil,  and  the 
statement  serves  to  urge  the  preceding  exhorta- 
tion :  '  love  your  enemies,  do  them  good,  and  lend, 
never  despairing.'  The  passages  in  Romans  point 
to  the  same  conclusion.  In  2*  the  xPVfT^Trii  is 
associated  with  '  forbearance '  and  '  longsuflering ' ; 
it  is  that  attitude  of  God  by  which  doing  good  in 
the  face  of  evil  He  leads  men  to  repentance.  In  the 
second  clause  of  this  verse  the  word  occurs  in  the 
form  rb  xpv^^^"  '"'"^  Otov,  which  prolmbly  means  tlie 
embodiment  of  tiie  xpv^t^^V^  in  acts.  On  the  same 
principle  in  ll'^  xP'n<^'''o'''V^  i«  the  opposite  of  diro- 
To/ila,  ' severity ' ;  'to  continue  in  the  XPV<J"''^V^  of 
God '  means  to  continue  in  conscious  deitendence 
on  this  undeserved  favour  of  God  (cf.  v.*',  '  be  not 
highminded,  but  fear').  In  1  Co  13*  we  read  of 
love  that  it  '  suflereth  long  (xp'/frreyerai),  envieth 
not,'  which  indicates  that  a  kindness  is  meant 
which  overcomes  obstacles.  In  2  Co  6',  again, 
XP'7<rT(}ri;s  is  found  in  conjunction  with  '  longsufler- 
ing,' and  in  a  context  which  emphasizes  the  patient, 
forbearing  character  of  the  Aj)ostle's  loving  minis- 
tration to  his  converts.  In  Gal  5-^  we  meet  with 
the  same  conjunction  between  '  longsufFering  '  and 
XpWTdrrjs,  and  here,  by  distinction  from  dyaOwavyri, 
'  benevolence,'  and  irpavrris,  '  meekness,'  the  sense 
is  narrowed  down  to  a  benevolence  which  asserts 
itself  either  with  a  peculiar  cheerfulness  or  in  the 
face  of  peculiar  difhculties.  According  to  Eph  2^ 
the  Divine  grace  is  shown  in  kindness  ;  no  matter 
whether  xpW'otv^  is  here  taken  as  abstractiun  pro 
concrcto  =  the  embodiment  of  God's  kind  procedure 
in  the  work  of  salvation,  or  whether  'grace'  be 
given  an  objective  concrete  sense ;  in  either  case 
the  association  of  the  two  shows  that  the  Divine 
XprjffTdrris  is  conceived  as  having  for  its  object  the 
sinful  and  unworthy.  The  context  of  Col  3'-  like- 
wise emphasizes  the  forbearing  and  forgiving  dis- 
position required  of  the  Christian  in  view  of  the 
forgiveness  received  from  God,  and  the  terms  with 
which  XPV'^'''^''"']^  is  here  associated  ('lowliness,' 
'meekness,'  'longsuflering')  are  again  terms  that 
describe  benevolence  over  against  faults  observed 
in  fellow-Christians.  The  xpvo'i'irTji  of  Tit  3*  is 
shoAvn  by  the  context  to  be  God's  kindness  towards 
sinful,  undeserving  man,  and  held  up  as  an  example 
for  the  Christian  of  abstention  from  evil-speaking, 
contentiousness,  and  pride.  It  came  to  such  as 
were  'foolish,  disobedient,  deceived,  serving  divers 
lusts  and  pleasures,  living  in  malice  and  envy, 
hateful  and  hating  one  another.'  Finally,  in  1  P  2^ 
(a  quotation  from  Ps  34")  the  general  meaning 
'  gracious '  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the  fact  that 
the  Divine  xp'/f^'^^'?'  is  set  in  contrast  to  the 
wickedness  and  guile  and  hj'pocrisies  and  envies 
and  evil-speakings,  w^hich  tiie  readers  must  put 
aside  as  new-born  men  (cf.  P-*  and  the  'therefore' 
in  2'),  and  the  putting  aside  of  which  is  invited 
by  their  vivid  experience  in  the  new  life  that  the 
Lord  Himself  is  gracious. 

Geeuiiardus  Vos. 

KING. — The  title  is  applied  to  rulers  of  various 
degrees  of  sovereignty.  We  find  it  employed  to 
designate  the  tetrarch  Agrippa  II.  (Ac  25") ; 
Aretas  of  Arabia  (2  Co  IF-);  Agrippa  I.,  whose 
territory  was  co-extensive  with  that  of  Herod  the 
Great,  and  wlio  seems  to  have  received  tlie  royal 
title  (Ac  12') ;  and  the  Roman  Emperor,  whom  it 
appears  to  have  been  the  custom  for  Greeks  and 
Orientals  so  to  designate  (1  Ti  2-,  1  P  2"- 1').  An 
instance  of  the  elasticity  of  the  term  is  provided 
in  Rev  17,  where  tiie  seven  kings  in  v.'"  are 
Roman  Emi>erors,  while  the  ten  kings  in  v."  are 
vassal  kings. 

1.  Christ  as  King.— (1)  The  nature  of  Christ's 
Kinrfship. — It  was  made  an  accusation  against  St. 
Paul  and  Silas  at  Thessalonica  (Ac  17')  that  they 
were  guilty  of  trejuson,    inasmuch   as   tiiey  pro- 


KING 


KING 


675 


claimed  another  king,  one  Jesus.  It  was  the  re- 
vival of  the  charge  brought  against  the  Master 
(Lk  23-).  It  is  true  that  tlie  Christians  did  chiim 
Kingship  for  their  Lord,  but  His  Kingdom  was 
not  of  this  world  (Jn  18*).  His  throne  is  in 
heaven,  where  He  is  set  down  with  His  Father 
(Kev  3-').  There  are  various  representations  of 
His  Kingship  in  the  aix)stolic  writings. 

At  one  time  His  reign  seems  to  have  already  he- 
gun.  This  is  the  thought  suggested  bj-  the  fre- 
quently recurring  phrase,  based  on  Ps  110^  '.«4it- 
ting  at  the  right  hand  of  God '  (Ro  8",  Eph  1'*, 
Col  3^),  which  signifies  Christ's  participation  in 
the  Divine  government.  According  to  tliis  view, 
Clirist  enters  into  His  /3eurtX«a  immediately  on  His 
Exaltation  (B.  Weiss,  Bib.  Theol.  of  the  NT,  Eng. 
tr.,  ii.  [1883]  §  99),  in  recognition  of  His  obedience 
"unto  death  (Rev  3-»,  He  l•2^  Ph  2«*).  On  the 
literal  interpretation  of  Col  1^,  the  Kingdom  of 
the  Son  is  present  even  now,  and  believers  are  al- 
ready translated  into  it  (so  Lightfoot  and  Haupt, 
while  others  interpret  the  plirase  proleptically). 
Their  citizenship  is  in  heaven,  whence  they  look 
for  Christ  (Ph  3^}.  The  law  they  obey  is  called 
vofLos  paffikiKos  (Ja  2*),  in  ^-irtue  of  its  emanating 
from  the  King  (Deissmann,  Licht  vom  Osten,  p. 
265).  At  times  this  heavenly  Kingship  of  Christ 
is  represented  as  undisturbed  by  further  conflict, 
and  as  peaceful  sway  over  the  powers  which  have 
been  brought  into  subjection.  So  in  1  P  3**  He  is 
on  the  right  hand  of  God,  '  angels  and  authorities 
and  powers  being  made  subject  unto  him '  (cf. 
Eph  1**-)  ;  and  in  He  10^^  He  is  represented  as 
sitting  down  for  ever  at  the  right  hand  of  God, 
'  from  henceforth  expecting  till  hLs  enemies  be 
made  his  footstool.'  According  to  this  view.  His 
Mork  is  finished  ;  His  present  state  is  one  of  royal 
rest,  and  it  remains  for  God  to  complete  the  sub- 
jugation of  the  hostile  powers. 

But  there  are  other  representations  of  Christ's 
Kingship.  The  most  general  view  of  His  ^acikeia 
in  the  XT  represents  it  as  not  already  realized, 
but  beginning  at  the  Parousia  (so  O.  Pfleiderer, 
Paiilinism,  Eng.  tr.,  1877,  i.  268) ;  and  according 
to  the  programme  sketched  by  St.  Paul  in  1  Co 
15^*^-,  His  reign  is  no  peaceful  sway,  but  a  cease- 
less conflict  against  the  powers  of  darkness.  '  He 
must  reign,  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his 
feet'  (v.=*).  The  last  enemy  to  be  overcome  is 
Death ;  and  when  that  is  accomplished,  then 
Cometh  the  end,  when  He  delivers  up  the  sovereignty 
to  God  (v.**).  Accoriling  to  this  outline,  Christ's 
reign  is  of  the  nature  of  an  interregnum,  to  be 
terminated  (in  opposition  to  the  ets  to  Sii/Ke/tes  of 
He  10^)  when  He  resigns  the  power  into  the  hands 
of  God. 

In  the  later  Epistles  this  programme  is  not 
adhered  to.  In  accordance  with  their  more 
developed  Christology,  Christ  becomes  the  end 
of  Creation  (Col  V^),  and  the  final  consummation 
is  now  represented,  not  as  the  reign  of  God,  who 
is  to  be  '  all  in  all '  (1  Co  15^),  but  as  the  Kingdom 
of  Christ  and  God  (Eph  5'),  or  even  of  Clirist  alone 
(2  Ti  4^),  whose  Kingdom  is  an  everlasting  one 
(2  P  1^^),  and  whose  sovereignty  is  declared  to  ex- 
tend to  the  future  a?on  (Eph  1"^).  Again,  in  the 
earlier  representation  Christ's  Kingdom  is  to  be 
established  on  earth  at  His  Coming,  but  in  the 
later  versions  it  becomes  a  heavenly  kingdom 
(2  Ti  4'*),  corresponding  to  the  kingdom  of  the 
Father  which  St.  Paul  had  expected  to  succeed 
the  interregnum  of  the  Son. 

In  Revelation  we  again  meet  with  the  conception 
of  a  temporary  reign  of  Christ,  its  duration  being 
put  at  l,tMX>  years  (20*).  It  is  questionable  whether 
that  reign  is  here  regarded  as  one  of  uninterrapted 
l)eace  and  blessedness,  or  of  continuous  conflict 
against  the  powers  of  evU.      H.  J.  Holtzmann 


{XT  Theologies  1911,  i.  542  f.)  thinks  that  the  only 
original  contribution  made  by  the  author  of  the 
Revelation  in  this  picture  of  the  millennium  is  the 
representation  of  the  interregnum  as  a  i)eriod  of 
waxe  and  rest  (20^  *• '').  On  the  other  hand,  F.  C. 
Porter  {HDB  iv.  262)  contends  that  the  1,000  years' 
reign  is  part  of  the  last  conflict  against  evil,  the 
reigning  and  judging  of  Christ  and  His  saints 
being  the  gradual  subjugation  of  the  powers  of 
evil,  and  that  there  is  no  suggestion  in  Rev.  that 
peace  and  rest  characterize  the  millennium. 

(2)  Christ  and  earthly  kings. — In  the  Pauline 
references  to  the  sovereignty  of  Christ  the  hostile 
forces  which  He  overcomes  are  not  earthly  poten- 
tates but  the  angelic  principalities  and  powers,  the 
world-rulers  of  this  darkness  (Eph  6",  2  Co  4^,  Col 
l^).  To  this  corresponds  the  conflict  with  Satan 
in  Revelation.  But  in  the  latter  book  there  is 
also  frequent  representation  of  Christ's  sovereignty 
over  earthly  potentates.  He  is  Prince  of  the  kings 
of  the  earth  (1*),  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords 
(17"  19'*).  Out  of  His  mouth  goeth  a  sharp  sword 
with  which  to  smite  the  nations,  and  He  rules 
them  with  a  rod  of  iron  (19'*).  The  kings  of  earth 
who  have  committed  fornication  with  Babjlon 
(17'),  and  who  marshal  their  armies  in  support  of 
the  Beast  (19**),  are  numbered  among  the  enemies 
whom  He  has  to  subdue.  Corresponding  to  this 
attitude  of  hostility  to  Christ  on  the  part  of  the 
kings  of  the  earth  in  Rev.  is  the  spirit  of  hatred 
to  the  Roman  Empire  which  the  book  breathes, 
as  contrasted  with  that  recommended  in  the  other 
ajjostolic  writings.  St.  Paul  as  a  citizen  of  the 
Roman  Empire  recognizes  in  the  higher  powers 
the  ordinances  of  God,  and  regards  subjection  to 
them  as  a  religious  duty  (Ro  13"^-).  St.  Peter  re- 
commends submission  to  every  ordinance  of  man 
for  the  Lord's  sake,  and  exhorts  to  fear  God  and 
honour  the  king  (1  P  2'»- '').  In  1  Ti  2«  the  in- 
junction is  given  to  pray  for  kings  and  for  all  in 
authority.  But  in  Rev.  we  find  a  fierce  hatred  of 
Rome  and  longing  for  her  destruction.  She  is  to 
the  author  the  throne  of  the  Beast  (16"),  the  very 
incarnation  of  the  sin  which  Christianity  sought 
to  destroy,  and  his  attitude  towards  the  Imperial 
power  is  the  direct  opposite  of  that  taken  up  by 
St.  Paul. 

2.  God  as  King. — There  is  no  power  but  of  God 
(Ro  13'),  and  all  kindly  authority  ultimately  pro- 
ceeds from  Him  who  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of 
lords  (1  Ti  6'*).  Christ  has  ultimately  to  deliver 
up  the  sovereignty  to  the  Father,  being  subject 
to  Him  that  put  all  things  under  Him,  that  God 
may  be  all  in  all  (1  Co  15-*"^).  In  the  song  of 
Moses  and  of  the  Lamb  (Rev  15*)  God  is  praised  as 
the  King  of  nations,  and  in  1  Ti  1"  a  doxology  is 
sounded  to  Him  as  King  of  the  JBons.  The  phrase 
may  be  chosen  with  reference  to  the  Gnostic  series 
of  seons,  and  maj"  mean  '  King  of  the  worlds.' 
Others  take  it  as  '  King  of  the  world  times,'  the 
ruler  who  decrees  Avhat  is  to  hap[>en  from  age  to 
age ;  while  others  render  it,  as  in  the  AV,  '  the 
King  eternal.' 

3.  Belieirers  as  kings. — In  Rev  1^  the  AV  runs : 
'  and  hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God.' 
This  is  based  on  the  reading  ^offikels,  which  must 
be  abandoned  for  the  better-attested  ^aaCkfiav. 
But  in  5'",  where  the  same  phrase  occurs  in  the 
song  of  the  angels  concerning  the  Church  (though 
here  again  there  is  a  variant  ^aaiXth,  which,  how- 
ever, would  render  the  concluding  clause  super- 
fluous), there  is  the  further  addition :  koX  ^aaiX- 
fvmicw  irl  yijs.  K  reads  /3a<rtX«Voiv«i' ;  and  if  we 
accept  that  reatling,  then  the  reference  is  to  the 
future  dominion  of  believers  as  represented  in  20*, 
where  they  live  and  reign  with  Christ  1,000  years. 
Other  references  to  this  future  sovereignty  are 
found  in  Ro  5'',  2  Ti  2^,  and  1  Co  6^  (where  they 


676 


KING  OF  KINGS 


KINGDOM,  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


judge  the  world  and  the  very  angels).  IJut  if 
paffiXeiJovaiv  be  retained,  then  the  standpoint  of  the 
author  is  tliat  already  that  sovereignty  of  tlie 
saints  prophesied  in  Dn  7'~* "  has  begun.  The 
Church,  tlown-trodden  and  oppressed,  is  already 
the  dominant  power  in  the  world.  St.  Paul  ironi- 
cally congratulates  the  Corinthians  on  the  assump- 
tion of  kingly  authority  (1  Co  4*).  Their  vaunting 
way  have  been  due  to  a  perversion  of  tins  doctrine 
of  the  present  sovereignty  of  the  saints. 

LiTKRATc-RE. — The  various  handliooks  ou  A'2'  Theol. ;  H. 
Weinel,  Die  Stellung  dM  L'rchriiiteHtiDit^  zum  Staat,  1908  ;  A. 
Deissmann,  Licht  votn  Osten,  1908. 

G.  "Wauchopk  Stkwart. 
KING  OF  KINGS  AND  LORD  OF  LORDS.— The 

title  '  King  of  kings,'  assumed  of  old  by  the  IJaby- 
lonian  nionarchs  and  adopted  by  the  Achajmenidaj, 
is  proved  by  coins  and  inscriptions  to  have  been 
laid  claim  to,  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian 
era,  by  various  other  Oriental  jjotentates,  e.g.  tlie 
kings  of  Armenia,  the  Bosporus,  and  Palmyra 
(A.  Deissmann,  Licht  vom  Ostcn,  1908,  p.  2G5).  It 
liad  been  applied  by  the  Jews  to  their  God  (2  Mac 
13*,  3  Mac  5^),  and  is  combined  with  the  appella- 
tion '  Lord  of  lords '  (bestowed  on  Jahweh  in  l)t  10'^, 
Ps  136^)  to  form  the  supreme  title  '  King  of  kings 
and  Lord  of  lords,'  with  which  God  is  invested 
in  1  Ti  6".  This  heaping  up  of  attributes  has  a 
parallel  in  1".  It  is  not  evident  whiit  is  its  precise 
purpose  in  the  context.  Some  would  explain  it  as 
a  counterblast  to  Gnostic  misrepresentations.  H. 
Weinel  (Die  Stellung  des  Urchristentums  zum 
Staat,  1908,  jip.  22,  51),  who  recalls  ti»e  Babylonian 
origin  of  the  title,  iinds  some  trace  of  the  old  Baby- 
lonian astrology  in  the  further  course  of  the  pas- 
sage, *  who  only  hath  immortality,  dwelling  in  the 
light  which  no  man  can  approach'  (cf.  Ja  1",  '  the 
Father  of  lights,'  i.e.  stars).  The  same  lofty  title 
is  applied  in  llev  l?^*  19^®  to  Christ,  in  earnest  of 
the  certainty  of  His  triumph  over  tlie  kings  of  the 
earth.  In  view  of  the  hostility  to  the  Iloman 
Empire  which  breathes  throughout  the  Book  of 
Ilevelation,  and  the  express  references  in  it  to  the 
worship  of  tlie  Emperor  (IS'^-^'  14*  20''),  it  is  pro- 
bable that  this  title  is  deliberately  assigned  to 
Christ  in  assertion  of  His  right  to  that  dignity  and 
reverence  which  were  falsely  claimed  by  the 
lioman  Emperor  (see  artt.  King  and  Lord). 

CJ.  Wauchopp:  Stewart. 

KINGDOM,  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.— 1.  References 
in  Synoptic  Gospels.— The  conception  of  the  King- 
dom which  occupies  so  large  a  place  in  the  lirst 
three  Gospels  Iinds  a  relatively  small  place  in  the 
remaining  books  of  the  NT.  In  our  earliest  Gospel* 
— that  of  St.  Mark— the  Kingdom  of  God  is  the 
main  topic  of  Christ's  preaching.  He  began  His 
ministry  by  announcing  the  good  news  tliat  the 
Kingdom  of  God  was  at  hand  (1^').  To  His  disciples 
was  entrusted  the  '  secret  plan '  about  the  Kingdom 
(4").  The  Parable  of  the  Seed  Growing  Secretly 
explained  that  it  would  come  like  harvest  after  a 
period  of  growth,  i.e.  it  would  present  itself  in  due 
time  when  the  period  of  heralding  its  advent  was 
over  (4-'®"^).  Its  coming  would  not  be  long  delayed, 
for  some  who  heard  Christ  speak  would  see  it  come 
with  j>ower  (9').  The  possession  of  wealth  was  an 
impediment  to  entry  into  it;  i.e.  wealth  hindered 
men  from  enrolling  themselves  as  disciples  of 
Christ,  the  coming  King  (10^-**).  Elsewhere  we 
read  not  of  the  coming  of  the  Kingdom,  but  of  the 
Coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  (so  in  IS'*  14«2).  The 
meaning  attached  to  '  gospel '  in  this  book  as  tlie 
good  news  of  the  coming  Kingdom  i)reached  by 
Christ  is  primitive,  and  earlier  than  the  Pauline 
use  of  •  gospel '  for  the  good  news  about  Christ. 

In  the  First  Gospel  the  term  is  changed.     We 

*  It  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  art.  to  consider  at 
length  the  idea  of  the  Kingdom  in  Chrisfu  teaching. 


readnowof  the  'kingdom  of  theheavens'  rather  than 
of  the  Kingdom  of  God.  But  the  main  line  of  idea 
is  the  same  (see  W.  C.  Allen,  St.  Matthew  [ICC, 
1907],  pp.  Ixvii-lxxi).  The  emphasis  which  is  placed 
in  this  Gospel  upon  the  near  coming  of  the  Son  of 
Man  to  inaugurate  the  Kingdom  (cf.  16'*  24*-**, 
etc. )  is  due  largely  to  the  Matthtean  collection  of 
discourses  used  by  the  editor. 

St.  Luke  returns  to  the  jihrase  '  the  Kingdom  of 
God,'  and  though  in  general  outline  the  idea  of  the 
Kingdom  is  the  same  as  in  tlie  two  prior  Gospels, 
tliere  are  one  or  two  suggestions  that  St.  Luke  was 
beginning  to  realize  that  a  considerable  period  of 
history  might  precede  the  coming  of  the  Son  of 
Man  to  inaugurate  the  Kingdom.  Jerusalem  is  to 
be  trodden  down  by  the  Gentiles  until  the  times  of 
the  Gentiles  are  fulfilled  (2r-'').  And  there  is  a  hint 
of  the  idea  which  was  soon  to  overshadow  the 
anticipation  of  the  near  approach  of  the  Son  of 
Man,  that  in  a  veiy  real  sense  the  Kingdom  was 
already  present  (17-*,  '  within'  or  '  among  you'). 

2.  References  in  other  NT  books. — Keferences  to 
the  Kingdom  occur  in  St.  Mark  some  16  times,  in 
St.  Matthew  some  52  times,  and  in  St.  Luke  about 
43  times.  By  contrast  with  this  the  comparative 
j)aucity  of  references  to  the  Kingdom  in  the  remain- 
ing books  is  very  striking.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel 
it  occurs  only  5  times,  and  in  all  these  passages 
the  conception  is  that  of  a  spiritual  Kingdom  which 
might  be  conceived  of  as  now  present.  In  Acts  it 
occurs  8  times,  6  of  them  being  references  to  speak- 
ing or  preaching  alx)ut  the  Kingdom.  In  the  whole 
of  St.  Paul's  Epistles  it  occurs  only  13  times,  in  the 
Catholic  Epistles  only  twice  (Ja  2*,  2  P  1"),  in 
Hebrews  only  twice  (1^  12^),  in  the  Apocalypse  5 
tiraes(l«-9  5'^lliM2"'). 

3.  References  to  Christ  as  King.— Outside  the 
Gospels  there  is  also  a  very  infrequent  reference  to 
Christ  as  King  except  in  so  far  as  this  was  involved 
in  the  title  '  Christ '  or  '  anointed.'  In  the  Gospels 
such  references  occur  almost  entirely  in  connexion 
with  the  events  of  the  last  few  days  of  the  Lord's 
life  (entry  into  Jerusalem,  trial  before  Pilate). 
The  exceptions  are  Mt  2-  (where  the  Magi  inquire 
after  the  one  who  has  been  born  King  of  the  Jews), 
25**  (where  the  term  '  king'  is  placed  in  the  mouth 
of  Jesus  as  descriptive  of  the  Son  of  Man  sitting 
upon  the  throne  of  glory),  Jn  1*^  (where  Nathanael 
addresses  Him  as  '  King  of  Israel '),  and  6"  (wliere 
it  is  said  that  the  multitudes  wished  to  make  Him 
a  king).  Nowhere  in  St.  Paul,  in  the  Catholic 
Epistles,  or  in  Hebrews  is  the  term  applied  to 
Christ.  But  in  Ac  17^  the  accusation  is  made 
against  Christians  that  they  acted  contrary  to  the 
decrees  of  Cajsar,  saying  tiiat  there  was  another 
king,  one  Jesus.  Lastly,  in  Uie  Apocalypse  the 
exalted  Lamb,  and  the  llider  on  tiie  white  horse, 
titled  'the  Word  of  God,'  are  called  'King  of 
kings  and  Lord  of  lords'  (17**  19*'^ ;  see  preceding 
article). 

4.  Reasons  for  paucity  of  references  in  apostolic 
literature. — If  wc  now  ask  why  the  idea  of  king- 
ship as  applied  to  Christ  finds  so  little  space  in  the 
literature  of  the  Ejiistles,  the  answer  must  be  mani- 
fold. (1)  The  conception  of  kingship  found  nartial 
expression  in  tlie  terms  'Christ 'and  'Lora.'  (2) 
The  avoidance  of  the  term  '  king'  was  an  obvious 
precautionary  mesisure.  Ac  17'  is  significant  in 
this  respect.  The  early  Christian  teachers  had 
enough  difficulties  to  contend  M-ith  without  invit- 
ing the  accusjition  that  tliey  were  guilty  of  treason 
against  the  State.  Apart  from  Mattnew,  whicli 
was  probably  intended  originally  for  circulation 
amongst  Jewish  Christians,  the  only  writing  of 
the  NT  which  in  so  many  words  assigns  the  title 
'  King'  to  Jesus  is  the  Apocalypse,  a  book  written 
at  a  time  when  State  persecution  had  driven  the 
writer  to  au  attitude  of  detiuite  hostility  to  the 


KIXGDO^r,  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


KINGDOM,  KINGDOM  OF  GOD    677 


Roman  Empire,  ami  hail  induced  liim  to  tlirow 
over  tlie  cautious  attitude  of  a  previous  generation 
towards  the  State.  (3)  It  was  soon  felt  that  tlie 
teaching  of  Christ  was  many-sided  and  capable 
of  more  than  one  interpretation.  Roughly,  there 
were  two  ways  of  thinking  about  the  Kingdom.  It 
might  be  thought  of  eschatologically  as  a  Kingdom 
to  be  founded  when  Clirist  returned.  This  is  per- 
haps the  view  which  prevails  in  the  NT.  It  is 
difficult  to  prove  this,  because  the  passages  which 
speak  of  the  Kingdom  are  not  brought  into  im- 
mediate connexion  with  those  which  speak  of  the 
Second  Coming  of  Christ.  And  it  is  therefore  often 
open  to  question  whether  the  Kingdom  referred  to 
is  a  Kingdom  to  be  established  when  He  comes,  or 
a  Kingdom  of  which  the  Christian  disciple  feels 
himself  even  now  to  be  an  actual  member  by  virtue 
of  his  relationship  to  God  through  Christ.  But  the 
eschatological  sense  is  probable  in  1  Th  2'^,  w  here 
St.  Paul  prays  that  his  converts  may  walk  worthily 
of  God,  who  calls  them  '  to  his  kingdom  and  glory,' 
and  in  2  Th  1*,  '  that  you  may  be  accounted  worthy 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  on  behalf  of  which  you 
sufl'er.'  The  same  may  be  said  of  2  Ti  4^  'his 
appearance  and  his  kingdom,'  and  2  Ti  4^^  'shall 
save  me  into  his  eternal  kingdom.'  This  eschato- 
logical sense  appeai-s  also  in  2  P  1",  '  an  entry  shall 
be  granted  unto  us  into  the  eternal  kingdom  of 
our  Lord  and  Saviour,'  and  less  certainly  in  He  12-^, 
'receiving  a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  shaken.' 
But  the  word  'kingdom'  here  may  perhaps  rather 
mean  that  Christians  even  now  become  members 
of  a  spiritual  kinfrdom  which  will  remain  unshaken 
even  during  the  final  catastrophe  which  will  cause 
the  dissolution  of  the  material  universe.  The 
passages  which  speak  of  Christians  as  inheriting  a 
kingdom  may  refer  to  the  Kingdom  in  the  eschato- 
logical sense,  or,  less  probably,  to  the  Kingdom 
conceived  as  present  (cf.  1  Co  6^-  ^^  lo^.  Gal  5-*, 
Eph  5',  Ja  2«). 

But  the  phrase  '  Kingdom  of  God '  might  also  be 
interpreted  of  the  present  life  which  Christians 
now  live,  in  so  far  as  this  is  governed  by  obedience 
to  Him.  The  writers  of  the  NT  seem  sometimes 
to  regard  Christians  as  already  members  of  the 
coming  Kingdom,  living  according  to  its  laws,  and 
enjoying  even  now  in  some  mea-sure  its  privileges. 
So  St.  Paul  in  Ro  14",  'the  kingdom  of  God  is 
not  meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness,  and  joy, 
and  peace  in  the  Holy  Spirit,'  and  in  1  Co  4**,  '  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  not  in  word  but  in  power.'  So 
too  Col  1",  '  hath  translated  us  into  the  kingdom 
of  the  Son  of  his  love.'  On  the  whole,  this  sense 
seems  to  be  not  primary  but  derivative  and  con- 
sequential. Just  as  the  writer  of  the  Hebrews 
thinks  of  the  true  rest  as  still  in  the  future,  be- 
longing to  the  world  to  come  (4*- '"),  and  at  the 
same  time  feels  that  Christians  in  some  sense 
anticipate  and  enter  into  that  rest  even  now  (4^), 
so  the  NT  writers  think  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  as 
waiting  to  be  manifested  when  Christ  conies  again, 
and  yet  feel  that  in  some  sense  the  Christian  is 
even  now  a  member  of  it,  and  that,  as  the  number 
of  Christian  disciples  increases,  the  Kingdom 
widens  here  upon  earth.  But  in  the  NT  this 
belief  is  always  conditioned  by  the  certainty  that 
the  Second  Coming  of  Chiist  is  necessary  to  the 
full  manifestation  of  the  Kingdom. 

This  double-sidedness  of  the  conceptions  *  king- 
dom '  and  '  kin^ '  may  in  some  measure  explain 
why  the  apostolic  writers  avoid  them.*  And  it  is 
significant  that  another  term  which  was  closely 
connected  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Second  Advent 
is  also  left  unused  outside  the  Gospels.  The  term 
'  Son  of  Man '  is  employed  in  the  first  three  Gospels 
chiefly  in  connexion  with  the  ideas  circling  round 

*  Sanday  finds  in  St.  Paul's  conception  of  '  righteousness'  his 
equivalent  for  the  Gospel  term  '  kingdom '  iffThSt  i.  481  ff.). 


the  thought  of  the  Death,  Resurrection,  and 
Second  Coming  of  Christ.  Similarly  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  it  is  used  chiefly  in  j^iassages  which 
speak  of  the  lifting  up  or  glorification  of  the  Son 
of  Man.  Outside  the  Gospels  it  occurs  only  once — 
in  the  mouth  of  Stephen  ;  here  too  of  the  glorified 
state  of  the  Messiah  (Ac  7**).  The  remaining  NT 
writers  never  use  it.  And  yet  the  thought  of  the 
Coming  runs  like  a  silver  thread  of  hope  through 
all  their  writings.  They  seem  to  have  felt  that 
on  the  one  hand  the  phrase  '  Son  of  Man '  was  too 
technically  Jewish  for  Gentile  readers,  and  on  the 
other  that  the  terms  '  King '  and  '  Kingdom '  were 
open  to  grave  misconcejjtion.  The  King  for  whose 
appearance  they  looked  was  no  earthly  monarch, 
and  His  Kingdom  was  no  rival  to  earthly  kingdoms, 
nor  even  in  so  far  as  it  was  now  partially  present 
did  it  prevent  men  from  loyal  obedience  to  the 
existing  government.  Hence  they  choose  other 
terms  in  which  to  clothe  the  Gospel  hope  of  Clirist's 
return,  and  the  state  of  felicity  which  would  ensue. 
St.  Paul  uses  such  terms  as  the  following :  '  to 
wait  for  his  Son  from  heaven'  (I  Th  P"),  'the 
parousia'  of  the  Lord  Jesus  (1  Th  2»9  3^'  4«  5^), 
the  Lord  descending  from  heaven  (I  Th  4^),  'the 
day  of  the  Lord'  (1  Th  5-,  2  Th  2-,  1  Co  P  5', 
2  Co  1",  Ph  1®),  '  the  apocalypse  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
from  heaven '  (2  Th  1"), '  waiting  for  the  apocalypse ' 
(1  Co  1'), '  until  the  Lord  come'(l  Co  4'),  'until  he 
come'  (1  Co  11^),  'the  day  when  God  shall  judge 
.  .  .  through  Jesus  Christ' (Ro  2'®),  'from  whence 
we  await  the  Saviour,  tlie  Lord  Jesus  Christ'  (Ph 
3^),  ' the  Lord  is  near'  (Ph  4^),  '  the  manifestation 
of  Christ '  (Col  3^),  '  the  epiphany  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ'  (1  Ti  6"),  'the  epiphany  of  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ '(Tit  213). 

In  the  Catholic  Epistles  we  have :  '  the  Parousia 
of  the  Lord  is  at  hand '  ( Ja  5*),  '  the  apocalypse  of 
Jesus  Christ'  (1  P  V^),  'when  the  chief  Shepherd 
is  manifested'  (1  P  5^),  'the  day  of  the  Lord' 
(2  P  3"),  the  manifestation  of  Christ  (IJn  3-) ;  in 
Hebrews :  '  he  that  cometh  will  come,  and  will  not 
tarry'  (10") ;  and  in  the  Apocalypse,  the  many 
references  to  the  Coming  of  Christ,  beginning 
with  v.* 

By  thus  expressing  the  Christian  hope  in  terms 
of  expectation  of  the  Return  of  Christ,  and  by 
substituting  for  '  King '  and  '  Son  of  Man '  such 
terms  as  'Lord,'  'Saviour,"  Chief  Shepherd,'  the 
apostolic  writers  were  able  to  avoid  suspicion  of 
political  propaganda,  and  to  give  to  the  thought 
of  the  Second  Coming  a  far  wider  significance  than 
any  Mliich  they  could  have  suggested  by  laying 
too  much  emphasis  upon  the  future  as  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  Kingdom,  however  much  they  might 
have  attempted  to  give  to  this  term  a  spiritual 
and  non-material  connotation.  For,  after  all, 
Christ  is  and  will  be  more  than  king,  and  '  king- 
dom '  does  not  go  very  far  in  expressing  the  con- 
ditions of  the  life  with  Him  for  which  Christians 
long. 

5.  Apostolic  conception  of  the  Kingdom. — If  we 
now  ask  what  ideas  the  writers  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  attached  to  the  term  '  Kingdom  of  God '  or 
'  of  Christ,'  the  answer  must  be  that  for  them  as  in 
the  teaching  of  Christ  in  the  Gospels  it  is  a  term 
to  symbolize  the  inexpressible — that  is  to  say,  the 
future  blessedness  of  the  redeemed.f  The  Anointed 
King  had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  was  seated  at 
the  right  hand  of  God.  His  reign  had  therefore 
Ijegun.  AVhy  then  did  they  not  conceive  of  His 
Kingdom  as  a  heavenly  one  into  which  His 
followers  were  admitted  at  death?  Mainly,  no 
doubt,  because  of  the  teaching,  ascribed  to  Christ 

*  On  the  unique  feature  of  the  Apocalypse — the  thousand 
rears'  reign  of  Christ  upon  earth — see  A.  Robertson,  Reffnum 
'Dei,  p.  113. 

t  '  It  connotes,  with  infinite  richness  of  meaning,  all  that  ia 
implied  in  the  word  "  Salvation  "'  (Robertson,  op.  cU.  p.  50). 


678     KINGDOM,  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


KNOWLEDGE 


Himself,  tliiit  He  would  return  to  {gather  to^etlier 
His  elect.  Partly,  too,  because  of  the  common 
a^K)calyptio  teaching  that  before  the  inauguration 
ot  the  Messianic  Kingdom  there  must  be  the  final 
act  in  tiie  present  world-order,  tiie  general  resiir- 
recti(m,  final  judgment,  and  transformation  of  this 
world  to  lit  it  to  be  the  arena  of  the  heavenly 
Kingdom.  Thus  the  Kingdom  was  in  being,  but 
it  awaited  its  manifestation.  The  King  was 
crowned.  His  subjects  could  serve  Him.  But 
however  close  tlie  union  l)etween  Him  and  them, 
there  was  a  sense  in  which  they  were  now  absent 
from  the  Lord,  and  awaited  His  coming.  Tlie 
Kingdom  would  be  fully  manifested  only  when  He 
came.  Meanwhile  the  Kingdom  could  be  spoken 
of  as  a  present  reality  rather  because  the  Christian 
could  be  transported  by  faith  into  tiie  presenc-e  of 
the  King  than  oecause  he  brought  (by  Ids  Christian 
life)  the  Kingdom  down  into  this  present  world. 

There  is  hardly  any  trace  in  the  Epistles  of  the 
medifeval  idea  that  the  Church  on  earth  was  the 
Kingdom  of  God.  And  the  idea  of  some  modern 
theological  Avriters,  that  this  world  as  we  know  it 
will  develop  under  Christian  influence  until  it 
becomes  the  Kingdom,  is  quite  alien  to  their 
thought.  Indeed,  the  apostolic  writers  seemed  to 
regard  this  worlil  as  incapable  of  becoming  the 
arena  of  God's  Kingdom.  They  felt  that  human 
nature  as  now  constituted  coulci  reach  a  very  im- 
perfect measure  of  Christian  perfection.  Limited 
as  we  are,  even  Christian  knowledge  must  be  im- 
perfect ;  '  now  we  see  tluough  a  mirror,  in  a  riddle,' 
cries  St.  Paul  (1  Co  L3'-). 

There  was  also  the  problem  of  physical  death. 
So  long  as  that  remained,  Christ's  sovereignty 
could  not  be  fully  manifested.  Tiie  ultimate  per- 
fection which  is  tlie  goal  of  the  individual  Christian 
could  only  be  dimly  guessed  at.  '  It  doth  not  yet 
appear  what  we  shall  be,  but  we  know  that  if  he 
shall  be  manifested,  we  shall  be  like  him,  for  we 
shall  see  him  as  he  is'  (1  Jn  3-).  And  in  a  wonder- 
ful passage  St.  Paul  seems  to  express  the  belief 
that  physical  nature  as  now  known  to  us  must 
imdergo  some  transformation  at  Christ's  return 
before  it  can  be  the  scene  of  His  Kingdom:  'we 
know  that  the  whole  creation  groaneth  and 
travaileth  together  in  pain  even  until  now.'  '  For 
the  earnest  expectation  of  tiie  creature  waitetli  for 
the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God '  (Ro  8'"-  --). 

Consequently,  their  anticipation  for  this  world 
was  far  from  being  a  hope  of  gradual  amelioration. 
The  period  immediately  preceding  the  coming  of 
the  Kingdom  would  be  one  of  evil  and  not  of  good. 
Cf.  1  Th  V\  '  the  wrath  to  come,'  2  Th  2^-^-,  « in 
the  last  day  evil  times  shall  come,'  2  Ti  3^  and  the 
Apocalypse,  passim.  The  writer  of  2  Peter  stands 
alone  in  anticipating  a  destruction  of  the  present 
world  by  fire  (2  P  3").  If  any  one  of  these  writers 
had  been  asked  whether  the  Kingdom  was  now 

£  resent,  he  would  have  answered,  No.  Christ  was 
Ang,  but  His  Kingdom  would  be  manifested  only 
when  He  came.  If  he  had  been  further  asked 
what  that  Kingdom  would  be,  or  in  wiiat  relation 
it  would  stand  to  this  present  world,  he  would 
probably  have  ansAvered  that  nearly  all  that  con- 
stitutes this  present  world  would  have  vanished — 
imperfection,  sin,  death;  and  that  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  new  world  he  could  say  but  little  save  th.it 
Christ  would  be  there,  and  that  His  servants  would 
serve  Him,  and  that  that  was  enougli  for  anyone 
to  know. 

When  modern  writers  ransack  the  records  of 
Christ's  teaching  or  the  other  apostolic  writings 
for  traces  of  the  conception  that  the  Kingdom  of 
God  is  now  present  in  liuman  life,  it  is,  of  course, 
possible  to  find  them.  For,  wherever  a  human 
soul  is  in  communion  witii  tlie  absent  King,  tliorc 
in  some  measure  is  the  .sovereignty  of  God  exhibited 


an<l  the  reign  of  Christ  realize<l.  IJut  in  the  NT 
the  admission  that  the  Kingdom  is  now  in  some 
sense  present,  whether  in  the  suVjjection  of  the 
Christian  soul  to  the  law  of  (,'hrist,  or  in  the 
("liurcii  of  which  He  is  the  Heatl,  or  in  the  life  of 
(Jo<l  streaming  down  into  the  world  through  the 
S[)irit  of  Christ  in  the  forms  of  righteousness  and 
jieace,  is  always  made  on  the  understanding  that 
these  foreshadowings  of  the  Kingdom  of  ( Jod  imply 
a  far  more  perfect  realization  of  the  Kingdom  in 
tlie  future,  and  that  when  Christ  comes  again  the 
Kingdom  will  come  in  such  sense  that  by  com- 
parison it  will  seem  never  to  have  come  before. 
Tlie  relation  between  the  Kingdom  now  and  the 
Kiiif^dom  of  the  future  is  perhaps  much  the  same 
as  that  between  the  presence  of  Christ  now  and 
His  presence  when  He  returns.  None  has  ever  so 
fully  been  conscious  of  the  life  of  Christ  in  him  as 
was  St.  Paul :  '  I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth 
in  me.'  Yet  none  has  ever  looked  forward  more 
earnestly,  with  greater  expectation  of  living  hope, 
to  the  day  of  Christ's  return.  He  could  even 
speak  of  this  present  life  as  a  condition  of  absence 
from  the  Lord  (2  Co  5").  By  contrast  with  such 
knowledge  as  we  have  of  Christ  now,  vision  of 
Him  when  He  came  again  would  be  *  face  to  face' 
(1  Co  13'2). 

LiTERATURK. — A.  Robertson,  Rcgnum  Dei,  London,  1901  ; 
A.  B.  Bruce,  The  KimjUoui  of  God*,  Edinburgh,  ISid  ;  J.  S. 
Candlish,  The  Kiwjdoin.  of  God,  do.  1884;  J.  Orr,  art. 
'  Kingdom '  in  HDIi  ii. ;  W.  Sanday,  '  St.  I'aul's  Equivalent 
for  the  "  Kingdom  of  Heaven  " '  in  JThSt  i.  [19()0]  481. 

WiLLouonBY  C.  Allen. 
KISH  (v'p,Kh),  the  father  of  Saul,  called  Cis  in 
the  AV  (Ac  13-1). 

KISS.— See  Salutation. 

KNOWLEDGE.— The  distinctive  sense  in  which 
the  apostles  speak  of  knowledge  has  reference  to 
the  knowledge  of  God,  and  especially  to  the  know- 
ledge of  God  and  the  world  through  Jesus  Christ. 

1.  The  organ  of  knowledge.— St.  Paul  teaches 
clearly  (Ko  I'^-^s)  that,  apart  from  any  special 
revelation,  God  has  exhibited  so  plainly  ills  attri- 
butes of  eternal  power  and  divinity  in  creation 
that  there  is  given  to  man  an  instinctive  knowledge 
of  God.  There  is  a  certain  intelligence  in  mankind 
which,  apart  from  the  power  of  tlie  senses,  makes 
God  known  by  the  heart  when  He  is  not  understood 
by  the  reason.  Indeed,  men  became  darkened  in 
their  understandings  when  they  began  to  indulge 
in  reasoning,  and  in  trying  to  be  wise  tiiey  became 
fools.  Thus  St.  Paul  places  tlie  intuitive  moral 
consciousness  as  the  central  organ  of  the  true 
knowledge  of  God.  When  the  Apostle  speaks  of 
the  means  by  which  the  Christian  knowledge  of 
(Jod  is  acquired,  he  develops  this  principle.  It  is 
true  that  St.  Paul  admits  that  for  the  knowledge 
of  the  facts  of  Christ's  life  he  and  others  are  in- 
debted to  the  testimony  of  witnesses  (1  Co  15^),  and 
that  for  bringing  faith  and  knowledge  the  preach- 
ing of  the  word  of  truth  is  invaluable,  but  he 
insists  pre-eminently  that  in  all  true  knowledge  of 
God  in  Christ  the  spirit  of  man  is  directly  acted 
upon  by  the  Spirit  of  God  (1  Co  2^-«,  Eph  3»). 

St.  I'aul,  who  excelled  in  logic  and  speculation, 
cannot  be  regarded  as  unnecessarily  decrying  the 
logical  faculty  or  the  speculative  gift,  and  yet  he 
speaks  of  reasonings  (Xoyurfiovs)  and  of  vaunting 
speculations  ('every  higli  thing,'  vav  vxpufxa)  as 
jiossible  strengths  of  the  enemy  that  required  to 
be  cast  down,  and  of  the  need  of  bringing  every 
tiiought  into  the  obedience  of  Ciirist  (2  Co  10'). 
Perhaps  this  attitude  may  have  been  accentuated 
for  the  Apostle  l)y  the  fact  tiiat  in  his  own 
experience  so  much  of  his  knowledge  should  have 
come  directly  in  visions,  as  in  (lie  vision  of  Jesus, 
the  E.xalted  Christ  (Ac  9^),  in  the  vision  of  the  man 


KNOWLEDGE 


KNOWLEDGE 


679 


of  Macedonia  (16'*'),  and  in  the  vision  of  the  third 
heaven  (-2  Co  12'). 

St.  John  declares  that  all  men  have  the  organ 
of  spiritual  vision  by  whicli  Goti,  who  is  light,  is 
revealed  to  tiiein.  >Iany  refuse  to  exercise  this 
organ,  and  prefer  to  dwell  in  darkness,  and  tlins 
lose  the  power  of  knowing,  while  spiritual  vision 
becomes  clearer  and  stronger  by  a  purer  and  better 
moral  life.  Those  who  keep  the  commandments 
of  God  come  to  a  growing  knowledge  { 1  Jn  2^),  and 
only  those  in  whom  love  is  abiding  really  possess 
this  Di%ine  knowledge  (4").  Whoever  persists  in 
sinning  does  not  know  God  (3*).  The  organ  of 
knowledge  is  spiritual  and  ethical,  not  merely 
logical  or  speculative. 

Thus  both  these  apostles  are  alike  in  their 
insistence  that  the  organ  of  Divine  knowledge  is 
to  be  found  in  this  deep  faculty  of  the  soul.  The 
apostles  would  agree  in  the  saying  :  '  Pectus  facit 
Christianum,'  if  not :  '  Pectus  facit  theologum.' 

2.  The  object  of  knowledge.  —  Much  of  the 
earliest  teaching  of  the  apostles  was  to  demonstrate 
that  Jesus  of  >'azareth  was  the  Christ  of  God  (Ac 
2*),  and  the  object  of  all  their  knowledge  and 
preaching  might  be  summed  up  in  the  phrase  of 
St.  Paul :  '  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowleilge  of 
the  glory  of  G<xl  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ'  (2  Co 
4*).  This  illumination  (^ioTi(rfi6i)  came  first  to  the 
apostles  with  the  purpose  of  being  conveyed  by 
them  to  others  who  were  in  ignorance.  Thus  the 
object  that  is  made  known  to  all  Christians  is  the 
glory  of  God  as  revealed  in  the  person,  character, 
and  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  so  that  what  was  only 
dimly  discerned  before  is  now  clearly  seen.  This 
is  the  open  secret  that  believers  in  Clirist  have  dis- 
covered and  delight  to  make  known.  This  is  the 
nvcrnpiov  that  was  hidden  for  long  ages  but  is  now 
revealed,  so  that  the  Divine  plan  of  redemption  is 
no  longer  a  secret  but  is  heralded  forth  in  Jesus 
Christ  (Ro  1623,  1  Co  2^).  Thus  St.  Paul  conceives 
of  the  glory  of  God  as  having  been  long  concealed 
by  the  clouds  of  earth,  but  at  last  having  shone 
forth  in  undimmed  splendour ;  and  those  who 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord  receive  a  vision  of 
God's  glory  that  illuminates  all  life,  history,  and 
experience. 

To  St.  John  also  Jesus  Christ  is  the  source  of 
light  on  all  the  great  matters  of  life.  Through 
Him  we  know  God  (1  Jn  2^),  and  this  provides  the 
key  to  all  knowledge. 

The  other  apostles  agree  in  the  central  place  in 
their  teaching  being  given  to  the  knowleilge  of 
God  in  Christ,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
(8"),  in  announcing  that  under  the  New  Covenant 
there  has  come  a  universal  knowledge  of  God,  not 
only  embodies  the  hopes  of  the  OT  prophets  but 
also  declares  the  faith  of  the  NT  teachers. 

3.  Implications  of  knowledge.— This  Christian 
knowledge  sheds  its  light  on  all  the  facts  and  aims 
of  life.  Thus  individuals  learn  the  outstanding 
features  of  their  own  characters  (Ja  1-^),  the 
sanctity  of  their  lives  as  being  the  temples  of  God 
(I  Co  31^),  the  value  of  their  bodies  as  members  of 
Christ  (6*'),  and  the  consecration  of  all  the  powers 
of  body  and  mind  as  an  acceptable  service  to  God 
(Ro  12').  Christian  knowledge  leads  to  a  better 
understanding  of  all  the  experiences  of  life,  and  to 
a  conviction  that  in  and  through  every  event  God 
is  making  all  things  to  work  together  for  good  to 
them  that  love  Him  (Ro  8-^),  and  especially  to  a 
conviction  that  the  trials  of  life  do  not  come  with- 
out Divine  planning  but  are  appointed  by  the  will 
of  God  (1  Th  3»).  Through  Christ  there  comes 
likewise  a  better  knowledge  of  social  duties,  e.g. 
in  the  relation  of  masters  and  servants.  Servants 
are  expected  to  render  a  whole-hearted  service 
because  they  know  that  their  real  master  Ls  Jesus 
Christ,  by  whom    they  are    to  be  recompensed. 


Masters  are  required  to  carry  out  all  their  duties 
M'ith  justice  and  fairness,  for  tliey  know  that  they 
have  to  account  to  their  Unseen  Master,  the  Lord 
in  heaven  (Col  3^^"^).  Even  minor  social  problems 
like  those  of  eating  and  drinking  have  new  light 
cast  upon  them  (Ro  14"),  for  the  light  of  Jesus 
Christ  has  illuminated  all  life  and  brought  know- 
ledge where  formerly  there  was  doubt  or  ignorance. 

In  the  Epistles  of  St.  John  this  Christian  gnosis 
has  a  predominant  place,  and  it  is  interesting  to 
note  how  wide  and  vital  this  knowledge  becomes 
according  to  the  Apostle.  The  knowledge  of  God 
is  at  the  centre,  and  it  radiates  forth  in  every  direc- 
tion to  a  wide  circumference,  for  it  includes  the 
knowledge  of  truth  (1  Jn  2"-'),  of  righteousness  (2®), 
of  love  (3^*),  of  spiritual  life  and  inspiration  (3-^  4-), 
and  of  the  state  of  those  beyond  the  grave  (3-).  In 
the  light  of  God  Christians  possess  a  light  that 
brings  enlightenment  to  them  on  many  problems 
of  experience,  perplexities  of  the  present  time,  and 
mysteries  of  the  future  life. 

4.  Complements  of  knowledge.  —  The  apostles 
uniformly  recognize  that  knowledge  of  itself  is  im- 
perfect and  must  be  always  associated  with  other 
Christian  gifts.  To  reach  its  fullness  it  must  be  ac- 
companied by  abnegation  (Ph  3*),  by  fellowship 
with  God  and  with  brethren  (1  Jn  1'),  by  obedience 
to  God's  commands  (2^),  by  attention  to  apostolic 
teaching  (4"),  and  by  faith,  ^-irtue,  temperance, 
patience,  godliness,  love  of  the  brethren,  and  love 
(2  P  1«). 

Special  notice  should  be  taken  of  the  connexion 
of  knowledge  and  faith,  and  of  knowledge  and 
love.  The  apostles  do  not  recognize  any  essential 
antagonism  between  faith  and  knowledge.  Faith 
does  not  arise  from  ignorance  but  from  knowledge 
(Ro  10^"),  and  knowledge  does  not  supersede  faith 
but  includes  it  (2  P  1^).  The  knowledge  of  God  in 
Christ  is  synonymous  with  faith  in  Him,  and  in 
their  essence  the  two  are  closely  inter-related.  In 
knowledge  there  is  the  recognition  of  the  Divine 
by  our  spiritual  nature,  in  faith  there  is  the  action 
or  the  will  in  virtue  of  this  insight,  so  that  the 
highest  knowledge  and  the  humblest  faith  go 
together.  There  is  a  kind  of  knowledge,  however, 
that  puffs  up  (1  Co  8'),  and  so  far  from  its  leading 
to  faith  it  begets  a  self-sufficiency  and  pride  that 
strike  at  the  very  foundations  of  all  Christian 
faith. 

At  their  best  there  is  also  no  antagonism  between 
knowledge  and  love.  To  know  God  is  to  love 
Him,  and  to  reach  the  highest  knowledge  love  is 
necessary.  '  Every  one  that  loveth  is  begotten  of 
God  and  knowetli  him'  (1  Jn  4").  Christian 
knowledge  is  not  a  matter  of  the  intellect  but  of 
the  deeper  moral  and  spiritual  faculties  that  find 
their  true  expression  in  love.  Still  knowledge  and 
love  may  come  into  conflict,  and  in  the  solution  of 
many  practical  problems  love  is  even  more  neces- 
sary than  knowledge.  St.  Paul  deals  with  this 
relation  especially  in  his  discussion  of  the  attitude 
to  be  adopted  to  things  sacrificed  to  idols.  For 
his  generation  the  difficulty  was  intense,  as  some 
Christians  dreaded  the  slightest  approval  being 
given  to  idol-worship,  while  others  were  so  con- 
vinced that  idolatry  was  false  that  they  considered 
it  a  negligible  quantity.  Among  the  latter  were 
many  Corinthian  Christians,  who  had  announced 
to  the  Apostle  their  conviction  that  the  whole 
system  of  idolatry  seemed  so  false  that  they  could 
eat  any  food  irrespective  of  its  being  associated 
with  idol-worship.  But  St.  Paul  in  his  reply 
(1  Co  8'*^*)  argues  that  a  mere  intellectual  convic- 
tion is  not  the  only  or  the  best  guide  in  such  a 
matter.  In  theory  the  Corinthians  might  be  right, 
but  in  practice  they  must  not  be  guided  by  know- 
ledge alone.  '  Knowledge  puffeth  up,  but  love  edi- 
heth,'  and  in  matters  that  are  intimately  concerned 


680 


KNOWLEDGE 


LABOUR 


with  the  feelings  and  prejudices  of  otliers  love  is 
the  safer  guide.  To  a  Christian  even  more  than 
to  a  philosopher  the  saying  of  Aristotle  must 
apply  :  rb  tAos  iffrlv  ov  yvQan  dXXd  irpa^is  {Nic.  Eth, 
I.  lii.  6). 

8.  Philosophy  and  theosophy.— The  relation  of 
Christian  knowledge  to  philosophy  and  theosopliy  is 
discussed  by  St.  Paul.  The  Apostle  expoimds  the 
gospel  as  being  not  only  '  power'  but  also  '  wisdom,' 
yet  he  refuses  to  establish  this  wisdom  by  any  of  the 
current  arguments  or  by  the  conclusions  of  Greek 
philosophy  (1  Co  2>"^-)-  He  is  proclaiming  a  gosjiel 
that  is  folly  in  the  eyes  of  many,  and  yet  it  is  the 
true  wisdom  to  those  who  understand  it.  This 
higher  philosophy  has  been  hidden  from  the  sight 
of  men,  otherwise  they  would  not  have  crucitied 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  It  comes  tlirough  the  in- 
dwelling of  the  Spirit  of  God,  who  alone  can  reveal 
it.  Just  as  the  spirit  of  man  alone  can  undei'stand 
the  things  of  a  man,  so  the  Spirit  of  God  in  man 
alone  can  understand  the  Divine  philosophy.  '  The 
merely  intellectual  man'  rejects  this  philosophy, 
as  he  does  not  possess  the  .spiritual  insight  to  dis- 
cern its  Divine  wisdom.  Even  Christian  people 
may  be  mere  children  in  this  respect,  not  able  to 
understand  this  teacliing  ;  and  among  other  indica- 
tions of  this  childish  mind  was  the  party  spirit 
by  which  so  many  were  impelled.  Thus  St.  Paul 
argues  that  the  initiated  Christians  find  in  Christ 
a  philosophy  as  well  as  a  gospel. 

Christian  knowledge  came  into  conflict  with  the 
theosophical  tendencies  that  were  so  prevalent  in 
many  ancient  schools  of  thought.  In  this  con- 
nexion St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  of 
chief  importance.  The  Apostle  deals  in  this  Epistle 
with  claims  that  had  been  made  by  certain  Chris- 


tians to  a  higher  Christian  life  thwugh  means  that 
involved  ascetic  and  ritual  practices,  and  from 
arguments  that  rested  on  speculative  and  theo- 
sophic  principles.  It  is  unnecessary  for  the  present 
purpose  to  decide  whether  these  heresies  arose 
from  a  latent  Gnosticism  or  from  certain  features 
of  Judaism  ;  but,  if  Judaism  was  the  source,  it  was 
a  Judaism  influenced  by  the  thought  and  spirit  of 
the  Diaspora.  This  may  be  judged  by  the  kind 
of  speculations  in  which  they  indulge,  especially 
in  the  cosmical  dualism  that  they  shadow  forth 
and  in  the  belief  in  an  endless  series  of  angelic 
beings  as  mediators  between  God  and  men.  St. 
Paul  does  not  denounce  all  speculative  knowledge, 
but  opposes  it  by  a  higher  knowledge  of  Jesus 
Christ.  He  develops  the  teaching  about  Christ  so 
that  He  is  presented  not  only  as  a  full  and  perfect 
Saviour  for  men,  but  also  as  the  Lord  of  the 
Universe,  in  whom  all  things,  even  angels,  were 
created,  and  as  the  fullness  of  all  things,  by  whom 
both  men  and  angels  were  made  at  one  with  (Jod. 
This  insistence  on  the  cosmical  value  of  Christ 
carries  with  it  the  best  refutation  of  all  extra- 
Christian  theosophical  teaching. 

LiTKRATURB.— H.  J.  Holtzmann,  NT  Theologie,  1896,  i.  4TC- 
48C ;  A.  E.  Garvie,  in  Manxfield  College  Essays,  1909,  p.  161 ; 
J.  Y.  Simpson,  The  Spiritual  I ntet~pr elation  uf  Nature,  1912, 
p.  11 ;  J.  R.  Illing-worth,  Jieason  and  liecelation,  1902,  p.  44  ; 
A.  Chandler,  Faith  and  Experience,  1911 ;  W.  P.  DuBose, 
The  Reason  of  Life,  1911,  p.  198 ;  J.  Denney,  The  Way  Ever- 
lasting, 1911,  p.  26 ;  W.  M.  Macgrregor,  Jems  Christ  the  Son 
of  God,  1907,  p.  175 ;  W.  G.  Rutherford,  The  Key  of  Know- 
ledge,  1901,  p.  1 ;  artt.  in  HDJi  (J.  Denney),  SDH  (J.  H. 
Maude),  and  CE  (A.  J.  Maas) ;  see  also  art.  Ignora.scr. 

D.  Macrae  Tod. 
KORAH  {Kopi,  hence  called  Core  in  the  AV).— 
His  rebellion  and  punishment  (Nu  16)  are  alluded 
to  by  Jude  (v."). 


LABOUR.— Greek  and  Roman  thought  regarded 
those  who  lived  by  labour  as  indispensable  but 
contemptible  necessities.  Jewish  teaching  stood 
in  strong  contrast  to  this.  '  Hate  not  laborious 
work '  (Sir  7")  was  accepted  as  a  rule  of  life.  Even 
the  scholar  was  to  spend  some  of  his  time  in 
manual  work  (Schiirer,  JIJP  ii.  i.  [Edinburgh, 
1885]  §  25).  The  apostolic  writers  repeat  and 
emphasize  this  principle.  A  man  who  does  no 
work  is  to  them  a  parasite  (2  Th  3'").  In  the 
Thessalonian  Church  the  expectation  of  the  speedy 
return  of  the  Lord  had  been  made  an  excuse  by 
many  for  the  abandonment  of  their  daily  work. 
St.  Paul  meets  this  by  reminding  his  converts 
how,  when  he  had  preached  to  them,  he  had  taught 
them  to  welcome  a  life  of  labour.  It  brings  with 
it  three  good  effects— quietness  of  spirit,  honour- 
able standing  among  neighbours,  and  independ- 
ence of  other  men's  alms  (1  Th  4'"-,  2  Th  S'^). 
To  these  he  adds  in  Eph  4™  the  ability  to  help 
those  who  are  in  need.  It  is  possible,  as  von 
Dobschiitz  suggests,  that  this  had  been  forgotten 
not  only  at  Tliessalonica,  but  also  at  Jerusalem, 
and  that  that  fact  was  one  of  the  causes  of  the 
distress  among  Christians  there. 

St.  Paul  enforced  his  teachingby  his  own  example. 
He  had  been  taught  at  Tarsus  the  local  trade 
of  tent-making,  and  by  practising  this  (cf.  Ac  18^) 
maintained  himself  while  evangelizing.  That  he 
might  be  no  burden  to  others,  he  willingly  worked 
overtime  ('  night  and  day,'  1  Tli  2*).  His  roughened 
hands  showed  the  severity  of  his  toil  (Ac  2U^'"*''). 
In  1  Co  9®  he  mentions  Barnabas  as  another  who 


lived  by  the  same  rule — a  striking  instance  of  self- 
discipline  in  view  of  his  past  history  (cf.  Ac  4^). 

The  justification  of  this  high  view  of  labour 
can  be  seen  in  St.  Paul's  treatment  of  the  position 
of  slaves  (Eph  6«-»,  Col  3-^-4^).  There  \yas  a 
danger  that  slaves  might  suppose  that,  as  in  the 
eyes  of  God  they  were  of  equal  value  with  their 
masters,  they  need  not  do  tlieir  work  very  care- 
fully. But  St.  Paul  forbids  all  scamping  of  work 
('not  in  the  Avay  of  eyeservice ').  It  is  to  be  done 
thoroughly,  because  they  are  servants  not  so  much 
of  earthly  masters  as  of  Christ,  who  has  an  absolute 
claim  on  their  best,  and  will  see  to  their  reward. 

It  was  the  custom  among  Jewish  artisans  to 
maintain  anyone  of  their  own  craft  who  was  seek- 
ing work  until  his  search  wtis  successful.  In  the 
Didache  (xii.)  a  similar  rule  is  laid  down  for  Chris- 
tians. But  such  help  is  to  be  given  for  two  or 
three  days  only,  to  avoid  imposture.  If  a  man 
does  not  know  a  trade,  he  is  to  learn  one.  Similar 
advice  is  given  in  Ep.  Barn,  (x.),  where  Christians 
are  forbidden  to  keep  comj)any  with  the  idle. 

Modern  conditions  call  for  a  renewed  emphasis 
on  the  apostolic  teaching  about  labour.  The 
principles  which  it  embodies  are  a  warning,  to  the 
wealthy  not  to  consider  themselves  exempt  from 
labour,  if  they  would  be  accounted  Christians,  and 
to  the  workman  not  to  be  content  with  less  than 
the  Itest  in  his  work,  because  anything  less  is  un- 
worthy of  the  Heavenly  Master. 

IjiTF.RATrRR. — E.  vOH  DobschUtz,  Christia7i  Life  in  the 
Primilive  Church,  Enir.  tr.,  London  and  N.Y.,  IIKM ;  W. 
Rauschenbuscb,  Christianity  and  the  Social   Crisis,  N.Y., 


LADY 


LA^IB 


681 


1907,  ch.  iii.  :  F.  Delitzsch,  7«ri>A  Artisan  Li'>  in  the  Tiiiif 
Hf  Christ,  London,  1902,  ch.  ix.  §  3  ;  A.  B.  D.  Alexander.  The 
jithic*  of  St.  Paul,  Gla^ow,  1910.  For  Greek  view  o(  labour  : 
E.  Barker,  Politieal  Thottght  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  London, 
1906,  ch.  viii.  $  1.  For  Roman :  W.  Warde  Fowler,  Social  Life 
at  Rome,  da  1908,  ch.  ii.  For  Jewish  :  Pirqe  Aboth,  ed. 
Taylor,  do.  1S77,  p.  IS  ;  cf.  Delitzsch,  op.  eit.  ch.  ii. 

C.  T.  DiMONT. 

LADY.— See  John,  Epistles  of. 

LAKE  OF  FIRE.— That  particular  conception 
of  future  punishment  lepresenteii  as  '  the  Lake  of 
Fire  '  is  found  only  in  the  Aix)calypse  of  St.  John 
among  the  Christian  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Age. 
For  a  fuller  account  of  the  early  history  of  the 
conception  see .  •  Introductory '  and  '  Christian ' 
sections  of  '  Cosmology  and  Cosmogony'  in  ERE, 
and  '  Hinnom,  Valley  of,'  in  HDB  ;  and,  for  the 
fuller  discussion  of  the  general  subject,  artt.  Hell 
and  Fire  in  the  present  work.  It  will  be  sufficient 
to  snm  up  briefly  here  the  facts  concerning  the 
origin  of  the  conception. 

Both  the  Babylonian  and  the  Persian  cosmogonies 
contain  the  conception  of  the  future  destruction  of 
the  world  by  fire,  closing  an  teon  or  period  in  the 
history  of  the  world.  But,  while  Persian  escha- 
tology  shows  the  presence  of  the  conception  of  penal 
fire  (cf.  SBE  v.  125  fl'.),  there  is,  according  to  H. 
Zimmem  {KAT^,  1902-03,  p.  643),  no  trace  of  the 
conception  in  early  Babylonian  religion.  Hence 
the  presence  of  the  idea  in  Jewish  prophetic  es- 
chatology  is  held  by  many  scholars  to  be  due  to 
Persian  rather  than  to  Babjionian  influence. 

1.  In  Jewish  eschatology  we  find  three  related 
conceptions,  each  possibly  a  different  topographical 
setting  of  the  same  central  idea  : 

(1)  The  conception  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom  ('J 
tiun)  as  a  place  of  fiery  torment  for  the  wicked 
during  the  Me.ssianic  Age ;  cf.  Is  ^S^-*,  where  the 
proximity  of  the  place  of  punishment  to  Jerusalem 
shows  that  the  Valley  of  Hinnom  is  intended. 

(2)  The  conception  of  a  fiery  stream  issuing  from 
Jahtceh,  or  from  His  throne  ;  cf.  Is  30**,  Dn  7'". 
This  form  may  possibly  have  links  of  connexion  with 
the  ancient  conception  of  Jahweh  as  a  volcano-god. 

(3)  The  conception  of  a  valley  or  sea  of  f  re  and 
sulphur ;  cf.  Is  34',  where  the  topographical  setting 
is  in  Edom.  This  conception  goes  back  to  the 
story  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  which  again  is  con- 
nected by  Gunkel  (Schopfung  und  Chaos)  and 
Jeremias  with  the  Babylonian  cosmology  (cf.  A. 
Jeremias,  The  OT  in  the  Light  of  the  Ancient  East, 
Eng.  tr.,  1911,  ii.  40  f.  ;  M.  Jastrow,  The  Eel.  of 
Bab.  and  Assy r.,  1898,  p.  507).  The  whole  valley 
of  the  Dead  Sea  is  still  called  by  the  Arabs  Wddy 
en-Xtlr,  '  Valley  of  Fire.' 

The  conception  as  it  appears  in  the  Apocaljrpse  is 
related  rather  to  the  forms  (2)  and  (3)  than  to  the 
Gehenna  conception. 

2.  In  the  Apocalypse  we  have  again  three  distinct 
conceptions. 

(1)  Hades  (see  artt.  Hades,  Hell),  an  inter- 
mediate place  or  state  whose  existence  ends  at  the 
close  of  the  millennial  kingdom.  Death  and  Hades 
are  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire  (Rev  2(V^).  Hades 
is  not  connected  distinctly  with  the  idea  of  punish- 
ment in  the  Apocalypse. 

(2)  The  Abyss  (20'),  in  which  the  dragon  is  bound 
during  the  millennial  reign  (cf.  9"  andLk  8*^). 

(3)  The  Lake  of  Fire,  mentioned  as  existing 
before  the  beginning  of  the  millennial  kingdom 
(19^),  the  place  into  which  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  are  cast  after  their  defeat  by  the  Lamb. 
It  is  also  the  place  into  which  the  devil  is  cast 
after  the  defeat  of  Gog  and  Magog  (201").  Then, 
at  the  close  of  the  Final  Judgment,  death  and 
Hades  are  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire  (20") ;  and, 
lastly,  everyone  not  found  written  in  the  Lamb's 
Book  of  Life  is  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire  (20").     An 


additional  statement  (21*)  descril)es  those  who  have 
their  part  in  the  Lake  of  Fire  ;  cf.  the  description 
of  those  who  are  without  the  city  (22'*). 

3.  The  relevant  passages  in  the  contemporary 
apocalyptic  literature  are:  3  Bar.  xliv.  15  (' the 
dwelling  of  the  rest  who  are  many  shall  be  in  the 
fire,'  in  contrast  to  the  blessing  of  the  righteous  in 
the  new  age  [xliv.  12]),  xlviii.  39,  43,  lix.  2,  Ixiv.  7 
(of  Manasseh),  Ixxxv.  13 ;  S  Es.  vii.  36  ('  the  pit  of 
torment'  and  'the  furnace  of  Gehenna,'  as  the 
abode  of  the  wicked  after  the  400  years'  Messianic 
kingdom) ;  ^.s*.  Mos.  x.  10  (the  enemies  of  Israel 
are  seen  in  Gehenna).  Hence  in  the  apocalyptic 
literattire  contemporary  with  the  Apocalypse  the 
precise  form  of  the  conception  does  not  appear. 

i.  In  the  same  way  the  passages  in  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  Hebrews,  2  Peter,  and  the  Apostolic 
Fathers  are  all  vague  and  general.  Fire  Ls  one 
of  the  accompanying  features  of  the  Parousia  ;  it  is 
the  real  or  metaphorical  agent  of  punishment  for 
the  wicked,  and  only  in  2  Peter  do  we  find  the 
definite  conception  of  a  final  conflagration  which 
will  destroy  the  old  heavens  and  earth. 

The  principal  question  then  arising  from  the  use 
of  the  conception  in  the  Apocalypse  is  as  to  its 
relation  to  the  future  state. 

(1)  The  Lake  of  Fire  may  be  regarded  as  a  place 
of  the  final  annihilation  of  evil.  The  force  of  the 
expression  '  second  death '  determines  the  writer's 
use  of  the  conception.  The  'second  death'  is  a 
Jewish  theologoumenon,  e.g.  in  the  well-known 
passage  in  the  Jcrus.  Targum  on  Dt  33®,  'Let 
Keuben  live  in  this  age  and  not  die  the  second 
death.' 

In  Jewish  Rabbinical  theology  the  expression 
seems  to  imply  a  non-participation  in  the  life  of 
the  age  to  come  ;  cf.  the  discussion  in  Sank.  11  as 
to  those  who  shall  share  the  life  of  the  coming  age. 
Hence  the  meaning  of  annihilation  is  possible. 
Those  who  are  not  raised  to  the  life  of  the  world 
to  come  cease  to  exist.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
writer  of  the  Apocaljrpse  holds  the  doctrine  of  a 
general  resurrection  to  judgment  at  the  close  of 
the  Messianic  Kingdom.  Hence  it  is  also  possible 
that  he  has  given  the  Jewish  phrase  a  new  mean- 
ing. But  for  a  fuller  discussion  of  this  point  see 
art.  Immortalitv. 

(2)  The  writer's  conception  of  the  Lake  of  Fire 
may  be  penal.  The  beast  and  the  false  prophet 
are  said  to  be  tormented  there  day  and  night,  and 
the  unrighteous  have  '  their  part  '  in  the  Lake  of 
Fire,  an  expression  which  is  most  naturally  inter- 
preted in  a  penal  sense.  In  the  light  of  contem- 
porary apocalyptic  literature  the  penal  sense  would 
seem  to  be  the  most  natural  one. 

(3)  It  is  possible  to  maintain  a  purgative  mean- 
ing for  the  conception,  but  this  Wew  finds  no 
support  in  the  NT  literature  itself. 

LmRATUSX.— Art.  'Fire 'in  DCG  ;  S.  D.  F.  Salmond,  The 
Ckriftian  Doctrine  of  Immortality*,  1901 ;  R.  H.  Charles, 
Eschatology :  Hebrew,  Jewitk,  and  ChrisUmfi,  1913 ;  W.  O.  E. 
Oesterley,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Last  Things,  1908  ;  C.  Clemen, 
Primitive  Christianitff  and  its  non-Jewtik  Sottrees,  Eng.  tr., 
1912 ;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John^,  1907;  P 
Volz,  J  iii.  Etekatologie  wn  Darnel  bit  Aiiba,  1S03. 

S.  H.  HOOKE. 

LAMB. — The  point  of  view  for  this  subject  is 
suggested  by  Delitzsch :  '  All  the  utterances  in  the 
New  Testament  regarding  the  Lamb  of  God  are 
derived  from  this  prophecy  [Is  53"],  in  which  the 
dumb  type  of  the  Passover  now  finds  a  tongue ' 
{Com.  on  Isaiah,  Eng.  tr.,  1890,  iL  297).— (1)  In 
Philip's  interpretation  of  this  passage  to  the  eunuch 
who  questioned  him  concerning  its  meaning,  he 
showed  that  its  fulfilment  was  found  in  Jesus  (Ac 
S^).  —  (2)  In  1  P  l**,  Christ  is  compared  with  a 
sacrificial  lamb  ;  as  an  offering  on  behalf  of  sin  He 
gave  Himself  (1  Co  5^),  Avithout  blemish  and  with- 
out spot  (cf.  Lv  23").     H  the  allusion  here  is  first 


682 


LAMB 


LAMP,  LAMPSTAXD 


to  the  descriptive  terms  of  Isuiaii,  yet  there  is  in- 
cludod  an  association  derived  from  the  Levitical 
ritual.  Christ  was  not  only  a  quiet,  unresisting 
sullerer,  but  also  a  sacrilicial  ollering  for  sin. — (3) 
The  main  use  of  the  term  '  Lamb'  in  the  NT  is  in 
Revelation,  where  it  occurs  28  times.  The  word 
of  which  it  is  a  translation  is  a  diminutive,  and 
is  peculiar  to  the  Apocalypse.  Many  surprises 
await  one  who,  familiar  only  with  the  signilicance 
of  the  Lanjb  in  tlie  Levitical  sacrilices,  traces  the 
new  forms  in  which  the  ligure  made  itself  at  home 
in  the  visions  of  the  Seer  of  Patmos.  It  is  evident 
that  the  writer  had  been  fascinated  by  the  sug- 
gestion on  account  of  wliich  he  lirst  employed  the 
term  to  designate  the  Exalted  Christ  (5"),  and 
he  was  afterward  conscious  of  no  incongruity  or 
embarrassment  in  continuing  to  use  the  title  when 
he  referred  to  Christ,  even  when  he  associated  tlie 
most  incompatible  qualities,  relations,  and  activi- 
ties with  it.  In  the  interest  of  clearness  and  con- 
sistency one  may  try  to  substitute  '  Christ '  for 
'Lamb'  wherever  tlie  latter  term  occurs  in  this 
book,  but  it  will  be  found  that  then  something 
almost  indefinable  but  very  real  has  fallen  out  and 
that  notiiing  of  equal  worth  has  taken  its  place. 
We  move  here  in  a  region  of  prophecy,  of  symbol- 
ism, and  of  spiritual  values,  wlierethe  imagination 
supplies  itself  with  wings,  and  where  exact  logical 
thought  lia.s  to  plod  along  as  best  it  can  afoot. 
According  to  Rev  5",  in  the  central  place  before  the 
throne,  in  the  midst  of  the  four  and  twenty  elders, 
and  the  four  living  creatures,  the  Revelationist 
turned  to  see  a  Lion,  symbol  of  majesty  and  over- 
mastering power,  when  lo  !  instead  of  a  lion  he  be- 
held a  Lamb,  standing,  bearing  still  the  wound  by 
which  He  was  slain  in  sacrifice,  yet  with  the  em- 
blems of  power  and  wisdom  in  the  highest  degree. 
'  He  looked  to  see  power  and  force,  whereby  tiie 
foes  of  his  faith  should  be  destroyed,  and  he  saw 
love  and  gentleness  by  which  they  should  be  con- 
quered '  (C  B.  Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  NT, 
1899,  p.  542).  The  reason  Hofmanu  offers  why  the 
Lion  which  has  conqiiered  appears  as  a  Lamb  is 
that  He  has  gained  His  victory  in  that  form  (  Weis- 
snnung  unci  Erfidlang,  1841-44,  ii.  328  ;  cf.  Is 
53'-).  Attempts  to  trace  the  symbolism  to  astro- 
theology  (cf.  A.  Jeremias,  Babylonisclies  im  Nl\ 
1905)  or  to  a  Babylonian  source  discover  a  single 
reference  to  the  blood  of  a  lamb  substituted  as  a 
sacrificial  offering  for  men  ;  but  no  influence  of  this 
on  pre-Christian  Messianism,  or  of  contemporary 
cults  on  this  particular  symbolism,  has  been  found 
(cf.  J.  Moflatt,  EGT,  '  Revelation,'  1910,  p.  385). 
Rut  always  at  the  heart  of  every  picture  of  the 
Lamb  throughout  this  book  is  the  never-to-be-for- 
gotten fact  of  His  sacrifice  and  victorious  power, 
and  all  the  properties  and  functions  of  the  Exalted 
Christ  take  tiieir  rise  from  this  fact.  Among  the 
functions  assigned  to  Him  is :  (a)  that  of  loosing 
the  seals  of  the  Divine  judgments,  i.e.  of  carrying 
history  through  its  successive  stages  to  its  ultimate 
goal.  Henceforth  the  life  of  the  world  must  be 
dominated  by  the  ideal  which  He  has  realized,  and 
the  power  for  its  fulfilment  must  proceed  from 
Him.  (6)  At  the  very  centre  of  the  heavenly  host, 
together  with  God  He  receives  universal  homage 
from  the  highest  beings  in  heaven— innnmeral)ie 
angels — and  the  entire  animated  creation  (Rev  5^"'^ 
7*"'").  The  significance  of  this  worship,  springing  as 
it  does  from  a  convinced  monotheistic  faith  on  the 
part  of  the  writer,  is  not  to  be  mistaken.  Not  a 
Iiigher  and  a  lower  worship  are  here,  but  the  two 
are  of  the  .same  order  and  unite  in  one  stream. 
The  Lamb  does  indeed  share  the  throne  of  God 
(22'),  yet  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb  is  one. 
(c)  To  Him  as  slain  the  redeemed  owe  their  power 
over  sin  and  death  (o«-»-ia  710.  u  1211  144) .  nor  in 
this  connexion  does  the  author  shrink  from  the 


word  'purchase.'  (d)  To  Him  is  entrusted  the 
eternal  welfare  of  men,  symbolized  by  the  '  book 
of  life'  (21'"  ;  cf.  3'),  the  history  and  significance  of 
which  may  be  traced  in  Is  4=*,  Ex  32"'-,  Ps  38'«89"", 
Ezk  139,  ISIal  3'«,  Dn  12',  Enoch  xlvii.  3,  Ajwr.  liar. 
xxiv.  1,  Asc.  Is.  ix.  12,  Lk  lO-"*,  Ph  4=').  (e)  Still, 
as  in  the  earthly  life,  the  redeemed  follow  Him  antl 
He  maintains  the  life  which  was  begun  through 
Him,  by  keeping  them  in  fellowship  with  Himself 
and  with  God  as  the  source  of  life  (Rev  7'^  H'--*). 
As  the  vision  unfolds,  several  startling  paradoxes 
are  thrown  into  the  foreground.  The  Lamb  bears 
the  marks  of  a  violent  death  at  the  hand  of  others, 
yet  He  is  all-powerful  (5").  He  gave  Himself  in  the 
surrender  of  a  perfect  love  for  the  sake  of  sinners, 
yet  He  is  moved  by  fierce  wrath  against  evil-doers 
(6'").  The  Lamb  becomes  the  great  Siiepherd  of  the 
sheep,  whom  He  guides  and  they  follow  Him  (7'^). 
Hostile  forces  shall  make  war  against  the  Lamb, 
and  the  Lamb  shall  overcome  them  (17'*).  In  the 
final  chapters,  the  scene  shifts  and  still  more  strik- 
ing symbolism  appears.  The  Lamb  is  pictured  as 
the  central  figure  in  a  marriage  feast — tlie  Bride- 
groom whose  bride  is  the  New  Jerusalem  (19^* '  21*), 
hidden  with  God  until  the  fullness  of  time.  Again 
the  scene  changes  to  the  New  Jerusalem,  whoso 
foundations  are  the  twelve  apostles  of  the  Lamb 
(21'^),  whose  temple  is  the  Lord  God  Almighty  and 
the  Lamb  {v."^),  and  whose  lamp  is  the  Lamb  (v.=®). 
In  closing  we  may  summarize  the  significance  of 
'Lamb 'in  the  Apocalypse.  The  meaning  of  the 
person  and  work  of  Christ  is  disclosed  in  sacrifice. 
The  secret  of  His  nearness  to  God,  of  His  personal 
victory  and  power  over  others,  and  the  common 
spirit  by  which  His  activity  on  earth  is  bound  to 
that  in  heaven,  is  found  in  love.  And  still  further, 
central  in  the  throne  of  God,  the  law  of  the  moral 
order  of  the  world,  the  power  which  moves  history 
to  its  goal,  the  all-pervading  spirit  of  the  angelic 
hosts,  the  principle  in  which  the  paradoxes  of  life 
are  resolved,  the  magnet  which  draws  heaven  down 
to  earth  and  domiciles  it  Avith  men,  and  the  light 
in  which  all  social  good  is  revealed  and  glorified  is 
sacrificial  love.  C.  A.  Beckwith. 

LAMP,  LAMPSTAND.— Recent  excavation  in 
Palestine  has  greatly  increased  our  knowledge  of 
the  types  of  lamps  in  use  during  the  various 
epochs  of  antiquity.  The  recently  published 
Memoir,  The  Excavation  of  Gezcr  (It.  A.  S. 
Macalister,  3  vols.,  1912),  has  multiplied  examples, 
and,  together  with  Excavaticns  in  Palestine  during 
189^-1900  (F.  J.  Bliss  and  R.  A.  S.  Macalister, 
1902),  allows  us  to  trace  the  development  very 
fully.  We  may  now  classify  the  lamps  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  under  the  head  of  'closed'  lamps, 
with  divisions  according  to  shape  and  ornamenta- 
tion. It  is  likely  that  the  most  interesting  forms 
lie  outside  our  period  (i.e.  after  a.d.  100) — those 
that  bear  Christian  inscriptions,  and  others  that 
show  the  conventional  'candlestick'  pattern. 
Allowance  must  be  made  for  the  older  '  open  ' 
type,  which  liere  and  there  persisted.  It  must 
also  be  remembered  that  Greek  influence  had  to 
a  large  extent  modified  the  national  types. 
Roman  forms  are  forthcoming,  but  they  are  rare. 
These  remarks  apply  to  lamps  of  the  ordinary 
material,  i.e.  clay.  Bronze  lamps  play  little  part 
in  Palestine,  and  even  terra-cotta  forms  are  un- 
common. All  forms  agree  in  certain  general  fea- 
tures, viz.  the  receptacle  for  oil,  and  the  orifice 
for  the  wick.  But  tnere  are  many  peculiarities  in 
regard  to  shape,  the  mode  of  base  and  of  handle, 
the  number  01  wick-holes,  the  size  of  the  reservoir 
opening,  the  presence  of  a  slit  for  raising  the  wick, 
etc.  In  the  type  that  retains  the  old  saucer  form, 
account  must  be  taken  of  the  number  of  jxjints — 
one,  four,  and  even  seven  ('multiple  radiating' 


LAODICEA 


LAODICE.V 


683 


lamps) — wliich  iiii plies  a  conespomling  number  of 
wicks.  The  lamp  is  for  the  most  part  dLssociateil 
from  its  itanJ.  Lampstands,  for  table  and  for 
floor,  and  candelabra,  with  ground  base,  as  appear- 
ing in  classical  illustrations  pertaining  to  tlie  1st 
cent.  A.D.,  are  highly  ornate.  It  cannot  be  said 
that  Palestine  has  produced  njany  examples  of 
these,  altlioiigh  they  were  in  use,  fashioned  from 
materials  of  wood,  stone,  and  metal.  Hanging 
lamps  were  also  known,  as  can  be  judged  by  the 
form  of  the  handles.  For  outdoor  purposes  the 
more  primitive  torch  was  used,  consisting  of  a 
handle  surmounted  by  a  saucer-shaped  protective 
disc,  and  having  a  receptacle  for  a  bundle  of 
wicks.  These  were  saturated  with  oil,  supplied 
from  a  separate  vessel.  The  oil  used  was  chiefly 
olive. 

-  When  we  examine  the  biblical  literature  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  we  find  that  the  essential  words 
under  this  head  are  Xi'Xfoi,  Xuxfia,  Xo/trds,  *  lamp,' 
•lampstand,'  and  'torch,'  according  to  the  above 
description.  In  spite  of  our  increased  knowledge 
regarding  specific  forms,  we  cannot  add  much 
towards  elucidation  of  the  passages  abont  to  be 
enumerated.  The  '  lights'  of  Ac  16®  (RV)  (<f>&ra., 
neut.  plur. — not  'a  light'  as  in  the  AV)  cannot 
well  be  detined.  The  Xa^rdSes  (Ac  20*)  in  the 
upper  chamber  might  as  reasonably  be  lamps  as 
torches,  notwithstanding  the  term  employed  (on 
the  reading  irroXanirddei  [D]  see  H.  Smith  in  ExpT 
xvi.  [1904-05]  478,  and  J,  H.  Moulton  and  G. 
Milligan  in  Expositor,  iv.  [1912]  566).  In  Rev  4' 
the  same  word  is  translated  in  the  RV  'lamps,' 
and  in  S'"  '  torch,'  which  shows  the  perplexity 
attaching.  R.  C.  Trench  (NT  Synonymf^,  1876, 
p.  159)  is  of  opinion  that  the  invariable  rendering 
in  the  NT  should  be  'torches,'  Mt  25*  being  no 
exception.     The  point  need  not  be  pressed. 

The  generic  term  X&xyoi  has  been  consistently 
rendered  'lamp'  in  the  RV,  'candle,'  which  is 
erroneous,  having  been  dropped  (Rev  18^  22*),  and 
'light,'  which  is  indefinite,  having  been  displaced 
(2  P  1'*,  Rev  21^).  No  information  can  be  gathered 
from  these  passages  as  to  the  type  of  lamp. 

Although  candle  has  been  dropped,  candlestick 
(^  Xir;^''''' — with  one  exception  plur.)  has  been  re- 
tained, and  '  lampstand '  placed  in  the  margin 
(Rev  112.13.  »  2'*  11*).  He  9-  stands  apart  from 
this,  '  candlestick '  alone  being  employed.  The 
reference  in  this  case  is  to  the  furniture  of  the 
tabernacle  (for  a  description  of  the  Golden  Candle- 
stick [Lampstand]  see  HDB  iv.  663  f.).  The  re- 
maining instances  quoted,  all  in  I£ev.,  also  hark 
back  to  OT  parallels  (Ex  25=^  37^,  Zee  4-).  There 
is,  however,  difl'erence  amid  similarity.  By  the 
necessity  of  the  case,  since  there  are  seven  churches 
(Rev  l*  etc.),  the  lampstands  are  single  and  number 
seven,  instead  of  being  one  shaft,  divided  into 
seven  branches.  The  parallel  to  Zee  4?  does  not 
extend  to  the  number  of  the  lampstands  (two  in 
Rev  11*,  one  in  Zee.),  although  the  number  of  the 
olive  trees  is  the  same.  This  jwint  is  elaborated 
in  HDB  iv.  255. 

In  conclusion,  reference  may  be  made  to  the 
representation  of  the  seven -branched  lampstand 
on  the  Arch  of  Titus,  often  reproduced,  which  is 
probably  a  copy  of  the  original  (EBi,  art.  '  Candle- 
stick ") ;  to  contemporary  Roman  practice  in  light- 
ing (see  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John, 
1907,  p.  240) ;  and  to  the  abundant  materials  for 
studying  the  development  of  the  lamp  witliin 
Christian  times  provided  by  H.  Leclercq,  Manuel 
cCarcheologie  chretienne,  1907,  ii.  509  ff.,  5o6  ff. 

W.  CrL'ICKSHAXK. 

LiODICEi  (S  has  XaoSixia  every^vhere.  B  has 
this  form  of  the  word  in  Col  2\  Rev  1"  Z^*,  but 
Aao5t/ceta  in  Col  4'^  ^*-  ^^  [the  latter  is  the  form  u.sed 
by  almost  all    Gr.  authors] ;  Lat.  Laodicea  [in- 


correctly Laodiciii]). — Laodicea  was  an  important 
seat  of  commerce  in  the  Roman  province  of  Asia, 
one  of  three  cities  in  the  Lycus  valley  which 
were  evangelized  about  the  same  time,  ft  was  11 
miles  W.  of  Colossie  and  6  nulea  S.  of  Hierapolis. 
Founded  probably  by  the  Seleucid  king  Antiochus 
II.  (261-246  B.C.),  and  named  after  his  wife 
Laodice,  it  was  kno\vn  as  '  Laodicea  on  the  Lycus ' 
{XoLoSiKia  ri  rpdi [or  irl]  rif  AvKifi,  Laodicea  ad  Lycum). 
Being  some  distance  east  of  '  the  Gate  of  Phrygia,' 
it  is  classed  by  Polybius  (v.  57)  and  Strabo  (XII. 
viii.  13)  among  Phrygian  cities,  while  Ptolemy 
sets  it  down  as  Carian.  It  stood  on  a  small  plateau 
about  2  miles  S.  of  the  Lycus,  and  had  behind  it 
to  the  S.  and  S.W.  the  snow-capped  mountains 
Salbakos  and  Kadmos,  each  over  8,000  ft.  above 
sea-level.  Designed,  like  the  other  Seleucid  foun- 
dations in  Asia  Minor,  to  be  at  once  a  strong  gar- 
rison city  and  a  centre  of  Hellenic  civilization,  it 
occupied  a  strategic  position  on  the  great  eastern 
trade-route,  where  the  narrow  Lycus  gorge  opens 
into  the  broad  Moeander  plain.  'Formerly  a  small 
town'  (Strabo,  xil.  viii.  16),  its  prosperity  dated 
from  the  peaceful  time  which  followed  the  Roman 
occupation  (133  B.C.). 

"The  country  around  lAodicea  breeds  excellent  sheep,  re- 
markable not  only  for  the  softness  of  their  wool,  in  which  they 
surpass  the  Milesian  sheep,  but  for  their  dark  or  raven  colour. 
The  Laodiceans  derive  a  large  revenue  from  them,  as  the 
Colosseni  do  from  their  flocks,  of  a  colour  of  the  same  name ' 
(Strabo,  xn.  %-iii.  16). 

The  native  religion  of  the  district  was  the  cult 
of  Carian  Men,  whom  the  Hellenists  of  Laodicea 
identified  with  Zeus.  His  temple  was  at  Attuda, 
13  miles  W.  from  Laodicea.  In  connexion  with 
it,  but  probably  in  Laodicea  itself,  was  'a  large 
Herophilian  school  of  medicine  under  the  direction 
of  Zeuxis,  and  afterwards  of  Alexander  Philalethes ' 
(Strabo,  xii.  WiL  20).  The  physicians  of  Laodicea 
were  skilful  oculists,  and  a  preparation  for  weak 
eyes,  called  'Phrygian  powder'  (W^pa  4>pvyia), 
was  well  known.  2^early  the  whole  basin  of  the 
Mjeander  was  subject  to  earthquakes  {ib.  17).  Im- 
perial funds  were  usually  given  for  the  restoration 
of  cities  thus  injured,  and  Laodicea  accepted  a 
grant  from  Tiberius  after  such  a  calamity,  but  of 
a  later  visitation  Tacitus  writes  :  *  The  same  year 
[A.D.  60]  Laodicea,  one  of  the  most  famous  cities 
of  Asia,  having  been  prostrate  by  an  earthquake, 
recovered  herself  by  her  o^vn  resources  (propriis 
opibus  revaluit),  and  without  any  relief  from  us ' 
(Ann.  XIV.  xxvii.).  She  had  long  been  rich  and 
increased  in  goods,  and  had  need  of  nothing  (Rev 
3^').  ilore  than  a  century  before  (in  51  B.C. ),  Cicero 
proposed  to  cash  his  treasury  Bills  of  Exchange  at 
a  Laodicean  bank  (Ep.  ad  Fam.  iii.  5). 

Such  a  thriving  commercial  centre  had  great 
attractions  for  a  colony  of  Jews.  If  the  first 
settlers  were  sent  thither  by  the  founder  of  the 
city,  or  by  Antiochus  the  Great,  who  is  said  to 
have  planted  2,000  Jewish  families  in  Phrygia  an4l 
Lydia  (Jos.  Ant.  Xll.  iii.  4),  they  would  enjoy 
equal  rights  of  citizenship  with  the  Greeks. 
When  Flaccus,  Roman  governor  of  Asia  (62  B.C.), 
forbade  the  Jews  to  send  contributions  of  money 
to  Jerusalem,  he  seized  a.s  contraband  twenty 
pounds  weight  in  gold  in  the  district  of  which 
Laodicea  was  the  capital  (Cicero,  pro  Flacco,  28). 
Calculated  at  the  rate  of  a  half-shekel  for  each 
man,  this  sum  represents  a  Jewish  population  of 
more  than  11,000  adult  freemen,  women  and 
children  being  exempted.  Josephus  preser\-es  a 
letter  from  '  the  magistrates  of  the  Laodiceans  to 
Caius  Rubilius'  (c.  4§  B.C.),  guaranteeing  religious 
liberty  to  the  Jews  of  the  city  (Ant.  xiv.  x.  20). 

The  details  of  the  founding  of  the  Church  of  Lao- 
dicea have  to  be  pieced  together  from  allusions  in 
the  Acts  and  Epistles.  St.  Paul  was  not  directly 
the  founder.     His  words  in  Col  2*,  •  I  strive  for 


684 


LAPIS  LAZULI 


LASCrVIOUSNESS 


.  .  ,  them  at  Laodicea,  and  for  as  many  as  liave 
not  seen  my  face  in  tlie  flesli,'  imply  that  he  liad 
not  personally  laboured  in  the  Lycus  valley.  In 
his  tiiird  missionary  tonr  he  did  not  go  to  Ephesns 
by  the  ordinary  route  of  commerce,  whicli  would 
have  brought  him  to  the  Lycus  cities,  but  passed 
through  'tjje  upper  country'  (tA  dvurepiKd.  ixipi), 
Ac  19'),  probably  by  Seiblia  and  the  Cayster  valley. 
His  influence  in  the  former  region  was  indinnrt. 
During  his  three  years' residence  in  Ephesus  '  all 
they  who  dwell  in  Asia  heard  the  word'  (19'"). 
The  truths  which  he  proclaimed  in  the  metropolis 
were  quickly  repeated  all  over  the  province,  and 
especially  in  the  cities  along  the  great  roads.  His 
evangelist  of  the  Lycus  glen  was  Epaphras,  whom 
St.  Paul  regarded  as  his  deputy  (Col  1'[11V],  read- 
ing virkp  TjfiQv  instead  of  v/xdv),  and  whose  labour 
on  behalf  of  the  three  communities  evoked  a  warm 
encomium  (Col  4'*'  ").  The  close  relations  subsist- 
ing between  the  churches  of  Laodicea  and  Colossoe 
are  indicated  by  the  injunction  that  the  Ei)istle 
to  Colossians  should  be  read  in  the  Church  of 
the  Laodiceans,  and  that  the  Colossians  should 
read  'the  Epistle  from  Laodicea.'  The  latter  was 
perhaps  the  canonical  'Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,' 
which  Marcion  expressly  names  the  Epistle  '  to 
the  saints  who  are  at  Laodicea.' 

The  last  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches 
of  Asia  is  addressed  to  Laodicea  (Rev  3'^"-"-*).  The 
severity  of  the  prophet's  rebuke  has  made  '  Laodi- 
cean' for  ever  suggestive  of  lukewarmness  in  re- 
ligion. Once  fervent,  Laodicea  became  so  tepid 
that  her  condition  excited  a  feeling  of  moral  nausea. 
Each  of  the  Seven  Epistles  is  of  course  concerned 
with  a  Christian  church  ratiier  than  with  a  city, 
but  the  Christians  were  citizens,  and  the  spirit  of 
the  city  could  not  be  kept  out  of  the  chnrcli.  The 
allusions  to  the  circumstances  and  character  of 
Laodicea  are  unmistakable.  The  famous  com- 
mercial and  banking  city,  too  proud  to  accept  an 
Empire's  aid,  is  invited  to  come  to  the  poor  man's 
market  and  buy  from  the  Sender  of  the  letter 
(irop'  i/jLov  is  emphatic)  gold  refined  by  lire  (vv,"*  '^). 
She  who  has  innumerable  flocks  on  her  Phrygian 
hills,  and  whose  fine  black  woollen  fabrics  are 
prized  everywhere,  has  need  of  white  garments  to 
cover  her  own  moral  nakedness  (v.'*).  HerAilscu- 
lapian  school  of  medicine  has  no  Phrygian  powder 
for  the  healing  of  her  spiritual  blindness,  whicli 
reqiiires  the  eye-salve  (collyrimii)  of  another  Phy- 
sicuvn  (v."*).  liich  Laodicea,  well-clothed  and  well- 
fed,  self-reliant  and  self-satisfied,  is  in  danger  of 
being  rejected  with  loathing.  Yet  her  absent 
Lonl  loves  her,  and  writes  her  so  incisively  only 
because  He  hopes  to  find  her  chastened  and  peni- 
tent when  He  returns  and  knocks  at  her  door 
(vv.'"-  ^). 

Little  is  known  about  the  post-apostolic  history 
of  Laodicea.  Traditions  regarding  Archippus, 
Nymphas  (Col  4"),  and  Diotrephes  (3  Jn  ^)  areworth- 
less.  The  so-called  '  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans ' 
(in  Latin)  is  a  forgery.  Tiie  subscription  of  1 
Tim.,  'written  from  Laodicea,  which  is  the  chief- 
est  city  of  Phrygia  Pacatiana,'  has  no  axithority. 
The  ruins  of  Laoilicea  are  nuiiiy  but  not  impressive. 

LiTERATURK.— W.  M.  Ramsay,  The  I^elters  to  the  Seven 
Churches,  1904,  pp.  413-430  ;  W.  J.  Hamilton,  Researche,^  in 
Asia  Minor,  J'ontiui,  Annenia,  1842,  i.  ."ilSf.  ;  W.  M.  Leake, 
Joximal  of  Tour  in  Asia  Minor,  1824,  p.  ef)!  f. ;  Murray's 
Handbook  to  Asia  Minor,  1895.  JaMES  STRAHAN. 

LAPIS  LAZULL— See  Sapphire. 

LASCIYI0U8NESS  (dtrAyeia).— 1.  Usage.— The 
Greek  word  occurs  10  times  in  the  NT  (Mk  7",  lio 
13",  2  Co  12-1,  Gal  5'*,  Eph  4'»,  1  P  4^,  2  P  2- 7- '«, 
Jude*).  It  should  be  read  instead  of  avwXeia  in 
2  P  2*.  It  is  7  times  translated  by  '  lasciviousness ' 
(AVm  so  translates  it  in  2  P  2^)  in  the  AV,  while 


the  11 V  translates  it  so  in  all  cases  except  Ro  13", 
wliere  the  'wantonness'  of  the  AV  is  retained 
(cf.  2  P  2'*).  In  2  P  2^  ii>  dae\yel(}  is  translated 
'  filthy  conversation.' 

2.  DerlYation.— The  derivation  of  the  word  is 
unknown.  The  old  derivation  was  from  Sclge,  a 
city  in  Pisidia  regarded  by  some  as  remarkably 
addicted  to  wantonness  (Suidas,  s.v.),  and  by 
others  as  noted  for  its  sobriety  (Ktymologicon 
Magnum,  fi.v.  ;  Strabo,  xii.  ;  Libanius,  schol.  in 
Dem.  Orat.).  In  the  first  case  the  a-  would  be 
intensive,  in  the  second  jjrivative.  Moderns  derive 
it  from  a  -f  aeXyu  (^Ayw)  (see  Trench,  AT  Synonym^, 
1876,  p.  54,  and  T.  K.  Abbott,  Ephesians  and 
Colossians  [ICC,  1897,  p.  1.32]),  or  from  a(r(' satiety') 
-f  e\7,  or  from  a  -f  ffoKay  (oreXas),  in  which  case  the 
primary  meaning  woukl  l)e  '  foul'  (J.  W.  Donaldson, 
New  Cratylus\  1859,  p.  692  ;  Ellicott  on  Gal  5'»). 

3.  Classical  meaning. — The  classical  meaning  of 
the  word  is  excess  of  any  kind — even  inordinate 
size  (see  Donaldson,  op.  cit.  p.  692),  but  particularly 
moral  excess  and  outrage,  contemptuous  violence 
and  insolence  towards  others.  It  has  thus  much 
the  same  range  of  meaning  as  O^ptj.  Trench  brings 
out  well  the  classical  meaning  of  the  word  (op,  cit. 
p.  54  ff.). 

4.  NT  meaning. — In  the  NT,  however,  the  term 
seems  to  refer  exclusively  to  '  open,  shameless  im- 
purity.' It  has  plainly  this  meaning  in  Ro  13", 
2  Co  1221,  Gal  5i«,  Eph  4i«,  2  P  2^-  's.  It  is  one  of 
the  works  of  darkness,  the  fit  climax  of  fornication 
and  uncleanness ;  it  is  a  vice  closely  as.sociated 
with  banquetings  and  drinking  l)outs  (/cw/ioi  Kai 
fMid-rj;  cf.  'wine,  women,  and  song');  see  C.  Bigg, 
St.  Peter  and  St.  Jude  (ICC,  1901),  168. 

a.(T^y€ia  or  aKadapcla  ('a  man  may  be  aKAdaproi 
and  hide  his  sin  ;  he  does  not  become  d(Te\yr]s  until 
he  shocks  public  decency '  [J.  B.  Liglitfoot,  Gala- 
tian^,  1876,  p.  210])  and  irXeove^La  seem  to  be  the 
two  characteristic  heathen  vices. 

Bengel  (on  Ro  1^),  followed  by  Trench,  main- 
tains that  psychologically  man  without  God  must 
seek  satisfaction  in  either  acr^Xyeta  (dKadapaia)  or 
irXeove^ia,  and  dffiXyeia  is  associated  in  the  NT  with 
cto-^/Seia  and  seems  to  be  characteristically  a  heathen 
sin  (cf.  Wis  142«,  3  Mac  2-").  Abbott  (op.  cit.  p. 
133  f.)  opposes  this  view  of  Bengel. 

In  Mk  7-^  and  1  P  4^  it  is  possible  to  defend  the 
classical  sense  of  'excesses.'  '  Raphelius  justly 
observes  that  if  dcriXyeia  were  in  tiiis  passage  [Mk 
7'-^]  designed  to  denote  lewdness  or  lasciviousness 
it  would  have  been  ailded  to  fioixfiai  and  vopvtiai, 
vices  of  a  like  kind,  in  the  preceding  verse.  But 
as  it  is  joined  with  56Xos — deceit — he  interprets  it 
in  general — an  injury  of  a  more  remarkable  and 
enormous  kind  ;  and  shows  that  Polybius  has  in 
several  passages  used  the  word  in  this  sense ;  cf. 
also  Wetstein '  (J.  Parkhurst,  Greek  Lexicon  to  the 
NT*,  1804). 

Against  this,  however,  see  the  convincing  note 
of  H.  B.  Swete  (St.  Marlc\  1902,  p.  154) :  'Here 
the  reference  is  probably  to  the  dissolute  life  of 
the  Herodian  court,  and  of  the  Greek  cities  of 
Galilee  and  the  Decapolis  ;  if  56Xos  characterized 
the  Jew,  his  Greek  neighbour  was  yet  more  terribly 
branded  by  daiXyeia.^  In  1  P  4*  the  word  is  de- 
finitely used  as  a  general  term  of  the  '  will  of  the 
Gentiles,'  and  is  evidently  the  licentiousness  which 
accompanied  heathen  feasts  and  lawless  idolatries, 
while  in  Jude  and  2  Peter  it  is  the  typical  sin  of 
the  cities  of  the  plain,  wiiich  the  libertines,  under 
the  guise  of  a  spurious  freedom,  followed,  and  into 
which  they  inveigled  others.  In  their  case  the 
sin  of  wXeovt^la  was  as.sociated  with  it.  While  a 
rigid  asceticism  sprang  from  a  horror  of  this  sin, 
sensuality  defended  itself  l)y  the  principle  that  the 
body  did  not  count  for  spiritual  life. 

We  may,   then,    conclude    that  the  prominent 


LASEA 


LAW 


685 


idea  in  d<r^X7eto  in  the  NT  is  flaj^'imt,  shameless 
sensualitj'.  While  this  was  reckoneil  one  of  the 
dStd^pa  among  the  heathen,  it  was  branded  as 
deadly  and  loathsome  by  Christianity.  In  the 
heathen  world  '  sexual  vice  was  no  longer  counted 
vice.  It  was  provided  for  by  public  law ;  it  was 
incorporated  into  the  worship  of  the  gods.  It  was 
cultivated  in  everj'  luxurious  and  monstrous  excess. 
It  was  eating  out  the  manhood  of  the  Greek  and 
Latin  races.  From  the  imperial  Caesar  do^vn  to 
the  horde  of  slaves,  it  seemed  as  though  every  class 
of  society  had  abandoned  itself  to  the  norrid 
practices  of  lust'  (G.  G.  Findlay,  Ephesians 
[Expositors  Bible,  1892],  272). 

LrmuTinuL — Grimm -Thayer,  «.c.  curcAvcta ;  R.  C.  Trench, 
KT  Synonym^,  1^76,  p.  54  f.;  J.  Miiller,  The  Christian 
Doctrine  of  Sin,  1S77-&5,  i.  159  ff. ;  the  Commentaries  of  Ham- 
mond (on  Ro  1^,  where  an  attempt  is  made  to  equate  aaikytia 
and  s-AfOM^w),  C.  J.  Ellicott,  J.  B.  Li^rhtfoot  (on  Gal  S>^X  H. 
B.  Swete  (on  Mk  7^2),  J.  B.  Mayor  (on  2  P  23). 

Donald  Mackenzie. 
LASEA  (\aaaia,  WH  Aoff^a). — Lasea  was  a  city 
near  Fair  Havens,  on  the  southern  coast  of  Crete 
(Ac  27*).  It  is  not  elsewliere  mentioned  by  any 
ancient  geograpliical  or  other  writer,  but  as  it  was 
one  of  the  smaller  of  the  hundred  cities  of  the 
island — 'centum  nobilem  Cretam  urbibus'  (Hor. 
Ep.  ix.  29) — this  need  cause  no  surprise.  The  con- 
jecture of  Captain  Spratt  in  18o3  as  to  it«  site  was 
confirmed  by  G.  Brown,  who  examined  tlie  ruins 
in  1856.  He  found  the  beach  buried  under  ma.s.ses 
of  masonry,  and  higher  up  discovered  the  ruins  of 
two  temples.  '  Manj'  shafts,  and  a  few  capitals  of 
Grecian  pillars,  all  of  marble,  lie  scatteretl  about. 
.  .  .  Some  peasants  came  down  to  see  us  from  the 
hiUs  above,  and  I  asked  them  the  name  of  the 

Elace.     They  said  at  once,  "  Lasea,"  so  there  could 
e  no  doubt'  (J.  Smith,  The  Voyage  and  Shipwreck 
of  St.  Paul*,  1880,  p.  268  f.). 

The  city  was  about  5  miles  east  from  Fair 
Havens,  and  1  mile  east  from  Cape  Leonda,  which 
was  so  named  from  its  resemblance  to  a  lion 
couchant.  As  St.  Pauls  ship  remained  for  '  much 
time'  (iKavov  xpo"*"')  in  the  Havens,  Lasea  was 
perhaps  frequently  visited  by  the  Apostle.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  the  evangelization  of  Crete,  in 
which  Titus  afterwards  laboured,  was  begun  at 
that  time.  J  AMES  Strahax. 

LAYER. — '  Laver '  is  the  translation  of  'kovrpor  in 
Eph  5-*  RVm,  where  the  text  has  '  washing.'  The 
same  Greek  word  occurs  in  Tit  3',  where  the  RVm 
again  gives  'laver.'  This  rendering  is  at  lea-<t 
doubtful.  In  the  LXX  tps,  'a  laver,'  is  always 
rendered  by  XoiT^p,  while  Xoi-rpoy  is  used  for  ny-"}, 
'washing,' "in  Ca  4*  6«,  Sir  SI**.  The  phrase  Sia 
Xourpov  raXivytveffiai,  therefore,  probably  means 
'  through  a  washing,  or  bathing,  of  regeneration,' 
rather  than  '  through  a  laver,  or  font.'  For 
patristic  references  conhrniing  the  translation 
•washing,'  see  J.  A.  Robinson's  Ephesians,  1903, 
p.  206.  James  Strahan. 

LAW.— 1.  Introductory.  —  The  subject  of  the 
Law  formed  one  of  the  main  problems,  if  not  in- 
deed the  main  problem,  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
inasmuch  as  it  involved  the  fundamental  relation 
of  primitive  Christianity  to  Judaism  on  the  one 
hand  and  heathenism  on  the  other.  Later  Judaism, 
on  its  Pharisaic  side,  had  carried  legalism  to  ex- 
tremes, and  thus  accentuated  the  separation  be- 
tween Israel  and  the  GentUes,  The  primitive 
Christian  community,  on  the  other  hand,  had  been 
taught  by  its  Founder  to  rank  the  freedom  of 
Di\lne  grace  higher  than  human  merit  (cf.  e.g. 
Mt  9*"^  i;s  and,  generally,  the  attitude  of  Jesus  to 
publicans  and  sinners),  and  to  regard  faith  as  of 
more  importance  than  the  distinction  between  Jew 
and  Gentile    (cf.   Mt  8^"  ^^   1521-^  y),      Jq  ti^g 


evangelical  record,  moreover,  the  early  Church  had 
preserved  the  recollection  of  its  Lord's  outspoken 
utterances  regarding  the  merely  relative  validity 
of  the  Jewish  ceremonial  Law  {e.g.  of  the  Sabbath, 
Mt  12^-"  lis ;  of  cleanness,  Mt  15'*-»  lis)— or,  at  all 
events,  of  the  interpretations  recognized  in  the 
Synagogue  ('the  traditions  of  the  elders,'  Mt 
15**'  ii).  StUl,  the  same  record  s-howed  that  in  prin- 
ciple the  attitude  of  Jesus  to  the  Law  as  a  whole  was 
an  avowedly  consenative  one  (Mt  5^''^,  Lk  16'"), 
even  as  He  had  lived  His  life  within  the  confines 
of  the  Law  (cf.  Gal  4* :  yevo/ievoi  inrb  vofiof) ;  His 
supreme  aim,  indeed,  was  to  bring  out  with  full 
clearness  and  force  the  will  of  God  made  known  in 
the  Law.  We  thus  see  that,  Avith  regard  to  the 
Law,  the  evangelical  tradition  seemed  capable  of  a 
double  construction,  or,  at  least,  that  it  did  not 
supply  the  means  for  deciding  a  question  that 
soon  became  urgent.  It  is  therefore  easy  to  under- 
stand why  the  early  Christian  community  in 
Jerusalem  assumed  at  first  a  rigidly  conservative 
attitude  towards  the  Law,  and  regarded  the  faith- 
ful observance  of  it  as  praiseworthy  (Ac  21^ ;  cf. 
2»  31  10»-  "  22»2).  St.  Peter,  e.g.,  required  a  special 
revelation  before  he  would  enter  the  house  of 
the  uncircumcised  Cornelius  and  admit  the  first 
Gentile  convert  into  the  Church  by  baptism  (10'"**) 
— a  step  which  did  not  fail  to  arouse  opposition  on 
the  part  of  those  who  '  were  of  the  circumcision ' 
(cf.  IV-^). 

2.  The  Yiew  of  St.  James. — The  principal  repre- 
sentative of  this  zeal  for  the  Law  in  the  infant 
Church  was  St.  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord, 
who,  according  to  Acts,  as  also  to  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  occupied  a  leading  position  therein  (Ac 
1513-21  2118-K  Gal  2* ;  cf.  1'^).  St.  James,  by  reason 
of  his  righteous  life,  is  said  to  have  been  esteemed 
scarcely  less  highly  by  non-Christians  than  by 
believers  (Hegesippus,  in  Eus.  HE  ii.  23).  His 
great  concern  was  to  smooth  the  way  by  which 
Israel  might  come  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  put  no 
stumbling-block  before  his  people.  From  this  [X)int 
of  \-iew  his  attitude  to  the  question  concerning 
the  Gentile  Christians  discussed  at  the  Apostolic 
Council  becomes  readily  intelligible.  Here  he 
shows  himself  to  be  a  genuine  disciple  of  Jesus 
in  recognizing,  after  the  example  of  Peter,  the 
supremacy  of  grace,  and  in  refusing  to  put  the 
yolce  of  the  Law  upon  the  Gentile  Christians, 
whom  rather  he  receives  as  brethren,  while  he 
acknowledges  St.  Paul  as  the  Apostle  of  the  Cir- 
cumcision (Ac  15^*"^  ;  cf.  v.",  Gal  2*).  He  thus 
came  into  direct  conflict  with  the  Pharisaic  group 
of  Jewish  Christians — those  who  asserted  that  the 
salvation  of  the  Gentiles  depended  upon  their  being 
circumcised  and  their  acceptance  of  the  Law  (Ac 
15^"*,  Gal  2'"*).  It  was  probably  only  for  the  sake 
of  brotherly  intercourse  between  circumcised  and 
uncircumcised  Christians  that  James  proposed  the 
restrictions  to  Gentile  Christian  liberty  which  were 
laid  down  in  the  so-called  Apostolic  Decree  (Ac 
15201. 2M.)  "Pile  reason  given  for  the  proposal  (v.-* : 
'  For  Moses  from  generations  of  old  hath  in  every 
city  them  that  preach  him,  being  read  in  the 
synagogues  every  sabbath ')  probably  means  simply 
that  the  four  prohibitions  in  question  —  which 
formed  the  kernel  of  the  so-called  Xoachian  com- 
mandments, and  correspond  to  the  laws  for  prose- 
lytes— had  come  to  be  so  impressed  upon  the  minds 
of  the  Jews  that  they  could  not  countenance  any 
disobedience  to  them  if  their  intercourse  with  their 
Gentile  brethren  in  the  Church  was  to  be  uncon- 
strained. In  formulating  the  injunctions  of  the 
Apostolic  Decree  St.  James  was  in  reality  only 
following  the  practice  of  the  Synagogue  with  re- 
gard to  proselytes  of  the  narrower  class  ('  the  God- 
fearing,' oi  (po^ovfuvoi  [or  tre/So^o-oi]  rby  dedp),  just  as 
that  practice  no  doubt  bad  already  prepared  the 


686 


LAW 


LAW 


way  in  the  ChriHtian  nii.ssion  to  tlie  Gentiles  ;  for 
the  fact  tliat  8t.  Paul  makes  no  mention  of  the 
Apostolic  Decree  in  Gal  2"'-  probably  Bi<,'nifies  that 
lie  had  observed  its  provisions  on  his  own  initiative 
(so,  in  substance,  A.  liitschl,  B.  Weiss,  H.  H.  Wendt, 
etc.  ;  cf.,  fnrther,  art.  MoSES).  liut  the  question 
re<,'ardin,LC  the  Gentiles  was  in  no  sense  solved,  as 
soon  ajiiM^ared  in  what  octMirred  at  Antio(;h  (Gal 
2""'^).  If,  for  the  sake  of  Christian  fellowsliip,  St. 
Peter  had  in  that  city  ij,'nored  the  Jewish  regula- 
tions about  food,  and  had  eaten  in  the  company  of 
Gentile  Christians,  this  did  not  coincide  with  the 
views  of  those  who  'ctame  from  James.'  These 
men  took  offence  at  St.  Peter's  practice — just  as 
the  Jewish  Christians  at  Jerusalem  had  resented 
his  action  at  Cjcsarea  (Ac  10  ;  cf,  IP'-) — manifestly 
assuming  that  Jewish  Christians,  as  the  circum- 
cised, were  under  an  absolute  obligation  to  the 
Mosaic  Law,  and  that  they  ought  not,  even  for 
the  sake  of  Christian  fellowship,  to  make  anj'  con- 
cession whatever  to  the  liberty  of  the  converted 
heathen.  If  concessions  were  to  bo  made  at  all, 
they  must  come  from  the  Gentile,  not  the  Jewish, 
side.  Whether  this  point  of  view  is  to  be  traced 
directly  to  St.  James  himself,  or  rather  merely 
coincided  with  his  position,  is  a  much-debated 
question.  It  is  probable,  however,  tliat  in  his 
view  of  the  matter  his  concern  for  Israel  bulked 
more  largely  tlian  his  regard  for  the  (Jentiles,  and 
that  accordmgly  he  would  have  preferred  to  sur- 
render the  possibility  of  perfect  Christian  com- 
munion between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians 
rather  than  grant  the  former  a  dispensation  from 
their  regulations  regarding  food.  Perhaps  we 
may,  with  B.  Weiss,  see  a  suggestion  of  this  point 
of  view  in  what  St.  James  says  in  Ac  15'*  re<^ard- 
ing  the  mission  to  the  Gentiles,  viz.  that  God  had 
taken  out  of  tliem  a  people  for  His  name — i.e.  a 
new  people  of  God,  in  addition  to  the  old. 

To  tills  type  of  Jewish  Christianity  corresponds 
generally  the  religious  standpoint  of  the  Epistle 
which  is  a.scribed  to  St.  James.  The  letter  sliows 
so  little  of  a  distinctively  Christian  character, 
that  Spitta  has  in  all  seriousness  hazarded  the 
theory  of  its  being  in  reality  a  Jewish  work  in 
which  the  name  of  Jesus  has  been  inserted  here 
and  there.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  liowever,  tiie 
writer  shows  clearly  that  he  is  a  Christian,  not 
merely  in  his  reference  to  Jesus  Christ  in  his 
address  (1' ;  cf.  2'),  but  also  in  his  giving  expres- 
sion to  siiecifically  Christian  ideas,  as  e.g.  when  he 
speaks  of  the  regeneration  of  his  readers  by  the 
word  of  truth  (1'")  and  of  the  saving  word  as 
implanted  in  their  hearts  (P').  He  betrays  his 
Jewish  Christian  mode  of  thought,  however,  when, 
in  enjoining  his  readers  to  be  doers,  and  not  merely 
hearers,  of  the  word  (l'-"^),  he  presently  replaces 
'  word '  by  '  law,'  although  '  the  perfect  law  of 
liberty'  means  tlie  law  as  given  to,  or  as  fulfilled 
in,  human  freedom.  He  thus  shows  that  for  him 
the  central  element  in  Christianity  consists  in  ful- 
filment of  the  Law  (cf.  l'^-^  with  2'2).  It  is  true 
that  St.  James's  conception  of  the  substance  of  tlie 
Law  likewise  shows  tne  influence  of  Jesus,  as  he 
ranks  the  law  of  love  to  one's  neighbour  above  the 
others  (2"),  and,  generally,  urges  the  pre-eminence 
of  the  commandments  enjoining  love  and  meny 
(2'-'»-  "'•  I-'""-  4",  etc.),  jiist  as'  he  specially  de- 
nounces such  sins  as  judging  one's  neighbour  (cf. 
Mt  V)  and  swearing  (cf.  Mt  6'*"^''),  and  condemns 
hatred  as  murder  (Ja  4-).  His  commendation  of 
the  practice  of  mercy  and  of  keeping  oneself  un- 
spotted from  the  world  as  the  true  worship  of  (Jod 
(1-*)  is  also  wholly  in  the  spirit  of  Jesus  (cf.  c.ff. 
Mt  9'*  12'),  while  he  is  silent  regarding  all  out- 
ward service  and  ceremony.  It  is  quite  unneces- 
sary to  follow  modern  criticism  in  reganiiiig  this 
s[iiritual  and  ethical  conception  of  the  Law  as 


pointing  to  a  iK)st-apostolic  date  of  composition, 
any  more  than  the  attack  ujion  the  doctrine  of 
justification  through  faith  alone  (2'''"'^)  need  be  re- 
garded as  post-Pauline.  St.  James's  view  of  the 
Law,  in  fact,  coincides  on  the  whole  with  the  view 
urged  by  Jesus :  in  substance  the  new  Law  does 
not  difler  from  that  of  the  OT,  and  in  2""'-  he  finds 
his  examnles  in  the  latter  (the  Decalogue  and  Dt 
1") ;  while  there  is  no  difliculty  in  seeing  why  he 
never  makes  the  slightest  reference  to  tlie  cere- 
monial Law — for  readers  sucii  as  his  it  was  quite 
unnecessary  to  insist  upon  that  side  of  the  old 
religion,  nor,  for  tiiat  matter,  did  Jesus  Himself  lay 
any  emphasis  upon  it.  Further,  if  the  Epistle  was 
addressed  to  Jewish  Christians  who  had  not  as  yet 
broken  ofl'  relations  with  the  Synagogue  (cf.  eg 
2"^-),  it  may  be  confidently  assumed  that  they  were 
not  neglectful  of  the  ceremonial  Law.  What  they 
required  rather  was  to  be  reminded  of  the  ethical 
asi)ect  of  the  Law,  and  above  all,  to  be  warned 
against  the  common  Jewish  delusion  that  hearing 
and  speaking  the  word  could  take  the  place  of  do- 
ing it.  In  2'''  the  reference  is  not  to  '  the  works  of 
the  Law,'  but  solely  to  works  in  the  ethical  sense. 
Moreover,  as  the  theologians  of  the  S^'iiagogue 
had  already  turned  their  minds  to  the  passage 
Gn  15*  (cf.  A.  Schlatter,  Der  Glaube  im  N'l^,  Cahv 
and  Stuttgart,  1896,  pp.  29  ff.  45  fl'.),  the  antithesis 
of  faith  and  works,  and  the  contrast  between  a 
justification  by  faith  and  a  justification  by  works, 
may  quite  well  have  been  formulated  in  an  age 
prior  to  St.  Paul. 

3.  The  Yiew  of  St.  Peter. — Besides  St,  James, 
the  most  outstanding  representative  of  the  Jewish 
Christian  position  in  tlie  primitive  Church  was 
St.  Peter.  But  just  as,  according  to  Ac  10,  he 
had  been  led  by  a  Divine  revelation  to  enter  the 
house  of  an  uncircumcised  man,  and  to  eat  with 
the  Gentiles  (cf .  1 P),  we  may  infer  also,  from  his 
speech  in  the  Apostolic  Council,  and  especially 
from  his  behaviour  in  the  Gentile  Christian  com- 
munity at  Antioch,  that  he  had  a  much  clearer  view 
than  St.  James  of  the  merely  relative  obligation  of 
tiie  Law  even  for  Jewish  Christians.  In  certain 
circumstances  he  thought  himself  justified,  for  the 
sake  of  brotherly  intercourse  with  Gentile  Chris- 
tians, in  disregarding  the  rigour  of  the  Law,  since, 
after  all,  salvation  did  not  depend  upon  the  Law, 
whose  yoke,  indeed,  neither  tiie  fathers  nor  the 
Jews  then  living  were  able  to  bear,  but  Jew  and 
Gentile  alike  could  look  for  salvation  only  to  the 
grace  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  faith  in  Him  (cf.  Ac 
15'-",  Gal  2'2»).  Hence  St.  Paul  takes  for  granted 
that  the  subsequent  vacillation  of  St.  Peter  at 
Antioch  (Gal  2'-'')  was  nothing  but  dissimulation, 
as  it  was  due,  not  to  any  change  of  conviction,  but 
simply  to  fear  of  the  Jews.  In  principle  St.  Peter 
recogliized  the  religious  freedom  of  the  Jewish 
('liristians,  not  merely  as  regards  the  more  general 
intercourse  with  their  Gentile  brethren  sanctioned 
by  the  Apostolic  Decree,  but  also  as  regards  the 
closer  intimacy  involved  in  eating  with  them  (cf. 
the  Agapfe).  In  other  words,  he  had,  according 
to  St.  Paul,  actually  acknowledged  that  the 
Jewish  Christians  liad  the  right  to  accommodate 
themselves  to  the  freedom  of  the  Gentiles.  Only 
we  must  bear  in  mind  that  St.  Peter  was,  in  a 
much  greater  degree  than  St.  Paul,  a  man  of 
moods,  and  was  therefore  not  always  so  consistent 
in  his  thinking. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  two  Epistle.s  bearing 
the  name  of  Peter  do  not  refer  to  tiie  Law.  The 
Second  Epistle  obviously  dates  from  a  time  when 
the  question  regarding  the  Law  had  given  jdace  to 
otlier  controversies,  and,  at  ail  events,  it  is  con- 
cerned with  a  liltertinism  and  a  doctrine  that  lie 
lH\vond  the  purview  of  Jewisii  legalism.  It  is  a 
striking   fact    that    even    the   First   Epistle,    the 


LAW 


LAW 


687 


autUenticity  of  which  is  open  to  no  decisive  objec- 
tion, does  not  so  much  as  mention  the  Law,  bat 
s{)eaks  from  a  quite  unstudied  and  non-legalistic 
point  of  view.  As  the  writer  implies  that,  e.g., 
the  OT  conception  of  the  priesthood  was  first 
properly  realized  in  the  NT  Church,  and  describes 
the  latter  as  the  true  Temple  of  God  (•>**•).  it  would 
seem  that  the  OT  legal  system  as  a  whole  had  for 
him  only  a  typological  value.  This  would  certainly 
be  strange  if  the  Epistle  was  written,  as  B.  Weiss 
and  Kiihl  suppose,  to  Jewish  Christians,  i.e.  prior 
to  the  time  of  St.  Paul,  but  is  quite  intelligible 
if  it  was  addressed  to  Gentile  Christian,  Pauline 
communities,  and  written  under  the  influence  of 
Pauline  Epistles,  as  Komans  and  Ephesians  —  a 
hypothesis  to  which,  in  view  of  the  editorial  col- 
laboration of  Silvanns,  the  follower  of  St.  Paul, 
no  exception  can  be  taken. 

4.  The  Yiew  of  St.  Paul. — In  point  of  fact,  the 
first  to  decide  the  question  of  the  Law  upon 
grounds  of  principle  was  the  Apostle  Paul  himself, 
though  others  had  already  pointed  the  way.  In 
conformity  with  Avhat  has  been  said  of  St.  Peters 
views,  it  is  perfectly  credible  that,  as  related  in 
Acts,  St.  Peter  was  the  first  to  baptize  a  heathen, 
and  that  he  should  make  reference  thereto  in  his 
address  to  the  Apostolic  Council  (Ac  15"'*).  Here, 
however,  the  most  outstanding  name  is  that  of  the 
martyr  St.  Stephen,  who  anticipated  St.  Peter  in 
divining  the  essentiallj-  non-legalistic  character  of 
the  gospel.  St.  Stephen,  as  a  Hellenist,  could  of 
course  more  easily  than  St.  Peter  discern  the 
merely  relative  validity  of  the  Jewish  legal 
system,  and  especially  of  the  Temple  ritual ;  and 
although  his  adversaries,  in  charging  him  with 
having  in  his  preaching  attacked  the  Holy  Place 
and  the  Law,  were  undoubtedly  doing  him  an 
injustice,  yet  the  accusation  was  not  altogether 
unfounded.  His  trenchant  speech  (Ac  7)  not  only 
attacks  the  Jews  for  their  persistent  rejection  of 
the  Prophets,  but  also  pointedly  criticizes  their 
over-estimation  of  the  Temple :  '  the  Most  High 
dwelleth  not  in  houses  made  with  hands'  (T****). 
His  general  plea  is  that  Di\Tne  revelation  is  in- 
dependent of  any  particular  holy  place,  and  he 
honours  Moses  less  as  the  Law-giver  than  as  the 
prototype  of  Jesus,  and  as  the  one  who  foretold 
His  coming  (cf.  7*"^-)-  The  very  Law  to  which 
the  Jews  appealed  they  had  not  kept  (v.**). 

It  was  no  mere  accident  that  in  particular  the 
personality  and  preaching  of  St.  Stephen  should 
have  wrought  powerfully  on  the  young  Pharisee 
Saul  (7**).  Saul  probablj-  belonged  to  the  CUician 
synagogue,  whose  members  had  disputed  with  St. 
Stephen,  and  in  any  case  the  latters  great  vindica- 
tory speech  must  have  still  further  opened  the  eyes 
of  the  zealous  Pharisee  to  the  inherently  non-legal 
nature  of  the  gospel,  and  rekindled  his  persecuting 
zeal  against  the  followers  of  Jesus  (cf.  G"-)- 

Even  before  his  conversion  Saul  must  have  been 
sensible  of  the  great  alternative  which  he  sets  forth 
in  Gal  2^*'*' :  either  righteousness  is  through  the 
Law,  and  Christ  died  for  nought ;  or  else  the  Cruci- 
fied Jesus  is  truly  the  Christ,  and  righteousness  is 
to  be  attained  through  faith  alone.  It  need, 
therefore,  occasion  no  surprise  that  in  his  con- 
version Saul  had  become  convinced  of  the  univer- 
sality of  Christianity,  or  that  thereafter  he  main- 
tained that  the  Law  was  not  in  a  religious  sense 
binding  upon  either  Gentile  or  Jewish  Christians 
(Gal  1.  2). 

According  to  Gal  I"'-  St.  Paul  saw  at  once  that  he 
was  called  to  be  a  missionary  among  theheathen,  and 
he  seems  to  have  laboured  as  such  for  a  time  without 
any  interference  whatever — a  circumstance  which 
will  hardly  seem  strange  when  we  remember  that 
certain  Hellenists  who  had  been  driven  out  in  con- 
sequence of  the  persecution  connected  with  Stephen 


had  preached  the  gospel  in  Antioch  even  to  the 
Gentiles,  and  that  the  numerous  converts  whom 
they  had  won  from  heathendom  were  recognized 
as  brethren  by  the  community  in  Jerusalem  (Ac 
jjio-Mj  Nor  does  the  Apostle  make  the  slightest 
reference  to  the  question  of  the  Law  in  his  earliest 
Epistles,  1  and  2  Thessalonians.  It  was  in  reality 
the  aggression  of  certain  Christian  Pharisees — 
Judaizers  (Ac  15'- ',  Gal  2*) — that  forced  him  into 
a  thorough-going  discussion  of  the  significance  of 
the  Law,  and  this  is  his  special  theme  in  his 
Epistles  to  the  Galatians,  Corinthians,  and  Romans. 
In  seeking  to  delineate  here  the  Pauline  doctrine 
of  the  Law,  however,  we  must  also  draw  upon  the 
Epistles  of  the  Imprisonment  and  the  Pastorals. 

(a)  His  use  of  the  term  '  Law.' — In  discussing  the 
Pauline  conception  of  the  Law,  we  note  that  the 
Apostle  uses  the  term  v6fu>s  in  somewhat  different 
senses.  It  may  mean  the  whole  Pentateuch — the 
Torah  in  the  wider  sense — as  in  Ro  3-^  (the  Law 
and  the  Prophets),  Gal  4-',  1  Co  14**,  and  even  the 
entire  OT,  which  might  be  thus  designated  a  parte 
potiori,  as  in  Ro  S*®  (the  Psalms  also  included  under 
the  term),  1  Co  \4?^  (Is  28"*-).  As  a  rule,  however, 
vbfiot  is  applied  by  St.  Paul  to  the  Law  delivered 
by  Moses,  as  recorded  in  the  Mosaic  Books  from 
Exodus  to  Deuteronomy  (cf.  Ro  5''-  ^* :  dxp*  '*/«>i; 
=fiixpi  M&we'wj,  Gal  3" :  the  Law  given  430  years 
after  the  promise).  Further,  St.  Paul  sometimes 
uses  the  term  with,  sometimes  Avithout,  the  definite 
article,  and  the  distinction  must  not  be  ignored. 
It  is  true  that  vo/noj,  even  without  the  article,  may 
mean  the  historically-given  Law  of  Moses,  the 
possession  of  which  was  the  special  prerogative  of 
the  Jews  as  distinguished  from  the  Gentiles  (Ro 
0:2-14  3»i.  51W.  20)^  The  omission  of  the  article,  how- 
ever, generally  points  rather  to  '  law '  as  a  principle ; 
thus  what  is  so  said  of  '  law '  would  hold  good  of 
any  other  positive  ordinance  of  God — if  such  ex- 
isted at  all  (cf .  Ro  2''"*' :  •  For  not  the  hearers  of 
law  are  just  before  God,  but  the  doers  of  law  shall 
be  justified  ;  for  when  Gentiles  who  have  not  law 
do  by  nature  the  things  of  the  law,  these  having 
no  laAv  are  law  to  themselves,'  etc.,  and  5"**:  'For 
prior  to  law  sin  was  already  in  the  world,  but  sin 
IS  not  imputed  when  there  is  no  law ').  In  both  of 
these  passages  it  is  obvious  that  p6iws  and  6  v6puK 
equally  refer  to  the  Mosaic  Law,  but  it  is  no  less 
ob>-ions  that  they  assert  principle*,  not  merely 
historical  facts;  cf.  also  Gal  5'*-  »  1  Ti  1«-  ('The 
law  is  good,  if  a  man  use  it  lawfully,  knowing  that 
law  is  not  made  for  a  righteous  man ').  On  the 
other  hand,  when  St.  Paul  wishes  to  make  a  his- 
torical statement  regarding  the  Law  of  Moses,  he 
uses  the  phrase  6  vd/iot.  The  extent  to  which  he 
can  abstract  from  the  concrete  historical  sense  of 
vofios,  however,  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  he  occasion- 
ally uses  v6fios,  virtually  as  a  purely  fonual  con- 
cept, as  equivalent  to  norma,  'rule':  Ro  3-''  (the 
law  of  faith,  i.e.  the  Divine  ordinance  which  en- 
joins faith,  not  works ;  cf.  1'  O'l  lO*  16»),  7^  (the 
law  of  sin),  8'  (the  law  of  life  =  natural  law).  Gal 
6^ ;  cf.  1  Co  14»  (the  law  of  Christ). 

As  regards  the  proper  signification  of  the  term, 
however,  the  Law  may  be  defined  as  the  positive 
revelation  of  the  Divine  ordinance  to  the  Israelites, 
who  therein,  as  in  the  covenants,  the  promises,  and 
the  Temple  service  (Ro  9*),  had  a  sacred  privilege 
unshared  by  other  peoples  (cf.  2'*  3").  The  law  of 
God,  which  in  the  heathen  was  but  an  inward  and 
therefore  vague  surmise,  was  for  the  Jews  formu- 
lated objectively  and  unmistakably  in  the  written 
Law  (Ro  2"-^' ;  cf.  2  Co  3"),  and  the  Jews,  even  if 
they  broke  that  Law  (Ro  2^"^-),  could  yet  boast  of 
a  moral  advantage  over  the  heathen  (Gal  2"). 

The  Law,  however,  is  a  revelation  not  only  of  the 
Divine  requirements,  but  also  of  the  Divine  pro- 
mises and  threats  attachetl  thereto.     The  Law,  in 


688 


LAW 


LAW 


sliort,  contains  a  jmlicial  system,  in  that  it  deter- 
mines tlie  relation  between  man  and  God  by  man's 
obedience  to,  or  transgression  of,  the  Divine  com- 
mandments. If  man  keeps  the  Aviiole  Law,  he 
is  rewarded  with  '  life'  (Gal  S'^^^Lv  18"),  and  tiiis 
is  bestowed  not  of  grace,  but  of  debt  (Ko  4* :  /iord 
6^€l\ii)Ha)  ;  wliile  if  he  does  not  keep  the  Law  in  its 
entirety,   he   is  accursed  (Gal   3''  =  Dt  27^),   and 

f asses  into  the  power  of  death  (Ro  6^  7"*,  1  Co 

Tiie  Law  demands,  not  faith,  but  works  ((I.al 
3"'-),  and  hence  St.  I'aul  speaks  repeatedly  of  tiie 
*  works  of  the  law  '  {fpya  vdfiov,  '  works  j)rescribed 
by  the  law ' ;  cf.  Ko  li-'",  Gal  2'").  liy  '  works  of  tlie 
law,'  however,  he  means,  not  simply  the  exter- 
nally legal  actions  in  wliich  the  lieart  is  not  im- 
plicated, but  no  less  the  morally  irrei)roachable 
iullilment  of  tiie  commandments,  which  claim  the 
obedience  of  the  soul  as  well  as  of  tiie  body,  and 
forbid  sinful  desire  as  well  as  sinful  action — just  as, 
indeeil,  tiie  requirement  of  the  whole  Law  is 
summed  up  in  the  commandments  of  love(Ro  IS"'-, 
Gal  5''').  It  is  no  doubt  the  case  that  for  St.  Paul 
outward  rites  and  ceremonies  are  included  in  the 
cliaracteristic  ordinances  of  the  Law  (Gal  2^*  4^" ; 
cf.  Ko  9*  14*).  The  Law  as  a  whole  consists  of  par- 
ticular commandments  of  a  statutory  nature  (rbw 
vdfioi'  tCiv  4vto\Civ  iv  d6y/xa(Ti,  E])li  2'^  ;  cf.  Col  2").* 
In  (^al.  it  is  especially  the  ceremonial  or  ritual 
ordinances  of  tlie  Law  tiiat  are  referred  to,  as  St. 
Paul  is  here  dealing  mainly  with  the  question  of 
circumcision  (cf.  2^-'^-  4='-i»  5-f-,  also  Col  2'»'-  2«-22). 
In  Kom.,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  treating  rather  of 
the  moral  requirements  of  tlie  Law  (cf.  2'-"="  7^-8*). 
Nevertheless,  we  must  not  ascribe  the  conscious 
diflerentiation  between  moral  law  and  the  cere- 
monial Law  to  the  Apostle  himself.  For  him  tiie 
Law  is  an  indivisilde  whole  (Gal  3^"  5^),  thougli  he 
certainly  recognizes  gradations  of  value  in  its  com- 
mands {e.ff.  the  commandment  of  love),  .and  tinds  its 
kernel  in"the  Decalogue  (cf.  Ko  13"-,  2  CoS^*"'' :  the 
Law  engraven  in  letters  on  tables  of  stone).  All 
tlie  Law  is  Divine.  Wliile  it  might  seem  as  if  in 
Gal.  St.  Paul  designedly  avoids  speaking  of  the  Law 
as  tlie  Law  of  God  (cf.  2'"  3'«-"),  but  rather  sets  it, 
as  the  '  mere  rudiments  of  the  world '  (4^-  * ;  cf.  Col 
2*"  *"),  on  a  level  witii  the  heathen  stage  of  religion, 
the  absence  of  any  such  design  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  even  in  the  same  Eiiistle  he  exhorts  his  readers 
to  fulfil  the  Law  by  love  (5'^'-),  and  thus  asserts  its 
holiness,  while  elsewhere  {e.g.  Ro  7'--  ^*-  ^'^-  -^)  he  in- 
sists upon  its  Divine  and  s])iritual  character. 

(b)  His  vicio  of  the  function  of  the  Law. — The 
most  cliaracteristic  feature  of  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of 
the  Law,  however,  is  found  in  his  statements  re- 
garding its  function.  Here,  in  fact,  he  develops  a 
view  directly  opiwsed  not  only  to  his  own  earlier 
Jewish  conception,  but  also  to  the  thouglits  of  the 
natural  man,  viz.  that  the  Law  is  not  meant  to 
mediate  life  to  man,  but  is  rather  a  medium  of 
death.  In  the  abstract,  of  course,  he  still  recog- 
nizes that  the  Law  wtus  designed  to  be  a  real 
channel  of  righteousness  and  life  (Ko  7^«  :  '  the 
commandment  which  was  unto  life,'  10*,  Gal  3''' : 
'  he  that  doetii  tlieni  sliall  live  in  them  ').  In  the 
actual  circumstances  of  life,  however,  the  matter 
has  quite  a  different  bearing,  for  no  human  being 
has  ever  fulfilled,  or  ever  can  fulfil,  the  condition 
of  perfect  obedience  to  the  Law.  Tlie  Law  is  thus 
^uite  incapable  of  bringing  life  to  man  ;  nor, 
indeed,  was  it  given  by  the  all-foreseeing  God  with 
any sucli  design.  On  the  contrary,  it  has i)rimaiily 
a  purely  negative  aim  and  efliect,  viz.  to  intensify 
the  moral  and  spiritual  misery  of  the  unsaved  man, 

*  Some  scliolars  are  of  opinion  that  the  word  {(iy/uara  hero  re- 
fers to  the  trt-aliitcs  with  which  the  ancient  Habbis  had  overlaid 
the  Law,  but  thiHis  hartllj-  compatible  with  Col  2'*:  t6  X"P<J- 


80  that  the  greatness  of  the  Divine  grace  may  be 
tiie  more  clearly  displayed ;  and  it  is  only  upon 
this  background  that  the  Law  has  any  positive 
significance  at  all. 

This  estimate  of  the  Law,  so  obnoxious  to  the 
Judaistic  mind,  the  Apostle  made  good  by  an  appeal 
to  experience  as  well  as  to  Scripture  and  sacred 
history.  His  demonstration  is  given  more  especially 
in  the  Epistles  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans. 
In  the  latter  he  starts  from  exjierience,  which 
siiows  that  not  only  tiie  heathen  who  live  without 
the  Law  but  even  the  people  of  tiie  Law  themselves 
are  all  held  fast  under  the  jxiwer  of  sin.  The 
Jews  glory  in  tiie  Law  with  their  lips,  but,  when 
tiieir  conscience  is  appealed  to,  they  have  to  con- 
fess that  their  deeds  are  little  better  than  tiiose  of 
tiie  heathen  (Ro  1'"  2^^).  Next  he  shows  from 
Scripture,  from  the  Torah,  which  speaks  to  tlie  Jews 
in  particular,  that  they,  equally  with  all  mankind, 
are  guilty  before  God  (3""-";  cf.  Gal  2'") ;  moreover, 
the  OT  plainly  declares  that  by  the  works  of  the 
Law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified  (Ro  3-'",  Gal  2'«=P8 
143* ;  the  words  '  by  the  works  of  the  law '  were 
added  by  St.  Paul  himself,  but  are  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  the  sense).  Finally,  on  the  lines  of 
sacred  history,  he  deduces  the  impossibility  of 
justification  by  the  works  of  the  Law  from  the 
fact  that  God  has  now  manifested  a  new  species  of 
righteousness  apart  from  the  Law,  viz.  the  right- 
eousness that  is  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  who 
has  been  set  forth  in  His  blood  as  a  l\a<rTr]piov  (Ro 
3aif.  25)^  i.e.  an  expiation,  or  a  propitiation  (Luther  : 
Gnadenstuhl,  '  throne  of  grace '),  and  has  rendered 
satisfaction  to  the  Law  (Gal  3^ ;  cf.  4').  This 
new  mode  of  righteousness,  moreover,  was  fore- 
shown by  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  as  is  argued 
in  greater  detail  in  Ro  4,  where  St.  Paul  discusses 
the  grand  precedent  of  Abraham  ;  for  Abraham,  the 
father  of  God's  people,  was  justified  not  by  works 
but  by  faith,  and  while  as  yet  uncircumcised,  in 
order  that  he  should  be  the  father  of  all  who  have 
faith  (4>'i-).  Besides  the  case  of  Abraham,  St. 
Paul  apjieals  specially  to  the  prophetic  utterance 
of  Hab  2^  (Ro  1",  Gal  3"  :  '  Tlie  just  shall  live  by 
faith ').  In  Gal.  likewise  he  attaches  great  import- 
ance to  the  pattern  of  Abraham.  Here  he  repre- 
sents the  Law  as  a  secondary  institution  in  com- 
parison with  the  Promise.  In  man  the  Promise 
presupposes  faith  only,  and  may  be  compared  to  a 
testament,  which  could  not  be  invalidated  bj'  a  posi- 
tive decree  such  as  the  Law  delivered  430  years  later 
(Gal3i»-i«).  In  the  section  of  Rom.  (9-11)  which 
deals  with  the  rejection  of  Israel,  he  returns  again 
to  the  biblical  arguments  for  the  righteousness  of 
faith,  which  excludes  justification  by  the  Law 
(1(F'").  But  the  decisive  proof  of  his  contention 
that  the  Law  is  incapable  of  justifying  sinners  lies 
for  St.  Paul  in  the  Death  of  Christ  proclaimed  in  the 
gospel  (Gal  2^^--^ ;  cf.  Ro  3="-)-  It  is  his  absolute  con- 
viction that,  if  righteousness  could  be  secured  by  the 
Law,  then  Christ  died  for  nought  (v.=i ;  cf.  Ro  \(fi*'-). 
Nor  is  the  synthesis  of  the  two  kinds  of  righteous- 
ness a  possible  conception.  The  Law  is  no  more 
based  upon  faith  (Gal  3^-)  than  the  grace  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Ro  S^'*)  is  based  upon  works  (Ro  11*  :  'if  by 
gi'ace,  then  no  more  of  works ;  otherwise,  grace  is 
no  more  ^race'). 

How  Qoes  it  come  about,  then,  that  the  ab- 
stractly possible  righteousness  by  the  works  of  the 
Law  (Ro  2'^)  is  impossible  in  the  sphere  of  actual- 
ity? Or,  otlierwise,  why  is  man  incapable  of  ful- 
fiUing  the  Law  t  The  answer  is  given  in  the 
Apostle's  idea  of  the  carnal  constitutiim  of  man, 
which  is  antagonistic  to  the  spiritual  character  of 
the  Law  (7''').  Man,  by  reason  of  his  carnal  nature, 
is  sold  into  the  servitude  of  sin,  for  tlie  mind  of 
the  Hesh  is  hostile  to  God,  and  cannot  become 
subject  to  His  (spiritual)  Law.     No  doubt  the  Law 


LAW 


LAW 


6d9 


of  God  includes  commandments  wliich,  because  of 
their  external  character,  nijiy  quite  well  be  obeyed 
by  the  '  tlesh '  (Gal  3' ;  cf.  4'"),  but  its  most  distinct- 
ive requirement,  the  law  of  love,  is  repugnant  to 
the  flesh.  For  with  St.  Paul  the  term  '  flesh  '  (adp^) 
is  by  no  means  restricted  to  the  sensuous  corporeal 
aspect  of  human  nature — as  if  the  principle  of  sin 
were  rooted  in  man's  physical  constitution  (cf.  Gal 
5^^-) ;  on  the  contrary,  the  flesh  penetrates  even 
to  his  inmost  soul,  so  that  we  may  speak  also  of 
a  •  mind  of  the  flesh '  (Col  2^^).  The  '  works  of  the 
flesh,'  accordingly,  embrace  not  only  sins  of 
sensuality,  but  also  sins  of  the  selflsh  will  (Gal 
5^*"^),  and  hence,  in  a  passage  immediately  pre- 
ceding this,  St.  Paul  contrasts  brotlierly  love  mth 
the  misuse  of  liberty  as  an  occasion  to  the  flesh 
(5^-).  Even  in  tlie  regenerate  man,  the  Christian, 
the  flesh  maintains  its  power  so  persistently  (5^*""^) 
that  he  cannot  conquer  sin  by  the  Law,  but  can 
triumph  over  it  only  by  the  Spirit  of  God  (Ro 

If,  however,  the  Law  does  not  bring  salvation  to 
man,  and  was  not  designed  to  do  so,  what  is  its 
real  function  ?  The  most  comprehensive  answer  to 
this  question  is  given  in  Ro  S"^** :  '  through  the 
law  comes  the  knowledge  of  sin.'  The  answer  is 
defined  more  concretely  in  a  number  of  kindred 
stotements  (cf.  4^^  5"'-^  7*-'*-,  1  Co  15«,  Gal 
3^).  The  Law  not  only  serves  to  make  sin  known 
as  sin,  and  to  condemn  the  sins  of  men,  but  it  re- 
solves ill-doing  into  aggravated  sin,  giving  it  the 
character  of  trespass  against  the  commandments 
of  God  :  '  where  there  is  no  law,  neither  is  there 
transgression'  (Ro  4^^),  'and  therefore  sin  is  not 
imputed'  (5'').  But  the  actual  operation  of  the 
Law  in  thus  resolving  sin  into  positive  transgres- 
sion and  guilt  must,  according  to  the  teleology  of 
the  Apostle,  have  been  the  Divine  purpose  of  the 
Law  (Gal  3'* :  tQv  -rapa^daeoiv  x<^P"'j  '  ^^  order  to 
bring  forth  the  conscious  transgressions  as  such '  ; 
cf.  Ro  5^  :  '  that  the  Fall  might  be  increased ' ; 
7^  :  *  that  sin  might  be  shown  to  be  sin '). 

Thus  the  Law  produces  a  qualitative  intensifica- 
tion of  sin :  sin  becomes  guilt.  The  eWl  done  by 
those  who  have  not  the  Law  is  relatively  blameless. 
But  the  Law,  which  invests  sin  with  the  character  of 
guilt,  evokes  wrath,  i.e.  in  God  (Ro  4").  Sin,  how- 
ever, is  not  only  qualitatively  intensified,  but  also 
quantitatively  increased,  by  the  Law.  For,  accord- 
ing to  Ro  7*"^*,  the  Law  tends  to  rouse  the  slumber- 
ing power  of  sin,  which  then  breaks  out  in  all  kinds 
of  appetites  and  passions.  Just  as  an  innocent 
youth,  who  has,  say,  listened  to  some  explanation 
of  sexual  matters,  may  thus  be  A^TOUght  upon  by 
sinful  inclinations  hitherto unfelt,  so — the  Apostle's 
idea  would  seem  to  have  been  something  of  this 
kind — the  as  yet  relatively  blameless  man  is  brought 
under  the  influence  of  eWl  desires  by  the  Law's 
very  prohibition  ofiSuch  desires.  This  in  no  sense, 
however,  proves  that  the  Law  is  sinful,  but  simply 
shows  the  awful  power  of  the  sin  that  dwells  in  the 
flesh ;  for  man's  conscience,  his  better  self,  agrees 
with  the  Law,  and  cannot  but  attest  its  holiness 
(cf.  75. 7-13.  IB.  23)_  Hgi-e  the  Apostle  is  probably 
not  thinking  of  an  outward  multiplication  of  sins  ; 
he  rather  assumes,  indeed,  that  generally  the  Jews 
live  on  a  higher  moral  level  than  the  heathen 
(Gal  2^ ;  cf.  Ph  3«),  and  his  idea  is  in  all  likelihood 
that  of  an  inward  development — in  the  shape  of  sins 
of  thought. 

The  Law,  in  thus  aggravating  the  power  of  sin 
both  qualitatively  and  quantitatively,  brings  man 
into  a  state  of  deeper  mi.-^eiy  than  he  ever  experi- 
enced while  still  without  the  Law  ;  it  works  in 
him  the  apprehension  of  God's  wrath  and  curse 
(Ro  4>*,  Gal  31*),  and  of  death  (Ro  V-  '^^  2  Co  2fi\ 
1  Co  15**),  and  yet  at  the  same  time  the  most  pro- 
found yearning  for  salvation. 
VOL.  I.— 44 


It  is  true  that  death,  as  a  result  of  Adam's  sin, 
reignetl  over  mankind  even  before  the  Law  (Ro  5^*, 
1  Co  15-"-).  Even  so,  however,  the  individual 
could  live  in  relative  unconcern  (Ro  5"*  7') ;  the 
Law  written  in  his  heart  asserted  itself  but  feebly. 
Accordingly,  when  God  determined  to  institute 
salvation  for  the  race  of  man,  and  chose  a  people 
as  its  depositary.  He  began  by  giving  to  Abraham, 
the  father  of  that  people,  simply  the  Promise,  the 
condition  of  which  was  faith  alone  ;  subsequently, 
however.  He  added  the  Law,  not  indeed  with  the 
design  of  laying  doA\'n  a  new  condition  co-ordinate 
with,  or  as  a  substitute  for,  faith,  but  rather,  as  it 
were,  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  His  people  in 
ward  and  custody,  the  Law  acting  as  a  stimulus  to 
the  power  and  guilt  of  sin  in  such  wise  as  to  exclude 
every  hope  except  that  of  justification  by  faith 
in  Christ  as  the  medium  of  salvation  (Gal  3*-®, 
Ro  4^*- ).  Had  Christ  appeared  without  the  pre- 
vious intervention  of  the  Law,  the  misery  of  man 
would  not  have  been  so  great ;  but  also  the  glory 
of  Divine  grace  would  have  been  less  transcendent 
(Ro  5**'-).  In  the  historical  outworking  of  redemp- 
tion, therefore,  the  Law  had  merely  a  pedagogic 
function ;  it  was  our  moral  guardian  {rauoayuydi) 
until  Christ  came,  so  that  we  might  be  justified 
through  faith,  and  through  faith  alone  (Gal  S**"**). 

(c)  The  abolition  of  t/ie  Law. — If  the  function 
of  the  Law  was,  as  we  have  just  seen,  merely 
pedagogic,  it  must  also  have  been  but  temporary. 
•  Now  that  faith  [or  its  object,  Jesus  Christ]  is 
come,  we  are  no  longer  under  a  tutor '  (Gal  3^ ;  cf. 
4^"^) ;  '  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  unto  righteous- 
ness to  every  one  that  believeth'  (Ro  lO*).  In 
Eph  21'  St.  Paul  asserts  that  Clirist  has  actually 
abolished  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in 
ordinances ;  and,  objectively,  the  Law,  as  a  statu- 
tory system,  was  abrogated  when  Christ  made 
satisfaction  to  it  by  His  Death,  or,  as  the  Apostle 
puts  it,  bore  its  curse  (Gal  4^  2i^  ;  cf.  Col  2^*).  But 
this  is  not  to  be  understood  in  the  sense  that  from 
the  time  of  Christ's  Death  every  man,  every  Jew, 
is  absolved  from  the  Law  ;  subjectively,  the  in- 
diWdual  is  freed  from  its  dominion  only  when  he 
becomes  a  Christian,  and  is  united  to  Christ  by 
faith  and  baptism,  so  as  personally  to  appropriate 
His  Death  and  Resurrection.  Just  as  Christ  Him- 
self was  released  from  the  La^rs  domain  only 
through  His  Death  on  the  Cross,  in  order  that,  as 
the  Risen  One,  He  might  thereafter  live  a  new  life 
in  immediate  union  with  God,  so  His  followers  are 
loosed  from  the  Law  only  through  their  communion 
with  their  Crucified  and  Glorified  Lord  (Ro  7^"*, 
Gal  2^-)-  This  is  to  be  taken,  first  of  all,  in  a 
legal  sense :  '  the  law  hath  dominion  over  a  man 
as  long  as  he  lives.'  Just  as,  when  a  husband  dies, 
a  wife  is  loosed  from  the  law  which  bound  her 
to  him,  and  may  marrj-  another,  so,  when  Christ 
died.  His  community  became  exempt  from  the  Law, 
and  was  free  to  yield  itself  to  another,  viz.  the  risen 
Christ  (Ro  7^"*).  Once  the  curse  of  the  Law,  which 
is  death,  has  been  carried  out  upon  the  transgressors 
of  the  Law,  the  Law  can  demand  no  more  ;  we  are 
then  redeemed  not  only  from  its  penalty,  but  also 
from  its  obligation  (Gal  3'='  4«-).  It  is  true  that 
many  interpreters  refer  this  exemption  from  obliga- 
tion not  to  Christ's  passive  but  to  His  active  obedi- 
ence to  the  Law — an  interpretation  that  may  be 
right  in  so  far  as  His  active  obedience  was  the  pre- 
condition of  the  propitiatory  significance  of  His 
passive  obedience.  But,  taken  all  in  all,  the 
Apostle's  \-iew  is  that  we  have  been  made  free 
from  the  Law  by  Christ's  Death  (cf.  also  Gal  2^-, 
Col  2"-^,  Eph  2^% 

St.  Paul,  however,  goes  far  beyond  this  purely 
juridical  conception.  He  also  represents  our  deliver- 
ance from  the  Law  as  a  transaction  ethically  con- 
ditioned.     From    the    mystical    union    with   the 


690 


LAW 


LAW 


Crucified  and  Risen  Lord  comes  a  power  wliicii 
transforms  and  re-creates  onr  nature,  and  tlius 
enables  us  of  ourselves  to  fullil  the  requirements 
of  the  Law  (Ro  8=^-,  Gal  5'" ;  of.  v.^^).  The  Apostle 
traces  this  power  to  the  Spirit  of  God  and  of  Christ : 
•  if  ye  are  led  by  the  Spirit,  ye  are  not  under  the 
law  (Gal  5'") ;  against  such  as  brinfj  forth  the 
fruits  of  the  Spirit  the  Law  is  not  valid  (v.") ;  the 
Law  is  not  imposed  upon  a  righteous  man  (1  Ti  P). 
Thus  freedom  from  the  Law  is  in  no  sense  a  merely 
legal  freedom  ;  it  is  an  ethical  freedom  which  is 
quite  different  from  mere  arbitrai'v  choice,  and 
implies  that  we  fulfil  the  demands  of  the  Law  not 
througii  compulsion  or  fear,  but  in  zeal  and  love 
(cf.  Ro  8"'-,  2  Co  3^'"- ).  Hence  the  Christian  is  not 
free  in  the  sense  of  being  his  own  master ;  on  tiie 
contrary,  he  is  subject  to  the  Lord  Jesus  and  God 
(Ro  14'"*),  but  serves  Him  from  the  dictates  of  the 
inmost  heart,  having  yielded  himself  with  consum- 
ing gratitude  and  love  to  the  Saviour  who  died  for 
liim  (2  Co  5'^'-). 

(d)  The  Lato  abolished  yet  continuing  in  force. — 
St.  Paul  thus  teaches  that  the  Law  is  abolished, 
and  that  nevertlieless  it  abides.  It  is  abolished 
by  Christ  in  the  sense  that  it  has  no  longer  any 
validity  for  the  Christian  as  a  statutory  sj'stem  : 
justification  is  effected  through  faith  alone,  and 
without  the  works  of  the  Law  (Ro  S^s,  Gal  2"'). 
This  holds  both  for  Jews  and  for  Gentiles 
(Ro  1^*'-  3-"-);  l>ere  there  is  no  difference  between 
them.  The  place  of  the  Law  is  now  taken  by 
Christ  (Ro  lO"*).  Everything  turns  upon  our  union 
with  Him,  and  works'  are  not  to  the  purpose ;  in 
other  words,  all  depends  upon  faith,  which  is  simply 
the  acceptance  of  the  gospel,  or  of  Christ,  and  the 
invocation  of  His  name  (Ro  10'"^').  In  particular, 
tiie  ordinances  which  had  hitherto  obstructed 
religious  intercourse  between  different  peoples,  as 
Israelites  and  Goyim,  had  all  been  done  away  in 
Christ  (Eph  f^--^ ;  cf.  Gal  S^*,  Col  3").  In  Him 
circumcision  is  nothing,  and  uncircumcision  noth- 
ing (Gal  58  61',  1  Co  7'").  Hence  St.  Paul,  a  Jew, 
can  become  as  a  Gentile  to  the  Gentiles  (1  Co  9"'), 
just  as  St.  Peter  and  other  Jewish  Christians  had 
done  in  Antiocli  (Gal  2^"^'^*).  In  the  religious  sense, 
i.e.  as  regards  salvation,  the  Jewish  Christians  too 
were  now  free  from  the  Law. 

On  the  other  hand,  however,  the  Apostle  also 
affirms  the  permanence  of  the  Law.  The  impera- 
tive of  the  Law  remains  valid  not  only  because 
it  still  retains  its  juridical  autliority  over  non- 
believers,  but  also  because  it  furnishes  the  ethical 
standard  of  the  Christian  life  generally,  and  of  the 
religions  life  of  Jewish  Christians  in  a  special  degree. 
Thus  the  idea  of  a  '  tertius  usus  legis,'  of  which  the 
Reformers  spoke,  corresponds  exactly  to  the  Pauline 
view.  Not  only  does  St.  Paul  regard  the  all- 
embracing  requirement  of  the  Law — the  command- 
ment of  love — as  a  permanent  expression  of  the 
Divine  will  (Ro  13^i",  Gal  S'*),  but  he  also  borrows 
moral  precepts  and  rules  of  discipline  from  the 
Mosaic  legislation  (see  art.  Commandment).  He 
is  confident,  no  doubt,  that  the  Spirit  supplies  not 
only  moral  power  but  also  moral  insight  (Gal  5'*; 
cf.  Ro  12-) ;  but  the  Spirit  does  not  operate  only  in 
the  individual  soul,  but  operates  also,  and  mainly, 
through  prophecy  and  through  the  written  LaM', 
which  indeed  is  spiritual  (Ro  7"),  and  must  there- 
fore be  spiritually  understood  (cf.  e.g.  1  Co  9"''*). 

Here  we  undoubtedly  light  upon  a  difficulty  in 
the  Pauline  view.  On  the  one  hand,  the  Apostle 
incisively  challenges  the  Judaistic  claim  to  impose 
the  ordinances  of  the  Law  ui)on  the  Gentiles,  while, 
on  the  other,  he  upholds  the  authority  of  the  Law 
under  the  term  '  Scripture.'  The  latter  contention 
might  readily  lead  to  a  new  kind  of  legalism,  and 
has  frequently  in  some  measure  done  so.  St.  Paul 
himself,  however,  rejected  this  inference,  and  even 


suggested  a  rule  for  the  spiritual  application  of  the 
Law,  viz.  in  his  doctrine  of  the  Law  as  having  a 
typological  or  allegorical  significance  for  Chris- 
tianity ;  cf.  Col  21'"-,  where  he  says  that  the  ordin- 
ances relating  to  foods,  feast-days,  etc.,  are  only 
prefiguring  shadows  of  tlie  reality,  which  is  Christ, 
just  as  the  circumcision  of  the  flcsli  has  found  its 
true  fulfilment  in  Christian  baptism  (v."'-). 

In  connexion  with  this  problem  we  must  also 
consider  the  peculiar  relation  of  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tians to  the  Law.  According  both  to  Acts  and  to 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  the  Apostle  maintained  that 
the  Law  had  a  peculiar  binding  force  ujxin  Chris- 
tians belonging  to  the  race  of  Israel.  As  regards 
Acts,  we  need  refer  only  to  21-' -''  \&  IS'".  When 
St.  James  spoke  to  St.  Paul  of  the  rumour  that  he 
taught  the  Diaspora  to  forsake  Moses,  St.  Paul 
promptly  gave  the  required  practical  evidence  for 
the  falsity  of  the  report,  and  for  his  own  allegiance 
to  the  Law  {2\^^"').  He  even  circumcised  Timothy, 
a  semi-Gentile  (16*).  According  to  his  own 
Epistles,  again,  he  was  to  the  Jews  as  a  Jew 
( 1  Co  9'*),  and  he  counsels  the  Jewish  members  of  the 
Church  in  Corinth  not  to  undo  their  circumcision 
(7^*),  since  every  man  should  remain  in  the  condition 
in  which  he  was  called  (v.-").  In  Gal  5'  he  solemnly 
declares  that  every  one  who  receives  circumcision 
is  under  obligation  to  keep  the  whole  Law — an 
assertion  designed  to  traverse  the  foolish  idea 
which  the  Jndaizers  had  tried  to  insinuate  into 
the  minds  of  the  Galatians,  viz.  that  circumcision 
was  a  matter  of  no  great  importance.  This 
declaration,  no  doubt,  was  made  from  the  stand- 
point of  those  who  believed  that  justification  was 
to  be  obtained  by  the  works  of  the  Law.  At  all 
events,  where  higher  issues  are  at  stake,  tlie 
Apostle  assumes  that  he  is  absolved  from  tiie 
strict  letter  of  the  Law,  as,  e.g.,  for  the  sake  of 
brotherly  intercourse  with  the  Gentile  Christians 
(cf.  1  Co  921  with  Gal  2»2-i-»).  There  is  another 
fact  that  points  in  the  same  direction.  In  Ro  1 1 
St.  Paul  asserts  that  the  Chosen  People  are  to 
occupy  a  permanently  distinct  position  in  the 
Divine  process  of  history.  But  the  persistence  of 
the  distinctively  religious  character  of  Israel  would 
seem  to  involve  their  permanent  retention  of 
circumcision  and  the  Law.*  How  such  segregation 
is  to  be  effected  and  maintained  in  mixed  com- 
munities without  violating  full  religious  fellowship 
is  a  problem  with  which  missions  to  the  Jews  are 
still  greatly  concerned;  cf.,  e.g.,  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Sabbath  and  Sunday.  But  it  is  implied 
in  the  whole  tenor  of  Pauline  teaching  that  in 
such  conflicts  the  principle  of  freedom  shall  in  the 
last  resort  prevail.  For,  as  has  already  been  said, 
all  the  commandments  are  comprehended  in  the 
law  of  love,  and  rites  and  ceremonies,  such  as 
circumcision,  purifications,  and  observance  of  the 
Sabbath,  are  but  shadows  of  the  reality  that  we 
have  in  Christ.  In  relation  to  God  circumcision  is 
in  itself  of  no  value.  Hence,  when  St.  Paul  as- 
serts that  it  is  the  doers  of  the  Law  who  will  be 
declared  righteous  in  the  Day  of  Judgment  (Ro  2"), 
he  is  thinking,  as  the  context  shows,  not  of  an 
external  obedience,  a  performance  of  the  law  'in 
the  flesh,'  but  of  a  circumcision  of  the  heart  and  of 
a  moral  righteousness  (cf.  2'*'-  23-29J 

(e)  Survey.  —  When  we  survey  the  Pauline 
doctrine  of  the  Law  as  a  whole,  we  .see  that  it  is 
quite  wrong  to  attribute  to  tlie  Apostle  any  form 
of  antinomianism.  Of  the  operation  and  purpose 
of  the  Law  he  doubtless  uses  language  which  could 
not  but  have  a  decidedly  antinoinian  sound  to  the 
ears  of  a  Jewish  Christian.  When  he  speaks  of 
the  Law  as  a  power  that  stimulates  sin  and  brings 
about  death,  and  of  the  ministration  mediated  by 

*  Cf.  on  this  point  generally,  A.  Harnack,  Nexu  Untertueh- 
ungen  zur  Apostelgeschichte,  Leipzig,  1911,  p.  21  ff. 


LAW 


LAW 


691 


Moses  as  a  ministration  of  condemnation  (2  Co 
3*""),  one  involuntarily  asks  how  such  utterances 
can  be  reconciled  with  the  praise  of,  and  the 
delight  in,  the  Law  which  we  find,  e.g.,  in  the 
Psalms  (of.  Ps  198^-  40»  119  !««*■•).  And  how 
does  his  description  of  the  period  between  Moses 
and  Christ  as  a  time  during  which  there  was  no 
faith  and  the  people  groaned  under  the  yoke  of  the 
Law  (Gal  3">-»)  harmonize  with  the  OT  ? 

As  regards  the  latter  question,  the  Apostle  does 
not  of  course  mean  to  deny  that  faith  was  a  power 
among  God's  people  after  Moses  as  well  as  before 
him.  He  is  quite  assured  that,  besides  the  Mosaic 
legislation,  Israel  had  also  the  adoption,  the  cove- 
nants, the  Temple  service,  and  the  promises  (Ro  9*), 
that  it  was  the  people  of  hope  (Eph  2^*),  and  that 
in  a  sense  Christ  was  with  it  (1  Co  10*-'),  just  as 
in  the  wilderness  wanderings  the  people  received 
prototypes  of  the  Christian  sacraments  (vv.*-*),  and 
in  their  sacrificial  worship  prototypes  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  Christ  (5"  ;  cf.  Eph  5-).  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
St.  Paul  saw  in  the  OT  dispensation  in  general,  as 
recorded  in  the  Scriptures,  a  typical  prefiguration 
of  the  NT  dispensation  (cf.  1  Co  lO^-ii,  Ro  \b*.  Col 
2").  And,  although  he  speaks  of  the  NT  salvation 
in  its  universal  application  as  having  been  a  Divine 
mystery  until  its  manifestation  in  Jesus  Christ 
(Ro  16-^'-,  Eph  I*  3'- «,  Col  1*),  yet  he  regards  it  as 
having  been  foresho^vn  in  the  prophetic  writings 
(Ro  1-  3-^  16*).  Hence  the  people  of  the  Law  can- 
not have  been  wholly  without  faith,  and  thus  what 
St.  Paul  means  in  Gal  3^  is  simply  that  Christian 
faith  as  the  one  exclusive  principle  of  righteousness 
was  not  revealed  until  Christ  came. 

In  the  OT,  doubtless,  the  supreme  principle  was 
the  Law.  Yet  the  Law  did  not  operate  in  a 
vacuum ;  devout  Israelites  always  saw  it  against 
the  background  of  grace.  Every  expression  of 
delight  in  the  Law  presupposes  faith  in  the 
gracious  and  merciful  God  who  '  passes  over  trans- 
gression.' Moreover,  the  Law  was  not  as  yet 
recognized  in  all  its  depth  and  rigour  ;  in  reality, 
the  people  lived  in  a  spiritual  environment  of 
mingled  Law  and  grace.  Such  a  state  of  matters, 
however,  cotild  not  be  permanently  borne.  The 
two  elements  necessarily  tended  to  disengage  and 
separate  themselves  from  each  other.  In  Pharisaic 
Judaism  the  principle  of  the  Law  moved  ever 
further  apart  from  the  principle  of  grace,  and  the 
Law  itself  came  to  be  regarded  more  and  more  as 
a  legal  contract  by  which  performance  and  recom- 
pense were  rigidly  adjusted  to  each  other.  The 
religious  untenabUity  of  such  a  position  could 
remain  unrecogiiized  only  so  long  as  the  Law  was 
understood  in  a  purely  external  sense.  But  as 
soon  as  it  came  to  be  interpreted  in  that  profound 
inner  sense  which  Jesus  indicated,  it  necessarily 
became  ob^-ious  that  legalism  could  only  lead  to 
despair,  and  that  there  could  be  no  other  principle 
of  salvation  than  grace.  The  Judaizers,  the  op- 
ponents of  St.  Paul  who  started  from  Pharisaism, 
were  legalists  in  their  way  of  thought,  conceiving 
of  grace — and  faith — as  in  a  proper  sense  merely 
supplementary  to  an  imperfect  fulfilment  of  the 
Law ;  in  other  words,  they  regarded  Christianity 
as  only  a  perfected  Judaism.  St.  Paul,  on  the  other 
hand,  although  his  starting-point  too  was  Pharisaic 
legalism,  combined  therewith  that  inward  inter- 
pretation of  the  Law  which  Jesus  had  instituted, 
and  saw  that  the  question  at  issue  was  not  that  of 
a  synthesis  of  Law  and  faith,  but  simply  that  of  a 
choice  between  the  two,  i.e.  between  Judaism  as 
a  religion  of  Law  and  Christianity  as  the  religion 
of  grace.  If  we  are  to  estimate  aright  his  utter- 
ances regarding  the  function  of  the  I^w,  we  must 
always  bear  in  mind  that  thej-  have  a  polemical 
setting,  and  that  he  is  speaking  of  the  Mosaic 
legislation  and    the    Old  Covenant    not    in  their 


historical  conditions,  but  in  their  character  as 
principles.  This  explains  the  apparent  bias  of  his 
statements  regarding  the  Law. 

Taken  as  a  whole,  however,  St.  Paul's  doctrine 
of  the  Law  does  not  issue  from  a  belief  that  the 
miserable  state  of  mankind  is  due  to  the  Law  in 
itself,  and  that  accordingly  God  had  abolished  the 
Law,  and  set  grace  in  its  stead.  The  Apostle's 
view  is  rather  that  human  wretchedness  arises 
from  the  sinful  flesh,  and  from  the  Law  only  in  so 
far  as  it  is  made  impotent  by  the  flesh  (Ro  8'), 
and  so  intensifies  the  misery  of  sin.  Thus  -the 
work  of  Christ  was  to  dissolve  the  immemorial 
connexion  between  these  two  powers — law  and  sin 
— on  the  one  side,  and  man  on  the  other.  Bat 
what  the  Avork  of  Christ  is  in  the  last  resort  de- 
signed to  secure  is  that  the  ideal  demand  of  the 
Law  shall  be  fulfilled  (Ro  8*).  The  essential 
purport  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  has  been  aptly 
expressed  by  Augustine  in  the  words  :  '  The  Law 
is  given  that  Grace  may  be  sought ;  Grace  is  given 
that  the  Law  may  be  fulfilled.' 

5.  The  Law  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.— 
Paulinism  was  fuUy  vindicated  by  the  historical 
development  that  took  place  on  the  soil  of  Judaism. 
Not  only  did  the  Jews  of  the  Diaspora  harden 
their  hearts  more  and  more  against  the  Pauline 
Christian  mission,  but  those  resident  in  Palestine, 
notwithstanding  the  conserA'ative  attitude  of  the 
raother  Church  towards  the  Law,  became  ever  the 
more  hostile  to  Christianity.  In  the  sixth  decade 
of  the  1st  cent,  the  antagonism  developed  into 
open  persecution,  and  James  the  Just  fell  a  victim 
to  it.  The  Christians  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  Palestine 
generally,  were  thus  brought  to  a  point  where  they 
had  to  choose  between  their  afi'ection  for  their 
fathers'  religion  and  their  confession  of  Jesus  ;  in 
particular,  their  connexion  with  the  fellowship  of 
the  synagogue  and  their  participation  in  the 
Temple  service  were  involved,  and  these  at  last 
could  be  retained  only  at  the  price  of  their  cursing 
the  name  of  Jesus.  Such  is  obviously  the  situa- 
tion presupposed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
In  the  opinion  of  the  present  writer,  this  Epistle 
can  have  been  addressed  only  to  Je\*'ish  Christians 
in  Palestine  who  were  tempted  by  their  passionate 
attachment  to  their  old  religion  to  apostatize  from 
Christ.  The  author  of  the  Epistle  wUl  therefore 
exhibit  the  pre-eminence  of  the  NT  revelation  and 
the  NT  priesthood.  The  essential  core  of  the 
Epistle  is  its  portrayal  of  Jesus  as  the  Melchizedek 
high  priest.  Inasmuch  as  such  a  high  priest  has 
been  installed,  the  old  legal  priesthood  —  the 
Aaronic — is  eo  ipso  brought  to  an  end.  But,  if 
the  priesthood  is  changed,  the  change  must  neces- 
sarily also  affect  the  Law  (He  7^^).  The  ancient 
commandment  is  annulled  because  of  its  weak  and 
unprofitable  character — 'for  the  law  made  nothing 
perfect '  {ovSiv  ereKfiwrey,  v.'*).  Hebrews  no  doubt 
looks  at  the  Mosaic  Law  mainly  under  the  aspect 
of  the  priestly  and  sacrificial  legislation,  but  its 
view  comes  to  embrace  the  Old  Covenant  as  a 
whole  (8),  in  the  place  of  which,  as  foretold  by 
Jeremiah,  Gk)d  has  instituted  a  New  Covenant, 
writing  His  law  upon  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men, 
entering  into  immediate  fellowship  with  them, 
and  forgiving  their  sins  (8"'^  10^).  The  weakness 
of  the  Old  Covenant  really  lay  in  the  external 
nature  of  its  institutions.  Its  oblations  were 
carnal,  and  could  not  purge  the  conscience,  and 
thus  required  to  be  continually  repeated,  just  as, 
again,  the  priests  themselves  were  mortal,  and  in 
turn  gave  place  to  others.  Likewise  the  sanctuary 
was  merely  of  this  world,  merely  a  copy  of  the 
true  sanctuary  in  heaven,  just  as  the  benefits  of 
the  Old  Covenant  were  of  an  earthly  nature — a 
shadow  of  heavenly  benefits  to  come  (8-10).  The 
leading  idea  of  Hebrews,  accordingly,  is  not  so 


692 


LAW 


LAW 


much  tliat  tlie  Law  is  a  tutor  until  Christ  comes 
(see  above,  4  (6))  as  that  it  is  an  imperfect  and  now 
obsolete  institution  whi(!h  Christians  may  there- 
fore tranquilly  leave  behind. 

Compared  with  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  Law, 
that  oi  Hebrews  ia  more  restrained  in  so  far  as 
it  attaches  {i^reater  importance  to  the  connexion 
between  the  Old  Covenant  and  the  New,  i.e.  that 
it  more  strongly  emphasizes  the  typological  char- 
acter of  the  Law,  and  that  it  regards  the  OT  faith 
as  being  more  akin  to  that  of  the  NT  ;  or,  to  put 
it  otherwise,  it  insists  more  upon  the  aspect  of 
hope  even  in  the  NT  faith  (ll'-12*).  Again,  how- 
ever, the  view  of  Hebrews  is  more  radical  than 
that  of  St.  Paul  in  so  far  as  it  is  of  a  more  spiritual 
stamp  (cf.,  e.g.,  the  expression  in  9'":  'only  .  .  . 
carnal  ordinances,'  fwvov  SiKatuifiara  aapKiis)  —  a 
feature  connected  with  the  fact  that  the  author 
has  in  view  mainly  the  ritual  law.  As  a  whole, 
the  Epistle  stands  upon  a  basis  of  Paulinism,  but 
it  also  bears  the  impress  of  the  Alexandrian 
spiritualistic  philosophy.  The  attitude  of  the 
author  to  the  Jewisli  Christian  problem  in  the 
narrower  sense — as,  e.g.,  the  retention  of  circum- 
cision and  the  Sabbath — cannot  be  directly  inferred 
from  the  Epistle,  but,  if  we  may  argue  from  his 
general  standpoint,  he  must  have  regarded  all  such 
matters  simply  as  adiaphora.  The  Epistle  as  a 
whole  may  be  described  as  an  appeal  to  the  Jewish 
Christians  to  abandon  Judaism  without  misgiving, 
since  Christians  have  here  no  abiding  city  (Jeru- 
salem), but  seek  the  city  which  is  to  come  (13'^). 
The  subsequent  destruction  of  the  Temple  was  the 
best  illustration  of  that  appeal. 

6.  The  Law  in  the  Johannine  writings. — Echoes 
of  the  controversy  about  the  Law  may  no  doubt 
still  be  heard  in  the  Johannine  writings,  but  the 
question  is  no  longer  a  living  one.  Paulinism  had 
by  this  time  fought  to  an  end  the  decisive  battle 
with  Judaism,  and  the  great  catastrophe  of  a.d, 
70  had  exercised  a  liberating  influence  on  Jewish 
Christianity.  It  is  true  that,  of  the  Johannine 
writings,  llevelation  may  have  been  written  in  the 
decade  preceding  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  but,  though 
in  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches  (2.  3)  the 
influence  of  the  Apostolic  Decree  is  probably  still 
traceable  (cf.  2^"-  with  2'*-  ^*  and  Ac  15-8),  yet  the 
idea  of  the  Law  plays  no  part  in  the  book.  The 
Apocalypse  no  doubt  attaches  special  importance 
to  the  'commandments  of  God,'  repeatedly  enjoin- 
ing their  observance  (12"  14*"^  22'*),  and,  similarly, 
great  stress  is  laid  upon  the  works  of  believers, 
since  in  the  Judgment  men  are  to  be  recompensed 
according  to  their  works  (2^  20"^'-  22'* ;  cf.  W^), 
while  in  five  (KV  ;  AV  all)  of  the  seven  letters  the 
direct  address  opens  with  the  words,  '  I  know  thy 
works '  {2'- 1»  3'-  »•  i«).  The  Avorks  referred  to,  how- 
ever, are  in  no  sense  the  '  works  of  the  Law,'  but 
rather  ordinary  Christian  actions,  or  Christian 
virtues ;  cf.  the  details  of  the  letters  and  the 
lists  of  vices  in  21^-27  22'*.  Nor,  again,  are 
the  '  commandments  of  God '  to  be  identified  with 
the  commandments  of  Moses.  On  the  contrary, 
the  peculiar  way  in  which  they  are  linked  with  the 
'  testimony,'  or  the  '  faith  of  Jesus,'  .seems  to  in- 
dicate that  the  expression  does  not  differ  essenti- 
ally in  meaning  from  the  phrase  '  the  word  of  God ' 
occurring  in  a  like  connexion,  and  that  it  finds  its 
explanation  in  1  John,  in  which  faith  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  and  brotherly  love  are  represented  as  the 
two  chief  commandments  of  God  (cf.  Rev  1»  12'' 
14*  with  1  Jn  3^  4'"-  5'-»). 

That  the  general  religious  attitude  of  Revelation 
is  Jewish  Christian  may  probably  be  inferred  from 
such  passages  as  11-  '20"  21'-  and  T'"".  But  this 
does  not  imply  that  the  work  has  a  particularistic 
or  an  anti-Pauline  standpoint ;  the  truth  is,  rather, 
that  the  book  presupposes  throughout  the  uni- 


versality of  salvation  (cf.  .')'•  7"  [21-*"^]),  just  as, 
conversely,  it  says  that  the  unbelieving  Jews  are 
not  Jews  but  '  a  synagogue  of  Satan '  (2"  3*).  And 
when  (in  2"*)  the  Lord  assures  believers  that  He 
will  cast  upon  them  no  other  burden  than  abstinence 
from  things  sacrificed  to  idols  and  from  fornication 
(cf.  2'*'-  -"),  we  are  reminded,  as  indicated  above, 
of  the  ordinances  of  the  Apostolic  Decree  for  the 
Gentile  Christians.  The  word  '  law '  (ctJ/ios),  how- 
ever, does  not  occur  in  the  book. 

In  the  First  Epistle  of  John — as  in  the  Second 
and  Third  as  well — we  find  no  special  reference  to 
the  Law.  In  the  First  Epistle  an  error  is  assailed 
which  lies  quite  outside  the  question  as  to  the 
validity  of  the  Mosaic  Law,  viz.  an  ethical  in- 
difl'erentism  which,  side  by  side  with  a  Docetic 
Christology,  had  apparently  assumed  a  Gnostic 
complexion.  When  John,  after  a  warning  against 
being  led  astray,  declares  with  emphasis  that  '  he 
(only)  that  doeth  righteousness  is  righteous,'  and 
that  'he  that  doeth  sin  is  of  the  devil'  (3^'-),  he 
probably  has  in  view  some  misapplication  of  the 
Pauline  teaching  on  righteousness.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Epistle  which  points  directly  to 
antinomian  tendencies,  but  something  of  that 
nature  seems  to  be  hinted  at  in  the  closing  ad- 
monition against  '  the  idols '  (5-'),  which  would 
appear  to  point  to  the  evils  mentioned  in  Rev 
21M.  20  Qjj  j,jjg  positive  .side,  the  exhortations  of 
the  Epistle  are  directed  towards  the  tme  faith  and 
towards  walking  in  brotherly  love ;  '  to  walk  in 
the  light '  consists  in  brotherly  love  (cf.  2}>- "  3""^' 
4.  5).  St.  John's  well-known  definition  of  sin  as 
'  transgression  of  the  law,'  *  lawlessness '  {duo/nia 
[1  Jn  3*]),  might  seem  to  be  of  special  interest  for 
our  present  subject,  but  he  does  not  further  develop 
the  thought,  which  is  apparently  only  of  a  sub- 
sidiary character,  to  be  compared  with  the  refer- 
ences to  the  reqiiirements  or  tlie  Law  with  which 
on  occasion  St.  Paul  supports  his  admonitions  (cf. 
Gal  5'*,  Ro  138-10). 

Finally,  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  shows  its  remote- 
ness from  the  ecclesiastical  conflict  regarding  the 
Law  by  the  subordinate  place  which  the  idea  of 
the  vSfio^  occupies  in  it.  This  probably  finds  ex- 
pression in  the  significant  verse  of  the  Prologue 
(1'^)  in  which  St.  John  compares  the  Old  and  the 
New  Dispensation :  '  the  law  was  given  through 
Moses;  grace  and  truth  came  through  Jesus  Christ.' 
The  antithesis  of  law  and  grace  is  genuinely 
Pauline  ;  that  of  law  and  trutli  reminds  us  above 
all  of  the  Epistle  to  tiie  Hebrews:  the  Law  was 
only  an  imperfect  revelation  of  the  nature  of  God, 
which  has  at  length  been  declared  by  the  only 
begotten  Sou  ( Jn  l'^),  '  full  of  grace  and  truth ' 
(v.''').  Moreover,  the  references  to  the  Law  in  the 
ix)dy  of  the  Gospel  are  not  so  much  meant,  as  in 
Mt. ,  to  interpret  its  requirements ;  here,  in  fact, 
the  Law,  or  the  Scripture,  is  adduced  rather  for 
purposes  of  argument  (cf.  a^^-*'--^'  with  7'"'-*  KP"- 
['your  law '  =  Scripture,  Ps  82^];  cf.  12" ['the  law' 
=  Ps  110*,  Is  9',  Dn  7'*]).  It  is  true  that  the  law 
of  the  Sabbath  is  referred  to  in  a  special  way, 
inasmuch  as  Jesus  was  on  two  occasions  charged 
with  violating  the  day,  and  vindicated  His  action 
(59-13.16-18  722-w.  cf.  9iiff-)  by  appealing  to  the  ex- 
ample of  God  His  Father,  who  '  worketh  even  until 
now '  (5'^),  and  to  the  practice  of  circumcising  on 
the  Sabbath  (7^).  A  passage  like  7"*,  however, 
and  still  more  decidedly  10**  ('  in  your  law '),  seems 
to  indicate  a  certain  detachment  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  Law  generally.  And  the  superiority 
of  the  Christian  point  of  view,  as  contrasted  with 
the  Law,  or  with  the  legal  worship,  finds  expression 
above  all  in  the  great  utterance  of  Jesus  regarding 
the  true  worship  (4-''  -••) :  '  the  hour  cometh  when 
neither  in  this  mountain  nor  in  Jerusalem  shall  ye 
worship  the  Father.  .  .  .  God  is  spirit :  and  they 


LAW 


LEAVKN' 


693 


that  worship  him  most  worship  in  spirit  and  truth.' 
The  ethic  of  St.  John's  Gospel  is  most  impressivelj* 
brought  to  a  focus  in  the  new  commandment  of 
brotherly  love  (13»*  lo^*- J»- ").  While  the  dis- 
courses of  Jesus  in  the  first  part  of  the  Gospel, 
in  which  He  addresses  the  people  ('the  world'), 
demand  faith  in  His  name,  those  in  the  second 
part  (13-17),  where  He  speaks  to  the  disciples  (those 
who  have  that  faith,  believers),  all  converge  in  the 
coniniandment  of  mutual  love;  here,  accordingly, 
we  have  the  same  two-fold  requirement  which  we 
found  so  simply  expressed  in  the  First  Epistle  of 
John  (3=^).  In  the  Gospel,  no  doubt,  Jesus  speaks 
not  only  of  His  commandment,  but  also  of  His 
commandments  ;  by  these,  however,  He  must  have 
meant,  not  the  commandments  of  the  OT,  but  in 
all  likelihood  simply  the  special  aspects  of  the  law 
of  love. 

1  John  tends  to  set  faith  and  love  side  by  side 
(cf.  Rev  14*-:  faith  and  the  'commandments  of 
God'),  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  shows  the  same 
collocation.  In  this  point,  accordingly,  St.  Jolm 
differs  from  St.  Paul,  who  indicated  the  subordina- 
tion of  love  to  faith  in  the  phrase  '  faith  working 
through  love '  (Gal  5").  In  point  of  fact,  however, 
St.  John  too  has  reco^ized  the  dejiendence  of  love 
upon  faith,  since,  as  just  indicated,  the  first  part 
of  his  Gospel  is  occupied  with  the  preaching  of 
faith  (1-12),  while  in  the  second  part  (13  ff.) 
brotherly  love  is  regarded  as  being  based  upon  the 
true  foundation  of  disci pleship,  i.e.  upon  faith. 
Through  faith  comes  life  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  (20'* ;  cf.  1  Jn  5'*).  No  room  is  left,  therefore, 
for  legal  merit  or  self-righteousness.  Thus  St. 
John  homologates  the  Pauline  conception  of  the 
gospel,  but  expresses  his  view  in  a  manner  much 
more  simple,  and  therefore  less  precise. 

7.  The  Law  in  the  sub-apostolic  writings. — In 
the  ix)st-apostolic  Mritings  of  the  1st  cent,  the 
Law,  as  signifying  the  Mosaic  legislation,  plays 
no  part  at  all.  In  the  so-called  First  Epistle  of 
Clement  the  term  occurs  but  once  (i.  3),  and  there 
in  the  plural  form :  *  Ye  walked  in  the  laws  of 
God' — an  utterance  which,  both  according  to  the 
context  and  in  Wew  of  the  jiersons  addressed 
(Gentile  Christians  in  Corinth),  can  have  no  refer- 
ence to  the  OT  Law  in  the  specific  sense.  It  was 
in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  of  the  2nd 
cent. — as,  e.g.,  the  Shepherd  of  Hennas  and  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas — that  Christianity  came  to  be 
regarded  as  'the  new  Law.'  Barnabas  says  that 
God  abolished  the  Jewish  sacrifices  in  order  that 
the  new  Law  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  is 
without  the  yoke  of  compulsion,  should  involve  no 
sacrificial  gift,  as  that  is  but  the  work  of  man  (ii. 
6) — an  idea  that  partlj-  recalls  St.  James's  phrase, 
'the  perfect  law  of  liberty'  (Ja  1=»;  cf.  2*-). 
Hernias,  again,  speaks  of  Christ  as  the  one  who 
gave  to  the  people  (of  God)  the  Law  that  He  re- 
ceived from  His  Father,  but  also  as  the  one  who  Ls 
Himself  the  Law  ;  the  Law  is  the  Son  of  God,  who 
was  preached  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  {Sim.  viii. 
3.  2)— i.e.  tiie  gospel  has  taken  the  place  of  the 
ancient  Law,  or,  otherwise  expressed,  Christ  in  His 
example  and  His  commandments  has  been  consti- 
tuted the  sole  moral  authority  of  Christians. 
What  distinguishes  this  sub-apostolic  view  from 
that  of  St.  Paul,  however,  is  that  the  idea  of  '  the 
new  Law '  not  only  verbally  but  also  materially 
implies  a  moralism  that  was  quite  foreign  to  the 
Apostolic  Age,  inasmuch  as  the  idea  of  Law  has 
coloured  the  conception  of  the  gospel. 

When  the  strain  between  Law  and  gospel  had  at 
length  been  relieved,  legalism  gradually  once  more 
found  its  waj-  indirectlj-  into  the  Church.  We 
can  already  trace  the  process  in  the  Ancient 
Catholic  Church,  and  still  more  distinctly  in  the 
Mediaeval  Church.     At  the  Ileformation,  however. 


the  primitive-Christian,  Pauline  solution  of  the 
problem  of  the  Law  was  vindicated  once  more, 
and  legalism  and  antinomianism  were  alike  sur- 
mounted. The  theology  of  the  Reformation,  in 
its  interpretation  of  grace  and  faith,  showed,  with 
St.  Paul  as  its  guide,  not  only  that,  but  also  how, 
the  Christian  is  constrained  to  do  good  works,  and 
thus  fulfil  the  Law  of  God  (Aug5mrg  Confetsion 
[1530],  XX.  36,  •  Apol.'  [1531]  iiL  15). 

LrrKRATURB.— The  text-books  of  NT  Theol(wj-  bv  B.  Weiss 
(Eng.  tr.  of  3rd  ed.,  Edinburgh,  1882-«X  "•  J.'Holtzmann 
^Tubingen,  1911X  A.  Schlatter  (CaJw,  1908-lOX  P.  Peine 
(Leipog,  1910),  H.  Weinel (Tubingen,  1911) ;  C.  ▼.  Weizsacker, 
Das  apoUMsehe  Zeitaiter  der  ehrutiiehen  Kirehe^,  Freiburg, 
1892  (peuntn) ;  E.  Grafe,  Die  paulinuehe  Lehre  vom  GeteU 
noA  den  vier  Bauptbriefen,  do.  1893 ;  Lyder  Bran,  PavbuTt 
lore  om  loven,  Cbristiania,  18M ;  A.  Zalin,  Da*  Gtietz  Guttu 
naeh  der  Lehre  und  der  ErfoArung  de*  ApotUl  PatiltwS,  Halie, 
1892;  P.  Peine,  Da<  ^etetuffreie  JBvangelivm  det  Paubu, 
Lei^g,  1899 ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  Theolom  <^  the  ST,  1899.  p.  17  ; 
A.  E.  Garvie.  Studie*  of  Paul  and  ht»  Goepel,  19U,  p.  193 ;  E. 
P.  Gould.  BibUeal  Theology  of  the  ST,  1900,  p.  27.  See  also 
the  accounts  of  Paulinism  bv  E.  Renan  dEofS.  tr.,  London, 
1869X  P.  W.  Farrar  (do.  1879),  O.  Pfleiderer  (Leipzig,  1873, 
Eng.  tr.,  London,  1S77X  A.  Sabatier  (^Paris,  1896,  E^.  tr.<, 
London,  1906X  and  treatises  on  the  subject  of  'Jesus  and  St. 
PaoL'  OLAF  MoE. 

LAWYER. — In  Israel  the  activities  of  the  lawyer 
were  limited  by  the  Torah,  or  Law  of  Moses.  His 
functions  were  three-fold  :  to  study  and  interpret 
the  Law  (and  the  traditions  arising  from  it),  to 
hand  it  down  by  teaching,  and  to  apply  it  in  the 
Courts  of  Justice.  The  lawyers  played  an  im- 
portant part  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Sanhedrin, 
not  only  voting,  but  also  speaking,  if  they  saw  fit, 
on  either  side  of  a  case,  though  in  criminal  charges 
solely  on  behalf  of  the  accused  (Mishn.  Sanhedrin, 
iv.  1).  The  Roman  lawyers  were  more  secular  in 
their  interests,  and  applied  themselves  more  directly 
to  the  practical  aspects  of  jurisprudence.  Their 
work  in  the  law-courts  covered  a  wide  range.  The 
most  general  representative  of  law  was  the  cognitor, 
or  attorney,  whose  place  (in  Gaius"s  time)  was  par- 
tially filled  by  the  procurator  litis,  or  legal  agent ; 
but  m  court  the  case  was  pleaded  by  thepatrontis 
or  orator,  the  skilled  counsel  of  whom  Cicero  is  so 
illustrious  an  example,  often  assisted  by  the  advo- 
catus,  or  legal  adWser.  The  opinion  of  jurisam- 
sulti,  or  professional  students  of  law,  could  also  be 
laid  before  the  judges.     See  Trial-at-Law. 

In  the  NT  lawyers  appear  as  yofUKoi,  'jurists' 
(freq.  in  Lk.,  but  elsewhere  only  in  Mt  22^  and 
Tit  3**),  or  yofi,oSiSdffKa\oi,  '  doctors  of  the  law ' 
(only  in  Lk  5*',  Ac  5**,  and  1  Ti  1") ;  but  they  are 
clearly  identical  with  the  ypafifiareh,  '  scribes,'  who 
are  mentioned  so  often  in  the  Gospels  and  Acts. 
These  lawyers  are  aU  of  the  Jewish  type.  The 
Roman  lawyer  appears,  however,  in  the  p^wp  or 
'orator'  Tertullus,  who  pleaded  the  cause  of  St. 
Paul's  prosecutors  before  the  Roman  governor 
Felix  (Ac  24**-)  —  in  order,  no  doubt,  that  the 
proper  technicalities  might  be  observed,  and  the 
case  presented  in  the  way  most  likely  to  win  over 
the  trained  Roman  mind.    See  Tertullus. 

Lttkrattrk. — On  Jewish  lawvere  cf.  D.  Eaton  in  HDS  iiL 
83 ff.,  with  references;  and  on  Roman  jurists  and  oraton  see 
A.  H.  J.  Greeaidge,  Legai  Procedure  of  Cieero'i  Time,  1901, 
p.  148 ff. ;  H.  J.  Roby,  Roman  Private  Law  in  the  Time*  of 
Cicero  and  of  the  Antonine*.  1902,  iL  407  ff. ;  and  other  authori- 
ties cited  in  art.  Tria1/-at-Law.  A.  R.  (JORDOX. 

LAYING  ON  OF  HANDS.— See  Ordixatiox. 

LE AYEN  (from  levare,  '  to  raise ' :  ^/iti,  ^vfimh' ; 
ferment  urn). — Leaven  is  a  substance  which  produces 
fermentation,  especially  in  the  making  of  bread. 
It  is  properly  a  piece  of  already  fermented  dough, 
which  is  mixed  with  other  dough  in  order  to  repeat 
the  process.  In  the  warm  climate  of  Syria  the 
fermentation  is  completed  in  24  hours.  The  com- 
mandment against  the  use  of  raised  bread  during 


694 


LEAVES 


LEVITE 


the  Passover  week  (Ex  12"  13'',  etc.)  was  no  doubt 
a  survival  from  Israel's  nomadic  period,  when  (as 
among  the  nomads  of  to-day)  all  bread  was  un- 
leavened. Fermentation  was  supposed  to  represent 
the  process  of  corruption  in  the  mass  of  the  bread 
— an  ideu  found  in  I'lutarch,  who  says :  '  Now 
leaven  is  itself  the  od'spring  of  corruption,  and 
conupts  the  mass  (t6  ^ijpafia)  with  which  it  is 
mixed'  {Qu(ts.  Rom.  109).  Bread  with  the  taint 
of  putrefaction  was  regarded  a~s  unlit  for  use  in 
religious  ceremonies  (see  W.  R.  Smith,  RS^,  1894, 
p.  1^0).  On  the  eve  of  the  first  day  of  the  Pass- 
over— the  14tli  Nisan — the  Jews,  in  accordance 
with  their  immemorial  custom,  still  carefully  re- 
move every  trace  of  leaven  wliich  can  be  found  in 
their  houses.  Fresh  dough  kneaded  with  pure 
water  is  used  in  tlie  preparation  of  the  cakes  of 
unleavened  bread  which  are  to  be  eaten  during  the 
holy  week. 

As  a  figure  of  speech,  '  leaven  '  is  applied  to  any 
element,  influence,  or  agency  which  effects  a  subtle 
and  secret  cliange  either  for  the  better  or  for  the 
worse.  On  the  one  hand,  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven 
is  a  leaven  which  is  destined  to  penetrate,  and 
assimilate  to  itself,  the  whole  of  humanity  (Mt 
\Z^,  Lk  13^'-).  On  the  other,  even  an  apparently 
insignificant  sin,  if  tolerated  and  unchecked  in  a 
community,  has  great  power  of  corruption,  and  St. 
Paul  twice  quotes  the  popular  saying,  'A  little 
leaven  leavens  the  whole  lump '  {Skov  rb  tpipafxa,  1 
Co  5®,  Gal  5").  The  followers  of  Christ  are  already 
unleavened  (dfu/xoi) ;  virtually  and  ideally — in  the 
purpose  of  God  and  in  their  own  passionate  desire 
— thej  are  completely  purged  from  the  leaven  of 
iniquity ;  but  the  iaeal  has  still  to  be  realized. 
They  are  therefore  exhorted  to  set  about  and  carry 
through  their  Passover  cleansing  of  the  soul — to 
rid  themselves  of  all  infected  and  infectious  re- 
mains of  their  pre-Christian  state — that  they  may 
keep  not  a  seven-days'  but  a  life-long  feast  with  the 
unleavened  bread  or  sincerity  and  truth  (1  Co  5"'^). 

James  Strahan. 

LEAVES.— See  Tree  of  Life. 

LEOPARD  (jrdpSaXij).— The  Greek  word  seems  to 
have  been  used  indiscriminately  by  the  classical 
writers  to  designate  '  leopard,'  '  panther,'  or 
'  ounce.'  The  only  NT  reference  to  the  '  leopard  ' 
is  in  Kev  13^,  where  it  occurs  in  the  description  of 
'  the  Wild  Beast  from  the  sea ' — '  the  beast  which 
I  saw  was  like  unto  a  leopard.'  The  concrete 
reality,  of  which  the  Wild  Beast  was  the  abstract 
emblem,  was  of  course  the  Roman  Empire.  To 
the  mind  of  the  Seer,  the  attitude  adopted  by 
Rome  towards  the  early  Christian  Church  was 
that  of  a  leopard.  She  exhibited  the  same  agility 
(cf.  Hab  1")  and  cunning  (cf.  Hos  13'^),  as  well  as 
the  same  ruthless  cruelty,  as  that  much-dreaded 
inhabitant  of  Palestine  and  the  East. 

The  leopard  (Felis  pai-dtcs,  Arab,  nimr,  Heb. 
ndmer)  is  still  found  round  the  Dead  Sea,  in  Gilead 
and  Bashan,  and  also  occasionally  in  Lebanon  and 
the  wooded  districts  of  the  west ;  but,  judging  from 
the  numerous  allusions  in  the  OT  and  tlie  occur- 
rence of  the  word  in  place-names  {e.g.  'Beth- 
Nimrah '  or  '  Nimrah '),  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  it  was  more  common  in  early  times.  It 
usually  lurks  near  wells  or  watering-places  (cf. 
•waters  of  Nimrim,'  Is  15',  Jer  48^'*),  and  in  the 
outskirts  of  villages  (cf.  Jer  5'),  to  pounce  at 
night  upon  cattle  and  dogs.  The  beautifully 
spotted  skins  are  often  sold  in  the  markets  and 
are  used  as  rugs  and  saddle-covers,  while  some- 
times they  are  worn  as  an  article  of  clothing. 

The  Felis  pardus  is  found  over  the  whole  of 
Africa,  S.  Asia,  China,  Japan,  and  the  islands  of 
the  Malay  Archipelago. 

Another  annual  of  the  leopard  tribe,  the  well- 


known  clieeta  or  hunting-leopard  of  India  (Felis 
jubatus),  is  sometimes  found  in  the  hills  of  Galilee 
and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Tabor,  but  its  occur- 
rence is  rare.  It  is  much  tamer  than  the  Felis 
pardus,  and  in  India  it  is  often  domesticated  and 
kept  for  hunting  antelopes  and  other  animals. 

LiTERATURK.— H.  B.  Tristraui,  SWP  vii.  [1884],  p.  18 f., 
The  A'atural  Eigtory  oj  the  BibUi",  1911,  pp.  111-114 ;  H.  B. 
Swete,  The  Apocalypse  oj  St.  John^,  1!K)7,  p.  162  ;  SDB  540  f.  ; 
HDB  iii.  95;  EBiiii.  2705Jf. ;  W.  M.  Thomson,  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  1804,  p.  444  f.  P.  S.  p.  HaNDCOCK. 

LETTER.— The  distinction  between  the  '  true 
letter'  and  the  'epistle'  was  dealt  with  in  the 
art.  Epistle.  In  the  Christian  literature  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  till  the  end  of  the  1st  cent,  we  have, 
besides  Ac  15^'^  and  23'^-^,  sixteen  letters  in  the 
proper  sense  of  the  term — viz.  the  ten  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul  that  may  reasonably  be  regarded  as 
authentic ;  the  three  Pastoral  Epistles,  which,  if 
authentic,  are  undoubtedly  real  letters,  and,  if 
spurious,  are  at  all  events  based  upon  genuine 
letters  from  the  Apostle's  hand ;  the  Second  and 
Third  Epistles  of  St.  John,  both  of  which  could 
at  once  be  characterized  rather  as  something 
like  short  private  missives ;  and,  finally,  the 
First'Epistle  of  Clement.  Of  the  genuine  Paulino 
letters,  Romans  comes  nearest  in  character  to  the 
'  epistle,'  though  the  fact  that  it  is  less  personal 
and  intimate  in  its  tone  and  more  suggestive  of 
the  treatise  is  quite  well  accounted  for  by  certain 
psychological  considerations  —  as,  e.g.,  that  the 
Avriter  was  not  personally  known  to  the  community 
which  he  was  addressing ;  we  should  not  there- 
fore be  justified  in  saying  that  the  letter-form  is  a 
mere  artifice.  On  the  other  hand,  the  so-called 
First  Epistle  of  Clement,  which  is  written  in  the 
name  of  one  entire  community  to  another,  is  a 
peculiar  composite  of  '  letter  and  '  ejiistle '  ;  it 
was  certainly  meant  to  be  a  true  letter,  arising 
out  of  the  actual  circumstances  of  the  writer's  own 
church  at  Rome,  and  having  in  view  the  actual 
circumstances  of  the  church  in  Corinth,  but  it  is 
quite  clear  that  Clement  was  working  upon  a  tradi- 
tion of  Christian  letters  and  epistles,  so  that — 
especially  in  regard  to  the  length  of  his  message — 
he  does  not  altogether  succeed  in  maintaining  the 
characteristics  of  a  true  letter.  The  Christian 
writers  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  in  fact,  had  not  yet 
become  proficient  in  such  literary  forms  as  the 
treatise,  the  dialogue,  or  the  controversial  pam- 
phlet, and  tliis  explains  why  they  had  recourse  to 
the  letter  as  the  simplest  literary  vehicle,  and  yet 
at  the  same  time  burst  the  trammels  of  its  form. 
A  comparison  of  the  true  letters  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  with  true  letters  from  approximately  the  same 
period  of  the  heathen  world  shows  that,  while  the 
similarities  in  style  and  diction  are  manifold  and 
by  no  means  insignificant,  yet  the  former  class 
display  a  very  remarkable  independence  in  their 
use  of  the  traditional  form. 

Literature. — Cf.  the  works  cited  in  art.  Epistle  ;  on  the  true 
letters  of  the  ancients  cf.  esp.  L.  Mitteis  and  U.  Wilcken, 
GrundziigetindChrestomathie  der  Papj/ninkunde,  2  vols.,  Leip- 
zig, 1912  ;  also  H.  Lietzmann,  Griechische  Papyri'^,  Bonn,  1910  ; 
G.  A.  Deissmann,  Licht  vom  Ontcn",  1909  (Eng.  tr.'-^,  1911),  and 
the  well-known  edd.  of  Oxyrhynchus  papyri,  etc.  On  '  true 
letters'  from  the  Christian  sphere,  cf.  tlie  present  writer's 
Oegch.  der  altchristl.  Literatur,  Leipzig,  1911. 

H.  Jordan. 
LEYL— See  Tribes,  Priest,  Aaron. 

LEYITE.— According  to  the  view  represented  in 
the  OT  by  the  so-called  '  Priests'  Code,'  the  Lcvites 
were  originally  the  clan  whose  members  were  quali- 
fied for  the  priestly  office.  In  the  course  of  time 
a  distinction  arose,  and  the  Levites  became  the 
principal  attendants  upon  the  priests,  entrusted 
with  minor  sacerdotal  duties  but  not  competent  to 


LEWD,  LEWDNESS 


LIBERTLNES 


695 


succeed  to  the  full  status.  In  the  NT,  outside  the 
Gospels,  the  terra  occurs  but  once  or  twice.  Barna- 
bas of  Cj'prus,  where  there  were  numerous  Jews 
and  Christians  (1  Mac  15**,  Ac  11^*),  was  a  land- 
owner, though  a  Levite  (Ac  4*),  the  old  ordinance 
(Nu  18-^)  against  the  possession  of  real  estate  ha^ong 
long  before  fallen  into  abeyance,  and  probably 
having  never  been  meant  to  apply  to  land  outside 
Palestine.  In  He  7"  the  writer  coins  a  word  to 
enable  him  to  write  of  '  the  Levitical  priesthood,' 
as  though  the  hallowing  of  the  tribe  were  concen- 
trated in  '  the  order  of  Aaron '  (so  Westcott,  ad 
loc.),  or  with  a  view  to  indicating  the  provisional 
character  of  all  parts  of  the  earlier  sacrificial  service 
and  not  merely  of  its  central  acts.  The  priestly 
tribe  with  all  its  privileges  passes  away ;  and 
another — the  royal  tribe  (He  7^^)— yields  Him 
who  is  able  really  to  save,  and  to  '  save  to  the  utter- 
most' (7-^).  In  later  times  an  assumed  parallel 
between  the  historical  and  the  true  Israel  was 
pushed,  until  the  relation  of  deacons  to  bishops 
and  presbyters  was  based  upon  that  of  Levites  to 
priests.  The  theory-  has  proved  useful  since  the 
days  of  Cyprian,  and  may  conceivably  have  origin- 
ated in  some  of  the  Ebionitic  Christian  communities 
of  our  period  ;  but  the  functions  of  the  two  classes, 
Levites  and  deacons,  were  quite  distinct,  and  any 
analogy  between  them  is  artificial  and  an  after- 
thought. R.  W.  Moss. 

LEWD,  LEWDNESS  (Ac  17'  18").— The  English 
word  occurs  twice  in  the  NT,  once  as  an  adjec- 
tive (Gr.  -rovtjpbs,  Ac  17*)  and  once  as  a  substantive 
{fXfSiovpyrifia,  Ac  18").  In  neither  of  these  cases  has 
it  anything  to  do  with  sexual  pa.ssion — the  sense 
in  which  the  word  is  now  used;  it  just  means 
•  vulgar,'  '  worthless.' 

1.  Ac  175.— The  word  TovrjpSs  (AV  'lewd,'  RV 
'  vile ')  is  used  to  characterize  the  dyopaiot  or  loafers 
in  the  market-place  whom  the  unbelieving  Jews  in 
Thessalonica  incited  to  an  act  of  popular  insurrec- 
tion against  St.  Paul.  They  were  so  far  successful 
as  to  prevail  on  the  politarchs  to  exact  bail  from 
Jason  for  peaceful  behaviour,  with  the  consequence 
that  St.  Paul  and  Silas  had  to  escape  to  Beroea  by 
night. 

*  Owing  to  the  dishonour  in  which  nianoal  pursuits  were  held 
in  ancient  days,  every  large  city  had  a  superfluous  population 
of  worthless  idlers — clients  who  lived  on  the  doles  of  the 
wealthy,  flatterers  who  fawned  at  the  feet  of  the  influential, 
the  lazzaroni  of  streets,  mere  loafers  and  loiterers,  the  hangers- 
on  of  forum,  the  claqueurs  of  law-courts,  the  scum  that  gathered 
about  the  shallowest  outmost  waves  of  ci^-ilisation '  (F.  W. 
Farrar,  St.  Paul,  1S83,  p.  370). 

This  class  is  well  described  by  the  adjective 
TOKT/pos.  Aristotle  distinguishes  the  wicked  man 
(xovTjpos)  from  the  d»:par^j,  the  weak  man  who  sins 
though  he  does  not  mean  to  do  so  and  who  is  un- 
righteous without  premeditation  (Eth.  Nic.  vii.  10). 
The  wicked  man  sins  with  the  full  consent  of  his 
will.  He  is  positively  malignant  and  injurious  to 
others.  Nearly  akin  in  meaning  are  (paCXos  and 
KaKos,  but  as  Trench  says  (AT  Synonym^,  p.  3(34), 
in  iroin)p6s  '  the  positive  activity  of  evil  comes  far 
more  decidedly  out  than  in  KaKos. '  Perhaps  Knox's 
phrase — 'the  rascal  multitude' — is  as  accurate  a 
translation  as  we  can  get. 

While  the  xp^'J'tos  is  one  who  diligently  follows 
his  occupation  and  maintains  himself  by  lawful 
work,  the  irovripos  or  xaKos  indicates  the  man  who  is 
wicked  in  behaviour  or  in  character.  The  words, 
however,  in  Greek  are  often  used  with  the  same 
latitude  as  we  allow  ourselves  in  English,  when  we 
use  similar  terms.  The  ordinary  speech  of  the  NT 
is  not  logically  exact. 

W.  M.  Ramsaj-  discusses  the  question  whether  the  reference 
to  Satan  in  1  Th  218— 'and  Satan  hindered  us  (from  coming)'— 
is  to  be  taken  as  referring  to  the  hostility  of  the  multitude. 
He  concludes,  however,  that  the  reference  "is  to  the  attitude  of 


the  politarchs,  who,  by  exacting  security  for  good  behaviour 
from  Jason,  prevented' the  return  of  St.  Paul  to  the  dty  (St. 
Paul  the  TracelUr,  1S85,  p.  230f.)L 

Wetstein  supplies  parallels  which  throw  light  on  the  daas 
denoted  by  iyopaioi  (in  Uteo). 

2.  Ac  18^*. — Here  the  word  '  lewdness '  translates 
the  Greek  ftg-diovprpifia.  The  RV  has  'villainy.' 
The  word  is  associated  with  d5t'oj/xa.  The  usual  dis- 
tinction between  them  is  said  to  be  that  dStKij/ui 
refers  to  illegality  —  something  done  contrary  to 
the  laws  —  whereas  pq.Siovp'/rifia  indicates  moral 
delinquency.  The  distinction  is  probably  to  be 
maintained  here,  as  Gallio  is  speaking  judicially 
with  reference  to  a  definite  charge.  St.  Paul  is 
guilty  neither  of  the  one  nor  of  the  other,  but 
according  to  Gallio  the  question  is  a  mere  dispute 
about  words — a  Jewish  squabble. 

p^Sioi'pyrjfxa  occurs  only  here  in  the  NT,  nor  is  it 
found  in  the  classics  or  in  the  LXX,  but  it  occurs 
in  Plutarch,  Pyrrh.  6,  and  the  allied  term  pgiSiovpyia 
occurs  in  Ac  13^"  of  Elymas.  The  latter  word 
occurs  in  papyri  in  the  sense  of  '  theft '  (see  J.  H. 
Moulton  and  George  ililligan  in  Expositor,  8th 
ser.  i.  [1911]  477).  It  is  not  likelj',  however,  that 
the  term  in  Ac  18"  is  used  in  this  restricted  sense. 

LirERATTRK.— J.  R.  Lumby,  The  AeU  qf  the  ApostUt  (Caxa- 
bridge  Bible,  18S6),  p.  217;  HDB,  art.  'Lewdness';  R.  J. 
Knowlingr,  in  EGT,  '  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,'  1900,  in  loec 
(where  literature  is  given);  T.  E.  Pag-e,  The  Acts  of  the 
ApogtUf,  1900,  p.  301 ;  Grimm-Thayer,  Lexicon,  s.v.  putuui^ 
ymia ;  E.  Hatch,  Essaps  in  Biblical  Greek,  1889,  pp.  77-S2 ; 
T.  K.  Abbott,  EstajfS,  1881,  p.  97 ;  R.  C.  Trench,  Stmonymt  of 
fA«-Vr».  1876,p.  361L  DOX  A  LD  MACKENZIE. 


LIBERTINES. — Both  the  construction  and  the 
contents  of  Ac  6'  are  difficult.  It  consists,  as  Hort 
says,  of  'a  long  compound  phrase,'  the  Greek  of 
which  is  'not  smooth  and  correct  on  any  inter- 
pretation' (Judaistic  Christianity,  p.  50).  An 
expositor  can,  therefore,  lay  claim  to  no  more  than 
a  reasonable  probability  for  his  exegesis  of  the 
verse.  St.  Luke's  statement  is  generallj'  believed 
to  have  been  derived  from  a  written  source.  Thus, 
Hamack,  although  he  argues  persuasively  in  favour 
of  St.  Luke's  having  obtained  a  large  part  of  the 
knowledge  he  committed  to  writing  in  Ac  1-12 
from  St.  Philip  at  Caesarea  (cf.  Ac  2P-  •),  yet 
thinks  that  he  had  a  written  (Antiochean)  source 
for  his  narrative  of  St.  Stephen's  trial,  speech,  and 
death  (The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  pp.  175,  188,  245). 
And  Ramsay,  writing  on  the  '  Forms  of  Classifica- 
tion in  Acts '  (Expositor,  5th  ser.  ii.  35),  explains 
the  exceptionsil  form  of  the  list  in  Ac  6"  as  '  due 
to  Luke's  being  here  dependent  on  an  authority 
whose  expression  he  either  transcribed  verbatim 
or  did  not  fully  understand.'  But  it  appears  to 
the  present  writer  possible  that  the  form  of  the 
list  18  due  to  its  having  come  to  St.  Luke  in  the 
way  of  oral  communication.  Its  style  may  be 
termed  colloquial :  it  looks  as  if  the  narrator  were 
quoting  from  memory,  or  reporting  the  very  words 
of  a  speaker  with  whom  he  had  been  conversing. 
May  not  the  speaker  have  been  St.  Paul?  The 
mention  made  of  Cilicia  in  the  list  is  in  favour  of 
this  conjecture.  Was  there  a  svnagogue  in  Jeru- 
salem of  which  it  is  more  likely  tliat  Saul  of  Tarsus 
had  been  a  member  or  a  leader  than  that  which 
Cilician  Jews  frequented?  The  Apostle  had,  in 
the  days  of  his  unbelief,  been  one  of  the  bitterest 
opponents  of  the  Christian  movement,  and  the  part 
he  had  taken  in  St.  Stephen's  death  was  a  subject 
of  life-long  self-reproach  (Ac  22^).  The  depth  of 
his  feeling  may  have  prevented  him  from  referring 
to  this  often  in  preaching  or  otherwise,  but  would 
not  have  debarred  him  firom  doing  so  in  conversa- 
tion with  a  trusted  friend  like  St.  Luke. 

Should  this  conjecture  be  well  founded,  it  would 
help  to  settle  the  vexed  question  of  whether  five 
synagogues  are  specified  in  the  list,  or  two,  or  only 


696 


LIIJERTINES 


LIBERTY 


one.  The  present  writer  agrees  with  Hort  (loc. 
cit.;  of.  Sweto,  'J'hc  Appearances  of  our  Lord  after 
the  Passion,  114)  that  only  one  synagogue  is 
mentioned,  that  of  the  Libertines,  and  that  tlie 
following  names  are  simply  descriptive  of  origin, 
the  nicmlbers  of  the  synagogue  being  partly  from 
Cyrenc  and  Alexandria,  partly  from  Cilicia  and 
Proconsular  Asia.  Possibly  St.  Stephen  and  St. 
Paul  both  belonged  to  this  synagogue,  but  of  this 
we  cannot  be  sure. 

The  synagogue  of  the  Ki^ffn-tvoi  doubtless  con- 
sisted, at  least  in  the  first  instance,  of  Jews  who 
had  been  prisoners  of  war,  and  liad  afterwards 
l»een  set  free  and  admitted  to  Roman  citizen- 
ship (Chrysostom,  Hum.  on  Acts  :  oV  Vwfiaiwv  dirfXfv- 
tifpoi).  Pliilo  tells  us  {Leg.  ad  Caiuni,  23)  tliat 
most  of  tlie  Jews  of  Home  Avere  enfranchised 
cai)tives,  and  the  passages  usually  quoted  from 
Tacitus  {A7in.  ii.  85)  and  Suetonius  {Tiberius,  36) 
agree  with  this.  Those  freedmen  who  had  re- 
turned to  Palestine,  and  their  descendants,  must 
have  formed  a  synagogue  to  which  they  gave  their 
name,  and  most  ])robably  Jews  from  other  parts  of 
the  world  came  in  time  to  be  afliliated  to  them. 
Although  this  statement  is  not  supported  by  in- 
dependent historical  evidence,  it  nuiy  be  regarded 
as  a  just  inference  from  the  text,  when  conjoined 
with  other  known  facts.  A  large  part  of  the 
population  of  .Icrusalem  consisted  of  foreign  Jews, 
who  had  come  to  reside  permanently  there,  that 
they  might  be  near  the  Temple,  and  might  be 
buried  in  the  land  of  tlteir  fathers.  Others  came 
for  their  education,  like  St.  Paul.  Those  Jews 
were  most  zealous  in  fulfilling  their  ritual  obliga- 
tions, and  attached  themselves  to  '  the  straitest 
sect'  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine  (Ac  26',  Gal  1";  cf. 
Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  NT,  i.  39  f.,  60  f.  ;  J. 
Mottatt  in  ElU  iv.  4788 ;  J.  Patrick  in  HDB  iii. 
110).  The  first  accusation  brought  against  our 
Lord  was  based  upon  a  misrei)resentation  of  words 
of  His  about  the  Temple  (Jn  2i»,  Mk  14'8),  and  in 
Ac  6'*-  '^  7^"'^  we  see  that  St.  Stephen  had  not 
kept  oir  this  dangerous  ground. 

It  is  uncertain  whether  we  should  read  ttjs 
\eyofiivr]i  (Til)  or  tuv  Xeyo/^vuv  (Tisch. )  in  Ac  e'-* ; 
but,  whichever  reading  be  preferred,  the  .sense  is 
not  aflected.  The  absence  of  various  readings  in 
the  substance  of  the  text  bars  the  way  to  any 
attempt  to  reconstruct  it.  Certain  Armenian  VSS 
and  Syriac  commentaries  seem  to  have  read  Ai^iiwv 
(cf.  the  unique  NT  reference  to  Libya,  Ac  2'*),  and 
this  paved  tlie  way  for  the  most  famous  conjectural 
emendation — that  of  Ki^varivwv  for  Ai^epTlfuv.  J. 
Rendel  Harris,  in  his  art.  in  tlie  Expositor,  6th  ser. 
vi.  378  f.,  has  traced  the  liistory  of  tiiis  emendation 
in  an  interesting  manner  from  Beza  (1559)  to  lilass 
(1898).  Prom  lieza's  Annotationes  he  quotes  the 
following  sentence,  in  which  the  main  difficulty  of 
the  text  is  well  .stated  :  '  Neque  enim  video  qua 
ratione  Lucas  istos  [Libertinos]  appellet  ex  condi- 
tione,  cjoteros  vero  ex  gente  ac  patria.'  Blass,  in 
his  Philology  of  the  Gospels,  69 1.,  was  not  aware 
that  the  emendation  had  been  proposed  by  any- 
one before  himself,  and  he  exprcsseu  liis  certainty 
that  Aipva-rivuv  was  the  true  reading.  This  word, 
wliich  is  used  by  Catullus  (Ix.  1,  montibus  Liby- 
stinis),  would  have  been  quite  suitable  for  desig- 
nating the  towns  lying  westwards  from  Cyrene, 
liad  it  been  sup]>orted  by  good  MS  authority  (cf. 
EBi  iii.  2793,  2794;  ExpT '\x.  437').  The  deriva- 
tion of  lAbcrtini  from  a  town  Libertum  in  N.  Africa 
is  much  less  plausible,  as  no  town  of  that  name 
seems  to  have  been  known  in  the  1st  century. 

Among  the  older  expositors,  Bengel  {Gnomon  of 
NT)  strongly  maintains  that  the  whole  description 
of  Ac  6"  is  that  of  one  flourishing  syiiago<jue,  com- 
posed of  Euro])eans,  Africans,  an«l  Asiatics,  to 
which  Saul  belonged.  His  note  is  still  worth  reading. 


LiTKRATLRK  — J.  A.  Ben^el,  Gnommi  of  NT,  ed.  Berlin,  186U, 
p.  287;  Til.  Beza,  Aniwtatioiws,  1.S59;  Fr.  Blass,  Philnlogy 
of  the  Goxpeh,  London,  1898,  p.  (J9f. ;  HDD,  art.  '  LibertintH' 
(J.  Patrick);  Klii,  artt.  'Libertines,'  'Libja'  (W.  J.  Wood- 
house),  '.Stephen'  (J.  Moffatt) ;  Exponitor,  5th  ser.  ii.  [1895] 
(W.  M.  Ramsay),  6ih  ser.  vi.  (1902)  (J.  Rendel  Harris); 
KxpT\y..  [181)7 -US]  437'';  Grimm-Thayer-,  189(1, ».».  Ac/3«pTriw; 
A.  Harnack,  Luke  the  Phynician,  Kn^'.  tr.,  Ixjndon  and  New 
York,  1907,  p.  163,  The  Acta  of  the  ApoMee,  Kriu'.  tr.,  do.  1909, 
pp.  xxxiv,  70,  71  n.,  120,  175.  188,  192,  VMi,2U),  245;  F.  J.  A. 
Hort,  Jiidnigtic  ChriHianity,  Ixsndon,  1894,  p.  60;  H.  A.  W. 
Meyer,  Com.  on  Acts,  Eng.  tr.,  Kdiiiburtjh,  1877,  i.  173 f.  ;  E. 
Schiirer,  UJP,  En(f.  tr.,  ii.  ii.  [do.  1885]  276;  H.  B.  Swete. 
The  Appearances  oj  uur  Lord  aftf.rthe  Pastion,  Ivondon,  1907, 
p.  114  ;  Th.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinbiirt'h,  1909, 

1. 39f.,60ff.  James  Donald. 


LIBERTY. — Liberty  (i\fvOfpla)  occupies  a  promi- 
nent place  in  the  thought  of  NT  writers  and  ap- 
pears in  a  variety  of  significations. — 

1.  In  the  political  sense.  —  As  denoting  the 
status  of  a  free  citizen  and  in  direct  (iontrast  with 
the  state  of  slavery,  the  word  figures  in  one  of  the 
great  dichotomies  used  by  the  apostolic  writers  in 
classifying  men  from  the  standjioint  of  tlieir  age 
(Col  3'^ — 'bondman,  freeman').  We  have  no 
means  of  knowing  even  approximately  in  what 
projiortions  the  churches  of  the  a])ostolic  and  sub- 
apostolic  times  were  made  up  of  freemen  and  of 
slaves.  Everj'thing  certainly  goes  to  show  that 
many  of  the  latter  class  became  Christians  ;  in  all 

frobability,  too,  they  usually  formed  the  majority, 
t  is  precarious,  however,  to  find  positive  evidence 
of  this,  as  A.  Deissmann  does  witii  regard  to  the 
Colo.ssian  Church,  in  the  mere  fact  that  (Col  3'*-4') 
counsels  addressed  to  slaves  are  given  in  ampler 
terms,  those  to  masters  quite  briefly  {St.  Paul, 
Eng.  tr.,  1912,  p.  216).  Similar  rea.soning  mifjht 
argue  from  1  P  3^'^- ''  that  wives  were  in  a  majority 
and  husbands  in  a  minority  ! 

The  fact  that  St.  Paul,  a  native  of  Tarsus,  was 
a  Roman  citizen  is  treated  as  a  matter  of  import- 
ance in  Acts.  It  w;is  the  Roman  Emperors  who 
gave  the  people  of  the  provinces  i>ower  to  enjoy 
the  rights  or  citizenship.  There  is  a  dramatic 
turning  of  tables  in  Ac  22'''*  when  St.  Paul  is  able 
to  say  quite  simply  (yet  Avith  a  touch  of  pride), 
'  But  I  am  a  Roman  bom,'  and  Claudius,  the  cap- 
tain, turns  out  to  be  but  a  parvenu  who  had  had 
to  spend  a  lot  of  monejs  somehow  or  other,  to  ac- 
quire the  citizenship.  The  same  status  is  claimed 
for  Silas  as  well  as  St.  Paul  in  Ac  16^''. 

Not  a  few  of  those  who  are  mentioned  by  name 
in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  {e.g.  Philemon,  Gains, 
Erastus,  Aquila,  Phoebe,  etc.)  must  have  been  of 
the  citizen  cla.ss.  The  number  of  such  increased 
as  time  went  on.  In  the  Ignatian  Epistles  {e.g. 
Smyrn.  xii.  and  Polyc.  viii.)  we  find  similar  refer- 
ences to  devoted  Christians  (Tavias,  Alee,  Daph- 
nus,  '  the  wife  of  Epitropus '  [or  '  of  the  governor '], 
Attains,  etc.)  of  the  .same  rank.  But  Christianity 
had  gained  access  to  the  palaces  of  the  aristocracy 
before  the  1st  cent,  was  out,  and  had  won  adherents 
there  who  sufFered  for  their  faith— witness  the 
well-known  cases  of  T.  P'lavius  Clemens,  the  con- 
sul, and  his  wife,  Domitilla.  And  for  the  same 
period  we  have  the  evidence  of  an  outsider  in 
Pliny's  famous  Epistle  to  Trajan  (x.  97),  where- 
in he  tells  us  that  he  found  in  his  i)rovince  large 
numbers  of  Christians  '  of  all  classes '  {omnis  or- 
dinis).  What  was  true  of  Bithynia  was  most  pro- 
bably true  of  other  parts  of  the  Empire. 

Citizenship  and  wealth,  of  course,  did  not  neces- 
sarily go  together.  In  the  class  of  freemen  were 
included  people  of  all  ranks,  from  artisans  and 
lalx)urers  up  to  the  wealthiest  aristocrats.  Un- 
fortunately many  citizens  were  but  idle  loafers, 
depending  on  the  Imperial  largesse.  The  existence 
of  the  huge,  overgrown  Ky.stem  of  slavery  hail  a 
sinister  ellect  on  the  great  mass  of  citizens, 
inasmuch  as  'paid  labour  was  thought  unworthy 


LIBERTY 


LIBERTY 


697 


of  any  freebom  man'  (C.  Bigg,  The  Church's  Task 
under  the  Roman  Empire,  Oxford,  1905,  p.  114). 
The  poor,  hired  labourers,  however,  of  Ja  5*  were 
not  technically  bov\oi.  The  same  Epistle  shows 
lis  how  soon  the  Apostolic  Church  experienced  the 
evils  too  possiblj'  attendant  upon  the  appearance 
of  the  rich  man  within  the  circle  of  the  Christian 
society  (chs.  2  and  5). 

Though  civic  freedom  is  quite  evidently  valued, 
we  find  little  or  nothing  in  the  apostolic  writings 
bearing  on  political  questions.  Lofty  moral  teach- 
ing and  profound  theology  abound,  but  there  is  no 
feeling  manifest  that  political  freedom  Avas  a  thing 
worth  seeking  for  its  own  sake.  It  may  indeed  be 
said  that  in  the  1st  cent.  '  the  prevailing  notions 
of  freedom  were  imperfect,  and  the  endeavours  to 
realise  them  were  wide  of  the  mark'  (Lord  Acton, 
-  The  History  of  Freedom,  London,  1907,  p.  16). 
See,  further,  art.  Slave,  SLAVERY. 

2.  In  the  sense  of  freedom  of  conscience. — 
'Liberty'  is  used  in  the  NT  to  denote  a  man's 
freedom  to  decide  what  is  right  or  wrong  for 
himself,  especially  in  relation  to  matters  enjoined 
upon  him  bj'  some  form  of  external  authority.  The 
development  of  such  a  notion  naturally  followed 
upon  the  development  of  the  notion  of  conscience 
itself,  which  in  turn  was  bound  up  with  the  grow- 
ing sense  of  human  individuality  and  personal 
responsibility.  In  pre-Christian  lines  of  philosophi- 
cal and  religious  teaching  (as  e.g.  in  Stoicism) 
we  mark  in  this  respect  a  prceparatio  evangelica. 
As  the  ancient  conception  of  man  as  merely  a 
component  unit  in  trib«  or  nation  faded  and  gave 
way  to  the  sense  of  his  value  for  himself  as  well 
as  for  the  community,  and  of  his  responsibility  for 
himself,  such  consequences  were  bound  to  follow. 
So  far  from  morality  consisting  simply  in  com- 
pliance with  commands  embodying  the  will  of 
the  community  of  which  the  man  is  a  part  (which 
commands  may  also  be  conceived  as  Divinely  origi- 
nated), when  man  realizes  his  individual  responsi- 
bility to  God,  conscience  emerges,  and,  criticizing 
those  very  commands,  may  disapprove  as  well  as 
approve,  whilst  it  may  also  find  a  whole  area  of 
moral  interests  which  the  injunctions  of  external 
authority  do  not  touch  and  in  which  it  must 
decide  for  itself. 

To  the  rise  of  Christianity  we  very  specially 
owe  an  advanced  conception  of  conscience  and  its 
corollary,  the  claim  to  freedom  to  act  in  accord  with 
the  behests  of  conscience.  '  Am  I  not  free  ? '  cries 
St.  Paul  (1  Co  9') ;  whilst  'Peter  and  the  apostles ' 
(Ac  5^)  are  heard  declaring  '  We  must  obey  God 
rather  than  men.'  These  sayings  might  ser>'e  as 
watchwords  of  the  new  era  as  viewed  from  this 
standpoint  (Judaism  itself,  it  should  be  notetl  in 
passing,  exhibited  in  course  of  time  a  similar 
development  in  its  ethical  teaching).  And  the 
cla.sh  between  the  new  order  and  the  old  neces- 
sarily brought  with  it  abundant  scope  for  the 
outcrop  of  cases  of  conscience  such  as  St.  Paul 
handles  in  1  Co  8fl".  and  PiO  14  f. 

Freedom  of  this  kind  can  be  properly  claimed 
and  used  only  by  the  conscientious  man — the 
man  who  is  above  all  else  concerned  for  harmony 
between  the  laws  and  customs  he  is  called  to 
observe  and  the  inward  regulative  principle,  and 
who  departs  from  such  laws  only  when  an  en- 
lightened conscience  imperatively  demands  it. 
For  another  imix)rtant  pre-requisite  is  that  the 
exercise  of  this  freedom  shall  be  based  on  intelli- 
gent judgment.  '  Let  each  man  be  fully  assured 
in  his  own  mind '  (Ro  14')  is  a  Pauline  dictum  of 
the  first  importance.  Cf.  the  deeply  significant 
logion  ascribed  to  our  Lord  in  Cod.  D  (Lk  6*) 
wherein  He  says  to  a  man  found  working  on  the 
Sabbath.  '  If  thou  Inowe-it  what  thou  art  doing, 
blessed  art  thou;  but  if  thou  knowest  not,  the 


art  accurst  and  a  transgressor  of  the  law.'  A 
man  cannot  justifiably  set  at  nought  a  positive 
commandment  or  institution  unless  he  has  sight 
of  some  higher  principle  which  determines  nis 
course  of  action.  The  freedom  an  enlightened 
man  asks  is  freedom  to  do  what  he  sees  he  ought 
to  do,  and  to  do  what  he  mat/  do  without  injury 
to  others. 

For  St.  Paul  very  emphatically  insists  on  the 
necessity  of  qualifying  the  exercise  of  one's  own 
liberty  by  regard  for  the  claims  of  others.  It 
must  not  involve  harm  to  others  or  an  infringe- 
ment of  their  liberty.  Self-limitation  for  tne 
sake  of  others  is,  indeed,  an  example  of  the  truest 
exercise  of  freedom. 

3.  As  a  description  of  the  Christian  life  and 
experience. — Social  conditions  being  what  they 
Avere  in  the  1st  cent.,  it  was  most  natural  that  the 
life  resulting  from  faith  in  Christ,  as  that  is  pre- 
sented in  the  NT,  should  be  describe<l  in  the  apos- 
tolic writings  by  a  cycle  of  metaphors  centring 
in  the  word  'redemption'  (Deissraann,  op.  cit.,  p. 
149).     This  is  specially  characteristic  of  St.  Paul. 

The  Christian  life  is  represent«d  as  (a)  freedom 
from  the  bondage  of  law. — St.  Paul's  treatment  of 
this  topic  (found  mainly  in  the  Epistles  to  Romans 
and  Galaiians)  is  not  easy  to  follow  and  is  doubt- 
less coloured  by  his  own  viWd  personal  experience. 
We  do  not  find  quite  the  same  line  taken  in  other 
early  apostolic  writings  that  have  been  preserved 
to  us.  By  general  consent,  it  is  true,  it  came  to 
be  held  that  Jewish  and  (Jentile  Christians  alike 
were  free  from  obligation  to  observe  the  Jewish 
Law  in  its  peculiar  institutions  and  ceremonial 
rules.  The  old  sacrificial  system  was  abolished 
'  that  the  new  law  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which 
is  without  the  yoke  of  nece-s-sity,  might  have  a 
human  oblation '  (i.e.  the  dedication  of  the  man 
himself)  (Epistle  of  Barnabas,  ii.  ;  so  also  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  and  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  iv. 
[regarding  Sabbath,  circumcision,  '  kosher '  foods, 
and  the  like]).  But  St.  Paul  has  far  more  than 
this  in  view.  He  is  thinking  of  all  law  as  the 
expression  of  God's  will  for  man's  life  and  the 
severe  revealer  of  man's  sin  as  he  departs  from 
it :  law  that  has  only  condemnation  for  the  sinner 
(see  the  autobiographical  Ro  7). 

That  the  Apostle  countenances  an  antinomian 
freedom  he  himself  indignantly  denies.  Nor  did 
he  lack  the  true  Jew's  veneration  for  the  Torah. 
With  him  law  assumes  the  form  of  '  an  imperious 
principle  opposed  to  grace  and  liberty  only  when 
it  is  viewed  a*  the  condition  of  justification,  the 
means  of  attaining  to  righteousness  before  God 
through  the  merit  of  good  work-s.'  As  the  expres- 
sion of  God's  will  and  the  guide  of  human  obedience 
it  is  '  holy,  just,  and  good '  (Ro  7'* ;  see  E.  H. 
Giflbrd,  Romans  [in  Speaker's  Commentary,  1881, 
p.  48]).  Torah  comes  to  its  own  in  the  new  life 
which  springs  from  Christian  faith  and  the  %inio 
mystica  between  the  Christian  and  his  Lord.  And 
if  other  early  Christian  writers  present  this  life  as 
lived  under  law  (see  Epistle  of  James,  esi)ecially 
the  ha^y  expression,  '  law  of  liberty,'  ch  1^ ;  also 
1  Jn  3'^-)>  St.  Paul  likewise  lays  stress  on  '  the 
law  of  Christ '  (Gal  6-)  and  gives  us  the  far-reach- 
ing aphorism :  '  Love  is  the  fulfilment  of  law ' 
(Ro  13i»). 

(6)  Freedom  from  the  bondage  of  sin. — Sin  is 
here  personifietl  as  a  tyrannical  master  (see  espe- 
cially the  line  of  treatment  in  Ro  6 ;  cf.  Jn  8**). 
An  interesting  parallel  is  furnished  in  the  Dis- 
courses of  Epictetus  (IV.  i.),  where  it  is  laid  down 
that  '  no  wicked  man  is  free. ' 

(c)  Freedom  from  the  bondage  of  idolatry. — See 
Gal  4*'- — a  jwint  of  material  imjHjrtance  to  the 
c.^vifiip  world  in  apostolic  days. 

Freedom  from    the  bondage    of  cormption 


698 


LIBYA 


LIFE  AND  DEATH 


(Ro  8^^). — Tliis  rather  belon<^s  to  tlie  liope  for  the 
world  at  large  which  contemplates  the  social  state 
wherein  the  new  life  is  perfectly  realized.  '  The 
glory  of  tlie  children  of  (iod '  is  a  liberty  whicli 
all  creation  .sighs  to  share. 

It  remains  briefly  to  point  out  that  not  only  does 
the  term  'redemption  (applied  to  the  work  of 
Christ  in  opening  to  men  this  new  experience  of 
life)  derive  from  the  social  state  in  the  midst 
of  which  Cliristianity  was  born,  but  '  adoption  '  as 
used  by  St.  Paul  (Ko  8"*-  '^j  Gal  4*)  similarly  gains 
special  significance  as  denoting  entrance  upon  the 
life  of  liberty.  Adoption,  in  a  general  way,  was 
no  uncommon  plienomenon  in  the  old  world  (see 
vloOfffia  in  Deissmann,  Bible  /Studies,  Eng.  tr., 
1901,  p.  239),  but  it  was  also  one  recognized  way 
of  giving  freedom  to  a  slave. 

There  is  no  inconsistency  but  only  striking 
paradox  when  this  experience  which  is  described 
as  freedom  is  also  described  as  a  servitude  to  God 
(cf.  1  1'  2"*,  0eoD  dovXoi,  and  Ko  6-^  dovXwdtvTfs  ry 
OfV).  Here,  too,  it  is  of  interest  to  recall  tliat  it 
was  a  Stoic  doctrine  of  liberty  that  true  freedom 
consists  in  obeying  God,  or,  as  Philo  of  Alexandria 
(see  Tract,  Quod  sit  liber  quisquis  virtuti  studet) 
puts  it,  the  following  of  God.  Again,  as  the 
Christian  is  commonly  described  in  the  NT  as 
a  dovXos  XpiffTov,  the  singular  use  of  iireXevOepos 
(=libertns,  freedman)  in  1  Co  7^^  noticeably  in- 
troduces the  notion  of  enfranchisement  to  describe 
the  gaining  of  freedom  in  Christ.  There  may  be 
here  the  underlying  thought  that  the  \freedmen ' 
of  Christ  stand  related  to  Him  somewhat  as  the 
liberti  stood  to  their  patron,  to  whom  they  were 
bound  to  render,  in  the  language  of  Roman  Law, 
obsequium  et  offlcium. 

4.  In  the  philosophical  sense.— See  art.  Free- 
dom OF  THE  Will. 

LiTKRATURE.— See  works  referred  to  in  art.  Slavkry,  and  in 
addition  to  works  quoted  in  foregoinK  art.,  T.  G.  Tucker, 
Hfe  in  the  Roman  World  of  Nero  and  St.  Paul,  London,  1910  ; 
H.   Wallon,   Ilistoire  de  I'esclavage  dans  I'antiquit^,  Paris, 

1879.  J.  s.  Clemens. 

LIBYA  {Ai^vri,  the  country  of  tlie  Aleves  or  Lubim). 
— Libya  was  the  name  given  by  the  Greeks  to  the 
great  undefined  region  lying  to  the  Avest  of  Egypt. 
It  was  for  a  long  time  equivalent  to  Africa,  a  Roman 
term  which  did  not  embrace  Egypt  till  the  days  of 
Ptolemy  (2nd  cent.  A.D.).  Libya  was  made  known 
to  Greece  in  the  7th  cent.  B.C.  by  the  Dorian  colon- 
ists who  founded  Cyrene.  The  beautiful  and  fertile 
country  occupied  and  developed  by  them  remained 
independent  till  it  was  annexed  by  the  Macedonian 
conquerors  of  Egypt  in  330  B.C.  It  finally  (in  90 
B.C.)  came  under  the  power  of  the  Romans,  who 
combined  it  with  Crete  to  form  a  single  province, 
Creta-Cyrene.  Its  original  name  was  revived  by 
Vespasian,  who  divided  Cyrene  into  Libya  Superior 
and  Libya  Inferior.  This  country  attracted  the 
Jews  at  an  early  period.  Philo  bears  testimony 
to  their  diflusion  in  his  time  '  from  the  Katabath- 
mos  of  Libya  (i.wb  tov  irpbi  Ai^vtjv  Kara^aOfioO)  to 
the  borders  of  Ethiopia'  {in  Flaccum,  6).  Jews 
from  'tlie  parts  of  Lil)ya  about  Cyrene'  (rk  /xipt) 
TTji  Ai^vr]s  TTjs  Kari,  Kvprjvriv)  were  in  Jerusalem  at 
the  time  of  the  first  Christian  Pentecost  (Ac  2'"). 
St.  Luke'sdesignationofCyrenaicaclosely  resembles 
that  of  Josephus,  ij  irpbi  Kvpiiv-qv  Ai^tJi}  (Ant.  XVL 
vi.  1),  and  that  of  Dio  Cassius,  Ai^Lrrj  i)  irtpl  Kvp^viju 
(liii.  12).  The  jjossession  of  tliis  fertile  region  was 
the  bone  of  contention  between  the  Turks  and 
Italians  in  1912.  Jamks  Strahan. 

LICT0R8.— See  Serjeants. 

LIFEANDDEATH.— l.Life.— Inainmsideiation 
of  the  subject  of  life  as  dealt  with  in  the  Acts  and 


Epistles,  three  Gr.  words — ^ios,  ^vxv,  and  fw^ — 
require  to  be  distinguished. 

(1)  /Sfos  denotes  life  in  the  outward  and  visible 
sense — its  period  or  course  (cf.  '  tlie  time  past  of 
our  life,'  1  P  4*),  its  means  of  living  (hence  in  1  Jn  3" 
the  RV  renders  'goods'),  tlie  manner  in  which  it 
is  spent  (cf.  '  that  we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peace- 
able life,'  1  Ti  2^),  its  relation  to  worldly  afl'airs 
(2  Ti  2^)  and  to  the  world's  love  of  pomp  and  show 
(1  Jn  2i»). 

(2)  ^i/x^J  (fr-  f'JX'^i  '  breathe ')  originally  means 
the  breath  of  life,  and  in  such  an  ex|)ression  as 
'  his  life  is  in  him '  (Ac  20'")  would  quite  swlequately 
be  rendered  '  breath.'  But,  as  breathing  is  the 
sign  of  the  presence  in  the  body  of  an  animating 
vital  force,  ^J^vxv  (cf.  Lat.  anima)  conies  to  mean 
'  life '  in  the  sense  of  the  animal  soul,  and  especially 
the  life  of  the  individual  as  distinguif^hed  from 
other  individual  lives.  This  is  the  life  that  may 
be  injured  or  lost  through  a  shipwreck  (Ac  27"*  ^'^), 
counted  dear  or  willingly  surrendered  (20-*,  Rev 
12") ;  the  life  which  Jesus  Christ  laid  down  for 
His  people  (1  Jn  3^*),  and  which  they  should  be 
prepared  to  lay  down  for  Him  (Ac  15^)  or  for  one 
another  (Ro  \Q\  Ph  2^,  1  Jn  Z^%  From  meaning 
the  animal  soul  or  life  (anima),  however,  yj^vxn 
comes  to  be  used  for  the  individualized  life  in  its 
moral  and  spiritual  aspects,  the  'soul'  in  the 
deeper  significance  of  that  word  (Lat.  animus),  the 
part  of  man  which  thinks  and  feels  and  wills 
(Ac  227,  Ro  '29,  2  Co  l^^,  etc).     See,  further.  Soul. 

(3)  But  of  tlie  three  words  for  life  fw^  for  the 
purposes  of  the  present  article  is  much  the  mo.st 
important.  Occasionally  it  is  employed  in  a 
way  that  makes  it  practically  equivalent  to  fiioj 
(1  Co  15'*,  'If  in  this  life  only  we  have  hoped  in 
Christ';  cf.  Lk  16^",  'in  thy  lifetime'  [iv  ro  fw? 
(Tox)]),  and  more  frequently  in  connexions  not  far 
removed  from  those  of  \pvxn  in  the  sense  of  the 
vital  energy  or  animal  soul  (e.g.  Ac  17^,  Ja  4'*), 
though  even  in  these  cases  it  is  noticeable  that  fw^ 
does  not  denote,  like  v^ux'Ji  the  life  of  the  indi- 
vidual, but  life  in  a  sense  that  is  general  and  dis- 
trilmted.  Ordinarily,  however,  fw^  stands  for  a  life 
which  is  not  existence  merely,  but  existence  raised 
to  its  highest  power  ;  not  a  bare" life,  but '  life  more 
abundantly'  (Jn  10'**),  a  life  which  St.  Paul  describes 
as  '  the  life  which  is  life  indeed '  (i]  6vT0)t  fwij,  1  Ti  6'*), 
a  life,  i.e.,  which  in  its  essential  nature  is  full  and 
overflowing,  and  in  its  moral  and  spiritual  quality 
is  perfect  and  complete.  In  this  employment  of  it, 
fwi}  is  very  frequently  characterized  as  '  eternal 
(aiCbvios)  life ' ;  but  the  epithet  does  not  impart  any 
real  addition  to  the  connotation  of  the  word  as 
elsewhere  used  without  the  adjective,  much  less 
restrict  its  reference  to  the  life  after  death  ;  it 
only  expresses  more  explicitly  the  conception  of 
that  life  as  something  so  full  and  positive  that 
from  its  very  nature  it  is  unconquerable  by 
death,  and  consequently  everlasting.  See,  further, 
Eternal,  Everlasting. 

(a)  In  the  usage  of  the  NT  this  fwi}  or  fwi;  aidivios 
is  first  of  all  a  Divine  attribute — a  view  of  it  whicli 
finds  its  most  complete  expression  in  the  Johannine 
writings.  It  inheres  in  God  and  belongs  to  His 
essential  nature.  '  The  Father  hath  life  in  himself ' 
(Jn  5'-*),  the  life  eternal  is  'with  the  Father' 
(1  Jn  1*).  The  Father,  however,  imparts  it  to  the 
Son,  so  that  He  also  possesses  'life  in  himself 
(Jn  5^),  and  possesses  it  m  a  manner  so  copious  that 
this  endowment  with  life  is  predicated  of  Him  as 
if  it  were  the  most  characteristic  quality  of  His 
being  (Jn  1^).  Thereafter  this  life  which  Christ 
possesses  is  communicated  bj'  Him  to  those  who  are 
willing  to  receive  it,  the  record  being  that  God 
gave  unto  us  the  eternal  life  which  is  in  His  Son 
(1  Jn  5"),  and  that  he  that  bath  the  Son,  viz.  by 
believing  on  His  name,  hath  the  life  (v.'^*). 


LIFE  AXD  DEATH 


LIFE  AND  DEATH 


699 


(6)  The  s'cinj  (oiwvtos)  thns  becomes  a  human  posses- 
sion and  qnaiity  ;  and  it  is  with  the  manifestations 
in  human  character  and  experience  of  this  life 
flowing  from  God  through  Christ  that  the  apostolic 
writers  are  principally  concerned  in  what  they 
have  to  say  about  it.  Their  references  bear  chiefly 
upon  the  source  from  which  it  comes,  the  means 
by  which  it  is  obtained,  its  fruits  or  evidences,  its 
present  possession,  and  its  completion  in  the  world 
to  come. 

(o)  As  follows  from  the  fact  that  this  life  inheres 
essentially  in  God,  its  primal  source  is  God  the 
Father,  from  whom  it  comes  as  a  gift  (Ro  6^, 
1  Jn  5^')  and  a  grace  (IP  3').  But  this  gracious 
gift  is  manifested  and  mediated  only  by  Christ 
(1  Jn  1-,  1  Ti  2=).  According  to  St.  John,  the 
eternal  life  which  men  enjoy  resides  in  God"s  Son 
(1  Jn  5"),  and  that  in  so  absolute  a  sense  that '  he 
that  hath  the  Son  hath  the  life ;  he  that  hath  not 
the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the  life  '  (v.^).  Similarly 
St.  Paul  writes  that  it  is  through  the  Son  that  the 
gift  of  life  is  bestowed  (Ro  6^),  describes  Christ  as 
'  our  life '  (Col  3*),  and  declares  that  this  life  of  ours 
•  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God '  (v.»). 

(/3)  But  this  gift  of  life  is  not  bestowed  arbitrarily 
or  apart  from  the  fulfilment  of  certain  conditions. 
It  is  not  thrust  upon  anyone,  but  needs  to  be  laid 
hold  of  ( 1  Ti  6^  ^*).  In  the  symbolic  lan^age  of 
the  Apocalypse  the  fruition  of  the  tree  of  life  which 
is  in  the  Paradise  of  God  is  promised  to  him  that 
overcometh  (Rev  2^).  Various  energies  and  atti- 
tudes of  the  soul  are  mentioned  as  conditioning 
the  attainment  of  life,  e.g.  patience  in  well-doing 
(Ro  2"),  endurance  of  temptation  (Ja  1^),  sowing 
to  the  Spirit  (Gal  6*).  But  the  fundamental  con- 
ditions, on  which  all  the  others  depend,  are  repent- 
ance (Ac  lli«)  and  faith  (13**,  1  Ti  l^*,  1  Jn  o'*"*). 
The  old  life  must  be  renounced  if  the  new  life  is 
to  begin  ;  that  is  what  is  meant  by  the  demand  for 
repentance.  And  life  cannot  be  self -generated, 
but  can  only  be  received  from  a  living  source ;  that 
is  the  explanation  of  the  call  for  faith. 

(7)  Among  the  fniifs  or  evidences  of  the  posses- 
sion of  life  St.  Paul  includes  freedom  from  the 
bondage  of  sin  (Ro  6**)  and  a  way  of  walking  in  the 
world  which  is  new  (v.*)  and  has  God  for  its  object 
(v.").  Inwardly  the  life  reveals  its  presence  in  a 
daily  experience  of  renewal  (2  Co  4^®),  in  the  pos- 
session of  a  spiritual  mind  (Ro  S*),  in  the  conscious- 
ness of  spiritual  liberty  (v.-).  Outwardly  its  fruits 
are  seen  in  holy  li\-ing  (Ro  6-)  and  its  signature 
written  even  upon  the  mortal  flesh  (2  Co  4").  To 
St.  John  the  great  eridence  of  life  is  love  to  the 
brethren  (1  Jn  3'*).  Everyone  that  loveth  is  bom 
of  God  (4") ;  but  the  love  which  is  the  proof  of  this 
Divine  birth  and  consequent  Divine  life  must  flow 
out  towards  the  visible  brother  as  well  as  towards  the 
invisible  God  if  there  is  to  be  any  assurance  of  its 
reality  (w.^*-  =").  In  the  mystical  language  of  the 
author  of  the  Apocalypse  life  has  the  evidence  of  a 
\vritten  record.  The  names  of  those  who  possess 
it  are  written  in  a  book  which  is  called  '  the  book 
of  life'  (Rev  3*  17*  2012  22»9),  or  more  fully  'the 
Lamb's  book  of  life '  (IP  212^).  %yith  this  may  be 
compared  St.  Paul's  use  of  the  same  figure  in  Ph  4^. 
See  Book  of  Life. 

(5)  To  the  apostolic  writers  life  or  eternal  life 
is  a  present  possession.  While  distinct  from  the 
ordinary  forms  of  earthly  existence,  ^v^th  Mhich  it 
is  contrasted  (1  Ti  6'*),  it  is  not  separated  from 
them  in  time,  but  here  and  now  interfused  dynamic- 
ally through  them  all.  This  is  a  conception  which 
is  especially  characteristic  of  the  Johannine  -n-rit- 
ings.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel  it  occurs  constantly 
(Jn  3^  17'  etc.),  and  in  the  First  Epistle  we  see  it 
reappearing,  a-s  when  the  writer  declares  that  he 
that  hath  the  Son  hath  the  life  (1  Jn  5^),  and  that 
those  who  possess  eternal  life  may  know  that  they 


possess  it  (3"  5").  But  it  is  evident  that  St.  Paul 
also  conceives  of  life  as  a  present  reality  when  he 
proclaims  that  Christ  is  our  life  (Col  3*),  and  that 
our  life  is  hid  mth  Christ  in  God  (v.'),  when  he 
makes  our  baptism  into  Christ's  Death,  and  resur- 
rection in  His  likeness,  determinative  of  our  pre- 
sent walk  in  newness  of  life  (Ro  6*),  and  declares 
that  to  be  spiritually-minded  is  life  and  peace  (8*). 
(c)  And  yet  this  life,  though  it  is  a  present  ex- 
perience, is  not  realized  in  its  totality  in  the  present 
world.  The  promise  given  to  godliness  in  1  Ti  4* 
is  said  to  be  for  the  life  that  now  is  and  that  which 
is  to  come.  Similarly  it  is  in  '  the  time  to  come' 
that  '  the  life  which  is  life  indeed '  arrives  at  its 
completion  (6^®).  St.  Paul  gives  especial  promi- 
nence to  this  future  aspect  of  the  life  in  Christ. 
He  anticipates  a  time  when  what  is  mortal  shall 
be  swallowed  up  of  life  (2  Co  5*),  co-ordinates 
eternal  life  with  immortality  (Ro  2' ;  cf.  2  Ti  V), 
and  places  it  in  direct  antithesis  with  death  (Ro 
6^)  and  corruption  (Gal  6-).  And  yet,  though  life 
for  its  completeness  must  wait  for  the  full  revela- 
tion of  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come,  which  are 
only  tasted  here  (He  6'),  the  present  and  the  future 
life  are  essentially  one  and  the  same.  It  is  be- 
cause the  Christian  life  is  hid  with  Chrbt  in  God 
that  it  carries  the  assurance  of  immortality  within 
itself.  As,  in  St.  Peters  language,  it  was  not 
possible  that  Christ  should  be  holden  of  death  (Ac 
2**),  so  it  is  impossible  that  those  whose  very  life 
Christ  is  (Col  3^)  should  not  be  sharers  in  HLs 
victory  over  death's  pains  and  powers.  To  all 
who  abide  in  the  Son  and  through  Him  in  the 
Father  there  belongs  this  promise  which  He  pro- 
mised us,  even  the  life  eternal  (1  Jn  2-*'-).  And  in 
this  promise  there  lies  enfolded  the  hope  not  only 
of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  but  of  the  resurrection 
of  the  body.  It  is  the  frailty  and  imperfection  of 
the  earthly  body,  its  domination  by  the  law  of  sin 
and  death,  that  hinder  the  full  enjojTnent  of  eternal 
life  in  the  present  world  (2  Co  5-*).  But  when 
mortality  shall  be  swallowed  up  of  life,  Christ's 
people,  instead  of  being  '  unclothed,'  shall  be 
•clothed  upon'  (5-*).  To  the  natural  body  will 
succeed  a  spiritual  body  (1  Co  15**),  to  the  body  of 
death  (Ro  7**)  a  body  instinct  with  the  Lord's  own 
life,  to  the  house  that  must  be  dissolved  a  house 
not  made  with  hands,  eternal,  in  the  heavens  (2  Co 

5^). 

2.  Death  (Gdvarot,  to  which  in  its  various  senses 
correspond  the  vb.  dxo^njo-jcw,  'die,'  and  the  adj. 
veKpos,  'dead').  —  Death  is  frequently  used  in  the 
apostolic  literature  in  its  ordinary,  everyday  mean- 
ing of  the  end  of  man's  earthly  course  (^uk)  or  the 
extinction  of  his  animal  life  (ypvxfi)  through  the 
separation  of  the  soul  from  the  body  (Ac  2**,  1  Co 
3'^,  Ph  2^).  Much  more  important  than  this 
purely  physical  employment  of  the  word  are  its 
various  theological  uses,  the  chief  of  which  may  be 
distinguished  as  the  punitive,  the  redemptive,  the 
mystical,  the  spiritual  and  moral. 

(1)  For  the  XT  writers,  and  above  all  for  St, 
Paul,  death  has  a  punitive  significance  as  the 
judicial  sentence  pronounced  by  God  upon  sin. 
\VTien  St.  Paul  writes,  '  The  wages  of  sin  is  death ' 
(Ro  6^),  or  '  Through  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world,  and  death  through  sin  ;  and  so  death  passed 
imto  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned '  (5") ;  or  when 
the  author  of  Hebrews  links  together  the  facts  of 
death  and  the  judgment  and  relates  them  to  the 
Death  and  redeeming  Sacrifice  of  Christ  (He  9^"^) ; 
or  when  St.  James  says,  '  He  which  converteth  a 
sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way  shall  save  a  soul 
from  death  and  shall  cover  a  multitude  of  sins ' 
( Ja  5*),  death  is  used  to  denote  the  punitive  con- 
sequences of  sin  and  the  state  in  which  man  lies  as 
condemned  on  account  of  it.  For,  just  as  fan}  in 
the  NT  means  not  the  earthly  existence  but  the 


700 


LIFE  AND  DEATH 


LIGHT  AND  DARKNESS 


larger  life  of  the  Christian  salvation,  so  ddvaros 
means  not  the  end  of  the  eartlily  existence  merely 
but  tlie  loss  of  life  in  the  full  Christian  conception 
of  the  won! — the  whole  of  the  miserable  results 
that  How  from  sin  and  constitute  its  penalty. 
Amonj,^  these  jjcnal  consequences  certainly  physical 
death  is  included,  as  passages  like  llo  5'--  '*  and 
1  Co  IS'-"'"  make  perfectly  clear.  More  than  this, 
the  death  of  the  l)ody  is  treated  as  '  the  point  of 
the  punitive  sentence,  about  which  all  the  other 
elements  in  that  sentence  are  grouped '  (H.  Cremer, 
Bib.-Theol.  Lex.^,  1880,  p.  284).  Death  is  the 
wages  of  sin  (Ro  6^^),  it  is  the  recompense  received 
by  theservants  of  sin  (v.^").  Sin  reigns  in  death  (5-'); 
it  is  the  stinw  of  death  (1  Co  15'").  The  saving  sig- 
nilicance  of  tlie  Death  of  Christ  is  due  to  this  same 
punitive  relation  between  death  and  sin.  He  died  for 
our  sins  (1  Co  15^) ;  He  bare  our  sins  in  His  body 
upon  the  tree  (1  P  2-").  And  it  is  through  the  Death 
CI  His  Son  that  we  are  reconciled  to  God  (Ro  5'"). 
In  including  physical  death  among  the  penalties  of 
sin,  however,  the  apostolic  writers  are  not  to  be 
held  as  meaning  either  that  man  was  naturally 
immortal  or  that  until  he  fell  there  was  no  natural 
law  of  death  in  the  physical  world.  In  neither 
the  OT  nor  the  NT  is  the  assertion  ever  made  that 
death  entered  into  the  natural  world  in  consequence 
of  the  sin  of  man  (the  'world'  in  Ro  5^^  is  the 
moral  world,  as  the  context  shows).  And  when 
man  became  liable  to  death  because  of  sin  (Ro  5'-*^'* ; 
cf.  Gn  2"),  this  does  not  imply  that  he  was  not 
created  mortal  (cf.  Gn  3'*).  Rut  it  does  imply 
that,  mortal  as  he  was,  he  differed  from  the  rest  of 
the  animal  world  in  a  potentiality  of  exemption 
from  the  law  of  decay  and  death,  owing  to  the 
fact  that  be  was  a  spiritual  being  made  in  God's 
image ;  and  that  by  his  transgression  he  lost 
God's  proffered  gift  of  physical  immortality  (Ro 
5",  1  Co  152"- )• 

Rut,  while  physical  death  is  the  point  of  the 
jjunitive  sentence,  the  .sentence  of  death  stretches 
far  beyond  it.  Just  as  fwi)  has  a  future  and  other- 
worldly as  well  as  a  jjresent  reference,  so  is  it  with 
^dxttros.  Sometimes  it  plainly  refers  to  a  death 
that  is  not  an  earthly  experience  but  a  future  state 
of  misery  whicii  awaits  the  wicked  in  the  world  to 
come  (Ro  p2,  l  Jn  S^*  5i«).  In  Rev  2ii  20«-"218 
this  future  condition  of  woe  is  called  '  the  second 
death,'  in  contrast,  viz.,  with  the  first  death  by 
which  the  life  on  earth  is  ended  (see  PUNISHMENT). 

(2)  At  the  other  extreme  from  this  punitive 
sense  of  death  is  the  use  of  the  word  witli  a  re- 
demptive meaning.  When  St.  I'aul  declares  in 
Romans  that  we  died  to  sin  (6-),  that  we  were 
buried  tlirough  baptism  into  death  (v.^),  that  he 
that  hath  died  is  justified  from  sin  (v.") ;  or  when 
in  Galatians  he  saj-s  of  himself,  '  For  I  through  the 
law  died  unto  the  law '  ('i'"),  the  death  he  speaks 
of,  as  tlie  last  passage  shows,  is  a  legal  or  judicial 
death  which  carries  with  it  a  deliverance  from  the 
state  of  condemnation  into  which  the  sinner  has 
been  brought  by  his  sin  (Ro  6^).  And  when  he 
speaks  of  this  cfeath  as  a  dj'iiig  with  Christ  (v.^), 
and  explains  more  fully  that  all  died  because  one 
died  for  all  (2  Co  5^''),  he  reminds  us  that  this  re- 
demptive death  is  possible  for  Christians  only  be- 
cause a  punitive  Death  was  endured  by  Christ  on 
their  behalf.  If  they  can  reckon  themselves  to  be 
dead  unto  .sin  (Ro  6"),  it  is  because  'Christ  died 
for  our  sins  according  to  the  .scriptures  '  (1  Co  15^). 

(3)  Side  by  side  with  this  redemptive  death  in 
Christ— a  death  to  the  penalty  of  sin — St.  Paul 
sets  a  mystical  djing — a  dying  to  its  power.  The 
Christian's  union  with  Christ  in  Ilis  redeeming 
Death  is  not  only  the  ground  of  his  justilication 
but  the  secret  scmrce  and  sjiring  of  his  sanctilica- 
tion.  If  the  transition  from  the  one  to  tiie  otlier 
is  not  very  clearly  marked,  the  reason  is  that  for 


St.  Paul  the  two  were  inseparably  joined  together. 
He  passes  at  a  bound,  and  as  it  were  unconsciously, 
from  the  legal  aspect  of  the  Christian's  death  m 
Christ  to  its  mystical  aspect,  from  a  death  in  the 
eyes  of  the  law  against  sin  to  a  death  to  the  prin- 
ciple of  sin  itself  (2  Co  5'^').  ]>ai»ti8m  into  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  symbol  and  seal  of  a  l)ai)tism  into  His 
Death,  which  means  not  only  a  dj'iiig  to  the  retri- 
bution of  the  offended  law  but  .a  crucifixion  of  the 
old  man,  a  destruction  of  '  the  body  of  sin,'  so  that 
we  should  no  longer  be  in  bondage  to  sin's  jKiwer 
(Ro  e*-'' ;  cf.  Gal  2'«).  It  may  be  that  St.  Paul's 
view  of  the  body,  not  indeed  as  essentially  sinful, 
but  as  the  invariable  seat  and  source  of  sin  in 
fallen  humanity  (see  art.  RoDV)  helped  him  to 
think  of  the  Crucifixion  of  Christ  as  carrying  with 
it  a  destruction  of  the  polluted  flesh  (cf.  Ro  8*) 
through  wliicli  the  way  was  opened  for  a  new  life 
of  holines.s.  But  in  any  case  death  to  the  law 
meant  life  unto  God,  because  crucifixion  with 
Christ  meant  the  death  of  the  former  self  and  the 
substitution  for  it  of  a  life  of  faith  in  tlie  Son  of 
God  (Gal  2""-).  Nor  is  it  only  to  sin  that  the 
Christian  died  in  Christ,  but  to  the  world  (6'''),  to 
the  world's  doctrines  and  precepts  (Col  2'*'-),  to  the 
attitude  and  affections  of  the  mind  that  is  set  on 
earthly  things  (3-).  '  For  ye  died,'  the  Apostle 
writes,  '  and  your  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God ' 
(v.').  And  in  this  case,  at  least,  it  is  plain  that 
the  death  of  whicli  he  thinks  is  not  the  judicial 
but  the  my.stical  dying,  the  dying  which  is  at  the 
same  time  the  birth  to  a  new  life  (cf.  Jn  12-^')  that 
carries  with  it  a  putting  to  death  of  all  that  is 
earthly  and  evil  in  tlie  natures  of  those  whom 
Christ  has  redeemed  (Col  3^). 

(4)  Once  more,  death  is  used  to  denote  the 
spiritual  atrophy  and  mural  inability  of  fallen 
man  in  his  unregenerate  condition.  This  is  the 
sense  that  belongs  to  it  in  the  expression  '  dead  in 
tre.spasses  and  sins'  (Ei^h  2^;  cf.  Col  2'^),  in  the 
summons  to  the  spiritual  sleei)er  to  awake  and 
arise  from  the  dead  (Ei)li  5"),  in  the  descriiition  of 
true  believers  as  those  that  are  alive  from  tlie  dead 
(Ro  6^*)  and  of  false  professors  as  having  a  name 
that  they  are  living  when  they  are  really  dead 
(Rev  3^),  in  the  statements  that  the  mind  of  the 
flesh  is  death  (Ro  8")  and  that  the  woman  who  lives 
in  pleasure  is  dead  while  she  livetli  (1  Ti  5*).  This, 
esjjecially  on  the  side  of  moral  inability,  is  the 
death  which  St.  Paul  describes  so  powerfully  in 
Ro  T""^-,  from  which,  conscious  of  his  helplessness, 
he  cries  to  be  delivered  (v.-^),  and  from  which  he 
recognizes  that  no  deliverance  is  jiossible  except 
through  the  law  of  the  Siiirit  of  life  in  Christ 
Jesus  (82). 

LiTKRATURK.— I.  LiFK.— S.  D.  F.  Saliuond,  The  Christian 
Doctrine  of  Immortality-^  1895,  p.  487  ff.  ;  E.  White,  Life  in 
Christ,  ists ;  E.  von  Schrenck.  Die  jofian.  Avffasimnr)  von 
'  Leben,'  1898;  the  NT  Thfolo^'ics  of  B.  Weiss  (Knj(.  tr., 
1882-83,  2  vols.)  and  W.  Beyschlagr  (Eiij,'.  tr.,  1895,  2  vols.), 
passim  ;  J.  R.  Illingworth,  Sf.nnons  preached  in  a  College 
Chapel,  1882,  p.  CO ;  J.  Macpherson,  in  Expositor,  1st.  ser.  v. 
[1877]  72 ff.  ;  J.  Massie,  in  do.,  2nd  ser.  iv.  [1882]  380flf.  II. 
Dkatii.— J.  Laidlaw,  The  Bible  Doctrine  of  Man,  1896,  p.  233  IT.  ; 
J.  Miiller,  The  Christian  Doctriiw  of  Sin,  Enff.  tr.,  ii.  [1885] 
280 fT.;  H.  Martensen,  Christian  Doflmati<%s,  Kng.  tr.,  1866, 
p.  209 ff.  ;  J.  Orr,  The  ChriMian  \'ieu'  of  tind  and  the  World, 
1893,  p.  228  ff.  ;  G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Theolorii/  of  the  AT", 
190C,  p.  423  ;  J.  R.  Illingworth,  Sennonn  preached  in  a  College 
Chapel,  1882,  p.  1 ;  G.  Matheson,  in  Expositor,  2nd  ser.  v.  [1883] 

40 ff.  J.  c.  Lambert. 

LIFE,  BOOK  OF.— See  Book  of  Like. 

LIGHT  AND  DARKNESS.  — Apart  from  the 
literal  and  ordinary  uses  of  the  words  '  light'  {<t>u)s) 
and  'darkness'  (ctaotos,  aKoria),  they  are  frequently 
emjiloyed  in  metaphorical  senses,  and  especially 
either  in  express  combination  and  ct)ntiast  or  with 
a  reference  to  each  other  that  is  latent  but  implied. 
This  figurative  use  of  the  terms  is  an  inheritance 


LIGHT  AXD  DARKNESS 


LIGHT  AND  DARKNESS 


roi 


from  the  OT.  There  '  light '  (niK  =  LXX  </)<Sj)  often 
denotes  a  state  of  happiness  and  well-being  (Job 
HS**-  ^,  Ps  56'^),  but  more  particularly  tiie  salvation 
Avhich  comes  from  God,  and  God  Himself  as  the 
giver  of  salvation  and  blessing  to  His  people  (I's  4® 
271  36»  43^  Is  10'",  AHc  7*).  'Darkness'  (:!»n  = 
LXX  ffK&ros),  on  the  other  hand,  stands  for  ignor- 
ance, misery,  and  death  (Job  lO-i  19«,  Ps  IS^s 
107'"- ",  Ec  '•2'^  Is  5*>  9^  etc. ),  and  generally  for 
everything  that  is  opposed  to  light  as  a  symbol  of 
life,  happiness,  and  moral  purity.  The  metaphors 
are  very  natural,  and  are  by  no  means  peculiar  to 
the  biblical  literature.  Keference  may  be  made 
to  the  Babylonian  Creation  narrative  with  its 
struggle  between  Marduk,  the  god  of  light,  and 
Tifimat,  the  god  of  darkness ;  to  the  Skr.  name 
for  deity — deva,  '  a  shining  one '  (cf.  6e6i  and  dens) ; 
to  the  Gr.  conception  of  Olympus  as  a  place  where 
a  bright  radiance  is  diffused  (cf.  XewTj  8'eiri5e5pofiep 
aty\T],  Od.  vi.  45),  and  of  the  nether  regions  as  a 
world  of  gloomy  shades  occiipied  by  *  infernal '  or 
subterranean  deities ;  to  the  Zoroastrian  antithesis 
— hardened  into  a  definite  dualism  —  between 
Ormazd,  the  god  of  light  and  life,  and  Ahriman, 
the  evil  power  of  death  and  darkness.  But  as  we 
find  them  in  the  NT,  and  especially  in  the  Johan- 
nine  and  Pauline  writings,  the  figures  of  light  and 
darkness  have  been  developed  on  Christian  lines 
which  impart  a  deeper  and  fuller  meaning  to  each 
of  the  conceptions,  and  bring  them  into  an  opposi- 
tion that  is  stronger  than  any  known  to  the  older 
religions,  because  it  is  more  spiritual.  The 
material  relevant  to  the  present  art.  may  be  con- 
veniently treated  as  it  bears  upon  the  doctrines  of 
(1)  God,  (2)  Christ,  (3)  salvation  and  the  Christian 
life. 

1.  God. — The  fundamental  passage  here  is  1  Jn 
1',  '  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all.' 
The  conception  of  God  as  light  is  familiar,  as  has 
been  seen,  not  only  to  the  OT  but  to  all  ancient 
religious  thought.  But  in  the  Christian  view  the 
physical  conceptions  of  light  and  darkness  which 
cling  to  the  ethnic  and  even  to  the  Hebrew  theo- 
logies entirely  disappear,  and  purely  spiritual  con- 
ceptions take  their  place.  In  this  passage,  as  the 
context  shows  (cf.  vv.*"^''),  *  light '  stands  for  holi- 
ness and  'darkness'  for  sin.  In  1  Ti  6^^  again, 
where  God  is  represented  as  dwelling  in  the  light 
which  no  man  can  approach  unto,  the  metaphor  of 
light  is  transferred  from  God  Himself  to  His 
dwelling-place,  with  reference  probably  to  Ex 
33^*'^  ;  but  the  idea  conveyed  is  that  of  a  holiness 
that  is  absolute  in  its  separateness  from  all  human 
imperfection  (cf.  vv. "■!*).  In  Ja  P'  God  is  called 
'  the  Father  of  lights,  with  whom  can  be  no  varia- 
tion, neither  shadow  that  is  cast  by  turning.'  And 
here  also  the  idea  of  this  light  without  shadow  or 
eclipse  is  used  to  emphasize  the  fact,  previously 
referred  to,  of  the  essential  holiness  of  One  who 
cannot  be  tempted  with  evil  and  who  Himself 
tempteth  no  man  (v.^^). 

The  darkness  against  which  God's  holy  light 
shines  is  sometimes  represented  impersonally  (Eph 
5«,  1  Th  b\  1  P  **).  But  in  Col  l'^  St.  Paul  gives 
thanks  to  the  Father  '  who  delivered  us  out  of  the 
power  of  darkness '  (cf.  Lk  22**) ;  and  the  word  for 
power  (i^ovffia.)  suggests  the  tyranny  of  an  alien 
authority.  This  is  confirmed  when  m  Eph  6'-  we 
find  the  Apostle  speaking  of  the  '  world-rulers  of 
this  darkness,  the  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness  in 
the  heavenly  places.'  When  we  read  in  2  Co  11", 
*  Even  Satan  fashioneth  himself  into  an  angel  of 
light,'  the  evident  suggestion  is  that  Satan's  true 
form  is  that  of  a  prince  of  darkness,  not  an  angel 
of  light.  In  Ac  26'^  there  is  a  significant  parallel- 
ism between  darkness  and  the  power  of  Satan  on 
tlie  one  hand,  and  light  and  the  redeeming  grace 
of  Grod  on  the  other ;  and  in  2  Co  6'^*  there  is  a 


similar  parallel  between  light  and  darkness  and 
Christ  and  Belial. 

2.  Christ. — As  applied  to  God,  the  metaphor  of 
light  points  to  His  essential  nature  ;  as  applied  to 
Christ,  it  denotes  His  special  function  as  the 
revealer  of  God  to  man.  In  the  one  case  the  light 
is  considered  in  its  intrinsic  glory  ;  in  the  other, 
as  shining  forth  upon  the  souls  of  .men.  It  is  in 
the  Fourth  Gospel  that  this  conception  of  Christ 
as  the  light  of  men — a  light  by  which  they  are  at 
once  illumined  and  judged — is  fully  worked  out 
(cf.  for  the  illumination  Jn  !*•  ®  8'-  12^,  and  for  the 
judgment  1»  S'"--').  But  in  2  Co  4»  St.  Paul  de- 
clares that  God  has  revealed  the  light  of  the  know- 
ledge of  His  glory  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
in  Eph  5'  he  says  of  those  who  were  once  in 
darkness  that  they  are  now  'light  in  the  Lord.' 
Similarly  in  1  Jn  2^,  where  the  revelation  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  His  'new  coiimiandment '  are  in  view, 
the  author  declares :  '  The  darkness  is  passing 
away,  and  the  true  light  already  shineth.'  In 
these  passages  the  reference  is  to  Christ's  function 
as  mediating  the  gracious  Divine  light  to  men  and 
thus  bringing  them  knowledge  and  salvation.  But 
in  1  Co  4'  Christ  appears  as  a  Judge,  who  by  His 
coming  '  will  bring  to  light  the  hidden  things  of 
darkness,  and  make  manifest  the  counsels  of  the 
hearts.'  In  this  case,  however,  the  penetrating 
judicial  light  of  Christ  is  eschatologically  conceived, 
and  is  not,  as  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  a  light  by 
which  men  are  already  judged  when  they  love  the 
darkness  rather  than  the  light. 

3.  Salvation  and  the  Christian  life. — It  is  in 
this  connexion  that  the  metaphors  of  light  and 
darkness  most  frequently  occur  in  the  relevant  NT 
literature.  ( 1 )  Christian  soteriology  has  to  do  \vitli 
sin  and  gi-ace  ;  and  these  two  contrasted  moments 
of  human  experience  find  fitting  representation  in 
terms  of  darkness  and  light.  Salvation  is  fre- 
quently described  as  a  transition  from  darkness  to 
light.  St.  Paul  was  sent  to  the  Gentiles  '  to  open 
their  eyes,  and  to  turn  them  from  darkness  to 
light '  (Ac  26'^  ;  cf.  13'') ;  he  says  of  his  converts  : 
'  Ye  were  once  darkness,  but  are  now  light  in  the 
Lord'  (Eph  5^);  and  so  elsewhere  he  addresses 
them  as  '  sons  of  light  and  sons  of  the  day,'  who 
'are  not  of  the  night  nor  of  darkness'  (1  Th  5^). 
In  2  Co  4^  he  compares  the  light  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  glory  of  God,  as  it  shines  into  the  heart  in 
the  face  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  the  creative  light 
shining  at  God's  word  out  of  the  darkness.  St. 
Peter  contrasts  the  marvellous  light  into  which 
God  has  called  His  people  with  the  darkness  in 
which  they  lived  formerly  (1  P  2^) ;  while  St.  John, 
with  a  stronger  sense  perhaps  of  the  progressive 
nature  of  the  work  of  sanctification,  reminds  his 
'  little  children '  that  the  darkness  is  passing  away 
before  the  shining  of  the  true  light  (1  Jn  2*). 
The  author  of  Hebrews  uses  the  expression  'en- 
lightened '  ((pwriadevTii)  to  denote  those  who  have 
had  experience  of  the  Christian  salvation  (6*  ICF), 
by  which  he  implies  that  before  tasting  of  the 
heavenly  gift  they  were  in  a  condition  of  spiritual 
darkness. 

(2)  In  Col  1^^  soteriology  passes  into  eschatology. 
Christians  have  been  already  delivered  from  the 
power  of  darkness  and  translated  into  the  kingdom 
of  God's  dear  Son ;  but  '  the  inheritance  of  the 
saints  in  light,'  of  Avhich  the  Father  has  made 
them  meet  to  be  partakers,  has  clearly  a  future  as 
well  as  a  present  reference  (cf.  Ko  13",  '  the  night 
Ls  far  spent,  the  day  is  at  hand').  In  the  world  to 
come  the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light  has  its 
counterpart  in  '  the  blackness  of  darkness'  spoken 
of  in  2  P  2",  Jude'^.  For  those  who  reject  the 
light  of  the  Divine  grace,  because  they  prefer  the 
darkness  to  the  light,  there  is  reserved  a  deeper 
and  impenetrable  darkness. 


702 


LIGHTNING 


LION 


(3)  But  salration  has  a  human  and  ethical  side 
as  well  as  one  that  is  transcendent  and  Divine ; 
and  this  also  is  set  forth  under  the  imagery  of 
light  and  darkness.  \Vhen  St.  I'aul  declares  that 
'  tlie  fruit  of  the  ligiit  is  in  all  goodne.ss  and  right- 
eousness and  truth'  (Eph  S^CRV]),  and  con tra.sts that 
shining  fruit  with  '  the  unfruitful  works  of  dark- 
ness' (v."),  he  is  giving  to  light  and  darkness  a 
plain  moral  content.  When  he  asks  in  another 
Epistle,  '  What  communion  hath  light  with  dark- 
ness ? '  (2  Co  6'^),  the  words  that  precede  show  that 
it  is  the  antithesis  between  righteousness  and  un- 
righteousness that  is  in  his  thoughts.  And  when, 
after  comparing  the  world  as  it  exists  at  present  with 
the  night,  and  the  approaching  Parousia  with  the 
day,  he  adds,  '  Let  us  therefore  cast  off  the  works 
of  darkness,  and  let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light ' 
(Ho  13>- ;  cf.  1  Th  5'^-  *),  he  is  summoning  his 
readers  to  that  deliberate  and  strenuous  choice 
and  etlbrt  of  the  will  in  which  all  morality  consists. 
Those  who  in  the  soteriological  sense  are  already 
'  sons  of  light  and  sons  of  the  day,'  and  accordingly 
'are  not  of  the  night  nor  of  darkness'  (1  Th  5*), 
are  not  on  that  account  exempt  from  the  dangers 
of  the  encompassing  moral  and  spiritual  gloom  or 
from  the  duties  to  which  those  dangers  point.  On 
the  contrary,  just  because  they  are  sons  of  the 
light  they  must  gird  on  the  armour  of  light,  and 
because  they  are  not  of  the  darkness  they  must 
watch  and  be  sober  (vv.«-*).  Similarly  in  1  Jn  !"• 
the  writer  calls  upon  his  readers  to  '  walk  in  the 
light  as  Christ  is  in  the  light,'  and  brands  as  false 
those  who  profess  to  have  fellowship  with  Him 
and  yet  continue  to  walk  in  darkness.  And  if 
they  should  ask  for  a  definite  test  by  which  the 
moral  life  may  be  judged  and  its  relationship  to 
light  or  darkness  determined,  he  refers  them  to 
the  new  commandment  which  the  Lord  has  given 
{2'^  ;  cf.  Jn  13^*).  '  He  that  loveth  his  brother 
abideth  in  the  light '  (2'»).  '  But  he  that  hateth 
his  brother  is  in  darkness,  and  walketh  in 
darkness'  (v."). 

Ltteraturk.— H.  Cremer,  Bib.-Thcol.  Lex.  of  NT  Greeks, 
1880;  B.  Weiss,  Bib.  Theol.  of  the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  1882-83; 
G.  B.  Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  NT^,  Edinburgh,  1906,  p. 
370 ;  PliE\  art  '  Erleuchtung ' ;  art.  '  Light '  in  EBi  and  DCG. 

J.  C.  Lambert. 

LIGHTNING  (do-rpaiTTj).— Lightning,  the  visible 
discharge  of  atmospheric  electricity  from  one  cloud 
to  another,  or  from  a  cloud  to  the  earth,  is  now 
known  to  be  essentially  the  same  as  the  electric 
flashes  produced  in  the  laboratory.  To  the  ancients 
it  seemed  supernatural.  Terrible  in  its  dazzling 
beauty  and  power  to  destroy,  it  was  associated 
with  theophanies  (Ex  19"*  20^8,  Ezk  I's- "),  and 
became  one  of  the  categories  of  Jewish  and  Chris- 
tian apocalyptic  (Rev  4'  8'  11'®  16'*).    See  Thundek. 

James  Strahan. 

LIKENESS.— See  Form. 

LINEN  (j3(5o-ffos,  from  pa,  adj.  ^vctrtvo^,  \ivov). — 
Linen  was  a  characteristic  product  of  Egypt,  where 
the  arts  of  spinning  and  weaving  were  carried  to 
great  perfection.  Both  in  that  land  and  in  other 
lands  to  which  it  was  imported  it  was  tlie  material 
used  for  priestly  vestments.  According  to  Hero- 
dotus (ii.  37),  the  Egyptian  priests  '  wear  linen 
garments,  constantly  fresh  washed,  and  they  pay 

f (articular  attention  to  this.  .  .  .  The  priests  wear 
inen  only.'  The  Hebrew  usage  is  indicated  by 
the  phrase  '  the  linen  garments,  even  the  holy 
garments'  (Lv  16^);  and  Vergil  {JEn.  xii.  120) 
speaks  of  Roman  priests  as  '  Velati  lino,  et  verbena 
tempera  vincti.'  Linen — at  least  the  best  kind  of 
it  (/Swro-oj,  or  '  fine  linen ') — was  too  expensive  for 
ordinary  wear.  It  was  the  clothing  of  kings  and 
their  mmisters  (Gn  41''-),  of  women  of  quality  (Pr 
31^),  of  ideal  Israel  in  her  royal  estate  (Ezk  16'»-  "). 


The.se  facts  explain  the  references  to  linen  in 
the  imagery  of  the  Revelation.  (1)  Tlie  seven 
angelic  mes.sengers  who  come  out  of  the  heavenly 
temple  are  'arrayed  in  linen,  pure  and  bright' 
(1.5").  In  spite  of  good  MS  authority  (AC)  and 
the  dubious  parallel  in  Ezk  28'-',  the  reading 
'arrayed  with  nrecious  stones'  (RV) — \i.dov  for 
\lvov — is  extremely  unlikely,  and  X  has  \lvov%.  It  is 
true  that  \lvov  was  commonly  applied  to  the  flax- 
plant,  but  it  was  also  used  of  linen  cloth  and 
garments  (II.  ix.  661,  ^Isch.  Supp.  121,  132).  (2) 
Fine  linen  was  part  of  the  merchandise  of  Imperial 
Rome  (Rev  18'") ;  the  city  was  arrayed  in  it  (v.'*), 
the  old  republican  simplicity  having  given  place  to 
a  wide-spread  luxury.  (3)  It  is  befitting  that  the 
bride  of  the  Lamb  arrays  herself  in  fine  linen, 
bright  and  pure  (19*).  The  added  words,  'for  the 
fine  linen  is  the  righteous  acts  (biKaiwuaTa)  of  the 
saints '  is  perhaps  a  gloss.  It  is  a  happy  inspira- 
tion that  makes  '  fine  linen,'  the  clothing  of  priests 
and  princes,  the  uniform  of  the  armies  in  heaven 
that  follow  Him  who  is  the  Faithful  and  True  (v.'*). 

James  Strahan. 

LINUS  (A^cos).— This  is  a  name  which  holds  a 
large  place  in  tlie  history  of  the  early  Church. 
We  first  find  mention  of  it  in  2  Ti  4''^',  where  St. 
Paul,  writing  from  his  Roman  prison,  conveys  to 
liis  friend  the  greetings  of  Eubulus,  Pudens,  Linus, 
and  Claudia.  Linus  was  thus  a  friend  of  Paul  and 
Timothy  in  the  closing  years  of  the  Apostle's  life. 
In  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (vii.  46)  he  is  re- 
garded as  the  son  of  Claudia  of  2  Ti  4-'  (Afi/oj  6 
KXai^Sias),  which  is  perhaps  doubtful  (see  art. 
Claudia).  But  the  name  Linus  is  found  both 
in  Irenseus  (c.  Hcer.  in.  iii.  3)  and  in  Eusebius 
(HE  III.  ii.,  iv.  9,  xiii,),  Avhere  he  is  regarded  as 
the  successor  of  St.  Peter  and  the  first  bishop  of 
Rome  after  the  Apostles,  although  Tertullian  (de 
Prcescr.  32)  assigns  this  dignity  to  Clement.  No 
details  of  any  kind  are  given  regarding  the  episco- 
pate of  Linus,  and  the  date  of  his  tenure  of  office 
IS  uncertain.  Although  Eusebius  regards  Clement 
as  the  successor  of  Linus,  and  Tertullian  reverses 
the  order,  it  is  not  improbable  that  both  held  office 
at  the  same  time  and  that  the  episcopjil  power  as 
wielded  by  them  was  of  a  very  attenuated  nature. 
Perhaps  both  held  their  position  during  the  lifetime 
of  St.  Peter.  According  to  Eusebius  (HE  III.  xiii.) 
the  episcopate  of  Linus  lasted  for  a  period  of  twelve 
years,  but  no  dates  can  be  fixed  with  any  certainty. 
Hamack  gives  as  probable  A.D.  64-76.  Linus  has 
been  regarded  as  the  author  of  various  works,  but 
there  is  no  evidence  in  support  of  this  view.  He 
is  the  reported  author  of  (1)  the  Acts  of  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul ;  (2)  an  account  of  St.  Peter's  contro- 
versy with  Simon  Magus  ;  (3)  certain  decrees  pro- 
hibiting women  from  appearing  in  church  with 
uncovered  heads.  The  Roman  Breviary  states 
that  he  was  a  native  of  Voltena  in  Etruria,  and 
that  he  died  as  a  martyr  of  the  faith,  being  be- 
headed ])y  order  of  Saturninus,  whose  daughter  he 
had  healcdof  demoniacal  possession.  His  memory  is 
honoured  by  the  Western  Church  on  23  September, 
and  the  Greek  Mena»a  regards  him  as  one  of  the 
Seventy. 

LiTBRATtTRB.— J.  Pearson,  de  Scrir  ,  f  imomm 

Ronue  Epincoponnn,  London,  108S;  A.  Ha.iii.icK,  i-.<:  Chrono- 
loffie  der  altchristlichen  Literatur,  Leipzig,  1897 ;  J.  B. 
Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  pt.  i.^,  1890. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 

LION.— With  the  possible  exception  of  1  P  5*, 
the  use  of  '  lion '  in  the  NT  from  2  Tim.  onwards  is 
dependent  on  the  OT.  An  animal  of  great  size  and 
strength,  of  noble  bearing  as  well  as  of  extreme 
cruelty,  he  is  a  fitting  symbol  for  moral  and  spirit- 
ual reference. 

1.  In  1  P  5*,  man's  adversary,  the  devil,  is  repre- 
sented  as    always    roaming    about   in    search    of 


LION 


LOCUST 


703 


f)rey,  bis  very  raging,  which  betrays  bis  ravenons 
innger,  striking  terror  into  the  hearts  of  all. 

2.  In  He  11",  the  reference  is  to  the  actual  wild 
beast.  Among  the  heroic  deeds  of  the  worthies  of 
the  OT  recounted  by  the  author  of  the  Epistle  is 
that  they  'stopped  the  mouths  of  lions '  (of.  Samson, 
Jg  14»- « ;  David,  1  S  17»*-» ;  Benaiah,  2  S  2S^). 
More  remotely  the  story  of  Daniel  suggests  this 
mighty  achievement,  yet  here  God  and  not  Daniel 
is  said  to  have  shut  the  lions'  mouths  (Dn  6**). 

3.  St.  Paul  declares  that  he  had  •  escaped  the 
mouth  of  the  lion'  (2  Ti  4"  ;  cf.  Ps  22^1,  1  Mac 
2**).  The  allusion  of  the  Apostle  is  to  the  punish- 
ment of  being  thrown  to  the  lions.  Some  have 
indeed  permitted  a  literal  interpretation  of  'lion' 
(A.  Neander,  History  of  the  Planting  and  Training 
of  the  Christian  Church,  Eng.  tr.,  i.  [1880]  345). 
Since,  however,  he  was  a  Roman  citizen  and  could 
claim  the  right  of  being  beheaded  (see  Beast), 
the  more  prol^ble  explanation  is  that  the  reference 
is  not  to  an  actual  lion.  Concerning  this,  various 
conjectures  have  been  advanced.  '  Lion '  has  been 
interpreted  as  Nero  (Chrysostom) ;  calamity,  which 
would  resiilt  from  cowardice  and  humiliation  (N.  J. 
D.  White,  in  EGT,  '  1  and  2  Timothy  and  Titus,' 
1910,  p.  182  ;  cf.  Ps  21*^-  ^  [LXX]) ;  '  the  immediate 
peril'  (Conybeare-Howson,  The  Life  and  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  new  ed.,  1877,  ii.  593),  although  the 
reference  may  be  to  St.  Paul's  having  established 
his  right  as  a  Roman  citizen  not  to  be  exposed  to 
the  wild  beasts.  If,  however,  the  reference  is  to  the 
lion's  mouth,  then  Satan  may  be  intended  as  a  de- 
vouring adversary  (cf.  1  P  5'*,  above),  from  which 
St.  Paul  had  escaped.  The  time,  place,  and  oc- 
casion of  this  reference  have  been  variously  con- 
ceived, (a)  2  Ti  4^-  "■^'-  ^-  21  is  a  fragment,  written 
from  Caesarea,  inserted  in  the  Epistle,  alluding  to 
his  address  before  the  Sanhedrin  (cf.  Ac  22*^  23" ; 
B.  W.  Bacon,  The  Story  of  St.  Paul,  1905,  p. 
198  fF.).  {b)  Writing  from  Rome  in  his  first  im- 
prisonment, he  says  that,  although  the  result  of 
the  preliminary  hearing  was  a  suspension  of  judg- 
ment, yet  he  had  expectation  that  he  would  escape 
a  final  condemnation,  and  that  too  in  the  imme- 
diate future  (A.  C.  McGiflFert,  A  History  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  Apostolic  Age,  1897,  p.  421).  Writing 
from  Rome  in  his  second  imprisonment,  St.  Paul 
says  that  at  the  close  of  his  first  imprisonment  his 
pleading  was  so  cogent  and  convincing  that  he  was 
set  at  liberty  (Eusebius,  HE  ii.  22,  1  Clem.  5 ;  cf. 
T.  Zahn,  Jnirod.  to  the  XT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  i.  441, 
IL  1  ff.).  (c)  After  his  arrival  in  Rome  the  second 
time,  the  preliminary  investigation  had  resulted 
in  his  remand  ;  but  the  completion  of  the  trial  would 
not  eventuate  so  favourably  (Conybeare-Howson, 
op.  cit.  ch.  sxvi.  ;  X.  J.  D.  White,  'op.  eit.  181  ff.). 

4.  In  the  Apocalypse  (5*)  the  Exalted  Christ  is 
presented  under  the  guise  of  a  lion,  where  the  un- 
doubted reference  is  to  On  49^.  He,  who  had 
overcome  through  death  and  the  Resurrection, 
who  had  thus  opened  a  way  to  God's  sovereignty 
over  men,  and  is  therefore  alone  able  to  loose  the 
seals  of  the  Divine  judgment,  i.e.  to  carry  history 
forward  to  its  consummation,  is  symbolized  by  a 
being  of  the  highest  prowess  and  strength.  Yet 
no  sooner  has  this  suggestion  of  overmastering 
might  become  effective  than  it  is  withdrawn  to 
give  place  to  another — its  exact  opposite — that  of 
a  lamb  as  though  slain,  a  symbol  of  sacrifice  and 
humiliation  (see  Lamb). 

5.  The  same  intimation  of  majesty  and  strength 
occurs  in  Rev  4",  where  the  Seer  is  taken  up  into 
heaven,  and  beholds  the  four  and  twenty  elders 
about  the  throne,  with  the  four  living  creatures, 
having  the  likeness  respectively  of  a  lion,  a  calf, 
the  face  of  a  man,  and  a  flying  eagle  (cf.  Ezk  l'*'- 
[esp.  v.io]  10^^  ;  also  Is  e^*-)- 

6.  The  remaining  references  in  the  Apocalypse 


revert  to  the  terrorizing  aspect  of  this  king  of  beasts 
(98  [cf.  Jl  1«]  9''  10»  [cf.  Is  5»]  132  [cf.  Dn  7«^]). 

C.  A.  Beckwith. 
LIPS.— See  Mouth. 

LIVING 1.  Outside  of  the  Gospels  '  living '  does 

not  occur  as  a  noun  in  the  AV  of  the  NT,  but  is 
found  three  times  in  the  RV,  viz.  in  1  P  1**,  2  P 
3",  where  it  denotes  the  manner  of  life  ( AV  '  con- 
versation,' Gr.  dpoarpo^),  and  in  Rev  18",  where 
'  gain  their  living  (i.e.  means  of  life)  by  sea '  re- 
presents the  AV  •  trade  by  sea,'  the  RVm  '  work 
the  sea,'  Gr.  t-^i"  0£\affaap  ipryd^ofrai. 

2.  '  Living '  as  a  verb  is  found  in  both  the  AV 
and  the  RV  of  Col  2®,  'living  in  the  world,' 
where  the  Gr.  is  fwin-cs;  and  Tit  3',  'living  in 
malice '  (Gr.  Sidyovres). 

3.  The  adj.  '  living '  (Gr.  fwr)  occurs  frequently 
and  is  used  with  various  shades  of  meaning. — (1) 
In  the  ordinary  sense  of  being  alive  in  contrast 
with  dead  (Ro  12»  14',  RV  of  Rev  V^).  In  Ac  10«, 
2  Ti  4},  1  P  4*  both  the  AV  and  the  RV  translate 
fwrres  by  'quick.'  In  the  'living  soul'  of  1  Co 
15**  and  Rev  16^  the  word  has  the  same  meaning  ; 
in  the  latter  passage,  however,  the  literal  render- 
ing of  the  Gr,  is  'soul  of  life'  (RVm).— (2)  The 
'  living  creatures  '  (R V  ;  AV  '  beasts ' ;  Gr.  f<^, 
being  the  LXX  equivalent  of  nrn  in  Ezk  1',  etc. )  of 
Rev  4®-  *,  etc.,  are  so  called  as  being  not  alive  merely, 
but  instinct  with  life  and  activity  (cf.  Ezk  l^''). — 
(3)  With  an  intensified  force  the  word  is  used  of 
God,  who  is  called  '  the  living  God '  (Ac  14'^  Ro 
926,  2  Co  3'  Q^,  1  Th  1»,  1  Ti  31=  4^"  6^'  [AV],  He 
312  914  iQSi  12*2,  Rev  72)  not  only  as  being  self- 
existent,  but  as  possessing  the  fullness  of  life  in 
absolute  perfection. — (4)  Figuratively,  the  ex- 
pression is  applied  to  the  oracles  given  by  God  to 
Moses  (Ac  7",  AV  '  lively ') ;  to  the  word  of  God 
generally  (He  4",  AV  '  quick ') ;  to  the  way  into 
the  holy  place  which  Jesus  dedicated  for  us  (10^) ; 
to  the  hope  xmto  which  God  has  begotten  us  by 
the  Resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead  (1 
P 1',  AV '  lively ') ;  to  the  Stone  rejected  of  men  but 
with  God  elect,  precious  (2*),  and  the  stones  built 
up  on  that  foundation  into  a  spiritual  house  (v.*, 
AV  '  lively ') ;  to  the  fountains  of  waters  to 
which  the  Lamb  shall  lead  His  people  (Rev  7"  TR 
and  AV  ;  RV  '  fountains  of  waters  of  life ').  The 
precise  force  of  'living'  in  each  of  these  cases  is 
determined  by  the  word  to  which  it  is  attached 
and  the  context  in  which  it  is  set.  The  word  of 
God  is  living  because,  being  God's,  it  is  instinct 
with  His  own  life ;  the  way  into  the  holy  place 
because  it  is  real  and  etticacious,  as  contrasted 
with  the  mere  ceremony  of  entrance  into  the 
earthly  sanctuary  ;  the  Christian  hope  because  it 
is  the  result  of  a  Divine  begetting,  and  is  therefore 
lasting  and  certain  of  fruition  as  human  hopes 
are  not  ;  the  heavenly  fotm  tains  because  they  are 
ever  '  springing  up  unto  eternal  life '  (cf .  Jn  i^"-  ^*). 
The  elect  Stone  and  the  stones  built  upon  it  are 
living  stones  because  the  persons  whom  they 
metaphorically  represent  are  living  persons — the 
One  alive  with  the  very  life  of  God,  the  others 
sharing  in  that  life  through  their  union  with  Him. 

J.  C.  Lambert. 
LOCUST  (dxpfs),— Apart  from  Mt  3\Mk  1«,  the 
only  references  to  the  locust  in  the  NT  are  con- 
tained in  the  Apocalyptic  Vision — 'the  Fifth 
Trumpet  or  the  First  Woe'  (Rev  9^") — where  a 
swarm  of  locusts  is  represented  as  emerging  out 
of  the  smoke  of  the  abyss.  There  is  probably 
here  an  allusion  to  the  plague  of  locusts  in  Ex  10*^ 
(cf.  also  Jl  1*),  but  both  the  power  and  the 
mi&sion  of  these  locusts  are  not  that  of  the  locust 
tribe.  They  have  the  power  of  '  scorpions,'  the 
deadliness  of  whose  sting  was  proverbial  (cf.  1  K 
12"- ",  2  Ch  l(fi\   Ezk  2«,  Lk  10»  11"),  while  in 


704 


LOCUST 


LONGSUFFERING 


contradistinction  to  the  usual  habits  and  tastes  of 
locusts,  they  are  commanded  not  to  liurt  '  tiio 
gross  of  the  earth,  neither  any  j^reon  thin<,',  neither 
an^  tree.'  Apparently  the  work  of  judgment  on 
this  part  of  creation  had  been  sufficiently  carried 
out  by  the  hail  which  followetl  the  First  Trumpet 
(Kev  8').  It  is  interesting  in  this  connexion  both 
to  comi)are  and  to  contrast  the  part  played  by 
locusts  in  Exodus.  There  too  they  follow  the 
hail,  but  in  Exodus  (10')  their  mission  is  to  'eat 
the  residue  of  tiiat  wiiich  is  escaped,  which  re- 
niaineth  unto  you  from  the  hail,  and  to  '  eat 
every  tree  whicli  groweth  for  you  out  of  the  field,' 
whereas  here  they  have  a  more  important  voca- 
tion— they  are  sent  forth  as  the  messengers  of 
God's  wrath  upon  '  those  men  which  have  not  the 
seal  of  God  on  their  foreheads'  (Kev  &*),  whom 
they  are  to  torment  with  '  the  torment  of  a  scor- 
pion '  for  '  five  nionth.s.' 

The  apj)earance  of  these  particular  locusts  is  as 
unusual  and  unexpected  as  their  mission  (9^'"). 
'  The  shapes  of  the  locusts  were  like  unto  horses 
prepared  unto  battle  ' :  this  part  of  the  description 
would  indeed  be  equally  applicable  to  an  ordinary 
swarm  of  locusts  ;  it  is  borrowed  from  Jl  2^,  and 
is  a  metaphor  '  chosen  partly  on  account  of  their 
speed  and  compact  array,  but  chiefly  on  account 
of  a  resemblance  which  has  often  been  observed 
l>etween  the  liead  of  a  locust  and  the  head  of  a 
horse'  (see  Driver,  ad  loc).  The  next  two  feat- 
ures are  peculiar  to  the  locusts  of  the  vision  ;  they 
had  '  crowns  '  on  tlieir  heads  '  like  unto  gold,'  and 
'  their  faces  were  as  men's  faces.'  The  crowns  are 
indicative  of  their  power  and  authority,  while 
their  human  faces  testify  to  the  wisclom  and 
capacity  with  which  tiiey  were  imbued.  Further, 
they  had  '  hair  as  the  hair  of  women,'  and  it  has 
been  supposed  that  we  have  here  a  reference  to 
the  long  antenncB  of  locusts. 

The  locust  belongs  to  the  same  genus  as  the 
grass-hopper  (Acrididce).  There  is  a  number  of 
different  kinds,  but  the  most  destructive  are  the 
CEdipoda  7)iigratoria  and  the  Acridiumperegrinum, 
of  which  the  latter  apparently  predominate.  The 
history  of  their  development  is  somewhat  strange  : 
after  emerging  from  the  egg,  which  is  laid  in  April 
or  May,  tliey  enter  the  lai-va  state,  during  which 
period  thej'  have  no  wings ;  in  the  pvpa  state, 
germinal  wings  enclosed  in  cases  appear  ;  while 
about  a  montii  later,  they  cast  the  papa  skin,  and, 
borne  on  tiieir  newly  emancipated  wings,  they 
soar  into  the  air.  Tlieir  hind-wings  are  generally 
very  bright-coloured,  being  yellow,  green,  blue, 
scarlet,  crimson,  or  brown,  according  to  the  species. 
It  is  noteworthy  that,  unlike  .moths,  tiiey  pass 
through  no  chrysalis  period.  They  only  api)ear  in 
.swarms  periodically,  and  when  they  do,  they  liter- 
ally darken  the  sky  (cf.  Ex  10^'),  while  the  rattle 
of  their  wings  is  like  a  fall  of  rain  (cf.  .11  2').  In 
the  drier  parts  of  the  country  they  are  at  all  times 
abuntlant,  and  are  a  constant  source  of  annoyance 
to  the  husbandmen,  whose  crops  they  sometimes 
entirely  devour.  The  larvce  are  responsible  for 
most  of  the  havoc  wrought ;  as  they  are  unable 
to  fly,  they  hop  over  the  land  around  which  they 
were  hatched  and  destroy  grass,  plants,  and  shrubs 
promiscuously.  It  is,  on  the  other  hand,  easier  to 
drive  off  full-grown  locusts  that  can  Hy,  as  they 
are  quickly  frightened ;  but  at  all  stages  of  their 
development  they  are  extremely  voracious. 

They  are  used  as  an  article  of  diet  by  the  natives 
to-day,  just  as  they  were  in  NT  times,  the  legs 
and  wings  being  first  removed,  and  the  ix)dy  stewed 
with  butter  or  oil.  They  are  said  to  taste  some- 
what like  shrimps. 

LiTKRATURK.— H.  B.  Tristrani,  The  Satxiral  IliMori/  of  the 
Bible^o^  1911,  pp.  306  ff.,  313;  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Api>mliih'«'  "( 
St.  John,  1907,  p.  115  ff.,  The  Gospel  according  to  67.  j/uri-', 


1902,  J).  5f.  :  Snn  649;  HDB  iil  V.iO.t.  ;  KDi  iii.  2S07ff.  ; 
and  espeoially  Driver's  'K.xcursti^  on  Loouste'  in  \\\sJ<ieland 
Amos,  1897,  pp.  82-91,  cf.  also  pp.  .'J7-39,  48-.')3;  W.  M. 
Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Hook,  1910  ed.,  p.  407  f.  ;  J.  C. 
Geikie,  The  Holy  Land  and  the  Bible,  1887,  L  79,  80,  142, 
^91-5.  402.  p.  .S.  P.  HANDCOCK. 

LOIS  (Gr.  Auls).  —  The  word  Lois  is  of  Greek 
origin,  related  to  \i^uv  and  Xvo-ros,  'pleasant,' 
'desirable.'  Lois  was  a  Christian  believer  of 
Lystra  and  the  grandmother  of  Timothy.  Her 
name  is  mentioned  in  2  Ti  P  along  with  Eunice 
(q.v.),  the  mother  of  Timothy.  Probably  Lois  was 
a  Jewess  and  the  mother  of  Eunice,  who  in  Ac  16' 
is  described  as  a  believing  Jewess  who  had  married 
a  Greek,  It  is,  however,  not  impossible  that  Lois 
may  have  been  the  mother-in-law  of  Eunice  and  a 
Gentile,  in  which  case  we  must  assume  that  she 
had  married  a  Jew.  This  theory  would  account 
for  the  fact  that  both  Lois  and  Eunice  are  Greek 
names,  and  also  for  the  description  of  Eunice  as  a 
Jewess.  But  it  was  not  uncommon  for  Hellenistic 
Jews  to  bear  purely  Gentile  names,  and  the  sup- 
position that  Lois  was  the  mother  of  Eunice  is  on 
the  whole  more  probable. 

The  Apostle  refers  to  her  '  unfeigned  faith,'  by 
which  he  no  doubt  means  that  Lois  had  accej)ted 
Christian  faith,  and  not  merely  that  she  cherished 
the  ancient  faith  of  Israel.  As  we  find  Eunice 
described  as  a  '  Jewess  who  believed '  on  the  oc- 
casion of  St.  Paul's  second  visit  to  Lystra,  probably 
both  she  and  Lois  were  converted  on  the  Apostle's 
first  visit  to  the  town.  Timothy's  knowledge  of 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures  to  which  the  Apostle  refers 
(2  Ti  3"^)  was  probably  due  not  only  to  his  mother 
but  also  to  Lois,  whom  we  may  regard  as  a  faithful 
Jewish  matron  attached  to  the  ancient  hopes  of 
Judaism,  and  who,  influenced  by  her  knowledge  of 
the  Scriptures,  readily  accepted  St.  Paul's  message 
on  his  first  visit  to  Lystra.  W.  F,  BoYD. 

LONGSUFFERING.— The  word  ■  longsuflering ' 
occurs  in  the  English  NT  in  Lk  IS''  (RV  only  ;  AV 
'  bear  long  with '),  Ro  2»  9-,  1  Co  U\  2  Co  6«,  Gal 
■o'\  Eph  42,  Col  1"  31=,  I  Th  5"  (RV  only ;  AV 
'  patient'),  1  Ti  P*,  2  Ti  S^"  4-,  1  P  S-*,  2  P  S"'". 
The  Greek  words  corresponding  to  this  are  iMKpit- 
Ovfioi,  fji.aKpo6vfjLla,  /jLaKpodv/xdv.  These  forms,  how- 
ever, occur  in  the  original  in  a  number  of  passages, 
where  the  English  Bible  (both  AV  and  RV)  has  as 
their  rendering  'patient,'  'patiently,'  'patience' 
(Mt  18^,  Ac  2G^  He  Q^--  '\  Jao^-  «•  i").  In  the  LXX 
the  word  occurs  in  the  following  passages  :  Ex  34", 
Nu  I4I8,  Neh  9",  Ps  86'5  103«  1458,  Pr  1429  1518  igaj 
19"  25^',  Ec  7«,  Jer  lo'^,  Jl  2",  Jon  4^  Nah  P.  In 
all  these  passages  the  Hebrew  has  d:5K  ^-jn,  or  the 
noun-form  of  the  same  word.  Besides  these  there 
are  four  instances  where  the  LXX  renders  by  ixaKpo- 
Ov/xia  other  Hebrew  words,  or  is  bjised  on  a  different 
Hebrew  text,  so  tliat  tiie  conception  does  not  occur 
in  the  English  Bible.  These  are  Job  7'«,  Pr  17", 
Is  57",  Dn  4^*.  fMKpodvfda  is  a  word  belonging  to 
the  later  Greek. 

The  Hebrew  d^sn  tj-jx  and  the  Greek  fiaKpSdv/jioi 
absolutely  coincide  in  their  verbal  structure.  None 
the  less  there  is  to  be  noted  a  dill'erence  in  the  basic 
figure  underlying  each,  which  will  explain  the 
ditterence  in  usage.  The  Hebrew  c^jx  specifically 
means  '  anger,'  '  wrath,'  and  accordingly  the  ^ik 
'if  is  one  who  is  'long,'  in  the  sense  of  'long- 
delaying  '  his  anger  ;  hence  in  many  cases  the  word 
is  rendered  by  '  slow  to  anger '  in  the  English  Bible. 
On  the  other  hand,  6vfi6^  in  fiaKp6dvjj.oi  does  not  speci- 
fically denote  '  anger,'  but  has  the  general  meaning 
of  '  temper,'  although  it  can  also  have  the  former 
specialized  sense.  A  /xaKpSdv/j-o^  is  therefore  he 
who  keeps  his  temper  long,  and  this  can  be  under- 
stood with  reference  to  wilful  provocation  by  man, 
in  which  case  it  will  mean  the  exercise  of  restraint 


LONGSUFFERING 


LORD 


705 


hom  anger ;  or  with  reference  to  trjing  circum- 
stances and  persons,  in  which  case  it  will  mean  the 
exercise  of  patience.  Tiie  Greek  term  thus  comes 
to  have  a  double  meaning  whilst  the  Hebrew 
equivalent  has  only  one,  never  being  used  in  the 
sense  of  'patience.'  Jer  IS^'*  is  no  exception  to 
this,  for  when  the  prophet  here  prays,  'Take  me 
not  away  in  thy  longsutfering,'  he  relates  the  long- 
suffering  to  his  persecutors,  and  expresses  the  fear 
that  God's  deferring  their  punishment  may  result 
in  his  own  death. 

fjMKpodvfua  is  in  the  NT  employed  in  both  senses 
— that  of  '  longsuffering '  and  that  of  '  patience  ' — 
with  reference  to  both  God  and  man.  The  only 
instance  of  the  meaning  '  patience  '  in  its  applica- 
tion to  God  seems  to  be  Lk  18^.  Here  it  is  said 
that  God  will  'avenge  his  elect  that  cry  to  him 
day  and  night  (Kai  fiaKpodv/iei  iir  avroh)  although 
he  is  longsuffering  over  them.'  The  ai-roh  does 
not  have  for  its  antecedent  the  persecutors  of  the 
elect,  but  the  elect  tiiemselves.  The  meaning  is 
that  God  proceeds  slowly  and  patiently  in  attend- 
ing to  tiieir  case  (cf.  2  P  3^  :  ^paSvvei,  '  the  Lord  is 
not  slack  concerning  his  promise').  In  all  other 
cases  the  word  when  used  of  God  denotes  specifi- 
cally the  restraint  of  His  anger  and  the  deferring 
of  the  execution  thereof  {—opryr));  thus  Ko  2*9^, 

1  Ti  li«,  1  P  320. 

This  DiWne  longsuffering  is  exercised  with  a 
two-fold  purpose:  (a)  to  give  its  objects  time  for 
repentance  (Ko  2*,  2  P  3***  ^)  ;  (6)  to  gain  time  and 
prepare  the  opportunity  for  tlie  execution  of  His 
purpose  in  otlier  respects  ( Ro  9~  ;  here  the  '  endur- 
ing with  longsuffering  of  the  vessels  of  wrath '  is 
placed  side  by  side  with  the  purpose  of  God  [diXeiv'] 
to  show  His  wrath,  and  the  naKpo6vfiia  does  not 
imply  a  reversal  or  suspense  of  this  purpose  [so 
Weiss],  but  simply  a  delay  in  its  execution,  among 
other  things  for  the  reason  stated  in  v.^^,  '  that  he 
might  make  known  the  riches  of  his  glory  upon 
vessels  of  mercy '). 

fjLaKpoOi'nia  as  exercised  by  men  towards  men  may 
be  both  'longsutiering'  and  'patience.'  It  is  not 
always  easy  to  tell  with  certainty  which  of  the  two 
is  in  the  mind  of  the  writer,  but  in  a  case  like  Col 
1^^,  where  inronovri, '  patience,'  and  naKpodv/iia,  'long- 
suffering,'  occur}  together,  the  meaning  is  plain. 
Trench  {NT  Synanym^,  1876,  p.  191)  observes  that 
fiaKpodvuia  always  refers  to  persons,  never  to  things. 
This  is  not  quite  correct,  for  He  6'~  *®  proves  that 
it  can  be  used  in  respect  to  circumstances  or  things 
as  well  as  to  persons.  Patience  can  be  exercised 
with  reference  to  trying  persons  as  well  as  to  try- 
ing circumstances ;  and,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
where  the  former  happens  the  distinction  between 
'  longsutiering '  and  '  patience '  will  become  more 
or  less  a  fleeting  one  and  the  line  will  be  hard  to 
draw  (cf.  Gal  5^,  Eph  4^,  Col  I'l  3'-,  1  Th  5",  2  Ti  3'», 

2  P  31*  on  the  one  hand  with  Ja  5^-  »•  i»  on  the  other). 
fiaKpoOv/xia  in  the   sense  of   '  longsuffering '   has 

for  its  synonym  ivoxv;  in  the  sense  of  '  patience,' 
iirofiov-q.  The  difference  between  /laKpoOvfua  and 
dvoxv  (Ro  2^  3^)  seems  to  be  that  in  dvoxv  the  idea 
of  the  temporariness  of  the  suspension  of  punish- 
ment is  given  with  the  word  as  such,  whereas  fiaKpo- 
dvjxia,  SO  far  as  the  word  is  concerned,  might  be 
never  exhausted.  As  to  inrofi-ovq,  this  differs  from 
fmKpodvfiia  in  having  an  element  of  positive  heroic 
endurance  in  it,  whilst  the  patience  called  fiaKpo- 
Ov/xia  is  a  more  negative  conception  which  denotes 
the  absence  of  a  spirit  of  resbtance  and  rebellion. 
As  stated  above,  fiaKpoOvfua  occurs  of  God  at  least 
once  in  the  sense  of  '  patience ' ;  inroiiovf]  is  nowhere 
ascribed  to  God.  dfbs  ttJs  virofjiourji  (Ro  15')  is  not 
'  the  God  who  shows  patience,'  but  '  the  God  Avho 
gives  patience '  (cf.  Ro  15'3,  He  13=0,  IP  5'").  It 
is  predicated  of  Jesus  in  2  Th  3',  He  12i-2. 

Gkekhardus  Vos. 
VOL.  I. — 45 


LORD. — In  the  AV  the  word  '  lord '  generally 
represents  the  Greek  KOpioi,  with  the  exception  of 
Ac  4-^,  2  P  2\  Jude^  and  Kev  6^",  where  it  stands 
for  deffirdTTjs.  In  the  last  three  passages  the  RV 
renders  'master.'  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
ca.ses  where  Kvpios  is  rendered  '  master '  both  in  the 
AV  and  the  UV—e.g.  Ac  16'«-  >»,  Eph  6^-  ».  As  a 
common  noun  the  word  'lord'  is  not  of  very 
frequent  occurrence.  It  is  used  of  the  Roman 
Emperor  (Ac  25-«) ;  of  a  husband  (1  P  3«) ;  of  the 
heir  of  a  property  (Gal  4^ ;  and  of  the  angelic 
powers  (1  Co  8^).  But  usually  it  is  applied  either 
to  God  or  to  Christ,  and  comes  to  be  used  almost 
as  a  proper  name. 

1.  The  name  applied  to  God.— In  the  LXX  idpios 
is  employed  consistently  to  represent  'jnx,  which 
the  Jews  substituted  in  reading  for  the  name  m.T, 
and  hence  it  became  the  general  designation  of 
God.  We  meet  with  it  frequently  in  the  NT  in 
this  application,  sometimes  expanded  into  the  title 
Kvpios  6  0e6s,  or  even  Kvpios  6  6ebs  6  iravTOKparup 
(Rev  4"  11",  etc.).  God  is  addressed  as  Kijptos  in 
prayer  (Ac  1^).  The  title  is  used  predicatively  of 
Him  in  Ac  17-^  ('  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  ').  In 
such  phrases  as  '  even  as  the  Lord  gave '  ( 1  Co  3^), 
'  if  the  Lord  will '  (4i9  ;  cf.  Ro  P"  IS^^),  'chastened 
of  the  Lord'  (1  Co  11^-),  the  reference  is  probably 
to  God  rather  than  to  Christ.  Naturally  it  is  God 
who  is  referred  to  where  the  term  occurs  in  quota- 
tions from  the  OT,  as  Ac  3~,  Ro  4«  9^^-,  2  Co  e^''- ; 
though,  as  we  shall  see,  there  are  occasions  where 
such  quotations  are  interpreted  as  referring  directly 
to  Christ.  The  reference  is  likewise  to  God  in 
various  phrases  which  recall  OT  associations,  such 
as  '  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord '  (Ac  5"),  '  the  fear  of  the 
Lord '  (9=*0,  '  the  hand  of  the  Lord '  (U^).  In  Rev., 
with  one  or  two  exceptions,  the  title  refers  to  God — 
e.g.  4*-  "  IV^-  "  19' — though  on  occasions  Christ,  in 
contrast  to  the  kings  of  the  earth,  is  called  '  King 
of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords'  (17"  19>«).  St.  Peter, 
St.  James,  and  Hebrews  seem  to  use  the  term 
indifferently  for  God  or  Christ.  In  the  Pauline 
Epistles  the  term  usually  designates  Christ,  but 
tliere  are  occasional  exceptions,  and  we  must 
determine  from  the  context  whether  God  or  Christ 
is  to  be  understood.  Thus,  e.g.,  in  the  phrase  '  the 
word  of  the  Lord,'  i.e.  the  gospel  (1  Th  1^),  we 
should  certainly  expect  '  the  Lord '  to  refer  to 
Christ,  yet  the  phrase  recurs  in  the  following 
chapter  in  the  form  '  the  word  of  God '  (2'^).  So 
'  the  Lord  of  peace '  (2  Th  3'®)  corresponds  to  '  the 
very  God  of  peace '  (1  Th  5^3) ;  and  1  Co  3',  where 
some  take  Kvpios  to  apply  to  Christ,  is  proved  by 
v.*  to  refer  to  God.  But  indeed  it  is  difficult  to 
say  with  certainty  in  many  cases  who  is  intended, 
and  sometimes  St.  Paul  ascribes  the  same  function 
now  to  God  and  now  to  Christ  {e.g.  1  Co  7'^  com- 
pared with  2  Co  10^*).  Some  {e.g.  Cremer  and 
Godet)  would  lay  down  the  rule  that  in  the  NT 
/ci'ptos  is  to  be  understood  as  referring  to  God  only 
in  the  OT  quotations  and  references  (so  also  Lietz- 
mann,  so  far  as  St.  Paul  is  concerned) ;  but  it  is 
evident  from  some  of  the  cases  already  quoted 
that  such  a  canon  cannot  be  consistently  observed. 

2.  The  name  applied  to  Christ. — For  the  most 
part,  however,  the  term  is  employed  in  the  NT  to 
designate  Christ. 

(1)  The  sitbjection  of  the  believer  to  Christ. — The 
simplest  instance  of  the  use  of  the  word  '  Lord '  for 
Christ  is  in  the  Gospels,  where  it  describes  the 
relationship  of  Jesus  to  the  disciples.  In  this  sense 
it  occurs  in  Ac  1*  as  a  form  of  address  of  the 
Master,  and  in  the  phrase  frequently  recurring 
throughout  the  book — '  the  Lord  Jesus,'  e.g.  1*'  4^ 
8'®.  But  such  employment  of  the  term  is  innocent 
of  the  doctrinal  implication  that  attaches  to  it  as 
generally  emplojed  in  the  NT.  We  meet  with  it 
in  various  forms — sometimes  simply  Kvpio%  or  6  ki'/jioj. 


706 


LOUD 


LORD 


sometimes  6  iri'pioj  ijuQv,  usually  with  the  addition 
oi'lriffous  or' IrjcroOi  Xpiffrds.  ^V  hat  is  suggested  by 
this  title  as  assigned  to  Christ?  The  simplest 
answer  is  that  it  calls  up  the  relation  of  king  and 
subject,  conceived  in  the  Oriental  spirit  as  that  of 
lord  and  slave  (cf.  1  K  IT^^  29»  [LXX]),  as  typical 
of  that  Mhich  obtains  between  Christ  and  the 
believer.  St.  Paul  frequently  calls  himself  SoDXoi 
'Iijffov  XpiffTod  (Ro  1',  Gal  1^",  etc.) ;  on  one  occasion 
he  uses  that  term  as  a  Morthv  designation  of  a 
faithful  disciple  (Col  4'''),  and  reminds  believers 
that  such  slavery  is  the  condition  into  which  they 
have  surrendered  themselves  (1  Co  7^). 

(2)  The  majesty  of  Christ.— The  title  Kipio^  as 
applied  to  Christ  suggests  something  more  than 
the  relation  of  subjection  in  which  the  believer 
stands  to  Him.  It  is  deliberately  selected  to  assign 
a  certain  lofty  dignity  to  Christ.  It  was  the 
custom  in  the  East  to  call  gods  by  the  title  '  Lord  ' 
(Deissmann,  Licht  twin  Osten,  253  fl'. ),  and,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  practice  of  the  LXX  had  made  this 
term  the  familiar  one  to  the  Jew  for  his  God 
Jahweh.  The  title  was  deliberately  transferred 
to  Christ  by  the  early  Cliristians  to  signify  that 
they  worshipped  Him  as  a  Divine  Bein^.  In  1  Co 
8"-  St.  Paul  defines  the  Cliristian  attitude  to  Clirist 
by  contrasting^  it  with  that  of  the  worshippers  of 
false  gods.  They  worsliip  many  so-callea  gods 
and  lords,  but  the  Christian  has  but  the  '  one  God, 
the  Father,  of  Avhom  are  all  things  and  we  unto 
him,  and  one  Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  through  whom 
are  all  things,  and  we  through  him.'  Here  St. 
Paul  places  Christ  alongside  of  God  as  entitled  to 
Divine  honour.  How  such  a  position  is  compatible 
with  the  strict  monotheism  of  the  '  one  God,  the 
Father,'  he  does  not  discuss.  It  may  be,  as 
Johannes  Weiss  (Christus,  p.  26)  suggests,  that  he 
selected  the  title  '  Lord '  for  Christ  here  as  predicat- 
ing a  dignity  one  rank  lower  than  that  of  Supreme 
God,  and  so  leaving  room  for  that  relation  of  sub- 
ordination which  the  Apostle  elsewhere  assigns  to 
Him  (2  Co  l^  Eph  1^^).  It  was  in  virtue  of  the 
Resurrection  that  the  Church  came  to  invest  Jesus 
with  such  unique  dignity.  This  is  the  standpoint 
of  Peter  in  Ac  2^2-36  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  '  a  man 
approved  of  God'  (v.^*),  has  by  the  Resurrection 
and  Exaltation  been  made  by  God  *  both  Lord  and 
Clirist.'  So  in  Ro  1*  St.  Paul  says  that  Jesus  has 
been  constituted  {,bpiadivTo%)  God's  Son  in  power, 
according  to  the  spirit  of  holiness,  by  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead  (cf.  also  Eph  1^"^-).  And  the 
well-known  passage  Ph  2''-'i  accounts  for  Jesus' 
investment  with  the  title  '  Lord '  along  the  same 
lines.  After  the  humiliation  of  the  Cross  'God 
highly  exalted  him,  and  gave  unto  him  the  name 
which  is  above  every  name ;  that  in  tlie  name  of 
Jesus  [i.e.  whenever  the  name  is  invoked  in  prayer 
by  oneself  or  sounded  in  one's  ears  by  others  (W. 
rieitmiiller,  Im  Namen  Jesu,  1903,  p.  66  f.)]  every 
knee  should  bow,  of  things  in  heaven  and  things 
on  earth  and  things  under  the  earth,  and  that 
every  tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father.'  There  is 
difl'erence  of  opinion  as  to  whether  'the  name 
Avhich  is  .ibove  everj'  name'  is  the  title  'Lord.' 
In  view  of  the  confession  of  Lordship  to  which  the 
passage  leads  up,  it  seems  natural  to  adopt  this 
interpretation.  13y  exalting  Jesus,  God  has  raised 
Him  to  supreme  honour.  He  has  bestowed  on 
Him  that  name  which  He  had  hitherto  borne 
Himself.  Tiie  passage  becomes  jiregnant  with 
meaning  when  taken  (as  Weiss  suggests  [op.  cit. 
p.  27])  in  connexion  with  the  LXX  of  Is  42* :  ^70* 
Ki'ipioi  6  6(6i,  TOVT&  fiov  iari.  rb  dfofxa,  tj]i>  S6^av  /xov 
iripifi  ov  bunru).  Rut  tliis  name  and  this  glory  God 
has  given  to  another.  He  has  invested  Jesus  with 
the  Divine  name;  He  has  given  Him  supremo 
sovereignty.     All  beingss  in  heaven  and  earth  must 


bow  the  knee  before  Him.  He  virtually  takes  the 
place  of  God,  the  monotlieistic  position  being  safe- 
guarded in  that  concluding  phrase,  'to  the  glory 
of  (Jod  the  Father.' 

The  whole  of  the  NT  goes  to  corroborate  the 
lofty  estimate  of  the  dignity  of  Clirist  suggested 
by  this  title.  As  Lord  He  conies  in  the  mind  of 
the  Church  to  take  His  position  alongside  of  God, 
to  exercise  such  functions  as  had  been  attributed 
to  God,  and  to  receive  such  reverence  as  had  been 
accorded  to  God  alone — according  to  an  inter- 
pretation of  Ro  9'  which  is  linguistically  unex- 
ceptionable. He  is  even  willed  6e6%  (cf.  also  2  P  1'). 
Prayer  is  addressed  to  Him  (Ac  7"*,  Ro  10'-,  1  Co 
1-,  2  Co  12^).  He  is  expected  to  judge  the  world 
(2  Co  5'<"-,  2  Ti  4'- 8),  and  is  endowed  with  Divine 
omniscience  (1  Co  4').  It  is  He  who  assigns  their 
various  lots  to  men  (7"),  who  grants  power  of 
service  and  endows  with  grace  (1  Ti  l'^*"),  who 
stands  by  and  strengthens  in  time  of  trouble  (2  Ti 
4''),  and  delivers  out  of  persecutions  (3").  All 
authority  in  the  Church  proceeds  from  Him  (1  Co 
5*,  2  Co  108  13"').  The  most  frequent  form  of 
benediction  invokes  His  grace.  Baptism  is  per- 
formed in  His  name  (Ac  8'*  10^).  That  name  is 
invoked  when  the  sick  are  anointed  with  oil  (Ja 
S^*) ;  and  not  only  on  such  formal  occasions,  but  in 
every  word  and  deed  (Col  3"),  for  that  appears  to 
be  the  significance  of  the  phrase,  one  is  to  *  do  all  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord'  (Ueitmiiller,  op.  cit.  p.  69). 
He  is  the  Creator  of  all  things  (1  Co  8»,  Col  P«) 
and  Lord  over  all  beings  (Ac  10^,  Ro  10'-),  our 
only  Master  and  Lord  (Jude*). 

But  perhaps  the  most  striking  instance  of  all  of 
how  Christ  comes  to  have  the  value  of  God  in  the 
Christian  consciousness  is  afiorded  by  the  fact  that, 
repeatedly  in  the  NT,  quotations  from  the  OT 
which  manifestly  refer  to  God  are  immediately 
applied  to  Christ.  Thus,  e.g.,  the  exhortation  of 
the  Psalmist  to  taste  and  see  that  the  Lord  is  good 
(Ps  348)  is  interpreted  (1  P  2^)  with  reference  to 
the  experience  of  the  believer  of  the  salvation  of 
Christ ;  and  St.  Paul  finds  an  answer  to  the 
question  of  Is  40'^  (LXX),  '  Who  hath  known  the 
mind  of  the  Lord  ? '  in  the  triumphant  declaration, 
'But  we  have  the  mind  of  Christ'  (1  Co  2'«). 
Other  instances  of  this  practice  will  be  found  in 
Ro  10",  1  Co  pi  10",  2  Co  3i«-  '8  10",  1  P  3». 
Such  being  the  significance  with  which  the  title 
is  invested,  it  is  small  wonder  that  St.  Paul  should 
have  regarded  acknowledgment  of  Christ's  Lord- 
ship as  the  mark  of  the  true  believer  (Col  2*).  To 
confess  Him  as  Lord  with  one's  mouth,  and  to 
believe  in  one's  heart  that  God  has  raised  Him 
from  the  dead  (observe  the  connexion  between  the 
Resurrection  and  Lordship),  is  to  be  assured  of 
salvation  (Ro  10**).  In  cases  of  ecstasy  such  con- 
fession was  the  infallible  sign  of  the  presence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  (1  Co  12^).  The  proclamation  of 
Christ's  Lordship  was  the  central  theme  of  the 
Apostle's  preaching  (2  Co  4^),  the  universal  re- 
cognition of  that  Lordship  the  consummation  of 
the  Divine  purpose  (Ph  2"). 

(3)  The  protest  against  Emperor -worship. — There 
remains  to  be  noted  one  other  aspect  of  the  as- 
sertion of  Christ's  Lordship— the  protest  implied 
against  the  worship  of  the  Emperor  under  the 
same  title.  Deissmann  has  shown  (op.  cit.  p. 
255  ir.)  that  already  in  the  time  of  St.  Paul  the 
title  was  current  as  a  form  of  address  of  the 
Emperor  (cf.  Ac  25^*),  if  not  in  Rome,  at  any  rate 
in  the  East.  Caligula  had  ordered  his  statue  to 
be  erected  in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  required 
that  he  should  be  wor.shipped  as  God.  Domitian 
is  called  in  official  reports  'our  Lord  and  God.' 
When  such  Avas  the  tendency  that  was  abroad,  it 
is  possible  that  even  in  the  mouth  of  a  man  who, 
like    St.    Paul,   urged    subjection    to   tlie   higher 


LORD'S  DAY 


LORD'S  DAY 


707 


powers,  the  proclamation  of  the  Lordship  of  Christ 
may  ha%-e  had  a  polemical  nuance.  In  the  middle 
of  the  2nd  cent.  Me  tind  Polycarp  layin"  down  his 
life  rather  than  say  Kvpios  Koiaap  (Mart.  Polyc.  viii. 
2),  and  probablj'  long  before  that  time,  on  the  lips 
of  those  who  repeated  it,  if  not  by  the  men  who 
first  employed  it,  the  formula  'our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ '  was*  uttered  with  an  emphasis  on  the  word 
viir  which  suggested  repudiation  of  the  claims 
made  on  behalf  of  the  Emperor  (Weinel,  Die 
Stellitng  des  Urchristentums  ztim  Staat,  p.  19). 
St.  Paul  could  say  of  the  Christian,  '  our  state  is 
in  heaven'  (Ph  3"*),  and  endeavour  to  keep  his 
religion  apart  altogether  from  politics.  But  when 
politics  invaded  the  sphere  of  religion  and  Cae-sar 
laid  claim  to  the  things  that  are  Christ's,  it  be- 
came the  duty  of  the  Christian  to  maintain  the 
sovereignty  of  his  Lord.  Such  passages  as  Ph  2*"", 
1  Co  8*'-  cannot  fail  to  have  been  interpreted  as  a 
protest  against  the  growing  tendency  to  ascribe 
to  the  Emperor  the  reverence  which  belonged  to 
Christ  alone.  We  hear  the  same  protest  in  the 
claim  of  Jude*,  'our  only  Master  and  Lord,  Jesus 
Christ,'  and  in  a  milder  form  in  the  subtle  dis- 
tinction made  in  1  P  2^',  '  Fear  God,  honour  the 
king,'  t.e.  the  Emperor.  In  Eev.  the  references 
to  tlie  Emperor-worship  become  more  explicit 
(138. 15  149  0(|4)^  and  the  protest  against  it  finds 
freer  utterance.  Christ  is  proclauned  King  of 
kings  and  Lord  of  lords  (17"  19^®),  while  the 
sovereignty  of  this  world  becomes  the  sovereignty 
of  the  Lord  and  of  His  anointed  one,  and  He  shall 
reign  for  ever  and  ever  (11**). 

LrrERATX-RE.— A.  B.  Bruce,  Apologetics,  1S92,  bk.  iii.  ch.  v. ; 
H.  Lietzmann,  Die  Briefe  de*  Aposteis  PatUus  {=HaiuUmeh 
mm  XT,  iii.  1  [1910JX  p.  53  ff. ;  A.  Deissmann,  Die  UrgesehieMe 
if*  Christentums  im  Lichte  der  Spraehfonehung,  1910,  Lieht 
vom  Often,  190S ;  Job.  Weiss,  Christus,  1909,  Da*  Urehritten- 
tum,  1914,  cb.  ii.  |  5,  ir.  §  3,  vii.  §  4 ;  H.  Weinel,  Die  SUUung 
de*  Urchri-itentums  zum  Staat,  190S  ;  H.  R.  Mackintosb,  The 
Penon  of  Jemis  Christ,  1912,  bk.  iii.  ch.  v. ;  W.  Boasset, 

KirriosChristos,im.        G.  Wauchope  Stewart. 

LORD'S  DAY.— 1.  Origin.— Before  the  apostolic 
period  had  wholly  passed  away  '  the  first  day  of 
the  week '  had  become,  or  was  well  on  the  way  to 
become,  the  stated  weekly  holy-day  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  bearing  tlie  distinctive  designation 
'the  Lord's  Day'  (^  icvpuiicr]  vpiepa).  It  is  evident 
that  this  day  was  regarded  as  of  special  importance 
from  the  beginning,  and  Mas  placed  alongside  of 
the  Sabbath  in  the  esteem  of  JcMish  Christians. 
In  the  course  of  time  it  became  a  substitute 
for  the  Sabbath  itself.  How  this  Mas  brought 
about  cannot  be  exactly  stated.  We  cannot  point 
to  any  definite  act  of  institution,  any  such  im- 
pressive story  and  legislative  sanction  as  the 
Pentateuch  supplies  M-ith  reference  to  the  JeMish 
Sabbath.  No  authority  of  the  Lord  Himself  can 
be  cited  for  it ;  there  is  no  '  Jesus  said '  to  cor- 
respond to  'God  spake  all  these  Mords,  saying' 
(Ex  2<D').  or  'the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  saying' 
(Lv  19'-^). 

The  materials  afforded  us  by  the  NT  are  scanty 
indeed.  Tmo  things,  however,  are  clear. — (a)  In 
the  brief  Resurrection  stories,  as  found  in  all  the 
Gospels,  conspicuous  emphasis  is  laid  on  '  the  first 
day  of  the  Meek '  as  the  day  on  Mhich  Jesus  rose 
from  the  dead.  See  Mk  16-,  Lk  24i,  Jn  20'  (rj  fug. 
tGiv  ffa^^driov),  Mt  28^  (eis  fiiav  trap^druv),  the  frag- 
ment Mk  16*-*  {rpd/Ti)  aa^^Tov),  Jn  20'»  (r^  ^/lipg. 
fKfipg  T^  fug.  ffttjSjSdTWj').  Jn  20^,  with  its  '  after 
eight  da5-s '  (the  octave),  is  specially  interesting, 
for  it  has  the  faint  suggestion  of  a  custom-germ, 
or  reflects  the  earlj'-established  practice  of  a  Meekly 
meeting  on  tliat  day.  Th.  Zahn  calls  attention 
to  the  particularity* M-ith  Mhich  John  notes  the 
days  connected  m  ith  the  Passion  and  Kesurrection, 
and  explains  it  as  due  to  the  Christian  Meek-scheme 


already  full}*  established  among  the  churches  of 
Asia  Minor,  Math  M-hich  the  Fourth  (Jospel  was  so 
closely  associated  (Skizzen  aus  deni  Lcben  der  alten 
Kirche,  no.  5,  p.  178). — (6)  Early  in  the  2nd  cent, 
the  first  day  or  the  week  appears  as  distinctively 
the  sacred  day  of  Christiamty  under  the  name  of 
'  the  Lord's  Day.' 

The  connexion  betM-een  (a)  and  (6)  cannot  be  for- 
tuitous. The  tradition  that  the  Lord  rose  again 
on  the  first  day  of  the  M'eek  naturally  invested 
that  day  Mith  special  interest.  Jesus'  R^urrection 
from  the  first  figured  as  a  dominating  fact  concern- 
ing Him  in  early  faith  and  evangelism.  WHiat 
wonder  that  that  day  should  come  to  be  regarded 
a&par  excellence  the  Lord's  Day? 

Tboee  wbo  deny  the  reality  of  tbe  Resurrection  as  a  unicjue 
event  are  bard  pressed  to  account  for  tbe  undeniable  primitive 
association  of  the  day  with  that  occurrence.  >N'hat  is  there 
convinciuir  in  the  following  suggestions  ?  '  It  is  quite  possible 
that  the  Christian  Sunday  was  originally  fix«l — ^perhaps  before 
tbe  women's  story  was  generally  known — in  some  other  way, 
e.g.  by  the  events  of  the  Day  of  Pentecost,  or  by  the  first  appear- 
ance of  the  risen  Christ  in  Galilee,  or  by  the  selection  of  the 
first  avaUable  time  after  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  that  tbe  con- 
nexion of  it  ^\-ith  the  date  of  the  Resurrection  was  an  after- 
thought' (J.  M.  Thompson,  MiraeUs  in  the  ST,  London,  1911, 
p.  ICS).  Later  on  the  same  author  seems  to  treat  the  '  app^r- 
ance '  also  as  a  fictitious  afterthought  grafted  on  to  a  Christian 
time-scheme  of  amazingly  early  development :  '  Both  the  appear- 
ances take  place  on  Sunday  (Jn  20).  This  is  another  indication 
of  the  ecclesiastical  and  eucbaristic  atmosphere  in  which  the 
Resurrection  stories  grew  up '  (p.  199  ;  of.  A.  Loisr,  A  utour  d'un 
peta  Here,  Paris,  1903,  p.  242  f.). 

The  NT  itself  is  not  without  evidence  that  this 
institution  began  its  groMth  in  apostolic  times. 
The  passages  are  few  but  familiar.  In  Ac  20'  the 
first  day  of  the  week  is  associated  with  a  Christian 
assembly  for  religious  purposes  {avtrtfyfieruw  Jifidv 
K\daai  dpTOp).  If  a  use  of  this  kind  had  not  already 
b^fun,  M'hat  propriety  or  moment  Mould  there  be 
in  stating  Mhat  day  of  the  Meek  it  Mas ?  Again, 
at  an  earlier  ix)int  in  St.  Paul's  career  mc  find  him 
urging  the  Christians  at  Corinth  to  make  weekly 
contributions  towards  the  fund  for  the  relief  of  the 
impoverished  church  at  Jerusalem,  and  to  do  it  on 
the  first  day  of  the  Meek  (1  Co  16-).  It  has  been 
pointed  out,  not  unreasonably,  that  this  contribu- 
tion is  not  represented  as  an  ofl'ering  to  be  collected 
at  some  meeting  for  worship  (Deissmann,  art. 
'  Lord's  Day '  in  EBi),  that,  rather,  the  expression 
xop'  eavTifi  simply  points  to  setting  aside  such  a 
gift  at  home,  and  so  the  passage  yields  no  positive 
evidence  for  the  observance  of  the  day  as  in  later 
times.  When,  however,  it  is  suggested,  as  an 
alternative  explanation,  that  the  first  day  of  the 
M-eek  is  named  because  probably  this  or  the  day 
before  Mas  the  pay-day  for  M-orking  folk  at  Corinth, 
we  need  some  definite  evidence  for  this  which  is 
not  forthcoming.  And  when,  as  Zahn  observes 
{op.  cit.  p.  177),  M-e  tind  that  in  the  2nd  cent,  there 
M'as  a  wide-spread  custom  of  laying  charitable  gifts 
for  the  poor  on  the  church  dish  in  connexion  Mith 
public  Morship.  it  is  difficult  not  to  connect  this 
\vith  St.  Paul's  Mords  here.  May  not  his  action  in 
this  particular  instance,  indeed,  have  directly  led  to 
the  institution  of  a  collection  for  the  poor  on  the 
Lord's  Day,  and  especially  in  association  Mith 
'the  breaking  of  bread'?  It  may  be  added 
that,  as  St.  Paul  urges  this  course  so  'that  no 
collections  be  made  when  I  come,'  and  as  the  Mhole 
M'ork  is  described  in  v. ^  as  a  '  collection '  {\oyia),  it 
is  most  natural  to  infer  that  there  Mas  not  only  a 
setting  apart  of  gifts,  but  also  a  paying  into  a  local 
fund  Meek  by  M-eek.  This  strengthens  the  vicM- 
that  1  Co  16-  incidentally  gives  evidence  of  early 
movements  towards  the  setting  up  of  the  Lord's 
Day  as  an  institution,  especially  Mhen  taken  along 
Mith  Ac  20^  ;  for  when  could  the  contributions  of 
the  people  be  better  collected  in  readiness  for  the 
Apostle  than  at  their  meetings  on  the  special  da\- 
of  M'orship ': 


708 


LORD'S  DAY 


LORD'S  DAY 


It  is  fair  also  to  nuggoHt  (with  Hcssey,  Sunday,  yi.  4;!)  that  the 
'  aiuieni)>lin); '  spoken  of  in  He  W^  niUHt  have  taken  place  at 
sUted  tiuicii  and  that  the  time  ia  most  likely  to  have  been  the 
first  day  of  the  week. 

The  mention  of  -f)  Kvpiaxij  rifiipa  in  Rev  1"  calls 
for  special  notice,  as  this  is  the  only  instance  in 
the  NT  of  the  use  of  the  expression  that  subse- 

auently  l>ecanio  so  established  and  familiar.  But 
oes  it  bear  in  tliis  place  the  same  significance  as 
it  came  to  possess  ana  possesses  still  ?  Some  have 
argued  that  what  is  meant  is  not '  the  Lord's  Day ' 
as  we  understand  it,  but  '  the  Day  of  the  Lord  '  in 
the  sense  in  which  the  OT  i)rophets  employ  the 
term,  and  as  it  figures  in  the  eschatologicaf  out- 
look of  the  NT  (e.g.  1  Th  5'^).  Hort  (Apoc.  of  St. 
John,  I.-IJI.,  London,  1908,  ad  loc.)  inclines  to 
this  view,  thinking  it  suits  the  context  better,  and 
seeing  no  reason  for  mentioning  the  day  on  which 
the  seer  had  his  vision.  He  suggests  as  a  possible 
rendering :  '  I  became  in  the  Spirit  and  so  in  tlie 
Day  of  the  Lord.'  It  is  not  surprising  that  he 
only  ventures  on  this  'with  .some  doubt.'  Deiss- 
raann  {loc.  cit.)  also  favours  tliis  view,  identifying 
•  the  Lord's  Day'  here  with  '  the  day  of  Jahweh,' 
the  day  of  judgment — in  the  LXX  i)  rnnipa  toO 
Kvploo  (as  also  in  St.  Paul  and  elsewliere).  But 
here  we  have  an  important  point  telling  for  the 
ordinary  view.  Neither  in  the  LXX  nor  in  the 
NT  (nor  in  other  early  Christian  writings)  have  we 
any  instance  of  ij  KvpiaKT)  rifi^pa  (if  not  here)  used  as 
=  'the  Day  of  the  Lord.'  The  term  with  this 
meaning  is  77  rifi^pa  (tov)  Kvplov.  If  the  two  expres- 
sions were  equivalent  and  interchangeable,  how 
strange  that  the  latter  should  occur  so  regularly 
and  the  former  be  found  in  but  one  solitary 
instance  ! 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  an  undisputed  early 
example  of  the  use  of  tj  Kvpiani)  -qfiipa  (in  noteworthy 
abbreviation )  as  = '  Sunday '  in  Didnche,  xiv.  1  (Kara 
KvpiaK^iv  di  Kvpiov avvaxO^vres  KXacrare  Aprov;  cf.  Ac 20'). 
The  expression  tlius  could  not  have  been  a  new 
term  r.  A.D.  100,  since  KvpiaKri  alone  is  used  as  = 
'Lord's  Day,'  and  particularly  in  the  striking 
collocation  KvptaKt]  Kvpiov.  The  relevance  of  tliis  is 
unaffected  even  if  Turner  is  right  in  regarding 
the  Didachc  as  simply  a  rCchnuffc  of  a  purely 
Jewish  manual,  and  the  curious  phrase  '  the 
Lord's  day  of  the  Lord'  as  'only  the  Christian 
substitute  for  the  Jewish  "Sabbath  of  the  Lord"  ' 
(Studies  in  Early  Chnrch  History,  Oxford, 
1912,  p.  8).  Cf.  also  Ignatius,  ad  Magn.  ix,  1 
'  living  in  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day  '  (Kara 
KvpiaKrjv  iCovTCi).  No  difficulty  in  ])oiiit  of  time 
emerges  concerning  the  use  of  -f)  KupiaK^  ijnipa  in 
Rev.,  whicli  is  reasonably  assigned  to  the  reign  of 
Domitian.  And  it  is  not  used  here  as  a  newly- 
coined  term.  How  much  earlier  than  the  time  of 
Domitian  it  came  into  use  none  can  say. 

It  is  true  we  find  the  sim))le  early  name  '  first 
day '  or  '  eighth  day '  continuing  in  use  long  after 
17  KvpiaKi]  Tj/lipa  emerges.  Note  particularly  '  the 
eighth  day,  which  is  also  the  iirst,'  used  by  Justin 
Martyr  (Dial,  xli.,  Apol.  i.  67)  and  still  later 
writers.  But  evidently  there  was  in  '  Lord's  Day ' 
an  inherent  suitability  and  felicity  which  caused 
it  to  outlive  these  primitive  designations  and  be- 
come the  permanent  and  characteristic  Christian 
name  of  the  day.  It  passed  into  Western  use,  not 
only  figuring  as  dies  dominica  in  the  liturgical 
scheme  of  the  week,  but  establishing  itself  in 
ordinary  modern  nomenclature  (e.g.  in  French 
dimarichc  and  Italian  domenica). 

2.  The  epithet  KvpiaKij  and  its  use. — Wc  can 
hardly  wonder  tliat  at  one  time  KvpiaK6s  was  re- 
garded as  a  word  'coined  by  the  a]K)st]es  them- 
selves' (Winer-Moulton,  Grammar  of  N'T  Greek^, 
Edinburgh,  1882,  p.  296).  In  Wilke-Grimm's 
Clavis   Novi    Testamenti^,    Leipzig,    1888,    it    is 


described  as  'vox  solum  biblica  et  ecclesiastica,' 
and  in  Grimni-Tliayer*,  Edinburgh,  1892,  this  is 
reproduced,  save  that '  solum '  is  passed  over.  How- 
ever, the  panyri  and  inscriptions  discovered  more 
recently  in  Egypt  and  in  Asia  Minor  abundantly 
prove  that  the  word  was  in  current  use  in  the 
whole  of  the  Greek-speaking  world  ;  e.g.  KvpiaKbs 
\6yos  (  =  Imperial  treasury)  occurs  in  a  government 
decree  issued  in  A.D.  68,  6  Kvpio^  being  a  designa- 
tion of  the  Emperor  (cf.  similar  use  of  Lat.  domini- 
(•lis).  For  other  examples  see  Deissmann,  Bible 
Studies,  Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1901,  p.  217  f. 

But  from  the  fact  that  early  Christians  did  not 
coin  the  term  Kt)ptaK6s,  but  found  it  ready  to  hand  in 
tlie  vocabulary  of  the  day,  it  does  not  necessarily 
follow  that  they  used  it  as  the  pagan  world  used  it. 
They  set  it  in  a  new  connexion.  In  their  use  of  it 
they  gave  it  a  specific  and  distinctive  character. 
Thus  we  find  it  used  in  specific  association  (which 
became  permanent)  with  the  Supper  (KvpiaKbv 
BciTTvov,  1  Co  11^),  with  the  Day  (as  here),  with  the 
Sayings  of  Jesus  (Xdyia  KvpiaKo.,  Papias),  with  the 
House,  the  domus  ecclesia;  (rb  KvpiaKdv). 

In  this  connexion  the  followinj?  note  from  OED,  s.v.  '  Church,' 
may  be  of  use :  '  The  parallelism  of  Gr.  KvpLaKov,  church, 
KvpcaK^,  Sunday  (in  11th  cent,  also  'church'),  L.  dominicum, 
church,  dominica,  dies  dominica,  Sunday,  Irish  domhnach, 
"  church  "  and  "  Sunday,"  is  instructive.' 

Deissmann  (loc.  cit.)  dissents  from  the  view  ad- 
vanced by  Holtzmann  and  others  that  our  par- 
ticular term  (77  KvpiaKr]  itixipa  or  tj  KvpiaKrj)  'is  formed 
after  the  analogy  of  Selirvov  KoptaKdv.'  He  prefers 
(though,  indeed,  with  a  certain  amount  of  caution) 
to  regard  this  Christian  mode  of  naming  the  first 
day  of  the  week  as  analogous  to  the  custom  of  the 
pagan  world  in  Egypt  and  Asia  Minor  whereby 
the  first  day  of  each  month  was  called  Ze^aar-^ 
(  =  Imperial).  Thus  the  Christian  weekly  'Lord's 
Day'  was  the  direct  counterpart  of  a  monthly 
'Emperor's  Day.'  This,  to  say  the  least,  is  not 
self-evident ;  and  Deissmann  may  well  hesitate,  as 
he  does,  to  maintain  that  the  Christians  thus  con- 
sciously copied  the  pagan  use.  We  need  not,  in- 
deed, argue  a  direct  analogy  to  KvptaKbv  detirvov  in  par- 
ticular. I'erhaps  we  may  more  reasonably  regard 
both  these  expressions  and  others  given  above  as 
being  independent  but  co-ordinate  examples  of 
the  application  of  the  epithet  KvptaKds.  Tliere 
could  ue  no  question  from  the  first  as  to  the  Ki'pios 
it  had  reference  to.  Nor,  again,  need  we  suppose 
that  Christians,  in  thus  speaking  of  Jesus,  were 
directly  influenced  by  the  use  of  6  Kupioi  or  6  Ktjpios 
'OfJLuv  as  designating  a  deity  or  an  emperor  in  the 
time  of  the  Roman  Empire.  They  had  a  sufficient 
precedent  for  this  in  the  Jewish  use  of  'AdCndi  for 
God.  At  the  same  time  the  parallelism  in  such 
use  among  Jews,  Christians,  and  pagans  is  a 
matter  of  some  interest. 

3.  The  relation  of  the  Lord's  Day  to  the  Jewish 
Sabbath. — As  shown  by  the  few  passages  already 
noticed,  the  first  day  of  the  week  evidently  began 
from  the  earliest  times  to  have  a  special  value  in 
the  eyes  of  Christians.  But,  whatever  the  signifi- 
cance and  use  of  that  day,  the  day  itself  was  not 
confounded  with  the  Jewish  Sabbath.  Nor  is 
there  any  sign  that  in  apostolic  times  there  was 
any  thought  of  superseding  the  latter  by  the  Lord's 
Day. 

'  Ij'idee  de  transporter  au  dimanche  la  solennitc  du  sabbat, 
avec  toutcs  ses  exigences,  est  une  idtie  Otrangcre  au  christian- 
isnio  primitif '  (Duchesne,  Orloines  dtc  culte  chrtHxen*,  p.  4C). 
Similarly  Zahn  (op.  cit.  p.  ISS  f.)  points  out  that  no  one  belong- 
ing to  the  circle  of  Jewish  Christians  would  think  of  relaxing 
one  of  Moses'  commandments  ;  and,  even  if  already  in  apostolic 
times  Sunday  came  to  be  observ  cd,  none  could  think  that  the 
Sabbath  commandment  would  be  fulfilled  throu;,'h  a  Sabbath- 
like observance  ot  another  day  instead  of  the  observance  of  the 
Sabbath  itself. 

For  a  considerable  time  the  two  existed  side  by 


LORD'S  DAY 


LORD'S  DAY 


709 


side.  Tlie  Jewish  Christian  wlio  met  with  his 
feUow-Christians  on  the  Lord's  Day  still  observed 
the  Sabbath  of  his  fathers.  Nothing  in  the  use  of 
the  tirst  day  of  the  week  as  a  day  for  Christian 
reunions  could  have  been  intendetl  as  hostile  to 
the  old  Jewish  institution.  Clear  evidence  as  to 
the  two-fold  observance  of  both  the  days  is  furnished 
by  Ignatius  (ad  Magn.  ix.  [longer  recension]), 
who  exhorts  Cliristians  to  keep  the  Sabbath,  '  but 
no  longer  after  the  Jewish  manner.'  'And  after 
the  ob^r\'ance  of  the  Sabbath,  let  every  friend  of 
Christ  keep  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  festival,  the  re- 
surrection-day, the  queen  and  chief  of  all  the  days.' 
Similarly  in  the  Apost.  Const,  ii.  59 :  '  Assemble 
yourselves  together  every  day,  morning  and 
evening,  singing  psalms  and  praying  in  the  Lord's 
House  {iy  roh  KvpuiKoh)  .  .  .  but  principally  on  the 
Sabbath  day  ;  and  on  the  day  of  our  Lord's  Ke-sur- 
rection,  which  is  the  Lord's  Day,  meet  more 
diligently,'  etc.  We  have  an  interesting  memorial 
of  this  primitive  double  observance  in  the  Lat.  and 
Gr.  liturgical  names  for  Sunday  (die^  dominica, 
KvpiaKTi)  and  Saturday  {sabbatum,  adS^arov),  the 
whole  liturgical  scheme  of  the  week  ha\ing  come 
down  from  early  times  when  Christians  discarded 
the  use  of  day-names  associated,  with  pagan 
gods. 

It  is  true  that  Justin  Martyr  in  a  well-knowii  passage 
(Apolofft/,  i-  67)  uses  the  name  '  Sunday '  (t^  tow  'HAt'ow  Aeyo/ifKri 
■illifpa);  but  the  expression  'the  day  caUed  the  day  of  the  sun' 
clearly  indicates  that  whilst  Christians  might  use  the  ordinary 
name  in  intercourse  with  non -Christians  they  did  not  use  it 
among  themselves.  Similarly  in  the  same  chapter  Justin  uses 
'  day  of  Saturn  '  (Saturday)  instead  of  '  Sabbath.'  ZsxYni  {op.  cit. 
p.  357)  marks  this  as  the  only  instance  he  knows  of  in  which 
a  Christian  writer  uses  the  term  'Sunday  '  in  pre-Constantine 
times  (see  also  ERE,  art.  'Festivals  and  Fasts  [Christian]'). 

.\s  Duchesne  (op.  eit.  p.  396)  and  others  hare  pointed  out,  the 
observance  of  Sunday  is  one  of  a  number  of  elements  which 
Christianity  bad  in  common  with  the  reli^on  of  Mithras.  In 
Slithraism  this  was  directly  connected  with  the  worship  of  the 
sun.  It  was  inevitable  that  some  should  argue  from  this  a 
vital  connexion  between  the  two  religions,  "fiiis  was  the  case 
in  primitive  times.  TertuUian  {Apol.  xvi.)  vigorously  repudiates 
the  charge  that  Christians  worshipped  the  sun  as  their  god. 

In  the  course  of  time,  the  distinction  between 
church  and  synagogue  growing  wider,  the  Sabbath 
inevitably  became  less  and  less  important  and 
eventually  fell  into  complete  neglect  among  Chris- 
tians, whilst  the  Lord's  Day  survived  as  their 
special  sacred  day  of  the  week.  (No  institution  of 
liKe  kind  was  known  in  pagani-sm.)  It  must  be 
remembered  that  St.  Paul  wa-s  opposed  to  the  in- 
troduction of  OT  festivals  (including  the  Sabbath) 
into  the  churches  he  founde<l  among  the  Gentiles, 
'  declaring  that  by  the  adoption  of  them  the 
Gentile  believer  forfeited  the  benefits  of  the  gospel, 
since  he  chose  to  rest  his  salvation  upon  rites  instead 
of  upon  Christ  (Col  2»« ;  cf.  Gal  4'«,  Ro  li*'-)'  (G.  P. 
Yi?\ier,  Beginnings  of  Christianitij,  1877,  new  ed., 
1886,  p.  561 ;  cf.  Zahn,  p.  189).  We  may  reasonably 
conclude,  indeed,  that  St.  Paul  himself,  being  one 
of  the  '  strong'  (Ro  14''-),  shared  the  view  of  those 
who  esteemed  '  every  day  alike,'  and  that  all  days 
were  alike  sacred  in  his  eyes,  whether  Sabbaths, 
Lord's  Days,  or  others. 

But  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day  miLst  have 
been  a  very  difl'erent  thing  from  that  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath.  The  commemoration  of  the  Resurrection 
of  Christ  alone  would  make  a  great  ditierence. 
Whether  or  not  the  apostles  saw  what  the  issue 
would  be  when  the  first  day  of  the  week  began  to 
be  thus  observed  (in  however  simple  a  way),  they 
must  have  given  the  growing  custom  their  approval 
and  welcomed  the  association  of  act^  of  joyful 
worship  and  almsgiving  with  the  day.  St.  Paul 
could  have  been  no  exception  in  this  respect ;  but 
apparently  he  did  not  foresee  that  the  Christian 
'  tirst  day  '  might  in  time  assume  those  very  feat- 
ures of  the  Jewish  '  seventh  day  '  Sabbath  which 
made  him  deprecate  the  introduction  of  this  ancient 


institution  among  Gentile  Christians  (see  also  art. 
Sabbath). 
4.  PrimitlTe  modes  of  observing  the  Lord's  Day. 

— The  fact  that  for  Christians  the  one  raison  d'etre 
of  the  Lord's  Day  was  the  commemoration  of  the 
Lord's  Resurrection  made  it  a  weekly  festival  to 
be  kept  with  gladness. 

Somewhat  later  on,  it  is  true,  other  associations  were  claimed 
for  it  as  if  to  enhance  the  dignity  of  the  day.  E.g.  a  connexion 
with  the  first  day  of  Creation  and  even  with  the  Ascension  was 
assumed ;  though  these  were  trifling  compared  with  some 
medixral  developments.  Between  the  11th  and  the  15th  cen- 
turies we  meet  with  a  wide-qwead  fiction  of  a  '  Letter  from 
Heaven '  inculcating  Sunday  observance,  wherein  the  bus^st 
claims  are  made  for  the  day  :  how  that  on  it  the  angels  woe 
created,  the  ark  rested  on  Ararat,  the  Exodus  took  place,  also 
the  Baptism  of  Jesus,  His  great  miracles.  His  Ascension,  and 
the  Charism  of  Pentecost  (see  An  English  UiteeUanji,  in 
honour  of  Dr.  Fumivall,  Oxford,  ISOl). 

(a)  We  are  frequently  reminded  by  early  Chris- 
tian writers  that  it  was  the  primitive  custom  to 
stand  for  prayer  on  that  day  instead  of  kneeling 
as  on  other  days.  Tertulhan,  amongst  others, 
dilates  on  this  [de  Orat.  xxiii).  Canon  20  of  the 
Council  of  Nica?a  plainly  reflects  a  very  old  custom, 
as  it  enjoins  that '  seeing  there  are  some  who  kneel 
on  Sunday  and  in  the  days  of  Pentecost  .  .  .  men 
should  otter  their  prayers  to  God  standing.' 

(6)  Cessation  from  all  work  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  required  in  primitive  times  as  an  ele- 
ment in  the  observance  of  the  day.  So  long  as 
there  were  meetings  for  religious  worship,  Chris- 
tians were  not  expected  to  cease  from  manual 
labour.  But  so  far  as  Je\vish  Christians  were  con- 
cerned, if  they  observed  Sabbath  in  such  a  way, 
they  would  hardly  be  likely  to  observe  the  day 
immediately  following  in  the  same  way  as  well. 
For  the  rest  it  may  be  questioned  whether  social 
conditions  made  it  practicable.  We  can  hardly 
argue  back  to  apostolic  times  from  customs  obtain- 
ing in  society  nominally  Christian  under  nominally 
Christian  government.  Old  Roman  laws  in  pre- 
Christian  times  provided  for  the  suspension  of 
business  (particularly  in  the  law  courts)  on  all 
ferice  or  festivals.  It  was  the  Emperor  Constan- 
tine  who  at  length  ordered  that  the  same  rule 
should  apply  to  the  Lord's  Daj',  thus  b€sto^ving 
honour  on  the  day  as  a  fixed  weekly  festival  (see 
Bingham,  Antiquities  of  the  Christian  Church, 
bk.  XX.  ch.  ii.).  It  is  noticeable  that  in  Ignatius 
{ad  Magn.  ix.  [see  above])  Christians  are  exhorted 
to  keep  Sabbath  'after  a  spiritual  manner,  re- 
joicing in  meditation  on  the  Law '  ;  and  absten- 
tion from  work  is  expressly  discountenanced,  while 
rest  from  labour  is  not  demanded  for  the  observance 
of  the  Lord's  Day.  Later  on  the  practice  of  using 
Sunday  as  a  day  of  rest  from  work  came  into 
vogue  ;  and  then  it  served  as  a  sign  distinguishing 
Cliristian  from  Jew. 

Con^erable  light  on  this  {toint  is  incidentally  gained  from 
the  29tb  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (4th  cent.)— lig^t  as 
to  what  bad  long  heen  the  practice  of  Christians  who  clung  to 
Jewish  antecedents,  and  as  to  the  conditions  then  prevailing. 
It  reads : '  ^Qiat  Christians  must  not  act  as  Jews  by  refraining 
from  woric  on  the  Sabbath,  but  must  rather  work  on  that  day, 
and,  if  they  can,  as  Christians  they  must  cease  work  on  the 
Lord's  Day,  so  giving  it  the  greater  honour.' 

(c)  The  assemblies  connected  with  the  Lord's 
Day  were  two :  the  vigil  in  the  night  between 
Saturday  and  Sunday,  and  the  celebration  of  the 
!  Liturgy  on  Sunday  morning.  One  reason  for  meet- 
'  ing  at  such  times  was  most  probably  the  need  for 
I  precaution  in  times  of  persecution  and  difficulty. 
\  An  interesting  account  of  Sunday  worship  of 
'  Christians  at  Jerusalem  in  the  4th  cent,  is  to  be 
'■■  found  in  a  letter  written  by  a  Gallic  lady  who 
\  went  on  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy  Land.  The 
'  document,  written  in  the  vulgar  Latin,  is  given  by 
i  Duchesne  in  his  Origines  dti  culte  chretien,  App.  5. 
{  No  doubt  the  picture  reflects  in  the  main  a  usag« 
I  which  had  existed  from  much  earlier  times.    A 


710 


LORD'S  DAY 


LOTS 


crowd  of  peojile  ('all  who  could  possibly  be  tli 
irathers  at  the  church  doors  '  oefore  cock-c 


lere') 
gathers  at  the  church  doors  '  before  cock-crow ' 
when  the  doors  are  first  opened,  then  streams  into 
the  church,  which  is  lit  np  by  a  large  number  of 
lamps  (luminaria  infinita).  (Not  that  such  zest  in 
church  attendance  was  universal  in  the  early  cen- 
turies. In  a  Homily  on  the  Lorcfs  Day  by  Eusebius 
of  Alexandria  [5th  cent.  ?]  the  slackness  of  people 
in  coming  to  church  is  humorously  treated  and  re- 
buked. )  The  worship  includes  inter  alia  the  recita- 
tion of  three  psalms,  responses,  prayers,  and  the 
reading  of  the  gospel  story  of  the  licsurrection. 
Justin  Martyr's  account  of  worship  on  the  Lord's 
Day  is  also  well  known  (Apol.  i.  65-67),  while — to 
go  still  further  back  to  the  very  fringe  of  tlie  Apos- 
tolic Age — we  have  Pliny's  famous  letter  to  Trajan 
wherein  he  describes  Cnristians  meeting  early  in 
tlie  morning  to  sing  hymns  to  Christ  and  (v.l. 
'as')  God,  and  joining  in  a  sacramental  act  and  a 
common  meal.  This  took  place,  he  says,  stato  die, 
and  no  doubt  that  fixed  day  was  the  first  day  of 
the  week. 

{d)  Very  possibly  the  sacramental  meal  ('  break- 
ing of  bread')  was  the  earliest  distinctive  feature 
in  the  Chiistian  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day,  the 
other  exercises  of  prayer,  reading,  etc.,  being 
added  later.  '  To  the  sacramental  meal  of  apos- 
tolic times,  understood  as  a  foretaste  and  assurance 
of  the  "Messianic  banquet"  in  the  coming  Par- 
ousia,  there  was  soon  prefixed  a  religious  exercise 
— modelled  perhaps  on  the  common  worship  of  the 
Synagogue — Avhich  implied  just  tliose  preparatory 
acts  of  penance,  pui'ification,  and  desirous  stretch- 
ing out  towards  the  Infinite,  which  precede  in  the 
experience  of  the  growing  soul  the  establishment 
of  communion  with  the  Spiritual  World'  (E. 
Underbill,  The  Mystic  Way,  London,  1913,  p.  335). 

5.  Modern  names  for  Lord's  Day. — The  varying 
names  by  wliich  the  day  has  been  known  in  later 
times  reflect  the  confusion  which  has  attended  the 
history  of  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  Christian  institution. 

(n)  To  speak  of  the  day  as  '  the  Sabbatli '  (even 
the  expression  '  Chi'istian  Sabbath '  is  only  admis- 
sible on  the  ground  of  analogy)  is  to  use  a  modus 
loquendi  that  primitive  Christians  could  never  have 
used.  Tlieir  distinction  between  Sabbath  and 
Lord's  Day  was  as  clear  as  between  the  first  and 
the  seventh  day.  It  arises  from  the  mistaken 
identification  of  the  weekly  festival  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  with  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews  and 
of  the  Fourth  Commandment  in  the  Decalogue. 
The  sanctions  for  the  observance  of  tlie  Lord's  Day 
were  wrongly  sought  in  OT  prescriptions  (see 
Richard  Baxter's  treatise  on  '  The  Divine  appoint- 
ment of  the  Lord's  Day  proved,  etc.,'  in  Works,  ed. 
Orme,  London,  1830,  xiii.  363tl".). 

Less  than  ever  is  it  of  service  now  to  appeal  to 
the  Fourth  Commandment  as  an  authority  in  urg- 
ing the  due  maintenance  of  the  Lord's  Day  ;  tliongh, 
indeed,  the  Mosaic  institution  has  its  full  value  as 
a  venerable  exemplification  of  the  naturally  wise 
provision  for  a  weekly  release  from  daily  business 
and  toil.  Christians  must  rely  on  other  sanctions, 
and  chiefly  the  definite  association  of  the  day  with 
the  Resurrection  of  our  Lord,  the  true  instinct  by 
which  with  great  spontaneity  the  first  little  Cliris- 
tian  communities  set  the  day  apart,  the  continuous 
usage  of  the  Church,  the  provision  for  the  function 
of  worship.  Others  wiio  may  be  uninfluenced  by 
specific  religious  considerations,  and  for  wliom  the 
very  term  'Lord's  Day'  may  have  no  significance, 
may  yet  very  well  recognize  the  value  of  the  under- 
lying natural  principle  of  tlie  '  day  of  rest.' 

{b)  Again,  the  persistence,  or  survival,  of  the  pre- 
Christian  and  pagan  designation  'Sunday'  is  a 
matter  of  interest,  especially  since,  being  tacitly 
denuded  of  its  ancientassociations  withsun-worship, 
it  has  come  to  be  invested  to  the  Christian  mind 


with  all  the  meaning  attached  to  '  Lord's  Day,'  and 
used  interchangeably  with  tliat  name.  VVe  have 
seen  how  careful  primitive  Christians  were  to  dis- 
tinguish between  tlie  pagan  name  and  that  which 
they  took  for  their  own  jjarticnlar  use.  But  the 
old  nomenclature  held  its  ground  in  the  civil  calen- 
dar notwithstanding  the  spread  of  Christianity. 
When  Constantino  (A.D.  321)  publicly  honoured 
the  Lord's  Day  by  enacting  that  it  should  be  kept 
as  a  day  of  rest,  he  spoke  of  it  as  dies  vcnerabilis 
solis.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  4th  cent.,  in  one  of 
the  laws  of  Valentinian  II.,  there  occurs  the  phraise  : 
'  On  Sunday,  which  our  forefathers  usually  and 
rightly  called  the  Lord's  Day  (Dominicum)' — a 
further  evidence  as  to  the  triumph  of  the  ancient 
name.  It  is  curious  to  see  '  Lord's  Day '  referred 
to  as  an  old  name  that  had  fallen  into  abeyance 
(see  Bingham,  op.  cit.  XX.  ii.  I). 

An  interesting  subject  of  inquiry  pre.sent3  itself 
in  the  fact  that  among  the  Teutonic  nations  of 
Western  Christendom  this  old  pagan  name,  '  day 
of  the  sun,'  has  established  itself  in  the  calendar, 
whilst  the  modern  Latin  nations  employ  as  the 
universal  name  the  early  Christian  term  dies  dom- 
inica  in  various  forms.  (The  futile  attempt  of  the 
Quakers  to  supersede  both  forms  and  revert  to  NT 
simplicity  by  using  the  colourless  expression  '  first 
day'  is  a  matter  of  history.)  In  the  light  of  this 
divergence  Zahn's  plea  for  the  day  as  alike  valuable 
for  Christians  and  non-Christians  has  point  only 
when  addressed  to  the  Teutonic  peoples.  The 
weekly  festival,  he  urges,  should  be  upheld  as  '  a 
"Lord's  Day"  only,  of  course,  for  those  who  call 
upon  the  risen  Jesus  as  their  Lord,  but  as  a  "  Sun- 
day" for  all  men,  a  day  when  God's  sun  shines 
benignantly  upon  the  earth'  {op.  cit.  ad  Jin.). 

Literature.— Art  '  Lord's  Day '  in  HDB  (N.  J.  D.  White), 
EBi  (Deissraann),  Sniith-Cheetham's  DCA  (A.  Barry),  art. 
'  Festivals  and  Fasts  (Christian)'  in  ERE  Q.  G.  Carleton), 
art.  'Sonntagsfeier'in/^iiiE3(Z(Jckler);  Bingham,  Antiijuitifs 
of  the  Christian  Church,  Oxford,  1855,  bks.  xx.,  xxi. ;  Duchesne, 
Origines  du  mite  chrHien*,  Paris,  1!X)9  (Eiig.  tr.,  Christian 
Worship*,  London,  1912),  also  Early  History  of  the  Christian 
Church,  vol.  i.,  Eng.  tr.  from  4th  ed.,  do.  1909;  J.  A.  Hessey, 
Bampton  Lecture  on  Sunday,  London,  1860 ;  Th.  Zahn, 
Skizzen  aus  dera  Leben  der  alten  Kirche^,  Leipzig,  1898, 
no.  5 :  '  Geschichte  des  Sonntags  vornehmlich  in  der  altcn 
Kirche.'  J.  S.  CLEMENS. 

LORD'S  SUPPER.— See  Eucharist. 

LOT  (Awt).— Lot,  the  nephew,  and  for  a  time 
the  companion,  of  Abraham,  is  thrice  over  called 
'righteous'  in  2  P  2''-*'.  With  all  his  faults,  of 
which  the  spirit  of  compromise  was  the  most  con- 
spicuous, he  was  relatively  Skatoy,  i.e.  in  com- 
parison with  the  citizens  of  Sodom  among  whom 
he  made  his  abode.  The  Vulg.  and  Erasmus 
assume  that  in  v.*  he  is  designated  '  just  in  seeing 
and  liearing' — 'aspectu  et  auditu  Justus' — but  it 
is  better  to  read,  '  in  seeing  and  hearing  lie  vexed 
his  righteous  soul.'  The  active  voice  (e^affdvi^ev) 
implies  that  while  he  was  no  doubt  continually 
vexed  beyond  measure  by  the  conduct  of  tiie  people 
around  him,  his  troubles  were  ultimately  of  his 
own  making.  '  It  was  precisely  his  dwelling  there, 
which  was  his  own  deliberate  choice,  that  became 
an  active  torment  to  his  soul'  (H.  von  Soden  in 
Handkom.  zum  NT,  in.,  Freiburg i.  B.,  1899,  p.  203). 

James  Strahan. 

LOTS.— 1.  Definition.— The  art.  Divination  in- 
dicated how  at  an  early  period  men  felt  it  to  be 
their  duty  and  for  their  advantage  to  get  into  and 
maintain  friendly  relations  with  their  divinities. 
There  gradually  grew  up,  on  the  one  hand,  methods 
by  which  the  deities  revealed  their  will  to  men  ; 
and  on  the  other,  methods  by  wliicli  men  could 
learn  the  desire  or  decision  of  the  deities.  Among 
the  latter,  one  of  the  most  primitive  and  most 
widely  diitused  was  kleromancy  (k\^/3oj  +  AtcwTe/a), 


LOTS 


LOTS 


711 


divination  by  lot.  While  the  efficacy  of  klero- 
luancy  in  modem  civilized  life  depends  on  the  elim- 
ination of  all  possibility  of  human  interference,  in 
the  lower  culture  it  depends  and  depended  on  the 
certainty  of  Divine  interference,  the  untrammelled 
exerci^se  of  the  Divine  will.  This  end  was  attained 
by  {(i)  the  use  of  certain  things  through  which, 
according  to  tradition,  the  divinities  could  express 
their  will.  There  were  many  such,  as  *  a  rod '  (pd^Sm, 
Sb?,  hence  pa/35o/ta»Teia,  'rhabdomancy '),  'arrows' 
(jS^Xot,  f? ;  hence  ^eXo^tojrrta, '  belomancy'),  knuckle- 
bones {drrpdyaXoi ;  hence  dtrrpaya\6nams,  '  astra- 
galomant'),  and  many  others,  as  pebbles  {\frr)<t>ot^ 
yfi),  beans,  etc.  ;  (6)  the  reverent  manipulation  of 
sacred  things  through  which  the  deity  had  indicated 
hLs  pleasure  to  make  known  liLs  vail,  a  good  ex- 
ample of  which  is  the  use  by  the  Hebrew  priests 
x>f  '  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim ' ;  (c)  the  select- 
ing of  a  method  by  which  the  deity  was  perfectly 
free  to  express  his  will  without  human  interference, 
a  good  example  of  which  is  seen  in  the  action  of 
Jonathan  (1  S  14*"").  This  latter  use  approaches 
very  closely  to  the  omen  or  the  ordeal  and  to  some 
kintls  of  rhabdomancy.* 

2.  DifihiBion. — Kleromancy  is  a  universal  religious 
practice.  It  was  resorted  to  by  the  Romans  t  and 
Greeks.*  It  prevailed  throughout  the  Semitic 
world.  In  the  form  of  belomancy  it  was  used  by 
the  Babylonians  (Ezk  21^  •*') ;  'he  shook  the  arrows 
to  and  "fro.'§  It  was  employed  by  the  sailors  of 
the  ship  of  Tarshish  (Jon  1"),  by  the  Arabs,;!  and 
Assyrians  (HDB  iiL  \32^),  wMle  the  Persians  re- 
sorted to  it  as  a  means  of  finding  out  lucky  days 
(Yst  3"  9^*^).  It  nourishes  in  China  and  Japan 
and  in  all  uncivilized  countries  to-day.  In  every 
case  it  is  in  close  connexion  with  the  worship  of 
the  deities,  and  often  takes  place  in  their  pre- 
sence or  in  their  temples,  and  always  imder  their 
auspices. 

•Among  the  Hebrews  in  the  oldest  times  the 
typical  form  of  divine  decision  was  by  the  lot,  or 
other  such  oracle  at  the  sanctuary.'^  Later  on, 
kleromancy  was  largely  and  regularly  employed 
with  the  sanction  of  Jahweh,  so  that,  apart  from  all 
human  influence,  passion,  bias,  or  trickery.  He 
might  be  able  to  dictate  His  will :  '  The  lot  'W'  prrg 
but  the  whole  decision  thereof  comes  from  Jahweh ' 
(Pr  16**).**  This  means  not  'that  the  actnal  dis- 
posal of  affairs  might  be  widely  different  from 
what  .  .  .  the  lot  .  .  .  appeared  to  determine* 
(Fairbaim,  Imperial  Bible  Dictionary,  ii.  US),  but 
the  exact  opposite  ;  hence  it  was  clearly  established 
that  '  the  lot  causeth  contentions  to  cease,  and 
parteth  between  the  mighty '  (Pr  18^).  We  have 
a  conspicuous  example  of  rhabdomancy  in  the 
budding  and  fruit-bearing  of  Aaron's  rod  (Nu  17^"^ 
[16-23]),tt  and  the  practice  is  also  referred  to  in 
Hos  4^,  and  probably  in  Is  17"*.  We  find  klero- 
mancy practised  in  the  form  of  belomancy  in  2  K 

*  S«e  James  £bre«, '  Divuaatioa  among  the  Ualagasjr,'  FoOC' 
Xorv.  iii.  (lS9g]193ff. 

t  F.  Gm^er.  The  Wonkip  of  Ou  Bamuuu,  1805,  pc  180; 
Cicero,  de  IHeinatUme,  iL  86,  etc ;  W.  Samth,  Diet,  of  Gnek 
and  Homan  Antiqttities,  1875,  artk  'Oncalnni,'  'Sovtes'; 
ThMiias  Gataker,  Treatise  of  Uu  Satmre  m»d  U*e  of  LObfi,  16S7. 
and  A  juH  Defence  of  certain  Paaages  m  [Ute  preceding] 
Treatite,  1633,  p.  75. 

t  W.  B.  BalUdar,  Greek  Divination,  1913,  ch.  x. ;  Smith,  loe. 
dt.,  arC  ' Dicastes' ;  Tft« Martyrdom  ofPolpemrp,  ri. 

f  The  Qnr'an  (son  ▼.  4.  Sale's  Pret.  Ditc  t.)  prohibite  ttw 
IMtxauin^of  aDiTineKotencebydrawingalotat  the  sanctnatr 
with  heMlesB  arnnra. 

1  W.  Bobertsoa  Smith,  '  Dinnatioa  and  Magic  in  Dt  ISI*-  U,' 
in  JPh  xiiL  [1S851 277. 

^  W.  BobeitsoD  Smith,  £fr. 

**  ^r  may  mean  (<t)  '  cast  into,'  or  O)  '  cast  about  in '  (ADB 
ir.  810X  pn  may  mean  the  bosom  of  (a)  a  peiaon ;  (fl)  a  gar- 
ment ;  (y)  a  thing,  as  a  chariot  or  altar,  hence  iD%fat  poasiUly 
mean  an  urn  (Smith's  DB  iL  146).  llie  mfaning  is  afanost 
certainly  that  under  (fi). 

ft  W.  R.  Smith,  RS^,  ISM.  p.  190,  and  comment  thereon  by 
O.  B.  Gray  in  Com.  om  Sftmber*(,ICC,  1903Jl 


1314-19  ♦  Under  the  form  known  as  the  Urim  and 
the  Thummim  it  was  or  became  a  mode  used  only 
by  the  priests,  t  Kleromancy  had,  of  course,  its 
largest  sphere  in  acts  directly  connected  with 
Jahweh.  The  decision  as  to  which  goat  should  be 
for  sacrifice  to  Jahweh  and  which  to  Azazel  was 
determined  by  lot  (Lv  lff>-").  A  war  was  the  war 
primarily  not  of  Israel  but  of  Jahweh,  and  that 
specially  if  it  was  for  the  panishment  of  wrong- 
doing ;  hence  the  members  of  a  punitive  expedition 
were  chosen  by  lot  (Jg  20*),  hence  also  the  spoil 
taken  in  war  (Jg  ff"),  whether  captives  (2  S  8*, 
Xah  3'",  Jl  3')  or  sections  of  a  conquered  city 
(Ob  ").  The  services  of  the  sanctuary  were  sacred ; 
hence  the  priestly  functions  were  assigned  to  the 
orders  by  lot  (1  Ch  24*-',  Lk  1»),  Shemaiah  the 
scribe  writing  out  the  lots  in  the  presence  of  a 
committee  consisting  of  the  king,  the  high  priest, 
and  other  functionaries  (1  Ch  2A^^).  The  musi- 
cians (1  Ch  258),  the  custodians  (i  Ch  26^  "),  and 
the  persons  who  should  bring  the  wood  and  other 
offerings  to  the  temple  (Xeh  10"),  were  all  chosen 
by  lot.  So  sacred  was  this  procedure  that  a  special 
official  was  entrusted  with  'superintending  the 
daily  casting  of  the  lots  for  determining  the 
particular  parts  of  the  service  that  were  to  be 
apportioned  to  the  various  officiating  priests' 
(E.  Schiirer,  HJF  n.  i.  269,  293).  It  was  even 
maintained  by  some  Jews  in  later  times  that  the 
high  priest  had  been  chosen  by  the  same  method 
(Jos.  BJ  rv.  iiL  7,  8 ;  c.  Ap.  iL  24).  As  the  king 
was  the  official  representative  of  Jahweh,  Saul  was 
chosen  by  lot  ( 1 S  lO**"^ ).  Godless  or  indiscriminate 
work  is  where  no  lot  is  cast  (Ezk  24*).  When  the 
c-v:  or  ban  had  been  pronounced  and  violated,  then 
the  gmlty  person  was  detected  whether  the  etti 
was  permanent  (Jos  7^*"^®)  or  temporary  (1  S  14"-^), 
in  both  cases  presumably  by  the  L'rim  and  the 
Thummim.*  As  the  Semites  regarded  the  land 
inhabited  by  a  nation  as  the  possession  of  the  god 
of  the  nadon,  Palestine  belonged,  as  an  allotment, 
to  Jahweh  (Dt  32*)  ;  hence  it  was  His  right  and 
duty  to  put  His  people  into  actnal  possession 
(Ps  105",  1  Ch  16"),  which  He  did  (Ps  TS^*  135" 
Ac  13^*),  and  to  divide  it  up  by  kleromancy  into 
allotments  to  the  various  tribes  (Xn  26**-  *  33^ 
3Sr).%  This  accordingly  was  done  in  regard  to  the 
nine  and  a  half  tribes  (Nu  34**,  Jos  14*  15»  16* 
171.  i«7  Ps  78M)^  to  the  conquered  land,  to  the 
land  still  unconquered  after  the  first  great  effort 
(Jos  18^"  19»-*>),  and  at  the  death  of  Joshua  (Jos 
13*) ;  also  in  regard  to  the  towns  for  the  Levites 
(Jos  21«,  1  Ch  6« ;  Jos  21»,  1  Ch  6«i ;  Jos  21«,  1  Ch 
e« ;  1  Ch  6« ;  Jos  218,  1  Ch  e»).  This  was  done 
'  before  Jahweh '  (Jos  IS*)  and  under  the  direction 
of  a  committee  consisting  of  the  high  priest,  the 
political  chief,  and  the  heads  of  the  fathers'  houses 
of  the  tribes  (Jos  W-). 

In  course  of  time  the  proeednre  which  had  been 
primarily  and  essentially  sacred  was  applied  to 
secnlar  affairs  such  as  the  selection  of  people 
to  inhabit  and  guard  a  city  (Neh  11*).  A  study 
of  the  Old  Testament  reveals  how  kleromancy 
coloured  the  thought  and  the  theology  of  the 
Hebrew  thinkers  and  poets. 

•  See  abo  PS  9is. 

t  As  was  the  epbod  (I  S  14i>):  T.TX  and  J.  Wdlbaasen. 
Protegananena  to  tie  Eittorp  ^ isrsel,  1SS5.  p.  133;  HDB  ir. 
SK,  with  the  Uteiataie  there  mentiooed,  and  r.  OOe^. 

SIS  1441-^  as  amended  fien  LXX  hy  A.  Knenen,  The  Be- 
ligUm.  of  Itrael,  L  [1S74]  98;  A.  B.  &  Kennedy.  HDB  it. 
839>> ;  6.  B.  Grar,  in  MamtfusU.  CotUge  Buaps,  1900,  Pl  120; 
SwB.  Driver,  Tezto/lAtfAMb  o/SraNMi;  1890. 

f  Eaeldei's  ideal  divisiaa  of  tiw  land  was  ly  lot  (Edc  47S 
48^  It  was  the  intentian  ol  AntiocfaiH,  after  sobdmng 
Palestine,  to  plant  ooionies  in  the  land,  dividing  it  amoi^  diem 
by  lot  (1  MacS^  Joaepbos  (B/  m.  viiL  7)  Mved  bis  life  by 
ntAwwmg  Ins  soldiers  to  agree  diat  tlie  order  in  iriudi  they 
flbooU  kin  each  other  sboold  be  decided  by  lot.  He  adds  this 
oiHnmait,  *  whether  we  most  say  it  happemd  so  by  chaaee,  or 
wbetber  by  the  proridence  of  God.' 


712 


LOTS 


LOTS 


8.  In  the  New  Testament. — At  the  Crucifixion 
of  Jesus  we  see  ita  secular  and  Kunian  use  when 
the  Holcliors  divided  His  upper  garments  among 
themselves  by  lot. 

After  the  suicide  of  Judas  it  was  decided  that 
a  successor  should  be  appointed.  The  procedure 
(Ac  r-"-^)  was  as  follows.  From  the  mass  of  the 
followers  of  Jesus,  numbering  about  one  hundred 
and  twenty,  those  only  were  declared  eligible  who 
had  proved  their  steadfastness  by  keeping  in  con- 
stant contact  with  Him  from  His  baptism.  From 
this  short  leet  they  appointed  ((arrjcrai'  ;  not '  put 
forward')  two.  Neither  the  parties  M'ho  did  this 
nor  the  method  of  doing  it  are  mentioned.  Then 
prayer  was  otiered  to  Jesus*  for  His  decision. 
The  next  step  is  not  quite  certain.  H  the  words 
(iuKav  k\i)poi<%  ai>ro«r,  which  is  the  correct  reading, 
mean  '  they  gave  the  lots  to  tliem,'  then  that 
indicates  that  to  each  of  the  two  there  was  given 
to  place  in  the  proper  receptacle  a  tablet  with 
his  name  or  mark,  and  he  whose  tablet  was  lirst 
shaken  out  was  held  to  be  Divinely  elected.  But 
the  phrase  is  not  the  classical  nor  the  NT  expres- 
sion for  casting  lots,  and  if  rendered  '  they  gave 
lots  for  them,'  a  quite  legitimate  rendering,  then, 
as  Mosheim  helif.t  the  election  was  by  ballot. 
This,  of  course,  is  not  in  harmony  with  Jewish 
practice,  as  seen  in  the  selection  of  the  goats 
(Lv  16^).  From  the  result  being  indicated  by  the 
words  '  the  lot  fell '  and  not  '  the  Lord  chose,'  it 
has  been  argued  tiiat  the  election  was  unwarranted 
and  tliat  the  Divine  intention  was  tliat  St.  Paul 
should  fill  the  place  of  Judas.  This  is  a  piece  of 
pure  imagination.  Nor  is  there  a  shadow  of  proof 
that  the  eleven  were  in  any  special  manner  led 
either  to  appoint  a  successor  or  to  appoint  him 
by  this  method.  The  fact  that  the  election  took 
place  before  Pentecost  has  no  vital  significance. 
The  act,  in  the  face  of  the  enemies  of  the  Church, 
was,  like  the  auctioning  of  the  camp  of  Hannibal 
by  the  Komans,  a  boldlj'  prudent  step,  a  declara- 
tion to  all  that  the  Church  was  neither  cowed  by 
the  death  of  her  Lord  nor  dejected  by  the  suicide 
of  the  traitor,  but  was  girding  herself  for  a  forward 
march.  When  St.  ,Iames  was  martyred  there  was 
no  occasion  for  such  an  act,  and  no  successor  was 
appointed.  Hence  this  remains  the  only  official 
use  of  the  lot  in  the  Apostolic  Church.:):  Klero- 
mancy  has  left  its  mark  on  the  thought,  and 
specially  on  the  soteriology,  of  the  Apostolic  Age. 
K\rjpoi  is  used  in  the  secondary  sense  which  it 
gradually  gained  as  something  assigned  to  man 
by  a  higher  power.  Judas  had  received  rbv  KKrjpov 
in  the  ministry  carried  on  by  Jesus  (cf.  II.  xxiii. 
862  ;  Ac  1'"),  and  iiis  su(!cessor  was  to  take  not  rhv 
KKrjpov  (K  C^E),  but  only  his  rbirov,  '  place '  (ABC*D ; 
Ac  1^),  while  in  it  Simon  Magus  had  neither  yuepis 
0^5^  kX%os,  neither  a  share,  a  limited  portion,  nor 
an  allotment  (Ac  8^').  The  vpea^vripoi  must  not 
exerci.se  lordly  mastery  (cf.  Ps  9  [10]*)  over  wliat 
is  not  theirs,  but  tCiv  kXtipwv,  allotments  made  to 
them  (1  P  .')').  Ignatius  prays  for  grace  els  t6  rbv 
K\r}p6v  fjiov  dvefjLirodicrTws  diroXa^f'ii',  '  to  cling  to  my 
lot  without  hindrance  to  the  end '  {Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  i.).  K\r]povofj.la  has  its  original  sense  of 
an  allotment  made  by  a  higher  power.  Abraham 
went  out  from  Ur  into  a  T6iroi>,  a  district  in  which 
he  was  promised  an  allotment  (He  11"),  but  in 

*  H.  P.  Liddon,  The  Divinity  of  our  Lord^^,  18S5,  p.  375  ;  A. 
Carr  in  Erpositor,  6th  ser.  i.  [1900]  389  ;  and  various  Coniinen- 
aries  in  loco. 

t  J.  L.  .Mosheim,  Inetitttfes  o/  Ecclesiastical  History,  18CS,  p. 
20,  note  3. 

X  3.  Bingham,  Ori'jines  Ecclesiasticce,  1840,  iv.  1.  11  ;  J. 
Cochrane,  Discourses'  on  Difficult  Texts  of  Scripture,  1851,  p. 
297  ;  J.  B.  Lijfhtfoot.  Epixtle  to  the  Philippians-,  1870,  p.  240  ; 
F.  W.  RoberUon,  Sfrtnony,  4th  ser.,  1874.  p.  117;  F.  Reii<lall, 
Expositor,  3rd  ser.  vii.  []Ks;«l  357  ;  HDIl  iii.  305,  and  liUratnre 
there  mentioned.  The  Oitlache  (15)  contains  no  reference  to 
the  method  of  eleclinjf  lii^hops  and  deacons. 


which  he  actually  got  none  (Ac  7*),  the  allotment, 
and  all  its  accompaniments,  resting  on  nothing 
legal,  but  on  a  mere  promise  (Gal  3"*).  Similarly 
the  called  of  God  still  receive  only  the  promise  of 
an  allotment  which  is  eternal  (He  9'"). 

The  transmission  of  an  allotment  was  regulated 
by  certain  customs.  A  holder  could  convey  it  to 
another,  as  Isaac  did  to  Jacob,  and  such  transfer- 
ence could  not  be  cancelled  or  altered  ((in  27^^,  He 
12").  It  was  recognized  that  the  son  of  a  female 
slave  could  not  share  an  allotment  with  the  son  of  a 
free-born  wife  (Gn  21'",  Gal  4^").  Hence  gradually 
the  children,  just  because  they  were  the  children, 
of  the  possessor  (Ro  8'^)  claimed  the  allotment  on 
the  death  of  the  possessor  as  a  thing  to  be  divided 
anion"  them  (Lk  12'^).  Because  a  child  came  to 
be  looked  upon  as  the  holder  of  the  K\^pos,  and 
when  he  attained  the  proper  age  (Gal  4')  entered 
on  possession,  K\ripop6/xoi  (KXrjpos  +  vi/xofiai,  'hold') 
came  to  mean  what  we  call  an  '  heir '  (He  1 1").*  In 
this  sense  the  word  is  used  prolejftically  in  the 
expression,  '  This  is  6  K\-ripov6nos,  let  us  kill  him 
and  the  KXrjpovofxla  will  become  ours  '  (Mt  21^,  Mk 
12^  Lk  20").  Similarly  the  higher  things  of  life 
came  to  V)e  looked  upon  as  something  the  xX^pos  of 
which  a  man  could  hold.  Noah  became  the  holder 
of  the  KXijpos  of  righteousness  (He  IV).  Very  sig- 
nificant as  attaching  excellency  to  a  name,  as  a 
condensed  form  of  the  whole  personality,  is  the 
expression  that  the  Eternal  Son  Siatpopunepov  KfKXrjpo- 
vSfirjKev  6vofj.a,  had  allotted  to  Him  a  more  excellent 
name  (He  I'*),  and  tiius  became  the  One  to  whom 
all  things  were  allotted  (He  l*),  KXrjpovbuov  wivruv. 
Salvation,  whether  as  promised  or  bestowed,  is, 
in  its  ultimate  eschatological  form,  sometliing 
allotted.  St.  Paul's  mission  to  the  Gentiles  was  to 
open  the  eyes  that  they  might  receive  kXjjpov,  an 
allotment,  a  thing  falling  to  their  lot,  among  them 
that  are  sanctified  (Ac  26"*).  God,  who  is  able  to 
give  them  a  KX-qpovofjilav  among  all  them  that  are 
sanctified  (Ac  20^-'), t  Himself  causes  them  to  be- 
come partakers  rov  KXrjpov,  of  the  allotment  of  the 
saints  in  light  (cf.  Ps  15  [16]8,  Col  1*-),  the  dppa^ufv, 
the  arles  of  the  allotment,  being  the  gift  of  tiie 
Holy  Spirit  (Eph  I''*),  and  the  ministry  of  the 
angels  (He  1").  The  promises  of  God  are  given 
as  an  allotment  to  tiiose  who  exhibit  faith  and 
patience  (He  6'-),  and  Christian  graciousness  to 
others  (1  P  3*);  while  to  him  who  overcomes 
temptation  there  is  given  as  an  allotment  the 
blessing  that  only  God  can  give  (Rev  2V),  and  to 
those  who  comport  themselves  rightly  to  the  home 
circle  there  is  given  as  a  recompense  the  allotment 
(Col  3-'*).  The  saints  in  this  way  become,  as  Israel 
of  old  (Dt  4-»  9-*-29  328),  the  allotment  which 
belongs  to  God  (Eph  1'^),  iv  (f  kuI  iKXrjpwdrifiev  (N 
BKLi'),  and,  being  the  riches  of  His  glory  (1"*),  are 
the  heirs  of  all  the  promises  (He  6'").  Just  as  the 
earth  is  an  allotment  made  to  the  meek  (Mt5'), 
and  eternal  life  an  allotment  to  those  who  have 
left  houses,  etc.  (Mt  192^  Mk  10",  Lk  10=«  IS'*, 
Gal  5-'),  so  there  is  a  Kingdom  in  which  the  un- 
righteous (1  Co  6''-''*),  in  which  flesh  and  blood 
(1  Co  15**),  in  which  fornicators,  etc.  (Eph  5'), 
cannot  receive  an  allotment ;  for  it  is  an  allotment 
prepared  only  for  the  blessed  of  the  Father  (Mt 
25**).  It  is  tlierefore  a  spiritual  allotment,  incor- 
ruptible, undeliled  (1  P  l"*).  This  iwssession  passes 
to  men  not  through  force  of  a  legal  enactment, 
but  through  their  showing  themselves  heirs  to  it 
by  their  ethical  and  si)iritual  conduct.  Thus  the 
allotment  of  this  Avorld,  promised  to  Abraham, 
pa-sses  to  those  linked  to  him  not  by  flesh  and 
blood,  but  only  by  the  righteousness  of  faith  (Ro 

*  Cf.  the  remarks  on  feudal  tenure  in  J.  Hill  Burton,  Tlif 
Scot  Abroad,  1898,  p.  4. 

t  Cf .  Polycarp,  Episllf  to  the  Philippians,  xii. :  'det  vobis 
sorteni  et  p.irtem  inter  sanctos  suos.' 


LOTS 


LOVE 


713 


4^'-  '*),  ami  only  those  who  are  thus  in  Christ  are 
Abraham's  progeny,  and  KXrjpovdfioi  according  to 
the  promise  (Gal  3^).  They  are  the  heirs  of 
eternal  life,  according  to  hope  (Tit  3''),  and  because 
they  have  loved  their  Lord  (Ja  2*).  Hence  it  is 
that  the  Gentiles  equally  with  the  Jews  are  aiv- 
K\r]pov6p^ot,  fellow  heirs  (Eph  S**),  and  wives  are  crw- 
K\r)pov6fiois,  joint  heirs  of  the  grace  of  life  (1  P  3").* 
The  conception  of  salvation  as  something  allotted 
to  man  may  have  tended  to  obscure  the  necessity 
for  diligence  and  earnestness  in  the  pursuit  of  the 
Christian  ideal,  and  this  again  may  account  for 
the  absence  of  the  idea  from  the  writings  of  the 
Apostolic  Fathers.  In  actual  life  at  least  we  are 
not  unfamiliar  with  something  similar. 

While  kleromancy,  it  is  true,  '  appeared  to  take 
the  responsibility  of  decision  out  of  the  hands  of 
man  and  vest  it  in  the  presiding  deity,'  t  yet,  in 
reality,  its  tendency  is  not  to  exalt  the  Divine  will 
but  to  enervate  the  human  mind.  It  thus  tends 
to  destroy  our  sense  of  responsibility,  and  the 
duty  of  patiently  permitting  God  to  enlighten  our 
minds  as  to  what  is  right.  It  thus  robs  us  of  the 
moral  and  spiritual  discipline  of  acting  according 
as  conscience,  enlightened  by  Him,  dictates,  and 
besides  opens  up  infinite  possibilities  of  trickerj- 
and  fraud.  Through  the  action  of  the  eleven,  and 
age-long  influences,  Jewish  and  pagan,  kleromancy 
continued  to  be  practised  in  the  Church.  Augus- 
tine held  that  divisorj*  lots  were  lawful  in  conmion 
things  but  not  in  di  posing  of  ecclesiastical  offices 
and  lives  of  men,*  and  similar  views  continued  to 
prevail  till  near  the  end  of  the  17th  century. § 
Jeremj-  Taylor  still  thought  it  'not  improbable, 
and  in  most  cases  to  be  admitted,  that  (iod  hath 
committed  games  of  chance  to  the  Devil's  conduct.' li 
Wesley  believed  in  Divine  guidance  being  given  by 
lotjIF  and  in  1738  a  journey  to  Bristol  was  finally 
decided  on,  after  various  appeals  to  the  Sories 
Sanctorum,  by  kleromancy.**  Among  the  Moravi- 
ans, whose  lirst  ministers  were  chosen  by  lot,  in 
1467,  and  whose  church  life  was  at  first  completelj- 
regulated  by  kleromancy,  its  sphere  was  steadily 
and  gradually  limited,  and  it  is  now  scarcely  recog- 
nized.ft  Though  down  to  the  end  of  the  16th  cent,  it 
was  frequently  practised,:^!  and  the  prevailing  view 
was  that  'lots  may  not  be  used,  but  with  great  re- 
verence, because  the  disposition  of  them  cometh  im- 
mediately from  God,'  yet  the  arguments  of  Gata- 
ker  §§  that  such  Divine  interposition  was  '  indeed 
mere  superstition,'  and  that  '  lots  were  governed 
by  purely  natural  laws,'  gradually  influenced 
educated  men.  Among  the  more  illiterate  sects 
kleromancy  long  lingered,  and  the  scene  in  Silas 
Marner  (ch.  1)  was  true  to  life.  Pious  but  ignorant 
people  still  resort  to  it  in  one  form  or  another. 
The  rule  that  when  a  lower  type  of  religion  is 
absorbed  or  superseded  by  a  higher  the  ceremonies 
of  the  former  finally  become  games,  and  then 
children's  games,  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that 
the  casting  of  lots,  once  sacred  and  solemn,  is 
now  totally  confined  to  games. 

LiTKRATURK.— This  has  been  indicated  in  the  foot-notes. 

P.  A.  GoRDOx  Clark. 

*  Cf.  the  slave  made  co-heir  (Hennas,  ii.). 

t  J.  E.  Carpenter,  Comparatire  Religion,  1913,  p.  178. 

X  Bingham,  xvi.  5.  3. 

§  Bingham,  iv.  1.  1.  For  the  connexion  between  kX^imk  and 
•clergy'  see  Li^htfoot,  p.  245,  and  E.  de  Pressensc,  Christian 
Life  and  Practice  in  the  Early  Church,  ISSO,  p.  52. 

II  Ductor  dtibitantium,  1660,  iv.  1. 

^  Life  0/  Weslej/,  by  Robert  Southey  (Bohn's  edition,  1864),  pp. 
80,  81,  110,  111,  119,  note  27. 

**  Journal  of  John  Wexley  (Evernnan's  editionX  i.  [1906]  175. 

tt  Primitive  Church  Ooreminen't  in  the  Practice  of  the  Re- 
formedin  Bohemia,  with  notes  of  John  Amos  Comenius,  1703, 
pp.  viii,  23 ;  H.  Klinesmith,  Divine  Providence,  or  Historical 
Records  relating  to  the  ilorarian  Church,  Irvine,  1S31,  p.  432. 

Jt  See,  e.g.,  Johnson's  Life  of  Cowley  (Ximmo's  edition). 

§§  Thomas  Gataker,  Treatise  of  the  Nature  and  Use  of  Lots 
pp.  91,  141. 


LOVE.  —  1.  Linguistic  usage.  —  Two  verbs  are 
used  by  the  NT  to  designate  religious  love — d7oirai> 
and  <pL\fiv.  In  theLXX  a  third  term,  fpif,  occurs, 
but  only  once  sensu  bono,  viz.  Pr  4®  (love  of  wisdom), 
once  in  a  neutral  sense,  viz.  Est  2"  (the  king  loved 
Esther),  everywhere  else  as  a  figure  of  idolatry  or 
political  theocratic  unfaithfulness  (Jer  22*"-**,  La 
1J9,  Ezk  l6»-38.»7  035.9.23^  Hos  2^- 1»- 12. 13).  That 
the  NT  does  not  employ  ipdv  at  all  is  probablj'  due 
to  the  sensual  a-ssociations  of  the  word.  In  regard  to 
the  difi'erence  between  aya-rdv  and  <^t\eti'  the  follow- 
ing should  be  noticed.  The  etymology  of  dyarSip 
is  uncertain,  but  it  .seems  to  be  allied  to  roots  ex- 
pressing ' admiration,' ' taking  pride  in,'  'taking 
pleasure  in.'  This  points  to  the  conclusion  that 
dyairdv  is  the  love  of  selection  and  complacency 
ba-seil  on  the  perception  of  something  in  the  object 
loved  that  attracts  and  pleases.  This  element  of 
selective  attachment  shows  itself  in  the  fact  that 
dyarav  can  mean  '  to  be  contented  with,'  '  to 
acquiesce  in,'  'to  put  up  with,'  and  also  in  this, 
that  dya-ravis  not  used  of  the  love  of  mere  compas- 
sion. On  the  other  hand,  ^i\e7v  seems  to  have  as  its 
fundamental  root-meaning  the  intimacy  of  bodily 
touch,  '  fondling,' '  caressing,'  whence  it  can  signify 
'  to  kiss ' ;  it  therefore  denotes  the  love  of  close  as- 
sociation in  the  habitual  relations  of  life — love  be- 
tween kindred,  between  husband  and  wife,  between 
friends  (Mt  6*  1(F  23«,  Lk  2tJ^,  Jn  IP-  »  1225  1519^ 
1  Ti  6'»  [<pi\apyvpial  2  Ti  3-»  [(piXrjdovos],  Tit  2*  [<pi\- 
avdpos],  Ja  4^  l<pi\ia  tov  koc/iovI).  In  Latin  diligere 
corresponds  to  dYairai',  a  ma  re  to  ^iXeiv,  except 
that  amare  covers  a  wider  range,  corresponding 
also  to  the  Greek  ipay.  From  this  distinctive  and 
fundamental  meaning  the  fact  maj'  be  explained 
that  in  biblical  Greek  dyairdv  is  used  exclusively 
where  man's  love  for  God  comes  under  considera- 
tion :  it  here  implies  the  recognition  of  the  ador- 
able and  lovable  character  of  tlie  Deity.  ^tXeiv  is 
never  used  of  man's  love  for  God  as  such,  because 
the  mental  attitude  of  intimacy  which  the  word 
implies  would  be  out  of  place  in  the  creature  with 
reference  to  the  Deity  (it  is  different  where  the 
love  of  the  disciples  for  Jesus  is  spoken  of  [Jn  Iff" 
2iis-i6-n^  1  Co  16-]).  Scripture  prefers  the  word 
which  unambiguously  puts  human  love  in  the  re- 
ligious sphere  on  a  moral  and  :?piritual  basis,  even 
if,  in  order  to  do  so,  it  has  to  leave  sonjewhat  of 
the  intensity  of  the  religious  afiiection  unexpressed. 
As  designations  of  the  love  extending  from  God  to 
man  l)oth  dyatrdvand  <pt\ei»  may  be  used,  the  former 
in  so  far  its  God's  love  is  not  blind  impulse  or  ir- 
rational sentiment,  but  a  love  of  free  self-deter- 
mination, the  latter  because  it  is  proper  to  God  by 
a  gracious  condescension  to  enter  into  that  close 
habitual  friendship  with  man  which  the  word  con- 
notes. As  a  matter  of  fact,  hov.ever,  <pL\dy  is  but 
rarely  used  to  describe  the  love  of  God  towards 
man. 

In  extra-biblical  Greek  love  as  extending  from 
the  gods  to  man  seems  to  be  an  unkno^\Ti  concep- 
tion, for  according  to  Aristotle  and  Dio  Chrysos- 
tom  both  d7aira«'  and  (fnXeTv  have  place  not  in  those 
who  rule  with  reference  to  those  they  rule  over,  but 
only  in  the  opposite  direction :  dToirov  ^tXetv  tAi' 
Ala  (where  A^  is  the  subject). 

It  is  in  keeping  with  the  distinction  above  drawn 
that  the  specific  term  for  brotherly  love  (see  art. 
Brotherly  Love)  is  tfH\ad€\4>ia,  for  the  idea  is 
derived  from  the  family-relation,  although,  of 
course,  dyairdv  here  occurs  with  equal  frequency. 
On  the  other  hand,  of  the  love  for  enemies  enjoined 
in  the  XT  (piXeTv  never  occurs,  being  excluded  by  the 
nature  of  the  case,  whereas  dyairdy,  involving  a 
deliberate  movement  of  the  will,  may  apply  to  such 
a;relation. 

While  it  appears  from  what  has  been  said  that 
dYoirai'  had  by  reason  of  its  inherent  signification 


/ 


714 


LOVE 


and  classical  use  an  antecedent  fitness  to  expre&s 
the  Mblical  idea  of  reli^iouH  lovu,  tliis  should  not 
be  construed  to  mean  that  tlic  word  carried  already 
in  extra- biblical  Greek  all  the  content  of  the  Scrip- 
tural conceotion.  In  the  profane  usaj^e  the  moral, 
spiritual  element  was  yet  lacking,  although  the 
elements  of  choice  and  rational  attachment  were 
given.  Like  so  many  other  words  \vhich  possessed 
an  antecedent  affinity  for  the  biblical  world  of 
thought  from  a  formal  point  of  view,  it  needed  the 
baptism  of  regeneration  in  order  to  become  fit  for 
incorporation  into  the  vocabulary  of  Scripture. 

The  noun  dydtrri  seems  to  have  been  coined  by 
the  LXX  to  translate  the  OT  conception  of  religious 
love.  It  is  not  found  in  classical  GI reek,  nor  even 
with  Philo  and  Josephus.  Perhaps  the  fact  that 
the  profane  literature  does  not  have  the  noun  is 
significant.  It  can  be  explained  on  the  principle 
that  only  through  transference  into  the  moral, 
spiritual  sphere  could  the  habitual  character  of 
the  act  of  loving,  which  is  inherent  in  the  noun, 
originate.  The  noun  in  the  Vulgate  is  caritas, 
from  carum  habere,  which  admirably  expresses 
the  specific  character  of  the  biblical  conception. 
Caritas  in  turn  gave  rise  to  the  *  charity '  of  the 
English  Uible  (AV),  in  most  passages  used  of  love 
towards  fellow-Christians  (cf.,  however,  1  Co  8*, 
1  Th  3*,  2  Ti  2^  3'**,  where  there  is  no  reason  so 
to  restrict  it).  The  IIV  substitutes  'love,' in  all 
passages  where  the  AV  has  '  charity '  (26  times  in 
all),  for  the  reason  that  '  charity '  has  in  modern 
usage  become  restricted  to  the  love  of  beneficence 
or  forbearance. 

The  following  discussion  confines  itself  to  the 
love  existing  between  God  and  man.  For  love  as 
between  man  and  man  see  art.  BitoTHERLY  Love. 

2.  Love  in  the  apostolic  teaching. — Love  is  in 
the  apostolic  teaching  a  central  and  outstanding 
trait  m  the  disposition  of  God  towards  man.  In 
this  respect  the  view  taken  by  Jesus  is  fully 
adhered  to.  If  in  the  witness  of  the  early  Chuich, 
as  recorded  in  Acts,  no  direct  affirmation  of  this 

firinciple  is  made,  that  can  easily  be  explained 
rom  the  apologetic  purpose  of  this  witness.  In 
the  fellowship  or  the  first  Christians  among  them- 
selves the  indirect  operation  of  the  new  force 
introduced  by  Jesus  into  the  hearts  of  His  followers 
manifests  itself  clearly  enough  (Ac  2^'""  4^-"^-). 

i.  St.  Paul.— With  St.  Paul  love  is  explicitly 
placed  in  the  foreground  as  the  fundamental  dis- 
position in  God  from  which  salvation  springs  and 
as  that  which  in  the  possession  of  God  constitutes 
for  the  believer  the  supreme  treasure  of  religion. 
God  is  the  God  of  love  (2  Co  13").  In  Gal  5=^  love 
is  named  first  among  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit.  It 
is  associated  with  the  Fatherhood  of  God  (Eph  6^). 
In  the  apostolic  salutations  it  stands  co-ordinated 
with  the  grace  of  Christ  (2  Co  13",  Eph  6^,  2  Th 
3').  It  is  the  greatest  of  the  three  fundamental 
graces  of  the  Cliristian  life,  and  the  sole  abiding 
one  of  these  three  (1  Co  IS^-'^).  This  primacy  love 
can  claim  even  in  comparison  with  faith.  For,  on 
the  one  hand,  faith  as  well  as  hope  is  a  grace  made 
necessaiy  by  the  provisional  conditions  of  the 
present  sinful  world,  and  in  both  its  aspects — that 
of  mediate  spiritual  perception  and  that  of  trust — 
will  be  superseded  by  sight  in  the  world  to  come 
(2  Co  5^) ;  on  the  other  hand,  faith  as  compared 
with  love  is  instrumental,  not  an  end  in  itself ;  it 
brings  the  Christian  into  that  fundamental  relation 
to  God,  wherein  his  religious  faculties,  foremost 
among  which  is  love,  can  function  normally  (Gal 
5*).  The  prominence  of  faith  in  the  Pauline  teach- 
ing is  not  therefore  indicative  of  its  absolute  and 
final  preponderance  in  the  Christian  consciousness. 
It  would,  however,  scarcely  be  in  accordance  with 
St.  Paul's  view  to  press  the  primacy  of  love  to 
the  extent  of  denying  all  independent  significance 


LOVE 

to  other  religious  states.  There  is  an  aspect  in 
which  faith  in  itself,  and  apart  from  its  working 
through  love,  glorifies  God  (Ito  4-"),  and  whatever 
thus  directly  contributes  to  the  Divine  glory  has 
inherent  religious  value.  The  same  must  be 
afiirmcd  of  the  knowledge  of  God.  The  emjihasis 
thrown  throughout  the  NT  on  the  value  of  truth 
cannot  be  wholly  explained  from  its  soteriological 
utility.  It  expresses  the  conviction  that  knowing 
and  adoring  God  are  in  themselves  a  religious  act, 
apart  from  all  fructifying  influence  on  the  believer's 
life.  When  St.  Paul  includes  '  knowledge' (1  Co 
13*)  in  the  thinfjs  that  shall  be  done  away,  this 
applies  only  to  the  specific  mode  of  knowledge  in 
tins  life,  the  '  seeing  in  a  mirror  darkly,'  the  know- 
ledge of  a  child,  which  will  make  place  in  the 
world  to  come  for  a  full  knowledge  '  face  to  face,' 
analogous  to  the  Divine  knowledf^e  of  the  believer 
(v.^-).  '  Knowledge,' while  of  value,  is  not  equal 
in  value  to  love  (1  Co  8^). 

{a)  The  love  of  God. — It  has  been  alleged  that  in 
two  respects  the  Apostle's  teaching  on  the  love  of 
God  marks  a  retrogression  as  compared  with  the 
gospel  of  Jesus :  on  the  one  hand,  St.  Paul  restricts 
the  love  of  God  to  the  circle  of  believers,  thus 
making  sonship  co-extensive  with  adoption = justifi- 
cation ;  on  the  other  hand,  he  emphasizes,  side  by 
side  with  love,  the  working  of  sovereignty  and 
justice  as  equally  influential  attributes  in  God, 
whence  also  the  effectual  communication  of  the 
Divine  love  to  the  sinner  cannot,  according  to 
the  Apostle,  take  place  except  as  a  result  of  the 
sovereign  choice  of  God  and  after  satisfaction  to 
His  justice.  This  charge,  however,  rests  on  a  mis- 
understanding of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  Jesus,  by 
way  of  correction  to  the  prevailing  commercial 
conception  of  God's  attitude  towards  man  in 
Judaism,  brings  forward  the  love  of  God.  Never- 
theless the  specific  Fatherly  love  and  the  corre- 
sponding state  of  sonship  are  in  His  gospel,  no  less 
than  with  St.  Paul,  redemptive  conceptions,  per- 
taining not  to  man  as  such,  but  to  the  disciples, 
the  heirs  of  the  kingdom.  This  may  be  seen  most 
clearly  from  the  fact  that  in  its  highest  aspect 
sonship  is  an  eschatological  attainment  (Mt  S'-*,  Lk 
20^®;  cf.  Ho  S-"-*).  It  is  true  that  a  developed 
soteriology  like  St.  Paul's,  delimiting  the  mutual 
claims  of  the  love  and  justice  of  God,  is  not  found 
in  our  Lord's  teaching.  But  this  could  not  be 
expected  before  the  supreme  saving  transaction — 
the  Death  of  Christ — had  actually  taken  place. 
The  great  principles  on  Avhich  the  Atonement  rests 
are  enunciated  with  sufficient  clearness  (Mk  10^). 
In  comparisons  between  Jesus  and  St.  Paul  it  is 
frequently  overlooked  that  what  corresponds  to 
the  Apostle's  soteriology  is  the  eschatological 
element  in  Jesus'  teaching.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  salvation  was  developed  in 
the  closest  dependence  on  his  eschatology.  If  the 
comparison  be  instituted  with  this  in  mind,  it  will 
be  seen  that  in  our  Lord's  eschatological  utterances 
the  sovereignty  and  justice  of  God  occupy  no  less 
central  a  place  than  in  the  Pauline  doctrine  of 
salvation,  and  that  the  love  of  God  in  its  eschato- 
logical setting  is  to  Jesus  as  much  a  redemptive 
factor  as  it  is  in  the  Pauline  gospel. 

The  phrase  '  the  love  of  God '  occurs  in  the 
Pauline  Epistles  in  Ko  5«  8^,  2  Co  13»*,  2  Th  3», 
Tit  3*  (^iXttf  ^/)wjr(a) ;  '  the  love  of  Christ '  occurs  in 
Ro  8^  (variant  reading  'love  of  God'),  2  Co  5'*, 
Enh  3^9  ;  '  the  love  of  God  in  Christ '  in  Ko  S»».  In 
all  these  cases  the  genitive  is  a  subjective  genitive. 
In 'the  love  of  the  Spirit' (Ko  15**)  the  genitive 
seems  to  be  that  of  origin  (cf.  Col  1*).  Some 
exegetes  propose  for  Ko  5'  and  2  Th. 3* 'love  to- 
wards God.'  In  the  former  passage  the  context  is 
decisive  against  this  (cf.  v.^  and  the  fact  that  the 
consciousness  of  '  the  love  of  God '  furnishes  the 


LOVE 


LOVE 


715 


ba«is  for  the  certainty  of  tlie  Christian  iiope).  In 
2  Th  3*  the  sense  is  determine*!  by  the  parallel 
phrase,  vro/xovij  toO  Kpiffroi) ;  if  this  could  mean  the 
'patient  waiting  for  Christ'  (AV),  then  dyaTr)  toO 
$eoO  would  be  'love  for  God.'  Such  a  rendering, 
however,  seems  to  be  linguistically  improbable, 
and  the  ordinary  interpretation  of  vronovv  as 
'  patience,'  '  steadfastness,'  requires  XpurroO  as  a 
subjective  genitive.  The  meaning  is  not  that  the 
love  of  God  and  the  patience  of  Christ  are  held  up 
as  models  to  the  readers,  but  the  Apostle  prays 
that  their  hearts  may  be  directed  to  a  full  reliance 
on  the  love  of  God  and  the  steadfastness  of  Christ 
as  the  two  mainsprings  of  their  salvation.  In  2 
Co  5^*  i]  yap  dyairr]  rov  XpurroO  aw^x^'-  Vf'-S.i  is  not  to 
be  explained  on  analogy  with  the  preceding  '  fear 
of  the  Lord '  (v."),  nor  in  contrast  to  the  knowledge 
-of  '  Christ  after  the  Hesh '  (v.i*),  in  the  sense  of  St. 
Paul's  love  for  Christ ;  but,  in  close  agreement  with 
the  following  '  One  died  for  all,'  it  is  meant  of  the 
love  Christ  showed  by  His  Death. 

To  St.  Paul  the  love  of  God  is  throughout  a 
specifically  redemptive  love.  Its  manifestation  is 
seldom  sought  in  Nature  and  providence  (Ro  8^, 
'  all  things'),  but  regularly  in  the  work  of  salvation. 
Since  this  work  culminates  in  the  Death  of  Christ, 
the  Cross  is  the  crowning  manifestation  of  the 
Div-ine  love  (Ro  5*).  What  thus  finds  supreme 
expression  at  its  height  underlies  the  entire  process 
as  its  primordial  source.  The  love  of  God  is  to  St. 
Paul  the  fountain  of  redemption.  It  lies  behind 
its  objective  part,  what  is  theologically  called 
'  the  Atonement,'  for  St.  Paul  traces  this  in  both 
its  aspects  of  reconciliation  and  redemption  to  the 
one  source.  As  regards  reconciliation,  the  initia- 
tive of  love  is  inherent  in  the  conception  itself, 
since  God  makes  those  who  were  objectively  His 
enemies  His  friends,  creating  by  the  Death  of 
Christ  the  possibility  for  His  love  to  manifest  itself 
(Ro  5«-  ^'>-  ",  2  Co  5>*-  i«-2i).  The  idea  of  redemption 
has  the  same  implications,  for  it  emphasizes  the 
self-sacrifice  of  love  to  which  God  was  put  in  saving 
man  (Ac  2(F,  1  Co  6-»  7^).  This  love  is  unmerited 
love,  hence  its  more  specific  name  of  xop">  'grace.' 
It  is  'love,'  not  mere  'mercy'  or  'pity,'  which 
determines  God's  attitude  towards  the  sinner. 
The  mercy  is  enriched  by  the  love  (Eph  2^).  The 
usual  associations  of  ayairdv  apply  to  the  love  of 
God  for  sinners  only  in  so  far  as  it  is  a  deliberate 
movement  of  the  Divine  will  and  purpose,  not 
because  there  is  something  admirable  or  attractive 
in  the  spiritual  and  ethical  condition  of  man  which 
would  explain  its  origin.  For  the  very  reason 
that  it  springs  spontaneously  from  God  without 
objective  motivation,  this  Divine  love  is  a  mystery 
'passing  knowledge'  (Eph  3'').  Salvation  on  its 
subjective  side  is  derived  by  St.  Paul  even  more 
clearly  from  the  love  of  God.  The  gift  of  the 
Spirit  is  a  pledge  of  it  to  the  believer  ;  hence  with 
the  pouring  forth  of  the  Spirit  into  the  heart,  the 
love  of  God  is  poured  out  therein  (Ro  5').  On  the 
consciousness  of  this  love  rests  the  certainty  of 
liope  in  the  completion  of  salvation  (Ro  5^- ').  St. 
Paul  calls  the  love  underlying  the  application  of 
redemption  irp6-/vw(nt,  'foreknowledge'  (Ro  8^); 
the  simple  yiyvuxrKeiv  in  this  specific  sense  occurs 
in  1  Co  83,  Gal  4^,  2  Ti  2^^.  This  term  denotes  not 
an  intellectual  prescience ;  but,  in  dependence  on 
the  pregnant  sense  of  the  Hebrew  pt  (Ex  2^,  Hos 
13',  Am  3-),  it  means  that  God  sovereignly  sets 
His  afl'ection  upon  a  person.  The  absoluteness 
and  unconditioned  character  of  this  ^ro^nom  are 
such  that  it  can  furnish  proof  for  the  proposition 
that  all  things  work  together  for  the  good  of 
believers.  Hence  it  fixes  as  the  destiny  of  believers 
('predestination')  eschatological  likeness  unto  the 
image  of  the  glorified  Christ,  and  with  infallible 
certainty  moves  forward  through  the  two  inter- 


mediate stages  of  vocation  and  justification  to  the 
goal  of  this  glory  (Ro  S"-*'*^).  The  conception  of 
eKXayn,  eicX^Yeff^at  (middle  voice,  '  to  choose  for  one's 
self ')  has  likewise  for  its  correlate  the  sovereign 
love  of  God  (Eph  1*).  The  association  of  the 
redemptive  love  of  God  with  His  prerogative  of 
sovereign  choice  renders  the  word  dyaxqp  especially 
suitable  for  describing  the  relation  involved.  It  is 
in  the  interest  of  emphasizing  both  the  sovereign 
Divine  initiative  and  the  energy  and  richness  of 
effectuation  of  redemptive  love  that  St.  Paul 
affirms  its  eternity  (connoted  also  by  the  rpo-  in 
irporyiyvuffKeiv  [Eph  1*]). 

The  love  of  God  does  not  exclude  for  St.  Paul 
the  co-ordination  of  other  attributes  in  God  as 
jointly  determinative  of  the  Divine  redemptive 
procedure.  In  the  Cross  of  Christ  is  the  great 
manifestation  of  love,  but  it  is  not  the  love  of  God 
alone  that  the  Cross  proclaims.  It  also  demon- 
strates the  SiKaioavtnj  =  the  justice  of  God  (Ro  Z^^-). 
The  a.ttemptoiB.it&ehl{Bechffertigung  nndVersohn- 
ting-,  ii.  [1882-83],  pp.  118,  218  ff.)  and  others  to  give 
to  oiKaiocrCivri  in  this  context  the  sense  of  gracious 
righteousness,  making  it  synonymous  with  the  love 
of  God,  breaks  down  in  view  of  the  '  forbearance ' 
of  v.^.  If  it  was  '  forbearance '  which  postponed 
under  the  Old  Covenant  the  demonstration  of  God's 
righteousness,  then  this  righteousness  is  conceived 
as  retributive. 

(b)  The  love  of  Christ.— The  love  of  Christ  St. 
Paul  %-iew3  chiefly  as  manifested  in  His  Death 
(2  Co  o^**-).  or  in  His  life  as  entered  upon  and  lived 
with  a  view  to  and  cvdminating  in  His  Death 
(Ph  2'^-)-  The  Incarnation  is  an  act  of  self- 
kenosis,  not  in  the  metaphysical,  but  in  the  meta- 
phorical sense  (AV  '  made  himself  of  no  reputa- 
tion '),  hence  is  described  in  2  Co  8*  as  a  '  becoming 
poor.'  It  ought  to  be  noticed  that  the  love  of 
Christ,  as  well  as  that  of  the  believer,  is  in  the 
first  place  a  love  for  God,  and  after  that  a  love  for 
man.  Christ  lives  unto  God,  even  in  the  state  of 
glory  (Ro  6^"),  and  »ave  Himself  in  the  Atonement 
a  sacrifice  unto  God  (Eph  5-). 

(c)  Love  toicards  God. — The  references  to  the 
lieiiever's  love  for  God  are  not  numerous  in  the 
Pauline  Epistles.  Explicit  mention  of  it  is  made 
in  Ro  8"^,  1  Co  2*  8'.  From  his  anti-pietistic  stand- 
point Ritschl  would  interpret  this  scarcity  of  refer- 
ence in  St.  Paul  and  the  NT  generally  (outside  of 
St.  Paul  only  Ja  1"^  2*)  as  due  to  the  feeling  that 
love  to  God  is  something  hardly  within  the  religious 
reach  of  man.  He  observes  that  in  1  Co  2^  the 
phrase  'them  that  love  God'  is  a  quotation,  and 
surmises  that  the  same  quotation  underlies  all  the 
other  passages  except  1  Co  8'  {op.  cit.  ii.  100). 
But  this  is  a  mere  surmise,  and  St.  Paul  has  at 
least  in  one  passage  appropriated  the  thought  for 
himself.  Besides  this  the  analog  of  the  love  of 
Christ  for  God  favours  the  ascription  of  love  for 
God  to  the  believer.  The  same  'living  for  God' 
which  is  predicated  of  Christ  (Ro  6^®)  is  elsewhere 
attributed  to  the  Christian  (Gal  2^\  As  Christ 
sacrificed  Himself  to  God  (Eph  5-),  so  the  believer's 
life  is  a  spiritual  sacrifice  (Ro  1*  12^).  The  Father- 
hood of  God  and  the  sonship  of  the  believer  postu- 
late the  idea  of  a  mutual  love  (Ro  8^).  The  idea 
is  also  implied  in  the  fact  that  St.  Paul  places  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  life  a  crucifixion 
and  destruction  of  the  love  for  self  and  the  world 
(Ro  6«,  Gal  2'3  6"),  since  under  the  Apostle's 
positive  conception  of  the  Chilstian  life  something 
else  must  take  the  place  of  the  previous  goals. 
The  glorifying  of  God  in  all  things  has  for  its 
underlying  motive  the  love  of  God  (Ro  14®,  1  Co 
10^1,  Eph  l^-'). 

ii.  Pastoral  Epistles.— In  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
the  universality  of  the  love  of  God  is  empha-sized. 
In  the  earlier  Epistles  the  Apostle's  universalism 


/ 


716 


LOVE 


is  not  (leJiiced  from  tlie  love  of  Cod  Imt  from  otlier 
principles,  and  is  distinctly  of  an  iiitcrniitioniil 
type.  Tiie  Pastoral  Epistles  make  of  the  love  of 
Clod  a  universalizin;,'  pnncij)lo  aiid  extend  it  to  all 
men,  not  merely  to  men  of  every  nation  (1  Ti  2^-" 
410  013^  'Yii  2"  3^).  In  some  of  these  passages  the 
context  clearly  indicates  that  a  reference  or  God's 
love  to  all  classes  of  men  is  intended  (cf.  1  Ti  2^ 
with  vv.'--;  Tit  2"  with  vv.-'^").  But  the  em- 
phasis and  frequency  with  which  the  principle 
IS  brouj^tht  forward  render  it  prohahle  that  some 
snecitic  motive  underlies  its  assertion.  80  far  as 
the  inclusion  of  ma^jistrates  is  concerned,  there  may 
be  a  protest  against  a  form  of  Jewish  particularism 
which  deemed  it  unlawful  to  pray  for  pa{,'an 
nmgistrates.  In  the  main  the  passages  cited  will 
have  to  1x5  interpreted  as  a  warning  against  the 
dualistic  trend  of  Gnosticism.  Gnosticism  distin- 
guished between  two  classes  of  men,  the  wevfjui- 
TiKol  and  the  vXikoI,  the  latter  by  their  very  nature 
being  unsusceptible  to,  and  excluded  from,  salvation, 
the  former  carrying  the  potency  of  salvation  by 
nature  in  themselves.  Over  against  this  the 
Pastorals  emphasize  that  the  love  of  God  saves  all 
men,  tiiat  no  man  is  by  his  subjective  condition 
either  sunk  beneath  the  possibility  or  raised  above 
the  necessity  of  salvation.  Hence  the  (t>ikavdptaicla 
of  God  in  Tit  S*  is  love  for  man  as  man,  not  for 
any  aristocracy  of  the  irvev/xa.  This  philanthropy 
is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  classical  concep- 
tion of  the  same  (cf.  Ac  27^28"),  for  the  latter  is 
not  love  towards  man  as  such,  but  simply  justice 
towards  one's  fellow-man  in  tlie  several  relations 
of  life,  and  is  conceived  without  regard  to  the 
internal  disposition.  Frobaljly  the  choice  of  tlie 
word  is  in  Tit  3*  determined  by  the  preceding 
description  of  the  conduct  required  of  believers 
for  which  the  Divine  'philanthropy'  furnishes  the 
model.  But  that  its  content  goes  far  beyond 
general  benevolence  may  be  seen  from  this,  that  it 
communicates  itself  through  the  Christian  redemp- 
tion in  the  widest  sense  (vv.''').  In  ail  this  there 
is  nothing  either  calculated  or  intended  to  weaken 
the  Pauline  doctrine  of  the  specific  elective  love  of 
God  embracing  believers.  The  Pastorals  aliirm 
this  no  less  than  the  earlier  Epistles. 

iii.  Ei'ISTLE  OF  James.— The  Epistle  of  James  l)y 
calling  the  connnandment  of  love  'the  royal  law' 
(2^)  places  love  in  the  centre  of  religion,  i'iiis  love 
is  not  merely  love  for  men  but  love  to  (!od  (2"').  It 
chooses  iUm  and  rejects  the  world,  the  love  for 
God  and  the  friendship  of  the  world  being  mutually 
exclusive  (4-').  It  manifests  itself  in  blessing  Goil 
(3®).  Behind  this  love  for  God,  however,  St.  James, 
no  less  than  St.  Paul  and  St.  John,  posits  the  love 
of  God  for  the  sinner.  God  is  Father  of  believers 
(3*).  They  that  love  (iod  are  chosen  of  God  (2'). 
The  Divine  love  is  a  love  of  mercy  ;  even  in  the 
Day  of  Judgment  it  retains  the  form  of  mercy  (2'-' 
5*").  It  is  a  jealous  love,  which  reqiiires  the  xin- 
divided  affection  of  its  object  (4*).  An  echo  of  the 
Synoptical  preaching  of  Jesus  may  be  found  in  this 
that  St.  James  sees  the  love  of  CJod  demonstrated 
in  the  gifts  not  merely  of  redemption,  but  likewise 
of  providence  (1'^). 

iv.  Epistles  of  Peter.— The  Epistles  of  Peter 
dwell  on  the  love  of  Christ  rather  than  on  that  of 
God.  Christ's  love  is  a  love  of  self-denial  (1  P  2'-') 
and  of  benevolence  for  evil-doers  (3'*).  To  it  corre- 
sponds love  for  Christ  in  the  heart  of  Itclievers. 
St.  Peter  shows  that  this  love  is  strong  enough  to 
assert  and  maintain  itself  in  the  face  of  the  in- 
visibleness  of  Christ  (I*;  cf.  1  Jn  4*"*).  The  love 
for  God  and  Christ  is  consistent  with  and  accom- 
panied by  fear  (1  P  1'^-  "*).  God's  love  is  implied  in 
the  mercy  which  lies  behind  regeneration  (l^). 
God  is  the  Father  of  believers  (!'") ;  they  are  the 
tlock  of  God  (5-) ;  He  (or  Christ)  is  the  Shepherd 


LOVE 

of  their  souls  (2").     The  longsuderiiig  of  (io<l,  as 
a  fruit  of  the  Divine  love,  is  njentioned  in  2  P  3". 

V.  Hebkews.— The  theme  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews — the  perfect  mediation  of  priestly  ap- 
proach unto  God — coupled  with  the  writer's  vivid 
perception  of  tiie  majesty  of  (iod  brings  it  about 
that  the  love  of  God  remains  in  the  background. 
The  Epistle  emphasizes  the  fear  of  God  even  for 
believers  (4'*  "''^  12^).  Still  believers  are  sons  of 
( Jod  (2'»  12^),  brethren  of  Christ  (2"-  i-- ").  God 
loves  His  children  as  the  Father  of  Spirits  (12*''"). 
He  is  tiio  (Jod  of  Mis  jieople  in  the  pregnant  sense 
(11'").  The  subsumption  of  the  greater  part  of  the 
religious  consciousness  under  faith  brings  it  al>out 
that  the  love  of  Christians  is  less  spoken  of  here 
than  elsewhere  in  the  NT.  It  is  mentioned  in  6'" 
as  a  love  shown  towards  God's  name,  i.e.  towards 
God,  in  the  service  of  the  bretlueu.  The  Epistle,  on 
the  otiier  hand,  makes  much  of  the  love  of  Christ  for 
believers  as  it  assumes  the  form  of  mercy.  This 
mercy  is,  however,  not  motived  by  the  mere  sutter- 
ing  as  such,  but  specifically  by  the  moral  aspect  of 
the  sullering.  It  is  compassion  with  the  moral 
weakness  and  danger  arising  from  sutlering,  be- 
cause sullering  becomes  a  source  of  temptation. 
Christ  can  exercise  this  mercy  because  He  Himself 
has  experienced  the  temj)ting  power  of  sutlering 

(018  415), 

vi.JoHANNiNE  LITERATURE. — There  still  remains 
to  be  considered  tiie  Johannine  literature  including 
the  Gospel,  so  far  as  the  statements  of  the  Evan- 
gelist himself  are  concerned.  Both  the  Gospel 
and  the  First  Epistle  represent  love  as  tiie  ultimate 
source  and  tiie  ultimate  goal  of  Christianity.  There 
is  this  difierence,  that  what  is  in  the  Gospel  related 
to  Christ  as  love  of  Christ  and  love  for  Christ,  is 
in  the  Epistle  related  to  (Jod  in  both  directions. 
In  the  Apocalypse  love  to  Jesus  appears  in  2^,  love 
of  Jesus  in  P  3**.  '  The  love  of  God '  is  not  uni- 
formly, as  in  St.  Paul,  the  love  which  God  shows, 
but  partly  this  (1  Jn  2^  4«-i-')  and  partly  also  the 
love  cherished  towards  God  (Jn  5^^  1  Jn  2'^  3^^  5*). 
Possibly  the  construction  is  meant  as  an  inclusive 
one:  'the  love  wliich  (iod  has  made  known  and 
which  answers  to  His  nature  '  (so  B.  F.  Westcott, 
The  Epistles  of  iit.  John,  1883,  }».  49).  Love  is  to 
St.  John  as  to  St.  Paul  a  spccilically  Divine  thing. 
Wherever  it  apjjcars  in  man,  it  must  be  traceil 
back  to  (jod,  and  jtarticularly  to  God's  love  (1  Jn 
410. 19)  ji^j,  source  iies  in  regeneration  (4^).  The 
Divine  primordial  love  is  grace,  not  motived  by 
the  excellence  of  human  qualities,  for  it  expressed 
itself  in  giving  Christ  as  a  proi)itiation  for  sin  (4"-  '**). 
The  supreme  manifestation  of  God's  love  is  the 
gift  of  Christ,  and  Christ's  giving  of  His  own  life 
for  man  (3"*  4",  Kev  3^*).  Hence  the  (Jospel  char- 
acterizes the  love  which  Jesus  showed  in  His  Death 
as  an  d7a7rai'  ei'j  tAoj  ('to  the  uttermost').  The 
giving  of  tiie  Spirit  of  God  is  an  act  of  love  not 
merely  because  the  Spirit  is  an  inestimable  gift, 
but  because  in  the  Spirit  God  communicates  llim- 
self  ;  herein  lies  the  essence  of  love  (1  Jn  3'^  4"). 
The  highest  embodiment  of  this  redemptive 
love  is  the  state  of  sonship  (1  Jn  3^).  The 
Apocalypse  uses  for  this,  as  extending  to  the  Church 
collectively,  the  OT  ligure  of  the  bride  of  God 
(llev  19^  2r--'').  Sonship  is  not  represented,  as  in 
St.  Paul,  as  awaiting  its  eschatological  consumma- 
tion, but  rather  as  issuing  into  a  higher,  yet  un- 
known, state  (1  Jn  3-).  The  summing  up  of  the 
Christian  life  in  love  is  rejuesented  as  'a  new  com- 
mandment,'which  is  at  the  same  time  old  ( 2^- *  3"- ■•^). 
It  is  old  in  so  far  as  it  goes  back  to  the  creation 
('  from  the  beginning '  [2^  3",  2  Jn*-"])  ;  it  is  new 
in  so  far  as  through  Jesus  and  His  work  it  has  now 
become  an  actuality  in  the  life  and  experience  of 
Christians;  hence  'it  is  tnic  in  him  and  in  you' 
(1  Jn  '2^).     la  both  the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle 


LOVE-FEAST 


LOVE-FEAST 


717 


'  to  know  Gotl '  is  used  as  synonymous  with  '  loving  ; 
God. '  '  To  know '  is  taken  in  such  connexions  { 
in  the  pregnant  sense  which  implies  intimacy  of 
acquaintance  and  the  fellowship  of  affection.  At 
the  same  time  there  is  in  this  an  indirect  protest 
against  the  unethical  intellectualism  of  the  false 
Gnosb  (IJn  2=-  *  «• "  3>- «  4«-  "•  «• «  5»). 

Both  the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  emphasise 
the  universalism  of  the  love  of  God  as  demon- 
strated in  the  gift  of  Christ  for  the  sin  of  *the 
world.'  In  Jn  3'*  '  the  world '  (6  Kocfios)  seems  to 
be  rather  qualitatively  than  quantitatively  con- 
ceived ;  the  greatness  of  God's  love  is  seen  ia  this, 
that  He  loves  that  which  is  sinful  (cf.  1  Jn  2^). 
Both  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle  also  lay  stress  on 
the  primacy  of  love  in  the  character  of  God  (1  Jn 
48.  iG^^  That  the  universalism  must  not  be  under- 
stood as  appropriating  the  love  of  God  in  its  most 
pregnant  sense  to  every  man  indiscriminately 
appears  from  such  statements  as  Jn  e-"-**-**  13^  15'^ 
l-6.8.i3_  ^  predestinarian  strand  is  traceable  in 
St.  John  as  well  as  in  St.  Paul.  And  that  the 
clear  statement  about  the  primacy  of  love  in  GJod 
should  not  be  construed  to  the  exclusion  of  every 
other  attribute  or  disposition  in  God  appears  plainly 
from  the  difference  which  both  the  Gospel  and  the 
Epistle  make  between  God's  and  Christ's  attitude  to- 
wards the  world  and  towards  believers — a  difference 
inconceivable  were  there  in  God  no  place  for  aught 
but  love.  The  statement  '  God  is  love '  means  to 
affirm  that  into  His  love  God  puts  His  entire  being, 
all  the  strength  of  His  character.  In  the  Apoca- 
lypse it  is  most  vividly  brought  out  that  in  God, 
brides  love  for  His  own,  there  is  wrath  for  His 
enemies  (cf.  even  '  the  wTath  of  the  Lamb '  [6^*]), 
although  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  Apocalypse 
speaks  as  little  as  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle  of 
God's  hatred  towards  His  enemies.  The  latter 
term  is  reserved  for  the  description  of  the  attitude 
of  the  world  towards  Gotl  and  Christ  and  believers. 
The  hatred  of  the  world  explains  the  righteous 
Nvrath  of  God  and  believers  against  the  world 
(Jn  3»  T  1518- ==•-*•=»  17",  Kev  2«}. 

LiTERATTRE.  —  Schmidt,  Handbrieh  der  lutein,  wni  grieek. 
Sirnonymik,  ISSti,  pp.  7o«>-rC«S  ;  R.  C.  Trench,  ST  Sj/Mmgm^, 
1901,  pp.  41-14 ;  J.  A.  H.  Tittmaan,  de  Sfwrnytnit  in  ST, 
lS-29-32,  pp.  5<>-55:  H.  Cremer,  BM.-TheoL  Worterbueh  der 
neutegt.  Grdeiuit^,  1911,  s.v.  ayawam ;  Deissmaiin  in  ThLZ,  1912, 
C0L3.  522-5^ ;  E.  Sartorios,  The  Doctrine  0/  the  Dinne  Lote, 
Eng.  tr.,  1SS4 ;  G.  Vos, '  The  ScripCaral  Doctrine  of  the  Love  of 
God,"  in  Preib.  and  Re/.  Review,  nii.  (1902]  1-37  ;  W.  Liitgrert, 
DU  Liebe  im  ST,  1905.  GEEKHARDUS  VoS. 

LOVE-FEAST The  history  of  the  Agapae  or 

Love- Feasts  of  the  Christian  Church  is  beset  with 
peculiar  difficulties,  and  has  given  rise  to  grave 
differences  of  opinion  among  scholars.  It  has 
even  been  maintained  by  Batitlbl  *  that  they  were 
absolutely  non-existent  in  the  Apostolic  Age ; 
and,  though  this  view  has  not  found  general  ac- 
ceptance, it  certainly  deser\es  to  be  treated  with 
respect.  The  name  is  indeed  found  only  in  the 
Epistle  of  Jude  (v." ;  cf.  also  2  P  21^),  the  date  of 
which  is  quite  uncertain  ;  and  it  is  probable  that 
in  the  earliest  days  the  name  was  unknown.  Still 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  common  meaLs, 
which  afterwards  gained  the  name  of  Agapie,  were 
held  by  Christians  from  the  beginning.  These 
common  meals  Mere  an  external  expression  of  the 
sense  of  brotherhood  which  was  characteristic  of 
the  primitive  Christian  churches,  and  they  were 
no  doubt  suggested  by  similar  institutions,  which 
seem  to  have  been  common  among  both  Jew.s  and 
Gentiles.  It  is  also  probable  that  the  recollection 
of  the  Last  Supper  of  our  Lord  with  His  disciples 
was  an  additional  cause  of  the  holding  of  these 
meals. 

1.  In  the  Act& — The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  gives 
*  Muides  d^Uattnre  et  de  theolotfie  pontic*^.  Puis,  1907. 


ns  a  picture  of  the  life  of  the  primitive  Church  at 
Jerusalem.*  In  Ac  2*^  we  read  that  the  converts 
'  continued  stedfastly  in  the  apostles'  teaching 
and  fellowship,  in  the  breaking  of  bread  and  the 
prayers.'  In  v. *«  we  read  that  'day  by  day,  con- 
tinuing stedfastly  with  one  accord  m  the  temple, 
and  breaking  breeid  at  home,  they  did  take  their 
food  with  gladness  and  singleness  of  heart.'  These 
passages  axe  patient  of  an  interpretation  which 
excludes  anything  like  an  Agape.  '  Breaking 
bread'  may  refer  only  to  the  Eucharist;  ana 
the  reference  to  the  taking  of  food  may  be  merely 
an  expression  denoting  their  joyous  manner  of 
life.  So  it  is  understood  by  BatifloLt  But  the 
view  of  Leclercq  J  seems  more  probable — that  the 
breaking  of  bread  was  accompanied  by  a  meal. 
For  we  know  that  that  was  the  case  at  Corinth, 
and  it  is  exceedingly  probable  that  the  communism 
of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  would  involve  common 
meals.  Indeed,  something  of  the  kind  seems  to 
be  indicated  by  Ac  6^.  That  this  included  the 
Eucharist  there  can  be  very  little  doubt,  though 
it  is  unlikely  that  it  was  identical  with  the  Euchar- 
ist. The  '  breaking  of  the  bread '  is  an  unusual 
phrase,  and  as  it  seems  clear  that  in  Corinth  the 
Eucharist  took  place  during  or  at  the  end  of  a 
supper,  so  it  probably  did  in  Jerusalem.  But  the 
evidence  is  not  sufficient  to  make  any  conclusion 
certain.  In  Ac  20''"  we  read  that  at  Troas  on  the 
first  day  of  the  week  the  Christians  were  gathered 
together  to  break  bread.  St.  Paul  spoke  to  them 
till  midnight,  broke  bread  and  tasted  it.  Here 
the  object  of  the  meeting  was  the  breaking  of 
bread.  And  the  whole  context  iK)ints  to  its  ha^in^ 
been  a  religious  rite.  There  is  no  hint  of  a  meal 
in  the  ordinary  sense.  The  word  yevaaneroi  cer- 
tainly does  not  necessarily  imply  it.  It  is,  how- 
ever, possible,  though  it  seems  unlikely,  that  such 
a  meal  took  place. 

2.  In  1  Ctorinthians. — We  now  come  to  the  ac- 
count given  in  1  Co  Hi*-**  of  the  Eucharist  at 
Corinth  :  '  When  ye  assemble  yourselves  together, 
it  is  not  possible  to  eat  the  Lord's  supper  :  for  in 
your  eating  each  one  taketh  before  other  his  own 
supper  ;  and  one  is  hungry,  and  another  is  drunken. 
What  ?  have  ye  not  houses  to  eat  and  drink  in  ? 
or  despise  ye  the  church  of  God,  and  put  them  to 
shame  that  have  not  ?  .  .  .  When  ye  come  to- 
gether to  eat,  wait  one  for  another.  If  any  man 
is  hungry,  let  him  eat  at  home  ;  that  your  coming 
together  be  not  unto  judgement.'  The  most  pro- 
bable interpretation  of  the  passage  is  that  St. 
Paul  blames  the  Corinthians  for  misljehaviour  at 
the  supper,  which  should  be  the  Lord's  Supper, 
but  cannot  be  so  regarded  in  view  of  their  be- 
haviour. It  seems  that  the  rich  men  brought 
their  own  food,  and  immediately  on  arrival  formed 
groups,  and  began  to  eat  their  supper  without 
waiting  to  see  whether  there  were  any  poor  men 
l)resent  who  had  nothing  to  eat.  St.  Paul  suggests 
tiiat  if  they  are  hungry,  they  had  better  have 
something  to  eat  before  they  come.  The  whole 
supper  is  the  Lord's,  for  He  is  the  host.  And  St. 
Paul  reminds  them  of  the  significance  of  what 
takes  place  at  the  supper,  namely  the  Eucharist — 
a  real  Communion  ^vith  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ,  and  a  memorial  of  His  Death. 

BatiJffol,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  that  St. 
Paul  blames  them  for  associating  the  Eucharist 
with  a  meal  at  all,  and  thesame  \-iew  was  pre^-iously 
taken  by  John  Lightfoot.§  It  must  be  admitted 
that  his  language  in  v.**,  '  Have  ye  not  houses  to 
eat  and  to  drink  in  ?'  seems  logically  to  imply 

*  See  »rt.  Eccbakbt. 
t  Op.  eit.  p.  S8S. 

{Art.  •  Agzpe' inCabni'a  Diet.  d^mrtkMoffie  ehrOieiHie  et  de 
Uttergie,  toL  i..  Paris,  1907. 
i  Workt,  ed.  Hbnaii,  London,  1322-26,  roL  tL  p.  S32  ff. 


718 


LOVE-FEAST 


LUKE 


that  the  assembly  of  Cliristians  is  not  a  suUuljlt! 
occasion  for  a  meal.  But  his  exhortation  to  them 
to  •  wait  one  for  another  '  seems  to  have  iid  puint 
unless  there  is  to  be  a  meal.  While  the  consider- 
ations adduced  by  St.  Paul  no  doubt  were  ulti- 
mately operative  in  bringing  about  a  separation 
of  the  Eucluirist  from  the  Agape,  yet  it  is  highly 
jirobable  that  they  were  not  carried  to  theii:  logical 
conclusion  at  once,  nor  indeed  intended  to  be  so 
carried.  There  is  no  doubt  that  there  was  a  supper 
at  Corinth  at  the  time  when  St.  Paul  wrote  ;  that 
all  the  members  of  the  Church  came  together  to 
it,  bringing  their  own  contributions.  Ihis  was 
apparently  a  sort  of  funeral  memorial  feast,  sacred 
in  its  associations,  but  especially  sacred  because 
in  the  course  of  it  the  Eucharist  was  celebrated. 
This  meal  was  desecrated  by  the  Corinthians,  who 
ignored  its  sacred  character,  making  it  no  longer 
an  expression  of  the  brotherhood  of  the  community, 
but  an  ordinary  meal,  and  an  occasion  for  display 
and  gluttony. 

3.  In  Jade  and  2  Peter. — The  writer  of  the  Epistle 
of  Jude  speaks  (v.'-)  of  certain  heretics  who  are 
'  hidden  rocks  in  your  love-feasts  when  they  feast 
with  you.'  In  the  parallel  jiassage  in  2  P  2'^  the 
bulk  ot  the  MSS  read  dirdrats  for  dydirais.  J.  B. 
Lightfoot*  regards  iwiraii  as  an  obvious  error  for 
dyaTraii,  and  Biggt  follows  him  in  this  view.  The 
matter  is  of  no  importance  for  our  purpose,  as  it  is 
the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  scholars  that  2  Peter 
is  dei)en(lent  on  Jude,  and  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  that  in  Jude  dydiran  is  the  right  reading. 
BatiHol  maintains  that  Jude  is  in  the  habit  of 
usin^  plurals  instead  of  singulars,  and  understands 
him  here  to  mean  'love'  with  no  reference  to  the 
Agape.  But  this  translation  of  the  word  does  not 
seem  possible ;  and  we  are  clearly  driven  to  the 
conclusion  that,  among  the  people  to  whom  Jude 
wrote,  the  Agape  was  an  established  institution, 
and  the  name  had  already  been  given  to  it.  But 
the  destination  of  the  E])istle  is  very  doubtful. 
M.  R.  James  X  ■writes :  '  We  may  place  the  com- 
munity to  which  he  writes  very  much  where  we 
l)lease :  Di".  Chase's  conjecture  §  that  it  was  at  or 
near  the  Syrian  Antioch  is  as  good  as  any.'  There 
is  nothing  to  indicate  the  relation  of  the  Agape 
mentioned  by  Jude  to  the  Eucharist.  It  seems 
most  probable  that,  as  in  Corinth,  the  Eucharist 
took  i)lace  at  or  near  the  end  of  the  supper.  St. 
Paul's  words  fierd  t6  SeiTrviJo-ot  in  1  Co  11^  make  it 
fairly  certain  that  Chrysostom  is  wrong  in  his 
statement  that  the  Eucliarist  was  followed  by  a 
meal.  No  doubt  Chrysostom  based  his  view  on 
the  customs  of  his  own  time,  when  fasting  com- 
munion was  the  rule. 

4.  Analogies  with  Love-Feast.— A  great  deal  of 
information  has  been  collected  by  Leclercq  ||  about 
the  prevalence  of  funeral  banquets  all  round  the 
Mediterranean.  These  banouets  were  originally 
for  the  benefit  of  the  deau,  though  later  they 
became  simply  memorial  meals.  These  supply  us 
with  an  analogy  to  the  Agape.  But  it  is  probable 
that  even  more  operative  was  the  example  of  the 
common  meals  oi  the  various  gilds  which  wvrv  a 

I)rominent  feature  of  social  life  in  Greek  (iiics. 
t  would  be  most  natural  that  converts  to  Chris- 
tianity should  welcome  a  Christian  common  meal, 
on  the  lines  of  those  to  which  they  were  accustomed. 
Parallels  are  also  to  be  found  among  the  Jews.1] 
Unfortunately,  our  evidence  is  not  sufficient  to 
enable  us  to  draw  a  clear  picture  of  what  the 
Christian  Agape  was  like.     It  was  not  purely  a 

•  Apostolic  Fathers,  pt.  ii.2  vol.  ii.,  London,  1889,  p.  813. 
t  Com.  on  Kpp.  o/  Peter  and  Jndei  {ICC,  Edinburjrh,  1902). 
;  Com.  on  3  I'eter  and  Jitde  (Cambridge  Ureek  Testanieut, 
Canihridife,  1912),  p.  xxxviii. 
i  11 DB,  art.  '  Jude,  Epistle  of.' 
I'  Ijoc.  cit. 
1  C(.  JosephuB,  Ant.  xiv.  x.  8 ;  Jer  W. 


cliarity-supper,  tliough  the  evidence  of  the  Corinth- 
ians shows  us  that  it  was  intended  that  this  char- 
acteristic should  not  be  wholly  absent.  It  seems 
to  have  been  primarily  an  expression  of  the  sense 
of  brotherhood  which  Christians  felt.  The  fact 
that  the  Eucharist  was  associated  with  it  gave  it 
a  specially  sacred  character,  and  makes  it  certain 
that  it  must  have  been  connected  in  the  minds  of 
tiiose  who  took  part  in  it  with  the  Last  Su])per. 
But  abuses  aro.se  in  connexion  with  it  both  in 
Corinth  and — apparently — among  those  to  whom 
the  Epistle  of  Jude  was  written.  The  evidence 
which  we  have  suggests  plenty  of  reasons  for  the 
separation  of  the  Eucharist  from  the  Agape,  which 
seems  to  have  taken  place  at  an  early  date. 

Litkrati;rf. — Besides  books  and  articles  already  mentioned, 
see  j.  F.  Keating,  The  Agape  and  thi:  Eucharixt,  London,  IWl ; 
A.  J.  Maclean,  art. '  Apape '  in  KllE ;  J.  B.  Mayor,  Api>cndix 
C  in  Ilort  and  Mayor's  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Seventh  Book  of 
the  Stromateix,  London,  1902  ;  also  books  and  articles  men- 
tioned in  art.  Eiciiarist.  G.  H.  ClAYTON. 

LUCAS.— See  Luke. 

LUCIUS.  —  Lucius  of  Cyrene  was  one  of  the 
prophets  and  teachers  who  presided  in  the  Church 
at  Antioch  (Ac  13*).  He  seems  to  have  belonged 
l)retty  certainly  to  the  band  of  Cypriotes  and 
Cyrenians  by  whom  the  Gentile  Church  at  Antioch 
was  founded  (11-").  Some  commentators  have 
rather  absurdly  identified  him  with  St.  Luke. 
The  names  are  not  identical  or  even  very  near  one 
another,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  St. 
Luke  would  have  introduced  himself  in  this  hap- 
hazard way.  He  may  be  identified  with  the  Lucius 
of  Ro  16^1.  W.  A.  SrooNER. 

LUKE.— I.  IXFORMATIOy  AS  TO  BIS  HISTORY. 
—1.  In  the  Pauline  Epistles.- The  Pauline  Epistles 
contain  various  references  to  a  certain  Luke,  who 
is  in  tradition  always  identified  with  the  author  of 
the  Acts  and  Third  Gospel.     These  references  are  : 

(1)  dffird^erai  v/jloLs  Aou/cas  6  iarpbs  6  dya-n-r}T6%  (Col  4'^) ; 

(2)  do-TTcifeTai  ce  .  .  .  AonAcas  (Pliilem-'');  (3)  Aoyxas 
ianv  fidvos  fier  ifiov  (2  Ti  4").  From  these  scanty 
allusions  we  can  gather  that  Luke  was  a  companion 
of  St.  Paul  at  the  time  that  Colossians  (with  its 
appendix  Philemon)  and  2  Timothy  were  written, 
and  also  that  he  was  a  physician.  The  trust- 
worthiness of  these  statements  may  reasonably  be 
regarded  as  falling  short  of  the  highest  grade. 
The  authenticity  of  Colossians  (q.v.)  is  probable, 
but  cannot  be  regarded  as  quite  so  certain  as  that 
of  the  earlier  Epistles ;  there  is  a  ditlerence  between 
the  group  Colossians-Ephesians  and  the  group 
Corinthians-Galatians-Romans  which  extends  to 
thought  as  well  as  to  language,  and  raises  the  sug- 
gestion that  the  former  group  is  either  un-Pauline  or 
has  been  much  edited.  It  is  on  the  whole  perhaps 
probable  that  this  doubt  ought  to  be  i)ut  aside  on 
the  ground  that  the  theories  of  interpolation  or 
pseudepigraphy  cause  more  difficulties  than  they 
solve,  but  the  point  has  not  yet  been  sufhciently 
discussed  by  critics.  In  the  same  way  and  in 
somewhat  greater  measure  the  reference  in  2 
Timothy  must  be  discounted,  on  the  ground  of 
doubts  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  Epistle.  So 
long  as  these  doubts  exist,  the  possibility  cannot 
be  entirely  excluded  that  the  references  to  Luke 
ouglit  to  be  regarded  as  the  result  of  the  tradition, 
rather  than  as  the  proof  of  its  accuracy. 

A  similar  element  of  doubt  attaches  to  the 
question  of  the  place  in  which  Luke  and  St.  Paul 
were  working  together  (awepyoi  /xov  in  Philem'" 
covers  Luke).  There  is  no  critical  agi-eement  as 
to  wiiether  the  so-called  Epistles  of  the  Imprison- 
ment were  written  from  Ciesiirea,  from  Rome,  or 
(according  to  a  more  recent  hyjwthesis)  from 
Ephesus.      It    is,    however,    noticeable    that,    as 


LUKE 


LUKE 


719 


llarnack  points  out  (Lukas  cicr  Arzf,  Leipzijj,  1906, 
p.  2),  Luke  is  not  referred  to  as  a  '  fellow-pnsoner,' 
and  there  is  consequentlj-  a  presumption  that  he 
liad  accompanied  St.  Paul  in  freedom  and  as  a 
friend. 

2.  In  tradition. — Very  little  is  added  by  tradition 
to  the  information  in  the  Pauline  Epistles  except 
(a)  the  constant  attribution  to  Luke  of  the  Third 
Gospel  and  Acts ;  (b)  the  statement  that  he  was 
an  Antiochene  Greek ;  (c)  somewhat  less  frequently, 
statements  tliat  he  died  in  Bceotia,  Bithynia,  or 
Ephesus ;  (rf)  the  statement,  found  only  in  late 
AISS,  that  the  Gospel  was  written  in  Alexandria, 
The  most  important  expressions  of  tradition  are 
those  of  (1)  Eusebius;  (2)  Jerome;  (3)  the  Mon- 
archian  Prologues,  found  in  Vulgate  MSS,  and 
possibly  of  PrisciUianist  origin  ;  (4)  notes  appended 
to  NT  MSS. 

(1)  Eusebius. — 

Aouicas  5«  TO  iiiv  ytvoi  5)V  Tav  afr'  "AiTtox'wiS,  ttji'  Si  ciri(mj(iTji' 
tarpon,  TO  irAeioTtt  <rvyyryova»s  tw  IlavAu,  icai  tois  Aonrois  Si  ov 
wopcpyaK  Ttii'  attoa lokuv  w/xtAT)Ku$,  i^  oirb  tovtiov  irpo<reicT^<raTO 
\lrux*>y  fltpajrevTKOfS  iv  Svai-v  ruilv  viro5ciy/iOTO  Btoirvrvaron 
KaroAcAotirc  Pi^ioit  r<Z  re  cirovytXjM,  6  icol  X'*P<'f*'  (lapTVpfiTcu, 
KoSa  vapiSovTO  aiVnt  ot  air'  apxifs  ainovrai  Kal  irmipiTiu  ysvofievoi 
Tov  Xoyov  oI{  Kat  ^T^tv  iTzavaOfv  aireuri  irap7)icoXov0i)«'»«<,  koX 
T«us  Ti>v  airo<rroAuv  wpd^etriv  at  ovKtri  Si'  axorj^  o^oA/uotf  Si 
avTOis  irapaXafiaiv  orvveTaSaTO.  ♦aut  Si  £ti  apa  toO  Kar'  avTiv 
fvayyekiov  niTifiovevdv  (laiOfv  6  IlavAos  OTnjviKa  in  jrspt  iSiov 
Tivoi  eiiayyeAiou  ypd^v  fAryf  '  icaTa  to  €v<ryy«'Ai6i'  fiov '  (^HE  iii. 
4,6). 

This,  which  is  the  basis  of  almost  all  later  state- 
ments, shows  no  knowledge  beyond  what  can  be 
deduced  from  the  Epistles,  combined  with  (i.)  the 
belief  that  the  same  Luke  wrote  Acts  and  Gospel ; 
(ii.)  the  statements  in  the  preface  to  the  Gospel ; 
(iii.)  the  (undoubtedly  mistaken)  view  that  St. 
Paul  was  referring  to  a  book  when  he  spoke  of '  his 
gospel'  (Ro  2i«,  2  Ti  2«) ;  (iv.)  possibly  the  text  in 
some  MSS  (which  may  belong  to  that  I  recension 
which,  on  von  Soden's  view,  was  familiar  to 
Eusebius)  of  Ac  ll**'*  :  ev  raiTais  ratj  ijfiepais 
KaTriXdov  airb  'lepoaoXvfiuv  irpo<f>i}Tai  els  ' Avrioxeiav 
(ruvc(rTpa[i|xevci)v  8c  iqfjiwv  f<p7]  els  i^  avrwv  ovojxaTi 
'Aya^os  kt\.  (D  p  w  Aug.);  this  is,  however,  by 
no  means  certain  ;  and  there  is  no  proof  that  this 
text  was  known  to  Eusebius. 

(2)  Jerome. — 

'  Lucas  medicus  Antiochensis,  ut  eius  scripta  indicant,  Gneci 
sermonis  noa  ignarus  fuit,  sectator  apostoli  Pauli  et  omnis 
perejrrinatlonis  eius  comes  scripsit  evangelium,  de  quo  idem 
Paulus  :  Misimus,  inquit,  cum  illo  fratrem  cuius  laus  est  in  evan- 
gelic per  omnes  ecclesias  ;  et  ad  Colossenses :  Salutat  vos  Lucas, 
medicus  carissimus  ;  et  ad  Timotheum  :  Lucas  est  mecum  solus. 
Aliud  quoque  edidit  volunien  egregium  quod  titulo  irpaf«t$ 
ob-oo-toAmi'  pnenotatur :  cuius  historia  usque  ad  biennium 
RomjB  commorantis  Pauli  pervenit,  id  est,  iisque  ad  quartum 
Iseronis  annum.  Ex  quo  intelligimus  in  eadem  urbe  librum 
esse  compositum.  Igitur  s-fpio^ous  Pauli  et  Thecte,  et  totam 
baptizati  leonis  fabulam,  inter  apocryphas  scripturas  com- 
putamus.  [Then  there  follows  the  weli-known  passage  about 
the  Acts  of  Paul,  quoting  Tertullian  (see  Acts  [Apocrvphal])!. 
.  .  .  Quidamsuspicantur  quotiescumque  in  epistolissuis  Paulus 
dicit,  luxta  evangelium  menm,  de  Lucae  signiflcare  volumine, 
et  [?  at]  Lucam  non  solum  ab  apostolo  Paulo  didicisse  evangelium, 
qui  cum  domino  in  carne  non  fuerat,  sed  a  ceteris  apostolis ; 
quod  ipse  quoque  in  principio  sui  voluminis  declarat,  dicens : 
Sicut  tradiderunt  nobis  qui  a  principio  ipsi  viderunt  et  ministri 
fuerunt  sermonis.  Igitur  evangelium,  sicut  audierat,  scripsit. 
Acta  vero  apostolorum  sicut  \-iderat  ipse  composuit.  Vixit 
octoginta  et  quattuor  annos,  usorem  non  habens.  Sepultus  est 
Constantinopoli,  ad  quam  urbem  vicesimo  Constantii  anno  ossa 
eius  cum  reliquiis  Andres  apostoli  translata  sunt  de  Achaia' 
(de  nv.  Illustr.  vii.). 

(3)  The  Monarchian  Prologues. — 

'  Lucas  Syrus  natione  Antiochensis,  arte  medicus,  discipulus 
apostolorum,  postea  Paulum  secutus  usque  ad  confessionem 
eius,  serviens  deo  sine  crimine.  Xam  neque  uxorem  umquam 
habens  neque  Alios  Lxxiui  annorum  obiit  in  Bithynia  plenus 
spiritu  sancto— qui  cum  iam  desoripta  essent  evangelia  per 
Mattbseum  quidem  in  ludaea,  per  Marcum  autem  in  Italia,  sancto 
instigante  spiritu  in  Achaiae  partibus  hoc  scripsit  evangelium, 
significans  etiam  ipse  in  principio  ante  alia  esse  descriptL  Cui 
extra  ea  quae  ordo  evangelicse  dispositionis  exposcit,  ea  maxima 
necessitas  laboris  fuit,  ut  primum  Graecis  fidelibus  omni  perfec- 
tione  ventari  in  camem  dei  manifestata,   ne  ludaicis  fabulis 


intentiin  solo  legis  desiderio  tenerentur  neque  hcreticis  fabulis 
et  stultis  sollicitationibus  seducti  exce<1erent  a  veritaie,  elabor- 
aret,  dehinc  ut  in  principio  evangelii  lohannis  nativitate  prse- 
sunipta  cui  evangelium  scriberet  et  in  quo  electus  scriberet, 
indicaret,  contestans  in  se  completa  esse  quae  essent  ab  aJiis 
inchoata,  cui  ideo  post  baptisnium  filii  dei  a  perfectione  genera- 
tionis  in  Christo  inplet;e  et  repeteiidx  a  principio  nativitatis 
humana;  potestas  permissa  est  ut  requirentibus  demonstraret, 
in  quo  adprehendens  erat,  per  Xathan  filium  introitu  recurrent!* 
in  deum  generationis  admisso  indisjiartibilis  dei,  prsdicans  in 
hominihus  Christum  suum  perfecti  opus  hominis  redire  in  se 
per  filium  facere.  qui  per  David  patrem  \enientibus  iter 
praebebat  in  Christo.  Cm  Luca;  non  inmerito  etiam  scribend- 
orum  apostolicorum  actuuni  potestas  in  ministerio  datur,  ut 
deo  in  deum  pleno  ac  Alio  proditionis  extincto  oratione  ab 
apostolis  facta  sorte  domini  electionis  numenis  compleretur, 
sicque  Paulus  consumuiationem  apostolicis  actibus  daret,  queni 
diu  contra  stimulos  recalcitrantem  dominus  elegisset.  Quod 
legentibus  ac  requirentibus  deum  etsi  per  singula  expediri  a 
nobis  utile  fuerat,  scientes  tamen,  ^uod  operantem  agricoUm 
oporteat  de  fructibus  suis  edere,  vitarimos  publicam  curiosi- 
tatem,  ne  non  tarn  volentibus  deum  videremur  quam  faatidient- 
ibus  pro<lidisse  '  (the  full  text  of  the  Monarchian  Prologvet  is 
given  in  Kleine  Texte,  i.,  by  H.  Lietzmann,  Bonn,  19(6,  and 
there  is  a  full  discussion  by  P.  Corssen  in  TU  xv.  1  [1896]}. 

(4)  Information  in  MSS  of  the  Gospels. — Almost 
all  tlie  later  MSS  contain  statements  at  the  begin- 
nings or  ends  of  the  various  books  relating  to  their 
authors.  They  are  of  course  important  as  repre- 
senting ecclesiastical  tradition  rather  than  as  con- 
taining historical  evidence.  The  most  complete 
list  of  the  Greek  ones,  is  given  by  von  Soden  in 
Die  Schriften  des  NT,  i.,  Berlin,  1902,  p.  293  ff. 
The  most  important  items  referring  to  Luke  aie 
the  following : 

(i.)  aweypdir]  to  icara  AovKav  evoYytXiov  ftera  xpoyom  u  (15) 
TTJ?  ToO  XpioToG  aroAijiJitttK  (v  'AXe^avSpfia  'EAAijfiaTi-  There  is 
also  a  form  of  substantially  the  same  note  beginning :  i^eSo^ 
irpb?  Bcw^tAoi'  eirto'icoiroi'  '.\.>Tiox"a9,  vpbf  &K  kcu  al  rpa^tti- 
This  form  is  found  in  many  late  MSS  with  a  great  number  of 
textual  variants,  (ii.)  A  remarkable  form  is  found  in  e  377 : 
TO  Kara.  \ovKay  evayye'Atoi'  KoX  n>v  ayt'uf  asvoToAwf  ai  rpo^etf 
v-!rriYopfv&j)<ray  vvo  iXeVpov  icox  HavAou  twk  aainnoKiar  firra 
Xpoi-o«5  viyrf  kou  StKa  rffi  tov  XpMTToO  orttXijifKmf.  Aovxa;  Si  6 
taTpb;  <rvvfypat!>f  koI  iicqpv^e  ml  cicotftiT^i)  iv  ^rifiali  iritv  orfioTq- 
Koyra  r^Tvapmv.  (iii.)  Further  information  confirming  the  huse- 
bian  tradition  that  Luke  was  an  Antiochene  is  found  in  some 
MSS,  e-g.  ovro?  6  ruoyytAtVmjs  Aovica;  ^v  fiiv  'Ai»Ttox«vs  07601}- 
Koi^a  rftrtrofnav  (c  1156),  and  6  fuixopiof  Aovicas  o  evayyeAi7Ti|S 
yiyovf  Svpof  («  3006). 

Added  to  these  note  may  be  made  also  of  the  famous  pseudo- 
Dorotheus,  and  the  longer  Sophronius.  The  text  of  the  former 
is  sufficient  to  illustrate  their  character : 

Aouicav  6  tvayyfkCcrnfi  'AvTtoxfi'?  Itiv  to  yei^>«  ^i",  larpof  Si  rifv 
rrxyqv.  trweypdyfia-n  Si  tx>  iiiv  evayyiXioy  kot'  ortTpoirijv  IIcTpav 
rov  atrooToAov,  tolj  Si  vpo^cit  twv  dstxrroAuv  icar'  i-mpoiniv 
UovAov  toO  oiro<rr6Ao«.  <n)vavfSii))iTi<re  yap  Tots  acoordAois  cat 
/loAtora  tu  IlavAot,  ov  cat  fimtfiovewra^  6  Hai/Aof  eypaififv  iv 
eiriOToAg  'ajrrd^frax  v/iaf  Aovxa;  o  larpot  6  iyosTfrbs  iv  mipuf.' 
aviOavf  Si  iv  'E^Vcb  icat  irdibi)  (Ktl.  fieTfTfffri  Si  wrrepov  iv 
Kiav<rravTivovtr6\ei  ^rra  icai  'AvSpiov  ical  Tiito6iov  riiv  avtxrrokuv 
Kara  tov?  Kiupovi  Kuporavriov  fiatri\euK  vloi  Kuvaravrivov  tov 
lieydXov  (the  t«xt,  and  that  of  Sophronius,  are  given  in  von 
Soden's  Die  Schriften  des  ST,  L  1,  p.  306  ff.). 

IL  'it'lifi '^.Sii-V^rrJ70fi.— The foregoingpara- 
graphs  summarize  all  that  is  known  as  to  the 
'  historic  Luke.'  It  now  remains  to  discuss  (1)  the 
internal  evidence  supplied  mainly  by  the  Acts  for 
and  against  the  tradition  which  identifies  the 
'  historic  Luke  '  of  the  Epistles  with  the  '  literary 
Luke '  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  Acts  ;  (2)  the 
sources  used  by  the  '  literary  Luke ' ;  (3)  his 
literary  methods.  It  would  also  have  been  desir- 
able to  discuss  his  theology,  but  this  has  already 
been  done  in  art.  ACTS  OF  THE  Apostles. 

1.  The  arguments  for  and  against  the  Lacan 
authorship  of  the  Third  Gospel  and  Acts. — In 
favour  of  the  Lucan  authorship  Harnack  argues 
that  the  redactor  of  Acts,  like  Luke,  was  (1)  a 
fellow-worker  with  St.  Paul ;  (2)  an  Antiochene 
Greek  ;  (3)  a  physician  ;  (4)  the  writer  of  the  '  we- 
sections.'  The  reasons  for  this  argument  are 
stated  in  his  Untersuchungen  zu  den  Schriften  des 
Lukas  (Leipzig,  1906-08)  with  great  power,  but 
with  a  certainty  which  is  sometimes  too  great. 

(1)  It  is  of  course  abundantly  e\-ident  that  the 
Acts  represents  in  the  '  we-sections '  the  evidence 
of  a  companion  of  St.  Paul,  but  until  the  linguistic 
argument  has  been  accepted  as  convincing  it  does 


720 


LUKK 


LUKE 


not  follow  that  the  redactor  of  the  whole  was  the 
autlior  of  the  '  we-scctions.' 

(2)  In  the  same  way  it  is  abundantly  clear  that 
a  great  part  of  the  Acts  is  concerned  with  Antioch  ; 
but  if,  as  Acts  states,  Antioch  was  really  the  centre 
of  tlie  Gentile  Christian  nioveniont,  this  is  really 
a  sullicient  ex))lanation,  and  throws  no  necessary 
li^'ht  on  tlio  provenance  of  tlie  writer.  If  anyone 
were  to  write  tlie  history  of  economics  in  Enfjland 
in  the  19th  cent.,  lie  would  constantly  be  speak- 
ing of  Manchester,  but  it  would  not  follow  that  he 
was  a  Mancunian  :  similarly,  the  writer  of  Acts 
constantly  speaks  of  Antioch,  but  he  need  not  have 
been  an  Antiochene.  That  Luke  was  a  Greek  ratlier 
tlian  a  Jew  is  possibly  true,  but  the  evidence  is 
poor,     llarnju'k  says: 

'  Lukaii  war  (rel)orcner  Grieche— Evanpfelinm  und  Acta  zeisren, 
wim  ciiies  Hewt-ises  nicht  erst  bedarf,  daH!<  sic  iiiclit  von  eineiu 
>fel)orenen  Judoii,  sondern  von  cineui  Oriechcn  vorfasst  sind,' 
and  adds  in  a  note  :  '  Ob  der  Verfasser  bevor  er  Christ  wiirde 
judischnr  I'rosel.vt  gewesen  ist,  liisst  sich  nii'lit  entscheidcn. 
Seine  Erwilhiiunjf  der  Proselyten  in  der  Apostelgeschichte 
liUst  keinen  Si.;hlu88  zu.  Seine  virtuose  Kenntnis  der  frriech- 
ischen  Bibel  Icann  cr  sich  sehr  wohl  erst  als  Clirist  angeeitrnct 
haben.  Fiir  scincn  criecliischen  Ursprung  zeugt  iibriyrens 
allein  schon  dns  ol  pdpPapoi,  in  c.  28,  '2.  4  '  (Lukas  der  Ant,  ch. 
i.  [Eng.  tr.,  19()7,  p.  Vli.]). 

It  may  fairly  he  urged  that  Hamack  does  not 
sufficiently  emphasize  the  complete  absence  of 
direct  evidence  that  Luke  was  a  Greek.  The  facts 
seem  to  be  quite  adequately  covered  if  we  suppose 
that  Luke  was  a  Hellenistic  Jew. 

(3)  Tliat  Luke  was  a  physician  is  argued  by 
Hamack — following  up  and  greatly  improving  on 
the  methods  of  Hobart — on  tiie  grouml  of  his  use 
of  medical  language.  The  argument  is  of  course 
cumulative,  and  cannot  be  epitomized.  It  is  be- 
yond doubt  that  Luke  frequently  employs  lan- 
guage which  can  be  illustrated  from  Galen  and 
other  medical  writers.  The  weak  point  is  that  no 
sufficient  account  has  been  taken  of  the  fact  that 
much  of  this  language  can  probably  be  shown 
from  the  pages  of  Lucian,  Dion  of  Prusa,  etc.,  to 
have  been  part  of  the  vocabulary  of  .any  educated 
Greek.  It  is,  for  instance,  too  '  keen '  wJien  it  is 
alleged  that  the  Lucan  phrase  Kal  €ir{<jTpe\(/€v  rb 
irvfvfua  avTTJs  Kal  aviarr)  irapaxpvf'-''-  iu  Ll^  8'''"  is  a 
medical  improvement  on  tlie  Marcan  Kal  ivOus 
dvcarrj  to  Kopdaiov  (o*-).  Could  we  stamp  a  writer 
as  a  physician  at  the  present  time  because  he 
spoke  of  '  bacilli,'  or  described  a  state  of  mind  as 
'  pathological '?  Yet  it  is  doubtful  whether  there 
is  anything  .so  'medical'  in  the  Third  Gospel  or 
Acts  as  these  expressions.  The  truth  seems  to  be 
that,  if  we  accept  on  the  ground  of  tradition  the 
view  that  the  Gospel  and  Acts  were  written  by  a 
physician,  there  is  a  certain  amount  of  corrobora- 
tive detail  in  the  language  ;  but  if  we  are  not  in- 
clined to  accept  this  view,  the  '  medical '  language 
is  insutlicient  to  show  that  the  writer  was  a  physi- 
cian, or  used  a  more  medical  phraseology  than  an 
educated  man  might  have  been  expected  to  ])ossess. 

(4)  Far  more  imi>ortant  than  tliese  lines  of 
argument,  which  seem  to  attempt  to  prove  too 
much  from  too  little  evidence,  is  the  thesis 
that  linguistic  argument  shows  tliat  the  writer  of 
the  '  we-sections '  is  identical  with  the  redactor  of 
the  Third  Gospel  and  the  Acts.  Here  again  the 
cumulative  nature  of  the  argument  jmdiibits  its 
complete  reproduction.  The  pages  of  Hamack 
must  be  studied  in  detail.  But  the  main  outline 
is  that,  if  we  study  the  Third  Gospel  in  comparison 
with  Mark  and  any  sort  of  reconstructed  Q,  we 
shall  fmd  out  whidi  idioms  are  especially  Lucan, 
in  the  sense  of  bclongwig  to  tlie  redaction  of  the 
Gospel.  If  then  we  lind  that  the  'Lucan'  phrase- 
ology is  especially  marked  in  the  '  we-sections,'  it 
follows  that  the  writer  of  the  'we-sections'  was 
the  redactor  of  the  whole.  John  C.  Hawkins, 
in  Horte  Synoptica  (Oxiovd,  1899,  =^1909),  had  al- 


ready (i%.  .attention  to  the  fact  that  this  line 
of  researi  .  pointed  to  the  unity  of  the  Lucan 
writings  and  the  identity  of  the  scribe  of  the  '  we- 
sectionsjj  with  the  redactor  of  the  whole,  and  in 
Lukas  der  Arzt  Harnack  elaborates  the  argument 
very  fully,  and  muy  be  regarded  as  having  proved 
his  point,  if  it  be  granted  that  no  redactor  would 
liave  completely  '  Lucanized '  tlie  'we-sections' 
without  altering  the  characteristic  use  of  the  first 
person.  Unfortunately,  this  is  a  rather  large 
assumption,  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  the  re- 
dactor kept  the  first  person,  because  it  implied 
that  his  source  was  here  that  of  an  eye-witness. 
It  is  clear  from  the  preface  to  the  Gospel  that  he  at- 
tached imi)ortance  to  the  evidence  of  eye-witnesses. 
The  arguments  against  the  Lucan  authorsliip  of 
Acts  (and  the  Third  Gospel  goes  with  them)  have 
been  given  at  length  in  dealing  with  Acts.  In 
summary  they  are  that  a  comparison  between  the 
Acts  and  tlie  Epistles  shows  that,  wherever  Luke 
and  St.  Paul  relate  the  same  facts,  they  give 
discordant  testimony,  and  that  the  Pauline  and 
Lucan  theology  are  evidently  dillerent  (see  ACTS). 
It  is  not  impossible  to  give  an  explanation  of  these 
facts  consistent  with  the  Lucan  authorship,  but 
their  obvious  bearing  is  to  render  that  theory  im- 
probable, so  that  the  results  of  these  two  lines  of 
investigation,  the  linguistic  and  the  historical  and 
tlieological,  do  not  point  in  quite  the  same  direc- 
tion. The  linguistic  argument  as  stated  by  Har- 
nack goes  a  long  way  towards  proving  that  the 
redactor  of  the  Third  Gospel  and  Acts  is  identical 
with  the  author  of  the  '  we-sections '  and  the  nar- 
ratives immediately  cohering  with  them.  This 
conclusion  is  not  seriously  impaired  if  it  be  granted 
that  in  telling  his  story  the  writer  often  makes 
use  of  clicMs  relating  to  miraculous  episodes  found 
in  the  literary  work  of  this  or  a  slightly  later 
period,  c.q.  iii  Philostratus,*  and  perhaps  in  the 
lost  writings  of  Apollonius  of  Tyana.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  historical  and  theological  argu- 
ments support  the  contention  that  the  author  can 
scarcely  have  been  a  companion  of  St.  Paul. 
Whenever  it  is  possible  to  compare  Acts  and 
Epistles,  discrepancies  of  varying  seriousness  are 
to  be  found,  and  the  Acts  shows  very  few  or  no 
signsof  acquaintance  with  the  Atonement-theology 
or  the  Christology  of  the  Epistles. 

Two  ways  may  be  suggested  of  combining  these 
conflicting  results.  On  tlie  one  hand,  it  is  possible 
that  the  prima  facia  evidence  of  the  linguistic 
facts  is  fallacious.  The  central  point  of  Harnack's 
argument  is  that  the  same  linguistic  character- 
istics are  to  be  found  throughout  the  wliole  work 
as  in  the  'we-sections.'  It  is  assumed  that  the 
latter  and  the  cohering  narratives  may  be  taken 
as  normative,  and  that  they  have  been  unchanged. 
Hut  if  this  assumption  be  challenged,  the  argument 
falls  to  the  ground.  Suppose  that  the  redactor 
found  a  source  relating  the  greater  part  of  St. 
Paul's  life,  and  in  places  claiming  that  the  writer 
was  an  eye-witness  by  the  use  of  the  first  person, 
it  would  be  not  unnatural  for  the  redactor  care- 
fully to  preserve  these  important  indications  of 
the  value  of  his  source,  while  at  the  same  time  re- 
writing or  touching  up  the  rest  of  the  language. 
It  would  then  present  all  those  signs  of  identity 
of  literary  style  with  the  rest  of  the  book  which 
Hamack  has  emphasized.  This  theory  circum- 
vents the  literary  argument,  and  enables  us  to 
accept  easily  the  historical  and  theological  results 
which  render  doubtful  the  view  that  the  redactor 
was  a  companion  of  St.  Paul. 

*  Tliis  seems  to  t>e  the  most  important  result  of  E.  Norden's 
Agnostos  Theos  (Leipzijif,  lOlU);  he  does  not  really  prove  that 
the  story  of  St.  Paul  at  Athens  or  similar  incidents  are  free 
literary  "comjiositions,  and  void  of  all  historic.al  found.ition,  but 
does  show  that  a  considerable  use  was  made  of  literary  cliches 
in  setting  out,  illuBtrating,  and  adorning  a  narrative. 


LUKE 


LUKE 


•21 


On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  tlui-  vc  are  de- 
manding too  liigh  a  standard  of  accuftioy  in  the 
Acts  :  sifter  all,  the  inaccuracies  and  mistakes — 
for  they  can  scarcely  be  anything  less — a.e  chiefly 
iound  in  the  earlier  parts  of  Acts,  and  Lake  may 
have  been  a  companion  of  St.  Paul,  and  yet  never 
have  thought  of  making  very  careful  inquiry  from 
him  as  to  the  events  of  his  early  career.  This 
would  be  esjieoially  probable  if,  as  the  suggested 
use  of  Joseplius  implies,  Luke  wrote  his  two 
treatises  for  Theophilns  late  in  life  (c.  A.D.  90). 
The  theological  ditficulty  is  more  serious :  it  is 
very  difficult  to  understand  how  a  companion  of 
St.  Paul  can  have  had  a  theology  and  Christology 
which  are  on  the  whole  more  archaic  than  those 
of  the  Epistles.  To  some  extent,  no  doubt,  this 
can  be  explained  by  the  different  objects  of  the 
wQrks.  To  some  extent  also  it  is  no  doubt  true 
that  we  have  gone  altogether  too  far  in  recon- 
structing a  '  Pauline  theology '  out  of  the  Epistles  ; 
these  were  St.  Paul's  answers  to  controversial 
points,  not  statements  of  his  central  teaching. 
Probably  the  preaching  of  St.  Patil  was  much 
more  like  the  Acts  than  systems  of  Paulinismus 
reconstructed  out  of  the  Epistles.  At  the  same 
time,  it  is  doubtful  whether  these  considerations 
really  carry  us  all  the  way.  The  theology  of 
Acts — not  linguistic  characteristics  or  historical 
inaccuracies — is  the  greatest  difficidty  which  faces 
those  who  accept  the  authorship  of  the  Third 
Gospel  and  Acts  by  a  companion  of  St.  Paul.  At 
present  the  matter  is  sub  judice,  and  Hamack's 
powerful  advocacy  has  turned  the  current  of  feel- 
ing in  favour  of  the  traditional  view,  but  he  has 
really  dealt  adequately  with  only  one  side  of  the 
question  and  dismissed  the  theological  and  (to  a 
somewhat  less  extent)  the  historical  difficulty  too 
easily.  It  will  not  be  surprising  if  a  reaction 
follows  when  these  points  have  been  more  ade- 
quately studied  and  expounded. 

2.  Lake's  soarces. — In  the  complete  absence  of 
any  definite  statements  as  to  the  sources  used  by 
Luke,  with  the  exception  of  the  preface  to  the 
Gospel,  internal  evidence  can  alone  be  used,  and  the 
results  of  its  study  are  necessarily  only  tentative. 

In  the  preface  to  the  Gospel  Luke  tells  us  that 
he  was  acquainted  with  many  previous  attempts 
to  give  a  5tTiyr]<rit>  rOiv  irerKyipoipofn^fiivuv  iv  tjijuv 
rpay,udT(i)v — a  difficult  phrase,  which,  however, 
much   more  probably  means   '  the   things  accom- 

Elished  among  us'  than  the  'things  most  surely 
elieved  among  us' — in  accordance  with  the 
tradition  of  the  original  eye-witnesses,  and  that 
he  also  had  decided  to  write  an  account  of  them 
because  he  was  raptjKoKovdrjKori  dvudev  Tciffiv.  From 
this  passage  it  has  sometimes  been  concluded  that 
Luke  disapproved  of  the  previous  ettorts,  and  re- 
garded himself  as  altogether  superior  to  his  pre- 
decessors. This,  however,  is  not  the  natural 
meaning  of  the  Greek  ;  Luke  says  :  '  Inasmuch  as 
many  ...  it  seemed  good  to  me  also'  (Ka/wi), 
and  the  force  of  the  '  also  '  is  to  class  him  with  and 
not  above  his  predecessors.  A  more  serious 
problem  is  provided  by  the  exact  exegesis  of  xa<rt 
m  P.  Does  it  refer  to  the  roWoi  of  1^,  or  to  the 
rpayndruv  of  the  same  verse,  or  to  the  avr&rrai  of 
1"'  ?  No  decision  is  possible ;  the  probability  is 
rather  in  favour  of  a  reference  to  xoWot,  as  carry- 
ing on  and  explaining  the  iireiSrirep  xoXXot  of  the 
opening  words,  but  the  other  alternatives  are 
possible.  In  any  case,  the  main  object  of  Luke 
was  to  provide  Theophilns  with  the  proof  (fro 
e-riyvifii  .  .  .  tt}»  dff<pa\€iat')  of  the  Xiyyot  in  which 
he  had  received  oral  instruction  {KarnxvBris).  Luke 
is  therefore  ^vriting  history  with  the  object  of 
giving  the  historical  basis  of  the  statements  (pre- 
sumably theological)  which  were  current  in  the 
oral  instruction  given  to  converts. 
VOL.  I. — 46 


(a)  The  toritien  s'otirces  tued  by  Luke. — In  tlie 
Crospel  at  least  two  written  sources  can  be  detected. 
(1)  Mark,  either  exactly  in  the  form  now  extant, 
or  in  one  only  sliglitly  differing  from  it,  was 
certainl}'  used  by  Luke.  This  is  one  of  the  most 
secure  results  of  the  criticism  of  the  Synoptic 
Gospels.  (2)  Besides  Mark,  Luke  used  a  docu- 
ment commonly  called  Q  {QuiUe),  which  was  also 
used  by  Matthew,  and,  according  to  some  scholars 
(not,  the  present  writer  thinks,  correctly),  by 
Mark.  The  exact  contents  of  Q  cannot  be  defined. 
Nor  can  we  say  with  certainty  whether  Q  represents 
one  or  many  documents.  These  points  are  at 
present  among  the  most  warmly  debated  and 
most  intently  studied  problems  in  the  Sj^noptic 
question.  If,  however,  Q  be  used  to  cover  all  the 
material  common  to  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  it  be 
assumed  that  Q  is  only  one  document,  it  must 
have  been  Greek,  not  Aramaic,  as  the  agreement 
between  Matthew  and  Luke  is  often  too  close  to 
admit  the  jxissibility  that  the  two  narratives  re- 
present two  translations  of  a  single  Aramaic  docu- 
ment. In  the  same  way  the  Mark  used  by  Matthew 
and  Luke  must  have  been  Greek ;  it  is,  however, 
possible,  though  no  sufficient  proof  has  been  given 
even  by  AVellhausen,  that  behind  the  Greek  Mark 
and  the  Greek  Q  there  were  originally  Aramaic 
texts.  (3)  It  is  doubtful  whether  Luke  used  other 
written  sources  in  his  Gospel.  It  is  possible  that 
the  Pertean  section  9*^-18^  may  have  had  a  written 
source,  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  '  Jerusalem 
naiTative '  of  the  Passion  and  Resurrection  ;  but  it 
is  also  possible  that  their  peculiarly  Lucan  passages 
rest  on  oral  tradition.  (4)  In  the  Acts  mnch 
depends  on  the  view  taken  of  the  critical  questions, 
but  in  any  case  the  '  we-sections '  must  be  referred 
to  a  written  source,  even  though  their  source  may 
have  been  a  diary  of  the  editor  of  the  whole  book. 
Whether  the  '  Antiochene '  source  was  a  written 
document  is  doubtful,  and  the  same  may  be  said 
of  source  B  in  the  Jerusalem-Caesaraean  tradition. 
It  is,  however,  as  probable  as  any  point  which  is 
supported  merely  by  literary  evidence  can  be  that 
source  A  (containing  Ac  3-4,  probably  8*"",  and 
possibly  also  ch.  5)  depends  from  a  written  Greek 
source  (see  art.  Acts  for  the  fuller  treatment  of 
the  question  of  the  sources  of  Acts). 

(b)  The  use  of  the  LXX. — It  remains  a  question 
which  criticism  has  as  yet  found  no  means  of 
solving  whether  Luke  used,  besides  the  foregoing 
sotirces,  an  Aramaic  document  for  his  narrative  of 
the  Nativity  in  the  Gospel,  or  gave  his  version  of  a 
tradition  which  he  had  heard,  casting  it  into  a 
form  based  on  the  LXX.  It  is  in  any  case  certain 
that  the  LXX,  and  not  the  Hebrew,  was  the 
form  of  the  OT  which  he  habitually  used,  and  his 
diction  seems  to  have  been  greatly  influenced 
by  it. 

(c)  The  use  of  other  tcritings. — No  other  books 
seem  to  have  been  certainly  used  by  Luke,  with 
the  possible  (or,  in   the  present  writer's  opinion, 

[)robable)  exception  of  Josephus.  The  facts  re- 
ating  to  Josephus  in  connexion  with  Theudas 
seem  to  point  very  strongly  to  a  knowledge  of  the 
Antiquities  (see  art.  Acts). 

(d)  The  use  of  the  Epistles. — There  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  Luke  was  acquainted  with  any 
of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
Acts  which  resembles  a  quotation,  and  in  relating 
facts  alluded  to  in  the  Epistles  there  is  more  often 
diflerence  than  agreement,  even  though  it  be  true 
that  the  diflerence  is  not  always  very  serious. 

3.  Lake's  methods.  —  In  using  his  materials 
Lukes  methods  are  in  the  main  those  of  other 
writers  of  the  same  period.  They  are  quite  un- 
like those  of  modem  writers.  A  writer  of  the 
present  day  seeks  to  tell  his  story  in  his  own  words 
and  his  own  way,  giving  references  to,  and,  if 


722 


LUKE 


LUST 


necessary,  quotations  from,  his  sources,  but  care- 
fully avoidinj;;  all  confusion  between  traditional 
fact  and  critical  inference,  and  certainly  never 
altering;  the  direct  statement  of  the  earlier  docu- 
ments without  expressly  mentioning  the  fact. 
The  method  of  antiquity  was  as  a  rule  almost 
the  reverse.  The  author  of  a  book  based  on  earlier 
materials  strung  together  a  series  of  extracts  into 
a  more  or  less  coherent  whole,  giving  no  indication 
of  his  sources,  and  modifying  them  freely  in  order 
to  harmonize  them.  Sometimes  he  would  select 
between  several  narratives,  sometimes  he  would 
combine,  sometimes  he  would  give  them  succes- 
sively, and  by  a  few  editorial  comments  make  a 
single  narrative  of  apparently  several  events  out 
of  several  narratives  of  a  single  event.  As  a 
method  this  is  obviously  inferior  to  modern  pro- 
cedure, but  even  an  inferior  method  can  be  well  or 
badly  used.  That  Luke  used  this  method  is  clear 
from  a  comparison  of  the  Third  Gospel  with 
Matthew  and  Mark,  but  on  the  whole  he  seems  to 
have  used  it  well,  especially  if  it  be  remembered 
that  his  avowed  object  was  not  to  '  write  history  ' 
but  to  provide  the  historical  evidence  for  the 
Christian  instruction  which  Theophilus  had 
received.  The  crucial  evidence  for  this  view  is  the 
use  made  of  Mark,  which  we  can  fortunately  con- 
trol. A  comparison  of  Mark  with  Luke  shows 
that  Luke  has  been  on  the  whole  loyal  to  his 
source,  though  he  has  consistently  polished  the 
language.  At  the  same  time,  it  must  be  admitted 
that  he  had  no  objection  to  deserting  it,  or  to 
changing  its  meaning.  Two  examples  must  suffice. 
(1)  In  Mark  the  call  of  Peter  precedes  the  healing 
of  his  mother-in-law  ;  in  Luke  a  dilf'erent  account 
of  Peter's  call  is  given  the  preference  over  the 
Marcan  one,  and  the  healing  of  his  mother-in-law 
is  placed  before  it,  apparently  to  afiord  a  motive 
for  tiie  obedience  of  Peter  to  the  call.  (2)  In  the 
narrative  of  the  Passion  and  Resurrection  Luke 
obviously  prefers  an  alternative  narrative  to  that 
of  Mark.  Tliis  narrative  is  different  in  the  essential 
point  that  it  places  all  the  appearances  of  the 
Kisen  Clirist  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem, 
whereas  Mark  in  14^,  etc.,  is  clearly  leading  up 
to  appearances  in  Galilee.  But  the  story  of  the 
woman  at  the  tomb  seems  to  be  taken  from  Mark, 
and  this  includes  tlie  message  of  the  young  man  to 
the  women  to  tell  the  disciples  to  go  to  Galilee, 
where  they  will  see  Jesus.  This  is  inconsistent 
with  the  '  Jerusalem  narrative,'  and  is  changed  by 
Luke  into  '  Remember  how  he  spoke  to  you  Avhile 
be  was  still  in  Galilee,'  and  the  whole  narrative  is 
freely  re-written.  If  this  were  quite  certain,  it 
would  show  that  Luke  cannot  be  depended  upon 
not  to  change  the  whole  meaning  of  his  sources. 
It  is,  however,  possible  that  his  modification  is 
based  on  some  otner  source  ;  if  so,  this  source  can 
liardly  have  been  originally  indei)endent  of  Mark. 
A  detailed  examination  of  the  Lucan  changes  in 
the  Marcan  material,  which  has  never  yet  been 
sufficiently  thoroughly  undertaken,  is  likely  to 
give  valuable  evidence  as  to  Luke's  methods  in 
dealing  with  his  sources  and  the  extent  to  which 
his  statements  may  be  trusted  as  really  represent- 
ing the  earliest  tradition,  or  discounted  as  being 
editorial  alterations.  It  may  be  suggested  that  a 
study  of  the  Lucan  parallels  to  Mk  13  is  especially 
needed  ;  a  superficial  examination  suggests  that  it 
will  show  that  he  was  inclined  to  remove  eschato- 
logical  sayings  or  explain  them  in  some  other  sense. 
Another  c-haracteristic — or  what  at  first  sight 
appears  to  be  one — is  a  tendency  to  separate  and 
give  to  definite  historical  circumstances  sayings 
which  in  Matthew  are  brought  together.  From  this 
contrast  between  Mattliew  and  Luke  it  has  been 
assumed  that  Luke  made  special  endeavours  to 
find  out  the  exact  circumstances  under  which  each 


saying  was  uttered.  But  this  conclusion  is  more 
than  the  facts  warrant.  All  that  can  really  be 
said  is  that  a  comparison  between  Matthew  and 
Luke  shows  either  that  Luke  separated,  or  that 
Matthew  combined,  or  that  each  did  a  little  of 
both ;  but,  as  we  do  not  know  what  was  the 
arrangement  of  the  material  in  the  source,  we 
cannot  decide  between  these  possibilities.  It  is 
sometimes  overlooked  that  reconstructions  of  Q 
such  as  Harna<;k's  or  Wellhausen's,  though  other- 
wise admirable,  are  useless  for  this  purpose,  as 
they  necessarily  assume  an  answer  to  tne  question 
at  issue.  It  is  perhaps  worth  notice  that  the  only 
safe  guide  Avhicn  we  have  is  Luke's  treatment  of  the 
Marcan  source.  Here  we  find  no  trace  of  the  sup- 
posed separation  of  sayings,nordo  we  findany  traces 
in  Matthew  of  the  supposed  combination  of  sayings. 
The  logical  deduction  is  that  Luke  and  Matthew 
did  not  use  the  same  edition  of  Q,  if  indeed  there 
ever  was  a  single  document  Q.  Of  course  it  is 
hazardous  to  press  this  point,  but  insufficient  atten- 
tion has  hitherto  been  given  to  the  value  of  Luke's 
treatment  of  Mark  as  the  only  objective  standard 
which  exists  for  deciding  what  his  methods  probably 
were  in  dealing  with  other  sources. 

Literature. — Besides  the  works  already  quoted  in  the  body 
of  the  article  see  B.  Weiss,  Die  Qiiellen  des  Lukasecanqeliums, 
Stuttpart,  1907;  J.  Moffatt,  LNT,  Edinburgh,  1911 ;  E.  Norden, 
Agnostos  Theos,  Leipzij?,  1913  ;  R.  Reitzenstein,  IleUenUtUche 
Wundererzdhlunrjen,  do.  1906;  E.  C.  Selwyn,  St.  Luke  the 
Prophet,  London,  1901 ;  H.  McLachlan,  .St.  Luke — Evangelist 
and  Uigtorian,  London  and  Manchester,  1912  ;  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
Luke  the  Phygician  and  other  Studiex  i?i  the  llintory  of  lieli'jion, 
London,  1908  ;  Th.  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  JSeio  Testament. 
Eng.  tr.,  Edinburgh,  1909.  K.  LAKE. 

LUKEWARM.— The  word  occurs  only  in  Rev  3" 
— '  because  thou  art  lukewarm  (x^iapos),  and  neither 
hot  nor  cold,  I  will  spew  thee  out  of  my  mouth.' 
As  tepid  water  causes  nausea,  so  lifeless  religiouf^ 
profession  leads  to  Divine  disgust  and  rejection 
(cf.  Ecce  Homo^^,  1873,  ch.  xiii.).  There  is  greater 
promise  in  men  who  are  outside  the  pale  of  the 
Church  than  in  those  whose  nominal  allegiance  to 
religion  has  created  a  false  confidence,  dulled  all 
sense  of  need,  and  checked  all  spiritual  growth 
(v.i*).  The  following  verses  (vv.'"-  ^^,  for  the  local 
references  of  which  see  art.  '  Laodicea '  in  HDB) 
suggest  that  this  condition  of  tepid  religion  in 
Laodicea  had  been  fostered  by  an  excess  of  material 
prosperity.  The  Laodiceans  had  become  so  com- 
fortable as  not  to  need  God,  nor  ought  God  to 
expect  much  more  than  patronage  from  so  con- 
sequential a  community.  He  must,  in  human 
fashion,  be  on  good  terms  with  a  church  with  so 
satisfactory  a  worldly  status,  not  inquiring  too 
closely  about  their  spiritual  zeal.  For  an  analysis 
of  this  lukewarmness  see  also  F.  W.  Faber,  Growth 
in  Holiness,  1854,  ch.  xxv.  H.  BULCOCK. 

LUST.— 1.  Linguistic  usage.— (1)  TAe  English 
word  '  lust.^ — The  word  '  lust,'  which,  in  modern 
English,  is  restricted  to  sexual  desire,  had  origin- 
ally a  wider  application  and  could  be  used  de 
neutro  and  dc  bono  as  well  as  dc  malo  of  desire 
in  general,  and,  as  Trench  says,  was  'once  harm- 
less enough'  {NT  Synonyms^,  1876,  p.  313).  The 
German  Lv^t  is  still  usea  in  this  wide  sense. 

There  is  no  instance  in  the  NT  where  the  English 
word  '  lust '  is  used  de  bono  in  the  AV  unless  we 
supply  the  word  in  Gal  5" — '  the  flesh  lusteth 
(fTTidvixel)  against  the  Spirit  and  the  Spirit  (lusteth) 
against  the  flesh.'  The  verb  is  absent  in  the  Greek 
as  in  the  English.  Lightfoot  (on  Gal  5'^)  thinks 
that  evidvfifi  cannot  be  supplied,  as  it  would  be 
unsuitable  to  describe  the  activity  of  the  Spirit  by 
this  term.  But  Rendall  is  probably  right  in  saying 
that  the  word  iiridvixfl  here  is  neutral  and  equally 
api)licable  to  the  good  desires  of  the  Spirit  and  the 
evil  lusts  of  the  flesh  {EGT,  '  Galatians,'  1903,  i» 


LUST 


LUST 


723 


loc. ).  The  English  word  '  lust,'  however,  is  scarcely 
neutral  in  the  AV,  and  j-et,  because  there  is  no 
possibility  of  misunderstanding,  no  other  verb  is 
supplied  to  describe  the  action  of  the  Spirit.  Even 
the  RV  has  not  supplied  a  different  verb  in  the 
second  clause.  This  is  not  to  say  that  the  Revisers 
would  consider  'lust'  a  tit  word  to  describe  the 
working  of  the  Spirit. 

It  is  true  also  that  the  passage  in  Ja  4' — 'the 
Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  us  lusteth  to  envy ' — is  now 
generally  understood  of  the  Indwelling  Spirit  of 
God,  but  it  was  not  so  understood  by  tne  AV 
translators.  To  them  it  was  the  evil,  envious  spirit 
of  man.  The  Greek  verb  used  here  is  iirLToddv, 
which  is  frequently  used  in  the  NT,  and  always  in 
a  gooil  sense.  St.  Paul  uses  it  of  his  great  longing 
to  see  his  converts  (1  Th  3«,  2  Co  7'",  2  Ti  1*,  Ph 
1^ ;  cf.  also  Ro  V^  15^).  They  are  to  him  (niroOrrroi. 
It  expresses  the  longing  of  Epaphroditus  for  the 
Philijipians,  and  of  the  Judsean  Christians  for  the 
Corinthians  who  had  liberally  helped  them.  St. 
Paul  uses  it  also  to  express  his  longing  for  heaven 
(2  Co  5^),  and  St.  Peter  exhorts  his  readers  to 
'desire'  the  sincere  (?)  milk  of  the  word  (1  P  2-). 
The  LXX  uses  it  of  the  soul's  longing  for  God  (Ps 
41*  [EV  42"^]).  Analogy  would  thus  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  St.  James  used  the  word  in  a  good 
sense.  The  quotation  in  which  the  word  occurs 
cannot  be  located  in  the  OT  with  certainty  (cf.  1 
Co  2^,  Eph  5^^) :  otherwise  the  sense  of  the  word 
would  be  beyond  dispute.  Some  suppose  that  St. 
James  is  here  quoting  St.  Paul  (1  Co  3^^,  Gal  5''). 
The  most  likely  meaning  of  the  passage  is  :  '  The 
Spirit  which  he  caused  to  dwell  in  us  j-earneth 
{for  us)  unto  jealousy.'  The  Spirit  of  God  has 
such  a  longing  desire  to  possess  the  whole  Christian 
personality  that  its  passion  may  well  be  called 
holy  jealousy.  If  this  be  the  meaning,  the  render- 
ing '  lust '  is  erroneous.  The  RV  is  not  decided  on 
the  interpretation,  and  has  substituted  'long'  for 
'  lust.'     RVm  is  probably  correct. 

There  is  no  passage,  then,  in  the  NT  where  the 
English  word  '  lust '  is  used  de  bono. 

(2)  The  Greek  word  endv/xeiv  and  its  cognates. — 
(a)  The  Greek  word  iiridvufTp  with  its  cognates, 
although  as  a  rule  used  de  malo,  is  not  always  so 
used.  It  occasionally  takes  the  place  of  tTLs-odeTv 
(1  Th  2",  Ph  123,  TTi  3\  He  6"),  which  seems 
always  to  be  used  in  a  good  sense.  It  is  used  of 
the  desires  of  the  prophets  to  see  the  deeds  of  the 
Messianic  Age  (Mt  13'";  cf.  also  Lk  17^^),  of  the 
desire  of  Lazarus  to  eat  of  the  crumbs  falling  from 
the  rich  man's  table  (cf.  Lk  16"-'  15'®  ;  perhaps  the 
desire  for  food  or  drink  or  the  sexual  desire  is  the 
ordinary  meaning  of  the  word).  It  is  used  by 
the  Saviour  to  express  His  desire  to  eat  the  Paschal 
feast  with  His  disciples  (Lk  22''),  by  St.  Paul  of 
the  desire  for  the  office  of  a  bishop  (1  Ti  3'),  by  St. 
Peter  of  the  holy  desires  of  the  angels  (1  P  1"), 
and,  in  the  substantive  form,  St.  Paul  uses  it  of 
his  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  Christ,  which  is 
far  better  (Ph  1^),  and  of  his  longing  to  see  his 
Thessalonian  converts  (1  Th  2").  The  LXX  also 
uses  it  in  a  good  sense  (Ps  102*  [EV  103*],  Pr  10-^). 
In  all  these  cases  we  have  evidv/Mtiv  translated  by 
the  word  'desire.'  The  word  evievfielv  in  the  Gr. 
NT  is  thus  much  wider  than  the  word  'lust'  in 
the  Eng.  NT,  and  even  '  lust '  itself  in  the  AV  is 
not  to  be  restricted  to  '  sexual  desire '  but  is  used 
of  unlawful  desire  in  general,  the  context  deter- 
mining its  specific  application. 

We  find  the  same  large  nae  of  the  word  iviOviUa  in  Plato. 
Generally  with  him  it  means  '  appetite '  in  the  narrow  sense — 
the  motive  element  in  the  lowest  part  of  man — yet  he  uses  it 
also  of  the  other  higher  departments  of  the  personality.  Even 
the  rational  soul  has  its  hij^  and  lofty  desires  {Rep.,  bks.  iv. 
and  ix.). 

(6)  When  the  word  is  used  without  an  object  it 


i  generally  refers  to  evil  longings  (cf.  Ro  7"  I3»  [from 
Ex  20'*],  Ja  4-,  1  Co  \(fi),  not,  however,  in  the  re- 
stricted usage  of  sexual  lust.  The  moral  colouring 
is  as  a  rule  supplied  by  the  context,  either  by  the 
mention  of  the  object  desired,  as  in  Mk  4",  1  Co  10*, 
which  is  the  ordinary  classical  usage,  or  by  the 
mention  of  the  source  of  the  desire  (commonly  in 
the  NT)  or  by  a  descriptive  epithet  (Col  3»).  This 
transference  of  moral  colouring  from  the  object 
desired  to  the  subject  desiring  is  significant.  It  is 
in  harmony  with  the  NT  moral  standpoint.  Here 
the  stress  is  laid  on  the  inwardness  of  morality, 
and  the  object  of  moral  judgment  is  the  character 
{KapSia),  rather  than  bare  outward  actions,  or  the 
consequences  of  actions.  In  the  NT  the  desire  is 
morally  judged  according  to  its  origin,  i.e.  the 
originative  personality  as  a  whole  is  dealt  with 
rather  than  the  desire  per  se.  The  NT  is  thus 
more  conceraed  with  change  of  character  than  with 
the  reformation  by  parts  of  the  individual. 

'Scripture  and  reason  alike  require  that  we  should  turn 
entirely  to  God,  that  we  should  obey  the  whole  law.  And  hard 
as  this  may  seem  at  first,  there  is  a  witness  within  us  which 
pleads  that  it  is  possible.  .  .  .  "Easier  to  change  many  things 
than  one,"  is  the  conmion  saying.  Ea.sier,  we  may  add,  in  religion 
and  morality  to  cban-re  the  w^hole  than  the  part.  .  .  .  Many  a 
person  will  tease  himself  by  counting  minutes  and  providing 
small  rules  for  his  life  who  would  have  found  the  task  an  easier 
and  a  nobler  one  had  he  viewed  it  in  its  whole  extent  and  gone 
to  God  in  a  "  large  and  liberal "  spirit  to  offer  up  his  life  to 
Him'  (B.  Jowett,  IiUerpreteUum  of  Scripture  and  other 
Essays,  London,  n.d.,  p.  321). 

The  NT,  however,  does  not  hesitate  to  pass  judg- 
ment on  desires  jser  se  and  on  their  consequences. 
We  find  such  expressions  as  '  the  corruption  that 
is  in  the  world  through  lust '  spoken  of  (2  P  l*) — 
where  corruption  is  the  consequence  of  evil  desire. 
We  find  the  phrase  '  polluting  desires '  (2  P  2'"). 
We  find  pleasures  (TJSoyat)  regarded  as  a  turbulence 
of  the  soul  (Ja  4'),  as  if  desires  destroyed  the 
balance  of  the  soul  (cf.  1  Ti  B*,  1  P  2",  Ro  7='). 
The  NT  has  no  meticulous  fear  in  passing  judg- 
ment on  evil  desires  and  on  their  consequences. 
It  does  not  take  up  the  immaculate,  fastidious 
attitude  of  '  \drtue  for  virtue's  .sake, '  but  its  point 
of  view  is  the  whole  personality,  and  on  this  is 
moral  judgment  for  good  or  evil  passed. 

(c)  Thrice  in  the  NT  we  find  the  word  enOvfiia 
translated  by  'concupiscence.'  This  term  is  a 
dogmatic  one,  which  has  played  a  large  part  in 
theological  controversy.  It  means  the  natural  in- 
clinations of  man  before  these  have  passed  into 
overt  acts.  It  is  diti'erent  from  consilium,  which 
is  the  'deliberata  assentio  voluntatis'  (so  Calvin, 
Institutes,  bk.  ii.  ch.  viii.  49).  Two  questions  of 
importance  arise  in  connexion  with  this  concupis- 
cence :  (i.)  What  is  its  origin  and  nature  ?  and  (ii.) 
What  is  its  relation  to  responsibility  and  redemp- 
tion ?  The  Pelagian  theolojrian  tends  to  identify  it 
with  man's  nature  as  appetitive  and  in  itself  morally 
neutral.  What  makes  the  moral  difference  is  the 
exercise  of  the  will,  and  the  will  is  free.  It  may  be 
that  there  is  weakness  in  man  due  to  the  removal 
of  '  original  righteousness '  which  Adam  had  before 
he  sinned,  but  this  removal  does  not  impair  human 
nature  and  it  does  not  make  virtue  impossible.  To 
this  class  of  theologians  free-will  is  the  important 
matter.  Sin  is  onlj-  conscious  sinful  actions.  This 
is,  generally  speaking,  the  position  of  Abelard, 
Arminius,  and  the  Tridentine  CouncU.  To  Augus- 
tine and  the  Reformers,  however,  this  concupiscence 
was  prior  to  the  individual's  evil  volition  and  in 
a  sense  caused  it.  Free-will  was  not  sufiBcient  to 
cope  with  it.  The  redemption  of  man  was  a  radical 
affair,  cleansing  the  whole  personality,  the  will  in- 
cluded. Concupiscence  is  not  simply  a  defectum 
(morally  inditierent)  but  an  affectus  of  the  soul 
resulting  in  a  positive  nisus  towards  sin  in  man's 
nature.  The  soul  as  a  whole  is  deflected  from  its 
true  centre — God.     As  regards  responsibility  for 


724 


LUST 


LUST 


concupiscence,  this  school  distinctly  teaches  it 
while  the  other  side  denies  it.  The  Keformers  did 
not  regard  '  desire  '  viewed  as  a  part  of  man's  ideal 
nature  as  '  evil ' ;  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  actual 
exiHirience  the  desires  are  found  to  be  evil. 

'  AH  the  desires  of  men  we  teach  to  be  evil,  .  .  .  not  in  so 
far  aa  they  are  natural,  but  because  they  are  inordinate,  and 
thev  are  inordinate  because  they  flow  from  a  corrupt  nature ' 
(Calvin,  Institutes,  bk.  iii.  ch.  iii.  12). 

During  the  Middle  Ages  and  in  Aquinas  con- 
cupiscence was  identified  with  man's  sensuous 
nature.  The  difllerence  between  flesh  and  spirit 
was  physical.  So  concupiscence  was  supremely 
manifested  in  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  interpreted  in 
a  sensual  fiusliion. 

The  NT  does  not  directly  deal  with  these  aspects 
of  desire,  but  its  spirit  is  more  in  harmony  with  the 
deeper  analysis  of  Augustine.  As  regards  responsi- 
bility and  redemption  in  relation  to  concupiscence 
the  Augustinian  position  is  the  Pauline.  Tne  word 
'  concupiscence '  has  been  omitted  altogether  by  the 
RV.  In  Ro  7®  iindvida  is  translated  '  coveting.'  It 
means  illicit  inclinations  to  follow  one's  own  will 
as  against  God's  law.  With  the  arrival  of  self- 
consciousness  there  is  already  found  in  the  per- 
sonality the  strong  bias  to  sin  which  comes  to  light 
as  man  is  brouglit  face  to  face  with  law.  Sin  is 
regarded  in  a  semi-personal  fashion  as  receiving  a 
basis  of  operation  in  this  bias.  The  word  iiriOufda 
is  thus  well  translated  'concupiscence'  in  the  theo- 
logical sense  of  the  term.  In  Col  3^  the  English 
'  desire '  is  suflicient  to  express  the  thought,  because 
it  is  as  vague  as  the  original. 

(d)  In  1  Th  4**  the  word  firi6v/j.la  is  used,  as  the 
context  shows,  of  'sexual  lust.'  The  use  of  the 
term  in  Jude  ^^  approximates  to  this  but  seems  to 
be  wider.  The  same  letter  (v.^*)  ascribes  it  to 
impiety.  The  passage  1  P  2"  approximates  closely 
to  this  meaning.  In  2  P  2^*  it  means  '  lust '  in  our 
restricted  sense.  It  is  equated  with  o-dp/cos  aaeX- 
yflaii.  See  also  Aposfol.  Church  Order  {ed.  Schatf, 
The  Oldest  Church  Manual,  1885,  p.  242),  where  it 
is  said  that  eviOvfila  leads  to  fornication. 

eirtdvfda,  then,  when  used  de  malo  of  illicit  desires 
is  not  wholly  restricted  to  sexual  depravity  (exc. 
in  1  Th  4»  and  2  P  2'«  ;  cf.  Jude  i«),  although  that 
is  included,  and  owing  to  its  obtrusiveness  could 
not  fail  to  be  included.  It  means  'the  whole 
world  of  active  lusts  and  desires'  (Trench,  NT 
5y».8,  p.  312). 

(3)  Other  Greek  words. — {a)  The  Greek  word  irdOos 
is  also  translated  '  lust '  in  1  Th  4*,  and  eirievfiia  is 
subordinated  to  it  as  species  to  genus.  This  is  the 
usage  of  Aristotle,  who  regards  '  lust,'  anger,  fear, 
etc.,  as  spe(!ies  of  ird^oj.  It  is  usually  maintained 
that  the  ditt'erence  between  the  two  is  that  irdflos 
refers  to  evil  on  its  passive  and  eiriOvula  on  its  more 
active  side.  It  is  impossible,  however,  to  prove  this 
distinction  from  the  NT,  although  in  Gal  5",  where 
'irad-f)ixaTa  and  iiriOv/xlai  are  found  side  by  side,  this 
distinction  makes  excellent  sense.  The  words  are 
used  in  a  loose  popular  sense  and  not  as  the  exact 
terminology  of  an  ethical  system. 

(6)  The  same  is  true  of  the  usage  of  iiSoval  (Ja  4'), 
which  is  translated  '  lusts.'  It  refers  to  pleasures  in 
general ;  though  sexual  pleasures  are  included,  and 
perhaps  form  the  chief  element,  eating  and  drink- 
mg  would  also  be  meant.  '  All  men  are  by  nature 
weak  and  inclined  to  pleasures,'  and  so  injustice 
and  avarice  follow  (Swete,  Introduction  to  OT  in 
Greek.  1900,  p.  567). 

(c)  Similarly  dof^tt  (Ro  1") — a  word  used  some- 
times in  classical  writers  of  the  highest  desires— is 
used  by  St.  Paul  of  the  unnatural  sexual  lust  of 
heathenism  (see  Trench,  AT  Si/n.'^,  p.  314). 

2.  Genesis,  growth  and  goal  of  lust.— (1)  Genesis 
of  lust. — We  do  not  find  any  attempt  to  deal 
psychologically  with  this  problem.     What  we  find 


is  various  suggestions  and  incidental  jillusions.  In 
Jn  S"  the  lusts  of  murder  and  deceit  are  traced 
back  to  the  devil.  The  idea  is  the  Jewish  one  that 
the  devil  tempted  Cain  to  murder  his  brother  Abel, 
and  that  the  serpent  deceived  Eve  (cf.  1  Jn  Z^"-). 
This  view  that  tne  devil  is  the  originator  of  lust 
took  various  forms  in  Jewish  thought  (Sir  25**"^-, 
2  Es  4**  8**),  and  there  are  echoes  of  these  in  the 
NT.  St.  Paul  (1  Co  111")  seems  to  regard  the 
wicked  angels  as  moved  to  sensual  lust  by  unveiled 
women.  The  existence  of  an  evil  tendency  (yezer 
hara)in  human  nature  was  a  problem  for  Judaism. 
Sometimes  it  was  simply  referred  to  the  fall  of 
Adam  (Wis  '2^- ;  cf.  Ro  S'*^-,  1  Co  152"'-),  some- 
times it  was  ascribed  to  the  devil,  and  sometimes 
to  God.  The  last  view  is  not  found  in  the  NT 
except  to  be  refuted  ( Ja  1'^'").  The  good  tendency 
(yezer  hatob)  was  without  difficulty  ascril^d  to 
God,  but  the  evil  tendency  could  not  be  so  treated. 
St.  Paul  (Ro  1^-^*)  simply  states  these  two  ten- 
dencies and  connects  the  evil  with  the  fall  of  Adam. 
Yet  there  is  nothing  to  encourage  the  view  that 
man  is  not  responsible.  In  truth,  where  St.  John 
mentions  the  devil  (I  Jn  3*)  as  the  originator  of 
evil  desires,  he  is  opposing  the  Gnostic  view  that 
the  '  spiritual '  man  is  not  responsible  for  sensual 
sins.  Yet  it  is  certain  that  the  problem  of  evil 
is  not  solved  on  NT  principles  by  any  atomistic 
view  of  human  personality,  and  that  the  redemp- 
tion of  Christ  has  its  cosmic  as  well  as  its  personal 
aspects.  St.  Paul's  teaching  in  Ro  7'^"-''  was  open 
to  misunderstanding,  but  in  principle  it  is  the  very 
opposite  of  libertinism. 

Again,  the  origin  of  lust  is  ascribed  to  the  cosmos 
(1  Jn  2*'"").  It  is  whatever  is  opposed  to  the  will 
of  God.  So  in  Tit  2^-  we  read  of  '  worldly  lusts ' 
(cf.  2  P  1*).  The  world  is  the  '  lust  of  the  flesh,' 
the  '  lust  of  the  eyes,'  and  the  '  pride  of  life.'  It  is 
the  kingdom  of  evil  as  organized  in  customs  and 
tendencies  in  human  society  and  human  hearts,  in- 
cluding also  evil  spirits.  It  is  found  in  man  as  the 
desires  of  the  '  flesh  and  mind '  (Eph  2^),  and  specifi- 
cally called  the  lusts  of  men  (1  P  4").  It  might 
appear  as  if  this  ascription  of  lust  to  the  '  world ' 
destroyed  personal  responsibility,  but  such  is  never 
the  case.  The  law  of  God  recognized  by  man  as 
good,  i.e.  as  the  law  of  his  own  conscience  (Ro  I'"-), 
is  against  such  lust,  and  the  Christian  command 
is  to  love  God  and  do  His  will.  The  fact  of  responsi- 
bility is  not  proportional  to  ability  in  the  Nl ,  and 
so  redemption  is  always  regarded  as  primarily  of 
grace. 

Similarly,  and  characteristically,  the  origin  of 
lust  is  ascribed  to  the  flesh,  i.e.  the  sinful  person- 
ality as  apart  from  God.  Th3  '  lusts  of  the  flesh  ' 
mean  mucn  more  than  sensuality.  '  It  was  not  the 
corruptible  flesh  that  made  the  soul  sinful,  but  the 
sinful  soul  that  made  the  flesh  corrupt'  (Aug.,  de 
Civ.  Dei,  xiv.  2,  3).  It  is  true  that  the  body  (ffufia) 
with  its  desires  (Ro  6^-)  was  a  sort  of  armoury 
where  sin  got  its  weapons,  but  the  body  as  such  is 
not  the  originative  seat  of  evil ;  otherwise  St.  Paul's 
view  of  the  Resurrection  would  be  meaningless. 
Platonism  looked  on  the  body  as  the  tomb  of  the 
soul  and  as  pressing  down  the  soul  (cf.  1  Co  9*^), 
but  Rotlie  is  scarcely  warranted  in  making  the 
sensuous  nature  the  primary  root  of  evil  (Theol. 
Ethik-,  1S70,  ii.  181-7). 

Again,  the  heart  is  viewed  as  the  origin  of  evil 
desires  (Ro  1"  ;  cf.  Sir  6'^).  This  centres  the  origin 
in  man's  personality  as  a  whole,  not  in  any  one  part 
of  the  personality.  But  it  is  the  personality  apart 
from  God.  So  we  read  in  Jude  not  only  '  tlieir 
own  desires,'  but  also  (v.'*) '  their  o>\'n  desires  of  im- 
pieties,' i.e.  evil  desires  originating  in  their  im- 
pious state.  A  similar  tliought  is  found  in  Ro  l*"^* 
(cf.  Tit  2'*^).  Evil  tendencies  develop  pari  passu 
with  God's  judicial  withdrawal. 


LUST 


LYCAONIA 


725 


It  might  thns  appear  that  those  who  make 
seljishiicss  ((piXaiTla)  tlie  root  of  sinful  desires  are 
nearest  the  truth.  Philo  does  so  and  Plato.  '  The 
truth  is  that  the  cause  of  all  sins  in  every  person 
and  every  instance  is  excessive  self-love '  (Laws,  v. 
731);  but  in  the  NT  the  'self  is  not  an  entity 
that  can  be  understood  apart  from  the  redemption 
of  Christ,  and  the  Christian  personality  is  so  com- 
plex that  we  cannot  safely  limit  to  any  single 
strand  the  origin  of  sin.  What  the  NT  is  concerned 
with  is  not  the  origin — an  insoluble  problem — but 
the  abolition  of  evil  desires.  Man  himself  is  the 
moral  origin,  and  the  great  question  is  how  to 
redeem  sinful  man.  In  other  words,  these  questions 
are  discussed  not  from  the  point  of  view  of  genetic 
psychology  but  from  the  point  of  view  of  redemp- 
tion. 

.  (2)  Growth  and  goal  of  lust. — St.  James  gives  a 
graphic  picture  of  how  ividvuia  develops.  She  is  pic- 
tured as  a  harlot  enticing  man.  Like  the  fisherman 
she  baits  her  hook,  and  traps  her  prey  as  the  hunter 
does.  Then  sin  is  produced,  and  sin  completed 
brings  forth  death.  It  is  clearly  stated  that  '  lust ' 
is  not  of  God.  It  is  man's  own,  and  the  inference 
is  that  man  can  resist  it.  There  is  no  mention  of 
God's  grace  in  the  specific  Christian  sense,  although 
in  v.  18  we  seem  to  have  this  strongly  emphasized. 
Perhaps  the  writer  loosely  holds  both  the  Jewish 
notion  of  free-will  as  itself  sufficient  to  resist  desire, 
and  the  Christian  sense  of  God's  grace.  It  is  pos- 
sible to  restrict  the  whole  passage  {V^")  to  sexual 
lust,  but  the  wider  sense  is  probable. 

Clement  of  Rome  {Ep.  ad  Cor.  iii.)  gives  a  long 
list  of  evil  desires  leading  to  death,  but  to  him 
strife  and  envy  are  characteristically  causative  of 
tliis  result,  as  in  the  case  of  Cain  (iv.).  In  the 
Apostol.  Church  Order  (ed.  Schafl",  p.  242),  lust  is 
pictured  as  a  female  demon.  It  leads  to  fornica- 
tion, and  it  darkens  the  soul  so  that  it  cannot  see 
the  truth  clearly  (cf.  Ro  V^^-). 

St.  Peter  associates  lust  with  ignorance  (1  P  1") 
and  St.  Paul  with  deceit,  the  opposite  of  '  truth ' 
(Eph  4^).  Since  the  time  of  Plato  desire  has  been 
regarded  by  philosophers  as  aiming  at  a  good 
<true  or  false).  The  end  is  always  viewed  sub 
specie  honi.  This  is  an  aspect  which  the  NT  does 
not  emphasize.  But  it  does  say  that  evil  desires 
leave  the  soul  unsatisfied  and  produce  disorder 
<Ja  4^).  It  is  possible  to  be  always  seeking  some 
new  thing  and  never  coming  to  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth  (2  Ti  3**-)-  Knowledge  alone  is  not 
sufficient,  however,  for  St.  Paul  regards  the  law  as 
both  revealing  desire  and  intensifying  it  (Ro  7"). 
Redemption  is  necessary  to  cope  with  evil  desires. 

The  desiring  of  evil  things  St.  Paul  regards  as 
the  moral  ground  of  all  sinful  acts  (1  Co  10) — of 
sensuality  both  as  fornication  and  idolatry — of  un- 
belief in  its  varied  forms.  This  desiring  does  not 
work  in  vacuo  ;  it  is  active  in  an  atmosphere 
already  tainted  with  idolatiy,  sensuality,  and 
devilry  (1  Co  lO^'^-,  1  Th  3*,  Eph  G^o^^-).  God  allows 
this  testing  of  men,  but  He  also  afibrds  a  way  of 
escape  from  it,  so  that  men  with  this  hope  can  bear 
up  under  temptations.  The  consequence  of  follow- 
ing one's  own  lust  is  regarded  both  subjectively 
and  objectively.  It  produces  corruption  of  the 
personality,  ending  in  complete  <j>d6pa  (Eph  4^ ;  cf. 
2  P  !■*,  where  <pd6pa  is  said  to  be  the  fruit  of  lust), 
whereas  the  will  of  God  leads  to  righteousness  and 
holiness.  The  man  who  sets  his  heart  on  riches 
falls  into  many  foolish  and  hurtful  desires,  and 
these  bring  him  to  the  depth  of  destruction  (SKedpos 
and  dirwXeta  are  the  inevitable  consequences).  Lust 
is  also  said  to  pollute  the  soul  (2  P  2i<*).  Besides 
this,  lust  brings  one  face  to  face  with  God's  destruc- 
tive anger  against  sin  (cf.  1  Co  10  and  Dt  32^*'-). 

It  is  not  possible,  however,  from  the  NT  to  arrange 
in  psychological  order  the  stages  in  the  development 


of  lust.  The  progress  is  as  varied  as  life  itself. 
Catalogues  of  sins  are  given  because  these  sins  are 
closely  connected  in  actual  experience,  and  in  ex- 
perience the  cause  is  often  the  efi'ect  and  the  effect 
the  cause. 

St.  John  (1  Jn  2"-")  is  not  to  be  taken  as  making 
the  '  lust  of  the  ttesh  '  the  origin  of  the  '  lust  of  the 
eyes '  and  of  the  '  pride  of  possession,'  nor  are  these 
a  complete  summary  of  sin.  They  are  compre- 
hensive and  characteristic,  but  not  necessarily  ex- 
haustive. The  genitives  in  this  passage  are  of 
course  subjective,  i.e.  '  the  lust  springing  from  the 
flesh,'  etc.  Here  again  the  'flesh'  is  the  origin 
of  evil  desire — not  the  body  as  such,  but  the  sin- 
ful personality  (Law  [Tests  of  Lif^,  1914,  p.  149] 
explains  '  flesh '  otherwise  here,  but  the  very  fact 
that  the  'flesh'  is  regarded  as  causing  desire  is 
against  him).  To  St.  John  also  the  issue  of  sinful 
desire  is  destruction,  as  it  is  contrary  to  the  abid- 
ing will  of  God. 

To  the  NT,  then,  evil  desires  contaminate,  cor- 
rupt, and  destroy  the  soul  itself  and  bring  upon  it 
God's  punishment.  These  desires,  however,  are 
already  proofs  of  a  personality  out  of  order,  and  to 
set  the  desires  right  the  personality  must  be  set 
right.  This  is  done  by  the  new  gracious  creation 
of  God  through  His  mercy  which  operates  through 
Christ.  Thus  man  is  made  God's  voltjfw.  by  the 
Spirit.  To  walk  in  the  Spirit  is  the  privilege  of 
the  new  creature  (Eph  2^*^),  and  in  this  way  he  can 
overcome  the  desires  of  the  'flesh'  (Ro  13"),  and 
learn  to  do  the  will  of  God. 

LiTKEATCRB. — See  Grimm-Thayer,  under  the  various  Greek 
words  translated  '  Lust' ;  H.  Cremer,  Bib.-Tkeol.  Lex.  of  ST 
Greek,  1872,  pp.  273-278.  For  the  general  teaching  see  C. 
Clemen,  Christl.  Lehre  von  der  Siinde,  Gottingen,  1897 ;  J. 
Miiller,  Chris.  Doct.  of  Sin,  Eng.  tr.,  1S77-8.5,  i.  157.  For  the 
Jewish  i'ezer  Hara  see  F.  C.  Porter  in  Bib.  and  Sem.  Studies, 
New  York,  1901 ;  W.  O.  E.  Oesterley,  in  EGT :  'St.  James,' 
1910,  pp.  408-413.  For  Concupiscence  see  I.  A.  Domer,  System 
of  Christian  Doctrine,  En^'.  tr.,  1880-82,  Index,  s.v.  'Concupis- 
centia.'  See  also  Literature  under  art.  Flesii.  The  various 
Commentaries  are  indispensable  :  Mayor  (31910)  and  Carr 
(Camb.  Gr.  Test.,  1896)  on  St.  James  in  relevant  places,  and 
Plnmmer  on  St.  John  (Camb.  Gr.  Test.,  1S86),  pp.  164-lca  See 
further  artt.  '  Lust '  in  HDB  and  '  Desire '  in  DCG. 

Donald  Mackenzie. 

LTCAONIA  (AvKaovia).  —  Lycaonia,  the  country 
of  the  Lycaones,  who  spoke  AvKaoviffri  ('in  the 
speech  of  Lycaonia,'  Ac  14"),  was  a  vast  elevated 
plain,  often  called  '  The  Treeless '  (to  A^vXaf),  in  the 
centre  of  Asia  Minor.  It  was  bounded  on  the  N. 
and  E.  by  Galatia  and  Cappadocia,  on  the  W. 
and  S.  by  Phrygia,  Pisidia,  and  Isauria ;  but  its 
limits  were  very  uncertain  and  liable  to  change, 
especially  in  the  N.  and  S.  Its  physical  character 
is  described  by  Strabo  (XII.  vi.  1) : 

'  The  places  around  the  mountainous  plane  of  Lycaonia  are 
cold  and  bare,  affording  pasture  only  for  wild  asses ;  there  is 
a  great  scarcity  of  water,  and  wherever  it  is  found  the  wells 
are  very  deep.  .  .  .  Although  the  country  is  ill  supplied  with 
water,  it  is  suprisingly  well  adapted  for  feeding  sheep.  .  .  . 
Some  persons  have  acquired  great  wealth  by  these  flocks  alone. 
AmjTitas  had  above  300  flocks  of  sheep  in  these  parts.' 

Having  no  opportunity  and  perhaps  little  capa- 
city for  self-government,  the  Lycaonians  had  no 
history  of  their  own.  Driven  eastward  by  the 
Phrygians,  they  were  always  under  the  sway  of 
some  stronger  power,  which  cut  and  carved  their 
territory  without  ever  asking  their  leave.  In  tlie 
3rd  cent.  Lycaonia  belonged  to  the  empire  of  the 
Seleucids,  who  more  or  less  hellenized  its  larger 
towns,  such  as  Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe. 
After  the  Roman  victory  over  Antiochus  the 
Great  at  Magnesia  (190  B.C.),  it  was  given  to  the 
Attalids  of  Pergamos  ;  but  as  they  never  ettectively 
occupied  it,  the  northern  part  of  it  was  claimed 
by  the  GaJatians,  while  the  eastern  was  added 
to  Cappadocia.  When  Pompey  re-organized  Asia 
Minor  after  the  defeat  of  Mithridates  (64  B.C.),  he 
left  northern  Lycaonia  (somewhat  curtailed)  to 
the  Galatians,  and  eastern  Lycaonia  (also  dimin- 


726 


LYCIA 


LYDIA 


ished)  to  Cappadocia,  while  lie  attached  south- 
western Lycaonia  (considerably  increased)  to  the 
province  of  Cilicia.  Mark  Antony  gave  the  last 
part,  including  Iconium  and  Lystra,  to  Polemon 
m  39  B.O.,  but  transferred  it  in  36  to  King 
Amyntas  of  Pisidia,  who  at  the  same  time  became 
king  of  all  Galatia.  Soon  afterwards  this  brilliant 
soldier — the  most  interesting  of  Asiatic  Gaels — over- 
threw Antipater  of  Derbe,  with  the  result  that  the 
whole  of  Lycaonia,  except  the  so-called  Eleventh 
Strategia  (which  about  this  time  was  given  to  Kin" 
Antiochus  of  Commagene,  to  be  henceforth  called 
Lycaonia  Antiochiana)  was  now  included  in  the 
Galatian  realm.  After  the  untimely  death  of 
Amyntas  in  25  B.C.,  his  kingdom  was  converted 
into  tlie  Roman  province  of  Galatia.  This  ar- 
rangement lasted  for  nearly  a  century,  exce])t  that 
Claudius  apparently  presented  the  S.E.  comer  of 
Lycaonia,  including  the  important  city  of  Laranda, 
to  the  king  of  Commagene. 

When  St.  Paul  brought  Christianity  to  Lycaonia, 
he  confined  his  mission  to  that  part  of  it  which 
was  in  the  province  of  Galatia.  On  reaching  the 
frontier  city  of  Derbe,  he  retraced  his  steps. 
Laranda,  in  Antiochian  Lycaonia,  was  beyond  his 
sphere.  If  the  S.  (Jalatian  theory  is  to  be  ac- 
cepted, he  passed  through  Galatic  Lycaonia  four 
times  (Ac  14*-  -'  16'  18'^) ;  he  addressed  the  mixed 
population  of  its  cities — Lycaonians,  Greeks,  and 
Jews — as  all  alike  '  Galatians ' ;  and  the  Christians 
of  Lycaonian  and  Phrygian  Galatia,  not  the  in- 
habitants of  Galatia  proper,  are  the  '  foolish  Gal- 
atians '  (Gal  3')  about  whom  he  was  so  '  perplexed  ' 
(Gal  4**).    But  see  Galatians. 

Nothing  remains  of  the  Lycaonian  language 
except  some  place-names  ;  but  the  Christian  in- 
scriptions found  in  Lycaonia  are  very  numerous, 
and  show  how  widely  diffused  the  new  religion 
was  in  the  3rd  cent,  throughout  this  country 
which  was  evangelized  by  St.  Paul  in  the  1st. 

LiTERATrRK.— W,  M.  Ramsav,  Hist.  Geog.  of  Asia  Minor, 
1890,  also  /list.  Com.  on  Galatiam,  1899;  J.  R.  S.  Sterrett, 
Wolfe  Expedition  in  Asia  ilinor,  1888 ;  C.  Wilson,  in  Murray's 
Handbook  to  Asia  Minor,  1895. 

James  Strahan. 

LYCIA  (Aw/a,  Eth.  Aiy/ctoj).  —  Lycia  was  a  se- 
cluded mountain-land  in  the  S.W.  of  Asia  Minor, 
bounded  on  the  W.  by  Caria,  on  the  N.  by  Phrygia 
and  Pisidia,  on  the  N.E.  by  Pamphilia,  and  on 
the  S.  by  the  Lycian  Sea.  It  was  'beyond  the 
Taurus '  (iKrbs  roD  Tavpov).  The  ribs  of  that  huge 
backbone  of  the  country  extended  from  N.  to  S. 
(in  some  places  over  10,000  ft.  in  height),  and  be- 
tween them  were  well-watered  and  fertile  valleys, 
the  homes  of  a  highly  civilized  race,  who  in  their 
love  of  peace  and  freedom  resembled  the  Swiss. 
They  were  not  Greek  by  race,  but  they  were  early 
hellenized.  They  had  many  overlords — Persians, 
Seleucids,  Ptolemys,  Romans — but  for  the  most 
part  their  autonomy  was  undisturbed,  and  they 
had  one  of  the  finest  constitutions  in  ancient  times. 

As  the  Lycians  were  suspected  of  favouring  the 
Imneriul  party  in  the  Civil  Wars  of  Rome,  Brutus 
ana  Cassius  almost  annihilated  the  beautiful  city 
of  Xanthus  (43  B.C.),  and  the  country  never  re- 
covered its  old  prosperity,  Pliny  says  that  in  his 
time  the  cities  of  Lycia,  formerly  70  in  number, 
had  been  reduced  to  36  (HN  v.  28).  In  a.d,  43 
it  was  made  a  Roman  province,  and  in  a.d.  74 
Vespasian  formed  the  united  province  of  Lycia- 
Pampliylia.  Lycia  is  named  in  1  Mac  15^  as 
one  of  the  Free  States  to  which  the  Romans  sent 
letters  in  favour  of  the  Jewish  settlers.  Two  of 
its  principal  seaports — Patara  and  Myra — are 
mentioned  in  Acts  (21'  27').  But  it  appears  to 
have  been  one  of  the  last  parts  of  Asia  Minor  to 
accept  Christianity.  Among  the  provinces  ad- 
dressed in  1  P  1'  as  having  been  partly  evangel- 


ized, neither  Lycia  nor  Pamphylia — both  south  of 
the  Taurus — finds  a  place. 

LiTRRATURB.— C.  Fellows,  Discoveries  in  Lycia  during  tnd 
Excursion  in  Asia  Minor,  1841 ;  T.  A.  B.  Spratt  and  E. 
Forbes,  Travels  in  Lycia,  MUyas,  and  the  Cibyratis,  1847 ; 
Benndorf-Niemann,  litiseninsiidwestl.  Kleinasien,\,:  'Reisen 
in  1-ykien  und  Karien,'  1884.  JAMES  STRAHAN. 

LYDDA  (Ai^SSa,  Heb.  X^rf,  Ar.  X«rfrf).— Lydda 
was  a  town  about  10  miles  S.E.  of  Joppa,  on  the 
line  where  the  Maritime  Plain  of  Palestine  merges 
into  the  Shephglah  or  Lowlands  of  Judaea.  Its 
importance  was  largely  due  to  its  position  at  the 
intersection  of  two  highways  of  intercourse  and 
traffic — the  road  from  Joppa  up  to  Jerusalem  by 
the  Vale  of  Ajalon,  and  the  caravan  route  from 
Egypt  to  Syria  and  Babylon.  Re-occupied  by  the 
Jews  after  the  Exile  (Nen  IP"),  it  was  nevertheless 
governed  by  the  Samaritans  till  the  time  of  Jona- 
than Maccabajus,  when  the  Syrian  king  Demetrius 
11.  made  it  over  to  Judaea  (1  Mac  11^).  In  the 
time  of  Christ  it  was  tlic  capital  of  one  of  the 
eleven  toparchies  '  of  which  the  royal  city  of  Jeru- 
salem was  the  supreme'  (Jos.  BJ  III.  iii.  5). 
During  the  civil  strife  of  the  Romans  (c.  45  B.C.) 
Cassius  sold  the  inhabitants  of  Lydda  into  slaverj' 
for  refusing  the  sinews  of  war,  but  Antony  gave 
them  back  their  liberty  (Ant.  xiv.  xi.  2,  xii.  2-5). 
Lydda  Avas  visited  by  St.  Peter,  whose  preachin<r, 
aided  by  the  miraculous  healing  of  .^Eneas,  is  said, 
'in  a  popular  hyperbolical  manner'  (Meyer  on 
Ac  ^),  to  have  resulted  in  a  general  conversion  of 
the  Jewish  population  to  Jesus  as  the  Messiah. 
From  this  town  the  Apostle  was  called  to  Joppa 
on  behalf  of  Dorcas  (9^).  In  the  Jewish  Wars 
Lydda  was  a  centre  of  strong  national  feeling.  It 
was  captured  and  burned  by  the  Syrian  governor, 
Cestius  Gallus,  on  his  march  to  Jerusalem  (A.D. 
65),  and  it  surrendered  without  a  struggle  to  Ves- 
pasian in  68  (BJ  II.  xix.  1,  IV.  viii.  1).  After  the 
fall  of  the  holy  city  it  became  one  of  the  refuges 
of  Rabbinical  learning.  Later,  it  was  known  as 
Diospolis,  though  its  old  name  was  never  dis- 
placed, and  it  became  the  seat  of  a  bishop.  At  the 
Council  of  Diospolis  in  A.D.  415  the  neresiarch 
Pelagius  was  tried,  but  managed  to  procure  his  ac- 
quittal. By  this  time  Lydda  had  begun  to  have  a 
wide  fame  as  the  reputed  burial-place  of  a  Christian 
soldier  named  Georgios,  who  in  Nicomedia  had 
torn  down  Diocletian's  edict  against  Christianity 
and  welcomed  martyrdom.  His  relics  were  taken 
to  Lydda,  and  round  his  name  was  gradually  woven 
a  tissue  of  legend,  in  which  the  Greek  myth  of 
Perseus  and  Andromeda  (see  Joppa),  the  Moslem 
idea  of  Elijah  (or  alternatively  of  Jesus)  as  the 
destined  destroyer  of  the  Impostor  (al-dajjcd)  or 
Antichrist,  and  the  old  Hebrew  story  of  the  fall  of 
Dagon  before  the  ark,  were  all  inextricablj'  inter- 
twined, till  Lydda  became  the  shrine  of  St.  George 
the  Slayer  of  the  Dragon,  whom  the  English 
Crusaders  made  the  patron-saint  of  their  native 
land, 

Lydda  is  now  *  a  flourishing  little  town,  em- 
bosomed in  noble  orchards  of  olive,  fig,  pomegran- 
ate, mulberry,  sycamore,  and  other  trees,  and  sur- 
rounded every  way  by  a  very  fertile  neighbourhood.' 
The  ruins  of  the  Crusaders'  Church  of  St.  George, 
have  '  a  certain  air  of  grandeur '  (W.  M.  Thomson, 
The  Land  and  the  Book,  1910,  p.  523).  The  town 
has  a  station  on  the  Jafla-Jerusalem  Railway. 

LrTERATrRE.— E.  Robinson,  Biblical  Researches,  1841,  iii.  49- 
55  ;  C.  Clermont-Ganneau,  Uorus  et  Saint  Georges,  1377  ;  G.  A. 
Smith,  UGUL,  1897,  p.  160 f.  JaMES  STRAHAN. 

LYDIA. — The  woman  M'ho  bears  this  name  in 
Ac  16''"^-  is  described  as  •  a  seller  of  purple,  of  the 
city  of  Thj-atira,  one  who  worshipped  God,'  The 
implication  is  that  Lydia  was  more  or  less  closely 


LYJJlA 


LYIXG 


attached  to  the  Jewisli  religion — a  'proselyte  of 
the  gate,'  in  later  Rabbinic  phraseology.  We  are 
told  that  she  vra-s  found  by  1st.  Paul  on  his  ^nsit  to 
Philippi  at  a  small  Jewish  meeting  for  prayer  held 
at  the  river-side  on  the  Sabliath  day.  On  hearing 
the  message  of  the  Apostle,  she  was  converted  and 
baptized  along  with  the  members  of  her  houseljold, 
and  thereupon  entreated  the  missionary  to  lodge 
in  her  house  during  his  stay  in  the  town.  As  a 
seller  of  purple  garments — among  the  most  expen- 
sive articles  of  ancient  commerce — Lydia  was  no 
doubt  a  woman  of  considerable  wealth.  Probably 
she  was  a  widow  carrying  on  the  business  of  her 
dead  husband,  and  her  position  at  the  head  of  a 
wealthy  establishment  shows  the  comparative  free- 
doux  enjoyed  bv  women  both  in  Asia  Minor  and 
in  Macedonia,  fier  generous  disposition,  manifested 
in  her  pressing  offer  of  hospitalitj-  to  the  Apostle, 
may  perhaps  oe  reflected  in  the  frequency  and 
liberality  with  which  the  Philippian  Church  contri- 
buted to'  the  Apostles  wants  (Ph  41*-  ^«).  She  holds 
the  distinction  of  being  the  first  convert  to  Chris- 
tianity in  Europe,  and  her  household  formed  the 
nucleus  of  the  Cliurch  of  Philippi,  to  which  St.  Paul 
addressed  the  most  affectionate  and  joyous  of  all 
his  Epistles. 

The  fact  that  the  Apostle  Paul  does  not 
mention  her  by  name  in  the  EpLstle  has  given  rise 
to  two  different  suggestions.  Some  have  thought 
that  shortly  after  her  conversion  Lydia  may  have 
either  died  or  returned  to  her  home  in  Thyatira  (as 
Milligan  in  HDB,  art.  '  Lydia  ').  Others  have  put 
forward  the  idea  that  Lydia  was  not  the  personal 
name  of  the  convert,  but  a  description  of  her 
nationality  as  a  native  of  Thyatira  in  the  province 
of  Lydia — '  the  Lydian  ' ;  and  further,  that  the 
Apostle  may  refer  to  her  either  as  Euodia  or 
Syntache  (Ph  4*).  Renan  takes  this  latter  view  of 
the  name,  and  suggests  also  that  Lydia  became  the 
wife  of  the  Apostle  and  bore  the  expenses  of  his 
trial  in  Philippi  (St.  Paul,  p.  148).  Ramsay  (HDB, 
art.  '  Lydia")  regards  the  name  as  a  familiar  name 
(nickname),  used  instead  of  the  personal  proper 
name  and  meaning  '  the  Lydian '  (so  Zahn,  Introd. 
to  XT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  i.  *o33).  Others,  however, 
point  to  the  frequency  with  which  the  name  is 
found  applied  to  women  in  Horace  (Od.  L  8,  iii.  9, 
iv.  30),  and  regard  it  as  a  proper  name. 

LtTKRATTRE.— E.  Renan,  S<.  Paid,  1868,  p.  143;  HDB,  art. 
'  Lydia' ;  R.  J.  Kaowling,  EGT,  '  Acts,"  1900,  p.  345  ;  Com- 
mentaries of  Holtzmann  and  Zelier  in  loe. 

W.  F.  Boyd. 
LTDIA  (Ai'Si'o). — Lydia,  the  fairest  and  richest 
country  of  western  Asia  Minor,  was  bounded  by 
Mysia  in  the  N.,  Phrygia  in  the  E.,  Caria  in  the 
S.,  and  the  -Egean  Sea  in  the  W.  Long  mountain 
chains,  extending  westward  from  the  central 
plateau,  divided  it  into  broad  allu^-ial  valleys. 
The  regions  between  the  ranges  of  Messogis, 
Tniolus,  and  Teninus,  watered  by  the  Cayster  and 
the  Hennus,  were  among  the  most  fertile  in  the 
world.  The  trade  and  commerce  of  Lydia  con- 
tributed more  to  its  immense  wealth  than  the 
mines  of  Tmolus  or  the  golden  sand  of  Pactolus. 
In  the  time  of  Alyattes  and  Croesus,  who  reigned 
in  splendour  at  Sardis,  the  kingdom  of  Lydia  em- 
braced almost  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor  west  of  the 
Halys,  but  Cyrus  subdued  it  about  546  B.C.,  and  a 
succession  of  satraps  did  their  best  to  crush  the 
spirit  of  the  race.  After  the  triumphal  progress 
of  Alexander  the  Great,  Lydia  was  held  for  a  time 
by  Antigonus,  and  then  hy  the  Seleucids.  After 
Magnesia  (190  B.C.)  the  Romans  presented  it  to 
their  ally  Eumenes,  king  of  Pergamos  (I  Mac  8'). 
From  133  onwards  it  formed  part  of  the  Roman 
province  of  Asia.  Before  the  time  of  Strabo  (Xlll. 
IV.  17)  the  Lydian  language  had  been  entirely  dis- 
placed by  the  Greek. 


The  religion  of  the  Lydians— the  cult  of  Cybele 
— was  a  sensuous  Nature-worship,  perhapB  origin- 
ally Hittite  ;  their  miLsic— '  soft  tydian  airs  '—was 
voluptuous  ;  and  the  prastitution  at  their  temples, 
whereby  their  daughters  obtained  dowries  (Herod. 
i.  93),  made  '  Lydian '  a  term  of  contempt  among 
the  Greeks.  Many  Jewish  families  were  settled  in 
Lydia  (Jos.  Ant.  XII.  iii.  4),  and  it  is  probable 
that  in  the  great  centres  of  population  not  a 
few  Gentiles  turned  to  them  in  search  of  a  higher 
faith  and  a  purer  moralitj'.  Among  these  was  the 
purple-seller  of  Thyatira,  who  was  St.  Paul's  first 
convert  in  Europe  (Ac  16*^-  *).  •  Lydia '  was  most 
probably  not  her  real  name,  bat  a  familiar  ethnic 
appellation.  She  was  'the  Lydian'  to  all  her 
Philippian  friends  (E.  Renan,  St.  Paul,  1869,  p. 
146 ;  T.  Zahn,  Introd.  to  the  NT,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  i. 
523,  533).     See  preceding  article. 

In  Ezk  30*  the  RV  has  changed  Lydia  into  Lud, 
and  the  country  Lydia  is  never  mentioned  in  the 
NT.  The  Roman  provincial  system  created  a 
nomenclature  which  most  of  the  \»-riters  of  the 
Apostolic  Age  habitually  employ.  Like  many 
other  geographical  and  ethnological  names,  Lydia 
ceased  to  have  any  political  significance.  St.  Paul, 
the  Roman  citizen,  uses  the  pro\"incial  name  Asia, 
and  never  Lydia.  John  writes  to  five  Lydian 
churches,  along  with  one  in  Mysian  Pergamos  and 
one  in  Phrygian  Laodicea,  but  all  the  seven  are 
'  churches  which  are  in  Asia '  (Rev  1*-  ").  It  is 
contended,  indeed,  by  Zahn  (op.  cit.  i.  187)  that 
the  Grecian  Luke,  to  whom  the  nnofBcial  termin- 
ology would  come  naturally,  uses  Asia  in  the  popu- 
lar non-Roman  sense  as  synonymous  with  Ljdia, 
to  which  F.  Blass  (Acta  Apostolorum,  1895,  p.'  176) 
would  add  Mysia  and  Caria.  J.  B.  Light  foot, 
however,  states  good  reasons  for  maintaining  that 
'  Asia  in  the  New  Testament  is  always  Proconsular 
Asi«'  (Galatian-^,  1876,  p.  19n.),  andW.  M.  Kamsay 
strongly  supports  this  view,  refusing  now  to  admit 
an  exception  (as  he  formerly  did  [The  Church  in 
the  Roman  Empire,  1893,  p.  150])  even  in  the  case 
of  Ac  2».  James  Strahax. 

LYING  (\f^€ide(rdai,  *  to  lie ' ;  ^evSoi,  if/ewrfua.,  '  a  lie ' ; 
yf/evSris,  'false';  feixmis,  'a  deceiver'). — 1.  It  is  the 
glory  of  Christianity  that  this  religion  reveals  '  the 
Giod  who  cannot  lie,'  6  d-f  cvStjj  deoi  (Tit  1'),  qui  non 
mentifur  Deus  (Vulg.).  He  is  true  in  both  senses 
of  the  word — aXytOiPos  and  dXiy^s,  venis  and  verax. 
He  cannot  be  false  to  His  own  nature,  just  as  men, 
made  in  His  image,  cannot  lie  without  being  un- 
true to  themselves.  It  is  likewise  impossible  to 
imagine  His  Revealer  departing  from  the  truth 
in  word  or  deed.  While  Hermes,  the  so-called 
messenger  of  the  gods,  was  often  admired  for  his 
dexterous  lying,  Christ  is  loved  because  He  is  the 
Truth  (Jn  14*),  the  faithful  and  true  Witness  (Rev 
3"),  through  whom  men  are  able,  amid  all 
earthly  changes  and  illusions,  to  lay  hold  on 
eternal  realities. 

2.  The  detection  and  exposure  of  imposture  was 
an  urgent  duty  of  the  early  Church.  The  speedy 
appearance  of  false  teachers  was  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  features  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  and  the 
Church  was  enjoined  not  to  believe  every  spirit, 
but  to  try  the  spirits  (1  Jn  4*).  There  were  ^eiS- 
dSfXdxH  (6al  2*),  ^evSardtrroXoi  (2  Co  11").  -^(i-So- 
vpo<tnrrai  (Ac  13«,  2  P  2^,  1  Jn  4\  Rev  \&^  19»  m'*), 
fev5o\6yoi  (1  Ti  4*),  ftvSoSt5aaKa\ot  (2  P  2^).  These 
deceivers  were  as  the  shadows  which  always  ac- 
company the  light.  To  the  apostolic  founders  of 
Christianity  the  bare  thought  of  being  ever  found 
false  witnesses  of  God  (■.pfvSond.pn'pes  tov  dtov,  1  Co 
15")  was  intolerable.  St.  Paul  often  protests,  and 
solemnly  calls  God  to  witness,  that  he  does  not  lie 
(Ro  91,  2  Co  11»  Gal  !*»,  1  Ti  2").  The  Church  of 
Ephesns  was  praised  because  she  had  tried  soi- 


728 


LYSIAS 


LYSTRA 


disant  apostles  and  found  thera  false  (^eySeii,  liev 
2*).  If  there  were  false  teachers,  there  were  also 
false  disciples,  who  claimed  the  Christian  name 
without  having  Christ's  spirit,  and  John  had  to 
formulate  some  clear  and  simple  tests  by  which 
'the  liar'  (6  \pevar-n^)  could  be  known  (1  Jn  2**  "* 

8.  Tlie  same  writer  emphasizes  the  gravity  of 
certain  moral  and  intellectual  errors — the  denial  of 
personal  sin  (1  Jn  P"),  the  rejection  of  the  historical 
Christ  (o'").  He  brands  tliein  as  blasphemous  as- 
sertions that  God  (whobe  Word  calls  all  men  sinners, 
and  whose  Spirit  inwardly  witnesses  to  the  truth 
of  the  jjospel)  is  a  liar. 

4.  Christians  must  not  lie  one  to  another  (Col  3*). 
In  the  pagan,  e.g.  the  Cretan  (Tit  1'^),  lyinp;  is  bad  ; 
in  the  Jew  (Rev  2*)  it  is  worse  ;  in  the  Christian  it 
should  be  impossible.  The  Law  was  made  for  the 
repression  of  liars  (1  Ti  1'") ;  tlie  gospel  gives  every 
believer  the  spirit  of  truth  (1  Jn  4*).  'AH  liars,' 
'  every  one  that  loveth  and  niaketh  a  lie,'  end  the 
black  list  of  the  condemned  (Kev  21^  22"),  who 
shall  not  in  any  wise  enter  the  City  of  God  (21^). 

James  Strahan. 

LTSIAS.  —  Claudius  Lysias  was  the  chiliarch, 
the  tribune,  in  command  of  the  Roman  troops 
stationed  at  the  Tower  of  Antonia  at  the  time 
of  St.  Paul's  last  visit  to  Jerusalem.  The  conjec- 
ture is  probable  that  he  was  by  birth  a  Greek,  and 
that  he  adopted  the  name  Claudius  when  '  with  a 
great  sum'  he  obtained  the  station  of  a  Roman 
citizen  (Ac  '2r2^ ;  seeR.  J.  Knowling,  EGT,  'Acts,' 
1900,  p.  463  ;  cf.  Ac  2\^).  The  Tower  of  Antonia 
communicated  by  a  stairway  with  the  cloisters  of 
the  Temple  (see  G.  A.  Smith,  Jerusalem,  1898,  ii. 
495  f.,  and  art.  JERUSALEM  for  the  position  of  the 
tower),  and  care  was  taken  to  have  soldiers  there 
in  reacliness  for  any  emergency,  especially  at  the 
time  of  the  Jewish  festivals  (Jos.  BJ  v.  5.  8),  like 
that  of  Pentecost,  which  St.  Paul  was  attending. 
News  was  quickly  brought  up  to  the  Tower  of 
the  riotous  attack  made  upon  the  Apostle  in  the 
Temple  at  the  instigation  of  '  Jews  from  Asia ' 
(21"*).  It  was  suggested  to  Lysias,  or  the  idea 
occurred  spontaneously  to  him,  that  the  object  of 
tiie  fury  of  the  mob  might  be  a  man  whom  he  was 
anxious  to  apprehend — viz.  the  leader  of  a  recent 
seditious  movement,  who  had  managed  to  escape 
when  the  procurator  Felix  fell  upon  him  and  the 
crowd  of  his  followers  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  8.  6,  and  BJ 
ii.  13.  5).  Hence  the  surprise  with  which  the 
chiliarch  turns  to  St.  Paul,  so  soon  as  he  had  been 
snatched  from  his  assailants,  with  the  question : 
'  You  are  not,  then,  the  Egyptian  .  .  .  ? '  (Ac  21^). 
After  allowing  St.  Paul  to  address  the  people 
from  'the  stairs,'  Lysias  had  him  taken  within 
the  Tower,  and  had  given  orders  that  he  should  be 
examined  by  scourging,  when  he  was  made  aware 
that  his  prisoner  was  a  Roman  citizen,  whom  'it 
was  illegal  to  subject  to  such  treatment'  (22^^- ). 
Seeking  to  obtain  the  information  he  desired  by 
other  means,  Lysias  convened  a  meeting  of  the 
Jewish  Council  on  the  following  day,  '  and  brought 
St.  Paul  down  and  set  him  before  them '  (v.*). 
The  tumult  that  arose  on  St.  Paul's  statement 
that  he  W8isa  Pharisee,  and  was  called  in  question 
'  toucliing  the  hope  and  resurrection  of  the  dead,' 
was  so  great  that  he  had  to  be  rescued  by  the 
soldiers,  who  took  him  again  to  the  Tower.  Tlien 
followed  the  '  plot  of  certain  of  the  Jews  to  kill 
St.  Paul,'  if  the  chiliarch  could  be  induced  to 
bring  him  again  before  the  Council.  News  of 
this  was  carried  to  Lysias  by  '  Paul's  sister's  son.' 
Thereupon  the  resolution  was  taken  to  send  the 
Aj)09tle  for  greater  safety  to  Csesarea  (23'^"^- )• 
With  the  escort,  Lysias  sent  a  letter  to  the  Gover- 
nor Felix  (v.*"^-)-  In  writing,  he  forgot  the  mis- 
conception about  •  the  Egyptian '  under  which  he 


had  first  apprehended  St.  Paul.  Uppermost  in  liis 
mind  was  the  fact  that  he  had  been  tlie  means 
of  rescuing  '  a  Roman '  from  tlie  mad  fury  of  the 
Jews.  Not  unnaturally  it  is  that  fact  he  empha- 
sized when  writing  to  the  Governor.  No  further 
trace  of  Lysias  is  forthcoming.         G.  P.  Gould. 

LYSTRA  {AvffTpa,  which  is  fem.  sing,  in  Ac 
148-  -'  16',  and  neut.  pi.  in  Ac  14»  W,  2  Ti  3").— 
Lystra  was  a  Roman  garrison  town  of  soutliern 
Galatia,  built  on  an  isolated  hill  in  a  secluded 
valley  at  the  S.  edge  of  the  vast  upland  plain 
of  Lycaonia,  about  18  miles  S.S.W.  of  Iconium. 
Itself  3,780  ft.  above  sea-level,  it  had  behind  it 
the  gigantic  Taurus  range,  whose  fastnesses  were 
the  haunts  of  wild  mountaineers  living  on  plunder 
and  blackmail.  It  was  the  necessity  of  stamping 
out  this  social  pest  that  raised  the  obscure  town 
of  Lystra  into  temporary  importance.  In  6  B.C. 
Augustus  made  it  an  outpost  of  civilization,  one 
of  '  a  series  of  colonies  of  Roman  veterans  evidently 
intended  to  acquire  this  district  for  peaceful  settle- 
ment' (T.  Mommsen,  The  Provinces  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  Eng.  tr.,  1909,  i.  337).  The  others  were 
Antioch,  Parlais,  Cremna,  Comama,  and  Olbasa. 
In  all  these  cities  the  military  coloni  formed  an 
aristocracy  among  the  incolce  or  native  inhabitants. 
Latin  was  the  official  language,  and  Greek  that 
of  culture,  but  the  Lystrans  used  among  them- 
selves 'the  speech  of  Lycaonia'  (Ac  14"),  of  which 
no  trace  is  left,  except  that  '  Lystra ' — which  the 
Romans  liked  to  write  '  Lustra,'  on  account  of 
its  resemblance  to  lustrum — is,  like  '  Ilistra '  and 
'Kilistra,'  which  are  also  found  in  the  country, 
doubtless  a  native  place-name.  The  site  and 
colonial  rank  of  Lystra  were  alike  unknown  till 
1885,  vvhen  J.  R.  S.  Sterrett's  discovery  of  a  pedestal 
in  situ,  with  an  inscription  containing  the  words 
Colonia  lulia  Felix  Gemina  Lustra,  settled  both 
these  points.  Coins  bearing  the  same  legend  have 
since  been  found. 

Lying  some  distance  westward  from  the  great 
triide-route  which  wentthroughDerbeand  Iconium, 
Lystra  can  never  have  been  an  important  seat  of 
commerce.  Still  it  was  prosperous  enough  to  at- 
tract some  civilians  as  well  as  soldiers  to  its  pleas- 
ant valley.  Its  blending  of  Greek  and  Jewish 
elements  is  strikingly  illustrated  by  the  mixed 
parentage  of  Timothy,  whom  St.  Paul  circumcised 
'  because  of  the  Jews  that  were  in  those  parts ' 
(Ac  le'-*).  No  mention,  however,  is  made  of  a 
synagogue  in  Lystra,  and  probably  the  Jewish 
colony  was  small.  Some  measure  of  Greek  culture 
among  the  Lystran  natives  is/>r('»ia/acic  suggested 
by  the  existence  of  a  temple  of  Zeus  '  before  the 
city '  (irp6  T^s  ir6\€(j)s,  Ac  14'^) — cf.  S.  Paolo  fuori 
Ic  Mura  at  Rome — as  well  as  by  the  naive  identifi- 
cation of  Barnabas  and  St.  Paul  with  Zeus  and 
Hermes.  But  these  facts  prove  nothing  as  to 
the  real  character  of  the  Lystran  worsliip,  for  the 
arbitrary  bestowal  of  classical  names  ujjon  Ana- 
tolian gods — an  act  of  homage  to  the  dominant  civil- 
ization— had  but  little  effect  upon  the  deep-rooted 
native  religious  feeling.  The  motive  of  the  priest 
who  wished  to  sacrifice  to  the  supposed  celestial 
visitants  (v.i*)  does  not  lie  on  the  surface.  That 
he  acted  in  good  faith,  being  thrilled  with  awe  be- 
fore superhuman  miracle-workers,  is  more  probable 
than  that,  knowing  better,  he  cleverly  used  a  wave 
of  religious  excitement  to  serve  his  own  base  ends. 
All  the  Lystrans  were  probably  familiar  with  the 
legend— told  by  Ovid,  Met.  viii.  626  If. — that  Zeus 
and  Hermes  once  visited  Phrygia  in  the  disguise 
of  mortals,  and  found  no  one  willing  to  give  them 
hof-pitality,  till  they  came  to  the  hut  of  an  aged 
couple,  Pliilemon  and  Baucis,  whose  kindness 
Zeus  rewarded  by  taking  them  to  a  place  of 
safety  before  all  the  neighbourhood  was  suddenly 


LYSTRA 


LYSTRA 


729 


flooded,  and  thereafter  metamorphosing  their 
cottage  into  a  magnificent  temple,  of  which  they 
became  the  priests. 

It  is  stated  (Ac  14>»)  that,  during  St.  Paul's 
sojourn  in  Lystra,  Jews  came  thither  from  Antioch 
(130  miles)  and  Iconium  (18  miles),  but  whether  in 
the  ordinary  course  of  trade,  or  on  set  purpose  to 
persecute  the  Apostle,  is  not  made  quite  clear. 
The  close  connexion  between  Antioch  and  Lystra 
is  proved  by  a  Greek  inscription  on  the  base  of  a 
statue  which  Lystra  presented  in  the  2nd  cent. : 
'  The  very  brilliant  sister  Colonia  of  the  Antioch- 
ians  is  honoured  by  the  very  brilliant  colony  of 
the  Lystrans  with  tne  Statue  of  Concord  '  (J.  R.  S. 
Sterrett,  Wolfe  Expedition  in  Asia  Minor,  1888, 
p.  352).  Lystra  was  more  closely  associated  with 
its  Phrygian  neighbour  Iconium  than  with  the 
more  distant  Derbe,  though  the  latter  was,  like 
itself,  Lycaonian  (Ac  16-).  At  Lystra  the  apostles 
had    experience    of    the  swift   changes    of    the 


native  popular  feeling,  as  well  as  of  the  malice  of 
their  own  race.  First  they  were  worshinped  as 
gods  come  down  to  bring  healing  and  blessing ; 
then  St.  Paul  was  stoned  as  a  criminal  not  tit  to 
live  (cf.  2  Co  11*).  Tinjothy  was  an  eye-witness 
of  the  cruel  assault  of  the  rabble  (2  Ti  3").  The 
Apostle  re-visited  Lystra  in  the  homeward  part  of 
his  first  missionary  tour  (Ac  14*') ;  again  in  his 
second  journey  (16*);  and,  if  the  South-Galatian 
theory  is  correct,  once  more  during  the  third 
journey  (18**).  Little  is  knoNvn  of  the  later  secular 
or  sacred  history  of  Lystra.  The  veterans  whom 
Augustus  planted  there  'notably  restricted  the 
field  of  the  free  inhabitants  of  the  mountains, 
and  general  peace  must  at  length  have  made  its 
triumphal  entrance  also  here '  ( >Iommsen,  op.  cit. ). 
Having  thus  completed  the  work  of  a  border  fort- 
ress, the  colony  of  Lystra  lost  its  raison  d'etre, 
and  the  town  sank  back  into  its  original  insignifi- 
cance. James  Strahan. 


THE  END  OF  VOL.  L 


Printed  by  Uokrisox  &  Gibb  LnorKD,  Kdinbtirgh 


1^} 


THE   FOLLOWING   STANDARD   WORKS 

AKE  ALL  REFERRED  TO   IN  THLS 

DICTIOXARY  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH, 

AM)    \l;i.    RECOMMENDED  FOR   FURTHER  STUDY. 


Published  by  Messrs.  T.  &  T.  CLARK,  Edinburgh. 

Messrs.  Clarh  extend  a  cordial  invitation   to  all  interested  in   their  Publications  to  visit  their 

Showrooms  at  38  George  Street,  Edinburgh,  or  at  Stationers'  Hall,  London, 

where  the  Boohs  may  be  examined  at  leisure. 


Edited  by  JAMES  HASTINGS,  D.D.— 

The  ExcrcLOP^DiA  of  Eeligion  axd  Ethics.     Vols.  I.  to  Till,  now  ready.     Price  per 
Volume,  in  cloth,  28s.  net ;  in  half -morocco,  Sis.  net. 

DiCTioxAEY  OF  THE  BiBLE.     Five  Vols.     Price  per  Volume,  in  cloth,  24s.  net ;  in  half- 
morocco,  30s.  net. 

The  One- Volume  Bible  Dictionart.     In  cloth,  20s.  net ;  in  half -morocco,  25s.  net 

Dictionary  of  Christ  axd  the  Gospeub.      Two  Vols.      Price  per  Volume,  in  cloth, 
21s.  net ;  in  half-morocco,  27s.  6d.  net. 


Adamson.  —  The    Chhistiax   Doctkixe   of   the 

Lords  Supper.  By  Rev.  Robert  M.  Adamson, 

M.A.,  Ardrossan.     Post  8vo,  4s.  6d.  net. 

'A  scholarly,  large-minded,  and  trustworthy  statement  of  a 
great  religious  and  Christian  theme.' — Christian  World. 

Allen.— Ixtroductiox  to  the  Books  of  the  New 

Testament.    A  Concise  Introduction  primarily 

intended  for  Students  and  Candidates  for  Holy 

Orders.    By  WiLLOUGHBY  C.  Allex  and  L.  W. 

Grexsted.     Post  8vo,  5s.  net. 

'  The  amount  of  reliable  information  which  is  contained  in  the 
ver>-  modest  compass  of  this  little  volume  is  very  considerable, 
and  we  think  it  may  confidently  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  students, 
and  that  it  is  hkely  to  ser^'e  well  the  purpose  for  which  it  is 
intended.' — Church  Times. 

Bigg.— Peter  axd  Jude.    By  Prof.  Charles  Bigg, 

D.D.       (International    Critical    Commientary.) 

Second  Edition.     9s.  net. 

'  A  first-rate  critical  edition  of  these  Epistles  has  been  for  a  long 
time  a  felt  want  in  English  theological  literature  .  .  .  this  has 
been  at  last  supplied  by  the  labours  of  Canon  Big^  .  .  .  full  of 
interest  and  suggest! veness.' — Gtiardian. 

Briggs.— The  Messiah  of  the  Apostles.  By  the 
late  Prof.  C.  A.  Briggs,  D.D.,  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  New  York.    Post  8vo,  6s.  net. 

'  As  Dr.  Briggs'  work  proceeds,  one  comes  to  realise  the  grandeur 
of  its  conception,  and  the  ability  with  which  it  is  n-rought  out.' — 
Expository  Times. 


Burkitt.— The  Gospel  History 
MISSIOX.  By  Prof.  F.  C. 
Cambridge.     Third  Edition. 


AXD    ITS   TrAXS- 
BURKITT,     D.D., 

Post  Svo,  6s.  net. 


'  His  book  is  delightful  reading.  It  rests  on  close  observation  of 
details  vividly  conceived  ;  and  yet  the  selection  of  points  is  so 
admirable,  and  the  touch  so  light"  and  rapid — never  a  word  wasted, 
and  always,  as  it  would  seem,  the  happiest  word  chosen — that  the 
reader  is  carried  over  subjects  that  he  will  be  apt  to  think  of  as 
dry  and  severe  with  the  ease  and  zest  of  a  romance.' — Prof.  W. 
Saxbat,  D.D.,  in  the  Expositor]/  Time^. 


Bruce. — Apologetics;  or,  Christianity  Defensively 

Stated.    By  the  late  Professor  A.   B.  Bruce, 

D.D.        (International     Theological     Library.) 

Third  Edition.     Post  Svo,  9s.  net. 

*  There  does  not  exist  in  our  language  so  satisfactory  or  original 
a  treatment  of  the  historicity  of  Uie  Gospels,  the  claims  of  Jesus, 
and  the  significance  of  His  appearance ;  nor  have  we  so  just  and 
infomung  a  criticism  of  the  theories  of  primitive  Christianity.' — 
Expotitor. 

—  St.  Paul  -  (  oxceptiox  of  Christianity.  Post 

Svo,  6.S.  net. 

'A  living  book,  candid,  clear,  and  supremely  able;  a  bo<^ 
worthy  alike  of  ttie  author  and  the  great  subject  with  which  it 
deals.'— fi^nVir  of  the  Churches. 

—  The  Kingdom  of  God  ;  or,  Christ's  Teaching 

according  to   the   Synoptical    Gospels.      Sixth 

Edition.     Post  Svo,  6s.  net. 

'  The  astonishing  vigour  and  the  unfailing  insight  which  char* 
acterise  the  book  mark  a  new  era  in  biblical  theology.' 

Principal  Makccs  Dons,  D.D. 

—  The  Humiliation  of  Christ,  in  its  Physical, 

Ethical,  and  Official  Aspects.     Fourth  Edition. 

Svo,  8s.  6d.  net. 

'  The  learning  and  the  de^  and  sweet  spirituality  of  this  dis- 
cussion wiU  commend  it  to  many  faithful  students  of  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  i^as.'—CongregationalUt. 

—  The   Epistle  to    the    Hebrews  :    The  First 

Apology  for  Christianity.    An  Exegetical  Study. 
Second  Edition.     Post  Svo,  68.  net. 

Chadwick.— The  Pastoral  Teaching  of  St.  Paul, 

His  Ministerial  Ideals.    By  W.  E.  Chadwick, 

D.  D.     Post  Svo,  7s.  6d.  net. 

'  The  book  is  to  be  praised  for  the  high  conception  of  ministerial 

work  which  it  reveals,  and  it  may  l>e  safely  conmiended  to  men 

who  desired  to  be  helped  in  their  spiritual  laboors  by  wise  advice 

and  an  assurance  of  their  high  calling.' — Athencewm. 


WORKS  REFERRED  TO  IN  'DICTIONARY  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH 


Clarke.— An  Outlink  of  Christian  Theology. 
IJy  Prof.  W.  N.  Clarke,  D.D.  Twentieth 
Edition.     Post  8vo,  68.  net. 

'  Has  it  ever  happened  to  any  of  our  readers  to  take  up  a  work 
on  8>'Ht«niatic  theolopy  and  open  it  with  a  siffh  of  weariiicsM  and 
dread,  and  find  himself  fascinatcHl  and  enthralled  and  compelled 
to  read  on  to  the  last  word  ?  Let  any  one  who  iraves  a  new  experi- 
ence of  this  kind  procure  Dr.  Clarke's  "Outline."  We  ({uarantee 
thot  he  will  learn  more,  with  greater  pleanure,  than  he  is  likely  to 
leurn  in  anv  other  systematic  theology.'— Dr.  .Marcuh  Dod«,  in  the 
Britiuli  Wefkly. 

—  What  shall  we  Think  m'  (  iii;i>ri amty?    Cr. 

8vo,  28.  net. 

'  Dr.  Clarke's  "  Outline  of  Christian  Theolop- "  had  a  reception 
rarely  accorded  to  an  American  book.  This  little  book  is  written 
in  the  same  channing  simplicity  of  lanuuage,  and  its  thouj^hts  are 
so  p-eal  and  simple  that  it  is  likely  to  find  an  equally  warm 
we\coii\c. '—ilxpogitory  Times. 

Clemen.— Primitive  Christianity  and  its  Non- 

.Ikwish   Sources.     By  Prof.  Carl  Clemen, 

Ph.D.,    Th.D.      Authorised    Translation.     8vo, 

98.   nt!t. 

'There  is  no  handbook  to  the  subject  in  English  or  German 
which  rivals  this  comprehensive  and  serviceable  treatise,  and  its 
real  imiwrtance  entitles  it  to  the  care  which  the  translator  has 
evidently  bestowed  upon  its  English  dress.' — Britinh  Weekly. 

Cremer.— Biblico-Theological  Lexicon  of  New 
Tkstamext  Ureek.  By  Prof.  Hermann 
Crkmkk.  D.I).    Demy  4to,  .SOs.  net. 

This  Lexicon  deals  with  words  whose  meaning  in  the  Ciassics 
is  modified  or  changed  in  Scripture— words  which  have  become  the 
bases  and  watchwords  of  Christian  theology,  tracing  their  history 
in  their  transference  from  the  Classics  into  the  LXX,  and  from  the 
tXX  into  the  New  Testament,  and  the  gradual  deepening  and  eleva- 
tion of  their  meaning  till  they  reach  the  fulness  of  New  Testament 
thought. 

'  It  gives  with  care  and  thoroughness  a  complete  history,  as  far 
as  it  goes,  of  each  word  and  phrase  that  it  deals  with.  .  .  .  Dr. 
Cremer's  e.\planations  are  most  lucidly  set  out.' — Giiardian. 


Dalman.— The  Words  of  .Jesus.  Considered  in 
the  Light  of  Post-Biblical  Jewish  Writings  and 
the  Aramaic  Language.  By  Prof.  G.  Dalman, 
lieipzig.  Authorised  English  Translation  by 
I'n.f.  D.  M.  Kay,  D.D.,  St.  Andrews.  Post 
7-.  (ill.  net. 

'  The  most  critical  and  scientific  examination  of  the  leading  con- 
ceptions of  the  Gospels  that  has  j'et  appeared.' — Prof.  W.  Sanday, 
LL.D. 

Davidson.— The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  By 
tlie  late  Prof.  A.  B.   David.son,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

I'.ilinlmrgh.    [ILnuJhoi,!:  Srrics.)    Cr.  8vo,  2s.  6d. 

lift. 

'  For  its  size  and  price,  one  of  the  very  best  theolojjieal  hand- 
books with  which  I  am  ac(|uainte<l — a  close  ,;;rappling  with  the 
thought  of  the  Epistle  by  a  singularly  strong  and  candid  mind.' — 
Professor  Saxdav  in  the  AccLdeiny. 

—  Old  Te-stament  Theology.  Edited  by  the  late 
Principal  Salmon'!),  D.D.  (International  Thco- 
In,/,,:,!  [Jhniri/.)     10.^.  Gd.  net. 

'Contains  the  essence  and  strength  of  the  whole  work  of  one 
whom  the  best  judges  have  pronounced  to  be  a  leader  in  Old 
Testament  learning.'— iJootinan. 

Davies.- The  Atonement  and  Intercession  of 
Christ.  By  the  late  Principal  David  C.  Davies, 
M.A.,  Trevecca.     Cr.  8vo,  3s.  net. 


Deissmann.— Bible  Studies.  Contributions,  chiefly 
from  Papyri  and  In.scriptions,  to  the  History  of 
the  Language,  Literature,  and  Religion  of  Hel- 
lenistic Judaism  and  Primitive  Christianity.  By 
Prof.  Adolf  Deissmann,  D.D.,  Berlin.  Author- 
ised Translation  (incorporating  Dr.  Delssmann's 
most  recent  changes  and  additions.)  Second 
Edition.     8vo,  7s.  6d.  net. 

'  The  method  of  investigation  advocated  is  so  far-reaching  in  its 
influence  that  every  scholar  must  take  account  of  it.'— liritish 
Weekly. 

Dorner.— A  Sy.stem  of  Chrlstian  Doctrine.  By 
Prof.  L  A.  DORNEH.  D.D.  In  Four  Vols.  8vo, 
2Is.  net. 

'A  monument  of  marvellous  iixliistry  and  rare  scholarship.  It 
is  a  tribute  alike  to  the  genius,  the  "learning,  and  the  untiring 
perseverance  of  its  author.' — Baptixt  Magazine. 

—  System  of  Christian  Ethics.    8vo,  10s.  6d.  net. 

'  This  noble  book  is  the  crown  of  the  Systematic  Theology  of  the 
author.  .  .  .  It  is  a  ma.sterpiece.' — Prof.  C.  A.  Briooh,  D.D. 

Drummond. — The  Relation  of  Apo.stolic  Teach- 
ing TO  the  Teaching  of  Christ.  By  R.  J. 
Drummond,  D.D,,  P^dinburgh.  Second  Edition. 
8vo,  8s.  6d.  net. 

'  No  book  of  its  size  has  taken  such  a  hold  of  us  for  many  a  day. 
...  It  is  a  strong  book,  the  book  of  a  scholar  and  thinker,  fear- 
less yet  reverent,  new  and  yet  built  on  a  solid  foundation  of  faith 
and  experience.' — Expository  Times. 

Falconer.— From  Apostle  to  Priest.  A  Study 
of  Early  Church  Organisation.  By  Prof.  James 
W.  Falconer,  M.A.,  B.D.     Cr.  8vo,  3s.  6d.  net. 

Farnell.— Greecs  and  Babylon.  A  Comparative 
Sketch  of  Mesopotamian,  Anatolian,  and 
Hellenic  Religions.  By  L.  II.  Farnell,  M.A., 
D.Litt.,  Oxford.     8vo,  6s.  6d.  net. 

'  Of  the  matter  of  the  book  it  is  impossible  to  speak  too  highly  : 
in  fact.  Dr.  Farnell's  work  in  this  new  and  most  fruitful  field  is 
beyond  all  praise.  We  have  read  it  with  the  greatest  interest  and 
pleasure.' — Journal  of  Hellenic  Stttdies. 

Godet.— A  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
TO  the  Romans.  By  the  late  Prof.  F.  Godet, 
D.D.     Two  Vols.     8vo,  12s.  net. 

—  A  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  First  Epistle 

TO  the  Corinthians.  Two  Vols.   8vo,  12s.  net. 

NOTE.— 4  selection  of  any  Four  Volumes  of  Prof.  Oodet's 
'  Commentaries  '  may  now  be  had  at  the  subscription  price  of  21s. 
net  {or  mor*  at  the  same  ratio). 

HUgel.— Eternal  Life  :  A  Study  ot  its  Implica- 
tions and  Applications,  By  Baron  Friedrich 
VON  HiJGEL,  Member  of  the  Cambridge  Philo- 
logical Society.  Second  Edition.  Post  8vo, 
8s.  net. 

'A  model  of  the  spirit  and  temper  in  which  the  history  of 
philosophy,  and  especially  of  religious  philosophy,  should  be 
written.'— T/oi/nini  of  Theological  Stvdies. 

Inge.— Faith  and  Knowledge.  By  Dr.  W.  R. 
Inge,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's.  {Scholar  as  Preacher 
Scries.)    Second  Edition.     4s.  6d.  net. 

'Contains  a  great  deal  that  is  of  real  interest  and  value.  .  .  . 
The  volume  is  one  which  is  especiall.\-  helpful  to  preachers,  as 
giving  them  fresh  materials  for  thought.' — Guardian. 


WORKS  REFERRED  TO  IX  '  DICTIUXARY  oF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH' 


Ladd.— The  Doctrixe  of  Sacred  Scripture:  A 
Critical,  Hi:-torical,  and  Dogmatic  Inquirj'  into 
the  Origin  and  Nature  of  the  Old  and  New- 
Testaments.  By  G.  T.  Ladd,  D.D.,  Prof,  of 
Mental  and  Moral  Philosophy,  Vale.  Two  Vols. 
8vo  (1600  pp.),  18s.  net. 

Laidlaw.    Thk  Bible  Doctrine  of  Max;  or.  The 

Anthropulogy  and  Psj'chology  of  Scripture.    By 

Prof.  J.  Laidlaw,  D.D.,  Edinburgh.    Post  Svo, 

6s.  net. 

•  The  standard  work  in  English  on  the  Anthropology  and  PBjcho- 

\ogy  of  the  }iib\e.'— Expositors/  Times. 

Lambert.— The  Sacraments  ix  the  New  Testa- 
ment. By  J.  C.  Lambert,  D.D.  Svo,  Ss.  6d, 
net. 

-'Will,  without  doubt,  come  to  be  re^rded  as  a  classic  work 
upon  the  Sacraments.  .  .  .  We  should  like  to  see  it  placed  in  the 
list  of  books  recommended  to  probationers  for  the  ministry,  and 
if  lavmen  could  also  be  induced  ta  read  it,  so  much  the  better.' 
—Methodist  Times. 

Law.— The  Tests  of  Life.    A  Study  of  the  First 

Epistle  of  St.  John.    By  Prof.  Robert  Law, 

D.D.,  Toronto.    Third  Edition.    Svo,  7s.  6d.  net. 

'  Xo  more  masterly  contribution  has  for  lonp  been  made  to  New 

Testament  exegesis"  and  theology.    No  New  Testament  book  of 

our  time  better  deserves,  or  will  better  repay,  the  most  careful 

study.' — British  Weekly. 

Lechler.- The  Apostolic  and  Post- Apostolic 
Times  :  Their  Diversity  and  Unity  in  Life  and 
Doctrine.  By  Prof.  G,  V.  Lechler,  D.D. 
Two  Vols.    Cr.  Svo,  12s.  net. 

McGiffert.— A  History  of  Christianity  in  the 

Apostolic  Age.     By  Prof.  A.  C.  McGiffert, 

D.D.    {International  Theological  Library.)    IDs. 

6d.  net. 

'  Xot  only  the  fullest,  but  the  most  impartial,  many-aded,  and 
stimulating  book  on  the  subject  in  the  English  Unguage.' — 
Critical  Recievr. 

MacgregoF Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God.    By 

W.  yi.  ^L\cgregor,  D.D.,  Edinburgh.    (Scholar 

as  Preacher  Series. )    4s.  6d.  net. 

'  We  doubt  whether  any  first  book  of  sermons  published  daring 
the  last  ten  years  will  receive  a  gpreater  welcome  than  this  mellow, 
meditative,  and   yet  inspiring    record  of   devout    and    faithful 

thought.'— Brifr^A  WeelUif. 

Mackintosh.- The  Doctrine  of  the  Persox  of 
Je-sus  Christ.  By  Prof.  H.  K.  Mackintosh, 
D.Phil.,  D.D.,  Edinburgh.  (International  Theo- 
logical Library.)    Third  Edition.     9s.  net. 

'  Of  exceptional  quality  and  richness.  Very  few  recent  theolo- 
gical volumes  are  on  the  same  plane  of  all-round  distinction,  for 
knowledge,  for  constructive  power,  and,  not  least,  for  admirable 
lucidity  and  arrangement.' — Expository  Times. 

MofFatt.— An  Introduction  to  the  Literature 

OF  THE  New  Testament.     By  Prof.  James 

Moffatt,  B.D.,  D.D.,  Glasgow.    (International 

Theological  Library.)    Second  ILdition.     10s.  6d. 

net. 

'There  is  no  other  English  book  so  comprehensive,  and  the 

reader  will  be  impressed  with  the  author's  learning,  lucid  style, 

methodical  arrangement,  and  reverent  attitude.' — Athencetim. 

Moulton.— A     Grammar     of     New    Te.stament 

Greek.     Part  I.     The  Prolegomena.     By  Prof. 

J.  H.  Moulton,  D.D.,  Didsbury  College.    Third 

Edition.     Svo,  8s.  net. 

'This  book  is  indispensable,  really  a  first  requisite  to  the  under- 
standing of  the  New  Testament  Greek.  We  do  not  see  how  it 
could  have  been  better  done,  and  it  will  unquestionably  take  its 
place  as  the  standard  grammar  of  Xew  Testament  Greek.' — 
Principal  Marccs  Dods,  D.D. 


Muirhead.— The  Times  of  Christ.  By  Lewis  A. 
MuiRHEAD,  D.  D.  (Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes. ) 
23.  net. 

Naime.— The  Epistle  of  Priesthood.     Stadie» 

in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.    By  Prof.  Alex- 

AXDER  Nairxe,  B.D.,  King's  College,  London. 

Post  Svo,  Ss.  net. 

"This  exposition  is  certainly  a  remarkable  work.  Prof.  Xaime 
shows  us  that  be  has  mastered  all  that  has  been  written  on  the 
book,  and  has  a  complete  scholar's  knowledge  of  everj-thing  re- 
quired for  its  interpretation.  .  .  .  Ita  broad  sympathy,  sound 
scholarship,  and  wide  reading  will  be  a  storehouse  of  suggestive 
thought.'— T»m«#. 

Plummer.— I.  Corinthians.  By  Alfred  Plummer, 
D.D.,  and  Kt.  Rev.  Arch.  Robertsox.  (Inter - 
neUional  Critical  Commentary.)  Second  Edition. 
10s.  6d.  net. 

—  II.  CORIXTHIAXS.  (International  Critical Commcn' 

tary.)     10s.  6d.  net. 

Reass« — History  of  the  S.acred  Scriptures  of 
THE  New  Testament.  By  Prof.  E.  Reuss, 
D.D.     Svo,  640  pp.,  12s.  net. 

Robinson.— The  Christiax   Doctrixe  of   Max. 

By  Prof.  H.  Wheeler  Robin.son,  M.A.,  Leeds. 

Second  Edition.     6s.  net. 

'This  work  is  one  of  the  finest  contributions  which  has  been 
made  for  long  to  Biblical  and  philosophical  theol<^-,  and  will 
ensure  an  eager  welcome  to  anj-thing  else  from  the  ssime  pen.' — 
Prof.  Jaubs  Dkxskt,  D.D. 

Salmond.— The  Christian'  Doctrixe  of  Immor- 

t.\lity.  By  the  late  Principal  S.  D.  F.  Salmoxd. 

Fifth  Edition.     Post  Svo,  7s.  net. 

'  This  is,  beyond  all  doubt,  the  one  book  on  the  transcendent 
subject  of  which  it  treats.  There  is  none  like  it — soond,  frank, 
fearless,  and  yet  modest  in  every  page." — Methodist  Times. 

Sanday.— OuTLiXES  of  the  Life  of  Christ.  Bj- 
Prof.  W.  Saxday,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  D.Litt.,  Ox- 
ford. Second  Edition,  with  new  and  important 
Appendix.     Post  Svo,  5s.  net. 

'  The  most  unconventional  and  illuminating  of  all  extant  works 
of  the  kind.  .  .  .  The  best  modem  work  on  the  life  of  our  Lord." 
—Methodist  Times. 

—  Romans.   ( Wi  th  Principal  A.  C.  H  eadlam,  D.  D.  , 

London).    Fifth  Ekiition.   (International  Critical 
Commentary.)     10s.  6d.  net. 

'  We  welcome  it  as  an  epoch-making  contribution  to  the  studv 
of  St.  Paul.' — The  Bishop  of  Ely. 

'  This  is  an  excellent  commentar>-,  scholarly,  clear,  doctrinal, 
reverent,  and  learned.  ...  It  is  a  volume  which  wiU  bring  credit 
to  English  scholarship,  and  while  it  is  the  crown  of  much  good 
work  on  the  port  of  the  elder  editor,  it  gives  promise  of  equally 
good  work  in  the  future  from  both.' — Guardian. 

Schaff.  —  History  of  the  Christiax  Church. 
By  the  late  Prof.  Philip  Schaff,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Six  '  Divisions '  in  Two  Vols,  each,  ex.  demy  Svo,  15s.  net.  Each 
Division  covers  a  separate  and  distinct  epoch,  and  is  complete 
in  itself. 

1.  Apostolic  CiiRisTiAxnT,  a.d.  1-100. 

2.  .ASTE-NlCESE   CHRISTIASITT,  A.D.  100-325. 

3.  NiCKXK   AXD   POST-NICEXE   CllRISTIA.\ITT,  A.D.  325-€0a 

4.  Mb01*val  Christia-MTT,  A.D.  590-1073 

5.  The  Germas  Reformation-. 

6.  The  Swiss  Reforhatios. 

Dr.  Schaff's  '  History  of  the  Christian  Church '  is  the  most 
valuable  contribution  to  Ecclesiastical  History  that  has  ever  been 
published  in  this  country.  It  has  no  rival  in  point  of  compre- 
hensiveness, and  in  presenting  the  results  of  the  most  advanced 
scholarship  and  the  latest  discoveries.  Each  Division  covers  a 
separate  and  distinct  epoch,  and  is  complete  in  itself. 

'  No  student,  and  indeed  no  critic,  can  with  fairness  overlook  a 
work  like  the  present,  written  with  such  evident  candour,  and,  at 
the  same  time,  with  so  thorough  a  knowledge  of  the  sources  of 
early  Christian  historj-.' — Scotsman. 


WORKS  REFERRED  TO  IN  'DICTIOXARY  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH 


Schultz.— Old  Tkstamknt  Thkology.  Tlie  Re- 
ligion of  Kevc'latiou  in  its  I're-CliriHtian  Stage 
of  Develoimient.  By  Prof.  Hkhmaxn'  SciiULTZ, 
D.D.,  Gttttingen.  Authorined  TranslcUion.  Two 
Vols.    8vo,  188.  net. 

*  Will  be  read  with  pleasure,  and  profit,  not  only  by  professional 
BtmlentH,  but  )>v  all  intelli(;ciit  ])criiona  who  have  an  interest  in  the 
Old  Testament."  -  Prof.  A.  H   Davidho.n,  D.D. 

Schlirer.— HisTOUY  of  the  Jewish  People  in 
THE  Time  of  Je.sus  Christ.  By  Prof.  E. 
SchUrer,  D.D.,  (jlottingen.  Complete  in  5  Vols. 
8vo,  268.  3d.  net.  iNOKX  Vol.  (100  pp.  8vo), 
28.  6d.  net. 

'  Every  English  commentary  has  for  some  yeors  contained  refer- 
ences to  "Schtirer"  as  the  great  authority  upon  such  matters. 
.  .  .  There  is  no  guide  to  these  intricate  and  difficult  tiiiics  wliich 
«ven  approaches  him.' — Record. 

Scott.— The  Fourth  Gospel  :  Its  Purpose  and 
Theology.  By  Prof.  E.  F.  Scott,  D.D.,  King- 
ston.    Second  Edition.     8vo,  6s.  net. 

'  A  work  that  should  be  widely  reati,  even  by  those  who  dissent 
from  its  conclusions,  for  it  is  probably  the  ablest  summary  of 
results  of  advanced  criticism  on  the  Fourth  Gospel  that  has 
appeared  in  the  English  language.'— Jowniai  oj  Theological 
Stxidies. 

—  The  Kingdom  and  the  Messiah.  Po.st  8vo, 
6s,  net. 

This  work  deals,  from  a  modern  and  critical  point  of  view,  with 
the  message  of  Jesus  and  His  attitude  to  the  Messianic  claim. 
The  subject  is  one  of  central  interest  in  theological  discussion  at 
the  present  time. 

Skinner.-  (Jenesis.  By  Principal  John  Skinner, 
D.D.,  Cambridge.  (International  Critical  Com- 
inentary.)     lO.s.  6d.  net. 

'  The  volume  does  honour  to  English  biblical  scholarship.  In- 
deed, it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  a  commentary  more 
carefully  planned  and  dealing  more  full3'  and  judiciously  with  the 
various  problems  which  call  for  consideration.' — Chtirch  Quarterly 
Review. 

Smyth— Chri.sti AN  Ethics.  By  Dr.  Newman 
Smyth.  (International  Theological  Library. ) 
Third  Edition.     9s.  net. 

'  It  is  the  work  of  a  wise,  well-informed,  independent,  and 
thoroughly  competent  writer.  It  is  sure  to  become  the  text-book 
in  Christian  Ethics.'— Boofci/um. 


Stevens.— The   Theology   of   the   New  Testa- 
ment.    By  Prof.  G.  B.  Stevens,  D.D.,  Yale. 
{ Interna/. imial  Theological  Library.)     10s.  6d.  net. 
•No  less  than  an  Encyclopndia  of  the  Teaching  of  the  New 
Testament.     Within  the  covers  of  a  single  volume  we  have  not 
merely   a  Kummary  of  Christ's  teaching  in  the  Gospels,  but  a 
luminous  anal>  sis  of  each  of  the  Epistles  which  every  clergyman 
will  And  of  the  utniost  value." — Guardian. 

Thayer. —Grimm's  Greek  English  J.lxicon  op 
THE  New  Testament,  being  Grimm's  Wiike's 
Claris  Novi  Testamenti.  Translated,  Revised, 
and  Enlarged  by  Prof.  Joseph  Henry  Thayer, 
D.D.,  Harvard  University.  Fourth  Edition. 
4to,  21s.  net. 
'  The  best  New  Testament  Greek  Lexicon.  .  .  .'—Bishop  Wbst- 

COTT. 

'Undoubtedly  the  best  of  its  kind.  Beautifully  printed  and 
well  translated  ...  it  will  be  prized  by  students  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures.' — Atheiicertm. 

Ylncent.— Philippians  and  Philemon.    By  Prof. 
Marvin  R.  Vincent,  D.D  ,  New  York.    (Inter- 
national Critical  Commentary.)    7s.  6d.  net. 
'He  has  given  us  an  edition  of  "Philippians"  that  takes  its 
place  beside  its  fellows  in  the  very  front  rank  of  modern  theo- 
logical literature.' — Expository  Times. 

Walker.— The   Gospel   of   Reconciliation  ;   or, 
At-one-ment.    By  W.  L.  Walker,  D.D.    Post 

Svo,  4s.  6d.  net. 
'  One  of  the  most  helpful,  illuminating,  and  spiritual  expositions 
of  this  most  fascinating  of  all  subjects  of  Christian  Theology.' — 
Review  of  Theology  and  Philosophy. 

—  The  Cross  and  the  Kingdom,  as  Viewed  by 

Christ  Himself  and  in  the  Light  of  Evolution. 

Second  Edition.  Svo,  7s.  6d.  net. 
'  We  desire  to  speak  with  admiration  of  the  good  work  done  in 
this  book.  It  is  worthy  to  stand  beside  his  former  treatise. 
Taking  both  together,  they  form  a  magnificent  contribution  to  the 
theological  literature  of  the  age.' — Principal  Ivbracii  in  the 
Expository  Times. 

—  Chrlst  THE  Creative  Ideal  :  Studies  in  Colos- 

sians  and  Ephesians.     Post  Svo,  4s.  6d.  net. 
'  A  really  noble  study,  worthy  to  take  its  place  among  the  best 
things  he  has  done.  ...  A  most  helpful  and  inspiring  study.' — 
Christian  Woi-ld. 

Wendt.— The  Teaching  of  Jesus.    By  Prof.  Hans 
HiNRiCH  Wendt,  D.D.,  Jena.    Two  Vols.     Svo, 
16s.  net. 
'  No  greater  contribution  to  the  study  of  biblical  theology  has 

been  made  in  our  time.    A  brilliant  and  satisfactory  exposition 

of  the  teaching  of  Christ.'— Principal  J.  Ivbrach,  D.D.,  in  the 

Expositor. 


Edinburgh:  T.  &  T.  CLARK,  38  George  Street. 
LONDON  :  SIMPKIN,  MARSHALL,  HAMILTON,  KENT,  &  CO.  LIMITED. 


T.  &  T.  CLARK'S  PUBIJCATIONS 


A   GREAT   ENCYCLOP/EDIA. 

SEVEN  VOLUMES  READY.    VOL,  VIH.  READY  JANUARY  1916. 

EAcyclop2edia  of 
Religion  and  Ethics 

EDITED  IBY 

Dr.  JAMES   HASTINGS. 

THE  purpose  of  this  Encyclopaedia  is  to  give  a  complete  account  of  Religion 
and  Ethics  so  fai  as  they  are  known.  It  contains  articles  on  every 
separate  religious  belief  and  practice,  and  on  every  ethical  or  philosophical  idea  and 
custom.  Persons  and  places  that  have  contributed  to  the  History  of  religion  and 
morals  are  also  described. 

The  Encyclopaedia  covers  a  distinct  department  of  knowledge.  It  is  the 
department  which  has  alwa)-s  exercised  the  greatest  influence  over  men's  lives, 
and  its  interest  at  least,  if  not  its  influence,  is  probably  greater  at  the  present  time 
than  ever.  Within  the  scope  of  *  Religion  and  Ethics '  come  all  the  questions  that 
are  most  keenly  debated  in  Psychology  and  in  Socialism,  while  the  title  will 
be  used  to  embrace  the  whole  of  Theology  and  Philosophy.  Ethics  and  Morality 
will  be  handled  as  thoroughly  as  Religion. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  work  will  be  completed  in  Twelve  Volumes  of  about  900 
pages  each,  size  11  i  by  9. 

PRICE— 

In  Cloth  Binding^    .        .     28s.  net  per  volume. 
In  Half-Morocco     .        .     34s.  net  per  volume- 
Each  Volume  may  also  be  had  in  12  Monthly  Parts,  price  2S.  6d.  net  each. 
A  full  Prospectus  may  be  had  on  application. 

'  Dr.  Hastings  and  th«  pablishers  are  to  be  congratnlated  on  the  steady  progress  cS  tbeir  great 
Encyclopsedia,  and  the  uniformly  high  character  it  maintains.  Everything  is  written  with  skill  by 
men  well  qualified  for  the  work  assigned  to  them.' — Times. 

'The  general  result  of  our  examination  enables  us  to  say  that  the  editor  has  risen  to  the  bei^t 
of  his  great  undertaking.  The  work  deserves  the  fullest  and  best  encouragement  which  the  worid 
of  readers  and  investigators  can  give  it.' — Athttutum. 

'  The  scope  of  this  enc>-clopedia  is  immense,  and  as  for  the  quality  <^  the  artides,  the  list  of  the 
contributors  proves  that  it  is  in  general  very  high.  ...  It  will  be  one  of  the  most  reassuring  and 
encouraging  signs  of  the  times  if  this  great  and  magnificent  enterprise  receives  adequate  encourage- 
ment and  recogniuon.' — British.  Weekly. 

'  No  library  could  'oe  better  provided  with  what  men  have  said  and  thought  through  the  ages  oo 
Religion  and  Ethics  and  all  they  imply  than  by  this  one  library  in  itself.  .  .  .  Some  of  the  articles 
themselves  summarise  a  whole  literature.' — Public  Opinicn. 


T.  &  T.  CLARK'S  PUBLICATIONS 


The  International  Critical  Commentary 

'  Scarcely  higher  praise  can  be  afforded  to  a  volume  than  by  the  statement  that 
it  is  well  worthy  of  the  "International  Critical  Commentary"  Series.' — Church 
Quarterly  Review. 

VOLUMES  NOW  PUBLISHED. 

GENESIS. 

I'rincipal  John  Skinner,  D.D.  IOS.  6d.  net, 

NUMBERS. 

Prof.  G.  Buchanan  Gray,  D.D.  los.  6d.  net. 

DEUTERONOMY. 

Prof.  S.  R.  Driver,  D.D.     Third  Edition.  los.  6d.  net. 

JUDGES. 

Prof.  G.  F,  Moore,  D.D.     Second  Edition.  los.  6d.  net. 

SAMUEL  I.  and  II. 

Prof.  H.  P.  Smith,  D.D.  los.  6d.  net. 

CHRONICLES  I.  and  II. 

Prof.  E.  L.  Curtis,  D.D.  los.  6d.  net. 

EZRA  AND  NEHEMIAH. 

Prof.  L.  W.  Batten,  D.D.  9s.  net. 

ESTHER. 

Prof.  L.  B.  Paton,  Ph.D.  9s.  net. 

PSALMS. 

Prof.  C.  A.  Briggs,  D.D.     Two  Vols.  9s.  net  each. 

PROVERBS. 

Prof.  C.  II.  Toy,  D.D.  lOS.  6d.  net. 

ECCLESIASTES. 

Prof.  G.  A.  Barton,  Ph.D.  7s.  6d.  net. 

ISAIAH. 

Vol.  I  (Ch.  i.-xxvii.).     Prof.  G.|Buchanan  Gray,  D.D.,  D.Litt.     los.  6d.  net. 
AMOS  AND  HOSEA. 

President  W.  R.  Harper,  Ph.D.  los.  6d.  net. 

MICAH,     ZEPHANIAH,     AND     NAHUM,     Prof.     J.     M.     P.     Smith  ; 

HABAKKUK,    Prof.    W.    H.    Ward;    and    OBADIAH    AND    JOEL, 

Prof.  J.  A.  Bewkr.     One  Vol.  IOS.  6d.  net. 

HAGGAI,  ZECHARIAH,  Prof.  H.  G.  Mitchell;  MALACHI,  Prof.  J.  M.  P. 

Smith  :  and  JONAH,  Prof.  J.  A.  Bewer.  ios.  6d.  net. 

ST.  MATTHEW. 

Principal  \V.  C.  Allen,  M.A.     Third  Edition.  los.  6d.  net. 

ST.  MARK. 

Prof.  E.  P.  Gould,  D.D.  9s.  net. 

ST.  LUKE. 

Alfred  Plummer,  D.D.     Fourth  Edition.  los.  6d.  net. 

ROMANS. 

Prof.  W.  Sanday,  D.D.,  and  Principal  A.  C.  IIeadlam,  D.D.    Fifth  Edition. 

IOS.  6d.  net. 

I.  CORINTHIANS. 

The  Bishop  of  Exeter  and  Dr.  A.  Plummer.     Second  Ed.        los.  6d.  net. 

II.  CORINTHIANS. 

Alfred  Plummer,  D.D.  lOs.  6d.  net. 

EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS. 

Prof.  T.  K.  Ahbott,  D.Litt.  93.  net. 

PHILIPPIANS  AND  PHILEMON. 

Prof.  M.  R.  Vincent,  D.D.  7s.  6d.  net. 

THESSALONIANS. 

Prof.  [.  E.  Frame,  M.A.  9s.  net. 

ST.  PETER  AND  ST.  JUDE. 

Prof.  Chas.  Bigg,  D.D.     Second  Edition.  9s.  net. 

THE  JOHANNINE  EPISTLES. 

A.  E.  Brooke,  D.D.  9s.  net. 


H55 


nc^      iqgs,   James   (ed.) 
Dictionary-  of  the 
Apostolic  Church 


gob<irti 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 


UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO 
LIBRARY 


,?•'-' '1*1 


|i   »-M^'>',f»'^' 


m 


mm^ 


m 


lfB&§w